Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Gaily skipping along, was a mischievous sneak, on this joyous International Women’s Day, when a fortuitous Assening occurred and the firmament poured forth a perfectly formed testament to the sacrifices and contributions women have made to international internationality. To honor and celebrate ARE WAHMEN, beings of pure light and goodness beholden to no law of reason or accountability, I present…the perfect ass.

 

(note: photo may or may not have been taken on International Women’s Day)

Is this a stalker-ish snap of a random hottie’s pert derriere? You bet! But a wise shitlord once said, “what good does it do a man to publicly splash the squeezable asses of his sexy intimates, when his trouser eye can spy the fine behind of a stand-in twin who tweren’t the wiser for it?” Ergo: Ass memorialized.

Women will receive a lot of vapid encomiums and treacly today from mangina suckups, and they will politely thank their coterie of fluffers with appreciative emojis, but I guarantee the chickadee in this pic, if she were to stumble across the Chateau’s shrine to her behind, this pasture of assture, would be far more flattered than if she were to get yet another #heforshe hashtag shout-out from a thirsty beta.

We here at the Chateau have a motto: Asstags before hashtags.

On a more serious topic, what makes the perfect ass? Allow me.

It must sit atop slender legs (preferably long, but short can work in a pinch (heh))

It must emerge like a lava dome from a lovely swayback.

And anchored to a lithe upper body.

Steered by a pretty face (preferably White, but swarth can work in a pinch (heh)).

It is round, and firm, and unblemished by cellulite or spots.

It is framed with exquisite attention to detail and form, erupting from a waist 0.7 times the width of her hips, filling out a space in three dimensions, the fleshy width no wider than the structural hips, the height approximately 2/3rds the width, the depth (protrusion) from the pelvic wall approximately 2/3rds the height. Aka the Pooper Apportion.

Finally, the crack is symmetrical and modestly pruned, ending below the back dimples, and nestling within incomparable delights.

What the Perfect Ass is not:

Fat

Gross

Extra wide

Flat

Pocked

Droopy

Steatopygous.

On that last trait, a definition:

Steatopygia is a high degree of fat accumulation in and around the buttocks.

The deposit of fat is not confined to the buttock regions, but extends to the outside and front of the thighs, forming a thick layer reaching sometimes to the knee.

This is a widespread genetic trait of the Khoisan (more commonly known as Bushmen). […]

Steatopygia is often accompanied by the formation of elongated labia (labia minora may extend as much as 4 inches (10 cm) (!) outside the vulva).

Look how a Boer in the XVIII the century describes this trait:

“The lining of the body appears to be loose, so that in certain places part of it dangles out. They have to themselves this peculiarity from other races that most of them possess finger-shaped appendages, always double, hanging down from the private parts; these are evidently nymphae (labia minora).”

James Cook, the famous British navigator, noted in 1771, while passing by Cape colony:

“The great question among natural historians, whether the women of this country have or have not that fleshy flap or apron which has been called the Sinus pudoris. The most recent testimony of travellers commands us to put the cutaneous ventrale of female Hottentots in the same category as the human tail, and in like manner to relegate it to the fables.” […]

It seems that steatopygia in both sexes was common in early types of Homo sapiens.

Come for the perfect ass (heh), stay for the accidental realtalk.

PS A science-y word to describe the perfect White woman ass is callipygian {adj, “having well-shaped buttocks”}.

Internet Bill Of Rights

The new robber barons are the Silicon Valley technopoly overlords. Today’s Standard Oil and Ma Bell are Goolag, Faceborg, Twatter, and Fapple. These anti-American pro-censorship leftoid behemoths must either be broken up or regulated as common carrier utilities.

To that end, everyone reading here must go right now and sign the Internet Bill of Rights petition to Congress and the White House requesting they ACT NOW to stop the menace of the Big Four and their fully converged subsidiaries like YouTube and PayPal. (h/t Steve Silver)

Internet forums and social networks which provide free access to the public are a digital place of assembly, and individuals using such methods for public communication should not be subjected to censorship due to political beliefs or differing ideas. Conservative voices on many large public website platforms are being censored, based solely on a differing opinion. Some of these platforms further employ tracking mechanisms for monitoring an individual’s digital history, which can be used to censor the individual’s public communication through various censorship practices, sometimes without knowledge or awareness. These actions directly violate personal liberty and stand at contrast with the bill of rights.

We the people demand action to bring our digital future into the light.

We will make our dissident voices heard.

Photo Of The Century

Ugly Truth Of The Day

When a woman cheats, odds are she’ll fuck the man with whom she cheats harder, longer, deeper than she has ever fucked her husband or boyfriend.

tclifford adds a relevant quote:

From Anthony Powell’s *A Writer’s Notebook*: “Being unfaithful to a woman gives a man rather tender feelings about her, but a woman usually hates a man when she is being unfaithful to him.”

It’s true because men have a harem mentality and a sexual appetite that can be easily divorced from emotional feelings, while women have a “be part of an alpha male’s harem” mentality and a sexual appetite that cannot be easily divorced from emotional feelings. It’s why a man can cheat on a perfectly loving partner, while a woman often resents and despises the partner who (she rationalizes) pushes her into cheating on him to seek the love she needs.

Bonus UTotD:

“Unwanted sexual advance” is an oxymoron. How’s a man supposed to know he’s sexually unwanted if he doesn’t advance? The advancing is necessary to find out if it’s unwanted. PoundMeToo

Read this, and marvel at Nature’s mischief in blessing women with durable egos tragically misaligned with the reality of their ephemeral eggs.

A woman in her early 20s — 400,000 follicles.

Ten years later — 30,000 follicles.

7.5% of her original supply, or a drop of 92.5% in ten years.

In Darwinian terms, the romantic worth of a woman in her early 30s goes down by 93% from her worth in her early 20s.

Hm.

For comparison purposes, here are some choice excerpts pulled from the archived wisdom of Chateau Heartiste, on the subject of women’s age and SMV:

A 40-year-old woman is worth (sexually) half of a 30-year-old woman, who is worth half of a 20-year-old vixen. These incontestable facts about the nature of the sexual market matter, and matter in big ways, to women’s romantic fortunes. (Link)

***

Men, no matter what age they are, converge on a female attractiveness ideal. And that ideal is a 20-year-old tart. A college bro and a middle-aged suburban domesticate want to screw the same dewy susie. Oh sure, the older married guy will never admit it in polite aka judgmental company, but you can bet he’s feeling it. Remember that, you older wives. And keep your hubbies away from cheerleader practices and college orientations. (Link)

***

Past age 20, women begin the retreat from their maximum potential beauty. The fade is slow at first (as reflected in the less precipitous drop of the right side of the beauty curve), and this initially slow deterioration gives women a five to ten year graceless period to hone their self-delusion skills. “I’ll find a great guy when I’m 30!” CH: “No you won’t. You’ll settle for less, and your gogrrl friends will lie to you about this fact.”

By age 30, a woman is down to about 85% of her previous beauty high. At this stage of the game, she can no longer deny the tribute her skin and sag have paid to the überpatriarch, Father Time. It might not be evident yet under winter clothes, but it sure is the morning after twixt the bedsheets.

Now the decline accelerates in earnest. Age 35: 60% of former glory. Age 40: 40% of former glory (equivalent to her incipient preteen beauty buds). Age 50: 10%. For the typical woman, the Wall — the age at which she becomes sexually worthless to any man who isn’t legally obligated to assuage her fears — strikes sometime in her mid-50s. Almost no women beyond age 60 are capable of inciting genuine boners in any (white or asian) man. (Link)

***

If you are a woman, this test will measure your dating market value.  The higher the number, the better quality man you can catch.  The lower the number, the more likely you will find yourself surrounded by cats.  Unlike the male version of this test, here I have added a sliding scale to some of the questions because this better reflects the outsized importance that certain factors have on a woman’s total sexual value.

Guys, you may take this quiz for your girlfriends or wives to see if you have settled for tepid sex once a week or if you always get hard looking at her and never forget her birthday.

1.  How old are you?

15 to 16 years old:  +5 points
17 to 20 years old:  +10 points
21 to 25 years old:  +8 points
26 to 29 years old:  +3 point
30 to 33 years old:  0 points
33 to 36 years old:  -1 point
37 to 40 years old:  -5 points
41 to 45 years old:  -8 points
46 to 49 years old:  -10 points
over 49:  you’ve hit the wall.  waysa? (Link)

A women’s remaining eggs and her remaining sexual worth roughly correspond. A decrease in Inner Eggs accompanies a nearly equivalent decrease in Outer Beauty.

What a funny coinkydink.

You got ten, maybe fifteen, good years, lasses.

DON’T

FUCK

IT

UP

(literally)

The fatherly advice youze poppas oughta be giving yer fairer sprog, but won’t because yer betapussies.

“Wahmen”

pewdiepie most based Swede.

This post sponsored by the PoundMeToo movement, dedicated to removing all accountability from starfuckers and blaming White men for the actions of (((white))) men.

