This womanizing whelp is learning the three Rs: reading, writing, and rakishness.
This womanizing whelp is learning the three Rs: reading, writing, and rakishness.
Forget the free market economy. The sexual market is the one market to rule them all. As if my preening weren’t already supremely ostentatious, here’s a recent SCIENCE! study confirming another Heartiste axiom: every human interaction and transaction is downstream from the existential struggle to find a quality mate, fuck, and procreate.
Fewer romantic prospects may lead to riskier investments
Encountering information suggesting that it may be tough to find a romantic partner shifts people’s decision making toward riskier options, according to new findings from a series of studies published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.
“Environmental cues indicating that one will have a relatively difficult time finding a mate can drive people to concentrate their investment choices into a few high-risk, high-return options,” says psychological scientist Joshua Ackerman of the University of Michigan, lead author on the research. “This is true even when the decisions people are making are not explicitly relevant to romantic outcomes.”
I’ve received some scoffing from spergy types projecting their spergitude onto this ‘umble outpost of love concerning the assertion often made here that the sexual market governs, consciously or subconsciously it doesn’t really matter, the machinations and ultimately the outcomes of the more palpable activity that takes place in the economic market. But here we have a study proving the truth of the CH observation that ripples and undercurrents of sexual compulsion and romantic desperation are the “invisible loin” that guides all human behavior in the secondary market of the economy and its supporting markets (like academia).
“This is exactly opposite from the pattern of investing we would predict if we assumed people were using an economically ‘rational’ decision strategy,” Ackerman explains. “From an evolutionary perspective, if the options are to do whatever it takes to find a romantic partner or risk not finding one, the more rational choice may be to do whatever it takes.”
This is a stone cold truth that no libertardian like Alex Tabbarak or Cheap Chalupas will ever get. Humans aren’t rational actors; they’re rationalizing actors. And what they rationalize are choices, in all spheres of transaction, that directly or indirectly improve their chances of landing that alpha male or that hot babe.
In a second online study, 105 participants read a newspaper article discussing demographic trends in the U.S. They then evaluated stock packages with equivalent values (e.g., 100 shares in 8 companies, 200 shares in 4 companies, etc.) and chose which package they would invest in.
Again, the data showed that both male and female participants who read about unfavorable sex ratios opted for riskier investments, choosing more shares in fewer companies, than those who read about favorable ratios.
In practice, “riskier strategies” for women amounts to what we see today on college campuses, where women outnumber men 60-40. The zeitgeist is a sexual pornucopia for a few alpha men getting the milk for free without buying the cow, and a lot of disappointment and depression among marginally pretty women who thought they could turn that fling into a thing.
The fact that sex ratio had an impact on decisions that were not directly linked with mating success suggests that sexual competition elicits a general mindset geared toward achieving the largest possible reward, regardless of the risk involved.
Polygyny, as is the norm throughout Africa, can induce the same risky investment strategizing from men as can an unfavorable sex skew. When a few men lock up many women, each individual man has an incentive to throw caution to the wind to be one of those few winner men.
As such, the researchers argue, these findings could have implications for decision making in domains as diverse as retirement planning, gambling, and even making consumer purchases.
Executive Summary: The meaning of life is to fuck.
This is what happens when you take Chateau pickup advice to heart and apply it in the field.
Hey CH I was the one [bernieciz] who emailed you about the girls flaking with the “I’m sick excuse” so I tried out what you said and here is the result:
I called her and set up plans for tonight and eventually got a confirmation text this morning:
Heh, received this message today and it put a smile on my face:
I know what some of the less perceptive readers are thinking. “Where’s the successful close? She still flaked on him!”
Ah, not so fast, young pantywad. Context matters. You’ll note three developments that strongly suggest this second “sickness” text from the girl is not a flake (i.e., an excuse to bail). One, after the “flaky mcflakester” gibe, she promptly replied with a flurry of three texts. No girl does this for a man unless she has had her curiosity and interest (re)ignited.
Two, she initiated a confirmation text the next day. Again, a girl planning on flaking (a second time) would not do this.
Three, her second sickness excuse sounded sincere. She’s effusive with regret, and at least puts on a genuine show of intent to meet at some point in the near future. The fact appears to be that this girl is a flu magnet, and doesn’t want to meet while sniffles and coughing ruin her appearance.
My conclusion is that this girl is still down to meet, and I look forward to bernieciz giving us all an update soon.
PS If I were bernieciz, I wouldn’t bother replying to her last text. The balls are in her court now. No need to hammer out further mission directives. Alternately, bernieciz could tease her for her inability to stay healthy. “maybe laying off the hooch wd help you get better”. Or:
From deep in the Le Chateau crypt (2007), a post about common beta male body language mistakes:
Closed body language
Guys who are confident that nothing in life can touch them have very open and smooth body language. Nervous guys who are always afraid of fights, of being sucker punched, of conflict, will defensively scrunch up their body as if they were psychologically warding off blows. Guys who fear nothing open their arms, expose their chests, and generally project the look of someone who never worries about being caught off-guard. In that vein, avoid shoving your hands in your pockets, crossing your arms, standing with a narrow stance, looking around the room with darting eyes, slouching, or grabbing one forearm with your hand.
Recently (2016), from an NPR broadcast,
To Catch Someone On Tinder, Stretch Your Arms Wide
In these experiments, the researchers compared young adults’ closed, slouched postures against open, or expanded, ones.
“An expansive, open posture involves widespread limbs, a stretched torso and general enlargement of occupied space,” says Tanya Vacharkulksemsuk, a social psychologist at the University of California, Berkeley and lead author on the study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
For the 144 speed daters, Vacharkulksemsuk says, “expansiveness nearly doubles chances of getting a yes [to see each other again.]” […]
Separately, she and her colleagues had three men and three women create two dating profiles each on a popular dating app. (All six participants were white and heterosexual). Their profiles were identical in every way except the pictures in one profile were all expanded postures, while its twin had all contracted poses.
The participants swiped yes on every potential suitor — 3,000 in total — for 48 hours. “Profiles that feature expansive photos were 27 percent more likely to get a yes,” Vacharkulksemsuk says. Expanding made both men and women more desirable during speed dating and in the dating app. The effect was more pronounced for men, however.
Bolded to twist the shiv in feminists’ spotted hides. Sorry, feminists, dominance displays benefit men more than women! (You can tell how badly this shiv hits the shitlib bone by the alacrity with which the NPR writer avoided deeper examination of this equalist narrative-busting caveat.)
These postures convey power and openness, says Vacharkulksemsuk. “The information packing in that nonverbal behavior is social dominance, and where that person stands in a hierarchy,” she says. And, presumably, the person high in the pecking order is sexy. Alphas are scarce and in demand.
The reader who forwarded the NPR link asks, “Do you ever get tired of being right?”
archerwfisher arrived for his stay at the Chateau, imbibed of the house wisdom, and left a more virile man.
Got to test a piece of game off this blog, it worked well. Went to a college church group at my alma mater–I’m 24 so I can still fit–and it was handfuls of guys or girls sitting around here or there, and a few games. I was bored and had only said a few sentences to a few people, then walked over to a bolo game they had set up. Saw a cute brunette I had spoken just a few words with, sitting at a table chatting with two guys and another girl. Used the power of the Chateau–pointed and gave a “come hither” gesture. She says to the others “ah, I gotta go” and walks over to me, just like that.
This blog could cost $50 a month to read and it would be totally worth it.
Poon Be Upon You, sir.
The come hither gesture is high risk, high reward. Risk: takes real balls to pull off confidently, can backfire if performed with the slightest uncertainty. Reward: a positive response is *really* positive, practically greasing the skids of the next hour of conversation.
A long, long time ago, in a pleasure dome far away, CH introduced the idea that the West is currently besieged by the Four Sirens of the Sexual Apocalypse.
So why are women now the eager instigators of divorce? What changed in the culture? Four things, primarily: the pill, easy divorce, women’s economic independence, and rigged laws that make divorce a good financial prospect for women. The four sirens of the sexual apocalypse together have created the perfect sociological storm where a woman has every incentive in the world to ditch a husband to follow the whims of her heart once his usefulness has been exhausted.
Later, CH expanded on the Four Sirens theme.
Two secondary Sirens were added to round out the list:
Probably of all the CH scribblings on this subject of Western Decline, this passage gets to the meatiest heart of it:
So, a crib sheet of quippy replies if you ever need it to send a feminist or manboob howling with indignation:
1. The Pill
2. No-fault divorce
3. Working women
4. Man-hating feminism
Toss into a social salad bowl already brimming with an influx of non-European immigrants thanks to the 1965 soft genocide act, mix thoroughly, and voila!: a huge, inexorable, relentless leftward shift in American politics, an explosion of single moms, wage stagnation, government growth, upper class childlessness, lower class dysgenics, and a creaking, slow deterioration in the foundational vigor of the nation and the gutting of the pride of her people.
Into this pot pie of portent throw in the Skittles Man, Bring the Movies Man, Nah Man, and Disappeared Again Man, for whom girls have always swooned but who now, thanks to relaxed pressure from women themselves requiring men to put a ring on it before getting any huggy or kissy, and the incentivizing of risky sexual behavior by government policy and contraceptive technology, could enjoy sex without the entanglement of marriage or gainful employment.
Game, for all the shit it gets from the usual suspects, was just a rational response to a radically altered playing field. It didn’t cause this calamity; it just profited from it.
Meanwhile, beta males are left scratching their block-like skulls, wondering what the fuck just happened.
All well and good, says the reader, but where is the ¡SCIENCE! buttressing all this speculation and real world observation to satisfy sperg demands? How about right here. (Via The Cheapest of Chalupas)
Family structure in the United States has shifted substantially over the last three decades, [HBDer: MUH GENETICS] yet the causes and implications of these changes for the well-being of family members remains unclear. This paper exploits task-based shifts in demand as an exogenous shock to sex-specific wages to demonstrate the role of the relative female to male wage in the family and labor market outcomes of women. I show that increases in the relative wage lead to a decline in the likelihood of marriage for those on the margin of a first marriage, and present suggestive evidence that these effects are concentrated among less-desirable matches. A higher relative wage also causes women to increase their hours of work, reduce their dependence on a male earner, and increase the likelihood of taking guardianship over their children. These findings indicate that improvements in the relative wage have facilitated women’s independence by reducing the monetary incentive for marriage, and can account for 20% of the decline in marriage between 1980 and 2010.
BOOM THERE IT IS. CH WAS RIGHT. Female economic self-sufficiency decreases the marriage rate and increases urban slut factory churn, because self-sufficient women need beta male bux less and therefore can indulge the chasing of alpha male fux more.
SCIENCE! has confirmed the existence of Le Chateau Heartiste’s Third Siren of the Sexual Apocalypse.
It’s like some people think I make this shit up outta thin air. No, I’ve just spent a lot of time in the trenches of the dating market. I have seen much. I have learned much. And my wisdom is infinite. YUGE, even.
You only had to listen.
“Ok, enough crowing. How about a solution?”
Sure. Here it is:
Repeal the 19th Amendment.
Maybe slightly more realistically, get rid of Title IX and the rest of the man-hating, human nature denying, legal fictions shoved down our throats in the last sixty odd years by rancid feminist cunts and their lackey low T manlets. Culturally, real progress can be made by simply ending the GRRLPOWER propaganda and returning to teaching the virtues of the masculine ideal. Too many boys in STEM? Great! That’s what boys are good at. Too many girls preferring marriage and stay-at-home mohterhood? Great! That’s what girls are good at.
Simple truths and simple beauties have more power than labyrinthine lies and grotesque ugliness, as long as you hold them close to a heart that has banished cowardice.