Politico recently discovered that demographics and race really, truly matter, and ran a huge article expressing their enlightenment (and burnishing their anti-white bona fides). One of the featured maps helpfully reveals where in the Land of the Twee you can find the biggest white male pussies. Oh, and the most hypocritical, too.

This is what the electoral map would look like if only white men had the vote. In such a world, Democrats would be lucky to win student council seats. However, there are a few (unsurprising) regions where ankle-grabbing, pillow-biting white males would continue voting for the party that hates them and wants them dispossessed from the country they built. Washington, Oregon, Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts: If it’s hypocritical, sanctimonious white male pussies you want as neighbors, these are the places to be! All you’ll need to settle there is a taste for soy latte and white skin (d’oh!), although rumor has it Somali refugee status will get you there too.

Basically, the parts of the country with the smallest numbers of nonwhites are associated with the biggest numbers of white pussies. Unfamiliarity breeds adoration? Or is it more like “supermajority white enclaves encourage cheap moralizing”? For answers, we sent a CH reporter to Provincetown, MA to ask the white man on the street his opinion.

“Sir, what’s your name?”

“Geordie Tait.”

“Mr Taint, what do think of your predominately white town?”

“That’s a racist question.”

“Have you ever had a black neighbor who kept it real?”

“Ugh, your question makes me want to throw up.”

“Provincetown is 92% white. Is that lack of vibrancy a cause for concern?”

“We have lots of diversity here. Maybe if you weren’t such an ignorant hick you’d come visit the dunes after midnight and see for yourself.”

“What message do you have for whites in other parts of the country who, unlike you, live in states with lots of nonwhites?”

“Jesus was black! Ahahaa!”

“He was Semitic.”

“Whatever. This country doesn’t belong to you anymore. You’re on the wrong side of history.”

“So the right side of history is Provincetown?”

“It’s whatever town shares our values.”

“Like New Orleans.”


“Ok, then…. Boys, unload the trucks!”

Ten thousand displaced Katrina victims descend on Provincetown.

“What is this?”

“History being made, Mr. Taint.”

“The name’s Tait! Fuck you, douchecanoe privileged white scum!”

Geordie takes a mighty swing with his thumb-tucked fist, breaks his wrist mid-air on some turbulence.

“Are you OK?”


“Stop shrieking like a girl. I’ll get help.”


“I’m not your dad.”

“My mother made me play with dolls!”


For the lingering optimists in the CH audience, here’s a map of future election results:

Omens… I see them.

“Gear switching” is a common female manipulative tactic that is very good at tripping up less experienced men. You can tell it’s happening when one minute a woman is seemingly signaling her romantic interest, and the next she’s taunting you for thinking you’re in her league.

Reader “Jaki” offers a case study of female gear switching,

Very common shit test i encounter:
she gives me a smiley either online or face to face, then:
Me: “its gonna take more than a smile to sweep me off my feet” – or along those lines – assuming the sale, that she wants to
Her: “who said i wanna do that?”

how to proceed? thx

First, never respond to a female gear switch with indignation or apologia. It doesn’t matter if she was serious, your job as a man is to never take her seriously, and this particularly applies to verbal detours she may pave away from the path to sex.

Gear switches are often, as in this case, reflexive chastity avowals. When a woman suddenly backtracks from a conversation that was turning sexual (or just mildly flirtatious), her behavior is best interpreted one of two ways:

1. she never envisioned you as a prospective lover and the change in your tone spooked her, or

2. she subconsciously doesn’t want to leave the impression that she’s easy.

If #1 applies to you, you’ve got your work cut out. If #2 is operative, your job is much easier, because you know there’s still interest, even if her words say otherwise. Perhaps it’s better to tell you what NOT to do, than to hand-feed you lines, so that in the future you can become a fisher of women.

ONE: Don’t apologize for your forwardness. You do that and you’re toast.
TWO: Don’t stammer about being misunderstood. Same result as above. Chicks don’t dig weaselly men.
THREE: Don’t cave to her frame, (her frame being “I am the girl, therefore I am the prize”).

Knowing what not to do is half the battle. Avoid the prostrate reactions I listed above, and the proper attitude will find a place in your id. Once you have the attitude, the effective response will come naturally.


“who said i wanna do that?”

“oops. you had me, but now you’ve lost me again.”


“who said i wanna do that?”

Ignore her, move on to a different topic.


“who said i wanna do that?”

“experience/a hunch/a funny little thing called love.”


“who said i wanna do that?”

“you’re new at this whole flirting thing, aren’t you? it shows.”


“who said i wanna do that?”

“oh, ok. take care then.”


“who said i wanna do that?”

“you protest too much.”


“who said i wanna do that?”

“three things you just did. i could tell you those three things, but maybe you’re not ready to hear so much about yourself.”


“who said i wanna do that?”

“your winning personality.”


“who said i wanna do that?”

“I dunno, but maybe next time you try not licking your lips like a hungry cat when you say that?”


I hope these responses give you an idea how to proceed with a gear switching girl. Now, none of these replies are guaranteed to work, but they are all guaranteed to improve your odds of closing the deal. The mating market is fierce, combative, and complex; improving your odds by even a small amount will exponentially improve your competitiveness in the all-against-all plunderdome of love.

You can add another slut tell to the patented and first-of-its-kind Chateau Heartiste list of slut tells.

Commenter backchecking explains,

In my experience, gals are extremely aware of ring etiquette. A ring finger is raised like garlic to a vampire — or flashed to evidence availability. This tic comes largely from the subconscious.

In a similar vein, lots of cheap rings and bangles indicate a babe on the hunt. Only one finger will be flamingly naked.

The “ring finger glaring omission” slut tell is almost as reliable as the tramp stamp. A girl with multiple rings on multiple fingers except the one finger that advertises monogamous commitment is practically sending up a Snapper Signal to the city’s gine fighters. Dark knights will converge on that girl to give her the hero sandwich she needs, even if it’s not the hero sandwich she deserves.

Bonus slut tell!

If a girlfriend or wife suddenly requests that you wear a condom, she’s a slut… with another man. No doubt she’ll offer some lame excuse for the change in pound town policy, but don’t believe her. The “abrupt condom policy change” slut tell is evidence that a woman wants to block your seed to allow unobstructed passage of another man’s seed. If you are the other man, and a woman has suddenly permitted you raw god* rights of entry, practice due calendar diligence. Every player should become acquainted with his LTR’s ovulation cycle.

*Ed: This was originally supposed to read “raw dog rights of entry”, but I like the typo better.

Male sexual entitlement – in its broader application, overconfidence – is attractive to women.

Here is an example of it in action (messages from girl on left):

Reader Blick Mang writes,

Please rewind to 2005, slap me in the face, and say “I fucking told you so.”

No further commentary required.

Thank you for it all.

You’re welcome.

Why do women love male sexual entitlement? It signals male status. What kind of man can afford to posture like a Lothario? What kind of man expects pussy to fall in his lap? That’s right, a high status man. A man, in other words, that other women want. Entitlement <-> status <-> female preselection. This is the wondrous feedback loop that traps vaginas in amplifying oscillations of raw tinglage.

As an exercise for newer readers, here’s the breakdown of Mang’s message game:

GIRL: …that is all I deserve?

MANG: We’ll have to see. 8===D

Instead of offering tributes to her achievement of being born with a vagina, Mang challenges her to make him a more generous man. The universal Dick Signal is, shall we say, none too subtle innuendo.

GIRL: sorry, that kinda puts me off blah blah i’m not that kind of girl.

Now, if Mang were a beta, he would’ve tried to appease this indignant girl right around here. Most betas, sensing that a monster is growing within the girl they love, promptly revert to Supplication&Appeasement mode. “I don’t expect that. I meant to call you earlier. I don’t think of you that way” etc. Mang wisely avoids this manipulative female beta bait.

MANG: Eating my jelly beans puts me off. :)

Tingles are born in the defensive crouch. Nice reframe. (Prolly could’ve dropped the winkie.) This one liner contains some powerful subcommunication that affects girls’ behavior. Its subtext says to a girl, “I’m not going to apologize for being a man, and if you go I won’t lose a wink of sleep.”

The girl sticks to her guns, but you can sense she’s weakening under the alpha onslaught.

GIRL: i deserve respect from you, even though i slept with you

Mang holds his frame.

MANG: See you tomorrow

Nice lack of punctuation.

GIRL: ok

Translation: Her pussy just exploded.

She’s defeated. Her euphoric defeat was so complete she mewled to see him a day earlier. Game recognized.

Days of Broken Arrows provides a short history of Charles Manson, convicted murderer, cult leader, psychopath, and alpha male with a knack for harem building and marrying much younger women while in prison for life.


Son of a prostitute.
No father.
Awful childhood.
Barely literate.
5’2″ tall.
Spent most of his youth in detention centers.
When he was finally released as an adult, he begged to stay inside, worrying he could not handle life on the outside.
With a few years he had harems of women.
Held orgies.
Orgies were so great that Beach Boy Dennis Wilson invited them to move in.
Dennis Wilson was a major Alpha Male rock star of the ’60s.
Manson then order his women to kill.
They were so devoted that they did.
His women were not ugly losers — some were former cheerleaders.

Say what you will about the guy, but he had an innate Alpha quality. Shame it was put to such bad use. Guys who whine they can’t get women should think about his life and how he managed to not only get women to sleep with him but basically make them servants to his will. He had some serious charisma.

I’m not surprised at the wife who is a fraction of his age. I’d be surprised if he didn’t have groupies.

He was even a talented songwriter. He placed a song on a Beach Boys album and penned this, which was later covered by Guns N’ Roses.

True love.

<dr seuss>

Yes, chicks dig jerks.
Some dig them a little
some dig them a lot.
Some chicks dig them
in the parking lot.
Some dig them white
some dig them black.
And some chicks even dig them
when they go on the attack.
Yes, chicks dig jerks
this much is true.
They dig jerks more
when they’re black and blue.
Chicks dig jerks
of all sizes and hues.
They dig charmers and badboys
and prisoners too!
Some chicks dig jerks
of the jerkiest sort.
They marry crazy killers
60 years older, and short.
Nice men and kind men
need not apply.
It’s dangerous folk
who catch a chick’s eye.
So when you see a puddle
and lay down your coat
just remember the chicks
backstage at death row.
Ol’ Charlie Manson
got himself married.
While you sit at home
and whack your tally.

</dr seuss>

On a related topic, F. Roger Devlin pondered the reason for the observable preference of women for jerks, in an article titled “The Question of Female Masochism“. A CH read of the week. The take-home punch:

I would suggest that female sadism might be expected to emerge in a society where men refuse to or are prevented from displaying dominance. A society-wide failure of men to take charge of women is likely to produce a great deal of conscious or unconscious sexual frustration in women which may express itself as sadism. [...]

I do not know if frustrated masochistic instincts cause sadism in women—it is just my hunch. What I do feel confident in stating is that female masochism is a critically important subject which neither feminist denial nor the sanctimonious gallantry of Christian traditionalists should dissuade us from investigating.

You only had to listen… to yer loveable Heartiste.

Alpha Or Beta Male?

Sandals. White tube socks. Is that a fanny pack? His fashion sense is clearly beta.

But then there’s his body language. Leg up, the fulcrum of his maleness insolently displayed under her nose. If this were a gif I bet we’d see him swinging his pelvis into her. A fat nerd in the distance looks on, horror-stricken.

Alpha or beta male? Let me put it this way: If I wanted a solid wingman, and my choices were 1. a dapper fellow stylishly appointed and subtly accoutered to catch the inquisitive female eye, but shy and liable to spend the night leaning against the wall for support, or 2. tube sock guy fearlessly projecting his male sexual entitlement, I’m taking tube sock guy, every time.

Boldness beats style, and it’s no contest. Why? Because a nerd with a ZEROFUCKSGIVEN attitude can be molded into something great. But a retiring fop who waits for women to approach him has to make an attitude adjustment before he can be great. The ALPHA ATTITUDE is the bedrock of tight game. It’s a lot easier to improve a man’s wardrobe than it is to improve his attitude, so rock out with your socks and cock out, Package Delivery Man, you’ve got that special something chicks dig.

The Boyfriend Zone

Reader H.H. is bedeviled by the Boyfriend Zone.

Dear Chateau! you’ve helped me a lot so…

What to do when girls always put me in the “potential boyfriend” category? I’m a sociable guy who usually has no problems talking to strangers, getting people to smile or laugh, etc. I travel, have a cool job, hit the gym every once in a while and know my way around both in a sports bar and in an art gallery.

However, I tend to always be approached or at the very least orbited by 7s and 8s looking for a relationship*. ”I’d like to leave home with you, but I need to know that you’re interested in the long term” or ”I’d like to kiss you now, but I have to find out first whether you’re married”. (I could take them home and fuck them, but I hate to lie.)

I’m more interested in short crazy, one nighters with no strings attached. What’s this? I’ve been afraid that I’m giving out too many nice guy vibes, could that be it? Is there an element of danger missing? Are the sluts not interested? What am I fucking up?

*Of course the next step is to upgrade from 7-8s to 8-9s, but i’m not sure if that problem is connected with this…

When a woman tries to put you in the Boyfriend Zone, it usually means you’re giving off a heavy player vibe. She fears you’ll make her another bedpost notch, but she desires you, so to reconcile the good feeling with the bad feeling, she presses for reassurances that you won’t use and lose her. This is classic anti-slut defense (ASD) posturing.

This is a perfectly natural female response, and you have two ways to tackle it. One, you can tone down your charming jerk vibe in favor of more beta-ish cues of reliability and emotional investment. In game parlance, you’d back off of the teasing and flirting and stress comfort-building and qualification (i.e., “Do you like the idea of traveling with one person you really love?”). You’ll also want to flash hints of vulnerability. “I’ve had my heart broken enough times to know I’m no player.” With these girls, that effervescent connection is king. “I’m just a guy looking for the same thing you are.”

Two, you can screen for girls who want short, crazy flings or one night stands. This means you amp your jerk smirk to 11 and escalate sexually (and logistically). The idea is that you avoid any confusion that you’re potential boyfriend material. Mixed messages are probably what’s confusing girls about your intentions. Normally, this is a good thing, unless you don’t like to mislead girls, which you said you don’t. An unambiguous dispatch of your cad intentions communicated through your behavior filters for girls who want the same thing. You’ll scare away LTR-focused girls, while attracting sluts, unhappily married women, ovulating women, thrill-seekers, rebounds, urban gogrrls on anonymous adventures, highly sexual women, and smart women.

Occasionally, a woman will put you in the Boyfriend Zone because your behavior in some way has pinged her boyfriend radar, and she’s excited about the prospect of dating a man who’s on her wavelength. Her excitement can be so great, she seeks validation for the LTR promise that hangs heavy in the air between you two. This validation seeking can take the form of probing questions about your “commitment to commitment”, because for these women romantic escalation is as intoxicating as sexual escalation. Many players have no compunction about leading these types of women on (and it’s quite easy to be good at it), so if that’s not something you’d do then you’ll have to stick to strategy #2 and actively select for low impulse control girls.

I have some disheartening news. If you’re constitutionally against the idea of leading women on*, you’ll have a harder time finding many 8s or 9s interested in no-strings-attached sex. Contrary popular mythology, most funfunfun girls who’ll agree to what amounts to slutting it up are the wastoids, the desperate, and, if your game is good, the borderline cuties in the 5-7 range. While SCIENCE! is hard to come by, my impression is that blue city 7s rack up more sex partners than 9s. Which makes sense; all women want the alpha male’s sex and the alpha male’s commitment. But only the best women — read: the hottest — have reasonable expectations of achieving both goals. Less hot girls will sometimes resort to giving away their sex for a shot of alpha male money shots and a slim hope of rousing his long game lovingkindness in the post-coital glow (it rarely happens).

This isn’t to say that you can’t find a boner fried hottie who tingles for the flingle. They’re around; they’re just better at concealing, even to themselves, any latent desire for a sexual romp. If you want to be both honest and noncommittal with a beauty, you’ll have a road ahead of you. If you can handle soft-shoeing your NSA message without having a moral crisis, then blazing a trail of microtears through HSMV women will be easier. Hotties are gonna need to see some feints away from pure sexual objectification. Of course, you’ll still want to make them work for your love.

“I’m dating around until I find that one woman I click with.”

PS *”Leading women on” is just another term for nonjudgmentalism. Men who don’t lead women on are, by necessity, more judgmental of the women they meet. Because in fact there is no such thing as true nonjudgmentalism; we’re all judging something about someone else at any given time. Hiding your judgmentalism is good for business if your business is persuading women to giveitaway.

PPS When a girl says ”I’d like to leave home with you, but I need to know that you’re interested in the long term”, the best reply is one that assuages her fears and avoids supplication. That means, don’t jump on her beta bait with forceful vows of fidelity.


“Oh, I’m definitely interested in the long term with you. I’ve always wanted a girlfriend.”


“Like you, I want the same things. But I can only answer that once I get to know you and spend time with you.”

Your long term interest is presumed but not guaranteed.

Maxim #45: If a girl isn’t working for your love, she’s making you work for hers. Better to be a love owner than a love laborer.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,064 other followers

%d bloggers like this: