Recently, I had box seats to a brief lovers’ spat on the sidewalk. The couple starring in the show crossed my path perpendicularly. It was a telling scene, flush with unspoken truths about the differences between men and women. She’s following him, begging for his attention. The girl has that frantic look like her baby is floating down the river in a basket and she’s chasing after it.
All the while (not a long while, maybe twenty seconds total), he’s striding purposefully ahead of her, oblivious, or affecting an air thereof, to her fevered pleadings. He stands tall, a confident posture and a neutral facial expression leading his way. He looks kind of like a dick.
I couldn’t make out what the drama was about, but it didn’t matter. There was a larger message in this theatrical release. I thought:
“This is the direction love should go. It’s natural. Woman to man. Woman gives love, man receives love. (Man gives desire, woman receives desire.) No matter what happens next, this woman desperately chasing down her man will eventually fall into his post-coital arms, the both of them happy with their respective statuses in the relationship.”
I tried to imagine by way of thought experiment how my perception of the scene would have changed if the roles had been swapped. If instead he had been pleading with his girlfriend to slow down, and she kept walking ahead of him. I twitched at the thought with instinctive revulsion. There was only one-way love in that reverse scenario, him to her. Submissive Male to Dominant Female. A guarantee of relationship extinction.
No one loves a needy man, not even himself.
How will you know your relationship is on solid ground? If she’s running after you, red-faced and trembling with love and yearning and desperation and desire and, yes, fear. The sexual polarity is aligned. The love amplified.
If you’re running after her, afraid to lose her love? You already have.
A good, if abstractedly imperfect, test of a woman’s love for you is to ask if she would she die for you. You can ask yourself this question, and if you’re honest you’ll know the answer.
I watched TED talks today and a woman there defined love as you would give your life for that person. I would die for my son without question..but for my husband probably not. I do love him, but I wouldn’t die for him..would I die for my husband when we first started dating when I was CRAZY in love with him? Nah..
You’ll know you own your woman if she’s so in love she’d at least claim in online scribblings that she’d die for you.
Through a series of photographs, you are about to witness the corruption of the American Woman unfold over the course of three years. It’s not for the faint of heart.
Photo 1: ~3 years ago. A smiling, modestly attired, feminine-looking 17 year old. On the “Marriageability:Down-To-Fuckability curve“, she would be a hot marriageable property (if she lived in a state where 17 was the age of consent).
Photo 2: five weeks after the first photo was taken. She still looks worthy of a man’s commitment and resources. But the giant sunglasses are the first hint that creeping sluttitude has infected her psyche.
Photo 3: three years later, she is now 20 years old. So much degradation in so little time. The wigger corn rows. The attention whoring, full-body, half-naked selfie (bra exposed). Fake tits, too? The navel piercing. The lacquered makeup. The ghetto nails. She is no longer marriageable, but she sure is DTFable. (wear two condoms)
Photo 4: present day, she is now almost 21 years old. Her corruption is complete. Daringly exposing her undertits for public consumption. Corn rows metastasized into permanent fixtures. Slutty makeup application (ladies pinch, whores rouge). Tattoos in erogenous zones. And the subtle tell of subconscious shame: she can’t bear to look directly in the camera. Who is taking her picture? Her black boyfriend? Is that his pit bull fighting arena in the background?
The reader who sent these photos writes,
heartbreaking decline of young white girl.
Not much to say here that hasn’t already been said. Giving young women freedom or any unsupervised time is a bad move for the woman, for her family, and for society. These before and after shots span from 17 yo to the current day where “Allison” is now 20, 21 later this year.
She was obviously beautiful, and had the potential to be everything a self respecting white man would have wanted in a wife. But after social media, college dorms, and working at twin peaks… This is what’s left of the liberated American woman: a microcosm of current white culture; take the best genes and throw them away.
I can genuinely say that I feel a sense of heartbreak for her father.
America corrupts her women, and America corrupts wherever She goes. Obesity, skankitude, deracination, mudsharkery, single mommery, faggotry, equalist dehumanization, social atomization… every corner of the globe touched by America has seen a rise in all these negative indicators of societal health.
The solution is clear: reform America, before She destroys everything in Her path.
There is a relationship between a woman’s marriageability and her “down-to-fuckability” (shortened: DTFability). It’s quite robust and replicable.
Down-to-fuckability is fancy scientific jargon for the impression a woman makes that she is eager and ready for sex, and that bedding her would not be much of a challenge. DTFability also suggests an openness to sexual experimentation and to trysts in public locations.
DTFability is similar to, but not the same as, sluttiness. For a woman to qualify as a slut, she has to have racked up a higher-than-average cock count. A better synonym for DTFability would be skankitude, which embodies the stylistic and behavioral qualities of sluttiness but not necessarily the high cock count that is the trademark of the slut.
A woman who is commonly considered by men to be “down to fuck” is a sexpot identified by her skimpy clothes, whore hoop earrings, tattoos, slut eye and other quirks of appearance, as well as by her seductive flirtations and aggressively sexual demeanor. Masculinized women with the telltale “manjaw” and careerist ambitions are representative of the DTF woman; they don’t play coy and they love giving head.
Marriageability refers to women who are “marriage material”. These women are the polar opposite of down-to-fuckable women. A marriageable woman, by her appearance, style and demeanor, implies a low risk of unfaithfulness and a high disposition to romantic loyalty, and following from these implications she likely possesses a pretty good maternal instinct as well. These things matter to men who are considering settling down and starting a family with “the right woman”. A faithful, loving, affectionate woman is a woman who is unlikely to frivorce or cuckold a man.
Looks-wise, marriageable and down-to-fuckable women aren’t all that different from each other. Beauties can be found in both groups, although DTF girls tend to a “hard” look and a psychotic thousand-cock stare, while marriageable girls tend to look softer, kinder and, less encouragingly, diffident. DTF girls inspire horniness in men; marriageable girls inspire romance in men.
Horniness and romantic investment aren’t positively correlated. Their relation is haphazard at best. Yes, men generally want to spend lots of time with women who make them horny, but women who inspire nothing BUT horniness exert a relaxation effect on men’s more subtle sexual urge: the urge to protect and provide. In scientific terms, a DTF girl is a “fucknchuck”, while a marriageable girl is a “waitnmasturbate” (i.e., men are willing to wait for the marriageable girl to open up sexually to them, while they endure the wait by masturbating).
And that explains the inherent tension in men when choosing between marriageable and DTFable girls. Men love the sexy, alluring ingenue with the come-hither eyes and Mariana Trench cleavage, but they don’t so much love her infidelity risk and her reckless, indiscriminate coquetry. And men also love the coy, demure, innocent blushing beauty with the promise of a hymen and a chaste sensibility, but they don’t so much love her prudery, sexual timidity and loose-fitting cable-knit sweaters.
So men looking to the future with a woman that goes further than a one-night-stand or a three month fling must find a balance between the two female genera. A woman who is too sexy is a divorce and cheating risk. A woman who is too prudish is a bed death risk, comfortable with weeks of sexlessness and having an aversion to blowjobs (which when she gives them can result in her face twisting into a rictus of disgust; quite the mood killer with the lights on).
Which brings us to:
The Marriageability-DTFability Relationship Curve
This curve captures the essence of the subconscious decision-making process that goes on in the minds of men judging women for their marriageability. A High Marriageability woman is NOT the most prudish and faithful; such a woman will dutifully bear and raise your children, but she will not dutifully bare herself and raise your churro. A very Low DTFability woman earns a “meh” on the marriageability question.
Peak Marriageability occurs at the inflection point where a woman is still relatively chaste but has a nascent talent for projecting a hungry sexuality in your general direction. This is the Sweet Spot (to complement the Wet Spot). A man would feel comfortable leaving a Sweet Spot wife for stretches at a time, and simultaneously would never dread having to hear from her the snapper-sutured lie “I have a headache”.
After this point, the more DTFable a woman becomes — which, in practice, means the more a man will push hard for first date sex with her — the less marriageable she is. A woman with a porn star look and Megyno Kelly’s aggrocunt short haircut will arouse a desire to rush her home and pile drive her through the mattress. What she won’t do is make any quality man with sexual market options reach for his wallet to buy her a fancy dinner, let alone a diamond engagement ring.
A smart woman knows where this balance lies, and works it to her advantage when trying to snag that perfect man into marriage. If there are glowing reviews to be written for the High DTFability girl, it’s that she isn’t satisfied with missionary alone, she gets down to business without a lot of insufferable wavering, and if you have even a lick of experience with women you’ll know how to spot her cruel wantonness and avoid serious romantic entanglements that could cost you your sanity and sense of self-worth, if it was precarious already.
Lift weights and do High Intensity Training like wind sprints.
There ya go. At the end of four weeks, subjects following this protocol gained an average two pounds of muscle and lost an average ten pounds of fat.
The hardest part for most people will be the drastic cut in total calories (most of which will come from carbs and a little less so from fat). Calorie restriction is notoriously hard to adhere to over the long term. But fortunately there’s a way to achieve the benefits of calorie restriction without cutting calories. Intermittent fasting – eating the same amount of daily calories during a shorter window of time – can readily substitute for the 40% calorie reduction in the study program above. Mangan explains it well.
You want to look like an Iron Pill-chugging Shredded Shitlord, esq., whose strength of body advertises his strength of mind? Now you know what to do. No more excuses.
Do you recall a post from last July featuring a CH twist on the Golden Earring song “Twilight Zone”, parodied as “The Shitlib Zone“? Good news! A reader tantalizes us with an update:
Shitlibbin’ up the studio zone at long last! Powerful emission building… -HD
From what looks to be a late 19th Century pamphlet advising women to heed the approach of The Wall and to abstain from the life of a dissolute party girl, (h/t @KaliYugaSurf):
“bad literature” 😆 50 Shades of Gray-style female porn has been around for a long time.
Our ancestors were wise. There was no “40 is the new 20” back then. A single woman at 40 has lost all her feminine charms; a sexual market outcast, for sure, but also a social outcast. The two designations tend to go hand-in-hand for women who remain unmarried and childless. (To a much lesser extent, this is true for men as well, but men have the option of several compensating social and sexual status-boosting pursuits that mitigate any marginal ostracism from remaining unmarried and childless.)
It was also assumed by our wise elders that women would have children by age 26, committing them to a life of home of hearth and removing them utterly from the field of courtship. Today? Eh…. not so much.
If you get the opportunity to snort c*ke off a girl’s ass, only one thought will go through your mind, blandly and iteratively.
“Here I am, snorting c*ke off a girl’s ass.”
The whole experience is meta to the max; audience to your own theater. The arietta will be accompanied by a syncopation of contrived eroticism, which nonetheless won’t much diminish its melodic exhilaration, because something beastly and primal is exposed by the indiscriminate consumption. But the passion, tacitly scripted, will in recollection seem quite silly the next day under the harsh glare of a noontime sun.
They haven’t seen the likes of Trump in their lifetimes. Johnny Redux explains,
Trump has so much game, and the general public (and especially libtards) have not seen great game in a White male public figure (especially a politician) in such a long time (maybe a generation), that they really have no clue on how to deal with him. CH, you could probably make a fortune as a hired contractor to advise Hillary, or Jeb!, on how to counter The Donald. If you do, of course, we will be obliged to hunt you down.
I *could* help Grandma Sociopath and Pop-a-Guac make headway against The Trumpening. (In fact, I have considered writing a post playing devil’s advocate and dispensing anti-AMOG advice to Trump’s Trumpenstruck victims.) However, it’s much more fun to watch Trump steamroll every goddamn cuck, cunt, and globalist turncoat in his signature jerkboy style. Best not take the chance that one of ¡Jeb!’s lackeys checks in on this site for tips and tricks that could stump the Trump.
There’s no way I’d help to slow down this shitlib destruction show. Here’s a taste of the fun (h/t Hackett to Bits):
I love it. From CNN:
“[Trump] added that Fox had been “extremely nice,” but it was too late. In an interview with CNN just before the rally, Trump said Fox News “apologized” to him for a mocking statement the television network issued…”
He has taken the most watched network in the country, pumped her and dumped her, and ‘she’ is begging him to take her back. Has any other candidate for any office at any time, anywhere in the world of electoral politics had this kind of power? Even Obama had to simper before he won in 2008.
Although in this day of and age of fractionated news sources no one medium captures attention so singularly as television used to, I also can’t wait for news that whatever tv coverage the Drake University event got beat the debate’s ratings. And for Trump for rub that in their faces too.
The annihilation of every pozzed-to-the-pubic-hilt American institution that Trump is spearheading is an absolute godsend for true patriots. Burn this mother to the ground and rebuild it in the image of the Divine Shitlord.
Getting back to the original point, I seriously can’t recall any White politician who has, or had, as much alpha male gravitas and tight Game as Trump has at this moment in time. The Rick Wilson clown car is at DEFCUCK 1 and the teeming masses of psychologically and physically disfigured leftoids are shitting their panties because none of them have been opposed by a man like Trump who so expertly wields the soulkilling Shiv, and who so masterfully understands and executes fundamental Game principles.
Besides presenting the best chance to make America great again, Trump is a frequently featured guest at the Chateau because he is the embodiment of a high level seducer, proving on a daily basis the effectiveness of the entire oeuvre of CH Game techniques. Shitlibs can’t stump the Trump because shitlibs have never seen this combination of
Power
Charisma
Balls
in one man. Zero Fucks Given means a million libcucks driven over the edge. Let’s hope it’s a long fall.
Megyn Kelly, a bimbo with a heart three times too masculine, has it in for The Trumpening. She’s too biased, and she can’t be trusted, so Trump was right to make her removal from the GOP debate moderator panel a condition of his attendance. (Trump has since called Roger Ailes’ bluff. It was beautiful. Trump is dismantling the legacy media right before our eyes.)
But did you know Megyno Kelly, the manjawed embodiment of gogrrl, riotgrrl, tankgrrl, de-feminized lawyercuntery, was rumored to have had an extramarital affair with a college student in 2008?
Megyn Kelly, fully-fledged narcissist and product of the post-America sexual market dystopia representing everything wrong with American women, looks awfully happy in that photo. I’d even say glowing. Did he slip her the D moments before that photo was taken?
I’m inclined to believe he did. Why? Because there’s a major alpha male tell in this snapshot. Can you see it? First commenter to get it right wins Bernie Sanders’ tree money.
PS I know some of you misanthropes are thinking “short manlet… there’s no way he was banging Megyn”. Have you learned nothing from your visits to the Chateau? Alpha maleness is more, much more, than physical stature. Short men may, on average, have it tougher than tall men, but if they have compensating personality attractiveness traits they can score a grimy giny giantess like Megynocracy.
***
Reader The Raven was the first to get it right. No hoverhand. This guy has got the Grip of Ownage on Megyn’s shoulder.
Other commenters pointed to additional evidence of alphatude. His forward-facing torso. The loose belt buckle which looks like he rushed to dress after their bathroom dalliance. And the impertinence with which he presses his body into hers (or hers into his). There is no daylight between them, thigh to shoulder.
Thumbs up, college bro! You may not always meet aggro Fox News “””reporters”””, but when you do you make it count.
CH hasn’t had a Trumpening Game post in a while. Check out this video of O’Cuckly interviewing Trump yesterday about Trump’s wise decision to forego the FoxNews GOP debate moderated by the extremely biased and unprofessional shit stirrer Megyn Kelly, (skip to 14:25).
TRUMP: Don’t ask me that question because it’s an embarrassing question…… for you.
That quip was deadly. It’s what I call a micro-reframe. In a pickup situation, one would use this on a girl who asked a personal question (say, about how many girls you’ve been with) that you didn’t want to answer. The pause before unloading the “for you” coda builds a smug anticipation in the girl that her qualification attempt will soon be validated. But, like what Trump did to O’Cuckly, you unleash this explosive little reframe and she will be left speechless, wondering where you’ve been all her life.
It takes balls to pull off stuff like what Trump does on a regular basis, but if you want to date young, cute, thin girls who have lots of options, you’ll need to find your balls.
Don’t be Fox News, the betabitch who begs for love.
