Paper: Predictors Of Infidelity

An interesting paper explored predictors of marital infidelity. From the abstract:

This paper explores the cross-cultural prevalence and predictors of extramarital sexual fulfillment and in doing so tests some predictions derived from evolutionary considerations. Although most adults, across cultures, believe that infidelity, particularly by the female, is ‘wrong’ and infidelity is often the cause of divorce and violence, the behavior is widespread. Evolutionists have noted various fitness advantages to be gained from sexual infidelity. With such a strong theoretical base for specific predictions about infidelity, it is surprising that few conclusions can be drawn about the predictors of the behavior in married couples. Our study of married couples from China, Russia, Turkey, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US) revealed that love of the spouse, frequency of finding non-partners attractive, and self-reported extramarital sexual fulfillment of the spouse predicted frequency of sexual fulfillment outside of marriage. Cultural similarities and differences are discussed.

Heads up, beta males:

If your wife’s love is gone ==> cheating whore.
If your wife works in en environment filled with alpha males ==> cheating whore.
If your wife has cheated before ==> recursive cheating whore.

Infidelity of the wife has been reported to be the most common reason married couples divorce cross-culturally (Betzig, 1989).

A woman’s infidelity is a far worse infraction than a man’s infidelity, for the simple reason that a woman could bring home the concealed seedling of her extramarital lover, while a man would bring home nothing except perhaps perfume on his shirt collar or, if he chose unwisely, the clap. Plus, a cheating woman is unlikely to be able to emotionally compartmentalize her bifurcated love life in the way that cheating men are able to do; an affair by the wife is often a harbinger for divorce theft. An affair by the husband is a harbinger for his better health. These kinds of sexual double standards are an emergent property of immutable biological nature and are never going away.

The adverse fitness consequences of being a victim of the wife’s infidelity are indicated by the accompanying negative affect. In most cultures, a cuckold is ashamed (Freedman, 1967) and may be ridiculed. A strong predictor of low self-esteem in US husbands was perceived and/or actual infidelity of the wife; suspected or actual infidelity of the husband was not a significant predictor of wives’ self-esteem.

When wives cheat, it is a direct refutation of their husband’s SMV, and the low self-esteem of cuckolds confirms this reality. When husbands cheat, it may or may not be a refutation of their wive’s SMV, as men often cheat because they had the option to do so and sexual variety for its own sake is pleasing to men. (Women will never understand this: Men have strong desires for sex with a lot of different, physically attractive and nubilely fertile women. The reason most men don’t act on this male-centric desire is because they can’t. Lack of options = relationship stability.) The lesser impact of husbands’ cheating on their wive’s self-esteem testifies to this biomechanical reality.

From the paper, other predictors of infidelity:

Maleness (ha!).
Permissive sexual values.
Premarital sexual activity.
Premarital cohabitation.
Previous divorce.
Low conscientiousness, narcissistic, and psychopathic women (ha ha!) are prone to infidelity.

(Women’s physical attractiveness was NOT a predictor of female infidelity. Most likely what this study has picked up is the fact that very attractive married women are hitched to high SMV men, so there are few alternative options that could effectively compete with the husbands of these women. The temptation for wives of high value husbands to cheat is weaker than it would be for wives of low value husbands.)

Socially dominant men and men high in resources tend to be unfaithful. (Options = instability.)

Low paternal investment and female economic independence are predictors of female infidelity. Quote:

For example, in matrilineal societies paternal investment typically is low, often giving rise to the avunculate, and infidelity and divorce tend to be common (Daly & Wilson, 1983; van den Berghe, 1979). Similarly, where the wife is relatively independent economically of the husband, marital bonds tend to be weak (Friedl, 1975; Goode, 1993; Seccombe & Lee, 1987) and infidelity by the wife is common.

Holy shit. Where have you read this sort of analysis before? What outpost of realtalk first pricked your ears with dulcet notes from the sexual market symphony?

Marital and sexual dissatisfaction are associated with infidelity.
Separate personal and occupational lives are associated as well. (Co-workers are a big threat to marital faithfulness.)

There’s a paragraph about “cads” versus “dads” life histories and its relation to infidelity:

Marital satisfaction and commitment have been associated with adopting a long-term, or slow, life history strategy (Olderbak & Figueredo, 2010), which presumably would reduce the incidence of infidelity. Possibly relevant here is the distinction between high-testosterone “cad” males who exert more short-term mating effort–seeking extramarital partners–and lower-testosterone “dad” males who are more uxorious and paternally inclined (Booth & Dabbs, 1993; Dabbs, 1992) . But “dad” males tend to earn more money and stray less, whereas Atkins et al. reported the opposite relationship between income and infidelity. Higher-income, economically independent spouses were more likely to stray (Atkins et al., 2001). Perhaps men may stray if their wealth makes them attractive or if they neglect their jobs to pursue extramarital affairs. The key for wives may be their financial independence.

Wealth and “romantic ambition” (game) are male attractiveness cues. For women, financial self-sufficiency makes them less attracted to provider beta males (dads) and more likely to risk marital disruption with alpha cad lovers.

As predicted, in all five cultures men reported greater extramarital sexual fulfillment than women. The sex difference on this variable is in agreement with men’s desire for sexual variety, and these findings are consistent with previous reports on various cultures.

Men dig lotsa twatas.

Two US historical trends do emerge from the Laumann data: wives have gained on husbands in engaging in extramarital sexual fulfillment, and infidelity per year of marriage has risen.

American women: Becoming more like non-American men by the day. (American men are becoming bronies.)

There was substantial cultural variability in frequency of reported infidelity, possibly due to a host of factors including economic state of the country, financial interdependence of the couple, financial independence of the wife, degree of wealth inequality among men, the sex ratio, sex role norms varying from liberal to conservative, and translation differences. The liberal wording of the question in the Chinese sample has been mentioned as an example of the last factor.

This fact, coupled with the practice of spouses sometimes living in separate cities for employment purposes, could at least partially explain why the infidelity rates of the Chinese are higher than those of Turkey, the UK and US.

Absence makes the cock go wander.

Similarly, the higher rate of infidelity in Russia compared to the other samples may in part be attributed to difficulty encountered by estranged couples in being able to afford divorce and/or in securing separate living quarters. Such people sometimes carry on with a spouse and family while having long-term extramarital affairs.

Russian men = alpha. Or is it the women?

Three consistent cross-cultural predictors of infidelity emerged for men and women: (a) love, (b) finding non-partners attractive, and (c) extramarital sexual fulfillment of the spouse. Men place physical attractiveness at or near the top of the list of characteristics sought in short and long-term mates, while women also value physical attractiveness in a potential mate, but place less of an emphasis on it compared with other criteria (e.g., Buss, 1989; Lippa, 2009).

One of the biggest myths believed by both red and blue pill adherents is that women value male looks as much as men value female looks.

We expected that attractive men and women would exhibit more infidelity because of their higher mate value. Previous US research has indicated that this is true of men but not women. However, we found that men’s perceiving themselves as attractive was not a consistent predictor of infidelity. Only US men who regarded themselves as attractive reported more infidelity.

My take on this result: Non-US men with high mate value are paired off with high mate value slender women, and so don’t feel as great an urge to cheat. US men with high mate value are stuck married to land whales and careerist shrikes, and cheat to alleviate their seven-minute itch.

Previous research has not indicated that attractive women engage in more infidelity; if anything, the reverse may be true.

Couple of reasons for this seemingly counter-intuitive finding: 1. High SMV women are better able to secure commitment from alpha males, and thus feel less compulsion to seek alpha male lovers on the side. 2. More attractive women feel less need for external validation from men in the form of sex and attention than do women of mediocre attractiveness, who require constant reassurance of their desirability.

Whether or not one sought sexual fulfillment outside the marriage seemed mainly to reflect amorousness toward the spouse, attractiveness of potential partners, plus the particular appeal of sexual variety to men.

Beta males rationalizing their lack of mate options as a virtue, women who project the peculiarities of their female desire onto men, and ugly feminists who loathe male desire are all disposed to misunderstand, underestimate, and disparage the natural male hunger for multitudinous pussy.

This corroborates the notion that evaluation of the mate continues into marriage, because the relative attractiveness of competing potential partners remains salient to most men and women even if they are not engaged in extramarital sex.

Marriage is no escape from the sexual market.

Kenrick and Gutierres (1980) found that men exposed to very attractive women (e.g., centerfolds, television stars) rated the attractiveness of average women lower than men who had not been exposed to the highly attractive females.

There’s a reason newlywed wives rush their husbands out to the suburbs and away from the fresh meat of the cities. It isn’t just about good schools.

Our own data show an inverse relationship between love for one’s spouse and finding others attractive, as well as between love of one’s spouse and extramarital sexual fulfillment.

Marry for love; it’s good insurance against divorce theft.

(Have you ever noticed that when you’re deeply in love with a woman, at least at the beginning, that all other women no matter how beautiful kind of recede into the background like corporate artwork?)

Infidelity and the potential resulting birth of a child carry long-term consequences for fitness and therefore are unlikely to reflect shifting environmental conditions as strongly as the quality of the mate.

The sexual market is the ur-market, most ancient and powerful. Environmental pressures would need to be severe and sustained to cause widespread shifts in sexual choices.

Another formidable factor might be infidelity of the spouse, which would pose the threat of desertion and might precipitate undertaking the countermeasure of seeking a new mate. If marriage is essentially a reproductive union [ed: changing now that gay marriage has been granted equivalent status], one would expect that sexual and amorous attraction would loom large in guiding marital behavior. The high correlations consistently obtained between sexual and marital satisfaction attest to the joint importance of these affinities.

Hot sex = warm love. And hot women = hot sex. Therefore…





Comments


  1. […] Paper: Predictors Of Infidelity […]

    Like


  2. Outstanding validation of the Red Pill approach to formulating a productive mating/reproductive strategy. This paper is particularly interesting when seen in context with the Grant Study: http://www.artofmanliness.com/2014/09/02/love-is-all-you-need-insights-from-the-longest-longitudinal-study-on-men-ever-conducted/

    Love does seem to be your best insurance against the pressures of the SMV.

    Like


  3. I once worked for a contractor who knew a private investigator. The PI related that not only are women the cheaters 90% of the time, they also are much better at it than men. One case had the investigator baffled trying to find the stray wife’s car at her lover’s residence, only to finally realize it was stored in a nearby tractor trailer. He also said that men would often break down in his office and cry over their wives’ infidelity.

    In my experience, if the woman you think is yours is cheating, it’s been over for a while anyway. There seems to be a severe emotional break from the cuckold that accompanies the infidelity, as opposed to a randy husband getting his rocks off with a young secretary or something. Well, Happy Sunday!

    Like


  4. Indeed. As not many of us want to be 85 year olds chasing 25 year olds, and want kids that actually talk to us, maybe a piece on how to keep that hot love ticking over in marriage for 20-30 years would be good.

    After, obviously, we have banged our way through out 20’s, 30’s, and part 40’s…

    Like


    • “As not many of us want to be 85…chasing 25 year olds.” CH has stated that he wants to be that very thing!

      Like


  5. Wow! I’ve always said and will say it again. THE MUSLIM CULTURE WHEN IT COMES TO WOMEN HAVE IT RIGHT!!!

    Like


    • And BT, I feel like the nihilism of modernity is rapidly accelerating the effects of this shit – the smartphone addiction, the credit card addiction, the “Days of our Lives” soap opera cock carousel riding addiction – it’s destroying the female soul. In my own life, I feel like in just the last four or five years I am seeing more and more women’s minds crumble and collapse under the weight of so much freedom from tradition and from so much purposelessness.

      Like


      • This, too, shall pass. There’s a major upheaval coming.

        Like


      • But HJ, to be replaced by WHAT? I’m an exceptionally optimistic guy by nature, but God damn I see some dark clouds gathering on the horizon.

        Like


      • ZH. Technology has improved the conditions of the average person while at the same time destroyed the traditional gender relationship. Even with the improvement of

        Like


      • Sorry. Commenting from my phone and hit the post comment by mistake lol. I was saying even with the average person doing better because of tech the fall out from the breakup of traditional gender relationships might end up destroying the gains from technology. Especially if we end up in a big brother 1984 state which looks like the direction this is all going. I hope I’m wrong though.

        Like


      • BT, I don’t even know that TPTB need “a big brother 1984 state” anymore – all these women with the iPhags glued to their noses are lost in Wonderland – it seems to be an imprisonment OF THEIR OWN CHOOSING. And the rare little boy who shows any signs of not being a team player just gets narked up on Ritalin/Adderall/SSRIs until he forgets that he ever even dreamed of rebelling.

        Like


      • ZS. Yeah I agree with you. The big brother state will actually be the big sister state that gives women whatever they want. Instead of the anti-sex league from 1984 it’s the reverse, the super-sex league of over the hill cougars like we see now. The sad thing is women are so socializable that they will adapt to anything. If society says wear a black arm band with swastika they will cheer that. If society says cuckold your husband with bbc they will do that. There is nothing they won’t do as long as it’s trendy in society.

        That’s why I say lets bring in the birkahs and the beatings for women ala Muslim culture. Since they will adapt and it seems to be what they want anyway, aka dominant men and fifty shades of grey.

        Like


      • “the big sister state” This past Friday, I had a brief but bone-chilling encounter with a 40s-ish/50s-ish Hitlery Rotten Clitless in the professional world. Bitch damn near got her ass defenestrated [and we were not on the ground floor]. There is no greater failure of fatherhood than to allow your little boys to be subjected to that evil in the gubmint indoctrination centers.

        Like


    • Yup! That’s why I picked up a girl who spent her formative years in Saudi.
      Those traditional values are an amazing armor against American culture. She is submissive, supportive, beautiful, and yet still holds on to enough of her “old way of living,” to make her worth investing in.

      Protip from a pro cad:
      “When you’re ready to invest in a quality woman, make sure she comes from a traditional background.”

      Like


      • My room mate freshman year was a saudi guy, so I ended up meeting a lot of saudi chicks through him. They are reared in a super traditional background so they make sure they go off to college in America where they finally get the chance to go cock crazy. He took advantage of that and banged these girls left and right freshman year, it was ridiculous.

        But I’m sure your gf tells you she never did that and you believe her, since she is your special snowflake chaste unicorn girl, judging from your previous posts. NAWALT etc etc

        Like


      • There’s more than one will kant

        Like


      • Lol Kant, projecting much?

        If a man has his shit together, he has nothing to fear from hypergamy.

        Are you suggesting I not choose wisely and carefully in a woman I’m keeping around?

        Oh, and for the record, there is only one Will.

        Like


      • “go cock crazy.”

        kant’s favorite thing to do.

        everytime he says tinder he really means grindr.

        Like


      • Kunt could use a midol or two for sure

        Like


      • Haha wtf?

        I’ll just change my username…

        Why wouldn’t you be Will1 or something wow haha

        Like


      • New “Will” is doing such a good job with ‘overconfidence’!!! Ha

        Like


  6. Can anyone jam a fat cock down my throat and lemme swallow his massive load of hot cream?

    Like


  7. There’s another really fascinating study in the news today, from Michigan State, which probably has a strong intersection with the underlying evo-psych phenomena at work in the Wisconsin study: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/11124140/Couples-who-met-online-three-times-more-likely-to-divorce.html

    Like


    • Michigan State: “Married couples who met online are three times more likely to divorce than those who met face-to-face, a study has found. Online daters are also 28 percent more likely to split from their partners within the first year, new figures from Michigan State University in the US suggest. A study of more than 4,000 couples found that relationships were far more stable if couples met in traditional ways such as introductions by friends or through work, hobbies or socializing. Couples who meet online are also less likely to get married and generally have a poorer relationship quality that those who met offline…”

      Like


    • BOTTOM LINE: The mother of your children had better come from practicing Day Game on the Nice Girls from the Good Families. Conversely, “Run Forrest Run!” at the first signs of Darkness and/or Insanity.

      Like


      • Dude, I think so much of what you say is out of left field, but you could not be more right.

        You may sacrifice for some excitement to find a balanced chick, but my god, it will be worth it.

        Like


      • Can you steamroll my back door with your massive jizzum spurting fountain of hurt?

        Like


      • Dude I agree this is right on Z.

        I also do not know what is the NEXT of Female Hyper-choice.

        Like


      • I don’t know how many more NEXTs the Big Fellah is gonna spot us [think of them as Divine Mulligans], but I do know where it all ends eventually. In the interim, the porn actresses seem to have to suffer through Unholy Hell in order to earn their eternal 1000-cock stare of salt.

        Like


  8. I hear a lot of red pill guys complain about their women cheating on them too though; not just beta males. Not that it bothers me too much. If the world was a fair place, nobody would ever stay faithful to any of you.

    Like


    • You hear about “keyboard alpha” redpill guys.

      If my lovely GF were to cheat on me… Well, I got a new number of the bartender just last night…

      Real cads inoculate themselves from the bitter sting of a straying partner with the sweet, tight vaccine of never ending options.

      Like


      • Words are just manipulation tools of women. What ‘kate’ said was that she has higher status (and so better) than all of us. What she hears when she reads your comment is that, yes, she is correct, because you accepted her frame, which I think is better called narrative. You took her opinion seriously. Please, guys, stop taking the opinions of sheeple seriously. They are ‘winning’ enough as it is.

        Like


      • Doug, you’re taking the NLP rhetoric far too seriously. It’s a bit out of touch and non calibrated.
        I don’t “lose” because I accept her frame.

        I’m stating how her “observations” are false because of the contradictory nature of what she said. A redpill guy, a real redpill guy, gets it, and probably won’t get cheated on.
        And if he does? A redpill guy has safeguards in place.

        Wait a minute… I bought into your frame… I just lost, didn’t i? 😉

        Respect.

        Like


      • Either you just don’t get women << men, or you are gently trolling a la the Cass Sunstein nudge. Respect for all regardless IS the problem of emasculated men. I comment for those who can benefit.

        Like


      • I didn’t say respect for all now did I?

        I was talking to you.

        Like


    • Accepting red pill truths doesn’t necessarily mean you’re not a beta i.e. the one doesn’t per se exclude the other.

      Like


      • True, I’m just so tired of the over use of hyper specific lingo. It shows me the person doesn’t know how to function as anything other than an autistic pickup nerd.

        /rant

        Like


  9. on September 28, 2014 at 10:15 am Fair weather fiend

    “A woman’s infidelity is a far worse infraction than a man’s infidelity, for the simple reason that a woman could bring home the concealed seedling of her extramarital lover, while a man would bring home nothing except perhaps perfume on his shirt collar or, if he chose unwisely, the clap.”

    WRONG. WRONG. WRONG.

    If the idiot male ‘husband’ cheats and impregnates his ‘lover’, he and the wife are going to be paying for the child.

    Like


    • Not to mention the bastard’s incubator.

      Like


    • You don’t understand, fair weather. CH is talking about evolutionary instinct, which shapes our perceptions and attitudes. It has always been considered far worse if the women of the family/tribe sleep around, because of the great danger to the family/tribe which will have to take care of an unwanted child. And the woman’s body took a blow from each birth, until she died in childbed.

      The man, meanwhile, could impregnate a woman of another tribe and just leave. And we instinctively feel that a man who successfully sleeps with many women has his act together, since only those men who had this instinct and were able to act upon it would have many children and dominate the DNA of future generations.

      If the idiot male ‘husband’ cheats and impregnates his ‘lover’

      So much anger. Funny that you write “male”, the feminist word for men. And you put husband and lover in quotation marks, even though there is zero reason to do so since, yes, it is a matter of a husband and a lover in this theoretical scenario. I suppose you were just fuming with hatred and needed to denigrate the hypothetical persons involved somehow. That’ll show ’em!

      From that sentence alone we can deduce that you are a woman. And so shouldn’t comment on things that have to do with relationships and evolution, since your selfishness will ban all understanding of reality.

      Like


      • The man, meanwhile, could impregnate a woman of another tribe and just leave

        I doubt that any husband will track me down after I have sex with his wife when she is either on vacation, or away for a weekend. Now the wife could narrow things down, but they will NEVER admit it. Especially when the guy is so much older – no woman is going to tell hubby that the guy in the band older than her father (who’s name she can’t remember) knocked her up. She will share the joyous news that “they” are expecting with the unsuspecting fool of a husband, just like women have done for thousands of years… And will continue to do so…

        Like


      • no woman is going to tell hubby that the guy in the band older than her father (who’s name she can’t remember) knocked her up.

        That was strangely specific an example. But I will not ask for details out of respect for your anonymity. Which instrument do you play?

        A note in all camaraderie: it’s “whose”, not “who’s”. “Who’s” only means “who is”, not possession.

        I should make a list of these. Come on Americans, it’s your language, not hard to remember! But maybe you make these mistakes because you learned the language mainly through talking in everyday life, not by studying it in a classroom.

        its – it’s
        your – you’re
        whose – who’s
        loose – lose
        their – they’re

        And for that matter, “euro skeptic”, not “euro sceptic”. Shows up a lot in British newspapers. And “cannot”, not “can not”. “A lot”, not “alot”.

        I’m missing many. I suggest everyone google “common English misspellings” sometime and look through the list, you live and learn.

        Like


      • @arbiter- Thanks. I’ve wanted to post that many times but never did.

        Like


    • If the moron female “wife” cheats and is impregnated by her lover, the husband will have to pay for the child when the “wife” files for divorce in the U.S. Of course, she can always have an abortion or collect welfare or give the child up for adoption. In the U.S., society supports the bad lifestyle choices of the womyns.

      Like


      • It’s not only in USA.More or less same rules in Europe. A bit better in Ukraine and Russia but there even if you don’t accept the fatherhood and prove the bastard is not yours.-you will have to pay for the kid till a certain age.

        Like


      • Women seem more prone to staying with an cad though. Infidelity is a terrible idea, either way, but a dude cheating is the least horrible option.

        Like


      • Under U.S. law, a child born within a marriage is deemed to be the child of the husband even if a paternity test states otherwise. Therefore, an American woman can cheat on her husband, give birth to a child that is not her husband’s child, file for divorce and receive child support from her ex-husband for another man’s child.

        Imagine if a wife had to pay for her husband’s children conceived as a result of his extramarital affairs. That would be misogynistic oppression by the evil patriarchy.

        Like


  10. “An affair by the husband is a harbinger for his better health.”

    Minus the possible STDs he gets or new bastards he creates.

    Like


  11. “1. High SMV women are better able to secure commitment from alpha males, and thus feel less compulsion to seek alpha male lovers on the side.” This gets at the other disturbing possibility about modernity: Increasing mobility implies ever greater assortative mating which implies increasing genetic propensity for whichever genes are being attracted to one another [e.g. Male Narcissistic Personality Disorder attracted to Female Borderline Personality Disorder], so that modernity could be amplifying the various quirks and faults and failures of our personalities.

    Like


    • Good point, ZS. (I knew you could do it)

      There’s also apps like Tinder, which provide a constant stream of dudes status signaling and trying to give your lovely wife the d. Tough to compete with that, even if you’re Alpha Prime One. Bright future ahead kids, don’t forget to bring a towel (to clean your wife’s dripping orifice after she’s been bred by her bull).

      Like


    • On the recent “Ephemeral Few” thread, many of us were saying that the few whom we remembered were the ones who were craziest in bed. But crazy in the bed => crazy in the head, so does increasing mobility pair up us Alpha cads with the batshit crazy hyper-orgasmic nutjobs, while the girls with the stable personalities [often frigidly non-orgasmic] are being written right out of the gene pool?

      Like


      • In the old days, we probably would have had sex with only one woman – our one and only wife – and we would never have known that there was anything “wrong” with orgasming inside of a woman who couldn’t return the favor with an orgasm of her own. But with the increased mobility and the increased choices presented by modernity, we get to experience sex with batshit crazy chicks, and who wants to go back to frigid [but stable and sane] after that?

        Like


      • Are you suggesting that despite our grievances with the modern shift towards r-selection, we secretly want things to be this way?

        Like


      • N, I don’t even know who “we” are or where the “want” is being experienced – it could be the genes which desire so desperately to be matched up with one another, and “we” [our conscious minds] are just being dragged along for the ride.

        Like


      • I do know that of the three best lays I ever had, all three of them came from broken homes, and their mothers [the old dames who would have been my mothers-in-law] had at least four divorces amongst them. And then in their own lives, those three best lays have had at least five divorces [or divorce-like fiascos] amongst themselves. On the other hand, from PA’s “Glass Half Full” point of view, those three best lays have been fairly fruitful [they do have a healthy TFR amongst them].

        Like


      • And at the other extreme, I know a ton of chicks who came out of the homeschooling scene, and have now graduated from college, and are in their mid-20s, but as far as I can tell, none of them have serious boyfriends, and the “Christian” boys they have to choose from are so hopelessly soft and effete and passionless that I suspect that most of those girls are still virgins. The situation with them is so horrible that I am seriously considering becoming a traitor to our ancient Western tradition of “1-Man/1-Woman” and knocking up every single one of them. Otherwise I feel like they’re all about to become Cat Ladies.

        Like


      • “we get to experience sex with batshit crazy chicks, and who wants to go back to frigid [but stable and sane] after that?”

        I am totally sold on the concept that the male corollary to the “alpha widow” is the “batshit crazy widower.”

        You just saved me a years worth of therapy.

        Like


      • > “batshit crazy widower” – Dude, that needs to become a meme.

        Like


  12. Put it this way…

    If the wife cheats and divorces the husband stands to lose his wealth and she loses her social status. (She might get his money and dignity but she’ll be nothing more than at best a cat lady…and an adulterer at worse)

    If the husband cheats he still stands to lose his wealth and possibly bring the unwanted pain of a slattern into the marriage. Plus the possibility his wife goes ahead and divorces him too.

    For the security of both parties fidelity is the way to go in marriage.

    Like


  13. OT

    Jooish lawyer porn:

    Like


    • Sometimes it just doesn’t pay to be black…

      Like


      • Excuse me?

        This black guy is gonna get payed big time!

        Not only did the trooper have a freakout; but he is a piss poor shot. He fired 4 rounds and only one hit from 12 feet away,

        WTF?

        Those 3 other rounds landed SOMEWHERE and white people don’t like that.

        That white cop is fucked (and so is your pension)

        Like


      • I think what thwack is trying to convey is that this dude just won grand prize in the nagger lotto.

        Like


      • He sounds like Richard Pryor

        Like


      • Perhaps you missed it Thwack, but most cops are horrible shots. They did a study of NYC police firing guns. Dogs are more likely to be hit than the criminals. (bystanders also, but then there are hopefully more of them than the criminal targets).

        Like


  14. Let me tell you guys a story:

    Last night, I had a rendezvous with a stripper I met on Tinder. I didn’t find out she was a stripper until a while into the date, but it was a nice little surprise, and gives you an idea of the kind of girl I’m talking about here.

    She and I meet at the park, shoot the shit, and she ends up being a really nice flirt. It’s always a pleasure to flirt with a girl who knows how to flirt back. She calls me handsome, and I tell her she’s “kind of cute.”

    I’ve never quite seen a girl hamster out like I saw her after that. She says, “I’ve never just been called kind of cute before…”

    We get back to her place, and she brings it up again. So I budge and tell her she’s kind of sexy. She still couldn’t wrap her head around it, so she leaves the room.

    She comes back in a tiiiiiny little thong and sexy bra.

    “Am I still just kind of cute?”

    I had already won.

    Like


    • You got a stripper to take her clothes off!

      Like


    • Reminds me of an Onion piece from years ago: “That Stripper Really Liked Me”

      Like


    • Well played, Reservoir Tip!

      One little way in which game helps.

      Like


    • Speaking of dating, a girl invited me over to her place tomorrow. This girl hasn’t lived in town for long, and I was nice to her when she moved in, showed her around a bit. I made my intentions clear by putting my arm around her when sitting in a coffee shop (sat down in a couch, of course) but she also made it clear that she didn’t want anything romantic.

      So I didn’t contact her again. That was five weeks ago. Now suddenly this weekend she asks in email how I am doing and if I want to come over.

      But this girl is quite emotional. I wonder how much dating experience she has had. Could spell trouble: perhaps she is naive enough to think that sex once means a commitment.

      I guess I’ll go and not push for anything without any indications of interest.

      Like


      • Brother,
        You go in there and push as if she blantantly invited you over for sex.
        Leave the indecisiveness for women. Have a goal for yourself and go over there and execute.

        Like


      • “perhaps she is naive enough to think that sex once means a commitment.”

        Commitment and sex are one in the same between men and women…before people decided to split up marriage and sex.

        Besides if she is emotional…then she’ll definitely become attached to you if you do the deed.

        Like


      • @Arbiter I was gaming a girl for a while. Then lost contact. She went away on a holiday for a few months. I ran into her at a party two weeks ago. She was all excited to be meeting up.

        We chatted about working out a secret sign on how we could leave the party without attracting attention or generating gossip. We went for drinks and I escalated and we were making out, dancing, making out.

        There is no “trouble” to fear. Go and see how this plays out.

        Like


      • “Could spell trouble: perhaps she is naive enough to think that sex once means a commitment.”

        *sigh*

        Like


    • The power of the neg ftw.

      Like


  15. Where is that bit about high testosterone cad males from? I am surprised those terms were used in a study and never thought of cads as high testosterone but just weak of character and dull of mind. Anyways, I had been thinking about how arranged marriage would be more optimal than marriage for love. Love sounds nice but it is really hard to find and easy to confuse with fantasy. I think arranged marriage requires marriage to be an effort, about oaths, and about the future. What better way to save it than to view marriage as a duty and infidelity as a dereliction rather than just following the emotions?

    Like


  16. about Russians– I lived there for a long time and infidelity is the national sport. Everyone does it. I think it’s just cultural…

    Like


    • Infidelity, sky-high rates of alcoholism and abortion. That’s Russia. Also systematic male rape, in their two-year military service. And arrogance, corruption and sadism. There’s a reason all their neighbors hate the Russians. The only good thing about Russia is Putin, somewhat standing up to the globalists because he is playing his own game.

      Like


      • Aside from that, it’s a great place!

        Like


      • You forgot 2nd to 4th place (depending on stats) in the world for divorce and raging male betaness, masqueraded as needy alphaness. Oh.. those stories of Russian men oneitis’es I love them so much.
        Ask a Russian to tell a story of his friend who was “in love”. I promise, you would not regret.. those colourful novels of humiliation, pussy worshipping and, unparallel to western men, self flagellation.

        Like


      • The relations between the Russians and their neighbors is a negative feedback cycle that has been going on since the Vikings were taking slaves to sell to the Muslims. Russians see enemies everywhere because they have been attacked by all their neighbors. Mongols, Swedes, Poles, Turks, Khazars… even the small Balt states grabbed as much as they could in during the Russian revolution, following Poland’s example (failed when their German mercenaries decided to try to take them over, but doesn’t mean they didn’t take a shot).

        Like


  17. OT but FYI for anyone who wants a good rating website for your pics (if you’re doing the dating market value test for men), beautifulpeople.com is a good place. Only 20 percent of the applicants pass through the application process and only women who have already been voted in (thus they at least have to be higher SMV than the average girl because of this filter) rate your pics. The process takes 48 hours, which ensures that a few hundred women will rate you.

    I got voted in comfortably, which actually lets me know that looks don’t matter that much to women because IRL I still have to ‘bust a move.’ It all comes back to the same basic shit.

    HotOrNot/Badoo is bad these days — most everyone just spams 10 or 1. Plus, most of the girls on there are nasty.

    Like


    • You’re so vain (you probably think this post is about you).

      Like


    • Beautifulpeople does not work.Been there,done that.
      Internet game is for losers. Yep, I am saying this in 2014.
      It’s like gaming women with a huge “beta” sign on your face.

      Like


      • Doesn’t work for what? I’m not on there to date, I just submitted pics to check my aesthetic progress.

        Like


      • Does not work for getting laid (for me at least).This is what men do on internet dating sites- find women to have sex with.

        “Aesthetic progress”- that sounds gay. Are you a reader of rok,by any chance?

        Like


      • the internet is just for getting easy pussy. It’s zero-calorie pickup game. You get them in a conversation however, get it sexualized. Many times, they push back and say “you’re just about sex” and of course, no shit, you are. You next them or make up whatever you want and keep chugging. Eventually fuck a few times or once and done.

        It really doesn’t matter. So many dudes are so beta, jeezus, just get on a free dating site and rack up bodycount. When your tally goes north of 50, at least you will feel somehow like a sexual success.

        women are into whatever is trendy- they heard that online dating was the “place to be” and so they went there. They go wherever they’re led.

        Like


      • Trying to look your best is gay? Checking to see that you’re actually improving is gay, too?

        No I don’t read ROK. Is it good?

        Like


      • @Scray It’s a blog run by Roosh (Return of Kings).

        Like


  18. Off-topic

    Psychopaths have game:

    “Become the people around you, but better. Watch people and look for loopholes. Figure out what you want early. Always express a little bit more vulnerability than them. Compliment them on things that they don’t ever get complimented on. Find things that people are passionate about and get them talking about it. Find the things that people wish other people noticed about them. Probe their reactions to different situations. If what you want is something the person wouldn’t normally do, or wouldn’t want to do, you’ll need it to be their idea. Do exercises that are similar but slowly ramp up the severity. You’ll start by doing small things that startle or upset them, and then reassuring them that everything is fine. Basically, condition them to feel fine when you do things that make them uncomfortable. When you make them food, and they ask what it is, don’t tell them. Say “just try it.” That’s an entry level discomfort-pleasure association. Tell them to do things, but refuse to tell them why. Make sure that they’ll be happy with the result. Slowly increase the level of discomfort they’ll feel. Pick up a butcher knife and as soon as you see fear in them start cutting vegetables. If there’s any kind of emergency, explain nothing. Take charge and tell them exactly what to do. If they question any of your orders, they’ll later feel guilty. Start giving them orders that don’t make any sense, things that they would normally question. For example, there’s a parking ban due to winter weather. Wait until it goes into effect and then say “You have to move your car now!” Don’t explain. After they do it, tell them about the parking ban and convince them that you saw tow trucks just around the corner taking cars away. Pointing a gun at someone’s head and saying “duck,” then shooting a baddie behind them is a prime example of this shown in movies, but not something easily translatable to real life. These things are best decided in the moment.
    Most of all, practice makes perfect. Never reveal to anybody that you’re manipulative, or manipulating them. Practice on targets that you don’t care about, preferably people who don’t know you.”

    “It’s hard to put into words because I mostly do it subconsciously.
    The key to getting people sharing their secrets is vulnerability. You won’t be vulnerable around someone who you can’t trust. The thing about empathy is that it’s about neural mirroring. If you make yourself feel something and you express it with your face and body, people with empathy will have no choice but to feel it too. People get weirded out if you act way more vulnerable than them, so you just act slightly more vulnerable than they do. You have to do this all the time. Always agree with them, never openly judge them. Make a safe space for them to tell you things, and always comfort them. Create a positive association in their mind with confiding in you.
    Start by telling them things that you would only tell a “friend.” If they like you, they’ll respond by doing the same thing. Slowly ramp up to telling them things that you would only tell your best friend. As long as they do the same, bring it up to things you would only tell a significant other, or family member. Eventually, you’ll be telling them things that you’ve never told anybody, and they’ll be doing the same. You should be doing this process by feel. With the right candidate it can be done in few hours. Lots of people take days, some take weeks, some take months, and some you just can’t get to.
    Of course, you may not have a bunch of childhood trauma that you can talk about, especially not things you’ve never told anybody. Even if you do, it’s generally better to make things up or tailor the truth to better suit the person you’re talking to. For example, someone will be much more likely to tell you about abuse in their childhood if you act like you’re having a bad day because someone reminded you of your father and blah blah blah. If you want to find out their dating history, talk about yours. If you think they’re leaving something out, get a vague idea of what it is from one of their friends/family and then tell them a similar (likely made up) story about your life that will remind them of it. Put them in a position where they can make you feel better by telling you what you want to know.”

    This part is funny:

    “Also if you’re studying social engineering, don’t be that guy. You know, the pickup artist or whatever. That’s just silly.”

    http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/1vebzo/psychopathssociopaths_of_reddit_what_its_like/cerqg03

    Like


  19. Heartiste, not double standard, different standard for very different groups. It is not a double standard that humans sleep in the house while horses sleep in the hay, for example.

    But very interesting article, and good commentary. Kudos to you.

    “However, we found that men’s perceiving themselves as attractive was not a consistent predictor of infidelity. Only US men who regarded themselves as attractive reported more infidelity.”

    Could be that they are stuck with landwhales. But could it also be that, against the global pattern, these attractive U.S. men have significantly better options? That would indicate that U.S. (or Western) women more than others value men’s looks. Today. Which would be only because of media-induced attitudes.

    Noteworthy is that feminism doesn’t seem to stop men’s chances of infidelity. If it did, there would be very few chances of men’s infidelity in the West. This shows, once again, that while women pay lip service to the screeching creed because no counter-arguments are presented to them, they really don’t believe it or act upon it.

    Like


  20. Marriage is no escape from the sexual market.

    How true, how true, how true. And thanks for the link in that comment to the earlier story, very interesting reading.

    This is one of the most important things we could teach men. Those who move in with a girl wonder when the game is over. It’s never over. Nor should it be. You should always try to improve, work out, never become mushy, childish or a toady, never let yourself go and become a worthless couch potato. A woman’s love and other women’s looks should be your reward, as well as the knowledge that you are sky-high above those men you know who sat down in the couch with a sign and never got up again. You should be better.

    Like


    • So in other words, the man has to keep trying to make the relationship with the woman work but the woman doesn’t have to do anything. What if the woman is the one who is the couch potato and doesn’t do anything for the relationship?

      Like


      • You tell her before hand that if she does, you won’t love her anymore and will dump her?

        Like


      • If you have to tell her that beforehand, she isn’t worth it in the first place.

        Like


      • A married couple are sitting on a porch swing… Wife says”If I got fat, you would still love me forever wouldn’t you”. Husband “Darling, I’ll always love you………………………………………. I sure would miss you though”.

        Like


      • Kirk, all it takes is one Lana Del Ray song to implant the thought on her head that I’ll love her even if she lets herself go.
        A gentle correction is nothing to fear, in fact, corrections happen continually. It is our job as men to set the standard, now isn’t it?

        Like


      • Both should set the standard. And the person who breaks the standard should be held accountable. The notion that men have the responsibilities while women just have the choices is sexist. Both have choices and responsibilities and both should be held to the same standards.

        Like


      • The best response I’ve ever heard to the “will you still love me if I get fat” question is “will you still love me if I quit working?”

        Like


  21. With the sentence “Marriage is no escape from the sexual market” CH links to this earlier post from 2012:

    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2012/11/16/marriage-is-no-escape-from-the-sexual-market/

    There you have a female commenter writing that CH’s factually based, proven observations are “bullshit”, because it’s evil for him to point it out, apparently. Facts irrelevant. Typical female response.

    But another commenter, Cynthia (and I strongly wonder if it’s really a woman), gives this noteworthy reply:

    The argument against most everything he writes here can be boiled down to “people are decent, and decent people don’t behave this way”. Which is true, when it’s true, but it’s also missing the point. This blog postulates that feminism is eroding the fundamentals of our society and we are, in effect, returning to a state of nature in regards to sexual relations. Base human nature is overtaking the decency of civilization, and this is the position he’s writing from. There’s no allowance for acts of personal decency, because in this world, such things don’t exist. It’s borderline satirical at times, but like all good satire, it’s a horrible reflection of an eventual reality, given a current social path.

    Basically, yes, there are still good people out there that are still clinging to civilization as a way to overcome the meaner driving instincts of human nature. But there are far fewer of them than there should be.

    Surprisingly insightful acceptance of reality. One thing though – it’s not just today, it’s not just because of feminism eroding the fundamentals of our society. As the study above shows, it’s the same outside the West and worse: Russia, China, Turkey. South America. Africa. This is life.

    Like


  22. “One of the biggest myths believed by both red and blue pill adherents is that women value male looks as much as men value female looks.”

    Dude, you really need to put an end to this. I can’t believe that after all the scientific studies you’ve read, you’ve never came to the conclusion that looks do matter to women as much as looks matter to men.

    To disprove your statement, all one needs to do is look at the popularity of Tinder.

    [CH: Tinder strips all context out of seduction. it’s useless as a gauge of what women respond to in real life.

    here we have the study results that refute your feelgood beliefs staring you in the face, and yet you still insist on ignoring them like a fool.]

    Like


    • “I can’t believe that after all the scientific studies you’ve read, you’ve never came to the conclusion that looks do matter to women as much as looks matter to men.

      A good-looking guy can run “young, dumb and full of cum” game on a girl and hook up if she is in the right demographic and the right phase of her cycle.

      An ugly guy cannot do the same, lest he come off as “creepy and gross”.

      Therefore, looks do matter to women. Yes.

      The premise CH keeps emphasizing is that looks do not matter NEARLY AS MUCH to women as they do to men, so your statement is incorrect.

      How many unattractive millionaire/billionaire heiress women do you hear about or see who are dating GQ-looking male model types? Virtually none, a such men prefer unemployed hotties or minimum wage baristas who look hot naked.

      These are men who could live a life of luxury and leisure if they’d just date or marry these women. But they don’t, why?

      How many unattractive millionaire/billionaire men do you hear about or see who are dating Victoria’s Secret quality trophy wives? Much of Hollywood, the high-end business world (even a local guy who owns a construction company or car dealership often has a pretty hot wife), the WAGs of sports stars and so on rife with examples.

      These are women who could snag anyone they wish, but choose to forego looks for money, power, fame, status or game. But they don’t why is that?

      Because women do not value physical looks, nor do they value status, power or income in a partner the same as men.

      In fact, if you talk to enough women, you’ll see that many of them PURPOSEFULLY AVOID very good looking guys, because they feel intense relationship insecurity or or physical unworthiness around them and do not want to have to constantly compete to hold onto him and keep his attention. Again, this has to do with a woman’s age, relationship cycle, emotional state, etc. but at no point along that spectrum does a woman’s value and preference in good looks exceed a man’s.

      Like


    • jigga wha? Tinder is a toy for attention whores. Anything that allows women to bring more attention upon themselves is going to be popular. You sound ugly.

      Like


    • It’s funny, that you come to make a point and quote scientific studies…

      Then fail to actually quote them.
      Put up, or shut up.

      Like


      • The funniest part is that he leaves out the SCIENTIFIC STUDY that CH quotes. It’s right above his quote:

        “Men place physical attractiveness at or near the top of the list of characteristics sought in short and long-term mates, while women also value physical attractiveness in a potential mate, but place less of an emphasis on it compared with other criteria (e.g., Buss, 1989; Lippa, 2009).”

        There have also been many, many other studies showing the same thing. And do women watch porn as much as men do? Hell no, men watch it many times more. While women read far more erotica. Because in erotic literature, they can get to know the man instead of seeing him, and that excites them.

        TinderBrah, if you want to talk science, are you aware of the evolutionary underpinning of this? Men are more visually excited because those men who were quickly excited would want more sex, therefore had more children, and over the generations their genes came to dominate. Women on the other hand can only have a few children in a lifetime, and so need to find only one man, the best possible man, and so they need to look carefully at the quality in all his traits, not just physique.

        This is very basic. It is part of the answer to almost every difference in behavior between men and women.

        Like


      • I’ll just point out that any study that asks women to SAY what they want is garbage for figuring out what women want.

        Like


    • I’m not even going to get started with this.

      You probably think this because your game sucks and you don’t know how to be charismatic with girls so youve never actually experienced the value of game

      Like


    • Someone drank the goodlookingloser kool-aid

      We’re onto you, bitch

      Like


  23. That is very frustrating.

    Just exactly what is the reason or rationale behind WordPress’ seemingly arbitrary holds?

    Is it up to the site moderator to approve? Does WP itself have algorithms that flag certain keywords and hold them up in queue?

    WP’s “your post is awaiting moderation” phrase or its complete unacknowledgement whatsoever of a post, is the equivalent of preparing to ask for a meetup on text or call, and having your phone battery go dead with no charger to be found.

    A salient point or thought held up in time until it is no longer salient or relevant.

    Like


  24. “One of the biggest myths believed by both red and blue pill adherents is that women value male looks as much as men value female looks.”

    It certainly is true but definitely varies from population to population.Dutch and Swedish HBs go out with nice looking men of a similar social class.British love niggas, tattoed lunatics and roid imbeciles.

    In societies where women after money- they would go out with pretty much anything remotely resembling a male , and absence of game is appreciated greatly (coz it’s easier to manipulate a looser).Take Russia for example.

    Like


    • Or Ukraine. You’ll see unshaven men dressed in coveralls or the like. But since that’s pretty much all there is, the women are stuck with them. They’re also alcoholics, they beat the women severely, and the whole society is rotten – it’s no coincidence that all political parties are corrupt and that the country is completely broke.

      Fun fact: What the media won’t tell you about Ukrainians’ willingness to strike a deal with the EU is that it’s all about getting visas so they can go feed off the wealth in Western Europe. And get away from other Ukrainians. The entire debate there is about this. The women want to get away from the men, and go somewhere where they aren’t beaten and treated like shit. The men drool after Western women, like all the other vermin. More socialist-voting rapists moving to the West.

      The “nationalists” go hand in hand with the globalists in this – get rid of some unemployed people and get a flow of Western money. And get a chance to move to the West. Both Ukrainian globalists and nationalists win. And who cares about the Westerners, right? There’s a reason every nationalist party in Europe opposes the “nationalists” in Kiev.

      Like


      • And many Ukrainian women are known to be great scammers. They lure foreign men to Kiev through online dating websites and social networks with the prospect of a relationship. Some of these women are looking for love but many just want to exploit the generosity of men. They come up with sob stories about a sick child, dying parent or some other hardship in order to extract cash. They take the cash and then dump the guy. A lot of Ukrainian women dress in flashy, tight clothing and wear high heels – even the heavier women. This is in contrast to the androgynous clothing usually found in the West. It is quite commonplace to hear about lovers and mistresses in the Ukraine and the women tend to have very open attitudes about sex. In rural areas, this may be different. If the Ukrainian men or any men are vermin as you have claimed, guess who raised them to be that way.

        Like


      • “But since that’s pretty much all there is, the women are stuck with them. They’re also alcoholics, they beat the women severely, and the whole society is rotten”

        A massive blue pill believe, happily spread by Ukrainian furies on “date a russian” websites. Do you honestly believe that a 45 millions country only has to offer alcoholics in coveralls? Have you ever been to Ukraine,to its capital? Its packed with looked after young men, who even happen to have plenty of liquid cash, thanks to a massive black market economy.From my peers in Ukraine not even one is an alcoholic or has a drinking problem- yet many are divorced or played badly by women.

        The described above problem does exist mainly in (used to be before putin bombed it all) industrial shitholes of Eastern Ukraine, where you literally see only zombies queuing in front of a drinking parlous since 8am. Pretty much like in Russia, everywhere 50miles outside of Moscow Circle road. It’s gradually disappears in large cities and decreases towards western Ukraine.But that you don’t want women from there neither, trust me.

        My favorite myth created by roosh-a-likes is that westerners have something to offer Ukrainian 8+. Never, not even once, I have seen a Ukrainian 8+ with a foreigner in Ukraine. And I have been (and largely remain,when I am back there visiting) a common visitor to all the up-market clubs in Kiev and my city in the South East. Ukrainian HBs are not interested for many reasons.It’s like Colombia- higher classes girls are largely unavailable to westerners.

        Now about the joining the EU thingy. Yep, you are right- most of Ukrainians want to join EU so they can emigrate to Western Europe. And you know what- I am a Ukrainian and I oppose Ukraine joining EU in the near to midterm future. Those who can offer something in terms of education or skills can emigrate anyways, and those who can’t- well..Europeans should not want them here, let’s put it this way. I support the free trade though.EU has done a massive fuck up allowing Romanian gipsies in. Allowing Ukrainian working classes in would bring the European job market to its knees.

        Like


  25. It’s at the point where I won’t bother writing more than a paragraph

    Searching for the downside here…

    (Unless it’s an interesting and educational FR, of course!)

    Like


  26. I don’t think it’s moderation unless you get the moderation message.

    So what is it? I don’t know. Just badly written code. And I have noticed that sometimes the messages do show up, after one day or two days, and sometimes they don’t show up at all. It seems completely left to chance.

    Like


  27. What color are you?

    Like


  28. I think women value height because it makes them feel submissive and protected. It isn’t so much visual as it is an emotional trigger. Not saying they won’t admire a tall hunky guy striding shirtless along the beach, but there’s more to it than you suggest.

    Like


    • “I think women value height because it makes them feel submissive and protected. It isn’t so much visual as it is an emotional trigger. Not saying they won’t admire a tall hunky guy striding shirtless along the beach, but there’s more to it than you suggest.”

      It’s the visual that triggers those feelings though right? I agree completely that women are way more emotional then men when it comes to sex. That is different then saying they are not as visual.

      Like


      • What do you not understand about the “less” portion of the statement “women are less visual.”

        It doesn’t mean they aren’t visual, or that looks don’t matter, or that women don’t get turned on by good looking guys… It means it’s not as high as looks stand on a mans priority list of attractive traits, namely, #1.

        Also, women’s visual centers of the brain are less developed, they are simply held back by their physiology in this way.

        Does that settle that?

        Like


    • Cryo sez: I think women value height because it makes them feel submissive and protected.

      Actually, no. After wondering for a long time, a few years ago I finally decoded the “protected” doublespeak that women always use when asked about their preference for taller men. It never rang true with me, but I coul for a long time quite put my finger on it.

      Here is what it really means: When they say protected, they really mean PROVIDED. Height is simply a proxy for the amount of manual labor a man can produce. Never mind that in modern society manual labor often is not important. In the primitive brains of a woman, more labor means more resources. To a woman, a man is just a unit of labor. The bigger the unit, the better. Simple. It is the primitive version of Beta Bucks.

      Never mind protection. There is a seemingly endless supply of stupid white knights that will protect a woman to get a chance with her. Telling a man that they value his protection is just a manipulation done because women know that men feel more proud about being viewed as a PROTECTOR than as PROVIDER.

      Corollary: A tall man does not make woman feel more submissive. It makes her feel more dominant, because she has been able to dominate a bigger piece of meat into laboring/providing for her.

      Like


  29. Women are less visual ummm, maybe because they are?

    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/808430

    “In other words, men are more sexually aroused by visual stimuli, but women are more sexually aroused by concrete examples of status.” (Slightly Edited)

    Dumbass.

    Like


    • No they’re not dumbass as I just explained looks are part of “concrete examples of status” and they always have been.

      Like


  30. Let me put it like this in a simple example. Danny Devito has high status through fame and money as an actor. Would his wife rather fuck her husband or the UPS guy who looks like a young Val Kilmer? Who really arouses her more? You know the answer.

    Like


  31. hot sex alone not equal warm love. Well maybe it does but it doesn’t. I had hot sex and I lost love. It has to be my type of woman- and I’m not stating claim to be α male, just saying, my type is a white blond or red or sometimes brown or black haired woman with blue or green or sometimes blond eyes- i’m myself Caucasian, that’s why I feel a right to one of these woman- at least one, provided I earn it on the battlefield or the battlefield of life. Still, I want her to have virtue- i.e. a nice personality, good heart but wisdom and understanding. some of that can be taught and trained. Some maybe can’t.

    Anyway I just realized something for game purposes that also applies to divorce rates and likelihoods. Consensus. Both men and women- but less so alpha men and alpha women- that is men and women who won’t have to pay a price, or don’t believe they will- they both are influenced in their behavior and mental behavior by the perception of consensus. A society which sanctions- de facto- and de jure often becomes de facto and vice versa- divorce and hypergamy and so on, will result in an increase in divorce. As per game, you know when you’re chatting up a woman, equally when she’s doing most of the chatting, you can ‘inform’ them of other women that have consented to your XYZ or whatever, to create the feeling of consensus/permission. That’s another way of bypassing the ASD and RBPS (resistance to being perceived as a slut). I think that’s horrible but I also think divorce can be on children and society. The young people view the world from their paradigm and few think of society as a whole, and the trends and the ideal civilization, like Plato or Nietzsche. So we get young people who can’t weigh in all the consequences when they form opinions, but our society is so far away from noble that it seems nothing matters. I wonder if we can even restructure it. It’s all corrupted and ruptured. Every man for himself, right? Right! But when talking to chicks, or women, or girls, or ladies, whether they’re your co-worker or neighbor or barista or co-ed, don’t be too obvious. You have to be subtle but if you are, you can slip in the idea of consensus. Yeah- every hot girl is fucking me, or rather I am fucking them. Every woman generally regarded as 8 or better GR8B- is taking their pants off for me or letting me do it, if they get the chance to know me. Because I’m really good at making deep emotional-sexual connection with lovely women and letting them be natural and unrepressed as to their sexual fulfillment, discreetly. We go biking. They like the vibration of the motorcycle on their clit while riding on back. They know I respect them as individuals, with unique sexual tastes.

    Like


  32. I actually agree with this concept, but only if I qualify it: women place a huge emphasis on looks UNTIL you pass the basic looks requirement, which is pretty low.

    That’s why the male model talk is stupid.

    Not only that, but you can overcome a lot of even the basic requirement stuff because of a personality-halo. Just like being hot makes people think you’re cool, being cool also makes people think you’re hot. Personality is also genetic.

    And you can alter both your appearance and personality —- or your phenotype of these genetic qualities — by a significant degree.

    Like


    • Women don’t want to be compared with a man who is more attractive than they are, so they avoid being seen with him. Hence, very handsome men (9’s, 10’s) have a lower percentage of women available to them than men who are 7’s do, assuming that the 7’s have high status so that their SMV ends up being 9, 10.

      Like


      • on September 28, 2014 at 9:31 pm Mean Mr. Mustard

        Unless her entitlement complex is so big that it demands that he is “hot” enough for “her” and she uses him as a tool to impress her family and friends.

        Like


      • i remember reading on a previous post that women who are lower in attractiveness tend to be more drawn to really good looking men while the very attractive women are more into men who don’t have supermodel type looks but instead have personality, social status, wealth, etc.

        i’ve seen this myself. homely chubby girls are the ones who salivate most over young hot studs while the most beautiful women tend to ignore them for men who have average looks but other high value qualities.

        could be nature’s way of balancing things out. a woman who isn’t very attractive is naturally drawn to men who rank high in the looks department because she instinctually knows mating with those guys will give her attractive children. something she can’t provide on her own.

        but a really attractive girl doesn’t need a hot guy to have attractive babies since she already has that covered. that means she has wiggle room to focus less on the appearance of her mate and more on other traits that would add value to the union.

        Like


      • About two beautiful people getting married to each other. It might be a problem if two big ego, narcissists married. Somebody has to get up and work and pay the bills and clean the toilet. What beautiful woman will want to do that?

        Not a problem if both are rich, though.

        Like


      • But hotness isn’t really the measure. If you want to impress your family and friends, you bring home an attractive rich guy from a good family, not a hot muscled bartender.

        Like


      • This comment says it all about female sexual strategy. Successful man from a good family? Congratulations, your prize is a very special lady who has already been worked over a dozen times by the bartender. And you get to meet her family!

        Like


      • Umm we’re talking about what impresses family and friends, not necessarily what girls are sexually attracted to.

        But yea, girls are attracted to wealth and status. And water is wet.

        Like


      • on September 29, 2014 at 8:16 pm Mean Mr. Mustard

        Amy; you are making overly generous assumptions about their family and friends.

        Like


    • Tell that to the members of KISS. Ugly motherfuckers, every one of them.

      Couldn’t tell them that though.

      Like


    • “I actually agree with this concept, but only if I qualify it: women place a huge emphasis on looks UNTIL you pass the basic looks requirement, which is pretty low.”

      This is about right. Social status/dominance can largely compensate for looks, but looks can’t compensate for “beta” behavior.

      Like


    • Indeed. Additional good looks past a point add very little to smv

      Like


  33. Has Heartiste ever discussed the fakk/fight ratio as a predictor of relationship health?

    Like


  34. CH, I believe you’ve published these charts before but it’s funny to see Jezebel and 538 pick them up. Are we seeing CH ideas filter into the mainstream?

    http://jezebel.com/over-22-years-old-men-find-you-less-and-less-attractiv-1635039272

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/christian-rudder-dataclysm-okcupid/

    Like


    • Christian Rudder has an amazingly creepy pedo/HIV/serial-killer face at the top of the 538 article and has shown himself to be the sort of authoritarian homo-leftoid who pushes for people with bad opinions to lose their jobs. Maybe he’s also the sort of guy who would be found dead in a ditch off a rest stop without pants.

      But that said, OKCupid also provided a great graph:

      “As you can see from the gray line, women rate an incredible 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium.”

      http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dating/

      Like


      • Doesn’t this say it all… Don’t believe what women say watch what they do… They say looks matter, and down rate 80% of guys…. and spend their days dating guys well within that 80%.

        Really just ignore whatever they say they like and focus on what we know they like.

        Like


  35. on September 28, 2014 at 9:28 pm Mean Mr. Mustard

    “Heads up, beta males:
    If your wife’s love is gone ==> cheating whore.
    If your wife works in en environment filled with alpha males ==> cheating whore.
    If your wife has cheated before ==> recursive cheating whore.”

    Yes.

    Or, best case scenario:

    The sex dries up (cue passionless, monthly sex, at best) or is non existent.
    Wife starts to expect and demand more and more from said husband.
    More “help around the house”, more household luxuries, better car, busts his balls to work harder/make more money; becomes even more of a status whore.
    The kids are used against him as leverage tool in dread (losing the kids).

    All until …

    a) the wife tires of the charade, walks away and husband gets reamed via the courts. and/or
    b) the kids are old enough to be a minimal work for her while he pays for her lifestyle/upkeep and the kids.
    c) she cheats on him with a view of finding a willing alpha or higher beta with more money/resources that she can sponge off until the cycle gets repeated or the charade continues with no sex while the husband keeps working harder to keep her happy while simultaneously envying the dead.

    All the while, her closest friends (quite likely in similar situations) are cheering her along from the sidelines, enablers to her rationalizations and entitlement.

    This happens so often in Australia its not funny.

    Like


    • or you can try d) whereby you act like a man. If you are getting married, you take time and choose your mate wisely, you understand you are getting married to raise a family, not have a fuck buddy, you don’t confuse chemical reactions with “love”.

      When you hand in your relationship you DON’T lose it or squander it by being a grown boy playing video games all day. You keep your woman in line, call her out on her shit, be outcome independent in your interactions with her, focus on YOUR mission and lead the relationship.

      You keep her working for you and qualifying to you. Women are looking for leadership. Provide that. Be worthy of being a leader. Keep a light thrum of dread running in the background. If you are focused on your mission and leading things it will come naturally. All women will gravitate to you and she will pick up on this.

      Men are leaders. When they let women lead, they get what they deserve.

      Like


      • You can lead all you want but if the woman decides to file for divorce, there is nothing you can do about it.

        Like


      • If the glove don’t fit, you must acquit.

        Like


      • Well you can learn from your failure for next time. Most of the time, the guy dropped the ball somewhere. It’s up to us to lead the relationship or else not be in one.

        Like


      • on September 29, 2014 at 6:09 pm Mean Mr. Mustard

        Caveat emptor applies here.
        Be careful and exercise due diligence before you “put a ring on it” and then do not fall back into a comfortble beta/blue pill mode or you will get toasted.

        As far as Australia goes, you will stuggle to find a more entitled, “empowered” (via their Mainstream media and feminist cheersquad), status whoring bunch of women in the World.

        Like


  36. Cryo sez: I think women value height because it makes them feel submissive and protected.

    Actually, no. After wondering for a long time, a few years ago I finally decoded the “protected” doublespeak that women always use when asked about their preference for taller men. It never rang true with me, but I coul for a long time quite put my finger on it.

    Here is what it really means: When they say protected, they really mean PROVIDED. Height is simply a proxy for the amount of manual labor a man can produce. Never mind that in modern society manual labor often is not important. In the primitive brains of a woman, more labor means more resources. To a woman, a man is just a unit of labor. The bigger the unit, the better. Simple. It is the primitive version of Beta Bucks.

    Never mind protection. There is a seemingly endless supply of stupid white knights that will protect a woman to get a chance with her. Telling a man that they value his protection is just a manipulation done because women know that men feel more proud about being viewed as a PROTECTOR than as PROVIDER.

    Corollary: A tall man does not make woman feel more submissive. It makes her feel more dominant, because she has been able to dominate a bigger piece of meat into laboring/providing for her.

    [CH: occam’s razor applies here. women enjoy the company of dominant men because they desire to submit to dominant men.]

    Like


    • Hahahaha no. I’m standing at 6’3″ and women melt at a tall man. Hight is intimidating, they feel over powered. They eat it up. Never once has a woman been MORE cocky with me once she realized how small she is compared to me. Not even once.

      Like


      • Right. We like to feel small and helpless next to you.

        Like


      • Corollary: A tall man does not make woman feel more submissive. It makes her feel more dominant, because she has been able to dominate a bigger piece of meat into laboring/providing for her.
        ————————————————————————————————

        Like


      • CH,

        I’ll adjust the corollary slightly. Having a much taller man perhaps does not make a woman feel “dominant” over him, but it does make her feel dominant over the rest of the sisterhood. And she still gets a power-trip out of him being “her man”. Maybe that is not dominance per se, but it is a close cousin. The tall man is also how she enacts her dominance of the world by proxy.

        Will,

        I’m 6’2 myself so I am not unfamiliar with the effect you are describing. However, I think men are deluded in thinking that women are not hiding a good part of the agenda (namely being provided for) when they “submit” to “dominant” men.

        Amy,

        >>Right. We like to feel small and helpless next to you.

        Because being small and helpless is very powerful for a woman, if she can at the same time engage a proxy to enact her power.

        Like


      • Just, I feel you, I just think you’re ascribing motives that are too intricate, and subconscious.

        I’ll totally agree that being with a tall, or good looking, or high status guys makes her feel like the queen bee amongst her friends, I’m just doubting she is plotting malicious resource extraction. Most women are not self aware enough to do this consciously. (Exception = gold diggers)

        Like


    • Tyranosaurs be rayciss.

      Like


  37. […] An interesting paper explored predictors of marital infidelity.  […]

    Like


  38. Marry, get the resources from the rich, divorce, remarry.Hypergamy on die-hard feminist, strong independent sugar-baby for a while … all-in-one story

    http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/25/living/lisa-ling-sugar-baby-essay/index.html?iref=obnetwork

    Like


  39. Come up with something witty to replace the “FILO” terminology. It is fundamentally at odds with an algorithm that is dependent on the size of the queued item, and the underlying OS implementation of paging. Assuming such an algorithm was even at work here.

    Like


  40. What are some ways to AMOG a try hard trying to game your gf? I was at a venue in the city this past week when I used the bathroom and left my girl alone with her sister. As I was taking a piss my gf texted me telling me there’s a guy trying to “talk” to her at the table. I got back to find some hair braided wigger talking to her. He played it cool and asked me where I was from. I told him a city he wouldn’t know the name of and named other non known cities and asked him if he knew where they were at. He looked bewildered and said no. At that moment we laughed at him and then I went on to complement his shirt and befriend him to make it known I wasn’t trying to make him look stupid. After some back and forth I asked him where his gf was at and he got up suddenly and left. I felt like the AMOG but I know sometimes I may encounter a higher up alpha. What should I do then?

    Like


    • Exactly what you did.

      Be your best and stop fearing others.

      Like


    • Uhh, marry her, get her out of the cock-carousel-riding bar-hopping scene, into a farmhouse in Deep Red Flyover Country, and begin the 20-year process of putting buns in her oven? SRSLY, if she’s really your “gf”, then why the fuck is she still hanging out in bars? Or, conversely, if she’s still hanging out in bars, then why the fuck is she called your “gf”?

      Like


    • The Vonnegutian ridiculousity of

      a) a girl sending a text when her boyfriend steps out for a moment to take a leak

      AND

      b) the guy taking the time to read the text while taking a leak

      is most droll.

      A brain surgeon on call or a general in the midst of battle never knew such instantaneous updates. lozlzozlzozlzozlozlozlozlozlozlo

      Like


  41. Take a look at this. Does this sound somewhat familiar? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Calhoun#Mouse_experiments

    “It was here that [Calhoun’s] most famous experiment, the mouse universe, was created.[1] In July 1968 four pairs of mice were introduced into the Utopian universe. The universe was a 9-foot (2.7 m) square metal pen with 54-inch-high (1.4 m) sides. Each side had four groups of four vertical, wire mesh “tunnels”. The “tunnels” gave access to nesting boxes, food hoppers, and water dispensers. There was no shortage of food or water or nesting material. There were no predators. The only adversity was the limit on space.

    Initially the population grew rapidly, doubling every 55 days. The population reached 620 by day 315, after which the population growth dropped markedly. The last surviving birth was on day 600. This period between day 315 and day 600 saw a breakdown in social structure and in normal social behavior. Among the aberrations in behavior were the following: expulsion of young before weaning was complete, wounding of young, inability of dominant males to maintain the defense of their territory and females, aggressive behavior of females, passivity of non-dominant males with increased attacks on each other which were not defended against. After day 600, the social breakdown continued and the population declined toward extinction. During this period females ceased to reproduce. Their male counterparts withdrew completely, never engaging in courtship or fighting. They ate, drank, slept, and groomed themselves – all solitary pursuits. Sleek, healthy coats and an absence of scars characterized these males. They were dubbed “the beautiful ones”.

    The conclusions drawn from this experiment were that when all available space is taken and all social roles filled, competition and the stresses experienced by the individuals will result in a total breakdown in complex social behaviors, ultimately resulting in the demise of the population.”

    Like


  42. Burger King Releases an ‘ALL Black Burger’ in Japan

    (does it come with bullet holes in it?)

    Like


    • Looks like the ol’ sesame seed bun and cheese have been replaced with a hockey puck squares of melted rubber.

      Pass.

      Like


  43. CH, I stumbled upon this. I couldnt help but think about everything I’ve learned from your site. *Hat tip*

    http://www.macleans.ca/culture/books/the-two-year-itch/

    Like