Feed on
Posts
Comments

Good White Liberal Translation Dictionary

Mar 8th, 2013 by

Over at GLPiggy’s, a discussion has ensued about an article written by a white man describing his experience growing up in a predominantly black neighborhood in Philadelphia. It’s the heartwarming story of a good white liberal daring to confront his deepest, darkest thoughts on the subject of race and what we in the sanity industry call “reality”.

Normally, good white liberal forays into the topic of urban real estate require a handy dandy translator service if you aren’t up to speed with the encryption used to guard the moral boundaries that separate crimethink (what we in the candor industry call “realtalk”) from cocktail party sophistry. That pulpit isn’t going to draw the flocks of finger-waggers if you can’t maintain the plausible deniability of the self-righteous neo-Puritan thundering against the boogeyman of Southron witches.

Good White Liberal Translation Dictionary

“dangerous” = black
“bad” = black
“sketchy” = black
“marginal” = black
“touch and go” = black
“rough” = black
“crime prone” = black
“inconvenient” = no cabs = black
“gun free zone” = black, as translated from the MSM-ese
“no-go” = 100% black
“ghetto” = archaic, so black has become unacceptable as a euphemism
“teen gangs” = the blackest of black
“seedy” = black + street walkers
“scary” = witnessed a black committing a crime there
“tricky” = black, with some mestizos
“crazy” = more trannies than blacks
“edgy” = African immigrant blacks with jobs + overpaid gay web designers
“borderline” = black, but saw some white faces and exhaled with relief
“decent” = less black
“up and coming” = even less black
“expensive” = non-black
“yuppie” = been non-black so long forgot how bad black was
“boring” = asian

This translation dictionary is a valuable companion on your sojourns through the land of clever silly SPWLs. Good luck trying to get a high verbal IQ SWPL to admit to what they’re actually saying. You may as well try to squeeze blood from a lawyerchick. But now you don’t have to do the impossible; with this dictionary, you’ll be able to suffer through semantic legerdemain while nodding knowingly and hoisting a craft brew in tacit tribal affiliation.

Posted in Culture, Ridiculousness, Ugly Truths | 118 Comments »

Alpha Male Power Moves

Mar 8th, 2013 by

Making people wait

Show up late. The King does not wait patiently for guests to arrive. The King arrives for meet and greets when guests are assembled in breathless awe. Principle applies equally to throne rooms and bar rooms. Arrivals, replies to questions, decisions to consensus building exercises, request fulfillments — all should be delayed to the point of provoking discomfort in others, but not beyond. People naturally assume the higher status of those who don’t jump when asked.

Not laughing at jokes

The King is not amused. And he is hard to amuse. The King does not suffer unfunny boobs gladly. The King does not care about fortifying social cohesion with insincerity, so he will stare at you expressionless if your joke bombs. He will not fake laugh to make you feel at ease. He will not laugh uproariously if you are a hot girl making a lame joke. You will feel uncomfortable, and this is why you will try harder to impress the King. The King knows this. He luxuriates in your appeasement.

Staring past people

You talk to the King? Impudent plebe! The King hears you, but his attention is elsewhere. Past you. Over you. Through you. Your entreaties are puffery to the King, because he has heard it all before. Your cleverness is dulled. Your insight is clouded. Your conversation is trite. And yet, somehow, despite all evidence to the contrary, the King answers you as if he had been listening intently the whole time. You feel relieved. You like this feeling, so you set about to win the King’s approval again. And again. And again.

Cutting people off

You talk and talk. The King has a thought of his own. It could be a grand thought, or a trivial musing. It doesn’t matter, because it is the King’s thought, and that means the King will cut you off mid-sentence to regale the masses with his wit and wisdom. His voice commands, his self-confidence refuses impugning, his happy entitlement woos crowds. Even you, cast aside and set adrift, find strange succor in the King’s heady leadership.

Disappointing people

The King has so many matters he must tend to. People need and want the King. His presence — nay, his blessing! — is requested at board meetings, parties, events and bedrooms. The King’s plate is full. It is always full. And this fact makes the King smug, even resentful. The King likes to disappoint people. Or, more precisely, he cares not for pleasing people. He knows scarcity is part of the appeal of his brand of authority. His subjects will wait on him, and he will sometimes not show up. And those subjects will be sad. So sad, in fact, that the next time the King *does* show up, their joy will be overflowing.

***

You may think these are dickish moves. You would be right! But the alpha cuts his teeth on dickishness. There is no alpha male who is not, at times, dickish. It comes with the territory. And since dickishness is a territorial aspect of alpha maleness, those who mimic it are presumed alpha themselves. And that, my budding alphas, is how you win pussy and influence people.

Alpha Male Power Moves will be a continuing series. Lord knows the incredible shrinking American Beta Male needs the lessons.

Posted in Alpha, Game | 245 Comments »

Men Turning Their Backs On Modernity

Mar 7th, 2013 by

Masculinized women. Feminized men. Witch hunts for white boogeymen. Enfeebling government largesse. Humiliating reeducation camps. Self-aggrandizing social media. Ruling class treason. Corn and porn. Hypocritical, status whoring SWPL leftoids robotically sermonizing about a diversity they spend vast energy fencing off from themselves.

It’s enough to make a guy want to say “Fuck it to all that.”

And some men are doing just that, before the diseased forces of modernity permanently infect their sanity. Commenter Dan at Mangan’s writes,

I was diagnosed with bipolar disorder a dozen years ago. It was not a misdiagnosis then. I was a mess with run ins with the police and mental institutions and a suicide attempt where my life had to be saved, while managing to graduate with honors from an Ivy league school.

Since then, I’ve had totally smooth sailing with stable marriage and four kids so far, a long tenure at a successful job, a nice house, large savings and so on, and some political activism while I tapered off medication almost completely.

Here are some lifestyle changes:
– Going from binge drinking to no drinking
– Going from massive caffeination to no caffeine.
– Going from lots of all-nighters to sleep every night
– Going from atheism to faith (if you are an atheist and not suicidal, you aren’t trying hard enough)
– Becoming conservative, not just politically but behaviorally
– Going from being the life of the party to being a bit square

When I changed, my friends said they wanted the old me back. Ha. The old me was mentally diseased and headed for a graveyard.

Mental illness likely has a genetic origin, but the particular ills of modern society — a recent innovation in human cultural ecology that is undoubtedly exerting powerful selection pressures on first world peoples that perhaps rival the great genetic selection events of the ancient past — could be exacerbating tendencies to psychological distress. Evidence is mounting all around us that Western people — whites especially, and white women the most — are unhappy, frazzled and dangerously delusional, even though they can’t quite put their fingers on the cause of their anguish and quixotic need for comforting self-flagellation.

Some turn to medication. Others, like Dan above, rearrange their lives in hopes of warding off the gray shroud of ennui. And they rearrange in a way that, intentionally or not, closely conforms to the kinds of lives that men led pre-postmodern America. They become less of what the modern society demands more of, and embrace the opposite of that which the modern society inexorably pushes one toward.

The men who turn their backs on modernity become less secular, less spastic with stimulants, less beholden to participation in the rat race, less burned out by digital addictions social or sexual, less political, less engaged in media-fed triviality, less liberal (yes), and less status-conscious. They may even become less sociable, as it seems a precondition of eschewing the trappings of modernity is a willingness to ostracize oneself from the hedonist herd.

This is not a lifestyle choice for everyone. Some of us like our freedom and sexual cornucopia, and can better manage, or compartmentalize, the peculiar stressors of secular modern society. But many people would find much comfort and peace of mind by essentially flipping the bird to the trajectory that the West is currently on. If you believe that maximizing human happiness is a noble goal, then you wouldn’t stand in their way.

Posted in Culture, Goodbye America, Hope and Change | 393 Comments »

Was Satoshi Kanazawa Right?

Mar 6th, 2013 by

Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary scientist and former columnist at Psychology Today who wrote an article (since pulled, and which got him fired from the magazine) about the attractiveness of the different races of women, (concluding that black women were the least attractive), might, in the end, have had his analysis vindicated.

Peter Frost, over at his blog, Evo and Proud, has a good post delving into a study by Michael Lewis et al which examined the attractiveness of the big three races. He starts with a primer about the evidence that beauty is not in the eye of the beholder, it is objectively measurable and only “subjective” inasmuch as the perception of objective beauty resides in the individual brain.

Notions of human beauty seem to develop along similar lines in all humans. Children as young as 2-3 months old look longer at female faces that adults have rated as attractive, be they white infants looking at faces of black women rated by black men or black infants looking at faces of white women rated by white men (Langlois et al., 2000; Langlois et al., 1991; Langlois et al., 1987; Langlois and Stephen, 1977). Similar findings have been obtained with adults of various racial/ethnic origins (Bernstein et al., 1982; Cunningham et al., 1995; Maret, 1983; Miller, 1969; Perrett et al., 1994).

In the most comprehensive of these studies, Cunningham et al. (1995) assessed criteria of female beauty among men of different ethnic backgrounds: Taiwanese, White Americans, Black Americans, and recently arrived Asian and Hispanic students. All of them perceived a female face to be more attractive when possessing high eyebrows, widely spaced large eyes with dilated pupils, high cheekbones, small nose, narrow face with thin cheeks, large smile, full lower lip, small chin, and fuller hairstyle.

To be sure, the East Asian men tended to prefer more immature and inexpressive faces whereas the Black American men tended to prefer women with larger buttocks and a heavier body build. These differences in preference, however, are much smaller than the differences in physique that actually exist among human populations.

Just as I have been saying: there are universal beauty standards molded by smaller regional racial preferences.

So what happens when physically different populations come into contact with each other? Are some judged to be better looking than others? And is there consensus on this judgment?

The anticipation is killing you! I hope it lasts.

Finally, Lewis addresses the possibility that this gender asymmetry may reflect an underlying asymmetry in sexual attractiveness: “If there are differences between the relative attractiveness of the genders between different races then asymmetries in interracial marriage will follow.” To this end, he asked male and female volunteers to rate the attractiveness of human faces that differed by ethnicity and gender. Of the male raters, 15 were White, 2 were Black, and 3 were Asian. Of the female raters, 14 were White, 3 were Black, and 3 were Asian.

The results are shown at the top of this post. Female raters gave the highest ratings to Black men, followed by White men and East Asian men. Male raters gave the highest ratings to East Asian women, followed by White women and Black women. There was no significant interaction between the race of the rater and the race of the face being rated.

This research, at least, supports Kanazawa’s theory that black women are the least attractive of the major races of women. Read the comments to Frost’s post as well. They are very good and blessedly free of feminist or equalist cant, even the ones which question the validity of the study or the conclusions one can draw from the data. Interestingly, in the chart appended to the top of Frost’s post, the standard deviation — or “spread” — of beauty is highest among white people (and lowest among blacks, except for Asian males). So, although the white beauty average is higher, there are more very ugly people and very beautiful people within the white race. The spread between ugly and hot, in other words, is greatest among whites. This observation falls in line with what appears to be a general trend for whites to have very large spreads in quality along multiple measurable human traits.

White people are, essentially, nature’s favored evolutionary guinea pigs. They are experimented on to a greater degree than other races, and as a result there are a lot more experimental failures, and a lot more experimental successes, within the white race.

My personal opinion on this matter of interracial attractiveness — besides the belief that nothing pricks the collective id like a rip-roaring, no-egos-spared discussion about the hotness of this or that group’s women — is that, like the women of most races, there are a fair number of hot black chicks I have seen whom I would most assuredly and happily defile with sweet lovemaking. And there are a lot of gross white women I wouldn’t touch with Tim Wise’s precious anti-racist dick. Honey Boo Boo’s mom comes to mind as a perfect example of the genre.

But we are talking about averages. If you don’t know what an average is, you should leave the internet and return when you are more enlightened than a garden slug. And, on average, I have noticed that some races just have proportionately more bangable women than do other races.

That’s all. If you can’t comment below without propping your ego with a strawman, or a hayfield of strawmen, you will be banned. Life is too short to tolerate obtuseness and trollery.

Anyhow, Frost talks about his own research into facial attractiveness, and explains where his conclusions or theories differ from Lewis’ study above.

Nonetheless, there are significant differences between my findings and Michael Lewis’. The cross-cultural study showed a general preference for lighter-skinned women, but only at the lighter end of the local range of skin color. We see this in folk terminology. Traditionally, a beautiful woman was ‘white’ in Europe and East Asia, ‘golden’ in Southeast Asia, and ‘red’ in sub-Saharan Africa.

As for my menstrual cycle study, the darker male face was indeed more strongly preferred by women in the first two-thirds of the menstrual cycle, i.e., when estrogen levels are high and not offset by progesterone. Yet, even in that group, there was still more preference for the lighter male face. In other words, estrogen seems to weaken a woman’s resistance to darker male skin, without reversing the direction of preference, at least not fully. […]

Finally, the ideological environment has changed over the past twenty years. In Lewis’ study, the White raters showed no tendency to prefer their own kind—an unusual finding in itself. Many of them may have thought long and hard before choosing a White face over a non-White one. Of course, this possible anti-White bias would not explain the gender asymmetry. It would simply shift all preferences towards the darker end of the color spectrum.

And that leads to another point. Perhaps some of the raters were unconsciously using East Asian preference as a proxy for White preference. In our current ideological environment, it is legitimate to admire East Asians for a wide range of good qualities: politeness, work ethic, self-discipline, attractive facial features, and so on. Such admiration incurs no social cost. So if you feel ashamed of your preference for White people, why not repackage it as East Asian preference?

Frost posits an evolutionary mechanism by which black men and white women would become more physically attractive over generations.

In some populations, men competed against each other for access to women. This was especially so in tropical ‘horticulturalist’ societies where year-round farming enabled women to provide for themselves and their children with little male assistance. For men, the cost of taking a second wife was close to zero and may even have been negative. Such societies thus had a high polygyny rate and correspondingly intense male-male rivalry for mates. The pressure of sexual selection was therefore on men.

In other populations, women competed against each other for access to men. This was especially so in continental Arctic societies where men provided almost all the food and where long-distance hunting caused more deaths among young men than among young women. Such societies thus had a low polygyny rate and a surplus of women on the mate market. The pressure of sexual selection was therefore on women (Frost, 1994a, 2006, 2008).

I’ve come across this theory before in different outlets, so it’s not like Kanazawa is some kind of freakish radical for suggesting it in the pages of Psychology Today.

A reader mildly objects:

My one caveat is that black women may not photograph as well as women of other races.  Having recently spent some time in the Caribbean around (non-fat) black women and I can say that there plenty _plenty_ of good looking black girls, at least where I was.  But I’ve never found black women all that attractive in photographs.  And the obesity epidemic in the US has hit them hard too.

A caveat worth considering. I’ll assume the Lewis study used photographs of slim black women, or at least photos of black women who were comparably thin to the other women, because otherwise that would qualify as a major flaw and oversight by the researchers.

As for the idea that black women photograph worse than women of other races, I’m not sure I buy it. Bodybuilders have known for a long time that tanned skin, sometimes tanned to the point of orange-y absurdity, looks better in glossy mags. Darker skin captures plays of light in more pleasing ways. Perhaps the reader is referring to the facial bone structure of black women, what with their pronounced jawlines and unappealing prognathism, and how that may contribute to their looking worse in photos. That’s possible, but I can’t figure out a way that theory would work such that the faces which look bad in 2D look better in 3D. Maybe some photoshop experts in the audience could lend their opinions.

Also, is it possible that sexual selection in some outlier black majority communities, like the Caribbean, runs the other way, producing hotter women and blander men? A sex skew in the favor of men could certainly produce more beautiful women over time. So could a greater demand by women for men who can provide for them. You might see this happening in black societies with white minorities, where the continual reminder of the minority’s higher status compels black women to seek out more paternal and productive and less showboat-y caddish black men. Or you might see it in societies where the women are not able to provide for themselves as easily as they can in lands with more fertile soils and better climate or where there’s a generous welfare system in place that substitutes for male provision. Pure speculation, but isn’t that the seed corn of scientific truth?

Posted in Girls, The Pleasure Principle, Ugly Truths | 365 Comments »

March 2013 Beta Of The Month

Mar 5th, 2013 by

The readers squalled, and their demands were answered: Beta of the Month is back in a big way. And why not? There’s nothing like a real life story ripped from the headlines to illuminate the reality of female hypergamy for strong and desirable alpha males, and the dire self-inflicted powerlessness of beta males which pushes their women into the waiting arms of lovers or divorce lawyers. Let us hie to the Betadome!

******

March 2013 BOTM Candidate #1 was submitted by a reader who requested anonymity. The reader pulled this first candidate from an online forum for Catholics, and he writes:

You must teach Catholic/Christian men to rule their wives. Save Christianity, save Western civilization. Or something like that.

If you don’t, who will?

Could it be…… Satan?

Ok, then. Class is now in session. And what group is more in need of an education in the reality of the sexual marketplace than gullible white knights and mincing betaboy men of the Church? Like most Western institutions, the Church has succumbed to the grinding feminization of its traditions and ideals. BOTM Candidate #1 weeps his plaintive wail to his Lord and the flock:

Hi,

My wife of 12 years and mother of 4 told me she wants a divorce because she has “fallen out of love” with me and can “never love me again. “

Where have we heard this before… oh yeah, everywhere.

Last night she explained her life plan, that I would buy her a car and two condos so we could be divorced and neighbors. She said her online friends are doing it that way.

Ballsy bitch. This “life plan” is a tidy encapsulation of the desire of women to extract emotional and financial resources from doting beta males while being free to pursue sexual resources from sexy alpha males. I love the “all our friends are doing it” appeal to popularity. Men use arguments to win the crowd. Women use the crowd to win arguments.

I don’t want a divorce but I do want to separate our finances. She’s been running up secret debts and taking out “loans” for her Etsy shop, and I don’t know of a way to stop her from driving me into a second bankruptcy so long as she is my legal spouse.

Marriage is a sucker’s bet for men. Western women simply know how to play this game better. The best way for men to play is to not play at all. At least not until there are significant legal and cultural reforms that level the playing field away from the direction toward wives that it has tilted for a few generations.

She’s been hinting that she has a long-distance boyfriend, and announcing that she wants to convert to the LDS church. I think she’s only saying that to try to get under my skin, but if true I wouldn’t want her as my wife and mother of my kids respectively.

When women fall out of love, they become as stone cold ruthless as the best trained warriors. If the man sticks around instead of freeing her, she will rapidly turn from cold to icily cruel.

I would enjoy life more without her, and I can’t imagine that divorce could possibly be more expensive than marriage to her thus far. I would really like getting to make it to mass (which she is absolutely against in practice, if not in word. )

Most women aren’t thinking about the financial angle when they want out from a marriage to a mewling beta. They’re thinking about getting away from the stench of his nauseating seed.

I don’t know. I bought her a bouquet of flowers last night and gave her more money, but I don’t think that marriage is a viable long term solution.

Systemic beta failure.

My mother was hospitalized yesterday and is facing possible death and almost certain permanent disability. And I haven’t slept much. So, I might be missing something obvious.

You can say that again.

I don’t know what to do. I turned to the rosary and felt prompted to buy a dozen roses. I talked to my priest, he was very kind and offered to prey for me.

Has a more fitting typo ever been seen in print?

My wife wants to keep this secret from everyone. I’m of two minds about that, on one hand the privacy might give her the leeway to back down. But on the other hand I think that divorce is a public problem. She said in response that we could separate and be married too.

By nature I like to let things blow over,

And that is why you fail.

but I fear that my serenity is foolishness or cowardice.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me ten thousand times, I’m a beta.

She refuses to go to marriage counseling.

It’s amazing how much smarter than the average man women are about evaluating relationship health and prognoses for remediation. Hopefulness is cowardice and cowardice is beta.

Anyway, I could really use some wisdom. In out of my field of expertise.

Poor bastard. Can anyone deny that this is a good man? He loves his wife. He’s emotionally close to her. He’s generous with his time and attention and money. But he has a fatal flaw. He’s a beta male. And that beta groveling he thinks is the key to winning the renewed love of his wife is JUST THE FAILURE that will ensure her loathing.

******

March 2013 BOTM Candidate #2 was submitted by reader dorsey47. It’s a video by a creativity class SWPL (aka try-hard beta) of his ELABORATE proposal to his rather plain-looking girlfriend who sports a *danger* male digit ratio *danger*.

Overproduced schlock. Any man who spends this much energy producing a film school highlight reel of his proposal to his girlfriend is a beta. Any man who constructs a proposal that requires the participation of twelve indie drummers and gifts and prizes spread out over twelve days is a master beta.

Look, I’m a romantic as much as the next hedonistic whore. But there’s an alpha way to romance a lady, and a beta way. Showering a girl with presents over two weeks and honoring her with a movie documenting the whole deranged process that took 1,300 man hours to complete is the beta way.

The overproduced and overdone film festival proposal is a sign of the times. That sign screams loud and clear: BETA MALE MUST GIVE IT HIS ALL TO SECURE FIDELITY FROM CHUBBY FRUMP. PRIME DIRECTIVE: SPIT SHINE WOMAN’S PEDESTAL.

Do women love this kind of stuff? Yes, in the abstract. Do they respect it? Unsure. Do they get aroused by it? No.

If you are a beta male thinking about drawing up schematics for a truly awe-inspiring proposal to your girlfriend, might I humbly suggest you instead divert that energy into more satisfying and personally advantageous pursuits, like a job promotion or an update to your herbish wardrobe? She’ll still love you, and you’ll have increased your options among prettier women. Win, win!

******

March 2013 BOTM Candidate #3 was submitted by reader Larry. Take some Tums, because this story is revolting. If you don’t feel a gag reflex, your stomach is stronger than mine.

A Staten Island woman went the full EatPrayLove on her beta hubby, and was predictably killed by some swarthy roustabout in Turkey. Ho hum, right? Well, it gets worse. To appreciate the glorious soul-imploding banality of this particular beta male husband, you have to read his words. Reporters found a treasure trove of Instagram messages from the husband that were posted a few weeks before his wife left on her self-actualization sabbatical.

“Don’t cheat in relationship [sic],” reads Steven Sierra’s Instagram posting dated Dec. 28. “If you’re unhappy then just leave.”

He put up another message later the same day, adding, “A real relationship is where you can tell each other anything and everything. No secrets, no lies.”

My guess is that the wife is the one who cheated. Cheating men rarely confess their sins in this manner. Neither do cheating women, but cheated on betas DO confess their helplessness to any who will listen.

“Good relationship [sic] don’t just happen,” the post reads. “They take time, patience and two people who truly want to be together.”

The wife is spinning out of the beta’s control, and he is desperate for answers. The flail is strong in this one. As is the martyrdom.

“People are to be LOVED. Things are to be USED. The reason why the world is in chaos is because THINGS are being LOVED and PEOPLE are being used,” the message declares.

That’s actually pretty fucking poetic. Is there hope for this beta? HA.

Turkish media have also reported that Sarai’s brother, David, warned his sister against cheating on Steven and encouraged her to simply leave him.

Yup, she cheated.

In an interview with Turkish paper Hürriyet, Steven [the jilted husband] said that his wife had insisted on going to Turkey and that he accepted her wishes. He has been mum on the rumblings of infidelity.

Never…. NEVER… allow your wife to travel overseas without you if there is even a hint of trouble in your relationship. You may as well give her a one-way ticket to cockalopolis.

“I had to permit her to go,” he said. “She was very insistent on going. In such situations. you have to support your wife.”

“I had to permit her to go… In such situations, you have to support your wife.” The rallying cry of the beta male. Wife cheated, wants to go to Turkey by herself? She’s BEGGING you to put your foot down and be a man for once in your pathetic life. She doesn’t want your permission. She doesn’t want your suppoooooort. She wants your strength. She wants you to take what is yours. She wants to feel your POWER. The alpha male POWER that is the only known force in the universe that can rend vaginas sealed shut by the weak solicitations of mincing beta males.

And if she still disobeys you, at least you have your dignity, you fucking faggot. You can walk away from her with your balls intact.

Sheltered numbskulls who fervently latch onto the belief that emotionally distant husbands are the primary reason women fly the coop have no goddamned clue how much women despise weak, emotionally available men. Beta men. They need to get out more.

******

Vote below:

Posted in Beta Of The Year Contest | 283 Comments »

The Settling Order Of Men With Limited Options

Mar 4th, 2013 by

How do men with constrained options choose which women deserve their commitment and emotional and resource treasure? There’s a hierarchy to the order of settling for Men Without Options (M-WOs) and Men With Limited Options (M-LOs), but before we get to that, we need to clarify our premises so that we can better understand the settling hierarchy. A man with limitless sexual market options — aka a man who has his pick of the kitty litter aka a super alpha — wants and desires the same thing that a man with no options wants and desires; specifically, a young woman with a pretty face, a slender hourglass-shaped body and a feminine, becoming temperament.

The only difference between the piss-stained homeless bum and the captain of industry is the ability of each to fulfill his shared desire for young, slender babes. That’s it. The desires are the same but the fulfillment of those desires varies wildly from man to man.

Any fat chick who tells you that her repulsive condition is Ok because at least fat men will always be there for her misunderstands the nature of the sexual market. Fat men without compensating male attractiveness traits will only be there for her because they have no other choice; expand (heh) the fat man’s options through, say, wealth or game or wit or social status cues, and his reluctance to settle for fat chicks rises in proportion to his increasing options among thinner, sexier women.

Thus, the hierarchy of settling that describes men with options is not very interesting. It would be a short ranking that starts and ends at “young, hot, tight, sweet”. At the very top of the alpha male heap, there is no settling at all. A few super alphas have practically unlimited choice in women, and their cornucuntia could not be exhausted given one hundred lifetimes of skirt-chasing.

At the bottom end of the male SMV scale, the omega males and dick dregs lurk. Their settling order, too, would be a short ranking: it would begin and end at “take whatever female filth will have me”. A few are lucky to have internet connections and porn outlets, in which case the living flesh vaginas of obese monstrosities, toothless methheads and prognathic missing links can’t compete with remote digital simulacra and chafed fap hands.

As with the super alphas, the hierarchy of settling that describes men with no options is also not very interesting.

But what about the rest of menkind? How do the remaining 80% of men — men who are bound by involuntary restrictions lenient and punitive on their dating choices — decide how far down the female attractiveness ladder they’re willing to descend? What is the settling order of the masses of beta males who aren’t particularly attractive nor unattractive to women, but who struggle to acquire the kind of stimulating pussy they really want?

Legend

Hot = pretty face (objectively measurable, highly correlated with youth, 8-10 on looks scale)
Pretty = minor flaws (6-7 on looks scale)
Plain = medium flaws (4-5 on looks scale)
Ugly = major flaws (2-3 on looks scale)
Fugly = extinction level flaws (0-1 on looks scale)
Slender = hourglass figure, 17-22 BMI, 0.65-0.75 waist-hip ratio
Bangable = 23-24 BMI, 0.65-0.75 WHR
Chubby = 25-26 BMI, 0.75-0.80 BMI
Fat = 27-28 BMI, 0.75-0.80 WHR
Shaneequa = Same as Fat, except more hourglass, fat sits in rump, hips and pendulous tits
Sausage = Same as Fat, except more cylindrical, 0.80+ WHR
Formless Blob = 29+ BMI, WHR irrelevant at such sizes
Young = 15-25 (18-25 under existing legal constraints)
Less young = 26-30
Not So Young = 30-35
Older = 36-40
Old = 41-50
Expired = 50+ (invisible to men with options, last resort for men without options)
Sweet = feminine disposition (empathetic, nurturing, kind, generous, employed in female-oriented profession)
Sassy = femininity salted with sarcasm and insecurity
Dull = lacking in any discernible personality
Self-Centered = attention whore
Caustic = Angry, humorless, bitter, nasty
Man-Like = Aggressive, ambitious, cutting humor, selfish, slutty, employed in male-oriented field
N/A = Not applicable

Settling Order Of Men With Limited Options

1. Hot/Slender/Young/Sweet

Most of these girls are scooped up by alpha males. For a night, at least.

2. Hot/Bangable/Young/Sassy

Hotness and youth still exert the most influence on a man’s requirements in a lover, but the tier of men (lesser alpha) who must make some small concessions to snag a hot, young lover will generally accept in their women a few extra pounds and a little more annoying sassiness.

3. Pretty/Slender/Young/Sweet

Facial hotness is so crucial to a woman’s dating success that when men have to sacrifice a little bit of facial beauty in their lovers, they tend to tighten up their standards for the other three attractive female traits. Here we find the greater betas who are dating young 6s and 7s with very nice bodies and wonderful personalities.

4. Pretty/Bangable/Young/Sassy

Again, greater beta males and some lesser alphas populate this settling group. You’ll notice that the requirement for youth hasn’t yet budged a day past 25 years old. Men will choose youth and beauty before perfect bodily dimensions and heavenly femininity, particularly when LTRs are under consideration. (This post is primarily focused on LTRs, which is the romantic arrangement to which “settling” usually refers.)

5. Pretty/Bangable/Less Young/Sassy or Dull

Now we enter the realm of real sacrifice. Here you’ll find your established “good catch” beta males who must make painful concessions to achieve love with a pretty girl with a decent body. The first major concessions are usually age and personality — most men are willing to put up with annoying personality quirks and an upward age adjustment to enjoy the scenery of a pretty face and curvaceous, taut physique.

6. Pretty/Chubby/Less Young/Man-Like

What, chubby girls can be pretty?!? No. Most girls with naturally pretty faces who are twenty or more pounds overweight will have concealed whatever prettiness was there under a layer of blubber . The common refrain from desperate mothers trying to marry off their slacker sons — “but she has a such a pretty face” — is often a dead giveaway that the girl in question is a fatso. That said, there are very exceptional girls who can manage twenty extra pounds and keep a pretty face suitable for excellent blowjobs because the fat accumulates in places hidden by clothes. The slightly better than average beta male with something going on for himself will be forced into this settling category. He’ll take the extra pounds (can’t really be helped in modern America what with 70% of women obese or overweight), less sprightly upper range of youthfulness, and less sparkling personalities for a shot at a girl with a face that can inspire unbidden boners.

7. Plain/Chubby/Not So Young/Self-Centered

Welcome to beta male hell. Dear Average American Man, this is your life.

8. Ugly/Bangable/Not So Young or Older/Caustic

Here are your butterfaces. Broken beta divorcees sink to this level of settling. Very horny and indiscriminate alpha males (see: roids, teenage boys) will occasionally slum it with these ladies, but never consider them for LTRs.

9. Plain/Shaneequa/Not So Young/Caustic

See #7. Substitute black beta male for white beta male.

10. Ugly/Fat/Not So Young/Sweet

A man who has to settle for a fat chick is a lesser beta male, or an extremely depressed and unconfident beta male. He will try to get a fat chick who at least treats him like a king.

11. Ugly/Sausage/Older/Dull

Say goodbye to even a semblance of a human female shape.

12. Fugly/Formless Blob/Young or Less Young/Sweet

Some men must have youthful lovers, no matter what, because there is at least a chance their seed will find fertile ground, even if the ground is a patchwork of tar pits, quicksand, bulging calderas and deep sea trenches. Here you will find those skeezy losers who prey on impressionable young fatties with willing mouths.

13. Ugly/Fat/Old/N/A (sweetness is not possible for these women)

This is the omega male wheelhouse. The walking deadmen in this group would welcome a crossbow bolt to the head.

14. Fugly/Formless Blob/Expired/Man-Like

Why are you bothering? A furries outfit with a spooge valve would feel, and look, better.

***

So there you have it. The fourteen-step settling order, from A to O.

Executive summary: Men will yield on feminine personality and a few extra pounds to get youthful and beautiful lovers, but the acceptable threshold for extra weight is met far more quickly than is the acceptable threshold for an unfeminine personality. A hot, young woman with a lawyerly in-your-face personality and with ten extra pounds distributed in a pleasing manner on her ass, thighs and tits is still more desirable than an older pretty woman with a perfect body and perfect disposition. But once the hot young babe starts to accumulate more than ten extra pounds, the older woman begins to look better and better as an LTR alternative.

Of course, past a certain age, weight, ugliness, or mannish disposition the choices become so dispiriting that men are hardly able to summon the motivation to lift a finger and pick out one grotesquerie from another.

Posted in Beta, Guy Rules, Ugly Truths | 324 Comments »

Comment Of The Week

Mar 3rd, 2013 by

The COTW goes to winner

Uncle Elmer confesses:

I like to watch Vietnamese travelogues with ForeignBride while she gently massages my loins. The food variety is epic.

Some comments win on substance. Others on the style with which the words trip psychedelically off the tongue. This week’s winner is firmly in the latter category.

Runner-up comment winnner

James waxes lyrically and substantively:

PUAs talk a lot about stripper game because it’s so hard. A whiff of beta or the slightest bend to your frame, and you’re just a customer to her again.

They have so many interactions that they’re really calibrated.

Plus all game is just flipping the script on women, and stripper game is apex of flipping the script. She comes to you looking for money. You give her none, and fuck her. Using only words and actions. It’s beautiful, in its way.

It is beautiful, in its way. The seduction of a guarded, self-patrolled, high stakes, manipulative sexy temptress who eats beta male hopes and wallets for a living, using nothing but your wiles and wisdom, is animated poetry most men will never get to experience for themselves.

Posted in Comment Winners | 117 Comments »

How To Keep A Stripper Enamored Of You

Mar 1st, 2013 by

A reader asks,

Hey there, thanks for your wisdom, was a self deluded beta, and since I took the red pill been trying and getting to fake an alphatude. Just gamed 2 strippers, slept with both, one got jelous, but now I am sleeping with a very hot stripper, I think Im doing ok, but how do I treat her to keep me on her head and ruin her for other guys? Im still dating other women, but I want to keep this one, she is a very high 8 maybe a 9.

so in other words how can I keep laying this girl for a long time?

Treat her like absolute garbage. Serious, yo. I’ve yet to meet or hear of a stripper who did not keep coming back to a certified asshole for more of his special lessons in love. Personally, I have treated strippers I was fucking with more disdain and cruelty than any other woman… and they were hooked.

Consider strippers to represent the far right tail of a bell curve of women distributed by the strength of their desire for assholes, jerks and douchebags. At the far left, you have your good Christian girls with low sex drives, low impulsivity, and an inordinate fear of dying alone, childless. These women will occasionally tingle when they watch Edward get all broody in a Twilight movie, but in real life they will stick with their plush beta providers and relieve their itch for edgier guys in pulp romance novels aka female porn.

In the middle, you have most women. They like their moments of tender intimacy punctuated with Discovery Channel sex, have dated a number of badboys, have rejected a number of niceguys, like to be lied to, have had their hearts broken by men they still love, pine for that musician who always showed up late to dates and once “forgot” to invite her to his after show party, have had multiple roaring orgasms with men who told them to shut the fuck up, once caught a lover they thought “was the one” in flagrante delicto, and sort of like it when a guy doesn’t answer their texts right away, but at the end of the day (and near the end of their prime fertility years) they will settle down with a caring, dependable beta provider who remembers birthdays and anniversaries and then pop out a couple of kids with him. 1% of the kids will not be the beta’s.

At the right side of the asshole-loving curve, you find your girls who get off on being psychologically tormented by aloof men who are always one foot in, one foot out in any relationship. These are the girls who actually *seek out* the idiosyncratic charms of assholes and deadbeats and cheaters, and who, in fact, will quickly get bored with men who aren’t sufficiently dismissive of them. Niceguys have no chance with these girls. Many of these women — 20-30% of the total eligible female population — have daddy issues or a history of dating assholes or a penchant for wildly swinging from one alpha male to the next, but there are plenty of exceptions. For instance, I once had a fling with a stripper who lived with her married parents in apparent familial harmony. They often made her lunches to take to “work”, (although I doubted she told them what line of work she was in).

The further right on the curve you go, the more abuse the women crave, culminating in those women who secretly get off being hit by their lovers, and always race back to them for post-beatdown sex. In this dreadfully toxic pool swim your Rihannas and that chick who married the killer of her twin sister.

And waaaaay out there on the right tail is that stripper you, dear reader, are trying to keep around for the long haul.

Good luck!

But I can see why you have asked for help. Chewy, Pillsbury herblings with frump wives comfortably wrapped in the security blankets of boring marriages will balk, but the hottest babes are disproportionately found at the right tail of the asshole-loving curve. This is why learning the Way of the Jerk is a life path most men who have been shown the light strive to follow.

If you were to superimpose the female asshole-loving curve on the male crazy chick-loving curve, you would find that the female curve sits well to the right of the male curve. Or, men are less interested in dating the analogue of the asshole that women love. What men *are* interested in dating are hot chicks, and, regrettably, many of those hot chicks are just the kinds of women who swoon for JERKBOY CHARISMA.

Back to your quandary.

First, you are doing things right by your stripper girl. Dating two strippers at once is just the sort of drama they need to keep feeling that lovin’ feeling. It’s practically an asshole badge stitched to your jacket that says “Vaginas may now open for business”.

Second, forget about keeping this girl for the long haul. The moment you act like you’re trying to keep her around, she will lose interest and fly the coop. If you keep her on tenterhooks, in a constant state of dread, and only very VERY rarely hit her up with some beta reassurance game (“Here ya go, babe, you’ve had a tough week, so I got you this cheese stick”), you have a shot to enjoy her ripe but strangely discolored fruit for a couple of years that thousands of other men have seen. Or until she ODs.

Third, beware any stinky beta bait she will toss at you. Strippers have exquisitely fine-tuned senses for the slightest whiff of betatude. If you cave, even a little, she’s gone. Strippers will do things like ask you to light a cig for them, and if you comply, she’s eyeing up the dude across the room. They will try to dump their problems on you (and strippers have a lot of problems), but all it will take is one minute of indulging her whining and she’ll have an excuse to bail on your next night together faster than you can say “Shit, I shoulda told her to shut the fuck up instead”.

Fourth, supply her. Got blow? Then you got stripper blowing you for as long as your supply is steady.

Fifth, mark your calendar. If you can keep a stripper in your orbit for a year, it’s time to update your strategy. Strippers rarely last in relationships longer than a couple of years. Most stripper “relationships” are kaput after a few months. They also date mostly beady-eyed, beetle-browed assholes or the manager of their club. Because of this, many strippers subconsciously desire, after enough time getting burned by sexy thugs, a bit of the old beta provider comfort food. If you have strung her along for a year, consider doing something nice for her. Now don’t go crazy! A simple favor to drive her home from work, or a small purchase such as a T-shirt which displays the terraced outline of her fake tits, or perhaps a home-cooked meal of mac and cheese, are all it takes to warm the shriveled, dark heart pumping life to her glorious orifice.

Sixth, be Ok with her line of work. Don’t try to “rescue” strippers. It never works. They don’t want to be rescued. If you try, she will misconstrue that as a desire for a deeper, more loving, more committed relationship, and she will run. So if the thought of greasy men ogling your lover’s vagina hole gives you the willies, I suggest you go to book clubs to meet girls.

I hope this helps. Ideally, you would bang the shit out of a parade of hot strippers until they have hit the wall (age 25), leaving them used up husks of former human females, and then settle down in domestic bliss with a good girl who never had a monster bug STD or popped her tittie out for a random dude to admire. Then you have a solid, tight, swole marriage to a loyal wife PLUS great stories to tell your sons and grandsons. That’s the plan, anyhow.

DFA

You’ll notice that the graph only includes girls aged 18 to 30. There’s a reason for this. Most women older than 30 have lost their taste for assholes. They still tingle for them, but they don’t go batshit insane for their attentions, and they start to feel a strong need for betaboys and their gentle, cotton swab comfortableness. Part of this change in attitude is introspection brought on by the approaching wall; a single woman of maturity doesn’t have time to waste on assholes who are likely to love her and leave her. Partly it’s brought on by her own cratering SMV; assholes have more options in the sexual market and they typically cash in for younger, hotter, tighter lovers. You might say that an older woman’s assertions that she no longer cares for jerks is akin to a sour grape fruit salad rapidly spoiling.

Posted in Game, Girls, Guy Rules, Reader Mailbag | 276 Comments »

Women Are More Emotional Than Men Because Of Biology

Feb 28th, 2013 by

A reader keeps it real:

[T]he male brain experiences an acid flush about three months into gestation damaging the corpus callosum, or intermediary between the two hemispheres.  This makes women more prone to bounce around between hemispheres, and men more prone to focus cognitive energy to areas of the brain consistently.  Furthermore, the caudate nucleus, ventral tegmental area (VTA), limbic system, are shown to be up to three times larger and far more active in the female brain than in the male brain.  The combined over influence from irrational, emotional centers of the brain together with the propensity to bounce around frenetically between hemispheres, leads to a less rational, more emotional product.

And why would nature build women in such a manner?  Because, in accordance with CH axioms, nature has designed women to be more emotionally prone for the (main) purpose of child rearing.  Furthermore, the rapid oscillation between hemispheres allows them to parallelize household tasks in the home, i.e. taking care of children, cooking, cleaning, negotiating with other units in the tribe, etc.  Males on the other hand, have more inherent ability to focus.  That combined with a heightened depth perception made us more adept for the hunter gatherer role.  It goes without saying thus far, we are in complete agreement with CH maxims.

Blaming ‘gender inequality’ for the gender disparity in the sciences is equalist ego assuaging bromide proffering at its finest.

Much of game can thank biological sex differences for its inspiration. Women and men, on some very fundamental and relevant grounds, differ to the bone, and many of these psychological sex-based divisions are set in motion before birth. Instead of society or culture molding humans like clay into “gendered norms”, it is innate human biology which molds culture and society into manifesting observed sex differences. Further molding occurs as forces within the cultural fold exert amplifying or dampening effects on preexisting biological dispositions. But the culture will always reflect the biological basis of its people; it will never transform wholly into something the people are not. Or: You can’t make a Zimbabwe out of America without first swapping the Americans for Zimbabweans.

There is some reinforcing feedback between biology and the culture which biology births, and nations become strengthened (or weakened) by the best and worst genetic characteristics of its source material. As humans are bequeathed a certain degree of adaptation capability in response to environmental stressors, there can be cultural shifts to accommodate new and aggressive memes which themselves emerge organically from the biological substrate. Thus is belched from the bowels of hell the twin reality-denying Western ideologies of feminism and equalism.

But sex differences are powerful, more powerful and more fundamental than even cognitive differences between individuals or groups, issuing as sexual desire does from the more ancient hindbrain rather than the relatively recently developed forebrain. Even the most virulent memes can’t dislodge and replace sex-based desires, as we can see by the fact that men and women continue to differ radically in noticeable ways. Women have to understand that, contrary to the bitching of feminists, it is not a validation of their worth as women to strive for dominance in pursuits that have traditionally been the domain of men. (Traditions, we must note, which became established practice and unquestioned common sense because they grew out of intrinsic biological urges.)

Men must realize the opposite, as well — that they are not made more man by becoming kitchen bitches or doing more housework — but for now the propaganda campaign to push men into women’s pursuits is muted compared to the propaganda push of the feminist devolution to deny women the fulfillment of their feminine natures.

Women are more emotional, intuitive and illogical than men. Anyone who’s lived a day in his life knows this. In the worlds of corporate industry, war-making and invention, perhaps these traits are setbacks. But women should not be measuring themselves by those standards, the standards of men. They should seek succor in the standards of women, and there — in the worlds of family, social cohesion, lawfulness, empathy and child-rearing — women excel and men struggle.

There will always be among men those shut-ins, universalist heart-bleeders, and comfortably ensconced middle class herbs married to unchallenging frumps who deny or downplay the psychological differences between men and women to focus on the similarities. Yes, as members of the same species (barely), men and women are similar. Both sexes whore for status, both sexes want the best for their kids, both sexes prefer flattery to criticism, both sexes like a peck on the cheek before heading off to work. But beyond those human qualities, sex looms, in all its divergent, polarized energy, ready like a feral beast in the shadows to burst forth and maul the delusions of the most naive believers in a common humanity.

And from that realization, it’s just a hop skip and jump to noticing other divergent, multipolar differences between peoples. The shadow beasts are everywhere.

Posted in Biomechanics is God, Culture, Ugly Truths | 252 Comments »

Chick Crack

Feb 27th, 2013 by

Chick crack is slang for communication techniques or conversational topics which provoke emotional responses. Women breathe, crap and piss emotions, and they love men who can incite latent passions and take them on journeys to lands far from logic or restraint. For this reason, chick crack is a critical part of game, particularly the attraction stage. The man who can summon a woman’s weepy, giggly Kraken rules the seas of snatch with an iron trident.

The CH archives are filled with examples of chick crack, but trawling it could take days. Helpfully, YaReally provides a succinct list of the primary chick crack formulations:

Try Cold-reads, roleplaying, misinterpreting what she says in a sexual way, and qualifying her (these things all take her on an emotional journey).

Listen to this Mp3 from 44:20 and on where he describes examples of story-telling, cold-reading, roleplaying and misinterpreting:

http://www.realsocialdynamics.com/realsocialdynamics.com_audio.mp3

Go to Page 48 of this PDF and read the section on Chick Crack:

http://www.tropgentilpouretreheureux.com/download/TylerDurdenEssentials.pdf

The key thing is to push her through emotions. You can talk about World of Warcraft if that’s interesting to you, as long as you can make it emotionally engaging to her.

1. Cold reads

Be a psychic. Pretend to know something about her. (Or be very observant, and actually know something about her.) Commit these cold read openers to memory:

“I see you’re the type of person…”
“You look like the kind of girl…”
“I notice you…”
“There’s something about you that says…”

Focus on positive impressions, to get a girl talking about herself (and therefore projecting the good feelings she gets from her favorite subject — herself — onto you). Advanced cold reads use a compliment to embed a challenge to a girl’s self-conception. For instance:

“You seem really self-assured, but I can tell there are times when you struggle with doubt.”

Who doesn’t struggle with doubt? Cold read predictive power: validated. Pussy lips: blossomed.

2. Role-playing

Role-playing is basically the ability to have fun and jettison linearity for extemporaneity. (Two attributes in which most men run a deficit.) It’s fairly self-explanatory. You choose a character for yourself and for the girl (women love to be lead down these roads of whimsy), and you construct an alternate reality where the goal is to bring to life a typical female fantasy. Ideally, your role-playing characters will open the door to sexualized conversation.

Handy role-play scenarios you should learn and remember are:

Priest and wanton woman
Daddy and daughter
Boss and secretary
Photographer and model
Master and slave (save this one for the final stretch)
Professor and student
Concerned neighbor and runaway
Vice cop and prostitute
Seducer and seduced (yes, self-referential role-playing works)

The advantage of role-play is that you can be much bolder with your sexual innuendo than you could in normal conversation, because you have the plausible deniability of your character.

3. Storytelling

Similar to role-playing, except instead of making up a fun scenario involving two fantasy characters, you tell a story — embellished where necessary — involving real characters from your life. The object of storytelling is two-fold: to entrance a woman with the lure of an emotional jackpot, and to embed subtle cues of your high(er) value, aka DHVs.

Neil Strauss (“Style”) is widely considered to be the father of storytelling as a pick-up tactic. The guy writes for a living, so that would make sense. He categorizes storytelling into four types:

Implicit qualification stories

These are the stories that reveal certain positive and exciting attributes about yourself that you really want the girl listening to you to possess. So, for instance, these stories will present you as a rebel, a rule-breaker, and an impulsive lover of life with a short time horizon. The girl hears this, and feels a subconscious need to qualify herself as possessing those same exciting traits.

Self-promotion stories

You talk about yourself and your pursuits, accomplishments, dreams, whatever, but you do it with passionate engagement rather than arid laundry listing. Did you start a business with nothing but gumption and a notepad full of stray ideas? Talk about that, but describe the feelings that coursed through you every step of the way. You want her to feel like she was right there with you, reliving the excitement.

Sex-themed stories

If it’s obvious you are telling a story from your past involving third parties, you can get away with some juicy sex talk early on that you couldn’t get away with if the subject wasn’t nicely wrapped in a one degree removed package. Example: That time you encouraged your ex to do an impromptu pole dance, complete with imaginary pole, for tickets to a sold-out show.

Metaphorical stories

These can be made up or extracted from your life, but the idea is to highlight a moral quandary or a life lesson, which will further move discussion and encourage the girl’s participation. Mystery’s ant farm story is a classic of the genre.

The two key requirements of any story that you must learn are:

– The hook line. Lead a girl into your story with an innocuous question. Ex: “Have you ever been to [place X]?”

– Descriptive language. Show, don’t tell. You didn’t bike down that French boulevard with your ex, you swerved dangerously close to passing Parisians and rumbled chaotically over stony paths, as the aromas of warm bread and hyacinth filled your nose.

4. Qualification

Unlike almost every other man out there, you are qualifying her to see if she meets your strict standards for a pleasing woman worthy of your time and company. Ex: “Girls who are passionate and uninhibited are so rare nowadays. Everyone’s cautious, trying not to seem weird. What’s the craziest thing you’ve done recently?”

She will bite (they almost always do if your pick-up progression has been congruent with her escalating mood), and her emotional systems will invariably engage. Whatever you do, don’t show too much interest in her answer; you want her to impress you, and that takes work.

Careful, don’t qualify too early. You will appear judgmental, and that will close off a woman. Wait for her to show some signs of interest, then qualify her when her outer defenses are down.

5. Misinterpretation of her words as sexual intent

This is the most fun of the chick crack tactics, because it’s so childish and yet so effective at fast tracking the interaction to a coital conclusion. Ex:

Girl: “How about we dance? I like this song.”
You: “Riiiiight. I get it. [air quote] Daaaance. Rule #1 for dancing: My butt is a public work of art. That means, you can admire, but no touching. Arms up top, ok?”

Girl: “Your shirt is soooo gay.”
You: “Are you always thinking about gay sex? Perv?”

Girl: “I just got back from Rome.”
You: “Little soon for sex stories, doncha think?”

Tyler D has a version of this called “sexual predator game”, where you playfully assume everything she says or does is to get you in the sack. Ex: “You want me to get you a drink? No way. I know where that leads. Liquor me up, get my defenses down, and next thing I know you’ve tied me to the bed posts. Forget it, fatal attraction.”

Sexual misinterpretation is a riskier technique than the other ones, especially if done too early, because the girl could feel creeped out if she isn’t yet intrigued by your charms. Save this for later, after a breezy rapport is established.

***

The above are the five kinds of chick crack you should learn by heart. They are readily applicable in most circumstances, and are extremely effective at distinguishing yourself from the masses of men that cute girls meet every day. Chick crack is like a psychological branding iron that sears a woman’s limbic system, leaving a brain welt she’ll tenderly finger as wistful memories of you throb beneath.

PS Everything written in this post is evidence in favor of restricting the vote to men.

Posted in Game | 101 Comments »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Also reachable over Tor: roissyrwpgxawb3etwznvay4eelbws4lkdtr4tt2r7wxb6adq6pajtqd.onion