Science Proves Me Right… Again

A while back, this Chateau post caused veins to bulge on the foreheads of haters. It was about instilling the dread of an impending breakup or loss of interest to promote a healthy relationship.

Women respond viscerally in their vagina area to unpredictability, mixed signals, danger, and drama in spite of their best efforts to convince themselves otherwise. Managing your relationship in such a way that she is left with a constant, gnawing feeling of impending doom will do more for your cause than all the Valentine’s Day cards and expertly performed tongue love in the world. Like it or not, the threat of a looming breakup, whether the facts justify it or not, will spin her into a paranoid estrogen-fueled tizzy, and she’ll spend every waking second thinking about you, thinking about the relationship, thinking about how to fix it. Her love for you will blossom under these conditions. Result: she works harder to please you.

The key for the man is to adopt a posture of blase emotional distance alternated with loving tenderness. Too much of either and she’ll run off.

Oh, how the haters swooned with indignation over my helpful advice. “You’re such a jokester”, said the disbelievers, somewhat nervously. “That’s a good way to end a relationship prematurely”, said the dating advice columnists. “It only works on girls with low self esteem”, said the shibboleth spouters.

Well, well, welly welly well… look what we have here!

Uncertainty Can Increase Romantic Attraction.

This research qualifies a social psychological truism: that people like others who like them (the reciprocity principle). College women viewed the Facebook profiles of four male students who had previously seen their profiles. They were told that the men (a) liked them a lot, (b) liked them only an average amount, or (c) liked them either a lot or an average amount (uncertain condition). Comparison of the first two conditions yielded results consistent with the reciprocity principle. Participants were more attracted to men who liked them a lot than to men who liked them an average amount. Results for the uncertain condition, however, were consistent with research on the pleasures of uncertainty. Participants in the uncertain condition were most attracted to the men-even more attracted than were participants who were told that the men liked them a lot. Uncertain participants reported thinking about the men the most, and this increased their attraction toward the men.

This study’s results confirm the “Dread” post to the letter, although I used slightly more… ornamental… language to get the point across. (Consider my methods a social experiment  — a sort of crisis and observation — designed to get under the skin, with exquisite pain amplification, of those predisposed to hate the message here, and to observe how many of you can handle the truth when it is stripped of all its sugarcoating.)

I don’t need the science to certify what I can already see with my own two eyes, but it’s nice to have it so that I can do the happy Snoopy dance and throw it in the faces of the usual tard crew. Weep those tears of unfathomable sadness, femcunts and nancyboys.

Naturally, some skirt-twirling teacups will chime in and attempt to muddy the waters by caviling about how men are susceptible to uncertainty game as well, while neglecting to mention the difference in degree between the sexes. Sure, men can fall for the Chateau patented dread psy ops, but they don’t fall for it nearly as often, or with the same intensity, as do women. Vulnerability to dread game is predominantly a female phenomenon.

Chateau Motto (posted at the gate):
Come for the truth, stay for the mindfucking of your enemies.

Thinking Like A Woman

I was at a house party noticing something I expect to see at these sorts of events: dudes not knowing what the fuck they are doing with women. (Proof that the practice of game is not making many inroads into general circulation.) Every single guy who was macking on a girl was telegraphing in the worst way possible his sheer delight to be speaking with her. Some of the gross errors of pickup judgement I observed:

• Laser-like focus of his eyes on her eyes.
• Leaning into her (in some cases the girl actually leaned back, like she was trying to escape his bad breath).
• Constant smiling.
• Rapid-fire talking.
• Interrupting her to vociferously agree with whatever she was saying.
• Too much laughing, and laughing too hard at ostensibly unfunny female jokes.
• Telling long-winded stories.
• Getting a laugh from her, and then repeating his brilliant joke for good measure.
• Nervous body tics (rubbing of fingertips on glasses, shifting of feet, crossing and uncrossing of arms, scratching of ears and noses).
• Relying too heavily on unsubtle sexual innuendo.
• Constantly asking if she needed a new drink.
• Excessive head nodding.
• Asking a lot of questions.
• Dutifully answering her questions.
• Never touching her.

Now none of these men were socialy awkward losers. They were all normal men with well-rounded lives. Solid, salt of the earth dudes. The kind of guys women claim to want to date. On paper, they were catches. But as we all know, credentialist paper mentality is why so many men fail with women. Rip that paper up, because it is not what women really want; it is what they say they want to make their mothers happy. And because women’s own hindbrains are a mystery to even them.

The general impression one would get from watching all these nascent courtship dances is CHASING. The men were doing all the chasing.

Chase, chase, chase, chase, chase, chase, chase…… aaaallll the way home. Alone.

Men, pull it together. The way to seduce women is by redirecting them to CHASE YOU. You do this by exploiting their natural and universal female desire to your advantage. This is what game is all about. If you act like the men I saw at this party, you are running no game at all. And no game may as well be anti-game, because its effects on women are the same — bored, dry pussy. The only difference between zero game and being actively repulsive is the speed which her pussy snaps shut. The destination is the same.

Remember the fundamentals of game recently discussed here at the Chateau:

1. Be aloof. (Amused mastery)
2. Don’t be insecure. (Irrational self-confidence)
3. Dehumanize and objectify women. (Do not put any pussy on a pedestal)

Re-read those fundamentals out loud. Taken together, what are they really saying?

“I am the prize. I do not seek the approval of any woman. She will, instead, want to seek my approval.”

Or, in simpler caveman language:

“She chases me.”

Yes, this thinking turns conventional wisdom on its head. Yes, it takes a huge dump on the evolutionarily derived instincts that govern the behavior of men and women. But as practitioners of the crimson arts, we are not here to abide conventional wisdom. Nor are we here to meekly march to the beat of our Darwinian impulses. We are here to learn how to seduce women… efficiently, completely, utterly.

The first step to getting a woman to chase you is to think like a woman. Only when you have put yourself into the mind of woman will the game that you need to seduce them begin to make any sense to you. Deep empathy — not the cheap bleeding heart kind but the kind that you struggle hard to attain so that it may redound to your maximum benefit — is the ultimate inner game that serves as the bedrock upon which the rest of the razzle-dazzle game will flow effortlessly.

In fact, this may be the best explanation of the meta-fundamental precept that underlies the above fundamentals:

Think like a woman.

Get in the mind of your adversary. (And make no mistake, men and women are, underneath the romantic tapestry, adversaries in the mating market. We have contradictory reproductive goals as nature designed.) Know what she needs to feel desire, what she loathes, how she will react before she does, and what her frame of mind is when men hit on her. Once you have successfully infiltrated one woman’s mind, you will have supremacy over all women’s minds.

When you think like a woman, you are imagining… no, you are accepting as a given… what it’s like to mercilessly judge the smallest details of a girl. What it’s like to be one foot in, one foot out with every girl you deign to talk to. What it’s like to cast a jaundiced eye at every girl before deciding she is worth more of your time. What it’s like to make silent demands of girls that you wouldn’t make of your male buddies. What it’s like to keep your options open until she has won you over. What it’s like to screen a girl, to qualify her, to shit test her, to tease her without worrying about giving offense, to refuse to backpedal from any offense given, to have an inner conversation with yourself *while she is talking to you* about whether she meets your ideal, to call her out in a good-natured manner on any of her bullshit, to seriously doubt her attractiveness until proven otherwise, to lean away from her when she is talking, to refrain from laughing if her joke falls flat, to notice her nervousness, to be laconic while she tries to impress you, to be comfortable with silences because it is her job to keep the conversation alive, to act noncommittal, to disagree with her occasionally, to glance furtively around the room every so often, to end conversations first, to happily hold court with other girls joining your conversation…

… in short, to make her dance to your tune.

Truth is, it is the tune she prefers to dance to above all others.

The day will come when you will have completed the merging of your mind with the neural network of womanhood. When that day comes — fully entwined, unable to return to  the one-dimensional, solipsistic man you once were — your game will be second nature. You will have transcended the dictates of crass materialist evolution and the straitjacket of social mores, and like magic the gates of vagina will open to you.

And if some numbnuts tells you it’s gay to think like a woman, you can ask him how many times he got laid talking about football and retrieving drinks for girls.

Going All In Or Cashing Out

A reader laments:

I met this incredibly cute girl who really did it for me and we’ve been dating for four months. But lately I’ve felt less and less like having sex with her. She still looks great but my thoughts wander to hooking up with other women I see every day. I’ve even been having sex dreams about ex’s. Has this happened to you? I don’t want to break up with her because she might be the best I can get at the moment, but my horniness for her is disappearing.

This is the classic relationship conundrum that all men experience — whether to go all in for a shot at the big pot, or cash out of the dating market altogether and settle into a life of comfortable ennui with one’s respectable winnings. Two endogenous factors will influence a man to one or the other choice: the number and sensitivity of his dopamine receptors, and his ability to pick up equally hot or hotter girls within a reasonable time frame. Two exogenous factors will also exert influence over his decision: the hotness of his current girlfriend, and the number of available potential replacements within his milieu.

A thrill-seeking man with tight game and a track record of fulfilling his desires who is currently dating below his level in a region filled with single beautiful women will be very difficult to corral into a monogamous relationship by any but the hottest girls. Strong cultural stigma and peer pressure, coupled with a 9 or a 10 on his arm, are the only counterweights capable of restraining his impulses. Men like these types are the reason why women rush their newly-minted alpha hubbies out to the bland suburbs where he won’t be tempted by a daily farmer’s market of juicy, ripe fruit for the plucking, and where his energy and focus will be spent paying off the McMansion mortgage.

A tentative man with no game and few past lovers of any note who is currently dating at or above his level in a region bereft of single beautiful women will be loath to leave such an arrangement. Strong cultural stigma and peer pressure are not needed for him to remain monogamous, except when he gets dumped and needs a kick in the ass to begin meeting new women. Men like these types are happy to run to the suburbs, to get their wives away from the roving alpha males.

The four factors are important, but it is the man’s skill with women and the hotness of his girlfriend which will most determine his likelihood to stick with her for a long time. In fact, a girlfriend’s hotness alone is an amazingly accurate predictor of how quickly the average man will grow bored of sex with her (if he is honest with himself).

GF’s hotness          Time to boredom
0                         0 seconds
1                          0.1 seconds
2                          0.5 seconds
3                          1.1 seconds
4                          15 seconds
5                          5 minutes (this is very much an exponential plot)
6                          3 weeks
7                          6 months
8                          2 years
9                          5 years
10                        10 years to never

Ladies, do you have trouble pulling your man away from video games to share passionate intimacy with you? Might want to look in the mirror. The fault, dear Beatrice, lies not in the stars (or in self-medicating thoughts that his plumbing is failing), but in you.

Now growing bored with girlfriend sex is not the same as running off to find new pussy. Many men make the sensible and quite logical calculation, based on a confluence of the factors listed above, that the risk of a long dry spell in the field is not worth the loss of tepid schtupping on the regular, no matter how rote it has become. And many of these men go on to lead lives of quiet resignation that their days of lackluster sex will follow them to the grave. It is this fear of the hopeless, grinding dry spell that keeps many ugly couples together, and breeding their ugliness into future generations.

There is also a vicious feedback loop that exacerbates the tendency of successful womanizers to continue their pump and dump ways. If the average man who is used to no better than 5s or 6s hooks up with a 7, he will be happy for quite a while with her IF his self-conception remains static. Yet, what will we likely see? His ego will grow in lockstep with the improving looks of his conquests, thus spurring him to greater challenges. Men who see sudden improvements to their game and consequently, their meet to lay ratio, are usually the most imprudent at relationship management, because their egos carry them perpetually forward searching for hotter girls until their limits are reached. The worst LTR prospect for a woman is the man new to game; he is a world of pain waiting for her. The best LTR prospects for women would be quasi-virginal men who have not had the beta beaten into them, or established players who are happy with their record of accomplishment and ready to slow down.

So… to go all in or cash out? Remember, there is a real risk that years of loneliness or regret are your fate should you jettison your devoted but familiar lover for the excitement of fresh meat. That in mind, I can only offer these words of wisdom:

You will get bored of sex with every girl you date/love/marry. The only question is how soon.

No girl can completely satisfy you. As soon as you meet such a girl, your standards will shift upward. This is the nature of your humanity.

You should go all in at least once in your life. You’d be surprised what you can achieve under duress.

Relatedly, you should not use one big winning from going all in to justify going all in all the time. That is the newb’s curse, and it will vex you in time. Sometimes, you do find that great girl, and the upside of gaining fresher pussy isn’t worth the downside of losing loving pussy.

If your game is good, throw your chips around like a whale. But always be open to the possibility of a final hand.

If your game is really good….. MLTR!

God bless!

PS Sex dreams featuring exes are pretty common for men. We have a tendency to fondly remember with rose-colored glasses the best of our exes while conveniently shunting aside the shit that drove us crazy. Coupled with our harem drive, it’s no wonder our brains fire off nighttime visions of multiple lovers past and present. That is why men will rarely have “love dreams” of former girlfriends. Fuck, I can recall the vulvas of at least five exes with more clarity than I can their faces.

Predicting A Girl’s Infidelity

A reader emails:

As a rule, when the supply of eligible men goes down, female sluttiness goes up. If a girl will only date guys [who are] soccer players 6-4 or taller, then she’ll get desperate around these men moreso than a girl without this “limiting factor”. If a girl comes across 1 eligible guy a month, vs 10 eligible guys a day, then that 1 eligible guy has massive hand, and will score even if he has negative game.

The short-term dating limiting factors could be, but not limited to:

1. age
2. looks
3. race / hair color / eye color
4. height / build
5. income / class
6. musical talent
7. cultural tastes / fashion
8. social proof / notch count
9. game / humor / confidence

I know girls that sleep around, often sober, but only with guys within narrow parameters. They often exclude known cads and alpha males in the group to focus on a narrower, but not necessarily superior, sub-set of alpha males.

I propose finding short-term relationships among women that date within narrow parameters and long-term relationships with women that date all over the map.

That’s counter-intuitive.

If you qualify based on a limiting factor it seems like the logical basis for a long term relationship, but she’ll go just as ga-ga over another guy that meets this same limiting factor. If you are lucky she’ll come across this guy when your game is tight, and not on a beta downswing.

A girl that’s less discriminating is less likely to come across a man that sweeps her off her feet, and you into divorce court.

What this reader is hinting about is known as The Template, (or, in more poetic language, the Ideal Lover). Every person, man and woman, has a template etched into their brains from birth that, upon the pubertal blossoming, guides them like an invisible genital towards certain types of people who most closely match their ideal. The Template is a force to be reckoned with, because it derives its power from deeply embedded genetic imprinting passed down from generations of ancestors following their own similar templates.

Master seducers beware: once a girl has laid eyes on her ideal man she will swat away the importunings from objectively superior suitors like so many buzzing flies. Not even Jedi game has the force to distract a girl from pursuing with single-minded focus the man of her Template dreams. The good news is that The Template is very rarely fulfilled; out of 1,000 men a woman might meet over many years perhaps one or two of them will press all her buttons. So as a practical matter, The Template is no barricade to free and easy sex for a fly by night womanizer.

The reader makes a good point about the supply of men being limited not just by the numerical sex ratio but also by the self-imposed mate choice limitations of women. A romantically idealistic woman fully under the sway of her Template is a woman with dating hand, because very few men will be able to satisfy her prerequisites for love. Luckily, most women are not so beholden to the prudish pull of their Templates. Usually, women age out of slavish devotion to their templates as reality slowly but inexorably pounds into their heads that their Template in Shining Armor is more real as a fantasy than as an actual man. For examples of girls still enslaved by the dictates of their Templates, stroll through any high school corridor.

This is not to say women (and men) give up on their Templates entirely. We have all experienced that heart-quickening epiphany when the woman of our Templates dances into our vision, and for a moment our self-regard and worries vanish like tears in rain as our brains rev furiously and every nerve in our bodies readies for a shot at conquest. But we shelve the Template most days, figuring that the constant heeding of its call is often a flimsy pretext for rationalizing solitude.

Back to the reader’s premise: sluts sleep around, but only with a select few men who meet their Templates, i.e. within narrow mate criteria parameters. The premise has a kernel of truth, but is incomplete, unless we expand those narrow parameters to include most alpha males. While I have argued before that sluts are not less discriminating than chaste women, they aren’t exactly starry-eyed romantics staring pensively out their bedroom windows at the late summer moon, smug with the knowledge that their virtue remains untrammeled until a superlative cock shows up to rescue her lust from its prison of self-denial. A slut is still a slut, whether she accrues her cock notches with a subset of high status men or with randomly chosen men who just happened to be in the right place at the right time and didn’t fuck it up by saying the wrong thing.

One should remember that the alpha male, by dint of his universal attractiveness, strikes deep limbic notes in women regardless of the proximity of his characteristics to a woman’s Template. There are enough of these interchangeable alpha males on the prowl that a dedicated slut could notch quite a few cocks despite the very narrow parameters she sets for herself.

So what do we make of the reader’s bold contention that “groupie sluts” are worse long-term prospects than “inclusive sluts” because of the potential that a stray man meeting the former’s Template would quickly and easily tempt her to infidelity? Should men who are seeking LTRs drop any women from consideration who express a fascination with, say, pasty-faced activist anarcho-libertarians? Should a man who meets a woman’s template worry that he could be replaced by another, similarly templated man? Live by the template, die by the template?

No. Although I admire the reader’s logical chain of thought leading to his contrarian conclusion, in reality inclusive sluts are no less a risk factor than groupie sluts. A girl who comes across ten eligible men per day may not swoon as uncontrollably as a girl who sees an eligible man once per day, but the fidelity assurance from the lack of swooning is offset by the increase in permissible suitors.

To put it another way, would you rather compete with one (from your woman’s point of view) rare, exceptional man or with ten less rare, do-able men? Statistically, I doubt the groupie slut is any less faithful than the inclusive slut.

Then there is the matter of correlations. A jaded woman with lax standards who has a history of spreading for all taxonomy of penii is going to be a cheating risk no matter how swoon-proof she is. Her atrophied Template is no guarantee of fidelity, but it is a guarantee of a weary, utilitarian outlook on life from whom getting genuine love would be like squeezing blood from a stone. A woman like that simply has fewer hurdles to jump before being comfortable enough to relinquish her hole for plundering.

Conversely, a woman who has only slept with indie band bass players wearing guyliner is no flight risk at all if you happen to possess the emo phenotype yourself. If you don’t, you still have rarity of number on your side. Keep her away from hipster nightclubs and you significantly reduce competition pressure. And you must have done something right to bed her if you didn’t meet her stringent Template. That alone should infuse you with unstoppable confidence. Some of the strongest relationships I’ve known were unintuitive pairings between Template centered women and men who didn’t match their Templates. That is because those men brought something new, and exciting, to the table, which emboldened their women to wriggle free of the straitjacket of their templates.

Women’s Standards Crumble Easily Given The Right Incentives

Maxim #39: A woman’s standards are like a house of cards: kick out one from the bottom and the whole edifice crashes down.

I was mingling with some friends, a mixed group, when one of the girls — 7.5, ~0.75 waist-hip ratio, lithe, A cups, mid-20s (because this info is vital to any discussion) — piped up about her standards in men. She went on for some length describing the kind of man she would deign to date. (She is single.) Now based on looks, age and lack of sprog baggage, she has the sexual market value to make some weighty demands. And she knew that on a logical level. Her 463 bullet point checklist she recited was quite impressive in its detail:

• worldly and well-travelled; must have been someplace besides Europe
• athletic; football or lacrosse player at a Div 1-A school preferred
• spontaneous
• generous; must have done volunteer work at some point in life
• Cute but with a rugged edge; a cross between Orlando Bloom and Christian Bale
• good conversationalist; can speak intelligently on any number of subjects, but especially film history
• stylish; not a J. Crew guy, but more like a Banana Republic-slash-Marc Jacobs guy
• muscular, but not too beefy; deltoids must be developed to bulging perfection
• tall, but not more than 8 inches taller than her
• a connoisseur of fine wine
• shuns video games

This was not the full list. It is the list I could remember for this post. Two weeks later, we all met again, and this time she was with a man, someone she had just started dating. He was:

• a full-time bartender
• a local who has never left the country (yes, he admitted this, with some pride)
• dressed in jeans and a button-down
• a couple inches taller than her (average male height)
• a state school grad
• tattooed
• a very chill, amiable guy; you could see yourself having a beer with him
• not particularly built, but not fat either
• better than average looking, but no Christian Bale
• socially savvy, but not intellectual
• confident
• a big video gamer (we discussed the finer points of the Kinect)

I hope you can see where I’m going with this. What she claimed were her inviolable standards and what kind of man she actually dated were very different. And she seemed oblivious to the disconnect. Bless her cutie pie hamster.

This isn’t the only example of a woman’s standards not being worth the mental paper they’re written on. I’m sure we’re all acquainted with the online spectacle of average-looking, and even ugly fat chicks, pumping their dating site profiles and Craigslist personals full of demands that would make a princess blush. But oh how quickly those standards evaporate when the harsh klieg lights of reality intrude!

A woman’s standards, however emphatically and insistently declared, are more like a fantasy dating team: free of the constraints of market barter, she happily indulges in a little of the ol’ ultradelusion. That is, if you ask a woman her standards, you will never —

and I mean never

— get an honest and realistic answer from her.

This is because women are, on the whole, incapable of accurate self-assessment. A woman’s prime directive in life is to sell herself the moon. A man’s directive is to sidestep paying her inflated price for that moon.

Given the right incentives, every woman’s standards will wilt into accommodation. And by incentives, I mean everything from the sex ratio to her actual sexual worth to the subversive level of game the man plays. A single, smart 60 year old woman, financially well-off and occupationally accomplished, can demand in the most florid and haughty language a sophisticated and wealthy man all she wants, but where the rubber meets the road she will jettison most of her ridiculously unrealistic standards for an average old schlub who tickles her pink because he managed not to fall asleep during an hour long dinner date with her.

And the hot young babe who wants the Hollywood caricature? Well, as we can see by the above anecdote, (played out millions of times over across this great land), if the guy is cool, aloof and has game, and maybe has the sort of conventionally low-status job that puts him in direct contact with lots of competitor women, our 463 bullet point heroine is gonna shred her list of demands like so many Vince Foster papers. (Why couldn’t the verklempft fag leak those cables?)

That’s the meaning of Maxim #39. If you have game, that is like pulling a card from the bottom of her stack of standards; she will quickly forget all about the cards on top that you aren’t holding.

Now women, being constitutionally hypergamous in a way that relatively more indiscriminate men aren’t, will by nature have more and higher standards than men, and will more often than men attempt to satisfy those standards. This leads to the laughable phenomenon of single mid 30s lawyer chicks futilely chasing after the same kind of guys they did when they were in college, except this time around the guys aren’t even bothering to give them the gratification of a pretend commitment.

But this shouldn’t dissuade you from recognizing a very important truth — for all their bluster and trumped-up demands, women will surrender rather easily to a dude with a righteous tattoo.

How To Greet Like An Alpha Male

Posts about alpha body language always elicit titters of snarky gayness from the haters. “Stand contrapposto like an alpha.” “Don’t lean in.” “Face out toward the room.” The closed-minded can’t, or won’t, comprehend that certain actions — even seeming trivialities like the location of one’s feet on the floor — can increase or decrease a man’s attractiveness to women. Their ignorance stems from their refusal to acknowledge the premise that alpha males and beta males not only exist in reality, but that each group shares behaviors and attitudes that define them. People who believe we are all special little snowflakes have a particularly difficult time accepting the fact of our biomechanistic origins and how this translates into universally shared traits and mating behaviors. Few people, especially the religious and the equalists (one and the same, really), like to think we are slave to ancient shadow forces making a mockery of our concept of free will.

Here’s another body adjustment that will boost your alpha appeal to women: When you nonverbally greet people, toss your head up and then down, instead of nodding down then up. Via Delenda est Carthago:

Back in the early 80s when I was a freshman in high school, I noticed that some male students, when they greeted people, would give a little toss of their head.  This “reverse nod” (up, then down) was remarkable because it ran counter to my own habit of nodding (down, then up) to people when I greeted them.  I don’t know how it got to be a habit, but it’s probably what I saw the adults around me do, and adults in movies and TV do, rather than something that somebody told me I was supposed to do.

Because the toss was new, and because the upperclassmen did it, I associated it with being “cool”, and tried to emulate it.  I may have had a dim sense of the biomechanics, but I lacked the analytical tools and vocabulary to appreciate what was at stake.  But as much as I practiced the toss in front of a mirror, I almost never remembered to deploy it in an actual social situation, and eventually I gave up.

As I have moved from youth to adulthood, I have observed others using the toss with diminishing frequency, although this could be me just not paying attention anymore.  But it’s easy to see how the study cited above maps onto the implications of the head toss.

The “reverse nod” does map onto the research posted at this blog recently about women preferring to look up at men. When you start your nod on an upward trajectory, instead of in the downward direction that most people nod, you are mimicking that masculine backwards facial tilt which brings women such delight.

Try the reverse nod now. Nod up then down. Now try the usual way. Nod down then up. You don’t have to be nodding at anyone. This little experiment will work even if you are alone. What did you feel deep down in the pit of your animal soul? I guarantee that most of you men reading this felt “more alpha” doing the reverse nod. It was a nebulous, ill-formed feeling, but a real feeling nonetheless.

When you feel the alpha in you, you know that girls are noticing the alpha in you. A small adjustment in a trivial thing like nodding can redound to your attractiveness in bigger ways. To be sure, a nod will not get you laid. But you start adding up all these little changes intended to emphasize alpha male characteristics, and suddenly you’re cooking with gas.

The Player Vibe

Reader Walawala asks:

[H]ow do you deal with chicks that suddenly start viewing [my newfound] self-confidence as being a player. “I’ll bet you have tons of girl friends…” etc..

Yes, these are shit tests, I get that, and can deal. But my problem lately has been chicks that get so attached after I bang them, they break up because they fear “it won’t go anywhere and you have lots of girlfriends”…even though quite honestly I don’t. I’m just confident.

This is a common complaint from men who are starting to see results with game. The answer is to focus on the basics. Forget tricky routines or clever quips or nuclear negs. You would be missing the forest for the trees. The specific reply to this type of shit test isn’t important; what matters is the big picture. As long as you recognize the forces at work in the woman’s mind, the answer you give will be good, regardless of the exact wording you use.

So what do you need to know? Really, just one thing. You need to refrain from playing into the woman’s frame. When a chick says “I’ll bet you’re a player” or some similar variation thereof, she expects you to feel shame, and then to backpedal, apologize, act humbled, or otherwise be a magnificent beta seeking her approval. Are you a beta? Because this is what goes through every beta’s mind, (AKA the twitchy guinea pig, if you will, because women are always using them as test subjects), and in this order:

This chick is hot.
She just said she bets I have a ton of girlfriends.
That’s good, right?
Again, this chick is hot.
I better not say anything to piss her off or ruin this magic moment we’re sharing.
Since chicks don’t like womanizers, I will deny being one.
I hope she is impressed by my answer.
Sex, maybe?

And just like that, you are dancing to her tune. No sex for you!

Now put yourself into the shoes of an alpha. This is what goes through his mind when a girl asks him the same:

This chick is hot.
Is she giving me shit already?
Typical hot bitch.
I’m gonna fuck with her.
Too easy.

Once you have identified the trap and have committed to sidestepping it, the right reply will come to you naturally.

“Yes, my harem is huge. Each girl has a specific job to do. How’d you like to be my grape-feeder?”

The above reply is an example of agree and amplify. It isn’t the only way to answer shit tests, but it is a proven successful technique. There are other, equally good tactics, for dealing with Venus Vajtraps. The specific tactic you use will depend on your personality and the comfort you feel using it. The point is that as long as you recognize framing and have the confidence to avoid approval-seeking behavior, executing a precise alpha counterattack won’t be something you have to struggle to find the right words to convey. A solidly grounded “I am the prize” mentality and a sharp awareness of female filtering mechanisms will make the job of finding the right thing to say much easier.

In Walawala’s specific case, girls he has been banging for a while are preemptively bolting because they tell themselves he is a player who won’t commit. Again, the worst thing Walawala could do would be to try to allay their fears. That’s throwing chum in the water as hungry sharks circle.

His problem isn’t that girls think he is a player. That’s just their hamster squeaking. I have never known a girl to break up with a man because she convinced herself he must be good with women. She may bitch and moan (usually facetiously), but she won’t actually walk away from such a man. Particularly if she is hot.

There are exceptions. Less attractive girls sometimes find the will to walk away from high value men because they subconsciously calculate that his slew of options with hotter girls mean there is no future with him. So perhaps Walawala is slumming it.

Another reason why girls may leave when things are going well is if the man is telling girls about his multiple girlfriends after a few months together, when such surprising news could precipitate a breakup. Walawala says that isn’t the case with him.

Barring those exceptions, his LTR issue with girls isn’t the player vibe, but, more likely, not enough vulnerability game. If he wants these spooked girls to stick around, then he’ll have to soften the aloof edges of his alpha game. This isn’t to say he should jettison the supreme confidence that got him the bangs; it is only to suggest that he needs to show more signs — however shallow — of commitment. Men who sleep around often forget that women possess a duality of heart. They lust for those romantic gestures of fealty almost as much as the alpha strut of independence. It can come as a shock to stone cold players when girlfriends suddenly scoot after the three month mark because they came to the sensible conclusion — from their genes’ point of view — that the alpha stud they luv would make a better short term sperm contributor than a long term backrub servant.

One other point: It has been my observation that sometimes, when women cry “player!”, what they are really saying is “beta!”. If there are unsatisfying aspects of your personality or attitude that she doesn’t like, she will be prone to using the more socially acceptable excuse of “player unwilling to commit” to rationalize her loss of feeling for you and subsequent dumping. Many women are loathe to admit, whether to others or to themselves, that they are leaving a man because he became too chumpy, beta, easy-to-please, predictable, unchallenging, weak, unambitious, sexually tepid, or even overly committed. They’d rather sugarcoat the real reasons so they can sleep at night, assured that their peers won’t kick them out into the icy wastelands for being a grade A bitch.

Do not underestimate just how incapable women are of directly acknowledging the ancient forces that drive their ids. Here, as in so many other matters related to sociosexuality and psychological motivation, men and women diverge markedly.