So why is she still working there? Does she have dirt on Twatter executives? Or is the entire Twatter HR department staffed wall to wall by crazy-eyed feminists and pantywaist sycophants allergic to facts and tasked with Narrative dissemination?
I see, someone REALLY doesn’t want to be allowed back on the twitter.
Does anyone seriously think a CH house lord would beg a porky misfit like Randi Lee Harper for re-entrance to the club she is inexplicably charged with monitoring? No, that is not how this will go. She will come to CH, on her ungulate knees, to offer an obsequious apology and reconciliation to her betters. As losers are meant to do.
Long-time guests of Le Chateau will recognize the deeper message of this post. They will know this post is not solely about Randi Lee Harper (or about using her SJW tools against her) — she is but a convenient emblem to showcase a much more pervasive societal sickness — but is about, instead, the tentacled mind and body rot oozing out over the commons from the sewage pipes emptying the uptalking id waste of the SJW corporation of bitter, spiteful, loser freak degenerates whose adult sentiments were prematurely calcified into a juvenile philosophy of solipsism as they peered at the world outside through the vents of their high school lockers.
PS Hi Randi! PETA wants to know how your blue-dyed dog is doing.
Thumping, throbbing, pulsing… a sinuous dolphinoid stroke through crisscrossing waves of briny, grinding flesh, arrive at destination: a ramshackle tropic-themed auxiliary bar. I wave, regally, in the vicinity of the bartendress, to order a stiff one. To my left, propped lordotically on a stool, a slim blonde in slimmer dress squeezes a lime wedge into her love potion. She thinks (incorrectly) a stray sour squirt hit me; I feign injury.
Blondie: “Oh, I’m sorry about that!”
Left hand up to left eye, I execute a grimace with great gusto. “Aagh! My eye! It burns.”
She gawks for a beat, I spread two fingers slowly apart, revealing the abstractly-afflicted eye, peering at her with my miraculously and expediently cured vision through the finger gap, smiling with same orb a reprieve from a personal injury lawsuit. I leave the scene, pressed in equal measure by physiological necessity and the advantages of calculated absence. Her friend, almost as attractive, says “bye” loudly as I set off.
The right inflection can flip a “bye” into a “why not stay for a longer ‘hi'”?
Re-trace my dolphin migration, arrive at bathroom to discharge the blowhole. Too many pissers. The walls bulge, Matrix-like, with the teem of testosterone. Zipping and careful to avoid slipping in the slosh of urine accumulating on the floor, I contort my return way through the crowd to the bathroom exit, as a crescendo of primate chest beatings alerts my early warning detection system. A stygian mutant standing in the doorway prognathously bellows, “That’s rude, man. That kinda rude can get a man killed”, at a retreating Topper pretending to ignore the taunt. He repeats his threat in staccato bursts of gumfire three or four (thousand) times, a menacing series of war cries intended to evoke the fear of an inevitable eruption of normalcy into sudden, violent, pitched battle. I raise my arms into a preparatory garrison as I snake around the rapidly intensifying black hole of gravitational incivility.
Escape velocity achieved. One hundred paces between chaos and rapture. Back at dryland Bar Tiki, the blonde, still seated, still smoldering, shifts to make room for my adjacent insertion. I accost her.
“You know I’m practically blind in my right eye now.”
“You mean, your left eye?”
“Oh, yeah, my left eye. Blind as a bat. At least your right side looks good. I hope your left side makes the grade.”
Her face energizes for gratifying combat. She sparkles, I toggle. Everything is gonna be alright.
No one knows for certain how the Neanderthals went extinct. There are many theories propounded — climate change, resource competition with newly arriving anatomically modern humans, megafauna population declines, etc — all of which are plausible, and some of which are supported circumstantially by recent genetic evidence.
I’ll suggest another, uncomfortably familiar, extinction mechanism for the Neanderthals: Diversity™ killed off the loveable brutes.
I don’t mean, exclusively, Diversity™ in the usual senses — warfare, rape&pillage, territorial disputes, food shortages. I mean it in the Calhoun rat “behavioral sink” sense. That is, the flood of Vibrant AMH Diversity™ arriving from points south, who may or may not have mingled peaceably with Neanderthals in the latter’s homeland, (and occasionally shared beds), by their mere proximate presence and cultural dissimilarity induced immense psychic pressures on the locals until their native fertility rate plummeted to levels…
…not unlike what we are seeing today among white Westerners living in homelands rapidly populating with millions of alien world migrants.
Diversity™, itself, is what killed the Neanderthals.
Arguing against my speculation: Contraceptives, the Japs.
Neanderthals didn’t have the hedonism aids of condoms and Pills. If they were “secularizing”, relative to their race’s historical norm, and choosing to forfeit childbearing in favor of extracting the last bit of fun from a shrinking playground, they’d have a challenge trying to do all this to the beat of the rhythm method. Not that it couldn’t be done; Neanderthalettes might have stiff-armed a lot of horny men if they felt that conditions weren’t optimal for raising a family.
The Japanese. They have a very low TFR at the moment, and last I checked there wasn’t a ton of Diversity™ in Japan. But, it is an island nation, and there are a lot of Japanese living on it, living a neon-colored and optically-wired version of the Western lifestyle. Here, the mechanism is entirely raw numbers, rather than raw numbers + clash of cultures.
The Neanderthals, it now appears from genetic analysis, have gifted White Europeans with just enough of their DNA to make something of a difference to the trajectory of white history. Did Neanderthals also gift us with a warning for our own race’s future, or lack thereof?
♂😎SCIENCE😎♂ swoons for Game once again, or rather, for the biomechanical truths explored here at the Chateau. Via reader RedEleven, a slew of studies examining the role of biological sex differences in gaits and other physical motions (there is such a thing as throwing like a girl).
There’s a lab in Canada that does motion capture studies of people and has collected data and produced animations that show distinct differences in the male and female gait.
This interactive flash applet lets you adjust the masculinity-femininity of a wireframe animation.
And here’s an excerpt from one of the studies they published:
“A framework is outlined that can be employed to obtain gender and other characteristics of the agent from human motion patterns and subsequently use this information to synthesize motion with particular, well-defined biological and psychological attributes.”
And from the discussion section:
“For instance the exaggerated male walker has wider shoulders than hips whereas in the female walker this ratio reverses. Male walkers display considerable lateral body sway whereas this is not the case for female walkers. Hip motion in male walkers is 180 phase shifted with respect to the hip motion in female walkers. The position of the elbows is very different in male and female walkers. Men tend to hold their elbows away from the body whereas women hold them close to the body. In general, the exaggerated man seems to attempt to occupy much more space than the exaggerated woman — a display not unique to the human species. ”
That first biomotion link provides a few minutes of amusement if you adjust the sliders to MAXIMUM ALPHA MALE.
Male-Female: All the way to the male.
Heavy-Light: All the way to heavy.
Nervous-Relaxed: All the way to relaxed.
Happy-Sad: All the way to happy.
There you go, gentlemen. Mimic the walking motion of the MAXIMUM ALPHA MALE:
Lateral sway in the upper body.
Knees high and out on the leg up-swing.
A little bit of bounce in your step. (“Get air” in your walk.)
In other words, lope like a pimp nigra.
j/k, but only sort of. Fact is, an alpha male gait that will turn on women is going to somewhat resemble a pimp roll. But Hwhyten it up. You don’t need to go the full gorilla to have an effect on lovely lady loins.
And whatever you do, don’t sashay your hips. Unless you’re John Scalzi, who is all about the swish.
BONUS: If you hoist iron, the resulting growth in your muscles and neural connections will naturally conform your gait into one that is more alpha male than beta male.
The second link is even funnier to watch in MAXIMUM ALPHA MALE MODE, (if not as educational), because it’s a full skeleton instead of a dot skeleton. You can practically see the silverback hair and prominent brow ridge.
How did you do on the “guess the sex” biomotion test at the last link? Your venerable Chateau host got 8/10 on the first sequence and 17/20 on the second sequence. Not bad considering the only clue to the sexes was a dot figure performing different motions. Do I know this because real world sex differences in gait and physical motion shape my impressions? Or do I know this because I was born with a mental template deep in my hindbrain that subconsciously informs my instinctive impressions? It’s probably both: Our genes create our sex differences, and our culture organically reinforces our genetic imprints.
Conclusion: The sexes are intrinsically, innately, immutably… biomechanically different!
Feminists, male and female? You there?
What about MAXIMUM ALPHA FEMALE MODE (i.e, how would an HB10 walk)?
Set the dot skeleton sliders in the first link to:
Try it, and I think you’ll agree that this female gait is the sexiest to male eyes.
Why? Because sex differences in mating psychology are telegraphed through our gaits. The HB10 is at her sexiest when she’s walking with:
– a 100% female gait
– a light step, but not so light she looks like a flaky slut
– a generally relaxed gait, but with a hint of nervousness that suggests vulnerability
– some perceptible sadness, because a 100% happy woman looks too strident and chirpy to properly ping those male radars for vulnerable faire maidens.
I hope this post has been as informative to open-minded readers as it has been hurtful and distressing to equalist fruit cups.
Commenter mendozatorres notes that the more “male” the dot figure, the greater the “crotch thrust” and the wider the man-spreading! Spread those legs out, men, and let your hog light shine! The women want a show. And, vice versa, when the figure goes from male to female, the crotch area sways more, like a pendulum tantalizingly swinging a basket of fruit at its end.
From commenter “its me”:
50/75/25/75 – effeminate homo/hipster walk lzozlzolzzolzzolzzozlz
It’s lzozlol because it’s true.
PS Fat-woman-who-has-given-up-on-life walk: 75/0/100/100. She looks like she’s ready to fall through the earth.
Chicks with six pack abs: A problem that is, thankfully, for now, small enough to tuck away for use as a hypothetical. But maybe not for long. It seems our world is careening toward an androgynous, sexually unimorphic hell, populated with femininity-crushing fatties or muscular femmes carving their bodies up to high-T specs.
Reader mac speaks for the vast majority of men,
i agree about the abs. don’t like a big beer gut on a girl of course but i’ve never been into visible abs on a woman either. i don’t understand why young guys these days all want their women to be ripped like men.
They don’t. They just say that for PR.
not feminine at all and ugh is right.
Rippling six packs on women are almost as nauseating as distended rolls of pork fat. Both obscure in their own ways the nascent feminine form struggling to emerge and soak up the sun of horny male attention. A perfect female stomach is flat, soft, and subtly terraformed as if to guide the adventurer to the furrow below it.
So while obesity is the epidemic destroying the natural beauty of America’s women, there is an opposite trend, much smaller but almost as destructive, toward hardened, fibrous, X-Fit borgs anchored atop a fulcrum of narrowed boyhips, tromping city streets in flats and trainers, shoulder checking personal space invaders, all the while denying the truth of their essential female nature.
The answer to obesity isn’t the masculinization of the female form.
Softness and slenderness, these are the gravitational forces of purest femininity.
Serena Williams would weep, but she lost touch with that part of her femaleness a long time ago.
Hope Solo wouldn’t weep; she’d just crush your nads in her clenched fist like they were walnuts.
A California assisted-suicide bill was shelved because of opposition from heavily mestizo districts.
Now personally, I’m in favor of assisted suicide at any age for leftoids in whatever physical condition. But one has to laugh at the irony of Diversity Park™ undocumented citizens bitch-slapping their effete white liberal patrons. You asked for it, now you’ll get it, good and hard.
I’m sure SCROTUS will find a Constitutional right to assisted-suicide in the near future, which is spelled out in the Constitution as clearly as the right to gay marriage, but in the meantime enjoy the cognitive dissonance.
Score: Invading aztecs: 1, white California liberals: 0. Shiv of the Week award goes to La Raza, for giving us all a glimpse of the unified, glorious future of America made stronger and happier by all her Diversity.
A player’s paradise — aka a cads and tramps society — would have distinguishing features that wouldn’t be found, or wouldn’t be quite as pronounced, in a beta male-ruled — aka dads and damsels — society.
1. More sexualized women.
Is T&A the order of the day? Do culture-amplifying mediums like advertising and entertainment try to get away with displaying the maximum amount of skin and minimum amount of clothing on their female messengers? Are women (especially women in the limelight) all too eager to comply with the zesty zeitgeist?
In a playa’s paradise, we can expect to find more sexualization of women because women will be more interested in short-term hookups with sexy, charming, dominant men. These men have dating market options, and as any man with options will do he’ll demand more sexual license and physical perfection from his considered conquests. Women will respond to this male-centric romantic preference by advertising themselves as sexual, sexy objects to be devoured in a bonerbath of contraceptively-safeguarded desire.
2. Less sexual dimorphism.
It seems counter-intuitive, but there is cross-racial evidence for the CH hypothesis that cad/tramp societies are less sexually dimorphic than dad/damsel societies. For instance, in the world’s OPP (Original Playa’s Paradise), Africa, the women are more masculine and less feminine than woman from dad/damsel societies. Even within the dad-centered West, a swing toward more cads/tramps is associated with less feminine (where feminine = coy, slender, and estrogenically curvy) women. Female athletes are the best example of this trend… all narrow boyhips, flat chests, and scowling countenances hitched atop glass-cutting manjaws.
Why? Best speculation: There are two processes happening that reinforce each other. One, girls with more masculine features and personalities tend, on average, to be more open to the idea of casual, NSA sex, and probably have, as well, stronger, more insistent, libidos than feminine women. Two, men seeking easy flings probably target, subconsciously, women with “sexually aggressive” phenotypic traits, and that may include women with bodies and desirous leers primed for piston-like pumping.
In a cad/tramp society, men will prefer good-to-go, low investment pussy properties, because there’s less paternity assurance (and less emphasis on paternity assurance by both sexes) and because there’s less expectation that any romantic liaison will lead to a long-term, sexually faithful, commitment. In a dad/damsel society, men are expected to commit before receiving the poon goodies, (and likewise women are expected to avoid riding the cock carousel before receiving that treasured commitment). Therefore, men under these conditions will prefer take-it-slow, high investment pussy properties, which means more feminine, prettier, coy women.
The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.
Feminism can be seen as both a happy allegiance to, and a bitter backlash against, a cad/tramp society. On the former, feminism advocates a social order that opens the short-term, sexual field to women, with the intent of allowing women the shameless pursuit of those few sexy, fly-by-night alpha cads who give them womb-shaking tingles. On the latter, feminism wishes to institute draconian, anti-male, anti-human rules of conduct that serve to straitjacket the romantic prerogatives of unsexy beta males. In this latter instance, the gimping of beta male courtship preferences — that is, the discouragement of beta males taking advantage of their sexual market strengths (shy, deliberate courting with long-term focus) — helps cad-chasing women avoid the awkward solicitations of any men other than those men who are skilled at the art of the approach.
4. Hatred of traditional sex roles.
A cad/tramp society should see more expressed hatred of the traditional sex roles that predominate in a dad/damsel society. This hatred will be found strongest among women who most benefit from the loose sexual and romantic expectations of a cad society: The middling 4s, 5s, and 6s who would rather enjoy five minutes of a higher value man scrubbing out their dirty dick holsters for a few weeks than the enraptured commitment of a lower value man offering financial and emotional commitment that these economically and egotistically self-sufficient women no longer need.
Cads themselves will also shit and piss on traditional sex roles, but they’ll mostly do this through their actions instead of the typical female strategy of verbal tumblrrhea designed to police thought boundaries and enlarge the conformist suck-up circle.
5. Hatred of beta provider males.
Concomitant with the above predicted observation, beta provider males will really take it on the chin. They are the biggest losers in a cad/tramp culture. Romantic failures, and hated for their romantic failure, beta provider males will have to find succor in waiting until their early 30s to marry a road-worn, cock-scarred cougarette on the make for a suburban sap she can latch onto for her obligatory 1.5 IVF-aided snot-nosed brats at the low low cost of once-a-year half-hearted birthday blowjobs.
6. More aggressive sexual signaling.
A cad/tramp society will teem with girls signaling their availability for hot sex from the right man. You would expect to see more tattoos, more body modifications, and more behavioral tics that transparently suggest the girl under consideration is DTF if you enter the correct all-access key code into her id-box.
Interestingly, on this matter, men will divide into two competing camps: The players and wannabes who emphasize their sexy male attributes at the expense of their latent romantic idealism, and the hardened betaboys who will cling ever tighter to their emotional tampon/orbiter game in the belief, usually mistaken, that at least one girl, at one point in their miserably incel lives, will tire of the cads and swoon for the beta’s earnest niceness.
7. Disproportionately higher STD rates among women.
A sexual market with cads and tramps at the top of the hierarchy would be sex-skewed in favor of the cads, for the simple reason that the female hypergamous impulse to mate with higher status men is more powerful and less malleable to compromise than the male impulse to fornicate with the prettiest girls. (In layman’s (heh) terms, men are more willing than are women to slum it once in a while.)
A consequence of female hypergamy is that once it is unleashed from cultural constraints, women will gravitate to a de facto polygyny, sharing the top 10-20% of men during their prime fertility years (15-25). What you’d find then, is a few cads spreading their venereal love to the larger number of women who lay with them. And that is what the data point to:
Overall prevalence of chlamydial infection was 4.19% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.48%-4.90%). Women (4.74%; 95% CI, 3.93%-5.71%) were more likely to be infected than men (3.67%; 95% CI, 2.93%-4.58%; prevalence ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.03-1.63). The prevalence of chlamydial infection was highest among black women (13.95%; 95% CI, 11.25%-17.18%) and black men (11.12%; 95% CI, 8.51%-14.42%); lowest prevalences were among Asian men (1.14%; 95% CI, 0.40%-3.21%), white men (1.38%; 95% CI, 0.93%-2.03%), and white women (2.52%; 95% CI, 1.90%-3.34%).
8. More women acting out like men.
Female teachers banging their underage and overhorny charges will be rampant in cad/tramp environments. So will women cursing like sailors, women posturing like drunken frat boys, women pretending to enjoy their slutty lifestyles, and women refusing the chivalric interventions of well-meaning old skool men.
Why bother cultivating the feminine traits when their usefulness has expired?
9. More men acting out like women.
This one is the mortal shiv in the heart of Western dad/damsel culture. What do you get when you (de)couple sexually focused, short-term thinking, masculine women with weepy, romance-starved, long-term focused male feminists?
The difference between manlets and manjaws is part motivation, part exogenous insult. Manjaws (unfeminine women) would suffer in a dad/damsel society where men were more discerning about which women they’d choose for commitment, but in a cad/tramp society vulgar, leg-spreading manjaws don’t take too big of a hit to their ability to find horndogs on the one-night-only prowl.
Manlets, in contrast, suffer a big hit whether they operate within a cad/tramp or a dad/damsel context. However, one could argue the hit they take is smaller in the dad/damsel milieu. So what motivates manlets in a cad/tramp society to stick to their feeble, flaccid guns? Perhaps their bitterness as SMV rejects creates a negative feedback loop exaggerating their impetus to unmanly posturing. Sort of like how a bullied kid will retreat deeper into solitude and fantasies of self-actualization.
But the reason may be more concrete than that psychological trawling. Post-America Manlettery (PAM!) could be the consequence of an all-out, all-points environmental estrogenic assault by the chemicals and Hivemind propaganda we all profoundly breathe and ingest on the daily.
Bottom line: Masculine women and feminine men are 100% bad box office. A 7-2 offsuit hand. A cosmic affront. A middle finger to the god of biomechanics. It won’t end well.
So, you tell the CH audience… are we living in a playa’s paradise?