Feed on
Posts
Comments

Every Man Needs A Harem Of Women

Jun 20th, 2012 by

Readers, Chateau Heartiste has gone mainstream! Check out my first submission to CNN’s blog, where I review a new book by two “relationship sexperts” who advise men seeking love to expand their pool of dating prospects by cultivating multiple concurrent sexual relationships with as many women as time and energy allow.

***

Every man needs a ‘harem’ of women.

If you’re a single man and you’re looking for love, forget about “The Ring” and stop worrying that “She just sees me as a friend.”

That was then, this is now – it’s a post-dating world you’re living in, and that means you have to shed your one-to-one mind-set and start thinking in terms of one to many.

In other words? Stop searching for Ms. Right and look around at all the Ms. Right(s).

That’s the premise of “The Harem,” a new book from Lord Cockenawe, who, along with Donald Juanholio, runs the website “WTF Is Up With My Love Life?!”

According to Cockenawe and Juanholio, every man – single or not – should have his own harem, a group of girls that occupy different roles in his life.

“You probably have a ‘harem’ of friends, who all play different roles and fulfill different needs for you,” explains Cockenawe. “You might call one friend to go gun shopping versus another friend when you’re playing first person shooters online versus another friend when you need a serious drinking buddy. Your romantic harem is just another piece of the much larger, long-term puzzle of how you structure the relationships in your life to feel full, happy and loved.”

The women in this harem can include anyone from the waitress you flirt with, to the ex-girlfriend you Skype, to the picturesque HR coworker you commiserate with over lunch. Whether you end up dating one or more of them is just an added bonus.

“As a man, having a harem provides you with a love life full of possibility: you have many women in your life, in many ambiguous but sexually enriching ways, who are all teaching you about yourself and your needs and desires and leading you closer to the girl and relationship you want,” say Cockenawe and Juanholio.

Terry Trespassio, a New York-based dating and relationship coach who is single himself, exuberantly extols the “uncoupled state” and takes things a step further: If you’re happily single but enjoy dating, he recommends seeing three different women regularly.

“When you date just one girl, you might feel pressured to commit, even if you’re not ready,” he says. “If you see two women, there’s often this unspoken need to choose between them. But three girls tend to balance each other out, like a tripod. There’s really no downside to female variety!”

Like the “Harem,” these three women can fulfill different needs – maybe you like to have dirty sex with one, public sex with another and intimate lovemaking with a third – which removes the burden of one woman to fill all those slots.

“This can also help you worry less about whether or not someone is your ‘match’,” says Trespassio, “and shifts your focus to the sheer joy of connecting with other young, slender, height-weight proportionate pretty women of all sizes and ages.”

Nor does being single have to equal celibate. Your harem may well include ex-girlfriends, hot sex prospects, and perhaps even a casual f*ckbuddy. It’s your love-life, so do it your way. As long as you’re open and honest with your dates when pressed on the matter – and practice safe sex until you’re assured she’s not lying about being on the pill – there’s no reason why you can’t be intimate with more than one person.

Just as different people can serve different roles outside of bed, so too can they satisfy different needs between the sheets. In their groundbreaking book, “The Ethical Player,” Dossier Everlong and Jamdhin Hardy describe the ways in which single men (and women) can juggle multiple sexual partners and enjoy intimacy safely and “ethically.”

Marriage is wonderful for many, but it’s not the right choice for everyone, particularly men, who must bear the brunt of sacrifice when deciding to accede to marital monogamy and forego all other lovers. Whether you’re sexually intimate with more than one person or simply enjoying a variety of friendships and dates, one doesn’t have to be the loneliest number.

Say Cockenawe and Juanholio: “We are living in a post-dating world because traditional dating is no longer the most common path that people are following to romantically connect and fall in love. And the more that men judge themselves and their relationships by traditional dating standards that no longer exist, the more they are going to feel an unnecessary despair and confusion and hold themselves back from finding multiple outlets of exciting love in this new romantic landscape.”

So go forth and harem build!

***

Isn’t it great how the mainstream is beginning to accept with open mind the teachings of players and sexually satisfied men? This could be the dawn of a golden era when all harem master penises are served, and all concubines satisfied. A revolution in romance!

Posted in Goodbye America, Guy Rules, The Good Life, The Pleasure Principle | 149 Comments »

Le Chateau Goes Stand-Up

Jun 19th, 2012 by

I’m happy to inform guests of dishonor that the campaign to infiltrate polite society with the secretive butthex teachings of the Chateau is under way. A reader writes:

I think you speak the truth about men and women.

A few weeks ago I read your post about drawing smiley faces on your girl’s tampons, and I loved it so much I worked it in to my stand up routine.

The link to me performing is here – it’s all about how to save your marriage.  The second point, about improving your sex life (with your wife) you might think is a bit beta, but I wanted to work in the stuff about not wanting it to be over quickly, and it does tap in to a widely held view.

I wish you the best – you are doing God’s work in educating men about women.

The beta stuff isn’t bothersome. I consider it a Trojan Horse to sneak in alpha wisdom. All comedians know that packaging scandalous truths in pretty bows is sometimes the best way to condition the audience’s receptiveness to the thoughtcrimes about to pop out like a jerk-in-the-box.

Anyhow, you can watch the vid below. I’d say it’s NSFW, but only because your female boss is a raging feminist who is envious that men are funnier than women.

Posted in Funny/Lolblogs, Vanity, Videos | 55 Comments »

Your Training To Delight Women

Jun 19th, 2012 by

Players and unaffiliated men who labor to pass on the Good Word of Game usually admonish neophytes that borderline uncomfortable numbers of approaches need to be made in order to become proficient at pickup. You’ve got to get out there and talk to more women than you would normally do in the course of a nondescript day.

This message is a good one. You won’t get good at the crimson arts until you’ve put in some real world practice interacting with lots of different women. The exact number is irrelevant; whether it takes you ten or one thousand approaches to improve doesn’t change the undeniable reality that very few men have the ability to go from video gaming malaise to WunderJuan on their first approach.

You could say that the approach mentality, at least during the learning curve stage, is a core principle of game.

There’s one other core game principle that I don’t see mentioned very much, if at all, in the pickup literature. In my view, it’s just as important a principle as approaching girls enough times to trespass beyond your comfort zone. That principle is the “find and foment her flaws” theory.

The idea is simple. Every woman you meet, from friend to love prospect to the barest acquaintance, and every woman who crosses your field of visual inspection, will be subject to your exceedingly judgmental eye. You will search, find and declare to yourself her flaw or flaws. If propriety and privacy allows it, you will verbalize her flaw so that it may become cemented in your wavering cortex and banish all doubt of the flaw’s authenticity. It is a well-kown fact among the big-toothed motivational speaker circuit that saying aloud slogans of self-encouragement or life goals helps the chanter sculpt corporeal heft to his dreams.

So, for example, you see a woman in the mall riding an escalator. Her sundress flounces insouciantly from above you. An incipient boner stirs. But this time, instead of allowing your beta twerpitude the run of your skullcase and straining to catch imagined glimpses of panty, you silence the dork force and, with proud stentorian innerauthority, jot a solid mental note of her larger-than-ideal thighs. Safe distance permitting, you might even rumble in a dampened voice to yourself, “Hm, thunder thighs. Too much speckle.”

You will enact this devious scheme for every attractive and not-so-attractive woman who has the misfortune of falling prey to your daggered gaze. Only the obvious sexual market losers of femaledom — the grossly obese, the crassly ugly, the desiccated old — will be exempt, for their flaws are so prominently obscene they need no reminding nor rooting.

What is the purpose of Principle #2? To balance gender sheets?

Certainly, you could argue with strong evidence that women are particularly unforgiving of men’s flaws, in the private if not in the public, being as how they are slaves to a much more powerful hypergamous force that excels at weeding out stellar-lite suitors with extreme prejudice. A little harsh judgment from you is just giving women a taste of the moldy bread they daily give to men.

But, no, that’s not the purpose, as vengefully titillating as that seems. The purpose is purely practical. The finding and fomenting of women’s flaws conditions the beta male mind to accept the attainability of women, and to discard the reflexive sanctification of women. No master seducer who ever lived believed even one woman was unattainable by him, nor that any woman was a flawless vessel of purity. The seducer loves women, but his love is vast enough to revel in women’s flaws. And that is why he wins.

The beta male who conditions himself thus, by his efforts to discover the flaws in women kept hidden to him by the shadow of his turgid lust cast around his vision, will slowly feel the power and the strength of the Attitude, that indomitable voice that rises like the Great Scrotum from the pubic patch and delivers with valedictorian presumption the message that no woman is out of reach or free of exploitable insecurities, the exploiting of which by a savvy man she herself would be ashamed to admit thrills her to the clitbone.

Returning to escalator girl, here are some more examples of flawmobbing.

– skewed eyes
– narrow hips
– rumpled blouse
– misshapen boobs
– nip/tuck victim
– manhands
– roo pouch
– clown feet
– incipient hump
– jug ears
– wasted calves
– bow-legged
– flabby arms
– pigeon-toed
– broad shouldered
– excessive peach fuzz
– asymmetric nostrils
– ETC

I can already hear the gripers. “But I just saw the hottest chick ever and she looked PERFECT! I couldn’t find anything wrong with her.”

There is always something wrong with a girl, no matter how beautiful. You may have to dig a little deeper, but you’ll find her thermal exhaust port with a practiced keen eye. Note that any of the above can easily apply to the hottest girl you have ever seen. That’s the beauty of the flawfinding mission: it unearths the normally overlooked blemishes scattered among a girl’s mien that her general beauty tends to obscure to men. If you socialize with a girl and gain insight into her personality, you have even more data from which to devise withering, silent judgments.

Once you have gotten reliable at noticing and promoting women’s flaws, their beauty will no longer hold such paralyzing power over you. Conditioned to emphasize a woman’s worst and attenuate her best, you will become a cad machine, irresistible to the fairer sex who will react shaken from their stupor by your dispassionate demeanor and feel the threat of your pervasive critical eye with senses aflame.

Maxim #30: Ignore a woman’s flaws at your peril. They are the key to reconfiguring your perception, and thus her attainability.

Posted in Game, Girls, Guy Rules, Maxims | 98 Comments »

More Scientific Evidence That Chicks Dig Jerks

Jun 15th, 2012 by

A reader writes, “We’re getting close to definitive proof that (most) chicks dig jerks.” Yes, we are.

Single women had their brains scanned as they looked at photos of men. The pictures had been subtlely altered to make the men’s faces more or less masculine.

The more masculine faces won out in terms of attraction — but the areas of the brain that were activated indicated these faces were also ones the women found most threatening. [ed: ]

The group found a few interesting results. First, compared with the feminized faces, masculinized faces led to more activity in five specific brain areas: the left superior temporal gyrus, bilateral precentral gyrus, right posterior cingulate cortex, bilateral inferior parietal lobule, and bilateral anterior cingulate cortex. These areas have been implicated in face processing as well as the assessment of risk, suggesting that, consciously or not, masculinized faces are perceived as not only more attractive but also more dangerous. The effect was quite robust considering just how slightly the faces had been morphed.

Let that sink in. Brain scans prove that women are attracted to threatening men. The female hamster has just been CAT-scanned, x-rayed and magnetically resonanced, and the wicked truth behind all the feelgood claptrap and feminist boilerplate is revealed for the world to gaze upon with eyes half-shut at the gruesome sight, repulsed and yet fascinated:

Chicks dig jerks. Assholes. Douchebags. Dangerous motherfuckers.

Another clue Rihanna may be getting back together with Chris Brown … the two partied at the same club at the same time last night … AGAIN.

Chris and Rihanna were spotted at Avenue nightclub in NYC. Sources at the club tell us the two were in the club together for roughly 30 minutes … and Brown spent some time hanging out at Rihanna’s table.

I’m fond of saying the boner doesn’t lie. The same could be said of lit-up neurons; hard to fake that funk.

I predict there will be much gnashing and flapping of labia from the usual suspects (manboobs included) about this latest study to prove that chicks love the badboy. But the evidence is irrefutable and really beginning to pile up that women are hard-wired to tingle for a dark triad.

For those of you who insist — INSIST, damn you! — that they’ve never needed to be an asshole to get women, I’ve only this to ask:

When was the last time you successfully picked up a hot, young woman?

HOT

YOUNG

Get it?

If you’re married to a frump, a plain jane, a cow (and odds are, you are), a has-been… well, no wonder you don’t need to be a jerk to keep her around. She’s got no options. She’s just grateful a man is willing to stick with her.

But the chicks with options… the ones who can pick and choose from among many men… the IN-DEMAND ones… they love the dickish dick.

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. I’ve never gotten more radical, more INSTANT, positive results when hitting on cute babes than when I deliberately amped up my asshole vibe. I mean, to the point of nearly insulting them. Eyes brightened and sparkled, legs uncrossed, fingertips danced all over my arms. And these were the upper class smart chicks with multiple degrees.

If you *have* to choose between being a niceguy and a total dickwad when picking up high value women…

ALWAYS err on the side of dickwad.

Posted in Alpha, Biomechanics is God, Girls, Ugly Truths | 97 Comments »

“How do I get out of the friend zone?”

Jun 14th, 2012 by

A reader urgently requested an answer to this post’s heading.

I’m certain Le Chateau has covered this issue before, but the archives are huge and formidable, so I’ll offer an update here.

If you initially tried to ingratiate yourself to a girl you want to fuck by spinning into beta orbiter mode, listening with growing ball pain to her woes about assholes she’s banging, and predictably getting friendzoned as a result, I can assure you that getting OUT of a friend zone and into a lover zone is far more difficult than working from scratch as an unabashed lover prospect. Once a girl has it in her head that you are a harmless castrati, an abrupt shift to incongruent sexiness will jolt her comfortable feelings of safety and security. She’s a good bet to lash out in anger, spite and emotional distancing. If you are a beta at your core, you will then make the situation worse by apologetically backpedaling and begging her to remain friends with you so that you may go home and vigorously masturbate your pimplepeen to the memory of her elbow lightly brushing against your arm when she hastily reached for her cell to take a call from your white whale.

So, my first piece of advice:

Don’t let yourself get into a scenario where friendzoning is possible.

You should be flirting all the time and dropping bits of sexual innuendo. Let a girl know, through subtle cues, that you are a sexual creature right up front. This is what successful players mean by “make your intentions known”. They don’t mean “go up to a chick and tell her you love her body and want to spill your sin all over it”. (Well, sometimes that works.) They mean that you should be innocuously flirting, with plausible deniability, sooner rather than later, so that her subconscious registers you as an alpha male not to be trifled with nor cavalierly tossed into the LJBF discount bin.

If, however, you do find yourself in the friend zone, the way out of it is… drum roll please… scarcity.

Disappear. Vamoose. Deprive her of the happy nonsexual emotional support she’s come to expect from you.

It’s a bit more complicated that that, but that’s the gist of the “LJBF2Lover” program. In detail, it would look like this:

1. Knock her out of her comfort zone with a surprise flirtatious vibe. Don’t overextend this. Too much shock to her system will drive her into a cocoon. You want to give her a small buzz, not an electric storm that immediately activates her anti-beta male, egg-preserving bitch shield.

2. After your flirty expectation sabotage, promptly pull back into beta orbiter mode as if nothing unusual happened. Your goal is to strike a hot iron at the girl’s subconscious without alerting her conscious awake state. If she calls you out on your flirt, act like she’s weird for bringing it up. “I hope you don’t get the wrong idea” is a great line to drop at that moment.

3. Leave her on a good (i.e. congruent) note. But leave her for at least two weeks. During the interim, if your LJBF is strong, she will attempt to contact you asking why, as a friend, you’ve been incommunicado. Again, chastise her for being needy, and tell her you’ve been busy. Do not explain yourself beyond that.

4. Meet her again. Repeat the above three steps, with the exception that you will amp up the intensity and frequency of your sexual, aloof vibe each new time you hang out with her. You are in the process of acclimating her to your new, sexual self.

5. You can speed up the process by actively flirting with other girls in her field of view. Jealousy is the most powerful hacksaw against the chains of the friendzone.

6. When enough time has passed, and your shift from asexual lump to cocky bastard is almost complete, drop the following line on her (with brow deviously furrowed in deep, phony concern): “You’ve been flirting like crazy. I think we should be apart for a while so we don’t risk our friendship.” Wham. Game dynamite with the fuse attached right to her hamster’s anus. You’ve implied she’s falling for you, you’ve disqualified yourself by insisting that you need time away from her, and you’ve flipped the script so that any further interaction would require some amount of chasing by her.

7. If she agrees with you, admit defeat (to yourself) and move on. The LJBF was too powerful to overcome. If you have made an impact on her perception of you, her attitude will be different. She will act confused, half-heartedly agreeing only as a default response with nothing better to say, or disagreeing in mild protest. “Nooo, I’m not flirting with you.” (The very act of verbalizing this will put her in a chaser frame of mind.) Or: “Nooo, we can still be friends.” Either way, insist that you’re right to spend time apart until “the heat cools off”. But if she can “control herself around you”, you might be OK with hanging with her some more.

8. Segue like a diabetic tourist. Forcefully move the conversation away from the drama that just went down. Act like she’s a girl you just met. Gauge for positive reception. If she attempts to pull you back into a friendship frame, the attitude you want to avoid is sounding resentful. She’s testing you for congruency with your new identity. A funny quip like “Oh, man, it’s just not the same anymore. I already miss the old you” should do the trick to pass her test. Again, hit on another girl in front of her. Leave prematurely.

9. At some point you’ll have to make a bold move for her vagina. This is when verbal game stops and physical game revs into high gear. A lot of recovering betas make the mistake of letting the attraction and comfort phase of pickup drag on too long, for fear of losing the good feelings they are engendering in the woman to a sloppy bedroom move. “You’ve never seen this part of my life” is a great line to use on a former LJBF to persuade her to come to your place. It ignites a sense of wonder in her that she will presume is missing with a man she (thinks she) knows very well.

10. Does the above sound like a lot of work? You’re right, it is! Accept the challenge of converting an LJBF for its own sake, but if lay efficiency is your goal, you’d be better off pawning that girl buddy into social circle game with her hot, and relatively unfamiliar, friends.

Posted in Game | 137 Comments »

Friendzoned By A Whore

Jun 13th, 2012 by

A more nauseating example of inept betatude would be hard to find. Reader Will sent a link to this plaintive wail from a forum member (I have no idea what communities these forums are meant to serve) who is perplexed that a whore he visits regularly no longer sees him “that way”.

been seeing the same prostitute for a few months. Lost my virginity to her, only person I’ve ever fucked. She’s semi attractive and not too expensive. Normally do it in a hotel but I can’t afford it and just invite her back to my place. We fuck for the amount of time I paid for. Just as she is about to leave she sees my dvd of an old film called “a matter of life and death”. Says thats her favourite film, asks if she can watch it. We watch a film together, we don’t do anything. She phones up the next day and asks if I want to hang out. When we meet up I ask if I can have sex with her. She tells me no, because she thinks we have gotten too close. asks if we can be friends. Did I get friendzoned by a prostitute? What can i do to fuck her again?

To be LJBFed by a whore is quite an accomplishment. It’s like a restaurant manager turning away a thundering herd of famished NAAFA members. Some people are so disgusted by their clientele they’re willing to take a hit to the bottom line.

Let’s suspend disbelief about the anecdote above for a moment so that we can extract the valuable game lessons contained therein.

1. Girls who see you as long-term boyfriend material will be less likely to put out for you in a timely manner.

2. Girls who have fucked you but begin to have feelings for you will start to withhold sex in hopes that an emotional connection can grow, free from the confusing entanglement of sex. Girls often believe, with some justification, that a “love connection” — aka your efforts to remember trivial details about them — can only emerge in an emotional greenhouse where your needs as a man are left outside in the cold.

3. It’s nearly impossible to turn an overtly paid sexual outlet into an emulated unpaid sexual outlet. This is why you should never tip strippers you intend to bang.

4. Making it a habit to pay for sex will corrupt a man’s ability to relate to women, and his willingness to learn how to seduce them. This is why men who have to pay for sex are rightly classified as loser omegas. The need to turn to whores for sexual relief, plus the distance from women’s particular psychological needs that paying for sex creates, renders the john almost useless as a potential mate without the crutch of cash in advance.

5. When a whore despises you so much she refuses your money, kill yourself. When a whore feels glimmers of real closeness to you that she refuses your money, the last thing you want to do is dispatch with her attempts to relate to you as a non-john by immediately requesting sex when you hang out with her. That’s just autistic, son.

6. Never watch a film with a girl if you don’t plan on touching her during it. A two hour non-sexual vibe will dampen a tingle faster than a ripped fart. In front of her friends.

7. To a whore, a nonsexual beta male friend is way more valuable than a lover or a fuckbuddy, the latter of whom she has an unending stream of applicants to appreciate. You win over a girl like this by making your emotional friendship reward contingent upon her available orifice reward.

8. Whores are riddled with disease. And the ones who aren’t are soulkilled to the point that a relationship with them is basically an excuse to fulfill a cuckold fetish. The only good reason I could see for wanting to be friends with one is the benefit of capitalizing on her social circle, which undoubtedly consists of plenty of non-whore hot chicks.

Posted in Beta, Funny/Lolblogs, Girls, Tool Time | 220 Comments »

Automation And Redundant Humans

Jun 13th, 2012 by

There’s a lot of chatter from the internetsia and on various econ-centric and forward-looking culture blogs (i.e. mediums hosting most of the interesting ideas you won’t ever hear discussed in the increasingly self-discrediting MSM) that automation and computerization are leading to impressive productivity gains, mostly concentrated among the high IQ elite knowledge workers who feign disbelief in the relevance of IQ (and other inheritable personality traits that are useful in a high-tech, interwoven economy, like conscientiousness). The thinking goes, and trend line evidence supports the notion, that vast swaths of humans will be left unemployable by their inability to grasp the language of abstraction. Unemployment rates that dwarf Great Depression numbers could soon be the norm.

Pursuing this line of thought, these Cassandras theorize that the end result of a bifurcating economy into machine overseers and redundant humans meant only to consume the products produced by the machines and their management consultant handlers will be huge wealth residing in the hands of a few, while pittances will drop like bread crumbs from welfare-issuance offices upon the benighted masses.

I happen to believe, based on the growing dysfunction I see organically emerging in my estranged country, that the theory has merit.

So I have two questions for any economists reading:

1. How is the present automation and productivity conundrum qualitatively different than ones from the past (for example, the classic case of the auto replacing the horse and carriage)? If you do not believe it is qualitatively different, explain how we escape the “zero marginal productivity” worker trap, especially in an era when human capital is shrinking due to a combination of dysgenic birth rate differentials and mass migration of unskilled poor? Note: “Humans are fungible” is not an acceptable cop-out.

2. If, say, most of the profits go to the top 10% in society, while the bottom 90% are unemployed or marginally employed, how is it exactly that those top 10% will be able to extract profits from a customer base that doesn’t have the income stream to afford more than the basic necessities?

There must be some self-regulating rebalancing dynamic that comes into play past a certain egregious level of wealth and employment inequality. I figure this rebalancing will happen in one of two ways: One, the government will step up redistribution (virtually guaranteeing a livable “income” for the left side of the bell curve). This option, naturally, confronts a bit more difficulty in a multiethnic society. Two, the profit geyser will dry up as the world comes to be increasingly dominated by a few elite essentially bartering amongst themselves. What good are productivity gains if no one is left with the cash to buy your products?

There is a third, albeit unlikely, outcome: goods will be able to be manufactured and distributed so cheaply that no more than a meager income stream will be needed to adorn one’s lifestyle with a slew of creature comforts.

Of course, riot-quelling Danegeld or sufficiently inexpensive goods say nothing about the devastation to the human psyche that would occur in a world of relegated uselessness. Unlimited consuming has a way of eating itself to death.

Please, spare me the singularity crackpottery. That, or genetic reengineering, won’t happen in time, if it happens at all, to stave off mass calamity.

Posted in Culture, Globalization, Goodbye America, Ugly Truths | 139 Comments »

Beta Males In The Wild

Jun 12th, 2012 by

This is a photo of a first wedding anniversary.

Humans are naturally repulsed by certain objects in the state of nature. Rotting carcasses. Fetid water. Leprosy victims. Feminists. Manboobs. A steaming pile of poop triggers our disgust reflex. This reflex likely evolved to protect us from ingesting poops and then dying from infection during a time when modern medicine was a schizophrenic witch doctor.

Like fresh turds, we are instinctively repulsed by the above photo. It violates our preinstalled norms of sexual polarity. Men, and women too, have evolved limbic systems and higher order cerebrum that are groomed to respond positively to couples where the man looks to be in charge and self-possessed and the woman looks in his thrall and in need of his protection. When we see the opposite — like in this pic — we recoil as if we had just accidentally stepped in a mound of dog shit.

The masculinization of Western women and the feminization of Western men continues apace, with no bottom to the depths to which this depravity will sink. Point by repugnant point, let’s examine the bizarro world inversion illustrated in the photo:

– Lap sitting, male on female. INVERSION
– Smothering neck vise, male on female. INVERSION
– Cross-legged male, open-legged female. INVERSION
– Stupidly grinning male, grimacing female trying hard to hide it. INVERSION
– Wraparound koala bear hug, male on female. INVERSION
– Closed body language and clenched fist, female on male. INVERSION
– Micropenis, male. Acromegalic clit, female. (speculative) INVERSION
– Being OK with having this picture taken and the moment memorialized for all time, male over female objection. INVERSION

The question, as always: What does this have to do with game? Gentlemen, you will have no success with game if you first don’t exorcise the sin of anti-game from your mortal soul. This means not behaving like a woman would behave when she is in the company of an exciting alpha male.

The good news is that recognizing, and discarding, bad anti-game habits is easier than learning pro-game techniques, especially if you are a natural introvert for whom cold approaches and crutch-like helpful scripts give you the hives. You’re 50% of the way there once you’ve stopped acting in ways that make girls feel like they just stepped in dog shit.

Posted in Beta, Goodbye America, The Id Monster | 184 Comments »

Omega Male Hall Of Shame: What Women Mean By Creepy

Jun 11th, 2012 by

A reader forwarded this email as an example of what not to say to a girl whom you “admire from afar”.

I’ve attached an email sent to one of my co-workers from a former co-worker who had the reputation of being ‘creepy’ towards most of the women in my office.

Anyway, I thought you’d get a kick out of this tripe.

****

Fw: U light up a room.

Hey – sorry if you catch me starring at you from time to time. I bet that it’s probably uncomfortable. You are very beautiful and continue to evolutionize your look at times so drastically that it;s intriguing. It also reveals the many levels, the rainbow of emotions within you. Most people have a collage of personalities that make them up into an individual, but struggle in finding a good, fun, kind balance between them. You are bless to be able to have such a capacity to be you and enjoy it. You are special. I have been around for a minute now (38 years) and seen and been in many adverse and awesome situations. Through it all I have met many people and few ( a handful)  have I ever felt like expressing what my spirit tells me to remind you of.

Today you look so Q, you can easily be thought off as a 23 year old. No harm intended in my comments young lady – it’s just that you light up a room. I also choose to e-mail you, rather than verbally tell you because I truly do not wish to make you uncomfortable, and if I do [name redacted] –  all you have to do is let me know and I will never comment again.

Anyhoo – you place a smile in my heart and I am just trying to place a smile in your face. There are folks with toxic attitudes around us at times do not get contaminated by them – instead – edify them.

:0)

Chao!

****

That’s one ugly mess. I nominate this yearning missive for inclusion into the Omega/Beta Hall of Shame. It’s a sterling representative of the genre.

A brief analysis of the points in the email at which the writer crossed the creep threshold are in order. Sometimes, it helps to spell these things out for the short bus contingent.

U light up a room.

Poetically flattering a woman you have not had one date with is like getting LOW VALUE MALE tattooed on your forehead. Because that’s how (modern) women are going to perceive your gallant efforts at a love connection.

“Hi, Jenny! You look really pretty.”

“Hi, Low Value Male! I can deduce by your forehead tattoo that your compliment is expected and honorably consistent with your low ranking on the male totem pole.”

“So you’re saying I have a chance?”

“Turn that LMV into an HMV, and we’ll talk!”

Also, there’s a beta and an alpha way to ignore punctuation. If your first word in an email is “U”, you’re starting off on the wrong foot. Generally, aloof alpha punctuation — where periods and capital letters are dropped in favor of mysterious cut-off sentences — is best reserved for text messages. Doing the same in email risks making you look like a remedial class teenager.

Hey – 

If he had begun his email with this, and ended it with this, he would have been on much firmer ground.

sorry if you catch me starring at you from time to time.

If you’re a desperate omega, the last thing you want to do is draw attention to your stalkerish omegatude. (This email is so bad, it better qualifies as the effortlust of an omega male than the tentative mincing of a beta.)

I bet that it’s probably uncomfortable.

A cool, funny chick would write back, “You bet correctly, sir!”

You are very beautiful and continue to evolutionize your look at times so drastically that it;s intriguing.

Great example of a mediocrity straining to sound smoother and smarter than he is. Paging Oswald Bates…

It also reveals the many levels, the rainbow of emotions within you.

You know when girls are down for this “I can appreciate all your levels” bullshit? When they have already been fucked by you at least 150 times. If you’re trying to make an impression on a girl by implying that you’re different than all the other guys who can’t see the real person inside of her, the time to do that is when it actually means something; like when it’s one year into a relationship and she’s still struggling to get you to agree on exclusivity. Also, no man should ever use the word “rainbow”, unless it’s to ridicule another man using the word “rainbow”. In today’s rapidly degenerating culture, the word too easily conjures scenes of bronies mutually fellating each other in a giant ponyjerk. With velvety plush headgear on.

You are bless to be able to have such a capacity to be you and enjoy it.

This is anti-game. He’s basically excused her from the burden of treating him kindly, let alone as a sexual prospect.

You are special.

When you’re in a hole, the first thing you do is stop digging. This guy’s gunning for China.

I have been around for a minute now (38 years) and seen and been in many adverse and awesome situations.

Worst DHV ever.

Through it all I have met many people and few ( a handful)  have I ever felt like expressing what my spirit tells me to remind you of.

What’s going through the girl’s head when she reads this: “He feels inspired to pour his heart out to me because he gets a chub every time he sees me over the cubicle walls?”

Well, that’s not actually what goes through her head. It’s more like this: “Creep, creep, creeper, creep. Ew.” Which amounts to saying the same thing as above.

No harm intended in my comments young lady – 

If you’re an older man hitting on a younger woman, the LAST thing you want to call her is “young lady”. Epic omega fail. And if you truly intend no harm, the last thing you want to say is that you intend no harm. There’s that rule in advertising that simply mentioning a negative is enough to plant it in a customer’s head and associate it with your product/personhood.

I also choose to e-mail you, rather than verbally tell you because I truly do not wish to make you uncomfortable

A seduction without discomfort is called idle chit chat. All seductions must contain a stirring of discomfort. Otherwise, every lame omega and beta male with sensitivity to spare and teardrops on command will be able to swoop femme fatales with ease.

all you have to do is let me know and I will never comment again.

Attainably attractive girls who have experience dealing with the fumbling come-ons of betas know this isn’t true. The minute a loser says he will “never comment/call/write again”, the girl knows he will do just that. Which is why girls will rarely reply to these sorts of queries; it only encourages the loser. (I once knew of a total omega male in high school who got a rejection message delivered personally from the girl friend of a girl he had a crush on for two years. The sad sack proceeded to pursue the girl for two more years, hoping to get a clarification.)

Anyhoo – 

Nerd alert.

you place a smile in my heart and I am just trying to place a smile in your face.

Let’s run this line through the Alpha Reformulator (a device which alters dorky beta droolings into coolbreeze alpha charmbullets): “my heart was smiling thinking about you until you microwaved that noxious curry lunch. thanks for killing the romance i was about to lay down on your day.”

There are folks with toxic attitudes around us

aka jerks who always take the girls.

at times do not get contaminated by them – instead – edify them.

What happens when a dumbass tries for profound and winds up writing gibberish.

:0)

No emoticons! What’s an emoticon doing in this email when I told you no EMOTICONS EVER!

and, oh dear lord, he added the o-nose. I bet he thinks women fart anime characters.

Chao!

You know what would’ve been funny? And less beta? If he had signed off deliberately misspelling “ciao” as “chow”. Unfortunately, his stupidity is of the unintentional variety.

Well, I hope that expedition through the thickets of the omega male psychological landscape was as painful for you as it was for me. Lessons learned:

1. Guys like this make it easy for guys with game.

2. There are shadowy realms beyond which even my considerable powers of instruction cannot penetrate. Introducing a lost cause like this dude to game will only provoke a defensive reaction and further turtling into his self-perpetuating misery. I think we all know a few guys who fall into that category.

I imagine every female reader who read that email had the word “creep” flash through her head. It’s a catch-all term that women generally use to describe men who exhibit the characteristics, mannerisms, self-negating attitude and social retardation that typically accompany involuntary celibacy and a lack of facility navigating the psychological peculiarities of women. Men need not necessarily be intrinsically low value to get slapped with the creep label; a man who could get lots of attention from women, but who evinces the attitude of the needy creep (much to the chagrin of the women who win an audience with him), is thrown into the same untouchables pile as our forlorn emailer inducted into the Chateau Hall of Beta Shame.

In short, “creeper” = “needy beta”. The slang may change, but the nature stays the same.

Posted in Beta, Girls, Tool Time | 355 Comments »

Do Fat Girls Get More Sex?

Jun 8th, 2012 by

A reader whose contributions carry more weight than the offerings from the rabble emailed the following about fat chicks and the amount of sex they do, or do not, get:

[I]t is a consistent finding that fat women tend to have more, not less, sexual partners than thinner women.  Poor impulse control etc. So, that explanation for late female virginity seems totally implausible.

The reader is referring to a speculation I made in this post that higher virginity rates among educated women may be skewed by the ENLARGING population of fat chicks who have a harder time convincing men to rut with them. The study he links to finds evidence that fat girls have more “sexual encounters with men than [do] normal-weight women.”

I find this interesting because it contradicts other studies I have read that concluded the opposite. For instance, here’s one that found obese French women were 30% less likely than thin women to have had a sexual partner in the last year. (Maybe French men have more dignity? Or fat French women more shame? Either way, it proves the French are superior to Americans on at least one moral metric.)

So, are fat chicks getting laid more or less than sexier slender babes? Evolutionary theory regarding the evolved mating preferences of the sexes actually offers plausible explanations for both assertions to be true. On the one hand, we have plenty of evidence that men prefer fucking and dating young, slim, BMI 17-23, 0.7 waste-hip ratio women because these attributes signal that the women are maximally fertile, and thus more likely to pass on a man’s genes. Since men prefer these kinds of women, it stands to reason that fat chicks would attract less sexual interest from men, and experience greater rates of involuntary celibacy.

On the other hand, we can presuppose, using evo-psych theory, that fat women are more likely to put out quickly and to offer more sexual access (read: orifices) to men because that’s the only way they can compete with the better-looking thin women who tend to leverage their beauty by making men demonstrate more signs of investment before being permitted to tap that ass.

Of course, both mating market dynamics could be at work, but one more efficiently than the other. If, say, there are more fat women willing to go all the way right away than there are men unwilling to ever bang a fat chick, the overall trend will be towards fat chicks getting laid more than thin chicks. Plus, throw in the fact that the obese population of American women is nearing 50%, at which point the planet earth begins to wobble out of its orbit, and you could make a strong case that American men have highly constrained choices in the sexual market and are thus forced to choose between masturbation with their height-weight proportionate hands and dumping a shameful fuck in a smegma-ringed porkhole.

Another way a skewed desirable female market could affect the sexual encounter ratio between fat women and thin women is by making thin women so spectacularly high value that they are able to pretty much command the price at which they reward their sex. In practice, this means the few thin chicks will hold out for a long time until they find the alpha male willing to wait and buy and wait for a life-giving gulp from the oasis of their sexiness. In a roomful of slutty fat chicks, the cockteasing hourglass-shaped girl is queen.

Finally, a sexual market that is filled with fatties will tend to lessen the shame that each individual fatty feels about her grossness; c.f. the fatkini “revolution”. When you are one fatty in a sea of hotties, you will know the excruciating feeling of being an outcast and, at best, invisible to men; at worst, cruelly mocked by them. But when you are one fatty amongst many fatties, and the sexy chicks are in the minority, you won’t be an outcast. Your friends and those around you will be just like you. Strength in numbers means you will hold your triple chin high, and your gorilla gut out proudly, giving desperate men who, in a normal functioning market, wouldn’t deign to speak to you for a second, an unreasonable amount of shitty, entitled attitude. You will imagine your blubber is attractive to men because Cleon the methhead got really drunk and horny one night and wooed you with a compliment about your “big, beautiful titties.” You will feel no shame undressing before a man with the lights on.

None of this says anything about the *quality* of the relationships that fat chicks get. As the first study states:

“These are very objective measures,” she said of the current data. “It probably begs for more qualitative studies … to better understand the quality of relationships.”

That’s a nice way of putting it. Fat chicks might be getting a lot of sex, but they are probably not getting a lot of love, if we measure love by signs of male investment and length and intensity of commitment. And for women, happiness and a feeling of success at life is found in love, not sex, the latter of which holds hardly any value for women because it is so easy for them to get, relative to the hoops men have to jump through to get laid.

The question of whether fat chicks get more or less sex than slim chicks remains an open one. Unfortunately, I cannot contribute much in the way of anecdotal support for either hypothesis, because my interactions with fat chicks have been extremely limited. By choice. And isn’t that the crux of the whole debate? In a world of real options — real, attainable choice — 99 out of 100 men are going to choose the slender babe over the shambling she-hog

EVERY

TIME.

That’s how you put a self-professed, proud fatty fucker to the test. Forget what he says. If he is approached for sex by two girls, one fat and one thin, and no one’s watching him, he’ll bang the thin one. Naturally, in real life, he won’t have that choice, because most fatty fuckers are losers who have no chance with slender girls. The exceedingly few men who would choose the fatty over the slim girl are freak outliers that serve to prove the rule rather than discredit it.

What does this all have to do with game? In countries with more fat women, your game will have to be very tight indeed, if you don’t want to be put in a position of choosing between porn and beast mounting.

Posted in Biomechanics is God, Hungry Hungry Hippos, Ugly Truths | 300 Comments »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Also reachable over Tor: roissyrwpgxawb3etwznvay4eelbws4lkdtr4tt2r7wxb6adq6pajtqd.onion