Archive for the ‘Psy Ops’ Category

…here’s what you may have missed:

  1. miscegenation is rampant. mostly one kind: white women with black men. also, the boob tube landscape is filling with mystery meat kids.
  2. grrlpower is on steroids. women run corporations, the military, and the united federation of planets. in fights, they routinely kick the asses of men twice their size.
  3. the bad guys are still nordic-looking white men. (with a few notable exceptions)
  4. insipid feminist boilerplate is not just implied, it is blatantly preached. the effect is jarring to anyone with half a brain cell.
  5. fags are everywhere, and all of them are well-adjusted middle class normals, brandishing the aforementioned mystery meat adopted children.
  6. did i mention the mudsharking? jeezus.
  7. black characters are still numinous, still wise, still doctors, lawyers, judges, and (most laughably) deep state operatives.
  8. trannies are beginning to make appearances. (glowing, of course)

There you have it. Entertainment for the masses has become a shitlib propaganda machine, and they are not letting up on the gas. They want to drive American culture straight into a Wall of Poz.

Read Full Post »

Obama’s Psychology

CH neither endorses nor rejects this thesis by reader anon2 (but there’s probably something to it):

Everything about Obama’s psychology can be summarized thus :

His father married a white chick and then left. His father had a number of other kids and was ‘alpha’, at least relative to other shitlib manginas his mother knew.

He was unloved by his white mother (she later mudsharked with an Indonesian) and felt abandoned by her.

When he came to the US, white chicks didn’t want him. That bugs him to this day, especially since his father who was jet black still got a white chick, but mulatto Obama with an American accent, at a top University, could not get a white chick.

A predatory, ugly black giantess saw that this introverted, whipped boy could be bullied into marrying her. She proceeded with this coercion and while Barack caved, he resented this his entire life.

Now that he is POTUS, he could certainly get white chicks (status trumps all), but years with Michelle have killed his penis, and it has fully atrophied after having been away from female beauty for so long. Note that being married to the giantess is worse than being a porn-watching single incel.

Hence, his inability to get white chicks = hatred of white people = desire to obliterate white civilization to the best of his ability.

That is all there is to Barack Hussein Obama.

My suspicion is that the half-breed princess is a down low m00-lah-toe. Dirty little secret: there’s a higher percentage of homosexuals among blacks than any other race. (I’ve read but cannot confirm that eskimos also have an unusually high percentage of snowmosexuals in their tribe.)

Read Full Post »

“Anonymous” has a great comment explaining the motivation of the Lords of Lies.

As Fabian Saulinsky pointed out over on MPC, “We’re really living in a world that resembles the final years of the Soviet Union, when the State Media existed as little more than a status signaling tool of the elite designed to humiliate and demoralize via punishing repetition of obvious untruths.”

(For Trek nerds, think of the torturer ranting at Picard that there were five lights and demanding Picard agree with him. It wasn’t because the torturer believed it and wanted company in his delusions, it was just another form of abuse.)

However, it seems the Goebbels-lets in charge of Harrison Bergeron’s megaphone, Salon in particular, have broken the first rule of drug dealers everywhere – namely by sneaking hits of their own product – and have succumbed to the inevitable brain damage. They now merely drivel transparent clickbait that can have no purpose but to further enrage sane people. The Onion can no longer parody them effectively because parody would imply coming up with something more ridiculous, more nakedly contemptuous of their audience, than what they happily say already.

Case in point, a year ago they were giggling that it was racist to worry about Ebola. The logical endpoint of their encroaching lunacy would be to state that you’re a racist unless you take out a billboard ad with your home address, begging third world savages to do a Wichita Horror on your family, then deed over your property to whichever of them gets there and does the “job American’s wont do” first.

Who knows, maybe the true believers will take them up on it.

The equalist leftoids who occupy most positions of power in the West are brazen hypocrites; most of them don’t believe their own bullshit, yet they spout it endlessly. The reason is because they want to humiliate you. To see you figuratively on your knees, your will bent in service to repeating their lies as if they were truth, and thus your identity — your soul — stripped of autonomy and coerced into servitude to your putative betters.

Well, CH says fuck that noize. You come here and you’ll learn to rise to your feet, and stare down the leftoids who claim a mantle of moral purity but who are in reality cruelty artists with a sadistic streak a mile wide (but an inch deep).

This is a good time to remind the equalist cruelty artists that there’s one foe who makes you piss your pajama boy pants: another cruelty artist with an additional quality you lack.


Read Full Post »

Üntermenschlet Michael Cera once starred in a movie called Youth in Revolt. It wasn’t half-bad by the standards of his usual sackless oeuvre, but the best thing about the movie — a quasi-parody of indie flics disguised as a romcom — was its exploration of the Game concept of Identity Creation. In this way, the movie is actually a hidden gem of masculine awareness. Cera’s character is a hapless beta male with oneitis who creates an alter ego of himself as a suave, smooth-talking, slightly douchey badboy. The girl, naturally, falls for the new and improved Michael Shitlord.

Identity Creation is a big deal among the Game intelligentsia. That’s because it works. Crafting a recognizable, even mythological, persona and skillfully conveying it to women will provide a big passive boost to your charisma. All women — not just slutty bar skanks — love a dollop of drama and pretension, and are intrigued by men who embody sexy archetypes. Those men stand out from the mediocre masses of beta male boobs, and this is crucial in a saturated dating market that is nearing an effective sex ratio which is extremely favorable to prime nubility girls.

Women imagine that men possessing powerful identities live in a more exciting world than the plebes — a secret society, to borrow a PUA term — and as is the wont of women they desire badly what they think is being denied them. They want into that mysterious man’s world.

An identity is part of both inner and outer Game. A strong identity allows you to know yourself and thus act with purpose; your frame will be solid with this self-aware knowledge. As an outer game strategy, your identity — aka your core personality — is communicated via style, behavior, attitude, and body language. The better you can convey your identity, the more women will autonomically moisten in your presence.

The Cadfather of Game, Mystery von Mystery, was a two-bit magician who used that seedling of a self-definition to grow a much stronger and more seductive identity which he whimsically deployed in da clubs to the delight of boner fried hotties. Here’s Mystery on the importance of a well-honed method to conveying your identity,

I will attempt to resolve his misunderstanding between STYLE and METHOD as well as reveal some insights on how to specifically customize material to convey a unique identity (for both you and my friend Thundercat). Once you customize your material to fit your chosen “strong identity” will you no doubt make others who watch you work wrongfully assume it is your particular identity that gets you the girls and not the method that powers the conveying of it.

As those who have taken a Mystery Method seminar know, MM consists of three main areas:

PART 1. A format (or game plan) which has 3 stages, each with 3 phases.
PART 2. Mental tools to get you from phase to phase (isolation tactics, kiss tactics, extraction tactics, etc).
PART 3. Scripts and personality conveying material (content) to fill in each of the 9 phases.

While parts 1 and 2 (the MM format and it’s tactics) don’t change from person to person, part 3 (personality conveying material) does. We each possess a unique identity. You are not me. I am a magician. My wing Style is a writer. Tyler D. is a public speaker. Does this mean you have to be a magician, a writer, or a public speaker in order to attract women? Of course not! But what you DO need is what Style, Tyler D. and I share in common: we each possess a strong identity.


I’m sure you’ve found yourself in a set and have reached the point where your target says, “What do you do?” You either give her your honest but lame answer like, “I’m a student”, or “I’m a system’s administrator”, or worse, you try to circumvent the question entirely with “I’m an ass model.”

The problem is you don’t have an attractive identity, or if you do, it’s not a strong one. Some guys will experiment with “I’m a rockstar”, or “I’m a promoter”, or “I’m a public speaker”, but your target will either feel you are lying (in the same way we believe an “actress” is likely a “waitress”), or if they DO believe your evidence, they become intimidated when you get weighed down by the stereotype they have of you.

If instead of answering her question “What do you do” with “I’m [x]” you can ground your present identity to her reality and harness the opportunity to convey a much richer personality. Here’s how you do it.

Instead say:

1. “Well when I was little I wanted to be a [x].”
2. “When I was a teenager [x] happened.” Tell stories about how you got from 1 to 3.
3. “Now I’m [x]. Can you believe it?”


So this is what you must now do to improve your game:

1. Figure out who YOU are by looking at what you DO repeatedly – something you can say in a word or two. (ex: magician, writer, toy inventor, CEO, hacker, rock climber, rapper, public speaker, traveler)

2. Come up with several stories that convey how you got from being a normal kid to doing what you repeatedly do.

3. Practice telling these stories to others to make the stories enthusiastic and natural.

OK, you now know grounding — i.e., delivery style — and self-tailored stories are important to conveying your identity and triggering or amplifying female attraction.

There are two pathways to Identity Creation:

  1. Reframing your already existing identity as one that is sexier than an objective analysis would indicate.
  2. Choosing a fresh identity that is attractive to women and complements, rather than contradicts, the general contours of your personality and worldview.

Crafting a completely novel identity that is so unlike yourself no one would recognize you can be done, but it’s difficult, particularly at the beginning before you’ve built up the mental muscles that will internalize your new identity and enable you to express it congruently. The more practical goal is to work within the confines of your resting personality state, knowing that at the margins your personality is sufficiently flexible. And the intensity and zero sum nature of the sexual market means that a small change at the margins can mean a big change in the quantity and quality of your notches.

First, take heed that some identities are more equal than others. Proudly assuming the look and lifestyle of a basement porn consumer isn’t a golden ticket to gushing tingles. Most people instinctively know which identities are timelessly sexy to women, but as a reminder here’s a short list of some of the most commonly perceived sexy male archetypes:

  • adventurer
  • corporate titan
  • brooding artist
  • street tough
  • Machiavellist
  • world traveler
  • rock star
  • jock
  • ladies’ man
  • tormented writer
  • photographer
  • rugged outdoorsman
  • social linchpin (bartender/promoter/event planner)
  • cult leader
  • spy/shadowy figure with a murky past
  • ex-con
  • war vet (“i’ve seen things…”)
  • Jeb Bush….. HAHAHAHAHA

Unfortunately, there’s a new persona/identity taking the culture by storm.

  • SJW

No one will ever mistake the typical SJW for a sexy male (or female) archetype. So why does it now flourish? The answer is simple once you recognize that SJWism is a siren song for humanity’s dregs. The ugliest, fattest, weirdest, gooniest LSMV losers adopt the SJW identity to raise their own status and knock down the status of their betters. These degenerate freaks on their own would go to the grave incel, but with a Tumblrrea and a passion for poopytalk the Crouching Manlet Hidden Dildo sees in the SJW identity a chance — the slimmest possible (but still better than zero) — to get a drunken pity fuck from a bluehair fatty before his dick stops working from cheeto-clogged arteries.

This is how dysfunctional the American sexual market has become: the SJW identity is a legitimate recourse to escape lifelong involuntary celibacy.

Let’s pull one random sexy identity from the above list and I’ll run through the process of building upon and eventually conveying this identity to intrigued women:


You can completely fabricate a persona as a photographer, but it will be much easier to pull off if you actually have some experience at photography, or have some genuine interest in the subject.

Now, you’re not going to walk around with a honking DLSR everywhere you go. But you will deck out your bang pad with the accoutrements of the accomplished photographer. The sexier, the better. Keep a personal photo album on the coffee table. Have a few B&W photos of naked exes on the wall. Have a dedicated studio room, where you take your unsuspecting prey dates and slyly suggest they “have the right skin tone for indoor shots”.

When you go out, have stories ready for girls.

“Well when I was little I wanted to be a painter.”
“When I was a teenager I was introduced to the modeling world by a cousin who worked with models. I went on a day trip to see what it was like. I had a point and shoot with me and just started taking snapshots of girls getting ready for shows. They loved it, and I discovered I had a better eye than a painter’s hand.”
“Now I do photo shoots for aspiring actresses. It’s great to be able to have a passion and make money from it!”

Seal the deal by taking your dates to local venues where you have agreements with the managers to hang your photos on the venue walls. Nonchalantly at some point during the date gesture to a photo hanging on the wall and tell her that’s one of yours.

Fashion-wise, cop the stereotypical garb of artsy photographers. All black outfits, slim fitting pullovers, sneakers for that high-low style contrast, a lethally steady gaze.

Related: Persona contests are the new medium for status whoring. As the niches for status striving exploitation have filled up, Americans have moved from materialist status competition (McMansions) through lifestyle status competition (home brewing) and now to persona status competition (“black lives matter”). Charisma has long been a defining feature of all three Prime Identities, but it is predominant in the persona, so it’s not a coincidence that Game has risen in esteem with the rise of the cult of the persona.

Read Full Post »

CH is fond of asserting that stereotypes don’t materialize out of thin air. They usually have a kernel of truth. The intent of stating this bleedingly obvious fact is to drive equalist, race creationist leftoids insane in the membrane. But, perhaps the truth embodied in common man stereotypes is more than a kernel.

There are many different ways to test for the accuracy of stereotypes, because there are many different types or aspects of accuracy.  However, one type is quite simple — the correspondence of stereotype beliefs with criteria.  If I believe 60% of adult women are over 5′ 4″ tall, and 56% voted for the Democrat in the last Presidential election, and that 35% of all adult women have college degrees, how well do my beliefs correspond to the actual probabilities?  One can do this sort of thing for many different types of groups.

And lots of scientists have.  And you know what they found?  That stereotype accuracy — the correspondence of stereotype beliefs with criteria — is one of the largest relationships in all of social psychology.  The correlations of stereotypes with criteria range from .4 to over .9, and average almost .8 for cultural stereotypes (the correlation of beliefs that are widely shared with criteria) and.5 for personal stereotypes (the correlation of one individual’s stereotypes with criteria, averaged over lots of individuals).  The average effect in social psychology is about .20.  Stereotypes are more valid than most social psychological hypotheses.

Generalizations about groups of people are useful because they are short cuts to evaluating another group’s values and predicting their behaviors in a variety of social contexts. Generalizations, aka stereotypes aka your lying eyes, work because they are more often right than wrong. There are big social (and reproductive) advantages to the person who is comfortable stereotyping ethnies, races, and sexes, not least of which is the ability to tailor one’s trust response according to the likelihood that a member of a different group shares one’s values, or will behave similar to oneself given the operative environmental cues.

As for the relevance of stereotyping to Game, if you enter the dating market believing that every woman is a unique snowflake (as opposed to feigning this belief with the purpose of moving a seduction forward), you will encounter a lot of failure from your inability to accurately gauge how women will respond to your romantic efforts. Learning from your mistakes becomes impossible if you refuse to notice patterns. There’s no faster route to incel than to go on believing that any one woman’s bad reaction to your beta supplication predicts nothing about how other women will react.

Which raises a question:  Why do so many psychologists emphasize stereotype inaccuracy when the evidence so clearly provides evidence of such high accuracy?  Why is there this Extraordinary Scientific Delusion?

There may be many explanations, but one that fits well is the leftward lean of most psychologists.

Color me shocked. Soft science field filled to the rafters with delusional shitlibs churns out slanted studies and deceptive interpretations of findings that validate their fragile cuckbaya egos.

And when something happens where they can’t avoid looking at [unpalatable findings], they have denigrated its importance.  Which is, in some ways, very amusing — if, after 100 years of proclaiming the inaccuracy of stereotypes to the world, can we really just say “Never mind, it’s not that important” after the evidence comes in showing that stereotype accuracy is one of the largest relationships in all of social psychology?

Can zero-integrity shitlibs really just utterly contradict themselves without a second thought? Does a fat feminist simultaneously claim fat is beautiful and beauty is in the eye of the beholder?


Via Canadian Friend,

This year, a team of scholars from six universities studying ideological diversity in the behavioral sciences published a paper in the journal Behavioral and Brain Sciences that details a shocking level of political groupthink in academia. The authors show that for every politically conservative social psychologist in academia there are about 14 liberal social psychologists.

Arthur C. Brooks, New York Times, October 30, 2015

How ironically banal that the group which preaches the endless benefits of Diversity™ is the group with the least amount of thought diversity in their academia bathhouses.

Read Full Post »

During the most recent GOP debate (which I didn’t watch but read about afterward), Trump was asked about his beef with Mark Cuckersperg, which turned to the subject of the immigration scam known as H1Bs, a program which is essentially a green light for tech corps to import slave labor to do the jobs, at a fraction of the wage price, that Americans already do.

Trump evaded. Or, worse, according to some he gave a response that was at complete odds with his campaign’s own immigration policy paper (written by Jeff Sessions). It was his one big slip in the debate, but it was near-lethal to a campaign that won over people primarily on the strength of its promise to close the borders.

The original question referred to a tweet that Trump, or a Trump staff Twatter, made about Rubio, calling him “Mark Zuckerberg’s personal senator”, an insult aimed at Rubio’s support of the H1B scam. It was a great zing, because it was true. Yet Trump backed away from his own zinger, when he could have used that point in the debate to go for Rubio’s throat and possibly deliver a mortal wound that could knock Rubio out of the race. I mean, ferkrissakes, nobody likes Mark Cuckersperg, except maybe his waifu.

Trump missed a golden opportunity to stick the shiv in a true cuck, and likely hurt himself with his weak backpedaling.

My question to the CH readers: Why do you think Trump avoided the easy shot?

I have a few guesses:

– Trump doesn’t read his own policy papers, and is only against “open borders” inasmuch as the topic can be used as a stand-in for runaway rapes and violent crimes.
– Trump has a personal affinity for Rubio, and the tweet in question was made without his knowledge.
– Trump isn’t in this race to win it, and this was the start of him taking a dive for the candidate that he prefers, or that friends of his prefer. (This speculation requires believing that Trump only entered the race to knock ¡Jabe! out.)
– Trump wants to tone down his rebel image now that he’s made it through a couple of rounds, to improve his electability later on. (This is a risky strategy so soon in the nomination process.)
– Or, Trump was off his game. (We all have our beta moments.)

Spinning this less cynically, Trump might think he’s got this nomination wrapped up, and he’s already casting an eye to the general election, when he’ll have to deal with a 24/7 hostile leftoid media haranguing him about his “racism” against mexican peasants.


Trump has already clarified his brief immigration backpedal. Very nice. He’s a quick learner. This supports my guess that he was just off his game at the debate. Trump 2016!

Read Full Post »

Framing and reframing are core Game concepts that every Chateau guest should by now understand and have internalized. The topic has been discussed frequently here at CH, and deserves that level of scrutiny because framing has broader applications beyond seducing women.

A frame is a system of interpretation that an individual or group uses to understand a certain event/situation.

Frame is important in pickup, because it communicates the PUA’s mindset as well as the underlying psychology behind his words and actions. For example, Swinggcat advocates a “prizing” frame, whereby the PUA always assumes the girl is interested in him as the prize. In this frame, a chick can say, “I really like the tie”. The PUA can respond, “Thank you, slow down a little bit. At least buy me a drink before you hit on me like that.” […]

“Framing”, [or frame control], in the context of media studies, sociology and psychology, refers to the social construction of a social phenomenon by mass media sources or specific political or social movements or organizations. It is an inevitable process of selective influence over the individual’s perception.

In pickup, as with mass media, there are always certain levels of interpretation of a specific event that can be reframed based on frame control, and your emotions and conviction in your beliefs.

Pay attention to that word conviction. It’s critical to knowing why cuckservatives are so cucked, and why they can’t ever seem to go on the offense against anti-White leftoids.

For now, a helpful (and amended) reminder of a relevant CH maxim:

Maxim #45: Any conversation with a woman/leftoid/Hivemind jackboot that is not explicitly framed by you to maximize your perceived status will lead to her/the leftoid/the Hivemind forming a negative perception of your value over time.

Which brings us to a comment left by reader Moses,

I’ve said it before and I’m gonna keep saying it:

White self-immolation is nothing more than a loss of frame on a massive scale.

When whites began elevating other groups’ interests of White interests it was a loss of frame on a societal level.

Other ethnic groups saw an opportunity to exploit White guilt and did so — and continue to do so — brilliantly.

Non-Whites have only the power that Whites give to them. It’s true that Whites deserve whatever they get. And they will get it good and hard.

Moses is right. A massive loss of frame will not just send you home alone a (self-)beaten incel; it will also send your civilization and your race to an incel defeat.

Relevant to this discussion, I was listening to a news show about the GOP nomination race and the guest cuckservative cucked his way into a perfectly cucky explanation for Uncle Ben Carson’s popularity among middle America Whites. He said, paraphrasing, “I’m not racist! Some of my best friends are black!”

Well, yeah, that’s pretty much what he said. More precisely, he said, “Republican support for Carson proves that they would love to vote for a black or hispanic or woman president.” Left unmentioned was the stool chafing he gave himself while watching his wife get banged out by her black lover.

This is what is meant by a massive loss of frame enabling White autogenocide. The cuck actually aids his enemy’s purposes when he loses frame and ADOPTS THE FRAME of his tormentors. He is essentially conceding that White Republicans are secret racists who are trying hard to overcome their terrible affliction and prove they are making progress toward the one true faith of antiracism, and voting for a shell entity black guy is how they impress their reeducation camp officers.

What if cucks — or even BadWhites in general — stopped losing frame? What would that world look like?

I can think of two powerful ways to reframe the anti-White leftoid narrative, and by so doing recapture the moral and practical high ground.

1. Attack the anti-White leftoid hypocrisy.

Cuck: “Republicans need to do more outreach to black/hispanic/tranny voters and prove they are not the party of exclusion.”

The Un-Cucked: “Blacks vote 90% for Dems. Hispanics vote 70% for Dems. Billionaires vote 80% Dem. The Democrats need to do more outreach to Whites and non-billionaires.”

2. Attack the anti-White leftoid premise.

Cuck: “Republicans have to show they aren’t going to be the party of White people.”

The Un-Cucked: “It’s good that there is a public voice for White interests. No one else but Whites will look out for Whites.”

That is how you establish the frame and Uncuck the Discourse. Nothing good gets accomplished until the cuck is cast off his royal corner stool.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,391 other followers

%d bloggers like this: