Feed on
Posts
Comments

Status Whoring SWPLs And Pitbulls

Feb 10th, 2013 by

I’m not the only one to notice the latest ridiculous SWPL fad of adopting abandoned ghetto-educated pitbulls as reclamation projects and status whoring symbols.

Pitbulls are one of the ugliest, nastiest dog breeds in circulation. The modern pitbull has been bred by upstanding, law-abiding citizens for aggression and a powerful bite. The pitbull is the thug of dogdom. It even looks like a fucking thug. Hence, its appeal to human thugs.

But now SWPLs, humanity’s insufferable burdenbraggarts, sensing another golden opportunity to flex their neoPuritan cred, have taken up the crusade of adopting ultraviolent, impulsive pitbulls and whisking them away from their ghetto cellar killing arenas to a brighter future in loving charter homes serviced by low wage, No Dog Left Behind hipster dog walkers.

Goddamned these herbalicious SWPLs. They really are a nauseating cult of pukes. Having failed at rescuing not one, but two mega-underclasses, their insatiable savior complex and hunger for balletic moral posturing, (usually satisfied at the expense of those other dog owners), have driven them into the blood-soaked paws of unpettable killer dogs. The SWPL’s soft, plush, Yoshi ego must gorge, and a multigenerational failure of positive thinking, supercilious sophistry, and self-good intentions has made SWPL Yoshi very very cranky. Not content with leaving ill-bred animals alone, and apparently incapable of enjoying the simple pleasure of normal dogs like labs without  experiencing an existential crisis, the pitbull has become the newest cause celebre for urban SWPLs who can’t make it through a day without a pat on the back from their fellow missionaries.

To understand this sudden and perplexing SWPL adoration for pitbulls, you must know the SWPL psyche. The SWPL’s greatest fear is confronting the demands of her ego and discovering that everything she believes is a pile of horse shit. Oh no, can’t have that, no way no how. Equalism is the gargantuan hamster pellet that feeds her head, and the pitbull is a fortuitous animal proxy for the underprivileged humans that the SWPL happily (and relievedly) carries on believing are equally capable, equally worthwhile, and equally oppressed (except for that one group, yuk they’re soooo creepy).

Dog “breeds” are a social construct. The pitbull is just like any other dog! The pitbull is misunderstood! The pitbull is a victim of the caninarchy! The pitbull just needs the right training. You’re a pitbullist! Gross, pitbullist! Look at the pitbullist! Point at him! Isn’t he evil? Evil evil EVIL PITBULLIST! Now watch, gross evil pitbullist, how tolerant I am. See how I benevolently guide the pitbull through medical school, out from under your pitbullist oppressive bigotryprejudicefearinsecuritynarcissism…

CHOMP!

ooow, my face… it’s missing.

I will smile every time I read of a stupid white SWPL getting her face chewed off by one of her pitbull redemptions. Does she deserve it?

Yes. Yes she does.

I was planning to include a graphic photo of one such victim as a coda to this post, but it was so visually disturbing I decided against it. You can google for yourself to see a mauler’s row of pitbull attack victims. It’s not like there is any excuse for being ignorant about the ingrained and genetically bred pitbull temperament.

Like human trash, pitbull dog trash needs to be removed from society, neutered with extreme prejudice, and dropped to the bottom of the ocean. But I suppose if you’re the sort of smug shit who loves the warm feeling of lifting the animal world’s bloodthirsty psychopaths from the tyranny of low expectations, you’d go ahead and adopt one of these filthy beasts, and then execute the most impressive triple lindy back-rationalization in the history of smug shits when you wake up one morning to see your infant son half eaten.

One wonders, when there is nothing non-white or tangentially non-white left in the human or animal kingdom to “””save””” aka save in posturing only (SIPO), to which desperate, in-need group will the whitely superior SWPLs turn their outstretched, priestly arms in welcoming redemption next?

Wait, lemme guess. Gypsies.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Culture, Status Is King, Tool Time | Comments Off

Always Be On

Feb 8th, 2013 by

We’ve all had publicly embarrassing moments. This one time, in band camp, I was skipping gaily jogging past a woman with my hands full of shopping bags. I glanced for a split second in her direction but it was enough time to miscalculate and tumble face first into the sidewalk. Hiding the pain in a most manly way, I bounced up and said “Made you look”. She laughed. A few more accusations against her propriety, and her number was procured.

Possessing a “game mindset” will help you make mash notes out of mashed potatoes. Always be on.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Game, The Good Life | Comments Off

Reader Mailbag: Dewy Vaj Edition

Feb 8th, 2013 by

Email #1

To get the formalities out of the way – it took me 2 years but I’ve ascended from horrifying betahood into what I like to think is the domain of the lesser alpha. Either way, these days I GET things, and I see things for how they are.

However, there is one question that I keep wondering about – what is the perceived effect of omitting some alpha male rules? To be specific – showing up late. I understand the workings behind it, the DHV, and I have no problems with it if I am arriving into a social circle (“We’ll meet up at XXXXXXX at 8, see you there!”), but I loathe it when when people are waiting for me, and on one-on-one dates, I tend to arrive on time more often than not. Just how big is the effect of turning a blind eye to this or that game concept in favor of a more personalized style? How unbendable is any of the concepts depending on context?

Ok, spergs and strawmen, it’s time for a quick lesson in basic human reality. I can’t believe this needs saying, but apparently it does. You’d think some of this stuff would be inferred in CH writings, but never leave to inference what a hater with a chip on his shoulder will twist into a self-serving ego fap.

Alpha and beta are not discrete categories of man. They are not precisely numbered and annotated bullet lists of behaviors that, should you fail to fulfill one item or execute another item twice more than advised, will automatically shuttle you up or down the male sexual value hierarchy and leave you stranded there permanently. Alpha and beta are ecological designations with fuzzy boundaries but which are still nonetheless readily apprehended, much like a desert is distinct from a grassy plain yet one would be hard pressed to identify the exact border that delineates the regions.

So it is with your question. CH, and others, have suggested that it is good alpha mojo to show up five fashionable minutes late for a first date, because doing so subtly signals your higher relative value to the girl, and higher value, when you get right down to it, is the name of the game. But if you prefer to show up on time for dates, it isn’t going to deep six your sexiness AS LONG AS you have enough alpha characteristics in the kitty. If she arrives later than you and sees you at the bar waiting patiently, the immediate value differential she may perceive won’t matter if she also gets to watch you yukking it up with the patrons, and you greet her confidently and suavely and lead the date toward a sexual apex.

Furthermore, you can get away with committing a whole slew of bland beta errors if you have enough compensating alpha traits acting as a balance. This is why you will often hear alphas charmingly self-deprecate; they have so much value in store that it doesn’t hurt them to lose (in a controlled manner) a couple points here and there. In fact, it can help them, by making them seem more attainable to women.

To put it succinctly: The core tenets of game are universally applicable, but the culturally or individually attuned applications of those tenets can vary. Within reason.

***

Email #2

It’s well known that masculine men and feminine women are natural partners, but are extroverted men and introverted women also natural partners?

An extroverted men is confident and well liked. He’s comfortable in conversation and can approach without being awkward. His popularity likely leads to social proof, and his social grace gives him high earning power in management, sales, and negotiation. He can provide emotions and resources to his mate.

An introverted woman is less likely to talk to random strangers, and therefore there are fewer opportunities for her to accumulate a count, or to stray in a relationship. The introverted woman sounds boring, maybe in bed too, but that is a trade-off many men make for a pure woman.

Quick take:

Extrovert man-Introvert woman: Good match. Strong love polarity. Dewy vaj at sight of him expertly working a room. Rock hard protective instinct for shy, modest woman. But she’ll wanna know just how much cheating, fucking around, and general mayhem he commits on his social sojourns.

Extrovert man-Extrovert woman: Explosive match. Strong sexual polarity. Will fuck in public locale on second date. Will never stop playing head games for the upper hand. Overpowering jealousy could lead to criminal indictment or revenge infidelity. Long-term prognosis: nonexistent. Paternity assurance: nonexistent. Domestic violence: Awkwardly likely. Anal sex: Guaranteed.

Introvert man-Introvert woman: Beta male fantasy match. Tepid sexual polarity, strong sensibility polarity. Best relationship in the world three weeks out of the month. Worst relationship in the world one week out of the month. Cuddles and kisses substitute for hot, penetrative sex until he goes Anders Breivik and acquires the inevitable mass murderer SMV boost.

Introvert man-Extrovert woman: Strong complementary match, if introverted man is more stoic alpha than retiring beta, and extroverted woman is more social circle glue than thrill seeking slut. Warm powerful love with puzzling bouts of sexual drought. High risk of cuckoldry. Must be comfortable dealing with flirtatious woman, i.e. avoid excessive mate guarding. Could be beta male’s first introduction to sniffing cocaine off a hot babe’s pert ass cheek. Powerful incentive to trade for lowered relationship expectations.

***

Email #3

So I know the things a natural, alpha man *should* be doing. There is surface-level stuff that during my ongoing transformation I’ve directly incorporated, that I feel I’m still only midway from beta to alpha. There’s underlying, inner game that I have yet to become congruent with.

Reading posts on the ways naturals think and perform makes total sense, but actually *becoming* like that is something else entirely. What is the best way to actually make the transformation from beta to alpha?

Fake it till you make it was the mantra of game practitioners until it was supplanted by an even better aphorism:

Fake it till you create it.

You see, doing all that “surface-level stuff” will not just improve how you are perceived by girls; it will actually create a new alpha identity from your beta clay. An identity that is more than verbal calisthenics, one that instead goes to the id, and lodges itself in near-permanence. That identity goes by another name: The Attitude.

It’s never easy becoming something you’re not in your natural, lazy, default state, nor is it easy becoming something more than you are. So expect that the effort you’ll expend and mental anguish you’ll endure will be more intense if your starting point is omega male rather than lesser alpha. But you shouldn’t think in those terms. Instead, think that no matter what the shape of your final destination, your journey will bring improvements every step of the way. You may not land a hard 10, but you can date girls a bit hotter and a bit younger than you would normally had you remained stuck in the rut of your betatude.

If you think that’s no big deal, try asking a guy who’s used to dating 3s what he felt when he got a shot at that 5. Actually, don’t bother asking. You’ll see it in the way his eyes sparkle with life.

Anyhow, to answer the grist of your question:

1. Hang out with naturals.
2. Avoid losers.
3. Follow the 16 Poon Commandments at the top of this satanic repository.
4. Break up with a girl once in a while just to get a feel for the Awesome Power of Alpha.
5. Create a fake alpha male profile and taunt girls online with promises of dates to get a feel for the Awesome Power of Alpha.
6. Remind yourself that women are essentially interchangeable, and that there is always another one around the corner.
7. Outcome independence is a fancy term for believing that you are God’s gift to women. Take it to heart. It works.

***

Email #4

A cute cashier gave me too much change ($12 too much). I was in a couldn’t-care-less-about-humanity mood so I took the extra change without shame even though she’d been friendlier than your normal cashier with a kinda shy greeting and goodbye.

Now that I’m back on terms with humanity (with my shame back) I want to square this with her because 1) the money will come out of her meagre pay so it is the right thing to do and 2) she was good looking so an excuse to talk to her again and only her not anyone else who works there would be welcome.   It’s the kind of store you only go to once a week, twice at most, so I can’t go there every day to see if she’s working like I’m a nice guy desperate to give her the money back – her colleagues might remember me if I did – but if I don’t I might not see her there again for two, three or maybe more weeks which would be too late – or would it? What to do?

PS – There was some confusion during the cash transaction so saying I didn’t pick up on the mistake at the time is plausible. Maybe enough confusion that she remembered it was me she gave too much change too.

Most Valuable Commenter nominee PA used to say that his preferred method of tipping was to handsomely tip single, older men and be stingier with young, single women. The subtext in his strategy is obvious: single older men who are working service jobs need the sexual market value boost a lot more than do single, younger women. In addition to that noble motivation, enriching young, single attractive women makes it harder for beta males to woo them, and easier for alpha cads to use them.

Naturally, most men do just the opposite. That is because most men are mediocrities.

So, in your case, Emailer #4, I wouldn’t fret that your foul mood-induced ill-gotten pocketing of a cute girl’s coin is some sort of karmic offense that will redound to your reincarnation as a field mouse. If anything, you did the world some good.

But you want to violate her holes date her in a gentlemanly manner, so here is what you do:

Go back to her shop, $12 in hand. (Or, if you’re a craven SOB like me, $6 in hand.) Look her in the eye. Hold the pimp daddy wad of money up. It doess’t matter how much she remembers of the previous transaction, or when it happened. Tell her, “You gave me too much change. Here. You know, you don’t have to treat me like a male stripper to get my attention.”

Or: “I’m getting tired of girls paying me for dates.”

That should be enough to coax a smile and get the ball rolling. Report back to us.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Reader Mailbag | Comments Off

Leftoid Egocentrism

Feb 7th, 2013 by

I’ve spent a lot of time in the company of leftoid SWPLs, liking some, disliking others, and I’ve spent nearly the same amount of time in the company of non-SWPLs and “blood n soil n family” types, again liking and disliking some. Here’s what I’ve found to be almost universally true:

Non-leftoids — i.e. conservatives, apolitical drop-outs, right leaners, sincere flyover country independents, anti-urban mainstream hipsters, commonsensical libertarians, earthy ethnics, and generally kind-hearted people who don’t like to argue politics or ideology at every turn — are exceedingly tolerant of leftoid SWPLs in their social group, even of the loony, attention whoring type of leftoid SWPL who can’t stop regaling a group with his or her political or social views. In fact, many non-leftoids go out of their way to befriend and include the few leftoids in social bonding rituals.

Leftoid SWPLs, in stark contrast, are exceedingly intolerant of anyone not a leftoid SWPL. This intolerance grows in proportion to the leftoid SWPL composition of a social group, and to the transparency with which the non-leftoids in the group adhere to their beliefs and world views. I have seen leftoid SWPLs WALK OUT of rooms, mid-conversation, because they experienced an uncomfortable reflex when some wholly unobtrusive non-leftoid let slip a sliver of marginal crimethink.

My conclusion: Leftoid SWPLs are among the most intolerant, self-righteous, egotistical pricks in the world, right up there with the Tutsis. For a sub-race of people that has spent generations propagandizing the sanctity of tolerance, they sure have a blind spot to their own non-incluuuuuuuusive behavior.

The question is… why? Why is this the state of affairs, and not some other state of affairs?

My answer is that I believe leftoid SWPLism is partly genetically inherited, and that this inheritance carries along with it a propensity for supreme, infantile egocentrism. Rank egocentrism is a child-like psychology of solipsistic, feminine essence that expresses from a deeply rooted insecurity about one’s status in her immediate world. The leftoid SWPL is an aggro, in-group curator who religiously polices the boundary of her carefully cultivated social scene, *precisely* because she is unsure of her mental footing and of the viability of her group should it be exposed to thought contamination. I say “she”, because it is typically the female SWPLs who are the most aggrieved and intolerant.

The leftoid SWPL is no different in psychology and temperament than the boogeyman Evangelicals and Jesus Freaks who populate her overactive imagination. Their numbers are large enough in the blue cities that they have reached a tipping point where their exclusivity and intolerance and hatred have become self-reinforcing. Their megachurch is the MSM newspaper op-ed, to which they dutifully attend every Sunday to read, recite and genuflect in solemn prayer and soul-nourishing thanks.

I like the SWPL lifestyle — they have done some things right — but many of them are simply grotesque robo-human caricatures one would be ill-disposed to assist in a moment of crisis. They are good for house parties and pleasant, polysyllabic banter, and that’s about it. And their women are thinner than non-SWPLs. So there’s that, and that’s an important thing.

The old saw that liberals love humanity but hate humans while conservatives hate humanity but love humans is proven accurate over and over, each time I am in the one or the other’s company. The tolerant are those who are more socially aware — more empathic, if you will — of the feelings of those within their sphere of social influence. The intolerant live in a pinched id box where the only awareness is of one’s relative status ranking and of the gratification of one’s self-glorified ego.

I prefer the human-lovers over humanity-lovers. After all, humans are right here, right now, part of my reality and my experience, while humanity is an abstract entity that does not love me or receive my love, smile with me, cooperate with me, or share fun times with me. It may not be the proper attitude of the utopian progressivist (doomed to failure as she is), but it sure makes poolside time a lot more enjoyable.

Given the growing intolerance of leftoid SWPLs and the unconcealed loathing of the ruling class for middle class whites, and the apparent ignorance of the irony inherent in their behavior, I predict that chunks of the USA are destined to part ways along internal fault lines that are presently unknowable. There will be a secession, perhaps not in the traditional way, but a seceding will happen, in one form or another. It is inevitable. Some will argue it will be a continuation of the Civil War, the war that never really ended because the vanquished stuck around in close proximity to the victors, despite efforts to salt their earth. I don’t know about that. I do know strange winds are blowing, the blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and the center cannot hold. The ego is the most powerful force in the cosmos, and it will not go quietly to lick its wounds before a cataclysm unleashes its dying fury.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Culture, Ugly Truths | Comments Off

How To Tell Women What They Want To Hear

Feb 7th, 2013 by

Nick Savoy is a pick-up coach who runs Love Systems. He’s been in the business of selling blueprints for getting laid a long time. Although he’s Canadian, I have nothing against the guy. Word is he’s an excellent artiste of the pick-up persuasion. However, I can’t help but call out — and compliment! — glorious bullshit when I see it, and parts of this latest interview with him qualify.

Savoy made an appearance on the Today show recently to hawk his new “””game””” book for women, called It’s Your Move: How to Play the Game and Win the Man You Want. Now when I hear the words “girl game” my BS detector goes off. The fundamental premise of the sexual market is that women trade their youthnbeauty for men’s power, prestige, charm, dominance and resources (among other desirable male traits). The best “girl game” in the world, then, is simply this:

Be young and hot, ladies.

Any advice geared for women beyond that basic prerequisite is sure to be warm, steaming feelgood pablum. Effective at the distant margins, AT BEST. And then, effective only on beta males who are the kinds of men apt to fall for manipulative girl game. The alpha males for whom chicks devise “girl game” to capture in heady commitment are just the sorts of men who are adept at sidestepping women’s manipulations.

(This is very unlike game for men, which is the inverse of game for girls, because it tends to be the hottest, highest value girls who swoon the swooniest for seductive men with pick-up skills.)

But of course that message won’t sell. And since women are the majority of book buyers, especially of books which tickle their solipsistic fancies rather than give them actual useful advice to measurably improve their lives, it pays a man like Savoy to craft a prettified message for the ladies that will make them happy and hopeful and validated and reaching for their credit cards. So Savoy is no dummy. In fact, I predict he will make more $cashmoney$ from this one “girl game” book than he has made from all his tougher-edged game books aimed at men.

To understand what I’m getting at, watch this video of his interview. (Sadly, SFW.) Savoy has to speak in womanese to these two old, stretchy faced broads or they’d ride him out on a rail. (Or, more likely, their white knights and femlickers would ride him out on a rail.) The womanese dialect Savoy employs is thickly accented, so I’ve included where necessary a helpful womanese-to-male English translation below.

Ok, let me get this out of the way first so the comments don’t get clogged with funny yet drearily repetitive remarks: Yes, Savoy sounds gay. He’s not, but he sure sounds it. If you’re wondering how a man whose voice is a nasally kazoo that projects Kegel-strengthened arias into the heads of the assembled can seduce so many lovelies, keep in mind that Science! has discovered bisexual men — who are a subclass of the class of effeminate men — have more female partners on average than do exclusively heterosexual men. My take: Those men in touch with women’s deepest truest desires, like apparently Savoy is, are best able to coax them into the sack.

Also, Savoy is kind of funny. I’d be surprised if the gentle humor that comes across in this interview wasn’t also a part of his pick-up success.

I’ll skip the first minute which is mostly a prelude to the juicy stuff.

1:10 — “Well, half the game’s won or lost before you even leave the house.”

Male English translation: “If you’re cute inside your house, then you’ll be cute outside your house.”

This statement is half sincere, and that’s all right. If he had said “9/10ths of the game’s won or lost before you even leave the house”, he’d be eight-balling 100% stone cold truth. But we’ll take half and call it a win.

1:16 — “How you dress is important, too. But also, I mean, you want to go out with like a couple of girl friends, not a massive group, because that’s intimidating for most guys.”

This is good, if obvious, advice. Men, of course, prefer to approach women who are alone or with one friend. But Savoy either doesn’t understand *why* women go out in large hen groups, or he understands but is deliberately avoiding the implications in order to spoon feed pleasant sounding advice to women who will in reality never take it up. Single women aren’t making an error of judgment when they choose to go out in big groups of clucking hens and a few beta orbiters. In fact they are making a wise choice; big groups insulate them from potentially dangerous men, and big groups allow them to judge a man’s facility to navigate pressure-filled social dynamics.

So telling girls to go out alone is like telling them to put out as quickly as possible: it ain’t gonna happen as long as the female biomachinery isn’t radically altered. You know what types of women go out alone or with one friend? Cougars. When you have low sexual market value, you have to make it as easy as possible for the desperate beta males who are your bread and butter.

1:33 — “…and wear something or bring something interesting that a guy can comment on.”

Male English translation: “Don’t dress like a potato sack.”

This is good advice as far as it goes, but again, it suffers from the tacit delusion that ugly girls can attract men by wearing an eye-catching ensemble or a peculiar accoutrement. The “unique purse” that Savoy recommends a woman carry as a lure to capture a man’s attention and give him something to talk about is advice best suited for women who are *already* attracting men with their looks, and who want to make it easy for those men to strike up convos. Like I said, decent advice, but not really the sort of advice that is going to do the women most in need of a “How to find a man” book any help.

2:44 — “It’s so important to go to your strengths. I’m with guys as they’re going out to bars or clubs or coffee shops, and they’re deciding who to approach and who they’re interested in, and I see so often that guys would much rather approach the woman who’s confident in her own skin, who looks comfortable with herself, and who maybe is telling a story about herself with how she’s dressed, than the 25th most attractive woman in the room who’s competing on that ground.”

Male English translation: “If you’re an unattractive girl, dress like a scenester slut. Men will figure you’re DTF and will approach you over the girl who is unattractive and prudish.”

This is great advice for the girl who wants to get banged out no strings attached, but not so great advice for the girl who wants a relationship with an alpha male. Since most girls want the latter, this advice is as likely to get them further from their goals as it is to help them fulfill their goals.

By the way, the very fact that Savoy can speak so fluently in womanese is testament to his skills as a womanizer. Perhaps he won’t like that I’ve labeled his girl game advice as bullshit, but in fact I am paying him a high compliment. You’ve got to be smart and seductive to spin a whole book out of “Be cute and young, and don’t be ugly or get old”.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Pretty Lies, Videos | Comments Off

The “IKEA Effect” Supports The Game Concept Of Compliance

Feb 6th, 2013 by

We’ll just begin this post with a preen.

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ *self-love* ♥♥♥♥♥♥ *self-love* *self-love* ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥

Ah, that’s better.

Wait. Did you hear that? Someone out there thinks this preen invalidates the science that is about to follow. What a strange duck that person is.

Pick-up artists have a term called compliance, which is a game tactic designed to raise a man’s value relative to the woman’s value, and to gauge a woman’s interest level. The concept is simple: You make a request of a girl, and if she complies you know that she is attracted to you. Furthermore, the very act of complying with your request will cause her to feel more attracted to you.

Compliance techniques can be physical or verbal. The verbal forms are known as “hoops”, as in “jump through your hoops”. For instance, raising your hand and gesturing for a girl to grab it and twirl is a physical compliance test. Asking her to watch your drink as you take a bathroom break, or to participate in a mind game of your choosing, are verbal hoops.

Compliance is a powerful seduction technique, for two reasons: One, it is grounded in an accurate appraisal of human, and particularly female, psychology and, two, it is so rarely used by men (and so frequently deployed by women) that the man who co-opts it for himself is immediately more alluring to women.

While there appears to be no scientific study directly measuring the effect of female compliance on a man’s desirability, there has been an analogous study examining how labor compliance affects people’s feelings of love for the objects of their labor. It’s called the “IKEA Effect”, and the study concluded:

In a series of studies in which consumers assembled IKEA boxes, folded origami, and built sets of Legos, we demonstrate and investigate the boundary conditions for what we term the “IKEA effect” – the increase in valuation of self-made products. Participants saw their amateurish creations – of both utilitarian and hedonic products – as similar in value to the creations of experts, and expected others to share their opinions. […]

Adding to previous literature on effort justification, we also show that successful completion is an essential component for the link between labor and liking to emerge; participants who built and then unbuilt their creations, or were not permitted to finish those creations, did not show an increase in willingness-to-pay. In addition, our experiments addressed several possible alternative IKEA Effect explanations for the increased valuation that people hold for their own creations. We show that successful assembly of products leads to value over and above the value that arises from merely being endowed with a product, or merely handling that product; in addition, by using simple IKEA boxes and Lego sets that did not permit customization, we demonstrated that the IKEA effect does not arise solely as a result of participants’ idiosyncratic tailoring of their creations to their preferences.

What psychological mechanisms underlie the increase in valuation when participants self-assemble their products? In the introduction, we suggested that the increase in liking that occurs due to effort (Aronson and Mills 1959) coupled with the positive feelings of effectance that accompany successful completion of tasks (Dittmar 1992; Furby 1991) is an important driver of the increase in willingness to pay that we observe. Of course, effectance itself has multiple psychological components: actual control over outcomes and mere perceived control over outcomes (Bandura, 1977). Given that our participants are in “control” by building their own products yet assembling them according to preset instructions (i.e., “not in control”), further exploration of perceived and actual control is likely to lend insight into the IKEA effect. In addition, there are likely additional underlying mechanisms that vary by the type of product being assembled. For instance, the assembly of more hedonic products often results in the opportunity to display one’s creation to others (Franke et al. 2010). Indeed, many of our participants who built Legos and origami in Experiments 1B and 2 mentioned a desire to show them to their friends, suggesting that the increase in willingness-to-pay for hedonic products may arise in part due to the social utility offered by assembling these products. We suggest, however, that social utility is likely to play a more minor role in increased liking for self-assembled utilitarian products like the storage boxes used in Experiments 1A and 3, given that the social IKEA Effect utility gained from displaying products decreases as product complexity decreases (Thompson and Norton, in press). It is also possible that the enjoyment of the assembly task itself is a contributor to the IKEA effect – building Lego frogs is more fun than building storage boxes – such that task enjoyment is another contributor to valuation that varies by product type. Future research is needed to unpack what are likely to be multiple drivers of the IKEA effect.

We note that we used generally small ticket items, and the question of whether the IKEA effect occurs for more expensive items is important both practically and theoretically. While future research should empirically examine the magnitude of overvaluation as a function of price, we suggest that, even for very costly items, people may continue to see the products of their labor as more valuable than others do. For instance, people may see the improvements they have made to their homes – such as the brick walkways they laid by hand – as increasing the value of the house far more than buyers, who see only a shoddily-built walkway. Indeed, to the extent that labor one puts into one’s home reflects one’s own idiosyncratic tastes, such as kitchen tiling behind the sink that quotes bible verses, labor might actually lead to lower valuation by buyers, who see only bible verses that must be expunged – even as that labor leads the owner to raise the selling price.

This is a boffo study with wide-ranging implications for numerous human social dynamics, including the seduction of women. Parsing the academese, what the study says is this:

The more work (labor) you put into a project, the more you will value the outcome of that project, even if objectively the value of your output is not high.

This relates to game. The charismatic tactic of inducing female compliance is essentially the coaxing of women to perform labor on your behalf, and for your benefit. When a woman labors for you, (“Carrie, hold my scarf”), she has invested in you, and her love for her “project” (you) grows commensurate with her degree of labor aka investment. It sounds counterintuitive (Typical Blue Piller: “Why would a woman love a man more if he’s being demanding and she’s being accommodating?”), but that is the nature of male-female mating dances: the reproductive goals of men and women are at odds, so romantic interactions tend to resolve into counterintuitive, even paradoxical, strategies.

And how often have we all seen this strange predilection of female nature play out in real life? Watch any natural/jerk/douchebag/player and you’ll see his lovers bending over backward to please him. And when you ask a girl why she loves the jerk who squeezes blood from her stone, she defends him to the high heavens, much like an IKEA consumer will defend his rickety, self-assembled Nordbox to any who question its actual worth.

This is one reason why artists do so well with women. Though he may not be consciously aware of the biomachinations that fuel his seductive charms, the artist’s “demand” of a woman to “get his work” or “grasp his message” is basically a challenge to her self-valuation, and a challenge that requires of her some mental (or physical) labor to reaffirm. Fashion photographers, the straight ones at least, absolutely clean up with hotties because they put their exquisite models in a constant, elevated state of laborious challenge — do this, move here, drop your chin, look this way, stop looking that way — which heightens their feelings of arousal and love for the photographer. It is akin to the feelings evoked by the psychology of Stockholm Syndrome.

Making demands of women feels very unnatural to beta males because those men have little experience with women beyond that which is acquired by flaunting their ability to provide, sympathy mewl on cue, and show up on time. To beta males, the notion of arousing a woman to dizzying sexual cravings through the conduit of compliance testing is incomprehensible. The beta male invests in women; he knows no other way. The alpha male lures women to invest in him. He knows there is another way.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Biomechanics is God, Game, Science Validates Game, The Id Monster | Comments Off

Contraceptives And Cuckoldry

Feb 5th, 2013 by

Khaaaaan has a post up about a German study which purports to show that the cuckoldry rate — situations where the presumed father is not the biological father of the child — in Germany is around 1%. (Via Glpiggy.)

A few words on that. First, misattribution of paternity can occur in any number of ways. Steve Sailer left some good comments over at Khan’s blog that illustrate in real life, flesh and blood scenarios how cuckoldry rates can be misattributed. Nevertheless, I’m not here to argue that the 1% figure is wrong. In fact, the 1% figure is higher than I assumed. Look at it this way: That recorded 1% cuckoldry rate is more than 30 TIMES the US recorded rape rate of 0.03%.

Besides the actual rate, there are other angles to this id-loaded topic that are worth exploring.

A flaw in assuming present-day cuckoldry rates align with historical cuckoldry rates is the fairly recent widespread availability of contraceptives and abortion. How many women who sleep with interloper males are using birth control? Probably most, and more so if those women are higher SES. How many are aborting the fetus, should contraception fail or not be used, before hubby finds out or is doomed to raise a child as an unwitting cuckold? Again, I’d guess most. That 1% figure may simply be a reflection of the fact that cheap and effective modern contraceptives bite into a possibly larger historical cuck rate. And since our sexual natures are the product of millions of years of fine-tuning, it would make sense for male jealousy and mate-guarding instincts to have evolved, especially if the real cuckoldry rate (and not just the “don’t worry, I’m on the Pill” shadow cuckoldry rate in which the act is performed but the consequence is averted) in the environment of evolutionary adaptation was considerably higher than 1%.

Or: Don’t start hedging your bets that women are no more than 1% evil.

Then there is the issue of serial monogamy. Serial monogamy is much more the norm now than it was in the past. Women on second marriages (or on post-divorce second dating lives) bring their kids from the first marriage into any new relationship. As much as the new boyfriend or husband might not want those bastards around him, he is going to participate in their raising in some form or another if he plans on banging out the mother for any length of time greater than two weeks. He is, in effect, a de facto cuckold, albeit an informed and, presumably, voluntary one. (Though the definition of voluntary is a bit loose when one is put in the position of weighing the odds of future fux against the pain of supporting present bastards. Duress matters if you are a desperate beta male willing to put up with snot-nosed shit to get some floppy, aged action.)

Women, too, are subject to unwelcome participation in the raising of unrelated children if they are in second relationships with divorced single dads, but in practice this punishment is not meted out to women nearly as often as it is to men, because it is usually the ex-wife who has full-time custody of her kids, or the single mom who is solely raising her hatchlings, and hence it is usually the sloppy seconds beta male who is getting the screws by groveling for sexual relief from these SMV leftovers.

So there are really two kinds of cuckoldry: De facto and deceptive. The latter is far worse from a moral calculus (it really is the equivalent of female rape, except the pain is dragged out over eighteen years) but the former is no less an indictment of the growing dysfunction of the modern sexual market.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Marriage Is For Chumps, Misandry, Sluts, Ugly Truths | Comments Off

The Opposite Of Hoverhand: Hineyhand

Feb 5th, 2013 by

Ah, hoverhand, that most identifiable of nervous, self-conscious beta male tells. Do you hover, body or hand? If you do, you must stop doing it so that women can begin to perceive you as a more attractive man, i.e. a man with a functional penis. Once you stop hovering, you may move on to step two: slyly placing your hand on or near a girl’s erogenous zones. What’s that? You’re afraid? Do not be afraid. Fear leads to beta. Beta leads to bitterness. Bitterness leads to involuntary celibacy.

Say again? Now you’re afraid a praying man-chin feminist will bite your head off if you put your hand on her in a less than obsequious manner? Silly fledgling. If you aren’t brusque about it, no woman will do that. Not even a feminist. Instead, the feminist will secretly enjoy your privileged sexual predations, and will only realize a day later after you have ignored her calls and text messages that she succumbed to an alpha male, whereupon her indignation will rise like froth in a stew of mashed ego gruel, and she will write a livid blog post about the asshole PUA she supposedly couldn’t care less for who can’t stop thinking about her.

Some of you burgeoning ladyslayers are wondering, “Where do I put my hand, then?”. Glad you asked! Here’s a graphic catered to the visual orientation preference of men.

The guy in the top left pic is headed toward LJBF land, if he isn’t there already. Beta. The guy in the bottom right is scared of his own shadow. Lesser beta with delusions of grandeur. The guy in the bottom left is doing it just right. Not too much grabass, like the boyfriend in the top right, but just enough to escalate her sexual response without triggering her egg protection protocol. As the night wears on and the seduction deepens, you should move your hand into previously inviolable regions. You’re on the right track if you can feel ass crack. As a reader says,

The guy at the waistline [bottom left] has to choose: up and out, or down and in.

Up and out, or down and in? Alpha male problems.

Where is the omega male’s hand? Why, feverishly pumping his pud ‘twixt forefinger and thumb!

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Alpha, Funny/Lolblogs, Game, The Pleasure Principle | Comments Off

Choice Quotes From Michel Houellebecq

Feb 4th, 2013 by

Michel Houellebecq is the patron prophet and Saint Shiv of Chateau Heartiste. He is a Frenchman novelist who grasps the essential corrosive nature of modern Western society, and who is unafraid to tell it like it is (in language poetic enough to disarm the outer defenses of the Cathedral). Here are a few choice quotes from his books which, I am sure you will agree, closely align with the CH message.

It’s a fact, I mused to myself, that in societies like ours sex truly represents a second system of differentiation, completely independent of money; and as a system of differentiation it functions just as mercilessly. The effects of these two systems are, furthermore, strictly equivalent. Just like unrestrained economic liberalism, and for similar reasons, sexual liberalism produces phenomena of absolute pauperization. Some men make love every day; others five or six times in their life, or never. Some make love with dozens of women, others with none. It’s what’s known as ” the law of the market”. In an economic system where unfair dismissal is prohibited, every person more or less manages to find their place. In a sexual system where adultery is prohibited, every person more or less manages to find their bed mate. In a totally liberal economic system certain people accumulate considerable fortunes; others stagnate in unemployment and misery. In a totally liberal sexual system certain people have a varied and exciting erotic life; others are reduced to masturbation and solitude…………

Love as a kind of innocence and as a capacity for illusion, as an aptitude for epitomizing the whole of the other sex in a single loved being rarely resists a year of sexual immorality, and never two. In reality the successive sexual experiences accumulated during adolescence undermine and rapidly destroy all possibility of projection of an emotional and romantic sort; progressively, and in fact extremely quickly, one becomes as capable of love as an old slag.

– Whatever, quoted in a review of the novels of Michel Houellebecq, “The Suicide of the West“.

The sexual market is not just differentiated from the money market; it is foundational of it. The money market is subordinate to the sexual market, though most times to the conscious observer it seems as if the money motive is all there is. But the exquisite perfidy of the sexual market relies in good part on its shadowy functioning. It works out of sight and mind because few can, or are willing to, discern its intricate workings, and even then, fully discerned and understood, it continues working. Its power is absolute.

Houellebecq here correctly identifies the winners and losers in the liberalized sexual market, and his hierarchy matches the writings uncovered on ancient CH scrolls:

Alpha males: biggest winners.
Alpha females: marginal winners.
Beta females: marginal losers.
Beta males: biggest losers.
Omega males and females: same as it ever was.

But the alpha male suffers a penalty of the soul for his embarrassing riches. As the commenter The Man Who Was… put it:

“Success with women is more disillusioning than failure.”

Houellebecq says much the same. The least romantic are those who have gorged on romance. Like economic prosperity, fulfillment of man’s deepest desires is the very success that suffocates his idealism, crushes his hope, and enervates his spirit.

The only known cure for a failing empire, like 2013 America, is economic and social collapse, to seed the ground for rebirth. Similarly, the only known cure for a bifurcated, winner-take-all sexual market, is collapse of equalism, that wrong-headed ideology which assumes the sexes are interchangeable. The collapse is inevitable, whether it happens all at once or slowly, because these forces, having been set in motion generations, perhaps millennia ago, perhaps even set in motion at the very beginnings of humanity, are incorruptible. One cannot manage or reason with the Gods of the Copybook Headings. The prime directive, will, once again, as it has done so many times before, shatter all illusions.

***

It is interesting to note that the “sexual revolution” was sometimes portrayed as a communal utopia, whereas in fact it was simply another stage in the historical rise of individualism. As the lovely word “household” suggests, the couple and the family would be the last bastion of primitive communism in liberal society. The sexual revolution was to destroy these intermediary communities, the last to separate the individual from the market. The destruction continues to this day.

– The Elementary Particles

The modern leftoid is not a Communist. He is a radical indivdualist. The nuclear family is the final defense against unfettered individualism. Hence, the need for its destruction. As long as there are functioning nuclear families, there is the possibility for in-groupism, tribal loyalty, and nationalism. And these are anathema to certain peoples. The Western man has at last been reduced to a gram of currency, rendered powerless, unable to perceive his growing powerlessness as his sinister baubles and superficial dopamine fixes become more entertaining, distracting, and enfeebling.

***

To increase desires to an unbearable level whilst making the fulfillment of them more and more inaccessible: this was the single principle upon which Western society was based.

– The Possibility of an Island

Modern Western society has been one giant compliance hoop, to borrow a term from the pick-up literature. Maybe a better way to describe modern Western society is as the mother of all cockteases. The Western man has been orbiting in the LJBF zone for decades, gratification and glory so tantalizingly near, a simulacrum of the moist pleasures of kingship held to his parched lips, yet at the same time all this has remained light years from his possessive clutch, cruelly mocking him from a guarded, viewable distance. As a reader comments:

Show men endless images of beautiful models and actresses and singers, show them endless images of beautiful, slim, women engaging in sex with enthusiasm, tell them that a world of uncommitted and marriageless sex is the norm — then, for reasons they don’t understand, slam the door in their face.

This is not a prescription for long term stability.

We are the front lines of a grand sociological experiment the fruits of which are just now beginning to ripen. There is no way to know the exact contours it will trace, because nothing of this precise nature on this gargantuan scale has befallen an entire civilization of our size, until now. But if past performance of similar civilizational devolutions is indicative of future returns, there is little cause for optimism. The omens are everywhere.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Alpha, Culture, The Id Monster, Ugly Truths | Comments Off

Stop Amnesty Now

Jan 29th, 2013 by

It looks like a bipartisan (read: bi-part the American public’s buttcheeks and ram it home hard) effort by legislators is about to lead to total amnesty for tens of millions of illegal infiltrators (as Israel’s government classifies similar migrants crossing their borders), in exchange for promises — promises! — of stricter border control in the distant future.

Do you ever get the feeling that we live in two Americas? America One, the status whoring playground and experimental lab of the ruling class. America Two, the masses of common sensical, decent people serving as guinea pigs for America One’s pleasure.

So Democrats want new voters and a lock on elections for the next fifty generations. Republicans want cheap chalupas and kickbacks to their corporate sponsors. And the public wants a solvent, livable country again, filled with like-minded people they can trust and count on to be there when the old age SHTF.

Guess who always gets what they want?

Take a stand. Notify your congressional representative, aka Filthy Fuck, of your displeasure with their august body’s program of de facto genocide against the founding and maintaining stock of the once-great American nation.

Not that this will do any good, because the ruling class has no interest in listening to the rabble; in fact, they seem to be of a mind lately to sneer at the rabble and to take joy in sticking it to them good and hard. But at least they’ll be put on notice.

What notice, you ask? Why, the notice of revolution. The notice of secession. The notice that their time, however gaudily invincible it appears right now, will come to an end, and if they were on the wrong side of this simmering intra-white status war they can expect retribution; swift, remorseless, unforgiving, and as gleefully and cruelly administered as the punishment they currently lord over their putative compatriots.

[crypto-donation-box]

Posted in Goodbye America | Comments Off

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »