Freelance Comment Of The Week: Less Feministing, More Hygiene

Reader TM forwards a comment made by an anon defender of the KA fraternity “Trump bros” who piled sandbags around their frat house and wrote “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN” on it. The context of the comment appears to be centered around some radfems snarking about the Trump bros’ insolence.

On the cbs article about “Trump bros”:

‘Note to college females who don’t want to marry “down.” You already outnumber males on campus 2 to 1. The ever fewer white males on campus are finally getting tired of the relentless and expanding PC environment that blames them from every ill from rape to black crime and at the same time expects them to pay more and more taxes to support the “47%.”

If you want to marry at your social, financial and intellectual level, you are going to have to out compete the other two girls who are trying to land the same lacrosse player/frat boy/computer geek. It may be fun to chant “Black Lives Matter” and “take back the night,” but your best chance for finding a well matched mate is while you are in college. The competition just gets tougher out in the real world (ask your older sister about how much fun the dating game is in your 30’s! ) Your future financial security, not to mention happiness, depends on beating the competition.

So if Trump rallies are increasingly “where the bros are,” you might want to take a shower, shave your legs, put on some nice clothes and head for the next Trump rally.’

Nice shiv twist at the end there. Like I’ve said, the “””rape culture””” myth is really an ego salve by low and middling SMV college girls struggling in a campus dating scene that is numerically skewed against their reproductive interests. As campuses demographically shifted more female over the past 30 yrs, the rape culture myth served as a nifty bogeyman to explain the increasingly shitty dating dynamics for women. “Shitty dating dynamics” = too few men (especially alpha men), who by dint of their scarcity can demand and get the milk without buying the cow.

***

This isn’t a freelance comment (it’s in-house), but The Tingler deserves a COTW mention here for asking a very straightforward question (that in a non-clown world would have a straightforward answer).

Was checking out Tim Wise today. Dude goes around teaching self-hate to whites at the nation’s colleges and lives in a $650,000 home in a 97% white community. Nothing new there.
Then I come across a quote from Malcolm X a few minutes later:

“Only a fool would let his enemy teach his children.”

When did the enemy start teaching our children, and how did we never notice he’d taken over the education establishment?

“Letting your enemy teach your children” would be a conspicuous facet of the cuck mind. When would you esteemed readers peg the Cuck Inception Date? Recently, around the time of president Floppy Wrist’s first term? Or earlier, say, when the Anita Hill hearings or the OJ trial occupied the news cycle 24/7?

Anyway, Tim Wise is a malevolent shitty little hypocritical lying cunt who’d be first to the public square with a black bag over his head in a sane society, but today enjoys paid speaking gigs because America has reached DEFCUCK 1, and the type of pale manlet who’s surprised to discover he has genitalia every time he unzips willingly wants to be berated by Wise and his ilk.

I don’t have a solution to this crisis of cuck crassness, except to say that intensifying the shiv lessons will eventually WAKE UP more White cucks to the abject humiliations they are visiting upon themselves, and if even a small percentage of them recoils in horror and turns to the shitlord side, the chance of making America great again goes up considerably. It only takes 10% committed dissidents to sweep along the recalcitrant 90% status quo NiceWhites and enlist them in the glorious revolution.

Niceness Will Be The Death Of The White Race

There is a theory to explain the origins of the core population of White cucks. (I use the term “cucks” in its shitlordy colloquial sense to mean White people who express more solidarity with antagonistic nonWhites than they do with their congenial racial kin.) This White cuck theory, associated with the writings of HBDChick, invokes two historical processes to account for the evolved psychological preferences of NW European Whites to feel altruistic urges and a moral duty toward strangers and particularly toward nonWhite strangers:

manorialism and non-kin marriage.

Basically, over a thousand-year period (or less) in the parts of Europe that today correspond to the Germanic nations, Scandinavia, and England, (aka core Europe), outbreeding (cousin marriage was prohibited by the Catholic Church) and circumstantial pressures (e.g., manorialism) that selected for more cooperative and docile individuals created a distinct type of people who are amusingly known by the acronym W.E.I.R.D.O. in social science circles — Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic, and Outbred.

