Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Vanity’ Category

Many moons ago, Chateau comptrollers presented their findings on the value of makeup as a sexual market value (SMV) boost for women. Conclusion: Makeup doesn’t add much to the typical woman’s looks. Worse, the value of makeup to women appeared to be declining as a result of massive cultural shifts in the dating market.

Many esteemed, and not so esteemed, guests of CH howled with indignation. Women insisted makeup turned them into beautiful princesses, so skilled was their application that men were utterly fooled by the cosmetic magic. Some men agreed, pointing to before and after photos of celebrities and fashion models as proof of the radical change in appearance that makeup could produce.

But, as CH explained to the disputants, the 0.5 point average SMV boost from makeup is a generalization that applies to the vast majority of women. The few weirdo outliers who experience 2 or more points of SMV increase from makeup are the exceptions who prove the rule.

Now, one is certainly free to disagree with a Heartiste opinion. But, more often than not, that would be a mistake. Right on cue, 🐴SCIENCE🐴 canters into the pen so that CH may ride her toward the sunset, victorious.

Cosmetics have little effect on attractiveness judgments compared with identity.

While at Bangor University’s School of Psychology, Dr Alex Jones, (now at Gettysburg College, Pennsylvania, USA) and colleague, Dr. Robin Kramer of the University of York, recently investigated this question. To do this, they asked participants to rate the same faces with and without makeup, with the restriction that no one person saw the same woman made up and un made-up. If makeup is important for attractiveness, it should overcome the variation in attractiveness between faces easily. But if it contributes little, then the variation between faces could overshadow any benefits of makeup.

The good news was that faces with makeup were rated as more attractive – nothing new there. But when they examined all the variation in attractiveness judgments, they found an application of makeup explained only 2% of this variation. In comparison, the variation between faces accounted for 69%. This was very surprising. It’s perhaps unfeasible for makeup to completely overcome differences between individuals, but the size of its effect on attractiveness is remarkably small.

CH knob status: Polished.

If anything, CH overestimated the SMV boost of makeup. According to this research, the attractiveness enhancing effect of makeup was measly, and hugely overshadowed by the biomechanic, intrinsic differences in the facial bone substructure of women. Or, beauty is DNA deep, ladies, and men can tell the difference between a beautiful face and a plain face no matter how subtly you shade your blush.

What do these results mean? Dr. Kramer, of the Department of Psychology at York, said “These findings show that, while makeup increases attractiveness, it is a very small contributor to attractiveness judgments. […]

The take-home message here seems to be that, for better or worse, our attractiveness is mostly determined by our natural appearance, and wearing makeup will only have a small effect in comparison.”

Don’t misunderstand the message of this post. Makeup may not improve a woman’s looks much, but it does do something. Women should, and will, continue to put the penis on a pedestal and try-hard to please men by using makeup to increase their attractiveness, even when that attractiveness increase is miniscule.

A 2% improvement in one’s odds doesn’t matter much in any endeavor…. except one:

The endeavor to find the highest quality mate possible for oneself.

The sexual market is the ur-market. It is foundational. All other markets — including the venerated economics market — bend their knees to the Sex Market Overlord. We humans may not have the perception to clearly understand or believe that a sex market governs all our actions and behaviors, (as it is the wont of the cosmic force 10 amplifier that the functioning of the sex market should remain opaque to the neural antennae of daily human consciousness), but that doesn’t mean our natural self-deluded state is proof that the sex market is a phantom.

It’s not surprising, then, that men and women will breathlessly grasp at the slimmest advantages to tilt the sexual market playing field in their favor, where the only game that matters is played, and played for a zero sum outcome in a battle as pitched, if not quite as bloody, as any war for survival. It’s why women will color their faces, despite receiving little benefit and less still the morning-after when the ruse is smeared off, for an infinitesimally small leg up over their female competition.

The stakes are that high.

PS With each day, science lends its imprimatur to the CH Dating Market Value Tests. Ladies, head on over and take the test for yourselves. Like 23AndMe, the patented CH DMV test will give you a readout of your overall attractiveness to men, where you rank relative to other women, and what that all means for your romantic prospects and your happiness.

Read Full Post »

Back in October, CH wrote, based on social circle confessionals, that gay marriage is a farce.

I’ll let you in on a leetle secret…

Every gay marriage that was talked about was an open relationship.

Not a one of these gays who were married, or planned to get married, held any pretense of practicing monogamy. When the topic of promiscuous married gays came up, the only surprise was the blasé avowal of the fact. The gay men announced their intention to defile the tacit monogamous stricture of marriage with such nonchalance that it would astound them to learn anyone thought they might behave otherwise.

CH didn’t know at the time that the New York Beta Times had already implicitly agreed with the Heartistian premise that gay marriage is a farce.

Many successful gay marriages share an open secret.

A study to be released next month is offering a rare glimpse inside gay relationships and reveals that monogamy is not a central feature for many. Some gay men and lesbians argue that, as a result, they have stronger, longer-lasting and more honest relationships. And while that may sound counterintuitive, some experts say boundary-challenging gay relationships represent an evolution in marriage — one that might point the way for the survival of the institution.

New research at San Francisco State University reveals just how common open relationships are among gay men and lesbians in the Bay Area. The Gay Couples Study has followed 556 male couples for three years — about 50 percent of those surveyed have sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners.

Gay marriage was never primarily about expanding the marital franchise to “historically oppressed groups” in the interest of faaiiiiiirness or haaaaaaaarm reduction, as RAWMUSCLGLUTES Andrew Sullivan perpetually insisted through his fog of roidpouting. Gay marriage is a leftoid equalist project to undermine and eventually to destroy the traditional and biologically heterocentric configuration of marriage. Gay marriage is nothing less than a front in the everlasting equalist war against white male European culture.

Gay marriage is one cultural schism put to use by the Lords of Lies toward the redefinition and de-stigmatization of marriage from an organic mate pair system which safeguards the primacy of paternity assurance to a free-for-all “liberation” that corrodes trust between heterosexual couples and renders hetero beta males wholly prostrate to an antagonistic marriage market stripped of any protections for their particular interests.

Mark my words, a massive elite push to legitimize and maybe even codify polyamory is next on the agenda.

That consent is key. “With straight people, it’s called affairs or cheating,” said Colleen Hoff, the study’s principal investigator, “but with gay people it does not have such negative connotations.”

The study also found open gay couples just as happy in their relationships as pairs in sexually exclusive unions, Dr. Hoff said. A different study, published in 1985, concluded that open gay relationships actually lasted longer.

Gays and lesbians… just like you and me. Except not at all like you and me. And that’s a truth the equalists dearly want to hide from view.

Read Full Post »

It’s always preenfeed to receive positive feedback from guests of Le Chateau. An anonymous reader regales:

Field report – the state of the union

I don’t post a lot because the tools you have all given me lead me to be a pretty busy guy. This one I had to write up because it was something different and something telling.

A few months ago I made a post for no strings hookup. One of responses was from a woman in another state. She was very flattering toward me for my pic but more for my post; it was gruff, short, direct, specific and used non-pc language to ward off men from responding. We exchanged a few emails where she explained she felt unfulfilled by the nightlife in her city. I said, “hey, in another life…take it easy” she said she might visit someday; I threw cold water on it, not looking to put any long term thoughts in her head.

…A few months later, I get an email that she is coming to my city and has purchased plane tickets. I told her she had better have her own place to stay and explained my time with her would be limited to 1 meetup. she wanted to press on…

This weekend she was here. I had the longest, most enjoyably depraved bout of sex in my life. Checked a lot of boxes. Not going to get into the nitty gritty but she was a goddamn maneater…and I tamed the tiger.

When I met up with her (in public), I spent about 30 minutes feeling her out to make sure she wasn’t boil-a-bunny crazy. What followed was a sad indictment of the current state of beta males. She complained about the men and the women in her city. The men were soft, overweight, sedentary betas. They couldn’t handle her sex drive, directness, or need for a strong man. She said she had stopped dating for x number of months prior to coming out to meet me because the guys just weren’t worth it. The women were all fat, entitled, bossy in a “born on third base and think they hit a home run” way, and of course, SJWs. If a table next to you is too loud, the shhhhh police show up. Basically, liberal feminists run amok. *Shudder*

She was attractive, fit, and petite, as far as looks go. Not long term material but good enough for a one night stand. Plus she was extremely direct and specific about what she liked sexually. It didn’t take much time to decide to head to a bed.

When it was all said and done, she had perma-smile. Multiple o’s. But heres the kicker: she basically worshipped me. I have never had this happen before. Very different. It was like I was Conan the destroyer and she was a girl in my harem. She moved over me catlike, she played with my chest hair, kissed and caressed every part of my body, basically acted like a cat when you give it catnip lol. I have had stuff similar to this happen before (laying on my chest, playing with chest hair, some girlish fawning, the ol’ pillow talk). This was unequivocally beyond that. I could have done anything to her and she would have done anything I said (trust me, I verified). She would have been happy to do this shit all day and night, apparently. It was strange, unfamiliar and extremely hot. It was the most manly I have ever felt; the confidence is dripping off of me currently.

All it cost me was $20.00. I took her to 2 well known food places but nowhere touristy. She flew to another state and all she got was marathon sex and a fast food. Didn’t give her a place to stay or act as chauffeur.
Heres what I did:

1. Shut the fuck up. Didn’t talk at all while driving or waiting for food. Answered her questions with brevity. Asked few questions but good ones (some from the list posted a few weeks ago on this site – the ones from the NYT).
2. Brought the wood. I think this more than anything is what made her believe my alpha state. Giving a chick mind blowing orgasms makes their hamster pretty much forget/justify anything they don’t like about you lol.
3. Body language in public. I let her caress/be lovey-dovey in bed after sex. But in public it was like she was a stranger. This of course made her want to constantly touch me/show other women she was with me. I would slightly shift or move away from her, enough to train her that she cant, aside from the occasional hand carass (her to me).
4. Wasn’t afraid to argue/disagree with her. She kept trying to get me to see things from her perspective. If it made sense to me, I would give her slight agreement. If it didn’t, I called bullshit.
5. Set up (false haha) time constraints. Made her freak out, kept trying to buy more time with me lol.
6. Was fun & playful, especially in bed. My roommate said all he heard all night was moaning then giggling, then moaning then giggling etc.

This post was not to brag, believe it or not. I felt it was my obligation to write this because CH is doing more for men than anyone else and this story provides anecdotal proof that following red pill truths and the 16 commandants of poon leads to real world success. Proof that there are unsatisfied women who will literally fly to another state for a taste of alpha. Thank you fuckers, I love you all.

You’re welcome.

One thing I would mention about these women who possess an outsized craving for absolute submission from themselves and absolute mastery from their lovers: Be cognizant that some women who readily embrace overheated sexual or romantic attachment early on can be major pains in the ass later, should you decide to invest more substantially in them. Watch for warning signs from her, like intemperate griping and complaining about all the men in her life who “didn’t measure up”. You’ll need a strong and swift pimp hand to tame these kinds of women. This caveat aside, it’s better for the health of a possible future relationship to fall deeply into passionate lovemaking sooner rather than later, and hotter rather than cooler.

Read Full Post »

What do women really want?, Steve Sailer asks. One of his readers, a possible CH mole, supplies an answer that’s closer to the truth than a thousand Ross Douthat NYBTimes columns on sex and love.

What do women want? Let’s look at their sexual fantasies. In my long years, I’ve known large numbers of women with drawers and e-readers full of “romance novels”. The story lines and characterizations are generally all the same. They are the Cinderella story recast:

There are one and more women between Cinderella and the Prince, who is handsome, charming, and has lots of money, status, and power. Cinderella acts to remove the female competition between her and the Prince so that she can take her rightful place as the Princess of the realm. The story line is generally consumed by scenes of females going at each other as they compete for the Alpha Male. The “bodice ripping” at the end of the chapters are thinly veiled rape fantasies. The Prince eventually finds Cinderella so “hot” that he cannot control himself. His lack of control excites her … because, it represents her final victory over the female competition who are unable to drive the Prince to sexual frenzy.

The CH tentacles reach everywhere.

I’m gladdened that Steve and some of his readers are coming around to the Heartistian worldview. I’d imagine it was a tough road to illumination for them, given the demographic quadrant I’ll safely assume most of them occupy — traditionalist conservatives who believe in marriage and kids and not screwing around (much). These are well-meaning folk, but their limited breadth of experience in the mating trenches constrains their observational power.

In a similarly themed iSteve post, a few feminists dug their heads out of the sand to assert the opposite of the available evidence.

Just because people read something fictional it does not mean that they do actually want to experience that in real life.

This is a common “””argument””” from those who can’t bear the retinal scorching from viewing female sexual nature head on, and it’s bullshit. If fantasy were not a reflection of true desire, then we wouldn’t see a near-universal preference among women for a particular type of sexual fantasy. We would instead see a million women have a million different fantasies completely severed from any actual feelings of lustful desire, and shlock like Twilight or 50 Shades which conform very closely to one or two specific female fantasy archetypes wouldn’t sell hundreds of millions of copy.

Or, to put it more poetically, a random female fantasy generator disconnected from real world desire should turn up at least a few instances of women fantasizing about being taken by Bob the beta accountant. Yet, in all the pulp romance ever written, scarcely any pursue that theme.

PS In completely unrelated news, female prison guards keep having sex with inmates. That genderless feminist utopia is really working out as intended. Heh.

PPS Smart urbane chicks are into the 50 Shades crap too. This isn’t a prolefemme phenomenon.

PPPS A young CH once spent a few weeks perusing pulp romance books for inside info about what turns on women. He figured, if girls were reading this stuff by the truckload, there must be something in there that could give a man an edge over other men in the hunt for shiny, glossy poosy. He was right.

Read Full Post »

More major Hivemind organs are beginning to accept, or at least grapple with, some core concepts of Game and how men and women interact in the flesh when they aren’t being prodded to chant equalist talking points. The New York Beta Times and even that den of shrikers, Jizzebel, have in their own way, and likely without knowing it, come round to the Proposition long espoused at Chateau Heartiste that romantic love is a glorious biomechanistic function which can be induced with certain premeditated seduction techniques, and that these techniques are especially effective on women who are the sex with an innate holistic appreciation of potential mate quality.

YaReally did such a bang-up job providing the backdrop to this post that I’ll just repost his comment here:

Jezebel admits that PUA works.

…without realizing it. lol The experiment they describe is just smoothly building comfort/rapport and the exercise ends with 4 min of deep eye-contact which is just running standard laser-eyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3Z4Nq0OrrM

“Catron calls this accelerated intimacy”

Ya, she’d BETTER call it that…because if she called it PUA or Game, Jezebel would shit a brick lol

It’s cute when normal society finally manages to spark a fire with rocks when they actively refuse to use the lighters PUA has offered for years lol

Posting this mainly to link the actual questions they use ’cause there’s a lot of good comfort/rapport building questions in here to swipe.

For reference, here are the 36 Questions that you should ask a woman, in order of increasing intimacy, with the goal of making her fall in love and desiring sex with you:

******

Set I

1. Given the choice of anyone in the world, whom would you want as a dinner guest?

2. Would you like to be famous? In what way?

3. Before making a telephone call, do you ever rehearse what you are going to say? Why?

4. What would constitute a “perfect” day for you?

5. When did you last sing to yourself? To someone else?

6. If you were able to live to the age of 90 and retain either the mind or body of a 30-year-old for the last 60 years of your life, which would you want?

7. Do you have a secret hunch about how you will die?

8. Name three things you and your partner appear to have in common.

9. For what in your life do you feel most grateful?

10. If you could change anything about the way you were raised, what would it be?

11. Take four minutes and tell your partner your life story in as much detail as possible.

12. If you could wake up tomorrow having gained any one quality or ability, what would it be?

Set II

13. If a crystal ball could tell you the truth about yourself, your life, the future or anything else, what would you want to know?

14. Is there something that you’ve dreamed of doing for a long time? Why haven’t you done it?

15. What is the greatest accomplishment of your life?

16. What do you value most in a friendship?

17. What is your most treasured memory?

18. What is your most terrible memory?

19. If you knew that in one year you would die suddenly, would you change anything about the way you are now living? Why?

20. What does friendship mean to you?

21. What roles do love and affection play in your life?

22. Alternate sharing something you consider a positive characteristic of your partner. Share a total of five items.

23. How close and warm is your family? Do you feel your childhood was happier than most other people’s?

24. How do you feel about your relationship with your mother?

Set III

25. Make three true “we” statements each. For instance, “We are both in this room feeling … “

26. Complete this sentence: “I wish I had someone with whom I could share … “

27. If you were going to become a close friend with your partner, please share what would be important for him or her to know.

28. Tell your partner what you like about them; be very honest this time, saying things that you might not say to someone you’ve just met.

29. Share with your partner an embarrassing moment in your life.

30. When did you last cry in front of another person? By yourself?

31. Tell your partner something that you like about them already.

32. What, if anything, is too serious to be joked about?

33. If you were to die this evening with no opportunity to communicate with anyone, what would you most regret not having told someone? Why haven’t you told them yet?

34. Your house, containing everything you own, catches fire. After saving your loved ones and pets, you have time to safely make a final dash to save any one item. What would it be? Why?

35. Of all the people in your family, whose death would you find most disturbing? Why?

36. Share a personal problem and ask your partner’s advice on how he or she might handle it. Also, ask your partner to reflect back to you how you seem to be feeling about the problem you have chosen.

******

Many of the above questions designed to create a rapid emotional bond with women will be familiar to long-time guests of CH. In fact, they are the EXACT SAME questions discussed in this six-year-old post.

YaReally continues,

Note that they go from silly/fun/light to deep/personal, just like building comfort/rapport should (really you build rapport and then transition into comfort). The first questions are more rapport based. Also there’s a lot of “us VS them” questions (assuming the two of you are together already and reinforcing that), and future projection (assuming the two of you will be together).

There’s also showing vulnerability but it comes AFTER the rapport stuff. The first Set of questions has no vulnerability but the third set has tons of vulnerability. A lot of this creates an emotional rollercoaster done in order too…like what’s your favorite memory (emotional high), what’s your worst memory (emotional low), and back up again after a few more questions.

Really this is rock solid in terms of the results it should give, though it would be weird to execute it in it’s full design in any way other than as a game/experiment. But you could take a handful of these questions and add them to your cheat sheet of comfort/rapport building questions and drop them into a conversation congruently and to the girl it would fell like, as Jezebel says, “and anyone who has met someone and moved fast knows what this feels like: It’s when you want to know someone so quickly and so thoroughly and so urgently that you wish you could do it via osmosis. You want to give of yourself and be given to, equally.” which in logical man-speak means “PUA fucking works, duh.”

“Which makes it worth noting: The experiment sounds like some kind of trick or shortcut to love, but if both parties are well intentioned and in agreement to try it, who is to say what sort of time it should really take to scale this terrain? We all move at our own speed.”

Will have to quote this the next time some feminist is crying that PUA is an evil trick that doesn’t work. lol

lol indeed. I’d also add a ‘heh’.

Also the description of laser eyes was interesting as it’s something I’ve been focusing on over the last year:

“After completing the questions, Catron and her date do the four minute unnervingly deep stare that ends the experiment, which at first involved a lot of nervous smiling, but then got a little more comfortable. She writes:

I know the eyes are the windows to the soul or whatever, but the real crux of the moment was not just that I was really seeing someone, but that I was seeing someone really seeing me. Once I embraced the terror of this realization and gave it time to subside, I arrived somewhere unexpected.

I felt brave, and in a state of wonder. Part of that wonder was at my own vulnerability and part was the weird kind of wonder you get from saying a word over and over until it loses its meaning and becomes what it actually is: an assemblage of sounds.”

Again it’s gay woman-fluff speak, but translated into something you can apply it describes why slowing down your speaking and leaving long lingering silences while you hold the laser eye-contact Liam describes in that video works…the first few seconds (I find it’s around 10-20 seconds) the girl is off in la-la land and then her brain realizes “oh wait, we’re really looking at each other here…” and her words trail off and your conversation switches more to subcommunications instead of surface level communication.

But casual glances or talking so fast you don’t leave tension in the air etc. won’t pass that point where it’s “nervous smiles” and entering that vulnerable “sense of wonder” stage that holding it and leaving silences creates.

Drive with Ryan Gosling is a good movie to check out for laser eye-contact…him and the chick do a lot of sub-communication shit just staring at each other. It’s exaggerated in that movie, but that’s along the right track.

Biggest key that Drive doesn’t do and this experiment doesn’t add is closing the distance during laser eyes. If you lock eyes and slowly close the distance so you get closer to the girl, it sends butterflies in her stomach into overdrive and you can turn that into attraction/sexual tension.

Gambler demos it here at 33:35:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-unuqF4uklE&t=33m35s

She doesn’t fully crack until he takes that last step and closes the space.

This really deep rapport/comfort stuff is what Mystery Method was built around and it’s the reason that Mystery was getting girls to “fall in love” with him, not just want to fuck him. Old school MM game was more about creating multiple-LTRs where the girl felt like you had a special connection she’s never felt with anyone else before etc. than just getting enough attraction for a one-night stand. There were reports of girls breaking down crying when Mystery/Tyler/etc. wouldn’t take their number, which sounds like bullshit until you’ve run this really deep comfort/rapport game a bunch and seen how earth-shattering it is to girls to experience it (especially hot bar chicks who are used to more shallow interactions with people) and taken it away from them suddenly and seen how they flip out and chase lol

I agree with this observation. Men (aka inexperienced betas) underestimate just how few women, and how infrequently those women, get to experience the attention of a man who really knows how to properly seduce and challenge small-talk emotional blockades. A woman who is a gifted recipient of a man’s seductive expertise can fall in love harder and faster than she ever thought possible.

This is also why people I meet feel like they’ve known me for years when we’ve only just met, because I know how to smoothly build comfort/rapport with strangers.

If you’re finding girls don’t stick around for more than one or two lays, or if you want to get into mLTRs, [ed: multiple long-term relationships, for the iSteve readers] experiment with this stuff. But also be aware that if you want casual relationships, you don’t want to use too much of this or she’ll get too attached and drop the Ultimatum sooner than she would’ve if you hadn’t built so much comfort/rapport.

And seriously, go study Mystery Method. Skip the feather boas and black nails, but study everything else. It’s lengthy and dense but it’s the ultimate foundation of understanding this shit.

Mystery Method, first edition, is a compendium of truths about the sexual marketplace and women’s romantic natures that will never go out of style. As Ya said, don’t be put off by some of the outlandish self-promoting of the original playas (OPs). They hit the field and in so doing hit upon deep abiding realities about women and their call-and-response behavior to particular courtship tactics.

Read this post carefully and think about the implications of the message contained in it. ‘Yes, you can inspire a woman to feel love for you by following this flowchart of pretested questions and nonverbal communication, just as the game aficionados have asserted for years’ is not the kind of lesson that will warm the tender hearts of rom-com saturated women or trad-con saturated men. A thousand bromides about the mystery of love and “just being yourself” will need to be jettisoned, to make way for a better understanding of the human universe.

To ask so much of them is practically an exercise in cruelty. You can tell this by the enraged and uncomprehending reaction they have when their polite beliefs confront stone cold reality.

Read Full Post »

NPR Morning Edition has a featured story about a lonely single man who decided to take charge of his romantic life after suffering a body blow from an ex-wife who exercised her right to express herself hypergamously.

This segment of the show explores how a man decided to conquer his fear of rejection by getting rejected every day — on purpose.

The evolution of Jason Comely, a freelance IT guy from Cambridge, Ontario, began one sad night several years ago.

“That Friday evening that I was in my one-bedroom apartment trying to be busy,” Comely says. “But really, I knew that I was avoiding things.”

See, nine months earlier, Jason’s wife had left him.

“She … found someone that was taller than I was — had more money than I had. … So, yeah.”

And since then, Jason had really withdrawn from life. He didn’t go out, and he avoided talking to people, especially women.

Jason decided to accept the Lewd Word of Game into his life, and began a program of desensitizing himself to social rejection, all in hopes that by conquering — or more practically, managing — his fear of rejection he would have an easier time approaching women and hitting on them for eventual fornication and lovingkindness.

“I had to get rejected at least once every single day by someone.”

He started in the parking lot of his local grocery store. Went up to a total stranger and asked for a ride across town.

“And he looked at me, like, and just said, ‘I’m not going that way, buddy.’ And I was like, ‘Thank you!’

“It was like, ‘Got it! I got my rejection.’ ”

Jason had totally inverted the rules of life. He took rejection and made it something he wanted — so he would feel good when he got it.

This is essentially the Inner Game concept known colloquially as “having an abundance mentality with women”. By reducing his fear of rejection — neutering it by morphing it into a game — Jason simultaneously increases his feeling of abundance. Immersion therapy like he’s doing is an effective method to cultivate that crucial abundance mentality. Once rejection means so little, a man begins to believe, rightly, that his sexual market options have greatly expanded. Once he thinks this way, his mental state gets telegraphed through his nonverbal and verbal behavior, and women swoon in response.

“Approach 100 women in a month” has merit as a task for game newbies.

“And it was sort of like walking on my hands or living on my hands or living underwater or something. It was just a different reality. The rules of life had changed.”

Many men who get good at the art of applied charisma say this about the world they inhabit: that it feels like a different reality. And it is; much different than what the mediocre masses of men will ever experience.

Jason kept on seeking out rejection. And as he did, he found that people were actually more receptive to him, and he was more receptive to people, too. “I was able to approach people, because what are you gonna do, reject me? Great!”

People instinctively admire, even submit to, bold men.

So what has Jason learned from all this?

That most fears aren’t real in the way you think they are. They’re just a story you tell yourself, and you can choose to stop repeating it. Choose to stop listening.

The essence of the alluringly overconfident man.

Now, NPR, filled to the rectal brim with echo chamber liberal pussies, would not favorably feature a story unless they agreed wholly or partly with the premise. So I consider this a major capitulation by liberal pussies to those awful PUAs and misogynists who propose game as a romantic solution for men seeking love.

Read Full Post »

Gratitude

America is feverish with shamelessness. Teeming Trash World migrants are escorted here on a transnational, transubstantiating, blood red carpet, only to arrive and shamelessly agitate for handouts, hand-overs, and upper hands. Single moms shamelessly flaunt their “independence” and “empowerment” as their kids have to endure a parade of dickheads tromping through their living rooms. Sluts shamelessly crow about their accomplishment persuading desperate losers to dump a spastic fuck in them. Fatties shamelessly parade their blubber, and doubleplusshamelessly demand acceptance of their grotesqueness. SWPLs preach diversity while shamelessly doing all they can to insulate themselves from their ruddy religious icons. Government and corporate globalists shamelessly smash the concept of a nation for a fatter wallet. SJWs shamelessly slake their hatred for their enemies’ perceived sin of hatefulness. Male feminists shamelessly surrender the last vestige of their masculinity for a patronizing pat on the head from screeching witches.

Soon, women will turn the Walk of Shame into an exuberantly proud strut.

Worse, the American shamelessness fever burns in a Bonfire of the Butthurt. Enthusiastic abandonment of humility mixed with prickly sensitivity is 100% bad box office.

What this world needs is a little bit of gratitude. And that’s the reason for this post. A simple thank you to you, the readers, for visiting the Chateau and, more importantly, for taking the lessons to heart.

It goes unmentioned (until now) that CH receives emails almost daily from grateful readers who saw improvements in their lives, or in the lives of people who matter to them, after applying the lessons taught here. Propriety, and sometimes requested confidentiality, dissuades the Chateau from printing these emails.

Some of the emails are incredibly moving. Like the one from an American soldier who lost friends on the battlefield in a most horrific manner, but who found sustenance and fortitude in the CH writings to bear the pain of loss and carry on. The resulting improvement in his dating life was just icing on the cake. To think that this blog is read thousands of miles away by warriors as spiritual nourishment is quite humbling.

But the email that swelled the heart of CH the most was the testimonial from a father of a teenage son. He explained in eloquent detail his distress from watching his son grow unhappier and lonelier by the day, another numberless castaway of a hypercharged high school dating market. The father stumbled across this digital oasis searching for “help my son find a girlfriend” and, struck by the unglossed nature of the CH message of hope, passed along the Rude Word to his son. At first, his son dismissed him with an embarrassed flourish, which the father expected.

Then, something changed. A few months later, the father noticed his son smiled more, and gained a renewed interest in his hobbies. He was funnier, and fun-loving. The moping and slammed bedroom doors decreased in frequency. Not long after that, the son casually announced over dinner he had to leave the house for a couple hours to “meet his girlfriend”. Dad, a smart man, did not make a production out of it, but inside he was bursting with pride and joy.

As was CH.

The gratitude, therefore, is for the people behind these testimonials, because in the end if nothing comes of Chateau Heartiste but that one attentive father saved his son from loveless solitude, every word would have been worth it.

So thank you readers, and thank you to those who have made donations, big and small.

I leave you all with this:

Love ferociously what is worth loving, hate with equal passion what is worth hating, and know that in the happy flux between those two poles you can make chaos dance to your tune.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,216 other followers

%d bloggers like this: