Feeds:
Posts
Comments

It’s always preenfeed to receive positive feedback from guests of Le Chateau. An anonymous reader regales:

Field report – the state of the union

I don’t post a lot because the tools you have all given me lead me to be a pretty busy guy. This one I had to write up because it was something different and something telling.

A few months ago I made a post for no strings hookup. One of responses was from a woman in another state. She was very flattering toward me for my pic but more for my post; it was gruff, short, direct, specific and used non-pc language to ward off men from responding. We exchanged a few emails where she explained she felt unfulfilled by the nightlife in her city. I said, “hey, in another life…take it easy” she said she might visit someday; I threw cold water on it, not looking to put any long term thoughts in her head.

…A few months later, I get an email that she is coming to my city and has purchased plane tickets. I told her she had better have her own place to stay and explained my time with her would be limited to 1 meetup. she wanted to press on…

This weekend she was here. I had the longest, most enjoyably depraved bout of sex in my life. Checked a lot of boxes. Not going to get into the nitty gritty but she was a goddamn maneater…and I tamed the tiger.

When I met up with her (in public), I spent about 30 minutes feeling her out to make sure she wasn’t boil-a-bunny crazy. What followed was a sad indictment of the current state of beta males. She complained about the men and the women in her city. The men were soft, overweight, sedentary betas. They couldn’t handle her sex drive, directness, or need for a strong man. She said she had stopped dating for x number of months prior to coming out to meet me because the guys just weren’t worth it. The women were all fat, entitled, bossy in a “born on third base and think they hit a home run” way, and of course, SJWs. If a table next to you is too loud, the shhhhh police show up. Basically, liberal feminists run amok. *Shudder*

She was attractive, fit, and petite, as far as looks go. Not long term material but good enough for a one night stand. Plus she was extremely direct and specific about what she liked sexually. It didn’t take much time to decide to head to a bed.

When it was all said and done, she had perma-smile. Multiple o’s. But heres the kicker: she basically worshipped me. I have never had this happen before. Very different. It was like I was Conan the destroyer and she was a girl in my harem. She moved over me catlike, she played with my chest hair, kissed and caressed every part of my body, basically acted like a cat when you give it catnip lol. I have had stuff similar to this happen before (laying on my chest, playing with chest hair, some girlish fawning, the ol’ pillow talk). This was unequivocally beyond that. I could have done anything to her and she would have done anything I said (trust me, I verified). She would have been happy to do this shit all day and night, apparently. It was strange, unfamiliar and extremely hot. It was the most manly I have ever felt; the confidence is dripping off of me currently.

All it cost me was $20.00. I took her to 2 well known food places but nowhere touristy. She flew to another state and all she got was marathon sex and a fast food. Didn’t give her a place to stay or act as chauffeur.
Heres what I did:

1. Shut the fuck up. Didn’t talk at all while driving or waiting for food. Answered her questions with brevity. Asked few questions but good ones (some from the list posted a few weeks ago on this site – the ones from the NYT).
2. Brought the wood. I think this more than anything is what made her believe my alpha state. Giving a chick mind blowing orgasms makes their hamster pretty much forget/justify anything they don’t like about you lol.
3. Body language in public. I let her caress/be lovey-dovey in bed after sex. But in public it was like she was a stranger. This of course made her want to constantly touch me/show other women she was with me. I would slightly shift or move away from her, enough to train her that she cant, aside from the occasional hand carass (her to me).
4. Wasn’t afraid to argue/disagree with her. She kept trying to get me to see things from her perspective. If it made sense to me, I would give her slight agreement. If it didn’t, I called bullshit.
5. Set up (false haha) time constraints. Made her freak out, kept trying to buy more time with me lol.
6. Was fun & playful, especially in bed. My roommate said all he heard all night was moaning then giggling, then moaning then giggling etc.

This post was not to brag, believe it or not. I felt it was my obligation to write this because CH is doing more for men than anyone else and this story provides anecdotal proof that following red pill truths and the 16 commandants of poon leads to real world success. Proof that there are unsatisfied women who will literally fly to another state for a taste of alpha. Thank you fuckers, I love you all.

You’re welcome.

One thing I would mention about these women who possess an outsized craving for absolute submission from themselves and absolute mastery from their lovers: Be cognizant that some women who readily embrace overheated sexual or romantic attachment early on can be major pains in the ass later, should you decide to invest more substantially in them. Watch for warning signs from her, like intemperate griping and complaining about all the men in her life who “didn’t measure up”. You’ll need a strong and swift pimp hand to tame these kinds of women. This caveat aside, it’s better for the health of a possible future relationship to fall deeply into passionate lovemaking sooner rather than later, and hotter rather than cooler.

Baby Got Swayback

There’s a new(ly identified) attractiveness standard by which women are relentlessly judged for sexual, romantic, and yes, marital worth: The swayback. Reader Experienced Father passes along the relevant study.

This paper reports independent studies supporting the proposal that human standards of attractiveness reflect the output of psychological adaptations to detect fitness-relevant traits. We tested novel a priori hypotheses based on an adaptive problem uniquely faced by ancestral hominin females: a forward-shifted center of mass during pregnancy. The hominin female spine possesses evolved morphology to deal with this adaptive challenge: wedging in the third-to-last lumbar vertebra. Among ancestral women, vertebral wedging would have minimized the net fitness threats posed by hypolordosis and hyperlordosis, thereby creating selective pressures on men to prefer such women as mates. On this basis, we hypothesized that men possess evolved mate preferences for women with this theoretically optimal angle of lumbar curvature. […]

Men again tended to prefer women exhibiting cues to a degree of vertebral wedging closer to optimum. This included preferring women whose lumbar curvature specifically reflected vertebral wedging rather than buttock mass. These findings reveal novel, theoretically anchored, and previously undiscovered standards of attractiveness.

The optimal swayback looks like the middle female silhouette:

The woman with no swayback too closely resembles a prepubescent boy. The woman with excessive swayback looks like a scoliotic whore who spent too may nights leaning into the open car windows of johns. The woman in the middle is juuuuuust tight.

It’s theorized that women with a 45 degree curvature of the lower spine are best adapted for squatting on their haunches and foraging for food. Over time, men would’ve come to prefer this female body shape because it indicated better fitness at the job of gathering nuts, berries, and other huthold objects.

I don’t know if this study controlled for race, but I bet one that does would find that the male preference for swayback is more cross-racially universal than is the male preference for bloated booty, which black men favor more.

Anyhow, more lab confirmation of the CH formulations based on real-world observations that biomechanics is god, love is a tender effusion stimulated in men by small adjustments in the geometric contours of the female face and body, and feminists are butthurt loons.

Not too long ago, a couple of “””academic””” feminists tenured at a New Scandinavia university compiled a study which they asserted disproved all the preceding studies which showed that women’s mate preferences change according to their ovulation cycles. You see, feminists don’t much like the idea of a set-in-stone mate choice algorithm making mockery of “female empowerment”, so this news was greeted with relieved, rapturous chants by lay(less)-feminists.

The feminist “””scientists””” used, or claimed to use, meta-analysis to disprove the theory of ovulation cycle shifts in female mate preferences. Meta-analysis is all the rage in the HBD (human biodiversity) set, but the technique is not without its flaws. I, for one, came to have my doubts about its efficacy when meta-analysis studies started to crop up that were 180 degrees at odds with the hundreds of individual studies purportedly examined in the relevant meta-analysis.

Now it turns out my doubts about the accuracy of meta-analyses have some foundation. A more recent study was published in response to the anti-cycle shift feminist meta-analysis and reconfirmed the original theory that women do indeed crave alpha male cock more when they are ovulating. Abstract:

Two meta-analyses evaluated shifts across the ovulatory cycle in women’s mate preferences but reported very different findings. In this journal, we reported robust evidence for the pattern of cycle shifts predicted by the ovulatory shift hypothesis (Gildersleeve, Haselton, & Fales, 2014). However, Wood, Kressel, Joshi, and Louie (2014) claimed an absence of compelling support for this hypothesis and asserted that the few significant cycle shifts they observed were false positives resulting from publication bias, p-hacking, or other research artifacts. How could 2 meta-analyses of the same literature reach such different conclusions? We reanalyzed the data compiled by Wood et al. These analyses revealed problems in Wood et al.’s meta-analysis—some of which are reproduced in Wood and Carden’s (2014) comment in the current issue of this journal—that led them to overlook clear evidence for the ovulatory shift hypothesis in their own set of effects. In addition, we present right-skewed p-curves that directly contradict speculations by Wood et al.; Wood and Carden; and Harris, Pashler, and Mickes (2014) that supportive findings in the cycle shift literature are false positives. Therefore, evidence from both of the meta-analyses and the p-curves strongly supports genuine, robust effects consistent with the ovulatory shift hypothesis and contradicts claims that these effects merely reflect publication bias, p-hacking, or other research artifacts. Unfounded speculations about p-hacking distort the research record and risk unfairly damaging researchers’ reputations; they should therefore be made only on the basis of firm evidence.

Somewhere, a shiv twisted. And an old feminist hag wept.

Moral of the bitch slapping: You can’t fully trust social or psychological science research coming out of universities these days, because the vast landscape of academia is stocked with feminists, leftoids, and their sycophant weaklings. There are no Realtalkers around to keep these freaks honest. My humble suggestion: Get out in the field and learn for yourself through direct experience what women are like. Later, leaf through the non-feminist scientific literature to amuse yourself with the loving complementarity between your personal observations and the laboratory data.

This latest salvo against the forces of sex equalism makes one wonder if the meta-analysis findings regarding obesity, exercise, and parental influence are equally as flawed by researcher bias or incompetence.

As for any game lessons to be drawn from this post, recall that CH has tackled the topic of female cycle shift preferences many times. While it’s easy to get too deep in the thickets of tracking women’s ovulation cycles for maximum seductive impact, it does help to mix up your sexual signaling strategy to keep women off-balance and wondering if you’re a charming player with Voltarian lovemaking skill, or a dependable provider with visions of a suburban familial fiefdom.

Bottom line: Chicks dig an unpredictable man.

The Wickedest Links

1. A gene for brain size is discovered and it’s only found in humans… and in Neanderthals. If you think we’re getting very close to a total refutation of the 20th Century liberal equalist faith, you’re right.

2. More evidence (in a roundabout way) that the Game concept of “faking it till you create it” is a potent seduction-improvement strategy.

3. Another CH principle is affirmed by ¡SCIENCE!: Playfulness is twat crack. (this rhyming dyad works best if you pronounce “twat” with a brit clip.)

4. This is a legitimate fear conservatives have about the risk of neuroscience being used to absolve violent criminals of any responsibility for their crimes. (“He dindu nuffin yerhonor, because he’s a slave to his neural wiring.”) The CH take: If genes are found which dispose to violent criminality, nothing should change in the realm of jurisprudence. The balance of faaaaaaaiiirness favors removing dangerous animals from public circulation.

5. If all it takes are small DNA changes to separate chimps from humans, how much smaller is the degree of DNA change necessary to separate the human races? Preemptive heh.

6. Are paleo eaters prepared to go all the way?

7. Processed agribusiness foods are really fucking bad for you, news at 11.

8. Feminists like to crow about older fathers passing on more DNA mutations to their children (an overblown concern troll and a reproductive “hit” that pales in comparison to the Wall-smashing fertility terminus that affects all women). Apropos the impotent ragepouting of feminists against older fathers, here’s a study which found that there were DNA mutations in the children of *teenage* fathers.

9. Beta male manlets trapped in feminist-friendly egalitarian marriages are unhappy with the extra household chores they are browbeaten into doing in exchange for once-a-year birthday blowjobs.

10. House of Cards, Season 3: Who Bitch This Is? (h/t furiousferrett) (meme source)

11. How many of these warnings have come true?

12. “More likely America will be finished as a single nation.” A constitutional crisis, and a resulting collapse, loom.

Bonus link:

13. Women don’t care about your job. What women care about is an emotional connection. (Score another one for game.)

Commenter 7darktriad3 writes about his ONE POON-HUNTING TRICK that turns around recalcitrant girls,

Not strictly redirection but I’ve found a great way of yielding high % of numbers when you get this type of response:

You: Send me your number
Her: But I hardly know you etc
You: Your right we should stay Tinder BFF and chat on here forever and ever
Her: Hehe I guess your right – ######

Essential Game Techniques 101 should be required coursework for all middle school boys.

Commenter nash2z writes,

[The sexual marketplace] is beginning to favor the much older man/younger woman pairing.

I will illustrate. I am a 52 year old white man, and am currently dating a 21 year old white woman, and a 24 year old white woman; simultaneously. I met both online, thru a dating site. I’ve gathered from both that their attraction to me (I do look a few years younger and can pass for mid-forties, and this is a prerequisite I believe) is in their expectations that I am more old school masculine than the younger men they can choose from in their pool. But there’s another reason I’ve picked up as well – and that is the expectation that the older man is not part of the pump-n-dump crowd (little do they know) of which the predominance as of late has been making these women feel cheated out of what they consider to be quality relationships. What they are looking for, in response to what they have been enduring their entire sexual lives, are for men to consider them in a more serious LTR light – never mind that they don’t deserve it. Putting off a muted version of this vibe while at the same time reminding them of the overall beta-flavor of their respective man-circles has done wonders not only to score with these two women, but in my favorable responses from other under 25 female prey when approached.

Could we be seeing the response from women to game – in the wider acceptance of the older man/younger woman pairing. Time will tell.

Effeminizing Millennials works to the sexual market advantage of older, more masculine men who haven’t yet learned of the wonders of the brony, male feminist, and transsexual anime lifestyles. But nash2z hits on another explanation that may be more pertinent: There are some younger women who crave a rock solid relationship. Whatever the objective reality, I would bet that older men do give off a “I’m capable of, and willing to, form an adult relationship with a woman who meets my stringent criteria for a worthwhile lifelong mate” vibe.

By filtering for these kinds of younger women tired of the dating scene, the older man can increase his meet-to-lay-to-love ratio. Beyond this implication, it’s a hypothetical exercise whether the acceptance and utilization of game by cad hopefuls will drive significant numbers of women into the arms of older (or younger) men who signal their readiness for more serious commitment.

The Redirection Rejection

Have you ever had to deal with an annoying girl who answers a question with a question, like she’s trying to put her tier 14 law school degree to use? A reader laments:

Thanks so much for your blog. I’ve read it for at least 5 years, and learned a lot. Lost my virginity at 18, so not a natural, but have banged 25 chicks in the last five months in South America by learning from your blog and others’, going to a spot suited for me, and generally improving myself.

At this point, I mainly worry about specific issues that crop up over and over. One is that I’ll text a girl an invitation, and she’ll ask a follow up question about it instead of answering. I call it the redirect rejection. Examples from tonight:

A girl I hooked up with 8 years ago and have seen twice since. Really.

Me: Better for me. I eat brisket like a glutton. I watch the game. They get you drunk. You come after.
Her: I can’t drink alcohol. (First redirection)
Me: Pregnant? (Plan to get back to the invitation, but first thought I’d tease)
Her: hahhahaha
Her: hahahaha
Her: Can I drink alcohol before traveling?
Me: No. No you can’t. You have to arrive skinny for more contrast with Americans.
Her: Hahahaha
Me: You drinking was the least important step. Most important is that I have my brisket and you come after. I will prepare you for your trip.
Her: What is brisket (second redirection)

Not expecting to see her tomorrow

——–

A girl whose number I got at a party and who I have invited out a few times with no success. I had given up. Tonight she texts me.

Her: Hey! You up to anything tonight?
Me: Working up the courage to ask me out? ;) (don’t chomp the beta bait, frame her as chasing, I toy with dropping the emoticon but I don’t want to discourage her)
Her: Hahahahah. Call it whatever you want.
Me: (stop fucking around and make the plans) Come by at 11. I have the best drink in town chilling in my fridge. Maybe you can convince me to go to [well-known club]
Her: What exactly is the best drink in town? (redirection)
Me: [Image of the bottle with the caption Trust Me]
Her: Haha. Alright. I’m sold.

expecting her in two hours

——-

A girl whose number I got out once. Never met up since. Been texting some. She went on vacation.

Me: [funny picture of me on a glaciar, I happen to be wearing tight jeans] are you back?
Her: I’m coming back.
Her: And that photo?
Me: A little present for you. Look how tight my jeans are.
Her: Hahahahahah
Me: I would send you a photo in my bathing suit but I don’t want to cause an accident
Her: hahaha good idea
Me: Let’s get together this week. There is a bar cafe I want to try.
Her: What bar? (redirection)
Me: The important thing is the company.

No response.

In only 1/3 did I turn around the redirection rejection, and that was when the girl had basically begged me to ask her out. Is the redirection rejection game over? I know that it means my game up to that point has been weak, but can I recover?

When a girl is in a positive mood and open to you, and she asks you which bar you plan to take her, it’s OK to just tell her, so I wouldn’t consider that last exchange a great example of the redirection rejection. You have to have a feel for when it’s in the interests of both of you to drop the banter and speak plainly. However, the first text snippet is a classic redirect. The reader made multiple meet-up offers, and she responded coyly to each suggestion with a lame question.

The redirection rejection isn’t game over, but it is game on life-support. She’s bored, maybe a little curious where this is going, but so far you haven’t excited her out of her resting female stupor. But she keeps the romantic possibility, however remote, open. Mostly to amuse herself.

If you are getting a lot of these redirection rejections, that means you’ve become predictable. Stale. She can see your friendly teases coming a mile away. She throws questions back at you because that’s her way of trying to extract a little excitement nugget from the conversation. She’s trying to amp the teasing to a level of edginess that makes her vagina feel alive. This is good news in one way: She’s saying you have a chance.

You need to surprise her. Don’t grace her questions with a relevant reply, like some earnest beta looking to solve all her problems. Instead, dodge and dislodge her hamster from its comfy resting state.

Her: Can I drink alcohol before traveling?
Me: Maybe you should stick with diet coke.
Her: Hahahaha
Me: You drinking was the least important step. Most important is that I have my brisket and you come after. I will prepare you for your trip.
Her: What is brisket (second redirection)
Me:

Be silly, be nasty even. The goal is a seismic shift of her emotional state from boredom to shock, dismay, and intrigue. If, after amping your alpha for a few iterations in this manner she still doesn’t make a firm commitment to seeing you, abruptly stop communication. If you can leave her with her last text dangling for a response, that’s good. She’ll be wondering why you didn’t reply, and it might upset her just enough to plant thoughts of you in her head for a week, after which she may be more amenable to your charms.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,173 other followers

%d bloggers like this: