Consummate Seduction vs. Limited Seduction

Some seductions aim squarely at consummation. Yet many have limited goals: to socialize, to flirt, to practice. Why does this difference in seductive intent exist?

Many moons ago, I noticed a rather curious phenomenon:

I’m a better seducer with girls I’m strongly attracted to.

When I’m really, really into a girl, I:

• Assert a much stronger presence

• Am much more present & engaged

• Behave in more attractive ways

• Game at a higher, sharper level

• Persist more, and more confidently

I’ve always spent a lot of time observing myself, looking for things I do naturally when I am ‘on’, then seeking to replicate them consciously when I am ‘off’. To a certain extent you very much can… but only to that extent. Beyond it, you simply have to be ‘on’.

I didn’t know if this was just me, but once I started digging into the science on dating and attraction, I found studies that seemed to support it. For instance, some studies on men’s voices find that change the way they speak when speaking to attractive women, and that third party observers rate the voice men use when speaking to attractive women to be a more attractive voice.

(women do this too, raising their voice pitches to people they find more attractive. A higher voice pitch is rated as more feminine and more attractive in women)

Having spent time in this space, I’ve also had many men lament that they perform much better with girls they’re really into – and why can’t they perform that way all the time?

It raises the question: if you perform with peak seductive prowess for women you’re very attracted to, why can’t you perform at peak prowess for women you aren’t? The end goal is the same after all – to achieve sexual intimacy – isn’t it?

Or is it?