Women Want Arrogant And Confrontational Men

Chicks dig jerks, the evidence mounts and mounts (heh).

The latest (via r/TheRedPill) (here’s a link to the original 2007 pdf)

Science says: Women most attracted to arrogance, confrontative behavior, and musculature for short term relationships from TheRedPill

Cuing the inimitable gbfm: alpha fux, beta bux. Same as it ever was.

This accompanying chart deftly summarizes the study’s conclusions:

Male looks is not the sole, nor even the most important, factor in women’s preferences in a short-term mate. (sorry, wolfiecub) While being handsome and muscular helps, it helps more to be confrontative and arrogant. A prick. A jerk. An asshole. A self-righteous peacocking glibly-preening ego-teeming smug sonofabitch.

Confrontational? Arrogant? Influential? Hey, sounds like Poon Comandment XIII:

XIII. Err on the side of too much boldness, rather than too little

Touching a woman inappropriately on the first date will get you further with her than not touching her at all. Don’t let a woman’s faux indignation at your boldness sway you; they secretly love it when a man aggressively pursues what he wants and makes his sexual intentions known. You don’t have to be an asshole, but if you have no choice, being an inconsiderate asshole beats being a polite beta, every time.

The most interesting finding is the category termed “Influential”, which is also described as “social respect” by the study authors. It is, essentially, male personality. Charisma. Force of personality is what wins men the respect of their social peers, men and women alike. As it so happens, social respect aka personality is the only trait of male attractiveness that is equally valued in a long-term and short-term mate prospect by women. Game is the full spectrum enhancement of male personality, utilizing and amplifying the mind-body feedback loop, to increase a man’s attractiveness to women, and it is the only enhancement that will work equally well on ovulating and non-ovulating women.

Therefore, BANG for buck, Game is the most efficient SMV boosting protocol a man can undertake.

Charisma is technically asshole-independent, but it’s undeniable that charismatic men are more often than not willing to tinker around the edges of assholery. Being an asshole is itself something of a charismatic trait, and one which women respond to very strongly, in their vagina areas. So while you don’t HAVE to be a huge asshole, if the choice is between HUGE ASSHOLERY and niceguy respectfulness….choose wiseguy-ly.

The following quoted from the study is funny in a tragic sort of way: Men perceived as less faithful were rated as particularly attractive as short-term mates by fertile women. So if you’re hittin da club and da egg-releasing estrogen fumes are blowin your way, it pays to come across like a shiftless cad who will spin a plate, dump a fuck, show up late, and run amok. These are the men women LOVE LOVE LOVE to FUCK FUCK FUCK.

Related: Poon Commandment VII.

VII. Always keep two in the kitty

Never allow yourself to be a “kept man”. A man with options is a man without need. It builds confidence and encourages boldness with women if there is another woman, a safety net, to catch you in case you slip and risk a breakup, divorce, or a lost prospect, leading to loneliness and a grinding dry spell. A woman knows once she has slept with a man she has abdicated a measure of her power; when she has fallen in love with him she has surrendered nearly all of it. But love is ephemeral and with time she may rediscover her power and threaten to leave you. It is her final trump card. Withdrawing all her love and all her body in an instant will rend your soul if you are faced with contemplating the empty abyss alone. Knowing there is another you can turn to for affection will fortify your will and satisfy your manhood.

More Crimson Pill excerpts:

…when women are fertile they report greater attraction to men other than their partners, but not greater attraction to their partners.

As most of these studies do not find changes in [female] sexual desire across the cycle, sexual desire per se is probably not responsible for these effects.

Based on good genes hypothesis, then, this theory should anticipate that women would find men perceived to be intelligent especially more attractive when [women] are fertile. We found no such pattern.

Male feminist white knighting MENSA nerdos cast to the icy faplands by women of waspy waist and sultry grace. What else is new?

Read Full Post »

Sartorially Shitlording Your Way To Prime Poosy

I have a shirt that is Pure Shitlord Energy. Its pec-framed artistry is set to maximum triggering; no fatty, frump. or fug SJW can see it without shaking violently on the inside. I wore this shirt recently at an outdoor event filled with the libbiest libshits, and every SJWhale and problem glasses fishmouth snarled as I passed by them. But the hotties….woowee they smiled and loitered in my vicinity. The beauty of the shirt is in its humor. The message is in-your-face antediluvian alphatude coated with a soothingly humorous shell.

Shitcocking serves three useful purposes:

1. It filters the noxious cunts from bang consideration
2. It attracts the curious cuties
3. It provokes curious cutie shit tests that allow you to demonstrate your grace under pressure

It seems the HSMV girls relish the triggering. They get a kick out of a man who triggers them; this is a stark contrast to the puritans and schoolmarms and twatalitarians who can’t tolerate dissent from their straitjacketed, dreary world view, and frown and scowl at any man who dares mock their prudery.

The catch is that if you’re gonna shitcock, you had better be fearless. The second you disclose through word or body twitch the slightest doubt and discomfort with your chosen form of shitcockery, the girls will eat you alive. Even the once-curious cuties. But if you are overflowing with overconfidence, the girls worth your attention will reel from sudden blasts of arousal. They will poke and prod, but it will all be done with a presumption of your attractiveness. Poking and prodding is a good thing; it’s when they frown and look the other way that you’ll know you rubbed their hindfur against the grain.

Mass triggering a large public gathering of shitlib cunts is one of life’s finer pleasures. But doing so while feminine fillies flirt with you, and your un-wipeable smirk steals the show, is a sensual shiv incomparable. If you’ve got the cahones, one mesmerizing shirt can substitute for one hundred cold approaches.

Read Full Post »

Trust Is Nice, But Jerkboy Is Spice

Platitudes are the curse of our times. The Pretty Lies are everywhere, and polluting the minds of our most vulnerable and emotionally fragile: single White women.

Here’s a revealing glimpse at one of the incantations performed during this Platitude Purification Protocol that single White women indulge to gain entry to the right-thinking GoodWhite World:

A morning zoo radio show had a discussion about the female orgasm and what women need to experience it. A chirpy White woman, quoting a glam mag article on the same topic, bubbled that women need trust to have an orgasm. The male hosts agreed, lending the skit an air of medicinal predictability.

This is a lie. As Overlord-pilled guests of the Chateau know, what women say and what they do are two very different things, especially in the realm of sex and romance. Women say: “I need to trust a man to relax enough and have an orgasm”. Women do: Have mattress-soaking orgasms with some bad boy who picked them up at a nightclub.

Women don’t need trust to have great sex. What women need is a psychologically dominant ZFG man who can arouse them to an autonomic orgasm.

Usually, when we restrict our range of options to women who are sexually unfulfilled, the men with whom these women have the most trouble having orgasms are the men women trust the most and know the longest: borefriends and hubbies.

tl;dr: Women say: “trust”. Women need: “alpha”. Trust is nice, but jerkboy is spice.

You want an uglier truth? Women’s orgasms may not be for women at all; they may exist to serve men.

Read Full Post »

Single White Women Are A Civilization-Scale Shit Test

Recently, the Audacious Epigone highlighted a poll which found that, among women age 18-29 (the single White woman years), the most common preferred term of self-identification is “feminist”.

I was reminded of that poll and the data showing single White women voted overwhelmingly for thecunt (and for Gay Mulatto), single women are more xenophilic than are men,  and single White women are for open borders trash world globohomoism, when I watched this Jordan Peterson video and read the following excellent commentary from a CH reader. Note that I have already commented on the same Peterson speech, but the reader who forwarded the video, including his commentary, fleshed out my thoughts more exhaustively.

******

This series is amazingly good. Very long lectures, but saturated with good ideas.

This third lecture is the most recent one I have listened, and they just keep getting better.

You must listen carefully to 2:33:00 to the end, last question at the end of the lecture, about 8 minutes.

Peterson says that the SJW “equality-above-all-else philosophy” is predicated on personality factors associated with women, “agreeableness and high negative emotion” but even controlling for those, SJWs are more likely to be female. He then tries to explain this.

The relative evolutionary roles of women versus men, is men produce and women distribute, and insist on fairness. This was shaped the evolutionary background of human beings.

He talks about the role of women political power, which has never happened before, He notes correctly how their demand for equality runs up against the reality of differential productivity.

The SJW phenomenon is associated with the rise of women to political power. “We don’t know what a truly female political philosophy would be like.” He then correctly notes simply saying everyone gets the same thing, which is not a sophisticated philosophy. He evades saying this is all the “philosophy” they ever will generates. But there is no reason to think it will ever be anything else.

Peterson then quotes someone — he can’t remember who — and a Google search does not turn it up: “Men test ideas and women test men.”

“We don’t know to what extent women test men sheerly by provocation. It’s a lot.” “I’m going to go after you and see where your weak spots are.” Bingo. He recognizes the that women shit test men. He then says that in this movement, and using shame, “there is a tremendous amount of provocation.” He is recognizing that PC, SJW behavior is a shit test.

As I have noted before, feminism, from the beginning was civilizational-scale shit test that women, at some level, wanted men to overcome. They wanted a firm hand, and instead they got: “Whatever will make you happy, honey” The men of our civilization failed this colossal shit test. And that was when our civilization started to fall apart.

This is amazing enough. But it gets better.

Back to Peterson.

He next says “I shouldn’t say this.” Then he says: “I don’t believe this but I am trying to figure it out.” Ha, right! As a Freudian psychoanalyst, Peterson himself would know this is a major tell. He knows it is risky to say it, he decides to say it, but then he tries to introduce some not-very-plausible deniability. He talks about 50 Shades of Gray and says it is “comical” that at the very moment of strident demands for equality this bestseller shows that the subconscious female mind desires for dominance.

Calling this “comical” is a way of downplaying its significance. It is not comical. Another Freudian tell. It is rudimentary that people claim to be joking when they are saying what they really think but are afraid to admit it. The gigantic fact of the bestsellerdom of 50 Shades is not funny. It is evidence. It is damning, irrefutable evidence of what women really want versus what they say they want. Peterson does not use the phrase “revealed versus disclosed preferences.” But that is exactly what it is.

He then says that something else he is trying to puzzle out, and he agains says “it’s not like I believe this” — again implausibly. He refers to the “crazy alliance” between the Feminists and the Radical Islamists “that I just do not get.” But he does get it. He pretends to take Feminism at face value, that it is about the rights of women, the safety of women, the wellbeing of women, which it has never been. He says “Why they aren’t protesting non-stop about Saudi Arabia is completely beyond me.” But, it is not beyond him, as his next comments prove. He then says, agains distancing himself “this may be the Freudian in me.” He then tells the truth couched as a question: “Is there an attraction that is there attraction that is emerging among the female radicals for that totalitarian male dominance that they’ve chased out of the West.” Again the distancing: “I mean, that’s a Hell of a thing to think.” It is even more of a Hell of a thing to live with as your country and your civilization is committing suicide because your females are so desperate for an unapologetic dicking that they are desperate to import the Muslim bitch-hand. Peterson then says he can see “no rational reason” for the alliance between radical females and Islam. Correct. There is an irrational reason. Or is it actually rational for a woman to want what evolution drives her to want. He

He raises and rejects the simple notion that the female radicals are attracted by radical Islam primarily because it is the enemy of the west.

Peterson then restates his main point more strongly. “I’m not going to shake my suspicion about this unconscious balancing. Because the demand for egalitarianism and the eradication of masculinity accelerates there is going to be a longing in the unconscious for the opposite of that, the more you scream for equality the more your unconscious is going to admire dominance.” Pause, as if he realizes he has gone very far. Then in an aw-shucks tone: “Well, that’s how you think if you are psycho-analytically minded.” Which has already repeatedly said he is. So in the end he admits, by logical indirection, but nonetheless clearly, that this is what he thinks.

This is an amazing performance. You can see struggling to puke out the truth, against his will and better judgment. But he does manage at last to puke it out. Dr. Peterson is courageous man. But even he does not want to say some things out loud, and at least initially hedges when he does so. But he is a realist and a truth-teller first. But getting there is not easy. We can see him clawing his way toward the truth, and speaking the truth. We can see that struggle in real time in this video.

Peterson is a mighty slayer of pretty lies. He is nothing less than a hero for what he is doing, and saying out loud.

******

Single White women don’t want to be appeased.

They don’t want to be indulged.

They don’t want to be catered to, coddled, or placated.

They don’t want their tears dried or their complaints addressed.

They don’t want men to listen to their words.

They want men to watch what they do and respond with the requisite dignified and dominant masculinity.

They want to submit to a man, and to a society, worthy of their submission.

Now of course single White women will never tell you this, or admit these 100% truefact desires to even themselves…but they feel these urges, and their hindbrains demand this from them and from the men they shit test.

Single White women individually shit test men and collectively shit test men through the male achievement of civilized society. Our shared single White woman problem is a civilization-scale shit test, and as the reader wrote, the men of the West have been, and continue, spectacularly failing this single White women shit test.

Modren Western man fails this shit test so badly that he is fairly likened to the incel beta orbiter who is always on call to provide a shoulder to cry on while his oneitis fucks dirt world ingrates who beat her silly and crap in his yard.

That is how badly, how powerfully, single White women yearn for the pimp hand. Their yearning for the ministrations of dominant men beckons them to sacrifice their homelands for the thrill of the tingle. A tingle which has been lost to them as their men have grown soft and weak under the yoke of decadence and decades of weaponized anti-White male propaganda.

It’s time the White men of the West learned Game and brought their women to heel. The alternative is civilizational death.

Game can save nations.

Read Full Post »

There’s No Bad Sex, Only Bad Stimulants

Many women, particularly single women of the slutty persuasion, take a perverse glee in recounting episodes of bad sex with a man. Some even like to challenge the alphalinity of a potential suitor by offering unsolicited stories of times in the past when they had endured bad sex, the unstated purpose being a sneaky desire to test the new man’s quickness or reluctance to assert that he is not one of those “bad sex guys”. (Sincerely answering this kind of probing question is a no-win situation; best reply is to tell her it takes two to tango.)

The femmesplaining and gloating by women cackling about bad sex is a rhetorical ego balm. The truth is that the bad sex theory, as a rule, is a misdiagnosis of the first cause: a bad stimulant. Women who complain about bad sex should look in the mirror. If you’re not very attractive, don’t expect the men who will have you to put much effort into pleasing you.

I’m sure there are isolated cases of men who for whatever reason are simply horrible in the sack. But it defies credulity that the world is overrun with bad sex bros; more likely is that very few men are banging their dream woman, and that this mismatch in the male hindbrain between bang reality and bang fantasy accounts for most of the bad sex complaints by the middle of the belle curve plain janes.

And the further down the female SMV hierarchy a man must tumblr to get laid, the less likely he is to feel the power of his Inner Jackhammer summoning him to feats of boudoir majesty.

This is the high unholies of ugly truths that sub-hottie poseur-thotties will never ever acknowledge (not that I blame them): that their romantic disappointment is a byproduct of their facial comportment.

Personally, I have noticed big differences in my enthusiasm with women who differ by as little as 1 point on the 1-10 female beauty scale. As a man of stealth and taste, Game and my accumulated experience with women have afforded me a lifestyle which precludes the necessity of dumpster diving for sustenance, however even a maester of the muff sometimes dates across instead of up, and heaven forfend even down a bit when the stars cross in cursed portent.

The occasional muse-less 5 or 6 has knelt at the Chateau pine shrine. From my perspective, at least, bad sex ensued, and I imagine they thought similarly though they kept that opinion to themselves. A perfunctory piston-efficient pumping, followed promptly by a snooze.

I can tell when I’ve delivered a sub-par performance because I know what heights of sexual abandon I’ve scaled when inspired to a great performance. The HB8s and yippie! 9s who’ve made the crimson-pillgrimage received the banging of their lives, all clitorises excited, all proclivities gratified, all G spots perused. Once, I broke my no-licky-the-sticky first month rule on a first date with a hard 9 whose pussy smelled of lavender. I went at her neatly trimmed bush like a tasmanian devil, gulping her aroma with the exuberance of a drowning victim piercing the surface for that precious breath of life. Anal? You betcha. Sweat? Through the sheets. Splattered juices? Like a crime scene. Bent over the kitchen counter, her head knocking into a cabinet as glassware rattled its orchestral approval? Oui oui, my mortal release. And did I kiss her deeply, passionately, longingly, as we met and pressed our flesh into one? It was required.

An older womanizer once told me that erectile dysfunction isn’t real if it can be cured by a younger, hotter, tighter woman. He was a mentor of sorts, and in his honor I remembered of him that old seducers never die, they just fade from the game.

Read Full Post »

Exquisite European Beauty

This post is the start of a series celebrating the uncommonly exquisite beauty of the White European woman. Befitting the title of this blog, Chateau Heartiste, our first featured lady is a Frenchwoman by the name of Pascale Petit.

Oo la la. This is the face of a woman who could pull any man away from vidgya games and pr0n.

Not an ounce of superfluous fat on her either. Pre-sugar dosed and carb-loaded European women were almost universally thin, even if not all of them were ravishing beauties. Beta males had it good then. Today, not so much.

Enjoy these photos and remind yourselves that our Globohomo open borders ruling class wants to erase this painstakingly refined beauty from the face of the earth, forever. In my book, that makes the Globohomo Bathhouse Alliance the purest evil.

Read Full Post »

Jordan Peterson On Female Hypergamy

I’m convinced Jordan Peterson, perhaps Canada’s only shitlord worthy of the appellation, is a long-time reader of the Chateau. Watch this video of him discussing the reality of female hypergamy (a topic covered extensively at this blog) and its influence on the dating market and you’ll see why I think that he’s been a guest at the Chateau under a pseudonym.

1:26 — “human females engage in hypergamy…women mate across and up dominance hierarchies, men mate across and down”

1:49 — “the socioeconomic status of a woman determines almost zero of her attractiveness [to] a man, whereas the socioeconomic status of a man is a major determinant of his attractiveness to a woman”

“and it isn’t his wealth [that’s attractive to women]… it’s his capacity to generate and be productive and to share”

Welcome to the Chateau, Jordan. I’m sure you’ve enjoyed your stay here.

Game is learned charisma. Another way to look at it: Game is male hypergamy, allowing men to date “across and up” in the instinctual manner that women date. The art of charisma and social dominance is essentially a flip of the evolutionary script, in which the savvy man pulls the same biomechanical levers that the average woman pulls to satisfy her urge to date up or at minimum to date across.

A good metric for determining whether your Game is Tight is to keep a mental tally of the quality of women you bed compared to your pre-Game dating life. If the number of times you dumpster dive is decreasing and the number of times you successfully grab the HBrass ring is increasing from what you used to pull in your beta days, then Game has been your friend in fitness maximization.

PS Here’s Jordan on “the shackles of marriage”:

I laughed at this because it’s a backhanded and cynical defense of marriage. JP is saying that the benefit of the marriage shackle is that you’re forced to surrender the illusion of romantic idealism for the low expectations of a humdrum honesty. Hence, the popularity of Fifty Shades of Bullwhip with married women.

Read Full Post »