The Sexual History-Sexual Satisfaction Equation

Commenter Max from Australia ponders an elegant mathematical formula of marital satisfaction.

If a Man and a woman both have 20 sex partners: the odds are:::

1/20 X 1/20 = 1/400

That they will both be sexually satisfied by the one they marry.

Close, but no didgeridoo!

The concept is correct. The more past partners each spouse has, the less likely they will be sexually satisfied with their one remaining lifetime spouse.

The problem with this formula is that the variables aren’t equivalent. As we know, women with a lot of past lovers are less able to be happy in marriage. Men with a lot of past lovers are better able to leave their past in the past and not get hung up on nitpicking deficiencies in their current lovers.

So a man with 20 partners is more like a woman with 4 past partners. And a woman with 20 past partners is more like a man with 100 past partners.

The sexual history-sexual satisfaction equation would then be:

1/5(1/n{man}) partners X 1/n{woman} partners = odds of mutual sexual satisfaction within a marriage.

The greater odds of a formerly promiscuous man being happy in a marriage must be balanced against the lower odds of a formerly promiscuous woman being happy in a marriage. The woman becomes the bounding variable, but the overall odds of mutual marital happiness go down a little with the man’s total former partner count. A woman with 100 past lovers has only a 1% chance of marital happiness by herself, but the chance of mutual marital happiness decreases to 0.1% if the man has had only two prior lovers.

My probability math is a little rusty, so I welcome commenters to adjust this SH-SS equation to more accurately reflect the underlying sociosexual realities.





Comments


  1. […] The Sexual History-Sexual Satisfaction Equation […]

    Like


  2. Another possibility – a man is more likely to settle down with a fertile girl who is the best lover he has ever had [often Borderline/Narcissistic Personality Disorder who has massively powerful multiple orgasms]. Whereas a woman will always be doomed to wistfully fantasizing about leaving in search of Greater Alpha Bad Boy?

    Like


    • There will also be a classical Game Theory “min-max equilibrium point” thingamabob at work here. E.g. an increase in, say, sexual aggressiveness and quality of love-making technique will probably come at the expense of a decreasing in stability of personality. So prudent folks choose to settle for the “Min-Max” Happy Medium?

      Like


      • This comes up in discussions now and then, that a woman who is crazy would also be “crazy in bed” whereas a saner woman would not. I must disagree. The word crazy does not mean the same thing in these two. You could easily argue that a woman who has mental problems will be more uncomfortable in bed, will use your requests as yet another opportunity to start a fight and portray herself as the world’s martyr. I have had good and bad sex with both stable and unstable women, I see no correlation.

        Like


      • agree; crazy women aren’t necessarily more fun in the sack. Depends on the brand of crazy. All women are crazy to some extent.

        Like


      • I have had three chicks in my life who came really furiously for me. Two were raging Borderline/Narcissistic Personality Disorder hot heads and one was a hippie chick “Dancing Bears” ex drug addict with a really bad case of Claustrophobia. And honestly, I can barely even remember any of the tens of other chicks whom I’ve fornicated with over the years. You only remember the ones who cum and cum and cum and cum and cum for you.

        Like


      • In my experience, if you want epic sex, then you’re going to have to put up with epic rage. Iron skillets, butchers’ knives, shit like that. Thankfully none of them ever came after me with large caliber firearms. At least not yet.

        Like


      • … In my experience, if you want epic sex, then you’re going to have to put up with epic rage…

        That is my experience as well.

        But I can understand other guys disagree because their experience is different.

        different men attract different kind of women… and who knows maybe guys like Zomb and I are cursed and we end up with more than our fair share of crazy women while other guys end up with mostly nice women?

        Sometimes after I have looked for all possible explanations for the bad things that happen to me, I give up and call it a curse.

        which is not all that different from calling it determinism…

        Like


      • “Thankfully none of them ever came after me with large caliber firearms.”

        What difference would it make if it was small calibre weaponry?

        Like


      • nah, I get the magnetic chicks that everyone wants, they’re usually batshit. They’re more FUN in a general sense, but in the sack…I guess all of them seem more the same than different. Yeah some chicks are uptight and some are freakier, but it seems like they all like most of the same stuff. As long as I am having it, it’s good sex lol.

        For example the Russian nutcase was not remarkable in bed. But I was, so she camped out under my window while I nailed an 18 year old black virgin. Really neither were anything to write home about, the black girl was very level headed mostly, calm…Russian was nutty. I’ve had my phone blown up, door banged on, had to call police once or twice, thrown hoez out, you name it. I just haven’t found a correlation between craziness and sexual attraction. My ex wife was certifiable and she was pretty vanilla horizontal. A subsequent fiancée was nuts but the strongest connection I had to a girl, so sex was spectacular. Most of the other dozens are just a blur, I keep a big list so I can remember their namesl. I want to be able to answer truthfully to a “good girl” that I’ve slept with so few women that I can still remember all their names LOL

        Like


      • > “What difference would it make if it was small calibre weaponry?”

        Unless you get really unlucky and it nicks a big artery [or your liver, or if it drops both lungs (bilateral pneumothorax)], you can survive multiple rounds from a 22.

        Like


      • The Jihadis in The Shit used to laugh at the M-16 peashooter shooting NATO 5.56 [which equals .21889 which rounds up to 22]. But in urban warfare, what made them piss in their pants was the 12-gauge shotgun shooting 00 buckshot.

        Like


      • If your woman comes after you with a 12-gauge, make sure that it’s filled with birdshot rather than buckshot – then there’s a chance that you might survive. There’s an awesome movie which nobody has ever heard of, called “Flesh and Bone”, where Dennis Quaid has to take a pair of tweezers and spend all night picking buckshot out of James Caan’s flesh.

        Like


      • “picking buckshot” = picking BIRDshot

        Like


      • Think birdshot is harmless? You may wish to re-evaluate that…

        Like


      • Rage = emotion = epic sex. concur. Especially natural red haired Irish gals…

        Like


      • > “Think birdshot is harmless?”

        Oh, birdshot will take your face right off at close range – might penetrate your skull – and it would definitely leave you permanently blinded.

        Like


      • But if you got a good running start, then you might be 30 or 40 feet away before the bitch pulled the trigger and shot you in the back. Of course this is all assuming that you’re enough of a White Knight [aka a gentleman] not to draw first yourself and shoot her pre-emptively.

        Like


      • > “Rage = emotion = epic sex. concur.”

        Right, it’s the ultimate shit test – she wants you to prove to her that you are a True Alpha with a spine of steel. Just stand tall and weather the shitstorm and refuse to back down, and you will be rewarded with the best sex of your life.

        Like


      • > “Especially natural red haired Irish gals”

        Yep, there could definitely be a strong Celtic/Dal-Riatan/Pictish/Danish/Viking/Scots/Welsh/Norman/Anglo-Saxon aspect to it which other ethnicities just wouldn’t grok.

        Like


      • My personal theory is that there is probably Phoenician blood at the heart of it all – the island folk, the seafaring people – eating , drinking, cursing, fighting and fucking like the sailers whom they were bred to be.

        Like


      • That Phoenician angle seems to be the model which Tolkien used for the Men of Numenor – the Men of the West – in the Silmarillion. And Tolkien was nothing if not a student of ethnicities and the eccentricities of their various languages.

        Like


    • It just occurred to me that a female with options can no more stop looking for a more alpha man than she can stop looking for the next pair of shoes. Every girl I’ve ever known has had at least twice as many shoes as any human could ever use in one lifetime.

      Give a girl options, she’ll end up with 500 of everything. That’s why girls with options make shitty girlfriends and/or wives. The funny thing is I figured all of this out two decades ago when I got with the fat girl who is in the middle of doing my laundry at the moment.

      I never did get anywhere with my little quest to commit some tasty adultery. Two weeks after officially throwing in the towel, I’ve read two books, built a wooden clock, and I came face to face inches away from a hummingbird while I was petting bumblebees. Life is pretty sweet.

      One of these days I’ll get fucking a pretty girl out of my system by renting one. It’s not the only way, but it’s a lot more palatable than continuing to work on the art of being a sociopath.

      Like


      • on September 2, 2014 at 1:29 am Mean Mr. Mustard

        Just as bad is a female who believes that she has options.
        Her hamster is spinning based on a faulty filtering mechanism.
        Attention from men (who just want to fuck and dump) serves to bolster her overly inflated and deluded opinion of herself.
        This is often enabled be her equally deluded friends and mainsteam media enablers (who are happy to do this as it enables them to sell her shit that she wouldn’t otherwise buy).

        Like


      • I read your blog. You’re quitting too early. Enable comments.

        If there’s a next step, it’s owner-operator, or some other self-employment strategy. Also, reduce your personal overhead costs so you can work less.

        If you’ve got the money, fix your wife’s teeth. Dentists and orthodontists and dental surgeons can do amazing shit for a few thousand bucks. Dread game works for weight loss. Skinny may be impossible, but fat isn’t inevitable.

        Also, you need some humor in your life. I recommend Terrance Popp on Youtube.

        Like


      • Comments are enabled as far as I know. I abandoned the original blog after the Great Crack Whore Debacle, which one of my female friends described as being like an episode of Seinfeld where George tries to be a bad boy.

        We have the money to fix her teeth, but she won’t do it. That and a dozen other things, man, I’m just tired of pissing in the wind. Accept her for the skank she is, or move on.

        I don’t have concrete plans yet, and I’m in a period of reflection. In the long run, I probably don’t have any better inspiration than to follow my original muse, and get back on the path that got interrupted by a pair of giant titties 20 years ago. I was on the road to becoming a professor. It would be a good use for a guy like me, if I can find my way through to grad school.

        Like


  3. http://armstrongeconomics.com/693-2/2012-2/anatomy-of-a-debt-crisis/

    Anatomy of a Debt Crisis that appears, only Julius Caesar ever understood.

    Like


    • “The family seemed to do all right. Their debt burden never showed. Even the last day before the bank took their house they had everything they needed. So judging by that pattern, they should have done well forever. That they were homeless the next day seems just a statistical anomaly.”

      When books are written about the dollar collapse, after the dollar has been abandoned as the default trade currency due to technology making it easier to “frog leap” between currencies when making a deal, you could start the book with this little analogy.

      Another one: I knew a guy who seemed to do just fine in college. Same as everyone else. Until the day he was no longer there, because he had flunked his classes. But up until that day everything seemed the same as always.

      One step more, all is fine. One step more, all is fine. Hey, seems like this will go on forever. Who cares that there’s a gaping chasm a few steps ahead? We have never fallen before. The doomsayers have been wrong every step so far….

      Like


      • The turkeys are always quite happy the day before Thanksgiving… Lot’s of food, nothing to do… it’s been a great year! Gobble Gobble!!!

        Like


  4. white man’s dream country

    Like


    • Dang I ain’t never heard 2 minutes 2 midnight being played in a Thai go go bar before. Every man should experience LOS before it becomes completely westernized, well on it’s way sadly. The girls attitudes are changing fast from the sweet little submissive Asian dolls to demanding entitled western cunts. Great footage from the bar scene.

      Like


    • I fuck girls like that in the back of their cars.

      Like


    • The military junta should do the world a favor and send all the transvestite prostitutes to the northeastern, Cambodian part of Thailand, as forced labor. Regional aid, yes?

      Thailand is a very conservative country, which may be a surprise to Westerners who have heard of the prostitution districts only. Why do they keep the transvestites around? Well, they have so many homosexual customers coming from other countries. (The West and Russia. The menues are often printed in English and Russian.) Money trumps all, it seems.

      Like


      • Addendum: does anyone think Thailand is worse off now that the military has taken power? They promise elections next year after they have cleared out a few things. Apparently Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra was a Thai version of Obama, blatantly abusing power. Her brother Thaksin lives in exile and would be prosecuted for snatching money from government coffers if he ever came back home. He also used his position to help his wife buy public land at an auction, etc.

        Yingluck Shinawatra could stay in power despite the wishes of a majority of real Thais because she was supported by her clients, the non-Thai residents in the north and northeast, who are actually of the Cambodian people. As always, the uglier, darker people are less productive and more eager to get government handouts. (These are also the ones who make up most of the prostitutes in the big cities, not real Thai. If you look at pictures, most of the prostitutes are ugly, while real Thai look much better.)

        So facing a “democracy” where corrupt politicians come to power through the votes of some of your people’s leftists combined with a foreign people hungry for your people’s money, what should the military do? They take the same position as the demonstrators who asked for the replacement of mass democracy with a council of society’s best and brightest, excluding the muds and their patrons from power.

        Like


      • who are actually of the Cambodian people. As always, the uglier, darker people are less productive and more eager to get government handouts.
        —————————————————————————————–

        When Pol Pot and Khmer Rouge took over, light skinned Cambodians were singled out for special treatment. Fortunately, many of them were able to escape to their white masters countries.

        Like


      • Paler skin Cambodians got better treatment?

        Maybe we need a new word for all this racism that is not done by whites,

        palism maybe?…

        Maybe a commitee should be created by non-pales of all races and billions of dollars injected to fight this palism that is prevalent all across the planet?

        Everyone needs to check their pale privilege!

        Like


      • Arbiter that was well said. The undermining of Thai society by bribing the poor hasn’t paid off like it has in the West. At least not yet. They will keep trying though because Thaksin and co. have the full support of the international money lenders. The Thai military at the top are not a bunch of faggot bought off homosexual generals like the USA has so they are standing up to the attempted takeover. The battle back and forth will continue. I think for all the Monarchists out there Thailand is a good example to use to support your case. Democracy is retarded and the middle class Thai people know it’s retarded.

        Like


    • White man’s dream country?

      get rid of the lady boys and make more than half the girls caucasian

      then maybe…maybe for some… but I never pay for sex, never had to.

      Like


      • Sex is never “free”.
        You pay for it in one form or another with the variants being what you pay in, how much and for how long.
        Paying for it in cash is just the most direct and convenient way.

        Like


    • on September 2, 2014 at 4:59 am Mean Mr. Mustard

      Rather Ironically; Thai ladyboys are better at being a woman than Western women are at being a woman.
      LOLZ

      Like


      • I have had sex with more than a dozen transsexuals; it’s a sad statement on modern women that they were all uniformly more feminine than natural-born girls. Maybe because they WANT to be women…

        Like


  5. The higher the man’s n-count, the higher the odds of mutual satisfaction. The man’s n-count/5 has to “keep up” with the woman’s for their to be mutual satisfaction.

    Like


    • Nope.

      A man who’s been with 50 is very unlikely to be happy to be with a woman over the long term exclusively. He’s like a woman who’s been with 10 men.

      Compare him to a man who’s been with just 4 girlfriends. He’s practically like a virgin who’s never been with any man before.

      Like


      • Point granted.

        The “correct” equation would probably be significantly non-linear. I’m saying that at the low end of the range for male n-count (under 5?), each additional notch increases the odds the ltr will remain mutually satisfying.

        Like


      • There is something to Titanic’s thought though. If the woman has a higher notch count than her husband that’s an aggravating favor making for it to be more likely that the couple is unhappy.

        Like


    • Is that the Titanic or the Olympic?

      Like


    • This is a question of correlation and causation.
      A man’s alphaness is highly correlated with his n count and his alphaness increases satisfaction for women but does his n count cause his alphaness.

      Like


      • Nope.

        Alpha causes N count.

        N count does not cause Alphaness in the same manner. I have seen some sneaky fuckers getting laid a lot. They’re not Alpha when it comes to the world of men.

        Often these “dudes” have a trouble maintaining their LTRs.

        Like


    • Jesus this is so asinine

      Like


    • The higher a man’s count, the more likely it is he is a narcissist who views women as narcissistic supply, and the more likely he is incapable of love and has his life collapse in middle age. I’ve seen it more than once.

      Like


      • If by “collapse”, you mean getting out of a shitty marriage/relationship – this ain’t all bad.

        Like


      • I don’t know about that. Well, I will grant that it could be true about many. But I would like to see statistics about it before being certain. Personally I have slept with a whole lot of girls because I long ago started following manosphere advice, but the “life platform” advice and the game advice, really taking it to heart. It worked. But of the people I know, I am the one most concerned with other people’s well-being. When we stand around talking in a group, I am the one thinking of whether everyone is included in the conversation, and if not, I start talking with the quiet person so he won’t feel like an outsider. Things like that. No one else I know does this, no matter how many women they’ve been with.

        Like


      • Even ignoring the nebulous nature of the word, “love” is something that women “feel” and men take advantage of. It doesn’t matter if a man is “incapable of love”, it has nothing to do with being able to attract and keep an attractive wife.

        Like


  6. Left a comment a couple of times to adjust the equation… but that ended up in the comment spambox or whatever.

    Like


  7. “1/5(1/n{man}) partners X 1/n{woman} partners = odds of mutual sexual satisfaction within a marriage”

    This assumes that if the man had 5 past partners and the women had one, they would surely be happy. Instead let us define that probability as a random variable X with mean c and variance k. After this we can scale the probability for more partners accordingly.
    For example:
    Let us assume c=0.5 and variance 0 i.e. there is a 50% chance that they will be happy with them having 5 and 1 partners respectively. Then the chance of the same couple being happy with 10 and 2 previous partners is (0.5)* ( 1/ 2) * ( 1/2 ) = 0.125.

    Like


  8. It should be times 5 not 1/5 for the man. Since men’s partners count for less, a man with 2 with a 100 count woman will actually boost her chances of satisfaction from by 250% from 1% to 2.5% but drops his own by 99%!

    Also I propose that the whole equation be multiplied by a factor of .5, since best case both virgin marital satisfaction is still only 50%.

    Like


    • It should be 5 times not 1/5. That part is correct.

      But a man who’s a virgin is not going to be able to maintain a strong sexually satisfying frame in most cases. So the equation when multiplied by 5 instead of 1/5 works out well, and works only when a man has been with at least 5 girls.

      Like


    • Exactly, 5 not 1/5. Of course CH might be playing find-the-sperg game. Remember the April Fool’s gag a couple holidays past? Making a general point: I don’t think we should glorify sperg disparagement at all, even if manboobz fit the category. Spergs the thinker-producers are the economy or there isn’t one. Sperg the label is cathedral rot associated with fake ADHD drug dealing and ruining the reproduction of thinker-producers that don’t need debt slavery. Frost posited that the delay in fatherhood associated with spergism is due to the cock carousel and beta producer cock blocking from earlier success and better pussy (http://www.thumotic.com/delayed-fatherhood-and-autism/). I takes time to learn to be a thinking man, especially with all the pretty lies. I don’t see how Frost’s idea could be wrong. Thoughtful thinking men have the greatest mutual repulsion to welfare queens and careerist battleaxes, and hot women are most repulsed by young, naive, thoughtful nice guys. Conquorer-‘spergs’ are what bring civility to the world, and mattmidical preezijon. Will high IQ fathers ever tell their sons shit? Which is why we come here in righteous disgust.

      Like


      • What was the April Fools gag?

        I remember the post showing “ordinary women” for readers to rate, and they were all feminists. That post linked back to a similar post from years ago showing two “women” for readers to rate, and one of them was actually a guy – they were brother and sister. (Almost all readers considered the woman more attractive. The guy just looked like a freak. The eyes definitely looked male. Curiously, Romanian women usually have eyes like that, I first thought it was a Romanian.)

        But I don’t think any of those were April Fools posts, though.

        Incidentally I managed to trick several co-workers last April Fools. I wrote an email about how the tennis court had new temporary safety standards while they investigated an injury – everyone would have to wear safety goggles while playing tennis the next weekend. I told them to email me back if they didn’t have goggles at home, and I would borrow some through my friend who works as a teacher. “That’s crazy!” they said. “How can they make us do that? Let’s go somewhere else!” So funny.

        Like


  9. Genes don’t “determine”, they predispose, and a 50% heritability rate is nothing to get excited about. GXE correlations and interactions mean the blank slaters and the absolute hereditarians are equally oblivious to how science actually works.

    Like


    • Clarify your argument and we might be able to set you straight. What idea do you see here that assumes absolute hereditarianism? If you take a look even the most radical hereditarian folks are way more sophisticated than your naive caricature.

      And you’re wrong: 50% heritability is worth getting excited about. If IQ is 50% luck, 50% genes, then almost everyone in the top 2% of ability comes from top 15% genes. And that’s important: among other things, it implies that all of our current social policies are insane.

      Like


      • If you take a look even the most radical hereditarian folks are way more sophisticated than your naive caricature.

        Exactly. Typical strawman argument: claiming that those who are aware of hereditary traits think that’s the only thing influencing people.

        Look, Arred, is this so hard to understand? Anyone who has had pets knows they are affected by genes from their parents. In general. No one claims you can’t change their behavior by how you treat them. While they will still be affected by their genes.

        Ah, why am I explaining this. Everyone knows this, it’s just that for leftists it’s an ideological demand that they ignore reality. Feelthink must trump facts.

        Like


  10. on September 1, 2014 at 9:44 am gunslingergregi

    I made a descision to not have other bitches my first marriage and didn’t
    after that I changed the rules cause it ain’t worth me giving up that chunk of my life to one bitch i’m with
    made the rules fit me
    first marriage yea prob would of wanted to fuck some them ho’s on my nuts
    I went to army school for a while in the place army dudes dreampt about going lol cause it was almost 100 percent female everywhere
    I got two lifetime chicks just not always gonna be with them
    I think the lifetime satisfaction will be fine as long as I don’t have to spend my whole life with only either

    Like


  11. on September 1, 2014 at 9:46 am gunslingergregi

    one remaining lifetime spouse”””””””””””””

    that is the flaw in the formula
    cause fuck that you can never be sure of that so why give up something for that long to have it have 50 percent chance going to shit

    Like


  12. Yahoo has an article about another Duggar girl getting married and looking forward to having kids. Bride: n=0. Groom: n= 0 presumably.

    Sad, filthy anti-whites screech in the comments section.

    Like


  13. To arrive at the correct correlation coefficient for the formula, it might be best to work backwards with the average n count for women and the average n count for men. Then plug in the divorce rate.

    – but that wouldn’t give you marital satisfaction, it will just give you the likelihood that they will be divorced (or not divorced, depending on how you work the formula)

    Marital satisfaction is far more nebulous than divorce rate (and/or – the ‘staying married’ rate) and will be best measured subjectively.

    Like


  14. This formula is symmetric in the man and the woman partners.

    Like


  15. on September 1, 2014 at 11:18 am EndlessHypergamy

    Men with a lot of past lovers are better able to leave their past in the past and not get hung up on nitpicking deficiencies in their current lovers.

    I’d actually wager that this corresponds to women also.

    Women can let go of their past lovers with a much greater ease than men can, especially if they’re young. Men can learn this but women are almost hardwired to forget their past lovers as soon as they meet (or like in past eras, taken by ) a new alpha(s).

    In the past, men where killed off by new conquerors and women were preserved for sexual/reproduction reasons by their captors.

    It makes complete sense that women needed to psychologically severe any past connections to ex-lovers or kin. Those who didn’t adapt were killed and culled from breeding. You can also see: War Brides.

    Off topic but hear me out on this:

    This has many ties into modern dating and the current interracial trends we are seeing. One may also infer that when a woman dates a man of another race, she must subconsciously feel a primal form of Stockholm syndrome. That is one theory I’ve kept in mind ever since I’ve started to date other races of women and seeing the differences of how they act in my presence. When they do submit, it’s a lot more profound than if I dated a women of my own race. Granted this isn’t always the case, but I have noticed it far too often to ignore it.

    It would be interesting to see what you other guys might add on to this.

    Like


    • The discussion here is that of a general marriage between an average man and woman.

      A man who’s willing to buy used, old goods that others have had for free, or very little cost, is necessarily a sucker, and just by the action of getting into an LTR with a woman with a big sexual history is out-alpha-ed by her past lovers, by way of default.

      Of course, you could outshine the older Alphas in her life, but why would you want to?

      Like


    • Very interesting thought, and I immediately thought of Rollo’s Article on War Brides. Haven’t dated asians or black girls much at all so can’t say much. There is a consensus that Asian women (either by culture or biology – most likely both) tend to be more submissive overall.

      Can you give some details on how exactly the submission of women of other races is more profound in your experience?

      Would be worthwhile to note if there are a few black/asian guys out here who have noticed this with white women vs women of their own race.

      Like


      • Women treat people like commodities, children like prize commodities. It’s not that they can’t let go of a concrete man, its that they can’t unlearn an archetypal pattern. Women mature quickly and once, never unlearn and relearn. She calibrates and is done. I call it calibration hardening. You could find my post on it (not a popular one). Women remember who they were with all previous men. You are looking from the womans point of view as a man, which is entirely blue pill wrong.

        It is not Stockholm symptom. There is rape fantasy theory, and I believe that. Generally speaking!!: Women are about covert status (packism); blacks are about overt status (tribalism). Win-win societal relationships and absolute improvement that characterizes civilization is not a concept of subhumans (whatever the sex or race of a subhuman, sexual reproduction tries every way everywhere). Black men and white women are on the same page of value determination. I know this is a repeat from previous comment I left about a week back, I covered this in my more popular post “Why Stupid Is Outsmarting You”.

        If the guy is white and the chick is black, then it is about cred as in white people rule the world. Hispanic society has lighter skinned people at the top, darker at the bottom. The Muslim conquerors preferred white women (blondes especially) to black, but they took what they could get for harems. I wonder if lighter men do better in the Muslim world? even if the religious tenet is that race does not matter. Anyway, white can be a fashion statement that says global success, but I don’t think there would be a special detante of the minds that way. Yes, there are exceptions, but I prefer to play the odds not the fool.

        That’s what I think at the moment.

        Like


      • There is a consensus that Asian women (either by culture or biology – most likely both) tend to be more submissive overall.

        Culture is a result of biology.

        But the right word is not “submissive”, that is feminist propaganda bullshit. They are more peaceful and more feminine – overall. Feminists hate that, so they focus on ONE factor that is more likely in a peaceful and feminine woman, namely that she is more likely to be submissive than an aggressive, masculine woman.

        This is a typical leftist tactic. Private trade, with private producers, investors and owners, and people buying and working where they like? They focus on the investment part, calling the whole thing “capitalism” to enrage workers, who hate the thought of some people making money “without honest work”.

        Nationalism, the idea that your people should look after its interests and preserve its identity, which all peoples have always had to do if they wanted to survive? They call it “racism”, focusing on only one part, namely the awareness of racial differences.

        Resistance fighters opposing the pro-Zionist occupation in Afghanistan? Call it “terrorism” to ignore all the regular fighting, information campaigning and societal organizing by the resistance.

        Like


      • “” There is a consensus that Asian women (either by culture or biology – most likely both) tend to be more submissive overall. “”

        NOT mainland, big city, Chinese or Hong Kong women.
        These souless heathen have money rabies.
        Turn up to the first date with a printout of all your assets your business plan and your balls in a Versace or Gucci bag for her.

        Like


    • Stockholm Syndrome? Nah, I have never sensed that. I have been with every race of chick repeatedly and they all just seem to be hoez

      Like


    • on September 2, 2014 at 2:06 pm Pijama Wearing Ninja

      I actually thought of that too. In a way it’s normal for girls to race mix if their men are wussies who tolerate foreign interlopers. After all, the mere presence of foreign interlopers is a huge tell of the weakness of their own men.

      Like


      • on September 3, 2014 at 5:47 am haunted trilobite

        the sting of regret kicks in when cindi brandi and jenni are parading their creme cracker faced toddlers. little d’andre is slightly oilier but absolutelying gorgeous, they assure her. it’s just a bit puzzling how his blue eyes and blonde hair seem to darken with every ddiay

        Like


  16. Can’t speak for others, but I never could have imagined settling down and getting married prior to racking up an N-count of ~100 or so, and I think hitting 200-300 actually wound up improving my marriage substantially, because I don’t feel the impulse to fool around much anymore. Perhaps other now-married ex-players can comment? Because if my experience is representative, then not only is the formula in the OP wrong, it’s WILDLY wrong.

    Like


  17. There is at least some point of diminishing returns for men. But it must be on the extreme side. For example, my dad was a big player before he married but stayed with his wife for many years…though he did diddle a bit on the side not much though. On the extreme side…I know a former UCLA QB who probably slept with thousands of nubile chicks who did have major problems getting satisfaction from his wife.

    Like


  18. The N-values should be reversed. If n = the number of sexual partners, and we are looking for an equation for marital happiness, the 1/5*(1/n(woman)) X 1/n(man) is what you’re looking for. I.e. For every 1 male partner that a woman has, it equates to 5 female partners a males has.

    Or n(woman) = 5*n(man)

    And thus marital satisfaction per male partner felines 5 times faster than males

    I could be confused too. And “n” wasn’t defined I don’t think

    Like


    • But there should be a lot of variables that go into the equation, if there’s an equation like that published. I think the general idea nails it though. Then the marriage will be happier if the woman has less partners

      Like


    • And that is a very low chance of sexual satisfaction in marriage…like 2 partners each is a 5% chance? That seems a little low

      Like


  19. the real question is how much lotsa cockas can a woman have before she is unwilling to settle for a beta. as the frequency of big dicks approaches infinity her ability to be happy with her average beta husband becomes 0. in physics this would model like Hookes law. heh. where you take the average penor size times the number of guys shes been with. (sum of penis sizes/numper of peni) times number of guys. as this constant grows above the average size of peni then her ability to become happy approaches 0. so basically if a ho slept with 20 men but they were all 3″ that would give her hookes constant of about 60. whereas a woman sleeps with 200 guys and the average size is 8, then her constant is 1600. which means that the chick whos slept with 20 guys is about 26 times more likely to be happy with an average beta then the one who has slept with 200. heh.

    Like


    • on September 3, 2014 at 5:56 am haunted trilobite

      perhaps loads taken should be factored into the equation. when you’re buying a hotpoint or zanussi second hand, the salesman will assure you it has only taken 150 loads, and is good for another 250. limescale starts to get encrusted to the inner tubings with heavy useage. how many loadas do you estimate cum with 200+ lotsa cockas ?

      Like


  20. Start with an obvious extreme: can Bree Olson be satisfied in marriage?

    Similarly, all high notch count babes have to throw in their towels.

    No K selection mating is possible.

    You see why slut logic drives XX voting towards the ‘daddy state.’

    Too late, many, many, babes discover that they’ve run out their string — and that they’ve been on a lesbian life-script — unwitting, by default.

    Babies are cruel. They demand to come early in adulthood… true priority.

    While motherhood thrives in youth, fatherhood is best dispensed from experience.

    There is no practical upper limit to a man’s sexual experiences before fatherhood, benefits wise.

    His marriage satisfaction will largely turn on how dominant his relationship is with his spouse.

    &&&

    Semen carries male hormones that bind a woman to her mate. They also provide a ‘buzz’ that last days. (especially strong during the next 48 hours)

    This natural rush is one of the reasons why she ought to swallow.

    These hormones are the real reason why a babe with too many lovers is emotionally burnt out. It starts at her neuroreceptors.

    In a manner similar to a junkie, she’s become inured to normal levels of stimulus. Since this occurs well below cognition, no woman can put her finger on it.

    A woman’s neuroreceptors compound away with a chronic love affair/ marriage. As long as his frame is maintained, her infatuation crosses over into a perpetual chemical alignment.

    Something very much like this also happens with mouth chemistry. Polite kisses morph into a sugar like rush as sexual bonding intensifies. It’s one of the reasons why whores don’t like to offer French kisses.

    This bonding is below the level of thought — hence the ancient phrasing: madly in love.

    The rush — for the female — can be so intense that newly bonding lovers can’t fall asleep.

    For the male, everything is inverted. A man with a new lover sleeps like a rock.

    This tick is so universal, so pronounced, that in some cultures any male that sleeps on too long into the morrow is deemed married — right then and there. (cf Polynesia) The female love interest is, of course, up with the birds, bouncing around like it’s Christmas and Santa put something in her bed.

    Like


  21. What about partners after marriage? Do they decrease the satisfaction?
    My guess is they increase it, if you don’t get caught.

    Like


  22. You know, attractive women with low n aren’t going to find a man with an n much higher than hers attractive. She’s not promiscuous by choice. Promiscuity is not a trait she’s going to tolerate in husband material.

    Like


  23. I’m not sure you can quantify sexual marital satisfaction mathematically….there’s a lot of variables…

    If a girl marries her perceived “alpha” then her sexual marital satisfaction will be relatively enhanced (it’s just another variable in the equation). BUT I do think that a girls notch count has more effect on her overall marital satisfaction and long term sexual relationships than a man’s notch count.

    But hear me out on this: isn’t ‘a man’s urge to spread his seed to many high value females’ the same as ‘a girls urge to get the attention of many useful (high value, good provisioning etc) men’ I.e. sluts.

    In our primal states this kinda makes sense. Alpha fux beta bux except the girl is using sex as a tool to get the attentions to keep coming back from the beta males. This is why if a girl denies you sex in ovulation phase you better run and run fast because she will cheat on you.

    Slut herself out to keep the providers providing for her and offspring, and be on the look out for alpha male when she’s ovulating.

    If you go by this, I think that her sexual marital satisfaction will depend on if she is with her perceived ‘alpha’.

    But then again if she has had sex with multiple perceived alphas in the past then her current perceived alpha will be perceived as relatively less of an alpha thus yielding less sexual marital satisfaction.

    Kind of like if you go on a roller coaster the first time, the second and third times aren’t as fun.

    But for a guy….there isn’t just one female like there is one alpha male. It’s more of is his partner still fertile–this will keep him happy because he’s fucking a fertile girl who will get pregnant.

    I think that once a girl has enough alpha fucks her next consecutive alpha fuck will be perceived as less and less alpha until it equates to beta excitement and then she will be fine with settling with a beta because her relative perception of alpha can’t go any higher.

    Now I’m just rambling–but kinda makes sense I guess

    Like


  24. Completely agree about Gals with 4 = Guys with 20.

    I maintain the best way to spot the low mileage girls is to ask about their dad. For some reason girls brag about sex to their moms but keep it from their dads. Must have something to do with slut shaming that would inevitably come from a moderately involved dad.

    And further if you ask, “hey ever follow some advice your dad gave you?”. Its a lock if she says yes that the girl cares about her dads opinions. Notice I say advice not “orders”, “indoctrination” etc… this will weed out all the lawyer-gash riff raff that really want to show up their dad… And hey they will show him how much of a slut his little girl is.

    It makes me think that the heavy influence of Single Mother households influence Guys to grow up to be White Knights and Girls to Grow up to be Jezebels.

    And to XX Genetic posters… yes I know NAWALT

    Like


    • This is a common tip in pua/game forums: listen to how a girl talks about her father. If she complains to you about her dad, that generally means trouble ahead for you. This is true whether the complaints are unjustified (she is damaged by default) or justified (her parents have damaged her).

      Like


    • A strong, present, Alpha father-figure tends to be rather good anti-slut insurance.

      Like


  25. Off topic: Went to a coffee shop with co-workers this evening, and had a conversation with the cute engineer girl across the table, plus the girl sitting next to her. Hard to hear, so had to lean over the table. Sitting next to me was an Italian guy, total ‘sperg so they probably kicked him out of Italy. Before I sat down there it seemed he wasn’t involved in any conversation. Now he started interrupting me, asking me about technical stuff that I had talked about last week. I had to answer him politely, and then he just kept asking, ignoring all cues that I wasn’t interested. Meanwhile the engineer girl turned to the side girl who asked her about something, and then I could no longer hear them.

    One reason out of many I say that confidence is not all you need. The Italian guy showed no sign of lacking confidence, but he lacks social awareness. I certainly have confidence, but I lacked good logistics, not sitting close enough to the engineer girl. I think when someone says all you need is confidence, he is picturing someone who already has other traits going for him. Just like when women say “I just want a guy who is nice” or whatever, they picture a guy who they are already attracted to.

    Like


  26. on September 1, 2014 at 3:05 pm Holden Caulfield

    “Promiscuity is not a trait she’s going to tolerate in husband material.”

    This reeks of either trolling or being thickheaded, but on the off chance its neither consider this:

    Women worry about whether their man of choice will divert resources away from them towards other (younger, more attractive) women during the long term, but the actual number of past partners of the man they choose is not a problem. If anything, it will re-enforce his alpha characteristics in her mind.

    Like


  27. How many dates it took on average for men to get a woman to sleep with them should be factored in, and how many blowjobs in a bar bathroom she has given while drunk as well.

    and if she was in gang bangs and how often,

    has she ever had sex with another woman

    If she is white, how many non-whites did she have sex with

    All those things matter, even how long her relationships tend to last on average

    how many tattoos she has, et cetera…

    Like


    • Tattoos on women are a disease, and graters are the cure.

      Like


    • I look for it on the 1st date. If there’s a 2nd date it’s only because I am trying to notch a belt. If she gives BJs drunk, scratch her. If she did GBs, wear a condom lol. Sex with blacks, spit on her and walk out.

      Tattoos, yuck, always a problem.

      Like


    • “has she ever had sex with another woman”

      This is bad, why??? 🙂

      Like


      • I did not say it was automatically a negative, just said it should be factored in.

        Like


      • Well, yeah, but given that every other bullet point *was* a negative, I kinda wondered…

        Like


      • on September 2, 2014 at 2:11 pm Pijama Wearing Ninja

        @A Random Guy, don’t be a feminist and assume you can have it all in this life. The reality is that the vast majority of girls who had experiences with other women are sluts. At least the girls I know who did, maybe they’re some special cases. It just so happens that serious long term relationships are most likely worse with bisexual women. Not that bisexuality in women is bad if you want to have some fun. 🙂

        Like


      • on September 3, 2014 at 6:05 am haunted trilobite

        she licked the sherrif’s badge of a woman who’s probably had 100s of exotic creams pumped into her. factor in the likelihood that she’s crammed hundreds of sausages up her own snatch, met her rug munching lover in a lgbt bar, so has probably had been railed by bisexual men who’ve had their cocks up other man’s shit pipes.. and that she’s a sex-crazed porn addict

        Like


      • on September 3, 2014 at 6:11 am haunted trilobite

        just imagine all the hpv and herpes that crawl into your mouth while you lovingly kiss her, not to mention the hiv and clap being slathered all over your glans when you rock her world with the kings of Leon hit single playing in the backgrounds

        Like


      • Simple and direct correlation to level of jadedness. Women tend to experiment down that path when they are jaded from too many interactions with men. Exceptions? yes there may be some, but that is like betting on blizzards in May south of the Mason-Dixon line.

        Like


  28. The first math is beautiful in its simplicity and correctness, since it assumes absolutely nothing. It passes by Ockhams Razor.

    Your improvement by supplying extra information, results in just one more variable, resulting in something like this formula for satisfaction:

    a/(b*c) where
    c: number of partners the man had
    b: number of partners the woman had
    a: ratio between male and female psychology stuff, i.e. a number one just
    adjusts to get results that better match statistics, reality.

    IAAM
    I am a mathematician.

    Like


  29. on September 1, 2014 at 4:08 pm Cobra the space Pirate

    To me it should be two equations: Women happiness={Nm/(Nw+1)^2}A
    Men happiness: {H^3/(Nw*Nm+1)} where A= Alphaness H=Hotness( women)
    Nm= men’s past sexual partners, Nw=women’s (real) past sexual partners

    Like


    • I like this addition. But, “girls (real) sexual partners”…

      What does that mean.

      Because alphas technically are the pump and dumps.

      A ‘crazy and wild’ one night stand with a high status charismatic male I would still consider “real”. If anything it would affect the girl more

      [CH: correct. the way to bet in these prematurely attenuated flings is that it was the alpha male who cut it short, not the woman involved. men by nature feel less emotionally invested in one (or five) nights of sex than do women.]

      Like


      • on September 2, 2014 at 10:44 am Cobra the space Pirate

        disregard “real”,it’s only in case you ask her about her past sexual life. Don’t expect a sincere answer.multiply it by 4.

        Like


    • none of this is relevant in the least. I had an ex model who was on the side of buildings in NYC at one point and I had as many new partners while we were dating off and on as she admitted to in her entire life (about 10)! She didn’t LIKE it but who cares what she likes? She kept coming back, again and again and again. Why do you suppose that was?

      She was hot and I twisted her crank, emotionally and physically. That’s all that matters. You wanna wrap chicks around your finger, not diddle around trying to equationalize women LOL. And I’m a freakin engineer too!

      CH needs to start advertising TRT around here, I swear…

      Like


  30. 1/(5*N) in general case where N. Remember, these are odds. It just so happens, M and W were equal to 20 in the example, thus (1/5*20*20).

    Like


  31. Meant to say N equal to number of women slept with times number of men slept with for both partners combined, it really doesn’t make a difference because of associative property. I was thinking that a power law might describe more accurately the “decay” of a woman as a function of number of men she has slept with.

    Like


    • Neurosis over this “formula” isn’t going to help you score…I mean wtf cares??

      Turn the playstation off and join an MMA gym, FFS

      Like


  32. That formula should not be a product, but instead a quotient. Put female experience in the denominator.

    Like


  33. on September 1, 2014 at 5:32 pm Not-the-average-stem

    Let’s ignore marriage for a moment and keep the focus on LTR’s. During her 20’s let’s assume a decay of ~10% per year. That results in a half-live of ~ 7,2 years until the 8 turnes into a 4 ( the 10% might be a bit high, maybe it is better to assume accelerating decay?)

    As soon as her looks decrease a certain point, her sexual value will drop to ~30% percent of what it used to be unless she turns out more willing than before ( bad sign).

    We want to stay below the crazy line for now, therefore we assume( [10-Hotness]*e^(-t*gamma)/(15*N_w *[crazyness(1-100)] )

    gamma: decay rate for her beauty
    t: perceived possible dating time
    15*N_w : Her #, adjust as you see fit.
    crazyness: her POTENTIAL to perform crazy actions

    if crazy levels go above ~70, adjust by sqrt(Hotness)*e^(-t*gamma) / (15*N_w*crazyness^3)

    Your value will be correlated to [°Alpha ( as in Game ; dominance; physique]*sqrt(Social_competance[1-10]) *[Job_security/Job_dependacy] / [(1-Fetish_compabiltiy) *[100-Lost°ofFreedom]*Beta_Misshaps]]

    Most of the stuff should be self explaining, as a LTR will lock you down in some ways, job_security and job dependence are related as the amount of recources you require may partially be provided by the ltr.

    Beta misshaps might be weighted more, as they will reduce your value stronger than acts of alphaness will restore it.

    Fetish_compability for the perverts among us, rate in %.

    Maybe her value should incorporate her skill in the bedroom in other ways, but I am open to suggestions

    Like


  34. Homo Sapiens is not a monogamous species. This means marriage, by its very nature, is something of a misbegotten social institution. For people with a demonstrated preference for large numbers of sex partners the arrangement is especially problematic, but I’m not sure why this obvious fact merits an entire blog post.

    Cheerleaders for traditional marriage would enthusiastically make a legally binding promise to have sex with only one person. People who are popular with the opposite sex would naturally not tend to share in this enthusiasm.

    Like


  35. Hey Scray, in response to your response to my question about mixed sets. Most likely I’ll be out solo in either a club or a bar.

    Question was how do you run mixed sets?

    Like


    • Well, it depends on what you have at your disposal. So, if you can, assemble a crew of high-value people to roll with — it makes the whole process way easier. The crew should be mixed company. A girl adds huge value to your group. Better still if you can just roll with a ratio that favors women in a group. Huge mileage out of hanging out with two girls.

      Then, make sure you’re the connector of the group — as in, the way people in it know each other is through you. That ensures that they will all vie for your attention in one way or another = skyhigh value.

      Annnyway, if you’re rolling solo or with like one person, you gotta do shit the harder way.

      First thing’s first, IMMEDIATELY when you roll into the venue, open EVERYONE for about 30 seconds and say ‘hi.’ Just hey, what’s up, how’s your night. Pretend you are a celebrity passing through.

      Once you do that, THEN approach the mixed set indirectly — classic MM shit….address them while facing away from them — profile to the group. Open the entire group with whatever you say — it can be whatever. You can use the same exact opener ‘hey what’s up?’

      After that, immediately start establishing your value. My fav is ‘I haven’t seen you guys around here before.’ This is a huge DHV — you’re indirectly saying ‘yeah this is my turf, I roll around here, I keep tabs, etc.’ It sounds stupid but it’s very, very effective.

      For now, start offering value about the venue — ‘yeah, have you tried the X drink or the X food dish or seen the selection on the juke box…?’ whatever stupid bullshit. DHV, DHV, DHV. The girls in the group will immediately be intrigued. This is your bait. Plus, you are offering value to the guys. When you’re new to the venue, just make this shit up. Over time, you’ll actually learn this shit.

      Now, here’s where you’re hoping the earlier shit helped you out — if you see someone you saw earlier passing by, be sure to just say ‘oh what’s up?’ or something. Even better if they say hi to you again. Best, of course, is if your own high value crew comes and finds you, but alas…lol.

      So after you throw all of that shit out there, just wait for them to start asking about you. If they don’t, drop it and move on. If they do, then you can start being more ‘happy-go-lucky sexual’

      Like


  36. on September 1, 2014 at 6:26 pm Max from Australia

    Hugely Honoured again CH – thanks very much – And I agree I was “close but no digeredoo”

    Cheers

    p.s. can anyone recommend a safe white picket fence town in a warm part of the USA that I can move to with my family please can you let me know? This place is increasingly getting overrun by “vibrant” characters similar to Rotterham. I’m thinking Austin Texas?

    Cheers

    Like


    • Texas is great – if you like having your life scrutinized if you don’t happen to go to the correct church.

      The West is fantastic, but Texas, meh, lived there, had my fill. Wyoming on the other hand, is fantastic, especially small hamlets like Buffalo.

      Like


    • on September 2, 2014 at 6:47 pm Mean Mr. Mustard

      Max, are you from Sydney, Melbourne or elsewhere in Oz?
      As you would well know, parts of Sydney have become overrun by the feral Muslim Southern Lebanese (considered by many in the Middle East as the uneducated dirt).
      In Melbourne they are a fraction more civilized but have predilections towards having lots of kids, living off the government dollar, illegal activities and marrying their cousins (I kid you not folks).
      At the same time, Australia (Melbourne and Sydney mostly) is being steadily swamped by cashed up Chinese and Indians/Pakis.
      One reason is that the Federal Government needs them to prop up our housing ponzi scheme.

      Like


    • on September 4, 2014 at 8:22 am Joachim Peiper

      Huntsville Alabama

      Like


    • Austin from what I have heard is about as far Left and SWPL as you will find in Texas. Can’t give better town there as I am stuck in the northern barrio area of Chicago – there are stores where they don’t speak English and most workers at any restaurant have Spanish as their primary language.

      Like


  37. The original idea was wrong-headed. While a woman’s sexual satisfaction depends almost entirely on her lover, on what he can bring out in her; a man’s is up to him – including the choice of partner.

    Sexual ecstasy, involving loss of self, is basically a feminine matter. Male sexual gratification is more a matter of ego – the pleasure of achieving a goal he has set for himself. A man does not intend to melt into ecstasy, his satisfaction is in staying in control.

    So the thing to measure is not sexual satisfaction but the enduring quality of the relationship – apart from issues of monogamy. If D [dicks] = the the number of lovers the woman has had, and P [pussies] = the number of lovers for the man, the relation is something like this:

    Endurance of relationship = (1/D)*(1-1/P)

    Or a little less severely

    E = (3/(2+D))*(1-1/P)

    Thus the only perfectly enduring relationship is between a woman who has had one partner (D=1) and a man who has had and infinite number (P= inf.)

    Like


  38. Need Shit Test help:

    Knowing only this text, how would you respond?

    “Your approach is intimidating. Does it normally work?”

    Like


  39. OT As some you may be aware there is another nude leak scandal out there,
    alleged 100 “celebrities” naked pictures hacked from i-cloud
    First question of course is how stupid you need to be to upload your naked pictures on i-cloud
    Second it seems that these brain dead celebrity whores all have portfolios somewhere in clouds, no exception,you may have 2 Oscars but without a portfolio you are nothing at all
    I saw a few pixalated pictures of the naked national treasure Jennifer Lawrence showing her whorish nature before they were removed
    FBI works third shift to find the war criminal that hacked the pictures.
    That of course is national priority number 1,we cannot possibly allow that the pictures of status self obsessed celebrity whores to reach the masses who cherish them
    If in meantime the third world starts in Ukraine that is nothing in comparison with lost honor of these exemplary samples of taste, grace and morality.

    Like


  40. Just watched the film “Nobody Walks”—great film as viewed from a Red Pill perspective. It revolves around a young manic pixie dream girl indie film student who comes to live with a family for a summer to work on her film.

    The date is a greater beta played by John Krasinski, mom is a psychoanalyst who is clearly in an unhappy or bored marriage. Sixteen year old daughter is being gamed BADLY by her douchebag Italian teacher.

    The girl is chasing the stud assistant and getting banged by the beta dad… It’s an exercise in hypergamy and how a lack of game is painful to watch.

    Like


  41. on September 1, 2014 at 9:37 pm The anus of a white woman is holier than the Wailing Wall

    Zionist Rabbis might disagree with the truth, but a white woman’s anus is holier than the Wailing Wall. The Bible said that Mary’s anus and anal gases purified Jerusalem from the hatred created between Palestinians and Hebrews.

    Like


  42. mn = male notch count < or = 20
    mN = male notches in excess of 20

    fn = female notch count

    [fn = reported fn * 1.7 + (bjn[blow job number])(.5)]

    female satisfaction probability (fs) = 3/4^fn

    male satisfaction probability (ms) = (1^mn + 15/16^mN)/2

    sh = shit happens, varies according to family and cultural circumstance ~5/7

    mutual satisfaction probability = msfssh

    thus, for mn =20 fn 4 [actual], probability of mutual satisfaction = ~.27

    Like


  43. Thx for the posts CH.

    off topic but I worked some good ol’ dread today with the ltr. She’s been off hormonal BC for a while and has been getting testy (maybe my own imagination). Anyway all is fantastic again.

    that’s an undefined win ratio so far for dread tactics. The power of dread seems limitless and can be used over and over again.

    Cheers.

    Like


    • In a LTR dread can be over used… think of it as salt. Don’t use it too much, a light touch. and no fake stuff. Real dread only. You can use indifference to her moods once she has gotten a blast of dread. Will be just as effective.

      When you start getting lot’s of loyalty tests instead of shit tests or she becomes forlorn/despondent, you are using too much dread…

      Like


    • It’s too bad that simply being a desireable male and mate isn’t enough to keep a woman interested in your case.

      Sounds like you’re not one of those, what do you people call them? “Naturals.”

      Like


  44. A male has a value of 1, because more partners may mean less chance of satisfaction but it also means more likely to be alpha and therefore the women’s attraction will be stronger and she will do more to please him etc. So it cancels each other out and a male brings a value of 1 to the equation.

    Like


  45. So two virgins are 100% certain to have a mutually satisfying marriage? Cool story brah

    Agree with Titanic

    Like


  46. Am I just really lucky then? I am a woman with a lot of prior sexual partners but the guy I have settled down with is genuinrly the best I have ever had. And I mean, I can give specific examples as to why. For instance he is the only man who has ever been able to hold ne up standing while we’ve had sex (and I am 150 pounds and fairly tall). He is extremely sexually dominant, the only man to ever pullmy hair during sex. I literally crave him at times.

    Well this post has given me something to think about. I knew I was lucky but I never knew just how lucky I am. I mean I guess it makes sense, what are the odds thay out of nearly 30 I would settle down with my best? Before this I just assumed everyone did that because people get better in bed with age so a 27-year-old is going to be better in bed then your average 19year old minute man. I mean, no comparison. But maybe the logic isn’t as cut-and-dry as I thought. You’ve certainly given me something to think about.

    Like


    • Yes, toots… you’re just lucky.

      I am a woman with a lot of prior sexual partners

      Him, meh… not so much.

      Like


      • I mean I can see why you would think so if you’re the type of man who obsesses jealously over such things. But my man is very secure in himself and doesn’t care about that. I mean, he’s never asked me how many guys I have been with because he doesn’t care so if your only criteria for “lucky” is “has slept with few or no men” then of course you would think so but his is stuff that actually matters, like treats him well, enjoys sex, takes care of herself, has a good sense of humor, doesn’t freak out over nothing, etc. So he feels lucky. I guess we all get what we value most in the end because we prioritize it.

        Like


      • …so if you’re the type of man who obsesses jealously over such things…

        If disdaining past sluttery and fearing STDs… especially the kind that never truly quit, of which we are finding more and more these days, go figure… is “obsessive jealousy”… (pardon the Ginnungagap-like yawn here over the Cathedral shaming gambit)… then I’m a green-eyed Hulk.

        And speaking of wide gaps…

        Like


      • Well you’re welcome to your paranoia. And to be fair, if you are American it’s not unjustified since a lot of Americans do have herpes and other STD’s (I’m not American by the way). I don’t have a “wide gap” as I’ve never had children. You don’t seem to be a very nice or pleasant person but I guess I wouldn’t be either if I was living in a prison of my own making. Demanding a virgin for a partner leaves you with few options. It sure must suck to be you.

        Like


      • Lol.Yup I see storm clouds ahead for Charles Atlas.

        Like


      • on September 3, 2014 at 7:10 am haunted trilobite

        (1) ‘it must suck to be you as looking for a virgin leaves few options’ (2) ‘I guess we all get what we value and prioritize in the end’
        statement 1 is a fine example of lashing out spitefully when the ego has been slightly jarred.
        statement 2 is a perfectly contradictory self-preen, exhibiting the romantic contentment of a cat who got all the cream he ego

        Like


      • I don’t have a “wide gap” as I’ve never had children.

        I was talking about the one up north, not south.

        LZOZLZLZOZLZOZLZOZLZOZLZOLZOZLOZLOZLOZLOZL

        Like


      • Well you’re welcome to your paranoia. And to be fair, if you are American it’s not unjustified since a lot of Americans do have herpes and other STD’s (I’m not American by the way). I don’t have a “wide gap” as I’ve never had children. You don’t seem to be a very nice or pleasant person but I guess I wouldn’t be either if I was living in a prison of my own making. Demanding a virgin for a partner leaves you with few options. It sure must suck to be you.

        Alert Guinness…. this has GOT to be a world record for most turbo-hamstered Cathedral shaming lingo packed into a single paragraph.

        The chateau stands in awe.

        Like


      • Nothing contradictory about it, it’s just a fact. We all get what we prioritize most in the end. One person’s trash is another person’s treasure. For example, you guys’ definition of the perfect woman (housewife you have to support, can’t have sex with them until marriage, pressured to rush into marriage, barefoot with tons of babies on her hip), is my boyfriend’s notion of hell. So, I am no catch in your eyes. And he is not fishing in your pool either. I don’t see the problem. Everyone wins.

        Like


    • It seems to me that this is the case for most women. They just want to be fucked good. Whether she’s had 2 partners or 200, if you give it to her right she’ll be mostly satisfied.
      All this talk about low N-count girls and “love” seems so silly to me. Are we living in the same world? She still wants to be dominated in bed and the “love” she feels is so fleeting as to be irrelevant.
      Maybe I’m just getting old. The only thing I expect from women these days is to maybe stick around for a coffee after we fuck. Keeps me out of this bitter “western woman are evil” mind space. They’re just human after all.

      Like


    • He wont ask you about your N count because he doesn’t want to face the possibility of knowing you had 20 different cocks inside you. He seems red pill aware, and most guys in this community know better than to ask for the n count. Don’t frame it like he doesn’t give a shit because he does. Ignorance is bliss.

      And the fact you’ve never had your hair pulled once before indicates the lack of alpha male lovin in your previous sex life.

      So I guess ‘you’ are lucky. Lucky enough not to have been involved with too many apex males.

      Like


    • on September 2, 2014 at 2:24 pm Pijama Wearing Ninja

      “He is extremely sexually dominant, the only man to ever pullmy hair during sex.”
      Seriously? You had to have sex with over 20 guys for this to happen? Are you Swedish or something?

      Like


      • He was my 27th and yes, he was the first sexually dominant man I have ever been with. Which is kind of ironic because he is among the less extroverted of the guys I have dated or had sex with.

        Like


      • 27 admitted to, eh? Multiplied by a factor of blow/hand/whatever jobs that “don’t really count”, I’ll reckon… lzozlzozlzolzolzol.

        Don’t know what the nationality might be… but if she had as many pricks sticking out of her as she’s had in her, she’d be a porcupine.

        Like


      • … but if she had as many pricks sticking out of her as she’s had in her, she’d be a porcupine…

        A specimen of Porcupenis Americanus?

        Like


      • If you insist on counting hand jobs or whatever then it is 29. Yes, I tend not to count instances where the man’s penises was not erect/functional enough to have intercourse as intercourse. I don’t see the contradiction when we are counting the number of people you have had intercourse with.

        Like


      • … I tend not to count instances where the man’s penises was not erect/functional enough to have intercourse ….

        How many penises have you seen or touched that could not get fully erect?

        but more importantly,

        why could they not get a full erection???

        Like


      • One and I am not sure although I am guessing weed had something to do with it. Why are you asking me why a young man experienced ED? And why are you so concerned with how a young man’s penis is functioning anyway? Apart from the obvious, of course.

        Like


      • …not concerned with anyone’s penis, I am simply wondering what is wrong with you that men can not get it up.

        Like


    • ‘the only man to ever pullmy hair during sex’
      ‘and I am 150 pounds and fairly tall

      Yes, what you needed was a man of large game.

      Like


  47. How many men maximum would you be OK with that your girl have had sex with?

    Like


  48. Whores aren’t loyal

    Like


  49. Re. Swedish artist jailed for racissss art: best thing to happen to someone who wants artistic cred. It’s practically guaranteed immortality, so long as his work has artistic merit.

    Six months is Swedish prison can’t be that bad, either.

    Like


    • it isn’t. did you post that link to anders brevik in prison? swedish inmates live better than 99% of the world’s freemen. yoga, flat screen tvs, personal trainers, library, and… wait for it… no blacks or ms-13s to fuck your shit up. i don’t recall if the article mentioned it, but i bet conjugal visits with admiring swedish girls are not just allowed, but encouraged.

      Like


      • on September 2, 2014 at 2:26 pm Pijama Wearing Ninja

        It does suck if you wind up in a maximum security prison though. Those aren’t as cozy. Of course, a third of the stuff Americans know about Sweden is made up by the left and another third is made up by the right(omg, look at those eeeeevil leftards there).

        Like


    • Yep, that was me who posted the article about Scandinavian prisons, which included a photo of a pretty physical fitness coach jogging with an image.

      Like


  50. Has anyone peeped any of these nude pics of JLaw,Rihanna etc? Can they still be seen ? Id like to see some celeb pussy for once–I always miss thi s stuff.Hilarious reading comments of rage by the fembitches,”They’ve been OBJECTIFIED!”

    Like


  51. on September 2, 2014 at 11:36 am gunslingergregi

    All these celeb sex pics have got to make you wonder just how much banging up the Hollywood ladder makes an actress’s career. 15 minutes ago ””””’

    you had to wonder lol
    come on
    they WANT to bang their way up the ladder

    Like


    • on September 2, 2014 at 1:05 pm gunslingergregi

      should make the guys who worship celeb chicks happy
      can prob just pay to fuck em
      me I get the bitches I lust after

      Like


  52. Heres a timely article of NOW’s beginnings -> Marxist Feminism’s Ruined Lives -> http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/mallorymillett/marxist-feminisms-ruined-lives/#.VAXC-6IiT3w.twitter

    Like


  53. Even researchers don’t understand what they’re finding in their studies:
    “The study found that tall men — guys over 6-foot-2 — marry at higher rates and are more likely to date and wed older, well-educated women. Short men, on the other hand, get married at the lowest rates, and they marry women who are less educated and younger than they are. They also marry women who are closer to their height — or taller.

    The study also examined what happens in the course of these relationships and found –somewhat paradoxically — that tall men, though they are viewed as more masculine, are more likely to be in egalitarian relationships. They do more housework than shorter men and their income is more likely to be similar to their spouse’s. Shorter men have relationships that more closely mirror traditional power dynamics: the man as breadwinner, the woman spending more time on housework.

    “Our findings portray a pattern in which short men compensate for their status disadvantage by enacting other types of stereotypical masculinity,” Weitzman said.

    If tall men have advantages when it comes to desirability, why do they do more housework than shorter men? Weitzman suspects that there could be two explanations.

    “It may just be that housework is less threatening to tall men, that is, if they believe their tallness confers them a certain degree of masculinity,” Weitzman said. On the other hand, short men compensate for the masculinity “perception gap” by displaying other behaviors—such as making more money outside the home and contributing less to housework.”
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2014/08/27/tall-men-have-their-pick-of-the-dating-pool/

    They discover something strange — on average short men are less successful, but the ones who are successful score babes that are ‘less educated and younger’ and they also do way less housework.

    Then, they proceed to bury it in modern-femi bullshit “taller men are less threatened by housework,” “shorter men compensate.”

    Or…the successful shorter men have had to acquire game out of necessity. This is what allows them to have relationships that mirror “traditional power dynamics.” Their taller brethren coasted because they had plentiful “initial interest” from women. However, they still ended up with an “equally educated” and “equally aged” women.

    Shorter men end up with a woman at around their height, who is younger, and who is less educated. Less educated could mean stupid, or less educated could mean “don’t need the books when you’ve got these looks.” Getting a girl who is at your height or even taller is not easy as a short male. Further, these guys are not only marrying these chicks….but they’re also maintaining serious hand over them — less chores, traditional power dynamics.

    Few other explanations besides “game.”
    This study indirectly shows the power.

    Like


    • on September 5, 2014 at 5:34 am haunted trilobite

      very interesting. short men tend to be more energetic and cheeky. the energy is a result of not having to be lugging around a heavier skeleton with more mechanically disadvantagedmuscles. t his cheekiness might be as a result of constantly challenging tall pauls in the playground – realising you can get another human to submit to your words and testing those boundaries

      Like


  54. OT: Ben Mathis-Lilley, a man who has an absolutely pussy for a father, writes for Slate. In an article about ISIS’ most recent beheading (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/09/02/isis_steven_sotloff_hostage_killed_group_reports.html), ole Ben begins as follows: “A group that monitors jihadists and white supremacists says ISIS has released a video that purports to show the execution of American hostage Steven Sotloff.”

    I love how ole Ben and his ilk can’t help but themselves but conflate every evil in the world with white people. Truly, why does “white supremacists” need to be mentioned in said sentence/article?

    Like


  55. on September 2, 2014 at 12:56 pm gunslingergregi

    my bitch comin up for her yearly ass whoopin
    guess time to cut my nails

    Like


  56. on September 3, 2014 at 11:22 am Ross (troll alert)

    What if a girl had a lot of past lovers, but she was legitimately in love with each one. At some point she thought she would marry each guy she’s with at the time. But none of those relationships worked out in the end for different reasons….

    [CH: a woman who has gone through a lot of past lovers is likely to have been responsible for at least half of her relationship failures, and probably a lot more, even if her failure amounts to having chosen the “wrong man”. bad choices are pretty obvious from the get-go, and still more obvious when the woman keeps returning to her bad choices.]

    1. Would she be less happy if she fell in love again and got married because of all the dick she’s had?

    [that’s what the data says.]

    2. Does she still qualify as a slut?

    [does a “reborn” virgin still qualify as a virgin?]

    Anyone care to cast some light on this please ?

    [i doubt it’s light you want cast. call me cynical.]

    Like


    • Appreciate the reply, thank you.

      What I mean is, would she still classify as a true whore at heart? I mean it’s not like she jumped the first cock that comes along. Boyfriends only, and there was a fuck buddy at some point when she was between relationships. Very attractive, smart, loves attention, loves sex, lots of guy friends, but she doesn’t easily give up the pussy. Very hard to game and no one night stands that I know of. Thoughts?

      Like


  57. […] Commenter Max from Australia ponders an elegant mathematical formula of marital satisfaction. If a Man and a woman both have 20 sex partners: the odds are::: 1/20 X 1/20 = 1/400 That they will both be sexually satisfied by the one they marry.  […]

    Like


  58. on September 5, 2014 at 1:30 am Alex Jones SuperFan

    Daily reminder that loose sexuality and the pornographic publicization of such degeneracy is still basically priming the young men of the West to lead lives of perpetual unsatisfaction – PUA sites complicit. You killed God and all you got for it was a culture of drunk & numb fuck-and-chucks – Inshallah the Lord of the Worlds will rain stones upon the United States just like he did with all degenerate past civilizations and the Taliban will reign victorious over an Aryanized Muslim America.

    Like