Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Girls’ Category

This hamsterbation on Jizzebel is a couple years old now but it may have broken an all-time record for number of CH readers who forwarded it requesting a satisfying takedown. All you have to do is read the title to know you are about to enter… The Hamster Zone. (At this point you visualize a hamster wheel spinning through outer space.)

What kind of guy does a girl who looks like Lena Dunham ‘deserve’?

What kind of apex predator can turn down sinking his teeth into that juicy bait?

The “””article””” is about that insipid show Girls (has it fallen off the air yet?) and specifically about the episode when lumpy moocow Lena Dunham’s character gets into a relationship with an older, handsome doctor.

Yeah, try to contain your credulity.

Apparently, feminists are offended (what else is new?) that some viewers have expressed the doubleplusungood opinion that Dump-ham didn’t deserve the blind good doctor.

As Will Munny said to Little Bill before shooting him dead: “Deserve’s got nothin’ to do with it.”

No woman, or man, “deserves” a certain class of lover. Anyone who says that (and it’s mostly women who say stuff like this) is intoning a palliative for her bruised ego. Everyone has a value on the sexual market, and if you want better choices of partners you have to work to make yourself more valuable.

asdf comments:

The key takeaway from this Girls episode is no matter how much of a loser a woman is she can sleep with top quality men simply by lowering the price enough.

Not really. Girls is unrealistic. A fantasy itch for Lena. IRL, a 4 like Dunham doesn’t get sex from handsome doctors, let alone commitment. There is this meme floating around the omegasphere that all kinds of ugly and fat and old and thunderously-thighed women can get sex from alpha males at the drop of a hat, but that is a fevered concoction badly extrapolating from a loose interpretation of the functioning of the dating market. Men, especially White men, and particularly popular White men, do discriminate when choosing which women they will bang, and their discrimination will become more intense, violating all sorts of EEOC laws, when considering a woman as a long-term girlfriend or wife prospect.

Lena Dunham is repulsive to most men with options, and she will be passed over by those men for sex with prettier women, even if it means the men pay a higher price in energy and time devoted to the pursuit of prettier girls. The only way the Lenas of the world can compete with better women is by slashing their prices so low that they are practically giving away their LSMV pussies. And a bargain bin price drop is no guarantee of sex for the bottom 10-20% of women who are so gross to look at that most of them won’t get any man’s attention, let alone an alpha male’s, with their legs wide open and a neon red vacancy sign pointing at their crotches.

This is a sexual market reality that trips up a lot of bitter men who have a weird need to imagine women have it incredibly easy and men must do all the lovelorn suffering. The dregs of womanhood will suffer incel spells, and longer insol spells, although the frequency of dry spells and the duration of each dry spell will be generally less frequent and shorter for women than they will be for men of equal low mate value.

Another sex-based distinction is that women will better tolerate periods of sexlessness than will men, while men will better tolerate periods of lovelessness than will women (as long as the lovelessness is substituted with casual sex).

Now this is not to say that women, ON AVERAGE, don’t have an easier time than do men getting sex when they need it. While both men and women are discriminating in their mate and marital choices, women can afford to be more discriminating pre-sex, because the average woman’s sex is worth more than the average man’s sex. But that’s where a lot of men and women have their perspectives skewed — a man’s worth to women is not his sex so much as it is his *commitment* and *survival utility*. The woman who can extract commitment from an alpha male is a winner. The woman who can only get pumped and dumped by desperate goons is a loser. And she knows it.

So, no, the Lean Dunhams of the world are not getting banged out by high status docs, and they certainly aren’t getting proposals from them. Instead, the Lena Dunhams are dumpster diving with dirty, socially maladroit, dull, whiny milquetoasts.

And deserve’s got nothin’ to do with it.

Read Full Post »

A reader alerted the CH audience to an excellent write-up by a seduction forum member, The Thin Man, titled “Woman’s 3 Fantasy Archetypes“. The archetypes the author describes specifically refer to “fantasy sexual scenarios”, but they sound similar to the femme fatale personality archetypes discussed here at the Chateau.

By understanding women’s archetypical sexual fantasies, and by identifying which fantasy animates a particular woman, a man can tailor his seduction sales pitch to better match a woman’s deepest desires.

Archetype 1) Pretty Pretty Princess- In the PPP scenario the woman’s desire is to be transformed by her sexual connection to a powerful man. The most common and foundational version of this sexual scenario is the Cinderella Fairy Tail. Cinderella is a scullery maid whose inner secret class and beauty are revealed through a super natural Fairy God Mother make over and a romantic evening with a good looking, rich and powerful man… Kissing and magic shoe shopping transform her into a princess.

The transformative archetype is why the part of Pretty Woman where Richard Gere buys the dresses for Julia Roberts, is so sexy to women… She is transformed from a prostitute, with a secret heart of gold, into an elegant socialite, who is so exquisitely sensitive that she cries at Italian operas! […]

The PPP is most attracted to highly self-developed men, because she literally wants to lose herself in your world. If she is whisked away on your horse, motorcycle, pirate ship, or limo… She must put herself in your hands, change her cloths hair and manners to match your world… This mean what happens next is up to you, she is rendered open and compliant. Because the Pretty Princes is aroused by the emotional rush of the giving over her self-transformation to a man, she is the most vulnerable of the three archetypes…The Princes does not risk her body, she risks her identity.

The PPP female fantasy archetype is held by women who most desire extreme sexual/personality polarity in their relatonships. They want to feel 100% woman with a man, and to achieve this they will execute a few feints in the opposite direction to test your fortitude to stay in the hunt and bend her to your will. Leading, giving directions, making demands, creating scenarios, emphasizing sex differences, and role playing are all effective seduction and romance techniques on the PPP girl.

The Amazonian Alpha and The Gold-digger are the two types of women most susceptible to cultivating PPP fantasies. These two female archetypes, each strong in their very non-feminist, but exceedingly feminine ways, are the women who crave a man stronger than them with whom they can finally feel 100% the woman they want to be.

Archetype 2 Over Come with Passion- The 3 sexist words in the English language to an OCP are… It Just Happened… Passion women have a lot to say and unlike the girly purr of a Pretty Princes, it tends to be pretty declarative, “We just could not help ourselves and tore each other’s cloths off… We were like animals…I could not help it… I never do anything like this…We were in public… Other people might have seen… We are practically strangers… Oh god this is so fucking HOT…”

Passion woman require the strongest masculine frame from you because their sexual scenario is about letting go of their inhibitions, they are aroused by transgression and risk. She is a little frightened by the intensity of her own desire and what she might do to satisfy it. She needs to trust you with that. This is why the OCP seduction is all about passing shit tests and trading barbed comments. Each time she tests your frame and it stands up, it increases the sexual tension. She needs a man that can handle her emotion/passion who is strong and trustworthy enough for her to be able to let go of her controlled social veneer and let her true animalistic passion out.

The OCP fantasy girl is likely an Eternal Ingenue. This type is charming, psychologically manipulative, often quite pretty, and occasionally slutty (while expertly concealing her sluttiness to less experienced men). The Thin Man is right about this girl: She is a master of the shit test and beta bait, and won’t relent qualifying you, which will usually trip up betas. The Eternal Ingenue is always seeking the “perfect romance”, and this is why she exhibits a predilection for fantasies involving passionate escalation that fills her with hope her search for the ideal lover could be over.

If you balk at grabbing girls and violently kissing them at unauthorized moments, then you will fail with the OCP ingenue.

Archetype 3 Submission Fantasy- Many woman have a variety of submissive fantasy scenarios, but whether they are imagining bondage, rape, coercion, discipline, being a pet animal, or spanked like a naughty school girl, all submissive fantasy has one thing in common. She is not in charge… And so does not have to be responsible for the sex act… I am not a dirty like that, he made me do it… I was tied up…and uh… I loved it.

Submission women have found a loop hole that removes their ASD. How can I be being slutty if I was handcuffed to the bed… For many woman their innate sexual resistance is at war with their desire. Their sub conscious fixes the problem with scenarios where their volition in the sex act is somehow compromised. This is the key to Submission woman… They are not fundamentally about the spankings or the handcuffs or the rough sex… although it is likely they will enjoy some or all of these things; Submission Women fundamentally crave being told what to do. The way to tease out submission fantasy is to tell her to do something and see how she reacts. I usualy start with, “ Sit here… and let me look at you,” said with a strong contained sexual state and a closed mouth smile.

Ah, the submission fantasy. All women have submission fantasies, to a lesser or greater degree, but some women craft their identity around them. The candidate archetype most likely to have submission fantasies is the Waif/Neurotic.

The Waif Neurotic is dangerous because she is emotionally manipulative through use of her vulnerability and commitment avoidance. A vulnerable, pretty girl playing hard to get is kryptonite to naive men. She is a master at the art of the push-pull, capable of driving men insane with her opacity and her mixed messages. For this reason, game tactics that “flip the script” work quite well on her.

The Waif-Neurotic often has submission fantasies because she craves what she hardly every experiences: a cocky, aloof man who won’t fall for her shit and who won’t beg her for signs of reciprocal romance. All she knows is that men dance to her tune, and she would kill for a challenge once in a while. In the act of submitting to a ZFG man she finds release from her romantic ennui, and for the first time in her life falls in love… with no psy ops strings attached.

***

Agent X adds,

An interesting follow-up would be the proclivities of these archetypes to cheating….and how to keep her faithful in a relationship.  Number 2, in particular, seems like a thrill junkie that is eventually going to end up in bed with the mailman unless that addiction to “ooooh..what am I even doing??” isn’t satisfied by some kind of risky/public sex life.

Number 1 would seem to be safe as long as Prince Even More Charming didn’t come along, but I suppose that’s basic hypergamy.  However, since her fantasy involves transformation and some kind of “story”, it would seem she’d be far less likely to slink into the bar broom closet with Chad on a business trip.

Number 3 seems to be the least naturally inclined to cheating.  A basic level of frame would seem to keep her happily in her place submitting to her man.

Overall, Number 2 seems to be the one least likely to remain faithful long term.  If your game involves relatively young divorcees or naughty housewives, it would seem your playbook is simplified a bit.  I-Don’t-Know-What-We’re-Doing Game.

Yes, #2 — the OCP (Overcome by Passion) woman — is the greatest infidelity risk.

Here’s a serviceable CH Maxim (that would be less salient for men with game):

Maxim #31: The faster a woman falls into bed, the faster she’ll fall into another bed.

Read Full Post »

This is an open letter to a loser in love, a beta male who has become bitter about women through repeated romantic failure. You find yourself here, at the Chateau, seeking answers. I am your Prophet and because you are in the Flock I will share with you my field-tested wisdom.

I say this with no malice but you will not like it. But I am going to say it anyway because it is the truth and that’s what you’re looking for. You are projecting all of the characteristic traits of a LOSER. You want to associate with LOSERS for succor, because they don’t threaten the comforting bubble of your whiny persecution complex. You complain about your health, money, job, height, weight, datelessness. You complain that you’re being forced to dance like a monkey for girls. You look in the mirror and complain that you aren’t a Hollywood hunk, and you use this as an excuse for your failure to act with the women you desire. You complain about everything!

This is the key to understanding your problems with women.

Men don’t complain, they ACT. A woman wants to give herself to a man who emanates power and decisiveness and brass balls. A man who says “It’s my way or the highway, baby!” A man with no money, who is fat, who is stupid, who is clueless in every way EXCEPT that he radiates those zero fucks given alpha attitude vibes will get laid all the time.

You bitch about this jerkboy antagonist so you know that this happens. You’ve seen it happen. And the jerk doesn’t just bang out club skanks either. Cute, confident SWPL chicks get horny in the presence of such power. Even a feminist ideologue will beg such a man to fuck her up the ass just to have him pay attention to her for a minute.

Loser in love, your attitude sucks. If you want to start fucking hot girls with sexy bodies, be a MAN. The key to power is not cash or looks or cars or any of that conventional crap you read about in Maxim. Those things are incidental and are only important insofar as they alter your state of mind. The mind is the ultimate weapon. The power is within you. All you have to do is decide to tap it.

Read Full Post »

We’ve all heard the story by now: Ashley Madison, the website that claimed to help cheating spouses hook up with each other in complete discretion, was hacked. The hackers released a huge user data dump and it was revealed that 90-95% of AM’s actual users were male, and the remaining were mostly fake female profiles.

Ashley Madison was a scam. But anyone who has the least understanding of sex differences would not be so gullible to think that there are just as many married women interested in anonymous internet sexual liaisons as there are married men interested in the same. Apparently, there are so few married women willing to go online specifically to find an extramarital lover that Ashley Madison could barely crack the 1,000 men:1 real woman ratio.

This is not to say that married women aren’t infidelity risks. But when women, legally taken or otherwise, want to have an illicit affair, their preferred method of target acquisition is a logged-off, face-to-face whirlwind romance, not a lifeless keyboard hunt for a collaborator who will make her feel like the whore she’d rather forget about herself.

A reader writes,

Can hypergamy explain [Ashley Madison’s fake female profiles]? One way to interpret that is, “women have no qualms about leaving their husbands”.

That’s one reason. The dearth of live wives seeking extramarital affairs on Ashley Madison is a consequence of:

  1. the nature of women to prefer their seduction be veiled behind flirtatious feints and parries (as opposed to arid, conspicuous match-ups with equally debased men)
  2. the disposition of wives to simply leave their husbands when they want to start new romances (husbands — and single men in relationships — can better tolerate balancing illicit lovers with a wife or steady girlfriend, even over long periods of time).
  3. the fact that women are not as promiscuous as men.

These are the big three explanations for AM’s 95% man/4.9% fake woman ratio. A fourth explanation — that going online for the explicit purpose of finding a sex partner in crime — is too much for most women’s anti-slut defenses. I suspect the Ashley Madison creators knew this, and figured that the male urge for poosy variety is so strong they could get away with scamming millions of men with impunity. They were right.

Read Full Post »

Dr. Giggles draws an astute analogy between the snarky “gotcha questions” that are the empty-headed, but rhetorically potent, semantic weapons of shitlib journalists advocates and the game concept of Beta Bait, which is a form of courtship test that women subconsciously use to smoke out supplicating, sexually thirsty beta males.

It’s amazing how Game is an integral part of a politician’s repertoire. The shitlib’s comments on David Duke wasn’t the only one Trump had to sidestep during the interview. They tried to get him on everything from his personal religious beliefs to his opinions on old controversial topics like Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill. DT didn’t take the bait….Which made me realize these gotcha questions are the same thing as Beta Bait!

Precisely. This is why it’s fair to say male shitlibs are wonanly: they attack using the verbal tactics preferred by women. Low T does that to a man.

The shitlib reporter hit Trump with the dating trap equivalent of a girl asking a man if he’s dating anyone else. “Donald, are you seeing David Duke, or any other proudly White supporters? Because if you are we can’t keep dating.”

Trump handled the David Duke question with his usual ZFG alpha male aplomb. “If it makes you feel better, sure I’ll do that for you…” is a huge neg. He basically called the reporter a wussy who needed a better man to stroke his delicate schoolgirl ego.

Neutralzing shitlib journalist beta bait is the same as neutralizing beta bait from women: Ignore it and plow into your favored topic, or reframe it as evidence of a character deficiency of your interlocutor. Either way, remember rule #1: NEVER APOLOGIZE. This includes never acting defensively, or butthurt with the accusation, or offended that your honor has been besmirched. Own the room, own conversation, own your antagonist.

Shitlib: “Do you agree that this latest tragedy of two white reporters shot dead means that we need stricter gun control?”

A Soldier Of Trump: “That’s interesting. Do you think a gun wrote the killer’s anti-White racist manifesto?”

If you can game women, you can game the leftoid media. If you can game the leftoid media, you win.

Read Full Post »

The Reactionary Tree (Twatter handle @ReactionaryTree) created a trolling campaign that combines White nationalism with Game. Tinder is the medium of choice for the beta testing stage of White Nationalist Game (WNG).

The line used to pick up girls on Tinder is simple, and unambiguous (and goes by the 14/88-evocative name “The 14 Words”).

“We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children.”

(The proper noun capitalization of “White Children” elevates this line from mere troll to art form.)

The responses — gathered at 8chan /pol/ — from attractive girls are, perhaps unsurprisingly, very positive. Or at the least very intrigued. (And in the arena of seduction, making a girl curious about you is as good as a win.)

You’ll notice in the above that the man’s reply is much shorter than the woman’s. Laconic Jerkboy Game rape!

Chicks dig a man who makes demands.

Never trust a woman who hates kids. That goes double for white women who only profess love for kids of other races.

“To show importance. With intrigue.” 😆

Is anyone surprised that an antiracism liberal chick doesn’t want kids? I’m heartened every time I hear one of these conformist dolts swear her everlasting childlessness. Clean out the gene pool of their kind.

This girl qualifies herself HARD. It’s but a short hop to the bedroom when a girl qualifies herself so vehemently to your White standards.

I predict this convo above will excite a few readers to 100+ comment marathons.

My sides… they’re splitting!

Agree and amplify: Game 101.

But this last one might be my favorite:

This post is like some syncretic intersectionality of major, if superficially disparate, Chateau themes.

White Nationalist Game may have been intended as a trolling operation with high comedic value, but in fact many of the responses to it from lovely White women have shown that there’s real Game applicability to mine. WNG demonstrates the value of:

  1. short and sweet replies to girls
  2. never apologizing for your bold anti-sjw pronouncements
  3. qualifying girls
  4. agree&amplify
  5. having a ZERO FUCKS GIVEN alpha male attitude.

How about that. Game can save a future for White Children!

Read Full Post »

Nothing.

Or, more precisely, less than nothing. She became unhappier.

The husband bent over backwards to fulfill his wife’s every demand, and the result is tragicomically predictable: gina tingles extinguished.

For the past year or so, my husband has ceased to be able to turn me on, to the point where I am almost repulsed by our lovemaking. Recently, I broke down and told him everything. Since then, he has done everything in his power to get us back on track. The problem is now me! Even though this is all I’ve wanted, I can’t bear to be touched in certain areas.

Never mind the couples therapist answer. As per usual for the quality of output typical of this field of inquiry, it’s garbage. A commenter’s sarcastic jab gets it more right: “I love you, but I’m not in love with you.”

Ok, just to torture the CH reading audience, here’s a sample of the couples therapist’s answer (a woman, natch):

This “hot potato” syndrome is not uncommon: one partner has an issue, but once he throws it off, the other catches something too hot to handle. In many ways, it is a good thing that your husband is responding so energetically to your plea for change, and you did an excellent job of moving beyond what had become a long-term impasse.

Yes, clearly what the husband needs to do is more of what didn’t work at all.

For example, you say you don’t like to be touched in certain places, so the exact details of this must be gently communicated to him, and he needs to be shown exactly what you would prefer.

As the feminist sages tell us, women are really turned on by having to read an instruction manual to their men on the proper use of their bodies during lovemaking.

You have done very well so far – be brave enough to address the next steps, which are largely about better communication.

“Better communication” to solve all your relationship problems! Empty platitude, the stock in trade of marriage counselors everywhere. The unhappy wife wrote to the worse-than-useless psychotherapist shell entity informing her STRAIGHT UP that she told her husband everything, and he did everything he could to meet her demands. What part of that suggests this relationship needs to be addressed with “better communication”? Sounds like they were communicating their marriage to an early bed death!

I shouldn’t be surprised anymore, but the alacrity with which marriage and couples counselors and creeeeeeedentialed “psychotherapists” resort to droning bromides devoid of any explicit advice that might prove useful to saving relationships but carries the baggage of gently disturbing the gentle egos of gentle wives with gently feminist views about the moral supremacy of the female prerogative and the assumption of the male’s automatic fault in any scenario stuns even experienced observers of the junk therapist scene such as yours truly.

This couple deserve better advice than what a one Pamela Stephenson Connolly can offer them. CH to the rescue…

To the wife: First, make sure it isn’t some serious physiological issue, like CVD or something that could affect your sexual response. For that, see a medical doctor, i.e. a real doctor. But, odds are it isn’t a medical problem.

The way to bet is that your husband is a beta male — that is, dependable, reliable, generous, deferential… and utterly unsexy — and that his beta maleness got worse the longer your marriage went on. It’s not uncommon for men to get soft in body and attitude once they’ve settled into the marital comfort zone.

If this is the cause of your turtling sexuality, I’m afraid anything you do could only make matters worse. This is because there is a natural disconnect in your female brain between what actually turns you on and what you think SHOULD turn you on. You will, therefore, be unable to give your husband any advice that would work.

To the husband: STOP doing what you’re doing, and do the opposite. Instead of appeasing your wife, ask her to do things for you. No, DEMAND of her those things. Stop supplicating, and instead assume that you are God’s gift to womankind and can do no wrong. Apologize for nothing, make no excuses for her. Be unpredictable. Leave her for a spell, preferably unannounced. Tease her, poke fun at her, squeeze her hip fat with a disapproving glare, flirt with other women as she watches. In sum, initialize the first sequences of Dread Game.

After a few weeks of this wifely romantic reprogramming, grab her when the mood hits you, and start tearing off her clothes, oblivious to her mewls of protest. If your psychological preparations have been successful, she will relent and shake off an orgasm like a dog shitting a peach pit.

If not, consider cutting her loose and saving your newfound self-confidence for another woman who will submit to your love in the way every man secretly desires a woman to do. Even the effete hipster manlets.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: