What I believe is required if you want to be REALLY successful with women

[BPH]

I recently got done reading The Art of Seduction by Robert Greene after receiving the recommendation from @BeExcellent . It's a great, albeit very long read, and I suggest everybody give it a look when you have several hours/days to kill. It's easy enough to find online for free, so I won't bother with a link.

Anyway, this book had me doing some introspection, and helped me identify patterns and behaviors that the book described as they happened to me in real time. This also led to my current opinion on what I believe is necessary if you want to be REALLY successful with women...

It's NOT going to the gym...

And it's NOT learning how to cold approach...

Those are great VEHICLES to achieve success, but I believe the mindset you need to have is this:

You need to LOVE women.

You might read that and think to yourself, "Well, obviously I love women, that's why I'm on a seduction forum - I want to get laid more and have more girlfriends", but it goes beyond that.

A lot of men found their way to this forum in many different ways; maybe a girl broke your heart, and you wanted her back/to get back at her. Maybe there's the "one that got away" and you want to never make that mistake again. Maybe you feel inadequate, and you need the validation of somebody else to feel good enough about yourself.

Whatever the reason may be, the commonality for a lot of members on this board is that they have some chip on their shoulder, some slight they received, where they believe the way to rectify that is by becoming proficient in this area of their lives. For me, it was because I saw everybody around me getting into long-term relationships with average women where sex was withheld for years, then only offered again as a gift for good behavior. I saw that, and decided that I didn't want that for myself - I wanted to be the one doing the choosing.

Getting back on track...what I've noticed is that while a lot of people on this forum "want" success with women, there seems to be a significant population that detests them, dislikes them, and wants to feel superior to them.

That mindset is not a recipe for success.

As with the gym, or a diet, or anything long-term, it requires a LIFESTYLE change. I believe getting good with women requires you to understand they are flawed, understand they can be terrible, and understand they are human - then to accept those facts while still seeing the positives and having the desire to include them in your life. Accept them as they are, and make adjustments in yourself - not demands of the world to match your ideal.

Not a lot of us start with that mindset. I sure didn't. Read my journal. The very first post where I detailed my goals I described one of them being along the lines of "f*** anything that moves". I saw women as objects for my validation. The way I speak about women now and the way that I interact with them presently is very different from how I behaved then.

If this is a long-term goal of yours, to get REALLY REALLY good at seducing, sleeping with, and entering relationships with multiple women, then I firmly believe this mindset is necessary. It is what I believe to be a significant factor in why I've achieved the level of success I have, despite my laughable circumstances otherwise.

I'll leave you all with this quote from The Art of Seduction by Errol Flynn. I believe his philosophy is most similar to mine, and he achieved goals similar to the ones I'd set for myself (though with him being a celebrity up until his death, his conquests number in the thousands, compared to my 101). If you can embody this quote, I believe that you can be fully present and fully enjoy the woman in front of you, leading to more success. I will post it in its entirety and underline what I feel is most important:

"I missed the mental stimulation when I was younger," he answered. "But from the time I began to have women, shall we say, on the assembly-line basis, I discovered that the only thing you need, want, or should have is the absolutely physical. Simply the physical. No mind at all. A woman's mind will get in the way." • "Really?" • "For me . . . I am speaking of myself. I don't speak for male humankind. I am speaking for what I've discovered or what I need: the body, the face, the physical motion, the voice, the femaleness, the female presence . . . totally that, nothing else. That's the best. There's no possessiveness in that." • I watched him closely. • "I'm serious," he said. "That's my view and feeling. Just the elementary physical female. Nothing more than that. When you get hold of that—hang on to it, for a short while."

—EARL CONRAD, ERROL FLYNN: A MEMOIR

 

[CornbreadFed]

To be honest, I think a lot of men online are just venting or saying things because they are getting paid to do it. I seriously doubt many of them actually live the way they preach. They talk a lot of talk, but are not walking the walk for sure. The deeper issue is this: many men have been conditioned to hide who they truly are around women. We either become a fake, robotic version of ourselves trying to force some kind of masculine frame, or we swing the other way and turn into awkward, bitter, and boring people stuck in isolation. We were told that if we were genuine, we would be ignored or pushed into the friend zone. But that was never the real problem. The real problem was being trapped in a scarcity mindset, focused on one woman as if she were our only chance. Just because one woman does not like you does not mean all women feel that way. But we let a few opinions shape how we see ourselves. We let a handful of hard rejections turn us into closed off men who cannot build real emotional connections that last. I know, because that used to be me. I spent most of my twenties living like that. It took a painful breakup with my ex-girlfriend to finally wake me up. I was not being authentic. I was just performing.

The truth is, you do not need to chase validation. You need to be yourself, build a real life, and stop letting rejection define your worth. Rejection is not the end. It is the start of clarity.

 

[BaronOfHair]

You need to LOVE women.

NEED/Have to? No. Is it preferable for you to do so? Absof-c-inglutely!!! Otherwise, dating and mating will be tantamount to pursuing a career in plastic surgery, primairly for the money... Yeah, you may be materially successful, but the amount of satisfaction you derive from your pursuits will be neglible-nonexistent


"Read my journal"

I tried, hoss... The nightmares began after consuming a few recollections of your step-dad taking you across the border into Tijuana as an 8 year old, to star in those "independent films", where you were made to do things with a donkey or seven. Call me a softie, but I couldn't find the fortitude to continue reading afterwards...

 

[BPH]

"Read my journal"

I tried, hoss... The nightmares began after consuming a few recollections of your step-dad taking you across the border into Tijuana as an 8 year old, to star in those "independent films", where you were made to do things with a donkey or seven. Call me a softie, but I couldn't find the fortitude to continue reading afterwards...

At least a solid 75% of the time (conservatively) I have no idea what you're talking about...

 

[Manure Spherian]

"I missed the mental stimulation when I was younger," he answered. "But from the time I began to have women, shall we say, on the assembly-line basis, I discovered that the only thing you need, want, or should have is the absolutely physical. Simply the physical. No mind at all. A woman's mind will get in the way." • "Really?" • "For me . . . I am speaking of myself. I don't speak for male humankind. I am speaking for what I've discovered or what I need: the body, the face, the physical motion, the voice, the femaleness, the female presence . . . totally that, nothing else. That's the best. There's no possessiveness in that." • I watched him closely. • "I'm serious," he said. "That's my view and feeling. Just the elementary physical female. Nothing more than that. When you get hold of that—hang on to it, for a short while."

Pretty much a guy who just wanted to screw lots of women, and did, and didn’t care for women beyond that. He did not love women as a whole or love one in particular, but was beholden to them, as many “Chads” are. He seemed very effeminate, as many Chads and Red Pillers are.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Acceptance that all of this is a numbers game and that no single interaction with a woman should be considered overly important needs to be part of it...

Mindset is where most men fail. They tie their self worth to being rejected once or twice and allow it to devastate them to the point they give up instead of seeing it for what it is, a numbers game that requires you to go thru that to get the results you want eventually and create incremental improvements so that the rejections becomes less and the successes becomes more over time.

 

[BPH]

Pretty much a guy who just wanted to screw lots of women, and did, and didn’t care for women beyond that. He did not love women as a whole or love one in particular, but was beholden to them, as many “Chads” are. He seemed very effeminate, as many Chads and Red Pillers are.

Not quite...he was married 3 times; twice for 7 years, then died 9 years into his third marriage.

Feel free to read the book; it describes how he was perfectly willing to play the long game to be with women he really enjoyed. The point of the quote is to show that he was able to appreciate the essence of what a woman is, without overcomplicating things.

 

[Bokanovsky]

You need to LOVE women.

It's a beguiling idea that makes sense on the surface but doesn't survive logical scrutiny. Just because you love something doesn't mean you will ever be good at it. You may love cars but that doesn't make you a good mechanic. You may love movies but that won't make you a successful cinematographer. You may love punching people in the face but that doesn't mean you have what it takes to be a professional boxer. You get the idea.

Being successful at something (and that includes interactions with women) is a product of three factors: talent, skill and persistence. "Love" is not a prerequisite. There are men out there who despise and abuse women and still manage to be good seducers (pimps would be a good example of this ). I agree that being outwardly bitter and hateful towards women is counterproductive. But I think you are confusing "love" with "charm". Those are two vastly different concepts. You can love women all you want but if you don't know how to charm them, you are sh!t out of luck (most "blue pill" folks fall in this category). Conversely, your charm doesn't not have to come from a place of genuine "love" to be successful on women. They fall for all sorts of losers and charlatans all the time.

 

[BPH]

It's a beguiling idea that makes sense on the surface but doesn't survive logical scrutiny. Just because you love something doesn't mean you will ever be good at it. You may love cars but that doesn't make you a good mechanic. You may love movies but that won't make you a successful cinematographer. You may love punching people in the face but that doesn't mean you have what it takes to be a professional boxer. You get the idea.

Loving something means you are willing to be bad at it long enough to become good at it. Steve Jobs had the quote: "The only way to do great work is to love what you do.”

Being successful at something (and that includes interactions with women) is a product of three factors: talent, skill and persistence.

In trying to debunk my point, I think you're actually reinforcing it. Correct, you need those 3 things to be successful...so do you think you're likely to endure the learning curve of developing these skills if you don't love the reason why you're developing them?

And while there are certainly losers and charlatans who see success from time to time based on a variety of factors, that is why I emphasized "REALLY" when it came to being successful.

 

[Bokanovsky]

In trying to debunk my point, I think you're actually reinforcing it. Correct, you need those 3 things to be successful...so do you think you're likely to endure the learning curve of developing these skills if you don't love the reason why you're developing them?

Yes. In my professional work, I had to learn to do certain things that I initially hated (and still don't particularly enjoy doing). Yet, I have become very good at them.

 

[BPH]

Yes. In my professional work, I had to learn to do certain things that I initially hated (and still don't particularly enjoy doing). Yet, I have become very good at them.

Good does not equate to great.

The most popular post over in the Mature Man subforum is asking members what their body count is, it's even pinned.

Many guys have a low count. Quite a few guys are in the low-mid double digits. Even fewer are approaching triple digits. And only a small fraction are into the triple digits - some of which admit to having low standards or settling for prostitutes.

I am among that small fraction. Now, you may have a different metric of "success" when it comes to women, but I think body count would certainly be one of, if not the most universal metric. And I believe a significant contributing factor as to why I've achieved that, despite my living arrangement, despite my income, despite everything, is because I simply love women.

I'm not demonizing them for their body count.

I'm not disqualifying them based on their socioeconomic standing.

I'm not "dating down", so I feel I have the power in the relationship.

I'm just either attracted to, or not attracted to the woman in front of me, and I let the interaction play out (or die out) based on that, and almost exclusively that.

 

[Clockwerk50]

Around age 20, I encountered The Art of Seduction and The 48 Laws of Power through a gym friend who practiced a calculated, often cruel, form of manipulation. He'd text a girl three times then ghost on the fourth to make her miss him, or call her out and hang up abruptly if she annoyed him. He'd give small gifts, like a teddy bear, early on to implant himself in her thoughts. He'd also accept invites only to cancel last-minute, then spend the night texting her, and even used Instagram to declare he wouldn't be anyone's second option.

I initially found The Art of Seduction boring and struggled to apply its teachings. Whenever I liked a girl, I'd flip through its chapters, desperately trying to figure out "the process" and my next move, but I consistently misjudged situations and messed things up.

Three specific failures still stand out. First, I ruined it with a hotel receptionist by going in for a kiss just five minutes into our first hangout, demonstrating poor timing and social awareness. Second, when I was close to sleeping with a girl from Guess, I prematurely acted like her boyfriend by repeatedly picking her up from work. This led her to want to slow things down, though I mistakenly broke up with her first. Finally, after a girl I was sleeping with didn't text me during or after clubbing, I followed my friend's advice to ghost her until she initiated contact three times. She reached out twice, but I accidentally pocket-dialed her, ruining the relationship. In each case, my misapplication of "seduction" tactics or general insecurity led to failure.

Later, after becoming sexually active, I reread the book, and it clicked. Here are the main lessons I now apply:

• You can’t seduce everyone. The person has to be open to influence. The book mentions subtle cues, blushing, dropping something, as signs of interest. It also points out that unhappy or people with a lot of time in their hands are easier to pull in. My friend’s girl wanted him from the start, his tactics only worked because the door was already open.
• Everyone has a need. Whether it’s feeling desired again, escaping boredom, proving they’re more than just looks, feeling important, exploring sexually, or wanting to be the one in control, seduction works by tapping into those unmet desires. If you can spot the need, and you’re after power, sex, or attention, you’ll know which angle to play and manipulate the other party.
• You can’t be ordinary. Once you have their interest, you need to stand out—be ****y, stuck up, passionate, dangerous, romantic. No one falls for average or bland.
• Effort matters. Planning something thoughtful goes a long way. It’s not always about the gesture itself, but what it says about how invested you are. Timing matters since you need to know if the person is falling for you. If it is done early they will flee.
• Avoid anti-seductive traits. Neediness, reactivity, and insecurity kill attraction fast. As you mentioned to someone else, archetypes like The Reactor or The Brute are instant turn-offs. Some guys freeze up even when a girl is clearly into them, sometimes she’s putting it all out there, even dressing provocatively to get his attention, but they’re too self-conscious to act. That hesitation usually comes from insecurity, and it ruins the moment. Some are stingy, have no style/swag, speak a lot about themselves, etc.
• Seduction doesn’t stop after sex. Chapter 24 covers this. The introduction, examples 1,3, and 4, and their interpretations show how to maintain intrigue and energy afterward. If you stop putting in effort, the connection fades. I still apply that lesson all the time so my plates continue spinning longer than usual. Maybe you should check these out.

This advice might not be for everyone, especially those already successful like yourself with so many notches. However, the chapter on anti-seductive traits is a must-read, as it covers crucial information often overlooked, like the importance of not "spliting the bill" with someone you want to know at a romantic level.

 

[Bokanovsky]

Many guys have a low count. Quite a few guys are in the low-mid double digits. Even fewer are approaching triple digits. And only a small fraction are into the triple digits - some of which admit to having low standards or settling for prostitutes.

I am among that small fraction. Now, you may have a different metric of "success" when it comes to women, but I think body count would certainly be one of, if not the most universal metric.

A high count is not impressive in and of itself. For 99% of "high count guys", their high count goes hand in hand with low standards. They are banging chicks that lower count guys would not touch. There is no glory in reaching for the low-hanging fruit.

Very, very few men have a triple digit count with 8's and 9's. Such men are typically A-list celebrities, rock stars, political and economic elites in developing countries, the rare heterosexual male model, etc.

 

[BPH]

The 48 Laws of Power

Is that really such a good read? I'd heard of it but never really considered it. I was originally going to read The Game, but now that I understand that it's more of a PUA memoir rather than something instructional like how The Art of Seduction was, I don't have as much interest.

Maybe you should check these out.

I'll let you know when I have plates to spin again

A high count is not impressive in and of itself. For 99% of "high count guys", their high count goes hand in hand with low standards. They are banging chicks that lower count guys would not touch. There is no glory in reaching for the low-hanging fruit.

Very, very few men have a triple digit count with 8's and 9's. Such men are typically A-list celebrities, rock stars, political and economic elites in developing countries, the rare heterosexual male model, etc.

I agree with this statement. I have a few friends with the "any hole's the goal" mindset, and I cannot relate. Like in my statement above, I need to be attracted to the women I'm with - I can't fake that, nor do I want to.

Most of my friends have lower standards than me. And although I haven't had LONG dry spells, I do have them, like right now it's been maybe a month and a half, and it's precisely because I DON'T go for the low-hanging fruit. Granted, the women who I consider "hot" here wouldn't compare to women who are "hot" in say LA or Miami, but I am very happy with the quality of the women I've been with, in addition to the quantity.

 

[Bokanovsky]

Most of my friends have lower standards than me. And although I haven't had LONG dry spells, I do have them, like right now it's been maybe a month and a half, and it's precisely because I DON'T go for the low-hanging fruit. Granted, the women who I consider "hot" here wouldn't compare to women who are "hot" in say LA or Miami, but I am very happy with the quality of the women I've been with, in addition to the quantity.

Why do you even keep score? Like, what's the point? I stopped counting after 15 or so. If you have a triple digit count, how do you even remember all the girls you've slept with? Do you keep a journal with their names and photos?

The other day, I saw a woman on the street that I thought looked vaguely familiar. It wasn't until later that day that it dawned on me that we had been intimate.

 

[BPH]

Why do you even keep score? Like, what's the point? I stopped counting after 15 or so. If you have a triple digit count, how do you even remember all the girls you've slept with? Do you keep a journal with their names and photos?

The other day, I saw a woman on the street that I thought looked vaguely familiar. It wasn't until later that day that it dawned on me that we had been intimate.

I'm generally pretty organized and like keeping track of things, including my notch count. I don't run up the score for any particular reason other than that I enjoy multiple women and have no interest in settling down anytime soon.

I used to remember names, but unless somebody was particularly memorable in some way, I don't recall a significant portion. I know some people keep spreadsheets, Google Docs, journals, etc, I don't do any of that. I have twin cousins and a friend of theirs who created a Snapchat group with the group name being our body counts, so now I quite literally update that to keep track now

 

[DonJefe19]

Is that really such a good read? I'd heard of it but never really considered it. I was originally going to read The Game, but now that I understand that it's more of a PUA memoir rather than something instructional like how The Art of Seduction was, I don't have as much interest.

You're probably thinking Rules of the Game - That one was more of a guide. That was my introduction to the PUA stuff but it also made me not like it at the same time. I even think Neil had even advised at the end of the challenge that becoming a pick up artist wasn't really the goal.

 

[BPH]

You're probably thinking Rules of the Game - That one was more of a guide. That was my introduction to the PUA stuff but it also made not like it at the same time.

I saw that when I searched for it, but I couldn't find a free version online, so I didn't bother looking too much harder.

 

[DonJefe19]

I saw that when I searched for it, but I couldn't find a free version online, so I didn't bother looking too much harder.

Yeah, Neil ain't making that free. He's still living off the royalties

 

[Clockwerk50]

Is that really such a good read? I'd heard of it but never really considered it. I was originally going to read The Game, but now that I understand that it's more of a PUA memoir rather than something instructional like how The Art of Seduction was, I don't have as much interest.

I read The Game in my 20s. It honestly felt more like historical fiction than an instructional book. The author spends a lot of time describing his lifestyle—where he lived, what the bootcamps were like, how he slept with women and had threesomes, that kind of thing. It’s more of a memoir than a practical guide.

The 48 Laws of Power is useful, but it’s really more suited for corporate or highly political environments. The lessons are things like:

• Make sure your subordinates do the work while you take the credit.
• Position yourself as the perfect courier so people rely on you for favours.
• Don’t appear too perfect because you’ll attract random enemies.
• Let your peers feel smarter so you have more room to maneuver.

If you’re not working in an office or a space where you need to be politically savvy, it’s not essential—unless you’re looking to subtly control your friends or family, which is its own game.

I’d actually recommend The Laws of Human Nature. It’s a much better read because it focuses on understanding people. It’s about seeing how flawed and irrational we all are, including yourself, and learning how to navigate that. It helps you read others, understand hidden motivations, and manage your own weaknesses. It’s less about manipulation and more about deep insight, which makes it useful in every part of life.