Hugging Is Beta

The subject of hugs as a social lubricant surfaced recently in the comments. Before continuing, I’ll say that hugs as a tactile ploy to quickly escalate physical comfort with a girl is an entirely different matter than hugs as they are used by girls when meeting friends or even loosely affiliated acquaintances. The former is an established game technique; the latter is, well… emasculating.

Gadfly Amy writes,

This is an interesting observation. I hug people all the time, and you are right, the “alpha” guys don’t really hug back. They don’t freeze up and act uncomfortable or nervous… they just don’t physically react. They make me do the work.

Hugging is all the rage in SWPL-land. And it’s something I could do without. But some social forces are so deeply ingrained that even the mighty iconoclast you know and luv, Highlander Heartiste, must bend to the will of the herd.

Although hugging is a great kino escalation tactic, in nearly every other context it’s phony and suspiciously emasculating. People (mostly women) feel the pressure to hug, and like lemmings they dive right over the personal space cliff to hug everybody from exes to bosses to friends of friends to friends of friends of boss exes. Whatever import accompanied the practice has long ago been stripped mined from it by perfunctory overuse.

Hugging is Depo-Provera for the Androgyne Generation. It’s the final snippity snip of soft castration for men whose testes are already halfway ascended to their diaphragms. It’s a comforting boundary in a world of hair-trigger offense, and a reprieve from busting a move to get the girl.

Hyperbole? Ok, try imagining Don Draper hugging Peggy or Joan or his secretary du jour every time they got together at a party. Try picturing James Bond hugging a woman he had no intention of seducing into bed. Try imagining your father, or your grandfather, or this guy, asexually hugging women at a backyard barbeque.

It is to laugh.

Fact: If you aren’t initiating hugs to fast-track a familiarity that can be leveraged into quick seductions, or you aren’t hugging a girl as post-coital homage to her bedside acrobatics or sympathy for her dead grandma, then the hug you are receiving is beta.

Naturally, if I have to put up with hugging I’m gonna press in real close if the hugger is a cute girl with a big rack. That’s called making smoosh juice out of lemons. And lemons it is, because hugging, besides feeling like a coerced gesture to which one submissively relents, is in most ways subtly desexualizing. I don’t know when or how the practice got to be the go-to social greeting among self-regarding liberal whites (aka alien grays), but I’ve no doubt that many women now deploy it as a means of preemptively dissipating any simmering sexual energy that might radiate from a man who still has stones knocking between his legs.

In some cases, the sexual energy she subconsciously seeks to dissipate is her own. Which is flattering to the man, until he stops to think that the hug is basically the girl pulling a Heisman on him.

Exceptions exist. Hugging is occasionally an overt come-on by a girl who wants to communicate her sexual intent using tools deemed safe and plausibly deniable by broad social acceptance. If you can tell that’s happening to you, then by all means welcome that hug and let your hand drop to the top of her ass.

But more often, hugging is a female power move to claim control of a man’s beastly sexuality. It’s emasculating in the sense that the hugger feels so at ease in your company, so blissfully unthreatened by your percolating sexuality, that she can swoop right into your flaccid body and press her supple flesh into your spirit house. Not in your house? Oh yes, in your house.

The female hug is a nonverbal message delivery vehicle. It can say “Wow, I like this guy and just want to feel his strong swaying manboobs”, or, more typically for your average SWPL betaboy who must entertain upwards of ten friendzone hugs per day, it says, “Wow, this guy is such a team player, but just in case he’s got life left in that microbone of his, I’m gonna arouse him with the proximity of my body and drink of his nourishing despair as he realizes the extent of his paralyzed impotence.”

You don’t want to be that guy. But what to do when the world is hug-happy and refusal would assuredly consign you to the disinvite list?

Based on what I’ve seen charming alphas do, there are two effective countermeasures. One, you can do as Amy observed, and let your body hang in languid repose, forcing the girl by your inaction to assume all the sexual pre-penetrative tension that is always bubbling not far underneath the polite veneer of a hug. Call it, “amused receivership”. The trick is to substitute calm indifference for rigid discomfort. Done right, it’s a great way to non-verbally wedge a girl into the “chaser” role. She’ll feel like she’s doing all the work, so you as a man must be worth it.

The other method requires a more cantankerous personality. When she moves in for the hug, agree and amplify. As she’s hugging, let your hands roam over her back and hips. Exaggerate your pleasure for the entertainment of the crowd or for your own amusement. Smile like you’re getting a hummer and press harder into her. Moan a little. Sexualize the hug. Accuse her of copping a cheap feel, or making you feel dirty. Force her world to accommodate your insolent penile aura. She’ll either be aroused by your manly effrontery and begin to contemplate unclothed transactions with you, or she’ll be thrown into a state of perturbation and think twice before hugboxing you again as if you were a little eunuch doll.

Either way, you win. If the second method should scandalize the gathered, prep them with a clownish attitude. This way there’s less chance they’ll mistake your gropings for anything but physical humor. If she, or her friends, really chafe at your impudence, you shouldn’t be hanging with such uptight pussies anyhow.

Amy continues,

How do your girl friends greet you, then? How do you expect/want them to greet you?

I don’t press up against guys when I hug them, it’s a greeting type hug, quick, and I usually kiss them on the cheek. The only exception is if I’m really glad to see them for a specific reason, i.e. the other night I saw a friend of mine who just recovered from a freak illness that almost killed him. I was so happy to see him out and looking healthy that I hugged him hard. But I don’t think anyone would confuse that with a sexual advance.

You underestimate the proclivity of men to interpret all variety of female attention as a cry for copulation. But to your question, long-time close girl friends I have no intention of fucking may get a hug now and then. Mostly though, there is a tacit understanding that it’s cool to get together without having to grease the friendship wheel with gobs of histrionic symbols of affection.

The French have it right, like they do in so many matters of intersex politesse. If you must have a physical greeting with women you aren’t fucking, the lean in, arm grab, and air kiss on the cheek is sufficient. Otherwise, just chill and go for the high five, pulling away at the last second leaving her hand flapping in empty air, after which you execute the “who’s gay” finishing move.

Failing that, there’s always the fist bump, a gesture which ironically works a lot better to establish your alluring dominance when used on girls than on male friends.

Read Full Post »

How To Win At Divorce

Commenter Mom’s proud provided a road map for taking the divorce industrial complex by the throat and throttling it until victory is yours.

You burn it down and start over. In all likelihood most of what you built was with her/family in mind in the first place. Not yourself and it doesn’t matter. It’s purely a materialistic mindset you are processing with. Take out all of the emotion and a divorce turns into a business transaction. As it should be.

I nuked a 25 year marriage, I filed and no it’s not easy. I consider myself the luckiest man in the world. I did what most men cannot and that is I walked away from a long term marriage without the burden of alimony and child support payments. I took on ALL debt from the marriage. I surmise it cost me around $245,000 in credit card balances, re-mortgage and division of the home equity (she got a check for $65,000 out of that, stung like a bitch) and some 401k stash plus a few silver and gold bars.

That was 5 years ago. Directly after the divorce was final, I filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy and stopped paying the mortgage on the house and continued to live there for the next 4 years for free. I am untouchable and debt free at 51 with a stash of cash you wouldn’t believe.

It can be done and you will survive – Fuck’em all

Sever all emotional ballast. Take on all debt. File for divorce. Then file for bankruptcy. Start over a new man. That’s living the new American Dream.

The more men that do this, the closer this bernankefied debt scheme comes to total collapse. If single momhood, sluts, and gross obesity can be free from shame, then so can bankruptcy. Shamelessness is the lube that greases the asshole of a civilization about to get rammed into obliteration.

Read Full Post »

Should You Confirm Dates?

I’ve never been on board with the habit of calling or texting a girl before a date to confirm that it’s still on. I get the idea of it — if she’s about to flake, you save yourself the hassle and indignity of getting caught out alone — but practical considerations aside, the very act of confirming dates conveys lower value. Assuming the sale means assuming she’ll be there at the agreed upon time. It doesn’t mean assuming she forgot, or she might not show, and you have to double check to be sure her oh-so-busy schedule still allows time for your meager and annoying company.

Given the inherent DLV of date confirmations, men are advised to avoid the practice altogether or, if circumstances require confirming a date, to confirm with sly obliqueness that sidesteps the trap of self-betatization.

On the subject, a reader asks,

Long time reader here who has improved game, life style and understanding of women in general.  Here’s my question.  I always find it DLV to confirm a first date with a new girl, and have devised a few C&F methods, but here’s a new one I seek your opinion on.  I send a text a few hours before the date:

ME: I already have plans for tonight, but I’m free tomorrow night

HER: what/ok/whatever

ME: Wrong person, obviously I have plans with you tonight.

It does 2 things – 1. Shows that maybe another girl is reaching out to you and 2. You’re actually confirming.

Thoughts? A better version?

TIA

This is a twisted version of Reverse Eavesdropping Game. It’s a manipulative ploy to project high male mate value by (not so subtly) insinuating the fullness of your dance card. And, as the reader has noted, it’s a sneaky method to confirm a date with a girl without appearing like you called to confirm.

The difficulty with this tactic is the substantial risk of transparency. How obvious is it that your text was actually meant for her and not for another imaginary girl? The less obvious, the better Reverse Eavesdropping Game works. If you think the context is right and the impression you left with her is congruent with the believability of these texting tricks, then give it a whirl. Otherwise, I’d say skip this style of overwrought sneaky fucker texting and try these alternatives to confirming dates instead:

1. The preemptive “I’ll be late” gambit.

Need to confirm a date? Not sure if she’ll show up? Text her a few hours beforehand to tell her you’ll be late.

“just letting you know i’ll be ten minutes late. don’t be tragically sad.”

The beauty of this trick is that it simultaneously makes you seem higher value (you’ve got a busy life) while leaving the door open for her to announce an intention to flake if that was her plan. You aren’t confirming anything; you’re assuming she’ll be there. Her reply will be either “ok” in which case you have pretty good evidence she’ll show up or, if she was planning to cancel, she’ll be trapped in a corner where she either has to baldly lie (most girls won’t do this) or fess up that she won’t make it.

2. The “Wear something cute” gambit.

This is a classic PUA end-run around a potential flake. You text, “Wear [X] and [X] tonight” a couple hours before the date. No direct confirmation, no DLV. The assumption of her presence at the agreed time and place is tacit. If she doesn’t reply, she’s lost interest and is likely going to flake. If she does, her reply will tell you enough about her intention, or lack thereof, to show up that you can cease any further communication until you’re face-to-face with her (or until you’ve deleted her number).

Hope this helps!

Read Full Post »

Abundance Mentality

How will you know you have an abundance mentality with women? When you screw around on a girlfriend, or think about leaving her, and all your buddies tell you how crazy you are for messing up a great thing with such a cutie.

Despite their uniform dissent, you still do it.

Read Full Post »

Why Men Shouldn’t Mate Guard

Mate guarding is a science-y term for possessiveness. Both sexes mate guard, but for reasons having to do with the inherent skew in reproductive value and goals between men and women, men are the sex who generally mate guard more often, and with more intensity. Men of the northlands, at any rate.

To be precise, beta men and lesser alphas are chronic mate guarders. 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.

Yes, when a beta male mate guards, his girlfriend will proclaim in the moment her ego-stroked thrill at his display of jealousy, but over time the accretion of those displays will erode her charitable judgment of his mate value. This is why women are viscerally disgusted by the thought of overly “possessive” boyfriends. It’s not the chauvinistic possessiveness per se that makes women wince (a shibboleth to which rationalizing feminists constantly allude); it’s the betatizing fallout that repulses women. No woman wants to think she’s hitched to a lower value man, just as no man wants to think he’s with a woman uglier than he can be expected to get.

It’s therefore in the master womanizer’s interest to avoid the trap of mate guarding. The temporary happy ego boost it might give your woman is not worth the long-term erosion in your mate status. If you doubt this, try to visualize scenarios of men in the act of mate guarding. Recall moments when you witnessed mate guarding by other men. Does “alpha male” spring to mind? Or do you feel something closer to pity for those men?

If you’re having trouble organizing your thoughts on the matter, a picture can help to wonderfully focus your mind:

Assuming for purposes of discussion that this isn’t a creep copping a cheap feel, who among you can restrain the impulse to mock this fingertip-affixed beta male boyfriend claiming ownership of his snoozing girlfriend’s thigh? This is what mate guarding frequently looks like: A quasi-pervy, insecure beta trying hard to let the world know that this is HIS girl, and you (or her) better not get any ideas. This is also why excessive PDA is beta.

When you think of alpha males, you picture a self-possessed (rather than possessive), somewhat standoffish dude with a girl gazing adoringly at him and squirming to wedge tighter into the nook of his chest. He might drape a noncommittal arm over her shoulders, but even that small gesture of mate guarding appears as if it had to be coerced from him. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to emulate this guy and not the guy in the photo above.

CH Maxim #57: Beta males mate guard, alpha males disregard.

Before the EXCEPTIONS ARE THE RULE crowd chimes in with their insipid blather, no one denies that there might be rare times when a forthright act of overt guardianship is necessary to remind an especially obstinate man or slutty woman of your boundaries. The rule to avoid mate guarding doesn’t mean avoid it at all costs. If the cost of avoidance is high enough, you’ll be better off breaking the rule. But if you find yourself breaking the NO MATE GUARDING rule a lot, you need to reassess exactly who in your relationship is the real break-up threat.

Read Full Post »

Never Put Yourself Out Of Contention

When yer lurvable CH manor lord was a wee lad sprinkled with fresh down, many illusory obstacles set themselves in his path to mastering the hearts of newly teenaged girls in the plum ripeness of supercuteness. He would carefully listen to them dictate to friends in squealing cadence the qualities they loved about the boys they loved. Words like “cute”, “hottie”, “great body”, “muscular”, “flat stomach”, “bedroom eyes”, “so sweet” and related would zip around from ear to ear, never reaching a depth of analysis beyond the barest superficiality.

Schoolboy CH would then examine himself for this or that girl-approved quality and decide he had come up short compared to the handful of boys who best exemplified what the girls claimed they loved. Momentarily discouraged, CH grit his teeth and put into motion plans of passionate adolescence that would vault him to the ranks of the beloved.

But a funny thing happened on the way to molding himself into the male blueprint drafted by girltongue: CH stayed alert long enough to notice the kinds of boyfriends all that supple teenflesh eventually began to gravitationally orbit. These boyfriends were, in the unsparing judgment only a teenage boy can summon, neither cute nor hot nor muscular nor temperamentally sweet. They were quite often funny-looking, soft, pudgy, awkwardly bony, and clearly unsweet. They did not have bedroom eyes; they had mole eyes.

But one thing they DID have, and a lot of, was preternatural confidence. They walked and talked with bravado. They stood athwart their girlfriends with impassive stubbornness. They nodded with a glaze of coerced recognition in the general direction of the girls who were showering them with admiration and affection. They moped with a practiced air of perpetual dissatisfaction. They were heartlessly cruel and emotionally blank. They crushed romantic hopes like a bulldozer smashing grub life to mush.

And beautiful babes loved them.

From those earliest beginnings, a truism about the soul of woman would guide CH to the heights of romantic bliss. He had learned, and not a moment too soon, to watch what women do and ignore what they say about their romantic needs. For all the men who knew nothing about what women wanted, even fewer women knew themselves.

Read Full Post »

Ladies Like Him — In A Way

Continuing with our latest CH series exploring the historical records for choice bits of wisdom that would be the equivalent of PUA game and Heartistian theories of the sexual market today, reader Arbiter forwards this excerpt from a 1902 issue of Cosmopolitan Magazine (before it became a women’s rag. Rag. Heh.):

The author explains the “Sissy”:

He is polite and rather anxious to please. He wishes always to do the thing which happens to be the proper thing at any given time. He never would think of initiating anything novel or starting out in a new and unexpected course. He likes very much to be with ladies, and ladies like him – in a way. He is a most useful creature and absolutely harmless, intended by Providence to carry wraps and rugs, to order carriages, to provide theater-tickets, flowers, bon-bons, opera-boxes and four-in-hands, according to his means and the position which he holds. He will call regularly upon a girl and in fact upon all the girls he knows, and he will keep it up for years, and it will never mean anything to him or to them, for he is essentially a tame cat…He is really an indispensable person in our modern life; for it is desirable that young women should have some male creature about them to fetch and carry – one who will do it all for the mere pleasure of the service, and who will never agitate them and disquiet them or make them feel it necessary to be on their guard.

“In a way”. 😆 😆

In 1902, (a modern age to the men living back then), men knew what being a beta orbiter meant. Thus we have proof that the sexless friendzone and the female exploitation of servile, supplicating men for “beta bux” have existed for over 100 years, and probably a hell of a lot longer than that.

He then proceeds to describe the qualities that make men respect other men. The explanation is long, but in short he must be honorable, reasonable, courageous and gentle.

The last one does not mean being effeminate, but a refinement in character:

Intellectually it means intuition, sensitiveness to all impressions, and the imaginative element which illumines the dark places of the mind and shows the way to great achievement. Temperamentally it denotes gentleness, and the tenderness which is the perfect complement to strength. It is to men who have this last and finest gift, that other men, since history began, have given not alone their liking but their service, their devotion, and their very lives.

What then is the conclusion? Men like in men these traits: the honor that ennobles; the justice that insures the right; the reasonableness that mellows and makes plain; the courage that proclaims virility; the generous instinct that disdains all meanness; the modesty that makes no boast; the dignity that wins respect; the fineness and the tenderness that know and feel. But when one thinks of it more carefully, may he not sum it up in just a single sentence, and accept it as truth, that all men like a gentleman?

Beta niceguys reading the above passage are undoubtedly saying to themselves, “Reasonableness? Generosity? Modesty? Tenderness? Hey, wait, I have all those qualities! Why don’t men admire me and women invite me to their beds?”

Because, dear beta, you must impress upon people you are those virtuous things by choice, and not by necessity. And the way to prove that is by first demonstrating that you are capable of behaving in the opposite fashion, as suits your needs.

Take a page from the sexy jerk. Watch how he shits with impunity on the polite norms of society, gets the girl and the admiration of his friends, and then pulls a rabbit out of the hat with a sudden and unexpected generous gesture that provokes an explosion of love kibbles raining on his dinner plate.

People, particularly women, overdose on virtue quickly. The scarcity principle applies here. You don’t want to be that dependable guy who’s always there for her; you want to be that inscrutable dark triad jerk whose occasional forays into the Light are greeted with glowing encomiums and flowering furrows.

Read Full Post »