IMO the way that most PUAs (MM followers, especially) define and think of attraction is ineffective. They structure their beliefs about attraction in a way that makes it HARDER for them to get laid.

When it comes to attraction, a PUA's focus should be on sexually framing the interaction so that she feels aroused with SEXUAL attraction. All the other things you've heard about attraction - such as like preselection, humor, wealth, and other commonly known DHVs - act mainly as logistical assistance that allows a woman to backwards rationalize her feelings of sexual attraction for a man. They aren't actually part of the main force that pushes the seduction forward.

In my workshops I redefine the classic attraction + comfort = seduction formula into something that looks more similar to the Gunwitch Method www.gunwitch.com . After chatting with some folks from the mASF forum, I restructured the model of seduction in my head as something more like Sexual Attraction (instead of just "attraction") + Lower ASD (redefined comfort) = Seduction.

I met up with this girl for lunch and sexually framed the interaction with tons of casually sexual remarks, some bordering on GM style of game without the "just kidding" part. I prevented my sexual remarks from making anything awkward by maintaining a strong frame of "this shit is normal." I also threw in some clear SOIs telling her that I think she's a cute girl and stuff like that. I planted the seed for sex location logistics early on by talking about a movie that she just HAS to see and I have it on my laptop. I compliance tested her further by bringing her up to my room to help me pick up some trash. This accomplished two things: 1. It made her invest in me and 2. It primed her to be comfortable with being in my dorm room. We then had to go our separate ways to go to our next class.

The next day we met up for breakfast or a snack or whatever it was and I focused on playing Objection Game (Vin DiCarlo) in order to lower ASD. My main focus was on communicating the message that I'm a very discreet guy who doesn't brag about my "conquests" so I don't ruin any girls' reputations if they do the dirty with me. I did this through a conversation talking about how I like to be discreet out of respect for women. Then we went on our separate ways to go to our next class.

In almost every conversation we had, she wouldn't shut up about her boyfriend who lives miles away in Bumfuck wherever whom she only saw from time to time. He actually called her a couple times when I was hanging out with her and she would answer with "Hey baby" in a sweet tone. I didn't take the fact that she was talking about her boyfriend as an IOD. I just took it as "I don't know what else to fucking talk about" so I just plowed through by flirting sexually and stuff like that. No resistance. Unless she was actually committed to a strict monogamy with her boyfriend, she had no reason to resist flirting with me and stuff.

Later in the day she texted me with "Wanna make out?" I think that counts as an IOI.

I texted back with "Not now, I'm smoking." This acted as push/pull because it isn't clear what I mean by that, or what my intentions are.

Later that night she texted, "You know, I was serious." Or something like that. I texted back, "Oh I know just close ur eyes and enjoy the ride."

Here's the interesting part: She then asked (over text) if I wanted to hang out the next day and I replied with "K but I can't promise anything besides stimulating conversation," WHICH WAS A MISTAKE. Mixing indirect game like MM stuff with direct game does not fly. She interpreted this as a potential rejection which caused her to attempt to protect her ego. She replied with "You didn't think I actually wanted to make out with you, did you?" I recognized my mistake after a few minutes of reflecting on the dynamics of the interaction here (big advantage of text game) and replied with " "stimulating conversation" " to which she replied with a tongue face . That most likely meant that she finally understood that I was just flirting and not trying to reject her.

So then I flat out agreed to meet her up the next day. When she got out of class the next day I just texted her "Come to my room." I got her to come over to watch that movie I talked about earlier. Then, escalation. We did not actually pay attention to the movie.

My roommate walked in on us later and, from the look on his face, I think he saw my balls.

yo chief, just epic dude. I like the concept of not mixing directly conflicting styles. A lot of guys are trying that with fantastic failures.

-Neo

And this lay marks a milestone in my life: I have now had sex with as many women as my father has had sex with in his entire life.

...or was it one more than he has? Dammit I forgot. Fuck it.

Every dude holds his father as a symbol for accomplishment in some way, shape or form. It's natural.

Chief, did you not just have an animated gif of a chick being banged for an avatar? I loved that one so much....

Anyways, I think this is very interesting, and I think there is definitely something to it. Any time I immediately take the conversation sexual (in a joking manner at first of course), it's almost as if she becomes friendlier and more open to advances. Like she realizes, "oh, this guy ain't so bad.." Honestly, it's like a short cut. Skip the tango and the panties fall off.

What kind of material are you using? Something that seems to be universal is "that's what she said..." and you can turn almost anything into a sexual joke with that. It's a little overused now, but still hilarious.

Friend - "I had a problem getting it to fit in the box!"

"That's what she said! WooOOOOoooo!!"

hahaha

_________________
"A man is but the product of his thoughts, what he thinks, he becomes." - Mohandas Gandhi

very impressive!

Saw the girl... VERY HOTT

Good work Chief

This is legit but it really and seriously depends on your attitude. Can you just talk about sexual shit without a thought and get her to laugh or "play along" with what your saying? A lot of dudes say some shit(as ive seen live) and there's no response what so ever back to what he said.

Just got to realize when its the time to twine in some of it(and if its acceptable). Like handling nitroglycerin, very powerful when used correctly, but fuck up and boom...your dead. There seems to be a margin where you can flat out say something and she wont take offense but change a few words around and the attitude of which you say it, might be the last time you talk to her after that remark. Whats forward about this whole technique is like chief saw, she texted him opting in for his little act of tomfooleries , its like he hinted enough to show her what it was, then here comes the connection/hint back from her accepting. Although he almost lost it at the drop of a coin(nitro style) that couldve been it right there