Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Self-Acknowledgement Game

Self-Acknowledgement Game — the art of verbalizing the technique and timeline of your seduction to a woman as it’s happening — has a storied pedigree here at the Chateau. A skilled practitioner can perform miracles with Self-Acknowledgement Game, because it’s at once flirty, edgy, jerkish, charming, and all while maintaining just enough running narrative emotional distance to avoid triggering a girl’s anti-slut defense or bitch shield.

Commenter Thoroughbred writes,

In the category of taking social risks, I’ve been using an opener for awhile now that works like dynamite because it’s so straightforward: “Hi… Wanna flirt and talk about sex?” At a minimum it gets a laugh just about every time, and most of the time it gets an enthusiastic “Sure!”.

The reason “Hi. Wanna flirt and talk about sex?” is so potent an opener is not because it’s direct, but rather because, despite the apparent directness of the message, it’s obviously humorous and therefore ambiguous in intent. And you know how chicks dig that tantalizing ambiguity.

I will say, though, that self-acknowledgement game probably works best if you’ve first gotten some minimal signal from a woman to approach. Otherwise, cold approaching inattentive girls with this line will come across more like an apocalypse opener.

And I wouldn’t try it on mixed groups. SAG is better for weeknight, one-on-one situations.

Thoroughbred continues with another anecdote that is more representative of cocky, preemptive disqualification game.

Tried another one recently that was pushing the limit and I was amazed at how well it worked. I had a good buzz on with just a bit of psilocybin in my system which always brings out the caveman in me for some reason. Don’t know if I would have tried this stone cold sober, but I’ll be damned if it didn’t work.

Sitting talking to a friend at the bar and a drunk 8 sits down next to me. We’re minding our own business, she’s loud and obnoxious. I’m taking up maximum space at the bar (actually have my feet up on the bar and leaning back on the bar stool) and giving her no attention. Catch her eye and she says “You’re a typical douchebag player aren’t you?”

Me: “That’s Mr. Douchebag to you.”

Her: “That’s what I thought. You don’t even deny it.”

Me (with a smirk): “Nope… And you obviously have no manners. I know your type. Rich little daddy’s girl who always got everything she ever wanted. You need to be disciplined.”

Her (Contemptuously): “Oh really… Who’s going to discipline me? You?

Me (Leaning in and whispering in her ear): “I’m out of your league sweetheart, but if you’d really like, I’d be happy to bend you over my knee and spank that pale little ass of yours until it leaves big red hand prints.” Her mouth drops open.

I turn around and start talking to my friend again and feel a tap on my shoulder. Turn back to her and she says “Will you dance with me?”

I couldn’t believe it.

The progression of male incredulity about female sexual nature:

Stage 1: “I don’t believe it.”

Stage 2: “I couldn’t believe it!”

Stage 3: “I’m beginning to believe it.”

Stage Player: “Wasn’t it always obvious?”

Pulled from the briskly invigorating comments to this insightful Mangan post on the paradox of nationalism. The discussion had moved into explanations for the apparently self-immolating pathologically altruistic universalism that characterizes people of NW European descent. A commenter digs up a Darwin quote that suggests the wise man understood the dynamics of outbreeding and reinforcing cultural feedbacks (feelbacks?) to create a universalistic morality among the populace.

in other words, there’s been something of a runaway universalism

Just as Darwin predicted in his ‘Descent of Man’.

“As man advances in civilisation, and small tribes are united into larger communities, the simplest reason would tell each individual that he ought to extend his social instincts and sympathies to all the members of the same nation, though personally unknown to him. This point being once reached, there is only an artificial barrier to prevent his sympathies extending to the men of all nations and races. If, indeed, such men are separated from him by great differences in appearance or habits, experience unfortunately shews us how long it is, before we look at them as our fellow-creatures.

Sympathy beyond the confines of man, that is, humanity to the lower animals, seems to be one of the latest moral acquisitions. It is apparently unfelt by savages, except towards their pets. How little the old Romans knew of it is shewn by their abhorrent gladiatorial exhibitions. The very idea of humanity, as far as I could observe, was new to most of the Gauchos of the Pampas. This virtue, one of the noblest with which man is endowed, seems to arise incidentally from our sympathies becoming more tender and more widely diffused, until they are extended to all sentient beings. As soon as this virtue is honoured and practised by some few men, it spreads through instruction and example to the young, and eventually becomes incorporated in public opinion.”

More memetic than genetic.

More? Could be both equally. I do think proponents of out- and inbreeding genetic theories of universalism tend to give short shrift to the role that culture-gene feedback loops play in amplifying nascent changes in a people’s character and moral sense. Cf, the recent surge in obesity.

Darwin considered the evolution of wide-ranging and unprejudiced empathy toward others the “noblest” of human virtues. But, he also understood that there were races of man, past and present, who would not or could not return the favor. In reconciling this inherent contradiction bedeviling those who wished to believe in a one-world humanity of equal moral disposition, Darwin glimpsed the outline of a tyrannical self-monitoring masochism and the development of cultural institutions to codify that tyranny of the mind.

More of the perceptive man’s thoughts:

Darwin goes on to touch upon what today is called political correctness…

“The highest possible stage in moral culture is when we recognise that we ought to control our thoughts, and “not even in inmost thought to think again the sins that made the past so pleasant to us.”* Whatever makes any bad action familiar to the mind, renders its performance by so much the easier. As Marcus Aurelius long ago said, “Such as are thy habitual thoughts, such also will be the character of thy mind; for the soul is dyed by the thoughts.”*(2)

* Tennyson, Idylls of the King, p. 244.
*(2) Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Bk. V, sect. 16.”

Darwin, as well as great minds from long before his time, foresaw our modern PC, anti-white male witch burning death culture. The point of anti-white propaganda and ritualistic shaming of those who dare to question the reigning equalist narrative is humiliation of wrongthinkers. Humiliate those who entertain even wispy tendrils of wrongthought and you spare the universalist religion and its glassy-eyed Hivemind followers from suffering stains of dispiriting truth upon its soul.

The Number One Killer Of Your Game

The number one killer of your game is a function of time, but it’s not time. Time — a merciless decay directive that commissions the end of everyone — is too crude and imprecise an agent of character change to rely on for guidance. We need to measure a new reality closer to the heart.

Around age 11 or 12, preteens experience a significant reorganization of their brains. New neural connections are made while gray matter is “pruned”. This process continues throughout adolescence, and doesn’t fully end until the mid-20s, when the brain reaches its final resting phase. The adult you is, in a mental sense, forever 25.

The biggest brain change in the early teen years is the shift away from prefrontal development and the shift toward emphasis on the amygdala, the brain’s emotional center. We become limbic creatures, more feral and impulsive, once we hit our teenage stride, because our decision-making ability, especially under conditions of stress, is then relegated to the control of the amygdala.

There is a sound evolutionary reason for this brain change. If teenagers were overly risk-averse and worried about the consequences of their actions, they would never take those first vital steps to establish their identity by trying new things. Instinctive bravery, or stupidity, is what pushes baby birds out of the nest to fly. Without that neural window of risk-attachment encouraging teens to bust out of their comfort zones, they would never leave home, rightly calculating that life is perfect under the auspices of their hearth managers.

After those heady teenage years, there’s a slow loss in the mental capacity for satiating curiosity and for risk-attachment. This, too, likely has evolutionary origins. Adults who remain wild and thrill-seeking like teenagers do their own children no good, because what those little shits need more than anything is a stable family environment. We are as hard-wired to step into the comfort zone as adults as we are to step out of it as preteens.

There’s another word for the risk-attachment that defines the teenage/early 20s experience: Passion.

Game is all about taking social risks and withstanding blows to the ego. It’s about reckless experimentation. It’s about an inner energy that drives a man to seek new or better lovers and romantic experiences. It’s about denying the soothing siren song of comfort zones with a force ten tenacity. Game is, in its essence, the exalting of passion over passiveness.

Unfortunately, game has a mortal enemy, and it is the brain itself. The loss of risk-attachment — the pure energy of passion — for the gain of risk-aversion — the serene submission to contentment — will kill a man’s game more completely and with greater finality than physical shortcomings, than financial ruin, than even marriage and its punitive bindings.

The number one killer of your game is the same inexorable biomechanical algorithm that killed your passion and replaced it with placidity: Your changing brain.

If you are a man of keen mind, you may even feel this loss of passion. You’ll sense the changes partly in your day to day behavior and partly by way of the nostalgia fuel your living memory provides. Ironically, although the tragedy when viewed from an unbiased distance is immense, you won’t feel the pain of passion loss as much as you should because you won’t have the passion left to mourn it. Kind of like how I imagine a very old man gazes wistfully at a young beautiful woman while his cock remains undisturbed by the commotion.

Regrettably, there’s nothing on offer that could guarantee you avoid this date with dispassionate destiny. But there are weapons that may help you beat back the gathering storm of brain-reconfigured apathy and keep you seducing women in top form for decades to come.

1. Willpower.

If you can sense it, you can slow it. The first step begins with self-awareness. Instead of bleakly shuffling into that fading light like a gelded automaton, turn your mental howitzers against inevitability and embrace the fight. Go into battle knowing full well your defeat is assured but that you’ll have a blast blowing holes in as many passion-killing droids as you can center in your crosshairs.

2. Understand that experience can make up for some loss of passion.

You will get better with women as you get older. This is a natural result of mastering the dating market learning curve and accepting the psychosexual foreignness of the female mind. Improvements in your knowledge and self-control will mitigate some decline in your baseline passion level. To put it more succinctly, you won’t need as much animating passion to seduce new women at 30 as you did at 15.

3. Weightlifting/Testosterone replacement therapy.

Testosterone is the fark matter of the pooniverse. It’s soul juice. It’s the git ‘er done drug. It’s the molecular chakra that unites man’s head, heart and hogzilla. Weightlifting has been proven to raise T levels both temporarily and permanently, and this is true for most men who follow the Law of Iron. So does eschewing the modern high-sugar, high-carb fattyfest. Refusing to allow your T to sink into oblivion is a clarion call for more intrinsically summoned passion. (Recent evidence finds that estrogen inhibitors may work better than testosterone boosters. I leave it to the reader to research the issue.)

4. Spermatogenesis.

WARNING: Experimental territory. Enter at your own risk.

Read this comment. It’s anecdotal, but the associations he draws have some founding in the scientific literature, not to mention similarities with the conventional wisdom. Boost your sperm production and that wonderful I’M ALIVE blue ball feeling through the interventions of no-fap, HCG, and something called LJ100. Scrotum pressure is a pathway to scoundrel passion.

5. Set an expiration date on all your long-term relationships.

If you make it a principle to escape LTRs before the two year mark, you’ll evade comfort zone entrapment and artificially reignite that dreamy teen passion for new experiences and thrills, and screw the consequences. Your brain will rewire itself to accommodate the new stresses you put on it. Call it, whoremesis. Of course, as great as this is for your love life, it’s as bad for the continuation of the species and a prosperous society. Maybe you’ll figure you can contribute in a godly way to society later in life, after you’ve had your fill of the best kind of pleasures and passions, in which case you’ll want to save some of that archaic energy for your sequels.

A killer is coming for you. Heed the immortal yearning of Roy Batty — I want more life, fucker — and follow him into that rain to die kneeling as you were meant to… but not before proving to yourself and the world you’ll damn your destiny on your feet.

Touch — aka “kino” in the pickup artist lingo — is a powerful courtship tactic that increases women’s compliance to men’s requests.

Previous research has shown that light tactile contact increases compliance to a wide variety of requests. However, the effect of touch on compliance to a courtship request has never been studied. In this paper, three experiments were conducted in a courtship context. In the first experiment, a young male confederate in a nightclub asked young women to dance with him during the period when slow songs were played. When formulating his request, the confederate touched (or not) the young woman on her forearm for 1 or 2 seconds. In the second experiment, a 20-year-old confederate approached a young woman in the street and asked her for her phone number. The request was again accompanied by a light touch (or not) on the young woman’s forearm. In both experiments, it was found that touch increased compliance to the man’s request. A replication of the second experiment accompanied with a survey administered to the female showed that high score of dominance was associated with tactile contact. The link between touch and the dominant position of the male was used to explain these results theoretically.

Touching a woman early and often during the attraction phase of a pickup, and escalating the erogenous intent of the touching as familiarity deepens, is one element of what I call the core precepts of game. (Qualifying, teasing, body language, and outcome independence are other core precepts.) Womanizers and love maestros have long extolled the virtues of touching, and now science has added its stamp of approval.

Most interestingly, touch appears to work its magic on women by signaling greater male dominance. Women have a feedback loop that registers male touch as dominant behavior; behavior which arouses women because evolution honed in them a subtle appreciation for men who can protect them from danger and provide them hard-gained social and material resources. A sexually, romantically, and tactilely entitled man is attractive to women for the same reason a beautiful, hourglass-shaped, young woman is attractive to men: They both signal possession of deeper traits that would maximize an opposite sex mate’s reproductive advantage.

If you spend any amount of time in the field, one of the first things you’ll notice is how men who stubbornly refuse to touch women, often from fear of rejection or of “crossing lines”, fail to close the deal. I could pick out the handful of alpha males in a bar with no information to go on except which men touch girls the most often and effortlessly.

***

The second study (from 1987, but given the feminist-polluted condition of current sociology departments, that is perhaps a good thing) is a diamond shiv straight through the black heart of sex difference denialists. Dominance behavior increases male attractiveness but not female attractiveness.

Four experiments examined the relation between behavioral expressions of dominance and the heterosexual attractiveness of males and females. Predictions concerning the relation between dominance and heterosexual attraction were derived from a consideration of sex role norms and from the comparative biological literature. All four experiments indicated an interaction between dominance and sex of target. Dominance behavior increased the attractiveness of males, but had no effect on the attractiveness of females. The third study indicated that the effect did not depend on the sex of the rater or on the sex of those with whom the dominant target interacted. The fourth study showed that the effect was specific to dominance as an independent variable and did not occur for related constructs (aggressive or domineering). This study also found that manipulated dominance enhanced only a male’s sexual attractiveness and not his general likability. The results were discussed in terms of potential biological and cultural causal mechanisms.

Dominance alone, as apposed to sheer aggression or domineering control freakery, made the male subjects seem more sexually attractive to women. The effect was not seen when the sexes were reversed.

Color me shocked. Women prefer virile, dominant men and men prefer feminine, deferential women. Thank you, ❤science❤!

(I bolded the second part as a reminder that, although it may appear at a glance that general likability is a prerequisite to female arousal, it is not. Players intuitively know this, and most men would, given the choice, choose passionate sex over “being liked” by women.)

Naturally, this will come as “news” to those creepy recluse losers and bitterboy sex difference denialists who haven’t come within ten yards of catching a cute woman’s intoxicating estrofabulous vibe. And just as naturally, these motley twerps will project the pain of their miserable anhedonic loveless lives with their internet provider or frump wives onto ruthless, charming motherfuckers like yours truly for daring to point out the bleeding obvious.

And it won’t end, it can’t end. The dance of sadistic cruelty with deluded losers, like the dance of love with youthful beauties, is a pleasure incomparable.

Love

A Chateau Heartiste accessory shoppe is in the works. Here is sample of what might be found lurking in the product line.

Love Logo T-shirt:

If you can confidently wear a t-shirt with this uplifting message emblazoned on the front, girls will be able to smell your heavy sex balls from twelve parsecs. The pheroMOANal assault could release dangerous shock waves of exploding vagina tingles. A warning label is included instructing the wearer not to wash the shirt for three months or to expect results if the shirt is accompanied by a defensive, apologetic demeanor.

In your travels across the landscape of women, you will encounter a few ice queens who play the soulkill game as well as any sociopathic man. The first exquisite experience with such a woman leaves one breathless with awe; the second experience invites reciprocal devilry.

I’m not saying e-eeevil women will carve you up with as much dramatic poise as Nicole Kidman does in this scene from Eyes Wide Shut, but I am saying these kinds of women exist and the flair they possess for digging deep to the male id and serrating it (usually after fellating it) is a power that would reduce most beta males (and some alpha males) to whimpering self-doubt or reckless vengeful rage.

Pop quiz for those aspiring to Amused Mastery Level of Alpha Maleness:

Given a similar situation, how would you respond to a lover pulling the “Check out my merciless female hypergamy” shiv on you? I know what I’d do. Let her finish her monologue, wait a beat for the moment to grow flush with threatening potential, grin, sit back in bed, and say “Cool story babe”. Better yet, if I were drunk and hadn’t the mental storage space for cutting quips, I’d get up midway through her speech and leave unceremoniously, as if the noise of her voice was giving me a headache.

To respond with fury or hurt would be perceived as her victory; calm dismissal is a tried and true shiv parry that enervates even the most sadistically charged thrusts.

UPDATE

Via reader PA. This scene from Witches of Eastwick is a case study in how an alpha male steals the frame and totally deflates a bitchy woman’s stream of emasculating insults. Be Jack’s amused mastery, and then, when your antagonistic lover has had the wind knocked out of her shivvy sails, go on the offense until her former snarling attack posture is reduced to a quivering crouch of passivity.

Accidental Alpha Game

A reader stumbled on a text schema that has the potential to light up vaginas from Tokyo to Toronto.

Dude. I just accidentally hit on a great way to sexualize a text exchange. I was Tinder chatting with a girl and after I spit some game, instructed her, as I always do, to punch in her number “and I’ll hit you up when I’m back from India.” (I’m really going fyi.) except that this time, I accidentally left out the word “up.” So, “I’ll hit you when I get back.” I then said “whoops. Meant hit you UP. stupid autocorrect…But I can hit you if you’re into that.” Which then led to a convo about hitting and I’m pretty sure she’s about to get punished soon. It may sound minor but it changed the flavor of the convo–and if there’s anything I learned from this site, it’s that the little things make all the difference. Cheers.

PS thanks for fucking changing my life

Better a sheepish alpha than a bold beta.

I think this reader would’ve had results just as rewarding, or at least as rewarding, had he not bothered issuing a regretful explanation, and let some time elapse wherein the girl could allow her hamster to roam freely trying to decrypt his true meaning. Spin spin rodent!

When a man hears “I’ll hit you”, his immediate instinct is to gird for violent battle. When a woman hears “I’ll hit you”, her immediate instinct is to wonder just how unbelievably sexy this man could be. Then, depending on the follow-up psychosexual feedback, she either girds for retreat or ungirds her loins.

PS Readers have approximately a six week window to try out this text trick before market saturation renders it unusable.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,999 other followers

%d bloggers like this: