How much texting should you do to get the girl? Less than you think
How much texting should you do to get the girl? Less than you think
Go places, do things
On Reddit I saw a post, "Being good at texting won't get you laid" (the argument is what you'd expect; it’s more true than not), and the comments are from younger guys saying incorrect things like…
Gen z girls operate with texting and establishing some kind of banter ESPECIALLY if you havent fucked her yet.
You will defo have to establish some rapport if shes 18-24ish. These girls were born and raised with social media.
Good luck cold approaching them and instantly scheduling a date over text.
Text skills are needed. Not saying be a dancing clown at all but guys here act like its illegal to build a little rapport behind the phone
Or...
I don’t know how old you are guys but I’m 19 years old, generation Z 50% or more of our communication is with text especially girls. You can’t just do what the red pill says and “text for logistics” and succeed most gen Z girls will flake on you if you do that even if you’re good looking because they have so many options you have to build comfort through text.
Having f**ked a fair number of gen Z girls (one sample story, and Ms. Slav is Gen Z, and there are others I haven't written about cause they’re basic lays), it's not true that "most gen Z girls will flake on you if you do that," because Gen Z girls are still girls... they like fun, interesting, and exciting guys... like all girls, everywhere, for all time.
If you are the guy doing things and going places, you're inviting her along for the ride. If she misses the ride, she knows you're going to be meeting and talking to other girls (and f**king them).
Do things. The time spent "building comfort over text" is better spent doing things, meeting girls, and talking to girls.
The whole frame of "you have to build a lot of comfort over text" is wrong.
One of my favourite texts is, "Missed out on xxx." 9/10 times, she asks "how," what happened, etc. Don't reply. Eventually, you invite her out, to do something, at a specific time and place... again.
Or, she says, "how," and you say, "let's meet at [place] at [time]. Too hard over text." She can't make it? She's probably not a serious prospect.
Texting is girl frame. Action is man frame. Action also generates stories to tell girls.
It's telling that the original poster has lots of advice... and no stories. Guys who do things, and date women, generate tons of stories. Many Gen Z guys spend too much time on their phones and playing video games… no wonder they think they have to text girls so much, cause they have nothing else going on.
I made some mistakes similar to the original poster when I was younger, because I thought I needed to have lots of chats and dates with girls to make them comfortable with me and make them like me. Then I got a bit older and discovered... I didn't need to do the long chats, etc., which sometimes led to dates and sex but often led to nowhere. A guy with things to do wants to sort girls pretty quickly into "real prospects" and "time wasters." The “three-date rule” is overstated, but a lot of girls are bored time wasters. A guy who is inexperienced is afraid of a girl saying no to him, afraid of finding out he's not going to sleep with her, so he doesn't listen to her indirect "no" and instead keeps lying to himself about whether she's a live lead.
Time wasters who are looking for entertainment in their bored, boring lives have probably existed since the advent of sexual reproduction. There is an old Mystery / Neil Strauss rule that you need to spend 4 - 10 hours with most girls, and an average of about 7, in order for the girl to be ready to f**k. I think I've tended to go a bit shorter than that, more in the 3 - 4 hour range, probably losing some girls along the way, but the lower end of that range matches up with a two date model... an hour-long first date, maybe a bit of texting chat after, and then a two to three hour second date. Some guys, like I mentioned, have an overly broad "three dates max without sex" rule. Some girls genuinely take a lot of time to get into bed and also sometimes periods and things like that will interrupt the flow. Apply a three-part rule,
Instead of chasing speed, apply a simple test to the girl and the dates…: 1. is progress being made? and 2. Do you enjoy spending time with the girl? (I may have subconsciously stolen these from someone else, and if so sorry… I am not claiming to be the first guy to talk about the subject at hand…). You could add 3., does she seem to be tooling you for value? Some girls are intensely pleasurable to be around, and some girls are a chore whose presence might be okay if that’s the road to sex but otherwise have little going for them.
"Text only for logistics" is overkill... there is some place for a bit of banter/chat... Mr. V's guide to texting chicks is still the best I have seen... one thing I like to do is mention something about a story or whatever. Then she asks for details. Then... I say, "Let's talk in person, at place and time." If we don't hit the date... I don't tell full stories via text. Most vibing/stacking/etc is and should be done in person... a little comfort over text is fine... but the goal should be to meet in person, not to be her in-phone entertainment.
Experienced guys view "no" (or ghosting) as a gift, of our time and attention back to us, so we can use it on girls who are still possible lays.
It's also possible to roll off, wait a week or a few days, then try again for the date. Something I learned to do in the last few years is switch media... so if I ask via text and she disappears or whatever, I try via Snapchat a few days or a week later. Something like, "This has been a wild week... I can do Monday or Wednesday though." If both fail, I move on.
The best way to be indifferent to flakey girls is to have other girls around. When I've been pretty busy with girls, it's been easy for me to let the flakey ones go... cause I'm f**king another girl (most often, other girls, plural). "Abundance mindset" is a common phrase, but the only way I've really found "abundance mindset" to work for me is to have "abundance reality." When I have a lot of girls around, and am having trouble keeping track of them... flakey girls naturally drop out of my mind. If a flakey girl is my only lead... then I'm more focused on texting game, etc. This is what the guy, who are over-analyzing texting, miss... if you are a man and you are doing a lot of things, you probably have a lot of in-bound girls... and so your texting will be shorter and more to the point... and if one girl isn't into you... you'll meet another in the next few days or week... which that one girl will sense.
The best way to keep some girls on deck as possible replacements for your main girl, is to have a main girl... and then cultivate some other options, if/when the main girl departs. I take this further but you don't have to... I'm more extreme than most guys.
Fixing my availability problem may have been the best single thing I did for my frame. It also feels a lot more natural.... By not texting when i don't want to text, I avoid sending bad texts.
The main way Breeze has fixed his "availability problem" is by... talking to more girls. Improving himself. Etc. If he is out talking to new girls, and has just had a good interaction with one, he is not worried about that b***h Stacy not replying to him or whatever it is.
Most of the guys advocating for lots of texting for comfort on Reddit either don't get laid that much, or get laid in spite of themselves (as I managed to do in my teens / early 20s...). Nothing wrong with getting laid in spite of yourself, that's true of 90% of guys. Maybe 98%.
When you are thinking about what to do, the top level guideline is to be a man of action. Go places. Do things. Meet people. If you are busy texting some girl who doesn't come out when you go out, and you meet a girl who is looking to get laid, or open to it, and you lay her out... you will not be very worried about the first girl at all. I like to have a couple of stories, if possible, about whatever I've been doing in the last few weeks or months. Sometimes I will tease, "The true answer would shock you... I can give you some of the more boring answers though." Girls love a well-delivered tease and don't like the straightforward logical answers men do. (Most girls lead boring lives, and that is why they are on their phone 6 hours a day.)
When you give her the complete and succinct answer you'd give your man buddy, she gets bored. If you give your male buddy the kind of teasing, indirect answers chicks love, he'll be annoyed, because why are you behaving like a chick? This is the shift from male digital communication to female analogue communication. Guys mostly talk to learn things and get stuff done. Chicks mostly talk for the sake of talking itself, and for gossip. You don't need or want to move 100% into chicksville, but the average guy needs to learn how to talk, how to tease, and how to give her 50%, not 90%, in many responses. Save your direct responses for your job as an engineer, for your computer science classes, etc., where they're valuable, and remember that chicks don't value true, direct direct answers, cause they're chicks.
Some texting for comfort may make sense in some situations, but you want to be biased towards action, and once you are a man of action, many of the apparent dilemmas will not bother you so much.
Despite all the stuff above... I'd be curious to hear from guys in the 16 - 25 range, who are natives to this demographic, rather than tourists like me. The girls who'll go for guys 10+ years older than them may also be different from the average chick this age.
Angel Devenganza on |Biggest Text Game Mistakes Guys Make|.
