The Main Reason Women Despise Niceguys

Because niceguys excuse women’s shitholistic behavior.

There will always be an urge in people (not just couples therapists and marriage counselors, although they are more prone to experiencing the urge) to relieve women of and burden men with responsibility and accountability. This is a consequence of the Fundamental Premise, which states that eggs, being pricey, add value to the vessel which houses them, and therefore that vessel commands deference and apologia from all social and institutional forces.

The feminist complaint of an oppressive patriarchy that puts women under the jackboot of men is literally the opposite of reality, but we should not be surprised by feminist delusion because it’s also in the nature of women to ignore their advantages and to focus on those perceived injustices that insufficiently coddle them to a torrential splooge.

On female unaccountability, @TrevorGoodchild notes the connection to Game and the modren dating market,

Women are also more attracted to men who hold them to account, and are actively repelled by betas that give them a free pass (they’ll still take the freebie, though)….

This may be one of the clearest definitions of Game and sexual market dynamics I’ve read outside of my own very stable genius scribblings. What kind of men hold women to account? Jerkboys. What kind of men absolve women of personal responsibility? Niceguys. Women love the former, and hold the latter in contempt.

Women don’t want a toady, regardless of any claims to the contrary. Women want a challenge. A man who will call them out on their shit. And jerkboys are the men who will give them that thrill.

Read Full Post »

The Tattooed Slut Is A Redundancy

2007: From the CH post “She eats her peas one at a time“:

Does she have a large trashy tattoo anywhere near an erogenous zone?

Slut.

2017: From ¡SCIENCE!:

We collect numerous measures of time preferences and impulsivity of tattooed and non-tattooed subjects and find broad-ranging and robust evidence that those with tattoos, especially visible ones, are more short-sighted and impulsive than the non-tattooed.

Tattoos are therefore a slut tell, because sluts are short-sighted and impulsive. A girl who’s impulsive in one domain is sure as Bartholin’s life-giving lube to be impulsive in other domains. And the more visible her tattoo, the more likely that hipsteress you have your eye on will go up to your apartment on the first date, let you finger fuck her mouth, give you a blowjob, and then complain about feeling “uncomfortable” in a long-winded solipsistic article written for “The Babe” or whatever menstrual rag is the current pit stop for butthurt feminists lamenting their inability to be wined and dined like the chaste ladies they aren’t.

The ThotTat life trajectory:
age 18-25: slut tell. easy lay, bring condom
age 26-35: cuck tell. she’ll cheat, bring paternity test
age 36-45: crazy cat lady tell, bring deodorizer
age 46-: sexual worthlessness. who cares about her saggy tats?

Future tradvaj to repopulate the lands with remnant based Whites will have clear, unscarred skin from head to toe, and the LoveLord who undresses her unpolluted body will draw a breath as the beauty of her unbroken porcelain wrapping turns his bachelor pad into a bioluminescent breeding ground.

Read Full Post »

Inflaming Foreplay

Men (and lately women too, thanks to the endless sex denialist propaganda stream) underestimate the vast difference in physical strength between the sexes, and as a consequence also underestimate the psychological impact men’s size and strength has on women’s emotional state when in the company of men. The strongest woman would be no match for the average soyboy, and this fact of life has implications for how women have evolved to behave around men. Specifically, women are evolved to be both aroused and scared of male physical strength, and particularly so when alone with a man and no nearby white knights to aid her in case the man she’s with turns out to be a psychokiller.

Women have evolved this way because a dominant, potentially dangerous man is both a benefit and a risk to her. His benefit is obvious: in a harsh environment filled with predators human and animal, he can protect her. His cost is obvious as well, but maybe less so to the muff-struck girl: a dominant man may turn his ire on her if she crosses him or his entitlement or rage escape his self-control.

Thankfully for you readers, years in the wench trenches and a compilation of personal experience from hundreds if not thousands of aspiring womanizers who told their stories in online forums have revealed some extraordinarily potent pre-bedroom maneuvers to heighten a woman’s sexual arousal and consequently lower her inhibition.

The goal is to walk that fine line between a display of dominance which excites women and a menacing threat which scares women. Foreplay is maximally inflamed with a quick, yet unmistakable, hint of your manly power.

The move is simple. Grab a woman’s wrist HARD in the heat of the moment. Pin it against the wall, or against her shoulder or hip. This motion is AC/DC electricity, and as segue to sex it’s both boner and beaver fuel. You see, your dominance display will not only arouse her, it will arouse yourself seeing her submit so deliriously to your entitled whim and overwhelming physicality. Dominance is the limbic lube that both men and women secretly crave, the former for its powerful alpha penumbra, and the latter for its submission summoning sexiness.

Read Full Post »

Peak Hug

From the #MeTooPlease vault:

In wake of Matt Lauer’s firing, NBC reportedly cracks down on hugging, asks employees to tell on each other

[…]

The source also informed Page Six that “staffers have been told that if they find out about any affairs, romances, inappropriate relationships or behavior in the office, they have to report it to human resources, their superior or the company anti-harassment phone line.”

Since when did consensual office romances become sexual harassment? Oh yeah, since bitter aging has-been whores deemed it so.

Imagine the type of person who’d be willing and eager to snitch on a co-worker having an office romance. The caricature that comes to mind is a giant, walking pussyhat. Nasty Womanhood, Inc. The anti-sex schoolmarms are on the loose.

The mass movement of women into the workforce and its consequences have been a disaster for Western nations.

To take it to the next level, the source further claimed NBC’s new rules stipulate employees wishing to hug one another “have to do a quick hug, then an immediate release, and step away to avoid body contact” and are forbidden from sharing taxis home or, oddly, “taking vegans to steakhouses.”

We need a new word to describe the hysterically man-hating, anhedonic feminist dystopia that’s unfolding at a rapid clip in America. Gynarchy doesn’t quite nail it. Prisstopia?

This would all be stupidly funny if it wasn’t dead serious, but tbh i’m not a fan of the hugging trend. Compulsory hugs between acquaintances phags up male friendships and desexualizes potential romances between men and women. Thanks, Shrillennials! But I think we’ve hit Peak Hug. Gen Zyklon is bringing back head nods, and with them, a return to electric sexual polarity.

Read Full Post »

Money And Chicks, The Executive Summary

Anonymous comments,

CH is fond of saying that $$$ has poor return in terms of women. I suspect you need real wealth (>$10 M) and live a truly different lifestyle (weekend trips to st Barths, aspen, other global hotspots) in order for it to make any real difference.

Below the level of extravagant male wealth, money doesn’t make a huge DIRECT impact on women’s attraction to men. If a man has a nice car and condo, no economically self-sufficient careergirl will be wowed by that. The benefit of money comes from the confidence it instills in men, which women DO love.

Another anon has doubts about the efficacy of money to pull women,

I feel like a distinction should be made about “high-status men” in what context. My experience says that now “high-status” is almost completely determined by “hookup criteria” and not long-term considerations until chick hits the wall (but preaching to the choir).

If modren Western women are indeed switching to an r-selected reproduction strategy — i.e., focusing on short-term hookups that advantage cads over dads and chads over NOWAGS — then a man’s earning power will have a smaller impact on female attraction than it historically has had in more patriarchal (aka Regulated Monogamy) times when women weren’t paper pushing corporate whores who could afford their own mortgages and streaming pussyhat entertainment packages.

Of course, this will not end well for civilization. When the big bulging mass of beta providers realize they can’t leverage their provisions for a loyal young babe who isn’t saddled with a porn star’s sexual history, they will drop out of the mating market and make just enough to satisfy their immediate needs. Then after the fiat economy collapses from the disengagement of its most competent and conscientious men, there goes the female workforce it enabled, and we’re right back to the primordial patriarchy of young, chaste, dependent women locking down that beta provider while she still has miles of virgin road left on her hodometer.

Read Full Post »

Be A Man With Standards

Adhering to standards and expressing them to women is what separates the quenched alphas from the thirsty betas. Too many men cede the Darwinian high ground of standards to women, an assumption not without biological basis in reality — the vessel housing expensive eggs can demand more than can cheapo spermos — but nevertheless an assumption that can cost men a lot of romantic possibility, and tragically an assumption which can be overturned with minimal mental effort.

We are all familiar with the 463 bullet point checklist that fertilely-fledged women carry in their subconscious to be accessed when and where potential suitors are found. The online dating market doesn’t even require the cloak of subconsciousness; there, women are forthright about their criteria. Some female Tinder profiles can run to upwards of fifty dealbreakers, often hilariously coupled with fatty bluehairs and fishmouth tatted freaks belying either their sincerity or their sanity with which they make their demands.

The “out and proud” female bullet point checklist accompanied by ravenous hordes of thirsty betas tripping over themselves to meet those female standards is solid evidence that the modren sexual market has shifted to the favor of women — likely culprits in the imbalance: numerical sex skew and female obesity — and that men are falling right into their roles as desperate hound dogs chasing after table scraps.

It’s even worse now that we’re in the era of Trump, and ideology has become one of if not THE sorting mechanism for Shrillennial hookups and relationships. “TRUMP VOTERS SWIPE LEFT” is a common refrain on girls’ profiles.

It doesn’t have to be this way. So much hidden love can explode in the world if men abided for themselves the same laundry list of criteria that women take for granted as the prerogative of their sex. Men with freely and boldly expressed standards are a lightning rod to women who labor under a scarcity of such men. Try it and see for yourself. Set standards of what you will allow or disallow in women and follow those standards. You don’t even have to be sincere; the mere revelation of your standards and ACTING as if they matter to you will be enough to flip the seduction script and have women effortflirting for your approval.

EVERY WOMAN SUCCUMBS TO THE BITTERSWEET THRILL OF CHASING A MAN OF DISCRIMINATING TASTE.

And I’m not talking about demands for physical perfection. Women already know men lust most forcefully for 36-24-34, barely legal, and blemish free. NO FAT CHICKS is just a start. You need to flesh that out with MORE demands, MORE criteria, MORE checklists. For example: HILLARY PUSSYHATTERS SWIPE LEFT. NO FATTIES, NO TATTIES, NO WHACKIES. BPD? SAVE IT FOR YOUR BETA MALE ORBITER. LTR FOR THE GIRL WHO EARNS IT.

Then sit back and recline in your cowgirl position banging chair as the ladies line up to

1. meet your exacting standards or
2. shit test you to kingdom cum

Either reaction is good. Remember, the shit test is prologue to sex. If a girl is uninterested, she will ignore you or curtly reject you. If a girl is interested DESPITE her forebrain telling her you’re no good, she will tease, taunt, and try to wind you up as a gauge of your alpha male state control (or beta male emotional and libidinal incontinence).

Some readers object: what’s to stop a girl from simply lying to you about meeting your standards?

A lying girl?

Is there another kind of girl?

If you ask the second cumming of Mother Theresa how many cocks she gave alms to in her youth, she will lie about the number.

Why it doesn’t matter:

You’re still getting laid.

And, unless you’re a hard-up buffoon who marries the first girl who looks at your cock cross-eyed, you are gonna have (at least) a three month trial period breaking her in; few women can sustain the illusion of a perfect fit with you longer than that. Her annoying tics, untrustworthy sluttiness, antagonistic value system, psychological scars, and feminist proclivities will eventually out, and they almost always out post-coitally, when she (like all women) thinks her vagina is sufficient to placate any doubting thomas and divert his attention from her shitty personality.

Know the ho
in the afterglow.

By then, you’ll be well-positioned to offer or rescind any implied promises of exclusivity.

Read Full Post »

Female Social Rank Is Irrelevant To Male Mate Choice

In my view, an unresolved mystery of human evolution is why women would bother engaging in status jockeying competition with other women when men choose mates primarily based on physical attractiveness and youth (but I repeat myself), traits which women have little control over and which are hardly altered by direct competition with other women. It’s obvious why men compete with other men….women are attracted to high status men who can provide resources and social connections for them and their children. It’s not so obvious why women compete with other women given that no man who wasn’t a scheming gigolo marrying an older rich widow to finance his gay twink lifestyle ever gave a rat’s ass about a woman’s social station.

And swaggering in to add the weight of natural world evidence to the evolutionary mystery of intra-female status wars, is our old friend ¡SCIENCE!: (via rman2017)

CH, here is a documentary about wolves.

I’ve forwarded to the part on topic. The females go into heat and the alpha has to choose which one he will mate with. He has 2 choices, who happen to be sisters. The assertive, aggressive Grey Female Alpha (GFA). Or the shy, submissive Black Female Omega (BFO). A few interesting bits:

1. The beta is disciplining the females, and being especially aggressive towards GFA. The Beta acts like the court eunuch keeping the harem in line.

Lupus orbiters.

2. The Alpha DGAF. He’s playing in the snow. (If you watch the full documentary you will see at the beginning that he establishes himself as alpha not because of his size or age, but because his attitude.)

no matter what happens, his claws are a-tapping’.

3. The Alpha makes his choice. It’s the BFO. Social rank within the female group has no bearing on the Alpha, as he completely disregards their status. He goes for shy and submissive. He knows that the mate he chooses will automatically become the Alpha Female in the pack by association, not the petty games the females play between them.

Among wolves, female social rank is irrelevant to alpha male mate choice.

Among humans, same. If you’re a hot babe, you’ll attract the attention of alpha males, no matter your social or occupational status. But human society is a bit more complex, so there must be a reason intra-female competition evolved.

One theory: women compete to demoralize SMV-comparable competition into ceding the playing field. Men won’t date women they don’t ever see or meet.

Another theory: A woman’s male partner isn’t the only provider of resources for her and her children by him. Other women can act as proxy providers by cajoling or otherwise influencing their own male partners to redistribute their resources to the highest status woman in the tribe/suburban neighborhood. Under this hypothesis, women compete to earn the favor of not just men, but of everyone so that they are looked favorably upon when times are tough and favors are needed.

Consolation prize theory: women compete intrasexually to scratch their itch for drama that they aren’t scratching with all the boring beta males sniveling around them for a piece of pity pussy.

Bottom line: there’s a lot of misunderstanding about the nature of the psychosexual differences between the sexes that needs clarifying before we #MeToo ourselves into Darwinian oblivion. One major source of misunderstanding is the mass psychological projection that men and women, but particularly women, engage in when they delude themselves into believing what attracts them to the opposite sex is also what attracts the opposite sex to them.

Koanic gave one sterling example of female projection feeding into false female beliefs of a societal double standard holding The Woman down:

If women can indiscriminately hit on all men by dressing like whores, then men can indiscriminately hit on all women by propositioning them like whores.

This gets at the heart of moderin confusion: sex denialism obfuscates differences between men and women, notably ignoring the fact that men are visually aroused and women holistically aroused. So in effect women dressing like whores IS hitting on men.

A lot of man-hating cruelty and female unhappiness could be avoided if we all accepted the biological truth that male desire is focused through the eyes while female desire is focused through the ego.

Similarly, the false consciousness that female social rank matters a whit to male arousal thwarts the budding of a lot of potential romances, while wasting in the rogering trenches the prime birthing years of women afflicted with the delusion of male desire for empowered careerist tankgrrl shrikes.

Read Full Post »