Merry Christmas!

Patterns

Zeets just texted me:

“Of all the women you’ve been with, have any gone on to have kids? Is there a pattern here?”

Thinking back, I don’t know one ex who went on to have kids. Now I haven’t followed the life trajectories of many of them, so I can’t be sure some haven’t popped out sprogs, but I do know that I’ve never once heard or been informed that a woman I’ve been with later had kids. A couple of women already had kids when I met them (weekend flings), but I’m pretty sure my despoliation of them convinced them not to have any further kids.

Patterns, I see them. Questions arise. Is the incorrigible player psychologically drawn to women with low maternal instincts? Does the womanizer target the barren of womb? Or do INDEPENDENT, MAKE MY OWN WAY women who would like to put off kids until after their second fine arts master’s degree in their late 30s naturally gravitate to cads? Or is it just an east coast urban “in heat” island effect?

Much is made of the dueling sexual strategies employed by men — the cad or dad conundrum — and how the ratio fluctuates depending on the larger cultural context, but what is sometimes overlooked is how the choices of women affect men’s mating strategies. A stong biofeedback loop exists in social environs that feature a lot of anti-kid, low maternal instinct women for men who bring status to the table (fame, looks, game) at the expense of resource provisioning ability. In short, the classic provider beta is being locked out of the competition in our bluest blue states and urban pleasure plazas.

My advice to beta males who can’t or won’t learn game is to head for the red states and rural areas. If you’re irreligious, learn to love the lord and sing a few hosannahs in church for the bounty of cornfed pussy that’s about to come your way. Merry Pussmas!

A Test Of Your Game: The Judging

Way back in November I posed the following scenario. What do you do when your girl keeps mentioning the name of another man she’s known since high school and for whom you suspect she nurses some latent sexual attraction?

363 comments suggests this sort of scenario is not that uncommon. Most readers’ responses would fall under the category of “overreaction”. Reacting out of proportion to a woman’s infraction is the quickest way to discredit your alpha cred. A few got it right. Here is a random sampling:

MeMyselfI wrote:

Ignore most of what she’s saying about the other guy. Tuck it away for future use, but don’t worry about it.

Hit on the waitress (assuming she’s reasonably good looking – better if she’s hot) in front of her during that dinner.

Take her home after dinner – no sex that night. Early if possible. Go to another party/event. Maybe text her from that event, if possible. See if she asks what your are doing.

Wait and see how she responds to the above…

In every “Test of your Game” post, I always include a few critical clues to the correct response. In this scenario, I specifically wrote that you had been dating this hypothetical girl for a few months. Now think about it — is it normal behavior for a man who’s been dating a girl for months to blatantly flirt with the waitress over dinner, drop his girl off at home with no sex so he can go to another party without her, and then text her from that party later in the night… all because she mentioned another dude’s name a few too many times during dinner? You don’t think the girl will ask you why you’re dropping her off and refusing to take her to another party? This is classic overreaction. Now this kind of asshole game will work on a girl you’ve just started dating who is playing hard to get with you, but not with a girlfriend.

Grade: D (Barely passing, because your heart is in the right place)

jom wrote:

Say something along the lines of, “Sometimes you have to let people make the stupid mistakes they are determined to make.” You frame him as a fool who needs to learn in order to reach your level.

Generally speaking, subtle psychological ploys like this one trump spazzy overreaction. In the post, I wrote that the girl was “fake complaining” about something the other man did. You know how girls fake complain about men they find sexually alluring? It gives them a reason to keep his name front and center in her mind. Jom’s psychological acrobatics can be an effective counter tactic, although it is not the best option available because his reframe continues with the theme of keeping the other man’s presence alive in the conversation.

Grade: B-

Dan wrote:

Kill her.

Well, at least it’s not beta.

Grade: F+

Thras wrote:

Wait for the next time that she doesn’t account for her movements, accuse her of seeing him. Storm out. Then get into a fight with the guy at the next available opportunity.

I’m pretty sure this reply was meant as a joke.

Grade if joke: B+

Grade if not joke: F

The Book of Dooderonomy wrote:

I’d defend the guy’s actions, so long as they were short of murder.

Her: I can’t believe John did *so and so objectionable action*.
Me: Ha, really? Well, from a guys perspective, it seems he did the right thing. Had I been put in that situation, I’d definitely have done something similar.

And I’d keep defending it, but defend it intelligently, yet with a hint of me just doing it to get under her skin. Also, I would note to her that he seems like a “really cool guy” and some of his other good qualities, but do it backhandedly.

This is psyche-out 101, similar to Jom’s reply, except better because it doesn’t risk making you sound resentful as you would if you were to criticize your competition, however adroitly you massage your criticisms. Backhanded compliments of intruder males, like negs to target women, is a sly — some would say slimy — ploy to keep the upper hand. It is usually effective.

Grade: A

Skryblah wrote:

Easy, just smile to yourself when she brings him up, each and every time, and each time she asks why you are smiling, just say that you remembered something funny…be sure to make it look legit, and then sit back as her brain goes hyper confused, she can connect the dots to figure out that you smile every time she mentions him but she will go crazy trying to figure out why on earth you are smiling, basically successfully shifting her focus from the other guy to why the fuck you are smiling. Never underestimate the crazy things women think of when trying to rationalize their guys actions that seem irrational.

I include responses like this one under the category of “What I pretend not to notice won’t affect me”. A generally safe bet as a strategy, but sometimes it *will* affect you. Then what? Nevertheless, if you can’t find an effective way to respond, a good default mode is the shit eating grin followed up by the utterly random conversational thread breaker.

Grade: B+

anony (a woman) wrote:

address it directly, with respectful teasing, that she has a crush on him. the particular words don’t matter.

Teasing a girlfriend about having a crush on another man works well if the other man in question is some faraway totally unobtainable dude like a Hollywood celebrity. Or if the other guy is obviously lower in status than you. But it’s a risky tactic if the other man is someone she’s known for years and could represent serious competition to you.

Grade: C

ASDF wrote:

My first reaction (if I could no longer ignore it) would be to call her out a bit. Saying something like “I’m not interested in talking about your buddy. That’s what your girlfriends are for. I don’t care about his problems.”

The “calling her out” strategy was very popular among the commenters. I say it risks sounding like overreaction. Sometimes a woman’s shit test is so bold it deserves a strong, alpha male “calling out” response, possibly appended with an ultimatum. This was not one of those times.

Grade: C-

The G Manifesto wrote:

You lost me here:

“You’ve been dating a girl for a few months. ”

But to play along, I like MeMyselfI’s moves.

I would get the waitress or girl bartenders number when the girl goes to the bathroom.

Then get a blower in the Lac before dropping her off.

Then roll to the Gentleman’s Club to swoop more girls.

All done suited down of course.

I was about to fail this entry, but then I noticed he would do all this suited down. I revised my grading.

Grade: A+

hcl wrote:

Hmmm, were this a real life scenario I’d believe she fails to meet his high, non-player (stoic = not a player) standards.

If he didn’t bang her then (and they obviously haven’t), he simply isn’t sufficiently interested. She’s an orbiter of his.

The likelihood they’ll ever bang is low, but non-zero.

hcl has done a good job of correctly assessing the dynamics of the shadow relationship. She’s known this other guy for years and yet, according to her, they’ve never dated or (presumably) hooked up? She’s an orbiter of him, not the other way around. Does this fact mean it is more or less dangerous for you? Tough to say. Assuming his interest in her is low and her interest in him is high, all it would take is a small move on his part, if he were so inclined, to tempt her into a tryst. But it’s also important to remind yourself that she’s fucking you, not the other guy. That is the fact that matters most above all other facts.

Grade: A for proper assessment

John wrote:

“Call him up…we can both bang you at the same time. I call mouth.”

If you are dating a superfreaky girl, this might just work. But then you’d have to watch another guy banging her from behind while you’re up front. Would you high five him during the Chinese finger cuffs?

Grade: E for effort

***

What I did:

While she was taking about the dude, I reached over and grabbed a piece of lint off her shoulder. Neg, abrupt conversation thread break, and protector of loved ones, all in one simple gesture.

Nonetheless, because of her not-so-infrequent mentions of his name, she was put on mental notice, and bumped down to tier 2 on the CH Fidelity Guarantee Purchase Policy. This means I kept my eye open for other prospects and put up token resistance when tempted.

Snow = Gina Tingles

Sitting in Tryst, watching the snow fall and eating a delicious smoked salmon sandwich, I couldn’t help but notice the glow of horniness on girls’ faces. I muse. Does a heavy blanket of snow trigger the provider beta attraction switch in women? After all, in prehistoric times in the northern lands a good snowfall meant wet, cold, and poor foraging prospects (food buried under snow). A technologically proficient and future time oriented beta would have planned for big snow events so that when they arrived he would be the go-to guy with the warm shelter and stored smoked meats. The sexy stud would have been building snow forts until his feet got too cold and he trundled home to the cave to an empty fridge. (My fridge is empty and I’m down to half a roll of TP. You ladies and your messy nether regions are paper hogs. Gaia is displeased.) I wonder if extreme weather inspires women’s lust for resource providing men?

Getting lots of looks as chicks walk by and I wink at them through the window. It must be the confidence I display in the face of uber inclement weather. Or my rugged pea coat.

A girl has tied her labrador up to a post. She sits behind me. The dog is rambunctious and pees on a Lexus SUV parked in front. I turn around and tell her her dog just peed on a Lexus, and that she has it trained well. She laughs. Love? Of course.

Guys, if you live in the snow path go out now and ask passing women if this is good quality snow for snowball making. Tell them you want to make snowballs “that only hurt a little.” That should get the ball rolling.

Science Continues Validating CH Reductionism

As I’ve been saying all along, female beauty is objectively measurable and not a function of the beholder’s eye.

The distance between a woman’s eyes and the distance between her eyes and her mouth are key factors in determining how attractive she is to others, according to new psychology research from the University of California, San Diego and the University of Toronto. […]

They discovered two “golden ratios,” one for length and one for width. Female faces were judged more attractive when the vertical distance between their eyes and the mouth was approximately 36 percent of the face’s length, and the horizontal distance between their eyes was approximately 46 percent of the face’s width.

“We already know that different facial features make a female face attractive – large eyes, for example, or full lips,” said Lee, a professor at University of Toronto and the director of the Institute of Child Study at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. “Our study conclusively proves that the structure of faces – the relation between our face contour and the eyes, mouth and nose – also contributes to our perception of facial attractiveness.”

Just think how many wars, inventions, poems, novels, symphonies were created because some woman’s facial bone structure developed a few millimeters in a pleasing direction.

***

Ogling voluptuous women will help a man stay healthy.

A rather bizarre study carried out by German researchers suggests that staring at women’s breasts is good for men’s health and increases their life expectancy.

According to Dr. Karen Weatherby, a gerontologist and author of the study, gawking at women’s breasts is a healthy practice, almost at par with an intense exercise regime, that prolongs the lifespan of a man by five years.

She added, “Just 10 minutes of staring at the charms of a well-endowed female, is roughly equivalent to a 30-minute aerobics work-out.”

I like looking, but fondling is my preferred method of interaction. This probably explains why titty bars have never held my interest for very long. I’ve got to have and to hold the goods.

If 10 minutes of staring at big round tits is equivalent to a 30 minute jog, what does one hour of titty fucking equal? A triathlon?

In addition, she also recommended that men over 40 should gaze at larger breasts daily for 10 minutes.

If you’re an alpha, you are free to gaze for 30 minutes, directly at the boobs and without blinking. Omegas must avert their eyes immediately, and their brief glance must be sidelong and then quickly evaporate under a burn of shame.

***

It’s funny when tired, hoary platitudes crumble. Guess what? You CAN judge a book by its cover.

Observers were able to accurately judge some aspects of a stranger’s personality from looking at photographs, according to a study in the current issue of Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (PSBP), the official monthly journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology. Self-esteem, ratings of extraversion and religiosity were correctly judged from physical appearance.

Researchers asked participants to assess the personalities of strangers based first on a photograph posed to the researchers’ specifications and then on a photograph posed the way the subject chose. Those judgments were then compared with how the person and acquaintances rated that individual’s personality. They found that while both poses provided participants with accurate cues about personality, the spontaneous pose showed more insight, including about the subject’s agreeableness, emotional stability, openness, likability, and loneliness.

The study suggested that physical appearance alone can send signals about their true personality.

“As we predicted, physical appearance serves as a channel through which personality is manifested,” write authors Laura P. Naumann, University of California, Berkeley, Simine Vazire, Washington University in St. Louis, Peter J. Rentfrow, University of Cambridge, Samuel D. Gosling,University of Texas at Austin. “By using full-body photographs and examining a broad range of traits, we identified domains of accuracy that have been overlooked, leading to the conclusion that physical appearance may play a more important role in personality judgment than previously thought.”

Living in the city has honed my threat detection system. I can, with a split second scan of a stranger’s face, tell you with better than random accuracy the character of that person. This has aided me when walking back from lovers’ apartments at 2 AM through vibrant neighborhoods.

I don’t think I need to tell you the significance of this study with regards to alpha body language and game.

***

Why 99.9% of history’s accomplishments have been achieved by men:

Researchers using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to study brain activation have found that men and women respond differently to positive and negative stimuli, according to a study presented today at the annual meeting of theRadiological Society of North America (RSNA).

“Men may direct more attention to sensory aspects of emotional stimuli and tend to process them in terms of implications for required action, whereas women direct more attention to the feelings engendered by emotional stimuli,” said Andrzej Urbanik, M.D., Ph.D., chair of Radiology at Jagiellonian University Hospital in Krakow, Poland.

Like a little fifteen year old girl, defending her feelings inside.

How does that old saying go? Men win the argument to win the group. Women win the group to win the argument. Which preference is more likely to lead one away from the truth? I’ve said it before: Suffrage is the poison pill that eventually destroys the body politic of a nation.

PS: There were two obscure pop culture references in this post. Can you find them?

November 2009 Beta Of The Month

We’re getting near the end of the year when the final beta — the One Beta to rule them all — is voted upon for inclusion into the pussywhipped Hall of Infamy. Last month’s winner, sent in by reader waysa, was the Croatian tennis “pro” (loosely defined) who begged and pleaded not just for sex, but for marriage!, from a has-been single mom cougar. Let’s hope for the Croat’s sake he was angling for the future divorce payday from his wealthy older lady lover.

November 2009 BOTM Candidate #1 was submitted by Mike (“Anonymous” technically got there first, but any submission signed anonymously is excluded from receiving props). A picture tells a thousand words:

The great thing about this picture is that no matter what the reason for this unfortunate man’s prostration, his action sullies him with the mark of the beta. And a really nauseating beta at that. If he lost a bet, he is a beta for playing poor odds that would result in him paying up in such a pathetic manner. If it’s a fetish, then this is proof that some fetishes are the domain of losers. If you must have a fetish, make it something alpha like collaring your woman. Beta fetishes: peeping tom/voyeurism, flashing, bang my wife, wearing women’s skin as suit and tucking junk between legs. Alpha fetishes: BDSM, amateur porn filmmaking, public sex, ceiling mirrors, saying “giggity” when you successfully close the deal.

If he’s doing it as penance for some horrible relationship transgression, he wins alpha points for the transgression but immediately gives them back and then some for agreeing to this form of punishment. If he’s doing it as a clownish joke to get on the internet, well… there are some self-deprecating jokes that you should never do. Good rule of thumb: If the Jackass guys won’t do it, neither should you.

If this photo portrays exactly what is happening — a sackless boyfriend dropping to hands and knees so his tired girlfriend can sit on him and humiliate him in public — then the beta on display here is so strong it defies explanation.

******

November 2009 BOTM Candidate #2 was submitted by Ross W. Have you ever wondered what happens when an inborn beta becomes a little too aggressively creepy in his pursuit of a taken woman? Well now, thanks to Lamebook, you can read a stellar example of just such a specimen.

I’m not going to categorize all the ways this guy Andrew misunderstands the nature of women. Suffice to say, he fails the Jumbotron test. Spectacularly.

By the way, Carla’s reply was better than Lee’s. Brevity is the soul of spit.

******

November 2009 BOTM Candidate #3 was submitted by Patrick. It’s a radio broadcast of a “War of the Roses” prank that features a cuckolded man literally begging his cheating live-in girlfriend to stay with him. Listen to the whole thing but pay particular attention starting at -02:50.

I honestly had a hard time making it through to the end, it was that bad. If I had to distill the beta essence in a few words, it would be “What can I do to make you love me?” Which is what this pathetic cur says. Over and over. Even after being told his mewling is not helping his cause.

The problem with betas is that they believe in the promise of hope instead of the disenchantment of reality. Listen to this guy closely. He finds all this evidence that his GF is cheating — the birth control, the new lingerie, the Facebook emails — and yet he continues nurturing hope that she isn’t doing what he knows deep inside she’s doing, and that she still has the capacity to love him. Hope is the great alpha killer, the destroyer of masculinity, the betrayer of dignity. It serves one purpose only — to trick you away from the path of righteous self interest. Weak people cling to hope. But hope is a faint siren song; as soon as you taste some success you will forget all about hope and wallow in the delights of reality.

Besides serving as cruel amusement for the coliseum, there is another very good reason for publicly shaming these wretched betas: their needy behavior feeds the treachery of women, which in turn poisons the well for every other man making his way in the mating market. By refusing to confront his bitch whore girlfriend in the only way that would earn any respect from her (and respect from women is measured in the oscillation of their tingle wavelength), the man in this radio clip unwittingly contributes to the romantic feelings between his girlfriend and her lover. Freed from the threat of his anger or his ultimatums or even his awareness, she is able to nourish her illicit love affiair with the thrill of secrecy and dangerous rendezvous. As we all know about women, a little mystery and taboo goes a long way to infusing a man with allure. You want your unfaithful girlfriend to really get the most out of her affair? Simple. Just play the fool and let her sneak around like a tramp in the night, her lover’s embrace made all the more compelling by the transgressive narrative. But confront her and leave her, and suddenly her lover is not so intriguing anymore.

There’s a reason women despise men like this guy Conor from the radio clip. When a woman cheats on you she does not want to hear that you still love her. All that tells her is that you have low standards and an even lower expectation that you could do better. It also confirms her suspicion that you love her for no other reason than the sex that she provides. Of course, alpha males also love for those shallow reasons, but they are smart enough to know that love can’t be requested. It must be earned.

******

The voting:

Newsflash! MILF Beats DILF

It’s not every day you see a mother-daughter couple where the mom is hotter and more bangable than her daughter. In fact, it’s so rare that the existence of such earns a place on this hallowed forum.

The mother is on the right. Judging by the somewhat prominent manchin of the daughter, my guess is that mom married a very testosterone charged alpha male, perhaps a corporate lawyer or a baseball player. You know how it is with genes; you do everything you can to ensure the best possible recombinatorial outcome but occasionally those damn genes throw you a curveball, like a daughter who looks more like rock ’em sock ’em pop, or a son who glows with the feminine softness of MILFy mom.