Linkage Disequilibrium

Paging Bryan “Fuck the rest of the country who wasn’t born with my genetically superior IQ, good taste, and exquisitely manicured principles” Caplan: Switzerland is not a diversity utopia.

Research group finds creating boundaries key to reducing ethnic violence

History is filled with examples of ethnic violence, the type that erupts when people with differing cultures attempt to live side by side. The Middle East comes to mind, as does Northern Ireland or Yugoslavia. What’s not so common are studies done that show what sorts of things actually work to prevent problems when people of dissimilar backgrounds live next door to one another. Thus, a new study done by Yaneer Bar-Yam and his team at the New England Complex Systems Institute, appears to be particularly relevant. He and his colleagues, describe in their paper on the preprint server arXiv, how a study they’ve done of the ethnically diverse country of Switzerland, shows that political and geographical boundaries have served to keep the peace between the different groups.

Libertardians: so smart ensconced in their fantasy bubbles aka homogeneous fiefdoms. Outside of them… eh, not so much. (I think at this point given the evidence of their own words it’s safe to say a significant proportion of mainstream libertarians are just sophisticated liberal anti-white bigots.)

***

Since I’m in a charitable mood, here’s a post by Caplan that pretty much nails the truth dead center. A reader writes:

I’d also note that lower class men can be pretty ornery and don’t necessarily make good employees in today’s economy, while lower class women tend to be comparatively docile and co-operative, so they are more able to get and keep jobs.

Yes. Female economic independence pushing their hypergamy into hyperdrive isn’t the only factor leading to the enervation of the working man. The modern economy is filled with jobs that are feminized in nature, and often require navigation of labyrinthine office politics that working class men with neither the inclination nor the social savvy find appealing. Men are built for focused single-tasking, and women for superficial multi-tasking. The West is currently tilted in the direction of a multi-tasking economy, for which remuneration flows disproportionately to those with the best social, political and client/customer juggling skills.

For those who scoff “adapt or die”, well, ok. But just remember that sometimes there’s a LOT of dying to go along with the adapting. Government policy can ameliorate or worsen the dying. Lately, it seems government is more interested in accomplishing the latter… for the target designated group.

***

Excellent post at the blog ‘Just Be a Man About It’, which documents evidence of female hypergamy, hookup culture, beta male supplication, alpha male aloofness, women’s love for alpha males and loathing of beta males, and sexual and relationship dynamics in a modern hunter-gatherer !Kung tribe. If you see parallels between the !Kung sexual market and your own, you are not mistaken. Just a friendly reminder that the concepts behind game and female desire, as discussed extensively here at the Chateau, are rooted in ancient biological forces that continue to shape who we are today. Take it in, and be enlightened.

(Note: Broad racial differences in mating predilection have probably evolved in the last 10,000 years. These differences do not rest on a presupposition that universal preferences don’t exist.)

***

As if sugar, refined carbs, cheaper junk food, prolonged cubicle farm sitting, and lack of walkable communities due to vibrancy weren’t enough, now there’s evidence that CO2 may be responsible for the explosion (heh) of obesity in the world over the last fifty years (via Mangan’s).

Coinciding with the sharp increase in the prevalence of human obesity over the last 50 years, weight gain has also been observed in animals. A recent study found that 24 populations of 8 different species, including laboratory animals that had been fed the same diets for decades, all displayed significant weight gain.3 This suggests that a shared environmental factor, favouring weight gain, may be involved in the regulation of energy balance. Such a factor has yet to be identified.

Even our pets are getting fatter. If pet food hasn’t changed, then something in the environment is causing Fifi to bloat up. Lack of exercise? Maybe. But cats are usually pretty good at self-regulating their weight, and they’re getting fatter too. Infectious parasite? A guy like Greg Cochrane, who has argued that homosexuality may be the result of a parasite in the mother, would be open to this argument. Proof would be if wild animals are getting fatter, too. Whatever it is, the cause(s) of the obesity epidemic is clearly environmental. Fifty years is simply not enough time for an obesity gene or genes to trickle through the general population and produce the rate of change in fatness that we observe.

The good news is that CO2-influenced levels of blood acidity can be mediated by spending less time indoors (where CO2 levels are higher) and getting more outdoors exercise. Also, you might want to limit your intake of beer. The carbonation may be responsible for the localized effect of the famed beer gut.

You know what’s the worst consequence of obesity? All those fat chicks skew the dating market. In fat America, thin chicks have bunker hardened egos because they know they’re in demand. In regions of the world were thinness is the rule and not the exception, the women have more manageable, i.e. feminine, egos. If it takes curbing global warming (a phenomenon I am not yet convinced is mostly human-caused or amenable to fixing) to make women more pleasant to be around, then sign me up for a fusion-powered DeLorean.

***

The commenter Severn delivers some righteous subversion at the Atlantic in a McArdle article about Europe’s demographic and financial woes.

Every aspiring economist should learn this on day 1 of Econ 101: Humans are not fungible. Repeat after me: humans are not fungible. Once more for the cheap seats: humans are not fungible.

Really, it would save so much energy spent bloviating in sophistic tantrums with no purpose other than to avoid confronting the goddamned obvious if the elite stopped being afraid of their own shadows. And it’d save us all a lot of money and psychic distress, too.

***

Facial symmetry experiment. Left sides and right sides of people’s faces were combined to show how different we would look if we were facially symmetrical on either our right or left sides. Below, the true portrait of a man(?) (L), his face adjusted for left side symmetry (C), and his face adjusted for right side symmetry (R).

A cursory glance at all the mock-up photos reveals something peculiar. The faces made symmetrical with one side are decidedly masculine-looking, and the faces made symmetrical with the other side are feminine. Could it be that a battle royale occurs in the womb where the masculine and feminine essences are locked in struggle for control of the destiny of the face and, presumably, the associated personality and character of the adult-to-be? Groovy, man.

***

Compare and contrast: Japan vs Haiti. Photos of Japan’s progress six months after its devastating earthquake and tsunami. Photo gallery of Haiti two years after its killer earthquake. Earthquake aid to Japan far less than aid to Haiti. A report on progress in Haiti.

Word of the day: fungible.

Related, Japan’s so-called lost decades of economic stagnation may be a myth.

***

More evidence that the modern, grain-centric diet is bad for us: white rice linked with type 2 diabetes. I’m not ready to go all-in on the paleolithic diet. Although the epidemiological momentum seems to be against grains and sugar, I’ve been reading too many conflicting studies recently for me to take a strong stand either way. For instance, here’s a study showing that red meat consumption is associated with increased risk of death (rebuttal here). Furthermore, some races may be better disposed to certain diets than other races. The bottom line is that calorie amount still matters, and calorie *type* matters as well. I split the difference by minimizing my consumption of refined grains, vegetable oils, red meat, sweets, carbonated drinks and fatty cheese and maximizing my intake of omega-3 heavy fish, (occasional) grass-fed lean beef, olive oil, dark green veggies, bitter tasting foods, nuts and whole grains.

***

Even educated chicks dig jerks. A female prison psychologist had a secret long-term relationship with a gang rapist. Yes, feminists, one of your own fell in love with a dude who rapes women for a living.

She also allegedly visited the prisoner – known as “H” – more than 20 times using her new identity, and wore an Islamic head scarf and sunglasses during her visits.

The Department of Corrective Services has been investigating the precise status of the pair’s relationship, including the possibility they have married, which remains unconfirmed.

The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the forensic psychologist first met “H” when she began counselling the long-term inmate during a sex rehab program at Parklea Prison.

He is serving 14 years and six months for the horrific and systematic pack rapes of young women in Sydney’s southwest in August 2000, lead by the depraved brothers Bilal and Mohammed Skaf.

Aren’t you gals the least bit embarrassed by your sex’s notorious sexual preferences? Of course you are. That’s why you never hear a feminist confront this female behavior without first resorting to some lame, contrived “patriarchy” boogeyman.

When the day comes that feminists decide to wrestle with female sexual nature honestly and openly is the day that feminism dies as an expedient ideology. It’s already dead as a coherent ideology.

Read Full Post »

Game, Obesity And Men Dropping Out

Over at Cheap Chalupas Central, asdf comments on an assertion by Charles Murray, regarding conclusions from his book “Coming Apart”, that falling marriage rates and rising single mom rates are due solely or mostly to men dropping out and eschewing marital responsibility:

Murray: “If you are arguing that 22-year-old men are saying to their girlfriends, ‘I just need a job and then I’ll behave responsibly…’ Well, that’s just bullshit.”

There are a lot of men this is probably true for. Men know, instinctively, that unless they make more money than their spouse the relationships can never be serious or a family formed. So if they consider their chances of getting a good job slim they will likely not try to do the other things necessary to become a family man.

asdf is spot on. I like Charles Murray. I consider him a leading light in the anti-lie movement. But like a lot of sociologists examining trends in the functioning of the sexual market, he misses or glosses over the relevance of female hypergamy. I understand why feminists would want to avoid confronting the deepest, darkest desires of the female id (aka My Secret Vagina Tingle!), but I can’t see a reason why putative iconoclasts like Murray would ignore it except as a reflection of an instinctive white knight complex that so many beta males harbor.

If women are offering men — well, really, just coolbreeze alpha males — the sex for free, then those men will revert to taking the path of least resistance. They won’t “man up”, because they won’t need to. This reading of market forces implicates women more than it does men. Women are making sexual choices, and men are responding to those choices.

It’s not entirely a female-driven decision tree. Women, particularly women in lower socioeconomic strata, are refusing marriage to jobless layabouts. Men could choose to raise their mate value by getting jobs, however undignified the work. In the past, this “manning up” brought the desired result: those jobless men would improve their marital prospects by taking on work. But the overarching change in the current culture is a one-two punch to the guts of men, especially lower SES men, that damages their ability to raise their status (i.e., their sexual market value, or SMV) via employment:

1. More jobs require advanced skills that left side of the bell curve men don’t have the innate mental capacity to learn, and more jobs require female-oriented dispositions that most working class men don’t care to learn.

2. Women have priced themselves out of their dating pool of men by becoming economically independent. A woman’s entirely natural and reasonable hypergamous instinct (hey, she’s only got so many eggs to spare) to mate with higher status men than herself dooms her to limited prospects if her own status has gone up relative to the men in her dating milieu.

Men are intuitive creatures, as well, even if not as holistically intuitive as women. Men will respond to depressed status enhancement from work by retreating from the employment field. Men will respond to women’s sexual choices by adopting the behavior of those men whom women lavish with their discounted derrieres. In some mating circles, this means men will learn game (i.e. the charismatic arts) and try to catch spillover from the maglev pussy express that roars along during women’s contraceptively-abetted prime years from the late teens to late 20s.

A feedback loop of alpha cock carouseling, single mommery, video gaming and porn watching results which will, in time, begin to infiltrate the upper classes. You can only insulate yourself from dystopian trends for so long before the uruk-hai batter down your private school walls.

In short, no sociological theory into sex, marriage and family trends is complete without a long, hard look at female hypergamy, the one biomechanical force to rule them all, and its intersection with economic realities. The science is out there; when women become financially empowered, they begin to choose men based on criteria other than their ability to provide.

But that’s not all that Murray, et al are missing. I’m here to tell Murray and others perusing his findings that there is another, MASSIVE factor at work skewing the sexual market, and one that, just as unsurprisingly, gets almost no attention from the PC-soaked punditariat: female obesity.

Imagine you are an unmarried working class dude recently unemployed. You look around you and marvel at a sea of grotesquely misshapen fat women, rolls upon rolls of undulating flesh hiding stores of cheesy poofs, porky hellion spawn trailing their wakes, chins resting atop chins, bloated diabetic cankles stomping the Walmartian grounds like lumbering elephants. In some towns, close to 40% of the available single women are clinically OBESE.

This is obesity folks, not just overweight. Overweight women are physically repulsive, but obesity renders them monstrous. To clarify this assertion for the modern indoctrinated female reader: an obese woman is as sexually undesirable to men as a jobless, charmless, humorless, enfeebled, dull man is sexually undesirable to women.

So back to our realistic scenario: Our typical unmarried working class man surveys his cellulite-blasted kingdom (and it does not matter how fat he, himself, is, for fat men and thin men alike prefer the exquisite sight of slender female bodies), and he makes a quick hindbrain calculation. Does he bust his ass in a crappy service sector job doing women’s work for a shot at legally bound long-term commitment to a shuffling shoggoth dragging the bastard spawn of a hundred alpha males in tow, or does he say “fuck it” and turn to video games and porn featuring hot, thin chicks for his status and dopamine fix?

You see where this is heading. It’s entirely reasonable, and expected, that a lot of men would drop out of the intensified competition for the few remaining childless slender babes in a world full of fat asses, single moms, and fat assed single moms. And even among the small contingent of sexually appealing women, they make enough in government and HR paychecks to cover expenses plus gifts for their Skittles Men. What working stiff beta provider can compete on those terms?

Men aren’t refusing to man up; they’re doing exactly what women do, and what both sexes have done since time immemorial: they’re acting in their self-interests. Incentives matter. You’d think Murray, of all people, would know this.

Women are as complicit in the current deterioration of family structure as are men; and, in fact, because of women’s natural roles as sexual gatekeepers, I’d argue that women are more complicit than men. In the arena of sexual choice and fulfillment, men are, on average, followers, and women are leaders. This is not to say that men exercise no choice; only that they exercise less choice in sexual partners than do women. A double whammy of women’s financial independence restricting their mate choices, coupled with a female SMV-destroying obesity scourge restricting men’s mate choices, has compounded to help usher forth the dysgenic shitfest we as a nation find ourselves in today.

If the reigning paradigm is unsustainable but also immune to rectification, as I suspect it is, then perhaps the only solution now is to wait out a total collapse of elite authority. Tick tock…

ps this post hate-list approved.

Read Full Post »

Is Finger Length Ratio Evidence Of A Woman’s Fidelity?

Here’s a very thorough and illuminating study into digit ratio (a subject previously covered on this blog) that adds a new angle: the relation of female to male digit ratio by ethnicity, and what it could mean about current human evolution. The study’s findings also have some interesting implications for pickup and game, and for male and female reproductive success and health in general.

This is a Big Info post, so I suggest you read the study at the link provided to get the full impact of its conclusions. Bonus: your diligence will help keep the comments free of non sequitur-ish clutter. To keep things straight in your head, it helps to remember that low digit ratio (a shorter index finger than ring finger) corresponds to exposure to higher levels of testosterone in the womb, and a high digit ratio corresponds to higher estrogen exposure in the womb. Prenatal hormone exposure influences the development of the brain, and thus the personality and behavioral inclinations of the adult.

The 2nd:4th digit ratio, sexual dimorphism, population differences, and reproductive success: evidence for sexually antagonistic genes? […]

We report data on the following. (a) reproductive success and 2D:4D from England, Germany, Spain, Hungary (ethnic Hungarians and Gypsy subjects), Poland, and Jamaica (women only). Significant negative associations were found between 2D:4D in men and reproductive success in the English and Spanish samples and significant positive relationships between 2D:4D in women and reproductive success in the English, German, and Hungarian samples. The English sample also showed that married women had higher 2D:4D ratios than unmarried women, suggesting male choice for a correlate of high ratio in women, and that a female 2D:4D ratio greater than male 2D:4D predicted high reproductive success within couples. Comparison of 2D:4D ratios of 62 father:child pairs gave a significant positive relationship. This suggested that genes inherited from the father had some influence on the formation of the 2D:4D ratio. Waist:hip ratio in a sample of English and Jamaican women was negatively related to 2D:4D. (b) Sex and population differences in mean 2D:4D in samples from England, Germany, Spain, Hungary (including ethnic Hungarians and Gypsy subjects), Poland, Jamaica, Finland, and South Africa (a Zulu sample). Significant sex and population differences in mean 2D:4D were apparent.

It has been known for some time that the ratio between the length of the 2nd and 4th digits (2D:4D) is a sexually dimorphic trait (Baker, 1888; George, 1930). In general, mean 2D:4D has been found to be lower in men compared to women (Phelps, 1952). The differentiation of the digits is under the control of Homeobox or Hox genes (the posterior-most Hoxd and Hoxa genes), which also control the differentiation of the testes and ovaries (Peichel et al., 1997; Herault et al., 1997).

Some people don’t like it when I use the term biomechanics in discussions of love and sex and men and women. They complain it’s reductionist, that I’m somehow violating a cosmic rule by analyzing the component parts of relationship dynamics and the sexes. I think studies like this must give them the hives, for every time one of these babies drops in the lap of intellectual debate, my reductionist worldview is further confirmed. Hey, I love poetry and starlight gazing and flutters of the heart as much as the next romantic sucker, and happily wallow in it, but I also love the truth. Especially when it has real world implications for my own life.

A correlate of maternal levels of testosterone and estrogen is waist:hip ratio (WHR). Women with low ratios have low testosterone and high estrogen, while women with high WHR have high testosterone and low estrogen (Evans et al., 1983). The WHR of women has in turn been found to correlate with the 2D:4D ratio of their children, i.e., women with low WHR have male and female children with high 2D:4D, and mothers with high WHR have low 2D:4D ratio children of both sexes (Manning et al., 1999). We argue that 2D:4D may be a marker for sexually antagonistic genes (Rice, 1996a, 1996b; Rice and Holland, 1997) that exert their effects prenatally.

I’m building up to a blockbuster hypothesis, so read the above again. Women with low WHRs, (that is, women with sexy hourglass figures) give birth to boys and girls with more feminine digit ratios — they pass their femininity on to their kids of either sex — and women with high WHRs (more boyish figures) give birth to more masculine sons and daughters. Scientists refer to this prenatal process as the actions of sexually antagonistic genes, meaning genes that are good for sons are bad for daughters, and vice versa.

On the one hand, low 2D:4D may indicate prenatal exposure to high testosterone and low estrogen levels, a situation that enhances fertility in males but reduces it in females. On the other hand, high 2D:4D ratios may correlate prenatally with low testosterone and high estrogen and be associated with low fertility in males and high [fertility] in females.

Digit ratio means something. It has real ramifications for your reproductive success, if this study is on the right track. Naturally, men and women don’t go around examining each others’ hands for mate suitability. Rather, we are attuned to more conspicuous behavioral and physical characteristics which act as a proxy for the genes that influence mate value and, by extension, digit ratio.

(Though it should be noted that there is such a thing as objectively appealing feminine and masculine hands. “Manhands” — hi Sandy! — are unattractive to most men, and strong bear claw hands on men are attractive to most women.)

I’m going to skip through a lot of tables and analysis on marriage rates, fecundity and digit ratio to get to the game-relevant meat of this study. (If you’re interested, some data I’m passing over for discussion include the results that male digit ratio had no effect on male marriage rate, but female digit ratio did have an effect — women with higher ratios (more feminine) were more likely to get married. Fecundity — large family size — was also positively correlated to high female digit ratio and low male digit ratio.)

We do not argue that the 2D:4D ratio is important mechanistically or as a display trait in mate choice. Most probably it affords us a window into prenatal hormonal conditions. […]

Our results indicate significant differences in mean 2D:4D between populations and confirm that the trait is sexually dimorphic. There was also a trend for 2D:4D to be negatively related to reproductive success in males (the English and Spanish samples) and positively in females (the English, German, and Hungarian Caucasian and Gypsy samples). There are many cultural and biological factors that intervene between fertility and reproductive success. Perhaps the most important is the fertility of the long-term partner. In an English sample we found high reproductive success in partnerships in which the male had lower 2D:4D than his partner and low reproductive success when 2D:4D was higher than that of his partner. When English and Jamaican data were pooled, there was some evidence of a weak negative association between WHR and 2D:4D in women. […]

The 2D:4D ratio is negatively related to testosterone and to sperm numbers (Manning et al., 1998). Our Finnish sample had very low male 2D:4D, and it is known that Finnish men have sperm counts that are nearly double that of men worldwide (Suominen and Vierula, 1993; Vierula et al., 1996).

Go Finns! The intra- and interethnic and interracial comparisons of 2D:4D digit ratio in men and women are the most interesting part of this study. The graph below is chock full of potential insights into ethnic differences in sexual behavior.

Poles of both sexes (on the far left) have the highest overall digit ratios in this sample, and Finnish men (far right) the lowest. Poles also show the least within-sex variance in ratios, and Finns and Hungarians the most. Intersex comparisons show that Polish women and men have nearly identical digit ratios and variance, and Finnish women are significantly more feminine relative to their male co-ethnics. Steady on, because this is leading to something.

We suggest the following model. Consider a man who has had high testosterone and low estrogen exposure in utero, i.e., he has a low 2D:4D ratio. It would be of advantage to him if his sons shared these characters. They may therefore make many grandchildren to him. However, what of his daughters? High testosterone and low estrogen could compromise the development of their reproductive system and therefore reduce their fitness. Similarly, a woman with low testosterone and high prenatal exposure to estrogen may produce fertile daughters but low-fertility sons. In such a situation, modifiers of genes controlling sex-limited prenatal testosterone and estrogen exposure may arise and spread. Eventually, we may expect complete sex dependence to characterize the expression of genes that influence prenatal hormonal levels.

The distribution of the 2D:4D ratio shows a high degree of overlap between males and females. This suggests that sex-limited expression is incomplete. Why is this so? Sex limitation is a complex adaptation, involving the evolution of sex-specific regulatory sequences (Rice, 1996a). It will therefore evolve slowly.

The fact that male-female digit ratios for many ethnic populations overlap and thus disadvantage the opposite sex children of the dominant gene expression suggests, tantalizingly, that evolution on these sex-dependent genes is in an incomplete stage. That is, we humans are a sputtering work in progress, and our current beta testing blueprint is rife with bugs and unintended algorithms. In his image, my ass.

Now we may begin the impolite hypothesizing. Are Finns, by virtue of their non-overlapping intersex digit ratios, a more evolved race than Poles? Not so fast. The study authors offer an alternative explanation to incomplete evolution.

However, other things being equal, it will eventually evolve. So do we simply need more time or are there other factors operating here? One possibility is the occurence of cycles of intragenomic conflict. Males, because they produce low-cost sperm, are able to fertilize many eggs. Females, because they produce high-cost ova, are limited to smaller numbers of offspring. In populations with polygyny or frequent extra-pair copulations (EPCs), the variance of male reproductive success is high. That is, a small proportion of successful males may fertilize a high proportion of eggs. When strict monogamy is practiced by most females, the variance in male reproductive success is similar to that of females. In such a situation, polygyny or EPCs may be a successful female strategy if there is substantial heritable variance in male fitness. If there is little such variance, female monogamy would be favored.

Suppose there are two loci controlling in utero hormonal exposure: one influencing testosterone levels and the other estrogen. A mutation arises at the testoster- one locus of a male, which increases in utero exposure. He has high testosterone levels and sperm counts, and these traits are passed on to his sons. However, because sex limitation is incomplete, his daughters have reduced fertility. The existence of such a male or small numbers of such males increases the variance in male fitness and favors a polygynous or EPC strategy in females. The high testosterone mutation will spread and with it the frequency of polygyny or EPCs. However, as the mutation becomes common, the variance in male fitness declines and females switch to increasing frequencies of monogamy. Now conditions favor the spread of a mutation at the estrogen locus, which increases in utero estrogen exposure. Alternating cycles of high prenatal testosterone and high prenatal estrogen will ccur. This is interlocus coevolution of sexually anagonistic genes. Such coevolution has the characteristics of the Red Queen process (Rice and Holland, 1997). Sexually antagonistic genes should affect fertility and, because of population cycles, may be at different frequencies in different populations. In populations with high prenatal exposure to testosterone in both males and females, there may be substantial differences in the variance in male and female reproductive success.

A negative relationship between 2D:4D and offspring number would be expected in males and a positive association in females. In addition, there will be selective pressure for the accumulation of modifiers that cause sex-limited expression. A population that is highly estrogenized in utero would have no marked difference in variance of male and female repro- ductive success, no strong correlation between 2D:4D ratio and offspring number, and little selective pressure for sex-limited expression of prenatal genes.

There is little variance in Polish male fitness, as judged by their tight gradient digit ratios. Or, to put it another way, Poland is filled with beta males and not too many omegas or alpha male cads. Poland is a place where female monogamy is favored. The fact that Polish men also have relatively high digit ratios suggests that the men are, like their women, more favorable to monogamy.

Now compare that to Finns. Finnish men have a lot of variance in digit ratio, and a very low (masculinized) overall ratio. We can then surmise that Finland is filled with a wide variety of men (relative to their population), from omegas to betas to alphas, who are, nonetheless, more masculine than men from most other ethnic backgrounds. Finnish women would be open to alpha cad flings, cheating and using betas as emotional tampons. Presumably, some Finnish men would be glad to oblige. Both sexes would be less disposed to monogamy.

That is, at least, what a digit ratio hypothesis into sexual behavior differences would tell us. Is it true?

Roosh recently wrote a post about how the Polish women in Poland were much more open to “beta male game” than American women are. He said Polish chicks loved being courted in the traditional sense, didn’t play “I’m the princess, here” games, and were inclined to long term relationships. His experience in Poland precisely matches my experience with Polish chicks. They really are sweeter, more feminine and less interested in short term flings than women from other backgrounds.

And both our experiences with Polish chicks corroborate digit ratio analysis; the high overall digit ratio and low intrasex digit ratio variance of Polish girls predisposes them to LTRs and preferring the company of more attentive, “traditional” men.

My hypothesis then, based on digit ratio analysis, is that in countries where the women have a high overall digit ratio (longer index finger than ring finger) and a low intrasex variance in digit ratio (where most women and men have pretty much the same digit ratio), monogamy will be the preferred relationship norm of the women and aloof alpha male game will need to be distilled with a heavy dose of beta provider game.

I therefore predict, based on the above ethnic comparison graph, that should Roosh go to Finland, he will have to run some seriously hardcore push-pull alpha cad game on the local Finnish women. If my digit ratio hypothesis is correct, he will find Finnish girls to be very similar to coastal city American girls, and very different from Polish girls.

Here’s hoping Roosh takes a detour to Finland and either confirms or falsifies my hypothesis. If he won’t, then maybe I will have to. In the interest of science, of course.

Read Full Post »

The Menstrual Shift To Beta Males

SUWEE protests:

Women don’t seem like they are genuinely attracted to beta males when they aren’t ovulating. At best they are just nonchalant toward them, and only seem to want a long term relationship with them for a chance to cheat with the alpha and have the chump beta raise the kid. Women seem to think like this- “Ugh im not attracted to this stupid beta but ill let him hit it once in a while if he provides for me and my bastard spawn.”

It’s best to think of alpha and beta males, and women’s mismatched desire for each, as residing along a continuum, rather than as discrete variables. When I explain that during the three weeks a woman is not ovulating (and especially during her menstruation) her desire is shifted toward beta provider males, I don’t mean she is suddenly going to be attracted to the opposite of the alpha males she craves when egging out. Instead, I mean she will become more indulgent of men who are somewhat more beta than the last alpha male she banged, or wished to bang, when she was ovulating.

To put this in the simplest terms possible, a woman who is hot enough to bang greater alphas will subconsciously gravitate to lesser alphas as her ovaries power down for three weeks. A plain jane who makes herself receptive to greater betas when ovulating will subconsciously begin to warm to the attentions of lesser betas reading her poetry after her hormones stabilize post-ovulation.

So, no, SUWEE, beta males are not going to suddenly see action for three weeks with the women who aren’t ovulating. What they might see is more receptiveness — more openness — to their sloppy, guileless flirtations from those women.

As far as cuckolding goes, my advice, if you’re worried about that threat, is to cheek swab any tiny gift of god under dark of night and send it to a lab for verification. In the meantime, enjoy your two or three tepid bangs during the three weeks you are reasonably safe from the depredations of your sweet girlfriend’s behavioral modification egg assault and any interloper alpha males who might be conveniently available to her. No, you won’t ever get her to scream “choke the living shit out of me and plunge your divine cock into my tight puckered asshole as far as it’ll go until I’m bleeding tears of exquisite pain ps I saved my incredibly lubricated pussy all for you” like Olivia Munn, but at least you get to wrap up your two minute tenderly administered intimacy sessions scraping your beta peen along her dry vagina walls with twenty minute cuddleramas and a bloated chickflix queue.

Just try not to think about the torrid sexual abandon your sweet snoogumwoogums is capable of unleashing in bed, in the kitchen, in a public restroom, with a better man for that one week her womb can actually bear fruit. Those kinds of thoughts are not helpful to affordable family formation.

Read Full Post »

Are The Chemicals Of Modern Society Emasculating Men?

Has anyone besides proprietors of Le Chateau noticed the gradual feminization and masculinization respectively of the men and women of the SWPL class? Something is causing the sexual polarity to reverse in Western countries among the striver set. Is it cultural? Genetic? Biological? I’ve previously offered some tantalizing hypotheses, but none strike me as potentially paradigm-busting and significant as the theory that chemicals in our consumerist products are to blame for the gender bending of tomorrow’s leaders.

Findings from a new study suggest it may be your mother’s dietary exposure to bisphenol A (BPA).

Galea and Barha have all my attention now. Ever since my pregancy, I have been tracking studies on BPA’s subtle yet shocking effects. One of the most common chemicals in the world, bisphenol A is found in the stuff we use every day of our lives. Soup and soda cans. Water pipes. Computers. Cell phones. Thermal paper receipts. Paper money. Even some baby bottles—at least in the U.S., because they are not banned here.

Much of the trouble with BPA lies in its ability to fool estrogen receptors into thinking it’s estrogen. Imagine a man doesn’t know that the woman he’s marrying is really an alien in drag, and you have a sense of the danger here. BPA disrupts any process that estrogen normally mediates, affecting brain, body, and behavior. It also tinkers with the way genes express themselves, turning up those that would otherwise be turned off or down. BPA exposure has been linked to breast cancer, heart disease, obesity, diabetes, attention-deficit disorder, increased anxiety, a decreased IQ in children and a low sperm count in men.

Curious? Wait til you hear the ramifications that BPA has for men.

There is evidence that BPA emasculates males and makes them sexually undesirable. Galea and Barha’s opening lines in PSAS are tongue in cheek—they are describing a new study at the University of Missouri on the effects of BPA on deer mice—but the application to humans is implicit. Adult mice whose mothers were fed a dosage of BPA equivalent to what the USDA deems safe for pregnant women, were, well, different from other males.

“One of the prominent effects of early BPA exposure is that it eliminates a number of sex differences in brain and behavior,” the researchers wrote. It turned out that BPA-exposed males have impaired spatial ability (can’t find their way out of a maze or to their nest, considered unattractive to females). They also suffer from decreased exploratory ability (incurious and easily lost), and overall reduced attractiveness to the opposite sex. They may even smell different from their peers—in rodents, a sign of unhealthiness. Females are disgusted.

Holy mojitos. The effluvium of hypercapitalism is neutering the Western man. And judging by the man-jawed dyke-ish freaks of femalehood now coursing through the veins of our civil institutions, it’s not a stretch to think that BPA is concurrently adding chest hair to the Western woman. We may now freely speculate what this means for the future of our downward spiraling nation.

On a population level, how might BPA affect us? Might boys in the U.S. grow up to have poorer spatial skills—and, because it’s linked, weaker mathematical ability? Might they have little interest in exploring the world, preferring to hang out at home? Might our national temperament become more placid? Because BPA is lined with obesity and heart disease, will we become fatter and more sedate? And what about our sex lives?

Take a look at human history through the lens of hormones, as Harvard University’s Daniel Lord Smail did in his fascinating book, On Deep History and the Brain. Smail introduces a new view in which physiology and culture evolve symbiotically in a process driven by brain chemistry. Caffeine stimulated the body and mind, driving the industrial revolution and the modern corporation. Tobacco help us to focus and be calm. These substances changed the character of society. Now we have environmental toxins such as BPA (and other hormone disruptors such as phthlates and PCBs) that may also change our culture in subtle but very real ways.

The stereotypes of the video gaming, pasty, unmuscled nerd, the spindle-armed, mincing, passive-aggressive hipster, and the flabby, manboobed feminist suck-up mangina might have their origins in an omnipresent chemical found in, among everything else, motherboards, iPhone cases and buttplugs. Oh, the irony. And where is the chemical emasculation of men leading us? Pathological altruism, that’s where. Hello, self-flagellation!

The good news is that the effects of BPA can be mitigated by a diet heavy in folic acid and B12. Think dark greens, eggs, beans and organ meats. And try cutting back on the masturbation. Full balls are hungry for release and will impel you to strongly seek out vagina. Empty, shriveled balls are the telltale sign of a “man” who proudly wears a “this is what a feminist looks like” t-shirt and pulls his micropud to a tepid, dribbling anti-climax on an hourly basis as tears stream down his face. Don’t be that guy.

Read Full Post »

It’s Time For Women To Woman Up

There’s been a lot of talk lately in the mainstream (read: leftist) media organs about the rising numbers of single moms and their bastard spawn in America, a dystopian trend to which hosts at Le Chateau were generous enough to alert the reading audience on and off over the past four years. The hand-wringing, the excusing and the rationalizing have reached a fever pitch as sob stories of tragicomic proportions litter the pages of esteemed broadsheets like the Beta Times. It’s a crescendo of heartwarming, anti-male anecdotes about poor, put-upon single moms with snot machines in tow bitterly complaining about the lack of good, reliable men.

Reading this gruesome tripe, something occurs to me. Not once, not anywhere, is the point of view of the typical man in these benighted communities across America examined. Nowhere did I find a mention, even the slightest acknowledgement, of the responsibility that women bear to attract a decent man for marriage and future fatherhood. It’s just assumed that men alone are the sex abdicating their societal duty, that all women need to do is show up, no matter how broken, bedraggled and burdened with bastards, and men will feel an overwhelming urge to marry these unfeminine, spiteful ogresses and provide for them. Yeah right!

Peruse any feminist or beta male columnist pontificating on the single mom + illegitimate hellion phenomenon, and the message condenses to a screech against male desire, tantamount to a lede saying “Men drop out, women and children suffering, men need to man up”. Someone should acquaint this crowd with the saying “it takes two to tango”.

If you want to know why men are running away from marriage, children and beta provisioning, one major reason is that the women available to these working class men are flat out disgusting. Take a look for yourself. What man of normal mental health and active libido wants to romantically woo and date, let alone marry, a beastly, waddling tatted mountain of pustulence with the issue of three other men barking and nipping at her cankles?

If you were a man with diminishing job prospects and stagnant wages thanks to mass low-skill immigration and automation, would you “man up” and “do your duty” for the sake of societal health and elite approval if the only women in your milieu are snorting megafauna hiding week-old salami in their stomach folds and eager to have you babysit their fatherless womb filth? Or would you say “fuck it”, hit the XBox and apply a dollop of asshole game to score a succession of flings and one night stands with the few remaining slender babes in your neighborhood?

And let’s not forget that economically empowered and government-assisted women, slaves to their hypergamous impulse for higher status mates than themselves, can’t help but winnow the pool of men deemed acceptable marriage material. When women say “there are no good men left”, what the astute observer hears is “there are no good men left thanks to a combination of my increased expectations and decreased attractiveness.”

So instead of facing the sexual market head on and grappling with its workings, you get “family values” white knighting numbskulls like BIll Bennett, lost for anything insightful to say, berating men for abandoning those incorruptible angels known as women, and feminists like Katie Roiphe, doing what feminists divorced from reality do best, recasting single momhood and bastard spawn into a valid alternative lifestyle that we should all show more tolerance toward, and redefining standards of civilized family functioning to avoid the omnipresent gaze of the evil eye of judginess.

And there you have the crassest self-deception of the traditionalist and feminist mindset laid bare: the former refusing to understand that standards of sexual behavior are a two-way street, the latter refusing to accept that standards of sexual behavior can’t be waved away to turn losers into winners.

If single momhood and bastard spawn are the blights on civilized Western society that all the data and real world observations indicate they are, then this blog’s simple program to save the institution of marriage is required reading for the “experts”. I’d add the following suggestions you won’t see in the mainstream media to encourage marriage and the formation of two-parent households among the non-elite classes:

Women —

Lose weight. Stop being so goddamned fat. Men are more willing to provide for women who are young and slender.

Learn to use contraception. Do not get pregnant outside of marriage. Men really don’t like taking on the responsibility of children not their own.

Try not to fuck around so much. Men are not enthusiastic about marrying women whose vaginas have played host to numerous cocks before them.

Government — 

Stop paying women for pumping out broods of bastards. You get more of what you pay for. Let the infants die of exposure if necessary. There’s nothing like the starvation death of a newborn child to clarify the mind.

Stop offering incentives to women to attend college and training classes. End all affirmative action for women. Governmental incentives like this effectively price working class men out of marriage contention.

Stop making laws that mandate companies have to accommodate pregnant women and mothers. Substituting big daddy government for beta provider men means fewer beta provider men.

“Experts” —

Relearn the valuable lesson that shame is a great motivator of human behavior. Stop normalizing the abnormal. Call a spade a spade, a bastard spawn a bastard spawn. This is the kind of hammer blow to the head that the lower classes need so that they know which life choices are good for them and which life choices are bad for them.

Do not be afraid to be judgmental. Judgment is alpha.

Self-esteem is not a virtue, it is a symptom. Get the causality straight.

Feminists —

Shoot yourselves. Seriously. You do no one but your own tender egos any good. Your semantic wordplay does nothing to thwart the inevitable reckoning.

Lords of Lies —

Start thinking about what kind of society your lies will create in the long term. That is, if you care at all.

Men —

Read this blog. If the rules won’t play by you, then learn to play by your own rules.

And finally, to the factory-farmed ivory tower sociologists studying marriage trends and turning out paper after paper of half-assed hogwash: there’s a whole other world out there. It’s the world of men, and in that world, men’s desires matter. You should think about incorporating that ugly reality into your theories.

In short, men will man up when women woman up. Because women, as the gatekeepers of sex, get the men they deserve. And, more often than not, what they deserve is what they want.

Read Full Post »

Hypergamy, Sluts And Smart Women

A reader emailed a recent fascinating study that, AS PER USUAL♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, confirms many core Chateau concepts and related game strategies.

Although robust sex differences are abundant in men and women’s mating psychology, there is a considerable degree of overlap between the two as well. In an effort to understand where and when this overlap exists, the current study provides an exploration of within-sex variation in women’s mate preferences. We hypothesized that women’s intelligence, given an environment where women can use that intelligence to attain educational and career opportunities, would be: (1) positively related to their willingness to engage in short-term sexual relationships, (2) negatively related to their desire for qualities in a partner that indicated wealth and status, and (3) negatively related to their endorsement of traditional gender roles in romantic relationships. These predictions were supported. Results suggest that intelligence may be one important individual difference influencing women’s mate preferences.

Anti-game haters and various sore losers in life: reread the above for comprehension before commenting. You’ll save everyone a lot of scrolling effort to glide by your blockheadedness.

Let’s tackle the conclusions of this study one by one.

1. Smart, educated, careerist women (aka urban SWPLs) are more likely to want to ride the cock carousel (i.e., “engage in short-term sexual relationships”). That old game hater saw that only low self-esteem sluts and dumb skanks like to play the phallus field is the complete opposite of reality. It’s the smart, educated chicks who dig the cock and, by deduction, it’s the smart, educated chicks who will fall for short-term pickup game more than dumb chicks.

In one fell swoop, a cherished feminist and beta male shibboleth gets crushed into dust and blown away.

2. Smart, educated, careerist women are less interested in a man’s money or career status. This dovetails perfectly with the Chateau contention that female economic empowerment has led to a sexual market where soft polygamy — the clustering of financially independent women at the peak of their fertility (and beauty) around charming alpha males — is the new norm in blue state meccas. If money and occupational status mean less to smart girls, then guess what means more to them? You got it. Game. And who loses in this arrangement? Yup, boring provider beta males.

3. Smart, educated, careerist women are more likely to eschew “traditional gender roles” in romantic relationships. So it is the smart girls, not the dumb ones, who say screw it to marriage, dating, fidelity and lifelong monogamy while they are in their primes, and who are more open to fucking around, casual hook ups, cheating and, ahem, serial monogamy. This is, not to put too fine a point on it, a description of a pickup artist’s paradise. Smart girls do eventually get married at higher rates than dumb, lower class girls, but the relevant factor to the typical urban beta male is how many girls in his milieu are ready for marriage and/or long term relationships *during their 20s*, when women are at their most desirable. If the rising age of first marriage is any indication, not many.

Bottom line: your typical slut is a smart, educated woman.

So what does this have to do with that noted force of nature, female hypergamy? Well, if we premise our argument with the claim that female hypergamy always exists, and is always operational and acting upon women’s mate choice mechanisms (a claim entirely consistent with observed female behavior), then, given the study conclusions above, we are presented with the possibility that smart, financially independent chicks emphasize different male attractiveness traits when choosing mates than do dumb, financially insecure chicks. What are they?

Charm. Wit. Looks. Confidence. Social savviness. Social status (as distinct from wealth or occupational status). Charisma.

Most of these male attractiveness traits favored by smart chicks, yes, even including social status, can be grouped under the game umbrella. Game makes men more charming, witty, confident, socially savvy and charismatic. It even boosts a man’s social status. (Being known as a ladykiller is chicknip.)

Looks are the one thing game can’t change, but in most men’s experiences, women’s judgment and emphasis of male looks doesn’t much vary between the lower and upper class women, or the dumb and smart women. The study does suggest, though, that economically empowered and übereducated women probably will put more emphasis on male looks than will economically insecure, less educated women.

Now you know why poor, dumb religious girls swoon (settle?) at younger ages for provider betas relatively more than well-off, smart, secular girls. And why the latter can be found hanging off the arm of your local indie band singer before doing the smart thing and marrying a beta as her expiration date looms.

The trends in female mate choice I have described in this post go a longer way than any economic or class argument I’ve read to explain the coming apart of the white race in America as detailed in Charles Murray’s new book. Anyone who wants to take a long, hard look at social trends and the phenomena of “men dropping out” needs to incorporate into his thinking the cold, merciless, unrelenting reality of female hypergamy. To do less would be… uncivilized.

Read Full Post »