by Neil K
Over the years I have gotten into quite a few heated debates about the subject of 'indirect vs Direct'. Usually these 'arguments' would occur online in some discussion forum or another related to dating and relationships, and sometimes these arguments would get a bit out of hand. I even got banned from one site because the PUA guru who ran it couldn't handle me breaking apart his indirect, PUA bullshit and exposing it for the nonsense it really is. Fortunately I'm somewhat less into arguing online now, but it did teach me a lot about the sort of misconceptions guys have about Direct.
A common argument I would hear a lot of guys start with me is that there are some situations where it's better to be indirect, whereas others it's better to be Direct. They would tell me that the smart guy would know when it's better to be indirect and when it's better to use Direct.
Personally I disagree with this point of view. In my experience, I have never known a situation where it is more effective to be indirect. If anyone can present a convincing argument as to why and how it would be more effective to be indirect in any given situation, feel free to go ahead but you'll have a job convincing me.
A lot of these guys also believed that you can become some sort of 'direct/indirect hybrid' sort of guy. Again, this is another notion I totally disagree with. You are either Direct or indirect; it's not possible to be a mixture of both at any one time.
Having said all that, are there any situations where it is not advisable to be Direct? I would say that you are better off not using Direct with women you work with, as if you get rejected it could prove awkward for you both having to see each other. But then again, you are likely better off not hitting on women whatsoever in the workplace, so this is not a reflection of it being a bad thing to use Direct.
Also, situations where there are a lot of people about such as a quiet train or bus carriage or a quiet library, maybe you wouldn't want to be Direct in those situations as you might feel uncomfortable with everyone listening. If you are in a place where people can overhear your conversation and it's really quiet, you could use a slightly 'toned down' version of Direct perhaps. But better still, how about you just learn to not give a damn what anyone around you thinks, and just be Direct whenever and wherever the hell you want? (Excluding the workplace, though).
Just because it might be advisable to tone down Direct or not hit on girls in some situations, that doesn't mean you need to resort to going indirect in these situations. Indirect wouldn't be more effective in any of these scenarios. If push really came to shove, Direct would prove more effective because it would convey your interest to the girl and you'd find out whether she felt the same or not.
I have also heard some guys (usually PUA types) claim that 'an amateur hits on a woman straight away', and that he should 'build attraction, comfort and demonstrate value first'. That all sounds good and well, but what if a guy spent all that time doing all that stuff, only to find out the girl wasn't romantically or sexually attracted to him? That happens to guys all the time.
Nope, the actual truth is 'An amateur wastes time beating around the bush being indirect, whereas the smart guy goes Direct FIRST....THEN gets to know the girl after that if he senses any romantic/sexual interest there'.
The bottom line is that Direct is ALWAYS more effective than indirect. Don't get duped by these guys who claim that 'it's sometimes more effective be be Direct, other times indirect'. Nope. Sure, it might sometimes be advisable to not hit on girls in certain situations, or it may be better to use a slightly 'toned down' version of Direct where you're less sexually explicit....but don't confuse that with thinking it's more effective to be indirect in those situations. It isn't.
Add comment
Comments