Naturals And Systematizers: More Alike Than Not

An anti-Game theme that occasionally surfaces in Dank Right blogs that lean towards the tradcon is the idea that learning successful methods and means to seduce women is somehow indicative of a *beep boop* sperg mentality which women hate, and that is why “Gamers” have trouble with women.

The premise is false along multiple fronts, but the major departure from reality is the belief that this tradcon caricature of PUAs, or the term I prefer, “self-improved casanovas”, is wholly alien to the natural born Naturals who “have a way with women”. This belief assumes the man who actively learns how to seduce women is an autistic reductionist, or a nerdy systematizer, who will never really get women because of his emotional limitations.

No doubt, Naturals work their magic with an intuitive gracefulness they have likely possessed since puberty, and maybe earlier. I’ve had the fortune to count a number of Naturals as friends. I’ve seen them in-field, and their crimson art is truly a majesty to behold. They seduce with an effortlessness and serene confidence that can only be acquired from years of successful beddings and other forms of positive feedback from women.

And the naturals I knew (and know) were/are not preternaturally handsome. They were average-looking men who seemed more handsome than they were because they projected their charm and masculinity through smirks, squints, and slickly smooth verbal sorcery.

So what about the Self-Improved Casanova (SIC) and his commonality with the Natural? What Game haters don’t seem to grasp is that Naturals behave around women EXACTLY THE SAME WAY as “reductionist spergs” do. The main difference is skillfulness of execution, but that is something that the latter will improve with practice. Another difference: Many Naturals don’t actually know why women react so well to what they do. Relying on intuition tends to dull one’s faculty of self-assessment.

Naturals perform intuitively the same pickup techniques and strategies that SICs perform with foreknowledge. That’s the only real distinction between them. In fact, much of what the Game-aware community knows about women’s sexual nature and about the male behaviors and traits women strongly respond to is gleaned from a collection of observations of Naturals interacting with women in the field.

The *beep boop* impression comes about because some people who encounter Game teachings are uncomfortable with the systematic analysis and breakdown of a human activity — romance — that historically has been thought of as magical, nebulous, and even divine. And, yes, many Game newbs are men who don’t have intuitive social grace, and while they are learning how to be better with women will tend to exhibit the *beep boop* quality until they get more comfortable applying what they’ve learned.

All of which is to say, Naturals and Game practitioners are a difference in degree, not kind.

***

It occurred to me to clarify that this post shouldn’t be read as a brazen assertion that any man can, with enough practice, become a Natural. That is false. By way of analogy, not every man can, with practice, become a pro baseball player. But he can become a better recreational baseball player than he would be without practice.

So it goes with seduction Systematizers emulating Naturals. If you are a born sperg, yours will be an uphill battle indeed. But if you apply yourself, you WILL get more dates, and with cuter girls than you would have gotten “just being yourself”. It works this way because the courtship behavior of Naturals (aka alpha males) is a code like any other human behavior that is open to cracking. Once cracked — that is, once you see the Vaytrix — emulation of the behaviors of Naturals will work to your non-Natural’s benefit.