The Pretty Girl’s Dilemma

A (possibly foreign) girl writes about a dilemma that should be familiar to any pretty woman with dreams of alpha males pledging devotion dancing in her bed,

I am writing to ask you a question related to dating and marriage. Just what you wanted to and so rarely hear 🙂 First, to introduce myself, I am what most men would rate as an 8, or on a really good day perhaps a 9, [ed: legit] am 26, and really only date alpha males. I can’t help it, I like the fire that can burn me. My last two boyfriends were both extremely charismatic, successful, magnetic et al and I spent a year with each before I realized they had something in common: aversion to marriage. Both were around 33, an age when many men begin to consider that stuff, in my opinion. My question is this:

As I am 26 and not going to be more attractive in five years, and I would like to get married within that time frame, how do I go about eschewing the alphas who are not interested in me for marriage? Should I start directing my attentions to the ones around 40 and up? Right now I can have my pick of most men, though it will not always remain thus, but as alphas are harder to marry than other men and commitment is what I want, should I redirect my attentions towards betas?

Of course perhaps it was just me that neither wanted to marry, but it was the reason for both breakups, and really I would rather not waste my time/energy/looks/emotions on men who just want to enjoy me for a year or two….

Anyway I appreciate you taking the time to read this and if you decide to post this and answer it on your website, feel free to, but please alter my name. Thanks 🙂

A critical detail remains unanswered: Did you initiate your break-ups with the last two alpha boyfriends? If not, you are probably dating out of your league — that is, you are fucking men who don’t think you have the goods to persuade them of an early retirement from the field — and the men decided your marital ultimatum, or innuendos of marital ultimatums to come, was a cramping of their style they couldn’t tolerate. So they dumped you while the dumping was good.

If, however, you did initiate the break-ups, it suggests your exes thought well enough of you to stick it out for as long as possible, holding out the hope of nuptial rewards until you called their deceptive feints. In this scenario, you are not dating out of your league so much as you are experiencing what it’s like to be with men who have the hearts of cads, but love you nonetheless.

My advice, should you choose to accept it:

Yes, dating older men is a solution. An older alpha male begins to feel two pressing awarenesses: his posterity, and his mortality. In this psychological stew, the love of a younger, loyal woman beckoning him to surrender his bachelor freedoms is a temptation hard to resist. But, if this is not an option…

Pursue the greater beta male. Often, the only notable differences between an alpha male and a greater beta male are the former’s superior charisma and the latter’s superior commitment. If you can suffer the even-temper and placid mood of the greater beta for his gift of marital capitulation, you will live a happy life. If not, prepare for my final piece of advice…

Continue your Sisyphean quest for the magnetic alpha male who inflames your ichor yet who is also willing to abide your peculiarly female constraints on his vital energies. These men do exist, but they’re rare. Not quite phantoms, but you’ll have to hunt them down. To start, you must identify warning signs of flightiness, and hopeful auspices of lifelong devotion.

– Is he a social king? The man who holds court, holds the love of many women. Try to date men who are less extroverted. The alpha introvert is socialy savvy, but he also prefers his solitude. This desire for solitude is correlated with conscientiousness, low impulsivity, and affinity for home and hearth.

– Are his parents still together (if alive)? The faithful apple doesn’t fall far from the tree of fidelity. Don’t underestimate the influence of genes on behavior.

– Has he dated and dumped a lot of beautiful women? Red flag.

– Are you better looking than his exes? You may be the one to quell his urge to wander.

– Is he willing to wait more than three dates before having sex with you? Hopeful auspice.

– Does he go out of his way to learn things about you? He’s smitten. (Or he’s a grandmaster player.)

– Does he have a (big) dog? He’s got an incipient paternal instinct.

– Is he politically conservative? If so, he’s more likely to want to marry and raise a family.

– Are his friends womanizers? He’s sympatico with the swinging scimitar lifestyle.

– Is he an epicurean of food, drink and art? He might also be an epicurean of women.

This is a partial list to get you started. One other thing. Beware prowlers bearing charming wit. Unlike men you meet within your social circle, the lone wolf does not come favorably endorsed nor does he fear betraying your friends’ trust.

Read Full Post »

How To Defeat Realtalk

A modest suggestion for the Cathedral and her foot soldiers. You know you can’t win on the facts. And you know you can’t win when there’s an army of independent broadsheeters (aka bloggers) more than willing to call you out on your lies. Not only willing, but happy to do so.

Realtalk is now a thorn in your side which will soon become a Poe-ian swinging blade pendulum whooshing over your noodle neck. You sense this, which is why you are in panic mode, squealing loudly like a cornered pig about to get mortally stuck.

So here’s how you take back the night. It’s quite simple, really. Deprive the truth-tellers of their power. Strip them of their online anonymity. Make it so that they can easily and quickly be identified by your PC Stasi and forthwith excommunicated from polite society and lawful employment. Do this while you still have a stranglehold over the collective consciousness and uncontested rule over the societal, bureaucratic and cultural apparatuses.

Gather your silent shock troops — the NSA, the CIA, PRISM, Google, Microsoft — and reveal the underground resistance that may one day explode into a full-blown revolution out of your control. But hurry!, before the enforcers that man your expensive military hardware wake up as well and point their gun turrets back at you. You know what to do. I’ve given you the keys to victory. Get cracking. Heh.

Read Full Post »

The Wickedest Links

1. “So there’s really nothing that can be done about the decline of the Republican Party. As virtue and ability decline in the electorate so does the republic.” Randall, and Reihan, are right. Demography and character are a nation’s destiny. And right now, the US of Gay is going down the crapper on both counts.

2. Do you have a palette of tissues handy? Because feminists are about to weep their last bitter tears. Satoshi Kanazawa is back in the news with a study that concludes the maternal instinct decreases by a quarter for every fifteen extra IQ points. Smart and over-educated lawyercunts are a dying breed. Literally. I believe it was the Audacity of Huge who once tabulated and correlated GSS data to find that smart men have more children than dumb men, while smart women have fewer children than dumb women. I call this the “Alpha Male-Cute Secretary Assortative Mating” theory. You may know it better by its street handle: Female hypergamy. And… wait for it… it will be the salvation of the white race in multicultural miasmas.

3. Study shows girls commit dating violence as often as boys. If you’ve ever dated a drama whore, you know that they can get physically aggressive. It comes with the hot sex territory. You’re banging the bejeezus out of her one night, and the next day she’s pushing you into the knife rack. Now of course, owing to inherent size and strength differences, this sort of physical violence from women carries less risk than the same violence would from men. Men are also more unwilling to admit they get pushed around by their girlfriends and/or wives. Which may be why girls resort to physical violence more often, because they know they can get away with it. The study authors also looked at “verbal violence” — which in CH terms is known as psychological warfare — and this too, is one area where women excel. Now I don’t believe verbal violence is nearly as bad as real violence, but if you take feminists’ and leftoids’ words for it — that bad words are trés hurtful and on a par with stabbings and shootings, and therefore their expression ought to be regulated by the state — then a lot of women should be thrown in jail for nagging and needling their men. #feministlogic

4. “[T]he West began to diverge from the rest long before the Growth Revolution.” Why did the West rise? If you look at GDP per capita, instead of total wealth, it becomes clear that the West diverged from China long before the 19th century. Conclusion: The North Sea diverged from the rest in 1,000 AD. Why? Outbreeding is one answer. Whatever the precise answer, it appears that genes are more and more becoming the obvious candidate for explaining Western greatness. #equalistpain

5. Chicks dig violent jerks. #hohum

6. Suicidal libertarianism. In multiracial, open borders societies, libertarianism is nothing short of a death cult. Any time sperglord Bryan Caplan is owned, is a time to

The inevitable logic of their Rainman ideology that libertarians don’t get (or pretend not to get for tribe-scoring subterfuge) is that, although open borders to the world’s riff-raff may bring short-term proximate benefits like cheap strawberries, it also brings longer-term costs in the form of sacrificing ultimate interests, like one’s ethnic genetic continuity. But perhaps that cost is what the open border libertarian traitors really want. In which case, all that needs saying to them is

7. Sex video exonerates men who were falsely accused of rape by a world class cunt. It’s ironic that the feminist push to enlarge the domain of legal rape and to make it easier for women to accuse men of various sexual improprieties is also creating an incentive for men to videotape every sexual liaison they have with women that feminists would hold up as cultural heroines fighting the patriarchy. But, that’s what you get when you follow #feministlogic.

Read Full Post »

Sexual Market Value Boosted, One Shed Pound At A Time

Visual proof of the damaging toll that fatness extracts from a woman’s sexual market value, and of the major increase in SMV that accrues when the excess fat is shed, is in this series of photographs of a single girl taken at regular intervals as she lost weight and went from a hippo to a totally bangable hot babe.

At 197 pounds, this girl was a hard 3 on the 1 to 10 looks scale. A hard 3 means that she would have had trouble getting love from a dweeby loser beyond a shameful one-night drunken rutting.

At 124 pounds, this girl is a solid 7.5, perhaps pushing into 8 territory. Let’s call her an 8 and unsplit the difference. Perfect curvy body (“feminine curvy”, not “feminist curvy“), youthfully peaking nubility, shock of fire engine red hair, exquisitely smooth milky white skin. You wonder if your eyes aren’t playing a trick on you and this is a different woman from the one at 197 pounds. But your boner doesn’t wonder which of these women it wants to nestle within. At SMV 8, this girl will have no trouble getting a high value man to commit to her for the long-term, and even to marry her.

From a 3 to an 8. Five whole SMV points — that’s a lot — at the low low price of losing 73 pounds.

This is the rough male equivalent of an average Joe going from a suburban shut-in to a semi-famous B-list actor. Or of a run-of-the-mill beta male mastering core game techniques, putting on ten pounds of muscle, dressing more stylishly, and behaving with unshakable overconfidence.

Love is pressing a biomechanical lever. You press the right levers, in the right order, and you can make the opposite sex fall in love with you. No magic required.

Read Full Post »

Did Commenter Kate Meet Her Fiancé At Chateau Heartiste?

Frequent commenter Kate (who used to go by the handle GeishaKate) reports that she is engaged to a manosphere writer, Mark Minter. Naturally, your genial hosts wonder if the passion-inspiring auspices of Le Chateau brought these two lovebirds together into a promise of holy matrimony. What a slap in the face this news must be to the barbarian peasants who incessantly claim CH is about nothing but pumping and dumping bar skanks. Excuse me, good haters, but I don’t see your blogs resulting in any nuptial engagements.

Read Full Post »

The Wickedest Links

1. Bruce Charlton wonders if the perpetual lying of the ruling elite is having a biological effect on their brain wiring.

After years and years of conditioning in dishonesty, the typical modern intellectual (whether journalist, scientist, lawyer, teacher, doctor or whatever) becomes physically unable to think straight.

Thus the lack of common sense of the ‘Clever Sillies’ who rule modern societies and are driving them into suicide and self-destruction may, in practice, be intractable – short of mass repentance and long-term rehabilitation and retraining of neural pathways and connections.

I can think of another method that would work to wonderfully focus the mind and bring common sense back.

******

2. A study from June 2012 finds that porn was a direct cause of 10% of all divorces in the US in the 1960s and 1970s.

We test whether pornography causes divorce. Using state-level panel data on the divorce rate and sales of Playboy magazine, we document a strong cross-sectional and time-series relation between lagged sales of Playboy and the divorce rate. The simple correlation between divorce and sales lagged two years is 44 percent, with a T-statistic of 20. This large correlation is robust to using only the first half of the sample, adjusting for all state-level heterogeneity and for any time trends by including state and year fixed effects, and using an instrumental variable to correct for any possible endogeneity in Playboy sales. Divorce rates are also significantly correlated with sales of Penthouse but they are not correlated with sales of Time magazine. Our overall estimates suggest that pornography probably caused 10 percent of all divorces in the United States in the sixties and seventies.

Options = instability. Porn isn’t a male sexual market option in the traditional sense, but it is an option in the hindbrain sense. The viewing of porn satiates the libido and tricks the gene’s prime directive into believing — that is, biochemically reacting as if — it has been fulfilled. Married men who watch porn are, in a truncated fashion, having dalliances with hundreds of sexy mistresses. Combine this phantom psychological grooming of feeling like one has limitless high quality mate options with the bursting female obesity epidemic that took off right around the same time porn ejaculated onto the cultural mainstream, and the only surprise is that the deadly one-two punch didn’t directly account for more than 10% of divorces.

In case you’re wondering, yes, female porn — aka pulp romance novels, celebrity tabloids, and soap operas — which coincidentally also took off as a cultural phenomenon in the 1960s, has likely contributed to marital dissolution as female consumers feed their growing hunger for alpha male love and drama and consequently drive a wedge of dissatisfaction between them and their real-life beta male spouses.

******

3. Chinese aren’t on board with the whole “democracy is great!” Western line of thought. Fancy that! Human population groups aren’t fungible, in either capability or sensibility. HBDers will nod knowingly at this latest revelation into real diversity, but the ruling elite, steeped and suffocating in a stinking silo of their own shibboleths, will grapple with this unsettling information the best way they know how: By silencing discussion.

******

4. Speaking of silencing discussion, it appears that the Left is now fully committed to the principle of speech restrictions. Ah, the Left. Remember those lovable guys? The ones who used to whine about witch hunts and censorship by the antediluvian Right? Yeah, well, times have changed, and victory in the endless war over less enlightened white people requires a… reassessment… of battle tactics. Now that the truths being uncovered are discrediting just about everything the current incarnation of the Left believes, and that the Cathedral is being mischievously subverted by agents provocateur who don’t fear them and in fact love taking a steaming dump in their faces, cherished principles will need to be adjusted to accommodate some progressive speech suppression so that no one’s feelings are hurt, except for the feelings of those implacable moral reprobates who don’t toe the party line. Naturally, the leftoids are confident they can pull off their inspired con, because the top of the rank is filled to brimming with the sorts of people who evolved an exquisite verbal facility for sophistry.

******

5. Boys with sisters are more likely to be Republicans. Correlational? Causative? Who knows, but this does hint that men who are exposed to female nature early in life and continuing forward are inclined to drift to the political right. The reason for that should be obvious: The earthy, organic right is where a realistic appraisal of the world substitutes for idealistic zeal in the perfectibility of humans. Or: Sisters be keepin’ it real, yo.

******

6. This is the closest to realtalk anyone on Fox News has ever come. But Bill O’Reilly still can’t pull the shroud all the way back and confront the id head-on. He blames the destruction of the nuclear family for blacks’ failings, failings to which, admirably, he gives a clean airing, but the truth goes a bit deeper, and a lot uglier. As some liberal Cablinasians will inform him, black family dissolution likely has a cause itself, an intractable cause that originates in the neural gears, and that, when left to grind mercilessly and free from cultural constraint, ultimately propels the social dystopia of sky high single momhood rates and parasitic criminality. The fear to face the id by the left and right is understandable. Blame the family breakdown, and you leave hope that amelioration is possible. But admit that dark, ancient forces woven into the architecture of the brain itself are at work, and all hope is lost. And when hope is lost, what is there left to meddle in for morally posturing and preening leftoids?

I have a suggestion for discouraged leftoids with nothing Left to do: Ban soda! Obesity is a more recent emergence, and preaching fire and brimstone against refined grains, sugar and soda can go a long way to beautifying the country.

******

7. For purposes of artistic license, I was a little glib in my assertion above that the reversal of black (and white) family breakdown isn’t possible or will have no effect on overall social dysfunction. Of course, this is not true. Contra some trailblazing determinists, the relatively ahistorical recent rise of single momhood proves that it has a social component as well as a genetic one. But without a realization by the ruling equalism-adhering elite that underlying human mental algorithms which evolved over tens of thousands of years manifest as social phenomena, there can be no effective policy crafted that will competently address the problem of black, and now increasingly, white dysfunction. But in order for a pro-nuclear family policy to find success, it must violate in some way the liberal ur-moral aesthetics of harm and fairness. That is, no public policy with the goal of constraining and redirecting evolved social preferences that are at odds with advanced civilization will work unless, to put it metaphorically, the lash is taken to delusions about untrammeled individualism and nonjudgmentalism.

For a real world example of what such a policy would constitute, consider the following: There once was a time when a relentless shaming campaign to stop jaywalking was public and social policy. And it worked. Jaywalking dropped precipitously. We can do the same with single moms, thuglets, fly-by-night cads, and blubbery fatties: Mock them. Mock them until they are on the verge of self-deliverance. Mock them until their pain is so acute and palpable that it serves as a warning to others contemplating the same life paths. Humans are at heart a social species, and nothing clears the mind and alters the behavior like a scorching psychological scaphism in the town square.

Will some people’s feelings get hurt? You bet. But there is more on this moral earth than is dreamt of in the cramped, claustrophobic moral attic of tunnel-visioned leftoids who can only see a fatty crying but miss a nation groaning under the weight of millions of fatties.

Read Full Post »

Cost-Free Gestures Of Romantic Reassurance

PA suggests that emailing this song to your girlfriend or wife is a simple gesture of well-timed beta reassurance that (uncorrupted, foreign) chicks dig… in small quantities.

It’s a fine song of loving lovitude. However, halfway through the listening experience my eyes drifted down to a random YouTube comment.

my dad played this song every time he picked me and my bro up for his court-ordered visit with us…actually ROD STEWART was the only thing both my dad and mom had in common. All they did was argue.

You are carried aloft on the whispers of a soulful love ballad, inspired to newfound hopefulness about the inherent goodness of the universe and the nature of woman, when you feel a tug and realize, once again, the dark tendrils of ugly reality are coiling around your ankles, dragging you back into the depths.

Read Full Post »