Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Ugly Truths’ Category

You can tell a lot about what people really value by… eureka!… listening to their conversations.

Women sometimes talk about sex — and they can be surprisingly raunchy recalling or imagining the details of intimate congress — but sex talk is hardly a major focus of their socializing amongst girl friends. Usually, one girl (the token slut) will crack a joke about the shape of the penis she inhaled and the others will collaterally cackle as part of an alliance preserving exercise. The smutcluck is dropped quickly for extended emphasis on subjects nearer and dearer to the female heart: Relationships and love.

(Slutwalk women who stick with the raunch talk for an awkwardly uncomfortable length of conversational air space tend to elicit disapproving glares and then social abandonment from their girl friends. Chicks have a limited capacity for enduring sex talk, even in their female friends.)

When women veer into R&L, as is the frequent wont of their meandering sex, their conversation assumes a VERY SERIOUS TONE.

***

INTERCHANGEABLE GIRL #1: “We’re back together.”

INTERCHANGEABLE GIRL #2: “Oh really! I didn’t know…”

INTERCHANGEABLE GIRL #!: “You didn’t know?”

[twenty  more minutes of delicate social maneuvering before getting to the meat of the topic]

INTERCHANGEABLE GIRL #2: “It’s just that he did this really nice thing and I really love that.”

INTERCHANGEABLE GIRL #1: “mmhmm, yeah that’s sweet.”

INTERCHANGEABLE GIRL #2: “And anyhow I think he tried to say he loves me.”

INTERCHANGEABLE GIRL #1: “He dropped the L word! Wow, that’s big.”

INTERCHANGEABLE GIRL #2: “Yeah, I know!”

[two more hours of hot debate about the precise wording of the boyfriend’s confession and whether it counts as a sincere exclamation of love. tack on another hour of girls #1, 3, and 4 alternately affirming girl #2’s decision to stay with her boyfriend and playing a gentle devil’s advocate for dumping the guy.]

***

Men, in the starkest of contrasts, rarely, if ever, have conversations about R&L. Instead, what do cool dudes talk about when the subject isn’t sports, work or hobbies?

***

ONE OF A KIND COOL DUDE #1: “So what happened last night? I saw you hitting on that hot blonde.”

ALSO ONE OF A KIND COOL DUDE #2: “Dude, I got her back to my place!”

VERILY, ONE OF A KIND COOL DUDE #3: “No shit! Did you tap it?”

ALSO ONE OF A KIND COOL DUDE #2: “Oh man, she was crazy. She was down on my knob, doing this thing…”

[twenty minutes of high fives and rapt attention as excruciatingly crude, detailed account is told of sex positions and composition of female squirt juice.]

NOT SO COOL DUDE #4: “Man, great stuff. Does this mean you’re gonna date her for a while?”

[sound of air being let out of balloon. full-body group cringing and disappointed looks exchanged.]

ONE OF A KIND COOL DUDE #1: “How ’bout those Dodgers?”

***

The examples I presented here are highly illustrative of real life among normal psychologically healthy human beings, but neither presupposes that men never concern themselves with relationships and love, nor that women are never interested in talking about sex. The key difference between the sexes is this:

Women are primarily interested in R&L, and secondarily interested in sex. Men are primarily interested in sex, and secondarily interested in R&L.

To punctuate the point, try to imagine a conversation between men that focused on R&L without any familiar, tension-alleviating digressions into sex talk.

***

BUTTPLAY ENTHUSIAST MANLET #1: “We’re back together. It’s been one month.”

BUTTPLAY ENTHUSIAST MANLET #2: “Aww! Tell me all about it!”

BUTTPLAY ENTHUSIAST MANLET #1: “Wellllll… she’s been really good to me lately.”

BUTTPLAY ENTHUSIAST MANLET #2: “That’s really great.”

BUTTPLAY ENTHUSIAST MANLET #1: “AAAAaaaand… I think she might’ve said she loves me.”

BUTTPLAY ENTHUSIAST MANLET #2: “Wow, that’s huge! How did that come up?”

BUTTPLAY ENTHUSIAST MANLET #1: “I’m not ENTIRELY sure she said the EXACT words ‘i love you’ but it sounded like she was trying to say them.”

BUTTPLAY ENTHUSIAST MANLET #2: “I knew there was something between you two!”

***

Preposterous on the face of it. No straight man has a conversation like this with his buddies, unless he’s auditioning for a part in a Broadway play called “My Colon For Old Fags” or “My Own Private Hide-A-Pole”.

Yes, yes, so many of you are shocked by this news. “Tell us something we don’t know, CH.” But we have entered a cultural dystopia when this common sense is rapidly being distorted and replaced by feminist and manlet poopytalk. Tragically, some of the SJW poopytalk is reaching the ears of impressionable naifs, and setting some of them on a course for self-destruction, especially those whose emotional stability is marginal.

There are CH readers with children. One of these naifs swallowing feminist slut cunt lies by the bucketful could one day be your daughter.

When bitterbitches ape the mannerisms and sociosexual predilections of men, their butthurt try-hardness is a transparent ruse all but the lappiest lapdogs can see through. A girl screeching about “opening her legs for every man BUT YOU” is assuming a twisted, false pride in a domain normally and healthfully reserved for men which she knows, deep inside where the armor of her lies yields to the rumbling growl of her id, is a phony front serving no purpose other than blind rage at the retreating world of a good man’s sincere love leaving her behind.

Case in point: The “dick is abundant and low value” girl I had to disembowel as a lesson for the others. With much pain and sorrow in my heart, I took the shiv to her exposed ego and performed a necessary duty. A duty that perhaps would, one day, somewhere, and in a fashion that social science studies would struggle to capture in their arid data sets, rescue an innocent young woman or young man from living by the lies of a loser in love.

For those still wondering what this is all about, a revelation. Above all, Le Chateau abides the Keats’ ode: “Beauty is truth, truth beauty.” Our glorious, gleaming civilization is getting uglier and further from the truth by the day. A mind full of lies contorts the body into misshapen ugliness. An ugly visage will infect the mind with ego-assuaging lies. Lies must be exposed at birth, or they will grow monstrous and consume everything beautiful in their path. In the wake of lies, ugliness follows like a toxic spindrift.

Therefore, the CH Excalibur… the Holy Heartistian Shiv… drives through the bullshit until the gore stains the hilt, so that beauty and truth may once again assert their rightful place as earthly host to humanity, and the loveless lampreys, despite their worst fears, find to their surprise a new hope for a better life…… or slink away to the icy outback where their limbic disease is quarantined to their own souls.

UPDATE

❤️SCIENCE❤️ presents her rump and accepts a meaty intrusion from yours truly before looking over her shoulder with love in her eyes.

Findings reveal that while communication patterns tend to be supportive and relationship-focused in women’s bathrooms, the graffiti in men’s bathroom walls are replete with sexual content and insults, in the course of the construction of hegemonic masculinity.

H/t commenter Strahlemann. The sex-based difference in predilection for R&L or sex talk is evident even in anonymous bathroom stalls. Chicks scrawl odes to LTRs. Men scratch sonnets to sexual slang.

If you play on Team CH, you bat 1.000. How can you not like those odds?

Read Full Post »

There’s a lot of confusion about the functioning of the sexual market among normally clear-thinking denizens of Realtalkland.

free pizzas will lead to the next wave of MRAs

WOMEN ARE HEARTLESS BITCHES WHO JUST USE ME FOR FREE MEALS, TEACH ME HOW TO PUMP AND DUMP THEM, SENSEI

the thing about beta losers is they have an uncanny knack for finding women who will manipulate them, and they assume this is what all women are like because all the women they get ensnared by do this to them

we’ve all known guys who end up with one crazy or manipulative bitch after another…I always figure this is a mommy issue and when I’ve been able to verify it, it is

All women are capable of exploiting men for emotional and financial provider services. What separates the manipulative woman from the endearing sweetheart is something more than simply differences in innate characteristics: It’s the exploitability of the men they meet and date.

Beta males don’t have an “uncanny knack” for finding manipulative women. What beta male niceguys have is an uncanny lack of astuteness about the nature of women. A niceguy with no game riding a heady romantic idealism into every interaction with women opens himself up to exploitation. The sort of doofus who buys pizza for a chick on Tinder he’s never met in the hopes of sexual favors is… to use a phrase that drives feminist cranks wild with rage… asking for it.

Women love sexy men, and part of being a sexy man is playing the courtship game with enough skill and keenness that you’ll never be mistaken for an anhedonic sucker.

Related: The mainstream media have been reading CH. “Men should play hard to get.” Glad to see the Rude Word of Game is finally penetrating block-like skulls.

Read Full Post »

The UMB (Urban Millennial Bitterbitch) wants you to know she’s a tankgrrl rolling over your male privilege and patriarchal assumptions.

Don’t they know it’s different for men?

Best advice CH could give women like her: Get off this:

Related: Sexual consent is implicit in the marriage contract.

Read Full Post »

This scorched-id ashvomit from a bitter, unattractive androgyne is representative of a lot of spoiled word salad written by emotionally shattered Millennials. It’s featured on the hallowed screen of the Chateau because it encapsulates just about every psychological disorder afflicting the inhabitants of the currently operative mating market.

See if you can spot the try-hard misappropriation of Heartistian ideas in her snarkbark.

My Tinder match decisions had grown more rapid and decisive. Handsome but no bio and all shirtless gym selfies? Dick is abundant and low value. Lists only an Instagram as a bio? Dick is abundant and low value. Quotes Jack Kerouac’s “The only ones for me are the mad ones…” Dick is abundant and low value. Went to Burning Man…twice? Dick is abundant and low value. Member of an improv troop? Dick is abundant and low value.

Technically, she’s right. Dick is abundant (aka sperm is cheap) and, therefore, low value. But if she were to finish her thought — she wouldn’t dare — she’d have to admit that high value dick is scarce, in fact scarcer than is high value pussy, and that her real problem is getting too much attention from loser men and not enough attention from the winner men she wants who aren’t desperate enough to momentarily flatter her self-conception as part of a low investment strategy for an easy lay with a rancid skank.

Dick is abundant and low value. I had gotten my new motto amidst the worst break-up of my life.

Break-ups are especially hard on women when they are the ones getting dumped. Women in their sexual prime are rarely cast off outright. Usually, when a man tires of his girlfriend, he strings her along and starts to check out while keeping his eye open for new possibilities. A man would have to be completely fed up with his girl to dump her cold before having another plate in his cabinet.

Shaken to my core by the degrading insults my ex had hurled at me but also mourning the permanent departure of some poetically good dick,

A frequent semantic ploy of Millennial chicks is their straining to ape the sexual prerogatives inherent to men, or their claiming to do so to an audience of like-minded bitterbitches cheering them on. The urban warrioress wants the world to know she has the sexual appetite of the most promiscuous men, because it infuses her with a false sense of power in the face of personal crisis.

I was spending a day mindlessly refreshing Twitter and reading up on how to spot sociopaths.

Dead giveaway she loves her some sociopath schwing.

Send an unsolicited photo of your lower body in your laundry-day underwear with your hand suggestively but not sexily placed over your semi and not even bothering to crop out your poor cat? Dick is abundant and low value.

If you look weird and have an unfeminine personality, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that the kinds of men contacting you are also weirdos with a poor grasp of of the concept of selling themselves.

Some will read my gleeful rejections on the many faces I encounter on Tinder as evidence of a disturbing uptick in malevolent, anti-male sentiments among single straight women. It is not. It is evidence of us arriving nearer to gender equilibrium where men can no longer happily judge the clear and abundant photos and carefully crafted profiles of women but become incensed when they take the opportunity to do the same.

This paragraph doesn’t make any sense. How does she reject on Tinder faces? With a vigorous clit flick? And how can men no longer judge the clear and abundant online dating photos of women? Are men blind, or just the men who contact her?

It was not always thus.

Painfully bad writing. If it weren’t for the internet, what would all these feminist Austen-wannabes do with their time?

I hoped that the obvious would become clear and that he’d do what I would do when faced with rejection: slink away to a remote cave and hope to find a sudden and merciful death. Instead, he flooded both my email and Facebook page with accusations of egregious superficiality and a sudden change of heart regarding my own attractiveness.

Note the subtle attractiveness-affirming humblebrag. Typical self-contradicting feminist. “I reject your patriarchal beauty standards, forthwith and egregiously. But not before I mention this one guy I rejected who acted like I wasn’t cute when it was so clear to both of us that he did think I was cute when he thought he had a chance.”

And, for all its faults, I still find Tinder delightful. […] No one can address me without my consent, which I can withdraw with an unceremonious “Unmatch” at any time. […] It is a special joy to left-swipe such profiles back into the bowels of Hades from whence they came.

Woman with low SMV imagines that a technology particularly suited to the insta-courtship, low investment preference of fly-by-night men is somehow a blow for female sexual empowerment.

When Tinder matches occurred, these men stormed into our messages with all the social grace of Steve fucking Urkel but none of his endearing sincerity with appeals like, “Sexy dress. Hook up?”

Men give women what they think women deserve. If you look like a good-to-go slut and you have a Tinder profile, most men will think you deserve little more than a dick pic.

They wore jerseys for teams that suck.

She’s got to pare down her 463-bullet point checklist by at least 462 bullet points.

And almost every last goddamn one of them found their whiskey habit absolutely fascinating.

Fascinating enough that she remembered them and wrote about them.

When these tactics repeatedly failed them,

Did the tactics fail them? This chick seems to have no comprehension of the appeal to men of the low investment, mass mailing seduction strategy. If 1 out of 100 drive-by “hey baby” Tinder come-ons work, that’s a roaring success considering the few seconds of effort it requires to put the plan in motion.

It would be sad that they inadvertently admitted that they actually just have no game if there wasn’t such a spiteful sense of entitlement in such sentiments.

Chicks dig entitled men.

Bless their blue-balled little hearts.

Alert: Unloved harridan enjoys visualizing herself in the role of temptress heartbreaker.

Meanwhile, a substantial number of other men guessed that women using Tinder might enjoy wild romantic gestures like using punctuation in sentences instead of winky faces, or asking which trains we lived off of to pick mutually convenient meeting places, or bringing their own condoms because safety is everyone’s responsibility. These men who care more about women’s realities than their own fantasies are the ones who still actually get laid on Tinder.

She’s yet to form a lasting bond with this kind of man. Mysteries of the universe.

While some women only use Tinder to seek long-term relationships, the assertion truth is that many of us are actively trying to find no-strings attached sex and even more are at least open to the possibility of it on an initial meeting.

Slut wants NSA sex, shocked to discover men who want same thing aren’t Prince Charming.

It is understandably non-negotiable for many women that this meeting take place in public because the law does not look kindly on us if we are assaulted after showing up at a new man’s home nor is it any kinder to women who welcome new men into theirs.

rapesthatwillneverhappen.txt

I am one of many women who has upgraded these initial encounters into sex and have grow increasingly skilled at selecting for only the most exceptional sex with every swipe.

David Fatrelle smiled knowingly.

One guy was 20 minutes late to our museum date and it turned out it was actually closed so we went to Ikea for our date instead. Ikea where love goes to die! Ikea. I carried his clunky-ass light fixtures across an industrial part of town in August heat wearing skinny jeans and still let him see me naked that day.

Well, that’s the kind of thing desperate LSMV women who love entitled jerks do.

I halfway had sex with an investment banker who insisted on bringing his shitty little dog into my pristine cat’s lair.

What you are witnessing is the raw, uncensored id of a loveless and unloveable shrike having a mental breakdown online as she recollects with exquisite detail and simmering rage all the badboys who dumped her after they squared away a few jackhammer sessions with her shredded snatch before moving on to less crazy pastures.

The truth is,

Autonomic female verbal tic meaning “the truth is not”.

sluts like me are everywhere on Tinder but we aren’t impressed by men who are positively beleaguered by the prospect of having to put effort into getting laid,

Funny, if you aren’t impressed by these men, why did you fuck so many of them that you were able to recall and write up a compendium of them as part of your mental health rehabilitation?

nor do we like it when they mock the boundaries of our girlfriends who want to use Tinder only for traditional dating.

Strange non sequitur. I’ll leave it as a challenge for the readers to parse its hidden meaning. My guess: She’s been used a few too many times by men as a pivot to score with her hotter girl friends.

But I’ve found enough value on Tinder to keep going, swiping and unmatching bad profiles out of my life at the first sign of unreasonable expectations.

Power Swiper. With any luck, Tinder will still be around when she’s really old (and not just old-looking), and she can assuage her butthurt spinsterhood by swiping away randos who love her as much as they love the other 100,000 Tinder ladies they’ve gallantly wooed.

Their corner of Tinder is a dark place, dense with hapless souls who didn’t realize that the centuries-long period of dick overvaluation is over.

Yet there she is, in the dark place with these hapless souls. So that makes her…?

The writer — and I use the term loosely — of this soul-scarred confessional is Alana Massey. You can follow her on Twatter here.

Esteemed winner of the CH Attention Whore of the Month award:

29-year old Millennial, or 50-year-old meth addict? If she’s the slut she says she is, she’s a great PSA for women to lay off the cock carousel.

(My shiv needs sharpening after this carving.)

Read Full Post »

Reader walawala points out that one of the men approached for sex by a feminist humorist (contradiction in terms noted) in the “social experiment” video set forth as proof that men are 30% more interested in casual sex than are women had, himself, some serviceable game, which he used on his phony solicitor to amusing effect.

This is what prostitutes do…also she sounds insincere…I’d be creeped out. What this does show is the power of game.

Check out how the third [ed: fourth] guy in the Paul Bunyan shirt starts gaming her: “That’s a very weird proposition…” and flips the script so she’s now qualifying herself.

He appears at 1:10.

I can’t make out what she says to him after he says “and that’s very strange”, but it does sound by the tone of her voice that she is qualifying herself to him. Also notice that she drops her arms down to her sides, which indicates an openness to further conversation, unlike the repulsing crossed-arm pose she maintained with a lot of the men.

So yes, game can work on women, even when those women are feminist agitators on a mission of attention whoring.

The whole spectacle does raise an interesting (if unrealistic) game-centered thought experiment. What would you do if a bangable female stranger walked up to you and solicited you for sex? I mean, no fluff, no guff, just a straight-up proposition out of the gate?

If the girl was truly interested in sex — I have been cold approached a few times in my life by girls saying they wanted sex, once I translated their womanese into recognizable English (e.g., “do you want to leave and have a drink at your place?” –> “do you want to go to your place to fuck?”) — and her query was absolutely sincere (easy to tell), then the only game you need is “sure”, (if that). The less you say, the better, because more words can only increase the chance of jarring her out of her already maximally horny mood. KISS. Keep It Succinct, Stupid.

But, assuming that any girl who cold-twats you is a prankster having some fun, then you’ll need some game if you want a shot at turning her clown act into a love pact.

I can think of three charismatic responses that are better than the groinotypical replies most men would knee-jerk fall back on:

1. Call her bluff.

The black guy right at the beginning of the video goes direct on her (how about that? a black guy dispensing with the subtler arts of seduction!), and peppers it with a strong dose of Agree&Amplify. Go over the top. “Yeah, let’s go. Wait’ll you experience the pleasure of my ribbed condoms. By the way, do I have to stay the full night?” Why does calling her bluff work? It communicates all the right mate cues: “Here’s a man who must be accustomed to women’s sexual favors if he so boldly takes me at my whorish word.”

2. Disqualify her.

This is Paul Bunyan shirt guy’s preferred angle of parry. The advantage of initiating with DQ game is its shock value. That temptress will be thrown on her wobbly heels wondering if she has BO or something.

3. Amuse yourself.

To be flank, I think the Asian-ish guy (appearing at 1:24 in the video) has the best game for this weird situation. “Let me get some gatorade first”, spoken in a measured, steady cadence, anchored (presumably) by a dead-pan expression. Think about it… if you suspect a girl is fucking with you, wouldn’t you want to let her know you’re in on it? Have some fun, turn it around on her, and if she laughs (which she did), you might just make her rethink her reason for approaching you.

Whatever you do, DON’T say “R u srs?” That’s the kind of unconscious blurt that beta males find a comfy verbal fit. When you answer a girl’s sexual interest with “are you serious?” all you’re doing is influencing her perception of you in a negative direction. She’ll think you’re the kind of man who doesn’t get much action if he reflexively assumes a girl coming onto him is a cosmic impossibility.

One other take-home lesson from this video: Very few men have game. I’d put the number at three out of one hundred. With those odds, it’s no wonder game packs more punch per minute of conversation than any other male mate value attribute.

UPDATE

Commenter theasdgamer whips out the heavy semantic artillery and provides a very funny reply to a theoretical girl soliciting him for sex,

Maybe…do you do anal?

It is required.

Read Full Post »

PA drives the shank into the flanks of both bitter feminists and white knight game-haters.

CH, he’s right. Hang it up and delete all your game posts. As any woman can tell you, real men don’t need game. Just be attractive and don’t be unattractive.

I help coach a youth league. Think I’m gonna stop teaching these kids any techniques and just tell them to be awesome and the W column will take care of itself.

Heh. For that matter, since it’s all predetermined and outside personal control, why bother with schooling? Just pop out enough kids who will grow up to pay the government levy, and the economy will hum along without the dead weight of teaching the three Rs.

Anyone get the sense that the reason bitter cunts and indignant tradcons hate game is because they secretly believe it works and don’t like the thought that women can be actively seduced into love? Or maybe they find the whole idea of working at something and achieving goals irritating, because it introduces the notion that those who don’t work at something can be harshly judged for falling short of universal ideals.

***

Gotta hand a SOTW runner-up award to GBFM, whose lifted shiv gleams with pregnant possibility against the bright blue sky.

After da GBFM got dones with her, Sheryll Sandberg wrote, “I say in the book, date the bad boys, date the crazy boys who don’t fall off the treadmill, but do not marry them. Marry the boys who are going to change half of the diapers until dey fallz offf lzozozozzzol.”

Sandberg did say that, in so many words. I wonder how Dave Goldberg felt when he read those words his wife wrote? Like he was second- or third-rate betaboy, diaper-changing material? I’m sure he sucked it up and put on a happy face, like an obedient male feminist would.

Read Full Post »

Recalling that feminist “””social experiment””” video which triggered millions of androgynous Millennials to ecstatic retweeting, commenter “anonymous” hit upon the primary design flaw which renders the feminist-friendly result absolutely worthless:

Experimenter bias

In social science, especially in an experiment like this, the experimenter interacting with subjects should be blind to the hypothesis being tested.

The 1989 Clark and Hatfield study mentioned in the page linked to had it right. Asking a random sample of unwitting subjects to proposition other random subjects of the opposite sex. 70 percent seems about right to me with that methodology.

With what was done in this video, the experimenter can give all kinds of subtle cues pushing the guys to give the answer they want. In addition they can exhibit selection bias- choosing guys that seem likely to give the answer they want. You should notice there were more yes answers in the beginning and more no answers later. She gradually got better at getting the answer she wanted later. (The video seemed to be in chronological order). I skipped around and didn’t watch the whole thing, but I also noticed a larger proportion of guys saying they were gay (or that came across as really obviously gay without saying it) than exist in the general population. To me that is a red flag as to the biases (either conscious or not) of those making the video. By the way the real proportion of gays is between 2 and 3 percent; the 10% number that gets repeated a lot is bullshit.

In a nutshell, if they wanted an answer of 0/100 or an answer of 100/100 she (and the people working with her) could “discover” whatever they wanted to discover. It’s not science with this methodology.

She looks good by the way. I would sleep with her. As a woman of course that’s the only thing she’s here on this planet for. Just a reminder

There were, in fact, multiple biases at work in that “girl asks men for sex” femcunt troll job, but experimenter bias is… as a mewling ankle-biter might say… the most “problematic”. Read the CH commenters to learn which other biases corrupted the 30% result.

(Another problem with the experiment design was what I call the “incredulity factor”. The girl gradually learned to deliberately hit on the kinds of men who are least likely to garner the attention of young attractive women, and these men probably surmised as a result that she was part of an underage solicitation sting operation, or she was taking the piss with them.)

Men and women are so completely different in the realm of sexual psychology that it’s not much of a surprise to discover that some men, when openly propositioned by a semi-cute stranger, will immediately doubt her motives. The real surprise is how many men are willing to cast aside their rational doubts and throw caution to the wind; that’s a powerful demonstration of a serious sex difference in predilection for the pleasures of casual sex; men are simply wired to want it, and to avail themselves of it, far more often and with more intensity than are women. But of course, your grandma would be able to tell you this without a stack of social science studies to back her up.

It won’t be long before we’ll have to amend that last clause to specify “great-grandma”, with the way this country is accelerating past timeless truths.

Update #2

Commenter Wake makes some good points.

Her approach induces a mass raising of red flags, it’s sooooo fake. Her body language is not that of a horny chick, quite the contrary (look for crossed arms, backward leaning, etc): it oozes revulsion. Her voice tonality is also incongruent with the message. No sane woman proposes directly and that fast (compare how often did your fuckbuddy/girlfriend /wife do that?). A horny girl would compliment first, chit chat for a minute at least and then would propose to look for an intimate location with a BS pretext, the subject of sex would at best be alluded to.

Most of the men refusing her offer could tell she was insincere. The 30% figure is thus looking like an incredibly high number of positive responses given all the negative body language signals she was sending out.

But, feminists gonna feminist, like shit gonna stink.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,240 other followers

%d bloggers like this: