Thot Of The Day

The plastic surgery industry wouldn’t exist if there wasn’t an objective standard of beauty.

Think about it.

Read Full Post »

Best Merkel Meme

h/t cortesar:

Read Full Post »

Chicks Dig Criminals: The Study

This study was published in 2014, so maybe it’s already been discussed at the Chateau, but if it hasn’t this post will rectify that oversight. (If it has, it’s worth revisiting.)

Criminal offending as part of an alternative reproductive strategy: investigating evolutionary hypotheses using Swedish total population data

Criminality is highly costly to victims and their relatives, but often also to offenders. From an evolutionary viewpoint, criminal behavior may persist despite adverse consequences by providing offenders with fitness benefits as part of a successful alternative mating strategy. Specifically, criminal behavior may have evolved as a reproductive strategy based on low parental investment reflected in low commitment in reproductive relationships. We linked data from nationwide total population registers in Sweden to test if criminality is associated with reproductive success. Further, we used several different measures related to monogamy to determine the relation between criminal behavior and alternative mating tactics. Convicted criminal offenders had more children than individuals never convicted of a criminal offense.

DANGER AHEAD

Criminal offenders also had more reproductive partners, were less often married, more likely to get remarried if ever married,

Because of criminal jerkboy impulsiveness, or because criminal jerkboys have more women begging them for marriage?

and had more often contracted a sexually transmitted disease than non-offenders. Importantly, the increased reproductive success of criminals was explained by a fertility increase from having children with several different partners.

So criminal jerkboys have to prove themselves worthy of more women’s pussies than do law-abiding betaboys, and it appears the criminal jerkboys have won that pussy-approval contest.

We conclude that criminality appears to be adaptive in a contemporary industrialized country, and that this association can be explained by antisocial behavior being part of an adaptive alternative reproductive strategy.

The killer line, right there. (heh)

Basically, what this research has rediscovered:

Hard men create good times.
Good times create weak men.
Weak men create hard times.
Hard times create hard men.

Why does the industrialized modern gynarchy improve the reproductive fitness of criminal jerkboys? An old CH post based on nothing but a clear-eyed LAYman’s view from the dating trenches offered an explanation: compassion creates more cads.

Bleeding heart compassion has cursed blessed the country with layers of safety nets that subvert the natural cleansing of losers from contributing to the next generation. The result of all this government largesse is the substitution of handouts for husbands. When provider males who are predisposed to marry and support a family are worth less on the market than they used to be they are slowly replaced by playboys taking advantage of the sexual climate. Women who have their security needs met by Big Government (in combination with their own economic empowerment) begin to favor their desire for sexy, noncommital alpha males at the expense of their attraction for men who will foot the bills.

Prediction: As women’s financial status rises to levels at or above the available men in their social sphere, they will have great difficulty finding an acceptable long-term partner. The men, for their part, will turn away from emphasizing their ability to provide as they discover their mediocre-paying corporate jobs are no longer effective displays of mating value. They will instead emphasize the skills of “personality dominance”.

Sex skew plays a role as well. If the natural culling of expendable men — from fetal development onward — is thwarted by human intervention and technological hazard mitigation, then perishable women have more sexual market options, which can mean that criminal cads offering something different and exciting from among the masses of mediocre betas find their star rising with economically independent women. Men navigating an unfavorable mate market saturated with male competition that concomitantly devalues beta provider traits will be under immense pressure to emphasize a caddish attitude toward women and a charming, physical presence over a dependable, agreeable personality.

Of course, mass Dirt World open borders immigration of primarily reproductive-aged swarths will exacerbate an already stressed and fracturing sexual market in the West. Women will begin to appreciate the very special charms of the native criminal jerkboy when waves upon waves of foreign jerkboys are crashing her homeland’s shores and pissing in her brunchtime mimosa.

Not that me telling you this will change anything, but I at least get the pleasure of saying I told ya so when the fires lick the gates of our encircled ruling class.

Read Full Post »

Corpulence And Consequences, Part Two

A fat chick was fat-shamed on the internet, but a national scandal was avoided when her boyfriend defended her honor and in return thousands of social media Likes fell upon the lovebirds like high glycemic index manna from heaven.

Boyfriend Restores Faith In Humanity With His Response To Someone Calling His Girlfriend “Fat”

HIS RESPONSE RESTORED FAITH IN HUMANITY
HIS RESPONSE REVIVED HUMAN BEASTS
HIS RESPONSE REVVED MANATEE TITTIES
HIS RESPONSE RUBBED HOS WITH CLIT-WILLIES
HIS NARCOTIC WORD ROD TROD HALF-WIT BLOBS WITH BROKEN HEARTS

Whenever you read a formulation of “just wait until you read his response”, slip into your biohazard suit because you’re about to be splooged by toxic shitlibbery.

The Fat Girl:

And here comes the PUNCHline….the chivalrous boyfriend:

The funniest outtake from this happy pill sap story leaking out of femmeland was this:

Following this, Tre also became the victim of online hate when he was asked if he had “lost a bet”.

😆 Ok, no but really this was the funniest part:

I believe this young black man is sincere.

The cathartic release all those reality-escaping libfruits have been waiting for:

People from all over the world decided to share their views on the controversial goings on, including Bill Clinton’s daughter, Chelsea Clinton. Madison’s tweet was retweeted more than 43,000 times and liked more than 224,000 times.

Tre’s love and support for his girlfriend was retweeted more than 33,000 times and gained more than 64,000 likes.

The couple even went on to feature in People magazine, where their story was published in newspapers and magazines in England, France, Italy, and all the way in Australia – not forgetting the coverage they received in the U.S.

Ahhhhhh, now doesn’t that feel better, losers? A troll cracked the fuggernaut fantasy facade for a brief shining moment when she reminded the corpulence collective that fat chicks are gross and doomed to rake the mud pits of the sexual market to relieve their existential loneliness, and the glimpse of reality sent the fat acceptance fupa frottage crowd into a rage denial spiral so combustible they shared a mass catharsis over an ungrammatical shit-tier tweet brimming with the moloko plus of empty bromides.

“Your not fat baby. Your perfect. PS GO AWAY I’M BATIN'”

Unsurprisingly, bugwoman nothingburger Chelsea Hubble retweeted Tre’s panegyric to his pachyderm. This horse-choppered spawn of thecunt is headed for great things, I tell ya.

PS What we are witnessing is the rapid evolutionary split of White America into two racial classes, the El-Aloi (pure White and jewish-hybrid globorace) and the Mudlocks (LSMV fat White chicks slapping a saggital-headed horde of mystery meatballs from the comfort of their Walmart cruisers). Some argue this is best for the White race, because a culling of the dregs further purifies and focuses the minds of the milky cream at the top. I disagree. Allowing and even celebrating the racial jettisoning of our worst kin instead of resisting the broken society that encourages their defiant retreat into depravity will have upstream effects that will reverberate for generations, infecting every member of the race from bottom to top.

The best solution is ending the female obesity epidemic so that a vast blight-wing enstupidation doesn’t take hold in our homeland and despoil the natural beauty. Maybe the day will come when we have no choice but to sever ties with our unlucky kin and kith, but for now there’s still time left to ennoble our worst to aspire to something better. But it won’t happen if our currently operative noblesse malice isn’t replaced soon by a return to noblesse oblige.

Read Full Post »

Women Become More Promiscuous In Relationships, Men Become Less Promiscuous

A curious finding is buried in this tour de force article recapitulating the wealth of scientific evidence for the huge sex difference in willingness to have sex with a stranger.

Over the last few decades almost all research studies have found that men are much more eager for casual sex than women are (Oliver & Hyde, 1993; Petersen & Hyde, 2010). This is especially true when it comes to desires for short-term mating with many different sexual partners (Schmitt et al., 2003), and is even more true for wanting to have sex with complete and total strangers (Tappé et al., 2013).

In a classic social psychological experiment from the 1980s, Clark and Hatfield (1989) put the idea of there being sex differences in consenting to sex with strangers to a real life test. They had experimental confederates approach college students across various campuses and ask “I’ve been noticing you around campus, I find you to be very attractive, would you go to bed with me tonight?” Around 75 percent of men agreed to have sex with a complete stranger, whereas no women (0 percent) agreed to sex with a complete stranger. In terms of effect size, this is one of the largest sex differences ever discovered in psychological science (Hyde, 2005).

Twenty years later, Hald and Høgh-Olesen (2010) largely replicated these findings in Denmark, with 59 percent of single men and 0 percent of single women agreeing to a stranger’s proposition, “Would you go to bed with me?” Interestingly, they also asked participants who were already in relationships, finding 18 percent of men and 4 percent of women currently in a relationship responded positively to the request.

Did you catch the glint of that sparkly truthgem? On the question of having sex with a stranger, the percentage of men willing to do so dropped from 75% if they were single to 18% if they were already in relationships…..while the percentage of women willing to fuck a stranger rose from o% if they were single to 4% if they were in relationships.

Welly well, isn’t that interesting. Alpha fux, beta bux in existential play?

Of course, 4% isn’t a big number. However, it is a big number when it leaps past 0%. It’s an even bigger number in a man’s calculations when her dirty deed, or thought thereof, is executed within the comfy cozy confines of a relationship under the presumption of her monogamous faithfulness. How strange that a woman would be slightly more open to stranger sex if she’s already in a relationship with a familiar betaboy than if she’s swingin’ single!

How strange….to anyone who hasn’t had a stay at the Chateau.

As we Illubricati know, the alpha sheen can and often does wear off a taken man. What was once a dominant and sexy new lover to a woman de-sexualizes into a submissive long-term beta bootlicker. Sad! And when that happens, his lady will start to entertain salacious notions of concupiscent cuckoldry. She’ll look at her primary investor, consciously thank him for his dependable omnipresence while subconsciously resenting his lost aura of mystery, and allow herself sensual dreamy drifts into fantasies of fucking the next stranger from afar who cock struts into her rearview, perhaps comforted in the knowledge that any illicit issuance of her tryst would remain undisclosed to her duped day lover.

So if you don’t want to be a victim of the 4%, learn Game. It’ll do your LTR or marriage good.

Maybe just as intriguingly, men become less — a lot less — promiscuous (i.e., willing to have sex with a stranger) when they are in relationships. The vast majority of single men would funbang an average-to-hot girl they had just met, but that percentage drops to a mere 18% of taken men.

So men become more moral once they commit to a woman, and women become less moral once they commit to a man.

Why? One reason: men in relationships fear losing their lovers. A complacency, anhedonic complementarity, and kneejerk gratitude settles in (aka betatization) and robs a man of feelings of masculine sexual worth, until he stops believing he can get a girl as good to him as his current girl is to him. So his big fear is a breakup followed by what he imagines will be years of incel. This fear instigates a cravenness in his behavior and attitude that only further dispirits his woman, who wonders where the heat went.

Another reason: Men in relationships are getting a steady supply of sex they never had when they were single, given that definitionally most men are betas whose single lives are dreary sexless landscapes punctuated by occasional flowerings of welcoming furrow, which are finally notarized into semi-regularity with the signing of the nuptial prison terms. So men in relationships are simply unwilling to risk losing access to that comparatively turgid sex stream, hence the drop from 75% to 18% in willingness to indulge their natural male desire.

A third possibility: Men really are more moral than are women, and this would explain why a huge number of them would deny their God-given male inclinations in order to fulfill the moral obligations tacitly understood to be essential to a monogamous relationship. Women otoh appear to lose whatever moral compass they brought with them to a relationship. Oopsie, sexy stranger’s fault!

Now, men are still men and not women, so the big sex differences in desire for casual NSA sex remain whether in or out of relationships. On the subject of openness to stranger sex, 18% of taken men is still far more than 4% of taken women, but the relevant variable is the intra-sex difference in willingness to eat, pray, stray. Men are horndogs, but women can rest a little knowing that once they’ve cornered a man and removed him from the market he’s basically a neutered pup compared to what he was before she snagged him. Men though have to worry a little bit more once they’ve locked a woman down, because…and this is a maxim somewhere in the CH archives I’m sure…the pussy lockdown is illusory. It doesn’t exist, except by the will of the woman and the Game of the man.

If women are slightly more willing to step out with a stranger when they are in a relationship, within which all the risk of discovery and moral approbation are arrayed against her, as opposed to sexing a stranger when they are single and morally unchained and free of the risk of blowing up an LTR or marriage…..then that should strike at least a shiver of fear in any man who thinks the dotted line secures his honor and his progeny.

Finally, a result that confirms a core CH tenet:

In a French replication attempt, Guéguen (2011) had experimental confederates of various levels of physical attractiveness actually approach real-life strangers and ask if they would have sex. He found 83 percent of men agreed to have sex with a highly attractive woman, whereas only 3 percent of women agreed to have sex with a highly attractive man. Among confederates of average attractiveness, 60 percent of men agreed to sex with a woman of average attractiveness, but no woman (0 percent) agreed to sex with a man of average attractiveness.

The takeaway here is that very good-looking men don’t have a huge sexual market advantage over average-looking men, but they do have some advantage, mostly in short term mating scenarios. No one of sane mind would argue otherwise, however it does prove (again) that male looks aren’t as crucial to men’s romantic success as female looks are to women’s romantic success. If you happen to be in the top 5% of male looks, congrats, you bumped your chance of casual sex with a random woman you just met from 0% to 3%. Unfortunately for the no-Game-having Drabios, women are holistic mate assessors and require a lot more convincing than that provided by a megawatt smile and biceps. The calculus is the same for men of average looks or good looks: to bed more women, and higher quality women, you’ll need a personality. A charismatic man of average looks will run labia rings around dull pretty boys.

Read Full Post »

Is This The Reason Men Adore Virgins (And Abhor Skanks)?

The greatest disconnect between whom a man claims to love and whom he really loves is that produced when asking him his thoughts on the superiority of the virgin bride. You’ll hear variations of the following from him:

“Hey man, I don’t care who’s she’s slept with as long as I’m her last dick.”

“Nah don’t matter, as long as she’s spreading for me.”

“How can I ask a girl to be a virgin when I have so many notch counts?”

“I want an experienced woman, not a dead fish.”

“What’s the diff? Pussy is pussy.”

These are all male hamster rationalization droppings, intended to conceal a deep truth that most men are uncomfortable revealing to themselves, let alone to any women they’re sizing up for long-term commitment. Men prefer virgins, and the preference is universal. The gynarchic West may have made it inconvenient to satisfy that male preference, or to even announce that preference out loud without threat of job loss and social pariah status, but that doesn’t mean the preference has been abolished. The primal code isn’t trifled with.

The CH explanation for this innate male preference to be the sole pumper of a virgin (and the numberless dumper of a slut) has been to invoke the paternity certainty clause: Men don’t get pregnant and bear children, so they have to be sure the women they choose to make honest are the sort to stay sexually faithful and guarantee any children of their unions are in fact fused tissues of their own seed.

And ¡SCIENCE! has been bearing this maxim out: Slutty women are a bad bet for marriage. The likelihood of marital disruption is greater if you have hitched your sunk opportunity costs and roughhoused wallet to a veteran cock carousel rider. Cheating is a surefire way to disrupt marital harmony.

Over eons of mutually co-evolving love and romance and righteous dickings, the virgin bride was prized by men (and prized as a condition to retain by women) because men could be near-certain that a child with a virgin would be his (and virgin women could be as nearly certain the love of an alpha male was theirs). Bedding down in legal limbo with a slut whose snatch has scarfed up a scud missile’s length of schlong is asking for a cucked effacing, a divorce raping, or a dignity scraping. The slut may put out sooner, but she’ll make you pay for it later.

Tantalizingly, ¡SCIENCE! may have stumbled on another, related, reason to explain why men prefer virgins.

Male Microchimerism in the Human Female Brain

In humans, naturally acquired microchimerism has been observed in many tissues and organs. Fetal microchimerism, however, has not been investigated in the human brain. Microchimerism of fetal as well as maternal origin has recently been reported in the mouse brain. In this study, we quantified male DNA in the human female brain as a marker for microchimerism of fetal origin (i.e. acquisition of male DNA by a woman while bearing a male fetus). Targeting the Y-chromosome-specific DYS14 gene, we performed real-time quantitative PCR in autopsied brain from women without clinical or pathologic evidence of neurologic disease (n = 26), or women who had Alzheimer’s disease (n = 33). We report that 63% of the females (37 of 59) tested harbored male microchimerism in the brain. Male microchimerism was present in multiple brain regions. Results also suggested lower prevalence (p = 0.03) and concentration (p = 0.06) of male microchimerism in the brains of women with Alzheimer’s disease than the brains of women without neurologic disease. In conclusion, male microchimerism is frequent and widely distributed in the human female brain.

63% of women tested had male DNA in their brains. The primary culprit in this study appears to be male fetuses, but prior studies have found male DNA infusion from other sources, and though it’s speculative at this point the possibility exists that one source of male microchimerism is sexual intercourse.

In conclusion, data suggest that male microchimerism in young girls may originate from an older brother either full born or from a discontinued pregnancy or from transfusion during pregnancy. We speculate that sexual intercourse may be important but other sources of male cells likely exist in young girls.

If sex implants tiny cargo holds of male DNA into a woman’s body — a big if at this stage of research — then it’s plausible that the male preference for virgins ensues from a subconscious desire of men to avoid having children with a skank whose vagina has hosted a spunk parade that could festoon his precious DNA-carrying vessel with the spermtastic spangles of past dangles.

The gbfm summary:

lotsa cockas, bastard totsas.

***

FYI chimerism is one of the leading theories to explain the persistence of low levels of homosexuality despite the huge reproductive hit the condition incurs in those afflicted (pathogens and genetic susceptibility are the other contending theories). The chimerism theory states that early in pregnancy the winning fetus absorbs genetic material from the losing fetus (which is never born), and in some cases this will mean female fetus DNA embeds in the male fetus’s brain, somehow altering the sexual orientation of his brain architecture. Just putting it out there.

Read Full Post »

Sad CNN Today, Demographic Obliteration Tomorrow

Yesterday, an Emmanuel Maricon-like cipher named Jon Ossoff lost to an uninspiring establishment Recucklican in the 6th District of Georgia. The Democreeps are now 0-for-4 in special elections since Trumperica dawned.

The DNC and energized shitlibs across the country had poured a record amount of money into Ossoff’s campaign, only to see it flushed away, a massive loss that would have made ¡Jeb!’s donors wince with pain. But the Gaystream Media (including cucksidiaries like National Review) was up today spinning the loss as a moral victory for their NeverTrump side. More on that below.

In the meantime, enjoy this freeze frame of CNN leftoids once again shocked and saddened after news broke of the defeat of one of their own.

😆

Left to right:

• just remembered he forgot to remove his buttplug
• is daydreaming of a refugee fucking her out of this dreary reality
• farting on the inside
• PTSD thousand yard stare

I love the sight of Democreep stunned faces in the morning!

Handel (the GOP candidate) won GA-6 by a smaller margin than did Romney. As I wrote above, the post-shame analysis by the Gaystream Media and the Democreep Party (redundant) is spinning Ossoff’s loss as a win for Dems going forward, and as a “demoralizing” (their word) loss for Republicans, given that the GOP had to sweat out eking a win in what was once a secure House seat. From this, the MSMDNC assassin-provoking collective is arguing that Ossoff’s near-win (not really that near, but close enough for shill work) is proof that Trump is hurting down-ballet GOP candidates, and the people are RISING UP against Orange Hitler’s reich.

Don’t believe a word of their lies. It’s all distilled skypeological projection and catharsis for their ashkepathic hamsters. The only people demoralized and fearful today are Democreeps and their media message crafters — eight months of spewing the most hateful vitriol against Trump, of inciting hysteria to rally the emotionally needy shitlib troops, of one mass pussygrab catlady protest after another, and of a massive unprecedented Creep State witch hunt against the Trump administration….and all the Dems have to show for it are zero….ZERO….wins in the four elections since Trump ascended the throne.

The skypes who currently control the horizontal and the vertical are mewling impotently and with their usual forked tongues about the Ossoff “referendum on Trump”, but their faces and transparently try-hard and agitated rhetoric betray their secret pain. However you frame it, this was a blow to libfruit, inc.

Having indulged our happy sadism at the expense of ululating shitlibs, it’s time to grapple with a reality that will hearten Dems and their controlled opposition cucked-out gluttons for pain:

Demographics.

Ossoff didn’t come sort of close to beating Handel in GA-6 because of demoralized Republican voters, or anti-Trump backlash, or the fruitcup resistance, or anything along those lines. Ossoff came close because of the demographic change in that district’s racial composition.

But demographic changes are brewing. Growing minority communities and transplants from other regions have made Atlanta’s suburbs increasingly competitive for Democrats. Georgia’s sixth congressional district, the location for April’s special election, exemplifies changes common in booming southern cities like Atlanta, Charlotte and Nashville.

The district was about 80 percent white at the turn of the century. But since then, the black share of the population has grown from 10 percent to 13 percent, the Hispanic share has doubled to 12.5 percent and Asian representation doubled to more than 10 percent

About a fifth of the district is now foreign born – twice the statewide average, according to census data.

The real story in this election, as in all elections since the Hart-Celler Treason Against Heritage America Act was passed fifty years ago, and in all the elections to come if something isn’t done to alter the course the country is headed, is a simple one: Demography is Destiny. Or Doom, from the perspective of the dispossessed native stock Whites.

If you could only take two lessons to heart from what has transpired over the past couple of years leading up to Trump’s amazing coup against the corrupt ruling elite, it would have to be these two:

1. The long-term, permanent solution to the crisis of journalism posed by an entrenched Gaystream Media (GSM) that routinely lies and manipulates news in service to the DNC and the Globohomo Bathhouse Alliance is a mass culling of leftoids from GSM ranks. That’s it. Nothing else will work. The media is something like 90+% leftoid, and the results of that horrible ideological skew can be read any day in a major metro newspaper. Given that ideology is partly heritable, we know there is no chance of changing the minds of the majority of these effete uptalking media leftoids; they must be removed, by force, by shame, by scheme, by defunding. I don’t care how the leftoids are removed — right-wing billionaires funding journalism school scholarships for shitlords, anti-trust lawsuits against the Big Six media empires, alternative maul-right outlets that sap GSM of ad money and audience, abortions and contraceptives on demand for journo school graduates — just that they’re whittled down to a manageable number so that the increased ratio of non-leftoid voices forces objectivity and balance in the newsrooms and at Bezos’ personal blog offices. You reading, NPR?
2. Ideology is heritable, and ideology is associated with race. NonWhites — hispanics, asians, blacks — vote for bigger government and anti-White social policies, no matter who is running for office or whatever outreach program is attempted to persuade nonWhites to vote differently. Left-wing, tribal, anti-White ideological feeling is IN THE DNA of nonWhites and no pre-funny farm era classical liberal appeal to assimilation will change that. People of different races are largely unassimilable. There are real and lasting and immutable consequences to effectively reducing the number of Whites in their own nation by importing nonWhite scabs to artificially prop up dem GDP numbers: the electorate is eternally shifted to the Left, which leads to the institution of a bigger and more oppressive bureaucratic apparatus, and to a degraded culture and unrecoverable frayed social bonds. Conclusion: The demographic fuggernaut of nonWhites into America must be stopped, and the millions of nonWhites here illegally must be deported. Those here by the treasonous graces of Hart-Celler and Gay-Mulatto must be encouraged to leave and return to the homelands of their ancestors. No other solution exists that will save the GOP’s future prospects without a complete betrayal of their stated principles. Even the laudable goal of maximizing the White vote to preserve GOP electoral success has an expiration date when the nonWhite population becomes too numerous to neutralize with a consolidated White vote.

There ya go, the two lessons you need to know to make America great again:

CULL THE MEDIA

CLOSE THE BORDERS

The rest is commentary.

Read Full Post »