Real Empiricists Test

real empiricists testIn the comments of Saturday’s article about signs you’re in the friend zone, uForia makes the following comment:

Ive been a long time reader of your articles, and I can’t help but be skeptical at times. Your posts often have a tone of disliking competition from other men, and what makes you even want to help other men? Wouldn’t you be worried that other men will take your girl eventually due to the popularity of this blog? Or does making money off this site offset the potential costs seen there? I know whenever other men ask me for advice, I always tell them to be nice and confident, of course knowing that the advice won’t help at all.

What really are your motivations for your website?

Leaving aside the suspicions of my motivations for running Girls Chase (which seem to imply that I’ve spent the past 5.5 years of my life, 3.5 of them full time, investing 6,000+ hours of my own time and writing somewhere between 1.5 and 2 million words building this site, dealing with all the headaches involved, composing and polishing and curating the content here, and responding to comments in order to wage a long-term, planetary-scale disinformation campaign designed to lead my competition for women down the garden path in order that I might personally have an easier time getting laid), I want to focus on one aspect in particular, and it’s this statement:

“I can’t help but be skeptical at times.”

To be sure, I actively encourage healthy skepticism in anything and everything that doesn’t match up with your prior experience and that you have no way of taking for a trial run.

And I’ll be the last man on Earth to tell you to take anything on faith alone (or even in large part).

And while I understand holding skepticism about things you have no ability to try out for yourself – things like religion, philosophy, or reports about anything remotely occult-related – the subject matter on this website is almost entirely (with a few dives into the theoretical here and there) not that sort of material.

Every single thing on this site is designed to be used, tried out, played with, toyed with, experimented upon, rotated in, weighed against alternatives, and kept if found sound or chucked if found not... not rolled around endlessly and skeptically in your mind as you try to make a decision on whether you want to personally believe it or not.

If you’ve been approaching the material on this site as something that must be taken “on faith”, and waiting for someone else to come along and convince you further, you’ve been coming at it all wrong.

Because I don’t want your faith. Don’t need it, don’t care for it. Never have, and never will.

Rather, I want your tests. Because real empiricists don’t take things on faith. Real empiricists test.

real empiricists test

What, pray tell, is an empiricist?

An empiricist is someone who believes that real knowledge comes not from thinking about things you have little personal experience with over and over again until, in a flash of inspired insight, you suddenly understand “truth”, but rather that knowledge comes from engaging in collecting experiences and actually doing and sensing things.

An empiricist finds speculation useful only insofar as it can be used to come up with hypotheses, which can then be tested.

We’re here using the term as part of a play on the Steve Jobs phrase “real artists ship”, designed to get his programmers and engineers focused on shipping product, rather than being perfectionists who just chipped away at projects forever and never actually did anything with them.

The concept is the same for us.

I was going to use “scientist” here, and say “real scientists test”, but then you get into semantics, and I have to deal with people complaining that I am not a scientist, because I do not do controlled laboratory studies and submit my findings for peer review. I also do not hold a PhD in anything. I don’t know if I am a “scientist” or “do science”; probably not. I’m just a guy with a website. And I didn’t want some semantics debate to detract from the point of the post.

So, real empiricists test. The point of almost everything on this site is geared around giving you actionable steps based on things I and others have tested out and found useful and effective, and getting you out there using them and discovering whether they work just as well for you yourself.

Speculation and conjecture can pack up and go home; by and large, everything here is stuff you can immediately test – and should.

Why I Don’t Want Your “Belief”

On the one hand, most anyone who has anything to teach isn’t too terribly excited about spending his time and energy trying to convince people to listen. This is a waste of time better spent on more willing pupils, as we discussed in “How to Find a Mentor.”

On the other hand, neither do I want blind devotees who are followers of the method because they view it as some sort of belief system. Over the years, I’ve seen guys like this pop up, and they are always a headache and an annoyance.

Here’s what I mean.

Every now and again, we get a guy – usually a guy from a deeply religious background – who finds Girls Chase and decides that (maybe because I sometimes speak like a preacher) it is his new religion. He is a True Believer, even more so than the guys who have been methodically and rigorously putting these teachings to work.

He doesn’t need to try it. He believes.

Not long after finding the site he does things like:

  • Get massively involved in the community
  • Espouse things I and other writers have previously said as dogma
  • Take his own preachy attitude toward seduction, lecturing other members
  • Concern himself with rising through the “hierarchy” of guys on the forum

... which aren’t in and of themselves bad things when they’re being done by someone who’s tested everything out rigorously and come to his own conclusions.

When forum members or commenters are trying to help someone else out, and say, “Well, I haven’t dealt with that myself, but Chase says this [link] / Alek says that [link] / Colt says this other thing [link],” that’s totally fine and helpful.

But these guys take it to an extreme. And pretty soon, they start adding additional pieces to it:

  • They become increasingly cynical and combative, questioning more senior, experienced members of the boards, other writers, and myself, and often becoming suspicious of us as having devious ulterior motives

  • They begin espousing increasingly unusual, divorced-from-reality perspectives that seem to be conclusions they’re arriving at purely from speculation

  • Optional: they start trying to “convert” other members to some new approach they think will be dynamite that they haven’t even tested

... then, they blow up.

real empiricists test

The mental models they’ve constructed for themselves based off of guesswork and conjecture run up hard against the belief systems of the other guys, which have been forged in the fires of experience.

They try to convince guys things about women’s behavior, dating, relationships, and sex based on having read extensively from various other sources that don’t match up with what other men have experienced from having actually gone out and had sex and had relationships with women instead.

And when they fail to convert the other guys, and their frustration levels and degrees of cognitive dissonance reach too fevered a pitch, they take their toys and leave, off to find some other cause where they can carve out a niche espousing speculative beliefs and build up a cadre of loyalists to their “cause.”

This is the usual trajectory of the man who takes things solely on faith, and it’s one I’ve watched unfold cyclically over the years.

Why it takes the trajectory it does, I can’t say for sure; all I really know is that because “the faithful” never learn the testing mindset, they never realize that the tools for genuine firsthand knowledge are there at their fingertips the entire time; they never had to take things on faith.

They don’t have to deal with deep inner turmoil, trying to decide what they believe.

All they actually have to do is go do stuff, and let the world sort out for them what’s valid and what isn’t.

The Church of Game

So many things are so easily solved with testing.

You want to know what happens if you text a girl one way instead of another?

Go test it and find out.

What if you ask a girl if she’s single and it turns out she isn’t?

Go test out some different responses and see what happens.

But what if you want to try and kiss a girl and she’s not ready? How can you tell if she is?

Go try and kiss a bunch of girls in different conditions and see how they respond.


Test test.

Test test test.

Test test test test test.

If you’re not testing, you should be.

If you are not testing, why are you not testing?

Because it’s hard, and you want to have all the answers first?

You won’t get ‘em that way. I promise you.

The education you get out of even the best material is directly proportional to the amount of real world experience you have doing a thing. That’s why someone who’s been restoring old cars all his life can pick up a “how to” manual on restoring a 1962 Ford Fairlane and know exactly what he needs to do after flipping through a few pages, while for a guy who’s never touched a wrench in his life he might as well be reading Greek.

Best thing for the guy who’s never touched a wrench in his life to do if he wants to succeed anyway? Go touch a wrench. Get to work. Play around with sparkplugs and brake pads and chassis and cams. Then check in on the manual intermittently as you get more and more experience working with old automobiles and be amazed at how things jump out at you you didn’t even realize were there before.

Seduction – and Girls Chase, for that matter – isn’t church. You don’t come here, get it downloaded into your brain, wrestle with it mentally for a while, and then you’ve got it and you’re an über-player.

You either take small bits of knowledge you get here that seem useful and applicable, go out and use them, then come back and get more later once you have more reference points, or else you’re just going to end up wasting your time trying to decide if something is realistic or not without the necessary reference points to ever arrive at an actual, results-backed opinion.

That’s like sitting in a room with no windows and reading differing reports about the weather online and trying to make up your mind about whether you believe there is snow or grass on the ground outside your house. Quit your damn deliberating and go walk outside and see for yourself.

Real empiricists don’t deliberate. They don’t subscribe to a belief system because it “sounds nice.” That’s for the religious, and those more concerned with talk than deeds.

You know what real empiricists do instead?

Real empiricists TEST.

real empiricists test

You want a belief system?

Great – here’s mine.

There aren’t any sure-thing answers in there?

That’s because I can’t test ‘em.

If I can’t test it, it’s all but irrelevant to me. Some theorizing is nice from time to time. But only if its conclusions are testable.

Now, let me tell you just why I find it a not-so-good use of my time arguing with people who haven’t tested out the material, and why you probably should too.

How People Decide If You’re Right

Do you know how people decide if you’re right?

It isn’t by weighing the facts, if that’s what you thought.

Nope – you’re more likely to believe someone who’s confident than someone who’s actually an expert. Further, the more frequently you hear a statement or argument, the more firmly you believe it, even if it’s the same person saying it again and again. Thus, if some girl you know tells you over and over again that women don’t want sex, only relationships, eventually you can’t help but start believing it.

Additionally, due to the Dunning-Kruger Effect, which I covered on here some time ago, quite often, the people who know the LEAST are the MOST confident and outspoken about their beliefs.

So here’s what happens, when you have non-testers start smacking you with their beliefs, doubts, and suspicions:

  1. They’ve heard advice that conflicts with yours a lot more often than they’ve heard yours – for instance, the mainstream advice that you should wine and dine a woman, share your feelings with her if you like her, and wait to make a move until at least the third date if you don’t want to scare her off. All that stands in stark contrast to what they read here, so right off the bat they wonder if those of us on GC aren’t a bunch of out-of-touch loons

  2. The people around them are 100% confident in their correctness, telling them things like, “Of course I would never date a guy who didn’t pay for a date!”, which causes them to view said sources as far more credible than myself and other writers on this site, who tend to use a lot of if-then situations, since we find the real world a bit more complex and nuanced than most people make it out to be

  3. Because they have not actually tested anything out, they overestimate their own ability to understand the world by a great extent, not having any reference experiences to check various flights of fancy. Then, despite having little or no real world experience themselves (or, perhaps, because of this), they draw heavy-handed conclusions about the state of the world, and if what you’re saying doesn’t fit within the frame of those conclusions, they assume you must be nutty, devious, or downright wrong

Then they come to you with eyebrows raised, dissonance that needs soothing, and doubts that need to be resolved, ready to engage you in a battle of ideas.

But I don’t need to battle their ideas, and neither do you. I, for one, have heard them all a million times before, and so will you if you remain in this space long enough. I have even tested them, just to see how they stack up to the alternatives (or, often, because I initially thought these ideas were right, too, and didn’t test out what I currently do until I tried the mainstream approach and found it decidedly lacking in impact).

So, I tell them what I know if they’re interested and send them off to go try it out, but then, if they can’t or won’t do that, I give them a gentle shrug. My days of arguing religion and politics are far behind me.

I am not your pastor, nor can I be, nor will I.

The Salvation of Experimentation

So, if you find yourself damned to the hell of eternal speculation, how to you make it out? Wherein lies your salvation?

The answer, my children, lies not with proclamation, but experimentation.

real empiricists test

Only by experimenting for yourself will you acquire the real world reference points to know what works and what does not.

Only by running your own trials will you discover that XYZ piece of advice from ABC source does not work from you, for whatever reason, but DEF advice and GHI advice from MNO other source work perfectly.

Only by tweaking and trying and playing around will you build an accurate model of the world, instead of a derivative model based on others’ derivative models that were themselves derived from derivatives further still.

Real empiricists test.

You won’t learn how to ask a girl out by reading every article and watching every video on the Internet, asking all of your friends, and then averaging those answers for your winner.

That’s like trying to decide what option to pursue to treat the cancer you’ve been newly diagnosed with having by reading everything online you can get your hands on, talking to a few doctors, and getting a bunch of friends’ and confident strangers’ opinions, and then picking the average of all of that: “Drink 5 green smoothies every day between the hours of 3 PM and 2 AM, and meditate on the 7 chakras after lunch.”

Instead, you pick someone who seems like he knows what he’s talking about (hopefully, in the cancer example, an oncologist of some sort), test out what he’s telling you to do, and find out if it works.

The Futility of “Convince Me”

Over the years, I’ve had various people come to me and ask me to “convince them.”

I used to get mired in trying my hand at it, but these days, my response is always the same: “No.”

Why should anyone spend his precious time and lifeblood trying to convince someone to go try out something he can just go try out?

I’m not going to try to convince you there’s snow on the ground. Go stand up and go look for yourself. Or don’t. You’re the one who keeps saying you want to go sledding. What’s it to me, or anybody else, if you do or don’t?

My theory these days is that the “convince me” people are not actually looking to “find the answer” for the thing they’re allegedly trying to find the answer for.

You know what I think they want? Debate. Hot, dirty, lusty debate.

Which is totally great and bully for them, but when you’re a busy person, debating with people about whether they ought to buy Cavendish bananas or Lady Finger bananas when they’ve never tried either and don’t want to try one until they’re certain they’re going to like it is an exercise in futility. It adds nothing to my life, and if you’re a busy person who’s on the make himself, chances are it adds nothing to your life too.

And if you find yourself doing this... endlessly questioning and looking for more debate about something that you could just go and do?

Ask yourself WHY you’re doing it.

Is it because you’re scared to take the plunge and are just looking for ways to stall doing so?

Or... is it because you really don’t CARE about taking action, and instead care more about “being right” – and asserting some kind of intellectual dominance over anyone with differing world views from yours?

I’m happy to have people try out the stuff I lay out for them to do, but I’m fine for them to do something entirely different if they prefer, or nothing at all. We each of us lives his own life, does his own thing, and selects his own path.

But please, I beg you – don’t come to me and tell me you’re “skeptical.”

You SHOULD be skeptical – but I’m not here to convince you. Convincing you is your job. Or rather, the job of your tests.

Want to be convinced? Shut the laptop or put away the smart phone, get up, open the door, and go talk to some girls.

They will do far more convincing for you one way or another in 10 hours of approaching and attempting than a thousand hours of debating Chase Amante’s recommendations with Chase Amante could ever do.

Real empiricists test, my friends.

Now, get thee to some women, and engage thyself in thine experiments.


Chase AmanteAbout the Author: Chase Amante

Chase woke up one day in 2004 tired of being alone. So, he set to work and read every book he could find, studied every teacher he could meet, and talked to every girl he could talk to to figure out dating. After four years, scads of lays, and many great girlfriends (plus plenty of failures along the way), he launched this website. He will teach you everything he knows about girls in one single program in his Mastery Package.


Get Your FREE eBook on Texting Girls

how to text girls pdf

Sign up for our email insights series and get a copy of our popular ebook "How to Text Girls" FREE. Learn more ...

Related Articles from


Anonymous's picture

Yes, my Lord. :-)

Joking aside, in my early years as a combative guy I spent many pointless hours engaged in heated debate with other men over, well, everything. One friend helped snapped me out of it when he flatly asked why I complain so much. So, one reason why people may be doing what they do is that they just want to bitch, piss, and moan.

The other thing I noticed is both sides have the belief that they are right. Yes, they believe the other person is wrong and that they themselves must be right. After all, that's how arguments are supposed to work.

I've learned over the years that it is a waste of my time and my happiness level to argue with people. Both of us end up angry and upset at each other and in the end nothing gets resolved.

May I make an observation to that end for you, Chase? You have said in articles past that you dislike when someone makes a claim with only anecdotal proof rather than hard evidence. You then seem to derive a sense of pleasure in ripping apart their arguments. Then you say that you do not wish to waste your precious time arguing with someone but proceed to write a 1000+ word article. In other words, you're contradicting yourself. I hope that you understand I am simply making an observation here.

Franco's picture

You have said in articles past that you dislike when someone makes a claim with only anecdotal proof rather than hard evidence. You then seem to derive a sense of pleasure in ripping apart their arguments. Then you say that you do not wish to waste your precious time arguing with someone but proceed to write a 1000+ word article.

This is true, but the difference is the purpose of Chase's argument here, which is to end all further arguments.

If you've noticed one thing about arguments like the type Chase mentions in this article is that the underlying purpose of the argument is to spur more arguments! People just argue because they like to argue! They like the ego boost obtained if they can wear down the opponent! They like the feeling of just being "right."

..But not only does that waste time, but no one also learns anything.

So Chase's "argument" here is to tell people to stop arguing and go TEST. As a moderator on the forums, I also get rather annoyed when inexperienced members argue with the advice I give them. If you don't want my advice, then don't ask for it. I give the advice because it has worked for me and it has worked for countless other individuals that I have given the advice to who have actually gone out and tested it. And if any of them feel like they aren't achieving the results that I achieved, I ask them to give me a detailed report so that I can correct the portion that was executed incorrectly.

So if you're going to argue with the content of a website, then this isn't the website to do it on. Chase isn't here to argue with people -- he's here to give advice to those who are willing to try it and use it.

Ideally, this article would result in being the last time he would have to quote a commenter's skepticism and then explain himself. THAT would be the point of this article. =)

- Franco

Chase Amante's picture


Well, I do enjoy a good debate. You have me there, Anon! I grew up in a household filled with constant debate about anything and everything, and I don’t know if it’s learned or inherited, but I can be a bit of a bulldog in that arena.

If I said I dislike claims based on anecdotal proof, hopefully I was fairly clear in saying I meant “hearsay”, because if I sweepingly claimed ALL anecdotal proof, well… I’m sort of arguing against most of the material on this site, since the majority of it comes from firsthand experiences and observations of friends and others.

As for why I post articles clarifying my stance on specific fears, questions, reservations, or other sentiments, Franco said it best:

Ideally, this article would result in being the last time he would have to quote a commenter's skepticism and then explain himself. THAT would be the point of this article. =)

Writing something like this is a way of optimizing for me - it clears up any questions or uncertainties regular readers have on a thing, and when a passerby starts raising the same objection, all I’ve got to do is say “Go here, and read this.” ;)


Zac's picture


whoever you are.

I shall note that Chase is one of the most humblest of people i know. IF one is to derive pleasure for kicking people's ass because the guy thinks he knows better, then maybe that's just how society(individuals) probably perceives it.

It's like a drunk guy picking a fight in a bar with a martial artist who is just there to relax and drink beer.

One way or another, you have to address them.


Anonymous's picture

Is there an article on this, or maybe someone can answer this outright. But why is it that mainstream dating advice is so contrary to the dating advice given on this site ? Why is it that there is almost no agreement ?

Chase Amante's picture


It's probably worth doing it's own post on, yeah - I've noted it down on the GC article queue. But I'd probably boil the difference down to mainstream dating advice attempting to advise guys to succeed under several assumptions:

  • Guys who need advice are not sexy lover types - thus, they are competing exclusively for the boyfriend role

  • When advising a guy, the guy is usually asking for advice on a specific girl, and most people try to advise him within that framework (rather than, say, telling him to quit focusing on one girl and start focusing on improving with women as a skill set)

  • When advising someone to succeed with a specific individual, your advice becomes risk averse, since you don't want him coming back to you and saying, "I tried what you said and she totally rejected me!" So, you will tell him to take the slow, safe, cautious path; and if he fails to get her, well, it's not because of anything you told him to DO (since you didn't really tell him to do all that much, and what you did tell him to do wasn't objectionable in the slightest), and instead it will just appear to be because it "wasn't meant to be"

  • As an advice giver, if you never hear negative feedback from people saying, "I tried this and it didn't work," you never realize you're giving out flawed or unhelpful advice - and most people, in a dearth of feedback, tend to overestimate their abilities as advice-givers and just assume they know more about any given topic than everybody else

Those would be my main reasons for why mainstream dating advice is so different. It's focused on a different problem than GC is; the problem GC's focused on solving is "how do you do better with women and up your odds", while the problem mainstream dating advice is focused on is "how do you not get rejected by that cute girl you like."


charles dickens's picture

hey chase m Andy but put my name as dickens cause guys who want stupid answers from u need to know that the answer to all is SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST
in your book you yourself say that 2 WAYS 2 SUCCESS R :
YOU R HELPING GUYS LIKE ME to choose that path but being a Dickens follower I know that it is me who want 2 walk the path....

nd thats y i want your every reader of yours to

and chase i guess you might b boiling while writing this piece .... chill all r not duffers some know your real meaning... :)

Anonymous's picture

All of you looking to argue in this comment section, be aware, as your just making it easier for Chase to pinpoint the guys who really need help in the game of seduction. You will be the guys he will target for selling his next book!

Hahaha Chase, I see what you're doing with this article. You're enticing those whom don't have the sound fundamentals given on this blog to argue your motives. Some guys don't realize that most of the advice given on this blog is fully congruent with the next article. As you said a million times, some guys will never understand the concept of asymmetric returns which leads to questioning your blog. I've gone through many seduction articles and forums, and by far, yours has been exactly what I was looking for.

In all seriousness though, this blog has given me the most results.

Chase Amante's picture

Cheers, Anon - I'm happy to hear you're getting solid results!

And actually, no ulterior motive with this piece - I'm not that complex (usually). I just wanted the guys who want to have theoretical debates about the value of the basics to break free of the logic trap that implies you can somehow gain deep knowledge of a field without deep experience of a field, and instead get out and test.

Testing will set you free...!


Anonymous's picture

Hey Chase! Awesome article and great to see you not letting these types of people affect the productivity of the website. I'll try my best to phrase my question... How can one improve himself in situations like when somebody is trying to really pressure you into something but you don't want to and you feel kind of submissive, get it? How do you behave in order to come off as a guy that doesn't get phased by awkward situations? That's the best I got and hopefully you understand what I was trying to ask. Thanks!

Chase Amante's picture


The best thing you can do here is get yourself out of the situation pronto. While in it, keep everything s-l-o-w... how you move, how you respond to things, how you blink your eyes and turn your head. This gives you time to think, and makes you come across relaxed and powerful.

It's helpful to have hard rules for dealing with sketch situations - e.g., "Sorry, I don't make decisions on anything over $100 the same day," or taking a default stance of, "If you're going to push me, then my answer is 'no.'" The latter is very powerful - you can tell people, "Look, I need to think about it," but if they keep pushing you, it's, "Okay - if you absolutely need an answer right now, then it's 'no.'"

If someone's too pushy, usually, it's better to walk away and get some space to think clearly than it is to just capitulate and go along with it.


The M's picture

Hi Chase,

Cool article.

I just saw a comment about beta males and clogged nasal passages, which got me thinking about a related question: why is it that the "stereotypical nerd" (mainly in movies - or maybe just cartoons, lol) has a nasal voice? I'd say most nerds in real life don't have that problem, but the stereotype had to come from somewhere, right?

The M

Chase Amante's picture


You know, I've never given this much thought. The hottest, most popular girl in my high school had a SUPER nasal voice... I thought it was endearing at the time (although I also had an 8-year crush on her, though at least it wasn't completely one-sided... she recently married my doppelgänger).

I think it's just because nasal-y voices sound whiney... they sound like a person is comp-LAAAAAINNNINGGG. Think Fran Drescher in The Nanny, if you remember that show. It's perfect for a nerdy, annoying guy on TV, even if most real life nerds are nothing like their television counterparts in that respect.


uForia's picture

Something that I posted out of curiosity became converted into a full blown article. Doesn't that contradict your Law of Least Effort? Just kidding, it is an important post to remind us of the importance of practicality, so I appreciate that you wrote this article. I find no need to defend myself in any way, nor go on the offensive either right now. It is simply your interpretation that mattered, and considering how text is horrible communication, this is precisely why I never "chat" with girls on text messaging (I remember you said before that the only purpose of text message is to set up logistics). Now I look back at my comment, and I find it interesting how I intended to show my curiosity for your motivations behind Girlschase, but yet you focused mainly on just that one sentence. I think for most new guys, skepticism comes up when they follow your instructions but it blew up anyways, which questions your legitimacy. It is uncertain for many beginners like myself whether your method needs more practice or it's just random PUA junk. Again, I didn't say this to offend you or anything (I think you're probably mature enough to not be offended anyways), as I'm sure you had difficulties finding what works and what doesn't as well.

Sorry if this is selfish, but many of us beginners simply don't want to reinvent the wheel, which is why we question every time we have to make an extended investment towards mastering one of your principles if it didn't work out so well at first.

Will Legend's picture

I'd argue the wheel has never truly been invented in the first place.

Maybe we've discovered better ways to get from point A to point B, but we've never fully invented a mechanism as foolproof as a wheel.

I say this because from personal experiences, different "tactics" work for different girls. Different "tactics" work for different situations. We're all unique, and our life's worth of experiences defines how we interact with others.

Same with the girls we interact with. They're all unique.

Does that mean that all theory is BS? No, they're ideas based from the author's own experiences, which means it's possible to replicate. But again, it's not foolproof.

Here's my take: all of this theory is particularly useful for beginners who don't even know where to begin. But once they get to a certain point where they have a pool of ideas to test, then start testing away. The faster you can test new ideas and get feedback, the better you get at ANYTHING.

Nick's picture

Hey uforia,
Yeah, it can seem like you are getting made fun of when a seemingly innocent comment will be singled out among dozens to be put on an article, you are not being made fun of though, that is not any writers intention on this site. Your comment actually was used to help just pave the introduction to the main idea of what the article is about, one that wants to inform the reader of how skeptical people will react to unconventional ideas( which is why the topic only focused on one line in your comment, and not on the rest, he responded to the rest of your comment on the original page if you want to check that out), how they will argue only to reassure themselves of what they have heard, because that is where their comfort zone is, and that you should not waste your time with them.

Chase wants to minimize headaches for many who are learning these things and the challenges that will arise from it and your comment helped spur an idea for another one. So, I want to thank you for that. Your initiative helped many readers on this site.

Also , I see the law of least effort being misinterpreted by many and Chase did not invent it, it has been a term for a long time before him, Chase uses it so the reader can understand easier why some people seem cool(like atheletes, musicians, or people who pick up chicks easily in front of others) and why women gravitate to them.

Anyway, many people think LOLE means do nothing if the job or goal requires work or ignore the situation if it is trying to bite you in the ass because to do otherwise requires effort. That is not the point of LOLE though, LOLE is to make the least effort and get the best result for your goal at the same time. Chases goal for the site is to inform the reader of techniques and mindsets to use to speed growth and minimize headaches, so instead of typing a response each time something like what the article refers to gets posted to comments(and there are many) instead Chase can just link a full detailed article for them instead of typing the same response over and over, sounds like LOLE being put to work doesn't it. ;)

On the last part of your comment, well... Chase does say in most of his articles that this requires tons of work and if you are a beginner with women that it will take more than one try to get the hang of it. It's not like a calculator for math problems. You are going to have to decide if getting good with women is worth the time, effort, and frustration because there is no other way. I can attest to what this site upholds if it makes a difference. I was one of the most awkward kids you could meet and a friends mother said I reminded her of Napolean Dynamite. I had sex only FOUR times before I turned 18, so I was definitely a beginner. Let me tell you it is worth all the doubt and frustration you will experience at first and that if you persist;eventually, you will be on another level than most men will be for the rest of your life. Again, thanks for taking the initiative to post your original comment.

Cheers and much success,

Chase Amante's picture


I’ll second what Nick weighed in with. I’m not making fun of you, and sorry if I threw you to the wolves on this one; that wasn’t my intention. I was focused on the objection here, not the man - this is one I’ve been encountering ever since I first waded into this niche almost a decade ago. Guys pop up with the, “Hey, I’m skeptical; why should I believe this works?” question, and I realize that feels like a relevant question when you’re in that mindset, but when you’re coming from somewhere different, it’s alien.

Like, when I found pickup material for the first time, after going it alone for a while, my immediate reaction was, “Wow, this sounds cool; and so does this! And this too! Awesome - let me go do it and see if I can make it work.” And then if I failed at making something work, it was, “Okay; let me go ask someone more experienced why this isn’t working and see if I’m missing something, or if there’s something better I can do instead of this thing.”

So when you’re like, “Hey, here’s what you can do to achieve thing X!” and someone’s like, “I’m not sure if I believe you,” you’re like, “Uh… huh?” the first couple of times, then you say, “Wait, let me re-explain that,” then try to explain yourself a little more clearly. Then the guy’s still not sure, and needs more convincing; so, you try again. Then again, and again once more. After a few years of fielding these requests, you realize that no amount of explaining ever clarifies or convinces to the other party’s satisfaction, and you end up sucked into an infinite loop of explaining and receiving pushback, and explaining and receiving pushback, and it never ends. The only thing that ever satisfies the guy is getting him to go out and actually do a thing and see it for himself.

Anyway, I saw your comment, and immediate reaction was, “Not THIS argument AGAIN!” and then there was the cherry on top of, “Hey… are you sure you’re not trying to manipulate me into being a failure with women so you can get laid more?” remark which was just kind of, “What?” I’d already been having an annoying week with various minor staffing issues and whatnot… probably was operating on too short a trigger.

And, other parts of your comments I addressed in a reply to that comment specifically; this article was just about speaking to the specific objection (“I’m skeptical”), rather than addressing the man. I reserved my response to your comment for that itself.

Your point here on beginners questioning legitimacy after going out and trying their hand at methods and having it blow up in their faces is a good one, and one probably deserving a post in its own right. I'll see if I can do one on that (that DOESN'T throw you to the wolves!).


Anonymous's picture

Can you do an article on how to get girls if you're a man that's short? I'm about 5'5 so I imagine I have to do things somewhat differently than guys who are average height or taller.

Chase Amante's picture


Yes - Jerome (the guy who wrote "Asian Guys and White Girls: The Secret to Success" - I think he's 5'3" or 5'4" if memory serves) was working on an article about this for us; I'll check back in with him and see how that's coming.


J.B's picture

Mastering anything takes time not one week or one month. For some, depending on the way they were raised even years. It's not the concepts taught here that are unfeasible, but your drive and will to see things through and see if there is a change in what you hope to master, my guess women. Personally, almost every subject/concept Chase covers and explains is something i have seen or experienced personally in my life, not a credible source in your eyes, but ask the members of the forum and base you data off them if you wish. I do not need convincing or doubt what is taught here because i have seen it many times to the precise points Chase makes about them in his articles. He and another seducer i follow are the only ones with knowledge that is very real, grounded, and field tested countless times, thus it is the reason i visit the site because there is no theory just results being discussed. No "just be Alpha dude", "Hold frame", "Be confident" articles without proper follow through here just the facts and the results which i look in any article i read about seduction. So again, if you do not believe in what Chase or any writer here explains and tries to teach kindly leave the site and look for your answers elsewhere. Or actually go out and try it for yourself and write a Field Report about it on the forum. I'm not saying you are but whatever you decide do not be like a woman who is an attention whore and cannot stop and revels in bringing negative or pointless attention to a topic that probably has been covered many times here and other countless sites, books, and other media.

Brian48's picture

Don't sweat the haters Chase, anyone with an analytical mind that's been threw the trial and error of trying to get laid consistently with the least amount of effort due to having "the right stuff" per se would appreciate your insights esp. since they are grounded in realism and very specific, and not on trendy idealisms and flimsy gimmicks. I can read an article of yours and simply take a look at the world around me and in certain instances better understand peoples behavior, when in the past I chalked up a lot of demonstrations to just people being crazy or stupid.

I came to the conclusion that a man(or at least me) should move fast with women before I ever read any of your stuff years ago simply because one day I took a look back at my bang history and the FACT was that the girls I got I got pretty swiftly and the ones I courted for an extended period of time I didn't close except for a hand full. I made a mental note of that and decided to try to ALWAYS go for the panties as soon as possible and if to much time and effort where required abort ship.

But like I said I made that decision years ago and to me it was a matter of common sense and being self aware and it wasn't rocket science. Now when you in your articles broke down and explained WHY men should move fast( the real dynamics behind it)and the power obtained when a man was successful at doing so it hit me as some good sound insight esp. from a business standpoint.

Anyway my point is anyone with any experience on the prowl with any self awareness would appreciate this site for its insights on social matters so I wouldn't stress the haters.

Chase Amante's picture

Cheers, Brian. Sounds like you had a pretty sound analytical process already before hitting this site.

Most guys aren't haters, I don't think, but they get frustrated or confused because what they're hearing doesn't match up with the mental model they have running already. It creates dissonance for them, and they push back. Some of the time you see this, it's a guy going through a rough patch; other times, it's a guy on the verge of auto-rejection, throwing out a last-gasp cry for help. Occasionally, you'll get guys who hang around and take this sulky kind of mentality like, "I don't know what it is, but it doesn't work for me; are you sure this stuff works for everyone?" and you can never really get a clear reason out of them what they're doing wrong because they don't know themselves (although usually it's just not doing enough approaching, or pretty stubbornly doing the same wrong things over and over again, while only making minor tweaks on less important parts of their approach).

But, there's not much you can really say that's any more effective than, "Go out, try it for yourself, and decide what you believe after that."


Marty's picture


The main line of argument in this article goes without saying for me; I spent a couple months last May-June trying everything before I ever uttered a peep on the forum or in the comment section. I also drew my own conclusions from my fieldwork: women dress up and look nice to attract men; women love it when men approach them attractively and with panache, regardless of actual outcome, particularly if it comes "out of the blue"; and women absolutely despise men who don't have the gumption to put themselves forward assertively and instead try to wheedle their way into their affections while tiptoeing around the issue in social circle or an occupational context.

That aside, I just want to pick up on one tiny point from your article, which you used purely for illustrative purposes.

Under "mainstream advice" you list "share your feelings with her if you like her".

Now one of those things you recommended, which I started trying very early on, was what you call the "direct opener". For me, that usually looks something like this:

"Hey, I just saw you browsing the produce section. You have the most beautiful slim legs, and I simply couldn't resist coming over to say hello! What's your name?"

Now I know it's not right to go "over the top" and lay on compliment after compliment with a trowel, but a little sincere flattery seems to go a long way. Yet above you recommend caution about sharing too much of your own attraction—presumably lest she feel she "has" you.

Can you speak briefly about how to judge the balance appropriately?

Thank you!

Chase Amante's picture


It's sort of a semantics difference, yeah. Worth clarifying exactly what is meant by each of those.

When I say "going direct", I mean you saying "I find you attractive" from a position of power, strength, confidence, and certainty. As a man, you'll genuinely be complimenting a woman from an "approving of her" point of view (as an authority figure); and you'll be delivering your direct remarks with relatively neutral or somewhat curious / inquisitive tones and expressions.

When I say "sharing your feelings", I mean you're saying "I really like you and hope you like me" from a position of weakness, hope, and uncertainty. You're announcing to a woman that you have no idea how she feels about you, and are leaving yourself at her mercy. It is a handing off of the decision making and steering power to the woman. Much of mainstream dating advice seems to push men in this direction (especially the advice given by women; "Just tell her you like her, and if she likes you too, she'll let you know!", although I think the misinterpretation by unconfident men is really what wrecks this overly-vague advice).

The first (being direct) is good, because it's attractive and reeks of the kind of confidence women really like.

The second (sharing your feelings) is not so good, because unconfident guys hear it and think, "Great! This saves me the work of having to try to seem confident... I can just lay myself at her feet and hope for mercy!" But that isn't what women find attractive, and it almost always results in a swift brush off into the friend zone.


V's picture

Hi Chase, I can approach girls alright at night mostly at the club or leaving from the club. But day game is another story, I don't have any feelings of nervousness nor do I experience the symptoms, but I still have this limiting belief that girls don't want to be approached by strangers. In my head I think, she'll say no, she doesn't want to be picked up, I don't have this and that, and she's not even thinking about letting a guy pick her up. When it comes to night time, I feel it's easier because they know there going to get approached so they tend go give you more leeway. I've noticed with night time girls, that they're extremely flaky, I have approached a few times during day time, but I never got a number from them.

I know they have pills for anxiety and I was wondering does it make a difference with approaching?

Is there anything I can do to believe in myself more to get rid of these limiting beliefs for day game?

Mark my words soon I'll do it and then I can bet ill get approach addiction.

Thank you!!!!

spicedrum's picture

Hello Lovers of Women,

I've followed for 2 months. I am 47 years old, divorced man; yet, look like I'm 35; because I work out and have a second job at a gym and eat right. (though, I party every chance I get).

I believe I'm a natural by pure luck. Yet, GirlsChase and crew speak truths and have highlighted new aspects I had not considered. They have profound insight to the seduction life-style. Finding your true being is the goal of all men; before we burst in a brillant light or fade to obscruity.

I have several lady-friends that enjoy my edge and sexuality and we spend time chasing each other (push-n-pull). And I'm always honest and they with me.

I've taken new hobbies, met new people (men and women) and bedded a few seriously attractive ladies. Life is good.

Bummer part is, I happen to contract herpes 2; way before I found this site and after my divorce. I always let new loves understand my predicament as soon as I see we may be intimate as windows escalate and open.

Suprisingly, due to my fundimentals - being strong, my intentions honest, I bask in abundance through honesty. Yet due to HSPV2, in more than half my interactions, I end up in the friendzone. That is fine, as some women seek my passion and others seek my friendship or Alpha dominance. Regardless, I am surrounded by women.

I see some men envious that down right hate me. Those men cast a weary eye and old, single male friends of mine avoid me. Because I have female attention and they lack confidence to leap forward. (That I have no control of.)

I feel (through comments and forum) that this new idiology of a man's skill to attract women is being scutinized.

GirlsChase and Crew stay steady. No need to justify.

I have to go... My wing-girl just left after chilling. I have my gym job (hotties galore), then errands around town. A two day sex-fiest with a nympho-friend. Then my dream girl for Tango Lessons come Saturday.

Maintain the confidence, style and Law of Less Effort with respect to all; and it is all good. Patience is vertue in all endeavors. Find your nich.

Swig a peace of life.


African boyo's picture

Hi chase

I remember you talking about GISS with one s standing for security what does the rest of the accronym stand for

Chase Amante's picture


The acronyms for this are:

  • G: Growth
  • I: Investment
  • S: Strength
  • S: Security

The latter three are the three "keys", and the first word in the acronym (growth) is a quality that you need in all three aspects throughout the relationship (always seeing growth in her investment in you, your strength in the relationship, and her security with you). The tricky part with growth is that if you grow things too quickly, you can end up setting a growth precedent for yourself that's difficult or impossible to maintain; thus, the biggest thing here is keeping growth occuring steadily, but always at a low enough level that you're never running out of room to keep growing in.

In any event, once the growth stops, the three keys begin to disintegrate and move in the opposite direction; she invests less, your strength begins to wane, and she feels increasingly insecure in the relationship. That's why I have growth positioned as a "meta factor" to the other three keys; it's a driver of them, rather than a standalone component on its own.


Anonymous's picture

Ho chase, is there a way to increase my intelligence or am I set for life?

Chase Amante's picture


You can train yourself up in various fields, with increases your expertise and effectively makes you more intelligent in those fields. Pretty much everything out there is a "field", so if you want to look smart, focus on increasing your expertise in the areas you regularly deal with.

As for the question about posting more pictures of women... check out Tumblr for this! Probably the best place on the web for finding scads and scads of pictures of beautiful, scantily-clad women.


Anonymous's picture

Can you post more pictures of beautiful women? Which celebrities do find most attractive? Just curious!!

V's picture

Hey chase, thanks for all of the feedback. What I was asking mostly about high school was the emotions of the women and the success of sleeping with them. I want to know if I see a girl I went to school with, say just shopping around or something. So I see her and this girl had a whole high school four year crush on me, would she sleep with me since she liked me for so many years?

So yeah, basically im just asking from a emotional point of view from a girl who liked you for four years of her life, while she was dating and sleeping with other men.

I know time isn't a factor because I've seen a few girls that use to like me years later and one girl asked for my number, while being in a relationship and having a kid or two. She was even asking me did I still go with me ex. We never made it pass the texting because I was not really interested in old news.

im just really interested to see if I can give these girls what they wanted before but never got.

Would I girl who liked you for four years and you didn't do anything with and it never ended badly, do you think it's possible to still sleep with this girl with ease since she liked you for so long?

And is it still possible to smash any girl that you knew from back then?

Thank you!!!!

Chase Amante's picture


I’m not sure if anxiety medication helps with approach anxiety. You could try it, though as I understand it some of the side effects aren’t the best - loss of motivation, creativity, and sex drive, to name a few. Better just to push through this obstacle and come out on the other side a stronger, braver, firmer man who’s started his fears in the face and charged headlong into them.

The only thing that will rid you of limiting beliefs when it comes to daytime is meeting girls during the daytime. It’ll only take a few successful interactions for you to realize that, holy crap, some of these girls are actually EXCITED to meet me during the day!

Once you have that realization, those limiting beliefs are history. Caveat is that the experience must come FIRST, which means you have to willpower your way through your fears until you’ve piled up a few good experiences to discredit your current set of beliefs.

On sleeping with girls who liked you in the past, I admittedly don’t have any experience in this area… I’ve just never really put much time into hunting down girls from high school or university, and because I travel so much, I never run into women I knew years ago, either. All I can say here is that from what I’ve seen of other guys, it certainly seems to be possible - I even had an uncle who divorced his wife, ran into a girl he went on a couple of dates with back in high school (but it didn’t work out), and the two of them embarked on a whirlwind romance and have been together a couple of years now. So if you need some evidence of attraction hanging around years later (if it was unrequited and never consummated originally), there’s one for a 45-year gap (they met again in their early 60s).


Mc's picture


I understand that building a connection with a girl through deep diving, relating, active listening, bit of humour etc is in most cases nessacery to a degree, but in some cases (particularly night game) you can be faced with the situation where your talking to a girl an even though you two hardly know each other and have only been speaking for five minutes you can just tell by her body language, voice tonality, eye contact etc that she wants you.

That's an escalation window right?

My question, how do you go about pulling girls who you can tell want you early on into an interaction without sounding a bit too much.

What I mean is, if I asked this girl to come back to mine after we have been speaking for only like 5 minutes mainly using surface level convo won't it sound a bit too soon for her etc, wont she be a bit taken back?

How do I word these pulls?

Something like 'well I know we've only started talking but I'm heading off soon, join me for a drink, could be fun'

Any ideas.

Also how common are these situations where a girl just wants you straight away? I guess it's got a lot to do with having great fundamentals.

And how do you tell a girl who really wants you hard right now and a girl who thinks your sexy etc but doesn't nesacerily want you want right now. Basically how do you know a girl with sex on her mind v a girl who is just somewhat into you.

Chase Amante's picture


When you're going for quick pulls, where you can tell the girl really wants you and you just want to book it as fast as possible, you essentially want to focus on rapidly escalating compliance to get to the next step ASAP.

So that'd look like this: Open --> Move her a few feet --> Chat for a minute --> Turn your body and have her turn with you --> Chat another minute --> Have her come with you to sit down (in a bar/club) or start walking (on the street/in transit) --> If walking outside, just walk her back to your place or hers, without saying anything about where you're going unless she asks, just keep going (if she asks, just say "we're walking and talking!") / if inside, propose the pull once you've moved her around enough or have her sitting with you for a few minutes and she's clearly still bursting at the seams for you.

If you're focused mainly on escalating compliance, you can escalate it, escalate it, escalate it, to the point where taking her home is a logical next step after just a few minutes of interaction, since everything else has escalated so smoothly. No need for much or any deep diving when this is the case; in a quick pull, you'll usually just be focused on keeping it light and keeping it moving.


Jordan M's picture

Chase can you help me out here,

I understand how and when to use deepdiving an I think I'm pretty good at it, I always enjoy finding out stuff about a person and discovering what makes them who they are etc.


I understand that deep diving has its time and place, and when it's not time to deep dive light hearted conversation is the name of the game.

Light convo is not something I'm very good at, I don't know why, I guess because I don't really enjoy it much - To me deepdiving is far more rewarding and interesting.

But I would like to get good at light conversation. Could you give me some ideas on what exactly is meant by this term and how to go
about becoming good at it.

From what I understand its basically banter, cracking a few witty jokes here and there sprinkling in some remarks, a bit of teasing etc.

Thing is, I find it far easy asking probing questions and uncovering somebody's life story then I do comming up with lighthearted stuff - I can never think of anything particularly witty to say etc and always end up deepdiving in situations where it probably is best left alone.

Any tips on light convo would be great and on exactly when and where to use it.

Chase Amante's picture


Light conversation's an art form in its own right, this is true. Some of the resources on this site for this specifically:

... and on keeping things sexual, which you can use quite liberally in light conversation:

As far as coming up with stuff on the fly, it's basically just "practice makes perfect." I have an upcoming article on developing humor and wit (whenever I can get around to it... it'll be a big one), but the gist is going to be "pick a style of humor you like, start preparing quips and remarks in advance and using them in your interactions the next day, and start thinking up responses to things people have said, even if it's after the fact." After a while of doing this, you start to come up with amusing remarks faster and faster, and eventually you're just letting them fly on the spot.


Wolf's picture

Chase, I often have the bad things that happened in my past destroy my mind and sanity. I've improved by myself and I've improved even more with the help of this site. I still have some unwanted habits and traits from the past, but as the days go by im getting stronger and trying my best to change my weaknesses into strengths.

I hate how I use to be so much, I felt I was so weak back then. With everything I did there was always doubt and I never felt aggressive enough. I constantly think over and over again about the people that have done me wrong in my life, the stuff I should of done, and rejections I got. I don't know if the real me is the past or the real me is the guy who grows with self confidence everyday. I don't want to feel like an imposter, now I feel like im capable of handling my business and my confidence has grown so much, I use to not be aggressive and now I am.

I can't even believe how I acted back then and how timid and weak I was. Right now in my mind im having a struggle getting rid of the past negative things ive done and things I went through, im having an extremely hard time getting over on all the girls I should of slept with and guys of should of fucked up.

I went from weak to strong, but I feel im not suppose to be strong because I was weak before.

1. Chase how can I stop thinking about all of the bad things that happened to me before , the mistakes, the regrets, and move on?

2. People I know from school always bring up the bad things from the past. How do I handle all of the trash talk from the embarrassing things that happened to me?

3. Who am I really? The past me or the present? Am I the weak guy I was before? Or am I the person who learned from his mistakes and now is strong?

4. Chase, I know you're all about self improvement. How do you feel about yourself from before when you look back on it? Do you feel the pain from past mistakes and regrets? Do you feel you're the chase before or the chase that you've become now? Do you just forget the past and move on?

My bad for all of the writing, I just had a moment, thank you.

Chase Amante's picture


"You" are, so far as I can tell, a combination of your past (memories and experiences), your personality (emotions and motivations), and your present surroundings (the environment around you right now, and the environment you anticipate being in soon). Each of those things has its own big impact on how you think, act, feel, plan, and perceive.

You are not beholden to your past, though until you overwrite old bad memories with new good ones, it's going to have a big impact on you.

Don't worry about things you did that are bad or embarrassing; so long as you've righted any wrongs, and learned not to make the same mistakes again, you'll be better for having made those lapses in judgment in the past (as discussed in "The Civilized Man"). That's just part of growing up... most folks have gone through a range of hard or embarrassing experiences, some worse than others, but so long as you're still alive, you've always got the opportunity to redefine the path you're on.

When I look back on my past self, there are a few things I think back on that make me feel a little foolish, even some that happened a long time ago. For the most part though, most of the things that once burned me up with embarrassment or shame nor don't even make me bat an eyelash. It's hard to worry too much about those things when you're busy.

As I talked about in "How to Overcome Depression", what I found to be the key to overcoming negative/obsessive thought cycles was simply filling the mind with thoughts about all the projects you're involved in, building toward the future. If you don't have any, pick some you find interesting, and set to work on them; the more focused you are on the future, the less focused you can be on the past; you just don't have the mental bandwidth to spend much time worrying about things that happened years ago anymore.

As for people who keep trying to drag you into the past, get your projects to work on, then boot those people from your life; they are no friends of yours. Unless it's just an occasional ribbing from otherwise forward-looking people, those who will keep bringing up the past are mired in it themselves, and trying to keep you mired in it with them. They're anchors, rather than wings.


Gem's picture

I liked the points made in this article, it’s an interesting topic. It’s very prudent I think that you take the time to address questions like these instead of just blocking them like all too many bloggers or writers do.

[You know what I think they want? Debate. Hot, dirty, lusty debate.]

Yes! I came to this conclusion a while back; for me with guys that “wouldn’t be convinced” I would typically be of the mind “cool, keep not being convinced; I really don’t care either way and while you keep not being convinced by things in life I can keep doing the opposite and experiment/learn new things/gain new experiences”

I never put too much thought into the topic at first (just thought that some people are open to learning and growth and new ideas and change and plenty aren’t or aren’t driven/motivated/curious enough to make any significant sort of change) until I started seeing this with a few different girls I dated who would always be challenging me and trying to best me. I’d always address challenges and be smooth/witty/good with my answers, and completely opposite how a normal guy would respond and I’d see the girls get very turned on by my responses.

At first this was hot and fun and I thought cool nothing really bad here just a little playful bantering. But with some girls I realized a pattern where they would just keep challenging me over random stupid stuff and I’d rebut and they’d go on a bit more and then the conversation would end with them being turned on and horny and stuff. It got annoying with the girls that were otherwise great girls and met plenty of my qualifications but would just keep at this sort of challenging.

It’s sort of your own fault when that happens isn’t it to some degree? Perhaps it’s a precedent I unconsciously created where they could “challenge Gem and get a turn on or rough “I told you so sex” in return”. There was a girl a while back who had challenged me over something so trivial and stupid and I was amused and sort of annoyed and I straight up asked her (not angrily just very candidly), “why do you always do that what does it matter what my reason for that was like do you really care that much”? She couldn’t answer, was like “I don’t know I’m just saying things”. And I came to that conclusion then that they probably get turned on, make an unconscious connection and then start to do that.

What do you think about that here? Is it only some types of girls that do this (or could any girl mold into this if you created a precedent for this)? And are girls that continually challenge and don’t get convinced of what you say not worth being labeled girlfriend material. I think I’ve seen that these girls will be less intent or able to learn things from you out of curiosity because challenging you directly like that seems to be the polar opposite of learning from you here.

I think with girlfriends I like some mix of girls not accepting what I say (challenging it) and seeking to learn from me (being curious). Oh, I should mention comes to mind here that the opposite of the girl that always challenges I think then would be the girl that believes everything you say (and I really don’t like either extreme haha).

Penny for your thoughts,


Chase Amante's picture


Women are turned on by being dominated by a man… it’s essentially a way of testing his strength and finding out that he is, in fact, every bit the Man you thought he was (or more!). So, frequently, they will challenge you when feeling sexually frustrated, and then become very aroused when you make them submit by besting them in the argument one way or another. I think it’s a universal female characteristic… I have yet to encounter a woman who becomes turned OFF when bested in debate or argument by a man.

The natural thing that happens here is that the woman challenges the man, the man dominates her, both get turned on, and then they shag. But of course, that’s very bad for YOU if what you want is as drama-free a relationship as possible.

My strategy has been to be very clear with women after an argument that there’s no sex for the rest of the day or night, and that the reason this is the case is because if we sleep together after an argument, that’s going to create subconscious reinforcement for “argument = hot sex”, which will make her begin causing more and more arguments whenever she wants sex from you. Basically, giving her sex after an argument conditions her to argue with you whenever she’s horny. I’ve seen lots of guys do this, and they can never seem to figure out how they’re reinforcing the behavior, and just spend a lot of time having knock-down-drag-out fights with their women, followed up by hot makeup sex, followed by more fighting not long after, then more makeup sex.

Instead, I tell girls, “Sorry, nope; no sex. If you want sex, next time just ask, or, better yet, come and be sexy and turn me on; if you argue, we can’t have sex, because that’ll send your subconscious brain entirely the wrong message.”

Then, what you end up doing is training the girl that arguing with you = a night of being really turned on but not getting laid, which sucks. So, arguing becomes a rarer and rarer thing, and instead, when a girlfriend is horny and wants sex with you, she either asks for it outright, or comes and does something sexy to make you want it with her too.


KeithCid's picture

Hey there, Chase
I am an active member of the church and also a long time reader of your site as most of your material here are so easily reworded or reconstituted to apply to different aspects of a person's life (and yes, I do use your material as well; though i have to admit i was like that guy who just reads and doesn't test that you mentioned in the article--bookworm and shy guy, cant help it).
though you have constructed this article to avoid semantics, i just have to quote something here
" In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead." (James 2:17, the Bible, NIV). You see, at least in the church that I attend and participate with here in the Philippines, we do promote faith in action; and like you at I least hate sticking to blind dogmas (gets me butting heads with "the religious" and "the church"). The way your "Argument" got worded to define these people makes them out to be more like extremist zealots, leaping on a belief system "on faith" and fighting desperately for it, without really knowing what they are fighting for, why they are fighting, or if there is even a need to fight to begin with. There are many people like this, in and out of the church, because, in the end, people are people, and others just love to argue.
Other than that one minor gripe, I am in total agreement with this article. [and no, I am not here to try and convert people into Christianity, nor denounce the evils of being honest with your intentions with women--and other people--in your interactions, and giving them a memorable experience interactions] But I am here to say that spirituality, instead of religiosity, was and always have been a sort of ancient self improvement movement; and that some of the dogma and outright manipulation of information from those at the top being a means to retain power over men as people realized that being holy is a form of power (in ancient times, priesthood was one of the 5 noble professions)
But I do digress.
In either case, thank you and your team for for writing up some very good insights; it has help me become more aware of myself (many times i read an article and a light goes off "so that's what I've been doing), and has also enabled me to find access to resources that i can immediately test if it resonates with my personality. May you be rewarded manytimes over for the wisdom you share and your humility in doing so. I pray more leaders/mentors be more like you.

Chase Amante's picture


Good points on the nature of faith here. I believe in my desire to drive the point home about the need for testing, I was a little hasty in dismissing faith outright - something I did my best to correct in "At What Point Do You Give Up?"

What I discussed there was that if you really don't believe that a thing is doable or that you have the ability to do it - something that requires faith, until you've actually successfully gone and done it already - you'll never motivate yourself to get up and go do it in the first place.

That would be another way of saying, "What faith motivates, action creates."

So, I'm ultimately in agreement with you - we could all use a dollop of faith... in ourselves, and our ability to make things happen in our lives, first and foremost!


Anonymous's picture

hi chase i'm sorry for upsetting you but i have a strange problem(or i'm just a coward)

i never even kissed a girl (but at least i'm only 18) i started reading your website when i was 16(yes i know you might think its very young) because i was pathetically rejected by my best friend ( i was in love with her since i was 12).

i started working out becvause i was really down and reading your website and other books that seemed interesting and i changed completely.

i was a bit fat little and i had no idea about anything. and became really fit and a lot taller and with a completely different mindset( better i hope) but i can see that a lot of girls find me attractive, okay maybe not a lot but comparing to 0 everything looks like a lot.

my problem is i just can't do anything. its like i know what i want and how to do it but when i am out i just cant even flirt with a girl that i dont know. i act like i'm scared but i dont think that way.
when i'm at home i get motivated because logically meeting girls is no big deal.
just by writing this i really feel ridiculous because by what you write you think we just have to test and do. But when i'm actually out i can´t do anything even in school and with girls i know i can only flirt. but actually doing something i can't. i know this might sound ridiculous but when i'm with a girl and i'm into her and i think about doing something i feel like it's impossible i don't even try to come up with a excuse it's really strange it's like is something i can't reach.
and what is even stranger is that i have a lot of girl friends and with them i am really cool. what i mean is that i can talk to girls and make them attracted to me i had even one girl that i thought i would never had a shot that told me she used to love me( of course she is a high school girl so for them loving anyone might not be what real women think but still i felt great)

so i get even more frustrated because there are girls that maybe are into me and i can't satisfy how can i be a man if i can't be with girls. you can't imagine how frustrating it is. just as an example the girl that i'm into at almost a year now. is my classmate and i think she is attracted to me but she is also in auto rejection because there was a party wher i stayed a hour and a half with her and didn't make any move
and know is just strange between us. i just slightly flirt with her but i can tell she doesn't have a clue that i am into her that much because dont show her and it is like this with every girl i'm slightly into.

and what is more scary is that they are only high school girls who supposely are easy when i get older i suspect that is going to be harder

i just wanted to ask you if you think i have some kind of really serious problem of sexual shame or if i'm just being a coward i would really apreciate a response and i just want what you really think and not what will make me feel better it would really mean a lot to me and i know it's pathetic to ask for advise like this but after 2 years of not being able to do anything i'm almos giving up so your honest opinion would mean a lot to me

thank you for your time and keep up with the good work !

Chase Amante's picture


No, nothing unusual there - tons of guys go through this. It's always scary when you're new, because every single interaction feels life-or-death. What's happening is simply that because you're not in a place where you have women in your life, every woman you could potentially hit it off with if things go right feels like a *REALLY BIG DEAL* to your brain, and you start freaking out and thinking, "Oh no, I'd better not mess this up! I won't get another chance with her if I do!"

There's only one way around it - sucking it up and making yourself do it anyway. It's like being terrified of roller coasters, or spiders, or anything else - the only thing that's going to get rid of that fear is forcing yourself onto a roller coaster, or grabbing a spider and letting it crawl on your arm. Fear is governed by the oldest part of your brain, and the only thing that part of your brain cares about is raw, visceral experience - have you experienced a thing and found it isn't that scary, or have you not? Until you've experienced approaching, talking to, and flirting with new women and realized it doesn't cause the earth to open up underneath you and swallow you, your brain will continue to throw spikes of terror at you every time you entertain the thought of making some flirty remark to a random girl.

You've just got to feel the fear and do it regardless.


Add new comment

The Latest from