Feed on
Posts
Comments

Social Scientists Are Discrediting Themselves

Sep 1st, 2015 by

A recent survey of 100 social science studies discovered that 60 of them failed to replicate. (I’d like to reproducibility with that girl on the left.) In scientific terminology, that’s called a “poor showing”.

The new analysis, called the Reproducibility Project, found no evidence of fraud or that any original study was definitively false. Rather, it concluded that the evidence for most published findings was not nearly as strong as originally claimed.

The reasons given for the… oh what shall we call it… INCOMPETENCE of social scientists are:

  1. Pressure to publish novel research and “make a splash”.
  2. The misuse of replication studies by (often younger) scientists who want to attack the original author.
  3. Small sample sizes.
  4. Small methodology differences between the original and reproduced studies. (This would sometimes redound in favor of the original study’s findings.)

I’d like to offer another two possibilities for the wretched state of social science, that I believe more parsimoniously explain the weak and sometimes utterly useless “discoveries” that the field generates on a near-daily basis:

Diversity™ and Equalist Bias.

Diversity is the King of All Moral Crusades in 2015 America, which in practice means that too many non-Whites and women of dubious talent are replacing White men with obvious talent. Corruption, incompetence, and ethnic nepotism are fast becoming the rule rather than the exception in the West as the fields most susceptible to the Diversity™ siren call fill with diversity-quota hires and empty of skilled White men.

Equalist Bias corrupts a field that is dominated by Leftoid Equalists. Social Science has some good eggs (David Buss) but most social scientists are flaming liberal cranks and feminists who simply entered the field eager to co-opt a creeeeeedentialist imprimatur for their preexisting blank slate race and sex creationism religion. This is why CH has said that one’s working assumption should be that 99% of any social science research which comes out of a university with a large and well-funded women’s studies department is worthless drivel. The source matters. Shitlib emotional bias isn’t something the modern social scientist tries to overcome; it’s something she tries to back-rationalize with her work.

The cure for social science is clear: Less Diversity™, More Realtalkers. Hope this hurts.

Posted in Current Events, Goodbye America, Psy Ops, The Id Monster | 64 Comments »

Why Is Anna Merlan Still Employed?

Aug 31st, 2015 by

Anna Merlan has a post up at Jizzebel about Trump, Hitler, Nazis, White Nationalists, and Hitler. That’s really all you need to know. In full, it is as stupid and incoherent and rife with empty-headed aging Millennial snark as CH’s executive summary makes it sound. Basically, shitlibs are flooding their diapers that Whites are starting to do what other racial groups have always done: embrace a race-aware political identity.

But the real story here, as is usually the case with these indignant witch burning histrionics from the thin-skinned bluehair nosepierce generation, is the circus sideshow that defines the life of the author. Let us recall that Anna Merlan is the acid-blooded feminist xenomorph who helped breathe life into the UVA fraternity rape hoax (a hoax roundly exposed by numerous media outlets), who was rightly condemned for her poor journalistic standards (i.e., libel), who lashed out in a vengeful rage and initially refused to own up to her part in the lie, and who finally was forced to issue a snide apology for her efforts at menstrually smearing the reputations of innocent men.

Merlan the Lizard

Merlan the Lizard

A huge cunt, all in all.

Anna Merlan’s been lying her whole life. She’s a Nimrod Class sociopath and attention whore, who uses lies to construct her glowing self-conception. A sane society would shun her kind to the icy wastelands, and never allow her to sully any respectable organization.

Given the well-known background on Anna Merlan — her lying, dissembling, malevolence, man-hating, and unethical, incompetent journalistic practices that make mockery of the field — why is she still employed? How is it that she is still able to have a platform to vomit her lies and libel after everything that is known about her?

Could it be………

NEPOTISM?

Posted in Feminist Idiocy, Goodbye America, Hitting The Wall, Tool Time | 194 Comments »

Comment Of The Week: The Thousand Yard Shiv

Aug 30th, 2015 by

COTW winner is LongWhiteCon, on the id-soaked reality facing White women who bear mixed race kids.

I don’t know too many men who dream about having kids (our nature is different, and it’s a vague abstract thought, mixed with necessary battle-wariness). However, ALL women dream of having kids, from the days they’re 18 months and playing with dolls and gurgling ‘aww, look at the baby-so cute!’. As slightly more mature women (slightly) their thoughts lean towards wanting to see some of themselves in the child they bear. As opposed to the father, they KNOW they’re the mother, and are assuming everything will go to plan. At first, they’re enthralled with their little mocha baby, with blonde hair and green eyes, but at 6 months, they’re aghast at how much the dark gene has taken over, laying to waste all the mother’s traits. A comment from a friend at the ‘caffeecleek’ (peer-group very important) along the lines of ‘she has such lovely brown eyes’ can really be a devastating shiv.

Like CH has said (and something which anthropologist Peter Frost has echoed in his writings), the White European aesthetic, behavioral and physical, is the result of a few thousand years of specialized, highly circumstantial selection for exquisitely refined traits that exist nowhere else in the world. Turning one’s back on that genetic heritage is akin to crapping on the Mona Lisa.

PA adds a painful twist,

That shiv is not for the squeamish, but in perverse times an acid bath of truth can save others from making a horrible mistake.

Another such built-in shiv lies in the word “beautiful.” Sarah Palin called her Downs Syndrome baby that. No scorn on her, as a sick child is a tragedy. But the point is, that nobody calls a normal child “beautiful.”

I see distant acquaintances and occasionally their friends-of-friends on FB post their children’s photos. In the rare cases that it’s a mulatto child of a White woman, there will invariably be a “beautiful” or similar words posted in comments. Almost never, in the case of a White child of a White woman (or a Black child of a Black woman, for that matter.

Intra-female dialogue has its own subtle rules. One of those rules is, I surmise, to appear generous and giving, while distancing oneself from any association with befoulment, as understood by her within the rules of her millieu.

This comment reminded me that I had recently heard a SWPL chick use the word “beautiful” to describe the mystery meat issue in a photo of a mixed race family (white father-black mother). The infant was about as far from “beautiful” as possible, she must have known this, and her little signaling game to her fellow SWPL whites wrested a pursed lip and a curt “hm” from me. Women have an amazing tolerance for these kinds of mincing, passive-aggressive status cues.

Posted in Comment Winners | 265 Comments »

Open Letter To A Loser In Love

Aug 30th, 2015 by

This is an open letter to a loser in love, a beta male who has become bitter about women through repeated romantic failure. You find yourself here, at the Chateau, seeking answers. I am your Prophet and because you are in the Flock I will share with you my field-tested wisdom.

I say this with no malice but you will not like it. But I am going to say it anyway because it is the truth and that’s what you’re looking for. You are projecting all of the characteristic traits of a LOSER. You want to associate with LOSERS for succor, because they don’t threaten the comforting bubble of your whiny persecution complex. You complain about your health, money, job, height, weight, datelessness. You complain that you’re being forced to dance like a monkey for girls. You look in the mirror and complain that you aren’t a Hollywood hunk, and you use this as an excuse for your failure to act with the women you desire. You complain about everything!

This is the key to understanding your problems with women.

Men don’t complain, they ACT. A woman wants to give herself to a man who emanates power and decisiveness and brass balls. A man who says “It’s my way or the highway, baby!” A man with no money, who is fat, who is stupid, who is clueless in every way EXCEPT that he radiates those zero fucks given alpha attitude vibes will get laid all the time.

You bitch about this jerkboy antagonist so you know that this happens. You’ve seen it happen. And the jerk doesn’t just bang out club skanks either. Cute, confident SWPL chicks get horny in the presence of such power. Even a feminist ideologue will beg such a man to fuck her up the ass just to have him pay attention to her for a minute.

Loser in love, your attitude sucks. If you want to start fucking hot girls with sexy bodies, be a MAN. The key to power is not cash or looks or cars or any of that conventional crap you read about in Maxim. Those things are incidental and are only important insofar as they alter your state of mind. The mind is the ultimate weapon. The power is within you. All you have to do is decide to tap it.

Posted in Biomechanics is God, Girls, The Id Monster, Ugly Truths | 83 Comments »

Shiv Of The Week: A Pretender Gets Real

Aug 30th, 2015 by

Chrissie Hynde, the lead singer of The Pretenders (their heyday was in the 1980s), sounds like she’s partaken of the nourishing well of Chateau Heartiste wisdom.

The former chart topper claimed in a Sunday newspaper interview that scantily clad women were likely to “entice a rapist” and that it is their “fault” if they are attacked.

It’s not entirely the skank’s fault, but she bears some personal responsibility for her safety. It’s like if you decide to take a pale stroll through the blackest ghetto at 2AM and get mugged, no sane person will excuse your attacker, but everyone will think you’re quite daft for doing what you did.

She also claimed that pop stars who call themselves feminists but use their sex appeal to sell records were effectively just “prostitutes”.

Hi, Miley!

“If I’m walking around and I’m very modestly dressed and I’m keeping to myself and someone attacks me, then I’d say that’s his fault.

“But if I’m being very lairy and putting it about and being provocative, then you are enticing someone who’s already unhinged — don’t do that.”

She added: “You know, if you don’t want to entice a rapist, don’t wear high heels so you can’t run from him. If you’re wearing something that says ‘Come and —- me’, you’d better be good on your feet… I don’t think I’m saying anything controversial am I?”

No, you’re not Chrissie. This woman is great. She’s speaking truth, girls, listen to her.

“A pop star who’s walking around, parading themselves as a porn star and saying they’re feminists.

“They’re prostitutes.

“I’m not making a value judgment on prostitutes, but just say what you are.”

“Just say what you are.” No, the degenerate freak mafia can’t do that, or they’ll have to face exactly what they are, and they can’t have that. Instead, lovable vivisectors like your truly will do it for them, gleefully.

Posted in Shiv Of The Week, Ugly Truths | 30 Comments »

May As Well Call It Aaron Mendelssohn

Aug 30th, 2015 by

We’ve all heard the story by now: Ashley Madison, the website that claimed to help cheating spouses hook up with each other in complete discretion, was hacked. The hackers released a huge user data dump and it was revealed that 90-95% of AM’s actual users were male, and the remaining were mostly fake female profiles.

Ashley Madison was a scam. But anyone who has the least understanding of sex differences would not be so gullible to think that there are just as many married women interested in anonymous internet sexual liaisons as there are married men interested in the same. Apparently, there are so few married women willing to go online specifically to find an extramarital lover that Ashley Madison could barely crack the 1,000 men:1 real woman ratio.

This is not to say that married women aren’t infidelity risks. But when women, legally taken or otherwise, want to have an illicit affair, their preferred method of target acquisition is a logged-off, face-to-face whirlwind romance, not a lifeless keyboard hunt for a collaborator who will make her feel like the whore she’d rather forget about herself.

A reader writes,

Can hypergamy explain [Ashley Madison’s fake female profiles]? One way to interpret that is, “women have no qualms about leaving their husbands”.

That’s one reason. The dearth of live wives seeking extramarital affairs on Ashley Madison is a consequence of:

  1. the nature of women to prefer their seduction be veiled behind flirtatious feints and parries (as opposed to arid, conspicuous match-ups with equally debased men)
  2. the disposition of wives to simply leave their husbands when they want to start new romances (husbands — and single men in relationships — can better tolerate balancing illicit lovers with a wife or steady girlfriend, even over long periods of time).
  3. the fact that women are not as promiscuous as men.

These are the big three explanations for AM’s 95% man/4.9% fake woman ratio. A fourth explanation — that going online for the explicit purpose of finding a sex partner in crime — is too much for most women’s anti-slut defenses. I suspect the Ashley Madison creators knew this, and figured that the male urge for poosy variety is so strong they could get away with scamming millions of men with impunity. They were right.

Posted in Biomechanics is God, Current Events, Girls, Ugly Truths | 61 Comments »

How Does Donald Trump Take A Penthouse Pet On A Date?

Aug 30th, 2015 by

What’s the opposite of try-hard? That’s Trump.

benfromtexas writes,

Did you guys see the news story, where Trump went on a first date with a Penthouse Pet? He took her for pizza (nothing extravagant), they went to her place, did the deed, and afterwards he gave her a copy of his book and told her to change her name! She said he was amazing! Straight ALPHA!!! The beta media just can’t handle him.

The book was like an anchor; every time she opened it up she was reminded of Trump. He made a Penthouse Pet an alpha widow in one night.

When paradigms shift, you’ll find an apex alpha male standing athwart the fault line, yelling Go.

Posted in Alpha | 69 Comments »

The Race Of Ancient Greeks And Romans

Aug 29th, 2015 by

The dysfunction of modern Greece and Italy (relative to the Northern European norm) leaves many to wonder how it was the distant ancestors of Greeks and Italians — presumably, the same lineage of people — accomplished so much and built empires when their present-day descendants are mired in corruption and crushing debt. What happened between then and now?

Here’s an answer to that riddle: Maybe the ancient Greeks and Romans weren’t anything like modern Greeks and (southern) Italians. It could be that the ancients were a different ethnicity/race — Northern European.

Nobody really talks about the race of ancients Greeks or Romans. It’s assumed they were swarthy Southern Europeans like the people who live there today. But if they weren’t, if they were instead races created from migrations of pale-skinned, blond-haired Northern Europeans, then that would upset a lot of blank slatists. It would affirm, once again, that genes matter. That the same genetic heritage which allowed the 19th and 20th century Germanics to invent practically the entire edifice of the modern technologically advanced civilized world is the heritage that propelled the world-beating achievements of the ancient Greeks and Romans.

Posted in Culture, Globalization | 439 Comments »

Wrong Name Game

Aug 28th, 2015 by

There are essentially two ways available to a man to satisfy a woman’s strong compulsion — call it hypergamy — to relinquish her body and love to a higher status man who is more powerful, in any number of characteristics, than the men in his milieu against whom he competes for the attention of women.

  1. Raise the perception of his SMV. (SMV = sexual market value)
  2. Lower the woman’s perception of her own SMV.

Now, a man can raise how his SMV is perceived by women through objective and subjective means (both are effective, although a good argument can be made that the latter is more enticing as a seduction lure). He can, objectively, increase his mate value by, for example, becoming wealthy or fronting a band in a local club brimming with young cuties.

He can also increase his mate value by learning and acquiring the behavioral traits of an objectively HSMV man that signal to women he too is HSMV. This is the province of Game.

That’s the first option. The second option is the dark art of raising his own SMV by making a woman question her belief in her relative SMV. That is, it’s the art of instilling doubt in a woman about her presumption that she’s out of your league.

Which brings us to today’s topic: Wrong Name Game (WNG for short, daringly sharing an acronym with White Nationalist Game).

Wrong Name Game is a dark art, one of the darker arts of pickup, and also one of the more dangerous to execute with the required level of skillfulness. Failure at WNG will likely blow you out of the running completely.* So, proceed to read with caution.

Reader Observasaurus Rex gives us a perfect anecdote of Wrong Name Game in action,

Girl: Hey I’ve got to (Flaking because reasons).
You: Sure Stacy, catch you later.
Girl: My name’s not Stacy, it’s (whatever).
You: You’re the blonde girl in the sundress from (venue) right?
Girl: No I’m (blah blah blah).
You: k

WNG is used here as an anti-flake tactic, which is how it will be most often used. Obviously, the idea is to make it seem as if you’re juggling so many women you occasionally mix up names (HSMV), and that this particular girl whose name you mistook for some other girl’s name (“Stacy”) didn’t leave much of an impression with you.

So, WNG both raises your perceived SMV and lowers the girl’s self-perceived SMV. It’s a two-fer, and that’s why it is nuclear off the nimble tongue of a smooth operator.

Notice what Observasaurus did here that helped the believability of his WNG:

One, he didn’t make a big production out of addressing this girl by a wrong name. He simply passed it off as a credible oversight tail-ended with a friendly “catch you later”.

Two, when she corrected him, he didn’t immediately lunge into beta-ish apologia for his rudeness. He did the opposite, pressing for more information about her looks/style which forced her into qualifying herself to him.

Three, when the ride was over, he cut it off with a perfunctory “k”, leaving the girl to think that he wasn’t much bothered by having thought she was some other girl.

All these conversational feints — so subtle and brief in execution, which is typical when Game concepts are applied in the real world — came together into a synergistic pairing of his higher SMV to her (now) lowered SMV, and the result is a tiny tingle in her hindbrain telling her that maybe this man is worth getting to know.

*It is VERY easy to fuck up WNG. I don’t recommend inexperienced betas try this, until they have gotten some poon notches to build their inner confidence. There is a lot of opportunity for WNG to backfire, in which you would sound like you deliberately mistook her name, and which will then make you seem like you are head over heels for her. The artistry of WNG is paramount; it demands a near-superhuman affectation of casual, unflustered aloofness.

Posted in Game | 137 Comments »

Shitlib Media “Gotcha Questions” Are Beta Bait

Aug 28th, 2015 by

Dr. Giggles draws an astute analogy between the snarky “gotcha questions” that are the empty-headed, but rhetorically potent, semantic weapons of shitlib journalists advocates and the game concept of Beta Bait, which is a form of courtship test that women subconsciously use to smoke out supplicating, sexually thirsty beta males.

It’s amazing how Game is an integral part of a politician’s repertoire. The shitlib’s comments on David Duke wasn’t the only one Trump had to sidestep during the interview. They tried to get him on everything from his personal religious beliefs to his opinions on old controversial topics like Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill. DT didn’t take the bait….Which made me realize these gotcha questions are the same thing as Beta Bait!

Precisely. This is why it’s fair to say male shitlibs are wonanly: they attack using the verbal tactics preferred by women. Low T does that to a man.

The shitlib reporter hit Trump with the dating trap equivalent of a girl asking a man if he’s dating anyone else. “Donald, are you seeing David Duke, or any other proudly White supporters? Because if you are we can’t keep dating.”

Trump handled the David Duke question with his usual ZFG alpha male aplomb. “If it makes you feel better, sure I’ll do that for you…” is a huge neg. He basically called the reporter a wussy who needed a better man to stroke his delicate schoolgirl ego.

Neutralzing shitlib journalist beta bait is the same as neutralizing beta bait from women: Ignore it and plow into your favored topic, or reframe it as evidence of a character deficiency of your interlocutor. Either way, remember rule #1: NEVER APOLOGIZE. This includes never acting defensively, or butthurt with the accusation, or offended that your honor has been besmirched. Own the room, own conversation, own your antagonist.

Shitlib: “Do you agree that this latest tragedy of two white reporters shot dead means that we need stricter gun control?”

A Soldier Of Trump: “That’s interesting. Do you think a gun wrote the killer’s anti-White racist manifesto?”

If you can game women, you can game the leftoid media. If you can game the leftoid media, you win.

Posted in Culture, Current Events, Game, Girls, Psy Ops | 68 Comments »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Also reachable over Tor: roissyrwpgxawb3etwznvay4eelbws4lkdtr4tt2r7wxb6adq6pajtqd.onion