It’s biomechanical feedback loops all the way down.

Reader chris forwards a study that examined the relationship between testosterone levels and mating success.

Fulfilling desire: Evidence for negative feedback between men’s testosterone, sociosexual psychology, and sexual partner number

Men who achieve what, for them, represents a successful pattern of mating, whether through committed relationships or uncommitted sex, should lower these costs by decreasing T production. The present results thus point to negative feedback in which T promotes copulatory success, and copulatory success in turn down-regulates T production.

So I’m guessing the inference from this is that abstaining from mating while still desiring to mate produces highest testosterone levels.

Testosterone must be costly to the male to produce and sustain at high levels, otherwise the body-brain axis wouldn’t shift to down-regulating T production once reproductive success was achieved. And note that the use of contraception wouldn’t attenuate this down-regulation: The brain-endocrine system has not evolved to keep up with modern procreation-thwarting technologies. (Evolution never takes a break, so it’s possible people, and particularly secular Westerners, are presently evolving in unforeseen ways to accommodate the reality of cheap, widely available contraception.)

This study jives with Mangan’s writings on hormesis — the idea that low level stresses (e.g., weightlifting and eating mildly toxic vegetables like broccoli) on the body and brain promote the health of an organism — as it would seem copulatory denial causes a man’s body to ramp up testosterone production, resulting in more vigor and initiative. Temporary bouts of incel may, in fact, do a man’s body good.

So maybe the No-Fappers are onto something. Hardcore porn may trick the male brain into recognizing that solitary onanistic spurt arced over the flicker of a sexy 2D babe as the culmination of a real life reproductive success. Hardcore porn, like the Pill and condom, is an evolutionary shock for which the human brain and its underlying genetic imperative are ill-equipped to make sense of. Relative to the timeline of human evolution, Tab 31 may as well be a Toba event.

And when we look around at American men, especially Millennials raised on a diet of internet porn (and high fructose corn), we behold a ghastly churn of manboobs, psychological faggotry, poz, and Scalzied male feminists bleating like tender lambs about their daughters’ ability to bench press more than they can.

What does this all mean for the inveterate player? Getting into a relationship with one of your plates will make you soft, figuratively and literally. So you’d better choose wisely which girl you allow to tame you.

Finally, if you’re looking for a way around this T down-regulation caused by the curse of your own sexual success, take up weightlifting. It’s been shown to increase resting testosterone in both the short- and long-terms.


Commenter Anti-Citizen demurs,

Meh, I just know that if I don’t fap for 3 days I start considering banging fat chicks. Not worth it.

There are two legit pro-fap arguments to be made. This one, and the idea that a pre-date fap will relax and imbue a man with that aloof and indifferent alpha male aura chicks dig (as explored in Something About Mary).

Although, tbh, fat chicks are so visually and pungently disgusting to the majority of (white and asian) men that even a semen backup of Hoover Dam proportions wouldn’t convince them to do a triple lindy into the deep end of the back boobs.

Lena Dunham — or as Vox Day calls her, the Dunham Horror — is back in the news, attention whoring on social media in her new lingerie fat folds hammock. (WARNING: You are about to see what cannot be unseen. The faint of heart should look away now.)





Until Lena, never in the history of womankind has an attention whore been less aware of the nature of the attention she receives, or of the mismatch between what she offers and the kind of attention she demands for her offerings.

Which manboob does Lena’s nottie bod most resemble?

I’ll have to go with “sidewinders”.

Lena’s personal philosophy and her behaviors which manifest from her beliefs are a cancer on the world. A grotesquerie like her should spend less time flaunting her repulsive ugliness on the internet and more time in the gym and away from the grease trucks kicking her body into a reasonably feminine shape that she can then proudly save for the pleasure of her gay husband in the privacy of their home. Growing out her hair so she looks less like David Fatrelle would help, too.

But, she will never do this. Find a husband, that is.

But even with their visible admiration for one another, this pair has no plans to say “I Do” anytime soon. It’s not that they aren’t ready. They just wish everyone [ed: gays] would be given the same opportunity in all 50 states.

This post is cruel. I’m in a giving mood, so I’ll leave youze guys with some oculation material.

Reader duderino stumbles upon an excellent jerkboy opener.

I was standing behind a hot girl at the grocery store a while back. She was fit and wore tight yoga pants. She was waffling over which sugar free energy drink to buy. I’d pulled an all nighter studying, and was beginning to feel sick. I unintentionally cleared my throat in a way that made it sound like I was telling her to gtfo of my way. She started apologizing and sheepishly grinned as I grabbed whatever had the most caffeine. I was barraged with questions about which drink was best and how she wanted something to give her energy without getting fat. Throat clearing must be an underrated opener.

I was too grumpy and caught off guard to follow through. I’ve been gaining muscle lately and aren’t used to cute girls opening me. Anyone with experience talking to girls at grocery stores?

A real man demands a woman’s attention. He doesn’t wait for her attention to fall in his lap. This reader accidentally learned the value of this truth, so next time he might try a deliberate throat clearing opener to startle and arouse a cute girl turned instantly submissive to the aural attack of his jerky, guttural impudence.

Coaxer of Shy Clits: [loudly clears throat] *hmmMMMmmm*

Little Red Clitoral Hood: Oh! I’m sorry. *sheepish grin* You looking for en energy drink? Which drink is best?

Coaxer of Shy Clits: Well, Red Bull gives you flings. I mean, wings.

Whatever you do after your throat clearing opener, don’t do beta. That means don’t give in to instinct and apologize for disturbing the girl’s tranquility.

More than a few readers have offered anecdotes in which they stoked a girl’s curiosity and feminine deference as a result of unintentionally mimicking alpha male jerkboy behavior in her company. This is interesting, because the results proceeding from accidental Game speak more forcefully to the efficacy of Game than do the results from deliberate application of Game.

When we set out on self-improvement, there is a natural human tendency to affirm the benefits of that which we have invested much effort to learn and apply. But those same benefits accrued by unintentional implementation of a behavioral change — that is, accrued without conscious apprehension of the behavioral process until after the fact, when a surprised appraisal is made — is a powerful clue that the change in behavior works as predicted.

The heart of the matter is quite disturbing to dewy-eyed and trembling-lipp’d romantic idealists when you really grasp its significance:

Maxim #65: The accidental alpha trumps the intentional beta.

The shiv withdraws, glistening with viscera.

PS There are illimitable ways to hit on girls standing in front of you at the supermarket checkout. One I’ve employed is making a comment about one of her odder choices of food items on the conveyor belt. Try to structure your comment so that it’s open-ended, leading her to invest a bit in the conversation, and possibly continuing it past the store doors. For example, “I guess I’m not the only one who eats durian fruit. What makes you think you can handle that bad boy?”


Amy delightfully recalls a man who plied her limbic labials with what I consider very tight grocery check-out game.

Once I was in line checking out at a grocery store and the guy behind me surveyed what I was buying (all leafy greens and fruits bc I was on a juice cleanse), and said, remind me not to come over to your place for dinner. I laughed and said it was for juicing. So then he looks at me and says with mock seriousness “you need meat.” Bold!

Indeed. Poon Commandment XIII: Err on the side of too much boldness, rather than too little.

Top-Down Patriotism

A peculiar trend I’ve noticed in the past few years is the emergence of old-skool Americana on the walls and atop the furniture of various upscale shops and restaurants in urban blue elite-capture islands. It started with SWPL hipsters wearing ironic American eagle and American flag t-shirts, which became less ironic and more sincere over time, culminating in spontaneous outbursts of liberal patriotism on American holidays like July 4th. Recently, the trend appears to be picking up speed. Paintings of the stars and stripes adorn überwhite tapas eateries. Norman Rockwell-ish art lines the halls of globalist corporate elite headquarters.

Have liberal Americans suddenly begun believing in the idea of America, now that it’s a race cuck depot? No. This is fear speaking. The elite and striver SWPL class sense the nation is fraying, and may come undone in their lifetimes. The top-down patriotism is a frantic gesture of unity when division rules the day.

The gesture is too late, too feeble. America will break apart into regional powers within the next fifty years, probably sooner. Mark these words.

CH answered this post title’s question already in the seminal “Dating Market Value for Women” at-home quiz, and in this post defining the qualifications of the “alpha female”, but feminists and male feminists continue to insist against the bleedingly obvious real world evidence that men desire smarts in women over and above all other mate value considerations. For instance, the latest garbage study purporting a strong male desire for female IQ is about as flawed as a self-report sex survey can get.

Instead of writing a draining exegesis on why smarts don’t matter much to women’s romantic fortunes —

executive summary: a woman’s IQ has little impact on her short- OR long-term desirability to men unless she’s beyond the comfort zone of intelligence compatibility with the man she’s dating; i.e. around 15 or more IQ points above or below the man’s IQ

— I’ll just reprint a Telegraph commenter’s witty response on the topic.

awesome research – it validates the view that porn has no future on the internet

So much feminist-friendly “””research””” has upon later inspection turned out to traffic in horribly flawed premises and methodology that it’s a good bet to prejudice any social science study issuing from an Anglo university with at least one Scandinavian- or Eskimo-sounding female name in the author list as worthless.


Commenter Arbiter does the hard work debunking this feminist study that I wasn’t willing to do.

All right, let’s take apart the Telegraph article:

1. Journalist Sarah Knapton has talked to a Professor David Bainbridge. So you would expect some strong scientific research to back up his claim, right? No. “Surveys have shown time and time again that this is the first thing that men look for.” You don’t even get to see the surveys. Nor do you get any mention of the fact that what people say in a survey doesn’t mean it’s true, especially not in a leftist climate that pressures them to ignore nature.

2. Bainbridge sets up a strawman to attack: it’s “large breasts and long legs” vs. intelligence. This is even in the title. He knocks large knockers by saying it’s not big breasts men want but symmetrical breasts, and he knocks long legs by saying it is straight legs men want, not long ones.

Ergo, men value intelligence instead of looks! Right? If you ignore the little fact that he just mentioned physical traits that men desire: symmetrical breasts and legs that are not crooked.

Far down in the article we also get this: “However men do like women to be curvaceous with voluptuous thighs and bottoms, and a waist that is much slimmer than their hips..” So the “men really look for intelligence, not beauty” theme that the article starts with is nonsense, even by the writer’s own admission. But this comes far down in the story.

3. The real “proof” to grab people’s attention is George Clooney. The article begins with a picture of him and Lebanese wifey Amal Alamuddin. Sarah Knapton writes under the picture: “Despite dating a string of attractive women George Clooney settled down with human rights barrister Amal Alamuddin”. They are mentioned again farther down in the article, and Alamuddin’s picture appears again.

No longer do you need to study thousands of people, you only need to look at one person’s choice. If you are the science editor at The Telegraph.

But not even this one example proves anything: Alamuddin doesn’t look bad for her age. She also no doubt shares Clooney’s socialist preferences, and his anti-White ideology served well by marrying a non-White. So looks, check, and compatible personalities, check. Furthermore, that she is a “human rights barrister” doesn’t mean she would be brimming with intelligence for Clooney to lust for. Probably she just has enough intelligence to be close to him on the scale.

Alamuddin is one of the worst exhibits the feminists could use to buttress their “men love SMRT women!” psychological projection. She’s hotter than 90% of women her age. And, lest the fact escape anyone, she’s also 17? years younger than Clooney.

Reader Chris from Dublin pens a stirring love letter to one of 20th Century filmdom’s most iconic (and loveable) alpha male jerkboys, and in the penning touches upon the abiding Heartistian sexual market truths that infuse the movie The Breakfast Club.

It was really only a matter of time before the Chateau would focus on John Bender of ‘The Breakfast Club’.

John Bender , brilliantly played by Judd Nelson (who was 26 at the time of shooting), easily ranks alongside Marlon Brando in ‘The Wild One’ and James Dean in ‘Rebel Without A Cause’ as one of the great cinema badboys, arguably the best of all because of his gritty suburban realism. It is deplorable that Nelson was not at least nominated for an Oscar for his performance and if he does no other work of note, ‘The Breakfast Club’ remains an outstanding achievement of his.

‘The Breakfast Club’ is John Hughes’s best film with a completeness that his other great work, ‘Ferris Bueller’s Day Off’, slightly lacks. What both films share is an enigmatic and deeply charismatic central character around whom the rest of the film orbits. ‘Ferris Bueller’s Day Off’ lacks the ensemble quality of script or performance of ‘The Breakfast Club’ and is also more of a straightforward fantasy (with it being generally accepted that Ferris Bueller is Cameron’s alter-ego, the man who the trapped and frustrated Cameron wants to be). Ferris Bueller is a far less likeable character than John Bender and, although no high-school bowsie like Bender would, in real life, possess the wit and articulacy that Nelson’s character has, this is no shortcoming of the film – it is, as the Chateau points out, a fantasy.

John Bender has an advantage over the characters played by Brando and Dean because, if for no other reason, ‘The Breakfast Club’ has a higher production standard than those films of the 1950’s and, as such, it is easier to watch. By the time John Hughes came around to the height of his career a more liberal attitude and practice had entered mainstream cinema allowing ‘The Breakfast Club’ to use explicit language and themes which would not have been considered in the 1950’s.

In terms of finding alpha moments, ‘The Breakfast Club’ has probably one of the richest repositories of such of any mainstream film. Bender spends nearly all of the film pissing off Princess Claire (Molly Ringwald) but the sexual tension between them grows incrementally and it becomes more and more obvious that Bender has seriously burrowed into her psyche – hear those tingles chime. When Brian interrupts their sexy ‘Moliere’ moment, Bender flings a damaged book at him in rage, but the sexual frisson is unmistakable.

As interesting is the vicious rivalry between Bender and Andrew Clarke (played by Emilio Estevez), the straight and serious beta jock who initially hits on Claire but gets politely declined.

Here’s why ‘The Breakfast Club’ is such a hit – it depicts the three levels of existence:-

Alpha: Bender and Claire
Beta: Andrew / Sporto and Alison / Emo (and they end up getting it on together by the end. Classic beta – Andrew doesn’t get alpha girl and has to settle).
Omega: Brian (who ends up getting nobody).

In that regard it is wrong to describe Brian as the beta nice-guy – Brian is the omega, while Andrew is the beta. Brian knows that he has no chance with an alpha female like Claire and can only fantasise, as Bender exposes him for doing, to his even greater shame. Andrew is not a nice-guy as such but he is a beta insofar as he is committed to conforming and playing within the system. Also his particular type of beta-dom manifests as butt-hurt and bitter rather than ‘nice-guy’. Remember that Brian ended up in detention for having a gun in his locker because he wanted to commit suicide. Andrew ended up in detention because he attacked a weaker boy in the locker room, very likely a subconscious manifestation of his frustration at having been pushed into an athletic lifestyle, to get a scholarship, that he did not want. Indeed, Bender makes a laugh of this scholarship nonsense during the film when he arses around in the gym and is taunting the deputy principal. This is another instance of Bender’s alpha-dom – he has taken a hit for the group by distracting the deputy principal (a great performance from Paul Gleason) while he lays on cannabis for the rest of the group (and see how that would go down in today’s America … !) As an alpha, the young prince is bestowing his weed upon the minions.

This film was released in 1985 and I remember that it made a huge impression upon us over here in Ireland – we were amazed to see how short Judd Nelson really is in real life (the photography had hidden this very well). At the time I was twelve, attending a bourgeois Roman catholic all-boys’ secondary school in Dublin, and Bender was like something from the space age, the man we all wanted to be, or to have like us. In hindsight our school was a deeply damaging environment of papist omega-dom and, in particular, our form teacher was a disgusting omega worm – unmarried, he spent his whole life in the school, engaged in the various ‘activities’ that seem to obsess such places and he boasted of how he had devoted himself to the “welfare of the boys” (* crickets *). I hated him from the start and it is interesting to recall that the other John Bender types at school felt the same way, and wanted nothing to do with him. That school was no proper environment for any impressionable teenage boy and it is significant that I felt the same way then as I do now, in my forties. As a place where adolescents could be moulded to cope with the realities of life it was hopeless and was no example for any boy.

Ultimately John Bender will always be a fantasy character, as the Chateau freely admits, but his defiance remains as inspirational and relevant today as ever before, leaving ‘The Breakfast Club’ as one of the greatest teen movies of all time.

Although the term beta gets tossed around here a bit cavalierly (as a matter of convenience and artistic license), in reality most beta males will wind up with a girl in their lives. The problem is that it will rarely be their first choice. (Omega males are the men who can spend years tormented by their incel.)

Game, or learned charisma, offers beta males the tools to increase their dating market purchasing power and thus to decrease the odds they will have to settle, or to settle very far down the female ladder. Charisma can help all men, but I believe the biggest benefactors are betas, due in part to their lower initial obstacles and to the law of diminishing returns (that latter being the reason why natural alphas are often given to scoffing at game).

In TBC, Bender was an alpha male… he got the hot girl that other guys wanted. Bender was also a specific class of alpha: The lone wolf, rule-breaking, leader of women alpha male who, I understand, would be called a Sigma Male by Vox Day.

In every respect, Bender was that cynical, aloof jerkboy chicks have a habit of falling hard for. He may not have been the most noble, or admirable, or competent man — he may even have had his personal moral and character failings that would disqualify him from leading men — but no one ever claimed that the alpha male was necessarily a paragon of virtue, nor that women would never choose men of Bender’s unruly temperament and poor character over better men. If we were to judge women’s characters by the men for whom they freely divulge their sex, I’d say the ledger of self-abasement is represented equally by the sexes.

Off-topic, Chris adds,

***** OTHER NEWS:-

Social meltdown has hit Ireland. There is a level of social unrest across middle Ireland, across the type of people who would never cause trouble in their wildest dreams, that is unprecedented. There is a particular type of person who, when they become angry, release all hell. It’s not entering the mainstream media of the UK or North America, because the powers that be are too scared. When Ireland explodes it will take the rest of the world with it – it’s begun.

Look up “Irish Water” and “Irish Water protests”.

Bring the flames …

Any Irish CH readers know something about this? What a teaser…

COTW winner is “anonymous”, reminding the studio audience ’tis nobler to suffer the fists and kicks of outraged white knights, than to sit trapped in a sea of man-hating humiliation sessions:

Sexual Harassment Prevention used to consist of the girls brother kicking your ass. Between that or a 45 minute PowerPoint presentation – Ill take the ass kicking

I dream one day the world’s HR broads have to sit through a 45 minute powerpoint presentation on false rape accusations. Their squirming would be, in a word, delicious!


shartiste is our COTW runner-up,

Its nice how “don’t marry the bad boys” is framed as the girl’s choice. They’re “bad boys” because they won’t marry you.

Right-o. Sheryl Sandberg is blowing smoke up everyone’s skirt. Women pursuing the “apha fux beta bux” strategy don’t refuse to marry the badboys; the badboys refuse to marry the women. Even arid studies confirm this observed reality.


Arbiter wins the CH consolation COTW (keep trying, commentbrah!):

This is what the puritan tradcons don’t understand, with their constant “Game is putting women on a pedestal”, “Game is meaningless sex and adultery”, “Game is faking and lying”. No. Game is about making it possible for a man to choose, instead of waiting to be chosen.

Pithy. Even if a man isn’t choosing his dating market options 100% of the time, a small improvement in the amount of control he has over who he dates can mean the difference between settling in legally-bound misery with a fat cow or cohabitating with a cutie outside the reach of the law. In the sexual market, the slimmest margins matter.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,247 other followers

%d bloggers like this: