Assanova’s Four Moods

The Real Assanova ( has long had very interesting things to say about the sexual marketplace. Most of his advice is aimed at men who are a combination of wealthy and good-looking, and a key tenet of his advice to those men is to not over-game and to leverage fitness, fashion and wealth – essentially, if you’ve got the classic attraction markers, use them!

But despite his organized and oft-cited opposition to “game” (I’ve never been able to gather exactly what he means by game and which parts he finds objectionable), he clearly understands, instinctively, some key concepts of interpersonal psychology. In his latest post “Women Want You To Fail,” he describes the dance of fitness testing, of women working to suss out a man’s true level frame and strength.

So why exactly did I sleep with this girl so fast, and why didn’t either of these guys get as much as a kiss out of her in the months that they were trying to get with her?

It was because they were unwilling to fail. As a guy aspiring to attract women, you have to understand that women want you to fail.

Why does he say she wants this?

Because once she rejects him, his true character will be revealed. When a woman rejects a guy’s openly sexual advances, it’s going to reveal one of four things about him:

A) He is going to keep pushing her for what he wants, which will reveal him as needy and desperate. Very unattractive.

B) He is going to cave in, be absolutely devastated, and reveal that his confidence was fake. Very unattractive.

C) He is going to get very upset, and reveal that he constantly fails, shown by his frustration. Very unattractive.


D) He is going to stay calm, relax, and act as if the rejection never happened.

When a woman sees that last reaction from a man after she rejects his sexual advances, assuming that she was initially attracted to him in the first place, if she doesn’t immediately give him what he wants, it will at least cause her to take a closer look at him, under the premise that he just might indeed be the real deal alpha male that she’s been waiting for.

Think about those four responses.





Now engage in some self-knowledge and think about how you’ve reacted to rejection over the years. How many of those moments (and if you haven’t gotten rejected, you haven’t been meeting and pursuing enough women) fit into each of those categories? Add a fifth category for “null reaction, because I didn’t escalate.”

As you talk to more women and get into more sets, you’ll be able to more clearly read your own responses to these tests on the fly. If you are paying attention, it won’t be long before you can start to modulate your responses instead of reacting to the situation. The game will “slow down,” like it does for an experienced quarterback who can predict the entire defense’s moves before the snap.


Filed under beta guide

38 responses to “Assanova’s Four Moods

  1. This is a fantastic post. I was doing this not necessarily on a conscious level. I always notice the reactions to rejection, whether it was a playful one to slow him down, or a REAL one.

    The last reaction you wrote about, the calm, is incredibly appealing. It comes across confident & can make a woman feel like the guy really wants her (since he persists, despite her resistance) and he doesn’t give up that easily.

  2. Matthew Walker

    Anti-game folks always tell you game is a hoax right before they give you the REAL secret to attracting women, which invariably turns out to be something game people have been calling a core principle of game for years.

    The fuzzy hat shit’s still dumb as dirt, though.

  3. The master skill is detachment from outcome. To me, this is the prime inner game skill. And if you can grasp this, then your external behavior will naturally align to reaction “D” without you having to think about it.

    Detachment from outcome doesn’t mean a lack of goals, effort, or extinguishing desire like a Buddhist would. It means your ego isn’t emotionally invested in the desired goal.

  4. OTC,

    I have practiced (and executed) the line “suit yourself, dear,” with a shrug.

  5. OTC-
    There is no spoon.

    DFO is VERY hard for most guys to grasp. But I’ve always thought it was the easiest to understand. Once DFO is internalized, the purest form of male confidence shines through.

    And the women just can’t resist it.

    I prefer, “your loss” better. It’s DVH and a neg at the same time.

  6. lovelost

    being “Calm” is surely alpha here and it straight comes from game. no arguing on that one.

  7. Lavazza

    Do not become confused in attachment to the fruit of your actions and do not become confused in the desire for inaction (2,47).

    Therefore one should not withdraw from the world of social involvement but live in it detached from the fruits of actions, since “action is better than inaction” and “renunciation of all action is impossible” (3,8). As a result, Krishna’s command to Arjuna is: “Always act with detachment to the fruits of actions. The one who is acting without attachment attains God” (3,19). This is Karma Yoga, the path of attaining liberation through accomplishing one’s normal duties with a totally detached attitude toward personal benefit. In his given context, Arjuna has to fight no matter who is going to die on the battlefield.

  8. SayWhaat

    Lavazza, you just became really hot.

  9. I had both A and C happen to me this year. I wasn’t testing either man. I just genuinely didn’t want to take things to a -physical level with either. I went out with each of them twice, determined that the attraction wasn’t there, and was honest with both men. They were both good looking guys who, on paper, had it together. The guy who continued to contact me every few weeks to meet him for drinks eventually came off pathetic and made it clear he had no other options by continuing to try with me. The guy who got angry showed his hand right away, making it clear that mine was not the first rejection he had encountered in the recent path. The reason why I wasn’t attracted to either of them was because I sensed on the first date that these were guys that lacked genuine confidence. Something was “off” and I felt it. The reason why the guy who shrugs it off and says he understands is attractive to women is because, i think, women on some level fear he must have other options and therefore they don’t want to lose their shot at him. This brings it back to many women’s need to compete with other women. And…scene.

  10. susanawalsh

    I was thinking that this is excellent guidance for both sexes, and then saw that Lavazza expressed that beautifully.

  11. Excellent advice. So hard to follow but the god’s own truth.

  12. Lavazza, what is the source text of that? Sounds very interesting. What do the numbers mean?

  13. OTC-
    the only thing i know its that it’s Hindu. but very well put.

  14. SayWhaat

    OTC, it’s from the Bhagavad Gita.

  15. I’m taking this advice for my writing. I keep sabotaging myself thinking on “how people will read this” when all i need to do is think that writing is my job whatever comes out of it is not of my interest or reflects on my character or my loved ones. Harder to do than to say it.

  16. Candide

    Assanova discovered outcome independence*!!! And there was much rejoicing #yay#

    * aka not giving a fuck

    This is backward rationalising anyway. What if he was simply more attractive than those other guys in her eyes?

  17. Lavazza

    There are several translations of and commentaries on the Gita available on line. I just took the first I found, covering this (central) passage.

  18. Lavazza

    The problem using this “advice” is to identify “duty” (dharma). Dharma is connected to caste (scholar/priest, warrior, servant etc.) or “age” (young celibate student, middle aged househoulder, reclusive ascetic etc.). The dharma of a philistine is quite hard to identify.

  19. Lavazza

    The figures are chapter and verse.

  20. Mike C

    Related to both A & C – Needy and Angry, this is why as a guy I think it is imperative to follow Rollo’s “spinning plates” and pretty much at all times try to have at least one girl you are getting laid with regularly whether FWB, FB, new girl you are dating, whatever.

    Any extended period of involuntary celibacy is likely to lead to a mental place of frustration, desperation, and neediness, and then you are going to pin all your hopes for sexual relief on the onenitis of the moment. It will nearly impossible to maintain a state of aloofness and indifference to the outcome. It would be like telling the man in the desert who hasn’t had anything to drink for a few days to not worry about drinking the glass of water on the table next to him. He has no idea if and when another glass of water might reappear.

    If a guy is getting regular sex or even semi-regular sex somewhere it makes it substantially easier to spin a new plate and not really care whether or not it becomes sexual, and the great irony is that indifference substantially increases the probability you’ll actually get laid.

    I mention this primarily because the mainstream cultural message would be a guy shouldn’t be fucking girl X if he is dating girl Y. One of the key things all guys have to do is unshackle themselves from limiting beliefs and dictums that ultimately are counterproductive to their success and getting what they want.

  21. Mike C

    Addendum to comment above, goes without saying that doesn’t apply if you’ve both agreed to exclusive monogamy, but no high value guy should be agreeing to exclusive monogamry with girl X until he is already regularly fucking girl X.

  22. Wow.. For some reason, I found Mike C’s comments really distasteful… I have no use for men with “spinning plates”

  23. Mike C


    My style is often brutally direct and blunt. I am very well aware that sometimes offend women who prefer indirectness and dancing around the line, For example, I prefer to use the term fucking over a euphemism like “sexual exploration”.

    Anyways, my comments are intended to be helpful words of advice FOR GUYS, not to avoid offending someone’s delicate sensibilities. Badger can correct me if I’m wrong, but I see this blog as being more guy oriented than say HUS. I think it is great if women join the conversation, but I certainly am not going to self-censor for fear of putting a “bad taste” in someone’s mouth.

    I can’t help but wonder if part of the “distaste” is related to the idea of a guy fully realizing the options he has in today’s SMP and fully exercising those options.

  24. deti

    The differing positions of Mike C and Cadence point up that the interests of men and women in the SMP (any SMP, really) are usually at cross purposes, which when you think about it leads to a circuitous outcome utnil one plays into the other’s frame. .

    It’s in a man’s interest to spin plates because odds are he’s not going to be sexually successful with all the plates. .

    It’s in a woman’s interest to lock down the highest status man she can get, until and/or unless a higher status man comes along…. which means she’s…spinning plates.

    Which is why he should spin plates too.

    And so it goes until the two have agreed to exclusive monogamy in some form or another.

  25. Mike C– No where did I ask you to censor yourself, and I would -hardly say I’ve got “delicate sensibilities”. I only stated an opinion about what was written. I see nothing wrong with being direct but the “brutally” part always turns me off. Plus, if the idea truly is to help men in the SMP, I thought it might be of interest how some of this information is received by women.

    Deti– Thank you for your take on the spinning plates. Ya, everyone should see that they have options. I think far too often people settle because they don’t see them. That’s no bueno. No one wants to settle, or be settled for… it doesn’t feel good and it’s relationship suicide.

  26. Mike C

    Mike C– No where did I ask you to censor yourself, and I would -hardly say I’ve got “delicate sensibilities”. I only stated an opinion about what was written.

    No prob. And I just stated an opinion on your opinion. Its all good.

    Plus, if the idea truly is to help men in the SMP, ****I thought it might be of interest how some of this information is received by women.****

    Couple of things here. Firstly, just about any guy whose has spent more then a few minutes studying this SMP stuff and applying it out in the real world realizes that for 95% of women there is a massive divergence between what they say and what they actually respond to so truthfully your opinion on something like the “spinning plates” concept is basically irrelevant to what any guy should actually do. Secondly, discussing something like “spinning plates” is behind the scenes shop talk. I would hope no guy is so stupid to tell some girl he is dating or seeing that he is “spinning plates” with that language. Magicians will share between each other the nuts and bolts of tricks which remove all the impressiveness and specialness to the trick, but they certainly are not going to walk the audience step by step through the details of the trick. They’ll just let the audience watch in amazement blissfully unaware to the nuts and bolts details behind the scene. The fact of the matter is an attractive guy spinning plates is just that….an attractive guy exercising his options that his SMV value accords to him and the vast majority of women will tingle for the guy without getting bogged down in the weeds of details.

  27. Mike C

    Deti, as always you are on point
    Regarding women spinning plates, this isn’t an original thought on my part, as Rollo has pointed out women are originators and masters of spinning plates. It is almost cliche about the girl who dumps her boyfriend because “she found someone better”. Even in exclusive monogamy, *some* women have their short list of upgrades/replacements if things don’t pan out. Heck, even marriage isn’t 100% assurance the woman won’t continue to spin plate. Dalrock has written a few posts on that movie with Kirk Cameron (Fireproof?) where the wife is basically lining up the doctor for husband #2 while still married to Kirk’s character. Marriage vows? Forsaking all others? Hmmm…
    My first serious relationship/love/sexual partner and really one-nitis (and wife and ex-wife)…..when we broke up she had a NEW BOYFRIEND inside 2-3 weeks. Really? At the time, I couldn’t believe it. So yeah. Women spin plates They’ve got the back-up guy or list of candidates
    In terms of frame, and who plays into the other’s frame, its about value I think, if the guy is either starting at the top 10-20% of attractiveness or working his butt off to get there, because of female hypergamy, he is sitting in the catbird seat. Funny thing is, some guys sit there and don’t even know they are there. I’m paraphrasing Rollo, but he says nothing simultaneously excites and scares a woman like a man who knows his value.
    Now IMO, at some point I think it makes sense to go with female frame of exclusive monogamy if you are getting a quality, nurturing, supportive, loyal girlfriend.

  28. Dalrock has discussed the moral difference between men’s and women’s preferred “spinning the plate” strategies before in

    Quick tl;dr summary: There isn’t any.

    I’ve got this theory about the different instinctive aims of men and women. I’m not sure if I’ve got it right, but it seems to match up with some of what I’ve observed and read about:

    Men want committed one-way monogamy. They marry the best women they can find while young and then remain committed to her for life. She will be required not to cheat on him, but he will regularly cheat on her, but always return to her, before eventually dying beside her. A lot of high-alphas have chosen this strategy throughout history. This is a stereotype about rich industrialist, it seems to have been the preferred strategy of Kings and knights in many different points in history. It also seems to logically be close to the best breeding strategy for a man.

    Comparatively women would seem to choose a series of short term (6months to 10 years) pseudo-monogamous relationships. He will never stray, while she will stray once, after which the relationship is over, and she’ll start a new short-term pseudo-monogamy. This seems to be the preferred style of relationship in the modern world.

    There could be some argument that men don’t actually want the committed main relationship, and would rather only have the sleeping around part, but where forced into it by social, economic, or political pressures (wanting a heir, it not being socially acceptable to be a bachelor, etc), but a lot of men want a loving life-long marriage, they just want sex with other women on the side as well. Even a lot of pickup artists claim that they would prefer to have a life-long commitment, but they don’t think they can get it with a good women so they just stick to the sex on the side.

  29. Candide

    Cadence and women like her: “We’re sexually exclusive, but I’m not having sex with you”

    They own your dick even before they see it.

  30. Pingback: A Reply To Cadence on Sex, Commitment and Spinning Plates | The Badger Hut

  31. Bo Ergu

    @Off the Cuff

    That’s Bhagavad Gītā. The best translation into English is by Franklin Edgerton; the version by R.C. Zaehner is more accessible and more easily available.

  32. LD

    have you read cadence’s blog? it’s delusional overwrought female brainwank.

    As regards above, did anyone else think of HE Pennypacker when reading about the wealthy industrialist model?

  33. Pingback: Happy Birthday to the Badger Hut, Part 2: Best Posts | The Badger Hut

  34. SgrDdySrfr

    Crikey! I read *one* page of Cadence’s estrogen-miasma fog-blog, and I now fear greatly for the emotional health of her children. Yet Another example of the real dangers to unfortunate children raised in a fatherless household.

  35. Pingback: Things I need to stop doing « stagedreality

  36. Deepcov3r

    Women who have “invisible friends” are and have to be treated like children.

    Don’t scream at the three year old that there’s no Santa Claus. Yes, dear, it’s great that God loves all of us, because even as he gives us cancer to turn us into festering clumps of pain, he gives us surgeons to bankrupt us as they operate.

    See, it all makes divine sense!

  37. Machiavelli

    I know this is an old post, but, curious about something. Since d) involves persisting, what’s the behavioral (not attitude) difference between d) and a)?

  38. Machiavelli,

    As I understand it, a guy doing (D) usually resets himself after the perfunctory “rejection,” re-framing the discussion back in his favor. This differs from simply proceeding with a second request for what she just rejected him for. I agree it’s subtle and almost imperceptible. One is a guy who can’t take a hint, the other a guy who doesn’t take no for an answer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s