This is fun. Reader PA creates a useful reference list of shit that cuckservatives say.
“Sadly, most victims of black crime are other blacks.”
“Unions destroyed Detroit”
“I’m all for legal immigration, just not illegal immigration”
“America is safe and free thanks to our troops.”
“Only terrorists would have a reason to oppose the Patriot Act.”
“America is a nation of immigrants.”
“I don’t agree with everything [Buchanan/Coulter/CH/etc] says, but…”
“I’m not a racist but…”
“I don’t care if you’re black, white, green, or purple, but…”
“Edward Snowden is a traitor”
“I stand with Israel”
“Family values don’t stop at the Rio Grande”
“Putin is the new Hitler”
“There is no room for hate and bigotry in the Republican party”
“We must court the Latino vote to stay relevant”
A few more:
“the GOP needs a big tent philosophy”
“LIEBRULS are the real racists”
“we’ve forgotten the lessons taught to us by Dr Martin Luther King, Jr”
Readers are encouraged to add to the “Shit Cuckservatives Say” list. CH will update the SCS list as contributions roll in, with the goal of making it a one stop reference shop — with a dedicated page at the masthead of Chateau Heartiste — for other blogs to link at their leisure.
The mockery of venal, pusillanimous cuckservatives will continue until testosterone levels improve.
My father’s grave
my daughter’s womb
Please take them both
and seal my tomb.
A reader, German Viking, explains the provenance of the second photo:
This photo was from a story on American and European women going to African and Caribbean countries for sex holidays.
What I really liked about this “Ameriqua, Then and Now” contrast was how it seems in the 1950s photo the handsome family is a metaphor for their nation, happy and full of promise for the future as they walk confidently toward the viewer.
In the second photo, the couple walks away from the viewer, a metaphor for an America receding, turning her back on her people, full of fatty desperation and, well, Africa.
The Dissidenti™™ and their frazzled hall monitors buzzsaw with talk about “cuckservatives.” It’s the shiv du jour, you see. As shivs go, it is in this ‘umble narrator’s opinion one of the more lethal of the semantic shanks employed by dark realists.
Lovers and haters of the Cuck Shiv gird for battle (well, the haters girdle for battle). The wielders love the twist of their shiny new toy. The haters brace defensively, shielding vitals. As well they should. CH commenters wonder, not without historical wonderment precedent for questions of Realtalk™ provenance aligned with Chateau themes, was it Heartiste who coined the “cuckservative” scarlet C? Answer: I don’t know. The first mention of it here is dated 24 Jun 2015. I suspect Poasting Whytes were first in the field with their version. Perhaps the term was independently formulated by multiple parties, inspired to simultaneous Phoenixian birth by the polluted cascade of daily poz.
I can tell you this for certain: The term “cuckold”, and its related emotional resonance, was thrust rudely into the public consciousness and popularized right here, at Chateau Heartiste, long before the current fascination with the pregnant (heh) weight of the slur. Kneejerk anti-truthers and perplexed alt-rightists scoffed at first contact with Le Chateau’s musings on the metadeath genetic threat cuckoldry poses to men, but in time even they began to see the value of the concept as a right and proper fitting metaphor for supplicants and sycophants and self-sodomizers of various stripes, which of course means they understood on a sub-discourse level the biomechanic sexual market truth implied by the insult.
Very basically, the cuckservative is a white gentile conservative (or libertarian) who thinks he’s promoting his own interests but really isn’t. In fact, the cuckservative is an extreme universalist and seems often to suffer from ethnomasochism & pathological altruism. In short, a cuckservative is a white (non-Jewish) conservative who isn’t racially aware.
That’s a serviceable academic description. I prefer something a leetle more… pungent.
CH definition: A cuckservative is a cowardly pussy who sucks up to leftoid equalists for mercy and pisses himself when he gets accused of racism, sexism, or anti-semitism.
Corollary to the above CH definition: The cuckservative will throw his brother and his nation under the bus if it means he keeps his token status as cog in the Hivemind machine. Those cocktail parties aren’t going to attend themselves!
So what’s the difference between a cuckservative and a garden variety shitlib? Delayed reaction. The cuckservative may or may not be a true believer in reality-denying feminism or anti-white antiracism, but he sure as hell knows to stick his crabbed finger in the air to see which cheek he should spread for his equalist overlord’s strap-on.
Some common traits of the species homo homo cuckservative:
– is quick to jump down the throat of any Realtalker.
– distances himself immediately from any ostensible ally who lets slip a jarring sin against the Narrative.
– will never once, not once, do or say something brave in his life.
– is at heart the rear-end of a lemming herd. won’t take a stand (or a plunge) until the numbers safely allow him to do so.
– is ignorant of or afraid to confront racial, ethnic, tribal truths.
– would rather bear witness to national decline and dissolution and preside over gross injustice than be on record that there are consequential race and sex differences beyond skin color and genitalia.
– thinks the only difference between the sexes that is acceptable to utter in public is the male penchant for gags and buttplugs. (he also projects wildly)
– dreadfully fears social ostracism, rendering him politically impotent.
– will force himself to clap loudly for pre-op Bruce Jenner, to coo falsely over mystery meat infants, to nod soberly in agreement when the pay gap lie is mentioned yet again as gospel truth, to pretend that Michelle Obama is attractive, and to insist women’s soccer is just as thrilling to watch as men’s soccer (which is not much thrilling to begin with).
– Will give every shrieking leftoid the benefit of the doubt while reflexively questioning the motives of every ballsy Realtalker.
– will preface every feeble tiptoe into his own Realtalk wading pool with an ass-covering “To be sure…” or a spastic impromptu paean to Martin Luther King, Jr.
– backs down with a quickness at roundtable debates with aggressive liberals.
– the only topics on which he won’t back down are taxes on the oligarchs and fighting terrorists over there so we don’t have to fight them here (while insisting open borders are American as apple pie and that muslim dude who shot dead a platoon of Christian soldiers was really a victim of discrimination and now, now, let’s not get crazy and question our shared enthusiasm for increasing Diversity™ in the military).
– will intone “diversity is our strength” while commuting home to an upscale gated community that is 98% White and 2% East Asian.
– exclaims “content of our character”, “fighting for freedom”, “blacks kill other blacks more than any other race”, and “hispanics are natural conservatives” without a hint of ironic detachment.
– has probably sexually molested a young boy sometime before his political career took off.
Cuckservatives are even more loathsome than true blue leftoid believers in the antiwhite progrom, because at least you can say the latter are loyal to a personal, if mortally twisted, ethos. The cuckservative is loyal to nothing but personal aggrandizement. The cuckservative so easily betrays his stated principles because, in fact, he has no principles. He is a globocorporate transnational post-american striver SWPL just as much as any of his ultraliberal co-evals, minus the overt eagerness for estate taxes and nationalized healthcare, and he’ll be damned if he’ll let some flyover smart-ass with an eye for both the big picture and the demonic detail to destabilize his easy-livin’ sinecure.
Given this list of characteristics, the “cuckold” root of the cuckservative metaphor is exceedingly apt. The cuckservative is, in habit of mind and sometimes in practice, that pathetic white man with noodle arms and crusted tear tracks sitting hunched on a stool in the corner of his bedroom watching, with willing fervor, his ecstatic white wife get pounded into post-white release by a buck nigra who eats his food and kicks his ass when the fridge needs refilling.
Yes, he’ll sit there nicely and putter with his pud while his wife (nation) gets banged out by another man (nonwhites, third world immigrants), as long as no one mistakes him for a small town prole who can’t tell the nose difference between a merlot and a pinot noir.
The cuckservative is cucked by antagonistic races, by antagonistic ideologies, by antagonistic corporate masters, by antagonistic talk show hosts, by antagonistic fat losers editorializing on the internet equivalent of teen beat gossip rags.
All he wants is their approval. A pat on the head from his sworn and intractable enemies. He swears he’ll keep his hands to himself and won’t cum until instructed to do so!
He is a low self-esteem, approval-seeking, whimpering cumlapper.
Amazingly, some cuckservatives are LITERAL CUCKSERVATIVES. Commenter james1 peruses a few famous biographies,
It’s interesting that even though the Boehner family and the Bush family are Republicans, they are bigger race mixers than the Kennedy family and the Clinton family are Democrats. Jeb Bush married a Mestiza who looks like the maid at your local Motel 6 or Days Inn and John Boehner’a daughter married a Jamaican pothead who is a wannabe Bob Marley.
Also the Republican John McCain adopted a very dark skin girl from Sri Lanka while JFK/Jackie O and Bill/Hillary who are Democrats never adopted any Nonwhite children.
Literal cuckservatives take their prostrate mewling before the antiwhite mob a little too seriously. But with a familial C.V. like, for example, Boehner’s or ¡Jabe!’s, is it a surprise that these self-abnegating genetic dead ends can’t think clearly on the subject of race, borders, nation?
As Occam’s Razor puts it,
On the other hand, the idea of whites acting as a group to secure their own interests terrifies the cuckservative. If you ever want to troll a cuckservative, just repeatedly use the word “white,” such as “this isn’t beneficial for the white community.” The cuckservative will be triggered immediately.
Nobody gets triggered like a nancygoy cuckservative gets triggered. Truly pathetic specimens of manhood. Wasn’t Boehner the puffboy who blubbered like a baby on stage recollecting his time in the bathhouses of the Castro District? With “leaders” and “representatives” like him, who needs an opposition party? If Boehner wants a real reason to cry, he should reflect on his daughter’s coal burning, doing her part to destroy an aesthetic, cultural, and genetic heritage 20,000 years in the making.
The Cuckservative: Re-raising equalist leftoids, because, hey, he’s got something to disprove.
Another sign that we are living in the r-selected age of a rising cad/tramp society (and a declining dad/damsel society) is the perception among women that having a low marital market value (LMMV) won’t hurt their long-term romantic prospects or rebound to their eventual unhappiness.
Reader duderino writes,
I broke it off with a fuck buddy a while back and she posted this popular meme, directed at me.
“I’m not the girl you’re going to marry, but I’ll be the one you’ll be thinking about 20 years from now when you’re having polite sex with your boring wife who fakes her orgasm to make you feel better about your receding hairline”
Try-Hard Level 99: Unlocked.
It’s weird to live in a time when girls brag about not being wife material. To me this (and the weird new pop songs) is a defense mechanism. Girls are giving it up without even a realistic chance of commitment now, and this was their post rationalization they had any power in the situation. In the time society tells them they are supposed to be empowered, most of them are feeling cheap and used.
That’s why women have to keep telling themselves they are expensive and factory fresh. The more reality harshes their mellow, the bigger the toke they have to take off the anti-reality blunt.
She wasn’t anything special, for the record.
Duly noted, and duly unsurprised. (You will hardly ever hear exquisitely beautiful and exceptionally self-possessed women trash talk in this manner. IM THE TOWN HO YOU’LL BE JERKING OFF TO IN TWENTY YEARS is the pained oinking of mediocre m’ladies and bitterbitch spinsters.)
A lot of this is sour grapes. A girl who has a shitty personality and little in the way of looks to compensate will find it psychologically comforting to pretend to herself and others that she never wanted those juicy wedding day grapes hanging just out of her reach. The best thing to do with girls like this is set phasers to “ignore”. The butthurt attention whore fears social isolation more than anything. If you want to twist the cosmic shiv a little before departing her presence, answer her womanly rant with a curt “gay”.
Donning the CH sociological omniscience cap for a moment, the turn by women away from selling themselves as worthy marital properties (and a concomitant turn by men away from selling themselves as dutiful provider betas) is a totally expected emergent sexual market phenomenon when marriage rates are down, age of first marriage is up, fertility is down, the Pill is up, and women can generally get by economically supporting themselves and their bastard spawn through SJW enforcer jobs or government largesse (itself redistributed from the efforts of reviled white beta males).
The devil is in the details. It’s the little things like this — woman crowing about their low MMV — which escape datanauts and statisticians combing through coarse sociological signposts for theories about where we are and where we’re all heading. In time, the little details of societal collapse add up to an epic story of shit, and an ending no one can confuse for fiction.
Reader ATC forwards a link to a Christianity Today article about the dark side (heh) of the Christian adoption scene. Apparently, there are lots of white Evangelical Christians who think it is their God-given calling to rescue the world’s orphans from lives of destitution, and race-cuck their own families in the process.
You have to read between the lines in theses stories for the full impact of what’s being discussed, but thankfully the context is so obvious that your inference skills don’t need to be particularly sharp.
At a church-sponsored adoption event, passionate servant-leaders unpack the clear and resounding call from the Holy Scriptures to care for orphans. Whether speaking one-on-one or in front of the larger group, they eloquently raise awareness of the plight of millions of orphans worldwide. They tell stories about the 100,000 kids in U.S. foster care who need permanent families.
Away from the crowd during a break, these same leaders talk with one another in muted tones about their real lives at home with kids whose backgrounds are filled with suffering, abuse, neglect, abandonment and deprivation.
AKA “normalcy” back in the adopted kids’ homelands.
They recount incidents of violence and hours-long raging.
Lil’ Shitavious slapping his white momma around.
They discuss the anguish of needing out-of-home care and the accompanying emotional agony and guilt. They lament the plight of healthier siblings [ed: white siblings] who aren’t getting the attention they need.
They note the stress that is added to their lives by extended family members who can’t or won’t understand and don’t help.
Here’s a clue: Psychologically normal people don’t like sacrificing their time, energy, and love for unrelated children who don’t look or act anything like themselves.
They nobly attempt to soft-pedal the grief they feel when their church families offer a quick “atta boy” but nothing more practical.
“atta boy” = “lord have mercy on them, that household is a banana republic”.
They talk about the strain in their formerly strong marriages, and the list goes on. Sleep deprivation. Secondary trauma. Hopelessness. Failure. And the feeling of being alone—so very alone.
Not to worry. Christ will reward you in the afterlife for throwing away your present-life on a doomed quest to recreate Mystery Meat Theater 3000 in your living room.
But they try to remain thankful to the One who will never leave them or forsake them.
Even as they are being left and forsaken. Triumph of delusion over stone cold experience.
They are trying to count it all joy.
They are begging God for help, for healing for their children.
And God replied, “I’m spiritual intervention. You want something more practical than that you’ll have to talk to the guy who runs biomechanical intervention. Be careful, though. He likes to cut deals.”
They pray for strength to get up and do it all over again—day after day.
I can sorta understand desperate childless couples putting themselves through this self-imposed hell, but couples with their own children, adding misery to their happiness and to their biological children’s happiness? wtf? That’s child abuse.
They don’t like who they become at times, when the stress and fatigue take their toll—but they see no other way forward.
The cops who patrol inner city ghettos agree with this sentiment.
They want to be filled with the fruit of the Spirit,
Turn your backs for a minute and your daughters might get filled with the fruit of the jungle spirit.
but survival mode is the order of the day, every day, and it can go on for years.
Suicidal Tendencies: When Separation Isn’t Possible.
While their church friends talk about sports and college and music, they talk about individualized education programs, 504s, therapists and psychiatrists.
And sleeping with their guns under the pillow.
All the adoptive families they know have versions of the same story.
The families may change but the dindu remains the same.
They love their children. They choose to love them with everything they’ve got. It would just be so much easier if they didn’t feel like they were doing it alone.
Translation: “You will love my adopted third worldlet with the same fervor as I love him, or you are evil. EVIL!”
But no matter how much they talk about their need for the help of the community around them, the help doesn’t come.
A player’s paradise — aka a cads and tramps society — would have distinguishing features that wouldn’t be found, or wouldn’t be quite as pronounced, in a beta male-ruled — aka dads and damsels — society.
1. More sexualized women.
Is T&A the order of the day? Do culture-amplifying mediums like advertising and entertainment try to get away with displaying the maximum amount of skin and minimum amount of clothing on their female messengers? Are women (especially women in the limelight) all too eager to comply with the zesty zeitgeist?
In a playa’s paradise, we can expect to find more sexualization of women because women will be more interested in short-term hookups with sexy, charming, dominant men. These men have dating market options, and as any man with options will do he’ll demand more sexual license and physical perfection from his considered conquests. Women will respond to this male-centric romantic preference by advertising themselves as sexual, sexy objects to be devoured in a bonerbath of contraceptively-safeguarded desire.
2. Less sexual dimorphism.
It seems counter-intuitive, but there is cross-racial evidence for the CH hypothesis that cad/tramp societies are less sexually dimorphic than dad/damsel societies. For instance, in the world’s OPP (Original Playa’s Paradise), Africa, the women are more masculine and less feminine than woman from dad/damsel societies. Even within the dad-centered West, a swing toward more cads/tramps is associated with less feminine (where feminine = coy, slender, and estrogenically curvy) women. Female athletes are the best example of this trend… all narrow boyhips, flat chests, and scowling countenances hitched atop glass-cutting manjaws.
Why? Best speculation: There are two processes happening that reinforce each other. One, girls with more masculine features and personalities tend, on average, to be more open to the idea of casual, NSA sex, and probably have, as well, stronger, more insistent, libidos than feminine women. Two, men seeking easy flings probably target, subconsciously, women with “sexually aggressive” phenotypic traits, and that may include women with bodies and desirous leers primed for piston-like pumping.
In a cad/tramp society, men will prefer good-to-go, low investment pussy properties, because there’s less paternity assurance (and less emphasis on paternity assurance by both sexes) and because there’s less expectation that any romantic liaison will lead to a long-term, sexually faithful, commitment. In a dad/damsel society, men are expected to commit before receiving the poon goodies, (and likewise women are expected to avoid riding the cock carousel before receiving that treasured commitment). Therefore, men under these conditions will prefer take-it-slow, high investment pussy properties, which means more feminine, prettier, coy women.
The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.
Feminism can be seen as both a happy allegiance to, and a bitter backlash against, a cad/tramp society. On the former, feminism advocates a social order that opens the short-term, sexual field to women, with the intent of allowing women the shameless pursuit of those few sexy, fly-by-night alpha cads who give them womb-shaking tingles. On the latter, feminism wishes to institute draconian, anti-male, anti-human rules of conduct that serve to straitjacket the romantic prerogatives of unsexy beta males. In this latter instance, the gimping of beta male courtship preferences — that is, the discouragement of beta males taking advantage of their sexual market strengths (shy, deliberate courting with long-term focus) — helps cad-chasing women avoid the awkward solicitations of any men other than those men who are skilled at the art of the approach.
4. Hatred of traditional sex roles.
A cad/tramp society should see more expressed hatred of the traditional sex roles that predominate in a dad/damsel society. This hatred will be found strongest among women who most benefit from the loose sexual and romantic expectations of a cad society: The middling 4s, 5s, and 6s who would rather enjoy five minutes of a higher value man scrubbing out their dirty dick holsters for a few weeks than the enraptured commitment of a lower value man offering financial and emotional commitment that these economically and egotistically self-sufficient women no longer need.
Cads themselves will also shit and piss on traditional sex roles, but they’ll mostly do this through their actions instead of the typical female strategy of verbal tumblrrhea designed to police thought boundaries and enlarge the conformist suck-up circle.
5. Hatred of beta provider males.
Concomitant with the above predicted observation, beta provider males will really take it on the chin. They are the biggest losers in a cad/tramp culture. Romantic failures, and hated for their romantic failure, beta provider males will have to find succor in waiting until their early 30s to marry a road-worn, cock-scarred cougarette on the make for a suburban sap she can latch onto for her obligatory 1.5 IVF-aided snot-nosed brats at the low low cost of once-a-year half-hearted birthday blowjobs.
6. More aggressive sexual signaling.
A cad/tramp society will teem with girls signaling their availability for hot sex from the right man. You would expect to see more tattoos, more body modifications, and more behavioral tics that transparently suggest the girl under consideration is DTF if you enter the correct all-access key code into her id-box.
Interestingly, on this matter, men will divide into two competing camps: The players and wannabes who emphasize their sexy male attributes at the expense of their latent romantic idealism, and the hardened betaboys who will cling ever tighter to their emotional tampon/orbiter game in the belief, usually mistaken, that at least one girl, at one point in their miserably incel lives, will tire of the cads and swoon for the beta’s earnest niceness.
7. Disproportionately higher STD rates among women.
A sexual market with cads and tramps at the top of the hierarchy would be sex-skewed in favor of the cads, for the simple reason that the female hypergamous impulse to mate with higher status men is more powerful and less malleable to compromise than the male impulse to fornicate with the prettiest girls. (In layman’s (heh) terms, men are more willing than are women to slum it once in a while.)
A consequence of female hypergamy is that once it is unleashed from cultural constraints, women will gravitate to a de facto polygyny, sharing the top 10-20% of men during their prime fertility years (15-25). What you’d find then, is a few cads spreading their venereal love to the larger number of women who lay with them. And that is what the data point to:
Overall prevalence of chlamydial infection was 4.19% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.48%-4.90%). Women (4.74%; 95% CI, 3.93%-5.71%) were more likely to be infected than men (3.67%; 95% CI, 2.93%-4.58%; prevalence ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.03-1.63). The prevalence of chlamydial infection was highest among black women (13.95%; 95% CI, 11.25%-17.18%) and black men (11.12%; 95% CI, 8.51%-14.42%); lowest prevalences were among Asian men (1.14%; 95% CI, 0.40%-3.21%), white men (1.38%; 95% CI, 0.93%-2.03%), and white women (2.52%; 95% CI, 1.90%-3.34%).
8. More women acting out like men.
Female teachers banging their underage and overhorny charges will be rampant in cad/tramp environments. So will women cursing like sailors, women posturing like drunken frat boys, women pretending to enjoy their slutty lifestyles, and women refusing the chivalric interventions of well-meaning old skool men.
Why bother cultivating the feminine traits when their usefulness has expired?
9. More men acting out like women.
This one is the mortal shiv in the heart of Western dad/damsel culture. What do you get when you (de)couple sexually focused, short-term thinking, masculine women with weepy, romance-starved, long-term focused male feminists?
The difference between manlets and manjaws is part motivation, part exogenous insult. Manjaws (unfeminine women) would suffer in a dad/damsel society where men were more discerning about which women they’d choose for commitment, but in a cad/tramp society vulgar, leg-spreading manjaws don’t take too big of a hit to their ability to find horndogs on the one-night-only prowl.
Manlets, in contrast, suffer a big hit whether they operate within a cad/tramp or a dad/damsel context. However, one could argue the hit they take is smaller in the dad/damsel milieu. So what motivates manlets in a cad/tramp society to stick to their feeble, flaccid guns? Perhaps their bitterness as SMV rejects creates a negative feedback loop exaggerating their impetus to unmanly posturing. Sort of like how a bullied kid will retreat deeper into solitude and fantasies of self-actualization.
But the reason may be more concrete than that psychological trawling. Post-America Manlettery (PAM!) could be the consequence of an all-out, all-points environmental estrogenic assault by the chemicals and Hivemind propaganda we all profoundly breathe and ingest on the daily.
Bottom line: Masculine women and feminine men are 100% bad box office. A 7-2 offsuit hand. A cosmic affront. A middle finger to the god of biomechanics. It won’t end well.
So, you tell the CH audience… are we living in a playa’s paradise?
(h/t peterike) At least the fattest one kept her dress down and spared us all an episode of PTSD.
It seems no commenters got the underlying message of this edition of “America, Then and Now”. The 1920s were a high (or low) water mark of sexual licentiousness and decadence in the US. There are those who argue that these decadence periods follow historical cycles. We may be at another peak (or trough) of sexual licentiousness and decadence now, in 2015 America. (The previous being the late 60s-early 70s.) Yet, the contrast between the 1925 photo and the 2014 photo couldn’t be starker. If the former is decadent, the latter is gutter filth.
Clearly, if there’s a poz cycle that operates on say, a forty-year cycle, the long-term trend over the accumulated poz cycles is towards ever-greater vulgarity. When some deep nadir in the poz cycle is achieved, the system will probably break into parts, rather than swing the poz pendulum back into anti-poz.