Luniac said:
it seems some girls are looking for a “romantic date” type experience or at least the “uncertainty” of whether the encounter will lead to something more even though they know you really just probably wanna hook up and not interested in a relationship.
Warning to all - this is going to very 'theory heavy'.
I just think that these types of discussions about The Pros and Cons of different approaches can be beneficial to people who are trying to find out what works for them.
One of my mates is a 6'4" natural. He lacks technical skill and insight when it comes to game/pick up, but he's probably had 50+ lays (mostly from online dating). Some of the girls are really hot. Stunners.
Based on his experience, he believes that the majority of girls he sleeps with are secretly hoping inside that the sex will become something more one day (from one hook up, to casual but ongoing, to a relationship). This is a guy who lacks technical insight - it's just his own opinion based on his experience. I always keep this theory in mind, as there
might be something to it. He also claims that hotter girls often require a lot more time messaging back and forth. Again - this is just
his theory.
Explicit vs Implicit (Words vs Behaviours)
As I spend more time with girls, I'm learning to
look at their actions, not their words. The women in my life have all stated what they're looking for with their words. But if you look at their actions, there's a mismatch between their words and their behaviours.
For example: 'Girl A' explicitly states she wants a serious monogamous relationship / life partner. For a while, it seems she really does want that. She pursues you as if she wants you to be her monogamous partner.
Then one day, her mood/desire changes for whatever reason, and she doesn't display as much of those behaviours anymore. She starts behaving as if she's more interested in a casual arrangement -
even though she never explicitly says it with her words.
The new behaviours might include taking longer to reply to your texts, stating that she wants to go on a holiday to Asia soon (which she knows you won't be going on with her), going out to the bars more etc. She didn't do any of these behaviours before, but
implicitly, it's obvious she has 'changed her tune'.
Another example: 'Girl B' states she is in a phase in her life where she really just wants something casual and open. After you sleep with her, she states "When you said you're not looking for anything super serious, I really liked that because I'm in the same boat right now. I have a lot going on with work and study and I just don't have the time".
But then as she starts getting to know you more, she catches feelings and starts doing girlfriend behaviours. Again, another mismatch -
even though she never explicitly says it with her words.
Some new behaviours might include: She texts you back quicker, she starts telling you about things going on with her day, she starts inviting you to do more things other than just sex (like go to a movie), she buys you a small gift etc.
My conclusion so far: It really does not fucking matter what you say at the start.
Actually, it does - but in a different way.
You probably wouldn't want to explicitly state "I'm looking for something serious and long-term".
Because even if the girl states (explicitly) that she also wants that, what she probably REALLY means is:
"I'm looking for something serious and long-term,
with a high value male who I'm highly attracted to and have great compatibility with - so we should probably meet in person first to see if you're high value and if we have chemistry before even discussing this any further.
Squilliam said:
I'm not opposed to something serious, I'm just not going to agree to that unless I really really like her.
Absolutely. Lets be real - it should take a long time for a girl to become qualified to be in a serious, long term relationship with us.
There's a lot of different schools of thought on how to navigate this grey area of dating. I think they all have their use.
I think you guys should check out BlackDragon's Open Relationship Manual. He's really big on the whole 'Implicit vs Explicit' thing. His take on it, is that you should avoid any 'explicit' conversation about the relationship labels for as long as possible, but 'implicitly' show her through your behaviour what it is that you want (in his case, an open relationship). Based on this approach, there would be absolutely no need to send Andy's text to a girl saying "I'm not looking for anything super serious".
Andy did a video podcast with BlackDragon. Andy mentioned something to the effect of "I'm really big on being honest, so I tell girls upfront that I'm looking for something casual". And BlackDragon replied something like "That's fine, but once you start actually hanging out with the girl, everything changes. She'll still eventually want to have the 'What Are We' talk." Based on my experience, BlackDragon is right about this. It's also possible that a lower percentage of girls will move to the next phase of the interaction (from an online dating match and into a phone number) if you explicitly state you're not after something serious. I'm guessing this is what Luniac might be concerned about.
Some PUA's go for a more sociopathic short-term approach, and just tell the girl whatever she wants to hear so they don't have to navigate any tricky conversations and risk losing the girl. From an ethics point of view, absolutely terrible. But from an efficiency point of view for a short-term mating strategy, it makes a lot of sense. I remember GLL writing an article about this. He had a friend who was unconsciously using this strategy. He would tell multiple girls 'you're my girlfriend' and would treat them as a GF, going on dates regularly and what not. The guy saw nothing wrong with it at all, it was just his instinctual way of keeping girls around and he benefited greatly. FYI - Chris did not condone this behaviour, he was simply sharing his observations.
Personally, Andy's templates have changed my fucking life and I can't believe I got them for free.
One of the things I LOVE about Andy's templates is that it's straight forward and does the screening for you. A lot of the time it doesn't work, but when it does work, holy shit - it works WELL (meaning the date goes very well and the girl will be very compliant all the way through to sex). At the end of the day, that's what we want, right? Compliance!
Andy's template has given me EXACTLY that. Compliance.
My experience with the templates:
- Match to phone number conversion: Very low (sometimes dishearteningly so)
- Phone number to lay conversion: Very fucking high - it makes all the wasted matches worth it
Either way, I'm going to keep running Andy's message scripts for a while because it's working out really well for me. But I agree with Luniac that there's nothing wrong with experimenting with different approaches. You would probably want to stick with one approach for quite a while though, before making any conclusions. (Eg, 3 months doing one approach and then coming back to us with your insights).