Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Love’ Category

The topic of this post comes via a 2014 study, so it’s possible it may have been written about already here at the Chateau. Regardless, it’s good enough to write about again and educate the newbs who are always stumbling into this coven of lovin’ and wondering with wide open eyes and whiplashed brains just how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Often it is claimed by catastrophically bitter feminist cunts that men love bitches such as themselves as much as women love jerkboys. This is a bluehaired lie. And now ¡SCIENCE! has arrived on the scene to ONCE AGAIN (i will never tire of this) gorge on the CH knob and validate my anti-feminist worldview: men don’t like crazy bitches unless those crazy bitches are sexy and willing to go all the way right away. What men like when they have their choice of vixens are nicegirls. Nice, feminine, natural hair-colored girls.

Scientifically, nice (heterosexual) guys might actually finish last. A study published in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin recently found that while men were attracted to nice-seeming women upon meeting them, women did not feel the same way about men.

[…]

The study examined burgeoning sexual interest and the participants’ feelings on the possibility of long-term dating with their new “partners,” and how those connected to their perceptions of a personality trait the study calls “responsiveness.”

In the study, responsiveness is defined as a characteristic “that may signal to potential partners that one understands, values and supports important aspects of their self-concept and is willing to invest resources in the relationship.”

Responsiveness, AKA appeasement. To put it a nicer way: approval seeking. To put it a psychotherapeutic way: External validation. To put it a PUA way: outcome dependence.

But it’s not as important of a factor when you first meet someone, according to the study. “Our findings show that this does not necessarily hold true in an initial encounter, because a responsive potential partner may convey opposite meanings to different people,” stated Birnbaum.

Overly responsive suitors can be perceived as manipulative suitors. Have you ever been creeped out by someone trying too hard to please you? That’s your mind-body axis telling you to distrust that person. This is particularly true for women and responsive men, because women have to be more on guard for men who just want to get them in the sack fast, and will tell those women whatever they think they want to hear to win their affection. Men, in contrast, don’t have to guard against responsive women because fast sex is an equally, if not more valuably, prized achievement as a committed relationship.

The researchers found that men who perceived possible female partners as responsive found them to be “more feminine and more attractive.” Past research suggests that physical cues of femininity stimulate sexual attraction because they suggest higher estrogen levels, better overall mate quality and solid reproductive health.

Nicegirls are more feminine than crazy bitches, and men prefer feminine women. Why would men perceive nicegirls as more feminine? Maybe because those girls aren’t busting their balls for propping up the patriarchy. Also, the default posture of women toward unfamiliar men is one of neutrality bordering on contempt. The responsive nicegirl therefore stands out as a real romantic prospect in a sea of resting bitch faces. And niceness is just more estrogen-y, which looks, sounds, and smells SO MUCH BETTER to men than does the caustic testosterone-y gogrrlism of your typical urban slore.

On the other hand, women didn’t necessarily perceive a responsive man as less masculine, but they also did not find a responsive man more attractive. What’s more, when women perceived their male partner to be responsive, they were less attracted to the man.

In other words, it appeared that in an initial encounter men liked nice ladies; women thought nice guys were kind of lame.

You have to attract women before you can have a relationship with women. Jerkboy attitude is necessary if not sufficient to lock down a quality (read: hot) nicebabe. The opposite is true for women: a bitchgirl attitude will make it harder for them to find a quality man.

The second study required participants to engage with either a responsive or unresponsive person of the opposite sex, then interact with them online while detailing a current problem in their life. The goal here was to remove the potentially confounding elements of live social interaction (smiling, physical attractiveness) to see if they could isolate how much responsiveness—or niceness—played into attraction.

Again, the men in the study thought responsive and attentive women were more attractive as potential partners, while women found men with those same traits to be less desirable.

And yet every couples therapist in the degenerated West advises the opposite: that men should be MORE responsive and attentive to women. How many relationships would be saved, and lonely men and women rescued from romantic failure, if the Chateau was the only couples therapist in the world? I give and give and give, like the humanitarian I am, and yet all I get is grief from the gatekeepers of socially approved discourse. It wounds me deeply!

The third and final study presented in the paper sought to test specifically whether the mechanism by which “responsiveness” motivated individuals to pursue relationships was, in fact, sexual arousal. To do so, they replicated the second study, but added a specific measure of sexual attraction. They then found that when men found women to be responsive, it led to a heightened sexual arousal among men. That, in turn led to greater desire for a relationship.

The petaling pussy is always more enticing than the dormant pussy, all else about the pussies equal. Male arousal is primed for action when the pussy is within jizzing distance. (Female arousal is primed for action when the pussy has to close the jizzing distance.)

While the studies shed some light on why men find responsive women more sexually desirable, Birnbaum explains that researchers are still unsure why women are less sexually attracted to responsive strangers than men.

“Women may perceive a responsive stranger as less desirable for different reasons,” said Birnbaum in a press release. “Women may perceive this person as inappropriately nice and manipulative (i.e., trying to obtain sexual favors) or eager to please, perhaps even as desperate, and therefore less sexually appealing. Alternatively, women may perceive a responsive man as vulnerable and less dominant.”

All of the above, but mostly for the reason I’ve described at this blog: responsive niceguys betray a lack of romantic options, and since female desire is holistic rather than primarily visual as it is for men, a man without romantic options is very unsexy to women, who will assume his desperation is evidence of weakness and deficient character. Chicks dig non-responsive jerks because any man who can afford to be a jerk with women must have his pick of the clitter. And every woman wants to be the one who snags the man who can have any woman. Not to mention, a man successful with women will pass on his pussy-smashing genes to her sons (sexy sons hypothesis).

The hierarchy, from most romantically valuable to least romantically valuable:

  • Jerkboys (desired by all women, for sex and love, rarely dumped)
  • Nicegirls (desired by all men, for missionary sex and love, not as rare as jerkboys)
  • Bitterbitches (desired by some men, for kinky sex, if she looks hot)
  • Niceguys (desired by no women, except Wall victims, cougars, and fugs. as common as cat dander)

***

Anonymous objects to one implication of this study:

Kind of disingenuous. Nice girls win IF they are attractive. When feminists or women in general complain of men liking crazy women, it’s usually in comparison to average/ugly women. I used to complain of this in high school. I used to say all the guys like the crazy/mental girls. The real issue was they liked them because they were hot. The craziness was just extra.

No doubt the crazy bitches who get a lot of men have to be very hot to compensate for their shitty personalities. But nicegirls win against bitches when matched for looks. I would bet nicegirls even win when they are one SMV point lower in looks. Bitches only “win” when they are significantly hotter and sluttier than their nicegirl competition, but since there are at least as many hot nicegirls as their are hot bitches the point is moot, and we’re back to the original conclusion: nicegirls win, bitches lose.

The one countervailing factor that bitches use to their advantage is sluttiness. Nicegirls don’t do slutty, so they will lose the men just looking for an easy lay. Bitches can compete more effectively against nicegirls by advertising their willingness to fuck without strings attached. This is a potent defensive tactic, and one reason why women are the primary slut shamers in society.

Read Full Post »

The relevancy of this post will probably be moot by the time it’s published, but I’ve made some points about our current climate of anti-sex prudishness that deserve consideration, so here ya go.

I’m glad Trump came out in support of Roy Moore. The man’s travails — stoked to an incomprehensibly vitriolic froth by Nasty Womanhood, Inc and the Jewish Interest Media — are emblematic of the man-hating culture that suffuses us. Do I think it’s a leetle weird for a 30 year old man to actively seek to date late teenage girls? Sure, but it’s not criminal (not as long as AOC varies state-to-state from age 14 to 17….I can’t take a statutory crime seriously if all it requires is a hop across the state border to decriminalize the charge), and certainly not worthy of national coverage knowing that it would hardly have made the local news in the 1970s (which really could have been a millennia ago given how much American culture has changed since then).

30-year-old Roy Moore’s preference for teenage love isn’t a radical aberration or departure from the spectrum of normal male sexuality. It’s out on the tails of normal male sexuality, but not off the curve into abnormality where actual paraphilias (e.g., pedophilia, necrophilia, bestiality) exist. NEWSFLASH: Men prefer young women, at minimum younger women than themselves, and men with power and social status that are naturally attractive to women will be better able and willing to fulfill their desire. At the margins, this means there will be HSMV older men who will date 17 year old Southern Roses, and some of those men will be actively pursuing a marriageable young woman with plenty of residual reproductive value to provide him with the large family he wants.

Roy Moore has four children with his wife of forty years. As far as we know, he has been faithful to her the whole time, and she adores him. His wife is fourteen years younger than him. This indicates that his youthful exuberance pursuing teen girls was part of a conscious desire he had at the time to find his One True Girl and marry her.

As long as there are teenage women with shapely figures telegraphing the opening of their prime fertility windows….

Kim Kardashian at 14 years old

…there will be men of all ages ogling them. Some of those men will have the mate value and the immunity to social expectation to win one over as his own. Roy Moore’s preferences were within the sphere of normal, naturally evolved male sexuality. To dumbly conflate his dating history with that of pedophiles and pervert potted plant masturbators cajoling actress whores with a bit of the ol’ quim pro quo, is a slanderous joke and reveals a deep-seated discomfort with and spite toward the Darwinian contours of male sexuality and male romantic longing.

FYI it’s not all that unusual or uncommon for an adult man to get tripped up by the apparent age of an especially voluptuous teen woman. Unless a man is in the habit of asking all 0.7 waist-hip ratio women for their IDs, there’s a chance one of them might conceal being a barely legal vixen.

Related, some men (maybe Moore) either physically age more slowly or retain a light-heartedness of spirit that belies their age, which both makes them more attractive to and more attracted to younger women. It’s not the rule, but it’s a fairly notable exception.

Say what you will about Roy Moore, at least his girls agreed to date him (even if they retconned a discomfort 40 years later). The Synagogue of Seediness doesn’t bother with the formality of mutual agreement, they just passive-aggressively jam tongues down throats “to rehearse our lines”.

In sum, if you believe every recollected detail of the ancient allegations, only one woman at the time was underage (barely) when Moore asked her out on a date, shared consensual 2nd base foreplay with her, and drove her home when she wanted to leave. The rest of his “accusers” — aka bitter aged cows who regret not being the woman Moore married, all of whom with shitty personal relationship histories and connections to thecunt’s #SheMenstruated cat lady symposium, retconning their bloom of youth trysts with Moore into criminal acts — were legal age at the time of the alleged May-December violation of the feminist code of acceptable intersexual conduct.

You may think it’s icky for a grown man to consensually date barely legal teen girls, but that doesn’t make it criminal. There was a time when, while not quite the social norm, such couples weren’t all that unusual and nobody much blinked an eye when they encountered one. We all know of our own or someone else’s great-grandparents with big age gaps who started popping out kids when great-grandmama was seventeen.

I doubt Moore’s janey-come-lately accusers really were all that scandalized by his come-ons in 1977. Here’s a rule of thumb I use to determine the validity of a woman’s sexual misconduct accusation: If she waits more than ten years to tell anyone about it, she wasn’t all that bothered by the infraction when it occurred. If she waits forty years, it’s a political hit job exploiting a radically changed anti-sex feminist cunt climate.

But it is fair to ask why Moore would, if reports based on memories of contemporaries from forty years ago are accurate to the tiniest detail (they’re not), pursue questionable if mutually consensual age-disparate relationships with teenagers to the exclusion of older women, and risk the specter of social ostracism. Some say it’s because Moore was emotionally stunted and socially awkward —  a 1970s proto-sperg — who wanted a deferential and awestruck teenage woman for company unlikely to challenge his self-conception or strain his capacity for mature adult banter.

Maybe, but probably not. I think he just liked ’em ripely hot, and didn’t much care about “relationship complementarity” as de-sexed ür-bugman Will Wilkinson might put it. This notion, held dear by both white knights and feminists, that men who date younger women are secretly intimidated by strong, independent, empowered older women is why I say betacels and bitterbitches have a lot more in common than they’d willingly admit.

Psychologically emasculated white knights who gripe about “power imbalances” in the workplace between male bosses and female subordinates, or in society between older high status men and younger inexperienced women, can’t seem to fathom or accept the reality that female sexual desire is different than male sexual desire, and women are typically attracted to powerful men. Two to tango, chumps. Men are aroused to provide for and protect vulnerable, deferential women, and women are aroused by strong men to whom they can safely and happily defer. Even to whom they can submit. Perfectly equal relationships are also perfectly passionless relationships. Sexual polarity is the lube of love. Male power and female admiration provide the sexual frisson that magnifies feelings of love and creates a solid foundation up;on which to build up a lifelong commitment.

Other theories for Moore’s focus on finding a teen fiancee that I’ve read hold more weight for me.

From RedPillofHergest,

Old Judge Roy Moore had an eye for beauty. Unlike the Epstein Weiner Weinstein pedo cabal, I think Roy’s forays with teens were an attempt to secure prime nubile fertility while it was still pure. He was wife shopping. It is as though he could see that the slide the country had taken would lead to Tindersloots, and he needed to get to a girl before Regressive Ideology did. A legacy American boy raised in the proud South in the 50’s, he’d served his country, got his degree, established himself in his career and when he was ready to settle down, young adult women– especially those who had gone to college– had been marinating in the vitriol and effluvium of feminism, race equalism, free love, and miscegeny. Roy chose girls at their peak beauty, less educated than he, who swooned at his status. He didn’t get all rapey. It appears he was wife shopping. Of the allegations, only 1 girl said he did more than kiss her, and that one claimed only what may be described as light petting. When she wanted to stop and go home, Roy stopped and took her home. Most of the women said he read them poetry and played guitar. He was courting these women. When he found the right one, she was 14 years younger and has stayed with him for over 35 years.

Moore’s treatment is a case study in how post-America is hell-bent on pathologizing male sexuality (while simultaneously infantilizing female sexuality).

Character matters, and it looks to me that Moore’s accusers have the lowest of character, which rightly calls into question their veracity. Their low character doesn’t disprove their allegations, but it certainly is a leading indicator that they’re telling lies, or at best telling politically embroidered quasi-truths.

The best evidence we have that Moore’s accusers are at least partially lying to relive their golden youth and stick it to the Patriarchal White Man is that Moore has no history of chasing barely legal skirt in the years since SouthernRosegate. True pervs don’t instantly drop their habits like that.

Jerry Seinfeld openly dating a 17 year old when he was 39. Don’t you remember the condemnations from the Left? Neither do I. He was 7 years older than Moore who is being called a “predator” for the same thing.

-Bill Mitchell‏

Well, you know, (((comedians))) get a special dispensation. (For the record, I have no problem with Jerry Seinfeld dating a legal 17 year old hottie. Men work hard to acquire status, fame and power FOR JUST THIS SORT OF OPPORTUNITY.)

An insightful theory for Moore’s peculiar premarital tastes come from therebbeblog, who comments,

The Truth About Roy Moore

When I saw his bio this jumped out at me. He went to West Point. If you know West Point men, they are often the most frustrated SOB’s on Earth. They sometimes head down to NYC to meet women, but the school is physically isolated. They have no sex life. Moore went from there to ‘Nam (again, no sex life), then Law School (no women there in the 70s). Essentially, he was isolated from women for his entire adulthood. Clearly he spent years dreaming of nubile women and flew off the handle like someone just released from prison. Not discussed often, but veterans often get sexually dysfunctional like that.

Clearly this was just a phase caused by extenuating circumstances. He’s passed it. Are we going to punish military men who get pervy when out of service? Think sailors on leave. Ask them about Bankok. This is unserious.

He clearly turned his life around. There is one instance of him pinching a girl in the butt after marriage? But he seems to have gotten married and cleaned up his act. Christians in Alabama understand this. Character turnarounds like this are the basis of redemption in their faith. Hope he wins.

That’s one of the better analyses of Moore I’ve read. He had an epic case of blue balls, and he wanted that feeling of young love that was denied him for so long. Are we going to lynch the man for that? If so, then you may as well criminalize men and castrate us all, because our dicks and our hearts aren’t going to cooperate with the anhedonic low T androgynarchic shrewtopia the hag collective wants to impose on society.

The next #resistance narrative is taking shape. Already I have shitlib acquaintances telling me, “How is it Ok that Trump can get away with groping women but no one else can?” You knew this was coming. Frankenwinestein was the sacrificial lamb to the gods of NeverTrump.

I’m near certain that Dem leaders and Cuckryans sat down with Frankenstien and said “Look Al, the photo is bad, you’re gonna have to resign, but look at it this way, you’ll go down a martyr, we’ll use your sacrifice to take down Moore and Trump. This is how you can do the most good.”

It’s pretty clear to me that the leftoid fuggernaut, caught off-guard by Pedowood, scrambled to segue from Chosen perversion to smearing the good names of Gentile anti-establishmentarians. Jizz up the waters enough and people forget who the worst perps are.

That’s why I have been consistent in my assessment of these decades-old sexual harassment allegations: mostly a bunch of Regret Fling griping from post-Wall women with a few genuine victims sprinkled in to give the moral panic a veneer of legitimacy. NeverForget that the overwhelming majority of these sex abuse accusations have been leveled against male feminist shitlibs, so what we are seeing is a moral panic started by shitlibs and feminists that they are DESPERATE to enlarge beyond the scope of the ghetto of male shitlib perverts.

Libs trying to tie Trump to #MeToo should be made aware of their telling silence and support when Hillary was running smear campaigns against Bill Clinton’s accusers. And in Bill’s case, one of the women, Juanita Broadderick, has been saying since day one he raped her.

It would be funny if, after every GOP establishment eel turned on Moore and the combined force of the jewish interest media lobbed their artillery at him, he still won. Biggest middle finger to the Globohomo Uniparty and to Schoolmarm Feminism this side of Trump’s election.

***

The most revealing quote from the Bezos Post exposé on Moore was this,

…episodes [the women] say they found flattering at the time, but troubling as they got older…

Sez it all. WE’RE AT RETCON FIVE.

When you accept that the GOPe cuck elite really truly hate the heartland Americans they pretend to represent, you’ll understand their behavior and be able to predict their future actions. The Uniparty is real, and they are feeling the heat. Moore, please.

Read Full Post »

Another seven years of this glory left to go! It’s Hardening.

***

Here’s the very first post in which Trump is mentioned at Le Chateau.

Here’s the very first post (dated June 17, 2015) in which CH endorsed Trump for President. I was ahead of almost everyone but a few perceptive samizdat bloggers.

Read Full Post »

The Thousand Cock Stare is the vacant crazy-eyed unhinged look that women get when they’ve slutted it up too much and the cavalry of cockas have left psychic scars. It’s a dead womb walking sheen of the eyes that is similar in soul-skinning affect to the “thousand-yard stare” that soldiers manifest when they’ve spent too much time in the charnel fields.

Thankfully, there’s a beautiful inverse of the thousand cock stare that alights on lovely women who’ve devoted their hearts and parts to one man. That is the “thousand tingle ogle”. Any man who has seduced a woman to reckless love knows that look. It’s the look that is at once arousing and comforting to a man, for it says simultaneously, “she will gobble my knob, and no one else’s”. It’s the eyes of a woman who has wedded her lust to her love. Powerful stuff.

A perfect instance of the thousand tingle ogle was caught on camera after a major election win for the forces of Goodness and Whiteness. Count the tingles arcing across the insufferable void between them as pro-nationalist Austrian wünderkind Sebastian Kurz is admired by his girlfriend:

Trump gets that look from women a lot, too. It’s the ocular equivalent of “I’ll let him grab me by the pussy when we get home”.

Read Full Post »

STOP MASS IMMIGRATION

This video is the most effective bit of pro-White European COPROP I’ve seen to date. You don’t even see the colonizing hordes in the video…you don’t have to, because you know that’s the dark shadow that lurks in the background…and this artistic choice gives the video greater power. The evil is all around us, choking us like dirty air, driving us from our homes.

Unfortunately, I can’t hot link the video to WordPress, because Twatter has likely shadowbanned the account which pinned it. Catch it now before it too, like all the Great and Beautiful Truths, is stamped out by our perfidious overlords.

Here’s a link to the video on PewTube.

 

Read Full Post »

It’s good to be alpha. Women will let you do things to them that would make Harvey Weinstein fertilize the nearest potted plant.

Beta males should watch this video below for real world proof showing how cute, “good” girls honestly and naturally react in the company of an alpha male. What gets lost in the moral panic about famous men groping women is that, like Trump said, the women LET THEM DO IT. Ben Affleck is to women what a random HB10 is to men: a passcode that unlocks the sexes’ most primal desires.

If you walked up to a girl like that as a total stranger and, after introducing yourself, drunkenly grabbed her all over like Affleck is doing here, I think you can guess what would happen to you.

Fame Game and Power Game are unstoppable arousal triggers and disinhibition stimuli of female sexual desire.

Untutored beta males and insol bitterbitches need to see this side of women, because it’s routinely hidden from social consciousness by anti-male propaganda and by women themselves who don’t want their depraved natures exposed to idealistic young betas who may be their provider hubby fall-backs in ten years time after the cock carousel has made them sore. That pussy pedestal requires a lot of good PR to keep its squeaky clean vajeen sheen.

Male power is both intimidating and intoxicating to women, and as I have argued (and others like commenter PA have as well) the rush of women into the workforce has undermined marriage and poisoned relations between women and the mass of betas who don’t glitter with fame and power, by exposing so many women to alpha male bosses.

Keep in mind that in women there is the natural pleasurable impulse to submit to a dominant man…it’s instinctual really… so when you read women who describe such men as “intimidating”, know that the intimidation psychologically strikes women much differently than it strikes men who would be the natural competitors or worker drones of powerful men. When a woman meets an “intimidating” man there is a part of her that is sexually and romantically aroused, and if conditions are right that part will flourish and manifest at the expense of the cautious part of her. When a man meets an intimidating man, he is aroused to fight, fold, or flee, all of these reactions serving in their particular ways to guard his honor, preserve his dignity, and spare his social status. Sometimes even spare his life.

Read Full Post »

Besides the sagging tits and wrinkling skin, there’s a good reason men of taste and sophistication who are looking to settle down spurn older women for the pleasure of younger women. DoBA writes,

In short, if you’re thinking about getting married, really think about what you’re doing. As someone who is divorced, I would say that you have to get in on the GROUND LEVEL with women. Once they’re about 33-34, you don’t know where the hell they’ve been and their anger toward men or neurosis about them will likely be taken out on YOU. From what I see, the best marriages are when the couples meet in high school or college.

That last paragraph is gold plated good advice. Single women get bitter and spiteful with age in a way that men don’t, because every added cock scours a woman’s soul while every added pussy gilds a man’s soul. Bad relationship experiences accumulating over the years can potentially embitter both men and women, but men in my observation, when they bounce back, are more seamlessly able to reconstitute a loving relationship with a new woman minus the emotional baggage of past women who left them with foul memories. In contrast, women who have run through failed relationships tend to dump increasingly heavy loads of baggage on their new men.

The Ground Floor Girl is another term for the “marriage material girl”, or the “wife and mother of my future children girl”. (In the meme scene, she is called the tradwife.) She is many different women, but the defining characteristic all GFGs share is youth and romantic innocence. You can get lucky meeting an older woman who has managed to retain her whimsy and untainted love of men, but that’s not the way to bet.

tl;dr: younger women >>> older women.

***

If you need the recap, the present configuration of the Western sexual market is despoiling and shrinking the pool of available Ground Floor Girls. Marriage rate is down, age of first marriage is up, and though I couldn’t find the data I’d be surprised if marriage counseling hours and clients as a share of total marriages isn’t up as well.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: