Feed on
Posts
Comments

A sharp-eyed observer can’t fail to notice how Game principles extend forward and backward in life, all the way back to early childhood. If you can recall your own childhood, or have opportunity to see tykes at play, a familiar dynamic emerges. The boy (usually just one boy, but may be more) who is least interested in what the little girls are doing, who is totally immersed in his own world, and who will even go so far as to push the girls away when they curiously peak around the periphery of whatever has his attention, is the boy who can’t beat the wee lasses off with a stick.

This will be especially obvious where the little boys are outnumbered by the girls. Early years sex skew produces the same intersex psychological phenomena that is produced by adulthood sex skew. And the hard-to-get challenging little boy is a tot magnet just like the hard-to-get challenging grown man is a thot magnet.

Little girls, just like tig ol bittied growed girls, adore a boy-II-man who makes himself the center of the universe. Girls of all ages can’t resist the fire and ice.

(Ever notice the “bad girls” of yesteryear rock had more femininity than the Lilith Fair femmes of the 90s or the cartoonish slutwalkers of today? Yet another signpost of metastasizing civilizational necrosis.)

So on the zero sum playground, little boys adhere to the Poon Commandments and little girls love them for it. Specifically, Commandments III and VI:

III. You shall make your mission, not your woman, your priority

Forget all those romantic cliches of the leading man proclaiming his undying love for the woman who completes him. Despite whatever protestations to the contrary, women do not want to be “The One” or the center of a man’s existence. They in fact want to subordinate themselves to a worthy man’s life purpose, to help him achieve that purpose with their feminine support, and to follow the path he lays out. You must respect a woman’s integrity and not lie to her that she is “your everything”. She is not your everything, and if she is, she will soon not be anymore.

***

VI. Keep her guessing

True to their inscrutable natures, women ask questions they don’t really want direct answers to. Woe be the man who plays it straight — his fate is the suffering of the beta. Evade, tease, obfuscate. She thrives when she has to imagine what you’re thinking about her, and withers when she knows exactly how you feel. A woman may want financial and family security, but she does not want passion security. In the same manner, when she has displeased you, punish swiftly, but when she has done you right, reward slowly. Reward her good behavior intermittently and unpredictably and she will never tire of working hard to please you.

The fact that cub cads and tiny thots instinctually obey the timeless biomechanical laws of the Poon Commandments strongly suggests that these principles of Game have a solid footing in the deepest, primal parts of human nature, and given that they are in evidence so early in life the later manifestations of it should not come as a shock to anyone but those in a low fertility society who have forgotten the wisdom of the wees.

Game is not socially constructed. Social construction is the effluvia of Game.

PS ¡SCIENCE! agrees! (what else is new?)

Science of dating: why playing hard to get only works for men

Men should play hard to get if they want to attract the opposite sex on a first date otherwise women will see them as unmanly or manipulative, new research has shown.

However women should ‘be nice’ as it will make them appear more feminine in the eyes of the opposite sex.

The research, which only studied straight couples, found that women are suspicious of a man who is too attentive, and are likely to view him as ‘vulnerable and less dominant.’

lol niceguys BTFO.

The studies worked on the basis that people often say that they seek a partner that is “responsive to their needs” and that such a partner would arouse their sexual interest.

However it seems that in the early stages of dating, women are more turned on by unresponsive men.

Professor Gurit Birnbaum of the Interdisciplinary Centre, Israel, said: “We still do not know why women are less sexually attracted to responsive strangers.

I know why, and readers of this blog know why. Perception of female preselection. A standoffish, self-possessed man who isn’t promptly smitten by a hot chick is perceived to be a man who has lots of options in quality and quantity of female company. In Darwinian terms, his seed is likely to birth champions who will find themselves living in a poosy paradise, which means his women can look forward to their genes spreading (heh) farther and wider (heh).

However, in contrast, the advice for women is to ‘play nice’ if they want to attract a male, even though dating Bibles such as ‘The Rules’ suggest they should remain aloof and disinterested.

The first experiment involved 112 single undergraduates aged between 20 and 33 years old who were paired with a member of the opposite sex on a 30 minute ‘date.’

It found that women who were judged to be more friendly and responsive were seen to be more sexually attractive.

Nicegirls are not the flip side of niceguys. What works for men doesn’t usually work for women. This is why Game exists, because there are stark and profound psychosexual differences between the sexes.

Men who interacted with an agreeable and attentive female perceived her as more feminine and as more sexually attractive than did men who found women aloof.

In this corner, we have cheap sperm. It prefers women who signal sexual and romantic availability.

In this corner, we have expensive eggs. It prefers men who signal outcome independence and a surfeit of mate choices.

Ten rounds, no ear biting, and don’t bother placing bets, because there can never be a winner…for long.

PPS Joe Biden and the Pope got a tingle up their legs reading this post.

107 Responses to “Every Girl Adores A Hard-To-Get Boy”

  1. Corinth Arkadin says:

    Excellent article.

    Also, FIRST, motherphuckers…

    Like

    • Sentient says:

      Clearly the hero we’ve been looking for.

      Thanks brutha

      Like

    • DA GBFM LZOZOZZOZLZLZLZZL says:

      Dear hearstietsttezes,

      DA GBFM has a BIGZ Problemzmzmz!!

      what should I do iwth my good lady wheat fieldwomanz shelley?

      lzlzlzoo

      Like

      • DA GBFM LZOZOZZOZLZLZLZZL says:

        da poor poor devil of a subsub GBFM’s trials and tribulationsz never end:

        lzozozozozmzgzlzozo

        Like

      • DA GBFM LZOZOZZOZLZLZLZZL says:

        and here siz one for all the relativiely SMALL promebelmsz of all the otherz commentatorosz:

        zlzoozzozlzozozozo

        Like

      • Anonymous says:

        GBFM, you might be interested to know that the incoming CEO of Goldman Sachs, David Solomon, plays DJ on the side with the stage name “D-Sol”.

        Like

  2. […] Every Girl Adores A Hard-To-Get Boy […]

    Like

  3. mendo says:

    This:

    Ever notice the “bad girls” of yesteryear rock had more femininity than the Lilith Fair femmes of the 90s or the cartoonish slutwalkers of today?

    …made me think of this:

    Liked by 2 people

  4. mendo says:

    mod test . . .(trying to link a photo)

    Like

  5. Truth-hammer says:

    Two girls for every boy. Song in there somewhere.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. theasdgamer says:

    Re: expensive eggs v cheap sperm…ain’t enough Joe Montanas to go around.

    Like

  7. Gunslingergregi says:

    Expensive eggs but a woman can fuck or get fucked by way more dudes than a dude can fuck number of woman

    Liked by 1 person

    • Gunslingergregi says:

      They all cant get there turn on alpha dick but an alpha woman putting out can saturate the market and everyone can get a turn

      Liked by 1 person

    • Gunslingergregi says:

      The expensiveness of woman comes from rules and regulations
      Not the actual value
      If they were free to do whatever they wanted they would be cheap

      Liked by 1 person

    • Captain Obvious says:

      A study published on Wednesday in the Journal of General Internal Medicine offers an additional explanation: declining health and rising death rates in rural Republican bastions helped tilt the presidential election toward Trump. http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/3684978/posts

      Like

      • Greg Eliot says:

        White Americans from rural America, with less education and lower income levels, voted disproportionately for Trump, according to the Columbia study.

        Sounds like the tired ol’ canard we’d been hearing all along, how only ignorant White trash voted for Trump.

        And what is this “disproportionately” poopytalk?

        Negroes, with the lowest rates of education and health, for that matter, have been voting “disproportionate” Democratic for generations… but somehow nobody needs conduct a study, nor even mention too loudly in the (((MSM))), about THAT fact, amirite?

        Nonwhites as a whole have always voted “disproportionately”.

        (((shakin’ mah haid)))

        Liked by 1 person

      • Captain Obvious says:

        GE, a few days ago, Gunslinger was saying that he knows a local bank teller who said that something like 25% or 50% of the kids in her high school class are now dead from overdoses.

        PS: You get one & only one guess as to why the (((Chaimstream Media))) is perpetuating a stone cold silence concerning the toll which the opiate epidemic is taking on young virile [& fertile] white Chr!stian men [& women] in Flyover Country.

        Like

      • Greg Eliot says:

        I dunno ’bout that, Cap’n… I’ve been hearing quite a bit about muh opiod epidemic lately, and the ads and mini-docs always show a goodly share o’ White.

        I think they’re even having some sort of Nat’l Opiod Awareness Day coming soon.

        Like

  8. guest says:

    Well, here in current year Weimerica men outnumber women, who are flooded by social media and online dating and dudes who read textbooks on cold approach. Playing hard to get just gets me lost in the mix unless the girl already has substantial interest, and then it’s a fine line between being a needy bitch and keeping her attention while she’s swiping through dozens of dudes a day.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Gunslingergregi says:

      Yea it’s worldwide shit
      White getting texted by e eryone

      Like

    • Les Saunders, Protestant says:

      You need to be interested and pursue without making it obvious.

      Talk about peace and treaties and humanitarianism and respect for international law while you annex Crimea.

      Talk about not being sure whilst unbuttoning bra straps.

      Say one thing. Do another. One of the golden secrets of life.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Abraham Lincoln says:

        >Talk about peace and treaties and humanitarianism and respect for international law while you annex Crimea.
        >Talk about not being sure whilst unbuttoning bra straps.

        lol!

        Like

  9. herb says:

    Oh gosh no! I can’t ear bite….ok. I shall abide by this and see for myself…Gosh I been screwing it up.

    Like

  10. traitors first says:

    forget the s&m part of the movie
    but watch secretary with james spader ………….. he definitely uses this to full effect

    Like

  11. Diversity Is Good says:

    PPS Joe Biden and the Pope got a tingle up their legs reading this post.

    LULZlollz. NFW Biden gets any tingle for girls over 11, or Francy gets off on anything to do with wahmen at all.

    Like

    • Captain Obvious says:

      The real purpose of the Manafort trial was to immunize Tony Podesta on EVERYTHING.

      The illusion of going after the G0d Emperor was just window dressing.

      It’s all about the immunization.

      Like

      • mendo says:

        So vaccines do work!

        Like

      • Captain Obvious says:

        Mendo, the same thing was true of Comey’s various “investigations” into Hillary’s email server in 2016.

        The purpose of the investigations wasn’t so much to exonerate Hillary as it was to IMMUNIZE all of Hillary’s staff & associates against any possibility of being forced to testify against her.

        The Deep State is using IMMUNIZATION to make the Greenspanian “Landing” [for all of these crooks] as soft as possible.

        Like

  12. The research, which only studied straight couples, found that women are suspicious of a man who is too attentive, and are likely to view him as ‘vulnerable and less dominant.’

    IOW fedora-tipping “M’Laydee!” Beta orbiters get nothing, not ever no way. Nice guys finish last with their rosy palmzzzlollolzz!

    ¡SCIENCE! confirms Game again!

    Like

    • To a certain extent, this falls into the category of “The Hamster only understands your weaknesses, and is clueless as to your strengths.”

      For instance, the Hamster doesn’t realize how very rare it is to cross paths with someone who is a truly first rate conversationalist [replete with outstanding manners and a strong sense of empathy to the psychological state of everyone participating in the conversation], because those strengths live way out beyond the sphere of the Hamster’s comprehension.

      OTOH, the Hamster is perfectly capable of becoming hopelessly wet between the legs when some brute butts in and nukes an exceptionally elegant conversation.

      It’s the difference between Little Johnnie in kindergarten, who builds a very intricate block tower from the floor of the schoolroom almost all the way to the ceiling, versus Little Chad, who kicks the intricate block tower out at its base, and then leads all the other kids in laughing at Little Johnnie, who’s now covered in the blocks.

      tl;dr == Your Strengths live in That Place Where Women Dare Not Look.

      Ergo women are utterly oblivious to your strengths.

      PS: If you’re Little Johnnie, and if you want to score teh jai1bait 5yo p00ntang, then pick up the nearest chair, and cr@ck 0pen Little Chad’s sku11 with it.

      Otherwise, prepare for a childhood of misery & degradation & humiliation.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Captain Obvious says:

        PRO-TIP: If you ever cross paths with a chick who is capable of appreciating your skills as a conversationalist – to the point that she will brush off Chad’s attempts to yank her away from you and onto the dance floor with him, simply because she’d rather spend the evening talking with you than dancing with him – then you stop whatever you’re doing and make an immediate decision as to BUNZ -> 0VEN.

        And don’t make the wrong decision, because you’ll likely never meet her equal again in this life.

        Liked by 2 people

      • mendo says:

        Cappy, I think I had a swing and a miss moment in that regard. But, I wasn’t into the gal that much, probably why I was able to keep the dialog rolling.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Captain Obvious says:

        It’s possible that your hindbrain realized she was a stalker.

        Part of getting [way Way WAY] ahead in life comes from developing some powerful skillz for realizing when someone’s ostensible interest in you is legit versus being e.g. some form of mental illness.

        But if you cross paths with a chick who legit appreciates you for who you really are, and if there’s even the slightest sexual chemistry between the two of you, then BUNZ -> 0VEN.

        [Where, again, “sexual chemistry” is probably strongly hindbrain-oriented as well, and likely has its roots in Biological Calvinism.]

        Liked by 1 person

      • Captain Obvious says:

        BTW, just last night, I thought of a really good analogy for explaining Biological Calvinism to n00bies: If the tastebuds on your tongue [and the neurons in your brain assigned to process the information coming from your tastebuds] evolved to sense bitterness in potential foodstuffs as a warning to you that you’re likely dealing with a poisonous substance, then could it not also be possible that the rods & cones in your eye [and the neurons in your brain assigned to process the information coming from your rods & cones] evolved to sense facial hideousness in another person as a warning to you that you’re likely dealing with a morally or spiritually or intellectually hideous human being?

        Liked by 1 person

      • Captain Obvious says:

        PS: The same thing holds true if the person smells funky, or outright stinks to high heaven. Biological Calvinism says that the best m@te for you is likely the chick who SMELLS the best.

        PPS: Also the tactile sensation of feeling her skin & hair – if her skin or hair feels off, then your Ancestors [and the sacrifices which they made so that you could exist in the first place] are likely screaming at you: “Run Forrest Run!!!”

        PPPS: And the sound of her voice – if she cackles like a w!tch, then she probably is a w!tch.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Captain Obvious says:

        Like

      • trav777 says:

        huh?

        dude chicks love conversation, or love storytelling..it’s entertainment. No fucking chad on a dance floor can yank them away when they’re already in my bed listening to me pontificate about whatthefuckever

        you people and your fear of “chad” out there lurking gonna take your woman away from you…THIS is your #1 problem

        Liked by 1 person

      • mendo says:

        Old friends somehow never discerned that ability about facial hideousness. Their thirst was all too strong. Thankfully, I had more discriminating taste and even more thankful for my spergy gooberness that helped me strike out–in all the right ways.

        Liked by 1 person

      • mendo says:

        What you do mean “you” people?

        Hush, hush travvy,
        Hush, hush travvy
        Hush hush don’t tell us that you’re hurt

        Like

      • Captain Obvious says:

        >>>>> “even more thankful for my spergy gooberness that helped me strike out”

        That spergy gooberness is you Hindbrain, man – it’s your Ancestors calling out to you from across the void of the Eons.

        The moar I think about this sh!znat, the moar I am convinced of the fundamental importance of ridding yourself of any & all deductivistic (((Narratives))) and instead rediscovering your natural instinctual self [whose Nature was bequeathed to you by your Ancestors].

        I’m not arguing in favor of stupidity – for any situation which is approaching you, it always helps to do as much background reading as possible, before you have to walk into the situation – but once you’re in the situation, and events begin unfolding, you must move fluidly & improvise on the spot, and, at that point, you simply have to trust your instincts [where one of the most important instincts of all is in realizing that all the background reading you had done beforehand is proving to be utter horsesh!t].

        BTW, I’m convinced that this how the G0d Emperor has lived his life – read everything you can in anticipation of what might happen, but, once things start happening, trust your instincts.

        Liked by 1 person

      • mendo says:

        Very on point, Cappy. Those sentiments have been surfacing in me as of late. Good job.

        Like

      • Captain Obvious says:

        >>>>> “And the sound of her voice”

        NYU Researchers Identify Tool to Help Transgender Women Have a More Authentic Voice https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/09/04/every-girl-adores-a-hard-to-get-boy/

        Liked by 1 person

      • OTOH, by midlife Johnnie will be rolling in dough–AND quality poon.

        Like

    • Oswald Spengler says:

      In days past, it was said that “nice guys finish last.” Nowadays, nice guys aren’t even in the running.

      Like

  13. Joab says:

    Thanks for the Pat Benatar link. As a rule, I do not like girl bands, but she rocked!

    Like

    • Moses says:

      Same. Pat Benatar was pure distilled raw sexy minxness. Not so beautiful, but she had that X quality. The feeling and emotion she put into her music was incredible. Nothing like her today.

      And yes — listen to the lyrics of “Fire and Ice” for a lesson in the value of push/pull. Pat is singing from her own experience.

      Ooh, you’re givin’ me the fever tonight
      I don’t want to give in
      I’d be playin’ with fire
      You forget, I’ve seen you work before
      Take ’em straight to the top
      Leave ’em cryin’ for more
      I’ve seen you burn ’em before

      Fire and ice
      You come on like a flame
      Then you turn a cold shoulder
      Fire and ice
      I want to give you my love
      But you’ll just take a little piece of my heart
      You’ll just tear it apart

      Movin’ in for the kill tonight
      You got every advantage when they put out the lights
      It’s not so pretty when it fades away
      ‘Cause it’s just an illusion in this passion play
      I’ve seen you burn ’em before

      Fire and ice
      You come on like a flame
      Then you turn a cold shoulder
      Fire and ice
      I want to give you my love
      But you’ll just take a little piece of my heart

      So you think you got it all figured out
      You’re an expert in the field, without a doubt
      But I know your methods inside and out
      And I won’t be takin’ in by fire and ice

      Fire and ice
      You come on like a flame
      Then you turn a cold shoulder
      Fire and ice
      I want to give you my love
      But you’ll just take a little piece of my heart

      Like

    • Moses says:

      Saw a Steve Miller concert in the 90s. Benatar opened for Miller. A rocking set, she got the crowd fired up.

      Then Miller came on stage. What a comedown. He sucked. No energy. And between songs he rambled on about nothing. It was the same feeling late night at a bar when everyone’s having a great time then mgmt cuts the music and turns on the harsh florescent lights on before closing time. Exactly like that.

      Miller invited Pat and her guitarist back out for a duet. Immediately the energy level went from 5 to 100. It plummeted again when she left the stage after the song.

      Benatar was (and probably still is) an incredible, amazing performer to see live. She’s still playing actually.

      Like

  14. Ironsides says:

    The other thing that’s interesting is how powerful the propaganda is for being a “nice guy.”

    When I was starting to get interested in brawds, all I heard was “be nice. Be attentive. Be considerate. Show interest in everything. Don’t show any sexual interest in any way. Be friendly. Be nice. Be nice. Be nice. Be attentive.”

    And when that (predictably) didn’t work, the response from basically ANYONE I told the failure about was “you weren’t nice enough. You weren’t considerate enough. You weren’t interested enough in her. Be nicer! Be more considerate! Be more attentive!”

    I sort of understand how guys get trapped in the beta loop. There are probably quite a few potential alphas who get stuck in that because they’re young, inexperienced and listen to the giant chorus everywhere — in person, in print, in film, on and on, a more concentrated propaganda effort than even selling the Holocau$t.

    It’s hard to figure out when you’re embedded in a vast unanimous everlasting bellow of “Be nice! Be attentive! Be nicer! Be attentiver!”

    That’s why this blog is priceless.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Moses says:

      Yeah, this.

      I was stuck there as a young man because that’s the advice I got, and I believed it. Worse, I had a feminist mother. Even worse, my dad coached me that the secret to getting girls was to pedestalize them.

      Needless to say, outside a few gfs I didn’t get laid. I got the “Aww that’s so sweet you’ll make some girl very happy one day” then she hung up the phone (this is back when ppl used phones) to f*ck a Chad.

      It took me years of pain and effort to discard all that beta conditioning.

      But goddamn, it was worth the effort. Discarding that nonsense and embracing my inner caveman felt like coming home. Skipped the first wife, went straight to the younger, hotter, feminine second one.

      Liked by 3 people

    • cortesar says:

      when you hear
      “you are emotionally unavailable” you know you are doing things right
      I am yet to meet a women who is not captivated by a “emotionally unavailable” man one way or another
      never forget that every single woman spend her life seeking validation, denying it is the key of reigning over them
      conversely professing an eternal devotion at first date is the road to slavery
      chose wisely

      Liked by 1 person

      • Doubter says:

        It is, in fact, so important that I have told each and every first date that I am not boyfriend material and emotionally unavailable.
        Catnip…..

        Liked by 2 people

    • Greg Eliot says:

      Being nice always worked for me…

      … until it was time NOT to be nice. 😉

      Like

    • trav777 says:

      the chick I just banged I told to fuck off and that she was a bitch.

      this was the one who I was gonna take to a nice place (bc I wanted to go) and who tried to reschedule to 7-11p with me. Aka to “no pussy” window.

      So I thought she was a player, turns out she actually wasn’t…go figure.

      The reads you get around here are not necessarily canon. The bang cost me an uber ride for which Amex gave me $15 credit lol.

      However, in CH’s favor- I took another chick to an even better place, a sometime plate of mine, and I txtd the bitch from the restaurant with a pic of me. She confessed that it made her jealous lol

      I actually texted her earlier in the week saying i was going to Plume to “spend $400 on raviolis” (actually of course not on that last part lol), and was going with another girl and if she wasn’t such a gold digger maybe I’d have taken her. Told her “just lettin you know fyi.”

      That shit worked lol

      Liked by 1 person

      • Lichthof says:

        Trav – you’re one of my favorite people around here but you sound like a nig in this post.

        Also I did the plates thing for 6 – 12 months. Long term it kills your soul and the girls you get are dead inside. When are you going to get off this addiction?

        Liked by 2 people

      • Worked great–for the girl who got the expensive dinner. (She was the more successful gold digger because she played the game better.)

        Like

    • Truth-hammer says:

      Regards your ‘nice guy’ reference, please see the original Karate Kid movie with that annoying little shit Danielsan and the blond alpha kid who was supposed to be the bad guy. Then watch the present day remake titled ‘Cobra Kai’ on JewTube and see how vile (((Hollywood))) was in pushing that ‘nice guy’ crap onto us. Cobra Kai shows that the ‘nice guy’ is a kike lie that us white guy goyim were supposed to internalize so that the Christ-killers could take advantage of us. The only other actor who could have played Johnny Lawrence, the supposed baddie but in fact alpha male, would be John Wayne.

      Like

  15. Dirty Randy says:

    “A standoffish, self-possessed man who isn’t promptly smitten by a hot chick is perceived to be a man who has lots of options in quality and quantity of female company.”

    YMMV, but in my case, I learned that my disinterestedness and aloofness was interpreted as signs of being homosexual. Hotties would tell me that they thought I was gay because I was unapproaching (and unapproachable). What gives?

    Liked by 1 person

    • WhoWhatWhenWhereWhy says:

      You expect a girl to be self aware? Its much easier for them to label you as gay rather than look inward and discover they aren’t the catch their orbiters have convinced them of.

      Same tactic for girls calling guys “weird” so flippantly.

      “How on Earth could some guy not like me?”

      *Hamstering Intensifies*

      “Must be gay…”

      Liked by 1 person

    • APL says:

      “What gives?”

      You are gay?

      Like

    • ultimathule1 says:

      When a woman accuses a man of being “gay” it doesn’t mean that she really believes that he is that way – it means that she is trying to insult his sense of manhood by questioning it, similar to accusing him of having a small penis or being impotent. It means that she is angry at him for not showing enough interest in her, which in turn means that she is interested in him as a potential mate – if she were not interested she wouldn’t even bother with the insult. If anything, she would be more likely to seriously suspect that a man is “gay” if he were friendly to her in a non-sexual “nice guy” way.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Damn Crackers says:

      An autistic/aspergie guy always makes the world his own. Unfortunately, it doesn’t translate into waves of interest from women.

      Liked by 1 person

    • trav777 says:

      maybe the feather boa was their tipoff

      Liked by 1 person

  16. cortesar says:

    lolzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    Rat scares jews. pic.twitter.com/KhU0cDwOu3

    — Lord Molyneaux (@Molyneaux_Lord) August 30, 2018

    Like

  17. dvdivx says:

    White women’s eggs are expensive. Black women not so much. Just shows how bad miscegenation really is.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. “PPS Joe Biden and the Pope got a tingle up their legs reading this post.”

    Like

  19. Macro Investor says:

    test

    Like

  20. Macro Investor says:

    modding fucked up again

    Like

  21. theasdgamer says:

    Old ladies on fb are trying to get me to go to one of their events…I want to be chased by prime poon, not some old battleaxes.

    Like

  22. Max Mayantz says:

    While there is definite truth to this, I think the underlying cause is shitty parents. Dads avoid their kids because they suck at parenting, their daughters internalize that men who are too busy to tend to their needs are attractive…and that the reverse isn’t manly. So they seek out unavailable men…

    I question the validity of this advice in a society where intimacy seems to elude…everyone. Basically you are telling men to act like the distant abusive father that every girl had…yes it works…but it just perpetuates the shame shit forever…not that I care, just pointing it out…

    [CH: this has nothing to do with distant fathers and everything to do with innate female nature evolved to maximize their reproductive fitness. intimacy is great, but ardor is its prerequisite. if men and women want intimacy, they have to do the things that make intimacy possible.]

    Like

    • Max, you’re right. Proof: women who had distant or abusive dads are the most likely to fall for cads. (Again and again.) Those who had better dads may fall for a cad (at least once) but it’s less likely. The question is whether we should perpetuate this cycle for our own short-term gain. (Do we still advocate “enjoy-the-decline”, or have we matured somewhat?)

      Like

  23. Captain Obvious says:

    >>>>> “PPS Joe Biden and the Pope got a tingle up their legs reading this post.”

    Pope Francis Likens Child Abuse Victims to a ‘Pack of Wild Dogs’ http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3684956/posts

    Like

    • Captain Obvious says:

      ‘Following weeks of pressure for Pope Francis to respond to accusations that he played a role in the cover-up of a Catholic Church pedophile ring, the pontiff finally spoke up on the scandal by referring to the victims of abuse as a “pack of wild dogs.”

      During Mass at the Vatican’s Sanctae Marthae guesthouse, the Pope raised the issue by likening the latest child abuse scandal to a biblical story where Jesus is driven out of town by a pack of wild dogs…’

      Like

      • Greg Eliot says:

        For the record, I know of no instance in the Bible where Jesus was “driven out of town by a pack of wild dogs.”

        Psalm 22 (“Why Hast Thou Forsaken Me” precursor of Christ’s crucifixion) has the psalmist mention being surrounded and tortured by all sorts of “assembly of the wicked” and likens them to dogs, the mouths of lions, strong bulls, etc.

        Like

      • Greg Eliot says:

        I seen now the Pope was taking his own non-Scriptural metaphorical liberty with Lüke 4, 16-30, wherein the jews drove Jesus from the synagogue and town and attempted to throw him off a cliff, but He walked through the crowd and went on His way, unscathed.

        Like

      • Greg Eliot says:

        ghai mod strikes again 😡

        I seen now the Pope was taking his own non-Scripturål metaphörical libêrty with Lüke 4, wherein the jews drove Christ from the synagögue and town and attempted to thröw him off a clìff, but He walked through the crowd and went on His way, ünscathed.

        Like

      • trav777 says:

        I do…after he was crucified, jews drove his body to a tomb, no?

        Anyway, Queen will be right along to tell us how we’re all missing out horribly on the opportunity to confess our sins to boy diddlers and faggots.

        You know, the people doing the sermons at your protestant church. The ones excising your Bible of gendered pronouns and commandments they don’t like.

        Christianity is in freefall- it has nothing to offer anyone anymore except suicide.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Greg Eliot says:

        I do…after he was crucified, jews drove his body to a tomb, no?

        Bible says nothing about “wild dogs” in that instance either.

        And as noted, the Pope was referring to Luke 4 and added his own metaphor of “wild dogs” to describe the jews who drove Christ from the synagogue.

        Let’s be careful out there:

        Revelation 22:18
        I testify to everyone who hears the prophetic words of this book: If anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book.

        Like

      • Captain Obvious says:

        >>>>> “Bible says nothing about “wild dogs” in that instance either.”

        GE, read all the kkk0mments to the Free Republic thread.

        There’s a lengthy discussion of this.

        Like

      • Greg Eliot says:

        Well, I went through the first page of comments and saw one or two that, like me, mentioned how there was no Scriptural story about “wild dogs” driving Jesus out of town.

        As noted, the Pope took metaphorical liberty with Luke 4 and was likening the jews that drove Jesus out of the synagogue to a pack of wild dogs.

        I’m not going to go through several more hundred comments just to find out what I’ve already made clear.

        Like

    • Greg Eliot says:

      And for the record, the way I read it, the Pope wasn’t speaking of the victims as “a pack of wild dogs”, he was referring to the press and those “not of good will” looking to stoke the flames, which I can’t disagree.

      Freerepublic, as usual, takes the tabloid path and twists the headlines for extra outcry on an already heinous situation.

      My biggest complaint is the (((MSM))) quick to mention the church, but NEVER mentioning homosexuality in re stories about pederasts, either sacred or profane.

      Like

  24. HeilYourSieg says:

    Fact that you called little kids “tykes” equals you being a tired old man. You fall asleep in your chair and your imaginary 20 year old girlfriend is having the time of her life next door with some hot mixed blood boys while you pay the bills and call yourself alpha to your secretly homoerotic boomer friends.

    [CH: projection…it’s what’s for dinner!]

    Like

  25. Lee says:

    The more the little-boy narcissism, the fewer the white people, because no one can long stand a narcissist.

    This site is a recipe for white depopulation. Grow up, or step aside for the adults.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. Realist says:

    I wonder how many women read and love Heartiste? Am I the only one? #redpill

    [CH: love wins]

    Like

  27. Carlos Danger says:

    Liked by 1 person

  28. Lichthof says:

    AA’ s article on neo nahzees is a good read

    Like

  29. Bucky says:

    So about a month ago I was out boating, trying to outrun a lightning storm, took shelter under a bridge. I get waived down by a cute chick on a paddle board. She wanted to know if the lightning was coming her way. Anyway, struck up a conversation with her meanwhile the tide pushed out into deeper water. I told her to hop her cute ass up on the front on my boat and I would give her a ride back in. She smiled, cocked her cute ass up on the bow of my boat with wry grin and I towed her to shore. The storm passed and I was about to get back to what I was doing. I said let’s get together for a drink sometime while backing off the sandbar. She told me where she worked and told me to drop by for a beer (she’s a waitress). I never did because it would be impossible to get her where I wanted while she was waiting tables. I would have just looked like beta orbiter.

    Fast forward to this past weekend and I stopped under the bridge again to fish with a buddy. Bridges are a nice place to fish in the shade in the heat of the day. There she is on the sandbar again on a floatie. I’m watching her out of the corner of my eye while positioning my boat. I see I caught her attention. So I look over to make eye contact and she defers. We play this game for a bit until I get a solid lock. I waive, she waives back. I putter over to the sandbar and ask if the would like to spend the day on the water with me and my friend. She can’t because she has to work in a few hours, but then says “I would love to go another time when I’m free”, so I said lemme get your number, which I do.

    Upon leaving, my buddy says “damn, did you see her face, she was openly flirting with you…you got this made”

    But here’s where I think I fugged up and need some chateau wisdom. I waited for about two hours to text her thinking that I should jump on this while it’s hot. Something lame like “bummer you had to work today”, “let’s go to location x (by water) when you’re free”. No response for 3 days. I get a response last night “I would love to go whenever I get a day off on the weekend” Keep in mind the days are getting short, the boat shtick wont work in 4 weeks. so, I wait until noon today and text “hey goofball, are you off on Friday?”

    I think I rushed into this too quickly, but I feel the pressure of boating season ending. Had this been July, I could have slow rolled it more.

    Like

    • Bucky says:

      Also:
      After getting her number, but before texting her, I went to another fishing hole- a local pier. There are some young dudes in their 20’s working on their boat. I overhear them talking about gaming chicks. I walked over and said, “I got a question, I just got this number of a cute chick, need a good intro line by text.” The one guy asks a bout her, long story short he knows who she is and just smiles. I said, “dude, warn me if I walking into trouble.” He just shook his head and looked down while smiling knowingly. I said “comeon’ let me know what’s up.” He said “she is a fun chick to hang with…” I said,” give up the dirt!!!” He said “she blew his buddy on a single seat motor cycle while going down the road- he was facing forward and she was backwards facing.”

      **pretty fugging impressive if you ask me….

      I said “that sounds like my type of girl, lol”

      so, this one shouldn’t need a lot of gaming, probably just isolate, some beers and boom chicka wow wow

      Like

  30. Esteban Danger says:

    From the telegraph article: “though dating Bibles such as ‘The Rules’ suggest they should remain aloof and disinterested.”

    Isn’t this pretty much exactly what game teaches men? I guess the book just addresses the wrong audience. I would say more than 90% of dating advice given by women (to other women AND men) is wrong and damaging – sabotaging the competition and weeding out the beta.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Also reachable over Tor: roissyrwpgxawb3etwznvay4eelbws4lkdtr4tt2r7wxb6adq6pajtqd.onion