We have all been told that being nonreactive and aloof is a positive quality in a man. If a girl flakes on us, or turns her head when we go for the kiss, or gives last-minute resistance during sex, we are supposed to act unfazed by it.

However, we are also encouraged through microcalibration and freeze-outs that we should punish a girl for her good behavior and reward her for bad behavior. In this way we will encourage good behavior (continued physical escalation, respect, etc.) and discourage bad behavior (resistance, shit tests, etc.).

I find this very hard to accomplish in practice. The very act of a response--either to punish or reward, seems reactive. If, for instance, she gives LMR, we are told that we should turn on the lights, and completely change the mood so that she misses what she has before and reinitiates it herself. Or considering microcalibration, if I mention that some girl should come along with me to a party, and she says she has something else to do, I should punish her by saying something like "oh you probably don't have the right clothes for it, that's cool." Or if I am trying to escalate physically by taking her hand, and I feel some tension, I am supposed to throw it away.

This sounds great in theory, but practically, I find it exceptionally difficult to anticipate the line and punish without seeming reactive. In any of the situations, I appear just pouty and upset, rather than nonreactive. No matter how I try to spin it, my actions suggest otherwise.

On the other hand, if I try and preempt it and cut things off when they are going good, I seem to be punishing the person for generally good behavior. In operant conditioning, punishments and rewards must be properly linked to a stimulus.

_________________
Lo' there do I see My Father.
Lo' there do I see the line of My People, back to the beginning.
Lo' they do call to me, they bid me take my place among them.
in the Halls of Valhalla, where the brave may live forever.

Defiantly a good fucking question. How do you reward/punish a girl but still try to appear "unfazed"? The act of doing either shows a response and no one is that stupid. If a girl doesn't call you back and next time you see her ...you just walk right by her...that's obviously a sign of being reactive and i know girls aren't stupid enough to put 2 and 2 together and think "he's probably upset b/c i didn't pick up/call back".

Very good question and i'd love to hear a answer that can maybe show me how exactly you accomplish this.

No takers?

On a similar note...if you always reward good behavior and punish bad, you become predictable, yes? You become predictable, because a woman will know that the attraction is still there, she can get away with anything, so long as she can swallow the punishments, because she has learned that a reward will always be waiting for her down the line if she wants to display good behavior.

_________________
Lo' there do I see My Father.
Lo' there do I see the line of My People, back to the beginning.
Lo' they do call to me, they bid me take my place among them.
in the Halls of Valhalla, where the brave may live forever.

I think that you really need to use your discretion when applying these techniques. Obviously to be totally unreactive is impossible as you would basically be pretending the girl isn't there.
If you feel like your giving off the "pouty and upset" vibe try lightening up a bit. Throw her hand away with a smile, be less unreactive and more fun.
As for being predictable, I sincerely doubt that your going to have a girl giving you LMR or any resistance that would deem these techniques nesessary on a huge number of occasions, enough to be predictable. IF that is happening youve probably got bigger problems than being predictable.