Feed on
Posts
Comments

Freelance Comment Of The Week: Anti-Fragility Is Code For ZFG

Aug 20th, 2018 by


CH

A two-fer from deadlifting economist and international man of pithiness N.N. Taleb (The Bed of Procrustes),

When she shouts that what you did was unforgivable, she has already started to forgive you.

True. This is a variation on the CH maxim that the opposite of a woman’s love isn’t her hate, it’s her indifference. A woman truly in an unforgiving mood will check out of the relationship and not care whether you express remorse. If she’s shouting at you through tears and indignation, she’s still very much in love.

Charm is the ability to insult people without offending them; nerdiness the reverse.

It’s the Neg versus the Tedium.

Posted in Comment Winners | Comments Off

The Era Of The Psychocunt

Aug 20th, 2018 by


CH

What social media has accomplished and which dwarfs all other impacts it has had on the culture, is this: It has weaponized female attention whoring. Check this out:

There are too many psychocunts in the USA to count, but this one stands above the rabble. Short story: using an advanced hot-cold, ghost-unghost technique, she lured hundreds of thirsty beta males on Tinder with promises of a hot date (“we can see what happens”), to meet her at the foot of an outdoor NYC stage where she would be to see a DJ perform. Our intrepid Thirst Brother treks to the location, and realizes, along with the rest of the beta dupes there, that he’d been had. In his words:

I make my way to Union Square. Eat a hot dog and look over by this open lot by 17th Ave and there is a stage and a DJ and about 100 ppl and cameras and shit and I think well this is some random ass Manhattan shit. […]

Eventually I see a girl moving towards backstage with two enormous bodyguards in sunglasses and realise it’s her and I’m thinking WHAT THINE FUCKETH IS GOING ON

ed: urkel alert.

I stay back and assess the situation and I’m like fuck I’mma stay right where I am til she texts me. The DJ eventually stops playing and she gets on the stage and I’m so fucking confused but think well I guess she’s a social media personality or some shit

She gets the mic and is like thanks for coming out I bet you’re all wondering what this is about and I’m like yeah what the fuck is this about

She then says so I know all of you here are on tinder and I’m like 🤔

Then she says I’ve invited you all here for a chance to go on a date with me and proceeds to give a hunger games speech about what its gonna take to date her

ALL THE DUDES THERE SHE FOUND ON TINDER AND TEXTED THEM THE SAME SHIT

Every man in the crowd looks down and mimes WHAT IN THE NAME OF SCOOBY DOO THE IS THIS SHIT to themself

At that point I am genuinely amazed at the fallopian fortitude this girl possesses. This is top 10 greatest finesse of all time. Dudes actually stayed and played.

This is what a corrupted sexual market looks like: a horrible female-favorable sex skew (whether numerical or attitudinal) giving rise to an army of psychocunt attention whores, leading a pathetic mob of thirsty betas by the nose, and cajoling them into a livestreamed “let’s you and you and you and you and him fight” battle royale for bitchcoin and vajtreonics (but no sex).

If this sounds like a boner-killing hellscape, you’d be right! And the only answer is Game. Lots of it. The motherfucking Script of The World must be mega-flipped to give men a fighting chance in a Western sexual market gone completely rogue.

This won’t surprise CH readers paying close attention, but based on a photo taken of her back, our psychocunt looks to be high T (or low E). Notice the linebacker shoulders and boyhips:

That’s a body made for Dread Game.

***

Sentient dug up a pic of her from the front:

Not much to look at. Charitably, a soft 7. Which is why so many beta males figured they had a chance with her.

She, obviously, is extremely bitter about men. Tooling all those betas must have slaked her thirst for vengeance something good. Except, not. She will continue pining for the alpha jerkboy who pumped and dumped her, taking out her spite on all the beta males who follow in her alpha widowhood wake.

***

Courtesy of Sentient, a better frontal view pic of Our Lady of Lording it Over Thirsty Betas:

Yeeeeeah, based on this high-res shot, I’m gonna have to downgrade my initial assessment of her from a soft 7 to a hard 6. Also, is anyone else getting shtetl vibes to go along with the powerful slut vibes?

Posted in Attention Whore of the Month, Culture, Current Events | Comments Off

The True Value Of Peacocking

Aug 20th, 2018 by

The true value of peacocking — wearing or attaching something to yourself that makes you stand out in a crowd of men — is that it provokes women to test you for your alpha male boner fides.

You won’t get far with women if you aren’t being shit tested (unless your mate status is so conspicuous that the need for needling is obviated). You need those tests to demonstrate your higher value to curious women. So stoking women’s curiosity and their envy of a man who can steal audience attention from them is step one towards the bedroom.

What women are wired to seek in a potential mate is an unfakeable signal of fitness.

The problem of dishonest mutants seemed intractable until Amotz Zahavi suggested a solution: the ‘handicap principle’. The handicap principle suggested that some signals might be too costly for a signaler to fake. For instance, certain mate attraction signals might only be produced by males that are of sufficiently high quality, because the costs to lower quality males of displaying these signals would be prohibitive.

Malefeminism.exe

Parallel concepts had arisen independently in economics, where ‘conspicuous consumption’ and ‘extravagant wastefulness’ were suggested to reliably signal wealth among humans. For the handicap principle, in particular, the long train of the peacock seemed to provide a plausible example, given the expense of growing and displaying such a costly structure for its bearer. Yet, the question remained whether the handicap principle could solve other cases of conflicts-of-interest between signalers and recipients; and if not, whether there might be other solutions for signal reliability.

As men and women have competing reproductive goals, an intersex evolutionary arms race is almost guaranteed in any sexually reproducing species. Thus, men have evolved an ability or disposition to fake signals of alpha maleness, and they are successful often enough at duping women over the millennia that the fakery continues to be a feature of the modren sexual market.

Solutions for signal reliability

Recent work has indicated that the handicap principle is not the only possible explanation for the reliability of animal signals and, in fact, several mechanisms — not all of which require excessive production costs — may guarantee that signals continue to be informative over evolutionary time. Indeed, when signalers and recipients are highly related to one another, or when they have minimal conflicting interest, then signals may be cost free,

Another curse of Diversity™: the added expense of signaling mate value to the opposite sex. Maybe this explains why the sexual market of racially/ethnically diversified societies becomes more r-selected over time.

with certain types of ‘pooling equilibria’ emerging in which some signalers of different types employ the same cost-free signal. And even when signalers and recipients have strong conflicts of interest, theoretical models indicate that honesty itself need not be costly: all that is required is that each instance of lying that deviates from the honest equilibrium be met with high costs. Mechanisms for reliability in conflict situations, therefore, typically hinge on the fact that recipients of signals have their own evolutionary interests, so if signals do become unreliable, then it will no longer pay recipients to attend to them.

A big part of the PUA literature is focused on anti-AMOG tactics, which you will need to have if you intend to provoke female (and therefore competitor alpha male) interest with gaudy signaling (peacocking). If you can’t back up your peacocking with a ZFG attitude, you WILL get BTFO by women and men alike.

(Think of the newb PUAlet dressed in a royal purple jacket who gets pressed on his sartorial choice by a hottie and immediately turns red-faced, stammering a weak rationalization for an adventurous style that obviously belies the lack of an adventurous personality.)

So the real value in peacocking is that it opens a path to demonstrating grace under pressure. That pressure can come in many forms (typically via sarcastic comments from women or belittling comments from AMOGs). There’s really no point to peacocking — in fact, it can be counter-productive — unless you intend to convert it into charisma currency, ie a proof of concept, a show of alpha male cred.

For instance, I sometimes wear a goofy [X] at the [Xplace], and a few times girls have approached me to comment on [X], to which I have usually replied “I’m glad you like it!” or “you have good taste” if the girl was transparently sarcastic, putting her back on her heels defending herself and/or trying to correct my intentional misinterpretation (and therefore investing herself in my approval). If she was more mean-spirited about it, I’d say “don’t be jealous”. If she was being flirty, I might opt for an equally flirtatious reply: “I bet you say that to all the guys wearing [X]”. If (exceedingly rarely) another man makes a snide remark, I ignore him or quip “I didn’t ask for your fashion advice”. Usually, though, when I get AMOGed it’s in the spirit of frattish good fun, and I laugh along and neg the dude on his “queer eye for the straight guy”.

I don’t always peacock, but when I do it’s Dos Sexist. I have a purpose in mind, which is to trigger women out of their humdrum lives and step into the ring with a Groove Perforator. I expect the backtalk, and so I’m prepared for it, immune to the flustering which catches anxious men off-guard, which means that my “faked” signal of mate value is effective and, in a deeply meta sense, authentic.

Posted in Game | 45 Comments »

Animal Farm, Trumperica Edition

Aug 17th, 2018 by

In an Animal Farm set in the President Trump timeline,

the media would be… (Squealer the pig/the sheep)

the alt-right would be….(Benjamin the donkey)

the GOP cucks would be….(Boxer the horse)

antifa would be…(the dogs)

the globalist elite would be….(mr jones)

Heritage America would be…(the hens)

YKW would be….(too easy)

And Trump would be…?

Posted in Culture, The Id Monster, Trumperica | 141 Comments »

The Vapid “Past Immigration, Ergo Perpetual Immigration” Argument

Aug 16th, 2018 by

Ah, not a day goes by without the treat of (((shitlibs))) trying to gull the un-woke with broken logic that sounds real purty on the surface. The latest is the uncle of that basest of jews, Stephen Miller, throwing his nephew under the bus to feed his tikkun olam-sized ego.

If my nephew’s ideas on immigration had been in force a century ago, our family would have been wiped out.

By DAVID S. GLOSSER August 13, 2018

Let me tell you a story about Stephen Miller and chain migration.

It begins at the turn of the 20th century, in a dirt-floor shack in the village of Antopol, a shtetl of subsistence farmers in what is now Belarus. Beset by violent anti-Jewish pogroms and forced childhood conscription in the Czar’s army, the patriarch of the shack, Wolf-Leib Glosser, fled a village where his forebears had lived for centuries and took his chances in America.

He set foot on Ellis Island on January 7, 1903, with $8 to his name. …

What does this classically American tale have to do with Stephen Miller? Well, Izzy Glosser is his maternal grandfather, and Stephen’s mother, Miriam, is my sister.

Boom, drop the ( )ike!

I have watched with dismay and increasing horror as my nephew, an educated man who is well aware of his heritage, has become the architect of immigration policies that repudiate the very foundation of our family’s life in this country.

Because America had past immigration, it must have endless future immigration. Unassailable logic!

Reality: any nation, including America, has the right and moral justification to turn on or off at any time the immigration spigot as accords the national interest. David Glosser’s self-serving indignation is not Americans’ moral crisis.

Or: get over it, glosser.

ps Ellis Island is just one of many “classically American tales”. You know what else is a classically American tale? The 1924 Immigration and Naturalization Act that severely curtailed immigration and restricted it to European Whites, leading to the greatest explosion in a country’s standard of living ever seen in history.

I shudder at the thought of what would have become of the Glossers had the same policies Stephen so coolly espouses— the travel ban, the radical decrease in refugees, the separation of children from their parents, and even talk of limiting citizenship for legal immigrants — been in effect when Wolf-Leib made his desperate bid for freedom.

American citizens are making a desperate bid for a livable country that isn’t overrun by foreign scabs and ingrates.

The Glossers came to the U.S. just a few years before the fear and prejudice of the “America first” nativists of the day closed U.S. borders to Jewish refugees.

Just missed!

Ya know, there’s another logical conclusion one could reach from Glosser’s glossing of mass immigration: Americans shouldn’t have let in all those bubbes.

Whatta pain in the tuckus they’ve been!

Is anyone else getting tired of maudlin shysters weeping schlockodile tears for the fate of a nation they are determined to destroy under a flood of culturally and genetically foreign migrants?

***

From commenter Another Dad,

As much as it makes the steam rise, i love seeing the likes of Glosser put this in print.

The whole “nation of immigrants” thing is objectively stupid. Mathematically, immigration forever means that the future America must assymptotically approach the shittiness of the shittiest nation on the planet–until literally no one else on earth wants to come here! Your line–your genetic contribution to the future–will either be extinguished or your descendants scrape by in an overpopulated dystopian hell hole.

It’s the anti-thesis of patriotism or love of nation. It’s wishing the nation’s destruction and extintion.

Now i realize i’m a few SD’s to the right of the average person in mathematical “sense”, so what’s obvious to me doesn’t immediately pop for everyone. But the more these bastards keep broadcasting their idea that immigration *must never stop* the more the average person will wake up and smell the insanity and the hate.

Mass Shitholiness (multiple entendres intended) is no way to make America great again.

And malevolent ingrates are no one anybody should take seriously.

***

Another sharp comment from Another Dad,

First off there is no reason to take any immigrants. What happened in the Americas was “conquest”. The US certainly didn’t really require any immigrants after the founding, but they–like my immigrant ancestors–juiced the conquest a bit. Certainly immigrants were redundant by the closure of the frontier say 1880.

But if you decide “hey, i’ll add a few folks to the team”, what would be the first requirement? Loyalty. They’ll mentally and emotionally join up, become part of your nation and put the interests of their new fellow citizens first.

Some people naturally take to that. Some people, some peoples, just massively fail that basic test.

I’m noticing that Maul-Right acolytes are becoming quite adept at not only challenging the Left’s framing, but reframing the debates altogether to utterly neuter and shut out the Left’s typical litany of feelgood debate points. Another Dad reimagines the frame perfectly when he denies the very premise of taking in *any* number of immigrants at any time.

Our rhetorical weaponry is getting more lethal.

Posted in Da Goyim Know, Globalization, GloboHomoBezos Ministry of Propaganda, Goodbye America, Pretty Lies | 19 Comments »

The Media’s and Big Tech’s War On Free Speech

Aug 16th, 2018 by

It’s chilling ‘cuz it’s true.

From the VDare feed:

Free speech has no greater enemy than the so-called #FreePress.

The government isn’t going to deplatform you, try to get you fired, and cheer on assaults against you.

Journalists will.

I’m calling it the REEE Press. The press REEEs indignantly, then hunts down the crimethinker and casts him to the icy wastelands.

Short-term solution: Make whorenalists the story.

The “free press” in alliance with their left-wing technodweeb symbiotes are deplatforming dissident voices faster than you can count, and are justifying the Stalinist Silencing by claiming that the victims of their inquisition are “inciting violence“.

Media: *incites violence against whites, cops, trump, republican congressmen, alt-righters*

PSYCHOLOGICAL_PROJECTION.EXE

Media: “Alex Jones incites violence!”

That biting quip comes to mind.

Leftoid: “my violence is speech, your speech is violence”

PS Brad Parscale, President Trump’s Viking warrior-slash-tech guru, says “Big Tech is becoming Big Brother“.

Big Tech has a big bias problem.

Social media platforms that once facilitated the free exchange of ideas and information are now actively seeking to silence and censor conservative opinions.

This new Orwellian impulse that is taking over Big Tech is particularly problematic because social media websites, which are supposed to be safe spaces for all free speech, get special legal perks.

Under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, websites such as Facebook and Twitter are not treated as publishers of “information provided by another” — which would subject them to libel laws and other headaches publishers have to deal with — because they “offer a forum for a true diversity of political discourse.”

This means social media platforms are not merely private companies who can censor whomever they wish — They are considered, by law, to be public forums that allow free and open debate.

Yet, they’re doing the exact opposite. They are stifling online speech, warping the national discourse, and obstructing the free flow of ideas. Big Tech is not just biased against conservatives — it is actively trying to silence them and deprive them of online platforms.

Big Tech’s bias was on full display recently when conservative activist Candace Owens was suspended from Twitter for satirical tweets mimicking the racist, anti-white tweets of New York Times editorial board member Sarah Jeong — who has never been suspended from Twitter despite a history of racist comments.

Parscale used the term “anti-White”.

Which means Trump has heard the term “anti-White”.

Which means it will appear in a Trump tweet very soon.

Which means the Left’s whole facade will come crashing down and their salty tears will flood the zone.

Twitter isn’t the only major social media site with a demonstrated history of bias against conservatives. Facebook is infamous for its lopsided application of its “community standards.” Conservative content is regularly removed from the site while vile, often violent, radical left-wing content is left alone. Recently, a GOP congressional candidate’s ad was banned because it depicted images of the Cambodian genocide.

To make matters worse, the social media giant recently changed its feed algorithms — ostensibly to combat fake news — but the result has been a suspicious and significant drop in the reach of conservative pages and advertisements. A study found that while liberal publishers saw a roughly 2 percent increase in web traffic from Facebook following the algorithm changes, conservative ones saw a loss of traffic averaging around 14 percent.

Big Tech’s anti-conservative bias is positively institutional. Facebook, Google (YouTube), and Twitter all work with the Southern Poverty Law Center, a far-left organization with a proven track record of anti-conservative bias, to decide what is and isn’t “hate speech.”

Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like Big Tech is set to return to its free speech roots anytime soon. The Left clearly no longer values free speech at all. […]

What we are seeing in Big Tech is the inherent totalitarian impulse of the Left come into full focus. The Left is losing at the ballot box, and there are some signs it is starting to lose the culture war too. The free and open Internet has been indispensable in spreading conservative ideas, and it was indispensable in getting Donald Trump elected president — and now the Left wishes to destroy it.

Hot DAMN Parscale dropped the hammer on the Leftoid speech police.

This is great news. Parscale has Trump’s ear; if Trump is getting daily updates about the coordinated censorship campaign of social media companies to silence right-wing populists and race realtalkers, then it’s a good bet that as soon as the battlefield clears a little for Trump to really flex his political and people capital, he will crush these anti-American technopolies and media propagandists with the MAGA Mjölnir.

Pray for Trump and the warriors in his inner circle. Our enemies are cornered and roused to sputtering rage and are liable to lash out and do something extremely unwise.

Posted in Da Goyim Know, GloboHomoBezos Ministry of Propaganda | 10 Comments »

Google’s New Motto

Aug 16th, 2018 by

“We’re evil, and we have your coordinates.”

***

It’s as bad as it looks, and worse. Orwell’s only mistake in 1984 was underestimating the depth and breadth with which his dystopian vision would become reality.

Posted in GloboHomoBezos Ministry of Propaganda, Goodbye America | 12 Comments »

“Evil is make-believe”

Aug 16th, 2018 by

Clown World keeps delivering.

American Couple Believing ‘Evil Is A Make-Believe Concept’ Bike Through Territory Near Afghan Border. ISIS Stabs Them To Death.

A young American couple who took a year-long bike trip around the world, believing that evil was a make-believe concept, took a fatal route in Tajikistan near the Afghan border, where alleged ISIS terrorists stabbed them to death.

Jay Austin and Lauren Geoghegan, 29, quit their jobs last year in order to make their trip. Austin was a vegan who worked for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; Geoghegan, a vegetarian who worked in the Georgetown University admissions office.

Can shitlib self-parody implode into an astronomical singularity?

While in Morocco, Austin wrote:

You watch the news and you read the papers and you’re led to believe that the world is a big, scary place. People, the narrative goes, are not to be trusted. People are bad. People are evil. People are axe murderers and monsters and worse.

I don’t buy it. Evil is a make-believe concept we’ve invented to deal with the complexities of fellow humans holding values and beliefs and perspectives different than our own—it’s easier to dismiss an opinion as abhorrent than strive to understand it. Badness exists, sure, but even that’s quite rare. By and large, humans are kind. Self-interested sometimes, myopic sometimes, but kind. Generous and wonderful and kind. No greater revelation has come from our journey than this.

Inner Hajnal shitlib Whites have a problem reconciling the existence of evil in the world because the fact is that, at least by Western White society standards, evil disproportionately exists in nonWhite and nonWestern societies. So instead of accepting the premise of banal, routine nonWhite evil, shitlibs prefer to deny the existence of evil altogether. Or play games of sophistry and redefine evil as “badness” (as if differences of degree and kind don’t matter).

White shitlibs also have a problem with the logical concept of mutual inclusion. Goodness, kindness, and generosity of spirit can exist alongside evil. The existence of the former does not refute the existence of the latter.

And reader PA had a thing or two to say about how nonWhite hosts can be quite gracious to guests they know will be leaving their land soon, and that this graciousness misleads gullibly naive shitlib Whites to believe the rest of the world is as nice as they are (except to BadWhites).

It’s all so grating, the mix of condescension, sanctimony, paternalism, and callowness of the typical modren shitlib. “People, the narrative goes, are not to be trusted” What narrative? The one your people control? And, sorry to tell ya (which you know now in your travels through the illimitable void), some groups of people really are less trustworthy than other groups of people. “we’ve invented” Who’s “we”, kemosoyboy? “to deal with the complexities of fellow humans” Describe those complexities. You mean like, stabbing foreign travelers to death at the side of the road? “it’s easier to dismiss an opinion as abhorrent” Yes, everyone the shitlib disagrees with is an ignoramus. “than strive to understand it.” The shitlib is so understanding, you should listen to him.

Austin also had some contemptuous words for President Trump:

Apparently Jay Austin thought there was evil in the world, in the form of President Trump.

Then, on July 29, 2018, as they were riding their bikes with two other cyclists in Tajikistan, five men exited their car and stabbed all the bicyclists to death.

A grainy cellphone clip recorded by a driver shows what happened next: The men’s Daewoo sedan passes the cyclists and then makes a sharp U-turn. It doubles back, and aims directly for the bikers, ramming into them and lurching over their fallen forms. In all, four people were killed: Mr. Austin, Ms. Geoghegan and cyclists from Switzerland and the Netherlands. Two days later, the Islamic State released a video showing five men it identified as the attackers, sitting before the ISIS flag. They face the camera and make a vow: to kill “disbelievers.”

I don’t believe these two cotton-headed dopey universalists deserved it…but they didn’t not deserve it. I hate their killers — evil personified — but I also hate the ideology of powerlessness and wishful thinking that enabled their victimization and the victimization of anyone who may be beguiled by their, yes, evil race-blind kumbaya beliefs.

The story screams out for a physiognomy reveal:

Crikey, the manjaw on that bish. If you shaved his beard and covered the top half of their faces, would you be able to tell who was the man and who was the woman? Who knew vegetarianism could grow such a mandible?

PS This timeline is unbeatable.

Mayor to female commissioner: You make a living off anal bleaching. It’s a PoundMeToo moment, she says

A Gabber quips, “I’ve noticed there is no denial of butthole bleaching.”

PPS More timelineliness:

SHOCK: The Catholic Church has a Big Homo Problem Again

Posted in Current Events, Funny/Lolblogs, GloboHomoBezos Ministry of Propaganda, Physiognomy is Real, Pretty Lies, Tool Time | 62 Comments »

Venus Logic Traps

Aug 16th, 2018 by

During moments of pop media regurgitation, I have had White girlfriends say to me, a White man they were happily fucking and to whom they professed their love, that, in so many words, “White men are the problem with society”.

Try to wrap your head around that lawgic trap.

***

Atavator comments,

Heartiste, remember Larry Auster’s “3 person morality play” in liberalism? Good White, Bad White, Other. Just about every movie people watch follows this script. Shitlibs say this kind of crap so easily because they simply assume that YOU assume they’re putting you in the “good white/redeemer” category. And when they say “white men” are the problem, they mean someone… out there.

It’s a disgusting filthy lie of a worldview, but few women have the ability to think their way out of that programming, and would probably express surprise that you would even take offense.

A big part of what we all need to be doing is making people PAY in some way (even if it begins with disgust and anger) for parroting this loathsome garbage.

Perceptive. (RIP Auster) This is the mentality at work here. When women find out I’m very much the badwhite of their nightmares (defying their expectation of the form and style a badwhite should take)….well, they get a little hotter in the panty blotter!…even if long-term they must know it’s not gonna happen between us.

It’s evidence of a profound sickness in our culture when you really digest what’s happening here:

SWPL White girls are trying to connect with White men by slandering White men. In the twisted landscape of their damebrain, these chicks think that bashing BadWhites to a White man is romantic, an example of “shared values” that White girls need to feel with a man before they’re ready to receive his swarth-free seed.

That White chicks don’t even contemplate the possibility a White man will ever object is an extremely damning indictment of the SWPL White men who share their social strata: the girls are probably right; vanishingly few craven soyboys will ever call them out for their insipid anti-White posturing.

Until they meet a stone cold shivver like yours truly. A subversive who swims among them. A rebel right under their noses.

Batrachian writes,

Women relate to things on an inchoate, emotional basis. They don’t understand themselves, or what the fundamental drivers of their behaviours often are.

The same women that feel deeply offended by the very proposition of societal eugenics and hierarchy are also the first to be socially-Darwinian in their attitudes toward men.

CH Maxim #77: The fealty to equalism women signal is belied by the ferocity with which they sift and sort men in the sexual market.

Evolution likely saw to it that women would not be aware of their subconscious motivations, lest the fair sex lose the ability to dupe beta males (self-duping authenticates other-duping).

Complementarily, evolution saw to it that men would appease the Sexual Darwinism of women by avoiding any show of weakness or expression of emotional vulnerability…or die incel. Over the eons, men have been selected to indeed be less emotionally vulnerable because instinct usually trumps affectation.

Autarky writes,

[Women’s] biological programming is to avoid social exclusion. Only when white men are seen to be more powerful than the media will ‘their opinion’ change.

My quick rebukes may not have changed their opinions but it did shut their pieholes. For a spell. (My reply to anti-White virtue sniveling women is along the lines of “you have me confused with someone who will listen to your crap”. Or mouthlove.)

Batrachian again,

I’ve often wondered about the lack of self-awareness involved in this [White women signaling anti-White bona fides].

It’s understandable that they’re primarily acting out of fear (the west has become utterly isolating and tyrannical in a way that few are able to articulate) but I doubt anyone openly acknowledges this.

Is fear driving the epidemic of White women to posture against White men? Yes, if you believe that White women believe social ostracism is guaranteed if they don’t parrot the Anti-White Party Line. Something else is driving it, too.

Disgust.

SWPL, overeducated, over-employed, under-childed White women, for reasons I’ve explained at length in the pages of this blog, have become disgusted with their White men, the soyboys and bugmen and effete toadies and “Concorde-nosed moguls” who are their sexual market confederates. No man is standing up to them; worse, these low T lackeys are cheering on their race-traitor White women to ever greater depths of Hajnalian subversion of their shared homeland and culture. On a primal level, one has to wonder if shitlib White women are lashing out at their own weak men through the barbed tips of anti-White agitprop.

And why these same chicks flee to tumblrrhea to tell of how they relievedly surrendered to a proudly White MAGAman and were beginning to question everything they thought they knew about themselves.

Posted in Culture, Girls, GloboHomoBezos Ministry of Propaganda, Maxims, The Big City Life, The Id Monster | 75 Comments »

The One Good Reason To Stick It In Crazy (And More Confirmation That Chicks Dig Jerks)

Aug 16th, 2018 by

Men have better sex with women who are emotionally unstable, a study has revealed.

And women prefer men who are less agreeable but pay attention to detail, according to the German survey of a thousand people.

They found “men whose partners had less emotional stability reported better sexual function” while “lower agreeableness of a sexual partner was predictive of better sexual function in women.”

From a Gabber,

Most men already knew this. The best sex you’ll ever have is with a woman who’ll stab you with a pair of scissors for liking another woman’s social media post.

Headcase women try a lot harder in bed because they love that feeling that their man might leave them at any moment. So Dread Game is useful in two ways: it keeps women attracted and faithful, and it heats up the bedroom. Of course, the downside is that you have to learn to deal with the blowback of continually provoking her to unlock ever-greater levels of achievement in girlcrazy.

The usual way these Manipulative Man-Crazy Girl relationships go is:

Hot sex => Surprise drama => Hotter sex => Manufactured drama => Soul-desiccating sex => Here comes the crazy train! => Stroke-inducing sex => Breakup.

Every one ends in a huge blowout-slash-blowjob because every man has his breaking point beyond which he can’t tolerate another bout of crazy from his girl. That breaking point is reached when the relief of getting away from the crazy is stronger than the regret of giving up the hot sex. For the options-rich alpha male, the breaking point is between three weeks and three months. For the options-starved beta male, the breaking point is between three years and early death.

The second part of that study — women have better sex with disagreeable men — recapitulates a rich Heartistian archive of personal anecdote and scientific confirmation of the CH maxim that chicks dig jerks. The man who locks a woman in (tethers her to his dick like ribbon to a may day pole) is the man who balances his charming and impeccably ambiguous emotional distance with his sensual expertise navigating a woman’s body.

Posted in Girls, Science Validates Game, The Pleasure Principle | 17 Comments »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Also reachable over Tor: roissyrwpgxawb3etwznvay4eelbws4lkdtr4tt2r7wxb6adq6pajtqd.onion