The Private Man

Attraction and dating information for all men

For Women – A Player Test

At the risk of incurring the wrath of my fellow Manosphere bloggers, I am going to give a method to women for determining if a man is a player or not. This only applies when a women meets a man out in the real world – bar, party, event, even on the street. Yes, it’s a test and Manosphere guys loathe these kinds of tests.

Here is the scenario…

A man starts a conversation with a woman who is single. It’s an innocuous chat but the woman is feeling an attraction for the guy. She can’t quite figure out why but there’s just something about this guy that sparks her interest. Perhaps it’s his witty comments, his confidence, his posture, his looks, even the tone of his voice. With the subtlety that only a woman can master, she notices that there is no wedding on his finger.

The conversation continues and gets just a bit more personal. They find out what each person does for a living, how many kids they each have, where they each were born. The man then asks for the woman’s phone number or suggests that they go have a drink. The woman is secretly thrilled yet shows nothing. She should be thinking “This guy started the conversation, What if he’s a player? Maybe he’s one of these pick-up artists who just wants a sexual encounter and nothing more?”

To any woman who finds herself in this situation (and who doesn’t just want a sexual encounter), here’s what she must ask, verbatim:

“What if I told you I was seeing someone?”

A man of good character will back off. He might apologize. He might just say “too bad”. He might even compliment the hypothetical boyfriend as “lucky fellow.” Regardless, he’s respecting the woman’s current, if mythical, relationship. This guy is a keeper.

The next phrase the woman must state is equally important:

“Well, I didn’t say I was seeing someone so here’s my phone number… What’s your number?”

If a woman finds a keeper, she has to make sure he’s not going to run away. Getting his number is crucial and sends the strongest of interest indicators.

In response to that question, the player will simply not care. He will continue on, not respecting that the woman might be seeing someone or is even in a relationship. “I’d still like your phone number.”, “Come on, it’s only a drink”. Players don’t understand boundaries.

Let’s go back to the original test question. It’s worded like that because it only implies she’s seeing someone and the woman can quickly backpeddle only slightly once the guy has passed the test. The “I have a boyfriend” test is too strong and a good guy will be put off when the woman tries to backpeddle from such a direct lie. Women of good character don’t lie so blatantly, good guys can recognize this.

Advertisements

Single Post Navigation

38 thoughts on “For Women – A Player Test

  1. The Geographer on said:

    You. WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?

    • The test is to discover a player.
      Not find out whether the man is going to be in a relationship with her.
      Just because a guy isn’t a player, doesn’t mean that he doesn’t know that past a certain age women of questionable morals are going to try and cheat a new guy in return, rather than deal with the players in her past.
      Mainly, ’cause she ain’t good enough to perform payback on the players.
      Burn…

  2. Jason on said:

    “In response to that question, the player will simply not care. He will continue on, not respecting that the woman might be seeing someone or is even in a relationship. “I’d still like your phone number.”, “Come on, it’s only a drink”. Players don’t understand boundaries.”

    Incorrect, and you know that. The reason a “player” ignores “I have a boyfriend” is because a lot of the time it’s a shit test.

    • Agreed.

      Yet, “What if I told you I was seeing someone?” is much more subtle.

      • What if I told you that a girl who tells guys she’s trying to test, that she’s seeing someone,
        is someone I find is probably a user?
        You know, she’s the female version of the player, the woman who coos about “defensive dating”, and “I have to audition many men before I find a keeper”?
        Would be a complete turnoff. She’s so-called “leading someone on”, and I’m supposed to act like it doesn’t matter?
        What if she’s planning to do the same with me?

    • wingwoman on said:

      I have a boyfriend is not a shit test, it’s woman’s kind way of say your ugly and I don’t want to fuck you please leave me alone before I need to knee you in the nuts you clueless prick and/or they actually have a boyfriend.

  3. I imagine a skilled player would answer this hypothetical hypothetically, or deflect it.

    • I’m definitely not a skilled player, or even an unskilled one, but if I had my wits about me I might answer like this:

      “What if I told you I was seeing someone?”

      “Well, I don’t know. Is that something you are likely to tell me?”

      But then, I would have interpreted her question as a bit of harmless flirting, rather than a make-or-break test of my suitability. Which shows how much I know.

  4. What if, during the course of the conversation, the guy asks the woman if she has a boyfriend or is married? If the woman does not, but is unsure about the guy (maybe he has a girlfriend(s) or wife or is a player or pick-up artist), what should she say?

  5. I think stuff like this is great and needs to be written about more often . The catch here is that Hos gonna Ho. You can tell a slutty girl how to spot players all day long and she’ll never listen, because she’s a slut. Good girls though, the ones who are still salvageable and savable will be open to this info

    As men of the enlightened variety we have to make a stand, either we’re for sluts or against them, we cant have both. I noticed this when the whole Sandra Fluke thing went down. The same guys who talk about how much they love being able to nail easy women were saying “for shame slut, for shame!”

    We have to accept that as me of considerable Charisma we’re inherentliy part of the problem and we either have to accept and adapt to that or become the men that “just want to watch the world burn”

    I’m personally okay with either.

  6. democratsarefascists on said:

    Doesn’t bother me. I find the whole idea kind of quaint, really. Not to shock anybody, but even when a woman isn’t consciously thinking she’s with a player, she knows it. The truth is, you’re not closing a deal with a woman. If she shows this much interest in you, she’s already well on her way to giving it up. And once you’ve had her, she’s invested in you. Usually, it doesn’t even matter if you’re married after that, or turn out to be the “worst sort of man.” The prospect of getting her pussy pounded by a man who knows how is enough to keep her coming back.

    • DC Phil on said:

      I’d have to agree. I think it was Roosh who commented on the “I have a boyfriend” defense like this:

      How much she’s invested in the real or fictitious boyfriend is how soon she mentions him in the conversation, and how much her speech drips of her feelings. Five minutes or less in the conversation? Very likely that she does have one and that she’s smitten. 15, 20, or 30 + minutes and she’s kind of iffy? He could still exist, but it means that she’s not heavily invested and might be looking to cheat.

      This can also apply to married women who don’t wear their rings, which is rare. I had this happen to me with one such woman. I didn’t know she was married until the second half of our second date when she told me and after sending me definite IOI’s.

      I’ve heard it said that, if they’re looking to cheat, women will put themselves in situations where they’ll allow themselves to be swept up in the moment. A kind of plausible deniability at work to feed the hamster if it does happen and she gets caught.

  7. Pingback: “What if I told you I was seeing someone?” « Betasattva

  8. Doug1 on said:

    My first response would be:

    “Well that would make you more of a challenge. But I’ve been known to steal girls from their boyfriends whom they weren’t totally happy with before.”

    That accomplishes DHV, preselection if only verbal, and leaves ambiguous for what purpose he’s stealth them from boyfriends, though with a strong suggestion it wasn’t a one off.

  9. Doug1 on said:

    My backstory (and the truth) informing meeting these sorts of shit tests is that I used to be, or have been at periods in my past quite a player, I’ve mellowed. That is that’s what it has been for some time when looking for a LTR. When in one but pursing some open privileges, I basically just agree and amplify that yeah player, but an affectionate one.

  10. derthal on said:

    My answer:
    “Just tell me the true, and you’ll see”.

    Her answer: “I have boyfriend” or something unambiguous like that – my answer “Good luck then”. End.

  11. Leonard on said:

    This is not any surefire kind of test because 1) people can be unhappy with boyfriends, 2) nothing has to happen on the date anyway except non-sexual things. Thus, nothing dishonorable is implied by not caring that she has a boyfriend.

    Now, perhaps, the man’s ANSWER will tell something important anyway. But his WILLINGNESS per se to go on a date will not.

  12. If she says, “What if I told you I was seeing someone” the correct answer is “Are you?” Then she either says “Yes” in which case you can continue with the knowledge, or she will say, “No”. Either way it gives you a way to proceed. If she then admits the “Yes” was a lie, you ditch her saying something to the effect, “I have better things to do with my time and be with a liar.” That puts her on the defensive – either way, the best thing to do is to do the something she’s not expecting – keep her off guard and dancing as fast as she can.

    The key is to not be predictable – do what she isn’t expecting. Up to and including walking away when she asks. Never let her get the upper hand with her shit-tests… Whats the worst that happens? You don’t score with her – that isn’t so bad, there are a lot of others in the bar so you didn’t waste a lot of time.

  13. dancelot on said:

    “What if I told you I was seeing someone?”
    “Yes I’m listening.”

    Nonsensical questions deserve the same kind of answers.

    If she does go on with this stupid question, you can turn it back on her: “Well are you or aren’t you seeing someone?”

    If she’s indeed seeing someone and she’s been entertaining you all this long, she’s up for it. Proceed as planned.

    If she’s not seeing anyone, what’s the problem then? Change the topic to something less stupid.

    “A man of good character will back off. He might apologize. He might just say “too bad”. He might even compliment the hypothetical boyfriend as “lucky fellow.” Regardless, he’s respecting the woman’s current, if mythical, relationship. This guy is a keeper.”

    You mean he’s a sucker. That’s not a man of good character, that’s a beta chump with a piss weak frame who has listening comprehension problem. Why would any man apologize for that? What exactly has he done wrong?

  14. Acksiom on said:

    “What if I pointed out that question is a tell for female players? You know, the kind of cheap user girls who just want to exploit men for everything they can get without giving anything back?”

  15. “What if I told you I was seeing someone?”

    “Then you’re pretty curious for someone already in a relationship.”

  16. democratsarefascists on said:

    Hmm. I guess some guys have more patience than I do. If she’s talking to me, I don’t care if she’s “seeing somebody” or not, and I don’t care if she knows it, either.

    I’ve just never met a woman in a bar who cared if I was a “man of good character” and I sure as hell don’t want her to think I’m a keeper. Truth be told, a bar’s the last place I look for women, anyway. I want women who are looking for excitement more than companionship.

  17. Hamster Tamer on said:

    This question (and its many variants) is, above all else, a *HUGE IOI*, the minor shit-test aspect easily suaved over, and a green light to ESCALATE, at the very least to a number-close.

    i.e. she “feels” you as a tingle/lover–she’s definitely not putting you in the LJBF zone (unless you wilt and LET her)–and there’s certainly NOTHING to apologize for, nor back off from. AYFKM? Sure, show a TINY glint of sensitivity, but you are moving in EXACTLY the right direction. Drive on, weather clear, track fast… and nuthin’ ta lose. (She did, after all, come to whatever bar/event/party withOUT Her Main Squeeze.)

    DemsAreF and dancelot (and betasattva and others) have it exactly right. (“Yes, I’m listening.” = PURE GOLD/not-a-cad-but-still-an-ALPHA, on several levels. STOLEN, as I almost always over-stroke this pivotal moment with humor… I will of course lean in a bit as I deliver it… though hand on chin would be too sarcastic.)

    I’m beginning to think our friend TPM is falling into… “wuv, twue wuv…” I’m going to send him some KY White Knight Rub-On Tarnish, lol.

    PS: somewhere in TPM’s bio it stated he was/is a comic/comedy writer, so perhaps today’s post is…”material”? ;’)

  18. Leftatforty on said:

    Thank you, but if I had a boyfriend and were in a bar, I wouldn’t send any kind of signal for anyone to chat me up. A woman who asks this question while talking to a man in a bar, is a player herself.

      • Amen, and good for you, girl.
        This is why I prefer women who already know they belong to me once I claim them.
        They might have to go out and cut me a hickory switch so I can remind them once in a while, but it generally avoids “misunderstandings” like that.

      • How do you ‘claim’ them? Drug them and tie them up perhaps?

      • Hamster Tamer on said:

        fi asks: “How do you ‘claim’ them? Drug them and tie them up perhaps?”

        Well, extreme feminists require extreme measures… I KID!… OTOH you walked right into it… and we wuv that about yew. ;^)

  19. democratsarefascists on said:

    Claiming is a rule for a world you don’t live in, fi.
    I’d explain it, but you obviously like vanilla, day in and out.

  20. I’ve gotten pretty good at filtering out the players.

    I don’t put out on the first date.

  21. Jumungus on said:

    Great post..!

    “What if I told you I was seeing someone?” — My experience, shes a player herself looking to play the game and its time to pounce! Thats like asking “what if I had a third tit?” the answer is open ended because it DONT matter! -Women this coy are looking for players, NOT nice guys who will run at the fact she has an “imaginary” bf ,but pound her regardless of her situation..
    Winners always get the spoils!
    I think this question is a test of MANHOOD not playerism… In retort, I would say this, with direct eye contact ..”then I’d say he is in trouble of losing you” – this should get a drip or two. Shows position, dominance, and a big dick mentality!

    Man ALL women have a beta or two they call “bf’s” at convience ONLY! bitch please! if she were taken he would be there or she would NOT be!

    • I agree. If she’s in a bar without her bf she’s a) looking for the next bf, or b) out with the girls. If she is out with the girls and is happy in her relationship with her bf, then the girls will prevent any approach from happening.

      Your response is perfect…

  22. Any woman, alone in a bar or with a slut-in-arms is not going to convince me of good girl status by saying she has a boyfriend. I find that annoying, hence why I wouldn’t give too shits about her so called relationship status. Most girls just monkey branch anyway. The unlucky dude who is her ‘boyfriend’ is just a ladder to reach better things. If a girl is really in love and respects her man, then she won’t even be perceptible to playerism.

    All in all, don’t say you have a boyfriend if you’re in a bar. Better yet, don’t be in a bar if you have a boyfriend.

  23. SHE: “What if I told you I was seeing someone?”

    Why are you encouraging women to engage in a typical female sh*t test? It’s a drama creation tool and no more than that. It’s not even effective in finding a well-adjusted male. Here’s why:

    PROPER POSSIBLE MALE RESPONSE(S):
    (to be delivered with a knowing smile)

    • “Why are you pretending I should take your word at face value? ”

    • “Telling me that doesn’t mean anything. Women are like monkeys. They don’t let go of one branch until they have a really good grip on the NEXT.”

    • “I would assume you were lying. ”

    • “So? Did I indicate I want to take his place?”

    • “What if I told you I was Brad Pitt? Even if you WERE seeing someone, you and I both know you would be on your back with your legs in the air faster than you can say “Angelina Who. So what you say is meaningless. I just met you.”

    (Suddenly her/your bullshit “player test” now blows up in her face.)

    You suggest she shit tests a MAN to try to find out if HE is a player??? He should be testing HER for that first! The opposite is more likely true. It’s more likely that SHE is a “player” – and your shit test only proves it. Because cheating COSTS men. It doesn’t cost women ANYTHING. They expect men to pay for their slutty mistakes. So who cares what she SAYS. Just because she says she is “seeing someone” doesn’t mean she won’t spread her legs for someone else. Your “player test” is going under the assumption that women are good and noble – which is totally false.

    REASONING: After all, 60% of married women cheat on their husbands. You can bet the percentage is greater in women who are merely “seeing someone” – where she is not even bound by any kind of vow, promise, or contract. So merely SAYING she is seeing someone is totally meaningless. It doesn’t mean she won’t spread her legs anyway. She could even be a lesbian who is seeing a woman. She could be ovulating and out looking for sperm donor in order to cuckhold the poor beta she is “seeing”. This happens to be true in 30-40% of DNA test results. But any worthwhile male will be instantly put off by such garbage – and all you are doing is encouraging women to create drama ……. when a simple & direct “No thanks, but I really enjoyed meeting you.” will work. Telling women to sh*t test is stupid and totally ineffective. Especially when she has already gone out of her way to be approached, seek out male attention, and put herself in a situation where she is LOOKING to engage with other males. Nothing that comes out of a woman’s mouth should be taken at face value. Female behavior clearly demonstrates this. They are the sex that commits paternity fraud and VOTES to make (keep) it legal in all 50 states. They are the sex lies to their own reflections in the mirror every day of their lives — from their hair color & painted faces to their fake body parts. Lying about their age when they are younger.. and lying when they are older. The moment a man realizes this , it’s GAME OVER for women. Their sh*t tests will fail.

    He should immediately smile and walk away. Permanently. Because your “player test” is only designed to try and sucker him into playing HER game. That’s how you beat women at their own game. Hold a mirror + a little honesty right up to her and turn the table on her. Women will then panic and cower instantly. It’s the BEST way to expose her – quickly.

    Man wins. She gains nothing from this kind of interaction, and sets her up to lose a potentially worthwhile Man. It’s got RED FLAG all over it. But by all means. Keep teaching women this. I always enjoy watching their stupid tests explode in their own faces…. while they run around wondering “where are all the good men?”

    “We’re right here. And we are NOT FUCKING INTERESTED. Bye.”

    The BEST advice you should give to women is how to be able to FIND, GET and KEEP a worthwhile Man. Not to get get RID of him before it’s even begun. Don’t teach women to look for players. Teach them to find a decent man. And this is the WRONG way to go about it. That’s like teaching someone where NOT to look for success. Stupid.

  24. AND PS. GREAT to see a number of men here (like Jumungus) who have EXACTLY the right idea.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: