- Joined
- Mar 27, 2023
- Messages
- 650
I have not seen much on this topic, but it seems to be an old school concept, perhaps tangentially related to NLP. It seems @Teevster can get descriptive about sensations in his gambits, so perhaps it is partly inspired by the school of thought. I am not quite ready for Riker.
Basically the idea is to use overly descriptive, flowery language to describe sensations, senses, feelings, etc.
@James Cruse mentioned JD Fuentes' book the Sexual Key in the classic seduction books thread. I do not see other mentions of this guy here. More from James on this:
www.skilledseducer.com
I haven't delved much into the book yet, but it starts by acknowledging Milton Erickson, Richard Bandler & John Grinder, and Ross Jeffries for applying NLP to seduction. Then he claims women process language with both sides of the brain.
Franco's books from around that time also feature this concept heavily. He actually wrote that he couldn't stop laughing while writing some examples because of how ridiculous and even aggrivating it can sound to a man. So it makes sense that guys may find it unnatural and forget about employing it. But he claims it's extremely effective.
Has this technique been lost to time? We're talking two decades now, after all.
***
@Chase are there any articles on using language bordering on "purple prose" to arouse? (Romantic dates can still pull, right?)
Is anyone else here consciously using this?
I must admit, when I think of an archetypical seducer in the classic sense, it is a silver-tongued Don Juan speaking about the sunset, handing a girl a rose he had just picked.
Basically the idea is to use overly descriptive, flowery language to describe sensations, senses, feelings, etc.
@James Cruse mentioned JD Fuentes' book the Sexual Key in the classic seduction books thread. I do not see other mentions of this guy here. More from James on this:
Socializing - 2021 in review and the state of seduction as we enter 2022
Today, while I was riding the subway, I got at least 3 approach invites from very decent chicks (no, they were not 10s, but I'm sure 80% of guys in this forum would give them a shot). Daygame is the easier it has ever been, by a large margin. Guys were not approaching before corona, but now, oh...
www.skilledseducer.com
I haven't delved much into the book yet, but it starts by acknowledging Milton Erickson, Richard Bandler & John Grinder, and Ross Jeffries for applying NLP to seduction. Then he claims women process language with both sides of the brain.
Franco's books from around that time also feature this concept heavily. He actually wrote that he couldn't stop laughing while writing some examples because of how ridiculous and even aggrivating it can sound to a man. So it makes sense that guys may find it unnatural and forget about employing it. But he claims it's extremely effective.
Has this technique been lost to time? We're talking two decades now, after all.
***
@Chase are there any articles on using language bordering on "purple prose" to arouse? (Romantic dates can still pull, right?)
Is anyone else here consciously using this?
I must admit, when I think of an archetypical seducer in the classic sense, it is a silver-tongued Don Juan speaking about the sunset, handing a girl a rose he had just picked.
