Where pretty lies perish.
Feb 18th, 2013 by CH
It’s cute the way Russian women look so mortified when they stumble. Truly, the Slav is a feminine stock of woman.
American women have their own charms, of course, stumbling and laughing it off as some kind of binge drinking medal sweep.
[crypto-donation-box]
Feb 15th, 2013 by CH
PA, one of the dark right’s consistently quality commenters, writes at GLPiggy:
When working on obtaining permanent residency for the foreign spouse, you are both interviewed by an ICE agent whose job it is to decide if you’re a real couple or not. Applicants (US citizen sponsor and the foreign fiancee) are advised to bring photos of the two of you on dates and other evidence that you’re a bona fide couple. They ask you things like the color of each others toothbrush, and things like that.
The agent who interviewed us — I was in my early/mid 30s then and my fiancee in her early 20s — HATED HATED HATED me. She gave out an enormous Ivy League lesbian feminist vibe, and kept trying to trip me up on facts. My demeanor was one of amused mastery layered with crocodile-grin politeness, and I’d produce every kind of documentation she’d ask for. I was genuinely amused by the process. At one point she asked me with a note of exasperation “are you a lawyer?” She ended the interview by telling my fiancee “make sure you get an education and know your rights as a woman!” or something to that effect. Good times.
By the way, I believe we were the only white couple in the entire waiting room filled with hundreds of other applicants that day.
Having known a few European-background foreigners of exceptional mien who journeyed through the (legal) US citizenship gauntlet instead of just doing the easy thing and jumping the border, and having heard their stories of woe navigating layer upon layer of inexcusably combative cunts and sneering diversity hire ballast, I can attest to the authenticity of PA’s experience.
So this is what America is becoming: Land of the Ivy League dyke and home of the anti-white bigot. A degenerate army of feminist and racialist bureaucrat multicultists who not-so-secretly despise white men staffs our government agencies, top to bottom, front to back, floor to ceiling, cubicle to cubicle, shore to shore. The very immigrants we should be welcoming with open arms — smart, white Europeans — are the immigrants to which our (literal) gatekeepers are most hostile, preferring instead to smile broadly and swing the doors widely to indigent Somali tribesmen.
Way to put your best face forward, America!
No homo, but I would trade one million American lesbian feminists for one foreign-born PA. It wouldn’t increase my competition — that’s one million fewer man-hating beasts despoiling my environment and spreading the virus of slothful fatassery among the few remaining slender American women — and it would add one more ally in the war against the ideological perversion known here as equalism. And if you think America isn’t stacked and packed with one million quasi-dyke feminists, well, you haven’t been here long enough to appreciate the comprehensive cave the voices of reason made to the forces of treason.
America is no longer the country she once was. She’s now a fragile papier-maché prop containing nothing but wire hanger and air inside her. Won’t take much more than a match to burn her sad effigy to the ground.
[crypto-donation-box]
Feb 15th, 2013 by CH
Reader MrJohn writes:
I didn’t know where else to talk to someone about this thing I’ve witnessed, so why not here. Valentine is really a great holiday to spot the betas of the world. Here’s a beta from Sweden. All seen on Facebook. The girl (24) and the guy (about 28) has been dating for about a half year. The past months she’s openly called him ‘hubby’ on FB, although they are not engaged. She’s pretty much unemployed and has definitely gained a lot of weight lately. I don’t wanna post pictures of her, but she’s a solid 6. He looks a bit feminine, bordering on gay with his facial expressions. He works his ass off to please her. The typical Swedish guy I guess.
Looking at her page, she has been posting almost every hour of the valentines evening. And at mid-night she’s summing up the evening: (Yeah updating Facebook before giving him sex or any other trivial activity)
“Last pics to summarise our night saw this movie here, got 15 roses of my favourite colours, three course dinner and finished the day with slow dance in our living room. I have such a wonderful man. Thank you (name). Love you with all my heart and hopefully 80 more years of this to come <3″
– attached are photos of them together in restaurants, with roses and all that.
I feel sick somehow. Am I just too sensitive? Perhaps this is the way to do valentines?
What has sickened you, gentleman reader, is the phenomenon of the beta female engaged in the act of relationship whoring.
You are right to retch, for beta female relationship whoring (BFRW, sounded out “Beef Raw”) is among the most transparent of ego-stroking ploys utilized by undesirable or marginally desirable women. You really want to call them out but, hey, polite society and all. That’s why we have this blog; so you can say what’s on your mind with the kind of freedom that nowadays only naive, small children or cantankerous old farts get to enjoy.
Women of questionable sexual worth who have “snagged” men of higher value, however precariously, are frequently susceptible to feeling urges to advertise on the flimsiest pretexts the undying love their loosely committed boyfriends have for them.
The reason the beta female feels this urge is because such overblown advertising of her relationship strength (as defined by the extent to which the man caught up in her shenanigans lavishes her with gifts and paeans to her awesomeness) serves multiple evolutionary purposes:
1. It signals her fidelity to her one-foot-in-one-foot-out boyfriend. Many men will settle for women less pretty than their ideal if those women compensate by offering implied (paternity) guarantees of present and future faithfulness.
2. It warns away female poachers. If her boyfriend is moveable product, there is a good chance he will bolt at the first sign of interest from a hotter girl. Women love taken men, but their predilection to act on that evil female instinct may be suppressed if the girlfriend of the desired man can fool her hotter competition into thinking he only has eyes for her.
3. It stroketh thine ego. A girl with a well-lubed ego is a happier girl who will be a more congenial girlfriend. (Congeniality nullified if happy ego results in ice cream aided fattitude.)
4. It is social oxytocin (or proxy oxytocin). The hormonally-charged bonding that naturally occurs in the early stages of a relationship can be synthesized quicker by ruses to project the relationship to a point in the future when it would presumably be stronger and more committed. Players use a modification of this strategy to speed up the time to sex, called time compression, time distortion, or future pacing.
5. If the girl is a bit prettier than average, say a 6 or 7, and on the wall side of 25, the beta female relationship whoring strategy could just as easily function for her as a self-regulating mechanism which “tricks” her into feeling stronger love for her boyfriend than she might in actuality feel, thus hindering any impulse she might have to trade up and risk a sure thing. Women have a more powerful “trading up” urge than do men, and this instinct can get them in trouble if they don’t have the self-discipline to know when they have a good thing and act accordingly.
Relationship whoring is essentially a technique employed by lower quality females for discouraging the competition and for encouraging the fence-sitting boyfriend to discard his fantasy of scouring the field for a hotter replacement. It can also serve to push a woman closer to a beta boyfriend so that she does not ruin herself on a perpetual hunt for commitment from an elusive alpha male.
If you doubt the efficacy of this strategy, here’s a thought experiment. Tell me, as a man, given two women of equal facial and body attractiveness, would you find it harder to dump or cheat on a woman who was emotionally distant and giving little indication she was interested in an LTR, or harder to dump or cheat on a woman who professed your mutual love to the world and tacitly confessed her utter devotion to you?
I mean, unlike me, assume you are a non-sociopath in the above thought experiment.
You may ask why one does not nearly as often witness this vile practice of BFRW from hot girls, or from very ugly girls.
Well, in the first case, hot girls have more options. They are thus less likely within any given relationship to feel as urgent a need to restrict their own choices by advertising their status as taken women. They are also less apt to feel insecurity about their boyfriends’ levels of commitment, (men are way more willing to stick around and invest if the lady is a champ), and they are less afraid of competition. (The threat of competition that would arise by dating a desirable alpha male is counteracted by the reduced threat of competition from being better looking than most of her female peers.)
In the second case, uglier girls (4s and under) don’t resort so much to the BFRW strategy because they don’t generally date men who are of sufficient sexual market value to entice female interlopers. The ugly girl is with a low value man, and nobody wants either of them, least of all themselves, despite the alacrity to which they resign themselves to their moribund romantic fate.
Middling girls are the ones who most benefit from BEEF RAW. Facebook is filled with 5s, 6s and 7s promoting pics of their candlelit Valentines dinners with herbish boyfriends looking for all the world like they’d rather be gunning down starships in an MMO.
What’s especially revealing about the BFRW subculture is that a man can indirectly appraise his own SMV by his inclusion or absence from BFRW antics. If your girlfriend has posted pics of you and her in all manner of romantic obsequiousness, you are probably a beta male with just enough SMV to avoid involuntary celibacy. If, in contrast, your girlfriend admirably restrains herself from the lure of online attention whoring and shouting your abject devotion to the heart of the world, you are probably an alpha male dating a good-looking lady of character. Hang up your player vestments, because…….. hahaha, who am I kidding!? You were gaming in your mama’s womb (stealing her resources) and you’ll be gaming till your last breath leaves you.
So, no, reader, this is not the way to do Valentine’s Day, unless you are a beta who doesn’t mind putting up with suffocating female crap and scaring away hotter girls who might be future conquests. Just get her a Skittles bag, enjoy her everlasting love, and be happy you aren’t getting pushed off-course your program to maintain relationship limbo in perpetuity.
[crypto-donation-box]
Feb 14th, 2013 by CH
What happened to the Nordics? Once a virile, conquering race of people who struck fear in the hearts of enemies, they have been reduced to a feminist utopia of sniveling beta males who are encouraged to pee sitting down and aggro women who’d rather go clubbing with earthy foreign invaders.
How could a race of man fall so low, so fast?
In the quest for an answer to this great mystery of mass manboobization, a commenter over at Parapundit serves this up:
I suspect the Scandinavians with the strongest temperaments left long ago as Vikings, same as that the bravest Englishmen left for the colonies.
The only ones who are left are the descendants of the guys who stayed home to weave with the womenfolk.
Or pule about “white privilege”.
Yes, I think there is something to this hypothesis. The alpha males of North and West Europe either moved away or died off in endless wars and pillages, and now their homelands are repositories of soft-tittied beta males.
There’s no denying that beta male skewed societies are nice places to live. Scandinavia enjoys high standards of living, low crime (until recently), a plethora of comfort-maximizing gadgets, good-looking women, and generally non-dictatorial government (until recently). As poolside (or hot springs-side) countries go, the Norselands are right up there with the most pampering of them.
So, beta male countries > alpha male countries.
But here’s the catch. Too many betas and no alphas makes Jakob a plush target.
Pure speculation, but it has bite… a nation needs its alpha males to keep the manboobery impulses of its softer, kinder, gentler beta males in check. Otherwise, some other nation’s alpha males will fill the vacuum left by the real or cultural disappearance of the native alphas, waltzing in to do the job because the native betas decided open borders to a whole world of vengeful, antagonistic losers is smart policy.
Exhibit A: Multiculturalism. Who pushes this shit? The descendants of Viking berserkers? No. Just look at the advocates of masochistic, self-annihilating ideologies and you will see a blubberers’ row of pudgy, chipmunk-cheeked herblings, snarky hunchbacks, watery eyed dweebs, space cadet neohippies, formless male feminists and, on the other side of the gender bender ledger, manjawed clitdicks, bullheaded warboars, jet-fueled rationalization hamsters, mustachioed grievance whores and shameless status seekers.
The beta male’s greatest strengths — his cooperativeness, friendliness, credulity, magnanimity, trust and openness — are also his nation’s undoing when allowed to express unopposed. He needs the wariness, leadership, skepticism, protectiveness, fighting spirit and stone cold instinct for survival of his brother alphas to prevent him from imploding into a blob of depraved navel-gazing, hoisting his red rump for any and all who’d love nothing more than to sharpen their knives in his flesh and lube their cocks in his forgiving bottom. Exhibit B.
A nation of tops is Zimbabwe. A nation of bottoms is raped into the history books. The West would be wise to reverse course for the middle ground.
Finishing off on a positive note, the system may be self-correcting. Ironically, feminism is likely selecting for the sexual success of more aggressive, high testosterone alphas. The removal of societal constraints on female sexuality allows for the flourishing of women’s hypergamous impulses, and women, adorable hypocrites that they are, can’t help but defy their open claims to the contrary to prefer sensitive betas, and instead swoonly spread for the love of anti-feminist men strong in mind and body.
The self-correction is not guaranteed, and for this glaring reason: widely available, cheap contraceptives and abortifacients. A turn to alpha male sexual success does not necessarily mean a turn to alpha male procreative success, as it would have in the past. It could be that the West is currently experiencing the worst of all worlds: feminism-abetted unfettered female sexuality coupled with hamster tingling for irresponsible cads and migrant males.
Is this post speculative? Yes. Did you feel a shiver of omen in these words? I bet you did. Stay tuned.
[crypto-donation-box]
Feb 14th, 2013 by CH
A reader celebrates the holiday of love:
I won’t bore you with my long story. Ex of 8 years cheated, dumped me, I learned about game and Alpha Males, started being awesome. She came running back, I backslide by banging her for a few months while seeing other women too. Learned she banged two of my friends. Was an idiot and let her end things.
I’m doing ok now, teaching myself to destroy my enemies and relentlessly chase my dreams. Can’t help but be irritated at this callous bitch and the shitty friends who chose her used up vaj over friendship. I’m moving on, [ed: are you sure?] but there is one thing I really wanna do…bang her sister.
Sister is younger than her by 5 years, looked up to me in her teens, isn’t my biggest fan after the breakup, but when in the same room we’re friendly. What angle can I use to try and seal the deal and destroy my ex for good.
Don’t you love a heartwarming Valentine’s Day story?
First of all, you’re not over your ex if you want to “destroy her for good”. That said, I know the feeling of exacted vengeance, and it feels good. Banging her sister would certainly do the trick, although there are easier ways to rain pain upon your ex-flame. (Ya know, just letting her see you in the company of a hotter girl would work, too, and without inviting all that messy familial shit.)
Women are naturally competitive, though they may sweetly claim otherwise, so I’ve no doubt your ex’s sister has at times entertained the thought of stealing you for herself. Now whether she still entertains that thought is open to question. I get the vibe from your email that you didn’t comport yourself in an attractive, aloofly alpha manner during your drawn-out breakup.
How about this angle: Try innuendo. Plant the seed of oblique romance and tell her a variation on these words: “Your sister is a great person, despite flaws we all share. It didn’t work out, but that’s for the best. When I was with her, there was often… someone else on my mind.”
Linger, linger, aaaaaand… walk off. Return another day to escalate the flirtation. Poison the sisterly well by absently remarking on this or that negative comment your ex made about her sister, true or not. Wonder aloud if your ex ever made moves on her sister’s boyfriends, because, ahhh, forget it… ok, ok, there was that one time she mentioned something weird about dancing with Kevin… yeah, yeah, you figured it was her Kevin your ex was talking about.
You get the idea, champ. Whatever you do, DO NOT tip your hand in the slightest that your pursuit is driven by butthurtness. You must remain as cool and calculating as you were, presumably, when you first seduced your ex.
***
Reader #2 asks:
From a transcipt on Obama’s State of the Union speech last night:
“And we’ll work to strengthen families by removing the financial deterrents to marriage for low-income couples and do more to encourage fatherhood, because what makes you a man isn’t the ability to conceive a child, it’s having the courage to raise one. And we want to encourage that. We want to help that.”
Your thoughts?
Nice platitudes. Prepare for wallet raping. Because wallet raping is all this present day crop of pols knows how to do.
***
Reder #3 wonders about girls and horses (horse cock sold separately):
I continue to meet and (sometimes) date females who are into riding horses. Sometimes they own the horses… sometimes they lease them, sometimes they just ‘rent them’. However, as I continue to meet more of the horse girls, the more convinced I am that something just isn’t right.
Unfortunately, I live in an affluent area in the county where sometimes the cost of the horse exceeds the cost of the house people live in, and they cherish the horse more than anything else.
Some help for us guys who continue to run into them? Are there any stable ( ha ha) horse chicks out there? Should I continue to date them and see where it goes? Have you had any experience yourself?
A < snarky fat feminist who thinks she’s clever >metric fuckton< / snarky fat feminist who thinks she’s clever > has been written about the love pretty girls have for horsemeat, ahem, cantoring stallions. Theories abound, and you can search for them at your nearest internet kiosk. My personal favorite theory is that the horse is a surrogate for the exciting badboy: dangerously explosive power tamed precariously under her tender tutelage. The horse evokes her nurturance instinct, her desire to monopolize and channel male (or animal) power, and her thrill for wild, unpredictable beasts with soulful brown eyes.
Remember, folks, we gave this gender the vote!
I’ve been around girls who either had family-owned horses or went horse riding semi-regularly. Very loosely, they tend to favor hard-charging, elitist men, kind of like their horses. Some of the older horse-loving women are closet lesbians, but the younger ones are hetero and usually feminine. Psychologically, they are different than cat lovers with respect to their propensity for drama; the cat ladies have it in spades. Other than that, further stereotyping eludes. Too many crazy SWPLs have clouded my ability to discern extra special craziness in female sub genera.
***
Reader #4 has lost his taste for his womenfolk:
So, I’ve dated lots of girls in life, and I’ve dumped most of them. Mostly, they’ve been lunatics, liars, and leeches.
In time, I started dating other ethnicities. Eventually, I married an asian. I’m caucasian.
I see lots of 7s and 8s these days, and they’re mostly caucasian. But for some reason–for some strange reason–every time I see a caucasian chick, I’m filled with disgust and I’m repulsed on some levels. Why? I’m not a racist. I’m not a liberal white self-hating kind of a guy. It’s just that I’m “formed” in this way. Something compells my subconscious to say “she’s worthy, she’s cool” if she’s from some other exotic locale. But my own white skin? I just don’t trust it.
Thoughts?
What’s happened to me?
The troll is strong in this email. But, it’s soon to be Valentine’s Day, and I’m feeling gullible.
Some minority of people in any race probably have a limbic disposition for other-race mates. I dunno the number. Say, 5%. These peeps, of whom you may be one, are particularly aroused by exotic women, and in particular naturally feminine exotic women, such as the asian. It could be nothing more than that.
Or, you may have had a damagingly bad experience with a white woman and the event left you with a repulsing psychological imprint which redounds to all white women.
Whichever it is, I’m not sure why I included your email in this mailbag, except perhaps to throw stinky chum into the commenter water. And this is why National Review won’t annex my talents.
***
Reader #5 would like to know how to deflect attention from a girl he doesn’t care for:
Been running game for a couple of months. Seeing some good results but also interest from the wrong areas. One girl, a high 7, is obsessive. Just for fun, what’s the most beta set of moves I could pull to make her stop feeling attraction?
Get caught fucking a dude in a furry suit.
Well, you asked.
For real, just stop talking to her. If she’s not the psycho sort, she’ll eventually take the hint and cry it out in her dim bedroom alone.
But, if you don’t have the patience to wait it out, and kind of like having her around for pivot reasons, I suggest the following betatization program:
1. Pretend every second of your day you are hiding from alien probes. Sit hunched, look nervously around the room, cross your arms and legs, hold your drink up to your nose, shudder a lot, shuffle, hang your head, spaz out at hearing loud noises, cry for no reason, look at your shoes when you speak, announce that flourescent lighting scares you.
2. Confess that you love her. Make sure to sound as nervous as possible. Apply fake sweat beads to your forehead. Tell her you wrote her a poem, and would like to read it aloud. When she screws up her face, cry. Whine that you just knew she wouldn’t like it.
3. Confide to her that you’ve been having erectile dysfunction problems. Say that you don’t mind telling her because you feel so close to her.
4. Constantly accuse her of seeing other men. “Were you with somebody yesterday?” “Who’s that guy? You know him?” “Did you sleep with him?” “Why do you have so many guy friends?” “Don’t you think it’s weird that you talk to other men besides me?”
5. Ask her if she loves you. Ask her twenty more times until she gives an answer that is acceptably foul to you.
6. Espouse feminism.
There are plenty more ball-shriveling tactics, but these should do the trick. If they don’t, you are probably lying that she is a “high 7″. Fat, desperate loser would be my guess, because no woman with a modicum of sexual value would be able to withstand that beta onslaught for long without retching.
[crypto-donation-box]
Feb 13th, 2013 by CH
Hugs is back in the news, and I can’t resist his mewling charms. So sue me.
Two articles of note. First, a Jezebel twisted paean to May-December romances penned by The Matriarchy’s First Lapdog himself.
Age Is Never Just a Number: How Girls Got Older Men/Younger Women Right
Though “One Man’s Trash” has been the most-discussed installment of this season (and perhaps of the entire show), much of the commentary has focused on the mind-blowingly insipid suggestion that a woman who looks like Lena Dunham doesn’t “deserve” a man who looks like Patrick Wilson. The focus on the imagined attractiveness disparity between the two actors misses an equally meaningful plot line: the appeal and the challenge of age-disparate relationships. […]
Tellingly, Hannah asks Joshua how old he is before she even knows his name: that Joshua is so much older seems to be an inextricable part of his appeal. The doctor’s affluence and handsomeness and stability are obvious, but Hannah seems more drawn by the age gap than anything else. Joshua, meanwhile, is fascinated, if a little bewildered by her boldness. Though a few male writers found the hook-up totally implausible, the mutual attraction is both believable and instantly familiar.
So Hugs is saying here that it’s totally normal for Lena Dunham’s homely character to be attracted to a high status man 15 years her senior. Ok, for a Hugo Schwyzer mental burp, this shows a reasonable grasp of the reality of sex differences in mate preference. But….
The storyline works because we live in a world where 42 year-old men are taught to find 24 year-old women more appealing than their own female peers.
Ah, that’s the old feminist water carrier we’ve come to know and loathe. Hugs, you are such a darling rimjobber. Do you even believe the runny shit you expectorate, or is it all a dog and fatty show for the benefit of your paying feminist overcunts? To ask the question is to mock you.
Like feminists, Hugo shares a propensity for boldly contradicting himself within the span of two sentences. In the confines of Hug’s hugbox, it’s normal for women to be attracted to older men, but “””society””” has to teach older men to be attracted to younger women. Women’s desires = natural, normal. Men’s desires = unnatural, societally conditioned.
It could never be the case for a felching manboob like Hugs who has sold his soul to the succubus that older men’s attraction for younger women is natural. Or that maybe… just maybe… the innate desires of both men and women, however divergent, are natural and normal and biologically hard-wired.
Yes, hard-wired, Hugo. From birth. Issuing from the hindbrain. Immune to cultural reeducation programs. Cemented in primeval neurons shaped in the crucible of evolution by millions of years of natural and sexual selection.
If it’s mentally taxing for you to grapple with the idea of innate, immutable sexual desire, think back, Hugo, to the time of your blossoming youth, when you first laid eyes on that young man with the broad shoulders, glistening chest, and conspicuous bulge in his Ocean Pacific shorts. Much to your surprise, embarrassment and volcanic shame which would sculpt the trajectory of your life, a boy boner sprouted from the downy thicket of your pubescent pride. You wept, beautifully.
Do you remember that time, Hugs? Yes, yes, of course you do. And you remember, as well, that it was no social conditioning or nebulous cultural influence or amorphous patriarchy that provoked those wild and lustful urges in you. Those urges, you will recall, rose unbidden from the depths of your being, like a thermonuclear blast through your sinew, to explode into the world and forevermore make mockery of the drivel you spew to this day.
Commenter anonymous writes:
…is [Hugo] real or some kind of sockpuppet. Surely no actual man believes that men are merely “taught” or conditioned into being attracted to 20+ yr old women?
