Should I tell a girl I like her? (direct vs. indirect) February 18, 2007
Posted by Niels in : Other , trackback
There is an ongoing debate (and probably always will be) in the pickup community about the merits of “direct” and “indirect” approaches. Some people say only a real man has the confidence to make his intentions known from the beginning. Others say that women are so used to being hit on that this will never work, so you need to sneak past their radar indirectly. My opinion is a little different. I think you need both, and neither.
But first, some definitions. A direct approach is one in which you state your interest explicitly. “Hi, I saw you, I thought you were cute, and I wanted to meet you.” An indirect approach is one in which you approach with some excuse other than your interest in the woman. “Hey, what’s good to eat here?”
The ridiculous of this distinction should be immediately apparent, mainly because women are about 1000 times more socially savvy than you are and will immediately realize you are hitting on them, no matter what sorry excuse you come up with. Actually, the sad truth is that any time you start a conversation with a stranger, they will assume you are hitting on them. (This has become particularly apparent to me, as I start conversations with strangers whenever I’m waiting around for anything and have gotten several numbers from men as a result.)
A much better distinction than direct vs. indirect is sincere vs. playful. A direct approach (”You’re so cute.”) can be either sincere or playful, depending on your voice tonality and your body language. And both versions are effective. An indirect approach can also be sincere or playful, though if you’re planning on flirting, you better be playful. A sincere indirect approach just leads to a boring conversation about whatever excuse you used to start the conversation.
So what about the playful vs. sincere debate? Well, neither one is better than the other, they’re just better suited for different environments. In a high-energy environment like a bar or a party, be playful. Be the life of the party. But in a low-energy environment like a coffeeshop, be sincere. I don’t want to see you wandering around the library going, “HEY! WHO LIES MORE, GUYS OR GIRLS!”
But in the end, you need both. And not just so you can pick up a girl anytime, any place. Relationships need both. No matter how playfully the relationship began, at some point you will need to get real and build an emotional connection. So be sincere. And the spark will eventually disappear from even the most passionate relationship unless you remember to flirt with your girl everyday. So be playful.
Sure, you can make do without playfulness. In fact, most couples I know aren’t willing to put the effort in to flirt with each other every day. And you can get laid without sincerity - just look at some of the hidden camera pickups you see on the web. But it’s only after you’re comfortable with both ends of the spectrum that your relationships will reach their full potential.
Comments»
I understand playful, but what is a “sincere” approach as you mean it? I’m not a practitioner, but I’ve recently looked around at what’s out there in the community and I see the direct/indirect divide, but it seems to me everyone agrees that playful is the predominant, if not only, effective style. Sincerity displays lower social value, and comes off as creepy. No?
or you could waive the parts and labor fees for her new oil filter… (::smacks forehead::)
either way works…. things that don’t work… being beyond foward
Something that I have sadly gotten use to guys doing :( bleh
its complicated thou if your a girl that isnt that used to getting hit on. If it doesnt happen all that often, its hard to spot it and differentiate it from being wierd or simply friendly. So might that make the initial judgement a lil bit rougher on the guy who is doing the hitting on? Or at least thats how i see it speaking from personal experience of course :oP.
Jake - A sincere is approach is one where you simply walk up to someone and state your sincere desire to get to know them better. It’s the opposite of creepy - those people who cannot converse without sincerity are the ones who weird me out.
franny - Sounds like a pathetic pickup attempt story?
Charlene - I apologize on behalf of guys for the fact that so many of us are idiots. We’re working to change that.
Swiss - You do have to adjust for the girl and the environment to some extent, but it really is the responsibility of the guy to approach well and not be weird.
This is so true.
Also, this is kind of random, but are you half asian?
Hello folks,
I have been reading a lot of these different posts on dating and approaching women and was particularly intrigued by the heated discussion on “I hate how fake you are” and “What does pickup have to do with dating?”
I think you’re great, Niels, and that’s why I looked you up. And, I am all for people connecting and finding happiness in whatever shape or form their relationship takes. So I hope you understand it’s in that spirit that I’m offering my observations (I’m a gal):
I think that it is great to provide strategies on how to cope with the anxiety and intimidation that can accompany approaching a stranger, especially if you are potentially interested. I am all for that, and I know that I often don’t have the guts to do it. I think, however, such strategies that give guys (since Niels, you coach mainly men) ways to manage anxiety, develop confidence, etc are only good to a certain point. What is missing in the equation, or at least in a lot of the stuff I’m reading is, being attuned to womens’ body language and their responses. I think you guys would be a lot more successful at, say, moving to the 2nd or 3rd date and avoid such hostile comments as “I hate how fake you are,” if you can read the subtle clues that women are sending when you are interacting with them.
I, for one, think you should have a class or workshop on how to read the signals that women give so that you can be sensitive to whether a woman wants to be approached or not. It seems to me that in much of the advice given, the psychology of women and respect for their various and individual sense of boundaries are not included. It’s too one sided, and from what I have seen it is all about the guys’ perspectives and boosting their confidence at the expense of women and how they might feel about all of this. For example, I’m thinking about the woman who blurted out “I hate how fake you are.” She certainly could have been a lot more polite about it. However, the fact that she didn’t want the attention wasn’t taken seriously. Maybe she was telling her friends about something important. Maybe she recently broke up with her boyfriend and wanted it to be a girls night out. Who knows? Rather than dismissing and explaining her hostility as a function of “being a a lesbian” (kind of a homophobic thing to say) to absolve Niels’ intrusion into the dynamic, I think it is a great opportunity to reflect and re-calibrate what women want, and don’t want. I know that personally sometimes I end up being rude because my subtle hints are either being inadvertently or blithely ignored.
I agree that it’s important to learn “how to approach and not be weird.” What is weird to one woman one day may totally be charming on another. It can depend on her mood, what’s going on in her life, etc. I think understanding that will also add to the “success” of an approach. It shouldn’t simply depend on whether or not you think a gal is cute. It should also depend on reading her body language from afar, and how it changes as you approach. And sometimes, even if she is cute, she may not want to be approached. I haven’t seen any advice here on how to read and respect that.
Wow, that was way more than I intended, and I still have more to say! If I didn’t bore you all with my academese, I may post some more later. I hope what I said does not offend. I think all you nice guys out there deserve to find your sweetie, and so I hope what I’m saying will improve your chances.
M
You make a good observation about the body language aspect. As much as 80 some percent of communication is non-verbal, and reading and responding to body language is very important. However, most guys suck at reading body language compared to women. I know I have much to learn yet. But the only way to really learn a woman’s body language is to interact with women. Guys with little experience with approaching women or flirting with them in or out of a realtionship, will have a harder time learning a woman’s body language. This is why the men are told to just do approach after approach, so they can gain experience.
Men have a LOT of anxiety when it comes to approaching women, even dating coaches like Neils still feel some anxiety before an approach. That is why men are not taught to read too much into body language at first. It would just physch them out even quicker. As a man gains experience of course he can learn the types of body language that gives him a clue as to how receptive a woman will be to his approach.
I like your intentions in doing away w/ the whole (in)direct debate. While it’s true that many women will assume that you’re gaming them, there are still many times where indirect is being played out as intended. This is especially true with the larger groups, but also even w/ a 1-set depending on your approach.
Now that I think about it, an indirect 1-set is actually more like gaming the entire venue w/ isolation of the target. Think about your token old man at the bar with all the WWII/DHV stories. He pretends as if he’d tell anybody the same story, and the target just happens to be the ‘lucky’ one sitting next to him.
So yeah… true indirect game can be accomplished with larger amounts of obstacles.
Actually… I change my mind one more time. This past weekend, my two friends introduced me to their friend. After formal introductions, I threw some cocky-funny her way, and we were off to the races. She was chasing me, and she had no clue she was being gamed.
So indirect game CAN be achieved within a 2 or 3-set (no opener).
Personally, it doesn’t really matter. By the time you reach comfort phase, all game is direct there on in.
Tambo,
I can totally sympathize and empathize with the anxiety that comes with approaching the opposite sex. I know when I get nervous, my field of vision shrinks and all I hear is my racing heart. But men (and women) did not drop from the sky in singular alien pods with no prior human contact. They have families, friends and neighbors. I think there are many opportunities to study women’s body language and other subtleties. Observe how your mother, sister, aunt–the women in your life interact, and I don’t mean it in the context of any sexual dynamic. In fact, I think it is better to observe when such dynamics are not in the picture just so one can understand the range of responses, and not just in terms of the a pickup. Plus, I think this will help men develop deeper relationships with women as people (and vice versa) and can only be good in the long run for developing a meaningful romantic relationship. Just watch how women interact with each other, with men and with you. If you expand opportunities for learning, then when it is in the context of an approach, when the stakes are obviously higher, then at least you may have one extra little advantage you didn’t have before.
This conversation is very fascinating.
M
M:
Excellent observations. I agree with you (and Tambo) that many men are terrible at reading body language.
This is especially true with regard to the kind of guys who get interested in pick-up, or attraction, or “relationship management” or whatever you want to call this thing that we’re discussing. The dirty little secret that is implicit in all of this is that the guys who get into this thing are generally social misfits. For one reason or another, they are not socially successful, and this obviously has the effect that they don’t have as much experience communicating, in all its forms, as more well-acclimated people do.
I don’t know if I agree with your statement about studying the body language of female family members and acquaintances. I think this is a case not of differences in male vs. female body language, but differences in known vs. non-known people. People who know you behave in very different ways when you approach them, say something acceptable or offensive, etc., as opposed to strangers. If you don’t already understand body language, I’m not sure there’s any way to learn other than talking to people you don’t know.
The really interesting part of what you said, though, is in your first post in which you said, essentially, “Yes, but don’t hassle people.” This is something I have a hard time with as an ethical issue.
I have a different take on this perhaps from my own personal experience. I fit into the generalities I described above, and the predominant reason is because for some reason I am mortified when I offend someone. Probably has something to do with early childhood, who knows. Anyway, the practical effect of this has been that I almost never approach anyone I don’t know because I’m afraid they don’t want to be bothered. The result is, shall we say, unenviable. I don’t think I’m alone in this either. My impression is that there are a fair number of guys who are too nice for their own good and end up alone as a result.
Think about it for a second. If you go talk to someone you don’t know, you have to make a determination that either 1) you believe that your presence will be more valuable to them than whatever they are currently doing, or 2) you just don’t care whether you add to their net happiness or not. So you’re either arrogant or a jerk. But that’s what you have to do if you want to meet new people. Does this mean that some degree of selfishness is absolutely required to be a social person?
Now let’s go one step further into the interaction. Let’s say a guy has struck up a conversation with a girl not previously known to him. (I’m looking at this from a guy’s perspective, but I think this is equally true for women) In almost ALL circumstances, the stranger will show some ambivalence about talking to you. If you say something that doesn’t fit the social context or standard, or you don’t meet that person’s criteria for physical attractiveness, etc., you’re probably going to get a cold reception.
Does any indication of disinterest require you to apologize and leave? Personally, my instincts strongly pull me in that direction, but Niels’ point is that this is the wrong thing to do. Persevere a little. Why? I suspect the reason is because, at that point, the other person doesn’t really know you. They’ve written you off before they got a chance to know you. By sticking with an unwanted conversation, you’re simply helping them correct their mistake. If they’re going to reject you, they ought to reject the real you and not some stereotype they’ve imposed upon you based on a first impression.
The key here of course is figuring out how far to take it. I think there are two variables at play here. (Since you said something about acadamese earlier, I don’t feel so bad about making this sound so serious). The first variable is how strong the negative reaction is, and the second variable is how long into the conversation the negative reaction persists. If you say “Hi, my name is . . .” and get sprayed with mace, you should back out. That’s a strong negative reaction which would justify terminating the interaction at the very beginning. On the other hand, Niels’ story about the girl who threatened to call security seems to me a case of lower-level reticence that ultimately couldn’t be overcome and a length of time went by at which the interaction became untenable.
This comment is already way too long, but one more thing. I can’t really say I know this from experience, but some sources in the community say that attractive women will often challenge men with a test to see whether they are “worthy” of their company or not. The idea is that she will throw out a negative comment to see how he reacts. If he takes it at face value and walks away, he’s a chump. If it doesn’t affect him, he obviously has some substance to him. So, can you really take the first thing a stranger says at face value? I do know that men do this to other men all the time, testing their mettle with comments, body language and bone-crushing handshakes to establish a hierarchy.
ur cute
Jake,
You make a lot of interesting points, and some of them I still need to ruminate over. I agree with you that perhaps the distinction is not between men vs. women so much as known vs. unknown.
I would like to elaborate on few points that you brought out about my earlier posting, mainly the question of ethics and my point about “Yes, but don’t hassle people.” I think you’re right that many people show ambivalence when approached by strangers. I know I certainly do. But, my ambivalence is often based on previous experiences where guys haven’t got the hint and left me alone. My defenses are up because I don’t want to have to resort to losing my cool to get some space. That’s just stressful for everyone involved. If I politely and respectfully decline an invitation, I would hope that I get that in return. But because I cannot predict which kind of a guy is approaching me–the creep or the sweetheart, I am very cautious. Personally, I think it is the creepy and the hostile ones that ruin it for the sweet ones who are deserving of a chance. And if more men are not trained to read womens’ body language or to respect their boundaries, the fewer chances men as a whole have with approaching women.
I also agree it is an ethical issue, but I don’t think I would frame it in terms your rhetorical question, “Does this mean that some degree of selfishness is absolutely required to be a social person?” (which I assume is a “yes” for you, though correct me if I have misinterpreted it). Ultimately, I think trying to connect with someone is about becoming more self-less as opposed to selfishness. And again it goes back to my earlier point about men who come off as creepy, even if it is unintended. A creepy guy is someone who doesn’t seem to get the unspoken social rules of personal space and boundaries, a guy for whom what I think, who I am, and what feels comfortable is totally irrelevant to his goals. I think it might be the language of instrumentality that makes me a little uncomfortable about the scenarios being described. It seems to me it’s not about the women at all, but how they can help boost mens’ confidence.
Now, I don’t have a better strategy or answer for men who need to learn to approach women. And obviously, this strategy has worked for many men and hence the popularity of such workshops and seminars. But I wonder if more men could be more successful if there was a concentrated effort to include more womens’ perspectives in these seminars. Are there such things?
I have to run, but I want to respond to your point about hierarchy and women testing men. So later!
M
I agree with some of the things you said, and certainly understand your viewpoint with regard to having a guy continue to hassle you after you have expressed that you don’t enjoy his company. There are a couple of things that concern me, however.
As you say, your ambivalence to being approached by unknown guys is based on previous experiences of dealing with jerks. And, as you imply, the net result is that you automatically react to an approach with some skepticism, and both creeps and sweethearts are weeded out in the process.
As to the first point, here’s the guy’s perspective on this: “I know that you are worried that I might turn out to be creep like some of the previous guys you met, but I haven’t talked to you before. I’m a unique, separate individual, and I deserve to be judged on my own merits and not be punished for the boorishness of the idiots before me.â€
As to the second point, doesn’t this mean that everything depends on the first impression? If a guy should leave as soon as he gets an indication of disinterest, and we’ve already established that you (generally, not specifically) show ambivalence to nearly everyone because of previous experiences with creeps, then that means that unless the guy can somehow bypass your “default mode,†he must stop his conversation with you right away. This means a guy’s only hope is making a positive first impression strong enough to overwhelm your inherent distrust of approaching strangers.
The only realistic way this can happen is if the guy is really good looking. I don’t think there’s anything a guy could say that would accomplish it, because impressive lines sound cheesy and “normal†conversation starters sound boring at first.
I don’t think we can accept as valid any viewpoint that says only good looking men should talk to women. It also seems that if men took your advice to heart, the ultimate result may be that only jerks would ever approach women in the first place.
On the selfishness point, I was speaking in terms only of the approach-quandary I mentioned in my last comment: to approach someone is to think you’re superior to them or simply not care about their feelings. It deals only with deciding whether to approach someone at all, not how to deal with them after you’ve struck up a conversation.
The ethical issue I mentioned is related but slightly different, and goes more to my first point above: since I’m getting screened because of stuff I didn’t do, how much disinterest do I really have to take at face value? Is it morally acceptable to make someone feel uncomfortable in the short run on the off chance that, once the barriers are down and we’re talking as individuals and not stereotypes, we hit it off and both gain?
It’s that line in “The 40 Year Old Virgin†where Steve Carrell’s character says “I respect women so much that I don’t talk to them.†That’s what I’m talking about.
And I understand the concern about the language of instrumentality, as you put it. You should read some of the other stuff that’s out there and you’d be really freaked out. Niels’ take is much healthier than some other community writers.
Hey M,
I am not in the business of offending women, or anyone for that matter. The only guys that really don’t read your negative body language are the jerks that don’t give a crap about respecting you. On the other extereme you have the “nice guys” who will bail out after even the slightest indicators of disinterest from a woman. And the best place to be lies in a place between these two extremes.
You don’t want a guy that is too aggressive, but at the same time a pushover won’t ever get your attention. Students are taught to be indifferent towards women’s reactions to them. This does not mean to disrespect them though. In fact it shows more respect towards women because you are not judging them too quickly. The guy is just throwing himself out there with the attitude of “hey, I’m out being social and having a good time, and if you like me being around that’s cool, but if you don’t, that’s cool too.”
An aoa student who gets what’s going on knows when to leave a conversation. But he also realizes that sometimes women do not open up right away either. Women who are approached all the time need to have a way to filter out the loser guys as quickly as possible. But some of the women that do this deep down are desperatley looking for a man to sweep them off their feet.
Jake and Tambo,
I am enjoying this conversation. This is giving me a lot of insight into how some men think!
I agree with you 100 % that it shouldn’t be only handsome guys that get to approach women, though I think that there seems to be an assumption creeps are not good looking. In my experience it is precisely the good looking ones who tend to be creepy since they’re so arrogant in the belief that they can’t possibly be uninteresting. Obviously, I can’t speak for all women, and some women might dig only good looking guys and don’t care about substance. And, yes, I agree with you that it is a pretty superficial society that we live in where it IS easier if you’re attractive.
I agree with your point that perhaps people do judge too quickly. For as you put it, from the guy’s perspective: “I know that you are worried that I might turn out to be creep like some of the previous guys you met, but I haven’t talked to you before. I’m a unique, separate individual, and I deserve to be judged on my own merits and not be punished for the boorishness of the idiots before me.†What I think I am also getting at is the other side of the equation of the pickup, which is that women are often not perceived as unique, separate individuals, who deserve to be judged on their own merits. There seems to be a lot of generalization about women, what they like, what they look for in a guy. And in many of the pickup exercises and scenarios described, what seems to be a recurring them is picking up “attractive” women. Just as you note, good looking guys should not be the only ones who get an easy pass. However, I think that this constant emphasis on attractive women as the only way to affirm the confidence of socially awkward men also suggests that only attractive women make unattractive men “worthy.” Furthermore, being “attractive” becomes these womens’ only significant feature such that their uniqueness, individuality becomes secondary. That seems to me to go against the larger belief that attractive people should not be the ones who deserve love.
What do you think about this idea:
Asking guys to try approach women they perceive as friendly? Or women they perceive as intelligent? Women they perceive as having a good sense of humor? I’m just throwing this out as a possibility because maybe it will:
1) get men to look beyond just physical beauty
2) really think about body language and attitude
3) get them to consider how they define “friendly” “funny” “smart,” etc.
4) and see that there is just a wide range of women worthy just like them who may not conform to social norms of beauty.
Admittedly this still involves some stereotyping and generalizations, and maybe that is already a part of your workshop, but that’s my late night attempt at a happy compromise!
If only. The problem is that we’re talking about the approach, as in, going up to talk to someone you don’t know. How do you know whether a person is friendly or intelligent or has a good sense of humor before you talk to them? Maybe only approach girls wearing a smile, glasses, or a silly hat?
”Maybe only approach girls wearing a smile,”
I try and get a sense for a girl in the first couple of seconds of seing her, if she’s well dressed, got good posture and wearing a big smile, she’ll get approached!
I hear you on the posture bit too. I don’t know what it is, but there are very few things more attractive than good posture.
I’m not sure what exactly an AoA workshop teaches, but I do know that most intructors in the pickup community teach men to start by approaching everybody, both men and women. A lot of guys that go to these nworkshops have a serious lack of social skills. Talking to strangers takes a lot of courage.
But the men also have to approach the women they find attractive, because these are the people they have the most anxiety approaching. I personally find it several times harder to approach a women I am really attracted to, over a woman I don’t find as attractive. For men gut level attraction is mostly physical, that just how we’re built. And the best way to face your fears is to face your biggest one, that being talking to women you are really attracted to.
So, I think that you need to approach and have conversations with all sorts of people, so that when you do find a really special women who has more going for her than her looks, you can be prepared.
Wow, so interesting! This is my first post ever but I couldn’t resist because this is such an engaging thread.
I find it almost inconceivable that we have developed into a society that is hyperanalytical of all aspects of life, quantifying everything, now the art of the pick-up. As a woman, however, my antennae are now highly attuned to the men out there who have read “The Game” or are into some kind of “pickup formula.” It’s not hard to spot the ones who are trying their skills on me, but what I can’t tell is whether he’s a nice guy who’s trying to use his new armament of possible techniques because he’s interested… or am I just test material? I’ve discovered that although I used to favour the super-confident gregarious type, I’m now a big fan of of anyone who seems earnest and real. I’m suspicious of anyone who seems forced or too smooth. My detection of even just a little bit of nervousness or vulnerability goes a long way towards me feeling comfortable with a potential “hitter-oner”.
And I hate to be critical in the guys’ otherwise outstanding blog, but if Niels had approached me the way he’d approached that chick in his hidden video post, I suspect I might have shut him down unless I was feeling pretty lost and alone in a new place. NOT because he’s not a nice guy, probably with potential to be a terrific date, boyfriend, mate, etc, whatever, but because I’d feel like I was being played using some formula. This of course would have been to my detriment, but I would never have found that out and oh well, us chicks don’t have perfect discriminatory powers.
That’s my $0.02.
AA:
(Do you mind if I call you that?)
What are the usual cues that a guy is a pua instead of a regular guy?
You know I read once that these zoologists tracked the mating choices of female doves, and younger doves are attracted predominantly to hyper-masculine bigger and more aggressive male doves, while more mature female doves are more attracted to smaller, less aggressive male doves. You post reminded me of that.
I find it fascinating that the guys around here argue with the women, when the women are the object of their affection. Men teaching men how to approach women can be helpful, but women giving men advice on how to approach women is priceless. Since men admittedly find women confusing, and a woman is here telling you what’s up, perhaps you should listen to her, or me, or any of the other females on here when we give our opinions on the topic. We know what we think of you. We know what the approach is like on our end. We know if these tricks work or not. We know how our own brains work and what our reactions mean.
The best dating advice I ever received was from a man… and it has worked incredibly well for me ever since.
I actually had a female friend that gave me dating advice quite often. Everything I tried backfired because it showed too much interest. Maybe she had an agenda, i dont know.
She’s back!
Sometimes there’s a difference between what people say they want and what they actually respond to.
Thanks AA and BATGirl. What you wrote was much more succinct and to the point than what I have been trying to say! At the end of the day, I was just curious to what extent to these workshops include the perspectives of women, something I asked in post #13. Now, it’s obvious that its zero.
M
Easy M! That’s a little harsh.
Of course the idea is to do things that women find attractive. Otherwise the whole thing is pointless.
As a factual matter, I know most of these courses have women lecturers who come in to critique the men.
And my whole point is that it’s alot harder than just being a nice guy.
Another Anonymous - You’re right that the guys who are trying to fix their relationships by learning a bunch of lines and gimmicks are going nowhere. But what if you had a “nice” guy, the sort of guy who’s always the perpetual friend, and you could give him a bit of confidence and flirtatiousness and general social savvy. That’s what we do.
M- Actually, we bring in girls on the third day of our workshops. The guys start a conversation with them just like they would on a bar or a street and the girls give them feedback. It’s one of the best parts of the workshop. It is, however, not the only part, because while girls can tell guys what they feel - whether the guy is creepy, or smooth, or very natural, they don’t necessarily know why. Girls say “That guy is creepy.” Our instructors say “That guy is coming off creepy because he doesn’t understand certain aspects of psychological space. Correct this, this, and this, and try again.”