So I am working on my book, and I am working on a concept called the "Step Back." I describe it in the book like this:
Once you have broken the ice and removed the invisible wall, you must at some point do what I call the “step back.” The step back is where you emotionally (and sometimes physically) do something to make yourself a challenge to the woman you have just approached.
The step back can be:
- A tease
- A false time constraint
- A physical step back
The step back is related to an earlier concept I discuss in my book:
To successfully approach women, you must reconcile two seemingly contradictory thoughts. On one hand, women should chase men rather than the other way around. It is part of the biological and evolutionary makeup of human beings that the low status individual in the tribe must proactively seek the approval and acceptable of the alpha male FIRST. A man who chases a woman is unattractive because he subconsciously communicates he is not the alpha male, but rather a low-status goob seeking validation. The alpha male does not seek the acceptance of others.
On the other hand, women are terrified of rejection, do not want to take the lead, and take a while to emotionally invest, so the man must approach the woman and lead the interaction. Women do not care about men until they emotionally invest, and a woman will not emotionally invest until she realizes that the emotional experience the man provides is superior. Therefore, an approach is a dance where you approach her, give her a small sample of your emotional experience, and invite her to validate herself to you so she can enjoy more of your emotional experience. The “theme” or “plot” of your interaction with women should be “this woman is trying to impress this guy so he will accept her.” The plot should NOT be “this guy is trying to impress this woman so she will accept him.”
Does anybody have any help on this concept? Other examples? Thanks.
CAPTAINSKINNYPENIS 4y ago
I enjoyed reading this small excerpt. I'm currently starting with a new plate right now and this perfectly describes what's going on between us. I'm doing very well in that she's playing the role of chasing me and trying to impress me, while I'm giving her small doses of emotional experience, but there is always that niggling thought/panic inside that if she hasn't contacted me for a day or two then I should approach her because of a fear that she has lost interest. It'd be good to hear you elaborate on how to deal with this and stop yourself from chasing her, instead being patient and waiting for her to chase you. It's something I've gotten MUCH better at as I age, but there's always that temptation to get in touch with them to see how they're doing and check in to reassure yourself she's still into you.
Intrepid_Place53900 1 4y ago
yup, it's very simplified as, you should always show less interest in her, than she in you. You have options, you are the prize, so show it.
CAPTAINSKINNYPENIS 4y ago
I suppose that's the key. It's always good to remind myself that if I ever suffer a moment of weakness and try to chase her it has the complete opposite intended effect and actually makes me less attractive to her.
Musicgoon425 4y ago
I dunno bro. I've always pushed forward. Get on board or get the fuck out of the way. There's always another girl that will be happy to get on board. I play it hard and fast. It's not a sniper approach, I don't have time to wait for a girl to chase. By then, my attention has shifted to some other prospects.
Do whatever works for you. I just approach every girl I like. Quick, bold and honest. It's seems to be a refreshing no bullshit approach to finding my next conquest.
This is why I never liked indirect game. I don't have the patience or time to craft or juggle bullshit.
JamesSkepp Moderator 4y ago
You're describing what Mystery and the old PUA crew called Qualification.
The most known is probabaly "are you the adventourous type?" stuff.
It works on multiple levels:
Does she comply or not? If not, is the non-compiance a shit test ("why are you asking?") or does it mean youre moving too fast (you challange her to makeout in at noon in the middle of a restaurant) or is it a genuine lack of attaction ( says "yes" but the bodylanguage says "fuckoff")?
Provides some semblance of excuse for the escalation to more sexual things later. You set up a narrative that whatver you want to do ("come here you little adventurous type") happens b/c you're "adventurous". This sounds as really weak "trick to make women sleep with you" untill you realize women do this themselves all the time - it's a rationalization preemtively deliverad by you, in the same manner that she post-rationalizes her choices: "I was drunk" (on half glass of wine), "things just happened" (like she didn't know or suspect what's coming after going home with you).
Helps remedy ASD by providing a "challenge" for her. It's a psychological trick (real one this time). By overcoming the "challange" (prove to me youre adventurous by going with me to another part of the club) she feel that she proven yourself to you, thus relieving the "he only approached me b/c i have tits hanging out" pressure. This is providing her with logical excuse for talking with you. Say her firends arrive and start cockblocking "why are you talking to him" - "this guy is ok were adventurous". She has an exuse ready to provide for herelf and for her friends, without that if she gets challanged (or has resistance b/c of thinking shes slutty for going too fast) she might get into defensive and simply reject you as to relive the pressure of being judged (she's not going to fight you provide exuse instead of flight)
Makes her invest in the interaction. She adds to it thus maskes it stronger, more meaningful and more personalized, as opposed to useless non-polarised small talk or non-commital lines she gets form other dudes.
Don't qualify on her real weak points (if she thinks you think she is low status she"ll get pissy), only on non-issues (she might be self-consious about having small boobs, but it's unlikely she will be self-consious about her height). Don't qualify on real logic ("are you good at economy?") unless it's clearly a joke she will get.
Do make sure she knows this is half joke, half serious by having "this is funny" + smile + "you are judging her" body language. By this I mean you have to convey the challenge but you also have to convey this is not serious at all. Think almost sitcom like acting, bit over the top, clear signals its suposd to be a funny scene.
In short: you do want to step back, but just a bit. The idea is not to flip the pressure of continuing interaction on her (99/100 she won't as women have no game and take no initiative, it will either fizzle out or she'll freeze or just leaves as to relieve the pressure), but to provide a way for her to contribute and participate. It's supposed to be a token challange not a real one.
Finally, and I've seen this a few times over last years, some "players" claim that Qualification is supposed to qualify her for real, as if you actually are looking for certain qualities in a girl and genuinely want to know if she is xyz. While this might make some sense on first glance it's 100% wrong interpretation from game perspective. Say you're looking for a good girl or a prude or 150iq or bisexual, what are you going to do if she doesn't pass the test, reject her? Now you just wasted time talking to her and have to move on? No, you're going to say "aww thats a shame" and tease her about it. So basicaly you just took your real, actual requirements and tossed them out b/c you don't want to have to reject her on that basis. So why have real requirements at all? Leave that for LTR vetting.
Woujo 4y ago
Thanks this is really helpful.
Intrepid_Place53900 1 4y ago
agree pretty much. It's best if a women approaches a man, or gives clear IOI's . Women (hate) rejections is very true. So, getting clear IOI's is basically an approach from her.
As you enter the mating phase, you should always be less interested than her, you are the prize, you have options. Most Women desire this in their man, agree.