• 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
« The Opportunity For A Globo-Equalist Ruling Class False Flag
Predictions About Dylann Storm Roof »

Clark And Hatfield Study: Men Are Far More Open To Casual Sex Than Are Women

June 18, 2015 by CH

Remember that unfunnygirl who performed a social science experiment up to the rigorous standards set by academic feminists everywhere, an experiment in which her results were presented as evidence men don’t want casual sex any more than women want it? Femcunts rejoiced, because femcunts will rejoice at whatever slender reed of feels gives succor to their pretty lies.

Dr. Jeremy, from Psychology Today, responded, vindicating the original Clark and Hatfield study finding that men are fantastically more agreeable to the prospect of casual, NSA sex than are women.

The difference between actual social science research and these pseudo-experiments is that, with real research, there are experimental controls put in place to reduce bias and alternative explanations for the findings. For example, the original Clark and Hatfield (1989) study standardized what was said by the experimental assistants to ask for sex, so that each participant received exactly the same believable message. Specifically they said, “I have been noticing you around campus. I find you to be very attractive. Would you go to bed with me tonight?”

Additionally, Clark and Hatfield (1989) used multiple experimental assistants to control for differences in attractiveness. Also, the assistants were asked to only request sex from believable partners (college students, relatively the same age, and attractive to them). Finally, participants were approached during times when they were most likely to have free time for sex (weekdays and not between class periods).

We see none of these experimental controls in the pseudo-experiment video. The woman is inconsistent with her approach and how she asks for sex. Sometimes she is laughing, uncomfortable, and clearly not serious in her request. She also approaches many men who are not plausible sex partners for her, who are busy with their day, or who are otherwise unavailable for immediate sex.

Nevertheless, when she does approach men that she finds sexually attractive, who are plausible sex partners, who are available, and her request to them is more complementary and believable, then she more often gets a yes (for example, see video at 1:54 with guy in blue shirt). In fact, simply taking the men out of the analysis who are clearly considerably older than her (10), state they are too busy to go with her immediately (9), say they have a girlfriend and cannot have sex with her (12), or tell her they are gay (3), begins to increase her probability of getting a yes to sex (28/66 = 42%). If she only approached men that she actually found sexually attractive, used a standardized and believable request for sex, and hid the camera too, then it is quite possible that her rate of success would be even higher and better match those of actual studies that used such experimental controls. In fact, more recent experimental studies, following those controls and protocols, have indeed found similar results as the original Clark and Hatfield (1989) experiments (for more, see Hald & Høgh-Olesen, 2010).

Clark, R. D., & Hatfield, E. (1989). Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 2(1), 39-54.

Hald, G. M., & Høgh-Olesen, H. (2010). Receptivity to sexual invitations from strangers of the opposite gender. Evolution and Human Behaviior, 31, 453-458.

Feminists — ah, fuck it, let’s just say all women — will never be convinced by logic or reason to accept that there are deep, abiding differences in the psychology of the sexes. Women are built by evolution to fool themselves as much as fool men to their true natures, because complete enlightenment and the pained introspection that would follow could sabotage the Darwinian prime directive to attract and monopolize the top alpha sperm and resources.

Share this:

  • Click to email (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • 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, The Pleasure Principle, Ugly Truths | 30 Comments

30 Responses

  1. on June 18, 2015 at 11:58 am jamzw

    Every woman with whom I associate would agree with this post. Yes, I know the women who wouldn’t, but we don’t chat much.

    LikeLike


    • on June 18, 2015 at 2:21 pm Laguna Beach Fogey

      In other news, water is wet.

      LikeLike


  2. on June 18, 2015 at 12:01 pm martin

    a couple points, firstly, as I recall, the video of the man asking women for sex had 0 yes answers, so 0/100 positive replies to his request for casual sex. the pseudo-experiment still had significantly more positive replies from men than women, but it was less than the study showed so apparently that means men don’t want casual sex because feminist logic. Second, I absolutely hate it when lefties try to use science as a wedge for political gain, especially when they aren’t even remotely close to being a scientist.

    LikeLike


  3. on June 18, 2015 at 12:02 pm Clark And Hatfield Study: Men Are Far More Open To Casual Sex Than Are Women | Neoreactive

    […] Clark And Hatfield Study: Men Are Far More Open To Casual Sex Than Are Women […]

    LikeLike


  4. on June 18, 2015 at 12:11 pm Captain Obvious

    Does anybody have any good links [real talk, or at least real-ish talk] about oxytocin bonding in women post-forn!cat!on? Thanks.

    LikeLike


    • on June 18, 2015 at 9:20 pm theasdgamer

      Oxytocin has a stronger impact on men. Women can handle addiction to oxytocin much betterer. Ok, so my blogging is ethanol-fueled.

      LikeLike


  5. on June 18, 2015 at 12:11 pm theasdgamer

    Women actually do a Catch-22 about the kind of men that they like so that only dishonest approaches actually cause them to spread their legs.

    LikeLike


    • on June 18, 2015 at 12:24 pm Captain Obvious

      I always felt that I did this as well – I was always much more at ease banging a Bar Ho than getting involved with a Nice Girl. Nice Girls always used to scare the bejeebus outta me, on account of how I couldn’t live with myself if I broke their hearts. On the other hand, now that I’m officially a Natalist, I’ll plow the Nice Girls with abandon. But no pump-n-dump. You never P-n-D a Nice Girl.

      LikeLike


      • on June 18, 2015 at 9:21 pm theasdgamer

        The onlyest Nice Goil ™ is a dead Goil ™.

        LikeLike


  6. on June 18, 2015 at 12:13 pm Hackett To Bits

    …Dr. Ron Jeremy?

    [CH: the spearhead of science.]

    LikeLike


  7. on June 18, 2015 at 12:19 pm pdwalker

    I wonder when they will do a study on whether bears shit in the woods or not.

    LikeLike


    • on June 18, 2015 at 2:22 pm Greg Eliot

      Exactly… I’m thinking the study should be credited to Mssrs. Clark, Howard, and Captain Obvious.

      LikeLike


  8. on June 18, 2015 at 12:23 pm no

    This implies that there is something in nature that expects this. Deep down women know this and adore this behavior in men. Do not apologize for it.

    LikeLike


  9. on June 18, 2015 at 12:35 pm Clark And Hatfield Study: Men Are Far More Open To Casual Sex Than Are Women | Manosphere.com

    […] Clark And Hatfield Study: Men Are Far More Open To Casual Sex Than Are Women […]

    LikeLike


  10. on June 18, 2015 at 12:40 pm Amy

    Well, girls are open to it if they’re gamed right– isn’t that what YaReally would say?

    [CH: correct. but a direct sidewalk solicitation of women minus the seduction component is not the way to go about it.]

    LikeLike


    • on June 18, 2015 at 1:03 pm moist back

      “girls are open to it if they’re gamed right”

      check out the stats on ONS turning into LTR. it seems whatever it is about a guy that makes a girl willing to have casual sex immediately is related to something that makes her want a relationship with him too.

      alpha fux beta bux isn’t the first choice. alpha fux alpha bux is.

      LikeLike


      • on June 18, 2015 at 9:32 pm theasdgamer

        There are no alpha bux. The alpha is the male lion in the pride. Females provide the food.

        [CH: recall the prized CH maxim: betas pay, alphas split, super alphas profit.]

        LikeLike


      • on June 18, 2015 at 9:57 pm theasdgamer

        “Super-alphas profit.” I like that, especially having considered myself omega all my life. My wimmenz always took care of me and I was always super picky about my wimmenz. I probably need a larger pride.

        LikeLike


    • on June 18, 2015 at 9:27 pm theasdgamer

      Lol, I did anti-seduction recently. I openly invited a broad to my place (we didn’t go there) to generate tingles, then teased her about stuff we did that would shock her friends. Her ASD took hold as I saw from her body language (legs crossed away from me and arms crossed, yet leaning towards me), yet she continued to desire my attention (hand-holding and walking and spending time together). She was in mixed-alpha-beta response. The broad was very corfuzed. It was fun observing it.

      LikeLike


    • on June 18, 2015 at 9:30 pm theasdgamer

      “Seduction component” is the wrong way to think about it. Better is “normal sexual engagement” or “Chase”. It’s playful, engaging, and sexual, all at the same time.

      [CH: there is a time and place for the apocalypse opener, but it’s probably not in broad daylight on the sidewalk.]

      LikeLike


      • on June 18, 2015 at 9:33 pm theasdgamer

        Maybe at the end of an evening dancing together?

        LikeLike


  11. on June 18, 2015 at 12:43 pm oink

    Shoutout to Maitre d’Chateau on the menstrual cycle-related female responsiveness to specific opening/treatments. With chilluns out for summer vacation, the variability in what got positive/negative was appreciable.

    The hamster has to be seen to be believed!

    LikeLike


  12. on June 18, 2015 at 2:08 pm Corey

    “Sometimes she is laughing, uncomfortable, and clearly not serious in her request.”

    My prediction is that in the not too distant future we’ll see To-Catch-A Predator-type shows where women make casual requests to strange guys on the street, but do so “unenthusiastically.” When the guy accepts and goes back to her place, he’s greeted by a television crew and a Hansenesque host who sanctimoniously calls him a rapist and lectures him about “enthusiastic consent.”

    “Why don’t you have a seat over there and tell me why you agreed to come back to her place. Couldn’t you tell she wasn’t serious? Do you feel ashamed at all for wanting to rape this woman?”

    LikeLike


    • on June 19, 2015 at 9:40 pm Lazy Hero

      He should then rape the host and rape him hard. Shammed rape!

      LikeLike


  13. on June 18, 2015 at 3:46 pm Clark And Hatfield Study: Men Are Far More Open To Casual Sex Than Are Women | Reaction Times

    […] Source: Heartiste […]

    LikeLike


  14. on June 19, 2015 at 12:21 pm Mario

    heartistez, distress call, need some serious help here

    Its regarding the orbits, my orbit count has rapidly dropped. I went from 4 to f/cking one…sh1t, its tough to keep frame now. In the same fashion the count was exponentially rising, now it is plummeting …

    Whats going on? Cases for explanation
    One of them (27yo) is settling down for a total beta , she even says sh1t about marrying, and that beta guy does everything opposed to teachings at CH. For instance, he sends message like : “I cant imagine living without someone else than you :)), my mama said she is going to pay a flat renovation for US :))” – literally

    another (21yo) is going to take eurotrip with guy (Im not sure about his game but doesnt look very representative of it)

    WTF Im doing wrong? picking up is working nice , but after 6 months its fading..how to set a balanced multipleLTR? Is it possible without supplicating? all of sudden chicks will settle and I get even outcompeted by betas? wtf is this

    …maybe whiteknightin , but Im pi55ed off, cant stop competition and just let it swim…

    LikeLike


  15. on June 20, 2015 at 3:43 am bigdickeddeadgordon

    Also, a lot of men might be dissuaded from a casual fuck because they fear the woman might make fun of their little dicks. Others men might refuse because it violates the teachings of Jesus Chroost of whom they are believers.

    If these 2 factors were somehow omitted the number of men willing to engage in a random fuck with an 8+ would be about 85%.

    LikeLike


  16. on June 20, 2015 at 2:19 pm Just Saying

    femcunts will rejoice at whatever slender reed of feels gives succor to their pretty lies

    Why does it matter? Look, feminists have pulled the biggest scam in history off, and sold it to the group of women that men most want to have sex with – the 15-25 year olds. Who cares where the old slags get their pleasure? They have made it possible for me to get my pleasure from the group I enjoy the most – yes, those young ones.

    Heck, I can’t tell you how many barely 18 year olds I’ve enjoyed on the matra of “live experience”. They want to have sex with more than one man – no worries, I’ll plumb her then pass her on to a group who will enjoy everything I have, but she’s used up – time for a new one. No worries, I’m not going back for sloppy seconds, I’m done with her – she’s some other slobs problem. Women are disposable these days – the ultimate disposable sex-toy. Use, them, fill, them, throw them away and get a newer one… There’s an unending supply…

    So why worry – let the Feminists say what they want, as long as they keep brain-washing the young pretty ones that they need to spread their legs, I’m not complaining. You shouldn’t either…

    LikeLike


  17. on June 23, 2015 at 12:33 pm Anonymous

    I don’t think there is anything remarkable about a girl having a 30% success rate with random men when propositioning them for sex. 30% is a totally believable rate. Like the article says, many men are out of the running because they are too old, not single, etc. Many men are going to weirded out by a stranger asking for sex and worried that this might be a weird set up. I was once propositioned by a beautiful but anorexic chick who was with some way older guy who was her roommate and the whole situation was so weird that I turned it down. With that guy around I was afraid of getting murdered or dragged into some really weird sexual kinks or something.

    LikeLike


  18. on June 23, 2015 at 12:34 pm Anonymous

    Besides, 30% success rate vs 0% for the college women studies is still a huge difference. Guys aren’t as sex crazy as typically portrayed in society. Women are less sex crazy than portrayed in society.

    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

    Captain Obvious on Finger Guns Game
    mendo on Finger Guns Game
    Exurban on Generation Anhedonia
    skorzecin150 on The Leftoid Infiltration Of Ce…
    skorzecin150 on The Leftoid Infiltration Of Ce…
    Alfred E. Neuman on The Leftoid Infiltration Of Ce…
    skorzecin150 on The Leftoid Infiltration Of Ce…
    streetsweeper on The Leftoid Infiltration Of Ce…
    bowman on The Leftoid Infiltration Of Ce…
    Greg Eliot on The Leftoid Infiltration Of Ce…
  • Top Posts

    • The Leftoid Infiltration Of Central Command Is Complete
    • Generation Anhedonia
    • Memetic Perfection
    • Adorable American Beauty
    • What Makes A MAGA Man?
    • Exquisite European Beauty
    • The Iconic Goodbye, America Photo, Or A Portent Of Reborn America?
    • The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon
    • MAGA Game Challenge
    • How To Get A Girl To Send Nudes Of Herself
  • 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.
%d bloggers like this: