Women Are Happy Communicating In The Language Of Children

Via The Other Anonymous, an anecdote that had my sides splitting from laughter.

https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/03/13/a-crib-sheet-of-game/

Re: Texting – My 10 year old Daughter inadvertently hijacked iMessages so that I didn’t receive any texts and, for a couple weeks – unbeknownst to me, had running text exchanges with a cross-section of my adult life – friends, colleagues, lawyers, romantic interests, etc.

Once discovered I read this mass of messages. Texts from guys ended in about three exchanges and with instruction to call them when I’d sobered up. Texts from women went on for pages and pages … the more mundane, the longer they ran on:

Her: What are your plans this weekend?
10 YO Me: Girl Scout camp
Her: LOL I’m visiting my parents maybe take their boat out.
10 YO Me: My parents make me wear floaties on the boat
Her: LOL

Now these are adult women, with families and careers – and none, not one, indicated suspicion that they were, in fact, speaking to a young girl.

The moral of this story is – Women can’t differentiate a text from a 40 year old man and a 10 year old girl … So, you must make it immediately apparent by using the universal, tried and true, one-size-fits all response to female Texts:

8====D

Fuckin A, I just reread that a second time and I’m laughing all over again. “My parents make me wear floaties on the boat, Her: LOL.”  😆 indeed!

There’s a Deep State Game lesson contained in TOA’s anecdote: 10-Year-Old Girl Game is a pretty good template for honing your Grown-Ass Man Game. Empowered, adult women can’t tell the difference between a 10-year-old girl’s texts and a grown man’s texts. To empowered, adult women who don’t know they’re texting a preteen girl, a 10-year-old girl’s texts and a sexy man’s texts both sound like ZFG, mischievous teasing to them, which turns them on so much they stick around to contribute pages and pages of texts, ecstatic with the cascade of professionally administered impertinent, flirty banter.

So the next time you’re texting an accomplished, proudly feminist lawyercunt, don’t make the mistake of speaking like an adult man clinging to his logic and linearity. Try chatting like a 10-year-old girl instead, if you really want to capture that confident, smart, adult woman’s imagination.

If you talk like a 10-year-old girl to your male friends, they’ll promptly tell you to sober up. Which is why the vote should have remained a male-only franchise.

Study: Diversity + Proximity = War (With Addendum On The Perceptive Genius Of CH)

May as well get this out of way early:

*💋PREEN💋*

An April 2015 research paper concludes that the Heartiste formulation

DIVERSITY + PROXIMITY = WAR

is a fact, is true, is empirically sound, and is an accurate description of the way the world actually works, (instead of the way various open borders ‘toids insist the world works through the haze of their equalist acid trip).

The Nature of Conflict

This research establishes that the emergence, prevalence, recurrence, and severity of intrastate conflicts in the modern era reflect the long shadow of prehistory. Exploiting variations across national populations, it demonstrates that genetic diversity, as determined predominantly during the exodus of humans from Africa tens of thousands of years ago, has contributed significantly to the frequency, incidence, and onset of both overall and ethnic civil conflict over the last half-century, accounting for a large set of geographical and institutional correlates of conflict, as well as measures of economic development. Furthermore, the analysis establishes the significant contribution of genetic diversity to the intensity of social unrest and to the incidence of intragroup factional conflict. These findings arguably reflect the contribution of genetic diversity to the degree of fractionalization and polarization across ethnic, linguistic, and religious groups in the national population; the adverse influence of genetic diversity on interpersonal trust and cooperation; the contribution of genetic diversity to divergence in preferences for public goods and redistributive policies; and the potential impact of genetic diversity on economic inequality within a society.

Diversity can be interesting… when corralled into separate countries and appreciated remotely or incidentally, such as when traveling. But Diversity™ — that is, the trademarked industrialized concept of diversity that demands it be situated in jarringly close proximity to Whites in White homelands — is a recipe for war.

War in every sense of the word:

• social unrest
• polarization
• lowered trust and cooperation
• severed bonds of shared purpose
• loss of public solidarity and ability to compromise on nation-defining principles
• a corrosion of generosity toward fellow citizens
• the rise of a host-parasite paradigm
• massive economic inequality
• stress-related illnesses from having to constantly be on guard against getting screwed
• a hundredfold increase in DMV wait times
• the normalizing of government incompetence and heavy-handedness

The list of shit consequences that flow like raw sewage from the proximate antagonisms of human genetic Diversity™ reads like a San Francisco bathhouse health code violation rap sheet. The more you scrutinize the fine print, the uglier — and bloodier — it gets.

Not that this will change any hearts and minds that most need changing. What’s a little (or a lot of) ethnic and racial civil conflict as long as Bryan Caplan gets to whore for status among his spergitarian SWPL buddies and live in a $450,000 median home price bubble?

The time for convincing shitlibs of any of these abiding truths is over. They are, at this stage of national dissolution, immune to reason and logic and simple common sense. The finer arts of persuasion have had their day. A more… direct… method of persuasion may be all that’s left to stop the suicide spiral.

Women In Love Act Like Beta Males In Lust

The behavior of a woman in love bears striking similarities to the behavior of a beta male in lust. CH previously explored this theme in lurid detail, and recently reader bw7and invigorated the theme with his personal experiences dealing with girls desperately crushing on him.

Heartiste, There have been a few girls I am fucking right now….all of them are around 2 points below my SMV. But I am getting regular action so I ain’t complaining.

One thing I noticed is that these girls will act the same way beta males act with hot girls. They try to entertain me when I am not in the mood. Like literally trying to make me laugh, entertain, put in effort which you just don’t see the hot girls doing for you or these same girls doing for other guys.

I play the aloof alpha card. suits my personality as well and I am able to pull it off pretty well.

Like this one chick, I never even showed interest in her whenever we met (thru social circle). I knew she was wildly attracted to me…she qualified…some comfort and she escalated physically all the time whenever we met. She actually made things happen like got drunk and got to my place unannounced to fuck me.

This is typically how 99.9% of false campus rape allegations go down: a mediocre girl with a major case of the tingles for a man strongly comes on to him, deliberately puts herself in a situation where sex is very likely to happen, and lubes the whole thing with alcohol because she wants the dick so bad she doesn’t want to risk her sober inhibitions making a “surprise, I might be a slut!” appearance at the moment of consummation.

The man, of course, is completely innocent, but the next day when the bitch realizes she will never be his Number One and has plugged into the feminist industrial waste complex the end of his life as he knows it will have begun.

I never made a physical move first….was just leading until the bedroom…..some kino escalation….kissing then F-close. Didn’t have to work for anything. Felt like a hot chick having to do no work to get laid. Played the aloof alpha card all the time and it worked like a charm. (never fell for her shit-test, total indifference at times even during LMR….no neediness)

I’d appreciate a more in-depth post on how women act with alpha males the same way beta guys act around hot girls.

Well, I say you’ve pretty much given all the depth the CH readership needs. A woman in the company of an irresistible, aloof, dominant, self-possessed alpha male will act not unlike a beta male in the company of a pretty girl.

The primary difference between the two is that the alpha male will bang the needy, try-hard woman as long as she’s decent-looking, while the needy, try-hard beta male is banging nothing but his head against a wall.

PS The implication of this post is that women are able to quickly and deeply fall in love with alpha males, despite their claims and romcom platitudes to the contrary asserting that love needs time to bloom. Corollary: Any beta male who tells his girlfriend that he loves her and receives from her a “it’s too soon for that, we need more time to see where this goes” response should accept it as fact that it will always be too soon and his girlfriend will never go with him where he wants her to go.

PPS Here are a few more examples of beta male-ish behavior that a woman swooning over an alpha male will display:

• ask a lot of questions about him
• laugh too hard at his lame jokes
• get too butthurt by his teasing
• agree with everything he says
• eagerly accept all of his venue bouncing suggestions
• pay for his drinks
• make no effort to qualify him
• excuse every lame, stupid, or shitty thing he says or does
• take it up the pooper at his request
• clumsily make all the first moves (with women, this means “incidental” contact with his erogenous zones)
• try too hard to fill momentary breaks in conversation with fluff
• misconstrue every minor indicator of interest as evidence of a blossoming love affair
• apologize too much

Comment Of The Week: …And That Is Why You Fail

COTW winner The Other Anonymous reminds defeatist losers that the men who do well with women all have a singular quality in common (and it isn’t looks):

I’m smarter than you, I’m richer than you, I’m better looking and funnier – but while you’re asking yourself these demotivating questions – I’ve already approached her – and that, more than anything, is why my odds are better.

If you only live by one credo, you can’t go wrong following the BUSTAMOVE philosophy.

***

Sentient wins COTW second prize for his field report demonstrating the manly allure of supreme overconfidence on women, using nothing but a presumptuous hand gesture.

I love watching Vitaly. Some of his stuff is really hysterical and matches my glibness when I am dialed up to 11… Was at a charity fund raiser recently at a street fair, manning a refreshment booth with a 28 YO 6 and 3 older guys (50+). Things are slow so I put some Vitaly “Hand of God” to use… Like this..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbYNAZxcWh4

I start pointing to women 10 – 70 feet away and motioning them to come to the table. It was pretty hysterical. First – 95% of them came over and zero percent of them – listen up Kevin [ed: kevin is a representative of the defeatist loser brigade] – gave any unpleasant response at all. The vast majority smiled, laughed and came all the way over.

No matter if they were with a guy or not… The few that didn’t just smiled or waved and shook there head no and kept walking.

I would just point to them, nod and gesture, could be a come hither with the finger, or a full palm over, and then I got creative as well – nodding and pulling hand over hand like on a rope or pulling back and reeling in like on a fishing pole… Giggles, curious sly smiles, “what me’s”… but 95% of them, maybe 50 women of all ages (I targeted the 6’s and up) step foot in front of foot all the way up to the booth… on command. with husbands, boyfriends etc in tow if they had any, with their girls around them… all caught in the power of a simple direct non verbal gesture.

Was really eye opening.

Now when they got up to the booth, I couldn’t run real game on them because I was surrounded by people who know me and wife, but damn, there was great banter, frivolity, teasing and a few of these girls went off completely crestfallen after I dismissed them to tend to the line. and lot’s of sales were made LOL.

Now the 28 YO with me (she had a 7 face but a little hippy) as I expected, responds well to this display. I start also commanding her to do little things for me, count the money, refill inventory, walk around and drum up business – all in a teasing but direct way. She is lapping it up though. In the small space, kino is incidental and becomes more frequent – arm, lower back, waist as we are moving around the booth… Hit her with some laser eye, close proximity and direct questions on what she got up to last night. Good stuff.

The older dudes – well they are a bunch of WK beta guys – but no doubt I am a legend to them “crazy”… they got to leer and mumble quietly “did you see that one!!!!” and occasionally stammer something out – picking up on my teasing but ham handed, cringe worthy stuff.

And I really understood why women don’t like beta K’s – because they are disingenuous liars… all of them WANTED to fuck these women, none of them wanted to acknowledge it and you could see the women… whereas I was fairly sexual – even in an indirect way – and they were responsive to different degrees…

Game concepts illustrated: ASSUME THE SALE. PRESELECTION. COMPLIANCE HOOPS.

***

PA wins COTW runner-up prize for the reason he gives approving of the stylistic elements of a White Student Union poster in Toronto.

I like that they’re using images of handsome men rather than beautiful women, as is common in pro-White propaganda. The beauty of the idealized White woman is indeed one of our glories, but we’re now in an environment where women should get discreetly moved out of sight and impressive men start appearing as the faces that represent us.

Very effective. The graphic sings with revolution. Also, you can see that the two men in the poster abide a CH truism about alpha male body language: Looking off into the distance, unsmiling, with heavy thoughts animating one’s gaze, is a very attractive pose to women. Not coincidentally, it is an inspiring pose that speaks to pre-revolutionaries as well.

***

Reader Jack gets a COTW honorable mention for correctly translating women’s stated preferences into their real world revealed preferences.

When a woman says she likes smart men, that word does not mean the same thing that men mean when they say “smart”.

Just like when a woman says she wants romance, what she really wants are parsimoniously doled out displays of almost-vulnerability from an unattainable alpha. Not a cringeworthy display of needy oneitis from an all-too-attainable beta.

The devil is in the definition.

What the men of the world need is a Womanese-to-English translator. What’s this? CH already invented one? How about that!

Diversity + Proximity = Sharia Law

A national survey of Muslims living in America found that:

a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.”  When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

Ben Carson said nothing wrong.

CAIR mau maus are a fifth column in America. Hoax bomb maker Ahmud and his family, and those like him, as well as the anti-White equalist leftoid media which provides a favorable platform for their America-loathing agit-prop, are bad news. Letting them into this country by the millions is a mistake we will pay for dearly in time.

But hey, Colbert is on to snark about Kim Davis so have a laugh and slip into the recline position, everything’s gonna be alright for one more day.

Chicks Don’t Dig Poindexters

CH has traditionally been agnostic on the burning question of whether chicks dig smart men because they’re smart or because male smartness is correlated with some other attractive male trait. It has been our contention that smarts alone do nothing for vagina tingles, unless the smarts are leveraged into wit, humor, and adult-themed teasing.

Smarts, too, will help a man better understand and apply the principles of Game. The sweet spot for male smarts is an above-average IQ that is coupled to a robust EQ. The biggest haters of game are either dumb “bros” who scoff at any idea that’s more mentally taxing than the philosophy found in beer commercials, or smart but socially maladroit spergs who lack the concrete field experience with women to accept that it’s possible to attract women without being a Hollywood star.

The Heartiste Dating Market Value Test for Men has a category devoted to IQ, and pussy-parting points are given to a man if he has an above-average intelligence, but deducted from him if he has a below-average or a well above-average IQ.

15.  What is your IQ?

Under 85:  -1 point
85 to 110:  0 points
110 to 130:  +1 point
130 to 145:  0 points
over 145:  -1 point

This scoring system reflects the reality any man who has lived a day in his life has observed: super smart men are often nerdy and weird, and that turns off women (or at best is considered a neutral attribute by women), while dumb men without compensating attractiveness traits will turn off women who aren’t dumb themselves.

And now here comes the confirmatory ♂SCIENCE♂ adding heft to the humble CH formula.

Human general intelligence (g) has been hypothesized to be an indicator of genomic mutation load and under sexual selection for indirect genetic benefits (‘good genes’ for the offspring), implying that high g should be sexually attractive. People clearly report preferences and assortatively mate for intelligence, but these effects can be due to direct phenotypic benefts of g and social homogamy.

I am on record stating that the “assortative mating” phenomenon of late 20th-early 21st century America isn’t driven so much by women preferring smart Ivy nerds (or by men preferring smart Ivy nerdgirls, as HBD nerd-triumphalists like to claim) as it is driven by simple convenience: people tend to date whomever is readily available within their social milieu, which one could call a “dating market bottleneck”.

Measured male g had no effect on female short-term attraction, but a small positive effect on long-term attraction, though only after extraversion and independently rated physical attractiveness were controlled.

Kneejerk nerd-defenders like LotB are chastened by this news.

The minor male attractiveness boost of intelligence to women thinking about the male subject as a long-term relationship prospect is caused by two factors:

1. the readout from an innate mate assessment algorithm women possess which informs them of the “dad” quality of potential suitors, and
2. the tendency of women to conflate intelligence with extraversion and looks. (We all know that social king with the wisecracking, uninhibited tongue who comes across smarter than he really is.)

Revenge of the nerds? Not quite:

Overall we found no support for intelligence being sexually attractive to women on first encounters, and limited support that it increases initial impression of the potential as a long-term romantic partner.

Someone alert the feminist industrial simplex: Women are shallow!

A commenter at Dr. Thompson’s sums it up pithily,

Mensa has no groupies.

A brief excursion into helix-gazing abstraction:

Taken together with very limited support for an association between g and mutation load in the currently available genomic data, these results cast doubt on the hypothesis that g is an indicator of genetic fitness under ‘good genes’ sexual selection.

I always thought that the best indicator of genetic fitness was, in women, their youth and beauty, and consequently their ability to induce my boner. (Women’s IQ plays little to no role in men’s sexual arousal. As no man ever said, “Dayum, that’s a fine-looking grad school degree you got, baby!”) It now appears men’s smarts play nearly as insignificant a role in female attraction.

Now, point of contention, I don’t actually think this is entirely true, based on the simple objection that the men I personally know (a large-ish number) who are good with HSMV women are also smarter than the average bear. But.. and this is a big but… those men are also socially savvy and self-confident, no doubt both of which traits are benefited by their respectable smarts. And they mostly hit on SWPL chicks who would probably not give the time of day to slow men who had trouble parsing their snark-heavy conversations.

No man reading this post should despair that he has a high IQ. There is no end to the ways in which being smart/alpha/sexy is better than being dumb/beta/scalzied. The study results merely suggest that smarts ALONE aren’t sufficient to attract women. You need something else, like charisma, humor, or… wait for it… POWER RAPE. As another commenter at Thompson’s put it,

Intelligence doesn’t need to be *inherently* attractive in order to make its possessors more attractive. Assuming ‘power’ is still “the ultimate aphrodisiac,” intelligence can be useful for getting it, showing it, faking it, and wresting it from unfavorable circumstances. Therefore, I don’t see this finding as necessarily dampening the hopes of shy intellectual men.

Precisely. A smart man has a leg up on a dumber man in one crucial respect in the sexual market: he has the brainpower to better understand women and therefore to sell himself to women more effectively.

PS There’s a not-so-hidden trove of dystopian nightmare material peeking through this study, for those who want to amuse themselves with supporting evidence for the Heartistian theory that unconstrained, liberated female sexuality (in conjunction with restricted, regulated male sexuality) necessarily leads to dysgenic reproductive patterns.

Giving Up The Burden Of White Privilege

Jews in America struggled for decades to become white. Now we must give up whiteness to fight racism.

Let’s teach our children that we are, in fact, not white, but simply Jewish.

Giving up the burden of white privilege to “fight racism”, aka to “freely shit in the faces of flyover White goyim in perpetuity and pull the Eskimo card whenever there’s a faint whiff of wholly justified blowback against our machinations”. How magnanimous!

(If you wonder why I used the “our” possessive pronoun above, do note that the chosen-not-frozen author staked his dialectical ground using the royal “we”.)

Of course, this “white privilege” he wants to give up is actually the albatross of “white defenselessness” he doesn’t want hanging around his neck now that it’s open season on Whites in America. It’s easier to subvert the once-dominant-but-now-a-fag69 White culture when you can simultaneously evade collateral damage and also receive protection from return fire by claiming anti-White fringe coalition membership.

PS I’m gonna head off a stream of runny commenter shit and just remind everyone that genetic analysis has proven that Eskimos are predominantly half northern Italian-half Middle Eastern by ancestry, and are thus best described as being a distinct White ethnicity. (Also, later waves and generations likely absorbed a fair amount of Slav genes.)