The Art of Seduction Book Study

[Microphone Fiend]

Discussion on our views also! This is gettin good, even if its just you n me for now Jayer, lol. Anyways Im sure more people will chime in when we get to specifics concerning their personal type


This is good however I think love is something that is subjective. Is love really something thats magical or is it just high infatution? I'd be curious to hear your opinion on this.
I think that love is based solely on your experience and outlook. As a seducer, it would be hard now to find that quote un-quote 'love' that is talked about in movies and tv shows. With a book like AoS @ our disposal it really debunks ideas of people just connecting and shows the techniques and mental reasoning.

Love for the most part is high infatuation but it most people will still attest to the fact that it feels great up until you get cheated on or LJBF'd. It's one of those things you should experience @ least once in your life imo. Throw caution to the wind and learn from experience...

"Seducers are never self absorbed. Their gaze is directed out-wards not inward. When they meet someone, their first move is to get inside that person's skin, to see the world through their eyes. "

Here is where some of the contradictory stuff comes in. If the whole ide ais to mirror someone else wouldn't you lose your self identity which is critical to confidence?
This was something I thought about a while back. I think it means when you mirror someone you do not try and become a spitting image of them; rather you try to hide things contrary to her beliefs. Ie: if she is looking for a guy likes to stay in, then you 'forget' to tell her that you go clubbing 6 days a week. The best way to get what you want is to give people what they want (or the illusion of what they want). There is also eliciting value too, which is popular @ fastseduction. Like if a woman says she only dates 300 lbs NFL linebackers, you ask her 'why' and then the reason she tells you is usually the real quality she is looking for, and 300 lbs NFL linebackers just happen to possess that quality more often than not. Like actress Gabrielle Union was dating a dude like that, but her history shows that she was raped as a teenager, so in a companion she is probably looking for someone that makes her feel secure and a 320 lbs dude can do that for her. If you can make her feel secure, it is a done deal...

Nice quote by Nietzche. So morals play no part?
It's not that morals play no part, it is that there is not such thing as morals to a seducer. Im not saying you go around raping and pillaging, but in a sense the lies, embellishing, and 'immoral' things you do are helping others. The seducing of others gives people a chance to 'love' and create memories that last a lifetime. You gotta see the whole picture of things, and since you cant as a human, it does not seem right imo to draw conclusions on right and wrong (in seduction anyway). It's like this old story you probably heard before:

Once there was a farmer whose horse ran away. His neighbor came over to tell him he felt sorry for him, only to be told in return: "Who knows what is good or bad?" The next day the horse returned, bringing with a wild horse it had met during its adventurous escape. The neighbor came over again, this time to congratulate the farmer on his good fortune. Only to be told once again "Who knows what is good or bad? The next day the farmer's son tried to tame the wild horse and fell off, breaking his leg. His neighbor came back again one more time to express how bad he felt But once again all the farmer had to say was: "Who knows what is good or bad?" The king of that land had started a war and the following day soldiers came by to draft young men into the army, but because of his injury the son was not taken.

 

[Microphone Fiend]

He is right on the money when he says that you must seduce your victim's mind and then you get to their body. This is certainly the object in seduction as we DJ's are trying to seduce the girl we are enthralled with mentally. .

I dont know about this. Some people can get laid just off of looks or money. People in the club scene are not engaging women mentally or anything. I think the seduction involved in the book is for varying degrees of long-term seduction with lasting effects but it is not the only way to approach seduction.

I love the point he makes about how we often see love and romance as something sacred and use it as an excuse to believe everything should magically fall into place. He is saying that seduction takes effort. Furthermore he goes on to say that a seductor does not concern himself with morals and those that are moralists are envious of the seductors success.

I agree with all of this stuff, especially the moralist who looks down on seducers. Of the people who judge seducers, most are more than likely the exact opposite of what a seducer is and there is a part of them that envies that lifestyle even if they are sworn to do the opposite because of religion or w/e.

I feel this is a tactic we as men are encouraged to use as well.

Yup. I think the main thing in this chapter was the idea of a person that was larger than life, with their looks or their uniqueness, bringing something new to the relationship. As a seducer I read that you should either create a frame/mindset and lure her into it, or fake going into hers until you can confidently and unoticingly construct your own to lure her into. In a sense, Celebrities are Sirens because their world is something we have not experienced and can get easily swept up in it. The topics that concern Sirens are all represented in celebrities
Body/Adornment: Usually very in-shape with high class taste and latest fashions
Movement/Demeanour: Celebs usually feel like they are the sh!t because they have 5 yes man telling them. The body language probably shows this or they have the money to hire someone that can teach it.


Good stuff, it feels good to really think about it and apply the ideas to real life instead of just letting it go in one ear and out the other

 

[Flirt-o-rama]

This is a very good book!

Siren/Rake works well when you want to be someone's dirty little secret or when someone does not care about what others think. Our animal sexual side is not that acceptable in polite company, this is not the type that gets taken home to meet the parents. It mostly attracts cheaters and other men and women of questionable character. On the plus side, cool non-conformist people often love this type, as long as some intellectual content is present aswell. Kids are often fascinated.

 

[FoolsCause]

Alot of the discussion in this book differs from the general approach of the DJ forum. Greene states throughout the book that men with some feminine qualities such as feminine facial features, nice clothes, attention to details, etc. attract women because women are all somewhat lesbian or self-absorbed at least and like seeing aspects of themselves reflected in a mate. DJ forum emphasizes being the macho, alpha male. Greene says you should flatter women, compare them to actresses and characters from novels, write emotional poetry, impress them with your passion for them. DJ forum says you should neg-hit, and not put them on a pedestal. Only a few AoS chapters examine this approach, mainly for women (coquettry).

Also, he states that you should stick with just one or two styles that naturally fit you, but doesn't explain which targets are ideal for your type. DJ forum approach is mostly standardized for all men and all targets, and doesn't address different styles or targets. I'm new here, so I'm sure there are some threads in the archive that do so, but I just haven't seen them. I'm not trying to knock either the book or this forum since both offer great advice, but just notice some divergence.

 

[Reyaj]

MF

"I think that love is based solely on your experience and outlook. As a seducer, it would be hard now to find that quote un-quote 'love' that is talked about in movies and tv shows. With a book like AoS @ our disposal it really debunks ideas of people just connecting and shows the techniques and mental reasoning. "

So it sounds like you think it's just extreme infatuation which can be broken down to a science. If this science is learned you can in fact seduce anyone could you? I personally don't know if I agree with this albeit thinking this way might be important to be an effective seducer.


"This was something I thought about a while back. I think it means when you mirror someone you do not try and become a spitting image of them; rather you try to hide things contrary to her beliefs. Ie: if she is looking for a guy likes to stay in, then you 'forget' to tell her that you go clubbing 6 days a week. The best way to get what you want is to give people what they want (or the illusion of what they want). There is also eliciting value too, which is popular @ fastseduction. Like if a woman says she only dates 300 lbs NFL linebackers, you ask her 'why' and then the reason she tells you is usually the real quality she is looking for, and 300 lbs NFL linebackers just happen to possess that quality more often than not. Like actress Gabrielle Union was dating a dude like that, but her history shows that she was raped as a teenager, so in a companion she is probably looking for someone that makes her feel secure and a 320 lbs dude can do that for her. If you can make her feel secure, it is a done deal..."

Good points. Now the challenge is how do you get a woman to feel you are the man that represents her need? This is imporant step and unfortunately probably the hardest. Can you share a real world example? I can share this: I was talking to this girl I am friends with and as an experiment I decided to see if I could get her to be attracted to me. Well I was myself and was very confident of course however I knew she was intelligent and interested in someone who was deep and wanted a future relationship that would lead to marriage (her ex would never give her a clear marriage proposal) so anyway when I talked to her I casually mentioned how I valued family and marriage etc.... well before I knew this girl admitted she had become attracted me. However I told her about my sex life (ive been with multiple partners) and she became turned off as she didnt think having sex not commitingly was a good trait.

"It's not that morals play no part, it is that there is not such thing as morals to a seducer. Im not saying you go around raping and pillaging, but in a sense the lies, embellishing, and 'immoral' things you do are helping others. The seducing of others gives people a chance to 'love' and create memories that last a lifetime. You gotta see the whole picture of things, and since you cant as a human, it does not seem right imo to draw conclusions on right and wrong (in seduction anyway). It's like this old story you probably heard before:"

What if you are just after a one night stand or casual sex? Do the ends justify the means. Just looking for your personal opinion here.


"I dont know about this. Some people can get laid just off of looks or money. People in the club scene are not engaging women mentally or anything. I think the seduction involved in the book is for varying degrees of long-term seduction with lasting effects but it is not the only way to approach seduction. "

How often do one night stands in clubs really happen? I know in college I've witnessed this stuff at frat parties and what not but the clubbing scene, esepcially for people ages 25 and over doesn't seem to have this happen frequent. Have you ever had a ons with someone you met in a club? Even if you are good looking your best bet being out nowadays is to get a phone number. Even if a girl is really drunk and might want to consider leaving with you her friends will always be there to c-block. I'm not saying ONS don't happen, I just think its pretty rare. This book seems like it aims to establish rapport between you and your subject and is more concerend with this rapport than the length of time of any relationship.

"I agree with all of this stuff, especially the moralist who looks down on seducers. Of the people who judge seducers, most are more than likely the exact opposite of what a seducer is and there is a part of them that envies that lifestyle even if they are sworn to do the opposite because of religion or w/e."

Is there a point you feel when morals could/should come into play? I'd be interested to hear your personal opinion on morality and seduction.


"Yup. I think the main thing in this chapter was the idea of a person that was larger than life, with their looks or their uniqueness, bringing something new to the relationship. As a seducer I read that you should either create a frame/mindset and lure her into it, or fake going into hers until you can confidently and unoticingly construct your own to lure her into."

Can you give some examples of mindsets on females you've encountered? This sounds good in theory but how do you create a mindset or more importantly lure the female in. Again if you have any real world examples I tihnk it would be great. One example I can think of is that I've tried to act rich and generous with girls I thought were after money and security. This didn't seem to get me laid though....


Flirt-O-Rama

Agreed


FoolsCause

"Alot of the discussion in this book differs from the general approach of the DJ forum. Greene states throughout the book that men with some feminine qualities such as feminine facial features, nice clothes, attention to details, etc. attract women because women are all somewhat lesbian or self-absorbed at least and like seeing aspects of themselves reflected in a mate. DJ forum emphasizes being the macho, alpha male. Greene says you should flatter women, compare them to actresses and characters from novels, write emotional poetry, impress them with your passion for them. DJ forum says you should neg-hit, and not put them on a pedestal. Only a few AoS chapters examine this approach, mainly for women (coquettry). "

This is exactly the paradox this book and DJ forum displays. This is what I want to get to the bottom of in doing this study. Which is the better fundamental way to act?



"Also, he states that you should stick with just one or two styles that naturally fit you, but doesn't explain which targets are ideal for your type. DJ forum approach is mostly standardized for all men and all targets, and doesn't address different styles or targets. I'm new here, so I'm sure there are some threads in the archive that do so, but I just haven't seen them. I'm not trying to knock either the book or this forum since both offer great advice, but just notice some divergence."

I agree entirely. I tihnk that's the problem. I once watched a Saved By the Bell Episode where Zack had to do a project on "What women want" he intereviewd a lot of girls on campus but all the answers seemed to be different. His conclusion was finally what the professor had wanted. "Women want different things"

I believe this is the case. Its tough to standardize approaches to women as they are all different but I think there can be some fundamentals learned regardless even if they are few and far between. These fundamentals can build a confidence structure and hopefully the natural DJ inside us all can do the rest.

What do you personally think is universal in attracting women? (can already hear confidence but would like real world examples please

 

[FoolsCause]

What do you personally think is universal in attracting women? (can already hear confidence but would like real world examples please

The stuff covered on DJ forum (like smile, humor, kino) is almost universal. One example from the book where it wouldn't attract a woman is if she's a "rescuer" victim-type. Then you want to play the poor boy loser. Or if she's a "reformed siren", you want to let her feel like she's seducing you. Problem is, you need to understand their psychology first before applying these strategies.

 

[Microphone Fiend]

So it sounds like you think it's just extreme infatuation which can be broken down to a science. If this science is learned you can in fact seduce anyone could you? I personally don't know if I agree with this albeit thinking this way might be important to be an effective seducer.
Yes, I think ANYONE can be seduced. I think everyone has a price and the goal of a seducer is to guess that price or make it seem like you are worth more than the price she is currently dating... man that analogy is giving ME a headache. What I'm getting at is that with the right words and moves, anyone can be seduced. When you turn seduction into a science however, you lose something integral, something that seperates you from a guy having fun to a guy who eventually will be just going through the motions.

the challenge is how do you get a woman to feel you are the man that represents her need? This is imporant step and unfortunately probably the hardest. Can you share a real world example? I can share this: I was talking to this girl I am friends with and as an experiment I decided to see if I could get her to be attracted to me. Well I was myself and was very confident of course however I knew she was intelligent and interested in someone who was deep and wanted a future relationship that would lead to marriage (her ex would never give her a clear marriage proposal) so anyway when I talked to her I casually mentioned how I valued family and marriage etc.... well before I knew this girl admitted she had become attracted me. However I told her about my sex life (ive been with multiple partners) and she became turned off as she didnt think having sex not commitingly was a good trait.

Getting a woman to see that you are the guy of her dreams should be subtle (but noticable to her). You cant come out and verbalize it, instead, let her discover things for herself so as to seem totally unplanned. In the instance you gave us, if you were SURE that what she SAID she wanted, she REALLY wanted (and wasnt just putting on a show to look feminine or possibly not knowing what she really wants subconsciously) instead of discussing directly that you value family life and marriage, talk indirectly about it: After she has forgotten all the specifics about the conversation a couple days later or w/e, casually bring up a story about the family traditions you like or the funny things your little sister does, etc.

Find out what it is (she wants). Be sensitive. You can pick this up in the small cues that she leaks out. Be intelligent in structuring your questions to be such that you can uncover nice pieces of data. What you're looking for is "something" that she always wanted that she's not getting right now, something she "aches" for, but can't have due to some life circumstance or something like that. It can be anything. Once you know what it is, you can either you "fill" the void

The book is rife with examples. One I think stands out personally is the early chapter with Cassanova. Each story shows how he managed to find a woman who was lacking something, and the bottom of page 32 onto page 33 sums up how he got what he wanted. He read the ladies and adapted himself accordingly.



What if you are just after a one night stand or casual sex? Do the ends justify the means. Just looking for your personal opinion here.
You are approaching it from a viewpoint that only men get pleasure out of One night stands.... It's not like we are clubbing women over the head and dragging them into a cave, most women get drunk to lose their inhibitions and (later) blame it on the alcohol. Some women try and get you drunk so that you (or they) can make a bold move. Liquor and One night stands are a two way street.

How often do one night stands in clubs really happen? I know in college I've witnessed this stuff at frat parties and what not but the clubbing scene, esepcially for people ages 25 and over doesn't seem to have this happen frequent. Have you ever had a ons with someone you met in a club? Even if you are good looking your best bet being out nowadays is to get a phone number. Even if a girl is really drunk and might want to consider leaving with you her friends will always be there to c-block. I'm not saying ONS don't happen, I just think its pretty rare. This book seems like it aims to establish rapport between you and your subject and is more concerend with this rapport than the length of time of any relationship.
Naw man... I've had 1-2 One Night Stands. It is like approaches in the sense that when you are not doing them, it seems like no one in the real world is doing it either, but once it happens, you realize that it is really not far out of your reach and that extra 10% is the only difference. Just focus on isolation to avoid c0ckblocks, and rapport to avoid/counter flaking (I read your approach journal )


Is there a point you feel when morals could/should come into play? I'd be interested to hear your personal opinion on morality and seduction.
When you start to use it with a malicious intent or disregard for the target, like sleeping with a friend's ex to get even with him. As a seducer I think it's mostly no harm no foul and I dont think you are resposible for people related to the target (Ie: boyfriend, lowly crushes, husbands, or whoever else is in the picture). Others are only taken into consideration imo if you know the person AND are friends with him. Bros before ho's does not count for the chick I met 2 days ago with the lovesick AFC I might meet tonight or w/e other scenario

Can you give some examples of mindsets on females you've encountered? This sounds good in theory but how do you create a mindset or more importantly lure the female in. Again if you have any real world examples I tihnk it would be great. One example I can think of is that I've tried to act rich and generous with girls I thought were after money and security. This didn't seem to get me laid though....
What you are talking about is Eliciting Values, which we talked about with the girl who valued marriage and family values. When I say mindset, I mean their thought process towards me as a person. For example, I worked in the Service Industry or whatever you call it when you serve others, like restaraunts, hotels, etc. When I talk to a customer, I enter that conversation as someone who was talking to a customer because my mindset is that this person is just another person who I need to serve in my job. However, if that person had a killer personality, gave a sh!t about MY day or really seemed like the reason for talking to me was because she/he wanted to, then the mindset gets changed into a conversation with a friend.

With women who initially see you as a AFC/not worth her time/a friend, its the same thing, you need to change their mindset of who you are as a person. Thats why when newbies get LJBF, standard DJ procedure is to make a bold move like cutting off all contact, or fvcking girls and make her see you in a different light. It's like that old saying, Treat a princess like a wh0re and a wh0re like a princess or something to that effect. If you get an uppity chick or a chick used to gettin attention from guys, instead of buying into her whole "I'm the Queen" persona, act like she does not seem special to you. Thats why you neg hit the dimes and Hb9s. She stops thinking that she is the center of attention and thinks about what you are doing, and YOU become the center of attention.

I feel like Im kind of discussing two things here but they are intertwined so its hard to stray away from one...

 

[Microphone Fiend]

The stuff covered on DJ forum (like smile, humor, kino) is almost universal. One example from the book where it wouldn't attract a woman is if she's a "rescuer" victim-type. Then you want to play the poor boy loser. Or if she's a "reformed siren", you want to let her feel like she's seducing you. Problem is, you need to understand their psychology first before applying these strategies.

Fool's Cause, lets hear what you think of the first chapter man :cheer:

 

[seagull]

Of all the seductive types, it seems that the female "Siren" is probably the easiest and most simplified one to master. Too bad the supposed male equivalent, the "Rake" seems to be vague in its description and I can't really see it being applied in modern life.

 

[Ricky]

I have the majority of AOS and it is a great book.

Perhaps you guys would like to discuss this and other books over the phone sometime.

If so we could use a host like www.freeconference.com to do that.

 

[Reyaj]

Well I was hoping to get more responses on the first chapter since we had multiple say they were interested. I'll give it a few more days and then vote to move on.

Microphone Fiend

"Yes, I think ANYONE can be seduced. I think everyone has a price and the goal of a seducer is to guess that price or make it seem like you are worth more than the price she is currently dating... man that analogy is giving ME a headache. What I'm getting at is that with the right words and moves, anyone can be seduced. When you turn seduction into a science however, you lose something integral, something that seperates you from a guy having fun to a guy who eventually will be just going through the motions."

I agree. I think seduction can be a science in the sense of learning some key fundamentals that help with confidence. The rest has to be natural which comes from practice. Just my current theory....

"The book is rife with examples. One I think stands out personally is the early chapter with Cassanova. Each story shows how he managed to find a woman who was lacking something, and the bottom of page 32 onto page 33 sums up how he got what he wanted. He read the ladies and adapted himself accordingly."

I've read the Cassanova examples in this book and maybe its just my previous DJ forum readings but he sounds like he would be a total AFC today. He totally supplicates women.


"You are approaching it from a viewpoint that only men get pleasure out of One night stands.... It's not like we are clubbing women over the head and dragging them into a cave, most women get drunk to lose their inhibitions and (later) blame it on the alcohol. Some women try and get you drunk so that you (or they) can make a bold move. Liquor and One night stands are a two way street."

You are right. You need to seriously tell me these hangouts though cause where I go the girls don't seem like tihs lol


"Naw man... I've had 1-2 One Night Stands. It is like approaches in the sense that when you are not doing them, it seems like no one in the real world is doing it either, but once it happens, you realize that it is really not far out of your reach and that extra 10% is the only difference. Just focus on isolation to avoid c0ckblocks, and rapport to avoid/counter flaking (I read your approach journal )"

I think you are right again. BTW what does counter flaking mean? As far as my approach journal feel free to chime in there as this latest girl I met is totally playing games with me. She still hasn't called me back!

"When you start to use it with a malicious intent or disregard for the target, like sleeping with a friend's ex to get even with him. As a seducer I think it's mostly no harm no foul and I dont think you are resposible for people related to the target (Ie: boyfriend, lowly crushes, husbands, or whoever else is in the picture). Others are only taken into consideration imo if you know the person AND are friends with him. Bros before ho's does not count for the chick I met 2 days ago with the lovesick AFC I might meet tonight or w/e other scenario"

Agreed

"With women who initially see you as a AFC/not worth her time/a friend, its the same thing, you need to change their mindset of who you are as a person. Thats why when newbies get LJBF, standard DJ procedure is to make a bold move like cutting off all contact, or fvcking girls and make her see you in a different light. It's like that old saying, Treat a princess like a wh0re and a wh0re like a princess or something to that effect. If you get an uppity chick or a chick used to gettin attention from guys, instead of buying into her whole "I'm the Queen" persona, act like she does not seem special to you. Thats why you neg hit the dimes and Hb9s. She stops thinking that she is the center of attention and thinks about what you are doing, and YOU become the center of attention."

This is something else that sounds good in theory and throughout the years I have tried this. While it helped my confidence and kept me from feeling down on myself, it didn't get me laid. Take this present girl from approach journal: if she never calls me back and I go ahead and neg hit her or treat her bad I might feel better but it isn't going to get me laid.



Lets get some more responses if possible everyone!

 

[Reyaj]

bump

 

[Flirt-o-rama]

Alot of the discussion in this book differs from the general approach of the DJ forum. Greene states throughout the book that men with some feminine qualities such as feminine facial features, nice clothes, attention to details, etc. attract women because women are all somewhat lesbian or self-absorbed at least and like seeing aspects of themselves reflected in a mate. DJ forum emphasizes being the macho, alpha male. Greene says you should flatter women, compare them to actresses and characters from novels, write emotional poetry, impress them with your passion for them. DJ forum says you should neg-hit, and not put them on a pedestal. Only a few AoS chapters examine this approach, mainly for women (coquettry).

Coquettry is a fear based technique that can be used to get others to pursue you. Coquette actions, or lack of actions place you in the feminine role of the chased, forcing the opponent to take on the masculine role of the chaser if he or she really wants to be with you.(A masculine appearance and macho actions balance this to avoid making a feminine impression.) The consensus here seems to be that a girl is to be nexted if she does not respond by chasing. The DJ selects for women who are willing to chase him right into bed.
If you are looking for quick easy sex, a girl who will chase a man who tells her mean things, who is not very respectful towards her, who suffers from insecurity is not at all likely to have strong boundaries and lacks self control. This is the sort of girl who gets into all kinds of sex acts hoping that it buys her love.

A secure girl or, more likely, woman who is honestly looking for NSA steamy sex will be more attracted to a Rake. (Many cheaters fall in this group.)

A woman who is looking for more than sex, is secure and in control of herself requires a seduction that costs more effort.

Coquette works to get laid because it costs little effort, so you can engage in multiple targets, and it works on exactly those targets who are not capable of restraining themselves sexually and thus provide sex frequently and easily.

A guy who plays any other type except Rake is not going to get sex as often, so if your goal is maximum body count, the other types are not nearly as effective.

There are men and women who learn The Art with other goals in mind, or a variety of goals. Learning new strategies and being able to play other roles enables you to seduce different types of targets.

Smile, eyecontact, approaching, numberclosing and asking a girl out is an almost universal formula. Exceptions are ONS or situations where you can trust to see the target again. If a girl is willing to go out with you, she wants you to finish the formula and go out together so she can get to know you and see if there is a click.

Personally, I would walk away if a guy neg hitted me and I have disabled voicemail because I don't like calling back.

 

[Flirt-o-rama]

The Art of Seduction is like the Art of War, always effective as long as you are more skilled in it that your opponent.

 

[Microphone Fiend]

Coquettry is a fear based technique that can be used to get others to pursue you. Coquette actions, or lack of actions place you in the feminine role of the chased, forcing the opponent to take on the masculine role of the chaser if he or she really wants to be with you.(A masculine appearance and macho actions balance this to avoid making a feminine impression.)
Yea I agree, in the prototypical sense, the gender roles are reversed.

The consensus here seems to be that a girl is to be nexted if she does not respond by chasing. The DJ selects for women who are willing to chase him right into bed.
If you are looking for quick easy sex, a girl who will chase a man who tells her mean things, who is not very respectful towards her, who suffers from insecurity is not at all likely to have strong boundaries and lacks self control. This is the sort of girl who gets into all kinds of sex acts hoping that it buys her love.
Interesting that you put it this way. So in a nutshell, the women who goes after what she wants is insecure, and the one that has 'self control' and makes the man chase her has strong boundaries. It's a catch 22 in my opinion because both women can be seen as confident and insecure. The woman who is confident/insecure enough to chase a man AND the confident/insecure female who does not make a move. I think it just depends on which side of the gender sideline you are cheering from, and how educated you are on seduction. I get the impression that you are a female, and I could be wrong but just a guess...

A woman who is looking for more than sex, is secure and in control of herself requires a seduction that costs more effort.
I hear what you are saying and understand the theoretical reasoning, but just because a woman wants more than sex, this does not equate to her being secure and in control. What if this woman equates her self-worth to whether she is single or 'dating'? What if she only does not have sex in the first date because deep down, she knows that her personality and other skills alone will not keep a man?

Coquette works to get laid because it costs little effort, so you can engage in multiple targets, and it works on exactly those targets who are not capable of restraining themselves sexually and thus provide sex frequently and easily.
Do a search on 'Spinning plate theory' by Rollo Tomassi. It gets you laid too, regardless of your effort you put in for each girl. You can spoil one girl, treat one girl like dirt, string along another, etc...


A guy who plays any other type except Rake is not going to get sex as often, so if your goal is maximum body count, the other types are not nearly as effective.
You say that the rake gets laid the most, but perhaps that is because you have succuumbed to that type in the past. You are just one (seemingly intelligient) female, so your advice is somewhat biased and foggy. What about women who are the opposite of you in terms of looks? In terms of personality?

There are men and women who learn The Art with other goals in mind, or a variety of goals. Learning new strategies and being able to play other roles enables you to seduce different types of targets.
Yup, I agree, and thats why i think you should at least give a quick read through for every chapter

Personally, I would walk away if a guy neg hitted me and I have disabled voicemail because I don't like calling back.
I think you say that you would walk away from a neg hit now, because you 'know' the game. But before... Im not so sure, plus a neg hit is not an insult or a rude comment like many people believe, but a compliment that seems good-hearted in nature but in the wrong context can seem satirical or off-hand. Anyways, seeing as you come across as an intelligient female who is not conceited or snobby, why would someone feel the need to neghit you unless they do not know what they are doing?

 

[Flirt-o-rama]

What would your perception be of each female type of seducer? What sort of look would you envision for each type?

 

[Flirt-o-rama]

So in a nutshell, the women who goes after what she wants is insecure, and the one that has 'self control' and makes the man chase her has strong boundaries. It's a catch 22 in my opinion because both women can be seen as confident and insecure.

If a woman is inspired to chase, even stalk a man despite evidence that he does not like her, allowing him to do things she resents later, then she is insecure. A secure woman can approach or call a man she likes, but if he is not into her, she is able to let him go. A woman who never approaches out of fear of rejection is also insecure. A woman who never approaches because she is busy enough with the men approaching her is also secure. Secure people are not as easily driven by fear, that's in fact my personal litmus test of security and boundaries..

It is pretty similar for men, although a man can chase a bit more than a woman. I'm happy to go out with a man who calls until he reaches me, suggests a date and feels at ease. He may call between dates, but about half the phonecalls are to plan a date. He is good company on the date, picks up the bill and is funny. Now if a man is calling me each day before we even went on a date, that would give an insecure impression to me. If he is nervous on the date and radiates that he is entitled to something physical as he picks up the bill, moves in for a kiss at an inapropriate time that would further solidify that inpression.
Both men chase, the first out of desire, the second out of fear.

A woman who is looking for more than sex, is secure and in control of herself requires a seduction that costs more effort.
I hear what you are saying and understand the theoretical reasoning, but just because a woman wants more than sex, this does not equate to her being secure and in control. I agree, this was about a woman who is all three.


What if this woman equates her self-worth to whether she is single or 'dating'? What if she only does not have sex in the first date because deep down, she knows that her personality and other skills alone will not keep a man?
This would fall under insecure, no structure and boundaries. (Self esteem can be plummeted easily, very fear based person.)

You say that the rake gets laid the most, but perhaps that is because you have succuumbed to that type in the past.
Both Rake and Coquette get laid more than the other types, ceteris paribus. Rake because he attracts women out for sex and Coquette because he attracts easy women. There is a limit to the time a man can spend on women so low effort techniques sell well. Hence, these two sets of strategies appear most often in guides for men. Come to think of it, DJ Guide advices making a first impression as Rake, masculine, sexual appearance, initiatial pursuit, touching. Coquette is popular with beginners because it can be an egoboost to have the opposite sex chasing after you. Plus, insecure women are less likely to poke through the initially shallow veneer of self esteem, so he gets the chance to fake it till he makes it.

If a man is willing to take the time needed to play one of the other roles, he can seduce women who do not respond to Rake or Coquette, he can seduce inlaws, employers, old people, kids, everyone. It takes more effort and sometimes more emotional investment.

There are men and women who learn The Art with other goals in mind, or a variety of goals. Learning new strategies and being able to play other roles enables you to seduce different types of targets.
Yup, I agree, and thats why i think you should at least give a quick read through for every chapter
Agreed, each type is equally useful, it all depends or your goals. If I was to seduce another woman into giving me a job, Siren would not be my choice.

I think you say that you would walk away from a neg hit now, because you 'know' the game.
When you see the swords, you know what shields to build.

Anyways, seeing as you come across as an intelligient female who is not conceited or snobby, why would someone feel the need to neghit you unless they do not know what they are doing?
Thank you. This is good food for thought... I'll apply my techniques for men who do not know what they are doing next time I encounter a neghit, which is indeed not often.

 

[FoolsCause]

Coquette actions, or lack of actions place you in the feminine role of the chased, forcing the opponent to take on the masculine role of the chaser if he or she really wants to be with you.(A masculine appearance and macho actions balance this to avoid making a feminine impression.) The consensus here seems to be that a girl is to be nexted if she does not respond by chasing. The DJ selects for women who are willing to chase him right into bed.
...

A secure girl or, more likely, woman who is honestly looking for NSA steamy sex will be more attracted to a Rake. (Many cheaters fall in this group.)

A woman who is looking for more than sex, is secure and in control of herself requires a seduction that costs more effort.

Coquette works to get laid because it costs little effort, so you can engage in multiple targets, and it works on exactly those targets who are not capable of restraining themselves sexually and thus provide sex frequently and easily.

A guy who plays any other type except Rake is not going to get sex as often, so if your goal is maximum body count, the other types are not nearly as effective.

There are men and women who learn The Art with other goals in mind, or a variety of goals. Learning new strategies and being able to play other roles enables you to seduce different types of targets.

Smile, eyecontact, approaching, numberclosing and asking a girl out is an almost universal formula. Exceptions are ONS or situations where you can trust to see the target again. If a girl is willing to go out with you, she wants you to finish the formula and go out together so she can get to know you and see if there is a click.

Interesting that you say Rake and Coquette are the two best methods of seducing women because they're basically opposites. The Rake is the HOT dog (or pepe lepew) who wears his emotions on his sleeve. The Coquette is the COOL cat, emotionally cold, aloof and elusive (penelope *****cat). The Rake is YANG, bold and masculine. The Coquette is YIN, passive and feminine.

You say coquette is the best for maximum body count, but from my personal experience, I'm not sure this is true. I tend to be narcissistic, aloof and unemotional, but this hasn't helped me since most women don't like to chase. When I was a child, alot of girls let it be known that they liked me, but passively waiting around to hear which women like you doesn't seem very effective for adult men. Also, how can a man approach women while retaining the coquette strategy? Approaching is in and of itself NOT aloof.

 

[Create Reality]

What you don't understand is timing of seductive strategies. If you stick to one method your mark will get bored and start seeing through your actions. You can incorporate a little Rake into your approach and initial seduction, yet transparently progress into the Coquette later into the relationship as she develops stronger feelings towards you. Each seduction method is not the be-all-end-all. They are all meant to be used together under different circumstances.

 

[FoolsCause]

You're right, Greene advises identifying and using your predominant natural seduction style rather than mixing them together, but he describes the hot&cold coquette. It's probably next to impossible to be a male cold coquette if your trying to seduce women, except during childhood.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Someone asked my opinion on the Siren chapter. Greene discusses this type as a female seduction method. Though it's possible for a male to use it, I can't see how it would be effective. The strategy is basically to grow some boobs, put on a tight sweater, and wait for multitudes of horny suitors to shower their affections on you. Seduction is alot easier for women... provided they're young and physically attractive.

While growing man-boobs will turn off most women, a man could workout in the gym until he achieves the muscle-bound look, go shirtless alot, then passively wait for women to hit on him. But then why not be the male counterpart, the Rake, and seduce women with your smooth talk and sexual aggression? The only possible use of Siren for males is for shy men, unable to approach, smooth talk, etc., who'll be willing to accept the lower body count (since most women don't chase men) as better than nothing.

How about moving on to the next chapter? We've been on the Siren chapter for weeks now.