Beta Female Relationship Whoring

Reader MrJohn writes:

I didn’t know where else to talk to someone about this thing I’ve witnessed, so why not here. Valentine is really a great holiday to spot the betas of the world. Here’s a beta from Sweden. All seen on Facebook. The girl (24) and the guy (about 28) has been dating for about a half year. The past months she’s openly called him ‘hubby’ on FB, although they are not engaged. She’s pretty much unemployed and has definitely gained a lot of weight lately. I don’t wanna post pictures of her, but she’s a solid 6. He looks a bit feminine, bordering on gay with his facial expressions. He works his ass off to please her. The typical Swedish guy I guess.

Looking at her page, she has been posting almost every hour of the valentines evening. And at mid-night she’s summing up the evening: (Yeah updating Facebook before giving him sex or any other trivial activity)

“Last pics to summarise our night  saw this movie here, got 15 roses of my favourite colours, three course dinner and finished the day with slow dance in our living room. I have such a wonderful man. Thank you (name). Love you with all my heart and hopefully 80 more years of this to come <3″

– attached are photos of them together in restaurants, with roses and all that.

I feel sick somehow. Am I just too sensitive? Perhaps this is the way to do valentines?

What has sickened you, gentleman reader, is the phenomenon of the beta female engaged in the act of relationship whoring.

You are right to retch, for beta female relationship whoring (BFRW, sounded out “Beef Raw”) is among the most transparent of ego-stroking ploys utilized by undesirable or marginally desirable women. You really want to call them out but, hey, polite society and all. That’s why we have this blog; so you can say what’s on your mind with the kind of freedom that nowadays only naive, small children or cantankerous old farts get to enjoy.

Women of questionable sexual worth who have “snagged” men of higher value, however precariously, are frequently susceptible to feeling urges to advertise on the flimsiest pretexts the undying love their loosely committed boyfriends have for them.

The reason the beta female feels this urge is because such overblown advertising of her relationship strength (as defined by the extent to which the man caught up in her shenanigans lavishes her with gifts and paeans to her awesomeness) serves multiple evolutionary purposes:

1. It signals her fidelity to her one-foot-in-one-foot-out boyfriend. Many men will settle for women less pretty than their ideal if those women compensate by offering implied (paternity) guarantees of present and future faithfulness.

2. It warns away female poachers. If her boyfriend is moveable product, there is a good chance he will bolt at the first sign of interest from a hotter girl. Women love taken men, but their predilection to act on that evil female instinct may be suppressed if the girlfriend of the desired man can fool her hotter competition into thinking he only has eyes for her.

3. It stroketh thine ego. A girl with a well-lubed ego is a happier girl who will be a more congenial girlfriend. (Congeniality nullified if happy ego results in ice cream aided fattitude.)

4. It is social oxytocin (or proxy oxytocin). The hormonally-charged bonding that naturally occurs in the early stages of a relationship can be synthesized quicker by ruses to project the relationship to a point in the future when it would presumably be stronger and more committed. Players use a modification of this strategy to speed up the time to sex, called time compression, time distortion, or future pacing.

5. If the girl is a bit prettier than average, say a 6 or 7, and on the wall side of 25, the beta female relationship whoring strategy could just as easily function for her as a self-regulating mechanism which “tricks” her into feeling stronger love for her boyfriend than she might in actuality feel, thus hindering any impulse she might have to trade up and risk a sure thing. Women have a more powerful “trading up” urge than do men, and this instinct can get them in trouble if they don’t have the self-discipline to know when they have a good thing and act accordingly.

Relationship whoring is essentially a technique employed by lower quality females for discouraging the competition and for encouraging the fence-sitting boyfriend to discard his fantasy of scouring the field for a hotter replacement. It can also serve to push a woman closer to a beta boyfriend so that she does not ruin herself on a perpetual hunt for commitment from an elusive alpha male.

If you doubt the efficacy of this strategy, here’s a thought experiment. Tell me, as a man, given two women of equal facial and body attractiveness, would you find it harder to dump or cheat on a woman who was emotionally distant and giving little indication she was interested in an LTR, or harder to dump or cheat on a woman who professed your mutual love to the world and tacitly confessed her utter devotion to you?

I mean, unlike me, assume you are a non-sociopath in the above thought experiment.

You may ask why one does not nearly as often witness this vile practice of BFRW from hot girls, or from very ugly girls.

Well, in the first case, hot girls have more options. They are thus less likely within any given relationship to feel as urgent a need to restrict their own choices by advertising their status as taken women. They are also less apt to feel insecurity about their boyfriends’ levels of commitment, (men are way more willing to stick around and invest if the lady is a champ), and they are less afraid of competition. (The threat of competition that would arise by dating a desirable alpha male is counteracted by the reduced threat of competition from being better looking than most of her female peers.)

In the second case, uglier girls (4s and under) don’t resort so much to the BFRW strategy because they don’t generally date men who are of sufficient sexual market value to entice female interlopers. The ugly girl is with a low value man, and nobody wants either of them, least of all themselves, despite the alacrity to which they resign themselves to their moribund romantic fate.

Middling girls are the ones who most benefit from BEEF RAW. Facebook is filled with 5s, 6s and 7s promoting pics of their candlelit Valentines dinners with herbish boyfriends looking for all the world like they’d rather be gunning down starships in an MMO.

What’s especially revealing about the BFRW subculture is that a man can indirectly appraise his own SMV by his inclusion or absence from BFRW antics. If your girlfriend has posted pics of you and her in all manner of romantic obsequiousness, you are probably a beta male with just enough SMV to avoid involuntary celibacy. If, in contrast, your girlfriend admirably restrains herself from the lure of online attention whoring and shouting your abject devotion to the heart of the world, you are probably an alpha male dating a good-looking lady of character. Hang up your player vestments, because…….. hahaha, who am I kidding!? You were gaming in your mama’s womb (stealing her resources) and you’ll be gaming till your last breath leaves you.

So, no, reader, this is not the way to do Valentine’s Day, unless you are a beta who doesn’t mind putting up with suffocating female crap and scaring away hotter girls who might be future conquests. Just get her a Skittles bag, enjoy her everlasting love, and be happy you aren’t getting pushed off-course your program to maintain relationship limbo in perpetuity.

Read Full Post »

Female Infidelity Red Flags

The corn&porn arm of the MSM is catching up with CH teachings. A woman has written an article about female infidelity warning signs, (supposedly culled from women who have cheated on their partners), and the information sounds suspiciously similar to earlier Chateau Heartiste red flags for women who are high infidelity risks. For instance:

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 1: She accuses her man of cheating. This common sign is an attempt to divert the guilt away from herself, and to project her dishonest behavior onto her partner.

Ministry of PoonandGrabass CH:

She asks you how many women you’ve slept with or accuses you of being a player. One word: projection.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 2: She starts dolling herself up. If a woman suddenly starts taking hours to get ready for places like the gym or the grocery store, then there may be someone she’s trying to impress.

CH:

She undertakes beautification projects. [A] girl who suddenly begins an exercise program or wearing carefully applied makeup or buying new sexy cocktail dresses is prepping herself for a return to the market.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 3: She tells her husband she needs space.

CH:

Chances of re-notch success are much lower once she has verbalized her need for space, but with proper post-relationship game you can improve your odds dramatically.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 4: She drops hints that she’s not happy.

CH:

A woman is honed like a machine to be a first responder to relationship crisis. She uses her intuition to pick out subtle nicks in the relationship armor that could grow to chasms if left untended. […] Women therefore have evolved an exquisite sense for sniffing out warning signs that a man is losing interest, or that his love, and hence his commitment, is cooling. Women therefore have evolved an exquisite sense for sniffing out warning signs that a man is losing interest, or that his love, and hence his commitment, is cooling.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 5: She has a new BFF her partner has never met. For starters, this new “friend” may not even be a girl at all. The friend could also be a single gal pal looking for a wing woman… and sometimes a woman is all too eager to go along for the ride.

CH:

She has a lot of slutty friends. Ye shall know her by her support group.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 6: She changes her plans… at midnight. If she consistently ends up staying out all night, then it’s time to question her loyalty.

CH:

This red flag is so obvious — hey, my girlfriend/wife is out again at midnight without me! — that I don’t need to dig through the CH archives to find a record of this blog stating the same thing.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 7: Someone else thinks she’s cheating. “I knew someone who had firsthand knowledge my girlfriend was cheating,” Mark says. “But I believed her when she said it was a lie, because nobody wants to believe the worst, no matter how obvious it may be.”

CH:

This is a milder version of catching her in flagrante delicto, *when it’s from a third party*. But there’s the rub. Many of your girlfriend’s or wife’s friends will not be your friends. If you hear something that suggests your wife’s infidelity from an oblivious sidewalk grocer, you should take the accusation seriously. If you hear it from her BFF who secretly hates you (or loves you), default to skepticism.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 8: She has a sudden increased interest in her partner’s whereabouts. A woman carrying on an affair needs to cover her bases. If she starts wanting to know her man’s plans for the day, especially when she’s supposedly at work or otherwise busy, then she could be making plans of her own.

CH:

This is pretty good advice for an MSM fem entity, but its accuracy as a warning sign depends a great deal on who’s downlow-ing whom. A wife will show increased interest in her spouse’s whereabouts if she suspects *him* of cheating, too. So if you are a faithful dude, and your wife is suddenly asking a lot of questions about your schedule while sounding like she’s pretending to ask in a spontaneous manner, as if it “just popped into her head”, then you may have something to worry about.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 9: She gives excuses to not have sex.

CH:

[W]e now know the number one dead giveaway that your wife or girlfriend is about to cheat on you:

Is she withdrawing sex during days 10-16 of her monthly cycle? Then you, my friend, are about to be betrayed.

If you hear from your woman “I have a headache” any time during her peak fertility, she has either cheated on you, is thinking about cheating on you, or is getting sufficiently turned off by your burgeoning betaness that cheating will soon become an option in the calculation of her moral universe.

MSM fem entity:

Sign No. 10: She’s checked out. If another man is meeting a woman’s emotional needs, then she will lose her enthusiasm in her current relationship, even when it comes to things like arguing.

CH:

[M]en are capable of fucking more than one woman concurrently without losing that loving feeling for any one of them. Women, in contrast, tend to have to fall out of love with their man before they can comfortably move on to fucking another man.

So, did this MSM fem entity plagiarize CH, or is it just a coincidence that there happens to exist in the world a woman who can speak as truthfully as the lordship of Chateau Heartiste?

Ps You have to love the spate of articles in recent years about cheating women. Is this a subject that would have been broached so explicitly in any putatively mainstream outlet fifty years ago? Either the culture has become less queasy about parading in print the true nature of women, or more women are cheating and the need to discuss the topic has reached critical mass, or both. Whatever the reason for the trend, it doesn’t do much for American women’s marriageability.

Read Full Post »

Declining Intimacy Vs Declining Attraction

An anonymous reader asks:

Le Cheatau in an LTR, what are the signs of a lack of rapport vs a lack of attraction?

Declining rapport can occur while the attraction remains strong, but declining attraction rarely occurs while rapport remains strong. To put it another way, within the context of a relationship, and particularly from the woman’s vantage point, rapport cannot exist without attraction, but attraction can exist without rapport.

(Note that declining rapport can be a function of either the man’s or the woman’s withdrawal, and that the originator matters for the course of action necessary to remedy it.)

When a woman is VERY attracted to her boyfriend, it will seem to her as if there is never enough rapport between them. If rapport DOES start to decline, she will paradoxically feel MORE attracted to him. This is her biology’s way of channeling her emotions toward the pursuit of bringing him “back into the fold”. (Double entendre intended.)

If a woman is losing attraction for her boyfriend (these things happen all the time), she will also lose her desire to maintain rapport with him. When a woman has stopped making efforts at rapport, there is nothing a man can do to reinitiate rapport except through reestablishing his attractiveness to her. The attraction MUST PRECEDE the rapport. Any supplicating efforts to “force rapport” will only result in her losing more attraction for him, and the cycle becomes a negative feedback loop ending in house celibacy (for him, only).

Men think intimacy means physical closeness garnished with pillow talk, but women have a different frame of reference. Intimacy to women means pillow talk garnished with physical closeness. (A general rule that breaks down at the margins, or during the ovulatory window in a woman’s monthly fertility cycle.) Rapport is intimacy in woman-world, so when rapport declines (as measured by frequency, intensity, or both) women start to fret about the stability of their relationships. Men don’t notice as much when rapport declines, as long as the sex is still on tap; to men, less chit chat in the bedroom is a sign of progress. But the reality is that less chit chat usually follows less sex, as most women are incapable of experiencing a closing off of the one without a closing off of the other.

The take-home message for men is that a woman’s declining attraction is more crucial to guard against than is her declining rapport. Low levels of rapport can be quickly mitigated. Just talk to her more, and show a soft side. But lowered levels of attraction cannot be fixed by more rapport, a “solution” so reflexively beloved by cloying betabots that will only make the problem worse. For that, you need to amp the alpha, and re-certify your worth as a challenging man with options.

From an aerial perspective, female lack of rapport is synonymous with female lack of attraction. So when you, as a man, are looking for signs of declining rapport in your girlfriend, you are essentially looking also for signs of declining attraction. But the two deleterious female LTR states have some differences worth highlighting. This is especially true in relationships where the woman reluctantly feels a growing realization that her boyfriend, whom she nevertheless loves very much, will not be there for her over the long term, and doesn’t share her goals.

The signs you should watch for include:

Lack of Rapport

She’s stopped asking you questions. (Women in love question everything, all the time. They are never fully reassured, and their hamsters like it that way.)

She still fucks you, but doesn’t want to cuddle afterwards.

She’s stopped sharing details of her day.

She tentatively broaches topics, as if she’s afraid you won’t reciprocate and she has to test the waters first.

She’s stopped nagging you entirely, or she’s begun nagging you way too much. (There is a minimal amount of nagging in a healthy LTR. Too little, she’s lost interest in fixing your idiosyncrasies; too much, she’s lost the ability or will to connect with you emotionally and behave like a girl who values your desires as a man.)

She’s dropped you as a sounding board in favor of her male eunuch orbiters, female friends, and best gay boyfriends.

She’s stopped discussing future plans with you, preferring instead to chat about trivialities and laugh away her unease.

She perfunctorily agrees with everything you declare because she’s no longer motivated to “hash it out” or “understand each other”.

In contrast to the above, everything she declares seems crafted to be maximally antagonistic to your beliefs and values.

She punctuates every other conversation with a variant of these: “We just don’t see eye to eye anymore” and “You don’t get me like you used to”.

You decide to talk about your relationship, and she eagerly extends it to a five hour marathon discussion.

She is unusually silent during long moments of physical closeness.

She cries a lot for no particular reason.

Lack of Attraction

She’s stopped having sex with you. (A woman can feel an erosion of attraction before she stops fucking you, but the time between her heart shutting down and her vagina shutting down is typically very short.)

She’s begun flirting more with waiters, bartenders and guy friends when you go out together.

She negs you, except that her negs are more backhanded than complimentary, and not meant to put you in the mood.

She scoffs at your idle musings.

She’ll take any excuse to denigrate you.

She looks bored. Especially when you talk.

She winces when you touch her.

She no longer initiates any physical contact. You must do all the work, and it feels like more work than ever.

She’s begun showering her cat with an excessive amount of sloppy affection, while you sit on the sofa wondering if you need to purr and poop in a box to get her to love you like that.

Remember when she used to punch you affectionately? Now she punches you for real.

You try to talk about your relationship, and she hastily changes the subject.

You buy her a gift. She looks at you with pity in her eyes.

She found your browser porn history. She doesn’t care.

You start to feel like the woman in the relationship. Even worse: she’s started to feel like the man.

*****

As you can see, there’s a lot of overlap and similarity between a woman’s declining rapport and her declining attraction. The most obvious distinction is the providing or withholding of sex by her. So, really, if you want a shortcut for determining the health of your LTR, just pay attention to how often and how vigorously she puts out. You won’t be led astray feeling for the tingle of the Telltale Twat.

Read Full Post »

Confronting Vs Ignoring A Manipulative Girlfriend

I-dawg writes:

Good stuff, man. I can’t tell you how much easier your blog and a rough knowledge of Game in general has made my dating life. Here’s a question for you though: how do you handle a steady girlfriend who wants to hang out with one of her now-married Ex’s (and his wife) from ‘back in the day’? It doesn’t sit right with me, but she keeps pestering me about it. Unfortunately, my stripper-ex has moved 1000 miles away and gotten married herself, so I can’t just agree-and-amplify by hanging out with her.

First, it’s almost always bad news when a girlfriend wants to “hang out” with an ex “from back in the day”, regardless of her ex’s current relationship status. You may as well start visualizing his cock sliding in and out of her right now.

You can take this to the bank: A girlfriend who want to hang out with an ex does so for only two reasons.

1. She wants to fuck her ex.

2. She is manipulating you for fun and profit.

Either way, it’s a red flag that your relationship is sailing for rocky shoals.

Don’t think for a minute that just because your GF candidly tells you of her idea to see her ex means that she isn’t thinking of fucking him. Quite the opposite; girls will usually drop bombs like that to alleviate the guilt they feel from harboring illicit thoughts of infidelity. It’s a major hamster rationalization that sounds something like this in their pretty little heads:

HAMSTER VESSEL: I can’t stop thinking about my ex.

HAMSTER: If you do something about it, it won’t be your fault if you warn your boyfriend first.

HAMSTER VESSEL: If I warn him, he’ll dump me! Or act clingy and beta and that is a huge turn-off I can’t abide if I want to marry and divorce him someday.

HAMSTER: What are you worried about? You’re just thinking about hanging out with your ex.

HAMSTER VESSEL: Yeah, hanging out! It’s his fault if he gets insecure about that.

HAMSTER: Now you’re getting it. And, hey, while your talking to me, can you pass me an aspirin? This spinning is giving me a headache.

My advice, friend, is to test the waters for which emotion is motivating her actionable offense against you. Is she really daydreaming about her ex, or is there something amiss in your relationship that is causing her to lash out like a mischievous impette? If the former, you should dump her first so that you can glide out of her life with that all-powerful hand which will give you a confidence boost for future pickups. If the latter, you have the luxury of deciding whether you want to play along and devise tactics which will reel her back into your orbit, or fuck with her head before delivering the sayonara shiv.

To determine where she is coming from, I suggest initiating the “instill dread” protocol. Do you detect whiffs of jealousy? Does she seem bothered by your flirting with her sister? Do your “late nights” at work get her worked up? Or does she seem blasé about your machinations? You could also call her bluff, but, as you said, counter her oh-so-innocent offer with your own suggestion for you to see your ex. “Funny you say that… my ex is in town and she emailed me to get together for lunch. I suppose we’re both cool with this, then?” Watch for facial tics that reveal she isn’t cool with that bargain.

The nuclear option is to straight up deliver an ultimatum. “If you see your ex, our relationship is over. These terms are non-negotiable.” If she’s bluffing, she’ll recant her suggestion. If not, she’ll act annoyed and say something like “we’ll talk again when you’ve calmed down.” If she was thinking about leaving you anyhow, she’ll just use your ultimatum as the excuse that she needs to dump you free of guilt.

Many men will be tempted to confront an unruly girlfriend who asserts her desire to see her ex-boyfriend. Confrontation is the useful strategy in some cases, but it’s not what I consider a go-to option. Confrontation can just as likely blow up in your face as smooth over problems. Cavalierly ignoring a manipulative girlfriend can be useful in measured doses, but as a strategy tends to diminishing returns the longer she knows you or the deeper any problems — like her roaring cuntery — fester.

The best strategy is structured, and builds upon itself as the circumstances warrant: start with a calculated amusement and teasing, coupled with a distant and condescending regard of her offer, followed by active steps to screen her motivations, and then finally a bold statement of your intolerance for her shit if it need come to that.

Whatever you do, don’t do beta. That means, no “aww, honey, let’s talk about this”, no “do you not love me?”, no “what did I do wrong?”, no “what do I need to do to make it better between us?”, no “why do you want to see your ex?”, no “do you still love him?”, no begging, no pleading, no supplicating, no butthurtness, no white knighting (“i’ll kill the guy!”), no manboobery (“but i thought he was a jerk to you last time you dated?”), no uber-manboobery (“i’m a card-carrying feminist! isn’t that what you wanted??!?”), and no promises to love her fitter, happier, more productively.

Read Full Post »

Economic Game Theory Support For Male Relationship Coyness

A reader with an active mind sends along his proposition, based on the principles of economic game theory, that men should never pursue relationships, even if they ultimately want a relationship or benefit from a relationship.

Conclusion: a man should only pursue commitment-free sex, even if he benefits from a relationship. This is especially true if he approaches or chases.

The famous Pascal Wager suggests everyone should believe in God since atheism costs the same as faith, but only believers share in upside. Technically, this sort of approach is known as game theory, which is ironic since we’re talking about game. In economics and politics, game theory is used to make decisions with uncertain information.

In a simple world, a guy has a partner, or he doesn’t and he’s looking for commitment or he’s not. Therefore, he’s faced with decision A, B, C, or D. These decisions roughly correspond to what the seduction community calls frames.

Based on conventional wisdom, a woman should prefer a guy with decision A, over a guy with decision B, over a guy with decision C, over a guy with a decision D. Guy A is a single guy looking to be a family man, what more can women want? Guy B, C, D all seem like players, but at least guy B will give her the comfort of a relationship, or said differently, going from one alpha to another. There’s no apparent upside to guy D.

That said, if each guy adopts the above frame, what does it say about each man’s dating outlook?

• guy A: he’s offering commitment, which means he expects less attractive choices in the future (girl conclusion: he should aim lower than me)
• guy B: he is incapable of commitment
• guy C: he expects to at least date girls like me, yet it is uncertain if he can date anyone better than me
• guy D: he’s been preselected, and it is certain his current girl is better than me (girl conclusion: I’m not in his league)

Guy B is an interesting case, but I don’t rate him highly since guy B communicates to the woman he’s incapable of commitment, which I think reduces his long-term upside. Women want to extract commitment from a worthy man, but she knows she can’t get it from guy B. That said, he’s better than desperate guy A.

I don’t think there is anything inherently wrong with chasing or approaching if the guy only has sex on his mind. It seems chasing becomes counter-productive when a relationship is the goal. It’s not clear what this framework says about direct vs indirect game, but it would seem guy D would naturally communicates via indirect game whereas guy C would have the option of direct or indirect game. I would also think guy D is limited to don’t chase game.

• guy C: indirect or direct game; chase or don’t chase game
• guy D: indirect only; don’t chase game only

If guy D is the highest value guy, the only way you’ll look like him is if you use a combination of indirect-don’t chase game. That said, guy C will have a higher notch count. Guy D will be able to do more with his girls than guy C will, physically and emotionally.

You can also simulate a “seek no commitment” outlook by treating the woman poorly.

An excellent analysis which backs up not only the personal observations and experiences of your humble Chateau hosts, but also the science which is slowly unraveling the mystery of why the most marketable chicks dig aloof jerks.

You could call this economic game theory analysis Relationship Coyness Game. The female analogue of male relationship coyness game is sexual coyness game. A man should be as insufferably, exquisitely coy about his relationship intentions as the typical woman is insufferably, exquisitely coy about her sexual intentions. A man who follows this protocol brings balance to the force; a man who jettisons his duty to answer female sexual coyness with equal relationship coyness is a feeble manboob who has made love more often to couch creases than to women.

If this game theoretic analysis has merit, then the indirect approach with muted intentions coupled with a studied aloofness to furthering the progress of any resulting relationship is the ideal strategy for most men who wish to make themselves as desirable as possible to the maximum number of high value (read: hot) women, given the constraints placed on them by their objective status or genetic endowment and the availability of any serious male competition.

And, in support of the game theory take on seduction, the women I have dated who have been the most exasperatingly, head over heels, obsessed with me have been those women I dragged my feet with the most. In contrast, the women I went out of my way to assure them of my relationship intentions were those women who perplexingly (to me, at the time) assumed the role of the foot-dragging man.

If you, as a man of stout penis, DO NOT seek a relationship, you gain nothing, and possibly hurt your chances, if you tell women that you are interested in a relationship, or if you behave as if your goal is a committed relationship. You are better off aligning your behavior with your true intentions.

If you, as a man of stout heart, DO seek a relationship, you STILL gain nothing, and possibly hurt your chances, if you act with the intention of committing long-term to the women you wish to bed. You are better off behaving exactly as the no-commitment-man above, and basically concealing your relationship intentions. This strategy will invoke a paradox of the female mind, wherein any relationship is more likely to develop under auspices of uncertainty and male coyness that are so thrilling to women’s senses and so fulfilling to women’s hypergamous desires for high(er) value mates.

Best case scenario for men who can’t help but fawn over women with promises of commitment and marriage is that their supplication will not push the girl away. But neither will it draw her much closer, at least not during the critical beginning stages of the dating trajectory. The most likely scenario is that she will come to devalue the man who readily promises the one treasure he has to offer at his disposal: male commitment. And once he is devalued in her mind, it’s a few short hamster rationalizations to suffering the indignity of getting his niceguy ass dumped for being “too nice”.

So far, so good. But… I think where this game theoretic analysis breaks down is at the extremes. For instance, a man who is much higher value than the woman he wishes to meet, or the woman he is already fucking, can afford to liberally promise vows of commitment. His revealed commitment intentions will allay a lower value woman’s feelings of inadequacy. Furthermore, a woman in such an arrangement feels no exigency to “chase” an aloof man as practical proof of his alpha male worth, because the higher status of her partner is so obvious to her. Of course, this just begs the question of why a high value man would bother settling for dating much lower value women. I guess some guys don’t mind lower quality sex if it means zero headaches and drama.

I wonder what mood-affiliated economist Cheap Chalupas thinks of all this? And then I wonder why I love taunting that guy so much.

Read Full Post »

Marriage Vs LTRs

Let’s compare two men.

Man 1 abjures marriage. He grows older moving from one long term relationship to another, experiencing relative instability in his love life but also the thrill of the hunt and the popping freshness of pussy varietals. As he ages, the number of women who are willing to abide his no-marriage clause shrinks, as does the youthful quality of the women. But he partly compensates for this inevitability with tight game and a charming, devil-may-care attitude, which allows him to punch above his weight well into his dotage. He has no heirs that he knows of, and for some reason this does not bother him as much as people tell him it should, but the fact that he is not bothered does bother him. He wonders, often now that the years ahead of him are far fewer than the years behind him, if one of those women he loved was one to hold to the exclusion of all others. At the end, he wheezes his last with memories of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of women — of their loving ministrations and tender caresses and fleeting intimacies between window blind shafts of sunlight — dancing through his head, and in the company of a nebulous regret that refuses to dislodge.

Man 2 abjures bachelorhood. He marries at 30 after a trio of lukewarm short term relationships, and because he is a good man (or, more likely, because he is a man of middling status and dull personality with limited options in the sexual market which alleviates any threats of temptation against his virtue) he never cheats and puts his heart into pleasing his wife, who, because of her biology, inexorably grows less interested in sex with him, as her own attractiveness subsides in accord with her fattening waistline. He is healthy and content, all things considered, and he grows old fondly remembering his wife as she was many years ago, sexy and slender and whimsical, while the allure of her pussy — the only pussy he has seen and felt in twenty years — gradually diminishes, until the time comes he would rather caress pretty strangers with his eyes than caress his wife with his hands. He has two children, of whom he is very proud and loves very much, but still their existence does not relieve the gnawing that grips him in the chest when he thinks of love, and desire, that left him long ago. At the end, he wheezes his last in the company of his old wife’s tears and clouded eyes, and he drifts off to forever with memories he wished he had, and memories so distant they have receded to mere imagination.

Now… ask yourself: Which of these two men had it better?

Read Full Post »

The Necessity Of Relationship Game

What ho! Another scientific study ♥♥♥confirming♥♥♥ CH observations about the functioning of female sexuality? You bet!

Women with stable but not-so-sexy mates become more distant, critical during periods of high fertility.

Long after women have chosen Mr. Stable over Mr. Sexy, they struggle unconsciously with the decision, according to a new study by UCLA researchers who look at subtle changes in behavior during ovulation.

At their most fertile period, these women are less likely to feel close to their mates and more likely to find fault with them than women mated to more sexually desirable men, the research shows.

“A woman evaluates her relationship differently at different times in her cycle, and her evaluation seems to be colored by how sexually attractive she perceives her partner to be,” said Martie Haselton, a professor of psychology and communication studies at UCLA and senior author of the study.

Now where have we heard this before? Oh yeah. Here… and here.

Creeping marital betatude isn’t an on/off switch; it’s a viral agent that slowly, but inexorably, sickens your wife until she wants to get as far away from you as possible. Usually into the arms of a man who isn’t infected.

As usual, the Chateau is well ahead of the curve.

I really love these studies validating core game concepts because I know they cause the haters to blow steam out of their puckered sphincters. Haters seem to be under the delusion that science is on their side, so the bubble bursting is even more delicious.

If you aren’t tracking your wife’s ovulation cycle, and you’re a constitutional beta male who strongly suspects you won her over with your promises of stability and resources and her looming wall as your ally in love, you should act now. Because when that egg’s a-layin’, those players you despise are gonna have the key to her heart. And no amount of beta puling will pull her back from the brink. In fact, it will make it worse.

The good news, if you can call it that, should be a relief to cuckold fetishists everywhere.

Nevertheless, the negative feelings appear fleeting, and they don’t seem to affect a woman’s long-term commitment to her romantic relationship, the study found.

If your ego can emotionally weather the morbid sight of your wife swooning for guys with smooth moves, and perhaps cheating on you one week every month, your marriage should be good to go. Naturally, most men can’t tolerate that, so game becomes of paramount importance for keeping their wives or girlfriends maximally attracted to them, and not other men. I.e., to keep them in line. Because much of game is, in essence, learned charisma of the high status alpha male, your beloved boo can be… how shall we say?… massaged, or imperceptibly guided, to avert her focus from other men back onto you, during those times when she is most susceptible to the allure of competitor cock.

Through a series of high-profile studies, Haselton’s lab has revealed telling changes that take place in women’s behavior during ovulation. Possibly to increase the odds of attracting suitable mating partners, these behaviors include a tendency to dress up and to speak in a higher-pitched, more feminine voice and — in a potential inbreeding-avoidance mechanism — to refrain from contact with male kin. In addition, the lab has found that women whose mates are less sexy and masculine tend to be more attracted to other men during the few fertile days leading up to ovulation.

The more beta you are, the more you need game just to tread water with the woman you love. A woman who is shackled to a beta male is going to feel more powerful urges to copulate with an alpha male when she’s biologically able to conceive. It’s as if her body knows, somehow, that the man who provides for her and supports her and bores her to death is worthy of genetic obliteration. Aren’t women sublime creatures?

The researchers, who used a questionnaire designed exclusively for the study, found no significant change across the cycle in how the women perceived their level of commitment to the relationship or, at least initially, in their satisfaction with it.

What this means is that women unknowingly lie to themselves, and effectively at that. A woman’s evolutionary programming has ensured that she is shielded from conscious, spontaneous knowledge of the functioning of the worst of her biomachinery, such as her id-driven desire to be impregnated via infidelity with an interloper alpha male. An ovulating woman who has, seemingly inexplicably, begun nagging her beta husband or boyfriend, is not going to like to be confronted with the real reason why she turned into a raving bitch. If you were to ask this woman about her level of relationship commitment, of course she will answer that all is well, because to admit otherwise is to upend and potentially sabotage the ancient female sexual directive to amass both alpha fucks and beta bucks. And her genes would not like that at all. AT ALL.

But an exercise that required the women to rate how close they felt to their men yielded dramatic results. As women mated to less sexually attractive men moved from their least fertile to most fertile period, their closeness scores dropped one point on a seven-point scale. Women mated to the most sexually attractive men, meanwhile, experienced the opposite effect. As these women moved from their least to most fertile period, their closeness scores rose by a point.

If you are already an alpha male — either by fortune of inheritance or by grind of self-correction — then your girlfriend or wife will fall MORE in love with you when she is ovulating. She will go from pleasantly in love to lustfully in love. Yet more proof that there is no end to the ways in which being alpha is better than being beta.

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.

When a man’s woman is being bitchy, the problem is him, but not in the way most men would think. Most men will promptly resort to DEFCUNT Level 1 Beta Supplication Mode to appease their harridans, thinking, wrongly, that their women are bitchy because they haven’t gotten enough signs of commitment and support from their partners. And who could blame these men for thinking this? When nagging, inconsolable women lob heat-of-the-moment accusations at their men, the accusations usually take the form of scattershot wails about one-size-fits-all conventional relationship issues that come straight from therapists’ hackneyed textbooks.

“You don’t care about me.” “You never listen.” “You don’t support this marriage like I do.” “You forgot to go food shopping AGAIN. How many times do I have to remind you?!”

So these beta men, quite reasonably, care harder, listen longer, support stronger, and buy enough groceries to fill a fat housewife’s appetizer plate. He reasons, “This is what she claims she wants, so this is what I’ll give her. And that should make her be nice to me like she was last week.”

In the meantime, the alpha male is now on his fifth year of forgetting to go food shopping, and his lover hasn’t bitched once about it.

If the beta male only knew what worlds of unburdened joy lie just beyond his reach…

The truth in these matters is just the opposite of the conclusions that the beta male’s reasoning takes him: what their nagging, maximally fertile women want is not more beta, but LESS BETA. They want the alpha male who dismisses their nags with a wave of the hand, a cocky attitude, and a vigorous entitlement to belittling sexual conquest. And they want this DESPITE what they claim to say they want. The man who understands this paradox about women is the man who succeeds with them by measures of success that transcend traditionalist bromides.

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.

The form may change, but the urge remains the same.

She calls the urge for a stable long-term partner along with the increased desire for a more sexually attractive mate during periods of high fertility the “dual mating hypothesis.”

Haselton and Larson next plan to look at whether fault-finding and the feelings of distance and dissatisfaction have any long-term destabilizing effects on the relationships of women with less sexually attractive men.

Science proves that game can help strengthen a monogamous marriage. It’s not just for banging a lot of club sluts anymore.

They also plan to look into how, if at all, the 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.

Ya think? Thank the lord of illuminating truth that storehouses of real-life acquired knowledge like this digital retreat exist for men. The reign of confusion about women’s nature is beginning to close, and a new chapter in the history of love and romance is being written. This message will be uglier to some, more beautiful to others, dangerous to a few. But one thing it will be for all: a path out of the darkness.

Read Full Post »