• S E X
    L O V E +
    R E L A T I O N S H I P S


    ❤️ Welcome Guest! ❤️


    Posting Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • SLR Moderators: Senior Staff

Do players' tactics work on the vast majority of women, or only a subset of them?

Completely besides the point.... but, don't you think your problems currently facing you might have something to do with this statement/representation of a mindset of yours?

I'm not sure if I understand your question but let me see if I can take a shot. I had some things occur in my life several years ago and it changed my personality. I lost a lot of confidence and decided that chasing one night stands was no longer a priority. I'm a grad student and am very focused on school so I rarely go out and don't have many close friends anymore.

If anything, now I'd rather find "the one," settle down, and get married. I don't really see that happening though because I essentially took myself off the market to focus on my studies. After I finish my Master's next summer I plan on moving to another state to continue with school to get a PhD. Since I know I will be moving in less than a year, I don't even bother trying to meet girls because who wants to start a relationship with a guy who will be leaving the state in a few months?

I used to have an athletic build, but was more on the scrawny side. That statement you quoted was mainly a semi-humorous way of saying that, at the time I was a player, I was fully aware that my personality got me laid more than my looks. I had friends who would go to the gym so they could look good and impress girls. Having a buff body was never in my bag of tricks.

Did I answer your question?

I think I took three paragraphs to basically say: Though I still avoid the gym, I don't have the same mindset that I used to have. Somewhere between then and now I quit caring about sex so much.
 
No I know, but I mean about going to the gym for your own reasons, ya know? For the exercise. :)
I'm just pointing out that perhaps if you had done that you'd have a foundation more solid and substantive than what a series of actions/reactions designed to feed one purpose provides.

Don't get me wrong, I'm lazy as all hell, as my post count attests. I'm not attempting to take a jab at you or anyone, no one should tell another how to live. I'm just saying that men,of which I hardly qualify, should have their own purposes so that they may be directed by an inner will less fickle than the whims of circumstance. Perhaps if you get to doing things more for their own sake, and less for the purposes of sheer manipulation or external influence, you'd feel more at ease with yourself?

The difference between "the game" and fishing is that most people's egos aren't as intimately intertwined with the results of fishing, but patience and playing the numbers game is key to both. Imagine how silly it'd be if people felt too rejected by the fish to cast out another line? How would the New England settlers have ever gotten off the ground? Let alone hunters on the Serengeti where the prey can kick you in the face or worse....sorry Noodle...
 
I think that for a lot of women (though I refuse to give a shot-in-the-dark estimate) it is indeed easy to get in their pants, particularly unattached ones, given the right "tools". I knew a man who boasted that he could screw just about any woman he had an interest in, just by noting their attire, posture, habits, etc., and tailoring his hits to mesh with their interests, a trick he was especially fond of pulling on women already in relationships. I would've called it bullshit, had he not done it to a mutual friend, and he spoke with the kind of glibness that I've come to associate with potentially dangerous individuals.
 
I appreciate everybody's responses.

I think in my original post, I might have been asking the wrong questions for analyzing this topic. It's kind of like asking, "What percentages of kids do toy ads work on?" or "What are the chances of a liberal arts college changing the thinking patterns of any given American adolescent?" The answers to all of these, including the subject line of this thread, are highly contingent on one person or group of persons' ability to understand the thought processes and motivations of another. I think this is really at the core of influencing people in any way -- understand what drives them (but don't let them know just how deeply you understand it!), and then play into it. Once you've earned their trust, you can slowly convince them to do things they wouldn't have originally been willing to do for you. I call it manipulation, rather than the neutral term influence, when the motivations are entirely selfish.

I guess I was always just a stickler for authenticity, which makes me a piss-poor manipulator. I can talk about almost anything with almost anyone, and am pretty good at seeing the good in most people. But exploiting somebody's weaknesses, and feigning values I don't really possess, crosses a pretty clear line for me. Which brings my to my next point. Jerry Atrick, I find it interesting when you say that during the time that you were a player, every move you made pointed toward getting laid, and you describe it as being a full time job. This contradicts conventional wisdom that an attractive man is one who doesn't need women, because he's got a rich enough life without one, and draws confidence from this nonchalance. Would you say that for the serious player, this nonchalance is actually just a gentlemanly facade, masking a mind that focuses on really nothing but getting boinked? Because I'll tell you, call me a misguided nerd, but the idea of building my whole life around getting laid never did much for me, no matter how much my loins ached.

I think I was also afraid that if I got good at analyzing women's (or any other people's) motivations, I wouldn't like most of what I saw, and would lose the idealism and faith in humanity that drive me.

CoffeeDrinker, yes, guilty as charged. Seeing dudes with motivations and principles rather contrary to mine getting rewarded handsomely (no pun intended) in ways I wasn't, was long a source of great existential angst for me. Although it doesn't really apply to me personally anymore, I recently realized that whether or not, and how, I make peace with this issue will have a great effect on what I tell my son when he asks me about girls.
 
i believe its possible for ALL women (and men) to be charmed by a charming personality and someone who says everything the ego needs to hear/pushes all the right buttons; some will continue to be hypnotized by the way those actions make them feel and become hooked, regardless of obvious warning signs; and others will build defenses at the first hint of bullshit; and continue building a wall and growing stoic toward that person and their advances.

i personally fall into category number 2. as the OP mentioned, i too am moreso stimulated by genuine personalities and confidence/equally matched with humility. "players" lack substance, and are very easy to detect. they dont want substance nor for you to fall in love with them, its the lure of the chase that they are seeking. say something genuine and complimentary to them, and watch them run a mile. if they think for one moment your intentions are greater than theirs or that you are seeking stability/comfort/returned appraisal from them; they will move on to the next person, etc. ad nauseam.

dont hate the player, hate the game? why hate someone who already doubts themselves; and has to resort to playing games to get others attention?

...kytnism...:|
 
Bullshit. Only if a woman goes out interested in being picked up. I can honestly say I get hit on a lot but I'm not the sort that goes out for attention. I go out to have fun so no, never been played as such.
 
Kytnism, you do make a good point about the inherent shallowness of game players. I think participating in "the game" (for either sex) feels most fun and natural for people who've been brought up to keep their public and private personas well delineated, and let very, very few people see their true inner selves. It doesn't surprise me when I hear about religious, political, or business leaders, and other people "in the public eye" getting caught in sex scandals. People like this must be so used to creating a rich public facade that hides their private life entirely, that creating another one to prowl for sex must come very easily.
 
some people look to their associations with others to define their own character, others look inward, instead. some may even vascillate between both approaches at various points in their life. all these so-called players ever did was identify a need/role in these womens' lives (or evenings) and played the part. whether they fit the part was clearly another matter altogether. if women were gullible or willing enough to sleep with them at the drop of a hat, then each of them got what they deserved. it takes a fair bit of effort to contrive your act time and again to suit the aims of different women. obviously these women failed to do their own research on such individuals to have considered the possibility that they were being played.

anyway, the analysing the psychodynamics of these scenarios seem like a pointless discussion - as I believe all unions (before meeting a life partner) happen perchance and any outcome from which correlates entirely with the individuals' mindset at any given point in time. that's not to say other people are merely pawns of our own minds, exactly, but we all invite certain influences towards us, either wittingly or unwittingly at any given point. and, depending on where we're at, we will deal with them in the requisite manner (so long as we can accept liability for their presence to begin wth).
 
^ Awesome post, hyroller. That sheds a lot of light.

I think it could be put this way: Charmers' chances of charming people into doing what they want depends on A) How accurately they gauge what role the other person would enjoy seeing them play, and B) How convincingly they play that role.
 
Precisely.

And let it be said, that women (at least generally speaking) can be very tolerant & forgiving when it comes to shortcomings and/or misgivings. Men can be, as well, but usually (in my experience) only when there are certain gains to be made - not because they are necessarily understanding (as far as the typical guy goes). Many (women and men) have also been known to forsake their higher powers of deduction when under the influence of intoxicating substances - as is the social norm. I've certainly overlooked some obvious red flags in my younger days because it suited me to have an overwhelmingly positive outlook, whatever the cost. Thankfully this naivete has worn off. ;)
 
Jerry Atrick, I find it interesting when you say that during the time that you were a player, every move you made pointed toward getting laid, and you describe it as being a full time job. This contradicts conventional wisdom that an attractive man is one who doesn't need women, because he's got a rich enough life without one, and draws confidence from this nonchalance. Would you say that for the serious player, this nonchalance is actually just a gentlemanly facade, masking a mind that focuses on really nothing but getting boinked? Because I'll tell you, call me a misguided nerd, but the idea of building my whole life around getting laid never did much for me, no matter how much my loins ached.

Hindsight is always 20/20. Looking back I realize that chasing girls, and doing it successfully, was probably over-compensation for other personal and social shortcomings I had. I was the youngest guy in my circle of friends and some of them used to give me shit and "bust my balls" to no end. I went to college in the Midwest and some of my friends used to make fun of me for being from Texas, being half-Mexican, being skinny, and having a lazy eye. Since I was smaller than all of them I couldn't beat any of them up, so my revenge was to sleep with more girls and make them jealous. For the most part, it worked.

I think confidence is something fluid, it isn't static. I was perfectly confident when talking to girls, but that only made up for a complete lack of confidence in other aspects of my life. I would say it is a facade. I was able to read a girl's personality while talking to her and determine whether I should act like I didn't need her or act like I really needed her. It didn't happen overnight, though, I really had to work at it. I went through a lot of trial and error learning what lines worked for which personality. It's all about feeling them out (pardon the pun) and pushing the limits of what you can say without pissing them off.

I'll tell you, as fun as the chase could be, often the next day I would feel completely empty inside. Instead of having a different girl, sometimes the only thing I really wanted was to have the same girl stick around. The only way to make that empty feeling go away was to go ahead and find another girl for one more night. Several years later when I started dabbling with heroin I had similar emotions. I would feel guilty and tell myself I shouldn't do it, but the only thing that would make those negative thoughts go away was to do it again. Anyways, I was only a player for a couple of years. I finally settled down with none other than one of my last conquests. Of course that relationship was doomed to fail from the start, but for those two and a half years waking up to the same beautiful face every morning made me the happiest guy in the world.

I still think these tactics only work on a subset of women. I was never one of those guys who thought he could have any woman.

As I think more about your "aching loins" statement, I think the actual sex was only a fraction of what my actions were about. For me it was more about the eye contact, the touching of the hands, the kissing, the talking, the laughing, the cuddling, the drug-like rush at the exact moment that I knew "it" was going to happen. It was like the beginning, middle, and end of a meaningful relationship all rolled into one magical night. Then emptiness until it happened again.

Now I'm the misguided nerd. I feel like George Costanza in that episode of Seinfeld where he gives up sex and becomes smart.
 
"Conquests"....lol....I think it's be said already, but let me rephrase it in the way I understand it best: Players tactics certainly work to a large degree for almost anyone, but a HUGE part of picking someone up is to find the person who wants to be picked up. That's one reason why the numbers game comes into play.
Terms like "pick-up artists" or "conquest" give WAY too much credit to guys who seemingly can't get enough of it, and demean the women's involvement to that of merely a puppet who was played like a fiddle, when in actuality both parties are invested 50/50.

Sure some younger, more inexperienced, girls are easier to manipulate, and they might have differing expectations about the intentions of everyone involved, but when it comes down to it they are just as responsible for their actions as the male.

I highly doubt a person would ever say "well the guy was just such a good pick-up artist that I had to sleep with him. That's why I cheated on you, sorry, but it's not my fault!"
 
all players are not confident. some are so narcissistic the whole reason they play is one massive ego boosting autofellatio session.

Welcome to Rangrz's world. lol.

Cept, if she is so shallow and ditzy that the only only reason she wants me in her pants is because I'm a bad enough dude to save the president, I do not want in her pants. Playing the game can work, for sure, hell lower your standard of success far enough, and slam your head into a brick wall enough, and something bounds to happen. But is it worth it?
 
I think one of the problems guys have with this is the idea that "women like assholes" or "women like badboys" and "Why do women like assholes and badboys?". I can see how this can seem completely wrong and unfair to a really good guy.

The way I see it, it is definitely true that those type of guys have an attraction for women, and I do think this is something instinctual - or based on the need to find a good protector in a man (or provider, for that matter, same thing). A guy who's unable to hurt other guys is not a good self-protector, either psychologically or physically, he can get killed before he can bring himself to raise his hand against someone, and therefore he is also not a good protector for a woman or children. So he has low surivial value, and can also be seen to have low replication value in that his children are ALSO likely to have poor survival mechanisms.

In that way I agree with the evolutionary psychology thing, and think it's nothing really bad or immoral with women, but more like an unwilling subconscious response. Like, I've always preferred good guys, but when I started focusing on "bad boys" I found that I definitely found them more sexy. They just spark more attraction, also because they tend to be more masculine and UNLIKE women, so they generate a kind of male/female attraction, and when I realised this they started to interest me more, and expressed in the right kind of way I could find it very emotionally and sexuallly gratifying. I also had a relationship with a guy like that, and although he often made me unhappy and I didn't find him ideal in any way, I had very strong emotions and attraction for him and found it very rewarding.
 
I like where this thread is going.

This is all some top notch food for thought and high quality participation all around everyone.

<3
 
As I think more about your "aching loins" statement, I think the actual sex was only a fraction of what my actions were about. For me it was more about the eye contact, the touching of the hands, the kissing, the talking, the laughing, the cuddling, the drug-like rush at the exact moment that I knew "it" was going to happen. It was like the beginning, middle, and end of a meaningful relationship all rolled into one magical night. Then emptiness until it happened again.

As Lemmy from Motorhead sings - "the chase is much better than the catch!!" - for some people it can be, as you said like that drug rush - fuck it I've had it...I think I'm passed that now, personally.

Welcome to Rangrz's world. lol.

Cept, if she is so shallow and ditzy that the only only reason she wants me in her pants is because I'm a bad enough dude to save the president, I do not want in her pants. Playing the game can work, for sure, hell lower your standard of success far enough, and slam your head into a brick wall enough, and something bounds to happen. But is it worth it?

Hahahah no it really isn't - it wasn't g=for me back in the day...It made me feel like shit, I'm sure it does nothing for anyone's self esteem.

Getting back to the actual question in hand - players tactics, using body language and working off social cues - I think you could pull the wool over most women's eyes using these skills, except the ones that really aren't interested in hooking up with someone straight from the get go...even then, it's do-able, you just gotta have that gift of the gab.
 
Last edited:
About good boy/bad boy...here is my take...its...well...fuck! good boys are boring! Would you rather read a short story by rangrz that involves a pile of meth and running RPG-7s to the shabububa tribe in Zaire for diamonds to trade for more meth; or a story about how rangrz built ans then painted white, a picket fence?

Conflict and surprise create interest, no conflict and no surprise, and damn, you are going to be having some boring conversations with your partner.
 
Precisely.
I've certainly overlooked some obvious red flags in my younger days because it suited me to have an overwhelmingly positive outlook, whatever the cost. Thankfully this naivete has worn off. ;)

Amen, sistah. Ain't that the truth. I've certainly been drawn to some douchebags, and I want to kick myself, because every single time, I've seen the flags within the first or second date. Every time. I ignored them, because I really liked the guy aside from the quirks that kinda sent me this little red flag. You can identify the younger crowd by their naive ideals, and they are sweet, but you have to be sweet and smart. Some people, though, need to experience things firsthand before they realize the signs and mistakes in being naive. I've always been one to need to experience the lesson myself, and holy shit I've had some hard damn lessons. lol
 
Top