A Man’s Perceived Physical Attractiveness Is Fluid

Men and women are psychologically, temperamentally, physically, and, as ♥SCIENCE♥ is now showing, perceptually different. How men and women perceive the opposite sex’s physical attractiveness varies greatly. What follows is a gem of a study that essentially vindicates the foundational elements of game and lends support to an understanding of the world that accounts for innate psychosexual differences between the sexes.

The abstract:

From an evolutionary perspective, beauty is regarded as an assessment of fitness value. The fitness value of a social partner can be influenced by both physical and nonphysical traits. It follows that the perceived beauty of a social partner can be influenced by nonphysical traits such as liking, respect, familiarity, and contribution to shared goals in addition to physical traits such as youth, waist-to-hip ratio, and bilateral symmetry. We present three studies involving the evaluation of known social partners showing that judgments of physical attractiveness are strongly influenced by nonphysical factors. Females are more strongly influenced by nonphysical factors than males and there are large individual differences within each sex. In general, research on physical attractiveness based on the evaluation of purely physical traits of strangers might miss some of the most important factors influencing the perception of physical attractiveness among known associates.

Reread for comprehension.

“Females are more strongly influenced by nonphysical factors than males…”

That’s the sex difference reality that pumps lifeblood through the heart of game. This is game set match for the losing “Only looks matter” psychosexuality reality denialist dorks, aka bedroom hermits.

We’ll unpack some of this badboy because it’s just that good.

A few studies have examined the effect of nonphysical factors on the judgment of physical attractiveness. Early studies that were not inspired by evolution include Gross and Crofton’s (1977) paper ‘‘What Is Good Is Beautiful,’’ written in response to Dion, Berscheid, and Walster’s (1972) landmark paper ‘‘What Is Beautiful Is Good,’’ and Nisbett and Wilson’s (1977) demonstration of a ‘‘halo effect’’ in which evaluations of one attribute of a person are generalized to influence evaluations of other attributes (see also Feingold 1992; Felson & Bohrenstedt, 1979; Owens & Ford, 1978). The famous ‘‘closing time effect’’ (Gladue & Delaney, 1990) demonstrates that simple availability can influence the perception of physical attractiveness. More recent studies inspired by evolutionary psychology show that social status (Townsend & Levy, 1990) and prosocial orientation (Jensen-Campbell, West, & Graziano, 1995) enhance perception of physical attractiveness.

The evidence in the bolded part is likely capturing the effectiveness of social status and social savviness to a man’s perceived attractiveness.

Another problem is that most studies on physical attractiveness—including the few that examine nonphysical factors—are based on the evaluation of strangers. Moreover, ac- cording to Langlois et al. (2000, p. 408), ‘‘most of the research we reviewed categorized people into two levels of attractiveness, high or low.’’ Comparing the ends of the dis- tribution exaggerates the consistency with which people rate others as physically attractive based on physical traits. These widespread methods are problematic from an evolutionary perspective. In ancestral social environments, interactions took place in small groups of people whose physical attributes were roughly average and whose nonphysical attributes were intimately known to each other. The psychological mechanisms that evolved to integrate these factors into an overall assessment of physical attractiveness might not be engaged by the artificial conditions of psychological experiments, even those that attempt to examine nonphysical factors.

This will be no news to men who routinely hit the field to meet women. Artificial psych experiments are simply inadequate at picking up those subtle nonphysical cues of social status that women find so enticing in men. That’s why there are so few lab experiments testing the real world efficacy of game; it’s just hard to replicate that feedback intensive environment and those high level psychological interactions in a lab.

We present three studies that were conducted in this spirit. The first added a twist to the method of evaluating photographs by having people evaluate the photographs of known individuals in their high school yearbooks. The second and third studies were conducted on actual groups of interacting individuals. In the second study, evaluation by group members was compared to evaluation by strangers based on photographs. In the third study, group members evaluated each other when the group was initially formed and again after a period of interaction, providing the strongest test of the effect of nonphysical factors on the assessment of physical attractiveness.

This part is quoted for informational purposes. The third study looks the most interesting from a game perspective.

To summarize the results of our first study, the perception of physical attractiveness appeared to be highly influenced by knowing the people and their nonphysical traits. It was not familiarity per se that was important in most cases—otherwise familiarity would have been the most important independent variable in the multiple regressions—but what is known and how it is evaluated in terms of liking and respect.

The authors discuss causation and correlation problems, and how they solved them, which you can read at the linked study above. Bottom line: If a girl doesn’t like you or respect you, she will perceive you as uglier than you really are. Likewise, the inverse. This is why girlfriends and wives in happy relationships often feel their men are better looking now than when they first met them.

A description of two team members will make the results of [the second] study more vivid and intuitive. One of the five males was a ‘‘slacker’’ who obviously was not pulling his weight, either literally or figuratively. He was the primary object of negative gossip and social control efforts, such as teasing and inspecting his bedroom window when he failed to show up for practice. He was uniformly rated as physically ugly by team members. Another of the five males was the opposite of the slacker, working so hard that he was discussed as possibly a contender for the U.S. Olympic team. He was uniformly rated as physically attractive by team members. This large difference in perceived physical attractiveness did not exist for raters who knew nothing about the contributions of the two men to the team.

This is direct evidence that when a woman is aware of a man’s high social status, she will find him more facially attractive. But the most conclusive evidence for status-based and tractable male physical attractiveness (and conversely, intractable female physical attractiveness) comes in part three.

[In the third study], initial rating of physical attractiveness accounted for only 9.3% of the variation in final rating of physical attractiveness for females rating females, 19.2% for females rating males, and 62% for males rating females. The remaining independent variables were highly correlated with each other and with the residual variation, as in our other two studies. Liking was the next variable to be entered in all three analyses and none of the other factors explained the residual variation after the addition of liking.

First impressions are way more important to men (as a function of women’s ability to attract men) than they are to women. If a man thinks a woman is hot, he’ll pretty much still think that after he gets to know her, no matter how bad her personality. Women, in contrast, will vary a lot between their first impressions and later impressions once they get to know the man.

Our third study is methodologically the strongest by avoiding the use of photographs and employing before-and-after ratings of physical attractiveness by the same person rather than ratings by a separate stranger. Nevertheless, the results of our third study are fully consistent with our other two studies. Among people who actually know and interact with each other, the perception of physical attractiveness is based largely on traits that cannot be detected from physical appearance alone, either from photographs or from actually observing the person before forming a relationship. The effect of nonphysical factors on the perception of physical attractiveness is strongest for females rating females, females rating males, and males rating males. It is weaker but still highly significant for males rating females.

The weakest effect of nonphysical factors on physical attractiveness is among males rating females, which is evidence validating evolutionary psychology theory that men are more looks-focused and women are more holistic in their appraisals of the appeal of the opposite sex. Nevertheless, men do think women can look a little better if they are also charming and likable, which proves the CH precept that femininity can boost a woman’s SMV by a half point. (Not insignificant when you consider that SMV is measured on a 10 point scale.)

Our studies were designed to address two shortcomings in the literature on physical attractiveness: (1) a relative paucity of studies that examine the effects of both nonphysical and physical factors on the assessment of physical attractiveness and (2) a relative paucity of studies that involve people who actually know each other. All three studies demonstrate that nonphysical factors have a very potent effect on the perception of physical attractiveness, which can persist for decades in the case of the middle-aged participants of our yearbook study.

Alert the manboob media! Science ♥proves♥ that GAME WORKS, and continues working right into the later years of life.

Physical traits per se are especially important in sexual relationships because they will be partially inherited by one’s offspring. Thus, it makes sense that males are more influenced by physical features when evaluating females than when evaluating males, although the comparable asymmetry did not exist for females.

Men dig beauty.
Chicks dig power.
Feminists wept.

Our studies also reveal individual differences within each sex that rival between-sex differences and that merit further study. In particular, individual differences are increasingly being studied in game theoretic terms as alternative social strategies, such as cooperation versus exploitation (Wilson, Near, & Miller, 1996, 1998) or high-investment versus low-investment mating strategies (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000). In future research it will be interesting to see if people who differ in these respects also differ in the factors that influence their perceptions of physical attractiveness.

Otherwise known as r-selection versus K-selection. Yes, it would be interesting to see which way the sexual culture is blowing. I kind of have an idea.

For example, are women from father-absent homes, who appear to adopt a reproductive strategy based on low male investment (Draper & Harpending, 1982, Ellis, McFadyen-Ketchum, Dodge, Pettit & Bates, 1999), more influenced by purely physical traits in males than those from father-present homes?

Answer from my purely observational, unscientific point of view: Yes. Or: Game — aka the nonphysical aspects of attraction — works better on smart, emotionally stable chicks from intact families. Now there’s a counter-intuitive that’ll really stick in the craw of anti-game haters!

In conclusion, thinking of beauty as an assessment of fitness value leads to the prediction that nonphysical factors should have a strong effect on the perception of physical attractive- ness. In addition, naturalistic studies are needed to fully understand how physical and nonphysical factors are integrated in the perception of physical attractiveness. If we were to state our results in the form of a beauty tip, it would be, ‘‘If you want to enhance your physical attractiveness, become a valuable social partner.’

Game, the art and leisure of becoming a valuable social partner.

As you can see from this study’s results, women trick themselves as much as men “trick” women using game. Remember that the next time you hear some feminist or manboob shrieking about how game is manipulative and deceptive. A woman deceives herself just fine without any help from a pick-up artist. Of course, she’ll get the help, because that’s what she wants.





Comments


  1. on August 22, 2013 at 1:09 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

    lzozozlzzozo yah!!! A Man’s Perceived Physical Attractiveness Is Fluid

    when da fluidz cums outtaa da GBFMZ lostas cockas onto her face FACE da GBFM is pretty attratctievsz lzlzlzozozo

    hey heartistez!!! da GBFM makesz a movie for my shcool projectz!!

    lzozozozo

    AMERICAN ANTHEMZZ: A FILM OF HONOR, CHIVALRY, LOVE, AND VALORZLzozlzzolzozo

    lzlzlzlzolzozozolozl

    as many of you migt hve heard the sad sad news, da gbfm was fired form fromz his dream job of working as a baristsatst baristasz at a starabucckasta starfcucckz zlzozlzozozlzoozo

    whata happenedz is dat 4 every shot of sespresso esproos i served a customerz, i took one myslefe to shar ein the joy and community and bortherhoodsz artististic broteherhodosz of da corporate cocfefe shops as i saw all da customers as fmailyz zlzlzozzlzlzozozo

    so anywheoz da GBFM got firedz and had to enrollz in da local community colleegz (student debt hedge fund) so as to build up his skillz for his seocnd two career choices:

    1. film directorz
    2. collegez professor of lietrtaurez englsizh and shisztizn zlzozo

    well in my online filmz class for which ben bernnake gave me twens thousnads of colleg loansz, our assignmengt was

    “Film a short piece capurturing the zeitgeistz–da Spirit of Americasz”

    well tcucker max rhemeys with goldman sax already shot da academy award oscarz scertive tapings of buttehxt which da dnecoctoncths womenz at da weekly stanatdard so love and ar eentrhalled iwthz

    so da gbfmz went out and bougt a camerasz to shootz an epic story of love and heorismz, but then surf was up so
    da gbfm went surfingzz

    and then and tehrez da GBFM had good GBFM lucksz as tehre was check out what i saw!! in da water i spied sawz matt kingz KING MATTHEWZ king matthew and otehr churchianz commentersz from dalrock’s blog white knighztingz it up and tryinzg to win dem sa grilflriendz!

    so i turned the cameraz on and fulfilled my community colllege (student debt hedge fund) assignmnetz of cpaturing da spirit and ZEITGIEST the SPIRIT OF AMERICA:

    da GBFM presentz to you: DA SPIRITZ OF AMERICA: A FILM OF HONOR, CHIVALRY, LOVE, AND VALORZLzozlzzolzozo

    lzlozozozo

    Like


    • I blush. One of the leading lights of the “manosphere” is my own personal pet troll. I define this as someone who brings up my name when I haven’t commented anywhere on the thread. There’s a gaggle of them out there, but GB bb, you’re my biggest get yet. XOXOXO

      Like


      • on August 22, 2013 at 4:25 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

        lzlzozozlz yesz we will form da SUPER HERO KING MATTHEWZ MATTHEW KINGZ fan clubz!!!

        we will patrol teh tsretet streetz with a dictoionary and thesaurus and barleby’s quotataionsz!!!

        we will save da damselsz in distress by commenting on blogs from our cell phones as we walk da streetsz!

        and this is what our comments will look likez:

        General Matt Kinglzozl comment: “non sequitur, red herring, quote from bartlebies sans context, attempted insult, pause to scratch butt and sniff, random chest thumping, mental/verbal masturbation, asinine conjecture, Shakespearean saying which makes absolutely no sense in his endless sentence, illogical fallacy, random h8, hackneyed expression with no context, cliche, wordpress code for bold italics, meaningless declaration in bold italics, Shakespearean quote out of context, pause to tell wife he will take out the trash in a few minutes, cliche from thesaurus, biggest word he could think of so as to confuse the issue, random big word chosen from dictionary by closing eyes and opening to random page, cliche with no context, irrelevant scholarly quote from bartlebies without context, bizarre accusation, empty condescension wrapped in words nobody ever uses, attempted insult, red herring, asinine conjecture contradicting previous conjecture, insult from the 80s, call on others to man up like him, mental/verbal masturbation,hackneyed expression with no context, cliche, cliche, attempted insult, asinine conjecture, hatred on men and mankind, scholarly quote from bartlebies without context, pause to scratch butt and sniff, attempted insult, red herring, wordpress code for bold italics, asinine conjecture contradicting previous conjecture, mental/verbal masturbation, biggest word he could think of so as to confuse the issue, apology to wife for not having taken out the trash yet.”

        lzozozozzozlolzz

        da gbfmz found some video of matt king (dr. smith from lost in spacez) posting on manosphere blogs and interacting with other posters!!

        that’s cool someone has been filming all this zlzlozozozlzoloz
        lzozozzol

        Like


      • You two are the Walter White and Jesse Pinkman of the manosphere.

        Like


      • If that’s true, if you think that’s who I am, then maybe your best course would be to tread lightly.

        Like


      • Hnnnnnngh such a good line….

        Like


      • on August 22, 2013 at 9:08 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

        zllzzozozz

        i can show you the way, neo, but you must be the one to open the door.

        take da red pill and you will see the butthetx fiat matrix for what it is:

        zlzlzozlozozlzzo

        Like


    • She belongs in the sea. Isn’t taht a hmup back whale?

      Like


    • on August 23, 2013 at 8:02 am Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

      hey herateitstez!!!

      i prey every dayz for your soul and prey dat you will findsz faith and godz and start GOING TO CHURCHIAN CHURCH!!!!!

      and ye will witnessed firsthadnz
      and will testify
      dat churchcianz
      has gottenz to da BOTTOMZ
      of the spirits
      of churhcianity zlzlzlozozlzozo

      Like


      • Make sure Driscoll is the pastor. He’ll tear him a new one.

        And those pure ladies sure do have good male songwriters. It’s not like they could come up with those unholy ideas on what to do with the dick on their own.

        Like


      • I am not a religious man AT ALL.

        I think religion is like a superstition, just when people used to believe trhowing a virgin down a volcano would keep it from erupting

        but still I am offended by that song.

        and…….Why don’t they sing this song to Mohamed instead of Jesus???

        Like


      • “and…….Why don’t they sing this song to Mohamed instead of Jesus???

        You know what will happen then, don’t you? Everyone picks on Christians because they can, because they know Christians are not going to take to the streets, use it as excuse to wage jihad, or issue death fatwas against the perpetrators. So, it’s open season on Christians.

        Try saying something against the Arabs living in Montreal; see where that will take you. The place looks like dumpster trash because of them.

        Like


      • Most religious are superstition.

        Except for mine.

        And Mohammed liked 9 year old girls…those ladies are 29 and 31 respectively.

        Like


      • Yeah, I was going to make a totally tasteless joke about what the best part is about fucking Mohammed’s wife, but I’m trying to be ecumenical.

        The heathens of the crescent moon have it about half-right, just like the J-wz, but they leave out the indispensable part. As Nicene has it: “I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages.”

        So many seeking Christ by other names, so much invincible ignorance out of vincible spiritual leadership. I think of the great religions as malign forces, their gods literal demons who seduce with the Word of the Lord, lure them right up to the brink of salvation, align their souls toward the Kingdom, but permit them no further. Only one last step to the Truth, but a bottomless chasm between.

        Luke 16:19-31

        “Father Abraham, have mercy upon me, and send Laz′arus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in anguish in this flame.”

        “If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced if some one should rise from the dead.”

        Yup.

        Matt

        Like


      • The Muslims have hypermasculinity…the religion that shall remain nameless has hyperfemininity.

        No wonder they both hate Christians.

        Like


    • on August 23, 2013 at 9:59 am Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

      Hey HEARTSISTEZZ!!!

      you writes:

      “Men dig beauty.
      Chicks dig power.
      Feminists wept.”

      YAH! da classic ancient greeks valued female beauty fmeinie beauty
      and masucline honor rage honor of achillesz

      did you know that teh cause
      of the Trojan war
      in the Iliad
      was a beauty contest?

      the goddesses were competing
      to see who was the most beatiful
      and PAris was the judge

      aphrodite bribed PAris saying
      that if he chose her as teh most beautiful
      she would give to paris Helen
      the most beuatiful greek woman mortal woman

      so Paris chooses Aphrodite
      and Aphrodite gives PAris Helen
      who runs off with PArise
      leaving her Greek husband behind

      and so the Trojan war begins
      as the greeks try to get Helen back

      so it is that men value beuaty
      women compete on the fields of beauty
      while men fight in the fields of war.

      now the thingz is
      the bernekfieifers womenz hate beauty
      because they hvae noen none
      and the bernekfieifers menz
      hate strnegth and honor bevcause
      they have none

      and so they must deocnstruct the GReeks
      and destory western civilziationz
      as dat is how dey feminsistz profitz zlzzzlzozozzo

      Like


    • I remember the wisdom GBFM taught me.

      Like


      • on August 23, 2013 at 12:07 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

        lzoozozz

        here was da gbfm in high shcoll zlzozlzl

        lzolzlzlzlolz

        Like


  2. Contrarian comment of the day –

    I think the problem with these studies is that it measures “looks” the same way for men and women, using facial symmetry and ratios that are relative to overall body size. While what women SAY they are attracted to may be based on those kinds of looks, the features that actually seem to control whether a woman spreads her legs or not are height and muscular build. A big, tall man who is facially unattractive is physically attractive to a hot woman. And this makes evolutionary sense. Pretty men don’t really offer a woman any survival benefits. A smart, social-savvy man who thinks on his feet is attractive, yes. But at the base of that female hindbrain, a woman is most physically attracted to a big, tall man who can protect her.

    [CH: Studies have consistently shown women aren’t attracted to muscleheads. Lean and toned is the male ideal.]

    Like


    • I don’t mean muscleheads or fat guys. I mean tall and large men. Over six foot, over 200 pounds.

      [CH: Tall, maybe. But not big. Most great womanizers are nowhere near 200+ pounds. Most men period are nowhere near 200 pounds.]

      Like


      • Big tall men are attractive for short term flings usually. LTR ? Not so much because the dimorphism starts to really come into play.

        Dimorphism in favour of the males indicate polygamy while dimorphism in favour of females usually indicate cannibalism of the male by female (think spiders)

        Like


      • on August 22, 2013 at 2:55 pm FuriousFerret

        “Big tall men are attractive for short term flings usually.”

        It’s a paper tiger though for most of the reader’s social environment. Big tall men that are middle class and up don’t get into fights because they don’t want to go to prison. However, the monkey hindbrain of men still thinks ‘Big man, don’t mess with me, show submissiveness’. You simply have to get out of that evolutionary vestige.

        Big men are apt to show their dominance more than puny men thus the disparity that you noticing. Hack the system and plug into the GodMachine directly. This isn’t savage times in Europe, nothing is going to happen the normal sized man for acting dominant and cool expect he will fucked with more and get some haters.

        Like


      • “[CH: women aren’t attracted to muscleheads. Lean and toned is the male ideal.]”
        Exactly!

        “[CH: Tall, maybe. But not big.”
        I don’t like too tall either. Over 6-2 and you’re invisible to me.

        Like


      • “I don’t like too tall either. Over 6-2 and you’re invisible to me.”

        I’m 6-4 and everybody notices me. It is a curse to be so popular.

        Like


      • Haha! Of course, I would notice you. But, I’m 5-4 and I think we’d look funny together, don’t you think? I like aesthetics too. When a couple looks right together, they turn heads. That’s why my cutoff is 6-2. Of course, I don’t like short guys either. So I have my . I don’t want to say where is my cutoff on the other side lol. Too many short guys here, and I don’t want to injure their egos. They have an uphill battle as is. That said, between too short and 6-4, I’d take 6-4. With your winning personality, you might win me over though. You did post Paul Harvey.

        Like


      • Reread for comprehension.

        “Females are more strongly influenced by nonphysical factors than males…”

        Like


      • on August 23, 2013 at 3:07 am Eliezer Ben-Yehuda

        The plural of Lilly’s narcissistic moments, is not information.

        Information is something which allows MAKING A DECISION, be it minor or major.

        Anything else is flatus.

        Already in the 1930’s the mathematicians were zeroing in on this truth. The truth was cathedralized by Claude Shannon’s seminal paper in the 1948 edition of the Bell system Technical Journal.

        It is your homework this week, Lilly.

        Like


      • Earl, you deserve a better cut of camp follower. Lily’s teenscene twaddle makes feministx sound like a Kundera heroine

        Like


      • Hahaha……but, I like Earl. He always sets me straight.

        Like


      • “Earl, you deserve a better cut of camp follower.”

        Yeah but if I go any more insane…I may start a movement.

        Like


      • I’m 6-4 and everybody notices me. It is a curse to be so popular.

        Feelsgoodman.

        Wake up white man.

        KUATO IS MY WINGMAN

        Like


      • The perfect misc/manosphere haiku.

        Like


      • Ahhhhh….no wonder why you and gregi make such bosom buddies 😆
        You’re 6-4 and he’s 6-2. The perfect couple. Love it; mystery solved.

        Like


      • Lady, I’m not 6’4″ midget.

        I’m a ten-foot-tall, two-ton son of a bitch who could eat a hammer and take a shotgun blast standing.

        I’m a ten-foot monster who slept with everyone’s wives here. And punched them all in the face. And they loved me for it.

        I’m a ten-foot tall beast man who showers in vodka and feeds my baby shrimp scampi.

        Matt

        Like


      • I’m only 6′ 2″…

        But mah left hand be iron and da raht one’s steel…
        If’n da one dohna gitcha, den da udda one weel.

        Dis ol’ Cajun dohna talk so good… but he ahlwas know de score.

        Like


      • “Lady, I’m not 6’4″ midget.”
        Do I gather you’re a midget then?

        Like


      • on August 23, 2013 at 1:00 pm gunslingergreg

        lily the gregi was cute for one but the contant misappropriation of the name to wrong person is grating
        quit thinking of me and write correct name thanks

        Like


      • on August 23, 2013 at 1:01 pm gunslingergregi

        so irritated didn’t even use my own name he he he

        Like


      • on August 22, 2013 at 8:00 pm Imperial Leather

        You previously claimed you we 6-3…what will it be next

        Like


      • 6′ 3.5″”

        Like


      • on August 22, 2013 at 8:26 pm Imperial Leather

        not 6′ 4.5″”

        Like


      • A fathom and half a hand.

        Like


      • Next it will be my 3″ cock.

        Like


      • on August 22, 2013 at 8:59 pm Imperial Leather

        pics or GTFO

        Like


      • 3-inch diameter cock could offset most height issues.

        Like


      • BTW, that was a joke, you guys. I have no idea what a 3-inch diameter peen means.

        Like


      • mine’s about treefiddy

        Like


      • (long)

        Like


      • I have no idea what a 3-inch diameter peen means.

        I know you don’t. No idea.

        Like


      • This is a new one. A reverse height fetish. I’m 6’3″ and that has always been an asset.

        Like


      • Heh…cause nobody will be noticing you?

        Hate to shatter your “worries” but ole Haley Pantyerre was the first thing I noticed.

        Like


      • Earl, it’s not about getting noticed, it’s about making a nice-looking couple.

        Here are some more pics of them together for your consideration. What do you think? Do you not think they look funny together? Maybe you can get the idea out of my mind, I don’t know.

        https://www.google.com/search?q=Hayden+Panettiere+%26+Wladimir+Klitschko&rlz=1T4ADRA_enUS452US471&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=F50XUsb1IYTY9QSJk4GoDw&ved=0CC4QsAQ&biw=1280&bih=546

        Like


      • They look really good together.

        Like


      • So, I take it you like the height difference?

        Like


      • I like attractive women…it doesn’t matter if they are 5-0 or 6-0.

        Like


      • A guy would have to be at least 6’5″ and maybe even taller for me to disparage him for being too tall.

        I am only 5 ft tall, but I have no subconscious bias against tall guys. Guys 6’4″ look great to me.

        But I have a really short torso, so my experience is that guys over 5’10 have a hard time kissing me while making love. Even at 5’10” they have to really arch their spines to get to me. So, I think I might consciously factor that in when assessing a guy’s attractiveness. I don’t make any attempt to date a guy over 6 ft, but sometimes it happens.

        Like


      • “I don’t make any attempt to date a guy over 6 ft, but sometimes it happens.”

        Tall guys usually like short girls. Most of the guys I dated were 6 to 6-2. It’s the 5-10s that like them taller. I know 5-10s that won’t date a 5-ft woman.

        Like


      • I agree. It’s the shorter guys that have a preference for women closer to their height. Or at least that’s how it seems to me. I have had several guys under 6 ft tell me that they prefer girls closer to their height. I have heard zero guys over 6’2″ say the same. Either they don’t care because practically no girls are close to their height anyway, or the ones that prefer taller can afford to avoid talking to me entirely because they have so many options (unlike the shorter guys who prefer non short girls who have to settle for me).

        Like


      • Lily, FemX: Yeah, that’s true for me. I’m 5’9.5″, and I do have an aversion to short girls. Evo psych would suggest that it’s because I don’t want to cripple my hypothetical future sons with shortness, whereas if I was over 6′ that would be a less likely problem.

        Like


      • Really? I’m quite tall for a girl (5’9″) and when I was single I didn’t get approached often by average-height guys (I’d consider 5’9″ – 6’0″ average for a man.) I think they’re used to shorter women and it feels odd to be with a woman closer to their height. I’d often get approached by SUPER-confident short (5’6″ – 5’8″) men who really liked tall women, or 6’3″+ guys where there was a greater height differential and they still considered me short.

        Like


      • Spiralina,

        I find this happens most often with 5-10 height males; they usually love tall girls.

        5-9, could go either way.
        5-11, could go either way too.
        5-8 and below, usually want petite women.
        But, the 6 footers and up love, love, love short girls. So I’m not surprised that the 6-3 and 6-4 men here love us petite girls.

        Like


      • Yeah im 5’10 and love a 5’7 girl.

        And 5’10 is an inch above average, so it is not “short”.

        Like


      • “Tall guys usually like short girls. Most of the guys I dated were 6 to 6-2.”

        This 6’1″ fellow likes short girls, it a domination thing. But I make it a rule not to kick tall girls out of bed either.

        Like


      • Most of the time a man’s preference, is just a preference. This means that even a woman who’s not your type comes along and she’s hot, you’d be interested. A beautiful woman is a beautiful woman, no matter the color of her hair or her height. I knew a few though that liked dark-haired girls and did not budge. Go figure (as to why they will not budge, not why they have a preference of dark-haired over blonde-haired girls).

        As far as height, tall men really dig short chicks. Like you say, it’s the domination thing. For red-pill men, it’s the leading reasons. For men that have not discovered the red pill yet, it’s a subconscious biological need that compels a man to be protective and take care of his woman, even though (in our society) he doesn’t know from where this need stems, since masculinity is expected to keep a low profile. A short woman (more than a tall one) implies she needs a man to protect her.

        Finally, I find that highly liberal men (men that have been deeply brainwashed by feminism, believe in female equality, and like fighting for egalitarianism) make it a point not to date short girls if they are tall. Not only that, they won’t date girls that are much younger than them, or girls that are truly beautiful (most of their GFs/wives are aging ugly bitches). They have these notions that there shouldn’t be any power disparity between the man and the woman. So in effect, their relationships are devoid of romance, since part of what creates romance in a relationship is the male-female polarity. If any woman here ever dated one of those men, I’m sure you agree their approach to dating leaves much to be desired. You will never feel fully feminine with them.

        These liberal men lie to themselves as to what turns them on, just as feminists lie to themselves as to what gives them gina tingles. In short, liberalism is a mental illness, as my dad often says (for many other reasons too).

        Like


      • Regarding dark hair over blonde hair, I remember once reading a study that said more men love dark-haired girls than blonde-haired girls. The men they asked in this study said they prefer dark-haired women for marriage because they perceive them to be more marriage worthy, more serious, and smarter. Now, really go figure.

        I’m blonde, BTW, so I’m not tooting the horn for the dark-haired girls. But, I do wonder if this is really true ????

        Like


      • Lily I have read something similar saying that men prefer darker haired women. But when I have made my hair lighter more men approach me.

        Like


      • She is the original Lily? because her or his Brown avatar is the same Brown avatar as other posters like Scray, etc.

        Like


      • The men they asked in this study said they prefer dark-haired women for marriage because they perceive them to be more marriage worthy, more serious, and smarter. Now, really go figure.

        Dark-haired women are seen by men in the same way as provider beta males are seen by women. Think about it.

        Like


      • corvinus, so do you think beta males prefer dark-haired women because they think they’ll be good wives and mothers over the ditsy sexy blonde? Interesting!

        I have to admit, there are gorgeous brunettes too………

        Like


      • on August 23, 2013 at 2:07 pm FuriousFerret

        “corvinus, so do you think beta males prefer dark-haired women because they think they’ll be good wives and mothers over the ditsy sexy blonde? Interesting!

        I have to admit, there are gorgeous brunettes too………

        Beautiful blondes are much more rare and thus more valuable and harder to lock down. Thus men rationalize that they like brunettes over blondes.

        They don’t.

        Like


      • Lily: “Regarding dark hair over blonde hair, ”

        Nothing more delicious than glossy long dark hair.

        That’s just a preference tho., too. And it would be a crime to exclude fit blond women.

        Like


      • Beautiful blondes are much more rare and thus more valuable and harder to lock down. Thus men rationalize that they like brunettes over blondes.

        They don’t.

        Agreed. There are exceptions (my dad seems to genuinely prefer dark-eyed fair-skinned brunettes) and caveats (I’ll take a blue-eyed brunette over a brown-eyed blonde), but in principle, whichever color is rarer is preferred. It seems to me that blond men prefer brunettes more than dark-haired men do, and I imagine that Swedes and Finns are more likely to have a thing for brunettes because blondes are so common where they live.

        Like


      • Blondes get more attention due to rarity in some areas but they are not objectively more beautiful.

        Think of some of the most beautiful faces out there that are naturally brunette (younger Monica Bellucci is a classic example). Do you think they would magically look more beautiful if they simply dyed their hair blonde? No way. They’d stand out more but it would be in the same way as a woman showing more skin or wearing a neon pink dress in a conservative environment.

        Don’t get me wrong, there are many beautiful blonde woman out there. But they are beautiful because of their faces, the colouring of which must be complemented by the blonde hair. Likewise with beautiful brunettes.

        Like


      • on August 24, 2013 at 9:54 am FuriousFerret

        “Do you think they would magically look more beautiful if they simply dyed their hair blonde? No way.”

        I’m pretty sure by ‘blondes’ people are including the typical fair features and skins that goes with it.

        Like


      • Long legs are more important than height. So if you’ve got legs, and know how to use them, that’s a good thing.

        (no extra charge for ZZ Top reference)

        Like


      • Long legs are definitely hot in women. Long legs and a tight ass.

        Like


      • Its like you read my mind.

        Like


      • I just would prefer a man to be taller than me. 5’8 and upwards. Of course more than 5’8 is preferable because I am 5’6, with 4 inch heels which I often wear, I am 5’10, and I don’t want to look taller than a man so I would always have to wear flats if a man is less than 5’10. I don’t know many men who are more than 6ft.

        Like


      • Actually, it’s ok if you’re slightly taller than he is, if you’re also slender. The couple looks like a flower next to a hulking rock. But if you aren’t slender, it would be a problem, lozlzozlzozlz

        Like


      • And I would think the guy would really have to be built well. Girls don’t want to feel like they’re the bigger one in any respect. I’m 5’4″ and it would be hard to go out with a guy who’s a skinny 5’6″…. I’d feel large next to him, even though I’m technically smaller. We need a decent height or weight differential (preferably both) to be comfortable.

        Like


      • Here the most men have a strong preference for tall blondes, and it doesn’t bother the man if the woman is taller. tall and slim. But that is probably because it is exotic, majority of Mediterranean women are short brunettes.

        Like


      • Arnold, Wilt, damn near any professional football player.

        Women are attracted to power. Leaned and toned is the male equivalent to the female nerd. Hypothetically attractive to middle and lower ranking members of the opposite sex, but they’ll still drop everything for a powerful man’s interest.

        Like


      • On Wikipedia it says that the average weight of American Males is 194.7 pounds

        [CH: I should have said that most *normal weight, non-obese* American men are nowhere near 200 pounds. Of course, the fatso epidemic changes that equation by a wide load margin. Not that it matters; most women aren’t attracted to 250 pound fatsos.]

        Like


    • on August 22, 2013 at 1:38 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

      But at the base of that female hindbrain, a woman is most physically attracted to a big, tall lotsas cokasz man who can protect her. lzozozozo

      OMG!!! i have found dis book very helpful and highliy reocmemendz it to CH for his similar OMG handicapsz zlzlozolzozozo:

      http://www.amazon.com/Live-Huge-Penis-Richard-Jacob/dp/1594743061

      OMG!! OVERSIZED MALE GENETALIEASZ!!! lzozlzzzozozoz

      Like


      • What if you have a small penis because your legs are very long?

        Like


      • on August 22, 2013 at 8:10 pm Imperial Leather

        your posting this question on the wrong blog

        Like


      • Well sir…since you know that this place is the wrong blog, you must have the info on where the right blog is.

        Like


      • on August 23, 2013 at 4:21 pm Imperial Leather

        earlslittledickproblems.com

        Like


      • All that website showed was beastiality photos. Perhaps you should embark on more Christian sites Mr. Leather.

        Like


      • on August 25, 2013 at 6:03 pm Imperial Leather

        Perhaps you should stop posting your private family photos there.

        Like


      • on August 22, 2013 at 9:15 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

        lzlzozozo hey ealr u have a good sense of humorz i have decided. keep da laughing upz!! tis a divine comedyz!!!

        zllzzozozz

        i can show you the way, neo, but you must be the one to open the doorzllzo.

        take da red pill and you will see the butthetx fiat matrix for what it is:

        zlzlzozlozozlzzo

        Like


      • Bernanke stole my sense of humor after I butthexed Amy Schumer, Joan Rivers, and Sarah Silverman.

        Like


      • The idea alone cribbled my risibility.

        Like


      • Since Earl mentioned Bernanke, have you heard the blessed news?

        He didn’t show up at Jackson Hole, WY, for the Fed’s annual meeting. Rumor abound that he’s really leaving this year.

        And, who’s replacing him? Again, rumor has it, a woman (Janet Yellen). GBFM, you’re slacking off. You’re supposed to be on top of this stuff.

        Add to the mix Hilary becoming president, and I can just see the implosion taking place here.

        Is GBFM going to survive this twist of events? I hope it doesn’t happen. I don’t want Hil or Jan.

        But, I am almost tempted, just for the craziness this will create. This place is going to be a riot. No better entertainment around.

        I wonder, what kind of inane ramblings GBFM is going to produce when the WH and the Fed both get invaded by feminist heads.

        Like


    • Height and muscularity indicate dominance, which women like — up to a point because of the negative implications (low child rearing investment). Anyway, the equation goes h + m = d. There’s a certain range of values for d that are optimal. So…the taller you are, the less muscular you need to be to reach that value. A man of average height can have a balance of both ‘moderate height, moderate/lean/tone musculature.’ A shorter man gains more benefit from being more muscular (this just comports with what I see in field…either the short guy is jacked or the short guy just radiates status/money). That’d be my guess….

      Like


    • >[CH: Studies have consistently shown women aren’t attracted to muscleheads. Lean and toned is the male ideal.]

      Woah, CH, can you reference the “women aren’t attracted to muscleheads” study? That doesn’t sound like anything from the same reality I live in.

      Like


      • From the very first paragraph:
        >As predicted, women rate muscular men as sexier,
        more physically dominant and volatile, and less committed
        to their mates than nonmuscular men.
        also:
        >Across three studies, when
        controlling for other characteristics (e.g., body fat), muscular
        men… report more lifetime sex partners, short-term partners, and more affairs with mated women.

        It’s almost like you posted that to prove the opposite of what I asked for proof of. I’m not going to read the whole thing, I have better things to do. You cannot find proof for the ”women aren’t attracted to muscleheads” statement because it is simply not true. I’m actually quite disappointed that CH would spout such nonsense, since he’s usually the voice of truth re: female sexuality.

        Like


      • Had you read the conclusions of the study would you have noticed that women preferred toned and built over brawny (which is muscleheads).

        Women are attracted to muscularity to a certain point. It’s already been discussed here at CH and in that study

        Like


      • If we’re talking about attractiveness for LTR’s, then maybe that’s the case, but the statement I contested was “women aren’t attracted to muscleheads” which is a lie. Muscular men, according to the study you linked to, are seen as attractive, but they are seen as less committed. Which is a good thing, if you ask me: By being muscular, women will want to fuck you, and they won’t expect commitment, or, at least not as much. How is that not the best possible option?

        Like


      • on August 22, 2013 at 5:18 pm FuriousFerret

        In the normal male population, of course people that muscular are going to pull more because they are more aggressive and have a trait that reinforces their self value which feeds back into itself. Basically it’s a tool to achieve social dominance.

        But that’s what Game is. It’s to find the master key that fuels everything else. Actually Game is simply a tool albeit a more powerful tool to really achieve the final state of a man that exercises his powerful options because he has set himself free from society’s values and now plays by the real constraints determined by bio mechanical law.

        All else being equal, the muscular better looking man wins. However, most men in America are fucked up sky high with insecurities and that my friend is their Achilles heel. Any insecurity you have will eventually be exploited and the game makes sure of that. You’re good looking, however what happens if that slips, now you’re fucked and your mind slips along with it.

        That’s also the twisted delightful irony of the situation. Your greatest strength becomes your greatest weakness. If a guy is vain, attack him where he holds his vanity.I assure you that there is always someone better looking than you. You draw that out of some guy that worships looks, get him to be insecure in his strength by ignoring it or not caring or skillful make him qualify how he holds a feminine value up so highly then he’s fucked.

        What can never be taken away is your essence. If you know that whatever situation you are in you are going to drive and make the play to win. How do they rattle that? When your value is that I’m a guy and I do the best I can with what I have. I thumb my nose about your rules and values. Force me to care. The short name of this is irrational confidence. I’m just now understanding what that means.

        Like


      • Awesome comment, I’d buy you a beer for that one.

        Like


      • I should have been more precise. Women find the lean, muscularly toned look ideal. Gym rats are not ideal. However, the gearheads have nothing to worry about. There’s a large enough niche of women who cream for them that the average female preference doesn’t matter so much to those men’s SMP options.

        Like


      • All my life I’ve noticed that most women (my non-scientific impression, 7 out of 10) don’t really go for the über-masculine types (beard, muscular, “mean-looking” etc.).

        But those three that do, well… they really go for the type.

        (((as Frank used to say: Ring-a-ding-ding! 😉 )))

        Like


  3. “This is direct evidence that when a woman is aware of a man’s high social status, she will find him more facially attractive.”

    Yes but doesn’t this contradict the “bad boy” theory a little?

    [CH: No. Badboys have social status up the wazoo. Badboys are often the most popular men within their social groups.]

    Think of the surfer dude. Everyone thought he was major alpha and those of us thinking he was an unattractive loser were basically told we were deluding ourselves. But he’s like the slacker male in the study that no one found attractive…. low social status.

    [Social status is not the same thing as economic status. Many internet women conflate the two because it’s easier to debate in conventional terms.]

    “Game — aka the nonphysical aspects of attraction — works better on smart, emotionally stable chicks from intact families.”

    Not only that– it works on them even though they KNOW they’re being gamed. It took me a while to wrap my head around that one.

    “Remember that the next time you hear some feminist or manboob shrieking about how game is manipulative and deceptive.”

    I think that’s mostly about the pump and dump part of it… deception about relationship availability to get the girl into bed.

    [But that’s not game. That’s just garden variety lying.]

    Like


    • “Social status is not the same thing as economic status”!

      Fuck CH you are reading my mind.I have been carrying it in my head for ages.This should be typed in massive letters on top of this blog.
      Funny enough,that this shit works in all the societies.Can give tons of examples from everywhere: eastern europe,western europe,latin america etc. Economic status * beta=cheating girl (if monogamous)/no girl (if poly).

      Like


    • Bad Boys have status because they tend to be strong. They contribute to whatever groups they form or are a part of. They always have your back in a fight, they usually won’t let anyone outside the group fuck with you, etc. That’s value.

      The problem with the surfer dude is that a lot of people were judging him relative to general society. So yeah, when assessing anyone who, relative to society, seems to take value (e.g. foodstamps, lazy, etc.) people tend to say ‘low value.’ But if you think smaller — like his own local social circle — he probably adds a lot of value. He probably helps people surf, he’s in a band, he maintains a presence on the beach, etc. etc.

      The guy in the study, on the other hand, was a slacker relative to his group. He contributed little value to that group — even though he may contribute to society at large by having a job, paying taxes, etc.

      Like


      • They contribute to whatever groups they form or are a part of. They always have your back in a fight, they usually won’t let anyone outside the group fuck with you, etc. That’s value.

        Value indeed…

        Except to certain pismirean elements here at the chateau…aka The Land That Snark Forgot (To Forget)… where, when you got a bro’s back, it’s dismissed as subordination or given odd forms of homoerotic projection by the pusillanimous pygmies and disingenuous dastards in mourning over their skewered oxen.

        Like


      • Wellll…..the people here who bust on you, Greg, are mostly within the group lol. That’s different.

        Like


      • Which group? The pusillanimous pygmies or the disingenuous dastards?

        lllozozozozozlzlzlzozozlzlzlzlozozlzlzlzl

        Like


      • Boy, you just have all sorts of alliterative adversaries.

        Like


    • Social status is not the same thing as economic status– you’re right and I never really thought about it. They overlap, though.

      Like


    • @Amy

      “Not only that– it works on them even though they KNOW they’re being gamed. It took me a while to wrap my head around that one.”

      That’s because we want to be gamed. If a man takes his time trying to game you, it’s a compliment. It means he thinks you’re hot, which is why he puts in the time. Women who love men, who are not ridiculous feminists looking to find fault with everything men do, savor these moments and treat the experience as part of the male-female dynamic, without which they can’t feel wholly female. Smart girls want men’s attention, and they want to be courted and gamed.

      “Game — aka the nonphysical aspects of attraction — works better on smart, emotionally stable chicks from intact families. “

      It’s why I told “checked out” to look for better quality women. He married a woman from a broken home who ended up just another statistic. She never appreciated his maleness and his masculine role in their family unit, because her mother never needed or respected the father. You can’t marry a worse woman.

      @CH

      ”[Social status is not the same thing as economic status. Many internet women conflate the two because it’s easier to debate in conventional terms.]”

      Agreed, “social status is not the same thing as economic status.” However, women like power. When a man is a beach bum, hanging out all day long, he doesn’t exude power. He screams loser. This guy is not merely low economic status, he has no status (economic, social, or otherwise) with which to establish his alpahness. I think you’re conflating low economic status with bumhood. A bum has an uphill battle in offsetting his losersish image. He’d have to be seriously alpha, and some women might still not get gina tingles every time they think of his nonexistent status. Male status equals power.
      .
      “[CH: No. Badboys have social status up the wazoo. Badboys are often the most popular men within their social groups.]”

      Yeah, because they have social status. They have lots of buddies and followers, and they’re the most dominating member of their group. A beach bum is not in the same league. He can try to dominate other bums, act like a leader, but when everyone around you is a rakish loser, no value is generated for you from leading them.

      Like


      • Life experience and observations confirm otherwise.Hot young women choosing not famous musicians,night clubs security guys,dance teachers and such over doctors,financiers and lawyers.If you ask me a man who is a dance teacher is a waste of life,his status= status of a cleaner (I dance salsa,I’ve seen plenty of those guys). Try to explain this to a woman…
        But it’s not yet that bad in western europe…
        In eastern europe where I am from,women don’t give a fuck about your profession or social status AT ALL..as long as you flash some cash.You can be ex-convict,thief,or corner shop owner..as long as you drive BMW and spend money on them-they think you are cool.Doctor,but not driving BMW?No chance.Status?They don’t even have a concept of such thing..

        Like


      • “Life experience and observations confirm otherwise.Hot young women choosing not famous musicians,night clubs security guys,dance teachers and such over doctors,financiers and lawyers.”

        Maybe in Eastern Europe and small-time America. In metropolitan areas, women don’t date losers, unless a guy is hot and they need a romp. In any case, all the type of men you brought as examples, are still a bit better than a full-time beach bum. This guy really takes the cake. The only thing he has going for him with which to offset his image, is the rumor he’s an aspiring musician with a band. There are many incidents of women “sticking it out,” until said musician agrees to marry her in spite of making it big, becoming famous, or having lots of other women he fucks. Except, I don’t know if this guy has real talent (at almost 30 he hasn’t made it and lives on food stamps), and I don’t know the quality of his women – are they hot with a bit of brains to stick it out, or just used and abused potheads hanging out at the beach with whomever has the next fix.

        Anyway, who said one has to be a lawyer, a DR, or a financier to have high status? They are on the top-end of the spectrum, and our beach bum is at the lowest-end of the spectrum. You bring extremes to prove the rule. How about a man with a regular job who has a masculine disposition that women go crazy for? The type you encounter in TX and vicinity, as opposed to the types you encounter in South CA or South FL?
        .
        “If you ask me a man who is a dance teacher is a waste of life, his status= status of a cleaner”

        Male dancers? You really are from Eastern Europe, eh?

        Status of a cleaner? That’s low for you? How about a beach bum? Not as low?
        .
        “In eastern europe where I am from,women don’t give a fuck about your profession or social status AT ALL..as long as you flash some cash.You can be ex-convict,thief,or corner shop owner..as long as you drive BMW and spend money on them-they think you are cool.”

        Well, we’re a bit more sophisticated in the states. We don’t get married and have kids as often as they have in Eastern Europe, BUT when we do, we at least want clean men. The ex-convict thief-type won’t do it for us if we’re women with standards and looks. Of course, America also has lots of trashy women from broken homes and with no father, that would date convicts fresh out of jail, or hell, while in jail (killers too), gang types, drug addicts, and your garden-variety bum. Our culture is on the decline, as 3rd wolders dictate the norm and what is cool nowadays.

        Like


      • Dont get confused.I am from eastern europe originally,but live in western europe for many many years.Most of my adult life basically.So I know how things are here too,and Ive been to states too (as a tourist though).
        Women in Northern Eastern europe don’t get married and have kids “often”.Where do you get these stereotypes?The birth rate and marriage rate in most of the northern eastern european countries (I dont count balkans,this is another world over there,has nothing to do with us)is lower than in states.

        Anyhow my point stands.Any man would confirm that hot young women end up shagging low lifes,as decribed above ,more often than guys from prestige professions.Why?Well because being a lawyer (high economic status) does not mean you have high social status.
        I have met guys,working in finance (M&A and skyscraping stuff of this sort)who get less quality pussy than a guy ,I used to know, who worked as a salesman in a department store.

        About that “beach bum”-he has a great life,common!Surfing,playing music,driving Escalade.What 21 yeas old hot girl would choose restaurant dates with a boring jewish doctor when she can hang around with that guy?Honest,don’t be ridiculous.

        And I have not met a woman yet who would like man because of his brains.

        Like


      • “Anyhow my point stands. Any man would confirm that hot young women end up shagging low lifes,as decribed above ,more often than guys from prestige professions.Why?Well because being a lawyer (high economic status) does not mean you have high social status.”

        Sorry, but your point doesn’t stand. Maybe, it’s based on your experience in Eastern Europe. There is certainly a type of woman that likes lowlifes (in Eastern Europe, the USA, and everywhere in the west). But non-slutty non-casual-sex women or women with standards will not bed a lowlife. Anyway, this guy isn’t a lowlife (which connotes bad boy), he’s just a beach bum. At least if he were a bouncer at a hot club, I can justify the idea that women are indeed falling for him. Lots of women date bouncers just for romps.
        .
        As far as prestigious professions not being the choice, I didn’t say they are. Pay attention to what I said:

        “who said one has to be a lawyer, a DR, or a financier to have high status? They are on the top-end of the spectrum, and our beach bum is at the lowest-end of the spectrum. You bring extremes to prove the rule. How about a man with a regular job who has a masculine disposition that women go crazy for? The type you encounter in TX and vicinity, as opposed to the types you encounter in South CA or South FL?”
        .

        “I have met guys,working in finance (M&A and skyscraping stuff of this sort)who get less quality pussy than a guy ,I used to know, who worked as a salesman in a department store.”

        That’s because they didn’t know how to release their masculinity, and the salesman in the department store did. We have some lawyers posting here who are alphas or are trying to be. Therefore, it’s not the occupation, it’s the mindset that determines who will get girls, and will not. However, when someone is blatantly a loser, like this 30-year-old beach bum on food stamps, it’s hard to believe that women flock to him, unless they are hanging out on the beach with him smoking stuff.
        .
        Anyway, if this guy was a club bouncer, there wouldn’t be any doubt as to his ability to procure girls. It comes with the territory. Same thing with club owners, those men always date models. I don’t know a club owner in Manhattan that doesn’t have a model GF, and even more so if he’s a Russian mafioso scary type. They have lots of money to invest in these clubs, and in turn, that brings them lots of women because they exude power and bad boy at the same time.

        And regarding Russians, many of them are very masculine and they work out and look really hot, even the lawyers and the businessmen. Russian men can be anything – losers or in high-end professions and still radiate masculinity.

        I’m sorry, I just don’t see our beach bum being anywhere near that type of alphaness needed to attract massive amounts of pussy. Not only that, but he is in Southern CA where image and status count more than anywhere else in the country. I can’t see girls that don’t hang out all day on the beach being in his circle. He’s not trophy-enough boyfriend for Southern California.

        Like


      • (this can be a repeat of another,rather longer reply I posted which dissapeared)

        I am from eastern europe but I have been living in the west almost all my adult life.I know how the cookie crumbles in both places.I ve been to states too (as a tourist).
        Women in northern eastern europe don’t “get married and have kids”.Where are all theserstereotypes from?The birth rate and marriage rate in most of the northern eastern european countries is lower than in states.

        Anyways my point stands.Hot young women don’t give a fuck if you are a lawyer or a doctor,economic status means nothing for them.They want a “cool dude” and a “cool dude” would quicker be a surfing “beach bum” than a M&A financier.Women keep dreaming of a “cool dude” when they are over 30 too.It’s just they realize they need some source of money,thus ending up with betas with money.

        These things are common sense,common.

        Like


      • I’m not sure that in Eastern Europe, the birth rate is lower because the women are less likely to want families and children. That is certainly true in Germany, where being childfree is a way of life and they’re consequently on the fast road to extinction. But in Eastern Europe, to start a family requires a man with a job that pays enough to support a family, and that isn’t easy to find.

        In the United States, white American fertility is down to 1.77 in 2011, whereas in Russia fertility climbed to 1.70 in 2012.

        Also, in the States, there are considerably more men than women, except among the elderly. In addition, the birth rate crash of the late 1960s and early 1970s caused a little-noticed but drastic increase in female entitlement, as women born in the 1970s had a ton of thirsty males after them, and a minor recovery in the 1980s was not nearly enough to reverse this sense of entitlement. In the FSU, this kind of crash in the birth rate didn’t happen until the 1990s. (Yes, I do think that Eastern European women born in the 1990s will be similarly entitled and insufferable, and that the appeal of Eastern Europe is probably ending soon.)

        Like


      • Cool dude counts for a lot. My boyfriend has accumulated a lot in assets, and he makes good money renting out the places he owns, but his annual income is still not that much higher than mine. Even as a chick that ❤ ❤ ❤ money, I would easily be dating a guy with more annual income if I dated practically anyone 35 years or older with a front desk job in a prominent financial firm. There are only 100 thousand such guys in NYC.

        But there was that time when Lauryn Hill's people hired him to produce a song for her. She was ok with it, but she refused to be in the same room as him because he was white (true story!). So she wanted him to leave the studio every time she came in to sing a vocal. But once she heard the final recording, she was so impressed by his playing that she called him and asked him to play tour with her.

        And he said no and called her a c*nt.

        Cool dude.

        Like


      • Having good, steady employment throughout your life, makes it less stressful, even if it doesn’t get you better/more women.

        Like


      • 2 corvinus.

        The birth rate in Russia is high only because of the Northern Caucasian (mostly muslim) nations,like Dagestan and immigrants.
        The birth rate among ethnic Russians and indigenous ehtnicities of Russia (peoples of finno-ugric decent like Mordvins) is very very low.

        Now you are pretty much full of stereotypes too.”hard to find a man with a job”-this is what a regular “natasha” on “marry a russian.com website proclaims.

        Although you are partly right,economic climate does influence the family formation no doubts.But:
        First of all,as of my own observations in Ukraine, there is no correlation between man’s income and desire of a woman to have kids.Most of the families with plenty of kids are those where a man is either an alcoholic or a manual worker.
        Second,in large cities there are plenty of jobs.if you are educated you are well off.In the capital with a degree you get your 1000-1500 dollars/month easily.F.e. a check out girl earns approx 500-700$/month.Junior manager from 700 up.IT guys make 1500-2000$ on average.
        Third,the government pays a lump sum of 1000 euro for every new-born in Ukraine.

        And I have not even mentioned Moscow where the average income is on par with western europe.Let alone Czech republic or Hungary.

        The reasons for that lay much deeper.The family relationships in post Soviet countries have become absolutely “surrogate” and unnatural.The average marriage lasts under 3 years and the divorce rates are staggering.

        Like


      • @caramba
        “The birth rate in Russia is high only because of the Northern Caucasian (mostly muslim) nations,like Dagestan and immigrants.
        The birth rate among ethnic Russians and indigenous ehtnicities of Russia (peoples of finno-ugric decent like Mordvins) is very very low.”
        In some regions ethnic Russians have a positive population growth and for the time being muslim fertility is not a big problem:

        http://darussophile.com/2013/04/08/a-demographic-zastoi-in-russia/
        “Some people like to say that Russia has only returned to natural population stability because of high fertility among Caucasus Muslims (who will overrun it and establish a Moskvabad Caliphate, at least in the febrile imaginations of Russian nationalists and Mark Steyn). Well, that is correct in a narrow sense, but in a way that clouds the actual picture.

        As we can see from the graphic above, whereas the biggest chunk of positive growth does come from the South and the North Caucasus (in practice, all of it would be from the North Caucasus, as the South still has a marginally negative natural growth), the Urals and Siberian regions – all of them predominantly ethnic Russian – have already returned to positive natural population growth, while the natural population decrease in the older, more settled parts of European Russia are now but a tiny fraction of what it was just a few years ago. On current trends, the non-Slavic Caucasian peoples will add about a million or so in the next decade, but so what? That’s equivalent to less than 1% of the total ethnic Russian population, which itself will remain roughly stagnant during that same period.”

        Like


      • I have skimmed through that blog,it seems to be overly propagandistic.
        Urals and Siberia account for really small percentage of total russian population.10% of the total population live in Moscow,the bulk in western European part,almost 80%.
        IMHO the reason behind the relative high brith rate in that part of russia is due to disproportionally high influx of young work force,since all the oil and gas industries are over there.Now when the gas has lost its price due to fracking and the Russian economy begins to stagnate,I don’t think this trend will remain.I would also not be that optimistic about “only 1 million” muslims. Russia is corrupt and badly governed-nobody really knows how many iillegal immigrants live there at the moment.Besides 1 mln in Russia is a lot-its just under 1% of total population.

        Anyways,let’s leave Russia aside-it’s very complicated country to analyze (152 nationalities,4 religions, massive differences between levels of development of different regions etc) check the map of ex soviet countries in that blog (Ukraine,Belarus and Baltics)-the birth rates are below anything possible.Now nobody can say that economic situation in Baltics is bad-it’s really good (comparing to most of the russian cities).

        Like


      • I think the two main factors are religiosity, which raises the birth rate, and — more importantly — high emigration, which depresses it.

        The Baltics (except maybe Estonia), as well as Poland, have lost a lot of young people to the British Isles, which would depress the birth rate. Same story with Romania, which has lost a lot of people to Italy and Spain. Czechs and Hungarians haven’t emigrated much, but they tend to be atheist (and the Hungarians are notorious sadsacks, with high suicide rates), so low birth rates with them is to be expected.

        Ukraine is at 1.5 children per woman, but it’s quite a bit poorer than Russia. Belarus is actually higher, at 1.6. But both countries are ironically higher than their western neighbors, due to their not being allowed free emigration to Western Europe.

        High emigration can kill a country. Over here, Puerto Rico is in that situation because they have free immigration rights to the United States. And Mexico only started to get better since 2008, when our economy went to shit and Mexicans no longer wanted to come here!

        Like


      • The way you keep bringing up the surfer guy only shows your attraction to him.

        Like


      • fuck yeah.

        Like


    • CH: [Social status is not the same thing as economic status. Many internet women conflate the two because it’s easier to debate in conventional terms.]

      Krauser recently talked about this: http://krauserpua.com/2013/08/21/the-great-gatsby/

      Like


  4. Where is the rule of social saviness #4?

    Like


    • on August 22, 2013 at 1:49 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

      Rule of social saviness #4: if her mouth don’t suck ur lostas cokas, your mouth no talkas. zlozozozzloz

      Rule of social saviness #4: if her mouth do suck ur lostas cokas, your mouth no talkas. zlozozozzloz

      Like


  5. I kinda think ‘game’ is to a man what salesmanship is to a product. The product must be good, but the trick is getting the mark to recognize that the product is good. What the product actually is, is irrelevant, as long as it’s good. So your confidence can come from almost anything, I think.

    Like


  6. Female attractiveness varies with the square of the time since last sex.

    Also as it gets closer to last call.

    Like


  7. CH have you ever come across this site? http://www.goodlookingloser.com

    They say physical attractiveness is important, but based on some of their articles it seems like their style is “caveman game.” If we go back to those posts you did on mesomorphs/ectomorphs/endomorphs, I’d say that what advice they give isn’t wrong since it fits their body structure and in turn their personalities.

    Like


  8. on August 22, 2013 at 2:24 pm dufus maximus

    “The weakest effect of nonphysical factors on physical attractiveness is among males rating females, which is evidence validating evolutionary psychology theory that men are more looks-focused and women are more holistic in their appraisals of the appeal of the opposite sex.”

    Long before evolutionary psychologists [sic] began insipidly repackaging well-known truths by preceding their proclamations with the phrase “evolutionary psychology theory sez,”

    [CH: Actually, most explanatory theories that evolutionary psychologists have come up with were practically unheard of among the general public and only grasped in limited fashion by academic scientists before smart men made the connection between genes, natural selection, and evolved human behavioral traits. But you keep revising history to suit the needs of your bruised ego.]

    people have known that men are more concerned with women’s looks than vice-versa.

    [No duh. But people didn’t know *why* things were this way. That’s what the scientific process is all about: figuring out why we observe the patterns we do.]

    This isn’t news to anyone over the age of six,

    [This is the latest equalist troll-style attack: to pretend like the theories of evolutionary psychology which are now undeniably powerful as a means of explaining the world and which equalists hate so much were actually known all along by everyone and evo psych scientists are just misogynists/racists/bigots/whatever-boogeyman-floats-your-boat who are “repackaging” age-old truths that morally and intellectually superior liberals took for granted.]

    and the phrase “evolutionary whatevery” doesn’t make it science.

    [Your sophistry doesn’t make this a worthwhile comment.]

    Like


  9. on August 22, 2013 at 2:41 pm FuriousFerret

    After struggling with very minor body issues I have recently came to the conclusion regarding looks. I have a face gets decent amounts of attraction and I’m 5’11, 178 with about 18 – 20 percent body fat, so it’s not like I’m hideous or anything.

    My conclusion is that the reason that vast majority of men are failing in this world is because they have turned their focus to ‘idols’. They fall for sexy siren songs of external attributes that they believe are the magic key to will unlock the doors of pussy heaven.

    They have no foundation. They are basing their whole lives worshipping different idols that they believe that if they pay enough tribute will reward them. However, the reverse is true. Their idol demands blood and extracts it, destroying their soul in the process.

    For example for the idol of Looks or ‘Narcissus’, a great number of guys are getting into bodybuilding these days due to the increasing hypergamy of western women. The reason being they want to look like fawned after movie stars and have the dominant presence of a physically stronger man. This is at first enticing. Just start lifting, count your macros and then bang hot model quality ass. However it’s a total scam.

    First, most guys simply don’t the natural genetics and extreme willpower to achieve to break into the top 10 percent that is required for people to actually give a fuck about your body in that it’s seen as something special.

    Second, facial aesthetics is far more important in the looks game than a powerful body since it’s more rare and can’t be manipulated as muscles can. No amount of lifting will make your face resemble a male model’s.

    Third and probably the most damaging is that you give power to other men over you. If looks are supremely important to you then you will naturally defer to the better looking man because you see this man as being inherently superior to you. What happens is your game will suffer greatly. You will be shook at the subconscious level.

    If you don’t value the better looking man, you take away his power. I’m not going to submit to him. Who the fuck is he? You’re huge and good looking. So? How about your security or your social dominance. Let’s see how that holds up.

    And that’s the real key. It’s your essence. What can you do as man to dominant your environment. How silver is your tongue? Can you read the ebbs and flows of the social putting green? Can you push and pull in equal amounts at the right time? How shaken are you when events don’t go just right?

    In a certain environment, yes big muscles mean something. But really where does that apply to CH’s demographic. Most of the yuppies I know aren’t going to prison over stupid shit. They just beat their chest and hope you buy into it. What good is being an athletic stud if you can’t use it. A weakness isn’t a weakness unless it can be exploited.

    A forth thing that Narcissus steals from you is your own self image. Narcissism and vanity are one of the main cause of these fatties. Their vanity leads them down the hole of ice cream, Cheetos and despair. The reasoning is if they can’t be in the top 20 percent of looks then they just say ‘fuck it’. Good is the enemy of perfect. Why bother? They then proceed to become absolute monstrosities due to their own narcissism. These are the women that complain about being ugly and for rally for fat acceptance. Being merely pretty in an average way isn’t good enough so they don’t want to play anymore.

    In terms of looks for a man, just do your best within reason. Look as sharp as possible in that you groom yourself and you adorn yourself with hair and clothes that grab attention. It’s not enough to have ‘nice’ clothes, they should be saying something. Keep your weight and shape under control but don’t worry about sub 13 percent body fat, it’s not going to do shit. Posture and strong alpha mannerisms round out the package.That’s it.

    Your worth is your courage and your drive. Your social dominance. Your inner man. Everything else is icing.

    Like


      • Those.

        Jonah 2:8
        1 Cor 10:14
        Leviticus 19:4

        Like


      • on August 22, 2013 at 9:09 pm FuriousFerret

        True, Matt.

        Even if you’re not religious, the bible is wisdom of the very smart from ancient times and it gives universal truths.

        Idols destroy you. Whether it be looks, money, power, job. They are all worthless because they aren’t you. They demand much and deliver nothing in return expect chasing after them. They don’t even give you what you want.

        What us guys want is to be true cool men.

        I’m a cool guy. I don’t need to be super jacked and loaded with money to achieve this. I’m a cool guy because I determine my actions. My values are not based on others weak opinions. I act on what I think is right and I don’t submit to unworthy people. I’m not going to bow down because some guy says I should, or some guy is some kind of athletic animal. My question is Why? Why should I? What kind of power do they really have? It’s just a façade. If you have power then do something about it. It always comes up snake eyes. The first second you don’t buy into muscles = dominance and money = superior man, the battle is already over, they are done because they rely on it and stupider men act accordingly to it.

        “In battle, if you you make your opponent flinch, you have already won.”
        ― Miyamoto Musashi

        “there is nothing outside of yourself that can ever enable you to get better, stronger, richer, quicker, or smarter. Everything is within. Everything exists. Seek nothing outside of yourself.”
        ― Miyamoto Musashi, The Book of Five Rings

        Like


      • on August 22, 2013 at 9:42 pm FuriousFerret

        Also on the topic of idolatry.

        I strong disagree with a some men’s assertion that PUA idolizes women and does anything to please them. I find this false.

        I think that beta blue pill thinking is the ultimate idolization of women as these holy Mother Goddesses. As just as with any other idol of something of pleasure it demands it’s pound of flesh. What do beta males do? They worship the woman of their desire. They give and give and what are they rewarded with? Nothing. Worse than nothing. They experience the pain of unrequited love of the object that they give praise and worship to. I mean why should the venerable Mother Goddess ever sleep with him? Divinity does not fornicate with the mere mortals.

        I would say it’s almost impossible to Game chicks if you worship them. I just don’t know how a man could do it. In fact it does the exact opposite you basically have to objectify them. She’s just another random prey animal. I don’t really even view other women that I don’t know as real human beings.

        So basically whatever you worship will turn on you in the end. Invest in taking social action and knowledge and it’s always there for you. Don’t give value to something that can be easily swept away.

        What happened in the past is I know what I should do but I was hamstringed by variation of ‘I’m not good enough’ or ‘this guy is better and I should defer’. When you throw those out the window and focus on action ‘Just Becuz’, it’s liberating. I’m free to do what I want because in the real world of power dynamics the vast majority of people have no real power. It’s just a sham. Their sole power is disapproval and dislike. Big fucking deal. If you don’t have haters then you’re basically a loser and that’s the stone cold truth.

        Like


      • Idols destroy you because no man can compete with a myth. You just have to get out there and do the thing that you believe only the idols can do — demystification is empowering.

        Like


    • Yeah, what I fail to understand is how people can feel -bad- about looking better tho. For me, just being at the top top end of ideal weight makes me feel GREAT. I feel sexy as fuck. I practically think I’m a male model, even though objectively that’s not the case. Who gives a shit? I just feel it.

      A year ago I was obese….so to me I’m like ‘wow I HAVE CHEEKBONES? A JAW LINE? GTFO! BRB APPLYING FOR GQ, PHAGGOTS’

      But there are a lot of good looking guys in the gym or whoever that are just so down on themselves. It’s bizarre.

      Like


      • on August 22, 2013 at 8:52 pm FuriousFerret

        Looking good, I think is still essential to having a good quality of life. I want to look as good as I can, as stylish as I can within reason.

        It’s very easy to get roped into the gym rat mentality. I don’t just want to look fit and cool, I want to be Brad Pitt in Troy. That’s when you’re in a bit of trouble because looking jacked is fucking hard. It’s like another job and you most likely will have to get on the gear. Then when you realize there is very little upside to it and that the main component of looks is your facial structure, then it really starts to mindfuck you.

        “A year ago I was obese….so to me I’m like ‘wow I HAVE CHEEKBONES? A JAW LINE? GTFO! BRB APPLYING FOR GQ, PHAGGOTS’ ”

        Obese is never ever good however it’s very easy with the proper nutrition to be decent. That’s one my points. People either go to one negative extreme to other and it’s just like what the fuck are we doing here? Both sexes need to get a grip and live their lives striving towards good weight management and styling themselves up to their natural potential and let this madness go.

        “I feel sexy as fuck. I practically think I’m a male model, ”

        Me too man. I like the way I look.To me I look like a normal North Euro guy and I look a little bit different than other white people with my extremely soft cheeks and nose, but that just gives me a uniqueness in my area.

        I find that most beta yuppie types don’t really initially like me just by sizing me up. Interestingly, ‘cool’ dudes, alternative types, working class I get pretty much instant rapport with. My friends and the women in my life were more off the beaten path in terms of culture. Weren’t freaks or anything just more arty and alternative.

        However in my daily life now it’s full of SWPL and they seriously don’t really like me that much. I always thought this was kind of a good thing though.

        Like


      • lol I just enjoy the blubberless life. All these comments you posted recently showcase an awesome mindset. You’re in a good headspace.

        There really should be some study about SWPLs; what I’ve noticed IRL is that more conservative-ish types — while they will say some racist, xenophobic, weird shit…paradoxically seem to give everyone a fair shake. And the opposite is true of my more liberal SWPL friends.

        Like


      • There really should be some study about SWPLs; what I’ve noticed IRL is that more conservative-ish types — while they will say some racist, xenophobic, weird shit…paradoxically seem to give everyone a fair shake. And the opposite is true of my more liberal SWPL friends.

        Made me think of a related anecdote:

        There was an observation made in this country… long ago, and attributed to whom, memory does not serve… but it went something like this:

        In the South, they hate the race but love the individual… in the North, just the opposite.

        Like


      • Maybe, both states of mind are still fucked up tho.

        Like


      • aka The Human Condition.

        Better to get a square deal and not worry so much about what the guy does or doesn’t say in his cups.

        Like


      • Virtue’s hall monitors never accept the “that’s just the human condition,” note. My sash is pretty balla, tho.

        Like


    • I love this comment. How uplifting.

      You definitely don’t sound hideous, you sound great. I’m so happy you got over the minor body issues.

      Like


  10. I was reading the SMV value test for Males and could not be more astonished at how profound that was for its time.

    After a half decade later I am THOROUGHLY COMPLETELY convinced that a guy who is completely average looking.. say Kevin Spacey could fluctuate like ths

    Add 1 point if he’s well dressed
    Add 1.5-2 points if he’s being an uncaring asshole/jerk (Dominance over men)
    Add 1 point if he’s feeling good about himself and being self-amusing

    And add from 1-6 points depending on fame/charisma.

    I truly believe a man’s attractiveness to a female FAR FAR exceeds the other way around. There’s got to be some hyperextended scale for male attractiveness.

    Some men may be putty and stammering to a blazing model chicke like Bar Rafaeli, but a lot of women are panties soaked, bubbly, submissive aroused stupid ditzy under the presence of a powerful man like Clinton to an even higher level.

    Like


  11. Another study that proves my doubts wrong…another time to go masturbate into a couch cushion to drown my sorrows.

    Now back to the serious tone…I’ve found the more angry, ready face I have (which I perceive to be ugly) the more women are attracted to it.

    So it’s better to have the powerful face…than the pretty boy face.

    Like


  12. Men using game is the analog of women using makeup.

    It improves your “appearance” and even if their frontal cortex knows that it’s bit of a put-on, their hind brain is all thumbs up about it anyway.

    Like


  13. There is the good looking man who has a very handsome face and good physique who all women will agree is very attractive. The men who look like Adonis.

    But I don’t think many women actually want a relationship or marriage with this type of man. I have met some men with faces so breathtakingly handsome. But there was so little beyond that. No depth, no strength of character. How long can you look at a man’s face and admire it? It would get boring. A man needs to have something extra for me to be physically attracted to him. He could even be ugly by society’s standards, but if I am able to see in him a man with a strong character , and above all else respect him because he is a wonderful man in my eyes, then he will become like Adonis in my eyes. Physical attractiveness in a man is depending so much on how masculine he is, if he is comfortable to lead. When this has been established the illusion of him being much more handsome than he actually is, is created. I cannot say I have a particular type of men, physically that I am drawn to, because it is changeable depending on the character of the man. If I say I like men with belly pudge.. but then meet a skinny man who I am so attracted to his personality, then I will suddenly like skinny men.

    Like


    • I like your comments.–

      Although there’s a too-good-to-be-true air that hovers around your posts, cloying like the scent of a white rose, and you may yet be revealed as the slyest Cypriot troll that ever sought a green card, I’m ready to accept you as what you claim to be: a simple, feminine woman.

      The women who comment here are highly intelligent bluestockings prone to eructate their opinions as readily as any neckbearded basement dweller, and they imagine that their wit, such as it is, and their one-of-the-boys vulgarity, are attractive to men. Maybe there are men who can imagine kissing such cantankerously talky mouths with pleasure, I don’t know — but your pleasantly simple posts are a relief from the usual harridan chatter of the Chateau.

      Like


      • Thank you n/a.

        I have no desire to obtain a green card, I love life here, it has a negative points right now, but which country doesn’t? I love when people are ready to stay in a country through thick and thin., even when things are not going so great. If everybody leaves when times get tough who will rebuild the economy and make the country again successful? (I’m not claiming I’m going to be the one to do that but I’m ready to champion the men who are).
        My posts may seem too good to be true, but I focus on being a good woman because I am a Christian, I am for the most part joyful, because I’m blessed, and when the ugly attributes of my personality surface I try to recognize them and change it. I am no different than any other woman, we all have sinful natures. The ability to be nice and love is helped by this realization, when we are able to confront the ugly parts of our personalities, accept blame, instead of blaming the rest of the world, and just focus on being good people and finding the good also in others. I know it sounds overwhelmingly cheesy.

        But back to the original topic- I know this about men’s attractiveness because I experienced it when I saw a man who looked like he could be a male model, and when we spoke I felt nothing. In fact, as mean as it sounds, I almost fell asleep from boredom. There was no depth to him, he was superficial, there fore I couldn’t respect him as a man, so he was not attractive to me. I have encountered another man who others could say he is ugly, but believe me, he has something so wonderful in his character, so masculine and strong, and sure, he can make the male model type seem invisible.

        Like


      • The thing I worry about with you good, Christian girls is the fire between your legs.

        I’m not saying that to insult you — I’m just noting that when you get them started, it’s not always easy to cool them down.

        Watch out for charismatic men: you’re easy prey for them, like our dear departed Katie.

        But that’s what I love about real, feminine women: when love hits them, really hits them between their eyes and legs, they follow their hearts like an orphaned duckling follows a passing dog. Nothing can stop them.

        You’re the impressionable type, so be careful.

        Like


      • Thank you, 🙂 I may be impressionable in some ways but I try to seek wisdom and I try to not put myself in situations which are foolish. Until that time I just try to be cautious like we all need to. And not follow my heart as much as I may want to, I am not going to follow my heart into destruction when I’m blessed to know better. Feelings are wonderful, but following them blindly on a whim, is not wonderful. Feelings are fickle unless they are rooted deeply in Christian love, a desire to love in a Christian way even when what we call “love” of this world, the capricious kind, has died. And that’s not how I’m naturally inclined to be, to not follow my heart and to “balance it with wisdom”. It’s just how I know I must be.

        .:The thing I worry about with you good, Christian girls is the fire between your legs.”

        If I marry, I hope my husband will take care of that.

        Like


      • I’m not dead!!! LOL In fact, you wrote this on my 35th birthday and first day back at work 🙂 Please try not to worry, n/a. A lot of what was written was untrue and everything is and will be fine. However, I do agree with your warning for embracing. I’ve said it before, but its worth repeating. Hanging around here can easily spoil you for, and make you dissatisfied with, regular men and kick your hypergamy into hyperdrive. So do be careful to keep everything in perspective. This is no place for the weak.

        Like


      • Well, look who it is — you must have emerged from the stocks just as I was hopping into my casket.–

        Kate, kiddo, I was by turns amused and mildly aghast during the heyday of your celebrity love affair.

        As far as lots of things that were written being untrue, you could always refer to the entirety of my comments to you over time if you want a fat mouthful of The Truth.

        But you know that. 😉

        Happy Birthday, etc.

        Like


      • Thanks, etc! And don’t place any stock in the stocks. I don’t 😉

        Like


      • Come on now. I bet if I plied you with dinner and drinks all night, you’d be willing.

        Like


      • If a fat feminist was hitting on me, beer goggles wouldn’t do it. I’d need a beer lobotomy. At which point, she’s just raping me.

        Like


      • Make ’em stiff, Lara, make ’em stiff.–

        Though I must admit you’re an excellent example of a woman who rarely if ever leaves her online mouth open long enough so as to remove all doubt.

        Like


      • Dinner and drinks? Hell…

        You had me at “Hello”.

        lllzllozoozlzlzozozlzlzozozlzlzozozlzl

        Like


      • Her posts may be simple but it’s clear that she is one of the more intelligent female commentators here, at least if ‘intelligence’ is to be defined in any meaningful sense. She demonstates the sort of foresight, wisdom, and understanding that the women of this generation desperately need to cultivate if they ever want to secure their future happiness. Doesn’t surprise me one bit that she credits her faith for this beautiful way of thinking.

        Love your blog chick. ❤

        Like


  14. Much like Grumpy is manipulative to Snow White…and then for some reason, Doc.

    Like


  15. These studies are worthless. I don’t wanna know if a woman will find me attractive or not. I wanna know if she will bang me or not. I don’t have to be good looking to get a lay. I have to know how to get her invested in my world and move her mind towards fucking me.

    Attractiveness without being able to move the girl towards sex is worthless. I could look like Cloony and not get laid if I don’t make the right moves.

    Like


  16. Corollary fact: men become bored after fucking a woman x number of times but women become more attached.

    The man gets used to the woman’s beauty and the woman is struck by the man’s quiddity.

    A woman must be beautiful and a man must be interesting.

    Like


    • Why have men been getting married for thousands of years if they get bored? Im not sure the institution of marriage could have survived for like 10 thousand years across every Eurasian culture if what you are saying is true.

      Like


  17. Great article. I have seen the negative effects all my life. Ive always been relatively attractive physically, but i have always had lots of trouble making and keeping good friends. Males in groups end up disrespecting and mocking me.

    Ive seen plenty of women go from attracted to repulsed. And the bad news is, its even harder to change your social status after 25 or so than it is to change your looks. Social connections beget more connections, and my phone remains silent.

    Like


  18. In-field footage:

    la la la la la I’ll just leave these here until people who don’t go out much start listening to Tyler, the ugly fuck who’s spent 10 years gaming and literally built a business out of teaching men of all sorts of looks/status to get women, and who has an hour of in-field footage up (see above) where he shows a 5’7″ skinny pale balding ginger with a nasaly voice having women make out and go home with him:

    And my archive where I’ve addressed this a bunch of times:

    http://yareallyarchive.com/search/?q=looks

    http://yareallyarchive.com/search/?q=height

    2 + 2 = 4. It doesn’t matter how strongly you feel like it should equal 3, or want it to equal 3 or convince yourself it equals 3 so you can justify your actions/results or lack thereof…2 + 2, if you spend enough time in the field (reading/debating theory and “observing” is not “in the field”), will continue to equal 4.

    in b4 they’re all paid actresses, drunk, sluts, cherry-picked footage (I don’t disagree on this one, but a guy who looks/sounds like that getting ANY kind of consistent success at ALL is proof alone that Game works), etc lol

    Like


    • on August 22, 2013 at 7:15 pm FuriousFerret

      “(I don’t disagree on this one, but a guy who looks/sounds like that getting ANY kind of consistent success at ALL is proof alone that Game works)”

      That’s the problem that a lot of guys have with Tyler. This is man whose supposed genetic destiny was to play D&D and marry a fat hog. He’s supposed to be the subservient nerd at work that is ‘nice’ to the other men. They won’t take advice from someone that they view as beneath him.

      What sticks the knife into the side is because he use Game/Personality to have sex with women. If it was money or fame they simply won’t care. Due to the fucked state of men and our feminized social programming we have become shims. We over worry about looks by a mile. Also you have to consider what Tyler represents. He is a middle finger to all their blood, sweat and tears at the gym. They spent all that time of what they thought would make them pussy magnets. To have someone to tell you it’s this hidden mystery in attracting women is being an old school man and taking care of your shit simply because that’s what a man does (which we basically have lived by for thousands of years), it threatens their belief system and basically takes away their advantage.

      When being a stud isn’t the answer, what now? A hilarious thing is when the bodybuilding guys find out that facial aesthetics is the critical component in pulling based on looks. A trait that can’t be gamed and because of that it’s much more valuable. That’s when they really start to weep.

      Ironically, the ultimate spokesman for Game would be male movie star type that is already ultra charismatic and top 1 percent good looking. Despite people protesting it’s because of his ultra elite passive value that he processes, he would still make it more popular because it taps into their value system of looks and fame.

      Like


      • FuriousFerrett killed it in today’s thread. Amen to everything you said.

        Like


      • on August 22, 2013 at 10:04 pm FuriousFerret

        Yeah, I just came into a moment of clarity regarding external attributes(money,looks,job, etc) and just like anybody that finally figures something out that’s been fucking with them I have to tell everyone about it.

        LOL.

        Like


      • There’s a limit to what you’re saying.

        I’m 5’8 better than average looking but the shorter you are, the better care you have to take of yourself. I gym alot and and watch my nutrition quite closely. If you’re short don’t be fat – you still need to get your foot in the door with chicks upon interacting with them (i.e look good).

        You are correct though there is a point where the effort being put in gives diminishing returns.

        Oh and grow a beard – it’s got me sooooo much attention in the past year I’m kicking myself as to why I hadn’t grown it in my earlier..

        Like


      • There are limits and then again, there aren’t. This is this theory that YaReally has touched upon and I endorse it. If you’re not conventionally “attractive”, then just by being direct in your approach then you can get on the girls radar.

        You don’t have to be 6’2″. It def helps, no doubt. But time and time again, the hotties will be attracted to the boldness of shorter men like us Turk.

        How do I know this? Because I like to go direct and use cocky/funny flirty routines. Sure, I think some of it overcompensates for insecurities I feel I have. At times where I feel like I may not “Be enough” then I tend to lean on disqualifying the girl, accusing her of picking me up, etc etc. Some times it’s overkill. But when it works, it works.

        An example from yesterday. This I sent to a couple of my wingmen.

        Okay, so quick situ from today. I blew up account with Belorussian,
        I got the HB8 Cuban chick from Miami on 08/21 to respond but nothing from my last text. That’s not blown up.

        Either way, I knew I had to make at least one approach today. Just one
        Walking near NY *********** in Downtown FiDi. See this tall blonde (5’10”), red shirt, tight legs and fitting jeans
        Let’s rank her a soft HB8
        “Fuck”. But fuck that, know what “My game is 10/10 and fuck what anyone thinks about me”

        I walk up from behind. I get on her peripheral, like my buddy showed me, I try to stop her with body language a bit.

        “Excuse me, I know I’m probably too tall for you, but I saw you back there and HAD to come say Hi”

        She is in the DayGame Daze™

        “I don’t know if it’s your red shirt or whatever but yeah”
        She’s still in the daze
        This is fucking on

        Immediately I take control. Introduce myself and shake hands. Her name is Yulia
        She has an accent with the way she pronounces her name but the next sentence is without the accent

        Mini cold read. “I know you’re not a New Yorker. Where are you from because you’re trying to cover up your accent. And most New York girls would have pepper sprayed me by now”

        She laughs. She is Russian
        “Oh my God” I throw my head back. “Not ANOTHER Russian girl. You girls are soo crazy. Mean too”
        “No we’re not. Not all women.”
        “Yeah not all Russian women are like that, said every Russian girl”
        She is still in a daze and laughing.

        I ask where she’s going, we talk about living in downtown, I ask if her big boyfriend is going to beat me up for talking to her
        “No, he doesn’t live down here” The way she said this……hmmmmmm
        We keep talking a bit. I cold-read again and guess that she came here when she was 15-16
        “14…how did you know?”
        I DHV and say that my cousins from Colombia (Lol) act like her. With the accent and still holding on to old culture.

        I also cold-read about what her profession she’s in. I get it wrong (PR, then fashion, then I give up). She works for a big media company.

        Eventually, it gets weird in this daze.
        She goes like “Sooooo, so what next”

        I say, “Well now you give me your number, and then we go out for a drink on Mondau around here”

        Her eyes light up. Similar to the way when I first approached. Intent+Assuming the sale = Magic
        “Haha, hmmmm I don’t know…”
        “Well look, just a quick drink after work. If I find out you’re a serial killer or whatever then I can leave early” (Love the serial killer disqualifier)

        “Haha, what about my boyfriend”
        “Look Yulia, I told you that I’m not the jealous type.”
        (Giggle, giggle)

        Boom, keep plowing.

        She somewhat reluctantly gives her number. But the reluctance is due to “I have a ‘bf’ ” and not due to lack of attraction. I can tell better now.

        I also use the WTWAC. Stands for Willing.To.Walk.Away.Card.

        “Look, if this is going to be some flakey number just say so and I’ll throw away my phone in this gutter right now. Don’t want us to waste each others time.”

        ~~I gesture like I’m about to spike my phone into the sewer grate. She laughs and I think this BT spike pushed her to give the digits.

        I call her phone. She jokes about me waiting for her to pick it up but field experience has taught me not to leave trivial matters in the air.

        I joke and tell her she has to spell my name right in her phone (love doing this.)

        She shows me how it’s spelled
        “So is it spelled like this” Points at phone “Amadeus”
        “Close but take out the ‘U’. Wow, you’re already thinking about “us” ‘

        Boom HEADSHOT
        She laughs. I confirm the meet on Monday with after work. Right then and then I text her.

        **Me: Hi Yullia this is Amadeus. Monday around 7**

        She is legit not getting hit on by dudes like me during the day like that.

        I accuse her of hitting on me and she’s like “Well you’re the one that stopped me!”
        “Yulia, I can’t help it! Okay”.
        I like that routine of owning up to my desire. No shame at all.

        I bounce and there is this strange aura when we say bye.

        **Her (30min later): Hi Amades, ok sounds good….btw it’s Yulia with one “L” lol**

        END

        NOTE: My name isn’t Amadeus. I used that as an example for illustrative purposes.

        Also, I will prob shoot her text the day before to confirm that ish.

        Anyways Turk. Look at that interaction. How many 5’8″ like me are hitting on her and carrying themselves that way. I def agree with you to get your body and image in line to where you want. But in the end, it’s the kind of stuff I did in that FR above that will set you apart.

        I agree with what you’re saying, just trying to give an example. I’m 5’8″ and get “cute” when I’m in shape. BTW, I’m about 20lbs overweight.

        ~IG

        Like


      • Solid daygame pickup. Lots of dominant leading, especially appealing to the Russian chicks who probably expect men to be pretty alpha. Good work on qualifying the number and calling her phone and all that…these are little things, but they help solidify the number in general.

        “She goes like “Sooooo, so what next”

        I say, “Well now you give me your number, and then we go out for a drink on Monday around here””

        Any particular reason that you didn’t push for an insta-date at this point and just try to fuck her that afternoon? (logistics? were you or her on the way to an appointment or something? didn’t feel you had enough attraction? didn’t think of it? didn’t think it’s possible to do?)

        Her having a boyfriend means that there’s a way higher chance of her flaking once her Buying Temperature settles down and her attraction isn’t as high as it was in the moment. A lot of times it’s easier to bang them than to get contact info out of them, because a random fuck is a secret fun adventure that probably won’t have any repercussions for her life/relationship, whereas she doesn’t know if giving you her # might result in you phoning her all the time or calling when she’s with her boyfriend etc. and could get her in trouble and/or ruin her shit.

        It sounds from the up-for-an-adventure “so what next?” (VS a dismissive “well it was nice meeting you”) and the eyes-lighting-up at you taking the lead to arrange getting a drink on Monday, that you might’ve had enough attraction to just go “let’s get coffee” and walk her into the nearest cafe to chill and build comfort/rapport and ideally venue change back to your place to bang within a few hours (too long and her BF will start txting asking where she is, gotta’ move fast).

        That doesn’t mean she WILL flake, who knows what her situ/relationship is like, or if she even HAS a BF etc. etc. But going for the # instead of the insta-date when you have attraction and presuming neither of you has a vital appointment to keep, is actually handicapping yourself.

        Julien from RSD puts it good: always try to go to your goal directly. If that doesn’t work, take the slightly longer route. If that doesn’t work, take the even longer route. If that doesn’t work, resort to the longest route. But always try the shortest route first.

        So applying that concept to this situation: an insta-date would be the shortest route. So you could go “let’s go get coffee, come with me.” and just try to lead her into the nearest coffee shop. If she goes “ohh nooo, I can’t!! I have to go to an appointment!”, THEN you go “okay, give me your # and we’ll go for drinks on Monday at 7.”

        Again, you did good here, I’m not bustin your chops lol Just pointing out something to keep in mind for the future to help streamline your game and get it as efficient and high % as possible. 🙂

        Like


      • Thanks Ya.

        100% with what you said. I’ve been on 2 instadates so far so it’s not that far out of my reality.

        This girl though, 2min into the set and I notice my right leg is shaking I was so nervous. Could not believe it was going down and so well.

        Especially when she was like ‘Soooo, what next?”

        My brain went straight to default and got the date and the digits.

        Why is that?

        Because it’s not in my reality yet to instadate that calibre of girl of the street. Thank you for reminding me that it could be.

        But I was just trying to swim in water at that point in time. I’m surprised my hand didn’t shake and drop the phone while I was number #closing lol.

        Excellent Julien quote and thanks again.

        Like


      • Even if you get tired of hearing it, I’m gonna keep saying it — this is so money.

        Like


      • You beeg genius. I’m going to wash my clothes, take a shower and go frighten some girls.

        Like


  19. Who could be surprised by this (female perception colouring their realities?) Its their nature, in the same way that every ex-boyfriend that a girl has ever had was either hung like a horse (if he did the dumping and she still burns for him) or a field mouse (if he became too beta to keep around and she cut him loose.) If you make the mistake of listening to a random girl/your current spinning plate in a bar as she blathers about her exes, you can figure out who the alphas were within minutes.

    Like


  20. “Nevertheless, men do think women can look a little better if they are also charming and likable, which proves the CH precept that femininity can boost a woman’s SMV by a half point. (Not insignificant when you consider that SMV is measured on a 10 point scale.)”

    You know, I don’t think I’ve ever seen you state that an evo psych study countered your own intuitions.

    [CH: It’s good to be the two-eyed king.]

    Presumably, you have in your life encountered research that supports a conclusion other than what you already believe.

    [Not often. And only then if the researchers were feminist freaks from U of Wisconsin or somewhere similar.]

    In this case, though males rating females in looks is the least malleable through familiarity, it is still markedly different between strangers rating strangers and ratings from people known to each other. I would say that this actually somewhat contradicts your concept of attractiveness, which is that attractiveness of women is very objectively measurable. As I have said before- attractiveness ratings are only purely objective if you have no other information about the woman.

    Though you have noted that a number of characteristics associated with femininity alter smv, I have never seen you say that personality perception affects how men physically rate a woman.

    It would be quite unfair to accuse you of viewing all research through the lens of confirmation bias

    [Listen you spergy droid, confirmation bias is just a two dollar word for common sense. When you approach the world with open eyes, it’s only natural that most studies will confirm your real world observations.]

    because ultimately, your view of sexual relations is extremely objective and seemingly accurate.

    [“seemingly” Really gets under your skin eh?]

    Thus, somewhere along the line, you must be actually quite good at discarding old beliefs if evidence shown to you does not support them. Yet, you are perhaps not aware that you do it. In your mind, it’s like you knew something the whole time and the belief was always a part of you.

    [When has CH ever claimed exceptions to rules don’t exist? Answer: Never.]

    Like


    • “[When has CH ever claimed exceptions to rules don’t exist? Answer: Never.]”

      Technically, I was implying that the rule based on present evidence is different than the previously held rule, not that this study is an exception to one of your rules. But nevermind that, let’s go back to how you see yourself after learning of this study (vindicated as always)-

      “[CH: It’s good to be the two-eyed king.]”

      A darling man once said, “one thing you should know about human nature. Ego >>>> IQ. Every time, every permutation.”

      “[“seemingly” Really gets under your skin eh?]”

      No. I admire you for it. It’s why I read your blog.

      “[Listen you spergy droid,”

      Meaniehead.

      “confirmation bias is just a two dollar word for common sense. When you approach the world with open eyes, it’s only natural that most studies will confirm your real world observations.]”

      Yes, I am aware. Wouldn’t give up the ‘sperginess’ as you call it, for anything though I wish you wouldn’t disparage me for it.

      [CH: Since you are of a tunnel-visioned mind with “MisterXenos”, let me explain to you and him how his (and your) invocation of the confirmation bias trope was unwarranted in this thread. Imagine I claim that the sun rises in the east. I claim this because I see it happen every morning. Then a study comes out which provides evidence for my observation that the sun rises in the east. I crow about this study. Then two more studies come out concluding the same thing. I crow some more. Then a nerdling like MisterXenos (or you) enters the fray to accuse me of confirmation bias; that is, that I am only digging up studies which support my observational point of view.

      So it goes with studies vindicating very common age-old wisdoms like “women are more attracted to men’s social status and men are more attracted to women’s looks.” I could cite hundreds of studies proving this common sense, and still not be fairly accused of confirmation bias because there would be few, if any, studies demonstrating the opposite. And usually, when there is that rare contrarian study that flies in the face of hundreds of studies agreeing with each other’s findings, it’s best to take that rare study with a flat of salt, rather than fling around accusations of confirmation bias because you are a fucking tiresome monkey nerd who once read an internet website listing some common logical fallacies.

      Hopefully you are beginning to see the limitations of these favored tropes of the nerd herd when they are sloppily applied to any and all discussions of human nature that normal people with normal social skills occasionally entertain. But you probaly won’t, because you are afflicted with a psychological disease not unlike autism that makes you something less than fully human and incapable of identifying with your fellow humans. HTH.]

      Like


      • Reading comprehension? Again and again and again, you accuse me of things that I am not doing.

        Fine, let’s assume that I am spergy (I am not). But still, my responses are meant literally. You said

        “”confirmation bias is just a two dollar word for common sense. When you approach the world with open eyes, it’s only natural that most studies will confirm your real world observations.]”

        And I said-

        “Yes, I am aware.”

        Do you comprehend this? I said Yes. That would be agreement. I agree because the concept of science is to assess repeated observations in an organized setting. In theory, this can be done intuitively for social psychology as you can personally make repeated observations and draw conclusions. Some people will be better at this than others. Those who are better at it will reach conclusions that are generally similar to the findings of social science studies.

        My original statement was that where evidence does not correspond to what you previously believed, you adjust your belief, but you may not be aware that you made a change in how you view things. This isn’t actually the same thing as a confirmation bias. Notice that my original post also stated that it would be unfair to accuse you of viewing the world through confirmation bias.

        Then MisterXenos disagreed with your semi-facetious statement about the importance of the confirmation bias concept. I am not that person. But even then, that person also did not accuse you of actually viewing the world that way.

        Maybe I am wrong about my statement about how you face evidence when it doesn’t correspond with what you believe. Maybe all the results of this study are exactly what you believed and I was not aware of that. Still, this type of observation on my part was meant as insight into your character, not a shiv to annoy you. My intention was that you would reflect on the statement and then decide to accept or discard it based on how accurate or useful you think the statement was.

        But you took the statement as me attempting to throw a zinger at you. That is not what it was, at least not consciously. Then you were really mean to me, and I didn’t know how to react to that as it hurt my feelings a lot. Then you felt that my distraught confusion was also passive aggression. I don’t know if it was or not.

        Ultimately, I find it strange to see someone get so angry over any sort of accusation related to a confirmation bias (again, no one accused you of that!). You start calling me c-word and three bagger and making fun of the way I dress (my hats?). I would get it, if you reacted that way to accusations of you being treacherous or horrible. But a confirmation bias is something that hinders even some of the most brilliant scientists in the world, and when someone points something in that realm out to you, you are just supposed to assess whether it is true or not and work through it. Getting really angry and bullying over this kind of matter is strange. I mean it- minor criticisms of someone’s analytical processes should not be able to incite rage and cruelty as a reaction, regardless of how valid or invalid the criticism is. Among sane people, those reactions should come from things like seeing your gf flirt openly with another guy or watching someone a lot more incompetent than you get a promotion instead of you.

        Like


    • “…confirmation bias is just a two dollar word for common sense.”

      Confirmation bias is not common sense.

      [CH: It is when the term is being over-deployed by spergly little trolls thinking they’re getting in a zinger on the big bad CH.]

      Anyone with solid scientific understanding knows that mitigating the effects of confirmation bias is a major area of science.

      [Dude, save it. I know what it means. It’s use was unwarranted in this thread.]

      Such biases are well known for their ability to produce erroneous conclusions. Your quick dismissal only illustrates your cluelessness about the scientific process.

      [And the flying spaghetti monster is my god! How’s your atheist dork club going? Any pussy yet?]

      I agree with most of what was said in this article, but don’t make yourself out to be a fool by making such statements.

      [Shaddup concern troll.]

      Like


      • “spergly little trolls ”

        I take it that’s a zinger aimed at moi? Well, I am little at least.

        [CH: If the obtuse fits…]

        “[Shaddup concern troll.]”

        This is your response to that entirely coherent sincere post?

        [It got what it deserved.]

        Really, what are you doing? Ritalin? Cocaina? Lemme do you a favor as I can give you my extra shrooms. Will chill you out.

        [The butthurt is strong in you. How do I know this? Because it’s always the butthurt who are first to attempt becalming measures against their tormentors.]

        I mean look at yourself here-

        “Such biases are well known for their ability to produce erroneous conclusions. Your quick dismissal only illustrates your cluelessness about the scientific process.

        [And the flying spaghetti monster is my god! How’s your atheist dork club going? Any pussy yet?]”

        What is this?

        [It’s called sticking the shiv in a self-satisfied atheist dorkulus.]

        You really want to be that guy?

        [Chicks dig *that guy*.]

        You can be so petty and bullying lately, and strange as it may sound, it’s not like you.

        [Do you think this weak sauce will work on a soul ripper like me, cunt?]

        Personally, I don’t mean to throw zingers at you just to one up you or something.

        [Just like a woman. “Stop making me hit you.”]

        No need for the paranoia, I assure you.

        [Three-bagger, this has got nothing to do with paranoia. I love the hunt.]

        You definitely have my respect. I just hope you mellow out soon.

        [You first.]

        Like


      • ………I c. Mea culpa. Sincerely, I deserve your wrath. Let’s face it.

        [CH: You won’t be facing it, if you know what I mean.]

        “[You first.]”

        How? Honest question.

        [Passive-aggressive evasiveness is a form of bursting anger.]

        Like


      • I am rather afraid to ask, but why are you so spiteful to me lately?

        [CH: Spite’s got nothing to do with it. But you keep being passive-aggressive, cunt, and you’ll continue getting the sharp end of my sadistic pleasure. You wanna keep playing?]

        And why do you believe I hold bursting anger towards you?

        [You hold pain. Which is just a vehicle for anger.]

        This second question is more of a mystery to me.

        [I bet it is.]

        Like


      • You’re an easy target,

        [CH: So are you.]

        Dude has a LOT of rage toward women as well,

        [Which one is your favorite gay pony?]

        if it isn’t obvious, to the point of being extraordinary.

        [Dull, boring and predictable is no way to go through life son.]

        Like


      • on August 23, 2013 at 11:35 am FuriousFerret

        Feministx,

        You do realize that there are multiple authors for CH. One of them probably hates you. LOL.

        Like


      • Really now? Here I was, thinking that CH was basically phase 2 down the pathetic path of Mystery. I’m waiting for him to start cutting his wrists soon.

        Like


      • Were you wearing a fashionable fedora when you wrote that?

        Like


      • ummm. I am now terrified of you. Not in a good way.

        [CH: If it were taken in a good way, I’d question my talents.

        ps Like I advised Maya, I will suggest you take a break from this blog. You’re beginning to get into that sickly body-rocking mindset where your pain is causing you to poke for soft spots in the beast that bedevils you, but you can only enlist the feeblest jabs at the most mundane technicalities. So leave the blog. Now. It’s for your own good.]

        Like


      • This behavior is bizarre and pitiful. Act like a human being and apologize to me.

        Like


      • What did I tell you about taking a break from the blog? It’s working for Maya. Join her in spiritual rejuvenation.

        Like


      • So CH, how’s that religion blue pill working out for you, anyway?

        [CH: http://i.imgur.com/2pIYLRx.jpg ]

        I would suspect you would identify yourself as Christian, given your obvious ire for atheists. Is this correct?

        [Fuckin a, you are a massive dork. And a dumb one as well. Bad combo.]

        Like


  21. So basically Aaron Sleazy’s schtick that only naturally good looking men can do well with women is BS?

    Like


    • If that’s what he says, yes.

      Like


      • I might be paraphrasing him, but that’s pretty close.

        Basically he considers Game to be BS, and he’s planning a series of posts slamming you. (Not that his traffic even begins to compare to yours)

        Like


      • on August 23, 2013 at 10:38 am FuriousFerret

        Aaron Sleazy’s problem is that he completely misses sub communication.

        Good looking men produce much more positive sub communication signals of high value than average men leading to much better results.

        That’s also the reason why you get these guys bitter at PUA. It’s because they are doing everything except what counts which is giving off the right sub communication, which is also the hardest thing to fake which makes it more of a valuable signal.

        You can say all the right things, run all the right routines and take all the right actions but if your body is betraying you and your mannerism are congruent with your works, then you’re fucked. Point blank. You have to believe in your own value.

        I convinced that’s why guys try and fail and then burn out. They never get themselves to really believe in themselves and their body language, mannerisms and subtle speech patterns betray them even if they had the other aspects right.

        Like


    • Sleazy has just realized what most people who get past phase 1 realize: the routines themselves will never be magic wands that when waved draw pussy into uncontrollable vortexes around you. However, without apparently realizing it, while he advocates building passive value — getting fit, getting experiences, he also advocates learning how to demonstrate value — get out there and be MORE SOCIAL. find your niche aka BUILD AN IDENTITY.

      Then he says what everyone in the game past phase 1 knows: cool guys get laid and always got laid — become a cool guy. This is all from his ‘debunking the seduction community’ book. But he seems to have set up kind of a strawman to attack.

      Most people who drop out of the game go out, run a few routines, they bomb (as expected) and then they’re like ‘well game will never work!’

      Like


      • on August 24, 2013 at 9:10 am TyroneSlothrop

        Actually, I think Sleezy’s point is that “Phase 1” is largely a bait-and-switch. The pickup community tells guys “Go do X”, and then when X doesn’t work they say “It wasn’t supposed work because you are an incongruent beta choad”.

        And he’s also correct that there’s a commercial aspect that wants guys stuck in “phase 1” because they’ll keep buying stuff.

        Why not skip phase 1 and advise guys to go right to the “cool guy” phase? Probably because that sounds too much like conventional dating advice and not “top secret pua techniques”.

        Like


      • Phase 1 is kind of necessary. People are scared shitless of approaching, and what are you supposed to tell them? Ya dudebro, it’s less like bursting out of your shell and more like being forged from sand to diamond in the crucible of intense public humiliation. Instead, ‘ya, say these routines and go for it!’ is enough to get out there.

        If you’re currently pulling 3’s, then your life will be immeasurably better if you started pulling 5’s. Ya, wow, who cares if the 10’s are out of reach. And ‘ya just be a cool guy,’ is pretty vague; a lot of it is a matter of trial and error — what works for you out in the field, what doesn’t work?

        Like


  22. Thanks GBFM for calling out Matthew King on his bible thumping white knighting….You even got Mr. Perfect to say FUCK

    Like


  23. Try this study; man A drives up in an $80,000 car and man B takes the bus.

    Like


  24. and lives at his mom’s house.

    Like


  25. What makes a “valuable social partner”?

    Like


    • For females: hotness, nonbitchiness, submissiveness, sweetness.
      For men: charismatic confidence, aloofness, ability to connect with, and modulate her emotions at will.

      Like


    • Does she tingle when you’re with her? You’re a valuable social partner.

      Like


      • “Does she tingle when you’re with her? You’re a valuable social partner.”

        Kind of circular. What causes that to happen?

        Like


      • RTFM. Or, in this case, blog.

        Like


      • on August 23, 2013 at 1:43 pm gunslingergregi

        don’t fuck her when she wants to fuck don’t eat the pussy when she wants you too
        she will go nuts
        then when she kissing on your neck and shit and trying to get you to the bedroom to fuck her don’t go
        this after you have her suck your dick off
        she will be like you make me so fucking hot how can you stay so cool when im trying so hard to get you to fuck me
        then she will start begging for you to fuck her
        pleading
        telling you she loves you
        saying she needs your cock
        offering you money coke whiskey trying to get you drunk and high so you will give her that validation of your dick in her
        then you let her have the pleasure of sucking your dick again then you allow her to maybe win and ride it for a moment then back to sucking your dick
        got offered 40 to eat the pussy wtf I ain’t no cheap male ho
        what the fuck Is up with the drug prob in states went to all white area where this chick at she did coke in past and was trying to get me to try it
        so she could take advantage of me he he he

        Like


      • on August 23, 2013 at 3:02 pm gunslingergregi

        bitches really are like eve if you let em they will bring you down learn how to say no to all their stupid shit

        Like


    • Do you make the group you’re in better, or worse?

      Like


    • on August 23, 2013 at 1:45 pm gunslingergregi

      if you break up and all the chicks she knows try to get with you then you are a valuable social partner
      if she can come in and kick other chicks out she is in competition with then you are a valuable social partner

      Like


      • on August 23, 2013 at 1:49 pm gunslingergregi

        clarify all the chicks she knows want to move in with you but you tell em to fuck off that makes you pretty valuable
        if she can brag about you to people it helps
        having options

        Like


  26. Beautiful, just beautiful. This study illustrates that women’s attraction knob functions more like a volume rheostat than a light switch.

    It has other implications as well, as CH alluded:

    “Game — aka the nonphysical aspects of attraction — works better on smart, emotionally stable chicks from intact families.”

    If this is true, then it’s also true that guys who work at game, a.k.a guys who were NOT genetically gifted with looks & height, are more likely to get with dimes than the naturals, precisely because they’ve LEARNED to modulate, amplify, and disseminate social value, whereas “naturals” just sort of do it without any rhyme or reason, and when “the magic” fails, they shrug it off as supernatural coincidence or other external locus of control.

    TL;DR: Charismatically polished gentlemen succeed more & get higher quality due to effort.

    Like


    • This study illustrates that women’s attraction knob functions more like a volume rheostat than a light switch.

      Watch out for the ones that go to 11.

      Like


    • You are flat out wrong, im really good looking, strong wide chest, 188cm but my game is weak.

      Many times its really better for me to stfu, because as soon as i open my beta mouth everything goes to hell and girl is repulsed instantly.

      I can only say this article is pure gold, as always with CH

      Like


  27. Meh. Most people already know the extra ace in mens’ sleeve alongside the primary traits: good looks, money and power/status is socialability. I’m sure most guys have seen one guy who’s quite the character around women and can get further with them when he lack the primary traits. However that’s the trait that nerds, dorks, geeks, otaku, losers, neckbeards, hikikomori, etc., lack: social skills. CH accidently admitted this the other day when complain losers tend to have bad “sperg” reactions when women challenged them. Hence said losers are autistic in some way and are bad in social situations. Since autism means the right side of the brain is poorly developed that means women have a genetic interest in avoiding losers.

    Like


  28. This is why the comparison of a woman to a flower has merit. A woman is very much like a plant. She can detect what is favourable or unfavourable to her (“Oh, I’m not getting enough light; I better grow toward the sun”) but she has no brain with which to analyse and comprehend. The modicum of logic she does possess is kept on a 3ft leash and acts only on commands from her will.

    Like


  29. I find myself constantly fascinated by the religious right,

    [CH: So you’re a daring liberal nonconformist. Got it.]

    how they’ll gobble up science (they probably only barely understand)

    [Did that attack feel good?]

    whenever it suits their belief system, yet freak out when it picks apart their precious religious beliefs.

    [“I find myself fascinated by the religious left, how they’ll gobble up science (they probably only barely understand) whenever it suits their belief system (like bashing creationists or global warming skeptics), yet freak out when it picks apart their precious religious beliefs (like the biological equality of the races or the blessings of diversity).”]

    I also find it fascinating

    [You find a lot of stuff fascinating. Are you a shut-in?]

    how they’ll harp on and on about how you can’t prove god DOESN’T exist, and then sit and laugh at ufologists.

    [It’s funny that you think CH is staffed by religious writers. Apparently you just started reading here yesterday.]

    We can’t prove aliens don’t exist either, yet you don’t see a bunch of people running around actually believing in aliens.

    [Scintillating logic! Not so long ago by historical standards, before it was experimentally provable, few believed in the existence of subatomic particles.]

    I rather enjoy the fact that male attractiveness to women is largely tied into things that can be feasibly improved, but if you appreciate the science that suggests such things are true (by the way, science doesn’t prove things), why not bite the bullet and accept that science also says that your belief in god is erroneous?

    [Do you aggro atheists ever realize just how much of a fucking BORE you are? For the record, I’m an agnostic. And in practice, totally irreligious. But unlike you fedora-sporting neck-bearded GOTCHA dorks, I don’t feel a pressing need to shit on religious people who enjoy a little bit of hope by believing in god. Because in the grand sum of things, I’ll take one thousand religious neighbors before I take two of you spittle-flecked, nasally voiced atheists as neighbors. Those god-fearing folks you irrationally despise are more decent and kinder to their friends and neighbors than grating assholes like you will ever be.]

    You guys claim to be such “logical” men, yet time and time again you go running to your giant cosmic daddy cause you’re scared of death.

    [If you don’t believe in an afterlife, it is rational to be scared of death. Illimitable darkness and all that.]

    Well I got some bad news for you:

    [My heart swells with the enlightenment it is about to receive by your gentle ministration!]

    There’s no special alpha heaven waiting for you after you die.

    [What about a beta heaven?]

    Nothing but the cold eternity of oblivion.

    [Dude, I do this schtick way better than you. Offense intended.]

    And if there was?

    [Masturbation for eternity!]

    Do you REALLY think God is going to be impressed with deliberately acting like an asshole and basically subverting everything Jesus stood for to the sole purpose of getting laid?

    [I think god would appreciate my purity of thought.]

    If you were so logical, you’d realize the absence of any kind of cosmic lawgiver and punisher is precisely the thing that will allow you do to the aforementioned things without any fear of reprisal from any cosmic agent.

    [So you believe that atheism encourages bad behavior?]

    But it becomes all too clear that you aren’t as logical as you pretend to be.

    [Where’d the material for the Big Bang come from?]

    Religion is, plain and simply, your version of the blue pill.

    [You think you are dealing with a familiar enemy. I assure you, you are not. I predict you will now slink away, unable to comprehend the demon with which you wrestle.]

    Like


    • Conservatives who don’t believe in god? Durrrhurrrr that doesn’t compute. I’m going back to looking at pictures of space on reddit so I can tell people how into science I am. Im going to wear my penny arcade shirt to tabletop gaming where I will fawn over this one fat chick who will never bang me. I’m smarter than you idiots and that makes me better, despite my bitter self hatred, low testosterone and patchy facial hair and poor hygiene and flip flops and Ill-fitting everything. Feminism is a real academic inquiry too

      Like


      • Feminism is a real academic inquiry too

        lolz. At least religious studies provided a guide for living beyond publicly funded rubbers.

        Like


    • Why bother to respond to this? I’m an atheist myself*, and I find atheists who can’t shut up about their views annoying, of course, but he’s hardly worth the vitriol. Let’s get back to serious matters, like macking on bitches.

      I will note that it is truly bizarre that he thinks you’re religious.

      *Or I identify as such for simplicity. Metaphysics is meaningless in my view, and I have never seen a reason to invoke some sort of “supernatural” explanation for any phenomenon. I suppose that makes me an “atheist”, though I dislike the term as I’m not sure precisely what is even being denied (an invisible magician who hates gays?).

      Like


      • on August 24, 2013 at 8:42 am FuriousFerret

        It’s a way to exert power over others by appearing smarter and more sophisticated. Plain and simple. It’s basically why liberals are liberals.

        Like


      • The whole liberal MO is feeling smarter and more sophisticated than anyone else. With minorities it’s smug patronization and permanent dependency/handouts in exchange for votes. With white people they have no use for as pawns (i.e. conservatives, rural folks, religious people) it’s just pure, open, hateful mockery. Smug, snarky condescension and superiority toward everyone who doesn’t look or act like them is the air they breathe.

        Like


      • Exactly. And that unearned, indefensible air of presumption is what CH roundly ridiculed, not so much the neckbeard’s position per se.

        But the problem is that those who hold the neckbeard’s position seem to invariably display the air of presumption. The position and the attitude coincide often enough that they must be associated to, if not co-dependent upon, each other.

        And it’s people like CH who are the likeliest to be piqued by the presumption, because this snotty little bitch gives agnosticism — a respectable, legitimate, defensible position — a bad name by confusing it with internet-dork atheism.

        Matt

        Like


      • Why bother to respond to this?

        Because he does it better than probably anyone on the web.

        CH is not even much removed philosophically from that poor irreligious victim, who also describes himself as an “agnostic” in another thread. Imagine the savagery if there were monumental differences. “Why bother to respond?” For sport. It keeps the muscles limber.

        Agnosticism is the only smart beginning point. It’s where Socrates began (“All I know is I know nothing”). It is a respectable intellectual foundation. It is the beginning of all true faith, to acknowledge how little one really knows. Which is also the beginning of all true knowledge.

        But CH better defines this tool as the practicing atheist he is, despite what the tool claims for himself. Atheism is the stupidest possible foundation for epistemology. “There is no God” is an affirmative assertion when 1) the asserter presents no grounds for such asserting, and 2) the grounds for assertion are almost definitely impossible.

        God is not one being among many, something within the realm of existence, to be proved or disproved. The God of Christianity is “ipsum esse subsistens,” the sheer act of being itself. There cannot be proof or disproof of God any more than there can be proof or disproof of existence (though postmoderns build a castle in the sky based on this elementary error, hence our heritage of nihilism).

        The agnostic might say “There probably is no God,” and you can drive a universe through that probably. Fine, we can work with that. But the atheist declares proof of a negative, despite giving no proof, and despite the fact that such proof is impossible. There is no real argument going on when one side is so aggressively and belligerently confused over the premises being debated.

        No real argument, just a cat toying with a mouse.

        Matt

        Like


    • Who told YOU that you could talk about God with men?

      You fucking child… you company man…

      You fairy.

      Like


    • You sound like a total dick.

      Like


    • “[Scintillating logic! Not so long ago by historical standards, before it was experimentally provable, few believed in the existence of subatomic particles.] -CH”

      Few? Read Greenblatt’s 2012 Pulitzer prize winner, “The Swerve” for more on how “atomism” was the 2500 year old antagonist to official religions up to the present day.

      Like


    • “[For the record, I’m an agnostic. And in practice, totally irreligious. But unlike you fedora-sporting neck-bearded GOTCHA dorks, I don’t feel a pressing need to shit on religious people who enjoy a little bit of hope by believing in god. Because in the grand sum of things, I’ll take one thousand religious neighbors before I take two of you spittle-flecked, nasally voiced atheists as neighbors. Those god-fearing folks you irrationally despise are more decent and kinder to their friends and neighbors than grating assholes like you will ever be.]”

      A very beautifully constructed reply. CH, you have your head screwed on right. I often notice that you have a very clear line between right and wrong.

      Incidentally, the basis of all morality is to recognize the good. You might not be a believer, but you recognize good when you see it. These remarks are very good proof.

      Recognizing the good is very rare nowadays, in the age of doubt, ennui, and cynicism. The Left is the most pessimistic bunch; they can’t see the good in anything, which is why they constantly bitch over everything, never feeling true happiness and satisfaction. Part of happiness stems from understanding the world by analyzing it properly. Understanding gives satisfaction. The Left’s theories are all wrong, since they’re not based on what really happens in the real world, which is why Lefties never find answers to their issues, and that in turn causes unhappiness and pessimism about all of life. A vicious cycle.

      It’s funny, even when studies disprove their erroneous theories, they refuse to accept them because it doesn’t fit the picture they’ve painted. Feminists are the worst offenders of this.

      Oh, we can go on and about the Left; it could fill this whole thread. Thanks for pinpointing at least one (out of many) of the Left’s wicked aspects.

      Like


  30. This blog needs a Sperg filter. Like a Captcha only if you do too well on it it flags you and then only shows their posts to them and nobody else so the rest of us don’t have to drown in Dork.

    A “reading for comprehension” mechanism would be nice, too. You have to answer three multiple-choice questions about a post before being able to comment on it.

    Just sayin’.

    Like


  31. See, how Beta this guy is. He gets a perfect rely from the girl. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDFFy20zolI

    Like


  32. on August 23, 2013 at 8:02 am FuriousFerret

    OT: Zimmerman trolling the world.

    George Zimmerman Shops for Tactical Shotgun

    http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=156424723

    ‘We’re told the owner’s son took Zimmerman on a tour of the grounds, including the area where the firearms are assembled. The photo of Zimmerman and an employee (above) was taken inside the assembly plant.”

    LOL. This is exactly what he should be doing. Becoming more of gun nut and be unapologetic about it.

    When there’s no way out dive further in.

    Like


    • Boss.

      That shotgun is sick too. Never seen one like that. Bullpup, 12 rounds… getting hard just typing this.

      Like


    • He’s probably afraid for his life and for his family’s life. He has the entire Black race ready to tear him to shreds. Give him a break.

      BTW, in case you haven’t noticed the entire country is under Blacks assault as a means of getting ravage for Trevor. It’s terrifying what’s going on. I knew Obama being president would eventually embolden Blacks. CH mentioned some of these attacks in his recent threads.

      Like


  33. on August 23, 2013 at 11:34 am Lucky White Male

    Re: your Mugshots from the 1920s:

    No doubt that American men, and I mean white men, looked much more Alpha than now

    It was much more sink or swim up until the 50s. At 18, you were basically on your own

    Too many young guys in 2013 are being coddled, not out in the real world, carving his way in a hostile world. You will make mistakes, you will fuck up, but you will become a man out of it

    The Alpha/Sigma is always is a “self made man” in some sense.

    You WILL see who a man is simply by his “mugshot” – one look

    Jack Donovan – “We admire gangsters not because they are necessarily ‘good men’, but because we see they are a ‘Man’

    Best thing you can do for younger males:

    1. Throw them out into real world to sink or swim

    2. Real Talk – challenge them, provoke them, hold them to standards,

    Shame the misfits, the guys in fear, the fat slobs, the sluts

    The Manosphere should have the cadence of men – not sanitized PC pussies

    Like


  34. While a man’s attractiveness clearly is fluid, I do believe that once his attractiveness declines to a certain point, his attractiveness (his total sexual or relationship value) can never be recovered in the eyes of a particular woman.

    IOW, it may be fluid upward, but only if the floor of that attractiveness is above the woman’s point-of-no-return. And there is *no* floor in regard to the man’s attractiveness declining. Cross that negative point-of-no-return, it’s buh-bye. The man is now infinitely unattractive. He doesn’t exist and never will again.

    This has been my observation, anyway, to about five 9’s of probability. I warn my LTR-engaged, or married male friends, of this phenomenon. As in “You’re getting warning signals, you’d better stop doing that right now if you want to keep her.” I’m curious what others think.

    [Because this is not the movies, and no one comes into the back of the airliner and says, “Is there an unappreciated man back her who can land this 737 and save all our lives? Because both pilots died and we need a hero please save us! … Thank you for saving us oh hero your girlfriend who was about to dump you now knows what a hero you are.”]

    Like


    • Doubt it.

      A woman could find you repulsive one day, and if she saw you the next day with a shitton of social proof/game/etc. = attraction.

      Like


      • I’ve not seen this … once. Perhaps the difference in perspectives is that I’m talking about men falling out of the zone of an LTR.

        Like


      • Well in that case I know it can happen because both of my ex-gfs have started treating me way differently. The second one, I broke up with so that’s unsurprising. The first one, tho, broke up with me. And it was precisely because I lost her attraction by failing to act like a man. Ya, like night and day. Could have either of them at any time…but lol they’re 5’s.

        I mean, yeah it’s an e-anecdote…and yeah, it took A LOT of self-improvement to see this kind of change, but it’s way possible.

        Like


      • all these “you can be cool again if you really BELIEVE AND ACT” is from the understandably idealistic viewpoint of young men/people.

        There is no coming back to being cool (with fertile women anywhere over 6 or the like) once you’re old unless you’re famous, rich or freakishly, genetically charming.

        Like


    • It’s recoverable if there’s a major change in the area of decline. If a guy lets himself go– hit the gym. Getting too passive and placating around the house– more alpha attitude, dread game. Loses job and not trying hard enough to get another one– start making money. Nine times out of ten it’s in one of those three areas, or a combination of them.

      Like


  35. CH, that was a righteous beat down. It never ceases to amuse me how these hapless, self-obsessed gammas of the belief spectrum think anybody but their fellow Aspies enjoys hearing what they have to say.

    Like


  36. “You guys claim to be such “logical” men, yet time and time again you go running to your giant cosmic daddy cause you’re scared of death.”

    The inverse argument can be made that atheists, at least of the modern variety, run away from the idea of a God because they fear being judged after death by an inhuman power that can’t be argued away with the assertion “It’s all relative/subjective/whatever”. If I knew there was an objective standard against which I would be found wanting and that failing to meet that standard would condemn me for all eternity to a suffering worse than any I had hitherto known, I would argue against the existence of that standard as well.

    Like


    • “You guys claim to be such “logical” men, yet time and time again you go running to your giant cosmic daddy cause you’re scared of death.”

      For the record, He’s my giant cosmic Commander-In-Chief… and the only thing I’m afraid of is not getting to play a part in His army.

      Right now, we’re fighting a guerrilla-style fray… the Adversary appears to be winning… but to borrow what a famous victor of the past once said, when asked to pack it in, we have not yet begun to fight.

      Afraid of death? Laughable… fear God, and you need fear nothing else.

      Like


    • Many people and religions don’t understand God. Yes, there is judgment after death, but it’s based on absolute truth. Think about it. If God is a sole omnipotent all-knowing creator, he knows what absolute truth is. When it’s your time for judgment, it will be based only on both absolute truth and real justice. His court of law isn’t like it is in our world. Yes, there are two sides – the Heavenly Defense, and the Heavenly Prosecution. However, unlike man-made courts, no one can lie to the Heavenly Court – not you and not the prosecution, and get away with it, because God knows the truth.

      If you ask me, I rather be judged based on the truth, and get exactly what I deserve, than be judged by human beings who have failings, flaws, faults, and often misrepresent the truth to satisfy themselves. All we can hope for in this world is that we get what we deserve. Yet, we can’t really get what we deserve in this world, but we can expect to get it in the “world to come” (the afterlife).

      Another thing to consider is God is compassionate and full of mercy. He’s not looking to get revenge, like human beings do. He wants to correct our souls. Therefore, God never condemns for all eternity. Once you have paid your debt in the form of cleansing your soul, you are released of the debt. Of course, there were few detestable people in history that no amount of spiritual cleansing in the form of spiritual suffering in the “world to come” has cleansed of their evilness.

      In any case, all this eternity condemnation business was made up by religious zealots who wanted to scare people into believing their brand of religion. They have no proof of this, yet God is logical. He doesn’t do anything that doesn’t make sense, even if we humans with our limited ability to see the whole picture can’t understand. In other words, “God doesn’t play dice with the world” (Albert Einstein). In other words, trust him NOT to take chances, or to make mistakes with the truth – trust him to treat you right.

      Apropos, many say Albert Einstein was an atheist. They were highly mistaken. I think he was an agnostic leaning in favor of God. Had he still lived today, after all the new evidence mounting that this universe could not have been the result of chance, Einstein would have been a believer.

      One ambiguous quote from a letter to a sixth-grade student named Phyllis Wright reads,

      “Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the LAWS OF THE UNIVERSE – a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is indeed quite different from the religiosity of someone more naïve.”
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/28/einstein-signed-bible-_n_3515232.html

      Like


  37. This 24-year-old teen has an 8-year-old son who decided to take his six-year-old sister on a joy ride in the teen’s car and killed the sister.

    http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/08/29/3593449/police-8-year-old-boy-driving.html

    Like


  38. […] [A Man’s Perceived Physical Attractiveness Is Fluid] […]

    Like