GIRLS CHASE MONTHLY SUBSCRIPTION
• Unlimited access to GirlsChase.com
Women put a lot of signals out there. Yet, there are things women do that men THINK signal interest to them… but nevertheless are distractions.We've talked a lot about ways women signal their interest in men.
However, as big a problem as missing women's signs of interest is, there's another problem under-discussed in the men's dating advice space: mistaking as signs of interest things that in fact aren't.
What's wrong with mistaking signs of interest? I thought you were supposed to assume attraction anyway, you might say!
Well, that's right, you are.
Nevertheless, if you recall from our discussion of the importance of the similarity of interest, the interest you show a girl should closely match what she feels.
If you show a lot more interest than what she feels, because you incorrectly judged her to be more warmed up than she was, you risk of burning out the courtship before it begins.
To help you not do that, in today's article we'll look at the most common behaviors of women's that men incorrectly think show interest -- so you can recognize these yourself and not get fooled.
Comments
Direct Approaching
So do you also share Alek's view that direct isn't always the best way to go? Do you use direct these days?What about for guys cutting their teeth what do you suggest for them? I've followed Hector on yt for years and always liked his style of expressing himself to women. Seems easier and more fun. Indirect sounds more tryhard.
Re: Direct Approaching
Anon-
I've never done full direct game, where you are simply going up and telling the girl you like her and propositioning yourself to her. I haven't actually known anyone personally who made that style of game work to any good extent with any good caliber of woman, save Hector.
To me it's always stricken me as a style of game that seems superficially easy, but in practice (in terms of actually getting the results you want from it) is damnably hard -- simply because it attempts to sidestep the normal human mating process, where you have this flirtation dance where women protect their value by vetting the man and pursuing him in vague, ambiguous ways.
I encouraged Hector to pursue his direct style of game when he was learning it. A lot of guys told him it wouldn't work, but it seemed to me like he'd be able to get it working for him -- he had the drive for it and had a lot of novel ideas about doing it. And I'd say he pulled it off.
If a guy has the drive to really work hard to learn that style of game, and he isn't afraid of all the hard rejections and hard pushback he'll get from women along the way, I'd say go for it.
I'll never try to steer a guy away from something he wants to do that I think he has the drive to figure out and get working for himself.
Also, if a guy is following a proven direct method, like Hector's, I think that's fine too.
In general, I consider direct game to be good for taking advantage of value differentials, where the girl perceives you as much higher value than herself and you simply want a quick hookup with her, and probably fair for moving things forward with girls you have a strong natural, mutual attraction with. What that translates to is "direct game is good for hooking up with girls who are less attractive than you are, and fair for hooking up with those girls you run into now and again where you have a special magical connection."
For high value women you do not have a magical connection with, unless you meet them when they're unusually horny and willing, you will need an indirect approach.
In general, there are a lot more beautiful women who aren't willing and ready than there are beautiful women who are, so my preference has always been indirect.
Each guy's different though.
I would also add (just to avoid confusion) that direct openers are excellent and likely always will be.
The main conversation on this site was about direct game (rather than openers. Some readers got confused).
Chase
Leave a Comment