Feeds:
Posts
Comments

A slew of eye-tracking heatmaps reveal some very interesting sex differences in subconscious desire, (as well as revealing optimum product positioning, which come to think of it is related to the former).

In the above map we see that men’s gazes focused on the woman’s face and body (and less so on the surrounding details). Women were more interested in the photo’s context, but they didn’t gaze any less at the model’s face and body. (It even looks like women spent *more* time checking out their competition.) Conclusion: Women objectify women as much as men do.

Similar results here. Women aren’t blind to other women’s beauty. Or their shoes. (Men, as per cultural stereotype, don’t give a shit about a hot babe’s choice of footwear.)

Here are two online dating profiles. The left profile is female, the right male. Eye tracking shows that men and women viewers gaze for a long time at the female profile’s face. The male profile photo, in contrast, hardly gets any attention, from either sex! More attention is paid to his background information, aka his story and his identity.

Eye gaze experiments provide strong evidence that a woman’s sexual market value is primarily a function of her looks, while a man’s SMV is multivariate. Women’s attraction triggers are holistic. Women will subconsciously measure and judge a host of personality, psychological, and contextual characteristics of a man before their arousal has solidified into conscious desire.

Because I know it drives certain spergalicious Rainmen crazy, once more with the slash of the shiv:

Maxim #5:  A man’s looks don’t matter as much to women as a woman’s looks matter to men.

Men who grasp the innate truth of the above maxim will do better with women than men who give up all hope because they are sad their jawlines are 0.1 micrometers too narrow.

***

Taking bets now on how many bitter quasimodos and Tinder sluts with poor reading comprehension show up here to ragefroth after ignoring the part that says “as much”.

Reader PA linked to an old video featuring four famous French singers embodying four distinctive styles of womanhood. All four are fantasizing about hitting on the same man who’s leaning against the bar. PA comments,

This is a delight in its own right. It’s also a Game tool: ask a girl which style, of the four shown here, is hers.

(Stay tuned for 3:34. Assuming it’s not electronically altered, dude has the deepest frog voice I’ve ever heard.)

The video is fun, and yes it does contain material that would serve very well reconstituted as a game routine. Which is what I’ve done.

Naturally, in most situations you’re not going to pull up a Youtube video for a girl you just met so you can ask her with which femme fatale she most identifies, (although there’s nothing wrong with doing that if you can manage it).

Do you remember the archetypical femmes fatales? The classics? The Chateau archives have posts about them and their particular gaming needs.

The golddigger.
The waif/neurotic.
The eternal ingenue.
The Amazonian alpha.

Asking a woman which female archetype she thinks she is will light up her eyes and deepen her conversational commitment. (Most girls like to think of themselves as ingenues. Be wary of the girl who proudly proclaims herself an amazonian alpha. Also be ready to bounce her home for the NSA bang.)

In the video, the singers represent, respectively (and commenters are free to argue with my categorizations):

Singer #1: The shy girl-next-door with a secret raging passion.
Singer #2: The fun-loving free spirit with a naughty side.
Singer #3: The elegant romantic who can throw a dinner party as well as she can flirt.
Singer #4: The take-charge seductress who might walk out with your wallet in the morning.

(Timeout to note how crazy beautiful and feminine Frenchwomen can be. I’d even consider monogamy with that first singer, and it takes a lot to inspire me to that sacrifice. Tragically, the times, and our women, have changed.)

If the girl you’re hitting on can watch this video with you, simply asking her which type she relates to will get the comfort stage ball rolling. Without the video, you’ll have to keep the above four (or eight) femmes fatales stored in memory for retrieval as part of the Femme Fatale Game Routine.

DEVIL’S VANGUARD: Women love to put men in boxes — you know, the frat bro, the nerd, the momma’s boy, the player — but there are types of women too. Femmes fatales. And men can tell a lot about a woman by her type. [pause for her curiosity to get the best of her. look away during this moment, so you don't leave the impression that you're anxiously anticipating her reply.]

LITTLE BO QUEEF: Really! So what type am I?

DEVIL’S VANGUARD: That depends. You see a man you like. You want to grab his attention. Do you look at him, then look away, blushing? Or do you bounce up to him and act flirty?

LITTLE BO QUEEF: Act flirty.

DEVIL’S VANGUARD: So you see yourself more as the free spirit than the shy girl-next-door. Ok, now if the choice is between being a free spirit, or sidling up in a sleek cocktail dress and remarking on his sense of style or whatever, which do you choose?

LITTLE BO QUEEF: Ooh, I like cocktail dresses. I’d do that.

DEVIL’S VANGUARD: Ok, so you’re more of an elegant romantic than a free spirit. Now you have to choose between being an elegant romantic, or wearing a sexy dress with a plunging neckline and whispering racy innuendo in his ear. The take-charge seductress.

LITTLE BO QUEEF: That’s too much for me. I’ll stick with being the sophisticated romantic in a cocktail dress.

DEVIL’S VANGUARD: Typical American woman. Great! Now I know what type you are. Ready?

LITTLE BO QUEEF: Yes!

DEVIL’S VANGUARD: The elegant romantic is passionate, but not crass. She’s no prude, she just likes a long build-up before going for the kill. She thinks herself sophisticated [ed: note that this is a challenge], and tries to dress stylishly [ed: another challenge]. She’s emotionally mature and has that natural sexiness which makes other women jealous, but not so jealous that they feel threatened. Men feel good about introducing you to business associates.

LITTLE BO QUEEF: Yay!

If words aren’t your thing, you can run an abbreviated version of the Femme Fatale Routine.

DEVIL’S REARGUARD: Shy girl-next-door, or naughty free spirit?

LITTLE HO’S SHEAF: Both!

DEVIL’S REARGUARD: That’ll do.

***

PS I understand that the “style” PA refers to may be the man’s style, but I think the routine works better as a pickup tool if you ask the girl about female-specific styles.

Yer ‘ginal aerator has not sifted through virgin forests of montes pubis without noticing a thing or two about the rhythmic ecological tickings of women. One of those tickings is the unmistakable sound of the cogwheel shift that occurs in women who have the good fortune to fall under the admiring gaze of an overconfident man.

“Over-” being the key prefix here.

As always, social science plays catch-up to the keen Heartiste eye.

study from 2012 concluded that even when overconfidence produces subpar results, its charm still wins the day. We might expect someone with more confidence than ability to underperform when pressed. The study tested that expectation and found it more or less accurate – but also found that it really doesn’t matter. Overconfidence may not shine when objectively tested, but it has a knack for seducing people to such a degree that they ignore the results in favor of keeping the golden child on a pedestal.

Sounds suspiciously like women ignoring the red flags of relationship threat when they’re in love with jerkboys.

If you had to isolate why, it seems to come down to a matter of status—a commodity that overconfidence is expert at creating and nurturing. When managed well, the social status conferred by overconfidence has an aura just shy of magical, capable of keeping our attention diverted from measurable results.

Chicks dig men with social status, i.e., leaders of men and women. They dig that male character trait more than looks, money, or dependability.

That’s a jarringly paradoxical conclusion when you consider the average person’s gut reaction to “that overconfident jerk.”  How can we be both repulsed and seduced by the same thing? The question gets stranger in light of another study that showed how even rudeness gets a pass if its bearer’s overconfidence has alchemized sufficient status.

In one of the study’s experiments, participants watched a video of a man at a sidewalk café put his feet on another chair, tap cigarette ashes on the ground and rudely order a meal.  Participants rated the man as more likely to “get to make decisions” and able to “get people to listen to what he says” than participants who saw a video of the same man behaving politely. Through a few other experiments the same results prevailed – people tended to rate the rule breakers as more in control and powerful compared to people who toed the line.

Jerks are rule breakers. Rule breaking is perceived as high status. High male status is attractive to women.

And what’s the all-essential ingredient in believing oneself above the rules? Why yes, overconfidence, of course. (This may also help explain why rude sales associates outsell others at luxury stores.)

Fake it till you make it. And then, once you’ve made it, fake it even more.

Those studies circle the question of why we’re prone to falling for the chutzpah of overconfidence, but say little of why the overconfident are so good at pulling it off. The most recent study on the subject has an answer that’s not likely to lessen our irritation about this whole thing, but irritatingly makes decent sense.

It can be summarized like this: Belief sells, whether it’s true or not. In the case of overconfidence, the belief in one’s ability—however out of proportion to reality—generates its own infectious energy. Self-deception is a potent means of convincing the world to see things your way.

Inner game. You won’t succeed with women until you first internalize the belief that you CAN succeed with women. And are DESTINED to succeed with women. Another term for this is ABUNDANCE MENTALITY. When you start to believe that there’s a new woman around every corner excited to meet you, that no one woman has a monopoly on specialness, then WOMEN THEMSELVES will begin to believe that about you, too. It’s as if your self-enlarging belief system is carried aloft on an ether of sexy vibes that women can sniff out from the dispiriting miasma of beta male self-doubt that permeates their existence.

While we may not like that conclusion, it’s difficult to argue that it isn’t in evidence around us every day. People who don’t believe in themselves—whether that belief is well-grounded or not—aren’t likely to convince others to buy in.

A better description of the beta male mindset you would be hard-pressed to find.

What the latest study and elements of the others are telling us is that self-deception is an especially potent brand of status fertilizer. When packaged with personality, it makes others want to believe even when the results would counsel otherwise.

Game is applied charisma. Charisma is status + a charming personality. These characteristics will lift an ugly man to a desirable man in the hearts of women. A false belief in your allure as a womanizer will become a true belief in time, and you can thank women’s loving assistance for the evolution.

Pulled from a sexxxy players’ forum, here’s some advice for older (or younger) men who want to know how to handle large age differences, particularly as the issue applies to online dating, where inclusion of age in the profile is required.

I lie on my dating profile and put it 7 years younger.

When I get asked my age in person I tell the truth.

Then they say “but your profile says xx”

“Oh, yeah that’s because when I had my real age on there all these old chicks were messaging me as if I want that”.

Then I make a comical shudder.

Hasn’t failed me yet.

Almost poetry. Why does this work? One, he’s assumed the sale. “Why *wouldn’t* younger women want to be with me?” Girls love that. Two, he’s implied his high mate value. “I have options, and age-appropriate women aren’t one of them.” Three, he’s demonstrated that reckless, careless asshole attitude that drives women crazy with desire. “Yeah, I faked the funk. What of it?” Four, he’s implicitly qualified and complimented her. “I’m with you, which means you made the cut.”

This technique can be used for real world interactions as well. The effectiveness will depend to an extent on how invested in you she has become. If you later reveal your real age with an insouciant disregard for her potential outrage, her ability and willingness to forgive and forget will be directly proportional to the love, or lust, she feels for you. You can do this with a lot of conventionally perceived mate value negatives that may deep-six a courtship before it has had a chance to get off the ground. Strategically omit any facts about yourself that you suspect deviate from her “Mr. Right checklist” until a later time when her 463 bullet point checklist has surrendered to her one bullet point vagina tingle.

One other thing… as one of the forum members wrote, a redirecting, strategically deployed compliment can go a long way to defusing female indignation over your naughtiness.

When/if she finds out, just smirk, “did you really think I was 25?”.

Then be impressed at her ability to find out your real age. Chics love thinking they were clever and can’t be fooled.

This is Sun Tzu seduction: Using a woman’s fondness for flattery against her. Just be sure it doesn’t come across like a last-ditch hail mary. Delivery matters. Pleasantly amused surprise is what you should shoot for.

In big and small ways, social science studies have a habit of confirming many CH precepts. The latest finds that expensive diamond engagement rings and expensive wedding ceremonies are inversely associated with marriage duration.

This study was done by professors from Emory University. They found that U.S. adults who spent large amounts of money on engagement rings and/or their weddings were more likely to end up divorced!

According to the research, men who spent $2,000 to $4,000 were 1.3 times more likely to end up divorced than men who spent $500 to $2,000.

And when it comes to weddings, if you have a wedding that costs more than $20,000, you’re more likely to end up in “Splitsville!”

The average cost of a wedding in the U.S. is $30,000, according to “The Knot.”

Expensive rings and weddings are classic provider beta male game. And, as science is showing and the Chateau has warned, beta male game is ultimately self-defeating. Women don’t fall in love with a wallet; they fall in love with a man. They don’t desire a mate guarder who has to pay fidelity money; they desire a self-assured jerkboy who expects love free of charge.

And if you’re dating a princess who demands a big ring or ostentatious wedding, my advice is simple: Run. Don’t look back. The next day, you can admire the bulge of your full bank account and your spared dignity. I just saved you from hitching yourself to a woman who couldn’t really love you without a large gift bag included in the deal.

What studies like this one uncover is a bidirectional sexual market feedback loop: On one vector, you have a weak man who feels it necessary to pay for love and supplicate to his fiancee’s gaudy selfishness. On the other vector, you have an unenthusiastic woman who knows she is settling for a less desirable man in a trade-off between exciting sexiness and boring security, and who therefore feels empowered to make her sloppy second beta pay tribute to her in Damegeld. Where these two vectors meet, relationship exactness and complementarity trump love, and subcurrents of divorce are never far from cresting the polished dinner party surface.

Why Online Dating Is Limiting

Reader Just Saying offers a new way to look at the inherent shortcomings of online courtship.

Online Courtship Can’t Replicate Face To Face Courtship

Of course not – for a simple reason, when you are face-to-face they don’t compare you to their mythical ideal, they feel attraction and voila, the panties come off. But with an app they compare you to their “idea” of what they should date. That is much more limited, if you meet that criteria, you’re golden, if you don’t you won’t get any trim… Simple…

Remember, women cannot control whom they are attracted to – and it’s often almost the opposite of what they think they want. Heck, no young 18 yo old thinks, “What I need is a 50+ year old to plow me like a field.” And if they thought about it, they would walk, but when they are there and feeling the attraction – all of that doesn’t matter, their little rationalization hamster goes full speed later to justify what they are feeling, “Sure, he’s older, but that means we can do more, and it’s FUN.” I have one that loves it when people will refer to her as “your daughter” when we’re out, as she’ll practically attack me and then say something like, “He’s my step-father.” Just to shock them… That is what women live for – the excitement, and an “app” on a phone can’t deliver that.

It is that simple…

This is well said, and I extend Just Saying a CH Honorary Degree in Preening.

The fact is that any medium which removes context and nuance and body language from the courtship will invariably redound to the man’s detriment, because men are judged by women on far more than their looks. Online dating does not penalize women as much as it does men, because women were always judged first and foremost on their looks. A profile pic may be a flawed substitute for a 3D representation of a girl, but it’s still a serviceable substitute that gives men most of the information they need that they would similarly get in the field, (barring fatties and oldies posting inaccurate pics).

In contrast, men are more harshly penalized by a medium in which the profile pic is heavily weighted. Women are attracted to men’s personalities as much as or more than they’re attracted to men’s physical presences. Online courtship handicaps the ability of men to project, spoken and unspoken, those sexy contours of their personalities that arouse women. Yes, there’s the option to write a witty or indifferently douchey bio that captures some essence of the man, but the style and rapid-fire trawling of online dating sites conspires to focus the female mate judgement algorithm on the attached pic before anything else comes into view. Average looking men are at a disadvantage online that they wouldn’t be in the real world, where they could boldly approach women and force them to take the measure of all their cocksure attributes.

Online courtship isn’t hopeless. For some men — the top 5% in looks, the exceptionally witty who have cornered a niche market, the mass copypastas playing an urban numbers game, the convicts with internet access — online game is a useful adjunct to whatever fleshworld game occupies their time.

But don’t expect internet game to net you the high quality lays and high octane love that face to face game has the greater potential to deliver. In the field, you only have a woman to seduce. Online, you have to seduce her and her alpha male apparition. One hurdle is better than two.

A single mom asks “Prudie” for advice about how to stop her horny faphappy son.

Q. My Son Can’t Keep His Hands Off Himself: I am a single mother with a 14-year-old son. I knew this time was coming but now I fear I am close to my wit’s end. I have seen evidence in his bedroom, the laundry room, and the kitchen. I know this is normal, but how much is too much? Things escalated last week when his hockey coach called me in for a conference. I have noticed my son has been taking a lot of penalties this season. It turns out he has been intentionally going to the penalty box to pleasure himself. I lashed out at him when about this and things have been awkward around the house this weekend. Am I overreacting? I know I have to talk about this with him in a calm setting, but I always find the thought of this type of discussion horrifying. I am losing sleep and I don’t want to succumb to letting his father deal with this, but what should I do?

Prudie’s (aka Emily YOFFE’s) answer is mostly anodyne, though she can’t resist the femtard compulsions to demonize the biological father and rationalize cutting him out of the picture, and to suggest “therapaaaaaah” for the boy. Yes, that’s the answer to all the problems that boys cause empowered, independent women: Therapy. While you’re at it, why not pry his eyeballs open and have him watch 48 hours of uninterrupted footage of suffrage marches and The View?

“I don’t want to succumb to letting his father deal with this”

Gotta love the pathological, unrelenting selfishness of single moms. Yes, don’t succumb to letting the kid have a talk with his real dad about something that his dad would intuitively understand. Better to yell at him for soiling your cuntrags.

This story? This is future America. Those who are nonchalant about our coming single momhood dystopia take heed: Your world is about to fill up with a lot more crusted calling cards.

Fuck this gay earth.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,030 other followers

%d bloggers like this: