Male is female. Observation is illusion. Diversity is strength.
If there is hope, wrote Winston, it lies in the proles.
Orwell, Updated
Jul 15th, 2013 by CH
Dan And Nadine
Jul 12th, 2013 by CH
Dan readied his stick and plunked a ball in a side pocket. Relishing his fleeting achievement, he raised his eyes to check if Nadine had bore witness to his excellence. She hadn’t. Gruff, caustic Robert, his misshapen nose and squirrel’s nest hair coaxing annoyed leers, was directing to a general audience of three girls a crack about drunkenly seeing twelve holes and the improvement to his game that was sure to bring. Nadine was one of those girls, and Dan squelched a perturbation of despondency when he saw Nadine’s eyes shine for Robert’s boisterous wit.
Nadine was Dan’s project. He met her, he welcomed her friends, he introduced them all to his friends, he slept luxuriously fitful nights imagining Nadine warming to him and reciprocating his feelings. Kind, pretty and, lately, eager to hang out with him and his buddies, Nadine was unassailable. Dan allowed renewed confidence in the value he offered her. Soon, he would ask her out. He just needed a private moment. They’d been out together as a group enough that Dan believed Nadine was hoping he would lurch at a pretext to corner her alone and deliver the magical words she’d been secretly anticipating. Dan occasionally wondered if the moment, when it came, would be so flush with spent resolve that they would seal the agreement with a passionate (but endearingly tentative) kiss.
Dan: “D’ja see that bank shot?”
Robert: “That bank shot wasn’t good…”
PAUSE FOR DRAMATIC EFFECT
Robert: “…that bank shot was GREAT.”
Nadine: *laughs*
Dan: *smiles weakly*
Robert: *touches Nadine’s chunky girl friend with chalky side of stick*
PAUSE FOR DRAMATIC REACTION
Chunks: “Hey! Not nice!”
Robert: “Blame Dan. He bet me I wouldn’t do it.”
Dan: “No I didn’t.”
Robert: “Come on, Dan, you’re always causing trouble. Don’t try to hide it.”
Nadine: “He doesn’t look like the one causing trouble here.”
Dan: “Thanks, Nadine.”
Robert: “I knew there was something between you two!”
Dan had always taken to understand that he was a handsome, if aesthetically understated, man. He certainly saw nothing in Nadine’s limpid gaze to suggest extended exposure to his countenance irritated her. If Dan were to count up the hours spent in Nadine’s company, (an exercise which, in point of fact, he did one evening while nervously fiddling with the bracing decision to text her one mere day after they had spoken by phone, the nerve!), the sum of their unspoken love would add to a considerable investment of life energy.
And so it was with naive expectation that Dan foresaw no interference, nor any of the usual social rifts that erupt when the sexes mix, issuing from Nadine & company’s enfolding. He was therefore emotionally denuded when Nadine’s redirected attention usurped his blueprint of steady bonding. A sickening awareness jammed his guts as he recorded the mounting toll of Robert & Nadine’s wet glances, slithery torso feints, forearm grazing entreaties, and joyously faux indignations, each a sharper dagger than the last. He sunk his last shot, and excused himself to “make a call”, which no one heard, nor needed to hear.
Seven years later, Robert would be married to a svelte, head-turner blonde, and they would reside in a charming suburb. Dan would have moved to another corner of the country, met an uninspiring but trustworthy woman, and married as well, settling in a jurisdiction not known for its disruptive temptations, but not mattering anyway. Government statistics would show that Robert worked in a high-stress field and had one child with his comely wife, and that Dan was a productive contributor to state coffers and had two children by his wife.
Acquaintances who knew Dan would say if asked that he was a happy, well-adjusted man. A real stand-up guy, a normal guy. The sort of guy who had everything going for him.
The Ideal Destination For The Single White Man
Jul 11th, 2013 by CH
It’s not a secret that American women have lost their mojo. They’ve fallen far from the heights of the pin-up girl era to the present day man-squerading as lantern-jawed corporate henchcunts and biodiesel dirigibles. If ever there was a time for American men to get the hell out of Pudge and seek pinker pastures oversees, this is it. But such a decision is not as easy as “go to where the grateful hotties live.” Many factors must be taken into account besides density of pulchritude. If the Congo was filled with hot women but everything else about the country was the same, would you live there?
It’s also not a secret that America is morphing into a 2nd and soon 3rd world dump thanks to the traitorous machinations of our ruling class whose lust for cheap labor and neoPuritan Yankee eagerness to stick it to the wrong kinds of white people has eradicated any semblance of border control against the tide of orcs and dissolved the last stirring of unifying national bonhomie. Hence, some American white men are pondering the wisdom of going back to Europe, cradle of their genesis.
Thinking seriously about this subject, Randall Parker has butthexed the data and located an ideal destination for the single man in search of vaghalla and soul nourishment.
I’ve been thinking about the problem. Perhaps you’ve seem my posts where I ask my readers. None have come up with a good answer. But I think there is one: Ukraine. They are poor. Smart affluents would bring a lot to the table. They aren’t Russia. They would like to be less under Russian influence. America has never screwed them. [ed: America, fuck yeah!]
They have lower population density than the heart of Europe. One could always fly to Germany or Switzerland to see medical specialists.
The Odessa region has almost perfect climate for human habitation.
The summers are not as hot as NJ and the winters no colder.
The Crimea would be milder.
And, of supreme relevance, Ukrainian women are among the most beautiful the good mother earth, and perhaps genocidal world war and Holodomor culling, have produced. (And the Lord sayeth, Good things will come from great evil. Sorry, gotta include that great evil. Otherwise I’d get bored with the good good good all the time.)
Another possible upside (or downside, depending on your POV): Ukraine is on the feminine babe side of the Hajnal Line, or, as us wags like to call it, the Harridan Line. This is a geographic line that demarcates the part of Europe where nuptiality was historically lower (Northwest Europe) from the part where it was historically higher (East Europe). That is, in the traditional West where capitalism thrived, the women married later, had fewer kids, and worked more. This is the side of the Harridan Line that birthed the unholy tri-meme of feminism/equalism/multicultism. In the East of Europe, women married earlier, married older men, and had more kids. Generally, these women adhere more strictly to gender roles.
These kinds of selective pressures across the Harridan Line give rise to different types of female mentality. Ukrainian women are likely to be more feminine than Northwest European women, more apt to take care of their appearances and to watch their weights, and more at ease with their roles as the family nurturer and childcare specialist. They are also comfortable falling in love with older men, and welcome the wonderfully intoxicating leadership of their boyfriends and husbands.
The implications of the Hajnal Line are not all fun and games, though. Theoretically, there will be fewer beta males east of the Hajnal, and more cads, so your game has to be tight, especially up front during the attraction stage of seduction, when your main competition for the attentions of women won’t be wilting niceguys who don’t know how to plow through a shit test. On the other hand, if you can pass the early hurdles dealing with obscenely beautiful women who will shit test mercilessly for alpha congruity, your American Beta provider game should work much better on east-of-Hajnal women than on rode-worn-and-tossed-away-weary west-of-Hajnal careerist sluts with overpriced purses stuffed full of discretionary cash and scented condoms.
Alpha Assessment: Terseness And Tingles Edition
Jul 10th, 2013 by CH
A reader passes along a screen capture of a text exchange he had with a girl who has a boyfriend she obviously worships as a king and duty-bound patriarch.
I thought you would get a kick out of this. Little background: this chick ended up doing facials, anal anything on demand. As of current I am in a relationship with her best friend who she introduced me to and she even endorsed me. They are no longer friends and she is on the rocks with her current bf bc he knows she still wants me. If i could change one thing I would’ve left out the “Lol.”
The reader’s poetic musing are on the right.
This is a thing of beauty. You’ve got a little bit of “Nah” game in there, lack of punctuation game, and all of it delivered with tingle titillating aloofness. This reader has expertly put into practice Poon Commandment V, always give less than you receive from a woman. If this text convo were displayed on a Jumbotron, he would feel no shame, for he would know the audience of millions understands he is getting plenty of action from this girl. And it is the audience that would feel ashamed that they intuitively know this, and will thus spend their whole lives embracing romantic platitudes as salve for their chafed soulholes.
The only question is, would the reader have achieved level A2M had he left off the “lol”?
Beta Of The Month: The Divorce House
Jul 8th, 2013 by CH
Is it really good for the children to see their father so pathetically emasculated on a daily basis? That’s the question that swirls around July’s Beta of the Month candidate, a broken man who continues living under the same roof (for which he likely foots the full bill) with his happy ex-wife in a refitted “divorce house” that’s partitioned down the middle.
Monica McGrath and Kent Kirkland are divorced parents of two young children. They live in one house with their children, call themselves friends and borrow sugar from one another.
The Edmonton family gained Canada-wide recognition this month after media attention turned to their family set-up and living arrangements. Part of this attention was due to their custom-built “transporter” house, with two separate sides and a hallway connecting them, but also because they’re doing what many separated couples say they want to do; put the kids first. […]
Their family model is a version of a “bird’s nest” arrangement where children stay in the house, while separated or divorced parents come to them. Some see this as a model that helps minimize disruption for children. It means they don’t have to be uprooted, trekking from one parent’s house to another’s on a regular basis. Although this model is still rare, experts say it has become increasingly common over the last 10 years. […]
The adults live on separate sides of the house with a wall between them. Their children’s bedrooms are at one end of the house and connect to both sides through a hallway with a door to mom’s side and a door to dad’s side. The parents alternate childcare week by week. When it’s one parent’s week, the other locks their hallway door.
“They’re both a lot happier now,” Mr. Kirkland says of their children. “Now if they want to see mom, it’s really easy for them to do it.”
Everyone in this family is smiling except for the house eunuch:
Details of his lurid soul castration follow.
They separated in 2010 and have already crossed the hurdle of dating other people, though both are currently single. Ms. McGrath and Mr. Kirkland say that their family arrangement takes priority and that a new partner would need to respect this.
Nine times out of ten in similar situations it’s the ex-wife who’s doing the banging with newly acquired pump and dumpers while the ex-husband has to stuff his ears with pillows to block the thumping moans of sex emanating through the walls.
But as might be expected, there are cons that come with living next door to your ex.
“The emotional side of things…” says Mr. Kirkland. “As Monica put it, there are still feelings and not all of them positive feelings.”
The only sure cure for an ex-wife is moving out of the country and covering all your tracks. Or, you can be all the beta you wanna be and share an exquisitely demarcated home with an ex-wife who loves taking photos of your hang-dog face to show the world how much she has your balls in a vise.
In related news, the West is still collapsing. Event horizon endgame should be any day now.
Comment Of The Week: The Subtle Art Of The AMOG
Jul 7th, 2013 by CH
YaReally (yes, really!) writes about an effective strategy for neutralizing competitor alpha males.
Also on a psychological side note, as a guy who’s been shot down in front of his buddies much worse a ton and watched the alphas REPEATEDLY telling the stories to anyone who will listen because they know certain stories legitimately embarrassed me and that it would get to me and throw me off and ruin my night (what assholes, right? Keep reading lol…):
The reason you took it personally is that your Ego (the Freudian one, tho I’m shitting all over his actual definitions just to make the point faster lol) took itself too seriously. It built up an Identity of “I’m a gentleman who respects women and would never be one of those creepy horny bar guys who wants to get in a girls pants!” and she and he both dug the needle right into that nerve on you, so you reacted terrified, embarrassed, angry, frustrated, humiliated, etc and instinctively your Ego tried to defend itself and keep that Identity together.
Every time your friend repeated tha story, it was like another little “see this guy’s Identity he’s so proud of and has tried to project to you all? It’s a LIE, he’s a horny little creeper!!!” and brings those feelings back.
The same thing was happening to me when I was a few years into pickup and fancied myself an expert with women. My Ego built up the Identity of “I’m someone who’s good with women” so every time they told the stories, especially to other alpha males and women I was attracted to, it was like another needle jabbing that “he’s not REALLY good with girls lol” nerve that only existed because I was a prisoner of my own Ego.
Consider it a lesson in humility they’re sub-consciously trying to teach you about not taking either yourself and/or picking up girls so seriously, and being able to laugh at yourself.
Your friend wasn’t necessarily a dick…you were just trapped in an Identity that you took too seriously. In the end its worked out for you at least, so in a way it’s good that I happened, but I know you felt like shit at the time…in my AFC days I actually did the accidental/misunderstanding creepy-follow once too, to a social circle girl during the daytime no less lol.
Now when my friends bring up the stories that used to frustrate and embarrass me and ruin my night, I just laugh them off and go “ya it was brutal. I suck with girls, no wonder I’m still a virgin.
” and it doesn’t phase me at all because I’m no longer trapped by that Identity.
Just wanted to explain this dynamic because of all the “your friend is a douchebag who doesn’t respect bros before hos” responses…technically, your friendship ended because at that point in your life you hadn’t grown an internal frame strong enough to not put your worth into the Identity your Ego created.
Also this concept is part of how I hold my own in the high-end clubs with jacked ripped 6-pack tall rich expensive suit wearing AMOGs. I know they’ve spent and spend so much of their life constructing their outward Identity/appearance of being a rich successful guy who’s good with women etc, and are trapped by their Ego into taking that Identity too seriously, so all I have to do to shake their frame/confidence is poke them with one little niggling doubt about themselves, like not being impressed about the thing they’re trying to impress myself and/or the girls with, or downplaying what they’re proud of to the girls so the girls stop valuing it as well.
ie – something like “wow man you’re ripped that awesome. You must spend all day in the gym hey, you must be going for a 2am workout after the bar tonight to stay that jacked lol I wish I had that kind of dedication but I’m a lazy fuck (pat my belly and make the girls rub it). I love good food too much, I have to get a steak when I’m at a restaraunt, I’d be embarrassed to order a salad lol you got way more balls than me man”. So in that bit, I’ve made him look like a salad ordering gym nut, and self-depreciated to contrast how I don’t take myself seriously (aka I’m more confident), AND I did it in a way where I’m actually complimenting him so he can’t even get mad at me…he’s stuck in Check wondering why the girls are patting my belly going “noooo I like your belly its cute!!” when I technically just told them how much better than me he is so logically they should want him more lol.
So there I’ve removed the value from one of the pillars he’s built his Identity around, in both my eyes and the girls’ eyes, and his Ego reacts butthurt (even if he doesn’t lash out at me, which he can’t because I complimented him, his state drops) and he loses the girls to me.
Sometimes if he’s frustrated enough he’ll try to tool me on my looks or money etc, something he puts value on so he thinks I’ll put value on, but 1) he’s just reacting to me at that point so he sabotages himself further in the girls’ eyes because the higher value person is the one who reacts less to the other person, and 2) I don’t build my self-worth around those external things so I’m not phased by it and will join in making fun of myself and be self-depreciating because I know my worth internally and know it has nothing to do with whatever he’s making fun of…the end result is if he does this, he takes himself from Check with the girls and puts himself in Check-mate and it’s over.
(if he’s a nice dude, I’ll back off and build his value up again for him and try to take the girls together and make a new buddy, but if he’s a dick I’ll just walk the girls away from him…they’ll follow me because I have all the high-value at that point)
This is the subtle art of the AMOG.
The kind of male buddies who turn AMOG on you are usually the friends who have insecurities about their own pick-up prowess.
***
Runner-up winner Dirkjohanson writes,
To be fair, sometimes women flake because of things like gas, vaginosis, and diarrhea.
Yes, but does a girl with vaginosis flake on her corporate HR drone job? No, for that she shows up right on time, because the job pushing paper is more interesting than the beta pushing for a date.
Options = Instability
Jul 3rd, 2013 by CH
“If you want to be happy for the rest of your life, never make a pretty woman your wife.”
The above will work, but it’s not Chateau recommended. After all, peace of mind, while nice, is not a formula for true happiness. Gazing into a pretty girl’s eyes, drilling the holy hell out of her, and basking in the warm energy of her insuppressible love… now that’s happiness.
However, the song does illuminate age-old wisdom about the nature of the sexual market. If one partner in a relationship has more options in the sexual market, there will be more instability in the relationship. Options = instability. The legal and social bindings of marriage are a buffer against exercising those options, but not a protection against the existence of the options themselves. A husband or wife with a large enough customer base that wants their genetic product will find it extremely difficult to resist the temptation of exercising his or her options. Virtue is not achieved except in the crucible of alluring vice.
Furthermore, there is an inherent sex difference in the destabilizing force of increased options. A man with more options than his partner is a less destabilizing force to his relationship than is a woman with equally more options than her partner. This phenomenon results from the greater hypergamous drive of women, who are less satisfied than are men with sub-par lovers, and from the biological reality that risk of female infidelity is a graver threat to relationship harmony than is risk of male infidelity for which there is no chance of “reverse cuckolding”.
Think of the relationship permutations this way:
Man with options + woman with fewer options = man with peace of mind and wandering eye + happy but anxious woman + lovingly prepared home-cooked meals.
Woman with options + man with fewer options = unhappy woman with wandering eye + happy but anxious man + microwaved dinners.
Man with options + woman with options = stable relationship. Both are happy and infidelity or rupture risks are minimized.
Man with few options + woman with few options = stable relationship. Both are unhappy yet infidelity or rupture risks are still minimized.
This is all classic, straight-up, shaken-not-stirred Chateau Heartiste wisdom. Now ♥SCIENCE♥ has bounded into the arena to lend confirmatory support. A recent study found that relationship length is partly a function of the attractiveness of the woman’s face.
Men looking for a quick fling prefer women with more “feminine” facial features, said a study Friday that delved into the evolutionary determinants of the mating game.
Feminine features like a smaller jawbone or fuller cheeks are closely linked to a woman’s perceived attractiveness, which in turn is taken as an indicator of health, youth and fidelity and other traits, it said.
Feminine features are associated with a higher level of the female hormone oestrogen, which is also linked with reproductive success. […]
The preference was especially high among men who were already in a steady relationship.
“When a man has secured a mate, the potential cost of being discovered may increase his choosiness regarding short-term partners relative to unpartnered men, who can better increase their short-term mating success by relaxing their standards,” wrote the study authors.
But in making long-term choices, men “may actually prefer less attractive/feminine women,” they added.
Previous research has found that attractive women are likelier to be unfaithful, particularly if their partner is ugly.
“If his partner cheats on him, a man risks raising a child which is not his own,” explained the authors.
You have to read between the lines of this study a bit to get at the underlying truth. What is happening is that beta males — and the great majority of men are beta males by definition, as are ostensibly the men recruited for these studies — are choosing peace of mind over elevated cuckoldry risk when they settle for a less attractive woman with whom to invest in a long-term relationship. It’s not that these men “prefer” less attractive women for LTRs; rather, men *settle* for less attractive women for LTRs because they don’t have the goods nor the game to lock a more attractive woman into a long-term partnership. They seem to grasp on a subconscious level that a long-term strategy with a hot babe will give them more grief than they can handle. Options = instability.
Women also employ this bifurcated mating strategy, but since women are more hypergamous than men — i.e., more compelled to date up — they are less likely than are men to curb their instinct to shoot for the moon. Many women try for LTRs with higher SMV (sexual market value) men before giving up on the project of commitment extraction when the first bricks of the sexual worthlessness wall crest the horizon.
Men who have options will, naturally, exercise them, which means in practice that a man who is good with women will be satisfied with nothing less than the romantic best, whether his favored idea of romance consists of short n sexy flings or long n loving mergers.
“Back To Europe” Movement
Jul 2nd, 2013 by CH
A smattering of far-sighted readers across the blogoglobe have impertinently suggested the possibility that as America the Disparate breaks apart socially, economically and perhaps even geographically, (a near-certain conclusion given present realities), a “Back to Europe” movement will arise in corners of the stressed population as a means of escaping the spiraling dystopia.
The thought of returning to an ancestral homeland is enticing. It’s been the enlivening cri de coeur of at least one major world religion. If you, as I do, subscribe to the notion that humans evolve in step with their environment, and that this co-evolution of culture, ecology and biology plucks deep, primal rhythms in the heart when the three are aligned in accord with their historical partnership, then it’s not a strange proposition that returning to Europe, the authentic homeland of diaspora whites, might speak to many Americans in the same yearning, nostalgic way that returning to visit the neighborhood and the home in which you spent your formative years produces powerful undertows of wistful longing.
This is the stuff of wild fantasy, but if the bottom falls out from under America it’s not at all inconceivable that millions of internally dispossessed Americans will cast an eye to a long-lost brother across the sea, in hopes of beginning anew what was so recklessly and stupidly squandered here. No one should expect a “B2E” movement to happen overnight; but we live in an accelerated age, and big change, say along a timeline of decades rather than centuries, is capable of sneaking up on you.
Obviously, difficulties in a Back to Europe de-colonization scenario present. Outlined below are a few of the biggest hurdles.
– The narcissism of small differences factor. Would the Europeans want us? Europe is already densely populated, much more so than most of the US, and the addition of 50 million Americans won’t alleviate that. Many continental Europeans don’t even much care for Americans, and view them as a distinct white ethnicity, loud, boisterous, ill-kempt, fat (guilty as charged) and uncouth, like the Dutch might view the Greeks. It would take a lot of convincing to get Europeans to agree to allow mass white American immigration, but if their native birth rates remain as low as they are now (Germany is at something like 1.2 TFR) then they may not have a choice but to welcome their wandering cousins back to the fold.
– The Mad Max factor. Would Americans be willing to leave their military and weapons industry unattended? Can you imagine the US nuclear arsenal in the hands of the left side of the bell curve? *shudder* And the good bet is that the left-behinds will be disproportionately left-curvers, as only the smart will have the foresight to know ahead of time to jump a sinking ship. (This last point is debatable.)
– The mutt factor. The founding stock of America is a mix of predominantly German, English, Dutch and Scandinavian ancestry. Irish, Italian and Polish added their bloodlines to the founding stock in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Since then, it’s been all downhill, but the essential biological nature of white America is largely unchanged: Most white Americans are some mix of the above European ethnicities. So where does a Euro-mutt American resettle in Europe? Germany? England? Italy? It’s not an easy question, as the theory of mind that evolution informs suggests that a Euro-mutt will feel ancient pulls toward each of his ancestral homelands. You might, for instance, feel equally benevolent toward the stoicism of Swedes and the lustiness of Italians, or equally comfortable in the mountainous Alps as in the steppes of Ukraine.
– The leftoid factor. Contrary to assumption, I think most B2Eers will be of the liberal persuasion. As Haidt has documented, conservatives possess a stronger moral emphasis on loyalty. It’s conservatives who will stick it out in America till the bitter end, loyal to the last. Liberals will cut and run as soon as their pasty, plush asses are threatened by real discomfort. Plus, Europe has always held more appeal to liberals, who nurse the idea that the continent is filled with sophisticates. To the liberal, escape to Europe is like a hipster backpacker’s dream writ large. Of course, liberals will rationalize their escape as being something like “getting away from those degenerate rednecks ruining America”, but by that time most of us will know the real reason, and it won’t be a secret carefully warehoused by a dying MSM anymore.
– The betrayal factor. To return to Europe is to dance on the graves of the Founding Fathers. It’s to say, “Sorry, old chaps, you bequeathed your posterity a great enterprise, and we made a hash of it. All that revolution for nothing.” Many Americans will have a hard time overcoming this emotional obstacle. Not a few Euros will probably rub it in our faces.
– The culture clash factor. 350+ years is enough time for a distinct American culture to flourish. It’s perhaps enough time for a distinct American genome to flourish as well. Plopping Americans into Europe could create a strain that, coupled with the dysgenic Muslim elements of European society, can’t be managed. But this is pure speculation. It’s just as likely that Americans, once safely in the womb of Mother Europe, will revert to their ancestral pre-American norms and imbibe the best of Europe’s culture while jettisoning the worst of America’s.
– The climate factor. Can America’s white Southroners, acclimated to their subtropical heat and humidity, take to the dryness and cold of continental Europe or the chill winds of the Scottish Highlands? If their genes haven’t changed too much, they can. White Northerners should have no trouble settling anywhere in Europe.
All told, the Back to Europe scenario is less likely than a Retreat to Canada or Trek to Australia scenario. Canada is closer and more simpatico (speak the same language) to American sensibilities, while Australians share Americans’ zest for life and genial brusqueness. If climate warming proceeds as predicted, Canada will become exceedingly friendly as a relocation spot (Australia less so). Regrettably, South Africa is a lost cause, and Russians have too much spooky Siberian blood in them to find enough common ground with Americans as next door neighbors.
For the single American man, the choice of relocation destination in Europe will depend on the beauty of the native women. At the risk of opening the floor to furious but unenlightening debate, all of the East European countries would rank high, along with Italy and France, followed by Sweden and Finland. But don’t stress about it. You’re going to Europe; woman-wise you really can’t go wrong since most of the world’s beauties hail from the land of the ice and snow where Cro-Magnons made inspired interspecies love with large-eyed Neanderthals.
Be A “No, Dear” Man
Jul 1st, 2013 by CH
The results from an interesting scientific study which could be fairly interpreted as providing evidence for the efficacy of the neg shows that men and women cooperate with each other differently, and that this cooperation disparity is based in differing expectations between the sexes. {Greek chorus: *FEMINISTS WEEEEEEEEEPT*}
In summary, women don’t trust beta males well-meaning men who appease them.
While men tend to match their partners’ emotions during mutual cooperation, women may have the opposite response, according to new research.
Cooperation is essential in any successful romantic relationship, but how men and women experience cooperation emotionally may be quite different, according to new research conducted at the University of Arizona.
Feminists are getting ready to weep.
Randall wondered how the act of cooperating, a beneficial relationship process, might impact emotional coordination between partners.
“Cooperation – having the ability to work things out with your partner, while achieving mutually beneficial outcomes – is so important in relationships, and I wondered what kind of emotional connectivity comes from cooperating with your partner?” she said.
What she found in her recent study – published in SAGE’s Journal of Social and Personal Relationships and featured in the journal’s podcast series, Relationship Matters – were surprising gender differences.
She and her colleagues found that during high mutual levels of cooperation with a romantic partner, men typically experience an “inphase” response to their significant other’s emotions. That is, if the woman in the relationship is feeling more positive, the man will feel more positive. If she feels less positive, he will feel less positive.
On the contrary, it seems women experience more of an “antiphase” pattern during high mutual cooperation. If her partner is feeling more positive, she will tend to feel less positive, and vice versa.
Aaaand… torrent of termagant tears!
Take, for example, the following familiar scenario: A woman emerges from a department store fitting room and asks her husband what he thinks of a potential new shirt. He likes it, he says, hoping his time at the mall is nearing an end. So does the woman head straight to the cash register and make the purchase? Probably not. Chances are, her husband’s enthusiasm won’t be enough; she’ll want to try on a few more shirts first.
Social psychology literature on cooperation tells us that women generally tend to cooperate more, while men often try to avoid conflict. Thus, men might be subconsciously syncing their emotions with their partners’ during cooperation in an effort to avoid conflict or reach a speedy resolution, Randall says.
If that’s the case, it’s possible, although Randall’s study didn’t test for it, that women may pick up on the fact that their partner’s agreeability is not entirely authentic. If she suspects he’s not really as positive as he seems, or that he has an ulterior motive, she may become less positive herself in an attempt to get at his real feelings and reach a more mutually satisfying resolution, Randall suggests.
Read the bolded part again. Here are the grounds for interpreting this study as providing evidence for the effectiveness of the game concept known as the neg. If you agree too readily with a woman — if you appease her and supplicate to her and seek her approval — she’ll feel less happy, even less aroused, in your company. She’ll instead attempt to “dramatize” your mutual interaction by becoming a sourpuss and challenging your agreeableness, which in certain contexts (such as bar pick-ups) materializes as the shit test.
Now we have the insight to know why, perhaps, the neg works on women: Because by deliberately adopting a pose of contrariness, of resistance to accommodation, a man can inspire feelings of connection, curiosity and craving in women. Be the jerk, and you’ll be beloved. Be the placater, and you’ll be perpetually pestered for proof of sincerity.
If you’ve ever had to endure a grilling from your girlfriend or wife for your opinion on something she’s wearing, you’ll know the pain of being a “yes, dear” man. The harder you try to smooth the waters, the more tirelessly she churns open sea turbulence. And so, having been in this exasperating situation a few too many times for my taste and sanity, I had discovered a better way, a way now bolstered by ♥SCIENCE♥:
Be a “no, dear” man.
Tell the light of your life, “No, dear, that dress looks bad on you.” “No, dear, those shows don’t make you look good.” No, dear, this look isn’t working for you.”
[GBFM version: “No, dearlzzlol, that thongzz covers the butthosllezx. Don’t make me do all da work when all da men before me got your butholeszzs for free lzlolzzzlolz”]
Betaboys shriek, “But she’ll hate me for saying that!” FEEBS! Have you not learned a single thing reading this blog? Lemme tell you what really happens. She makes an indignant face, looks shell-shocked for a half second, retreats to the dressing room or closet, and returns with a new item to buy or wear, no further questions asked, yerhonner. The “yes, dear” demon infant has been killed in the crib.
Seduction is the art of flirting, and flirting is an artful term for pushing away and pulling toward. All betas know how to do is pull toward, aka “Please like me! You’re the best! Here’s proof of my love!” game. But this is boring to women, and actively repulses them during their one week ovulatory period. Taking the opposite tack is the blinkered douche, who only knows how to push away. This is exciting for women at first, but the novelty wears off quickly.
The right balance is struck between alternately pulling toward and pushing away. As all great seducers know, and as science is now coming around to confirming, the ideal male lover is the man who understands the value of emotionally desyncing with women. He doesn’t distance himself from a woman; rather, he cleverly directs her arousal by undermining feelings of closeness just at the moment she starts to relax and senses that she can predict his desire and behavior, and then drawing her back in when she fears his loss of interest. By alternately undermining and reengaging like this, he subverts the Male Chaser-Female Chasee expectation, and thus flips the normal sex status differential that is the standard operating procedure of an unobstructed and undirected mating market so that, by his manipulations, he is perceived as the more valuable commodity.
From there, female hypergamy finds root and the labia flower like spring lilies in the noon sun.
Prompt punishment for bad behavior, intermittent reward for good behavior, emotional desyncing and resyncing for creating deep feelings of arousal and connection: These are the tools of the modern Casanova in a global mating village where the old rules to curb the primal chaos of female sexuality have long been discarded and forgotten.
PS Here’s Psychology Today‘s analysis of the same study.
PHOTO BLOGS
Archives
Gab Feed
-
Agreed, but the primary threat of empire decline and collapse is that it takes the nation with it. History is littered with tragic examples of the founding stocks of various collapsing empires becoming subsumed into racial miscegenation or eliminated by the barbarian overrun. The result is that the nation never quite matches its previous glories, if it doesn't change entirely into something unrecognizable.
The good news is that there are also examples of new nations rising from the ashes of empires, birthed into existence by the remnant rural outposts of native stock left untouched by the turmoil in the more populated regions of the former empire.
-
You don't need to look it up, you won't find anything. I made up that term too.
-
If we somehow lived in a world where our media signal-boosted and rhetoric-embroidered every depraved nigger-on-White attack with the same devotion to the craft that the media in reality shows for unsavory characters like Fentanyl Floyd, the anti-White imperium would collapse overnight.
And it wouldn't go without a spectacular denouement.
-
No joke, all of those suggestions are better than getting mindraped by Yidflix.
-
Dearborn has been full of Arabs since Henry Ford let them in to work his factories. This isn't really surprising or worrisome, unless the practice starts to spread outside Dearborn. (Which it will)
-
It's my pun on Netflix, the streaming service that is 80% snapper slop for modern women.
-
Atheists could actually use niggers as the best argument against the existence of a benevolent God, but they won't do that because all avowed atheists are leftoid System enforcers.
-
Yes. And while we're at it, ban pulp romance novels and Clitflix.
-
Glubb lamented this very question about humans avoiding the cycle of empire birth-life-death. He believed as you wrote, that the answer would need to be, first, knowledge of the empire life cycle, and then a willing renunciation of power by the elites. A "drawing-down" of empire into more human-scaled and virtue-encouraging, ethnically homogeneous sub-states.
He concluded his paper on the fate of empires with a dopey kumbaya entreaty to love one another. The answer, somehow, would be found in love. I interpret that as him raising the white flag of surrender, because he knew that human nature precluded any possibility of the empire's rulers giving up their power, or of the subjects of the empire willingly giving up their entitlement expectations or their striving for status.
We are doomed to repeat the cycle for all time, because we are doomed to be human.
-
That would undoubtedly be Trump's greatest, and perhaps only, worthwhile legacy.
-
PAGES
Recent Comments
Categories
GAME
MAGA MEN
SYLLOGISM AND SYNTHESIS
-
TOP POSTS
-
Comment Of The Week: When It “Does Count”
Jul 14th, 2013 by CH
Anonymous (choose a handle you lazy bum) lists the stringent copulation criteria that would need to be met for a woman (or her hamster) to admit that the sex she was having “counts”.
General Social Survey data experts are baffled that the face-to-face questioning the GSS utilizes yields inaccurate results about women’s sexual habits.
Maxim #101: The sluttier the girl, the more noticeably pregnant she’ll need to be before she admits to having had sex that “counts”.
Corollary to Maxim #101: Even then…. “Oh, it’s the way the shirt fits.”
Posted in Comment Winners, Girls, Maxims, Pretty Lies | 229 Comments »