Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Keychain Game

Valued commenter Reservoir Tip relays,

I’ve been toying with this game method for a little while now, and think it’s pretty solid.

When a date and I are sitting down, I grab her keychain, and say, “Ya know… You can tell a lot about a girl by what she keeps on her keychain.”

Sucks them right in. Then you go on to analyze all the little trinkets she keeps on it. College girls’ keychains are practically cat o nine tails with all the junk they have hanging off them. Found a girls AA token on a keychain last night, and it had her qualifying herself to me for the next ten minutes.

Keychain Game.

As practical game advice, the phrase “You can tell a lot about a girl by [X]” (or its variant, “I can tell a lot about you by [X]“) is highly concentrated and purified chick crack.

Chick crack is any conversation topic or titillating segue that engages girls so powerfully they forget to act bored or shit test you. Cold reads like Keychain Game fall into this category, as does any ruse which implicitly recognizes a girl’s natural solipsism and entrancement with her own uniqueness.

The best thing about chick crack, besides its ability to pry taciturn pouters, are the opportunities for negs, teasing and disqualifications once the girl starts giddily reveling in her psychological diagnosis. Per Mr. Tip, the more a girl loves herself, the better you can leverage her self-love into self-surrender.

Is Pollution Feminizing Men?

A reader passes along research which discovered that river pollution — specifically, endocrine disrupting chemicals (which are found in everyday products such as pesticides, contraceptive pills and detergents) — in Spanish estuaries is feminizing the male fish.

Welly well, CH has been in front decrying a perceptible increase in Western male manboobery aka feminization. We are awash in male feminists, our culture is getting regressively scalzified, and that can’t be entirely chalked up to genes. Something befouls the pool of innate masculinity, turning once-proud penises inward and sacks upward.

Can we infer negative impacts of pollution on human males from male fish? I think we can, but further research will help clear this up. If it turns out pollution is a major cause of beta orbiters, male feminists, and other self-flagellating pudding pops, then Western technological civilization can rightly be accused of waging a war against men, and the war is going global.

And it’s a good bet that whatever’s feminizing men is also masculinizing women. Manjaws and narrow boy hips are everywhere, in case you haven’t noticed. American women are counting notches on their bedposts while American men are penning sappy paeans to pedestaled sluts.

One interesting angle to this “pollution makes manlets” research is that we can expect to find manlier (i.e. psychologically healthier) men where water and air pollution is lower. Now where would that be… rural areas? Low population density areas? You see where this is heading.

Rural red state good ol’ boys 8====D~~~ urban blue state SWPLs.

Assume The Sale Game

Here’s a conversation I had with a girl on the night we met. Some details have been redacted to protect the devilish.

Little Lord Lucifer: Go over there and do [X] for me.

Girl: And what would I get out of that?

Little Lord Lucifer: My approval.

Girl: (waits a beat, audibly snorts) Your approval! What does that even mean?

Little Lord Lucifer: It means exactly what it sounds like.

Twenty seconds of me warmly smiling and her accusing me of being “full of it” and “a psycho” elapse. Suddenly, she looks at me with widened eyes, her mouth opens a little, she cocks her head, and gets up to do [X]. She returns, mission accomplished.

Girl: (with feigned deference) Did I perform to your expectations, oh great one?

Little Lord Lucifer: Yes. Thanks. I approve.

Girl: (sarcastically) Oh, I am SO relieved to be in your good graces!

***

Now, there’s a couple sociosexual dynamics going on here. There’s the obvious one that she did the thing I asked of her. Sarcastic intent notwithstanding to the contrary, I raised a hoop and she jumped through it. All that her consent required was my rock-solid frame and confidence that she would do it. Overconfidence is the heart of game.

Two, even when humorous or sarcastic intent guides a woman’s compliance — as if she was role-playing for the amusement of both of you — the physical motions of going through with the request will generate real feelings in her of slightly lower value and submission to a higher value man. This phenomenon is like the inverse of power poses, where instead of elevating one’s confidence and self-assurance through behavioral cues, one evokes feelings of submission and deference through “powerlessness poses.”

All of this psychological legerdemain acts on the abacus of subconscious mate evaluation. PUAs call it subcommunication, and it’s a powerful, if mischievous, means of strengthening attraction in women.

Reframing

Here’s an example of the utility of reframing to domains outside the sphere of pickup. Reader PA asks,

What is a good, short, SFW [safe for work] response to the 77% [pay gap] lie?

Other than “it’s not true if type of profession, years of experience, and overtime are factored in.”

PA is right to tacitly assert that an effective reframe to a ridiculous but widely-believed PC lie should be short and sweet and digestible. References to arid data or statistical qualifications won’t win over the common plebe or plebette.

One reason why anti-Cathedral dissidents rarely get traction in these sorts of arguments they should be winning handily is that they don’t know how to package their pushback in a way that makes it more receptive to the part of the listening audience who aren’t brain-dead true believers. What is true for seduction is true for persuasion. Terse charm >>> loquacious insistence.

So in that vein, some persuasive, office-friendly reframes to the 77% pay gap lie would be:

“You say that like it’s men’s fault.”

“And secretaries only make 10% of CEOs. We should narrow that gap too.”

“Motherhood really competes with work.”

“Handouts would fix the problem.”

I welcome the readers to add their own pay gap myth reframes.

***

PS On a related subject, change is a-blowin’ in the wind, my friends. It’s small change, but something is definitely happening. I’ve noticed of late a certain reticence by the boyfriends of SWPL girls to robotically agree with their girlfriends’ feminist boilerplate. Instead of the usual head nodding and “yes, yes”s whenever their girls babble feminist cant, these once-sackless wonders have begun to look off into the distance impatiently, and their blank expressions betray conversation thread-killing neutrality. It’s not the CH-style shiv, but it’s better than total supplication.

I’d like to think that the Chateau message is finally influencing the zeitgeist; if so, we may be cresting the horizon to revolution, and moving into a brighter, sunnier, more unapologetically erect day.

Omega Male Of The Month

“i’m biased against PIV”

The Germans have a word (the Germans always have a word) for “a punchable face”: Backpfeifengesicht.

Why do these male feminists all look the same? Is there a factory that shits out bald, pale, pencil-necked, peach-fuzzed, brony fluffers who were born with full diapers?

Self-flagellation is nothing new for the pillow biter set, but one wonders how effective the male feminism pose is as a mating strategy. Assuming the androgyne above isn’t a bottom, he must cop this degrading attitude on some level to score flabby feminist poon. It’s either an evolved behavioral strategy that works juuust often enough to prevent it from being culled from the male population, or, like open borders race cuckoldry, it’s a maladaptive expression of a genetic trait that may have been useful a long time ago in a different sexual environment when the steppe thundered with brazen misogynists and the sensitive man had some relative value to women.

Regardless, the male feminist strategy sucks for attracting cute girls unless you have compensating attributes like charm or social status.

Alpha Male Of The Month

now let’s see if you can suck dick at the same time.

When a woman publicly, willingly, and happily prostrates herself to a powerful alpha male, it triggers the egalitarian instinct in northwest Europeans (men and women) who, feeling vicarious indignation, snark and sputter their displeasure. For instance,

Proof that men are completely helpless.

Yes, it could be proof of that (if you ignore the fact that he appears to be a healthy man capable of standing on his own without aid). But much more likely it’s proof that his beautiful lover takes great pleasure in serving him.

To the modern, equalism-addled Western mind, such displays of raw female submission to raw male sexuality are both alien and unsettlingly evocative of sexual relations as they may occur without social censure, or as they may have occurred in the distant past when fewer formalized rules were in place to constrain the sexual gluttony of alpha males and the dewy-eyed slavishness of the women who loved them. Threatening, too, because the occasional display of stark sexual polarity in egalitarian societies, consensual and brimming with joy by both parties, is a shivvy reminder to the mass of mediocrities of their own organically constrained romantic options.

In short, sour grapes and snark are the typical reactions by losers suffering the ceremony of winners.

For those optimists who don’t think lying liars and the mendacious ideas they propagate matter, President Barry Kenyatta-Downlow Obama today signed two executive orders addressing the so-called “sex pay gap” myth that feminists have been menstruating over the national discourse for decades. In one order, federal contractors will now have to report how they allocate their wages by sex and race to the Inquisition government.

Ideas matter. The public megaphone matters. The pay gap as it is exploited by feminists and their shit lapping allies is entirely explainable by organic forces manifesting from innate sex differences. Hoped-for UGH MISOGYNIST discrimination has got nothing to do with it. Once adjustments are made for variables like occupational choice, downtime, part-time work, leave, hours worked, and natural sex-based variation in ambition and conflict resolution, the pay gap DISAPPEARS. In fact, some studies have shown that, after these adjustments, women actually make a little MORE than men on average.

Why is this important? Because the policies that evil ideas generate are actively harmful to the people who don’t personally benefit from the lies. You can lay at the crooked labia of feminist ideology the consequences of futile efforts to correct the “pay gap” in the name of helping women “lean in”. Employers have a new pointless cost to cover, and undoubtedly they will shift some of that cost onto their male employees. They suffer, consumers suffer, government efficiency (such as it is) suffers. Social distrust leeches into every facet of life. And, in the THX-amplified CH-widescreen picture, lower male wages undermine the marriage market.

Tell me again how feminism is irrelevant. With a straight face.

Yet there are normally clear-thinking scoffers who, emotionally shackled to their manicured knee-jerk caricatures of anti-feminists as *derp incel bitterboys*, fail to grasp what’s happening right before their eyes. Or, grasping it, disregard the tangible evil in favor of fantastical theoretical journeys to the “source” of the evil, which, they reason, is the only recourse to eliminating the influence of deranged and feels-propped ideologies shaping government policy RIGHT NOW.

CH is well-versed in the pleasures of excavating downward through cultural detritus to find the root causes of feminism and it’s parent evilology Equalism, and of offering solutions. Being “anti-feminist” and being a “root cause-ist” aren’t mutually exclusive; if anything, these stances are mutually reinforcing. And, procedural note, managerialism is likely not the ultimate source of feminism; that dishonor more likely belongs to genetic changes brought on by NW European excessive outbreeding.

But yeah, go ahead and spend your sadistic capital mocking anti-feminists as one after another feminist proposal sees the light of day and earns public acceptance and protection from realtalk ridicule. Meantime, see how far talk about “managerialism” severed from the actual lying propagandists thriving within the managerialist system gets you with the voters. Nah, I prefer my shivs aimed for the solar plexus, at the filthy fucking liars pushing their gruel down a gullible people’s throats.

I get why some men dismiss the threat of feminism. Some are low intensity suburbanites happy to have settled for dutiful and loving frump wives who cook for them and pursue lifestyles totally removed from the sphere of feminist babble. Others date cutiepie sorority types who haven’t so much as uttered the word “feminist” their whole lives. Still others have been out of the dating market for ten or twenty years and have lost touch with the energies that guide women’s mate choices and the pro-feminist social lubrications which younger urban SWPLette women easily imbibe and regurgitate.

To these men, white knighting comes naturally because they don’t see any direct line from the easygoing women in their own lives to the feminist assault on innate sex differences and, ultimately, on Western civilization. And yet, when the reasonable women they know enter the voting booth, a majority of them vote for feminism-loving politicians, and the skew is especially pronounced if they’re unmarried. If that gives you hope, do note that single women are a growing demographic cohort.

The day-to-day details of the non-confrontational, marginally empowered, platitude parroting woman hardly impress as antidotes to seismic feminist lies when job purges for crimethink are becoming the norm and government policy is twisting into pretzels to accommodate femcunt poopytalk. Maybe you think-tankingly believe quoting a few Burnham passages is the panacea to the black tentacle goo of feminism and equalism corrupting a new institution by the day. It could be, but people respond better to real world enemies identified and engaged.

Women are natural followers. You attack feminism and ostracize its advocates to lead women away from its carrion call. You do this in conjunction with deeper exegeses on root causes for Western social and cultural dissolution. Every attack angle counts when the castle is under siege. The front line is everywhere.

Or you could derp about anti-feminist bitter divorcees and nerdy incels (characterizations which, by the way, aren’t true to life; the most joyous anti-feminists I know are happy-go-lucky players who get laid at will), and watch from the sidelines as yet another workaday stiff is tossed out on his rump by cackling hags offended by a lame dongle joke.

As a related afterthought, I wonder if leftoids understand the logical end goal of all their anti-pay gap agit-prop? Do they sincerely want a world where everyone, despite his talent or efforts, is awarded a $100K annual lifetime salary? Just level the playing field completely and be done with their griping. Some people are hard-wired to work no matter the recompense or status compression, but surely there will be millions of marginal cases who will say “fuck it” and drop out to collect the same salary doing nothing. And then you can kiss your comfortable cosmopolitan life goodbye.

That’s the thermal exhaust port of leftoid equalists: they never think through the consequences of their spur-of-the-moment feels.

Put away your history textbooks, this is the only graph you’ll ever need to consult for an explanation why civilizations rise, plateau, and fall.

set a course for vaginaland, sulu

In honor of the factually baseless, feels-fueled, and insipid “””Equal Pay Day“””, this graph represents what happens to civilizations as they slowly but inexorably womanize.

As you can see, the trajectory is back-loaded. The reason for this is that it takes a long time and a lot of realism to build a civilization from the dirt, but a very short time for that civilization to wither and die once an irreversible feels threshold is crossed. Civilizational peak and plateauing typically occur after feels have pushed aside realism and begun consolidating its cultural power and influence. The lag effect is a feels-ifying culture eating its seed corn.

Tragically, this belle swerve is an inevitable consequence of civilizing progress. Like biological death, civilizational death is unavoidable, an emergent property of collective human nature. The hopeful soul might say that curbing women’s political and cultural leverage can stop the bloodletting; theoretically a possibility, but what are the odds? Better to lounge poolside and enjoy the spectacle of civilization’s enemies shrieking in shiv-peppered pain.

Update

“An increase in the influence of women in public life has often been associated with national decline.”
- The Fate of Empires, Sir John Glubb

Commenter “Z” over at Cheap Chalupas/Bargain Beans had this to say about poverty alleviation programs,

Welfare programs have never been about solving poverty. Even the most wild-eyed utopian dreamer knows that’s absurd. The poor will always be with us. Poverty programs serve three functions today. One is riot insurance and prevention. The people of Maryland, for example, have a real concern about the ‘citizens” in Baltimore burning the city to the ground. Giving them money to sit home and watch Springer all day is a cheap and bloodless way to deal with that problem. Welfare is just a part of the defense grid.

The other function is to employ an army of state workers that become poll workers, organizers and fund raisers for the political parties. The fact that tax money goes to operations like Planned Parenthood, for example, who then funnel it back to the politicians is a good example of the self-dealing at work. The massive amount of campaign money that flows from government unions back to politicians is not an accident.

Finally, these programs, their university training grounds and the non-profit barnacles attached to every poverty program are excellent dumping grounds for the dimwitted children of the ruling classes. Throughout the state systems you find relatives of state reps and party hacks. In Massachusetts, for example, the state is now largely run by a few Hibernia clans. There are families in Mass that have three generations of hacks.

CH’s advice to leftoids who believe they MUST uplift the poor or they’ll lose out on all that dopamine-boosting self-congratulatory feels is

1. Deal with it.

2. Make transfer payments to the wretched refuse contingent upon temporary or permanent sterilization.

Your typical SWPL high priestess won’t rest until she’s solved the problem of the poor? Solution: Policies which reduce the amount of poor people being born each generation. It’s simple, it’s effective, it robs the insufferable Salon crowd of their religious fervor. And that’s why it’ll never see the light of day.

Word of advice: Barring extenuating circumstances, don’t go out with a group of guy friends and one cute woman. You will righteously tool yourself before you’ve taken two steps toward self-hell into the bar.

The ultimate in toolbaggery is the group of mirin’, pleased-as-punch über orbiters who show up to a venue with one hot girl in tow. Or rather, at center stage. Because that’s where she inevitably ascends — straight to a social throne that her gaggle of beta pissboys have adorned for her.

I recently witnessed such a spectacle. Five men — not strange looking by any stretch, just normal dudes in department-wear — and one flaxen-haired hottie tucked in the middle of her men-ses, like a small sun radiating through a Saturnian Tool Belt. Everywhere she drifted, they followed, establishing without a doubt to the unbiased third party eye who was gravitationally in charge. When she smiled, her triptych of tools smiled on cue. When she pointed at something, they looked en masse in the direction of her pointing finger. When she laughed, they laughed uproariously. When she sat down, they encircled her even more tightly, parting occasionally to unwittingly afford her a better view of better men.

And when she touched the arm of any one of them, the rest shuffled and frowned with noticeable agitation.

But the coup de brah by a long shot was when the five guys enlisted the help of a passing bartender to take a photo of the girl surrounded by her eunuch guards. The barkeep obliged, and the assembled onlookers retched. When he walked away after returning the phone-cum-camera, I was privy to his eye roll and bastard grin that he signaled to a colleague still behind the bar. The girls in my company also noticed the entire scene as it unfolded, and politely strained to hide their pity.

No one respects a beta orbiter, not even women. Everyone knows a beta orbiter when he sees him. But FIVE beta orbiters hoisting the royal palanquin of a darling princess? Have you no shame, sirs?!

Not one of those men was boffing that girl, I would bet your life savings on it. Every one of those men *wanted* to boff that girl, continuing in the theme of betting your life savings on it. She had no interest in boffing any of them, and to this bet I would add your mom’s life savings.

What is happening to men of the West? By most indicators they have forgotten how to be men, or if they know they’ve lost interest in the art. They kneel at the feet of women, kiss her painted toes, and kowtow to her every whim. They gleefully sacrifice their dignity to public judgment and ridicule. They thirst for the pussy like lost adventurers lapping sand from hallucinatory oases.

Mind you, my complaints extend as far as my big-picture interest in preserving the culture which facilitates my poolside time. As a practical, day-to-day calculation, the abject fealty of my competition increases the destructive power of my game.

If you’re a beta suffering a lengthy dry spell, don’t expect relief to come from the accompaniment of an asexual female friend. Certainly don’t expect it if she is accompanied by four more of your male buddies. If you must go out accompanied by a cute female friend, leave your buddies home. Insist that any additional hangers-on exclude too many of her male friends and include a few of her female friends. And, for the love of all that is hole-y, check the game literature for strategies and techniques detailing how to use a cute girl-friend as a pivot to other cute girls you have a realistic chance of sexing. Because that’s about the best use of a cute female buddy.

It’s almost tragic how unaware beta males are of the latent male SMV-boosting power which resides in an attractive female friend who can trigger the preselection algorithms of nearby girls. Unaware, and incapable of exploiting it. But isn’t that just another dulcet note in the battle hymn of the beta male? Strike suicidally at one’s own breast plate, and drip blood until a chubby spinster with sprog on the mind rescues you.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,841 other followers

%d bloggers like this: