Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Biomechanics is God’ Category

It’s all about the lack of balls. Les Saunders, Protestant, explains.

In my line of work, I run into a lot of young attractive women and cucks (in addition to old crones). Being me, if an attractive young lady in the workplace drips past, I’ll make a comment about her appearance of something or other. You know, normal guy stuff. These cucks seem just aghast that a male could think of women in such vulgar ways.

I think I’ve figured it all out.

Cucks have never, ever in their lives seen pussy, gone after pussy, and grabbed pussy*. Rather, they are the pathetic losers who have only gotten laid by virtue of women choosing them, instead of their choosing the woman. These are the guys in university who got laid maybe once per semester or year because some drunk girl grabbed them at 2am on the dance floor when Red Red Wine came on. They’ve never chased a woman in their life, save perhaps for some weak, passive aggressive, beta supplicant way which never works by the way. So naturally, they find the idea of men pursuing women “problematic”. Sad!

*it bears repeating. Those of us who’ve ever seduced women in our lives know that grabbing women by the pussy did not and does not mean sexual assault. That’s for losers and Arabs. It’s about seducing and creating that moment with a woman where she totally surrenders to you, and you can take what you wish.

Cucks, manlets, manginas, and reedy-voiced white knights will actually use words like “vile” to describe Trump’s braggadocio about women letting rich and famous men grab their pussies. Les gets it; the manginas’ carefully manicured revulsion of boldly entitled alpha males is a product of their immersion in the shrikeheist of a demasculinized gynecratie coupled with an EXTREMELY slow life history that meant decades in the incel wilderness waiting waiting waiting for subpar poon to fall in their laps instead of sacking up and doing the one thing women really cream for when it comes from a man: busting a move.

The baleful rise of anhedonic male feminism is directly related to the expansion of the incel subsociety and the missing experience that comes from actually hitting on women to know that Consent Feminism virtue signaling dries pussy faster than an accidental Pill overdose.

Read Full Post »

There are posts buried in the CH archives discussing the phenomenon of sexual polarity and its importance to relationship health. Masculine men match well with feminine women. Yin and yang. Quim and wang.

What about gender oddities like feminine men and masculine women? The Law of Sexual Polarity — or what some have called the Law of Gender Conservation — states that the masculine and feminine must balance out in any relationship, in whichever sex those essences are primarily contained. So that means feminine men match well with masculine women. And if you’ve seen the wedding photos of Jezebel manjaws and their shlubby, uptalking, no-T, chinless beta hubbies, you’ll respect the perspicacity of the Law of Gender Conservation.

Which brings us to John Scalzi. If you wonder why I shiv this magnificent mangina so hard, you need look no further than the reason for his internet fame: a craven, dorky, shitlib virtue signaling post on his inane Whatever blog that likened Whiteness to playing at the lowest difficulty setting on a video game.

This lumpy hypocritical doughgoon who lives in a 98% White town deserves every bit of contempt coming his way. He is the androgynous embodiment of everything that is physically and psychologically deformed in the White leftoid race.

With that as context, Scalzi’s marriage — which he loves to boast about on Twatter, always (naturally) casting himself in the egregiously self-deprecating role of the anhedonic willfully emasculated doofus beta bitchboy raising an empowered feminist daughter and licking the boots of his warrioress wife — is revealed to be the PERFECT example of the Law of Gender Conservation in action.

scalziandwife

CAPSLOCK HUSTLA nails this smug phaggot nerdo to the wall:

SCALZI PROVIDES EXAMPLE # AD INFINITUM FOR THE LAW OF GENDER CONSERVATION: IN EVERY COUPLE, ΣMASCULINITY = ΣFEMININITY.

Did he marry the love child of the Refrigerator and the Mountain? But for real…

EVERY

SINGLE

TIME

you find a quisling White mangina begging for acceptance into the Amanjaw Marcuntte man-hating club, there’s a she-ggoth glowering over him.

Cerebral scalzied is filth. His brand of contemptible cowardly virtue whoring self-neutering is emblematic of the shitlib mind rot that’s sweeping through the White West. It’s good to call him out as the pathetic whipped cur he is, putting not just him on notice, but any other impressionable Whitelings who may be tempted to comfortable prostration by his sickly siren call.

These degenerated freaks have only just begun to feel the crunch of the Fourth Turning grinding its gears into motion.

Read Full Post »

Via Marginal Autism,

We show that promotions to top jobs dramatically increase women’s probability of divorce, but do not affect men’s marriages. This effect is causally estimated for top jobs in the political sector, where close electoral results deliver exogenous variation in promotions across job candidates. Descriptive evidence from job promotions to the position of CEO shows that private sector promotions result in the same gender inequality in the risk of divorce.

Commenters at the Cheap Chapulas grease truck have lots of theories to explain the results of this study, but it boils down to a basic understanding of female nature. When women advance in their careers, their husbands, should they not equally advance in theirs to keep up, are “left behind” on the occupational status ledger that women subconsciously consult when evaluating a man’s mate worth. (Among 463 other male mate value ledgers that women have at the ready.)

Female hypergamy is real, is different from male “dating up” (which is closer to polygamy in nature), and has consequences in the aggregate on marriage and divorce rates. Women want to look up to higher status men; men want to look *at* beautiful women. In our rapidly de-masculinizing, anti-White male, pro-tankgrrl culture, men are in a status free-fall. Knowing this is all you need to explain why women initiate 70% of divorces.

Read Full Post »

A quick story about the power of the uninhibited approach. This one time (in cad camp), a girl crossing my path on the sidewalk strongly resembled a girl I was dating, at least in profile and from the back. So much so that I thought she was my girl, and I hurried forward to catch up with her and deliver a warm greeting. She hadn’t seen me when I trotted into her view and said “Hey!” inflected with an intimate, and confident, familiarity.

From her vantage, this was a cold pickup attempt. From my vantage, I thought I was saying a surprise hello to a girl I was banging. For a flickering second, we eyed each other with disbelief — her trying to figure out why I introduced myself, and me suddenly realizing she wasn’t the girl I was dating at the time.

Then an odd turn occurred in the plot line. Instead of furrowing her brow with annoyance at the bother, or promptly dismissing my accidental approach, she parried my ‘hey!’ with an equally friendly and intimate ‘oh, hi!’, and stood still, planted to the sidewalk in front of me, looking like she was expecting more consent-defying magic to spring from my prolix tongue.

This girl was in it to see if I would win it. My instinct switched from ‘I should tell this girl I thought she was someone else’ to ‘Wait a sec….she thinks I’m hitting on her…and she’s open to it!’. Now aroused by the opportunity before me of fresh cleft, I hesitated to exit our fortuitous rendezvous with a curt explanation for my impudence. During what must have been just a couple seconds but felt like an eternity, I considered my next course of action….I could easily springboard from my accidental hello to deliberate pickup banter….but at the last decided to take the noble — or less adventuresome — route and excused myself on the wispy adieu of mistaken identity.

The scene reminded me of a truth about women and pickup that guests of the Chateau should know by heart. For all the talk of tactics and logistics and hurdling last minute resistance, indubitably all of it a valuable store of knowledge to the aspiring womanizer, one rule governs them all: the man who says something will always get further with women than the man who says nothing.

The world of women will only open to men brave enough to trek it. If you never invade a woman’s safe space, she’ll never post hoc rationalize your invasion as her invitation. Women’s safe spaces are essentially self-fulfilling until a man with a set of steel ones decides they aren’t.

This girl I thought was someone else had no idea I greeted her under false assumptions, yet the confident familiarity with which I made my existence known to her lithesome universe sparked something primal in her: a welling up of ancient desire that the expectations of modern society successfully suppresses most of the time. I’m sure vanishingly few men have ever cold cocka-ed her like that on the sidewalk. When one man did, it stirred a longing every woman shares to be the lust object of a man who takes what he wants. My accidental entitlement reminded me that deliberate entitlement remains the essential provocation of women’s romantic curiosity.

Read Full Post »

Over at Goodbye, America (in a photo), commenter Buh wins a freelance COTW for this insight to the nature of White women and how that knowledge can help White men keep their women within the beautifully unswarthed White fold.

Cut the welfare and you’ll stop subsidizing the outgroup indulgences of errant white women by cutting the ability of blacks to pay for them. This is similar disincentive for women to firing/divorce-nuking older men who have affairs with tasty 18 year old interns. When society punishes both with financial ruin sit back and watch the recessive white gene pool preserve itself in traditional marriages. No 1488 necessary. Of course that won’t alter the fornication market, but isn’t it about time young white men emulated the traits of their dusky competitors? Irrational self confidence, muscle mass, gang membership and assertiveness would serve them well compared to safe spaces and consent forms. Make white women barefoot and pregnant with white babies again.

I’m afraid Buh is right; this is where we are today, and if White men don’t rediscover their long-lost balls their women will continue leaving the reservation to get jacked up by googles. Everyone is drawn to the strong horse, but White women love the coolasfuck ZFG jerkhorse the most. It’s time to remind White women that the Age of Scalzis is over, and the new dawn has arrived: the Rule of Renegade White Men.

Read Full Post »

Female hypergamy is real. How real depends on which data set you take as gospel. One study claims that 8,000 years ago, 17 women reproduced for every one man. (Tribal ancestor of CH confirmed for top 6%) This skewed reproduction ratio is so large it can’t possibly be accounted for by the pre-reproductive age mass deaths of men alone. Women at that time had to have been sexually selecting a few alpha males and sharing these lucky few men with other women. The researchers hypothesize that the transition from hunting/gathering to agriculture allowed a few men to accumulate a lot of resources, possibly by exploiting the labors of less ambitious or aggressive men. This naturally aroused many women who as a sex are instinctively drawn to powerful men who can provide a bounty for their future family.

A notable geneticist, Greg Cochran, objected that the study failed the plausibility test. He figures that at the worst of runaway female hypergamy (or premature male deaths), 80% of men made it to the bang and the follow-up banglet.

Such a society would be like the famous car-wash scene in Cool Hand Luke – all the time.

Whatever the disparity in the reproduction ratio, it is evident that throughout history more women than men reproduced. If this were not so, other selection pressures (e.g., child mortality) would have to take up the slack for the loss of a major driver of human evolution.

What is also evident is that the dawn of civilization has had a dampening effect on female hypergamy. Civilization requires engaged and committed beta males. Lots of them. A sex market that radically disenfranchised a big chunk of those betas would sabotage any civilizational momentum. Severe sex restrictions and runaway female hypergamy can exist in a state of nature, but putatively only for short periods of time. Entrenched and unrestricted female hypergamy would sexually and reproductively dispossess too many men and remove the ROI foundation upon which advanced societies are built.

So civilization and its dampening effect on female hypergamy selects for women who perhaps are more averse to sharing an alpha male, less averse to settling with a beta male, or sufficiently sexually muted to resist the orgasmic promise of pump and dump sex with a harem leader. (The reader is free to draw up a compare and contrast chart with present-day Europe and Africa.)

Not to mention civilization provides a reproductive safety net that was unimaginable in the preindustrial world. That safety net goes a long way to evening the reproductive playing field between men and women.

Nevertheless, civilization is not a perfect tamer of the sloot. There are still more postindustrial age men locked out of the sexual gratification market, and to a lesser degree from the procreative market.

In more recent history, as a global average, about four or five women reproduced for every one man.

Now of course there are two variables in this sex market equation: procreation and fornication. Just because the procreation ratio may be close to equal doesn’t mean the fornication ratio is as egalitarian. Birth control, penicillin, and social sanction have permitted a long, premarital flourishing of a consequence-free open legs sexual market, aka the cock carousel. And within that market, one may reasonably observe a minority of alpha men monopolizing a majority of pussy, particularly the choicest pussy.

While civilization has been good for beta male family formation, it has not been so generous for beta male furrow incursion. Settling for a post-prime, high cock count gogrrl in her 30s to pop out 2.1 kids may brighten up the genetic balance sheet nicely, but it doesn’t do much for the abacus of self-worth that animates a beta male’s id. He has procreated….but at great cost to his ego’s ledger of lifetime pleasure.

Given this sex disparity reality, we may say that in the modern, “civilized” sexual market, there are two parallel mating systems: the enforced marital one and the single lady free-for-all. In the wall-approaching marital market, women settle and satisfy their evolved hypergamous compulsion with clitlit and cheating. In the sexually liberated anonymously atomized urban cock carousel market, you have the 20-80 bang ratio rule in effect: 20% of men drinking the milk of 80% of the cows (which they bequeath to their beta brethren to nuptially purchase at fire sale prices).

Any computational geneticist would say beta males win out under civilized conditions, but the numbers don’t tell the whole story of the hardened hearts and blue-ish balls that these beta bux must endure for a good portion of their most sexually…insistent…years. I have argued in these pages that the current sexual market configuration is unsustainable for just this reason; generations of dispirited betas missing out on prime pussy, even if they get the consolation prize of an older wife and two kids, will eventually erode societal bonhomie and lead to civilization eating itself. Eating its seed porn, if you will.

Civilization tames the sloot, but only reproductively. Carnally, the civilized woman is no more tamed than her preindustrial forebear. Ironically, civilization in the process of guaranteeing beta males a place at the procreative table may have unleashed women from pre-civilization restrictions on their sexuality, giving women a sexual bounty of alpha males — and a larger pool of beta males to reject — that they would not have in a world without birth control, abortion, penicillin, dissolved community oversight, or social acceptance and even glorification.

The question begging for an answer is this: How long can modern civilization accommodate both beta male reproductive success and beta male sexual isolation? Both female resource exploitation of beta males and female sexual wantonness with alpha males?

One thing is certain: the current system configuration is a boon to, and the reason for, men with Game. Western women are now culturally, economically, and perhaps cognitively optimized to disregard negative consequences from casual sex and to ignore potential risks from “hookups”, while simultaneously readjusting their mate value calculator to de-emphasize the beta male traits of dependability and resource hoarding. Into this steamy, globalized and civilized sex market stew the charming jerkboy strides confidently, knowing no pregnancy threat, angry father, or watchful town squire with a genetic kinship to more than a filament’s worth of his neighbors’ DNA is there to stop him from plundering and ghosting and plundering again.

Weak men create HARD times, indeed.

Read Full Post »

In news that, if you think about it, makes perfect sense, it turns out faggy boys who think they’re girls more often have crazy, BPD, depressive mothers. Link.

This pilot study compared mothers of boys with gender identity disorder (GID) with mothers of normal boys to determine whether differences in psychopathology and child-rearing attitudes and practices could be identified. Results of the Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines and the Beck Depression Inventory revealed that mothers of boys with GID had more symptoms of depression and more often met the criteria for Borderline Personality Disorder than the controls. Fifty-three percent of the mothers of boys with GID compared with only 6% of controls met the diagnosis for Borderline Personality Disorder on the Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines or had symptoms of depression on the Beck Depression Inventory. Results of the Summers and Walsh Symbiosis Scale suggested that mothers of probands had child-rearing attitudes and practices that encouraged symbiosis and discouraged the development of autonomy.

Mentally and emotionally rekt moms promote sex identity complexes in their sons, and leach off their sons to feel better about themselves. COLOR ME SHOCKED.

How many feminists do you know who *aren’t* depressive, crazy, BPD headcases? Now imagine how many gender bender fruitcup sons those feminists will produce. IT’S A BALLOCAUST!

Don’t stick your dick in crazy, confirmed by SCIENCE.

***

In more soul-crushing SCIENCE news for feminists, a congenital defect that alters the balance of sex steroids in developing fetuses affects sex-specific behavior later as children.

Prenatal Hormones and Postnatal Socialization by Parents as Determinants of Male-Typical Toy Play in Girls With Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia

Toy choices of 3- to 10-year-old children with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) and of their unaffected siblings were assessed. Also assessed was parental encouragement of sex-typed toy play. Girls with CAH displayed more male-typical toy choices than did their unaffected sisters, whereas boys with and without CAH did not differ. Mothers and fathers encouraged sex-typical toy play in children with and without CAH. However, girls with CAH received more positive feedback for play with girls’ toys than did unaffected girls. Data show that increased male-typical toy play by girls with CAH cannot be explained by parental encouragement of male-typical toy play. Although parents encourage sex-appropriate behavior, their encouragement appears to be insufficient to override the interest of girls with CAH in cross-sexed toys.

God of Biomechanics: 1
The Patriarchy: 0

Contrary to feminist claims (what else is new?), social conditioning is a phantom that has no bearing whatsoever on how girls and boys turn out. Sex-based behaviors are hardwired; baked into the cortical cake the moment sperm spears egg.

A tragic footnote to that study is the description of parents sensing their little girl is a bit too “boyish” and feebly attempting corrective measures to get her to behave more girl-like. This must be the life story of every manjawed femcunt who currently functions as a Narrative Reinforcer for the leftoid media machine.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: