• Home
  • Diversity + Proximity = War: The Reference List
  • Shit Cuckservatives Say
  • The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon
  • Alpha Assessment Submissions
  • Beta Of The Year Contest Submissions
  • Dating Market Value Test For Men
  • Dating Market Value Test For Women
  • About

Chateau Heartiste

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« Grow old along with me, the best is yet to be
The Gayest Show On Earth »

Preemptive Rejection

April 21, 2008 by CH

One thing that comes with dating a lot of women is an improved ability to detect when her level of enthusiasm isn’t matching yours, and when to cut off investment when the profit outlook is poor. Inexperience and lack of diversification causes a lot of men to hold onto a girl’s stock far longer than is wise, dragging out first dates that should have been cut loose after 15 minutes, or chasing after girls for second dates when the first date ended on a cheek peck note.

But there is another factor. Men, with a few exceptions like very empathetic artist and salesmen types, don’t have the highly refined intuition for gauging subtle social cues that women have from birth. Men’s intuition — or gut instinct — is underdeveloped. Their communication channels between their decision-making process and their subconscious have a lot of static. Women, by contrast, are always locked in to their sixth sense.

There is a reasonable explanation why this is so — as choosers of mates based on criteria less visually based, a woman with a superior sixth sense in terms of accuracy and speediness was fooled less often into bearing the children of beta schemers than a woman who had trouble judging the true character of her suitors. But as relatively indiscriminate chasers of T&A, men never needed to develop the sophisticated bullshit character detector system that serves women so well in separating the weenies from the Shaft. Lunkheaded persistence was more useful to men.

The kind of raw numbers dating experience that modern players have which never existed in the tribal environment that is still the heritage of our hindbrains plays a big role in altering this mating dynamic. A fearless guy who plucks a new woman out of the giant anonymous dating pool of the urban copulation carnival every week starts to get a good sense of his chances of closing the deal. He’ll listen better to his inner voice and cut dates short that aren’t progressing as steadily as he’d like, and he’ll avoid calling a woman for a second date when he feels based on her lackluster vibes from the first date that there’s a higher than average risk of her delaying sex, canceling the date, or taking too long to return his calls. Persistence and chasing women benefits a man less when his options are so numerous. Time and inexperience replaces rejection as his number one enemy.

But like every sea change in human behavior there is an unintended downside. I’m now so finely attuned to the slightest negative feedback from women that I get skittish at the first red flag of foot-dragging. I’ll walk away from dates after ten minutes before the condensation has formed on our drinks if she hasn’t inched closer to me on the couch or if she glanced around the room more than once instead of maintaining solid eye contact. I won’t follow up for a second date even if the first date ended with her telling me to give her a call if I suspect, based on her bad body language, that she will flake.

A woman who is too self-possessed on a first date will not get a call back from me. I need to see real physical and emotional escalation quickly or she drops off the face of the earth in favor of the next girl in my queue. The dating scene is that cutthroat now.

There is no doubt that my improved sixth sense and skittishness to avoid wasting time and resources on dead end dates has cost me girls who might’ve put out had I stayed the course and pursued a little more aggressively. But I believe the downside is worth the greater upside of saving time and headaches and minimizing the odds of a Rules girl exploiting me. Plus, I suffer less second date rejection, which is worse than approach rejection, and my ego stays strong and inflated.

Many times I have run into women at bars or on the street I had one date with but who I never called for a second date because I figured they would flake. They have always looked at me with a hint of discomfort on their faces and walked by muttering terse hellos. I take great satisfaction when this happens because I know that even if the girl never intended to see me again I robbed her of the opportunity to call the shots.

No matter how badly the first date went and how much she doesn’t want to hear from you, if you don’t call a girl for a second date it will leave her confused and less full of herself. You will have lowered her self-esteem and made it easier for the next man to nut inside her. The good karma this selfless act generates will return to you a hundred easy first dates that end the next morning.

Share this:

  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Posted in Dating, Psy Ops, Rules of Manhood | 143 Comments

143 Responses

  1. on April 21, 2008 at 6:19 pm Ava V

    there’s one blogger out there, who shall remain nameless, who walks out in the middle of dates due to lack of enthusiam. i gotta say its gutsy, and although sometimes it should be done, i don’t think i can do it myself.

    LikeLike


  2. on April 21, 2008 at 6:31 pm Reggie

    Why are you so obsessed with hurting women you perceive as having wronged you by having the temerity to not be as interested in you as you think you’re entitled to? You often claim that the purpose of game is to enter into mutually rewarding situations with women — be it a relationship or a satisfying fling — but posts like this show a retributive mean streak that would seem to put the lie to that claim.

    If you’re really such a player, why don’t you just accept the rejection, wish them well, and move on? Why do you care so much?

    It’s stuff like this that creeps people out about the game. You’re just reinforcing the notion that it’s about bitter men getting revenge rather than decent men learning how to improve their sexual and romantic lives.

    LikeLike


  3. on April 21, 2008 at 6:48 pm Shannon

    Reggie, the Revenge of the Nerds aspect of Game cracks me up. Gameboys, I’m sorry we didn’t go out with you before, it was probably because you were still eating paste in the 11th grade. That’s no excuse for being a jerk to women to get petty revenge – shouldn’t we all be over high school by now?

    LikeLike


  4. on April 21, 2008 at 6:49 pm alias clio

    I await Roissy’s answer to your question with interest, Reggie. I often wonder the same thing.

    Roissy, a “Rules” girl is not necessarily an egotistical or spoilt woman. She may be a woman looking for a possible husband (depending on the context in which you met, I suppose), and, sensing on that first date that you don’t want a wife [!], she is cautious about accepting your advances. She may not even be a Rules girl, just a woman looking for signs of sincerity and reliability.

    You ought to hope that there are a few women like that in the world, to ensure that if you ever do decide that you want a permanent liaison, there are still a few women left of the right age who have not been “pumped and dumped” by someone else.

    LikeLike


  5. on April 21, 2008 at 6:54 pm roissy

    You’re just reinforcing the notion that it’s about bitter men getting revenge

    not calling a girl back for a second date that you are not interested in is not the same as getting revenge on her.
    hope this helps.

    schoolmarm:
    That’s no excuse for being a jerk to women to get petty revenge – shouldn’t we all be over high school by now?

    your reading comprehension is low.

    LikeLike


  6. on April 21, 2008 at 7:04 pm Shannon

    “They have always looked at me with a hint of discomfort on their faces and walked by muttering terse hellos. I take great satisfaction when this happens because I know that even if the girl never intended to see me again I robbed her of the opportunity to call the shots.”

    Nope, nothing petty about that. No, sir.

    LikeLike


  7. on April 21, 2008 at 7:39 pm monhechomierda

    It’s a strange world we live in when not calling a chick back for a second date because she seemed disinterested is called “hurting women”. Unfuckingbelievable.

    LikeLike


  8. on April 21, 2008 at 7:41 pm Jack Goes Forth

    I wouldn’t be surprised if you ran into one of your “first-date drop outs” once every few days. DC is just way to small for someone with your dating experience/blogging proclivity, for this not to happen.

    LikeLike


  9. on April 21, 2008 at 7:43 pm Shannon

    Mon, you misunderstand. Nobody is entitled to a second date, and women have been dealing with jerky guys for millenia – it’s not really “hurtful,” just lame and sort of dorky.

    Running into a woman you took out once and taking Roissy-esque glee in her discomfort is petty and immature. Like, we get it. You’re cool, yo.

    LikeLike


  10. on April 21, 2008 at 8:26 pm T.

    But I believe the downside is worth the greater upside of saving time and headaches and minimizing the odds of a Rules girl exploiting me.

    I don’t think of The Rules as exploitative at all. In fact, I think they’re damn good game for women who are looking to get married. It’s all about ways for women who want to get married to weed out men who don’t want to get married so that they don’t waste each other’s time. Case in point, you don’t want to get married. A girl who follows the Rules will lose your interest quickly and cause you not to call her back, and both of you don’t waste each other’s time and come out better off. She can now move on to a guy who is looking for marriage and you can move on to a girl who’s down for just having fun and not trying to tie you down. How does that exploit you? I read the Rules and I’d actually recommend it to women.

    LikeLike


  11. on April 21, 2008 at 8:28 pm jaakkeli

    not calling a girl back for a second date that you are not interested in

    That’s not what you said:

    I need to see real physical and emotional escalation quickly or she drops off the face of the earth in favor of the next girl in my queue.

    even if the girl never intended to see me

    You’re avoiding calling her because you felt that she wasn’t interested. Telling yourself that she’s feeling bad about that makes you feel satisfied. Yeah, fretting over getting imaginary revenge for imaginary insults is the new alpha.

    This time the haters have you pwnd.

    LikeLike


  12. on April 21, 2008 at 8:33 pm alias clio

    Mono said:
    “It’s a strange world we live in when not calling a chick back for a second date because she seemed disinterested is called “hurting women”. Unfuckingbelievable.”

    Roissy said:
    “They have always looked at me with a hint of discomfort on their faces and walked by muttering terse hellos. I take great satisfaction when this happens because I know that even if the girl never intended to see me again I robbed her of the opportunity to call the shots.

    No matter how badly the first date went and how much she doesn’t want to hear from you, if you don’t call a girl for a second date it will leave her confused and less full of herself. You will have lowered her self-esteem and made it easier for the next man to nut inside her.”

    Clio says:
    Now do you get it, monowhat’syername? Shannon has already made this point, but since you appear to be a bit slow in the uptake, it seems worthwhile to make it again.

    LikeLike


  13. on April 21, 2008 at 8:43 pm Shannon

    T., did you ever read The Rules for Marriage? There’s a whole chapter on how to get your way by pouting and withholding sex.

    No wonder the women who wrote that wound up divorced. Yikes. But it’s a pretty funny read.

    LikeLike


  14. on April 21, 2008 at 8:43 pm roissy

    jaakbenimblejaakbeslick:
    You’re avoiding calling her because you felt that she wasn’t interested.

    her lack of showing sufficient interest makes me uninterested in her.
    this is the proper attitude a man must have if he wants to streamline operations.
    plus, it helps that it’s true.

    Telling yourself that she’s feeling bad about that makes you feel satisfied.

    incidentally preventing a girl from feeling smug is not the same as making her feel bad.
    hth.
    fyi: alphas have a sense of humor.
    what’s your excuse?

    LikeLike


  15. on April 21, 2008 at 8:53 pm John Smith


    incidentally preventing a girl from feeling smug is not the same as making her feel bad.

    This is key. It seems like this epitomizes the way many women characterize people like Roissy as hurting women and being misogynistic. He simply removes their power of rejection. They may perceive it as “hurt” because they are loosing something they had previously, and so have to blame it on someone.

    But, ultimately, there is ALWAYS a nice guy that women can go to if they want to avoid people like Roissy and have a man that will treat them great. Until the day that those men become the 1st choice, the players should be able to do what they want, as long as there isn’t any violence or whatnot.

    Random question: Is DC that small that people run into each other alot? Is that better or worse for someone really trying to get some?

    LikeLike


  16. on April 21, 2008 at 8:58 pm roissy

    clio huffed:
    Shannon has already made this point, but since you appear to be a bit slow in the uptake, it seems worthwhile to make it again.

    mono will not get your point or schoolmarm’s point because it is un-gettable.
    in the case i outlined in my post, any confusion or lowering of self-esteem felt by the girl is incidental to the action of scratching her off the list of girls to continue pursuing for second dates because of insufficient display of interest by her. the fact that i take pleasure in this incidental preemption of her rejection module smugness accelerator can in no way be construed as a deliberate effort on my part to hurt her out of retributive vengeance.
    or: i woulda called the babe back if i thought she’d be good to go.
    ya doofuses.

    LikeLike


  17. on April 21, 2008 at 9:05 pm Days of Broken Arrows

    Roissy is 100 percent right here — I’m living proof that his methods do work. I’ve done this, but not because of some grand scheme — because I just don’t like rejection. If you cut and run first, you do throw their plans off-balance.

    Hell, I’ve cut and run BEFORE a first meeting if the vibe wasn’t right. I’m not going to sit through torture sessions; I did this as a teen and it wasn’t worth it. Women can be sadistic bitches and it’s pretty easy with the internet to just find the next one.

    LikeLike


  18. on April 21, 2008 at 9:12 pm jaakkeli

    her lack of showing sufficient interest makes me uninterested in her.

    So move on.

    this is the proper attitude a man must have if he wants to streamline operations.

    When I run run into a vaguely familiar woman, I’ll usually have trouble remembering whether I slept with her, whether she bitch slapped me or whether it’s a cousin I haven’t seen for a while.

    incidentally preventing a girl from feeling smug

    Tell me, what do you think of it if some little kid feels all smug and superior – maybe he heard your old gym class grade or something? You smile. You’re the man. He’s a silly little kid. Why don’t you do the same to silly little girls?

    Because they’re not silly little girls to you. They’re the prize and you’re not the man.

    LikeLike


  19. on April 21, 2008 at 9:12 pm Topshelf

    Some very good points made in this post. One comment: I think men do have a decent “6th sense”, but many of us Alpha types have been trained to pursue each and every opportunity until success or failure, despite the possible negative feelings of rejection. We’re trained to ignore setbacks.

    I think pre-emtivemtive rejection is for guys with slightly underdeveloped egos. Of course there are exceptions, where the date just went really poorly………but ussually her feelings, intentions, etc are a bit more shrouded in mystery.

    LikeLike


  20. on April 21, 2008 at 9:12 pm cuchulainn

    I like the karma effect. It’s important to do everything you can to let men have the same choice in women as women do in men. That’s REAL sexual equality. Women got it in the workplace, it’s time men got it in the sexual marketplace. Showing women we won’t put up with their shit, and will completely ignore them if necessary, is good for society. (fyi not being sarcastic)

    LikeLike


  21. on April 21, 2008 at 9:13 pm alias clio

    Roissy (et al), I was annoyed at the fact that you announced you were taking pleasure in the loss of self-esteem that a woman might feel if you didn’t call her back. It may be perfectly human to feel good about retaining the upper hand in such a situation – but to take pleasure in the self-esteem hit is a bit petty.

    Now, I’ll do a reversal to show good will and say that it may be better to do this than to be the kind of wimp I was about saying “no” to a man in whom I wasn’t really interested. I had great difficulty with this precisely because I hated injuring any man’s self-esteem – and actually did more harm that way than I would have just by saying no and enjoying my power, as it were. These days I still can’t say I enjoy that power, but I do exercise it more effectively, and cause less distress as a result.

    LikeLike


  22. on April 21, 2008 at 9:15 pm cuchulainn

    Hurrying on through a date or completely abandoning it part-way through is necessary sometimes. Some women are just annoying and standoffish.

    LikeLike


  23. on April 21, 2008 at 9:45 pm monhechomierda

    Let’s look at the sequence of events.

    1. Man approaches women, initiates conversation gets #.
    2. Man calls woman, arranges a date.
    3. During date man using his past experiences as a guide notices that said woman is not interested in him.
    4. Man does not call for a second date.
    5. Man is accused of being “obsessed with hurting women”.

    Like I said, WTF?

    This thread is great example of why men should never listen to advice from women on women.

    LikeLike


  24. on April 21, 2008 at 9:49 pm alias clio

    You’ve left out a step between 4 and 5, mono

    4.5. Man runs into woman by chance and enjoys the fact that she seems discomfitted by the encounter. He further enjoys speculating that she has had some of her smugness knocked out of her by the fact that he didn’t call back, and will put out more readily for the next man.

    That was the critical step, the one that annoyed me.

    LikeLike


  25. on April 21, 2008 at 9:53 pm Shannon

    Cuchulainn, some people just take a little longer to warm up to somebody they don’t know – sometimes it’s shyness, not rudeness or malice. I know a lot of shy people who get written off as rude or standoffish.

    I’ve been known to cut short a date if I just wasn’t feeling it, I figure it’s for the good of both of us. But if I run into the guy later I try to make him feel comfortable and don’t hope I have the upper hand or whatever. That’s just lame.

    DC is a small town, people run into each other all the time.

    LikeLike


  26. on April 21, 2008 at 9:55 pm na-ny boo-boo 69

    “One thing that comes with dating a lot of women is an improved ability to detect when her level of enthusiasm isn’t matching yours, and when to cut off investment when the profit outlook is poor.”

    I stopped reading after this. It’s just the same old shit.

    LikeLike


  27. on April 21, 2008 at 9:56 pm Shannon

    Monogetaneasierhandle, what clio said. If Roissy needs to prop himself up with the discomfiture of random women who have done him no harm, then it’s his self-esteem, and not theirs, that took a hit.

    This has nothing to do with coddling women and everything to do with not being petty.

    LikeLike


  28. on April 21, 2008 at 10:01 pm Shannon

    Also, “schoolmarm”? Tut tut, Roissy, you’ll have to stay after school and write “I will be nicer to women,” on the chalkboard 1000 times. And I’ve got a lovely dunce cap for you.

    LikeLike


  29. on April 21, 2008 at 10:11 pm W.

    “There is no doubt that my improved sixth sense and skittishness to avoid wasting time and resources on dead end dates has cost me girls who might’ve put out had I stayed the course and pursued a little more aggressively.”

    Your sixth sense is nothing more than fear. Most animals; human or otherwise will pick up on it and get skittish themselves. This is why you’re having to preemptive strike.

    LikeLike


  30. on April 21, 2008 at 10:54 pm roissy

    clio:
    but to take pleasure in the self-esteem hit is a bit petty.

    petty can be fun.
    remember, clio, i am a hedonist.
    but before the female histrionics get out of control here it’d be wise to note that any girl in this scenario i pass on the street is not going to know what’s going through my mind, unless i blurt out “hey, sucks i didn’t call you back, but you were just too damn cold on our first date.” which i never do. because i don’t have to.
    just seeing me as a reminder is enough.
    heh.

    tut-tuts are never as fun as tit-tits wrote:
    If Roissy needs to prop himself up with the discomfiture of random women who have done him no harm,

    replace “needs to prop himself up with the discomfiture of” with “enjoys the private pleasure of sowing incidental confusion in” and “random women who have done him no harm” with “women i dated who didn’t show enough interest to warrant a return call from me to arrange a second date” and you may have a point.
    btw, you really tip your insane femdork victimologist hand with your equivalence of my rather harmless decision to forego calling back a tepid first date with causing *discomfiture* in the girl.
    how about you and your feeble fem brigade SACK UP?
    or are you too weak to do that?
    heh heh.

    then it’s his self-esteem, and not theirs, that took a hit.

    funny, i don’t *feel* less self-esteemed.

    Tut tut, Roissy, you’ll have to stay after school and write “I will be nicer to women,”

    niceness must be earned.
    now get me a chicken sandwich and waffle fries… FO FREE.

    btw, if it feels like i’m coming down hard on you
    i am.
    you represent by your attitude and warped looking glass gender relations worldview everything that’s wrong with the modern american woman.
    so don’t take it personally.
    i aim to work here to set women (and men!) like yourself on the path of righteousness, praise the devil.
    and any prop in a storm will do.

    LikeLike


  31. on April 21, 2008 at 11:21 pm Shannon

    “your equivalence of my rather harmless decision to forego calling back a tepid first date with causing *discomfiture* in the girl.”

    Did you read your own post? You rattled on about how you didn’t call back a so-so first date (fine, no issue there), and that you enjoy her discomfort if you run into her later (kind of lame and petty). This is a connection made by you, not me.

    LikeLike


  32. on April 21, 2008 at 11:35 pm roissy

    and that you enjoy her discomfort if you run into her later (kind of lame and petty).

    it’s petty of you to comment on blog posts trying to get the upper hand.
    you must be trying to prop yourself up.

    LikeLike


  33. on April 21, 2008 at 11:43 pm Patrick Bateman

    It’s called game for a reason. Rules girls are playing it too, but winning means something different for them than it does for players. They’re trying to trick a man into marrying them and accepting a subordinate position in the relationship. We’re trying to trick them into bed. It feels good to defeat your enemies. If you bang them, you win. If you deny them the pleasure of rejecting you, you win.

    Rules girls can bring you great pleasure if you continue to play them because you don’t feel any guilt when you break their hearts. You won’t drop much cash on her because you’ll only see her ~once per week. Put domestic thoughts in her mind and tell her you love her when the time is right (few men can pull off the “I love you” lie but I’m one of them) and she’ll fuck you silly. Lather, rinse, repeat on the next cum guzzling rules girl.

    LikeLike


  34. on April 21, 2008 at 11:54 pm na-ny boo-boo 69

    33 Patrick

    What a man. Awesome.

    LikeLike


  35. on April 21, 2008 at 11:58 pm na-ny boo-boo 69

    roissy, you’re a nightmare and your excuse is always “yes, but they’re worse!” It’s more life in hell, so why am I reading this? People like you actually exist and I just can’t get over it. It’s fascinating.

    LikeLike


  36. on April 22, 2008 at 12:17 am duke of windsor

    ive considered doing the whole “preemptive rejection” bit, but based on my own experiences, i cant always see whats coming. ive been with women that acted blase on date #1, but i was in bed with them three weeks later. ive had women – SOBER women – who i have exchanged wet tongue kisses with at the end of the night, but when i called ’em two days later, they wouldnt answer the call or commit to anything.

    hey, if its not going to work between the 2 of us, kool. but id rather hear it right then and there on the date, rather than be strung along. my feelings wont be hurt. ill be disappointed that it didnt work out, yes, but id rather they get it OVER with. women can scheme just as bad as guys do. if you dont want me, let me know up front and be respectful.

    i cant lie, when confronted with flakiness, ive called women up and basically let ’em have it, calling them on their bullshit and politely telling them that they could shit or get off the pot. hell, no, they didnt like it! theyve called or e-mailed me back to tell me how “pushy” and “angry” and “arrogant” and “snotty” i was, but how did you expect me to react? sorry, there is just something very INSULTING about women who act distant and expect you to just “get the point.”

    especially when you know youre going to see them again.

    LikeLike


  37. on April 22, 2008 at 12:23 am Chic Noir

    “You will have lowered her self-esteem and made it easier for the next man to nut inside her”

    My God, that sounds like it was writen by a man who really hates women.

    LikeLike


  38. on April 22, 2008 at 12:36 am alias clio

    Ah, Patrick Bateman. Living definition of a nice guy. You make Roissy sound like an angel. Perhaps he invented you, for contrast?

    LikeLike


  39. on April 22, 2008 at 1:07 am Abhs

    To all the women that rose up in righteous self-indignation: Chill out, you’ve probably done the same. Usually it is fairly difficult to attack someone who is precisely clear about their motives, but one must never forget the universally applicable PC bomb.

    LikeLike


  40. on April 22, 2008 at 1:17 am alias clio

    Oh for heaven’s sake, wanting men and women not to treat each encounter like a zero-sum game has nothing to do with political correctness. Some people think it’s inevitable, but is it? We may all, men and women alike, have pretty nasty natures, but I think it’s possible to rise above them, with a bit of effort.

    LikeLike


  41. on April 22, 2008 at 1:34 am Days of Broken Arrows

    Alias Clio said: “Now, I’ll do a reversal to show good will and say that it may be better to do this than to be the kind of wimp I was about saying “no” to a man in whom I wasn’t really interested….”

    Soonafter, the Mapquest site went down after cybergeeks crashed it trying to find their way to something called “Canada,” in search of an elusive “muse” who admitted online she cannot say “no.”

    Hehehehehe.

    LikeLike


  42. on April 22, 2008 at 1:50 am Shannon

    “…so don’t take it personally.”

    And Roissy, I hope you don’t take anything I say personally. See, I don’t think of you as a person at all. I picture a sort of two-headed Rush Limbaugh/Glenn Quagmire beast with tentacles made of cocktail shakers.

    Giggity!

    Also, I’m not a person. I’m the women’s studies program of Bryn Mawr, brought to life by complex magic and penile sacrifices.

    LikeLike


  43. on April 22, 2008 at 1:56 am roissy

    chic:
    My God, that sounds like it was writen by a man who really hates women.

    you wish.
    it’s a pop culture reference to the youtube video “unforgivable”.
    some of you need a humor implant.

    duke:
    sorry, there is just something very INSULTING about women who act distant and expect you to just “get the point.”

    duke of windsor, i understand where you’re coming from but you have to realize that women act in this inscrutable way because it is a subtle form of shit test to weed out the unworthy from the worthy penises. you see, the test is designed to elicit a response — crisis and observation — and if you lash out you will have tarred yourself as a beta and they will have — with some regret — confirmed their suspicions.

    clio:
    We may all, men and women alike, have pretty nasty natures, but I think it’s possible to rise above them, with a bit of effort.

    what reason do we have to rise above our true natures? why should we even, besides to avoid doing those things which could curtail our freedom with jail time?
    if you want to argue religion, well, feel free to prove the existence of god anytime.

    LikeLike


  44. on April 22, 2008 at 2:01 am na-ny boo-boo 69

    36 duke
    “i cant lie, when confronted with flakiness, ive called women up and basically let ‘em have it, calling them on their bullshit and politely telling them that they could shit or get off the pot.”

    This is not so bad. Personally it’s better to be straightforward. At least you are attempting to deal with it head on with no games.

    Machiavelli says in The Prince that before somebody attacks you, you should attack them, because that is the only defense. Even if the other has not attacked you yet. If you attack first there is more possibility of winning; if they attack first there is less possibility of winning. One has to be cunning, clever. One has to calculate about the future and think about past experiences. Only man does this, and only man is vicious as a result.

    Everyone is protecting themselves because of the thought that life is dangerous. That idea makes life an enemy and once the habit of keeping your guard up is too ingrained, it’s very difficult to let it down. You end up separated from everyone. Is it worth it to have an inflated ego?

    LikeLike


  45. on April 22, 2008 at 2:07 am alias clio

    We should try to rise above our nasty side because life is sweeter when we do, Roissy. It’s that simple. It closes off one’s opportunities for schadenfreude, but it opens so many other pleasures. I will leave it to you to imagine them.

    DoBA, you do like to try to embarrass me…I found it hard to say no to dates, not sex. That, indeed, was the problem. I feel sorry for the men whom I misled in that way, but it really wasn’t intentional. I was naive and immature. My muse Clio is wiser than I am, but she only ever tries to intervene in my aesthetic/intellectual life. She leaves me to blunder my way through the social world as best I can.

    LikeLike


  46. on April 22, 2008 at 2:09 am na-ny boo-boo 69

    43 roissy

    “what reason do we have to rise above our true natures?”

    I disagree that anyone has an inherently nasty nature. We’re trained into nasty behavior. If you haven’t noticed, children are not born with nasty natures. We have to work at being nasty and get so good at it, it seems natural, but it’s highly unnatural. If you look at a young human you can see that clearly.

    If you look at less civilized cultures you can see that, and before anyone here gets hysterical, I’m well aware that not all primitive or less civilized cultures are innocent, but it’s my opinion they are generally more natural and humane to each other.

    LikeLike


  47. on April 22, 2008 at 2:51 am freak show

    alias clio:
    “We may all, men and women alike, have pretty nasty natures, but I think it’s possible to rise above them, with a bit of effort.”

    In America, nice guys are at a selective disadvantage in the dating game. Social Darwinism dictates that such behavior will be expressed less so in such societies. Likewise, if asshole behavior engenders more positive reaction (over time) from women then it is going to be expressed in greater degree.

    Instead of bitching about how this sucks, how about nubile women, who CONTROL the dating game, just dictate that assholes will suffer in the dating game? That would put a stop to all this asshole male demeanor.

    But, somehow I doubt that will happen. I respect Lemmonex for at least acknowledging women like assholes. Things might be changing, however, with deteriorating economic conditions in America, which might improve the social standing of financially responsible beta men, like myself. However, I don’t begrudge Roissy for doing what he needs to do to ‘win’ in this dating market. Be an alpha male who sometimes acts like an asshole and get all the pussy you want!

    LikeLike


  48. on April 22, 2008 at 2:53 am mq

    Every third or fourth post on this blog shows intense hostility and insecurity with respect to women. This one is more obvious than most, though, so even the fence-sitters can see it pretty clearly. Both the hostility and insecurity are palpable, and their relationship is clear. Notice how the fear and insecurity over potential rejection drives the hostility when he sees her later, and fantasizes that he has struck a damaging pre-emptive strike on her before she damaged and injured him.

    His admitted fear of “second date rejection” is interesting. A woman you can’t be pretty sure of after the first date is often a stretch seduction, someone on the edge of being out of your league. If you get in a relationship with her, you’ll have difficulty keeping the upper hand. Roissy apparently has difficulty facing even the prospect of not having the upper hand with a woman. But if you want to really fall in love, it’s going to be hard to keep that upper hand. You’ll have to keep your emotions restrained at all times.

    Look, I like this blog because I understand where Roissy is coming from. Like a lot of men, I went through a hellish period in my late teens/early 20s before I understood how to navigate the opposite sex. Then, again like a lot of guys, I wasted a chunk of my 20s staying in relationships with 4s that I wasn’t fully attracted to. It wasn’t till my late 20s and 30s that I got the confidence to be more in charge during the seduction process. It’s not an easy thing to do. Even today, from a pure pick-up point of view (which is not my view of things), I might not stretch enough for 8s and 9s that I could get with a more aggressive attitude.

    Anyway, all of that early stuff can leave huge scars. Even when you should be just balanced and seeking what you really want — which for most men, will not be endless casual sex with different partners — you can get bogged down trying to make up for previous damage that was done to your adolescent ego. It can be an ugly thing to see, and Roissy gives us a window into it. A chunk of the factual stuff he says is true, but the twist he puts on it is fear-driven. From a psychological perspective, this is a terrifically enjoyable blog and Roissy is doing a service by putting it out there.

    LikeLike


  49. on April 22, 2008 at 2:56 am freak show

    “I disagree that anyone has an inherently nasty nature. We’re trained into nasty behavior.”

    Read anything on behavioral evolution, Blank Slate, Red Queen, Selfish Gene… The history of humanity is replete with barbarism and rape. The nice guys in antiquity didn’t just finish last, they were often killed outright by alpha males. You, me and everyone are their descendants. Each of us has at least one ancestor (and this is an understatement) who was a rapist and/or murderer. Maybe this explains why women respond so well to assholes- they’ve been bred for a long time to do so.

    The supposed civility of modernity that you allude to is itself rife with many wars, but, in any case, is an extremely recent occurrence in the great span of our species’s existence.

    LikeLike


  50. on April 22, 2008 at 2:57 am mq

    how about nubile women, who CONTROL the dating game, just dictate that assholes will suffer in the dating game?

    More anger at women because they hurt you by not giving you what you want. That’s what drives this whole thing. They don’t owe you just because they have the pussy. They’re just responding to the dynamic confidence they find attractive in men, just like you respond to the qualities you like in them.

    Women are just as fucked up and human as you are. Forgive them for that, and then you can just love them as the individuals they are.

    LikeLike


  51. on April 22, 2008 at 2:57 am roissy

    We should try to rise above our nasty side because life is sweeter when we do, Roissy.

    what if i receive pleasure from indulging my nasty side? life feels pretty sweet when i do.

    It closes off one’s opportunities for schadenfreude, but it opens so many other pleasures.

    zero sum, clio? what if i can experience those other pleasures while still pursuing schadenfreude to my heart’s content?

    candy strained:
    I disagree that anyone has an inherently nasty nature.

    has internet anonymity been a force for

    a. politeness

    b. cruelty?

    If you haven’t noticed, children are not born with nasty natures.

    another lamer who hasn’t read lord of the flies.

    I’m well aware that not all primitive or less civilized cultures are innocent, but it’s my opinion they are generally more natural and humane to each other.

    wrong.
    see: murder rates of the yanomami and abos.

    LikeLike


  52. on April 22, 2008 at 2:59 am leena

    nanynayboooooo

    oh…. but there are nasty children… -children that are just innately nasty!!

    -you seep of rousseau… and that indeed is naïve!! (imo)

    LikeLike


  53. on April 22, 2008 at 3:01 am Days of Broken Arrows

    “I disagree that anyone has an inherently nasty nature. We’re trained into nasty behavior. If you haven’t noticed, children are not born with nasty natures.”

    Sorry to tell you, but this is completely untrue and maybe you have to be older or be a parent to realize this. Scientists are just now coming around to mapping out “criminal DNA,” and having lived a few decades I can tell you a good amount of nasty people are born that way.

    How do we know this? Well, I know it from experience: I’ve watched my brothers and cousins grow up in a large Italian family and noticed the nasty little kids were always that way — and grew up under the same circumstances as their nicer siblings. They are now the nasty, anti-social adults.

    Some blame parents, some blame society, but often people grow up in nearly the exact same situation as these miscreants (or worse situations) but are nice by nature. I send thank you notes when people do nice things for me. No one taught me this. My cousins get in bar fights. Their dad certainly didn’t teach them this. Their nastiness probably came from the genetics of their mom’s side, where everyone is in prison. But they never met most of these people.

    And by the way, a few tweaks in the brain by a surgeon or pharmacist will turn assholes into the Maharishi. It’s all chemical and I can’t wait until scientists map it all out and all psychologists are put out of business.

    One of the problems of our society I like to go n about is how women no longer need to be married to have kids, so they breed with idiots who won’t stick around, producing a culture of young animals. I just thought I would throw it in here. Go to Half Sigma or Steve Sailor’s blog for more DNA info.

    LikeLike


  54. on April 22, 2008 at 3:02 am mq

    also, most women don’t like assholes. They just don’t particularly care if men are assholes so long as they get the man exhibits the self-assurance and confidence they need to carry them past their coyness. A man who has those qualities while still being a genuinely nice guy will clean up with women.

    Guys who have nothing really going for them except that they aren’t assholes are forever resenting women for not giving them pussy just because they’re “nice”. Well, that’s not enough, just like it’s not enough for a woman to have a nice personality if she’s fifty pounds overweight. That’s just reality.

    LikeLike


  55. on April 22, 2008 at 3:05 am freak show

    Another great book on evolution and sex is Sperm Wars- really explains the underlying basis for sex from an evolutionary standpoint.

    LikeLike


  56. on April 22, 2008 at 3:08 am freak show

    “More anger at women because they hurt you by not giving you what you want. That’s what drives this whole thing.”

    Sure, describe me however you want. I admit I’m a beta male and angry. What’s your point?!? It doesn’t change how my points are still completely valid. Look at my points and not the motivation behind them, please.

    LikeLike


  57. on April 22, 2008 at 3:09 am roissy

    mq queued up:
    Every third or fourth post on this blog shows intense hostility and insecurity with respect to women.

    by the fainting couch measure of hostility you’re using, mq, every 4th post on this blog also shows intense hostility to men.
    or do you find it convenient to overlook those particular special lessons of mine?
    rhetorical.

    Then, again like a lot of guys, I wasted a chunk of my 20s staying in relationships with 4s that I wasn’t fully attracted to.

    why do you show such intense hostility to ugly women? 4s need love, too, you know.

    LikeLike


  58. on April 22, 2008 at 3:10 am alias clio

    freak show,
    the taste for ***holes among women is not universal. It’s not even a majority preference, although it’s common enough. Anyway, not all alpha males are ***holes, and not all ***holes are alpha males.

    One of the elements that complicates the issue is that very young men can be so desperate for a girlfriend – or for just plain old boffing – that having such a man pursue you, if you’re a young woman, is not in any way flattering. You end up telling yourself, “yes he seems keen but he’s obviously keen on anything in skirts.” A jerk who makes it plain that he only pursues beauties is at least an ego affirmation (and even pretty women sometimes need that). A quiet but discriminating young man who makes it clear that he only pursues women he really likes and finds attractive in other than sexual ways can also do well for himself, but these are getting rarer – and so are the kind of women they like, sigh.

    That is why the appearance of choosiness in men is attractive to women, a fact that Roissy gets but doesn’t quite get the reason for. He thinks it’s because pretty women are so spoiled that they want hard-to-get men, or that it’s a purely biological issue of subconsiously preferring the biggest, hardest man to father one’s children. Well, I don’t doubt that both these elements play a part in the matter, but more obvious to any woman on a conscious level than either of these two facts is the social fact that a man who seems unavailable is more of a prize if you can actually “get” him.

    LikeLike


  59. on April 22, 2008 at 3:12 am alias clio

    And Roissy, I’m one of your more frequent female commenters and I do NOT show hostility to men. Just a degree of appropriate suspicion.

    LikeLike


  60. on April 22, 2008 at 3:30 am mq

    every 4th post on this blog also shows intense hostility to men.

    that’s true, your internet persona is generally a bitter misanthrope. You resent women more because you are more vulnerable to them, but men trigger you a lot too.

    why do you show such intense hostility to ugly women? 4s need love, too, you know.

    I damaged them more by staying with them longer before dumping them, it would have been better to break up earlier. But several of my alumna have married and had kids, which I’m happy about.

    LikeLike


  61. on April 22, 2008 at 3:34 am mq

    I admit I’m a beta male and angry. What’s your point?!? It doesn’t change how my points are still completely valid. Look at my points and not the motivation behind them, please.

    Your resentment causes you to over-focus on some points and to ignore other ones. There are lots of truths in the world, good and bad ones, spend all your time thinking about the bad ones and you’ll be miserable. Try spending some time concentrating on the positive truths that can help you.

    LikeLike


  62. on April 22, 2008 at 3:42 am roissy

    mincing qock:
    that’s true, your internet persona is generally a bitter misanthrope.

    you misspelled gleeful sadist.

    but men trigger you a lot too

    i notice you left off the part where i helpfully pointed out the fruitcup definition of hostility you were using and, hence, the point you were trying to make was really no point at all.
    hth.

    LikeLike


  63. on April 22, 2008 at 3:43 am alias clio

    Ah ha Roissy!

    Lord of the Flies was written by a semi-lapsed Catholic believer who was making a point about Original Sin, not about innate biological nastiness. (Though the two may be the same thing – if you read St Augustine carefully enough.)

    Don’t I just lend a higher tone to your blog?

    LikeLike


  64. on April 22, 2008 at 3:53 am na-ny boo-boo 69

    51 Roissy

    “another lamer who hasn’t read lord of the flies.”

    Oh God, not a lamer! Anything but that! LOL You call yourself a romantic and really you’re a hopeless cynic. Lord of Flies is about a group of boys, all old enough to have been polluted by their environments. You forget I have a child. I have known her since she was born. You have not been around children much, it’s obvious. Otherwise you would not be so cynical and hopeless.

    49 freakshow

    “The history of humanity is replete with barbarism and rape.”

    Young children don’t commit acts of barbarism and rape. The may be the subject of barbarism and rape, but don’t commit it themselves. Why be so hopeless? Does it make you feel good to be so cynical? Realistic? Great, let’s all be realistic and give up looking for the good in the world. At least no one will accuse you of being lame.

    LikeLike


  65. on April 22, 2008 at 3:58 am Days of Broken Arrows

    “Young children don’t commit acts of barbarism and rape.”

    No, but they can bully incessantly and often this comes in a herd instinct, completely at odds with what they are taught at home. The US has re-imagined childhood as this idyllic paradise, when it’s actually a hell on earth for many. This is why adults need to civilize kids. Not the other way around.

    The child is not, in fact, father to the man. Whoever said this was an idiot.

    LikeLike


  66. on April 22, 2008 at 4:04 am na-ny boo-boo 69

    51 roissy “see: murder rates of the yanomami and abos.”

    Oh wow. You found some exceptions. I take it all back. I could find many more examples of peaceful non so-called civilized cultures but why bother? You’re convinced that life it Hell, so why try? I give up on you, but not everyone.

    53 DOBA “Sorry to tell you, but this is completely untrue and maybe you have to be older or be a parent to realize this. Scientists are just now coming around to mapping out “criminal DNA,” and having lived a few decades I can tell you a good amount of nasty people are born that way.”

    I am both older and a parent. And how did DNA get the way it is? Science is limited in what it can know. What science doesn’t know is far more vast than what it does.

    “I’ve watched my brothers and cousins grow up in a large Italian family ”

    Italians are the worst! Drama addicts in general. They seem to thrive on pain and suffering. Sorry, but it’s been my personal experience. Forgive me.

    LikeLike


  67. on April 22, 2008 at 4:05 am na-ny boo-boo 69

    65 DOBA “No, but they can bully incessantly and often this comes in a herd instinct, completely at odds with what they are taught at home.”

    I’m talking about very young children, m’kay? Have you guys ever met any?

    LikeLike


  68. on April 22, 2008 at 4:05 am Abhs

    Clio: We may all, men and women alike, have pretty nasty natures, but I think it’s possible to rise above them, with a bit of effort.

    I agree completely, however, unfortunately, we often forget. Sig et non dear clio

    mq: My definition of a successful male is the man that is more perceptive of the world around him. Betas and nice guys don’t do shit to the equation. But I consider a true alpha male to be a man that is able to perceive the Force and the beauty in life, and as such also its decrepitudes, but achieves mastery without adulterating his soul to the crippling world views of the dark side.

    LikeLike


  69. on April 22, 2008 at 4:15 am mq

    I’m apparently starting to get your goat, Roissy.

    And my point stands. The kind of hostility you express is potentially quite corrosive to the person who feels it, while merely serving as a source of free entertainment to onlookers. Your apparent notion that you’re being sadistic to your readers reminds me of internet women who claim to have “beaten men at their own game” by having cheap one-night stands with them.

    Now, off to the computer and type up another bilious rant for our amusement!

    LikeLike


  70. on April 22, 2008 at 4:23 am InterestedParty

    Great, insightful stuff here, roissy. The hostility, while understandable (women aren’t used to viewing dating through this lense), is misplaced.

    It’s just a numbers game, really people. The politically correct version of roissy’s approach is called “speed dating”.

    LikeLike


  71. on April 22, 2008 at 4:28 am na-ny boo-boo 69

    70 IP “It’s just a numbers game,”

    Surely you jest. It is not a numbers game and those who think it is, worship the God of Science–a God more even more imperfect than the original. 🙂

    LikeLike


  72. on April 22, 2008 at 4:31 am Abhs

    People have been drinking mad hate-o-rade up in here lately..

    LikeLike


  73. on April 22, 2008 at 4:34 am na-ny boo-boo 69

    68 Abhs “But I consider a true alpha male to be a man that is able to perceive the Force and the beauty in life, and as such also its decrepitudes, but achieves mastery without adulterating his soul to the crippling world views of the dark side.”

    You deserve some recognition for this. Sweet and very true words. Life without music and poetry is sterile indeed.

    LikeLike


  74. on April 22, 2008 at 4:55 am Poseur

    Hi Candy Cane oops I mean na-ny boo-boo, good to have you back. Now Mr.Pilkington can resume his tirade of sarcasm.
    Roissy its actually pretty funny. When this post started you were in the wrong. It isn’t a sign of healthy personal self-esteem to go around and destroy other’s self esteem. You probably meant to say ego as that is what the real evil is. However, a woman with self esteem wouldn’t be affected by roissy’s not calling back because she knows the value of her own core. So in other words there are two possible scenarios both of which are win win. Roissy just wrote the post in a very provocative mean spirited manner, unlike his usual calm and collected manner of writing.

    “I am both older and a parent. And how did DNA get the way it is? Science is limited in what it can know. What science doesn’t know is far more vast than what it does.”

    I’m sorry, but I have to laugh at this statement. WHO ARE YOU to tell experienced scientist what they do know and don’t know. The arrogance of your statement is disturbing and is symptomatic of the contempt of metaphysical scholars of America of science. Just because you aren’t well versed in the intricacies of modern science (believe me I am not either) doesn’t mean you can make a blanket statement.

    Candy, it’s refreshing to know that there are women out there that can offer a hint of poetry in this objective and dogmatic world. That poetry has its place, but not on a blog about objectivity.

    Roissy, for your own personal development, ask yourself why you wrote this post and where you were coming from when you wrote it. If for anything then for the improvement of your own game. The self is always shining through and bitterness is only going to hinder your ability to enjoy life.

    LikeLike


  75. on April 22, 2008 at 5:27 am Days of Broken Arrows

    “I’ve watched my brothers and cousins grow up in a large Italian family ”

    Italians are the worst! Drama addicts in general. They seem to thrive on pain and suffering. Sorry, but it’s been my personal experience. Forgive me.

    I could just as easily have said Irish or black or Asian when looking at personality traits from a larger perspective. The fact that you dumped everyone into a stereotype clearly means you’re not meant to be taken seriously. I said in my post most of us went on to have norma llives; there were some bad apples. I’m sure Irish people here know a few alcoholics.

    “I am both older and a parent. And how did DNA get the way it is? Science is limited in what it can know. What science doesn’t know is far more vast than what it does.”

    Also, this statement is breathtaking in its ignorance. This is like listening to an old person say allergy shots and antibiotics are “a bunch of hooey.”

    Hey Roissy, can we get an age limit on here, so old bats like Candy Cane can’t post?

    LikeLike


  76. on April 22, 2008 at 6:00 am na-ny boo-boo 69

    Poseur and DOBA

    Your intelligence, knowledge, and intellect are so far beyond me that I can hardly comprehend it. To continue my futile and pathetic attempts to counter your insightful and brilliantly profound arguments would only serve to further highlight my woeful ignorance and subject me to more unbearable humiliation.

    LikeLike


  77. on April 22, 2008 at 1:35 pm Patrick Bateman

    “I picture a sort of two-headed Rush Limbaugh/Glenn Quagmire beast with tentacles made of cocktail shakers.”

    I think that’s one of the Hindu gods.

    LikeLike


  78. on April 22, 2008 at 2:04 pm na-ny boo-boo 69

    74 Poseur

    “WHO ARE YOU to tell experienced scientist what they do know and don’t know. The arrogance of your statement is disturbing and is symptomatic of the contempt of metaphysical scholars of America of science.”

    I just have to comment on this. You say “metaphysical scholars” have contempt for science. There is not a smidgeon of contempt intended in my contemplation. Dispassionate observation and questioning currently accepted dogma is the cornerstone of science. The thing that has you accusing me of blasphemy is that I don’t worship Science as a God the way you seem to. Albert Einstein himself was highly aware of his mental limits and was a very spiritual man.

    “That poetry has its place, but not on a blog about objectivity.”

    Roissy is objective? Please enlighten us!

    LikeLike


  79. on April 22, 2008 at 3:47 pm Coach Amy

    Wow!

    Not giving a woman a second chance? You may be the one missing out. Some women take a bit to feel comfortable with someone. My client wouldn’t be married if he didn’t pursue his wife. She was kind of on the shy, clueless side (not every woman is as intuitive as you think).

    Women like to know that she is special and desirable. It was a huge turnoff if I knew a guy was dating several women- and I was one of many.

    When you are serious about finding “the one” you will stop playing games. You will go with your heart. Sure, no one likes rejection- but it’s part of the dating process. Of course if a woman seems unavailable or doesn’t call you back, you should move on. Rejection can be a gift- so you don’t waste your time pursuing the wrong people.

    Good luck with your dating and mating! – Coach Amy
    http://www.DCDatingInfo.com.

    LikeLike


  80. on April 22, 2008 at 4:10 pm roissy

    coach amy:
    It was a huge turnoff if I knew a guy was dating several women- and I was one of many

    gentlemen, check it out: here is a perfect example of how a woman’s words contradict her actions.

    Rejection can be a gift- so you don’t waste your time pursuing the wrong people.

    exactly. that’s why if a man knows from experience that a marginal first date has low odds of leading to sex, he should preemptively bail out.
    and, you know, it’s kinda fun stealing a girl’s thunder.

    mewling queef:
    I’m apparently starting to get your goat, Roissy.

    the rule of mindfucking contests clearly states that he who first claims goat-getting has had their goat gotten.

    The kind of hostility you express is potentially quite corrosive to the person who feels it,

    that’s something a victim of my hostility would say.

    Your apparent notion that you’re being sadistic to your readers

    funny, those who have been lashed by my sadism don’t sound like they’re having a fun frolic judging by their sputtering hate.
    see: dizzy.

    Now, off to the computer and type up another bilious rant for our amusement!

    the amusement’s all mine.

    LikeLike


  81. on April 22, 2008 at 4:52 pm alias clio

    gentlemen, check it out: here is a perfect example of how a woman’s words contradict her actions.

    Speaking strictly for me, I always wanted to know that the man who was pursuing me was wildly attractive to other women but that he had rejected them all for me.

    That approach didn’t work out very well. As you see…

    LikeLike


  82. on April 22, 2008 at 5:12 pm Azuzuru

    Good stuff MQ. Really good stuff.

    I used to be one of those bitter guys who couldn’t understand why my “niceness” wasn’t good enough to get pussy while assholes pumped and dumped. Then I discovered game. I learned to liberate my inner boldness, assertiveness and other manly characteristics that my extreme PC upbringing had buried deep down.

    Now I’m getting plenty and all is right in the world. I’m not an asshole, either (well some of my ex’s might disagree).

    Recently I had a girl ding me after a second date. She was a good one too. But, hey whatever. Not everyone likes everyone, no biggie. I wish her the best because it just doesn’t matter. There’s plenty more to take her place in my bed.

    Gentlemen, remember — the best “revenge” is living well.

    LikeLike


  83. on April 22, 2008 at 5:22 pm Usually Lurking

    Speaking strictly for me, I always wanted to know that the man who was pursuing me was wildly attractive to other women but that he had rejected them all for me.

    Were you aware of that, or is that something that you realized years later?

    LikeLike


  84. on April 22, 2008 at 5:39 pm alias clio

    I think I was aware of it, although I wouldn’t have put it in quite those terms. What I didn’t realise was how destructive it was.

    LikeLike


  85. on April 22, 2008 at 5:51 pm PA

    I used the kiss test to see if a girl is worth continued dating.

    If she turned her cheek when I went slowly for a first- or second-date kiss, it let me know she isn’t attracted to me, and there was no more need t ohave any more contact with her.

    LikeLike


  86. on April 22, 2008 at 6:38 pm anonymous

    85 PA “If she turned her cheek when I went slowly for a first- or second-date kiss, it let me know she isn’t attracted to me, ”

    My friend just got married to a guy she was not attracted to at all at first. He says she “just needed convincing.” Believe me, she is convinced. Women like a man who will not let them pass up a good thing, but it requires confidence and determination on the part of the man. Sounds like you’re looking for a short term deal. She may have been seduced and burned a few times too many.

    LikeLike


  87. on April 22, 2008 at 6:48 pm DF

    Next time you run into a girl you never called for a second do the following;

    Don’t look her in the eyes, walk right up to her.

    Stop right next to her.

    Do this. http://www.wwtdd.com/post.phtml?pk=5263

    then keep on walking without exchanging any words or glances.

    LikeLike


  88. on April 22, 2008 at 6:52 pm duke of windsor

    85 PA

    “I used the kiss test to see if a girl is worth continued dating.

    If she turned her cheek when I went slowly for a first- or second-date kiss, it let me know she isn’t attracted to me, and there was no more need t ohave any more contact with her.”

    Not always a good barometer.

    Like I said above, I’ve had girlfriends who gave me cheek when I aimed for the lips, but I got farther than that a few dates down the line.

    LikeLike


  89. on April 22, 2008 at 7:01 pm roissy

    yeah, the kiss test should not make your decision to pursue or cut your losses. the first date kiss has too much baggage to be a reliable indicator of a woman’s attraction for you. many women who like you will turn their cheek to you as a shit test to see how you handle it.

    better to gauge her interest level by subtle cues like her body language and the flow of convo.

    LikeLike


  90. on April 22, 2008 at 8:18 pm Chic Noir

    you wish.
    it’s a pop culture reference to the youtube video “unforgivable”.
    some of you need a humor implant

    Sorry but that sentence was very cold 😉

    “The history of humanity is replete with barbarism and rape”
    freak show

    Does this mean that you think rape is alright?.

    mq
    “how about nubile women, who CONTROL the dating game, just dictate that assholes will suffer in the dating game?

    More anger at women because they hurt you by not giving you what you want. That’s what drives this whole thing. They don’t owe you just because they have the pussy. They’re just responding to the dynamic confidence they find attractive in men, just like you respond to the qualities you like in themWomen are just as fucked up and human as you are. Forgive them for that, and then you can just love them as the individuals they are..”

    I agree and thank you for this MQ

    Guys who have nothing really going for them except that they aren’t assholes are forever resenting women for not giving them pussy just because they’re “nice”. Well, that’s not enough, just like it’s not enough for a woman to have a nice personality if she’s fifty pounds overweight. That’s just reality.

    I think I am in love with MQ:)

    For some reason, many men think that women should just fall into their lap(no pun) without have to put in any hard work.

    LikeLike


  91. on April 22, 2008 at 8:46 pm duke of windsor

    “For some reason, many men think that women should just fall into their lap(no pun) without have to put in any hard work.”

    I have no problem with putting in the hard work. I can deal with a turn of the cheek, but when it gets to the unreturned-phone-call stage, they WILL get an argument from me.

    If I gotta put in some hard work for woman, there had better be an end result.

    LikeLike


  92. on April 22, 2008 at 9:15 pm mq

    Wow, Roissy…I’m speechless. You have a rich fantasy life.

    LikeLike


  93. on April 22, 2008 at 10:18 pm Shannon

    “If I gotta put in some hard work for woman, there had better be an end result.”

    No woman on this earth owes you jack for your “effort”, aside from a polite and heartfelt “thank you.” Women aren’t a commodity (Roissy’s sexual market pseudoscience notwithstanding). Yeah, if you aren’t getting what you want out of the situation, be it sex, a committed relationship, good conversation, whatever, feel free to move on. But I’m sick of guys who think women owe them sex because they sat through the ballet.

    LikeLike


  94. on April 22, 2008 at 11:39 pm Chic Noir

    ^^^ I2I Shannon.

    LikeLike


  95. on April 23, 2008 at 5:41 am duke of windsor

    “If I gotta put in some hard work for woman, there had better be an end result.”

    “No woman on this earth owes you jack for your “effort”, aside from a polite and heartfelt “thank you.” Women aren’t a commodity (Roissy’s sexual market pseudoscience notwithstanding). Yeah, if you aren’t getting what you want out of the situation, be it sex, a committed relationship, good conversation, whatever, feel free to move on. But I’m sick of guys who think women owe them sex because they sat through the ballet.”

    Now where in the hell did I say I was owed “sex?” That end result I mentioned could mean anything. And the way I used it, I meant give me your TIME. If we like each other, the sex will follow. I ain’t THAT impatient.

    Nothing wrong with a little hard work to get the reward. And if it’s not working, I can accept a no. But when it gets to jumping through hoops…for someone who acts like returning phone calls is illegal…I call bullshit.

    LikeLike


  96. on April 23, 2008 at 11:09 am johnny five

    Roissy apparently has difficulty facing even the prospect of not having the upper hand with a woman. But if you want to really fall in love, it’s going to be hard to keep that upper hand.

    relationship power = water
    men = uphill
    women = downhill

    water doesn’t flow back uphill, so it’s dam it or damn it, if you know what i mean.

    LikeLike


  97. on April 23, 2008 at 11:50 am PA

    Roissy, I see your point about the fallability of the kiss test. In my case, though, it was a good indicator of a girls’ attraction to me.

    I did most of my dating from 29 to 32, after which point I got married. I am tall and good looking guy, but as far as my personality, when I dated I had typically shown brilliant and entirely instinctual displays of alphahood but then pulled back to Betaness (I knew absolutely nothing of Game and presumed that women like “nice guys,” “don’t like to be seen as sex objects.”)

    So when a girl gave me her cheek for a kiss, it was a safe bet that the potential for more is nil. But when she passed the kiss test, it’s clear to me in retrospect that her physical attraction to me overcame my regression to Beta.

    Fortunately, at one point I had a good chat with an Alpha acquaintance, which enabled me to meet and keep the girl I ended up marrying. She did pass the kiss test anyway 🙂

    Anyway, in my then-combination of good looks and inconsistent Alphaness, dating was an all-or-none scenario and the kiss test was a reliable indicator.

    LikeLike


  98. on April 23, 2008 at 11:51 am PA

    the first smileyface is a typo, damnit!

    LikeLike


  99. on April 24, 2008 at 5:11 am Eurosabra

    This $#^t always, always comes up as “entitlement” from a feminist perspective, and, well, if you’re going to aggressively misread the experience of THE VAST MAJORITY of men (Beta Nice Guys) that way, less power to you. The fact is that 1 date for 50 approaches is a DAMN good average for the beginning gamer, and most men in that situation CAN’T/DON’T have the luxury of tolerating ambiguity, the 7 who hems and haws is a LOT less attractive than the 4 who luvs you if the 7 just seeks to leverage your continuing pursuit into the sort of possibility-of-pu$$y worship that gives her power, as outlined by Roissy previously on this blog. It’s not “hurting women” to call them on their manipulative bull$#it.

    And yes, I’m a headcase, big deal–but being poly helps somewhat. What would help more is getting 7s instead of 3s and 4s, but to do that I’d have to be “Alpha” instead of a “nice-guy-intuitive-Beta-offering-GREAT-sex.” Part of what REALLY blew my fuses was seeing what women selected for and how little bearing good touching and good sex had on their selection–I had to ALREADY be socially/visually superior to the women BEFORE I could begin demonstrating the quality of my touch. And until I started getting laid on a regular basis, I’d disassociate during sex *because* I couldn’t stand how much lower on the scale I had to go before “nice” became a selling point. Shorter summary: Almost any woman can still effortlessly get laid.

    Don’t think you’re going to pi$$ me off by calling me an insane woman-hater. Quasi-fascism is just how I roll.

    LikeLike


  100. on April 25, 2008 at 5:34 am Bill

    bravo! the lesson guys need to take here is perfectly encapsulated in the last paragraph. take these cunts down a peg and in the aggregate all of our jobs become easier. it’s these needy, grubbing and groveling betas who kiss the ass of hot women who make our lives difficult.

    I swear sometimes I go into dates hoping the girl will be a cunt because there is little I find more satisfying than peacing on her 20 minutes into the date. example from the other day, out with an 8.5. I had picked up on a couple things she had said previous to this that made me think she was in all likelihood an uppity bitch, so this wasn’t entirely out of the blue:

    me: I’m not the world’s biggest hockey fan, but I’m kinda bummed the Caps lost. I used to go to their games all the time in high school and always had a blast.

    her: I was a figure skater for 10 years, I put hockey players to shame on the ice.

    me: (chokes on my cocktail like The Dude did when Maude told him her exercises increased the chances of conception)

    her: you okay?

    me: I’m sorry, but did you just say figure skaters put hockey players to shame on the ice?

    her: hell yeah. YEAH.

    me: you’re dillusional.

    her: (goes on some uninteresting screed about how strong figure skaters have to be and how good their balance must be in order to pull off some of their moves)

    me: (pulls out wallet, drops a $20 on the table, which, might I add, stuck her with the preponderance of the bill) I’m sorry, but from that statement I can tell we will never get along, so I’m going to bid you good afternoon, good evening, good night and good luck.

    her: …the fuck?

    me: look, I’m not even that big a hockey fan, but hockey is WAR on ice. those guys have to be the most dynamic skaters in the world just to be competent on the ice. it’s totally taken for granted because they still have to be superior puck handlers, shooters, passers, checkers, etc. all you have to do is train your muscle memory to do a few precise movements over and over again, all of which are done in a completely controlled, pre-planned routine. and you don’t have 230 lb motherfuckers slamming into you constantly while you’re doing your little twists and jumps, either. I find it impossible to believe that you don’t recognize this fact yourself, as it is totally self-evident. you remind me of this Krav Maga specialist chick my buddy was dating who made all kinds of claims about how she could physically whup 90% of men out there. I, who had no martial arts training and only outweighed her by about 40 lbs, took her up on this challenge and wiped the floor up with her in the middle of her dojo one day. she and her feminazi training partners were outraged. outraged! after the selfless public service I had provided them, which was the realization that despite their years of training, women are not and will never be as strong as men. so, I’m willing to bet that your retarded claim actually stems from this idiotic “equality of the sexes” crap that those pushing a liberal agenda want us to swallow in the hopes of reprogramming human nature so that the world exists as they would like it to be, rather than how it actually is. I’m sure there are plenty of lapdog beta boys out there who would be willing to swallow their nuts and concede that to you, but I’m not one of them and never will be, so please believe me when I say that we aren’t compatible. I’m saving us both a lot of time here. I’m gonna head uptown and meet some friends, but I will have the hostess get you a cab. later.

    I was grinding my teeth as I was leaving, thinking about her hot, figure-skater ass that I was NOT going to be hitting, but that lasted for about 5 seconds before my heart and my testicles swelled with pride (blueballs pun only partially intended).

    and another (much shorter) story:
    out at a bar that my friend Scott manages. great spot, popular, great crowd. I’m hanging with my boys when this broad and her friend walk up to us. I’d say Girl A was about an 8 and Girl B a 7. they know one of my friends, so my buddy introduces me and Scott (the manager) to the girls. after we exchange perfunctory pleasantries, Girl A chimes in with, “This place sucks. I think all the guys here are gay.” knowing Scott as I do, I know this makes his blood boil, but in the interest of being a good ambassador, he can’t say shit to her. so I step in. “Hey. My boy Scott here is the GM of this place. How do you feel now? And it’s not that the place sucks or that we’re gay, maybe people are just put off by your exaggerated gum-to-tooth ratio. You do have REALLY big gums.” we walked away and Scott nearly cried he was laughing so hard. needless to say, Gummy didn’t stick around long before closing her tab and leaving to find a place that didn’t suck so badly.

    me: 2
    cunts: 0

    Girl A from story 2 has probably taken some stong upstream swimmers since then.

    sorry for the length, but relieving those moments was worth the derision inevitably coming my way…

    LikeLike


  101. on April 25, 2008 at 1:49 pm Shannon

    No derision, just pity. Wow, I couldn’t imagine being the sort of person who relishes and looks forward to combat, vs. wanting to have a nice time on a date and maybe meet somebody special.

    How sad.

    LikeLike


  102. on April 25, 2008 at 2:07 pm na-ny boo-boo 69

    100 Bill

    “it’s these needy, grubbing and groveling betas who kiss the ass of hot women who make our lives difficult.”

    Are you serious? Sounds like you do a pretty good job of that all by yourself. The only advice I would give? Try not to take the bitches so seriously or what they say/do too personally. You’re excreting an awful lot of adrenaline. Sounds like being a 9, 10 bitch is likely to be more dangerous than a 6, 7 bitch. You wouldn’t care so much about a less attractive bitch, but a 9, 10 bitch? You let them have it with both barrels. Being beautiful is a catch 22. You’ve got the ass kissers and the one’s who want to take you down 10 notches in a heartbeat.

    LikeLike


  103. on April 25, 2008 at 3:01 pm PA

    Angry, ballsy stories posted on line are usually fantasies of someone who wishes he could have acted that way with a girl who annoyed him. In all likelihood, the dramas that Bill is describing took place in his imagination.

    Exaggeratedly masculine comments are a sign of overcompensation.

    LikeLike


  104. on April 25, 2008 at 4:02 pm jaakkeli

    WTF guy goes psycho because some chick told him that FIGURE SKATERS PUT HOCKEY PLAYERS TO SHAME?!?

    He sounds like Cartman come to life.

    LikeLike


  105. on April 25, 2008 at 4:22 pm mq

    Awesome post by Bill. A cruder and more direct version of the same stuff Roissy puts out, but maybe even more entertaining.

    LikeLike


  106. on April 25, 2008 at 4:27 pm mq

    Eurosabra (99): there’s some truth to what you’re saying, but you clearly need to hold out more and be a little harder to get. Raise your standard in your own mind and women will pick up on that. Just refuse to go for fat chicks who don’t attract you.

    LikeLike


  107. on April 25, 2008 at 5:24 pm roissy

    A cruder and more direct version of the same stuff Roissy puts out, but maybe even more entertaining.

    don’t be silly. if you’d have been paying attention you’d know i never advocate such a counterproductive tactic.

    LikeLike


  108. on April 25, 2008 at 9:50 pm Chic Noir

    ” Part of what REALLY blew my fuses was seeing what women selected for and how little bearing good touching and good sex had on their selection–I had to ALREADY be socially/visually superior to the women BEFORE I could begin demonstrating the quality of my touch. ”

    Eurosabra

    Can you explain this^^^ a bit more. Where did you come across this list(do you have a link).

    ‘it’s these needy, grubbing and groveling betas who kiss the ass of hot women who make our lives difficult”

    Bill

    The type of betas above go far with me. I can not stand a douche alpha(and most alphas are douches). About the only things I like about alphas are their height(6ft+), high salary(but its not everything) and very very very good looks(why lie, I love very handsome men)

    Bill, I hope you did not punch that young woman in the face and why not agree to disagree with your date.

    shannon comment 101-we are I2I.

    How are fat chicks< betas?

    LikeLike


  109. on April 26, 2008 at 8:12 pm Eurosabra

    Chic Noir,

    It’s one standard feminist critique of pick-up that men regard women as having a “gatekeeper” role, meaning that non-sexual requirements, attributes, and standards must be in place (and up to the woman/women’s standards) for sex. Figleaf (at http://www.realadultsex.com, a commentary site with NSFW items below the fold) calls this the “no-sex class”, meaning that men must bring non-sexual “leverage” (job favors, payment in baubles, social prestige) to any potential sexual encounter in order to engineer sex.

    It was my ACTUAL experience that a straight-up trade of sex-for-sex ONLY happened in the context of my becoming (as an average man) an object of desire, and only with women from the same cultural group (same language, “race”, ethnicity, primary language, religion, and economic status) with whom I could develop simple “mirroring” rapport. In short, I could offer sex to women who, because of their weight, shape, ethnicity, etc, were (in the aggregate) not seen as sexual beings AT ALL by men (in the aggregate). “Game” is seen as bridging the gap between this reality and a woman’s sense of entitlement, i.e. the idea that a woman wants someone of greater social value, however she defines it, as well as a competent, respectful, and complementary (to her desires) sex partner. I was dealing with women for whom quality touching was both rare and easy to demonstrate because it was not on offer from the vast majority of men, and it raised my already relatively high market value. As soon as I’m dealing with someone who normally has to fight men off with a stick, my value plummets and (in the absence of extraneous leverage) my lack of “game” (as opposed to rapport-building) gets me nowhere.

    I got here from Roosh V’s and Virgil Kent’s blogs, since I lived in the DC area from ’03-’05 and had the opportunity to sample the frustrations of that metro area.

    LikeLike


  110. on April 27, 2008 at 4:23 pm na-ny boo-boo 69

    109 Eurosabra

    It all sounds so calculating. Why? Are you happy now? What is your ultimate goal? Pleasure?

    LikeLike


  111. on April 28, 2008 at 4:22 pm Eurosabra

    Pleasure is actually fairly easy, attracting the people you want to attract is hard.

    LikeLike


  112. on April 28, 2008 at 4:59 pm Bill

    shannon:
    me saying “sometimes I hope the girl is a cunt so I can peace on her” was totally tongue in cheek. of course I always hope the date goes well, but if it doesn’t, I always rest easy knowing that I’ve usually got some zingers waiting on deck to put egomaniac chicks like the one in my first story in their places. it’s an eminently satisfying contingency plan.

    #102:
    like I said, the girl in the first story had made several snide remarks prior to me letting her have it, so you would probably think I WAY over reacted if you hadn’t been there to observe her in all her cunterrific demeanor. e.g. we were out at Oya, which has fantastic sushi, and she claimed it “wouldn’t be nearly as good” as her favorite sushi place in NYC–even though she had never eaten at Oya before and we hadn’t even ordered our food yet! then she was a total cunt to our waitress–calling her sweetheart in a super-condescending manner– which really pissed me off because I know some of staff there. I could go on, but suffice to say that if she hadn’t been taking herself so seriously, I wouldn’t have blasted her like I did. you’ll just have to trust me that she was in dire need of a serious deflating. the butt-hurt look on her face as I turned to leave still makes me smile…

    mq:
    appreciate the praise, but let’s be real. I hashed out that turd of a post in about 10 minutes. part of what makes Roissy so much fun to read is his mix of eloquence and sagaciousness. my style is more akin to Begby from Trainspotting writing a blog comment.

    Chic Noir:
    this is me heaving a giant sigh of relief that you are ratcheting down your expectations so that “high salary” isn’t everything! whew! j/k, I don’t mean to be a prick but that sounded a little…ugh. as for agreeing to disagree, she wasn’t that kind of girl. she was one of those domineering alpha females who always felt compelled to crush the nuts of whoever was around under the spike of her stiletto heels. think Hillary Clinton minus the penis, with a figure skater’s body.

    LikeLike


  113. on April 28, 2008 at 5:44 pm na-ny boo-boo 69

    112

    Understood Bill. I too had the satisfaction of putting a major prick in his place. We were watching a movie at my place, I went into the kitchen for a few minutes, came back and asked to have the movie rewound a tad. He said “NO”. After a few more interchanges I threw him out of my house. The reason he didn’t want to rewind the movie? It was five minutes more he’d have to wait for sex and he was just that horny. Stupid prick got none that night. LOL

    LikeLike


  114. on April 29, 2008 at 1:37 am Eurosabra

    I mean, yes, it sounds calculating, but when I was “natural”, all hopped-up on testosterone and need and spouting the Twenty Questions (“What’s your major?”) that AFCs use to try to generate rapport, I got nowhere VERY quickly. In five years I approached about 1000 women and got a few phone numbers and dates, and no romantic contact whatsoever. If you have low-status “tells” like nervousness, breaking and resuming eye contact, etc, you’re actually energetically driving women away.

    I spent quite a few years doing the old hypno version of what Ross Jeffries does, and had intermittent success. Basically the combination of social marginalization, physical disability, and real depression meant that the same 100 approaches that a PUA does in a week and a normal guy in a month took me a year. As I age, I find that I certainly can’t go out more than a few nights a month, and I simply don’t have the staying power to talk with someone at a club for a few hours, join her at her place, and talk for a little while more prior to spending the night. Right now I’m at a bit of an impasse, because it takes me DAYS to store up the energy to go out and try day game, and online is slow and hit-and-miss. In short, I do recognize the extent to which what I do can be brutally manipulative, but most of my faults have come from starting a seduction but NOT taking risks to advance it, which was viewed as teasing women equally as marginal as myself.

    LikeLike


  115. on September 1, 2008 at 10:02 pm Yours truly

    “what reason do we have to rise above our true natures? why should we even, besides to avoid doing those things which could curtail our freedom with jail time?”

    Long term happiness, self respect and pride. That is my motivation.

    Example. I know a chocolate pie is tasty and I also know I’m very sensitive to sugar. If someone offered me a large piece of chocolate pie, my nose would tell me to eat it all up because it is tasty, evolutionary systems would tell me to eat it all op, for starvation may be around the corner. Other brain areas would tell me to eat it all up so I can feel high. My rational side will tell me that it will be tasty for 10 minutes, then I’ll feel high for an hour and then low for two. I know that if I do this too often it harms my long term health. So I control myself and either take a much smaller piece, or know that eating a small piece will make me want more and skip it altogether.

    But that is how I’m wired, you may be different.

    About the people here whining for young women to be chaste; If you are a man, you can best accomplish this by rewarding chaste girls. If you are a woman; by being chaste and showing other girls the benefits of chastity.
    Whining for girls to be chaste just makes you sound bitter, they don’t listen to your words if they don’t reflect society.

    As soon as men date chaste women often and become their boyfriends and husbands, more young women will be chaste. When men avoid women who have dated criminals and druggies in the recent past, women will avoid doing so.

    Very young women, up to roughly 22, will look at the short term benefits over the long term benefits. So will most very young men. If girls who sleep with jerks and wear next to nothing get free drinks, handsome boyfriends, lots of attention immediately, then young girls will wear very little and sleep with jerks.

    Women of about 23-32 will moreso consider the long term benefits of their behaviours but are pretty much misinformed by society. The other thing is that they see the men their age not pursue marriage, but moreso girlfriends, so they present themselves as girlfriends rather than wives. Men their age are often selecting women who are pretty, sexually adventurous and easygoing and are offering uncommitted companionship. A woman who is not available for anything temporary is going to have less men who keep asking her out. Because of the enormous amount of lipservice from so called pro sex feminism, she does not see the difference between short term interest and serious interest, because it is not PC to contemplate it. If guys stop asking her out because she is not french kissing them she will think she has to get physical early on to get anywhere fast. That will ensure she is not going to date guys she does not feel immediate physical attraction to. This essentially means guys who are short, shy or wear glasses will be getting less play. It also means many girls will be less open to men in the first place, because the feel sex is expected.

    You can tell women to date older guys but the women who are attracted to older men already date them, the rest simply don’t feel attracted to them, so that is not really an option. Unless you want to teach girls to marry men they are not attracted to, but that would raise the infidelity rates.

    If you want women to openly say no to you rather than block your number, it helps if men tend to take it like a man. “Thanks for letting me know, good luck with dating” rather than either whine about it or get agressive.

    It’s the same way for women really, if we as a group stop rewarding bad men, men will step up.

    But it is bit of a prisoners dilemma, both for men and for women. And it is hard to get other men, and other women to change their behaviour, without putting an authoritarian system in place.

    “mean, yes, it sounds calculating, but when I was “natural”, all hopped-up on testosterone and need and spouting the Twenty Questions (”What’s your major?”) that AFCs use to try to generate rapport, I got nowhere VERY quickly. In five years I approached about 1000 women and got a few phone numbers and dates, and no romantic contact whatsoever. If you have low-status “tells” like nervousness, breaking and resuming eye contact, etc, you’re actually energetically driving women away.”

    I hear what you are saying. As a girl who was very socially inept as a child and teenager, I very much appreciate self improvement, self control and learning new skills. I did get approached by strange boys, just not by guys at school. Actually, I like self improvement for it’s own sake, I enjoy the learning even more than the results. Learning better social skill does not harm anyone and I think it brings you closer to yourself rather than further. A book like “How to win friends and influence people” actually brings you a lot closer to being a genuinely nice person, while also being effective. Better social skills made me a better listener and a more thoughtful, appreciative friend. I found that it takes true character to learn superficial charm. It takes patience to find something to compliment, and to cater the compliment to the person. It takes self control to avoid saying inappropriate things. It takes self honesty to find out what clother suit you best. It takes relaxation and self acceptance to build good body language. So working on the outside improves the inside simultaneously.

    I guess anger can be a motivation to learn and in that it is not a bad thing. I guess bitterness happens when people can’t use the anger effectively, and so the angry energy stays in their body and becomes putrid and bitter. Sure it must be painful to be rejected by a girl because you are fat and lack social skills and only watch TV for hobbies and it is normal to feel anger if you are in pain and someone is causing it. It is also normal to feel strong emotion when you realise that people respond differently to you when you are healthy, go to the gym, read books and do fun things and know how to approach women. It’s just that unless you control your anger, your bitterness will repell the most pleasant people. Plus less energy is released for learning, so the lessons are less deep.

    I now realise that my looks and superficial charms are not the only thing men care about, but they do draw them in long enough to discover my character. I also feel that because the superficial me is a result of the inner me, what attracts people is partly my inner power and beauty as reflected in my appearance, motorics, voice.

    People who are fat, sloppy, jerky or boring are actually robbing other people of a chance to get to know them, the real person that lies within.

    LikeLike


  116. on September 1, 2008 at 10:16 pm PA

    Yours Truly, good comments. Strangely, until the comment above, I thought you are a man.

    But why do you comment on ancient threads? chances are no one is going to read it. Anyway, I hope you stick around.

    LikeLike


  117. on September 1, 2008 at 11:16 pm Yours truly

    “Yours Truly, good comments. Strangely, until the comment above, I thought you are a man.
    But why do you comment on ancient threads? chances are no one is going to read it. Anyway, I hope you stick around.
    ”

    Thanks!

    I think I have a pretty strategic way of seeing things, which is a masculine trait and the name is a bit gender neutral. Sometimes I also mistake people’s gender over the internet. One time I thought I would be meeting a woman, then when asking for a description, I read the height to be 6’6″, and though “hmmn that is really tall”. So I’m looking for this extremely tall, brunette woman and suddenly a tall man, otherwise fitting the description approaches me.

    How do you find out what threads you previously replied to? I want to see the responses to my older posts, but some were to old threads and I can’t really find them.

    I do have a habit of abandoning forums, but if the conversation is stimulating, I may spend years in a place online. Right now I have the sniffles and the plague and my main board is out of order 😦

    LikeLike


  118. on September 2, 2008 at 1:14 am David Alexander

    lack social skills and only watch TV for hobbies

    As one of the boring people who post here, I would like to note that some of us stay inside and simply watch TV or sit in front of a computer because it’s our version of fun, and going out to various activities isn’t fun for us. In other cases, some of us are simply too afraid and intimidated to be around the pretty people. Lastly, a few of are simply too depressed to go outside and enjoy the world.

    LikeLike


  119. on September 2, 2008 at 10:26 am Yours truly

    Sorry if you feel hurt by what I said., I did not mean to say that you are an unworthy person or anything 🙂

    I guess it also depends on what you do on the computer, one can learn a lot these days by surfing the internet. One can also read, paint, sculpt, write, meditate or engage in astronomy without leaving the house. Being an introverted or indoorsy person is not the same as having no interests.

    That said, being cowardly or depressed does make one less pleasant as a friend or partner. Many have remedied those conditions with self discipline and willingness to leave one’s comfort zone. With time they feel more and more comfortable in new situations and they learn to enjoy themselves in a wide variety of acts.

    LikeLike


  120. on September 2, 2008 at 5:54 pm Usually Lurking

    …you can best accomplish this by rewarding chaste girls

    Fair enough, but, their may be some simple Math at work here.

    Let’s say that a large minority of Men would like to date/marry chaste girls. But, they are attracted to attractive girls. And, it turns out that pretty girls are LESS likely to be chaste than the not-so-attractive ones. Plus, more than half of the girls out there are overweight, , with more than half of those being obese.

    With added weight affecting girls differently than it affects guys, well, here is the Math problem.

    Supply and Demand.

    If girls who sleep with jerks and wear next to nothing get free drinks, handsome boyfriends, lots of attention immediately, then young girls will wear very little and sleep with jerks.

    Unless all of the mothers and aunts refer to them, relentlessly, as whores. Again, culture was there for a reason.

    This is why, probably, culture played such a big part of our lives (i.e. “…take your hat off in a woman’s presence you crass idiot…”) in the past.

    A woman who is not available for anything temporary is going to have less men who keep asking her out.

    Unless she is attractive, then, she will have, basically, no problem getting dates.

    If you want women to openly say no to you rather than block your number, it helps if men tend to take it like a man. “Thanks for letting me know, good luck with dating” rather than either whine about it or get agressive.

    The Bar/Club scene, where most of this plays out, is nothing like the old church social. It is much more primal, therefore, more primal responses.

    Specific social situations were crafted in the past for a reason.

    LikeLike


  121. on September 2, 2008 at 6:29 pm Yours truly

    “Unless all of the mothers and aunts refer to them, relentlessly, as whores. Again, culture was there for a reason.

    This is why, probably, culture played such a big part of our lives (i.e. “…take your hat off in a woman’s presence you crass idiot…”) in the past.”

    I agree. Social pressure was in place to force people to be loyal to their gender. Though ups and downs have existed here.

    “With added weight affecting girls differently than it affects guys, well, here is the Math problem.”

    How does it effect girls differently then guys?

    “And, it turns out that pretty girls are LESS likely to be chaste than the not-so-attractive ones.”

    How does that work then? In what ways are not-so-attractive girls rewarded more for chastity than pretty girls?

    “Unless she is attractive, then, she will have, basically, no problem getting dates.”

    But there is a difference between getting new dates and being asked out repeatedly by the same guy. If men do what Roissy suggests; stop asking girls out who don’t put out by date X, then the chaste girl will find herself dating lots of different men on the short term. If she sees women who sleep with men having boyfriends for a year or two, she will think that is a step ahead, especially if no one is pointing out the difference between a lover and a husband.

    “The Bar/Club scene, where most of this plays out, is nothing like the old church social. It is much more primal, therefore, more primal responses.

    Specific social situations were crafted in the past for a reason.”

    This is very true. I think modern society is afraid to create situations that promote mutually pleasant interaction between the sexes.

    LikeLike


  122. on September 2, 2008 at 6:42 pm Usually Lurking

    How does it effect girls differently then guys?

    You add 20 lbs to the average girl and ask her man, honestly, how he feels about her. That is, how sexually attracted to her is he now that she has added 20 lbs of fat.

    Then do the same for the guys and ask the girls.

    IOW, guys and girls are quite different in what turns them on.

    How does that work then? In what ways are not-so-attractive girls rewarded more for chastity than pretty girls?

    No, what I am saying, is, that pretty girls, the one in demand, are less likely to be chaste than less-attractive girls. I do not have any stats to back that up, it has just been my general observation. To put it another way, Pam Anderson (and her kind) can screw around as much as they want and still get marriage offers. Same with Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan. For average girls and, especially, unattractive girls, they do not have this luxury.

    If men do what Roissy suggests; stop asking girls out who don’t put out by date X, then the chaste girl will find herself dating lots of different men on the short term. If she sees women who sleep with men having boyfriends for a year or two, she will think that is a step ahead, especially if no one is pointing out the difference between a lover and a husband.

    No attractive woman became an old maid by being “too virtuous”. Like you said, girls need this taught to them.

    I think modern society is afraid to create situations that promote mutually pleasant interaction between the sexes.

    Those social structures were created to 1.) promote interactions between the sexes while at the same time 2.) protect the girls chastity.

    That is almost unthinkable today. Too politically incorrect.

    LikeLike


  123. on September 2, 2008 at 7:10 pm Yours truly

    “You add 20 lbs to the average girl and ask her man, honestly, how he feels about her. That is, how sexually attracted to her is he now that she has added 20 lbs of fat.

    Then do the same for the guys and ask the girls.

    IOW, guys and girls are quite different in what turns them on.”

    Well, I personally find few things less masculine than a fat man. I haven’t really met a woman who was open to dating an obese man. I do know some who like a buff guy with a little pot bolly, a teddy bear type, if he is tall. But perhaps this is different in your country.

    Fat increases estrogen production in men as well as women, and obesity makes both sexes less fertile. The seed of an obese man goes comatose and obese women ovulate less often. It would make sense for both to become less sexually attractive.

    “To put it another way, Pam Anderson (and her kind) can screw around as much as they want and still get marriage offers.”

    This is true, but if they were chaste they would still get more offers than the average girl. And the men proposing would likely do so at a younger age, rather than playing the fiels until their thirties.
    I’m not sure if chastity even really increases the amount of proposals, unless everyone is doing it. I think it is moreso that the lack of heartbreak from several failed relationships that included sex keep women off the dating market for months or years to heal. The time spent licking their wounds can be better spent when the girl does engage in loveless sex.

    “Those social structures were created to 1.) promote interactions between the sexes while at the same time 2.) protect the girls chastity.

    That is almost unthinkable today. Too politically incorrect.”

    I’m not that sure about it. If the system is very rigid and chastity is strictly promoted as a commodity, then women will reject it. If there is more focus on how keeping sex for loving relationships prevents “love hangovers”, and promotes a sense of balance, self acceptance and self respect.

    LikeLike


  124. on September 2, 2008 at 7:21 pm Usually Lurking

    Well, I personally find few things less masculine than a fat man. I haven’t really met a woman who was open to dating an obese man.

    I didn’t say obese. I worded my question carefully.

    This is true, but if they were chaste they would still get more offers than the average girl. And the men proposing would likely do so at a younger age, rather than playing the fiels until their thirties.

    I completely agree.

    If there is more focus on how keeping sex for loving relationships prevents “love hangovers”, and promotes a sense of balance, self acceptance and self respect.

    The girls would still choose the bars and clubs for a Saturday night. They are more hip and cool. The only way to keep them (or anyone) out is shame. Shame has nearly completely left the Western world. People are only ashamed of some possible Racism, and, basically, nothing else.

    As long as you are properly PC, you have nothing to be ashamed of.

    LikeLike


  125. on September 2, 2008 at 7:53 pm Yours truly

    “The girls would still choose the bars and clubs for a Saturday night. They are more hip and cool. The only way to keep them (or anyone) out is shame. Shame has nearly completely left the Western world. People are only ashamed of some possible Racism, and, basically, nothing else.”

    I’m not sure. I think the chaste options currently available are religious or have too heavy a parent involvement. A lot of women interested in an alternative are not religious or not interested in too heavy a parental involvement.

    The main reason that many girls who plan to be chaste fail to do so is because the idea is pushed by her parents and church. Women who actually choose to avoid casual sex of their own accord are far more likely to stick to it. They know their reasons for making their choice and have more cognitive consonance going on.

    I think a woman who has chosen chastity does not need to be shamed into visiting places where her chastity is protected, as long as she can have a pleasant time there and meet compatible men.

    LikeLike


  126. on September 2, 2008 at 8:13 pm Usually Lurking

    Women who actually choose to avoid casual sex of their own accord are far more likely to stick to it. They know their reasons for making their choice and have more cognitive consonance going on.

    Fine point. But that group of women make up a pretty small percentage of the truly attractive. And that is my point.

    Of the desirable women, few choose this path. More importantly, of the very desirable girls, many are absolutely drawn to the “worst” bars/clubs. Most are not looking for really easy going places. They are drawn to the “hippest” bars which often have a real feeling of pure sex to them.

    This has an effect. Like you said. Those chaste girls now need to compete with the not-so-chaste girls. It is an uphill battle.

    When society place “scarlet letters” on the “whores” of society, it was much easier for the good girls.

    And, again, the hottest women are not looking for a “pleasant” time. This is why they prefer the bars and clubs to nice house parties and dinner parties.

    LA is just an extreme, but good, example of this.

    LikeLike


  127. on September 2, 2008 at 8:22 pm Ba1anced gives Chic Noir faith in some men.

    DA saidsome of us are simply too afraid and intimidated to be around the pretty people

    Some of us pretty people like to post on forums too. 🙂

    LikeLike


  128. on September 2, 2008 at 8:30 pm Ba1anced gives Chic Noir faith in some men.

    UL said: Pam Anderson (and her kind) can screw around as much as they want and still get marriage offers. Same with Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan

    I get Pam Anderson but what is it about Paris Hiltona and Lindsay Lohan.

    LikeLike


  129. on September 2, 2008 at 8:43 pm Usually Lurking

    I get Pam Anderson but what is it about Paris Hiltona and Lindsay Lohan.

    All I mean is that they are very attractive. Yes, even Paris. For all the bashing that she takes, you would think that she is really cute if you had never heard of her and simply saw her on the street.

    Remember to compare these girls to the average girl…they are very attractive.

    And that is the point, even if they are a known quantity, a slutty quantity, many guys would still LOVE to marry them. Sure, they might be betas, but they are still there.

    If an unattractive girl tried to pull half of that slutty stuff, and her future guy knew about it, she would likely not be so fortunate.

    LikeLike


  130. on September 2, 2008 at 8:48 pm Yours truly

    “This has an effect. Like you said. Those chaste girls now need to compete with the not-so-chaste girls. It is an uphill battle.

    When society place “scarlet letters” on the “whores” of society, it was much easier for the good girls.”

    You are right, I hope there is another way. I think chastity is growing in popularity, but adding shame into the equation would actually keep a lot of women from contemplating the idea.

    For one, in many cultures only one lover is enough to give a girl the scarlet letter and make her irredeemably a bad girl and then marriage is no longer an option for her and she must become a misstress or prostitute. This locks out the women who want to wait for love but not necessarily marriage, the womn who have previously had a lover or those who feel compassion with other women. Secondly, the focus on shame and guilt causes people to reject sex even in marriage.

    The concept of taking some time to get to know eachother, whet the imagination and let love bloom before enjoying committed, loving and passionate sex is far more friendly to women who want to have a pleasant, stressfree dating life and look forward to married lust.

    “And, again, the hottest women are not looking for a “pleasant” time. This is why they prefer the bars and clubs to nice house parties and dinner parties.”

    I think that does depends on how you define hot. I think chaste and unchaste women both come in beautiful, ordinary and ugly varieties, but a chaste woman is less likely to be wearing hotpants and a wonderbra. Or if they do they are called prickteasers by the men.

    I think it is possible for both men and women to give a hint of their sexual nature in a way that is appropriate to a dinner party. Sensual tension can build up with a certain kind of eye contact, a slow dance, a deep warm voice, a sensuous cologne or a form fitting evening dress. As long as it is simmering rather than boiling and steaming, it need not be inappropriate nor lead to excessively early consummation of desires. I do think it is a shame that we no longer learn the subtle charms to the degree our foremothers and forefathers did. The babyboomers flushed that wisdom down the drain and nowadays it is very hard to find.

    LikeLike


  131. on September 2, 2008 at 8:50 pm Yours truly

    “Yes, even Paris. For all the bashing that she takes, you would think that she is really cute if you had never heard of her and simply saw her on the street.”

    She does give a good example of feminine dress.

    LikeLike


  132. on September 2, 2008 at 8:52 pm Nicole

    @Lurking post 126

    Society already has scarlet letters…halter tops and what we call “taybas” here, the low jeans.

    For men and women, certain styles of dress broadcast which clique someone is in or at least wants to appear as. Some things say wannabe bad boy, and some things wannabe bad girl.

    If a guy wants to see an ars (chav/thug) when he looks in the mirror, I know he’s not the guy I want to see next to me in the morning. So if a woman is dressed inappropriately for her figure, the weather, and the occasion, that’s a big red A.

    Whatever feminists say about how it shouldn’t matter how one dresses, clothing is a costume. Someone doesn’t put on a dashiki to play a Klansman in a movie. Women who want to be perceived as classy, don’t dress like hookers.

    Nudity isn’t the issue. Hippies and naturists often show alot of skin when the weather permits, but they’re not in hoe uniform.

    LikeLike


  133. on September 2, 2008 at 9:07 pm Nicole

    @Roissy said:
    “You will have lowered her self-esteem and made it easier for the next man to nut inside her.”

    Some women’s self esteem isn’t lowered so easily.

    One guy not calling after the first date or even the first shag is a little annoying, but doesn’t really affect my confidence. It means that he wasn’t long term material, and did the right thing by quitting while he’s ahead.

    Maybe what you have a talent for is picking out women whose self confidence is dependent on how she is treated by each and every guy no matter who that guy is. These are likely women with no brothers and/or no male friends.

    Women with a variety of male friends usually understand men a bit better, and are less shaken by one guy not liking her (boo freakin’ hoo). Most of her true male friends are also not sexually attracted to her, and her ego handles that just fine.

    …but then, from experience, I can say that such a girl is very likely to tell you if a date is going badly. She’ll suggest making it a hanging out experience instead of a date, pay for her own stuff, and give you a nice real hug.

    LikeLike


  134. on September 2, 2008 at 9:15 pm Yours truly

    “If a guy wants to see an ars (chav/thug) when he looks in the mirror, I know he’s not the guy I want to see next to me in the morning. So if a woman is dressed inappropriately for her figure, the weather, and the occasion, that’s a big red A.”

    Agreed. You can say chavs are alphas who get all the hot chicks until doomsday, but I’d never be able to ignore how grating his style and bad grammar is.

    That said, there are bad boys and bad girls who do not always look the part.

    A velvet dress with booths on a summer morning, low jeans with muffin tops or a lumberjack shirt at a wedding are moreso the hallmarks of the plebian than of the scarlet man or woman. There certainly is a correlation, but they are not the same.

    I’ve met some girls in the student social life who did not look the part, but slept with guys indiscriminately. I met some bad boys at a sailing club who would not be caught dead in thugwear. I met some grown, married people who cheat with anything they can get and do not look the part. The difference is that it is more often a passing phase and more discretion is used.

    LikeLike


  135. on September 2, 2008 at 9:24 pm Yours truly

    Is the picture on top a scne for Phantom of the Opera by the way?

    LikeLike


  136. on September 3, 2008 at 1:06 am Chic Noir is medium brown and proud

    Yours truly
    “Yes, even Paris. For all the bashing that she takes, you would think that she is really cute if you had never heard of her and simply saw her on the street.”

    She does give a good example of feminine dress.

    Point well noted. Paris is often photographed in girly dresses these days.

    Before the drugs&drinking, I thought Lindsey was one of the best looking women in Hollywood.

    I got a soft spot for red heads. Anyone remember Angie Everheart?

    LikeLike


  137. on September 3, 2008 at 1:35 am Usually Lurking

    I think chaste and unchaste women both come in beautiful, ordinary and ugly varieties, but a chaste woman is less likely to be wearing hotpants and a wonderbra. Or if they do they are called prickteasers by the men.

    What I am saying is, the girls that look best at the beach are most likely to go to the “hip” bars and clubs.

    LikeLike


  138. on September 3, 2008 at 1:39 am Usually Lurking

    Society already has scarlet letters…halter tops and what we call “taybas” here, the low jeans.

    Nicole, that is not a scarlet letter. You never choose to wear a Scarlet Letter. It is forced on you by an elder or elders.

    LikeLike


  139. on September 3, 2008 at 8:01 am Yours Truly

    “What I am saying is, the girls that look best at the beach are most likely to go to the “hip” bars and clubs.”

    Maybe. I guess if your standard uniform is half naked, it makes sense to invest more in looking good in that state than the average person. I guess women look moreso at faces and clothed figure when determining beauty. When people get a bit older, things do shift a bit because the good girl types tend to age more gracefully than the bad girl types. Nigella Lawson and Monica Belluci are older than Pamela Anderson, but look a lot softer and fresher. But then again, on a market for brief flings, Pamela will be as succesful as Nigella or Monica.

    There is also a certain glamour to darkness of character in itself. The gangster and the whore are basically versions of age old archetypes that evoke a certain glamour even if the professions per se are no more glamourous than that of a salesman. I guess when someone gets to the point of being a top gangster or a top courtesan, one must have taken a ton of risks and beaten the competition, which requires good survival genes.

    LikeLike


  140. on September 3, 2008 at 9:00 am Nicole

    @Lurking post 138

    Does it make a difference whether the force is with the hands or with the mind?

    Apparently, droves of people are being convinced to let their inner thugs/hoes shine through with mind control, which in my opinion, is far more effective and sinister than brute force labeling.

    A promiscuous or unethical person doesn’t always look the part, but it’s very helpful if they do.

    Sometimes it’s not even a matter thugs and hoes, but other types as well. Certain things are more or less common in certain groups. At least the well dressed hoe tends to know what’s expected of someone who wishes to mix with a certain sector of society.

    To seduce a preacher from the front pew requires strategic shoulder, not tactical upper thigh. 😉

    LikeLike


  141. on September 3, 2008 at 10:59 am Yours Truly

    “Apparently, droves of people are being convinced to let their inner thugs/hoes shine through with mind control, which in my opinion, is far more effective and sinister than brute force labeling.”

    I think people are having difficulties with the blurring lines between playing dress up or irony or fantasy and reality.

    An actress playing a hooker in a film or a play, with nudity and all that is clearly fantasy. A wife putting on the corset, stockings and red nipple dye for a bit of role play is clearly fantasy, but is also clearly enjoying the part and so is her husband. It stays between the two of them and they get to be the nice suburban couple in the morning. A woman playing a 16th century courtesan at a renaissance fair or in an online game for most of her free time is walking those blurring lines. A lot of her friends know that side of her better than the side that goes to work. Still, unless she is taking johns at the fair or sleeps with the men she met online, she is much like a volunteer actress. There is social pressure against actually fully acting out the harlot part at a renaissance fair, actual sex is forbidden in a play or film and the roleplaying couple is still a married couple.

    Then you have trashy dress up parties like this: http://www.expornstar.com/
    Where the dress up theme is always a celebration of raunch and bad taste are required. (Those are their own words, bot my judgement) I’m pretty certain that people who go to parties like these regularly are hving flings there. The skimpy clothing in combination with drunkenness and close physical contact makes it difficult for men not to initiate and for women not to submit.

    People need fantasy to spice up life a bit, bonedry sensible reality is a bit boring. But when your behaviour crosses the lines and animalism becomes reality, there is also no fantasy left. Aside from roleplay or vicarious roleplay (plays, films, books) we also stimulate our fantasies with erotically evocative perfumes, or music that alludes to sexuality. Jazz often explicitly refers to sexuality and the cad lifestyle.

    Much of civilisation is just about making our animal nature more implicit and wrapping it in pleasant rituals. The problem with most people is that the rituals have lost meaning so implicit sexuality becomes absent sexuality. The choice between that and explicit sexuality will then favour the latter. Very few people want to be sexless, and very few people know how to be sexual is a subtle way. So you get a lot of crass people.

    But the changes have only just begun. It is highly interesting to see how technological changes are affecting society.The boundaries between reality and highly realistic fantasies are dissolving. In a virtual world, every woman is as young and as pretty as she wants to be, and every man young and handsome or you can sleep with an AI stripper or biker who can fulfill your sexual and masochistic desires but never gives you a real STD. You can have a doormat/drone AI cater to your narcissistic ego. This will be fascinating to witness.

    LikeLike


  142. on April 28, 2009 at 10:11 am Pulling Solid Number Closes « Roissy in DC

    […] have run similar number closing game on girls, and I can inform you this reverse psychology method is highly effective. It’s a wonder I don’t number close like this all the time, but […]

    LikeLike


  143. on September 21, 2010 at 8:12 pm Rarfy

    “You will have lowered her self-esteem and made it easier for the next man to nut inside her. The good karma this selfless act generates will return to you a hundred easy first dates that end the next morning.”

    See, this is what I tell all my friends, to no avail. It’s imperative that guys who deal with women do everything they can to lower their self-esteem at all times. But they stand there whistling at them on the sidewalk and telling them how pretty they are, etc., etc. Ridiculous.

    And I too have gotten to the point where I cut things off if I don’t get exactly what I’m looking for all the way from hello to the bedroom. It’s an art. It’s what women do. When you have a ton of options you screen VERY carefully and use “thin slicing.” Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t, but it’s nothing to be ashamed about.

    LikeLike



Comments are closed.

  • Copyright © 2018. Chateau Heartiste. All rights reserved. Comments are a lunchroom food fight and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Chateau Heartiste proprietors or contributors.
  • Visit the Goodbye, America photojournal website.

    Then cleanse your visual palate with a visit to the Welcome Back, America photojournal website.

  • Pages

    • About
    • Alpha Assessment Submissions
    • Beta Of The Year Contest Submissions
    • Dating Market Value Test For Men
    • Dating Market Value Test For Women
    • Diversity + Proximity = War: The Reference List
    • Shit Cuckservatives Say
    • The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon
  • Twitter Updates

    Error: Please make sure the Twitter account is public.

  • Recent Comments

    Veritas on Betrayal Is A Woman’s…
    Publius on Sweden Vs Norway
    Publius on Sweden Vs Norway
    Dr.Benway on The Three Abrahamic Religions,…
    Dread Forman on Sweden Vs Norway
    Dr.Benway on The Three Abrahamic Religions,…
    Publius on Sweden Vs Norway
    Publius on Sweden Vs Norway
    Publius on Sweden Vs Norway
    Name(required) on The Three Abrahamic Religions,…
  • Top Posts

    • Battlebrows As Portent Of Sociopath America
    • Women's Sports Will Be Killed Off By Invasive Trannies
    • Betrayal Is A Woman's Heart
    • Red Tsunami?
    • The Three Abrahamic Religions, Abbreviated
    • Oy, There It Is
    • NPC Culture, In One Meme
    • Globohomo's Next Target: "Sexual Racism"
    • Shitlib Logic Trap!
    • The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon
  • Categories

  • Game

    • 60 Years of Challenge
    • Alpha Game
    • Cajun
    • Krauser PUA
    • Rational Male
    • Roosh V
    • Tenmagnet
    • Treatise of Love
  • MAGA MEN

    • Alternative Right
    • AmRen
    • Anonymous Conservative
    • Audacious Epigone
    • Dusk in Autumn
    • Education Realist
    • Evo and Proud
    • Gene Expression
    • Hail To You
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • Lion of the Blogosphere
    • My Posting Career
    • OneSTDV
    • PA World and Times
    • Page For Men
    • Parapundit
    • Rogue Health and Fitness
    • Steve Sailer
    • The Anti-Gnostic
    • The Kakistocracy
    • The Red Pill Review
    • The Spearhead
    • Unqualified Reservations
    • Vox Popoli
    • West Hunter
    • Whiskey's Place
  • Syllogism and Synthesis

    • Alias Clio
    • Arts & Letters Daily
    • Deconstructing Leftism
    • Elysium Revisited
    • Feminine Beauty
    • hbd chick
    • Human Biological Diversity
    • Library of Hate
    • Overcoming Bias
    • Stuff White People Like

WPThemes.


loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
%d bloggers like this: