Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Girls’ Category

Commenter Yup wants us to notice something very telling about Trump’s wives.

Trump’s had 3 wives.

1st wife: 14 years

2nd wife: 4 years

3rd wife: 11 years and counting.

Guess which wife was American.

😂 I’ll take “4 years” for $5.5 billion, Alex.

Read Full Post »

Piers Morgan (he’s had a “come to shitlord” moment) writes about Trump’s sway over the ladies. Read this, and you’ll wonder yourself if Trump was a founding proprietor of Le Chateau.

‘They say every powerful man is good in bed,’ I once asked Donald Trump. ‘That true?’

He smirked. ‘I think there is a certain truth to that, yes. Put it this way, I’ve never had any complaints. A lot of it is down to The Look. It doesn’t mean you have to look like Cary Grant, it means you have to have a certain way about you, a stature. I see successful guys who just don’t have The Look and they are never going to go out with great women.

‘The Look is very important. I don’t really like to talk about it because it sounds very conceited… but it matters.’

Count the number of statements Trump made which affirm core CH principles governing male-female relations.

  • Powerful men are generally good in bed. Why is male power and sexpertise correlated? Power imbues a man with self-confidence that opens bedroom possibilities to him, enticing him to be more demanding of the women he sweetly fucks, which in turn makes those women perceive him as more sexually skilled. Similarly, women will have stronger orgasms with a powerful man, regardless of the man’s objective sexual prowess, which alters their perception of the man’s skill.
  • “A lot of it is down to The Look.” Trump understands that facial expression and body language can communicate charismatic winner… or dull loser. Handsomeness is beneficial, but not required. A man who projects confidence with his posture, his piercing gaze, his unflappable ZFG demeanor, and his snapper-sundering smirk is more alluring to women than the prettyboy with the vacant stare.
  • “I see successful guys who just don’t have The Look and they are never going to go out with great women.” Trump, like CH, knows that money and business success are no guarantee of pussy abundance. Wealthy Silicon Valley nerdos lacking in any notable charm, like fat waifu-settling Mark Cuckersperg, are proof that wealth cannot compensate for a shit personality. Women are turned off by dull betas, even if a billion dollar portfolio is added to the equation. Sure, not a few golddiggers will fake their love to mooch the betabux moolah, but that is paid-for allure. Transaction “love” is no substitute for sincere validation love.

There is no doubt in my mind that Trump enjoys, and has enjoyed, the validation love of many beautiful women in his life. Strong evidence for my assertion comes from Trump’s ex-wives, who speak better of him than most men’s current wives speak of them.

ps article via minor Twatter celeb @DJTWMAR.

Read Full Post »

Lesbians are repulsive to look at. To gaze upon a lesbian is to scoop out one’s retinas as an offering to the sun god who will burn them to a crisp. Almost all of them are fat and ugly with bad skin and worse clothes. The “lipstick lesbian” is a trope of porn-addled dweebs; sure, they exist, (I’ve come across a few) but their numbers are vanishingly small set against the IMMENSE majority of lesbians who are the furthest thing from bangable any man could imagine.

The general impression of lesbiandom is blobbiness. Lesbian couples are two extra large pastry puffs meiotically becoming one super sized pastry puff. Or two circling gas giants gravitationally stripping each other of a pleasing personality.

Yet they Find, Meet, Attract, and Close…. looking as they do. Clearly, lesbians care not, or care very little, for appearance. Looks are somewhere below “can breathe without mechanical assistance” on the lesbian ledger of acceptable mate criteria.

Lesbians, then, tell us something true about straight women. Retention of crucial psychosexual characteristics of the heterosexual standard is common in both lesbians and gay men. Just as gay men behave sexually like straight men, except with damaged target designators and no female gold-plated pussy obstacles to outmaneuver, lesbians behave sexually like straight women with no need to arouse visually-oriented straight men.

In the heterosexual sex market, the opposite sex is like a check on each other, placing constraints on just how much a person can express his or her sexual nature. Women can’t let themselves go without risking solitude and men can’t satisfy their urge to sleep with thousands of women without achieving a high social or material status or a degree of skill in the crimson arts.

These opposite-sex constraints are missing or greatly mitigated among homosexuals. Gay male libido is just as visually-oriented as that of straight men’s, but is allowed to fully express because gay men are less protective of their cheap sperm than straight women are of their expensive eggs. Ugly gay men have it rough, but for most it’s a sexual circus with no safety net.

Think of straight women as boots on illegally parked straight men; a straight man with T levels above manlet metadeath would love to park in the tight space of every pretty girl he sees every day of his life. He can’t because the cooch collective has bolted the boot on his hot rod. If he manages to park in one of those spots, he’s staying there for a while. Gay men, otoh, are free to park their hivvy pork wherever they like and come and go as they please; very few gays will put the boot on gay boner. The gay male sexual market is a parking lot of receptive rectums*.

Lesbians, likewise, are essentially unconstrained straight female sexuality hypercharged, or rather hypocharged, to its inevitable conclusion in lesbian bed death (and tremendous levels of domestic violence). Dyke Fright is real because women, straight and homo alike, just don’t care as much about a sex partner’s looks as do straight and homo men about their sex partners’ looks.

Lesbian dishevelment and apparent apathy toward improving their appearance to please other lesbians is indirect proof that straight women place less emphasis on men’s looks than men place on women’s looks (and less than gay men place on other gay men’s looks). The difference between straight women and lesbians is that the former aren’t trying to find love with other women who will care as little about looks as they do.

scissister

*band name alert

PS Reader The Observer observes,

You can learn a lot by watching a lesbian work on her target paramour while out and about, too.

They push boundaries HARD. They know it works, and where the limits are, and walk right up to them. They understand the function of obligation in the female psyche.

Observe, and learn.

Obligation and submission are two powerful psychosexual undercurrents in the roiling sea of a woman’s soul. It’s a shame it goes so little remarked upon by mainstream social analysis. But that’s why the Chateau exists; a beacon of truth guiding the way through a dark wood. *heart bursts with vanity*

Read Full Post »

File the latest SCIENCE! study in the “Chicks dig jerks” binder (it’s bulging).

Women really DO love bad boys: Females are more likely to lust after people with criminal records than males, study finds

There has been a long history of people falling for inmates and criminals and now a study has found the phenomenon may be more common than thought.

According to a new study of prison guards and other correctional workers, the attraction is felt more by females than males, and hardly ever has a happy ending. […]

In a study published in the journal Déliquance, justice et autres questions de société, the researcher focused on more than 300 cases of the phenomenon in the US and European media over a ten-year period, from 2005 to 2015. […]

The study found women were more affected than men, with over 70 per cent of cases of sexual misconduct in US correctional system involving female staff, despite them making up less than half of the prison workforce. [ed: much less than half. in 2011, women were a quarter of total prison facility employment]

The usual Hivemind-approved rationalizations are given for why women LOVE LOVE LOVE incarcerated lowlifes (“emotional manipulation”, “forced intimacy”, “savior mentality”, etc), but really the answer is the most Occam-y of the hypothesis razors: dangerous men make women’s vaginas wet with arousal and their hearts flush with yearning.

Scathing ridicule aside, let’s keep something in perspective. Women fawning over hardened inmates and opening their pussies to criminal cock is an insult to the families of the victims of these killers. SHAME. SHAME. SHAME.

But that is female nature for you. Instead of ignoring that nature, or hand-waving it away under a shitstream of sophistry, we should all confront it and accept it as an unchangeable fact of life. Then, we as a nation need to have policies which recognize and synchronize with the reality of female sexual nature rather than attempt to defy it or mold it into something alien. So here’s an eminently reasonable suggestion that will be dutifully tut-tutted by our equalist overlords: ban women from working at male prisons.

Perhaps Trump can bring this up on his victory parade to the White House.

Read Full Post »

Longtime Chateau guests know I’m keen to *preen* when the pretext is right. But sometimes even an egregious preening can’t sufficiently convey the tumescence of my stroked ego when SCIENCE! lands a study in my lap that grinds me to completion.

A recurrent theme at CH is the personal observation that American women are becoming less feminine. As it so happens, CH was right! A new study finds that, hey, American women are becoming less feminine.

Masculine and Feminine Traits on the Bem Sex-Role Inventory, 1993–2012: a Cross-Temporal Meta-Analysis

The Bem Sex-Role Inventory (BSRI) is one of Sandra Bem’s most notable contributions to feminist psychology, measuring an individual’s identification with traditionally masculine and feminine qualities. In a cross-temporal meta-analysis of U.S. college students’ scores on the BSRI (34 samples, N = 8,027), we examined changes in ratings on the Bem masculinity (M) and femininity (F) scales since the early 1990s. Additional analyses used data collected in a previous meta-analysis (Twenge 1997) to document changes since the BSRI’s inception in 1974. Our results reveal that women’s femininity scores have decreased significantly (d  = −.26) between 1993 and 2012, whereas their masculinity remained stable. No significant changes were observed for men. Expanded analyses of data from 1974 to 2012 (94 samples, N = 24,801) found that women’s M rose significantly (d  = .23), with no changes in women’s F, men’s M, and men’s F. Women’s androgyny scores showed a significant increase since 1974, but not since 1993. Men’s androgyny remained the same in both time periods. Our findings suggest that since the 1990s, U.S. college women have become less likely to endorse feminine traits as self-representative, potentially revealing a devaluation of traditional femininity. However, it is also possible that the scale items do not match modern gender stereotypes. Future research may need to update the BSRI to reflect current conceptions of gender.

This is yuge… (news, as well as study sample size.) The implications in the study’s findings about the transformation of the American sexual market are profound. If American women are becoming less feminine, then American men will find them less attractive, especially as long-term investment vehicles for marriage and family. And that is what the data show; the overall marriage rate is down and the age of first marriage is up, coinciding with the period during which women have lost their feminine charms.

Men are dropping out because women are leaning in. Way to go, feminist harpies!

In the big picture, female femininity has declined over the last generation or two because of feminist indoctrination and social signals encouraging and celebrating the abandonment of femininity.

In the bigger picture, widely and cheaply available birth control, abortion, obesity, processed food toxins, and female economic self-sufficiency have all conspired to denude women of their femininity and to impel women to adopt masculine posturing.

In the biggest picture, the loss of American women’s femininity is exactly what one would expect to see in a culture that is unmooring from its historical K-selected, predominantly White biomechanical foundation (patriarchal, high paternity certainty, slender women with low cock counts) and drifting toward an r-selected, increasingly nonWhite society (matriarchal, low paternity certainty, muscular and obese women with high cock counts) similar to the African sexual market norm, (where men more than anywhere else in the world are “dancing monkeys” for women and the women toil in the fields and bring home the bacon while crapping out kids from behind-the-bush trysts with multiple fathers).

When men’s sexuality is maximally restricted, and women’s sexuality is released of all constraints, the inevitable result is a dispiritingly corporate romantic market of supplicating male lackeys and aggro “slut positive” careergrrl chubsters whose very financial independence (government gibsmedats by any name) obviates the need to be more pleasing and feminine to attract beta male providers with tight resource sharing Game.

An unfeminine androgyne is the New World Woman, and she is letting men know they aren’t worth her effort to please, (and her unkempt vagina has seen lots of action DEAL WITH IT).

PS Would have loved to have seen this study controlled for race (if it hadn’t been). Mass invasion of nonWhites must certainly skew raw femininity/masculinity scores in one direction or another.

PPS Another SCIENCE!❤ CH knob job: Storytelling ability increases a man’s attractiveness as a long-term romantic partner.

Read Full Post »

Michelle Fields is a former reporter/present attention whore who was canned from her job at Breitbart for making up a story about Trump’s campaign manager Corey Lewandowsky manhandling her and pushing her to the floor at a speaking event. She bubbled over to Twatter to show off her forearm bruise, and White Knights like Ben Shapiro jumped to her defense, choosing to take the word of a halfway decent-looking woman with slut eye at face value before the facts were in.

Security cam footage emerged a day after the incident clearly showing Fields suffered no assault beyond the jostling typical of a crowded room (she had claimed she was violently assaulted and pushed to the ground by Lewandowsky). Nonetheless she decided — or rather, she was encouraged by Shapiro — to file a formal charge with Florida police against Lewandowsky.

Unsurprisingly, nothing came of the trumped-up (heh) charge. The prosecutor (a Clinton lackey, no less) had no choice but to drop the case, citing lack of evidence for anything other than that Fields appeared in the video to fake a dive.

Palm Beach County won’t prosecute because video evidence shows Fields invaded Secret Service ‘bubble’ around Trump and touched him first

Lewandowski, they found, ‘reacted and did what he needed to do’ and bruises on Fields’ arm pictured days later were not visible that night

One witness told police he thought Fields staged ‘a fraudulent slip-and-fall’ and was ‘animated and acting’ – and ‘at first I thought she was drunk’

By the way, Trump stayed loyal to Lewandowski during this entire sordid skank-manufactured affair. That alone speaks volumes of Trump’s admirable character (and of his enemies’ lack of character).

This incident (among so many other alpha male-hating, feminist-fueled false accusations over the past few years) demonstrates the corrosive harm that beta male white knights can inflict on society, and on women.

Turning to little Benny Shapiro as an example, here’s a case of a white knight blowing up a woman’s career and killing what was left of her reputation as a reporter because he used his influence as an anhedonic orbiter and eunuch confidant to cajole her to elevate her fake assault game to the next level and file a charge with police (wasting taxpayer dollars in the meantime). Little Benny Shapiro hates the Trumpening and loves Michelle Fields’ cleavage, so he had every motivation to whisper sadistic nothings in her ear. She, being a woman, took the bait.

(I’m getting an image in my head of little Benny Shapiro dabbing bruise makeup on Fields’ arm, giggling like a schoolgirl as they conspire to END TRUMP’S NOMINATION RUN, and then little Benny, insistent boner denting his kid’s size jeans, looks “that way” at Michelle, & she quickly leaves the room.)

A far from exhaustive list of the ways in which white knights are bad for women:

  • white knights’ reptilian enticements to pursue futile revenge plots can destroy women’s careers
  • white knights’ cloying “m’lady” courtesies can simultaneously inflate women’s egos and deflate women’s labia, rendering them less likeable to the next man to talk to them, and therefore more likely to wind up an aging spinster
  • white knights’ quickness to jump to a faire maiden’s rescue when another man is hitting on her can ruin her chances at finding love
  • white knights’ ulterior motives (appeasement, flattery, and guardianship for the implied guarantee of sex at a later date) can sour women on all men, creating a resentful belief in women that every congenial interaction with a man is a pretext for sexual exploitation (which tbh is true if the woman in question is a hottie)
  • white knightss excessive you-go-grrlisms to their fat female friends can make those fatties insufferable to be around, as they assume every conversation with them is a romantic solicitation, and respond accordingly
  • white knights’ unctuous “supportiveness” toward their slutty female friends can convince those sluts to delay settling down to ride the cock carousel, possibly costing them a marriage and family to a quality (read: non-loser) man
  • white knights’ unthinking readiness to rush to a bitchy woman’s defense can encourage bitches to stay bitches instead of improving their personalities to attract good men
  • white knights’ instant and unquestioning forgiveness of women who have wronged them can create monsters incapable of guilt and tempted to take advantage of weak men for as long as they can get away with it

There is no end to the ways in which not being a white knight is better than being a white knight. The time when white knighting had any personal or social benefit was a long time ago; specifically when Western societies were structured around female deference and low cock counts. In that environment, male chivalry made sense.

PS The reader would do well to bracket this entire post in ((())) for improved understanding.

Read Full Post »

The title of this post is something a grandmother would say to her granddaughter warning her against drinking as a gateway to sluttery and morning-after “regret rape”.

On this wonderfully anti-feminist subject, reader pavetack describes a photographer’s social experiment in girls and their drunkenness.

Photographer takes photos of friends after 1,2,3 glasses of wine.
Notice by the second glass every woman is trying to appear seductive, and by the third it’s “devil may care”. Drinks that go into you may make her more attractive, but ones that go into her definitely do.

These were my favorite “RBF-to-DTF” series of increasingly besotted women photos:

drunklady1

drunklady2

Two thoughts:

Smooth Gs who can successfully bed sober women earn more of my admiration than womanizers who rely on drunk girls exclusively for their make notch count great again.

Important lesson here for the ladies: If you don’t want to regret sleeping with a man the next day, don’t get drunk with him the night before. Hooch cuts the line between your brain and cooch.

Glancing over the men’s photos, the overriding pattern is “sober serious face” -> “drunk smiley face”. I don’t see many seductive faces appearing on the male mugs. Chicks don’t much dig smiley men, so it may behoove you smoov dudes to move on the gina groove when you’re sober. Otoh, if you’re drunk, the girls you’re with are likely drunk too and probably won’t notice how stupidly you’re smiling at them.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,542 other followers

%d bloggers like this: