There are two reasons men get bored with women: Intellectual incompatibility and beauty incompatibility. The less mentally stimulating or aesthetically stimulating a woman is to a man, the quicker he will grow bored with her and throw his worm back into the waters for nibbles from new fish. Which of these two factors controls a larger portion of a man’s interest? Beauty, clearly, and especially so in the critical first few months, but assuming a threshold for acceptable beauty is met intellectual attraction or lack thereof serves to capture a man’s interest beyond the three-month mark. If neither the beauty nor intellectual threshold of attraction is crossed, a man will get bored after the first ejaculation. If both are met, a man is susceptible to the woman’s ploys to entrap him into marriage.
Beauty and intellectual compatibility are relative to the man’s dating market value. If the man is a 9, he will need a woman who is a 9 or 10 in beauty, and no less than 10 IQ points lower than his own, if he is to avoid getting bored with her after a month or two. Although I’ve known plenty of people whose wit, charm, and humor belied their average IQs, I will use IQ in this post as a rough proxy for intellectual and personality compatibility. For purposes of discussion, I’ll set aside the few exceptions where the IQ of the partners is equal but their interests are so contrary that boredom becomes a manifestation of despising the other person’s hobbies.
What follows is a handy chart illustrating Time To Boredom for the average man (male dating value rank = 5 on a scale of 0 – 10 inclusive) based on the two critical variables of female beauty and IQ. Note that Time To Boredom is a relative value that will, on average, occur much sooner for a high ranking man than it would for a low ranking man. It is conceivable, in fact, that a male 10 will get bored with every woman he meets within hours if he doesn’t have mistresses to take up the slack in his attention span, while a male zero might take years to get bored of a female zero, although in the latter case the boredom might be just as quickly forthcoming but given the dearth of options available to the male zero he will work hard to keep his boredom and disgust hidden from his ugly partner.
Female IQ is measured against a male baseline of 100.
Female Hotness Female Time To Male
Rank IQ Boredom
0 +-10 points 1 nanosecond (Neural disgust registers
before conscious awareness)
0 >-10 points same diff
0 >+10 points same diff
1 +-10 points 1 millisecond (time to retinal burn)
1 >-10 points irrelevant
1 >+10 points 1 millisecond to boredom + annoyance
2 +-10 points 1 second
2 >-10 points 1 minute (male inspired to
ridicule the dummy)
2 >+10 points 1 minute (male inspired to
ridicule the nerd)
3 +-10 points 5 minutes (male tries to find
redeeming quality)
3 >-10 points 3 minutes (male fails at finding
redeeming quality)
3 >+10 points 6 minutes (takes male extra minute to
realize she’s ugly thanks to her
impressive knowledge of
computer hardware)
4 +-10 points 1 hour (male wants same night lay)
4 >-10 points 1/2 hour (male wants same hour lay)
4 >+10 points 2 hours (males wants same night lay
with talky talky chick)
5 +-10 points 5 weeks (bloom off the rose after
third bang)
5 >-10 points 3 weeks (pillow talk excruciating)
5 >+10 points 4 weeks (male charmed, then annoyed,
by chick’s nerdiness)
6 +-10 points 3 months (best he’s ever had,
but still not that good)
6 >-10 points 2 months (her hobby is beer pong)
6 >+10 points 2.5 months (emasculated by her
sharp tongue)
7 +-10 points 1 year (a beta’s heaven)
7 >-10 points 9 months (tard kills boners dead)
7 >+10 points 1.5 years (male inspired by her,
but relationship unstable)
8 +-10 points 5 years (even a beta will get tired
of sex with same hottie)
8 >-10 points 5 years (she’s too hot to care
about tardness)
8 >+10 points 5 years (she’s too hot to care
about nerdiness)
9 +-10 points 30 years (beta suffers seizure from
constant stream of endorphins)
9 >-10 points 30 years (she’s too hot to notice
tardness)
9 >+10 points 30 years (she’s too hot to notice
much of anything except
how hot she is)
10 +-10 points forever (entered realm of unreality)
10 >-10 points forever + 1 (tardness means she can’t
tell he’s a beta)
10 >+10 points forever -1 (one day, she uses big word
that renders him impotent)
As you can see, it is almost guaranteed that men of every status rank will grow bored with their girlfriends, dates, wives, fuckbuddies without an external injection of groinal stimulation. There is only one way a man can delay Time To Boredom:
Did Obama successfully end a war I was unaware of? Did he open an anti-American church in Chicago? Did a member of the Nobel committee get a sweetheart no-money-down deal on a Chicago penthouse?
Any “peace” prize that is awarded to Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama but not to Ronald W. Reagan, who did more for the cause of world peace than any other leader of the past 50 years by helping unshackle millions from the scourge of genocidal Communism, is not worth the froo froo parchment it’s printed on.
We are living in the Age of Great Lies. Keep calling out their bullshit. The liars are starting to get nervous.
When you take a look at this series of photos ask yourself if any other world leader has the cogliones to do what Silvio did. Silvio, despite being a foot shorter and 50 pounds lighter in muscle than Michelle, gives her the “come to me” greeting with a shit eating grin plastering his face. Total alpha power move. Barack was AMOGed, and he’s none too happy about it. Note especially in photo #3 Barack’s response to Silvio’s tooling of him — like a nervous boyfriend getting outshined by a charming interloper, he gloms onto Michelle in a weak attempt to cockblock Silvio. Beta. The world’s presumptive numero uno alpha male cockblocks an AMOG by addressing him directly.
And look at that smile on Michelle’s face! I haven’t seen her happier.
Luckily, the AMOG is more oversized totem than reality. Nine out of ten times you will not have to worry about another man deliberately interfering with your pickup. It is even rarer for a man to hit on your girlfriend in your presence. (This latter flavor of evil normally happens when the victim boyfriend gives off the beta vibes of someone who is hanging on by a thread to his girlfriend, and knows it.) But it does happen, and if you go out a lot to meet women or to chill with your lady you should be prepared for those times you get AMOGed, because nothing lowers your status — or your testosterone — faster than a tooling by a socially stronger man. And every woman who sees it go down will treat you like the plague.
I go on to describe tactics for dealing with especially aggressive alpha males who are trying to steal your girl. Go read the whole thing of beauty over there.
Reader mailbag is an opportunity for you, the readers, to help lovelorn men (and women) achieve happiness in their lives. You may save a virgin tonight. Or a faltering marriage. Or a high living bachelor from the hooks and chains of marriage.
Email #1: Once more into the breach
Hello! Would be nice to get some opinions on the salvage ability or odds of getting back together/course of action to get back together of a little talked about situation an ultra short term “relationship”. – about 2-3 weeks.
This woman is a PhD, published and a well paid practicing psychologist/statistician…..are there certain guidelines when dealing with women like this..maybe she gets offended easily…or maybe she does not have a good sense of humor?
First date no previous contact ..date was excellent, great chemistry, passionate kissing call and email by her “had great time can’t wait to talk to you again”.
Second meeting about 10 days later..she invites me over late at night/early morning, massage, cuddling, close intimate time (hours) though no sex. Email by her next day “great seeing you last night just giving you the heads up might need to contact you for consulting again”.
However, after I received that email but before I checked my email to see it I sent her a text(SMS) with what I thought was a friendly ironic/sarcastic joking message about how she was so seductive..joking that she was the femme fatale that took advantage of the innocent guy that evening (an ironic joke). I felt we had a close enough rapport to handle this plus we had developed several inside jokes and plus she is a witty person and she is very physically attractive.
The following day she drops the bomb…after reading the text(SMS) message she regretted having me over and that comment turned things sour for her/felt uncomfortable and she shut everything down “you are a nice person, good luck”. LOL (I say).
Okay then, knowing specifically ruined things should make this straightforward, right? What is the plan of action (timeline, actions, etc.) to re-establish communication and get things back on track? This has to be approached differently than a longer term relationship because there are very few attachments/feelings. My intuition says NC [No Contact] is not appropriate, right?
Recent happenings:
Its been exactly 8 days since her cutting it off “break up” email to me. I sent her a voice mail and email apologizing for any hurt I caused her by the joke and emphasized it was a joke and lets just move on. I reassured I meant no disrespect or unkindness. These two were sent the day after I received her email.
I went NC for about 5 days and then shot her another upbeat voice mail telling her about a exciting thing that happened to me, wished her a good day and then mentioned that I agree it is good that we are calling it quits. I may have also sent a SMS or two earlier in the 5 day period. I don’t have a problem being naturally upbeat in communications with her.
All communications I send emphasize compassionately (not pleadingly) that I apologize for hurting her feelings…but I have never, ever, asked or suggested she take me back or anything of that nature. Seriously, I just want her to know that I did not mean anything bad by the joke and that I really did have a nice time with her. I’m not apologizing to her in a manipulative way so she will take me back..I just want to make it clear I was not trying to be an asshole.
I did, however, suggest we meet in person to talk this over. Anyway, She absolutely has not responded to any of them….everyone here seems to be able to get their girl to respond to them! This girl will not!
What do you do if a woman she goes completely silent? What snaps them out of it? Since we don’t know each other well should I be assertive and go ring her doorbell??? (I don’t think so but this is a different kind of situation). And what influence does the very short timespan of our knowing each other have on the NC strategy? I have a feeling there should be some modifications because how will a girl miss you if she has not formed strong attachment? She was very affectionate, wanted more contact with me and I feel we made a connection. Tomorrow will be the 9th day post “breakup” email. comments??
thnks, D.
First, get an editor. This email is too long. Anyone else interested in receiving my wisdom has a better chance of being picked for reader mailbag if the email is two paragraphs or less.
There are no different guidelines when dealing with a credentialed woman than there are dealing with any other kind of woman. Nearly all women respond the same to game. An analogy: A male MIT grad will be just as turned on by a nice rack and ass as a male high school dropout.
Here is where I believe you went off the rails: You forced her anti-slut defense hand with your text message. It’s not a good idea to insinuate that a woman is a manipulative sexpot before you’ve had sex with her. It’s especially not a good idea after the second date when you had almost crossed the goal line with hours (!) of foreplay only to leave her unsatisfied AT HER PLACE. And it’s really not a good idea to send a follow-up “ironic” text message that can so easily be misinterpreted without facial cues.
I bet this is what she was thinking: “Is this guy toying with me?”
I bet this is what her gina was thinking: “What kind of beta kisses me for hours without closing the deal?”
I’m not surprised she dropped the cunty “good luck” text/call on you the next day. However, your second big mistake was in assuming her cunty reply was the end of the road. It was not. It was, instead, a killer shit test, which you failed. “LOL”? That’s how you responded? Do you know what “LOL” says to a girl who just called your shit out and put your balls in a vice?
“Ha, I got under his skin. I *knew* he was weak. Folded like a cheap lawn chair.”
Moving on, your post-mortem attempts to salvage the momentum you had on the second date are just cringeworthy. You “apologized for any hurt” you caused her? Dude, did you read the 16 Commandments of Poon? YOU NEVER APOLOGIZE FOR YOUR ACTIONS. And you certainly never apologize when you’ve done nothing wrong. This is “How To Handle Female Psychology 101″. Massive, space-time ripping, Jumbotron fail.
Then of course you dug your hole straight to China with multiple follow-up texts and apologies. Are you a parody of a beta? I have a hard time believing someone who knows about my site would commit such elementary errors. You insist you’re not apologizing to her in a manipulative way, but that’s exactly what you’re doing. What else do you call apologizing for no reason, doing so over and over again in the face of the silent treatment, and generally acting like a desperate pud who hasn’t been touched by a woman since he puckered up to his mom’s teat for a meal?
No Contact strategy is for men on the road to alphahood. Who ever said you could work with alphas? No Contact strategy for winning back an EX-GIRLFRIEND won’t work on girls you’ve actively repulsed, and haven’t even banged.
Allot yourself a few hours and re-read everything on this site. Absorb it. And then not until you come to an epiphany about your counterproductive behavior should you consider meeting a new woman.
The emailer sent me a post script:
What about this kind of attitude:
Just sending a message like this which is treating her like a bad little girl (calling her bluff)
“Stop with your tests..I can see right through them!”
or
“you had me going there for a while, but now I see you are just playing games” so stop it because I am not amused and they are not working anyway….you are wasting your time.”
Comments? on this kind of attitude when she does not reply…furthermore, I have heard that women will test you by even breaking up for no reason..just to see how you handle it….have you heard of that?
Dude, this chick is unsalvageable. Too many mistakes of a deal-killing nature ruined your shot at turning it around with her. The most alpha-iest, wittiest, asshole-iest text or email in the world isn’t going to save you now. All it’s going to do is further destroy your dignity. I wish I could tell you something more positive, but the fact is, at this point the most alpha response would be:
No response.
In the future, stick to these rules:
Hours of foreplay is beta. Always be closing.
Never apologize, even if you accidentally kill her cat.
Don’t text. If you must text, keep it short and sweet. Force yourself to write no more than five word replies without the crutch of emoticons.
Email #2: Don’t embrace me, bro!
I am dating a woman who periodically characterizes our relationship as one of casual dating. From there she proceeds to talking about other guys. Sometimes I counter with discussions of my other (presently fictional) girls. Other times I tell her she’s not allowed to date other guys. I’m always annoyed by the conversation.
Understanding that text book responses include agree and amplify, don’t let it phase me, and get other girls, any other alternatives you might suggest?
L.
A common shit test women employ is the “Anti-commitment” ruse. The way you responded (by mentioning other girls) is not good. Most women will see through that counterinsurgency tactic as the flailings of a man who got his ego pricked.
I suggest responding in one of two ways:
Ignore her provocations. A simple “Cool” will suffice when she pulls this rabbit out of her hat.
Call her bluff, obliquely. “Phew, I was hoping you’d say that.” Then say nothing more. If she presses, (and 99% of women will press), all you have to know is that you are in the driver’s seat. A woman pressing for info is a woman who has lost hand. Go on to inform her “We’re playing it by ear. I like your maturity about this.”
Reframe, baby. Turn that bitch right round.
Email #3: The silverback doesn’t say sorry
Hey – wondering if you could clear up a crucial point your philosophy of game that’s been troubling me for some time now. You say explicitly that men shouldn’t simply “be themselves” and should impersonate confidence and dominance in order to win women. Clearly you say this in an effort to increase a mans confidence, a laudable goal I couldn’t agree with more. Yet when I’ve tried “not being myself” and faking confidence and strength, paradoxically, I actually felt much LESS confident and secure than those times when I’ve simply been myself! And I’m sure this came off in my emotional demeanor, because when I’ve tried faking confidence I’ve actually done worse with women, and things would only get better when I got sick of faking it and scorned to be anything other than be myself. Women would then immediately pick up on my confidence and respond positively.
Further, it seems to be that most betas problems is that they are afraid to actually be themsleves – to admit their desires, to go after what they want, to take the mask off, and their “niceness” is not necessarily who they are but who they think they should be. The “don’t be yourself” theme is one of the cornertsones of your approach, and you repeat it many times, but it seems to actually generate more insecurity and anxiety than being yourself, which might take courage and strength. The great paradox seems to be that faking confidence seems to doom you to not getting confidence, wheras refusing to fake who you are seems to the first step towards generating genuine confidence. Can you clarify your thinking for me? Thanks so much!
G.
More precisely, I say men shouldn’t “be themselves” if being themselves is not getting them laid. Alphas who are getting pussy can be their bad selves all they want.
If you’re feeling confident being yourself then that will redound in positive female attention. Then there is no reason for you to change your personality wholesale. Otherwise, I really don’t see the point of your email, except as a feeble attempt to undermine a core tenet of game. Are you a woman impersonating a man? Feel free to be honest.
Confidence is the result of years of successful interaction with women. A man getting the love of women is a confident man. A man getting scorned is a doubtful man. Confidence is not some abstract, nebulous ephemera that alights like cosmic dust on a man who wills it into existence. Confidence is a manifest set of behaviors and attitudes that reflect a man’s inner emotional harmony. This emotional harmony is better known as “becoming alpha”. A man not getting what he wants in life can observe, learn, and mimic the behaviors of confident men until he starts experiencing the success he wants and his emotional state follows in accordance. There is no definition of confidence that doesn’t include these behaviors and attitudes.
Email #4: DHV
I have been looking for this site for 3 years. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
S.
Me balls, they are licked. You’re welcome.
Email #5: Lie to me I promise I’ll believe
Hey, I just discovered your blog. It’s great, keep it up.
How do you react to the “is she hotter than me” shit test? I can laugh most shit tests off pretty effectively, but this one utterly baffles me. You can’t just pretend like she didn’t say it. “she” is of course always a 10, probably a celebrity. Can you just say “yes”? Deflect it with a joke? What do you think?
L.
Reframe. “I like confident women. Are you self-confident?”
Alternatively: “She’s different hot.”
Email #6: Bloupie bonanza
First off, I like your blog. You are a great writer! I don’t apply your techniques in my life, but it’s still a really fun read.
I read your article – “What a Girl’s Job Tells You” – and read your comments about girls that are bloggers:
If she writes a confessional online diary, expect her to be passive-aggressive, petty, moody, cruel, untrustworthy, vengeful, and highly libidinous. Make a sex tape as soon as it is feasible so you can use it as blackmail in the event of post-breakup threats to out your dirty laundry on her blog. Sexual Satisfaction Rating: N/A Long Term Potential Rating: N/A
I was wondering how universal you think this assessment is? What evidence, if any, do you have to back it up?
As it turns out, I am dating a chick that has one of these blogs. If you have first-hand experience, I’d like to hear a bit more.
Thanks,
T.
Yes, my assessment is accurate. My evidence is double digit bloupie (blogger groupie) hookups with girls who also write blogs. Sure, there are notable exceptions, (one sweetiepie comes to mind right now), but most chicks who write exhibitionist blogs are going to share some damning personality traits, and not the kind of traits that make for a good long term prospect or marriage material, if that’s what you’re looking for. But if you want a wife or girlfriend who is an emotional basketcase, a born again slut, and an insecure saboteur all in one delightful package, then you can’t go wrong with a blogger chick. Double up on the condoms.
For these reasons, I stopped hooking up with blogger chicks. Dating them was beginning to feel like a broken record. Same old same old. They are great lays and can be a lot of fun at times, but their neuroses and awkwardly self-debasing gameplaying can quickly grow tiresome.
I now actively screen for girls who *don’t* write blogs, much like I screen out girls with multiple cats. If I find out she writes a blog, particularly a sex or relationship oriented blog, I get my bang in and immediately demote her to third tier. It’s been a big improvement to date only girls who don’t feel a need to splash their dirty laundry and hangups all over the internet.
I received a thankful acknowledgment from emailer #1, “D”.
I enjoyed the feedback, I’m glad to have received it, thanks. I had only stumbled upon your blog after all of that happened, so, no, I did not have an enlightened perspective when approaching that situation. Now I do 😉
Sounds like it was an authentic advice seeker. Sir, your incredible betaness is forgiven. But henceforth you cannot plead ignorance. PS ditch the smilie.
My goal is to learn from this..so what would have been appropriate counter tactics to her:
1. killer shit test…I actually did not reply “LOL” (that was my comment when I wrote it up to send into your blog). My original reply to her was, “I did not mean anything negative with my text message and if you want to break it off that is your right (I’m fine with it).”
What would have been an appropriate reply to “pass” the shit test?
Ok, good thing the “LOL” isn’t what you sent. Unfortunately, the text you did send is even worse. Too wordy, too apologetic, too passive aggressive. An appropriate response to her “Good luck” text would have been: Radio silence for a day, then a text message saying “You too.” Your goal at that point was to get under her skin and make her wonder what you’re thinking.
2. Regarding these: (your comments)
I bet this is what her gina was thinking: “What kind of beta kisses me for hours without closing the deal?”
This one she apparently got over because the day after she emailed me reiterating to me how she enjoyed her time with me and said we’d have to do it again soon….so it left only one issue ….the following:
I bet this is what she was thinking: “Is this guy toying with me?”
So how could I have defused her anti-slut defense barrier? Should I playfully have said that she can’t take a joke?
Since you already activated her ASD, you needed to deactivate it. One way to do that is to cancel a scheduled date. Another way, in your specific case, is to cut off all texting. Don’t tell a girl she can’t take a joke, no matter how playfully. Saying that is walking back from your supposed offense, and therefore giving her power. An alpha does not walk back; he owns his offensiveness. Reversing an activated ASD is tough, and not something for the faint of balls.
By the way, everyone should check out the comments to yesterday’s post for the… stimulating… banter between me and the whore entity known as Feministx. Good times.
To find out what people actually prefer in sex partners it’s much better to observe what they do than to ask them what they do. (You noting this, GSS nerds?) Our sex preferences, being the bedrock human value that underlies all other values, is also the one most susceptible to self-deceit. In that vein, a billion readers sent me a link to the blog of the online dating service OkCupid that had a post about research that compared the rates that people of different races respond to messages sent to them by horny admirers. You can go read the full article, including charts, here. I imagine it’ll be genuinely eye-opening to those who’ve been living in a windowless basement their whole lives.
The author, Christian, good SWPL that he likely is, interprets the data from a “racism is alive and well” perspective, but we here at CH headquarters know better. These are the ugliest of the ugly truths. Read on.
The author writes:
When I first started looking at first-contact attempts and who was writing who back, it was immediately obvious that the sender’s race was a huge factor. Here are just a handful of the numbers that illustrate that:
Black men love Asian chicks because they play hard to get. Really hard to get. The big surprise is the love that Indian women (dot, not feather) *don’t* have for their Indian brothers. Wassupwitdat, subcontinental ladies? I’ve written before that it’s likely the natural human preference, for all races of people, is to date, and particularly marry, within race. OKcupid is just one American online dating service (which skews young, educated and progressive) so we aren’t seeing the full picture, but assuming this data is even remotely indicative of reality outside of the online dating world, then one wonders why Indian men turn off their own women. Is this an emigrant phenomenon? If we dumped a bunch of white guys in Bombay would the Indian women immediately jettison their homeboys for the fresh white meat? Or is it just Americanized Indian chicks that have the Temperate Zone Fever?
The author goes on to explain how they calculated reply rates by race, describing the match compatibility system that OKcupid uses. You can read the details there, but in short, it looks as though, given an exact match on all other variables, people are choosing to reply or to not reply based on the one variable of race.
When viewing the charts below, keep in mind that yellow is a neutral (expected) reply rate, red is a reply rate that is lower than predicted by match compatibility, and green is a reply rate higher than predicted.
Now let’s look at the vastly different table of actual reply rates for messages, sent by men to women (I know our gay readers are interested in same-sex versions of these tables, and I will produce them next week):
The numbers on the perimeter of the table are the weighted average rates for each column/row. Here’s what we know:
Black women are sweethearts. Or just talkative. But either way, they are by far the most likely to reply to your first message. In many cases, their response rate is one and a half times the average, and overall black women reply about a quarter more often.
That’s not all we know, Christian. Some other possible reasons why black women reply at higher rates to men of all races:
– they’re sluttier.
– they’re more open-minded.
– they’re more experimental.
– they have lower standards.
– they get less attention from men in general so they resort to casting their net farther and wider for a nibble.
Note also that black women reply at the lowest rates to black men. For all the talk from black women about how much they want to date black men, their actual online preferences suggest they really want to date anyone *but* a black man.
White men get more responses. Whatever it is, white males just get more replies from almost every group. We were careful to preselect our data pool so that physical attractiveness (as measured by our site picture-rating utility) was roughly even across all the race/gender slices. For guys, we did likewise with height.
Maybe I should try my hand at online dating again. I did it a few times, with surprisingly good results (for me, anyway; not so much for the husband of the chick who agreed to meet me), but despite my unusual success in the online world, I don’t recommend it as anything more than a supplement to meeting girls in real life. The main reason why online dating sucks is simple: The kind of girls who have to hide behind a monitor to meet men often look like this:
So which women give white guys like me the most love? Native Americans, Other, and Black chicks. My memories of sweet intimacy with black girls are fond.
White women prefer white men to the exclusion of everyone else—and Asian and Hispanic women prefer them even more exclusively. These three types of women only respond well to white men. More significantly, these groups’ reply rates to non-whites is terrible. Asian women write back non-white males at 21.9%, Hispanic women at 22.9%, and white women at 23.0%. It’s here where things get interesting, for white women in particular. If you look at the match-by-race table before this one, the “should-look-like” one, you see that white women have an above-average compatibility with almost every group. Yet they only reply well to guys who look like them. There’s more data on this towards the end of the post.
Speculation time: Did the mass of white SWPL women vote for Obama to assuage their subconscious guilt for prefering white men as mates? The jig is up white ladies. The next time I hear one of you braying about “racism this” and “racism that” I’m gonna shove this data right back in your pieholes.
Based on the weighted average rates at the bottom of the chart, Indian and Asian girls are the coyest women. Men, it’s a solid gameplan to avoid dating these chicks if you want to get some action before the tenth date.
Let’s see what happens when it’s the women writing the messages to men.
The first thing we notice is how much more eagerly men reply to female senders of all races than women reply to male senders. Hey, men are easier lays than women, news at 11. The second thing that jumps out is the high rate that Middle Eastern women get replies. According to this chart, white women are not the queens of the ball; every other group of women except black women gets a slightly higher reply rate than white women. Are white women’s deserved shitty reputation for entitlement, loudness, and cat hording finally catching up to them? Or is it that obese white women are more likely than fat chicks of other races to turn to the internet for love? What we do know is that worldwide, white women are the admired example of femininity, even for little children whose parents and culture are trying to convince them otherwise.
Men don’t write black women back. Or rather, they write them back far less often than they should. Black women reply the most, yet get by far the fewest replies. Essentially every race—including other blacks—singles them out for the cold shoulder.
Black women get no love. Summoning the Obsidian Kraken.
White guys are shitty, but fairly even-handed about it. The average reply rate of non-white males is 48.1%, while white guys’ is only 40.5%. Basically, they write back about 20% less often. It’s ironic that white guys are worst responders, because as we saw above they get the most replies. That has apparently made them very self-absorbed. It’s interesting that white males do manage to reply to Middle Eastern women. Is there some kind of emergent fetish there? As Middle Easterners are becoming America’s next racial bogeyman, maybe there’s some kind of forbidden fruit thing going on. (Perhaps a reader more up-to-date on his or her Post-Colonial Theory can step in here? Just kidding. Don’t.)
I would also note from the chart that Middle Eastern men are the biggest horndogs of all races.
The title of this post is sarcastic. It’s no more racist to prefer the opposite sex of your own race for dating and fucking than it is to prefer brunettes to blondes. If sex preferences are racist, then we need a new word for *real* racism; racism that includes things like forced segregation (superracism), racial violence (superduperracism) or slavery (goddamnthat’ssomebadassracismrightthere). But our sexual preferences are hardwired, and if the free expression of those preferences are racist, then racism itself is hardwired. Woops. Cat’s out of the bag!
The knee-jerk response to all this unsettling data from good, moral liberals will be “Ah, this just shows that institutional racism is still with us so we need more reeducation camps, mach schnell!”, never once considering the possibility that these “racist” preferences, by progressive socially enlightened OkCupid members no less!, reflect deep biological proclivities to favor mates who look like us. ON AVERAGE.
It’s no coincidence that our Western transnational de-patriotized elites are propagandizing Americans with a constant bombardment of images of interracial couples and swooning articles extolling the virtues, nay the moral imperative, of white people to date other races. The elites, hermetically and hypocritically marrying within their own race/class/ethnic religion, have it in for those who are best positioned to unseat them from their thrones of power. They know that if tribal identity, instinct — and even behavior — are biologically unalterable, then no government policy in the world will solve what they see as an impediment to utopia. This depresses them no end. Their answer is to have everyone (but themselves) mix it up in the sack until all human diversity is gone and we are left with a one race world that can get on in an orderly fashion with the business of being cogs churning in the gears of the globocorporate krell machine.
But it will never work. The heart wants what the heart wants.
I propose, as an extension to this theory, that the absurdity of mid-20th to early 21st century feminism and all its adjuncts are better understood as progressively sophisticated emergent sexual selection strategies which act as social obstacles to filter out men who aren’t able to successfully navigate them. In essence, feminism is an advanced biocomputational Turing test; a giant social subcommunication roadblock devised and embraced by women and, at least in principle if not in practice, by alpha males intended to ensure the continuation of the hypergamous weeding out of lesser men who don’t possess the savvy to play by ever-shifting sexual market rules. Feminism is only superficially about female equality; at its core it is a ginanomicon of secrets to which only socially adroit men are privy.
Why feminism? Why now? In a word: Beta males acquired too much power. The ascendance of the beta male (and, not coincidentally, the rise of American power) through the late 19th century to the mid-20th century, exemplified by the common man seeing his income and standard of living rise and his opportunities for marriage with quality women rise in response, resulted, as is necessary in the zero sum sexual market, in a lessening of female market leverage to satisfactorily satiate their hypergamous impulse. As I wrote back in this post:
Maxim #15: Female cultural equality = male dating inequality. Female cultural inequality = male dating equality. You cannot have both. So sayeth human nature.
With more beta males in the ranks of the economically and socially empowered, and *relatively* fewer alpha males monopolizing the keys to a happy life, the expression of women’s natural hypergamous compulsion was partially thwarted. More men in the running for pussy means fewer men on the chopping block. Which in turn means a blurring of the distinctions between competing men that women rely on to make their mate choices. Women need those omega-beta-alpha male distinctions because they are programmed from cosmic conception to choose from amongst numerous suitors. Cramp their style, and women will find a workaround to indulge their style again. It is their pleasure and their punishment.
Given the endless appetite of women to date up (even though there is evidence that engorgement of this appetite makes them unhappier), this wide and deep Beta Ascendance was an evolutionarily unstable environment. New complex memes would naturally arise in reaction to assist in pushing the evolutionary envelope of what qualifies as an alpha male, and here feminism and its discontents, its counterintuitive criteria and amorphous edicts, entered the vacuum left by the absence of widely practiced hypergamy to serve as the newest iteration of female sexual selection strategy. And the winners were the alpha males who could mouth the right platitudes while practicing the dominant behavior that put the lie to those same platitudes.
During the saturation phase natural selection resulting from the costs of having large brains checks further increases in cognitive abilities.
Feminism as a meme has reached its saturation phase. Further filtering advantage for women is no longer possible, and in fact a shrinkage of the market position of men who embrace feminism is under way in earnest. Now that the era of feminism is winding down (despite its last gasp ineffectual thrashing to the contrary), what will be the next organically emergent sociosexual meme to separate the alpha wheat from the beta chaff? My nomination: Nonjudgmentalist Game.
We are entering the Era of Amoral Alpha Players. Remember ladies: You get what you give.
The herbification of the Western world is not just an American phenomenon; Japanese men — heirs of Samurai and Kamikazes — are herbifying straight into an anime-tastic fantasyland of celibate extinction.
Reader Eric sent me a link to a videogame blog discussing an article written by a BBC reporter called “Is Japan a dying nation?”
I’m no social psychologist, so I wouldn’t dare to come up with an explanation for why Japanese couples aren’t having enough babies. But one theory is that Japanese women are increasingly reluctant to marry, because they think Japanese men have shown themselves unable to adapt to the needs of a new, more flexible society – and have retreated into a fantasy world of comics, video games and animated pornography where they feel less threatened.
The BBC article is all the talk on the internet in Japan, and has riled dishonored Japanese men to stand up and defend their manliness. The blog at the link highlights the reactions of indignant Japanese men to the article by posting a representative sampling of the comments they’re leaving on a popular bulletin board:
-Make reality more interesting than games please.
-Yeah I can live on games alone.
-If everybody became obsessed with games then we would live in a peaceful society.
-Reality does not want to deal with me you idiot.
-The world in the monitor is reality. The world we live in is just imaginary.
-To be honest, I don’t want a (real) woman.
–Love Plus is reality.
-There are too many Japanese people anyway so decreasing the population would be just right.
-But the 2D world is ideal.
-Oh and its OK to be obsessed with movies and books then?
-My (2D) girlfriend is Aika-san. She lets me meet her whenever I want and greets me with a smile if I forget a date – and she does not cost money. Thats all I need.
-His words are racist.
-I’m 30 and earn 3.5 million yen (35K USD) – how am I supposed to get married?
-Why is somebody from a declining country (England) telling me this?
-The decline of the population has nothing to do with games or manga.
-My partner is Hatsune Miku. I would do anything for her and we are thinking of having kids.
-I tried to face reality and it became Love Plus.
-We must fight reality!
-They should make a game for the DS called “lets face society”
-A country of Neets (England) being worried about Japan?
-Not sure about England but the hurdle to getting married over the past 20 years in Japan is gone up too high – socially and financially.
-Unless there are more job positions then I cant face reality.
-Girls in games wont cheat on us.
-The solution is to make reality in games.
-I’m too busy with work to think about getting married.
-But Sanya is too cute.
-Solution is simple – make it so that anime and manga characters can get pregnant.
To my Euro and American readers, any of these complaints sound familiar? The Japanese, Rushtonian K-style, have simply taken the Great Beta Retreat one step further. I would say that Japanese men need game, but really, when you’re this far gone (“make it so that anime and manga characters can get pregnant”) you’re not ready to accept the Good Word of Game into your life.
If China wanted to invade and occupy an aging and increasingly celibate cartoon porn-addicted Japan right now, they would find an easy go of it. I think the Chinese know this.
