Feeds:
Posts
Comments

The idea of a false rape accuser registry has been around for a while (most notably right here at Le Chateau), but lately it’s picked up momentum.

It’s time has come. More precisely, it’s time came ten years ago. We’re already playing catch-up.

False rape accusations put innocent men in jail where they are buttfucked by large black men. Feminists cheer this. Feminists are hateful cunts. It’s time to turn the tables on them and their manlet taint-lappers.

A publicly accessible list of women who have falsely accused men of rape they didn’t commit will go a long way towards shaming these succubi until they slice lengthwise. This will also serve as a lesson for the others.

Call it… David’s List. Would a diligent, energetic entrepreneur care to take up the challenge? Justice and righteousness will guide your path.

It’s becoming clearer with every close examination of the subject that online dating is a poor facsimile of real world dating. The latest social science shows that the Dunbar number — 150, the number of people of varying acquaintance an average person could reasonably manage in his social circle — doesn’t increase on social media virtual networks. In fact, the evidence suggests that online social networks degrade the quality of our more intimate inner circle relationships because we devote more of our mental energy to maintaining connections with distant people.

With social media, we can easily keep up with the lives and interests of far more than a hundred and fifty people. But without investing the face-to-face time, we lack deeper connections to them, and the time we invest in superficial relationships comes at the expense of more profound ones. We may widen our network to two, three, or four hundred people that we see as friends, not just acquaintances, but keeping up an actual friendship requires resources. “The amount of social capital you have is pretty fixed,” Dunbar said. “It involves time investment. If you garner connections with more people, you end up distributing your fixed amount of social capital more thinly so the average capital per person is lower.” If we’re busy putting in the effort, however minimal, to “like” and comment and interact with an ever-widening network, we have less time and capacity left for our closer groups. Traditionally, it’s a sixty-forty split of attention: we spend sixty per cent of our time with our core groups of fifty, fifteen, and five, and forty with the larger spheres. Social networks may be growing our base, and, in the process, reversing that balance.

Close real world friendships suffer when we whore for attention on Facebook from people we hardly know. It’s similar to how multitasking and clickbait internet distractions corrode our mental ability to focus deeply on a single topic. Our intimate relations and our creativity are both sacrificed in this new world mordor.

On an even deeper level, there may be a physiological aspect of friendship that virtual connections can never replace. This wouldn’t surprise Dunbar, who discovered his number when he was studying the social bonding that occurs among primates through grooming. Over the past few years, Dunbar and his colleagues have been looking at the importance of touch in sparking the sort of neurological and physiological responses that, in turn, lead to bonding and friendship. “We underestimate how important touch is in the social world,” he said. With a light brush on the shoulder, a pat, or a squeeze of the arm or hand, we can communicate a deeper bond than through speaking alone. “Words are easy. But the way someone touches you, even casually, tells you more about what they’re thinking of you.”

Once again, a game concept — this time, kino and the art of touching and physical escalation — is corroborated by ❤science❤. A player will communicate a lot of his sexual intention nonverbally, through escalating violations of his quarry’s personal space. If he is skilled, the woman will respond to his touches with intensifying attraction, and erotic thoughts will sabotage her efforts at studied indifference. This tension is what will make her seduction so memorable for her in days, and maybe years, to come.

One concern, though, is that some social skills may not develop as effectively when so many interactions exist online. We learn how we are and aren’t supposed to act by observing others and then having opportunities to act out our observations ourselves. We aren’t born with full social awareness, and Dunbar fears that too much virtual interaction may subvert that education. “In the sandpit of life, when somebody kicks sand in your face, you can’t get out of the sandpit. You have to deal with it, learn, compromise,” he said. “On the internet, you can pull the plug and walk away. There’s no forcing mechanism that makes us have to learn.” If you spend most of your time online, you may not get enough in-person group experience to learn how to properly interact on a large scale—a fear that, some early evidence suggests, may be materializing.

Thin-skinned, infantile, tantrum throwing, socially retarded internet SJWs explained. A little bit of pushback, and your typical online male feminist or fatty apologist shrieks in horror and promptly retreats to the comfort of a two liter Mountain Dew with a side of Cheetos.

“It’s quite conceivable that we might end up less social in the future, which would be a disaster because we need to be more social—our world has become so large” Dunbar said. The more our virtual friends replace our face-to-face ones, in fact, the more our Dunbar number may shrink.

Online dating is the perfect match for our sperged-out, credentialist suck-up culture. Static photos, a CV, and all the nuance, grace, subtle physical cues, playful expressions, and sexual tension stripped from the initial courtship maneuverings are exactly what America’s fearful androgynes want. It’s a world perfectly crafted by, or perfectly symptomatic of, the sexually neutered and psychologically withered beta males and the aggro, unfeminine, ego-salving bloat bodies that pass for females. There is even evidence now that relationships which form from meeting online are more likely to break up.

Call me old school, but I prefer meeting and seducing women in the flesh, where the pleasant discomfort of the moment can’t be escaped, our stats can’t be aridly collated and perused, my probing hands can’t be evaded, my warm smirk can’t be missed, my wordless entendres can’t be mistaken. The incitement and sustenance of a woman’s romantic attraction demands a… personal touch.

Anton Chigurh (watch where you point that thing) colorfully, Bukowski-ly, paints a picture of the current state of Western White Man’s self-annihilating mind.

“[re: Ebola], there is always something new out of Africa, and it’s all bad.”
LOL’ed

The elites in the West are so terrified of seeming racist that they’re apparently willing to kill us for it.

The West is like the stupid white girl at the bar who gets invited to go off on her own by a black guy. She is terrified of looking racist in front of her friends, one of whom is a black girl from the office who she likes to impress with her liberalism.

So she goes happily with the black fella, who turns out to be a savage niqger. Later, after the niqger brutally rapes her without a condom and leaves her in an alley for dead, she thinks, well, at least now everybody knows I’m not a racist.

A day later she sits in her hospital bed, recovering from her internal and external injuries and having contracted Ebola and AIDS. She will not survive this combination compounded by her weakened, broken body.

She hoarsely tells her friends visiting her, including the sassy black girl from the office who she wants so desperately to impress, “It’s not his fault. He had a hard life. He’s experienced racism his whole life. I know in my heart he just made a mistake. White people are so racist, and we made them slaves for like 800 years, sometimes they get angry. I don’t blame him.”

That’s the mass of Western whites right now.

White ethnomasochism evil is like Ebola: Super virulent, kills with impunity, spreads easily, but burns itself out before reaching truly pandemic proportions.

At least, that’s the hope. Anyone care to place bets?

Related, here’s one of the rotating header images I shamelessly pilfered from the Kakistocracy blog.

Stanley Kubrick On Game

Hat tip: Sunny Bunny.

The readers have responded to this post’s game challenge with a show of force. It’s a good sign that men who come to this blog are still interested in learning how to pick up women. The scrotal sack of Western man is not yet drained of life.

Many commenters felt that it was a fool’s errand to pursue a girl who had shot her hand up and and barked “No!” before the man could get one word out.

Game shaman YaReally essentially subscribed to this point of view.

And the instant “No” girls aren’t judging you as a human being because they haven’t met and interacted with you. They’re just lumping you in with a type of low-value guy because for whatever reasons that’s the headspace they’re in at the moment and she wasn’t aware of you doing anything to NOT be lumped in with those guys before you approached.

It’s all very simple. Ones and zeroes, binary shit: If you’re high-value in her mind, she’ll talk to you, if not she’ll lump you with the rest and not give you a chance. So you can either walk away and take the loss, or figure out how to build your value to her. Those are the two options. She still won’t owe you shit even if you build your value, and she doesn’t owe you the opportunity TO demonstrate higher value. IDEALLY, you DHV’ed in front of her before approaching so you don’t get the “No” in the first place, but assuming that’s happened you have two options: You either find a way to DHV or you move on.

I don’t disagree with Ya or with readers who’ve expressed a similar sentiment; as a matter of principle and of practice, it’s best to NEXT a No Girl with apathetic prejudice. If you’re getting a NO! and a Heisman before you’ve opened your mouth, you’ve got a high hurdle that’s not worth the effort to jump. YaReally’s ideal suggestion — to promptly backturn the No Girl and engage an adjacent group while loudly announcing within No Girl’s earshot “wow, that girl HATES me. I didn’t even get past the word ‘hi’. Looks like I’ll be a virgin forever. :(” — is, in my view, the best option from among a really limited set of options.

But the original reader asking for advice did not ask for the ideal response; he asked for the response that would “salvage and optimize” the interaction with No Girl. He wanted to know what he could say or do that would have a chance of turning No Girl around, despite the heavy odds against him. That’s why his question was the topic of a “Test Of Your Game” post.

Assuming he doesn’t have the convenience of an adjacent mixed set he can leverage YaReally-style, he’ll have to game No Girl on her terms. That means a direct verbal or nonverbal reply. The best of the commenters’ suggestions follow. For some, I’ve included a grading system. Entertainment Value measures how hard you, and perhaps No Girl’s circus elephants, would laugh if you were there watching it happen.  Workabiliity describes how easy or difficult it would be for a newb to pull it off in the field. And Game Tightness is an appraisal of the chances that the response would actually spur No Girl’s curiosity and attraction.

 pupton1974 writes,

By saying “Talk to the hand” she has announced her status as a bitch. Hold nothing back. I don’t want to turn her lemon into lemonade. I want her to feel like the turd she is. Any of these with a “don’t give a fuck” smirk could take her down a peg:

1) “Eww, it looks like you’ve pitted out that blouse really bad.”
2) “Put your arm down, you’re attracting flies.”
3) “Raise your hand if you have a yeast infection.”

#3 is the best. “Raise your hand if [X]” is a good all-purpose takedown of the No Girl’s signature “talk to the hand” maneuver.

Entertainment Value: A+
Workability: C (These lines can be a mouthful under pressure.)
Game Tightness: D (Don’t expect this tack to result in a mutually satisfying interaction.)

***

monster211 writes,

GIRL: *hand shoots up* “No!”

BABY’S ARM HOLDING AN APPLE: *sneeze all over her hand, wipe your nose with your arm while sniffling and then wink while nonchalantly grabbing your crotch*

I would pay to see a guy sneeze violently on a No Girl’s jivemama hand.

Entertainment Value: A
Workability: D (You’d better be able to sneeze on command.)
Game Tightness: F (Hard to see this leading to a love match.)

***

Days of Broken Arrows flashes his Macchiavelli card,

“No.”

“Um…I was going to ask if you were one of my sister’s friends. She died last month. Have a nice day.”

Cold as ice. I can’t think of a better wedge between No Girl and her friends. The shame will burn to the bone.

Entertainment Value: C (A downer for everyone but you.)
Workability: C (You’ll need good acting chops.)
Game Tightness: B (If she believes you, she’s yours. If not, she still might be yours. At least, one of her friends will want to console you.)

***

Danny Kovach channels a young alpha male:

“Your hands look like my grandma’s”

Entertainment Value: B
Workability: A (Short and sweet.)
Game Tightness: B (More insult than neg, given the context. Don’t expect miracles.)

***

Anonymous couples the high five with a disqualification,

hahahaaa, my immediate response was the high 5 with a huge grin on my face before i even finished reading, maybe followed with ‘eww, whats that on your hand, thats fucking disgusting’ and then a ‘made you look’.

I like the high five. It’s quick and easy to pull off on a No Girl (she might not even see it coming, what with her head facing the other way), it’s surprising, it’s amusing for you and her friends, and it can open up a lot of disqualification possibilities and enable follow-up ramble game. It’d be really funny if you execute the high five, grinning like a jerk, as you’re passing by her to talk to her friend. An alternate but similar version of the high five is “rock paper scissors”; start playing the game with her when her hand shoots up.

Entertainment Value: B (High fives lift everyone’s mood.)
Workability: A (Easy peasy lemon squeezy.)
Game Tightness: C- (Outside chance No Girl turns into Yes Girl.)

***

corvinus takes a shot at her id,

“Hmm, no wedding ring. Figures.”

Another superb shiv that draws its blood without much thrashing about. But as another commenter suggested, it might be more “game savvy” to frame this reply differently, less spitefully. “Hmm, nice wedding ring.” Nuanced wording can create wildly different impressions.

***

gnarlinbrando writes,

*sexy grin and slight chuckle to yourself* then look to her friends:

“Is she always this much fun?”

This is a classic PUA neg. The goal is to embarrass her and DHV yourself, while getting her group to switch allegiance.

***

DangerWolf opts for the nonverbal, physical tease,

Immediately back-turning and talking to another girl, then slowly backing up into her and, if she objects, shouting “no!” with the hand gesture is also fun.

Just sticking around No Girl after the fact can make it deliciously awkward for her and fun for you, as long as you aren’t sticking around nursing your butthurtness. This tactic only works if you have a YaReally-esque scenario set up where another group is directly adjacent and available to open.

***

Boron and a host of commenters went the palm reading route,

Pretend to read palm.
“And this is your cat line. I see A LOT of cats in your future.”

Entertainment Value: C (Most people aren’t good at this.)
Workability: D (You’ve really got to command her attention for the duration.)
Game Tightness: B (If it sticks, you’re in like WIN!)

***

leahnnovash tries the plausible deniability strategy,

If she is alone, simply ask if I can take one of the extra chairs.

Entertainment Value: B (Could be really funny if timing is perfect.)
Workability: B (How good is your state control?)
Game Tightness: F (It’ll save face, but not much else.)

Others suggested similar versions of Plausible Deniability Game (cf., Francis Beam’s comment about sipping her drink and wincing). It’s popular among the commentariat. Done well, yeah I do think this can take the wind out of No Girl’s sails, but the dynamic between you and her won’t be much altered. Also, PD Game could backfire if it’s obvious you first approached her with an intention to hit on her.

***

whorefinder blows up the joint,

flash and smoke and smell of sulfur. Whorefinder appears

Why, thank you, kind sir. However, the treatment for this kind of Obama voter, er, See-You-Next-Tuesday rag is a bit different…

1. Observe hand.

2. Slowly check the crowd’s reaction from left to right.

3. Smile in friendship and extend your own hand, shaking hers, and pulling her onto her feet.

4. Quick, sharp kick to her stomach, double-middle finger to her face , and STUNNER, STUNNER BY GAWD J.R. ITS A STUNNER!!!!!

….

5. And only THEN rape….on the floor in front of the entire bar/club.

Stone Cold Awesome Rape! Rape on, gentlemen, rape on!

flash and smoke and sulfer. Whorefinder vanishes

Entertainment Value: A+ (A++ if smoke bomb included.)
Workability: F (Good luck!)
Game Tightness: F (Rape Game Tightness: A)

***

newlyaloof writes,

Girl: No!
You to her friend: Hmm. I like your friend. She’s feisty.

This is another take on “making lemonade out of lemons” game. The “feisty” line has been a staple of PUA tactics for a long time. The idea is that it signals your imperturbability. Nothing gets under your skin. Chicks like that about men.

***

anotheronetakesthepill,

That’s right. No, I don’t wanna get you pregnant

Funny, quippy, jerkish. Wanna see just how much funnier, quippier, and jerky you can get. Post your progress. #TINGLENATION.

***

Area Man reminisced,

This comment from a few years ago is still the winner:

“So I guess a blow job in the parking lot is out of the question?”

Entertainment Value: B- (Entertaining for you, not for her.)
Workability: B- (Gonna be tough to say this with a straight face.)
Game Tightness: D- (May work on a crazy slut with a history of dating serial killers.)

***

Eeyore tries Disagree&Amplify,

Disagree and amplify [meta, you're agreeing to play disagree]. Yes! Yes like you’re Ben fucking Kingsley. Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Dean Moriarity turned up to 11. Preach it. Sell the fuck out of yes, like you’re discovering it for the first time. Yes is America, Apollo 11, and that first girl who let you feel her up when you were supposed to be doing homework. What the fuck is no? No is no. No is nothing. Yes is everything else. Yes is what you want, what she wants, what everybody wants. So yes. Yes to yes. Fuck yes. No fucking no. Yes.

My hunch is she will either (a) disagree more and more playfully or (b) shrink away (and look at you in awe). Regardless, your name for her is Yes. The rest is superfluous.

D&A is taking a page out of Toddler Game. If you are truly a No Fucks Given kinda guy, I say try it out. NOYESNOYESNOYESYESYESNO!!!YESYESYESEVERYTHINGYES
WE’RECOMINGUPYESATHOUSANDYESSESMLADY!!!!

Anyone who tries this is required to report back to CH with his results.

***

Steve enlightens us all,

If you don’t have a fart ready to fire, a burp will do.

Entertainment Value: B+ (Until the smell hits.)
Workability: F (Unless you ate a burrito beforehand.)
Game Tightness: Who cares? I don’t think I’d stop laughing if I saw this go down.

***

Anonymous gets to the heart of the matter,

“who’s gay”

The trick to this reply is NEUTRALITY. It only works as intended if your facial expression and vocal tone are blank and monotone respectively. If you insert emotion, it’s liable to come off angry.

***

Nathan imaginatively writes,

Keep it simple:
sticking your tongue out and ice cube to the neck/down the dress


‘At least I’m not wasting my time’, 360, moonwalk away

Whorefinder has competition in the Totally Unrealistic But Awesome If You Can Pull It Off Game challenge.

***

Finally, from Mean Mr. Mustard, there’s Penis Game.

Entertainment Value: Busts the grade curve.
Workability: A+ if flaccid, C+ if erect.
Game Tightness: A+ in Toronto and Wellesley.

Men instinctively know to avoid single moms and BPD headcases. No man wants to help raise another man’s kid, and crazy drama whores aren’t much fun after the post-coital glow wears off.

Now we can add another archetype to the list of women to avoid: The Credentialist Whore.

Reader Dr. Giggles explains,

Perhaps we’ve found another type of woman who, like the single mom, should be avoided by men at all costs. Call her the credentialist bachelorette. She carries baggage like the single mom in the form of spiraling college debt which you end up subsidizing, by either paying for everything during the relationship, or outright paying the debt itself once married. Unlike the bastard spawn you can kick to the curb once it turns 18, the debt may last into her golden years, according to a recent Beta times article.

A woman who whores herself out for useless college credentials like an MA in Vagina Pondering, and amasses a mountain of debt on her quest for status feels and anonymous urban fucking, is a horrible long-term relationship prospect. Not only will you invariably get stuck directly or indirectly paying off chunks of her debt, you will have to deal with her insufferable “credentialed girl” entitlement lovingly honed from years fobbing her bills off on her daddy. If you’re really unlucky, she might be the type of CW to unload on you about the patriarchy during a first date.

File the Credentialist Whore, along with the Single Mom and Crazy Bitch, under “pump and dump”, and don’t even think about moving in with her. Sex is a lot more satisfying when you’re not paying for it in some form or another.

Researchers performed a historical analysis of cohabitation in the US and discovered that previous estimates of cohabitation understated the pace of change after 1960, and that the cohabitation rate before 1970 and going back to 1880 was historically low. After 1970, cohabitation rose dramatically, and has not stopped rising.

1970 appears to be the foremost dividing line between “good, functional, beautiful America” and “bad, dysfunctional, ugly America”. So many social ills explode with a ferocity sometime around 1970, and continue exploding right to the present day. Count them out.

Single momhood.
Obesity.
Male unemployment.
Divorce. (Appears to have plateaued recently, thanks in part to fewer marriages.)
Total marriage rate.
Alternative mating arrangements.
STDs.
Abortion.
Low White fertility.
Astronomical debt.
Crime. (Though crime began a long decline in the 1990s, thanks in part to mass incarceration and internet porn.)
Feminism.
Equalism.
Multiculturalism.
PC neoPuritanism.
Anti-white and anti-free association Acts.
Wiggers.
SJWs.
Slut parades.
Fat acceptors.
Credentialism.
Bryan Caplan.
$22 trillion wasted in malign “war on disparate outcomes”.
Hijacking of every major public institution by the Left.
Diversity graft.
Welfare replacing workfare.
Parasite shamelessness.
Surveillance nation.
Manboobery.
White population displacement.

And the Big Kahuna that arguably precipitated or magnified at least half of the culture diseases in the above list:

The 1965 Open Borders to the Non-White European World Act.

It makes one wonder if a supervillain dumped a mind-altering drug in American water supplies in the summer of ’69 that stripped citizens of the character traits which were responsible for the relative sanity of previous generations.

Cohabitation, like abortion, may not necessarily qualify as a social ill (e.g., cohabitation “works”, so far as we know, in the Swedish parts of Sweden), but let’s just say both are leading indicators of trouble brewing in the mating market.

And a generation unable to talk straight or feel healthy human emotions because they’re either utterly brainwashed into true belief or cowed into sociopathic self-policing by anti-white shock troops is a leading indicator of a culture on the verge of giving itself over to the sweet release of death.

Some social problems, notably crime, are cyclical, following patterns for which we yet struggle to identify causes. But even the cyclical social ills experience a radical jump and disheartening persistence after 1970 that set them apart from previous incarnations. Emergence of new ills and amplification of old ills is the story of late 20th century and early 21st century America. Ebola ain’t got nothin’ on whatever post-1970 shadow poison rots the soul of this once glorious nation.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,030 other followers

%d bloggers like this: