Revelations

[Playboy]

I know that revelations is by venusian arts and that it is not generally the method of choice on this forum. I wanted to bring up a question that the material brough to my awareness though and see what you guys thought about it.

In the program it talks about the "zen of cool" which is a balance of yin/yang energy. This is an extension of being unreactive towards others while also leading and projecting value as a man.

The big thing that has me a bit confused is the all popular high value vs low value guy that the VA/MM people are so focused on.

While many other schools of seduction tend to lean towards genuine or even direct and sexual approaches, these guys say that anything that shows interest is like proclaiming to the girl that YOU have lower value than HER.

To go up and show intent or interest is statistically not in your favor, especially in bars. Why? Your already going to be a bit suspect for approaching in the first place under nuetral conditions (cold approach, no social proof, no girl on your arm) To then follow it up by showing interest is saying that you firmly place this woman as higher value than you and basically equates to "I like you, do you like me?"

The program basically compares this to kindegarden tactics and blasts it as very basic and low value, the kind of thing that can blow you out with ALL the women around you, particularly when the woman rejects you, which STATISTICALLY is likely to happen.

So what do you direct and genuine guru's have to say about that? They feel that doing that is coming up like you WANT something. Your not GIVING value your just out for something from some girl you don't even know. This makes her put her guard up and makes her uncomfortable. That's the entire basis of their argument.

They even go so far as to shoot down the biggest argument that direct and genuine teachers have used against them. The biggest argument that could be said is that a woman already KNOWS why your talking to her, and trying to be cool or indirect about it only makes you come off inauthentic, wimpy, or manipulative. They say that while the woman may have an idea that you like her, when delivered correctly and done right, there will be what they call "plausible deniability". What Plausible deniability means is that she may think you MIGHT be interested in her, but there is doubt in her mind. Kind of like how to convict a juror cannot have reasonable doubt. They say by instilling reasonable doubt in her mind that you create intrique and curiousity, things go smoother and you are better able to display who you are without her mind being preoccupied with ways to get rid of you. It also makes them feel safer and more comfortable.

Even better is they say that actually living the frame that you are presenting and REALLY not need anything from her and just having fun without hitting on her brings value. They have a system to know when the time is right to take it to a new level. They also argue this gives YOU time to get to know HER and if you even want to get involved.

So this really seems to add up. I want to hear from the direct and genuine guys who play into the roles of a womans suspicions and just own up to it immediately. Why do you feel this is a better way than all that I just outlined? Is it because it's simpler? Is it because your in loud clubs and cant get to know girls that well or have a in depth conversation with them? Is it because you just don't give a **** and are lazy and live in a part of the country where there are so many targets that you can just go up to girl after girl, moving from club to club until you find a girl that is easy enough to go home with you?

What gives?? Understand that I do appreciate direct game, in fact I practice it. I LIKE direct game. It's just that this revelations stuff just adds up so much better for being the kind of way a woman would most appreciate or want for an interaction to go with a stranger she just met. Seems direct game is kind of like shooting in the dark compared to this.

 

[Playboy]

Wow! No one has a responce to this? That speaks volumes.

 

[The Texas Tornado]

Mystery Method obviously works. Direct game obviously works. There are a lot of valid ways to game. I personally am a HUGE fan of the mystery method teachings but I apply the model to direct/semi-direct game.

Some people prefer direct game because of simplicity. Some people just don't like to hide their intentions and like the idea of just going up and going for what you want in a completely upfront, honest way. Also direct game eliminates a lot of complications and makes things a lot simpler because you don't have to feign disinterest, run much game, or do a whole rack of things that indirect game requires.

 

[Playboy]

Mystery Method obviously works. Direct game obviously works. There are a lot of valid ways to game. I personally am a HUGE fan of the mystery method teachings but I apply the model to direct/semi-direct game.

Some people prefer direct game because of simplicity. Some people just don't like to hide their intentions and like the idea of just going up and going for what you want in a completely upfront, honest way. Also direct game eliminates a lot of complications and makes things a lot simpler because you don't have to feign disinterest, run much game, or do a whole rack of things that indirect game requires.

These are all good points and I agree. Thing is that it seems the direct guy may have it simpler in his "approach" but he has to work a lot harder to get anywhere, be relentless, be thick skinned, and be persistant. He must open more girls in order to land one than someone who masters indirect as indirect done right is what more women on average respond to. Also it seems direct will not necessarily lead to hot women, Im sure it can, but your probably a bit constrained by your looks and style relative to hers.

 

[speakeasy]

Just because you approach doesn't mean you are automatically going to be seen as lower in value. You may be equal in value to her. Obviously someone has to initiate some conversation for something to happen. I do believe though that you need that tension. You need to not come off as the needy guy who once he opens acts like he is going to hang on her like a leech for the rest of the night. That's why I think Mystery's false time-constraint method is clever. You automatically add whatever value you might have lost simply by approaching. You have shown that you might walk away any moment.

 

[Playboy]

Just because you approach doesn't mean you are automatically going to be seen as lower in value. You may be equal in value to her. Obviously someone has to initiate some conversation for something to happen. I do believe though that you need that tension. You need to not come off as the needy guy who once he opens acts like he is going to hang on her like a leech for the rest of the night. That's why I think Mystery's false time-constraint method is clever. You automatically add whatever value you might have lost simply by approaching. You have shown that you might walk away any moment.

This TOO is true.

Thing is -- for a long time I have wanted to introduce a more direct style of game. Why? I lean back, I walk away, I look around -- IM NOT NEEDY. I tease - I bust balls - I even piss chicks off royal - I tell it like it is. Im a bit too much of a challenge and an emotional whirlwind.

Soooo

It just seems the direct thing would be a good new ingrediant to make the rest of it more powerful, give her more reason to want to keep my interest. It's harder for her to do that if she feels she is trying to keep something she never had.

After watching revelations though, it makes it sound as if direct is real bad and low value -- perhaps that advice is for noobs or maybe not.

 

[speakeasy]

This TOO is true.

Thing is -- for a long time I have wanted to introduce a more direct style of game. Why? I lean back, I walk away, I look around -- IM NOT NEEDY. I tease - I bust balls - I even piss chicks off royal - I tell it like it is. Im a bit too much of a challenge and an emotional whirlwind.

Soooo

It just seems the direct thing would be a good new ingrediant to make the rest of it more powerful, give her more reason to want to keep my interest. It's harder for her to do that if she feels she is trying to keep something she never had.

After watching revelations though, it makes it sound as if direct is real bad and low value -- perhaps that advice is for noobs or maybe not.

Direct game could work too, but it depends on your vibe and what kind of girls you are targetting. If you are a Tommy Lee type of guy and you are approaching slutty porn-star looking women, direct game would be the way to go. Direct game is going to turn off a woman of substance. They want to know you are interested in them for more than their bodies. So it's best to warm such girls up with some general conversation first.

 

[The Texas Tornado]

direct game is not entirely dependent on looks. there are many things that attract women and many different ways to do it. indirect game relies on building high value through DHV'ing, etc, which is a valid way to do it. direct game builds attraction by opening with confidence and boldness and dominance. these are all traits that women are instinctively attracted to. thus i know average looking people who have succeeded doing direct game

 

[Playboy]

direct game is not entirely dependent on looks. there are many things that attract women and many different ways to do it. indirect game relies on building high value through DHV'ing, etc, which is a valid way to do it. direct game builds attraction by opening with confidence and boldness and dominance. these are all traits that women are instinctively attracted to. thus i know average looking people who have succeeded doing direct game

My instinct is that with social proof you can probably pull a girl that is of equal value using direct, and once in a while one that is better. So a 5 guy can pull a 7 once in a while with it. I just feel there are some major direct things missing from my game and that I should work on it if for nothing else but the practice.