Archive for the ‘Marriage Is For Chumps’ Category

This post is presented “as is”, with neither editorial condemnation nor endorsement. Read at your own risk.

There are scores of CH posts in the archives dealing with game for married men: How to (re)seduce your wife, and how to seduce applicants for mistresshood. But there aren’t many posts about picking up married women. An odd oversight, or a tribute to a latent moral code in the heart of CH?

Nevertheless, we feel it is important to give it all to the reader: The light, the dark, and the chaotic. To shy from forbidden topics would be a refutation of everything the Heartiste abides.

Will writes,

this is what I do if they are married or have BFs (you’d be surprised how many girls wear fake rings to weed out the weak.)

Anyway, the line is simple

Alpha-In-Training:” so, let’s grab a drink sometime.”

Cougar: “Oh! That’s so sweet, but I’m engaged, see my ring?”

AiT: “Hey, it’s just coffee”
::hands her the phone with the ‘New Contact’ screen already open::

C: “I shouldn’t…”

AiT: “How about this, I’ll shoot you a text and you can think it over.”

Works like a charm.
The above does two things. It demonstrates that you are persistent and get what you want. Secondly, she has plausible deniability. You’ve given her jiminy cricket a way to justify her giving out her number.
It sails right past any objections in a smooth manner.

The “it’s just coffee” and “I’ll shoot you a text and you can decide.” win 80% of the time.

I’m of the belief, perhaps optimistic, that a married woman truly, deeply in love with her husband cannot be seduced to betrayal. If I’m right, the problem remains: Just how many married women truly, deeply love their husbands? In this diversifying, slut parading, trust-cratering society we call a nation, vows of fidelity seem quaint. How many wives would you trust to uphold their end of a marital contract when every signal and every noise encourages female empowerment through perfidy?

Will is basically correct about the two premises that must be established when picking up married women. One, you’ve got to foresee and neutralize objections. This is obvious. Married women aren’t going to jump to pressure tactics. It’s too easy for them to lean on the crutch of their back-at-home hubbies when the heat comes between their legs. This means, in practice, giving her hamster a lotta room to spin. You’ll be courtly aloof, but with white hot sexual intent communicated all the same.

Two, all you need is her number. Unless she’s aggressively seeking an excuse to cheat, an insta-date isn’t likely an option. Secure her digits, then text her once later, maybe even a few days later, so that the temptation to sin simmers in her.

The happily married woman can’t be “taken with extreme prejudice” like the single woman. She will need to feel like she’s exercising some control over the proceedings, and she will need to feel like she can walk at any time.

On a related subject, a buddy I knew sometimes wore a fake wedding ring when he departed for the hunt. The first time he did this, I told him it was counterproductive. Surely, most girls will balk at getting hit on by a married man? He smiled, and said, “I have a line with this ring. ‘Oh, I’m not married. I just wear this ring to scare away stalker girls.’ Or I say, ‘It keeps away unwanted attention.’ It really messes with their heads. It’s like when hot girls sometimes wear fake wedding rings so they don’t get bothered by guys all the time. I’m telling them the same thing, except with the sexes reversed.”

magistro meo, mi amice…

Read Full Post »

Commenter Otsuka Duojinshi highlights another great H. L. Mencken quote, this time on the topic of the romantic isolation of the wives wedded to boring beta male providers.

HLM identified a wife’s contempt for the beta/omega precisely:

A woman, if she hates her husband (and many of them do), can make life so sour and obnoxious to him that even death upon the gallows seems sweet by comparison. This hatred, of course, is often, and perhaps almost invariably, quite justified.

To be the wife of an ordinary man, indeed, is an experience that must be very hard to bear. The hollowness and vanity of the fellow, his petty meanness and stupidity, his puling sentimentality and credulity, his bombastic air of a cock on a dunghill, his anaesthesia to all whispers and summonings of the spirit, above all, his loathsome clumsiness in amour—all these things must revolt any woman above the lowest.

HLM, if he were alive today, would wholly cosign Game as a legitimate pursuit for men, because he would understand that improving one’s sexual charisma does a marriage good. Here’s the Wiki on HLM. A lot of notable quotables by the great man!

Read Full Post »

A new study finds that husbands’ happiness depends on their wives’ happiness.

The authors did not find a significant association between spouse’s marital appraisals and own well-being. However, the association between husband’s marital quality and life satisfaction is buoyed when his wife also reports a happy marriage, yet flattened when his wife reports low marital quality.

This isn’t the first study to discover a dependency on wife happiness for husband happiness, but not the reverse (i.e., wife happiness dependent on husband happiness).

Two internally derived psychological dynamics are at play here. First, what this study and others like it are picking up is the scarcity mentality that broadly afflicts the class of married men, who in their premarital lives would be known as provider beta males. Scarcity mentality refers to the instinctive and not altogether unjustified male perception that attractive women are hard to get and if you lose a woman you already have it’s a good bet you’ll spend lonely and aggravating years trying to replace her.

Men (non-NAM men at any rate) are wired to think this way because women are, in fact, the reproductively more valuable sex and thus the choosier sex. So when a man gets married, his happiness, as a consequence of his fear of losing his hard-won sexual outlet, ebbs and flows with his wife’s happiness. If wifey is unhappy or sexually distant, hubby’s visceral fear of incel goes into overdrive. His response, usually counterproductive, is to amp up his mate guarding.

Second, a wife’s happiness doesn’t depend on her husband’s happiness because wives, particularly younger wives with more sexual market options, don’t share the same fear of years of incel. Women have their own pressures and hurdles to overcome, (such as convincing a HSMV man to commit), but total sexual abandonment by the opposite sex is not usually one of them (unless she’s fat, ugly or old).

There is also the reality that unhappy husbands can still want and enjoy sex; unhappy wives… eh, not so much. Husbands who want to keep that twat train rolling have an incentive to maintain their wives’ happiness. Wives who want marital sex don’t necessarily need to keep their husbands happy.

What I’ve described is the influence of ancient biology. Today, we can add a third dynamic, one that is externally derived: Divorce theft. An unhappy husband won’t indirectly threaten a wife’s access to her resources or her children, but an unhappy wife can portend a near future of her husband’s bank account and assets slashed in half and time with his kids reduced more than that.

A case could be made that civilization is ascendent when wives try to increase the happiness of their husbands, and civilization is in decline when husbands fret over the happiness of their wives.

Read Full Post »

Well-meaning tradcons with white knight complexes like Charles Murray and Ross Douthat wonder why more men aren’t MANNING UP and getting married. They say it’s because too many men are jobless.

Maybe. But there’s another, less Hivemind-hospitable explanation for the marriage dearth: Too many women are fat. Groom looks like he just found out he’s the designated prison bitch.


Commenter negro jesus writes,

True or not, I read that one of the original purposes of the best man was to privately ask the groom just before the wedding, “Do you REALLY want to do this??” If the groom said no, the best man would stand in front of the crowd and announce that the wedding was off. That’s what this poor bastard needed.

So, if true, the best man acted as sort of an alpha male wingman who would cockblock an ominous nuptial, but not before getting the green light from the gloomy groom. Outstanding. The West could learn some lessons from its disappearing traditions.

Read Full Post »

In big and small ways, social science studies have a habit of confirming many CH precepts. The latest finds that expensive diamond engagement rings and expensive wedding ceremonies are inversely associated with marriage duration.

This study was done by professors from Emory University. They found that U.S. adults who spent large amounts of money on engagement rings and/or their weddings were more likely to end up divorced!

According to the research, men who spent $2,000 to $4,000 were 1.3 times more likely to end up divorced than men who spent $500 to $2,000.

And when it comes to weddings, if you have a wedding that costs more than $20,000, you’re more likely to end up in “Splitsville!”

The average cost of a wedding in the U.S. is $30,000, according to “The Knot.”

Expensive rings and weddings are classic provider beta male game. And, as science is showing and the Chateau has warned, beta male game is ultimately self-defeating. Women don’t fall in love with a wallet; they fall in love with a man. They don’t desire a mate guarder who has to pay fidelity money; they desire a self-assured jerkboy who expects love free of charge.

And if you’re dating a princess who demands a big ring or ostentatious wedding, my advice is simple: Run. Don’t look back. The next day, you can admire the bulge of your full bank account and your spared dignity. I just saved you from hitching yourself to a woman who couldn’t really love you without a large gift bag included in the deal.

What studies like this one uncover is a bidirectional sexual market feedback loop: On one vector, you have a weak man who feels it necessary to pay for love and supplicate to his fiancee’s gaudy selfishness. On the other vector, you have an unenthusiastic woman who knows she is settling for a less desirable man in a trade-off between exciting sexiness and boring security, and who therefore feels empowered to make her sloppy second beta pay tribute to her in Damegeld. Where these two vectors meet, relationship exactness and complementarity trump love, and subcurrents of divorce are never far from cresting the polished dinner party surface.

Read Full Post »

Having had the great honor and privilege to detox my buttox be a member in charmed standing of social circles past that included a fair number of gay men, I’ve heard enough lurid stories about their sex lives to fill an abattoir of ripped anuses. Some of them got gay married, many of them knew someone who got gay married. As an insider, I’ll let you in on a leetle secret…

Every gay marriage that was talked about was an open relationship.

Not a one of these gays who were married, or planned to get married, held any pretense of practicing monogamy. When the topic of promiscuous married gays came up, the only surprise was the blasé avowal of the fact. The gay men announced their intention to defile the tacit monogamous stricture of marriage with such nonchalance that it would astound them to learn anyone thought they might behave otherwise.

The Chateau has gay readers. I know you’re reading this. Tell me I’m wrong.

Gay marriage will be a continuation of the unmarried gay lifestyle and all that entails, except legitimized by the state. The bathhouse won’t stop at the boy wedding. The national embrace of gay marriage will have, as per usual when infantile tantrum-throwing leftoids get their way, unintended consequences down the line, and I predict bad ones at that. Marriage is already assaulted by numerous cultural forces; undermining it further by essentially permitting into its scope avowed nonmonogamists will drive deeper the wedge between straight beta men and the institution. And once the beta males leave the marriage game, it’s game over.

Read Full Post »

What would a clickbait Chateau Heartiste be like? “Anonymous” comments,

If CH writes a post now with a title like “Robin Williams Forced to Commit Suicide by Divorce Court System” he can get a lot of traffic and extra fame. One thing I suspect happened is that the family courts of California ruled that Robin owed each ex-wife 5 figure alimony sums every month regardless of any drop in his earning power or desire to retire. But he was a liberal who supported that kind of system overall.

There is evidence that suicide risk has a genetic basis, however, like most genetically-influenced behaviors, strong environmental shocks can suppress or trigger the expression of the genes. In the case of Robin Williams, his two ex-wives were the environmental shocks that pushed him to a final solution.

Robin Williams will return to TV after nearly three decades – because two divorces have left him short of cash.

The comic’s breakups cost him £20million and he claims to need a ‘steady job’. He is also selling his £20million California ranch due to his sizeable alimony payments.[…]

The 62-year-old, said: ‘Divorce is expensive. I used to joke they were going to call it “all the money”, but they changed it to “alimony”.

It’s ripping your heart out through your wallet.’

There is no “rape culture” as deranged feminist cunts starved for male attention would want you to believe. Rape rates are at historical lows. There is a divorce rape culture, and it has amassed a pile of real victims far larger than criminally prosecuted rape has claimed. Men are literally killing themselves out of desperation once the divorce rape industrial complex has taken everything from them.

And I do mean “them”. Williams’ ex-wives had absolutely NOTHING to do with his talent, his drive, and his career success. Nothing. And yet with the sanction of the state they walk away with pieces of the man’s soul, leaving him pondering the escape of the rafter rope.

Marriage has never been a bigger sucker’s bet for men. Prenups are routinely shredded by lawyers and ignored by judges. The fix is in. The fundamental premise has been codified in law to the cheers of rabid feminists and solipsistic soccer moms and taken to its logical conclusion: Men are resource chattel, milked by a constabulary of strongmen to redistribute their earnings to an army of cackling divorcees.

If America is fated to be a post-Malthusian, r-selection reproductive free-for-all, then let it be in every way. That means, women are cut loose from the male alimony and child support teat to fend for themselves and accept the consequences of their decisions. Relying on men for support, pre- and post-marriage, is a luxury afforded K-selection societies, and that luxury comes with certain duties that modern women have largely chosen to abandon. If justice is fair and not wholly rigged against the interests of men, the divorce rape culture will be dismantled and an ex-husband’s life may be saved.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,393 other followers

%d bloggers like this: