How to Be Attractive to Women
Last night I went to see Bohemian Rhapsody (which is exactly what you think it’s going to be). Afterwards I had a few beers in a bar, which I hardly ever do any more. One of my buddies was kind of gawping at the young women walking past, like men do. Then he said something like, “I just have no idea when a woman is interested in me. And every time I’ve ever had a girlfriend, I met her through singing in musical theatre.” This led to me giving an impromptu sermon of thoughts as they came into my head, some of which I thought were good enough to write down.
So, this is a list of the things that cause women to be attracted to men. These “attraction factors” are written in roughly the order of influence, with the strongest factor written first. There is, however, cross-pollination between the factors (e.g. developing competencies tends to lead to more wealth which raises a man on the power hierarchy as well as on the competence hierarchy).
I have marked points that men typically get utterly wrong in blue. The reason for the misapprehension tends to be that those points are completely counter-intuitive to the male way of viewing the world. Take note, because without them you won’t get a fucking thing.
1. The Power Hierarchy
Hopefully you already know that women are attracted to powerful men – with “power” here being defined as having people do what you want. This is also known as a dominance display. Dominance behaviours can either be done directly to the woman (via non-compliance) or telegraphed to her by doing them to other people or being seen as the leader of a group.
Some typical ways to be higher up in the power hierarchy are as follows:
- Being physically larger and stronger.
- Behaving aggressively or antisocially (which is only effective as far as people are willing to tolerate you).
- Being the leader of a group, company or organization.
- Gaining political power.
I don’t feel like going into the evolutionary psychology of why women like powerful men, as it’s a fairly tedious subject once you get the general idea. It boils down to something like “greater access to resources”, though.
Since most of you aren’t going to become a CEO, talent agent, high priest or wife-beater, you need a simple way to display dominance that won’t land you in jail. The most straightforward method (which anyone can do) is non-compliance, which is probably one of the most misunderstood concepts amongst regular men.
Non-compliance involves intentionally failing to comply with a woman’s requests or her ideas about how you should behave.
Non-compliance can also mean minor violations of social norms to show that you play by your own rules.
Anything related to confidence, outcome independence, and what is broadly known as “game” falls within the remit of the power hierarchy. The range of behaviours that fall into this category is so broad as to be almost exhausting, but I will list some common and easy examples you can begin implementing right away. The first is that, if she asks you to buy her a drink, you say no. It doesn’t really matter how you say it. All that matters is that you deny her request. Your default answer to any of her requests should be “no”.
The exceptions to this rule are her requests which will actually help you to attract her, or get you closer to sex. So, if she asks you to dance, and you are a competent dancer, of course you should dance with her (and be sexual with your dancing as much as you can be). If she requests sex from you, obviously you should say yes (assuming that is what you want).
I would suggest that this rule can be rewritten: Do the opposite of what a “gentleman” would do. If she asks you to light her cigarette, light your own then just put the lighter down on the table. (I don’t smoke any more, and smoking is for idiots. It does however make meeting women rather easy.)
Another seriously good use of non-compliance is humour used in the right way. This is another area where men screw up: they use humour, but in the wrong way.
To use humour correctly, the joke must be non-compliant with her ideas about what men should and shouldn’t talk about. For example, last night a woman asked me what I thought of Bohemian Rhapsody and I said I thought it was all right but I’d have liked to have seen more of Freddie being slowly worn down by the AIDS, ending with his withered corpse being fed into an incinerator. Then I just let that sit there. After a moment of tension, she burst out laughing then agreed. She agreed! If you say something arguably insane, then she agrees, she is attracted to you and is demonstrating that by complying with your worldview, even if that worldview is intentionally twisted and mental. It is not your job to be compliant with the ideas of how society thinks you should behave. Rather, you should do the opposite then have her come to comply with you.
The way guys usually screw this up is as follows. They don’t understand that the moment of tension is everything. It is the willingness to inject tension into a situation that conveys non-compliance and dominance. Regular guys tend to do everything in their power to avoid making the woman feel uncomfortable. They do everything they think she wants. This achieves the literal opposite result of what they are hoping for. And they make “safe” jokes which carry no risk, or they self-efface which is even worse. Never do this. If a joke doesn’t have the potential to destroy the entire interaction, then it is not a good joke. That is the risk you must be willing to take in order to climb the power hierarchy through humour. In short, it shows balls. To pull this off, you are also required to commit to the joke. You have to say it then wait with a deadpan face, and never break the tension by laughing first. Wait for her to laugh to break the tension – that’s her job.
There is plenty of scope for this to blow up in your face, especially when first figuring out where the lines are really drawn. And obviously you’re not going to be telling jokes this dangerous in the workplace. But this is the kind of cavalier risk-taking that women, for some reason, find intoxicating.
The gist of non-compliance is therefore that you should do very minor antisocial behaviours to convey that you can – i.e. that you are the one who gives yourself permission over what you are allowed to do, not her. It establishes your dominant position on the power hierarchy.
Another example from last night is that a girl asked me what I think of her. This is quite common when you send confusing signals like “not kissing her ass” – she doesn’t know where she stands with you, and this burns a hole in her. I told her: “I think you’re quite stupid. [Pause!!] But you’re also very cute, if that takes the edge off it.” After some horrified moment, she admitted that she is quite stupid, but being told she’s cute does take the edge off it. Then she asked me to join her and her friends. I said “maybe later” then left, because she actually was too stupid for me (though I didn’t verbalize this last part, since I’m not needlessly cruel and the job had already been done).
Without the pause, highlighted in blue, this would not have worked. You need to risk destroying everything, and brutal honesty is a very effective way of doing that. I said something no other guy would have said to her (because she is very hot and they are trying desperately to get into her pants) and then she agreed with me. That is what attraction actually looks like. If she complies with you, she is attracted; it is as simple as that. To have her comply, you will need to be non-compliant in the first place. I will add at this point that approaching itself is non-compliant because it disregards her existing situation in favour of the situation you desire. Approaching is therefore attractive to women.
I think the main reason non-compliance is so difficult for regular guys to grasp is that it is simply the opposite of how their mothers told them to be. I have seen guys who have read endless materials explaining non-compliance (whether it be Mystery’s “negs” or David DeAngelo’s “cocky and playful” or one of the thousand other iterations of the concept) and they still don’t understand it, and certainly don’t practise it even if they do. This is a shame because non-compliance is probably the easiest way to create attraction (and, yes, it does create attraction out of thin air).
Blackdragon has the best post I’ve ever read on non-compliance and it is worth a read after you finish up here: http://blackdragonblog.com/2016/12/01/men-dont-understand-female-attraction/
This is the reality that, in a sexual or romantic relationship, the more you comply with a woman’s demands, desires, parameters, and rules, the lower her attraction for you becomes over time.
Gently saying no to a woman’s demand actually makes them more attracted to you, or at least maintains the current level of attraction they have. Saying yes to all of their demands reduces attraction.
Crazy, I know, but that’s how this works.
2. General Good Looks
The power hierarchy outranks good looks for the following reasons:
- Ugly but powerful men can still get hot women.
- The best looking guy in the world still has to play the non-compliance game, even if it’s only at 1% the level everyone else has to play it at, or he’ll come across as completely docile and asexual and he won’t get anything. Non-compliance is therefore a sine qua non for female attraction.
While those two examples cover the extremes, Average Joe will have to do his best in both areas. So let’s talk about looks.
Despite feminists’ claims to the contrary, there are general things men find attractive in women – a kind of “Platonic ideal” to which we compare women physically – which doesn’t change with the times, and which is NOT a “social construct”. These general items are health and fertility markers and include things like:
- Long shiny hair
- Being thin
- A certain hips/waist/tits ratio
- Firm breasts and buttocks
- Clear skin
- Good posture
- Facial symmetry
Yada yada, you get the gist. I don’t know what order to rank those in, since they all seem pretty rad. The equivalent list in men however DOES get ranked, and I perceive it being something like this:
- Being tall. It just seems to outrank everything else, looks-wise, in my experience.
- Not being fat. Fat is the difference between an ugly man and a handsome man. Do the Snake Diet if you’re fat.
- Facial symmetry.
- Facial hair. The difference in female attention since growing a beard is quite staggering, actually. I once got opened with, “Ooh. You’re very beardy.” What an absolutely crazy fucking thing to say!
- Handsome features, which are defined in a woman’s mind according to the current position of her ovulation cycle:
- If she is ovulating, she will be attracted to high-testosterone “rugged” features in men: large body, square jaw, facial hair, body hair, larger nose etc.
- If she is not ovulating, she will prefer more feminine-looking men: slender body, “prettier” face, less body hair etc.
- Since women on the birth control pill don’t ovulate, the standard for male good looks has flattened out to some gay Hollywood ideal of a blow-dried manicured eye-liner-wearing cream puff (Russell Brand, Johnny Depp, Orlando Bloom etc.). If you’re a slender guy you may want to capitalize on this trend by dressing like a fag.
- In all cases however, women seem to prefer facial hair over clean-shaven – in other words, if you can grow a decent beard, you absolutely should, and if you go on a date you should have stubble at the minimum. If you have a real baby face however, and your facial hair grows thin and sparse, you are better off clean-shaving.
- Being muscular or at least toned.
- Good posture, movement, and not being afraid to take up space. (Difficult to know where to rank this one.)
- A good mood radiating through your face. (And this.)
In this category you are largely stuck with what you’re born with. The two most actionable things are losing weight and growing facial hair, which can both do astounding things for how attractive women find you.
Some additional instructions related to this category would be:
- Don’t stink.
- Don’t dress like a mentally retarded person.
3. Female Preselection
EDIT: Unbelievably, I missed this section from the original issue of the post – so here it is, wedged in at roughly the correct place.
Back when I was writing under “Corvette”, I had a series of posts called “Corvette’s Rules” detailing the most important points for picking up women. A quick Google search reveals that all these posts are now lost, and the only rule I remember is in fact Rule #1:
The easiest way to get a woman interested in you sexually is to make out with another woman in front of her.
Today I would rewrite this rule as follows, in order to remove the juvenile delinquent connotations of a club-going youth:
The quickest way to get a woman interested in you sexually is to display to her that other women are already interested in you sexually (done optimally via a physical example).
So, it is not necessary that you go around sticking your tongue down random girls’ throats – just having their attention firmly pointed at you is usually enough to spark interest from surrounding women. Being seen as “taken” is another way to achieve this.
This is another one of those rules that is very difficult for most men to understand, because it is literally the opposite of how THEY would react if the tables were turned. If you saw a woman making out with another guy, it would probably turn your stomach and you would immediately demote her a couple of points, especially if it appeared they had only just met. However, when a woman sees that other women are interested in you, your sexual attractiveness shoots up immediately in their eyes. It does not matter if this is achieved via gross signals like making out with another woman, or subtle signals like making a group of woman laugh using correct humour – the result is the same. Your sexual attractiveness goes up.
On a sexual level, women do not care if you’ve just had your tongue in another woman’s mouth. They might moan about it morally, but sexually they will be more attracted to you. It is just one of these innate biological drives.
This rule is hardly new. I believe it was Mystery who first began calling it “female preselection”. I felt the need to codify it in my own set of rules however after experiencing its power firsthand in a couple of incidents which left it undeniable in my mind.
In the first, I had met a girl in a bar by challenging her to a game of pool. After the game we made out a bit and she gave me her number. However, this number proved to be a dead-end, with her only sending a text in order to get another text (a common pattern). I gave up on her quite quickly. However, a couple of weeks later I was chatting up another girl in that same bar, and could see the first girl over in the corner with her friends. Positioning us where I knew we would be seen, I starting making out with the second girl, then left the bar with her. In the taxi on the way to the second girl’s house, my phone suddenly blew up with texts from the first girl asking, “Who was that you were talking to?” followed by “Do you want to meet up?” I said “No, I’m busy,” and then she started calling me trying to get me to come back. Insane. The next night she drunk-dialled me asking to meet up but I was already in bed by that point.
The second story was even more ridiculous. I had met a girl at a club, kissed her and taken her number (due to something legitimately getting in the way of me taking her home). The lead had since gone dead. However, a few weeks later I saw her out at the same club while I was there with a female friend. Since I really fancied the girl, I asked my female friend for a favour: make out with me where she can see us, which she did, with some bewildered amusement. I then went and stood at the bar on my own, and felt a tug on my sleeve. There was the first girl, smiling at me. “Who’s that?” she asked. “Is she your girlfriend?” I replied, “Oh, no, that’s just whatever, you know?” Sooner or later I was making out with her too, and took her home, and she became my fuck-buddy for a couple of months. Then, to cap it all off, the female friend decided she was jealous and I started sleeping with her too! That was a good year.
Man, I sound like a real douchebag in these stories. But the purpose of this post is not to teach moral perfection, but rather to illustrate how the world of boys and girls is – especially when you’re young, deluded, sex-crazed morons, which most people seem to remain long into adulthood.
I place this factor as #3 in the ranking of “how to be attractive to women”. I suspect it is actually at #1 in terms of absolute power. However, it usually requires a modicum of power and/or looks to be preselected by women in the first place, so I have to place it third for reasons of utility. Hiring an escort to hang around with you probably won’t work as I suspect women can smell BS.
4. Genetic Matching
I struggled to rank this because it is rather vague. What I’m getting at in this category however is that there is sometimes a profound mutual attraction between two people which isn’t adequately explained by the other categories. I think this is probably caused by genes identifying each other on some level. For example, there is assortative mating, where animals favour mates who are most genetically similar to themselves. This is largely evaluated via visual characteristics. A good example is how similar John Lennon and Yoko Ono look to one another. Lennon was certainly in a position where he could have almost any woman he wanted, but he chose one who is not classically attractive but happens to look very similar to himself. This is the kind of thing I’m talking about in this category. Another example might be a guy choosing a woman who looks a bit like his mother (often unbeknownst to him).
Anyway, the point is that occasionally there is a woman who is strongly into you seemingly for no reason. So, if you’re a seven in looks, but a woman is responding to you as though you are some manifestation of Apollo, there is probably some genetic jiggery-pokery taking place. This is completely beyond your control but is worth looking out for regardless.
I think this is fairly well understood on an intuitive level. Many people however would deny this category exists.
This is where you dress in a certain way and adopt the views and behaviours of a target group – e.g. goths, chavs, hipsters, moneyed fuckers, media types, artists and whatever else – in order to get girls of that type. It is well understood that a goth girl will most likely end up going home with a goth guy, a chav will end up getting another chav pregnant, and so forth. We’re wired to seek “our kind”.
All the various fashion advice fits into this category. Sleazy has the best guides on subtyping – I think Minimal Game covers it: http://blog.aaronsleazy.com/index.php/books/
For information, the only subtyping I’ve ever done is “smarmy intellectual” and “religious cult leader”, the latter being successful beyond prediction since women are so into “woo”.
6. The Competence Hierarchy
I have no idea where to rank this category. I was originally going to put it second place. Then I thought that a good-looking guy can probably easily wreck a seven with a good singing voice. Then I thought a great singer can still easily pull, but would a chav girl really go home with a goth guy however good his singing voice? Probably not. So it’s ended up here, though it could be higher, really.
The gist of the competence hierarchy is that demonstrating a skill makes you more attractive to women. I know this because I do karaoke semi-regularly (I can sing) and a woman always approaches me afterwards to tell me it was good. So, if it’s causing women to open you, it must be attractive, since attraction literally means the coming together of two objects.
Not all skills are equal. No one cares if you’re good at video games. (Well, gamer girls might, but do they actually exist? And if they do exist, are they good-looking? I suspect not.) Playing piano is probably my best one, and I used to have a video on my phone to show women (and you would be amazed at the number of ways a conversation can be “steered” to that outcome without it looking completely contrived). Public performance, e.g. singing well in front of people, is really good because most people are terrified of it, so it shows big hard balls and you therefore get a leg-up on the power hierarchy, too. If you can cross-pollinate categories in this way, you are golden.
The message for this category is that you should be good at at least one or two things and find opportunities to demonstrate them, preferably in public (though a private piano show is obviously an effective precursor to sex). You should not be humble about your talents.
I think that’s just about covered everything you can do to make yourself attractive to women. An honourable mention might go out to “demonstrating you’re a good father” but since I have no experience of that I’ll leave it out. If you think of anything else you’d like me to talk about, just ask in the comments.