The two cliche pieces of dating advice you will get when you ask people for help with women are "Just be yourself" and "Be confident". Both of these phrases are meaningless platitudes and they never helped anyone.
First, it's impossible to be anyone except yourself. A guy who has spent his whole life being himself and not getting laid is a guy who wants a change. Neil Strauss, author of The Game, had a great way to reframe this: He said that you don't need to be yourself, you need to be your best self.
"Be confident" accomplishes nothing because it's impossible for someone to be confident just because someone told them to be. Do you believe there has been anyone in the history of the earth who, upon being told to "be confident", slapped his forehead and said "Oh yeah! Great point, thanks!" and proceeded to become a multimilliondollar playboy who was having threesomes with models every night?
What I tried to do here was give you an idea about what your end goal should be. I tried to explain what these two phrases meant. This post is not a magic pill to dating success -- there is no such thing as a magic pill, in this area or any other. Mastery takes years of hard work. But how can you reach mastery if you don't even know where you are going?
Try to think of the advice I give you as if I am merely pointing my finger in the direction you should be moving. It's on you to do the work and move in that direction. It's fucking hard work and it takes a long time, but mastery is worth it. I'm far from a guru, and am still a long ways away from what I would consider mastery. I am not a guru. Some of the things I describe in this thread I have not yet achieved for myself. But I'll get there some day. I hope to see you all there too.
Good luck, to all of us.
I'm not a good looking guy- no hot girl will like me. I have nothing to offer her because I'm only average looking.
It's true that women are telegraphing most of their sexual value through their looks, and that a substantial amount of our attraction for a girl we haven't met is determined exclusively by her body type and various health indicators, such as long shiny hair and clear skin. This makes sense evolutionarily speaking; a man needs a sexually mature woman who is healthy and can carry a baby to term without becoming ill or dying. Imagine all the wasted energy if man in a tribal society 50,000 years ago selected a sick woman as a mate, and cared for her for months only to have her die and the child be stillborn. This is what we call high "replication value": A woman is sexually attractive if she communicates visually that she can replicate reliably.
Because of this, many men assume that a woman is looking for the same thing they are looking for- that women are only attracted to a "good looking" guy. But consider my previous example. Men have been designed by natural selection to be sexually attracted to healthy bodies. A woman certainly wants a man who won't die while she is pregnant or caring for an infant, but it's only one of many factors she will select for, and it is in fact far from the most important. Besides, most men have the same replication value. Whereas the woman must become pregnant and carry a child for nine months in addition to surviving childbirth, if a man is capable of getting it up and ejaculating, he is a reliable replicator. What is far more important to the woman is what is known as "survival value".
In a troop of apes, the male with the highest survival value is the alpha male. This is the male who will be the most sexually attractive to the females and is in fact likely to mate with all of them, while the beta males compete for the rights to care for his offspring. In fact, a female may pairbond with a beta male who will provide for her while she mates with the alpha who impregnates her. Alphaness for an ape, especially lower apes such as gorillas, is generally achieved through physical dominance.
However, this is not how alpha status is determined for humans. Humans have spoken language and are vastly more intelligent than apes. This means their social networks are developed and controlled in fundamentally different ways, and the person who can control the social environment can use the group to eliminate his enemies. Simply put: Lead the men, and you have survival value. In a tribal society, the man with the highest survival value is the chief. Is a female really going to care if the tribal chief isn't good looking? No. She couldn't care less. He's in control of the social dynamics of his troop, he's in control of the men, he's taking care of the women, and therefore he has the highest survival value of any man she knows. If she wants to pairbond with a guy who can ensure her safety and security while she is pregnant and nursing, she needs look no further than that man-- what he looks like has nothing to do with it.
