Feed on
Posts
Comments

The Universality Of Game Concepts

Jan 30th, 2014 by

Neophytes who have stumbled into discussions about game gently but persistently have their doubts allayed as the picture of human sexual dynamics becomes clearer, but one skeptics’ framework remains difficult to dislodge, and that is the belief that game is contextual, and that what will work for one man won’t necessarily work for another.

But this superficially plausible belief relies on a misunderstanding of the nature of game. Skeptics often wrongly conflate the idea of “pickup lines” with the plethora of techniques that constitute the discipline of “game”. They envision a world where specific lines substitute for conceptual knowledge and holistic mastery, and from this faulty premise criticize targeted tactics as unsuitable for this or that kind of man.

But without a grasp of the concepts, the quotable lines will never be more than parlor tricks with which newbs can trip themselves up and ignoramuses can spotlight into easily digestible soundbites for the amusement of their loser audience. One must learn the game concepts and the overarching strategy before applying the pointed techniques, or risk babbling incongruent nonsense severed from situational demands.

Commenter YaReally elegantly explains this universality of game concepts and the confusion that leads to the common misperception by students and hecklers of game that only a subset of men can benefit from game.

For ME, [this line, “there’s no reason to go blow $20 on drinks, you could get a lapdance for that lol”] works because it’s congruent to me. I set the frame early on of being the type of guy who would think in those terms. Bob the harmless nice guy from Accouting saying it would get blown out. Russell Brand or Tommy Lee wouldn’t.

This is why I don’t give a lot of word for word examples of my game and just explain the concepts/structure behind them instead. Not a lot of guys, esp who are just starting out learning, would be able to congruently say the things I say. But at the same time, the words themselves are irrelevant…the concepts/structure are what cause attraction.

My push/tease/disqualifier might be “sorry I don’t fuck ugly chicks. But come back when I’m done with this beer and you’re blurry.” Whereas Bob from Accounting might push/tease/disqualify with “sorry you’re not my type, I don’t like high-maintenance women.”

Both versions would cause the girl to go “omg!!” and qualify themselves, because it’s the concepts/structure that’s key.

Someone new to game will say, “Ah, the crass beer goggles line is the ticket to endless poon!” without realizing that the game is not the line, but instead is, as YaReally stated, the underlying concept of “push/tease/disqualify”.

Bob from Accounting would likely get blown out if he spit a line that called a girl ugly, and then Bob would go home and squat in his masturbatorium, railing online about how game is a lie and everyone who writes about it is a huckster. But if Bob was a wiser man with a more temperate disposition, he would return to the well of game knowledge and discover that women autonomically respond less to the precise semantical schemata than to the subconscious cues of being pushed away, teased, and shrewdly disqualified as potential sexual partners.

Bob would then realize that the push/tease/disqualify game concept is valid, but he needs to apply the concept with an eye toward congruency with his personal vibe and presence, and in conjunction with environmental constraints. So the next time Bob ventures out, he tells a woman she’s “not his type”, because she’s “too high maintenance”, and like magic he’s getting a better response.

The game concepts don’t change; the expression of the concepts change. If you were a car salesman, would you sell a Porsche the same way you sell a Honda? Of course not. But the psychological triggers that you use to get people to buy are the same. That’s the fundamental truth of game, only you’re selling yourself instead of a car.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Game | Comments Off

Picky Men

Jan 29th, 2014 by

The alt-internet is a strange land where you can find people who appear to have lived in a hermetically sealed Tyvek bubble since birth, and have escaped all interaction with reality. A recent example of this reality-cushioned subspecies is the obligate sperg — male or female — who believes, with absolutely no supporting evidence beside the whispers her hamster breathes into her brain ear, that men exercise no discretion when choosing a mate.

You’ll see this type litter comment sections of blogs whenever the discussion turns, however tangentially, to the horrifying and bowel-shaking notion that men actually prefer to bang and commit to prettier women at the expense of uglier women, and that this preference likely contributed to the evolution of beauty in women, particularly the women of certain races. On the Ugly Truth scale, mentioning that in medicated company is the equivalent of casually noting the vast (and increasingly puzzling, based on current performance) overrepresentation in elite institutions of 2% of the population.

But as anyone who has lived a day in his life knows, men are choosy. (I’m looking at you, Satoshi Kanazawa.) Go to a bar or a nightclub and AMAZE YOURSELF at the sight of so many men gunning for the attention of best in show, and how that best in show as judged by men are, PECULIARLY, often the same three girls. And then notice to your UTTER STUPEFACTION how so many men ignore the overtures of the less attractive girls, even at closing time when, legend has it, men become sex-hungry dogs incapable of controlling their impulses.

No, men are not dogs. Men are discerning dogs. Yes, men like to hump, but they do so with an eye for quality. Male choosiness is real, and while it’s not the equivalent of female choosiness in breadth or intensity, it exists, and it has likely shaped who we are today, and how our women look today. Intriguingly, there have been environments in the distant past when the sex ratio was so skewed by premature male deaths that the few lucky men left alive had a bounty of mate options that would seem incomprehensible to most men alive today, save for the über famous or obscenely wealthy. And since men, almost to the exclusion of all other considerations, prefer sex with hotter women to sex with plainer women, it’s a small logical leap to infer that, given favorable sexual market conditions, men will choose to fuck more often, and more vigorously, the prettiest of women from among all the women. And from that, men will choose to invest their resources in those prettier women, ensuring that their children have a survival advantage over the children of uglier women.

Rinse with sperm and repeat for a thousand years, and you’ve got a race of women who look as if they’ve been touched by the chisel of God.

And the male impulse toward polygyny needn’t be dismissed out of hand for this to work. Simply impose environmental constraints on the amount of resources any one man can amass and thus distribute among multiple women, and he will be nudged in the direction of favoring with his cooperation and sexual gift only those women who most stiffen his splitter. Even a small nudge in this direction can produce massive long-term generational change in the looks of women. An alpha male in possession of a few extra furs and stores of winter grain, who services, say, four women, will plow harder, and plow more often, the best looking of his harem. Over time, and patterned similarly among other men like him, this targeted ardor will lead to differentials in reproductive fitness between the women.

But enough of the theorizing. You don’t need computational geneticists to prove to you what your own eyes can see any night in a crowded bar. So get the hell out of your lala land, internet sperg, and join the human race. You might learn a thing or two.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Biomechanics is God, Girls, Guy Rules, Pretty Lies, The Id Monster, The Pleasure Principle, Ugly Truths | Comments Off

The CH Boss-Secretary Sexual Strategy To Reduce Income Inequality, Increase Fertility, And Reinvigorate National Pride

Jan 28th, 2014 by

Your lovable overlord CH is on record advocating the “Boss-Secretary Sexual Strategy” (BoSSS) to reduce income inequality and increase the fertility rate among the better classes.

Fisher agress with the CH diagnosis of the postmodern West that the end days of a civilization are characterized by an exaltation of deviancy (equalism) and a debasement of normalcy (sophism). We in the West long ago abandoned our barbarian ethos. In return for this “moral progress”, we have limitless pleasures of the flesh and material comforts. But we also have complacency, self-annihilating moral universalism, and infertility. Perhaps a return to barbarian values is just the medicine to save the West from a long walk in the shadow of the valley of death.

The patented CH solution to dysgenic fertility is to break the stranglehold of assortative mating by IQ that is currently aided and abetted by the helicopter parent ethos, and return to traditional pairings of powerful, high ability men with pretty but less educated and accomplished women. Call it the CH boss-secretary sexual strategy to renew Western vitality. This will increase fertility, increase total happiness, and decrease the degenerate SWPL culture monolith that is at the lead of decivilizing and ethnically cleansing great Western nations.

Silly reader, you thought it was a self-amusing exercise in hyperbole. Oh no.

Has there been an increase in positive assortative mating? Does assortative mating contribute to household income inequality? Data from the United States Census Bureau suggests there has been a rise in assortative mating. Additionally, assortative mating affects household income inequality. In particular, if matching in 2005 between husbands and wives had been random, instead of the pattern observed in the data, then the Gini coefficient would have fallen from the observed 0.43 to 0.34, so that income inequality would be smaller. Thus, assortative mating is important for income inequality. The high level of married female labor-force participation in 2005 is important for this result.

Science and CH… ♥♥♥ together!

Assortative mating is creating an Eloi-Morlock, or Elf-Orc, social stratification. People are forming credential-based blocs and seceding economically and socially if not yet politically. This cultural secession is reinforcing mutual ignorance, dampening mutual sympathies, and hollowing the natural fellow-feeling that is the bedrock foundation — the first principle — of any nation that wishes to carry forward in prosperity for the benefit of its posterity. Explosive diversity amplifies the stratification, and may have even been the fission reaction that set this immolation aflame and hardened hearts in its crucible of crisis.

The deadly chain of assortative mating must be broken for Western civilization to have a rebirth of greatness. The way to do this is the BoSSS system. BoSSS men will marry pretty secretaries or other occupationally “lowly” women instead of acquiescing to the hitch of convenience with multiple-degreed lawyercunts. The result of a generation of BoSSS is an end to the reign of meritocratic lovelessness, cognitive and geographic cocooning, and class-fueled hatred. An end to late-in-life spergs borne of the desiccated wombs of overeducated cougars. An end to the swarm of communications graduates with nothing to offer in a modern tech-centric economy. An end to… dare my heart speak it!… feminism and equalism as mass delusions rationalizing a world tearing apart.

There will be those who protest that BoSSS is dysgenic. But they operate under a misconception about how exactly women’s value in the mating market is calculated. A woman’s mate worth is not measured by her years toiling in grad school, or by her achievements, or by her ambition, or by her social connections or her business acumen. It is measured by her beauty, her femininity, and her compassion. The secretary with the blazing blue eyes, hourglass figure, and heart of gold is worth, in the abacus of men’s desire, more than a thousand meticulously credentialed globalist form factors. She is true beauty to the ascendent ugliness looming around her.

And she needn’t be dumb, either. Many sweet, charming “lower class” women are sharp as tacks, despite their mortal sin of having not willingly endured 52 years of academic mind meld to the equalist borg.

CH said it once, and says it again: It’s time to return to the old, true ways. To a courtship arena that paired established men with pretty young assistants full of adoration and admiration. It is the natural order of things, the divine prescription, when the starry-eyed lovely, already gazing in welcome submission, completes the act of her surrender to the powerful man above her. And in so doing, circles back to the wisdom of the ancients, and casts to the everlasting darkness the jackal harridans of the globo-femcunt credentialist collective.

I tell you now, break these assortative mating chains! Free! Free! Free at last! Thank God Almighty you are free at last to pursue love with a cute, worshipful underling and be a happy man again!

PS: There are plenty of reasons why CH rails against the obesity epidemic so passionately, but one is that it’s easier for high status men to date “occupationally lower” women if those women still have their exquisite figures.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Biomechanics is God, Culture, Dating, The Pleasure Principle, Ugly Truths | Comments Off

“The Wreck Of The Beta Male Cuckold”, Performed

Jan 28th, 2014 by

An inspired reader has put to song The Wreck of the Beta Male Cuckold.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Funny/Lolblogs, Music, Videos | Comments Off

Top 5 Signs That A Woman Is Using You

Jan 27th, 2014 by

If a woman you know isn’t having sex with you, it pays to be cognizant of signs that she’s using you for emotional or material support. You may not want to be used in this manner, so knowing her intention is half the battle. Even if you don’t want sex with her, you may also be uninterested in serving as an emotional sponge which she can fill with her tears.

Sexlessness is a necessary but not sufficient condition for female exploitation of male friends, but since most men want to bang their female friends, the unreciprocated desire for sex is enough for afflicted men to feel as if they’re being exploited, regardless of the purity of their female friends’ intentions. It is thus in these men’s interests, and for their mental health, to know when they’re giving above and beyond the call of a casual friend and not getting what they want in return, so that they can exit stage right while they still have a shred of dignity left to preserve.

The lure of prime vagina can cloud the most perspicacious men’s minds, so one must devote pointed mental energy to noticing any signs that a woman is using him for friendship without benefits. In my travels across these blown-out post-patriarchy lands, I’ve seen dicksploitation that would shrivel an elephant’s nads. The following list is a summary of the most common methods I’ve observed women employ to snare betas into unwitting friendzone or house eunuch arrangements.

The top five signs a woman is using you, in no particular order of certitude:

1. She’s a single mom.

That’s all. Single mommery is not just a promise of emotional manipulation, it’s a guarantee. The single mom in your life could be the kindest, most generous woman alive, but she’ll be unable to resist the succubus song of her sex’s prime directive: Extract resources from an available male to help her lil’ bastards survive. If a single mom becomes entangled in your life, it won’t be long before you’re shuttling her sprog to soccer games and sex ed classes. Many single moms instinctively know how repelled men are at the thought of raising another man’s issue, so these half-moms often pay their hapless beta volunteers in pellets of post-partum poon. Assuming attractiveness thresholds are reached, this is all well and good… until about three weeks in when, rubbing your knee after having tripped over yet another infernal toy on your way to the sexroom, mommy coyly wonders aloud if… oh never mind… what? what?… oh, it’s just that it would be a really big help if [robe opens to reveal one breast]… yes?… [uptalk alert] if you could take little Sarah to school tomorrow morning so I can get ready for a job interview?

And by then, it’s too late. She has her hooks in you. My advice: Single moms are short-term sex aids. Get in and get out before a fortnight has passed.

2. She’s a flirtatious flake.

Don’t confuse a flake for a flirtatious flake. The latter is FAR more dangerous. The flake is usually a one and done deal. She flakes, you never hear from her again. The flirtatious flake will reinitiate contact on a regular basis, filling you with renewed hope every time your phone buzzes with her latest ego-stroking scam. The dead giveaway of the flirtatious flake is the phony joy she exudes when anticipating the date you proposed — “can’t wait! c u then!!!” — which is followed by an abrupt last-minute cancellation. A few days later you’ll hear from her again, in full apologetics mode, and the cycle begins anew. If she has a real sucker in her hands, she’ll get you to meet her out with friends and buy everyone rounds of drinks… and you’ll leave later, with dry crotch and empty wallet, wondering if what you just experienced was an actual date or a group hug. Hint: It wasn’t a date.

3. She’s a date whore.

This is the girl who muscles in on the man’s prerogative to choose the date venue. She likes dating; she doesn’t much like sex with the types of men who will agree to her demands for endless dating. No matter what date you suggest, she’ll counter-offer with something that will invariably cost you more money. “Oh hey, I read about this new play downtown… I’d love it if you went with me?” Of course, there’s no logical procession from her date suggestion to her paying her way. If you agree to whatever exorbitantly priced scheme she has in mind, you’re stuck coughing up the cash. Unless you’re a total asshole (ahem) and slip out the back Jack, when Jill gets the bill.

There are two ways to smoke out a nascent golddigger: 1. Absolutely demand she meet you for drinks at your favorite cheap dive bar. If she balks or, worse, if she goes but sulks all night while trying to bounce you to a pricier venue, you’ll have evidence that she’s a user of losers. 2. Suggest an outrageously expensive date idea. If she jumps at the chance after having spent weeks evading your efforts to meet up with her, she plays tools for fools. Don’t try to stick it out with her; if you think sex is “just around the corner”, that’s a corner that never ends.

4. She likes to play “Let’s you and him fight”.

Some girls love to incite white knight theatrics. They get a rush from manipulating dupes to fight other men for their sake. These girls typically have very high tolerances for drama, so it takes a lot to rev their egos. The spectacle of a betaboy friend confronting another man for the approval of a fair maiden is too delicious to these women to pass up. If you find yourself precariously edging toward such situations every time you’re out with a girl, take it as a given she’s using you for emotional orgasms. And those are the least interesting orgasms from a man’s perspective.

Women can also play the “let’s you and him fight” game with invisible ex-boyfriends. She’ll insert an ex into the conversation as a psychological combatant to measure your response. It’s crisis and observation, and if you don’t dismiss her ploy out of hand, you always come out the losing party. Women who bitch and moan about exes on dates aren’t really needing your “support”; what they need is to see what kind of man you are.

5. She’s a self-made martyr.

The old damsel in distress scam. “Pity poor me! My ex/BFF/pimp did this horrible thing to me, and now I don’t know what to do… [bats eyelashes]… maybe you can help?” Beware the walking sob story. She’s a predator who strikes at men’s weakest access point: Their protective instinct. Many a beta chump has been swindled to do the bidding of a doe-eyed martyr expertly wielding the distant reward of sex. These women know that many betas nourish a powerful fantasy of winning the girl through acts of heroism and sacrifice, and they exploit that delusion mercilessly.

If you’re dealing with a self-made martyr, resist the urge to be a Captain Save-a-Ho. Remember the First Rule of Fuck Club: Fuck first, favors later. Sex can always be followed by favors, if you wish. But favors are rarely followed by sex. Get your priorities straight.

Bonus!

Top five signs she’s a true friend and not just using you.

1. She brings her own drugs to share.
2. She pays for the first round, and insists on alternating after that.
3. She never mentions ex-boyfriends or family problems on dates.
4. If you ask her about an ex, she’ll say you don’t want to hear about it, and mean it.
5. She genuinely surprises you with unexpected gifts, because she remembers that time you did something for her.

Double Bonus Round!

How to turn a friendzone to your sexual advantage.

Preemptively friendzone the girl if you suspect she has similar designs. Getting the LJBF jump on a girl will seriously fuck with her mental toolkit. Expectations UPTURNED! Sense her attraction isn’t quite “there” yet? Worried she might try to insert you into her group of friends as the reality of your animal desire looms? Tell her, “I like hanging out with you, because there’s no pressure. It’s good that I’m not interested in you that way.”

A preemptive friendzone is a sucker punch to a girl’s ego. What was once her romantic inertia will become her raging curiosity. “This guy just wants to be… friends?!?” Humor her attempts to drag love interests and exes into conversations. In fact, ask her for more juicy gossip, because you like hearing about all the guys who fall for her tricks. Agree & amplify. Brag about yourself, because now you’re no longer “trying” to impress her. Exaggerate your indifference to her sexuality; “I’m glad we can be this physical because it doesn’t mean anything.” Play it cool and play it with sincerity, and you can energize the sexual tension until such time that you decide you’ve “had a change of heart” about her. It’s the rare woman indeed who doesn’t fall for this convenient about face. Proceed to plunder at will.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Game, Girls, Guy Rules, The Id Monster | Comments Off

Why Are Women More Liberal Than Men?

Jan 24th, 2014 by

It’s hardly a secret that women vote more liberal and Democrat than do men. Even married women, while voting less liberal than their unmarried cohort, retain the sex disparity in vote preference. A study has found that suffrage moved the country inexorably to the left, and it hasn’t stopped moving in the degenerate direction since.

CH proposed a biological mechanism that follows from an understanding of the sexual market to explain the greater liberalism of women. As the resource-exploiting sex, women are neurally charged to extract support and transfer provisions from men to themselves to see them through the tough times of pregnancy and the raising of small children. To aid them in this purpose, women have evolved an innate (if subtly shifting) warmth for men who can provide for them and who show it through romantic displays of fidelity.

But when women become self-supporting, either by their own financial independence or via government largesse (which is in practice the redistribution of beta male resources to women), then the limbic impulses that help them connect with beta providers become short-circuited and redirected to charming cads and government growth. The cad serves the pile driver need while the sugar daddio big government serves the provider need. Under this arrangement, women can indeed “have it all”, (except for long-term commitment from men, which loses its incentive structure in this beta-bypass system).

Therefore, the liberalism of women is as much a consequence of their reliance on government serving as husband substitute as of their inherently greater sensitivity to perceived inequality or rifts in community cohesion. This theory gains traction by the evidence that married women become less liberal, ostensibly because their provider needs are being met by a real husband and the government has assumed the role of a malevolent outsider ransacking their intact family for tax money to be distributed to other women and their children.

All’s fair in souls and shivs, but this may be only part of the story of women’s infantile harm-based liberalism. The political and economic liberalism of women coexists with a greater female tendency to collectivism and religious feeling. Oddly, women appear to be both more liberal and more conservative than men, at least when the metrics used for comparison are sliced thinner. (And the hamster went wheeee….)

Researchers have (re)discovered that boys are slugs and snails and puppy dogs’ tails and girls are sugar and spice and everything nice.

Can disgust sensitivity help explain why women tend to be more collectivistic?

The researchers sought to examine why women are more likely than men to endorse the socially conservative attitudes of collectivism and religious fundamentalism. Both attitudes encourage cooperation with one’s own social group and the shunning of outsiders.

Women on average tend to adhere to social and religious norms, and practice within-group reciprocity more than their male counterparts.

So… women are conformist lemmings who get the vapors when someone dissents from the party line. Never woulda guessed.

“Females are more likely to exhibit forms of social conservatism that involve ingroup cohesion and outgroup avoidance (e.g., collectivism)…”

White women, in particular, are assiduous about dating within their race. SWPL chicks may chant kumbaya, but their revealed dating preferences say “white is right”.

Across four separate studies, the researcher found that those who were more easily disgusted and more afraid of contamination were more likely to be both female and socially conservative. The four studies were comprised of 980 undergraduate students in total.

WEIRD alert.

The link between disgust and conservativism is bolstered by previous studies. […]

But why do women tend to be more easily disgusted than men? The researchers think this can be attributed to evolution.

Men and women are both vulnerable to pathogens in the environment. However, the sexes face a distinct imbalance when it comes to reproduction. Women must bear approximately 9 months of pregnancy, while men’s “initial investment can be as little as the amount of time that it takes for copulation,” the researcher explained.

Women therefore have more to lose from mating with a bad partner. They also need to avoid exposing their gestating offspring to pathogens. Women with heightened feelings of disgust would have been more likely to avoid sickly mates and keep their fetus healthy, and consequentially more likely to pass on their genes.

Makes sense. In the environment of evolutionary adaptation, pathogens were a much greater threat than they are today in the age of penicillin and indoor plumbing. Disgust and its concomitant moral rationale evolved because it increased the chances of one’s survival, and the survival of one’s children.

Women’s heightened feeling of disgust also explains the quickness with which they resort to labeling men they don’t want to have sex with as “creeps”.

Disgust, in turn, encourages “the preference of ingroup members over outgroup members, because outgroup members pose a greater disease threat,” the researchers wrote. This preference towards members of one’s own group manifests itself as socially conservative attitudes, like religious fundamentalism.

“In other words, disgust sensitivity prepares individuals to have a negative perception of others who may be a source of contamination and to avoid them.”

If women feel more disgust, why do they vote more liberal? The conundrum is solved if you don’t conflate “collectivism” and “conservatism”. The two are very different moral outlooks. Collectivists have strong liberal tendencies, such as wealth redistribution and PC policing. Conformism, too, is today more a trait of liberals than of non-liberals.

What about social liberalism? Aren’t women on the whole more socially liberal than men? First, SWPL women are not all women. For example, support for abortion restrictions runs about dead even between men and women nationally, but I’m sure you’d find that in the baby-less blue cities, pro-abortion is the default position among women.

Second, social liberalism can accommodate collectivism (or vice versa). If the prevailing view of “your tribe” is that gay marriage is doubleplusgood, then you’ll happily parrot newspeak if it means strengthening in-group cohesion. And you’ll do this even if your sex possesses a lower disgust threshold.

Jonathan Haidt has theorized that disgust/sanctity is one of five moral foundations, of which ideological conservatives weigh more heavily than do liberals. I think there is evidence based on women’s greater propensity to feel disgust to question Haidt’s categorization. The disgust reflex apparently acts to amplify women’s social liberalism, possibly by providing emotional justification for repurposing feelings of disgust against ideological outsiders. If this is happening, as I suspect it is, then natural female disgust is, in the modern context, less a behavioral adaptation to infectious disease than it is protection against “infectious ideological opponents”.

The analysis gets more complicated when race is added to the mix. Black women are liberal, but their liberalism is driven by different moral and self-interested motivations than that which drives white women. The question left unanswered is whether the disgust reflex is universally higher among women or if it varies in intensity between the races.

Finally, we can predict that liberalism is ascendent and will continue its cultural ascent in lockstep with generationally decreasing testosterone levels, because lower testosterone among men putatively translates to stronger feelings of (ideological) disgust in men (akin to what women feel), and a stronger predilection toward feminine collectivism and equalist conformism.

In other words, the world is becoming more womanly and scalzied. Those who hope for a return to reason and common sense may first need to figure a way to re-inflate the sad shriveled sacks of the manlets of the West.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Biomechanics is God, Culture, Goodbye America, The Id Monster, Ugly Truths | Comments Off

When Asshole Game “Backfires”

Jan 23rd, 2014 by

Asshole Game is one of the best and fastest methods for stimulating attraction in women. But its raw power tempts risky overuse. There are assholes who overplay their hand, and lose the girl. Women are romantically dichotomous creatures, at once lured by the aloof asshole as by the wooing beta. This dichotomy exists because women procreatively require both the seed of a proven quantity alpha male and the provisions of a proven investor beta male. The tension of the female dichotomy is never more apparent than when she’s at that precarious six-month stage of a relationship with an intoxicating alpha male, and she’s starting to fret about a dearth of romantic gestures from him that would allay her fear of abandonment.

Wise players understand this womanly war with herself, and tailor their game to satisfy her dueling needs, (or until such time that the player becomes restless for new conquests).

However, asshole game is SO powerful, that even overuse doesn’t automatically kill a budding relationship dead like beta supplication kills it flat out. Hence, the nuance quotes around “backfire” in the post title.

For an example of what I’m talking about, read what this reader passes along,

I’ve been devouring your archives these last two weeks. Great stuff that has really been life changing at my tender age of 19. I was never a complete beta, but I did not have an alpha attitude that I look to adopt now. I wanted to get your thoughts on a text thing that I’ve taken to. In the same vein of “gay” and “…”, I offer up “haaaaaaaa”. With as many A’s as you want. Recent example from an old ex texting me the other night, after a missed phone call from her at 11:30 on a Thursday.

ex: why didn’t you answer
me: i’m out
ex: i need to talk to you
(30 minutes later)
ex: actually forget it. go fuck yourself asshole.
me: haaaaaaaaa
ex: seriously?
ex: you’re immature as fuck
(hour later)
ex: are you home yet?

Thoughts?

My thoughts are this is classic aloof asshole game, and her reaction indicates that it’s working on her. How do we know she continues to dream about you pounding her out? Because she’s responding. Not only responding, but initiating contact. Her words may sound resentful, but the fact that she bothers to express herself against your perceived indifference is all the evidence you need she can’t stop thinking about you. Women who are truly uninterested in a man show it by not showing anything at all — they tend to vanish in a quickly evaporating mist of curt goodbyes.

To the average culturally medicated passerby, it reads like your ex is really angry with you and that romance is the last thing on her mind. But to those with experience in the dating trenches, her indignation is a major tell. A woman’s emotional outpouring, good or bad, is reserved for men who matter to her.

Did this reader’s asshole game straddle the line between puppeteer of poon and jettisoned jerk? Perhaps. But there’s something you should know about assholes and their unusual pull on women. Beta suck-ups are rejected before they even know where they went wrong; an asshole can dump a quarry full of his toxic slurry into a woman’s heart and she’ll still leave the door to her pussy open a crack for him, based on nothing more than a slim hope he’ll redeem himself in her eyes.

Women give latitude to men with attitude, while earnest betas are swiftly disposed.

***

In related news, the Napster-founding asshole with expertise in the art of vanishing has somehow managed to provoke the obsessed love and unthwarted womb receptivity of a model. Will wonders never cease?

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Game, Girls, Guy Rules | Comments Off

The Wreck Of The Beta Male Cuckold

Jan 22nd, 2014 by

The Wreck of the Beta Male Cuckold, sung to the tune of:

The legend lives on from the Left Coast on down
of the beta they called “Cuckold Freddie.”
The cuck, it is said, sits alone near the bed
when the thighs of his wife spread to darkies.
With a load of mandingo twenty inches more flaccid
than the Beta Male Cuckold at full chubby,
that goon man and true worked his bone black and blue
when his wife and her lover slapped uglies.

The cuck was the pride of the 4channer side
coming back from some brony convention.
As the big betas go, he was fatter than most
with manboobs and a belly in tension,
concluding some terms with his wife of 12 years
when they agreed to bring in an “acquaintance”.
And later that night when his wife’s gina danced,
could it be the lost tingle they’d been missin’?

The suck in her snatch made a tattle-tale sound
and a tremor broke over her vulva.
And ev’ry man knew, as Freddie did too
’twas the twitch of desire come on her.
The dusk came late and his wife couldn’t wait
for the big dicked intruder to come over.
When all three were there he called himself “Bear”
as his wife pressed her hand in his crotch bulge.

When sexytime came the sad cuck came to bed sayin’
“Fellas, I’d like to now join ya.”
But in his wife’s eyes he saw his demise,
And she snapped, “Go wait in the kitchen!”
The cuckold bemoaned he heard sex noise comin’ in
through the walls two rooms wide clear as ever.
And later that night as his wife screamed delight
came the wreck of the Beta Male Cuckold.

Does anyone know where a proud atheist goes
when his wife’s moans turn the minutes to hours?
The cisgenders say he’d have kept his wife tame
if he hadn’t leased her out like a street whore.
They might have split up or they might have hate fucked;
but at least Freddie’s shame would be no more.
But all Freddie hears through his hot beta tears
is, “put a gag in his mouth so he won’t direct”.

Cuckold suffering tolls, Hypergamy sings
in the rooms of Freddie’s Mountain Dew mansion.
Bear’s black mamba creams in his wife’s wet vajeen;
Her asshole and mouth are for Bear’s fun.
And farther below, Freddie’s marital ho
takes in what Bear’s privilege can send her,
And Freddie will know as all swinging alphas know
it’s two women-one man not the inverse.

In a musty old hovel in a basement he prayed,
in the “Beta Male Cuckolds’ Cathedral.”
The blade shimmered twice as he sliced quick lengthwise
for the dignity that Freddie surrendered.
The legend lives on from the Left Coast on down
of the beta they call “Cuckold Freddie.”
“A sperm puddle,” they said, “dripped from his wife’s cleft
and ’twas that ended Freddie’s life early!”

***

A tip o’ the fedora to these plucky gents for digging up the pastiche of true stories this song is based on.

The original:

ps yeah, i know this is closer to omega male territory, but poetic license demanded the use of beta.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Funny/Lolblogs, Music, Psy Ops, Tool Time | Comments Off

Goodbye America: Juxtaposition Edition

Jan 21st, 2014 by

Via:

The ghost of George wept.

I’m sure there’s a segment of the American public — let’s call them dickless cucks — who look at this and see a vision of progress, an America hurtling toward a bright future of rhythmic world beats, Oval Office courtship displays, and white pissboys gamely pretending to enjoy their cultural annihilation. But those of us with a bigger picture mentality see a different harbinger.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Goodbye America, Ridiculousness | Comments Off

Wendy Davis: Iconic American Woman

Jan 21st, 2014 by

Chuck has a great exposé on Wendy Davis, the Texas Democrat gubernatorial candidate who’s been lionized by the mass liberal media as some sort of working single mom superheroine.

If your values are inverted, then, yes, Wendy Davis would seem to you an icon for the age. Her life resumé reads like a leftoid wet dream.

– Lawyercunt. Could it be any other way?
– Single mom.
– Crusader fighting the good fight against “old boys’ network”.
– Poster bitch for grrlpower.
– Self-supporting Harvard grad.
– Beacon of liberal hope in backward, inbred, red state Texas.

The truth about Wendy Davis is somewhat less heartening for her loyal spinster army.

– Lived with her mom for a while after she dumped her first husband.
– Relied on the patriarchy — her father — for a job as a waitress at the theater he owned.
– Married her second husband, Jeff Davis, who is 13 years older than her.
– Jeff Davis paid for her final two years at college, and then for her Harvard Law School tuition by raiding his 401(k) savings.
– The DAY AFTER he made the final payment on her Harvard school loans, the golddigging, scheming, sociopathic, hypergamous cunt filed for divorce.
– This proud single mom relinquished custody of her kid.
– In Jeff Davis’ divorce affidavit, he cited his ex-wife for adultery.

Heroic single mom, my squat-hardened ass. This anvil-jawed broad is a con artist and a leech.

Allow CH to drop some truly hideous truths into your lap today.

Single mommery is not heroic, apart from a few special circumstances (e.g., war widow). The single mother who has tragically and prematurely lost a husband and a father to her children is not a single mom; she’s a widow, and like any befallen widow her extended families and her neighbors will feel the pull of charity and rally to her aid, and give her and her children comfort and love. This will redound to the children’s benefit. But the single mom who cavalierly disposes of a good husband and father, or who makes a poor, tingle-inspired choice of mate, will not inspire nearly the same outpouring of charity and love from her families or neighbors. Her bastard spawn will suffer in part from this organic casting out by those on whom she expects to rely.

The institution of single mommery — and let there be no doubt that the equalists are attempting to elevate the single mom lifestyle to an honored place in American society — is a cancer on civilization. Single moms who are in their predicament by choice or by cumulative bad decisions are vectors of societal disease, bearing with them the rotten fruit of a new generation of misfits, degenerates, orcs and orc-incubators. They are not to be lauded; they are to be shunned. Ridiculed. Insulted. Shamed. Driven from the body politic like a virus, surrounded by healthy white blood cells and cordoned off from the functioning of vital organs. As a lesson for the others who may be teasing with the idea of following the same malignant life path.

But our body politic is weak, suffering from an autoimmune disorder that is incapable of identifying viral agents let alone expelling them before lethal damage is inflicted. Instead of watching Wendy Davis laughed out of the public sphere, she collects millions in feels money from feminists and their leftoid lackeys who excuse or ignore her malevolence with the same alacrity they pounce on those who commit the slightest realtalk offenses against PC boilerplate.

Wendy Davis is one woman — specifically, she’s one cunt — in the wasteland of a deathstruck nation, but the exquisite arrangement of her life particulars makes her emblematic of the times. It’s rare to find encapsulated in one gnarled specimen so many modern ills and torments and false gods; a woman that lies built. For this reason, Wendy Davis is the iconic American woman for the young century. She is the mudpie that the slouched beasts lift up and proclaim art. She is anti-truth. She is anti-beauty. She is death, destroyer of worlds.

Posted in Culture, Current Events, Feminist Idiocy, Goodbye America, Ugly Truths | Comments Off

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »