Niceness Will Be The Death Of The White Race

There is a theory to explain the origins of the core population of White cucks. (I use the term “cucks” in its shitlordy colloquial sense to mean White people who express more solidarity with antagonistic nonWhites than they do with their congenial racial kin.) This White cuck theory, associated with the writings of HBDChick, invokes two historical processes to account for the evolved psychological preferences of NW European Whites to feel altruistic urges and a moral duty toward strangers and particularly toward nonWhite strangers:

manorialism and non-kin marriage.

Basically, over a thousand-year period (or less) in the parts of Europe that today correspond to the Germanic nations, Scandinavia, and England, (aka core Europe), outbreeding (cousin marriage was prohibited by the Catholic Church) and circumstantial pressures (e.g., manorialism) that selected for more cooperative and docile individuals created a distinct type of people who are amusingly known by the acronym W.E.I.R.D.O. in social science circles — Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic, and Outbred.

I would add my personal theories to HBDchick’s emphasis on outbreeding and manorialism to explain the development of White universal altruism: the Buffer Zone Theory and The Culling. Core NW Europe, being a core, is surrounded by White nations and White tribes. Over millennia, this “ring of white” lands shielded core Europe from the worst depradations of the nonWhite world. This proto-NATO defense umbrella permitted the rapid selection for supranice Whites within the Bubblecuck region who had rarely had to confront violence on a regular basis from truly foreign-looking and -acting invaders. From other Whites, yes. But not so much from Vibrancy.

The Culling simply states that the great 20th century wars of White fratricide removed the hardiest and least cucked men from the gene pool. I don’t see how a continent’s character emerges unchanged by 80+ million premature deaths.

Whatever their provenance, altruistic WEIRDOS all have psychological traits in common, and one very noticeable commonality is their NICENESS. If you’re American, you’ll encounter this radical niceness in the Midwest and plains states, where White people of Core European lineage settled and multiplied. It’s practically the basis for the humor in the movie Fargo. Nice Germanics and Scandis and Anglos will have nary an unkind word to say about anyone, and warmly welcome any traveler who might wander into their lands. They are trusting (and trustworthy) and are just about the best kind of people to go to for a car repair, financial advice, or contract negotiation. They won’t screw you over, and they (perhaps naively) believe no one means to screw them over.

These are the people, not to put too fine a point on it, who practically built Western Civilization and modern society.

What can one possibly say about them that is less than fulsome praise? There is no end to the ways in which nice people are nicer than not-nice people…

except for one flaw in the WEIRDO algorithm.

One very big flaw.

Possibly an existential flaw that will negate every good thing achieved by these NiceWhites.

Their gullibility.

(Throw in a predilection for sanctimony, and you’ve got all the ingredients for supreme cuckitry.)

I agree with John Derbyshire that Midwestern NiceWhiteness “is America’s Achilles heel, and will bring down our civilization one day.” It’s becoming more apparent that these niceguy White cucks will go to their golly gee willikers graves dispensing unreciprocated niceness on the world’s ingrate riff raff, and in their misdirected zeal to be nice to the world’s 7 billion not-nice schemers and dirty dealers, they’ll take America down with them.

The Trumpening is illustrative. Twatter renegade @Ricky_Vaughn99 compiled a list of the state-by-state share of pro-Trump vs anti-Trump White ethnic groups that can be used to predict Trump wins.

The anti-Trump NiceWhites are mostly inside-the-Hajnal, core NW European ethnicities. (Keep in mind these are the cucks who happily voted for Marco Lubio, and who love open borders nutjob John Cucksich. Ironically, fake phony fraudulent slimeball Ted Cruz is a beneficiary of cuck love. Like I said, gullible.)

The pro-Trump Whites who love his fighting spirit, properly directed decency, and straight talk are borderlands, periphery, Southern, and Central/Eastern European ethnicities. These are the Whites who get, at least on a gut level, the danger posed to survival by the mass migration of alien peoples who have nothing in common with the White-centric heritage of America.

There might be an intervention which could save NiceWhites from themselves, and thereby save America and the West: forced integration with the blessings of Diversity™. You’ll note most NiceWhites live in very White states. And most RealWhites — Whites who are less gullible about the realities of the world and who prefer Realtalk over Poopytalk — live with or near nonWhite Diversity.

The hypothetical remedial emerges: expose the NiceWhites to those vibrant characters they claim represent “who we are”, let stew for a generation or two, and voila!… hardened shitlords speaking openly about the coming RaHoWa and assuming the aliases of ancestral Viking berserkers and Visigoth barbarians.

Read Full Post »

Monotheistic Religions May Encourage Paternal Investment

Twatter tartlet @clairlemon passes along a study sure to get on the nerves of neckbeard atheists and secular anti-Christian (((feminists))). She writes,

Interesting paper suggests that monotheistic religion is a paternity-certainty facilitator.

With paternity certainty, comes paternal investment. Men who don’t know if the kid is theirs are less likely to stick around and support mom and child. The blowback from that is an exercise in imagination I leave for the readers.

From the abstract,

The sacred texts of five world religions (Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism) use similar belief systems to set limits on sexual behavior. We propose that this similarity is a shared cultural solution to a biological problem: namely male uncertainty over the paternity of offspring. Furthermore, we propose the hypothesis that religious practices that more strongly regulate female sexuality should be more successful at promoting paternity certainty. Using genetic data on 1,706 father–son pairs, we tested this hypothesis in a traditional African population in which multiple religions (Islam, Christianity, and indigenous) coexist in the same families and villages. We show that the indigenous religion enables males to achieve a significantly (P = 0.019) lower probability of cuckoldry (1.3% versus 2.9%) by enforcing the honest signaling of menstruation, but that all three religions share tenets aimed at the avoidance of extrapair copulation. Our findings provide evidence for high paternity certainty in a traditional African population, and they shed light on the reproductive agendas that underlie religious patriarchy.

The major world religions sprang from patriarchal societies in which the resources critical to reproduction, whether in the form of land or livestock, were inherited from father to son down the male line (1⇓–3). Consistent with patrilineal inheritance, the sacred texts set forth harsh penalties for adultery and other behaviors that lower the husband’s probability of paternity (4⇓⇓⇓–8) (SI Discussion). The scriptures also place greater emphasis on female than on male chastity, including the requirement of modest attire for women and the idealization of virginity for unmarried females (6, 8). Previous studies have considered the evolutionary biology of patriarchy, but have focused on primate antecedents or cultural factors rather than religion (2, 9⇓–11). Here we test the hypothesis that religions that more strongly regulate female sexuality are more successful at limiting the incidence of cuckoldry, defined as offspring sired by extrapair copulations (EPCs).

SCIENCE! lands another sloppy wet kiss on the Chateau’s turgid…ego. Female chastity and fidelity really are more valuable to men than male chastity and fidelity are to women. (Male chastity is actually a subtraction from women’s appraisals of men’s mate value.)

The study population is the Dogon of Mali, West Africa, who practice four religions: Evangelical Protestantism introduced by conservative American missionaries; Catholicism introduced by French Jesuits who focused on humanitarian projects; Islam; and the indigenous Dogon religion, which is monotheist. Our quantitative analysis supports the hypothesis that religious ideology serves the purpose of defense against EPCs.

CH is on record (check the archives) predicting that the wholesale abandonment of religion by Western societies will lead to higher rates of cheating and cuckoldry, by both men and women. Recent CDC data on infidelity supports the CH observation that cheating is up, especially (and critically) among women. And as I have argued, unrestricted female sexuality is FAR MORE dangerous to civilizational health than is unrestricted male sexuality, and this is why thousands-year-old religions have evolved to specifically curtail the existential threat of female infidelity.

Muh dik is the slogan of the black ghetto; muh muff is the dirge of the dying White West.

Discovery of the reproductive consequences of religious practices is helpful for understanding the interface between the sacred and the secular, a neglected terrain despite growing interest in the evolutionary biology of religion.

Atheists and other irreligious types nursing an exaggerated spite against (mostly) Christianity have no idea the forces of chaos they are working towards unleashing. If they can’t tolerate pious platitudes and Sunday Church services, they are gonna have a really hard time getting accustomed to the worldwide Zimbabwe that an areligious “state of nature” will portend for their sexdoll time. Once you kill paternity certainty, you have signed the death warrant on Western Civ.

We show that paternity certainty was higher in the indigenous religion than in Christianity, which we attribute to the abandonment of menstrual taboos by the Christians.

The liberalization and feminization of Christianity will mean its death, either through attrition or transmogrification.

Women in the traditional religion are exiled for five nights to uncomfortable places called menstrual huts; during the day menstruating women work in the fields (23, 24). The indigenous religion uses the ideology of menstrual pollution as the supernatural enforcement mechanism to coerce women to disclose their menses by going to the menstrual hut. Hormonal data showed that fear of breaking these religious taboos enforced honest signaling to the men of the husband’s family, who situate the menstrual huts in close proximity to the toguna, which is a shade shelter specific to the males of a given patrilineage.

“Modern” feminists balk, but there’s a good reason for the existence of these religious rituals that appear, superficially to the comically stunted shitlib mind, to be relics from an antediluvian past. Stupid shitlibs think they can ignore the wisdom of their ancestors without consequence.

These findings for an evolutionary purpose to religion are often hard to disentangle from the native traits of the people that constitute the major world religions. Maybe Africans and Arabs have a psychology that requires draconian religious strictures to ensure paternity? And maybe White European women are sufficiently swayed by less onerous religious dictums? However you approach the question of causality, it’s fair to be concerned that the rapid demise of Christianity, and the concomitant rise of feminism, in the West will have downstream effects on the basic reproduction structures of civilization, and that in the future atheism and agnosticism and secularism may even influence the process of sexual selection and change the genetic characteristics of the people to something that resembles the anti-civilization shitholes of today.

Read Full Post »

How Not To Be The Creep That Chicks Don’t Dig

Girls, bless their holistic hearts, aren’t keen on detailing the reasons why this or that man is unsuitable as a lover. Instead of a sober assessment of a man’s characteristics, girls prefer to render their judgments in all-encompassing terms like “creep” or “weirdo” or “loser” or “nice guy”. Many subconscious mate value calculations operate in the female hindbrain that are consciously concatenated into swift and sure slanders of dismissal.

If a girl thinks you’re “creepy”, console yourself that her assessment doesn’t necessarily mean you are a creep. All it means is that you failed to exhibit those behaviors and traits that trigger her arousal instinct. But you should still take the smear as an opportunity to improve how you sell yourself to women. The alternative is meta-death.

With that in mind, here’s an illuminating study about the male tics and mannerisms that women think qualifies as “creepy”.

On the nature of creepiness

Surprisingly, until now there has never been an empirical study of “creepiness.” An international sample of 1341 individuals responded to an online survey. Males were perceived as being more likely to be creepy than females, and females were more likely to associate sexual threat with creepiness. Unusual nonverbal behavior and characteristics associated with unpredictability were also predictors of creepiness, as were some occupations and hobbies. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that being “creeped out” is an evolved adaptive emotional response to ambiguity about the presence of threat that enables us to maintain vigilance during times of uncertainty.

The limbic “creep” burp is a distant early warning to a girl that the seed under consideration shall not penetrate her eggs’ perimeter defense.

Salon (fag bastion alert) does a halfway-decent job itemizing the primary creep factors.

One of the paper’s hypotheses states unpredictability in a person is associated with higher levels of creepiness. Because we’re already initially uncomfortable with being unable to assess a person’s motives, we become hyper-aware of their behavior while trying to size them up.

This claim should be read with a critical eye. Ambiguity and unpredictability (i.e., being a challenge) are actually quite arousing to women, so the risk of setting off her creep alarm should be balanced against the reward of turning on her snapper sprinkler. My impression is that when a woman is curious about a man, there always lurks in the back of her mind the potential for her curiosity to lurch into anti-creep defense mode. To put it another way, every successful seduction is accompanied by an element of danger.

Other things found to sound our creep-alarms are behaviors such as standing too close to a person, frequent and persistent lip smacking or licking, odd dress and relentlessly directing a conversation to one topic.

Touching girls early on in a pickup is a crucial step to advancing toward the bedroom. But a light forearm touch is a different beast than posting up a foot inside a girl’s personal space. The initial kino should barely be perceptible; standing nose tip to nose tip is a little too “on the nose” for most women.

As for lip smacking and licking, don’t do it. Obvious. You ever see a man who does well with women licking his lips like Marco Rubio after the foam party antics have dried out to a crusty glaze?

Odd dress… just means don’t dress poorly or too skewed from the norms for your culture. Wearing a Bedouin sheet in Chicago will freak out a lot of people.

The last creep factor is the most important one: conversational stubbornness. Girls love freewheeling convos full of breezy associations and delectable tangents. We all know that nerdo or spergo who can’t let go of a point he’s trying to make over the happy din of a socially-gelling mixed group. If there’s one piece of advice I would give to men on how to avoid being the creep chicks despise, it’s LET GO. Didn’t get your point across? No prob. Ride the wave. Swing at another pitch. Take the detour in good humor and with a sense of adventure. The best womanizers I have known all shared this trait in common; they were pros at both leading conversations and going with the conversational flow. You can do this, too, but it will demand that you get out of your head and become more situationally aware. The field  of seduction is no place for shutting out external catalysts.

Read Full Post »

Cuckoldry Culture

Feminists bitch and moan and lie about a mythical “rape culture” that permeates America, but if you look at the numbers instead of wallowing in poopytalk it becomes clear that, in parts of the West at any rate, a far better case can be made that we live in a Cuckoldry Culture rather than a rape culture.

Britain has a fairly accessible data set on national rape and cuckoldry statistics, so we’ll examine the UK as a proxy for the larger Anglosphere.

(For those new to the Chateau and unfamiliar with some of our terms of enshivment, “cuck” is the colloquial term for men, usually married beta males, who unwittingly raise the bastard spawn of women who have cheated on them and gotten pregnant by another man, usually a jerkboy alpha male. The term is so descriptively brutalist that it was ported to the political arena as a hard-hitting insult — cuckservative — aimed at Republican pundits, pols, and voters who surrender to leftoid race equalism premises in order to curry favor with the gatekeepers of polite discourse. Rhetorically, cuckservatives sell out their children’s and their nation’s future, and their ancestors’ pasts, on the altar of liberal dogma, in practice “raising another man’s ideology”. And they do so oblivious to the humiliations they visit upon themselves.)

New research has shown that the cuckoldry rate in Britain is 2% — 1 in 50 British fathers are unknowingly (or without prior consent) raising the offspring of another man.

Researchers at Leuven University in Belgium said that they decided to conduct the first ever in-depth study after being surprised and intrigued to learn that the issue has received little serious scientific consideration, despite being a concern felt by many men.

That’s because, contrary to dumb feminist assertions about “the patriarchaaaaaahh”, women are treated as the more valuable sex in most societies, particularly in Western societies. This instinctual social, economic, cultural, and legal favoritism toward women is a psychological phenomenon which stems from the fact that, biologically, eggs are more expensive than sperm.

2% sounds like a blessedly low number, but if you take into account the absolute meta-extinction level event that cuckoldry represents to a man’s genetic and personal interests, 1 out of 50 is a rate that should give most men a little pause, and some men a lot of pause.

It’s an especially damning statistic when we compare that 2% cuckoldry rate to the UK rape rate for women.

The 2006–07 British Crime Survey reports that 1 in every 200 women suffered from rape in that period.

A 1-in-200 rape rate for UK women is 0.5%, or four times smaller than the cuckoldry rate for UK men.

Cuckoldry Culture is four times more likely than rape culture to be the operative paradigm.

But you won’t ever hear TheCunt or feminists or their Hivemind manlet lickspittles honestly broaching this ugly truth.

And note as well that the physical violation of rape last minutes, with recurrent bouts of psychological distress, but the physical and emotional violations of cuckoldry can last eighteen years, uninterrupted.

So maybe it’s time to discuss “the matriarchy” and “the cuckistocracy”, and how these social constructions amount to a “War on Men”.

PS Sparing a moment to pontificate abstractly, it might be somewhat eugenic in the long long term to permit, or at least to ignore, a low level of cuckoldry in an advanced White society. Unfortunately, while this may have been the case in the distant past, today it seems women will “cheat down” just as often with layabout badboys as they will “cheat up” with corner office kahunas, obviating any overall eugenic effect from cuckolding their wimpy beta hubbies.

PPS And let’s not forget that however eugenic a sexual market transaction (and any attendant social stigmas or sanctions), there are individual men who get caught on the wrong side of the sexual market equation and suffer immensely.

PPPS A real rape culture is emerging in Sweden, but the blame for that rests squarely on all the swarthy migrants GoodWhite Swedes have allowed into their country. Lying, cuntfaced feminists don’t have much to say about that, unless they have an opening provided by the leftoid media to (erroneously) blame White men.

Read Full Post »

NPR Dweebs Agree With Heartiste: Chicks Dig Alpha Male Body Language

From deep in the Le Chateau crypt (2007), a post about common beta male body language mistakes:

Closed body language

Guys who are confident that nothing in life can touch them have very open and smooth body language.  Nervous guys who are always afraid of fights, of being sucker punched, of conflict, will defensively scrunch up their body as if they were psychologically warding off blows.  Guys who fear nothing open their arms, expose their chests, and generally project the look of someone who never worries about being caught off-guard.  In that vein, avoid shoving your hands in your pockets, crossing your arms, standing with a narrow stance, looking around the room with darting eyes, slouching, or grabbing one forearm with your hand.

Recently (2016), from an NPR broadcast,

To Catch Someone On Tinder, Stretch Your Arms Wide

[…]

In these experiments, the researchers compared young adults’ closed, slouched postures against open, or expanded, ones.

“An expansive, open posture involves widespread limbs, a stretched torso and general enlargement of occupied space,” says Tanya Vacharkulksemsuk, a social psychologist at the University of California, Berkeley and lead author on the study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

For the 144 speed daters, Vacharkulksemsuk says, “expansiveness nearly doubles chances of getting a yes [to see each other again.]” […]

Separately, she and her colleagues had three men and three women create two dating profiles each on a popular dating app. (All six participants were white and heterosexual). Their profiles were identical in every way except the pictures in one profile were all expanded postures, while its twin had all contracted poses.

The participants swiped yes on every potential suitor — 3,000 in total — for 48 hours. “Profiles that feature expansive photos were 27 percent more likely to get a yes,” Vacharkulksemsuk says. Expanding made both men and women more desirable during speed dating and in the dating app. The effect was more pronounced for men, however.

Bolded to twist the shiv in feminists’ spotted hides. Sorry, feminists, dominance displays benefit men more than women! (You can tell how badly this shiv hits the shitlib bone by the alacrity with which the NPR writer avoided deeper examination of this equalist narrative-busting caveat.)

These postures convey power and openness, says Vacharkulksemsuk. “The information packing in that nonverbal behavior is social dominance, and where that person stands in a hierarchy,” she says. And, presumably, the person high in the pecking order is sexy. Alphas are scarce and in demand.

The reader who forwarded the NPR link asks, “Do you ever get tired of being right?”

No.

Read Full Post »

The Science Of Slurs

There’s nothing quite like a sharp semantic shiv that hits a vital. But did you know slurs evolved to serve a social purpose? And that there are sex-based differences in the perception of slurs?

We investigated the influence of the sex of the target and the sex of the sender on the judgment of slurs (verbal derogation). From previous research, we selected and clustered slurs into seven categories and respondents rated their degree of perceived insult in two consecutive questionnaire surveys (N = 281 and N = 224, respectively). Results confirm that slurs are generally judged as being more insulting when directed towards females than towards males.

The fundamental premise: Women are the reproductively more valuable sex, and this biological reality has downstream effects on human psychology. This is why Trump (PBUH) catches so much flak for insulting fat, caustic pig Rosie O’Donnell or slimy gotcha “reporter” Megyn Kelly, yet no one cares when he levels worse insults against the hundreds or even thousands of men who have landed in his target designation cross-hairs.

In comparison, differences in sex of sender were small. When directed towards females, slurs referring to “being loose” were rated as the most insulting.

That’s because it undermines the female prime directive to attract and keep a high value man with promises of fidelity (aka paternity assurance).

For both target sexes, remarks referring to homosexuality and physical unattractiveness were among those rated as the most insulting.

I guarantee you the homo slur was rated more insulting by men.

Least insulting were slurs referring to unethical acts, lack of intelligence and cowardliness.

This is why I usually favor a rhetorical attack on shitlibs that hits them where it hurts: their sexual androgyny and circus freak physiognomy. Although I don’t buy the finding that “stupid” isn’t an effective insult, especially when aimed subversively at the pencilnecks whose only source of pride is their MENSA membership.

A sex of respondent effect was found, suggesting that women rated slurs generally more insulting than men. The pattern of results showed considerable stability across surveys attesting for the reliability of the method for measuring the social evaluation of slurs.

Rank of slur effectiveness, least to most shivvy:

Character
->
Economic status (more effective against men)
->
Social status
->
Smarts
->
Looks (for women, less so for men)
->
Sexual worth (“slut”, “nerd”, “creep”)

The most vicious slurs circumvent the superego and ego, striking at the pith of the id, where the rawest measure of a man is contained: his (or her) worth as a mate.

Read Full Post »

Guess Which Virtual Sex Doll Women Want The Most?

In Japan, a burgeoning “fake anime boyfriend” market is capturing the hearts of Japanese women and overseas American women.

Since the 90s, Japanese women have been playing otome (“maiden”) games, which allow the player to pursue virtual relationships with several virtual hunks. In the interest of journalism, I spent over $60 flirting with emotionally manipulative anime characters, and it fucking ruled.

So what kind of virtual boyfriends do nipply Nipponese and sassy statesiders prefer? Take one guess.

When I asked Gray which character types tend to perform best, she told me that the “sadistic but charismatic” archetype is beloved in both Japan and the US.

Chicks dig those charismatic jerkboys.

She pointed to Eisuke Ichinomiya, which she says is the most popular character in Kissed by the Baddest Bidder, Voltage’s top-grossing game in the US. […] On Eisuke’s character profile, he is billed in glittering pink and purple script as a “cold-hearted narcissist.” His quote is “I’m going to make you mine. And you don’t get to say no.”

What’s revealing about this dating simulation (aka female pornhub) is that it is essentially the female version of sex dolls for men. Women aren’t aroused as much by the visual and tactile inspection of men’s bodies as they are by the emotional and psychological inspection of men’s personalities. And when choosing male archetypes, the jerkboy narcissist is number one pulse amplifier in the arterial transverse between a woman’s heart and vagina. This is why real world feedback continually proves the efficacy of Game to the goal of seducing women: Game is the creation of sexier male personalities.

“Usually [this character is] sadistic and mean to you, but sometimes, when you and him are alone, he becomes so sweet and very kind to you,” Gray explained.

Vulnerability Game. A girl wants a challenging man (i.e., a man with a lot of poosy options) who can’t help but occasionally, and reluctantly, succumb to her erotic charms.

Also like Voltage’s millions of other customers worldwide, I was really only interested in the mean and sadistic gentlemen—which is weird, because I actively avoid mean and sadistic men in real life.

Fantasy is inward projection of outward sexual desire. We know this because no woman in the history of the world has ever fantasized about a reliable beta male in pleated khakis. Hence, the reason there’s a maxim stating “watch what women do and ignore what they say”. The details of female desire are quite disturbing to idealistic minds when seen up close, so much so that even women recoil from a cogent awareness of their own sexual urges. Which is why women are gifted with an ability to flim flam themselves whenever they are asked about what they want romantically.

This woman quoted above, when alone with her virtual tingle generator, chooses a badboy for her stimulus. “In real life”, she claims otherwise. But that’s the source of the fantasy’s power; in real life, most women don’t have the goods to attract and tame the badboys who turn them on, so in moments of introspection they fall back on sour grape-isms to rationalize the parade of dependable boring betas that is their lot in life. Or, oppositely, they have been burned by badboys so often in the past that avoiding them must be an “active” process rather than the more natural, unplanned pursuit that doesn’t require active effort typical of women who don’t have a dating history littered with alluring assholes.

Gray insisted that most of Voltage’s users “think that their real life and romance in our apps are totally different.” However, in the same response, she acknowledged that an elision between fantasy and reality does often take place. “The user who has a boyfriend plays our app to fill in the unsatisfied part of her boyfriend. Playing the app makes her happy and it helps to prevent fights with her boyfriend,” Gray told me.

Virtual alpha widows. Literally cucked by an anime lothario.

There is no bottom to the romantic humiliations that beta male boyfriends can suffer.

Read Full Post »