Why You Should Hit On Hot Girls Out Of Your League

A particular paradox of the sexual market is one that works in the favor of men. More precisely, men with balls. It’s what I call the “Prime Pussy Paradox”.

Reader Scott explains,

I’m 48 years old, overweight, and out of practice after being married for 20 years. But I’ve still never understood the fear of approaching women. In my younger days, I dated roommates at the same time, a Playboy model, and regularly bagged ladies in the 8-10 range.

Now I have a 24 year old son. I told him when he was a teenager, that the easiest way to get a hot chick to go out with you is to simply ask. Since most guys are too wimpy to approach a 9 or 10, it is actually the girls in the 6-8 range that get hit on the most. In reality, 10′s get hit on less, and are easier to pick up than the less attractive girls in the 6-8 range.

That is the honest truth – believe it or not.

I believe it, because I’ve experienced the same. As have many of my player buddies. That sexy 8 will give you a warmer smile and more feminine charm than that ego-inflated 6 with a chip on her shoulder who’s had to deflect the horny intrusions of a hundred middling beta males who thought that 6 would be easy pickings.

The Prime Pussy Paradox states that the very hottest girls – high 8s, 9s and 10s — get hit on less frequently and by fewer men than do women in the “pump&dumpable” or “cute” range from 4 to 7s, and that this male approach skew psychologically grooms the hotter girls to be more excited when a man does boldly hit on them. The essence of the PPP is that hot girls are often MORE APPROACHABLE than cute or, god forbid, plain girls.

Why is the PPP a valid concept? The intersection of a woman’s self-esteem (modulated by her intrinsic hotness and the male attention she expects to get based on her self-perceived hotness) and a man’s sexually entitled boldness is where love explodes. A handy graph visualizes the phenomenon.

The black line represents a hot woman with unmodified self-esteem; that is, self-esteem which exists in a sexual market with perfect mate information flow where she gets exactly the amount of attention that her looks should theoretically command.

Naturally, such a world doesn’t exist, because men don’t make a decision to approach based entirely on a woman’s looks. Men also internally calculate their risk of rejection and their own courtship savviness. Which is where the red and green lines fit in. A woman with immoderately high self-esteem (green line) — i.e., a woman who thinks more of her mate value than her looks inform — will be a tough rut to shellac. A man would need to be very bold (and skilled) to hurdle the huge cockblock that is her bloated self-esteem.

A woman with immoderately low self-esteem (red line) — i.e., a woman who thinks less of her mate value that her hotness would conceivably suggest — will be an easier target than presumed, and who won’t require preternatural reserves of boldness to seduce. These women are a dying breed in America, (bloated self-esteems, along with bloated bodies, are the growing female demographic), but they do exist, and happily enough, they exist in surprisingly disproportionate number among the very hottest women whom men imagine are the least likely to have lower-than-expected sexual-esteems.

Like an information bottleneck in the stock market, the PPP is a sexual market vulnerability which can be exploited by fearless men with insider connections. 9s and 10s (and most 8s) don’t get conspicuously hit on as much as 4s, 5s, 6s, and 7s. Consequently, hot girls tend to harbor stirrings of doubt about their SMV. Their egos (and love lives) hunger for proof of validation, and they gorge on the rare direct attentions of bold men who aren’t afraid of or humbled by their beauty.

There are limits to the PPP exploit. Very low SMV men won’t be able to capitalize on it with the same profitability as moderate SMV men. The sweet spot is a man one to three SMV points lower than the hot girl, and who acts with the prerogative of a man with equal (sex-adjusted) SMV to the hot girl. Male 6s and 7s (as ranked along male-specific measurements of attractiveness) who approach with the bold intention of a male 9 can “shock” a female 9 into aroused curiosity.

Now some of you are wondering, “Don’t hot girls get a lot of leers from admiring men?” Sure, but female self-esteem operates as a more complex feedback system than male self-esteem. A female 9 will receive ten times the number of head snaps from men than will a female 7 (it’s exponential), but she’ll also receive ten times FEWER the number of intentional approaches from men than will the female 7. Women register the glances from afar, but the bold approach is so unmistakable in intention that it counts for more as a self-esteem boosting factor.

Hot women, experiencing a relative paucity of men hitting on them compared to that experienced by mediocre-looking women, tend as a result to carry less ego-stroked baggage. They are more grateful, and more interested, when a man dares to pierce their bubble of hotness. To approach such a beauty as she, why this man must truly be worth her company!

Read Full Post »

Approach Week Roundup: Updated

Approach Week has officially ended. The comments are open again. This is your opportunity to recount in the comments section your favorite approaches from the past week (you did approach during Approach Week, right?). Consider it a teachable moment. The best anecdotes will be added to this post in an update below.

So… now that you’ve approached, how do you feel? Do your testes hang heavier? I’ll tell you one of my approaches. (Some details redacted to evade GPS locators.)

SHIVCALIBUR: Hey there.

Mary’s Little Clam: Wut?

SHIVCALIBUR: I said hi.

Mary’s Little Clam: Oh… hi.

SHIVCALIBUR: Can’t wait for this conversation to heat up.

Mary’s Little Clam: That’s so weird. [she trots off]

OK, that came up a bit short of WINNING. But you know what? It still felt better than doing nothing.

******

Update: Readers submit their approach stories.

Eeyore had a George “the jerk store called” Costanza moment:

Actually said: That’s a pretty name. What do they call you [for short]?

Should have said: What’s that, Spanish for freckles?

Approach Week was not about the perfect opener. It was about approaching. Get over the fear first, then work on improving your delivery.

***

Martin’s approach turned out to be an accidental neg.

Well, I fell short of my goal to get a phone number, but I did learn this is probably a difficult thing to achieve. I approached an asian woman who I would guess was maybe 30 who is a receptionist at the front of a library but she was not working. I asked her if she happened to own any cats because for some reason she looked like a cat person. Well, I felt numb with anxiety as I was asking her this and especially in the pause where I waited for her response but we ended up having a brief conversation and she mentioned she had a boyfriend during the course of it. I suppose it was a subtle cue but maybe not. I have seen her before on many occasions but never talked with her so I guess I did not go up to a random woman I haven’t met before. I am not sure if there was really much of a learning experience that took place. While I don’t think she was terrified or repulsed, I can’t say I got any idea about how to be successful doing this.

A girl will curiously recall “you look like a cat [lady]” a lot more readily than she’ll remember a man asking her about her job.

***

Rick250 gives us his approach.

Hot woman in beginner yoga class i take had a shirt on with an artsy looking nuclear symbol.
I approached her at the end of class where people drink tea, “So your shirt has a radioactive symbol on it. Does that mean i should keep my distance?”

You certainly get points for the approach, but in future I would steer clear of self-denigrating openers like this one. (You have implied she would want you to keep your distance.) A better frame with which to use this opener would be: “Your shirt has a radioactive symbol on it. Are you toxic to men?”

***

stigletz writes,

approached in Edinburgh the other day (I’m from the states)

a tremendously hot girl jay-walked across the street in front of two cops so I walked up with a, “you got a lot of balls for jay-walking in front of two cops like that”

explain how it’s a whole nother offense in Europe, generally

she was giving me that smirk (or perhaps a petrified rictus?) for having the balls to approach but I could tell she was weirded out / overwhelmed

a silence fell over (I was comfortable
enough with this) and she says, ‘why are you still here?’

a haughty shit test. best thing to do was start a new thread and not acknowledge or play it against her (and did I ever fail the ‘you must be drunk for even talking to me’ shit test by that error) but instead I sort of just ‘misinterpreted’ the question and said I was just there from the states trying to get to know Edinburgh

we conversed some more and she hopped on her bus and left. didn’t bother salvaging the number scraps.

I have to say, “why are you still here?” is a tough shit test that most inexperienced betas would fail. You did well. I suggest any man who gets this shit test (or something similar) respond as they would to a child who said the same to them. For example: “Because those are the rules.”

***

Nyan Sandwich confesses,

Did way less approaching than I should have. That said, did more than I would have otherwise.

Went to a club and chatted and danced with cute girls. They seemed to lose interest. It was fun, but then I ran out of mojo and it stopped being fun so I went home.

Made an extra effort to chat up sales girls.

Have to actually start doing daygame yad-stops.

Awkward but improving.

You won’t approach girls unless you set aside a specific block of time or devote a compartment of mental energy to do them. That was the goal of Approach Week… to get you guys into the right head space where inaction could not be rationalized.

***

Troubadour puts his cards on the table.

My Approach Week was weird. I saw four girls worth approaching, but didn’t approach any of them. I have just accepted that unless I catch the right break, approaching girls while I’m working is just too much for me.

I have decided to try a completely different approach to everything. I need to get out during my time off, when I’m not representing any brand other than my own. I really hate going out alone just to try to meet girls, and given a choice between going out alone trying to find girls to meet and staying home with my wife, I have decided to just stay home with my wife 90% of the time. This is getting me nowhere.

So what if I went out with my wife, and tried to meet girls? I’ve been saying I ought to do this, and some of you have said if I actually have the balls to do that, it’s beautiful game.

Well, why the fuck not?

So here in a little bit, I’m going to put the wife in my truck and ride up to see my friend girl. We all know friend girl was just using me for attention, and I’m never going to fuck her, but this will amuse the shit out of me anyway, so I’m going to do it. I’m going to get my wife to stand there with her hand on my cock, stroking my beard, while I totally ignore her and talk to friend girl for the last time. I need closure to get over that stupid obsession, and you never know… Yeah, it’s a desperation play, but WHAT a desperation play!

Girls want what other girls want. Being married only proves my wife hasn’t taken the cash prize yet. I have a woman who will do ANYTHING to keep from being dumped, and I can prove it by making my wife stand there attending to me while I’m actively trying to fuck some other girl. (I don’t have one yet, but she has agreed to wear an “I AM A FAT PIG” t-shirt, and a dog leash. Heh heh heh.)

The last time I got laid on the side, this is actually how it happened. I used to massage that girl’s tits directly in front of my wife, and I fucked her, and then I spent 20 years feeling guilty about nothing, and never cheating again. It’s a fucked up way to get laid, but it worked once. Why won’t it work again?

My wife is fat and plain, so this won’t be as effective as it could be. It may turn out that trying to use a fat wife as social proof doesn’t get me anywhere at all.

I can terminate the experiments at any time. We’re going to see how this goes. I would enjoy having company as I go in search of pussy, and I truly don’t give a shit if she divorces me, so I have everything to gain by trying this.

After we see friend girl, I’m taking her to a titty bar, and making her pay for everything and sit there stroking my beard while I stare up some hot girl’s snatch.

This is my brand of honesty game. I’m just putting all my cards on the table; some good, some not so flattering.

…

Mission accomplished.

My instincts were telling me not to do this the whole way up there, and the closer you get to doing the right thing, the more last minute excuses you find not to do it, so… I did it!

I guess what I really accomplished was shattering the stupid fantasy. I didn’t succeed in communicating my message at all, and everything went over like a lead balloon. Friend girl was freaked the fuck out, and probably scared half to death.

Well, that’s better than believing there’s some extreme wild ass way to get out of the friend zone that only works for me.

I got laid three times tonight. Life could be worse.

No further comment necessary. Editorializing would distract from the brutalist poetry of Troubadour’s rendezvous.

***

The Supreme Gentleman drops “No Fly Zone” game.

Met a cute girl at a party this weekend. When I went to the bathroom, I hatched a great idea. I deliberately left my fly unzipped and sat next to her. The following happened after a few minutes:

Her: um, lulz, your pants are unzipped

Thief of Hearts: (nonchalantly) oh how embarrassing. at least we know where your eyes are at now *devious smirk*

She had a twinkle in her eye and her jaw dropped with a hint of a grin. I left it unzipped for the remainder of the conversation and carried on like Satriales sausage shop wasn’t open for business. I number closed her and I might be taking her out for drinks this week, depending on my schedule.

My cold approaches didn’t have much of a success rate, but this was pretty much the highlight of the week. Something tells me I’m gonna fuck close this chick next time I see her.

By the way, CH, as far as cold approaches go, one thing I’ve always seen in movies is a guy approach a chick at a bar and whisper something into her ear. Sounds kind of corny, but it looks like a good way to initiate touching. I’d like to hear your take on this. What sort of sweet nothings would you whisper into a girl’s ear during a cold approach?

No Fly Zone Game is a great contribution to the seduction literature. As for “Whisper Game”, no doubt it’s powerful, but also limited in application. Most venues, bar or otherwise, are too loud for whispers to register. Then there’s the creep factor; unless the context is just right, and your delivery honed to perfection, you’re liable to receive a retreating head jerk as soon as the first eddies of your hot breath tickle her ears.

Given the inherent limitations, I nevertheless have a nugget of experience using whisper game. Sweet temptings I’ve stitched into the ear lobes of prospective plunders:

“Do you have the time?” This works especially well if you build up to the whisper with a dramatic flourish, as if you’re about to tell her a secret.
“It’s me” or “Don’t turn around.” Then when she swivels to see who it is, affect a shocked look as you exclaim you thought she was someone else. Shrug your shoulders and start a new conversation.
And for the warm post-approaches (pre-known girls): “Now you know what a skipped heartbeat feels like.”

The key with Whisper Game is to approach the ear slowly and deliberately, if you are facing the girl, as if you are expecting nothing less than full compliance. A quick lurch for her aural cavity will startle the prey.

Read Full Post »

Thought Experiment

Commenter jack rips a page from Heartistian dark magic texts and presents his own mischievous thought experiment.

I posed this question to my blue pill friends.

Let’s say you’re going to die tomorrow. (Your wife/gf) doesn’t exist. You can have sex with one girl tonight as a grand finale to your life, but she will be random and the ONLY thing you can choose about her is her age.

Nobody picked an age higher than 19.

I said 16.

The interesting thing about jack’s question is that it left the issue of the woman’s beauty unresolved. If you as a man have no idea how a girl will look, you’ll pick a younger girl because you know that whatever a woman’s looks relative to other women, she herself will never look better (read: more fuckable) than when she’s in her late teens. That’s the way to bet.

The law can come down hard, feminists and their manboob flipfloplickers can howl with indignation, white knights can insist to the contrary while steadfastly ignoring the boner putting the lie to their words, but the biological facts of male desire will go on unchanged and irrevocable.

Now, if the question had been posed with the hypothetical girl’s beauty added as a variable, the answers men give would be different:

“a hot 17 year old”

Read Full Post »

The Difference Between Men And Women In Two Charts

An OkCupid SWPL, Christian Rudder, who is handy with database cross-referencing, is publishing a book soon about findings gleaned from OkCupid luser data. Two graphs in particular, which “disturbed” a DroneFeed editor (do these fruit cups ever let up on the faux outrage?), are, to CH eyes, unsurprising and starkly humorous.

The first is a graph plotting age of the women who ostensibly have active OkCupid accounts against the age of the men who “look best to her”:

male SMV window of attractiveness

As you can see, women have a shifting perception of men’s physical attractiveness that skews older along with women’s increasing age. Cougar glorification agit-prop to the contrary notwithstanding, women are not keen on dating men younger than themselves.

Now we turn to the second graph, which is the same, except with the sexes swapped:

female SMV window of attractiveness

Better humor through simplicity.

Men, no matter what age they are, converge on a female attractiveness ideal. And that ideal is a 20-year-old tart. A college bro and a middle-aged suburban domesticate want to screw the same dewy susie. Oh sure, the older married guy will never admit it in polite aka judgmental company, but you can bet he’s feeling it. Remember that, you older wives. And keep your hubbies away from cheerleader practices and college orientations.

Men have always been simpler to analyze from a sexual market perspective. Female youth+beauty = high fertility, which men dig. Or, more precisely, which men’s genetic directive digs. And, given the option and a guarantee of little or no blowback, most older men would happily and hungrily gnaw at some tender shoots.

Women’s biologically conditioned sexuality is more interesting, because women are attracted to a whole suite of male mate value cues that include but are by no means limited to men’s physical attributes. Social status, wealth, confidence, creativity, and charm are examples of male sexual signaling traits that women love. And, many of these male mating cues don’t fully ripen until later in life. This explains why women can legitimately find older men physically attractive. The women are attracted to a host of age-neutral male traits which they associate with easily perceived cues such as facial looks.

The male span of redeemable sexual attractiveness is, on average, 20 to 30 years longer than the female span of sexual attractiveness. This isn’t to claim that the typical 50-year-old man will arouse the typical 20-year-old woman. But it is accurate to say that that 50-year-old man has a lot more options for love than would his 50-year-old female peer. He can genuinely drive a younger woman to ecstasy, whereas a 25-year-old woman is already starting to sexually bore her man.

Read Full Post »

The Misery Of The Househusband

The CH mailbag received a while back results from an unpublished study that added confirmation to the weight of evidence that househusbands (aka kitchen bitches, sexual egalitarians, plush manlets) have worse sex lives and unhappier wives. Quote from the original CH post:

When men are men and women are women, the sex is more frequent. And probably hotter, too. When men are scalzied manboobs and women are manjawed feminists, the bedroom is an arid wasteland of dashed passion.

Sexual polarity — the primal force that adheres the cosmic cock to the celestial snatch — is the truth of truths that belies every feminist assertion ever made in the history of that insipid, leprotic ideology.

We have to be careful, as we were left with explicit instructions to not reveal the source of the study or the precise study results. But this was too juicy to pass up, so an attempt will be made to paraphrase the important findings without risking confidentiality.

1. A woman’s sexual attraction and general satisfaction increases when her man does “masculine” chores like DIY projects or car repair. Her sexual attraction doesn’t budge when he does “feminine” household chores.

2. Households where men do most of the chores were those most likely to argue frequently about sex.

3. Female breadwinners argue more about finances, household chores *and* sex life. The less money the woman made relative to the man, the fewer arguments and the better her general relationship satisfaction.

4. Equal division of major financial decisions decreased attraction, feelings of love, and general satisfaction in the women, and this decrease was even stronger than the decrease seen when household chores were shared. The more responsibility the men had for financial decision-making, the more sexually and romantically satisfied their spouses/partners.

5. Men were more attracted to women the more the women cooked. So ladies, you can make your man happier by donning the apron and sizzling the bacon he brings home. (Sexist? Yes. Reality? Yes. You’ll just have to resolve your dissonance on your own time.)

6. Across the board, women who are breadwinners are less satisfied with everything.

7. Arguments about chores, money, sex life, and romance were highest in couples where the woman made all or most of the decisions. Female decision-making status was an even stronger determinant of relationship dissatisfaction than female breadwinner status. Women can handle making more money in a relationship, but they despise being the leader in a relationship.

8. Argument frequency decreased among female breadwinners if they were not the primary decision-makers. Lesson for men: You can have a happy relationship with a woman who makes more than you as long as you remain the dominant force in her non-work life. Or: GAME SAVES MARRIAGES.

9. Most dishearteningly for the equalist pissboys, men who do most of the chores in households where the woman is the breadwinner have the highest likelihood of frequent disagreements about chores, sex, and romance. Let that sink in: The more household work you do to compensate for your girlfriend or wife making more money than you, the bitchier she gets!

The source explains why this study has yet to be published:

But now that the findings are there [ed: N is large], they are reluctant to release this to the media. They fear that releasing such findings might create negative press for us instead of positive media attention. Their reluctance annoys me for many reasons, and I really want to get my study published. I have till XXXXXX to come up with a good reason for why they should publish this study. If they do, then my investment bank, a reputable objective third party would be behind this finding. Normally, they have the ability to circulate our studies through dozens of major media outlets (WSJ, NYT, NPR etc). Thus, it would be really helpful to getting this kind of idea into the public consciousness to have the study released through my investment bank.

But right now there are barriers to getting my study released. The marketing head isn’t very comfortable with the findings I gave her. She thinks it isn’t a story at all and doesn’t know how to market it. I want to somehow convince her to go forward with it. Can you help me come up with ideas? Right now, she says I have to “soften” it and come up with an explanation of what investment management people could do about these findings. Those recommended actions would have to be things HR would not frown on.

Another great example of how female-dominated HR retards progress and the pursuit of knowledge. But hey, everybody is kumbaya, so the sacrifice is worth it, right ladies?

Anyhow, a “softening” lede attuned to your particular clients’ sensibilities would be something like, “Financially responsible husbands make happier marriages.” Or, “A division of labor means an addition of love.”

 

Read Full Post »

Before You Say Nonconsensual Sex Isn’t Pleasurable, See These 8 Facts From An Esteemed Sexologist

1. Girls love selfish badboys.

2. Nonconsensual erotic rape fantasies are more common among women than previously thought.

3. Girls love dominant men who take what they want.

4. Girls hate men who do as they’re told.

5. Girls hate sensitive, emotionally available men.

6. Girls love men who take charge.

7. Girls love it when men touch them without asking.

8. Girls love men with “appetitive-aggressive” tendencies.

Read Full Post »

The Sexiest Words Ever Spoken By A Woman

“Do you want to put it in my ass?”

I’ve heard women speak to me a million permutations of sexy invitations and romantic aches, but none hastened my heart, boiled my blood, and coagulated my cock like these nine words sailing over a smooth, prone shoulder and landing ear-ways with a sparrow’s chirp. I wish I could say otherwise; that it was some other, loftier, exclamation of desirous love that etched a permanent shelter in my neural storage locker. But I must stay true to the Chateau Heartiste mission statement and judge a woman’s sexy interlude not by the parched abstraction the superego demands, but by the ignited viscera that livens the id.

Read Full Post »