Feed on
Posts
Comments

A Giddy Reminder Of The Evil Influence Of Feminism

Apr 8th, 2014 by

For those optimists who don’t think lying liars and the mendacious ideas they propagate matter, President Barry Kenyatta-Downlow Obama today signed two executive orders addressing the so-called “sex pay gap” myth that feminists have been menstruating over the national discourse for decades. In one order, federal contractors will now have to report how they allocate their wages by sex and race to the Inquisition government.

Ideas matter. The public megaphone matters. The pay gap as it is exploited by feminists and their shit lapping allies is entirely explainable by organic forces manifesting from innate sex differences. Hoped-for UGH MISOGYNIST discrimination has got nothing to do with it. Once adjustments are made for variables like occupational choice, downtime, part-time work, leave, hours worked, and natural sex-based variation in ambition and conflict resolution, the pay gap DISAPPEARS. In fact, some studies have shown that, after these adjustments, women actually make a little MORE than men on average.

Why is this important? Because the policies that evil ideas generate are actively harmful to the people who don’t personally benefit from the lies. You can lay at the crooked labia of feminist ideology the consequences of futile efforts to correct the “pay gap” in the name of helping women “lean in”. Employers have a new pointless cost to cover, and undoubtedly they will shift some of that cost onto their male employees. They suffer, consumers suffer, government efficiency (such as it is) suffers. Social distrust leeches into every facet of life. And, in the THX-amplified CH-widescreen picture, lower male wages undermine the marriage market.

Tell me again how feminism is irrelevant. With a straight face.

Yet there are normally clear-thinking scoffers who, emotionally shackled to their manicured knee-jerk caricatures of anti-feminists as *derp incel bitterboys*, fail to grasp what’s happening right before their eyes. Or, grasping it, disregard the tangible evil in favor of fantastical theoretical journeys to the “source” of the evil, which, they reason, is the only recourse to eliminating the influence of deranged and feels-propped ideologies shaping government policy RIGHT NOW.

CH is well-versed in the pleasures of excavating downward through cultural detritus to find the root causes of feminism and it’s parent evilology Equalism, and of offering solutions. Being “anti-feminist” and being a “root cause-ist” aren’t mutually exclusive; if anything, these stances are mutually reinforcing. And, procedural note, managerialism is likely not the ultimate source of feminism; that dishonor more likely belongs to genetic changes brought on by NW European excessive outbreeding.

But yeah, go ahead and spend your sadistic capital mocking anti-feminists as one after another feminist proposal sees the light of day and earns public acceptance and protection from realtalk ridicule. Meantime, see how far talk about “managerialism” severed from the actual lying propagandists thriving within the managerialist system gets you with the voters. Nah, I prefer my shivs aimed for the solar plexus, at the filthy fucking liars pushing their gruel down a gullible people’s throats.

I get why some men dismiss the threat of feminism. Some are low intensity suburbanites happy to have settled for dutiful and loving frump wives who cook for them and pursue lifestyles totally removed from the sphere of feminist babble. Others date cutiepie sorority types who haven’t so much as uttered the word “feminist” their whole lives. Still others have been out of the dating market for ten or twenty years and have lost touch with the energies that guide women’s mate choices and the pro-feminist social lubrications which younger urban SWPLette women easily imbibe and regurgitate.

To these men, white knighting comes naturally because they don’t see any direct line from the easygoing women in their own lives to the feminist assault on innate sex differences and, ultimately, on Western civilization. And yet, when the reasonable women they know enter the voting booth, a majority of them vote for feminism-loving politicians, and the skew is especially pronounced if they’re unmarried. If that gives you hope, do note that single women are a growing demographic cohort.

The day-to-day details of the non-confrontational, marginally empowered, platitude parroting woman hardly impress as antidotes to seismic feminist lies when job purges for crimethink are becoming the norm and government policy is twisting into pretzels to accommodate femcunt poopytalk. Maybe you think-tankingly believe quoting a few Burnham passages is the panacea to the black tentacle goo of feminism and equalism corrupting a new institution by the day. It could be, but people respond better to real world enemies identified and engaged.

Women are natural followers. You attack feminism and ostracize its advocates to lead women away from its carrion call. You do this in conjunction with deeper exegeses on root causes for Western social and cultural dissolution. Every attack angle counts when the castle is under siege. The front line is everywhere.

Or you could derp about anti-feminist bitter divorcees and nerdy incels (characterizations which, by the way, aren’t true to life; the most joyous anti-feminists I know are happy-go-lucky players who get laid at will), and watch from the sidelines as yet another workaday stiff is tossed out on his rump by cackling hags offended by a lame dongle joke.

As a related afterthought, I wonder if leftoids understand the logical end goal of all their anti-pay gap agit-prop? Do they sincerely want a world where everyone, despite his talent or efforts, is awarded a $100K annual lifetime salary? Just level the playing field completely and be done with their griping. Some people are hard-wired to work no matter the recompense or status compression, but surely there will be millions of marginal cases who will say “fuck it” and drop out to collect the same salary doing nothing. And then you can kiss your comfortable cosmopolitan life goodbye.

That’s the thermal exhaust port of leftoid equalists: they never think through the consequences of their spur-of-the-moment feels.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Culture, Feminist Idiocy, Hope and Change, Ugly Truths | Comments Off

How To Be The Biggest Tool In The Bar

Apr 7th, 2014 by

Word of advice: Barring extenuating circumstances, don’t go out with a group of guy friends and one cute woman. You will righteously tool yourself before you’ve taken two steps toward self-hell into the bar.

The ultimate in toolbaggery is the group of mirin’, pleased-as-punch über orbiters who show up to a venue with one hot girl in tow. Or rather, at center stage. Because that’s where she inevitably ascends — straight to a social throne that her gaggle of beta pissboys have adorned for her.

I recently witnessed such a spectacle. Five men — not strange looking by any stretch, just normal dudes in department-wear — and one flaxen-haired hottie tucked in the middle of her men-ses, like a small sun radiating through a Saturnian Tool Belt. Everywhere she drifted, they followed, establishing without a doubt to the unbiased third party eye who was gravitationally in charge. When she smiled, her triptych of tools smiled on cue. When she pointed at something, they looked en masse in the direction of her pointing finger. When she laughed, they laughed uproariously. When she sat down, they encircled her even more tightly, parting occasionally to unwittingly afford her a better view of better men.

And when she touched the arm of any one of them, the rest shuffled and frowned with noticeable agitation.

But the coup de brah by a long shot was when the five guys enlisted the help of a passing bartender to take a photo of the girl surrounded by her eunuch guards. The barkeep obliged, and the assembled onlookers retched. When he walked away after returning the phone-cum-camera, I was privy to his eye roll and bastard grin that he signaled to a colleague still behind the bar. The girls in my company also noticed the entire scene as it unfolded, and politely strained to hide their pity.

No one respects a beta orbiter, not even women. Everyone knows a beta orbiter when he sees him. But FIVE beta orbiters hoisting the royal palanquin of a darling princess? Have you no shame, sirs?!

Not one of those men was boffing that girl, I would bet your life savings on it. Every one of those men *wanted* to boff that girl, continuing in the theme of betting your life savings on it. She had no interest in boffing any of them, and to this bet I would add your mom’s life savings.

What is happening to men of the West? By most indicators they have forgotten how to be men, or if they know they’ve lost interest in the art. They kneel at the feet of women, kiss her painted toes, and kowtow to her every whim. They gleefully sacrifice their dignity to public judgment and ridicule. They thirst for the pussy like lost adventurers lapping sand from hallucinatory oases.

Mind you, my complaints extend as far as my big-picture interest in preserving the culture which facilitates my poolside time. As a practical, day-to-day calculation, the abject fealty of my competition increases the destructive power of my game.

If you’re a beta suffering a lengthy dry spell, don’t expect relief to come from the accompaniment of an asexual female friend. Certainly don’t expect it if she is accompanied by four more of your male buddies. If you must go out accompanied by a cute female friend, leave your buddies home. Insist that any additional hangers-on exclude too many of her male friends and include a few of her female friends. And, for the love of all that is hole-y, check the game literature for strategies and techniques detailing how to use a cute girl-friend as a pivot to other cute girls you have a realistic chance of sexing. Because that’s about the best use of a cute female buddy.

It’s almost tragic how unaware beta males are of the latent male SMV-boosting power which resides in an attractive female friend who can trigger the preselection algorithms of nearby girls. Unaware, and incapable of exploiting it. But isn’t that just another dulcet note in the battle hymn of the beta male? Strike suicidally at one’s own breast plate, and drip blood until a chubby spinster with sprog on the mind rescues you.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Beta, Tool Time | Comments Off

James Franco’s Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Text Game

Apr 6th, 2014 by

James Franco is an A-list Hollywood actor who could have women fellating him within fifteen minutes with an inviting smile, so it would be surprising if his text game read like it came from a tone-deaf beta sperg. Or would it?

in case you didn’t know, i’m a really famous dude

don’t i look like a brooding james dean in my avatar?

i mean the # of inches you can take

autistic? or accustomed to easy lays?

he just has that “x” factor.

A normal non-famous man without compensating attractive personality traits would bomb badly running Franco get-to-the-point anti-game right out of the gate. But Franco is not a normal man; he’s famous, and Fame Game is the most powerful game known to exist in the universe. Franco has likely had no problem throughout his starfucked life getting laid when he wants, so he has been conditioned by his experiences with eager beavers that anything beyond minimal “name, rank, phone number” is unnecessary effort. His SMV is so high he could condense his courtship displays to pointing at his crotch. It would therefore be a mistake to draw lessons from Franco’s text game and apply them to the average aspiring womanizer.

But even the gravitational pull of Fame Game will yield to the electromagnetic push in the opposite direction of needy omega-ish anti-game. Women HATE HATE HATE desperate beta behavior maybe more than they LOVE LOVE LOVE famous men. It appears here that Franco’s charmless interrogation was sufficiently off-putting to ruin his chance with a springtime fresh Scottish lass. As a commenter put it, “Dewd gave her the social validation she craved, and is now in damage control mode.”

More than a few celebrities could use a dollop of game (as well as a primer in discretion). Some readers have shared stories of celebrities they overheard in the act of hitting on women, and they recall how surprised they were by the celebrity’s incongruous beta behavior. Being famous doesn’t necessarily mean being a smooth seducer. Presumably, these hapless actors either fell into their fame by accident, or they are so accustomed to women making all the effort to bang them that they regress to an M.O. of sheepish grins and stilted interview-style questions, perhaps resorting to handlers to do the actual dirty work of arranging face-to-face meetings with their hoped-for conquests.

Funny enough, the best part of Franco’s text game was near the end, when he wrote a curt “bye” to the girl. The threat of his disappearance suddenly loosened her tongue and switched her id gears from chasee to chaser. It was a helpful reminder of his incalculably numerous sexual market options.

Addendum

To head off the mewling nancyboys and nurse ratcheds menstruating about age of consent and “creepy older men”, a strong dose of reality: It’s as creepy for older men to lust for nubile teen girls bursting with secondary sexual characteristics as it is for teen girls to lust for older male stars bursting with charisma. That is to say, not at all. The necessity of drawing arbitrary legalistic AOC boundaries to thwart genuine pedophiles to the contrary, it’s totally normal and sexually healthy for older men to be aroused by the sight, scent and aural sphere of sprightly teenflesh. Nothing abnormal about it. Of course, whole edifices of cultural baggage to shame and contain that natural male impulse have been erected (heh) by threatened older women and beta males on the receiving end of the fallout from unchecked alpha male romantic pursuit and the delight of their pursued.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Alpha, Beta, Current Events, Girls | Comments Off

Abundance Mentality

Apr 4th, 2014 by

How will you know you have an abundance mentality with women? When you screw around on a girlfriend, or think about leaving her, and all your buddies tell you how crazy you are for messing up a great thing with such a cutie.

Despite their uniform dissent, you still do it.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Psy Ops, Rules of Manhood | Comments Off

Reader Mailbag: It’s Not The Venue, It’s You

Apr 4th, 2014 by

Email #1

Southern Man writes,

Sunshine Mary is reviewing a book in which the authors (both women) propose that the five core needs of a woman are:

to be cherished by a man
to be protected by a strong man
to rescue a man
to be sexually alive
to escape reality

We are of course skeptical of any advice for women written by women but this list doesn’t look too bad. How would it fare under the harsh light of the Chateau dungeon?

Heaven forfend, the Chateau is not a dungeon good sire! It is a temple. With a dungeon.

It’s natural and justifiable to be suspicious of romantic advice from women. As CH has explained at length before, the predominantly visual component of women’s attractiveness precludes them from having to grasp too much bowel-shaking reality. Men, however, can’t just apply makeup and slip into a slinky dress to get scads of attention from the opposite sex; men must learn what makes women (and competitor men) tick if they want a decent shot at sex and love.

Nevertheless, there are those rare fair flowerings of insight from the passive sex. The list above compiled by “Sunshine Mary” distinguishes itself by avoiding the flagrantly shallow and self-serving pretty lies that are the stock in trade of most of her sistren. But like most female advice, a heaping helping of contextual hedging is necessary to make any use of it.

Yes, women want to be cherished by a man… an alpha man. And they don’t want to be cherished too soon, too often, or too egregiously.

Yes, women want to be protected by a strong man… who makes them wet. And they want that protection in small doses, before it lurches into possessiveness.

Yes, women want to rescue a man… from his own jerkboy sexiness.

Yes, women want to be sexually alive… but that’s a symptom, not a cause, of the kinds of men to whom they freely give their love.

Yes, women want to escape reality… no qualification needed.

My advice… take women’s sex and romance advice with a flat of salt. Even the well-meaning ones.

***

Email #2

A reader channels Michelle Pfeiffer in Dangerous Minds,

40$ up for grabs in case I find your advice good enough.

Disqualification noted.

I’m 25 years old and I’ve only recently discovered game, but already found a wide range of instances where even just a little game makes a huge freaking difference. I’m still new and grasping basics, but the sex life with the wife has improved significantly. Yes, I have a wife and child already. Trying to get the nuclear family thing going to keep western civilization outside of America running (you’re all fucked already).

Anyway, long story short, I have to get a job as a temp at a junior high-school to support my family. No other options available. The school isn’t one of the worst, around 75/25 white/other. I want to be prepared for troublemakers however, so I read some about AMOG’ing, but all examples are in bars (naturally).

Chateau, how to deal with annoying brats, trying to take a swing on the alphatemp? Examples highly appreciated.

A physical swing? From 13 year olds? Sounds like juvie instead of junior high.

This is perhaps beyond even the cosmic ken of the all-seeing id of CH, but one thing I can pass along is what I remember my alpha teachers behaving like when they had to deal with a class badass (*innocent look*). One such teacher used to feign obliviousness to the distracting student’s antics as he strolled along the aisles formed by our chairs, and then in a swift movement and without warning would send his pointer stick crashing down on the offending rapscallion’s desktop with an eardrum-breaking crash, saying not a word in the aftermath but what was spoken by his glaring eyes. That usually did the trick.

If you prefer the subtler approach, try dunce caps (a comic trope that needs renewed life), making the loser “L” sign on your forehead, quoting an updated Dean Wormer’s classic “fat, dorky, and stupid is no way to go through life son”, or pimp slapping. CH takes no responsibility for any helicopter parent’s wrath which may be incurred by pursuing the above tactics.

***

Email #3

A refreshingly self-aware reader would like some tips on how to improve his anti-flake artillery. His Tinder/text replies are on the right (if it wasn’t obvious).

Passing along a tinder/text convo that ended in a flake. Fully aware that she never hooked very hard, if at all. But she gave a lot of shit tests which you might find interesting

Anyway the convo is for your amusement. For me, I am wondering if you have any tips for me as a 27 yr old w/ girls who are under 21 (can’t take to bars). Thanks and please dont use my name/email in anything.

reel… reel… reel….

damn! an old shoe!

My first take: You didn’t answer her shit tests hard enough. You were too forgiving. You started tossing in “fun” routines before you had energized her curiosity. That’s why your routines and leading questions fell like a led zeppelin. Also, you qualified her to soon. “You seem cool” should only be reserved for girls who have shown real effort to seem cool to you. But I think you know all this.

By the way, girls sometimes unintentionally drop clues that they’re liable to flake. “We’ll see if it works out” is one such pre-flake clue. The tiny clause “we’ll see” is one of the worst things you as a man will hear from a woman. She’s so noncommittal she can hardly contain her ennui.

To answer your question, think about what excites under-21 girls. What excites them is what over-21 men do that men their own age don’t or can’t do. Backstage passes. Shows. Artsy house parties. Introductions to movers and shakers. Cultural or urban nooks and crannies to which only older men can give her access. Yes, bars too. Ice cream? No. That’s a date you have with a girl you’ve been fucking for a long time.

I don’t think the problem is your uninspired venue-choosing algorithm. She’d have been happy to go to a bar with you if she was sufficiently intrigued by your company. Never blame a flake on a logistical imperfection that could just as readily be blamed on a dearth of excitement. If a girl desperately wants to meet you, a crusty public bathroom can suffice.

***

Email #4

A reader broods,

I have a question re: men’s looks. I know this isn’t as important as things like social proof and attitude but the thing is, where I’m not considered ugly, I’m also not very masculine-looking; I have quite feminine facial features and I’m very thin (working on this). Men who self-identify as “ugly” typically still have masculine features, just not in very good proportions. I, on the other hand, have decent proportions but not very masculine features. In terms of objective measurements like symmetry and proportion I’d say I was a 6, but I wonder: does having a “baby face” count against me, and how much? And how, physically-speaking, do I counter this? Should I play up an effeminate angle (not really my preference), or try to defeat it in some way (I also can’t grow decent facial or chest hair yet despite having very hairy legs — thanks mom and dad!)?

You’re thinking too much about this, like a little girly-woman with a little girly-hamster. Can you change your face? No. Can you approach more women and try to be more charismatic and challenging? Yes. If you do what you can theoretically do instead of complaining about what you cannot possibly do, you’ll meet women who will either love your baby-face or who will make up rationalizations for loving your face when it’s really your attitude they love.

About the only practical advice I could give you regarding your face is to abide the maxim “contrast is king”. Women will be expecting a trustworthy, genial fellow when they meet your baby-face; they’ll be pleasantly shocked when you flash your jerk pass.

On the other hand, I suppose you could go the plush beta orbiter route and aim for the bang circa 2023.

***

Email #5

The spring must bring out the brooders. Ohiomega laments,

Hi, liege. Imagine a man had taken your DMV test and received a very low score–almost everything about him was subpar in terms of its ability to help him snag snatch. How could he most efficiently go about improving his lot? What is the order of operations, so to speak, of male improvement?

Ok, this may go against conventional pickup doctrine, but the *quickest* path to improving your lot is through the weight room. Squats, deads, bench, pull-ups. We’re talking fast, right? In two months, you’ll feel manlier and you’ll look manlier. Game ROI is pretty quick too, but in my experience nothing will boost your outlook like a month or two of hard lifting. Don’t worry about “getting hyooge”. That’s not the point. Attitude adjustment is the point.

Now, if we’re talking about *total* ROI, rather than quickest, you’ve gotta hit the field and apply the core game principles on real live women. Efficiency-wise, that means:

Get rid of crutches, aka loser male friends, who are unintentional or otherwise obstacles to you walking up to women to meet them for eventual copulation as the good lord intended.

Find someone who knows how to dress. Emulate that person.

Keep a few negs, a few conversation starters, a few generic text replies, a few juicy alpha male movie quotes, and a few psychological games in your memory bank for instant retrieval. Trawl the CH archives for these.

Be a good boy scout and prepare for every woman to shit test you.

Have a pre-planned “date night activity list” in your head, which you will use for just about every woman you meet. This means you know beforehand you will take the girl from Venue #1 -> Venue #2 -> Home/Venue #3, and you will know which drinks you’ll get and who works there, as well as transportation options and distances from your 150-count bedsheets. Confidence is a side effect of tight planning.

Learn to engagingly tell one story from your life that makes you look good. Frame it in such a way that it seems you are reluctant to tell her, but oh well, she seems really interested.

Reader Mailbag entries are piling up. Expect some more in the coming weeks.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Reader Mailbag | Comments Off

Shakespeare Vindicates Chateau Heartiste

Apr 3rd, 2014 by

Perspicacious and numerate commenter “St” writes in response to this post about Shakespeare having his male characters utter fewer words than their romantic female counterparts,

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.

“St” is referring to CH’s Poon Commandment V:

V. Adhere to the golden ratio

Give your woman 2/3 of everything she gives you. For every three calls or texts, give her two back. Three declarations of love earn two in return. Three gifts; two nights out. Give her two displays of affection and stop until she has answered with three more. When she speaks, you reply with fewer words. When she emotes, you emote less. The idea behind the golden ratio is twofold — it establishes your greater value by making her chase you, and it demonstrates that you have the self-restraint to avoid getting swept up in her personal dramas. Refraining from reciprocating everything she does for you in equal measure instills in her the proper attitude of belief in your higher status. In her deepest loins it is what she truly wants.

It appears that CH, knowingly or unwittingly ;), stumbled upon a deep and abiding truth about sex, love and the erotic nature of women that was known to the literary greats of the distant past.

Heartiste and Shakespeare… truly, madly, deeply in ❤️!

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Culture, Game, Love, Vanity | Comments Off

Studies Provide Support For Dread Game

Apr 3rd, 2014 by

A series of riveting studies, referenced in this video from 7:15-11:05, examined the effects of reward, punishment, or a mix of the two on behavioral attachment. The reader who forwarded the video summarizes the studies’ results,

Experiment where baby animals are rewarded, punished, or a mix of both, for following researchers, their “mothers”.  The researchers measured attachment this way, and while punishment leads to more attachment from baby animals to the researchers, a mix of both, uncertainty leads to the most attachment.

Applied to game, this shows that while being an asshole is better than being nice, a mix of both, keeping a girl on her toes, will lead to the most attachment/attraction.

The pertinence of these studies to game should be obvious to the proto-illuminated. In turn:

– Young monkeys who were scared avoided the wire-constructed feeding mother in favor of the non-feeding, comforting cloth mother. Warmth and comfort were more important than food to fostering attachment (aka LOVE).

Game relevance: Beta males who think they can buy women’s love are sorely mistaken. Corollary: The comfort stage of game should not be neglected.

– A fake “rejecting” mother (a blast of air pushed the young monkeys away) increased the monkeys’ attachment. Frustration actually amplified the monkeys’ desire to attach.

Game relevance: The optimal game strategy is neither All Push nor All Pull, but Push and Pull working in concert to create delightful, tingle-generating uncertainty.

– Puppies who received random, intermittent love became the most attached to the researchers.

Game relevance: Relationship dread increases emotional attachment. This is a ❤️direct vindication❤️ of a core CH principle of intersexual relations.

A brutally truthful quote glares at you from the linked video:

…stress, including the mental stress of uncertainty, is an ingredient in attachment or love and that perhaps even manifestations of hatred (its polar opposite) somehow enhance love.

Where have you heard this before?

Indifference, not hate, is the opposite of love.

Of course, you don’t need the science to convince yourself of the merits of game. You could do the more personally rewarding thing and exit into the real world, try it out on women, and discover the power of applied charisma in the charts and graphs of women’s wet, yearning eyes and venturesome fingertips.

There’s a tangential point to be made regarding this slew of studies. The carrot and the stick together work best to alter people’s behavior. Those weepy liberals who decry “shaming” tactics take note. All access/all the time kumbaya self-esteem feels boosts make puppies and monkeys and ducklings… and humans… selfish little ingrates. If you want women to try and please you, they need to ride the exquisite see-saw of your acceptance and repudiation. Women may not *want* this, but they *need* it to feel the release of passions they escape to pulp romance to obtain vicariously.

ps For those claiming this “works on men too”, do note an important implied qualification: It works on beta men. Desirable men with options are rarely hornswoggled by women playing the same game they play.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Science Validates Game, Self-aggrandizement | Comments Off

Another Study Confirms Diversity + Proximity = War

Mar 28th, 2014 by

Via The League of Extraordinary Sadists comes another study concluding that diversity is incompatible with a sense of community.

Community psychologists are interested in creating contexts that promote both respect for diversity and sense of community. However, recent theoretical and empirical work has uncovered a community-diversity dialectic wherein the contextual conditions that foster respect for diversity run in opposition to those that foster sense of community. More specifically, within neighborhoods, residential integration provides opportunities for intergroup contact that are necessary to promote respect for diversity but may prevent the formation of dense interpersonal networks that are necessary to promote sense of community. Using agent-based modeling to simulate neighborhoods and neighborhood social network formation, we explore whether the community-diversity dialectic emerges from two principle of relationship formation: homophily and proximity. The model suggests that when people form relationships with similar and nearby others, the contexts that offer opportunities to develop a respect for diversity are different from the contexts that foster a sense of community. Based on these results, we conclude with a discussion of whether it is possible to create neighborhoods that simultaneously foster respect for diversity and sense of community. (spoiler: it isn’t)

IQ fetishists who want to bring boatloads of Asian to America are almost as silly as pathological altruists who want to import Africa to Minnesota. I say almost because, yeah, at least with the Asians you don’t have to worry about getting jacked while walking down the street. You just have to worry about your finances, bureaucracy and cultural institutions getting jacked.

So here’s another study affirming what Robert Putnam (Bowling Alone) found in his reluctantly published study about diversity decreasing levels of social trust. Studies are nice and all, but you don’t need multiple degrees and strict adherence to experimental procedure to walk out the door and notice how different the races of people are, and how everyone, even and especially hypocrite SWPLs, have a natural affinity for their own kind.

Maybe the leftoid lie machine is permitting these studies to be released now because they sense where the logic of their stinking ideology is heading:

Is this actually a breakthrough of any kind, or is it exactly the sort of thing elites will appreciate? The lower and middle classes have been well and thoroughly diversified now. The logic of diversity is pretty clear: the rich white/jewish gated communities should be diversified as well. But before anyone gets around to noticing this, there’s scientific reason to forestall such efforts. Sorry about that, goy, but the arguments we used to obliterate *your* communities don’t work anymore. It’s unfortunate, yes, but there will be tradeoffs. You know how it is.

Does anyone doubt for a second that the richest communities will ensure that tradeoffs in *their* cases go in the opposite direction from “diversity”? These studies aren’t challenging shitlibs at all. They aren’t even advances in our understanding (as PMAN points out, how hard is it to realize these things could be opposed). Instead, it’s just toadying to an elite that refuses to suffer the consequences of its own decisions.

Like Robert Ringer wrote, always look out for #1. And the elite are nothing if not practiced in the art of looking out for themselves.

Sadly, the burdensome diversity is already cooked in the books. CH predicts that within the century America will break up into regional entities, along broad racial and ethnic lines.

Cheap Chalupas would weep if he weren’t an android.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Culture, Goodbye America, Ugly Truths | Comments Off

Romeo Had Game

Mar 27th, 2014 by

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.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Alpha, Culture, Game | Comments Off

Duke Porn Whore Belle Knox Interviewed By Chateau Heartiste!

Mar 26th, 2014 by

The recently outed Duke porn whore Belle Knox (real name MIRIAM WEEKS) was interviewed by an intrepid CH reporter.

You can watch the interview here.

Ok, so she’s not much for words. Her mouth is busy doing other stuff. And yes, she really is a women’s studies major. Like millions of other women with useless degrees and six digit student loan debt, she had no choice but to turn to facial abuse porn to survive.

At least one member of her immediate family will self-deliver before the year is out, count on it.

ps MIRIAM WEEKS. She wants the publicity, she and her family will get the publicity, good and hard. I’m sure she can accommodate.

pps This story is less about MIRIAM WEEKS than it is about our leftoid, pozzed media who love to jam stories like these down everyone’s throat. I dunno, but I imagine in halcyon days of American yore a stone bold slut like MIRIAM WEEKS would be shunned by everyone, including the media, to live out her diseased days alone and isolated from normal human contact. She might not be a changed person, but the culture that enveloped her would be different. And what worse fate for the BPD attention whoring sociopathic slut than being utterly ignored?

pps I love that porn whores and obese monstrosities are the only real allies feminists have left.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Goodbye America, Self-aggrandizement, Sluts, Videos | Comments Off

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »