Cool. JW – Do you believe that when it comes to what you convey in terms of the vibe/romantic connection, that in the end its the woman’s decision whether or not she wants to escalate things with you? Essentially that obviously its the woman’s choice in the end that she wants you (Even though sex is win-win).
I personally believe seduction is mutual, and if there is the slightest form of attraction based on perceived value you can get a woman “out of your league” I was reading puazone and saw how you were getting ransacked by warm approachers (makes no sense to me). I personally believe social norms/race/age and the rest matters a lot for different types of girls…so to have many warm approachers argue that aspect with you seems so utterly dumb.
Of course it is the woman;s decision in the end. I never said that you can force a woman to like you.
However, if she feels like there is a romantic connection, she will choose you 9/10 times.
Yea, I am fully aware that many ‘semi-gurus’ depend on forums to make them feel good by giving their advice with NO form of proof that they can back it up what-so-ever. When they see someone who raises the standard, they feel more threatened, and wish to challenge anything I say just because anyone can play tough guy on the internet.
Anyhow, Aaron Sleazy, and Roosh are a waste of time listening to.
Wel dose’nt that make it a numbers game if she makes the decisions,however i thought you can convice a girl with GAME (domino effect) and choose her by creating the rommantic connection which makes the girl fee Won over by you…
JUSTIN can you make this clear ?….
Wanted to add….lets be real in the cold approach concept…all of the PUA theory is simple backwards rationalizing bullshit to make sense of why some relationships are “odd” why some girls end up with the geeky nerdy guy (due to whatever value she holds of him) and all this stuff. The core truth is only one thing: approaching and acting through your own intent and doing whatever you want. Would you agree?
Too often I see PUAs criticizing others, criticizing lay approach ratios, criticizing “oh man you shouldnt have kissed her so suddenly” and all this nonsense. It’s meaningless I think in the end. It is man, woman, and there is nothing but the approach and sticking it out to the bitter end or even moving on.
Doing what you want is not a bad thing but you want to increase your odds for success so if doing what you wants works then stick with it, but most times doing what you want doesn’t yeild the results that you want and hence the dreadful numbers game. Heck the problem is that everybody is doing what the want thinking it will work. I think the core truth is that you must find the truth through rigourous analysis and TESTING out hypothesis INFIELD.
Micheal not to judge you but it seem like your missing the whole concept of the romantic connection its mutual, graceful and dependable. Either YOU are playing to much of the numbers game or your just not playing the game and just analyizing from the comfort of you computer
I’ve been playing the numbers game, I know this much and obviously doing what I want is not getting me the results in the interaction….but realistically out in field, every girl is raised differently and what not. I feel like even the romantic connection is doing what you want in some ways, does not necessarily mean the girl will logistically value it the same as yours. I definitely am sitting behind the comfort of a computer during analysis, but I have been exhaustively going out and the truth is all girls are different, while the romantic concept seems to hold universally true In a cultural context Kastro, in the end it seems like there are just too many factors to why she may not like you despite your game / wrap. Romantic connection never says anything about making the hell NO girls into “yes girls”…and even then it depends on numbers of approaches mathematically speaking and truthfully analyzing it.
Bro i feel you that it may seem like numbers but so then why has JW been so successful, you got to MAXIMIZE your odds (fashion, vibe, logistics, approach style, psychology, fitness) if you approach game as “anything can happen and the outcome is beyond my control” it becomes really difficult to improve and very depressing. Just remember Justin stuck to the MM for a year without success switch to the DOMINO EFFECT and look how efficient is now without going out as much. Bro you can do it!
Totally man. I’m waiting on his book. As for style fitness and physique, believe me being a male model in California has got that nailed down. Obviously my outlook looks grim BUT I am NOT saying the outcome is beyond my control. I do agree game is a numbers game vs your game (what you control) and believe me I cannot be any more fit or have a fashion sense which is relative PER GIRL anyways (in terms of fashion). Some girls may think one guys style sucks, others won’t.
Regardless I have been depressed at results, and I have been waiting for the domino effect book so I can LEARN it.
I listen to your the radio i get the impression that you looking for the girl of extradionary calibur just remember game is value based if you not ten then it is unlikely that you will land a ten. And i doubt ever girl out of 30 is messed up maybe game isnt for YOU….take a break… but you got change the mind state
I also wanted to strongly disagree that it is solely value based and the concept of “if im not a ten” makes no sense because technically speaking it differs per girl what a “10” guy is. But obviously, without results – your state of mind doesn’t just change.
Like I said, I had 30 women who there was obviously some physical attractiveness with (not ideal for me clearly), but the amount of rejections and the sheer numbers game was never mentioned on the radio. I felt had they known that the investment was literally so many approaches, that it was seriously not worth it in terms of the QUALITY of girls.
Hey Justin, this is a little off topic. But I hope you can help me a little and get your perspective on something. I wanted to ask, how does your emotional state affect one’s pickup success and to what extent does it matter? The reason why I am asking is I am pretty depressed, my self esteem is pretty low and I’m pretty disconnected. Will these affect the pickup? It is advisable to fix these before going to pickup? I wanted to get your opinion on this since you’re probably one of the only ‘PUAs’ I trust, there’s too much B.S. out there…
I’m not Justin Wayne but I would think that if you are socially depressed, not wanting to talk to anyone etc, ask yourself why. If it is a deep truth like you don’t like such as your fitness, your appearance, etc some of these are in your control then you need to fix your foundations. I doubt being overweight can help you much get women out of your league
Lol. I felt like I needed to clarify that when I said women of my quality, I meant in the long term/caliber. I felt a lot of the YES/NO questions addressed to me were sort of one-sided.
But I hope you knew what I meant when I said “quality women” I do not sleep with “1’s and 2’s” but it is very much depressing when certain women are not of my HIGHEST preference (Does not mean I’m not attracted to the girls I sleep with…I wouldn’t even be able to bring it up if that was the case).
The people were blasting me for “not knowing what I want” out of all my interactions. I don’t go in planning to get a girlfriend. Obviously I want SEX, but please make no mistake: I am not indecisive in the physical attractiveness of the women I like…..
One part of the interview did confuse me, i did notice that when I’m very getting to know her/build social comfort in a direct approach, one could consider it “indirect vibe” after the direct opener…but would you even physically escalate in the indirect phase?
Like talking about her and then escalating or does it always have to be direct flirt, then direct physical escalation in terms of progressive flirting? Something tells me the timing has to make sense with the type of vibe …
the interview was weak. justin wasnt given much time and when he was he acted too polite. it seemed both justin and mike was mocking the interviewer. but after that whole 30 girls comment he was laughing back. my biggest concern is when is ur book coming out?
I think you mean the interviewer was mocking back. In my opinion Justin was hardly given any time and even then it was constantly related back to Mode One stuff which is indescribable direct game…..and which I think was just insane. If I had to go up to every girl and say “wanna fuck” I think there would be an imminent sexual harassment charge against me eventually…but like the host said ….he doesn’t even approach women on the street so I had no idea how he was even suggesting such a crazy idea.
Thanks for realizing this. Too many people were flaming me in the chat room and I was majorly pissed Justin Wayne was not given much time to say much and most of it was so focused on me personally…I in fact apologized to Justin Wayne for the ridiculousness of the interviewer midway when he brought me back. They basically were baiting me to say “I just want to fuck women without a relationship” but they don’t realize all men that look at their wives and vice verse initially think the same thing “damn I’d love to fuck her.” No one thinks “I would love to tell her I want to fuck you then perhaps take it to a relationship level” I don’t know much about Mode One, but it sounds seriously AWFUL.
I myself work in the media/entertainment industry as a notable journalist, so for that interviewer to take such a spotlight on brief drama and blow up my depression was uncalled for. Im also looking to get JW an interview after this ridiculousness for our Santa Monica Magazine and the Sun in California with a circulation of 196K (more than Mode One I’m sure). But I will send out an actual inquiry to you that actual PUAs can gain benefit from than third grade drama.
Justin Wayne I do apologize again on behalf of that interviewer and myself for not hanging up, but I felt if I did not explain it, they would spin it to make game look bad and this simply is NOT the case.
In any case, I am definitely a huge supporter to someone seeking the truth in this world where guys are wasting away in the numbers phenomena.
Also on a good day, to answer the question, I approach around 50 or more women (especially group scenarios) and a good 30 will give me numbers of which most will be inevitable flakes. Very rarely do I stay to prolong conversation. Until JW that is. I noticed even changing my game up to spend even more time with a girl is good, but it is not time in a SOCIAL zone, I do some flashy stuff and it’s hardly a romantic connection. Only recently did I seriously try for a romantic connection….it’s like when you do it, you yourself feel the romance….it’s hard to describe…but yea numbers game is a reality and THAT’S the depression factor for me, the MARGIN of CHOICE women. As for approaches, sometimes i go everyday including weekends for 24-25 days…we are looking at about 1200 approaches a month which yields 480 numbers in a month ( out of 21,600 approaches TOTAL approaches over 18 months (assuming I manage a solid 50 approaches with a number close of at least 20 numbers per day). Assuming my constant texting the next day (mass texting) out of 8640 numbers in a 18 month period and only 30 closes do the math : success rate (assuming the girls even reply…many flake….many reschedule) of .347%.
Now let’s keep in mind, I am doing a very short game and very numbers game. Very Paul Janka as I talk with him everyday on Skype and he’s been my mentor above all others. But it’s nowhere near his “11%” close rate as he states in his book. And this ladies and gentlemen is why Justin Wayne is a genius because he seeks the TRUTH. The truth is logistically speaking and value based speaking, Paul Janka and I are not identical in universal values of height, race, or build. Hence why 2 people can get 2 very incredibly different results doing the numbers game…..
And hence DEPRESSION. If only ARC learned to listen to his guests than speak over them, this would have been made known.
Justin, I am sorry you felt that you were not given enough time to speak. I cannot say that I 100% agree with that. I ended up doing a 3-hour episode, and compared to other guests on my show, you had a lot of opportunities to speak.
The good news is, the episode is being downloaded like crazy. Right now, Thursday’s episode is my 3rd most downloaded episode of the 2011-12 season within the first 24 hours after the live show aired. Only my episode about Steve Harvey’s “Think Like a Man” book & movie, and my interview with Sasha Daygame, had more downloads in the first 24 hours.
Michael, with all due respect, you came across as being very inconsistent, contradictory, and generally full of shit. It’s like, in one breath, you were “bragging” …. but in another breath, you were “whining” and “complaining.” You talked about having sex with 30 women in 18 months …. but then you talk about being “depressed” over the fact that most of the women you had sex with were “beneath your standards.”
I had a few minor “philosophical disagreements” with Justin, but overall, I enjoyed conversing with him. I cannot say the same about you Michael. At times, you seemed innocent and lighthearted, but other times, you were just annoying. You rarely gave me a brief, straightforward answer to my direct questions. I don’t like guests and/or call-in listeners who give me very “long-winded / rambling” type answers. You did that a lot.
Finally, you might not agree with my principles and philosophies concerning The Mode One Approach, and that is your choice to feel that way. I will not try to convince you that Mode One Behavior is the way to go. Mode One Behavior is not for everyone. I tell men that all of the time. You have to have thick skin and be totally egotistically indifferent toward the opinions and criticisms of others in order to exhibit Mode One Behavior on a regular basis. Not many men have those qualities.
Again … the show is being listened to by a lot of people, so that is a good thing for Justin. He will surely get more traffic to this website.
Alan Roger Currie
Host, “Upfront & Straightforward with Alan Roger Currie”
Author, “Mode One: Let the Women Know What You’re REALLY Thinking”
Alan, I found you smart enough at times but likewise I found your integrity as an interviewer to be lacksadaisical at best. With all due respect, Mode One has nothing to do with stranger approaching, and I just personally feel your limited audience was more jealous about some fact that I slept with 30 women when someone asked that question of me than understanding the context behind it. And honestly Justin was hardly given a fair talking time. Please approach 1400 women if you do not understand why depression is the issue, if you can’t do that…then with all due respect…stop being full of shit yourself and advising guys to be so blatantly direct with women when you meet them because it’s a bunch of bullshit.
And also if you want yes/no Answers to questions, please stop phrasing them in such a way that assumes someone who goes to a woman knows what he wants in the long scale term of the relationship. No one could tell the future, and I doubt you went to your wife and said, I want you to be my wife….or I want to have sex with you, I want a one night stand, I want a weekend fling. It’s just unrealistic Alan. Anyone can phrase questions In a yes/no manner which makes absolutely no sense.
Michael, you say, “Alan, I found you smart enough at times but likewise I found your integrity as an interviewer to be lacksadaisical at best.”
Alan’s response: What does that even mean? My integrity was “lackadaisical?”
Michael, you say, “With all due respect, Mode One has nothing to do with stranger approaching.”
Alan’s response: If you truly believe that, then you really do not know what The Mode One Approach is all about. The vast majority of women who I have approached have been women I have never met before (i.e., “strangers”)
Michael, you say, “and I just personally feel your limited audience was more jealous about some fact that I slept with 30 women when someone asked that question of me than understanding the context behind it.”
Alan’s response: I can assure you …. none of my listeners were “jealous” of the fact that you had allegedly had sex with 30 women in 18 months. If those stats are true, then that is impressive. You attracted criticisms from my listeners because you did so much whining and complaining. It’s like a guy who used to be really poor, but now they have become very wealthy …. but they’re complaining about it. Or a guy who used to be really obese … but now he has a really slim and athletic physique, but yet, he’s saying he’s “depressed” and that his physique is still beneath his standards. No one wants to hear that.
Michael, you say, “And honestly Justin was hardly given a fair talking time.”
Alan’s response: Again, I beg to differ. I allowed Justin to talk just as much, if not slightly more, than any guest I have ever had on my show. Go back and listen to old shows of mine, and listen to Justin, and I guarantee you … he did not get “cheated out” of any significant amount of talk time. (and you have to remember … there was a 10-15 minute period where his phone dropped; I didn’t even have him on the line)
Michael, you say, “Please approach 1400 women if you do not understand why depression is the issue, if you can’t do that…then with all due respect…stop being full of shit yourself and advising guys to be so blatantly direct with women when you meet them because it’s a bunch of bullshit.”
Alan’s response: I would never encourage any of my male clients to approach 1400 women in a short period of time “just because” or just for the hell of it. There would have to be a very good, valid reason for me encouraging a man to approach that many women. And yes … The Mode One Approach is all about expressing one’s romantic and/or sexual desires, interests, and intentions in a manner that is HIGHLY SELF-ASSURED, UPFRONT, and STRAIGHT-TO-THE-POINT. I don’t believe in lying to women, bullshitting women, or engaging in manipulative ‘head games’ with women.
Michael, you say, “And also if you want yes / no answers to questions, please stop phrasing them in such a way that assumes someone who goes to a woman knows what he wants in the long scale term of the relationship.”
Alan’s response: I always know what I want from a woman when I approach them. Always. Now, granted, my desires, interests, and intentions might CHANGE as I get to know a woman better, but AT THE TIME I FIRST MEET A WOMAN, I know what I want.
You said you slept with 30 women in 18 months. It’s obvious you just wanted casual sex. If you slept with that many women, it is more than obvious that you did not want a long-term and/or monogamous relationship with any of those women. Be REAL with yourself young man.
Michael, you say, “No one could tell the future, and I doubt you went to your wife and said, I want you to be my wife….or I want to have sex with you, I want a one night stand, I want a weekend fling. It’s just unrealistic Alan.”
Alan’s response: I would very much beg to differ with you. In my lifetime, I have met WAY MORE men who think like me, than I have met men who think like you. Most of my male friends and acquaintances know EXACTLY what they want from a woman by the end of their first conversation with her.
You take my older brother. He said he knew after his first conversation with his now-wife that he wanted to marry her. And sure enough, 2 1/2 years after they first met, they were married. I would say with me, probably no less than 75-80% of the women I have met in my life, I knew immediately if I wanted a long-term monogamous relationship with them, a long-term non-monogamous relationship, a short-term monogamous relationship, or a short-term non-monogamous relationship.
Michael, you say, “Anyone can phrase questions In a yes/no manner which makes absolutely no sense.”
Alan’s response: I didn’t say I wanted you to give me simply a “yes” or “no” response, but I definitely did not want you giving me all of those very long-winded, rambling type answers. Most of your responses were waaaaaay too long.
Just letting you know all is good on my behalf. Sure, we will disagree on some things, or have different means to the same end. Other than that, I was not familiar with the format of your usual show. It was entertainment for me. Looking forward to when you come to NY.
to be honest the majority of time A.R.C. was stating his opinion when one of you guys were about to say sumthing good , “i personally beleive that blah/ i dont aggree with…” was not called for as i wanted to hear what justin+micheal wanted to say not the opinions of the interviewer
starlingpua, you say, “to be honest the majority of time A.R.C. was stating his opinion when one of you guys were about to say sumthing good.”
Alan’s response: That is debatable. For starters, I always express my opinions on my show. Just about all talk radio hosts express their own opinions on their own show. If someone says something that I agree with, I am going to say that. If a guest says something that I disagree with, then I am going to express that. Simple as that.
starlingpua, you say, “I personally beleive that blah / i dont agree with… was not called for as i wanted to hear what justin+micheal wanted to say not the opinions of the interviewer”
Alan’s response: Then you were listening to the wrong show partner. I am never going to do a show where I am just “quiet” as my guests and listeners talk. On any given episode of my show, I am going to either express strong agreements with what my guests / listeners are saying, and/or I am going to express strong disagreements with what my guests and call-in listeners are saying. That’s just how I roll ….
you always give sick reply’s lol what ive noticed is if you dont agree with suttin you will flat out say it like in the janka interview A.R.C what do you consider yourself though man? dating coach? not a pua though right
Hey Michael, thanks for your reply to my post above. The advice about working on my fundamentals resonated well with me. Any chance you’d be willing to advise me about a couple more things via email? I’d appreciate your time since you seem like you’ve gotten quite some experience.
I’ve gotten much experience, but it’s not a path I recommend because it was like flipping coins for months. Carl, I just mean like if you truly are not happy with say your body, do it for you. Work out, not be one of those guys that thinks he needs women with a great body. In the past, many gorgeous intimidating women have chosen me above most guys and I myself am average despite the fact that I model part time.
I recommend if you have anything that makes you upset about people, eliminate the belief. Every person is different is the ONLY generalization I ever make. I don’t call some girls “club girls” “nerdy girls” etc. Everyone is different. You just need to give people a chance. I used to be extremely incredibly high ego in high school. I am an extrovert, but I thought largely people were users, girls were pointless, etc. I suggest eliminating terrible beliefs like this if you have it. It can only create a negative spiral of thinking in the best of us.
Huge fan of your work. You are about the only one who stresses being sexual and provocative around women. Can you recommend any more examples of sexual talk besides “Talk dirty me” and “Ooh Say it again”? Books, movies, websites etc. Your books and seduction stories have really inspired me to upgrade my mouth piece.
I guess a lot of what you said clears up some of the question style format. I think we will have to disagree with the concept of immediately knowing if a girl is my wife or not, but I seriously appreciate the clarification. I think we will have to agree to disagree with the concept of the long winded answers, but I felt there was a need to be more elaborate on the matter you didn’t which is OK.
As for Mode One, thank you for explaining it to me and that you don’t in fact advocate guys do that, it really clears it up but I also cleared up the fact which if your readers knew I approached over 1200 women a month, then they would probably know its not just “whining and complaining” but to someone who does not get why this would be, I can see how this is perceived. In any case, I definitely understand the format of the show better so it makes more sense now especially with mode one and your style of interview and at least you are upfront about it, which not many people do.
@ Michael: Fair enough. We’ll just have to “agree to disagree” on many of the issues that you and I have different opinions on. Again though, I still say that I would never approach 1,000+ women per month, or even per year, if the end result is that it was leaving me feeling “depressed,” or at minimum, “dissatisfied.” What is the point then? Secondly, I would never have sex with 30 or more women in an 18-24 month period if I felt that most of the women I was exchanging orgasms with were “beneath my standards.” That just does not make sense to me. My two recommendations would be: 1) Stop approaching so many women, and 2) emphasize QUALITY over QUANTITY.
@ JD: I am very biased, but as far as books go, I think the best book out there that discusses in detail that art of “talking dirty” to women that you’ve just met is my own book, “Oooooh . . . Say it Again: Mastering the Fine Art of Verbal Seduction and Aural Sex” (Amazon & Barnes&Noble). I haven’t read, or heard about, any other book that discusses in detail that particular talent.
As far as movies go, here would be my recommendations for films that had a male character who utilized the art of sexually provocative and/or erotically explicit “verbal seduction” techniques:
Adult Films:
– “Talk Dirty to Me” (1980)
– “Talk Dirty to Me, Part II” (1983)
Mainstream FIlms:
– “Shame” (Michael Fassbender’s character of ‘Brandon’)
– Many James Bond films with Sean Connery as James Bond
– “Vicky, Cristina, Barcelona” (Javier Bardem’s character of ‘Juan Antonio’)
– “The Good Wife” (Sam Neill’s character of ‘Neville Gifford’)
– “Internal Affairs” (Richard Gere’s character of ‘Dennis Peck’)
@starlingpua: With all due respect to those who use “pua” in their monikers and pseudonyms, I personally do not like the term “pick up artist.” Among other reasons, that is simply not what I do or who I am. I consider myself more of a “bold, straightforward, truth-teller.” That is really what I do. I don’t approach women with a “I want to get you in bed anyway possible” mentality. What I do is simply approach women, and very boldly, confidently, provocatively and straightforwardly let them know that I want to exchange orgasms with them at some point in the near future. They either 1) reciprocate my desires & interests, 2) resist my desires & interests, or 3) reject my desires & interests.
#1 and #3 scenarios are easy to deal with. Mode One Behavior most comes into play with women in the #2 scenario. The women who are interested, but choose to “resist” you to one degree or another. I call these types, “Wholesome Pretenders” and “Erotic Hypocrites.” Those women are my specialty.
Enjoy the rest of your weekend fellas …. the episode is still being downloaded like crazy, so spread the word about it…
Alan I love mode one and the concept, but I don’t think you understood some of the points Michael was making.
Namely, to go out into the streets and approach women asking them to fuck is not really ordinary. Being rejected over and over again is why this leads to depression.
Alan I’m not sure if you’ve done street approaching but going mode one 100% of the time is not feasible and doing it can lead to depression because of the amount of inevitable rejections you’ll get. Sometimes indirect to direct later (mode 2) is needed I think.
Author Allan Roger Currie, do you have any infield videos of the Mode One approach? In real life. Please don’t reference Hollywood movies as they’re scripted. Thanks.
I have mentioned many times on various Internet message boards: Personally, I do not believe in the concept of “in-field videos.” Particularly for an approach like The Mode One Approach. If others like them, more power to them.
My criticisms?
1) Most in-field videos are actually illegal.
Comment: I have worked in the Entertainment Industry and feature-film industry in Hollywood. You cannot record someone on audio and/or video without them signing some sort of “waiver,” and then upload it for reasons that are commercially motivated (i.e., you’re looking to earn a profit from the audio recording or video recording). If you do, the person you recorded or videotaped can actually sue you.
2) Many in-field videos are actually “fake”.
Comment: I know of at least two Dating Coaches / Seduction Gurus (who I will not name) who have videos showing how they have made “fake” in-field videos that LOOK very real to the naive eye. They use actresses and green screens.
3) If a woman knows she’s being audio recorded or videotaped, she’s not going to really be her “true self.”
Comment: Most of the women who I have had X-rated / sexually provocative conversations with during my first-conversation with them would have never been as relaxed and as forthright with me if they knew ahead of time that they were being audiotaped and/or videotaped. Would you like it if a woman was conversing with you on the streets, and then uploaded the video to YouTube without your knowledge?? I know I wouldn’t.
So, it is highly doubtful you will ever see me uploading “in-field” videos.
This guy Allan came of as stubborn and ignorant. Going up to girls and telling them your only after sex doesn’t work. Maybe if you know the girl already for a while and you already established some type of value/connection, but trying that on strangers doesn’t work. This is probably the worst advice I have ever heard anyone give. It might work on the ugly/easy chicks and the ones who lack self esteem, but I don’t think guys want to pursue girls who they don’t find appealing.
On the interview he kept cutting everyone off at the point he disagreed with them and didn’t really give them a chance to explain just so that he can automatically win. I didn’t like that at all. Anyone said something Alan disagreed with he would just cut them off and purposely negatively re-frame what they said and not give them a chance to speak. This guys ego is too big and he thinks hes always right about everything, be a little more humble and give other people the chance to speak without irrationally flipping out on them. It takes away the substantial value of the interview which is what the audience wants.
At the end of the day, the most efficient way to game a girl is based on how she is. Her overall comfort levels, social conditioning, energy levels and self perception are some of the top factors. Trying to game every girl the exact same way is retarded because every girl is different. That is why there are so many different styles of approaching women that have to be considered in every situation. When someone mentioned going indirect, Alan suddenly became bipolar and started bashing it without a good understanding of the concept. It just takes social intelligence and experience to know when to do what, and I tell you that going up to girls and telling them you want to just fuck them will be an extremely inefficient overall method of getting the job done.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “This guy Alan came off as stubborn and ignorant.”
Alan’s response: And that is why for the last 5 years, I have had the #1 rated Dating & Relationships talk radio podcast program on BlogTalkRadio (http://www.pr.com/press-release/404160)
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Going up to girls and telling them that you are only after sex doesn’t work.”
Alan’s response: For YOU … or for ME? I can’t speak for you, but for me, it was worked, and worked wonderfully for 25+ years.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Maybe if you know the girl already for a while and you already established some type of value/connection, but trying that on strangers doesn’t work.”
Alan’s response: See my response above. It is obvious that you are only speaking for YOURSELF. Not ME.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “This is probably the worst advice I have ever heard anyone give.”
Alan’s response: We all have our own individual opinions. The worst advice I have heard? Go up to women … engage in trivial, bullshit “small talk” … build disingenuous “rapport” with women …. develop a very misleading and manipulative “emotional connection” with a woman …. have sex with the woman for a few days or a few weeks … and then create a reason to just dump her for no reason. Most fucked up advice I have ever heard in my life, but yet, this is exactly what over half of the Dating Coaches and Seduction Gurus are teaching men.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “It might work on the ugly/easy chicks and the ones who lack self esteem, but I don’t think guys want to pursue girls who they don’t find appealing.”
Alan’s response: That comment of yours is representative of what is known among intellectuals as “Circular Logic.” Circular logic is when you say “XYZ doesn’t work …. and in those instances where XYZ does seem to work, it’s because the people that it worked on were flawed, naive, or stupid.” That is what you’re doing with that comment. “Mode One Behavior does not work …. and in the event that you do get a woman in bed because of The Mode One Approach, it’s because the women you seduced were highly promiscuous, on drugs, psychotic, extremely needy, ugly, fat, or have something else wrong with them.” That is too funny my friend.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “On the interview he kept cutting everyone off at the point he disagreed with them and didn’t really give them a chance to explain just so that he can automatically win. I didn’t like that at all.”
Alan’s response: It’s funny … no one has said that to me, other than guys on this particular blog site. That is interesting to me. Do I sometimes cut people off when they are talking? Yes, I sure do. 1) If my time is limited, and the guest or call-in listener is “rambling” and not giving me the answer that I am looking for, I will most surely cut them off; 2) if a guest or call-in listener says something that I consider to be totally invalid or representative of bullshit; 3) if the guest or call-in listener is expressing comments that are inconsistent, contradictory, and/or hypocritical.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Anyone who said something that Alan disagreed with, he would just cut them off and purposely negatively re-frame what they said and not give them a chance to speak.”
Alan’s response: Give me specific marks of where this happened. (example: The 0.58:30 mark, the 1.42:37 mark of the interview, and the 2.14:10 mark)
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “This guy’s ego is too big and he thinks he’s always right about everything. Be a little more humble and give other people the chance to speak without irrationally flipping out on them. It takes away from the substantial value of the interview which is what the audience wants.”
Alan’s response: If you don’t like the way I conduct my shows, I would suggest, 1) you never listen to my talk radio podcast program again, and 2) start your own talk radio podcast program on BlogTalkRadio or some other Internet radio / podcast format. I am a “host” … I am not a “moderator.”
A ‘moderator’ is someone who just listens to the viewpoints and opinions of others, without adding in their own opinions (such as a moderator for a U.S. Presidential Debate).
A ‘host’ is someone who invites other people to express their opinions, but he or she is also free to add in their own opinions and viewpoints. The latter is what I do. If you are a guest, or a call-in listener on my show, and you say something that I totally disagree with, I am going to speak my mind about it. If you and others don’t like that … so be it.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “At the end of the day, the most efficient way to game a girl is based on how she is, her overall comfort levels, social conditioning, energy levels and self perception are some of the top factors. Trying to game every girl the exact same way is retarded because every girl is different. That is why there are so many different styles of approaching women that have to be considered in every situation.”
Alan’s response: Where is your book? Where are your CDs or DVDs? How many workshops have you done? I was voted the Top Speaker and Most Informative Presenter at both The Direct Dating Summit in London (November 2010) and The Direct Dating Summit in Las Vegas (March 2012). I have supporters of my three paperbacks in up to 25 different countries. And again, I have a top-rated talk radio podcast program.
It’s really this simple: If all you want is short-term, non-monogamous sex (i.e., “casual” sex) from a woman, you need to have the BALLS and BACKBONE to let a woman know that in a confident, upfront, straightforwardly honest manner. Anything else is cowardly, dishonest, disingenuous, and manipulative. It’s really that simple.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “When someone mentioned going indirect, Alan suddenly became bipolar and started bashing it without a good understanding of the concept.”
Alan’s response. See, there you go … exaggerating. I did not “bash” the concept of being ‘indirect’ with women. Most of the time, I asked Justin, Michael, and the others what their specific definition is of being “indirect.” Many men have different definitions of that.
I am not necessarily against being “indirect” with women, if your definition of it means being honest with women … but just in a more slow, gradual, palatable-on-a-woman’s-ears manner. But if your definition of being”indirect” is blatantly lying to women, giving them the misleading impression that you want something long-term and/or monogamous when you know deep-down that you only want something short-term and/or non-monogamous, then yes … I am a very harsh critic of that bullshit.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “It just takes social intelligence and experience to know when to do what, and I tell you that going up to girls and telling them you want to just fuck them will be an extremely inefficient overall method of getting the job done.”
Alan’s response: I say for the third time …. speak for yourself. The Mode One Approach has always benefited me. Always. I’ve been Mode One with women since the mid-to-late 1980s, and I have not regretted it once.
But, in fairness to other men … if you don’t have thick skin, you are very sensitive to harsh criticisms from women and/or abrupt rejection from women, and you really don’t have the balls or backbone to express your true thoughts, desires, interests, and intentions to women in a bold, straightforward manner … then of course Mode One is not going to be conducive with your personality.
I am not doubting that your style could work in some situations, but from the very limited information that you gave on this particular interview we are under the impression that the situation revolves around stranger approaching. I am also automatically assuming that your generally speaking going after attractive women. Having said all of this, I can guarantee that for the most part going fully direct so fast wont create efficient results. It might create results in the situations that you use them in, but nobody wants to wait for the perfect situation. If it were as easy as telling girls “I want to have sex with you”, according to what you said on the interview 2 out of every 10 girls are down, then it would be as easy as cake to get laid. Just say the same thing to every girl and eventually you will run into that 20% who will fall for those magical words. Its your fault for not explaining your methods clearly in this specific interview, you have to always assume that you will have new listeners and be DETAILED with how exactly you do your thing. The way you made it sound its like you really need no game, just go up and be direct and eventually you will get lucky.
Going direct or indirect has nothing to do with how much “balls” you have, which is what your trying to get at. It has to do with having the social intelligence to know which style of approach is appropriate in context to the situation. Gaming women isn’t “balls” oriented. You don’t go out talking to women with the mentality to prove to yourself you have balls, your going after the women trying to create some type of connection. If you want to prove to yourself that you have balls go wrestle a lion or something. What we want here is results, so that is why we use our social intuition to know which situations need indirect approaches. You should have given Justin Wayne a chance to give you examples about it but you just kept attacking him instead and calling him “mode 2” or whatever that corny thing you said. I don’t have a problem if you dislike going indirect, I just have a problem with how you make it sound like going indirect is inefficient and useless. Not only that but you obviously weren’t open minded enough and willing to listen since you kept interrupting and trying to put words into peoples mouth (going back to what I said about re-framing).
At the end of the day the method someone uses to game women is irrelevant as long as it creates results and has proper ethics. Be more open minded to new ideas and LISTEN to what others say instead of automatically jumping to conclusions about it and trying to make it sound like your method is superior. I wouldn’t even be posting this if you actually gave Justin Wayne and Michael a REASONABLE chance to talk, but since you didn’t I have to come here and dismantle you and expose how hard headed you are. I don’t know if you are even conscious of your annoying re-framing and hard headed behaviors, but they are fairly obvious to any normal open minded person who was listening to this interview.
Like I said before, I am not really attacking your method or questioning your ability to get women. All I am doing is trying to make you consciously aware of how stubborn you are and how rude you are to your guests (when you disagree with them). Also trying to make you aware of how vague you were with your concept of going extremely direct in THIS PARTICULAR interview. I win you lose, accept it and move on or make your life difficult and continue with your bipolar ego driven remarks. Your behaviors are very predictable so I expect you to reply again with progressively more stupidity.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “I am not doubting that your style could work in some situations, but from the very limited information that you gave on this particular interview we are under the impression that the situation revolves around stranger approaching.”
Alan’s response: You backing down from your original opinion already? At first you said, “Going up to girls and telling them that you are only after sex doesn’t work.” Now, you’re saying, “Well, I guess it could work in certain situations.” Which is it? Make up your mind my friend.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “I am also automatically assuming that your generally speaking going after attractive women.”
Alan’s response: I only approach women who possess a physical appearance that is attractive and appealing to my eyes and senses.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Having said all of this, I can guarantee that for the most part going fully direct so fast wont create efficient results.”
Alan’s response: You are very wishy-washy.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “It might create results in the situations that you use them in, but nobody wants to wait for the perfect situation.”
Alan’s response: What is your definition of the “perfect situation?” What is your description of an “imperfect situation” for approaching women, and letting them know your true romantic and/or sexual desires, interests, and intentions?
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “If it were as easy as telling girls ‘I want to have sex with you,’ according to what you said on the interview 2 out of every 10 girls are down, then it would be as easy as cake to get laid.”
Alan’s response: Many times, getting laid is as “easy as cake.” Anytime you meet a woman who is just as interested in engaging in a one-night stand or weekend fling as you are, having sex with this woman is going to seem “as easy as eating cake. Just say the same thing to every girl and eventually you will run into that 20% who will fall for those magical words.”
Justin himself divided women into categories that are similar to me. Justin said during the interview that all women are either “Yes, I am interested” types, “No, I am not interested” types, and “Maybe … I might be interested” types.
I divide all women a man approaches into four categories:
– Reciprocators (i.e., a woman who once she knows what your desires & interests are, she will reciprocate those desires & interests fairly quickly)
– Rejecters (i.e., a woman who once she knows what your desires & interests are, she will let you know fairly quickly that she does *NOT* share the same desire & interests)
– Pretenders (i.e., a woman who once she knows what your desires & interests are, she will initially, temporarily, or indefinitely “pretend” like she is not interested in having sex with you, but deep-down, she is interested; She is just worried about being perceived as an ‘easy lay’ or a ‘slut,’ so she feels compelled to give you the impression that she is a “prudish good girl”)
– Timewasters (i.e., a woman who once she knows what your desires & interests are, she will initially, temporarily or indefinitely give you the misleading impression that she has the same set of desires, interests and intentions … but in reality, she has no interests whatsoever in sharing your company in a romantic and/or sexual manner; She is just interested in a) flattering attention, b) entertaining conversation and platonic social companionship, c) financial and non-financial favors, or d) an empathetic listening ear [see this article: http://www.examiner.com/article/men-be-wary-of-the-you-just-want-to-get-my-pants-guilt-trap%5D)
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Its your fault for not explaining your methods clearly in this specific interview, you have to always assume that you will have new listeners and be DETAILED with how exactly you do your thing.”
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “The way you made it sound its like you really need no game, just go up and be direct and eventually you will get lucky.”
Alan’s response: Actually, that is essentially what I believe. I believe in simply approaching women …. letting them know what you true, genuine desires, interests, and intentions are …. and each woman is either going to present herself as a ‘reciprocator,’ ‘rejecter,’ ‘pretender,’ or ‘timewaster.’ The key for you is developing the skill set to distinguish a “pretender” from a “rejecter,” and distinguishing a “timewaster” from a “reciprocator.”
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Going direct or indirect has nothing to do with how much ‘balls’ you have, which is what your trying to get at.”
Alan’s response: I beg to differ. In my mind, that is actually the ONLY THING that separates the ‘direct’ approachers from the ‘indirect’ approachers. Indirect guys are generally those who are afraid of being rejected and/or afraid of being harshly criticized. Direct guys are those who really don’t give a fuck if they get abruptly rejected or harshly criticized.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “It has to do with having the social intelligence to know which style of approach is appropriate in context to the situation.”
Alan’s response: I disagree. I think a man does have to possess a certain amount of social intelligence to know 1) how QUICKLY he should verbally escalate (i.e., transition from a non-sexual conversation to a sexually provocative conversation) and 2) what is the most appropriate language to use with women in various situations (e.g., PG-13 language, R-rated language, or X-rated / XXX-rated language). Other than these two factors, social intelligence is a very secondary priority.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Gaming women isn’t ‘balls’ oriented. You don’t go out talking to women with the mentality to prove to yourself you have balls, your going after the women trying to create some type of connection. If you want to prove to yourself that you have balls go wrestle a lion or something.”
Alan’s response: Approaching women, conversing with women, and ultimately attracting them and seducing them is ALL ABOUT BALLS and BACKBONE. That is what “game”, in my opinion anyway, is ALL ABOUT. A man with no balls and no backbone is never going to be able to handle abrupt rejection from a woman and harsh criticism from a woman in the same manner that a man who has BALLS and BACKBONE.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “What we want here is results, so that is why we use our social intuition to know which situations need indirect approaches.”
Alan’s response: I already told you the two factors that require a sense of social intelligence and personal intuition: 1) How quickly do you transition from a platonic / non-sexual conversation to a sexually provocative conversation? 2) When do you use PG-13 language VS R-rated language VS X-rated/XXX-rated language?
Other than that, social intelligence and intuition is a very secondary priority.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “You should have given Justin Wayne a chance to give you examples about it but you just kept attacking him instead and calling him ‘mode 2’ or whatever that corny thing you said.”
Alan’s response: I take offense to your accusation that I “attacked” Justin during the interview on my talk radio show. I never “attack” any of my guests. There is a big difference between DISAGREEING with someone’s opinion, and “attacking” them. There were some things that Justin expressed that I either a) asked for further clarification on, or b) expressed a philosophical disagreement with, but at no point during the interview did I “attack” him or his philosophies.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “I don’t have a problem if you dislike going indirect, I just have a problem with how you make it sound like going indirect is inefficient and useless.”
Alan’s response: I have never been officially quoted as saying that approaching women and letting them know your desires, interests and intentions in an “indirect” manner is “ineffective.” I know men who have gotten laid by being indirect with women.
Here are my main criticisms of being “indirect” with women:
1) Being indirect requires engaging in much more trivial, inconsequential, and platonic-type conversation than most ‘direct’ type guys are willing to do;
2) Being indirect with women opens the door for women who are “Timewaster” types to cause you to waste valuable time and even money;
3) The primary motivation for being indirect is usually to diminish the chances of being harshly criticized by a woman and/or to avoid being abruptly rejected by a woman.
Other than those three reasons, I have no major “beef” against a man being indirect with women.
What I do have a major problem with is this: Men who blatantly LIE to women about what their true desires, interests, and intentions are …. and men who give women the misleading impression that they want a relationship that is long-term, emotionally profound, and monogamous, when they know deep-down that they just want some variation of casual sex. I despise men who use such tactics.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Not only that but you obviously weren’t open minded enough and willing to listen since you kept interrupting and trying to put words into peoples mouth (going back to what I said about re-framing).”
Alan’s response: You have to provide me with specific marks of the interview (e.g., “Listen to the portion of the discussion that starts at the 2.15:38 mark…”) that will support your allegations and accusations.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “At the end of the day the method someone uses to game women is irrelevant as long as it creates results and has proper ethics.”
Alan’s response: What is your definition of “creating results”?? What is your specific definition and description of “proper ethics??” When it comes to the attraction and seduction of women, you NEVER have “total control” over the results you experience. The only thing you have direct control over is 1) how you behave toward women, and 2) how you respond and react to women’s behavior toward you.
As far as ethics, my number one ethic is UPFRONT, STRAIGHTFORWARD HONESTY regarding your true desires, interests, and intentions toward wanting to have sex with a woman.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Be more open minded to new ideas and LISTEN to what others say instead of automatically jumping to conclusions about it and trying to make it sound like your method is superior.”
Alan’s response: Realistically, I am going to always favor The Mode One Approach over any other method of approaching women. Always. If I did not, why even write any books? I believe the manner in which I approach women is the best method.
That being said though, I do not intentionally “disrespect” any other method that is promoted by others, as long as it does not promote lying to women or manipulating women.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “I wouldn’t even be posting this if you actually gave Justin Wayne and Michael a REASONABLE chance to talk, but since you didn’t I have to come here and dismantle you and expose how hard headed you are.”
Alan’s response: If you believe you are “dismantling” me, then more power to you. LMAO. Now that is FUNNY.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “I don’t know if you are even conscious of your annoying re-framing and hard headed behaviors, but they are fairly obvious to any normal open minded person who was listening to this interview.”
Alan’s response: We all have our own individual opinions. You have yours … and I have mine.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Like I said before, I am not really attacking your method or questioning your ability to get women. All I am doing is trying to make you consciously aware of how stubborn you are and how rude you are to your guests (when you disagree with them). Also trying to make you aware of how vague you were with your concept of going extremely direct in THIS PARTICULAR interview. I win you lose, accept it and move on or make your life difficult and continue with your bipolar ego driven remarks. Your behaviors are very predictable so I expect you to reply again with progressively more stupidity.”
Alan’s response: Son, you are not on my level. If you were, you would have your own website, your own book, and be financially compensated for giving other men good, solid advice. As far as I know, you are not in that category. If you do have a book, what is the title of it? If you have been a featured speaker at a workshop or conference, what was the title of it?
Let me ask you this “Kobe” … let’s say I put you in a social environment that included these seven women:
1) A woman who is attracted to you, but she is only interested in having sex with you within the context of a long-term monogamous relationship that is going to lead to marriage;
2) A woman who is attracted to you, and she is potentially interested in having a one-night stand or weekend fling with you, but if you start talking about sex too quickly, she is going to give you the misleading impression that she is “offended,” and is going to try to make you feel like a “jerk”; But in reality, she is waiting for you to demonstrate your sense of backbone and confident persistence;
3) A woman who is attracted to you, and she prefers to engage in a long-term monogamous relationship with you, but she would be willing to settle for a “friends-with-benefits” relationship
4) A woman who has no attraction to you whatsoever, but she is willing to talk to you for at least 10-15 minutes to see if she can get you to flatter her and tell her how beautiful she is;
5) A woman who has no attraction for you whatsoever, but she wants to add you to her stable of “male platonic friends,” and get you to go out bowling with her and dancing with her, event though she knows she will never have sex with you;
6) A woman who is not attracted to you romantically or sexually at all, but she is willing to temporarily “pretend” as though she is in order to see if you will offer to “wine & dine” her, and spend money on her to buy her free lunches or free dinners;
7) A woman who is not attracted to you at all, but she is willing to talk to you for at least 10-15 minutes about her disappointments with other men, her frustrations with other men, and she wants to “vent” about how all men are “jerks” and “assholes”, and she wants you to empathize with her;
So … “Kobe” …. if I gave you 75 minutes (90 minutes tops) to approach and converse with ALL SEVEN WOMEN … even though you had NO IDEA which of the seven women had what specific motivation … how would you go about conversing with each one? How would you start out talking to them? You have an average of 10-13 minutes to converse with each woman ….
Alan I personally already feel like we have explained both our sides and that I understand mode one and you yourself have clarified that you don’t advocate approaching women. But I do not get why there is an argument against “every woman’s different” as Kobe Bryant explains.
It is a fact of life, everyone is different…not sure why asking him if he has written books, been voted top this and that in ways of qualification yourself helps here…..I actually wanted to know if Mode One considers the types of women or just classifies them as pretenders etc based on the mode one method not working with these women.
To anyone that does not understand, mode one seems to be explicitly direct game and assumes you know what you want with a woman when you approach her, but this is something I disagreed with earlier and we agreed to disagree.
Michael says, “Alan I personally already feel like we have explained both our sides and that I understand mode one and you yourself have clarified that you don’t advocate approaching women.”
Alan’s response: When did I *ever* say that “I don’t advocate approaching women?” I very much advocate approaching women. I said to you that I don’t advocate approaching women, and especially 1,000+ women in 6-12 months, “just for the hell of it” or “just for practice.” But I never said that I don’t advocate approaching women in general.
Michael says, “But I do not get why there is an argument against ‘every woman’s different’ as Kobe Bryant explains.”
Alan’s response: I don’t believe that I have to behave differently toward women simply because they are different. Truth is truth. There are only 2-3 variations of truth. Upfront, straightforward truth …. “beat-around-the-bush” truth … and camouflaged truth. I’m all about truth.
Michael says, “It is a fact of life, everyone is different…not sure why asking him if he has written books, been voted top this and that in ways of qualification yourself helps here…..”
Alan’s response: When people treat me like “I don’t know what I’m talking about,” or that my advice and philosophies are “nonsense,” then yes …. I am going to ask you, WHAT IS YOUR CREDIBILITY? Who are YOU to criticize ME? Many people are like that. That’s why most sports shows only hire athletes who have a high degree of credibility to criticize other athletes. Because if you’re an “average Joe,” and you’re criticizing LeBron or Michael Vick, it’s like, “WHO ARE YOU to criticize LeBron or Vick??”
Michael says, “I actually wanted to know if Mode One considers the types of women or just classifies them as pretenders etc based on the mode one method not working with these women.”
Alan’s response: Again, I believe every woman you approach is either going to be a Reciprocator, Rejecter, Pretender, or Timewaster. As I said, the key to Mode One is separating the Reciprocators from the Timewasters, and the Rejecters from the Pretenders.
Michael says, “To anyone that does not understand, mode one seems to be explicitly direct game and assumes you know what you want with a woman when you approach her, but this is something I disagreed with earlier and we agreed to disagree.”
Alan’s response: And we will continue to “agree to disagree.” I firmly believe that all men and women know what they want RIGHT NOW. You may not know what you want tomorrow, one week from now, one month from now, or one year from now. But you always know what you want from someone RIGHT NOW. I always know what I want from a woman at the time I approach them. Always.
2/3 – 3/4 of the time, I want casual sex from women. For most women I approach, I usually just want a one-night stand, a weekend fling, or some other variation of casual sex. Only maybe 10-20% of the women I approach do I look at as “potential girlfriend” material.
Michael, look at that “7 women in social environment” situation that I posed to “Kobe”, and give me your thoughts on how you would handle that…..
@Alan
Thanks for those recommendations. You are like Morpheus to me. Being indirect and asexual around beautiful women is just not NATURAL. And it def wont get that pussy wet.
IMO…I think Justin Wayne should be on your show again. Maybe after his book is released. You 2 are the best in the game. I’d def like to hear both you chop up game for a few more hours. If it does happen make sure it’s a closed session. No phone calls that distract from the topic. No offense to you Michael.
@Everyone Else
Women flaunt there sexuality all the time. Wearing sexy revealing outfits that drive us insane.
A Mode One guy just fights FIRE with FIRE. He flaunts his sexuality verbally. Being asexual and indirect around women is like bringing a knife to gun fight.
“1) Most in-field videos are actually illegal.
Comment: I have worked in the Entertainment Industry and feature-film industry in Hollywood. You cannot record someone on audio and/or video without them signing some sort of “waiver,” and then upload it for reasons that are commercially motivated (i.e., you’re looking to earn a profit from the audio recording or video recording). If you do, the person you recorded or videotaped can actually sue you.”
This is the biggest bunch of bullshit out there. Dude, stick to dating advice, don’t start advising on what you don’t know. Firstly, it depends on STATE law. Secondly, there are only a couple states that are really strict about recording in public if you have a commercial intent. Thirdly, just uploading on YouTube doesn’t really make it commercial.
@ anon …. we all have our opinions. I am not into “in-field” videos. If my (male) clients have a problem with that, so be it. I never have been into those, and 99% chance, I will never be into them. I would never want someone audiotaping me and/or videotaping me without me knowing about it, and then uploading a conversation of mine to YouTube. So, I believe in “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
@ Curious Day Gamer …. I am not trying to gain you as a client or customer, so if you do not like what I have to say … ignore me. Simple, really.
@ J.D. … man, that is so funny! Literally, just two days ago, I had a male client refer to me as “The Morpheous of the Dating & Relationships” world. When I spoke in Las Vegas in March 2012, I had 2-3 guys say the same thing. They said, “Alan … in your own way, you offer guys your version of the ‘red’ pill and the ‘blue’ pill. You like to talk about reality … and not ‘happy fiction’….” So, I consider that a huge compliment my friend.
Everything you said is representative of how I feel. You can be “charming” by being indirect, but you’re not going to get a woman’s pussy wet. I told the guys in London: I have had women CURSE ME OUT … and then days later, those SAME WOMEN would confess to me that I had their pussy wet. Why? Because I was SEXUALLY PROVOCATIVE and I conversed with them as if I had NO FEAR of being criticized by them or rejected by them.
So Mr Curry is simply saying Justin Wayne is disrespectful to women because he records them, also Mr Curry is saying walk up to a woman and be super direct which means his method propbly works in the Western world not in some parts of the world were cultural beliefs determine how women respond to courtship even in my own language it will just sound vaulgar whichever direct thing u say.Mr Curry also believes he has a top radio podcast so interupting his audience remains insignificant because he is the top host.To conclude from what Mr Curry said he does not demonstrate his method ,perhaps u do in person when there is no recording devices since its not the kindst thing to do.There is a saying ” its not what u do its how u do it” Mr Curry u are insensitive to other people i guess thats why u are mode one as u call it.
This episode is currently ranked #1 in the category of “Romance” / Dating & Relationships on the BlogTalkRadio Internet Radio network (BTR), and it is ranked #52 in the BTR Top 500 Episodes-of-the-Week. That means a LOT of people have been listening to the interview.
That’s all that matters. I’d rather have a “controversial” interview that everyone is listening to, than to have a “pleasant, friendly, basic” interview that no one is listening to.
Justin and I got along … and that is all that matters.
This reminds me of 2009, when I interviewed NY Times Best Selling Author Robert Greene (author of “The Art of Seduction” and “The 48 Laws of Power”). I challenged Greene A LOT during my interview with him, but he was cool with it. He and I got along fine.
But after the interview, many of his male fans wrote me some nasty, harshly critical, hateful Email messages. I was like, “WOW.” Many of them were like, “How DARE YOU challenge an Icon like Robert Greene!!! You asshole! You Jerk!! You are not even on Robert Greene’s level!!!!” Robert wanted to read a copy of ‘Mode One’; I sent him an autographed copy. Again, he and I were cool. He didn’t mind that he and I had some “philosophical differences,” just like Justin doesn’t mind it.
Just drop it and move on. I enjoyed the interview, Justin got to express a lot of his opinions and philosophies, and people are listening to it like crazy.
Damn. Robert Greene is one of my favorite authors. I have to search your archives for that interview. Robert Greene loves indirection and subtlety. Not surprised you clashed with him.
Have you read the “Art of Seduction”? There’s a chapter in it I think you’d identify with. “The Rake”.
Great book but it’s too vague. In that chapter Greene hints that women have a weakness for language and words. But he doesn’t go into much detail. This frustrated me for years until I read your own book on verbal seduction.
Yeah JD, my interview with Robert Greene is my 2nd highest ranked episode EVER. We were supposed to discuss “The Art of Seduction,” but we really didn’t get around to it. I have read that book though.
We talked mainly about “The 48 Laws of Power,” and “The 50th Law,” which had just come out at that time.
Mr Curry here u go again, u are ego cetric, u said it yourself recording is illegal blah blah i was merely commenting. Justin Wayne is humble hence he is able to take it.Tou mr Curry however dont take critisism kindly. Its not about howmany people listen to ur show its about being a nice person .
Justin i was curious will things out of your control be always ‘greater’ than things under your control. and whats your take on ARC idea of ethics because some of the girls seem “Really” into you during the romantic connection so once you decide to let them go don’t they get really pissed
Lol, that was the most ridiculously invaluable interview/show I’ve ever heard. I tried my best to be open minded at first, but wow, an hour was about the maximum any semi intelligent human being could take.
#1: ARC continually flaunts how well the show is performing on BTR. Don’t kid yourself buddy, that’s because Justin’s name is on it, not because of the quality of the show. In the first hour, there was no educational value, simply advertising and you stroking your ego making fun of someone seeking help.
#2: Justin hardly got any time to express his views or ideas, which was the whole reason all those people actually listened to the show. Instead we were stuck listening to ARC literally screaming into the microphone (seriously buddy we get that you’re alpha and dominant and overtly sexual, no need to scream the entire time)
#3: The whole discussion with Mike was pathetic on ARC’s part. It was basically ARC stroking his ego about how cool he is and how good is method is (for which he has NO verifiable proof – I’m sorry being voted best speaker at some event doesn’t even half count, please don’t bring that up again.)
#4: Anyone who has actually hit the clubs and streets and hit on A grade girls (we’re talking models, actresses, strippers, gogo dancers…not the “cute” girl from your hood who likes cheap booze and fun guys) KNOWS that always doing flat out blatant sexual approaches turn this into a bad numbers game. Some girls love it, most girls who don’t dig you off the bat hate it. But I’m sure in your imagination it works like gangbusters, and it sells well, so hey what’s the problem right?
Wow. I can’t believe guys are still replying to this.
All I have to say is …. we ALL have our own set of opinions. Good, bad, critical, not-so-critical, narrow-minded, objective, valid, and invalid. You have yours … and I have mine.
I do have to add this, since you love it when I “stoke my own ego” … you say the only time I get listeners is when I have big-name guests? Well, I will have you know that my most listened to episode of the 2011-12 season was an episode when I actually had NO INVITED GUESTS or EXPERTS on my show AT ALL. It was the episode where I discussed the strengths and weaknesses of Steve Harvey’s book, “Act Like a Lady, Think Like a Man”
So, no one can ever say that the only time I have a lot of listeneres is when my invited guests bring their followers and supporters to my show….
The Justin Wayne Blog 
Cool. JW – Do you believe that when it comes to what you convey in terms of the vibe/romantic connection, that in the end its the woman’s decision whether or not she wants to escalate things with you? Essentially that obviously its the woman’s choice in the end that she wants you (Even though sex is win-win).
I personally believe seduction is mutual, and if there is the slightest form of attraction based on perceived value you can get a woman “out of your league” I was reading puazone and saw how you were getting ransacked by warm approachers (makes no sense to me). I personally believe social norms/race/age and the rest matters a lot for different types of girls…so to have many warm approachers argue that aspect with you seems so utterly dumb.
Of course it is the woman;s decision in the end. I never said that you can force a woman to like you.
However, if she feels like there is a romantic connection, she will choose you 9/10 times.
Yea, I am fully aware that many ‘semi-gurus’ depend on forums to make them feel good by giving their advice with NO form of proof that they can back it up what-so-ever. When they see someone who raises the standard, they feel more threatened, and wish to challenge anything I say just because anyone can play tough guy on the internet.
Anyhow, Aaron Sleazy, and Roosh are a waste of time listening to.
Wel dose’nt that make it a numbers game if she makes the decisions,however i thought you can convice a girl with GAME (domino effect) and choose her by creating the rommantic connection which makes the girl fee Won over by you…
JUSTIN can you make this clear ?….
Wanted to add….lets be real in the cold approach concept…all of the PUA theory is simple backwards rationalizing bullshit to make sense of why some relationships are “odd” why some girls end up with the geeky nerdy guy (due to whatever value she holds of him) and all this stuff. The core truth is only one thing: approaching and acting through your own intent and doing whatever you want. Would you agree?
Too often I see PUAs criticizing others, criticizing lay approach ratios, criticizing “oh man you shouldnt have kissed her so suddenly” and all this nonsense. It’s meaningless I think in the end. It is man, woman, and there is nothing but the approach and sticking it out to the bitter end or even moving on.
Doing what you want is not a bad thing but you want to increase your odds for success so if doing what you wants works then stick with it, but most times doing what you want doesn’t yeild the results that you want and hence the dreadful numbers game. Heck the problem is that everybody is doing what the want thinking it will work. I think the core truth is that you must find the truth through rigourous analysis and TESTING out hypothesis INFIELD.
Micheal not to judge you but it seem like your missing the whole concept of the romantic connection its mutual, graceful and dependable. Either YOU are playing to much of the numbers game or your just not playing the game and just analyizing from the comfort of you computer
Oh trust me.
I’ve been playing the numbers game, I know this much and obviously doing what I want is not getting me the results in the interaction….but realistically out in field, every girl is raised differently and what not. I feel like even the romantic connection is doing what you want in some ways, does not necessarily mean the girl will logistically value it the same as yours. I definitely am sitting behind the comfort of a computer during analysis, but I have been exhaustively going out and the truth is all girls are different, while the romantic concept seems to hold universally true In a cultural context Kastro, in the end it seems like there are just too many factors to why she may not like you despite your game / wrap. Romantic connection never says anything about making the hell NO girls into “yes girls”…and even then it depends on numbers of approaches mathematically speaking and truthfully analyzing it.
Bro i feel you that it may seem like numbers but so then why has JW been so successful, you got to MAXIMIZE your odds (fashion, vibe, logistics, approach style, psychology, fitness) if you approach game as “anything can happen and the outcome is beyond my control” it becomes really difficult to improve and very depressing. Just remember Justin stuck to the MM for a year without success switch to the DOMINO EFFECT and look how efficient is now without going out as much. Bro you can do it!
Totally man. I’m waiting on his book. As for style fitness and physique, believe me being a male model in California has got that nailed down. Obviously my outlook looks grim BUT I am NOT saying the outcome is beyond my control. I do agree game is a numbers game vs your game (what you control) and believe me I cannot be any more fit or have a fashion sense which is relative PER GIRL anyways (in terms of fashion). Some girls may think one guys style sucks, others won’t.
Regardless I have been depressed at results, and I have been waiting for the domino effect book so I can LEARN it.
I listen to your the radio i get the impression that you looking for the girl of extradionary calibur just remember game is value based if you not ten then it is unlikely that you will land a ten. And i doubt ever girl out of 30 is messed up maybe game isnt for YOU….take a break… but you got change the mind state
I personally didn’t feel the 30 girls were of my liking. It really is as simple as that. Were you the one – Manny?
I also wanted to strongly disagree that it is solely value based and the concept of “if im not a ten” makes no sense because technically speaking it differs per girl what a “10” guy is. But obviously, without results – your state of mind doesn’t just change.
Like I said, I had 30 women who there was obviously some physical attractiveness with (not ideal for me clearly), but the amount of rejections and the sheer numbers game was never mentioned on the radio. I felt had they known that the investment was literally so many approaches, that it was seriously not worth it in terms of the QUALITY of girls.
Justin, when will you pick me up?
Where can I watch this interview? I clicked on the pic but I don’t see the interview there
it will be on thursday night at 10pm eastern live
Hey Justin, this is a little off topic. But I hope you can help me a little and get your perspective on something. I wanted to ask, how does your emotional state affect one’s pickup success and to what extent does it matter? The reason why I am asking is I am pretty depressed, my self esteem is pretty low and I’m pretty disconnected. Will these affect the pickup? It is advisable to fix these before going to pickup? I wanted to get your opinion on this since you’re probably one of the only ‘PUAs’ I trust, there’s too much B.S. out there…
I’m not Justin Wayne but I would think that if you are socially depressed, not wanting to talk to anyone etc, ask yourself why. If it is a deep truth like you don’t like such as your fitness, your appearance, etc some of these are in your control then you need to fix your foundations. I doubt being overweight can help you much get women out of your league
Hey Justin..
Lol. I felt like I needed to clarify that when I said women of my quality, I meant in the long term/caliber. I felt a lot of the YES/NO questions addressed to me were sort of one-sided.
But I hope you knew what I meant when I said “quality women” I do not sleep with “1’s and 2’s” but it is very much depressing when certain women are not of my HIGHEST preference (Does not mean I’m not attracted to the girls I sleep with…I wouldn’t even be able to bring it up if that was the case).
The people were blasting me for “not knowing what I want” out of all my interactions. I don’t go in planning to get a girlfriend. Obviously I want SEX, but please make no mistake: I am not indecisive in the physical attractiveness of the women I like…..
Also – super pissed they didn’t really let you talk much on your method!
Hey Justin,
One part of the interview did confuse me, i did notice that when I’m very getting to know her/build social comfort in a direct approach, one could consider it “indirect vibe” after the direct opener…but would you even physically escalate in the indirect phase?
Like talking about her and then escalating or does it always have to be direct flirt, then direct physical escalation in terms of progressive flirting? Something tells me the timing has to make sense with the type of vibe …
I have different categories for each. It depends on the category.
Sent from my iPhone
the interview was weak. justin wasnt given much time and when he was he acted too polite. it seemed both justin and mike was mocking the interviewer. but after that whole 30 girls comment he was laughing back. my biggest concern is when is ur book coming out?
I think you mean the interviewer was mocking back. In my opinion Justin was hardly given any time and even then it was constantly related back to Mode One stuff which is indescribable direct game…..and which I think was just insane. If I had to go up to every girl and say “wanna fuck” I think there would be an imminent sexual harassment charge against me eventually…but like the host said ….he doesn’t even approach women on the street so I had no idea how he was even suggesting such a crazy idea.
Yea I didn’t get much time to say anything. You had the spotlight bro
Sent from my iPhone
Soon. I have been busy recently. Hopefully time will clear.
Sent from my iPhone
question to micheal how many approaches does it take to lay 30 girls in 18 months….it seems like alan roger currie jumps to assumptions a bit to much
Journey,
Thanks for realizing this. Too many people were flaming me in the chat room and I was majorly pissed Justin Wayne was not given much time to say much and most of it was so focused on me personally…I in fact apologized to Justin Wayne for the ridiculousness of the interviewer midway when he brought me back. They basically were baiting me to say “I just want to fuck women without a relationship” but they don’t realize all men that look at their wives and vice verse initially think the same thing “damn I’d love to fuck her.” No one thinks “I would love to tell her I want to fuck you then perhaps take it to a relationship level” I don’t know much about Mode One, but it sounds seriously AWFUL.
I myself work in the media/entertainment industry as a notable journalist, so for that interviewer to take such a spotlight on brief drama and blow up my depression was uncalled for. Im also looking to get JW an interview after this ridiculousness for our Santa Monica Magazine and the Sun in California with a circulation of 196K (more than Mode One I’m sure). But I will send out an actual inquiry to you that actual PUAs can gain benefit from than third grade drama.
Justin Wayne I do apologize again on behalf of that interviewer and myself for not hanging up, but I felt if I did not explain it, they would spin it to make game look bad and this simply is NOT the case.
In any case, I am definitely a huge supporter to someone seeking the truth in this world where guys are wasting away in the numbers phenomena.
Also on a good day, to answer the question, I approach around 50 or more women (especially group scenarios) and a good 30 will give me numbers of which most will be inevitable flakes. Very rarely do I stay to prolong conversation. Until JW that is. I noticed even changing my game up to spend even more time with a girl is good, but it is not time in a SOCIAL zone, I do some flashy stuff and it’s hardly a romantic connection. Only recently did I seriously try for a romantic connection….it’s like when you do it, you yourself feel the romance….it’s hard to describe…but yea numbers game is a reality and THAT’S the depression factor for me, the MARGIN of CHOICE women. As for approaches, sometimes i go everyday including weekends for 24-25 days…we are looking at about 1200 approaches a month which yields 480 numbers in a month ( out of 21,600 approaches TOTAL approaches over 18 months (assuming I manage a solid 50 approaches with a number close of at least 20 numbers per day). Assuming my constant texting the next day (mass texting) out of 8640 numbers in a 18 month period and only 30 closes do the math : success rate (assuming the girls even reply…many flake….many reschedule) of .347%.
Now let’s keep in mind, I am doing a very short game and very numbers game. Very Paul Janka as I talk with him everyday on Skype and he’s been my mentor above all others. But it’s nowhere near his “11%” close rate as he states in his book. And this ladies and gentlemen is why Justin Wayne is a genius because he seeks the TRUTH. The truth is logistically speaking and value based speaking, Paul Janka and I are not identical in universal values of height, race, or build. Hence why 2 people can get 2 very incredibly different results doing the numbers game…..
And hence DEPRESSION. If only ARC learned to listen to his guests than speak over them, this would have been made known.
Justin, I am sorry you felt that you were not given enough time to speak. I cannot say that I 100% agree with that. I ended up doing a 3-hour episode, and compared to other guests on my show, you had a lot of opportunities to speak.
The good news is, the episode is being downloaded like crazy. Right now, Thursday’s episode is my 3rd most downloaded episode of the 2011-12 season within the first 24 hours after the live show aired. Only my episode about Steve Harvey’s “Think Like a Man” book & movie, and my interview with Sasha Daygame, had more downloads in the first 24 hours.
Michael, with all due respect, you came across as being very inconsistent, contradictory, and generally full of shit. It’s like, in one breath, you were “bragging” …. but in another breath, you were “whining” and “complaining.” You talked about having sex with 30 women in 18 months …. but then you talk about being “depressed” over the fact that most of the women you had sex with were “beneath your standards.”
I had a few minor “philosophical disagreements” with Justin, but overall, I enjoyed conversing with him. I cannot say the same about you Michael. At times, you seemed innocent and lighthearted, but other times, you were just annoying. You rarely gave me a brief, straightforward answer to my direct questions. I don’t like guests and/or call-in listeners who give me very “long-winded / rambling” type answers. You did that a lot.
Finally, you might not agree with my principles and philosophies concerning The Mode One Approach, and that is your choice to feel that way. I will not try to convince you that Mode One Behavior is the way to go. Mode One Behavior is not for everyone. I tell men that all of the time. You have to have thick skin and be totally egotistically indifferent toward the opinions and criticisms of others in order to exhibit Mode One Behavior on a regular basis. Not many men have those qualities.
Again … the show is being listened to by a lot of people, so that is a good thing for Justin. He will surely get more traffic to this website.
Alan Roger Currie
Host, “Upfront & Straightforward with Alan Roger Currie”
Author, “Mode One: Let the Women Know What You’re REALLY Thinking”
Alan, I found you smart enough at times but likewise I found your integrity as an interviewer to be lacksadaisical at best. With all due respect, Mode One has nothing to do with stranger approaching, and I just personally feel your limited audience was more jealous about some fact that I slept with 30 women when someone asked that question of me than understanding the context behind it. And honestly Justin was hardly given a fair talking time. Please approach 1400 women if you do not understand why depression is the issue, if you can’t do that…then with all due respect…stop being full of shit yourself and advising guys to be so blatantly direct with women when you meet them because it’s a bunch of bullshit.
And also if you want yes/no Answers to questions, please stop phrasing them in such a way that assumes someone who goes to a woman knows what he wants in the long scale term of the relationship. No one could tell the future, and I doubt you went to your wife and said, I want you to be my wife….or I want to have sex with you, I want a one night stand, I want a weekend fling. It’s just unrealistic Alan. Anyone can phrase questions In a yes/no manner which makes absolutely no sense.
Michael, you say, “Alan, I found you smart enough at times but likewise I found your integrity as an interviewer to be lacksadaisical at best.”
Alan’s response: What does that even mean? My integrity was “lackadaisical?”
Michael, you say, “With all due respect, Mode One has nothing to do with stranger approaching.”
Alan’s response: If you truly believe that, then you really do not know what The Mode One Approach is all about. The vast majority of women who I have approached have been women I have never met before (i.e., “strangers”)
Michael, you say, “and I just personally feel your limited audience was more jealous about some fact that I slept with 30 women when someone asked that question of me than understanding the context behind it.”
Alan’s response: I can assure you …. none of my listeners were “jealous” of the fact that you had allegedly had sex with 30 women in 18 months. If those stats are true, then that is impressive. You attracted criticisms from my listeners because you did so much whining and complaining. It’s like a guy who used to be really poor, but now they have become very wealthy …. but they’re complaining about it. Or a guy who used to be really obese … but now he has a really slim and athletic physique, but yet, he’s saying he’s “depressed” and that his physique is still beneath his standards. No one wants to hear that.
Michael, you say, “And honestly Justin was hardly given a fair talking time.”
Alan’s response: Again, I beg to differ. I allowed Justin to talk just as much, if not slightly more, than any guest I have ever had on my show. Go back and listen to old shows of mine, and listen to Justin, and I guarantee you … he did not get “cheated out” of any significant amount of talk time. (and you have to remember … there was a 10-15 minute period where his phone dropped; I didn’t even have him on the line)
Michael, you say, “Please approach 1400 women if you do not understand why depression is the issue, if you can’t do that…then with all due respect…stop being full of shit yourself and advising guys to be so blatantly direct with women when you meet them because it’s a bunch of bullshit.”
Alan’s response: I would never encourage any of my male clients to approach 1400 women in a short period of time “just because” or just for the hell of it. There would have to be a very good, valid reason for me encouraging a man to approach that many women. And yes … The Mode One Approach is all about expressing one’s romantic and/or sexual desires, interests, and intentions in a manner that is HIGHLY SELF-ASSURED, UPFRONT, and STRAIGHT-TO-THE-POINT. I don’t believe in lying to women, bullshitting women, or engaging in manipulative ‘head games’ with women.
Michael, you say, “And also if you want yes / no answers to questions, please stop phrasing them in such a way that assumes someone who goes to a woman knows what he wants in the long scale term of the relationship.”
Alan’s response: I always know what I want from a woman when I approach them. Always. Now, granted, my desires, interests, and intentions might CHANGE as I get to know a woman better, but AT THE TIME I FIRST MEET A WOMAN, I know what I want.
You said you slept with 30 women in 18 months. It’s obvious you just wanted casual sex. If you slept with that many women, it is more than obvious that you did not want a long-term and/or monogamous relationship with any of those women. Be REAL with yourself young man.
Michael, you say, “No one could tell the future, and I doubt you went to your wife and said, I want you to be my wife….or I want to have sex with you, I want a one night stand, I want a weekend fling. It’s just unrealistic Alan.”
Alan’s response: I would very much beg to differ with you. In my lifetime, I have met WAY MORE men who think like me, than I have met men who think like you. Most of my male friends and acquaintances know EXACTLY what they want from a woman by the end of their first conversation with her.
You take my older brother. He said he knew after his first conversation with his now-wife that he wanted to marry her. And sure enough, 2 1/2 years after they first met, they were married. I would say with me, probably no less than 75-80% of the women I have met in my life, I knew immediately if I wanted a long-term monogamous relationship with them, a long-term non-monogamous relationship, a short-term monogamous relationship, or a short-term non-monogamous relationship.
Michael, you say, “Anyone can phrase questions In a yes/no manner which makes absolutely no sense.”
Alan’s response: I didn’t say I wanted you to give me simply a “yes” or “no” response, but I definitely did not want you giving me all of those very long-winded, rambling type answers. Most of your responses were waaaaaay too long.
Hey Alan,
Just letting you know all is good on my behalf. Sure, we will disagree on some things, or have different means to the same end. Other than that, I was not familiar with the format of your usual show. It was entertainment for me. Looking forward to when you come to NY.
Real cool Justin. Yes, I look forward to connecting with you in-person. You seem like a really intelligent, genuine young brother. Kudos.
Alan
to be honest the majority of time A.R.C. was stating his opinion when one of you guys were about to say sumthing good , “i personally beleive that blah/ i dont aggree with…” was not called for as i wanted to hear what justin+micheal wanted to say not the opinions of the interviewer
starlingpua, you say, “to be honest the majority of time A.R.C. was stating his opinion when one of you guys were about to say sumthing good.”
Alan’s response: That is debatable. For starters, I always express my opinions on my show. Just about all talk radio hosts express their own opinions on their own show. If someone says something that I agree with, I am going to say that. If a guest says something that I disagree with, then I am going to express that. Simple as that.
starlingpua, you say, “I personally beleive that blah / i dont agree with… was not called for as i wanted to hear what justin+micheal wanted to say not the opinions of the interviewer”
Alan’s response: Then you were listening to the wrong show partner. I am never going to do a show where I am just “quiet” as my guests and listeners talk. On any given episode of my show, I am going to either express strong agreements with what my guests / listeners are saying, and/or I am going to express strong disagreements with what my guests and call-in listeners are saying. That’s just how I roll ….
Thanks for your feedback though.
Alan
you always give sick reply’s lol what ive noticed is if you dont agree with suttin you will flat out say it like in the janka interview A.R.C what do you consider yourself though man? dating coach? not a pua though right
Hey Michael, thanks for your reply to my post above. The advice about working on my fundamentals resonated well with me. Any chance you’d be willing to advise me about a couple more things via email? I’d appreciate your time since you seem like you’ve gotten quite some experience.
I’ve gotten much experience, but it’s not a path I recommend because it was like flipping coins for months. Carl, I just mean like if you truly are not happy with say your body, do it for you. Work out, not be one of those guys that thinks he needs women with a great body. In the past, many gorgeous intimidating women have chosen me above most guys and I myself am average despite the fact that I model part time.
I recommend if you have anything that makes you upset about people, eliminate the belief. Every person is different is the ONLY generalization I ever make. I don’t call some girls “club girls” “nerdy girls” etc. Everyone is different. You just need to give people a chance. I used to be extremely incredibly high ego in high school. I am an extrovert, but I thought largely people were users, girls were pointless, etc. I suggest eliminating terrible beliefs like this if you have it. It can only create a negative spiral of thinking in the best of us.
Michael
Alan,
Huge fan of your work. You are about the only one who stresses being sexual and provocative around women. Can you recommend any more examples of sexual talk besides “Talk dirty me” and “Ooh Say it again”? Books, movies, websites etc. Your books and seduction stories have really inspired me to upgrade my mouth piece.
JD
Hey Alan,
I guess a lot of what you said clears up some of the question style format. I think we will have to disagree with the concept of immediately knowing if a girl is my wife or not, but I seriously appreciate the clarification. I think we will have to agree to disagree with the concept of the long winded answers, but I felt there was a need to be more elaborate on the matter you didn’t which is OK.
As for Mode One, thank you for explaining it to me and that you don’t in fact advocate guys do that, it really clears it up but I also cleared up the fact which if your readers knew I approached over 1200 women a month, then they would probably know its not just “whining and complaining” but to someone who does not get why this would be, I can see how this is perceived. In any case, I definitely understand the format of the show better so it makes more sense now especially with mode one and your style of interview and at least you are upfront about it, which not many people do.
Take care,
Michael
@ Michael: Fair enough. We’ll just have to “agree to disagree” on many of the issues that you and I have different opinions on. Again though, I still say that I would never approach 1,000+ women per month, or even per year, if the end result is that it was leaving me feeling “depressed,” or at minimum, “dissatisfied.” What is the point then? Secondly, I would never have sex with 30 or more women in an 18-24 month period if I felt that most of the women I was exchanging orgasms with were “beneath my standards.” That just does not make sense to me. My two recommendations would be: 1) Stop approaching so many women, and 2) emphasize QUALITY over QUANTITY.
@ JD: I am very biased, but as far as books go, I think the best book out there that discusses in detail that art of “talking dirty” to women that you’ve just met is my own book, “Oooooh . . . Say it Again: Mastering the Fine Art of Verbal Seduction and Aural Sex” (Amazon & Barnes&Noble). I haven’t read, or heard about, any other book that discusses in detail that particular talent.
As far as movies go, here would be my recommendations for films that had a male character who utilized the art of sexually provocative and/or erotically explicit “verbal seduction” techniques:
Adult Films:
– “Talk Dirty to Me” (1980)
– “Talk Dirty to Me, Part II” (1983)
Mainstream FIlms:
– “Shame” (Michael Fassbender’s character of ‘Brandon’)
– Many James Bond films with Sean Connery as James Bond
– “Vicky, Cristina, Barcelona” (Javier Bardem’s character of ‘Juan Antonio’)
– “The Good Wife” (Sam Neill’s character of ‘Neville Gifford’)
– “Internal Affairs” (Richard Gere’s character of ‘Dennis Peck’)
@starlingpua: With all due respect to those who use “pua” in their monikers and pseudonyms, I personally do not like the term “pick up artist.” Among other reasons, that is simply not what I do or who I am. I consider myself more of a “bold, straightforward, truth-teller.” That is really what I do. I don’t approach women with a “I want to get you in bed anyway possible” mentality. What I do is simply approach women, and very boldly, confidently, provocatively and straightforwardly let them know that I want to exchange orgasms with them at some point in the near future. They either 1) reciprocate my desires & interests, 2) resist my desires & interests, or 3) reject my desires & interests.
#1 and #3 scenarios are easy to deal with. Mode One Behavior most comes into play with women in the #2 scenario. The women who are interested, but choose to “resist” you to one degree or another. I call these types, “Wholesome Pretenders” and “Erotic Hypocrites.” Those women are my specialty.
Enjoy the rest of your weekend fellas …. the episode is still being downloaded like crazy, so spread the word about it…
Alan
Alan/Justin,
Alan I love mode one and the concept, but I don’t think you understood some of the points Michael was making.
Namely, to go out into the streets and approach women asking them to fuck is not really ordinary. Being rejected over and over again is why this leads to depression.
Alan I’m not sure if you’ve done street approaching but going mode one 100% of the time is not feasible and doing it can lead to depression because of the amount of inevitable rejections you’ll get. Sometimes indirect to direct later (mode 2) is needed I think.
Anyway its all good:
MMMmmoooOOOOOOoooooooOOOOOOOoooOOOOooooode OOOOOOoooooOOOOooooooOOOoooone!
Author Allan Roger Currie, do you have any infield videos of the Mode One approach? In real life. Please don’t reference Hollywood movies as they’re scripted. Thanks.
I have mentioned many times on various Internet message boards: Personally, I do not believe in the concept of “in-field videos.” Particularly for an approach like The Mode One Approach. If others like them, more power to them.
My criticisms?
1) Most in-field videos are actually illegal.
Comment: I have worked in the Entertainment Industry and feature-film industry in Hollywood. You cannot record someone on audio and/or video without them signing some sort of “waiver,” and then upload it for reasons that are commercially motivated (i.e., you’re looking to earn a profit from the audio recording or video recording). If you do, the person you recorded or videotaped can actually sue you.
2) Many in-field videos are actually “fake”.
Comment: I know of at least two Dating Coaches / Seduction Gurus (who I will not name) who have videos showing how they have made “fake” in-field videos that LOOK very real to the naive eye. They use actresses and green screens.
3) If a woman knows she’s being audio recorded or videotaped, she’s not going to really be her “true self.”
Comment: Most of the women who I have had X-rated / sexually provocative conversations with during my first-conversation with them would have never been as relaxed and as forthright with me if they knew ahead of time that they were being audiotaped and/or videotaped. Would you like it if a woman was conversing with you on the streets, and then uploaded the video to YouTube without your knowledge?? I know I wouldn’t.
So, it is highly doubtful you will ever see me uploading “in-field” videos.
This guy Allan came of as stubborn and ignorant. Going up to girls and telling them your only after sex doesn’t work. Maybe if you know the girl already for a while and you already established some type of value/connection, but trying that on strangers doesn’t work. This is probably the worst advice I have ever heard anyone give. It might work on the ugly/easy chicks and the ones who lack self esteem, but I don’t think guys want to pursue girls who they don’t find appealing.
On the interview he kept cutting everyone off at the point he disagreed with them and didn’t really give them a chance to explain just so that he can automatically win. I didn’t like that at all. Anyone said something Alan disagreed with he would just cut them off and purposely negatively re-frame what they said and not give them a chance to speak. This guys ego is too big and he thinks hes always right about everything, be a little more humble and give other people the chance to speak without irrationally flipping out on them. It takes away the substantial value of the interview which is what the audience wants.
At the end of the day, the most efficient way to game a girl is based on how she is. Her overall comfort levels, social conditioning, energy levels and self perception are some of the top factors. Trying to game every girl the exact same way is retarded because every girl is different. That is why there are so many different styles of approaching women that have to be considered in every situation. When someone mentioned going indirect, Alan suddenly became bipolar and started bashing it without a good understanding of the concept. It just takes social intelligence and experience to know when to do what, and I tell you that going up to girls and telling them you want to just fuck them will be an extremely inefficient overall method of getting the job done.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “This guy Alan came off as stubborn and ignorant.”
Alan’s response: And that is why for the last 5 years, I have had the #1 rated Dating & Relationships talk radio podcast program on BlogTalkRadio (http://www.pr.com/press-release/404160)
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Going up to girls and telling them that you are only after sex doesn’t work.”
Alan’s response: For YOU … or for ME? I can’t speak for you, but for me, it was worked, and worked wonderfully for 25+ years.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Maybe if you know the girl already for a while and you already established some type of value/connection, but trying that on strangers doesn’t work.”
Alan’s response: See my response above. It is obvious that you are only speaking for YOURSELF. Not ME.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “This is probably the worst advice I have ever heard anyone give.”
Alan’s response: We all have our own individual opinions. The worst advice I have heard? Go up to women … engage in trivial, bullshit “small talk” … build disingenuous “rapport” with women …. develop a very misleading and manipulative “emotional connection” with a woman …. have sex with the woman for a few days or a few weeks … and then create a reason to just dump her for no reason. Most fucked up advice I have ever heard in my life, but yet, this is exactly what over half of the Dating Coaches and Seduction Gurus are teaching men.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “It might work on the ugly/easy chicks and the ones who lack self esteem, but I don’t think guys want to pursue girls who they don’t find appealing.”
Alan’s response: That comment of yours is representative of what is known among intellectuals as “Circular Logic.” Circular logic is when you say “XYZ doesn’t work …. and in those instances where XYZ does seem to work, it’s because the people that it worked on were flawed, naive, or stupid.” That is what you’re doing with that comment. “Mode One Behavior does not work …. and in the event that you do get a woman in bed because of The Mode One Approach, it’s because the women you seduced were highly promiscuous, on drugs, psychotic, extremely needy, ugly, fat, or have something else wrong with them.” That is too funny my friend.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “On the interview he kept cutting everyone off at the point he disagreed with them and didn’t really give them a chance to explain just so that he can automatically win. I didn’t like that at all.”
Alan’s response: It’s funny … no one has said that to me, other than guys on this particular blog site. That is interesting to me. Do I sometimes cut people off when they are talking? Yes, I sure do. 1) If my time is limited, and the guest or call-in listener is “rambling” and not giving me the answer that I am looking for, I will most surely cut them off; 2) if a guest or call-in listener says something that I consider to be totally invalid or representative of bullshit; 3) if the guest or call-in listener is expressing comments that are inconsistent, contradictory, and/or hypocritical.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Anyone who said something that Alan disagreed with, he would just cut them off and purposely negatively re-frame what they said and not give them a chance to speak.”
Alan’s response: Give me specific marks of where this happened. (example: The 0.58:30 mark, the 1.42:37 mark of the interview, and the 2.14:10 mark)
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “This guy’s ego is too big and he thinks he’s always right about everything. Be a little more humble and give other people the chance to speak without irrationally flipping out on them. It takes away from the substantial value of the interview which is what the audience wants.”
Alan’s response: If you don’t like the way I conduct my shows, I would suggest, 1) you never listen to my talk radio podcast program again, and 2) start your own talk radio podcast program on BlogTalkRadio or some other Internet radio / podcast format. I am a “host” … I am not a “moderator.”
A ‘moderator’ is someone who just listens to the viewpoints and opinions of others, without adding in their own opinions (such as a moderator for a U.S. Presidential Debate).
A ‘host’ is someone who invites other people to express their opinions, but he or she is also free to add in their own opinions and viewpoints. The latter is what I do. If you are a guest, or a call-in listener on my show, and you say something that I totally disagree with, I am going to speak my mind about it. If you and others don’t like that … so be it.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “At the end of the day, the most efficient way to game a girl is based on how she is, her overall comfort levels, social conditioning, energy levels and self perception are some of the top factors. Trying to game every girl the exact same way is retarded because every girl is different. That is why there are so many different styles of approaching women that have to be considered in every situation.”
Alan’s response: Where is your book? Where are your CDs or DVDs? How many workshops have you done? I was voted the Top Speaker and Most Informative Presenter at both The Direct Dating Summit in London (November 2010) and The Direct Dating Summit in Las Vegas (March 2012). I have supporters of my three paperbacks in up to 25 different countries. And again, I have a top-rated talk radio podcast program.
It’s really this simple: If all you want is short-term, non-monogamous sex (i.e., “casual” sex) from a woman, you need to have the BALLS and BACKBONE to let a woman know that in a confident, upfront, straightforwardly honest manner. Anything else is cowardly, dishonest, disingenuous, and manipulative. It’s really that simple.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “When someone mentioned going indirect, Alan suddenly became bipolar and started bashing it without a good understanding of the concept.”
Alan’s response. See, there you go … exaggerating. I did not “bash” the concept of being ‘indirect’ with women. Most of the time, I asked Justin, Michael, and the others what their specific definition is of being “indirect.” Many men have different definitions of that.
I am not necessarily against being “indirect” with women, if your definition of it means being honest with women … but just in a more slow, gradual, palatable-on-a-woman’s-ears manner. But if your definition of being”indirect” is blatantly lying to women, giving them the misleading impression that you want something long-term and/or monogamous when you know deep-down that you only want something short-term and/or non-monogamous, then yes … I am a very harsh critic of that bullshit.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “It just takes social intelligence and experience to know when to do what, and I tell you that going up to girls and telling them you want to just fuck them will be an extremely inefficient overall method of getting the job done.”
Alan’s response: I say for the third time …. speak for yourself. The Mode One Approach has always benefited me. Always. I’ve been Mode One with women since the mid-to-late 1980s, and I have not regretted it once.
But, in fairness to other men … if you don’t have thick skin, you are very sensitive to harsh criticisms from women and/or abrupt rejection from women, and you really don’t have the balls or backbone to express your true thoughts, desires, interests, and intentions to women in a bold, straightforward manner … then of course Mode One is not going to be conducive with your personality.
My thoughts.
To “Mr. Always Right” Alan:
I am not doubting that your style could work in some situations, but from the very limited information that you gave on this particular interview we are under the impression that the situation revolves around stranger approaching. I am also automatically assuming that your generally speaking going after attractive women. Having said all of this, I can guarantee that for the most part going fully direct so fast wont create efficient results. It might create results in the situations that you use them in, but nobody wants to wait for the perfect situation. If it were as easy as telling girls “I want to have sex with you”, according to what you said on the interview 2 out of every 10 girls are down, then it would be as easy as cake to get laid. Just say the same thing to every girl and eventually you will run into that 20% who will fall for those magical words. Its your fault for not explaining your methods clearly in this specific interview, you have to always assume that you will have new listeners and be DETAILED with how exactly you do your thing. The way you made it sound its like you really need no game, just go up and be direct and eventually you will get lucky.
Going direct or indirect has nothing to do with how much “balls” you have, which is what your trying to get at. It has to do with having the social intelligence to know which style of approach is appropriate in context to the situation. Gaming women isn’t “balls” oriented. You don’t go out talking to women with the mentality to prove to yourself you have balls, your going after the women trying to create some type of connection. If you want to prove to yourself that you have balls go wrestle a lion or something. What we want here is results, so that is why we use our social intuition to know which situations need indirect approaches. You should have given Justin Wayne a chance to give you examples about it but you just kept attacking him instead and calling him “mode 2” or whatever that corny thing you said. I don’t have a problem if you dislike going indirect, I just have a problem with how you make it sound like going indirect is inefficient and useless. Not only that but you obviously weren’t open minded enough and willing to listen since you kept interrupting and trying to put words into peoples mouth (going back to what I said about re-framing).
At the end of the day the method someone uses to game women is irrelevant as long as it creates results and has proper ethics. Be more open minded to new ideas and LISTEN to what others say instead of automatically jumping to conclusions about it and trying to make it sound like your method is superior. I wouldn’t even be posting this if you actually gave Justin Wayne and Michael a REASONABLE chance to talk, but since you didn’t I have to come here and dismantle you and expose how hard headed you are. I don’t know if you are even conscious of your annoying re-framing and hard headed behaviors, but they are fairly obvious to any normal open minded person who was listening to this interview.
Like I said before, I am not really attacking your method or questioning your ability to get women. All I am doing is trying to make you consciously aware of how stubborn you are and how rude you are to your guests (when you disagree with them). Also trying to make you aware of how vague you were with your concept of going extremely direct in THIS PARTICULAR interview. I win you lose, accept it and move on or make your life difficult and continue with your bipolar ego driven remarks. Your behaviors are very predictable so I expect you to reply again with progressively more stupidity.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “I am not doubting that your style could work in some situations, but from the very limited information that you gave on this particular interview we are under the impression that the situation revolves around stranger approaching.”
Alan’s response: You backing down from your original opinion already? At first you said, “Going up to girls and telling them that you are only after sex doesn’t work.” Now, you’re saying, “Well, I guess it could work in certain situations.” Which is it? Make up your mind my friend.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “I am also automatically assuming that your generally speaking going after attractive women.”
Alan’s response: I only approach women who possess a physical appearance that is attractive and appealing to my eyes and senses.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Having said all of this, I can guarantee that for the most part going fully direct so fast wont create efficient results.”
Alan’s response: You are very wishy-washy.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “It might create results in the situations that you use them in, but nobody wants to wait for the perfect situation.”
Alan’s response: What is your definition of the “perfect situation?” What is your description of an “imperfect situation” for approaching women, and letting them know your true romantic and/or sexual desires, interests, and intentions?
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “If it were as easy as telling girls ‘I want to have sex with you,’ according to what you said on the interview 2 out of every 10 girls are down, then it would be as easy as cake to get laid.”
Alan’s response: Many times, getting laid is as “easy as cake.” Anytime you meet a woman who is just as interested in engaging in a one-night stand or weekend fling as you are, having sex with this woman is going to seem “as easy as eating cake. Just say the same thing to every girl and eventually you will run into that 20% who will fall for those magical words.”
Justin himself divided women into categories that are similar to me. Justin said during the interview that all women are either “Yes, I am interested” types, “No, I am not interested” types, and “Maybe … I might be interested” types.
I divide all women a man approaches into four categories:
– Reciprocators (i.e., a woman who once she knows what your desires & interests are, she will reciprocate those desires & interests fairly quickly)
– Rejecters (i.e., a woman who once she knows what your desires & interests are, she will let you know fairly quickly that she does *NOT* share the same desire & interests)
– Pretenders (i.e., a woman who once she knows what your desires & interests are, she will initially, temporarily, or indefinitely “pretend” like she is not interested in having sex with you, but deep-down, she is interested; She is just worried about being perceived as an ‘easy lay’ or a ‘slut,’ so she feels compelled to give you the impression that she is a “prudish good girl”)
– Timewasters (i.e., a woman who once she knows what your desires & interests are, she will initially, temporarily or indefinitely give you the misleading impression that she has the same set of desires, interests and intentions … but in reality, she has no interests whatsoever in sharing your company in a romantic and/or sexual manner; She is just interested in a) flattering attention, b) entertaining conversation and platonic social companionship, c) financial and non-financial favors, or d) an empathetic listening ear [see this article: http://www.examiner.com/article/men-be-wary-of-the-you-just-want-to-get-my-pants-guilt-trap%5D)
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Its your fault for not explaining your methods clearly in this specific interview, you have to always assume that you will have new listeners and be DETAILED with how exactly you do your thing.”
Alan’s response: If you want to gather more details about The Mode One Approach, then you need to read one or more of my three books (http://www.amazon.com/Alan-Roger-Currie/e/B002BLQ9Q0/)
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “The way you made it sound its like you really need no game, just go up and be direct and eventually you will get lucky.”
Alan’s response: Actually, that is essentially what I believe. I believe in simply approaching women …. letting them know what you true, genuine desires, interests, and intentions are …. and each woman is either going to present herself as a ‘reciprocator,’ ‘rejecter,’ ‘pretender,’ or ‘timewaster.’ The key for you is developing the skill set to distinguish a “pretender” from a “rejecter,” and distinguishing a “timewaster” from a “reciprocator.”
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Going direct or indirect has nothing to do with how much ‘balls’ you have, which is what your trying to get at.”
Alan’s response: I beg to differ. In my mind, that is actually the ONLY THING that separates the ‘direct’ approachers from the ‘indirect’ approachers. Indirect guys are generally those who are afraid of being rejected and/or afraid of being harshly criticized. Direct guys are those who really don’t give a fuck if they get abruptly rejected or harshly criticized.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “It has to do with having the social intelligence to know which style of approach is appropriate in context to the situation.”
Alan’s response: I disagree. I think a man does have to possess a certain amount of social intelligence to know 1) how QUICKLY he should verbally escalate (i.e., transition from a non-sexual conversation to a sexually provocative conversation) and 2) what is the most appropriate language to use with women in various situations (e.g., PG-13 language, R-rated language, or X-rated / XXX-rated language). Other than these two factors, social intelligence is a very secondary priority.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Gaming women isn’t ‘balls’ oriented. You don’t go out talking to women with the mentality to prove to yourself you have balls, your going after the women trying to create some type of connection. If you want to prove to yourself that you have balls go wrestle a lion or something.”
Alan’s response: Approaching women, conversing with women, and ultimately attracting them and seducing them is ALL ABOUT BALLS and BACKBONE. That is what “game”, in my opinion anyway, is ALL ABOUT. A man with no balls and no backbone is never going to be able to handle abrupt rejection from a woman and harsh criticism from a woman in the same manner that a man who has BALLS and BACKBONE.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “What we want here is results, so that is why we use our social intuition to know which situations need indirect approaches.”
Alan’s response: I already told you the two factors that require a sense of social intelligence and personal intuition: 1) How quickly do you transition from a platonic / non-sexual conversation to a sexually provocative conversation? 2) When do you use PG-13 language VS R-rated language VS X-rated/XXX-rated language?
Other than that, social intelligence and intuition is a very secondary priority.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “You should have given Justin Wayne a chance to give you examples about it but you just kept attacking him instead and calling him ‘mode 2’ or whatever that corny thing you said.”
Alan’s response: I take offense to your accusation that I “attacked” Justin during the interview on my talk radio show. I never “attack” any of my guests. There is a big difference between DISAGREEING with someone’s opinion, and “attacking” them. There were some things that Justin expressed that I either a) asked for further clarification on, or b) expressed a philosophical disagreement with, but at no point during the interview did I “attack” him or his philosophies.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “I don’t have a problem if you dislike going indirect, I just have a problem with how you make it sound like going indirect is inefficient and useless.”
Alan’s response: I have never been officially quoted as saying that approaching women and letting them know your desires, interests and intentions in an “indirect” manner is “ineffective.” I know men who have gotten laid by being indirect with women.
Here are my main criticisms of being “indirect” with women:
1) Being indirect requires engaging in much more trivial, inconsequential, and platonic-type conversation than most ‘direct’ type guys are willing to do;
2) Being indirect with women opens the door for women who are “Timewaster” types to cause you to waste valuable time and even money;
3) The primary motivation for being indirect is usually to diminish the chances of being harshly criticized by a woman and/or to avoid being abruptly rejected by a woman.
Other than those three reasons, I have no major “beef” against a man being indirect with women.
What I do have a major problem with is this: Men who blatantly LIE to women about what their true desires, interests, and intentions are …. and men who give women the misleading impression that they want a relationship that is long-term, emotionally profound, and monogamous, when they know deep-down that they just want some variation of casual sex. I despise men who use such tactics.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Not only that but you obviously weren’t open minded enough and willing to listen since you kept interrupting and trying to put words into peoples mouth (going back to what I said about re-framing).”
Alan’s response: You have to provide me with specific marks of the interview (e.g., “Listen to the portion of the discussion that starts at the 2.15:38 mark…”) that will support your allegations and accusations.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “At the end of the day the method someone uses to game women is irrelevant as long as it creates results and has proper ethics.”
Alan’s response: What is your definition of “creating results”?? What is your specific definition and description of “proper ethics??” When it comes to the attraction and seduction of women, you NEVER have “total control” over the results you experience. The only thing you have direct control over is 1) how you behave toward women, and 2) how you respond and react to women’s behavior toward you.
As far as ethics, my number one ethic is UPFRONT, STRAIGHTFORWARD HONESTY regarding your true desires, interests, and intentions toward wanting to have sex with a woman.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Be more open minded to new ideas and LISTEN to what others say instead of automatically jumping to conclusions about it and trying to make it sound like your method is superior.”
Alan’s response: Realistically, I am going to always favor The Mode One Approach over any other method of approaching women. Always. If I did not, why even write any books? I believe the manner in which I approach women is the best method.
That being said though, I do not intentionally “disrespect” any other method that is promoted by others, as long as it does not promote lying to women or manipulating women.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “I wouldn’t even be posting this if you actually gave Justin Wayne and Michael a REASONABLE chance to talk, but since you didn’t I have to come here and dismantle you and expose how hard headed you are.”
Alan’s response: If you believe you are “dismantling” me, then more power to you. LMAO. Now that is FUNNY.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “I don’t know if you are even conscious of your annoying re-framing and hard headed behaviors, but they are fairly obvious to any normal open minded person who was listening to this interview.”
Alan’s response: We all have our own individual opinions. You have yours … and I have mine.
Pseudonym Kobe Bryant says, “Like I said before, I am not really attacking your method or questioning your ability to get women. All I am doing is trying to make you consciously aware of how stubborn you are and how rude you are to your guests (when you disagree with them). Also trying to make you aware of how vague you were with your concept of going extremely direct in THIS PARTICULAR interview. I win you lose, accept it and move on or make your life difficult and continue with your bipolar ego driven remarks. Your behaviors are very predictable so I expect you to reply again with progressively more stupidity.”
Alan’s response: Son, you are not on my level. If you were, you would have your own website, your own book, and be financially compensated for giving other men good, solid advice. As far as I know, you are not in that category. If you do have a book, what is the title of it? If you have been a featured speaker at a workshop or conference, what was the title of it?
Let me ask you this “Kobe” … let’s say I put you in a social environment that included these seven women:
1) A woman who is attracted to you, but she is only interested in having sex with you within the context of a long-term monogamous relationship that is going to lead to marriage;
2) A woman who is attracted to you, and she is potentially interested in having a one-night stand or weekend fling with you, but if you start talking about sex too quickly, she is going to give you the misleading impression that she is “offended,” and is going to try to make you feel like a “jerk”; But in reality, she is waiting for you to demonstrate your sense of backbone and confident persistence;
3) A woman who is attracted to you, and she prefers to engage in a long-term monogamous relationship with you, but she would be willing to settle for a “friends-with-benefits” relationship
4) A woman who has no attraction to you whatsoever, but she is willing to talk to you for at least 10-15 minutes to see if she can get you to flatter her and tell her how beautiful she is;
5) A woman who has no attraction for you whatsoever, but she wants to add you to her stable of “male platonic friends,” and get you to go out bowling with her and dancing with her, event though she knows she will never have sex with you;
6) A woman who is not attracted to you romantically or sexually at all, but she is willing to temporarily “pretend” as though she is in order to see if you will offer to “wine & dine” her, and spend money on her to buy her free lunches or free dinners;
7) A woman who is not attracted to you at all, but she is willing to talk to you for at least 10-15 minutes about her disappointments with other men, her frustrations with other men, and she wants to “vent” about how all men are “jerks” and “assholes”, and she wants you to empathize with her;
So … “Kobe” …. if I gave you 75 minutes (90 minutes tops) to approach and converse with ALL SEVEN WOMEN … even though you had NO IDEA which of the seven women had what specific motivation … how would you go about conversing with each one? How would you start out talking to them? You have an average of 10-13 minutes to converse with each woman ….
Let me know your thoughts.
Alan I personally already feel like we have explained both our sides and that I understand mode one and you yourself have clarified that you don’t advocate approaching women. But I do not get why there is an argument against “every woman’s different” as Kobe Bryant explains.
It is a fact of life, everyone is different…not sure why asking him if he has written books, been voted top this and that in ways of qualification yourself helps here…..I actually wanted to know if Mode One considers the types of women or just classifies them as pretenders etc based on the mode one method not working with these women.
To anyone that does not understand, mode one seems to be explicitly direct game and assumes you know what you want with a woman when you approach her, but this is something I disagreed with earlier and we agreed to disagree.
Michael says, “Alan I personally already feel like we have explained both our sides and that I understand mode one and you yourself have clarified that you don’t advocate approaching women.”
Alan’s response: When did I *ever* say that “I don’t advocate approaching women?” I very much advocate approaching women. I said to you that I don’t advocate approaching women, and especially 1,000+ women in 6-12 months, “just for the hell of it” or “just for practice.” But I never said that I don’t advocate approaching women in general.
Michael says, “But I do not get why there is an argument against ‘every woman’s different’ as Kobe Bryant explains.”
Alan’s response: I don’t believe that I have to behave differently toward women simply because they are different. Truth is truth. There are only 2-3 variations of truth. Upfront, straightforward truth …. “beat-around-the-bush” truth … and camouflaged truth. I’m all about truth.
Michael says, “It is a fact of life, everyone is different…not sure why asking him if he has written books, been voted top this and that in ways of qualification yourself helps here…..”
Alan’s response: When people treat me like “I don’t know what I’m talking about,” or that my advice and philosophies are “nonsense,” then yes …. I am going to ask you, WHAT IS YOUR CREDIBILITY? Who are YOU to criticize ME? Many people are like that. That’s why most sports shows only hire athletes who have a high degree of credibility to criticize other athletes. Because if you’re an “average Joe,” and you’re criticizing LeBron or Michael Vick, it’s like, “WHO ARE YOU to criticize LeBron or Vick??”
Michael says, “I actually wanted to know if Mode One considers the types of women or just classifies them as pretenders etc based on the mode one method not working with these women.”
Alan’s response: Again, I believe every woman you approach is either going to be a Reciprocator, Rejecter, Pretender, or Timewaster. As I said, the key to Mode One is separating the Reciprocators from the Timewasters, and the Rejecters from the Pretenders.
Michael says, “To anyone that does not understand, mode one seems to be explicitly direct game and assumes you know what you want with a woman when you approach her, but this is something I disagreed with earlier and we agreed to disagree.”
Alan’s response: And we will continue to “agree to disagree.” I firmly believe that all men and women know what they want RIGHT NOW. You may not know what you want tomorrow, one week from now, one month from now, or one year from now. But you always know what you want from someone RIGHT NOW. I always know what I want from a woman at the time I approach them. Always.
2/3 – 3/4 of the time, I want casual sex from women. For most women I approach, I usually just want a one-night stand, a weekend fling, or some other variation of casual sex. Only maybe 10-20% of the women I approach do I look at as “potential girlfriend” material.
Michael, look at that “7 women in social environment” situation that I posed to “Kobe”, and give me your thoughts on how you would handle that…..
Alan
@Alan
Thanks for those recommendations. You are like Morpheus to me. Being indirect and asexual around beautiful women is just not NATURAL. And it def wont get that pussy wet.
IMO…I think Justin Wayne should be on your show again. Maybe after his book is released. You 2 are the best in the game. I’d def like to hear both you chop up game for a few more hours. If it does happen make sure it’s a closed session. No phone calls that distract from the topic. No offense to you Michael.
@Everyone Else
Women flaunt there sexuality all the time. Wearing sexy revealing outfits that drive us insane.
A Mode One guy just fights FIRE with FIRE. He flaunts his sexuality verbally. Being asexual and indirect around women is like bringing a knife to gun fight.
Alan claims infield videos are illegal. Since Justin Wayne isn’t in jail I call BS.
Unless Alan can show us some unedited infield videos of “Mode One” , I call BS on “Mode One.”
And Alan, please no Hollywood movie references. They’re fake and scripted.
@ARC –
“1) Most in-field videos are actually illegal.
Comment: I have worked in the Entertainment Industry and feature-film industry in Hollywood. You cannot record someone on audio and/or video without them signing some sort of “waiver,” and then upload it for reasons that are commercially motivated (i.e., you’re looking to earn a profit from the audio recording or video recording). If you do, the person you recorded or videotaped can actually sue you.”
This is the biggest bunch of bullshit out there. Dude, stick to dating advice, don’t start advising on what you don’t know. Firstly, it depends on STATE law. Secondly, there are only a couple states that are really strict about recording in public if you have a commercial intent. Thirdly, just uploading on YouTube doesn’t really make it commercial.
@ anon …. we all have our opinions. I am not into “in-field” videos. If my (male) clients have a problem with that, so be it. I never have been into those, and 99% chance, I will never be into them. I would never want someone audiotaping me and/or videotaping me without me knowing about it, and then uploading a conversation of mine to YouTube. So, I believe in “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
@ Curious Day Gamer …. I am not trying to gain you as a client or customer, so if you do not like what I have to say … ignore me. Simple, really.
@ J.D. … man, that is so funny! Literally, just two days ago, I had a male client refer to me as “The Morpheous of the Dating & Relationships” world. When I spoke in Las Vegas in March 2012, I had 2-3 guys say the same thing. They said, “Alan … in your own way, you offer guys your version of the ‘red’ pill and the ‘blue’ pill. You like to talk about reality … and not ‘happy fiction’….” So, I consider that a huge compliment my friend.
Everything you said is representative of how I feel. You can be “charming” by being indirect, but you’re not going to get a woman’s pussy wet. I told the guys in London: I have had women CURSE ME OUT … and then days later, those SAME WOMEN would confess to me that I had their pussy wet. Why? Because I was SEXUALLY PROVOCATIVE and I conversed with them as if I had NO FEAR of being criticized by them or rejected by them.
Good stuff J.D. …. thanks my friend.
So Mr Curry is simply saying Justin Wayne is disrespectful to women because he records them, also Mr Curry is saying walk up to a woman and be super direct which means his method propbly works in the Western world not in some parts of the world were cultural beliefs determine how women respond to courtship even in my own language it will just sound vaulgar whichever direct thing u say.Mr Curry also believes he has a top radio podcast so interupting his audience remains insignificant because he is the top host.To conclude from what Mr Curry said he does not demonstrate his method ,perhaps u do in person when there is no recording devices since its not the kindst thing to do.There is a saying ” its not what u do its how u do it” Mr Curry u are insensitive to other people i guess thats why u are mode one as u call it.
Dhara, give it a rest. Really.
This episode is currently ranked #1 in the category of “Romance” / Dating & Relationships on the BlogTalkRadio Internet Radio network (BTR), and it is ranked #52 in the BTR Top 500 Episodes-of-the-Week. That means a LOT of people have been listening to the interview.
That’s all that matters. I’d rather have a “controversial” interview that everyone is listening to, than to have a “pleasant, friendly, basic” interview that no one is listening to.
Justin and I got along … and that is all that matters.
This reminds me of 2009, when I interviewed NY Times Best Selling Author Robert Greene (author of “The Art of Seduction” and “The 48 Laws of Power”). I challenged Greene A LOT during my interview with him, but he was cool with it. He and I got along fine.
But after the interview, many of his male fans wrote me some nasty, harshly critical, hateful Email messages. I was like, “WOW.” Many of them were like, “How DARE YOU challenge an Icon like Robert Greene!!! You asshole! You Jerk!! You are not even on Robert Greene’s level!!!!” Robert wanted to read a copy of ‘Mode One’; I sent him an autographed copy. Again, he and I were cool. He didn’t mind that he and I had some “philosophical differences,” just like Justin doesn’t mind it.
Just drop it and move on. I enjoyed the interview, Justin got to express a lot of his opinions and philosophies, and people are listening to it like crazy.
Damn. Robert Greene is one of my favorite authors. I have to search your archives for that interview. Robert Greene loves indirection and subtlety. Not surprised you clashed with him.
Have you read the “Art of Seduction”? There’s a chapter in it I think you’d identify with. “The Rake”.
Great book but it’s too vague. In that chapter Greene hints that women have a weakness for language and words. But he doesn’t go into much detail. This frustrated me for years until I read your own book on verbal seduction.
Yeah JD, my interview with Robert Greene is my 2nd highest ranked episode EVER. We were supposed to discuss “The Art of Seduction,” but we really didn’t get around to it. I have read that book though.
We talked mainly about “The 48 Laws of Power,” and “The 50th Law,” which had just come out at that time.
Here is the link: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/modeone/2009/10/09/an-interview-with-author-robert-greene
Mr Curry here u go again, u are ego cetric, u said it yourself recording is illegal blah blah i was merely commenting. Justin Wayne is humble hence he is able to take it.Tou mr Curry however dont take critisism kindly. Its not about howmany people listen to ur show its about being a nice person .
Justin,check your comment spam folder and approve my comment which got sent to spam.
Can’t wait for the interview to go live.I clicked on the link but nothing happened.This is big though.
the link is up… http://www.blogtalkradio.com/modeone/2012/06/29/approaching-women-on-the-streets-with-justin-wayne
Justin i was curious will things out of your control be always ‘greater’ than things under your control. and whats your take on ARC idea of ethics because some of the girls seem “Really” into you during the romantic connection so once you decide to let them go don’t they get really pissed
Lol, that was the most ridiculously invaluable interview/show I’ve ever heard. I tried my best to be open minded at first, but wow, an hour was about the maximum any semi intelligent human being could take.
#1: ARC continually flaunts how well the show is performing on BTR. Don’t kid yourself buddy, that’s because Justin’s name is on it, not because of the quality of the show. In the first hour, there was no educational value, simply advertising and you stroking your ego making fun of someone seeking help.
#2: Justin hardly got any time to express his views or ideas, which was the whole reason all those people actually listened to the show. Instead we were stuck listening to ARC literally screaming into the microphone (seriously buddy we get that you’re alpha and dominant and overtly sexual, no need to scream the entire time)
#3: The whole discussion with Mike was pathetic on ARC’s part. It was basically ARC stroking his ego about how cool he is and how good is method is (for which he has NO verifiable proof – I’m sorry being voted best speaker at some event doesn’t even half count, please don’t bring that up again.)
#4: Anyone who has actually hit the clubs and streets and hit on A grade girls (we’re talking models, actresses, strippers, gogo dancers…not the “cute” girl from your hood who likes cheap booze and fun guys) KNOWS that always doing flat out blatant sexual approaches turn this into a bad numbers game. Some girls love it, most girls who don’t dig you off the bat hate it. But I’m sure in your imagination it works like gangbusters, and it sells well, so hey what’s the problem right?
Wow. I can’t believe guys are still replying to this.
All I have to say is …. we ALL have our own set of opinions. Good, bad, critical, not-so-critical, narrow-minded, objective, valid, and invalid. You have yours … and I have mine.
I do have to add this, since you love it when I “stoke my own ego” … you say the only time I get listeners is when I have big-name guests? Well, I will have you know that my most listened to episode of the 2011-12 season was an episode when I actually had NO INVITED GUESTS or EXPERTS on my show AT ALL. It was the episode where I discussed the strengths and weaknesses of Steve Harvey’s book, “Act Like a Lady, Think Like a Man”
So, no one can ever say that the only time I have a lot of listeneres is when my invited guests bring their followers and supporters to my show….
😉
I bet todays shooter in Colorado was a Mode 2 or 3 guy that just snapped. Real sad.