On Naturals: Part One

I used to believe in Naturals.

The Natural: the man who can, without explicitly learning game, based on his own charisma or magnetism attract and sleep with lots of women of a respectable quality.

As a chode who regarded the sexual marketplace as nothing more than an indicipherable set of secret, mysterious customs I knew of many guys that other guys thought “were good with women”. At University there was “that cool guy” on your corridor who was acknowledged by all as ‘a bit of a ladies man’. After University, moving through the more socially sparse region of my twenties when I encountered ouposts of human interaction they usually contained one guy that either seemed to be successful with women or whom everybody thought was. In fact, doesn’t The Natural feature heavily in most chode’s painful “origin stories”. They certainly do in mine. The Natural: the nemesis of the gamer. The brother who got everything for free while the other brother had to crawl over miles of crushed glass for every crust which reached his mouth.

But recently I got thinking, how many naturals actually are there? And then I started analyzing all the naturals I’ve known and deconstructing them and then to my suprise I realize there are an awful lot less than I at first thought. Let’s first start with University or for you Americans, ‘college’. Now looking back at the characters I encountered, the cool guys that every somehow knew were ‘good with women’ my first thought was.. how many girls did these guys actually fuck?

My main nemesis at University, the opressively good looking “best friend” who value-tapped my existence, the guy we both acknowledged was “attractive to women”… left University with three lays. Three! Pathetic. The other guy, the older super-cool Bohemian guy; I think he screwed up to a dozen girls a year. The Mancunian scally whom I saw groups of girls openly discuss as “hot”… perhaps a half dozen a year. These are not huge laycounts. In fact given the OUTRAGEOUS ABUNDANCE OF SINGLE AND SLUTTY GIRLS at college I’d say they were all tragic.

I can say with absolute certainty that with one tenth of the game I have now I could have fucked ten times the women I did at University. So that’s ten. Heh. With the game I have now I could have left college having fucked skywards of fifty girls. It’s speculation right? It’s hindsight speculation and it’s calibration. Have you ever been on a date and not done that well then a week later thought back to that date and realised what you did wrong or realised what song was playing that you couldn’t recognize at the time? I call this a calibration-lag. Suddenly that little piece of the mystery fills in and the calibration-jigsaw becomes a little clearer. From then on when you’re on another date and the same song starts playing…. you know the dance! Right? Well the same can happen here. I look back at the people I knew, the social situations, I remember explicitly all the nights out, the bars, the clubs, the groups of friends, the social dynamics interplay, the things the girls did and said, their expressions, their attitudes, the things they told me… and my judgement is as above: that with my game now I could have fucked myself senseless.

So if a guy at college fucks a dozen girls a year… is he a natural? I’d argue not. If he leaves University and continues to do so… and hasn’t learned game, then I’d strongly argue that he is. Post-college life is a barren desert of social interaction compared to college. Most people scatter to the wind and end up in city X or town Y in an office, and given the polarised career inclinations of men and women usually an office full of men, and their social circle contracts. Continuing to fuck a dozen girls a year through your twenties is in my opinion spectacular.

Back to college. So how were those guys actually fucking girls? I argue that game had little to do with most of it. First off: some of them were just really good looking. Being really good looking is not game. Secondly, I’d argue that what some guys were doing was just unrecognized ecosystem game. College is a big ecosystem and it contains thousands upon thousands of interwheeling circles of friends, friends of friends, clubs, classes and acquaintances. They’re all there to be manipulated. Find a circle and pawn it. Position yourself as the alpha, have other guys supplicate to you and make it common knowledge that you are good with women and then reap the rewards. I’ve deconstructed with hindsight the guys that got laid at college and bar the really good looking ones they all seem to have used a similar system. It goes something like this:

  1. Arrive at college. Don’t gush and be friendly. Create an aura of detached cool from day one.
  2. Deign gushing chodes with your presence and value-tap them. They will start to supplicate to you and build your legend. Let it be known that you are ‘good with women’, perhaps drop anecdotes or hints here and there, or stick up a lot of photos of “ex girlfriends”, all hot, on your wall.
  3. Have some form of gambit for your coolness. This can be as simple as being the guy with all the liquor in his room that everyone goes back to after the club kicks out. Or maybe the guy with all the records and the DJ decks. Or maybe you’re the really jacked guy. Or the guy who’s uncle works in the record industry.
  4. Wait until girls IOI you. Wait until said girls are drunk or high.
  5. Fuck them.
  6. Be discrete. Never admit it. This makes you safe for other girls to fuck plus everyone will know it anyway.

I saw that system used time and time again at college. It’s the same old system cave-men used to get laid. It’s the system which guys exploit to get girls from nightclubs. It’s called hypergamy. Could these guys be called naturals? Maybe they were, after all it’s a simple and effective way to get girls, but just because a guy milked a few dozen pussies out of college over three years doing this doesnt qualify him as so. What they are doing is of course “natural” but they don’t fall under my definition of ‘a Natural’.

Let’s move beyond college. Here it becomes far easier to weed out who the real naturals are. First off, we simply discount anyone really good looking and with at least an ounce of game. After this we need to weed out guys who are milking ecosystems.

  • Work in a bar or club and get laid? No.
  • Work in media or fashion and get laid? No.
  • Work as a dive instructor, ski instructor, tour rep etcetera? No.
  • Teach dancing? Teach nightclass? Volunteer in Africa each summer and bang bleeding heart whities? No.

All ecosystem. If you’re not good looking, and you’re not in college, and you’re not working an ecosystem and you bang double figures numbers of girls most years and either never learned game or were doing this before you did… then congratulations you’re a natural. They do exist. I’ve met a few.

I take that back. I don’t think double figures is an accurate requirement. I’d say half a dozen. Doesn’t sound like a lot? Most men fuck less than that their whole lives. Plenty of good looking guys are hitting bars three times a week and fucking three girls a year. Or one or two. Six girls a year from age fifteen to thirty five gives you ninety girls which is a huge laycount, far, far, far in excess of most men’s wildest imaginations.

In my next post I’ll analyze some of the true naturals that I’ve met and take a guess at what makes them tick.

11 responses to “On Naturals: Part One”

  1. There are 3 types of Naturals I have encountered personally:

    1. The born Alpha and leader as mentioned in the story – being charismatic even as a kid (very rare in my opinion)
    2. The formerly shy, but extremely good-looking guy, who starts getting approached by girls at a very young age. He learns interaction with girls, because he is the target. (saw plenty of those guys – shy as fuck at age 14/15 – 2 years later center of the party – when girls chase you all the time you become “Natural”)
    3. The aggressive guy with an enormous amount of testosterone – as soon as puberty hits in he just can’t help himself but approach girls regardless of looks, shyness etc. He simply interacts with girls non-stop and is usually more or less good at it through trial and error by age 18-20.

    Nowadays there might be a emerging a different kind of “Natural” unseen in previous generations:

    4. Some bright kid who starts learning about Game at the tender age of 14 – gobbling up all the info on the net and even actively starting to unleash the Alpha state within him. My younger cousins might become those guys since I am in the process of teaching them Red Pill and Game at ages 13-14. Have not encountered them in real life as of yet.

    Now all those guys have something in common: They all approach a lot! I knew guys in college who did not approach that many students – they went out 5 times a week and approached dozens of girls every week for 4 years.

    While of course in comparison to the scientific approach of PUAs it was not highly effective, they got laid and after some time became better and exuded a natural Player vibe.

    I also had the most funny experience 2 months ago in Singapore at a corporate training week. I met 5 veritable Alphas! We hit it off like best pals. The most extreme time was when we hit the beach and everyone moved instantly to the hot babes. I think every moderately slim girl from HB5 was approached on that day. The Alpha state, 60% good looks and a lot of wild Approaches made them “Naturals”.

  2. I knew a guy in college who banged 150+ girls. He was lanky and bald, but milked the social ecosystem of our fraternity, where he eventually became president. I think he badically pushed for the bang relentlessly and told women he had a big dick, it worked. After college he rarely got laid with new women, finally marrying an average, asian girl. Without the ecosystem he was lost and needy.

  3. Just being Devils advocate here bodi, but isn’t daygame also an “Ecosystem”? Just one where you have to go to a lot more effort to meet a decent amount of girls?

    Why make things more difficult for yourself??

  4. I spent a summer last year getting value tapped as you well know. Looking forward to the next part.

  5. None of this has any connection to reality. I was a natural in college and I didn’t “value-tap” anything. I barely even paid attention to girls giving me “IOIs” because I was too busy thinking about sports and videogames. Girls simply throw themselves at you if you are good looking, and you most CERTAINLY do not try to bang as many of them as you can because you pick the BEST of them and build a real RELATIONSHIP with her. I had a girlfriend in college for 3+ years, but she was the BEST girl around. Why the fuck would I want to leave the best girl and try to bang inferior ones lol? Notchcounts are for losers. Your entire viewpoint is shaped by ressentiment. It’s extremely transparent and it’s pitiful.

    1. Good point. Notch counting might be useful for measuring progress when you’re learning, but as a goal it’s a total ego trap.

      It’s no different than chasing money for money’s sake and then reading the “How to Spend It” supplement without recognising the irony.

      At some point blogging about your conquests with lay reports goes from pedagogical tool in creating the life you want to the ego equivalent of cashing in your bonus on a Lamborghini to impress others. You’re the same rat in a different wheel, you simply bought into another value system.

      Anyway, being “natural” is going to correlate with emotional health, high self esteem and secure attachment in relationships. No wonder that every natural I’ve met except one* has ended up in LTRs with quality girls for long periods. That’s pretty natural if you ask me…

      *The outlier was a psychopath.

  6. you sound like a faggot

  7. I think naturals with women should be seen in light of the 2 areas most of us are familiar with: academics and sports (i’m leaving work/career out of it since we all branch off into too many directions and the above 2 categories are adequate to make the point).

    1.) Academics: We all know that some people have aptitudes for math, some for science, music, some for literature etc. etc. We all know people for whom those subjects were childs play, who hardly had to study or work at it, who used to tutor others of us who were not good at them.

    2.) Sports: We all know athletes who with an equal or less amount of effort than ourselves rocketed ahead in their development & abilities in a sport. They had some natural coordination a/o quickness a/o strength a/o jumping ability a/o an aptitude for the mental aspect of the sport. My favorite example is an depth phsychological testing they did on Larry Bird (Black guys call him the baddest white boy to ever play the game – bball). They determined that in any given situation (for example 2 a defender in front of him and a defender to the left) he was able to draw on ….I forget, like 3 or 5 times the number of previous scenarios the average NBA player could mentally draw on in order to come up with an instantaneous solution. The man could not jump, was not very fast, but when a lot of hard work is added to some extreme aptitude….those are the stars.

    Is it really any surprise to anyone then and is there any reason to doubt that some men may have a raw, natural aptitude for some aspects of game ? I’m not talking about just a whipsmart intellect alone – I’m talking about emotional intelligence, intuition, ability to think on your feet, non-reactional, humor, somewhat less emotional than average, aggressive, etc. etc. We don’t have to parse each of those – they’re off the top of my head, I’m not arguing that one cannot enhance what attributes/aptitude we’ve got, and it’s not an excuse (if one doesn’t have these) not to work at each of them. It’s simply to say that when the discussion of ‘naturals’ comes up, and you see a top level performer in game (or anything else), if you really drill down you’re probably going to find some kind of strong measure of aptitude for some aspect of it. One of the reason game fascinates me is that there are so many facets of it: physical, psychological, emotional, intellectual, intuition etc. etc.

    You’ll notice there are no short, slow guys who can’t jump in the NBA. That doesn’t mean that they’re not having a lot of fun playing somewhere else – There are a lot more hot women than tip/top world class players

  8. […] my first post I mused a little on the phenomena of the ‘natural’: the man whom using only his […]

  9. […] is the final part in my three-part series on naturals. As a quick recap: in part one I defined a Natural […]

  10. I wouldn’t advice anyone act like I did at uni. I am very lucky to have come through unscathed, but my system was as follows.

    1) Dress cool.

    2) Cause trouble, smash things and break stuff.

    3) Be generous and affable to a close circle of cool friends and as obnoxious as possible to most outsiders.

    4) Try to do the ‘impressive’ bad boy stuff (get into fights, roll joints nonchalantly in public, pull out a massive block of weed) in front of people you know will broadcast it to others. No point getting arrested if there is no capital in it.

    I got banned from the students union in my first month, banned for a whole year and my reputation with girls was set from that point on. I fucked a lot of skirt at uni.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *