GIRLS CHASE MONTHLY SUBSCRIPTION
• Unlimited access to GirlsChase.com
Women are vexing creatures, aren’t they?
Men often find aspects of basic female nature completely perplexing. Women, for their part, often find many aspects of basic male nature an utter bore.
I talked about the multi-layered aspects of what
women want before; today I’m going to talk about why exactly
they make it so indecipherable what they want in any one moment for men
(and frequently themselves).
Have you ever watched a man who is good with women? You’ll notice women do all kinds of womanly things around him that would make most men boil, while he just laughs.
How can such a man be so nonplussed around the madness that is woman?
We see men commenting on Girls Chase about this often. A guy comes on and rages about how women don’t make any sense and men shouldn’t have to change one lick for them. Shades of the good old fashioned “just be yourself and everything will work out fine” argument which took over popular thought sometime in the 20th century with its ineffectual pseudo-intellectual quips.
There is one element you see again and again that drives men to tear their hair out in patches though, and that’s this: women change their minds like monsoon season weather. One minute it’s pounding sheets of rain, and the next minute the sun’s out bright with nary a cloud in sight.
Most men do not understand this... while the men who are good with women just smile and laugh. “Girls are silly and cute,” such men say.
You may know this mentality is better intellectually, but perhaps you still find yourself bugged by women’s behavior emotionally. Happens to lots of guys.
With regard to the man irritated by women’s behavior, and the man at
peace with it:
How can these two men have such totally different views on women – and what’s really going on in women’s heads that make them so darn flakey?
Comments
Great Article
Well done Chase, another brilliant article. Although all of yours are so damn readable, and offer so much.
Your definitely right about women and them being inconsistent and indecisive. It's definitely something I have realised. And I don't mind it. Not one bit really.
I think this is why it's so important to have abundance though, and why so many men DO get worried when their girlfriend or potential hookup starts acting a bit different. They can't handle the fact that she may leave. So they get all flustered and call her out on things like her being indecisive etc.
Few questions:
(1)
Doesn't this inherent nature make relationships very difficult with women? I mean truly good, happy rewarding relationships. I mean, you say in the article how the smallest of things can cause women to just suddenly shift. And I get how in a simple interaction you can circumvent this happening by playing a perfect game, but in a relationship how damn hard is it to run things perfectly? Eventually you are going to do something or say something wrong and make her wonder 'hmm, is this the guy I really though he was' etc etc. ]
Makes me wonder if truly happy relationships that last for longer than a couple of years are really that realistic.
(2)
In the last article you posted I asked you about the perfect facial expression, and you said that you thought it was best to go neutral. I kind of get how that makes sense. I guess it makes you seem less intimidating, and more open to being 'activated' as you put it. Thing is...
I always feel like I appear a sexier object when I walk around with a kind of cute and sex 'bedroom eyes' look on my face. I am sure I do look sexier.
But would you say that you recommend going neutral because it stops you looking too sexy too soon? Is that the idea?
I have been reading a lot lately about how seduction is a process of gradual escalation. Before I always used to assume be as completely sexy as possible from the off. Give her the deepest bedroom eyes you can, look into her soul, start asking probing questions etc etc.
But perhaps that was all to much. Perhaps it was too intimidating and I should have been ramping it up slowly. What are your thoughts on this?
Does it make more sense to tone back that sexuality earlier on? and gradually ramp it up. IS this why you recommend the neutral expression to start with?
(3)
Sorry another facial expression question (it's just an area I am looking at improving at the moment, as I've always had really bland expression, so its always on my mind)
While you stay neutral to begin with, when just walk about etc. When you actually start an interaction with a girl do you switch the expression to anything in particular? Or do you just use which ever expression suits the situation.
-
I guess what I am asking is: if 'neutral' is your walkin about not talking default expression - what is your default 'interacting with women' default expression? If any.
Thanks so much Chase. Appreciate all the hard work you do.
Relationship Counterbalances & Facial Expressions on Opening
Anon-
When it comes to relationships, maybe think of a good partnership as something that allows the average man's constancy to absorb some of the average woman's inconstancy. So long as you're pretty evenly matched for what your personality is, your relationship skill level is, and your level of abundance, the slings and arrows of day-in-day-out relationship running won't get to you.
Maybe think of a normal relationship as one in which the man's steadiness absorbs some of the woman's inconstancy and allows her to relax more and be more reliable, and the woman's inconstancy providing some drive and direction to the man's steadiness and prevents him from getting stuck in place too long in the wrong place. If there's an imbalance - he's too steady for her, or she's too inconstant for him - major problems ensue. (and you can also have the steady woman / inconstant man scenario, though it's much less common)
The happiest relationships are the ones where the partners get into it with complementary degrees of inconstancy/steadiness, then either don't change, or change at the same rate, so they always counterbalance. Where relationships fall apart is when one partner changes while the other does not (e.g., the man becomes much more steady than she is inconstant and she starts feeling like she doesn't affect him and he doesn't care about her anymore - which may be the case; she's no longer challenging him enough... or the man becomes much less steady, and she no longer feels like he's strong or masculine enough).
Re: early sexuality, depends what you're going for. If you're trying to screen exclusively for girls who are looking to hook up immediately, being very sexual right away is good. Downside is most women aren't looking for insta-sex, which means you'll come off too strong for most girls. If you want to cast a wider net, typically better to start off less strong, and gradually stir in stronger vibes to see where she's at. This way you can still get the girls who are kinda down to hook up now, and the girls who aren't looking to hook up now but will give you their numbers and meet up with you later too.
Re: facial expression on opening, yeah, definitely don't go in neutral on open. If you're doing a high energy opener (street stop, girls dancing in club, etc.), you usually want a big smile and a friendly facial expression. If you're doing a low energy opener (girl waiting in line, girl propped up against the bar, etc.), typically something more subdued / subtle / sexual is in order - a sly grin, glancing at her out of the corner of your eyes, things like that.
Chase
Disqualifying
Chase.
Does a really sexy man with killer fundamentals have to disqualify himself as a boyfriend verbally?
Or, is he already disqualified as a result of being so damn sexy?
Can you give me your thoughts on this.
Is adding a little drop of 'Uhh yeh actually I am going abroad travelling in a week for about a month' always a good idea which will always help solidify that disqualification. Or is it not always needed?
Disqualifying When Sexy
L-
Not usually, with most girls.
With really inexperienced girls or undersocialized women, he may have to.
He may also have to in environments where boyfriend options are scarce (or with demographics where boyfriend options are scarce), or if he's coming from a highly preferred boyfriend stereotype for that girl.
e.g., really sexy guy whom she knows has a good job and has had a string of monogamous relationships starts talking to her. She's been single and hooking up for a while, but now she's casting about for a boyfriend. True, this guy is incredibly sexy... but he's perfect boyfriend material, and she even knows he does LTRs. Chances are, unless he can change her mind, he goes right into the "future boyfriend" box.
I usually prefer vague over specific personally with when I'm traveling overseas. I always think specific will work, and then it never does (at least for me). Might be a vibe thing. Vague works better in my experience. I think this is because even if she thinks you're just a lover, what may excite her more than that is the idea of having you as this secret lover she sees repeatedly for follow-up liaisons. When you take that away and tell her you're out of here next week, or tomorrow, or whenever, then it's "Oh. It's just sex. Not some torrid, scandalous affair," and that seems to nix a whole bunch of the girls who'd otherwise go for it with you.
Chase
Up/down/left/right
I'm reading this article and I'm starting to see where some of my mistakes are when I'm handling resistance. Especially out the gates. When I approach women their feelings for me are all over the place.
It's either:
1. How many girls do you have
2. Why don't you have a gf
3. You seem like a player
4. I wanna smash but because of 1-3. I can't.
I'm starting to realize that staying light on my feet, and rolling with shit tests is apart of the fun. It's kinda like slap boxing ur younger brother. You move and groove because you know in the end your the champ. But ur brother can sneak a couple pops in as well. So stay ready.
So I guess my question is ... How do you stay in that moment where you have to be clutch?
Staying in the Moment
SB-
Yeah, if you're getting that stuff, means you're in a good place.
One suggestion: try making yourself a little less smooth. You generally get the "you seem like a player" stuff when you're coming across as too smooth... it seems practiced, like you do this all the time. Add a little roughness to it and the player objections stop coming up.
Staying in the moment is a combination of experience and momentum/excitement, I find. Experience, so that even when you're starting off slow and you're not excited, you can still roll with the punches. Momentum/excitement comes into play if you've racked up a couple of wins and you're feeling good, or you're chatting up a girl you really like that things feel promising with.
One "emergency fix" I've found though is if you notice your brain starting to wander, or you're having trouble thinking of what to say next, it's helpful to mentally tell yourself to stop trying to think so far ahead and just knock it off and listen to what she's saying and talk to her about that. Just a quick mental "Stop it; pay attention to her" usually is enough. That plus reminding yourself to escalate investment are usually the only reminders you need unless you're actively practicing new additions to your approach (lines you're trying out, stories, tech, a challenge you've set for yourself, etc.).
Chase
Topics of Interest
The streak never ends! Once again, Chase, you have composed a well-written, insightful article full of fresh analysis (I've read every one of your articles, and the way you manage to avoid rehashing is impressive).
I don't mean to impose, but I wanted to leave a list of topics that I would be immensely interested to read your take on. I only do this because you have mentioned that you were considering backing off from writing as frequently on this site, the reason being that you felt that you were running the risk of becoming redundant, and did not want to produce anything of less than top-notch quality and relevance. However, you later said you were going to maintain a more direct involvement with articles on the site because....well, let's face it, your articles are very good and bring in a lot of traffic for the site.
Given this situation (of you running dry of engaging topics to discuss yet still needing to write), I decided I would like to leave a list of articles that I personally would love to read if authored by you. Granted, you might have LOADS of topics you still want to cover or have recently thought of, in which case I am mistaken and I understand if you have no need or interest in my suggestions. (I'm sure there is a never-ending line of people who want to tell you, "This is what you should write on because I KNOW WHAT'S BEST". I don't want to put myself in that irksome choir....I'm just an interested student raising his hand).
But...in case my view is correct, I hope my list might serve as a helpful/ intriguing suggestion.
List of potential topics:
1) How to Be Dominant in a Fast-Paced, Competitive Environment
(let's say, such as a rugby locker room or a very busy job where there really isn't time to deep dive, but interactions are under a minute each...maybe enough time for a quick joke or very short story. Should you change styles (from smooth to talkative guy)? Should you talk less or talk more, forget subtlety and be more blatant in your confidence/ control? Do you change social styles? How do you act differently with this group as opposed to a group of people in a bar/club/ at school?)
2) A Day in the Life of Chase Amante
(I personally learn very well from imitating successful people by learning about their daily habits/ routines. This could include a current update as well as what you did when you were most fully engrossed in mastering seduction.)
3) The Mindset of a Winner
(I know you touched on a few points in articles about how to be dominant/ concerning the winner effect, I believe, and also you are not a big fan of "mental game", since many people know what to do intellectually but simply don't take action. Still, I would be interested to know how you approach social situations, dates, business meetings, meditation, etc. What questions/ attitudes do you consistently maintain in your mindset? I love reading about the mindset of athletes in the face of big games or setbacks, and I would be curious to see a detailed explanation of your own approach.)
4) Analysis of Hollywood Villains and Bad Boys
(I really don't know what movies you watch, but I can can think of several characters who have very powerful, mesmerizing, and charismatic personalities. I can think of a few off the top of my head: Don Draper (Mad Men), Michael Corleone (The Godfather), Bill the Butcher (Gangs of New York), and especially Colonel Hans Landa (Inglourious Bastards). It would be interesting to read your take on these and other movie characters, almost like a character study pointing out the particular traits they demonstrate. Perhaps you could make it a series, and include videos like in your article 'How to Be Cool'.)
This is only the beginning of my list, but I think I have filled up more than enough space for a single comment. Like I said, these might not resonate with or interest you at all, in which case just ignore them; nothing personal whatsoever. However, if any of the above topics seem worthwhile, or you would like to see more of my suggestions, I would love to share them with you either in future comments or directly to a business email.
I hope I have not been too long-winded. Here's to looking forward to your next article, whatever topic it might be.
Just thought I'd chime in on
Just thought I'd chime in on suggestion #4. Villains as we know them to be in movies, like in the examples you give, are not the same as "bad boys" we talk about on this site. In fact, being a dickhead or a sleazy person is not what we're going for here. Read Chase's articles on bad boys.
You want to have bad boy qualities but being a villain leans towards a cynical/bitter vibe and will alienate women. The bad boy lover is a bad boy through the perspective of women. Being a murderer, for example, may get one or two totally screwed up in the head women, but for the most part, women will feel endangered, disgusted, and unwilling to connect with someone like that.
Evan
I appreciate the input, Evan.
I appreciate the input, Evan. And yes, you are absolutely right: the examples I gave are terrible human beings and by no means role models. No one is going to start seducing beautiful women by joining the mafia or being a Nazi investigator.
However, bear in mind that these are fictional characters. I don't feel there is any need to turn a blind eye on their powerful and charismatic traits because the atrocities and crimes they "commit" don't really happen; it's all fake. I would hesitate to write an article breaking down the genius or appeal of a real serial killer, but I would love to read a character study of the Joker. As long as one can distinguish between reality and fiction, I don't really see any harm.
The characters (and many other fictional villains in pop culture and literature) I mentioned undeniably DO possess many qualities that demonstrate strength, mystery, intrigue, and high levels of social intelligence/ calibration. Hans Landa (Inglourious Bastards) is a master at getting investment and observing the Law of Least Effort. Michael Corleone (The Godfather) maintains solid frame control and relaxed body language while confronting other murderers and facing life-and-death situations. Don Draper (Mad Men) is an asshole; he knows what he wants from women, what he is willing to put up with, and how to act dominant amidst people who are all very socially adept.
I have not myself done a study on these, or other fictional villains/ anti-heroes/ bad boys, but I would love to see what Chase had to say about them, and think it would make an engaging as well as educational article. And hey, at the end of the day, who doesn't like a little controversy?
NickAngel, I didn't mean to
NickAngel,
I didn't mean to shoot down your suggestion, as I do understand what you're saying. However, analyzing fictional characters for the purposes of seduction is not very productive. This is the "James Bond Fallacy". Fictional characters are not subjected to real-life circumstances and therefore, they're not good studies for seduction. If the writer adds in that the woman falls head-over-heals for the character, then it just happens, even if the character does everything wrong in seduction. Fictional characters are as good as their writers. If the writer doesn't grasp seduction at the level of someone like Chase, then it's not productive to study their characters. You're stating that you don't want to use real villains (ie: serial killers), but fictional ones rather; there is no difference when it comes to studying fictional villains from real ones for the purposes of seduction. You're still analyzing evil people who would not be warm and seductive to women. Read Chase's article on the difference between being a jerk and an asshole. Being a bit of a jerk is ok, but being an asshole doesn't get you pussy.
If you're suggesting that a GC writer point out charismatic, interesting things in characters, then so be it. However, these characters that you have named are not seductive by any means. The Joker, Nazi war criminals, etc. may get some pussy in their storylines, because that's what the writer wanted. Writing an article about these villains would be essentially pointing out what makes villains cool, and wouldn't be about how they would make great seducers.
We do occasionally point out body language that actors use in movies (ie: Sean Connery as Bond), but we're not studying the *character*, we're studying the real-life actor who is very well versed in body language and knows how to make it seem sexy, as Connery did as James Bond. It's not the character we're looking at, but rather Connery making the magic happen.
I think it makes more sense for GC writers to analyze fictional bad boys who actually are seducers (ie: Damon from Vampire Diaries, who is commonly referenced on GC). It would obviously be better to analyze actual bad boys, since real people are subject to real-life circumstances, but very rarely do real bad boys have a camera on them 24/7 so we can analyze them. It tends to be that fictional characters are the ones we see in media and thus use as examples.
Evan
Wouldn't it be great if
Wouldn't it be great if girlschase started posting videos and analyses of real life seductions? I'd take a video of Chase interacting with women over any of my aforementioned suggestions in a heartbeat. Any of the writers on this site, for that matter, would be great to watch in action.
But until that happy day, we're stuck with fictional characters, characters who might be getting beautiful women/ success/ respect/ money / whatever simply because that's part of the story. That's the risk of learning from fiction. But I have to disagree when you say that "analyzing fictional characters for the purposes of seduction is not very productive"; while there a plenty of movies and books that display ridiculous interpretations of social situations or romance (romantic comedies, for example), I find there are many stories, books, and yes, even some movies, that beautifully illustrate truths about human nature, including aspects of seduction and social dominance.
The reason I feel comfortable studying a fictional villain as opposed to a real-life villain is because I would find breaking down the positive traits (body language, social skills, conversational talent, etc.) of someone who actually killed people to be in poor taste, and just personally disagreeable. But if you are studying the positive traits of a villain who doesn't just commit crimes but is also very charismatic/ likable / appealing, it doesn't rub me the wrong way. The literal analyses of a fictional and a real villain would be the same, true, but I just find studying a fictional one more suitable. And when I mentioned the Joker, it was not to use that character as an example of a great seducer (although he has a strong appeal), but to demonstrate how I feel differently when studying a character who isn't real as opposed to a person who is.
Not all the characters I mentioned are seducers, true. But I'm personally interested in studying a broader spectrum of skill, such as social dominance, strength, charisma, etc. I have I hard time believing you know who these characters are or have seen these movies when you say that they are "not seductive by any means". The Nazi war criminal I mentioned, Hans Landa, (Inglourious Bastards), is a very appealing character despite the atrocities he commits; you have to remind yourself that you shouldn't be rooting for him. I've been told by multiple women that they find him attractive, even though the actor portraying him, Christoph Waltz, is not classically "hot" and is an older man. I could go on about the other characters....there is a REASON these villains are so popular. Their appeal, in one way or another, is almost universal, even if it's a type of grudging respect for the power they possess.
As far as "being an asshole doesn't get you pussy", I would refer you to Chase's article "How to be an Asshole - and Become Adored by Women". He makes a very clear case as to the kind of asshole you should and should not be (never go full asshole).
Like you said, this site has been known to point out the body language of fictional characters. This is exactly the kind of analysis I would hope for if Chase wrote an article: not an analysis that breaks down the motivations, goals, dreams, and fears of a fictional character, but an analysis that breaks down how a certain character demanded investment, made powerful eye contact, or delivered a powerful point in a conversation. And while of course you are watching a real actor play a fictional character, I find it can often be more helpful to watch the character from the movie rather than watching the actor in real-life because many actors do not act as dominant or seductive as they do while portraying a fictional character.
Anyways....here's to hoping this site might one day post videos of real seductions/ interactions.
Re: Topics of Interest
Nick-
Cheers! I do try to avoid rehash as much as possible. Sometimes it's easier than other times.
Topics are eminently welcome. I have a long "topics suggestions" spreadsheet, but haven't updated it in sometime. A few quick comments:
1) Great topic. Yes, switching styles is mandatory - you'll have your default personality of course, but the guy who can't transition to different approaches to his conversation is the guy who's a one trick pony and is ace in one kind of environment and a dud everywhere else.
2) Yeah, there's a curious idea. Although, might be less interesting/educational than you'd think :) I don't really have too many interesting habits, actually, aside from "wake up, meditate/visualize, morning exercise routine, some work at home/hotel, breakfast, shower, cafe, do work, possibly chat with a few people, possibly make a few new connections, change cafes, have a meal, do more work, head home / meet someone / go to a class / hop on a call." When I was learning, even worse, because I had a soul-sucking 9-to-5 that never had any work for me to do no matter how many people I asked for tasks, but I had to be there all day anyway to bill the client for hours. So most of my day was wasted trading time/energy for money, and then I'd lift weights / see a girlfriend / go to the bars after, and try to get by on 3 to 5 hours of sleep a night weekdays and crash on the weekends.
3) Mindset of a Winner - haha... takes a certain kind of person to call himself "a winner". I'll say now I don't think of myself as "a winner", probably because whatever I'm doing that I get good enough to win at, I then immediately raise the bar so I continue to struggle and have to work harder to overcome more challenges. I kind of always feel like I am this exasperated guy who never catches any breaks, until occasionally I look at whatever my current success rate is in whatever it is I'm doing and realize it's far in excess of whatever my original goals were. Because I keep raising the bar, I never get the "winner" feeling I suppose. Momentary victories, then back to the grind. But this mindset in and of itself might be worth discussing (not sure how helpful it is, as at least with me it just seems to be a default reaction to success - "Oh, you did good? Excellent. Bar just went up for any future victories").
4) Villains - also a great topic. You and Evan have an interesting dialogue going about this below. I think the characters actors get into while playing villains is the most interesting aspect of it. Villains are frequently the most compelling, captivating characters in film because they're the most liberating roles - the actor gets to inhabit this personality who just does whatever he wants. There's a reason women are attracted to many of the villains, and that you get phenomenon like hybristophilia. It's directly tied to what we talked about in "How to be Cool": the guy who breaks the rules is alluring. Women especially like the "tragic villain", whether it's Tom Hiddleston's Loki or Ted Bundy in real life. It's kind of a head trip.
Anyway, got these noted down.
Chase
Excellent as always
I love that this site is unplugged from the domestication of the West. All of it is usually unnecessary suffering through nonsensical judgement and images. Any particular advice, besides having healthy skepticism, for those mostly around other people in the West (college, social job)? Thanks as always Chase!
Seer
Unplugging in the Thick of It
Seer-
Yes: read the classics.
I’ve been slowly making my way through Plutarch’s Parallel Lives for about a year now, and it’s utterly refreshing.
I recently came across Lubbock’s List, which I’m probably going to source much of my future recreational reading from:
http://www.interleaves.org/~rteeter/grtlubbock.html
Might seem like heavy stuff at first, but it’s all quite enjoyably written, of the ones I’ve read. Just because it’s old doesn’t mean it’s dry – these are some of history’s finest minds, discussing the most important issues men face. Keeps your perspective in the right place, in contrast to all the folks for whom 1950 is ancient history and nothing before the ‘80s warrants consideration.
There are many things men have known throughout history that get forgotten in various eras, only to be remembered later on. To stay sane, and know all the things man has known, and not just the ones it chooses to remember in any given era, read the classics.
And of course – turn off the TV, turn off the radio. Movies/Netflix/iTunes are all okay, so long as you’re aware of the messages you’re pumping into your brain. Most important thing is get away from advertising – it’s full of B.S. messages that hypnotize you into thinking you’re more special than you are (so long as you buy our product!) or that the world owes you more than it does.
Chase
women
Would you agree with the saying "women are overgrown children?"
Overgrown Children?
Anon-
Yes and no.
Both sexes drop certain childish behaviors as they mature, while retaining others.
A man at his most responsible will typically be more mature and less childish on average than a woman at her most responsible. e.g., a man will think more big picture, do things for the larger community, think farther on down the road, etc. Women tend to be focused on their immediate friends and relations, and leave the big-picture thinking to men.
However, it could be argued that big picture thinking is pie-in-the-sky childish dreaming, and a focus on the immediate is just good practical planning. So, the whole childishness vs. grown-up-ness thing ends up being a bit of an “eye of the beholder” situation.
Chase
Could you give me some advice, please.
Hi Mr.Chase,
I read your article on what to do when she doesn't text back. So Im looking for a bit of advice.I am a college student staring my first year. So I like this girl, she is two years older. I met her last Thursday and I managed to strike up a conversation with her,it was great fun but strange as well because she started talking about 'hentai'... and managed to get her twitter. (to nervous to ask for her number)
So basically I followed her, tweeted her and she hasn't replied. Well I see her every Tuesday and Thursday, I was thinking if I should tell her its me (in person) but I don't want to seem desperate. And as you say the "girls should chase" :P
Sorry for the lengthy-ish letter, thanks in advance.
Hey
Chase.....is these one of those articles that can quickly skyrocket my success?
Sky Rocket
Anon-
Depends on where you're at and what you do with it ;)
-C
What to do?
Chase, this literally came out the same exact day this girl flaked on me. I want to know how to act around her at work. I'll give you a quick synopsis of everything. This girl at my job is a mother, we hung out one night, and were on each other like crazy, then she tells me she's on her period. I'm not used to this excuse and believed it. So I got some answers from the boards, and left the situation alone.
Over the course of months, she has been on me hard at work all of the time, feeling on me to kissing me, while I'm just laying back. I've tried a few times to get alone with her to fuck, but she flaked each time. That's when I read your post on the boardsame saying I should try to fuck at work, thing is there is no way in hell I could do that, way too many people.
So I have up, and she keeps feeling on me, then telling me how attracted she is to me and keeps feeling on me, and how she wants me to fuck her. I tell her I've tried to make it happen, but you keep flaking, then she says she did because she didn't want me to fuck her and stop talking to her, blah, blah.
I told her that I wanted to ravish her, and she came even harder on me ignoring work, she couldn't keep her hands off me, and I pulled back.
I told her if you want to hang, you hit me up, I put the ball in her court. She didn't hit me up of course.
My question is Chase, what should I do in this situation for the best outcome? I want to fuck her brains out, but I'm not going to Chase, the ball's in her court. I don't know what to do in this situation Chase at all, what's the best solution? Thanks
Also, do you think men should have kids younger? Like 20's?
Pt2
She's also in her mid 30's of that makes any difference, I'm a lot younger than her, and I know she knows that. I thought that older girls wouldn't play games like this.
Thanks for this article
Thanks for this article Chase, one of those ones which popped up just when i needed it! Just keep your eye out for any feminist looking people following you suspiciously for the next couple weeks ;)
How do you tie this mindset in with the one mentioned on (i think) the performance anxiety article, which is the sexual man who has a primal, animalistic sexual passion, and is a ceaseless dominator and a conqueror of women (sexual objects etc)? Do you sort of interchange the two for different situations, or different stages of an interaction? cheers!
And, while we are suggesting articles, I'd love to hear from any of the writers a really thorough run down on the process of doing nothing. throw on the bored look, then what? How do you stay smooth and effortless when, say, someone breaks circle with you and you feel super exposed?
Kia ora!
Pouncing Distance
Anon-
Think of it like a lion watching the gazelles and waiting for one to walk within pouncing distance. The gazelles are just meandering about, closer and farther, farther and closer. He is always in his predatory mode, but not about to go start chasing down prey he cannot reach. He just sits and waits, and sits and waits.
The nice thing is that with women, it’s (usually) cooperative. Only “combative”, really, when you have a horny woman who’s in a bad mood and isn’t really into you but needs SOME guy to give it to her, or a girl who’s close to auto-rejection with you but not quite over the cusp. The rest of the time, the gazelle is cooperating with you to give you that meal.
As for feeling exposed… just pure social experience. The first times it happens even if you know what to do logically it’s like your first fist fight; you might have had years of training, but you’re still fairly likely to freeze up and get yourself clocked. By the time you’re in fight #10 though, you’re not quite so frightened and much more poised. Just trial and error, although make sure you’re applying the right strategies as much as you can while you’re waiting for the game to start slowing down.
Chase
The four quadrants
Can you do an article on the difference between unknown, jester, peasant, and King in terms of their mindsets and perceptions of reality, habits, schools of thought etc ? And looking at the difference under a variety of scenarios? The essence of effortless seduction is being so fucking good and providing so much value while making it seem easy. But behaviors come from beliefs and mindsets and visions of the future.
One scenario is entertaining a woman at your place. How does the unknown jester peasant and king think about entertaining someone prior to even having the person over? I can see the jester just trying to wing it, while the king might explicitly think about how to awe-inspire but making it seem like it's no big deal. Like the king might decorate his place with artifacts from all over the world which would suggest he's a world traveler: and he lets the woman ask questions about his travels if she chooses; otherwise he says nothing.
Another scenario is work or a sports team or social circle. Why do people love the king but look down on the jester? How to identify jester behaviors and beliefs and tendencies in yourself and in others?
I think it would help the readership greatly to further see the difference between the four quadrants (unknown, jester, peasant, king) in mindsets, beliefs, visions of the future, behaviors, approaches, and levels of wisdom (what the king knows but the jester doesn't).
another scenario for the 4 quadrants.
Another scenario is decision making when the target is resisting doing what you want to do.
Like say you and your girl go to dinner and you want to split the bill and she is protesting. How would the 4 quadrants approach this scenario?
Or you want to go into a store to check some stuff out and she is protesting and telling you with her body language or even overtly that NO she doesn't want to do what you want (only what she wants).
How would the 4 quadrants even approach these scenarios?
I suspect that the unknown might not assert himself whereas the jester might employ guilt-tripping to get people to do his wishes. But employing guilt tripping has an insidious side effect in that it causes the victim to feel resentment toward you...but the jester can't see that. And so the victim might acquiesce but it comes at a price: emotional distance.
What about the peasant and the king how do they approach situations like this when the target is outwardly defiant?
Another scenario to also consider is when a girl is just a skeptic by nature and her inclination is to say NO to almost everything. How would the 4 quadrants approach such a girl? It's a lot of work to have to Repeatedly convince someone on doing things they may be against doing. moving from unknown to king is all about optimization effort reduction and efficiency. So how would the quadrants deal with a girlfriend who's a skeptic by nature? Is the optimum thing to do just find a girl who is less rigid and more submissive?
Thoughts?
Quadrant Mindsets/Habits
Breeze-
Hmm, well, the big challenge is everything on Girls Chase is designed as a "here's what the other three quadrants do... if you want to get maximum results for minimal effort (King), here's what you OUGHT to do" - so this'd basically have to be extremely high level because you're trying to encapsulate the overarching thought drivers behind the various strategies and mentalities recommending across the site (most articles are actually laid out in the "here're the things guys USUALLY do: some silly thing that never works (Jester), this one boring thing that works sometimes, but only with certain girls (Peasant), or nothing at all, they don't even try (Unknown). Here's what the guys who clean up with women do, however: (King)." Just without applying the sprezzatura labels in every article.
I could try and come up with a real high level one, and have it noted down... although I'm not sure off the top of my head if it'd be useful outright. It's exactly like saying let's put together a piece that talks about what a 40-year-veteran master car mechanic thinks when he looks at a blanket full of car parts vs. what some guy who's only ever changed a brake pad once in his life before thinks when he looks at the same blanket. Could be a neat read, actually, although the utility is probably limited.
Re: individual scenarios, much of what's on GC is devoted to this! How do most guys respond when somebody interrupts them... how SHOULD you respond. What do most guys do after they get a girl's phone number... what should YOU do. etc.
Bunch of articles here on resistance:
Of course, there's always going to be a million different possible scenarios you could encounter. Girlfriend doesn't want to split the bill... the King's just going to pay it. Then call it a night, in a completely neutral tone toward her, and go home without her. When women pull this, they're trying to set up the "you buy me dinner, I give you sex" dynamic. The King knows this dynamic, and upsets it by buying the dinner, then turning down sex. The woman is left having failed to uphold her end of the bargain, which puts her in a low-value position of her own design, and now she's forced to either make it up to him in some non-sexual way (since he's devalued her sexuality) or accept being lower value than the man is, which is a position that women, masters of social maneuvering, absolutely detest being in.
Another possible King move is laughing it off and telling her if she gets this one, he'll get the drinks after. That's if the resistance is not as severe... response needs to be calibrated.
Peasant will normally just pay, usually with a quip like "Okay, I'll get this time, but next time it's on you, and I don't mean some cheap-o taco shop" that allows him to save some face, then go home with the girl anyway and get his sex reward for being a good dog and paying. Jester will try a bunch of outrageous things to get her to pay or cause controversy that just piss her off and send her into auto-rejection. Wouldn't even be an issue for an Unknown because he isn't willing to rock the boat enough to try to get the girl to pay.
Checking out stuff in a store is a total non-issue... King move is just "Okay. Why don't you go down to [XYZ store she likes] and I'll meet you at the fountain in 15." Peasant move is something like "Tell you what; if you come in here with me, I'll go with you to Banana Republic after, and we'll stay there as long as you want and I won't complain if you're trying on a million things." Jester goes crazy trying to convince her to come. Unknown may not even tell her he wants to check out that store; he'll drive back sometime when he's by himself and go then.
Millions of little situations like this you can do. The more important thing is the overarching mental frameworks you get through lots of exposure to women and social situations that test your frame control and teach you how to get what you want from people in the most effortless manners possible. Once you figure out the core rules (mostly what we discuss on this site), you no longer need a roadmap for each and every situation, because you've internalized the right mental models and respond naturally with King responses to novel situations.
But yeah, I can see about a high level mindsets article... probably will be fun, if not entirely useful to everyone (or maybe it will be; sometimes I'm surprised by how guys use this stuff!).
Chase
Thanks for taking the time to
Thanks for taking the time to respond. My whole strategy is to optimize and minimize effort.
For me, thinking about the king's response vs that of the peasant or the jester is a way of reframing how social interactions can go, and opening my mind to alternative responses and possibilities. It's like reading with new glasses on. Now when I look back on some of your articles, although you often left it unstated, I can now see clear as day: certain hypothetical situations you devised were clearly Jester, then you'd follow up with the King response! I just didn't make the connection until recently. But I feel like I learn better when I can intuitively grasp the difference between behaviors in the various quadrants. It might seem self-evident to you, but to me, I'm recently just starting to see the differences.
Aspiring to be the king is the goal, but the problem is, how can you be the king if you have nothing concrete to aspire to, and you're blind to why certain alternatives (incl what you currently do) aren't even on the peasant level but still on the Jester level? Many of us don't come from a line of influence that was filled with efficient effective Kings. Many of us grew up around people with ineffective beliefs and behavioral patterns, and many of us had no clue that those patterns were Jester, or that there were these these four quadrants of effectiveness and that there are actually more optimal ways of behaving while still getting what you want. That's why for me, framing certain behaviors (e.g. responses to challenge, etc) as Jester (what not to do) vs King (what to do) provides me more emotional motivation and makes coming up with behavioral responses (to the various situations that arise) on the fly more intuitive. Recently I've been trying to keep in the back of my mind: "don't do x, that's Jester! instead let's be the king, let's do y!" The more able I am to classify certain behaviors as Jester, and the more able I am to think on what a king might do, then the more the social game starts to slow down and the more effortless I can be in real-time. Much of the fear that I've ever had with socializing (although I didn't consciously know it until recently ) is that I had a primal fear of not wanting to be the Jester. Somewhere deep in my subconscious from as far back as I can remember (4 years old at least), I never wanted to be the Jester, I always wanted to be the King...I wanted to be better than others and do less work than others while getting more returns than them without realizing the work and shame that I'd need to go thru to get to the king level...
And after learning ineffective behaviors for so long, it's extremely hard to unlearn them and adopt a new mentality, mindset, and behavioral pattern. For example, regarding the whole gf that doesn't want to pay for dinner example (especially after she's skipped on paying a few times, she's not been pulling her weight, and she dares to protest or get rude about not paying after I've politely brought it to her attention) - my learned behavior to this ridiculousness is to basically be a bully: get mad, put her in her place, say mean things if necessary, dominate, and get her to back off her bullshit and pull out her wallet. This may win the battle, but then it breeds resentment and is an ineffective long-term strategy as it pops the seduction bubble, may even make her cry, sad, and over time may cause fear. It also requires the expenditure of a great deal of negative energy, and even if I win the battle, and she submits to my frame, what's the cost? By acting on auto-pilot and reacting in this negative way, I may also miss the possibility that she may have been playing a mind game, or that I could expend way less effort and still put her in check. It makes me miss that I should just be patient, and focus on victory (whatever that is) even if it's not as immediate....
So that's why taking the time to explicitly lay out why you don't want to be jester (people will look down on you or even have disdain for you), then explicitly frame certain behaviors/responses as jester, peasant, king, and then explicitly explain the difference in mindsets between the king's mindset and his overall strategy (which leads him to behave in the way he did) compared with the mindset/haphazard foggy strategy of the Jester would be beneficial, especially to newer folks.
There's always a better way of doing things, but it's hard to see how to get better and how to optimize especially when you're not surrounded by a bunch of fearless effective efficient kings...but you're surrounded by alot fearful ineffective (but arrogant) Jesters. It's all trial and error to level up.
Thanks though, I appreciate.
Are you single ?
Hey Chase, been meaning to ask this for quite some while now.
Basically, the "are you single" opener i find really interesting, but what bugs me is what exactly do you follow it up with ?
Whenever i use "are you single" opener, regardless of her yes/no answer i know how to proceed to the very end of the interaction.
But i just simply don`t know what to say right after i deliver the "are you single" opener, so that i can proceed with my interaction.
A good follow-up
Chase has got some good audio available - excerpts of him coaching guys via Skype etc.
There's a really good session where he's coaching a European bloke. One of the pearls of wisdom that stuck with me was purring the word "interesting" in a sexy voice during conversations.
Regardless of a woman's answer to the "are you single?" question, I tend to always follow up with "interesting..." - delivered in a sexy voice.
Side note: it's a brilliant question to ask. If you can do so in a socially savvy way, it oozes confidence.
Hehe, nice one. Will put it
Hehe, nice one.
Will put it to use.
I can`t find that excerpt you are talking about, perhaps you can link-share it here ?
And one more thing, what else do you continue with after delivering "interesting" with a sexy voice ?
A couple examples that spring to my mind after reading your reply are the following:
Me: "Hey, are you single?"
Her: "No"
Me: "Hmm...Interesting ( said with a sexy voice ), is this one of your "just girl night outs"
Her: "bla bla bla"
Soon later i will politely bid farewell and be on my way.
If she was testing me, she may come after me.
Me:"Hey, are you single?"
Her: "No"
Me: "Hmm...Interesting ( said with a sexy voice ), your man left you alone with all these wolves around?"
Again, if she tested me, she may come after me.
Testing or not, i don`t think i will do anything wrong here now, would i ?
I`d have screened her out or passed her test...
Me:"Hey, are you single?"
Her: "Yes"
Me: "Hmm...Interesting ( said with a sexy voice ), well, from what i see tonight, i guess only beautiful people are single... I am Alex ...
or
"Hmm...Interesting ( said with a sexy voice ), are you the only single girl in your group ?
Basically, do you think these are good examples of a follow up to a "are you single" question, with implementing your "interesting - with a sexy voice" line in ??
Looking forward to your reply.
simple
Brilliant article. Simple enough. Insightful and true. Women...silly and cute. etc..etc.. There is really no excuses for yourself when you drive the main points of the article in your head.
Women not well suited
Chase,
Is it safe to say that women should not be counted on in a business setting if they can't be punctual or keep emotions out of business?
I chuckled when I read the story of the meeting in Italy. I literally had this happen to me today. I don't have my own business, but if I did, I would leave women out of executive responsibilities or even out of things that require punctuality, keeping a cool head, or logical decision making. Am I right to assume this?
Thanks,
Evan
One more thing...
Just one more question for you, Chase.
It makes sense that women's agendas have dominated mass media and pop culture, as not only are they more vocal about how they want things (like you said), but also because the majority of men in Western society are nice guy/orbiter types who yield to women's demands.
That said, I understand the importance of not buying into mass media hype.
However, how do I come off as being privy to pop culture (to get blonde bombshells, for example), if I don't buy into it? Should I still consume pop culture/mass media but just see it as the outsider and not buy into it, like I currently do? Or do you suggest cutting it out altogether?
I do consume mass media because I like to know what peoples' mindsets are and what type of information people generally are consuming. This prevents me from being aloof to my surroundings in social settings and to keep me well socially calibrated.
Thanks for your time, Chase!
Evan
Staying Current on Mass Media
Evan-
Three paths here:
1. Genuinely buy into the culture of the girls you want access to
2. Get your game/fundamentals so tight it doesn't matter
3. Surround yourself with enough of the girls you want access to that you absorb their cultural references through osmosis without having to directly consume this media yourself (essentially: they do the work of processing the material, and just transfer onto you the memes they pick up and spread around)
I guess there's also a fourth path: go for girls who like what you like. But sometimes that's hard, if your interests are super out there and esoteric or uncommon... you can end up fishing in a pretty small pond that way ;)
Chase
Women at Work
Evan-
Depends on what you want to have them doing (and that's true for both women and men). Punctuality is not necessarily tied to dependability; I'm terrible with punctuality personally, always have been, so I wouldn't be the guy you'd send to pick someone important up from the airport at six in the morning, butwhen it came to deliverables I was always like clockwork in both school and work. Never missed a deadline that I can recall.
Emotions out of business, again, depends; if all the person is doing is fighting with coworker, yeah, can them or avoid them, but if they're getting emotional because they want a really great product, like Steve Jobs, give them the resources they need and let them do it (with proper supervision) if you're the boss... if you're the coworker though, yeah; be careful. Emotional people live in the moment, and years of friendship and alliance go out the window with them if they find it expedient to ditch you or climb over you at some point, or if you come to blows on some issue somewhere.
For hiring, I like women in roles that require stability, but aren't mission critical. I find it pretty rare to meet women who are superstar employees, but they're less likely to get itchy and start requesting promotions and raises and more interesting work like ambitious male employees do. The downside is that women are more prone to suddenly disappearing without explanation from time to time, I find, probably because they're afraid you'll be angry if they tell you they need to stop work or their situation has changed, so they just say nothing and vanish. So, things like clerk, formatter, graphic design, etc., I like them in.
I've known few women I'd trust in an executive role... however, I have met a few. And I've known women who were super puntcual (unlike me). Much of this depends on personality level. The one issue women have in management roles is that they have great difficulty managing; men dislike being managed by women and women often don't know how to manage men, while women managing women is a nightmare even worse. I could possibly see one really high level woman with a few direct male reports who then manage larger teams beneath them, however. So long as you pick the right men to place in support roles beneath her, it could work.
Chase
reading
Hi Chase,
Few years back you did an article on recommended reading...I've gone through many you mentioned, along Sith a few others I found off my own back and was wondering if you have any recommendations on fiction/non fiction ones out there, or a resource you use to find what to buy next.
More Recommended Reading
Anon-
I recently just came across Lubbock's List:
http://www.interleaves.org/~rteeter/grtlubbock.html
It was a list put together just before the turn of the 20th century by Sir John Lubbock, not necessarily of the books he personally considered the best, but simply of the books he kept hearing again and again recommended as the best books ever written.
I've read perhaps a twentieth of the authors listed on this list (though some of these authors have massive works, and there's just stuff on there like "Shakespeare" or "The Bible"), but this is my reference for where I pull books from for the foreseeable future... mainly because I just started feeling like every book I read about science or business these days is rehashing the same ideas and research over and over.
Every bestseller is like the last bestseller, +2% new material. The classics are timeless wisdom from some of the smartest men who ever lived, and these are the tomes that stood the test of time and are still read hundreds or thousands of years later - most of today's bestsellers won't even be in print in 20 years.
One 21st century addition to my list since I wrote the Recommended Reading post has been Stephen King's On Writing; I've read it 2.5 times (it's the only paperback book I have on me; I take it with me on airplanes for when my computer's out of juice), and actually just sat down and cranked out a couple of novels over the course of a month or two after my most recent reading. Rare for me to get jazzed like that, but King has magic fingers.
Another one I've been working my way gradually through during meals and at airports is Plutarch's Parallel Lives. I've been recommending it to everyone I talk to... it's one of the best things I've ever read. If you want to download the mindsets of the greatest men in Greek and Roman history, this is the book to do it with.
Chase
what is the perimeter of this
what is the perimeter of this article? are women in business also concerned? In my experience, most women I met in the corporate world are steady, constant and reliable.
Women in Business
Moon-
Purely dating/pickup/relationships.
Women are much steadier at work, yeah. Their future work and pay depends on it.
In this case, it's different environments leading to different outcomes. If she acts inconstant at work, she's screwing herself over. Meanwhile, if she acts constant with men... that's also screwing herself over.
If she bails on some guy who turns out not to be as cool as advertised, that's actually a plus as far as her next guy's concerned, not a minus. Men have a lot more sympathy for the girl who says she realizes her man was not everything he promised himself to be, so she left to find someone greater (you), than they do for the girl who says I realized he was a loser and a total dirtbag, but I'd promised him we'd date so I just went along with it anyway.
In the business world, it's the complete opposite, so women behave in the opposite way.
Don't expect that just because she's steady at work she'll be steady on the romantic playing field, though. These are two different arenas.
Chase
Failed mating attempt - women changing their minds
Hi Chase,
First off, I just want to say how life changing your material is - its all genuine and non of the scripted PUA stuff I see all over the internet.
I invited a girl over for dinner at my apartment for a second date, and tried to get physical with me but she did nothing more than make out. On the first date I took her out for a brief informational date, nothing more. When we were eating on my deck, I invited to my bedroom to "show"her a painting. We started making out but she was a terrible kisser, devoid of any passion. After kissing for a few minutes I led her to my mattress on the ground (I just moved to a new city and don't have a bed yet) and she lied down but started laughing about my mattress what she called a "glorified" sleeping bag. Nothing but a real mood killer there. Anyway, I gave her kisses all over, but she was still passionless, kissing terribly, and wouldn't let me lift up her blouse to even kiss her cute little tummy. She said she had to go, then left. I texted her to get tea this weekend and she said yes, and am going to try and go back to her place this time around.
Do you think she is still interested and just got freaked out? Any advice besides the second date strategies? She is 28 and I'm 26, and went to catholic school until she left for college.
Judging by her past of being
Judging by her past of being in catholic school, I'm pretty sure she doesn't have enough experience to be a good lover. Either this experience freaked her out and she wants to go slow, or she's just not interested that much.
One way to find out? Escalation.
Thanks luke. When I was with
Thanks luke. When I was with her in my room, escalation is how I felt. It was either now or never. Chase always mentions results over reactions, and I wasn't getting many reactions of sexual tension between, so I figured I still should just go with it (she was after all in my apartment).
I didn't show her my room, or give her any "tour" of my apartment when she first arrived. I thought that may have helped get her more comfortable, so she wasn't shocked when she saw my bedroom the first time.
Do you think that being more of a challenge could have helped? For example, when I noticed she was a terrible kisser (either not interested in me, or lacking experience). Maybe I could have gone to kiss her, then pulled back?
Intellectual Conversation With Girls
"In the end, embracing the inconstant, changeable nature of women is quite freeing, and you realize it’s better to use men for man stuff like philosophical and intellectual conversation and talking about business, and it’s better to use women for women stuff like going dancing or picking up and seducing or having sex or spending time together in a romantic relationship."
Hey Chase,
Neat article; this above quote stood out to me. I’ve always enjoyed communication and conversation with a woman and have thought that when I get in a relationship with a girl it is fundamentally important that she be intelligent and savvy and the type who I can talk to about many things.
I had always thought this to mean that I would be able to talk about any intellectual topics talk about religion or science or politics or ethics or psychology or philosophy or whatever with her; and that I wouldn’t have that side of myself hidden or just on the down-low like I do with most girls (where I am instead just teasing/bantering with them, turning it back to them and poking and prodding them and stuff, in a player sort of way).
But reading this quote kind of opened my eyes, and caused me to think back to various relationships I had with more intellectual, rational, deeply intelligent women. I had an engineer girlfriend who was in many ways quite an ideal girlfriend and a girl I was very happy of my time dating and of my history with; I thought of her and of two other women who I had been friends with who were additionally intelligent but also very blunt and like stupidly rational at times that it could even be irritating.
I thought back to my conversations with them, and realized even when they were to broader scope or degree and on topics at times that may fly over many people’s heads: much of the time our conversation was very simple, and still conversation that held the shape of the masculine feminine flirtation that should be present between lover and an attracted submissive female.
I thought back to the two friends or my ex-girlfriend and realized we talked about these topics but just as you said: we didn’t go into those details that I would talking to a likeminded male friend. It was more surface level, maybe based more on feeling and emotion, and looking at different perspectives.
Despite this simpler different style of conversation, I felt that those conversations were well insightful and intellectual in their own ways; but because of a sort of feminine intuition/perspective that only a smart well-qualitied girl could provide me; and because of the value I’d get out of being teacher to these girls when they were curious and would ask me things.
If I had just in a split moment thought back to those conversations I would have said “yeah you know we talked about intellectual stuff and deep topics all the time”; but it was in fact, in different ways than with guys.
Much more valuable in many ways; very necessary in their own way.
Much more could be said here, but I hope I’m at least on the right track/in the right ballpark? Feels that way a bit… thanks, for the insights though, look forward to reading more.
Gonna forward this one to my feminist professor! ;)
-Gem
Re: Intellectual Conversation With Girls
Gem-
I'll bet she'd love that!
Yeah, I much prefer high IQ / highly educated women myself, and I've noticed this as well. You can talk deep mechanics on things with them but they often aren't as interested, or their eyes will glaze over a bit. And then they'll interrupt you with an insight seemingly out of left field that nevertheless makes you have to go and adjust your model a bit because they've got a part of it you didn't get. It's nice.
This is another reason why I personally need strong-willed women around me... softer women just smile and nod at whatever you say, and you end up in an echo chamber. Good if your aim is tranquility... not so good if your aim is perpetual improvement and expansion. Intelligent, opinionated women make you work more to sway them, and are more likely to interrupt your ramblings with something succinct, pointed, and perhaps previously unconsidered by you.
Chase
War is good.
War is good.
Pregnant Wife(hormonal)
Hey Chase,
This is going to be unrelated, if you have the time to answer that would be cool. If not, that is fine too. Uh so anyway, I was reading one of your articles on women and drama, and that brought me back to something the other day, my friend was going on half jokingly about his pregnant wife and how she is starting to get moody and naggy. She comes off a little disrespectful to me. Friend would try to have sex with her and she would tell him she would rather gouge out his eyes. She complains about everything right now, their sex life seems to have become non-existent, and she ridicules him a lot. Many people play it off like "oh she is just hormonal, get over it" and excuse her for her behavior. I don't know if we just have to learn how to tip toe around them but it seems in-congruent with what is taught on this site.
Is this something that all men have to deal with if they want children or is there a way to make this disrespect go away like in your other articles?
Re: Pregnant Wife(hormonal)
Anon-
The nice thing about women who are hormonal is just as they act like horrible people much more easily, they also break from frustration and return fire more easily too... which gets you back on even footing.
The right response to a woman being extremely disrespectful without prompting is either confronting her on it, or giving her a stiff cold shoulder until she apologizes and explains herself. Which you use depends on the situation. Pregnancy / hormones are not an excuse for this... she may feel bad, but him allowing her to use him as the punching bag to take her bad emotions out on is like buying a dog and then kicking it whenever you feel bad because hey, that's what it's there for. If the dog bites back hard when it's kicked, pretty soon the human realizes that no matter how bad he feels, he probably doesn't want to get a chunk of his calf bitten out because that'll just make him feel worse.
Have your friend check out this article (or just educate him on the principles):
"Operant Conditioning in Your Romantic Relationships
Chase
A woman that hits in a relationship...
An acquaintance of mine just has this issue with his wife (been married for less than 2 years and she has a hot temper) that starts hitting him first during an argument and then he hits back, it has happened on 2 occasions now. I advised him to warn her that the 3rd time it happens he would divorce her... whether he takes my advise or not, I don't really care, we are not really close friends and I did not really talk much with him.
What is your own tolerance range for a girl that hits during an argument... For me if it happens twice, that is the end of the relationship (or marriage)...
Women Hitting
Tayo-
I've only been hit twice by girlfriends, never that strongly, never in full "rage"... both times by different girlfriends, both seemingly as "test hits" (like, they were testing to see if they could get away with it with me). Both times I simply hit them back in the same parts of their bodies the way they hit me, with equal force to their hits plus a smidgen more. And then I told them whatever you do to me, I will do back to you, plus 10%. One complained about men aren't supposed to hit women... my response was "Well just don't hit me first and you've got nothing to worry about." Neither girl hit me again after that, despite the relationship going on for a good while longer in both cases.
I'm not sure offhand what my tolerance to multiple instances would be. You'd have to escalate the severity of the reaction each time (i.e., not hitting her back harder, but perhaps the second time you just up and leave, or kick her out, etc.), at least. At some point you'd just have to call it quits, yeah. Hard to say when that'd be though without having gone through it. I had a girl yell at me in public once, which I'd never had happen before, and had long speculated to myself if that ever happens with some girl, we're done then and there, but then she came crawling back and I just lectured her instead: "You do not EVER raise your voice to me in public again. Ever. If you ever do that again, even once, over something tiny, you and I are finished and you do not get to apologize. I don't care how good your reasoning is. You talk to me calmly, or you wait until we're in private. You DO NOT raise your voice to me in public." I don't usually speak to women like this, but when they're behaving way out of line you have to treat them like a naughty child. In this case it seemed to work, and the girl even admitted to feeling completely cowed after... not necessarily a good thing, because I want a girl who will challenge me, not a slave girl, but if it gets the message across that a certain kind of behavior is totally unacceptable, that's good. You can always encourage her to challenge you more in appropriate ways later on once the moment is past and the lesson is learned.
Chase
Indecision
A pretty good article, but I think your example of what is perceived as a woman changing her mind (about the relationship) is somewhat typical of the thinuaking and process both sexes go through when evaluating a new prospect.
I think a better example of women's flightiness is the day-to-day stuff.
As a waiter though graduate school women drove me absolutely crazy with their flightiness, absentmindedness and indecision. A ladies luncheon of 10 women aged 65 was your worst nightmare. Just to get the order in was a battle. Forget telling them about the specials unless you are going to tell them all individually, because you'll never command their total attention. Someone order a tea and you ask, "Ok, does anybody need anything else?" as you are thinking about the three other tables of yours that are suffering as a result of this group. "No, no, no, all good!" "Are you sure? Anyone? Coffee, tea, an Old Fashioned?" "No, no, no!" And invariably what happens is you bring that tea and the woman next to her THEN declares, "Oh, you know, that looks nice, maybe I'll have tea also..." Then you have to figure out if it is maybe or yes. Then you can count on repeating the process as you ask again if everyone is all set, then bring that tea, and then have someone else ask for something else.
And for waiting on them hand and foot you could look forward to 10-15% if you were lucky, and you sacrificed making 20% at your other tables as they didn't receive that value as it was toiled away on fickleness at this table.
My only defense was to simply stay away from the table. So you drop the first tea off, as you RACE by, never linger, and make sure you are busy on the other side of the room. And don't 'offer' anything, meaning, don't ask if anyone wants coffee or tea.
And to conclude on this fickleness, I developed another strategy; I simply wouldn't bring what was asked. Eight or ten minutes later, they had forgotten! And no they weren't dementia sufferers. I am serious. They had either forgotten, or more likely, by THEN it was NO LONGER IMPORTANT, minutes later.
That is the nature of women.
On a side note, I was fired from my last job, a very high end restaurant. I was by then a 28 year old man, and the managers and chef surrounded me and told me I didn't really want to be a waiter anymore, and I said, "You know what, you're right."
I guess telling people, "Let me get you another waiter," is an extreme way of dealing with fickleness. For me it was practical.
The moral of this is we don't have to bite every line they cast out, respond to everything, acknowledge everything, tolerate everything, or even hear everything.
"What was that again?" "Oh, never mind." "OK."
Leave a Comment