Make Daygame Great Again

November 10, 2016
krauserpua

Let’s start by saying I don’t mind if you’re a fag and voted for TheCunt. I don’t mind because you lost. You are still welcome at Chateau Krauser, which stands firm despite a recent shellacking from the snakes of Twitter. Whatever your political creed, all are welcome in the daygame journey [1]. I don’t engage in political dialogue on my blog anymore [2] but let’s consider the question on every right-thinking Euro Jaunter’s mind.

What does the Trumpslide mean for daygame?

Earned me £3k at the bookies

Earned me £3k at the bookies

1. No nuclear war with Russia
Russia is hated by the globalists because Putin has deftly maneuvered it into a position of relative independence. Therefore Hillary was itching for war, throwing all kinds of baseless accusations about Russian hacking and threatening retaliation. She also insisted on a No Fly Zone over Syria that would require shooting down Russian aircraft with American weapons and thus likely trigger WWIII. In contrast, Trump has expressed a desire to get along with Putin and support them in Syria against ISIS

VERDICT – The fine daygame city of Moscow will not be vaporised in nuclear war, Putin will not withdraw visas, and the world’s greatest pool of hot women continue to stride arrogantly down the street in high heels and short skirts.

2. Ukraine does not join NATO
The God Emperor Trump has expressed numerous doubts about the viability of NATO and has generally presented a fairly isolationist / non-interventionist foreign policy. In contrast, Hillary is fully behind the EU-Globalist eastern expansion into Russia and it was her boss George Soros who funded the coup in Kiev. The EU has expanded eastward and held more territory than either Napoleon or Hitler in their attacks upon Russia. Bringing Ukraine into NATO (and eventually EU) would quickly lead to US military bases on the Russian border, the currently-forming EU Army in bases there and…… well, this won’t happen because Russia cannot under any circumstance allow Ukraine to join NATO. Putin would likely quickly invade Ukraine again and many military strategists predict Russia could take Kiev in a fortnight.

VERDICT – The fine daygame city of Kiev will not be occupied by Russian troops nor the battleground in a war with NATO. Another of the world’s greatest pools of hot women will continue to stride arrogantly down the streets in even higher heels and shorter skirts [3]

3. Reversed Muslim Migration to Europe
With Hillary in the Oval Office the US would continue to meddle in European affairs on the side of the EU-Globalist nexus. Our Western flank would be continually under threat by a hostile power. Hillary has frequently declared she wishes to emulate arch-Cunt traitor Angela Merkel and would thus give her support in importing millions more in-bred subhuman Muslim invaders [4] While hordes of Muslim rapists is likely a boon for Deepak Wayne’s business it’s rather a problem for us fully-human daygamers. The streets would very quickly devolve into marauding gangs of rapist immigrants in all the Old Town squares and train stations [5] that are the rightful property of marauding gangs of plowing daygamers. A Trump victory means our Western flank is secured and with Putin having already secured the Eastern flank, the globalists are encircled and less likely to repel the various nationalist uprisings in Europe.

VERDICT – The fine daygame cities of Central Europe will have considerably improved vibe and girls more open to street stops.

4. No support for future Balkan wars
The first Clinton White House saw Bill bomb Christian Serbia in order to protect the Muslim terrorists of the Kosovo Liberation Army. Since then Serbia has been on the EU’s diplomatic shit list and they are now forcing that beautiful country to heel with crazy demands on homo/tranny participation in government and Gay Pride parades. Trump has no history of violence against Serbia and seems rather pro-Christian.

VERDICT – No likely flashpoints with Serbia and thus the fine daygame city of Belgrade will remain a popular destination for daygamers who want to piss me off by burning it down.

The election was the right kind of near miss

The election was the right kind of near miss

I am not sufficiently au-fair with Philippines and SEA politics so I can’t tell whether fellow shitlord Duterte will respect Trump [6] and re-kindle the hundred-year-old US-Philippines alliance or if Obama losing it to China is permanent. If it’s the former, fat losers who can’t get laid in Europe with white girls will still have an escape vector from which to write pathetic e-books on getting laid abroad.

[1] Yes, even the total faggots on the Left.
[2] Though with Twitter gone, I am looking for a new platform for the next 8 years of Trump-inspired triumphalism.
[3] Likely pestered by less dirty Turkish sex tourists than currently
[4] How many millions before Germans lynch her is something I’m not qualified to estimate.
[5] I haven’t asked girls if this feels any different to an RSD daygame bootcamp
[6] As opposed to quite literally telling fag-traitor Obama to “fuck off” earlier this year

If you thought this post shoved political opinions in your face without you asking, you should see my Twitter. Actually, you can’t because the spaghetti-armed low-T fags banned me for Nuclear-grade Shitlordism. Given that I absolutely had to celebrate the Trump victory, it’s basically them forcing me to do so on the blog and therefore they are to blame. You fag.

Simple In-Set Predictions

November 8, 2016
krauserpua

We you talk to a girl, there are two variables that determine whether she’s likely to fuck you: interest and availability. Put simply, to fuck a girl she must be at least somewhat interested (in you) and somewhat available (to you).

Contained within that are all manner of shades of grey. If she’s happily married, heavily k-selected, and feels sexually cold towards you then that’s an extreme No Girl for a caddish player in town for a week looking for casual sex. She could be a Weak Maybe for a local daygamer looking for a mistress over the longer term. She’s unlikely to be anything closer to Yes for anyone else. An all-around low probability girl because she’s happy with her current romantic options, her life plan, and not of the type to have casual sex easily.

In contrast a girl who broke up with her boyfriend three months ago, hasn’t had sex since, is in a new city, and at the horniest time of the month – this girl scores high on general availability. If you then happen to match her on DNA or the archetype of man she likes, she’s interested in you. This could be a Yes Girl. Between those two extremes are all kinds of Maybe Girls. Sometimes a girl is dating a boyfriend but growing dissatisfied and harbouring thoughts of dumping him – she’s just waiting for a better option. So she is somewhat available and you coming along may be the push she needs. Even so, you might not be her type so she’s uninterested in you even though she’s theoretically available to a player with different characteristics.

Most daygamers have experienced a girl who eye spazzes quickly, gives a long hand-hold, allows you close and to touch her, and is clearly dripping wet on the street but….. is married and says no. That’s a girl strongly interested in you but unavailable.

girl-goals-green-eyes-hot-favim-com-3026562

So, that fleshes out the concept that the girl must be interested in you and available to you – and that these are somewhat sliding scales. Let’s talk about how to recognise it in set.

INTERESTED / AVAILABLE – These girls give immediate positive reactions be it strong eye sparkle, blushing, giggling, hand-holding (strong interest) or a milder version of the same, so as subtle body shifts, solid eye contact, and an agreeability (mild interest). The crucial tell is physical engagement. If you see that, you can tick off “interested”.

Now, does she invest? If a girl is willing to stick around for ten minutes talking to you, come on an idate, or she tells you she’s late for a train but she gives you a few minutes: this granting an opportunity to make a pitch suggests availability – she may still be making her mind up about you (i.e. not strong interest) but she’s at least willing to hang around a while to find out – she’s generally available.

INTERESTED / UNAVAILABLE – These girls also give the positive signs of physical engagement but – crucially – few signs of social engagement. Think back to how many times you had a fun chat with a girl who seemed ‘on’ but at the end she says “sorry I have a boyfriend / husband”. Now rewind your memory of the set and look for one specific thing – did she ever throw herself into the conversation?

These girls are always holding something back in-set. You feel they won’t take a step forwards into the interaction. Rather, you get the feeling they are letting you run your game as if they are spectators to a football match. They aren’t taking the pitch themselves. This situation emerges because these girls like you (are interested) and therefore wish to continue feeling the pleasant sensation of flirting but would feel guilty about actively encouraging you (are unavailable). So they fudge it – they let you run your game, coo and giggle, but don’t muck in themselves. These sets usually last five minutes and end as soon as you force her to stop sitting on the fence.

No reason

No reason

UNINTERESTED / AVAILABLE – These are the flat boring sets that never seem in a rush to end. Let’s say you spot a girl sitting in a cafe and you open. She looks a little dubious but makes conversation. It probably feels like you are plowing at the beginning and it takes skill and effort to keep the conversation going. Yet she’s not really IODing you. She doesn’t ask you to leave or make excuses (the street version is she doesn’t walk away). So you think “maybe I can turn this one around”. You sit down and have a twenty minute chat. She gradually opens up. She shit tests you but does give some mild IOIs. You bring the set to an end on your own timescale (not hers) be it a number close or an idate. She doesn’t reply to your feeler text.

This happened because she was generally available to being picked up by somebody but she lacked initial interest in you specifically. Given that she felt open to the world she allowed you to run your game so she could see if she’d warm to you and develop some interest. She granted you the opportunity to make your pitch. That’s why she shit tested you, to see if it would provoke feelings of interest in her. It’s why the whole thing was so flat – she’s just not very interested. These sets are the worst time-wasters because the girls don’t excuse themselves quickly like the INTERESTED/UNAVAILABLE girls do. Typically they’ll last between ten minutes and an hour.

UNINTERESTED / UNAVAILABLE – These sets are easy to spot – you never have a real hook point. They either blow you out fast or stand around impatiently with magnetic feet (they want to be polite but also want you to take the hint). Most of these sets last between ten seconds and two minutes. You never feel like you’ve stopped their momentum.

Next time you’re out daygaming watch for how the end result of your set can be predicted by spotting these signs while you’re in there.

If you thought this post was clear, precise, and actionable you should see my video product. It’s all of this done live in-field with a shit-load of analysis.

Pussy Begging

November 5, 2016
krauserpua

There’s an idea that’s been floating around PUA circles a long time, the crux of which is that chasing women is low value. The idea takes many forms. Anti-Game types will usually give it a moral flavour, to say that sleeping around is ‘degenerate’. Married men may tell you it’s more ‘alpha’ to marry a mediocre woman and have sex with her as she ages. You’ll hear it within the game community too – specifically two variations:

  1. Just use Tinder. It’s much easier and it gives me more time to focus on my online business, gym, and folding the pocket squares.
  2. Get a social circle on lockdown then the women come to you.

In both cases, the man making the statement will look to devalue the very idea of proactively chasing women because, obviously, he’s not chasing them himself. These are self-serving reality weaves. Men with significant cold approach experience don’t need me to explain the obvious, but I shall for newer readers. The “don’t chase” lifestyle has these big problems:

1. Grotty girls. Nature has set up the sexual market place very specifically to be that women put themselves on display, men step up and make a pitch, then the women choose whether to be swept along. A key part is making the pitch. The act of making your pitch shows the girl so much about your character, confidence, and offers a window into your personality. If you remove this step then you are trying to reverse SMP rules by expecting the girl to make the pitch. There is only one consistent way to get girls to approach you – drop your quality standards. When someone (male or female) feels they have a shot at someone two or more points higher in SMV then they lose all shame [1]. Most “no approach” systems of Game boil down to putting yourself in the vicinity of girls two points below you then acting like James Bond while they hit on you.

Tinder is a weaponised form of this. Every man swipes the girls, then the girls filter for the highest SMV guys on there, knowing casual sex is the price they pay for any kind of sexual access to a guy so far above them in SMV. Social circle game is a less extreme version.

2. Slutty girls. Expecting girls to come to you means the girl must have the drive and comfort with seeking out casual sex. It goes against a girl’s hard-wiring to give herself away so cheaply and thus such an approach filters heavily for r-selected girls. Some social scenes are by nature extremely r-selected and thus ‘make-em-come’ will work fairly well there. For example, the USA is the most r-selected country in the Northern hemisphere, New York its most r-selected city, and Brooklyn its most r-selected area. If you then focus on rock or hipster scenes you are in the most r-selected of this filter. This is a massive filter. There are lots of girls in this scene who are going out looking for casual sex and a smart player can figure out how to be the guy they choose. Great. Just know that’s what you’re getting and don’t expect it to work as well in an environment with different filters [2] Also note, r-select girls are rarely as attractive as k-selects. Banging sluts is great fun at first but you soon lose all respect for the women you sleep with and that ruins your inner game. It also puts you in your head over whether you can actually get one of the normal hot girls who doesn’t sleep around.

There is one way the ‘make-them-come’ method can get you decent quality girls who aren’t sluts. It’s the Holy Grail of that type of game, so let’s look at that.

First you must build up tremendous social value and occupy a powerful position within a chosen environment. For example you may start as a bartender in a hip bar then start a popular band, so you have a rep in your area. Perhaps you buy a strip club and hold hire-fire power over dancers. Perhaps you set up weekly house parties and become the ‘connected’ guy who can subtly value-tap every male in the room because you hold the invites. Girls will notice you are the top dog and gravitate towards you. Some of them will be hot [3]

That’s great. It’s getting you laid with hot girls. So the upside to this strategy is obvious. But rather than pretend it’s a panacea, let’s look in detail.

1. Fundamentally, this method is a status play and thus you filter for girls who highly value status. You are wrapping yourself in the clothing of external status and pulling based on that, rather than your character. Of course in that environment you can still show charisma (but you’d have to develop it, and thus include other activities in your strategy). This means you are actively selecting for girls who are impressed with social status. Despite what Red Pillers would have you believe, such girls are a subset of the female population. Most girls do not just seek casual sex with the top dog [4]

The extreme end of girls who value status

The extreme end of girls who value status

However, some of the girls who do are hot so it’s a valid strategy. How do you recognise such girls? brand name fashion, active Instagram accounts, time-consuming make-up and grooming regime. Personally I can’t stand such vacuous girls (nor they me) but plenty of them are hot so if that’s your thing, go for it.

2. This is not a low-effort strategy. You are literally changing your entire life-pattern to create a net to catch girls. That’s no different to what daygamers do, so don’t pretend it’s low value when we do it but high value when you do.

3. It’s not portable. It’s an effective strategy for a man who lives in one city and intends to stay there. It falls apart when he travels. So pick the one which fits your future plans.

Don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying this higher-level version of ‘build-it-and-they-come’ is bad. Done well it’s highly effective. Just don’t fall for the self-serving spiel of its proponents that chasing girls is pussy begging in comparison. Chasing girls across different countries using a charisma-based game will suit men with certain personality types, certain goals, and a certain preferred type of woman. Make-them-come strategies will suit men with a different set of variables and priorities.

Have a look at this video of lions hunting and killing buffalo. Afterwards, pop over to the National Park and explain to them that they are “buffalo begging” and ought to just sit in the zoo and let the zoo-keeper bring them food.

[1] – Just think of your office workmates at the company Christmas party when they are suddenly standing next to the “hot girl” from Marketing. They’ll embarrass themselves. Conversely, if a man has very high SMV then two points below is still pretty. But why isn’t he chasing girls two points above him?
[2] – I suspect many game theory arguments come from applying a model that works well in one highly-filtered environment with a model for a completely different environment

[3] – This is subtly different to being simply a bit shiny in a location full of sluts. Now we mean normal girls who don’t sleep around who are on the look-out for a man who exemplifies the things they value. That’s not the same as a slut coming out to get fucked and choosing the best option that night.

[4] – The PUAsphere gets this badly wrong because most of them are engaged in world-creation. They go to places full of status-chasing girls, in a country known for it, and then try to display status. What a surprise that the only women they succeed with happen to be the status-chasers. They falsely generalise from this to think all girls chase status, because the ones who don’t are outside of the filter.

If you thought this post outlined a case for why chasing skirt is a worthwhile activity, you might like my book. It’s about how I chase skirt.

Escaping The Grind

November 5, 2016
krauserpua

There are a few stages most daygamers go through as the years pass and the set-count racks up. Over time your relationship to daygame changes. Let’s see if we can make some sense of it.

In the beginning it is exhilarating and scary in equal measure. The idea of walking up to any girl you choose and hitting on her is like a whole new world opening up. You’ll probably get lots of friendly non-sexual reactions from girls because they think it’s cute. You’re like a happy puppy wagging his tail and yelping at them. They don’t perceive a sexual threat so they are comfortable absorbing your happy energy and patting you on the head. Fortunately you’ll miss that subtext and think you’re actually getting somewhere, so you press on long enough until you stumble across a Yes Girl. That success feeds the delusion and the cycle continues.

It doesn’t really matter that your daygame isn’t working because the fact is you’re on the streets and once in a while the numbers game throws you a bone. You’re still getting laid, just not for the reasons you think.

"I literally just saw you and...."

“I literally just saw you and….”

Towards the intermediate level you’ve developed the skills and are doing things competently. You still likely lack calibration and the ability to make sound decision but that doesn’t matter much because the model has taken care of all that for you. Your daygame is more than just the numbers game now – what you do in set actually influences the outcome. It’s unfocused and lacking control, like trying to shoot a target 200m away with a pistol – taking good aim increases your chances but the barrel length means you’re still missing most things anyway.

Finally as you hit the mythical advanced level you see exactly what’s going on and few things surprise you. You can control about as much as you ever will, and everything else is down to chance. On your good days it feels like an opportunity to hit the crack pipe and on bad days there’s a fatalism.

What interests me right now is the energy cost at these stages.

Beginners are typically burning up energy non-stop, walking around in a daze. They have a disconnected incredulity about them like the first time Roddy Piper puts on the They Live glasses. They used to see the streets like a normal person – things with shops, cafes, traffic lights, and a path from A to B. Now they are taking their first steps into seeing the streets as a hunting ground where none of that matters, instead they scan for girls.

One-on-one coaching, yesterday

One-on-one coaching, yesterday

Most of the energy is burned up by Approach Anxiety, as if they’ve taken a huge adrenal dump. Beginners can feel physically sick and often can’t handle more than an hour or two in field before their legs feels like jelly. I know from my own experiences in 2009 that I’d do two hours then sit in a pub feeling like I’d just stormed a machine-gun nest. It was exhilarating but draining. Like watching a drag race.

Intermediates burn energy like a leaky bucket loses water. It’s more like a constant small flow sapping them. They are already at the point where daygame has ceased to be lulz that you might do now and again. It’s a way of life, a journey, a route to salvation (or whatever). The intermediate is committed and takes it very seriously indeed. Most such men I meet are very serious. They have an elaborate series of affirmations or inner-game tricks, fairly rigid preferred high-probability routes, a settled set of times and days, and frequently a game-plan to work on specific elements in a given session.

They’ve made themselves daygame professionals. It’s serious stuff [1]

Intermediates burn up energy between sets rather than in them. They are constantly switched on and the engine is burning up fuel the whole time. Even if they walk around a mall for an hour without opening it still drains them. Their head is full of self-talk, inner game mantras, an obsession with state control, and all the complexities of the model. This is where the grind hits hardest. The light-hearted puppy dog feel has gone to be replaced by a scavenger [2]

When I walk around with an intermediate guy I often feel he’s carrying an invisible rucksack loaded with bricks. The pressure of daygame wears on him. Over the hours it’ll crush him until he has to sleep it off and recharge for the next session.

Once you come out of the Intermediate seriousness into Advanced, that rucksack disappears. Daygame becomes light, joyful and whimsical. The energy profile changes so that now there’s very little energy burn between sets but once you go to a girl, the afterburners are on maximum. The real art to advanced daygame is to reduce to zero the energy burned in the empty hours when not in set so that all of your energy remains to pour into the sets themselves. That’s like folding most poker hands – without getting frustrated – then going all-in on the good hands.

On my way to Kiev

On my way to Kiev

When you’re at this level you feel like you can be out all day because each minute on the streets costs you nothing. Throw in warm sunny weather and a good wing then your daygame session feels like pure fun.

It’s not always like that, mind. The downside of eliminating the burn rate is that you are voluntarily surrendering some of your control. It becomes harder to open when you don’t feel like it. The maniacal self-discipline you had to just-do-the-ten-sets weakens. That throws up a whole new set of challenges – how can you direct your mood into the sweet spot so that you retain consistency in effort without putting the rucksack back on?

More on that in the next book.

[1] – I’m not mocking this. We all do it precisely because it’s effective.
[2] – I’m exaggerating. There are many times when intermediates are having great fun. I’m trying to describe the pervasive seriousness underlying those sparks of joy.

If you like the thought of wandering the streets chasing women, you might enjoy my book Adventure Sex. That’s pretty much all it’s about.

Rage Quit

November 5, 2016
krauserpua

Daygame is a Sisyphean task. Depending on how you do it, it’s either hunting or fishing. Most of the time it’s the former – we go out onto the streets and search for women. When we find one we like we pounce on them. Fishing is also possible; sit in a good spot outside a cafe and chill with your friend waiting for the right girl to amble past – then you pounce.

This is both the joy and the sorrow of daygame – it’s all on you. When you’re in the mood for the work, it’s exhilarating. You have the ability to roll up into a new city and make things happen. If you get the right combination of effort, skill and luck you’ll bang a pretty girl that week. Long-time daygamers will also know the downside to that calculus – when you aren’t in the mood, it’s a grind. You know that if you stop putting forth the focused effort, your results dry up.

I was watching a video analysis of Dark Souls last night [1] Towards the end of the video the speaker addressed the game’s theme, something widely contested in that geek’s corner of teh interwebs. For him, Dark Souls is about a bleak choice – you either strive or you die. The world or Lordran is fierce, unforgiving and no matter how hard you try you never make real progress. You put forth your best efforts, step-after-step, facing never-ending hardship and then any time you stumble you’re thrown back to the beginning. It’s a never-ending struggle just to stay in the same place. Any time you lose an engagement, you’ve had a little of your humanity whittled away from you never to return. The game is like walking up a down escalator.

lordran

And yet you persist. It’s compelling. Why is that?

Is it because that while the world is harsh, it’s fair? Every time you replay an area you learn a little more about its traps and opportunities. Every time you face an adversary you pick up on the tells and patterns in his attacks. You learn his weaknesses. There are few moments as satisfying as taking down a boss at the tenth attempt, crowning a learning cycle that began with you getting smashed into a pulp on the first attempt.

Is it because the alternative is simply death? There’s no easy mode in Dark Souls. It sets you a herculean task and you either press ahead or you give up.

Is it because that perilous journey feeds a never-ending supply of small engagements with enemies and forces you to become intensely aware of every metre of land in the level? Dark Souls forces you into a hyper-awareness of your surroundings and you come out of every play-through with a collection of mini-dramas from the battles – the wins and the losses.

When you play Dark Souls you experience video games very differently to blasting through on-rails levels like Call Of Duty. You sink into the world of Lordran and are immersed. Time ticks by while you are focused on the task. You are in a flow state. But sometimes it’s all too much. You creep down the spiral staircase of an abandoned castle tower to the spot where you died ten minutes ago. You see the bloodstain marking the spot – if you reach that you recover all those souls that took you an hour to collect. You step into the room and….. smash, crash, bang the Black Knight has just killed you. You’d forgotten there was one there.

RAGE QUIT

An absolute fucking cunt, yesterday

An absolute fucking cunt, yesterday

Those souls are gone forever. An hour of work evaporates before your eyes while the Black Knight stands above, hacking at your lifeless corpse. FUCK THIS! Your controller goes flying across the room. You simply cannot bear to play it any more.

Obviously if daygame was that shit I wouldn’t have done it for seven years. That’s just the downside. Conversely, the upside creates feelings which are – without exaggeration – the most addictive and joyful I’ve ever experienced. Two days later Dark Souls is back on your mind. You’ve been strategising while in the bath – if I throw an alluring skull into the far corner he’ll investigate then I can creep in and backstab him. Yes! I’ll try that! Four hours on the Dark Souls roller-coaster and the controller goes flying across the room again [2]. But you learned something in the interim. You opened up a new zone and unlocked a new shortcut. You had a compelling four-hour struggle and you remember some of the battles in exquisite detail.

For the past six weeks I’ve been deep in Daygame Revulsion, the rage quit equivalent in our world. 2016 has been a fantastic year with tremendous upsides and many memorable encounters (win or lose). I’ve unlocked new areas in Lordran [3] and encountered new enemies [4] and also helpful NPCs. But now it’s cold, I’m worn out, and I’ve already banged enough girls for the year.

Just as I can’t go long without picking up that controller for another run at Dark Souls, I know with certainty I’ll be back out on the streets putting forth real effort again. But not for a while. I’m done with 2016 [5]. I’ll do a little half-assed opening on auto-pilot, akin to the zombies in Dawn Of The Dead stumbling around a shopping mall listening to the echoes of a former life.

[1] – Go on, tell me that surprises you.
[2] – I exaggerate. I’ve only launched the controller once ever. Usually I’ll just shout expletive-laden rants at the screen.
[3] – Specifically, Odessa and Moscow
[4] – There’s one big muscular brown mini-boss with an Indian accent. His main attacks are smoke and mirrors. It’s pretty easy to just aggro him and watch him kill himself.

[5] – Personally,I blame Donald Trump. It’s impossible to focus on getting laid when the entire future of Western Civilisation is to be decided within a week.

If you thought this was a bit negative, you’ll be glad I was banned from Twitter. In the meantime, buy my book.

I don’t plow

November 3, 2016
krauserpua

“I don’t plough” I say to my friend after letting a girl walk away after just thirty seconds of chat. “Waste of time”

A bit later I’m talking to a different girl. She tells me she’s in a hurry for the train home. I keep talking and tell her to get the next train. I’m much more interesting, I tell her, and what’s the point of rushing home to watch TV all night when the most interesting and charismatic man she’ll ever meet is inviting her for a drink right now? She seems indecisive, clearly weighing up the two options.

“But I have a boyfriend” she protests.
“I don’t care. I’m not the boyfriend type” I reply. “Look, there’s a nice bar over there. Let’s get a quick drink. Come on.”

She dances side-to-side awkwardly and I can almost hear Joe Strummer singing Should I Stay Or Should I Go.

“I’m sure you love your boyfriend. That’s great. You can get married, buy a house and have lots of beautiful children. But right now, I like you and you like me. Let’s go.”

She relents and joins me on the instant date. So, do I fuck this girl or not? Who knows, who cares. The point is why did “I don’t plow” became “I just plowed”?

Would you plow this?

Would you plow this?

I don’t think about technique in set anymore [1]. I trust the years of practice to have drilled my muscle memory to do everything right or at least close enough to right that fine-tuning doesn’t matter. Now I’m just looking for answers to the key questions, the main one is this: Does she fancy me?

That’s the single most important success factor in chatting up a girl. There has to be some attraction there. It doesn’t need to be a lot, but she has to have some. Often you can take your time in the set (be it the street or a bar) and let a girl gradually warm to you and then go for the number regardless. However, sometimes circumstances require you to make a decision about whether to cut your losses or to go all-in.

Instant dates are an obvious example – it only takes a minute to take a number but idates can stretch on from twenty minutes to seven hours. Suddenly there’s a massive time investment in walking her off rather than taking a number. That’s a decision to make carefully and I explain exactly how in Daygame Mastery.

Plowing is another special case. This is because unsuccessful plowing can really fuck up your vibe and frame. If you do it too much you’ll look and feel like a pussy beggar. Girls will feel awkward and it’ll sour your sets. Your body language and eye contact will become needy, carrying over into all your future sets. Conversely, we’ve all had times when a girl initially protests but we end up fucking her. Nobody wants to leave money on the table. So, what to do?

Put that back on the table, bitch

Put that back on the table, bitch

For me it’s simple – I ask myself does she fancy me? If she does, I’ll plow and I’ll argue the toss. So long as she fancies you, you avoid the main pitfalls of over-plowing. She won’t feel awkward because the mutually-understood context is of course you’re going to try and she’s pleasantly receptive precisely because she likes you and thus enjoys your show of interest. You don’t feel like a pussy beggar because you’re not plowing every girl, just the ones whom your calibration directs you to. Chasing high-probability leads is hardly begging.

Additionally, once you start arguing the toss you are free to engage in very overt fourth-wall chat which makes the set even more entertaining for you both.

“Look, I can already see your future. You’re nervous now and you’ll run away, jump on that train. And I’m telling you – later tonight, you’ll facepalm. How could I be so stupid you’ll tell yourself. I was talking to literally the most handsome and charming man I’ve met in my whole life but I ran home to watch House Of Cards. This could be the biggest mistake of your life.”

“My mother says I’m special. Don’t you agree? Look at the firm angle of my jawline, the cheerful spark in my eyes. This is what charisma looks like.”

So how do you know if she fancies you? I think existing PUA literature has that covered. The big ones for street game are:

  • a flash in her eyes that you feel as electricity
  • wide eyes and big smile
  • she lets you get close
  • she lets you touch her

[1] Because I’m so awesome at street game

If you thought this was specific, relevant and helpful to improving your daygame, then you might like my book. It’s basically the best thing in the world.

The Games PUAs Play

November 3, 2016
krauserpua

There’s nothing new under the sun. This is as true of art and literature as it is of human interaction. We are all wired the same way and behave according to the same scripts. The fact that we are often oblivious to their underlying mechanics and must re-learn the lessons of the ancients doesn’t mean the scripts weren’t there or weren’t predictable.

Think of your own knowledge of “blue pill chodes” now that you’re a “red pill player”. You see your friend get involved with the wrong girl, you see her playing him, and you know she’ll cheat. Equally, you know he’ll be devastated. In this particular circumstance, Rollo has done us all the favour of delineating the exact process and underlining dynamics in his books. You see it, your friend doesn’t. For you it’s an extremely predictable script but he’s in the whirl and it’s a black swan event for him.

Oh, did I say black swan?

Colour and Swan-ness are just social constructs

Colour and Swan-ness are just social constructs

Anyone watching The Big Short will be aware that the financial crisis of 2008 was eminently predictable so long as you had access to the script. It already happened in 1929 – fractional reserve money, margin lending, opaque dealings, and a perceptable shift from Investment to Speculation to Ponzi. Just as Rollo has collected the underlying scripts together in his books, Charles Kindleberger’s Manias Panics and Crashes collects together the underlying scripts for this cycle.

And yet, just as chodes are perpetually blindsided by relationship crisis, financial chodes are perpetually blinded by financial crisis.

But its so predictable. You just need to know the script. Naturally, given that there are seven billion people on this planet why is it that so few have access to the script? It’s almost as if there’s a conspiracy to feed us the wrong scripts. In Rollo’s world that conspiracy is the Feminine Imperative. In Finance, it’s International Finance [1]. We can say the same about politics – read Vox’s blog or check out Stefan Molyneaux’s podcast on the fall of Rome. These things are extremely easy to predict if only you have the script.

Ok, so we get handed the wrong script by evil-doers. But why are we so bad at recognising it? Why are our instincts so bad? Well, now we inch closer to PUA again.

a PUA inching closer, yesterday

a PUA inching closer, yesterday

We exist because our genes survived and then replicated. The very fact of our existence is the proof that we embody a functional solution to the survival and replication challenge. However, we haven’t won, in the past tense. We are merely still winning. We haven’t lost yet. Like footballers on the pitch, until the final whistle goes there’s still the chance the other team scores.

Life is a constant frame control battle.

Even when you’re sitting in a cafe, sipping a latte, and chatting to your friends on WhatsApp (like I’m doing right now). Think of frames as in the same battle as bacteria and antibodies, or immigrants and natives. It’s a constant battle waged at every level. It never ends. Like a real battle front you may have quiet sectors and calms before storms but it never ends.

Your frame is always under assault. This is because the easiest way to steal resources in the S&R battle is to frame control a rival into surrendering his resources to you, and thus you can guarantee the drive and capacity to do exactly that has evolved within us.

Every time you see an advertising billboard that tries to suck you in by highlighting an unmet need or an aspirational lifestyle. Every time you walk past a cake shop and smell the chocolate [2] Every time you read an internet lay report where the writer is trying to co-opt you into supporting his self-image [3] Men with strong frames can rebuff these attacks like a tank under small arms fire. Just because your frame is under assault doesn’t mean you risk surrendering your frame. You ignore most billboards and don’t eat the cakes [4]. And if you’re like me you don’t follow any other PUA’s material.

Wouldn’t it be nice if someone had collected together all the scripts of frame control? Wouldn’t it be nice if someone had laid out in precise detail why we allow people to hand us fake scripts and why we act on them? How about if he explained what the true script was so you were better able to shurg off the frame control attack and understand your actions better?

Ye Daygame Masterie

Ye Daygame Masterie

If so, check out Eric Berne The Games People Play. Berne posits that people engage in games in which they follow scripts to predictable endings (usually some ego pay-off for all involved) but that the surface-level interactions are misleading (i.e. they believe the fake script) and the games are only understandable – and thus predictable – if you have access to the ulterior motives motivating adherence to the real script. Consider this example of the If It Weren’t For You game:

Mrs. White complained that her husband severely restricted her social activities, so that she had never learned to dance. Due to changes in her attitude brought about psychiatric treatment, her husband became less sure of himself and more indulgent. Mrs. White was then free to enlarge the scope of her activities. She signed up for dancing classes, and then discovered to her despair that she had a morbid fear of dance floors and had to abandon this project.

This unfortunate adventure, along with similar ones, laid out some important aspects of her marriage. Out of her many suitors, she had picked a domineering man for a husband. She was then in a position to complain that she could do all sorts of things “it if weren’t for you.” Many of her woman friends had domineering husbands, and when they met for their morning coffee, they spent a good deal of time playing “If It Weren’t For Him.”

As it turned out, however, contrary to her complaints, her husband was performing a very real service for her by forbidding her to do something she was deeply afraid of, and by preventing her, in fact, from even becoming aware of her fears. This was one reason… [she] had chosen such a husband.

His prohibitions and her complaints frequently led to quarrels, so that their sex life was seriously impaired. She and her husband had little in common besides their household worries and the children, so that their quarrels stood out as important events.

“Yeah that’s all well and good” you may say, “but what’s that to do with me?” Well, PUA has it’s own If It Weren’t For You game. Hang around with an avoidant wing or spend a little time on PUA forums. Try analysing their complaints in terms of IIWFY, i.e. that they are deliberately choosing patterns of interaction which foreclose their ability to engage in a given action because they can’t admit that action frightens them. The combination of fear and ego will frequently lead to hysteria in the rationalisation.

“It’s so easy to bang hot girls in Russia” says the US-based chode who’s never actually been there. “If it wasn’t for my job here, I’d go”.
“I really want to do daygame” he says. “If it wasn’t for my small town with empty streets, I’d do it.”
“I want to cold open and fuck girls” he says. “But so many PUAs are scammers, you don’t know who to trust. If it wasn’t for that, I’d be a slayer.”

I’ve just picked up on this example because I was browsing through an article that linked to the IIWFY game and I immediately thought of the people who protest something is limiting their options while consistently enmeshing themselves further into that limiting factor. The book lists many many games and it’s fascinating.

[1] i.e. Jews
[2] Bodi never walks past a cake shop
[3] I’d never do that, perish the thought
[4] – Bodi notwithstanding

Blog at WordPress.com.