“Women are Evil” | Girls Chase

“Women are Evil”

Chase Amante

Hey! Chase Amante here.

You've read all the free articles I can offer you for this month.

If you'd like to read more, I've got to ask for your help keeping the lights on at Girls Chase.

Click a plan below to sign up now and get right back to reading. It's only 99¢ the first month.

Already a GirlsChase.com subscriber? Log in here.


women are evil
Tests, complaints, difficulty, and betrayal. It’s easy to see why some men think women are evil. But is what they do the product of villainy?

This is a sentiment we’ve seen various commenters, forum members, and passersby express over the years. That “women are evil”. They are bad, devious, snake-like creatures, not to be trusted. They are the Devil himself, in his most seductive form.

I addressed this to a certain extent a few weeks back in “A Few Thoughts on MGTOW: Men Going Their Own Ways.” However, I want to address it head-on in this article. If you have trouble believing any man could actually seriously think women are evil, here’s a comment from a reader named Neal on my recent article “You Only Get One Second Chance”:

This is actually a good article on the evils of women. Ah well, I got banned from Chase forums for making these posts. They were deleted too. The irony though is that my articles were really good, and were deleted, but they reoccur in some other form by authors here.

I’ll begin this article by stating that any man who places his trust unconditionally in anyone else than his mother or his father sets himself up to be made a fool. Friends may turn their backs on you, children may forget about you, mentors may give up on you. Women may leave you, scorn you, or humiliate you.

Which is not to say any of these people will do these things. Only that they might. There are plenty of men with friends who last a lifetime, children who serve them with filial piety, mentors who champion them ceaselessly, and women who never waver in their devotion to them.

But the men who’ve been burned, well, those are the men you hear from who stop by to educate you on how terrible the nature of this or that segment of the human population is. Friends are mere opportunists, mentors will abandon you, children are leeches, and women turncoats. They’ve seen the ugly side of things, and they’re convinced this is the true side of things. Anyone who says different is silly, naïve, trapped in childish delusions... or worse: a snake himself, slithering around sowing confusion so the party doesn’t end for all the other snakes.

In light of these opinions, in this article, we’re going to have a look at the nature of man. We will examine why men (and women) do the things they do, both in support of those around them, and to those others’ detriment.

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 One Date System.



Anonymous's picture

Hey Chase,

Great article as always. I loved some of the books you recommended on your reading list. Can you recommend a few more books, preferably history books that you find interesting?

Chase Amante's picture


Sure; here are some of the ones I've enjoyed. Plutarch's Parallel Lives is wonderful. Agricola's account of Roman Britain and Germania makes for fascinating reading. Robert Schiller's Confucius's Analects is jam-packed with footnotes on historical China; it's not a history per se (there are probably better books for it), but if you're interested in moral philosophy anyway, it's a nice fusion of the two.

The Rise and Fall of Alexandria was another I quite enjoyed, all about how ancient Alexandria essentially set the foundations for all the sciences that emerged into full fruition during the Renaissance, millennia later. Rise of the Third Reich is a great look at how the Nazi party came to power in all the confusion of Weimar Germany, and how contentious the elections really were and how easily things in Germany actually could have gone a completely different way.

Also, best books in history right here, including some histories:

Lubbock's List


slayme's picture

or are you afraid of having other opinions than yours on here? Ugh - this is why i dont' do message boards - this isn't free speech -it's "waiting to get approved" speech - which isn't cool. We'll see if you have the balls to post what i wrote in my other message or not. My guess is you are too buys trying to sell things to please some woman to really care... whatever.. good luck with your "how to get pussy" scam..

Anonym's picture

Hi Chase,

An interesting aricle. I have never beleived that „women are evil“ (well, some of them are, but not all of them).
But you wrote one interesting thing: „I encourage you to reprogram yourself to stop empathizing with the victims, and start to think as the leader.”

This is one of the issue that I face. One thing is that I do not believe that thinking as a leader is mutually exclusive with empathizing with victims. But another thing is that I have never considered myself as a leader (or as a dominant or aggressive man). During my life I developed a different identity that is not compatible with those features. For certain reasons I considered dominance or aggressivity as a bad thing (both definitely have its dark side) and I have never been in a leader position (and did not really pursue it). I also honestly did not know what women were attracted to and did not understand why are they attracted more to certain guys than to others. They were attracted more to guys I did not like than to my friends or me which was confusing, because that meant that girls valued in men different things than me. It did not make sense why it happened. It took years of studying different resources (including GC, texts about “nice guys” etc.) before I understood the things better.

But even though now I have much more information and knowledge what works it is still difficult to truly internally accept that woman want me behave in a more dominant and aggressive way. F.e. I did not know whether is it better to just kiss a girl or ask her whether I may kiss her (because I found kissing without asking overly aggressive and imposing). Now I know that it is not good to ask a girl such things, but I still feel like I do something bad, unnatural, shameful or something that is not compatible with who I am when I want to somehow express my sexuality, behave in a dominant or aggressive way.

However, while I am uncomfortable to behave in a dominant and aggressive way and being a leader, I am still attracted to submissive feminine girls. On the other hand, I sometimes feel uncomfortable around overly masculine men and I do not relate to characters like James Bond (I certainly respect him, but I really do not relate to him).

It really sucks to find out that what you believed how the world works, what you believed are the right things to do and how you see yourself who you are is in quite a sharp contradiction with what you need to do to satisfy your basic needs and desires. We have zero control about what women are attracted in men, we just have to adapt (and vice versa, of course). But if you find yourself in this situation, the transition period can be really long and difficult and you can easily end up stuck, confused and torn.

Do you have some advice about how to deal with those identity issues without changing who you really are? How to truly internally accept the reality to be able to behave accordingly?

Thank you very much


Chase Amante's picture


Your comment partly inspired this article:

"Loser Mentality, or Why You Can’t Identify with Winners"

Check it out. It's a shift in thinking (and it doesn't mean you can't empathize with victims anymore; just means that isn't where your mind goes to first). You really tend to have one tendency - you empathize with X group first and have to push yourself to empathize with Y group (and most folks never learn to push themselves to empathize with others they don't immediately empathize with). But once you make the switch from immediately empathizing with unsuccessful folks to immediately empathizing with successful folks, it colors the way you see the world differently.


Mia's picture

Hey :)

I can only tell you from my experience and myself. While I do am attracted to dominant men more, it is a specific kind of dominant. One that CAN lead and make choices when necessary but doesn't force it on others, one who is not agressive. One who can lead in bed (I am into BDSM) but who stops and is caring when I have a drop or a kinda panik attack (I can't stand being shaken but that happens when having strong penetration, so I sometimes when I try to endure it for my bf I burst out in tears and that is something I have absolutly no control over).  

I am a very independent woman outside of bed and I do want no man force his will opon me in my regular life. Yeah, advice or talking something with me though is ok, but I hold the last word about my life as he has the last word over his life. 

I personally don't want to be kissed by a stranger or someone I date without asking me first, and in my opinion one can ask in a very nice confident way. What I mean is if one ask with a uncertain, breaking voice it is unattractive to me. If he asks straightforward he would like to kiss me am I ok with that (with kind of a voice and bodylanguage that says "It is ok, I am safe, you can trust and rely on me) THAT is what I prefer.  And I absolutly DON't like it when someone kisses me without my consent. 

Sooo. And one more thing I like to add. It is ok to show weakness. I actually like that. It shows me that you trust me, it forms a bond that we are there for each other. You see, my bf has complex PTSD and a looot of shit going on in his family. He is in therapy and manages better and better and maybe will be able to do a practica soon:)  but there have been times when we had not one single nice weekend for weeks to months because he was triggered and tense all the time and had panick attacks regulary. Ok, I admitt that were horrible times but we got through it and it made us stronger.  And when I saw him crying his eyes out in my arms because what happend to him and in his family I was there for him and admired him for being such a humble and kind person despite all that he has went though and what is still going on. 

He is a really sensitiv guy, a really kind one. One with lots of problems in his back. One that can take the leader roll when necessary, one that fits to me :)  

I wish you all the best.


Ps: You don't need to be agressiv or show no weakness. If you are into more submissive women you do need to be more dominant competent but not agressive. Just find the right woman that fits to you. Reflect on what a woman must have to fit to what you have to offer and what you need.


Neal's picture

I'll reiterate.

Women are some of the most evolutionarily selfish creatures. For example, women never be the 1st to say something or start a conversation with men they don't know.

Women never tell a joke to men. They never try to make men laugh, or try to be "funny" with guys. It's always guys that try to make women laugh. Women just have horrible personalities.

Women never laugh unless men laugh 1st.

If men never be the 1st to talk to women, then women never be the 1st to talk to men.

Women are never "more social" to men they don't know. When women are surrounded by introvert men, they parrot off, or mirror off, the introvertedness.

Want to know what it's like talking to a woman when you're a man? Do you know what they say? "The minimum" required.

Friendships, relationships, and marriage:

In friendships, relationships, and marriage, women want the upper hand. They want the guy to desire them more than they desire them.

Women only want to be with a man who loves her more than she loves him. Women do not want to love their man and give them affection, they are only interested in being loved. There's a difference between receiving love and giving love. Women want to be loved more than they love back.

Women have to have this in control otherwise they will not be in a relationship with a guy.

So guys, it is important to remember that your girl will never really love you or care that much about you, they are not capable of those feelings. They're extent of loving you extends to you loving them more, and loving them 1st.

Women and attraction:

Women expect men to entertain them and keep them “unbored.” If not, they will lose interest in them. Just like women want to be loved than to love, and are better at receiving love than giving them, they want to be entertained and unbored than to entertain.

Women are about receiving happiness rather than giving happiness. This is why women will not affiliate with a sadder guy. Men will approach a girl that looks depressed, rather than the other way around. (Evolutionarily, happier women have no causation with depressed men.).

As happiness is the key to attracting most women, by this analogy the easiest women to attract are the saddest women, and the hardest to attract are women at the top of the happiness-chain.

Or in other words, women are not providers (except to their kids), they are receivers.

Except when women are much older than a guy, women are never “more funnier” than a guy.

Proving Women are Evil:

To prove women are evolutionarily evil, just ask any of them (or ask on the Internet): “Women, if you saw a depressed guy sitting down somewhere, would you approach him, and ask him why he’s sad?”

How many times can a woman sit down alone somewhere sad, and will get approached by men?

Agent Hunt's picture

Hmm... Having myself never seen your posts on the boards , I get it now why Chase banned you from the forums.

Anyway, that was a brilliant article from which I got some interesting motivational boosts.


Neal's picture

Ah my bad, I wasn't banned, only my threads were locked and later deleted.

This is the issue. It advocates insecurity and censorship. They viewed me as an atheist in a theist forum or a theist in an atheist forum.

Me, personally, I'm still trying to research women. Where I live at in Chicago, we are very segregated. I'm a White guy that looks Latino, so I get thought of as 1 in a Latino neighborhood.

I kind of gave up on White women, as they are too coward. When I hand out pamphlets out in the public street or train, with White women, 90% of the time they immediately reject before even knowing what the pamphlet is about. With Hispanic women, it's the opposite. The largest Latino gang in Chicago are Latin Kings, and in Latin King neighborhoods, Hispanic girls can be seen walking around in bikinis (as they feel protected by the gangs there). White women do not do this in their own hood, they only do that in crowded, special events. And I lived in Black neighborhoods too, Black women too got more confidence.

Years ago, on the public trains, a man would say behind me "Scuse me sir, you're backpacks unzipped." And throughout the coming years, every time my backpack is unzipped / open, it will always be the men to say that, or older women.

On the boring summer days, I would walk around the park and keep picking up trash. The women as well as women in gangs wouldn't say anything to me. And only the male-park district staff would compliment me, not the women.

Recently, I was walking around a Puerto Rican gang neighborhood, and I got punched in the face by 1 of them and got a bloody nose and chin. I decided to just continue walking around. All the gang bangers that asked me about my face, were men, as well as older women. But certainly not any baby mamas.

Generally, White women and Hispanic women don't look for reasons to be the 1st to say something, but Black girls do. They are the most talkative. Every time I sneeze, it's always Black women and men of any race, that say something. So if I'm in a computer lab and I sneeze, all the Black women will say "bless you" and such. Just like Black women will tell me my backpack is unzipped, not White or Hispanic women.

And several other examples I may post.

S. P. 's picture

That's quite unusual. I live in Serbia where you would get a relatively different rhythm and song. If you would go for a stroll through the town parading your eviscerated face, the guys are more likely to go "lol his face got turned to salsa". In my classroom, the girls (and one awkward guy) "blessed" you on you sneezes, while guys were prone to throw a bitch fit if someone didn't recognize their respiratory system's functions.

I see that women are more courteous in societies and circles where masculinity is the virtue. Now, is it because women play it cool under patriarchal societies, waiting for the female uprising, or do they assume direct control under nu-male infestation, since a leader is definitely needed? I don't really care, honestly. I know that mine is to be a man, and that's exactly what I will do.

uhondo's picture

You have a strong point my brother.

justAnyone's picture

Hey Chase,
I don't think you will get into arguments battle with him. It's such one sided and emotionally filled perspective that you can't really fight it with logical arguments here.
Women are selfish just because men usually make first move? That seems so, because you see it as a burden, not a joy. Men who think differently see it as a joy to make their girl feel desired, good and so on (one main reason - they learnt HOW to do it). Girls really have more to lose (reputation, being left alone with child and so on... - yeah she needs that assurance, yet if you're a man you won't take it neither too seriously nor too childishly).
There can be a lot of stuff discussed, it's laid out in articles several times... but Chase, I suppose when person sees more value in holding to the argument which is tied to his identity he won't just discuss - he will defend his argument like attack to his self - and such battle can't be won, because person gets on the defensive mode, not in "let's find out the truth" mode.

I was in these shoes myself, that's why I know how it is - I'm not really a lover (at least yet), but my views are more neutral than ever - I don't see neither men, nor women as some obligation carrying gods, more like ordinary people who do stuff, sometimes well, sometimes mess up. I still dislike people messing up, but it's less and less of a big deal when I'm on the path of increasing self reliance ;)

Keep it up, Chase.

Chase Amante's picture


Are women more selfish than men? I’d love to put you in a room with a radical man-hating feminist, ask you both which sex is the more selfish sex and for as many examples as you both can muster, then run out of the room and lock the door to contain the chaos.

We’re talking about biological organisms. We are all perfectly selfish. Everything you do is done in your own (perceived) best interest. You are a great example, for instance. Your comment here drips of selfishness: if only women could be more like… Well, like how you’d like them to be. Wouldn’t the world be better if everybody just did things the way I wanted them done?

You’re correct that women are the receptive sex. Men are the penetrative sex. In highly urbanized societies, men are conditioned to be more receptive and less penetrative, to make them more docile workers and consumers and a more easily controlled / less rebellious populace. You are a product of the system you came up in, and you have been trained to ignore your biology and instead embrace a receptive, feminine role.

You’ve started to wake up to the fact that waiting to receive what you want from women doesn’t work; but rather than blame the bullshit you’ve been reared on for stripping you of your male nature, you want to blame women for their female nature. That’s not bad, per se; it’s a normal step of the awakening process. The bad part is when men get stuck there.

We may not have much to offer you on Girls Chase at the stage you’re at yet. You’re still trying to get the bad emotion out, and don’t seem particularly interested in or curious about what women are and why they do what they do. To you they’re bad and selfish because they don’t give you what you want (oh the irony, right?).

Your comment gives me ideas for two future articles I’ll write; one on men’s and women’s roles as penetrators/givers/conquerors and receivers/conquered, respectively, and one on why women behave one way with one kind of man (e.g., they will boss him around and extract more love from him than they give in return) while behaving another way with another man (e.g., they will submit to him and love him more devotedly than he loves them).

At the stage you are at, I would encourage you to ask yourself if it’s really the man’s role to wait around and hope for women to come give him what he wants, and if this is actually what would make you happy and feel fulfilled. I would also encourage you to explore where this mentality came from, that it’s okay and good for a man to be passive and receptive and hope for women to come make his dreams come true for him. It’s not an uncommon mentality, and it’s one I had to some degree for a while when young, so I empathize. At the same time, I’d encourage you to look around at the men of non-Western societies and notice that most of them do not share this passive approach to getting what they want from women, and see if you can start to disentangle your nature as a man from your conditioning as a creature of polite urban consumer society.

Also, in the meantime, here’s an interesting way to think about female nature:

Women can sometimes be cruel and unkind toward weak, needy men. Yet they are across the board girlishly sweet, submissive, and devoted toward strong, robust men. Depending upon whether you have taken the time to develop yourself into a strong man or not, you may see completely different behavior from a woman than a man on the opposite side of the fence sees from her.


Neal's picture

Chase, my examples of the evils of women aren't by offering men sex. It's more along the lines of things independent of gender.

Like walking around with an unzipped backpack, and only the men point that out.
Or when you pick up trash at the park, only the men staff compliment you.
Or walking around a gang neighborhood with a bloody face, only the male gang members ask what happens to you, not the female gang members.

Now I won't have many White examples because I lived in a lot of Hispanic 'hoods. How about a story where some Mexican guy claims as he was walking down the street, a car full of gang members started swearing at him. And why did they do that I asked... he says he could hear females in the car giggling. And I've heard stories where women have lured their boyfriends who was not in a gang, into an abandoned warehouse where he was set up to be killed. And so and so forth.

I once moved into a gang neighborhood and walked around shirtless, as an experiment to see how the females of that 'hood reacted. But in reality, I was setting myself up, men that came to beat me up, coincidentally did it when females were around (or was it not a coincidence).

Granted you say things like when women are rude to you, it's because they're horny. So women can get away with it. And if you were ever having a depressed day, and you sat alone on a bench at the mall, would any woman that didn't know you show reciprocity?

As for which gender is more evil, then it would be men if we were to talk about particular races. I've been beaten by a lot of men in gangs and scammed monetarily, ripped off, etc. A lot of men in gangs take advantage of me because I'm White.

Franco Lombardi's picture


"Like walking around with an unzipped backpack, and only the men point that out.
Or when you pick up trash at the park, only the men staff compliment you."

This sounds like confirmation bias to me -- I haven't noticed this at all. All this tells me is that your mind is paying more attention to positive interactions from men and negative interactions from women than it is to negative interactions with men and positive interactions from women. If anything, my experience has been that women are generally the "preservers of peace and equality," and they are the ones more likely to tell you about an unzipped backpack or compliment you for picking up trash somewhere.

"Granted you say things like when women are rude to you, it's because they're horny. So women can get away with it. And if you were ever having a depressed day, and you sat alone on a bench at the mall, would any woman that didn't know you show reciprocity?"

I ask you this: how many complete strangers who looked "depressed" at the mall have you approached and talked to with the goal of making them feel better? My guess would be the answer is closer to 0 than it is to 10.

It's evident just from your examples that your focus is on "absorb and remember all negative things women do around me" while "forgetting all positive things women do around me." Also, many of your examples take place in the 'hood' with women in gangs; it would be easy for me to argue that women who are in gangs and/or involved with gang members have likely had poor upbringings, and they are the closest thing you'll get to "bad apples" when it comes to women. If you want to get some decent women, look for them in decent places.

- Franco

Neal's picture

Okay Franco, as for me approaching depressed people at the mall, is that for both genders or women? I'd guess if you compared men approaching both genders versus women approaching genders, it'd be more balanced, at least with married men.

And for people approaching only the opposite gender, I don't think it's balanced. Many times an attractive girl can sit down somewhere alone and get approached by guys. Won't work for old ladies though.

Imo, the hardest time *is* find women who go places solo. Every time a woman goes grocery shopping, goes to the mall, or to a carnival, they always just have to go in groups. Also true to men too. That is why I like women that are independent.

And I prefer tougher women, so I've given up on White women. My preference are women in gangs, especially if they wear the round-circle earrings. Likewise, I prefer sluttier women than conservatively-dressed women, and so the thing with Hispanic women over White is confidence.

White women are afraid to be approached by men of other races, Hispanic and Black girls are not.

Franco Lombardi's picture


This statement:

And for people approaching only the opposite gender, I don't think it's balanced. Many times an attractive girl can sit down somewhere alone and get approached by guys. Won't work for old ladies though.

...and this statement:

Imo, the hardest time *is* find women who go places solo. Every time a woman goes grocery shopping, goes to the mall, or to a carnival, they always just have to go in groups. Also true to men too. That is why I like women that are independent.

...are contradictory.

You mention that "many times an attractive girl can sit down alone and get approached by guys." But then in the very next paragraph, you mention that girls never go places solo. So which is it? Do women often sit down by themselves and get approached by men, or are they never alone and never get approached by men?

Anyway, aside from that contradictory statement, from my experience, women are often solo a lot. You can easily find women at the grocery store or the mall who are alone and are just shopping. I see it almost every day on a regular basis.

If you are in a more dangerous part of town, then it's more likely women probably travel in groups for their own safety. I don't personally live in a dangerous part of my area, but I would expect women to not be solo in parts of town where their life is in danger.

And I prefer tougher women, so I've given up on White women. My preference are women in gangs, especially if they wear the round-circle earrings. Likewise, I prefer sluttier women than conservatively-dressed women, and so the thing with Hispanic women over White is confidence.

So you prefer women who are in gangs, yet you are not in a gang and are often picked on by gangs? You are having the same issue as the guys who come on here and want sorority girls but are not in a fraternity. Or you want the tatted up girls who hang out with tatted up guys in wife beaters, but you are the non-tatted up, skinny guy in a vest and jeans. Your issue here is that you desire women who do not desire men of your type. You are not adapting your fundamentals to become the type of man that these women are attracted to. In order to get the type of women that want gang members, you would have to join a gang to reliably get them.

I will never advocate joining a gang. Instead of "giving up on White women," you should spend more time using this website to learn how to improve yourself to get (much) higher quality women. You're here trying to refute Chase's arguments with "passive" learning (which, by the way, teaches you nothing) instead of using Chase's material to practice "active" learning. You are gauging reactions instead of results. The only way to get past reactions is to put yourself in the field and be the aggressor, the penetrator, the man. When Chase says that men are the "penetrators," he is not just referring to sexual intercourse; he is referring to the overall personality of our gender. We are the ones who make the move, and the women are the ones who (gladly) respond to our moves. They embrace their roles, and they love and cherish the men who embrace the "man" role.

You have much to learn, young padiwan. And you won't learn anything of significance by making posts on here without going out into the field, being the aggressor, and actively improving yourself as a man.

- Franco

Neal's picture

Hi Franco, I don't believe in approaching women. I am not a pick-up artist.

"Nice guys talk because they have something to say. Pick-up artists talk because they have to say something."

My 2nd post in Chase forums was "5 reasons men shouldn't approach women" and it wasn't just censored or locked, it was deleted. These people advocate censorship.

Anyways Franco, before exploring into any relationship, I'm dedicating my time researching and trying to get into the friend zone (I've never been in the friend zone before).

I would love it if I were worthy of being a woman's guyfriend. I.e., she asks me to go shopping with her, etc. So as for sex or relationship, I don't even have time to think about that, because I'm concentrating at what's on the surface.

99% of my conversations with people are all with guys. 100% of my enemies, including filing lawsuits against, are all men. So my fantasy - includes having a conversation with women, and if you say I should be the 1st to talk to them, which I have, those conversations are all "21 questions - I ask a question, she answers. And if I'm done, she's done." I make small talk with women here and there, but so what? I can never get into the friend zone, I'm always viewed as an outsider.

Motiv's picture

Strange that you would adamantly declare yourself not a pick-up artist on a blog for which pick-up tech is the primary focus. Inner conflict I sense within… no offense – we all have that to some degree.

These days, I go out solo just so I can sit alone and write my own comments (long-winded and meandering as they sometimes be). Ironic to be sure, but I find it extremely therapeutic while still allowing me some opportunity to meet women at the same time. Call it my coquette game. At least it’s a step in the right direction from staying home alone.

I would love it if I were worthy of being a woman's guyfriend. I.e., she asks me to go shopping with her, etc.

This statement is extremely strange to me. What benefit do you perceive in being any woman’s guy friend?? In all my experience, women have colleagues, girlfriends, and lovers… and that’s it (aside from family). I hate to break it to you, but there is absolutely no such thing as being any woman’s “guyfriend.” The closest position to that is being her gay (or straight, supplicating) male friend to giggle with. I have a feeling that is not what you want. The concept of friendship has different meaning between the sexes. If you are looking for your concept of friendship in a women, you will never find it.

On the subject of censorship, GirlsChase is a private blog and a business. I feel fortunate Chase has not removed any of my ramblings. I’ll take that as a sign he sees at least some value in what I attempt to communicate. If you really want to hang out here, it might pay to empathize a bit more with your audience. Just my two cents.


She enters your world… not the other way around.
Tweak your way to the top ;)

Neal's picture

Hi Mischief.

Re: "Strange that you would adamantly declare yourself not a pick-up artist on a blog for which pick-up tech is the primary focus."

Right, just like being an atheist in a Christian forum.

Re: "This statement is extremely strange to me. What benefit do you perceive in being any woman’s guy friend?? In all my experience, women have colleagues, girlfriends, and lovers… and that’s it (aside from family). I hate to break it to you, but there is absolutely no such thing as being any woman’s “guyfriend.” "

Is this what men want you to think? Maybe you've never tried to be a woman's guyfriend before?

As for what benefit I would get, it's actually my fantasy to get in a woman's friendzone. Or even a real conversation with 1.

Motiv's picture

…how would you even define a "real" conversation with a woman? You mention that you have never had one. Why do you suppose this is?

As for my own views on this "guyfriend" thing, I'll refer you to
Book Review: The Rational Male by Rollo Tomassi
. The model put forth in this book most closely resembles my own experience with women.


She enters your world… not the other way around.
Tweak your way to the top ;)

Neal's picture

How do I define a "real" conversation with a woman?

1 where.

-It's not me asking questions or coming up with something to talk about.

So on the Internet, it's not 1 where the woman just suddenly stops replying and only "views" your conversations to her.

Bonus points if it's the female that started the conversation.

Annetta's picture

Yeah sure. All women are evil.

You know what? The last man I dated, I paid for his rent for two years, for his food, he slept in my bed. He pushed me to the very edge of the wall each night, taking up most of the space. He tore my self esteem down so low (I come from an abusive background) that two years later I am still trying to build myself up again. I contacted his ex girlfriend, the one that he villainized as being "crazy", turns how he beat her with a hammer. She has a restraining order on him. He has been to jail three times. Spent my money on meth. Broke into my home and stole my mentally disabled, deaf brother's rent money.

I put so much time and energy into him, so much heartache. All for love. Women aren't evil. Men are. We're nothing more than a warm body, a means to an end. The ones like me that are damaged goods will never be looked at with respect and love. I will never have the opportunity to feel safe. I subscribed to the Fairytale, and life just doesn't work that way.

If I had met a loving partner, it might have been different.

slayme's picture

I know through my experience and those of friends - and from the women who have actually admitted it - they are indeed "some of the most evolutionarily selfish creatures." Women use their looks and sex to get what they want. Short on rent this month - I bet there is a guy a woman could tell a sob story too and he'll pay her rent and she won't even have to have sex with him. I've seen this happen - multiple times. So listen up guys - and I'll tell you The Truth - your woman is only with you until someone better comes along - or she gets bored with you. Do YOU want to spend your whole life trying to please some woman who you're only trying to please cause she might leave you if you don't spend your whole life trying to please her? Ugh. Now I know why gay dudes have it so easy - there is none of that involved - no games - no trying to impress. There are very few Great Girls out there - but you'll know you've found one when she love you for who you are - does NOT test you (good lord what is this grade school) - and stays with you even during your worst times. Any other women are just out there "playing the game" - which sucks - get a Real Woman instead. And honestly - jerkin it is better than having to put up with a woman's BS about 95% of the time.

Motiv's picture

but neither does alpha. Think on this for more than a moment… give it a go when you feel ready.


She enters your world… not the other way around.
Tweak your way to the top ;)

bri's picture

Women have suffered more at the hands of men then the other way around. You can read about it through actual quality research if you ever stop being a misogynist. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/out-the-darkness/201208/why-men-opp... Approximately 3 women die on account of domestic violence daily. And this is after trying to be loving. Not to mention how many women get left and cheated on by men whom they had children with? I want to also add in while you're judging women, a cool guy wrote a while back that men are murdering women out of their own evil and selfishness basically and it needs to stop! https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/25/men-stab-and-kill-... Because he's nice! And he Cares.

Laith's picture

Hi chase , great article as always , i would like to know if there are books that you recommend for self improvement , or any book from your choice ? Thanks .

Chase Amante's picture


Sure; check out these two articles for some of my book recommendations:

Some thoughts from one wonderful self-improvement book here:

Of course I'd recommend my own book as well, which is as much about improving as a man as it is about getting girls (though it's certainly all about that latter, too!):

Also see my response to Anonymous above you, titled "Re: Recommended Reading"; I have a few more recommendations in that comment that aren't in any of those links.


Will Edward's picture

Great article, Chase! I definitely agree that you attract the kind of people and things in your life based on your thoughts. Making that mental shift and building the habit of thinking of the good things in life will make things much easier for you. Reading these types of articles is a good reminder to keep those healthy thoughts in check.

Mark Zuckerberg's picture

But many men and women endure in these situations. They refuse to give up or walk away, often to the point of shrugging off the advice of everyone around them.

That's because they focus on other things, not just money and weight. People care about different things with different people - you are judged on so many other things and if you don't live up to it, people will leave. They might not do X (leave, betray) because you don't have money anymore, but they might do it because you lack something else they deem important.

For example, in this article, you write about a girl who was starting to lose interest in you, but as soon as you gave her multiple orgasms, she was ready to be with you and yelled "I don't think I can LEAVE you!".

* If a woman loses interest in a relationship because you're having hard time financially and she regains interest after you recover, then she is one of those that 'buckles in extreme situations' and a sociopathic gold-digger.


* If a woman loses interest in a relationship because you're bad at sex (among other things) and she regains interest after you give her multiple orgasms and improve your 'fundamentals', then she is one of those humble, non-flashy women who just want to support her man.

You're treating these as polar opposites, when in fact they are very similar.

If you couldn't give women strong orgasms anymore or your fundamentals were declining, how many of them would stick around?

Why are you treating interest based on money (gold-diggers) as bad, but interest based on strong orgasms (hedonist, pleasure-digger) as example of a good character?

I’ve seen this myself repeatedly – girlfriends where everyone in their lives has told them I was no good for them and they needed to leave me, and yet they endured with me, fending off these attacks, for years.

This is a disconnect between priorities. People in her life were looking at you as a loser and thought you would not be a great provider for her and your potential children. She would probably agree with that.

You provided her strong orgasms and masculine presence. That is what she was addicted to and cared about. Not money, but orgasms. When someone tells her "This guy is a loser with no future and you need to leave him", she doesn't care about it that much and will be with you for years (as long as those orgasms keep coming).

I’ve gone through periods of doubt and malaise in which I had deeply negative net worth and no idea what I’d do with my future, and all girlfriends I had at these times did was stand by me, look for ways to take some of the burden off of me, and (aside from the occasional spat) try to remove as much stress and pressure from the relationship as possible."

Their priority, when spending time with you, was getting strong orgasms and enjoying you masculine presence, so they didn't care about your deeply negative net worth too much.

If you're dating professional women with a high-paying jobs (which I assume you do), then they will be less likely to leave you if you have deeply negative net worth. You give her something she wants, but can't get on her own - masculine presence and strong orgasms. Everything she does, like removing stress or giving you money, is an incentive for you to stay with her and be a good lover.

Motiv's picture

"If you're dating professional women with a high-paying jobs (which I assume you do), then they will be less likely to leave you if you have deeply negative net worth. You give her something she wants, but can't get on her own - masculine presence and strong orgasms. Everything she does, like removing stress or giving you money, is an incentive for you to stay with her and be a good lover."

I have more or less held this exact thought myself: are not the more professional, strong women generally lower sexual marketplace value, while the girly, flakier girls usually higher up? One could argue that the professional (somewhat more masculine) types are easier to seduce and sleep with because they have fewer strong men propositioning them (because their strength makes them inherently less feminine).

This is not a knock on Chase. I have noticed this exact trend with myself, all the while wishing I could be much better at taking home (or going home with) those purely hot-bod, knockouts for endless hours of senseless shagging – no meaningful feelings, no relationship – just primal fucking.


She enters your world… not the other way around.
Tweak your way to the top ;)

Chase Amante's picture


Interesting question. Let’s break it apart.

First off, I’d differentiate between overall sexual marketplace value, and specific sexual value to any given man. For instance, a fat girl may have no sexual value to you, but enormous (pardon the pun) sexual value to another guy. Meanwhile, you may much prefer a thin and petite girl, but he will tell you she’s “low value” to him (because she’s unattainable). Overall, more men want the thin, petite girl over the BBW, though.

Individuals tend to heavily class-sort. So while some educated women may shack up with the pool boy, and some educated men may date down with the waitress, they tend not to marry this way. For every Matt Damon who marries a bartender, there’re two or three George Clooneys who marry lawyers. The sticky part is, are the Matt Damons marrying bartenders the ones make a bad SMV deal, or are the George Clooneys marrying lawyers making bad SMV deals? Overall, more men at the socioeconomic status of a George Clooney or a Matt Damon opt for an educated, professional woman over an uneducated, unprofessional one.

This is probably one of the places where sexual market value breaks down in practice, since individuals have such varied tastes. In theory you should be able to rank everyone from 1 to 7 billion in SMV; in practice, one man’s #2 may be another man’s #2,507,418.

If we’re going by what the overall market decides though, at least for successful, educated men, similarly successful, educated women are the highest SMV (all other things being equal – obviously if a guy has to choose between plain accountant and beautiful barista, that’s a little more complicated; fortunately, there are beautiful accountants too).

Which would make sense, right? Educated, professional women will tend to be more intelligent, and if we assume human urban civilization puts selection pressure on in favor of intelligence, an equally beautiful woman who is also more intelligent would be higher SMV.

(also, re: your subject line – some of the strongest women I’ve known have also been some of the girliest)


Chase Amante's picture


If you’re proposing an equivalency between wealth, and an attractive man (good fundamentals) who’s great in the sack, and saying these two things are equal, then no, they’re only superficially similar.

Wealth functions at the level of strategic reasoning and ‘logical matching’, in a kind of Victorian “He’d be a good match for you,” way. Attraction + orgasm functions at a deep, primal level that inspires feelings of love, devotion, affection, and fidelity. The two are quite different.

No woman’s ever said, “Of course I’d never cheat on him. He’s rich. What else could another man have to offer me?” But plenty of women will say, “Of course I’d never cheat on him. He’s super sexy and he makes me scream all night. What else could another man have to offer me?”

On the other hand, if your argument is simply “There are similar because both qualities might go away, and then where will you be then?”, then, well, yes and no. Barring an injury or an illness, you’re not going to lose your ability to make women orgasm. I’ve made girls cum from sex when I had terrible stomach illnesses that had me otherwise curled up in bed (for some reason, I get really horny when I’m sick. No idea why). By the time most men start experiencing erectile dysfunction, their women have already hit menopause and taken a huge drop in sex desire – by that point they’re no longer looking for the best quality male to knock them up; they’re usually just content to live out their lives with their partner and watch their kids and grandkids grow.

This is almost as true with fundamentals. Unless you get really fat, fundamentals aren’t going to go away. Even if you’re bipolar and go through periods of extreme depression, fundamentals don’t go away. I’ve had multiple friends who go through deep depressive bouts, and they still remain attractive to women throughout.

That said, on the “yes” part of that equation, if you DID somehow lose everything about you that made her want to date you in the first place, well yeah, sure – of course she’d want to leave you. Same as if you started dating a girl who was slim and pretty and bubbly and fun, and then she became fat and ugly and morose and boring. Some people stay in these relationships anyway, where the other party completely let themselves go, but they aren’t usually all that happy about it even if they opt to stay.

My point wasn’t that you can trap a girl in a relationship by having good qualities, then lose all your good qualities and she’ll stay because she somehow knows you have “better genes” or something, even though you now no longer have any qualities to signal this.

My point was that there are some qualities that affect a woman on a more primal basis, and these factors weigh more heavily in a woman’s decision of how completely to devote herself to a man.


Random Stranger's picture

The only reason the need to be provided for is not as strong of an urge as the need to fuck is because we live in an abundant society. When women disincentivizing men to produce reaches it's apex, this society will fall and be invaded, and after enough raping the roles will reverse again.

You also made the argument that people attract different groups of people based on how they treat them. I find that argument hilarious because it is self-defeating: I can claim that your entire world perception is based on sleeping with loose women addicted to neurochemical release and is therefore as invalid as the views of the men you criticize.

If it seems like I am attacking you, I am not. I am not a game denialist and I do pick up. My problem with articles like the one you have written, and I have seen hundreds of them, is that they are entirely based on your need to believe in a just world, a holdout from your blue pill programming. Bad things happen to good people and karma, due to the statistical randomness of these events, can be ruled from existing. Yet people will leave someone down on his luck even if he saved their lives. They rationalize he deserved it, and didn't do the right thing. They need to believe that not following a system lead to his woes because without this belief, they have to face the reality that they could die tomorrow for no reason, all of their money can be stolen from a hack, or they could be arrested on false charges. They need to believe that good things will happen to them, because without their system telling them they are good, they will be forced to look in the mirror and may not like what they see. You are committing the exact same fallacy here. It's disgusting in my opinion: this advice will help no one, gives no one any real advice (it reads like a feminist scrying on about how you 'just weren't strong enough' or 'you aren't hanging around the right type of women') and only serves to assuage the ego of you and people who read it.

A better piece would describe how to be completely cold and sociopathic towards those who betray you, and how to figure out who those people are, and how to hide your emotions so they don't know you are on to them until you have gotten what you want from them. With women, we all know that playing her solipsism against her is the easiest way to get the truth out. Men new to the red pill don't. Other good advice would be helping men get physically fit, not to attract women but to help them project power. People may not return loyalty, but they tend to be craven and obey those they fear.

EvanK's picture


This article brings home some major points that have to do with men's outlooks and how it effects our pursuits with women. I think you did a good job tying this in with mental models, as guys from the MGTOW mentality seem to have a very obscure mental model and this effects how they see women.

Chase, I have a question for you relating to mental models that has plagued me for quite some time.

Why do women respond to jealousy differently than men?

If a woman finds out that a man she's been seeing has been out with another woman, her instinct may be anger, but part of her is attracted even more to the guy and she may then try harder to pursue him.

However, if a guy found out a women he's been involved with recently was out with another man, he'll feel anger, some betrayal even, and his instinct is *not* to go after her harder. As someone who's enlightened to the way seduction works, I don't let these things bother me anymore. However, the fact is, I'm not more into her if I find out she was out with another guy.

I do understand that scarcity and preselection are driving this, but why does it effect women and not men? And should I drop hints to women that there may be other women in my life to make them more jealous? I did read your article on jealousy, and it's fantastic. I was hoping you could just answer this question that I have.

Thanks again for everything, Chase.


Michal's picture

about jealousy, based on evolution, think about it this way:

Men = sperm suppliers
Women = baby making machines

If a guy has a girlfriend and she sees him with another woman, she is angry because the guy strays and does not hold is sperm only for her while simultaneously attracted because it means his sperm is good product (because someone else wants it too).

If a girl has a boyfriend and he sees her with another man, he is angry because on some level he thinks of her as his property because she is his baby making machine. She is not supposed to make babies for other guys because she is his. Imagine having a Ferrari where you are the only one who has the key. And suddenly you see some other guy, complete stranger have the keys too. He can go there any time and drive away with it so what good is the car for you now if it is not completely yours.

Sorry for the materialistic analogy. But this thinking is in our more instinctive level.


Motiv's picture

Speaking of reprogramming, I have personally strived hard to rid myself of the expectation that any woman ought ever be loyal to me—as a man who seeks psychological and sexual freedom, I believe this to be a vital action step. As a matter of fact, I am deeply attracted to what one might call the "super slut"—a woman who loves being used as a cum bucket by multiple men. Somehow, I can almost imagine the experience vicariously of the submissive female enjoying one explosive orgasm after another as a slew of dominant men all have their way with her… then I, being the expertly dominant of all, finish her off, saving the best for last. She becomes addicted to me for my cock above all else, but she also loves the sexual freedom I allow her—after all, there's only so much fucking one dominant man can provide before he needs (and wants) some chill time to recover.

It is always easier for the "average" attractive female to get new males than vice versa—this law applies to every animal species, in my opinion. This explains how female jealousy leads to greater sexual attraction—a man must be exceptional if new women want him on the regular (as this is not the case for the majority of men, unlike how it is for the majority of women—just biology at play).

In fact, I do from time to time lie to women I am sleeping with about my being with other women (although it is occasionally true), and this has indeed made the sex more powerful for them—talking about a slew of horny girls lining up to get penetrated by me has sped up and intensified a girl's climax with my dick inside her.

On the flip side, this tactic has also backfired and caused one girl to start crying on the spot, bringing our doggy style sex to a grinding halt… for me, this proves that whether or not any behavior causes emotional pleasure or emotional pain is highly contextual.

Feel free to try stuff out and always be ready to walk away from (or clean up) the mess you create—there's no other way to learn and grow.


She enters your world… not the other way around.
Tweak your way to the top ;)

Xander's picture

Hi Chase,
Great topic as always. I believe that opinion of women is based on personal experiences. For me women in my environment are "evil" because: they friendzone all guys from their social circles, are closed for approaching in daygame (they don't expect to be approached) and threat almost all guys like providers (only guys with much lover social and other status can be lover, but evan this is not the rule).
I know this is not true evil, just their tendency to feel safe. Because I've only seen this side of story I feel demotivated and I just don't have will to aproach them/game them. anymore. I'm sick of it. Can you give me some advice, and/or put some articles about motivation?
Also I have one more question, unrelated to this topis. I've noticed that lot of girls want to talk to me forever but nothing more. I used to meet girl and she would talk and talk with me, but nowhere showed that wants something more. We talk and talk for eternity and no one sign from her that I need to escalate. Should I cut such conversations and move on?
Thanks again,

Chase Amante's picture


A few articles on motivation:

As for girls talking to you forever and never moving forward, the simple trick there is to ask for compliance. Try to move them, or use compliance tests.

If they won't go along with it, tell them, "Okay, I'll see you later," and leave on very warm, friendly terms. When you see her again, engage her again, and after a few minutes see if she'll come with you. If she will, lead away. If she won't, leave again. Rinse and repeat the next time. Sometimes with social circle it takes a couple of tries before she realizes, "Okay, I like this guy, and if I want anything more than 3 minutes of conversation with him I'm going to have to start complying with him" (I'm assuming these are social circle girls or girls you meet in social venues like bars or parties; if it's a street approach and you'll never see her again, you should probably be more persistent).


Anaya 's picture

I must say it is one of the best article by chase as it covers the main reason of victim mentality that men go through..... I hope many men learn from this article

SBM's picture

Great article Chase! A year ago, ibprobably would not have agreed with the "lose the victim mentality" point, but the points you made on why you should do make sense to me. The question is though, how do you screen for gold-diggers? How can you find out whether or not a girl you're taking out on a date is infact a gold-digger?

Chase Amante's picture


I'll do an article on it. I think it'd be a fun topic.

Meanwhile though, some of the easiest ways are just to not buy her things and to not reveal wealth too early if you have any. Elon Musk, for example, when he met his second wife, didn't reveal to her that he was a business owner worth 9 figures until he'd been talking to her for hours and got to know her more. She thought he was just some rocket nerd who worked an engineering job at his own company.

The more practiced gold diggers will discard you the moment they decide you're unmoneyed or unwilling to pay. Even if they know you're rich but think you won't pay for them, they take it as a personal slight, since the lens they view the world is that if a man values them, he pays for them - so if a man doesn't, usually they will auto-reject. But then there are also the confident, savvy ones, who view a wealthy man who doesn't initially open his wallet as a challenge rather than an insult. These are the ones you're better off just not letting on you have wealth around in the first place.


John Doe's picture

"Meanwhile though, some of the easiest ways are just to not buy her things and to not reveal wealth too early if you have any."

This is okay advice. Buying things is certainly bad. Having your net worth known can be beneficial.

A much better way to screen out gold diggers is deep diving. Ask girls about their education, their career and their ambitions. If they are, or want to be, highly educated (preferably STEM or Finance) with a good career, then they are most likely not a financial parasite (gold digger).

Revealing your status or wealth can be beneficial as well. Sure, it will attract some gold diggers. But it will also attract highly educated and ambitious women who can relate to you (like attracts like).

"Elon Musk, for example, when he met his second wife, didn't reveal to her that he was a business owner worth 9 figures until he'd been talking to her for hours and got to know her more. She thought he was just some rocket nerd who worked an engineering job at his own company."

Why is that even relevant? Also, they've met in Mayfair, London, which is an exclusive part of town - this signals he has connections and some wealth.

Check her career (actress - unstable) and her education (weak, unrelated to career). She filed for divorce many times. She seems very childish and novelty-seeking. I wouldn't be so quick to label her as 'not-a-gold-digger' just because she talked to him for hours without knowing his exact net worth.

Gil's picture

"You don’t see a man’s true side until you see him in utter extremity."

You got that from "Firefly" didn't you?

Chase Amante's picture


Still haven't seen it yet! I want to though - I enjoyed Serenity a lot.

More of just a general human principle. Once you've seen people flip under extreme duress (and I've seen it both in person and in the various biographies I've read - Plutarch's Lives is great for this), you realize you don't know what he's actually like until you've seen him under pressure and in a vise. That's when men either earn your unending respect... or they lose it.


Neal's picture

Chase, just about every argument you use, you can use it the other way around.

For example.

"A woman will force you to be a man. She will not allow you to be a little boy around her."

Now, this example of mine won't apply to White women, it will be for Hispanic women affiliated with gangs. Imagine if you were walking by yourself at night, and someone attempted to armed robbery. And you decide to give some money to spare the bullet. And then, what would happen if you were with your woman when that happens, and you don't want to act like a coward in front of her, and you get shot. Who's fault to blame?

I think women are evolutionarily evil not because they won't want to have sex with some random attractive guy, but for the same reasons humans are evil. Most of the time when people are not evil, the answer is simply, because there is no situation. But you could put people in a situation to allow them to be evil, and most of my examples are with gangs.

But with women, imagine asking a poll on the Internet "Women, if you were walking around the mall or park, and you saw a sad depressed guy sitting by himself, would you approach him?" Compare this to guys seeing a depressed girl and using that as an excuse to justify being the 1st to talk to her.

A woman can sit alone in a nightclub and be approached by guys. What's a story where a guy can be alone in a nightclub.

There are cases where I be the 1st to talk to women, and cases where I don't. If I see a woman wearing a cast on her arm or leg, I don't use that to go "what happened to your arm/legs?" However, if I see a homeless cokehead guy asking for change, and the woman actually digs into her purse and gives him a little something, then I confront her about not giving money to a holes, as that money is just going to go to drugs, cigarettes, beer, cocaine, etc. (But after that, I leave, I don't use that as an excuse to continue talking to her.).

I think a bigger issue is friendship, I can never be friends with a woman - can never get into their friendzone, as they always view me as an outsider. But the same is true with guys. So I don't have any friends of any gender.

Sometimes when I move into a new gang neighborhood, I get beat up by the gangs there. Why? For some of the time, they do it to show off to their females...

Chase Amante's picture


Everything you write sounds like inexperienced mixed with too little empathy, too much time on the Internet, and not enough time in the field.

The “sad, lonely guy at the bar” thing is one of the best tricks in the book to get approached and opened by girls. If I’m not energetic, it’s my go-to, personally. Isolate yourself away from your friends, look a little sad, stare off into space. Then girls just drift toward you.

It’s arguably better for me than walking around and approaching girls at random in the bar, and I know a lot of guys who will say the same. The attractive-but-sad-and-lonely guy is mysterious and intriguing, and girls start concocting fantasies about who this guy must be and what his story is and why is he so sad (did he just break up with his super hot girlfriend???) and can they get a high caliber man on the cheap because he’s emotionally vulnerable.

Of course, you need fundamentals to do this. No girl wants to meet the schlubby unattractive guy who looks sad and lonely, just like an ugly fat girl can look as sad as she wants at the bar and no one’s going to talk to her but chubby chasers. No girl wants to meet the guy who looks angry, or weak, either. She wants to meet the man who looks sad but proud. Just like men want to meet the girl who looks sad but hot. Pride/confidence is the male equivalent to looks in women.

You’re talking about stopping people on the street to lecture them about giving to beggars. You are assuming they’re coming from the same paradigm as you, but they aren’t. People who give to beggars don’t do it because they think the money will go to cigarettes or cocaine, and if you start with trying to lecture them about that’s where the money will go, they assume you are ignorant or insensitive and simply dislike you. You might as well lecture a stray dog not to chase so many cats. And then you’re talking about getting beat up by gangs and not having any friends.

Your problem is you perceive things about people, but interpret them through an ungenerous mirror and presume you are right and everybody else is wrong and/or ignorant. You see what people do, but don’t understand their actions, and instead assign malicious or Machiavellian intent to everything. For every one person you get that right about, there are another 100 more who shrink back in horror at how clearly you assign terrible things to them that are not there. Until you can shake the automatic assumption that other people are evil, self-centered, nefarious actors, you will continue to be stuck on the outside. Would you like friends or girlfriends who think everything you do is designed to extract resources or other things from them? Of course not. You’d ditch such individuals faster than you can say “ward off the psychic vampires!” And because you are such an individual, you prompt everyone else to do the same to you right now. They will continue to behave that way until you stop projecting bad traits and intent to regular people.


Neal's picture

Uh Chase, I'm not a pick-up artist. I don't approach girls. Never asked a girl for sex, never asked them out on a date. So I am the sad lonely guy. The only conversations I have with women is when I go to grocery stores or eat-outs and have a female cashier, and tell them what I order...

My knowledge of women does not come with my interactions with them, it comes with my lack of interactions with them. And I don't have any stories of being the lonely guy at the cafeteria and being approached by women.

So my experiments like picking up garbage in the park or having a backpack unzipped, are generally a social experiment by gender.

And I do know reverse courtship does happen. A Christian couple I know, the girl pursued the guy for relationship (she decided to make herself religious 1 day and go after the most religious guy). So she pursued him. And my Mom asked my Dad for marriage.

T's picture

Excerpt: "I think a bigger issue is friendship, I can never be friends with a woman - can never get into their friendzone, as they always view me as an outsider. But the same is true with guys. So I don't have any friends of any gender."

I think nearly everyone who has read your comments could tell you why and believe me that has NOTHING to do with women. This is perhaps the point where your problems are most clearly visible and get most uncomfortable for you.
Ever heard of vibe? This site is full of texts about it. You should read it and in the meantime leave the women alone (independent of race, color of skin or whatever...)

I really don't want to hurt you, but a had to say this after reading all your comments.


Charlie's picture

Generally speaking. I do think women are evil.

When I look back at my life and most of my encounters with women. I have WAYYYYYY more examples of their evilness than their kindness.

Chase can say what he wants. But I fucking hate women with every fibre of my being. But I still want to fuck them. So I guess I'm screwed.

Add new comment

The Latest from GirlsChase.com