|
ElanSubdued -> RE: What do it takes to become a pro domme? (10/26/2010 4:16:18 PM)
|
DMFParadox,
Important precursor: I'd like to remove gender from this discussion because the dating approaches you describe are used by each gender - not by all members of each gender, but certainly by some members of each. Given that I'm going to discuss my own approach (which involves women), I'll leave gender terms with the understanding that genders may be switched anywhere.
I've caught up with your posts and I caught RedMagic1's "results oriented" methodology too. One of the lovely things about people is that while in some regards we are all very similar, in others we are all very different. The women you've described... yes, I've run into women like this. And, you know what? These are the personality types I now avoid. This kind of woman may well be attracted to the aloof/bad boy approach you've espoused. However, that type of woman isn't usually attracted to me and this is okay (with me) because someone who desires such an approach isn't to my taste either. I understand the hypothesis "they don't know they're responding to it", but I don't buy this. At any rate, I'd rather attract a woman who values chemistry that builds from honesty and naked vulnerability, who knows what she wants and is cognizant of what she responds to (well, within reason, in as much as any person can be), and who has desires and skills in harmony with my own.
Flirting prowess has many forms of which, in my experience, the tactics you've described are essential if you're going to impress a certain kind of person. But, as I already stated, this isn't the kind of woman I'm trying to attract (albeit, this doesn't mean I hold these women with disdain; I simply acknowledge they are not my dating/relationship match). During introductions, I now use an approach that, I'll admit, at first, had me concerned because it goes against dating advice that suggests "don't share too much too soon". I express what is on my mind and I don't sugarcoat this or hide it. If a woman catches my attention, I tell her so and why, and rarely is the "why" of a surface-only nature. If questions or concerns come up, I address these in a straightforward way. Sometimes this approach backfires, but in general I find it an excellent way to discover those I can communicate with.
In certain environments, such as pubs and corporate parties, once enough camaraderie and alcohol have set in, an approach like "hey baby, you've got a banging ass" may succeed. This is especially true at corporate parties when you don't work for the company, are not associated with an important business transaction, and are attending because of an indirect invitation. In other words, the direct, bad boy approach breaks protocol and thus succeeds as a sexy-hot ice breaker; there is low job-related risk; and those who are inebriated tend to improperly prioritize other factors, such as safety and sexually transmitted diseases. However, while this kind of mystique (along with additional, well-timed flirting prowess) may bed someone for the night, it's usually not enough to keep them interested the next day, the day after that, and so on... at least this has been my experience and what many women have told me. Admittedly, I'm not very good at the bad boy approach so perhaps my findings are biased because of this. Still, given that my goal is to build a long-lasting, meaningful relationship based on trust, honesty, and communication, I'm not concerned with the ineptitude I just admitted to.
All of this said, while it may seem I disapprove of your approach, this isn't the case. When reading between the lines, I don't think you're advocating unethical behaviour. Rather, you seem to be suggesting the use of social gambits (read: using an understanding of human psychology to increase relationship prospects). I think everyone does this, but at the level you've described it feels too much like literally playing a game. During chess, I enjoy manipulating my partner so as to capture their queen early in the game. In relationships though, I aim for a win-win approach where each person succeeds and is treated with honesty and openness throughout. Getting back to dating approaches, using social gambits as you've described may ultimately result in a win-win for all involved, but the process feels a little too manipulative, bordering on dishonest. Hey, some people love this stuff and all I can say is more power to 'em, but leave me out, thanks.
Edited to add: I just found something that caused me to reconsider. As follows...
quote:
DMFParadox:
But you can't stand on one emotion too long. Push, then pull; laugh, then get distracted and wander off; wander back, ask something deep, then forget and caveman the girl. Raise a topic, then drop the thread in the middle and start another. The idea is to have so many unanswered questions about you that the girl's brain fries thinking about it. Then get more friendly, but start pulling away if she shit-tests you. Which she will, more often than not. But since her brain is fried, she'll generally make some motion or gesture immediately retracting once you show you're not to be trifled with. At that point, she's just proven she wants you around, and it's game over. Get the number, get the invite, go wherever you want with it.
Something else to remember is that this doesn't just apply to meeting women. A girl you've been seeing for a while, is still female... and still likes to have her brain fried. So if she's worth keeping, then keep your game around and don't get too lazy. Plus it keeps the mind sharp.
Speaking for the receiving side, this is the type of scenario that when a friend asks for advice, I reply "exit fast".
Elan.
|
|
|
|
