Read a tweet today about why Gen Z men are not "manning up" and cold approaching women. It's obviously the fear of getting your life ruined, not the fear of rejection.
This is established fact for virtually anyone who's ever thought about the subject (besides NPCs).
But my thought is even if you somehow took away the risk of ruining your life, there are a lot of problems with expecting men to find relationships by walking into the buzzsaw of cold approaches over and over. First of all, it kind of hurts to get turned down based on your physical appearance, and the appearance of 80% of men is inadequate on its own. You can make up for that with banter and flirting. But is it realistic to expect every man, or even most men, to develop the level of game needed to pick up girls off the street?
Second, most attractive women you see on the street already have a boyfriend. Not a meme boyfriend, an actual dude. Now it is true that if you're Timothee Chalamet you can probably turn half of those women into cheating hoes, but why would you want to given that you're going for a serious relationship? In the end it's just very awkward for both parties to go through the script again and again. "Sorry, I have a boyfriend." [forced smile] "Oh, my bad sorry"
In the past women were somewhat more likely to take cold approaches as a compliment. Disclaimer: somewhat more likely. Today the infinite choice of online dating has more than filled women's thirst to be admired, so getting approached in public mostly makes them annoyed for the same reason that most people prefer to be emailed rather than called.
There is a way for guys who aren't male models to be attractive to women: get to know them in a mutual community so their appreciation of your positive features overcomes the "ick" and "he's not a kpop boy band member" factors that they initially notice. People can also figure out who's in a relationship and who's looking without embarrassing themselves. This form of courtship, coincidentally, has been attacked by each successive sexual revolution.
I'm generalizing in several places, but I doubt that most relationships are going to happen through cold approach in a healthy society, whether that's in person or on a Jewish dating app.
One thing I've thought about a lot is that average men are much more aware of the treatment that top 10 percenters are getting from women than they were in previous generations. Men are pretty willing to jump through hoops and put up with the kind crap that average men have to in order to date if they simply see it as the price of admission. But if they see Mr. Hawt Guy walk in and have shit handed to him on a silver platter putting up with all that shit becomes a lot harder to justify. I know watching Chads get handed sex and dating just for existing killed any willingness I had to put effort into trying to date. You're just paying for sex at that point, and if you're gonna do that it's cheaper by the hour. There are obviously plenty of other reasons men are checking out and the OP describes one. But I really do think that widespread knowledge of AF/BB is playing a major role in killing men's interest in dating.
It's even worse nowadays. Women are actively rejecting the "beta bux" and going it alone, the state and alloparenting providing resources for them and their offspring via wealth distribution. Alongside affirmative action and young women now outearning their male counterparts.
The loneliness epidemic is only going to grow as more and more men get disenfranchised from dating and society.
Historically, a surplus of young ,dissatisfied, sexually frustrated men has not been a good omen for whatever society they live in.
To be fair to Mister Hawt Guy, maintaining such an aesthetic IS hard work. They may enjoy the hard work, they may only enjoy the results and not the process, but either way, it's usually strict lifestyle, diet, and exercise regiment, alongside keeping up to date on fashion etc. The gigolos put effort into their "thing".
I don't think we should malign the "alphas" for being "alpha". They're just playing the game, and winning with some well-known cheese strats that have some tricky elements to them. Quite literally, as pick up artistry directly refers to it as "the game" and even general society describes it as the "dating game" or "having game". I don't malign some korean teenager for having more APM than me at Starcraft, and I don't malign Chad for doing more pushups than me while listening to fashion tips on tape. They paid their price of admission when they stopped eating carbs entirely, except for a rare low-carb drink when picking up at the bar.
If women have issues that some men aren't engaging in these "cheese strats", and are quitting the Game altogether because the cheese strats have a massively overinflated win rate compared to skill floor, well... The women determine the win rate, that's entirely on them. They made the game, every single bit of it, the men are just players, not developers.
Everyone who wants to engage in "the game" as you describe the so called "alpha" winning is a mindless degenerate chasing pointless hedonism. We need a return to morals and social shaming for that behavior, for both sexes.
It is harder for men to succeed at that game, but it doesn't make being a manwhore an actual good trait.
I don't think anyone here hates another dude for getting lucky.
What we hate is being treated like subhuman mudworms by others for not being as lucky. We have all seen the OKCupid survey on how women rate 80% of men as below average. hoe_math has a bunch of excellent videos on that topic.
Remember the good looking convict from a few years ago? If that dude looked like John Lithgow he would probably still be in prison. But because he had blue eyes and a chad jawline he made hundreds of thousands of pussies wet to the point that he had a modeling gig even though he literally murdered people.
I personally know a guy from college who makes over $150k a year, and yet he hasn't had a date in years. Part of it is due to the fact that he is Indian and only wants to date other Indians, but he's also like 5'8", has a high pitched voice that cracks all the time like he's still in puberty, and isn't a bodybuilder.
With the amount this dude makes you would think that there would be at least some gold digging whores after him, but even six figures isn't enough nowadays.
Six figures turned into five figures valuewise in about 4 years.
Hedonism is hedonism no matter who does it
They don’t have to play very hard. Even the uncouthed potential Chads are one workout regimen / outfit / job opportunity away from smashing a lifetime of pussy.
And this isn’t a video game. This is real life. Game Over doesn’t just mean suicide, it could end up very violent.
I agree with you. Chad isn't really the problem here. What he's doing is working, and women need to start selecting for something other than looks and height if they want things to change. But they won't, so they'll just continue to fight over the same half dozen guys who "the bar is in Hell" for.
Don’t hate the scammer, just hate the scam.
Is it a European-American thing? The top 10% best-looking guys aren't that great. With rare exceptions, they're not getting anything handed to them.
People don't understand statistics. 10% means that on average, of 10 guys, there is one 'Hawt Guy'. Yeah, no.
Besides dozens of automatic matches on Tinder? No idea what context you're talking about
I'm saying that the top 10% isn't great-looking.
Hell, you live in a country (I assume) where 2/3 is overweight or obese. By simply not being a lardass, you land yourself into the top 1/3. Take care of yourself, and you'll probably be in the top 15%. Have some muscle mass, and that's the top 5%.
I'm being very rough, but come on. You guys cannot seriously actually believe the stuff you're saying. It's the male equivalent of "I fail in life because RACISM".
I think you're neglecting to mention the importance of height and facial structure there. I've been called a "hot guy" myself, but it's still a bit demoralizing to realize that the person I'm trying to connect with is busy talking to a dozen other guys.
You're right - but as I said, I was being rough.
But it doesn't matter what your facial structure is when you're fat. It's going to look awful no matter what.
That's true. Even if you're not trying to impress women I think it's always worth while to try to stay fit. Defeatism in young men is a problem, but I like to think there's a middle ground where we can encourage men to self-improve without telling them that everything is their fault.
There is some truth to that. I take the time to be fit, I've had women crush on me. Problem is, the climate makes everything harder *to find a real relationship, and it really shouldn't be. Hence the apocalyptic birthrate.
People don't really understand numbers very well. It's like when they complain about the "1%", like some radiologist is somehow in on a plot to destroy the world.
Chad does exist, but it's probably closer to the top 5% or 2%.
I actually think the percentage is smaller. I've seen anything from top 1-20 percent cited, so I split the difference with 10. Better Bachelor showed stats that said 5, but that was over a year ago and I'm sure it's only gotten worse. The exact number isn't really the point though. The point is that a tiny percentage of men are having a hugely disproportionate amount of success in the SMP, and a lot of the less successful men have concluded that putting in more effort than the hawt guy is a chump move.
Well, if people on the internet say it.
So that means that out of every 20 people, there is one. Still seems like a whole lot. I wouldn't say that out of 20 guys I see, one is great looking.
What a poor excuse for being lazy because there is porn out there. The 'Hawt Guy' isn't going out unshaved (unless it's intentional), with dirty hair, bad glasses and dragging along 50 kg of fat.
How do you not get this?
The exact percentage doesn’t matter. It’s about the ratio. Too many women think they deserve the very highest status men. Even if that apex male demo is only 1%, then probably 10% of women think they legitimately deserve those men. This represents the collapse of assortive mating as the dominant dating paradigm.
I’m starting to realize that you’re just fucking dumb.
Every man I know thinks he deserves a supermodel.
I think you mean to say that they will only date men like that. Let's accept this for the sake of the argument. Now, that would be 10% of women who are remotely in the league of these men, right? If it's just morbidly obese women with necrotic tissue in their fatrolls, I don't think you would mind it that much.
Let's assume the top 1% of men are all occupied, taking out 10% of our top 10% of women. That would mean that 90% of the top 10% of women are single. Is that your experience, that nearly all drop-dead gorgeous women are single? Not mine, and it's not because they tell me that they have a boyfriend to get rid of me.
Start to realize? You're too modest. How can you 'start to realize' that now when you've been calling me stupid for a year or so?
You two have been going back and forward when you could both just walk outside and look at the first 100 guys you see and judge for yourself.
Exactly! That is what I propose he do.
You're gay how would you know.
If I were homosexual, wouldn't that make me perfectly suite to judge how attractive or unattractive men are?
Why would you think the predelictions of a deviant would be comparable to a real woman?
I mean just take dykes for example. The vast majority are women who would be rejected by anyone with functioning eyes.
Not predictions, observations. I'm sure even you have some idea of what women like, do you not?
Yeah. Me.
I was in the top 10% (older now), and while there have been ego-boosting moments there have also been many rejections. I've had more success than most men, but to imagine a world where I got even fewer spontaneous compliments, flirts, smiles, hard eye contact, opportunities etc. would honestly be soul-crushing.
Attractive men get a fraction of the attention that average women receive. Average men are essentially invisible.
Why are you so retarded?
Tony is a brown woman. Take a guess.
Can people who are retarded normally give an explanation for why they are retarded?
i'm just amazed at the magnitude of the fuckup by the "cultural stewards of society". how the fuck do you make the value proposition of getting a partner so bad, that even with all the 20-yo male hormone storm putting the finger on the scales on your side, more and more men still go "eh. not worth the trouble".
It was done intentionally to destroy relationships. All sex is rape, children oppress women, women are formless beings, etc.
Relationships were intentionally killed because it makes you dependent on ideology more than practical sentiment.
sure. The world is a hostile place. Plenty of forces want you robbed to your last cent at best, raped and dying in a ditch at worst (or, not even at worst, they have plenty of imagination).
The basic design of every society implies that you, as an adult, are capable of identifying, and brushing aside the crude obviously hostile manipulative "social engineering" shit.
It is supposed to be the job of churches, unions, clubs and all other low-level groups to help you with this. Instead, they all sold us out.
churches, I blame the most for this. They're the ones suposed to have the most stable moral compass. When all else fails, a beacon of meaning in a sea of despair. And they squandered it all on bullshit crusades.
I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that our fathers and grand fathers were and are traitors to their God, sons and country.
Don't be so hard on them. Nobody would have even been around to tell them they were wrong. You're lucky to have born with access to the internet. Before that, there was no conservative media, and Rush Limbaugh had to basically personally save AM radio just to tap into it. Worse, if you think the Tech Giants are bad, you should have seen what the FCC was up to.
Before that, the John Birch Society had to mail video recordings by catalog because no newspapers, radios, and TV stations wouldn't have carried them.
Before that... was the Progressive Era. Socialism was at it's peak popularity, and most normal people just accepted that Socialism was the way of the future, but what form was it supposed to take.
Truth is, we are the latest line of a Liberalization movements against Socialist societies. Your grandfathers had no idea that that was the case. They didn't know that FDR was a Democratic Socialist. He never called himself that, and declared that Hoover was spending too much money.
They certainly handed us a sinking boat. No guidance and a wasteland to inhabit.
Every day I wake up and wonder "why bother?"
The circumstances that my great-grandfather, grandfather, and father met their wives literally do not exist anymore.
There's blame to be placed, but I don't really put it at their feet.
I'm committed to church and I agree with this more and more. Either churches were complacent and materialistic, or highly motivated but blinkered and socially retarded.
It genuinely baffles me.
I find it hysterical that Catholics are lecturing people about the need for a good moral frame work, and institutional religion, when the pope is a fucking Communist that is theologically infallible.
Motherfucker, really? Where is your schism?!!
There's alot of gynocentric churches
In fairness, all of those "Civil Society Organizations" were all universally infiltrated by Leftists and weaponized against us.
Well, not the Unions. Those were always Leftist weapons that also made Civil Society gestures on top of that.
Although I've grown more sympathetic to Christianity over the years. The Christian Churches seem to have gotten worse. More than that, they priestly class seem to be a kind of middle-managerial class who are all default shit-libs normally anyway. I've actually stated multiple times that I think I could run a better church than most priests and pastors nowadays, as an anti-theist. Mostly because I would harp of absolute devotion to sacred duty, personal responsibility, and was prepared to meet people in their darkest places.
I don't know what the fuck middle-class churches are even for. If you can't feel the need for some proper fire & brimstone rants from the lockdowns, from the terrorism, from the attacks on children, from institutional support of demoralization, or from the aggressive weaponization of people's psyche via the media; what the fuck are you even doing?
If you, as a Christian, can't figure out that you are in a spiritual war right now that you, your family, your friends, and your neighbors have been LOSING, then what the fuck good are you?
If I were a genuine Christian, I'd be an uncompromising zealot waving around a broadsword and painting my chest with the colors of Saint George because we need an an American spiritual crusade. I don't understand what the hell Christians are doing. "Well, I don't know, maybe girls do have a penis?" WHAT ARE YOU DOING?
Nah. Women have historically been seen as the spiritual 'center' or 'focus' of the family(men deal with reality, women with the spiritual), so the majority of Christian teaching has pivoted to catering to women.
So, here we are. Gestures vaguely to everything.
Rats will forgo food if they have a button that just activates their dopamine receptors, and men will forgo relationships if they have the easy fix of porn.
so, what you're saying is, there is no obvious added value compared to titillating videos on a screen ?
that doesnt sound like a counterargument.
As I recall they ran the experiment with some variations. The rats that got a shitty environment with just the bare minimum for survival(shelter and food) went for the button all day long. Meanwhile the rats that had a big ol' playground and plenty of other rats to mingle with just sort of ignored the button...I may be mixing this up with a different experiment but the point is that when inhabiting a healthy environment the "endless hedonism" option was ignored in favor of hanging out with others and living life.
That's where we are right now: a deeply unhealthy envrionment. Porn is a symptom, not a root cause.
Easy travel and communication has been a disaster for civilization. We are meant to be in limited communities with finite populations. Part of maturing is men and women realizing that if they don't want to die alone, they will have to compromise at some point. Wasting your 20s moving to the big city and trying to carve out a livelihood and build a community from scratch is nightmarish.
Bullshit. Easy travel and communication are GREAT for civilization. If that's what we actually had.
We don't. We have a billionaire owned set of communications platforms that are primarily used for censorship and manipulation. There's a reason the CIA spent so much money and time making sure Facebook became a thing.
For a brief moment in the 90s, you could see it, we had the power and they didn't own it all yet, small businesses had power, women and men were getting together like never before, and the voice of the people could actually be heard.
That really hurt Peter Theil, Eric Schmidt and Elon Musks's feelings, and their chances at profits, so they swooped in on government contracts and rigged it all into the fucked up mess we have today.
Future generations will never know what they lost. Those who knew the sound of the internet will tell the tales of the golden age but no one will believe them in time.
Even if the billionaire class disappeared over night, I don't think people in general have the discipline to stay the fuck home. My home town has doubled in population twice in the last 20 years. That's not natural, and absolutely cannot be adapted to. You aren't meant to pick up roots and wander hither and yon. Cheap travel has been eroding the concept of community for a century. The dotcom bubble was not a point of light.
If they have a good enough job and prospects to build or buy their own home they tend to stay in it. You're missing the forest for the trees here.
The point of cheap travel is tourism. The overwhelming majority of people are not using cheap travel to immigrate or find a new city to stay in.
Who said it was? People forget that was in 2000. Not every boom is sustainable, who cares if it is, what matters is, did most of the wealth stay in the hands of the people?
I assume this is mostly referring to false rape/assault claims. There is also the cost in time and money that weigh on people.
Wasn't there a fad going around of women taking pictures of men who ask them out and mocking them online?
You're using past tense. But that likely is still present-tense going on in many circles.
Yes. And it's only going to get worse. In the UK, the Online Safety Act will require all websites available in the UK to protect the safety of women and girls. That will require the likes of dating apps to vet men and stop unwanted attention and communication lest they face fines of £18m or 10% of their worldwide income, whatever is bigger. Only Chad will be able to continue unabated on dating apps, everyone else risks being banned as companies in fear of the fines overcompensate.
So they have given up on protecting women from muslim rapegangs in real life and decided to LARP doing it online?
It's not even a money issue for me. Urban/suburban women are the biggest time-suck I know of. Getting good enough to stream speed runs of Elden Ring is less of a time commitment than most suburban women require.
Well, yes. Or getting blasted in the New York Post because you tried to ask a sports reporter out. Not exactly getting your life ruined but definitely not going to encourage anyone to try.
Didn't Henry Cavill say he won't flirt with women anymore out of fear of being accused of sexual harassment?
He had a boyfriend before he was famous so idk if he's being 100% honest here
Wait, really? First I've heard of him having a boyfriend.
He dated Gina Carano, that's a pretty good indicator of a red-blooded male
I know I got downvoted to shit, but this was a thing back when Man of Steel was released. There's a whole photo album of them hanging on each other and one of them posing while staring at each other. It was before he got famous, but it's still gay.
I know people think he's based and a good actor, but the guy had a "best friend" who is/was openly gay and admitted that they were in a relationship before changing his mind later when it was becoming a thing. Probably got paid to stfu.
I dont want to be bothered while shopping for groceries either, but make it make sense. Approaching sober women in public in broad daylight? BAD! Approaching inebriated women in bars, clubs or frat parties? Good! (well if you accept the risk of coyote ugly turning into a rape accusation)
Rejections certainly add up, but its no longer just a simple 'no.' A lot of messaging today tells young men that they are immoral or completely worthless if women arent having sex with them. Dating is a humiliation/findom ritual where men are expected to pay for a woman's time, knowing she is likely getting her sexual "needs" met on the side by a guy who doesnt have to pay anything.
Women are just so gassed up that they really see average men as too far beneath them to bother. They have their bullshit jobs, an education system built for them, endless attention on social media, and all the gadgets and dragons in their nightstands that never tire. Then theres the fat acceptance and slut walks to bludgeon young men into accepting any repulsive female behavior or be shunned as an incel. The scales are being tipped so harshly in women's favor that at a certain point its not surprising that many young men have so little self-worth and are so exasperated that being 80th in line is appealing.
Once again men gave women exactly what they explicitly fucking demanded and now the women are more unhappy and angry than ever.
Stop listening to women.
This is tangential to your post, but I fucking hate banter, and I hate the value that girls place on banter. I get that they watched every episode of Gilmore Girls or whatever and think that’s how normal people should interact with one another, but I just couldn’t do that shit back when I was single. It’s so god damn phony to participate in, and it’s so god damn embarrassing to watch other people try to do it. I find that the people who are most into “banter” are dipshits who think they’re clever as fuck when they actually have all the wit of a piece of plywood.
Millennial Snot.
Exactly
That was part of my opening strategy.
Force a moment of silence.
If they can't handle it and make themselves to inject babble into the moment you know it's over.
The other thing people tend to forget: majority of women you cold approach are already alpha widowed.
Rollo did an excellent video on this. Any woman who has already rode the carousel to any extent on dating apps is already a washed out and ran-through wench. I know a lot of guys don't want to think of it this way or accept this harsh reality, but it's true.
They found that the average 19-year-old girl these days has a bodycount equivalent to a 54-year-old woman from the previous generation. And I'm sure that's a conservative figure given that most women now lie about their bodycount because they know men find it to be a huge turnoff.
So even IF you opt to cold approach, you're either cold-approaching someone who -- as you mentioned -- is already in a relationship, and either not willing to give you the time of day or willing to cheat if you fit the Chad/Tyrone stereotype, or she's already ran-through and alpha widowed and you'll always be a beta-bux provider while she still dreams of being with the Chad/Tyrone who made her walk funny all those years ago.
Unfortunately it's a lose-lose situation for most guys unless you are cold-approaching in an absolutely traditional, highly conservative, middle-of-nowhere place where every young woman there hasn't already become the town bicycle before they even get their first job.
What blows my mind is how even moderately attractive women would rather have 5-10% of Chad’s time/attention knowing he has other women lined up than 100% of an average dude.
You can't negotiate attraction with banter, flirting and game. And from revealed preferences (what they do as opposed to what they say), physical appearance is the biggest factor for attraction.
I've also found that the women who want relationships are already in them. Single women today, including non-feminist ones, are on the dating apps but aren't looking for a relationship. A good way to describe what they're seeking was stated in another community by another individual - a "lifestyle choice".
Men are rejecting cold approach regardless because it's too much of a risk now for much less payoff. They're even stationing police officers in UK nightclubs to deter men from making "unwanted advances".
The loneliness epidemic is going to grow exponentially and it doesn't help when the likes of ShortFatOtaku have been on a recent anti-single crusade to denounce single men as misogynists and state that you're only a man if a woman finds you attractive.
The UK is not a good example of anything any more. What a disaster.
You're not supposed to Cold Approach women anyways, and it rarely every makes sense to.
You're supposed to approach women already in your social group, at a social function, or at the behest of a friend or family member who intentionally introduces you.
The problem is:
Those are major gaps that need to be filled, and everyone in society is being delinquent about them. If you have a relationship, you need to start looking out for your bros. If you are the bro in question, you need to start navigating IRL social circles, and you probably need a disproportionately woman heavy hobby like reading, gardening, ballroom dancing, antiques, candles, furniture, etc.
I'll often see in television shows adult mixers, single meetups, and general adult mingling events. I've never personally known how to find them in my neck of the woods, or if they exist. Of course I'm an extremely awkward person so I don't going looking for them either.
That's not actually what I mean because that's too formal. Singles meet-ups might not be a good place to get to know someone. Instead, what I'm talking about is a club. Something like a book club, a gardening group, or something along those lines.
Nerds tend to have DM groups, and tend to use those to get into relationships, and party members can make safe recommendations of men and women they've already socialized with. It's not designed to be a "singles meet up", but it it does allow for regular social engagements.
This way, you never actually have to have the artificial pressure of a "hook up" engagement. Instead, you are already in a safe and comfortable social environment, and you can engage with your potential partner over the safe topic being discussed. That way, rejection can be very soft, and you can go on about enjoying the hobby instead.
How do you square this with the increasing gender polarization? Men and women are both retreating into same sex social groups more than ever from what I can tell.
I don't know why, but the first thing I thought of when I saw this post was the meme of the fat ugly woman saying "She's not interested!" Still makes me chuckle.
I think you've got a point, but social stratification plays a BIG role too, and I think that is somewhat missed.
I met my now-wife in graduate school. Of our social circle from that era, I know probably 5-6 couples who met in grad school. I know more who met in law school or a post doc or while teaching. All these connections were made by shared interests and shared environments. Of this group of people, none of them have gotten divorced. This goes back say ~15 years, so Tinder was not yet a thing, but there were other dating apps and sites at the time that were widely used.
I know another group of people who met in high school or undergrad. These people were are far more likely to have gotten divorced by now.
I do not have a great deal of confidence that I would have gotten married if I had not gone to grad school.
If you look at academics across the country, today, most academics are married to other academics. (Ok, I don't have statistics for this, but that is my overwhelming impression.)
I similarly today, professionally, know quite a few corporate business people, most of whom are married to women who are also corporate business types.
So if you're part of the professional managerial class, you kind of have an in-group that you fuck, date, and marry in.
If you're not part of that class; if you don't have higher education; if you're not in a VERY high-earning job; and, of course, if you're not attractive, things are going to be a lot harder.
Bottom line..."class" still exists. Apps like Tinder expose all classes to each other, but the value of the class is somewhere missing on first impression. What's left is attractiveness. And that's a battle that most men are going to lose.
Really insightful post. All of that rings true in my experience
That's kind of where PUA was wrong and some of TRP started looking into evolutionary psychology and other pieces of the female puzzle.
The reality is every male and female has an SMV but there's a filter based on perception. The problem now is that women's expectations are coddled that if a man is equal or lesser to her own perceived SMV, she'll be disgusted that the cretin even had the balls to approach her. Women will typically chase men who are two points above themselves and I sincerely believe there's no workaround for that unless she's past The Wall (meaning past her genetic prime). You can try to improve yourself to increase your SMV through personality or other changes, but there's an upper limit to that based on genetics and intelligence. So men have to play a different game now or just not play at all.
I'm inclined to agree, but depending on the community you share mutual interest in, you might drop too far below one's own SMV in terms of options. There's also the danger of being too similar to one another that the relationship could bore quickly.
One of the many pieces where Rollo is correct is on the idea of non-polar attraction, which is something I saw in my parents. Have a few common or shared interests with the woman, but be different enough that the relationship can still have a long spark in it, and not so different that you're both incompatible.
Not sure if this is an example you're thinking of, but hypernerd stuff Magic the Gathering comes to mind. There are sweet stories of a boy and girl meeting in WoW guilds and marrying, but anyone going to look for a wife in those settings is quixotic.
I totally agree with this. I've seen girls light up and completely change their attitude when they find out a guy is into something they really like.
Yeah I was maybe being a bit hyperbolic about it, but that's in the ballpark of what I was imagining
I used to do it all the time at bars etc. but I just can't find the give a damn anymore
Women's standards are so high the average man is invisible to them
Women most affected.
Counterpoint:
Most guys weren't cold approaching even 10-15 years ago, because lets be real, it's hard. People did it because there was no other option, and the type of PUA approach dozens of Women in a session is limited to a fraction of a fraction of 1%.
Unless you have a pua mentor behind you physically pushing you, I'd wager no-one here has every approached more than 100 Girls in total. Most dudes would see a cute girl and talk to her specifically, nor shotgun approaching everyone.
I'm not sure if this was what OP was referring too. But as an example of that I know a dude from my pua days maybe 10-15 years ago, i saw him in a mall the other day randomly, doing what he was doing years ago. Walking around looking for chicks to cold approach. The guy has probably approached an appreciable percentage of the Women in my city over the years. There might be 10,000 Women that would have had the experience of being cold approached in my city, but only 1 Guy who has had the corresponding experience of cold approaching.
I suspect the original tweet refers to the more "normal" interaction of asking a Girl your into out in person though. And I think that's just a skill or lack of perceived skill about talking to chicks. There's no scenario thats realistic where asking a girl out and her saying no would lead to any life altering consequences if it was that in itself.
In typical twitter fashion everyone's talking about a term and nobody defines it.
I'd say cold approaching, to most people, means going up to a girl you barely know and trying to get a date. Asking out a girl that you do know in person is much healthier. There's a lot less risk for both parties because you can tell if someone's at least somewhat warm to you. Doesn't mean she'll say yes, but there's a higher chance of it working out.
If that's the case, that's incredibly rare to begin with, 10-15 years ago there was very few genuine pua's. I remember being younger and joining my local city lair and it was basically a dozen guys trying to work up the courage for a few hours each weekend with a couple of guys that just did it seamlessly. Cold approach is actually really hard. I think that's overlooked.
It is a lot rarer than people's perception, to the point where "just be a man and ask the cute girl out" is more of a Hollywood boomerism trope than not.
Having said that, I've talked to a few old couples - and I mean 70s and up - who have storybook tales of the guy asking out the girl behind the jewelry counter at the department store. I've gleaned that it was more common in the past, but at the same time that world was also completely alien from the entire PUA scene because it was premised on monogamy, not teaching Indians how to bang drunk girls at the bar.
Come to think of it, the bar is probably the last holdout where cold approaches were/are normal. There's a decent number of people who have dated from random chatups at the bar, although I would not call that a healthy culture by any means either.
The missing part of this puzzle is in the past towns were smaller and more insular, meaning that random girl behind the counter probably has X degrees of connection to you anyway, even if you've never directly interacted.
Like, in my tiny hometown today if I talked to a girl with intent, she would absolutely know someone who knows me in some way to preselect from that. And I would likely know something about her family in general. There was a pre-built foundation for us to interact on that the cold approach wasn't nearly as frosty as it is today.
Same with the eligible pool back then being far smaller because of the (again) more small, insulated communities people lived in. Its a lot easier to be fine with talking to a random guy/girl if they are one of the 8-20 in your age range to begin with. You weren't competing as a guy with every single dude in the town because women were still shamed for picking something wildly inappropriate (like a much older man).
That, yes, but even city culture was also healthier. One common denominator in all these stories is that both men and women were more resilient, but also more amicable. Girls would be more open to trying out guys on a first date, would be more polite about rejecting them, and guys weren't too concerned about rejection and were less hung up on oneitis.
Well we were still living in a higher trust society. Girls didn't have a lot of worry about because niggers were still constrained to being on good behavior and guys in general knew they might get lynched or worse if they fucked around with some guy's daughter.
Now most girls don't have a dad, niggers are free to do anything, and everything is awful.
Yeah, that's another huge piece of the puzzle we're missing today. A girl used to be chaperoned and protected by the boys and men in her family. Without that tradition, girls instead rely on society for protection, but without any strings attached. Then we have women siccing social media and the courts on men while taking no responsibility for their own behavior.
Both are big factors imo. Rejection is never pleasant, and it's become so heavily integrated and normalized into modern dating practices and infrastructure that it makes you wonder if approaching someone is worth bothering with. It's probably a similar phenomenon to other things like unemployment. If you send out say, a 100 job applications and don't get even a single phone call, it starts making you wonder why you should continue. Makes it start to feel Sisyphean.
Things weren't this bad in the past with regards to this kind of issue. It's a relatively new problem to contend with, and no good answers have been found yet. (And by "good" I mean ones that people will actually start finding en masse. Obviously on an individual and maybe regional level you can continue and play the odds as best you can in your favor, work on yourself, and reject a lot of modern thinking for the time being and still find a good person to be with, but that still depends on things like favorable circumstances and is still likely to be a long road until you get what you want)
There is absolutely no scenario left in society in which it is acceptable for a man to approach a woman if she doesn't want him approaching her. That rule set dictates that men will simply stop approaching. There is no room left for failure so the only move left is to just not engage.
In my early 20s, I figured dealing with shit-tests, general rudeness, and shallow interests of many modern women was just stupid. The ease life-ruining accusations is a bonus. I stay the hell away at a hint of crazy or lack of virtue/independent thought, and don't bother dating or sleeping with sane ones I can even stand having a conversation with.
Just go with "Hi! I'm an evil overlord looking for underlings. I'm offering a bimonthly salary, full food and drink coverage, free internet, full insurance coverage, commissions and fully-kitted for apartments as housing. You work 8 hours a day, your job is to obey my every order and carry them out to the best of your ability. Interested?"
But if you don't care what women think then who cares if you get rejected? It only matters inasmuch as other approachable women might witness.
Also I doubt very much that any man except alteady-famous ones have had their "lives ruined" after a cold approach. Why would any woman care that much about a nothing that she already swatted off? How could she even know anything about you to ruin?
Thing is, everyone does care about what women think. At least the type of women they personally like. Dudes who are able to completely turn off what women think about them are not really inclined to building families.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/oBv666tN4E4
That's a bit like you'd see on SNL...
Yes, and it's already happened to dudes who dared to even look in the general direction of gym thots filming themselves...................