MikeMehlman.net

Main blog - https://mikemehlman.net/

Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/mikemehlman

Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/mike_mehlman/

Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/mikemehlman.net/

Most of the male's ability to walk on the end of a dime comes from his raw approach volume, not his number of plates.  Non-neediness manifests as essentially the degree to which the male comes across as cut-throat in his interactions. Being able to walk on the end of a dime cannot be faked and is palpated easily by women. They have a 6th sense for a male's confidence and non-neediness levels and inherently understand a male's SMV by the degree to which he accommodates to them. The less he accommodates, the greater his SMV is relative to hers.  When most guys think of a high-SMV male, they imagine some famous rockstar with women flocking to him. However male SMV is not measured by the arbitrary degree to which women are zealous about a particular guy. Male SMV is determined by what females ultimately *do* sexually when they are around that guy.  A hypothetical rockstar might have women willing to sleep with him, but if he's not forward, non-needy, and confident, he won't be able to actually make it happen. And in turn, *that* is what reflects his SMV, not the hypothetical of how amazing he supposedly is.  A woman doesn't have to like you. But it's not her opinion that matters; it's what she *does* when she's around you that matters.  You go and get tea with her. She's maybe half-interested. But you're actively approaching and don't need the interaction. You're forward with her because you don't care if you burn the bridge and put her off. She comes back with you and hooks up. Then she ghosts.  Once again, it's not her opinion that determines the male SMV; it's what the female *does* in terms of her sexual decisions with that male that determines it. She can decide she's not interested. She can ghost. But it doesn't change the fact that she hooked up. Her decisions are what matter.  And by all means, the male can do everything "right" and most women will still not come back anyway. Male SMV in this context is reflected by the summation of his interactions. Males with higher approach volume will have more dates and will convert over more, so it makes sense that approach volume generates male SMV.  An advantage men have is that confidence and non-neediness contribute most to the male SMV, so insofar as he approaches consistently, he will be perceived as attractive to the women he interacts with. His confidence and non-neediness can be swapped for looks, where he will be aware he's interacting with various attractive women, where he's able to match their attractiveness, not because of his looks, but because of his forwardness, non-neediness, and confidence.  Non-neediness accrued through approach is quickly reversible if the male stops approaching; confidence is less readily reversible and is packaged with greater stability. If the male has a high macro approach volume, he can have high confidence while still becoming more needy in his interactions if his micro approach volumes have declined. He won't be needy compared to guys who have low macro volume, but compared to his baseline, he'll become more needy. Any women he's with will be able to pick up on this via changes in the nuances of his behavior.  The more non-needy the male is, the more rushed and insular his frame might appear to be from the woman's angle. He appears very solid in his state and isn't bending to her in any way. It's essentially: he's there, and she's interacting with him and does what he wants to do; he's not modifying his behavior to accommodate to her, nor does he care.

Continue reading: mikemehlman.net

Main blog - https://mikemehlman.net/

Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/mikemehlman

Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/mike_mehlman/

Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/mikemehlman.net

This video is essentially a continuation of yesterday's, where I talked about how it's normal and predictable for girls to decline the male's attempt to meetup via text once or twice, without offering an alternative.  The question today is from someone who asked if this changes after you've hooked up with a girl - i.e., is it normal for a girl to decline you after you've hooked up, or does that mean she's not interested.  And what I can say is that it is in fact normal for a girl you've hooked up with to decline you once or twice, without it meaning that's she's not interested.  We as guys like to adhere to the simple idea that if a girl is interested, then she'll just always happily and enthusiastically be willing to meet up. Female enthusiasm is specific for her interest but not sensitive. This means that if she agrees enthusiastically to a meetup, then this rules-in her interest, but if she declines, this does not rule-out her interest.  After you've hooked up with a girl, your willingness to tolerate her deferrals just depends on how interested you are in her. But be aware that female deferrals are often shit-tests, where if you delete her instantly because you're so alpha and non-needy, that in turn is exactly the type of male she wants to eliminate.  If you're hyper-quick to delete any girl who defers your advances and doesn't come across enthusiastic, then the female subconscious is more than happy to have you eliminated as a partner because you're proving that you wouldn't stand by or provide for her anyway.  The male's ability to tolerate one or two rounds of female deferral, both pre- and post-hookup, is reflective of his ability to stand by her if any type of hypothetical relationship were to proceed. After all, if you met a girl who's your type, where you carried genuine interest, wouldn't you at least try to push through once or twice?   Even if your volume is high and you don't need any one girl you interact with, the point I'm communicating here is that you should view it as *normal and predictable* for girls to decline your invites once or twice, *without* offering an alternative, both before and after you've hooked up. That is, don't default into viewing her lack of enthusiasm as a sign she's not interested.  As guys, we're very binary, where if we're interested, we'll do everything we can to meet up, and if we can't, we'll offer an alternative. So we think this applies to women as well. But women don't operate like we do. It's normal female behavior to decline male advances *even in the setting of interest.* If that sounds counterintuitive, it's because it takes high volume of interactions over many years to see this to be the case.  Established plates will defer/decline as well, where this type of dynamic can be a way for them to continually assess your SMV. As the male, you can never get lazy, or you will lose your plates. Never get defensive if the girl declines. Just either non-respond, or say "Ok" a few hours later, then simply re-message in 1-2 weeks.  A plate will be able to judge your neediness levels by how you react vs non-react to deferral. If you're not approaching consistently, then you're more inclined to wonder why she's deferring, if she's potentially just half-interested, and/or if she's seeing other guys. If you're approaching consistently, you really don't care either way. "Ok, she deferred. Standard. Re-message maybe in a week or so."

Full article: mikemehlman.net

Main blog - https://mikemehlman.net/

Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/mikemehlman

Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/mike_mehlman/

Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/mikemehlman.net

The question is at what point is it needy to persist with a girl via text. I've talked about before how I will delete girls who outright ignore me. That's essentially my red line. And it's not anything ego-based. It's just literally what my high volume of approach has led me to in terms of my behavior. I view females who outright ignore as not having interest. I view them as unreceptive to the interaction, the same way that on the initial approach, I view outright ignoring as unreceptiveness. We cannot judge a book by its cover often times, yes, but I nevertheless view a girl outright ignoring, both on the initial approach, and via text, as unreceptive, and I will ultimately walk away from the approach, the same way I'll delete her from my phone. What I do have tolerance for however is girls who defer once or twice via text who also *do not* offer an alternative. I've come to see this as normal and predictable female behavior. This isn't weird. This doesn't mean she's not potentially interested. It's just what women do. It's normal. I want you to reframe your mindset to *expect* girls to defer/decline once or twice your propositions to meet up via text without offering an alternative. This is really just a matter of your mindset and what you see as normal dating dynamics. The same way you see it as predictable and normal that most girls you say hi to on the cold approach will reject - that's not weird, right? - well the same is true for texting: it's predictable and normal that most girls will decline once or twice and not offer an alternative. I'm giving you permission to not view yourself as needy to persist with a girl if she declines your texting proposal once or twice. I want you to essentially go into your texting with girls *expecting* that the trajectory will be, "Ok, well she'll probably defer once or twice, then maybe agree to meet up the second or third time I propose a time." This is really about entitlement. When we are early on in our approach practitionership (i.e., your first several thousand approaches), we might feel entitled to a girl's interest. We see our newfound confidence as a big deal. "Most guys can't do this. This is a big deal. She should be interested because I was so bold. That's rare to get approached like that." That is, we feel merited to a girl's interest. This type of entitlement eventually subsides, where we begin to see rejection as just a normal and inherent part of the dating process - "Of course I'm going to get rejected all of the time, despite being super forward and confident. Doesn't matter what I say or what I do." However, the male will still carry entitlement for *the degree of enthusiasm* the girl will have toward him. That is, even though he's eliminated entitlement as far as rejection is concerned - he now sees rejection as normal - he is still entitled to believing that girls must be *enthusiastic* to meet up with him. "If she's not F yes about me, I'm not interested. It's needy to pursue girls who aren't hell yeah about me." This type of entitlement, too, subsides. Eventually the male will not only eliminate entitlement to a girl being interested - i.e., he sees rejection as normal - but he will also eliminate entitlement to a girl's enthusiasm as well - i.e., he expects girls to not act excited / he expects girls to decline once or twice via text. When a girl declines your advances, this is really just a form of shit-test. If you're so alpha and non-needy that you are so fast to delete a girl the instant she defers, *that's exactly the type of guy she wants to eliminate.* You're demonstrating you wouldn't provide for or stand by her. So her subconscious is glad you've deleted her. And in turn the male fails her shit-test. Full article: mikemehlman.net

If you want to be able to care less about the opinions and judgments of those whom you approach and the surrounding audiences, the key is incurring more rejection. It takes work, yes. It's not easy to subject oneself to repeated rejection. But things that are worth a lot take time and work.

Rejection provides value

How to be your most attractive

Confidence comes from adversity

Lousy date. But getting her home anyway