I would add my personal theories to HBDchick’s emphasis on outbreeding and manorialism to explain the development of White universal altruism: the Buffer Zone Theory and The Culling. Core NW Europe, being a core, is surrounded by White nations and White tribes. Over millennia, this “ring of white” lands shielded core Europe from the worst depradations of the nonWhite world. This proto-NATO defense umbrella permitted the rapid selection for supranice Whites within the Bubblecuck region who had rarely had to confront violence on a regular basis from truly foreign-looking and -acting invaders. From other Whites, yes. But not so much from Vibrancy.

The Culling simply states that the great 20th century wars of White fratricide removed the hardiest and least cucked men from the gene pool. I don’t see how a continent’s character emerges unchanged by 80+ million premature deaths.

Whatever their provenance, altruistic WEIRDOS all have psychological traits in common, and one very noticeable commonality is their NICENESS. If you’re American, you’ll encounter this radical niceness in the Midwest and plains states, where White people of Core European lineage settled and multiplied. It’s practically the basis for the humor in the movie Fargo. Nice Germanics and Scandis and Anglos will have nary an unkind word to say about anyone, and warmly welcome any traveler who might wander into their lands. They are trusting (and trustworthy) and are just about the best kind of people to go to for a car repair, financial advice, or contract negotiation. They won’t screw you over, and they (perhaps naively) believe no one means to screw them over.

These are the people, not to put too fine a point on it, who practically built Western Civilization and modern society.

What can one possibly say about them that is less than fulsome praise? There is no end to the ways in which nice people are nicer than not-nice people…

except for one flaw in the WEIRDO algorithm.

One very big flaw.

Possibly an existential flaw that will negate every good thing achieved by these NiceWhites.

Their gullibility.

(Throw in a predilection for sanctimony, and you’ve got all the ingredients for supreme cuckitry.)

I agree with John Derbyshire that Midwestern NiceWhiteness “is America’s Achilles heel, and will bring down our civilization one day.” It’s becoming more apparent that these niceguy White cucks will go to their golly gee willikers graves dispensing unreciprocated niceness on the world’s ingrate riff raff, and in their misdirected zeal to be nice to the world’s 7 billion not-nice schemers and dirty dealers, they’ll take America down with them.

The Trumpening is illustrative. Twatter renegade @Ricky_Vaughn99 compiled a list of the state-by-state share of pro-Trump vs anti-Trump White ethnic groups that can be used to predict Trump wins.

The anti-Trump NiceWhites are mostly inside-the-Hajnal, core NW European ethnicities. (Keep in mind these are the cucks who happily voted for Marco Lubio, and who love open borders nutjob John Cucksich. Ironically, fake phony fraudulent slimeball Ted Cruz is a beneficiary of cuck love. Like I said, gullible.)

The pro-Trump Whites who love his fighting spirit, properly directed decency, and straight talk are borderlands, periphery, Southern, and Central/Eastern European ethnicities. These are the Whites who get, at least on a gut level, the danger posed to survival by the mass migration of alien peoples who have nothing in common with the White-centric heritage of America.

There might be an intervention which could save NiceWhites from themselves, and thereby save America and the West: forced integration with the blessings of Diversity™. You’ll note most NiceWhites live in very White states. And most RealWhites — Whites who are less gullible about the realities of the world and who prefer Realtalk over Poopytalk — live with or near nonWhite Diversity.

The hypothetical remedial emerges: expose the NiceWhites to those vibrant characters they claim represent “who we are”, let stew for a generation or two, and voila!… hardened shitlords speaking openly about the coming RaHoWa and assuming the aliases of ancestral Viking berserkers and Visigoth barbarians.

Game Recognized

What a public sight I saw recently. A fat (white) man — grossly obese like David Fatrelle after a pastry bender, arms like bloated Ganges corpses, manboobs jutting so forcefully into the air I thought they might spontaneously projectile lactate — was in the midst of a tiff with his (white) girlfriend.

His cute, slender, perfectly fuckable (white) girlfriend.

She was crying, her face contorted and flushed with emotional discharge. A lover’s argument kind of face. She was at his side, then walking ahead of him and turning to plead with him, then walking backward in front of him to keep pace with his uninterrupted stride, (or, in his case, shamble). Every so often she would reach out and grip his ham hock solicitously, to punctuate a question or coax a response.

He said nothing, mostly ignoring her except for the occasional exasperated frown. He barely acknowledged her, brushing off her touches and changing his peripatetic course so that she’d have to jog after him to keep him with earshot. His body language was as dismissive as his silence. This cute girl who’d have no trouble finding ten other non-obese men willing to fuck her and love her and dry her tears was chasing down a land manatee and begging for his tenderness.

BEGGING.

His tits were bigger than hers.

BEGGING.

Game recognized, fat man.

It’s not the first time I’ve seen similar scenes, but it was one of the more egregious examples of the awesome power of Game to overcome almost any male deficiency. How did I know he had Game? I knew indirectly, through his girlfriend’s reactions. But I also knew by the way he hauled his heft.

Fat as he was, underneath all that triple-chinned blubber I could discern the contours of a shitlord’s ZFG mug. His eyes, in permanent squint through larded lids, projected but one emotion: cocky self-confidence. He never wavered under the onslaught of her tears; there was no second act where her entreaties broke his situational command. He walked on, he smirked, he pushed her off, and he never appeased her implied demand for comforting reassurance. A fat man walking with a chiseled man’s self-regard. The alpha attitude was all over him, and when I saw that I understood how it came to be this thin, sexy girl was chasing after him, coiled in a tempest of dread that he might leave her and take the warm swaddle of his pendulous milktits with him.

Comment Of The Week: Is There An Elite Plan To Africanize American Culture?

Responding to a post about religion serving the noble purpose of facilitating paternity certainty, plumpjack makes an interesting connection between the interests of the State (and its administrative elite) and the need for, in effect, regulating the expression of testosterone in 99%er men.

Is it safe to say that the West is becoming Africanized sexually too?

It’s a good question and one I’m trying to sort out myself. here’s my theory on the matter:

the formula for building advanced civilizations was, for thousands of years, organized testosterone: do more shit, get more/better pussy and respect from your bros.

but now it’s being turned on its head, largely due to the advancement of technology. progressives truly believe that there has been sufficient technological advancement such that they can now do away with organized testosterone altogether and just press buttons to get what they want.

the greatest perceived threat to the progressive mind is organized testosterone in the form of fascism. an organized, empowered group with a common identity (***cough***…crackers…***cough***…) that’s skilled and capable is likely to handily and gladly final-solution other groups which are not considered good neighbor material

the africanization of our culture and our women is the progressives’ goal because base, uncivilized humans can’t organize themselves into large, unfriendly (to THEM) groups and are therefore less of a threat. an “africanized” citizenry can be easily controlled and manipulated because their constant infighting keeps them atomized and stunted. (of course cubicle living/careerism also keeps people atomized, which is part of the effort)

From a number of perspectives, the Africanization of American culture appears to be proceeding apace. The question then becomes: is it a deliberate conspiracy by the elite, or an emergent phenomenon of the policies and practices that the elite pursue to ensure their economic monopoly and safeguard their sinecures and bubblecuck lifestyles?

That question is largely academic, the answer to which simply means the difference in how quickly and perfunctorily the gallows’ stools are kicked out. The theory that plumpjack lays out has been explored before, but never (as far as I know) from the angle that cultural Africanization in the West essentially amounts to testosterone regulation by an elite intent upon preventing high T (White) shitlords from organizing effective rebellions against the power structure.

Corn and Porn enervates men and robs them of their rebellious spirit (a disposition Jefferson thought invaluable to ensuring a healthy republic); Broken Families and Gay Normalization severs communities and thwarts alignments that used to coalesce around shared values. Open Borders and Diversity™ enfeebles fellow-feeling and weakens natural-forming ethnic/racial bonds that normally provide the high-trust foundation for political and social revolutions.

Do the elite and their cuck lackeys know they’re doing this, or did they stumble into their wickedly traitorous worldview accidentally? More importantly, will they succeed in turning America into an African shithole ruled over by a psychopathic autistocracy from behind ten layers of security detail and electric fence? Stay tuned!

Monotheistic Religions May Encourage Paternal Investment

Twatter tartlet @clairlemon passes along a study sure to get on the nerves of neckbeard atheists and secular anti-Christian (((feminists))). She writes,

Interesting paper suggests that monotheistic religion is a paternity-certainty facilitator.

With paternity certainty, comes paternal investment. Men who don’t know if the kid is theirs are less likely to stick around and support mom and child. The blowback from that is an exercise in imagination I leave for the readers.

From the abstract,

The sacred texts of five world religions (Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism) use similar belief systems to set limits on sexual behavior. We propose that this similarity is a shared cultural solution to a biological problem: namely male uncertainty over the paternity of offspring. Furthermore, we propose the hypothesis that religious practices that more strongly regulate female sexuality should be more successful at promoting paternity certainty. Using genetic data on 1,706 father–son pairs, we tested this hypothesis in a traditional African population in which multiple religions (Islam, Christianity, and indigenous) coexist in the same families and villages. We show that the indigenous religion enables males to achieve a significantly (P = 0.019) lower probability of cuckoldry (1.3% versus 2.9%) by enforcing the honest signaling of menstruation, but that all three religions share tenets aimed at the avoidance of extrapair copulation. Our findings provide evidence for high paternity certainty in a traditional African population, and they shed light on the reproductive agendas that underlie religious patriarchy.

The major world religions sprang from patriarchal societies in which the resources critical to reproduction, whether in the form of land or livestock, were inherited from father to son down the male line (1⇓–3). Consistent with patrilineal inheritance, the sacred texts set forth harsh penalties for adultery and other behaviors that lower the husband’s probability of paternity (4⇓⇓⇓–8) (SI Discussion). The scriptures also place greater emphasis on female than on male chastity, including the requirement of modest attire for women and the idealization of virginity for unmarried females (6, 8). Previous studies have considered the evolutionary biology of patriarchy, but have focused on primate antecedents or cultural factors rather than religion (2, 9⇓–11). Here we test the hypothesis that religions that more strongly regulate female sexuality are more successful at limiting the incidence of cuckoldry, defined as offspring sired by extrapair copulations (EPCs).

SCIENCE! lands another sloppy wet kiss on the Chateau’s turgid…ego. Female chastity and fidelity really are more valuable to men than male chastity and fidelity are to women. (Male chastity is actually a subtraction from women’s appraisals of men’s mate value.)

The study population is the Dogon of Mali, West Africa, who practice four religions: Evangelical Protestantism introduced by conservative American missionaries; Catholicism introduced by French Jesuits who focused on humanitarian projects; Islam; and the indigenous Dogon religion, which is monotheist. Our quantitative analysis supports the hypothesis that religious ideology serves the purpose of defense against EPCs.

CH is on record (check the archives) predicting that the wholesale abandonment of religion by Western societies will lead to higher rates of cheating and cuckoldry, by both men and women. Recent CDC data on infidelity supports the CH observation that cheating is up, especially (and critically) among women. And as I have argued, unrestricted female sexuality is FAR MORE dangerous to civilizational health than is unrestricted male sexuality, and this is why thousands-year-old religions have evolved to specifically curtail the existential threat of female infidelity.

Muh dik is the slogan of the black ghetto; muh muff is the dirge of the dying White West.

Discovery of the reproductive consequences of religious practices is helpful for understanding the interface between the sacred and the secular, a neglected terrain despite growing interest in the evolutionary biology of religion.

Atheists and other irreligious types nursing an exaggerated spite against (mostly) Christianity have no idea the forces of chaos they are working towards unleashing. If they can’t tolerate pious platitudes and Sunday Church services, they are gonna have a really hard time getting accustomed to the worldwide Zimbabwe that an areligious “state of nature” will portend for their sexdoll time. Once you kill paternity certainty, you have signed the death warrant on Western Civ.

We show that paternity certainty was higher in the indigenous religion than in Christianity, which we attribute to the abandonment of menstrual taboos by the Christians.

The liberalization and feminization of Christianity will mean its death, either through attrition or transmogrification.

Women in the traditional religion are exiled for five nights to uncomfortable places called menstrual huts; during the day menstruating women work in the fields (23, 24). The indigenous religion uses the ideology of menstrual pollution as the supernatural enforcement mechanism to coerce women to disclose their menses by going to the menstrual hut. Hormonal data showed that fear of breaking these religious taboos enforced honest signaling to the men of the husband’s family, who situate the menstrual huts in close proximity to the toguna, which is a shade shelter specific to the males of a given patrilineage.

“Modern” feminists balk, but there’s a good reason for the existence of these religious rituals that appear, superficially to the comically stunted shitlib mind, to be relics from an antediluvian past. Stupid shitlibs think they can ignore the wisdom of their ancestors without consequence.

These findings for an evolutionary purpose to religion are often hard to disentangle from the native traits of the people that constitute the major world religions. Maybe Africans and Arabs have a psychology that requires draconian religious strictures to ensure paternity? And maybe White European women are sufficiently swayed by less onerous religious dictums? However you approach the question of causality, it’s fair to be concerned that the rapid demise of Christianity, and the concomitant rise of feminism, in the West will have downstream effects on the basic reproduction structures of civilization, and that in the future atheism and agnosticism and secularism may even influence the process of sexual selection and change the genetic characteristics of the people to something that resembles the anti-civilization shitholes of today.

How Not To Be The Creep That Chicks Don’t Dig

Girls, bless their holistic hearts, aren’t keen on detailing the reasons why this or that man is unsuitable as a lover. Instead of a sober assessment of a man’s characteristics, girls prefer to render their judgments in all-encompassing terms like “creep” or “weirdo” or “loser” or “nice guy”. Many subconscious mate value calculations operate in the female hindbrain that are consciously concatenated into swift and sure slanders of dismissal.

If a girl thinks you’re “creepy”, console yourself that her assessment doesn’t necessarily mean you are a creep. All it means is that you failed to exhibit those behaviors and traits that trigger her arousal instinct. But you should still take the smear as an opportunity to improve how you sell yourself to women. The alternative is meta-death.

With that in mind, here’s an illuminating study about the male tics and mannerisms that women think qualifies as “creepy”.

On the nature of creepiness

Surprisingly, until now there has never been an empirical study of “creepiness.” An international sample of 1341 individuals responded to an online survey. Males were perceived as being more likely to be creepy than females, and females were more likely to associate sexual threat with creepiness. Unusual nonverbal behavior and characteristics associated with unpredictability were also predictors of creepiness, as were some occupations and hobbies. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that being “creeped out” is an evolved adaptive emotional response to ambiguity about the presence of threat that enables us to maintain vigilance during times of uncertainty.

The limbic “creep” burp is a distant early warning to a girl that the seed under consideration shall not penetrate her eggs’ perimeter defense.

Salon (fag bastion alert) does a halfway-decent job itemizing the primary creep factors.

One of the paper’s hypotheses states unpredictability in a person is associated with higher levels of creepiness. Because we’re already initially uncomfortable with being unable to assess a person’s motives, we become hyper-aware of their behavior while trying to size them up.

This claim should be read with a critical eye. Ambiguity and unpredictability (i.e., being a challenge) are actually quite arousing to women, so the risk of setting off her creep alarm should be balanced against the reward of turning on her snapper sprinkler. My impression is that when a woman is curious about a man, there always lurks in the back of her mind the potential for her curiosity to lurch into anti-creep defense mode. To put it another way, every successful seduction is accompanied by an element of danger.

Other things found to sound our creep-alarms are behaviors such as standing too close to a person, frequent and persistent lip smacking or licking, odd dress and relentlessly directing a conversation to one topic.

Touching girls early on in a pickup is a crucial step to advancing toward the bedroom. But a light forearm touch is a different beast than posting up a foot inside a girl’s personal space. The initial kino should barely be perceptible; standing nose tip to nose tip is a little too “on the nose” for most women.

As for lip smacking and licking, don’t do it. Obvious. You ever see a man who does well with women licking his lips like Marco Rubio after the foam party antics have dried out to a crusty glaze?

Odd dress… just means don’t dress poorly or too skewed from the norms for your culture. Wearing a Bedouin sheet in Chicago will freak out a lot of people.

The last creep factor is the most important one: conversational stubbornness. Girls love freewheeling convos full of breezy associations and delectable tangents. We all know that nerdo or spergo who can’t let go of a point he’s trying to make over the happy din of a socially-gelling mixed group. If there’s one piece of advice I would give to men on how to avoid being the creep chicks despise, it’s LET GO. Didn’t get your point across? No prob. Ride the wave. Swing at another pitch. Take the detour in good humor and with a sense of adventure. The best womanizers I have known all shared this trait in common; they were pros at both leading conversations and going with the conversational flow. You can do this, too, but it will demand that you get out of your head and become more situationally aware. The field  of seduction is no place for shutting out external catalysts.

Cuckoldry Culture

Feminists bitch and moan and lie about a mythical “rape culture” that permeates America, but if you look at the numbers instead of wallowing in poopytalk it becomes clear that, in parts of the West at any rate, a far better case can be made that we live in a Cuckoldry Culture rather than a rape culture.

Britain has a fairly accessible data set on national rape and cuckoldry statistics, so we’ll examine the UK as a proxy for the larger Anglosphere.

(For those new to the Chateau and unfamiliar with some of our terms of enshivment, “cuck” is the colloquial term for men, usually married beta males, who unwittingly raise the bastard spawn of women who have cheated on them and gotten pregnant by another man, usually a jerkboy alpha male. The term is so descriptively brutalist that it was ported to the political arena as a hard-hitting insult — cuckservative — aimed at Republican pundits, pols, and voters who surrender to leftoid race equalism premises in order to curry favor with the gatekeepers of polite discourse. Rhetorically, cuckservatives sell out their children’s and their nation’s future, and their ancestors’ pasts, on the altar of liberal dogma, in practice “raising another man’s ideology”. And they do so oblivious to the humiliations they visit upon themselves.)

New research has shown that the cuckoldry rate in Britain is 2% — 1 in 50 British fathers are unknowingly (or without prior consent) raising the offspring of another man.

Researchers at Leuven University in Belgium said that they decided to conduct the first ever in-depth study after being surprised and intrigued to learn that the issue has received little serious scientific consideration, despite being a concern felt by many men.

That’s because, contrary to dumb feminist assertions about “the patriarchaaaaaahh”, women are treated as the more valuable sex in most societies, particularly in Western societies. This instinctual social, economic, cultural, and legal favoritism toward women is a psychological phenomenon which stems from the fact that, biologically, eggs are more expensive than sperm.

2% sounds like a blessedly low number, but if you take into account the absolute meta-extinction level event that cuckoldry represents to a man’s genetic and personal interests, 1 out of 50 is a rate that should give most men a little pause, and some men a lot of pause.

It’s an especially damning statistic when we compare that 2% cuckoldry rate to the UK rape rate for women.

The 2006–07 British Crime Survey reports that 1 in every 200 women suffered from rape in that period.

A 1-in-200 rape rate for UK women is 0.5%, or four times smaller than the cuckoldry rate for UK men.

Cuckoldry Culture is four times more likely than rape culture to be the operative paradigm.

But you won’t ever hear TheCunt or feminists or their Hivemind manlet lickspittles honestly broaching this ugly truth.

And note as well that the physical violation of rape last minutes, with recurrent bouts of psychological distress, but the physical and emotional violations of cuckoldry can last eighteen years, uninterrupted.

So maybe it’s time to discuss “the matriarchy” and “the cuckistocracy”, and how these social constructions amount to a “War on Men”.

PS Sparing a moment to pontificate abstractly, it might be somewhat eugenic in the long long term to permit, or at least to ignore, a low level of cuckoldry in an advanced White society. Unfortunately, while this may have been the case in the distant past, today it seems women will “cheat down” just as often with layabout badboys as they will “cheat up” with corner office kahunas, obviating any overall eugenic effect from cuckolding their wimpy beta hubbies.

PPS And let’s not forget that however eugenic a sexual market transaction (and any attendant social stigmas or sanctions), there are individual men who get caught on the wrong side of the sexual market equation and suffer immensely.

PPPS A real rape culture is emerging in Sweden, but the blame for that rests squarely on all the swarthy migrants GoodWhite Swedes have allowed into their country. Lying, cuntfaced feminists don’t have much to say about that, unless they have an opening provided by the leftoid media to (erroneously) blame White men.