Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘The Pleasure Principle’ Category

Men have better sex with women who are emotionally unstable, a study has revealed.

And women prefer men who are less agreeable but pay attention to detail, according to the German survey of a thousand people.

They found “men whose partners had less emotional stability reported better sexual function” while “lower agreeableness of a sexual partner was predictive of better sexual function in women.”

From a Gabber,

Most men already knew this. The best sex you’ll ever have is with a woman who’ll stab you with a pair of scissors for liking another woman’s social media post.

Headcase women try a lot harder in bed because they love that feeling that their man might leave them at any moment. So Dread Game is useful in two ways: it keeps women attracted and faithful, and it heats up the bedroom. Of course, the downside is that you have to learn to deal with the blowback of continually provoking her to unlock ever-greater levels of achievement in girlcrazy.

The usual way these Manipulative Man-Crazy Girl relationships go is:

Hot sex => Surprise drama => Hotter sex => Manufactured drama => Soul-desiccating sex => Here comes the crazy train! => Stroke-inducing sex => Breakup.

Every one ends in a huge blowout-slash-blowjob because every man has his breaking point beyond which he can’t tolerate another bout of crazy from his girl. That breaking point is reached when the relief of getting away from the crazy is stronger than the regret of giving up the hot sex. For the options-rich alpha male, the breaking point is between three weeks and three months. For the options-starved beta male, the breaking point is between three years and early death.

The second part of that study — women have better sex with disagreeable men — recapitulates a rich Heartistian archive of personal anecdote and scientific confirmation of the CH maxim that chicks dig jerks. The man who locks a woman in (tethers her to his dick like ribbon to a may day pole) is the man who balances his charming and impeccably ambiguous emotional distance with his sensual expertise navigating a woman’s body.

Read Full Post »

Matteo Salvini, Italy’s Trump, with his fiancée Elisa Isoardi,

Salvini is no Brad Pitt, which goes to show how far a little ZFG attitude and shitlord street cred can take a man.

Read Full Post »

This isn’t freshly trod ground for regular Chateau readers, but it bears repeating for the joy of triggering any wayward feminist cunts and their betasoy lackeys who stumble into this outpost of sexy chauvinism: SCIENCE continues amassing a trove of evidence vindicating the real world observation that women get hot n bothered for fun-lovin’ sexist men.

Yes, AWALT. Even feminists uncontrollably splooge for misogynist pigs.

Quite simply, women can’t trust male feminists to come through like men if times get tough. This basic mistrust of the masculinity of male feminists is toxic to female arousal.

Soyboys who cloyingly parrot feminist vagitudes and profess an abiding belief in the equality, sameness, and interchangeability of the sexes leave women emotionally cold, if not intellectually underwhelmed. And in the business of romance, the hindbrain owns the forebrain.

This is why careerist shrikes have such a hard time finding a man. They too want a man who will “provide and protect”, but their economic, occupational, and social success means that a vanishingly small pool of men can fit their bill. So they go alone to their cat graves, bitter and spiteful and leaning in to the lonesome last, tragicomic victims of their own hypergamy that evolved in an environment and sexual market in which women didn’t waste years of prime fertility pursuing the corner office.

You don’t have to beat women over the head with proclamations of their inferiority to bed them, but it helps to implicitly remind them of their vulnerabilities and dependencies through your unapologetic actions and self-entitled words. The ZFG jerkboy hypnotizes women because everything he does and says is the tacit antithesis of male feminism.

***

Cracker adds,

yeah, the fact that [male feminists] CAN actually get a feminist girl this way is the saddest part

they end up getting the crap girl and she makes his life a living hell from then after

Right, there are two ways a man can “get” a girl: expediently (she settles for him b/c she’s ugly or damaged and he’s in her orbit) or passionately (she swoons for him b/c his masculine energy is irresistible).

Men who “get” feminists expediently suffer for their laziness and cowardice. The bitter spiteful femcunt will unload every bubbling resentment she harbors onto one of these unlucky males, who will wind up in a minefield relationship spending most of the time dodging her incoherent rage and appeasing her increasingly lunatic demands, all for a once-every-six-months perfunctory ball-dribbling into the shallow end of her dry hole.

Read Full Post »

Overgaming is the mistake inexperienced but eager-to-learn men make with women. It’s a term that means “coming on too strong” (or too jerkish, or too cloying, or too supplicating, etc).

Overgaming usually occurs during the attraction phase of a pickup (the first fifteen minutes) because that’s when men are most hyped up to leave a solid impression on a qtπ. But overgaming can occur during any stage of a seduction, and it’s not uncommon for men to act too “creepy” during the comfort stage or too aggressive during the bedroom close.

However, rarely have I heard of overgaming during a blowjob, until now.

From Sad Girl:

Anecdote on ways to ruin something good. You will probably find it annoying that I am using your terminology and for being foul, but here goes since I am anonymous.

Annoying? I find it charming that you cum to me for help. Doubtless I would be less charmed if we were dating and you were regaling me with sexploits from your slutty past.

Scenario: Guy (a natural) I am dating told me I was worldclass at blowjobs in the middle of one (posture: cocky, leaning back casually on the sofa with his head resting in his hands, which I like to see)

Every man worth his yarbles should strike this pose at least once in his life when the opportunity ARISES. Your T level will go through the roof of the Trump Tower.

and outlining that I was in the top 3 in his life, *subtly ranking me while his dick was in my mouth*. Exceptional, you see – but not number one. A neg…

LMAO. I mean, this is funny af but totally unnecessary. In his defense….since when have jerkboys been known for their circumspection?

This kind of behaviour doesn’t lower his value to me psychologically, as I am sure you will understand.

All too well.

But…it has soured this ”special thing we share” – spending time together with his cock in my mouth. I think this is an example of ”overgaming”. My enthusiasm was at a level 10 for this act, and now it has dropped.

To a 9.5?

I am around 30 which I think you will find relevant, and there was literally no need to psychologically motivate me to suck harder by planting a seed of competition in my head, since it was already my favourite thing that I do constantly without being asked, and I assume that’s a huge part of why he is dating me.

How long had you two been dating when he gave your BJ technique a top 3 finish? (technically, he could have meant you were number one. technically.) If you had been dating for a while, and exclusively, then his hummerbrag would sound more like a toothless joke. If you had just started dating, then it would indicate something more ominous — that he was still playing the bj field or would be if your technique fell short (heh) of his standards. Or maybe he just thought it was funny, and jerkboys don’t bother with nuisances like idle thought filters.

In this case, there was only room to go down.

These things happen after a blowjob.

I think negging me in this situation like that made me enjoy it less, and I don’t think I can go back to the real enthusiasm I had before. I just feel differently now. It hurt my feelings, or my ego, or who knows the other things going on emotionally i haven’t sorted out yet, while I have actually been giving my all. It’s not the same now.

If you were genuinely hurt by his flagrante delicto judgment call, I have the cure for your sub-par bj blues.

*zzzzzziiiiiipp*

Get ready, your bj level is about to hit 99 (inches).

I’ll spare a moment of post-lockajw seriousness; if he only said it once and you can tell by his joy that he still loves cumming to you for your very special lessons in oral love, then don’t allow a poorly timed spell of overgaming to spoil you on him. And to be franknbeans, it sounds like you’re still with him, giving him a little less than your all (but which would still qualify as a bone-anza to the typical beta incel) but giving it to him nonetheless, so my conclusion is that you are HEAD over heels for this lovable jerk and came here to vent your insecurities about his potential waywardness, and wondering aloud if in coded language to Chateau lords the odds that Top 3 Knob Job Jerkboy would leave you for a girlie with a nimbler, precision targeting tongue.

To that, all I can advise is take a cue from his tone. Did he rank you in the braheemian vocal stylings of a man eager to show off, or was his message delivered with a blunt blurt suggesting his mind was likely drifting to memories of the agog minxmouths of lost lovers? If the former, brush it off. If the latter, there’s a website you can go to where you’ll find plenty of men who will treat you with the dearest respect you so obviously deserve when your polehole is wrapped for his pleasure:

http://www.mgtow.com

Read Full Post »

Staying slender is no reprieve from the Wall, ladies. When you get old, your slender figure turns skeletal and the flesh droops like canvas drapes off the bones. Your best bet for delaying critical Wall impact is weightlifting (notably squats) in conjunction with cardio. You lose that tender adipose fat soon after your early 20s and you need something to replace it — muscle — to keep your curves and protuberances in the right boner-inducing size and place.

PS: Men: let this be a lesson. That 35 year old sexpot teacher you have the hots for when you’re fourteen? Have fun with her, but don’t marry her. When you’re 45, she’ll be 66, and that’s the boner killer for which there is no cure.

Read Full Post »

The Judge says giving women all the responsibility for initiating and controlling the pace of sex is the answer to false rape accusations.

Women are just dishonest to the bone, 24/7. You can think everything is cool because the dumb bitch doesn’t say anything, next thing you know, she claims you raped her, or she “felt half-raped”.

In such a climate, Game…CHARISMA…is needed, because the only safe sexual encounter is one initiated and controlled by the dumb bitch.

The Judge is well-meaning but his suggestion will actually make the problem of women blaming men for the regret and emptiness women normally feel after impulsive hookups much worse. Ceding the domain of bedroom escalation to women is no guarantee of a safe sexual encounter. As we all know, a woman will back-rationalize any sexual encounter into a distant facsimile of actual events to support whatever her feelings require in the moment, and that includes sexual interactions she initiated and controlled. Even if you signed a consent form with a lawyer present and tied your hands behind your back so that she would have to undress you and guide your penis into her three holes, if she felt bad about it the next day she’ll concoct a load of self-serving sophistry to excuse her actions and relinquish her accountability, which in practice means IT’S ALWAYS THE BOYIM’S FAULT.

Paradoxically, the closest thing men have to a guarantee against a false regret rape accusation is to DOMINATE and LEAD the girl to a sexual encounter in which she CAN’T CONTROL her erupting arousal and EAGERLY SURRENDERS to the man. (Then make sure you give her a peck on the cheek and tell her something nice before bolting in the morning. Leave em wetter than you found em.)

The problem with the physically and personably unattractive amy schumers of the world is that they are fated to date weak men, soyboys, gloryhole faces, male feminists, john scalzis, and simpering omega nerdos. A woman who initiates and controls the sexual encounter from start to finish with one of those kinds of un-males will FEEL LIKE she was raped afterwards, because her contaminated womb will be crying out for a mercy killing. Naturally, this bad feeling of existential darwinian regret will compel her to deny her role in the consensual sex and to seek absolution by shifting a fake blame onto the unwitting loser male who thought she was enjoying his tepid romantic advances.

A woman sexually in control is a woman emotionally in doubt. Give her control over sexual progression and the only guarantee you’ll get is her post-coital spite and resentment. Few women, deep down, want to lead a man. Most women, deep down, want to follow a man. You, as a man, deny this want of women at your peril.

Read Full Post »

dshugashvili makes what I consider a novel and convincing case against Male Genital Mutilation (aka circumcision): the barbaric practice robs both men and women of the white hot lust which intimately bonds them for the long haul.

plumpjack: Prior to my [circumcision] restoration, I had some great experiences – or so I thought. In hindsight, they were all experiences that centered around HER pleasure: “Boy, I really made her cum last night,” etc. But now there was a profound difference; the experiences I was having were mine. And they were damn good.

Ironically, the more pleasure I started having, the more that my partners began to have. They could sense my pleasure and this made them more excited. There is an interconnected aspect to sexual intercourse, and having genitals that function correctly is an integral part of this.

How I Restored My Foreskin

***

kinda off-topic for this post, but I would like to offer you my sincere congratulations for overcoming the humiliation that the Khazars and their stooges inflicted on you when you were a defenceless child. (the Khazars always prefer their victims to be defenceless; for example, they delight in shooting children along the Gaza border fence.)

apparently, it’s all part of the plan:

Similarly with regard to circumcision, one of the reasons for it is, in my opinion, the wish to bring about a decrease in sexual intercourse and a weakening of the organ in question, so that this activity be diminished and the organ be in as quiet a state as possible. It has been thought that circumcision perfects what is defective congenitally. This gave the possibility to everyone to raise an objection and to say: How can natural things be defective so that they need to be perfected from outside, all the more because we know how useful the foreskin is for that member? In fact this commandment has not been prescribed with a view to perfecting what is defective congenitally, but to perfecting what is defective morally. The bodily pain caused to that member is the real purpose of circumcision. None of the activities necessary for the preservation of the individual is harmed thereby, nor is procreation rendered impossible, but violent concupiscence and lust that goes beyond what is needed are diminished. The fact that circumcision weakens the faculty of sexual excitement and sometimes perhaps diminishes the pleasure is indubitable. For if at birth this member has been made to bleed and has had its covering taken away from it, it must indubitably be weakened. The Sages, may their memory be blessed, have explicitly stated: It is hard for a woman with whom an uncircumcised man has had sexual intercourse to separate from him. In my opinion this is the strongest of the reasons for circumcision.

Moses Maimonides

see also:

The effect of male circumcision on the sexual enjoyment of the female partner

LOL that Maimonides thought it was a bad idea that a woman would love her man too much.

Maybe jews really are malignant masochists? The notion neatly explains some of the more dire aspects of diaspora jewish behavior in the lands of their generous Gentile hosts. From a reader,

Saw a decent argument that (((they’re))) pure masochists on a memetic level, always wanting to revisit the good old days of Deuteronomy when they fucked up on a tribal basis and needed heavy handed correction by God.

Nothing else can explain their sheer malevolence. Other middleman minorities don’t openly taunt the host populations, don’t beg for wipeout.

I disagree with that last part. I would say we are entering (for better or worse) an age in Western nations in which other minorities, taking their jew cue, openly taunt the host population. Bindis for instance have taken up the “taunt Whitey” banner with real gusto. This might not be a bad thing in the long run. NiceWhites can only take so much shit pushed in their faces before they abandon their niceness with the same gusto that their nonWhite taunters revel in their anti-White malice.

The other possibility here (to explain why circumcision was historically a jew thang), might be that the high average IQ jews inherited (thanks to occupational bottlenecks European Gentiles created to protect their hamlets from levantine imprint) conflicts with their equally inherited ravenous Middle Eastern libido, and into this unholy amalgam pitting the forebrain against the hindbrain the masochistic impulse in jews grew beyond normal bounds to accommodate the inevitable cogdis, and ritualistic circumcision was one manifestation of this internal battle. I hope this makes sense. (Maimonides seems to have understood what I’m saying.)

From that 1999 anti-circumcision research paper (brace yourselves for a poonami of realtalk):

Women having sexual experience with both circumcised and anatomically complete partners were recruited through classified advertisements in magazines and an announcement in an anti-circumcision newsletter. Respondents to the advertisements were mailed a survey to complete and return, the comments then compiled and the responses analysed statistically.

[…]

Comparisons of experiences with circumcised or intact males are shown in tables 2 and 3. With their circumcised partners, women were more likely not to have a vaginal orgasm (4.62, 3.69-5.80). Conversely, women were more likely to have a vaginal orgasm with an unaltered partner. Their circumcised partners were more likely to have premature ejaculation (1.82, 1.45-2.27). Women were also more likely to state that they had had vaginal discomfort with a circumcised partner either often (19.89, 5.98-66.22) or occasionally (7.00, 3.83-12.79) as opposed to rarely or never. More women reported that they never achieved orgasm with circumcised partners (2.25, 1.13-4.50) than with their unaltered partners. Also, they were more likely to report never having had a multiple orgasm with their circumcised partners (2.25, 1.13-4.50). They were also more likely to report never having had a multiple orgasm with their circumcised partners (2.22, 1.36-3.63). They were also more likely to report that vaginal secretions lessened as coitus progressed with their circumcised partners (16.75, 6.88-40.77).

During prolonged intercourse with their circumcised partners, women were less likely to ‘really get into it’ and more likely to ‘want to get it over with’ (23.32, 11.24-48.39). On the other hand, with their unaltered partners, the reverse was true, they were less likely to ‘want to get it over with’ and considerably more likely to ‘really get into it.’ […]

When the women were divided into those with more or fewer than 10 lifetime partners, those with >10 were more likely to have orgasms with their circumcised partners than those with fewer partners, but still less frequent orgasms than they had with their unaltered partners. Women who preferred a circumcised partner overall were more likely to have had <10 partners (3.52, 0.92-13.50).

If a woman has accumulated enough rides on the cock carousel to have a penis preference, do not stop at Ho, do not collect nuptial vows.

When women who preferred vaginal orgasm were compared with those preferring orally or manually induced orgasm, the former rated unaltered men higher (Z=2.12, P=0.016), had more positive post-coital feelings (Set 3; Z=2.68, P=0.003) with their unaltered partners, and rated these men higher overall (Z=2.12, P=0.016). These women were more likely to prefer being on top during coitus to achieve vaginal orgasm (2.46, 1.21-4.98). They were also more likely to have an unaltered man as their most recent partner (1.74, 0.87-3.47).

The women who preferred circumcised partners (as elicited in one of three questions, n=20) were more likely to have had their first orgasm with a circumcised partner (8.38, 2.88-24.35) than those who preferred unaltered partners. Although these women preferred circumcised partners, they still found unaltered partners to evoke more vaginal fluid production, a lower vaginal discomfort rating and fewer complaints (Sets 1 and 2, Table 3) during intercourse than their circumcised partners.

And finally, the coda, which could win prizes in literature:

These results show clearly that women preferred vaginal intercourse with an anatomically complete penis over that with a circumcised penis; there may be many reasons for this. When the anatomically complete penis thrusts in the vagina, it does not slide, but rather glides on its own ‘bedding’ of movable skin, in much the same way that a turtle’s neck glides in and out of the folder layers of skin surrounding it. The underlying corpus cavernosa and corpus spongiosum slide within the penile skin, while the skin juxtaposed agaist the vaginal wall moves very little. This sheath-within-a-sheath alignment allows penile movement, and vaginal and penile stimulation, with minimal friction or loss of secretions. When the penile shaft is withdrawn slightly from the vagina, the foreskin bunches up behind the corona in a manner that allows the tip of the foreskin which contains the highest density of fine-touch neuroreceptors in the penis [1] to contact the corona of the glans which has the highest concentration of fine-touch receptors on the glans [18]. This intense stimulation discourages the penile shaft from further withdrawal, explaining the short thrusting style that women noted in their unaltered partners. This juxtapostion of sensitive neuroreceptors is also seen in the clitoris and clitoral hood of the Rhesus monkey [19] and in the human clitoris [18].

Of course, this is correlation and potential selection bias, so it’s possible unaltered men happen also to be jerkboy men who maximally arouse women, but the uniformity of the results at least should give the mutilated man pause, as it indicates circumcision itself reduces women’s pleasure.

It’s really a counter-intuitive argument, because most people would assume that by diminishing through circumcision the sexual pleasure and ardor a man can feel, he would be less likely to stray and satisfy his over-torqued libido with mistresses. Instead, reducing his pleasure reduces his woman’s pleasure as well, and the sexual disappointment may contribute to relationship dissolution.

Putting the results of this study in the language of our oypressors, “informed consent” means the barbaric practice of infant circumcision must end. My boner, my choice.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: