We’ve got a trifecta of beta males this month vying for #1 Beta. You sit in judgment. It’s all good, sadistic fun, but remember, one of these betas could stumble across this site, read their demolition and experience a rebirth. You might just save a life today.

BOTM Candidate #1 is Nick Viall, the runner-up on that idiot box show “The Bachelorette”. Some slut born with her legs spread slept with both him and the eventual winner of her hand in marriage. She rejected Viall, and well, he reacted… poorly.

As fans saw on the Monday, July 28, finale of The Bachelorette, Andi Dorfman chose and got engaged to former baseball player Josh Murray in the Dominican Republic, leaving runner-up Nick Viall heartbroken and confused. Viall tried multiple times after their breakup to get back in touch with the woman he thought would be his wife—and he finally got his chance to confront her during the live post-finale sit-down.

Both of the bachelors — Viall and Murray — are handsome. You can look up their pics. Why is this relevant? Because there is a stubborn contingent of ignoramuses who cling to their belief that handsome man can’t possibly be beta and repel women.

Clearly still devastated, Viall began by telling host Chris Harrison that he just wanted to have an “honest conversation” with Dorfman about what went down between them. The conversation was honest, all right—but it was also awkward, uncomfortable, and rife with tension.

There are many tells of the beta male, but few so conspicuous as the butthurt yearning to have a “conversation” with the woman who inexplicably resisted his loving, responsive beta male charms.

Viall told Dorfman he would always be grateful to her for opening his eyes and his heart to the possibility of romance. She responded, in turn, by saying that he would find love again, and that he deserved someone who would reciprocate his feelings 100 percent.

Women are so sweetly patronizing to beta males. This is why you never want to be on the receiving end of a woman’s cooing pity. She’s telling you the sound of your voice makes her vagina seal tight like a clam exposed on the beach.

“The hard part is…feeling like you did,” he said. Then, referencing the night they spent together in the Fantasy Suite, he added, “If you knew how in love with you I was, why did you make love with me?”

Beta males “make love”. Alpha males “fuck”. (Or bang.) Most men believe women want the former, or want to hear about the former, because that’s what women say they want when asked. So much ignorance. Rule Number One:

(repeat after me)

DON’T LISTEN TO WHAT WOMEN SAY, WATCH WHAT THEY DO.

His comment stunned both Dorfman and the audience, who let out a collective gasp at the remark. “That’s below the belt,” she said coolly, chiding him for revealing personal information on national TV.

Yes, women don’t want to be reminded of their sexual natures. And who can blame them? Female sexual desire, stripped of its pleasant accoutrements, is quite wild and depraved.

She then proceeded to defend herself and her actions, telling him she respected him enough to let him know before the rose ceremony that they didn’t have a future together. “I didn’t have you pick out a ring. I didn’t have you walk down there and think you were gonna propose to somebody,” she said. “I did that out of respect for you.”

More likely, she avoided unnecessary cruelty toward him because she didn’t want to risk a beta blow-up.

Playing devil’s advocate, if Viall’s mewling plea was an actorly ploy to publicize Dorfman’s sluttery, (and in the so doing reveal a side of women that is largely hidden from viewer masses), it was brilliant. I think the odds of that are very low, so I included him in this month’s BOTM.

He then sent Viall backstage before reuniting the Bachelorette with her newly minted fiance.

Things were much more lighthearted after that.

The magic of that alpha male attitude!

Dorfman and Murray openly cuddled on the couch, giggling together and kissing between questions. “We’re in love!” she gushed when Harrison pointed out that they couldn’t keep their hands off each other.

I guess he’s OK with this television-cum-real life whore fucking another man at the same time he was courting her?

Her groom-to-be even joked that he was trying to get her pregnant.

Gotta hurry and push that tepid beta male seed outta the way.

Moral of the shiv: If you think you’ve completely won over a slutty woman’s heart by “making love” to her once, you might be a beta male.

******

BOTM Candidate #2 is a Reddit cuckold whose mysteriously low libido asexual girlfriend went on vacation without him, and…. (I bet the suspense is killing you)

My GF and i have been dating for 5 months now. This lady and i have have never had intercourse.

Around a month or so ago she went on vacation with a close friend of hers and her friends family. They come back, everything seems hunky dory. Fast forward to yesterday. She informs me that one night on vacation she was black out drunk after a long day of heavy drinking on the beach, wakes up in her hotel later that night and her friend tells her that she went off with a pair of guys.

Why did his girlfriend so readily confess her party slut sins to him? One, she has so little respect or desire for his manhood that she neither fears his retribution nor cares for his psychic pain. Two, the “blackout drunk” plot device is a helpful bit of plausible deniability meant to keep a hopeful, irrepressibly loyal beta male strung along for further provision and emotional support extraction. Yeah, she may have been drunk, but who chose to pour drinks down her throat? Vlad Putin?

Now her friend assumed she had sex, my GF is in denial (being blacked out).

“I’m a beta male and I believe her 100%!”

She thought nothing of it. Turns out she is pregnant.

Her slutcation fling didn’t have to wait five months. Don’t expect a beta male to ponder the discrepancy. That would ruin the shine on his whore’s pedestal.

Shes absolutely scared to death, shaking, sobbing, apologizing profusely saying “you don’t deserve this, you deserve better”.

She’s scared her faithful lapdog “boyfriend” will abandon her and not foot her abortion bill… or the 18-year-blood-from-a-beta bill.

I’ve never thought she is the type to go out and have a random hook up especially being that at that point we decided to be exclusive.

How do you decide to be exclusive to a girl you haven’t fucked once in the five months you’ve known her? “Hey babe, from this point onward you can’t cocktease any other men besides me.”

Her family, with whom she is very close to, being very religious and conservative, lose shit on her because she is seriously considering an abortion.

I hope her pro-life parents are prepared for the possibility of a… vibrant… gift from God.

I ask if she honestly wants to be with me to which she replies yes, most definitely.

Subtext: “Who else will stick around to wipe the shit off my bastard child’s bottom and suffer in silence as I get my cunt scoured by more exciting men?”

I feel the same way. i propose that we can work through this and that no matter what she decides i will back her 100%.

This is what a man with limited options, or a perception of limited options, sounds like.

We speak awhile and leave on okay terms. She decides to stay with her friend for awhile.

“Aww, he’s so sweet”: Heard about fifty times at her friend’s place.

my reaction. I’m stunned.

It’s time to stop being stunned. Come visit Le Chateau. Leave an informed consumer.

I know that shes a good girl, not the most responsible person ever but has a good heart

“has a good heart”?! She got hammered, hammered, and wants to hammer this tool into cuckold submission. Fuckin a, does a girl have to leave a body in the basement before her beta sycophant will question her virtue?

and never wants to hurt anyone. At the same time i cant help but to think about all the possibilities of what happened on that vacation. Was she raped? Drugged? Did she want a hook up?

No, no, yes. Answers that he’ll tell himself to quiet the inner rage: Yes, yes, no.

My personal opinion is that abortion is the best option, i haven’t told her that in fear of swaying her decision one way or the other but i feel like her family will guilt her into keeping the child. i really don’t know what to do at this point. Did i do the right thing? Any opinion or advice would be greatly appreciated.

Just think, in the not-too-distant sexual market of the past when contraceptive cop-outs were rare and beta males were tougher men than they are now, this princess would have had to think twice before happily stumbling onto a vacation cock carousel.

tl;dr: GF of five months goes on vaca, has sex, tells me yesterday she is pregnant and considering abortion. Please help! Need advice!

Thank your savior for small blessings: You aren’t married to the manipulative bitch. Toss her a razor blade, suggest she slice lengthwise, and leave her for good. You won’t do this, but if you did you’d be a better man instantly. And it would change the sad trajectory of your pathetic life forever.

******

BOTM Candidate #3 is this responsive boyfriend:

There’s more wrong with this picture than what immediately arrests the eye. Yes, she’s a grotesque tub of lard, and beta males are often reduced to settling for these swine pieces to get any action. More revealingly, this fupa queen shits all over her boyfriend’s (or beta orbiter’s?) honor by making a spectacle of herself to the jeers of gawkers.

Judging by the hats, this shot was taken in America.

American woman, lay your gut on me.
American woman, mama jump on me.
Beta dog gonna lift you up
So all the men see your wee A cups.

******

The voting:

In yesterday’s post, one of the beta male of the month contenders was a guy who had lifted a hideous chubster onto his shoulders (“Do I even lift? Why, yes, I do lift!”) so that she could flash the crowd of gawkers a pair of bee stings that Manboob Emeritus David Fatrelle laughs at.

Interestingly, as a reader pointed out, there’s a hidden shiv in this photo if you look closely and direct your attention to the grinning man in the black hoodie, front and center.

“Da fuckin’ tits and bellybutton look like a face!”

Sure, a chubster publicly undulating her naked rolls will achieve “attention” from men, but not all of it, in fact not much of it, will be the sort of attention she wants. Men gawk at naked fat chicks like they gawk at car accidents, or at Kramer’s self-portrait. “She’s a loathsome offensive beast, yet I can’t look away.”

So for all the fat and ugly and manjawed lawyer attention whores who like to clit-stroke on cue about the surfeit of male attention they get, it’s helpful to keep in mind that a lot of the so-called “attention” they think they receive from men is nothing more than the furtive ridicule of happy-go-lucky rogues.

The Patriarchy is dead. God save the Patriarchy!

In the archives are CH posts about feminist utopias, how they would manifest and the signs that America is becoming a version of one.

If the lesson wasn’t yet clear, matriarchies suck. Historically and present-day, matriarchies (or facsimiles thereof) are associated with poverty, disease, violence and navel-gazing decline. Where a matriarchy is evolving, a civilization is devolving.

Here’s Exhibit M as evidence that we in the US may have crossed a matriarchal Rubicon (Boobicon?):

What used to be underground — gigolos, minus the tacit sex — has gone mainstream. A start-up is offering women their very own personal “ManServant“, or what we in the seduction domculture call “beta male orbiters”, “white knights” and “incels“.

It’s not a stripper who gets naked and rubs his greasy body all over you. It’s a ManServant: a gentleman who treats you like a queen. Book one for a bachelorette party or any gathering to be your personal photographer, bartender, bodyguard, and butler all in one.

How is a ManServant addressed?

A ManServant will answer to the name you’ve bestowed upon him, whether it’s Garçon, Bartholomew, or Ryan Gosling. [ed: John Scalzi and David Fatrelle were taken.]

What is a ManServant’s code of conduct?

A ManServant always responds with “As you wish.”

A ManServant shall address clientele with “My lady.”

A ManServant keeps his penis in his pants and out of the lady’s face.

The Rules to being a ManServant: The lady always makes The Rules.

What are some of the ManServant’s duties?

Takes photos.

Gives round-the-clock compliments.

Cleans up your hot mess.

Going to a ballgame? He’ll be your sports announcer, wait in line for the restroom, and get your hot dogs.

At the club, he’ll act as your bodyguard: secure drinks, shoo away douchebags, and drop off or pick you up curbside.

If it weren’t so ominous it’d be funny.

Naturally, women have to pay for these services, which is telling in itself. Women don’t value men for their penii or sexual prowess. What women value is what women will pay for, and that is male commitment, provisioning, and emotional support.

Just as naturally, real life ManServants get no nookie, because what comforts women in their moments of social need is not the same as what excites them in their moments of sexual need.

ManServitude is just about the end game of the feminist matriarchy. Strip men of all offensive male sexuality — essentially create a kneeling army of eunuchs — and set them loose upon the land to take photos of attention whores and cockblock men with dignity and a working pair.

How soon until ManServitude moves from plucky business venture to accepted cultural practice to legally enforced Damegeld?

Recall CH’s maxim about the true nature of feminism (and, related, the true nature of equalism):

The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.

Welcome to AndrogyNation. Where the women are pushed to be men and the men are happy to be women.

I talk a fair bit about the decline of America, but theatrical aplomb aside I never seriously entertained the thought that the collapse of my country would happen within my lifetime. Now I’ve begun to wonder.

Skittles Man has his antithesis: Meet JavaScript Male*.

Commenter Reservoir Tip writes,

The female reception of this piece, even here at CH, has been incredibly elementary.

I imagine the beta man-boob response is no different.

Reminds me of a funny story, actually.

Recently I was on Facebook (I know I shouldn’t have one, but Tinder) and a girl friend of mine asked via status update whether she should get a pixie cut or grow her hair out.

I told her, “pixie cut and I’m personally kicking your ass.”

To which her feminist friends and a former friend of mine turned hardcore cultural Marxist manboob replied, “omg Reservoir Tip’s opinion is stupid. Why are you even concerned about societal standards of beauty?” (LOL)

Then the manboob, who I assume is somewhat into the girl, posts something for the beta hall of fame.

“I wrote you a java script to help you figure out which style is going to work best for you” and of course, he posts the script.

As if she has any idea what the hell to do with it. Neutered man-booby goonery at its finest. I could practically feel his anticipation for her thanks and whatever attention she would afford him.

“Oh I know how to win her over! I’ll write her some java script! That’ll get her attention!”

“I’LL WRITE HER SOME JAVA SCRIPT!”

“JAVA SCRIPT”

*I can’t bring myself to call him JavaScript Man, because the term “man” carries positive character associations. Low T beta losers who behave in ways more typical of women and betray a lifetime spent struggling with testes nestled somewhere up near their diaphragms are best described as “male”, acknowledging the fact that they possess some rudimentary form of biological maleness, however actively it’s suppressed.

…don’t do these “perfect responses”. Self-deprecation and tacit acknowledgment of one’s rejection may amuse an audience of Buzzfeeding drones, but it won’t make ginas jingle.

Ironically, one of the “perfect” text responses to a wordless antagonist unintentionally reveals the seductive power of “radio silence game”.

A little digging suggests the author of this particular text is a girl. Sarcastic nuance to the contrary notwithstanding, not texting back for hours does appear to be very adorable to chicks, because there she is sending out a distress signal for her silent suitor. Interest confirmed. (When a girl loses interest, or never had interest, she’s not thinking of you hours later.) If this guy were to reply “lol” right now, she’d be ready all over again to slip into her pretty panties and dream of his objectifying gaze.

So what do you do when a girl doesn’t text you back (say, after you’ve sent out a feeler text for a meet-up)?

1. She will not reply. Don’t bother setting up a date. Her interest level isn’t strong enough. You’ve just saved an hour of your time and $20 for drinks.
2. She will reply a few hours later, or the next day. She’s on the fence and probably dating other guys. Use your discretion to decide whether to give her the chance to enjoy the pleasure of your real live company on a date. If you’re juggling a lot of girls and getting laid already, you may want to skip these wafflers.
3. She will reply within ten minutes. She’s into you. Take her on a date and bring a condom.

If a girl doesn’t text you back within a reasonable window of time (two days, max), don’t bother trying to reopen the lines of communication. Her interest level is zero and she’s hoping you forgot you met her.

That said, there is a case to be made for attempting something on a long shot. It’s not like texting is any serious expenditure of your time or effort. So, for example, let’s say you’ve heard nothing from a girl you texted three days ago about meeting up. A last ditch text that might bring her fold back into your fold is this favorite of mine:

“made you look”

It’s funny, it’s non-needy, and it’s low expectation. (Don’t forget insouciantly unpunctuated, your liege.) Most intransigent girls will respond to the above.

Another one I sometimes use on disappearing act girls:

“hey carrie, drinks thur at [x], 8pm”

The bite in this broadcast happens to be the fact that “carrie” is not the name of the girl I’m texting. She reads it, wonders who Carrie is, and feels compelled to respond in some manner. Her response could be positive or negative, and it doesn’t matter, because *any* response from a girl is better than no response. A talking girl you can work with; a silent girl is unreachable. She might therefore reply,

“I’m not Carrie”

…to which I would say “close?” and wait to see if she chomps on the stinky bait.

Texting has really opened up a world of experimental game possibilities because of its low barrier to entry (pun intended). Phone calls are emotionally draining for many men and require focus on multiple attractiveness cues, like vocal tone. Plus, girls are readier to ignore phone calls than they are texts, for similar reasons as men are to avoid making phone calls: There are more mate value variables of which to be cognizant in a phone call than there are in text.

A chilling academic paper titled “The Population Cycle Drives Human History — from a Eugenic Phase into a Dysgenic Phase and Eventual Collapse” landed like a soggy Sunday paper at the Chateau doorstep.

In the period before the onset of demographic transition, when fertility rates were positively associated with income levels, Malthusian pressure gave an evolutionary advantage to individuals whose characteristics were positively correlated with child quality and hence higher IQ, increasing in such a way the frequency of underlying genes in the population. As the fraction of individuals of higher quality increased, technological progress intensified. Positive feedback between technological progress and the level of education reinforced the growth process, setting the stage for an industrial revolution that facilitated an endogenous take-off from the Malthusian trap. The population density rose and with it social and political friction, especially important at the top of the social pyramid. Thus, from a certain turning point of history, the well-to-do have fewer children than the poor. Once the economic environment improves sufficiently, the evolutionary pressure weakens, and on the basis of spreading egalitarian ideology and general suffrage the quantity of people gains dominance over quality. At present, we have already reached the phase of global human capital deterioration as the necessary prerequisite for a global collapse by which the overpopulated earth will decimate a species with an average IQ, still too mediocre to understand its own evolution and steer its course.

Executive summary: Equalism is death.

Longer version: Economic success contains the seed of its own destruction. As a people become wealthier and their miseries alleviated by technology, equalism (formerly known as egalitarianism, or in its looser form as liberalism) finds fertile ground in social discourse, and welfare safety nets grow in breadth and complexity, thwarting the natural evolutionary culling process until the reproductive rewards are shared equally between the fit and unfit, and finally reaching a nadir when the economically unfit become reproductively favored at the expense of the economically fit.

Idiocracy, as I have stated, may be the most prophetic movie of any time. The earth becomes overpopulated with mediocrities and dummies as technology interferes with the natural and healthy culling process, the equalist ideology hastens the dysgenic trend, and finally the barbarians swarm over their demographically dying equalist overlords, ending the civilizational project until the cycle renews and rebirth can find purchase in the smoldering ashes.

The difference now? Nukes. All bets are off on how this iteration of doom will realize its potential. It’s possible the destruction this time around is so complete a new cycle of human transcendence will be stillborn.

What does it mean for humanity to understand its own evolution and to “steer its course”? It means knowing that bleeding hearts lead to bleeding civilizations. A few far-seeing people know the score. A great paternalistic (patriarchal, even) impulse — but one that is necessarily cruel (to be kind) — is needed to steer this darkly enlightened course to a happier outcome. I envision a CH six-point insurance program of collapse prevention:

1. Close the borders to Western nations indefinitely. (Reason is self-evident.)
2. Create voluntary incentives to reduce dysgenic fertility. (Dollars for Depo.)
3. Discourage IQ- and education-based assortative mating. (Successful men pairing off with pretty, but less educationally attained women, is eugenic. The smart, industrious genes are passed more fully around the general population.)
4. Reinvigorate protectionism. (Gutted native wages only intensifies public pressure for government largesse to a growing segment of long-term unemployed.)
5. Eliminate all female-friendly public policies. (No more Title IX, mandated day-care, freebie contraceptives, etc. The evidence is strong that publicly catering to women’s fickle pleasures incentivizes bad things like single mommery, latchkey kids, late marriage, low fertility of the higher classes, and punishment of creative iconoclasts who are the engine of progress.)
6. Reduce proximate diversity. (Social atomization encourages short term time orientation, distrust, and corruption, which lead to incompetence and decay.)

That last one may require a break-up of the US. Ironically, to save America, you must kill it first.

Too funny. Even funnier: There are some gems of game to be mined from this humor. A reader writes,

It’s titled “Things You Can’t Do When You’re Not a Toddler”. I say it’s Things You Do When You Don’t Give a Fuck.

I’m going to walk up to girls and announce that I sleep in a big boy bed.

The “big boy bed” line is gold, and would work if your delivery is stone-faced. Other examples of “Toddler Game” that can be modified for adult-sized game.

- Walking naked in front of a girl you just started dating. (“I need these moments of freedom.”)
– “I’m 35-and-a-half.” Good all-purpose answer to girls asking your age.
– Hiding behind a pant leg or a chair when a girl asks you a personal question.
– Swapping a girl’s glasses and examining them with focused intent.
– Throwing stuff on the ground.

CH has covered this territory before. Children are great real life naturals at game. You’ll get a better education in how to tease women by watching little boys interact with little girls. We forget these life lessons as adulthood robs us of our wonderment and carefree attitude. Chicks dig the free and easy boy inside.

The careerist shrike is emblematic of social dissolution and sexual market atavism. Yet women have historically worked in some capacity, whether that was at home or in the fields. It’s a rare culture where the average woman lounges around all day while men and hand maidens provide her an endless stream of creature comforts.

The difference in this iteration of decivilization is the nature of the work occupying the energies and time of “modern” Western women (who are better categorized as premodern women aping the sub-Sahara African style of year-round female farming self-sustenance). “Working” women existed throughout European history, but the substance of their work and, more importantly, the people for whom they worked were markedly different than what we have now, distilled to its rotten essence in the manjawed, pulsing forehead-veined, tankgrrl lawyercunt.

A reader writes,

You said that “women are happier when they abide traditional sex roles.” That is very true, but most people do not know what the role of women was in unadulterated European society. Below is a link to The Moneychanger and his Wife, painted in 1539.

Notice the wife is working with her husband by making entries into the accounting book. Wives were usually expected to work in whatever trade the husband’s was. For example, a farmer’s wife did farming. This also included military ranks, for example the wife of an army count was a countess. Robert E. Lee’s wife was called “Mrs. General Lee.”

The wife was there to help her husband with his trade. Help would consist of cooking and making clothes so to free up his time, then any other time would be to work in that trade. In European civilization a husband and wife were considered partners. Often married couples would be hired as opposed to individuals. Ever notice the Queen sat next to the King?

Good point. Historians in the CH audience can attest to how widespread was the practice of European partnership-style marriage, where the wife’s role was employee to her husband-boss.

What the reader describes is a superior form of social system that redirects the natural female (of which “wife” is a subset) hypergamous instinct toward, instead of against, her husband. The working European woman of 1539 was working for her husband. Her lover and her comfort and her family was also her boss. In this arrangement it would be hard for her not to look up to him, and to admire him, and this admiration would translate quite easily into happy sexual submission. Her instinctual compulsion to surrender to a better man would be sated, and her marriage would thus be stronger.

What we have today is that same working-woman hypergamy now directed to powerful men who are not her husband. The modern wife leaves the world of her husband every morning to submit to sexy male rulers presiding over the parallel world she inhabits during the day. She still has a boss, but it’s no longer her husband. The temptation for her to cheat, either bodily or in mind, must be great. The male equivalent would be as if dutiful husbands were catered to on the job by a steady stream of swimsuit models. Even the firmest virtue will bend to perpetual succulent vice.

This is why I argue that feminist-inspired, female-aggrandizing public policies should be repealed. “Pro-woman” (aka pro-r-selection) policies like Title IX and mandated maternity leave create perverse incentives for a sub-Saharan female-forager style social system that channels natural female hypergamy toward company men and away from family men. Men — particularly men with little experience bedding women — have a hard time understanding this primal craving of women for higher status mates, because men don’t give a fig about female status. To help focus minds, recall what you as a man feel when a beautiful young woman poured into a slinky cocktail dress sits close to you and smiles. That’s what women feel in the presence of powerful male bosses commanding them to do their bidding.

Starting to feel a little nervous kissing your wife goodbye as she heads to work in the morning? You should. She’s doing something that most of her female ancestors never did.

Via. This is the first pro-white, pro-European video I’ve seen that didn’t flirt with subtext. The message is loud and clear and unmistakable. Now the fight can commence on fair terms.

CH wrote a few posts explaining why the losers of humanity act out the way they do. WELP, here comes ❤science❤ to… once again… wrap her luscious DSLs around the Heartiste Hambone.

Masculine men and feminine women have greater life satisfaction.

The aim of this study was to investigate the relevance of self-identification in traditional gender roles of masculinity and femininity in women’s and men’s life satisfaction. Participants consisted of 1233 women and 1233 men from the Spanish general population aged between 20 and 60 years. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses showed that although in both genders the most important predictors of life satisfaction were self-esteem and social support, both masculinity and femininity were associated with higher life satisfaction in women and men. Besides, in the prediction of life satisfaction, femininity interacted with social support in women, and masculinity with self-esteem in men, and it was found that the association between femininity and life satisfaction only occurred in women with high social support, and self-esteem was associated with life satisfaction only in men with low masculinity. These results provide information concerning the significance of adherence to gender roles in life satisfaction.

Every goddamned lying filthy loser feminist cunt and mewling diaper loading male feminist manboob just wept on cue. (John Scalzi and David Fatrelle are at this very moment hugging it out, bitch titties intermingling in a dance of erect nipples and pimpled cleavage.)

The evidence is mounting (heh): Happy people are people who more closely adhere to the normal expression of biological sex traits and sex roles. Anyone who veers far from the archetype for her sex will experience unhappiness, dissatisfaction, bitterness, and an unrelenting urge to undermine social norms, get back at her dad, and post tumblr pics of her gross body in a fatkini while insisting she’s sexually attractive to hot, studly men.

If you’re a man, the more you look and act like a masculine man, the more satisfied you are with yourself. If you’re a woman, the more you look and act like a feminine woman, the more satisfied you are with yourself.

It’s as simple as that. And that’s why it drives the rejects on the archipelago of misfit mutants crazy with resentment. It’s a beautiful truth so elegant in its simplicity and unassailable in its parsimony that there’s no way for the degenerates to escape its merciless judgment. They are left swinging futilely at their timeless tormentor, retreating into a false bravado built with lies, sophistry, desperation and the company of their miserable sideshow scoldmates.

Fortunately for the entertainment of the CH reading audience, the Cosmic Shiv doesn’t suffer these tools gladly.

This isn’t the first CH style post, but it is the most scientifically validated. The optimal color coordination is only moderately matched.

Fashion is an essential part of human experience and an industry worth over $1.7 trillion. Important choices such as hiring or dating someone are often based on the clothing people wear, and yet we understand almost nothing about the objective features that make an outfit fashionable. In this study, we provide an empirical approach to this key aesthetic domain, examining the link between color coordination and fashionableness. Studies reveal a robust quadratic effect, such that that maximum fashionableness is attained when outfits are neither too coordinated nor too different. In other words, fashionable outfits are those that are moderately matched, not those that are ultra-matched (“matchy-matchy”) or zero-matched (“clashing”). This balance of extremes supports a broader hypothesis regarding aesthetic preferences–the Goldilocks principle–that seeks to balance simplicity and complexity.

Excessively color matched people look try-hard and dorky. Color clashing people look unkempt and imperceptive. The sweet spot is looking like you took some care to put yourself together, but not too much care. You look good in the whole, but glimmers of rebellion and inattentiveness adorn your aura. You might call this fashion rule the sartorial equivalent of the Careless Aloof Asshole attitude.

Interestingly, the color scheme that is most fashionable to the human eye is a metaphor for the social scheme that is most attractive to the female heart. Ambiguity is chicknip. Women neither want socially awkward (socially clashing) men, nor romantically obvious (sexually try-hard) men. Women love most those men who are smooth talkers acting on a boldness leavened with a plausibly deniable doubtfulness of intention.

Push-pull. Hot/cold/hot/cold. Good advice in matters sexual and stylistic.

A reflexive male impulse to white knight for women may have evolved because, one, enough women in the past sexually rewarded men who went out of their way to protect female virtue and, two, the precoital penumbras of female sexual vice are fainter than the leery male sexual vice, and therefore more easily missed or misinterpreted by constitutional white knights.

White Knights and Pussy Polishers provide a useful context for the topic to be discussed in this post. Many men, especially pedestal-primping provider-primary beta males, are utterly oblivious to any signs that their girlfriends or wives may be growing romantically removed from them. Worse, when a man does feel that sinking feeling that his woman’s nethers retract to his touch, he reacts with self-abasing misunderstanding of the nature of her sexual withdrawal, often wrongly supposing his own fault and figuring that more of what she claims she wants from him is exactly what she needs.

More cynically, there’s an ego protective mechanism in men, evident in its advanced stages in married men, to elide the existence of, or the causes for, any romantic dissatisfaction percolating in their lovers.

Given the characteristic white knight urge of men to, basically, assume the best of women and the worst of themselves, it should come as no surprise that women often begin cheating in their hearts long before their boyfriends or husbands are aware of the limbic detour. The stereotype of the befuddled beta hubby oblivious to the real reasons for his wife’s foreclosed desire is a sitcom staple.

Luckily, you are honored to be on the elite Chateau Heartiste guestlist, (“I’m an H-lister!”) which means you have access to knowledge that the ancients pondered. Here you will learn what signs to watch for that betray congestive infidelity in your woman’s heart.

She has stopped spontaneously touching you.

White Knight/Pussy Polisher Imagined Cause: She’s reacting to your emotional distance.
Real Cause: You lost that alpha male mojo.
White Knight Response That Won’t Work: Tenderly express your feelings so she’s comfortable being intimate again.
CH Solution That Will Work: Slap her ass after flirting with a waitress in front of her. Ass-ownage is 9/10ths of the law.

She’s stopped acting jealous when other women talk to you.

White Knight Imagined Cause: She’s matured into a secure woman with a healthy self-esteem.
Real Cause: You no longer inspire her to mate guard.
White Knight Response That Won’t Work: Compliment her on her independence.
CH Solution That Will Work: Dread game.

She’s nagging all the time.

White Knight Imagined Cause: You aren’t doing your share of the household chores.
Real Cause: She’s becoming repulsed by your beta stink and lashing out by subconsciously emasculating you.
White Knight Response That Won’t Work: Be a helpful househusband.
CH Solution That Will Work: Tell her to shut the fuck up. Leave for a few days. Don’t say where you’re going.

She’s stopped asking for your opinion about mutual concerns.

White Knight Imagined Cause: She’s a strong independent woman who has learned to think for herself.
Real Cause: She cares as little for your opinion as she cares for your dick in her pussy.
White Knight Response That Won’t Work: Leave all decision-making to her.
CH Solution That Will Work: Rudely inform her when you think she’s about to do something stupid. When she complains that she didn’t ask you, act nonchalant. “No shit. But I said it anyhow.”

She’s stopped dressing like a feminine woman in your company.

White Knight Imagined Cause: Love is unconditional and she doesn’t have to prove herself to you all the time.
Real Cause: Women don’t try to please men they don’t want to fuck. You’ve become weak.
White Knight Response That Won’t Work: Learn to appreciate her ratty sweatpants.
CH Solution That Will Work: Have another woman’s perfume on your shirt collar.

She’s staying longer hours at work.

White Knight Imagined Cause: She’s an ambitious woman.
Real Cause: She wants to fuck her boss.
White Knight Response That Won’t Work: Support her!
CH Solution That Will Work: Come home even later than her. Humming a happy tune.

She’s making impossible demands.

White Knight Imagined Cause: Her demands are reasonable. You’re letting her down.
Real Cause: She turning into a cruel bitch who hates having to live under the same roof as you.
White Knight Response That Won’t Work: Supplicate harder!
CH Solution That Will Work: Agree and amplify. “Yeah, I’ll do that right after I bang your mom’s hole ten ways to Sunday.”

She shows no appreciation for what you do.

White Knight Imagined Cause: Whatever you’re doing for her is not nearly as much as she’s doing for you.
Real Cause: You turn her off and she’s lost any desire to please you.
White Knight Response That Won’t Work: Drop passive-aggressive hints about feeling unloved.
CH Solution That Will Work: Stop doing things for her. When she notices, tell her, “You have two arms and hands? Use them.”

She’s never satisfied.

White Knight Imagined Cause: You aren’t treating her like the strong, independent woman she is.
Real Cause: She despises you.
White Knight Response That Won’t Work: Compliment her. Cuddle her. Perform cunnilingus. Ask for nothing in return. Promise to do more.
CH Solution That Will Work: Flip the script. Get her Skittles for her birthday. Make her do favors for you.

The number one sign that your woman is thinking of cheating may be a monthly biological process, which moderately correlates with all of the above signs.

The male infidelity urge resolves itself quickly. When men start feeling that tug toward fulfilling their primal genetic compulsion for poosy varietals, they will, if unburdened by scruples, execute in fairly short order and without the psychological torture that emotionally distancing women will put their men through. But a woman’s winding road to infidelity is longer, twistier, and unmarked. She’ll take a while getting there, and she’ll drop moldy bread crumbs for you along the way, but once she’s there she’s never coming back, not in the same way you knew her, and you won’t be able to reach her when she’s that far out either.

A woman’s unfaithfulness is like Ebola; by the time you’re bleeding from the eyes, it’s too late. You have to catch her waywardness early and deliver the proper correctives — 90% of the time, this means stop being beta. At the first notice of any of these omens of unfaithfulness, you have a window of opportunity to switch her bitch off. Dial down the beta provider comfort giver, and dial up the alpha lover excitement giver. If you are already at the stage where she’s denying you sex on flimsy pretexts (“My cat needed his asshole Nair’ed”), it’s probably too late. Her heart has left your stable and is trotting away for alpha pastures.

Nothing like a leetle auto-fill search query to pry open the lid on the female id.

The urge to trade up is stronger in women than in men, both because male sexual attractiveness is contextual and mutable and because women are disposed by the circumstances of their biology to be more careful about their mate choices. Women, unlike men, are practically born with their SMV already established. A pretty wife will stay attractive to her husband as long as she stays pretty. There’s not much contextual nudging, other than drastic weight gain and aging, that will greatly influence a woman’s SMV. So that’s why we uncover evidence that there is greater concern among women about lost attraction for their boyfriends and husbands than there is among men about lost attraction for their wives.

Continuing with the theme, here’s the same query after a small syntax change:

The rewording is subtle, but important. The first query is premised on an accepted loss of attraction, and a post-hoc search for rationalization. This second query is premised on a deeper worry about a missing attraction that should be there. It’s the type of wording a despondent searcher might use if he or she was trying to make sense of the dying love, and interested in fixing the “problem”.

The results are telling. The first hit — men asking why they aren’t attracted to their wives anymore — implies that there was previous attraction, but some mysterious occurrence (age? fatness?) changed the equation, and now the men want to know how to go back to the way things were.

The women, starkly, ask in a way that could be fairly interpreted as never having had attraction for their husbands (or niceguys). They have these wet noodle beta hubbies and orbiting niceguys whom they are inculcated by everyone around them to lust after, and yet despite the social pressure they can’t understand why the men they should desire leave them feeling… unmoved down there.

The final search result reinforces the point about social pressure yielding to primal desire. Presumably non-black women, steeped in a culture that propagandizes the sexual and romantic allure of black men, struggle with deeply innate feelings that are at odds with the juggernaut of cultural messages telling them to feel the opposite way.

Female hypergamy is real, even if the term is off-putting to around-the-way sadists. Cultural influence is real, too, but largely ineffectual against hindbrain desire. Intense and persistent media propaganda can only effect changes in human mate choice at the farthest margins, where the weakest-willed are most susceptible to social pressures to fit in with a mirage. Innate sexual desire is a prime force too powerful for the depraved elite’s mindfuck machines to overcome.

Hat tip, reader “Humans are animals” for the idea.

It seems there are still a few hermits and delusional freaks who think beauty is in the eye of the beholder and every beholder is different so, following the logic of this platitude, anyone can be beautiful if they immerse themselves in enough Jizzebel pep talks. Your Citadel Chateau stands athwart this march of moronic posturing, yelling shiv, but it never hurts to twist the knife and add a little more hurt.

Pierre Tourigny created composites of Hot or Not female profiles and the results are nothing short of dryly predictable. This first series is based on the 1-10 female beauty scale:

There are very few male beholders who will mistake the 1.0 girl for the 9.5 girl. There are fewer still who, given a free choice, would choose to have sex and romance with the 1.0 over the 9.5. The opinions of the beholders, averaged out, will reach a very objective consensus about the rankings of all these composites.

Tourigny notes,

What did I conclude about good looks from these virtual faces? First, morphs tend to be prettier than their sources because face asymmetries and skin blemishes average out. However, the low score images show that fat is not attractive. The high scores tend to have narrow faces.

There’s more to female beauty than that, but yeah, bloat kills beauty dead.

The ugly truth about beauty is about to get uglier. Here are composites of 2005 Miss Universe contestants by total, region and finalist:

The first thing that jumps out at you is just how similar very beautiful women look. Beautiful women from all races resemble each other more than they resemble the uglies of their own races. The big wide-set eyes, the bright smiles, the good teeth, the high foreheads and cheekbones, the dainty noses…. it’s almost as if there’s a universal objective standard of beauty that exists in the world inhabited by humans!

The second thing you notice (if noticing doesn’t make your bowels erupt) is how these worldwide representative composites of pulchritude converge, give or take a few racial idiosyncrasies like epicanthic folds, onto something close to what could be regarded as archetypical white woman beauty. Tourigny:

Miss Universe contestants owe their delegation to a mix of local and universal standards of beauty (or at least the pageant’s version of universal). I created multi-morph composites (see some details how here) for each continent from photos of the delegates.

The Americas composite most closely resembles the one from all delegates while the Europe composite more closely resembles the one from the finalists. Bias in the judging or in the standard? Who knows?

It could be bias. Or it could be an accidental revelation. If cosmetic surgery trends are equally indicative, it would appear that the pinnacle of universal female beauty coincides with the pinnacle of European female beauty. Where da white women at, indeed.

Finally, as Peter Frost has described, men all over the world prefer lighter-skinned women (relative to their own race’s hue). In the above Miss Universe composites, the representative African woman is not that much darker than the non-African women. And her nose… almost as petite as the European nose.

The trifecta of ugly truths about female beauty is complete with the following composites based on age:

Tourigny on the details of this composite,

The Hot or Not web site gives people the option of rating women of all ages or of seeing only a specific age group.I collected photos of women who scored at least a 9.5 average and created multi-morph composites (see some details how here).

The only thing I noticed was that the attractiveness standard people use is more lenient the older the subject.

Some people dispute the existence of The Wall, and point to the fact that beautiful 40+ year old women can be found in the wild. My answer to these Wall doubters is two-part: One, numbers matter. There are vastly more 25 year old female 9s than there are 41 year old female 9s. Two, longitudinal comparison matters. No matter how hot a 41 year old woman is, the 20 year old version of herself was hotter.

The exceedingly rare exceptions prove the rule.

People do get more lenient judging the attractiveness of older people, but that’s not proof of a magical reformulated age-adjusted objective beauty standard. Rather, what the leniency demonstrates is rationalization resulting from a restriction of options. As the average man gets older and falls out of the primary sexual market, he fools himself into believing his secondary sexual market female peers are just as attractive as the pretty young things he would prefer to fuck if the possibility were open to him. It’s Consolation Prize Syndrome.

That’s enough shivving for today. There’s blood all over the shag carpet. I’ll end on a hopeful note for the ladies: If you’re a pretty girl with boner-inducing face structure, you can avoid a premature impact with the Wall and sexual worthlessness by simply refusing to get fat. Look at that 41+ year old composite. No fat face there. No wrinkles either, but like Tourigny said, all he had to work with was blurry source images. Heh.

The Economist ran a piece about the economics of prostitution that reads like it slipped by the Hivemind perimeter defense drones under cover of night. There’s so much RealTalk and UglyTruth it’s a wonder equalist foot soldiers haven’t converged on it to drown it in a vat of squid ink and sophistry.

FOR those seeking commercial sex in Berlin, Peppr, a new app, makes life easy. Type in a location and up pops a list of the nearest prostitutes, along with pictures, prices and physical particulars. Results can be filtered, and users can arrange a session for a €5-10 ($6.50-13) booking fee. It plans to expand to more cities. [...]

We have analysed 190,000 profiles of sex workers on an international review site. (Since it is active in America, it was not willing to be identified for this article. A disclaimer on the site says the contents are fictional; we make the assumption that they are informative all the same.) Each profile includes customers’ reviews of the worker’s physical characteristics, the services they offer and the price they charge.

The data go back as far as 1999. For each individual we have used the most recent information available, with prices corrected for inflation. Some of those featured may appear under more than one name, or also work through agencies. The data cover 84 cities in 12 countries, with the biggest number of workers being in America and most of the rest in big cities in other rich countries. As this site features only women, our analysis excludes male prostitutes (perhaps a fifth of the commercial-sex workforce). Almost all of those leaving reviews are men.

Lots of platitude-pummeling charts follow. First, the inflation-adjusted price of prostitution services has been going down.

The article offers several reasons why this might be so; however, I think the primary causes are shifting social norms and demand substitution (online porn, video gaming).

Meanwhile, broader social change may be reducing demand—and thus, prices. Free, no-strings-attached sex is far easier to find than in the past. Apps such as Tinder facilitate speedy hookups; websites such as Ashley Madison and Illicit Encounters, adulterous ones. Greater acceptance of premarital intercourse and easier divorce mean fewer frustrated single and married men turning to prostitutes.

Disincentives matter. When the public shame of stepping out on your wife is lessened, the motivation to do so increases. This is all part of a society morphing from a predominately K-selected one to an r-selected one.

Most services above and beyond the base vaginal rate (BVR, could be a band name) cost more, because they’re niche services and because women, even hardened whores, instinctively feel some sexual acts are more degrading than others. Funny, if unsurprising, findings:

Women take kissing very seriously. Kissing is a more intimate act for women than it is for men. If you want to kiss a whore you’ll pay more than if you want to poke her in the pooper. PUA haters who scoff at players getting “make-outs” that “don’t go anywhere”, take note.

Like most regular women, most whores would rather spit than swallow. What I don’t get are the johns who insist on paying for her to swallow. It could be a dominance move, but then a money shot to the face is more debasing.

“Multiple men”. The data was pulled for female hos only, so this category represents putatively straight men who get off on sharing a ho with another dude. It’s disturbing that the cuckoldry fetish appears to be on the rise in Western megalopolises. Could this self-annihilating, self-castrating psychological disorder be caused by a parasite?

As surprising as the cuck finding is, the highest price commanded by its inverse — one man, two women — is predictable. Men dig non-gay threesomes.

The next chart will make a million fatties and fug feminists sprout martyrdom stigmata on their marbled labia.

Appearance matters a great deal. The customers who reported encounters to the website we analysed clearly value the stereotypical features of Western beauty: women they describe as slim but not scrawny, or as having long blonde hair or full breasts, can charge the highest hourly rates (see chart 3). Hair that is bleached too unconvincingly to be described as blonde attracts a lower premium, but is still more marketable than any other colour. For those not naturally well endowed, breast implants may make economic sense: going from flat-chested to a D-cup increases hourly rates by approximately $40, meaning that at a typical price of $3,700, surgery could pay for itself after around 90 hours. The 12% share of women featured on the site who are described both as athletic, slim or thin, and as being at least a D-cup, suggests that quite a few have already taken this route.

Pop-a-boner quiz: What do men dig?

Feminist: They dig rubenesque feminists with short black hair and flat business-friendly chests.

Patriarchy: They dig slender, long-haired blondes with big round boobs.

Patriarchy wins.

(For those wondering, when men say they prefer “athletic” women, what they mean is they prefer toned slender women who don’t have cellulite. Or, “athletic” is a euphemism for “barely legal”.)

Where da white hos at?

(You’ll notice that the cities with a higher proportion of white men — NYC, London — have the greatest skew in prices between black and white whores. But even in majority-black cities like Atlanta white whores still command a price premium.)

We had too few data from other cities for a reliable breakdown by ethnicity. But Christine Chin of the American University in Washington, DC, has studied high-end transnational prostitutes in several countries. In Kuala Lumpur, she found, black women command very high rates and in Singapore, Vietnamese ones do. In Dubai, European women earn the most. What counts as exotic and therefore desirable varies from place to place, and depends on many factors, such as population flows.

Baby got lumps. I guess black hos could go to Kuala Lumpur and… Bueller? Bueller?

Yet a cost-of-living index compiled by the Economist Intelligence Unit, our sister organisation, suggests that Tokyo is the most expensive city overall of the three. The apparent anomaly may be because escorts who appear on an English-language review site mostly cater to foreigners, who are not offered the more unusual—and expensive—services Japanese prostitutes provide for locals. These include the bubble baths and highly technical massages of Sopurando (“Soapland”), a red-light district in Tokyo, which can cost ¥60,000 ($600) for a session and involve intercourse (although that is not advertised).

The Japanese are weird, #3,187 in a series.

A degree appears to raise earnings in the sex industry just as it does in the wider labour market. A study by Scott Cunningham of Baylor University and Todd Kendall of Compass Lexecon, a consultancy, shows that among prostitutes who worked during a given week, graduates earned on average 31% more than non-graduates. More lucrative working patterns rather than higher hourly rates explained the difference.

Easily explained. Smart women are better at exploiting market niches, and smarts correlate with beauty (up to a point).

Although sex workers with degrees are less likely to work than others in any given week (suggesting that they are more likely to regard prostitution as a sideline), when they do work they see more clients and for longer. Their clients tend to be older men who seek longer sessions and intimacy, rather than a brief encounter.

Older men need testosterone replacement therapy so they don’t wind up emptying their wallets for pillow talk and a cuddle.

A mother in Scotland asks how other prostitutes juggle child care and selling sex, given that bookings are often made at short notice so babysitters are hard to arrange. Another contributor who is thinking of having children asks how much other women saved before taking time off to have a baby, and whether the new calls on their time meant they earned less after giving birth. One reply points out that prostitution is easier than many other jobs to combine with motherhood: it pays well enough to cover child-care costs, and can be fitted around school holidays, plays and sports days, and children’s illnesses.

A nation of whore mommies. Ah, but it’s genetics all the way down, so no big deal. Until it is.

A greater awareness may develop that not all sex workers are the victims of exploitation.

I remember reading a study from not too long ago that found most teen prostitutes get into the business volitionally. Kidnappings and sex trafficking are actually quite rare, especially in East Europe. Also, prostitution does have a damping effect on rape and sex assault rates. This isn’t necessarily an argument for decriminalizing prostitution, but it does suggest that the god of biomechanics likes to prank our moral codes.

Reader Email #1

Synopsis:
I started going out with someone I met. Not exclusively, but she blew away the competition in every way. Her actions at that time were great …hot sex and her pretty much admitting to “being crazy for” me. Somewhere in there, I got the oneitis and flipped from alpha to beta (and yes, I know I fucked up).

Be very wary of girls who say stuff like “I’m crazy for you” soon after you and her have started dating. These are the kind of BPD drama whores who love the idea of passionate love and in their excitement will try to prematurely generate intense feelings, instead of patiently allowing any feelings to emerge organically. Because as fast as these chicks turn it on, they also can turn it off. One day, you’ll catch her texting another dude, and you’ll wonder “What happened to that whole part about you being crazy for me?”.

Actions speak louder than words, and she started to distance herself. She wanted to “talk to me in person about something” on Friday, and I knew what was next.

Whether intentional or evolutionarily directed, the “crazy for you” drama queen act will trap a lot of less experienced men into buying the schtick and responding in kind with florid beta male paeans. It can be a massive shit test, iow.

Just as I figured though, she gave me the “things are not the same and don’t feel right, I’m sorry text” on the evening we were going to have a face to face instead of meeting tell me (I know women are non-confrontational and I figured this would happen).

I need a timeline. How soon after you met her were you discussing “face to face” meetings to clear the air?

I responded with a “I know”. I then erased every trace from my phone. Forty five minutes later, she send me the “I wish you only the best” text. I do not respond. Erase. Delete.

“lol” would have been funnier, but a non-response is the next best thing.

If you would be so kind, here’s what I need help with, .

I thought about it. I read an entire set of your articles. Two things dawned on me.

1) She may be shit testing me or she may have lost interest as she rides the cock carousel. She could have not wished me luck at all…end of story.

It’s not a shit test. She lost interest, but she’s trying to weasel you into some sort of beta orbiter role who lavishes her with attention when she needs it.

2) After three nights, it bothered me that I was such a stupid idiot for going beta on this broad. I tend to speak my mind, and having not responded to her last text made me feel like I didn’t show my indifference to her goodbye. AFC.

You don’t “show” indifference to a break-up text by demanding explanation or playing a game of gotcha. You show indifference by being indifferent. WWAAWAHD? What would an alpha with a harem do? He wouldn’t bother responding, or he would text her something that made him laugh, like a birthday cat emoji.

I read your articles. And on the third night, I finally sent her a one word text in retort to her “wish you only the best” text. I responded with, “gay”.

Ok. This would’ve been better right after her text. Waiting three days to text “gay” makes it seem like you needed the time to craft the perfect three letter comeback. The “wait a day or two before texting a girl back” is not a universal rule. It’s not even much of an individual rule. Too many exceptions.

Whereas before she would text me back hours later, she texted me back within minutes asking me “what?”

You gave her a tiny hit of dopamine.

Part of me wants to leave it at that. Fish or cut bait. Erase. Delete. Move on.

NEXT.

The greater part of me wants to seduce and destroy. It would be much more fun, fulfilling, and make me feel better (yes I know I have ego and revenge issues). Am I crazy to think this is still an option? If so, I thought about waiting another 3-4 days and responding with the “never mind, I thought you were different” reply. Would you please advise?

Regardless of your advice and opinion. Thanks again for the articles. It has helped me much.

Again, VISUALIZE ALPHA. If you had your fill of cute babes, how would you handle this one girl? You’d fuck with her, that’s what you’d do. “wut” or “8====D~~~”. Followed by a curt statement that you’ll be at [X] on [X] if she’s down to fuck. You’ll act like the earlier unsavory business between you and her never even happened. You are the Whamster, whamming her hamster.

******

Reader Email #2 is from “High School Narcissist”.

Hi. I’ve been following your blog for a little while, and I’m a sophomore in high school. I don’t know that you’ll respond to me since I’m under 18, but I’ll give it a go.

It’s never too soon to make girls swoon.

There’s another girl in my grade, and she’s basically the queen among girls. A lot hotter than everyone else, everyone knows her, etc.

The thing is she seems to be a complete narcissist. She’s very confident, she will give no one time, and is obsessed with herself. I assume this comes with the popularity.

It also comes with the beauty. But let’s not get caught up in an arid cause-effect polemic.

She makes herself unapproachable, and it shows, as every guy is a beta orbiter around her. Never seen a move made on her, just pedestalization.

Great. More opportunity for you to shine.

So I’m curious, how do I exploit this? I’m an average guy in terms of attractiveness. I’ve not ever communicated with her before by the way.

This is high school, a time of your life when the girls will never be riper. At this age and growing awareness of their power over boys, it’s also never a worse time to be a lovesick betaboy. Be mean to make the bitches keen. Shock her into curiosity about you. Say something she would never expect. “Hey could you help me with my homework? You look kind of nerdy.”

Get the idea? Summon your inner exuberantly reckless asshole. One last thing. Be prepared to get backtalk. She’s gonna be startled and peeved (in a good way), and she’ll lash out to test your state control. If you know it’s coming, you’ll stay composed. She might be mad that you called her a nerd. You reply, “Hey, nothing wrong with being a nerd. Don’t hate yourself.”

Enjoy this freshest of poon while you have it, because it’s all downhill from high school!

******

Reader Email #3

What’s the deal with all these bitches who work at “non-profits”?  5-10 years ago bitches were all in public relations.  Now it’s the non profits.

What the hell is a non-profit? Another charitable tax hiding place for rich dudes which allows him to increase power and influence?

Yup. Also, luxury self-actualization. Don’t worry, after the collapse the nonprofits will be wiped from the face of the earth. Fundraising results correlate directly with economic conditions.

Working at a nonprofit allows SWPL women to feel good about themselves. But, more germane, nonprofits appeal to women because they are perceived as happy work which avoids the sink-or-swim ladder-climbing hothouse of for-profit industry. Women are constitutionally averse to competition in ways that men aren’t.

******

Reader Email #4

I am looking for some advice. Recently single, I was in a LTR that ended up being long distance for school. Took a few weeks to get over it, and happy to say I’m moving on. Here’s my situation: My friend is traveling with her friend she met abroad. (2 women, one foreign) I hung out with them before they left, at a pub then a party one night, then the beach a few days later. Explaining their trip they invited me to join them in vegas, and I was like hell yeah, no reason not to.

Not long after at the party, the foreign girl made her interest in me known, and we fooled around a bit, she said she wanted to slow down if I was coming to vegas, although she was still all over me in public and private.

Ignore girls when they say stuff like “I want to slow down if…”. In the final analysis, you will either get the bang or not depending on your seduction acumen. And if you’re good, she’ll forget all about that promise she made to herself.

At the beach she was more discrete but still all over me in private. I’m meeting them in a week, and I’m looking for some advice on how to proceed. I’d call myself a greater beta…working on improvement but I do tend to let my emotions get the better of me. I have no problem attracting women, but I backslide.

I’m going into this intending to have a crazy week partying in vegas but I can’t lie and say I don’t hope I have a fling with this girl before she heads back overseas.

Pre-bang trips are risky. They are pregnant with expectation. She knows you know this trip is an excuse for sex. She knows you’ll be expecting it. She’ll be expecting it (on a less conspicuous level). All these unspoken assumptions will activate her anti-slut defense.

She has a bit of a bitchy nature to her, but I think its her version of trying to be playful, or its a result of her accent. At the beach I got a snarky vibe from her but when we were alone she jumped on me.

That’s a good sign. If it were the reverse — she was all over you in public but a frigid bitch in private — I’d be worried.

Basic plan is to be super social with everyone I meet (my natural strength anyways) and pay her some but not a lot of attention. I’m mostly afraid of coming off coupley when all i really want is to sleep with her as much as possible. I’m ok to cuddle, but only after about an hour of vegas sex.

When expectations and concomitant ASD are high, comfort and a little bit of preemptive disqualification are welcome. Don’t be cutesy (i.e., “what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas, amirite?”), but don’t be totally stand-offish either. You want to physically escalate toward sex while at the same time letting her know in a nuanced manner that you don’t need her approval in the form of sex, even on a trip where sex is frontmost on both your minds.

Your basic strategy is sound. Don’t initiate the Groping Protocol as soon as you set off on the trip. Be chill, act like you’re really anticipating the parties and gambling and poolsides, tease her to get her out of the discomfort zone (she’ll be in it again because the sex cloud will have been hanging over her for the past week), and after a settling-in period isolate her for deeper rapport. Even the sluttiest of sluts need a man’s imprimatur of emotional investment.

I don’t know how you’ve worked out the hotel situation, but it’s better to pop that sex cherry before awkward consensus meetings over who sleeps where begin. If that’s not possible, you’ll have to cajole her with some plausible excuse to come into your room.

******

Reader Email #5 is from Changer89.

Can you write a post analyzing Tracy Chapman’s song ‘Fast Car’ from red pill/economically right-wing/racial realism perspective?

Black lesbian warbles tragically about leaving for the white suburb on the hill with her shiftless thug lover as realization of depressing ghetto fate slowly dawns on her. See also: Any halfway smart black person surrounded by imbeciles.

******

Reader Email #6

Ever thought about ways in which not to be a sulking beta if the woman denies you sex? freeze outs are hard, so I have an easy alternative. Tickle game – where you throw her onto the bed against her will and tickle the shit out of her. Then when she says she’s had enough keep going until you’re satisfied. Yeah it’s immature and childish but so are the funniest of men and women can’t resist not being taken seriously.. thoughts?

Good stuff. Even better: Tickle the giggles out of her, then get up and say “Ok, that’s enough. I gotta go” and leave her in a state of breathless confusion. This is the long-game strategy; you’re denying her sex now for hotter, more devoted, sex later.

******

Reader Email #7

Can i get some advice on campus life? I plan to move onto residence for my final year of university. I’m moving to a new city, so how do I go about making new friends, and get myself into a social crowd?

I have a fairly good physique, and try to dress well, but still I lack confidence and am bad at conversation/small talk.

Rule #1: Stay away from losers. There’ll be a temptation to join their nonjudgmental cliques because they’ll take the pressure off you having to socially perform. Resist it. If you get sucked into a loser social circle, it’ll be ten times harder to infiltrate a winner social circle that’ll grant access to prime poosy.

Rule #2: If your conversational skills are weak, or you’re a natural introvert, cultivate a “laconic rebel” personality. That means, don’t overtalk (to avoid social miscues). Train yourself in the art of the drive-by quip. Once you’ve gotten a fair shake by the winners, you can move on from “laconic rebel” to “aloof asshole who doesn’t care what people think of him”. Then you get the girls.

******

Reader Email #8

Long time reader, first time emailer.  I’ve found myself in a bit of a conundrum with one of the latest girls that I’ve been seeing.  My concern is that I’m the one to initiate nearly all of our dates.  On one hand, I feel that the “leader mentality” should mean that it doesn’t matter that I’m the one initiating every date.  On the other hand, I don’t want to come across as the one that’s chasing her.  She agrees to the date about 90% of the time.  When she doesn’t, sometimes she gives a good excuse; other times, she is very terse.  We are not in a relationship, but have been seeing each other casually for several months.  Should I be concerned that I’m being strung along, or should I just keep pushing?  Feel free to use this message, but please don’t use my name.  Thanks!

While foot-dragging or a lack of initiative by a girl can be a cause for concern, if she’s banging you I wouldn’t worry about it. Girls vote with their vaj. Some girls simply prefer a man who orders their lives for them.

So, my question to you is, are you fucking her? I’ll assume you are, because “several months” in non-beta orbiter land means “several months of fucking”. If you aren’t… abandon ship!

A girl who hasn’t put out is de facto pulling strings. She is in the command seat of power. She has all the hand. If you feel like you’re chasing a girl you haven’t yet banged, you probably are. And you won’t get that bang until you’ve gone some lengths to flip the script and get her to chase you a bit.

But if she’s already given her most valuable asset to you, then the chasing you feel manipulated into doing may just be the expression of her natural feminine reticence against being pumped and dumped. She needs more signs of your commitment before she’ll permit the vulnerability of love to strike down her last bulwark of defense. Only you can tell which advice pertains.

What would a clickbait Chateau Heartiste be like? “Anonymous” comments,

If CH writes a post now with a title like “Robin Williams Forced to Commit Suicide by Divorce Court System” he can get a lot of traffic and extra fame. One thing I suspect happened is that the family courts of California ruled that Robin owed each ex-wife 5 figure alimony sums every month regardless of any drop in his earning power or desire to retire. But he was a liberal who supported that kind of system overall.

There is evidence that suicide risk has a genetic basis, however, like most genetically-influenced behaviors, strong environmental shocks can suppress or trigger the expression of the genes. In the case of Robin Williams, his two ex-wives were the environmental shocks that pushed him to a final solution.

Robin Williams will return to TV after nearly three decades – because two divorces have left him short of cash.

The comic’s breakups cost him £20million and he claims to need a ‘steady job’. He is also selling his £20million California ranch due to his sizeable alimony payments.[...]

The 62-year-old, said: ‘Divorce is expensive. I used to joke they were going to call it “all the money”, but they changed it to “alimony”.

It’s ripping your heart out through your wallet.’

There is no “rape culture” as deranged feminist cunts starved for male attention would want you to believe. Rape rates are at historical lows. There is a divorce rape culture, and it has amassed a pile of real victims far larger than criminally prosecuted rape has claimed. Men are literally killing themselves out of desperation once the divorce rape industrial complex has taken everything from them.

And I do mean “them”. Williams’ ex-wives had absolutely NOTHING to do with his talent, his drive, and his career success. Nothing. And yet with the sanction of the state they walk away with pieces of the man’s soul, leaving him pondering the escape of the rafter rope.

Marriage has never been a bigger sucker’s bet for men. Prenups are routinely shredded by lawyers and ignored by judges. The fix is in. The fundamental premise has been codified in law to the cheers of rabid feminists and solipsistic soccer moms and taken to its logical conclusion: Men are resource chattel, milked by a constabulary of strongmen to redistribute their earnings to an army of cackling divorcees.

If America is fated to be a post-Malthusian, r-selection reproductive free-for-all, then let it be in every way. That means, women are cut loose from the male alimony and child support teat to fend for themselves and accept the consequences of their decisions. Relying on men for support, pre- and post-marriage, is a luxury afforded K-selection societies, and that luxury comes with certain duties that modern women have largely chosen to abandon. If justice is fair and not wholly rigged against the interests of men, the divorce rape culture will be dismantled and an ex-husband’s life may be saved.

A Japanese company claims to have reached the next level in developing the most genuine looking sex doll which comes complete with realistic feeling skin and authentic looking eyes.

Orient Industry say their new range of dolls, made from high quality silicon, are so realistic there is very little to distinguish them from a real girlfriend at first glance.

The dolls, which are non inflatable, are sold under the name ‘Dutch Wives’, a Japanese term for a sex doll, and adverts in the media boast that anyone who buys one will never want a real girlfriend again.

The Japanese are getting close to scaling the uncanny valley.

The dolls come with a “skeleton”, which means they can be arranged into any position. Any position.

The coming sexbot revolution — and make no mistake, it is coming — will have profound ramifications on social order and the functioning of the sexual market. To this day, people underestimate the effect the Pill had on Western society; multiply that effect by a thousand and you’ll get an idea of the subversive havoc mass consumable sexbots will wreak.

Her pockets are longer than her shorts.

Dat body language. It’s like she caught a whiff of dog shit. Betaboy doesn’t know it yet, but she checked out of their one-way playdate relationship long ago.

The story is here, in all its lurid, coalburning detail. I’m warning you so prepare yourself as you see fit. No matter what you tell yourself or others, the deepest recesses of your hindbrain will twitch in revolt. If you’re white. If you’re black, your heart will swell with tribal pride.

A white hottie with a soulless gaze cheated on her beta “””boyfriend””” (see above). And by cheated, I mean she triple lindied into a Rwandan pre-machete spree pep rally and had her clam shucked and pried by a diorama of dark continent dick. Pics and video and insta-taunting tell the tale. Rumor has it the video and pics didn’t catch all the action, and the full measure of her character was assessed by twelve mugging mandingos tickling the back of her throat.

I do enjoy a descriptive id punch.

[NB: She's leaning poolside. Looks like she's a product of a happy middle (upper middle?) class suburb. Witness born for those who want to insist race-crossing sluts are all low class land whales.]

As repulsive as is her self-mockumentary, what her sackless beta shitlapper borefriend did next was (if it’s possible) even more repugnant.

I’ll give you one guess what it was.

.

.

.

.

Drum pail, please….

He forgave his princess.

He forgave her after being subjected, no less, to a barrage of very personal muh dikking.

A man shames not just himself, but his male ancestors and male descendants, the whole lineage in a straight line from past to present to future, when he defends the honor of a dishonorable slattern. He betrays his close kin and extended race. He surrenders his dignity. He prostrates himself for a pence of peripatetic pussy. He is the human equivalent of shit speckle on a public toilet seat. I could carve a better man out of a banana.

Now, if the “””boyfriend””” had just said (in so many words), “Hey, I had my (weirdly platonic) fun with this discount bin whore, and now I’m cutting her loose based on the available evidence of her unsuitability as a long-term mate”, all would be forgiven of him. Her… not so much. But that is stain for another day.

Naturally, given that the attention whoring has grown beyond her limited means of message discipline, the party favor skank has tried to play the “I wuz drugged” get-out-of-slut-shame card, but no one is buying it. As well they shouldn’t. Post-cock rationalizations always carry a whiff of desperate image consultancy.

Where was her father in all this? Has he self-delivered in the aftermath, or did he essentially self-deliver from raising his daughter long ago? There are 99 ways a father can fail his children, but this way is FATHER FAIL numero uno. You’d have to be less than human to not feel the burn of shame if you were this father. Will he show his face in public again? Or doesn’t he care? Is this escapist self-annihilation — by both white father and white daughter — the new growth of an invasive society species that chokes to memetic death the value of fathers and the forward-thinking modesty of daughters?

The less judgmental among you could argue she and her pitifully loyal white knight lapdog and absentee father are sick in the head and deserve compassion. Maybe. But I tend to another hypothesis: What we see happening around us is the symptom of a society that has relinquished all controls over female sexual prerogatives. Female sexuality, when left unattended and free to do as it pleases, often travels into very dark and depraved cul de sacs, and can circle there for generations, creating a vortex that sucks in all civilized life to a pathetic and predictable doom.

Worse, this removal of restrictions on female sexuality has been accompanied by a perverse reaction in the opposite direction to confound men about the true reproductive nature of women. We see rising lockstep with rank sluts a hapless loser beta peasant class who are so ignorant of the masculine behaviors and vibe women crave that they meander helplessly through a sexual market minefield, bouncing bettys bouncing them from one bloody heartache to another. Repeated romantic failure inculcates in the young beta male’s mind a hopelessness that circumscribes his options well beyond what a realistic appraisal of his SMV would demand.

And so what we have here is what you see with this particular beta male… a stockholm syndrome-type of pathological clinginess that feeds on a feared lifelong incelibacy and is conditioned by this fear to rush to the defense of manipulative psychocunts who play ping pong with his blue balls while joyously gobbling the knobs of hooting ferals who live and die on liberating instinct.

***

Flyover naifs claim that plenty of “good girls” can be found. I’ve no doubt. I have lain with many good girls, and have nothing but the fondest memories (of memories made and memories in motion). But that is a non sequitur. The question isn’t whether there are good girls left in America — there are — but whether their numbers as a percentage of the whole are retreating. We have only our life experiences, anecdotes, and coldly sterile data to consult for answers. (Which normally is enough for examination of routine human behavior, but never is when we put the microscope to the monstrous vitals of the lust-fueled id.)

On the life experience and anecdote metrics, these sordid self-debasements of the slut-proud social media class seem to be increasing in frequency and dramatic flourish. Each week brings a romantic ignominy to top the previous week’s sexhibitionism. Girls raging gleefully at the dying light of patriarchal civilization; men raging impotently at the dying loins of their once virile majesty. One simply can’t help but notice change is a-blowin’ in the wind. And personally, I have accrued enough boudoir time with enough high society ladies to know that there is hardly a one — no matter her class, education, intellect, or family background — who doesn’t have clattering skeletons in her walk-in closet, and fewer still who aren’t practiced in the art of camouflaging otherwise.

(And bless their ladylike hearts for feeling the need to attempt the camouflage to appease my masculine prerogative. Truly.)

Data-wise, the evidence is murkier. GSS self-report surveys hint at a sexual cocooning strangely at odds with the growing portfolio of Facebooked frolicking. If true, it perhaps suggests less a hidden chasteness than a bifurcation in the sexual market, split between evangelical virgins and blue city girls gone wild.

The current CDC data veer more toward affirming the anecdotal, but there too the pussy picture is unclear. Some sexually transmitted diseases are on the rise, but teen sex is down (while teen pregnancy is up *head scratch*). Age of first sexual intercourse is up, but rates of throat and anal cancers in younger women are up as well. “Technical virgins”.

(Do white girls slot a 12-dick coal train into the “technical virgin” category? Kind of like how fucking a dog doesn’t really steal a girl’s virginity? It might explain a lot.)

It is as if two worlds — one a last stand by a besieged former empire, the other a new world disorder where chaos reigns supreme — are in our day locked in a death struggle for preeminence. And here we are, living it in technicolor splendor.

It shouldn’t bear repeating, but every time one of these slutbombs explode in the Chateau gardens, there are invariably “players” who chastise Your Unholy Greatness for his perceived judgmentalism and self-defeating yearning for a better past filled with better women.

Yes, reports tell of a past America that was better. Not better in every way, but better in the ways that mattered. And yes, I will admit to some giddy despair over the dissolution of a nation that no longer lays claim to my heart. But I also won’t look a gift ho in the mouth. If a cute girl makes it easy for me and wants to screw after ten minutes of meeting her, I won’t stop her. I won’t conspicuously judge her, either, except by the bewilderment and pain I plant in her when I prematurely recuse myself from her girlfriend expectations a few weeks (or months, if SMV is 7+) later.

The slut is souldead! God save the slut!

The slut is a useful tool. Great fun, great sex, horrible long-term investment. And that’s not just a gut feeling. The whitecoats confirm. There’s a sound evolutionary reason (white) men are attuned to signs of sluttitude and women are aggrieved by sluts in their midst.

And that’s really the crux of the whorecrux. A girl who surrenders her every orifice to a pack of howlhounds live-streaming for a studio audience the slow flaying of her soul will become the woman no worthy man will think twice about marrying. Her humiliation, so abject and complete and perfunctorily recorded for posterity, (though for now she only feels it in fleeting sensations on the back of her neck late at night through the self-medicating haze delivered in warm liquid doses by her muscly rationalization hamster), will render her utterly unmarriageable to the vast majority of quality men with options. This stone cold reality will make her life incalculably harder, and wrest an incalculable torrent of tears from her mother and an incalculable tribute of emotional withdrawal from her father.

A merciful god would find some way to attenuate their torment. God helps those who help themselves. (If by chance some cleansing… salvation… were to befall the family, it would serve a valuable lesson for the others.)

A father’s shame, more profound, maybe, than his daughter’s. Because what is a father’s mission critical job as regards his daughter? It’s to preserve his daughter’s honor and see her off into the world the kind of woman a good man would want to take up. A failure to complete this job discredits him as a father like few other failures can.

This is the normal state of affairs, and shame and guilt have evolved to ensure that civilized fathers and daughters comport themselves in line with the prevailing social norms. But shame is dead in the West, and guilt is following soon in its brother’s wake. Social norms divide and redivide like a multicellular demon embryo, partitioning into separate and competing camps unsurprisingly in line with the diversity of seed that contributed to the demon’s corrupted cuckolded conception. Le Chateau stands a citadel against the alien revocation of these timeless forces of civilization, and for that we are despised by the wayward and wanton. More deserving enemies we could not pray for.

These horror stories always remind me of a fitting song.

CH has written about the problem of exploding female self-esteems, its causes and its manifestations, as well as the shallow (if broad) nature of the epidemic of bloated gogrrl egos and what it all means for players looking to exploit sexual market loopholes for love and romance.

Apparently (and unsurprisingly), the results from a recent social ❤science❤ study confirm CH field experience and idle theorizing.

Self-Esteem Instability and the Desire for Fame

The desire to become famous was examined among individuals with stable and unstable forms of self-esteem. Participants were 181 female undergraduates who completed measures of self-esteem level and fame interest along with daily measures of state self-esteem (i.e., how an individual feels about oneself at the present moment) for seven consecutive days. Our results show that individuals who possess unstable high self-esteem reported a stronger desire to become famous than did those with stable high self-esteem. These findings suggest the intriguing possibility that individuals with unstable high self-esteem may want to become famous as a means for gaining external validation. Implications of these findings for understanding the connection between self-esteem and the desire for fame are discussed.

181 self-reporting female subjects doesn’t qualify as a huge (or unerring) study, but it’s enough to glimpse penumbras of the womanly craving for external validation, aka attention whoring.

Why were only women studied?

We focused exclusively on women in the present study because previous research suggests that women were more likely than men to report being interested in fame as a way to gain status (Greenwood et al., 2013) and use their interest in celebrities as a way to establish their own identities (i.e., celebrity worship; Reeves, Baker, & Truluck, 2012).

Paradoxically, men gain MUCH more reproductive fitness from fame than do women, and yet women appear to crave fame more. It could be that women’s self-esteems are naturally more unstable than men’s self-esteems, and that women also have a stronger constitutional need to “feel good in the moment” than do men, so they turn to fame and facsimiles of fame (posting Africa AIDS kid pics to Instagram while assuming the missionary position (double entendre intended)) as a sort of palliative to rub their hamsters with the grain.

The most interesting aspect of this study (because let’s face it the results pretty much internally and externally validate generations of conventional wisdom about women’s natural disposition to flaunt their prime nubility goods for ego assuaging feels) is the finding that unstable high self-esteem women are the most likely to attention whore.

What is an unstable high self-esteem woman?

The present study focuses on self-esteem instability, which refers to fluctuations in moment-to-moment feelings of self-worth over time. Accounting for both self-esteem level and self-esteem instability is important because it allows researchers to identify those individuals who possess secure and fragile forms of high self-esteem. That is, individuals who possess high levels of self-esteem that are stable over time (i.e., stable high self-esteem) are believed to be secure in their feelings of self-worth because their positive attitudes about themselves appear to be well-anchored and do not fluctuate a great deal based on external circumstances. In contrast, individuals who report generally high levels of self-esteem but experience considerable fluctuations in their feelings of self-worth over time (i.e., unstable high self-esteem) are thought to possess a relatively fragile form of high self-esteem because these frequent changes in their self-esteem suggest that the positive views expressed by these individuals are at least somewhat uncertain.

Self-esteem instability has been found—both by itself and in conjunction with self-esteem level—to be associated with a variety of important life outcomes including anger (Kernis, Grannemann, & Barclay, 1989), aggression (Zeigler-Hill, Enjaian, Holden, & Southard, 2014), defensiveness (Zeigler-Hill, Chadha, & Osterman, 2008), interpersonal style (Zeigler-Hill, Clark, & Beckman, 2011), humor style (Vaughan, Zeigler-Hill, & Arnau, in press), academic outcomes (Zeigler-Hill et al., 2013), and psychopathology (e.g., Zeigler-Hill & Wallace, 2012; see Jordan & Zeigler-Hill, 2013, for a review). These results are consistent with the view that unstable high self-esteem reflects vulnerable feelings of self-worth that require external validation as well as some degree of self-deception (see Kernis, 2003, for a review). Unstable high self-esteem is thought to be associated with a wide array of negative outcomes (e.g., poor psychological adjustment, defensiveness) because this form of high self-esteem may lack the protective mechanisms that seem to shield those with stable high self-esteem from experiencing these outcomes. These results suggest that self-esteem instability is an important moderator of the associations that self-esteem level has with an array of life outcomes. Our goal for the present study was to examine whether self-esteem instability also moderates the association that self-esteem level has with the desire for fame.

In the study description provided at the link, you’ll read that fragile (unstable) high self-esteem women tend to be “unrealistically optimistic” and mean-spirited. Sounds about right. You know the type: Those hyperactive drama whores who backstab perceived enemies one minute with foul-tempered fury and then crow about how great life is the next with a phony sing-song chirpiness that’s carried aloft by bluebirds and garland.

The fame-starved, superficially high self-esteem girl (a close cousin of the BPD girl) is the bread and butter of nightgame pickup artists. To game one of these chicks, you have to know first that feeding her fragile ego is absolutely the OPPOSITE of what you should do. Once a SHiSE girl has gotten her external validation, her vagina shuts down. To keep that vagina open and curious, her ego needs to be kept on tenterhooks, always waiting and anticipating but never getting that next hit of validation. Not without clauses and stipulations, at any rate.

And do you know what game tactics perfectly exploit this innate weakness in the female psyche?

Disqualification (“Oh, we would never hit it off. You’re too uptight”).

Negs (“Nice hamster. Is it real?”).

Warning: You would never want to LTR or wife up a SHiSE woman. Her constant annoying need for validation will either drive you insane or drive you to jealousy when she strays to get her feels from other men. Cheating is almost inevitable with these types of girls, because one man can only externally validate her so much before the value of his validation, no matter how tantalizingly wielded, drops below the price of inflating her ego.

Maxim #29: Think of female egos and female vaginas as opposing forces. The more one is stroked, the less the other wants to be stroked.