A dataslut at FiveThirtyEight tallied the lines each pair of characters spoke to each other and found that Romeo was following Poon Commandment V.
Juliet speaks 155 lines to him, and he speaks only 101 to her. His reticence toward Juliet is particularly inexcusable when you consider that Romeo spends more time talking than anyone else in the play.
And yet these two are the most famous star-crossed lovers in literature. Romeo knew, or more precisely Shakespeare knew, that women — and female readers — love a man who doesn’t give away the store.
In general, Shakespeare’s female lovers lavish a larger share of their lines on their men than the men do on them. This is true not just of “Romeo and Juliet,” but of “Macbeth,” “The Taming of the Shrew” and all four couples in “A Midsummer Night’s Dream.” The only real exceptions, tellingly, occur in the plays where the women pose as men: “Twelfth Night” and “The Merchant of Venice.” (Antony and Cleopatra spend roughly equal shares of lines on each other.)
😆 There’s more egalitarian relationship communication when the women pose as men. Says it all, really. But you feminists keep telling manboobs to emote like girls; that’ll really make them more attractive to women.
Forget modern culture in its totality. Everything important you need to know about men and women you can find in the works of Shakespeare.
[…] Romeo Had Game […]
lzozozolzol
da GBFMZ PWNZ da MAIN STREMSZ MEDIASZ!!
http://www.readunwritten.com/2014/03/26/what-the-fuck-happened-to-dating-in-college/#li-comment-789
lzozozolzolzozol
Nice
“GBFM ECONOMICZ MAXIM # 1: A woman’s courtship value is equal or less than the lowest price she ever gave her pussy away for. lzolzoz
GBFM ECOnOMICZ MAXIM # 2:
A woman’s courtship value is equal or less than the lowest price she ever gave her pussy away for.
After a woman has had a one-night stand
or given her pussy for free
her courtship value
is 0.
As why would you want to be the guy
who pays for what others got free when it was younger hotter tighter
forty pounds lighter”
I’m going to start sharpie-ing that on bar walls instead of the obligatory “Go home dad, youre drunk” under the ubiquitous “I fucked yer mom”.
Ya, I hang out in classy joints…
All men should begin immediately by reading the following books which the central bankers and their fellow churchians hate, fear, and detest:
0. THE BIBLE
1. Homer’s Iliad
2. Homer’s Odyssey
3. Exodus & Ecclesiastes & The Psalms
4. Virgil’s Aeneid
5. Socrates’ Apology
6. The Book of Matthew & Jefferson’s Bible
7. Plato’s Repulic
8. Seneca’s Letters from a Stoic
9. Aristotle’s Poetics
10. Dante’s Inferno
11. The Declaration of Independence
12. The Constitution
13. John Milton’s Paradise Lost
14. Shakespeare’s Hamlet
15. Newton’s Principia
16. Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations and Theory of Moral Sentiments
17. Henry David Thoreau’s Walden
18. Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn (& all of his work)
19. Shakespeare’s Hamlet
20. Ludwig von Mises’ A Theory of Money and Credit
21. F.A. Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom
22. Herman Melville’s Moby Dick
23. Einstein’s The Meaning of Relativity
24. Joseph Campbell’s The Hero With a Thousand Faces and The Power of Myth
25. Ron Paul’s Revolution & End the Fed
26. THE BIBLE
Please note that neither Dr. Helen Smith nor Michelle Malkin ever, ever, ever quote nor acknowledge THE GREAT BOOKS FOR MEN. Next time you see them, ask them why they never salute our EXALTED FATHERS and our NOBLE HERITAGE and the FOUNDATION OF NATURAL RIGHTS, THE FAMILY, FATHERHOOD, and NATURAL LAW. lzozozol
I believe in the Tripitaka of Buddhism -.-”
just like your mom belivesz in da Tricockaka of Butthism
TRUTHZ!!!!! lzolzlzlzlzlz
A few more:
Analects – Confucius
Bondage of the Will – Luther (churchian unapproved)
Histories – Herodotus
Anabasis – Xenophon
Secret History – Procopius
Lost in the Barrens – Farley Mowat
THE BIBLE again
Schopenhauer’s “The World as Will and Representation”.
You left out the Penthouse Forum’s Best of Letters Collection.
Sure, the bibble, read the fantasies of Hebrew shepherds, as proclaimed by Saul, a tentmaker who found a more fun gig traveling around and fooling the hated Romans, selling them a “slave morality where the high are bad and the low are good. The strong are bad, the weak are good. “The first shall be the last and the last shall be the first”. And “There is neither J ew nor Greek, neither slave nor free, neither man nor woman, for you are all one in Jevsus.”
That is the fantasy that paved the way for socialism, which is simply Xtian attitudes put into political practice. European leaders would ignore the weakening message before that, but when people learned to read it was impossible to keep them from learning the insanity in the bibble. Fast forward to today, when Westerners want to kill themselves because their ancestors were successful conquerors, which marks us as “evil” while others are good. Churches leading the way by actively promoting and aiding in bringing in mass immigration. Worst of all being the Catholic Church, a majority non-White institution that has always, always had non-White members and always sought to include more of them. The media owners love it and welcome Xtians into their coalition with open arms.
Good show.
Well put!!
Ghey
You are quote mining parts of the Bible to suit your false thesis that Christianity emasculates the nature of man.
I can just as easily quote mine parts of the Bible that would make Christianity look like something out of the Taliban. Deuteronomy 22:20-21, “If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.”
The premise of Christianity is simple: We are all born sinners and need a savior. Jesus, the son of God, came into this world and died so that sinners can achieve salvation through faith. This is not a so-called slave morality. Learn how to interpret the Bible properly if you wish to criticize it.
Do you think the more virtuous are worth more to God or do you think we are equal in his eyes? Do you think the poor and meek get easier in heaven than the rich and powerful?
No Catholic Church and Islam conquers all Europe centuries ago. We’d now be a mixed race degenerate shit hole. Power of the Church has now been destroyed and Europe has no protector, our future is guaranteed genetic destruction by third world hordes and eternal rule by YKW.
Straight forward really. The whole, “Europe has abandoned Christ and wants to commit suicide, that’s real Christianity! The YKW master plan has come to fruition after 2000 years!” is pretty fucking retarded if you ask me.
The Church was fighting for Europe against YKW and Islam 1600 years ago, who the fuck are you?
Are you American? If so, you are yet more specimen that justifies why Americans should shut the fuck up about history until you learn proper history.
True that. Hold it together. Keep it tight and terse.
Ep ar ep ar epar!
(Aquire the Whorefinder approved ‘shining’)
*acquire
Winning.
Isn’t it funny how hip-hop lingo compliments discussions like this so well? We tend to criticize blacks for some of their behaviors and political leanings, rightfully so perhaps. But OTOH I think an honest awake man would be lying if he said that there’s no value in ‘real’ hip-hop like the best of what came out in the early 90′s like Lord Finesse, The Pharcyde, etc. I happen to really like that music. Too bad more black males won’t wake up and embrace the libertarian ethos that their music personifies much more than leftism.
Could this be any more obviously an Israeli student with a book of talking points?
The important, albeit obvious, point to make is that this occurred naturally, unlike, e.g., game-aware text conversations.
LOL. Shakespeare is FICTION. There isn’t anything natural about it. What is natural, perhaps, is teenage male groaning when subjected to Romeo and Juliet, amidst female swooning at such cad tactics. Perhaps we ought introduce these classics as poon instructions for teenage males. Extra-credit: bag a 14-year-old hottie whose father already hates you. Double extra credit: make her father hate you, then bag the hottie. Check local age-related rape laws and father’s penchant for bloodletting before proceeding.
> “such cad tactics”
Hamlet “murdered” Ophelia’s father, Polonius.
Or at least he stabbed him to death, behind the curtain, without knowing exactly who he was stabbing.
Then he proceeded to treat Ophelia so horribly that he drove her to self-murder.
When Ophelia’s brother, Laertes, finally got Hamlet in his sights, he immediately challenged Hamlet to a duel to the death.
Which, of course, Hamlet won.
I never saw anything whatsoever which was noble or worthy or sympathetic about Hamlet’s character.
I always felt like Laertes was the only halfway decent character in the entire play.
Shakespeare was such an odious nihilist on so many different levels – both textual and semantic.
But I guess it’s that sociopathic nihilism which gets them ginaz to tinglinzzzz.
Sounds like you missed the point of Hamlet, lol.
Hamlet was pointless.
Like everything that Shakespeare wrote.
Shakespeare was a complete nihilist – at least from the standard Stratfordian point of view.
Which is actually part of the allure of the Oxfordian point of view – and especially Prince Tudor theory – that it offers some hope for proving the existence of a human core at the heart of the corpus.
That there were actually subtexts [or supertexts] to the works which flew right over everyone’s head [except for the handful of people at the time who were in on the secret].
Assuming Oxford, I don’t see nihilism. I see self-reproach.
Okay, now I understand what you said. Yes, the Stratford theory makes of Shakespeare something monstrous. Oxford theory humanizes.
So what is the point of Hamlet? Is that the only point? If there is only one point, why does he waste hundreds of pages saying it?
Its about true leadership: not the confusion of Hamlet figuring out the red pill nor the hasty violence of Laertes. Its the measured control of Fortinbras that makes him the model man.
Quit your croaking
Your record’s broken 🙂
7 times in one night – couldn’t stand forever …. so THATS why your smiling!?
Hamlet was a YKW conspiracy thought up by the Frankfurt School.
Ophelia was a slut who killed herself because she was despondent over the child she aborted, among other things.
“There’s rue for you, and here’s some for me; we
may call it herb of grace o’Sundays. You must wear
your rue with a difference.”
Tragic, yes. Nihilistic, no. These deaths are all lamentable. And they can’t all be laid at Hamlet’s feet. He didn’t kill Ophelia any more than he killed poor Yorick. He’s the conscience of the play, not its sole agent of death.
Slut? Who else but Hamlet?
I hadn’t thought of this before, but this would mean that Hamlet lost not only his father, but his son.
I’ve always liked you, Zombie. Knowing the classics makes things even better.
There’s a theme on this blog, and elsewhere, like Free Northerner et al, that “Game” is real, but it’s a tool of developed by evil. An allternative theory, also promulgated here and elsewhere, is that “Game” is a method evolved in, or “natural” to, men that has been repressed among the good and traditional (those not necessarily being one and the same). It appears folks are beginning to grapple with this conundrum.
Double extra credit: make her father hate you, then bag the hottie.
—————————————————————————————–
triple extra credit if you’re black with a criminal record, no job and one toof
You left out cephalosporin-resistant gonorrhea.
Redundant?
If she had a good father, she’d never end up with a subhuman like you.
Ape rape!
Or even meet a etc. etc.
She would stay up real late at night
And there is strong evidence that “Shakespeare” was homosexual. As if anyone would take his advice about men and women.
I call BS. Fa99ots try to claim that every famous man was into taking it in the pooper.
Pay no attention to Wallace. He’s just a butthurt loser who’s mad over CH’s popularity. If you look at his posts, a good chunk of them are arguments against CH’s posts (and uses strawmen, of course).
He really loses it over the Dark Triad.
“I call BS. Fa99ots try to claim that every famous man was into taking it in the pooper.”
Exactly. I’ve seen every single successful man in history, at one point or another, held up as “believed to be homosexual”. They are a particularly insecure lot, wot?
It gets better: they say every man is a fa99ot:
If you’re straight and think h0m0 behavior is disgusting, you’re not secure in your masculinity and must be a closet fa99ot.
If you’re straight and a libtard, it must mean you’re open to trying it, which means you’re a closet fa99ot.
If you’re out, loud, and proud… you’re a fa99ot.
Makes sense, huh?
lol. just lol.
he was an octoroon. You can tell by the way he talked.
Swerve! Octoroons can’t speak at all!
“And there is strong evidence” — If there would be strong evidence, how curious that you don’t name any of it.
Homosexuals like you are working hard on lying about history, proclaiming that an ever longer list of people they manage to find in history books are perverts. It is just another lying socialist tactic.
That’s probably the one place where Sobran was obviously wrong. Southampton was a son, not a catamite.
Shakespeare is fiction, not natural, as tteclod points out. As for natural alphas, are you one? Only a small minority of men are natural alphas. The rest have two choices. They can keep living as betas if that’s their thing, sometimes going for a year or more without sex in their twenties – or they can learn the techniques they don’t do naturally.
Much like when your mother taught you not to speak with your mouth open and to sit up straight, you learned to improve in a way that didn’t come natural to you.
It is as artifial as makeup, high heels and giggling to the jokes told by an alpha.
“Everything important you need to know about men and women you can find in the works of Shakespeare”
Stendhal’s “Red and Black” is pure game
Brilliant book. Mme. Renal and Mathilde also exemplify two female archetypes.
She is not pretty; she is not wearing rouge.
http://www.eharmony.com/blog/tag/ovulation/#.UzRNzNzXklJ
When you emote – emote like a bad boy.
When eHarmony’– the secret Christian hookup service–is recognizing the science behind game, you know you’re making inroads against the cathedral.
The Temple.
It’s not a fucking Rheims or a Westminster for fucks sake. It’s a Synagogue.
The existence of cathedrals is evidence of the early foundation of The Cathedral.
What chairs are even mentioned in the Greek scriptures?
thats why you gotta play fasssst game.
> “Forget modern culture in its totality.”
If only.
It’ll likely take a violent civil war in order to seize back our institutions from the Tribe which now controls them.
You should see the filth and poison and nihilism which they are shoving down our children’s throats with Sesame Street and the Disney Channels.
And God only knows what it’s like to be growing up as one of these Adderall-narked little boys who is on the receiving end of the absolute totalitarian anti-male warfare which Christina Hoff Sommers tried to warn us about.
Great example of game in Shakespeare is Kate and Petruchio from Taming of the Shrew.
Kate is insanely horny so goes around shit testing every man she sees. Petruchio the player is the only guy who can pass the tests and tame her.
When I had a Shakespeare class in college, the prof’s entire thesis what that in that play Shakespeare wasn’t saying what he obviously was saying. He thought the play was misogynist, and Shakespeare couldn’t be misogynist, so it obviously must have been a parody.
Reminds me of when we were reading something in a college lit. class and I used an idea we had learned in one context over in another context in a way I knew was politically incorrect. I just knew I was being disobedient by doing this.
And sure enough the prof. just replied that I had “misused” the idea, and went on. No explanation of how the idea should be modified or its domain of application defined. Just “you misused it.”
I went to the registrar and switched to a music class, where one is not accused of misusing things because political content is always vague. I wasn’t sure I could behave for the rest of the lit. class.
I went to the registrar and switched to a music class, where one is not accused of misusing things because political content is always vague.
There is political content in modern music composition. That sh!t gives me a headache.
Reminds me of this:
“Mixing different peoples in the same country has no negative effects whatsoever on the West.”
“Europeans are responsible for all the wars in Africa because they drew the borders so that different tribes ended up in the same country.”
Socialist teachers say both of these. Use the assumption about Africa on Western countries, however, and you are “misusing” the idea.
Sidenote 1: Were there fewer wars between African tribes before Westerners gave them countries with roads, hospitals and other ills? Before that they didn’t have anything at all separating them, now at least they have borders against some of the surrounding tribes.
Sidenote 2: How would you draw up countries so that each African tribe got its own country? There are thousands of them. Not to mention that they have sold even their own tribesmen as slaves, and taken slaves from related tribes. In Europe and other human regions small tribes coalesced into countries.
Ditto with the merchant of venice.
Much Ado About Nothing
Lots of Red Pill in that play. Also the title is a play on words: “No Thing” is Renaissance-era innuendo meaning “No Dick” or, in other words, vagina.
Much Ado About Vagina. Get it? 😀
I felt no desire for Catherine Lechardoy; I hadn’t the slightest
wish to shaft her. She was looking at me and smiling, drinking
Cremant, trying her hardest to be brave; nevertheless I knew she
really needed to be shafted. That hole at the base of her belly
must appear so useless to her; a prick can always be cut off, but
how do you forget the emptiness of a vagina?
(Houellebecq, Whatever, 1999)
> “a prick can always be cut off, but how do you forget the emptiness of a vagina?”
Okay, I LOL’ed, but I’m not exactly sure what it was that I was LOL’ing at.
I’ll have to investigate this dude further.
No wonder they teach “Midsummer Night’s Dream” in school, a truly stupid play that is obviously pointless.
Plus the lead man is named Benedick, i.e. “Good Dick”
One of the best examples of Shakespeare Game is Richard III, Act I Scene 2. After killiing both her husband and father, he manages to seduce her.
“Was ever woman in this humor wooed?
Was ever woman in this humor won?”
Yup, apparently so.
http://nfs.sparknotes.com/richardiii/page_16.html
CH,
I hope you realize that 101/155 = 65.1%
Which is disturbingly close (1.6%) to the 2/3 male-to-female text communication ratio you advise.
If that’s not another exogenous vindication of Chateau principles, I don’t know what is.
The Taming of the Shrew is archetypal game. Read it, ponder it, and resolve to be more like Petruchio.
Ramzpaul did a good video called Taming of the Feminist Shrew.
We on this blog are a merry band of brothers,and all the betas at home a-bed(alone) shall hold their manhood cheap(well they will certainly be HOLDING their manhood ha ha ha ) because they are white knight fags.
Shouldn’t this post have been been written in Iambic Pentameter? Just sayin’.
CH’s prose is actually fairly impressive. I suck at analyzing literature, but somebody ought to make a literary analysis of his writing style.
How do they call it when he writes things such as “poonicon” or “hoisted him by his own retard”?
Brilliant.
“But you feminists keep telling manboobs to emote like girls…”
And when men do follow such advice, and subsequently complain about negative results, feminists accuse them of having “nice guy syndrome.”
Anyone who has read Romeo and Juliet knows that Romeo was a thirsty beta.
Feeling love doesn’t make a man a beta.
The word is ‘horny,’ you trend-fucked faggot.
Anyone who has read Romeo and Juliet knows that Romeo was a thirsty beta.
He still had nothing on Young Werther.
Mercutio was fairly Alpha as I recall.
OT: Hey can you guys turn up the fat-shaming a notch? Looks like the land whales still don’t get the message:
A “Fat Justice and Feminism” seminar sponsored by Swarthmore College blamed Ronald Reagan for the suffering of fat people and accused the Body mass index (BMI) of having “direct links to a white supremacist.”
http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=5505
Measure for Measure is the ne plus ultra play about sex.
King Solomon demonstrated the golden ratio long before Shakespeare. Read the Song of Songs and you’ll see his peasant girl bride speaks far more verses of amorous thoughts than he had.
Solomon certainly had abundance mentality. He had 200+ plus wives.
what is called game today was common sense until a couple generations ago
A “Fat Justice and Feminism” seminar sponsored by Swarthmore College blamed Ronald Reagan for the suffering of fat people and accused the Body mass index (BMI) of having “direct links to a whit e s uprem acist.”
It does make some sense. The mindsets behind worrying about BMI and WS are not exactly that far away, as this blog proves day by day
In non-white countries, we all love obese women. Male sexual preference has no basis in biology, it’s all a social construct! Didn’t you know?
yeah Othello would be a great game analysis.
Would love to see analysis of Iago & the Dark Triad. Henry IV Part I had some legit moments, as I recall. Hotspur & his wife from a sex point of view, and Hal and his wingman Falstaff in terms of applying his charisma to take care of business.
Iago is a great example of how to play on the kneegro paranoia and stupidity.
Was Othello about a mudshark?
We know it wasn’t written by a black “man,” that’s for sure!
Impossible rape!
Macbeth was beta…Richard III—gamma?
Richard II=Beta
Henry IV:=lesser alpha/greater beta
Henry V=Super-alpha
Henry VI=no one ever reads these 3 plays.
Note that I’m only going on the play, not the historical person.
Rape.
Usually gammas don’t get the girl. Especially if they’re hunchbacks with mangled hands who killed her husband and father. And even if they did get the girl, they’d be clingy as hell. Richard has his bitch killed to prepare for another one.
Nor do gammas succeed so spectacularly in life, like taking the royal crown and having all rivals killed off through third party hands, leaving him blameless and innocent.
Plus, Richard owns the fact that he’s an unrepentant dickhead. A gamma would be more likely to have delusions of nobility, a nice guy and white knight.
Richard III is what gammas wish they could be with their intellect and cunning. While he ultimately lost his ass, he did win for a while, and he did it while others (mostly women) called him a conniving piece of shit to which he laughed and didn’t give a fuck.
It would be more accurate to call him a sigma, a man who goes against the grain and is very competent at doing so.
u say dick like its a bad thing kung poo….
…pof opener for 9s and 10s…hey fucker..or.ey….fucker..
You know who else had game?
Hitler.
So all you PUAs are just like Hitler.
QED.
Reich rape!
Most great dictators had game. Game and charisma go together.
Pol Pot had neither. He was just mad because he was brown and all the light skinned Cambodians in college made fun of him for being short and dark skinned.
People try to come up with all kinds of sophisticated political theories and explanations to account for Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge but its really quite simple.
Who was it that came up with “emotional pornography?” Was it CH? It’s just like a romantic comedy. Men want physical intimacy, women want emotional intimacy. So don’t be too generous with your feelings.
Didn’t seem like Romeo was much of player to me. Maybe this will explain why:
http://tyrionlannister69.wordpress.com/2014/03/23/pick-up-artists-game-subculture-evolutionary-analysis/
troll
Talk is cheap.
Silence is golden.
Men get it.
In non-white countries, we all love obese women. Male sexual preference has no basis in biology, it’s all a social construct! Didn’t you know?
Social construct is…… a social construct
Amen to that…
Just this past weekend I was at a gig and one woman (easy on the eyes with a nice rack) was babbling incessantly and after she was done she turned to me and said, “What do you think?” I looked at her and said, “I stopped listening 20 minutes ago, I’ve just been enjoying the view.” While looking pointedly at her, and the other girl’s breasts. That got laughs from the other women that were there, and she was rather clingy till we went back to the room. Women’s mouths are best used for other things, but as I told one – you talk to give your mouth something to do between blow-jobs, everything else is extraneous. Then I put her to work. Women love knowing that is their only use to you – as long as they can make you happy. That is why we keep them around…
Of course they will bitch and moan and deny it – but every man knows to keep a woman happy, you have to always keep her competing for his attention. As long as she see that you have options, she will keep wanting you. As soon as she knows that she has won, she will move on to the next prize. It may not be pretty, but that’s life.
yes and screw this.
“because you SHALL be just in your word and you SHALL conquer in your judgment.”
I swallow the stream of expletives I’m tempted to post.