mASF post by "Chaco"
posted on: mASF forum: Advanced Discussion, May 5, 2005This post in intended to foster some discussion about “natural game»” or direct
game, the current game style in vogue on ASF. I am not posting any
revelations, I am seeking guidance and clarification, but the discussion is
pretty advanced in my view, so I feel justified in posting on the advanced
board.
My question is this: do natural or direct game guys do anything to consciously
create the moods/mind states they want a girl to feel, or do they present
themselves with a strong frame that assumes attraction and let the interaction
develop naturally?
Let me explain further.
From the beginning of this community, all the way back in the days of Speed
Seduction, there has been a belief that the man could, and should, actively and
consciously create the mind state needed for that particular stage of the
interaction. If attraction was needed, run an attract pattern. If connection
was needed, run a connection pattern. For sexual feelings, run a sexual
metaphor pattern (“discovery channel”). The idea was that the man should
actively install these states in the woman’s mind.
Later models, such as Mystery Method» and RSD take the same approach, though
used different tactics. Rather than hypnotic/NLP based patterns, “routines”
were used. But the overall strategy was essentially the same – to create
attraction, run an attraction routine (a DHV, tease, neg, push-pull, c&f etc).
To create rapport, run a rapport routine, such as Mystery’s “grounding”). To
physically escalate, use escalation routines, such as Mystery’s “you look like
you want to kiss me” or Style’s “evolution phase shift”.
Even Gunwitch Method, perhaps a lesser degree, but still to a degree, calls for
conscious tactics to create mind-states in a woman that lead the seduction to
sex. To create attraction/horiness, go into a sexual state. To create
rapport, assume verbal rapport and focus on neutral topics.
But now we have natural game», something promoted by Woodhaven, Razorjack,
Player Supreme, Shark, The One, and others. The general idea as put forward by
these PUAs is that inner game» comes first and from a strong frame of assuming
attraction, the right behaviors flow naturally without having to consciously
keep track of various tactical considerations. I recall Razorjack posting that
by having the proper inner beliefs, his body language and tonality fall into
place without having to keep a mental checklist of TD’s famous 25 points.
So, I have been trying to shift my game to a more natural, direct style. But I
want to ask those who run this type of game the degree to which they
consciously consider tactics through out the course of the sarge. And I mean
though out the entire sarge. We tend to focus so much on the opening around
here, but I am curious about the development of rapport and physical
escalation.
I think it may help to explain why I am posting about this. I had a day2
today, I went to the park and had tea with a woman. It went generally well, I
was relaxed, I asked some screening/get-to-know-you questions, she asked some
of me. The convo flowed well. I stayed away from routines other than The
Cube. But this girl was very factual and logical (she is a lawyer), so she
kept talking about factual matters when I would screen and try to probe for
more feelings.
In the end, though I think it was solid overall, I felt I didn’t create much
intimacy. There was a spark missing. And me being the analytical type, I
starting wondering what I could have done to create that feelin...and then I
realized I was running natural game» and wondered if I SHOULD be trying to
actively create that feeling in the first place? Or should I just be presenting
myself in a relaxed way, with a confident frame and letting the interaction
unfold naturally, assured that the proper feelings will come in time?
I have a wing who thinks that I used to sabotage my sarges by having too much
of an agenda in my head. Like I would go to a day2 thinking “I must get her to
sit next to me, I must kino, I must run The Cube, I must kiss close, I must try
to isolate"...Rather than letting things unfold on their own, knowing that a
girl will naturally present opportunities for things in the presence of a high
status man, the timing based on her temperament.
So, direct guys, how much of what you do is all “belief-based” vs. active
tactics? Do you really just interact with strong inner game», assuming
attraction, and let things take their course naturally? Or do you consciously
try to create mind-states in women who you are sarging? If you felt a day2 was
not intimate enough, would you use a tactic or would you kick back and let it
happen patiently? If you wanted to get her feeling sexual, do you use some
tactic to create a sexual state in her, or would you make your move as you saw
her sexual state develop naturally? I am confused about the extent to which
this natural game» style is about beliefs and letting the sarge run on
auto-pilot vs. employing tactics to make things happen.
I think this would help clarify direct game/natural game» for a lot of us who
were so used to indirect game.
Thanks for your help.
- Chaco
|
