The Thousand Cuck Stare

You’ve all read about the “thousand cock stare“, and most of you have seen a woman exhibiting it in your daily life. Now there’s a male version of the thousand cock stare — the thousand cuck stare — and it has nothing to do with a high number of sex partners, (just the opposite, really, as the thousand cuck stare is usually coincident with involuntary celibacy and a legacy of romantic failure).

Those eyes are seen on two types of (typically white) males: Literal bottoms (who have just passed a wet gas bubble of gay lover sperm) and figurative bottoms who are psychological castrati eager to bend over for the world’s cunts, ingrates, and swarths in a bid to rationalize that severely low T can be a blessing for humanity.

The thousand cuck stare is a watery, degenerate Sanpaku-eyed window into the soul of a male who has embraced powerlessness out of necessity and rubs out dopamine rushes by posturing as an androgyne happily relinquishing any trace of testicular fortitude for abject prostration at the cankles of the femborg hivegine.

He is a soy-drenched, sexual market discard who pretends his groveling at the feet of those who despise him is a righteous blow for equality and unctuous unisexuality. He is a contemptible loathsome creature who by dumb luck is having his day in the sun, but who will, as natural law dictates, soon be back where he belongs, foraging the icy wastelands for scraps of charity.

In two generations, when majestic Trump Presidency memorials dot the nation’s landscape, will the grandchildren (however few and miraculous) of these grandcucks recall with great shame their emasculated forebears as warnings against denigrating masculinity?

The Great Men On Women’s Lib

From a 1973 interview by Italian leftist Orianna Fallaci of the Shah of Iran, Reza Phalevi.

Q: How strange, Your Majesty. If there is a monarch whose name has always been associated with women, it’s you. And now I’m beginning to suspect women have counted for nothing in your life.
A: I fear your suspicion is justified. Women, you know… Look, let’s put it this way. I don’t underestimate them, as shown by the fact that they have derived more advantages than anyone else from my White Revolution. I have fought strenuously to obtain equal rights and responsibilities for them. I have even incorporated them in the Army, where they get six months’ military training before being sent to the villages to fight the battle against illiteracy. Nor should one forget that I’m the son of the man who removed women’s veils in Iran. But I wouldn’t be sincere if I asserted I’d been influenced by a single one of them. Nobody can influence me, nobody at all. And a woman still less. In a man’s life, women count only if they’re beautiful and graceful and know how to stay feminine and… This Women’s Lib business, for instance. What do these feminists want? What do you want? Equality, you say? Indeed! I don’t want to seem rude, but… You may be equal in the eyes of the law, but not, I beg your pardon for saying so, in ability.

Q: Aren’t we?
A: No. You’ve never produced a Michelangelo or a Bach. You’ve never even produced a great cook. And don’t talk of opportunities. Are you joking? Have you lacked the opportunity to give history a great cook? You have produced nothing great, nothing! Tell me, how many women capable of governing have you met in the course of interviews such as this?

Q: At least two, Your Majesty. Golda Meir and Indira Gandhi.
A: Hm… All I can say is that women, when they are in power, are much harsher than men. Much more cruel. Much more bloodthirsty. I’m quoting facts, not opinions. You’re heartless when you’re rulers. Think of Caterina de’Medici, Catherine of Russia, Elizabeth I of England. Not to mention your Lucrezia Borgia, with her poisons and intrigues. You’re schemers, you’re evil. Every one of you.

“You’ve never even produced a great cook.” 😂

Was the Shah of Iran wrong? Hyperbolic, sure. Affected with that paternalistic condescension so common among Middle eastern men, yes. But basically right. Look what’s happened since… women have turned away from being beautiful, graceful and feminine, and coincidentally the West is in a free fall to oblivion.

Bonus Shah wisdom: in praise of authoritarianism when the governed populace is too dumb and low trust to allow them to Rock the Vote.

Q: God forbid, Your Majesty, but would you deny that you’re a very authoritarian king?
A: No, I wouldn’t, because, in a sense, I am. But look: To go through with reform, one can’t help but be authoritarian. Especially when reform takes place in a country like Iran, where only 25 percent of the inhabitants can read and write. Believe me, when you have three-quarters of a nation afflicted with illiteracy, only the most strict authoritarianism can ensure reform; otherwise nothing can be achieved. If I hadn’t been strict, I couldn’t have carried through even agricultural reform, and my whole program would have been at a standstill. If that had happened, the extreme left would have liquidated the extreme right within a few hours, and more would have been lost than the White Revolution. I had to act as I did. For instance, to order the troops to fire at those opposing land redistribution. So that to assert there is no democracy in Iran…

Western shitlibs (and cucks) will need to come to terms with the reality that certain racial and ethnic groups require a firmer hand to guide their nations toward, if not peace and prosperity, a stable equilibrium between Western-style democracy and chaos. Unfortunately, shitlibs and cucks will never come to this realization because they lull themselves into a moral preening stupor with visions of cable news broadcast purple-tipped fingers pointing up their asses.

The Fat Man-Cute Babe Couple Conundrum

I have remarked that one will see far more fat man-slender cutie couples than the inverse. This REALTRUE observation perfectly accords with sexual market theory: specifically, men place primary importance on women’s looks and women place primary importance on men’s social status and personality (or, less pointedly, holistic importance on each facet of a man’s character).

But libido-projecting male readers remain astounded: how could it be so?

Instead of a dry exegesis on the mechanics of the dating field and women’s evolved romantic preferences, I’ll paraphrase a pithily revealing convo I had with a girl when this subject came up.

SHIV IN FLESH AND STEEL: You know [fat guy X]. His girlfriend is so cute. And thin! He must bring something to the table.

EXPERIMENTAL GIRL SUBJECT: Confidence.

SHIV IN FLESH AND STEEL: {Faux curiosity} Oh yeah?

EXPERIMENTAL GIRL SUBJECT: He’s got it.

SHIV IN FLESH AND STEEL: {faux prying} And that makes up for the uncinematic sex?

EXPERIMENTAL GIRL SUBJECT: *laughs* I bet the sex is hot. He probably throws her around like a rag doll.

Yes, for anyone, man or woman, it’s better to be lean than fat. No one of sound mind would argue otherwise. But a fat man with an out-sized personality and bloated self-confidence will easily compensate for his extra pounds. (A fat woman has no such option, because men aren’t wired to see past her blubber to the beauty within.)

Girls have an amazing ability to overlook or rationalize a man’s physical demerits if he has equal or surpassing merits in his non-physical traits. Nothing further needs saying on this topic.

Everything Wrong With America, In A Photo

WOMAN: Hulking, sullen, traps that could stuff an NFL running back.

MAN: Effete beta, deferential to his wife, smug libfag smirk because he’s proud of himself for signaling his male feminist bona fides. (“Ladies and gentleman…my beard! I wouldn’t be where I am today without him..er, her.”)

COUPLE: Bitter black affirmative action queen who longs for real black man dick, and spiteful tragic hipster gay mulatto who adopted black power identity and hates White people, especially his late mother with the boy’s name and lifelong penchant for fucking District 9 set extras.

CONTEXT: President and First Macaque of the United States of America.

CONCLUSION: WE FUKKED

***

Beta males, especially those of the cuck variety, have a knee-jerk urge to publicly elevate their wives to positions of influence in their lives that are all out of proportion to reality. Jeb!, Kasich, Cruz…they all did it. A little self-abnegating generosity toward the wife is fine until it turns hyperbolic and comically supplicating. Beta males still haven’t learned that the handicap principle is easy to abuse and backfire on them, and that a man has to show a little alpha gumption before he can safely indulge some oily deference toward women.

How To Coax The Inner Confidence That Ladies Crave

A few readers have asked, if male confidence is so crucial to sub-cortically triggering arousal in women, how does a habitually low-confidence man go about locating a hidden reservoir of confidence and ushering it to the surface for exhibition, where it may be appreciated by women?

This is a great question, and the answer is less automatically glib than you may think. Sure, getting good at some objective pursuit will boost your confidence major, and that will positively affect how women rank your capacity to deliver them id-shaped pleasure. But what do you do if you don’t get sufficiently good at your chosen pursuit to stand above other men doing the same? What if achievement in your pursuit isn’t particularly valued by women? What if circumstances conspire in the wrong way to diminish the impact of your achievements on distaff vajflap?

That’s where proactive self-confidence stimulation helps to improve your seek-to-meet and meet-to-meat ratio.

Feeling self-confident from nothing but an inner emanation of willed empowerment is accomplished via lots of mind-body feedback loops. Reader buildthewall16 visualizes one such positive feedback loop.

alpha body language and behavior summed up in one sentence:

act like you are the star of the #1 reality show of all time: cameras following you around and millions watching it because you are so damn interesting.

So many men stumble before they even give themselves a fighting chance because they flood their brains with negativity to the point where they’re more comfortable wallowing in self-pity than strutting in self-confidence. Mentally focusing to resist the comfort zone of inaction and instead lodging, piecemeal or wholesale, irrationally exuberant thoughts of prowess and domination WILL, over time, manifest in your demeanor around women. If you think highly of yourself, the women will come.

It’s a cognitive trick that pays dividends, and in the zero sum mating market even small dividends allocated on a temporary schedule can mean the difference between incel and in-belles.

This in mind (heh), here’s a brain hack I use to boost my self-perception into the strutosphere: I imagine I’ve committed horrible crimes. It’s not true (mostly) and the imagining could be used as evidence of a nascent psychopathy (mostly), but if I think it enough and think it during those times I’m out in public (as if hiding something from the world) it really does infuse me with a devilish invincibility and the sense that my temper could flare suddenly, and I often will discover well after the fact that a shit-eating grin had found its way across my thugmug.

Chicks somehow pick up on my glowing sinner state and react, as is the wont of the jerkboy-loving sex, agreeably to my sly guy eye jive. Try picturing yourself in the role of the (lady)killer on the run and see if it doesn’t work for you as well.

Comment Of The Week: In a Nut(less)shell

PA briefly and with much-needed clarity explains the force of evil presently descending on the West.

Neoliberalism has turned people into fungible economic units. It’s a vampiric system that sucks the humanity out of men and women for the enrichment of the mobile capital class. They call it liberal democracy.

Perfect. Globalism is another shorthand for this system of fat cat and rootless cosmopolitanism enrichment in return for the sacrifice of the nation-states that provide the necessary conditions for our current crop of traitors to thrive, which conditions they are now working tirelessly to subvert and ultimately destroy. May the globalists burn in hell.

Just How Many Beautiful Women Are There In The World?

How rare is female beauty? The answer to this question has yuge implications for the functioning of the sexual market and the average man’s odds of landing himself a cutie-pie. Reader Wrecked ‘Em tries to get a handle on the raw numbers, and cleverly draws a connection to the normal distribution of IQ among humans:

If you take the HB10 scale to generally mean a normal distribution with mean = 5 and standard deviation = 1, it works out reasonably well.

7 = 1 woman in 44
8 = 1 woman in 741
9 = 1 woman in 31,574

With a global female population of 3.52 billion there would be 1,009 “10s” in the world. That’s a reasonable definition of an HB10: “one of the 1,000 most beautiful women in the world”.

Makes an interesting comparison to IQ…

7 = IQ 130
8 = IQ 145 (low bound for “genius”)
9 = IQ 160

Like IQs above 150, at some point it becomes difficult to “test” since IQ and beauty aren’t like horsepower — better to get them together and sort them into a closed-order ranking based on their own opinion of each other.

Let’s assume (justifiably) that the 1-to-10 scale of female beauty predominately applies to under-35 women. Aging has such a deleterious effect on women’s looks that the 1-10 ranking no longer sufficiently captures the over-35 woman’s negative contribution to the normal distribution curve of female beauty. There are so few 7s, let alone 9s and 10s, among women older than 40 that to include them in the data set would dramatically skew the beauty curve to the left side, where the has-beens reside.

Given the above age-adjusted correction, there is still a problem with Wrecked ‘Em’s statistical premise. To wit: If you live in a region with lots of under-30 women who haven’t let themselves bloat into lardasses, you might be surprised to learn that only 1 out of 44 of them qualify as an HB7 (or higher). The reality is different than a normal distribution of female beauty would suggest; there are way more bangable 7s strolling around our urban fertility sinks than 1-in-44. I’d say the number of 7s or higher in any given population of White, under-30, slender* girls is closer to 1-in-5.

What gives? Well, I propose that the female beauty curve for prime fertility women (ages 15 to 25) is right-skewed. That is, if excess adiposity is avoided, a larger share of fertile young women than is inferred under a normal distribution are cute enough to impregnate.

That right skew in fertile female beauty is hard to quantify, but readers are welcome to take a shiv at it. Now you can argue that one man’s 7 is another man’s 5, but the real world evidence refutes you; most men pretty much agree on which women are 7s, which are 9s, and which are LSMV pawns in your master plan to womanize the fuck out of this gay earth.

So we’re left with the problem of graphing the distribution of a primally fertile female sub-population that has more 6s, 7s and 8s in it than a normal distribution would predict. (Although perhaps not many more 9s and 10s; extreme right or left tail rarity isn’t budged that much by an overall skew in the entire demographic.) My guess is that between the ages of 15 and 25, the representation of HB7s is triple what you would find in a perfectly normal distribution of female beauty.

What about the left side of the female beauty curve? Meh, WGAF. But for shits and giggles, gross obesity (but I repeat myself) has clearly increased the ranks of women in the unfuckable 1-3 categories. Regular, height-weight proportionate unattractive girls (plain janes) still exist, but their relative numbers have been crushed (heh) by the growing (heh) class of fat chicks. In a healthy America, say, 10% of women would be 4s; in a super-sized America, only 5% would be 4s because half of the 4s would have gotten fat and demoted themselves to 3s and 2s and “I’d sooner pork an apple pie”s.

Perhaps, then, the Current Year prime fertility female beauty curve looks more like a camel’s double-hump: lots of, ironically, sexually invisible fatties, and enough bangable slender babes to keep men at least partially invested in making a go at it rather than surrendering entirely to Pornhub. As age gathers, the female beauty curve starts to resemble a normal distribution, until a sexual worthlessness inflection point is reached and nearly all the women bunch up on the far left-behind side of the curve.

*Obesity so badly damages women’s SMV that there are wide (heh) swaths of the USA where barely any young women are attractive enough to inspire thoughts of the bang.

PS Comparison of the extreme tails is revealing. My hunch is that the left tail of female looks is longer/fatter than the right tail. If 1-in-30,000 women are 9s, then 1-in-300 are 2s. And this mismatch accords with personal observation. It’s probably a consequence of the sheer number of genetic permutations that have to go right to produce a 9, as opposed to the relatively light demands placed on the God of Biomechanics to produce a 2. (Basically, Nature stops de-bugging her code, and lets the mutational load run havoc.)