Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Maxims’ Category

Are you familiar with the sound of a rhetorical shiv piercing mangina hide and splintering id-bone? It sounds like this feeble defensive mewl from John Scalzi, the world’s most foremost beta male feminist emasculate.

Following a shock and maul CH campaign on both Twatter and at this ‘umble blog belittling the remnants of Scalzi’s manhood and everything he stands for, El Castrato finally cracked and Twat-streamed this effluvium of butthurt katzenjammer:

∑T = ∑E

That wedding photo is so very revealing. Megawife must’ve been ovulating on her wedding day, because she doesn’t want Scalzi’s supplicating seed anywhere near her eggs. I haven’t seen a “lean out” like that since Sheryl Sandberg’s husband set his treadmill speed to “the sweet relief of marital release”.

Naturally, I stuck the shiv once more in the undulating mass of Scalzi’s swolelessness.


Uxorious, adjective
– doting upon, foolishly fond of, or affectionately submissive toward one’s wife.

Scalzi is the Uxorious Male personified. His debased kind seem to be blossoming like dainty wildflowers all over Gaymerica, sending airborne tufts of estrogen to signal high T pollinators that their women are open to illicit dalliances.

The Uxorious Male is in reality a red flag of relationship disquiet. A man who ostentatiously and publicly bends the knee to his woman and considers it an act of sexual polarity-inverting rebellion against masculine norms instead of what it really is — a craven display of sycophantic shamelessness by an LSMV manchild — unintentionally announces to any spectators that his relationship or marriage is not what he wants it to seem.

Male uxoriousness, especially the variety that seeks a public platform, is a flamboyant concealment of relationship trouble. This trouble can take many forms:

  • the male feels an urge to cheat, and is ashamed of it
  • the woman is emotionally and sexually disconnecting from the relationship
  • both partners have checked out and are now in the business of keeping up (laughably try-hard) appearances
  • the male has experienced a sudden increase in financial or social status and subconsciously feels impelled to reassert his fidelity
  • the woman has experienced pleasing attention from other men and behaves in an emotionally distant way that triggers the male to uxorious mate guarding
  • the male is extremely low value relative to his woman and believes, mistakenly, that cloying displays of faithfulness and admiration will keep her as interested in him
  • both partners are sexually low value and each of them abides the uxorious male’s exaggerated show of fealty because it pumps their flagging egos

Dear girlfriends or wives reading at this outpost of outrageous truth,

DON’T TRUST A MAN WHO WANTONLY GLORIFIES YOU

He has an ulterior motive, is feeling guilty for something, or you can do better and he knows this (even if you don’t…yet).

CH Maxim 88: The fervor of a man’s public declarations of fidelity to his woman positively correlate with an increased risk of cheating by either the man or the woman.

Scalzi is not just a psychologically disfigured beta bitchboy; he’s also an anti-White virtue signaling whore. And as long as the Chateau stands in defiance of the Degenerate Freak Mafia, anti-White empty virtue whores like Scalzi will no longer be free to indulge their smarmy habit unopposed. It’s a new day.

More Scalzied chew-toy fun:

Read Full Post »

CH Maxim #90: Bitterness surges in a sexual market that is fully liberated, producing a surplus of incel beta males and pump and dumped beta females.

Recall the CH definition of feminism: An ideology of ugly, mannish, and slutty women who want to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.

The theoretical end product of such a feministed society is similar to what we see developing in the decadent West: Women sharing their late teens-late 20s prime pussies and hopeful hearts with a few top tier men, loads of beta males demoted to omega male involuntary celibacy, lots of mediocre-looking women “promoted” to the alpha male pumpndump discard pile, and in the waning years the sad resignation of late-in-life marriage between has-been sluts and never-was incels settling for a weak facsimile of passion over solitude.

The liberated sexual market is the embittered sexual market, for all but the few alpha males who have the cheat code to exploit the system to fulfill their male primary directive: casual sex and flings with enamored peak nubility women.

Everyone else suffers to a degree. Even HSMV (beautiful, chaste) women lose out. One, by competing with slutty women for the sexual attention of high value men. Two, by getting stuck with commitment offers from low value beta males, which accumulate rapidly as the Wall looms nearer.

Another consequence of the liberated sexual market: Male *and* female sociopathy is likely on the rise. A beta male mid-century opened the mate market to exploitation by sociopaths.

The answer to the Embittered Sexual Market is a return to Sexual Socialism, the driver of human civilization:

sexualsocialism

Read Full Post »

Diversity + Proximity = War (by electoral means):

tribalelectorate

No worries. We keep being told by the pretty lie police that race and sex are social constructs, so by the transitive property of equality any election result that is determined by the votes of social constructs is itself a social construct. Which means Trump doesn’t have to concede in the event thecuntcrü rigs the election, because it’s impossible to concede to something that isn’t real.

The Founders had the right idea — only White men with a stake in the nation should be allowed to vote. The enfranchisement of nonWhites and women ever since has rapidly calcified the decline of America.

Interestingly, the shitlib mythology of a monolithic oppressive White power structure is blown up by these maps, where we can easily see that White people are the most ideologically diverse group in America. The groups that vote tribally are colored people (superfluous preposition removed).

The reason I didn’t break down the POC vote into various groups by gender, ethnicity, or education level is that no matter how I broke it down, it was always 100% blue.

Heh.

ps Not entirely unrelated to this post’s subject, a big reason the Verbal Class is getting outgunned in social media is because they are deficient in visual-based mediums that emphasize the transmission of gut-punch memes and neutralize the sophist’s advantage of beguiling foes with an avalanche of wordy evasiveness.

Read Full Post »

VIP Chateau guest Matt King takes a moment from his appointed role as the Court Contrarian to deliver a sincere compliment to yours truly, the Sultan of Shiv, (and to make an insightful point in the meantime). I would be honored if he places his COTW trophy next to his replica Pietá.

Let’s take a second here during a game post to congratulate CH for the victory in the general culture we are all now experiencing. The election (win or lose) is a symptom of that victory, not its cause. The essential triumph has already begun, and there is no possible way to snuff it out now.

The reason CH uses a pen name is testimony to the unexpectedness of the victory. I have been generally optimistic that the culture would have to gradually turn back to men if it were to survive, but we all must admit to being astonished at the rapidity with which the entire milieu has changed.

Trump’s candid discussion with Billy Bush about women’s behavior around alpha males is the equivalent of a 2006 CH blog post. But instead of being distributed by a pseudonymous author like samizdat from a secret chateau, it was said by the next president of the United States — who will be the next president in very large part because he applied that “crimson” knowledge to politics.

Politics is downstream from culture, and we collectively anticipated the revolution down here in the online ghetto, we applied it to our lives, and now it is operable in the culture. Many understood the essential insight — that boys will always be boys, even if they are made illegal, and women will illegally love them for it — but CH gets credit for understanding its connection to power in general. Hence, his gradual transformation away from pick-up basics, which can be summarized and transmitted quickly, to the arena of power, which has an unlimited number of applications.

It may be time to drop the anonymity. Not all at once in a useless, grandiose, and still suicidal gesture. But with this culture shift, one may want to slowly begin knitting back together one’s split identities and become less shy about possible exposure (cf. Mike Cernovich, formerly “Danger&Play”; cf. the resurrection of Ricky Vaughn). They can’t snuff us out without a trace now that Trump has “taken the slings and arrows” on our behalf. (See his pivotal speech today in Florida, it belongs in the history books.) The paper tiger of the left has been exposed. They cannot intimidate or credibly threaten us anymore.

Each man’s mileage may vary, depending on what “lives, fortunes, and sacred honor” are individually at stake. But Trump had more to lose than perhaps any of us, and he pushed it all to the center of the table, showing us the way it will be done in the second revolutionary era.

We return to and participate in this site — despite the almost insufferable technical difficulties — because here and only here was the essential insight developed and maintained and ultimately applied to the world beyond the author’s original mandate, many years before the greater culture caught on. Now the rest of the West is beginning to thrill to the dark wisdom, and now is our moment.

Matt

If anyone can appreciate some florid prose, it’s I. So here I go…….. *PREEN*

Ironically, it’s the dark wisdom that will bring light back to the West. Now I don’t want to say I knew it all along….but I knew it all along.

***

COTW second prize (a set of steak knives) goes to hard9bf for providing a moment of sardonic clarity.

Women never lie about rape or sexual assault. NEVER. And even if they do lie and even if the gaystream media report the lies as truth, that’s okay because it points to a deeper truth that men, particularly White men, need to worship and prostrate themselves before womyn at every turn and ask permission before kissing them, touching them, or even looking at them.

What we are witnessing unfold in real time in the West, and especially in America, is the efflorescence of the Feminist Dystopia, wherein enfeebled effete males jockey for power in the way that women gossip for social status, where disloyalty and backstabbing are rites of passage and courage and honor are ridiculed as the false virtues of the benighted classes.

The Feminist Dystopia is, in the long run, incompatible with civilization, because the lifeblood of civilization is masculinity, and all the manly virtues that entails. An emasculated civilization is not long for this world, as it will fall quickly to any invasive force not yet evolved to appreciate the subtle empowerment that comes from putting one’s balls on the chopping block. “Please chop.”

Before masculinity returns with a vengeance, there will be a nadir of societal effluvium the feminized nation must crawl on its belly through to reach the open air; it will be a clown world time when only weak men, employing the rhetorical weapons favored by traitors, cucks, cat ladies and subversives, spitefully cling to power. But the Relinquishment is coming.

***

Hitfan gets a COTW honorable mention for bringing Le Chateau back to where it all started.

Speaking of negs.

I once unwittingly negged an HB9 after having fornicated with her. She was quite versatile in the manner of all sorts of sexual positions and the like, trying hard to impress.

After our session I said rather flippantly “You’re quite the sexual athlete, aren’t you?” and she seemed rather hurt by what I said. And to clarify, I didn’t really intend it to be as a neg (I guess she took it as one) but my subconscious must have conjured up the heartbreaking shiv. She was basically a party girl coming off the carousel looking to settle down (I looked like a good bet), so my words cut quite deeply.

She was quite cold though and you needed the heart of a true sociopath to get her to feign any long term interest in you. Was tired of playing the game, started acting my regular self and soft nexted her for a nicer girl.

You may tire of the Game, but the Game will never tire of you. Thecunt will soon learn that lesson because her foe understands it all too well.

PS That neg is pretty good. Slut insinuation is MASS WEIGHT GAINER rationalization hamster feed to women, (like loser insinuation is to men), so it’s only effective if the insinuation is as sly and plausibly unintentional as possible.

CH Maxim #48: The best negs are both plausibly deniable and strike at the chewy moist center of a woman’s self-conception.

***

Missed one superb comment by Truth-hammer, which I’ll grandfather in as a COTW future winner.

As a lowly no-wealth, no name nobody in fly-over country, but a nobody who took the red-pill and has become a keen observer, I would put forth that Donald Trump has become the Pale Rider. The skypes believed that they finally had a lock on history. They thought that they had achieved their goal. Like Simon Bar Sinister they would rule the world. They had control over the entire Narrative (Hollywood, television, radio, newsprint, publishing, advertising, pop culture) and all of the institutions (banking, finance, gov’t, politics etc…) They had a presidential candidate who would be their “drawer of water and hewer of wood” and who would cater to their every whim. But then along came a big, brash, arrogant goy. One who made his bones in skype central (Manhattan) but who did so in a big, loud, brash, unapologetic manner unlike the skypes’ shadowy and under-handed manner. He made it his way. The skypes never accepted Donald Trump and probably never thought that this buffoonish reality TV star would throw his hat into the ring and dash all of their dastardly plans. It is funny how he made the skypes hundreds of millions of dollars when he had his show and now they are trying to destroy him. We now have a presidential candidate who is unashamedly American. He has shown up our half-google President Obtusema as the epitome of Affirmative Action and our supposedly watch-dog media as dog food. There is one thing the skypes got right. Donald Trump’s presidential run has been the best reality show evah. All Hail the God Emperor Trumpus Maximus! Cometh the hour, cometh the man!

This was poetry. (i swear that’s not a tear, it’s a bead of eye sweat!) The Trumpening is summoning passion and art from his flock.

Read Full Post »

Maxim #54: A woman’s happiness is inversely proportional to efforts to accommodate her demands.

Corollary to Maxim #54: The more a woman’s demands are catered, the more irrational will her future demands become.

Appeasement is relationship death. Appeasement is the damping oscillation that brings a woman’s tingle to rest. There is hardly a self-defeating behavior a man can exhibit more hazardous to his love life than appeasement of his woman’s fickle and endlessly reconsidered stipulations. Once you go down the road of appeasement, the cliff side is an inevitability.

Given this reality of female nature, the riddle is why so many men resort to appeasement when the heat is on?

Part of the reason for the reflexive beta male embrace of the appeasement strategy is that it does work… occasionally, and only temporarily. Betas are so scared — picture a shivering, frightened little bunny as symbol of their state of minds — to provoke their women’s ire that appeasement becomes not only the emotionally satisfying recourse, but also the logically rationalized one based on retrieved pleasant memories of those few times it worked when nothing else works for them.

Barring competing effective strategies to pacify a pissy wife or girlfriend, an appeasement gambit only has to “work”, say, one out of ten times for it to become the go-to prostration for befuddled beta males. And remember that in the beta male’s worldview, a working romantic strategy is one that doesn’t end with his lover leaving him. The bar for healthy LTR management is set very low in the beta universe.

(For comparison, the typical alpha male standard of satisfying relationship health is the continuance of morning surprise hummers.)

A beta husband may be able to briefly calm his wife down by appeasing her, but the escape he narrowly engineers is just a trap door to a pit of lifelong termagant torment. That’s the poison appeasement pill he swallows: Quick relief, followed by progressive system failure. Tragically (and comically), he knows no other way.

Commenter ‘having a bad day’ serves up his own hard lesson in the futility of appeasing women:

my wife was like that too. pick a fight for no reason, not getting enough attention, blah blah blah…it almost ruined me and my ‘happy home.’

but wife’s behavior was based on the ‘best friend’ model of marriage that was indoctrinated into my impressionable young mind throughout my life…

who knew that women didn’t really know what they really want…? (that’s the real ‘crazy’…)

i had bought into the feminine imperative and was trying to ‘have it all’…best friend, lover, confidant, etc…and she hated it!

she was a follower, because all women are followers if they are happy. (just like the ‘teachings’ around here state.) it really is true…if they are happy, they are following someone they can look up to, admire, respect, feel safe and protected by, blah blah blah…if not, not happy…

the ‘crazy’ comes out when she doesn’t have that in a way that is unmistakable. she’ll put pressure on the relationship (shit test) to check for leaks…no leaks = anything you want…with a big shit eating grin at being able to please her ‘leader’

the ‘big crazy’ comes out the same way you train a guard dog…you push it a little, it ‘fights’, you let it ‘win’…you push a little harder, it reacts, you let it win…soon enough you can break a baseball bat over its head and it’ll still rip your arm off…same with women…and the younger, more fertile (hotter) the woman, the faster the escalation goes…so she can ‘win’ at uncovering the ‘beta’ (so no sex) or ‘alpha’ (so anything you want, just use me and not that other chick over there…)…because her body knows that her time is short, and it wants those better genes…

my marriage was shot because of the ‘friendship model’, but i got some game and turned it around, thanks to this place and the related ‘outposts’ and for that i am truly thankful…

my wife is ecstatically happy, deferent, doesn’t pick fights, apologizes for being crabby or in a bad mood, goes out of her way to offer support, etc. in other words, she has become much more feminine…

she does NOT want to go back to the ‘best friends’ model of marriage. Just today, i was doing something and happened to slip back into a beta response to something, and she got kind of panicky, and told me ‘you know, i don’t want you to beat me, but you need to sack up, and make a decision.’ (direct quote…) she did not want me to be her ‘oh, i don’t know, what do you think?…’ ‘best friend’…and yes, there was a little bit of panic in her eyes…but only a little, and then it went away when i told her what i wanted…so she could work on being a good follower…

better follower = happier woman…

Why do women come to resent their appeasement in time? The male mind formulates, “She’s getting what she wants, why isn’t she happy?” The problem is projection: The male mind draws a direct connection between wants and demands. Accounting for a few Machiavellian exceptions, when a man makes a (rare) relationship demand, you know that’s what he wants. And so men project their mental experience onto women. But what most men (and most men are betas by definition who lack a sufficient learning curve in the hearts and beds of women) don’t comprehend is that women have a disconnect between their demands and their wants. When a woman makes a demand within the context of a relationship, it’s a reflection of her want, not the want itself. Her demands are better understood as either child-like gropings toward self-expression of confusing and troubling emotions, or subconscious gom jabbars (tests of mind) that aid her in her hypergamous (yes) quest to obtain the best man her looks and femininity can afford her.

Seen in this way, appeasement is a strategy that misses the mark entirely or, worse, fuels resentment because it is evidence of failure to live up to a woman’s ideal lover and protector. And it makes sense if you put yourself in women’s stilettos; appeasement is the biopolitical strategy of the weak, and what woman wants to be with a weak man? Weak men are inherently untrustworthy. You can’t know with the requisite certainty that a weak man will have your back when threats emerge. Grrlpower glorification notwithstanding to the contrary, women are slaves to their hatred for weak men, and a manjaw or six figure salary won’t change that innate female revulsion for pliant men. This visceral revulsion is so strong that even the obvious benefits of a reliable and generous provider can’t fully extinguish a woman’s bodily disgust at the thought of receiving his seed.

“Women with the really good, stable guy felt more distant at high-fertility periods than low-fertility periods,” Haselton said. “That isn’t the case with women who were mated to particularly sexually attractive men. The closeness of their relationships got a boost just prior to ovulation.”

To ensure that the findings were not an anomaly, Haselton and Larson repeated the experiment with 67 other co-eds in long-term relationships. This time, however, the researchers administered a better-recognized measure for relationship satisfaction than the one they originally used. They also administered a questionnaire aimed at illuminating a dimension not studied in the first round: pickiness. The questionnaire asked the women to rate how characteristic such faults as being moody, childish, emotional, thoughtless and critical were of their mate.

The researchers found that women mated to the less sexually attractive men were significantly more likely to find fault with their partners and, again, feel less close to their partners during the high-fertility period than the low-fertility period. Women who rated their mates as more sexually attractive, meanwhile, did not exhibit these changes and instead reported being more satisfied with their relationship at high fertility than at low fertility.

The researchers believe the findings shed light on a suite of conflicting behaviors that stem from mating strategies that might have provided an evolutionary benefit to women’s female ancestors of long ago but today probably serve no other purpose than to stir the domestic pot.

“Since our female ancestors couldn’t directly examine a potential partner’s genetic makeup, they had to base their decisions on physical manifestations of the presence of good genes and the absence of genetic mutations, which might include masculine features such as a deep voice, masculine face, dominant behavior and sexy looks,” said Haselton, who is affiliated with UCLA’s Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture.

Men can’t (pragmatically) change their Hollywood looks, but they can change their behavior to conform more with dominant behavior that is typically associated with irresistible alpha males. A big first step that doesn’t require huge amounts of willpower is simply avoiding the temptation to appease women.

They also plan to look into how, if at all, the [aggrieved female] behavior is perceived by the male partners of these women.

“We don’t know if men are picking up on this behavior, but if they are, it must be confusing for them,” Larson said.

You bet it’s confusing for them, if by “them” you mean beta and omega males with limited experience navigating the shoals of women’s ids. Men who have bedded more than two or three women know the score, and the female behavior that’s confusing for most is for them an opportunity to play and enlarge the scope of their authority. The plain fact of this highlights the trade-off inherent in the womanizing lifestyle: The sexual experience that permits exploitation of women’s mate choice ploys to one’s personal benefit will also degrade a man’s ability to feel transcendent emotional attachment. Knowledge inevitably leads to cynicism, which is corrosive to romanticism and relationship stability unless one has the unearthly capacity to resolve the tension between self-interest and self-transcendence.

Relationship appeasement, then, is a Pyrrhic victory, buying time at best. When you stand accused by your woman, don’t act like a guilty party. Instead, act like a powerful authority figure suffering a self-incriminating tantrum from one of his acolytes, no matter who is technically at fault. I’ll give you an example from CH’s own repository of rendezvous.

GIRL: You’re really being an asshole. Why am I with you?
HADES’ GARDEN HOSE: Sorry. I’ll stop.

hahaahha. Bizarro world CH. No, that’s not how it went.

GIRL: You’re really being an asshole. Why am I with you?
HADES’ HOWITZER: [silently waits a beat, then stealthily moves in to perform the same asshole move at half intensity and half speed.]
GIRL: Cut it out! What’s the matter with you?
HADES’ HOWITZER: Would you say I’m being the biggest asshole you’ve ever known, or just a run of the mill asshole?
GIRL: Enough of an asshole.
HADES’ HOWITZER: Cause you know, I can turn it up so I’m number one asshole in your heart again.
GIRL: [starts to smile] Seriously, you have problems. No don’t turn it up.
HADES’ HOWITZER: [pulls same asshole move]
GIRL: Fuck!
HADES’ HOWITZER: Oh yeah, that hit the sweet spot.
GIRL: Grow up.
HADES’ HOWITZER: You know what I’m hearing? “Please pee on me in the shower tomorrow morning.”

To all the beta male readers: Next time you feel the need to appease, stop, and do the opposite. Pacification is the province of pussboys. You will take the road less traveled. The road to goad. Expect push-back. That’s a good thing. If you can stand strong against the immediate headwinds, you’ll find a tranquil, and deliriously scenic, vista open before your eyes.

Read Full Post »

If your girlfriend tells you she needs “space”, your relationship was over months earlier. You just got the memo late. “Space” is girlcode for “making space in my vagina for other cockas”. If you hear those words, leave, and don’t bother her for clarification. The only dignity you’ll have left to spare is what you don’t give away trying to salvage a stone dead relationship. If you want to exit stage right with Heartistian flair, you can relievedly exclaim with acting class sincerity, “Phew! I’m glad you brought this up. You were reading my mind. Really takes the pressure off”, or maybe even a simple “Yeah, I hear ya”.

Maxim #44: There is a three month lag time between a woman’s vaginal prerogative and her words. Her heart gets the message long before you do.

This womanly lag time between her true feelings for you and her verbal confirmation is the reason why you have to learn to rapidly identify the subtle signs of a woman’s emotional detachment, and make a course correction before her vagina has petrified to an impenetrable thicket at the thought of your approaching dick.

A perfect example of this comes from that reject repository, Reddit:

My girlfriend of 11 years broke up with me saying “She just needs some space now, and we may get back together.” I am wondering what the chances are that she actually intends on giving a relationship another shot, or if it was just said to get me to easily sign over the house and let her keep everything.

About four weeks ago she dropped this on me. As far as I knew everything was going great – we had just gone on a nice vacation together, night before had a bunch of friends over for a little get together, and were planning out future together. She said it was because we fight all the time, we honestly haven’t had a single fight in 2+ years.

That’s not a positive development. A chronically peaceable woman is a romantically withdrawn woman.

We owned a house together. We bought it about seven years ago, renovated it all, and made it into something we both liked. Wasn’t a particularly fancy house, but it was our house. We also had two dogs we got shortly after moving into the house. She now has the house and everything that was in it, I didn’t put up a fight for any of it.

Hope is often a prerequisite to failure.

She kept saying things like “I’d like to try a relationship again, but I know if you piss me off I’ll probably never even talk to you again.” Me being the broken hearted sap I was tried my damnedest to not upset her.

Classic niceguy mistake. Your appeasement made things worse. When a woman threatens to leave if you piss her off, what she’s really saying is that she’s pissed off with herself for her incapacity to tolerate your predictable amiability.

Signed the house over to her (her mother paid off the mortgage for her, I got nothing) and let her keep the dogs and everything we had gotten over the past 11 years.

pwn3d

except imagine the matador walked backward onto the horn.

I packed up my clothes, and found an apartment to move into.

So I officially moved out over the weekend, and sitting in my shitty little apartment my mind can’t help but keep racing to the idea that I just got manipulated out of everything I had. It just seems that if she really had any intentions on ever making things work there would have been much better options than this.

tl;dr: GF wanted a break, I gave her everything on the chance of another shot. Did I just get swindled?

A man can’t get swindled unless he swindles himself first, and the one thing idealistic beta males excel at is swindling themselves about the nature of women and the vagaries of love.

But there is a solution. You can read Chateau Heartiste and learn the ways of the ruthless sex, or you can continue to self-immolate in a one-window masturbatorium while your ex straddles a new man to orgasmic escape velocity on the bed you paid for and from where you cooed eleven years of your devotion into her pillow-framed ear.

Read Full Post »

Women of all (pre-menopausal) ages and all social strata are fascinated by mental parlor tricks. They enjoy the self-revelatory aspect of psychological quizzes, and especially those versions which summon the senses and amplify the feels. Once a girl is emotionally charged, it’s a simple matter to anchor her good feelings to your company.

Today, I will reveal a very special game routine that as far as I am aware exists nowhere else in the game literature. It is a proprietary and leather patented CH blend of neural witch-craftery that engages girls so powerfully they won’t want you to stop. This routine — what I call the Imagination Test — is ideal during that getting-to-know-each-other phase of the pickup, (or what PUAs call the comfort stage). You could try to use it at any time during a pickup, though; the routine is designed to work within a broad array of contexts.

The premise is uncomplicated. Like an acting class instructor, you guide the girl through various sensual exercises simulating brief scenarios or actions that you choose at your discretion. For example,

“Imagine you’re holding an ice cream cone and the scoop falls out to the ground. Feel your face change as your disappointment rises.”

Or,

“Imagine it’s midnight and you hear a loud knock at the door. All the lights are out and you have no idea who it could be.”

The gist of this routine is to heighten the emotions that a girl feels in your presence. The mere evocation of sensual stimuli will produce authentic elevations in her emotional calibration, much the same way that adopting power poses will produce real elevations in a man’s testosterone level and feeling of confidence. Couple the mimetic onslaught with a shrewdly anchored hand to thigh or forearm and when she recollects her dreamy night feeling the fuzz of an imaginary peach you concocted from thin air, her mind will travel a short hop from fruit to you, farmer of emotions.

By getting a girl to essentially play-act imaginary stimuli recruiting one or all the senses, her mind opens to further exploration with you and she becomes quite a bit more pliable to your commands, (a pliability to which she secretly yearns to release herself). The Imagination Test is, besides a stimulant for bored girls’ wary ennui, a demonstration of your creativity and originality. Rest assured, there are few men riding these kinds of thought trains through the stony skulltunnels of girls just met. Women are always looking for men set apart; this routine is one way to accomplish that.

The hard part is not the routine itself, but the sophisticated segue you must have to open an unweird social space for the routine. A couple of springboards I use that work well:

“Are you interested in learning a little bit about yourself?”

Or

“Many girls can get by on their looks, but not many can get by on their imaginations. How good is your imagination?”

Neither segue is failsafe verbillade, but they’ll get the job done often enough.

Further examples of the Imagination Test:

Imagine yourself…

stroking a puppy’s belly.
searching through a dark attic with a flickering flashlight.
holding a pigeon to your chest.
seeing a loved one for the first time in a long time.
overhearing your parents having sex.
catching a whiff of a man’s cologne.
smelling freshly mown grass.
tasting something you hate.
feeling an ice cube on your neck (or breast, if mood permits).
massaging a lover’s face.
letting rose petals slip through your fingers.
wrapped in a sheer satin curtain.
breaking warm bread fresh out of the oven.
gently tracing the face of your grandmother.
rolling your fingertips over a strong back (substitute female body part if you think she’d be down for the FFM).
biting into a juicy sweet melon.
revealing yourself naked for the first time to someone you love.

After your hypnotized hussy has gamely visualized and phantom experienced your sensate novellas, the opportunity is rich for a well-placed neg or a grudging acceptance of her imaginative, if unexpected, spark. Too, there is the chance to reveal to her (fib, really) what her mien during the exercises says about her personality (feel free to wing it here). As long as it’s about her and her centrality to the cosmos, she’ll feel that ever-present but slyly nebulous “connection” that women so love and that men strive to fabricate for slits and tingles.

Your post-thespian responses can run the gamut:

“When you tasted the food you hated, your mouth made this funny snarl, like a dog trying to lick away peanut butter.”

“When you smelled the grass, you had this incredibly serene look. What was it that made you so contented?”

“You put your hands behind your back when you imagined being naked. This small movement tells me you want no obstacles between yourself and a lover.”

***

Seduction comes in three stages for a reason: it’s the rediscovery of a natural mating rhythm that has likely remained unchanged for eons beyond memory. Now you, reader, imagine a woman’s heart as a pot of water on the stove. You tease her and challenge her to turn on her burner. You draw her in with words festooned in emotional garland to warm her lifeblood. You raise her temperature with feints toward the gas jet until she is boiling over. Tease, engage, escalate.

TEASE. ENGAGE. ESCALATE.

Maxim #20: First, lead by defying. Then, lead by inspiring. Finally, lead by desiring.

All steps, however abbreviated, must come in their order to inflame her curiosity, just as your eyes must travel the expanse of her body and the inflection points of her face, and your ears receive the chirp of her voice, to form the full measure of your lust.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: