Main blog - https://mikemehlman.net/
Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/mikemehlman
Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/mike_mehlman/
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/mikemehlman.net
The question is at what point is it needy to persist with a girl via text. I've talked about before how I will delete girls who outright ignore me. That's essentially my red line. And it's not anything ego-based. It's just literally what my high volume of approach has led me to in terms of my behavior. I view females who outright ignore as not having interest. I view them as unreceptive to the interaction, the same way that on the initial approach, I view outright ignoring as unreceptiveness. We cannot judge a book by its cover often times, yes, but I nevertheless view a girl outright ignoring, both on the initial approach, and via text, as unreceptive, and I will ultimately walk away from the approach, the same way I'll delete her from my phone. What I do have tolerance for however is girls who defer once or twice via text who also *do not* offer an alternative. I've come to see this as normal and predictable female behavior. This isn't weird. This doesn't mean she's not potentially interested. It's just what women do. It's normal. I want you to reframe your mindset to *expect* girls to defer/decline once or twice your propositions to meet up via text without offering an alternative. This is really just a matter of your mindset and what you see as normal dating dynamics. The same way you see it as predictable and normal that most girls you say hi to on the cold approach will reject - that's not weird, right? - well the same is true for texting: it's predictable and normal that most girls will decline once or twice and not offer an alternative. I'm giving you permission to not view yourself as needy to persist with a girl if she declines your texting proposal once or twice. I want you to essentially go into your texting with girls *expecting* that the trajectory will be, "Ok, well she'll probably defer once or twice, then maybe agree to meet up the second or third time I propose a time." This is really about entitlement. When we are early on in our approach practitionership (i.e., your first several thousand approaches), we might feel entitled to a girl's interest. We see our newfound confidence as a big deal. "Most guys can't do this. This is a big deal. She should be interested because I was so bold. That's rare to get approached like that." That is, we feel merited to a girl's interest. This type of entitlement eventually subsides, where we begin to see rejection as just a normal and inherent part of the dating process - "Of course I'm going to get rejected all of the time, despite being super forward and confident. Doesn't matter what I say or what I do." However, the male will still carry entitlement for *the degree of enthusiasm* the girl will have toward him. That is, even though he's eliminated entitlement as far as rejection is concerned - he now sees rejection as normal - he is still entitled to believing that girls must be *enthusiastic* to meet up with him. "If she's not F yes about me, I'm not interested. It's needy to pursue girls who aren't hell yeah about me." This type of entitlement, too, subsides. Eventually the male will not only eliminate entitlement to a girl being interested - i.e., he sees rejection as normal - but he will also eliminate entitlement to a girl's enthusiasm as well - i.e., he expects girls to not act excited / he expects girls to decline once or twice via text. When a girl declines your advances, this is really just a form of shit-test. If you're so alpha and non-needy that you are so fast to delete a girl the instant she defers, *that's exactly the type of guy she wants to eliminate.* You're demonstrating you wouldn't provide for or stand by her. So her subconscious is glad you've deleted her. And in turn the male fails her shit-test. Full article: mikemehlman.net
