Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Psy Ops’ Category

Major1 wins COTW for clearly stating in colorful dialogue the unbending reality of leftoid psychological projection,

This entire post [leftoid envy post] can be condensed into a single, eternal truism.

Whatever a liberal/progressive says, they mean the opposite. Period.

There are only fifty-eight bazillion examples.

“Trump colluded with Russians”
Translation: “Hilary colluded with Russians”.

“The alt-right are fascists”.
Translation: “We are fascists”.

“Trump isn’t mentally healthy enough to be President”.
Translation: “Hilary’s seizure disorder, Parkinson’s disease, alcoholism, and inability to competently handle classified material makes her unfit for the Presidency”.

“Trump is a vulgar pussy-grabber”.
Translation: ” Al Franken, Harvey Weinstein,and Bill Clinton are vulgar pussy grabbers”.

And….ad infinitum.

We can pity our liberal friends, neighbors, and co-workers. That level of prevarication and cognitive dissonance must take a terrible psychological toll.

But just because we pity them doesn’t mean we can’t crush them, mercilessly, under our boots.

Freud really nailed it when he identified “psychological projection” as a real cognitive bias. (He wasn’t right about much else.) The affliction bedevils leftoids far more frequenlty and with greater intensity than it does conservatives. Why? Theory: leftoid will to power is based on phony moralizing, so they need a devious rhetorical trick to convince themselves and their enemies that they act with virtuous intentions. Believing one’s lies helps with that.

Read Full Post »

This is NOT a parody comic strip lampooning SWPL shitlib sensibilities and their lifestyle pretensions.

“The Future is Female”. From the old oven, indeed. Heh.

It gets worse. The heroine is a fat, tatted, mudsharking cow.

My sides! So we’ve got two mystery meatballs playing in the grass, a dyke in a vest jacket, and a slovenly fat white woman with her black boyfriend who, btw, is wearing a Local Food t-shirt. There isn’t a single dindu in the world who gives a flying fuck about eating locally.

LOL Schlomobomb.

Again, not a parody. Astounding. One has to wonder about the physiognomy of the cartoonist — Marc Alan Fishman — who drew this multikult jizzart with sincere intentions.

The work is the product of an ad campaign by the town council of Homewood, IL, a suburb of 20,000 outside of Chicago. The goal is to pull effete Shrillennials away from Chicago by presenting their town as an affordable, less hectic “urban lite” enclave with its delightfully comforting trappings familiar to rootless cosmopolitan White liberals: the mixed race couples, the feminist posturing, the edgedork t-shirt slogans, the avocados, and of course the low T White soyboys prostrating themselves to their Masters of Diversity.

But the whole thing comes off less like a promo for an idyllic suburb with a decent walkability score than like a creepy caricature of shitlibville at the highest estrogen setting. I want to wash the menstrual blood off my eyeballs after reading this “comic”.

In one strip, a Homewood mom with a purple streak in her hair and a tattoo praises the school system. “Zen gets to be with the same kids all the way through high school,” she says.

Many urban hive bugmen and bugwomen feel an ancient stirring for less social atomization and more connectedness in line with how we humans evolved for most of our history, but the feeling is horribly atrophied in them, so they have to grapple with it through an infantilizing lens of abject POZ, because they frighten easily by the thought of a de facto patriarchal normietown where everybody knows your shame. Compromising solution: POZburbia for the burned out city creature.

The ads, which will run through the end of May, were the idea of Mary Jane Maharry [ed: echo alert], a public relations consultant to the town. Maharry enlisted Fishman, the local artist, and presented the concept to the village board, whose members embraced it, according to Homewood Mayor Richard Hofeld.

Try to picture the roomful of pasty herbs and jaw-jutting femcunts who signed off on this concept. Yeech.

Hofeld said the town wants more young families to move there, and as urban Millennials start to think about homeownership and child-rearing, it’s the right time to recruit them. “We found the Millennials [in Chicago] are prone to looking to the north suburbs and the west suburbs, and rarely look to the south,” Hofeld said.

Forget it, Zen. It’s N*****town.

Who’s the sucker for moving to the suburbs now, eh?, the ads seem to ask. But the characters are more or less interchangeable; the implication is that if they move to Homewood, those tightly wound Chicagoans will chill out and name their kids “Zen,” too.

While they might seem suspiciously like they were generated by an algorithm fed with marketing data and New York Times trend pieces,

And run through a soy compiler.

the comic-strip Homewood denizens are based on real residents and real events, according to Maharry (who lives in Homewood herself).

Maybe this is why Homewood needs a public relations consultant. (so very organic)

In fact, “Think Homewood” reveals just how much the old dichotomy of city vs. suburb is blurring.

It’s blurring because the cities are becoming Whiter (and thus more desirable) while the suburbs are becoming browner (and thus less desirable to high income Whites). There are huge tracts of suburbia throughout regions of the USA where the schools look like Little Mexico. Plus, blacks are being economically forced out of the cities they once held as a super majority, and flooding into the surrounding exurbs (with all the blackness that defines ghetto life transported in toto to the burbs).

It proves a fact that would have been unthinkable 20 or 30 years ago: Suburbs now have to work to attract the cohort they were built for.

Right, suburbs ringing the big shitlibopolises are rapidly embrowning, so they aren’t as attractive to Whites living in cities that are more pleasant places to live now than they used to be before their Paris-ification. This is why diverse suburbs like Homewood have to hire PR firms to sell their towns to Whites who have grown tired of talking to the cat.

As certain cities become more sought-after and lively, suburbs can no longer just sit back and wait for the inevitable stampede of first-time homebuyers and new parents. They have to convince skeptical young folk of their essential urbanity first.

To a juvenile mind, “essential urbanity” means a pussyhat and feigning adoration of mixed meatballs.

They also have to offer a competitive advantage vis-a-vis the city. In Homewood, that advantage is affordable real estate and good public schools. The median home value in Homewood is a reasonable $149,800, according to Zillow. The area high school, Homewood-Flossmoor, is well regarded.

“Well regarded” is real estate-speak for “no metal detectors in the separated White part of the school“.

In the view of sociologist John Joe Schlichtman, Homewood is basically promising gentrification without the guilt.

This is exactly it. The suburbs of these big cities are trying to replicate the cities’ success at convincing Whites to return en masse.

The multiracial cast of these ads is not a sleight of hand. Homewood is legitimately diverse: 53 percent white, 37 percent black, 2 percent Asian, and 8 percent Hispanic. Its schools are majority nonwhite. These figures reflect larger demographic shifts as people of color move out (or are pushed out) of expensive cities, and as immigrants bypass central cities and head straight to the ’burbs.

Open borders mass third world immigrations has been a disaster for suburbia. The landscape is now dotted with tiny ramshackle homes housing three generations of aztec peasantry.

But Homewood-Flossmoor also has a history of proactive integration efforts: The South Suburban Housing Center, a regional fair-housing organization, was founded in Homewood in 1975.

A history that will never end. Hint: the best kind of integration is the integration that doesn’t require proactive efforts to summon forth. It happens naturally, because the people are racially, temperamentally, behaviorally, and culturally similar.

[Mayor Hofeld] hopes people who are interested in the town will attend one. Millennials, he said, “have enjoyed living in the city, and the features the city might afford. But they’re getting a little bit older, thinking of raising families, and looking around for a stable community that has a lot of amenities. And that’s what we are.”

If the schools are good (White) and the residents genuinely feel an affinity for each other, then the amenities will organically follow. But amenities are a symptom, not a cause, of a strong social community. All the amenities in the world won’t turn southside Chicago into a Pleasantville.

I can laugh at the effort while appreciating the intention. De-urbanization (aka de-scaling) is generally a good thing, so in principle I support any efforts to get White libs to disperse for the countryside so that their liberalism is muted by a closer connection to the land, to kids, and to normal Americans. But some efforts are more retarded than others, and this one is super retarded. Not many Whites of the replacement fertility level persuasion want to live in a town that feels it necessary to have a PR flack and thinks purple-haired fat coalburning goonettes are a selling point. And they won’t live in a town without some serious compensation if the schools are *wink wink* “well regarded”.

Read Full Post »

da GBFM needs no introduction, but does need a Pulzlolzllolzzlitzer. Reprinted in full:

******

TO EE HOW WELL ALL OF YOU BEETATTZ BUNGHOELRZ HAVE BEEN STSUDYDYTING lzozlzozlzlzz

lzozozlzozo da gbfm quiz:

1. The best way to bernankify a woman is through her:
a) nose hole
b) ear hole
c) mouth hole
d) butthozlzoozlz
e) gina hoelez
f) zlzozozlzolzozozoz

2. Tukker MAx rhryems with
a) Goldman sax
b) ben bernanke
c) sosdoomy
d) feminisst writer
e) sextrrive tapingz of buttehtx

3. The proper spellinzg of butthext is:
a) buttheext
b) butetehtxtxtx
c) butetehxtxtxt
d) buetetxlxoooozozoz
e) butetehrolozozozozozoz

4. The neoeocnths promote butyhe buttehxt so as to
a) desoul your womenz
b) beernakify your owmenz and ruin them as motehrz
c) pwn your owmenz and addict them to buttehxt
d) plant the butthextual longing seed that leads to divorce
e) detsory the fmaily to put your chcildren in beernaneke day care
f) all of da above zlzozooozlzoz

5. The following neoenthcts faought and were injured in the Middle East warz:
a) Jonah Goldbergz
b) BEn BErnnanke
c) Bill Crrystal
d) Jonah Goelebrgz mom lucianne goldbergz
e) bene shapriorz
d) none of teh abaovez lzozozozozoozoz

6. Sigmund Freud stated that the one question that puzzled him most was “What do women want?” The famous polymath poet/psychologist GBFM figured it out circa 2011. According to the great GBFM, women want:
a) beta fucks and alpha buckz
b) beta bucks and betasz fucks
c) alpha fucks and alpha fucks
d) alpha fucks and beta bucks
e) alpha fucks, alpha buckz, beta bucks, an all your moneyz too zlozlzlzozoz

7. The best way to gt a publishing deal with a publishing house run by women, or to be featured in a consertaive magazine article penned by women is to:
a) write exlated rhyming poetry
b) butthext a girl and tape it secrtely without her ocnctnt conthent
c) write a story with plot, values, and honor, like homer’s odyssey
d) write a shakeparean sonnet with imanbic pentaammeneterz and a couplet dat ryems at da end lzozlzlzozozoz

8. The difference between modern ministers and pimps is dat
a) pimps will not charge you for past use of a pussy
b) pimps are not fronting a divorce regime which transferz money from menz to owmenz and the state at gunpoint
c) a pimp cannot garnish your wagesz if yo ho beocme preggeersenenlzlzlzlzo
d) a pimp does not ask for donationz
e) a pimp doesn’t claim he’s doing god’s work by grating you temporal use of a pussy in esxhange for past, present, and future wages
f) all of da aboveez zlozlozlzlzozozoz

10. If a womanz is a 3 and 7 alphas pump and dump her in collegez, she will do the math and conldue she is a
a) 3-7 = -4
b) 7-3 = 4
c) 7+3=10 I AM A TEN ZLZOZOZOZO!!!!!!

11. BOUNS BONUS BOENERUS QUETSION EXTRASZ CREDITZ: Chivalry is good because:
a) It gets betas to pay for what alpahs got for free hwen it was younger hotter tighter twnety pounds lighter
b) It guarantees that there will be men with assetetzzz that can be rapaed via dirrvoece
c) granpda said so, “when i was your age son,” i was married and supporting a family. man up and marry da whos!!! lzozloz”

12. The chronalogical chroniloogical chronological economic relationshpipz between ass and assets is:
a) da bankerz get your wife’s ass in college (as thy sefctrievly tape her doeusling in a buttehxtual buttehxting sessisin like tuukker max rheyems woith godlman saxxx) and your assets after divorce
b) your wife givez her azz butthoele away for free in college, and then chagegegrs you moneyz (assetts) just to look at it
c) your wife is butthurt after her ass is plundered in college and den she takes her revenge by plundering your assettsst
d) da bankerz deosul your wife in college by bebenrnakaifying her in her buttholez ass, and den dey program her to transfer your assets to them, fgruataleyfliey transferring your assets out theorugh her bngohole and into their beenrbeeknake bank acocuntz zlzozozozoz
e) all of da above zlozzolzozoz

FEEL FREE TO ADD YOUR OWN QUESTSIOZNZZZZZ!!!! lzozozozoozoz

ESSAY QUESTION: Describe thee relationship between usury and sodomy. Those who cite Milton, Dante, and other historical sources and figures will be given higher scorezz zlzozolzlozlzozlzzozozozozlz

lzozozozolzolz bonus nboenerz wuqestsionz:
#11. I like dating aemrican womenz and western womenz beacues:
a) i like paying for what otherz got for fre when it was younger hotter tghtr twnety poundz lighterz lzozooz
b) i like paying for rental carsz after i return them
c) i like urinalz dat make me pay and make small talk each time i pee
d) i like suiting up in a hazmat suit, self-contained breathing apparatus, snorkel, fins, and thre cans of lysol when i go down on pusysysysys zlzozozlzo
e) i like hearing about how men created all the evil in the world including shoppng malls, cars, ipodz iphonez twitter (clitter/twatter) and even cinabun zlzozozolzozzl

******

In a sane world, GBFM would be hailed a visionary poet on NPR while Ta Nigisi Coates would be doing dreary slam rap on the gay black bar circuit.

Read Full Post »

This is a great comment by emery, who tells about a clinically diagnosed psychopath among his group of friends:

********

There are a lot of posers in this topic who are commenting about psychopaths without realizing that their opinion of them has been super biased by the media they consume. Like this guy
“A psychopath or sociopath or narc will never fight for his ‘tribe’. There is no tribe for them. There is no social belonging. Its just them and them alone for miles to come in their head. Their evolutionary strategy is simply to fend for themselves using short term measures. They also make incredibly poor soldiers who have trouble sticking to chain of command and instead use the system to gain short term benefits. “
or this guy
“I’m a psychiatrist and the dude seems more likely to be one of those common internet aspie nerds than a psycho. Psychos dont post on the internet. They dont tell others they are psychos. Aspie nerds have low sensitivity to stimuli because of continuos uninterrupted viseogaming and porn surfing”

My closest friend is a psychopath, 6 out of 10 on the scale (around 8 you start to be unable to integrate into society in any meaningful fashion) and boy let me tell you that our host’s assessment of their charismatic powers is dead on. For some reason women of all stripes love him, men want to be his friend and all sorts of opportunities are opened for him with seemingly no effort. He is willing to kill over his friends and is the first guy to kick up a shitstorm when one of us is dissed (when it can be done and we get away with it, he always has a sense of when to fight or walk away too) so their lack-of-tribe isn’t a hard rule. As a soldier they are great; there’s the book “Wisdom of Psychopaths” which interviews some elite british special forces guy and he’s a geniune psychopath. They are unfazed by danger and are willing to do crazy shit; and they follow orders WHEN THEY MAKE SENSE. Otherwise they operate with independence which you want in your most elite forces. You want someone wacked, you send the psychopath.

Anyways I wanted to respond to this comment.
“I’ve heard it said, “a true psychopath would never know he was a psycho.” I don’t buy that. A true psychopath would know exquisitely that he was a psycho…and wouldn’t care. “
I can only speak for my friend but he didn’t know he was a psycho until recently. He just thought other people made dumb choices or had weaker logical centers than him. Turns out he is half right, since the defining thing of psychopathy is that emotions don’t affect their actions. He only found out he was a psycho because he asked me, “Sometimes people just completely misunderstand what I say, Why is that?”. One thing led to another and voila.

As you can tell I’m totally jealous of him. Psychopathy is the tits in our modern society, like running on a clear high while everyone is a panicked mess. It’s like being in the zone in a game you’ve mastered and played for years going up against people who still make newbie mistakes and don’t really understand how to play and are stuck in their head. Only one weakness; There is some truth to all the posters saying they are predators who feast on the tribe. If they are poorly socialized they will roam and prey on people and they absolutely cannot sustain a hierarchy. My friend is loved by everyone and they’ll do what he says when he asks but doesn’t have that tribal-leader quality that keeps group cohesion strong. It’s hard to phrase, but he cannot see and thus cannot add to the ‘social currency’ that really tight groups use to feel bonded to one another.

There IS a place for them though. You want your doctors, soldiers, executioner headsman and your priests to all be psychopaths. The commonality is that they benefit when their personal emotions do not factor into their actions. Btw, I believe this is why they totally slay women (heh). Women manipulate emotions through superior empathy and superior empathy-manipulating-tools (boobs, childlike features, demure purring etc.) and they are completely stripped of those weapons against the psychopath. If she doesn’t have any other mental tools (and modern women are the least socially adept they’ve been in, possibly, all of human history) it’s, again, like a child fighting a master.

********

One of the greatest pickup artists — womanizers, in the new-old vernacular — I’ve known was on the psycho spectrum, in my estimation based on his personal acquaintance with me. And yes, women were totally out-gunned and ill-equipped to parry his charms. Short term conquests were his specialty; he had a few gfs but his relationships always ended prematurely, and usually with spectacular fireworks. He acquired many obsessive stalkers in this way.

I recall reading somewhere that heart and brain surgeons have the most psychopaths in their ranks of any occupation.

I’ve written about this before, so I’ll reiterate my thoughts here: As we enter the Fourth Turning — the time of Crisis — the sociopaths and their close cousins the psychopaths will be in their element, alternately feasting on America’s decaying husk for personal benefit and disregarding virtue signaling peers to crush the enemies of America. We would be smart to corral the Stone Cold Charisma Corp to our ShivNat cause.

Read Full Post »

Henry Mueller (this guy again!) has a great anecdote that involves himself, an SJW chick, and a brief but sufficient flash of brass balls.

No matter how often it happens, I’m still surprised sometimes by how well “You’re wrong” game works.

Just for kicks, I tried this approach with a girl standing in line for food recently. Turns out she was a carpet muncher. A 4 or 5 at best. But she started loudly talking shit about “pussy power feminism” and all that, in line.

Finally I couldn’t stand it any more and just started playfully contradicting everything she said. I called hardcore activists losers with no lives, and to my great surprise she said “Well..I don’t actually go out protesting and all that, my girlfriend is more into that…”

Point is, during a five minute interaction I actually had her by the end leaning against me while asking my help looking up a book I had recommended. We could call this the “I hope you’re not like those other girls” frame, and it’s another old school tactic that still works like a charm.

“You’re too pretty for the pussy hat march” might be the ideal game for these types. Most of them are in it for the virtue signalling as mentioned. And all women want to be perceived as special, especially at the expense of other women. Even if that woman is her girlfriend.

Convince her that this SJW nonsense is for losers, and then it’s a win-win either way. Either she sees the light and comes to the right side. Or she just pretends to in order to submit to you.

Isn’t it great when you can get a pussyhatter SWPL chick qualifying herself to you?

Every girl desires a dominant man. Every girls secretly desires to submit to a dominant man. Every girl will test men for their dominance. Every girl BEGS for a man to PUSH BACK against her insolence and entitlement.

Girls are BEGGING to be DEFIED.

Keep close CH’s three rules of manhood:

YOU make the demands.

SHE is judged worthy or wanting.

Always be prepared to WALK AWAY from the deal.

Read Full Post »

Two common cognitive biases, negative transference and psychological projection, are evident in most people but especially common in those of the leftoid persuasion. There are also racial differences in vulnerability to each of these ego-assuaging biases, manifesting typically in lower performing and worse-behaving groups who use these coping mechanisms to alleviate or accommodate their feelings of resentment and envy.

Negative transference is a subset of psychological projection. A quick definition:

Transference is having feelings that seem to be about one person when they’re really about someone else. For example, I sometimes think my therapist doesn’t want to listen to me. Really it was my mother who didn’t listen, and I’ve transferred those feelings onto my therapist.

Projection is where you think someone else is feeling or behaving in a particular way when actually they’re your feelings or behaviour. I find it hard to feel sad or angry about things I tell my therapist, but I imagine him feeling sad or angry – I project my feelings onto him. And sometimes people accuse others of doing things they are in fact doing themselves.

So transference is about the cause of the feelings, and projection is about who you think is feeling them. Does that help? So your therapist would tell by looking at a) the cause of the feelings and b) where you think they’re coming from.

If you experience your therapist as being distant when really a parent was distant, that’s transference.

If you experience your therapist as being distant when really you’re being distant, that’s projection.

Negative transference is similar to scapegoating and blame shifting. Basically, person [A] transfers negative feelings he has for person or group [A2] to an innocent third party [B] when person [A] has an affinity for or emotional connection to person or group [A2] and balks at blaming [A2] for his bad feelings.

Psychological projection is when person [A] accuses innocent person or group [B] of poor behavior that person [A] is doing himself, or which person [A]’s associated group [A2] is doing. Projection is also a form of blame shifting.

These two powerful cognitive biases are ego emollients because they shift blame away from a person, or away from a group with whom the person positively identifies, to a resented third party person or group.

Which brings me to this observation:

Just like “White racism” is negative transference by blacks who can’t admit it’s black dysfunction and criminal violence that bedevils them, “the patriarchy” is negative transference by women who can’t admit it’s female cattiness, gossip, innuendo, emotional manipulation, and envy of other women’s beauty that bedevils them.

In both cases, blacks and women (particularly feminists) also psychologically project their own bad behavior onto resented outgroups (Whites and men, respectively). So they are covering for themselves as well as for the groups to which they belong.

Negative transference and psychological projection explain A LOT of the current hysterics we see from the BLM crowd, the pussyhat bluehairs, and the…..well, you know who.

Read Full Post »

Mate guarding tactics, in descending order of alphaness:

  • She mate guards you
  • You flash a frown and she promptly self-corrects
  • You mindfuck her (see: Dread Game)
  • You let most insults slide, but explode once in a while to keep her on edge and in line
  • You kick the other guy’s ass
  • You lavish excessive PDA on her whenever another man is talking to her (or just in the general vicinity of her)
  • You buy her stuff
  • You beg her to love you
  • You marry her*
  • You accept her terms of polyamory
  • You mate guard yourself (the undescended testicles soyboy option)

*”Marriage is beta?”, sneers the tradcon. No. Marriage is beta when it’s relied on by a man as a solution to prevent a woman from straying (it never works). If you think the legalistic imprimatur of marriage will finally convince that thot to take her mind off other men and love you unto the end of time, you’ll be disappointed. You’re an even bigger tool if you believe a huge rock and expensive wedding guarantees a woman’s fidelity. (Just the opposite — if you have to spend a lot to convince a woman to accept your monogamous submission, she’s more likely to divorce you.)

As I’ve argued in these pages, and as ¡SCIENCE! has confirmed, frequent mate guarding, as it is typically practiced by Western men, is beta.

Established alpha males don’t typically mate guard — at least not obviously — because they don’t fear their women cheating on them or falling under the spell of other men, and, less benignly, they redirect some of their relationship energy that would normally be spent on mate guarding toward hooking up with side lovers.

Beta males, whether consciously or not, sense more keenly the sexual interloper threat posed by other men and the wandering eyes of their own women. This heightened threat detection system is likely an evolved instinct that serves the useful purpose of keeping the lover of a beta male faithful, (or constrained in her ability to cheat).

Here’s where it gets interesting for philosophers and warriors of Game alike: While mate guarding may offer some temporary or discrete relationship security, multiple acts of mate guarding will paradoxically increase longer term relationship fragility. The mechanism by which this LTR instability is generated is a status feedback loop; if a man mate guards, his woman will subconsciously evaluate his romantic worth downward because (her sensitive idware will reason) only a beta male would feel the need to mate guard. An alpha male would not; his aloofness would be perceived as proof of his impenetrable high status.

Research has even found a positive association between a man’s jizz quality and his indifference to mate guarding.

In another blow against mate guarding as a viable minx management tool, research has shown that “aloof and indifferent” men who create feelings of uncertainty in women are more attractive than clingy men:

When women think of assholes they don’t want to date, they’re thinking of caring assholes. The kind of men who are clingy, mate guarding buffoons. The assholes who are loved by women are the men whose jerkitude is implied through emotional distance, cocksureness, outcome independence, and inscrutability.

The Alpha Apex for a man is reached when a woman is so smitten with him that the thought of cheating never even crosses her mind and in fact she spends most of her idle cognition devising ploys to keep other women away from him (and his attention focused solely on her *daily bjs wink wink*).

The Nancyboy Nadir for a male-thing is hit when his woman is given free rein to indulge her slutty cheating heart while he puts limits on his own behavior, fearful of her wrath and rejection should he hold her to the same faithfulness standards he holds himself.

Mate guarding is a behavior associated with men who fall in-between those two extreme states of manhood. It isn’t always self-defeating, but it quickly can be if it becomes the primary means to manage a wanton woman. As a general rule:

Alpha men never or rarely mate guard (they don’t have to because their women love them too much to risk losing them, but when they do mate guard, obedience is immediate and unquestioned).

Beta males sometimes or frequently mate guard (and when they do, their women are often driven further away by the weak display of desperate possessiveness, but can sometimes be convinced to stay in the relationship with promises of trinkets and marriage).

Omega dregs never or rarely mate guard (it’s futile for them as they are in no position to make demands, and the rare times they do mate guard it usually emerges in a clumsy spectacle of inchoate rage that further lowers their already low SMV).

Soyboys (psychologically lower than omegas) actually reverse mate guard — they mate liberate, preferring to avoid any conflict that might threaten their relationships (or beta orbiter status) via the warped solution of permitting total sexual freedom for their women while restraining their own sexuality.

Mate guarding is largely the province of sub-alpha men, because men lower on the sexual market hierarchy have to deal with 1. more threats from male competitors and 2. an urge to unfaithfulness from their women. As a preventative against gf or wife cheating or abandonment, these men show signs of loyalty (generously defined) or possessiveness (more realistically defined) as enticement to their women to stick with them. Since women love dem beta bux, these displays of commitment can be persuasive on those women peering at the Wall cresting over the horizon and eager to settle down in post-cock carousel expedience.

Mate guarding can take numerous forms, one of which is the elaborate proposal. If you notice an increase in certain mate guarding behaviors, you are seeing an increase in beta males (as perceived by women) who feel the need to hammer home the message that they’ll give everything plus their dignity to assure a woman’s fidelity.

The corollary to the mate guarding = alpha LARPing observation is that men can raise their perceived SMV by avoiding conspicuous displays of mate guarding when a woman is likely to expect them. Undermining her expectation of a jealous reaction will create cogdis that encourages subtle but powerful micro-reassessments of her beta boyfriend/hubby, that over the long run raise his value relative to her value.

***

This topic re-arrested me because a study just released seems, at least on the surface, to contradict CH teachings and previous studies examining the relation between mate guarding and men’s attractiveness to women.

Men with higher testosterone levels report being more protective of their romantic relationships

Whoa, hold the phone. Alpha males tend to be higher T, and higher T is associated with more mate guarding. What gives? Delving into the study’s details reveals that there is no contradiction.

“…very little research has examined whether testosterone relates to other forms of mating-relevant competition, such as effort aimed at retaining a mating partner. This includes benefit provisioning (e.g., doing nice things for your partner to highlight your commitment to her such as buying gifts, proposing marriage) and cost inflicting (e.g., threatening other men to stay away) acts meant to hold on to exclusive access to one’s mate.” […]

The researchers collected saliva samples from 108 male undergraduates to measure their testosterone levels and had them complete surveys on mate retention and intrasexual competition. They found there was an indirect relationship between testosterone and mate retention behaviors.

“Our results suggested that there is a modest relationship between testosterone and mate-retention, but that this relationship is not direct in nature. Rather, testosterone predicts holding a more competitive attitude toward members of the same sex (intrasexual competition), and it is this characteristic of intrasexual competitiveness that in turn predicts mate retention,” Arnocky told PsyPost.

“Moreover, this relationship seems to be strongest for cost inflicting, rather than benefit provisioning, acts of mate retention.”

Examples of cost-inflicting mate retention behavior include things such as limiting a partner’s social life by monopolizing her time and insulting her to make her feel undeserving of the current relationship.

Teasing and negs are a valuable component of a healthy, committed, and uncucked relationship!

I was right in my suspicions about what this study was really saying. Higher testosterone was associated with “cost-inflicting” mate retention behaviors, i.e., threats against interloper men or psy ops against girlfriends. Psy ops on girls and maneuvering for dominance over other men are alpha male pastimes. Showering women with reassuring PDA, being a shoulder to cry on, expressing devotion, and “benefit provisioning” as mate retention strategies are the lower T beta male options, and in the Darwinian calculus these beta strategies aren’t nearly as effective as the “cost-inflicting” alpha strategies for keeping women in love and reproductively loyal.

“Our study was correlational in its design, and so one cannot make any causal assumptions about whether testosterone influences levels of intrasexual competitiveness or mate retention,” Arnocky noted.

Correlation does not equal penetration.

Ted Colt adds,

if you want to prevent a woman from straying, impregnate her, limit her employment prospects, & surround her with family

it worked for thousands of years

Realtalk. But suffrage happened, and now we live in Vagina World. For modren times (ie the age of careerist shrikes and mass contraception), the best prophylactic against a woman cheating on you is

  1. choose wisely and
  2. have her fall in love with you

A love of sufficient infatuation is indistinguishable from worship. And no woman will cheat on her god.

***

Women mate guard too. They use sex as their preferred means of mate control.

Chapter 5, “Green-Eyed Desire: From Guarding a Mate to Trading Up,” deals with other economic constraints relating to the human mating market. Women appear to use sex to help guard male mates by keeping them satisfied, reminding men what they stand to lose should they defect—or as many women in the study put it, “keep[ing] his mind off other women.”

More sex from women? Sounds great! To gain access to that parallel pooniverse, you have to keep women in a steady state of uncertainty and anxiety.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: