What is GK’s game like?

by GK on November 10, 2009

An e-mail I received from overseas during my recent hiatus reminded me of a post I’d been meaning to make — to explain my “game,” so to speak. It goes like this: 

“I know you don’t use relating too much. but do you use the open-ended-question vacuum  reward ( relate )? I would be glad if you can say how your gameplan looks like.  Do you also use disqualifications? I don’t know what to use and what is unnecessary according to the juggler method?”

The e-mail also began with, “I think game is a stupid word.”

This may seem ironic coming from a guy who has “game” in his blog title, but I agree. Guys who have spent time with me, and even those of you who have only read me, have some idea of my personality and the way I express it when I’m socializing. But for those of you wondering what I’m like with women and with friends, I’ll explain it here. I hope you’ll see that “game” is just a small part of me, and that you’re better off not trying to imitate me.

The question focuses on how I apply Juggler Method, which is of course the inspiration for Charisma Arts and my paycheck as an instructor. Thing is, Juggler Method really isn’t what I’m teaching. Nor is it the Big Four, which is a condensed version. Nor is it any particular technique. I’m teaching guys how to go after what they want in their social lives, and in particular how to lead. The tools are grounded in Wayne Elise’s method, but they vary by the guy, and they’re interchangeable.

What is not interchangeable is you. That’s my big problem with so many of the services being sold out there — they homogenize a guy’s unique traits with a cookie-cutter approach that’s dependent on a certain style or technique. The bootcamp I took over three years ago was not immune to that, though I think we’ve made some big strides since then. I don’t care how charismatic the instructor is — trying to become his carbon copy is a perilous road that can be tough to return from. You’re better off getting to know yourself and emulating that.

Now, I’ll get off my high horse and just answer the darned question.

If I were a car, I’d be much closer to a Cooper Mini than a Ferrari. I’m stylish, but understated. I was a shy emo kid in high school, and I’m still no extrovert. The usual adjectives tossed around to describe me include “down to earth,” “easy going” and “low key.” This is especially true if I’m in a relaxed setting, though as I’ve written here before, I can flip the switch in a louder place.

As for my game plan, it varies. I feel no shame about having a quiet night out where I stick to my friends. During the day, I often keep to myself and write at my local Starbucks (much as I’m doing now). I only go out two to three nights a week, because anything more would tire me. However, when I do mingle, I make sure to do that soon after leaving the house, so I get in the right mood.

This may not sound like your typical episode of “Entourage,” and indeed my life doesn’t revolve around glamor. But I also enjoy a fulfilling, busy social life with high-quality friends and women. And I continue to have some wild times. So I must be doing something right.

I tend to build to a slow boil when I meet a woman I like. I’m not overly sexual or challenging with her, though I do love double entendres and playful jabs, and I usually build a friendly, fun vibe with her before I do any serious escalating. If I had to rate between 1 and 10 how sexual I am in words and touch during the first meeting, it’s probably a 7. These days I avoid kissing her or taking her home the night I meet her, as I’m more concerned with having a real connection that will lead to a date. However, if I’m at a dance club or in another city, or if she’s just too damned fun, I might accelerate this process.

Regarding specific techniques: How much do I vacuum with an open-ended question? Not much. However, I often create silence after I’ve been making statements, because I’ve committed more to the interaction that way, and I’m likelier to get commitment back. I don’t like doing most of the talking.

I find relating and rewarding to be utterly boring with someone I’m just getting to know. I’ve already made that clear.

I disqualify more than the average guy should, which is why I rarely teach it. I think disqualification is best reserved for these situations: when someone puts you on a pedestal, or they’re challenging you in some way. Unless your name is George Clooney, active self-deprecation is rarely sexy.

I do practice what I preach with the Big Four, though I’m not consciously doing so. Nor am I consciously going by any script. That’s the beauty of being where I am now — I’ve reached a very satifsfying full circle. I came into this stuff with only my personality, then experienced lots of trial and error while internalizing the stuff that helped me come out of my shell, and now I’m back to just expressing my personality.

Likewise, I help each guy determine how much of this stuff is right for him, so it becomes less about a method and more about self-expression.

Comments on this entry are closed.