Comment Of The Week: Only The Nice Die Lonely

COTW winner is tsparks156, cutting to the quick with his trenchant observation about one of the primary characteristics that distinguishes assholes from niceguys.

In my time I have seen many unfortunate nice guys that are lonely. I’m trying to remember if I have ever met a lonely asshole.

This sounds like the beginning of a beautiful country music tune.


COTW runner-up is shartiste, springboarding off the Ahmud hoax bomb story that has so animated shitlibs and President Butt Naked, to outline a general theory of cultural decline resulting from the equalist project of raising the Defective/Normal Ratio of society:

The scope and brazenness of this hoax speaks to how out of touch elites are with the common man. Yet it also gives hope. All the conspiracy theories about how these smart rich people masterfully control everything fail on one point: elites don’t truly understand what makes people tick, so they can never fully win hearts and minds of the masses. They will always have their defective cheerleaders: the fat and slutty, the eunuchs and gammas. But normal, typical people will see through these gambits. That is why the keystone strategy of liberals is to raise the defective/normal ratio in a society and win with the one-two defectives/democracy combo punch.

They do this most obviously by simply importing defectives and more gradually with conversion, by turning otherwise normal people into defectives by making women slutty workaholics, men weak cucks. Media has been doing this but its been a slow grind since the 60s and many are resistant because their biomechanics are averse to it.

This is why we have hope, albeit temporary. When normals have an option, they will always be won over by leaders that intuitively understand them. These leaders will have an advantage because they work with people’s sensibilities and people need far less Machiavellian persuasion this way. Messages become simple: Build Wall. No Rapists. Better Deals. Let’s Win. Obvious truths negate decades of carefully insidious progressive demoralization of the masses. Those in control take great care to make sure these leaders never break in to the arena, because once they do they are not the heel, they are the hero. The barriers to entry are high.

Trump is the first to make it. He may not be the last. But he may also be the last chance. When the defective/normal ratio tips too high, coupled with universal suffrage, the state is doomed. If Trump gets cockblocked it will be an interesting century for America or whatever is left of it.

May we live in Trumpening times.


A two-fer for shartiste.

A nascent HBDer that thinks he’s clever might suggest that the univeralist blank-slatism of white liberals is a culture that mirrors their genes. I’d argue that it is not, but rather a tendency toward status-whoring. Those who can’t achieve status through more traditional means lean on liberal politics to signal intelligence and status, buttressed by media and Hollywood liberal signalling. This blank-slate diversitard stuff isn’t in anyone’s genes, if it was then rich liberals wouldn’t live in 95% white enclaves.

HBDers would argue that the genes are the causal agent that germinates the expression of status whoring and whatever is the contemporary outlet for socially signaling one’s moral superiority. So one could say both the HBDer and shartiste’s views are simultaneously operative. I do think shartiste’s point about the numerical growth of shitlib defectives meaning that there will be more empty status signaling by SJWs who couldn’t accrue real status is spot on.


Let’s make it a three-fer for shartiste!

lots of times when a guy “suddenly lost interest” its because he got the notch. women often omit this detail from their “I got ghosted” stories, they don’t want to believe putting out can vacuum the attraction out of a guy that quickly, especially when it had the opposite effect on them, but the novel new nookie brings a clarity that had been clouded to the man in pursuit.

Men fall asleep after sex. Women want to talk, cuddle, and get reassurances that their love is reciprocated after sex. That right there should be enough to clue even the stupidest gender bender feminist that men and women are fundamentally different in their psychologies.


  1. “They will always have their defective cheerleaders: the fat and slutty, the eunuchs and gammas”

    This appears to be a perennial fatal flaw of left wing juggernauts. In Arthur Kostler’s “Darkness at Noon” (1944) the protagonist Rubashev, a Soviet agent in Weimar Germany, meets with a local left wing activist who happens to be a stutterer. After the meeting Rubashev wonders “why do we attract so many defectives?”


  2. Must watch! You will not regret it.


  3. In my time I have seen many unfortunate nice guys that are lonely. I’m trying to remember if I have ever met a lonely asshole.

    That’s because assholes don’t get lonely… and the fact that women are suckers for emotionally unavailable men.


  4. More about shartiste’s point about left wing ideology’s stumbling block being the innate ugliness of its essence. I like to say that it is not strong minds, but weak stomachs that abolish such ideologies. Truth is beauty and beauty is truth.

    Below is a translation of Zbigniew Herbert’s (1924 – 1998) poem “A Matter of Taste” (orig: “Potęga Smaku”) on that very subject. He explains that anti-communist dissidents like himself were not so much men of character, as men who were disgusted with what they saw.

