Feeds:
Posts
Comments

A viral load of white female privilege dropped in the patriarchy’s lap this week. It’s a video produced by a racist white puppeteer featuring a racist white woman, Shoshana Roberts, (OK, maybe she’s a “convenience white” woman), walking through some vibrant and culturally nonconforming New York City neighborhoods for ten hours recording the reactions of the underprivileged men around her.

Wow. Just…. wow. I can’t even…. I can’t watch any more of this video. I feel physically ill from the othering. FCKH8!

The racist subtext is obvious. Some cisgendered white woman with a rap sheet of unchecked privilege and internalized racism claims to speak for all goddesshood, and trawls through Harlem like she’s on some safari, baiting the heterodusky into othersexual, courtship-positive mating displays. What does she expect, imposing herself on their colorful and enriching gape culture, blaming the victims for her socially constructed alabastercentrism? This is nothing less than minority shaming. And with her mile-wide ass she should know better.

There’s clearly a superstructure of anti-indigeneity in her feminist pose. Colonialist oppression is not far from her dismissive gestures. This woman wants to fight against Hollaback discourse, but all she really is doing is promoting Collablack sexual politics. She wants to collar all the blacks and Ricans who don’t accept her barely caucasian hegemony to decide rules of intergender solicitation.

Well I ain’t no collablack girl, and to this racist white woman pretending to be a real feminist I say, “Don’t impose your values on under-served, differently amorous communities. Not every catcall needs your affirmative consent if it doesn’t come from a rich, white man with good manners.”

Or maybe Shoshana Roberts and her racist white moneygrubbing masters would like to explain the reactions of her white sisters to this man? Should he just accept their creepy, threatening harassment, or should there be laws against this kind of female objectification of the male body (part)?

ps hi jezebel!

pps videotaped reactions (or indifference, as the case may be) from men on Wall Street and the Upper East Side were, for some odd reason, left on the cutting room floor. rumor has it shoshana made out with a few men who glanced her way.

ppps heh.

Don’t marry a woman over 30. There are the obvious reasons…

- The over-30 woman has lower fertility. If you want to build a dynasty, your over-30 wife might stall out at 1.3 heirs.

- The over-30 woman has likely amassed an impressive knob count. When you marry a 30+ woman, you’re marrying her 30+ cockas. Hope you like getting phantom cucked! As magically prehensile as your penis may be, she’ll never look up to it in cross-eyed awe like she did with her first cock when she was younger, hotter, tighter, and inexperienced.

- The over-30 woman is bitter from a wasted prime spent on failed relationships she hoped would lead to marriage. Now that you’re marrying her, she should be grateful, but she’s not. You remain perplexed, as is the wont of your beta male class.

- The over-30 woman fell in love with her career and the alpha male bosses she answers to before she fell in love with you. Wrong order.

But all these reasons pale in importance to the fact that a man marrying an over-30 woman is investing everything he has in a rapidly depreciating pleasure provider that has already lost a lot of its aesthetic value.

As reader Trainspotter helpfully notes,

Zombie Shane: “But the fall-off [in a woman's attractiveness] a few years later can be shockingly abrupt.”

It certainly can be. So many guys these days are marrying early 30’s women, and then, almost immediately – Bam! The wall. It’s over almost before it began. It comes on so fast these guys should qualify for some sort of PTSD related disability.

As I go through my week, I often see married couples walking about. At least nine times out of ten, the wife is so unattractive that there is no way I could possibly imagine doing her, and these are just women in their 30’s. In fact, it is impossible for me to imagine most of them as having ever been attractive enough to warrant male attention.

Perhaps the fault is mine, and my imagination impoverished. Where I saw only blight, sag and bloat, their male partners saw bounteous opportunity, vistas beyond compare.

Do these men have stomachs of iron, or something? What power of will do they possess that I lack, in order to service these mighty warpigs? Most assuredly, I could never do what they do. I lack the strength, to my great and eternal shame.

Col. Kurtz himself has nothing on such gods, strolling amongst mere mortals such as I. Give me ten divisions of men like that and…well, not exactly sure what I could do. Probably bump up porn sales a notch or so.

“It’s over almost before it began.” The shining shiv delivered. The message received in pierced heartmeat. Surprise expiration!

Marrying an over-30 woman is like buying a used car one mile short of its 120,000 mile servicing. Yeah, you’ll enjoy a few bumpy rides sitting in that steal, but it won’t be long before the tailpipe falls off somewhere on Route BigMistake and the heater blows ice queen air.

The over-30 woman can fix herself up enough to fool the prospective provider hubby for a short while, and once the line that is dotted is signed the ruse will be discarded. The short time horizon thinking and avoidance of easy prescience are the thermal exhaust ports of many a beta schlub too desperate for love to project the catalyst of their ardor a few years forward.

Marry her young and un-plunged. That’s the ticket (if you must punch it). This way, you get to enjoy five to ten more years of your wife’s prime nubility before her petals start floating to the ground. Ten years of almost famous sex in exchange for surrendering your natural male prerogative for poosy variety beats two years of reunion tour sex at the same exorbitant price.

There’s another, subtle, reason to refuse the wedded diss of marrying the over-30 woman. Now, naturally, if you marry an under-30 woman, the day will come, ostensibly, that she’ll be your over-30 wife. But you’ll have something that chagrined men who married women on the cusp of sagging cups don’t have: Years of very fond, very monopolized, very supple memories. If you maritally snag a 21-year-old minx and occupy her sugar walls for the next ten years, the spermatomically bonded cervix-splattered glue of all those splendid tumbles of passion accrue into something larger than the sum of your individuated speckles. All that young woman heat, heat which will never be replicated with the older version of your wife, captures into limbic amber a network of interlocked, superconductive emotions with the power to sustain lovingrapture a good ways past the poignantly brief era of peak wife ripeness, onward into the elevator muzak era of bland marital inertia (50 years, plus or minus).

You marry an over-30 woman and you’re left grasping at a grease truck menu of curdled, pear-shaped memories and wrinkled recollections for sustenance.

Don’t fall victim to marrying that Charlie Brown Christmas tree that drops its one bulb as soon as you carry it across the threshold. Find yourself a young healthy fir, chop it down, decorate it with your tinsel, and leave lots of unwrapped gifts under its voluptuous boughs. Just make sure there’s no room under there for anyone else’s gifts.

Nor does the sexual promiscuity of Brave New World seem so very distant. There are already certain American cities in which the number of divorces is equal to the number of marriages. In a few years, no doubt, marriage licenses will be sold like dog licenses, good for a period of twelve months, with no law against changing dogs or keeping more than one animal at a time. As political and economic freedom diminishes, sexual freedom tends compensatingly to increase. And the dictator (unless he needs cannon fodder and families with which to colonize empty or conquered territories) will do well to encourage that freedom. In conjunction with the freedom to daydream under the influence of dope and movies and the radio, it will help to reconcile his subjects to the servitude which is their fate.

– Aldous Huxley, 1947, sounding very much like archival Heartiste.

“The Great Men On [X]” is a new CH series. The “red pill” has been digested before by men of perspicacity, and as the night follows day it has been disgorged by shallow men who forgot or ignored the lessons of their betters. Once again, we wade through a putrid sea of slate blue filth, not content to merely dismiss ancient wisdom but to harass it for harshing our mellow.

A reader passed along this graph, but I don’t know the source. It looks like a graph cobbled together by a feminist or feminist-friendly manboob trying to artificially extend the sexual market viability of aging beauties. See if you can spot the category errors.

The Y-axis is “percentage of potential”, which presumably means the percentage of maximum potential beauty that a woman at a given age possesses. So, from the graph, a 15-year-old teenager has achieved 40% of her maximum potential beauty. A 50-year-old woman is on the downslope of her beauty curve and has 85% of her maximum potential beauty remaining (*snort*).

The three lines are “external attractiveness” (physical beauty, which is pretty much the kitten and caboodle), “internal attractiveness” (aka inner beauty, which counts for a little), and “combined attractiveness” (the total attractiveness of a woman after her outer and inner beauty have been factored together).

If you haven’t got it yet, the category errors are:

1. The curve is much too generous to older women. There’s no way in the real world that a 60-year-old woman possesses the same amount of beauty as her 17-year-old self.

2. The inner beauty curve is likewise unrealistic. The typical woman’s personality and femininity reaches its maximum at age 70 (and up)? By whose standard? Oh yeah, by the standard of delusional feminists. If nothing else, aging subtracts IQ points, so 70-year-old women are likely not the sparkling conversationalists they were at age 25 (though they may occasionally drop gems of wisdom).

3. Finally, the combined attractiveness curve is worthless because it rests on the false premise that a woman’s external and internal attractiveness are equally valuable to her romantic prospects.

Here’s the improved, Chateau Heartiste version of the Female Total Attractiveness-Age Curve:

Much better. Red line is beauty (dispensing with the “external” redundancy), green line is inner beauty.

As you can see, the red line more accurately reflects the average woman’s external attractiveness trajectory. For most women who haven’t concealed their natural slender youthful beauty under an arctic-stressed layer of blubber, their peak beauty will occur between ages 15 and 25. The average woman will therefore max out in beauty at age 20. Unusual exceptions that desperate cougars trot out in support of an argument to the contrary prove the rule.

Past age 20, women begin the retreat from their maximum potential beauty. The fade is slow at first (as reflected in the less precipitous drop of the right side of the beauty curve), and this initially slow deterioration gives women a five to ten year graceless period to hone their self-delusion skills. “I’ll find a great guy when I’m 30!” CH: “No you won’t. You’ll settle for less, and your gogrrl friends will lie to you about this fact.”

By age 30, a woman is down to about 85% of her previous beauty high. At this stage of the game, she can no longer deny the tribute her skin and sag have paid to the überpatriarch, Father Time. It might not be evident yet under winter clothes, but it sure is the morning after twixt the bedsheets.

Now the decline accelerates in earnest. Age 35: 60% of former glory. Age 40: 40% of former glory (equivalent to her incipient preteen beauty buds). Age 50: 10%. For the typical woman, the Wall — the age at which she becomes sexually worthless to any man who isn’t legally obligated to assuage her fears — strikes sometime in her mid-50s. Almost no women beyond age 60 are capable of inciting genuine boners in any (white or asian) man.

The green line — inner beauty — is also adjusted to more accurately portray what’s going on with the average woman’s personality as she ages. This one is trickier to pin down than physical beauty, so I’ll explain.

A woman’s “internal attractiveness” covers a lot of territory, but if we are concerned with how she’ll fare romantically then we can pare back the number of relevant personality and temperament dimensions to only those that will contribute to, or subtract from, her dating or marital success. When it comes to “inner beauty”, the female traits that matter are those traits that men find delightful about women’s nonsexual (and sometimes sexual) company. This would include:

Her cheerfulness.
Her kindness.
Her submissiveness (to a greater or lesser degree).
Her coyness (suitably circumscribed).
Her fidelity (slutty aggressiveness has a short shelf life).
Her mothering instinct (does she love animals and children?).
Her gratitude (does she laugh at your jokes and swoon for your kingly mercies?).
Her femininity (does she love your teasing, return the favor, and do it all with a sparkle in her eyes?).
Her focused desire (she is desirous of you, and no other man).
Her patience (she warmly tolerates your masculine eccentricities).
Her self-restraint (she doesn’t nag).

The new and improved green “inner beauty” line closely follows the red “outer beauty” line. This is no coincidence. A woman is most charming when she’s happiest, and a woman is happiest when she’s most desired by men and feels most womanly.

There’s a slight lag in personality development. Generally, women blossom physically before their femininity matures. There’s a bit of catching up to do to the reality that her body inflames the ardor of young and old men alike. But indiscriminate male ardor can also harden the prettier women who come to learn the art of ice queen coldness as a deterrent to mistaken intentions. Thus, the peak of female inner beauty is short-lived, typically occurring during the mid-20s, after she has mastered her feminine wiles but before any single lady bitchiness has robbed some of her charm.

Inner beauty is a moving target and highly susceptible to changes in a woman’s relationship status. Women who ride the 20s-early 30s cock carousel, or who are out of committed relationships more than they’re in them, will succumb to the call of the bitch. Their femininity will disappear under a bunker of nastiness and bitterness. This is why women’s inner beauty line collapses faster than their outer beauty line: If we are talking about a woman’s LTR or marital prospects, then desperation-fueled bitchiness will betray her state of mind before her body betrays her state of hind.

Women who do the smart thing and lock down a man at their beauty peaks (early-mid 20s) won’t have this issue of rapidly deteriorating inner beauty, at least not with the same intensity undergone by unattached women. They will have started families and their happiness will become contingent on their wife and motherhood experiences more than their romantic allure.

That caveat aside, all women, no matter their marital or familial status, will suffer a cratering of inner beauty as their outer beauty abandons them. No one relishes the prospect of aging and body decomposition, but the travail affects women more deeply as they are the sex for whom youthful vainglory is most conspicuously allied with their fortunes of romance. By age 50, a woman will have lost most of that feminine charm she had as a 20-year-old vixen. This fact of womanhood is IQ-independent.

But it never bottoms out like her physical beauty. Past age 50, a woman becomes matronly, finally surrendering the last of her dreams of sultry attractiveness for the serene reality of her asexual, swaddling bosom. At this stage, a woman can jettison the feminine for the grandmotherly and substitute one set of happy personality traits for another. The older woman will never be as scintillating as her young self, but she can be pleasant company, rife with stories and disregard for restricting social etiquette, helped to fruition by the specter of sex banished to fond memory. Thus, a woman at age 70 can be as charming as she was at age 13. Peculiarly, at each end of life, a woman’s asexual allure converges onto a similar precociousness and innocence.

There was no need to draw a revised combined female attractiveness line. Women’s physical beauty is 9/10s of the Wall. Her inner beauty counts for something, particularly when that something is a man’s decision to long-term commitment, but as a factor under consideration by men it hardly budges her outer beauty curve in a more “age-appropriate” direction. The best you can say about women’s inner beauty is that it can bump up female SMV a half point, perhaps a full point as you get into the rarefied air of 8s and higher. (This latter phenomenon is what I call the “Oh shit, she’s hot AND sane!” lottery win.)

These are unkind truths, but they need telling, now more than ever in this time of delusional freaks vomiting their mental disease through every available medium. A woman who does not square up and accept this reality about her inevitable and all-too-swift sex-specific attractiveness decline is setting herself up for an unhappiness far more profound and entrenched than any fleeting discomfort from reading the Rude Word of Heartiste.

Wed Man Walking

Well-meaning tradcons with white knight complexes like Charles Murray and Ross Douthat wonder why more men aren’t MANNING UP and getting married. They say it’s because too many men are jobless.

Maybe. But there’s another, less Hivemind-hospitable explanation for the marriage dearth: Too many women are fat. Groom looks like he just found out he’s the designated prison bitch.

***

Commenter negro jesus writes,

True or not, I read that one of the original purposes of the best man was to privately ask the groom just before the wedding, “Do you REALLY want to do this??” If the groom said no, the best man would stand in front of the crowd and announce that the wedding was off. That’s what this poor bastard needed.

So, if true, the best man acted as sort of an alpha male wingman who would cockblock an ominous nuptial, but not before getting the green light from the gloomy groom. Outstanding. The West could learn some lessons from its disappearing traditions.

In the first installment of “Optimizing Your Womanizing”, we discussed the value of targeting a field of play that has a favorable sex ratio.

In this post, we’ll talk about the value of physique to augmenting your game.

A man’s physique is less crucial to his romantic fortunes than a woman’s physique is to her’s. This discrepancy is a natural outcome of the biological differences between the sexes. A woman’s mate value is connected predominately to her window of prime fertility, and by proxy to those physical cues — a pretty face, a slim hourglass figure — that alert men to her capacity to gestate the next generation.

Men’s mate value, in contrast, is determined by a number of factors, physical fitness being but one of them, and not even the most important one (at least for 29 days out of the month). And we see this playing out in the real world; the sight of an unattractive, rich man with a trophy wife, or an out-of-shape, charismatic hipster with a cute girlfriend, is far commoner than the inverse.

Nevertheless, it is better, all else equal, to look physically masculine than not. This series, after all, is about optimizing your womanizing, which means maximizing your strengths and minimizing your weaknesses until you have crafted yourself into a complete package Casanova.

Bang for buck, pump for fuck, weightlifting is the king of physique transformation protocols. No other exercise comes close to the improvements that performing the equivalent of dragging a large animal carcass across the veldt will make to your body and your attitude. The Iron Pill even provides anti-aging benefits.

(Endurance exercise has its place, but studies show greater physiological rewards from resistance exercise.)

And, like game, nearly everyone will see improvements from weightlifting. There are few exceptions to this rule.

(Even in those few randomized studies that find nonresponders to resistance training, the number is typically small – on the order of fewer than 20% of total participants, the subjects tilted female, and the time period too short. So, worst case scenario, one out of five men and women won’t get much muscle growth from doing light weight knee raises for three weeks. Good news: 80% of you will see results within only three weeks! Better news, the worst case scenario from this one study is likely not indicative of real world results from resistance training for the great majority of people.)

(Those who want to disingenuously argue that resistance training response is heritable should remember that longevity is heritable as well, but has been dramatically increasing for the past century. Environmental input matters.)

No, not every man will see equal improvements in the gym, nor look like Franco Columbu, but there will be noticeable improvement. And sometimes a little improvement is all it takes to open a man’s world to a wider vista of vagina.

I won’t discuss exercise form here. It’s relevant, but you can find plenty of YouTube clips showing how to do various compound and isolation movements. Sticking to the basics of resistance training, here’s a list of answers to typical beginner questions:

- You will gain just as much size from hypertrophy (i.e., “bodybuilding”) training as you will from strength training. If size and leanness are your goals, you don’t have to do high weight, low repetition sets like powerlifters do. If strength is your goal, then you’ll want to incorporate more high weight, low rep strength building exercises.

(Hypertrophy training also results in strength gains; just not as much as the strength gains from pure strength training. The difference isn’t big.)

***

- The optimal combination of sets and reps and weight is, wait for it, somewhere in between low sets/high reps/low weight and high sets/low reps/high weight. The former, geared to hypertrophy, and the latter, geared to strength gain, both result in approximately the SAME AMOUNT of muscle growth. A 3/10/10RM (3 sets of 10 repetitions each at a weight you can lift for ten consecutive repetitions) routine will give you the same muscle growth as a 10/3/3RM (10 sets of 3 reps each at the maximum weight you can lift for three consecutive repetitions) routine.

Since women can’t really tell the difference between a man’s size and strength, and don’t really care, most men who aren’t competitive lifters but are competitive splitters will prefer the hypertrophy protocol.

Men who care about both size and strength (they’re correlated, but not precise mirrors) will want to devise a lifting plan that includes both high rep/low weight and low rep/high weight. In the long run, muscle response is highest when your body has to adapt to different loading schemes. A mix of hypertrophy-based and strength-based training will create a synergistic muscle response.

Therefore, the ideal lifting routine would be something like 3/8-12/8-12RM: Three sets of eight to twelve reps at a weight that you can lift for eight to twelve consecutive reps. Every third workout, substitute this protocol with a strength-based, higher weight circuit.

Another option, and a popular one, is to simply mix the two systems into one workout session. So you would start your exercise with a lower (60-80% of maximum) weight at higher reps (8-12) for the first two sets, and then finish up at a high (90-100% of maximum) weight at lower reps (1-4) for the third set.

***

- Another advantage of the hypertrophy routine is the time savings. More rest is needed between sets of very high weight, less rest for sets of low or medium weight. At 1/3 the time, you can achieve the same muscle growth as you could from a strength training system.

***

- Injuries happen. To minimize the chance and severity of injuries, favor a hypertrophy routine over a strength-building one. Most injuries occur under the stress of very heavy loads.

***

- Full body, compound exercises – squat and deadlift being the two most representative – are better than isolation exercises (e.g., bicep curls) but not for the reasons gym rats think. Studies find that “big” lifting exercises don’t alter the hormonal profile any differently than do smaller movement exercises. The primary advantage of compound movements is that you can hit a lot more muscle per rep, and you can do heavier weights which, when controlling the number of reps, will generally produce more muscle growth than lighter weights. The ideal is a mix of compound and isolation exercises.

***

- The downward motion of a lift (known as the eccentric phase) is perhaps more critical to muscle growth than the contraction movement. It’s during the “deceleration” part of the lifting movement that muscle damage accrues, and from that damage the body heals itself by building the muscle up. Injury is also more likely during a point in the eccentric motion, so take care to lower your weights (or your body, if you’re doing squats) slowly and deliberately.

***

- The average man will see observable results in as little as six weeks. Six months later, girls will take notice. A year later, he’ll be a new man. Three years later, he’ll intimidate other men. Now, you can train three years for a marathon and get nothing from it but a participation ribbon and noodle arms, or you can lift for three years and at least look like a physically active man.

***

- All you need is 2-4 workout sessions per week, 30-60 minutes each. Hell, you’ll see positive results going just ONCE per week for FIFTEEN MINUTES. In fact, it’s better to err on the side of training too little than training too much.

***

- Steroids work. Most men won’t need them. People who demonize testosterone replacement therapy have a secret fear of masculinity.

***

- Here’s a good list of the top strength and health supplements for men. If you only buy three supplements, make them whey protein, creatine, and magnesium citrate.

***

We’ve reached the end of this post. Psst lean closer, I’m gonna tell you a secret…

The times of my life when I slew pussy like the Quim Reaper were times when I slacked off at the gym. At my physically weakest, my pussy pioneer skills never left me. I haven’t seen much of a connection between my muscle strength/size and my harem size. Yeah, sure I get more looks from girls, and more playful arm squeezes, when I’m fitter, but the true test of a man’s seductive prowess is the bang. A man still has to approach and charm a girl to her final surrender. And on that measure, my close rate was independent of my bicep circumference. The weight room did not hold my hand on the way to the bedroom.

So why did I write this post?

Because the evidence that the Law of Iron holds for every man is too great to wave away. The Law of Iron states:

Every man is a better man when he’s stronger rather than weaker.
A strengthened body strengthens the mind.
Looking and feeling stronger imbues a man with that aura of confidence so alluring to women.

Character, Fortitude, Confidence. That’s the Law of Iron.

I don’t know how much better my total to-date notch count would be had my gym time been more consistent and less interrupted by injury or laziness. Maybe much better, happy as that is to contemplate. I do know that, during those gym down times, my boldness and no-fucks-given attitude took me a lot farther with women than my lack of muscle definition pushed me away from women.

That’s the core lesson of the Law of Iron, right there. Boldness. Weightlifting will benefit introverted men the most, which is most of the men who seek game advice, because the confidence and masculine attitude that flows from muscle development will nudge men closer to women and to interacting with women. It isn’t the muscles that will make a man a great slayer of poon, it’s the boldness and cocksureness that follows from lifting and inevitably enshrouds his personality.

PS: Lyle McDonald’s Body Recomposition website is a valuable resource of exercise and diet information.

From Craigslist (remember that site?):

thanks again for leaving me out in the rain! w4m

my phone is now ruined, so I’ll have to resort to this – the way we first met. here.

we both knew the other was married… but now that I tell you I’m pregnant, you have nothing to say… your only reaction being to leave the bar and go hail a cab!?

i ran after you for about half a block until almost movie-like it began to rain and i just felt like a whore.

so i stopped.

those raindrops felt like an amplified otherworldly expression of my soul dying.

please at least talk to me through here. tell me how you feel. i think safer speaking here anyhow. more freely. quasi anonymously.

how we started…

“I’m pregnant.”

Another option is to toss her a Groupon for Planned Spinsterhood services.

It’s an interesting speculation if the gotcha pregnancy risk profiles of married and single women are the same. A single woman faces the prospect of raising a bastard on her own, which is a powerful disincentive to seeing it through. A married woman might similarly want an abortion before her beta hubby finds out, but then she also might calculate that a cuckolding is worth risking discovery say, ten years down the road. As a player cad, you must weigh the available incentives influencing the “accidentally” pregnant single or married woman, and decide which outcome you can most tolerate.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,034 other followers

%d bloggers like this: