How to read female signals correctly

[Whiteheart]

I don't know how to write this to be clear. Often when I communicate with women, the interaction is good or bad, but every time I am rejected when I ask for compliance. @Chase adamantly, persistently and irrefutably claims that I have some degree of autism and that women are certainly interested in me and my dick, but I'm missing some signals they're sending me or I can't recognize those who are really interested, so that's the reason why they reject me. I will not enter into the debate about who is right and who is wrong, I want to ask what are the sub signals/emotional calibration and the things like that I am missing and how can I recognize them? I can't find any article, especially with pictures/gestures/caricatures of those gestures and how to react to them. I know what emotions are and how contagious they are, I myself often influence people to change their mood.

If it helps, all the women I've met in my life fall into 3 categories:

1. When we meet somewhere, sometimes there is sexual chemistry and sometimes not, but in any case, she pretends to be delighted that she met me, she talks with me enthusiastically, amuses with my flirting and when we part ways she is no longer interested in interacting with me until we meet again somewhere by chance. Of course, if during the conversation (at any moment and in any way) I ask for (instant) dates, etc. she must refuse. Some women seem to feel sorry for having to reject me after such a good conversation, but they refuse compliance anyway. If I text to them, they often ghost me or behave insolently and rudely to demonstrate disinterest that they conceal in real life. So, they all act as if I have nothing to offer them except momentary attention and fun, nor do they want anything sexual with me, but it's good for them to know me. In short, a superficial acquaintance. The largest number of women I have met fall into this category. I call it a mixture of friend zone-attention whoring. This includes women who have 30-40% similar personality or type to me but are uglier/less educated/less successful etc., or women who are very beautiful but have very few similar personality characteristics to me. Unfortunately, even girls who are similar to me in everything, if they have already found someone, fall into this category.

2. When we meet somewhere, most often there is no sexual chemistry, and he behaves very indifferently and slightly uninterested towards me. @Chase calls this passive disinterest. Most often women who (feel) much uglier, stupider, etc. from me fall into this category. One exception was a very ugly girl who behaved pleasantly when we met, but later demonstrated disinterest through text messages and treated complexes.

3. These are the women who hate me the most. These are those who have a lot of similarities in interests to me and value similar life values (focus on work, ambition, success, etc.) but are less successful in this or are less beautiful than me or our personalities are somewhat different in the sense that I am more honest and kinder than them. These two categories above are just uninterested, and in this category hates me and is uninterested at the same time. Also these women mostly claim that I'm don't understand their signals, although in reality they're just looking for an excuse to act like shit. This category includes girls who see that I am sexy and interesting and want to show off in front of their friends how they reject and insult such men. Fortunately, the least number of women fall into this category.

If you are bored reading this about categories, in short, women who are not like me see me as not their type and those who are somewhat similar see me as unattainable.

What I (autistic or not) see in communication with all women is that they don't feel any readiness for some kind of compliance - they don't want to invest anything in me. The conversation is often good/acceptable and there are sexual tensions, but they simply do not show any desire to take things to a higher level at any moment of the interaction. I really don't feel or see any gesture that indicates it's time to escalate/ that she is ready to do anything with me besides talking. It's as if literally in their heads they can't even imagine that something could happen between us no matter what I do, and that's how they behave. At best, they will be aroused and talkative, but polite.

Best wishes,
W.

 

[Police dog]

What I (autistic or not) see in communication with all women is that they don't feel any readiness for some kind of compliance - they don't want to invest anything in me. The conversation is often good/acceptable and there are sexual tensions, but they simply do not show any desire to take things to a higher level at any moment of the interaction. I really don't feel or see any gesture that indicates it's time to escalate/ that she is ready to do anything with me besides talking. It's as if literally in their heads they can't even imagine that something could happen between us no matter what I do, and that's how they behave. At best, they will be aroused and talkative, but polite.

Best wishes,
W.

You just escalate and see the reaction. If she is receptive to your physical touches, then you go for a kiss, if she is receptive for that you go for more sexual touches and so on. If she doesn’t respond positively you backtrack to previous successful stage, wait for some time and try it again. The best signal is that she doesn’t object when you do this. Unless she is drunk or just very horny she won’t initiate anything with a random guy herself.

 

[DarkKnight]

Test for compliance is most reliable way. Also trusting your gut although things always remain a bit ambigious because girls can hide their interest very well.

 

[DarkKnight]

Also sometimes a girl comess of really aloof and uninterested. Like you dont exist, but when you talk to them and acknowledge them they suddenly flare up and are weirdly submissive. Probably they saw it as a green light without which they try to protect themselves.

You need to experiment with this

 

[Surveyor]

You need to experiment with this

So do I lolll. Tbh I tend to next when this sort of thing happens, and in similar situations.

 

[Karea Ricardus D.]

There are a few things you can do to test if a girl is attracted to you. The main ones of the top of my head are

• compliance testing
• qualifying
• moving her
• touching her

That will tell you a lot about where she's at.

However, there's something else to consider here: men and women misunderstand each other ALL THE TIME, even when they communicate verbally, and even more so nonverbally cause men in general suck at reading women's nonverbals.

There's even books written about it and they're all stupid. "If she tilts her knee in a 30 degree angle and her pupils dilate, she thinks you probably have a big dick."

So I wouldn't even try to read the attraction that much, cause we aren't mind readers. Just try to move things forward in small baby steps and if she's not interested, she will let you know explicitly.

Too many guys wait for the girl to do something very explicit or obvious before they feel they have permission to ask her out or touch her. This comes from a fear of rejection and needs to be shit canned cause this isn't really how women act.

Yeah if you look like Brad Pitt they will do that shit, they will spazz out immediately without any game, chat you up, ask your number, touch you and generally make it extremely obvious that they like you. But they're still just as open to guys who aren't Brad Pitt, just it's more subtle.

TD once said something like... if you're hotter than the girl she will get sexually aggressive, but if you have other kinds of higher value than the girl she will get sexually receptive.

The latter is very subtle and can sometimes be difficult to read, so just do the 4 attraction tests in the bullet point list above. And if you're not sure, generally assume she's interested and try to move forward with her, she will let you know if she's not interested.

This works out better in both scenarios.

1. If she likes you, you now have a shot at getting together with her, whereas second guessing and doing nothing gets you nowhere
2. If she doesn't like you, you will find out so at least it's no longer a mystery

When I say "move forward" I mean take the one next subtle step, like touch her arm, move her to another area, invite her to a thing, ask her to qualify herself. I don't mean force yourself on her obviously. Ugh I wanna delete this sentence it's so dumb but I guess in this day and age necessary.

HTH

-Karea.

 

[Whiteheart]

There are a few things you can do to test if a girl is attracted to you. The main ones of the top of my head are

• compliance testing
• qualifying
• moving her
• touching her

That will tell you a lot about where she's at.

However, there's something else to consider here: men and women misunderstand each other ALL THE TIME, even when they communicate verbally, and even more so nonverbally cause men in general suck at reading women's nonverbals.

There's even books written about it and they're all stupid. "If she tilts her knee in a 30 degree angle and her pupils dilate, she thinks you probably have a big dick."

So I wouldn't even try to read the attraction that much, cause we aren't mind readers. Just try to move things forward in small baby steps and if she's not interested, she will let you know explicitly.

Too many guys wait for the girl to do something very explicit or obvious before they feel they have permission to ask her out or touch her. This comes from a fear of rejection and needs to be shit canned cause this isn't really how women act.

Yeah if you look like Brad Pitt they will do that shit, they will spazz out immediately without any game, chat you up, ask your number, touch you and generally make it extremely obvious that they like you. But they're still just as open to guys who aren't Brad Pitt, just it's more subtle.

TD once said something like... if you're hotter than the girl she will get sexually aggressive, but if you have other kinds of higher value than the girl she will get sexually receptive.

The latter is very subtle and can sometimes be difficult to read, so just do the 4 attraction tests in the bullet point list above. And if you're not sure, generally assume she's interested and try to move forward with her, she will let you know if she's not interested.

This works out better in both scenarios.

1. If she likes you, you now have a shot at getting together with her, whereas second guessing and doing nothing gets you nowhere
2. If she doesn't like you, you will find out so at least it's no longer a mystery

When I say "move forward" I mean take the one next subtle step, like touch her arm, move her to another area, invite her to a thing, ask her to qualify herself. I don't mean force yourself on her obviously. Ugh I wanna delete this sentence it's so dumb but I guess in this day and age necessary.

HTH

-Karea.

I totally agree. I asked this because @Chase claims that I miss some microsignals in the interaction and that this is the reason why women are so uncompliant. What a fact is, that most of the women I met (negatively) differed from me, in one or more ways. Whoever thinks that women like men with more value than them in anything is seriously mistaken. I don't even know if this is the main cause of my failure, but I really almost never felt that someone was really interested. In the beginning, they are very excited/intrigued because they met someone new (me), but that's all.

In general, girls who don't have most of my qualities are quite indifferent and demonstrate passive disinterest, those who have some of my qualities but not all of them usually hate me, those who are beautiful but don't have most of my qualities are attention whores and those who have most of my qualities but aren't some beauties offer me friendship and persistently say that they don't feel chemistry and arousal towards me no matter what I do (they simply don't want to feel it).

 

[Karea Ricardus D.]

those who have some of my qualities but not all of them usually hate me

They HATE you?

Because they have some of your qualities... but not all?

What qualities are those?

 

[Whiteheart]

They HATE you?

Because they have some of your qualities... but not all?

What qualities are those?

Look, I didn't come here to argue.

If your question was really about what things girls don't like about me then this is the answer. Classic things like good look, higher education than they have/better average mark in college than they have, a better job, more interesting lifestyle, reputation in the social group, etc. and above all, the possibility to achieve some things in life and work that they cannot. This group of women who have all these qualities but somewhat less pronounced than me or have some of these things and some don't (and can't achieve) really hate me. So, women who are my type but somewhat less successful or partially my type show the most pronounced symptoms of low attainability. They are brash and rude or they behave neutrally and look for a reason in the interaction to start behaving brash and rude.

There is this belief that women like extraordinary guys, but it's really the opposite. Average women find that guy repulsive. They are simply not interested from the beginning. They don't hate such men, but they really don't care about them. Slightly above average women hate such men because they want to be like them but they can't. Those best women who are extra in everything, but not particularly beautiful, only want friendship with these men, and in the case that they are similar to extraordinary guys in everything, they keep such men as marriage material after having previously hooked up with assholes.

Anyway, the topic of the post was reading female signals, in case I missed something from their body language or vibe.

 

[Karea Ricardus D.]

What I (autistic or not) see in communication

Why are you implying that you might be autistic? Did Chase tell you that he thinks you are?

Look, I didn't come here to argue.

Well, this right here might explain why your interactions with women are conflict prone. I was literally just asking you to clarify what you said.

To summarize your post:

If:

• you're an extraordinary guy
• have a good look
• good job/education
• interesting lifestyle
• social rep
• possibility of achievement

Then:

• average women will find you repulsive
• slightly above average women will hate you
• the best women only want friendship

But you don't want to argue about it - no worries. Keep those beliefs. Let me know how that works out.

Anyway, the topic of the post was reading female signals, in case I missed something from their body language or vibe.

Then my post is on topic. You are definitely misinterpreting female signals.

they only want friendship with these men, and [...] keep such men as marriage material after having previously hooked up with assholes.

Ah, moan-o-sphere member spotted. I wish you all the best, I won't "argue" with you anymore.

-Karea.

 

[Whiteheart]

Why are you implying that you might be autistic? Did Chase tell you that he thinks you are?

Yes. Repeatedly. Unambiguously. In fact, that is his explanation, that many women are actually interested in me, but I miss some micro-details in communication and that's why they reject me so irreversibly (My guess - if women are really interested then those super micro details don't matter that much), or that because I have some autistic characteristics they are visible on women's radar and that's why they are repealed by those things.

Well, this right here might explain why your interactions with women are conflict prone. I was literally just asking you to clarify what you said.

To summarize your post:

If:

• you're an extraordinary guy
• have a good look
• good job/education
• interesting lifestyle
• social rep
• possibility of achievement

Then:

• average women will find you repulsive
• slightly above average women will hate you
• the best women only want friendship

But you don't want to argue about it - no worries. Keep those beliefs. Let me know how that works out.

You just understood the essence of the comment. Average women are repealed and indifferent to such men, slightly better women hate us and the best women want friendship or marriage after they finish hooking up with assholes. There may be some women in other parts of the world who are different from this rule, but all women I have interacted with or seen others interact with, this rule applies. They want to find a provider similar to them, who is their level or a little worse, who has a personality that will be focused on fulfilling their wishes and maybe hook up with some asshole. They are not interested in anything else when it comes to men.

Then my post is on topic. You are definitely misinterpreting female signals.

Ah, moan-o-sphere member spotted. I wish you all the best, I won't "argue" with you anymore.

-Karea.

Listen, I didn't mean anything bad, my comment was just in case you don't agree with my opinion and want to enter into some criticism and controversy. I have met different personalities on Internet forums, and usually when someone asks a question strictly related to some detail in my post, they later start a debate about how I am terribly wrong. I'm glad you're not like that.

Best wishes,
W.

 

[Rakehell]

Look, I didn't come here to argue.

This is your issue, two fold.

You literally just mistook a genuine question for someone trying to argue with you.

1. You misinterpret peoples actions
2. Then you post here about how you actually don’t misinterpret peoples actions, and any other observation is completely false and them trying to “argue” you down.

Basically, you aren’t trying to solve your real issue, you just want someone to confirm what you already think. Therefore you’re just gonna keep getting the same results whatever those might be for you (whatever you’re posting here for) until you’re able to acknowledge that just maybe you may be wrong.

I mean how can you ask something like “how do I read womens signals”, then assert the signals you KNOW they’re sending you when someone tells you you’re reading them wrong?

At some point people are gonna stop trying to help you and you’ll really be at a loss for what to do next. And it’ll be your fault because you refuse to help yourself.

 

[Whiteheart]

This is your issue, two fold.

You literally just mistook a genuine question for someone trying to argue with you.

1. You misinterpret peoples actions
2. Then you post here about how you actually don’t misinterpret peoples actions, and any other observation is completely false and them trying to “argue” you down.

Basically, you aren’t trying to solve your real issue, you just want someone to confirm what you already think. Therefore you’re just gonna keep getting the same results whatever those might be for you (whatever you’re posting here for) until you’re able to acknowledge that just maybe you may be wrong.

I mean how can you ask something like “how do I read womens signals”, then assert the signals you KNOW they’re sending you when someone tells you you’re reading them wrong?

At some point people are gonna stop trying to help you and you’ll really be at a loss for what to do next. And it’ll be your fault because you refuse to help yourself.

Bro, it is because of comments like yours that I wrote that sentence. So, people who with their advice do not contribute anything concrete to answer the question of the post, but deal with other things, such as a sentence I wrote.

I can't guess other people's thoughts through the screen, but I write a sentence in advance to protect myself from potential misunderstandings.

Your way is the same: You don't say specifically how to read women's signals, but you repeat that I can't read them well. I probably can't, but the fact that I can't read women's signals live has nothing to do with whether I can guess other people's thinking through the screen.

If someone writes that there are no special ways of reading female signals, and then if I disagree with him on something, he starts pointing out that I still can't read female signals, that seems a bit frivolous.

You see, I'm sick of forums because of such comments. So, you don't answer anything to what I asked you, but you confirm and point out that I'm retarded because I can't do something about what I asked. If you do not know the answer to the question of the post, do not comment.

 

[orkie123]

Change your mindset from:

I don't know if she wants me, does she hate me, is she trying to argue with me etc

To

She likes me, she is just bantering/teasing for fun, she cares about my opinion.

Unless she explicitly tells you otherwise.

In doing that, expect the best and move the interaction forward.

Also focus on not being defensive on 99% of things. Being defensive is unnatractive. If someone teases you, double down on it and have fun with yourself. If someone is being genuinely rude, leave the situation without a care.

 

[Chase]

The obsession with value, and constant repetition about how yours is so high, and women's failing to respond to you despite your so-high value, which in your mind can only be explained by women not liking valuable men, is not helping you at all. I can tell you struggle to empathize with women and their behavior mystifies you, but getting into this 'value contest' with them you are, where you are trying to measure your value against theirs, is not bringing you any closer to results with women. Nor is it bringing you any closer to wrapping your head around reality.

I'm going to point something out to you... I don't know if you've realized it... but your explanation for women not wanting you is literally a "too good for them, king", "too good for them, queen" meme:

I will give you a logic tree you can go through. The logic in this is incontrovertible, and you can use it to narrow things down:

1. EITHER women are attracted to higher value men, in which case
   
   • You ARE higher value than women, but fail to CONVEY it, so they are not attracted to you.
   • You ARE NOT higher value than women*, and only think you are, but women recognize you're not and thus are not attracted.
   • You ARE higher value than women, SUCCEED at conveying it, but fail to recognize women's signs of interest and escalation windows.
     
2. OR women are NOT attracted to higher value men*, and perhaps even REPELLED by them (as you say), in which case:
   
   • You should be devoting a whole lot of energy into aggressively LOWERING your value!

If it's 1a, then you have value, but aren't accurately conveying it.

If it's 1b, you do NOT have value (at least not value that women value), and need to acquire it.

If it's 1c (which is my position), you need to learn how to pick up on all the signals and escalation windows you are missing.

If it's 2a (which seems to be your position), you need to start chainsawing your value.

There is an asterisk next to 1b and 2, however, because there is also this possibility:

Women ARE attracted to higher value men, but not the kind of higher value YOU think is higher value, as you and women have different value standards. e.g., perhaps you prize punctuality, an orderly home, impeccable grammar, a comfortable middle class income, your bachelor's degree from a fairly decent school, and your entry level BMW, and consider these to be marks of excellence. Meanwhile, women consider these things ordinary things that a huge number of men have, and do not consider any of them particularly valuable at all, nor do they cause women to experience attraction.

I'm not going to write about picking up on women's signals because we've got probably over a dozen articles on the subject on GC. You can find those here:

Girls Signs of Interest | Girls Chase

www.girlschase.com

I'm also not going to write about what women value -- and what causes ATTRACTION in women -- because, once again, we have an entire section of the website devoted to that:

Attraction | Girls Chase

www.girlschase.com

If I was you, I would spend some time going through that logic tree, deciding where I thought I was going wrong, then come up with a plan of action to TEST my hypothesis:

Real Empiricists Test

In the comments of Saturday’s article about signs you’re in the friend zone, uForia makes the following comment: “Ive been a long time reader of your articles, and I can’t help but be skeptical at times. Your posts often have a tone of disliking competition from other men, and what makes you...

www.girlschase.com

For instance, if your hypothesis is "I am too valuable for all these low value women, and my extreme value repulses them", then the way to test that is by lowering your value. WHAT HAPPENS IF instead of telling women about your job, you tell them you are unemployed? Or a starving artist? Do they become more attracted? WHAT IF instead of proudly telling them about your Alma Mater, you tell them you actually never went to college? Does it work? Do you start getting girls? Or not?

(I do not want to hear about, "Oh no, I could never do that, Chase... I could never lower my value. I could never stoop to these girls' levels," because all you are doing in that case is dodging the TEST to keep yourself stuck in victim mode, up in your ivory tower where you assume your value is so very high, without ever testing that against reality, purely measuring it with the yardstick of your own solipsism. True value is determined through interaction with the world -- and, newsflash, if you CAN'T get women, you are sorely LACKING in one key form of value that men and women both PRIZE -- the ability to find and secure mates!)

Unless and until you test your hypothesis, you are merely condemning yourself to be on here (and us listen to you) a year from now, two years from now, five years from now, writing the same posts with your same untested ivory tower hypotheses about women and the world.

There is only one solution:

You think you know the answer, then get out there and TEST IT.

If it works -- if slashing your value causes women to become wildly attracted to you -- then you are right, and now you know what to work on to raise your results.

If it doesn't, and you test a variety of different ways to slash your value and test that out with enough approaches, and women still aren't wild for you, then you know you are wrong, that the problem is NOT that you are "just too good for all these bitches", and so instead you need to go back to the logic tree and pick a different hypothesis to test.

Happy testing,

Chase

 

[Whiteheart]

The obsession with value, and constant repetition about how yours is so high, and women's failing to respond to you despite your so-high value, which in your mind can only be explained by women not liking valuable men, is not helping you at all. I can tell you struggle to empathize with women and their behavior mystifies you, but getting into this 'value contest' with them you are, where you are trying to measure your value against theirs, is not bringing you any closer to results with women. Nor is it bringing you any closer to wrapping your head around reality.

I'm going to point something out to you... I don't know if you've realized it... but your explanation for women not wanting you is literally a "too good for them, king", "too good for them, queen" meme:

I will give you a logic tree you can go through. The logic in this is incontrovertible, and you can use it to narrow things down:

1. EITHER women are attracted to higher value men, in which case
   • You ARE higher value than women, but fail to CONVEY it, so they are not attracted to you.
   • You ARE NOT higher value than women*, and only think you are, but women recognize you're not and thus are not attracted.
   • You ARE higher value than women, SUCCEED at conveying it, but fail to recognize women's signs of interest and escalation windows.
2. OR women are NOT attracted to higher value men*, and perhaps even REPELLED by them (as you say), in which case:
   • You should be devoting a whole lot of energy into aggressively LOWERING your value!

If it's 1a, then you have value, but aren't accurately conveying it.

If it's 1b, you do NOT have value (at least not value that women value), and need to acquire it.

If it's 1c (which is my position), you need to learn how to pick up on all the signals and escalation windows you are missing.

If it's 2a (which seems to be your position), you need to start chainsawing your value.

There is an asterisk next to 1b and 2, however, because there is also this possibility:

Women ARE attracted to higher value men, but not the kind of higher value YOU think is higher value, as you and women have different value standards. e.g., perhaps you prize punctuality, an orderly home, impeccable grammar, a comfortable middle class income, your bachelor's degree from a fairly decent school, and your entry level BMW, and consider these to be marks of excellence. Meanwhile, women consider these things ordinary things that a huge number of men have, and do not consider any of them particularly valuable at all, nor do they cause women to experience attraction.

I'm not going to write about picking up on women's signals because we've got probably over a dozen articles on the subject on GC. You can find those here:

Girls Signs of Interest | Girls Chase

www.girlschase.com

I'm also not going to write about what women value -- and what causes ATTRACTION in women -- because, once again, we have an entire section of the website devoted to that:

Attraction | Girls Chase

www.girlschase.com

If I was you, I would spend some time going through that logic tree, deciding where I thought I was going wrong, then come up with a plan of action to TEST my hypothesis:

Real Empiricists Test

In the comments of Saturday’s article about signs you’re in the friend zone, uForia makes the following comment: “Ive been a long time reader of your articles, and I can’t help but be skeptical at times. Your posts often have a tone of disliking competition from other men, and what makes you...

www.girlschase.com

For instance, if your hypothesis is "I am too valuable for all these low value women, and my extreme value repulses them", then the way to test that is by lowering your value. WHAT HAPPENS IF instead of telling women about your job, you tell them you are unemployed? Or a starving artist? Do they become more attracted? WHAT IF instead of proudly telling them about your Alma Mater, you tell them you actually never went to college? Does it work? Do you start getting girls? Or not?

(I do not want to hear about, "Oh no, I could never do that, Chase... I could never lower my value. I could never stoop to these girls' levels," because all you are doing in that case is dodging the TEST to keep yourself stuck in victim mode, up in your ivory tower where you assume your value is so very high, without ever testing that against reality, purely measuring it with the yardstick of your own solipsism. True value is determined through interaction with the world -- and, newsflash, if you CAN'T get women, you are sorely LACKING in one key form of value that men and women both PRIZE -- the ability to find and secure mates!)

Unless and until you test your hypothesis, you are merely condemning yourself to be on here (and us listen to you) a year from now, two years from now, five years from now, writing the same posts with your same untested ivory tower hypotheses about women and the world.

There is only one solution:

You think you know the answer, then get out there and TEST IT.

If it works -- if slashing your value causes women to become wildly attracted to you -- then you are right, and now you know what to work on to raise your results.

If it doesn't, and you test a variety of different ways to slash your value and test that out with enough approaches, and women still aren't wild for you, then you know you are wrong, that the problem is NOT that you are "just too good for all these bitches", and so instead you need to go back to the logic tree and pick a different hypothesis to test.

Happy testing,

Chase

Thanks for the articles! You are definitely right. Women value sexual value. Things that belong to social value, such as success, are not valued by most women (except in the sense of attainability).

When I wrote about my value as the reason why women don’t want me, I meant social value, I should have been more precise. I don't know how sexually valuable I am. Based on the analysis, most women see me like this: "this is a boring husband/ordinary boyfriend/some guy who seemed interesting at the beginning but whom I certainly do not deserve because he is too good for me or not my type.". So everything you and I wrote is true. My value is not valued much by women and also at the same time makes them repealed.

The real test I need to do is how to simultaneously increase sexual value and attainability (decrease social value). Now I stick with the SAC model. He gives better results in the sense that I have a larger number of somewhat horny women than ever before, including women of all profiles, but still the vast majority do not like my personality (traits such as ambition, inventiveness, etc.) and are therefore uncompliant.

Attraction can be divided into fascination and excitement. Simply, I changed the country from my native one. And the women here have a much different mentality. Literally, they all have the same personality, they differ only physically or in terms of education. They are not at all ambitious, pleasant, selfless and soft. All they are interested in is an ordinary life and working as little as possible. Simply, when we meet each other in the initial phase of communication, they see that I'm not like them, they are not fascinated and friend zone me in the beginning. Maybe there will be sexual tension or interesting and even connection conversation, but they really don't want to have anything more than that with me.

I don't want to continue the post by deviating from the initial topic. I will continue as you recommended me to test things and I hope that soon I will be able to set up new experiences, which will once and for all solve the problem of why my social value is unattainable to women and my personality directed in that direction is dissimilar.

Cheers,
Whiteheart