    The translated poem:

    It did not require great character at all
    our refusal our disagreement and resistance
    we had the necessary shred of courage
    but fundamentally it was a matter of taste

    Yes taste
    In which there are fibers of soul, the cartilage of conscience

    Who knows
    If we had been better and more attractively tempted
    Sent rose-skinned women thin as a wafer
    Or fantastic creatures from the paintings of Hieronymus Bosch

    But what hell they made instead
    A wet pit the murderers’ alley the barrack
    Called Palace of Justice
    A home-brewed Mephisto in a Lenin jacket
    Sent Aurora’s grandchildren out into the field
    Boys with potato faces
    Very ugly girls with red hands

    Verily, their rhetoric was made of cheap sacking
    (Marcus Tullius kept turning in his grave)
    Chains of tautologies a couple of concepts like flails
    The dialectics of butchers no distinctions in reasoning
    Syntax deprived of the beauty of the subjunctive

    So aesthetics can be helpful in life
    One should not neglect the study of beauty

    Before we declare our consent we must carefully examine
    The shape of the architecture the rhythm of the drums and pipes
    Official colors of burial rituals

    Our eyes and ears refused obedience
    The princes of our senses proudly chose exile

    It did not require great character at all
    We had a shred of necessary courage
    But fundamentally it was a matter of taste

    Yes taste
    That commands us to get out to make a wry face draw out a sneer
    Even if for this the precious capital of the body the head
    Must fall


  5. Where are all the lonely assholes?

    High school lunch room again…


    • on October 4, 2015 at 12:46 pm Captain Obvious

      The new Steve Jobs biopic is a travesty, says his ex. Cold? Ruthless? Obsessive? No, he was FAR worse than that. He denied he was the father of our child and was…ROTTEN TO THE CORE


      • on October 4, 2015 at 12:49 pm Captain Obvious

        “It was like a game of Snakes And Ladders, with Steve as the game master who played to win at any cost. The ups were hopeful and the downs were extreme – then I found out I was pregnant…”


      • @Captain Obvious
        Are we to believe this dumped chic or the Hollywood fantasy? Didn’t they already do this flick last year? Either way, fuck Hollywood worship of cultmarx heroes. Agreed?


      • @JohnDSee

        Agreed. I got to where I can’t stand any Hollywood bs anymore.


      • on October 4, 2015 at 8:32 pm Captain Obvious

        JohnDSee, what she’s describing here is a Psychopath: “…I looked at Lisa and then Steve and then Lisa again. Suddenly, I understood that the person I was longing to save the situation didn’t have the basics of emotional intelligence, much less a real conscience. He was somehow just blank and theoretical. I felt unspeakably heartbroken as Lisa, mute and shy, took him in with her soft eyes. She had no idea who this Mr Glad Rags was. Eventually, after not getting the applause he had somehow expected, he asked if we could go outside. Steve never came by again. There are many men who in a backward kind of logic seem to care only for what they pay for and invest in. As Steve had so little invested, he did not know to care…”


      • on October 4, 2015 at 8:35 pm Captain Obvious

        That’s how normal people – who are terrified to ponder the unthinkable – write about the psychologically aberrant and deviant: Normal people try to make all sorts of excuses for the aberrant/deviant’s behavior, excuses which make sense to normal people, but which don’t even begin to describe the horrifying reality of the aberrant/deviant’s nihilism.


    • Eleanor Rugby?


  6. A brilliant take on degeneracy.

    The leftist and anti-Whites had their time mocking the good and the healthy. From Abie Hoffman through Jonathan “Stewart” Liebowitz. Now it’s out turn.

    The healthy tissue is protected. The tumor is identified, excised, and tossed into the medical waste incinerator.


    • PA – awesome video. I don’t know whether I want to laugh, or cry, or get mad, or run away, or puke, or jerk-off. Humans – so awesomely fucked-up. Us. Partly who we are. Hopefully it is not all that we are. Who knows?


  7. The lonely assholes are shooting up your schools.


  8. What is “HBD”?


    • Yes please


    • on October 4, 2015 at 3:23 pm Captain Obvious

      “HBD” is an abbreviation for a term which Steve Sellout Sailer coined, “Human Bio Diversity”, in order to poke fun at libtards who want “diversity” in everything except e.g. IQ scores or criminality rates.


      • on October 4, 2015 at 3:29 pm Captain Obvious

        Another term which Sellout coined was “Partially Inbred Extended Family” as a substitute for “Race” or “Ethnicity”. Sellout used to write essays about e.g. breeds of dogs [say, Chihuahuas versus Mastiffs] as a means of trying to get a biological concept of “Race” or “Ethnicity” through the six-inch-thick skull of the typical libtard. But I haven’t been following Sellout since he sold out [to Eskimo Potato Chips Incorporated], so I don’t know what he’s writing about lately.


      • I know sailer is too afraid of losing his minor mainstream success, but I’m not familiar enough with his writings to determine when he sold out. Are you referring to unz or way before that? Cheers (hope this gets through mod in time for an answer)

        [CH: sailer’s not a sellout. unz lets him write what he wants to write. accusations of selling out are the domain of leftists who think any creative enterprise which manages to turn a buck must thereafter be inauthentic.]


      • Captain kook thinks associating with a Jew in any endeavor is selling out because Jews are magically super-Evil.


      • @CH
        Understood. Thanks. What is sailer’s signature piece? Is he unapologetically a race realist?

        [CH: i don’t know what would qualify as his signature piece, but his early work contains an article (for NRO!) called “Is love colorblind?” and it’s one of the first shots across the pozzed bow.]


      • Sailer is one of the good guys and has always struck me as decent and fair. One of his better known articles is an earlier one published in, I think, National Review called “Why Lesbians Are Not Gay.”‘


      • on October 4, 2015 at 9:38 pm Captain Tautological

        I refuse to read either Steve Sellout or John Derbysellout ever since they sold their souls to Eskimo Potato Chips Incorporated. I’ve got a zero tolerance policy for traitors who take the Eskimo Geld.


  9. “Those who can’t achieve status through more traditional means lean on liberal politics to signal intelligence and status”

    We all remember them from school – the kids who weren’t good looking, didn’t have many friends, were no good at sports, weren’t really academic either. But they grew up and learned to make themselves feel better by believing they were MORALLY superior. The great thing about moral superiority is that, unlike sports or SAT tests, it can never be disproved. A hundred years ago they were clergymen or temperance campaigners, now they’re holding up ‘refugees welcome’ signs and posting the pics on facebook.


    • And snark was their weapon of social aggression. It wouldn’t work on alphas or attractive girls but was often effective against deltas (average kids) and non-weaponized gammas.

      “Heathers” was their coming-out movie and wish-fulfillment fantasy.


    • You’re wrong in your assessment of signaling motivation. Those who gratuitously launch signals of moral superiority, by and large, find themselves on the right side of the bell curve, are “educated” and generally have large formal and informal networks of friends and associates.

      Moral signaling is a sport for intelligent followers who dutifully identifiy the direction of the social and political winds before staking a position.


  10. And Google joins the pedo-normative movement :


    • on October 4, 2015 at 10:59 am Captain Tautological

      Elmer, that is absolutely fascinating – the smart aleck little kid [Pajama Boy?], the sore loser Shegetz quarterback [Tom Brady?] and the Eskimo coach with the Groucho Marx mustache. It looks like the sort of thing which Director Tamir Pardo would have farmed out to Daniel Kahnemann, who would have called David Axelrod, who would have called Rob Reiner, whose secretary would have made a few calls to eventually get in touch with one of the Eskimos on Disney’s Pixar animation team.


      • I like the “O” faces at top right and phallic “L” top left. I simply must submit my “sex toy Google” and see if it makes their home page.


  11. on October 4, 2015 at 10:50 am CuiPertinebit


    No, 100 years ago they were not clergymen (in the Catholic Church, I mean), because the seminaries still controlled very tightly for that. Starting 50 years ago, they have increasingly started to become clergy.

    There is a reason why our Lord, in stressing the need for being “more righteous than the Pharisees,” directed so much of his preaching against hypocrisy and the smug sense of self-righteousness which is endemic to SJWs. It is because real holiness has no enemy so formidable as moral status-signaling, and it seems that amongst all the sins mentioned in scripture, the Almighty has a special hatred for this one. It must have no place in the Church’s clergy, and in manlier ages it generally doesn’t.


    • on October 4, 2015 at 11:05 am Captain Tautological

      You do realize that all the recent blather from the Argentinian, about e.g. [the intentionally manufactured myth of] “Global Warming”, and his apparent embrace of s0d0mite marriage, is, at best, just so much “moral status-signaling” [and, at worst, amounts to his “coming out” ceremony].


    • Hi CuiPertinebit:

      I like to call the sentiment you speak of – “contempt for the contemptuous”. It is easy to fall for this – but how can one claim moral superiority to those that demean, by replying with a demeaning attitude? When one does this one is committing the same sin as the sin one is criticizing. You and I are in agreement about this – yes?

      I am so surprised how rampant this error in judgement is – I see it everywhere. I think it is partly due to the masculine’s deep-seated need for a foil (them vs. us), or a frontier. It is better to use our masculine nature to penetrate the frontier, at this juncture, than to seek an enemy to penetrate. We gotta get past this “them vs. us” thinking (but by also keeping in mind it is part of our heritage as men, it has always been part of the human story, perhaps been always part of the story of the history of life itself). Some self-awareness around masculine needs to express our male birthright – the exuberant aggression we are all born with as men, would help at this juncture.

      That is one of the reasons why I have been seeking the female emotive correspondent, to the male emotive aspect of masculine power, i.e. – the deep-seated exuberant aggression. I highly value the exuberant aggression within myself. It is not to be denigrated. That is a mistake. But it must be used wisely.

      What is the female emotive coresspondant? If we could better uncover this, I think we could make some headway all around (gender issues and culture/ethnic issues).

      Your thoughts?


      • on October 4, 2015 at 4:35 pm Captain Obvious

        > ” It is better to use our masculine nature to penetrate the frontier, at this juncture, THAN TO SEEK AN ENEMY TO PENETRATE.” ——— I knew that ‘Wild Man’ worked for Tamir Pardo after I read its very first post, but I played by the Marquess of Queensbury Rules, and gave it the benefit of the doubt. No more, though, little Eskimo, no more Marquess of Queensbury Rules for you.


      • @Wild Man
        You want to live in a world of ‘should’.
        I suggest you live in the world that ‘is’.


      • Hey CO and JohnDSee:

        Coming back here after an evening out, and seeing your comments just now made me think of something. You could paint my post above as the essence of guru-game (i.e. – I recently got the idea of guru-game by watching Vikram Gandhi’s 2011 documentary – Kumare – the movie definitely shows strong guru-game in action with respect to the females wanting bad to fuck the guru, but it is also guru-game on another level too, because he is a fake guru who transmogrifies his fakeness into genuineness, thus transforming cynicism into idealism). Is the transformation a mind-fuck to shitlib-land, or is it the future? Should we paint the transmogrification of cynicism into idealism, as a farce or as a moment of holy alchemical inspiration?

        Is serious religious teaching just base cynical guru-game or is it holy alchemical guru-game?

        Is everything, everything just one big mind-fuck, and nothing but a mind-fuck? Maybe there is no such think as moral higher ground. Maybe we should just equate: idealism = shitlib-land.

        Or maybe not.

        Pragmatically, it seems prudent to try to get beyond the “them vs. us” because it seems like humanity has acquired too much destructive power now and so “them vs. us”, uncoiled to it’s logical conclusion, in such circumstances, logically, concludes in disaster.

        Maybe that fucking doesn’t matter in the whole scheme of things.

        On a personal note, emotionally, I can get right turned-on by both the cynical view (“let’s kill those fuckers!” – I have to admit the adrenaline rush of exuberant aggression I feel coursing through me when I embrace these words feels damn good), or by the idealistic view (“let’s search for the way into the unforeseen frontier where perhaps something beyond comprehension awaits” – to entertain a thought like that also feels damn good, it fills me with exuberant aggressive hunger for the unknown).

        What kind of man am I going to choose to be? What about you?

        Sounds like a trite hackneyed ending to a Hollywood flick doesn’t it? Those fucking eskimos! The fucking Eskimo Psychiatry Incorporated conspirators just mind-fucking us again!


    • Glad to see you around, Frater ☺


  12. I don’t really believe that all human activities can be reduced to genetics. that is too strong of a statement.


    • on October 4, 2015 at 4:42 pm Captain Obvious

      martin, there are bell curves to EVERYTHING. In particular, there are some folks who are more receptive to brainwashing and some folks who are less receptive to brainwashing – some folks can see right through the relentless ubiquitous all-penetrating Eskimo propaganda, but others cannot. So for some of us, our “Common Sense” and “Skepticism” seems to be strongly genetic in nature, whereas others of us will immediately start parroting whichever lies-du-jour the Eskimos instruct them to parrot.


  13. What’s more damaging to the slut’s psyche:

    Losing a man post expedited surrender, or, losing a man due to the discovery of her sexual history pre-surrender?

    We all know both cases are subject to her rationalization gymnastics, but I believe the latter, being novel, shivs deeper because it accutely violates her socially approved worldview that men and women are the same and should be treated the same and that a woman with a sexual history that reads like an indictment on her character should somehow raise her quality in the eyes of normal men.

    In my experience the latter provokes a cocktail of disbelief, rage then ego saving dismissal while the former generally provokes a confused sadness.


    • With “post-expedited surrender” do you mean a slut getting dumped after she gets married because of her sexual history?


  14. Everyone dies alone and lonely. Doesn’t matter if you do it surrounded by your family or alone in your shitty apartment watching Seinfeld re-runs.

    This becomes clearer as one ages.

    But yeah, assholes aren’t lonely. So non-assholes need to find non-asshole-girls and just accept that they won’t be as hot as asshole-lovers. But still do not settle for fatties.


  15. In re: Signaling.

    I find Vox Day’s concept of the “mid wit” useful.

    A truly stupid person will just believe observable facts plus common sense. The mid wits have to differentiate themselves from the stupid by believing the opposite of observable facts plus common sense. In other words, contrived nonsense. The truly smart people with no need to prove his intelligence will believe what facts & logic show him, which often matches the common sense that the stupid believe.

    For example:
    Stupid people are (correctly) racist.
    Mid wits are (incorrectly) blank slatists.
    Smart people (correctly) believe HBD.


    • If you’re correct, you aint stupid in my book.

      But yes, it’s all a dynamic of framing/signaling as a means for ruling sociopaths to keep their power.


    • on October 4, 2015 at 1:51 pm The Spirit Within

      As an executive at Wells Fargo once told me (paraphrased), the cheaters at the top and at the bottom never get punished. The big fish because they’re so powerful, and the little fish because nobody cares. It’s the fish in the middle who get always caught.


  16. Politicians are like this. Ever notice how better they are when they do profiles on them growing up? Part of this nations problems stem from no Alphas in spheres of power and influence. Trump is the first.


    Hollywood full of casting couch betas.
    Politics betas easily controlled by powers that be.
    Teachers controlled by SJW unions.
    Churches now pushing immigration and slavery apologies.
    Business leaders pushing “green” shit to tax us but not them.
    Media just a bunch of commies.

    It’s endless how the betas have used these institutions and now oppress anyone they can to hold on to their power.


  17. on October 4, 2015 at 11:51 am Abundance Mentality

    ” I do think shartiste’s point about the numerical growth of shitlib defectives meaning that there will be more empty status signaling by SJWs who couldn’t accrue real status is spot on.”

    This is also how these nothings can lie themselves into thinking they are superior to everyone who lived before them. Since not even a real “Einstein” could have anticipated the various twists and turns of SJW ideology, it’s easy to dismiss anyone who had any deviation from whatever “the now” says is “just”.

    It’s also how a SJW who took 7 years to graduate from some state school can posture to be smarter than a right-of-center Harvard Ph.D.

    I think this lack of accurate positioning of oneself within the hierarchy of talents is a major cause of social disharmony. People think they are not getting their “just desserts” and so rebel. Meanwhile, these same people are the ones who benefit most from the civilization their superiors have created.


  18. From the lonely arsehole thread:

    “Bang on. I’ve seen guys in the street beat the SHIT out of their girls, and the girl still walks with him after, while crying.

    I’ve seen brainless chavs doped up on weed, unable to even write their own names, with 2+ girls around them, easy sex on the regular.

    The girls who hang around with these, say they’re NICE GUYS.

    “A teenage torture victim has said she thought she was going to die as three sadistic attackers beat her with metal and wood before urinating on her in an eight-hour ordeal.”

    Summer, from Doncaster, said she considered Amy a friend and thought Jay was be a “nice guy”, but said she sensed “something was wrong” almost as soon as she entered the flat.

    Ever see a “nice guy” beta have multiple girls willingly coming to his flat? Nope.”

    People in this area (including one of his previous teaching assistants) have posted that the “nice guy” has always had “problems”, and been a full on twat all his life.


  19. I have actually met lonely assholes, not in the alpha cocky asshole kind of way, but in the self-centered, outrightly fuck their good friends over kind of way. Those guys don’t have friends or maybe only one friend who barely tolerates them and they indulge in video games at home on a weekend.

    [CH: yeah but they still have girlfriends.]


    • OK, we may need more precision in our definition of asshole. Just being an unpleasant dick isn’t enough on its own to garner female attraction.

      I think I know who JDR means, I roomed with a guy one semester who was an asshole in the sense that he was a mincing, thieving bastard. And no he didn’t have a girlfriend or any female interest so far as I could tell, because he was JUST an asshole.

      I mean I get it when a girl calls a guy an asshole, she usually means he doesn’t bend to her will, catnip to the fairer sex. But when a guy says asshole he usually doesn’t mean alpha, he just means someone causing unnecessary grief of one kind or another.

      [CH: this was covered in past posts. executive summary: uncaring asshole > caring asshole.]


  20. Men fall asleep after sex. Women want to talk, cuddle, and get reassurances that their love is reciprocated after sex. That right there should be enough to clue you in to cuddle and talk to her after sex. Give her the reassurances she needs, then you get what you need. But don’t do it EVERY time!


    • on October 4, 2015 at 2:53 pm Hair Slicked Back With Swag So Fresh

      You sleeping next to her is reassurance enough. If you really want to fuck with her, slip away quietly in the middle of the night.


      • on October 4, 2015 at 5:41 pm Chad Durbsley

        I always do this.

        Discovered it accidentally.

        The key is to not sneak out. Just get up and leave. Get dressed noisily. Knock over a few things on the way the way out. Step on her cat. Also grab any Whisky etc that you see.

        Ps. when you’re at a girls place, 1st time or 10th time- never shut the bathroom door. No matter what sort of nasty shit you are about to perpetrate.
        Then don’t flush. Or wipe.

        Maxim #2:
        Alphas don’t wipe


      • “Step on her cat.”

        You really want to upset her, don’t you? Lol


  21. preening


  22. “People will do anything for those who encourage their dreams, justify their failures, allay their fears, confirm their suspicions, and help them throw rocks at their enemies.”


  23. Where have all the assholes gone?
    Long time fla-aking?
    Where have all the assholes gone?
    Long time ago.
    Where have all the assholes gone?
    Gone to next girl every one.
    When will they ever learn?
    When will they ever learn?


  24. A girl here, if you couldn’t tell by the name.

    [CH: you could be posting a fake name. i mean, it’s been known to happen.]

    Been reading your blog for ages to find so much truth and clarity on the current dating scene.

    But what I don’t understand is still this “suddenly lost interest” after sex thing. I get it, and have seen it happen in real life, but so many guys I know also date girls 3-4 points below their league, sleep with them while dating, and then they marry those girls!

    [you must live in LSMVtopia. where i stand, i don’t see too many men dating let alone marrying girls 3-4 points lower than themselves. what i see are 60% even match-ups, 20% low confidence men dating down, and 20% overconfident men dating up (sometimes way up).]

    One example. High earning litigator (in shape, cute) just recently married (after 3 yrs of dating) a chubby 4.

    [i would need more information about the man. “cute” means nothing. girls use that word to describe infants and puppies and anything that isn’t “creepy”. so let’s say he’s not ugly, and he’s in shape. that’s great. but it’s not enough to go on. women are drawn to a whole suite of male attractiveness traits that go beyond his physique. a non-obese man with money and a good job might have a boring personality and a supplicating nature. those are tingle-killers to hotties, and it would easily explain his marrying a chubby 4, because that was all he could get given his restricted options, so they go for what they think will be easier lays.]

    This kind of thing happens all the time.

    [no it doesn’t. you’re trolling. or lying. same diff.]

    I see chaste 8-9s sitting on the bench. It doesn’t make sense. Shouldn’t the attractive chaste women be the ones to be pursued?

    [no girl writes like this. i disbelieve you. but the answer to your question is two-part: 1. a woman’s chasteness is not easily discernible from a distance while she’s sitting on a park bench. 2. hotties get cold approached far less often than do plainer girls. the reason is simple. most men don’t have the balls to hit on hotties.]

    I’d appreciate you explaining this curious phenomena to me as it is completely contradictory to your blog’s teachings.

    [ok, now i know you are definitely a lying troll. you just gave it away with this last line. the “completely contradictory to your blog’s teachings” is classic concern troll rotten meat coughed up by bitterati nerdos. poor form. transparent you are.]


    • Mayhaps this Jewel is one of them “chaste 8/9” gals, sitting on the bench… self-described, of course, but okay, I’ll play…

      Don’t play the ice princess too long, dearie… send out a few IOI’s to the guys who glance over your way on occasion, for… see the roses on your trellis dying, and hear the spectral singing of the moon

      In other words, tick-tock, toots… 8s and 9s have a funny way of becoming 5s and 6s over the years.


  25. “This blank-slate diversitard stuff isn’t in anyone’s genes, if it was then rich liberals wouldn’t live in 95% white enclaves.”

    You’re almost there (no disrespect).

    They’re ‘handicapping’. And yes, it’s genetic. Instinctive.

    I prefer ‘peacocking’, though.

    Try reasoning with the peacock about how ridiculous and self-defeating the massive plumage is. It’s bulky, as heavy as the bird itself, a veritable neon sign saying ‘eat me’ to predators (and the bird can hardly fly!). Oh, and a massive metabolic sink-hole, too.

    And yet – there it is.

    I humbly suggest alt-right/HBDers need to think more about why.

    ‘Ditch the handicap, dude – it’s going to get you killed, don’t you see? A simple, bright red feather would work just as well (to catch the eye of the hottest peahens – why not?). The tail makes no sense, whatsoever. And not to mention, you might get all of us standing next to you killed in the bargain.’

    ‘In fact, it’s downright retarded.’

    ‘Self-hating, pathological Pea-tard!’

    You’d be wasting your breath, of course. The peacock’s not wrong. You would be wrong. The tail isn’t there in spite of being a handicap – it’s there precisely because it’s a handicap. ‘I’m so much better – healthier, fitter, more bad-ass – than all the others, I’ve survived, and thrived, with one hand tied behind my back. Let’s see these lesser pea-twerps pull that off. Now, give me my reward.”

    Overconfident jerks!

    Moose do it (the horns). Birds, too (alpha birds fight for the privilege of standing between predators and the flock). Antelope (high-status males hop up and down in front of attacking predators instead of ‘getting the [email protected]@k out of Dodge’).

    Rich people do it (‘conspicuous consumption’).

    Aristocrats do it (the archaic names for their kids (‘Beatrice!’ ‘Eugenie!’). The lisps and stutters. The ridiculous hats (Ascot). (For that matter, sending their kids to ‘public schools’ (private boarding schools) to be buggered, like they were.)

    Alpha male (humans) do it. They ‘lead with the chin’ (deliberately). Throw their arms wide open to invite the first punch. Indeed, they let you and everyone around know they can ‘kick your ass with one hand tied behind their back’.

    Liberals do it. (I’m talking the SWPL variety, here – NAMs, eskimos, LGBTers, etc are different stories. The world’s complicated).

    If there aren’t enough obvious ways for them to advertise superior status, they will have to create them, by ‘peacocking’.

    Which is why reasoning with them about the hazard they’re creating may be as pointless as reasoning with the peacock. In fact, it might even be reinforcing.

    Because the hazard is the point. Along with your fear of it. Because, on average, they have less to fear. That’s all it takes.

    Which is where the ‘95% white enclaves’ come in. They can afford to retreat to them, and you can’t.

    That’s the whole point.

    Does natural selection act on the individual, or on the group?

    And while I doubt 1 in a 100 has any inkling of why they’re doing it, neither does the peacock.

    And (brace yourselves) – it makes no difference. The peacock still isn’t ‘wrong’…

    [CH: ok not much argument from me on the basic theory of the handicap principle, but doesn’t shartiste have a point? if “peacocking” swpls really wanted to demonstrate their higher status (by handicapping themselves and inviting danger) then they would MOVE RIGHT INTO THE THICK of the ghetto and stay there even after their kids were old enough to go to the public schools. the fact that swpls don’t do this, and indeed employ a whole language of sniveling euphemisms to cover up the fact that they don’t do this, strongly suggests they know they are lying to everyone, and to themselves, and know on some level that their professed beliefs are bullshit. this is different than the peacock or the alpha antelope who have no idea why they signal their status the way that they do.
    and, the fact too is that a lot of these status whoring leftoid swpl hipsters DON’T have the money to retreat to 1% gated community enclaves. they have to instead tiptoe tentatively into edge neighborhoods and hope that the White gentrification takes hold before they’re shot to death. they will, despite their moral claims to the contrary, actually work really hard to push that gentrification process forward. (one swpl i knew was on the phone every day to cops pressing them to shut down a house on his block that was being used as a drug den by vibrants.)
    so if swpls know, (even if they never admit it) that their ideological posturing is wrong, then they are ipso facto… wrong.
    and calling them out on their lying bullshit will make them veeeery uncomfortable, and defensive, and full of impotent rage. and that is a GOOD thing. for it is the shaming of the swpl that will end their orwellian mind tyranny.]


    • Oh, but the peachicks!

      Won’t somebody think of the peachicks?


    • Been meaning to weigh in on the dissidenti‘s “signalling” theory for some time, and guess here is a good place to do it. I’ve held off because you’re all so fond of it and I know that when an idea catches on and becomes dogma there’s really no stopping it.

      Well, it’s wrong — in order for signals to matter, there must be rewards for picking up on them; this is the Darwinian principle behind Michael Spence’s original economic signalling theory which was picked up to back Amotz Zahavi’s “handicap principle”. And it can’t be demonstrated that leftists are signalling at each other to gain “status”. It can be alleged, but not demonstrated.

      The scenario proposed by white nationalists et al. is actually tautological: the leftists, they say, signal belonging to a social movement or “group” to which they already belong. In other words, the only real consequence is punishment, making counter-signals the only relevant variable. This can be demonstrated, e.g. someone loses their job for saying something objectionable.

      As a side note, game is able to turn what is normally punishable (the counter-signal, i.e. a signal of not being part of groupthink background noise) into something women might reward.

      Alternatively, they say it’s a superiority contest — a game of holier than thou brinksmanship. Again this sounds plausible, but there’s no real social reward for doing so beyond the ephemeral accolades of one’s Twitter followers or whatever. Psychologically the reward is obvious, however, and that of course reminds us that it is basically a narcissistic habit of mind.

      But this fails to account for why it caught on so rapidly and has become the new normal (moralistic bandwagon effect—why wouldn’t you agree you that hate is evil?). Although people do compete ideologically, it’s much more a “keeping up with the Joneses” scenario than a contest of who’s more correct than whom, unless it’s a matter of sniffing out or manufacturing dissenters, which of course is also very common, but still the exception. Most people are still just going about their business, not wasting time on Twitter and Tumblr witch-hunts.

      Anyhow, peacocking is much closer to the mark but not a precise analogue. By the way heartiste,

      “if “peacocking” swpls really wanted to demonstrate their higher status (by handicapping themselves and inviting danger) then they would MOVE RIGHT INTO THE THICK of the ghetto and stay there even after their kids were old enough to go to the public schools.”

      Answer: for the same reason birds and ungulates don’t move into the dens of their predators — they all “know” better. You said that, I know.

      I propose that true handicap signalling in other animals is necessarily costly, whereas signalling in humans of the sort we are discussing (as opposed to, say, cholos and their trucks, or hipsters and their phones or selvedge jeans) is incredibly cheap, and therefore worthless as far as status.

      From Robert Trivers, Social Evolution

      “Verbiage, it may be noted, is virtually defined by its biological inexpensiveness. The difference in cost between true and false statements must be trivial, at least as measured by energy expended in speaking (compare ‘yes’ and ‘no’), so verbal reality is likely to be a poor guide to social behavior.”

      Pause and consider that for a few moments. Our breaths of air, so laden with “meaning”, are metabolically almost worthless. I don’t know exactly how many calories are burned by cogitating, typing or talking, but judging from the herds of angry tumblrinas and gamer spergs it can’t be more than double-digits.

      This means it costs leftists nothing to parrot universalist sentiments. But that means there’s zero risk. But — that means they aren’t status-whoring or “signalling” at all..

      Which means that we bear all of the costs of the whole game by counter-signalling at our own risk. Leftism as an attitude (forget its consequences) is defined by the absence of risk, which explains why women will defend it until reality comes crashing down around them.

      This is pretty good:

      “Because the hazard is the point. Along with your fear of it. Because, on average, they have less to fear. That’s all it takes.

      Which is where the ‘95% white enclaves’ come in. They can afford to retreat to them, and you can’t.”

      There you go. Again, it costs nothing to chirp about tolerance, equality and injustice when you’re safe. Worth reading about this in full:

      [CH: shitlib signaling might not carry much risk — although there is the risk of insufficiently signaling one’s eager devotion to the cause — but it does have the huge upside of coaxing flattery from judgmental peers. in this sense, shitlib signaling is very much “status whoring” because it is literally whoring out one’s cognitive and moral integrity for payment in emotional feelgoods, aka social status.]


      • It is starting to occur to me that there is another way to untangle what might be going on with the weirdness coming from the left, from the shitlib camp. If you instead ask – why do so many women fall for guru-game? You are half way to the answer. Women dig idealism. Why? Because it feels good (more good if you are a woman though). It makes women, particularly, feel all warm inside.

        If you buy this guru-game thing, then what does such insight illuminate with respect to pretty much everything else talked about in the manosphere (i.e- the intra and inter-gender dynamic + intra and inter-cultural critical analysis)?


  26. Men fall asleep after sex. Women want to talk, cuddle, and get reassurances that their love is reciprocated after sex.

    I don’t take issue with incontrovertible differences in the sexes, just this one piece of evidence, which I believe points more to the prevalence of female sexual dysfunction.

    [CH: well, research has shown that sleep-inducing hormones are released in men post-coitus, but not in women. this thing is bigger than psychoanalysis.]


    • CH is right.

      and i think the main reason these sleep-inducing hormones occur in men is so they will be in the state of mind to talk and cuddle. without them they would get up immediately after the fact and move on to other things. this would leave their woman wanting and women need the after care to bond properly. it’s natures way of making sure this happens. none of this is an accident. it’s all interrelated and very intentional.


  27. The so-called elite are not really that smart and they know it. They are paranoid control freaks. They want to damage every child so nobody can challenge them. The key to their power is the modern public school system they created and implemented starting in the 19th century continue to refine to this day with common core. There will be no liberty until the people, the local communities, get total control of the schools and better yet the parents get full control by paying for their children’s education themselves on the market.

    Government schools serve the government as those who control it, not the people.

    Trump is dangerous. He is the strong man (so is Sanders) that we are warned about in “The Road to Serfdom”. He’s the guy who’ll get things done and make the trains run on time. Proceed down the road of Trump at your own peril.


  28. […] Comment Of The Week: Only The Nice Die Lonely | Chateau Heartiste […]


  29. On shartiste’s comment about defectives:

    During the Soviet Union a bunch of psychologies liked at the dear leadership. What they found was that 5,5 – 6% are defective, congenital psychopaths, cluster-B types and those affected by lesser ailments of the mind. This group of freaks coordinates to take over society from the “normies” in order to institute a government according to their own dreams.

    This core, with psychopaths at its center, is surrounded by another ~15% of the population which becomes affected, due to their own mental weaknesses, by the ideologies spouted by the core.

    Observable in the old SU as well as in any contemporary western govt or in international institution such as the UN, is that a) the 6% own the power in said institutions completely, b) positions of power are filled or replaced exclusively with defectives regardless of competence needed to discharge the supposed duties of that position while normies will be relegated to positions of lesser or no influence, or be eliminated (lest they become uppity).

    Books to read:
    * Anonymous Conservative’s book and Blog
    * Vox Day’s “SJWs Always Lie”
    * Lobaczewski’s “Political Ponerology”

    The SJW movement, Marxism, anti-white racism and all those fancy ideologies could also be understood as a sublevation of defectives and those of reduced ability, what is inter alia what more and more people have been saying.


  30. Here’s what Cluster B type girls are like and what to avoid… They use social media to shame others under the veil of self-righteousness.