How American Women Are Seen By Kazakhs

Investigative reader Joe T. sent me this unintentionally hilarious survey of Central Asian (particularly Kazakh) attitudes toward, and stereotypes of, foreign women. The survey was conducted by the Gender Studies department at a university in Kazakhstan, and all I can say is that if American gender studies departments were like this one, our college “””educated””” women wouldn’t be so fucked in the head. I might even take a class. It’s disconcerting to note that it’s in the marginally 3rd world countries where the truth doesn’t send people into pants pissing mode and where no one uses PC as a sanctimonious cudgel to gain status over close kin rivals. You have to concede that the West is in a race to abdicate everything that made it great. Stupid fucks.

The stereotypes of foreign women that the survey highlighted shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who has lived a day in his life.

Appearance of the Chinese woman is distinguished by refinement, small forms, delicacy, grace, fragility, slimness, beauty, narrow eyes. Often it is mentioned, that Chinese woman is poor, submissive, hurt, without claims and demands, traditions, home, family are in the first place for her. She can be secretive, knows which side her bread is buttered, reserved, silent, patient, and, probably, wise, calm, polite.

Her main typical quality is diligence, also she is very practical, thrifty, talented, persistent, indefatigable. In the post-Soviet environment Chinese woman can be met at the bazaar, where there is much of everything, everything by wholesale and very cheap.

If you’ve been through a Chinese street market, you know they eat just about everything under the sun. Very nutritionally resourceful.

[…]Korean woman is associated with Korean salads, rice, spices, kuksi noodles and dog meat. She is distinguished with narrow eyes, miniature, graceful and exotic beauty and cleanliness. Like Uigur woman she is engaged in trading at the bazaar, business in area of café, restaurants, clubs, shops, and for this reason she is rich. Her entrepreneurial success is promoted by diligence, accuracy, intellect, tenacity, pragmatism, dynamism. Depending on situation and character Korean woman can be both refined, subtle, tender, lively, wise and capricious, crafty and bad-tempered.

Does anyone talk like this anymore in the US? They should. It’ll help people get along better.

In the row of Asian women with outstanding cooking abilities a special place belongs to Tatar women. Unlike Uigur and Korean women, Tatar women are not active in trading and financial sphere. She is also cunning and practical, but these qualities help them to settle their family and social affairs.

Having dated a half-Tatar Ukrainian woman, I can attest to the above description. Funny how the Kazakhs and me both agree on female Tatar characteristics, depsite being from opposite sides of the globe.

How are the Turkish women viewed by Kazakhs?

Many note her exotic beauty, plastic, graceful figure, big black eyes, long eyelashes and an indispensable attribute – a headscarf. […]

Social status of Turkish women is presented by people in typical way: submissive, driven, without rights, enslaved, captive, slavery, many children, family for her in the first place, a housewife, tries to resemble a European,, closed door, does not know her bridegroom before wedding, under yoke of rigidly patriarchal and stringently ruled family life.

Above explains associations of her complex inner world: closed, reserved, aggressive, spoilt – are these not images of harem captives?

Any man who can successfully manage a harem can run a multinational corporation.

Oh, here’s a juicy one sure to raise hackles.

Jewish woman  is sometimes described by ethnographic images (synagogue, Esther, Rachel, Sarah, “Havva nagila” song”). Everyone knows her typical appearance: hair above her lips, dark-brown eyes, hooked nose, large thighs, thin waist, often fat, speaks in scandalous manner, not very neat.

Amazing unanimity is observed in responses regarding maternal role of the Jewish woman. Variations on this topic are as follows: head of the family, mother with many children, mother of the family, mamma of the big family, 100%-mother, brooding-hen mother, mummy, very much attached to family values, home, thrift, good housewife, cultural traditions.

Psychology of Jewish woman reveals a complex and flexible character: she is cunning, knows which side her bread is buttered, self-conceited, ironical, easily adaptable, lively, not boring, warm, intellectual, coquettish, sexual, expansive, uncommon.

Surely, Jewish woman is smart, she has high intellect, talent, mathematical cast of mind, elitism. Nevertheless, she has also such qualities, as greediness, practicality and prudence, this woman always knows her advantage and always settles her affairs well. This explains her successfulness, activeness, strength, well-being, prosperity.

The thing with stereotypes is that they don’t arise out of the ether unbidden. They must have a kernel of truth to exist in the first place.

Like Chinese, Japanese woman is beautiful, graceful, she has small feet, cheeks, eyes, porcelain face, small pace, but she is bright, thin and strange, like greenhouse. Traditionalism is her main specific feature, she is patriotic, proud with a country, with herself, her husband, life. Educated and cultural, she knows her rights, emancipated, travels trough the world. Her portrait is supplemented by such qualities as quiet, secretive, reserved, well-wishing, agreeable, refined, delicate, poetical, with sense of beauty.

How do these barbarian Kazakhs form such accurate impressions of foreign women? It must be low class bigotry fed by media consumption. Ah, no. Most of the survey respondents were from the educated classes, the type of people who have read extensively of other cultures and traveled abroad.

The survey covered 85 people, 75 of them were women, 10 – men. 59 of them were citizens of Kazakhstan, 5 – of Kyrgyzstan, 5 – of Tajikistan, 4- of Russia, 3 – of Belarus, 1 – of Ukraine, 2 – of Georgia. The sampling mainly included members of the Central Asia network of gender research (41 people) and representatives of women’s public organizations. Most respondents have higher education, live in cities, being by occupation NGO activists (37 people), university professors (22 people), post graduate students (5 people), students (2 people), pupils (2 people), journalists (2), employees of international organizations and funds (6), non-working people (2) and others (7).

Now we get to the juiciest stereotypes; you know, the ones formed by the locals of foreign women who are from countries much farther away from Central Asia. Let’s see if their sweeping generalizations remain as accurate for Western women.

Probably, the most typical ethnographic image of German woman, known from textbooks, is a blonde in white flounced apron, with plump hands, shaking off flour.

German woman usually is bright-eyed blonde, often stout, plump, sometimes wan, awkward, plain. Often respondents present German woman as unattractive, thin, without make-up, manlike. Undoubtedly, she is a good housewife and spouse, she has a strong united family. One can easily guess which features are typical for German woman in the most concentrated way, serving as a national attribute. They are accuracy, cleanliness and pedantry. This is supplemented by practicality, prudence, diligence, strictness, discipline, thrift, solid sense, honesty, punctuality and we have a business portrait of German woman. However she is characterized with poor spiritual qualities: coldness, dryness, cruelty, secretiveness, boring.

Score! German personality: Nailed. German woman’s propensity to shake off flour: Bullseye! (I’m not kidding. I have fond memories from my youth of my female German descended relatives arm deep in flour puttering around the kitchen barking orders like a military officer. “Flour, please. Flour und eggs, mach schnell! Vere ist your flour und eggs, hmm?”)

I’d quibble with the Kazakhs’ opinion that German women are unattractive, but they are hinting at something true with their description of “manlike”. German women, especially the northern Nordics, do have more prominent facial features and stronger jawlines than the Central Asian women Kazakhs are used to seeing.

Italian woman speaks much and fast, very noisy with a loud, scandalous and hoarse voice, sultry beauty, sensual, southern, sunny, sun tanned.  She has magnificent hair, splendid bust, this is Sophie Lauren. She is embodiment of flourishing, money and luxury. This spirited, expressive woman, full of love, energetic, can cause a scandal and quarrel any minute. Men value in her sex appeal and impulsiveness, merriness and restlessness, sense of humor and bright womanliness. This is a volcano, ready to explore all of a sudden, warm strength, which makes a dull life of bored man an art of survival and self- possession. This a holiday of which one is tired, but always wishes again.

As with my German relatives, I concur with the Kazakhs’ views of my female Italian relatives. They do seem to seek any excuse to start a drama-fest. Italians and Italian-descended women must need to nourish their souls with histrionic outburts. Yet I cannot look away. They are indeed a holiday of which one is tired, but always wishes again.

Ethnic archetype of Swedish woman is defined by rigid landscapesnow, mountains, cold wind, ships, Vikings. Let’s imagine a tall sportive woman without make-up, in trousers, coat and sports shoes, with few gestures and self-confident. Her color is white. It dominates in description of her pale image: white, fair, with fine complexion, with fair hair, with straight straw or flax-color hair, freckles nose, a pale moth, in one word. […]

Respondents could not help recalling a Swedish family, where sex is so common, that children are taught it in the textbooks from the age of five, without any secrets and love, as a result.

Answers of male respondents show, that their images and stereotypes are very similar to presentations of women by both content and visually.

Swedish babes… lusted the world over.

And now we get to the Central Asian stereotype you’ve all been waiting for: American broads!

American woman is described in quite contradictory way. Most amazing is a negative estimation of her appearance. There are many variations on this topic: not well-groomed, not stylish, does not dress well, not fashionable clothes, not ironed shorts and T-shirt, sleepers, put on bare feet, elderly woman in shorts, emancipated woman, for whom it is not important how she looks, a girl without make-up, happy fatty woman, stout and shapeless person, a short hair-cut, a knapsack, waddling walk, tennis shoes, dentures, plain, manlike, unisex. Positive estimations are given less frequently: smiling, loudly speaking, stylish blonde, jeans, jeep, cowboy hat, cigarette, uncommonness.

“Happy fatty woman”. Ha haaw! Even the positive estimations are backhanded compliments. “Loudly speaking”? Yeah, that’s real feminine.

Knowing a kind of our sampling (activists of female organizations and researchers of gender issues), we are not surprised, that most people relate image of American woman with achievements of the female movement in the USA: feminist, independent, free, self-sufficient, uninhibited, emancipated, enjoying equal rights, wealthy, hater of men.

Please stop, I’m dying over here. The Kazakhs are more astute and honest regarding American cultural disintegration at the hands of the alpha male-feminist front nexus than are our own fucking elites. I hope I’m painting a clearer picture of who exactly is your number one enemy in this war supreme to bring America to her knees. Hint: It ain’t al-Qaeda.

Besides, American women are emotional, uninhibited so much, that they look ill-mannered, snobs, arrogant, hypocritical, empty, with complexes, cold, dry, egoists, superficial, non-constant and impudent.  Their actions are often characterized with regulated character, black and colored women are distinguished with a habit to rely on social support and not to undertake anything to change their life.

File under: Things you will never see printed in the New York Times.

But the Kazakhs do have something nice to say about American women.

Despite this, business qualities of the majority of American women – intellect, professionalism, activeness, self-confidence, discipline pragmatism, career-mindness – are worth of great respect.

Thanks, you want ’em? I’ll trade you my professional “active” American women for your sweetly feminine Kazakh women. Then we’ll see how long your “great respect” for them lasts.

Read the whole article. It’s a trip.

The Kazakhs speak their mind and tell it like it is. Something the West should relearn. It causes ulcers to constantly police against stating the bleedingly obvious. Diversity is a wonderful thing to observe, if not necessarily to live amongst. I’m intrigued that there are so many different nations of so many different ethnicities and races with their unique characteristics, some good, some bad. Nations are really human ethnic groups by another name. Even America. Though to a lesser extent than that of, say, Japan. Or Israel.

Maxim #42: Xenophobia is good for diversity.

The Kazakhs need reeducation in the proper parlance of the times: We’re all the same on the inside, we just look different on the outside. Only a bigot could think otherwise.





Comments


  1. Trying to read this with a “Borat” type accent just made me LOL.

    Although I will disagree with Jewish women and their “mostly fat”… a lot of the Jewish girls I know (and I know a lot, considering I’m from one of the most heavily Jewish areas of the country) have been really fit and in shape, with great arses. Though some of them do have the requisite nose that I’m not into… 😛

    Like


  2. American women, for the most part, make me sick…

    every bit fucked in the head as they are entitled.

    what’s my name?

    Like


  3. What, nothing on Canadian women? I’m offended.

    Like


  4. This is hilarious and thanks for posting it, but it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that most of the stereotypes come from bad movies and old picture books. German women are either “blonde in a white flounced apron” or a “concentration camp commandant”? Funny as it is, pretty impossible to take seriously.

    Like


  5. actually, it’s a weird mix of cartoon stereotypes from children’s books and some stuff that is sort of accurate (I can attest to the Jewish women one). I suspect there were a few respondents who had wide experience with travel and a bunch who had really never left the home village.

    Like


  6. “My seester, she is a….ah….pros-prostitute?”

    “Oh no”

    “Why?”

    “She like to make money! High 5!”

    Like


  7. Germans are not a distant people for Kazakhs. Stalin deported masses of Volga Germans and other Eastern European Germans there and Kazakhstan ended up with a rather large German minority (5 % or something like that).

    Of course, that’s testimony to the staying power of culture, since those Germans haven’t had much to do with Germans in Germany since the times of Catherine the Great.

    Like


  8. Hmm, a central asian country had mostly negative things to say about two of the most reviled groups of people in the world: Jews and Americans. Nah, couldn’t be.

    Funny stuff, though.

    Like


  9. “Hater of men.”

    Like


  10. Note how American women, who are a hodgepodge of ethnicities, can be SHAPED into a very unfeminine bitch from hell prototype given the right elites dictating culture …

    Where would American men be without Game?

    The other day, I came across an old book that came out 10 years ago, 1998, called “How to Succeed with Women,” by Ron Louis and David Copeland. This was a few years before DeAngelo and Mystery, et al., came on the scene, and was a bestseller at the time.

    Flipping through it, the book has some decent things to say, but it basically repeats a tired strategy of more or less supplicating the woman – playing up to her fantasies.

    What was really called for, in retrospect, in dealing with the unfeminine American bitch from hell is what we got a few years later: Cocky and Funny, the Mystery Method, the “Neg,” and generally turning the tables.

    Fundamental changes in such a basic dynamic as men and woman always calls for fundamental revolution.

    The authors of “How to Succeed…” are coming out with a Second Edition in January. It will be interesting to see if – 10 years later – they basically have to revamp everything they say about women, considering the impact of Game.

    At the same time, I noticed Wikipedia is deleting several profiles for the pioneers of “seduction community” arguing the profiles are “no longer relevant.” Say what?

    “Game” is a big caveman throwback horror show for elites. But it’s a godsend for American men

    Like


  11. Roissy Maxim #42: Xenophobia is good for diversity.

    The Kazakhs need reeducation in the proper parlance of the times: We’re all the same on the inside, we just look different on the outside. Only a bigot could think otherwise.

    Funny, just the other day I stumbled upon this book review by John Derbyshire with some similar thoughts:

    http://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm/wood-derbyshire-1794
    In the Empire Boys’ Annuals of my own British childhood, the human world was a diverse place indeed, populated by head-hunters, cannibals, Polynesian bungee-jumpers, ferocious Gurkhas, exquisitely polite Japanese, reed dwellers, cave dwellers, tree dwellers, suttees, thuggees, fellows who inserted four-inch wooden disks into their lower lips and women who elongated their necks by adding a metal ring every year. Now youngsters are assured that though people who live in foreign parts may sometimes look a bit odd, they are really just middle-class Americans in thin disguise. Little Masai boys like to play soccer, says the “Social Science” textbook issued to my fourth-grader. In China they prefer volleyball. Uh-huh.

    Like


  12. on November 13, 2008 at 3:34 pm Dr. Grzlickson

    What’s my name?

    Like


  13. You’re no Kick a Bitch.

    Like


  14. “At the same time, I noticed Wikipedia is deleting several profiles for the pioneers of “seduction community” arguing the profiles are “no longer relevant.” Say what?”

    Wikipedia is edited by the same guys who encourage their pregnant wives to paint Obama ’08 on their stomachs and the women who do it.

    Like


  15. HP, game has always been out there, it’s just that before the internet underground world as proof it would’ve been mighty tough for obscure magicians to convince mainstream publishers that their ideas about “negs” have value enough for whole books.

    You can spot the game in snippets in lots of old books. Nope, there’s nothing special about modern times, it all worked exactly the same in the 1950s, the 19th century, two thousand years ago or whatever it is that you imagine to be the era of pre-feminist bliss when women liked supplicating nice guys and not cocky, funny players.

    Like


  16. I simply hate wasting time reading roissy’s verbose and tiresome diatribes, but also feel a deep need to add my opinion to the fray. Call it speed comprehension. I just glance at it and generally get the gist of it. 99% of the time it’s some negativity of some sort.

    Today’s post: “How horrible are American women? Let me count the ways.”

    Boring…… ^_^

    Like


  17. I simply hate wasting time reading roissy’s verbose and tiresome diatribes,

    Yes, your months of constant visiting and commenting really show that.

    Like


  18. This post is hilarious.

    On a separate note, I’ve been relayed quite a few stories lately of American women openly expressing their resentment of Eastern European girls here in NYC. Love it.

    Like


  19. DF – can you post any links to that activity in NYC? Any articles or quotes?

    Like


  20. Those Kazakh women don’t look so bad:

    Hardly a man-face to be seen. One thing I hate about the Mountain West — mostly northwestern Euros, so super-girly faces are pretty rare, even among the young ones, compared to back east.

    Like


  21. Kick a Bitch

    word…

    Like


  22. I’m way out of context here but I sincerely hope this crowd will take a look at the link below; it really doesn’t get any better than this:

    http://www.firstwivesworld.com/

    social networking website for divorced women. Wow.

    Like


  23. This reminds me of the 1976 National Lampoon piece, “Foreigners around the World” which surveyed every conceivable ethnic prejudice. It’s a classic work of political incorrectness. You can read it at:

    http://www.olimu.com/Notes/Foreigners/Foreigners.htm

    Like


  24. Hmm … Sarah Michelle Gellar, Amanda Bynes, Michelle Trachtenberg, Alona Tal, Bar Rafeali? Dunno about you, I would hardly characterize them as the Kazahks do.

    Moreover, what exactly has Kazakhnstan accomplished? Vs. America.

    The American model is that of the pioneer woman. She traded wealth and refinement and opportunties for even a poorer woman to snag Mr. Big for independence and the requirement for hard work, but also freedom. Wyoming gave women the right to vote in 1869.

