Direct vs. Indirect Approaches: What Actually Happens When You Talk to Women

Everyone has an opinion about how direct you should be when approaching women. Dating coaches argue about it. Reddit threads debate it endlessly. But nobody actually shows you what happens at each level of directness.

I decided to run the full spectrum—from using gay excuses to avoid rejection all the way to asking women if they want to have sex within seconds of meeting them. Each approach got progressively more direct and sexual than the last. The goal wasn't to prove one method is 'better'—it was to show you the reality of how women actually respond to different styles.

What you're about to read are real interactions, not theory. Some worked. Some crashed spectacularly. But they all reveal something important about attraction, social dynamics, and what actually matters when talking to women.

I started with possibly the most indirect approach imaginable: 'If I wasn't gay, would you go on a date with me?' This is what guys do when they're terrified of rejection—they create an escape hatch before they even start.

The interaction went fine. She said maybe, I revealed I wasn't actually gay, we talked about Vegas and her trip from Connecticut. I got her Instagram. On paper, it 'worked.' But here's the problem: I established myself as dishonest and low-value from the start. Any guy who needs to pretend he's gay to talk to a woman is telegraphing massive insecurity.

This approach protects your ego at the cost of your results. Sure, you can claim 'I would've had a chance if I wasn't gay'—but you were never gay. You just couldn't handle the possibility of real rejection. Women can sense this weakness immediately, even if they're too polite to call it out.

As I dialed up the directness, I started with simple compliments and clear interest: 'I thought you were really cute' or 'You look like you could be on The Bachelor.' This is where most guys should be operating—direct enough to make your interest clear, calibrated enough to not freak anyone out.

These interactions flowed naturally. I talked to women about chess, Miami versus Vegas, their majors in college, reality TV. The conversations had substance because I wasn't hiding behind gimmicks. When you're upfront about attraction from the start, you can actually have real conversations instead of playing games.

Notice what happened: I got Instagram handles, made plans for drinks, set up dates. The success rate was solid because the approach was honest but socially calibrated. You're not trying to trick anyone or hide your intentions—you're just being a guy who sees an attractive woman and does something about it.

The key detail: I combined direct interest with actual personality and conversation. 'You're cute' isn't enough by itself. But 'you're cute' plus genuine curiosity about who she is? That's the formula that actually works in real life.

Stepping it up, I started asking women if they wanted to 'Netflix and chill' or watch Vampire Diaries together. This is sexual escalation wrapped in a culturally understood euphemism. Everyone knows what Netflix and chill means—you're not hiding anything, but you're not being crass either.

The responses? Pretty positive. Women gave me their Snapchat, said 'possibly,' engaged with the question rather than shutting it down. Why? Because the approach threads a specific needle: it's clearly sexual, but delivered with enough social awareness that it doesn't feel threatening or weird.

This is where most guys get confused. They think being sexual means being crude or aggressive. Wrong. Being sexual means being honest about what you want while still respecting the social context you're in. A woman standing on the Vegas Strip at night is in a completely different headspace than a woman reading in a coffee shop at 10 AM. Context matters.

The Netflix and chill approach works because it assumes attraction and frames the interaction around hooking up, but gives her room to engage playfully. It's direct about intent without being socially retarded about delivery.

Then I went all the way: 'Please sleep with me. I haven't slept with anyone in a very long time, and you're just so attractive.' And the most direct possible: 'Would you like to have sex? I'm pretty good at it.'

What happened? Some women laughed. Some were taken aback but still engaged. One gave me her number after I asked directly for sex. None of them called security or threw a drink in my face. The sky didn't fall.

Here's what this extreme teaches you: women can handle directness way better than most guys think. The problem isn't that you're too direct—it's usually that you're direct without confidence, or direct with neediness, or direct in a context where it makes no sense.

When I said 'please sleep with me' with a smile and full ownership of how ridiculous it was, it became playful rather than creepy. When I asked 'would you like to have sex?' with complete confidence and no neediness about the answer, some women actually responded positively. The delivery matters more than the words.

But let's be clear: this isn't the approach I recommend for most situations. It's the edge of the spectrum, useful for understanding what's possible, not what's optimal. Most guys should be operating in the middle range—direct about interest, sexual in subtext, calibrated to context.

After running this full experiment, the pattern becomes obvious: your level of confidence matters infinitely more than your level of directness. I could say 'if I wasn't gay' with zero confidence and get a polite rejection. I could say 'want to have sex?' with full confidence and get a number.

Women aren't rejecting you because you were too direct or not direct enough. They're rejecting you because you're incongruent—your words say one thing while your body language and energy say another. When you're genuinely confident, almost any approach can work. When you're not, even the smoothest line falls flat.

This is why obsessing over the perfect opener is a waste of time. Your opener doesn't matter. Your follow-up doesn't matter. What matters is whether you actually believe you're worth talking to, whether you're comfortable with sexuality, and whether you can handle rejection without your ego shattering.

The guys asking 'should I be direct or indirect?' are asking the wrong question. The real question is: 'Am I confident enough that my approach style doesn't matter?' If the answer is no, go get confident first. Everything else is tactics without strategy.