Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Disgust, more than fear, dampens women’s sexual arousal. As a devoted skirt chaser, it’s better to make a girl a little afraid of you than it is to disgust her.

(Any connection between wives’ growing disgust for their beta hubbies and their frequency of headaches is purely coincidental.)

This female hindbrain reality explains why women are so quick to label men they don’t like with terms that evoke disgust, (e.g., “creepy”, “strange”, “weird”), and why men, in turn, are so careful to avoid being labeled as such, and to feel the sting harder when they are the recipient.

But it is also true, as any man with extensive field experience will attest, that women tend to throw around the “creep” smear with scattershot profligacy, as a means of “dramatizing” an incipient seduction as often as a means of communicating outright rejection of their suitors. In other words, the “creepy” label is a semantic shit test, and like any female shit test, if successfully passed your attractiveness to the girl will markedly increase.

There are counter-semantic measures a man can take to power down the empowerment a girl feels when she drops the “creep” bomb.

GIRL: “Ew, you’re being soooo creepy/such a creep!”

YOU:

Agree&Amplify

“Please, you haven’t seen anything yet. Wait’ll I put on my clown make-up.”

Preemptive DQ

Basically, light-heartedly call the girl out as a creep before she gets a chance to do it to you. It’s a great preemptive reframe of a courtship that constantly forces the girl back on her heels, in the defensive crouch (where tingles are born!)

Ambiguous Accusation

“Oh, you’re one of *those* girls.”

Amused Dismissal

“Do you eat with that mouth?”

Reverse Shit Test

“BOOORR-ING!”

Straight-up DQ

“Classy.”

Assume The Sale

“Look, this is my final offer. After this, I have to cut you loose.”

Ignore&Plow

This might be the best option for newbies. Just change the topic and “reset” the convo as if she hadn’t said anything of note.

Playground Challenge

“It takes one to know one.”

Redirection

“You got something caught in your teeth.”

Dramatic Flair

“I bet you say that to all the boys.”

Jerkboy Charisma

“There’s no accounting for taste.”

Style’s Attraction Amplifier

“I’m taken.”

Bring Da Movies Game

“Gay.”

***

As always, when engaged in the business of applied charisma, avoiding the pitfall of sounding defensive is paramount. This is not so hard as it seems, if you mentally groom yourself to be prepared for anything a girl might say in the course of a courtship. If you enter every pregnant-ly romantic interaction with a girl expecting to hear the unexpected from her, the crass from her, the bitchy from her, you likely never will be surprised by whatever she says, and this is the secret to building a personal defense against your own proclivity to butthurt defensiveness.

You needn’t be a cynic; you merely need to be accepting of the full behavioral spectrum of female privilege. You won’t always be able to predict what a girl will say to you, but you can predict how you’ll respond when she throws a monkey wrench into your laid-best plans: Unflustered, because you know this is how women are, how they have been for millennia, and how it is your job as a man to joyously pluck and eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and women. If you don’t pluck it, some other man will. Or, tragically, it will rot and fall to the ground, to be eaten by scavenging house cats.

The title of this study arrests you.

How your brain reacts to emotional information is influenced by your genes.

Hoo boy, loaded for bear. Are we talking about the intrinsic ability to sympathize with others, and are we talking about genes controlling this ability, and are we talking about these controlling genes varying across race? Mmmmm…. could be!

Your genes may influence how sensitive you are to emotional information, according to new research by a neuroscientist. The study found that carriers of a certain genetic variation perceived positive and negative images more vividly, and had heightened activity in certain brain regions.

Inverse: There are people who are more aloof toward pleasure, or distress, signals from others. Like psychopaths.

The gene in question is ADRA2b, which influences the neurotransmitter norepinephrine. Previous research by Todd found that carriers of a deletion variant of this gene showed greater attention to negative words. Her latest research is the first to use brain imaging to find out how the gene affects how vividly people perceive the world around them, and the results were startling, even to Todd.

“We thought, from our previous research, that people with the deletion variant would probably show this emotionally enhanced vividness, and they did more than we would even have predicted,” says Todd, who scanned the brains of 39 participants, 21 of whom were carriers of the genetic variation.

Researchers once again shocked by the degree of behavioral influence exerted by genes, news on the hour every hour.

Carriers of the gene variation showed significantly more activity in a region of the brain responsible for regulating emotions and evaluating both pleasure and threat.

“regulating emotions” = innate impulsiveness. I prefer the stronger definitional formulations. Helps focus the mind.

Todd points out there are also benefits to carrying the gene variant. “People who have the deletion variant are drawing on an additional network in their brains important for calculating the emotional relevance of things in the world,” she says. “In any situation where noticing what’s relevant in the environment is important, this gene variation would be a positive.”

“emotional relevance of things” = how other people feel. Empathy, and its feelings handmaiden, sympathy, have a genetic basis.

Land ho!, here comes the money shot…

The ADRA2b deletion variant appears in varying degrees across different ethnicities. Although roughly 50 per cent of the Caucasian population studied by these researchers in Canada carry the genetic variation, it has been found to be prevalent in other ethnicities. For example, one study found that just 10 per cent of Rwandans carried the ADRA2b gene variant.

Mic dropped. 50% of white Canadians have an empathy-boosting genetic variant which only 10% of black Rwandans possess.

The writers of this article must’ve been so shaken to their equalist cores by that hatefact which slipped through the cracks that they hastily flubbed the second to last line, resulting in a humorous contradiction between “prevalent” and “just 10%”.

CH has a big post coming soon which delves more deeply into the darkest of dark truths about racial differences in the empathy response. There are studies out there which the Hivemind won’t touch even obliquely, or through professional grade distortion filters. Ignorance is mind control.

Politicians know European-Americans are more diverse in their voting habits, often splitting their votes 50-50 between the two parties (or 40-30-30 between three parties). They also know blacks and mestizos are less ideologically and psychologically diverse, the former going 90+% Democrat and the latter 65-70% Democrat every time.

This is why all European-Americans must cast a wary eye toward legislation or legal rulings that attempt to curtail gerrymandering, the practice of dividing districts along racial lines to create “voting blocs”. Simple math illustrates why anti-gerrymandering disfavors European-Americans.

In a perfectly gerrymandered state, District 9 is 100% black, and District 8 is 100% white. From this partly-artificial (but only partly) political arrangement, we can expect District 9 to reliably vote Democrat nearly 100% of the time, and District 8 to vote GOP 52% of the time and Democrat 48% of the time.

Let’s also assume for the sake of clarity that the populations of both districts are the same.

Now this is what happens when anti-gerrymandering is forced on the districts, and they are redrawn so that, say, 25% of the blacks have moved (representationally) into the white district, and 25% of whites have moved (representationally) into the black district.

Those 25% of blacks continue voting 100% Democrat, while those 25% of whites continue splitting their votes 52-48% GOP-Dem. What is the end result? Well, where before (in the gerrymandered scenario) District 9 enjoyed the benefits of Democrat local governance and District 8 the benefits of Republican local governance, now District 9 still votes Democrat while District 8 has started to vote Democrat more as well.

The 25% of GOP-leaning whites have barely budged the Democrat advantage in District 9, lowering the Dem vote total from 100% to 87%.

[(o.75×1.00DEM) + (0.25×0.48DEM)] = 0.87DEM

But here’s what happens to the slight GOP advantage in all-white District 8 with the population shift to 25% black:

[(0.75×0.48DEM) + (0.25×1.00DEM)] = 0.61DEM

Did you see that? Don’t look away, because it happened quick as lightning. All-European-American District 8 went from voting for Democrats 48% of the time to voting for Democrats 61% of the time after their population was forced to politically accommodate 25% blacks.

End game: Both District 9 and District 8 become, for all practical purposes, Democrat strongholds.

And the Dem grip on those districts only becomes more pronounced as Diversity™ increases and the share of European-Americans, and the districts they control, decreases.

Now some of you are principled sorts and therefore are repulsed by the anti-democratic notion of gerrymandering as a way to “keep the peace” by making Dindugeld payments, and their consequences, more centrally located and removed from European-American scrutiny.

But we don’t live in an American Utopia of 90% European-American demographics (that time passed somewhere around mid-20th Century), when such a principled stance against gerrymandering could work in practice. We live in Diversity World™, and in this world high-falutin’ White Man privileged principles bow deeply to the blood-fueled pragmatism of tribalism. In Diversity World™, we don’t get the luxury of ideologically diverse whites arguing about street widths and weekend park rules; we get instead Everyone Not White driving drunk and shitting in the parks while ganging up on the few remaining Whites to fork over ever larger taxed remittances from their paychecks.

The elite know all this, which is why, next time you hear them lamenting gerrymandering, what they’re really opposing is a place where BadWhites enjoy the blessings of self-determination.

If you didn’t already know, #LoveWins is a Twitter hashtag celebrating hatred for people who don’t agree with the gay marriage SCROTUS dicktat.

As CH #Loves to do, we find opportunity for romantic pleasure in the detritus of a disintegrating nation. One such opportunity was discovered by reader newlyaloof:

I’m thinking that #LoveWins would be a great pickup line:

Guy sees girl, just walks up to her and tries to kiss her.
If you’re a charming bastard, the girl just may kiss you.
If not:
Girl: “What are you doing?”
You “Love Wins!” and go for it again. Or tease her and accuse her of being against love.

Heh. Ballsy, but has broad and deep potential. This tactic doesn’t have a short shelf life, either. It can work well after every ADD-suffering American girl has forgotten why there’s a rainbow sticker on her butthexed bungholelllzlzllol. I could see this opener easily parlayed into an extended, disqualifying, teasing riff on a girl’s numerous character flaws.

GIRL: “What are you doing?”

LOVE’S PENETRATING GAZE: “Are you against being in love?”

GIRL: “No.”

LOVE’S PENETRATING GAZE: “Next thing you’ll tel me you hate puppies.”

GIRL: “I don’t hate puppies either.”

LOVE’S PENETRATING GAZE: “You seem like the type to hate on cute things.”

etc. Anyone willing to try it out? Do I have to be the only one here to go into the breach?

If you don’t want to risk kissing a girl you just met, you could try a toned-down version of the above. Instead of kissing, place your hand gently on her shoulder and, longingly staring into her eyes, say with mock seriousness, “You and I, there’s magic between us. Can you feel it?” When she balks, segue into the “Love Wins!” riposte. The goal is to go for the tension-releasing taunting humor, which will set you up nicely for a more profound seduction.

A long time ago , CH criticized “Sex at Dawn” writer, Christopher Ryan, for his beliefs that jealousy is a social construct (or a recent, malleable, adaptation) and his presumption that polyamory is the natural state of de-Christianized, de-programmed white Europeans.

But there is also the powerful emotion of jealousy, a painful emotion which is not socially constructed, but is instead a visceral hindbrain reaction in the majority of men to thoughts of their women fucking other men. Did jealousy really evolve in just the last 10,000 years, or has it been with humanity for eons? It is possible that jealousy is a more recent evolution in the human psyche, and perhaps there are population group level differences in how much jealousy is experienced as a motivating impulse. (Maybe Africans feel less jealousy than Asians toward cheating partners.)

Whatever the evolution of jealousy, it is clearly an indicator that men DO give a fuck about paternity, and are NOT Ok with promiscuous women as long term partners who have been chosen to carry their young. If virginity weren’t valued by men, there would be no market for it. But in many large scale societies, not only is there an implicit market for virgins, there is an overt market for them.

I don’t need a laboratory or multiple Pee Aich Dees to know that men feel more more white hot jealousy for a sexually cheating girlfriend or wife, and that women feel more jealousy for an emotionally cheating boyfriend or husband. One would have to have been born and raised in an SJW reeducation camp to believe otherwise.

These are the observed CH ugly truths that discredit feminism and its parent ideology, equalism, and drive their adherents crazy with rage.

Which is why, once the equalist liars are twisted into a rictus of butthurt, I like to ease the shiv in further, whispering to them in their death agonies, “Give up, you don’t stand a chance! Let’s end this here! It will be easier for you, much easier. You’ll see it will be over quickly.” And, since the anti-human leftoids pride themselves on their fellowship with ¡SCIENCE!, nothing quite delivers the killing blow like enlisting the aid of their godhead to betray them to their last breaths.

Apropos, here’s 💋SCIENCE💋 telling us that, yes, CH was right again: Men and women feel jealousy differently, and this difference is best explained by a biological, innate cause.

Highlights

• Strong sex differences in jealousy responses across measurement paradigms
• Sex differences in jealousy responses not subject to moderation or mediation
• Noteworthy sex differences in a nation with high paternal investment expectancy
Findings contradict explanations derived from social role theories.
• Findings support evolutionary predictions.

Despite some controversy about sex differences in jealousy, data largely support that sex differences studied with the forced choice (FC) paradigm are robust: Men, relative to women, report greater jealousy in response to sexual infidelity than in response to emotional infidelity. Corresponding sex differences for continuous measures of jealousy typically have been less robust in the literature. A large sample of Norwegian students (N = 1074) randomly responded to either FC or continuous measure questionnaires covering four infidelity scenarios. Large, comparable, theoretically-predicted sex differences were evident for both FC and continuous measures. Relationship status, infidelity experiences, and question order manipulation (activation) did not consistently influence the sex differences for either measure, nor did individual differences in sociosexual orientation or relationship commitment. These large sex differences are especially noteworthy as they emerge from a highly egalitarian nation with high paternal investment expectancy, and because they contradict social role theories that predict a diminution of psychological sex differences as gender economic equality increases.

There will never be a polyamorous culture, legalized or de facto, in European-derived nations that doesn’t end in tears. Feminism, as per usual, is a crock of shit and a belief system that, contrary to its stated intent of enlarging the moral universe, strips humans of both sexes of their humanity.

Grexit, PRexit… Texit?

Greeks aren’t (genetically, culturally) Anglo-Germanics. Greece creaks under a mound of debt and must fleece Germany to stay afloat.

Puerto Ricans aren’t (genetically, culturally) Anglo-Germanics. Puerto Rico pimp rolls under a mound of debt and floats her crime and steatopygous sassiness to the US by the boatload.

Greece is a failed EU “equal partner”, and portends the eventual failure of the EU project.

Puerto Rico is a failed US territory/protectorate/whatever, and portends the eventual failure of the US open borders project.

Texas is becoming less Anglo-Germanic and more Hispanic by the day. Soon, Texas will exit the GOP and take any hope of ending anti-white antiracism from within the ruling class with her.

Speaking plainly like this is pointless. No one will listen. No one wants to listen. Messengers are reviled.

As always, I’ll be poolside, watching it crumble away, if we’re lucky. Burn, if we’re not.

I’ve heard every beta male excuse for sexual market inaction under the sun.

“She wasn’t looking at me.”

“She seemed like she didn’t want anyone talking to her.”

“I wasn’t feeling the vibe.”

“Too loud.”

“Too quiet.”

“Too crowded.”

“Too empty.”

“Too public.”

“Too private.”

“I might startle her and freak her out.”

“I can’t get to her without making it too obvious.”

“She probably has a boyfriend.”

“I need another drink first.”

“She’s out of my league.”

“You can’t just WALK UP to girls on the sidewalk!”

“This isn’t the place to hit on girls.”

“People are watching.”

“I’m dressed like a slob/I smell/I feel out of sorts/My hair is a mess today.”

“She’s talking to a bunch of people. I’ll wait till they leave her.”

“I forgot my opener.”

“My ass-less chaps are wrinkled.”

“I forgot to wear my Power Fedora.” (ed: this one’s not a joke, i heard it)

“I’m not feeling it right now.”

“Oh, wait, she saw me looking at her. Now it’ll just be weird if I go up to her.”

“I waited too long.” (ed: well, no shit!)

“I didn’t go out tonight to hit on girls.”

“If it happens, it’ll happen.” (ed: logic trap)

“I’m not in a good mood now.”

“I’ll hit it hard tomorrow.”

“The moment isn’t right.”

***

The perfect moment is the enemy of the pickup. Forget it, Jake, the perfect moment will never come to men who insist on waiting for perfect moments.

Perfect moments are made, by opportunists, aka charismatically bold men. Women happily back-rationalize the moment they meet interesting men as “chemistry”, “we clicked”, and “everything just seemed so perfect”, even if in reality all that happened was he approached and spoke a few words and impudently allowed his hands to take liberties with her erogenous space. So why are you bothering to wait for a perfect moment to hit on women when women will do all the work post hoc constructing that perfect moment in their pretty little heads?

Be an opportunist, not an idealist. For example, here’s a “perfect moment” that occurred when a particularly ruthless buddy of mine exploited what would normally have been an exceedingly embarrassing social situation into a #LoveWins ❤️. The girl who is the subject of this recollection had just tripped while walking on the sidewalk. As is the wont of girls, she got up, brushed herself off while suppressing obvious signs of pain, and attempted to carry on gracefully as if nothing had happened.

(When men trip, they will look backwards at the offending sidewalk crack as if to challenge it to a fight.)

My buddy would have none of that.

HIM: Don’t worry about pretending it didn’t happen, I saw the whole thing.

HER: Oh, yeah, ha, that was crazy.

HIM: Confession. I made a Vine of it. You’ll be on the internet in ten minutes.

HER: That’s not even funny.

HIM: Ok fine, it wasn’t as funny as your fall.

HER: I’m glad you were entertained!

HIM: I was. Does that make me a bad man?

HER: Yes, it does.

HIM: Good. This means you’d be down for drinks this week.

***

Every moment is a perfect moment to pickup girls, if you have heavy balls and skill wielding them.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,263 other followers

%d bloggers like this: