Despite a global pandemic, I managed to sneak in an approach last weekend.
Quick blowout, but hey, at least I know I can re-conquer AA when the Daygame Gods thrust back this crowned devil of a virus from whence it came2.
Since there’s not much game to do, it’s been a good time to catch up on my reading. After reviewing John Gray’s popular book on relationships, I picked up David Deida’s Way of the Superior Man. It assumes male-female polarity as a core axiom of our beings then builds upon that. It consists of a deep mixture of practicality and spirituality, and uses Love to glue it all together. Where The Rational Male is the cold-stoned slap in the face, Way of the Superior Man is the firm yet gentle guiding hand. I recommend both.
At the end of the day, I read these books to help me with this area of my life; my dating life hasn’t yet seen the light of day. I’ve had some lays, but they’re inconsistent and my game, so-to-speak, is a work in progress. With just under 500 approaches under my belt, I’m learning that I cannot rely on lines that I’ve picked up from Krauser or the Black Sheep Bandit (formerly known as Tom Torero), or anyone else for that matter. Their lines don’t quite hit for me, whether because I deliver them incorrectly or because they’re incongruent with who I am. I think it’s a bit of both, but regardless, the training wheels need to come off and I need to develop my own daygame “material”. This is where Deida’s book helps out. He strikes at the core of masculinity, from which we can go in to motivate the creation of our own, personal one-liners to defuse a shit test or calm the storm that is her feminine prerogative.
In recent weeks, MidwestDaygame and RPD posted articles on mental exercises to stay sharp during these Corona times. We are fortunate to have these two scholars discussing theory and practice; it’s a disservice to the community to *not* act on their wisdom. So here, I think it wise to practice some past scenarios I’ve encountered, and poorly performed on, but with a fresh mind.
During a date, there are some common conversational threads that come up. I typically bring up music, which I am now reconsidering, given that I listen to, what apparently, is a very niche style. I listen to blues, blues rock, country rock, acoustic rock, classic rock, rock and roll, rap, southern rock, and at the moment, a bit of jazz. Guys who sell out concerts, but, it turns out, are not mainstream. Guys like Joe Bonamassa, Warren Hayes, Derek Trucks, Ben Harper, Chris Stapleton, Susan Tedeschi, Gary Clark Jr., I could go on. These musicians are popular in my social groups (I guess none of us are mainstream), but girls have no idea who the fuck they are. So it’s not something from which I can build a deep discussion. It took about four first dates for me realize I won’t be able to draw a common connection with girls on musical tastes. It’s bad form to force it. I also learned, if you’re not going to be able to connect on specific artists/genres, it’s better to not bring it up.
Then, I realized, with the help of Deida, the connection is not built upon trading facts and interests, it’s about trading *feelings*. Funny, how often it keeps coming back to feelings for me. That’s my biggest sticking point; I’m not in tune with my feelings. That’s holding me back, from the open to the vibing, to the date. That’s what I need to improve.
So let’s start with a baseline. When chatting with a bud, we would relate by sharing knowledge. “Hey did you know the bassist for Clapton’s tour in the 90’s went to my school?” Pretty boring, but anyone who knows Clapton’s bassist in the 90’s would respect the tidbit of trivia.
Doesn’t work like this with girls, because, as I’ve learned, girls like music for the feelZ. It resonates internally within them. They’re feeling the rhythm, percussions, crescendo, rising dynamics, rapid tempo and off-beat syncopations. They give two shits about the hidden meaning behind the lyrics; it’s about how they’re delivered rather than what they mean. It’s dancing to Usher instead of Jackson Browne.
Let’s set the stage as to how this sort of conversation arises.
Me: So tell me, what’s something that you’re really passionate about? Something that gets you going, just at the thought of it?
Her: Music! I love music. I have my headphones in all the time. I even got the new Air Pods!
Me: Cool, what kind of music?
Her: Umm, I don’t know, whatever!
In the past, I’ve dropped the ball at this point.
Me: No specifics? Like pop or rock? Maybe some rap?
Her: I don’t know, just whatever is out there.
Me: Just anything? Like whatever’s popular? You must have some idea of what you’re tuning into? [this is the mistake]
Her: I guess, I mean whatever is on the radio…
There’s a lot going on above, and words alone are insufficient to paint the full picture. Imagine her feeling like I’m investigating her, like I’m challenging here. We’re on a date, on the first drink, about 15 minutes in. It’s not the time to be overbearing. The mistake is in pushing too heavily, and in the past I have continued pressing on, making her feel bad for not being able to back up her passion. If a guy says “I love music”, I damn-well expect him to know his sense of music, and we can build a conversation out of that. With girls…no. Bless their ethereal souls, they care not for the nuance, they care for the energy! I need to remember to chill out when I’m with them.
Back to game. I can tease a bit at the end of that last sentence and relate on feelingZ. Here’s the plan:
Me: The radio? They still make those? Welcome to the new century, young lady. I don’t know if you’ve heard, but there’s this thing called the internet. Say it with me now. [calibrate the tease according to her response in terms of facial expressions, smile, eyes, etc.]
Her: Haha! You know what I mean! Whatever is on Spotify.
Me: Ok. I like music a lot too. The best moments at work are when I can just focus on what I need to do with my headphones blocking out all the noise. No meetings, no interruptions, just music and work. Of all the styles out there, the Chicago blues from the 60’s is my favorite.
Her: Haha, the blues?!
Me: It’s the percussions behind their sound, it drives everything else. Heavy drums, heavy base, over-powering almost. You can remove everything else and just have those two. Right around the time of the Beatles, super bands became a thing with drummers and bassists responsible for lifting the music. With the Chicago Blues, it complemented the raw, soul-searching vocals of the singers and the rough, gritty guitar work. And the harmonica…seems like a feeble toy today, but the way they played it in the 60’s, in Chicago, it brings you to tears just as quickly as it raises your spirits in awe, all within a single tune. Great stuff, powerful stuff.
Her: Haha, that’s cool, you’ll have to show me. [bounce, seeded]
In my head, the outcome of this visualization exercise is very much in my favor. In practice, well, I’ve tried something like this in my last date. It hit okay, not great. I need to clean it up a bit, but I think there’s something there. It’s got to be calibrated to the girl, though.
If I’m not getting any signals of interest in the spiel, I need to be ready to snip the thread and move on to something else. The level of interest will be in her eyes. They’ll be wide and excited, or glossy and bored. That’s the name of the game, Calibration. Krauser calls it an advanced topic in his book Daygame Infinite; though I’m convinced it’s a necessary skill, even for the beginner. Can’t get laid with a one-size-fits-all suit.
I had this idea for a blog post around for a couple of weeks now, even had a draft ready last weekend. But lo and behold, Yoylo beat me to the punch and posted an excellent example of conversing with a beauty on the topic of music before I got this out. Cheers to Yoylo.
> Where The Rational Male is…
> I recommend both
How dare you!
> or the Black Sheep Bandit
How are you again!
You managed to mention half the dudes I like least in the first few paragraphs, but somehow I kept reading.
> I typically bring up music
Great idea.
> but girls have no idea who the fuck they are. So it’s not something from which I can build a deep discussion
Oh? Are you trying to build a relationship out of commonalities?
For the record: I mostly date girls I have basically “nothing in common with.” I don’t even think that is weird (anymore). Commonalities aren’t important. You’re leading her. You’re pulling her into your world. You love how different you are.
CONCEPT FOR YOU: Similar is “comfortable,” different is “sexy.”
> I realized, with the help of Deida, the connection is not built upon trading facts and interests, it’s about trading *feelings*
Yeah. Again, I think connection IS the goal, but commonalities aren’t really important. A lot of is created via leading, she likes where you take her, you like her natural qualities… the “connection” is the fact that you’re enjoying each other. I’ve never said that before, but maybe that is true.
There is a different between CONNECTION (physical/emotional/spiritual) and “understanding each other.” Or for her to “feel seen” in the sense that you can tell her what she just said and then she says, “yeah!”
Especially when I think about PHYSICAL CONNECTION… that has nothing to do with “cultural similarities” at all. It might be hard to find out that you have physical compatibility without some cultural common ground… but… very possible. NON VERBAL SEDUCTION is all about this.
MUSIC is a great example of how you might “meet” without having anything in common but the “Heavy drums, heavy base.” Right? That rhythm might be the commonality.
> Way of the Superior Man. It assumes male-female polarity as a core axiom of our beings then builds upon that
If you limited me to only ONE TOOL to use in game, I’d take masculine/feminine polarity, every time. It’s the master concept above all else.
You can “connect with her” strictly on those terms. “You’re so feminine, I like it. When I see soft, pretty girls like you, it brings out the big, scary man in me.” That is a little exaggerated, but I said stuff like that, almost word for word.
The “connection” is ancient. It’s “strong man” to “pretty girls.” I can be much more sophisticated about it, but that’s often not where the “heat is.”
So if she’s never heard of my genre of music (“WEST COAST BASS MUSIC”), I’m not surprised. And I might tell her that. And I might say “I don’t expect, sweet, innocent, little things like you to know about such bad-bad music.” And just like that… we’re in the scene. That’s better/hotter/more-immediate than “you like the Beatles, oh wow, I like the Beatles too.” Rapport isn’t sexy… it’s not.
And I think you’re exactly right, about relating on emotions. I like “monster bass” and the girls I date often like Taylor Swift. And those genres are polar opposites. But, “you know, when the music just takes you away?” is a way to get the experience to stack on top of each other.
I am not into your “blacksheepbandit” dude… but he likes to talk about Russel Brand – all the Daygame.com guys did. And Russel Brand can go off on a topic (“cosmic dust in the galaxy, baby”) and spin BS in this very poetic, personal way. And there is no way the girl knows what he is talking about… but she is “bewitched” by his “birdsong” (as Sneaky Tom) would say.
And that is yet another way to take YOUR CONTENT (what ever is cool for you) and to use it as content to share time with a girl. Go off on your topic (share your mastery/depth in an area), and then use the EMOTIONS as the way for her to understand it.
All of these are examples of “it’s not what you say, but how you say it.” Which is another way to say, “its not how you say it, but the vibe between you as you do.”
I love the MASCULINE/FEMININE stuff as the vibe is prescribed. And it’s not arbitrary. It’s ancient, cross-species “balance” between male/female. You get that going, and then the CONTENT is just “filler” through which to transmit the “vibe” (see, now I sound like Russel Brand).
> or anyone else for that matter. Their lines don’t quite hit for me, whether because I deliver them incorrectly or because they’re incongruent with who I am. I think it’s a bit of both, but regardless, the training wheels need to come off and I need to develop my own daygame “material”.
I like watching you go through all this. I remember, very much, how I did it too…
And now… I am so sure of where I will take a girl (almost any girl, regardless of her tastes) that I laugh at the idea of using anyone else stuff (even though I probable do… I’ve just completely appropriated it at this point).
ADVANCED: A lot of what I am doing with masculine/feminine to me, seems exactly right, perfect, some of the highest forms of game. But our man Pat Stedman (who is A+ solid) might accuse me of doing “too much persona,” too much role playing, not making it personal enough. He would say it’s powerful, but that there are limits to how deep you can go if you stay in a “role.” I am totally personal, none of this is an act for me… but I include Pat’s POV here, as I am challenged by it… it is helping to keep me honest, and I’m still chewing on how right/wrong he might be.
Right on, Breeze. Here’s to an end to the BS of 2020 and return to close encounters.
Viva Daygame.
>You managed to mention half the dudes I like least in the first few paragraphs, but somehow I kept reading.
Oh did I miss someone? I’ll tag them in the next post!
>Commonalities aren’t important. You’re leading her.
>CONCEPT FOR YOU: Similar is “comfortable,” different is “sexy.”
Yes this is great. I’m faultering to a search of mutual interests, which is both unnecessary and possible damaging. I need to learn how to reframe our differences as something novel, exciting, adventurous. And the way to do so, is through the emotions. You can like watermelons, I can like apples, doesn’t mean we can appreciate the difference in sweetness and texture of the fruit. The topic of conversation is a medium to share emotions and feelings, not facts.
Lee Cho exmplified this concept in a recent post (https://leecho.game.blog/2020/05/19/asiandaygame-lay-report-young-fresh-full-of-retro/):
>I politely answered maybe the first two or three, but when she asked, “So, do you have any hobbies?” I burst out laughing. She was really cute.
The same question can be reframed in much better ways, ways that bring out sentiments as opposed to facts.
>Or for her to “feel seen”
Similar to “feeling heard”, I think. Imagine this, you date a girl who doesn’t like soup. You take her to a ramen shop. She says “You know I don’t like soup!” (assume she says in a playful, but slightly agitated way). “You don’t like watery soup, with no texture, just a single flavor, generally bland or artificially flavored. You’re in for a treat here, give it a shot. If you don’t like it, I’ll get you a Whopper later. Well, a Whopper Jr because you’re so tiny.” Damn, I miss game.
>It’s “strong man” to “pretty girls.”
Yes, this is it! The “fallacy of shared hobbies”. In 2015, after a long-term relationship ended, I was asking myself what kind of hobbies are girls in to? I’ll get in to them so we have shared interests! I learned a bit about cooking and took salsa classes. Glad I did them, especially to learn how to cook better, but the reasons were wrong. I was feminizing myself (those activities are great, and can be done with a ton of masculunity. I just had the wrong motivations from the start). I’m seeing in this space, not only the attractive qualiities of drumming up the male/female polarity, but necessity of it for a healthy relationship.
>“you like the Beatles, oh wow, I like the Beatles too.” Rapport isn’t sexy… it’s not.
I learn just as much by example as by counter example. Good way to illustrate the point.
>And now… I am so sure of where I will take a girl (almost any girl, regardless of her tastes) that I laugh at the idea of using anyone else stuff (even though I probable do… I’ve just completely appropriated it at this point).
Boom! I’m entering this phase. If you’re not using your own stuff, it’s eventually going to show as incongruence. Unless it’s stuff that becomes a part of you. I feel like I’m starting from scratch since I need to “rewrite” my material. It’s as exciting as it is frustrating.
>Here’s to an end to the BS of 2020 and return to close encounters.
Cheers to that!
Love to read you both guys
Appreciate that. It’s nice to hear that I share readers with Nash.