The Reality Method 2.0

Social Energy in Seduction

What follows is a pretty esoteric concept, so those looking for hands-on, practical techniques should probably click away.

Nevertheless, after a lot of reflection, I’ve come to believe that understanding and applying the concept below will make a notable improvement in your interactions with women.

Seduction as Energy
This whole concept came to me when I faced the prospect of having over one of my fuck buddies. It had been 6 months since I’d last seen her, and although she is cute, independently wealthy, and has some social status, for some reason I was not looking forward to having her over.

I instantly went into my introspective self-reflective mode, questioning myself and carefully watching my thought process. “What is it about this girl, or this scenario, that is NOT exciting me?” In fact, I had the feeling that having her over again would be sort of a drag.

To unwrap this complex feeling, I was eventually lead down the pathways of my mind that dealt not just with this particular girl, but any girl I seduced.

What I realized was this: when I seduce a girl, I am literally putting energy into her — not just in the sense of the phrase that we usually use, i.e., “I’ve put a lot of energy into this project at works, I hope it get me that promotion,” but in the very most literal sense. Every joke I crack, every time I bust on her mannerisms, every compliment or dig or observation or read of her personality, it’s all designed to pump energy directly into her mental/emotional/physical system.

That is actually the most concrete physical description I can give of the process of seduction: putting energy into a system.

Sometime you’ll hear people describe this energy as “chemistry” or “spark” or “sexual tension” but it is literally energy, and it is what we are working with when we seduce or even interact socially. You’ll see this observed upon by astute people: “Wow, he was a real downer,” or “She always cheers me up” are references to the actual energy changes that these other people cause in us.

This leads us to the Law of Higher Energy: when you enter a group of new people, especially for the first time (as in seduction, when you are targeting a woman in the group), you will be accepted into the group and valued as a friend so long as you add energy to the group. If you are neutral to the group’s energy, or have a negative effect (withdrawing more energy than you contribute) they will jettison you.

There is another energy law, and that is the Law of Greatest Contribution. The person who contributes the greatest amount of energy to a given 1-on-1 interaction is also invariably the person who is convinced they will get the most energy back out of the interaction….in the long term.

A third law might be called Law of Greatest Efficiency: that is, in a social setting, the individual who is able to give out the greatest amount of energy to groups and people around him, while expending the least amount of personal energy, will naturally dominate the social group and suck up attention and attraction from those around them. And this explains all those words we use to describe these people otherwise, when we call them extroverted, charming, or charismatic.

These three laws should start giving you a mental image of people in society as energy conduits, constantly generating, consuming, and re-directing social energy. If you are a poorly-tuned conduit that blocks energy internally, doesn’t re-direct energy well, or requires enormous internal energy to generate social energy to give away, you will be socially “ostracized”. When people scorn someone socially, it’s because that person has either violated social rules (through ineptitude, ignorance, or deliberately) or is simply not up to the social “par” of the energy of the group, and therefore gets left behind in the conversation. There’s no moralizing here; it’s just the mechanics of the interaction’s energy.

So how does this conduit-view of social energy relate to seduction?

I don’t care if you’re hitting a girl with the tightest game in the world, as long as you are gaming her, you are contributing more energy than she is. For you, deploying super-tight game — and, more importantly, putting in all the time socializing necessary to even develop super-tight game — is an energy investment that will pay off in your ability to A) fuck the hottest and most desirable women in the world and B) forget about them the next day, or not, as you choose, on your terms.

Why would you unroll your tightest game against a woman that you did not expect a payoff from? This is why guys practice practice practice and practice some more, hard, on average and above-average women — so they are sharp and prepared to bring their tightest game to the real prizes, the hottest, most intelligent, most socially valuable women that they will run across only once in a great while. They want to be able to choose which women the attract and have relationships with, rather than simply settling for “whatever’s available”.

And ‘whatever’s available’ really comes down, I think, to the women who game guys. I have heard plenty of stories from guys of their past, in which they weren’t suave or seductive at all, and eventually landed in their first relationship because a single girl had seen enough value in them that she basically chased them, gamed them — putting energy into them — to the point that they finally got the hint and hooked up with her. This is certainly how things played out with my first “girlfriend”.

A good deal of what makes sex exciting, I think, is who is getting more out of the exchange. Some people may describe this as “who wants it most” but I think that is an oversimplification predicated on the murkiness of the term ‘want’ that fails to get at the root of desire itself, which is an energy payoff.

I think a lot of “attraction” is caused by this energy dynamic; the energy one party seems to stand by achieving the goal of sex. The greater an obstacle to overcome, and the more outlandish and unlikely that goal, the greater tension will be generated between the two parties.

This is why building false-disqualification into your seductions is so powerful: language like “I could never date you / fuck you” or “You’re like my little sister” go to work immediately creating a powerful energy imbalance, which is what lies behind attraction.

This is also why office romances between subordinates and superiors are so common and hard to resist; people say “Well it’s the power dynamic, power is a natural aphrodisiac” and that’s true because it has to do with dominance, which causes attraction in women for evolutionary and psychological reasons, but the difference in status that signals dominance to the woman could just as easily be called an energy imbalance. It’s ALSO true to say that the strength of the taboo generates immense perceived value for the subordinate, and for the boss alike: both understand what a “coup” it would be in energy terms to overcome the immense static wall of energy that the office policy represents.

This may seem pretty esoteric, but it makes a lot of sense to me to think of it this way. If you’re a neurologist or biochemist, think of action potentials. When the potential is low, there is no discharge of electricity between axons — but once the potential gets high enough, the discharge of energy happens automatically, the energy is transferred, and the action potential returns to normal.

Sex is all about this cycle of build up and release, and creating sexual attraction is merely the process of setting up the action potential so that it can discharge.

In fact, if you want a good relationship to last, that’s the key, right there: the relationship ac needs to not be a static unchanging line (which to many people would represent “stability”), or even a parabola, but instead a series of peaks and valleys, representing the buildup and subsequent dissipation of energy….over and over and over and over and over again.

Real-World Application
Let’s bring it back to this fuck buddy who I’m not excited about.

I actually resent the process of having to pour energy into the interaction and into this girl in order to get her hot and bothered enough to fuck. Even though I know that is what she wants, and it would probably be decent sex, the fact that SHE is not putting her fair share of energy into the interaction irks me.

Think to the reverse. If I were a hot girl, and she was a less-attractive-but-still-valuable guy, would I be in a huge hurry to let her fuck me? Especially if s/he wasn’t very experienced in seduction.

No.

Thinking in these terms unravels the whole ball of wax that my fuck-buddy situation was becoming. A long time ago, she admitted to me that she thought I was “out of her league”. Yet there she was, lying half-naked on my bed.

I didn’t think much of this in the time. In retrospect, it’s a pretty clear case of “settling” — my own perceived value being lower than it actually is.

But, after all this time has passed, I now understand that this girl was absolutely right: I am out of her league, I can get women hotter (and more socially valuable) than her, and she will continue to put up the token resistance to sex in order that my process of pouring in energy to overcome it arouses her enough to fuck (In fact, this process of resisting is probably a subconscious attempt to act in congruence with her value observations. If you don’t believe me on this, try this experiment: go out tonight, find a girl that is definitely less attractive than you, and game her with the same attraction-amplifying stuff you would use on a much hotter girl. Watch how quickly you get blown out).

And therefore, to my mind, overcoming those barriers she’s going to throw up is no longer worth it. The energy payoff at the end is not big enough; therefore the energy required to get to that payoff is no longer justified.

I realize this whole thing makes human relationships sort of sound like a cost-benefit analysis, but in a lots of ways I think that’s exactly how people operate (oftentimes without even realizing it themselves).

So hopefully you’ve gotten something out of reading this. I have gotten a lot out of writing it.