He is as real as the beneficiaries of his delusional ego-assuaging largesse want him to be. No, I don’t think Hugo actually believes that men are taught to desire younger women over older women. But I wouldn’t bet on it. The West is filling up with simulacra of actual men who have swallowed the rancid feminist jizzbombs by the bucketload, and are begging for more. A willing mouthpiece like Hugo finds purchase today amongst a cacophony of loudmouthed losers who would have stayed ensconced in their hermit holes fifty years ago, brooding it out to themselves instead of polluting the internet airwaves. The Rise of the Hugo is a story of the Fall of the West.
To demand logic, reason, good faith, common sense, or accountability from the Hugo Hordes is a fool’s errand. There is apparently no contradiction or inconsistency or hypocrisy or lie too craven for the house eunuch to call into service if it wins him a contemptuous pat on his gelatinous bottom from the circle of shrikes. Hugs, is the sacrifice of your dignity worth the accolades from a bunch of psychologically and physically defective losers? Please tell me you are at least tapping some of the better feminist ass your humiliating masochistic spectacle ought by rights to procure you.
***
Article of note #2 was not penned by Hugo, but it was about him. After a quick read, I’m not all that interested in commenting on the substance of the article (it’s stupid, as is the case of most Atlantic articles lately), but I am perplexed why the Atlantic writer — a Mrs. Raphael Magarik — would write a term paper on Hugo Schwyzer’s internet persona and his psychological motivations without consulting the authoritative reference guide on the matter.
Come on, Raph, how about throwing a link bone to your betters?
Never mind. I can see when I’m not wanted. *sniff*
PS Hey, Hugo! Are gay men taught by society to desire other men?
Gotcha!
PPS Even when Hugo stumbles on a truth, he wraps it in foul-smelling lies. Here are two quotes from that Jizzebel article which demonstrate Hugo’s inability to speak truthfully.
Ask 20-something women on OK Cupid or other dating sites how many they receive from men 15 and 20 years older; ask women in their 40s how many guys their own age seem primarily interested in pursuing much younger romantic partners. The “cougar discourse” doesn’t change the reality that most heterosexual relationships with a substantial age gap still feature an older man and younger woman pairing.
Check out this slippery eel known as the male feminist. “[T]he ‘cougar discourse’ doesn’t change the reality…” Well, no duh it doesn’t change the reality! The cougar discourse affirms the reality that men of all ages prefer younger women. Hugo, is the “cougar discourse” saying something to the opposite of that reality, or are you just an oily snake dissembling for the sake of your fat cunt readership?
As she so often does, Hannah reverses the stereotype by being the sexual aggressor —
What Hugo omits here is the more reasonable interpretation that Hannah’s (Lena Dunham’s character, a hard 4) sexual aggression is not a deliberate ploy to flip stereotypes on their heads, but the necessary forfeiture of a dumpy, unattractive woman required to capture the sexual attention of an alpha male who’d sooner pursue a much hotter woman were one conveniently available. Hannah has to literally throw herself at this dude to get him to dump a fuck in her. She has to make it EASY for him. Making it easy is the only way marginal women who aren’t warpigs manage to get laid with attractive men. And then not so much; the strategy fails as often as it works, because men exercise discrimination in choosing mates, although on average men are less discriminating than women when sex is the goal. (Men are more discriminating than women when relationship commitment is the goal, and that’s why frumps like Hannah rarely get high status men to commit to them, which is the true measure of a woman’s romantic worth.)
Even if Dunham didn’t intend this interpretation, this is what actually occurs in the real world. Hugo could note that; but that would mean he had a spine.
and Joshua’s intensely grateful reaction suggests not just surprise at her boldness but also, perhaps a kind of relief that a woman in her mid-20s finds him still desirable.
The relief is for the zero effort he knows he’ll have to put in.
Forget the dick-wringing from male writers
You rang, fucker?
about how a hottie like Wilson would never go for a young woman who looks like Dunham.
Define “go for”. In real life, handsome doctors do not go for tubalards like Hannah, no matter the age. They go for slender babes. The tubalard may occasionally get serviced by a very tired or depressed Joshua who just got off the bender of a bad divorce, but he won’t be dating her or sending her flowers, or even seeing her in public. And your strawman notwithstanding to the contrary, what Hannah does or doesn’t deserve has got nothing to do with it. It’s horny turtles all the way down.
Not only does that woefully underrate the sex appeal of the Girls‘ star,
You’ve gotta be kidding me. Oh man, you are such a lickspittle. Tell me, would you say your wife is more, or less, attractive than Lena Dunham? Try not to squirm answering this.
it also obscures the reality that having a younger woman walk into your house and make the first move is a classic middle-aged man’s fantasy.
Only if she looks like Megan Fox. Try to keep it real, for once in your life, Hugs.
[crypto-donation-box]
Feb 12th, 2013 by CH
I’ve long peppered my emails and texts and IMs with onomatopoeia — words that sound like the thing or abstraction they are describing. I drop them in conversation, too. I do this because I’ve discovered that it’s an excellent way to screen out stuck-up, prudish girls who don’t know how to have fun. Girls who dig banter about subjects other than name, rank and serial number LOVE LOVE LOVE men who can nimbly weave child-like blurts into serious adult conversation. The “sounding words” are very sensuous on the ears, and that probably accounts for their appeal to women. Using them is a step toward speaking the language of women.
(And, yes, MGTOWs, it’s horribly “unfair” that men have to go out of their way to speak the language of women but women don’t have to speak the language of men. Unfairness and lopsided, up-front investment is inherent in an evolved mating system where the reproductive machinery of women is worth more than that of men. But I profess.)
Interestingly, I see I’m not the only one to pick up on this peculiarity of female auditory preference. A reader comments:
Off topic, I ran some ‘your mom!’ game tonight. ( I mean seriously, ‘your mom game’… are the possibilities not boundless?
Solid 8 blonde cutey, my neighbor, so basically i’ve seen her naked. She had a boyfriend for a while, single as of monday. little whatever texts, haven’t had contact in a month.
It’s not reached a conclusion, I guess i just think it’s a decent way to open up younger girls. i’m 37, she’s 24. i pass for 28-30 though, that helps because i primarily only game younger women.
Me 7:58: your mom!
Court 7:59: what? Ha are you drunk neighbor!
Me 7:59: your moms drunk!
Me: 8:00: but that wasn’t for you. bonk
(for some reason texting sounds has been surprisngly useful. bonk, boink, derp, boom. See: younger girls)
Court 8:00: didn’t actually think so
Me: but your mom is dunk, prolly
Court 8:03: ha umm no shes not!
Me 8:09: its all good court. we all have drunk moms.. its the new drunk dads
court 8:10: bahahaha Kkkkk
end.
i dunno. drunk dad your mom game
Younger women are, of course, more fun-loving than older women. You’d be too if your body looked its best, you felt energized all the time, men of all ages checked you out, and the icy breath of Father Time wasn’t breathing down your neck (or squeezing your uterus in a vise). But I molest.
The reader above used a version of non sequitur text game, a CH patented technique that is LIT’RULLY guaranteed to provoke a reply from a girl. When she replies with the expected challenge, feminine dare or snarky attitude, try punctuating your follow-up with a whoosh, derp, nofap, or wheeee giggly giggle shoe shopping!#$!!#$#!!. It’s unpredictable, it’s immature, and it’s transparently patronizing. That last part is important, because a patronized girl is a girl whose self-perceived value has been deliriously, enticingly nicked.
I wonder if girls are in general becoming more responsive to goofy, glib texts from men. If true, it may signal a subtle cultural shift that girls are also becoming more fun-loving and less guarded. Or that they’re so fed up with being the breadwinner they appreciate men who can zoom them away from their dreary cubicle farm lives.
[crypto-donation-box]
Feb 12th, 2013 by CH
Originally started by dumb feminists as a sincere effort at self-congratulation for imaginary deeds of heroism, the #TellAFeministThankYou Twitter feed has morphed into a shooting gallery for the entertainment of trolls and assorted sadists, providing a laugh a second. Feminists on that feed have been reduced to impotently bleating “wait for them to get it out of their systems.”
Go for the fun, stay for the cruelty. And keep an eye out for malevolent forces committing drive-bys of spectacular carnage. The kind of carnage that can leave a feminist with barely enough strength to mewl for the sympathies and circle-wagoning of fellow travelers.
UPDATE
Feminists are deleting the sarcastic tweets as fast as they appear. No surprise. Wouldn’t want to risk a mass suicide.
[crypto-donation-box]
Feb 11th, 2013 by CH
The corn&porn arm of the MSM is catching up with CH teachings. A woman has written an article about female infidelity warning signs, (supposedly culled from women who have cheated on their partners), and the information sounds suspiciously similar to earlier Chateau Heartiste red flags for women who are high infidelity risks. For instance:
MSM fem entity:
Sign No. 1: She accuses her man of cheating. This common sign is an attempt to divert the guilt away from herself, and to project her dishonest behavior onto her partner.
Ministry of PoonandGrabass CH:
She asks you how many women you’ve slept with or accuses you of being a player. One word: projection.
MSM fem entity:
Sign No. 2: She starts dolling herself up. If a woman suddenly starts taking hours to get ready for places like the gym or the grocery store, then there may be someone she’s trying to impress.
CH:
She undertakes beautification projects. [A] girl who suddenly begins an exercise program or wearing carefully applied makeup or buying new sexy cocktail dresses is prepping herself for a return to the market.
MSM fem entity:
Sign No. 3: She tells her husband she needs space.
CH:
Chances of re-notch success are much lower once she has verbalized her need for space, but with proper post-relationship game you can improve your odds dramatically.
MSM fem entity:
Sign No. 4: She drops hints that she’s not happy.
CH:
A woman is honed like a machine to be a first responder to relationship crisis. She uses her intuition to pick out subtle nicks in the relationship armor that could grow to chasms if left untended. […] Women therefore have evolved an exquisite sense for sniffing out warning signs that a man is losing interest, or that his love, and hence his commitment, is cooling. Women therefore have evolved an exquisite sense for sniffing out warning signs that a man is losing interest, or that his love, and hence his commitment, is cooling.
MSM fem entity:
Sign No. 5: She has a new BFF her partner has never met. For starters, this new “friend” may not even be a girl at all. The friend could also be a single gal pal looking for a wing woman… and sometimes a woman is all too eager to go along for the ride.
CH:
She has a lot of slutty friends. Ye shall know her by her support group.
MSM fem entity:
Sign No. 6: She changes her plans… at midnight. If she consistently ends up staying out all night, then it’s time to question her loyalty.
CH:
This red flag is so obvious — hey, my girlfriend/wife is out again at midnight without me! — that I don’t need to dig through the CH archives to find a record of this blog stating the same thing.
MSM fem entity:
Sign No. 7: Someone else thinks she’s cheating. “I knew someone who had firsthand knowledge my girlfriend was cheating,” Mark says. “But I believed her when she said it was a lie, because nobody wants to believe the worst, no matter how obvious it may be.”
CH:
This is a milder version of catching her in flagrante delicto, *when it’s from a third party*. But there’s the rub. Many of your girlfriend’s or wife’s friends will not be your friends. If you hear something that suggests your wife’s infidelity from an oblivious sidewalk grocer, you should take the accusation seriously. If you hear it from her BFF who secretly hates you (or loves you), default to skepticism.
MSM fem entity:
Sign No. 8: She has a sudden increased interest in her partner’s whereabouts. A woman carrying on an affair needs to cover her bases. If she starts wanting to know her man’s plans for the day, especially when she’s supposedly at work or otherwise busy, then she could be making plans of her own.
CH:
This is pretty good advice for an MSM fem entity, but its accuracy as a warning sign depends a great deal on who’s downlow-ing whom. A wife will show increased interest in her spouse’s whereabouts if she suspects *him* of cheating, too. So if you are a faithful dude, and your wife is suddenly asking a lot of questions about your schedule while sounding like she’s pretending to ask in a spontaneous manner, as if it “just popped into her head”, then you may have something to worry about.
MSM fem entity:
Sign No. 9: She gives excuses to not have sex.
CH:
[W]e now know the number one dead giveaway that your wife or girlfriend is about to cheat on you:
Is she withdrawing sex during days 10-16 of her monthly cycle? Then you, my friend, are about to be betrayed.
If you hear from your woman “I have a headache” any time during her peak fertility, she has either cheated on you, is thinking about cheating on you, or is getting sufficiently turned off by your burgeoning betaness that cheating will soon become an option in the calculation of her moral universe.
MSM fem entity:
Sign No. 10: She’s checked out. If another man is meeting a woman’s emotional needs, then she will lose her enthusiasm in her current relationship, even when it comes to things like arguing.
CH:
[M]en are capable of fucking more than one woman concurrently without losing that loving feeling for any one of them. Women, in contrast, tend to have to fall out of love with their man before they can comfortably move on to fucking another man.
So, did this MSM fem entity plagiarize CH, or is it just a coincidence that there happens to exist in the world a woman who can speak as truthfully as the lordship of Chateau Heartiste? This MSM article’s eerie similarity to CH writings is…plagiarismcoincidenceyour vanity is out of control.
Ps You have to love the spate of articles in recent years about cheating women. Is this a subject that would have been broached so explicitly in any putatively mainstream outlet fifty years ago? Either the culture has become less queasy about parading in print the true nature of women, or more women are cheating and the need to discuss the topic has reached critical mass, or both. Whatever the reason for the trend, it doesn’t do much for American women’s marriageability.
[crypto-donation-box]
Comment Of The Week
Feb 15th, 2013 by CH
Commenter Revo Luzione suggests a reason why the exclamation snort is not attractive when women use it:
Snort!
This gets to a larger point: the snark and snideness and gleeful antagonism that works for men to attract women does not sit as well on women when they use it to try and attract men. This is because male aloofness and other male value-raising ploys — of which the Theory of Snort is a part — are designed to appeal to women’s natural hypergamous urge for higher status (read: condescending) men than themselves. In contrast, men are not attracted to women’s social status, and in fact may be put off by women with higher social or economic status than themselves. Men’s hypergamy, such as it is, seeks ever more beautiful and feminine women. And there is nothing about leaving an impression of an angry Holstein that makes women seem more beautiful or feminine.
[crypto-donation-box]
Posted in Comment Winners | Comments Off