Have you ever found yourself with a girl with whom everything happened effortlessly?

It is because she accepted your frame from the get-go.

It could be because of physical or personal characteristics—you are jacked, you are a Chad, you have a deep voice, you have a hard face… or she has observed you long enough as a bystander to vibe with your personality through your behaviours.

It does not have to be either/or any of the above factors; it can be a mix of whatever resonates with her.

Many guys are misguided when they hear "masculine frame". They feel that they have to overdo it to establish themselves as alpha.

If you have to go to this extent, it shows the actual lack of it.

A bit like a guy who says he is XYZ, in this situation, "I am an alpha male". Not only does it sound cringe, but anything you need to say results from the fact that there is no display.

Words are used to cover the facts for what cannot be evidenced.

Women love to say that they are strong and independent. At best, it sounds like self-affirmations with the end purpose of becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. At worst, they are empty words that portray them as someone they are not.

Whether it is the alpha male or Ms. I.N.D.E.P.E.N.D.E.N.T., whatever they say at this point in time crystallises the fact that they are not.

The same principle goes for Boundaries. Boundaries are first and foremost for you to know, rather than communicating them to another person. Otherwise, the overall reason behind the boundaries is codependent to an external being other than yourself.

Your need to communicate them only translates your lack of power in the situation you find yourself in, like with ultimatums. It is only from a position of powerlessness you do. The same principle goes for threats.

Threats are only the flip side of the coin; the other is the expression of boundaries communicated from the onset to someone new.

With threats: "If you cheat on me, it is over". Does it need to be said if you already know it will happen? The fact you are entertaining that thought or possibility only communicates your fear of it happening, undermining your overall frame.

With boundaries: "I won't accept you going on a girls' trip." The fact that you entertain that possibility only shows the little confidence you have in yourself that the person may be tempted to do it. Again, undermining your own frame.

Whenever you are dealing with someone new, you can see, feel, and appreciate his aura, charisma, and gravitas; none of it is said, but all of it is displayed. So much that you may even look down when you speak to him.

Why do you think eye contact is such a key factor when establishing attraction?

In France, when you deal with hoodlums and look them in the eyes, they say, "Look down." This command is powerful because it establishes who is the dominant and who is the dominated. The hoodlum's Command is him already assuming the dominant frame, but the action itself is the self-fulfilling frame-setting he instigated.

The difference between Commands and expressed Boundaries is that Commanding assumes the dominant frame, and the recipient accepts the invitation to be dominated. Expressed Boundaries sub-communicate that the other person is an equal who should appreciate the fact you have rules. Women, at best, tolerate equals.

Meanwhile, expressed boundaries are buffers that only communicate one's lack of control over a situation and, through a false show of character, a reality in which one cannot command the situation.

Strong people don't communicate their strength directly. They assume it is already there, and despite the overt nature of a Command, it is indirect.

Does it mean that we must be oblivious to negative happenings such as cheating and girls' trips? No. And this is where you must not let REALITY overwhelm YOUR OWN REALITY. Of course, it can happen, but in your world, it cannot. You are actually communicating assurances that despite the physical possibility of that happening, under your leadership, it cannot, through you assuming in your communication it won't—a self-fulfilling behaviour.

By letting the REALITY of that possibility potentially occur in the future by verbalising your threat or your expressed Boundaries, you are more likely to undermine the power you have within you. You have literally given up your power away.

Like with Self-Belief, it starts from within to eventually contaminate others. Is it real at first? No. Does it become real after? Yes. Illusion becomes a reality. Whether it is frame, self-belief, strength, or power, it all comes down to perception, not the reality itself.

"Power resides where men believe it resides. It's a trick. A shadow on the wall. And a very small man can cast a very large shadow." Varys (Game of Thrones)

This is why even rich and famous people, despite the actual REALITY they live in, get the same outcomes that other average people live through. If THEIR REALITY is not in accordance with the REALITY that everyone can see, their behaviour will fail at attracting or keeping a woman.

Walking away rather than telling someone off is so much stronger because you demonstrate the cost of breaching your internal, non-expressed boundaries. You are happy doing so without any prior warning. Showing you don't care.

That is why not caring is the strongest frame of all. You don't need to do or say anything to someone because you don't like, value, or care for them. It is not try-hard because you are not trying anything. Indifference communicates superiority through an immovable frame.

Guess what? Women will always call your bluff if you try something. So you may get away with it by telling her off one or more times, but if you are still there, what does she realise afterwards? That you actually cannot say no to her. What happens? It is then that the negative spiral starts to unfold.

Life is an implicit frame, a perspective of what is in your eyesight. You are painting the reality of your world. She is painting hers. Reacting to the frame she has painted only validates hers and undermines yours.

This is why, even if you feel you have been wronged and want to be petty or vengeful about it, you must not show it because you will have already lost. When you display a nonreactiveness while still operating in the background to right what you deem wrong, you turn the tables on whose reality overshadows the other.

In practicality, the more outside factors you display effortlessly, which she associates with a frame she wants to fall within, the less she will shit-test you because she is bought into your reality. This is the Macro side.

However, if you lack the above, she will start to test you because she is not bought into your front-loaded implicit display. If you want to be with her, you will have to avoid or return the curve balls she throws at you. This is the Micro side.

If the Macro side starts to fritter away, if you had any, to begin with, or did not have much to pass the minimum threshold, and the default mode is the Micro side, you will have to extricate yourself from it.

Why bad boys get away with murder or criminals get so many women without lifting a finger is because the Macro side is at the top end of the pyramid.

Frame is a given, and any explicit attempt at displaying it, whether it be through expressed boundaries, threats, ultimatums, or any showings of disapproval towards a behaviour from the other party, only translates the fact you are harmless as you are still fighting an outcome which is already there and which you validated by not only staying within the interaction but also at verbalising the fact you had no control over it.

Thus cornering yourself in your own failure.

Taking away your attention, walking away or ignoring the other person shows evidence that their reality does not impact yours and that you are not relying upon them to validate your boundaries, which should, in the end, be only for yourself.

They have no other purpose than to be the guidelines for your life. They are not there to be used as a goal-seeking mechanism to assert your frame, which is already there to start with.

It is only when she comes back, if she does, that she realises your frame is the one she wants to fall within.

Frame battles are implicit and non-verbal; they are psychological warfare, and the principle behind them is that they are covert. Calling it out shows you don't understand the game by being rattled, and the moment you do if she ever does fall within it, it will only be done out of force when it has to flow naturally.

A Command is natural because she accepted you assuming a dominant frame. Your Macro side was already established in her head before you even made the Command.

Power dynamics are under the surface, never over it.

"Any man who must say, "I am the king" is no true king."

Tywin Lannister (Game of Thrones)

‍