From The Lips Of Babes

Women who have Cupid’s Bow lips are more likely to orgasm during sex than women with straighter lips.

A recent study by the University of the West of Scotland found that women with a prominent, sharply raised ‘tubercle’ on their top lip — commonly known as a Cupid’s bow — are 12 times more likely to reach orgasm through sex alone.

This is one of those weird phenotypical associations that, if true, probably has some prenatal hormonal basis. Maybe women exposed to high amounts of estrogen in the womb as fetuses have more feminine facial features like the upside-down-W upper lip, and feminine women feel more aroused by sex with a man. Or maybe cause and effect is different and tip-and-dip-lipped women, being more attractive to men, are simply hooking up with more alpha men and experiencing orgasm during sex more frequently as a consequence.

Btw, the Cupid’s Bow looks great as it’s stretching up and outward across the ridge of the glans.

***

Does sex reduce genetic variation?

Heng and fellow researcher Root Gorelick, Ph.D., associate professor at Carleton University in Canada, propose that although diversity may result from a combination of genes, the primary function of sex is not about promoting diversity. Rather, it’s about keeping the genome context – an organism’s complete collection of genes arranged by chromosome composition and topology – as unchanged as possible, thereby maintaining a species’ identity. This surprising analysis has been published as a cover article in a recent issue of the journal Evolution.

“If sex was merely for increasing genetic diversity, it would not have evolved in the first place,” said Heng. This is because asexual reproduction – in which only one parent is needed to procreate – leads to higher rates of genetic diversity than sex. […]

According to Heng, the hidden advantage sex has over asexual reproduction is that it constrains macroevolution – evolution at the genome level – to allow a species’ identity to survive. In other words, it prevents “Species A” from morphing into “Species B.” Meanwhile, it also allows for microevolution – evolution at the gene level – to allow members of the species to adapt to the environment.

If sex is really about maintaining a species’ identity against assimilation with closely related species — a sort of Darwinian nationalistic response to the borg collective — then does this add weight to group selection theory? It would seem so. I’ll leave it to the reader to explore avenues arising from this line of thinking. (Just a little something to get you started: when women are ovulating, they prefer sex with men of their own race.)

***

War, what is it good for? Well, how about civilization.

“This study is part of a larger, worldwide comparative research effort to define the factors that gave rise to the first societies that developed public buildings, widespread religions and regional political systems — or basically characteristics associated with ancient states or what is colloquially known as ‘civilization,'” said Stanish, who is also a professor of anthropology at UCLA. “War, regional trade and specialized labor are the three factors that keep coming up as predecessors to civilization.”

Do you lose sleep at night when you ponder the sacrifice in blood and pain of countless ancestors, cruelty upon cruelty inflicted upon and by them until the pile of skulls reached high enough that you could retrieve with your grubby sausage fingers the iPhone perched at the top of the macabre stack?

***

Daughters have more influence over their mother’s sexual self-esteem than the other way around.

A new study by a Temple University Fox School of Business professor finds that teenage girls have a strong influence on the products their mothers buy solely for personal use, as in makeup or clothing, and that mothers have a much stronger tendency to mimic their daughters’ consumption behavior than vice versa.

The researchers analyzed whether teenage girls tend to emulate their mothers’ consumption behavior or whether mothers mimic their daughters. The study, conducted through questionnaires, sampled 343 mother-daughter pairs, with an average age of 44 for the mothers and 16 for the daughters. The researchers found that if a mother is young at heart, has high fashion consciousness and views her daughter as a style expert, she will tend to doppelgang her daughter’s consumption behavior.

Moms must know with some conscious awareness that their piping hot fresh teen daughters look a lot hotter than they do. It would only be natural for moms constantly reminded of their rapidly approaching reproductive obsolescence to ape the habits and dress of their sexual betters in hopes the magic would rub off on them. But enough of that cheery cocktail hour talk. What do daughters REALLY think of their moms?

However, even if the daughter has high interest in fashion and an older cognitive age –thinking she’s older than she is – she still is less likely to view her mother as a consumer role model and to doppelgang her.

You can hear the ouch from that sting all the way from the dressing room of your local trailer park titty bar.

***

I keep hearing from all these erudite economists and Ellis Island schmaltzfuckers in love with their open borders theories that the down economy is causing illegal migrants to return to Mexico by the truckloads. Oh really?

Number of Mexican immigrants returning home dropped during latest recession, study finds.

Fewer Mexican immigrants returned home from the United States during 2008 and 2009 than in the two years prior to the start of the recession, a finding that contradicts the notion that the economic downturn has hastened return migration to Mexico, according to a new RAND Corporation study.

I love the whir of a furious backpedal, coming soon to a libertardian blog near you. Can we just finally concede that the anti-nationhood Western elite policy of ignoring the porous borders and demonizing anyone who notices was nothing but a giant middle finger gleefully wagged in the face of middle and lower class whites? Candor is good for the soul.

***

File under: Pedestal rot. Women are wired to seek “extra-pair paternity“.

Seeking out extra-pair paternity (EPP) is a viable reproductive strategy for females in many pair-bonded species. Across human societies, women commonly engage in extra-marital affairs, suggesting this strategy may also be an important part of women’s reproductive decision-making. Here, I show that among the Himba 17 per cent of all recorded marital births are attributed by women to EPP, and EPP is associated with significant increases in women’s reproductive success. In contrast, there are no cases of EPP among children born into ‘love match’ marriages. This rate of EPP is higher than has been recorded in any other small-scale society. These results illustrate the importance of seeking EPP as a mechanism of female choice in humans, while simultaneously showing it to be highly variable and context-dependent.

For political and social cohesion reasons, it’s doubtful we’ll ever see an accurate number on rates of cuckoldry, but we will get closer as DNA testing improves and becomes more widespread. I wonder if, as this study implies, arranged marriages across the world have higher rates of cuckoldry — aka female rape — than companion marriages. A great mental energy must be spent by women reconciling their desire for monogamous romance with their compulsion to foist a bastard upon an unwitting beta.

***

“Stayover relationships” are the new marriage.

Changes in relationship formation and dissolution in the past 50 years have revealed new patterns in romantic relations among young adults. The U.S. Census indicates that young people are choosing to marry later and cohabitating more often than past generations. Now, a University of Missouri researcher has found that people in their 20s are redefining dating by engaging in “stayover relationships,” spending three or more nights together each week while maintaining the option of going to their own homes.

“Instead of following a clear path from courtship to marriage, individuals are choosing to engage in romantic ties on their own terms – without the guidance of social norms,” said Tyler Jamison, a researcher in the Department of Human Development and Family Studies (HDFS). “There is a gap between the teen years and adulthood during which we don’t know much about the dating behaviors of young adults. Stayovers are the unique answer to what emerging adults are doing in their relationships.”

Jamison found that “stayover relationships” are a growing trend among college-aged couples who are committed, but not interested in cohabiting. However, little is known about the effects of stayovers on future commitment decisions or marriage.

“A key motivation is to enjoy the comforts of an intimate relationship while maintaining a high degree of personal control over one’s involvement and commitment,” said Larry Ganong, professor in HDFS. “We see this interest in personal control nationally in more single adult households, and in the growing phenomenon of ‘living apart together’ (middle-aged and older monogamous couples who maintain their own households). It may also help explain why marriage is on the decline, particularly among young adults.”

Who says stayover relationships have to be the domain of teenagers? I’m a big fan of the system. A few nights a week, no messy financial or property entanglements, and some time alone to fish for auxiliary prospects. What’s not to like? PS: Marriage as we know it will be gone in thirty years, barring some social cataclysm. It only takes a relatively small vociferous minority to shift public opinion and practices, unless there is an equal or greater pushback before the new opinion metastasizes in elite thought and manifests in all-out propaganda war. The time for that pushback is long gone.

Read Full Post »

Another Game Concept Confirmed: The Allure Of Male Choice

Camelot007 writes:

I believe there is no better explanation of what women need than in this excerpt:

“And within a committed relationship, the crucial stimulus of being desired decreases considerably, not only because the woman’s partner loses a degree of interest but also, more important, because the woman feels that her partner is trapped, that a choice — the choosing of her — is no longer being carried out.”

It comes from an article titled “What Do Women Want” written by Daniel Bergner and is backed by research done at Queen’s University in Ontario Canada.

The stability of a long term relationship rests mostly on the happiness of the woman. Men in lackluster LTRs are perfectly happy keeping the thing sputtering along if they are getting their sexual needs met on the sly with mistresses. But women are a different beast entirely in this matter; if a woman feels turned off or egregiously neglected by her lover, she will prefer to jettison the relationship altogether and start fresh (as fresh as an aging woman can start) rather than share her intimacy with multiple men concurrently.

And so when a man loses interest in his partner the LTR or marriage is in less trouble than when the woman loses interest in her partner. Married men would be wise to recognize this insidious imbalance in the sexual force and behave accordingly if they don’t want to get the barrel end of the divorce theft industry pointed squarely at their nads. You may not like it, but under the restrictions imposed by the corrupt state of modern marriage the onus is on men to keep their wives happy, rather than the other way around. (Yet another reason to skip out on marriage in favor of LTRs or cohabitation.)

What this research implies is that if you want to sustain the hot sex in an LTR for longer than the first few months, and by extension reduce the odds that your girlfriend will cheat or generally behave like a bitch, you need to frequently qualify her. Qualifying a woman makes her feel like she has to continue working for your affection, and thus overcomes the naturally emergent impediment common to all LTRs of anhedonic emasculation. She wants to know she has earned your interest, for only when this final piece of the puzzle is in place will you remain the mortal god she yearns to idolize.

In the turbulent bazaar of the sexual market, perception is everything. No matter how deftly a wife or long term girlfriend is able to logically convince herself that her partner’s SMV is no lower than when they first met, her altered perception of his value that accompanies LTR confinement and complacency will inevitably corrode her feelings of lust. Game can remedy this dissolution by instilling in her a renewed appreciation for her man’s desirability. A healthy reminder, if you will.

A woman loves to feel that the man she is with has illimitable choice among competitor women. A man with sexual choice is a desirable man, for he is preselected by women and will pass on his preselected genes to her sons. A man without choice in women — and, however wrongly, such can seem the case to a woman hitched to a man in a familiarizing and deballing monogamous LTR — is an undesirable man, for why should she love a man whom no other woman would deign to love? She begins to question not only whether he still finds her attractive, but more importantly whether he is himself still attractive to other women and is choosing her among a smorgasbord of pussy options. The disenchantment spiral unwinds.

A man “trapped” in an LTR can avoid, or at least temper, the disenchantment spiral by employing various game methods designed to validate his woman’s hypergamous need to be with a higher status man than herself:

1. He can instill dread.

For example, kill complacency dead by calling her from a location where girls’ screeching voices can be heard in the background.

2. He can screen her like he did when they first met.

“It’s important to me that a woman knows how to do the reverse spider monkey hanging from a pull-up bar.”

3. He can provoke competition anxiety.

“Your friend Carrie looks like she’s been hitting the yoga classes a lot. A man can tell.”

4. He can helpfully remind her of his options.

To wit: Don’t look away in misguided appeasement when that sexy waitress tosses you a flirtatious glance under your GF’s/wife’s nose. Instead, revel in the moment. Grin and wink back at her. Make it obvious that you could get a new woman in a day if your lover was to leave you.

5. He can cheat.

This is the trepanation of reviving a flagging relationship. Use with caution. Fact is, when you cheat on a woman her perception of your sexual market value skyrockets.

A woman will fight with the last fiber of her being against the encroaching discomfort that she is being settled for by a man with a lack of options. Every marriage and LTR, left to their own inertial devices, encourages this encroachment. Do her, and yourself, a favor: game the shit out of her til death, or the wall, do you part.

Read Full Post »

The Reluctant Cockblock

I noticed her immediately. The hottest girl in the room weaved through the crowd, walking in my direction. As she neared at a quick pace, I saw her right arm extended behind her. The awkward positioning seemed odd to me. She passed, and a fat homely girl, attached to the bombshell’s right hand, was being dragged behind like a circus elephant. Fatso was a good foot shorter than the hot babe leading her around the sweaty drinkers, and, conservatively, 4 points lower on the looks scale. She wore a miserable expression; she clearly didn’t want to be there. She was literally walking in the shadow of a superior specimen of womanhood.

While the hot-ugly friend pair is not common, you do see this social female arrangement every so often, especially in meat markets. (A group of women of varied looks, some hot and some not, is more common.) Always the hottie looks like she’s having the time of her life and her unattractive friend looks irritated, wishing she were anywhere else.

Approach these bifurcated two-sets with caution. The ugly friend won’t actively cockblock you, (she’s too subservient to her hot friend’s prerogative), but you’ll have to deal with an even bigger obstacle: the hot chick has brought her along because she intends to either

a. find the warpig a man, or

b. launch the flaming warpig from a trebuchet at any man who lingers too long.

If (a), you’ll know right away; she’ll quickly introduce the fug before you can get a word in edgewise, encourage a dance circle of the three of you, then lean into fug’s ear, say something, and skip away to the bar, leaving you and the consolation prize alone. Niceguys will generally stick around for a few minutes (or hours), thinking that is the virtuous thing to do, and hoping the hot chick will come back and shower love on them for being genial with her ugly friend. Of course, that last part never happens. Meaner guys (ahem) will bolt, raining down blows upon an already clobbered homely girl’s ego.

If (b), you’ll know by watching for any nonverbal signals the hot girl telegraphs to her ugly friend. She’ll enjoy your flirting for a little while, but then the fug, as if on cue and reading from a script, will monotonously declare she has to get up early, or somesuch excuse. Having imbibed a sufficient quotient of your attentions to achieve orbital velocity validation, the hot girl will shrug her shoulders and trot off.

How do you handle the hot girl-ugly girl two-set? The game literature is clear: you open the ugly girl first and drop a neg on the hot girl, building a faux camaraderie with the potential cockblock, thus neutralizing any compulsion she may harbor to menstruate all over your game. But the ugly girl in the two-set is usually a reluctant cockblock; she’s not interested in rescuing her friend or being a noxious cunt. She agreed to go out because she likes to inhale the second hand seduction from all the action her hot friend gets. It’s vicarious thrills. But now she’s regretting her decision. (She can’t help it; hot girls have stronger powers of persuasion than ugly girls.)

No, the real cockblock in this two-set is the hot girl. She’s tough enough to game when she’s with a group of friends, but when she’s with one ugly friend, you have got your work cut out. I’d advise avoiding these “couples” in favor of cute girls who have equally cute girl friends. Then you can rev up jealously plotlines to your heart’s content.

Read Full Post »

“What are you thinking about?”

It’s impossible to date a girl for any significant length of time and not hear this plaintive inquiry from her. In fact, if she likes you, you will sometimes hear it on a first date. A reader offers a quick escape:

Answer with “thoughts are sacred” and change the subject so it doesn’t seem like you’re trying to be profound. I stole that from a Fellini film. Have used it on a few different types of girls and it works like a charm. I enjoy the blog man.

Not bad. Another good reply (if she’s got enough brains to catch the wit): “My burdensome masculinity.” Or: “A ham sandwich.”

Any move to evade the question, or to answer it in a way she could never have predicted, is the correct move. The key is to understand that in matters of romance, women don’t want to be taken seriously. They want you to, with a wink and a smirk, patronize them like the be-boobed and be-hipped children they are. The worst possible answer to these seemingly innocuous female questions (which, in reality, are actually subtle shit tests) is the candid answer. For example… BAD: “I was just thinking about how much I like you.” You, with your feeble beta brain, thinks she wants to hear that, (because why would she ask?) but she doesn’t. What she wants to hear, or rather what her vagina wants to hear, is “A ham sandwich.”

Now of course there will be times when the sincere response is the right one. A long term girlfriend asks because she is A) worried you’re withdrawing from her, or B) genuinely interested in what’s on your mind. In those cases, you may, but only occasionally!, stroke her inquisitive feelers til she’s purring like a kitten.

I can hear the chorus of betaaches now. “When should we be sincere and when should we be cocky?”

Don’t sweat the small stuff. A good rule of thumb is the 3:1 cocky-to-sincere ratio. A sincere reply should be bookended by at least three cocky ripostes. This can play out over a few minutes of an energetic first meet or over a few languid days, depending on your level of intimacy with the girl. This gives her hamster juuuuuuuust enough pellets to keep him shitting regularly. Too many pellets and the overworked bugger gets the runs, his rationalizations spinning out of control into a turgid drama fest. Too few pellets and he gets constipated, backed up with negative emotion. A regular hamster is a happy hamster. And a horny hamster.

Read Full Post »

An Important Lesson

If you notice a girl checks her fingernails by curling her fingers inward toward her palm, like a man would, you can bet she loves sex and will put out on the first date. She has also cheated on past boyfriends.

If she checks it with fingers outstretched, back of hand facing upward, she is going to be a drama queen with a heavy repertoire of shit tests. The more diva she looks when checking them in this fashion, the likelier she will make you wait more than a few dates for sex. A full ten seconds checking, turning her hand this way and that with nails glistening in the club lights, means she will flake on you.

A girl who doesn’t check her fingernails except for the most cursory glance, and despite your prompting, is a keeper.

You can get a girl to check her fingernails by mentioning something about her nail polish color, or the unusual way her fingernails grow and what that says about her. (Just make some shit up. For instance, “Oh, flat fingernails means you are very grounded.” Or, “Curved fingernails means you are hard to please.”) Watch for how she proceeds to look at her fingernails, and remember what this blog told you. Then sing silent hosannas to the knowledge dropped here.

Read Full Post »

Chicks Dig Jerks: The Veil Of Self-Deception

Swatting her cat off her couch before sitting down on it, I rested my eyes on her thighs and then up at her face. Cradling a tumbler of scotch, I asked, “How was ladies’ night with the girls? Any juicy gossip?”

She beamed with eagerness and inhaled loudly. “It was great! Let’s see, what have I heard… Oh, there was this girl Gillian, you haven’t met her, an old high school friend of Kelly’s, who’s been seeing this guy for eight years. Everyone hates Gillian’s boyfriend because he’s cheated on her, more than once.”

“Worse than a one night stand?”

“Much worse, but that’s bad too, so don’t get any ideas. He was cheating on her for a whole year with another girl. He had a relationship with this girl while he was seeing Gillian.”

“Wow, that is…”, I searched for a suitably ambiguous word that would simultaneously express disapproval and admiration, “…brazen.”

“It’s dickish is what it is! And then after Gillian found out, he cheated on her again with someone else. But Gillian never left the guy. Eight years together, and she’s still seeing him.”

Doing my best to affect surprise and consternation, I stentoriously proclaimed, “I would think that a hidden relationship with another woman is pretty solid grounds for breaking up, but I guess Gillian didn’t see it that way.”

“I know, it’s crazy. And Gillian is really attractive, too. She could have any guy she wanted. There were tons of guys at the club going up to her, but she couldn’t be bothered. Why she stays with him is a mystery.”

I cocked an eyebrow. “Do you have a picture of her from the night?”

She held the camera in front of me. “It’s her.” I solemnly judged. A hard 9.

She exasperated, “We’ve tried telling Gillian to dump him, but she won’t listen. All she does is complain about him, but she never leaves him. So we gave up trying to help her. If that’s what she wants. It just doesn’t make any sense why a girl with her looks would put up with that from a…”

“Douchebag.”

“Yeah, a douchebag.”

Mischievous tendrils curled around my thoughts. “I’ve noticed it’s the prettiest girls that go for the biggest assholes. Why do you think that is?”

“Well…” she stutters. “I don’t know. *I* don’t go for assholes.” She smiles and pushes me into the couch cushion.

“I think hot girls love a challenge, and assholes give that to them.”

My sexy interrogation subject looked around the room distractedly, as if the conversation had suddenly ceased to enthrall her.

I pressed. “I bet there are lots of great guys who would treat Gillian well, who she doesn’t give the time of day to.”

“I guess so. What can I say? Who knows why some girls go for these guys. I can’t figure it out. It’s not something I would do.”

“I know you wouldn’t.” I poked her cat in the anus with a pen I was holding. It meowed and leapt to the floor.

******

If you ask the typical woman why girls, particularly good-looking girls, dig jerks, you’ll usually get a flurry of denials or a shoulder shrug of bewilderment. What you will never get is an accurate appraisal of the phenomenon. There is such a glaring disconnect between the reality of girls chasing after assholes, (something which every man who has lived a day in his life has seen often enough that it has become a well-worn cliche), and the inability of girls to recognize the readily observable facts of their own behavior, that it leads one to believe women were born with a self-deception mental module that prevents them from having sufficient awareness of their sexual desires.

If this is so, then it at once must engender a sort of charmed understanding, even cooing pity, for women when they attempt to grapple with the issue of their sexuality, like children fumbling with letter blocks to form that first monosyllabic word. We want to reach out and hug them for the accomplishment of achieving cognizance of 1% of what motivates their lust. It is simply the case, therefore, that a full theory of female sexual behavior must include the working assumption that women are barred by some shadowy biological force emanating either from the brain case or the loins from, one, recognizing their actions in the sexual marketplace for what they are and, two, from properly explaining them when they do accept the facts laid before them.

Women truly DO NOT UNDERSTAND why it is they love the types of men they do. Evolution, in its infinite wisdom, has decided that it is in the best interests of genetic propagation for women to be fairly well shielded from the crass machinations of their own lust drives, in a way that men are not. So the next time a girl who is very important to you, and whose opinion you respect, bafflingly throws up her hands in complete ignorance of the ancient urges that guide her attractions, do the wise thing and cut her some slack. She really has no idea.

Read Full Post »

Are Short Women More Desirable Than Tall Women?

In particular, are short women more desirable as girlfriends? Note I used the word desirable, and not “attractive”, which bears an important distinction. Female desirability encompasses more than physical attraction, such as femininity, selflessness, loyalty and temperament. There is evidence that short women are more feminine than tall women because estrogen levels, which inhibit bone growth, are higher in them.

traditional girl writes:

High levels of estrogen halt bone growth. Have you ever noticed that shorter, more finely boned women are (on average) kinder, less competitive, and more feminine? Tall, muscular women with sturdy skeletons and jaws are more likely to have low levels of estrogen and high levels of testosterone.

An article referencing the bone-growth-halting properties of estrogen: http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jan/15/health/he-staturegirls15

In any case, it seems to me that in our ancestral environment, a woman’s kindness, sexual loyalty, cooperative spirit and fertility would have been more important to her mate than her physical strength. She would have been too busy with pregnancies and infants to slaughter a bear.

As an aside, as a heterosexual women, I greatly prefer small-boned, large-breasted women for friendship. They’re more likely to be loyal, sweet, and share my values. I try to avoid tall, large-jawed, small-breasted women. I always get the “I want to screw around, break up relationships and eat babies” vibe from them.

Men are attracted to a woman’s looks first and foremost, but after a while — a few weeks to a few months — a woman’s other assets become important to men, especially men seeking long term relationships. Is she sweet and affectionate? Does she like to cook him dinner? Is she nurturing and does she coo over other women’s babies? Is she an animal lover? Does she prefer to avoid getting into arguments? Does she frequently cede decisions to her man? Does she shy from logic and debate? Is she quick to tear up during sad movies?

Most men, their curmudgeonly ribbing to the contrary notwithstanding, really do love these attributes of the feminine woman. Yes, we may complain about a woman’s runaway emotions, her focus on seemingly trite household matters, or her bleeding heart worldview, but we love them for it. The alternative — dating a woman with a man-like personality, ambition and outlook, however sexy she may be — leaves us feeling like we’re dating an alien impostor, and our instinct to protect and provide for an intrinsically vulnerable lover is muted with such masculine-essenced women.

Looking back on the women in my life, I think there is something to this. The shorter women have been, with few exceptions, more feminine and sweet-natured than the taller women I have dated. (And also more full of charming neuroses.) The short girls were the ones begging me to return to bed after sex so they could get their cuddle fix, while the tall girls would jump out of bed first after getting their rocks off. Hey, if I have things to do, I don’t mind a girl occupying herself after sex, but in the big picture I greatly prefer — and I suspect most men do too — a woman who acts like a stereotypical woman in and out of the bedroom. Unfortunately, women like this are running out in the West.

So maybe estrogen explains why everyone isn’t over six feet tall. Men of all heights are drawn to the feminine allure of shorter women with higher levels of estrogen, and have families with them, rejuvenating the next generation with shorter descendants. Perhaps men also choose these shorter women for family formation subconsciously knowing that they are less of a cuckolding risk than masculinized tall women.

Not that tall women don’t have their advantages. You’ve gotta love those long legs wrapped around you, for one. And if you’re a tall man you don’t have to prop up a tall woman’s behind for easier doggy-style access. Plus, tall women make for more striking arm candy as long as they meet a minimum beauty threshold. It’s just too easy for a hot short girl, sexy though she may be, to get lost in the crowd.

Read Full Post »