The bar is low

[BillyPilgrim]

If the women aren't doing the majority of the talking on a first date there won't be a second date.

I had one woman refuse to tell me what she did for a living and that she was "saving it for the date". Meaning she was going to be coy and clam up during the date as well. I ghosted her at that point.

 

[pipeman84]

If a man doesn't physically escalate a first date, that's not him being a challenge. That's him sending a mixed signal, or failing to lead, or failing to fall into masculine frame.

This is a quote from 'The System', Touching chapter:

 

[tksniper]

I think the problem is these guys don't fit into any sexual archetypes. How many archetypes are there really? There's the stable career guy, the bad boy, the sigma male, the effortlessly good looking natural, the "game guy," (I'm being generous to include him) and the "alpha male". None of these examples that you guys can provide in these failed videos fits into any attractive archetype. Just imagine we are all in a room. And every attractive male archetype makes the top 20%. And the rest are the 80% that are invisible to women.

So I would argue, no, the bar isn't low. The bar is only low if you identify as part of the 80%. If you identify as part of the 20%, there's always competition. There's always someone better looking, taller, more socially connected, has more game, richer, etc.

Let's stop identifying with the invisible 80% men in society. These men dont even exist to women. They get used for their money, attention, and resources. I haven't had a woman act like a lifeless mannequin in my presence ever in my entire life and I'm 41. That's not the norm for a top 20% male. That's an anomaly.

The bar is not low and it has never been low. You will always - since time memorium, have to be a top 20% male. And if you think these chumps in these failed videos represent the top 20% of the male population, then I have news for you.

There's more millionaires than ever. More fit people than ever thanks to nutrition science. More pseudo celebrities in social media than ever. More people living in abundance than ever and more desperate people than ever.

Nowadays when you you go out, you can see a clear seperation from the haves and have nots. The line used to be blurred, but nowadays it's right in front of your face.

If anything the top 20% is seperating themselves from the bottom 80%.

My best advice on this forum is this - Don't worry about what losers do, You are not them. Contemplate on what the winners do and live in this reality 24/7. Forget the red pill or purple pill or whatever pill.

Focus on what creates abundance by focusing on the winners, not the losers of society.

The biggest misconception when it comes to social dynamics is that one should do the opposite of what losers do. This is not true. Doing the opposite still has you reacting to women. The biggest truth is one should be proactive and not reactive. And you can only find proactive principles by observing winners. Simply put, winners don't even consider women as part of their equation. Women in general are just lumped into "abundance". This is why most guys who have abundance with women can rarely give you good advice when it comes to game. This is because they have women lumped into the "abundance" category along with everything else that represents abundance.

 

[Sega Genesis]

This is a quote from 'The System', Touching chapter:
View attachment 14579

@pipeman84 I agree with you! And subsequently with the above attachment from The System..

I have stated same, that being when a woman is attracted, SHE will let you know in subtle ways such as physically moving closer, ever so slightly touching against your arm or leg (when sitting), subtle touching of your hand, mirroring your movements, often times without even realizing it!

It's simply a natural byproduct of her feeling a strong attraction physically/mentally and possibly emotionally given you have just met and/or first date.

I also agree that many women love mystery, and uncertainty (although many women will deny this) and sexual tension...

When a man so boldly and directly states his sexual desire and/or physically escalates so as to express that same desire right off the bat, where's the tension?

You've laid your cards directly on the table, there no wondering, uncertainty OR tension (sexual or otherwise).

She might also view him as just another overly thirsty horndog trying to get into her panties which works against him in many cases (with the 'quality' girls).

Not to mention the direct approach and sexual escalation before receiving any subtle IOIs from her (and even after), again squelches any wondering, mystery, uncertainty and sexual tension, the very things that serve to create and build sexual/mental and emotional attraction!

Exercise restraint and allow the uncertainty, sexual tension and attraction between you to build! You will thank yourself later...

I've gotten shot down by some here for such views....but nevertheless it IS how many women feel.

Again, not all obviously as there are women who don't give a rat's rear about feelz or even attraction; if he's got a pulse and wants to f*ck her, she's in!

I am not familiar with The System but from the excerpt above it sounds like it's a worthy read, thanks for posting it!

ETA: Some people might refute this (men and women) but in many cases it's actually the woman who seduces the man, not overtly but rather with a certain subtlety and softness...

$.02

 

[SW15]

This is a quote from 'The System', Touching chapter:
View attachment 14579

Thank you for posting this. "The System" was written in the 1990s. Advice and the mating environment has changed since then.

1. First date in a seaside restaurant -- That is so late 20th Century. Starting somewhere in the 2000s, advice moved to never using meals at restaurants. First dates in restaurants were a better option when women had less abundance and people met through social circles at private residence parties and maybe semi-private, non-bar events. They don't work in the high speed internet, smartphone, and social media era when approaching strangers randomly. That dinner date idea might work if two people are set up from strong mutual friends. However, a drinks date is still a better date even in that situation.

2. Seating arrangement -- Sitting across from someone makes distance more difficult. That's bad. Yes, the eye contact is good. Sitting perpendicular at a table is good enough for eye contact. Additionally, a lot of restaurants are so loud that sitting perpendicular would be the only way to hear someone. In general, men shouldn't even be at a table in a restaurant. They should be side-by-side at a bar.

3. Women initiating touch -- It would be ideal if a woman initiated touch first. That's a high interest sign. In reality, that doesn't happen much. When it does happen, it's likely happening to a 6'0"+ fit/muscular man. If a man doesn't initiate touch, she won't be wondering about him. She'll be scrolling through her swipe queue, her DMs, and maybe text messages from other men. Times have changed. Touch needs to happen on a date and the best way that a man can ensure that there is touch on a date is if he controls that element.

Touch is a great way to set up kissing too.

 

[Sega Genesis]

Women initiating touch -- It would be ideal if a woman initiated touch first. That's a high interest sign. In reality, that doesn't happen much. When it does happen, it's likely happening to a 6'0"+ fit/muscular man

Not always true.

It's his energy. Their energy together (chemistry).

Which includes physical attraction but that does not necessarily equate to him being a 6'0"+ fit/muscular Chad.

For many women (NOT all), a man's energy (their energy/chemistry) trumps everything, and I highly doubt that will ever change.

 

[SW15]

It's his energy. Their energy together (chemistry).

A man's energy (their energy/chemistry) trumps everything, and I highly doubt that will ever change.

Attraction and seduction come down to looks, money, status, and personality.

The energy surrounding the interaction is related to these 4 factors.

Personality is a factor in this but not as important as looks. A man's physical appearance is the most important factor in the energy. A man doesn't need to do much with his personality if he is 6'2" with some muscle definition and 12-15% body fat. His personality can't be terrible but he's not required to do as much with his personality if he is at least 85th percentile in looks.

One of the men in the OP's example talked too much and didn't make the evening about the woman. Connecting with the woman emotionally matters. She needs to feel something. If she's talking about herself, the man is actively listening, and the man asks a few good questions, he's in good shape. She will feel good energy. If this is a first date, he has a good chance of getting laid by doing that and being 85th percentile + in looks.

 

[SW15]

The bar is not low and it has never been low. You will always - since time memorium, have to be a top 20% male.

Men outside the top 20% struggle to get pussie. Getting attention is even difficult for them.

And if you think these chumps in these failed videos represent the top 20% of the male population, then I have news for you.

The chumps in the 2 dates that @Captain Redbeard observed were not top 20% males.

 

[tksniper]

I wou

Men outside the top 20% struggle to get pussie. Getting attention is even difficult for them.



The chumps in the 2 dates that @Captain Redbeard observed were not top 20% males.

l would even go as far to say that men outside the top 20% are responsible for the battle of the sexist, me too movement, radical feminist move, etc.

Case in point, look at the me too movement. All the ugly guys are in prison and the handsome guys have been able to reacurect their image.

I've personally slept with feminists, lesbians who were feminist, and lesbians who were feminists who were trying to get rid of AIDS in Africa(sex with no condom no less).

If you look at Reddit, most women complaints are getting approached from guys they aren't attracted to*.

Why don't they just dress in anything but underwear? Because they still want that attention from the top 20%.

Basically the whole entire world wishes the bottom 80% of males would just disappear. That's the reality.

If you are in the bottem, 80% of males, not just women, but the entire world wishes you would just disappear.

Bottom 80% of males trigger extinction of the human race, so most humans are repulsed by your presence.


Now the million dollar question is "can I go from the bottom 80% to the top 20%? The answer is yes.

Ask that question and you'll be surprised by all the positive and creative responses. Don't delve into the bottom 80%. Let's focus on the top 20%. Maybe I might have some things to say myself on this subject.

 

[Sega Genesis]

Personality is a factor in this but not as important as looks..

Personality is not energy @SW15 , nor are looks, money, status.

Those things are entirely different and separate from the energy/chemistry generating between two people.

And I disagree that for every woman across the board, it's "looks, money, status, and personality." In that order.

Some sure of course. But not all.

Not sure if you've experienced what I'm referring to but energy/chemistry is intangible, when it's happening and it's genuine, often times we don't even know why!

It's that somethin somethin that's simply there between two people and it can be powerful!

Looks, money, status - these things are superficial and have very little to do with genuine energy/chemistry/attraction but if you've never experienced it you'll have no idea what I mean or even talking about!

Which is fair so not gonna debate about it.

We all have different experiences.

 

[Solomon]

Personality is not energy @SW15 , nor is looks, money, status.

Those things are entirely different and separate from the energy/chemistry generating between two people.

And I disagree that for every woman across the board, it's "looks, money, status, and personality." In that order.

Some sure of course. But not all.

Not sure if you've experienced what I'm referring to but energy/chemistry is intangible, when it's happening and it's genuine, often times we don't even know why!

It's that somethin somethin that's simply there between two people and it can be powerful!

Looks, money, status - these things are superficial and have very little to do with genuine energy/chemistry/attraction but if you've never experienced it you'll have no idea what I mean or even talking about!

Which is fair so not gonna debate about it.

We all have different experiences.

You have to understand @SW15 looks at women through an autistic lens, he doesn't understand the metaphysical aspects of game, hence he discounts personality.

Most men who have never experinced "The Spark" with a woman have no clue, but it can't be explained through LMS because it's a level beyond that.

 

[BaronOfHair]

Goes to a point previously discussed

The idea that rejection is nothing personal

So Lebron James should've just pursued his art interests instead of basketball? No idea how you got that from what I wrote. LeBron James feels like he can do anything he wants to do. And part of it is physical abilities but much of it is mental. Plenty of physically gifted athletes never...

www.sosuave.net

The current abysmal view of men can actually be work in our favor

 

[Manure Spherian]

it does happen, it's likely happening to a 6'0"+ fit/muscular man

Where is everyone seeing this lookism?

 

[mbc0029]

The Date 1 guy probably lost from the start. When you said he was desperate, if you're noticing he's desperate, she definitely notices it. Lack of confidence is going to show through. Basically telegraphing he doesn't get it. Doesn't know how to play the game. You're not going to be able to create sexual tension if you're desperate.

The Date 2 guy at least had a chance to get a lay or a second date. If he didn't talk as much, and just let her do most of the talking, he probably wouldn't have come off as obnoxious. Also, the money thing, that's probably not something you want to overtly state. Even if it's obvious you have money by the way you dress or your appearance, she's going to see that anyway. Demonstrate, Don't Explicate.
Seems like the second guy was trying a little bit too hard when he didn't need to.

 

[SW15]

Women initiating touch -- It would be ideal if a woman initiated touch first. That's a high interest sign. In reality, that doesn't happen much. When it does happen, it's likely happening to a 6'0"+ fit/muscular man. If a man doesn't initiate touch, she won't be wondering about him. She'll be scrolling through her swipe queue, her DMs, and maybe text messages from other men. Times have changed. Touch needs to happen on a date and the best way that a man can ensure that there is touch on a date is if he controls that element.

Where is everyone seeing this lookism?

It would be common to see something like this at bars late on Friday/Saturday nights. This seems to be happening less now with fewer bars having a strong approaching culture, but it was common to see in the 2000s-2010s.

One of my friends is a 6'4", White, former NCAA athlete in a country club sport. I went out to the bars with him at times. Before his marriage, he was able to put up a triple digit notch count.

His verbal game was mediocre. When we were going out to bars in the 2010s, I had superior verbal game because I had to do so as a 5'10" male.

However, women reacted more positively to his presence due to his 6'4" height and still having a comparable physique to his NCAA athlete days. This would have included touching. He was able to get a lot of one night stands from bars from having looks and status.

Lookism can also be observed with female swiping patterns.

The Date 1 guy probably lost from the start. When you said he was desperate, if you're noticing he's desperate, she definitely notices it. Lack of confidence is going to show through. Basically telegraphing he doesn't get it. Doesn't know how to play the game. You're not going to be able to create sexual tension if you're desperate.

It is unknown how that date was arranged but it seems likely that it was a swipe app arranged date.

Even in 2025, plenty of men still offer 1st date dinner dates to women off of the swipe apps. The seduction community has told me to avoid dinner date in restaurant first dates for a long time.

This man has recently moved to a new city with a limited to zero social circle and no girlfriend. That's a tough position for finding dates. The only options then are swipe apps, sending social media DMs, and approaching strangers in real life.

He was desperate, likely because of mediocre looks and no social circle.

The Date 2 guy at least had a chance to get a lay or a second date. If he didn't talk as much, and just let her do most of the talking, he probably wouldn't have come off as obnoxious. Also, the money thing, that's probably not something you want to overtly state. Even if it's obvious you have money by the way you dress or your appearance, she's going to see that anyway. Demonstrate, Don't Explicate.
Seems like the second guy was trying a little bit too hard when he didn't need to.

This was likely a guy with money but nothing else. He was overplaying the money card.

 

[BaronOfHair]

This seems to be happening less now with fewer bars having a strong approaching culture, but it was common to see in the 2000s-2010s.

In the 2000s and early 10s, we hadn't yet adopted eternally expanding definitions of "trauma" and "safety". Could it be a coincidence that we were more sociable during those days? That's a greater enigma than wondering:

"If Hilary Clinton hadn't married Bill, would she have ever gotten within 500 yards of The Senate?"

 

[SW15]

In the 2000s and early 10s, we hadn't yet adopted eternally expanding definitions of "trauma" and "safety". Could it be a coincidence that we were more sociable during those days?

Sociability started to decline as the smartphone grew in popularity in the late 2000s/early 2010s. Starting then, it was becoming more common to see people (especially women) playing with their phones, even in bars.

Approaching was still considered a social norm in bars in the 2000s-2010s, even as smartphone ownership grew. It was getting more difficult to compete with the smartphone for attention in bars in the late 2000s/early 2010s, but an approach was more welcomed then if one could compete with the smartphone.

Right now, in 2025, the approach isn't as well perceived. The approach is becoming less common. We have 15-20 years now of interactions starting more from tech methods.

 

[BaronOfHair]

Starting then, it was becoming more common to see people (especially women) playing with their phones, even in bars.

There was a time when the only thing you regularly saw folks playing with in public was themselves, especially on the bus or subway whenever an exceptionally well-developed 8th grader's skirt rode up a little high, on a day where she'd left her panties at home

We never realize how glorious life is, until the era we're unhappy with is replaced by a far more vexatious one

 

[Gamisch]

I'm not surprised at all.

From the days of me going out, till recent times, I have noticed that Men have become SIGNIFICANTLY more passive and just flat out do not know how to talk/seduce Women anymore.

Back in, let's say... 2011 - 2015, There just seemed to be a lot more interaction and guys taking initiative to go up to Women with at least decent "game" but from what I can tell, it has drastically changed.

I'm not sure what has happened, since I haven't been in the singles scene for the past couple of years but for SURE there is a difference.

Because inherently men LOVE to be bluepilled dorks. I've "lost" like at least ten homies to the bluepill agenda, even tho we've spent hours and hours talking about RP shyte. It's quite embarrassing.

Sometimes even on the forum experienced members fall back into their bluepilled hardwired ideology.

The thing is, there will be moment in a woman's life where you can and will get away with it tho...the 1st diner, the lack of a mouth piece ect ect. The first year or two you might feel like " you are such a special man that all the acquired knowledge is important for the next man but not for you". I'm talking broke dudes with no game,no cash, no muscles, years long dryspellls ...

The problem is that she ( unlike he) will s STILL( unconsciously??) keep her eyes open for a better candidate

 

[SW15]

men LOVE to be bluepilled dorks. I've "lost" like at least ten homies to the bluepill agenda, even tho we've spent hours and hours talking about RP shyte. It's quite embarrassing.

Most men in Western nations have a blue pilled ideology towards relationships throughout their lives. This doesn't mean that they are bad men. I think they are misguided men. I have maintained numerous friendships with blue pill ideology men. There is an ongoing thread about how I'm relating to my mainly blue pill ideology friends and acquaintances that I've met since moving to my current city.

https://www.sosuave.net/forum/threa...ll-social-circle-starts-having-babies.275901/

experienced members fall back into their bluepilled hardwired ideology.

I have seen this hardcore with one of my friends. I wonder if he was ever red pill. This is a man who put up a triple digit notch count prior to marriage and then transformed into a typical beta male. I think he always had that blue pill ideology, but he was able to cover it up well enough due to his looks (6'4", White, in shape) and his status (NCAA athlete). Before he met his current wife, more of his interactions were shorter term. He went full beta male once he reached a 1 year relationship with a woman.

When he observing the multitude of marriages in our social circle + the multitude of marriages from his high school and college friends, he felt that he had to copy their life choices.

The problem is that she ( unlike he) will s STILL( unconsciously??) keep her eyes open for a better candidate

Hypergamy is ongoing.