Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Self-aggrandizement’ Category

I’m not surprised by how many out-of-shape vegetarians waddle among us. Since most vegetarians are women, this means I’m not surprised by how many self-declared vegetarian women are dumpy. The media-pushed image of the slender vegetarian woman is far from the reailty.

Is it because fat women are more likely to adopt vegetarianism to lose weight? No. Fat women are more likely to continue eating whatever is put in front of them. The real reason so many self-righteous and putatively health-conscious vegetarian women are chubby is because they substitute their hated meat with a much worse food-based product: sugar.

You may as well call vegetarians “sugartarians”, or “pastatarians”. Spend any amount of time eating with a vegetarian and you’ll see that they don’t actually eat all that many vegetables. What they eat in place of meat is a lot of pasta, chips, noodles, rice, beans, cereal (oh lord, do they eat a lot of cereal), bread and pretzels. In other words, they have replaced an under-appreciated fat and protein source with an inordinate amount of simple, high glycemic carbs. Result: bloat.

Vegetarians should get off their high horses and realize that the pasta they shovel down their gullets is worse for their health and looks than the T-bone steak they claim is the root of evil and the gender pay gap. A healthy meat-eater like a paleo dieter probably eats more real veggies than a zealous vegetarian. And they look better, too. That suggests one tactic for moving the lemming sex away from a stupid status whoring trend: impress upon women how their sanctimonious diet is ruining their looks. They’ll stampede for the exits.

Read Full Post »

Ah, HBDers. They get a bad rap as autistic nerdlings. But, you know what, Rainman didn’t miss a toothpick. That’s more than can be said for emotional equalists who make up toothpicks where none exist, and pretend that the toothpicks in front of them are actually thumbtacks. The latest support for human biodiversity theory comes to us from a guarded location deep in politically incorrect kingdom, where offense reigns supreme, censors are routed, and outraged pussies are mercilessly mocked until they slice lengthwise.

What’s the latest news you can self-abuse? Penis size differs by ethnicity and race.

The average British man’s penis is apparently 5.5in when erect – coming ahead of the French at 5.3in, Australians (5.2in), Americans (5.1in) and Irish (5in).

And it towers over the average manhood in North and South Korea – the smallest in the study at a mere 3.8 in.

But British men do not have a great deal to shout about in the trouser stakes – coming only 78th out of 113 nationalities covered in the study.

The men of Africa’s Republic of Congo are best equipped of all at 7.1 in.

The study isn’t without its critics, who contend the methodology is wanting. But it is a preliminary stab at a forbidden subject that pretty much confirms what all of us slyly notice in pornos and at the gym locker. Black dudes are packing and Asian dudes are sprouting. White dudes are in the middle.

Average penis size by country:

Republic of Congo, 7.1 [ed: show-er… and grower?]

Ecuador, 7

Ghana, 6.8

Colombia 6.7

Iceland 6.5

Italy 6.2

South Africa 6

Sweden 5.9

Greece 5.8

Germany 5.7

New Zealand 5.5

UK 5.5

Canada 5.5

Spain 5.5

France 5.3

Australia 5.2

Russia 5.2

USA 5.1

Ireland 5 [leprechauns!]

Romania 5

China 4.3

India 4

Thailand 4

South Korea 3.8

North Korea 3.8 [but their women’s pussies are tight like balloon knot, so it doesn’t matter… until they emigrate to non-asian countries.]

Penises are like the story of Goldicocks and the Three Bears.

Big Black Bear’s cock is sexy but uncivilized. It tears Goldicocks up, leaving her a quivering mass of orgasmic release and STDs.

Androgynous Asian Bear’s cock is unstimulating but loyal. It barely makes a dent in Goldicocks’ cavernous vagina, but it sticks around to see the kids (aka “grays”) through 35 years of post-graduate schooling, and eventually goes on to rule the world with their half-asian bear, half-jewish home invader progeny.

Wan and Woolly White Bear’s cock is juuuuust right. Sexy enough for Goldicocks to feel like her cave is properly explored, but included with some safety gear and a home mortgage.

On a less serious note, readers may wonder why racial and ethnic penis size differences exist in the first place. Random genetic drift? An evolutionary adaptation along for the ride because it was hitched to some unrelated genetic variant that improved survival&reproduction? Sexual selection? Lynn has offered his theories, and I’ve heard of others. The most plausible theories boil down to these two:

– Women in warmer r-selection societies (where kids are pumped out early and often and fathers are mostly absent and not needed to help raise the kids) choose men who are flashier, sexier and sizier. Literally. It’s hot out, you’ve got your cock out, and women are staring at your package next to a bunch of other guys’ packages. The women don’t care so much about your fidelity or your paycheck from coding Facebook apps; first things first, they want that massive dong.

– Men in r-selection societies need bigger penises to dig down deep and scoop out competitor male sperm, said sperm which is in there because the women are really slutty and/or unfaithful. Men in highly k-selected societies, like Japan, don’t need huge dongs because their women aren’t always on the prowl for side action sexytime. A small hoohah helper does the trick.

If you’ve got other theories for population group penis size discrepancies, let’s hear them. The more interesting angle to this is the intra-European size difference. Why are the Irish smaller than the Germans? Why are Swedes so relatively hyooge? Background noise? Or is something else going on here? Something… so distasteful to polite society, that not even whispers escape the mouths of crime thinkers?

Read Full Post »

A reader talks about how he trains his slut girlfriend:

I have to credit the Chateau to some degree for what has happened in my relationship over the past week.

A little background: We’ve been dating for about 15 months or so, it’s a pretty serious relationship and I am letting her move in with me starting in January. She’s a solid 8, 5’2″, 100lbs and a great body.

I am currently away for work for the next 7 weeks, and it’s put a bit of a strain on the relationship for the first few weeks of my absence. [ed: if you have hand in the relationship — i.e., she wants you more than you want her, or you have more latent options than she has — a long absence will work in your favor.] This past weekend she said she and her best friend were going to get matching tattoos that they’d been talking about getting for years. They were going to get them on their ankles, which I found to be incredibly trashy looking. I put my foot down and said I did not approve and did not want her to get it. She lashed out initially and got upset, saying she felt like she couldn’t make decisions on her own anymore. I told her simply and succinctly that if she was wanting to be in this type of serious relationship with me that there were boundaries. I stood my ground, and was rewarded. Shortly after, her response was that she was not getting the ankle tattoo…and much love was sent my way.

In previous portions of my life I may not have reacted as confidently and strongly. I give partial credit to this site for waking my ass up. Thank you.

Proving a Chateau maxim, tattoos are a leading indicator of sluttiness. The more garish the tattoo, and the closer the tattoo sits to an erogenous zone, the more likely the wearer has taken the cock carousel for an extended after-hours spin.

But tattoos are also kind of sexy, especially small ones in dainty, hidden places, like the ankle or hip. This is why girls both wish to have them, and feel guilt about getting them: tats make women more attractive as short term flings but less attractive as long-term romantic partners.

I commend you for laying down the law. Your spidey sense tingled and telegraphed to you that your girlfriend would become a bigger cheating risk if she followed through with getting the tattoo. And the fact that she wants a tat has made you reevaluate her fidelity risk profile. Yours was a bold move, and chicks dig the bold move.

Naturally, a girl will stamp her wee feet when you tell her you won’t tolerate this or that behavior from her. But if you stay firm and in control of your emotions, and you are perfectly ready to call her bluff should she attempt the ol’ “I’ll find someone else who can appreciate me” counter-maneuver, you will be richly rewarded with her new and improved loyalty. Women love to feel sexy, and nothing makes them feel sexier than submitting, at last, to a strong man’s will. When you properly lead, women can’t wait to fall in line and follow. They are wired to follow, but only behind a man worthy of their relinquishment.

The reader above wrote a week later with an update:

Gentlemen…same guy that submitted about the ankle tat yesterday.

My gf recently discovered the ability of a hot girl to get lots of followers and instant positive reaction from twitter trolls. [ed: trouble brewing.] So this has sucked up a lot of her time over the past couple weeks, and she’ll post flirty pictures and what not. She’s got nearly 600 followers already and probably about 1700 tweets in the last 3 weeks that she’s put out. I’m on twitter as well and following her and vice versa and we interact on there as well as via txt/phone like we always have. I haven’t seen really anything that’s stepped over the line except one instance where I immediately called her out on it. She retweeted a somewhat suggestive comment a guy had made passively referring to her. She immediately took it down and said she was sorry, she didn’t really think of it that way. She said she just found it funny so she retweeted it.

She does interact with other guys on there, and I have indicated that I will not tolerate any sort of flirting with other guys. She offered to take it down last week when we were fighting about all of this, but I get the feeling the offer was simply a trap. I told her I wasn’t telling her to take it down, but that I was not going to allow twitter to be taking my place. My gut feeling on all of this isn’t all that great. I’m away for work until after the election and I only get to see her maybe once a week if we’re lucky.

Thoughts on the twitter? I know what’s going on here…she’s never been the girl that all the guys wanted, [ed: was she an ugly duckling as a child?] and now this lets her soak up all the instant compliments and such. I realize that it’s simply her feeding her desire for validation, but I need to keep it under control. Thoughts?

Be careful. Your girlfriend is transmogrifying into an attention whore right before your eyes. 600 Twit followers from posting salacious pics of herself. Yes, women have so much to contribute to civilization; namely, they passively motivate men to do the heavy lifting. Your GF’s confessed desire for a tattoo was an early warning signal. Twitter is like a gateway drug to evermore dangerous attention whoring highs. The progression usually starts off slowly, and culminates in a raging runaway ego:

Infancy ==> if she’s a cute baby, adults will stare at her longer
Toddlerhood ==> all her antics are “adorable”. uglier toddlers get chastised.
Grade school ==> a constant stream of self-esteem boosting messages from parents, teachers and media begin the malignant growth of her ego.
Social media ==> she has entered the world of sexting, Instagram, Facebook and Twitter. there’s no turning back now.
High school ==> one “innocent” flirty pic of her in a bikini results in 2,314 likes from men of all ages around the country. she savors her power.
College (or working class service jobs) ==> the tables begin to turn, due to the unfavorable sex ratio and the world of ruthlessly aloof cads who are wise enough to not feed her ego. but it’s a short bump along her highway of hubris.
SWPLland! ==> the working world brings her in contact with hordes of undersexed, overcomplimenting beta herbs. the few alpha males shine like diamonds in this rough. she at once gets her ego fed and her tingles satiated.
Alpha male overdose ==> fifty years later, she will remember this one week romance she had with the man who never replied to her texts, except to say “gay”, and who gave her a bag of Skittles as a gift. the Skittles are now moldy, still cherished. she is ruined for all beta males. her ego has exploded.
Bars/nightclubs/scenes ==> not one of her drunken sexpot poses or phony smiles goes unphotographed or unreported for public consumption. beta males virtually hoist her above their heads, like an Egyptian queen. by now, her ego has metastasized into terminal cancer of the soul. deeply diseased women will experience shortness of breath when no one is taking their picture. bar dancing whores will strategically go commando on nights out.
Working world ==> “I don’t even need a man to pay for my shoes!”
Adulthood ==> historically, age 18 ushered adulthood, but times have changed. 30 is the new grown-up. her looks are beginning to show signs of the remorseless fade, but years of accumulated beta male sycophancy have gifted her with an ego able to weather a storm of self-doubt for years past her sell-by date.
Withdrawal ==> whether or not she has managed to land a beta sucker for marriage, she begins to experience withdrawal symptoms from coming off her attention drug. no more likes on FB. Twit pics garner 10 followers instead of 600. her “you go girl” chorus consists of mostly flabby, cat-owning hausfraus. blog commenters mock her thumbnail avatar. even the tattoo artist suggests she get a more tasteful tat on a “smoother” part of her body.
Lashing out ==> the beta hubby, because of his proximity and inborn weakness, suffers the brunt of her bitter spite. she will open her legs for random jerks who can’t be bothered to learn her name. she will nag her husband or BF until he is pulling his pud to gloomy, late-night porn while she sleeps. if he’s lucky, divorce or a break-up will relieve him of his indentured servitude.
Children ==> she will live vicariously through her daughter, enrolling her in creepy kiddie beauty pageants, or, if she’s higher class, seducing her daughter’s horny boyfriends away from her. the drastic shrinking of her desensitized ego will render her a bitchy malcontent, unable to feel pride in any personal achievement, and needing to latch onto others for internal validation.
Ego death ==> arrives twenty years after sexual prime death. decades of self-delusion have taken their toll. she is a shell entity.

Good reader, this is your future if you do not take steps to redirect her away from the siren song of social media aka digital stripper pole. Your gut feeling is correct; it’s a bad sign for your relationship that she’s passively flirting with men on Twitter, no matter how insistently she protests it’s all innocent fun.

Maxim #41: It’s never innocent fun.

If you’re in a solid relationship with a girl who loves you and values you, external validation through social media will never become an issue. She will use Twitter and Facebook to keep in touch with her social circle, and privatize her accounts so random men can’t find her and comment on her photos or daily musings. That is a normal, healthy female response to the lure of social media status whoring. A woman in love is validated by her lover, not by cloying flattery from hard-up strangers.

My friend, between the tattoo and the Twitter whoring, you are getting red flags flapping in a stiff wind over your head. She is constitutionally incapable of finding self-worth without propping herself on a fiber optically constructed sex stage or marking her body for the amusement of the gawking masses. Or perhaps she finds you insufficient as a man powerful enough to sway her from the attention whore spotlight. Or it could be both reasons.

Whatever it is, you have to proceed as if what you have with her is far from locked downed. All girls have an innate desire for external validation, as it is the nature of their sex that external characteristics most define their value in the sexual market, which is the one market to rule them all. But the degree to which women desire this external ego stroking varies by woman, based on variables like psychological predisposition, beauty, family history and being in love. The ideal woman is a pretty girl who got lots of affection *and* character-building discipline from her father, and who’d rather suffer the vagaries of being in love than play head games to avoid being hurt.

Anyhow, you have already once laid (lain?) down the law with your girlfriend, over her tattoo request. So I don’t see a reason why you can’t put your foot down again and tell her to privatize her online accounts. The danger with laying down the law is that overuse of your authority can create an impression, justified or not, of insecurity: the man who needs to be in control of every facet of his woman’s life is a man who is afraid the tiniest taste of freedom will send her running for the exits.

I respectfully suggest your LTR has some issues that need clarifying. Fifteen months is just about the time when both parties will subconsciously judge the quality of their relationship, and decide to keep at it or find a way out. This is especially so in modern America, a strange time of delayed responsibility and celebrated shamelessness, particularly of women. Furthermore, moving in together tends to hasten and strengthen the internal call for judgment. She is acting out because things have just gotten real.

My advice:

Keep a suspicious eye on her. Flirt with other girls to remind yourself you have options should the worst happen and your girlfriend cheats or hints at breaking up. Tell her public tweeting is out; if she really loves you, she’ll gladly accept the imposition on her crass desires. Remind her it’s for her own good over the long-term, and that other girls you have dated had no need to whore on Twitter. At last, begin to instill some dread in your relationship; this is how you will simultaneously test for her faithfulness and fullness of heart, and draw her away from the temptation of external validation. I’d offer you good luck, but I think that even if you “win” this round with her, the future prognosis doesn’t look promising. She’s on the upswing of venturing forth into attention whore land, and it’s hard to bring a girl back down to earth when she’s already catapulting into lookatme orbit.

Read Full Post »

Women (and men) who run slow laps on treadmills for hours on end, or who rack up languid miles running SWPLthons, are in for a rude surprise: your efforts aren’t amounting to much. Advocates for the paleolithic lifestyle got another boost from science recently, in a study which found that short, intense bursts of exercise are more beneficial than long, moderately intense exercise for your heart health.

Short, intense bursts of exercise could be better for our health than longer intervals.

Spending 2 minutes 30 seconds exercising at a high level of intensity, could be better at protecting the body against risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) than longer sessions of less intense exercise, claimed experts at the British Science Festival today.

The ability of the body to deal with fat following a high-fat meal is a marker for the likelihood that a person will develop CVD in the future. The faster the body is able to get rid of the fat in the blood following a high-fat meal, the less at risk that person is of developing CVD – for example atherosclerosis, which is the build up of fat within the blood vessels.

A study led by Dr Stuart Gray, from the University of Aberdeen’s Musculoskeletal Research Programme asked participants to undertake 2.5 minutes of high-intensity exercise – 5 x 30 second sprints exerting themselves to their maximum ability with 4 minutes of rest between each sprint – before eating a high-fat meal.

Findings of the study—published in Clinical Science—showed the fat content in the blood of these participants after that meal was reduced by 33% compared to if they had not undertaken any exercise.

The fat content in the blood is only reduced by 11% if a moderate intensity exercise session – 30 minutes of brisk walking – is undertaken before the same meal is eaten.

Paleo gurus have been saying for quite a while that wind sprints and heavy low rep deadlifts >>>>> jogging for miles and high rep pink dumbbells, for both maximizing heart health and muscle tone. And now we have some lab proof. On a personal note, I feel a lot stronger and alive when I do a set of sprints, complete with hard turns at the 40 yard mark, than I do running five miles at a slower pace. I also like to clean and jerk fat chicks. Not a euphemism.

On another personal note, it gives me pleasure to sneer at SWPL chicks and emaciated hipsters running hither and tither to their poofy froo froo pillow fight aerobicizer classes and ventkatamaran yogurt meditations. Classes, seminars, socials, oh my! Must feel busy before I die!

Read Full Post »

Feminists are gonna blow an ovary reading this study. Perfect.

Although most researchers acknowledge the speculative nature of evolutionary arguments in this area, social aggression among reproductively viable females is usually interpreted as a form of mate competition. Hess and Hagen, for example, suggest that the sex differences uncovered in their study would likely have been even more pronounced in a younger group of participants. Evolutionarily, historically, and cross-culturally, they point out, girls in the fifteen- to nineteen-year-old range would be most actively competing for mates. Thus, anything that would sabotage another female’s image as a desirable reproductive partner, such as commenting on her promiscuity, physical appearance, or some other aberrant or quirky traits, tends to be the stuff of virile gossip.

File under: Women are the world’s worst misogynists.

So now science has come along to (re)prove what we all knew anecdotally: women, particularly younger women who are most desirable to men, gossip viciously as a means of tearing down the female competition for high quality men. So gossip is analogous to a woman stitching a verbal scarlet S (or F or H) onto the blouses of other women who would compete for the men she likes.

Stay classy, ladies.

You’ll notice as well that the sort of stuff women primarily gossip about — sluttiness, infidelity and fatness — to cut down their female competition, are exactly the character flaws and vices that feminists claim should be free from judginess, and accepted by everyone, especially men. Why do feminists focus on these things? Because they know they matter. Men really are less likely to commit to sluts, whores and fat chicks. And for good evolutionary reasons. (Not to mention good aesthetic and tactile reasons.)

An interesting question is why, if gossip is, presumably, evolutionarily adaptive as a means of reducing the mate value of sexual competitors, men don’t do the same thing? Where are all the male yentas tearing down the competition?

First, men have their own version of gossip; it’s called winning. Men kneecap male competitors by fighting and defeating them, physically, mentally or socially. Second, women are more intuitive than men are about reading subtext in gossip. A man who gossips about another man’s sexual prowess, or social savviness, or whatever, in the hopes of reducing his mate value is likely to be perceived by women as a second tier beta clumsily trying to undermine better men than himself. And gossip just doesn’t sit right on men; women are liable to think you’re gay if you prattle on about other men a lot.

Personally, I think a lot of female gossip is much less effective than believed by women. Men mostly judge women by how they look, so a guy is not going to stop boning out for a hot chick just because some mother hen gossiped about her disloyalty. But gossip is universal and still with us, so it must offer some mating advantage to women. My guess is that gossip which distills to slut smears (“she’s got crabs!”) is probably the most effective at handicapping a woman’s ability to snag a high value man into a long-term relationship. This is why women who aren’t broken losers are so mortified at the thought of being labeled a slut.

Like feminists who claim otherwise, they know it matters.

Read Full Post »

Supposedly, it’s protocol for internet content providers (ha!) to rattle the tin cup twice per year. So here we are. Donate here, or (more easily) use the donate button to the right on the main page, just under the blog banner heading.

Have you learned from this castlemonium deluxe? Have you been treated with the requisite haughtiness? Has your psyche been vigorously penetrated? Most importantly, has this stone-front, gated internet retreat nestled deep in the misty meadows of medieval France gotten you laid with the women of your choice?

If so, show your appreciation!

If not, fuck you.

In the meantime, here is what the future holds for Le Chateau Sensuality:

1. A book (or two!). (Pending defeat of personal laziness demons.)

2. In-field stuff. (Might include guest spots.)

3. More reviews of game material. (There’s a pile of ebooks and manuals to read laying disconsolately on the sofa, currently being sniffed by an overfed dog.)

4. More movie scenes of game in action.

5. More real-life stories. (Expect calculated timeline distortion and detail restructuring to misdirect the haters.)

6. More science. (Sorry, it’s a CH favorite.)

7. Fewer adjectives. (Yeah, we’ve heard you.)

Read Full Post »

Shiva the Detroyed Feminist locates a crumb of feminist hope amid a sea of feminism-crushing scientific studies and reality-assaulting dissonance:

I think this will win comment of next week:

This just blew open the “wall” theory. [ed: she wishes.]

sure, women may not be at the prime of their beauty in the future but they’ll still be in prime fertility at , say, 45.

Wow.

[ed: just wow.]

The schooling shall commence…

The wall is a function of women’s looks, which are, evolutionarily-speaking, a proxy for women’s fertility. Ovary transplant tech may extend fertility but it won’t do a damn thing for aging women’s declining looks. Men’s eyes don’t see women’s ovaries, they see women’s bodies and faces. Men are wired to respond sexually and emotionally to youthful female looks, not to a hidden working uterus. A 70 year old woman could be rejiggered to bear children thanks to the intervention of science, but she’ll still look 70 years old, and so men won’t be turned on by her. She will suffer the indignities of wall victimhood, having to settle for conceiving children with a turkey baster or a blind old goat who gets around on tennis balls. Tragically for feminists nursing delusions of sustained desirability, in the gene-governed sexual market where visual cues are men’s primary information medium it’s the proxies that matter, not the actual biowiring underneath.

There’s really no point to explaining the facts of life to feminists and other assorted grievance groups with real reasons to fear and loathe the truth — beyond its entertainment value as a button-pusher — because in three weeks’ time the same lot of them wander back into this happy hunting ground babbling the identical, debunked bromides all over again. Logic and reason hurt their wee egos for a brief spell, and then when enough time has passed for their self-medicated ids to baseline to normal and reconcile their cognitive dissonances, (say, ten minutes), they are right back to chanting pretty lies, sticking their fingers in their ears, and stamping their ascii feet. Never underestimate the lengths to which humans will lie to themselves and, consequently, to others to maintain an illusion of high sexual or social market value in the face of rapid deterioration or expendability.

If I had to put a number on it, I’d guess 80% of the human population is aggressively self-deceiving, with the number reaching close to 100% in backward societies and within certain ideological sects. With those numbers arrayed against you, it’s fruitless to battle for hearts and minds. The best you can do is mercilessly mock their pretensions to high holy hell, preferably in front of an audience, until some tiny illumination of self-preservation sparks in their limbic chimp systems and they sulk off to lick their ego wounds rather than face the psychic torture of further debasement on a public stage. Even the most blockheaded deluded dumbass will think twice about shrieking his or her stupidities when Total Ridicule is the only reward.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: