The Truth About Mixed-Race Couples

The stereotype that black-white mixed-race couples are typically black men hooking up with trashy, fat white women has a factual basis.

When comparing data on non-Hispanic white mothers of white children vs. non-Hispanic white mothers of mulatto children, the NLS survey data creates a distinct profile of white mothers of mulatto children. The profile strongly supports the common stereotypes about these women that are held in both the white and black communities.

White females with mulatto children are significantly less educated. They perform significantly worse on the ASVAB test. They average a higher body mass index [BMI]. In personality test scores they are, on average, more difficult, more quarrelsome, more stubborn, and less dependable. They are significantly more likely to say that they “lie and cheat often.”

When rated by interviewers, white females who report having black sexual partners are rated as less attractive, not as well groomed, and having less desirable personality traits. They are dramatically more likely to test positive for chlamydia or trichomoniasis. They perform worse on vocabulary tests.

The data was compiled by the website Race/History/Evolution

It’s fair to say the whole media industrial complex portrays the exact opposite of reality.

Stereotypes don’t materialize out of thin air. There’s a reason they exist. People notice patterns and formulate generalizations around those observed patterns.

In homogeneous societies, the most undesirable females are left without partners and go to their long dark death having failed to fulfill their genetic prime directive. End result: Humanity in such societies benefits as a whole from the eugenic cleansing. In late stage multicultural anti-societies, the slag of womanhood does an end-run around sexual selection and procreates outside their race. The question is put to the studio audience: Is this a net positive or net negative for those rainbow societies?

UPDATE

Some readers ask what is the point of posting this information? What good does it do?

Other than the obvious — rebuking the lies that the Cathedral/Synagogue/religious metaphor for the anti-white establishment of your choice churns out at an industrialized clip — I think the best reason is a psychological one:

Entrapment.

I can imagine a preening, bigoted SWPL reading this and quivering in anticipation of launching a SCIENCE-backed diatribe against those wrong kinds of white people, those slovenly rednecks the SWPL loves to hate, when suddenly it dawns on him.

“Wait… oh crap, can’t go there.”

Read Full Post »

Are Humans A Pair Bonding Species?

Reader Hector_St_Clare writes,

Re: Humans are a pair-bonding species with polygynous tendencies.

To be more accurate, humans are a pair bonding species with *mild* polygynous tendencies.

To be even more accurate, humans are a pair bonding species with mild tendencies towards male polygyny and covert female promiscuity.

Hector is mostly correct. It’s a myth that humans evolved for lifelong, monogamous relationships, but it’s also a myth that we are sex machines rigged to copulate orgiastically with whomever presents for a ravaging, a la Sex at Dawn.

Humans appear, from the gathered evidence, to be a cross between chimps and bonobos in sociosexual behavior and attitude. There is strategic female promiscuity, but there is also female preference for monogamy. There is male desire for sexual variety, but there is also male jealousy and mate guarding. The glans ridge on male penises indicates that men evolved to scoop out competitor sperm from presumably slutty women, but the flush of oxytocin released in the female brain after sex indicates that women evolved to strongly attach to lovers for longer than a night.

There are many more examples of the inherent contradictory nature of human sexuality like the above. Further complicating the picture is the growing evidence that these sexual predispositions vary by continental race; jealousy, promiscuity, mate guarding, cuckoldry, polygyny, and even female preference all vary in kind and degree depending where you are in the world. There are certainly human sexuality universals, but these universals are modified by unique environmental pressures.

The bottom line is that people who claim lifelong monogamy is the natural state of humanity absent cultural interference are wrong, and people who claim free love is the natural state of humanity absent cultural constraints are also wrong. The truth, as always, is a lot uglier than either side would have you believe.

Read Full Post »

Aloofness Will Make Women Want Sex More

Readers have been writing to express their gratitude ever since the CH “Dread” post was published, which advised men in loveless relationships to become more aloof and unavailable as a means of reigniting their women’s desire for them.

Women respond viscerally in their vagina area to unpredictability, mixed signals, danger, and drama in spite of their best efforts to convince themselves otherwise. Managing your relationship in such a way that she is left with a constant, gnawing feeling of impending doom will do more for your cause than all the Valentine’s Day cards and expertly performed tongue love in the world. Like it or not, the threat of a looming breakup, whether the facts justify it or not, will spin her into a paranoid estrogen-fueled tizzy, and she’ll spend every waking second thinking about you, thinking about the relationship, thinking about how to fix it. Her love for you will blossom under these conditions. Result: she works harder to please you.

The bitterboy haters really swooned with indignation after reading that post, feeling deep in their bones that anything less than flowers and constant supplication was the only way a man should act if he wanted to revive a flagging relationship. Hundreds of testimonials to the contrary would not convince them. Theirs is a Hallmark world, and goddamnit it’s going to stay a Hallmark world.

By why heed your real world experiences and the wisdom of CH when you can wait for CREDENTIALED EXPERTS to give you the go-ahead to try something new and daring with your life?

But the [female] rationale [for wanting sex] I’d like to focus on here is one that’s rarely alluded to in the literature: namely, a woman’s wanting sex–and at times desperately so–out of fear that her partner may be on the verge of leaving her. That is, she may actively pursue her spouse sexually to help deal with powerful feelings of anxiety, stemming from her intuition or knowledge that her relationship is in jeopardy–fragile, teetering, or on the brink of collapse.

The woman’s apprehension about a possible break-up may derive from her partner’s broadly hinting that he wants out of the relationship or, in fact, from his directly informing her of his intentions to move out and file for divorce. Or it’s possible she might suspect that he’s having an affair; or (because of the vast emotional distance separating them) that he’s actually fallen in love with someone else and, on that account, secretly planning to desert her. In a panic about it all–especially if she still feels devoted to him, or there are children involved and she’s frantic to keep the family together at all costs–she may be desperate to initiate sex to feel less helpless, as well as to exert some control over (and hopefully alter) her husband’s errant, non-loving behavior toward her. […]

As a consequence of her distress, or anguish, she’s strongly impelled to prompt a heated sexual encounter whereas previously she may have shown ambivalence, apathy, or even a marked antipathy toward making love with her partner. Withdrawn and quite possibly sexually shut down, in the bedroom she may take on the role of “aggressor”–or, probably a better term, “seductress.” […]

Ironically, the sex that can emerge from the considerable trepidation and anxiety I’ve been describing can be unusually passionate. Though I’ve already characterized such sex as “fear-inspired,” the very intensity of this fear can transform itself into substantially heightened sexual arousal — such that the end result of lovemaking can be electrically charged (what noted sex therapist, David Schnarch, actually refers to as “wall socket sex”!). It’s as though, ironically, the woman’s pronounced fear of abandonment renders her capable of having more abandoned sex than she may have been capable of before.

As we say in the business —  Game. Set. Snatch.

Le Chateau ahead of the curve, again. A little bit of fear and dread will motivate a sexually retreating woman to joyfully spread for the sake of committed love. To put it in even more concise terms: Do the opposite of a beta male.

Dread is essentially a form of the scarcity principle, producing effects in the sexual market similar to the effects seen in the economic market when an in-demand good is in short supply. Not only will calculated doses of dread revitalize relationships, but it will also allow average men to date much hotter women than they would be expected to date by the dunderhead masses.

Maxim #55: A man can shoot way out of his league if he acts as if he is the one occupying the higher league.

Dread, or fear-inspired romance, is not a relationship cure-all. An average man can keep a level-headed hottie on a string for about six months using nothing but anxiety-inducing seduction techniques, but beyond the six month mark fissures will begin to erupt. Women’s hindbrains can fry from too much sustained anxiety, and past that point relationship management with a beautiful woman becomes more difficult, requiring more emotional investment from the man. Accepting this reality, the man will usually opt for gaudy beta displays of commitment, and as if on cue this will cause the hottie to reevaluate her relationship options.

Given the long-term risks of overuse, dread is still the winning move for the average man. Just as five minutes of alpha > five years of beta for women, six months of sex with a hot babe > ten years of sex with a plain jane for men.

The best news is that dread is exceptionally effective as a tool to coax hot sex from a woman if you are within an already established relationship, such as marriage. The trick to keeping the bedsheets stained with poos joos is the subtle application of intermittent dread, which releases your woman’s anxiety just long enough that she swings wildly between cuddly comfort and ravenous restlessness. Sustained dread is better when you’ve started dating a girl, and particularly the types of eye-catching girls who get propositioned on the daily.

Read Full Post »

Masturbation And IQ

Satoshi Kanazawa has a theory that general human intelligence evolved partly in response to environmental novelty, and that high IQ people are more likely than low IQ people to crave novel experiences.

How did human intelligence evolve to be so high? Lynn [Lynn, R. (1991). The evolution of race differences in intelligence. Mankind Quarterly, 32, 99–173] and Rushton [Rushton, J.P. (1995). Race, evolution, and behavior: A life history perspective. New Brunswick: Transaction] suggest that the main forces behind the evolution of human intelligence were the cold climate and harsh winters, which selected out individuals of lower intelligence. In contrast, Kanazawa [Kanazawa, S. (2004). General intelligence as a domain-specific adaptation. Psychological Review, 111, 512–523] contends that it is the evolutionary novelty of the environment which increased general intelligence. Multiple regression analyses support both theories. Annual mean temperature and evolutionary novelty (measured by latitude, longitude, and distance from the ancestral environment) simultaneously have independent effects on average intelligence of populations. Temperature and evolutionary novelty together explain half to two- thirds of variance in national IQ.

Kanazawa has remarked that this theory explains why smarter people drink more than dumber people: Alcohol and its effects provide a novel mental and kinesthetic experience.

I can buy this. Based on personal observation, the smarties do tend to drink more, and take drugs more regularly. However, the less smart more often fall into crippling addiction when they take up drinking or drugs. It would seem the dumber can’t handle the novelty.

Masturbation is a form of novelty-seeking, particularly for men, because most masturbation material is hardcore porn featuring a variety of women (fatties, uggos and wall victims excluded — there’s only so far the concept of variety will stretch before it morphs into something grotesque). If Kanazawa is right, then I extrapolate from his theory that higher IQ people will masturbate more than lower IQ people.

Is there evidence for my inference? Inquisitive readers who want to collate GSS data, or who have access to any relevant studies, are welcome to try and find compelling evidence one way or the other. Operators are stroking by.

Note that I am asking for a fapping-to-prefrontal frisson correlation, rather than a sexual intercourse to smarts correlation. This way, we control for the possibility that smart people desire more sex than dumb people, but are less able (or willing) to fulfill their desires, leading to a misinterpretation of the results.

It may strike some as counterintuitive that smarties are more sexually charged than lunkheads, but sexual desire does recruit imagination centers of the brain, and imagination will be found in greater abundance in those with, well, greater brain abundance. “Vapid jocks” probably get more sexytime than the exquisitely self-aware, but that disparity could be just as much a consequence of the thwarted rocket-fueled desire of the smart as of the satisfied whitenoise desire of the dumb.

Read Full Post »

The Pill And Divorce: The Real Connection

Some religious organizations have long argued that widespread contraception use leads to higher divorce rates because severing the connection between sex and procreation also severs the emotional connection between spouses. The duty one feels to one’s spouse is weakened when the primal bonds of sex and the consequences which normally follow in the state of nature are thwarted.

They may have a point, but I’m going to present what I believe is a more compelling reason why contraception use (predominately the Pill) and divorce track each other so closely. For a graphical representation of how closely the rate of Pill usage and the rate of divorce have tracked over time, see this (original source here):

That five year lag time between the rise in pill use and divorce is critical. It’s solid evidence that once women had the Pill down their throats, they began escaping their marriages in droves.

The Pill is one of the Six Sirens of the Sexual Apocalypse. Like opening Clamdora’s Box, the Pill is one of the six crimson spirits that now haunt the world and visit upon the civilized West far-reaching unintended (and perhaps intended) negative effects. Why would Pill usage contribute to a rise in the divorce rate? For an answer to that, you have to look to women first, and how the Pill alters their perceptions of men.

And what the Pill does to women’s brains is… how shall we say… veeeery interestink. Women on the Pill experience a shift in their mate selection criteria and begin to prefer plodding dads over plotting cads. Actually, not so much prefer boring betas as avoid sexy alphas.

Extrapolating from this premise is enlightening. What do most delicious SWPL sluts women using oral contraceptives do once they get married, or not long after getting married? That’s right, they go off the Pill so that they can start a family. And what happens when women go off the Pill? Their hindbrains shed the fog of feeling satisfied with beta male cuddles and revert to adoring sexy alpha male power thrusts, and that adoration reaches maximum cervical impact one week per month when fertile.

So perhaps the Pill and its relation to divorce is not so much about severing emotional connections as it is about reconstructing sexual connections. The wife whose lust is freed from the false prison of the Pill will suddenly, and quite inexplicably to her conscious evaluation, discover her beta husband — the man who fulfilled her in most ways when she was on the Pill — is sexually repulsive. This disgust will reach a crescendo 25% of the time of her pre-menopausal life, and she will either succumb to cheating with a more dominant man, or she will do the “right thing” and leave a marriage that is making her unhappy because her beta betrothed-turned-beta bother doesn’t know how to “communicate” with her and “meet her needs”.

And of course the beta hubschlub, tricked by the Pill’s abetting and steeped in his anti-male culture and believing everything the wife wants is good and true and everything the husband wants is wicked and false, will do the EXACT OPPOSITE of what he should do to reignite his wife’s post-Pill listing libido. He will crank up the beta, figuring that more of what sealed the deal in the first place is just the medicine to prevent the deal from breaking.

And he will be sorely mistaken, and for his good-faith efforts at reconciliation against the headwinds of unacknowledged and often heatedly denied biological reality the state will reward him with a family court ass-ramming so deep and girthful he will come to accept as a means of psychological emollient that his life is rightfully meant to be a dutifully suffered shitfest endured with stiff upper lip. And then he will be a dead man walking.

The problem of post-Pill wives losing their desire for their husbands is so bad that drug companies are trying to create a compensating pill — call it the Thrill — that will reinvigorate flagging female libidos. The intention is to cure “hypoactive sexual-desire disorder,” aka HSDD, by tapping into the primal recesses of the female brain and manipulating lustful brain lobes into activity.

The Thrill may work, but I bet not in the way the researchers intend. This is because the “problem” is not so much low female libido, but low female libido for their betaboy husbands. The added clause is crucial. A pill that fuels female clit boners will reawaken women… straight into the arms of interloper alpha males. Imagine a world of supercharged horny housewives boffing everyone in sight. Shit just got a lot more interesting.

A Thrill pill that tricks wives into perceiving their beta husbands as sexy romance novel stranger-from-afar badboy alphas may or may not work to strengthen the institution of marriage, but I can tell you one intervention that is GUARANTEED to help your marriage: Game. Specifically, dread game. A small adjustment in your mentality and behavior toward being more of an alpha male can gain you all the benefits of a thrill pill-popping wife with none of the dangerous side effects.

Read Full Post »

Body Men Vs Face Men

If a man is presented with a choice between a butterface (ugly face, hot body, everything “but her face”) and a myspace angle (cute face, ugly body), his decision will depend in part on whether he’s down for a short-term fling or if he’s seeking a long-term lover.

The reason for this is not hard to figure out upon reflection: the prime directive is to survive and reproduce, and that means, for men, getting seed into womb (or wombs, as the opportunity may present). A man with pump and dumps on his mind will shift focus to girls with highly fertile bodies, placing less emphasis on their faces. His dividing rod will target women with 0.7 WHRs, 17-23 BMIs, fruitfully ripening in the age range of 22-29. Since he’s not planning on investing much time or energy in his little red curvette, he doesn’t sweat the worry of romantically gazing into the limpid eyes of a plain jane year after year.

A man who is more K-selected, i.e., more NW European white or East Asian (ain’t I a steenker!), feels a cosmic pull toward hitching himself to a woman for the long term so that his few kids have a shot to thrive in a resource-restricted environment. It’s the quality over quantity strategy. To this man, a woman’s facial prettiness matters, a lot. He’s gotta look at her and provide for her for a long time, and he won’t be much inspired to do either if her face isn’t intoxicating. The body is still important (fat chicks left out in cold again, news at 11), but now the contours of her face have become a crucial determinant of her acceptability as a mate. His dividing rod will be recalibrated toward younger women — ages late adolescence to mid-20s — with large, expressive eyes, small chins and jaws, and exquisitely molded subcutaneous fat deposits.

This is the theory. In practice, such choices rarely come up, because there is a strong correlation between a woman’s facial prettiness and her body attractiveness. When a rift between body and face does occur in the same woman, it is typically a butterface. Homely-faced women with slender boffable bodies are more common than pretty-faced women with unappealing bodies. Fat chicks stir the needle a little toward myspace anglers, but just a little, because it doesn’t take much weight gain until a girl’s face begins to display the deformity that is evident in her body. Another example of the myspace angler is the masculinized woman with a striking model-esque face tethered to a curveless body built for spiking volleyballs.

Another point worth making is that men, regardless of their mating strategies, will only choose between butterfaces and myspace anglers when they HAVE to choose. Most men, given a free choice, will choose women who are blessed with both. Plotting cads and plodding dads will both choose the woman who has it all, face and body (and yeah, personality too, I guess) if such a woman is a real prospect.

Originally, this post was meant as conjecture, based on observation and hunch. But to my surprise, there are ♥♥♥STUDIES♥♥♥ available for perusal which have looked into the issue of male preference for female body versus female face and how that preference might change depending on a man’s mating strategy. These studies, naturally, confirm CH hunches, as they almost always do, because it’s hard to be disproven by SCIENCE when you simply keep your eyes open to watch how the world works.

PS The Area Code Rating System is a handy method for efficiently categorizing your dates by their bangability and relationship worthiness. If you regularly hook up with 000s, might I suggest you lay off the absinthe?

Read Full Post »

Have Guitar, Will Tingle

Once again, science has come around to ♥♥♥♥vindicating♥♥♥♥ folk wisdom and Chateau teachings. This installment of SCIENCE ♥s GAME explores the subtle tricks of perception that mimicking a high social status man can play on women. A recent study found that the mere act of lugging around a guitar case will significantly improve a man’s odds of getting a number close from a woman.

This experiment tested the assumption that music plays a role in sexual selection. Three hundred young women were solicited in the street for their phone number by a young male confederate who held either a guitar case or a sports bag in his hands or had no bag at all. Results showed that holding a guitar case was associated with greater compliance to the request, thus suggesting that musical practice is associated with sexual selection. […]

What happened was that when he wasn’t holding anything he got a number 14% of the time. The sports bag, though, put women off and dropped his average to just 9%.

It was the guitar case that did the trick, bumping up his chances to 31%. Not bad at all considering he was approaching random strangers in the street.

So no matter what you look like, what job you have, how much money you make, or how stylishly you’re dressed, you can arouse more women by demonstrating higher value with an empty guitar case and signaling (falsely, if necessary) that you are a shredder of six strings and snatch.

Female hypergamy don’t give a shit for acceptable signals of male mate value. Female hypergamy don’t give a shit about societally approved male accomplishment. All female hypergamy cares about is that a man *IS* higher status — and thus more socially and psychologically dominant — than herself, regardless of the measurably objective or amorphously subjective nature of that status.

The game lesson here, beside the obvious one — carry a guitar case — should be easily comprehended: adopt the trappings and the behavior of the high status, socially and sexually preselected, dominant male and you, too, will see your romance life improve by 100%. Or better.

Read Full Post »