Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Jesus Had Game

Jesus wept? Oh no, my friends. Jesus charmed!

Jesus, like so many leading protagonists in the great books for men, had game, and used it to mesmerize the fuck outta his audiences of admirers. There’s a direct line throughout history leading from the thorny crown to the furry hat. Jesus was mystery, and Jesus was the first Mystery.

Proof of Jesus’ mad skills with the coy doubters comes to us via this nifty list of his best follower pickups.

One of the best-described of all charismatic leaders is Jesus. About 90 face-to-face encounters with Jesus are described in the four gospels of the New Testament.

Notice what happens:

The Son of God is about to raise your buying temperature.

Jesus is sitting on the ground, teaching to a crowd in the outer courtyard of the temple at Jerusalem. The Pharisees, righteous upholders of traditional ritual and law, haul before him a woman taken in adultery. They make her stand in front of the crowd and say to Jesus: “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. The Law commands us to stone her to death. What do you say?”

The text goes on that Jesus does not look up at them, but continues to write in the dirt with his finger. This would not be unusual; Archimedes wrote geometric figures in the dust, and in the absence of ready writing materials the ground would serve as a chalkboard. The point is that Jesus does not reply right away; he lets them stew in their uneasiness.

Jesus used tension to build attraction.

Minutes go by. One by one, the crowd starts to slip away, the older ones first– the young hotheads being the ones who do the stoning, as in the most primitive parts of the Middle East today.

Finally Jesus is left with the woman standing before him. Jesus straightens up and asks her: “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”  She answers: “No one.” “Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus says. “Go now and sin no more.” (John 8: 1-11)

Jesus is a master of timing. He does not allow people to force him into their rhythm, their definition of the situation. He perceives what they are attempting to do, the intention beyond the words. And he makes them shift their ground.

Jesus forced others into his frame.

He does not allow the encounter to focus on himself against the Pharisees. He knows they are testing him, trying to make him say something in violation of the law; or else back down in front of his followers. Instead Jesus throws it back on their own consciences, their inner reflections about the woman they are going to kill. He individualizes the crowd, making them drift off one by one, breaking up the mob mentality.

Jesus passed shit tests.

Jesus is a charismatic leader, indeed the archetype of charisma. Although sociologists tend to treat charisma as an abstraction, it is observable in everyday life. We are viewing the elements of it, in the encounters of Jesus with the people around him.

Game is applied charisma. I wonder if Jesus was a Dark Triad? Or should I say, Dark Trinity?

(1) Jesus always wins an encounter [...]

Jesus never lets anyone determine the conversational sequence. He answers questions with questions, putting the interlocutor on the defensive. An example, from early in his career of preaching around Galilee:

Jesus has been invited to dinner at the house of a Pharisee. A prostitute comes in and falls at his feet, wets his feet with her tears, kisses them and pours perfume on them. The Pharisee said to himself, “If this man is a prophet, he would know what kind of woman is touching him– that she is a sinner.”

Jesus, reading his thoughts, said to him: “I have something to tell you.” “Tell me,” he said. Jesus proceeded to tell a story about two men who owed money, neither of whom could repay the moneylender. He forgives them both, the one who owes 500 and the one who owes 50. Jesus asked: “Which of the two will love him more?” “The one who had the bigger debt forgiven,” the Pharisee replied. “You are correct,” Jesus said. “Do you see this woman? You did not give me water for my feet, but this woman wet them with her tears and dried them with her hair… Therefore her many sins have been forgiven– as her great love has shown.”

Jesus doesn’t follow conversational threads like an attention starved beta; he breaks them and makes his own. He answers ambiguously. He puts people in the defensive crouch, where tingles are born. Jesus follows the statement-statement-question format of effective discourse control.

The priests send spies, hoping to catch Jesus in saying something so that they might hand him over to the Roman governor. So they asked: “Is it right for us to pay taxes to Caesar or not?”

Jesus knowing their evil intent, said to them, “Show me the coin used to pay taxes.” When they brought it, he said, “Whose image is on it?” “Caesar’s,” they replied. “Then give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”  And they were astonished by his answer, and were silent.

Jesus the charismatic alpha male was unpredictable. You expect him to say one thing; he says another. AMOGs show deference and vaginas weep on cue.

(2)  Jesus is quick and absolutely decisive

As his mission is taking off in Galilee, followers flock to hear him. Some he invites to come with him. It is a life-changing decision.

A man said to him: “Lord, first let me go and bury my father.” Jesus replied: “Follow me, and let the dead bury their dead.”

It is a shocking demand. In a ritually pious society, there is nothing more important that burying your father. Jesus demands a complete break with existing social forms; those who follow them, he implies, are dead in spirit.

Chicks hate mincing betaboys. Jesus was not a mincing betaboy. Chicks dig rule breakers. Jesus was definitely a rule breaker.

The Pharisees complained, “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” Jesus replied, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

Jesus perceives who will make a good recruit, and who will not.

Jesus was practiced in the art of target selection.

(3) Jesus always does something unexpected [...]

Some of the disciples said indignantly to each other, “Why this waste of perfume? It could have been sold for more than a year’s wages and the money given to the poor.” And they rebuked her harshly.

“Leave her alone,” Jesus said. “She has done a beautiful thing to me. The poor you will always have with you, and you can help them any time you want.  But you will not always have me. She did what she could. She poured perfume on my body beforehand to prepare me for my funeral.” (Mark 14: 1-10; Matthew 26: 6-13)

A double jolt. His disciples by now have understood the message about the selfishness of the rich and charity to the poor. But there are circumstances and momentous occasions that transcend even the great doctrine of love thy neighbour. Jesus is zen-like in his unexpectedness. There is a second jolt, and his disciples do not quite get it. Jesus knows he is going to be crucified. He has the political sense to see where the confrontation is headed; in this he is ahead of his followers, who only see his power.

When was the last time you saw an alpha male do the dull, boring thing? Never.

(4) Jesus knows what the other is intending

Jesus is an intelligent observer of the people around him.

Jesus was situationally aware.

He is highly focused on everyone’s moral and social stance, and sees it in the immediate moment. Charismatic people are generally like that; Jesus does it to a superlative degree.

Jesus lived in the moment. Jesus did not suffer “paralysis by analysis”.

Jesus’ perceptiveness helps explain why he dominates his encounters. He surprises interlocutors by unexpectedly jumping from their words, not to what conventionally follows verbally, but instead speaking to what they are really about, skipping the intermediate stages.

Jesus knew how to “elicit values”, and build deep connections with people.

(5) Jesus is master of the crowd [...]

Crowds are a major source of Jesus’ power. There is a constant refrain: “The crowds were amazed at his teaching, because he taught as one who had authority, and not as their teachers of the law.” His enemies the high priests are afraid of what his crowd of followers will do if they attack Jesus.

Jesus was socially proofed.

[His disciples] are the privileged in-group, and they know it. Jesus admonishes them from time to time about their pride; but he needs them, too. It is another reason why living with Jesus is bracing. There is an additional circuit of charismatic energy in the inner circle.

Push-pull game.

Jesus can still arouse this crowd, but he cannot silence it. He does not back off, but becomes increasingly explicit. The metaphors he does use are not effective. His sheep that he refers to means his own crowd of loyal followers, and Jesus declares he has given them eternal life– but not to this hostile crowd of unbelievers. Words no longer convince; the sides declaim stridently against each other. The eloquent phrases of earlier preaching have fallen into cacophony. Nevertheless Jesus still escapes violence. The crowd is never strong enough to dominate him. Only the organized authorities can take him, and that he does not evade.

Alpha males can be taken down by a state-sanctioned beta male show of force.

(6) Jesus’ down moments

Even an alpha male occasionally gets cockblocked.

Leaving aside the miracle itself and its symbolism, one thing we see in this episode is Jesus conflicted between his mission– to demonstrate the power of resurrection– and his personal feelings for Lazarus and his sisters. Jesus let Lazarus die, by staying away during his sickness, in order to make this demonstration, but in doing so he caused grief to those he loved. The moment when he confronts their pain (amplified by the weeping of the crowd), Jesus himself weeps. It is the only time in the texts when he weeps. It is a glimpse of himself as a human being, as well as a man on a mission.

Vulnerability game.

Finally Jesus is taken before Pilate, the Roman governor. Jesus gives his usual sharp replies, and indeed wins him over. “Are you the King of the Jews?” Pilate asks.

King of the Poon, amirite?

“Is that your own idea,” Jesus asks in return, “or did others talk to you about me?”

“Am I a player? Only if you want me to be.”

In the crises, Jesus’ interactional style remains much the same as always; but the speaking in parables and figurative language has given way to blunt explanations. Parables are for audiences who want to understand. Facing open adversaries, Jesus turns to plain arguments.

Sometimes it’s necessary to drop the flirty banter and aloofness and draw a line in the sand that you don’t want a woman to cross.

Jesus the alpha male. Jesus the PUA (of disciples). Jesus the master of the crimson arts. Men followed him. Powerful men feared him. Prostitutes paid *him*.

Jesus is risen, indeed!

It was a brief vignette shoehorned into the end of the day that nonetheless attested to a meaningful psychological and social difference between the sexes.

I was walking

dislodging a buttplug

down a busy sidewalk when I noticed a young-ish black (and possibly gay) guy asking for high fives from passersby. He had something like a clipboard in his hand, but I wasn’t interested enough to determine whether he was a snazzily dressed street bum performing for loose change or a campaigner for some idiotic cause.

In the time it took me to first notice him and walk past him, three (white) women and two (white) men were accosted by his street performance shenanigans. As each neared, he would spit his loudmouthed pitch and histrionically hoist his hand for a high five. All three women complied, reaching upward to meet his hand with sheepish grins and blushing faces. The two men sneered or frowned and swerved away from his entreaties.

(If you’re wondering what I did, I didn’t swerve. I walked right into his jabber zone and right out of it without an iota of acknowledgment.)

The scene was a reminder how emotionally manipulable women are, compared to men. I’ve seen similar scenes unfold hundreds, perhaps thousands of times, and the same sex disparity in call-and-response emerges: Women are more apt to obey the commands of an annoying (if friendly) stranger than are men. This instinct is likely a property of women’s greater predilection for group cohesion and agreeableness, probably mixed in with some latent desire to submit to a man who’s large and in charge.

One reason game works so well on women has to do with their greater degree of emotional manipulability. A man who understands that women are more impressionable creatures who will reflexively follow strong leadership is a man who gets laid. Indecisive betas earn women’s disgust and cruelty; decisive (some would call “douchey”) alphas earn women’s love and respect.

Some game concepts, like calculated scarcity, are universal and will work, more or less, on both sexes. But women are much more susceptible to these unisex game techniques because of the nature of their paper-thin emotional defenses against such manipulation. This is how you know that the occasional dumbfuck female contrarian who comes on here to shriekishly assert how game works just as well on men is full of shit. Yes, some of these game tactics can work on men… weak beta men with dispositions not unlike that of women. In contrast, game works on all women, and works best, ironically, on the best-looking women.

Should You Confirm Dates?

I’ve never been on board with the habit of calling or texting a girl before a date to confirm that it’s still on. I get the idea of it — if she’s about to flake, you save yourself the hassle and indignity of getting caught out alone — but practical considerations aside, the very act of confirming dates conveys lower value. Assuming the sale means assuming she’ll be there at the agreed upon time. It doesn’t mean assuming she forgot, or she might not show, and you have to double check to be sure her oh-so-busy schedule still allows time for your meager and annoying company.

Given the inherent DLV of date confirmations, men are advised to avoid the practice altogether or, if circumstances require confirming a date, to confirm with sly obliqueness that sidesteps the trap of self-betatization.

On the subject, a reader asks,

Long time reader here who has improved game, life style and understanding of women in general.  Here’s my question.  I always find it DLV to confirm a first date with a new girl, and have devised a few C&F methods, but here’s a new one I seek your opinion on.  I send a text a few hours before the date:

ME: I already have plans for tonight, but I’m free tomorrow night

HER: what/ok/whatever

ME: Wrong person, obviously I have plans with you tonight.

It does 2 things – 1. Shows that maybe another girl is reaching out to you and 2. You’re actually confirming.

Thoughts? A better version?

TIA

This is a twisted version of Reverse Eavesdropping Game. It’s a manipulative ploy to project high male mate value by (not so subtly) insinuating the fullness of your dance card. And, as the reader has noted, it’s a sneaky method to confirm a date with a girl without appearing like you called to confirm.

The difficulty with this tactic is the substantial risk of transparency. How obvious is it that your text was actually meant for her and not for another imaginary girl? The less obvious, the better Reverse Eavesdropping Game works. If you think the context is right and the impression you left with her is congruent with the believability of these texting tricks, then give it a whirl. Otherwise, I’d say skip this style of overwrought sneaky fucker texting and try these alternatives to confirming dates instead:

1. The preemptive “I’ll be late” gambit.

Need to confirm a date? Not sure if she’ll show up? Text her a few hours beforehand to tell her you’ll be late.

“just letting you know i’ll be ten minutes late. don’t be tragically sad.”

The beauty of this trick is that it simultaneously makes you seem higher value (you’ve got a busy life) while leaving the door open for her to announce an intention to flake if that was her plan. You aren’t confirming anything; you’re assuming she’ll be there. Her reply will be either “ok” in which case you have pretty good evidence she’ll show up or, if she was planning to cancel, she’ll be trapped in a corner where she either has to baldly lie (most girls won’t do this) or fess up that she won’t make it.

2. The “Wear something cute” gambit.

This is a classic PUA end-run around a potential flake. You text, “Wear [X] and [X] tonight” a couple hours before the date. No direct confirmation, no DLV. The assumption of her presence at the agreed time and place is tacit. If she doesn’t reply, she’s lost interest and is likely going to flake. If she does, her reply will tell you enough about her intention, or lack thereof, to show up that you can cease any further communication until you’re face-to-face with her (or until you’ve deleted her number).

Hope this helps!

Cuck Up

Cuck up, idiom, slang, origin: Chateau Heartiste.
1. Variation on the “man up” theme; to demand of a cuckolded man that he support the bastard child of his cheating wife or girlfriend.
2. A taunt directed at a beta male to ostensibly shame him to provide for the child of another man’s seed, often delivered by ugly feminists and low SMV white knights who are projecting their fear of mass beta male abandonment of a sexual market skewed by law and custom to satisfy the preferences of women and women alone.

Courtesy of reader Waffles, a (probably fake but still illuminating) story on Reddit that serves as a wonderful microcosm of the murky churn at the bottom of the sexual market, where fat sluts dupe manboobed omegas into race cuckoldry.

Off topic but will be appreciated by the CH crowd. Over on Reddit a debate was going on after some guy posted this. His kid came out black. There apparently were actually people telling him that he should “man up” and take care of the kid as his own! Delusional.

The OP:

I did not walk out on anything. It is not my responsibility to raise a kid that did not come from me. I may sound like an ass, but I can’t believe the people who said to raise it as mine. Imagine your wife finally getting pregnant, only to see a different race pop out, and you realize it’s not yours. I am not raising that kid, however enjoy your free karma.

definitely not master of her domain

Some choice replies:

Some white babies do come out looking black though, sometimes you gotta let it air out for a little bit for the complexion to even up.

:lol:

At least your wife had the decency to fuck a black man, so you could tell she cheated on you. So you’ve got that going for you, which is nice.

Womb half-full.

Did you drink grape soda the day before?

Science!

Before you lawyer up and sue for divorce, I would ask you to take a step back and a deep breath. Try to remember that it isn’t the little guy’s fault.

Cuck up… “for the children”.

I must ask, are you mad that the child is not yours; Or is it because the child is Black?

Because racism is the true moral outrage here.

He has your palms.

at least he has a chance to get laid before he turns 30

You laugh, but every other relationship depicted on televagina these days is essentially a warmly accommodated race cuckold fantasy. Sorry White knighters… white women eat that shit up.

If you ever receive a dubious excuse from a girl who has cancelled a date at the last second, the best reply is an ambiguous one that could be interpreted as either sarcastic disbelief or sincere sympathy. For example,

GIRL: Sorry I can’t make it! My grandma fell and can’t get up. I have to take her to the hospital.

YOU: wow

That’s it. The insidious beauty of this one word reply is that, in the event her excuse was genuine, your muted exclamation can easily fill in as a plausible expression of condolence. If she’s lying, she’ll be psychologically self-groomed to interpret your “wow” as a jerkboy dismissal, and your value to her as a sexual being will go up.

“wow” is a great all-purpose ambiguous message that can springboard into all sorts of flirty conversation.

YOU: wow

GIRL: You don’t believe me? No really my grandma fell.

YOU: ok. say hi to grandma for me.

or…

YOU: wow

GIRL: don’t be such an asshole.

YOU: wow that sucks. I hope she feels better.

You can really screw with a girl’s head if you’re familiar with the art of ambiguity.

Gaming Mediocre Girls

Yes, I know what some of you are thinking. “Game mediocre girls?! What’s the point? That’s like learning how to appreciate the aroma of a turd bouquet.”

This electro-retreat tries to stay as close as possible to practical advice that would work in the real world. In the real world, most men are not banging out 9s and 10s (for the simple reason that there aren’t nearly enough 9s and 10s to service all the men who want them). In the real world, some men are huge nerds. As CH has written before, game, like all male attractiveness traits sans perhaps fame, has its limits. Notwithstanding tout-able exceptions to the contrary, all else equal game will not enable the typical male 3 to date female 8s on a long-term basis.

Given that plain-as-day premise (and yes, I know there are game maestros who joyously flout the fat part of the bell curve), there remains a healthy market for the placid love of mediocre girls who are, after all, not fugs nor morbidly obese Beelzeblobs.

Short primer
Untouchables: 0,1
Uglies: 2,3
Mediocrities:4,5,low 6
Cuties: high 6,7
Hotties: 8,9,10

In the arena of accelerated seduction, comparative SMVs matter. Half of men are starting from a low spot in the male sexual hierarchy, from where a bounce up to dating 5s or 6s would represent for them considerable improvement in their romantic fortunes.

This post, then, is for those men. It’s quick and dirty game for the mediocrities and, to a lesser extent, the cuties who have not yet had their egos inflated past their psi burst risk. Game doesn’t need to do much to make a man much happier than he ever imagined he could be. If a low SMV man is sadly accustomed to dating 3s, the joy of dating 5s regularly will make him feel like the luckiest man on earth. (At least until he gets bored of the 5s.)

Gaming mediocre girls is, in the general, a less purposefully antagonistic affair than gaming hotter girls. This is because middling chicks have lower self-esteems and thus don’t require the verbal feints and parries that hotter girls need to feel excited about a man.

The above betacentric generality loses relevance if the SMVs between the man and the mediocrity are close. That is, a male 8 gaming a female 5 will need more front-loaded beta reassurance game to make her feel like he is attainable and sincerely interested in her. For him, simple compliments on her sense of style can open the floodgates to speed seduction.

But a man who is closer in SMV to a mediocre 5, or even lower SMV than her, will have to game her like she’s a 7. However, my travels across the dating landscape have revealed a peculiarity to gaming mediocrities: Many are so beaten down by the pump and dumps they’ve suffered that they need to hear a nice thing before they’ll be receptive to any sort of pickup attempt.

The key is how your “nice” opener is framed. It can’t be chucked into the air like a hail mary pass. It can’t be sappy. It can’t be trite. Instead, try this:

“You seem like a happy person. That’s not a bad thing.”

To a genuinely upbeat girl, this will provoke a smile. Technically, it’s a compliment. But it’s also a very subtle neg and frame control; you’re short-circuiting her instinct to assume she’s being patronized, while guiding her to a conversation on your terms.

Even compliments can be massaged by game so that they are more effectively delivered. If you’re a nerd for whom 5s and 6s are a dream come true, game for mediocre girls who otherwise wilt under the heat of intense seduction techniques may be something you should consider adding to your traditional pickup repertoire.

cold russian on the restrictions diversity organically imposes on discourse,

Dialogue is naturally limited under the condition of diversity. Atomize any further and it gets down to kindergarten level, pretty much “Don’t say that bad word!” dictated in baby talk. All of this for the upkeep of a lonely society where you say “Have a nice day” to the black receptionist at the dentist’s office or where the Asian at the sushi place puts on a cheery voice to greet you. Anybody who wants to make a living out of writing has to tip-toe around this issue, or else face the anger of a bunch of blacks who feel disrespected, and signaling whites who nail you for the highest kind of evil possible in their perpetually abstracting minds.

There are actually two negative forces at work on Western social cohesion and comity: Diversity and diversity elevation. The first, the actual ratios of different people within a single geopolitical and cultural space, reduces trust and bonhomie by the action of observable behavioral and temperamental differences, particularly if those group differences are unequally suited to thrive in a complex modern society. The second, the glorification of diversity by status whoring whites and their non-white pawns, infects otherwise normal daily politeness between different peoples with a patina of coercion and resentment.

In an ethnically and racially diverse society the natural fissures created by the compressed diversity are exacerbated by secular-religious belief in the unassailable value of diversity and by proselytizing of diversity as an unmitigated good exempt from criticism. Organic diversity strains social connectedness, but diversity elevation draws a spotlight to that strain through the inhuman demands it makes of people to dumb down their dialogue and ignore what their lying eyes tell them.

So, for instance, the necessary upkeep of saying “Have a nice day” to a black receptionist in a diverse but psychologically healthy society is easy politeness no normal person finds objectionable that gets twisted into something darker and more resentful — like a false confession under duress — in a psychologically damaged society that denies one race their identity while exalting the identities, real or fantastical, of every other race. The most delicious irony of the diversity inquisitors is that their very fervor to stamp out heretical thought is driving the natural wedges of diversity deeper into the body politic.

COTW winner is YaReally, who summarizes the best use of a group of hapless men guarding their prized quarry.

Take their girl.

You’re cooler than them by default simply because they’re so low-value to her that they’re her orbiters, and you’re the bright shiny new object. Just ignore her and chat with them, then tease her when she tries to get your attention and she’ll choose you and demand more of your attention. If you choose her, they can “protect” her and kick your ass…but if she chooses you, there’s nothing they can do about it because she’ll defend you from them. All they can do is go home and cry themselves to sleep, then Google “how do I get this one special girl I’m in love with??” and end up on their way to enlightenment lol

The shiv is strong in this comment. Congrats Ya. Your Golden Shiv trophy is waiting for you at the Chateau reception desk.

***

First COTW runner-up is EdwardWaverley, who writes a poem about a girl who secretly yearns for the grimy nonconsensual love of a street bum.

Tramp Seeks Tramp

I don’t want a beta provider
a simpering resource divider.
I won’t love a dashing young turk,
nor even a debonair jerk.

To render me gasping agape
I need to experience rape.
I know ’round the mountain I’d come
to play rape with the neighborhood bum.

As he stumbles alluringly near
with his gin-addled grin and his leer,
and accosts me without my permission,
all the dregs of my id start to wishin’

that he’ll yank me right into his alley
to assault my near-quivering valley.
Though I’m trying to straighten my dress
and to vocalize “no,” I’m a mess

of frightfully strange contradictions.
And I’m finding that civil restrictions
are a cramp to my hideous kink,
that I wonder what mother would think

could she see me receiving attentions
from nefarious, strange uber-menschen
in a dark semi-public demesne?
Better not to examine that vein

up too close. Yet it’s dreadfully clear
that an open-air climax is near!
If this fantasy goes any further
I may wind up a homeless man’s birther!

But enough! I can’t think any longer
of my rapey mysterious schlong-er.
(He’d be homeless, and horny, and free!
And he’d long just to rape only me!)

I’ve resigned myself simply to ponder
a vague thought of felicity yonder.
With my husband I’ll gladly play dumb
as I secretly yearn for a bum.

Stirring. I would pay good money to watch a prankster recite this on-stage just after a feminist slam poetess had finished her dull harangue.

***

Second COTW runner-up is Just Saying, who reminds the dudio audience that giving a woman even an ounce of control is a recipe for romantic failure.

Women HATE making decisions or being in control – so don’t let her. Tell her where to be, and when to be there. If she is – great, if not you should have others lined up and it’s her loss. I have had a woman blow me off and my last text to her was a – “Sorry to miss you. Met someone, we’re off.” Suddenly my phone exploded with texts – which I ignored till the next day since I was with someone and they took precedence. The next time she was there – on time, and I banged her. You always have to be willing to walk on a woman – other wise they get full of themselves, and NO WOMAN is worth your dignity.

Being her pet monkey sending her photos with her name on it [re: James Franco], is BS – she showed it to all of her GF’s and laughed at you. No women is worth that – I would have sent her a canned photo of an old GF’s butt that I keep for such occasions with the verbiage – KISS THIS.

Depedestalization is a prerequisite to seduction. Of course, you can fake the pedestal funk to charm women, but really feeling the weight of that pedestal in your bones is a burden that will pollute any charm offensive you take.

***

Finally, the COTW consolation prize is awarded to Waffles.

One of the first dates with my now GF of over a year, we were discussing what to do after we got food etc. I said something along the lines of “you can just drop me at my car tomorrow morning”, she said something like “Oh, what makes you think you’re coming back to my place?” Channeling the teachings of CH I smirked and said “Always assume the sale”. Sure enough went back to her place. We’ve been dating over a year now and live together. She STILL brings up that comment “always assume the sale” with sparkles in her eyes and tingles galore.

There is so little game in the world, and so few men practicing the art of game, that a little bit goes a long way. So long, in fact, that a woman will remember a cocky line spoken years earlier as the prelude to a deep and wonderful romance.

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.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,836 other followers

%d bloggers like this: