Now that I’ve got you with that clickbait-y title, let me clarifying my question: I’m not asking whether the act of Game is effective – that it’s all smoke and mirrors in front of money and looks – because we can clearly see that at the very least some elements of Game such as systematically approaching lead men to get laid more and with hotter girls. At the least, Game offers better market access. Really, what I’m asking is: does Game actually convince a girl to do something, as if you’re opening a door with a key, or is it merely a signal which then leads to her deciding to open the door herself (with her standing on the other side)? Is Game an actual persuasive technique or is it just signaling?
A large portion of Game, in my opinion, is designed to act upon a girl’s attraction to pre-selected guys. When we ape naturals by using more statements than questions, assuming the sale, or other shows of dominance, for example, then we imagine that it sets off a little lightbulb in her head that tells her that this guy has had a decent amount of sex before. That creates the typical decision/emotional reaction which leads to attraction on her part. For most guys in the beginner and lower intermediate stages of Game this is all they’ve really got to play with, and as I suggested in this post, since their value is faked rather than real, they’ll end up with the girls they would have got anyway and those who are fooled by the mimicry. But is it the act itself which is influencing her decisions, or is it just a signal?
It’s impossible to get someone to do something if they don’t want to do it. Zero multiplied by any number, is still zero (maths lesson for today). You cannot create something out of nothing. When I wrote my recent post about when to push for a number, I had this fact in mind. If the girl isn’t interested, then by the terms of my previous analogy, she’s never going to open the door, isn’t listening, and won’t give you her number. And even if you weasel it out of her, it’ll likely flake. But when a girl is “listening” then there’s a chance that she can be signalled to.
Just think about those times where you’ve been “persuaded” to go to the pub, after work, for just one drink. Everyone knows that “just one drink” becomes quite a few, most of the time, but when they make that initial attempt to influence you, it’s your umming and ahhing that tells them to push the envelope. They knock at the door, hear you shuffling about behind it, and so start to knock harder, twist the knob (ooh err) or maybe break it down.
This would suggest, to me, that pursuing Game is mainly about perfecting a filtering strategy. Sift through all the women in your local area, select the ones you find attractive, talk to them, and push the envelope if they’re “listening.” To begin with, i.e., for beginners and lower intermediates, it will feel a lot like you are convincing/persuading/selling to them. I think this comes from having low expectations: if you’re used to one type of girl, or a certain quantity, then once you start approaching systematically, and employing some basic tenets of Game, then you’ll end up with a result which is higher than your expectation. Results like these tend to make you think that Game is some sort of persuasive magic.
However, over time, your expectations change and shift upwards so that reality matches your expectation. This is why, I suspect, a lot of guys eventually start saying things like “I know how it’s going to go after the first 30 seconds.” At this point, I think, guys understand that their value is mainly static, on the day, without some major change in vibe, and so they’re flipping stones, waiting for the girl to reveal that she’s “listening.”
So, in essence, it’s a cycle: you start off seeing Game as a numbers game where you’re flipping stones and hoping for a Yes girl; one who either likes you for you or is fooled by your mimicry. That could be described as the beginner stage. Then there’s the intermediate, in-between, stage, where you can see that by blindly following the tenets of Game you’ve been able to improve your results. At this point Game seems like a probability game where your actions allow you to magically unlock the door. Lastly you come full circle, accept that your value is mainly static on the day, that you’re signalling to the girl rather than actively convincing/persuading/selling to her, and that it’s a numbers game again.
P.S. I understand that there is a circular argument here: if we choose to do the correct signalling for the girl in question, isn’t that persuading/influencing/convincing? Well, yes and no. My point in this post wasn’t to make a black and white statement that Game does or doesn’t work, but instead highlight two ways of seeing the world: one where we actively unlock the door, and another where the door is opened for us.