How To Spot A Charming Loverboy

You know, all these warnings by women about players and their charming ways wouldn’t be necessary if women weren’t instinctively falling for their charms. Think about it. You won’t read too many articles warning women away from boring beta males. Women manage to Heisman those guys all on their own without directives from Cosmo.

Vox notifies,

Take a bow, Heartiste. Once more, science underlines Game:

The article is titled ‘How to Spot a Manipulator’, but it may as well be a truncated game guide for men.

One study tried to determine which personality traits pickup artists, men and women*, share.

The article begins by explaining,

In some ways, pickup artists use traditional tactics that fall into the category of persuasion. Whether it’s yourself or a product you’re trying to sell, you rely on methods of persuasion any time you attempt to influence someone else’s attitudes. You’re hoping that by influencing someone’s positive attitudes toward the item or person you’re promoting, you’ll change that person’s behavior.

Pickup artists have to influence people who have never met them to like them almost immediately. They rely on general strategies that others use to make a good impression, such as seeming attractive, charming, or successful. Unlike a person truly interested in getting involved in a romantic relationship, though, the pickup artist needs merely to look like someone who’s looking for love.  These qualities—being manipulative, self-centered, and insincere—are exactly those that show up in the personality constellation known as the “dark triad” of psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism.

The HEXACO model of personality structure informs us that Dark Triad people are low on the Honesty-Humility factor. Lemme tell you a leetle something about honesty and humility as pertains to What Women Want™: Honesty is relationship lube, not attraction lube. All else equal, no woman makes the decision to fuck a man because he’s honest. And humility is actually counterproductive to sparking a romance; chicks dig those overconfident men.

Interestingly, they went into the research assuming that, despite the stereotype, women as well as men could fit the criteria—and in fact, the study included plenty of female pickup artists based on the self-reports the team collected.

*Female “pickup artists” are really just cockteases with borderline personality disorder, as you will see this study pretty much confirms. Unlike male pickup artists who are interested in increasing the quantity, quality, or both, of their conquests, female pickup artists are mostly just interested in manipulating a lover or two for incessant ego validation and, when the men she twirls around her fingers are inexperienced betas, for material gain.

In the pilot study that began the project, Jonason and Buss asked 102 participants—all undergraduate students and two-thirds of them female—to describe their experiences with people who had “pursued short-term sexual encounters.” The 71 acts the participants described ranged from abuse (verbal or physical) to avoidance (not returning emails or phone calls). Between these extremes, those who sought to keep their interactions as uninvolved as possible engaged in behaviors such as avoiding non-sexual intimacy (such as hugging), keeping conversations superficial, failing to introduce partners to family and friends, and seeming promiscuous or blatantly announcing that they were only seeking short-term sex.

Lessee… avoiding cuddling and pillow talk… playfully teasing… remaining somewhat mysterious… refusing to relinquish too quickly to expectations of commitment.

Sounds like abundance mentality coupled with Aloof&Indifferent Game. This combo is irresistible to so many women, it’s a wonder more men didn’t evolve the ability to express it naturally. (It’s such a wonder, in fact, that I am tempted to believe there was a time, a long epoch, in our human past, when strong environmental pressures dissuaded women from cleaving to charming players or dissuaded players from openly displaying their talents.)

Male and female pickup artists were equally likely to use the tactics that would keep the relationship from evolving into a one of longer-term intimacy, as well as to seek ways to keep the relationship sexual. However, there were some gender differences: Men were more likely to use violence directed toward their partners, while women were more likely to let a partner know that they were only in the relationship for the sex.

Both sexes use what they know works.

In the all-important personality domain, pickup artists showed specific traits, including antisocial tendencies. As predicted, they were also more likely to be narcissistic. Again, though, male and female pickup artists differed in some aspects of their personality profiles: Women who acted openly promiscuous, for example, were higher in psychopathy. Men high in Machiavellianism were more likely to adopt the tactic of not integrating partners into their lives.

This is interesting. Promiscuous women are, as this study found, CRAZIER than promiscuous men. And our real world observations confirm this. It makes sense. Men are built — some rapscallions would say evolved — for promiscuity, or, at the least, for a tendency to be promiscuous when opportunities arise. Men are thus better equipped, mentally and emotionally, for no-strings-attached sex than are women.

Persuasive charming men — the kind of men women LOVE LOVE LOVE — will manage their promiscuous lifestyles by CARING ENOUGH for their lovers that they don’t lead them too deeply into highly charged emotional and commitment expectations. Heh.

Overall emotional stability also played an important role, but one that differed for men and women: Women who were most likely to engage in keeping the relationship from becoming intimate were also the least emotionally stable. And for women, but not men, self-rated promiscuity was also related to conscientiousness scores.

Again, sex-focused, relationship-averse women are emotionally unstable and self-destructively impulsive in a way that sex-focused, relationship-averse men aren’t. The sexes are different on a fundamental level. Perchance, to deal with it.

So how should women spot a charming loverboy? A short list to start them off:

Telltale behavioral signs

1. Engaging in unkind acts such as verbal or physical abuse intended to drive you away.
2. Avoiding physical intimacy other than sexual.
3. Being unwilling to introduce you to the important people in their lives.
4. Openly flirting with others in front of you.
5. Being unavailable and nonresponsive to attempts to maintain or establish contact.

The joke, of course, is that women can spot these signs and it won’t do a lick of good. It’s like asking men to spot the signs of beautiful women so that they can avoid them for low maintenance frumps.

Telltale psychological signs

1. (for men) Seeming to care only about what you can do for them, not how they can help you. [ed: chicks dig a sexually entitled man.]
2. (for women) Being late, sloppy, careless, and unconcerned about meeting other people’s expectations.
3. (for women) Seeming unstable, worried, anxious, and insecure.
4. (for both) Being highly preoccupied with their own appearance, showing undue self-centeredness, and expressing feelings of entitlement.
5. (for both) Showing lack of regard for other people’s feelings, not just yours, and expressing lack of remorse for actions in which they caused harm or pain to others.

The few BPD chicks I’ve dated were, without exception, perpetually late and lived in clutter boxes. I knew early on that women who had no interest in keeping up their homes (however humble square-footage-wise) and who preened constantly while simultaneously fretting about their looks (without justification) were basketcases who fucked like champion mares and who would be gone from my life, of their accord or mine, within six months. It’s funny how these female archetypes are universally recognizable. Special little snowflakes, my ass.

White Male Pussy Of The Month: Anderson Cooper

Anderson Cooper enjoys a gleeful moment of white ethnomasochism when he happily discovers a slave murdered one of his ancestors.

No further comment. The sickness is self-evident.

UPDATE

Ok, maybe some further comment. To head off the inevitable haters and short bus slopeheads, the “sickness” to which I refer isn’t the anti-slavery posturing; it’s the preening eagerness that Cooper brings to learning about his blood ancestor being killed by one of the slaves.

A non-pussy white man with a set of working stones, upon hearing the same news, would react more like this:

“Hm. How about that. Well, I’m conflicted. Not too happy about the slavery thing, but I’m not going to sit here and crow about one of my own blood getting brutally murdered, whether his killer was slave or not, just to act all sanctimonious for liberal whites and TV ratings. So, I’m glad they hanged his killer.”

Is it really so hard for pussy white male leftoids to MAN UP a little? Must be genetic.

Rationalization Hamster, Meet Psychological Projection

For those of you new to the Chateau, the rationalization hamster (original hamster — O.H. — introduced here) is a descriptive term for the typical woman’s tendency to rationalize her decisions to fulfill herself sexually such that her personal culpability in making the sex happen is removed or reduced. Since that original definition, the rationalization hamster has come to acquire a broader meaning, encapsulating all the odd little mental tricks that women (and sometimes men) do in service to their glowing self-conceptions.

Psychological projection, in its conventionally understood sense, is attributing to others feelings or motives that you yourself possess, but are uncomfortable acknowledging or unable to perceive in yourself. In dating market parlance, projection is a form of rationalization for an opposite sex’s idealized behavior. For instance, women often project onto men their own expectations and attraction triggers, fooling themselves into believing that what they desire in men is what men must desire in them, (or, similarly, that what women dislike in men must be what men dislike in women).

FYI, men, especially inexperienced beta males, project their desires onto women as well, though this particular self-deception is more commonly found in use among women, (for reasons that have been explained in previous posts, namely, the paradox that women have more to gain from their self-deception). A good example of a low N beta male projecting his desires onto women is the man who believes that women will only be intrigued by him for his looks, because that’s what he primarily desires in women.

The reason I bring this up is because I swoon with anticipation in presenting to you, CH celebrated readers, what I consider one of, if not THE, best representations of female psychological projection ever put to print. The article is titled, ‘8 Reasons Why You Should Marry The Complicated Girl’, and, if you check the authoress’s accompanying photo, the listicle was compiled by what appears to be a high testosterone woman with a glare so evil she could make the Grinch recoil in horror.

First, she begins by explaining the basis for her theory,

I am not simple. I am a challenge for any man, I will admit. As hard as I try to be the simple girl, it is just not in my nature to be one. I demand more from everyone because I see great potential.

I only want the best for myself and for my partner, so I will never just go along with some semblance of a mediocre, passionless relationship.

An unevolved man or a boy will always want the simple girl. He doesn’t want to have to work hard for anything, especially not a relationship. He doesn’t want to be challenged or confronted.

But, a real man knows that by being with a complicated girl, he will be better for it.

So, essentially, slander is the basis for her grand theory of male-female relationship dynamics. “Unevolved” men want simple (i.e., kindhearted) girls; “real” men want complicated (i.e., drama-prone) girls.

Her eight points are a gold mine of accidentally revealed preference… that is, her own revealed preference for what SHE wants in men, not what men want in women.

Marry the girl who tells you exactly what she expects and follows through.

Men who aren’t named John Scalzi despise domineering women. Women, in contrast, have shown a noted proclivity for enjoying the company of decisive men with leadership qualities.

Marry the girl who demands your respect.

Girls are respected when they earn that respect, not when they demand it. However, men who make inordinate demands on women do tend to get rewarded sexually for their impertinence.

Marry the girl who can talk politics, even if her opinions are different from yours.

Again, pure female projection. Nothing, other than obesity or a secret penis, kills a man’s incipient boner faster than a girl who is jabbering about politics on a date and is making a point of defying the man’s opinion. Women, otoh, do feel delicious yearnings for men who have strong opinions and stand their ground in the face of opposition.

Marry the girl whose eyes flicker with passion about a number of different subjects.

Translation: “Please marry me for the same reasons I want to marry you, oh passionate and learned man whose eyes flicker with life about a number of different subjects.”

Marry the girl who won’t let you get away with slacking on your talents.

Nag. Even a died-and-uncool male feminist will weary of a nag in time. But women do love a man who qualifies them as worthy partners.

Marry the girl who pushes you to be better every day.

Demanding potentate. But women do love a man who keeps them on their toes and away from the pints of ice cream. What she’s really admitting is that she wants to craft a man to be more like the type of alpha male who turns her on. This doesn’t translate into what men desire in women, though.

Marry the girl with whom you sometimes fight.

Drama queen. These kinds of girls love the pre-sex fight as much as they love the post-fight sex. Men just love the post-fight sex. Most men would be glad to jump straight to the post-fight sex without actually having the fight.

Marry the girl who is your equal or greater.

And here it is. Distilled female rationalization hamster projection. Pure femergy. Men don’t want women who are their “equal or greater”. Men want sexy, pretty, young(er) women with a feminine, more or less submissive disposition. It’s women who strongly desire an “equal or greater” lover, because women are viscerally attracted to mentally, physically, and emotionally strong men.

Post-list, the funny keeps on giving:

My dad always says the thing that attracted him most to my mom was the fact that she was smarter than him.

Gullible, thy name is desperately ego-assuaging woman.

Only a real man can say that and know it’s good for him.

Or a smart man who knows that empty flattery works on aging wives.

Don’t get me wrong; a complicated girl who is not yet mature will be a pain in the ass.

Define “mature”. (Answer: It never arrives.)

She will pick fights with you about everything, and you will always feel like a failure in her presence because you won’t know how to make her happy. But, with a little experience and wisdom, this is the girl who will become wife material.

Maybe the reason why men don’t want to commit to attention whores like herself is because they can see the writing on the wall. Just a thought?

And, once she’s at that point, you better never let her get away, or you’ll risk losing the best thing you ever had.

High blood pressure?

In some respects, this is one of the saddest, and most textbook, feminist limbic blurts I’ve read. Pained by men who have rejected her need for screed, she, like many women, refuses to look at herself squarely and instead puts all the onus on men to accept that they are really attracted to girls like her, and only men’s unevolved immaturity is holding them back from realizing this about themselves.

Yet again, a sterling display of a woman avoiding the consequences for her actions. The best thing she could do for herself — deep examination of her off-putting drama whore behavior and steps to correct it — she won’t do. Those eyes say it all:

“I am woman, hear me roar for validation.”

Reader Mailbag: The Uphill Battle

What does an uphill battle with a girl in chat look like? A reader who shall go by the initials “CM” writes,

Attached is my first contribution for your critique and the amusement of readers of the hallowed chambers of the Château.

Here in middle sized university city UK there aren’t too many 8+ around on your average night out. My current plates consist of an English 8 (29), Indian student 6.5 (21) and Polish nurse 7 (31). Swapping out the 6.5/7 for something hotter is a proving tricky since I don’t approach in sufficient numbers. Most of the 8+ are aged 18-24. I usually let them guess my age and then correct them at their guess plus 1 (recently ranging from 23-28) – I’m 34.

This conversation was after a 5 min chat outside a cocktail bar. I was acquainted with one of her friends that used to work somewhere I shopped. I didn’t have great confidence in a further meeting since the interaction was brief and wasn’t as sexually charged as I would have wanted to get. Fighting an uphill battle?

Feel free to publish the chat but please omit my name and her photo (a solid 8 I reckon).

The girl is attractive and slender. She would be a nice addition to the Chateau seraglio.

Here’s CM’s messaging exchange.

As you can see, her shit tests come charging right out of the gate (as is the automatic reflex of pretty girls).

who and huh? Haha

CM swats it away. I’ve read this text exchange a couple of times, and it’s interesting to me because there doesn’t appear to be a moment when CM blew it. There was no “bad game” that could be blamed for killing a promising vibe. He gets some decent teases in there, and doesn’t chase too hard.

If there were a couple of missteps that I had to call out, they would be:

you’re the nerdy little beautician right?

This is a passable neg, but I have a policy against total recall in chats. Very subtly, the act of remembering a drunk woman’s job when all you have in common with her is a short conversation is, to a woman’s mind, something of a beta tell. This is especially true for young, cute women who get a lot of attention from desperadoes. She will think (or her limbic node will think for her), “This guy must really like me if he remembered something about me I don’t even remember telling him.” If you have to ask, this isn’t a good emotion to evoke in a girl who hasn’t invested anything in you.

The other misstep:

Yeh im fussy too. U live close by in?

Dragging out the “full bod massage” script flipping was probably overkill at this point, but the question about where she lives was unnecessary and, since we’re talking about a girl CM hardly knows, a risky probe. Girls are very circumspect of men who ask what could be misconstrued as stalker questions. I would’ve just suggested a venue and then let her explain, if required, why that venue is too far for her.

Maybe the other thing CM should’ve done is offer a day for a date that was a little further into the future, instead of the next day.

None of these quibbles are of major concern. (TBH, I don’t get his last message. Was that a non sequitur text game attempt?) My take is that in the hour between him suggesting tomorrow for a date and her rejection, some old flame, or new guilt, reasserted himself or itself in her life. Her rejection — I work late and long days — is an obviously implausible blowoff (what, is she working 168 hour weeks?), but I don’t see it being a consequence of CM dropping the ball somewhere. It looks more like (my best guess) fate intervened against CM, or she is the kind of girl (beautician! hah) who really responds sexually to edgier jerkboys. If the latter, CM needed to communicate that better in his messages. As is, he’s operating in Jerkboy Lite mode, and that won’t cut it for the younger hotties.

Another Realtalker Burned At The Stake

A University president was fired by the school board for talking sense about personal responsibility and advising women on the effective means available to reduce their chances of sexual assault or romantic disappointment.

Jennings, who to no avail apologized for his comments before his firing,

Never apologize. It only incites the barbarians to pick through your bones.

still insists that his critics are taking the YouTube video out of context. But even the truncated version casts doubt on why he has been ridden out of town on a rail. The video excerpt begins with Jennings saying he’s going to let the women in on “a little secret”: “Men treat you, treat women the way women allow us to treat them. . . . We will use you up, if you allow us to use you up,” he said. “Well, guess what? When it comes time for us to make that final decision, we’re going to go down the hall and marry that girl with the long dress on. That’s one we’re going to take home to Mama. There is something about the way you carry yourself and respect yourself that commands and demands respect from us.” At this point, the video shows the female crowd clapping in agreement.

Slutty women get used like sluts. This was conventional, even trite, wisdom not that long ago, but today is apparently crimethink that can get you fired.

Then came the statement that clearly sank Jennings’s presidency (he may still have tenure as a professor): “I’m saying this because, first and foremost, don’t put yourself in a situation that would cause you to be trying to explain something that really needs no explanation, had you not put yourself in that situation.”

When the speech excerpt appeared on YouTube, it created an uproar. Marybeth Gasman, a University of Pennsylvania education professor, said it showed that “the president blames young women for being raped by saying that when they have sex with someone and regret the act, they then create a story [of rape] to explain it.”

Some women do this. Regret Rape is a real social phenomenon. But feminists and their enablers would rather light the torches and brandish the pitchforks against anyone who dares practice the sorcery of noticing the bad behavior of women.

The UVA False Rape Fabulists

As most CH readers know by now, a gaudy account of alleged gang rape at a University of Virginia fraternity (Rapegate) was exposed as a hoax, or, more charitably, as a freakin’ lie. Many feminists and lapdog betaboys were left shell-shocked by the sudden undermining of their religious belief.

This isn’t the first rape hoax. The Duke lacrosse stripper rape never happened. And more recently, Lena Dunham, SWPL heroine, was outed as a fabulist for concocting a story about a “Republican conservative” who raped her in college. In Dunham’s case, she named a man. Hopefully he will sue her to kingdom come.

What makes the current false rape accusation (FRA) craze so dissonant is that it’s happening in a social climate where actual reported rapes are in decline and at a 40-year low, at least among whites. It’s almost as if feminists WANT to gin up a rape culture because the current rape-less society they live in is unsatisfactory to them.

The Jane Jones hysteria demands explanation. What is motivating all these rape hoaxes? I have some theories.

1. “Rape-culture culture”, driven by white females, and particularly by academic white females of a highly ethnocentric minority tribe (Erdely, Merlan), and targeted primarily against the white fraternity brother archetype, is revealed hatred of a certain majority group’s men for being, well, what they are: The tribal bogeyman. Sexual desire for these men and warped shame for feeling that desire must underlie some of that irrational hatred.

2. Rapegate is the proxy mechanism by which underattractive white females get to express their true resentment of the sexual aggression of black men and the asexual indifference of white men. As iSteve commenter countenance writes,

Because “rape culture” is how white men in frat houses get the blame for black men raping white women.

White women do get real raped (and sometimes killed)… disproportionately by black men who look like this guy:

But of course, because race is the ultimate totem of intra-white status whoring, academic white females can’t come out and say “Hey, a lot of black guys are raping us.” So they release that anger through a convenient proxy: white frat bros. And why are white frat bros, mostly harmless even when drunk, the preferred alternative rape culture oppressor? Because they don’t give unattractive feminists the time of day. Thus, their expediency as punching bags for feminists is rooted in the latter’s resentment at being overlooked as sex objects by high mate value white men.

3. The sex ratio on college campuses — 60%+ women and rising — favors men in the dating market. Female students are thus put into a position, by virtue of their natural hypergamous instincts, of being one of the shared side dishes of a popular male student, of dating less desirable nerd betas, or of getting shut out of the dating market altogether. At the margins, this lopsided sex ratio and its consequences will cause some mentally unbalanced women (feminists) to act out like lunatics.

4. This is the darkest theory, and the one therefore favored by CH priests. Rape fantasy is a staple of subliterary erotica, aka female porn. A fair number of women are sexually and romantically aroused by violent men. Death rows are filled with the clutter of love letters and even marriage proposals from swooning women. Lurid rape hysteria really may be psychological projection of lurid sex fantasy in a world full of sexless betaboy drones. It’s a parsimonious explanation for Lena Dunham’s obsessing over a “Republican conservative” man having sex with her many years ago, and her current transmogrification of that consensual event into a latter day Regret Rape political stance. Five minutes of right-wing alpha. She just cannot get enough of that memory of real man cock. Manlet SJWs, limp-wristed male feminists, and slobbering white knights will never get this about rock-ribbed feminists: Most of them despise the company of the weak men they feel forced to endure. These feminist rape-mongers dream of being assertively taken by a strong man torqued with unstoppable lust. (Related: I have a theory that women secretly desire men of opposite political persuasion, and that the reason most couples align politically is largely a result of convenience sorting and arid subconscious calculations of child characteristics.)

***

Some sadistic thinkers dismiss feminism as a relevant social force. I disagree with them. For example, look at this latest feminist flop; will the rancid ideology finally pay a price? UVA is Peak Feminism, right? No wait, that was Duke lacrosse. No, it was Lena Dunham. Seems Peak Feminism has yet to arrive. Lesson: Feminists benefit from power elite shielding. Individual feminists may be mentally unhinged and emotionally scorched, but their insipid politics finds its way into government and private policies. Women in the military, Title IX, affirmative consent laws, and bans on paternity testing, to name a few. Feminist propaganda matters. It has real world consequences that victimize real men, in ways direct and indirect. The Hivemind masters — the Lords of Lies — protect feminists from their own malignancy and prevent them from suffering due punishment for their slander and caustic beliefs.

Everything rotten about 2014 America is exposed by rape and race hoaxes: Leftoid duplicity, media boosterism, anti-white male animus. CH is doing its part to help bring balance to the force, which has tilted for too long in the direction of the Snark Side. But we can only do so much. Others must step up. You can start here: A website devoted to exposing corruption among our journalistic, political, and academic elite. Call them out on their lies, record it for posterity, ruin their reputations, and hope that the righteous backlash has only begun to start.

How Women Avoid Consequences

Commenter Wrecked ‘Em writes,

OT, but good comment over at iSteve about “Karpman Drama Triangle”… [ed: i can’t be bothered to find the link] and how women transmogrify from “strong woman – hear me roar” to “damsel in distress – rescue me” very quickly to wiggle out of consequences and to keep the blame on “not me”. Might be a good topic to investigate.

This all gets back to the Fundamental Premise. Women are the biologically and reproductively more valuable sex, (men are the culturally and civilizationally more valuable sex), and this instinctive reality influences every social and political aspect of our lives. It’s the reason why women are eager to recuse themselves from any blame, no matter how deserving, and the reason why men are eager to enable women to do this.

Since this sex difference in blame apportioning and accountability is biological in nature, there will never be a program or seminar or rehabilitation camp capable of overturning it. The most you can do is point it out so the worst excesses of it aren’t codified into law by raving feminist lunatics and nancyboy beta suckups.

Women are indeed verbal magicians in the art of redirecting blame and avoiding consequences for their actions. They likely evolved this talent as an answer (antidote?) to male physical and martial superiority. Some other ways women avoid consequences:

– blaming “the system” or “the patriarchy” (this covers a wide swath of feminist philosophy, such as it is)
– pathologizing male behavior
– exploiting white knights (most of whom are beta males secretly yearning for romantic attention)
– making “for the children” pleas
– demanding female sexual empowerment, then demanding desexualized men (a fine demonstration of cruelty)
– gossip and alliance-building
– tears
– sex withdrawal (the male analogue of sex withdrawal is resource withdrawal. ask a wife how she’d feel about that!)
– its opposite: promises of sex
– poisoning children against their fathers
– making, or threatening, abuse and rape allegations (more common than most think, because a tyrannical state permits this vile behavior to metastasize)
– being unaware of or ill-disposed toward examining their own sexual machinations (it’s easier to defy blame for crappy behavior when you can’t perceive the importance of your agency, or the motivation for your desires)

It’s good to know these unsavory characteristics of women, but unfortunately the inertia toward idealizing the imagined purity of women is strong in tradcons like Steve Sailer and Ross Douthat. No offense to these gentlemen (ok, a little offense), they mean well and their Galileic work in these neoPuritan times is invaluable, but their #Realtalk stops at the bedroom door, like it does for most men with limited experience in the mating trenches.