An occasional concern I get from prospective clients is whether there is going to be “actionable advice” in our workings together.
They know I get “deep work” and know my stuff about women… but will I tell them specifically what to do and say to a girl? Are they gonna get the right homework assignments, and systems to cultivate attraction?
It’s an understandable worry. They’ve been lost for so long, and they want clear direction. If someone just tells them exactly what to do to get results — then they’ll be sailing smooth.
I admit this is not my strong suit. And I know for other “gurus” it is.
They have a perfect, flawless, “8 step system”… and if you just follow it, and just say this “one ‘bizarre’ little line” — women will go crazy for you too.
Or will they?
It must be acknowledged that some guys get temporary results with these systems and techniques. And perhaps these training wheels are enough to get them “in the game” so they can iterate from there.
But I’m not really a fan of this philosophy.
And I’ll tell you why:
When you are relying on a system, you are not only suppressing your own authentic self-expression, blocking you from connecting with a girl emotionally… you are ignoring the context of an interaction and could very well be learning the wrong lessons.
Understand: bad dating and relationship advice centers around dogmas.
For instance, The Red Pill for a long time has made it a known that the way to save a “dead bedroom” relationship is to start running “dread game” — aka making yourself scarce, flirting with other women, and jacking up your real/perceived value.
The problem with this advice is that, while some of it might be timeless (it’s always good to get in shape), other parts of it may not necessarily be appropriate to the context.
Is the bedroom dead because you’re a needy little bitch? Or is the bedroom dead because your communication is terrible? Or maybe is it something else?
Running dread game in one relationship might yield some progress, running it in another might have mixed results, running it in a third might destroy the relationship immediately.
Similarly, an opener for one girl in one situation might do really well… whereas in another, it would fall flat or completely backfire (great example: using lines for cold approaches in a bar for girls you like in social settings).
Which is why I believe giving blanket advice like this devoid of context is akin to MALPRACTICE or at even FRAUD. And while it may make people FEEL like they are “doing something” when they have some flawed, uncalibrated system to go off of… I don’t want to be a part of it, because this is how you make bad problems worse.
Which is why I do not teach SYSTEMS, I teach PRINCIPLES and specific tactics to go along with them.
Principles are timeless; they are archetypes. To use an analogy: if you were teaching someone to paint, you would teach them optics, shadows, and perspective — because these are the principles that undergird the ability. Then you might show them colors and how they blend together; these would be the tactics. Putting this together would then require practice; honing your eye (awareness) and fine motor skills (smoothness in execution).
In contrast, people who tell you to follow a “system” for something like dating or relationships that involve a dynamic environment and calibrations for other people… this is like having someone copy the outline of someone else’s painting.
It is rote memorization and has LOWER ENERGY to the beholder, and bars the person from being able to “paint” in any context aside from the one taught.
The only benefit of this is to a really curious person who uses the copy to infer on his own what is going on.
But if you teach them the principles YOU CAN DO THAT ANYWAY and MUCH FASTER.
Moreover, you avoid bad habits and drawing the wrong conclusions.Which is why guys who internalize my methods *may* take a little longer at first… but STOP NEEDING HELP after.
Because with my feedback, they start to “get it” and change their vibe. They start to pay attention, and tap into a more natural expression with women… rather than getting in their head, and getting half-hearted results.
Now, does this mean there are only principles and no examples?
Of course not. I give plenty of examples to clients.
But they are there to illustrate principles, and I encourage clients to use them as templates rather than copy-paste responses… as the context they are in with a girl might be different.
Which brings me to a salient point, answering a question I commonly receive… what’s the difference between the masterclass and coaching?
The masterclass is filled with principles and tactics, along with examples of them. It gives you pretty much all the awareness and tools you need to succeed with women.
(You can get all 18.5 hours of the masterclass here)
Coaching is the reinforcement of those principles, but it allows me to help you use them in appropriate contexts.
In other words, coaching is calibration. I take what you learn in the masterclass and from our conversations, and help you to apply it specifically in situations that affect you.
This is indeed the part most guys struggle in, and it is where the value proposition of having a “master” in your corner comes in.
NOTHING I do with clients is “cut and paste.” I ALWAYS ask lots of questions so I am able to form an accurate picture of the scenario, so that my direction is calibrated as close to perfect as possible.
Unfortunately, this nuance is not very common with coaches, many of whom simply repeat platitudes or systems without considering said context.
So I recommend if you decide to get a coach, to choose wisely.
It might not be me. And that’s fine.
But be very cautious of gurus who try to promote some sloganeered system as having all the answers.
This is good marketing to the low-vibration parts of our mind, because it plays on the fantasy of a lazy mindless “solutions.”
But mastery and wisdom don’t come from that approach. They only come from active engagement and curiosity.
Anyway, enough said.
If you want my help, apply here: www.patstedman.com/application
– Pat
