This is from a Field Report I wrote in 2008 titled "FR: I might as well have been talking to a plant"

This FR was essentially the spark that started the forest fire; it was the beginning of my realization of something BIG.

I didn't immediately realize it at the time, but after that night the thoughts just sat there growing and growing at the back of my mind. At the time of writing of that FR, I had already spent nearly 5 years studying everything that the mainstream PUA community had to offer: Mystery, Style, Ross Jeffries, David Deangelo, Mehow, Hypnotica, Steve P, Carlos Xuma, Gambler, and many, many more. I can't tell you how, but I got my hands on all of the best material from all those gurus.

When it came to attraction, I knew how to do it all. I could tell custom DHV stories, I could microcalibrate to preserve high value, I could cold read like a pro, I could elicit values, I could anchor positive feelings, I could AMOG, I could be C&F, I could push/pull, I could expose vulnerabilities to establish deeper trust while still preserving value... I had a full deck of cards up my sleeve, figuratively speaking. Figuratively? Fuck, I even learned how to read Tarot cards! Needless to say, I could play the game and I could do it damn well... or so I thought.

It took my dumb ass a long time to notice a pattern from all the experiences I've had with women. Things finally clicked when I shifted my focus from the "attraction = value" school of thought to the "attraction = sexual tension/arousal" school of thought.

What did I realize about all those attraction techniques like DHVing and cold reading that I listed above? Well, I realized that...

NONE OF THAT SHIT MATTERED. THEY HAD LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO WITH THE REASON WHY THOSE WOMEN HAD SEX WITH ME.

I also realized that the things that actually mattered, or the things that actually had any sort of direct relevance to seduction, were very few in number. None of that shit taught by mainstream pickup about attraction actually mattered - they're just there to distract us from simplicity.

Those mainstream techniques tend NOT to address creating sexual tension. Unfortunately, what PUAs should be focusing on is the very sexual tension that DHVs don't address. We're seduced into believing that these attraction techniques will create this "attraction" thing we can barely define, and in the end that attraction is supposed to generate sexual tension on its own somehow, right? Come on! What the fuck! This sounds more like religion than science to me.

What's even worse is that you had the mainstreams teachers telling you that you needed to have mastered their entire system to be a PUA (they called this "solid game"), and to just ignore the one night stands you get when you didn't run your entire routine stack because they are "fool's mate." Please don't tell me how you can't see how ridiculous that is.

Fortunately for me, I eventually found "gurus" that taught the shit that actually had anything to do with actually getting laid. I've heard them referred to as "the sexual tension guys" by some community members. Unfortunately for the community, though, these sexual tension guys - like Gunwitch and 60 Years of Challenge - are NOT mainstream. In fact, those two names are probably THE most mainstream of the sexual tension guys. Ever heard of Aaron Sleazy? No? Yeah, I know. Hey, it's not your fault that these guys never had their own reality show. Fuck you, VH1.

The good news is that even some of the mainstream guys are starting to wise up. Gambler teaches a lot of sexual tension stuff now, and even the MM and MM-related companies are starting to upgrade their shit thanks to the threat of losing business. Those MM guys will probably never admit that most of their material is bullshit, though, and the bullshit will still always be there in the mainstream to distract you from simplicity.

If you ever find yourself getting nowhere with a girl after running routine after routine, technique after technique, that's when you might start to see what I've seen. There's a reason why I barely ever use the word "attraction" anymore. On the other hand, if you have consistently gotten great results from using that shit, awesome. However, consider the possibility that you're getting laid not because of the attraction techniques, but because you're creating sexual tension someway, somehow. Then, get rid of everything that has nothing to do with creating that sexual tension and start focusing on the shit that directly addresses sexual tension and escalation; you'll get the same fucking results - perhaps even better results - and you'll save a shit ton of time and effort.

That FR I wrote in 2008 was the beginning of my awakening, like starting to wake up under that half-sleep-half-conscious state. The final slap in the face that got me fully alert was probably 60 Years of Challenge. Yeah, I know this damn thing sounds like a fucking advertisement now but I'm not trying to make it like that. Sorry if I did.

Good post.

I would slightly modify your conclusion though. It's not that attraction doesn't matter AT ALL. It does. It's just that it's not ENOUGH on its own to guarantee the close.

Basically the mainstream stuff teaches guys who cannot build any attraction how to do so. The trap is to emphasise the DHV, neg, etc. and overgame in attraction because it's new and exciting and fun. You can end up becoming a dancing monkey, or a wall of DHVs and actually lose attraction because you raise your value TOO much.

If attraction is like a spark, then a lot of PU stuff taken too far is like pouring petrol everywhere and lighting a match - you get a huge pyrotechnics display for a minute, and then it's all over.

Sexual tension and good midgame in general is about taking even just a tiny ember and keeping lit and making it burn stronger and longer and fiercer as time goes on. That takes skill and patience, calibration and understanding.

_________________
SEX Technique Material http://bit.ly/iFdky0

FREE PDF w Openers, Date ideas and Videos on Direct: http://www.sashapua.com

Blondguy, I cannot agree with you more. It is so interesting to read many of the post from most of these advanced PUAs who claim that success is so easily attainable with X method. It is almost as if they forget the importance of taking those baby steps so that you actually learn every step of the way.
Now, Chief, I dont advocate being a lil b*tch and not going out sarging so that one can calibrate and become better; it's just that many times I notice a person who has had success argue that what they did before was BS compared to what they are doing now. I am sure that it is. But have you ever considered the fact that you are who you are because you dealt with your shortcomings a certain way, calibrating what you were learning into your being? Basically, you needed to go through a certain amount of X,Y, and Z, before you can actually benefit from whatever method you are using now. I mean, I started with MM, quickly noticing the shortcomings there, then I read some GWM and DiVinCarlo. I noticed that one needs to take the best of each and incorporate it into your being so that you are congruent and flexible.
But I notice that because I never spoke to strangers, MM was probably best to start with. Then GWM and DiVinCarlo helped with the more direct aspects of my game, while strengthening my inner game.
I have read 60 Years Challenge's article. It was good, but before that kind of game is effective for me, I need to sift through other material and sarge away to improve my overall game.
Chief, tell me what you think about my overall idea on how I am learning this PUA skill. (I would really appreciate your input)

_________________
(I LOVE THIS COMMUNITY!)

Great thoughts Chief.

I'd say my experiences would kind of concur with this.

It's kind of like one of the girls I'm seeing at the moment - when I go round hers I always see other guys and stuff around hitting on her etc. I don't even bother talking to her. Then at the end of the night I wack on some sexual tension and then sleep with her. All I really do is sleep with her.

Howeverrrrrrrrrrrrrr

one big issue I would have with your theory here (looking at past experience), is that this also has the potential to lead to LMR if you don't take active steps to eliminate LMR before it happens.

although im pretty new to all this; DHVs ive kinda noticed are a good way to just get a girls attention (im a newbie maybe later i wont) but i still think it shouldnt be a story.

a man is someone who takes action, not sits around talking about it i.e. DHV stories.

but until Chiefs 60years review, i was worrying about my value with MM.

good post, do you think cold reads can be used to create/escalate sexual tension? or are they unneeded.

_________________
"You don't want girls to think you suck dick at fucking pussy"
-Seth (Superbad)

It makes a lot of sense, just think about it two seconds : How would the naturals who don't know anything about the game seduce their targets? They don't do any routines, they create sexual tension naturally, that's what works.

_________________
I am me

The way I see it, the mainstream stuff distracts us from understanding what attraction really is. I once had a long conversation with a prominent mASF member (who shall remain unnamed) about attraction and I learned that what most people think of attraction (DHVs, etc.) aren't actually about attraction at all. That shit is about comfort.

If you demonstrate high value, if you show that you're a cool guy who can do cool tricks, etc., you're basically making her more comfortable with the idea of being associated with you in any way. Can anyone here actually tell me how DHVing generates attraction? In order to do that, you'll have to tell me what attraction means. You'll probably come up with a definition like "something that makes her want to have sex with me," in which case that would mean attraction = sexual arousal.

A woman won't feel comfortable with feeling sexual arousal around a guy who's unpopular and looked down on by everyone else, but she can still feel that arousal. The mainstream attraction techniques actually address sexual comfort, and have little to do with attraction itself.

So, using those mainstream attraction techniques aren't like a spark or fuel at all; it's just providing oxygen for the flame to survive. Metaphorically speaking, these mainstream PUAs are going around providing all the oxygen in the world while only accidentally lighting a spark here and there.
Vin DiCarlo*

This is actually a very interesting argument. While a lot of people consider MM to be a practical stepping stone for beginners, I considered my experience with MM to be a big fat waste of time. The core of my argument is that MM teaches an incredibly inefficient view of attraction. Even if someone is a newbie who has trouble speaking to strangers, the fact that he is led to believe that he should worry about his value and run all those mainstream attraction techniques distracts him from the lesson that there is a big difference between being social and being seductive.

Sure, you might argue that being social is a good prerequisite to being seductive, but why go through the trouble of using a method that disillusions you with inefficient beliefs about attraction just to become more social? It seems to me that reading and applying something like "How to Win Friends and Influence People" by Dale Carnegie is a better choice for that purpose. When it comes to pickup, though, it's unfair for all these guys to waste a ton of time and effort chasing high value and other things that actually have more to do with comfort in hopes of getting their dick wet when they should be focusing on sexual tension and escalation in order to achieve that goal. The mainstream techniques are, for the most part, unnecessary to anyone.
It really doesn't take a lot to prevent and/or deal with LMR. You certainly don't need what the mainstream calls "solid game" to do this. You mostly just have to make sure the girl doesn't feel "tricked" into being seduced... you know... that feeling girls get when they've been pulled to the seduction location with indirect game...

In my experience, if the girl feels consistent sexual tension all the way to closing time, the most LMR you'll ever get is token resistance. Now, this is in the absence of ASD. And, in order to get rid of that ASD a lot of times all you need to do is to let her know that you're a discreet guy. Compare that to preparing a 7-hour long routine stack.
Everyone, keep a close eye on this shahanshah guy. He's been learning the right shit faster than anyone I've ever seen.

Do you go sarging every fucking night or something?

By the way, you forgot to mention that attention does not equal attraction
Cold reads, like the rest of the mainstream attraction techniques, do not directly address sexual tension or escalation. It's just cool shit to do. Things like sexual state, SECT, sexual frame, silence, triangular gazing, etc. address sexual tension.
And, of course, the disadvantage of trying to understand how this is done "naturally" is that it's fucking hard to do since the naturals have trouble explaining their methods. It's not so productive to say "they do it naturally" when AFCs are lost in a cloud of confusion.

These "naturals" create sexual tension through the use of sexual state and sexual frames, one or the other or both.

I personally can relate myself to what Chief calls sexual tension game, and you are basically right. At first, I was hitting LMR almost all of the time.
However, when dealing with this type of fast escalation, you got to share your ideals with her and the way you treat life. You need to make her feel that you trust-worthy and that you don't kiss and tell. You "manage expectations" as Chief defined it in one of his posts.

You're basically, letting her guards off all the inhibitions, restrictions, and fear from being called a slut, that society has been putting on her, and opening her up.
She needs to know that its ok to proceed with the escalation.

_________________
"Despite all the giggling, blushing and talk about having a deep connection, it all ends
with a cock in her mouth." ~60 Years Of Challenge

Yeah, I agree with you two.

Also if you're congruent with what you want it's not usually an issue anyway.

haha wow if someone prepared something that long. do pickups really take that long. its like an hour tops to get her to come back with you.

But then again I tell them I'm taking them home, and I tell them to trust me.

If there was a method that goes in steps it would go like this for me.
a set from my experience goes like this:
attention--->valuing-->sexual tension w/escalation--->k-close-->more direct escalation--->f-close/n-close

by attention I mean introduction rarely do I have bitch shields hit me
usually I say, whats your name--->shake hands--->my name
then say, its nice to meet you

valuing: is just my frame its been judged a couple seconds after the attention rarely needs more.

sexual tension: having normal conversation and creating it through non-verbals escalating, using mainly 60's, gunwitch, di carlo, and gamblers stealth attraction ideas
usually I have isolated by now, something simple to do it is claw(arm around shoulder) they will reciprocate by arm on waist, put my arm on their waist then move in front of them. bam isolation in middle of party or wherever

when sufficent tension is made, k-close

direct escalation:now I can start talking dirty etc touching more, building up and up

F-close/N-close: by this time I've put in my time up to an hour, either they will come back with me or they want to continue this and give me their number. either way Its sweet for me, get a lay or get a number and can look for another target.

If F-close: Di carlo is gold

If N-close: maybe I pursue, maybe not idc

These are just my thoughts on if someone wants to follow a step by step, its not always the rite way but for 90% its what I do for club/party places. not always my way but the typical way remember that.

_________________
Inner game is the core, outer game is just an expression of it

Somewhere between two strangers meeting and those two strangers engaging in a night of x-rated fun, there is sexual arousal. Get her to that state and keep her at that state. I don't think anybody would disagree with that.

The reality that seems to throw all the guys off is that a male's path to 'sexual arousal' is usually very different than a female's path to 'sexual arousal'. A male sees a hot piece of ass and he's there already. On the other hand, a girl could gawk and drool over some guy and when put to the test might still say, "Ehmm . . . nope . . ."

Unlike many men who could probably bust a nut in any emotional state, women simply don't work this way. Even during the act, they could hear some funny noise, think some strange thought, smell something odd . . . and that's it. It's all over: No orgasm. Their route to sexual arousal can be JUST AS FINICKY.

So the idea is to do what we can to guide her towards sexual arousal. They may not all explain it this way but if the idea is to pick up and have sex with women, the goal behind all the PU 'schools' is to get the woman into a state of sexual arousal.

And this is where schools split off into different strategies.
Can the above happen? Sure, why not . . . but I would say the above is typically the way the male psyche functions. We may not feel comfortable to be aroused by a Nazi torturer but if she's hot, we say to ourselves, "Well, I'd still bone her of course." - We're still aroused. A woman in many cases won't even get NEAR the state of arousal with a person that cannot address her values. She won't even begin . . .

But here's why Chief's Sexual Arousal route works wonders. When you're a teenager or a young 20 something, what sort of 'values' do you have to offer? Most guys haven't even figured out their own values let alone a way to figure out how to add value to others' lives. The only sure thing that they know is that they want to fuck, they like to fuck, and they would like to fuck the girl who is standing in front of them. This is the most honest and usually, the highest value they can offer. . . (women know this)

Seriously . . . it's hilarious for me to hear typical 19 year olds test girls with the ol' "So what do you have going for you?" Are you kidding? All you have going for you is a twitching boner . . .

This changes a bit if you actually have some real values to offer . . . or if you are expected to have some high values. (Typically, when you reach professional age) Women in fact BEGIN sexual arousal without any efforts from the guy when her values are met. (Bar tricks and funny jokes aren't really it . . .) And as stated earlier, sexual offerings could be a big part of this but if that's all you're doing, I'd say that you'd miss out on opportunities. And as you get older, and you target larger audiences, you'll miss out on even more.

Here's what guys need to accept:

What do men jack off to? What does EVERY guy do when they're watching porn?

They keep their fingers on the fast forward/back buttons to get to the money shot. . . Right?

What do women jack off to? Ever watch porn with women? What's in 'sexual literature' that turns them on?

Sure, there are overlaps but there are also vast differences in what turns men and women on. Ask yourself: are you trying to pick up men(yourselves) or are you trying to pick up women?
Depending on the situation, I'd say that the exact opposite could be true. Demonstrating your value and who you are in the World sparks the interest: She thinks, "Oh, I would definitely fuck this guy." Then you'd need to continue to fuel this spark by escalating sexually and demonstrating that there's a possibility if she plays her cards right . . .

I couldn't agree more. When I was doing the PUA stuff, I noticed that what I was also doing was creating sexual tension. That's when I had the girl chasing my ass. Even today with my fairly new g/f, I just stopped talking so much, because I never like those awkward silences, and made the situation awkward on purpose... Looked at her, triangular gaze, and we were kissing better than ever before (No make-out, she was at work), and we got to the kiss faster than ever before.

Being that I am only 21 and have generally interacted with women only in the 30 and younger range, I can definitely see how the stuff you're talking about could be way more applicable in the later years of my life.

As someone who isn't even settled into a solid career at the moment, I feel that conveying and offering such strong and unique values is a little out of reach for me. And, as for the majority of guys who get into pickup, they'll probably be pretty far from this awesome really-knowing-thyself situation, too. For the sake of efficiency I think PUAs should take the sexual tension route without worrying so much about the value stuff for the greater beginning stages of their learning curve.

For the sake of fulfillment, I would be greatly interested in developing this more genuine type of value you speak of, but I have feeling that it's not going to just come to me overnight. I know that it's going to take me years and years of hard career work to get there. Sexual tension techniques are things that anyone with a normal functioning sexual response system can start applying right away.

Thanks for the enlightening perspective, though, kasabi. I'll be doing that stuff one day.

I think this is one of your most interesting posts I've read Chief.

I believe what you tell is true, that it didn't work for you with that girl. But still, how come that books like the game give you the feeling that MM let you get laid alot? If we must believe Style and Mystery, they have fucked tons of girls with MM, just like succesfull students of them. Or is this exagerrated?

Before you met that girl you talked about, you used all that stuff: NLP,cold reading, neg, C&F, etc. Didn't you have succes with it before?

Last year I started off with MM, or just with everything which seductionbase.com told, which was nearly all the techniques. It included various autors and also inner game. I didn't had the succes I wanted, but that was to my opinion because I was recovering of being a huge AFC that it didn't work. Still, I got more and more intrigued by natural game and sexual tension, which came by observing Chuck Bass from Gossip Girl (I know might sound ridiculous but he is a master at acting bad boy and bringing up sexual tension by facial expression, body language and voice tonality) and by Gambler's Stealth Seduction and Arousal. Your 60's article, however still having some doubts with it, became also a part of my PU arsenal.

Basicly, I still am C&F, I still push&pull, and (dis)qualify, now added with a bunch of inner game, body language, kino (teasing), sexual arousal and stuff. I can't let everything go because I still believe that some things, especialy those I have just mentioned, are still very valuable in PU because there are important things you can't elicit in body language.

But since you discovered that it hasn't anything to do with the routines, what did you do next? Did you drop everything and walked up a new pick up road? Or are you into mixing as well?

_________________
You WANT to make a change.
You CAN make a change.
You WILL make a change.

Ambitious to be succesfull => Shyler

The way I see it, attraction is the equivalence of regular interest. If a woman is the slightest interested in you = she is attracted to you in some level. This is why the posts here confuse me a bit. Maybe we have different persceptions of what defines attraction. However, if attraction is the same definition as I've percieved it then I don't see how DHVing in any way is not attraction at all.

DHVing sparks the interest, obviously. The girl will talk to you, she'll be more interested. In other words, she'll be more attracted to you than if you didn't talk to her.

Attraction is not equivalent to sexual arousal. Those are two completely different terms with completely different definitions. You can attract a woman and she still won't sleep with you - but you can also arouse a woman and she won't be attracted to you. Both ways work in fact.

Hence, DHVing is, in fact, attraction. But that's not the way to arouse a woman. Only to spark interest.

I guess it all depends on how you define attraction in the first place. We seem to have different views on this.