(3) Journeyman

I was doing some reading the other day when I came across the term “trivializing.”

It gets thrown about in popular media, and often is something you learn to somewhat ignore, just because of how often people lament others “trivializing” some XYZ “really big deal” to them, that seems trite or overblown to others.

And yet...

Examine the classic debate between two opposites. Say someone who is pro-renewable energy because he wants to save the planet, and someone else who is pro-fossil fuels because he doesn’t want to be forced to pay top dollar for new, less effective technologies when cheaper alternatives are available.

The first guy accuses the second guy of killing the planet. The second guy feels like the first guy is trivializing his need to not burn a hole in his wallet, and becomes offended, and tells him off. The first guy then feels like the second guy is trivializing his desire to save the planet as an ignoble cause, and fiercely retorts.

This is a case of crossed wires communication-wise of the sort we discussed in “Dale Carnegie’s Most Life-Changing Piece of Advice”, but it goes broader than this, because trivializing comes in many shapes and forms, and it’s hard to detect and harder to combat in nearly all of them.

Who’s fault is it when a relationship fails?

Two words for you: the man’s.

Usually.

Note: a relationship failure is something different than letting a relationship decline and die, or just breaking up with a girl, because you’ve lost interest or other things in your life have taken precedence or she’s let herself go and is no longer meeting your requirements for someone you’ll keep around in a relationship capacity.

In that case, while a female observer would still consider it a “failed relationship”, from the standpoint of the male it probably isn’t (unless it’s a case of her letting herself go... then, maybe it is, if she was what you wanted before that but stopped being it after it). In that case, it’s just a relationship that didn’t work out.

When I say “failed relationship” here, what I’m talking about is a relationship that you really wanted to work out... but it went belly up anyway.

Is it ever the woman’s fault?

Yes, sometimes. Rarely. In the case where the relationship is a female dominated one because the man has yielded to her the role of captain aboard the good ship Relation... in that case, he is following her lead, and the direction the relationship goes is up to her.

Even then though, I’m torn... because most women who lead don’t want to do it, and resent men who make them do it as weak. If I’m the officer of a military unit and I hand over my command to one of my subordinates, who then goes on to lead us right smack into a disaster, am I absolved of all blame, or do I still take some too?

The large majority of the time, across most kinds of relationships, it’s the fault of you, the man – and nearly always, it’s a failure of leadership that causes the relationship to fold.

As promised, I will now share a practical technique built on the theory of “sexual prizing”.

Before I begin however, I would like to mention that this post is rather advanced. This is good news for our more experienced readers, but for those of you who are beginners/intermediates, I highly recommend you read my three previous posts that build up to this one:

• Standards
• Qualification
• Sexual Prizing (optional)

These posts will work as pillars for the technique I am about to share with you. You will soon see “why” and “how” this all applies.

Although in theory reading these posts beforehand isn’t required, I very much recommend it. Reading them will give you a better, deeper, and broader understanding of the concept I am about to share with you.

Finally, keep in mind that this is an advanced (yet very efficient) technique, which means that having some in-field experience with women might be necessary in order to be able to pull this off properly. Still, if you don’t have that experience, read this post, and try it out and maybe fail anyway – it just might make you better. What I am really saying though is that you should not be too hard on yourself if you are a freshman with women and this doesn’t work as you’d expected.

A reader writes in, asking the following questions:

“”Chase,

I’ve read several of your articles, and I can relate to quite a bit of what you say. However, it seems to me that in your scenarios, the guy is always the one who is at fault. It’s as though the girl is fully functional, prepared to choose who she is interested in and whether or not the guy fits in to one of her categories,  I guess robotic in a way. What I’m trying to get at mainly is the no second chance with women idea. Like if you don’t move fast enough she is gone for good. Is it really the case that the guy has to do everything right or else he is out? This perplexes me as we live in a society where equal opportunity for race, genders, and sexuality is at the forefront. In the corporate world and in the military, women are continually given more and more power/leadership/etc. They are no longer viewed as the traditional queen role from what I see. In this respect, why must the guy solely be the one to make things happen fast, take her as his lover before she flees to the next guy, and so on.

Perhaps I have read your writings incorrectly, but your advice (though as I said much of it rings true with me) seems to put the vast majority of the burden on the guy’s shoulders.

Also, let’s say that I screwed it up with a chick. I took her as my lover, but then later decided she was no longer interested. Walked away, realized I made a mistake. Apologized a couple weeks later, she says she has moved on to someone else. Your principles seem to be true here at first, but when she blames me for the fallout, then comes to the bar that night and makes out with me, only to run off and go kiss on some guy’s cheek, and give all sorts of mixed signals thereafter, things get hazy. No second chances, but I’ll make out with you? It just doesn’t click with me that anyone has all of this figured out. Life isn’t black and white, I don’t think.

I would appreciate your reply!””

So, there are a lot of interesting questions and themes in here worth addressing:

• Are there no second chances with women?
• Is it all on the man to make things happen?
• What about equality?
• Why do women send mixed signals?
• Why do women flirt if they don’t want you?
  

I’m not really going to talk about the other bullets here – I addressed the “do/should guys REALLY have to do EVERYTHING?” question here a few weeks ago: “What Role Should Women Play in the Mating Game?” I’ll throw a quick bone to that one though because I have a couple more things to say on it you should find interesting. The third bullet is addressed in that post, and the fourth and fifth in these two: “Mixed Signals from a Girl: What These Mean” and “The Paradox of the Flirty Girl.”

Let’s talk about second chances though, because that’s one it seems like a lot of guys want to know about, and it’s worth discussing for sure.

Hi everyone. Good to be back! How is everyone doing? I am sorry for having been inactive. I was busy with school. But now it is all over and I will be able to pump out a few articles for you!

Previously we discussed what it meant to have standards. We covered different types of standards and reflected on different aspects of it. Today we will talk more about standards, but this time more about its practical aspects – namely, how you can use “standards” in qualification.

First of all, I am aware that qualification has been covered multiple times here at Girls Chase, but in my belief, repetition is good, especially when it is about important topics.

Also, I probably have a different view on qualification than other posters here, which in the end will just build up to your technique arsenal of mass seduction. New readers will of course benefit from this post as well.

Also keep in mind that this post on qualification, like the previous one on standards, is another of the crucial elements of sexual prizing. This post, in fact, covers such an important element of sexual prizing (a concept I introduced a month ago), that if you want to be able to truly understand my upcoming posts on that topic, this one is a must read.

Imagine this scenario, if you will.

A man goes out with a woman, and everything feels like it is going great. She’s totally into him, smiles at everything he says, and follows his lead. Then, at some point during the interaction, she does something that completely catches him off guard.

Maybe she refuses a request in an attempt to test him.

Maybe she decides that going home with him wouldn’t be a good idea, and she protests at such an idea.

Maybe she puts up last minute resistance and leaves him wondering what in the world he needs to do to get past it.

All of the previous scenarios include a defining moment, because these men are unsure of how to proceed with unforeseen challenges.

These defining moments are the points in conversation where most men lose women. They are lost at what to do in such a scenario, and effectively scrape their minds to find a strategy to blow past that which is in the way of their goals.

… And when each strategy just doesn’t work out, what do they do? They lose power, and begin to panic. The loss of power causes them to become moody, belligerent, and bitter, because they just aren’t getting what they want with women.

Overreactions like this happen all the time. They are one of the primary destroyers of an interaction which otherwise may have been going along quite well, but were utterly destroyed when the leader (that’s you) ran into a roadblock. The smooth, seductive mask is lifted, and you are left angry at finding yourself unable to get to where you wanted to get to.

Remember that girl you dated in high school? You know, that really cute one with the seductive laugh who hemmed you all up and then started acting like a complete loony bird?

If you’ve been out of the house much, I’m sure that rings true for many a woman that you’ve dated or maybe even ended up in a relationship with.

A study published in the Archives of General Psychiatry on “Mental Health of College Students and Their Non–College-Attending Peers” found that 1 in 5 young adults have a personality disorder, based on interviews with 5,092 persons aged 19 to 25 in 2001 and 2002.

So, crazy people are everywhere. You’re probably wondering: how do you spot them before you get involved with them? And more importantly, how do know when you’re dating one of these crazy girls?

Well my good friend, wonder no more. What follows this brief introduction will serve you well as a complete guide to detecting those mad as a March hare, no matter how well they think they cover it up.