Marriage Is No Escape From The Sexual Market

A reader passes along this personal anecdote:

I wrote you about a year ago with a tale about a birthday dinner with a girlfriend where I showed up late, had no present, and subsequently violated her in wonderfully new ways that night as a result.  The main reason I wrote at the time was because I owe a great deal of how my life has changed, both at work and with women, to your blog.

Today I have another entertaining story that proves yet again how right your posts are.  I’ve been talking to a married woman for about a month now.  Her husband is well off, but about 15 years older and has made no effort to take care of himself.  He also has very little sex drive.  She does modeling and acting.  I’ve included a picture so you can make your own assessment of how attractive she is (please don’t post that if you do comment on the blog about this.  I’m really not looking to affect her career with this). [ed: she’s sexy.]

I’ve been working her pretty hard the last month.  She gets approached by men EVERYWHERE.  She even has pro athletes trying to hook up with her.  So I  had to go a different route and ride that line of being somewhat supportive when she complained about her husband, but frequently make sure she knew I found her sexy as hell, and wanted to violate the hell out of her.  Halloween, that tension build-up all paid off.  We were both at a party at a bar, friends of hers all over, and after just one drink, she didn’t care who was watching.  We didn’t even make it to midnight before I was violating her in the parking garage.  The thing that was most striking to me after that, was how hard she was working to try to get some indication of commitment from me to assuage any doubts she had about what had happened.  She clearly wants out of her marriage, but that old hypergamy makes her want to know she can jump straight from one secure place to another.

The saddest thing is that her husband effectively all but told her to go fuck me.  She’s spent years trying to get him to go to the gym, go do things with her instead of sitting on his ass, and be affectionate to her.  He basically gave no alpha, and didn’t even give any supportive beta either.  As she’d describe her marriage, he honestly sounded more like your typical housewife (let himself go, believes she should just love him for who he is, etc.) than a man.

I wonder if this kind of thing happened with any regularity in Medieval Europe?

Women simply cannot be trusted to act virtuously. Their sexuality must be constrained to some degree by the operating patriarchy if civilization is to flourish. In times past, the threat of lethal cuckold revenge struck fear into the hearts of whorish wives and alpha male interlopers. Today, the State ensures the cuckold foots the bill for any bastard spawn the whore may have with her itinerant lovers.

How far we’ve fallen.

But I digress. The photo the reader included of the cheating wife was quite telling. Some girls just have the “eye of the trollop”; their intense, smoky glare broadcasts far and wide “I act before I think.” I’m not surprised a rich man married her; rich men tend to be both ignorant of female nature (they can’t be bothered to learn) and hooked on the thrill of possessing a dangerously sexy trophy wife. Rich men are under the mistaken assumption that their wealth is enough to keep a wife fulfilled and satisfied. We here who study the crimson arts know better. Perhaps they deserve the cuckolding they get.

The “love me for who I am” platitude has got to be one of the most self-destructive pretty lies a person can sincerely hold. If you believe that, and act in accordance with that belief, I can practically guarantee you will suffer in love. Even the most naturally natural alpha males who strut with conviction that they are Satan’s gift to the world know that women require certain emotional stimulations to respond sexually and to fall in love.

What can we learn from this reader’s story? Well, if you like the idea of fucking sexy, bored housewives in nightclub parking garages, you should be aware of the following:

1. Does she give off that wonderful whore vibe? Watch for the eyes and the walk. Women who love da cockas have a certain way of walking. And if she glances even for a split second at your package, she’s pre-lubed.

2. Has she been drinking? Really, it helps.

3. Does she complain about her husband or boyfriend within the first five minutes of meeting her? Now you may think this is a recipe for being her emotional tampon so she can bitch about the asshole she loves, but the benefit to you depends greatly on how you handle her whining. Too much concern, you’re beta toast. Too little, you give her no excuse to find salvation in your crotch. Also be cognizant of the style of her complaints; if she’s down to fuck around, she’ll sound more coldly dismissive of her husband or boyfriend rather than earnestly despairing.

4. Do her friends all seem like sluts? Slutty female friends are rarely cockblocks. Do you know why? Because sluts love it when their friends are sluts, too. It means no chance of being judged.

5. Is it Halloween? If it is, double your odds of closing the deal on the same night.

Whatever you do, never give your real name, address or phone number to a married woman. The last thing you need is a shotgun in your face when you open the front door.

Read Full Post »

Petraeus And The Infidelity Risk Curve

A reader writes amazedly:

I like sex as much as the next guy, but I’m amazed at what men will throw away to get it: a Presidency (B. Clinton, DSK), a 38 year career, CEO positions, money, respect, freedom…it just doesn’t make sense. No matter who she is, she’s not worth it. IMHO, obviously.

He speaks of Generals Petraeus and Allen and their Lebanese immigrant, faintly masculine mistresses (last I checked of this labyrinthine lovers’ octagon.) Yes, the scent of an attractive, height-weight proportionate woman is strong, stronger still when her surroundings are populated by bloated pustules formerly known as women. Scent of a Womb, you could call it. Men sniff it in the air, like a wolf picking up the odor of prey animals, and they are sprung to action. But it is useful to remember that as strong as that fertile pussy odor is to men, equally strong is the alpha male odor to women. Perhaps even stronger in women, since alpha males are so much rarer, and thus more exciting when discovered, than are young fertile women to men, who need only stroll around a SPWL neighborhood for a few minutes to ogle ten or fifty babes who can adequately stiffen the staff.

A woman in a room with a four star general is as overtaken by powerful urges to FUCK AND FUCK NOW as a man is when in the company of a pretty, young woman with suppleness in all the right places. You just don’t fiddle with the god of biomechanics and expect a slurry of sexual harassment lawsuit threats or career-ending consequences will keep His Dark Eminence at bay and the work environment safely borg-like and aridly void of sexual tension.

Feminists can screech and shriek, manboobs can pule, white knights can huff and puff, but, like all of us, their knees too will bend to the cosmic prime directive.

The scandal itself — so mundane in its predictability* — is only noteworthy for three reasons:

1. The conspiracy angle. It’s hard to avoid suspicions that Petraeus was not going to be fully cooperative on Benghazi and was therefore summarily deep-sixed by timely revelations courtesy of Team HopeandChange.

2. The male archetype on display of the “beta male in alpha clothing”. Too many people readily confuse occupational status for alpha maleness, when it’s a man’s attitude, first and foremost, which imbues him with the alpha allure. Although very high social status and alpha maleness correlate, it is by no means exact. Petraeus’s (or was it Allen’s?) self-incriminating email avalanche is some proof that he harbors the soul of a beta. A real alpha male does not do the email equivalent of gushing like a lovestruck schoolgirl, unless he really was lovestruck. (More on that later**.) He especially does not do this when he is high ranking military brass with a lot to lose should his illicit effusions be discovered.

As for the archetype of Beta Males In Alpha Clothing, these types of men get action from women entranced by their status, but then quickly lose these women’s interest when their betaness reveals itself in manifesting clinginess. The leader of men can be just as blind to the nature of women as the celibate omega male or the cloying beta male. Leader of Men beta males are often victimized by their mistresses because the women don’t have the strong feelings of love and loyalty to them that they would have to attitudinal alpha males.

3. The game lessons contained therein. Petraeus and Allen both miserably failed the Jumbotron test. You do not write tens of thousands of sappy emails to your mistress that you wouldn’t be comfortable airing on a Jumbotron for the world to see. That goes doubly for CIA directors. I like to follow the KISS principle in matters of the heart: Keep It Scarce, Stupid. And for God’s sake — the Draft folder? Have you dumbasses never heard of anonymizing remailers?

There are many tawdry twists and turns in this saga soon to come, I’m sure, but you really only need to see two pictures to understand pretty much 99% of what’s going on.

The wife…

And the mistress…

Wow, notice that masculine digit ratio she has? That, plus the squared off, clenched jaw and forehead zit are leading indicators that this broad is well on her way to breaking a land speed record for cock gobbling the alpha males in her midst.

How in tarnation is Petraeus’s potato sack poster wife for Puritan living supposed to compete with this fuel-injected sex machine? There isn’t a man alive who would pass up a chance at tapping that harlot if his only alternative was Miss Massachusetts 1687. You may as well dangle a chunk of raw meat in front of a starving lion’s maw and expect it to sit still for twenty years.

Look, I’m not claiming Broadwell is any raving beauty. She’s probably around a 7, adjusted for age. And she has that incipient manjaw going on, a classic tell of the late stage America, careerist shrike tankgrrl female with clit dick. But in relation to the wife, she’s a hard 10. Hard enough to cut diamond. If your wife — and I say this with the utmost clinical detachment — is utterly unbangable, then a 7 prancing around your office day in and day out, year after year, in high heels, pencil skirt and a sexpot squint will test the resolve of the most religiously indoctrinated or divorce theft-averse man. Every day you don’t expel yourself in the tramp’s come hither wicker is one more day you drag yourself home to suffer in stark contrast the sad, depressing sight of the Michelin Ma’am dutifully holding down the home post. Your guilty thoughts will eat you alive either way, so you may as well enjoy the benefits of the burden of that guilt.

The God of Biomechanics does not reward virtue. His works are Total Gonad.

I find the notion coming from some quarters (feminists and white knights and manboobs, oh my!) that Petraeus ought to have been more virtuous absolutely laughable. The man’s station in life, if nothing else, made him a rock star in his milieu. Women would have made their sexual intentions known to him rather blatantly. Virtue is easy when there is little to realistically tempt one to vice, as is typically the case for nearly all omegas of either sex, and betas of the male sex. This was not the case here. Petraeus had the equivalent of a thousand attractive men’s temptations thrown in his face every day. A choir of heavenly saints would have trouble keeping the Boner of Light in their pants under such circumstances.

Which brings me to my next jeremiad: Tossing men and women together in the workplace is a recipe for dissolving marriages, sexually dispossessing beta males, and corraling women under the banner of a few industry captain alpha males. Men and women in a putatively monogamous society are simply not meant to be in each other’s company, away from family, all the day long and night. Is it any wonder, really, that female infidelity rates are now approaching that of men’s rates? The gender neutral workplace experiment has brought alpha males and fertile females together like no other arrangement yet devised by man. And it happened under everyone’s noses, because no one bothered to note that human nature is real, and it isn’t going anywhere soon.

There is a reason why newly minted wives rush their husbands out to the suburbs, and it’s not just to get their kids into good white schools: it’s to sequester their men from the sea of luscious young pussy that swims the streets of the cities. Similarly, most husbands are much happier when their wives either stay at home or work in jobs where they are mostly surrounded by other women or beta males, like teaching or accounting. The goal for each is the same: to reduce excessive alpha male/hot female temptations.

Of course, don’t bother telling feminists this undeniable aspect of society: they’d rather stuff purple saguaros in their ears than contemplate the merciless, gender aneutral reality of humanity. Their willful ignorance is rivaled only by their catastrophic stupidity.

*How predictable was this affair? Very. The greater the sexual market value disparity between a husband’s wife and his female coworkers, the likelier the odds of his having an extramarital affair with a woman closer in SMV to himself. This postulate is best expressed graphically:

A high status man whose wife is a full 10 points lower on the looks scale than the women he works with is guaranteed to cheat, and cheat a lot. You will notice that some alpha males advanced in the ways of self-abnegation can resist the temptation to cheat, so long as the other woman is no more than a couple points better looking than the wife. But once the other woman crosses that threshold from “kind of prettier” to “yup, she makes my wife look like a duffel bag of laundry”, the infidelity is set in stone. And only those who loathe male desire will see fit to condemn such a man for his actions.

For the recent members of the studio audience: Feminists and their lapdog beta supplicants tend to be the types to nurse an irrational loathing of natural, normal male desire.

There are those tricky little trolls who will innocently(!) ask “Don’t you feel sorry for the wife? What did she do wrong?”

I do feel a twitch of pity for her, but it stops there. She did nothing “wrong”, in the Biblical or PC sense, but the fact that she obviously felt it reasonable to so fully let herself go is evidence that she cared not a whit for her husband’s animal desires, and was probably up to her ears in feminist ideology about the uselessness and evil of appealing to the visceral demands of men for physically attractive, slender lovers. Had she stayed thin (something which is entirely possible, barring very rare physiological ailments), she would have enjoyed more loving sexual attention from her husband. But she is undoubtedly a creature of the zany zeitgeist, and as such was likely imbued with latent hatred for the idea of pleasing one’s husband in the way that husbands prefer to be pleased.

There is also the matter of expectations that are inevitably placed on women who have managed to capture in unholy matrimony a rising star alpha male. The pressure to stay sexy and feminine will be much more strongly felt by a wife hitched to a valuable alpha male. After all, he has options most men don’t. The luxury of resting on her wifely laurels to scarf down a pint of Edy’s is not in the cards for such women. To put it mildly: Ladies, if you want the alpha male, be prepared to put in the hard work to keep him amused. If you don’t want that responsibility, then go marry a beta male who won’t have the SMV leverage to complain or seek alternate humanistic outlets for his needs.

Naturally, some of you women will balk. But try this thought experiment on for size:

The fat wife of an alpha male is the SAME THING as the unmotivated, dull, needy husband of an alpha female.

If you would be hard pressed to place full blame on the alpha female for her succumbing to infidelity, then so should you think twice before placing full blame on the alpha male for his succumbing to infidelity.

If you cannot grasp this elementary logic, then you are either a raving feminist loon, or a very feminine woman who confuses feelings for reason.

**Was Petraeus in love? I bet he was. Broadwell was considerably younger than him, and considerably sexier than his wife, and those two things are prerequisites for illicit love to bloom in the heart of a man. Feminists often sputter angrily when they see a much older, powerful man with a younger woman, a reaction which arises because they are aware that what they are seeing is an asymmetrical power relationship, but even worse, that the subordinate woman in the relationship ENJOYS IT! The man likes having a pretty girl look up to him, and the woman likes having a powerful man to look up to.

I think it is within the realm of possibility, then, that Petraeus really loved Broadwell, and saw her as much more than a fun fling. He returned her love, though in the end it appears she didn’t get what she wanted from him, and her knives came out.

Will anyone in the media beside this blog talk about the genuine love Petraeus, or Allen, had for their respective mistresses? No. The belief that a man cannot love more than one woman at once is ingrained deeply in the psyche of the masses. Most cling tightly to hopes that non-monogamous relationships cannot be loving. And who wants to believe that an older man can truly fall in love with a younger woman? Certainly not the legions of older wives!

Then there is the uncomfortable fact of female nature: who among the media elite really wants to confront the reality of the base desires of women, of their yearning for powerful men, and of their natural inclination to happily assume the subservient role to such men? Who will mention how cavalierly women will dismiss the far-reaching consequences of their actions if such actions bring them closer to joyful fulfillment in the arms of their married lovers?

Love can thrive in relationships where lust is the driving force. When I read that Petraeus was having an affair with Broadwell, I was happy for him. Imagine the torment such a man with his temptations must suffer, just to keep up appearances in service to his political career and his dreary family life. But he went ahead with his affair anyway, and he did it for love. He put love ahead of duty and the wrath of the PC Kommisars. He chose to live not as the mass of men live — empty of any joy. Petraeus may be a fool and betrayer, but he is also a bold, exuberant romantic. A man willing to risk it all for a pretty woman’s love, the best thing that there is in this godforsaken world.

In the final analysis, the magnetic appeal of this story is clear:

Petraeus is us.

PS I predict that the cuckolded beta male hubbies, both of whom are “conventionally alpha” doctors, of Broadwell and Kelley will be the least examined aspect of this story by the media. Remeber, folks, men are expendable! And that goes triply for beta males. They are the forgotten lepers in the wilderness of unspoken tabulations of human worth. We will hear a never ending tale of woe about Mrs. Petraeus, but hardly a peep about the sad sacks who suffered their wives’ unfaithfulness. Some sexes are just more equal than others.

Read Full Post »

Cultivate Your Inner Dark Triad

Possessing a “dark triad” personality is good for attracting women. It’s also good for getting what you want out of life in realms beyond those of acquiring pussy. Reader moses passes along:

The Dark Triad ain’t just for seducers. It works in real life too.

From the WSJ book review on “The Wisdom of Psychopaths” by Kevin Dutton:

“Mr. Dutton, with his tongue not entirely in his cheek, develops a skill set he calls the Seven Deadly Wins, “seven core principles of psychopathy that, apportioned judiciously and applied with due care and attention, can help us get exactly what we want; can help us respond, rather than react, to the challenges of modern-day living; can transform our outlook from victim to victor, but without turning us into a villain.” His seven are: ruthlessness, charm, focus, mental toughness, fearlessness, mindfulness and action.”

This is absolutely correct. In my business career I’ve seen people with these traits win again and again, often by screwing others over.

I’ve employed a few of these traits myself to great effect.

Ruthlessness

Demand a pay raise. Don’t wait for it.

Escalate to a fuck close. Don’t wait for it.

Charm

Avoid defensiveness in favor of amused dominance. You will win more allies by directing their emotions toward deference instead of away from deference.

Avoid argumentativeness in favor of playful teasing. You will win more women by directing their emotions toward pleasure instead of away from pleasure.

Focus

Don’t get distracted from your career goals. Avoid dead weight who would hold you back.

Don’t get distracted from your sex goals. Avoid cockteasers who would LJBF you.

Mental Toughness

Never let a critical boss, coworker or client fill you with self-doubt.

Never let a woman’s caprice or shit testing shake your frame.

Fearlessness

You will pursue those things which you want despite the risk of failure.

You will approach women despite the risk of rejection.

Mindfulness

You will work to neutralize threats from competitors, through force or guile.

You will work to improve your social savviness, and avoid incongruence in the pursuit of women.

Action

Contemplation is for closers.

Fantasizing is for fuckers.

There is but one thing in this world which feels better than a brain shattering orgasm released into the warm wet vagina of a pretty girl, and that is the rush of power that flows like the Orinoco through a man’s arteries when he commands his environment and those who dwell within it.

Heartiste, what is good in life?

To crush beautiful pussy, see them love you for your power, and to hear the lamentation of their LJBFed beta suckups.

The Dark Triad is the clarion call that has replaced outmoded concepts of honor, virtue, chivalry and self-sacrifice as the organizing principle which motivates and galvanizes the post-society American man. It is the ultimate expression of untrammeled individualism. A society crumbling into atomizing modernism is both symptomatic of growing psychopathy in the population and causal of more people turning toward the psychopathic dark side. When truth is exiled, the allure of cold-blooded self-concern is evident.

Read Full Post »

Cultural Eugenics: A Theory

The top and bottom against the middle. White status whoring with minority pawns. SWPL hypocrisy. Anti-white anti-racists. Two Americas. Jesusland.

You’ve heard all these before. The Orwellian prognosis of a political culture steeped in a mountain of lies and suppressed crimethink. Astute observers of the American scene can’t help but notice that something foul is afoot, and they’ve given it a contour: the white ruling class has it in for the white working class.

The WRC is working diligently to make life as difficult as possible for the WWC. The white elite are successfully putting their hate for “those other whites” into policy form, the result being open borders, quotas, AA, outsourcing, emasculating indoctrination, Section 8, credentialism, etc. These policies hurt the WWC much more than the blowback hurts the WRC because the latter has the money and foresight to live in carved-out enclaves full of upper class and upper middle class whites like themselves. But they speak out of both sides of their mouths, for they do not want the WWC to know that the elite don’t really practice what they preach.

I have a theory that I believe has even more explanatory power than irrational ruling class hatred for working class co-ethnics. I call it “cultural eugenics”, and it basically states that, within the ruling minority — in this case, the WRC — there percolates a subconscious mental algorithm, shaped by ancient genetic imperative, which compels the WRC (the alpha males of the national pack) to “filter” or “select” whites lower on the status hierarchy for the ability to navigate the WRC’s cruelly labyrinthine cultural obstacles. It is similar in function to how a small hunter-gatherer tribe has rites of passage for its adolescent males, and how the tribe will viciously ridicule members who fail at a task or embarrass themselves in some manner. The purpose is not to kill them off, but to make them stronger. More like the alphas of the tribe.

The WRC doesn’t intend to do this culling specifically; it is an organic phenomena that arises out of a social milieu in which clearly delineated status hierarchies are becoming even more starkly delineated. The book “Albion’s Seed” goes into detail how these status hierarchies were always a part of America going back to her colonization, because they reflect pathways laid down hundreds of years ago by different tribes of Englishmen.

So in a way you could argue that, perhaps subconsciously, perhaps with awareness, the WRC has had, until now, the WWC’s best interests in heart — to make them better whites. The problem has become that racial diversity — one of the “betterment sufferings” the WRC has deployed to ostensibly strengthen the moral character of the WWC — has severed the comity and the trust and the simple visibility between the white classes, and made the task of scaling the WRC’s obstacles that much harder for the WWC to accomplish. A grave malaise, even an emotional regression, has settled in on the minds of the lower status whites, and instead of fight for their place at the white table and look with pride upon their co-ethnics who have succeeded (pride, because there was historically an implied understanding that the WRC life could be theirs with devotion to self-improvement), they have reverted to aping the crass lifestyle of those indigents who surround them and who are their most visible alpha males of the pack.

In sum, the white ruling class lost its sense of shared destiny and obligation, and the white working class lost its kindred alpha male to emulate. The cultural eugenic program has morphed from one to lift the weakest tribe members and humble the strongest tribe members, to one in which the strong tribe members have decided to kill off or banish to the wastelands the weaker tribe members.

This is not a recipe for national greatness. Or even survival.

Read Full Post »

Why Single White Women Vote Overwhelmingly For Democrats

I left this comment over at GL Piggy’s, on a post about election predictions. I think it is worth reprinting here (with additional commentary) because of its timeliness.

PA: “In reality, young white women’s pro-Obama leanings are a factor of their feminine/nurturer pity for a omegas for which “poor blacks,” “inner city single moms” and other such are a stand-in in their minds.”

There is this. In actuality, I think it is a confluence of three psychological factors that pushes a huge majority of single white women into the arms of Dem pols. (Single NAM women follow the gibsmedat principle almost exclusively.)

1. As PA states, women have an inborn disposition toward nurturance, and the pity is strong in them. I think women get off a little on feeling pity and sympathy for others, and feeling needed by the less fortunate. This is why so many women flock to work in the human despair services fields, like nursing or teaching. Married women also have this nurturance instinct, but it is redirected to their own families, which turns their moral focus inward to the center ring of the concentric rings of genetic distance and moral regard. This in effect makes them more GOP friendly (and more sane from a societal perspective), and we see this reflected in the polls.

2. As Whiskey states (well, speaking on the record, as *I* originally stated), single women’s prime directive is to fulfill their hypergamous impulse for the highest possible status man they can coax into long-term commitment. The party that is perceived as being pro-unrestricted female sexuality, anti-male sexuality, and anti-drone beta male is going to get their vote. You would probably not be surprised to learn that not only do single white SWPL chicks just automatically ASSUME everyone in their social circle is an Obama cultist (yours truly gets a pass because CHARMING BASTARD), the first thing that pops in their heads when you ask them why they’re voting for Obama is usually something along the lines of “Romney wants to take away my birth control”. Yeah, these are educated women saying this. Thanks suffrage!

The fact is, marriage advocacy (and earlier marriage) is bad for young women’s sexual market value leverage, (but good for older married women’s SMV leverage who, it should be noted, were the original pro-monogamy constituents and advocates). A party that embodies the single and seeking alpha cock in the city lifestyle will appeal to them. The party which is perceived (facts don’t really matter in politics) as pushing women to settle down early with a reliable company man and start popping out future video gamers is anathema to the single, economically self-sufficient, white woman sensibility.

3. Finally, and perhaps most saliently, single white women see Big Daddy State as a beta provider husband substitute. This has nothing to do with pity for the downtrodden masses and everything to do with “how much money and services I can redirect my way with an assist from the white knight contingent”. The single white woman who delays family formation finds herself battling her ancient subterranean limbic rhythms which always and everywhere guide her to seek out potential mates who could provide resources for her and her children, particularly when she is burdened by pregnancy and mostly unable (at least as would have been the case in the ancestral environment) to fully provide for herself. The single white woman, lacking the beta provider hubby (ironically, mostly by her own hand) seeks to fill his absence with the alternative — the looming Big Man tribal leader, which in modern America is the federal government, and its shaman is Obama. Women are naturally redistributionist because women are naturally self-aggrandizing and self-entitled, as befits their higher reproductive worth. And, more controversially, a very bad man like myself would say that women are naturally comfortable in quasi-harem arrangements, which is what the single woman concubine-government alpha provider relationship amounts to. And just like an alpha provider/protector, the government is very good at forcibly extracting tribute from the beta male masses.

On this last factor, the American growth industry of single moms is certainly pushing the country in a more redistributionist direction, because no demographic outside of blacks, gays and Hispanics is more generally and reliably pro-government handout than the single mom with kids to feed and no dad around to help out.

Alert the media! The stereotypes are true! Sanitization Protocol… activated.

In effect, Big Government is at once the alpha male tribal leader and the beta provider sucker who happily assumes the cuckold role as step-father to the single mom’s cadbaggage.

Now, the final, and most emotionally laden, variable in this equation is the black man angle. Both sides in this long-running debate have their points. My take from ground-level recon is that the people claiming single white women love alpha black men are overstating their case, and the people claiming single white women would never think of hooking up with “lower class, less accomplished, thug” black men are overstating theirs. White women do find plenty of black men physically exciting. And smarter white women do hesitate to date black men because of a very reasonable fear that, should a warpling issue from the union (this is always in the back of women’s minds, despite the easy availability of contraceptives), the black man will be less likely than the white man to stick around and care for her in her time of need.

As far as a I can tell, contra white nationalist hopes and dreams, single white women have ZERO concept of loyalty for their white men. Try to explain to your typical single white woman about the importance of loyalty to her men and of the idea of genetically preserving the white race’s unique winning attributes, and you may as well be a Martian spurting goo all over her. Now, in practice, one could argue that unmarried white women exercise a de facto loyalty to their men, because most white chicks date white men, and studies have shown that white women are the most resistant to dating outside their race. But how long will this hold? Census data points to a slow but inexorable increase in out-marrying and out-dating by white women (and white men). If there is some subconscious racial loyalty or primal preference acting to steer the tingles of single white women (and I believe there is), it is showing signs of withering under a coordinated cultural assault that has made even broaching the topic the equivalent of condemning oneself to the social gulag.

Btw, from a tingles-first perspective, a lot of white women thought Bill Clinton was way sexier than they currently think of Barack Obama’s sex appeal. This isn’t a looks or race thing… Bill just had more sensual, oozing charm than Barry. Chicks dig charming mofos.

Barring total collapse, I don’t see this trend:

…ending anytime soon. (Nice battering ram arms, Fluke.) So you may as well recline poolside, while the pool is still filled with water and chlorinated.

PS My election prediction:

It’s a toss-up, so I won’t bother picking a winner. I predict the popular vote and electoral college vote will split, with all that entails (yay, riots!)

I will confidently predict that most of the demographic vote ratios will remain roughly the same as they have for the past few election cycles.

Single white women will vote 60-40 Obama.
Single moms will vote 75-25 Obama.
Blacks will vote 98-2 Obama.
Hispanics of Amerindian ancestry will vote 65-35 Obama.
Asian-Americans will vote 70-30 Obama.
Ruling class elites will vote 70-30 Obama.
Libertarians will vote 70-30 Obama (such independent free-thinkers, those libertarians!).
Self-professed feminists will prove their non-conformist bona fides by voting 100-0 Obama.
Single beta males will vote 55-45 Romney (still beta, still white knighting).
Married white men will vote 80-20 Romney (this shift will be bigger than polls are currently projecting).
Married white women will vote 55-45 Romney.
Pickup artists will not vote. They got better things to do.

A lot of white men and white married couples are going to break for Romney, but the social and racial and familial demographics of the country are moving with such force in the opposite direction that the white man vote, no matter how consolidated, is going to eventually get swamped by the undertow and rendered irrelevant for many, many election cycles to come (assuming there will continue to be a country in existence that is capable of holding elections). When the white man “wakes up” to this fact, I predict secession movements will sprout up all around the country, descaling the nation to more socially and tribally congenial entities. But most of us reading this will be dead by that time. And it will be too late, regardless. In the meantime, expect populism to rise again, and tariffs to become the talk of the townhall. A billion Chinese is a lot of surplus cheap labor to churn through before wages equilibrate. There will be blood in the interim.

Read Full Post »

Did Obama Have Game?

The fate of the world may hinge on whether Obama was once a lady slayer. Commenter Sp5 writes:

Based on this article about the judgment of his ex-girlfriends, Obama did have game, at least in his early years:

“In one diary entry from February 1984, Ms Cook – a girlfriend for more than a year – noted that in their relationship “the sexual warmth is definitely there – but the rest of it has sharp edges”.

She recalled “feeling anger” at Mr Obama, whose “warmth can be deceptive”. Foreshadowing a criticism often levelled at the President today, she said: “Though he speaks sweet words there is also that coolness”.

. . . . In another entry, she wrote that there was “so much going on beneath the surface, out of reach,” adding that Mr Obama was “guarded, controlled.””

If this woman’s recollection is true, it’s definitely evidence in favor of Obama having once had game. (I say “having once had”, because the First Linebacker seems to have beaten it out of him.) The description of Obama’s attitude — c.f. his state control — shares similarities with that of alpha males and charismatic men. Many womanizers are affectionate and sexual, but keep a psychological arm’s length between themselves and their quarry, which of course motivates the women to chase the men for more commitment and love. If you were wondering, this is a good position to be in as a man, because it allows you to call the shots.

Naturals and alpha males, in fact, are more apt than are niceguys and beta males to objectify and compartmentalize women. Yet, to listen to feminist complaints, you’d think the exact opposite was the reality. But that’s just because feminists in particular, and women in general, are constitutionally incapable of admitting the truth about the contours of their sexual desire.

My personal theory about our hope and changer is that the burdens of his intrinsic duality and loneliness that all racial halfies must bear, and the especially painful bitterness that abandoned sons of deadbeat fathers and emotionally distant mothers nurse their whole lives, eventually won the battle with his easygoing cool side, subsuming his game charms under a thin veneer of barely concealed seething resentment and racial solidarity mongering (it’s human nature to want to feel part of a distinct group, and this is doubly so if your group membership cred is questionable). Nevertheless, hints of Obama’s game survive to this day, mostly in the way he has mastered the art of mirroring — pretending to listen to people and regurgitate their thoughts even when he thinks differently. Obama is a cipher, and ciphers are often some of the most devastatingly charming ladykillers.

Read Full Post »

“I didn’t need game to land my wife”

A fairly common hater/game denialist shibboleth is the extrapolating from anecdote fallacy. For example, a well-respected herb in his community will find this blog, feel his beta ego fill with regret for years of missed opportunity, and immediately assert he is manlier and/or a more attractive and psychologically balanced individual because he “didn’t need these mind game tricks” to find a wife or girlfriend who loves him.

I don’t doubt that a lot of these anti-game haters are telling the truth as they perceive it. They probably didn’t need game, or more likely unwittingly used a greatly diluted version of game, to find and fall in love with a faithful (best not think otherwise) GF or wife.

Reasoning from anecdote is a logical fallacy, but there are enough of these assertions by game haters that it’s possible a statistically nontrivial number of men really did not need or use game, intentionally or otherwise, to get hitched. Therefore, discounting them automatically is not a legitimate counter-argument. There is a better way to expose their sham claims for what they actually represent.

Here’s the rub: it’s a good bet the quality (aka the sexual market value, or SMV) of their girlfriends or wives is on the middling to low end of the female attractiveness scale.

If you are the average man — average height, employed, no major physical or emotional deformities, able to hold a conversation without shitting your pants, don’t know what LARP means, can refrain from obsessively counting toothpicks that fall on the floor — then you won’t need game, or very much game as the term is commonly understood, to fall ass-backwards into long term relationships with plain janes, facial mediocrities, or chubsters (who, note, constitute the majority of American womanhood, and thus fall right in the middle of the fat (heh) part of the bell curve).

If you are this man, all you need to do to win over a woman like this — the average woman — is approach, say “hi”, chat a bit about her likes and dislikes, and show some persistence and you’ll get her in bed by date five or twenty. Voila!, an “I didn’t need game to land my wife” anti-gamer is born from the wreckage of his surrendered dreams. Since most average men are ball-less castrati, the majority of you anti-gamers are likely staying within your comfort zones and meeting only women who are not attractive enough to fuel inject your lust or challenge your risk-avoidance habits.

This is my working assumption, and I’m certain the types of guys who go stir crazy with spite at the mention of game are dating or married to dreary commonplace women they had little trouble “winning over” the lackluster, “show up on time” way.

So, to visually summarize, if the women you date or are married to are about as attractive as her:

or her:

…then, yeah, congratulate your virtuous self, you won’t need much game to score a date every two months that resolves in uninspired, tepid sex.

But if the women you date, or want to date, are as attractive as these girls:

…then you will need game. And a lot of it. Because, you see, hot girls have options, and options means they will demand more of the men who want to sleep with them and love them. And game, aka learned charisma, effectively satisfies that demand.

Or you can continue taking the path of least resistance and settling down in easy monotony with potato faces so that you can enjoy stalking pickup blogs and railing about the futility of game.

Read Full Post »