I'm sorry, but I really didn't want to get into this debate with you because it involves me debunking your religious views, and I know that you made a personal choice to stick with abstinence.

However, I'll pull out all the stops when I see an opportunity to cast ignorance into the garbage disposal.

Having someone develop admiration and respect for you, having someone enjoy your company... these are all social things that you can have with anyone, regardless of gender and sexual orientation.

Sex (and the potential for sex) is the ONLY thing that separates the friend zone and the "lover" category. Sex is the number one priority for any seduction or love interest. I know that your scriptures disagree with my view, but a romantic interest means nothing without sex.

Think about it. Surely you have a male friend that you admire and respect. Maybe you even enjoy his company. Why not share those emotions with just him and not with women?

It's because, somewhere deep inside you, underneath all that religious programming, you want to fuck that beauty of a woman HARD until she's exhausted from moaning and squirming so much.

The social aspects which you speak of - admiration, respect, enjoyable company - have absolutely nothing to do with seduction, pickup, romance, dating, nor ATTRACTION.

THEY HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH ATTRACTION. Absolutely nothing. This is why men who find themselves in the "friend zone" find it so difficult to escape from. Sure, they can be admired, respected, and companionably enjoyed by many women, but they won't be getting laid. What separates a seduction from a friendship is sex.

The framework in which you build this FRIENDSHIP with a woman after sex comes from the basic social skills you've used throughout your life to make friends in general. That's all. Seduction and attraction are of a different realm.

In other words: she won't see you as anything more than "just a friend" if you don't have sex with her, or are not in the process of seducing her toward the goal of having sex.

Chief, I believe ZEGlass is assuming that in this "first encounter" you aren't actually "being yourself" - I think hes viewing this as plowing. Which in the case of plowing you throw all your chickens in a basket and aren't showing anything else.

HOWEVER, what Chief hasn't said and I know is true; just because you are presenting a strong sexual frame DOESNT mean you aren't developing a connection with a girl. If any of you have actually read the Shock and Awe article and are familiar with Gunwitch, you'd know that this isn't JUST about going caveman. The pretense is to exude an aura personal/sexual confidence.

THUS when you are interacting with a woman she is developing an attraction for ALL facets of your personality.

Then you know that if the game you described in the initial post is all you did, you would make it very difficult for a girl to feel attracted to you.

You're mistaking "sexually turning a girl on" with "attraction". Go ahead and turn a girl on with your sexual frame. Keep it up, keep it up . . . keep it up . . . and now fuck off. What happens with that girl? Any other guy approaches her with a smile and he will have her tongue in his mouth within minutes. You seem to experiment a lot on the field so I am sure you've seen this phenomena. Personally, I've been on both ends enough times to know that there is a big difference between flicking a sexual switch and attracting a girl TO YOU.

You titled this thread "sexual attraction" and you perfectly described one method to get the FUCK FUCK going on! So you hit a home run. I think opening up his own "sexuality" is one of the highest barriers a newbie faces. However, in terms of creating a full spectrum of attraction . . . it simply does not work.

I know you have your issues with DHV but why? Everything in a girl's life revolves around a value system. What makes you think her interactions with a man would be any different? Do I think spending 2k on a LV bag is ridiculous? Ha ha ha . . . watch me laugh! What a freaking joke! But who am I to judge a girl's value system?(Eh hem . . . as retarded and plastic as they maybe . . . ) My goal is to get everything that I want based on her value system. Whether it truly exists or not is another issue altogether. She perceives it, and I go with it.

What you're offering girls with the method described in your initial post is a deep snort of coke. It's good . . . It's somewhat taboo . . . and it's seriously intoxicating. I LOVE this shit. But after the high wears off (10 minutes after a snort or 10 minutes after her orgasm), she might want it again . . . she might tell a few friends about it . . . but it's not something she shows off to the World. She doesn't call everybody up because really, what the fuck is there for her to say? "The guy told me he wanted to fuck me and we did . . ."??

. . . Couldn't one offer a girl the LV bag along with a bit of that cocaine? Haven't you ever seen a girl go nuts over some piece of leather and stitching(as long as there's some well known logo stamped here and there)? There's no question she spreads her legs in this case as well but when she goes home. She thinks about the bag, she calls her friends about the bag, she dreams about the bag, she wants to fuck the bag again. . . over and over again. And there's no shame in it whatsoever. She tells her neighbor she just banged an LV bag. She tells her cat that she's in with an LV bag. She calls up her mom and goes "You wouldn't believe this new bag that I just saw . . ." She dreams about taking a holiday with the new bag . . . maybe walk around the mall with it and have all the other girls go, "Oh my God, that's a beautiful bag!" And every time she goes through these little exercises, she builds up her attraction to you more and more.

*Tough to do this if you're a 10 dollar fake from a street in HK.

This is close to what I'm trying to say, but not exactly. Chief, this isn't about my religious programming or my particular attitudes toward sex, though. You're absolutely right that at "some level," I'm approaching a woman because I want to have sex with her. It would be counterproductive and dishonest for me to pretend otherwise.

What I'm saying is that working a little harder and using a technique that gives a girl plenty about you to admire AND also gets her attracted to you is better than one that JUST gets her attracted. Of course I want want women to feel sexual attraction for me, but I also want a slew of other positive reactions from them.

Finally, to touch upon your mention of my religious inclination, unless you think that being a Christian and being a pickup artist are completely incompatible, there's nothing to debunk. Yes, I'm going to have to work harder, but I didn't come here to learn how to make it easy. I'm here to learn the right skillset to achieve goals of my own choosing.

_________________
Some vices miss what is right because they are deficient, others because they are excessive, in feelings or in actions, while virtue finds and chooses the mean.
Aristotle, Ethica Nichomachea

OK....so you say that this is closer to what you were talking about....WHY can't you accept that it is possible to have a strong sexual prescense and STILL develop an emotional connection....If I remember correctly Rye Lee teachs how to do both o.0

I'd really rather not be seen as a fucking handbag lol

I don't want her to be thinking about me all the time, and I don't want her to be telling all her friends or the world about me, giving some sort of impression that she and I are an item.

My game is not ego-based. It's not about having others perceive me as "high value" or any of that bullshit. It's just about me and the girl I'm sarging, so I cut out all the bull that makes me look good to everyone else and the world and focus on making her feel good with me.

Personally, I don't do relationships, so I definitely wouldn't want her to be thinking about me all the time or telling the world about me. I want her to be fucking other guys and playing the field as much as I do. I manage expectations for this goal a LOT.

This is about telegraphing that the goal here is sex and no more, besides maybe more sex. You make that known through your subtext or being direct about it, either way you should cover the basis that this is about sex and no more. (Under Chief's directive, this would differentiate if you were wanting more)

I said that to emphasize (and even exaggerate) the significance of the sexual dynamic in any "romantic" relationship (any relationship more than that of friends).

Sure, I can have a friendly relationship with my male friends, but when it comes to women, there is more often than not a sexual dynamic involved. If there is no sexual dynamic present (no sexual attraction by means of sexual state, frame, tension, or intent), then it's nothing more than a friendly or familial relationship.

I guess it could be unfair to say that sex is "the number one priority," but this sexual dynamic is the one factor that differentiates a seduction from befriending. In light of this realization, I put sex at the top of my list when it comes to this thing called "seduction" in order to make it clear that I'm not friend-zone material.

Chief has a point that sex is a deciding factor in any relationship beyond friendship. In10se put it best

A successful healthy relationship has a balance of 3 things

Passion (sex life)
Committment (security, in knowledge of having someone who cares for you)
Intimacy (emotional connection)

I'm going to explain the varying relationships u can have with combinations of each of these concepts and what you can get with what and what you wont get.

P = a one night stand
I = friendship
C = empty dying marriage
P + I = Relationship based on sex....FBs.....Heat of the moment
I+ C = Companionship...connection lacking sex....Ex. Grandma/Grandpa that don't have sex.

Now all of these are different types of relationships but none of them are a heathly lasing relationship. A healthy relationship has a balance of all 3; Passion, Intimacy, and Committment.

In Chief's case he is more interested in P or P+I, and there is nothing wrong with that. However, it doesn't detract from the fact that a solid relationship needs a firm foundation in sex.

P.S. If you guys liked my little above excerpt, I would be happy to go more in depth in a seperate thread about how you can use the above criteria to find your IDEAL relationship.

This is really what I was driving at and now that you've said it outright, we're cool. The tone of your original post was essentially, "Why go to all of that trouble, when you can do this instead and get laid?" Well, to me, the answer to "why go to all of that trouble?" is that it generates additional possibilities besides getting laid. I wasn't trying to say that "This doesn't seem good for relationship building, so it's useless." I was looking for confirmation from you that it was not ptimized for relationship building.

JSquared, I won't deny that it's possible to use a highly-sexualized frame to generate a real connection, but I don't think it's safe to assume that it automatically will, either. Chief's technique here seems to be especially good at expediting a sexual encounter, but not especially optimized for anything else. That's fine if sex is your primary goal and other forms of interaction with the girl are considered secondary or even completely unimportant.

_________________
Some vices miss what is right because they are deficient, others because they are excessive, in feelings or in actions, while virtue finds and chooses the mean.
Aristotle, Ethica Nichomachea

Perhaps I haven't made myself clear.

Any form of interaction that doesn't ultimately (directly) lead to sex is platonic. Friend-zone. LJBF.

My opinion regarding this is that you should be running routines that either develop multiple layers of interaction at once; or you should be running various routines to develop multiple layers of interaction in parallel. Again, like I said, if sex is your sole goal, building just a sexual interaction is fine. On the other hand, one of the most charming descriptions of marriage that I've ever heard was "best friends forever, who also fuck." If your goals extend beyond sex, you have to choose the right pickup tools for the job.

The forms of Game in which I am most interested are those that sustain the window for a sexual relationship, but ultimately lead to sex over a time frame measured in months rather than a time frame measured in hours or days.

_________________
Some vices miss what is right because they are deficient, others because they are excessive, in feelings or in actions, while virtue finds and chooses the mean.
Aristotle, Ethica Nichomachea

Detachment does not equal indifference. . . but sometimes it does.

Ok....obviously you guys are STILL missing the point. You DON"T have to frame the ENTIRE conversation around SEX. You can SPIKE these things into conversation. The object is to get her to THINK about having sex with you. This is a natural way to frame conversation. It is a small facet of your interaction.....this is the part you are missing....

THIS IS ONLY A PORTION OF WHAT INTERACTION SHOULD BE LIKE.

Actually, framing as much of the interaction around sex as possible will be more beneficial to your goal of getting laid.

So, ideally, you will indeed want to frame the entire conversation around sex even while you are controlling for ASD.