“Having common hobbies kills the spark for me.”

Lara, presumably a girl, wrote the subject heading in the comments to yesterday’s post.

Lara may be a troll, or she may be a girl lying about what she sexually responds to in order to score retarded internet debate points, but her blurt has a kernel of truth. Dating advice columnists, a most loathsome breed, and marriage counselors are fond of telling the lovelorn how important it is for a man and woman to share interests and hobbies if they want to make a relationship work for the long haul. This meme has, in fact, become so imbibed by the general popluation that you cannot date a girl, or listen to a girl talk about what she wants in a man, without hearing her say that “he has to share my values“, or “he has to like the same things I like.”

A conversation I had with Zeets the Throwback Barbarian comes to mind.

ME: Your parents have been together a long time. Do they go shopping at arts and crafts boutiques like other mature couples do?

ZEETS: Hell no. My Dad plays poker twice a week to get out of the house, and my Mom hangs out with her friends on the weekends.

ME: They’re not attached at the hip then?

ZEETS: Not even close. They need to get out of each other’s hair. They have different interests. They both like to swim in the pool, though.

ME: But you can really see the love they have for each other.

ZEETS: Exactly.

This “shared values and interests” chestnut is a load of horseshit. Lara is hitting upon something important in her throwaway quip. Men and women who like the same things and do a lot of activities together risk instilling the contempt of familiarity in each other. This is particularly the case for women, who must abide their genetic programming to find overly accessible men undesireable.

Women may squawk a big squawk about wanting men who share their interests, but in reality they most admire and love those men who have their own interests, and who pursue those interests without regard to the women’s participation. Women, in short, love to be spectators to men’s passions. They love to be dragged into a man’s world.

As with all things gender related, women want to look up to a man. They do not want an equal or a play time buddy. Feminists who claim otherwise are lying, not only to you and me, but, more importantly, to themselves.

Read Full Post »

Triangulation

Obama’s post-blood libel “Let’s move past the hate that was completely generated by my side” speech which sent tingles up Rich Lowry’s khakied pants is a classic example of triangulation. Obama nods and winks for a few days as his ideological allies go on the offense smearing their political and cultural enemies, and then emerges from the fray to deliver an impassioned call for unity and civility, thus positioning himself as the savior with the efflorescent halo who can bridge the divide and turn those frowns upside down. Naturally, this bridging involves a lot of government largesse and leftist cultural brainwashing.

Is Obama a better triangulator than Clinton was? That remains to be seen, but there is no denying that triangulation is effective psy ops on the mediocre masses. Expect Obama’s poll numbers to jump and open borders amnesty to receive a modest osmotic boost in support.

If the right ever wants to win at this game they need to get it through their thick skulls that the way to victory is through the game concept of framing. Frame the debate, win the hearts and minds. Take a page from the Alinsky school for radical revolution: the best defense is a good offense.

Whenever these cultural blow-ups occur, the right is always left reeling on its heels, in the defensive posture. They need a little more of that irrational confidence and lack of scruples that the left has in spades. They need to be more proactively mischievous. Instead, the right continually plays the role of the qualifying girl to the leftist PUA. That’s a great way to get screwed, but doesn’t do much for avoiding pump and dumps.

This is one of the many reasons why Palin generates so much hate. She may not be the brightest bulb, but she knows how to set the terms of the conversation, and this drives the left insane, accustomed as they are to wielding the cultural bullhorn.

The right also needs to learn to deal with a media industrial complex that is almost wholly a propaganda arm of the left wing and Democrat party. Limbaugh and Fox have their followers, but in the scheme of things they are kazoos against the buzzsaw din that echoes from Hollywood, TV, the music biz, academia, the education racket, news organs, government, NGOs and workplace reeducation camps, all run to a great extent by leftist ruling class elites. This saturation megaphone may not conspire in the traditional sense of the word, but they coordinate by instinct, like fire ants converging on an El Paso picnicker.

Once the right grasps the fact of this stacked deck and what it means for them, they will understand that, despite Obama’s calculated call for unity, the left never intends to play cricket with them. Not as long as that bullhorn stays glued to their lips. The right can get its own bullhorn, but that doesn’t solve the problem; they need to learn to ignore, mock, satirize and NEG, in equal measure, the bleatings of the enemy’s bullhorn. And before that they need to pin their foes against the wall with their own brand of accusatory self-serving righteousness. In other words, set the frame.

It’s odd at first glance that a tiny cadre of high IQ elites can direct the national conversation with such precision, but it starts to make sense when you realize that most people want to be led by a strong band of alpha males. The apolitical middle will heed the hatchet job of the Associated Press and the siren lies of humanities professors and maudlin TV documentaries, and they will fall in line, and wearily assume the problem is now in capable hands and with people who have honest intentions. Meanwhile, the nation dissolves in an acid bath of deceit, a victim of its elite’s facility with psychological manipulation.

Game has taught me to see the unacknowledged, and often unperceived, machinations that govern the behavior of men and women. Not surprisingly, it has also allowed me to see the underlying forces that animate the political sphere, for that sphere is merely a subset contained within the larger sexual market.

Read Full Post »

Science Proves Me Right… Again

A while back, this Chateau post caused veins to bulge on the foreheads of haters. It was about instilling the dread of an impending breakup or loss of interest to promote a healthy relationship.

Women respond viscerally in their vagina area to unpredictability, mixed signals, danger, and drama in spite of their best efforts to convince themselves otherwise. Managing your relationship in such a way that she is left with a constant, gnawing feeling of impending doom will do more for your cause than all the Valentine’s Day cards and expertly performed tongue love in the world. Like it or not, the threat of a looming breakup, whether the facts justify it or not, will spin her into a paranoid estrogen-fueled tizzy, and she’ll spend every waking second thinking about you, thinking about the relationship, thinking about how to fix it. Her love for you will blossom under these conditions. Result: she works harder to please you.

The key for the man is to adopt a posture of blase emotional distance alternated with loving tenderness. Too much of either and she’ll run off.

Oh, how the haters swooned with indignation over my helpful advice. “You’re such a jokester”, said the disbelievers, somewhat nervously. “That’s a good way to end a relationship prematurely”, said the dating advice columnists. “It only works on girls with low self esteem”, said the shibboleth spouters.

Well, well, welly welly well… look what we have here!

Uncertainty Can Increase Romantic Attraction.

This research qualifies a social psychological truism: that people like others who like them (the reciprocity principle). College women viewed the Facebook profiles of four male students who had previously seen their profiles. They were told that the men (a) liked them a lot, (b) liked them only an average amount, or (c) liked them either a lot or an average amount (uncertain condition). Comparison of the first two conditions yielded results consistent with the reciprocity principle. Participants were more attracted to men who liked them a lot than to men who liked them an average amount. Results for the uncertain condition, however, were consistent with research on the pleasures of uncertainty. Participants in the uncertain condition were most attracted to the men-even more attracted than were participants who were told that the men liked them a lot. Uncertain participants reported thinking about the men the most, and this increased their attraction toward the men.

This study’s results confirm the “Dread” post to the letter, although I used slightly more… ornamental… language to get the point across. (Consider my methods a social experiment  — a sort of crisis and observation — designed to get under the skin, with exquisite pain amplification, of those predisposed to hate the message here, and to observe how many of you can handle the truth when it is stripped of all its sugarcoating.)

I don’t need the science to certify what I can already see with my own two eyes, but it’s nice to have it so that I can do the happy Snoopy dance and throw it in the faces of the usual tard crew. Weep those tears of unfathomable sadness, femcunts and nancyboys.

Naturally, some skirt-twirling teacups will chime in and attempt to muddy the waters by caviling about how men are susceptible to uncertainty game as well, while neglecting to mention the difference in degree between the sexes. Sure, men can fall for the Chateau patented dread psy ops, but they don’t fall for it nearly as often, or with the same intensity, as do women. Vulnerability to dread game is predominantly a female phenomenon.

Chateau Motto (posted at the gate):
Come for the truth, stay for the mindfucking of your enemies.

Read Full Post »

Thinking Like A Woman

I was at a house party noticing something I expect to see at these sorts of events: dudes not knowing what the fuck they are doing with women. (Proof that the practice of game is not making many inroads into general circulation.) Every single guy who was macking on a girl was telegraphing in the worst way possible his sheer delight to be speaking with her. Some of the gross errors of pickup judgement I observed:

• Laser-like focus of his eyes on her eyes.
• Leaning into her (in some cases the girl actually leaned back, like she was trying to escape his bad breath).
• Constant smiling.
• Rapid-fire talking.
• Interrupting her to vociferously agree with whatever she was saying.
• Too much laughing, and laughing too hard at ostensibly unfunny female jokes.
• Telling long-winded stories.
• Getting a laugh from her, and then repeating his brilliant joke for good measure.
• Nervous body tics (rubbing of fingertips on glasses, shifting of feet, crossing and uncrossing of arms, scratching of ears and noses).
• Relying too heavily on unsubtle sexual innuendo.
• Constantly asking if she needed a new drink.
• Excessive head nodding.
• Asking a lot of questions.
• Dutifully answering her questions.
• Never touching her.

Now none of these men were socialy awkward losers. They were all normal men with well-rounded lives. Solid, salt of the earth dudes. The kind of guys women claim to want to date. On paper, they were catches. But as we all know, credentialist paper mentality is why so many men fail with women. Rip that paper up, because it is not what women really want; it is what they say they want to make their mothers happy. And because women’s own hindbrains are a mystery to even them.

The general impression one would get from watching all these nascent courtship dances is CHASING. The men were doing all the chasing.

Chase, chase, chase, chase, chase, chase, chase…… aaaallll the way home. Alone.

Men, pull it together. The way to seduce women is by redirecting them to CHASE YOU. You do this by exploiting their natural and universal female desire to your advantage. This is what game is all about. If you act like the men I saw at this party, you are running no game at all. And no game may as well be anti-game, because its effects on women are the same — bored, dry pussy. The only difference between zero game and being actively repulsive is the speed which her pussy snaps shut. The destination is the same.

Remember the fundamentals of game recently discussed here at the Chateau:

1. Be aloof. (Amused mastery)
2. Don’t be insecure. (Irrational self-confidence)
3. Dehumanize and objectify women. (Do not put any pussy on a pedestal)

Re-read those fundamentals out loud. Taken together, what are they really saying?

“I am the prize. I do not seek the approval of any woman. She will, instead, want to seek my approval.”

Or, in simpler caveman language:

“She chases me.”

Yes, this thinking turns conventional wisdom on its head. Yes, it takes a huge dump on the evolutionarily derived instincts that govern the behavior of men and women. But as practitioners of the crimson arts, we are not here to abide conventional wisdom. Nor are we here to meekly march to the beat of our Darwinian impulses. We are here to learn how to seduce women… efficiently, completely, utterly.

The first step to getting a woman to chase you is to think like a woman. Only when you have put yourself into the mind of woman will the game that you need to seduce them begin to make any sense to you. Deep empathy — not the cheap bleeding heart kind but the kind that you struggle hard to attain so that it may redound to your maximum benefit — is the ultimate inner game that serves as the bedrock upon which the rest of the razzle-dazzle game will flow effortlessly.

In fact, this may be the best explanation of the meta-fundamental precept that underlies the above fundamentals:

Think like a woman.

Get in the mind of your adversary. (And make no mistake, men and women are, underneath the romantic tapestry, adversaries in the mating market. We have contradictory reproductive goals as nature designed.) Know what she needs to feel desire, what she loathes, how she will react before she does, and what her frame of mind is when men hit on her. Once you have successfully infiltrated one woman’s mind, you will have supremacy over all women’s minds.

When you think like a woman, you are imagining… no, you are accepting as a given… what it’s like to mercilessly judge the smallest details of a girl. What it’s like to be one foot in, one foot out with every girl you deign to talk to. What it’s like to cast a jaundiced eye at every girl before deciding she is worth more of your time. What it’s like to make silent demands of girls that you wouldn’t make of your male buddies. What it’s like to keep your options open until she has won you over. What it’s like to screen a girl, to qualify her, to shit test her, to tease her without worrying about giving offense, to refuse to backpedal from any offense given, to have an inner conversation with yourself *while she is talking to you* about whether she meets your ideal, to call her out in a good-natured manner on any of her bullshit, to seriously doubt her attractiveness until proven otherwise, to lean away from her when she is talking, to refrain from laughing if her joke falls flat, to notice her nervousness, to be laconic while she tries to impress you, to be comfortable with silences because it is her job to keep the conversation alive, to act noncommittal, to disagree with her occasionally, to glance furtively around the room every so often, to end conversations first, to happily hold court with other girls joining your conversation…

… in short, to make her dance to your tune.

Truth is, it is the tune she prefers to dance to above all others.

The day will come when you will have completed the merging of your mind with the neural network of womanhood. When that day comes — fully entwined, unable to return to  the one-dimensional, solipsistic man you once were — your game will be second nature. You will have transcended the dictates of crass materialist evolution and the straitjacket of social mores, and like magic the gates of vagina will open to you.

And if some numbnuts tells you it’s gay to think like a woman, you can ask him how many times he got laid talking about football and retrieving drinks for girls.

Read Full Post »

Attracting Women By Exploiting Their Insecurities

Truly the darkest and most powerful of the crimson arts is the seduction of women through the identifying and exploiting of their weaknesses and insecurities. To bed a woman is a wonderful pleasure, but to get inside her head and manipulate her to willingly offer the key to her heart — well, that is sublime gratification. Only experts in the mechanics of the human psyche can pull off Exploitation Game with any credibility.

First, it is important to note that weakness and insecurity are distinct categories of ego suppression. A weakness is an objective flaw in a woman who may or may not be self-consciously aware of it. An insecurity is a gnawing discomfort with some facet of her life that she feels is amiss, whether or not her self-doubt has any factual justification. Weaknesses and insecurities provide fertile emotional chaos upon which the master seducer may fruitfully sow a path to redemption… through his groin, of course.

Imagine, for instance, you have met a girl at a house party who you happen to know is dating a man who already has a girlfriend. Her life is in disarray, and all she can think about is how to win him away from his primary lover. This girl has a genuine insecurity about her standing with him, and she doubts her ability to monopolize the love of a high value man. You identify her insecurity, and then you exploit it by talking in general terms about how it’s nice to have someone completely devoted to you and makes you feel comfortable and loved.

“Sometimes, at the end of the day, you just want someone there who accepts you totally, and won’t make you play games or feel like an afterthought.”

Naturally, you do not directly confront the girl with her insecurities, (unless it is your intention to cause pain). That would only ensure a defensive turtling in reaction, or, worse, a lashing out like a stuck pig. Deliberative exploitation is effectively accomplished through the use of third party puppets. The girl in the example above would not be the subject, but she would subconsciously put herself in the place of the subject in your conversation.

Here is another example: suppose you meet a single mom who still has her looks. You don’t intend to marry her, but you do want to enjoy a fling. She has a real weakness; bastards are bad for business in the dating arena. Her lack of awareness or acknowledgement of her weakness is irrelevant; a weakness extracts its tribute from even the most armored egos, for the reality of its existence cannot be concocted away in the primal centers of the brain where the rationalization hamster dares not tread. If you can insinuate her weakness into your conversation — assuming the truth of its negative influence while offering an escape from its consequences — you simultaneously crush and release her ego to pursue that which will provide momentary relief from her rattled reality. Again, the use of third parties is critical.

“There are too may demands placed on some of us. People expect you to follow the script, expect you to conform to whatever normal is supposed to be, but what do they know? I was never one to judge. I see what others don’t and admire it. Nothing beats meeting that one person who will take you into a separate world, away from the day to day crap that drags you down.”

Exploitation Game can be used during the attraction or comfort stage of seduction, but is preferable in the latter, particularly if it is the patina of sincerity you are striving for. Some may consider this cruel art a breach of the last ethical frontier of pickup, but the joy on her face and the quickening in her loins belie such phony sanctimony.

Read Full Post »

The Training Of The Shrew

A buddy’s girlfriend and I were watching a movie on his TV and a scene had come on featuring the lead actress dragging her beta boyfriend to her alpha ex-boyfriend’s house for a party.

“This guy is a doofus for agreeing to go with her to her ex’s party. He’s walking into a trap. Any guy who does this in real life is asking for a breakup.” I beamed with pride at my insightfulness.

She disagreed. “No way, she’s a bitch for expecting him to go with her. Actually, she’s a bitch for even keeping in touch with her ex.”

Pleasantly surprised by her answer, I nodded my head approvingly and admitted to myself that my analysis of the movie scene was flawed. The beta boyfriend was not the primary offender; it was the obtuse, or manipulative, girlfriend.

My buddy is an alpha male. He teases, he bellows, he rises to anger, he’s sexual, he gives as good as he gets, and he tolerates ZERO bullshit from his girlfriend. She is quite cute, and ragingly feminine.

How did my thinking go so astray while her’s hit the mark? If you observe carefully, you may have noticed throughout your life that the sweetest girls with the most sympathetic dispositions toward men and the problems they have to deal with are those girls who have been with alpha boyfriends or husbands for a while. (Key qualification: “a while”. Girls who ride the alpha cock carousel are primitive, opportunistic sluts.) The reason why is simple: they have been “broken in”.

Once a girl has experienced the exquisite pleasure of submitting to a dominant lover her basal femininity is reset to something less accommodating of feminist boilerplate. She becomes keenly aware of the unique challenges that face men, and is able to a certain degree to put herself in their shoes, or, barring that, to at least sympathize with men and refrain from taking them for granted. This is the training of women that is similar to the training of dogs. And this sympathy and understanding extends beyond her alpha lover to men in general. It’s as if the domestication of her desire by a dominant man softens her feelings for all men. Not sexually softened, mind you. A woman in thrall of an alpha male is a faithful woman. But socially softened.

The converse should be apparent; women who have been denied the affection and commitment of an alpha lover, or who have been driven insane with spite by the dispiriting attentions of beta males they consider below them, nurse a steady stream of agitation toward, and resentment of, men in general. Exhibit A: a disproportionate number of avowed feminists are butt ugly. Exhibit B: SWPL city girls who yearn for loving, long term relationships with powerful men but get stuck with pump and dumps by players and cloying obsessions by undersexed betas. These women have yet to be broken in; their untamed limbic mania sets the tempo of their higher thinking. They drag their owners for a walk, instead of being walked. They are obstinate, crude, and, when their feminine humours do reassert for a temporary spell, sloppily scattershot in their compassion for indigents a world away while being brutishly curt and spiteful in their dealings with men in their social orbit. Feminism speaks to them because their femininity is suppressed.

The answer for these wastrel shrikes, as this blog has been saying from day one, is more game. While the mating market is zero sum, the pleasure market is positive sum. More pleasurable seductions of more women can only bring good things to relations between the sexes.

Read Full Post »

Why So Serious?

The night was late. I was killing her softly with a tune I began playing on my guitar. She eased back, ensconced in the plush cushions of my sofa, and her eyelids lowered a bit as I strummed my grandioso opus for her ears only. A content smile warmed her face and she interrupted me when I paused to work out a chord.

“You look so serious when you play. I like it.”

My serious concentration took a break as I turned to face her. She had lust in her eyes. She sat up and wrapped her arms around my shoudlers. We kissed.

I easily recalled her statement the next day because they reminded me of eerily similar statements said by past lovers in analogous circumstances. When I have redirected my attention from seducing women to performing a solo activity disengaged from their participation, they have responded in like manner —

“I love it when you’re so serious.”

What is going on here? I have a theory.

Women love two things: Passionate men who pursue their mission(s) in life with single-minded focus, and easily distracted men whose interests and hobbies are capable of diverting their attention from the wiles of women. The evolutionary reasons for this can be explained thus:

– Men on a mission who pursue goals with passion are better at securing resources and protection (survivial value) for the women in their lives. Women don’t consciously think this way, of course, but they don’t need to. All their genes care about is getting them to swoon for a man fully “locked in” on whatever challenge he is confronting or purpose he is fulfilling. The rest will take care of itself.

– Men who are easily distracted away from women’s beauty and women’s guile are attractive because they signal a high level of competence and familiarity with women (an “act like you’ve been there before” attitude) that suggests to women a history of success at bedding them. Men who are successful at bedding women bring high replicative value that redounds to the sexual success of any sons the women may have by them. This is why women love to chase after unattainable bad boys who’ve never paid for a dinner or given flowers in their lives.

Moral of this post: Get a hobby, any hobby (except video gaming or Civll War reenacting), and throw yourself into it. Make sure she occasionally sees your brow sweating with passionate single-mindedness. You don’t even have to be that good at it. Her libido will respond right on cue.

Read Full Post »