From (of all places) Real Clear Politics, an essay on David Lisak and the lies about campus rape he pushed onto an eagerly believing academia and equally gullible legal system, to the detriment of American men everywhere.

Discredited Sex Assault Research Infects U.S. Legal System […]

The example discussed here began with a small study by an associate professor at a commuter college in Massachusetts. The 12-page paper describing the study barely created a stir when it was published in 2002. Within a few years, however, the paper’s principal author, David Lisak, a University of Massachusetts-Boston psychologist, began making dramatic statements that extrapolated far beyond the study’s conclusions. He created, virtually out of whole cloth, a theory that “undetected” serial rapists are responsible for 90 percent of assaults on college campuses, that they premeditate and plan their attacks, and that they are likely to have committed multiple acts of violence.

When speaking on campuses, to the military, and to law enforcement, Lisak started showing a highly disturbing video that he claimed was based on the transcript of an actual interview with a campus rapist to whom Lisak gave the name “Frank.” The authenticity of the video has been seriously questioned, raising grave doubts about Lisak’s contention that it illustrates the typical campus perpetrator—in his view, an unrepentant sociopath who cannot be reached or educated.

A news search for mentions of Lisak finds only a single one prior to 2009, in which he revealingly opined in an urban policy magazine about the Duke lacrosse rape hoax. He was interviewed again by CBS News in November 2009 about non-stranger rapes. He increasingly became the draw at conferences on sexual assault and his calendar filled with campus presentations. The media began to fawn over him […]

As his celebrity grew, the gap between documented facts and his status as an expert became almost inconsequential.

Criticism did eventually catch up to David Lisak. His serial predator model of campus rape has been compellingly debunked by scholarly researchers and well-regarded publications, including investigative articles and a book. His claims regarding the psychology of campus perpetrators were revealed to be based on nonexistent interviews. […]

His assertions, allegedly supported by a study he co-authored in 2010, that false accusations of sexual assault are exceedingly rare, have been shown to violate basic math by counting as true cases that didn’t qualify as sexual assault, had insufficient evidence to make a determination, or were referred for prosecution but about which the outcome was unknown.

As for Lisak’s vague statements about having interviewed “hundreds” of serial rapists (occasionally styled as “thousands” when others talk about him), in truth no evidence exists that Lisak has interviewed any “undetected rapists,” serial or otherwise, since his dissertation research 30 years ago.

Feminism, of the femcunt or mangina variety, causes real pain and extracts real tribute from innocent men. It’s essentially blackmail of men, a ransom on normal healthy masculinity. Feministism is a blight on the country and should be taken seriously as a wicked ideology which destroys lives, communities, and whole nations.

Unfortunately, our “elites” and our institutions in which we have placed our trust lap up the lies of feminism and beg for more of that man-hating vitriol:

Yet all of these devastating exposés have barely dented Lisak’s popularity. […]

Were the damage wrought by David Lisak’s popularity confined to his college-circuit road show, there might be some hope that his toxic influence would be worn down by the critical thinking ostensibly prized by the academy.

Instead, that has not happened. The list of invited presentations, workshops, and media appearances in which he has hawked his unsubstantiated theories runs an additional 40 pages on his curriculum vitae. Among the most worrisome aspects of Lisak’s presentations and workshops is how they appear to be gaining influence among professionals close to the investigation and adjudication of sexual assault. His debunked serial predator theory and wildly extrapolated statistics on the false-accusation rate form the core of the training materials he has developed—and in some cases sold to law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, and the military.

Read on, it gets worse. The System is utterly and totally rigged against men.

Most troubling of all, Lisak’s material is being codified in law enforcement policies, legal precedents, and judicial guidelines at the local, state, and federal levels.

The Sexual Offense Bench Guide for judges in the state of Washington, for example, draws liberally from Lisak’s 2008 publication “Understanding the Predatory Nature of Sexual Violence.” His claims have been similarly incorporated into New Mexico’s Sexual Assault Bench Book, the Tribal Court Judges Bench Book on sexual assault, the Missoula County Attorney’s Office Policy and Procedure Manual, the Pennsylvania Crimes of Sexual Violence Benchbook, New York State’s Judicial Symposium, Wisconsin’s Prosecutor’s Sexual Assault Reference Book, and the Judge Advocate General Corps Criminal Law Desk Book.

The relationship between prosecutors, judges and the juries who will ultimately arrive at verdicts in criminal trials is further tainted by recommendations that prosecutors and judges incorporate into the jury selection process: namely, Lisak’s claim that false accusations are rare and his unsupported theory about serial offenses.

JAG guidelines for prosecutors, for example, advise that “myths” about the frequency of false reports be challenged “directly, in voir dire and in argument.” Prospective jurors whose information does not align with the (inaccurate) information provided in guidelines influenced by Lisak could then be dismissed and/or a seated jury could be told of the supposedly “true” facts.

Ignoramous snarkmouths mock anti-feminism as “male whining”, but flesh and blood innocent men are being chewed up and their livelihoods destroyed by this lying spiteful institutionalized femcuntery that has polluted our legal system:

A judge in Montana, for example, denied a request to have a case dismissed on the grounds of a Missoula police department requiring officers to presume the guilt of the accused when investigating sexual assault. The judge stated that she based her ruling on Lisak’s (baseless, and thus misleading) testimony about the low rate of false reports. When such decisions are made, when presumptions of guilt are part of the training of judges and prosecutors, or reflected in jury instructions, innocent defendants are put in harm’s way.

No institution is immune from the feminist gelding project. The media are bullhorns for every crackpot man-hating feminist or mangina claim that lands in their Faceborg feeds:

Even those ostensibly in the business of impartial news coverage have been tainted by their own guidelines, as when the media have been fed the same misinformation, masquerading as insight. Their contribution to the problem is further amplified when they are further advised not to use the phrase “rape allegation” because “allegation is not a neutral term and strongly implies doubt,” and they fail to see that the alternative suggested—“reported rape”—implies an act that has, indeed, happened, distinguished only by the fact that it is on record.

The authors of this piece ask:

Where does that leave those for whom accuracy, integrity, and truth matter?

Crushed underneath the jackboot of the Anti-White Male Narrative enforcers.

This is not an easy assignment, but the use of good lawyering to dismantle bad “research” can be powerful, and good courtroom theater as well. When faced with a Lisakian claim that “only 6 percent of rape allegations are false,” the defense attorney can ask what percent, then, are true? David Lisak himself would have great trouble answering that question without being exposed as a statistical manipulator, because his writings have never even addressed it. Rather, he has used misleading language to imply that almost all rape accusations have been proven true. Indeed, a good defense lawyer could fairly ask: “Isn’t it a fact, Mr. Lisak, that the number of rape accusations that have been proven false may well be larger than the number that have been proven true?”

Reminder that false rape accusations may be as high as 40-50% of total rape cases.

Women lie. Women especially lie about matters concerning sex. Shitlibs and tradcons need to deal with this fact of womanhood, and stop pretending belief in the Princess Proposition.

Lisak’s claims are wrong and the experts who tout them are vulnerable when asked direct questions. The discrediting of Lisak must become part of the court record, in case after case, before the far more difficult task of correcting the effects of his bogus claims on criminal justice policies can be accomplished.

The Truth won’t be denied forever. It will out, one way or another. And helping the Truth out will be the re-introduction of lots of Based White Gentile Men into the legal profession. More White Gentile shitlord lawyers will put these laywercunts and their greasy society-subverting (((accomplices))) under the microscope, their biases and agenda revealed for the world to mock, their malfeasance exposed, and themselves along with their standing army of Fake Social Scientists punished with extreme prejudice.

The focus here has been on one particular—and particularly problematic—conveyer of misinformation. David Lisak’s high profile and willingness to depart from even his own published papers in service of an agenda makes him the embodiment of the attack on due process. But Lisak is not alone. He has recently been joined by other “experts” straying even further afield from verifiable data and often in direct contradiction of known science.

The Fuggeraut feels no guilt. The Hate Machine feels no empathy. Fuggernaut and the Hate Machine will only stop when they are stopped by a more powerful force wielding a more powerful weapon: The truth.

The difficulty of fighting the toxic distribution of misrepresentation and statistical sleight-of-hand is partially a function of high-profile purveyors and enablers.

sand-sophists

The codification of myths in law enforcement procedures; in the training of prosecutors and judges; and in policy at the town, county, state, and federal levels all but guarantees insidious and continuous regeneration.

There is a great deal of ruin in a nation, and there is a great deal of effort required to repair a ruined nation.

The roadmap such myths provide is wrong but concrete, offering up sociopathic villains in place of a continuum of offenders, permission to presume guilt in the absence of evidence, and a philosophy that accusers not only don’t lie but are never mistaken.

A lot of this man-hating false rape fabulism witch hunting is motivated by an ego-preserving shitlib urge to avoid confronting the elephant in the room: the massively disproportionate rate of black-on-white rape. The Lying Lisaks of the world give white feminists and their mangina lickspittles an excuse to avert their eyes and level their redirected rage against the object of their desire and envy: White Gentile Men.

%d bloggers like this: