I think l have given you some great tools for recognizing CHICK TESTS and CHICK FRAMES. Now l am going to teach you how to do some amazing linguistic artistry called "reframing" to not only inoculate these tests and frames, but to also use these tests and frames as a way of getting women chasing you. We are going to combine this reframing with some of the other ideas we have learned--such as, cold reading, open loops, Pushing & Pulling, and Qualifying & Challenging. This will make for a very powerful combination.
Let's get started.
One thing to keep in mind is that you never want to respond to a CHICK TEST or CHICK FRAME directly. Now, that is not to say, you want to be the sort of guy who never addresses a woman's questions in direct way. What l am saying is that you never want to address a chick test or chick frame within the same frame.
This reinforces and acknowledges a woman's frame. Put in other words, when a woman throws a chick test or chick frame at you, it is only her subjective opinion. The moment that you address it directly, you are buying into it being objective reality. So, the first step is learning not address these chick tests and chick frames directly.
Let me give you guys an example:
Suppose that a guy is out on a date with a really hot woman. At some point during the date the woman says to the guy, "Would you please not be so touchy with me. And don't think by acting that way that you are going to get any from me tonight". Suppose the guy reacts to her by saying, "Oh l am sorry...if l stop touching you...will you have sex with me tonight?" Guys, I know this example almost seems unrealistic, but l have actually witnessed my own friends acting this way around girls.
So what is wrong with the way this guy responded to this girl? He affirmed her subjective opinion of the situation as being the objective underlying meaning. Put in other words, he bought into her frame. Bad thing!
So how do we handle chick tests and chick frames?
How do we address them without falling into their frame?
Before getting into this, there are a couple of things to keep in mind, which we have already covered in Chapter VIII: Setting frames.
One, you need to always DEFINE your meta-frame or the overall underlying meaning of your interaction with her:
1. That you are the PRIZE.
2. That she is trying to get you to like her or trying to win you over--whether it be in the sense of attraction, acceptance, or validation.
3. That she wants you so bad that she is trying to make you sleep with her.
4. The both of you are going to sleep together, but only if she lives up to your standards and expectations.
Two is that you need to assume this before even approaching.
Three is to not choose her (or tentatively choose her). Not choosing her or only tentatively choosing her is one of the best ways to maintain this metaframe.
Anytime you sense that a woman is trying to change the defined and assumed underlying meaning of the interaction, you are usually dealing with some sort of CHICK TEST or CHICK FRAME.
However, if you have not defined and assumed your meta-frame, you will not be able to sense when you are either being CHICK FRAMED OR TESTED.
So boys, know your meta-frame.
Fourthly, you need to set frames that imply our meta-frame. When we reframe, we are using these frames to replace the frame that the CHICK TEST or CHICK FRAME is attempting to set. These frames get us back on track and moving in the direction we need to go.
Let's review some of my frames, which you can use for accomplishing this:
1. Framing one or more of her actions, behaviours, or things about her as meaning that she is not good enough for me or cannot handle me (this implicates that l am the PRIZE and that l might not go for her because she falls short of my standards and expectations).
2. Framing one or more of her actions as her being interested or trying to pursue me (this implicates that l am the PRIZE that she is trying to win me over, that she wants to sleep with me, and etc.).
3. Framing one or more of her behaviours or actions as her being a little crazy (when a woman is trying to get you to buy into a frame and you view it as her saying something really out there, or as something that has no place in objective reality, it inoculates the frame and let's her know that you are unwilling to buy into it).
4. When framing her behaviours, actions, or something about her as meaning that she lacks class, it implicates many great things, one of which is that l am the one who is the PRIZE in the interaction.
5. Framing her behaviours, actions, or something about her, as meaning that she is a goober (slang for someone who is socially inept), implicates lots of good stuff. One is that since l am cool and she is a goober, I get to judge her behaviours but, since she is a goober, she is ill fit to judge mine. Two is that it sets me up as being the one who is the PRIZE in the interaction.
6. Accusing her of not really living the life that she wants to live (or accusing her of being envious of me). Both of these are great ways of implicating that l am the one who is the PRIZE.
7. Framing some of her behaviours, actions or things about her as meaning that she is a little creepy (girls often times call guys creepy and there is nothing that messes with a girl worse than me letting her know that l think she is a little creepy. God l love this one). This one can be used to implicate that she wants me but that l would never go for her because she falls short of my standards and expectations.
8. Framing some of her behaviours, actions, or things about her as meaning that she is a sleaze balI (this is another great way to implicate that she wants me but that l am not so sure if she will live up to my standards and expectations).
9. Framing her behaviours and actions as being rude or insensitive (this implicates that she is not living up to my standards and expectations).
Now that you know when you are being chick tested and know what frames to replace the chick test with, let's look at how exactly to reframe.
But before we do that, let's look at the structure of a chick test. Most chick tests have a structure like this: some thing, action, or behaviour X means Y.
So, for example, the 'chick judging you' chick test 'Are you trying to pick up on me?' has this structure: the behaviour 'you talking to her' means, according to her stupid judgmental chick logic that you are picking up on her.
Now let's look at some reframes.
The first reframe we are going to talk about is the redefine. There are two great ways to do this with women. The first is to redefine the behaviour by assigning it a different meaning. Let's look at some examples.
Remember the 'chick judging you' chick test l mentioned above 'Are you trying to pick me up?'?
How could we reframe this by redefining the behaviour? By saying:
"Actually l was being social. But honey, accusing a stud like myself of hitting on you is not a good way to get me to like you. Try being yourself, it might help...but don't expect to get into my pants...unless you have big bank account."
Damn...that was good: we did so many wonderful things. Did you pick up on the frame we led her into? First we redefined the behaviour of us talking to her from meaning 'us trying to pick her up' to 'us being social'. Then we further defined her accusation of us trying to pick her up as being about her attempting to get us to like her. Then we went further by telling her that she is going to have to work harder if she plans to get into our pants.
Guys, this led her right into the meta-frame that we are the ones who are the PRIZE in the interaction.
I know some of you guys probably have intuitions that are telling you something along the lines of this: "reframing chick tests seems dangerous because I am not listening to or acknowledging the girls worries or concerns; and furthermore l might break rapport or even worse, mess up my chances with her."
Trust me, even though a lot of what l am saying might seem counter intuitive, no matter what: do not listen to your intuition if it is at all similar to the worries above.
If you listen to the inner child inside of you who is afraid that you are going to mess it up or that she wont like you if she thinks you are being mean, you will come across as a needy ass kisser. This is a bad thing, unless you are content with your sex life being restricted to Internet porn.
Alrighty then, I am finished with my tangent. Let's get back to reframing.
Another type of redefine is to point out how their accusation more appropriately fits with a different behaviour than the one you displayed.
Let's take the same chick test 'Are you trying to pick me up?'
I might respond by saying, "Honey, hitting on you would be buying you a drink...if you think this is hitting on you, maybe you need to get out of the house more... maybe those guys over there would try and pick you up...but you are going to have to be a bit more creative with your pickup lines to get lucky with me".
Here l am showing her that her accusation 'hitting on her' is an inappropriate match for the behaviours l was displaying. Then l am judging or chick testing her accusation of me hitting on her as meaning that she is a bit socially inept--a big goober.
What frames am l setting? I am setting the frames that she is a bit socially inept, I am cooler than her, and that she wants me. These are all great ways of setting the meta-frame that you are PRIZE and that she wants to sleep with you, but that she is going to have to prove herself if she wants that to happen.
Apply back to chick:
Another great way of reframing is what l call "apply back to chick". This is about taking a chick frame or chick test and turning it around by applying it to the woman.
Let me give you a great example of this that comes from my friend Scott. He was out with this girl and she started to chick test him by saying: "I don't want to sound like a bitch but size does matter". Now instead of my friend buying into her frame by saying, "My penis is a little above average, am l okay, do l meet your qualifications?" he said something very different. Instead, my friend gave her a look of approval and said: "you know what: you are a cool chick for being honest with yourself about what matters...big breasts are important". At this point, she busted up laughing knowing that her chick test had been successfully reversed. But Scott did so much more. He took back control of the overall underlying meaning of the interaction: namely that that he is the PRIZE and that they are going to sleep together but only if she lives up to his standards, rules, and expectations.
Are you getting why these reframes are so powerful and what they are doing? If you are still not getting it, you need to reread the chapters on frames again. I say this because l don't want you just memorizing the lines l give you. Instead l want you to understand the structure behind what l am teaching so you can come up with your own stuff.
SO IF YOU STILL DON'T "GET IT" REREAD THE STUFF THAT I TOLD YOU TO AND THEN COME BACK.
Alrighty then, moving on:
Here is one of my favourite examples of the "apply back to the chick" reframe. I came up with this one about a year ago. Before l tell you what it is, let me tell you the story behind how l came up with this. I was at a very trendy Hollywood nightclub, when a bunch of girls from a bachelorette party befriended me. As usual, I was teasing all of the girls, and defining the underlying meaning of the interaction as me being the one who is the PRIZE. All of the sudden, one girl attempted to take back control of the frame (or underlying meaning) by interrupting me in mid sentence: "my eyes are not there (as she pointed to her breasts) they are here" (pointing to eyes). I immediately thanked her and then walked away. I had learned something so cooI: I could use her little tactic on other women.
So, this is what l learned. If a woman is trying to chick test me, or if she is trying to control the frame, I will interrupt her train of thought by turning my head to the side as if l see something interesting. Almost a hundred percent of the time, they will look. Then l will look down at the ground, sure enough, they will also look at the ground. Then l will say: "my eyes are up here (pointing to eyes) not down there (pointing to my crotch), please stop staring at my package you pervert".
This always reaps a good laugh and reframes the interaction as me being the PRIZE.
Another powerful way to use the "apply back to chick" reframe is to apply the judgment she made about you back at itself. Wow! That's a mouthful...let's look at an example:
If she says, "Are you trying to pick up on me" you could respond by saying, "is that your way of showing that your interested in somebody or just your standard M.O. for picking up sexy men?"
Wow...not only did l apply her judgmental chick logic back on itself...I did something else that is so powerful.
I embedded a false choice: put in other words, she is either interested in me or trying to pick me up--nice!
As long as she stays within my frame (which they usually do), she is damned if she does and damned if she doesn't.
Also, I not only reframed her, I outframed her: meaning that l created a larger frame around the frame of her chick test.
Reframing is changing the underlying meaning of a chick test or chick frame in such a way that it not only inoculates the test or frame, but also gets the woman to chase you. One way to do this is called "redefining". There are two way of doing this, the first one is to point out that your behaviour or action—or even the interaction between you and her--means something other that the meaning she assigned it with her chick test or chick frame. The other way of doing this is to point out how the meaning she assigned to your behaviours, actions (and the interaction between her and you) actually fit better with different behaviours, actions, and situations than ones you displayed.
The other type of reframing is what l call "apply back to chick". This is when you take a chick test or chick frame and turn it around by applying it back to the woman.
You should have some idea now about when you are/were being chick tested or chick framed by a woman. Come up with a few example of when women were chick testing or chick framing you. Next, come up with ways you could have used either the redefine or apply back to chick reframe to inoculate it and use it to make her chase you.
Was this article helpful?