Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Rules of Manhood’ Category

Beta male sexual market strategies are not always doomed to failure. They can work under certain conditions. The two primary scenarios in which the beta male strategy is workable (if not necessarily optimal) are:

1. As a “softening agent” to improve your attainability, or your “long term lover” potential, if your alpha male traits have pushed a woman too far into feeling unloved and unneeded.

2. As a self-advertisement for long term relationship suitability, given preexisting sufficiently compensatory alpha male traits.

Number one is a game corrective. Number two is a specific game strategy designed to screen out girls who would make bad long term relationship prospects, and attract women who are looking to settle down.

Note that the common denominator in all successful beta male mating strategies is the assumption of some degree of preexisting alpha male characteristics, or an already present alpha male dynamic within a relationship. Beta male strategies, in other words, are meant as adjuncts to alpha male, or high value male, game.

The reverse — adjunct alpha male strategies to complement low value beta male game — is hardly ever an effective strategy for attracting and bedding the women you want. But it can be a decent way of life for beta providers who wish to spice up their marriages as a preventative against wifely infidelity or bitchiness.

In very unusual circumstances, an extreme form of beta male game — the loathsome male feminist orbiter — can occasionally redound in rare, ungainly and passionless sexual favors from the manipulative, flabby wymyn to whom this execrable species (hello hugo!) ingratiates himself. But it is not a strategy any man who understood women would recommend, for the cost in investment, time and psychological health far outweighs the meager sexual payout. And yet, this seems to be the strategy most (Western) men naturally gravitate toward, owing partly to the enfeebled state of mind of the modern man and partly to the low risk-low reward structure of such a strategy, a structure which appeals to large swaths of humanity unwilling to leave their bubbles of comfort.

Conveniently, there is a fantastically laughable Yahoo/Match article highlighting reader emails from people who describe how they “won their sweeties back”. Most of the confessions are nauseatingly beta, and students of game may well wonder how such tactics could possibly work on women.

Assuming for purposes of this post that all these emails aren’t just made up by bored Yahoo staff, we can use them as illustrations of what sorts of compensatory alpha dynamics have to be in place for hardcore beta male game to work. Reading the subtext opens a window to hidden alpha game that buttresses the beta male supplicating, and allows the latter to flourish, however temporarily.

He rapped his way back into her good graces
“I had a fight with a girl I was dating, and to try and get over it, I went out with the guys, and one thing led to another. Eventually, the phone got pulled out and I called her. She phoned me the next day and said I’d left her the sweetest, funniest voicemail ever. Apparently, I apologized and told her how much I cared about her all in the form of a freestyle rap! I couldn’t believe it, and neither could she. I can’t rap to save my life, but she said she hadn’t smiled that big in awhile.”
— Marty, 31

Creating a rap song about how much you care about a girl sounds awfully beta, but check the context: he had a fight with his girl and fled the scene to chill with buds. Fighting is typically a demonstration of alphaness. Beta males tend to get passive-aggressive, sulky or apologetic. A real fight excites women because they crave drama. Put a fist through the wall and you have just opened the vaginal floodgates. Also, framing your “apology” in the form of a song is not only a signal of creativity — an alpha trait women love — but also a clever way of not really saying you’re sorry as it has come to be conventionally understood and expected. So what we have here is a facsimile of beta male game wrapped in the bear hug of alpha male context.

He went to great lengths to tell her how he felt
“My girlfriend and I had been taking a break from dating for about a week. Things were all good until we ran into each other one day. We both pretended like nothing was wrong, but I couldn’t take it anymore and I called her shortly after. Right in the middle of a fairly deep conversation, tears and everything, my cell phone died. I needed to see her, so I walked seven miles to her house in the rain (what can I say? I had transportation issues that day) and showed up shivering, coughing, and barefoot on her front steps. We agreed the fight was over — and that I was stupid for not having a land line.”
— Matt, 24

Getting dumped: beta. Taking a mutual break: alpha. Again, context matters. This guy was already in a position of alphaness when he called his girlfriend to reconnect. Perception is all that matters in women’s hearts and in seduction, and the perception of him here would have worked to his benefit. Bonus accidental alpha validation: cell phone death. Nothing says “alpha male” like cutting a girl off mid-conversation when she’s pouring out her heart.

His sneaky “sorry” proved to be fruitful
“I had a huge fight with my girlfriend. We decided we should talk things out and be civil before making any permanent decisions about our relationship. We met, and it turned out to be really awkward. But when she wasn’t looking, I slipped a picture of a banana in her bag. Across the top it said, ‘I’m still bananas for you.’ Corny, I know, but she called me when she found it and said it made her laugh. Things got better from there.”
— Ed, 26

Making light of a tense situation and playing around with a girl’s emotions demonstrates amused mastery; the banana photo was funny in a dorky way, but at least it wasn’t apologetic or cloying. He reframed this drama to his benefit, and in the process hit all her “unpredictable alpha male” buttons. Plus, the context was post-fight, which we know is a good context to be in if you want to spark a girl’s passionate desire.

His sincerity hit all the right (love) notes
“My girlfriend and I had a fight the day before Valentine’s Day. I got a hundred of those little kid Valentine cards with SpongeBob SquarePants and the Backstreet Boys on them and wrote different things I liked about her on each one. I put them all into a box wrapped with plain brown paper, and I drew a heart on the top that said ‘I’m sorry.’ She called me when she found them on her doorstep and forgave me.”
— John, 25

Alpha context: post-fight. Alpha trait: creativity. Execution: beta.

Very creative, but sickeningly beta, efforts at making up can work on some women (hint: fat or ugly women with few options), but the glow she feels will wear off much more quickly than would the glow from an expression of creativity that is alpha in nature and delivered with alpha insouciance.

He drew her back into his heart, though her neighbors were not amused
“I was totally in love with this woman, but we broke up because I got angry and jealous when she wanted to spend a day with a good guy friend of hers. Of course, I immediately realized how stupid I’d been. So, during the middle of the night, I snuck over and wrote ‘I’m sorry, please forgive me’ on the side of her neighbor’s house in sidewalk chalk so that she could see it from her bedroom. They were mad, but it washed off. And it worked.”
— Chris, 32

Did it really work, Chris? Or did she “go back” to you after she took “good guy friend’s” dick in her box. Never assume the best about a woman who is spending time with other men, no matter how much she insists she loves you.

But I’ll give you points for the chalk graffiti. Defacing property is kind of alpha.

Even girls can get in on the act of beta female game.

Their love story got a happy Hollywood ending after all
“I was head over heels for a guy and he dumped me. I thought if I could just remind him of our intense connection, he would see the light. I was working at a filmmaking company and used the editing facilities to splice classic movie breakup scenes together with disturbing scenes from Apocalypse Now. Anyone else would have probably gotten a restraining order, but I knew his sense of humor, and I knew he would think it was funny. He loved it, and we’re still together.”
— Amy, 34

“if I could just remind him of our intense connection…” Man oh man, is that not just a perfect archetypical hamster rationalization? “I know he loves me because we had an intense connection. He just dumped me because he got scared.” Goddamned priceless.

Anyhow, if this chick is telling the truth, she must be really REALLY hot. Because, in reality, that’s the only sort of “game” that works for women, especially women who do weird stalkerish shit like she did.

That’s enough for this post. Sometimes beta male game can win an attractive woman over if it’s executed with extreme creativity, whimsy, ballsiness or unpredictability, and is reinforced by a preexisting alpha male context. “Sometimes” being the key word here, because if you think that this sort of rom-com sappy beta male suckuppery is the ticket to poon paradise or marital bliss, you will be sorely reminded of the squalid nature of female sexuality in short order. Beta male game should be the seasoning to your alpha male main course. When betaness becomes the main course, women get their fill of your starchy sycophancy not long after the appreciative smile leaves their faces.

Read Full Post »

A reader telegraphed the Chateau a link to a very interesting experiment that an intrepid blogger ran on OKCupid. He created ten fake profiles, five men and five women of increasing physical attractiveness, and measured the response rate he received over a four-month period. The results should be little surprise to regular guests of this mysterious sanctum sanctorum, but are worth examining in detail for the clarity they provide to men who are considering making online dating the fulcrum of their mate selection strategy.

The experiment: How many unsolicited messages do men get compared to women? And what difference does their physical attractiveness make to each man and woman’s success? [ed: all ten dummy accounts had the same written profile. you can read about his experimental set-up at his blog, which i recommend. we’ll focus on his results here.]

Here are the photos he used, ugliest to hottest, left to right:

The results after 24 hours showed that the two hottest women were instantly barraged with suitors, while the men, even the good-looking ones, struggled to get a nibble.

• Each woman received at least one message, but the two best looking women received 581% more messages than the other three combined.

• Only one man received any messages.

For the second-hottest chick, 1 in 3 men who viewed her profile sent her a message. For the second-hottest man, 1 in 10 women who viewed his profile sent him a message. (Strangely, the putative hottest man got no messages.) Conclusion: Looks matter a lot more for women’s mating success. Or: looks matter a lot less for men’s mating success (relative to all the other criteria they must meet to satisfy women’s 463 bullet-point checklist).

What about the results after 7 days?

As we can see, the two hottest girls are cleaning up in the attention whore sweepstakes. The two hottest men get a few bites, but because they are men and have no personal concept of the sheer volume of sexual attention that hot women experience during their brief window of prime fertility, they think they are Kings of Maine.

Handsome Joe: “Hey, Emma, I got eight messages this week! I’m in demand!”

Exquisite Emma: “Oh, uh, hee hee… that’s great Joe!”

Handsome Joe: “How many did you get?”

Exquisite Emma: “128.”

Handsome Joe: 😯

Even more depressing for those above average-looking men who think they can bank on their decent looks to score pussy, the ugliest girl (that cow all the way over on the left) got one more message than the three men, from left to right, got in total. The plain jane got almost as many messages as the two hottest men combined.

• Three of the men had no messages, despite their profiles being viewed about 25 times between them.

• The women’s messages outnumbered the men’s 17 to 1 (mostly thanks to the two best looking women).

Behold female hypergamy and male potency.

Finally, the results after four months:

Holy mackerel! Check your female privilege. The next time you hear a feminist whine about the patriarchy, show her this graph and tell her where the real power resides.

A couple things to note. The ugliest man got nothing after four months of desperation. The three men with looks ranging from ugly to above-average received a grand total of three messages over four months. If you are the average man, don’t plan on letting your generic beta profile and photo do your work for you. Hell, even if you are a good-looking man, you won’t have many messages to work with after four months. Conclusion: Men, you NEED game in order to excel in the thunderbone that is online dating. Otherwise, you’ll have better odds picking up women just talking to any of them that you meet walking down the street.

Worse, the ugliest woman got nearly as many messages as the best-looking man! (Or second-best-looking man, depending on your judgment of the rank order of male photos.) The second-ugliest woman — a piddling 3 or 4 by most men’s standards — received as many messages as the two hottest men received.

• The two most attractive women probably would have received several thousand more if their inboxes hadn’t have reached maximum capacity.

• It took 2 months, 13 days for the most popular woman’s inbox to fill up. At the current rate it would take the most popular man 2.3 years to fill up his.

This is why men, unlike women in their primes, cannot wait around for lovers to fall in their laps. They have to bust a move. This also explains why men, in general, have a firmer grip on the reality of the sexual market than do women: when you’re a hot babe, you can afford ignorance and platitudes because the tidal wave of messages will come regardless. But a man who wallows in pretty lies will soon find himself banished to Pudpullia, where boners go to chafe.

The blogger who performed the experiment also analyzed the content of the messages that the OKCupid customers were leaving the fake profiles.

My impression, after reading several hundred in the women’s inboxes, is that most men compliment the attractive women a lot, they make reference to something in the woman’s profile (you would not believe how many times men mentioned the party tricks and ‘Arrow’ the cheetah from the generic profile I wrote), or they ask a general question about travel or something equally boring.

They are rarely, if ever, imaginative…

Game will never become overexposed. Boring beta chumps who are truly nice outnumber charming aloof jerks who are truly cocky by about 1 million to 1. This is good news for the player with game who plays the online charade: online, you can decimate, because your competition is so weak and so ludicrously market saturated.

So what is the experimenter’s recommendation for men? His recipe for success will sound familiar to practitioners of the art of seduction.

• Demonstrate creativity, intelligence and a great sense of humour
• Be totally different to anything she may have received before
• Be obviously unique and not a cut-and-paste job
• Show that I’ve read her profile and absorbed facts about her
• Not be needy!

Unpredictability, ignoring her beauty (negs), non-neediness, listening ability, and wit. All core game concepts.

Note, too, that the guy running that blog sounds like a well-meaning liberal who probably thinks feminism is a-ok, so the fact that he’s coming to these conclusions about the sexes and the steps men need to take to attract women — steps which fly in the face of feminist and beta male bromides — suggests that his self-enlightenment is genuine, and not an affectation.

He includes in his post the “perfect message” that he sent to a cute chick, which you should go there to read. It’s a bit long and try-hard for my taste, but he mostly abides the standard game rules and does a good job avoiding horrible anti-game. Notice that at the end of his message he ASSUMED THE SALE. She replied positively.

He ends with thoughts about the obstacles that men and women face in the hyperconcentrated online meat market.

The fact that the first stage of online dating is so heavily stacked in women’s favour doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s any easier for them, compared to men, to reach the end goal of pure love or perfect sex. They may have the pick of the bunch to begin with, especially if they happen to be really attractive, but they can still only date one man at a time—they must still filter the largely undifferentiated onslaught of male attention into yes and no piles. Then the yes pile has to be sorted through in much the same way as anyone else does it—by talking, bonding, finding common interests, realising there’s been a big mistake, or a wonderful discovery.

An overabundance of sexual attention is a problem most men would like to have. So I don’t buy his feminist-glazed assertion that women have it just as tough as men. First, he’s simply wrong to think women can only date one man at a time. Women, especially the hot ones, can and do date multiple men concurrently. Usually, they do this before they have committed to any one man with the broken seal of their vaginas, but before then women have no ethical or psychological roadblocks stopping them from dating three or five or ten men per week. In fact, I’ve known cute chicks who BRAGGED about how many men were treating them to nights out on the town.

It’s different, of course, once women enter a sexual relationship. Then, they find it hard, and soul-crushing, to give themselves over to more than one man at a time. Men, in contrast, will happily screw many babes concurrently if they could get away with it. Most men can’t, so they pretend they have morals to explain their heavenly monogamy.

Second, the online sorting process is not as hard for women as this guy is making it out to be. Women have finely honed beta male filter mechanisms that can quickly and efficiently sort the bores from the bosses. Sorting through 500 email messages becomes a lot less daunting when you can immediately delete the 495 of them that start with “You’re very pretty…” or “Hi, my name is…” or “Do you like living in…?”.

Granted, women have to put more time into their message sorting chores than men do (who base their judgments almost completely on a quick millisecond glance at a photo), but most women would secretly agree that the ego boost of an overflowing email inbox is worth the extra time picking through all the losers. For proof of this, just listen to any aging cougar who laments the loss of her youth when unwanted attention from men was a hassle. Being sexually invisible (like most men) is a change in life status most women don’t accommodate very well.

Beyond the scope of sorting, meeting and dating, there is a good point to be made that the difficulty level for women navigating the sexual market begins to rise and even surpass the difficulty level for men once relationships are within reach. Men can glide more easily in and out of failed dating adventures, and even failed LTRs, for they have more time on their side than do women. Plus, they have no risk of a disabling nine month burden. A couple years here and there with different women doesn’t much affect the overall dating outlook for men. Women, otoh, risk a lot more with the time and energy they invest in each man they date. An LTR that fails after two years can be fatal to a woman’s dating window of opportunity.

Two final notes.

1. It’s easy to be misled by this data from online dating sites that ugly women are just as in-demand as handsome men. No. First, the men contacting the ugly women are likely the dregs of malehood. Second, a low-effort copypaste email to an ugly chick is worth it from a loser man’s perspective if it results in a quick, sloppy lay. The trick for these ugly women, which they find is much harder to manage, is getting these losers to stick around and commit to them for more than the one-off perfunctory fuck. In other words, you can’t accurately judge a woman’s sexual market value by how much sex has, or how easily she can have sex, with losers.

Third, female choosiness means that the rate of online female messaging is not as indicative of men’s SMV as online male messaging is indicative of women’s SMV. An online profile is simply NOT ENOUGH for a woman to judge a man’s sexiness and compatibility. She needs to smell him, be touched by him, watch him move, listen to him speak, and furtively eye the way his crotch bulges. But an online profile IS ENOUGH for a man to judge a woman’s sexiness and, yes, sometimes even compatibility, because men seek to build connections primarily as a function of their visually-based lust, unlike women who seek to find reasons to dismiss budding connections as a function of their critical hypergamous impulses.

2. Differential online messaging rates between men and women, when a bare bones written profile and photo are all the viewer has to go on, prove that looks in a potential mate simply aren’t as important for women as they are for men. If they were, women would be messaging the two hottest men at the same rate that the men messaged the two hottest women. But women need a LOT MORE from their men than just a nice-looking face. Women need a whole plethora of signals of high value mate quality, and that includes to a great degree men’s personality traits, vibe and attitude.

This is not to say that women don’t care about looks; only that women compartmentalize looks along with other, less physically tangible male characteristics that they are subconsciously attracted to in men. Less facially gifted men with game should be heartened by these online results: they show that a tight email message that exhibits the qualities of the preselected alpha male can draw the interest of cute girls who might otherwise dismiss these men based solely on their photos.

In short, women have a tool. Men have a toolbox. If a woman’s tool, however powerful it is, is broken, she’s shit out of luck. If a man’s wrench is broken, he reaches in and grabs the pliers.

Don’t wait for a woman to slip her tool in your toolbox. If you do that, you are looking at long dry spells. Reach in, grab your tools, and hot wire her circuitry.

Read Full Post »

Readers, Chateau Heartiste has gone mainstream! Check out my first submission to CNN’s blog, where I review a new book by two “relationship sexperts” who advise men seeking love to expand their pool of dating prospects by cultivating multiple concurrent sexual relationships with as many women as time and energy allow.

***

Every man needs a ‘harem’ of women.

If you’re a single man and you’re looking for love, forget about “The Ring” and stop worrying that “She just sees me as a friend.”

That was then, this is now – it’s a post-dating world you’re living in, and that means you have to shed your one-to-one mind-set and start thinking in terms of one to many.

In other words? Stop searching for Ms. Right and look around at all the Ms. Right(s).

That’s the premise of “The Harem,” a new book from Lord Cockenawe, who, along with Donald Juanholio, runs the website “WTF Is Up With My Love Life?!

According to Cockenawe and Juanholio, every man – single or not – should have his own harem, a group of girls that occupy different roles in his life.

“You probably have a ‘harem’ of friends, who all play different roles and fulfill different needs for you,” explains Cockenawe. “You might call one friend to go gun shopping versus another friend when you’re playing first person shooters online versus another friend when you need a serious drinking buddy. Your romantic harem is just another piece of the much larger, long-term puzzle of how you structure the relationships in your life to feel full, happy and loved.”

The women in this harem can include anyone from the waitress you flirt with, to the ex-girlfriend you Skype, to the picturesque HR coworker you commiserate with over lunch. Whether you end up dating one or more of them is just an added bonus.

“As a man, having a harem provides you with a love life full of possibility: you have many women in your life, in many ambiguous but sexually enriching ways, who are all teaching you about yourself and your needs and desires and leading you closer to the girl and relationship you want,” say Cockenawe and Juanholio.

Terry Trespassio, a New York-based dating and relationship coach who is single himself, exuberantly extols the “uncoupled state” and takes things a step further: If you’re happily single but enjoy dating, he recommends seeing three different women regularly.

“When you date just one girl, you might feel pressured to commit, even if you’re not ready,” he says. “If you see two women, there’s often this unspoken need to choose between them. But three girls tend to balance each other out, like a tripod. There’s really no downside to female variety!”

Like the “Harem,” these three women can fulfill different needs – maybe you like to have dirty sex with one, public sex with another and intimate lovemaking with a third – which removes the burden of one woman to fill all those slots.

“This can also help you worry less about whether or not someone is your ‘match’,” says Trespassio, “and shifts your focus to the sheer joy of connecting with other young, slender, height-weight proportionate pretty women of all sizes and ages.”

Nor does being single have to equal celibate. Your harem may well include ex-girlfriends, hot sex prospects, and perhaps even a casual f*ckbuddy. It’s your love-life, so do it your way. As long as you’re open and honest with your dates when pressed on the matter – and practice safe sex until you’re assured she’s not lying about being on the pill – there’s no reason why you can’t be intimate with more than one person.

Just as different people can serve different roles outside of bed, so too can they satisfy different needs between the sheets. In their groundbreaking book, “The Ethical Player,” Dossier Everlong and Jamdhin Hardy describe the ways in which single men (and women) can juggle multiple sexual partners and enjoy intimacy safely and “ethically.”

Marriage is wonderful for many, but it’s not the right choice for everyone, particularly men, who must bear the brunt of sacrifice when deciding to accede to marital monogamy and forego all other lovers. Whether you’re sexually intimate with more than one person or simply enjoying a variety of friendships and dates, one doesn’t have to be the loneliest number.

Say Cockenawe and Juanholio: “We are living in a post-dating world because traditional dating is no longer the most common path that people are following to romantically connect and fall in love. And the more that men judge themselves and their relationships by traditional dating standards that no longer exist, the more they are going to feel an unnecessary despair and confusion and hold themselves back from finding multiple outlets of exciting love in this new romantic landscape.”

So go forth and harem build!

***

Isn’t it great how the mainstream is beginning to accept with open mind the teachings of players and sexually satisfied men? This could be the dawn of a golden era when all harem master penises are served, and all concubines satisfied. A revolution in romance!

Read Full Post »

Players and unaffiliated men who labor to pass on the Good Word of Game usually admonish neophytes that borderline uncomfortable numbers of approaches need to be made in order to become proficient at pickup. You’ve got to get out there and talk to more women than you would normally do in the course of a nondescript day.

This message is a good one. You won’t get good at the crimson arts until you’ve put in some real world practice interacting with lots of different women. The exact number is irrelevant; whether it takes you ten or one thousand approaches to improve doesn’t change the undeniable reality that very few men have the ability to go from video gaming malaise to WunderJuan on their first approach.

You could say that the approach mentality, at least during the learning curve stage, is a core principle of game.

There’s one other core game principle that I don’t see mentioned very much, if at all, in the pickup literature. In my view, it’s just as important a principle as approaching girls enough times to trespass beyond your comfort zone. That principle is the “find and foment her flaws” theory.

The idea is simple. Every woman you meet, from friend to love prospect to the barest acquaintance, and every woman who crosses your field of visual inspection, will be subject to your exceedingly judgmental eye. You will search, find and declare to yourself her flaw or flaws. If propriety and privacy allows it, you will verbalize her flaw so that it may become cemented in your wavering cortex and banish all doubt of the flaw’s authenticity. It is a well-kown fact among the big-toothed motivational speaker circuit that saying aloud slogans of self-encouragement or life goals helps the chanter sculpt corporeal heft to his dreams.

So, for example, you see a woman in the mall riding an escalator. Her sundress flounces insouciantly from above you. An incipient boner stirs. But this time, instead of allowing your beta twerpitude the run of your skullcase and straining to catch imagined glimpses of panty, you silence the dork force and, with proud stentorian innerauthority, jot a solid mental note of her larger-than-ideal thighs. Safe distance permitting, you might even rumble in a dampened voice to yourself, “Hm, thunder thighs. Too much speckle.”

You will enact this devious scheme for every attractive and not-so-attractive woman who has the misfortune of falling prey to your daggered gaze. Only the obvious sexual market losers of femaledom — the grossly obese, the crassly ugly, the desiccated old — will be exempt, for their flaws are so prominently obscene they need no reminding nor rooting.

What is the purpose of Principle #2? To balance gender sheets?

Certainly, you could argue with strong evidence that women are particularly unforgiving of men’s flaws, in the private if not in the public, being as how they are slaves to a much more powerful hypergamous force that excels at weeding out stellar-lite suitors with extreme prejudice. A little harsh judgment from you is just giving women a taste of the moldy bread they daily give to men.

But, no, that’s not the purpose, as vengefully titillating as that seems. The purpose is purely practical. The finding and fomenting of women’s flaws conditions the beta male mind to accept the attainability of women, and to discard the reflexive sanctification of women. No master seducer who ever lived believed even one woman was unattainable by him, nor that any woman was a flawless vessel of purity. The seducer loves women, but his love is vast enough to revel in women’s flaws. And that is why he wins.

The beta male who conditions himself thus, by his efforts to discover the flaws in women kept hidden to him by the shadow of his turgid lust cast around his vision, will slowly feel the power and the strength of the Attitude, that indomitable voice that rises like the Great Scrotum from the pubic patch and delivers with valedictorian presumption the message that no woman is out of reach or free of exploitable insecurities, the exploiting of which by a savvy man she herself would be ashamed to admit thrills her to the clitbone.

Returning to escalator girl, here are some more examples of flawmobbing.

– skewed eyes
– narrow hips
– rumpled blouse
– misshapen boobs
– nip/tuck victim
– manhands
– roo pouch
– clown feet
– incipient hump
– jug ears
– wasted calves
– bow-legged
– flabby arms
– pigeon-toed
– broad shouldered
– excessive peach fuzz
– asymmetric nostrils
– ETC

I can already hear the gripers. “But I just saw the hottest chick ever and she looked PERFECT! I couldn’t find anything wrong with her.”

There is always something wrong with a girl, no matter how beautiful. You may have to dig a little deeper, but you’ll find her thermal exhaust port with a practiced keen eye. Note that any of the above can easily apply to the hottest girl you have ever seen. That’s the beauty of the flawfinding mission: it unearths the normally overlooked blemishes scattered among a girl’s mien that her general beauty tends to obscure to men. If you socialize with a girl and gain insight into her personality, you have even more data from which to devise withering, silent judgments.

Once you have gotten reliable at noticing and promoting women’s flaws, their beauty will no longer hold such paralyzing power over you. Conditioned to emphasize a woman’s worst and attenuate her best, you will become a cad machine, irresistible to the fairer sex who will react shaken from their stupor by your dispassionate demeanor and feel the threat of your pervasive critical eye with senses aflame.

Maxim #30: Ignore a woman’s flaws at your peril. They are the key to reconfiguring your perception, and thus her attainability.

Read Full Post »

Beware the blessings of gratification.

The relationship. The long-term relationship. The Holy Grail for some. Purgatory for others. Serene limbo for most.

The relationship — aka marriage, when in its most loathsome permutation — is supposed to be the culmination of romantic transcendence. It moves lovers beyond lust into the realm of silent covalent bond. But this bond, unspoken and understood, can’t form out of any primordial soup; it requires the presence, and the absence, of specific ingredients. The rarity of the founding broth is the reason why poets elevate inviolate love to the sublime. One isn’t liable to effuse about the commonplace or the trite, which can spring like weeds from the craggiest soil.

In every relationship, there is a transition period; that window of time when a man senses he has crossed a boundary from experimental abandon to tribute paid in increments of freedom. A man stands at the Gates of Pudenda and makes his decision for Eros: to step through, committing himself to a revised moral code etched with broad brushstrokes of obligation and the peculiar rewards accrued therein, or to turn back to gallivant another day.

The decision at the moment of transition is not the same for every man. If you haven’t experienced multiple lovers, your transition into an LTR will be easier. You won’t sacrifice much in leaving behind your life of infrequent elation for the rhythmic reassurance of content stability. Players with a lurid, technicolor memory plate filled with many women will find it harder to accede to the straitjacketing of an LTR because of an acute sense of something missing, of what could still be had for the taking, and of withdrawal from the thrill of the hunt. The man who has bedded in his lifetime more than two or three lovers (the average number for the typical beta male) has a feature length film of past and present conquests running in a continuous loop, instantly evoked, as H.H. would say, on the “dark innerside of his eyelids”, in perfect optical replication, to effortlessly remind him of the incomprehensible pleasure of vulvic variety and of all the women waiting in oblivious anticipation for the arrival of his plunderprong.

The memory and the knowledge are the curse of the player. Memory stokes the wanderlust with insistent, torrential recall of scores of curvaceous bodies and rippled vulvae. Though in theory one vagina is no different than the rest, in a man’s mind each furrow is an ecological feature etched into strange planets across the galaxy. Every vagina is a new world to a man, some more exotic than others, and the unbridled enthusiasm he will feel planting his flag on fresh colonizations is no accident of evolution. Contrary to feminized misappraisal, this is not the pretentious joy of shame or escape; it is the sincere joy of pleasure that needs no reason.

The knowledge that the player possesses at his whim the skill to seduce women is the twin sabotage that undermines relationship endurance. A player will see the world of women lit from every angle, exposed to his exploration, if he knows, through experience, through the touch of a thousand fingertips, that he can bed women fairly consistently, and with manageable effort. The psychological emollient of knowing this power is his is enough to burden the heart of a man contemplating even a facsimile of fidelity. Bound to his lover by, in turns, conscience, social opprobrium, and legal sanction, the streams of waiting conquests slipping past like rivulets of glimmering intimacies, taunting his parched loin loosely moored to the ballast of loyalty, is the torture of a lifetime of short-circuited ejaculations.

In contrast, to be the grateful man with no history of sexual plenitude, for whom omnipresent sensual possibilities seem as remote as the twinkling stars in the heavens and thus unlikely to stir his ancient calling, is to be released with the gift of the constrained vision. Where possibility is dead, or unfathomable, so is dangerous yearning. He is now free to step back from the beautiful painting and dryly ponder its geometric contours. When this man falls in love with an accessible work of art, one he can call his own, he has little else to compare its grip on his imagination. He cherishes his chosen muse, blissfully ignorant of the carelessness and glibness with which he would succumb to, and love, the millions of competing muses were they to be more tangible to him than airbrushed magazine cover placeholders.

The curse of the player, then, is ultimately illumination, tactile and cerebral. His own success in love betrays his quest for the ultimate love. He has seen vistas he cannot unsee.

He is not a disbeliever in everlasting monogamous love, quite the contrary; but his eternal search for it has corrupted the destination. Each step of his journey lands like the heavy stamp of slash and burn machinery, decloaking the mystery of the source at the mouth of the tributary. He is as certain to destroy underfoot the elixir of redemption as he is to finally catch it, leached of its nutrients.

Ironically, the man (or woman) best situated to find divine love is the one whose efforts aren’t excessively profitable.

Read Full Post »

To praise, or not to praise? “seeking truth” asks:

The transition from sleeping often with women of assorted beauty and quality, over the past 8 years, to recently establishing a longer-term serious relationship with what I consider quite a valuable women is an interesting dilemma. Clearly there are long-term issues to excessively praising a woman, as constant exposure to praise will naturally lead one to lower the value of praising party, through over-exposure. However, when one is happy it is easy and natural to express the reasons for ones happiness. What is the balance?

What is your take on the long-term potential of a relationship strategy that involves praise for a woman’s strong points – Fun loving, Funny, Quick, Smart, Loving, Affectionate, and Attractive in large helpings of each, with a somewhat raunchy, nasty, perverted objectification of her as a sex object required to submit/please, along with occasional reminders of how successful and easy it has been to create hook-up situations?

For example, saying i love you and the same breath telling her to practice stretching so she can be manipulated for an easier pounding during an upcoming trip.  Does the sexual objectification offset the Betazoid aspects of praise?

I am finding the application of game interesting and looking to better understand its various implementations to sort out a comfortable role for it in relationships.

Here are three key seduction maxims to live by.

Better to err on the side of too much boldness than too little.

Better to err on the side of too much assholery than not enough.

Better to err on the side of too little praise than too much.

Do you know what happens to guys who cravenly praise their girlfriends day in and day out? They get dumped. Or tossed into sexual solitary confinement. Or taken for granted, if they’re lucky.

Do you know what happens to guys who are stingy with their praise? They get more sex than they can handle. They also get some drama, but… would you rather deal with drama or getting dumped?

I hope this lesson has reached home. Man, I have known guys who:

1. never complimented their GFs’ looks

2. never complimented their GFs’ smarts

3. never complimented their GFs’ personalities

but who had their GFs wrapped around their fingers. Even funnier, their GFs complimented *them* all the time, and all they answered in return was a head nod or a “you bet”. Isn’t love grand?

Now this doesn’t mean you have to go ice cold aloof ninja to sustain a loving relationship. As men, when we love a woman, we feel urges to compliment her. It’s a natural by-product of wanting to sex her hot bod with extreme defilement. And, it makes us feel good to throw her a bone of flattery. But betas completely surrender themselves to this urge, and it costs them. Alphas channel this urge, and it pays dividends. The Goldilock’s Principle is definitely in play. Allow me to open a window into a woman’s head, so you can see how your praise is received by her subterranean neuronal rhythms.

Excessive praise ===> “I can do better than him”

No praise ===> “He doesn’t love me”

Just the right kind and amount of praise ===> “I love him”

The first one will corrupt your LTR. The second one will corrode your LTR, but only after a very long time has passed. The third one will feed her hamster juuuuust enough pellets to keep her wondering, guessing, loving, and desiring.

There is a flattery balance to strike that won’t DLV yourself, and here are some guidelines to reaching that balance:

1. Never praise your girlfriend from a position of weakness.

There’s no worse time to lavish your woman with compliments than when she’s giving you the cold shoulder. But, men being men and unable to comprehend the maddening illogic of the female mind, that’s usually the time when they can’t stop praising their girlfriends. She’s snapping at you? Butter her up! She’s withholding sex? Ring up the excessive compliments! She’s being a raging bitch? Tell her how great she is! And then plead forgiveness of your sins!

Lord almighty, is this what the church of white knightery teaches men nowadays? You couldn’t do more harm to your cause had you tucked your junk between your legs, kneeled and begged her to touch your pee pee from behind.

The absolute WORST time to flatter your girl is when she is making your life miserable. Why would you reward bad behavior? Make like the pussy whisperer and train your woman not to crap in your face. Betas have no game except cloying flattery and “””supportiveness”””, so their instinct is to turn to that in times of turmoil and layer it on thick as can be. And you know the gruesome results of that: the woman feels even more repulsed by his presence.

No, when you praise or compliment or act supportive, ALWAYS do it from a position of strength. If you’re wondering when that is, it’s when she’s fawning over you, or begging you to irrigate her furrow as you brush your dick tauntingly across her pink eggplant, or singing your praises to her friends, or just generally acting like a sweet, feminine woman in your company.

2. Never be consistent in how, or how often, you flatter your girlfriend.

Two predictable compliments a day, like a doctor’s order, is going to get tiring real fast. She should never know when you might deign to make her feel loved. And she should never hear the same damn turn of phrase every day either. The best times to praise your girl are when she least expects it, and that is usually when something else is happening and her attention is distracted from “you and her”. I like to toss out a compliment when she’s just dribbled food onto her blouse, or whisper a loving bon mot in her ear as she’s trying on clothes in front of the mirror. Unpredictability is as arousing to women as full firm tits are to men. Which leads to…

Maxim #55: The training of the woman distills to this essence: Punish her bad behavior consistently, reward her good behavior intermittently.

Enjoy your vagina deluge.

3. Flatter her in public.

You know what really flutters a girl’s heart? When you say something nice about her in front of her friends. That’s a relationship boost and a social status boost in one. Nonsexual public praise is the safer bet, but sexual public praise, if done right, can make her heart explode.

4. Praise those things about her that will redound to your benefit.

Sure, it’s easy to lapse into praising a woman’s most obviously enticing features, like her eyes or luscious lips. But she has little control over those advantages she enjoys. But if you praise her attractive behavior… “I love they way you’re so affectionate. It’s really sexy and so rare to find in a woman nowadays”… you encourage more of that positive behavior from her in the future.

Similarly, if you go the physical route, praising your girl’s ass will have the most impact when she just got back from the gym. She’ll want to keep going to the gym to earn more of that praise.

5. Use adjectives.

Chicks dig the adjective. Lots of them. Nice eyes? Meh. Orbs of liquid blue allure? Plow me! Caveat: Lawyercunts tend to balk at adjectives, because they are unfeminine and have incipient clit dicks. Just tell them you’re gonna rape them in two, and watch their love pour forth.

6. Always substitute nonverbal praise for verbal praise when you can.

Pinching her ass and smiling is more effective than telling her she has a great ass.

7. Substitute “we” for “you” in your compliments, when you can.

It’s the difference between putting her on a pedestal, and leaving a spot for her on your pedestal.

8. Romantic contrast is king.

If you always tell your girl “you’re so pretty”, she will expect the same endearment next time. If you always tell your girl “you’re ass is so righteous I’m gonna fill it with my religion”, she will expect the same perversion next time. But if you sweetly woo her “I love the way we kiss” as you’re leaving for work in the morning, and then hoarsely whisper to her “your ass is so hot my dick wants to wear it as a sombrero” when you return in the evening, she’ll have two orgasms, one for her and one for her hamster. Squeak!

9. Rarity is the glow of clits.

If you get a great reaction from your flattery, don’t beat it to death. Stop, drop and change the subject. You’d be amazed how many betas will sabotage their brief moments of glory by returning over and over to the same well. Any sort of praise of a woman ought to be, by natural habit and sincere discernment, a rare and welcomed thing. Most men have the problem of overestimating the right amount of praise. The right amount is much less than men think. If I had to estimate, one week between compliments is a good rough number to shoot for within an established LTR. Whatever number, it should never be more than the number of compliments *she* lavishes on you. Abide the Golden Ratio (see the 16 Commandments at the top of the blog). Note: raunchy talk is technically not praise, so you can raunch it up often without worrying about DLVing yourself, though it’s a good idea to dish that out irregularly, for the same reasons you would be spare in your nonsexual flattery.

10. Finally, praise feminine qualities, not masculine qualities.

Do you want to turn your sweet petunia into a proud feminist with a jagged fault line running straight through her soul? Then why are you complimenting her “ambition”? Men with no clue often think women want to hear what they would like to hear. No. Women want to hear that you acknowledge and love their unique gifts — their femininity, their generosity, their softness, their sexiness. It’s similar to how men get tired of hearing their women praise their “muscles”. Ladies, you really want to strike the gooey center of your man’s heart? Tell him you love how he commands a room. Bam. You’ve just won an extra 30 seconds of lovemaking.

I hope this clears the matter for you. Compliments are garnishes, not the main dish. Nobody wants to eat a full plate of parsley. And remember, disapproving of her flaws is as crucial to LTR management as offering praise of her… talents. More crucial, I’d say, because a missed compliment won’t lower your value like a missed reprimand will.

Read Full Post »

It’s a regular trope of feminists that male sexists are bitter, beta male losers. “Oh, you hate women because you suck with them”, and vice versa. It’s very comforting to feminists — actually, to all women — to believe that only resentful losers they don’t find attractive would harbor sexist thoughts. It’s very discomforting to feminists to entertain the thought that happy-go-lucky men who do well with women would be brazenly sexist.

But the truth, as per usual, falls squarely in the “discomforting to feminists” camp.

Research indicates that the endorsement of sexist ideology is linked to higher subjective wellbeing for both men and women. We examine gender differences in the rationalisations which drive this effect in an egalitarian nation (New Zealand). Results from a nationally representative sample (N = 6,100) indicated that the endorsement of Benevolent Sexism (BS) predicted life satisfaction through different mechanisms for men and women. For men, BS was directly associated with life satisfaction. For women, the palliative effect of BS was indirect and occurred because BS-ideology positioning women as deserving of men’s adoration and protection was linked to general perceptions of gender relations as fair and equitable, which in turn predicted greater levels of life satisfaction.

So if you are a benevolent sexist — that is, you believe men and women are psychologically different and respond to stimuli in different ways, and that women are the weaker sex deserving of male protection — you are more likely to be a happy person than the man (or woman!) who clings to a bitter feminist ideology that assumes biological and psychological equality between the sexes.

And that’s really got to stick in the craw of any feminist who comes ambling through the Chateau happy hunting grounds. Not only are sexist men happier in life, but women in the company of sexist men are happier as well! Paging sad vegetable lasagna Alex Pareene

But that’s not all. Sexist men make more money than their manboobed counterparts. And, in what is sure to be a shot straight to the flabby feminist gut, women are more sexually receptive to assertively sexist men.

The popularity of speed-seduction techniques, such as those described in The Game (Strauss 2005) and advocated in the cable program The Pickup Artist (Malloy 2007), suggests some women respond positively to men’s assertive mating strategies. Drawing from these sources, assertive strategies were operationalized as involving attempts to isolate women, to compete with other men, and to tease or insult women. The present investigation examined whether hostile and benevolent sexism and sociosexuality, the degree to which individuals require closeness and commitment prior to engaging in sex, were associated with the reported use of assertive strategies by men and the reported positive reception to those strategies by women. It was predicted men and women who were more sexist and had an unrestricted sociosexuality would report using more and being more receptive to assertive strategies. Study 1 (N = 363) surveyed a Midwestern undergraduate college student sample, and regression results indicated that sociosexuality was associated with assertive strategy preference and use, but sexism only predicted a positive reception of assertive strategies by women. Study 2 (N = 850) replicated these results by surveying a larger, national U.S. volunteer sample via the internet. In addition to confirming the results of Study 1, regression results from Study 2 indicated that hostile sexism was predictive of reported assertive strategy use by men, suggesting that outside of the college culture, sexism is more predictive of assertive strategy use.

tl;dr — chicks dig sexist jerks.

None of this should come as a surprise to my alpha male readers (estimated at around 20% of readership). If you’ve spent any time in the company of other alpha males, or if you are an alpha male yourself, you know how sexist in-demand, high value men can be, whether shooting the unmonitored breeze with male friends or challenging the preconceptions of feisty girls. And you know how much women swoon for those sexist pigs.

Some of the best sexist jokes I’ve heard came straight from the mouths of top gun alpha males. Some of the most revolting, too. And you wanna talk about how badly men objectify women? Try listening to a player describe in delicious detail every nook and cranny of the broads he boffs. Bitter beta males bemoaning the unfairness of getting the shaft in divorce court are veritable wymyn’s studies graduates and honorary lesbians in comparison to their distant alpha male cousins.

Now don’t get the wrong idea; alpha males are breathtakingly sexist, but they aren’t spiteful about it, nor do they allow their cynicism to ruin a good time. They love women as women, not as substitute men, and if that imbues them with an air of condescending paternalism, then so be it. Chicks dig that, too.

The trick is to coat your sexism in a lacquer of smooth cockiness. Call it: sexism with a smirk. You never want to logically argue with a feminist, at least not in typical social situations; you want to mock her. Preferably mercilessly. You don’t want to launch into diatribes about the double standard of paying for drinks; you want to tease a girl asking you to buy her a drink if she’d like your debit card as well. You don’t want to make a fuss about holding a door open for a hot chick; but you do want to let it slam in her face if she’s ugly or obese. You don’t want to discuss loaded feminist topics on a first date; but you do want to chide a girl who gives you feminist guff over drinks. She’ll appreciate your refreshing boldness*, or she’ll become indignant. If the latter, you’ll know it’s safe to stiff her with the check. Or just stiff her.

*Most girls will appreciate the sexist’s boldness, because the type of girl who would be stupid enough to bring up feminist topics on a first date is usually the type of girl who, regrettably, dates way too many beta males and is sick of their sycophancy. She is testing the waters for real manliness, which means real sexism… the kind of Draperesque sexism that drives women wild with the opposite of closed-vagina indifference.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: