Archive for the ‘Feminist Idiocy’ Category

Once again, SCIENCE! affirms Chateau Heartiste maxims and squats lumply on feminist mythology while unloading a phallus-shaped deuce. A deep state study finds that there’s a neuroanatomical basis for the observed sex-based difference in emotion regulation.

As expected, males significantly scored higher in emotion regulation ability than females did. More importantly, we found the sex differences in the neuroanatomical basis of emotion regulation ability. Males showed a stronger positive relation between emotion regulation ability and regional gray matter volume (rGMV) in the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. In contrast, females demonstrated a stronger positive relation between emotion regulation ability and rGMV in an anatomical cluster that extends from the left brainstem to the left hippocampus, the left amygdala and the insular cortex. The present study provides the first empirical evidence regarding the sex-linked neuroanatomical correlates of emotion regulation ability. These findings may help understand why there is a higher prevalence of affective disorders in females and maladaptive behaviors in males.

SCIENCE! and CH: dancing the duet of fated lovers. This study literally discovers neurological proof for the truefact stereotype that women are more hysterical than are men. State control…it’s a man thing. You women just wouldn’t understand.

I gotta wonder how self-deluded feminist are gonna spin this latest out-take from the HARDASFUCK sciences?

RANDOM MANJAW: “well, you see, that’s just the patriarchal culture influencing female fetuses and changing their brain wiring.”

THE SHIV OF PRIVILEGE: “is the patriarchal culture also influencing female fetuses to become raving lunatic feminists?”

PS The last line in that study abstract is lethal thoughtcrime (literally). Mood (affective) disorders largely afflict women because their brain structure provides a more fertile (heh) environment for hysteria and related emotional malfunctions to flourish. Men, in contrast, have a sex-specific brain architecture that predisposes them to the opposite: emotion-less disorders that characterize ailments like autism, psychopathy, and anti-social behavior.

PPS The Game relevance should be evident. Tap into a women’s roller coaster emotions and you can guide her to expressing herself in the way that matters most to *your* emotional needs.

Read Full Post »

Sharon Stone is a long way from her star turn in the movie Basic Instinct as a femme fatale who flashes her vaj during an interrogation. Thirty years on, paying audiences don’t want to see her vagina anymore. And, if the bitterness and sour grapes that drip from this recent interview with Stone are any indication, not many quality men in her real life want to see her vagina either.

After two divorces and decades in the business, Sharon Stone isn’t looking for a casual romance.

How convenient.

The 58-year-old actress opened up to AARP magazine about the effects of aging on both her personal and professional life.

“Obviously it’s pretty easy to get a date,” she said. “But to me, my life is so full. I don’t want to take time out to just go on a date, or to just have sex with a stranger.”

Translating from the hamsterese: “There’s a whole world between ‘sex with a stranger’ and involuntary solitude, but I can’t access it because obviously it’s pretty hard to get a date with a man who doesn’t eat his own boogers as a woman over 50.”

“At this point, I get more satisfaction – physically, spiritually, emotionally – from a smile, a laugh, a warm conversation or a really sexy look,” she told the magazine. “You know the way a man can look at you? Where you know he really sees you? I don’t want to be with someone unless it’s like that.”

The above is what age-related low libido looks like in words.

The aging beauty claims to seek romantic perfection as an ego emollient to avoid the crushing reality that imperfect romance isn’t even an option for her anymore.

Why pick on Sharon? Isn’t her personal torment enough punishment? The problem is that, unlike most aging women who must nurse their fantasies and shill their platitudes in private or to a small audience of immediate family and close friends who know better, Stone has a public platform to spread her lies to impressionable younger women who can’t see through the bravado to the sexual market rejection hurt underneath. At the margins, some younger women could be convinced, to their detriment, by Stone’s false pride that playing the field until late middle age is a viable route to life happiness, instead of what it really will be: a big mistake.

Making an example of Stone is a lesson for the others to avoid the same lonely fate. Prime fertility women need to know with the utmost seriousness that it will NOT be easy for them to get a date at age 58, with ANY man, and an old lady saying otherwise is blowing smoke up their skirts. Platitudes are cute when no one really believes them, but they’re downright malevolent when asserted with righteous authority as truth.

Read Full Post »

A telling anecdote about the state of America’s girls and women:

In 15 years as a BSA leader I never heard dads speak so proudly as when saying that their daughters were tomboys.

I’ve heard the same thing from dads of daughters. One psychological urge at work here is the desire of fathers who secretly wished for sons to impart their unrequited longings onto their daughters. “Butching up” a daughter is a facsimile, however poor, of having the real thing… a son.

Another reason for this glorification of grrlpower and imputation of male sex roles onto daughters by beta dads is, it must be said, a subconscious kowtowing to the reigning feminist shrikegeist. The culture is so steeped in feminist idiocy and the attendant ugly woman project of training girls to grow up into ballbusting men (and of shaming men to become supplicating nancyboys) that it seems perfectly reasonable and normal for the regular dad on the suburban street to crow about reshaping his daughter into an androgynous weirdo with a penchant for throwing balls… but still like a girl.

If things are to change for the better, a full frontal assault by real-thinking men AND women is needed. The goal is to establish positive feedback loops to fight back the poz before it metastasizes.

Read Full Post »

A reader worthy of wielding the obsidian Chateau shiv sends a screen cap of his Tinder response to a single mom-by-choice. The lols are strong (and frequent) in this one. (Reader’s Twatter handle is @FUSigma.)

How to teach cause-and-effect to Millennial Tinderellas & impose sanctions on single mommery:

(It’s especially effective if it’s done immediately, so that the reason is obvious.)



A few thoughts:

First, this reader’s Game, however little of it he revealed here, is tight. He promptly starts off with a qualifying question, to which the single-mom-by-choice eagerly feels the urge to defend her skankly honor. The quickest seductions occur when the woman is thrown back in the defensive crouch. In fact, the line “So how normal are you?” could legitimately serve as an effective, all-purpose opener. Don’t even bother with the “hi”, just stroll up and drop that hamster nuke at ground zero. It’ll get laughs from the cool, self-confident (read: thin and cute) women, and that’s practically the same as foreplay.

Second, I commend the sly follow-up leading question; not “are you divorced?” (which can trigger an offended rebuttal), but “how long have you been divorced?” This is assume-the-slut Game, and she couldn’t resist correcting his assumption.

Third, this woman is weaponized American Whore, marinated in decades of feminist cunt indoctrination. Her answer — “I’ve never been married lol” — indicates a confidence with, or an obliviousness to, how she’ll be received by men for admitting she shat out a bastard with a fly-by-night jerkboy. She thinks men will praise her. And why does she think men will praise her shitty life choices? Because she probably has experience on Tinder stringing along thirsty beta and omega pre-op Millennial males to treat her nicely and boost her ego major, in return for a fraction of the sex she lavished in one night on her sperm donor.

Fourth, notice all the “lol”s Alayna scatters throughout her banter. This is a tell-tale verbal tic that hints at the desperation and self-doubt lurking underneath her tough skank facade. Insincere LOLs are an attempt to coax intimacy, and a conversational bonding, that doesn’t yet exist. Beta males do it all the time (which is why  they fail). The scattershot LOL is also a ploy to distract someone from keying in on the LOLyer’s personal flaws (which in this case is the single mommery and Samsonite sprog).

Finally, my opinion is that the best message shiv to deliver single moms-by-choice is the pump-and-dump. Leading her on to get what you want out of her — a quick and dirty no muss no fuss lay while avoiding tripping over her kid’s toys on the way to the bedroom, and then ghosting — will leave bloodier stigmata on her soul than the curt “Unmatch”. The problem is that very few men can pull off this cold-hearted maneuver without getting physiologically attached to the pussy and returning repeatedly to that over-used well, because very few men are alpha males accustomed to living with the knowledge of endless sexual market options. Therefore, an alternative special lesson to teach the feminist-brainwashed squadrons of stupidly proud single moms is what FUSigma did here: the rhetorical pump-and-dump.

Read Full Post »

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 »

Stamping the imprimatur of SCIENCE! on what we already knew, this study found that cats and childlessness go together like a horse and carriage.

Quantifying the Search Behaviour of Different Demographics Using Google Correlate.

Vast records of our everyday interests and concerns are being generated by our frequent interactions with the Internet. Here, we investigate how the searches of Google users vary across U.S. states with different birth rates and infant mortality rates. We find that users in states with higher birth rates search for more information about pregnancy, while those in states with lower birth rates search for more information about cats. Similarly, we find that users in states with higher infant mortality rates search for more information about credit, loans and diseases. Our results provide evidence that Internet search data could offer new insight into the concerns of different demographics.

Wait for it……..


Small useless pets like indoor cats are child substitutes. There’s no flim-flamming away that obvious conclusion under a fog of try-hard White Knight rhetoric. The cat provides the single in the city cock carouseler the outlet for her maternal nurturing instinct (however weak) that a real child of her own can’t, because she hasn’t gotten pregnant in the fifteen years she’s been on the Pill.

There’s been chatter among the alt-cognoscenti about parasites and assorted pathogens secretly being involved in most of humanity’s weird behavioral outliers. News come daily of discoveries that viruses have the creepy ability to alter our personalities. Maybe T gondii, the cat-transmitted pathogen, infects the cat owners’ minds and suppresses their desire to settle down with a dutiful beta male who will help them raise a brood. It might even compel cat ladies to pop womb-charring Pills and seek fleeting hookups with undependable cads. Cat food for thought…

Read Full Post »

Recall the CH axiom about any social “””science””” coming out of a feminism-drenched university: If there’s a women’s studies department, the good bet is that the social science department is similarly corrupted, and any feminist-friendly findings are likely to be tainted and worthless. Leftist saturation of academia has become so bad that social expectation bias and self-serving bogus science rubber-stamping the equalist narrative are more the norm than the exception.

On that premise, here’s Greg Cochran sticking the shiv in the hide of yet another crappy feminist study that defies credulity.

I just noticed an new article in PNAS – research by Daphna Joel a behavioral neuroscientist at Tel Aviv University. Using MRI, she concludes that the brains of men and women aren’t really different. She suggests that the notion that men and women behave differently may be a myth.

She is, of course, utterly full of shit. It’s fountaining out of every pore: her hair will never go gray. We know of many sex differences in the brain – not just volume, not just the fraction of gray matter vs white matter, not just big differences in the incidences of neuropsychiatric disorders like autism and anorexia nervosa. In a few cases (like CAH, or androgen sensitivity, or maybe Turner’s syndrome) we know something about the developmental mechanisms involved. We see analogous differences in animal models: and no, it’s not culture. […]

…similarity in gross anatomy does not ensure similar behavioral tendencies. If I compared the brain of a pit bull with that of a similar-sized border collie, I doubt if I could see the behavioral differences in the size of the amygdala or whatever. Those behavioral differences exist, they’re innate, they have a physical/genetic basis – but at the moment I couldn’t tell you what brain differences to look for. Could be differences in the distribution of neurotransmitter receptors, or differences in axon length, or dendrite connectivity – lots of things, including many that wouldn’t show up on MRI.

Anyone who’s lived a day in his life can’t help but notice men and women are on average different in some powerfully fundamental ways. Desire, sexual proclivity, communication, hobbies, occupational preferences, bathroom habits… the list of REAL WORLD sex differences goes on for miles.

Yet we are supposed to believe a raging lunatic feminist burnishing a conveniently pro-equalist study while steeped in the toxins of a feminist milieu? Yeah, no.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: