How to Power Shift with Social

Cunning and Savvy

By Eric Reeves

Power, often thought of one of the

driving forces behind manʼs will
(see Nietzsche's concept of “der
wille zur macht”) to live.

We see it every day, and it invades

our interactions as well as
influencing our every action.

Take a look at a couple of these

scenarios:

Scenario A

A man walks into his bossʼs office

and requests a raise. He gets
turned down.

Another man walks into the same room and proposes a similar offer,
with the intention of walking away. He instead gets the raise.

Scenario B

Two students are studying together, the girl mentions, “Youʼre a

good friend.”

The male rejects the notion of just friends, and begrudgingly

utters, “Friends? Hardly.”
Scenario C

Two friends are together chatting in high spirits, when a cohort

suddenly comes along.

“Ah, are you this little boyʼs friend?” one girl asks flippantly.

The male looks at her slowly, as if only realizing that she might be
talking to him. “Who?” he powerfully and quizzically asks almost as
if in genuine confusion.

The girl corrects herself, “A-ah, are you this guyʼs friend?”

... can you see it more clearly now?

Itʼs not until you reach the upper echelon of dominance that you
start to cherry-pick these shifts of power (hence force called a
power shift) out from everyday situations, and are able to take
advantage of navigating through the ever-changing tides of social
dominance.

But using power shifts, and maintaining an air of respect and power
about oneself can be taught and learned, and in todayʼs article Iʼm
going to pull off the veil that shrouds these common occurrences in
subtlety and nuance from the eyes of those who haven't paid as
much attention to them yet.
So what exactly is going on, and what is the importance of learning
how to make use of a tool like the power shift for the social
connoisseur?

Being dominant at an art or practice often requires the deep

understanding, subconscious or not, that allows unparalleled
performance. This becomes all the truer when multiple players are
present; itʼs almost impossible to maintain dominance among
other practitioners when your skill level is not up to snuff.

Think about it, whatʼs more likely? A player being renowned because
he can spike a volleyball or pitch a great fastball in practice, or a
player who can crush an opposing team with aces or being
unhittable?

To be dominant, as the definition suggests, inherently conveys that

there is an order, and position, at play.

The volleyball player hits harder than the opposing team can
receive.

The pitcher throws faster pitches than the batter can hit.

A manager of a business assigning tasks to employees.

A ruler directing his generals in a war.

The rulerʼs army crushing another countryʼs force.

The most attractive and confident guy in a classroom or at a

party.

An intelligent mathematician winning a Nobel prize.

Typically youʼll see an order of simplicity, such as A is greater than

B. It does get a bit more complicated with the interplay of multiple
players in things like group conversations, but thatʼs the gist of it
(players A and B).

Another important aspect to note is that there are varying degrees

of status, which typically are determinant of how high you are and
the breadth of the competitors. Beating out more competition
results in higher levels of power.

The mathematician is dominant over most others, with his status of

prize winner.

The ruler has power over far more than the average peasant, or the
manager with his employees.

The most attractive (not handsome; attractive, as in knowing how to

attract women, and there is a difference) guy in the room
automatically gets assigned the highest status in the room; just by
being there he bests the rest of the males.

So when we look at seduction and social cunning, as a skill rather

than uncontrollable happenstance, we learn that there ought to be
an order to things. This means we have new variables to
manipulate and train, and whatʼs incredibly surprising is that next to
no one even knows this.

No one really trains their understanding of human nature, apart from

the academics (and us)!

Just by this realization alone of the power structure between

interactions we benefit and put ourselves ahead of the curb.
Our competition is usually very little; itʼs not hard to be the top dog
when the rest of the pups are busy suckling from the teats of the
females.
Understanding the Power Shift

The examples I gave at the outset of this article give some great
insights into the common power dynamics scenarios that happen to
even to the average Joe (often largely unbeknownst to him). Letʼs
break it down scenario by scenario to better understand the social
constructs at play.

Scenario A: The Boss, and the Employees

A man walks into his bossʼs office and requests a raise. He gets
turned down.

Another man walks into the same room and proposes a similar offer,
with the intention of walking away. He instead gets the raise.

Letʼs go ahead and start assigning out names for these situations.
The employee that had his request for promotion denied will be
Employee A. The successful and more dominant man (disregarding
the boss of course) will be Employee B.

Look at things in terms of order and compliance.

The boss is in the top position, with the compliance of his

employees. Heʼs the top dog, no bones about it.

Two of those employees, A and B, are below the boss. Both go to

him with equal propositions (overwhelmingly dominant men often
require permission), and with assumingly equal value as both
employees contribute equal amounts of quality and quantity of
work.

The X-factor that contributes to Employee Bʼs value over A is

his compliance. He knows that his the company values work, and
that gives him power over his boss. Employee A doesnʼt realize his
actual worth, and thus does not have the same power to his
proposition.

The successful employeeʼs offer gets accepted because he

introduced less compliance, and as a result more power. The
boss knows by the suggestion he made, “I want a raise, or else I
may leave,” regardless if true or not, that he has more options than
Employee A. More options often means more power. The employee
played his cards right, and the boss succumbed to his ultimatum
because denying the raise would result in less gain for the company.

Scenario B: The Girl and the Boy

Two students are studying

together, the girl mentions,
“Youʼre a good friend.”

The male rejects the notion of

just friends, and begrudgingly
utters, “Friends? Hardly.”

The typical scenario between

the study-buddy boy and the
attractive girl. The girl,
seemingly out of nowhere,
asserts that she enjoys their
friendship.

The boy, like many others have

before, protests in rebellion against his new label.

“Who is she to determine our status?” the boy may be thinking.

The attractive girl is clearly higher status than the boy, but by
how much? His frustration is not all too unfounded actually; the girl
played a little trick on him to assert her power over him.

By sending an undesirable signal to the boy, she is demonstrating

her superior value. Thereʼs a good chance that this happened
because she knows the boyʼs intentions of romance, and is able to
use that against him to establish control.

It could have gone much worse actually (and better), with varying
degrees of shifts of power. Letʼs say the boy had three different
personalities, and each has their own response.

1. “Iʼm not your friend.”

The more caricatural “bad boy” response, which would

actually be typically better than the lower two.

He completely and utterly rejects any notion of friendship, and

protests in complete rebellion. He plays a high-stakes risky
game because he knows his position better than the others,
and has more options.

2. “Friends? Hardly.”

The reluctant response but one with enough compliance and

less risk aversion. He feels his value ought to be higher, and is
frustrated at the power-shift she engages with. Regardless, he
does not feel the rewards are high enough, and dares not to
commit fully with his resistance.

Women feel this is completely weak. Neither did he have the

courage to commit to risky rejection nor safe acceptance.

Thereʼs a good reason why the coinage “Average Frustrated

Chump” has the moniker “Chump” attached, while the “Nice
 Guy” label is devoid of any mockery.

3. “Yeah, of course!”

The safe route, the nice guy. He doesnʼt want to go against his
authority figure in the interaction. Heʼs effectively pedestaling
the girl heʼs with by showing no interest in rejecting her power.
Any results he gets with the girl would be purely by luck of the
draw.

There is a reason why all three responses fail. These responses are
boyish. Real men donʼt deal have to deal with these kinds of things.
The bad boy and his rebellion against authority is something a child
would do. The nice guy and the average chumps likewise fail to be
that authority in the relationship.

There is a better way to handle these kinds of power struggles, but

Iʼll come back to that after going through the last example.

Scenario C: The Spirited Group

Two friends are together chatting in high spirits, when a cohort

suddenly comes along.

“Ah, are you this little boyʼs friend?” one girl asks flippantly.

The male looks at her slowly, as if only realizing that she might be
talking to him. “Who?” he powerfully and quizzically asks almost as
if in genuine confusion.

The girl corrects herself, “A-ah, are you this guyʼs friend?”

There are three people in this situation: the cohort, the male, the
girl.
The girl is clearly more powerful than the male, and she asserts her
dominance by using a type of power shift thatʼs effect is twofold:

1. Sheʼs testing the new variable (the cohort) to the dynamic

2. Sheʼs subsequently asserting power over the male

The male overcomes this perfectly.

If he had accepted her label of “boy” to his friend, instead of “guy”,

both him and the girl would have been granted higher status over
the friend. Think of it as the two becoming partners, their two
statusʼs are somewhat equal. The cohort may be higher on the rung,
but not by much.

The maleʼs status gets dropped and heʼs forced with the added
social pressure of not one -- but two acts of social climbing.

On the other hand, the cohort could have rejected his friendʼs new
label of “boy” and defied the woman. Yes, the woman. The woman
has climbed up the likes of the cohort (also, the man). The cohort
struggles against this new dynamic she has introduced, thus being
less powerful.

What he did instead was much better. He completely and utterly

crushed any sort of insubordination between the two. The girl
committed a social faux pas and he capitalized on it excruciatingly
by making a fool out of her. He did it with a single word: “Who?”

He prevented his friend from slipping down the social ladder, and
also brought her down for trying to ladder climb. His friend and the
girl are now equal, and all is well for the cohort as he stands at
the top over them while looking down.

He also handled this smoothly, through his graceful manner. If he

had asked the same question in fury, rather than curiosity, the result
would have been the same. However, the difference lies later on, as
this would have been power through dictation: a very abrasive and
underhanded method.

You would be surprised at how subtle this would actually happen in

a real conversation. The girl would have made a mistake, and
corrected herself as if the cohort had not heard properly (thus the
embarrassment being only from an internal feeling, rather than
public shame). The boy would have thought nothing of it, and the
cohort would have received her warmly with a pleasant, “Ohhh!
Yeah!”

Thus, the power shift occurs with subtlety, the girl loses little
face, yet by overreaching and attempting to exert dominance
and failing, she has lowered her social standing relative to those
she attempted to dominate socially; thus, she dies (socially
speaking) on her own sword, but the cohort reassures her that
everything is okay.

Well what next?

How to Capitalize on a Power Shift

Hereʼs a little secret thatʼs rarely understood: power is not made by

strength, but weakness.

Imagine two martial artists in their respective stances, ready to

battle it out. They trade fierce glances and are consequently frozen
in stature. Youʼve seen it in movies (possibly with guns drawn), or
maybe even in real life. MMA fighters will often walk around a bit
before engaging, or stay out of range of their opponent.

Why is this exactly?

Itʼs quite simple: they know instinctively that the second a
mistake is made, it will be capitalized on. If they strike and miss,
the opponent will counter by taking advantage of that opening and
punish them for it. Both fighters know this, so they are stuck in a
perpetual standstill.

Offense is often said to be the best defense, but that is not the case
for the master-class. Offense is only reliably useful when there
are grave differences in strength, or when some sort of
disparity is present.

Our bad boy in scenario B is playing a very all-or-nothing style of

aggressive play. Any sort of conflict brought his way is crushed with
his own strength. Itʼs a gamble. If his opponent is weak enough, this
opponent will succumb to his might. If the opponent happens to be
stronger, the bad boy will be ruined instead. “Iʼm not your friend,” he
says. The girl responds with, “Douche,” and leaves. The bad boy of
course now has to chase after to get what he wants (which never
actually works, and never should be done).

Our nice guy and frustrated chump are too afraid to fight, so we
canʼt even consider their play-style in this game.

The dominant man (like the cohort) approaches it differently. Heʼs

waiting for that moment when the other messes up. He always
capitalizes, and consistently gets rewarded by doing so.

Youʼll see an incredible amount of these kinds of exchanges in war

tactics and the history of them.

Take the teachings of Sun Tzu and his Art of War for instance:
something heralded as a masterpiece on tactics and conflict, not
only in the military world but in the business management one too.
By itself, without any prior experience, itʼs hard to see its true value.
If you deconstruct some of what he has to say however, youʼll see
itʼs incredible teachings.

Here are some quotes (muddled by translation of course) from the

immortal man:

1. Invincibility lies in the defense; the possibility of victory in the

attack.

2. To fight and conquer in all our battles is not supreme

excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the
enemy's resistance without fighting.

3. Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be

extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness.
Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate.

4. The opportunity to secure ourselves against defeat lies in our

own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is
provided by the enemy himself.

I wonʼt quote any more as to not overload you, despite there being
so many goodies to pick out.. but hopefully you can see how this
ties into my previous ramblings using martial artist as an example.

This is the reason why sprezzatura, gracefulness, and humbleness

are such effective manners of achieving high social status. These
operate on the passive style of subtlety, and allow for your opponent
(such as your date, your boss, your audience, etc.) to make
mistakes that you can capitalize on (while also limiting the errors
you can make).

In the first quote, Sun Tzu mentions possibility of victory in the

opponentʼs attack. This is exactly it -- again, power comes from
weakness, not by application of strength. Again he mentions it, in
the fourth quote: we are our own defeaters and our enemies are
theirs.

If you donʼt believe me (or Sun Tzu) then try to think of how many
ways there are to make a blunder or insult someone and then how
many ways to do that without uttering a sound (I can think of only
one per culture). You canʼt do either very well without opening
your mouth.

We can even see this stuff in nature, with things like spiders and
their webs. Waiting for their prey to fall into their hands is much
more effective than going around and hunting. Trapdoor spiders will
wait until unsuspecting victims crawl above in a moment of
defenselessness, and then will strike.

In war itʼs often used to fight against vastly superior forces. Sun Tzu
used his tactics against the Chu army (of 300,000) with his
comparatively meager force of 30,000 men.

In the Vietnam War, America lost despite an overwhelming

advantage in strength because the same tactics were applied. The
Viet Cong effectively used guerrilla tactics, and had no central force
(see Sun Tzuʼs concept of formlessness in the third quote). This
made it impossible for the American military to do any substantial
damage. In fact, quite the opposite occurred when the Vietnamese
waited for air drops, and then capitalized on them by wiping each
one out one by one. Other tactics were of course used, but the
result was that America retreated and Viet Cong had won.

Formlessness, mysteriousness, waiting, and capitalization; all

these make up the back bone of the masterʼs road to victory
over challengers. It is the opponents who give him the opportunity
to raise his position, by entering his sphere and giving him mistakes
to capitalize upon.

While I donʼt want to advocate any sort of adversarialism between

you and those around you, itʼs good to learn the different sort of
power shifts that commonly occur.

Hereʼre a few of the likely ones youʼll encounter and might be

stumped by (without this guide, of course):

#1: The Friend Zone and Other Statuses

Ah, hello my infamous friend. We are back. Iʼve always said to those
I speak with about this is that, “Girls donʼt put men in the friend
zone, the men do it for them.”

It canʼt be any truer.

The word “friend” is just a word; it really means nothing. In fact, the
Italian language has 20 or more such words just for relationship
statuses. So why does it matter? It actually doesnʼt.

Words that dictate status (and my use of the word dictate is most
literal), such as:

boyfriend,
lover, and
friend
... are typically just that. In a brawl, this is more like a left jab. Itʼs to
poke around and get a feel for the situation when he or she has a
hunch, a gut feeling, of weakness. Itʼs only when you REACT to it
when things start to tumble downhill.

Imagine a suave guy like James Bond, and try to picture him (if you
can...) getting friend-zoned by a girl. What do you think he would
do? Scoff at the idea? Maybe, but even that seems a bit too
unrefined. Heʼs more likely to just sip his martini and continue
conversation as if she had never said it (much like the example
earlier of the cohort pretending he didnʼt hear or understand the
girl).

Any attention you give something gives it power. This means

even the little stuff with reactions like scoffing, or strange looks. The
more you contest the more you show your weakness. Granted, itʼs
often not enough of a shift the balance of power over to another
person, but these things work like a war of attrition. The sands of
time eventually corrode over your body and youʼve lost your former
self.

The best of this comes with the understanding of the situation, and
when you start noticing others doing this to you by trying to redirect
focus or denying compliance.

I added some tags on the end of each line to help you understand
whatʼs going on by using the previous martial arts example as an
analogy.

Guy: I thought we were friends? [jab]

Girl: Well we are more like acquaintances... [block]

Guy: So we canʼt be friends? [jab]

 Girl: We donʼt really hang out often... [block]

Guy: So what are we supposed to do then? Go on a date? [side-

steps]

Girl: What would we even do? [side-steps]

You can see where this is quickly going... The guy knows sheʼs
interested in at least some modicum of romance between the two,
and so he presses her a bit to get what he wants (well, what they
both want actually).

Her strategy of redirecting, while good at maintaining her image and

preventing any sort of chase dynamic, is not the best solution. Itʼs
immediately obvious due to the attention and importance sheʼs
assigning to the word that it has some value to her, so sheʼs
avoiding giving a simple yes or no response.

For the guy however... he got what he want with pure cunning.
Heʼs a sly fox, and he knows that people tend to like to follow the
path of least resistance.

For her, in this situation, he knew that his “jab,” the label, was
enough for him to make a weakness appear in the girl. She feels she
needs to respond, and doesnʼt want to comply, so she avoids
answering. This is troubling for her, so he offers her an escape
from this dynamic by proposing a date (indirectly).
She then follows along, as itʼs easier. Along the way however, sheʼs
been defeated. She succumbed to his slyness and is now being
strung along (to somewhere she wants to go, mind you).

This is what girls see and feel every time they assign you two a
relationship status. She doesnʼt know exactly how you feel, but
sheʼs got a pretty good idea. She knows exactly the right buttons to
push to get you to do what she wants (like trap you in the friend
zone as a backup plan for later on in case she needs you then).

Again this happens with not only the friend zone, but the ever
humbling, “I have a boyfriend,” line. This one is a bit tougher to
handle, and I always think loudly in my head “SO?”

It pops up AGAIN when used in the opposite fashion, “Do you have a
girlfriend?” Chase thankfully covered this one well in his recent
article, “Do You Have a Girlfriend? Hereʼs How to Answer This.”

The possibilities are endless.

Itʼs another reason why routines have such a low success rate. You
canʼt possibly plan ahead for all these scenarios, and plan out
responses to them. Youʼve just got to learn the elementary aspect of
the concept of non-reaction, and start to think in your head instead:
“Oh, sheʼs doing this as a way to power-shift things in her favor...
what are her motives?”

Then respond.

#2: Labels and Attrition

This one is a dirty little trick, used often by many. The idea is this:
find a weakness, such as a pet peeve or dislike of a label, and
relentlessly weaken until compliant.

Itʼs very subtle and gradual, otherwise it wouldnʼt be very effective.

--- first appearance ---

Guy: I donʼt know, she wouldnʼt leave me alone.

Girl: Thatʼs kind of being a jerk.

Guy: Huh? No way.

Girl: ….

--- a couple days later ---

Girl: Youʼre such a jerk.

Guy: *laughs* I know!

Girl: Right?

--- a couple weeks later ---

 Girl A: Hey, this is my friend... heʼs a jerk.

Guy: Ugh.

Girl B: Like jerk-off?

Guy: Wow.

*everyone laughs*

--- a month later ---

Girl A: Hey, this is jerk.

Girl B: Hi, jerk! Thatʼs a weird name.

Guy: Yeah...

Girl A: Yeah, jerk!

Eventually it can get out of hand and leading to bullying, but thatʼs
one example right there of attrition. It can happen with any label,
and itʼs used to shift power over either readily (“Donʼt do that,
thatʼs douchey”) or gradually over time. At the start the
conversation was normal, but by the end the guyʼd gained a new
nickname.

Even if you deny this vehemently, it will still be a question of

who breaks first. Itʼs the age old paradox of an unstoppable force
meets an immovable object. In the story of the Teumessian Fox
(destined to never be caught) against Laelaps (destined to catch
everything), Zeus himself had to step in and break up the fight by
turning the two into stone (or stars).

Itʼs better to not surround yourself with these types of girls or

people (who will engage in petty labeling and ladder-climbing one-
upmanship), and instead make friends with those higher up on the
social ladder. Just be wary when this happens, and donʼt engage.

#3: Assignments and Tasks

A common way of gaining compliance is through requesting,

assigning, or demanding tasks. In social psychology these tactics
are called foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face. There are
others, but these two Iʼll focus on (and have partially brought up
before).

It can be done both ways, starting low and gradually working up (Iʼd
skip the first request in practice however):

Guy: Hey, can I buy you a drink?

Girl: Okay, sure.

Guy: Letʼs sit over there?

Girl: Okay, sure.

Guy: Move over a bit.

Girl: Okay.

Guy: Letʼs go home.

Girl: Okay!

Next one. You will rarely see this actually intentionally done, but it
will pop up on your scanners here and there when people start
making demands on purpose to test your compliance:

Girl: Buy me a coffee!

 Guy: Okay, sure.

Girl: Yay!

Itʼs a bit out of place and extremely clumsy, but most donʼt notice
it. People can actually get away with such extreme blunders, and no
one really notices. I remember a request from a student to a
professor in a class I attended once that was interesting along these
lines; actually it wasnʼt a question, it was a very abrasive demand:
“Move down the page to the bottom.”

I was surprised he got away with that one, typically youʼd see some
sort of gradual buildup. You donʼt normally see requests made that
curtly and forcefully that early on in the dynamic between two
people who havenʼt established compliance yet, when requests are
still being ramped up.

The rest of the learners in attendance are asking questions, like

“Can you ___?” while one fellow blows through social norms and
demands in an authoritarian tone. Youʼre asking for whiplash if thatʼs
how you approach all your engagements -- without an ounce of
subtlety.

This is the advantage to those with positions of power: itʼs

difficult to say “No” when youʼre paying your physical therapist and
she tells you to roll over.

Again, donʼt react to this or give into these demands for compliance.
Navigate using social grace. Hereʼs a better response:

Girl: Buy me a coffee!

Guy: I dunno, isnʼt that too date-like?

Girl: Itʼs not a date itʼs just a coffee!

 Guy: Is it? Okay, then you should buy me one instead.

Girl: What!? Fine.

In all likelihood, you wonʼt even run into these requests and
demands too often as you advance at dating and seducing women.

You can use these to gauge how youʼre doing, and the shifting of
power. If you see higher numbers of demand-like requests, you
need to work on your fundamentals and may presently be at an
equal or lower status. Alternatively, if youʼre starting to get risk-
averse requests, like “Can I get your number?” or “Can we go over
there?” then you know youʼre doing really well.

If youʼre starting to get permission requests, thatʼs a tall order

to fill. It means youʼve got to do one thing, and start moving her.
She really likes you so she is playing it really safe; youʼve got to save
her from this and take her home.

Another end of the spectrum would be working your way down, this
might have a better success rate for the girl:

Girl: Buy me a car.

Guy: Uhh...

Girl: Okay, how about just a coffee?

Guy: Sure, I guess.

Notice how most of these responses are typically in three forms:

Compliance: “Okay, sure.”

Half-Compliance: “Sure, I guess;” “Friends? Hardly...”

 Rejection: “Uhh..;” “Iʼm not your friend.”

#4: Laughing and Playing Along

Another peculiar construct that

happens is others laughing at
something funny youʼve said, and
just in general thinking youʼre
funny... when youʼve done nothing
of the sort.

Trying to have a real conversation

with a person like this who laughs
at everything you say is incredibly
frustrating. Itʼs like almost talking
to a wall, because anything you
say will be played along with.

If youʼve ever found yourself

scratching your heading thinking...
wait a minute... I didnʼt make a
joke, and what I said was NOT funny. Why did they laugh? Thatʼs
where the presence of social influence starts to seep in.

If you are with two girls and you say, “Okay, Iʼm going over here
where itʼs warm,” and they both laugh as if you had told them a joke,
does that make sense? None at all, unless you realize that the
people around you might happen to be catering to your
whimsies, and like stated earlier -- suckling at the teat.

Feel-good people try to boost their statuses by making others feel

welcome.

Stop it.
Even I catch myself doing this sometimes when I laugh at what I say,
or in response to others. It takes away your challenge that you
present, defuses tension, and makes you more attainable.

If you laugh at what youʼre saying, then it can be considered

compensating in anticipation of not being well received.

If you laugh at what others say, then youʼre sucking up and social
climbing, or maybe youʼre too afraid of what others think of you to
go against the grain.

Conversely,

If people laugh at what they are telling you, then they are
grandeur-izing what they say to leave an impression on you.

If people laugh at what you say, then they are effectively

pedestaling your status, or are too afraid to go against it.

If you catch others doing this then this is another easy way to
gauge the shift of power (as long as youʼre not telling actual
jokes).

#5: Kissing and Sex

This is so incredibly common a power shift for men to shoot their

feet off with all the time, and yet women do not. Women
understand this dynamic MUCH better than men, and take
great care of it. This is typically driven by the same motives as the
friend-zone.

Ricardus went over this really well in a full length article (which
could be considered extension/continuation of this one, even if
written at an earlier date) about how sex changes the control of the
relationship:
Relationship Control and Female Domination

How to Rule the World (of Seduction)

The ideal position to be in is not one of dominance, but of

someone who faces no opposition. A better term for this idyllic
situation would be ruler or emperor, as there are no other players in
the game. They face no opposition. The word “dominant” is more
appropriate to social situations because this is such a hard position
to be in.

I did make a joke in the article on stress coping techniques that,

“We donʼt really teach you on this site how to overthrow nations
(yet),” but it seems I actually have begun to.

We can progress this trait of dominance and understanding of

power dynamics in society quite far, and it helps us get what we
want. The goal you must seek out is not that of a dictator or a
subordinate, but a ruler. Through grace and pleasantry you can
make others want to work with you (and for you).

Just remember, non-reactance.

Itʼs not a battle or conflict unless you make it one, and I wrote
this article with the intention of helping you pick out when
others are using a power shift on YOU.

The powerful donʼt deal with opposition, not because they are
against it but they donʼt acknowledge its presence or significance.
The governing bodies that serve them are the ones that deal with
acts of aggression. Granted, you canʼt always opt for non-reactance
and ignoring social climbing, but understanding them prevents quite
a bit.
Once you get better at it...

You might find that if you keep quiet, things may go your way more
often than not. You might find that if you stop praising yourself that
others may do it for you.

You might find that if you compliment others, they will bring you
gifts and ask you out on dates.

And you just might happen to find whatever it is youʼre looking for if
you keep at it.

Stay powerful,

- Eric

About the Author: Eric Reeves

Eric Reeves is a member of the Girls

Chase Forums and an occasional
contributor to Girls Chase. His focus is on
strategy, analysis, and power dynamics in
social relationships.

FREE 7-DAY COURSE ON THE SCIENCE OF ATTRACTION

Get her onto dates and into bed with the same tips scientists use to
get girlfriends.
Girls Falling All Over You
Over the next 7 days, I give you a CRASH COURSE in the science of
attraction (60+ scientific studies), guaranteed to put new girls on
your arm.

Related Articles from GirlsChase.com

New Forum Launching Soon; What "Join Bonus" Would Tempt You
the Most?
How to Get Laid Every Time, Part II
How to Eat a Girl Out: Tips from an Ex-Porn Star
Responding to Interruptions