Seduction

The Moon Is Blue is a 1953 film about pick up, seduction, and sex. In it, a playboy picks a girl up and brings her home. Another player tries to seduce her first, and fascinating things ensue.

The Moon Is Blue is a delightful 1953 film about seduction, based on a German play translated in 1951 to English and staged on Broadway.

It begins with a day game out-shopping pickup. Donald Gresham (played by William Holden, who has a habit of playing the moody seducer types) receives an approach invitation from Patty O'Neill (played by the charming Maggie McNamara), but fails to approach after she backturns him and walks away.

When he spots her eying him a second time a few moments later, he realizes she's definitely into him and he'd better chase her down to make his approach. So chase her down he does.

This entire film is about pickup, seduction, and male and female dynamics. The words 'pick up', 'seduce', and 'seducer' appear throughout its runtime.

If you like film examples of seductions, or you're interested in seduction dynamics, you're almost certain to like this film.

Ever have a woman imply she wants something… then later change to say or act like she “never wanted that anyway?” Does it mean she actually didn’t want it… or is she auto-rejecting?

Here's a place I see guys get tripped up a lot.

A woman they're courting or in a relationship with suddenly starts acting like she isn't interested in moving things forward with them. So the guy concludes, "I guess she isn't all that interested after all," and moves on to the next girl.

Meanwhile what was actually happening was the woman had started to auto-reject.

But she actually did want the guy to move things forward with her.

She only started acting like she didn't when she thought he wouldn't.

Tragically, things fall apart due to a miscommunication between the two... yet this miscommunication is all too common.

You were just about to ask her out. You were just about to make a move. You were just about to make the relationship serious. But women don’t wait for you. Why must girls be so impatient?

There's a recurring theme you see when you're in this industry long enough.

Well, actually, you see a lot of recurring themes.

But one of them is guys complaining about how women don't wait for them.

Men complain that women don't wait for them across so many domains:

• "I wanted to ask her out, but it's like she lost interest and moved on. Why couldn't she wait for me?"

• "We were having such a great conversation, and I was getting ready to make a move, but the emotions changed and she left. Why didn't she wait just a little longer for me?"

• "I'd been talking to this girl for weeks and had some really great dates with her. Then she texted me she'd started seeing someone else. I thought we had a great thing. Why didn't she wait?"

• "This girl and I were dating for five months. She kept asking me how I felt about her, and I didn't really have an answer. Then eventually she began to pull away, and broke up with me. I just realized I'm crazy about her. I want to give her everything she wanted, but it's too late. I don't understand why she didn't wait for me?"

Long-time readers know the first part of my answer: attraction has an expiration date.

Just because she's into you now doesn't mean she will be four hours from now if you don't take advantage of it while it's there.

But what about for the guys who are in relationships?

Why do women ditch guys they've been dating for months, who were just about ready to offer that next step up in the relationship those women had sought?

Is there any relation between women not waiting in relationships, where they're already intimate with the man, and women not waiting for men they're not yet intimate with?

Want to optimize your seductions? Step 1: learn effective canned routine concepts. Step 2: “naturalize” those concepts to fit your personal approach and style.

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.

You have something sexual you want to tell a girl or show her, but it’s inappropriate. How do you get around its impropriety? By baiting her into begging you to share it with her.

Want a simple little tactic you can use to bait girls into asking you things you couldn't/wouldn't normally be able to get away with in conversation?

Because there are some things that you really cannot just come out and drop on a girl, without it being too forward or out-of-place.

The solution, if you want to use a really forward compliment or bring up or show her something really sketchy is to lure her into asking you for it, pushing you for it, so that when you finally drop it on her, "she asked for it."

With a little good framing, this is not hard to do at all.

Note: while this tactic is simple, it requires a fair degree of calibration, and thus its use is a bit more advanced. So this will mostly be for intermediate and up guys (and really is for more advanced seducers).

Beginners may still find it interesting to read about, if purely for the psychology aspect.

Byronic flaws make a man more interesting, and much more bondable in courtships and relationships. Yet there’s an art to revealing them that many men often get wrong...

I recently worked with a hard case guy on a repeated relationship problem he has. Periodically, his relationships fail, inexplicably to him, with every woman he dates peeling off and wanting out.

He's been unable to understand why, but with this latest girl she gave him a lot of very clear feedback, that also mirrors feedback he's gotten from other girlfriends, as well as mirrors my own feeling personally with him.

That feedback was this:

That the girl, despite six months of trying to peel back his layers, was never able to get to know the real him. She feels like, after six months of attempts, she's still right back where she started with him, and is tired of trying.

This is a guy who, in most on-paper respects, should be a desirable guy. He's tall, accomplished, has good fundamentals, and good game. He's well-nigh unshakeable in his frame and is relentlessly optimistic (without being unrealistic). He's an ex-military man and is tough-as-nails, yet is also a religious man and is caring and intelligent, if sometimes not always totally attuned to why a woman is doing what she's doing.

What I realized on looking at how this latest girlfriend quit the relationship is that he isn't letting women peel his layers back properly, and this is causing women to feel like they don't even really know him.

Which in turn causes those women to feel like failures, then causes them to leave.

What I said to him was, "You need to help women peel your layers back properly. You might also need to get more comfortable yourself showing people more of whom you are underneath your armor."

Canned game routines get a bad rep in the community since the natural game reaction. But are they really all that bad?

Hey guys. Welcome back.

On my second article about dealing with groups, DJM commented:

“Alek! Thanks for your great posts. Now that the mainstream pickup scene is filled with so much crap, it’s great that we have someone from the old school days still writing great content. I would really be grateful if you wrote a post about routines, gambits, and canned material. Nowadays, it’s taboo to mention routines or gambits in the community. You’re one of the few who still believes in and uses them. Please elaborate on how they can help – especially for beginners – and remove some of the stigma around them. Thanks a lot!!.”

Thank you for the kind words! Comments are what keep me motivated in doing the work I love: writing about pickup and seduction. So, thanks again.

Now, onto your request. As DJM implies, I think routines are misunderstood. What is a routine? In pickup and seduction, they’re ready-made techniques you can use as routines. The commentator is correct when he says there is a stigma surrounding them. It’s why we often prefer calling routines “gambits.”

In this post, I’ll discuss the pros and cons of using canned routines. Next week, I’ll explain my way of using routines, how they can benefit you, and how they can give you ALL THE PROS without THE CONS listed in this article.

First, I need to discuss some theories on why routines have such a bad rep.