The Four Sirens Of The Sexual Apocalypse

A long, long time ago, in a pleasure dome far away, CH introduced the idea that the West is currently besieged by the Four Sirens of the Sexual Apocalypse.

So why are women now the eager instigators of divorce? What changed in the culture? Four things, primarily: the pill, easy divorce, women’s economic independence, and rigged laws that make divorce a good financial prospect for women. The four sirens of the sexual apocalypse together have created the perfect sociological storm where a woman has every incentive in the world to ditch a husband to follow the whims of her heart once his usefulness has been exhausted.

Later, CH expanded on the Four Sirens theme.

1. Effective and widely available contraceptives (the Pill, condom, and the de facto contraceptive abortion).
2. Easy peasy no-fault divorce.
3. Women’s economic independence (hurtling towards women’s economic advantage if the college enrollment ratio is any indication).
4. Rigged feminist-inspired laws that have caused a disincentivizing of marriage for men and an incentivizing of divorce for women.

Two secondary Sirens were added to round out the list:

• Penicillin (reduced the cost of contracting STDs)
• Widely available hardcore porn.

Probably of all the CH scribblings on this subject of Western Decline, this passage gets to the meatiest heart of it:

So, a crib sheet of quippy replies if you ever need it to send a feminist or manboob howling with indignation:

1. The Pill
2. No-fault divorce
3. Working women
4. Man-hating feminism
5. Penicillin
6. Porn

Toss into a social salad bowl already brimming with an influx of non-European immigrants thanks to the 1965 soft genocide act, mix thoroughly, and voila!: a huge, inexorable, relentless leftward shift in American politics, an explosion of single moms, wage stagnation, government growth, upper class childlessness, lower class dysgenics, and a creaking, slow deterioration in the foundational vigor of the nation and the gutting of the pride of her people.

Into this pot pie of portent throw in the Skittles Man, Bring the Movies Man, Nah Man, and Disappeared Again Man, for whom girls have always swooned but who now, thanks to relaxed pressure from women themselves requiring men to put a ring on it before getting any huggy or kissy, and the incentivizing of risky sexual behavior by government policy and contraceptive technology, could enjoy sex without the entanglement of marriage or gainful employment.

Game, for all the shit it gets from the usual suspects, was just a rational response to a radically altered playing field. It didn’t cause this calamity; it just profited from it.

Meanwhile, beta males are left scratching their block-like skulls, wondering what the fuck just happened.

All well and good, says the reader, but where is the ¡SCIENCE! buttressing all this speculation and real world observation to satisfy sperg demands? How about right here. (Via The Cheapest of Chalupas)

Family structure in the United States has shifted substantially over the last three decades, [HBDer: MUH GENETICS] yet the causes and implications of these changes for the well-being of family members remains unclear. This paper exploits task-based shifts in demand as an exogenous shock to sex-specific wages to demonstrate the role of the relative female to male wage in the family and labor market outcomes of women. I show that increases in the relative wage lead to a decline in the likelihood of marriage for those on the margin of a first marriage, and present suggestive evidence that these effects are concentrated among less-desirable matches. A higher relative wage also causes women to increase their hours of work, reduce their dependence on a male earner, and increase the likelihood of taking guardianship over their children. These findings indicate that improvements in the relative wage have facilitated women’s independence by reducing the monetary incentive for marriage, and can account for 20% of the decline in marriage between 1980 and 2010.

BOOM THERE IT IS. CH WAS RIGHT. Female economic self-sufficiency decreases the marriage rate and increases urban slut factory churn, because self-sufficient women need beta male bux less and therefore can indulge the chasing of alpha male fux more.

SCIENCE! has confirmed the existence of Le Chateau Heartiste’s Third Siren of the Sexual Apocalypse.

It’s like some people think I make this shit up outta thin air. No, I’ve just spent a lot of time in the trenches of the dating market. I have seen much. I have learned much. And my wisdom is infinite. YUGE, even.

You only had to listen.

***

“Ok, enough crowing. How about a solution?”

Sure. Here it is:

Repeal the 19th Amendment.

Maybe slightly more realistically, get rid of Title IX and the rest of the man-hating, human nature denying, legal fictions shoved down our throats in the last sixty odd years by rancid feminist cunts and their lackey low T manlets. Culturally, real progress can be made by simply ending the GRRLPOWER propaganda and returning to teaching the virtues of the masculine ideal. Too many boys in STEM? Great! That’s what boys are good at. Too many girls preferring marriage and stay-at-home mohterhood? Great! That’s what girls are good at.

Simple truths and simple beauties have more power than labyrinthine lies and grotesque ugliness, as long as you hold them close to a heart that has banished cowardice.

Read Full Post »

Donald Trump’s Stone Cold Truths About Women

I’ll let you in on a leetle secret. It wasn’t Trump’s policy positions that initially roused my enthusiasm for his prospects as a cuckstablishment destroyer. Yes, the Wall and the rest of it certainly sealed the deal, but it was Trump’s charisma — his Game — that I noticed first and, based on my judgment then, would be the pure energy that carried him to victories innumerable. I have since been vindicated.

Trump’s Game is evident in the facility with which he handles friends and foes alike, but for astonishingly confirming evidence, one should look to the archives of Trump’s statements on female nature. The man clearly knows the score.

Shitlibs faint with the “I can’t even” vapors at the sight of Trump’s knowledge droppage, but we who operate in the dating trenches nod knowingly and recognize Trump as one of us: the few, the proud, the poonlords.

Here’s a selection of Trumpening Truths about women:

I would never buy Ivana any decent jewels or pictures. Why give her negotiable assets?

Trump gets that all’s fair in love and divorce.

Beauty and elegance, whether in a woman, a building, or a work of art, is not just superficial or something pretty to see.

Trump knows that Beauty is Truth, and Ugliness is Lies.

26,000 unreported sexual assaults in the military-only 238 convictions. What did these geniuses expect when they put men & women together?

Trump understands that men and women are different in mind as well as body.

It’s certainly not groundbreaking news that the early victories by the women on ‘The Apprentice’ were, to a very large extent, dependent on their sex appeal.

Pretty women can cash in their looks for fabulous prizes. And they do.

You know, it doesn’t really matter what [the media] write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of ass.

Self-evidently true.

There are basically three types of women and reactions. One is the good woman who very much loves her future husband, solely for himself, but refuses to sign the [prenup] agreement on principle. I fully understand this, but the man should take a pass anyway and find someone else. The other is the calculating woman who refuses to sign the prenuptial agreement because she is expecting to take advantage of the poor, unsuspecting sucker she’s got in her grasp. There is also the woman who will openly and quickly sign a prenuptial agreement in order to make a quick hit and take the money given to her.

Trump is familiar with the female archetypes. He is also familiar with the CH maxim “Always be ready to walk. It’s a man’s best defense against scheming broads”.

Women have one of the great acts of all time. The smart ones act very feminine and needy, but inside they are real killers. The person who came up with the expression ‘the weaker sex’ was either very naive or had to be kidding. I have seen women manipulate men with just a twitch of their eye — or perhaps another body part.

The greatest con feminism ever pulled was the idea that women are powerless pawns in the resource-acquisition market.

[Angelina Jolie’s] been with so many guys she makes me look like a baby… And, I just don’t even find her attractive.

Trump is a based slut shamer. He knows that cock-ravaged sluts have lowered their value as marriage material. #NoHymenNoDiamond

My favorite part [of ‘Pulp Fiction’] is when Sam has his gun out in the diner and he tells the guy to tell his girlfriend to shut up. Tell that bitch to be cool. Say: ‘Bitch be cool.’ I love those lines.

Trump is well aware of sexual dynamics, and that a real man is in charge of his woman. Beta males get steamrolled.

During one down period, I referred to him in print as a ‘financially embattled thousandaire’ and he sent me a copy of the column with my picture circled and ‘The Face of a Dog!’ written over it.

Fucking LOL. If the ugly shoe fits…

Women find [my] power almost as much of a turn-on as [my] money.

The stoniest, coldest truth. Chicks dig power. Men dig beauty. Trump is a student of the immutable cosmic laws governing the sexes.

All of the women on ‘The Apprentice’ flirted with me — consciously or unconsciously. That’s to be expected.

Trump assumes the sale. A sterling demonstration of a classic Game technique.

Bonus TrumpenTruth!

Women: “You have to treat ’em like shit.” (New York magazine, Nov. 9, 1992)

And here the Trumpening completes the circle with the Chateau. A maestro of the muff, Trump has internalized one of the Chateau’s timeless truths: Every girl loves a jerkboy fascist. They can’t help themselves. All the quisling, mewling betaboys can do is nip at the Asshole Alpha’s ankles, inflamed with envy as they go home at night to be reminded of their low sexual worth by the sight of their fat and dumpy wives (or gay lovers).

Donald Trump is the father and role model every young boy would be blessed to have, especially the little shitlib boys. May the Lord guide him and help him achieve the ultimate AMOG of America’s pissant cucks: the White House throne.

Read Full Post »

Spot The F*ck Me Stare

While you’re at it, see if you can spot the “I’m a witchy cunt” stare, too.

Read Full Post »

All The Single Ladies Are Pushing America Over The Leftist Cliff

Single momhood is up. The marriage rate is down. The age of first marriage is up. And the divorce industrial complex provides incentives to women to shatter marriages that would have survived similar rough patches not too long ago.

What does this distressed state of frayed affairs portend for America? How about a rapid and continual shift in the electorate toward Leftism and all its attendant social ills.

Why have women become Left-Wing? The political gender gap and the decline in marriage.

The last three decades have witnessed the rise of a political gender gap in the United States wherein more women than men favor the Democratic party. We trace this development to the decline in marriage, which we posit has made men richer and women poorer. [ed: this is not necessarily true. controlled analysis of actual living standards post-divorce support a less financially stable position for men. and the *perception* of financial gain matters; women perceive, due to legal incentives, that they will gain more in a divorce.] Data for the United States support this argument. First, there is a strong positive correlation between state divorce prevalence and the political gender gap—higher divorce prevalence reduces support for the Democrats among men but not women. Second, longitudinal data show that following marriage (divorce), women are less (more) likely to support the Democratic party.

Divorced men don’t stop voting Democrat because they are in a better financial position than they were in marriage; rather, they stop voting Democrat because the Democrat Party supports the whole panoply of anti-male feminist policy preferences that tilt the divorce playing field against men’s interests. Burn a divorced man once, shame on him. Burn him twice….

The real reason single women — pre-marriage and post-divorce — more strongly support the Shitlib Party is because they are biologically compelled to seek a male provider and his resources when they are mate-less. If no dependable or asset-rich man is available, then single and divorced women, and especially single moms with future juvenile delinquent and roadside stripper mouths to feed, will seek resources from the best available alternative: Big Daddy Government.

Consequently, as the nation loads up with more sex and the city mimosaettes and platitude-quaffing obese single moms of mystery meats, the bigger government will grow to satisfy the demand for more free first date dinners of dem welfare programs. And that is how the culture substrate changes absent any widespread genetic changes in the population, (which will follow not long after a massive and prolonged culture change).

Moral of the SCIENCE!: Female suffrage was a big mistake.

Read Full Post »

Cat Ladies And Childlessness: A Love(less) Connection

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 »

A 1949 Instructional Film For American Adolescents

This video is great. At 9:02, get ready to 😂.

Realtalk America –> Poopytalk America, in sixty years. Astounding. It’s time for the pretty lie-ugly truth pendulum to swing back towards sanity.

Read Full Post »

The Great Men On Pussy Pedestalization

J.R.R. Tolkien was a deep thinker who knew the world of women as well as he did his fantasy worlds. Reader Modern Primitive draws attention to Tolkien’s fatherly letters of advice to his son, Michael Tolkien.

Don’t know if this has been posted yet but here’s some letters from Tolkien to his son vis a vie women and marriage.

http://glim.ru/personal/jrr_tolkien_42-45.html

Go from number 43. Tolkien seemed like a pretty red pilled dude, identifying many subjects and trends discussed here at the chateau, although it’s probably more that society in general was much more red pilled than we are today by way of not opting to put on its own blinders.

The Great Men of the past were more redpilled than the Weak Manlets of the present, because they were smarter and wiser, but also because they lived during times when their homogeneously glorious White society wasn’t actively crushing crimethinkers. First, here’s Tolkien on the danger posed to men of befriending women before be-fucking them:

‘Friendship’ then? In this fallen world the ‘friendship’ that should be possible between all human beings, is virtually impossible between man and woman. The devil is endlessly ingenious, and sex is his favourite subject. He is as good every bit at catching you through generous romantic or tender motives, as through baser or more animal ones. This ‘friendship’ has often been tried: one side or the other nearly always fails. Later in life when sex cools down, it may be possible. It may happen between saints. To ordinary folk it can only rarely occur: two minds that have really a primarily mental and spiritual affinity may by accident reside in a male and a female body, and yet may desire and achieve a ‘friendship’ quite independent of sex. But no one can count on it. The other partner will let him (or her) down, almost certainly, by ‘falling in love’. But a young man does not really (as a rule) want ‘friendship’, even if he says he does. There are plenty of young men (as a rule). He wants love: innocent, and yet irresponsible perhaps.

FYI, Tolkien and CH are on the same page. Here’s an old Chateau post about the cruel impositions of impossible friendships between men and women.

The reason for the post title is this bit by Tolkien where he warns against pussy pedestalization.

There is in our Western culture the romantic chivalric tradition still strong, though as a product of Christendom (yet by no means the same as Christian ethics) the times are inimical to it. It idealizes ‘love’ — and as far as it goes can be very good, since it takes in far more than physical pleasure, and enjoins if not purity, at least fidelity, and so self-denial, ‘service’, courtesy, honour, and courage. Its weakness is, of course, that it began as an artificial courtly game, a way of enjoying love for its own sake without reference to (and indeed contrary to) matrimony. Its centre was not God, but imaginary Deities, Love and the Lady. It [pussy pedestalization] still tends to make the Lady a kind of guiding star or divinity – of the old-fashioned ‘his divinity’ = the woman he loves – the object or reason of noble conduct. This is, of course, false and at best make-believe. The woman is another fallen human-being with a soul in peril. But combined and harmonized with religion (as long ago it was, producing much of that beautiful devotion to Our Lady that has been God’s way of refining so much our gross manly natures and emotions, and also of warming and colouring our hard, bitter, religion) it can be very noble. Then it produces what I suppose is still felt, among those who retain even vestigiary Christianity, to be the highest ideal of love between man and woman. Yet I still think it has dangers. It is not wholly true, and it is not perfectly ‘theocentric’. It takes, or at any rate has in the past taken, the young man’s eye off women as they are, as companions in shipwreck not guiding stars. (One result is for observation of the actual to make the young man turn cynical.) To forget their desires, needs and temptations. It inculcates exaggerated notions of ‘true love’, as a fire from without, a permanent exaltation, unrelated to age, childbearing, and plain life, and unrelated to will and purpose. (One result of that is to make young folk look for a ‘love’ that will keep them always nice and warm in a cold world, without any effort of theirs; and the incurably romantic go on looking even in the squalor of the divorce courts).

The bolded parts are crucial. Pussy pedestalization, contrary to what White Knights for Her Faire Maiden profess as the benefits of their beta male worldview, can actually make a man more cynical about women, because he has her propped on a queenly throne for which she is ill-suited by the nature of her fallen sex to occupy.

Bonus Tolkien! The man expounds on sluts, careerist gogrrls, female practicality (and aversion to romanticism), the allure of badboys, and women’s greater predilection for monogamy.

You may meet in life (as in literature¹) women who are flighty, or even plain wanton — I don’t refer to mere flirtatiousness, the sparring practice for the real combat, but to women who are too silly to take even love seriously, or are actually so depraved as to enjoy ‘conquests’, or even enjoy the giving of pain – but these are abnormalities, even though false teaching, bad upbringing, and corrupt fashions may encourage them. Much though modern conditions have changed feminine circumstances, and the detail of what is considered propriety, they have not changed natural instinct. A man has a life-work, a career, (and male friends), all of which could (and do where he has any guts) survive the shipwreck of ‘love’. A young woman, even one ‘economically independent’, as they say now (it usually really means economic subservience to male commercial employers instead of to a father or a family), begins to think of the ‘bottom drawer’ and dream of a home, almost at once. If she really falls in love, the shipwreck may really end on the rocks. Anyway women are in general much less romantic and more practical. Don’t be misled by the fact that they are more ‘sentimental’ in words – freer with ‘darling’, and all that. They do not want a guiding star. They may idealize a plain young man into a hero; but they don’t really need any such glamour either to fall in love or to remain in it. If they have any delusion it is that they can ‘reform’ men. They will take a rotter open-eyed, and even when the delusion of reforming him fails, go on loving him. They are, of course, much more realistic about the sexual relation. Unless perverted by bad contemporary fashions they do not as a rule talk ‘bawdy’; not because they are purer than men (they are not) but because they don’t find it funny. I have known those who pretended to, but it is a pretence. It may be intriguing, interesting, absorbing (even a great deal too absorbing) to them: but it is just plumb natural, a serious, obvious interest; where is the joke?

They have, of course, still to be more careful in sexual relations, for all the contraceptives. Mistakes are damaging physically and socially (and matrimonially). But they are instinctively, when uncorrupt, monogamous. Men are not. …. No good pretending. Men just ain’t, not by their animal nature. Monogamy (although it has long been fundamental to our inherited ideas) is for us men a piece of ‘revealed’ ethic, according to faith and not to the flesh. Each of us could healthily beget, in our 30 odd years of full manhood, a few hundred children, and enjoy the process. Brigham Young (I believe) was a healthy and happy man. It is a fallen world, and there is no consonance between our bodies, minds, and souls.

A realtalker like Tolkien, if he lived today, would be banned from so many colleges and charged with violating so many feminist safe spaces that he’d land on the SPLC’s hate watch list. Which should tell you something. (Specifically, 2016 America is a shamefully effete den of faggotry and cuntery.)

Read Full Post »