Next Monday you'll feel more confident. After the gym you'll feel more confident. After one more drink you'll feel more confident. After you get a better haircut, a better jacket, a better job.
You've been "getting ready" for two years.
She's standing ten feet away right now. She'll be gone in four minutes. No amount of preparation will manufacture the courage that only comes from moving your feet.
Walk over. Stumble through the first sentence. Let it be clumsy. Let it be imperfect. You will feel more alive in those ten seconds than you have all month.
Attraction runs on a clock.
She flirted for weeks. Touched your arm. Found reasons to be alone with you. And you were careful. Respectful. Waiting for the right moment.
The moment had a shelf life. It expired around month two, and by the time you asked her out, she'd quietly filed you under "little brother."
One of the hardest lessons inside the 22 Rules: women rarely wait. Interest either grows or it decays, and nothing decays it faster than a man who never moves.
Make the move while she's still inventing reasons to be near you.
JackRobin said:foreign women and American women included
if you were to average it out, what do you think the range would be?
I am going to 40-45 women
You've replayed it a hundred times. She stood three feet away, scrolling her phone. You had an opening. You composed the perfect line — after she was gone.
For all you know, she's married now. To some guy who said something. Anything.
Openers are cheap. Almost any sentence works when it's delivered within three seconds. The expensive part is the standing there, drafting and deleting, while the window quietly closes.
The "22 Rules" stripped out my hesitation. What to open with, how to keep it alive, and the one habit that costs guys more women than anything else: waiting for perfect.
6237 adults is not a large enough sample pool imo to gauge this.JackRobin said:
I find it very representativeCrashOverRide said:6237 adults is not a large enough sample pool imo to gauge this.
Nutrition? Where is the nutritive part of sex? You suppose that the people surveyed were tricked into cooperating with a government peek into their sex lives by the surveyors calling it a "nutrition exam?" Personally, if I were asked to participate in a "nutrition survey," and they started asking about my sex life, I would feel irritated and would just click 'A' 'A' 'A' 'A' through that section.The survey, formally titled the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, did not include the homeless, prisons inmates or other institutionalized adults.
Your buddy Dave has been single for three years and thinks "hey u up" is a valid strategy. Your other buddy Mike just got dumped and told you to "just be yourself."
You showed them her text. You asked them to decode the emoji. You drafted four responses and sent the screenshot to the group chat for a vote.
She's been waiting forty minutes.
Put the phone down. Stop crowdsourcing your love life. Type something that sounds like you. Hit send. Then go do literally anything else with your evening.
I believe that the overconfidence bias is systemic by nature, so one can probably assume that this number is biased in the higher direction. In other words, everyone lies, but lies roughly the same. If a guy says he slept with 15 women, the reality is that they probably forgot a few (and rounded up), or counted encounters that weren't sex as sex, again rounding up. The reality is that people who claim 10-15 are probably more like 8 or 9, those claiming less than 10 are probably at 3-5 etc. (rough estimations, I have no real data to back this). However you can assume EVERYONE lies about it and generally drop a few numbers.Plutoman said:I don't believe for one moment 29% of guys sleep with 15 or more women. That's a ridiculous statement.