    What is interesting is how this model has broken down, to the more European model. Women in America trade freedom and responsibility for pursuing the Alpha. That’s a huge shift from the Pioneer model (women have a tough life, but filled with freedom, as pure equals in status/standing).

    That pioneer model pushed America to greatness. It is now fading.

    Like


  25. […] conditioning of women in America and plan a blog on it. In the meantime here is the Roissy link: How American Women Are Seen By Kazakhs Roissy in DC __________________ JunkyFungus.com Steve O. Blog Updated 11/10/08 Order Inquiries: Please use […]

    Like


  26. Whiskey you forgot to add Micheal Obama to your list.

    Like


  27. Chic – Who’s Michael Obama?

    Like


  28. Opps
    *Michelle Obama*

    I was thinking about Micheal Jackson.

    Like


  29. Verra nice, great success!

    Like


  30. chic, I think whiskey was referring to Jewish women, not to American women.

    BTW, Bynes’ father is Catholic and her mother is Jewish, which technically does make her Jewish, and she practices Judaism, I believe. But she is wholesome and WASPy enough to have played a girl named Penny Pingleton in “Hairspray”… and that works for me.

    Anyone else get a stiffy from Penny’s schoolgirl outfit?

    Like


  31. I was thinking about Micheal Jackson.

    Understandable. With all the testosterone, Michelle Obama makes me think of a man as well. 😉

    Like


  32. T saidUnderstandable. With all the testosterone, Michelle Obama makes me think of a man as well
    I am going to break my foot off in your ass T. Leave Michelle alone. I think she is a very nice looking woman.Maybe you don’t find her pleasant to the eye, but plenty of people(both men and women) find her attractive.

    Like


  33. I think she is a very nice looking woman.

    I have a bridge to sell you.

    Like


  34. Joe T, those are stories that have been told to me personally from various people in different situations. Their frequency and similarity were uncanny.

    For example, the most recent story was told to me by the girl I am curently dating. She and a friend were having a conversation in Russian in the ladies room, when a trio of American girls overheard them and began saying conspicuously amongst themselves, “Russian women are such whores”, “why are Russian women so trashy.” The intent was obvious.

    Like


  35. I agree with jaakkeli. In fact, I believe that DeAngelo said at one point that you can actually figure everything out by watching the old Sean Connery Bond movies. The body language, the aloofness, the cockiness, it’s all there. There’s one scene where he pats a girl on the ass and says “Run along. Man talk.” and then talks to his buddy. It’s gold, really. Of course the problem is that most guys when emulating this try to be James Bond and don’t pick up on the more abstract points, and don’t have the internal beliefs necessary to convey it congruently.

    Like


  36. DF – I was in Williamsburg Brooklyn a few years back with some girls I knew, the most bleeding heart stereotypical Berkeley libs you’d ever meet, and a few hot Polish girls from nearby Greenpoint in the bar got onto the dance floor and started dancing provacatively and laughing and flirting and having fun. All the guys were looking at or dancing with them. The dagger looks and hateful racist rants I heard from those “racially tolerant” progressive chicks I was with blew my mind. I’ve heard lots of anti-Eastern European women rants since then. I suspect it will only get worse as more men catch on.

    Like


  37. T saidI was in Williamsburg Brooklyn a few years back

    YOUR A HIPSTER!!!!

    DF- women are catty.
    T, the women probably didn’t think much of insulting the Polish women’s’ ethnicity since Polish women are white.

    Like


  38. I am going to break my foot off in your ass T.

    Stop hitting on me you perv!

    Like


  39. I think she is a very nice looking woman.

    I have a bridge to sell you

    If you woke up next to a naked MO, there is no way you would kick her out of your bed.

    Like


  40. I am going to break my foot off in your ass T.

    Stop hitting on me you perv!

    LOL if you say so

    *wonders if DA is into S&M*

    Like


  41. on November 13, 2008 at 6:16 pm Dr. Grzlickson

    Holla at Grzlickson!

    Like


  42. Regarding the observations of American women, none of it is surprising to readers of this blog, but I think it should be kept in mind that the agreeable nature of women from other parts of the world is born out of economic necessity.

    Women with “traditional values” are that way because hardship requires the women act as helpmeets to their men. The other factor is religion helping to instill these values.

    As most people on this blog are capitalists and heathens, we need to think about just what this means.

    I believe Joe T. and MQ made some good points elsewhere about what “turbocapitalism” does to the culture WRT women.

    You bring a girl from a traditional culture over here and soon enough she will be towing the party line. The same biological drives that compel her to pair off with the “strong like bull” guy in her poor country will compel her to pair off with the gel-slicked blackberry-wielding MBA guy in this country where basic survival needs are pretty much taken care of.

    It’s evolution, baby.

    Like


  43. As most people on this blog are capitalists and heathens, we need to think about just what this means.

    *DEAD*

    Like


  44. on November 13, 2008 at 6:24 pm Christopher Tracy

    “Whiskey you forgot to add Micheal Obama to your list.”

    Freudian slip.

    Like


  45. on November 13, 2008 at 6:31 pm Fred Sanford, z''l

    I seem to recall that a commenter on this site recently referred to the soon-to-be First Lady as a 5, and said she should consider herself lucky to be married to BHO.

    As for me, Mrs. Obama looks suspiciously like Aunt Esther, Fred Sanford’s sister-in-law on the 1970’s sitcom Sanford & Son. (Look up the actress LaWanda Page on imdb.com.) Give her 10-15 years, and no one will be able to tell them apart.

    She may be a helpful political spouse for an extraordinarily gifted and ambitious politician, but Jackie Bouvier/Kennedy/Onassis she isn’t. (Often the best-looking politicians don’t end up with the best-looking spouses [see Bill Clinton] and vice versa — see the wives of Fred Thompson and…Dennis Kucinich for evidence of this epiphenomenon.)

    Like


  46. Tupac, I was thinking about that comment about hypercapitalism earlier today but didnt want to bother looking for it. I thought it was a very accurate observation and agree with your extension of it.

    Like


  47. The characterization of “self-confident” was used uniquely to describe American women.

    Like


  48. @anony

    “The characterization of “self-confident” was used uniquely to describe American women.”

    So? The Kazakhs were obviously being charitable there, scrounging around for something positive to say.

    The positive comments on American women were added to the tail end of a copious stream of invective, probably so as not to burn bridges with a superpower which can (theoretically, at least) spread some of its largesse around in Central Asia.

    It’s been noted here before, and frequently by Roissy, that American women often project a calculated *facade* of false self-confidence to mask an underlying self-loathing and anxious ego-dystonia regarding their own femininity.

    Like


  49. @joe T.
    Please consider:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

    which is it?
    projection is an especially commonly used defense mechanism in people with certain personality disorders:

    * Paranoid personality disorder
    * Narcissistic personality disorder
    * Antisocial personality disorder
    * Psychopathy

    I suspect it is the 3rd.

    Like


  50. Jackie Bouvier was no great beauty. Get a picture and take a look at her teeth.

    Like


  51. @anyony

    It’s most likely got a lot to do with Acquired Situational Narcissism:

    http://samvak.tripod.com/journal73.html

    “… can narcissism be acquired or learned? Can it be provoked by certain, well-defined, situations?

    Robert B. Millman, professor of psychiatry at New York Hospital – Cornell Medical School thinks it can. He proposes to reverse the accepted chronology. According to him, pathological narcissism can be induced in adulthood by celebrity, wealth, and fame.

    The “victims” – billionaire tycoons, movie stars, renowned authors, politicians, and other authority figures – develop grandiose fantasies, lose their erstwhile ability to empathize, react with rage to slights, both real and imagined and, in general, act like textbook narcissists.”

    Note that Millman, who first described this syndrome, says that most of its “victims” are entitled people – celebrities, politicians, and other “authority figures”.

    I would argue that in today’s America, especially in sophisticated urban milieux like Washington, DC, *women* as a gender are an artificially entitled group (not for reasons of affirmative action, which may be some of y’all’s first guess, but for the inter-gender dynamic that comes from having too many choices and far too many eager, drooling males artificially and undeservedly boosting one’s self-regard)…

    This phenomenon, combined with a profound cognitive dissonance (q.v.), leads to the facades of phony overconfidence, sarcasm, and malignant self-regard which is commonly found in the single, white urban American female.

    Like


  52. I would argue that in today’s America, especially in sophisticated urban milieux like Washington, DC, *women* as a gender are an artificially entitled group (not for reasons of affirmative action, which may be some of y’all’s first guess, but for the inter-gender dynamic that comes from having too many choices and far too many eager, drooling males artificially and undeservedly boosting one’s self-regard)…

    I would wager it has something to do with youth indoctrination when it comes to the younger generations. Today’s girls are inundated by messages of ‘girlpower’, ‘you can do anything’ and ‘you’re worth it!’. Media has fought to overcome the male gender bias, but one wonders by what measure would they declare victory? There’s campaigns to engage more women in math and science. But where’s the campaigns to prop up the relatively shrinking percentage of men in higher education? Those in charge of this campaign are fighting their own demons from decades ago. There are lots of gender specific positive messages. Yet boys still remain unmoved from their gender specific issues like crime, drug abuse and suicide. Is it any wonder that this situation has resulted? By the time you pile on male-oriented placations like video games, it should surprise no one that women find themselves ‘amongst a sea of the unworthy’ and the princess complex to go along with it.

    Like


  53. DA, what is your blog address. I have a link for you, this chic is your type of woman.

    Like


  54. on November 13, 2008 at 8:07 pm Dr. Grzlickson

    Grzlickson sez:

    Don’t trade Escobar et al. for Jake Peavy.

    Like


  55. the women probably didn’t think much of insulting the Polish women’s’ ethnicity since Polish women are white.

    Jews are white too and it isn’t considered proper to insult their ethnicity.

    Like


  56. Every single person is an individual; man or woman. To lump them all into a nationalistic category is just plain stupid. Roissy has hissy fits about man haters and is one of the biggest hypocrites on the planet.

    Like


  57. I grew up in the NYC area and I have to admit that a lot of this rings true to me. NYC is a huge freaking melting pot of every culture in the world.

    It’s like taking a snapshot of the Kazakh’s view on women across the world and putting the basics at work in the city. Sure there are some that might not meet the profile, but most do. Although most Israeli girls were smoking hot, so they might be off on that one, I think the rest are right on.

    Isn’t it funny though, how Roissy can take a photo-essay of Toronto yesterday and capture most of these stereotypes the Kazakh’s have neatly fit us into. Another metropolitan area, and most of the times you can pick out the ethnicities of people pretty easily.

    Just last night, while at a bar in Memphis, I realized that most American girls are bull-shit artists, but I love them all the same. I guess that makes me a bigger bull-shit artist! My point is that most American girls model themselves after media and what they think they should be. I believe, in doing so, they totally screw up their world. Stay thin, wear this, eat that, buy that, stay thin, stay thin! With media closing in from every direction its no wonder our US culture is so freaking Effed up.

    In that aspect, its very easy to “lump them all into a nationalistic category.” After all, isn’t it the USA that promulgates what stereotypes are anyway. Most other countries wouldn’t have a clue what someone in Asia was doing without US media in the first place.

    Like


  58. Jews are white too and it isn’t considered proper to insult their ethnicity

    PA- No, but it’s treated differently if the two groups are from the same race. African -American making a joke about Black Brazilians is looked at differently than an African-American making a joke about Asian people. A Japanese person making jokes about Korean people versus a Japanese person making fun of White people.

    By the way, not all Jews are white. Ethiopian Jews are blk. There is also a group of Black Jews from Southern Africa. I also know a few African-American converts(- incl Hebrew Isralites).

    Like


  59. cosign Sara.

    How is the baby coming along?

    Like


  60. junky fungus saidMy point is that most American girls model themselves after media and what they think they should be.Stay thin, wear this, eat that, buy that, stay thin, stay thin! With media closing in from every direction its no wonder our US culture is so freaking Effed up

    *walks over to junky fungus to shake hands*
    My friend, I’ve been posting this^^^ since my first day here. Most people have no idea how much their tastes are shaped by the media. BJ Brenda came about because of Clinton and Monica’s affair being talked about every day on the news for one year. Celebrity sEx tape culture only added fuel to the fire. It’s part of the reason I don’t ride the hipsters too hard for making such a concentrated effort to be different.

    *uses hand sanitizer after looking at his name for the second time*

    Like


  61. Let’s not start on the Japanese – Korean thing. The Hiroshima area in particular had no love at all for Koreans. It’s funny to me, because the Koreans were the ones who were invaded, but… My brother in law has no use for them at all.

    Now some of that might have changed recently, but consider that until a very few years ago, more Japanese married Americans than Koreans, and Pusan is a 15 minute plane ride from Fukuoka. The wheels barely get up before you’re landing. Not much love lost on either side.

    A couple of years ago there was some big video romanticizing Korea, so Korean things became a fad, and Korean men were seen as being more masculine and more romantic than Japanese. I think it already faded though.

    I will say my experience is that there is a reason for those stereotypes. They are true of a lot of people. Korea has a lot of extremely hot looking women. Probably more per capita than Japan, truth be told.

    Like


  62. Sadly, Michelle Obama is both not Jewish (as Gellar, Bynes, Tal, Trachtenberg etc are) and not independent and accomplished. She is an angry, resentful, Affirmative Action beneficiary who espoused in her thesis (I read it, simply dreadful) racial separatism and the dead end of Black nationalism.

    Hardly either Jewish, a beauty, or independent in the pioneer spirit. More in the tradition of the spousal-rainmaker ala Hillary with Rose Law.

    Trading on her position with her husband to gain a corrupt payoff system. Nepotism. About as attractive as Hillary, which is not at all. Not that this matters, there is a lot more to women than attractiveness, but please don’t tell us she’s attractive. She’s not.

    Or what Fred Sanford said, hahah.

    Joe T — powerful insight.

    Like


  63. on November 13, 2008 at 10:35 pm ironrailsironweights

    Let’s not start on the Japanese – Korean thing.

    I’ve heard that women in Korea actually like the Glorious Natural Pelt. The thicker, richer and more luxuriant, the better.

    Peter

    Like


  64. Leave Michelle alone. I think she is a very nice looking woman.

    she’s a MAN, baby!

    anony:
    The characterization of “self-confident” was used uniquely to describe American women.

    you say this as if it matters to their attractiveness as women.

    ps: it doesn’t. in fact, it might even have the opposite effect.

    Like


  65. In my experience white American men from middle class homes outside of the South tend to prefer somewhat guyish women. They want their girlfriends to have feminine faces and bodies and dress well, but they rarely get too excited about emotional and psychological femininity and want “cool girls”, not excessively girly ones. This lasts until they hit 35-40, by which time they’ve matured enough to see the value in a person that isn’t exactly like them, whereas their youthful egotism kept them from seeing the virtues of femininity. Also, at midlife their bodies are declining and they want a nuturing wife to care for them in their dotage. Obviously this isn’t a universal taste, hence this blog, but many many young men wouldn’t choose an uberfeminine woman when they could have a sporty best friend chick to watch the game with.

    And yes American women who hate on foreign women should get the hell over themselves and put on some heels. But that goes without saying.

    Like


  66. Michelle can best be described as a “handsome” woman. Not really pretty, but not hideous.

    Like


  67. You can be proud of your accomplishments, but have a shaky sense of what it means to be a woman. And you can be full of a tranquil, life-affirming understanding of your femininity but wish you had more social and professional status. And Roissy, if you think the majority of DC men prefer the latter to the former you are mistaken.

    Like


  68. Look, Obama didn’t marry her because she was a beauty queen; he married her because she was a hardworking Harvard-educated lawyer. Yes he could have gotten a more attractive woman, but he chose his wife as the future mother of his children and thus considered more than just looks. Some men do that.

    For the record, I think Michelle is good looking, but she’s no Garcelle Beauvais.

    Like


  69. “They want their girlfriends to have feminine faces and bodies and dress well, but they rarely get too excited about emotional and psychological femininity and want “cool girls”, not excessively girly ones.”

    I am not attracted to “cool” girls, only to girly ones. One of my biggest peeves, which I’ve railed against here before, is young white women who are “into sports”, who like to frequent sports bars and “hang out with the guys and watch the game”…. Ughh!

    In other words, the Sarah Palins of the world can take a long hike off a short ice floe.. no interest in women who are into shootin’, huntin’, hockey, or any of that shit. I’m not even into that crap.

    The girlier the better for me, but that just doesn’t represent the average American female of marriageable age anymore, that’s why I regularly go abroad to see what I can find.

    Like


  70. One of my biggest peeves, which I’ve railed against here before, is young white women who are “into sports”, who like to frequent sports bars and “hang out with the guys and watch the game”

    Some of it may be due to feminism, but I suspect that it may be due to the fact that smaller families means that some fathers are performing masculine hobbies with their daughters in order to do something with their kids. The behaviour itself manifesting in adult females may be a proxy for low maintenance/low expenses/no princess expectations, which may appeal to some men who want a girlfriend who can “take care of themselves” with minimal input from the boyfriend, but weeds out wussy David Alexander types who aren’t athletic or outdoorsy and thus, masculine.

    Like


  71. And yes American women who hate on foreign women should get the hell over themselves and put on some heels. But that goes without saying.

    That’s an interesting perspective from a female…

    As somebody who has a high heel fetish, I’d kill for more women to wear stiletto heels, but most women that I know have generally complained about how wearing heels hurts, so they’re unwilling to wear them unless it’s a somewhat formal occasion. Then there are the women who used to wear heels extensively in their youth, and now have various types of pain in their feet in their middle and older age. So as much as I would like to see more heels, just as how I can’t force women into nails due to the harsh and abrasive chemicals that destroy the natural nails, I can’t force women into wearing something that may be uncomfortable in the short or long-term to please me.

    Non-Mean Observation: The young black women are work are more likely to wear heels than the young white women.

    Like


  72. hello is it me you’re looking for:
    You can be proud of your accomplishments, but have a shaky sense of what it means to be a woman. And you can be full of a tranquil, life-affirming understanding of your femininity but wish you had more social and professional status.

    usually, very feminine women have high social status. any woman who is unduly concerned about her professional status is a bad bet for marriage. she will likely either price herself out of the market, or not have enough energy to spare to properly service her husband.

    And Roissy, if you think the majority of DC men prefer the latter to the former you are mistaken.

    guys just tell women they care about their career accomplishments and life goals to get in their panties. most guys don’t give a shit about a woman’s career or professional success as long as she looks good. for guys interested in marriage, it helps that she isn’t saddled with huge debt.

    Look, Obama didn’t marry her because she was a beauty queen; he married her because she was a hardworking Harvard-educated lawyer.

    we don’t know what barack was feeling when he married michelle. for all we know, he finds her attractive and really loves her. also, keep in mind that at the time they met michelle was within his social universe, so hooking up was just as much a matter of serendipity and convenience as anything else.

    For the record, I think Michelle is good looking, but she’s no Garcelle Beauvais.

    i’ve noticed that it’s mostly the women here who think michelle is good-looking. the men for the most part see her as what she is — a 5 at best. this is more evidence that either you can’t trust a woman to give an honest opinion about another woman’s looks, or women have more lenient standards than men for judging other women’s looks.

    Like


  73. David – you should go to Kiev, Ukraine. Young women wear stiletto heels there by default. You will see them trudging up steep, cobblestoned hills carrying shopping bags in 4-5 inch heels.

    Also I notice when I’m in London, a lot more young white professional women there wear heels and dresses to work. Not saying all do, not saying it’s as common as a place like Kiev.

    I find that in general Britis women get a bad rap when it comes to (1) looks and (2) clothes. Although things degenerate the further outside of London you go, London is densely-packed with some of the most stunning young specimens I’ve ever seen. The ratio of head-turners there beats DC by a factor of about 5. And they tend to also pay a lot of attention to the way they dress.

    And no, for the 100th time, I am *not* referring to the many immigrants from Poland and Eastern Europe who’ve inundated the UK of late.

    Yes, Polish and other EE chicks can be hot, no doubt, and yes, many of the ones in London are. But many of the native English babes, especially from the more “posh” tribes can set off fires.

    Like


  74. we don’t know what barack was feeling when he married michelle.

    A big reason why Barack married Michelle is that she represented authentic American blackness. He wanted to identify with black America, but as the Hawaiian raised child of an East African father and a white American mother he never really belonged to the tribe. So, he married into it. Apparently, Barack’s need to belong trumped his need for good looks.

    Like


  75. Joe, I’ve heard of the tales of Ukranian and Russian women and their obsession with stiletto heels, but I’ll refrain from why I won’t visit those places.

    Regardless, the question is why are European women who are more likely to walk around or use public transport when compared to their American counterparts more likely to wear heels. One could argue that the young women of Eastern Europe don’t have images of older women with foot pain from high heels like some women have here in the States due to Communism putting a crimp on purchases “non-essential” clothing.

    Mind you, I suspect that some women don’t wear heels because it boosts their height, which makes some men cringe due to the reduction in height difference. Plus, for some reason, it seems that some Americans to think that femininity is undesirable trait and that it gets in the way of progress and that it’s not serious, hence why some women who want to be feminine in their clothing choices at work feel the need to dress in dour clothing.

    BTW, I know some women who keep their heels at work, and wear sneakers or other flats while commuting.

    Like


  76. Roissy, I’ve been posting here for several weeks now with nary a marginally polite answer from you despite my witty, hilarious, heartfelt and often comically raunchy posts so if you think you can simply insult my handle then you…

    *Gasp*

    Oh Chic, he finally noticed me!!!

    *Weeping with delight*

    As for your comments:

    Do very feminine women usually have high social status? The very high-status women I see in DC are almost like walking manniquins whose mechanical gestures are as lacking in feminine vitality as they are in masculine vigor. Almost like the women in “The Importance of Being
    Earnest”. I’ve known dancers and actresses in DC whom no one could describe as high status but who had womanliness pouring out of their ears. But we may be describing different attributes.

    Do DC men (professional white men) prefer brittle career gals? I think it’s just what they are used to. All things being equal they’d probably choose a sultry Russian woman, French woman, or any woman who had her hips on straight, but they go to school and work with career chicks. Guys are lazy and they like what’s nearby.

    In that vein you’re right about the nature of the Obamas courtship. Unless and until their marriage proves, a la Clinton, to be unstable enough to interfere with his work how they met and why he liked her really do not matter.

    And you’re right not to trust women’s appraisals of other women’s looks. If I were trying to steal Obama for myself there’s plenty I could rag on. But hell, any woman has flaws if you look hard enough. That’s why women tend to sympathize with politicians’ wives who, through no fault of their own, find themselves in the spotlight. Basically, if I have no personal agenda and a woman isn’t fat or truly ugly (the ugly standard in my book is Andrea Dworkin) she’s usually attractive to me.

    Like


  77. Re heels: Mexican women also adore heels. Stillettos on a daily basis are not good for your feet. However sensible pumps with a one and a half or two inch heel are fine for walking around the city, but make sure they are of a durable design and material. Have slippers or sneakers for around the house and stretch your calves and glutes daily because heels will make them tight. Once you learn good posture in them you become so much more confident than in flats. I always feel just a little theatrical in heels because they remind me of tap shoes.

    Like


  78. Joe T:

    *hug* My Italian-American brother! I too date many foreigners, or American born Hispanics who like feminine women.

    DA:
    Heels make your ass look more curvaceous. Black women know how important this is.

    Like


  79. However sensible pumps with a one and a half or two inch heel are fine for walking around the city

    Yeah, but they’re not as alluring. 🙂

    Seriously, even those heels are bothersome for some girls that I know. Wellesley Queen didn’t mind them and would sport low heel sandals during the summer, but I know of a few girls who hate them, and prefer ballet slippers, Uggs, and the dreaded flip flops. My non-date g/f and her friend basically only wear ballet slippers and Uggs leaving heels for semi-formal and formal occasions. Although, after doing some window shopping with her, it’s not like she’s not interested in buying said shoes if she had the money, but she’s always found that her feet hurt after an hour or so.

    I too date many foreigners, or American born Hispanics who like feminine women.

    Feminine women are pretty, very likely to wear heels and get their nails done. The downside is that they expect you to do a lot of shit, and be the masculine superman, and femininity isn’t cheap…

    Like


  80. “Feminine women are pretty, very likely to wear heels and get their nails done. The downside is that they expect you to do a lot of shit, and be the masculine superman, and femininity isn’t cheap…”

    Yes, feminine women want the man to take the lead in the relationship and expect a lot from their men. A lot of men don’t want the responsibility.

    Like


  81. Do very feminine women usually have high social status?

    DC high status is essentially derived from political power. DC isn’t attracting pretty trust fund girls who want to do nothing all day, or work in fields where beauty is a bit more appreciated…

    Do DC men (professional white men) prefer brittle career gals?

    It’s possible that DC men prefer such women, but one could argue that the demands of family for proper social status means that men are oriented towards marrying or entering long-term relationships with career girls. We live in a world of assortative mating where like marries like, and status whores in the proper classes will do anything to get a leg up on the competition.

    Yes, feminine women want the man to take the lead in the relationship and expect a lot from their men. A lot of men don’t want the responsibility.

    Of course. I don’t want that responsibility because when shit goes down, I get blamed. I’d rather blame somebody else than take the heat.

    Like


  82. The Omega Man:

    I’d rather blame somebody else than take the heat.

    You should, like, work on that.

    Like


  83. Every single person is an individual; man or woman. To lump them all into a nationalistic category is just plain stupid.

    The problem is that too many people don’t have the ability to think at a high enough level of abstraction. One of the stupidest statements I often hear is “most belonging to group X are of type Y but there are exceptions”. In reality, there are no clear-cut types. Stereotypes are abstractions constructed from the mean or median values of many independent statistical variables.

    Of course it is also stupid to “refute stereotype” by saying everybody is an individual and leaving it at that. But as long as many people have the tendency treat stereotypes as concrete realities such refutations are justified. The existence of political correctness is a just punishment for people who haven’t bothered to learn to think about population groups at the right level of abstraction.

    Like


  84. jaakeli, Joe T:

    You claim that Game has existed “forever.” I think it’s revolutionary – let me explain where I’m coming from.

    Perhaps you two can tell me what I’m missing.

    First, a patriarchial society existed in the 1950’s, but this is not Game. A ‘patriarchal society’ is a societal structure, not a pickup technique.

    Second, DeAngelo says James Bond movies are good to watch to learn how a “man’s man” talks and acts. He says nowhere that everything Game teaches can be found in a Bond movie (?)

    Here is what was revolutionary about Game, in my view:

    Game is really based on evolutionary psychology. And evo psyc itself did not even exist as a discipline before the 1970s: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology

    This means there was no way until recently to 1) know what really pushes a woman’s attraction buttons; 2) design a potent system of attraction and seduction around it.

    What was revolutionary about DeAngelo’s Cocky and Funny was he identified WHY cocky and funny works.

    If you’ve seen the DVD, he asks – “Well, why do people laugh … even when something is not funny.”

    Good question. Actually a pretty profound question for a so-called pickup artist to even be asking. Because thinkers like Nietzsche were asking the same thing a century ago. Namely “Why is the human the only animal who laughs?”

    The short deep answer behind laughter seems to be: the person who instigates laughter is high status, the people laughing, low status.

    And here is the key: DeAngelo tapped into the burgeoning mainstream Evolutionary Psychology movement in the early 2000’s, coming on the heels of Ridley’s “Red Queen” 10 years earlier in the same decade with “Moral Animal.” He declared “Attraction is not a choice.”

    If you can push the right attraction buttons in a woman, evolutionarily speaking, through immediately demonstrating high status, you are “in,” because women get wet for high survival and replication value, in a phrase – high status in men.

    There is more to C/F than this. But at base, C/F an intentional mindfuck aimed to put immediately put women in a one-down position.

    Where were American men ever instructed to do this before?

    Now, I see the “Neg” as Mystery running with DeAngelo’s breakthrough. And more. Because it was Mystery who came up with the Demonstration of Higher Value canned material routine, and most importantly, the Attraction – Comfort –Seduction nine step system.

    Here’s a magazine excerpt quoting bonafide academics on Game’s revolutionary nature, including none other than zoologist Desmond Morris (“Manwatching” etc. ) :

    “While Mystery refuses to talk about the psychological underpinnings of his Method, several experts I consult testify to its soundness. Desmond Morris, the British zoologist and sexuality expert, admits that the Method is a shrewd compression of the phases of love. “One of the great mistakes men make is not playing all the stages of courtship,” he says. “It has to be done stage by stage if it’s going to work.”

    Cornell associate professor of human development Cynthia Hazan thinks the Method works on a deeper level than even Mystery knows. First of all, she says, “you knock [the woman] off balance” with the neg, so throughout the next phases “her judgment is impaired. She becomes focused on getting his attention and approval and getting back into the group.” From the point of view of evolutionary psychology, she adds, “it’s really anxiety-provoking, and humans have a built-in aspect where when we’re anxious we want to get closer to other people.”

    The act of negging an attractive woman can even tamper with her brain chemistry, says Helen Fisher, the author of Why We Love: The Nature and Chemistry of Romantic Love. “When you fall in love with somebody, what’s going on in the brain is an elevated activity of dopamine,” the main arousal chemical, and “the system that motivates you to win a reward,” she explains. “A woman who’s a 9 or a 10 doesn’t have to do any work to get a man, so the system usually isn’t triggered and she doesn’t feel romantic love. But when someone spurns her, that system will kick in and she’ll feel attraction… And when the woman discovers she’s been conned?

    Once people learn the truth, says Fisher, it often doesn’t matter: “The thing is, once you’ve hooked somebody in, they’ll be willing to ignore almost anything.”

    http://www.themysterymethod.com/in-the-media/elle-magazine/

    There have been other revolutions in Game: the idea of the “Frame” – and that the man should strive to have the “strongest frame” because the lesser frames (women, the seduction targets) get sucked in to his dominance.

    Again, Erving Goffman only published “Frame Analysis” in 1973.

    Like


  85. David Alexander, regarding your heel fetish: you must like those high heels shoved into your rectal cavity, no? It reinforces your self-image of being a bottom-feeding toad, right? Man, you’ve got some real bizarre, ultra-Freudian issues going on in you head.

    No red-blooded MAN with any worth in this world would shit on himself the way you do. If there’s one thing in this world that any MAN should never give up without a savage fight, it’s his SELF-RESPECT. Learn that, and stop this insane self-loathing routine that belongs on some shitty daytime talk show.

    In a somewhat related note, I was watching a program on Arthur Ashe, one of the greatest sportsmen of his time, and a true gentleman. A ballsy individual (first black man to win Wimbledon, civil rights activist, etc.), who always carried himself with studied dignity and eloquence. Universally admired by everyone; even a basket-case like Mike Tyson has a tattoo of him on his upper arm. He’s the type of guy that young black men should look up to. Maybe you ought to try to emulate him.

    Like


  86. Why am I under moderation ? LOL

    Like


  87. “Positive estimations are given less frequently: smiling, loudly speaking, stylish blonde, jeans, jeep, cowboy hat, cigarette, uncommonness.”

    Lone Star State, bitches!

    Like


  88. You sure this isn’t footage from ‘Borat’ that didn’t make the final cut?

    Like


  89. I find that in general Britis women get a bad rap when it comes to (1) looks and (2) clothes. Although things degenerate the further outside of London you go, London is densely-packed with some of the most stunning young specimens I’ve ever seen. The ratio of head-turners there beats DC by a factor of about 5. And they tend to also pay a lot of attention to the way they dress.

    I’ve been to Britain only once, for five days in early 2004, and as I recall the women tended toward the extremes of the looks distribution to a greater extent than in America. There were many rather frumpy types, and many hotties, but not too much in the middle.

    Peter

    Like


  90. Higher power – Game is old, it’s just that society lost its way and moved away from it as men became feminized. Read Iceberg Slim and you’ll see pimps have been practicing these concepts since the beginning of the 20th century. Evolutionary Psychology and Goffman’s work didn’t create Game, it reverse-engineered it and explained it in a way that allowed even the nerdiest person to study it like a lesson plan and implement it like basketball drills. It broke it down to science, created a terminology and formulas and spread it among the masses, and it is this spread among the masses that is the real revolutionary part of Game. Pimps, for example, prided themselves on keeping as much secret about Game as they could, hence the phrase “The Game is to be sold, not told.”

    Like


  91. “So, he married into it. Apparently, Barack’s need to belong trumped his need for good looks.”

    She was a means to an end.

    Like


  92. A big reason why Barack married Michelle is that she represented authentic American blackness. He wanted to identify with black America, but as the Hawaiian raised child of an East African father and a white American mother he never really belonged to the tribe. So, he married into it. Apparently, Barack’s need to belong trumped his need for good looks.

    Yes, I’ve floated this theory around as well. He needed her for “Black American cred.” If he was married to another biracial person, a white person, someone of East African descent, none of these things would give him increased cred with Black Americans. he needed someone who was 100% descended from black American background, with a direct tie to slavery and Civil Rights generation. But one may also ask, why couldn’t he get a woman who was 100% black but better-looking than a 5? Well, the other part of the equation comes into play: as a liberal marxist, he needs to marry a woman with an academic pedigree similar to his own, to show feminists that he is not “intimidated” by a woman who is his equal. (See how feminists bash Bush for being married to a librarian for example, or bash Laura Bush for not being a “real” career woman). Liberal feminist women love high-powered shrews like Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama over June Cleaver-types like Laura Bush.

    As every guy knows, the higher the pedigree and brains on a woman, the lower her looks are likely to be. The average hotness at beauty school or community college is waaaaay better than what you see at Ivy League and top engineering schools. In the black community, it gets even worse, not only are there very little to choose from at elite universities to begin with, the chances of them being hot are incredibly slim. So for Obama to get a woman of the right pedigree of any color, he was automatically going to have to give up a lot in the looks department. When you limit it to the black race only, settling for a 5 really becomes understandable, especially back in the 80s.

    Even if he did find a hot black chick with the right pedigree, her standards would have been so off the charts he wouldn’t have had a chance anyway. he was broke for a while after law school, driving a hooptie and not making much cash. Even hot middle class black chicks have major entitlement issues with the careers and looks of the men they expect to date, so imagine a hot, Ivy-league lawyer black chick? As a lifelong 5, I’m sure Michelle Obama’s expectations were not that grandiose no matter what her career was.

    Like


  93. this is more evidence that either you can’t trust a woman to give an honest opinion about another woman’s looks, or women have more lenient standards than men for judging other women’s looks.

    the only time i see women attack a woman for being ugly is when she is actually hot to men. like i see many women sticking up for michelle obama and hillary as beautiful when they get attacked, but someone who is a bona fide MILF like Palin they attack as being overrated and ugly with extreme venom. You know how many times I’ve heard women seriously try to convince me that Scarlett Johannsen is overrated and ugly? Women like Michelle Obama because she’s not threatening and excites ZERO envy physically. When a woman is hot and invites rabid, sincere male lust, she will invite a venomous barrage of physical insults from other women.

    Take Britney Spears, when she was young, fit and smoking hot, women bashed her for being overrated and ugly. After she let herself go and guys stopped lusting for her so much, suddenly she was being defended by women as beautiful and a “real” woman.

    Like


  94. T.:

    As every guy knows, the higher the pedigree and brains on a woman, the lower her looks are likely to be.

    Hush your mouth!

    (Clio, he didn’t really mean that.)

    Like


  95. I’m sure Clio is an outlier. Just talking averages! 😉

    Like


  96. higher power, excellent comments.

    i say goodbye, you say hello… hello hello:
    Roissy, I’ve been posting here for several weeks now with nary a marginally polite answer from you despite my witty, hilarious, heartfelt and often comically raunchy posts so if you think you can simply insult my handle then you…

    *Gasp*

    Oh Chic, he finally noticed me!!!

    don’t get cocky, kid.

    *Weeping with delight*

    i get that a lot.

    Do very feminine women usually have high social status?

    as very feminine women are often also very pretty, they have high social status. men want them, women want to be in their popular clique.

    The very high-status women I see in DC are almost like walking manniquins whose mechanical gestures are as lacking in feminine vitality as they are in masculine vigor.

    if she’s hot enough, she’ll get action. but no man of value, unless he’s one of those weirdo masochists who gets off on ambitious butch women, truly feels a gut level attraction to women who act and think like men.

    I’ve known dancers and actresses in DC whom no one could describe as high status but who had womanliness pouring out of their ears. But we may be describing different attributes.

    so have i. 😉
    btw, these women can have status within their milieu. which is why it’s best for a man who isn’t in that social circle to pick them up when they’re not at work and outside their comfort zone.

    Do DC men (professional white men) prefer brittle career gals?

    they prefer women who’ve got something going on so they don’t have to support them like a welfare case. this does not mean they prefer gung-ho brass ring careerist chicks. femininity and professional ambition are more often than not mutually incompatible.

    I think it’s just what they are used to. All things being equal they’d probably choose a sultry Russian woman, French woman, or any woman who had her hips on straight, but they go to school and work with career chicks. Guys are lazy and they like what’s nearby.

    there is some truth in this. convenience plays a part. and girls in the office find that the hierarchical corporate structure suits their goals of pinpointing the alpha males just dandy.

    Basically, if I have no personal agenda and a woman isn’t fat or truly ugly (the ugly standard in my book is Andrea Dworkin) she’s usually attractive to me.

    hello, do you scissor?

    but someone who is a bona fide MILF like Palin they attack as being overrated and ugly with extreme venom. You know how many times I’ve heard women seriously try to convince me that Scarlett Johannsen is overrated and ugly? Women like Michelle Obama because she’s not threatening and excites ZERO envy physically.

    T., this is a good insight. women like “real women” because they like less competition for men.

    Like


  97. T,
    You think that if Michelle looked like Garcelle Beauvais women would hate her? Women want to like the first black first lady. As far as Sarah Palin goes, having people hate you is a frequent side effect of strong charisma. Love them or hate them, you can’t be indifferent to them. This is also why conservatives hated Clinton so much, and although I disagreed with him politically I really thought all the emotion conservatives invested in hating the man was irrational. But that’s what charisma does.

    Like


  98. T,
    You think that if Michelle looked like Garcelle Beauvais women would hate her? Women want to like the first black first lady.

    I think she’d be hated on more than Michelle Obama for being prettier, but she’d still get much more of a pass for being 100% plus dark-skinned. That’s the other advantage of Michelle Obama in winning over black voters, she is dark-skinned too. If she looked more like Beyonce or Rihanna she’d probably invite a lot more hating (Black women used to REALLY hate on Beyonce).

    As far as Sarah Palin goes, having people hate you is a frequent side effect of strong charisma. Love them or hate them, you can’t be indifferent to them. This is also why conservatives hated Clinton so much, and although I disagreed with him politically I really thought all the emotion conservatives invested in hating the man was irrational. But that’s what charisma does.

    I don’t think they hated Bill Clinton for his charisma, but rather all the crooked stuff his charisma allowed him to get away with. Same with Obama, his charisma along with his color allow him to get away with things that would sink an uncharismatic and white politician. For Palin, I think she’s hated not just for her charisma but for the reasons Roissy put forth in his post explaining the anti-Palin hate.

    Like


  99. That should have read “1000% black” in the comment above.

    Like


  100. related question of the day:

    would you do michelle obama or laura bush?

    i’d choose michelle. a little better looking than laura, and her body is still tight for a middle aged woman.

    Like


  101. I’d go with Laura Bush. I just can’t get the Patrick Ewing comparison out of my head. And I think Michelle’s body is a little TOO tight. Don’t like overmuscled middle aged women, for example the new Madonna.

    Like


  102. i wrote:
    [men] prefer women who’ve got something going on so they don’t have to support them like a welfare case. this does not mean they prefer gung-ho brass ring careerist chicks.

    one more thing. some high-flying wealthy men do like to provide for financially helpless women because it triggers a deep need in them to feel like a dominant tribal protector — a rainmaker. i get these feelings too. but ladies, keep in mind that a man who gets his rocks off showering you with baubles and trinkets is also the type of man who is more likely to treat you like a sexual object — a trophy bestowed him for his largesse. it will be the simplest barter exchange: your looks will be traded for his money, no questions asked. your mere presence in his company will act to confirm his alphaness.

    if you are one of those women who wants a man to connect with her on a deeper emotional level than trophy wife, then i suggest avoiding wealthy men who only know the art of spending money on you. some women can fall in love playing muse to a man’s sugar daddy complex; most can’t.

    Like


  103. Roissy,

    “as very feminine women are often also very pretty, they have high social status. men want them, women want to be in their popular clique.”

    Frequently very beautiful and desirable women have trouble making girlfriends because other women are too jealous. Women want friends who are attractive and pleasant, but they don’t want their friends to blow them out of the water. The same thing with actresses: women like actresses like Reese Witherspoon and Julia Roberts who are cute but not beautiful while a stunning actress like Catherine Zeta Jones is more popular among men than women.

    Also, popular women who like to autocratically rule cliques are often high T types who attract beta-ish males or ones that are obsessed with status to a slightly homoerotic level. These women rarely get the alphas they want and take it out on their beta boyfriends as well as chasing away masculine men who want to date their feminine friends.

    And haven’t you noticed the passive, wonkish nerds in this town? They fit in very well with butch wmen?

    “Basically, if I have no personal agenda and a woman isn’t fat or truly ugly (the ugly standard in my book is Andrea Dworkin) she’s usually attractive to me.

    hello, do you scissor?”

    My boy, the fact I post here shows that I’m objective enough not to take stuff personally 🙂 I judge women’s looks objectively, and then decide how to express myself on the subject. If I want to denigrate her, for whatever reason, I do so but I don’t take it to heart unless I’m intensely emotionally involved. I like having a positive attitude and thinking that you are surrounded by Rosie O’Donnel lookalikes is very negative. Besides, there are more women that take care of themselves physically than emotionally so I more often call them bitchy, catty, immature, or note somewhat mannish behavior. Very easy here in DC.

    *batting eyes*

    Like


  104. What happened to make black women more accepting of Beyoncee? Rihanna has the face of a Greek statue, not unlike young Harry Belafonte.

    mm, Harry Belafonte!

    I can see why she’d provoke resentment in black women frustrated w/ America’s Eurocentric beauty standards, although they as well should get the hell over themselves.

    Like


  105. What happened to make black women more accepting of Beyoncee?

    Honestly, i don’t know. That’s a good question. They used to hate on her HARD, now not so much. I have no idea why, but it seems to have happened around Dreamgirls.

    Like


  106. Michelle’s high T may make her look like a tranny, but at least it means she’d like some horny hard-fucking.

    Laura would be kind of like fucking a frigid WASP grandma.

    Like


  107. Hey Roissy and others,

    I’m surprised you can’t find anything good to say about Michelle Obama’s appearance. She’s tall and if she’s over-muscled she’s at least slender, but without the ropiness and veins that someone like Madonna has. Her face, though like her body also a bit masculine-looking, is even-featured; she’s got big eyes and a clear complexion. Seems to me that all that is worth more than a 5 rating, if you insist on using that old system.

    Incidentally, if any of you remember Bo Derek, from the movie “10”, how many of you today would see her as an exceptional beauty? She had a big bosom but her hips were as slim as a man’s and she had virtually no rear end. Her face was also a bit mannish, with its big jaw. Yet she was considered a beautiful woman in her day.

    As for attacking women like Scarlett Johannson, I can only speak for myself here, but although I see that she’s extremely pretty I’m not quite certain why she’s attracted so much attention considering the enormous number of pretty women in the movie business. So it’s not that I think she’s not beautiful – I just find myself wondering “why her?”

    clio

    Like


  108. T: Why did black women stop hating on Beyoncee? Rihanna has a face like a Greek statue, not unlike young Harry Belafonte.

    mm, Harry Belafonte!

    I can understand why Rihanna would provoke resentment in black women frustrated with America’s Eurocentric beauty standards, though they as well should get the hell over themselves.

    DA: sensible pumps might not be as hot as stillettos but they make your ass look better than flats.

    Like


  109. but ladies, keep in mind that a man who gets his rocks off showering you with baubles and trinkets is also the type of man who is more likely to treat you like a sexual object

    Or he’s a beta provider. As an example, look at my desire to spoil my non-date girlfriend with nice clothes and to pay for her school because I feel sorry for her…

    would you do michelle obama or laura bush?

    Given that Laura Bush is uglier than Michelle Obama, I’d take Madame Obama. She’s not hot, but she’s not fugly. She just has a somewhat masculine face which is something that appears to be somewhat commonplace in black women…

    I think she’d be hated on more than Michelle Obama for being prettier, but she’d still get much more of a pass for being 100% plus dark-skinned.

