Seducing dominant girls

[topcat]

MODERATOR NOTE: responses to this post split from thread to not derail.

If you are not that type (as I am not) you basically just end up having to go in a bit under the radar so you aren't triggering their "hey this guy isn't the kind of guy I want! I want a soft guy!" reflex.

This is interesting to me, as these types are also my preference.

What reasoning do they give for their aversion to overtly dominant men?

 

[ChrisXKiss]

My dominant girlfriends, as well as dominant chicks I've had as female friends, have typically mostly approached their softer/more feminine prior boyfriends themselves. Basically they look for guys who seem shy and nerdy, then approach them, chat them up, and propose doing something with them, then persist until they get the guy if he's at first a little standoffish.

Sometimes they will go for guys who approach them, if those guys seem soft/shy enough and trigger their "this is my type!" radar.

If you are not that type (as I am not) you basically just end up having to go in a bit under the radar so you aren't triggering their "hey this guy isn't the kind of guy I want! I want a soft guy!" reflex.

I don't want to derail the thread, that said this is really interesting. I also like these women quite a bit, and I've always struggled to understand how to even approach and move things with them.

It's more or less what you say, they feel pretty dominant in their behaviour, so because I don't want to just be submissive to them, it feels like a class that doesn't really go anywhere.

At least with more submissive women I understand I have to go in and lead, it's straightforward. With them I don't exactly get what is the goal.

Is it to go in and outdominate them? Whatever they throw at you to frame it as they are chasing you, your know better than them, and they should follow you? It feels more antagonistic than I like, and haven't managed to really make it work either.

I have tried being more soft and letting them take the lead as long as they want me around too, but this rarely goes anywhere either, it kills most sexual tension and at best we become friends. And I get it, at some point you do have to make a move and have sex, she won't just jump on you.

So could you explain what you mean with "having to go in a bit under the radar so you aren't triggering their "hey this guy isn't the kind of guy I want! I want a soft guy!" reflex", and how to transition from this to being the more dominant party in the interaction?

I'd say for me personally, having a woman that initiates things up to a point is something I enjoy, since I don't want to always feel I have to take care of her and plan things all the time, but of course I'd also want to have dominant sex with her and have her all lovey dovey with me in the relationship.

 

[Chase]

@topcat,

What reasoning do they give for their aversion to overtly dominant men?

In the past I asked a few directly why they went for nerdier/quieter guys. One was a friend, one was a girlfriend.

I basically said, "You're a beautiful girl with tons of success and ambition. Why do you [or in the case of the girlfriend, did you before me] keep going for weak, nerdy guys who are below your level?"

They both gave me some variation of, "I'd be worried a more ambitious guy would just forget about me," which really surprised me because they were both so vivacious and confident. I was like "Whaaaaaa...!"

But the takeaway I had was that dominant girls feel safer when they're in control. Or think they feel safer that way. So they try to find guys they can have control over.

Another dominant girlfriend I had long-term basically would perpetually have insecurity flare-ups throughout the relationship because she could not control me and did not feel safe. The best response to that was always simply holding my ground and teasing her about being such a control freak, while also showing I understood whatever issue she was being panicky about. Get her to feel understood, get her to laugh at herself, then get her to ease up.

Of those two earlier girls (the friend and the girlfriend), they both ultimately married dudes I 100% approve of as on their levels energy/ambition/achievement/status-wise, so at least for marriage it looks like they got their houses in order.

Sometimes I wonder if I contributed to that by pointing out that their choices in dudes were not on their levels!

Chase

 

[Chase]

@ChrisXKiss,

I don't want to derail the thread, that said this is really interesting. I also like these women quite a bit, and I've always struggled to understand how to even approach and move things with them.

It's more or less what you say, they feel pretty dominant in their behaviour, so because I don't want to just be submissive to them, it feels like a class that doesn't really go anywhere.

At least with more submissive women I understand I have to go in and lead, it's straightforward. With them I don't exactly get what is the goal.

Is it to go in and outdominate them? Whatever they throw at you to frame it as they are chasing you, your know better than them, and they should follow you? It feels more antagonistic than I like, and haven't managed to really make it work either.

I have tried being more soft and letting them take the lead as long as they want me around too, but this rarely goes anywhere either, it kills most sexual tension and at best we become friends. And I get it, at some point you do have to make a move and have sex, she won't just jump on you.

So could you explain what you mean with "having to go in a bit under the radar so you aren't triggering their "hey this guy isn't the kind of guy I want! I want a soft guy!" reflex", and how to transition from this to being the more dominant party in the interaction?

I'd say for me personally, having a woman that initiates things up to a point is something I enjoy, since I don't want to always feel I have to take care of her and plan things all the time, but of course I'd also want to have dominant sex with her and have her all lovey dovey with me in the relationship.

Indirect approach, nothing too bombastic, basically calibrate to the girl's energy.

These girls tend to be excitable on the approach, so you don't really need arousal (they are already in an aroused state). Dumping a bunch more arousal in makes you look like a player or a clown. Instead you need to create variance energy, where you are this chill, composed guy who is taking in their energy and appreciating it.

You just focus on building similarity with them for a while, with some intermittent small compliance. "Let me see that whatever it is" "Hey let's grab seats" "Let's go over here" etc. Most of the compliance comes from you directing the flow of the conversation, screening her, getting her to open up to you, etc.

How much arousal you build later on depends on the girl's personality. The ones with a wry sense of humor I find chase framing works very well with. The ones without much sense of humor who are just "dominate, dominate, dominate" you try chase frames with and they just sort of bounce off them, so then you go "okay, well scratch that for this chick" and just focus on building similarity while getting the occasional relaxed touch in here and there. I've never found caveman game effective with these types.

The behavior of the dominant ones you can't really build arousal with when you pull them is funny. You get them to your place, or hotel, or wherever, get them comfortable, go for the kiss, and they have this visible moment of, "Oh -- what?" followed by "Hmm, okay!" and then they go for it. It's like since they're so focused on being dominant they do not pick up the subtle signals that this is a seduction -- but they are still seduced anyway, so once they realize you want that with them they go with it. The ones you're able to build more overt arousal with OTOH know what they're going with you for and participate in the seduction (i.e., by keeping up the flirtation) the whole way.

Chase

 

[ChrisXKiss]

Indirect approach, nothing too bombastic, basically calibrate to the girl's energy.

These girls tend to be excitable on the approach, so you don't really need arousal (they are already in an aroused state). Dumping a bunch more arousal in makes you look like a player or a clown. Instead you need to create variance energy, where you are this chill, composed guy who is taking in their energy and appreciating it.

You just focus on building similarity with them for a while, with some intermittent small compliance. "Let me see that whatever it is" "Hey let's grab seats" "Let's go over here" etc. Most of the compliance comes from you directing the flow of the conversation, screening her, getting her to open up to you, etc.

How much arousal you build later on depends on the girl's personality. The ones with a wry sense of humor I find chase framing works very well with. The ones without much sense of humor who are just "dominate, dominate, dominate" you try chase frames with and they just sort of bounce off them, so then you go "okay, well scratch that for this chick" and just focus on building similarity while getting the occasional relaxed touch in here and there. I've never found caveman game effective with these types.

The behavior of the dominant ones you can't really build arousal with when you pull them is funny. You get them to your place, or hotel, or wherever, get them comfortable, go for the kiss, and they have this visible moment of, "Oh -- what?" followed by "Hmm, okay!" and then they go for it. It's like since they're so focused on being dominant they do not pick up the subtle signals that this is a seduction -- but they are still seduced anyway, so once they realize you want that with them they go with it. The ones you're able to build more overt arousal with OTOH know what they're going with you for and participate in the seduction (i.e., by keeping up the flirtation) the whole way.

Very interesting. I had this feeling that if I tried to build compliance with such a woman after letting her express her dominant energy, she would just casually reject it. Like why would she comply to someone that is clearly not dominant over her?

But I surely understand the power of being more chill, it has some dominance in itself, in the sense that you really ground all her energy. Funny how that's something I could do more naturally than being very energetic, but haven't used it that well.

What would you say about the fundamentals they are looking for? You mentioned glasses in the other post and also that they tend to go for weak, nerdy, quiet guys here.

What attracts them to these guys though? Is it the looks, their calm composure, their authenticity, maybe a particular skill or art they excel at? Because even if they feel safer with them I guess they must feel sexually aroused by them a bit, in order to be pursuing them, having sex and getting into relationships.

And if there is no charisma, no leadership qualities, no strong non-verbals or verbals, what is really that makes these dominant go getters feel: "That's a guy I want to have!" ?

 

[Chase]

@ChrisXKiss,

What would you say about the fundamentals they are looking for? You mentioned glasses in the other post and also that they tend to go for weak, nerdy, quiet guys here.

From the patterns I have seen:

• They often date skinny, nerdy guys (who are sometimes a bit short as well)
  
  
• When they date muscular guys, those guys are usually the really nerdy muscular ones (software developer, goofy face, nerdy interests, etc.)
  
  
• They will OCCASIONALLY go for the conventionally hot guy, usually only for an ONS/fling though (e.g., on the rebound, etc.)

What attracts them to these guys though? Is it the looks, their calm composure, their authenticity, maybe a particular skill or art they excel at? Because even if they feel safer with them I guess they must feel sexually aroused by them a bit, in order to be pursuing them, having sex and getting into relationships.

From the guys I have met that they dated, the dudes were nerdy but not usually WEAK.

Like, even if they had not been laid in a year or more, they weren't desperate or anything. They weren't crying about it or what have you. They were content to just do work/school/nerd stuff.

The vibe I get from these girls is consistently that they are looking for "diamonds in the rough."

Sort of like, "Ha HA! All those other dumb, superficial girls overlooked this guy, because he didn't have the superficial characteristics of male attractiveness... but actually I have recognized his attractive male value!"

I have never seen a dominant girl with like an overweight misogynist neckbeard nerd, for instance. Or some desperate clinger.

It's always a slim nerdy guy with a decent job who has self-respect for himself, even if he's not exactly a ladies man.

A lot of the times when they break up with these guys it occurs when the guy displays weakness.

e.g., I have seen breakup reasons such as:

• Guy got needy and started saying he wanted to be exclusive. Broken up with shortly after. (seen multiple times)
• Guy was leaving town and pushed for the girl to come live with him and marry him. Broken up with shortly after.
• Guy kept premature ejaculating and getting sick and the girl felt like he was too weak. Broken up with shortly after.
• Guy masturbated into a sock while the girl was in the shower after they had sex instead of coming into the shower and banging her. Then got angry that she criticized him for his sock-fuckery. Then cried and apologized when she was disgusted. Broken up with shortly after.

Honestly, seeing the shit guys do in relationships, I am like, "I would 100% dump all these guys too if I was a chick. No wonder they can't keep these gals!"

The sock one I still can't get over... that whole situation was just bonkers to me. I don't know how that kind of thing happens. Dudes be crazy!

And if there is no charisma, no leadership qualities, no strong non-verbals or verbals, what is really that makes these dominant go getters feel: "That's a guy I want to have!" ?

Again, seems to be that "diamond in the rough" sense.

At least until the guy shows real weakness, at which point the girl goes, "Oh. I thought he was a diamond but he's just a piece of glass."

Chase