Hey guys!
Last week, in response to a reader’s question, I detailed the pros and cons of using canned routines to seduce women.
To recap, the benefits of using scripted gambits are:
-
You have well-thought-out techniques that have been tried and rehearsed by others designed to work at your disposal
-
Others can try your routine, comment, add changes and tweaks. This benefits the community
-
You have a working tool in your arsenal. You avoid talking for the sake of talking, and you can accomplish a specific goal with your words
-
It can reduce your nervousness when opening since you have a well-tested routine or gambit that has worked in the past. You don’t have to rationalize for not opening because you don’t have a good opener. Now you have one
-
Beginners especially can benefit from having clear guidelines for what works and what doesn’t in seduction. This is likely THE MOST important point
The cons:
-
Even though gambits show you what to say, you may find yourself in a protracted interaction where you run out of gambits and are left with nothing to say
-
The delivery can sometimes be artificial since it may not calibrate to you or your personality (probably why many men got seduced by the idea of “natural game” since it focuses on being more “you”). Guys can get stuck delivering a rehearsed script that mismatches the vibe of the interaction and the venue
-
You have little flexibility; you end up stuck within the gambit
-
Sometimes a magical gambit that worked 90% of the time will not work on a certain chick for whatever reason. (A dogmatic routine user would argue that you should learn more routines; a good solution, but it’s not the most effective, as we will see, and surely not the most pleasant)
-
You may feel alienated from the material since it is not yours (the exception is when you create your own material, which more experienced seducers do, myself included!)
Last week I discussed these pros and cons while sharing some historical elements behind routine-based game and why it lost popularity.
However, I realized I did not present a solution to the problem. Is natural game the way to go? Or should you stick to routines? In my opinion, the answer lies somewhere in between. Ideally, we would like to gather as many of the benefits of routine-based game while keeping it natural. In other words, get the best of both worlds.
I want to present my view of “naturalized” game. I initially wrote a post titled “Naturalized Game” around 2008. It didn’t get much attention, partly because it was short and did not deliver anything mind-blowing then. I did not spend the time or effort to make a good, solid argument for my position. But I intend to do so today.
Note that I have stuck with naturalized game since that day.
Before I discuss what this concept is and how it works, I need to clarify a few ideas.
SHOW COMMENTS (1)