MikeMehlman.net

Read full article that goes with this podcast here: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/06/25/why-youre-not-exchanging-with-more-girls-on-the-cold-approach/

See full article that pairs with this podcast: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/06/11/the-1-factor-that-determines-how-much-sex-a-male-has/

See full article that pairs with this podcast: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/06/08/5-things-you-should-do-on-the-cold-approach/

See full article that pairs with this podcast: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/05/28/81-girls-contacts-in-9-hours-of-daygame/

Watch this podcast in video form on YouTube here. -- 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 This short clip briefly addresses how we can make strides to feel better about our appearance, not just in dating, but in general. The idea being greater happiness, naturally.

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 This short clip briefly addresses why you should never be surprised when a girl who you think is interested in you ghosts. This clip also addresses male whining, which is one of the top things I despise.  Whining/complaining is the number-one trait that will finish a male. With all of the content I put out on the topic + time I spend discussing it in this chat, I still have been receiving DMs lately from guys who are "sad" a girl didn't hook up, or that she ghosted.

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 I've discussed in a lot of my content about how to improve confidence. In this current clip I compare that with how to improve self-esteem. The two routes of personal growth are very different, at least in my experience.  If you want a longer-form article on overcoming others' opinions and judgments, as well as how to improve self-esteem, you're going to want to read this article of mine: https://mikemehlman.net/2018/01/20/living-true-to-yourself/

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 This is an advanced-level clip discussing why most guys who demonstrate some initial efficacy with approach eventually drop off from approach altogether.  In other words, it’s a predictable scenario of a guy who seems eager to be better with meeting women and improve his non-neediness and confidence, and he’ll start approaching for a few months (or even upward of a couple years), before finally fading entirely.  If he and I have a text exchange of some kind, it's always some form of him being down about his "low numbers" and rejections. And then I have to repeatedly assert that high rejections are normal and inherent to how approaching and meeting women works.  I've been preaching for a while how rejection composes the overwhelming majority of approaches and dating interactions no matter what. But many guys might only take this idea on board halfway. That is to say, they might tell themselves, "Ok, Mike said rejection is normal, and I get that, but like, I'm doing really bad. Like, my numbers are *really* low." And they become upset about the process and ultimately fade from approach altogether.  I have to reiterate that the number-one trait that determines a male's efficacy in dating is his ability to not complain about rejection and continue approaching anyway.   There's a DNA component where some males are just way more prone to complaining than others. But there's also a component of the degree to which the male understands rejection as normal and not a repudiation of himself.  Most of the rejections you take, it doesn't even matter who you are. Girls will reject the overwhelming majority of the time regardless. The reason most men aren't sleeping with a harem of women is because it requires consistently approaching A LOT of women and incurring incessant rejection as the entrance requirement to attaining that.  Even if your response is, "Yeah, but I don't even need a harem. I just honestly want one plate." My response is: you still need to approach consistently and in high-volume in order to maximize the chance of any of your interactions successfully proceeding.   Most guys approach as a mere expedient to find "the one," before eventually collapsing into a transient monogamy where the female commands the frame. And this isn't because this is what most guys truly want; it's because it's what most guys are *only able to attain.*  In other words, most guys *can't* attain a rotation of plates because they lack the ability to 1) approach consistently and in high volume, and 2) not complain about their rejections.  Those two aspects of approach and dating are the entrance requirement to having a repertoire of women you're dating. They're not an outrageous task. They're the baseline requirement.  I don't hook up with various women because I'm so special and don't get rejected. I hook up with various women *because* I get rejected all of the time incessantly *as the entrance requirement* for that to be the case.  The number of rejections you incur is directly proportional to how many hookups you have. If a male says he has "lots of hookups" but simultaneously says he doesn't get rejected a lot, then he's either lying about his hookups, or he's lying about getting rejected a lot. Full article: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/02/28/why-most-guys-who-seem-promising-stop-approaching-women

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 In this clip I address two main points about dating apps:  1) Why girls will swipe right/up for you and then not respond, and  2) How to maximize dates/hookups.  I had written about Tinder / dating apps a couple years ago in extensive detail here:   https://mikemehlman.net/2019/05/30/tinder-why-she-wont-respond-to-your-message/

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 In this clip I address a question I received about how to make a woman feel desired beyond just sex.   That is, when it comes to giving some form of reassurance, what's the best route to go about that?  Do women even want reassurance that you're interested beyond sex?  What are some things I might say to women to help move an interaction forward?  Regardless of whether you're looking for an LTR or a casual plate, in this clip I address how to maximize the probability of moving an interaction forward with a woman. Full post: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/02/21/how-do-i-make-a-woman-feel-desired-beyond-just-sex

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 I've been talking about for at least the past couple years about how the male is his most attractive when he is fully deregulated.  Guys will ask what the fuck that means.  Deregulation means fully winging your behavior. That is, it's not about the hyper-specifics of what you say or do; what matters most in your interactions with women is that you are fully winging your interactions and not implementing behavioral contrivances.  "Tactics" and "schemes" such as negging, disqualification, and kino are classic examples of where the male attempts to generate attraction from a place of contrivance.  The male must maintain a baseline of forwardness with deregulation superimposed on top of it. Deregulation is never a permission slip for non-forwardness.  In this video I formally talk about deregulation, one of my major themes. This will provide a lot of value for guys who have made many thousands of approaches but still aren't getting the results they want and/or still feel needy sometimes. For the novice male, hearing this advice early is essentially the luckiest scenario you could have encountered as you'll be off to the best start possible.  I've made plenty of content on the topic, but this video addresses deregulation head-on. Once again, lots of value here. Full article: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/02/17/how-to-be-your-most-attractive-around-women

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 In this short clip I respond to a question about to what extent age matters in relation to the male's ability to attain sexual outcomes. That is, is there generally a certain timeframe (i.e., 40s, 50s, 60s) at which point the male will experience a notable drop-off in sexual outcomes.  I've talked about male SMV in prior content.  The question as far as an exact age with respect to hookups suggests to me the real information sought was: "How much do age and looks matter, period?" Full article: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/02/13/how-much-do-looks-and-age-matter-for-male-smv

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 Scenario 1:  Girl who's your type agrees to a 5pm date via text. She says however that she has to meet a friend at 6:30, and she can't adjust the time. Should you meet up with her or re-arrange for a different time?  Scenario 2:  You're approaching on the street / in a station and come across a girl who's your type. She's receptive. You go for the instadate. She agrees. But then she tells you she has to meet a friend in an hour. Do you go on the date anyway in order to build rapport and increase the chance of a second date, or do you just take her contact and keep approaching?  --  In this short clip I talk about whether "rapport dates" are worth it.  That is, is it worth it to go on a date with a girl even if you don't have the logistics (i.e., not enough time or too much distance) to get her back. Will this increase the chance of a subsequent date and hook up? My answer isn't what most guys might expect.  I also address in this clip "stacking" dates. And if I do stack, do I prioritize a girl I haven't slept with yet versus a plate, etc. Full article: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/02/11/rapport-dates

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 This clip is in response to a question I received about rejection in relation to age. I thought the Q was a half-troll because my last video was about how I get rejected all of the time, so count on someone to immediately seize on the opportunity to question whether it's about, e.g., something I'm doing wrong, or about age, etc.  I'm literally the only person out there who preaches with candor about how rejection is normal. Show me someone who tells you the truth about how rejection to the level I do. Won't happen.  I can't reiterate more that rejection will compose the majority of your interactions no matter who you are, what you say, or what you do. This is how it will be forever, in perpetuity. Essentially, getting rejected all of the time right now while I'm in my prime at age 34 is "training me" for when I get rejected all of the time when I'm, e.g., 64.  Very very rare that a girl will actually care that the male is older. She might say she doesn't prefer a guy who's, e.g., 52, but she'll by all means still date him if he's forward/confident enough and decently in shape. If the male is insecure about it and lacks confidence, that will reflect outwardly in his behavior, and that will actually be what winds up getting him rejected more than likely.  Male SMV is actually a lot higher during his 30s and 40s as compared to his 20s.  In other words, I will open girls who are 18+ when I'm a lot older, and various ones might even say, "Oh wow, creepy, grandpa are you lost?" But I'll know that the incessant rejections I get, even when I eventually hit my 60s, won't be *because* I'm older; they'll be because that's how most interactions go regardless. I'll reflect on all of the rejections I got when I was in my 20s and 30s and say, "I got rejected incessantly when I was in my prime. That's no different from now."  But more concretely, right now at 34 my ability to be forward and pull is a lot greater compared to even just a couple years ago. The notion of male SMV rising into his 30s it's just some arbitrary concept; it really does manifest in the sense that you will continue to become increasingly confident and bold. I can *feel* that my SMV is higher now. And it should be noted that this is because I have been an active practitioner and have stayed consistent with approach.  In terms of any value I can provide you, I want you to know that if you are in your 20s and feel like you are getting "old," or are concerned about getting older, just know that things will only get better into your 30s. Insofar as you continue approaching, your confidence level will continue to rise in a way that cannot be faked.  You will also fuck up a lot less in your 30s. Essentially the 20s male is characterized by fucking up a lot. And this entails many blown experiences that reside with the male painfully. But these only ignite him going forward, and he is less inclined to make the same mistakes into his 30s... Full article: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/02/08/do-girls-like-older-guys

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 In this short clip I talk about the extent to which rejection is normal. I've made lots of content discussing how rejection will compose the overwhelming majority of your interactions regardless, but most guys take on that input/advice only halfway.  In other words, guys might hear me talk about the normality of rejection and say, "Ok, well I guess getting rejected a lot is normal." But they don't *actually* internalize my statement. They don't realize that when I say rejection will compose the majority of your interactions, it *literally will compose the majority of your interactions.*  So are you not getting the outcomes you're looking for? You feel like you're getting rejected too much? Right. Well that's normal. No it's not excessive. That's *normal.* That's how it's supposed to be.  The purpose of this short clip is to provide reinforcement of that point; it is to communicate to you that you need to embrace rejection as a core pillar of the dating process.  You will incur an inordinately greater number of rejections than you will sexual outcomes, at all time points. This will never change. So any male who truly does achieve high numbers of sexual outcomes *must* incur a significantly greater number of rejections. There's no way around that. It doesn't matter who you are, what you say, or what you do.  Needy PUAs will preach sexual outcomes sans the rejection - i.e., they won't discuss rejection as a normal facet of approach and dating. This is linked to insecurity and believing that rejection is an outright repudiation of the male.  Since high numbers of sexual outcomes require the male to absorb an inordinately greater number of rejections as a prerequisite, and the latter are what generate non-neediness and confidence in the male, if the male truly is truly having lots of sexual outcomes, he will be able to openly communicate about his rejections, since those are what generated his confidence to begin with.  Needy PUAs might be able to front charismatically, however this should not be misconstrued as confidence. Because true confidence will enable the male to openly discuss his rejections. And, once again, if he is actually achieving many sexual outcomes, then he must be incurring many more rejections as part of the process. So any discussion where the male ardently claims he doesn't get rejected a lot, and he's telling the truth, this therefore means he doesn't hook up a lot and merely is capable of fronting.  The inculcation and learning point is that if you want to hook up a lot, you need to get rejected a lot. The number-one trait in the male that will determine how successful he is achieving sexual outcomes is his ability to incur repeated rejection and continue approaching anyway. And he must never complain about his rejections and whine about his "low" percentages.  Male whining over rejection reflects a non-understanding about the normality of the extent to which it is normal. Because if the male understands that rejection composes the overwhelming majority of outcomes, he won't voice his concerns about why his rejection numbers are supposedly so high, or wonder about "what he's doing wrong." Full article: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/02/07/are-my-rejection-percentages-too-high

Gaijin Guide to Japanese Daygame (My Japanese daygame book): https://www.amazon.com//dp/1718170394 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 I had been living in Japan for about 6 months at the time, and I had gone on a day trip to Kyoto. I was with a female and we entered a bar around 4 or 5pm. I ordered a Guinness for myself and a hard cider for her.  The guy working at the bar was a white European probably in his late-30s. The girl I was with didn't speak English, and I communicated with her in hyper-rudimentary Japanese, but we managed. The bartender started speaking at me in fast Japanese. And he was obnoxious about it. It wasn't a scenario where he was trying to AMOG. He was essentially engaging in the typical foreigner dick-measuring contest of "My Japanese is better than yours."  I couldn't understand what he was saying. And he said to me, "How are you learning Japanese right now." I said I was at a Japanese school and that I mostly studied at cafes. He said, "You're wasting your time. You need to join a baseball team or something." Apparently he had spent 6-12 months playing on a baseball team when he first came to Japan and had learned the language really well that way. He made the point that if I wasn't actually using the language, I was wasting my time.  It must have been very satisfying for him. He sees me - this confident and cocky-appearing foreigner - come into the bar, and then he immediately makes it clear, "No, your Japanese sucks." I was really annoyed at the time. But the reason I remember this and am reflecting on it now is because he was right. His advice was the best I had received. I needed to *use* the language. And studying at cafes wasn't the ideal route.  If you're of the academic mindset where you enjoy learning from the books, you will experience a rude-awakening after 12-15 months of living in your country of interest.  I had written a long article back in 2017 on the benefits of language immersion. If you are considering moving to a new country, this article is a must-read. I've also written a book on Japanese daygame (link above).  Even after a few more years of living in Japan (over 4.5 years at the time of this post), it's still the case that if I were to do the whole process over again (e.g., move to Korea and start again from the ground-up), I would over-index on *conversation* and essentially keep the academic/bookwork to a minimum.  One might think that spending lots of time at cafes in order to assiduously learn the grammar, syntax, and vocabulary would ultimately help one with conversation in the long haul, but I cannot reiterate more that this is *not* the case. It sounds counterintuitive. But this is where real experience cannot be faked.  Essentially I had moved to Japan and invested heavily into a "potential energy period," where I spent long hours learning Japanese from books and flashcards, thinking that this initial study period would ultimately propel me into a much better place with conversation later on - i.e., "I'm going to have to learn this stuff anyway, so I might as well get it out of the way now. And I'll be way better at conversation later because of it."  But this couldn't be further from the truth. What I learned is that time spent on bookwork applies very very little to... Full article: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/02/05/approaching-in-a-new-country-with-a-language-barrier

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 I've talked about before how to get a girl back on a date, including driving the point that the ideal date is going to be one that is as short as possible.  Greater than 97% of my first dates (and second dates with girls I haven't hooked up with yet) are very boring and streamlined: I meet a girl at a busy station not far from where I live, we go to a cafe of some kind, and then I go for the pull within 10-25 minutes.  But the question I received a few days ago was specifically about the type of dates I have with established plates. That is, do I still focus on getting her back as quickly as possible where my dates are equally as streamlined and boring, or do I actually ever... ya know... have fun with the girls I see.  And the answer is: No, my dates are never fun. And I'm always boring.   This isn't me attempting to generate some kind of parody either. I'm being serious.  I keep my dates very short regardless as to if I'm out with a plate or not. But in the case of a plate, the brevity of my dates is more to do with efficiency and just not wanting to waste time, as opposed to keeping things short so that the chances of a hookup are maximal.  It's very rare for me to go on dinner-/drink-type dates. Even with plates, I practically never go for dinner. Once again, I'm boring. And any girl I see is probably okay with that, or prefers that. No I do not go bowling or to a pool hall. No I do not go to movies. And, again, very rare for me to go to dinner.  But here's where I can provide a little bit of value apart from just voicing my preferences:  Essentially my short, boring dating style is a natural result of my high volume of approach and meeting women, the same way my terse, 30-60-second cold approach convos are a function of my high volume.  In other words, I don't have short, boring dates because I'm intransigently adherent to some arbitrary notion of how streamlined and alpha a date is supposed to be. I literally don't give thought to it. The same way my convos on the cold approach are hyper-short, well so are my dates.  The assertion that one's approach volume is inversely related to his length of interactions is not a consideration that a male should force upon himself so as to "fake" the behavior of a high-volume male. In other words, a male need not artificially force his interactions to be hyper-terse because that's what I do. He should just be aware that as he approaches more both in the micro and macro, the natural proclivity will be toward him having shorter cold approach convos and dates, regardless as to if the latter are with plates or not.  If you want to meet up with a plate in order to go bowling or to a movie, that's great. That's just not what I do. I'm aware I'm boring. But I'm also fast and direct pretty much always. And if my approach volume were to fall, I'd probably be inclined to invest more into "couple time" and my dates would become more extended. This is not speculation either. I observe it with other males as a function of their low approach volume along a sliding scale, where the lower the volume of the male, the more extended and "couple-like" his dates tend to be. Full article: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/02/04/are-your-dates-with-plates-different-from-your-first-dates

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 Someone asked a question on my last YouTube video about how ego relates to rejection. I wouldn't ordinarily think anything of this, but there are two notable points:  1) Various guys have asked me this, so apparently this is a concept frequently gestated, and  2) I myself have never once thought about ego in relation to rejection.  The second point in particular is very interesting to me because this might actually be the unlock into helping explain how I'm able to withstand incessant rejection to the level I do.  In other words, I've never once contemplated ego in relation to rejection. When I talk about aptitude for approach, somehow I just intuitively understood, even from Stage 1, that incessant rejection wasn't a repudiation of me but instead just an inherent facet of the cold approach / dating process.  The fact that I don't connect rejection with ego is what allows me to effectively embrace the former. It's what allows me to approach in high volume. If I internalized rejections as an affront to my ego, then I certainly wouldn't be able to approach as many women as I do.  *The less the male ties rejection to ego, the more greatly he will be able to withstand incessant rejection and continue approaching anyway.*  I've talked about how the #1 trait that determines a male's success in dating is his ability to continue approaching in spite of repeated rejection. This means the less the male ties his ego to rejection, the more successful he will be in dating. This makes sense in a qualitative sense - i.e., "Well yeah, ego is generally a bad thing, so of course a male would be better in dating if he doesn't have an ego." But the actual tangible bridge of thought to be made here is that less ego surrounding rejection means the male is literally able to approach more.  It's not an accident that I am able to approach as much as I do. It's a direct result of the mental state I occupy where I don't take rejection personally.  Guys might say they could approach a lot in theory if they wanted to. "Well yeah, I could approach tons of girls every day if I really wanted to." But I don't see this to be the case. I really don't think guys can. I don't think most guys are strong enough mentally to be able to maintain consistent approach volume.  It is in my view that the male's ability to incur repeated rejection and persevere with his approaches, as a result of not taking rejections personally, is a more core, innate characteristic of the male rather than one he acquires via his surroundings/influences - i.e., a constitutional rather than acquired/learned mindset.  A male can have the greatest influences in the world (i.e., my blog, videos, and DMs) and still be a whiny simp who takes rejection personally and can't maintain any appreciable volume of approach.  *My aptitude for approach is linked to the fact that I've somehow been able to innately decouple ego from the process of getting rejected repeatedly.*  The inability to disconnect ego from rejection is the reason why many guys will never identify the latter as inherent to approach/dating. Their ego prevents them from realizing/accepting that rejection is normal and will never go away. Their ego creates a blind spot. Essentially a form of denial that shields them from... Full article: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/02/03/can-you-talk-about-ego-and-getting-rejected-by-women/

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 In this video I discuss, as the title clearly states, the #1 trait that determines a male's ability to be successful with women.  It is an observation I repeatedly make that many guys who start to become active approach practitioners over the course of several months will ultimately fade / drop off altogether.  If I happen to have convos with these guys, they'll admit how they haven't been approaching as much.  This is largely linked to not getting the outcomes they're looking for. It's understandable. After all, if you're investing time and mental energy into the approach/dating process, you want a return on your investment.  This clip will be particularly beneficial for you if you're finding your approach volume has declined because you're not getting the results you're looking for. And if you are still hyper-early in the approach process and haven't fallen off yet, this clip will help prevent you from succumbing to the inevitable mental struggles that lie ahead. Full article: https://mikemehlman.net/2021/02/01/the-1-trait-that-determines-a-males-ability-to-be-successful-with-women/

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 I've talked about in prior content the general ideas of soup texting and how to arrange a date. In this current clip I respond to a question about *calling* girls to arrange dates.  It's like "oh wow *calling* girls, holy shit."  In other words, if you're able to get the girl on the phone and have a short convo with her, wouldn't that theoretically increase the male's chances of securing a date? So I address this in the current clip.  As I've discussed prior, the male is his most attractive when he is fully deregulated (i.e., 100% winging his interactions). Insofar as you maintain high approach volume, your non-neediness will be maximal, and natural attractive behaviors will manifest on your end.  That is to say, the exact timing of when you text and what you say, or even whether you text vs call the girl, doesn't matter insofar as you are consistently approaching and are deregulated.  However what I can say is that I never call girls. And that's not because I have an ego-based rule against it in any way. It's because I am consistent with approach and have high volume of contact acquisitions, so it's not a spontaneous behavior that ever manifests on my end.  The greater the approach volume of the male, and the more contacts he picks up, the less likely he is to even consider calling girls. It's just not practical.  The less the male meets new women, the more likely he is to affix longer-term, "what's the potential with this girl?"-type thoughts to any one girl he meets. This isn't about right or wrong. This is just a matter of the natural behaviors that manifest on the male's end as a result of the volume of approach he does.  And even if one were to make the argument, "But what about, despite high numbers of contacts, you pick out one or two girls you liked more and then just call them? Can't you work in the habit somehow?"  My response is: Once again, I just never call girls. And truthfully, I don't even care if it theoretically could increase the chance of meeting up with an occasional girl by 8%.  If a girl doesn't meet up with me because I texted rather than called her, I'm okay not meeting up with that girl.  It's called: you launch off high-volume texts and various ones will respond. Then just ask if they like coffee/tapioca, then arrange a time, then meet up. That's the process. It's not complicated.  If you want to call girls because that's your deregulation, my advice is it's OK to experiment a bit and try it out for yourself. But it's important to note that as your approach volume increases and you acquire more contacts, the notion of calling girls will literally become laughable.  When I was living in Australia with my old Italian housemate, for pure entertainment I decided to call a girl I had approached a few days earlier. It was funny because he knew the girl from one of his social circles on campus, and he was like, "You're calling her?" We laughed. I got the girl on the phone and we talked for maybe 5-10 minutes. I can't even recall whether I had tried to arrange a date with her during that short convo, but I do remember that we never ended up meeting up. And apart from that, I can't even remember the last time I've called a girl... Full article: https://mikemehlman.net/