You can practically see the exact moment a tingle zaps her vagina.
The ponytail pull is a staple of charismatic jerkboys. This outtake is the best distillation of game in three seconds you will likely come across. Why is this so? Think back to this post describing the Fishing Theory of Game.
The shared idea behind all these pithy game theories is that women want a man who seems like he gets so much mad pussy that he can take or leave any one particular pussy. This is the man who “flips the script” and has women chasing him. Women love the man of plenty. Women are repulsed by the man of need.
The ponytail pull is fun, teasing, even taunting. But there’s a deeper subcommunication that speaks directly to the female id. The man who pulls the ponytail with reckless disregard for the potential of a withering rebuke from the girl is the man who, through his strong indication of indifference (IOI) to the girl’s reaction, signals that he is flush with sexual market options.
The ponytail pull is a powerful mate value cue; it implies to the delighted recipient, “This man is a man of plenty. He breezily risks my wrath, and my romantic rejection, therefore he must have no trouble getting women. Women desire him, so I must desire him. And, oh yeah, the thought of getting my hair pulled during a sweaty rut turns me on.”
A clearer delineation between alpha and beta males you couldn’t find. If you surveyed one hundred alpha males, more than a handful would confess to having pulled the ponytail. And those who hadn’t could easily envision themselves doing it.
One hundred beta males, to the contrary, would confess to never having pulled a ponytail. Instead, they would stare aghast at this demonstration of entitled, dominant, seductive male courtship display, and wonder aloud how it is girls fall for these jerks every time while they politely keep their hands off ponytails like true gentlemen.
Are you wondering how to maintain that “man of poon plenty” attitude (aka fornucopia) when your social circle plays matchmaker for you? Commenter mendozatorres asks,
“Women are repulsed by the man of need.”
So in a case where a man is being introduced to women by friends/acquaintances, does this work against him, since it could come across as him being needy?
It could, but it won’t, if you know the Way of the Charming Jerkboy. It’s a very simple reframe when you want to avoid the stink of neediness that does tend to Pigpen-ishly waft around the clients of eager beaver matchmakers. When you are introduced to the girl, lightheartedly break the ice:
“I apologize for my friends’ insistence on setting me up. They apparently don’t like the women I date without their help.”
This serves two subcommunication goals: One, you don’t need their help to get laid. Two, she’ll wonder what kinds of women you pull. And when women wonder about that, their hamsters can’t resist imagining some sexy, hell-on-wheels badgirl with zero bedroom inhibitions.
Poz Vox recently had its one-year anniversary (“happy voxiversary”… that’s one smooth portmanteau). A staff photo was Twitted.
Vox, as you may or may not know, is a seething pit of anti-badwhite “anti-racism” Judeo-Christian hatred. If there’s a Dindu Nuffin or a Gentle Giant or a make-believe rape culture victim who can be exploited to slander normal, heterosexual white men, the girls at Vox are on the case.
With that in mind, notice anything peculiar about Vox’s staff? Can you… spot the Diversity?
I see one. Lower right corner. Couple of asians in the mix, too, but they don’t qualify as “Diversity” in the way the word is meant by Voxian shitlibs.
Infamous Tweeter, @CAPSLOCKHUSTLA was up to the task of spotting the Diversity. He responded “FOUND IT” and included a helpful pointer:
Very relevant postscript: Matty Yglesias named his kid “Jose”. You can’t make this shitlibbery up.
PPS This post hit a lot of nerves. Matty Yce is that you shoving your porky sausage link fingers into a bunch of sockpuppets? Heh. Tell us, why did you give your kid your wife’s maiden surname? Are you a huge faggot male feminist? Or did your wife turn the screws on your nutsack? Could be.
Its provenance uncertain, an anonymous sage explains the Fishing Theory of Game:
It’s like fishing. You don’t just jerk your line out of the water as soon as you can. That’s how you get a broken line and lose an expensive lure. You jerk her in slowly letting the fish tire herself out. Once she’s sufficiently submissive then it’s time for the net. After that if you feel like catching another one then just cast your reel again.
You never let a girl control the line. That’s how you lose fish.
Mystery’s “cat string theory” describes a similar phenomenon of female psychology. A cat won’t lunge for the string if it’s just sitting there in front of her, but if the string [your penis and any proxies for your penis, like your brain or personality] is moving away or zig-zagging, she’ll pounce.
The shared idea behind all these pithy game theories is that women want a man who seems like he gets so much mad pussy that he can take or leave any one particular pussy. This is the man who “flips the script” and has women chasing him. Women love the man of plenty. Women are repulsed by the man of need.
I don’t make the biomechanic rules, folks, I just deliver the news, because a well-informed citizenry is an accountable sexual market.
Nobutferreals, the AOTM is this faceless, orchestrating German man from the years 1969-1970 whose candid photos of his mistress (who is also married at the time of the affair), along with notes he wrote about the affair, were recently discovered hiding in an old abandoned suitcase (zehr romantic!).
We know this because Günter meticulously documented the affair like a compulsive accountant.
Ethnic stereotypes — they don’t materialize out of thin air.
The story would be dull—clichéd even—without the voyeuristic thrill that comes with the intimate details: a married German businessman and his married secretary, Margret, have a brief affair from 1969 to 1970. Everything you see here came from a suitcase purchased at an estate auction 30 years after the affair, and it’s an utterly engrossing collection of artifacts.
So far, so alpha. But what elevates this man from garden variety loverJunge to alpha male of the month is the following detail tucked in the recesses of his l’affaire journal.
At one point, the man’s wife confronts [mistress] Margret, accusing her of disrupting a happy marriage. Margret is furious, and so the businessman then forces his wife to apologize to her.
And there it is. A greater beta male who finds himself balls-deep in an affair would cave instantly when his wife discovered his infidelity and confronted his lover. An alpha male has his scorned wife APOLOGIZE to his mistress for her accusatory insolence! That pivotal conversation as recounted by Günther:
Indeed, his notes reveal that his wife Leni is aware of the affair but chooses to endure the humiliation.
Maxim #50: The wife of an alpha male will stoically endure the worst humiliations while the wife of a beta male won’t tolerate his merest deviation from her impossible expectations.
In one of the first long notes, typed on a page from a calendar, Günther describes a confrontation between Margret and his wife:
[Roughly translated from German]
Monday 7.9.1970: At lunch Leni (Günthers wife) says to Margret: Madame, you are a lesser character, you are disrupting a good marriage.
Tuesday 8.9.1970: Around 10 a clock Margret says to me: You let this insult from your wife against me pass? No more sex, you can jump on your own wife. Whatever you do, you are not allowed to jump on me anymore. [ed: classy lady]
Later, my wife has to apologize to her at lunch on 8.9.1970.
That afternoon they go upstairs again to make love and the note ends with:
Devil salad is eaten. Everything is okay again.
Before you think this alpha male has oneitis, or is led by the dick by Margret, read on:
He gets involved with other women at the request of Margret who wants him to go on dates with other women, presumably to quell suspicion from her own husband.
There is Giesela, who Günther describes as “sexually starving”, and Ursula, a “big and skinny” 21 year-old who “looks really good. White boots, green dress, black hair.” Günther reveals Margret’s subsequent panicked jealousy, begging him not to fall in love with Ursula. He also mentions that despite him still being involved with Ursula, Margret fights with her husband and asks for a divorce.
When your wife apologizes to your mistress, and your mistress gets jealous of your other mistresses, you might be an alpha male.
And the questions linger. What makes a man document his affair so meticulously? Did he want to preserve the relationship to relive it later? Was this industrial businessman searching for a creative platform to express his love? Or merely the confirmation of his control over the situation, as he mastered the art of adultery?
All of the above. A man’s memories of his lovers and his sexual pleasures will be his most vividly recalled, right into old age. More easily recalled than even the names and ages of his children. A man is roused to creativity by youthful, beautiful women. And a man takes pride in his seductive prowess. This is the way of a man. Yes, a real man.
During one of their “business trips”, Günther makes a list of all the times they made love….
Wednesday 12 Aug. 1970: 17 18.15 1x
Beginning of her period (tampon) Initiation party anyways.
Tuesday 18 Aug. 1970: 15.15 -15. 20.
Yellow chair in front of the aquarium (sitting) 1x
Wednesday 2 Sept. 1970: 17. 05-18.00 1x
With beautiful music, resting afterwards
Günther wasn’t about to let the Red Army stop his initiation party advance. Now, if his mistress hadn’t been a sweet piece of ass, you can bet Günther wouldn’t have thrown propriety to the wind and pressed into the bloody breach, undaunted.
Günther’s testimony proved one of the CH maxims about the power of female youthnbeauty:
Maxim #40: A young, pretty girl is nature’s viagra, capable of exciting an old man who hasn’t seen action in forty years to perform on command.
Postscript: The photos of Margret the Mistress are poetic in their own right. Günther had an eye for fleeting beauty, and doomed romance. Look at these candid snaps. Overlook her dated hairdo for the full impact. Margret has hot little minx face, if ever a woman had it.
COTW winner fredmertz reprimands regular troll “james blond” aka thwack for assuming museums will still be around when the whitey race becomes a relic of the past.
No nigga gonna pay fo a.museum, specially one fo da white man! Only exhibit I can see is a statue of a giant EBT card. ”Is it true, daddy? We used to get money for nuthin’?” “Dass true Quantavious…it be over now. White man gone…”
On a social scale it seem like the next deductive next step – blend a justifiable Eat Pray Love narrative with the more visceral (yet unignorable) sexuality of 50 Shades and women will readily consume it. I expect there will be the same hamster spinnings of NAWALT and most women respect their marriage vows, but it still wont wash with the overwhelming ‘guilty pleasure’ popularity that 50 Shades exposed on a large scale.
Writers like Rinaldi and E.L. James have tapped into the Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks anxiety rooted in women’s primal insecurity inherent in doubting their optimization of Hypergamy. If appealing to visceral sex sells products to men, appealing to the inherent ‘you-only-live-once’ insecurity of feminine Hypergamy sells to women – and women being the primary consumers in western society, sell it does.
EatPrayGetPumpedAndDumped plus 50 Shades is the event horizon of civilizational decadence and decline. Once that Boobicon is crossed, it’s a rapid swirl down the toilet bowl. Give women the run of the place and the Swirl is the inevitable result.
I believe the Roman Empire in its waning years was also marked by sexual libertinism, especially of their women. Weimar Germany, too, before its rebirth under a patriarchal epoch which unfortunately insufficiently and belatedly weeded out the psychopaths who are otherwise so crucial to the early stages of revolution, welcomed the indignities of wanton women pursuing the alpha fux/beta bux (sometimes not even bothering with the beta bux) lifestyle.
A telling societal signal of imminent collapse is the glorification and commercialization of the worst instincts of women, and the denigration of the best instincts of men. Our women become like men, and our men like women, until an androgynous slop characterizes an empire wheezing its last.
For a small but portentous example of this radical change, just read the title of the latest attention whore du jour’s memoir: “The Wild Oats Project”. Sowing one’s wild oats used to be the prerogative of men, or at least the excusable offense of men, and this was widely understood by men and women. Now the modern aggrocunt and her mewling manlet sidekick want to assume the wild oats mantle for aging hags and urban brunchettes, while denying the same fun to men whose testes haven’t yet climbed north to hibernate.
The cultural message is unmistakable: The clit is the new cock. But this message is wrapped in a fairy tale with a very dark ending. Women can no more play the man’s game than men can play the woman’s game. Not for long, at any rate, and not without a gnawing unhappiness that corrodes the soul.
Commenter 7darktriad3 writes about his ONE POON-HUNTING TRICK that turns around recalcitrant girls,
Not strictly redirection but I’ve found a great way of yielding high % of numbers when you get this type of response:
You: Send me your number
Her: But I hardly know you etc
You: Your right we should stay Tinder BFF and chat on here forever and ever
Her: Hehe I guess your right – ######
Essential Game Techniques 101 should be required coursework for all middle school boys.
[The sexual marketplace] is beginning to favor the much older man/younger woman pairing.
I will illustrate. I am a 52 year old white man, and am currently dating a 21 year old white woman, and a 24 year old white woman; simultaneously. I met both online, thru a dating site. I’ve gathered from both that their attraction to me (I do look a few years younger and can pass for mid-forties, and this is a prerequisite I believe) is in their expectations that I am more old school masculine than the younger men they can choose from in their pool. But there’s another reason I’ve picked up as well – and that is the expectation that the older man is not part of the pump-n-dump crowd (little do they know) of which the predominance as of late has been making these women feel cheated out of what they consider to be quality relationships. What they are looking for, in response to what they have been enduring their entire sexual lives, are for men to consider them in a more serious LTR light – never mind that they don’t deserve it. Putting off a muted version of this vibe while at the same time reminding them of the overall beta-flavor of their respective man-circles has done wonders not only to score with these two women, but in my favorable responses from other under 25 female prey when approached.
Could we be seeing the response from women to game – in the wider acceptance of the older man/younger woman pairing. Time will tell.
Effeminizing Millennials works to the sexual market advantage of older, more masculine men who haven’t yet learned of the wonders of the brony, male feminist, and transsexual anime lifestyles. But nash2z hits on another explanation that may be more pertinent: There are some younger women who crave a rock solid relationship. Whatever the objective reality, I would bet that older men do give off a “I’m capable of, and willing to, form an adult relationship with a woman who meets my stringent criteria for a worthwhile lifelong mate” vibe.
By filtering for these kinds of younger women tired of the dating scene, the older man can increase his meet-to-lay-to-love ratio. Beyond this implication, it’s a hypothetical exercise whether the acceptance and utilization of game by cad hopefuls will drive significant numbers of women into the arms of older (or younger) men who signal their readiness for more serious commitment.
Five-star commenter chris marshals ¡SCIENCE! to support the theory that feminists are masculine women who use the ideology of feminism to rearrange normal society into a twisted slutscape that serves the interests of less attractive women who fail at extracting commitment from high value men. Quoting him in full:
******
Here’s a theory for you:
Feminists are a phenotypic morph.
Feminism is political-ideological weaponization by that phenotypic morph.
Polymorphism in biology occurs when two or more clearly different phenotypes exist in the same population of a species—in other words, the occurrence of more than one form or morph. In order to be classified as such, morphs must occupy the same habitat at the same time and belong to a panmictic population (one with random mating).
“Stay or stray? Evidence for alternative mating strategy phenotypes in both men and women”
This study shows there are two distinct phenotypes within human populations. Promiscuous people and non-promiscuous people. Promiscuous = low digit ratio=higher testosterone=short-term mating strategy.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25250010
“Feminist activist women are masculinized in terms of digit-ratio and social dominance: a possible explanation for the feminist paradox.”
This study shows that feminists are masculinised in terms of digit ratios=low digit ratios=higher testosterone.
This explains why feminism is about changing society from long-term to short term mating. It explains why they defend women being sluts. It explains why they defend women cuckolding. It explains why they defend and agitate for women to pursue careers and achieve self-provisioning sufficiency. And it explains why they try to change the culture to support these values and necessarily oppose their anti/inverse values.
Thus, there is no right-wing war on women. There is a right wing war on the short-term mating or feminist or matriarchal morph.
Likewise there is a left-wing war on the long-term mating or anti-feminist or patriarchal morph.
And here’s the catch: most women are in the long-term mating / anti-feminist / patriarchal morph.
In other words. feminism is anti-(the majority of)-women.
******
A powerful shiv to the bloated gut of feminism is to remind normal, attractive women of the gross, ugly, and deranged feminist women (and their effete male lackeys) who purport to speak for all women. Women are nothing if not herd followers, and if it’s made clear to the Normal Majority of women that feminists are unbangable fugs no worthwhile man would touch with a manlet’s micropeen, then the herd will change course and leave the losers in its dust.
CH is doing its sadistically fun part of getting that message out to the masses.
The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.
Masculinized feminism-congenial women want an unnatural order instituted that grants them the shame-free sexual freedom inherent to men while simultaneously restricting any expression of the natural sexual impulses of men themselves. Feminists want to be able to call all the sexual market shots, take no heat for misfires, and publicly excoriate anyone who fires back. This is the dictionary definition of insanity.
National Review, in a rare moment of ballsiness, also corroborates the chris/CH theory of feminism:
Feminism has become something very different from what it understands itself to be, and indeed from what its adversaries understand it to be. It is not a juggernaut of defiant liberationists successfully playing offense. It is instead a terribly deformed but profoundly felt protective reaction to the sexual revolution itself. In a world where fewer women can rely on men, some will themselves take on the protective coloration of exaggerated male characteristics — blustering, cursing, belligerence, defiance, and also, as needed, promiscuity.
Allow me to reword the conclusion of this NR statement for endarkening clarification:
“In a world where fewer ugly, unfeminine, financially self-sufficient women can or need to rely on provider beta males, some will themselves take on the protective coloration of exaggerated male characteristics — blustering, cursing, belligerence, defiance, and also, as needed, promiscuity that leaves them feeling gross and unloved the next morning after Jack has slipped out the back.”
The view is coming into focus now.
Loudmouthed feminists are more often than not:
ugly,
out of shape chunksters,
unfeminine androgynes,
older, Wall-victim spinsters,
spiteful, LSMV misfits…
who simultaneously loathe and envy the natural freedom and energy of male sexual desire. Because feminists are losers in the sexual marketplace, (and because they know it), they seek to tear down the organic, biomechanically-grounded social and sexual orders and replace them with bizarre androgynous dystopias that help them feel better about themselves. Their justified feelings of low self-worth cause them to lash out at men in the aggregate, (and particularly at lower value beta males), and at prettier, feminine women who by their mere existence daily remind feminists of their pitiful ranking in the hierarchy of female romantic worth.
When losers stop knowing their place, and begin insisting their betters are no such thing, and worse when the losers have acquired the power and means to punish their betters, you get what we have today: A failure to propagate; to propagate as a race and to propagate as a successful civilization.
Comment Of The Week: A Post-White World
Apr 4th, 2015 by CH
COTW winner fredmertz reprimands regular troll “james blond” aka thwack for assuming museums will still be around when the whitey race becomes a relic of the past.
[crypto-donation-box]
Posted in Comment Winners | Comments Off