• 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
« No One Is Entitled To Commitment
Women Prefer Taken Men »

The Manjaw-ification Of American Women: Science!

January 15, 2013 by CH

CH has been at the forefront of noting a trend among Western, particularly American, women toward masculinization. This “manning up” by secularized post-industrial women is prominent in both their physical features (fatter, manjaw-ier, bigger framed) and their personalities (bitchier, more entitled, less fecund, more prone to binge drinking). A theory was put forward that the Six Sirens of the Sexual Apocalypse, among other downstream effects they have caused, have pushed women away from their essential femininity, via exact mechanisms poorly understood as yet.

Genetic alteration does not seem a likely candidate, because it is mathematically impossible for alleles coding for manlier women to sweep through a large population in a couple of generations, unless some cataclysmic event were to wipe out the majority of people. Adaptation to cultural stimuli is likelier, though that leaves us wondering how it is culture can physically change the shape of women’s jaws to resemble Christmas nutcrackers. Some sort of biological insult, like a toxin or estrogen in the water or BPAs or high fructose fattening syrup, could be the culprit. Or maybe it’s an epigenetic phenomena — the response by protein-coding enzymes to environmental stressors, such as that of becoming financially self-sufficient, being surrounded by supplicating beta males, and riding the alpha cock carousel until closing time.

Some of you naturally will ask, “But are your personal suspicions supported by the evidence? Are American women really getting more masculine?” A fair question! And for that, we may turn to… science! (She pleasured me with science… ) A reader writes:

As you noted in one of your posts there seems to be a manjaw-ification of women. However, actual evidence, besides anecdotal, has not been found, yet.

This TED Talk by Amy Cudy, an associate professor at Harvard University, put me on track of possibly starting to find this evidence.

http://www.ted.com/talks/amy_cuddy_your_body_language_shapes_who_you_are.html

In this talk she presents the ideas from one of her published articles (Carney, Cudy & Yap, 2010) in which she tested the idea of power posing influencing behavioural outcome. The authors not only wanted to show that indeed assuming a specific pose gives rise to a stronger or weaker feeling of power, but they went one step further to actually measure testosterone and cortisol levels in the test subjects. Here is where it gets interesting!

Power posing did positively relate to the feelings of the test subjects and they showed that strong power poses increases the level of testosterone and decreases the level of cortisol, and weak power poses decrease the level of testosterone and increases the level of cortisol in both men and women. From this they conclude that the body can influence the mind through the endrocrine system, as testosterone is linked to power and cortisol to stress. (Before it was only believed, as we know in the community, that assumed psychological frames can create new beliefs and behaviours, eg. faking confidence breeds confidence.)

This got me thinking about the effect of these changes in levels of testosterone in children. One would assume that growing up as a powerful young Man the testosterone level is boosted due to physical behaviour resulting in an Alpha male. But the reverse would also be true. By being controlled/shamed/pussyfied young men will experience a decrease in testosterone resulting in a Beta or worse.

Now if one would apply this logic to young women, as Cudy allows because effects were the same in both male and female test subjects, we can conclude that putting young women in physicaly powerful situations/behaviours it would increase their testosterone levels and vice versa.

One of the goals or outcomes of feminism is that young women are learned to behave and act like men. By displaying this more powerful physical behaviour, following the earlier logic, they will exhibit increased testosterone levels and thus develop more mannish features, like manjaws. Also, by keeping young boys on a leash and not allowing them to physically explore their masculinity their testosterone levels are stunted, resulting in more feminine features. Ultimately leading to a more androgynous society.

One of the criticisms could be that these changes are quite small, but hormonal levels only need a very small change to have large effects, especially in children and over a long time.

By pointing you towards this article I hope to help solve the mystery on why women are turning into men and men into women on a physical level, causing some of the problems that we are seeing as the redpill community.

“Power posing influencing behavioural outcome.” Now where have I come across that idea before? Hmm….. lemme think…. oh yeah!
YET AGAIN, science proves a core game concept. How about that? ♥♥♥♥♥♥

This reader’s inference — that the social expectations of feminism and the accumulated effect of grrlpower SWPL parents who push their daughters in the same direction as their sons induces physical as well as behavioral changes in girls and boys through hormonal mechanisms that tend toward androgynizing the population — deserves serious investigation. It’s time to pull out the calipers and assays and begin measuring the geometry of jaws and testosterone levels in Western women by generation and over lifetimes. If it is true that power posing influences not just behavioral but physical outcome, then we can boldly assert that

FEMINISM MAKES WOMEN MANLIER.

And that, my friends, will finally and once and for all, kill the rancid ideology deader than dead, because no woman in her right mind wants to be manlier. This bizarre epoch will come to be seen as a time when women were led so far astray that they became, socially and biologically, men. And men, for their part, became manboobs.

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 Biomechanics is God, Culture, Girls, Science Validates Game | 139 Comments

139 Responses

  1. on January 15, 2013 at 2:53 pm Jonathan

    There is an even likelier explanation. Women who are stressed during pregnancy produce more testosterone. I think it’s pretty safe to say that because of feminism and it’s pressure on women having a career women today are feeling more stress which equals heavier doses of testosterone in the womb and manlier girls.

    Here’s an article on the subject.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-368100/A-stress-free-pregnancy-deliver-popular-child.html

    LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 4:59 pm Diomedes

      Jonathan is right in addressing that the prenatal effects are likely the key to all of this. Besides stress factors, add in; pollutants in our environment (plastics et cet.), poor diet (carb based and nutrient poor), obesity, alcohol consumption, poor sleeping habits and poor physical health. All of these issues are a problem within our society and will affect the testosterone of a female before she gets out of the womb.

      Additionally, studies on mice have found that females who are exposed to higher than average levels of testosterone prenatally are more likely to be aggressive, indulge in lesbian behaviour, enter motherhood at an older age and have a bigger gap between the arsehole and fanny.

      Therefore; lesbians and feminists = half men. (As if it needed mentioning.)

      LikeLike


  2. on January 15, 2013 at 2:57 pm Jonathan

    I just have to add that too much testosterone int the womb won’t necessarily make a boy manlier and tougher, it can result in impaired language and social skills which can manifest itself as autism and Asperger. That is geeky and socially awkward guys.

    Is the “geekification” and “nerdification” of western men also a result of this?

    LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 5:09 pm Diomedes

      From what I understand, it causing autism is an outlier scenario and may not even be the case. It is more likely to manifest as a man essentially being the archetypal big dumb brute. Think Bluto. (Anyone who has read more widely, feel free to correct me if I am in error.)

      However, low testosterone prenatally for men is linked with language skills developing at an early age (as is the norm for women). This may explain why there is a predisposition of homosexuality/bi-sexuality/femininity of mind in novelists/poets/songwriters.

      LikeLike


  3. on January 15, 2013 at 3:05 pm Georgia Boy

    I dunno man, the masculinity isn’t all new if you ask me. Some of the old-school female movie stars look really masculine in my opinion. Bette Davis kinda had a manjaw, and the rest of her face looks masculine to me by modern movie star standards: big prominent forehead, wide cheekbones. Katherine Hepburn, no manjaw but same deal with the forehead and cheekbones, and with a flattened bridge of the nose. Joan Crawford, fuhgedaboutit, change up the hair and clothes and she’d easily pass for a male. Of course it’s not all of them, you also had Audrey, Elizabeth, and Marilyn, but it’s just distracting when you watch some of the old movies on TV, I’m like that’s the supposedly pretty female lead?

    LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 3:10 pm The Man Who Was . . .

      I kinda wonder about this too.

      LikeLike


      • on January 15, 2013 at 3:15 pm JironGhrad

        Back then, women also typically had to have talent. Singing, dancing… something else. Lacking modern special effects, most movies had to rely on other draws (along with better written plots).

        LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 3:16 pm Jonathan

      I remember a pic comparing the average female stars of the 50:s with those of today. The only thing manlier on the female star of the fifties was her nose. But the chin and eyes were definitely manlier on the average female star of today. And with the rise of plastic surgery and in particular nose-jobs there is an explanation for that. Chins are harder to fix.

      LikeLike


      • on January 15, 2013 at 11:23 pm Matthew King (King A)

        I see no difference, other than the introduction of color (no, thwack that’s not your cue) and a tilt toward manjaw-ification:

        Keep in mind we are not comparing all of these women at the same age. Glamor allowed an actress to carry her aura well past her early-20s prime. But since then “glamor” has left the silver screen for the fashion runway (h/t Camille Paglia). A true comparison would be between classic actresses and their post-wall contemporaries like Angelina Jolie, Julia Roberts, and Cameron Cruz. We are so used to 20-year-old skin in Victoria’s Secret and Sports Illustrated today that defines beauty today, but that has no parallel in the past: those girls were not exposed like they are now.

        In any era, Grace (@ 0:54) wins everything. And she had the good sense to get decapitated shortly after encountering the wall. Live fast, die young, leave behind a pretty corpse.

        Matt

        LikeLike


      • on January 31, 2013 at 1:11 am JayMan

        Have you seen this?

        The changing face of fame : Gene Expression

        LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 5:17 pm Diomedes

      “Some of the old-school female movie stars look really masculine in my opinion”

      Keep in mind that they are not reflective of wider woman as a whole. Take a look at Hollywood Babylon by Kenneth Anger. A lot of the early Hollywood gals spent more time on their knees in front of producers than reading scripts. A woman who is willing to ‘network’ her way to the big time isn’t going to be the most feminine of ladies.

      LikeLike


    • on January 16, 2013 at 5:49 am Days of Broken Arrows

      Celebrities do not = real life. This is a bad example.*

      The reason for this is that the celebrities you see don’t just appear. They’re selected by “gatekeepers” — casting agents, directors, magazine editors, modeling agencies.

      The women you see represent THEIR AGENDA not the average woman on the street.

      This discussion is about how American went from having sweet little girls baking you pies in home economics class to thick-angled freaks running around like fools on the women’s lacrosse field.

      * As a sidenote, I want to mention that I see female commenters do this and wonder if the above commenter is really a “boy.” Whenever we discuss men treating women a certain way, inevitably a female on here chimes in with something like “But that’s not how it happened in ‘Love Actually’ with Hugh Grant!'” THAT’S A MOVIE!!! Not real life. Everything you see was edited and re-edited for effect. This is a blog where we discuss real women we know, not “movie stars” and what they’re fictional characters do.

      LikeLike


    • on January 24, 2013 at 10:18 am Dave

      Turn on Turner Class Movies right now and you will see a woman more feminine than the average woman you see today. I guarantee it.

      LikeLike


  4. on January 15, 2013 at 3:16 pm bevis

    manjawphication?
    manjawfication?

    LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 8:58 pm pdwalker

      manjawification

      LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 1:03 am sir vicks

        mandibular android hypertrophy?

        LikeLike


  5. on January 15, 2013 at 3:16 pm The Man Who Was . . .

    I wonder if its all just an artifact of women working out more. You’ve got a lot more hardbodies out there in the media and in upper classes. Women didn’t used to be fat back in the day, but they didn’t work out much either, so even the relatively slender babes kept some baby fat on them.

    LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 3:29 pm Greg Eliot

      Their jaws are certainly getting more of a workout nowadays… as their posts right here at the very chateau will evince.

      LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 5:00 pm PetiteOlive

      I went through an excessive workout phase (> 5 times a week) and my round face became scrawnier (which I liked at the time because I always wanted sunken ana cheeks….(slight anorexic tendencies when I was younger but I digress)), my ex at the time preferred my face rounder but I thought I looked hot. Also another thing I notice during my excessive excercise phase was that my abs and waist grew like a rock solid two inches….my natural hourglass started looking squarish…perhaps women working out too much makes them look more masculine. You could not convince me then that my manly scrawny shape was not the hottest thing though….

      LikeLike


      • on January 15, 2013 at 8:11 pm Grit

        The very idea you wanted to ‘look hot’ is masculine. Men want women to look hot. Women want men to commit. (Pesky gender roles aside)

        [Heartiste: This is like the mirror image of the claim that men who want to be interesting to attract women are themselves acting feminine. Women who want to look hot for men are perfectly normal and feminine. They understand, on a subconscious level at least, that their looks are the primary determinant of their success in the dating market. If anything, a woman who is not concerned with her looks is usually very masculine. See: Any feminist shrike.]

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 2:35 pm Matthew King (King A)

        A cute layer of baby-like fat is the mark of youth, fertility, and feminine softness. Muscle tone is a sign of health, which is good, but it is otherwise masculine. I don’t know if there is a way to achieve the not-skinny/not-porcine balance through diet and workout, or if it is just youth and genes. But I do know not to advocate “a cute layer of baby-like fat,” as the modern woman will take it as their license to let themselves go. “But you said you liked fat!” In the land of the obese, err on the side of anorexia.

        “My ex at the time preferred my face rounder but I thought …” STOP THINKING. It is literally bad for your health. “You could not convince me then that …” STOPPPPPPP.

        Of all sad words of tongue or pen, / The saddest are these: “My natural hourglass started looking squarish.” *retch*

        Matt

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 3:18 pm PetiteOlive

        I did have disordered thinking re weight but I grew out of it. My natural proportions are a smaller toner natural version of kim kardashain, but when I was younger I hated it and wanted to look more like the olsen twins, you can only diet and exercise your boobs/butt to a certain extent I learnt. Anyway, now I just work on keeping things “tight”/maintaining a flat tummy. I have accepted my curvage and sometimes I even admire them now…..not so much so when I was in my late teens.

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 4:23 pm Matthew King (King A)

        You have committed high crimes against femininity. Luckily they occurred as a minor, and you will not be tried as an adult. May God have mercy on your fun-sized soul.

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 6:14 pm PetiteOlive

        Amen

        LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 6:09 pm cynthia

      I’ve definitely seen that in some of the women I went to school with and work with now. Working out can drastically change a woman’s body. But usually, you’re talking about soft tissue; pumping iron isn’t going to necessarily alter the bone structure of your face.

      [heartiste: Marathoners are the worst violators of accidental gender reassignment. Women who run extreme long distances have leathery, wrinkly faces utterly devoid of any appealing feminine fat. They also have missed periods, spindly legs, no tits, and flat asses. Women who work out with weights, but don’t overdo it, have nice sculpted asses without losing too much of their cute girly fat. (Note: Cute girly fat != obese pig.)]

      LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 3:24 pm WW

        Can I see some photos and/or diet/workout guides for the ideal not skinny-not fat-not muscular female body type?

        LikeLike


  6. on January 15, 2013 at 3:22 pm Sam Spade

    “…SWPL parents who push their daughters in the same direction as their sons …”

    Same direction as their sons, or opposite? Now that’s what’s really scary.

    LikeLike


  7. on January 15, 2013 at 3:34 pm Canadian Friend

    If behavior can increase testosterone levels, then this probably explains why women are attracted to bad boys

    men who behave badly , most likely cause their testosterone levels to go up especially if they have been bad boys for a long time, say decades, this has over the years given them more manly features, and this makes those bad boy more attractive to females

    it is also possible that the higher levels of testosterone are detected trough the sense of smell of women even if they are not aware of that, they are still attracted and don’t know why.

    but it is probably mostly visual cues ( indicating higher testosterone) that make women crazy about bad boys.

    Now how do we explain the fact most women love to nag nag nag…

    LikeLike


  8. on January 15, 2013 at 3:39 pm Kobayashi

    FEMINISM MAKES WOMEN MANLIER. – Kudos CH, priceless phrase.

    LikeLike


  9. on January 15, 2013 at 3:40 pm Tmason

    Off-topic: That post from RooshV on the 9 ugliest feminists really stirred up the menstral fluids of the femcunts. Check out the twitter feeds of who me mentioned.

    I bet a grand we have no less than five articles tomorrow in the cunteratti talking about RooshV.

    LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 3:41 pm Tmason

      “who me mentioned” should be “who he mentioned”

      LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 8:12 pm anon

        *whom

        LikeLike


  10. on January 15, 2013 at 3:41 pm taterearl

    One thing is for sure…women make terrible men.

    However strangely enough…beta men are so much better at being women.

    LikeLike


    • on January 16, 2013 at 5:38 pm aleister

      Well said!

      LikeLike


  11. on January 15, 2013 at 3:42 pm Canadian Friend

    If behavior in women over time increases their testosterone levels…

    what does the availability of porn ( and a reason to be turned on/masturbate often ) does to men?

    Before the age of porn men saw naked women much MUCH less often than they do now, our brains and bodies are not used to looking everyday at dozens or hundreds of videos of naked women having sex,

    this has got to be affecting or causing some changes in us

    is it good? is it bad?

    LikeLike


    • on January 16, 2013 at 5:52 am Days of Broken Arrows

      Before the age of civilization men saw women naked every day. I’d say the whole idea of us running around in our ugly little outfits created by ugly little designers is what “caused changes.” Naked is actually the norm.

      LikeLike


    • on January 16, 2013 at 8:57 am taterearl

      It emasculates them…easily. If they jerk off all the time to it they lose T.

      LikeLike


    • on January 16, 2013 at 7:10 pm yaser

      I tend to belie porn consumption lowers testosterone levels…

      I also have read that most studies have shown that this is NOT the case, but fuck’em, every man knows that being sedated with porn makes you a pussy.

      How many here think that people would build ships and travel the wild oceans 400 years ago if they had porn?

      LikeLike


      • on January 17, 2013 at 12:25 pm NiteLily

        “How many here think that people would build ships and travel the wild oceans 400 years ago if they had porn?”

        I really like your brand of thinking yaser.

        I think porn is very harmful, especially to married people. My goodness, if your wife doesn’t do it for you enough that you need to watch porn, then your relationship is headed for trouble. Either she is not hot anymore and has gotten fat, or her attitude stinks and she doesn’t enjoy sex with you anymore, which means she needs you to game her, not abdicate to watching porn. Porn leaves marriages unsatisfying, and women hate it when their husbands watch porn, instead of sexually focusing on them. Porn is only for losers who do not have a satisfying sex life.

        LikeLike


  12. on January 15, 2013 at 3:44 pm brookingstyler

    One has to wonder if the perception that women now have more of a masculine jawline is simply that we are evermore linked into mass media; and that there has been a move in society to push more of the big jawed women to the star podium. When you consider that so many mommies are now acting daddies too, it is not surprising. I believe paleontologists suggest larger jaws are/ were more prominent in hunter gatherer societies vs agricultural. The other thought that came to mind was how orangutang males will grow that facial boxing mask of flesh once they are alpha. If that is what hormones can do in a short time, it’s not too surprising. Lastly, I have always found it ironic that the most anti-male people tend to be angry bull dykes who are quite masculine themselves. Maybe due to competition for mates.

    LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 7:43 pm thwack

      +1 on the orangutang reference; they arn’t just “some ape”.

      In other news, Ted Talks = Gay

      LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 6:01 pm aleister

        Tedsters are known liberal fags. There are some good talks there, no doubt, but they are not the norm.

        LikeLike


  13. on January 15, 2013 at 4:02 pm whatever

    For posts that amount to “grass green, sky blue, water wet” I find the Science Validates Game series surprisingly enjoyable.

    LikeLike


  14. on January 15, 2013 at 4:02 pm JayMan

    It does indeed deserved to be researched. One way to do it is to get representative photos of women over the decades (as well as men) and see if their appearances become less gender-typical over time. Of course, that’s far from a simple task. On top of this, I can think of numerous confounds (changing ethnic composition of the country, for example).

    I’m doubtful of this, however. Showing that testosterone can increase or decrease in response to local circumstances is different from showing that those levels will be overly difference over extended periods of time. It is yet another thing to propose that this alters childhood morphology.

    That all being said, I can’t exclude the possibility.

    LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 7:46 pm thwack

      or, look at marriage photos of your mom, her mom, and her mom…

      LikeLike


  15. on January 15, 2013 at 4:28 pm JS

    I believe I read that men get their square jaw at adolescence when there is a rush of testosterone into the system. I speculate that it is the influx of teenage girls into high-school sports that is causing manjawitis.

    LikeLike


  16. on January 15, 2013 at 4:33 pm Eric Jacobus

    Thai female jaws would be a worthwhile area of study for this.

    LikeLike


  17. on January 15, 2013 at 4:39 pm chernobylsurvivor

    Women’s masculinization is probably more a result of increasing insulin resistance. Severe IR causes Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) in women, which in turn leads to greatly elevated levels of free testosterone in the once-fairer sex.

    And in men, insulin resistance leads to metabolic syndrome and an unnaturally estrogenic state. Metabolic syndrome causes an accumulation of belly fat and liver dysfunction – both of which make men more estrogen-y. Men suffering from cirrhosis of the liver will have gynecomastia (literarlly, man breasts) because their livers can’t break down the estrogen and get rid of if. Some of that estrogen may come from the environment, but most of it is just a normal metabolic process where some T gets converted to E. But, IR leads to MS, which can cause a fatty liver degeneration so it impedes a man’s body from getting rid of that extra E.

    Succeeding generations of pregnant women who are becoming more and more IR (and more PCOS-ish with higher levels of free testosterone) are probably giving birth to slightly more masculine female babies. A little bit extra T in the womb would have a greater impact on the development of a female fetus than a male one.

    Each female generation becomes a litter more IR, a little fatter, a little more PCOS-ish, with slightly higher free testosterone levels… and their female fetuses in the womb are getting more and more masculine as a result.

    The male feminization takes place later as a combination of the culture (feminism) and a diet that leads to insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome later on in life.

    I don’t think it’s a coincidence that consumption of sugar, and, later, high fructose corn syrup, have skyrocketed in the U.S. in the last 50 years. That’s the most likely culprit for the increase in insulin resistance and what we’re constantly told is an obesity epidemic.

    Maybe turn this around and look at it another way … maybe the hormonal changes are, in part, driving the proliferation of feminism and female masculinization (same thing, in my opinion).

    It’d also be interesting to look at the diet and obesity rates of countries where the women are thinner, more feminime and inclined toward traditional roles.

    LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 5:00 pm BetaForLife

      diabetes can lead to MS?

      LikeLike


      • on January 15, 2013 at 6:21 pm Julia

        In the above post I think MS stands for metabolic syndrome not multiple sclerosis.

        LikeLike


      • on January 15, 2013 at 11:36 pm Canadian Friend

        as far as I know the cause of Multiple Sclerosis is still a complete mystery…

        all we know is that Canada is one of the places where there is a lot of more cases of MS

        LikeLike


      • on January 18, 2013 at 1:18 am healthtrekker

        @CF: MS has a HUGE correlation with Vitamin D Deficiency due to pale-skin, high-latitude, and cloud-cover. See: Scotland.

        LikeLike


    • on January 16, 2013 at 7:20 pm yaser

      Awesome *taking notes*

      LikeLike


  18. on January 15, 2013 at 4:40 pm Diomedes

    “Power posing did positively relate to the feelings of the test subjects and they showed that strong power poses increases the level of testosterone and decreases the level of cortisol, and weak power poses decrease the level of testosterone and increases the level of cortisol in both men and women.”

    Gentleman – you too can do your bit for getting rid of the menace that is the Masculinisation of the Western female.

    When smashing your girls:

    – Make sure she is on her knees servicing you thrice-weekly.
    – Make sure you pin and mount her like the rabid bull that you are: Press those hands firmly onto her back and watch as any hope of escape drains from her eyes.
    – Make sure you never fall for the dangerous commie traps of letting your gal mount you ‘cowgirl’ and the peril of servitude that is ‘cunnilingus.’

    Follow these bedroom secrets and you’ll have a button-nosed cutie pie quicker than you can say ‘Germaine Greer.’

    LikeLike


  19. on January 15, 2013 at 4:41 pm BetaForLife

    second generation Mexican American here. i think the manjaws have always been around, but the immigrant/pioneer generation was infiitely tougher just by neccessity, its the men that maybe have gotten softer.

    LikeLike


  20. on January 15, 2013 at 4:49 pm John

    It seems as if it’s more about genetics rather than hormones. To be more precise, the amount of androgen receptors one has in certain parts of their body. For example, the guy that has a deep voice but has a face that isn’t particularly masculine indicates he had high test in puberty but didn’t have the genetics for a masculine face. Females are choosing more masculine men and having more masculine daughters. Females have 10-20x less testosterone than men and yet alot of them are still developing large jaws. So, it seems unlikely females would even be able to raise their T high enough to make a difference if it simply came down to hormones. If you have the genetics for a large jaw, you will get a large jaw period.

    LikeLike


  21. on January 15, 2013 at 4:56 pm RedPillPaul

    Or women could be getting more testosterone from other sources. With nothing restraining their hypergamy, they have all the time in the world to swallow massive amounts of cum or absorb it w/o making babies.

    More reasons to stay away from manjawed beings born with 2 x chromosomes.

    LikeLike


  22. on January 15, 2013 at 5:02 pm Rollo Tomassi

    You know, there is a canine breed of mammal where the females produce more testosterone than the males.

    They’re called hyenas.

    [Heartiste: And their clits are bigger than the male dicks!]

    LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 5:08 pm Greg Eliot

      No laughing matter.

      LikeLike


      • on January 15, 2013 at 5:41 pm Diomedes

        HA!

        Hyenas – a look into the future of male and female dynamics? They do not form pair bonds, the gals are sluts, males submit to females, females prefer youthful partners, females choose passivity over aggression in a mate and the females mount the males to procreate.

        Give it a few years. Our species is nearly there.

        LikeLike


      • on January 15, 2013 at 11:27 pm Brazen

        Realizable feminist utopia. Holy Shit!

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 7:40 pm yaser

        *taking notes*

        LikeLike


      • on January 17, 2013 at 12:26 pm NiteLily

        “Give it a few years. Our species is nearly there.”

        Hahahaha….that put the fear of God into you, eh? And, yaser is horrified but he’s taking notes lol

        LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 5:36 pm Newly Aloof

      Manjaws – n. Hypergamous females with hamster brains and hyena jaws.

      LikeLike


      • on January 17, 2013 at 1:22 pm Greg Eliot

        And dragon tattoos… as well as mouths. lllzozozozozozlzlzlzlzozozozozlzlzl

        LikeLike


      • on January 20, 2013 at 3:18 pm NiteLily

        Them Dragon mouths are so terrible.

        LikeLike


  23. on January 15, 2013 at 5:07 pm TEch

    American porn (airbrushed fake shit ) on the whole doesn’t cut it for me anymore. The woman are crude, loud, dominant at times, fake bodies, makeup etc. Its rather vile and obnoxious. I skip right over it.

    Asian culture porn tends to be more submissive, feminine, soft, sometimes more quiet. The women tend to be more natural also. Anime, and manga I’ve noticed also tends to draw their women in coy protective poses (arms centered, elbows turned in, knees tounching), this may be suggestive to the audience this is the ideal. I think they are right. and I find it rather cute and arousing.

    Over the last year I have developed stronger Yellow fever for these reasons, plus the exotic look of the women. In person I’ve met a few that demonstrate a very soft and feminine demure in their walk, hand gestures and face expressions. American girls on the average that I’ve noticed behave more and more like men, and my penis and biological urges toward them recoil.

    LikeLike


    • on January 15, 2013 at 7:35 pm Canadian Friend

      I agree,

      American women ( at least in porn videos ) are often less feminine, and at times dominant , two things that do not turn me on, and I prefer real breasts anyway

      while Asian women are more feminine, softer, more sensual, and not dominant, and rarely have fake breasts

      if you watch massages porn videos the difference is striking

      I have never dated an Asian woman, Maybe I should work on that…

      LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 12:07 am Matthew King (King A)

        Pornography is gay in its essence: men and masculine women with manly sex drives making videos produced by men and consumed by men. It is the equivalent of a rest-stop quickie (or marathon): dudes using other bros to get themselves off. Where else have you been subjected to so much erect cock in your life, so much semen?

        Matt

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 9:09 am Canadian Friend

        …Where else have you been subjected to so much erect cock in your life, so much semen?

        King A

        that is why I almost exclusively watch lesbian porn

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 2:04 pm Matthew King (King A)

        Which is literally gay.

        Porn is insidious. Images of feminine beauty are the furthest thing from queer. We hold them up as the art that they are, even religious art.

        But we quickly go from I love that to I want to fuck that to I’ll watch another guy fucking (or girl licking) that to two guys fucking that is twice as good to fifteen-man gang-bang to for some reason I am now watching a room full of naked and aroused dudes. Allow this impulse off the chain into the infinity of the internet, and a healthy appreciation for beauty (now more accessible than ever, beyond surfeit) quickly sours into a solipsistic sexual life.

        Porn is the ethos of unfettered male hypersexuality (bathhouses, chain parties) made gradually palatable for normal male consumption and addiction. The women in porn are used as a gateway to gay, among other depravities.

        Matt

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 7:35 pm yaser

        “…for some reason I am now watching a room full of naked and aroused dudes…”

        Hilarious, lol

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 7:39 pm yaser

        Porn also ruins the one thing that gave men the incentive to build civilizations.

        You go intro a illusion of having a harem, instead of having to fight to get an actual harem. Difference? You remain a loser, and don’t impregnate anyone.

        It’s actually good for us who skip it. Less competition.

        LikeLike


      • on January 20, 2013 at 3:19 pm betaforlife

        Matt, this is great. Thanks for posting. The light bulb was just starting to flicker in my brain, now it all makes sense and thankfully, its not too late. Warn the brethren!

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 2:01 am tom

        “…Asian women are more feminine, softer, more sensual, and not dominant, and rarely have fake breasts” yep, I thought exactly the same thing while reading this post… so true

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 6:09 am x

        how can someone with a smooshed in alien mongoloid face (ie all asians) considered feminine at all ? weird.

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 1:47 pm thwack

        how can someone with a smooshed in alien mongoloid face (ie all asians) considered feminine at all
        ————————————-

        I like my Asian girls to look Asian.

        I like my black girls to look black.

        If I want a white girl, I’ll get a white girl.

        I like Chinese food but I ain’t tryin to eat it every day.

        LikeLike


  24. on January 15, 2013 at 5:31 pm asinusspinasmasticans

    [FEMINISM MAKES WOMEN MANLIER. – Kudos CH, priceless phrase]

    Feature, not bug.

    LikeLike


  25. on January 15, 2013 at 6:09 pm Beefy Levinson

    This broad is pretty tubby even for an Army officer: http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/09/16437185-noting-army-flap-marine-corps-orders-its-spouses-clubs-to-allow-same-sex-members?lite

    LikeLike


  26. on January 15, 2013 at 6:58 pm betablocker87

    Non-sequitur, but very related to game concepts:

    “The idea of human equality is a dangerous fiction which, when taken up by the ‘very lowest class of men’ at the urging of demagogues, has in the end always resulted in slaughter and the plunder of property. And society, Ramsey wrote, far from being the voluntary compact conjured up in ‘the idle dreams of metaphysicians’ was in real life an inescapable organism created by the flight for survival of weak and solitary men to the protection of the strong.”

    LikeLike


    • on January 16, 2013 at 7:48 pm yaser

      “protection of the week” is a male instinct.
      “avoidance of danger” is a female instinct.

      In our matriarchal era (feministic, communistic), “protection of the week” is extracted from men with no due re-compensation, while “avoidance of danger” is blown out of proportion.

      If mothers were to decide, this would never have formed:

      LikeLike


      • on January 17, 2013 at 12:33 pm NiteLily

        “In our matriarchal era (feministic, communistic), “protection of the week” is extracted from men with no due re-compensation, while “avoidance of danger” is blown out of proportion.”

        What’s happening is that protection of the weak, which indeed is a male instinct, is being taken away from men and substituted by the State. The State is now supposed to protect women and children, not men. Men are expected to relinquish their natural rights to protect themselves and their families to the State. Hence, gun control.

        Avoidance of danger, which is indeed a female instinct, is as you say, being blown out of proportion, which is why the State makes laws against all risk taking, including drinking or eating supposedly non-healthy foods, like soda and salt. When the State tries to eliminate all risk taking, people without skin in the game make decisions for the risk takers – the investors, the producers, the developers – so that their risk taking is not rewarded by high profits. Instead, they end up saddled with high regulations and high taxes that curb risk taking and transfer wealth to the ones that “avoid danger,” if you can even call them that. They are more parasites than danger avoiders.

        All of these symptoms is the feminizing of America.

        LikeLike


      • on January 17, 2013 at 1:54 pm yaser

        “Men are expected to relinquish their natural rights to protect themselves and their families to the State.”

        Don’t forget that the “State” does NOTHING, it only employs men to do the bidding of the State, and rewards them horribly bad for it. Men take the risks, the state takes the honor.

        “Hence, gun control.”

        Hitler loved gun control. Stalin too.

        LikeLike


      • on January 17, 2013 at 4:10 pm NiteLily

        “Hitler loved gun control. Stalin too.

        Exactly right! Every despot on earth took guns away from his population. How convenient, eh? Only stupid liberals can’t see the trend. That’s why I say they are mentally useless. Their policies are running this country to the ground.

        Pay attention, throughout history who did more harm to its citizenry, the State or the individual? Who killed more people, State authoritarians or individuals? Stalin, Hitler, Mao – they killed hundreds-of- millions of people combined. Therefore, who has more power over you, the State or the individual? Obviously, the state. Which is why the State is to be feared way more than the individual. That’s why I don’t worry about guns at the hands of people who mostly look to protect themselves, save a few crazies that spring up now and then. The State removing all guns wholesale is more worrisome to me.

        Who has more power over you and who can control your life, the State or corporations? Who can arrest you, the State or corporations? Again, I fear the State more than I do corporations. But then again, there are some here who trash big business all the time, as if it has a way of forcing you to buy its products. It’s true, certain big businesses do have some power over you like banks for instance, but that’s only because banks are in cahoots with government, which in itself is a form of fascism, prohibited by the Constitution. The State is not supposed to take sides. Because the State picks sides, its power should be curtailed, not ours. Its interference with our decision-making and our protection of ourselves should be a big red flag to leftists who always talk about “equal protection under the law,” when the State does anything but. It’s constantly choosing winners, too big to fail, or groups to support, to the detriment of the others – usually white males. When you have a silent and not-so-silent war on white males you know the government has been feminized.

        LikeLike


  27. on January 15, 2013 at 7:54 pm thwack

    “biological insult”

    Ha, ha, thats a good one; I will deploy it against the next shesquatch that assaults my optic nerves.

    Thanks.

    LikeLike


  28. on January 15, 2013 at 8:06 pm DarkTriad

    Timely piece by Heartiste – Roosh just hit a home run on a related topic in Return of Kings –

    http://www.returnofkings.com/2099/the-9-ugliest-american-feminists

    He skewered the manjaws and fat apologists with prose worthy of the Chateau, and the feminist blogosphere is lighting up so hard it crashed his site.

    LikeLike


    • on January 20, 2013 at 3:22 pm NiteLily

      it’s unbelievable the response he had on his site. LOL, the feminists themselves are stampeding it. But it’s a puzzlement – most of the feminists in his list are not J. Maybe that’s why not many here made mention of his list. No J, nothing to say, eh? Out of 9 feminists only 2 are J on his list. Not all feminists are J as you all insist, ha?

      LikeLike


      • on January 20, 2013 at 3:30 pm Greg Eliot

        Hmmm…. even a small side list of one man’s snark nets in 22% representation of an alleged 3% of the population?

        Some seven times the amount of representation that the numbers alone would warrant?

        And for the record, who, exactly, said ALL feminists are YKWs?

        LikeLike


  29. on January 15, 2013 at 9:23 pm Gil

    Meh. I would argue the opposite women seem to be getting better looking (or at least a sub-section anyway). When you look at old timey photos most of the women there look tough and manly.

    LikeLike


    • on January 16, 2013 at 3:30 pm WW

      Makeup

      LikeLike


  30. on January 15, 2013 at 10:19 pm James

    The interesting (and inconvenient) thing is that the changes in body chemistry that make men more feminine and women more masculine, for some reason do not also make men more attracted to masculine women, or women more attracted to feminine men. The result is a lot of unhappiness all round.

    LikeLike


  31. on January 15, 2013 at 10:44 pm The Manjaw-ification Of American Women: Science! « PUA Central

    […] Genetic alteration does not seem a likely candidate, because it is mathematically impossible for alleles coding for manlier women to sweep through a large population in a couple of generations, unless some cataclysmic event were to wipe out the majority of people. Adaptation to cultural stimuli is likelier, though that leaves us wondering how it is culture can physically change the shape of women’s jaws to resemble Christmas nutcrackers. Some sort of biological insult, like a toxin or estrogen in the water or BPAs or high fructose fattening syrup, could be the culprit. Or maybe it’s an epigenetic phenomena — the response by protein-coding enzymes to environmental stressors, such as that of becoming financially Source: Chateau Heartiste   […]

    LikeLike


  32. on January 15, 2013 at 11:18 pm Brazen

    Off topic:

    Older man and younger wife = marriage that lasts.

    Paul Hogan, 73, and Linda Kozlowski, 54

    27 years

    Hogan split with his first wife, Noelene Edwards, in 1986, the year that “Crocodile” was released and in which he started romancing his co-star. Hogan and Edwards were first married in 1958 (the year Kozlowski was born) and split in 1981, though they got back together less than a year later. Hogan and Kozlowski were married in 1990

    http://ca.movies.yahoo.com/blogs/movie-talk/crocodile-dundee-couple-proves-not-years-mileage-mate-202854812.html

    LikeLike


  33. on January 15, 2013 at 11:22 pm dannyfrom504

    This is why I love being a southern boy, our wowen, by and large, are girls. And they make an effot to be ladies. They actually embrace taking care of their man.

    That being said (and I wasn’t about to read the whole article) my guess is the mindset and the lifestyle of feminist indoctrinated grrrrls today is the culprit, once you believe it, you become it. Plus, most women today are more obese than ever, they are simply bigger.

    Men, are being raised as women and are medicated throughout childhood and into early adulthood.

    My nephew, whom I ALWAYS schooled on girls, is a fucking wolf now. Kid has applied all the game I taught him and he’s knocking back 3 ways like it’s nothing. I get nakie pics chicks send him all the time with caption, “thanks uncle Danny she was a handful”. He’s a 21 year old heartbreaker, and dad gives ME credit. Lol.

    God bless game. It shows you how predictable women are. Before the blog I was good with women, now just over a your later- I’m fucking surgical when it comes to women.

    LikeLike


  34. on January 15, 2013 at 11:23 pm dannyfrom504

    As in deicing, or opening a jar of pickles.

    I was trained to NOT let a woman carry a lot of items or anything heavy. If you are a woman I know, I CANNOT let you carry more then one item, I’ll carry 6-7 bags to your one. Lol.

    LikeLike


    • on January 17, 2013 at 12:38 pm NiteLily

      Still a gentlemen despite it all? Sounds good if true.

      LikeLike


  35. on January 15, 2013 at 11:37 pm Glunder

    It wouldn’t surprise me.

    I noticed a long while back that there are facial structure differences between life-long English speakers and new, ESL immigrants – and the further away from English the mother tongue, the more pronounced the differences. So, a Chinese immigrant who learned English in his twenties before emigrating to the States will have recognizably different facial subtleties from their twin raised here from an infant.

    If so, it may have to do with the use of different facial and neck muscles in the production of different clusters of sounds peculiar to each language – use different facial muscles all your life, and it will affect both the musculature and the underlying bone structure. Not exactly the same thing as environmental stimuli causing hormonal “doping” in children and young adults, leading to gender-reversed facial features, but similar in a way.

    LikeLike


  36. on January 16, 2013 at 12:10 am Neecy

    So a strong jaw is no longer simply a case of bone structure? LOL

    LikeLike


    • on January 16, 2013 at 12:50 pm Canadian Friend

      Bone structure is a social construct

      ( this is a joke of course )

      LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 2:06 pm Matthew King (King A)

        Haw!

        LikeLike


  37. on January 16, 2013 at 1:14 am dannyfrom504

    the simple fact is, most women are simply bigger (read more obese) than past generation. they are being raised to be honey boo-boos. and men are being emasculated. in essence, women are NEEDING to become men since men are no longer manly.

    fuck that.

    i raised nephew on game since he was 10. now he’s 22 and he’s a a fucking wolf. because of the way most men are raised now, they’re pussies. which makes it EASIER for guys that understand game. i’m 38 and i haven’t banged a woman in her 30’s in YEARS. all my girls are 19-25. and it’s EASY. i mean, i game my female readers for God’s sake.

    point is, women may be getting manlier, but thank you for me living in the south where girls actually LIKE being girls. down here, women take pride in taking care of their men and being submissive. lol.

    LikeLike


  38. on January 16, 2013 at 3:25 am Zelazny

    I honestly doubt it’s the stance testosterone. Any indications of how the blood serum levels of T are influenced by stance? Lifting weights, diet and listening to fucking awesome music are probably bigger in their effect on your serum testosterone.

    [Heartiste: Watch the linked vid. She presents solid evidence that power poses increase T. Anyhow, it benefits a man to adopt alpha male power poses because women are attracted to that kind of male body langauge, regardless of its effects on the man’s T levels.]

    LikeLike


    • on January 16, 2013 at 7:07 pm Zelazny

      @Heartiste : I never disagreed on that part. They work and I use them too. I was mostly wondering if the link between manjaw and power poses isn’t a bit far-fetched, as I suspect that eating good precursors (beef, eggs and cholesterol-laden foods) for T might actually work better in raising your T levels, even though it may fuck up your body over time.

      I doubt if the trickle of T from those poses is enough to lead to serious masculinisation of female faces, as compared to other environment factors.

      But yeah, you’re right on the body language. It’s amazing how much it leads to others deferring to you.

      LikeLike


  39. on January 16, 2013 at 3:28 am Wrecked 'Em

    The cliché is true, “Men create large networks of shallow relationships. Women build small networks of deep relationships. i.e. men foster society, women foster family.”

    This is why the manosphere will win over feminism. Because it is slowly becoming an army, in a very real sense, armed not with guns but with knowledge.

    What CH and Roosh are doing weaponizing information.

    LikeLike


    • on January 16, 2013 at 11:58 am thwack

      What CH and Roosh are doing weaponizing information
      ————————————————————————

      Yeah, I hear what you sayin; but theres got to be something else going on because we still see guys trying to do the cavalry charge in the era of machine gun nests, pillboxes, barbed wire…

      For example, who the fucks idea was it for Lance Armstrong to confess to doping on Oprah?

      WFT?

      Why didn’t he do this on David Lettermans show?

      Dave is a dude. He knows what its like to get ratted out. He knows what its like to be a risk taker; he knows what its like to be a dude.

      Its just like Patrice says; women love to bring men down because they hate what they are.

      I see the same thing in black people; always tryin to take white people down so that THEY don’t hafta improve and step up their game.

      (((shakin my head)))

      I can see it now. Armstrong is gonna go on Oprah tomorrow and beg for a “pussy pass”. And Oprah is gonna stand there and say, “wadda ya think girls? should we issue him a vagina?

      Or make him suffer some more?

      Letterman or any dude would handle it completely different.

      Wake up white man.

      LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 2:16 pm Matthew King (King A)

        I see the same thing in black people; always tryin to take white people down so that THEY don’t hafta improve and step up their game.

        Hey everybody! Say hello to the manosphere’s newly discovered Booker T.! (The “T” stands for Thwack.)

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 9:22 pm Greg Eliot

        I understand he was a fair musician as well.

        LikeLike


      • on January 16, 2013 at 8:10 pm Hook or Crook

        Goddammit, thwack: if you keep making salient points like this I’ll have to actually start taking you seriously, and nobody wants that.

        LikeLike


      • on January 17, 2013 at 12:39 pm NiteLily

        It’s thwack’s new persona for 2013. He’s sassier now.

        LikeLike


  40. on January 16, 2013 at 7:35 am AAB

    Man-jawed women throughout history have tended towards traditionally ‘male’ pursuits. Just look at the visage of Calamity Jane: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Calamity_jane.jpeg.

    And if you want to see what happens to the face of a women has no testosterone in her system at all, then look at images of women with Turners Syndrome. They’re more likely to suffer from various conditions including Micrognathia (small jawedness). (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turners_syndrome)

    As you say, feminism will result in manlier women because it’s from the manly end of the female spectrum, and the leaders of any movement/population always has an infuence over the herd.

    LikeLike


  41. on January 16, 2013 at 8:37 am Maciano

    OT: Anybody seen this yet?

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323374504578217973101313736.html

    First part: “I was 30 years old, just out of a long-term relationship and no longer interested in playing the field [edit:alpha cock caroussel]. It was time to settle down with the right [edit:beta]man, get married and start a family. At the urging of several friends (and my worried mother), a strategy was settled upon: I joined Match.com and JDate, a website for Jewish singles.”

    That’s (online) dating for you all boiled down to its essence. While you, the beta/AFC, are in your teens/early 20s wilderness years, the women date/fuck freely with the not so serious alphas/jerks and can’t get enough of it — a fact which the writer silently admits in (yet omits from) a newspaper article as if that isn’t important. As soon as the fertility window starts closing, the woman reorientates herself, reluctantly solely through parental and peer pressure, to the beta provider. What a great deal for the beta!

    In the article the woman laments the many unserious guys out there who only want sex. How she spendt her late teens an 20s is anyone’s guess, but I think anyone will get the picture. It’s the complete blue pill world where unequal ethics hold: women playing the field; normal, good, fun; men playing the field: stupid, bad, mean. The rest of the article’s got some pretty OK online dating advice for women though.. Read up.

    LikeLike


  42. on January 16, 2013 at 8:48 am thwack

    Her is a doc about the East German doping program back in the day that discusses the effects of T and other roids.

    Yes they do discuss clitoris growth.

    Pay attention to the shot put girl

    LikeLike


  43. on January 16, 2013 at 10:34 am Anonymous

    Puleeez do a post, CH, on this. Pat Robertson, the Televangelist, actually said something useful recently when he blamed bad marriages on women letting themselves go:

    http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/weird-wide-web/pat-robertson-awful-looking-women-blame-marital-problems-

    Manginas all over the Internet are bashing him for saying that.

    We can be sure that he, himself, will back off like a scared weakling. Evangelist types are like that.

    But let’s see some manosphere posts that will get into the mix about this. You know that Jizzabel will be weighing in (pun intended).

    LikeLike


  44. on January 16, 2013 at 10:45 am Erudite Knight

    ‘the response by protein-coding enzymes to environmental stressors’

    I think this has some merit, the subconscious sees being ‘manly’ equates with more success and subtly changes hormones.

    I have long blamed estrogen in water though.

    LikeLike


  45. on January 16, 2013 at 11:36 am ry

    Is it really impossible? What if there were some cultural cataclysm that made a large portion of the male population genetically invisible? Let’s say when women were faced with a choice of mating with a more or less masculine man they always picked the more masculine man, whereas in the past they might have gone 50/50. And say there were a large amount of the genes for large jaws already in place, all that was needed were slight testosterone boosts..

    LikeLike


  46. on January 16, 2013 at 11:42 am AlphaBeta

    The goal of every feminist: http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/behold/2013/FUTURE%20(Alyssa)/Brian%20Finke%20bodybuilders/BrianFinke_Bodybuilding14_09.jpg.CROP.article920-large.jpg

    LikeLike


  47. on January 16, 2013 at 1:16 pm anon

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/01/16/us/women-shortage-in-north-dakota-profiles.html

    what happens when men drastically outnumber women.

    LikeLike


  48. on January 16, 2013 at 6:46 pm Kvinnligt kön « Yasers hörna

    […] [The Manjaw-ification Of American Women: Science!] […]

    LikeLike


  49. on January 16, 2013 at 7:20 pm Socker « Yasers hörna

    […] It’d also be interesting to look at the diet and obesity rates of countries where the women are thinner, more feminime and inclined toward traditional roles. [källa] […]

    LikeLike


  50. on January 16, 2013 at 7:24 pm Andrea

    Maybe I’m just stupid, but I never really understand what counts as a manjaw. Is it having that boxy, square look? I’m convinced that I have a manjaw (I have a fat, chipmunky Miranda Kerr-shaped head, no matter how skinny I get) and it really, really bothers me. Anyone mind posting pictures of a few different women they consider to be manjawed?

    LikeLike


    • on January 16, 2013 at 11:38 pm Foolish Dog

      Better yet, post your pic.

      LikeLike


  51. on January 16, 2013 at 7:29 pm Testosteron « Yasers hörna

    […] Hyenas – a look into the future of male and female dynamics? They do not form pair bonds, the gals are sluts, males submit to females, females prefer youthful partners, females choose passivity over aggression in a mate and the females mount the males to procreate.Give it a few years. Our species is nearly there. [källa] […]

    LikeLike


  52. on January 16, 2013 at 7:31 pm Könrelaterade testosteronskillnader « Yasers hörna

    […] Hyenas – a look into the future of male and female dynamics? They do not form pair bonds, the gals are sluts, males submit to females, females prefer youthful partners, females choose passivity over aggression in a mate and the females mount the males to procreate.Give it a few years. Our species is nearly there. [källa] […]

    LikeLike


  53. on January 16, 2013 at 7:42 pm Anti-Blue Pill

    You know what fixes Manjaw-ifcation?

    RAPE!!

    LikeLike


    • on January 17, 2013 at 5:26 pm aleister

      Classic!

      LikeLike


  54. on January 16, 2013 at 8:30 pm Kate

    Saw an ad for the product Axiron today. (underarm testosterone treatment) So, apparently, my great idea to use testosterone to get over a break up would only result in extra body hair and acne. No thank you!

    LikeLike


  55. on January 17, 2013 at 2:54 am foo

    Revolting:

    http://jezebel.com/5976202/i-cant-stop-looking-at-these-south-korean-women-whove-had-plastic-surgery

    Chinaman are so ugly, they themselves, desperately, don’t want to be chinaman and have non-chinaman eyes and features. The jizzbels are very puzzled as to why this is so, since beauty is on the inside.

    Funny how it never goes the other way, ie no caucasoid or afroid ever wants mongoloid features.

    LikeLike


    • on January 17, 2013 at 9:48 am Greg Eliot

      I found the article subtitle Unnerving Push Toward Uniformity ironic in the extreme.

      LikeLike


  56. on January 17, 2013 at 8:44 am Plumnuts

    now that’s a jaw that was built to last

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/now-im-going-after-my-husbands-rich-backers-8455669.html

    LikeLike


    • on January 17, 2013 at 9:47 am Greg Eliot

      Looks like the Terminator mated with Farah Fawcett.

      LikeLike


  57. on January 17, 2013 at 1:06 pm Anonymous

    nah jaws get bigger from sucking too much cack

    LikeLike


    • on January 17, 2013 at 5:42 pm Greg Eliot

      Then Madonna would look like American Dad.

      LikeLike


  58. on January 20, 2013 at 3:53 pm ihatethereforeiam78

    This is such a genious article and so applies to San Francisco. Besides the manly jaws, the other scary phenomenon among a surprising number of young and seemingly attractive women is extremely low, manly voices. This is such a turn-off.

    LikeLike


  59. on January 21, 2013 at 2:37 am Sean

    I wonder if feminism and manjawification is also at least partially responsible for declining birth rates in liberal states…

    http://www.contracostatimes.com/contra-costa-times/ci_22359475/california-baby-bust-under-way?source=rss

    LikeLike


  60. on January 22, 2013 at 5:01 am evilwhitemalempire

    Genetic alteration does not seem a likely candidate, because it is mathematically impossible for alleles coding for manlier women to sweep through a large population in a couple of generations, unless some cataclysmic event were to wipe out the majority of people.
    ———————-
    ah, but there could be!

    not wiping out existing people but instead preventing certain types from being born to begin with

    the pill might do it

    here’s how

    couple A: man is dominant over woman

    couple B: woman dominant over man

    without the pill, which couple will make more children? doesn’t take an einstein

    but introduce the pill into the equation and NOW which couple makes the most children? again, doesn’t take an einstein

    without the pill, male horniness trumps will to motherhood as means of baby making
    but with the pill, female will to motherhood trumps male horniness as means of baby making

    now let’s suppose scientists have amassed a body of evidence from identical twin studies, and etc. that show that things like personality and behavior have a sizable genetic component

    then we can reasonably conclude that there is almost always a genetic component to one’s dominance or submission

    so this means that widespread birth control use will, over time, substantially alter the genetic demographic leading to fewer ‘strong’ men & ‘weak’ women and lead to more ‘weak’ men & ‘strong’ women

    social/cultural changes would inevitably follow

    but then you say “how can evolution work so fast?”

    then i say consider how long it took for the russians to produce a race of silver foxes as tame as puppy dogs

    http://suite101.com/article/domesticating-the-silver-fox-a68305

    LikeLike


  61. on January 23, 2013 at 1:09 pm Anonymous

    There is a reason why women were not allowed to do athletics for several thousand years. sports, etc.. boost testosterone and create the problem. Title IX and other items are designed to boost masculinity among women and thereby aid the feminist cause. This is all cultural marxism designed to destroy civilization and crush the stay at home mom who dutifully cares for the kids.

    LikeLike


  62. on January 31, 2013 at 1:01 am JayMan

    Actually (after thinking about it), if this is a real phenomenon (and that’s a big if), it could be evolution after all.

    See this post of mine:

    It’s not the cads, it’s the tramps « JayMan’s Blog

    Dysgenic breeding is primarily dysgenic female breeding. Today, lower IQ (and, presumably, lower “quality”) women are more reproductively successful than women on the high end. Now, pre-sexual revolution, one could imagine that the ~20% of women who didn’t breed were the spinsters. Of course, why would a woman be a spinster? Yup, if she was not a very desirable mate – unattractive, unintelligent, etc. A significant portion of the unattractive women were so because their faces were too masculine. It is selection for female attractiveness that keeps people attractive. Now, if that selection was relaxed (which is was), you might expect to see overall attractiveness go down, including more masculinized faces in women.

    LikeLike


  63. on February 8, 2013 at 3:37 pm Reader Mailbag: Dewy Vaj Edition « Chateau Heartiste

    […] Fake it till you create it. […]

    LikeLike


  64. on March 7, 2013 at 10:45 pm Men Turning Their Backs On Modernity « PUA Central

    […] Masculinized women. Feminized men. Witch hunts for white boogeymen. Enfeebling government largesse. Humiliating reeducation camps. Self-aggrandizing social media. Ruling class treason. Corn and porn. Hypocritical, status whoring SWPL leftoids robotically sermonizing about a diversity they spend vast energy fencing off from themselves. […]

    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

    Ironsides on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Carlos Danger on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Jay in DC on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Agent X on Oy, There It Is
    jOHN MOSBY on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    cortesar on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Lichthof on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Davy Holmes on Sweden, The Cuck Corner Stool…
    Lichthof on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    jOHN MOSBY on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
  • Top Posts

    • Battlebrows As Portent Of Sociopath America
    • Women's Sports Will Be Killed Off By Invasive Trannies
    • Red Tsunami?
    • Oy, There It Is
    • Shitlib Logic Trap!
    • Globohomo's Next Target: "Sexual Racism"
    • How To Get A Girl To Send Nudes Of Herself
    • The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon
    • The NPC Song: "Feel"
    • There's Something [Very Special] About That Migrant Caravan Truck
  • 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: