(2) Intermediate

Resistance is not rejection. Pros know this and calibrate accordingly. Novices think it's the end of their chances with the girl they're talking to.

Editor's note: while this is Part 2 of Alek's series on fear of rejection, we mistakenly published it first. You can read Part 1 here.

Hey guys, welcome back!

Last week I discussed how to counter different forms of anxiety regarding “making a move” with girls, whether we’re dealing with:

• Approach anxiety

• Fear of escalating the vibe

• Fear of going for the kill (attempt an extraction)

Some of you have experienced great results through affirmations and other techniques (inner game). Others have conquered anxieties with meeting women by repeatedly exposing themselves to rejection.

I won’t deny that for some, these strategies may work. However, they simply don’t work for me. I’m a practical guy; I want practical solutions to my problems. Whenever I know that I have an answer to any potential difficulty I may face, I feel more comfortable and less anxious about the situation.

It’s from this point of view that I decided to write a two-part series on this subject. Last time we discussed the many causes of resistance and rejection. Being aware and knowing how to avoid these issues will grant you better results and allow you to feel more confident and relaxed since you know you can potentially avoid resistance and rejection.

Resistance may still occur, but with my advice, it can be a lighter form that is less hostile or scary. More importantly, that “lower caliber” resistance (sometimes facing resistance is simply unavoidable) will be easier to deal with.

That alone should make you feel more at ease with making a move (that’s the message from my last post). But what if you could prevent the mistakes that trigger resistance and deal with it whenever it bears its ugly face? What if you could turn resistance around to your benefit?

Would making a move seem scary then? You’d not only know how to prevent resistance (the subject of my last post) but also know to circumvent it and turn things around. There wouldn’t be any lingering fears, or they’d be greatly minimized. Worst-case scenario you’d enjoy the practical benefits of doing things right, which would give you better results.

Today I’ll discuss how you can learn to handle resistance and turn it around, listing the different strategies. I won’t write about anything new here but will share some basics in a new light so newer readers can take the message and get more results. More experienced guys may view this post as a good recap.

The Moon Is Blue is a 1953 film about pick up, seduction, and sex. In it, a playboy picks a girl up and brings her home. Another player tries to seduce her first, and fascinating things ensue.

The Moon Is Blue is a delightful 1953 film about seduction, based on a German play translated in 1951 to English and staged on Broadway.

It begins with a day game out-shopping pickup. Donald Gresham (played by William Holden, who has a habit of playing the moody seducer types) receives an approach invitation from Patty O'Neill (played by the charming Maggie McNamara), but fails to approach after she backturns him and walks away.

When he spots her eying him a second time a few moments later, he realizes she's definitely into him and he'd better chase her down to make his approach. So chase her down he does.

This entire film is about pickup, seduction, and male and female dynamics. The words 'pick up', 'seduce', and 'seducer' appear throughout its runtime.

If you like film examples of seductions, or you're interested in seduction dynamics, you're almost certain to like this film.

When you’re on the prowl, and you’re not sure a woman is sufficiently liberated for your purposes, what do you do with her? Well, you screen her… next her, if she doesn’t measure up… then return.

Here's a devious little tactic you can use in social circle settings or anywhere you have a 'captive audience'.

First off: this tactic is not so well suited to cold approach.

You can use it sometimes, in some cold approach scenarios, such as early on in a bar or nightclub (e.g., if you are doing shotgun opening / hit-and-run game).

But it is really best suited to situations where you are going to see a woman again and again.

You are going to use this tactic to get girls to get on-board with the way you want to seduce them or pick them up. It will both make compliant girls feel extra special, and make non-compliant girls become a lot more compliant (if not now, then in the future).

It's simple to do, but it takes some balls.

Why do you have the sexual, romantic preferences you do? Much of it is socialized. That is: you learn it from your experiences, your environment, and the media you consume.

We had a discussion on the forum about dating older women. In particular, "What's the oldest woman you've been with?"

The guys there had predictably varied tastes. Some guys are very into older women. Some are fine with much older women. But some aren't.

A point I raised was that it seems to me a preference for older women is likely socialized. i.e., this is a preference acquired by men, due to influences around them.

A lot of people aren't aware of just how many of their tastes are acquired tastes. They also often aren't aware of how they acquire them.

So from whence, pray tell, do your romantic likes originate?

You were just about to ask her out. You were just about to make a move. You were just about to make the relationship serious. But women don’t wait for you. Why must girls be so impatient?

There's a recurring theme you see when you're in this industry long enough.

Well, actually, you see a lot of recurring themes.

But one of them is guys complaining about how women don't wait for them.

Men complain that women don't wait for them across so many domains:

• "I wanted to ask her out, but it's like she lost interest and moved on. Why couldn't she wait for me?"

• "We were having such a great conversation, and I was getting ready to make a move, but the emotions changed and she left. Why didn't she wait just a little longer for me?"

• "I'd been talking to this girl for weeks and had some really great dates with her. Then she texted me she'd started seeing someone else. I thought we had a great thing. Why didn't she wait?"

• "This girl and I were dating for five months. She kept asking me how I felt about her, and I didn't really have an answer. Then eventually she began to pull away, and broke up with me. I just realized I'm crazy about her. I want to give her everything she wanted, but it's too late. I don't understand why she didn't wait for me?"

Long-time readers know the first part of my answer: attraction has an expiration date.

Just because she's into you now doesn't mean she will be four hours from now if you don't take advantage of it while it's there.

But what about for the guys who are in relationships?

Why do women ditch guys they've been dating for months, who were just about ready to offer that next step up in the relationship those women had sought?

Is there any relation between women not waiting in relationships, where they're already intimate with the man, and women not waiting for men they're not yet intimate with?

A mental priority of men and women alike is to preserve internal consistency. Threats to that cause resistance – both in the women you want, and in you, yourself.

People do and say a lot of hypocritical things.

But what happens when you call someone out on an act of hypocrisy? Does he say, "Whoops, my bad! You caught me slipping"?

No, of course not. That almost never happens.

Instead, the usual reaction is what? Defensiveness and denial. Auto-rejection is also a common response.

Imagine you try to go home with a girl you met at a bar, and she tells you, "I don't just hook up with some guy I just met." But two hours later, you see her leaving the bar... with some other guy she met after she talked to you.

So you stop her and, feeling a little salty, say to her, "I thought you didn't go home with guys you just met?"

How will she react?

I think you can imagine how she will.

She'll either be:

• Incensed: "What are you, my dad? Get away from me!"

• Denying: "Actually we know each other" (might be a lie!)

• Embarrassed: "Umm, I just need to go home now, sorry John" (you cockblocked the other guy)

At no point is she going to just say, "Ha, good point! You caught me in an act of inconsistency. Bully for you!" then just continue with what she was doing.

But internal consistency goes a lot deeper than this.

It reaches the way a man interacts with a woman he wants to pair with, or with another man he wants to form a connection with.

And it even reaches the heart of a man's very thoughts about himself, the way he conducts his life, and his ability (or inability) to do what he needs to do.

Want to optimize your seductions? Step 1: learn effective canned routine concepts. Step 2: “naturalize” those concepts to fit your personal approach and style.

Hey guys!

Last week, in response to a reader’s question, I detailed the pros and cons of using canned routines to seduce women.

To recap, the benefits of using scripted gambits are:

• You have well-thought-out techniques that have been tried and rehearsed by others designed to work at your disposal

• Others can try your routine, comment, add changes and tweaks. This benefits the community

• You have a working tool in your arsenal. You avoid talking for the sake of talking, and you can accomplish a specific goal with your words

• It can reduce your nervousness when opening since you have a well-tested routine or gambit that has worked in the past. You don’t have to rationalize for not opening because you don’t have a good opener. Now you have one

• Beginners especially can benefit from having clear guidelines for what works and what doesn’t in seduction. This is likely THE MOST important point

The cons:

• Even though gambits show you what to say, you may find yourself in a protracted interaction where you run out of gambits and are left with nothing to say

• The delivery can sometimes be artificial since it may not calibrate to you or your personality (probably why many men got seduced by the idea of “natural game” since it focuses on being more “you”). Guys can get stuck delivering a rehearsed script that mismatches the vibe of the interaction and the venue

• You have little flexibility; you end up stuck within the gambit

• Sometimes a magical gambit that worked 90% of the time will not work on a certain chick for whatever reason. (A dogmatic routine user would argue that you should learn more routines; a good solution, but it’s not the most effective, as we will see, and surely not the most pleasant)

• You may feel alienated from the material since it is not yours (the exception is when you create your own material, which more experienced seducers do, myself included!)

Last week I discussed these pros and cons while sharing some historical elements behind routine-based game and why it lost popularity.

However, I realized I did not present a solution to the problem. Is natural game the way to go? Or should you stick to routines? In my opinion, the answer lies somewhere in between. Ideally, we would like to gather as many of the benefits of routine-based game while keeping it natural. In other words, get the best of both worlds.

I want to present my view of “naturalized” game. I initially wrote a post titled “Naturalized Game” around 2008. It didn’t get much attention, partly because it was short and did not deliver anything mind-blowing then. I did not spend the time or effort to make a good, solid argument for my position. But I intend to do so today.

Note that I have stuck with naturalized game since that day.

Before I discuss what this concept is and how it works, I need to clarify a few ideas.