    Judging from what I saw on a blog entry, if Obama went for a dark-skinned girl with “whiter” features, we would have been looking at the Hillary Clinton candidacy, and the rule of a Scots-Irish man and his jeune third wife as the effective rulers of the nation. Black women backed Obama because he had a “real black wife”.

    For Palin

    Oh, I didn’t hate her, but she’s a prole bitch with five kids, one of whom was pregnant before 18. She made the race competitive and was probably a decent choice in terms of engaging the Republican base when compared to Biden. Hell, I was one of the people who thought Obama was going to lose once the media noted Palin’s candidacy, and I wanted to curse the DNC for its massive stupidity.

    Like


  110. People like Scarlett not only for her looks, but for old Hollywood glamour, sophistication and her disinclination to flash her genitals in public.

    Like


  111. Scarlett Johannsen is overrated and ugly

    Ugly, no. Overrated, maybe. Mind you, my standards of beauty are different.

    Take Britney Spears

    You do realize that Britney Spears now is still more doable than Scarlett Johannsen?

    Yes, I’ve floated this theory around as well.

    While one could question why Obama would have such high ambitions for the Presidency at that point in his life, I’ve presumed that his desire for a black wife may have to do with his period out of Hawaii. He went from “mixed race boy” to “black guy” on the mainland, and finding out that you’re not magically special and presumed black when one is young and still impressionable may have induced some afro-centric desires within him. In other words, his whiteness was useless because everybody saw him as a black guy, and I suspect this pushed him towards the idea of marrying black and associating with tools and douchebags like Wright..

    I suspect it’s similar to how some Caribbean immigrants and their American-born children cling to the Caribbean descriptor. I’m in that boat, and I know of others who hate being called African-American.

    as a liberal marxist, he needs to marry a woman with an academic pedigree similar to his own

    He’s not a liberal marxist, he’s a frigging beta status whore. Alphas don’t give a shit, so they can marry hot feminine girls with no lives. Betas do give a shit, and they’ll put up with an unfeminine career girl that boosts their income potential, social ranking, and makes family happy.

    See how feminists bash Bush for being married to a librarian for example, or bash Laura Bush for not being a “real” career woman

    If the woman was smart, then yes, it was a waste of her to be a mere librarian when she could have had a career with prestiege and some degree of power. Hell, it wasn’t like she was raising a brood of kids either, and she’s not that feminine looking either. You’d think Bush back in the ancient days of yore when he was a playboy could have picked somebody better looking…

    Like


  112. As for attacking women like Scarlett Johannson, I can only speak for myself here, but although I see that she’s extremely pretty I’m not quite certain why she’s attracted so much attention considering the enormous number of pretty women in the movie business. So it’s not that I think she’s not beautiful – I just find myself wondering “why her?”

    A lot of sex symbols and models today seem to be chosen with the sensibility of gay men or straight women in mind, they are thin, hipless, tall and muscled like teenage boys, except with boobs. I notice that they can understand Keira Knightley’s appeal much easier than Scarlett’s. Scarlett is curvy, soft-looking, big boobed, not the least bit masculine in the face, raspy Lauren Bacall-ish voice. The fact that straight women and gay men don’t get her so much is very telling. I think a lot of straight women have been conditioned by the media to conform to gay men’s expectations of female beauty than straight men’s.

    Like


  113. David Alexander, regarding your heel fetish: you must like those high heels shoved into your rectal cavity, no?

    No, it’s not because of the various BDSM traits of high heels, but because to my pissant low IQ mind, high heels implies a heightened desire of the female to look and hunt for sexual activitiy and femininity.

    No red-blooded MAN with any worth in this world would shit on himself the way you do.

    Self-respect is useless if one lives in a delusion.

    You should, like, work on that.

    I’d much rather be in the position where I can blame somebody for making a poor decision than to be the person receiving the blame for making a decision that wasn’t correct. So what’s the incentive to work on something that will expose me to more criticism and expose my poor traits?

    Like


  114. Ugly, no. Overrated, maybe. Mind you, my standards of beauty are different.

    They are also heavily influenced, by your own admission, by lots of porn-watching.

    Like


  115. guy who loves tranny looking porn stars with lantern jaws wrote:
    Mind you, my standards of beauty are different.

    understatement of the year.

    Like


  116. Just for kicks, Michelle Obama yearbook:

    Young Laura Bush:

    I give Michelle Obama credit, she did improve a LOT. Still has the underbite, but is way better than before. I do think if you compared her to Laura at every matching stage of their lives though Laura would come out ahead. I agree with a previous commenter earlier in this thread who said when Michelle hits the age Laura Bush is at now she will look very much like Aunt Esther from Sanford and Son.

    Like


  117. Well, Mr T., I also wonder “why her?” about Keira K., who doesn’t seem that interesting to me.

    On the other hand, the young Julia Roberts conjured such on-screen magic in Pretty Woman, in spite of the fact that it wasn’t a demanding role (but then, being memorable in an undemanding role is harder than the reverse, surely?), that I never wondered “why her?” in her case, in spite of her lankiness that some men find unattractive.

    I don’t mean that she was objectively more beautiful than the others named here. They’re all beautiful – I’m just sometimes surprised at the ones who are noticed and remembered by men.

    No one has addressed my point about Bo Derek…perhaps you’re all too young to remember her?

    Clio

    Like


  118. Lawanda Page? Cruel and inaccurate.

    Like


  119. Just for kicks, Michelle Obama yearbook:

    sweet mother of medusa.
    well, that settles it. in their primes, laura was way hotter than michelle.

    Like


  120. hello, look at that yearbook photo and get back to me.

    Like


  121. Julia Roberts succeeded on the virtue of her adorableness or in you words she’s an eternal ingenue.

    Like


  122. i dont see why you guys are all getting off on palin; i guess she has a tight body for a woman of her age but she is white trash, butch, mannish.. sorry watching NASCAR and going huntin’ just does not get me off. no class at all.

    as far as female politicos go i think the hottest by far is the failed socialist candidate for president of france, segolene royal, hands down. straight up m-i-l-f. and sarkozy’s wife, though she’s more arm candy, is hot as hell too. american pols are playing in the junior leagues with what they’re pulling.

    though i do remember thinking silda spitzer was decent looking for her age and

    she isn’t much to look at now, but i saw an old photo of hillary from what was probably the early 70s on the campaign trail with bill and i would say, just ignoring her personality completely, she was hittable. wish i could find the photo. i couldn’t believe it. i know it was on WP somewhere.

    Like


  123. Here’s my bigoted over-generalization about an entire group: I’d say American women are quite willing to bypass the dubious joys involved in catering to the men on this board. They don’t want you, and they don’t care if you know it (hence all the drama on here about how to fake out the ones who are willing to have a one-night-stand into having it with one of you).

    Like


  124. Lawanda Page had a much broader nose than Michelle as well as smaller eyes.

    Like


  125. Julia Roberts status comes mostly from being forever associated with the Manic Pixie Dream Girl archetype thanks to Pretty Woman. This is the female counterpart to the Byronic Hero archetype most modern men imagine themselves as:

    http://www.avclub.com/content/node/57870

    http://www.avclub.com/content/feature/wild_things_16_films_featuring

    The Byronic Hero is also, I believe, the narrative Obama set up for himself to capture the imagination of the public (and especially single women) if you read his bio. Much like the Manic Pixie Girl archetype is crack for dudes, the Byronic Hero is crack for single women. Whiskey has a great post on the Byronic Hero over on his Twilight review at his blog.

    Like


  126. dizzy, if nothing else, i admire your consistency. like a comfortable blankie made of the fur of lesbians’ thighs.

    Like


  127. They are also heavily influenced, by your own admission, by lots of porn-watching.

    Obviously. Women in porn are much more sexual looking than their counterparts in the real world, hence why it’s so hard to bother turning non-date girlfriend into an actual sex partner. She just can’t compare with the hyper-sexuality of the average porn star. So in the case of Scarlett, while she is a beautiful woman, she just isn’t sexually attractive because compared to a porn star, even if she was naked, she’s simply lacking.

    Mind you, porn stars in regular clothes without their makeup and other accessories tend to be rather plain and unremarkable, and sometimes downright ugly, especially if they’re heavy drug users. Their makeup artists and “stylists” are professionals who do a very good job given what they’re working with in the women.

    I suspect my porn-influenced tastes are why I don’t find European women attractive…

    I can understand why Rihanna would provoke resentment in black women

    Rihanna, the pride of the Caribbean. 🙂

    DA: sensible pumps might not be as hot as stillettos but they make your ass look better than flats.

    From what I’ve seen sensible pumps do very little, IMHO.

    american pols are playing in the junior leagues with what they’re pulling.

    The question to ask is why are American politicians linked up with women of average beauty? Curse our WASP overlords?

    No one has addressed my point about Bo Derek…perhaps you’re all too young to remember her?

    I saw her at the Museum of Natural History… 🙂

    Like


  128. “The short deep answer behind laughter seems to be: the person who instigates laughter is high status, the people laughing, low status.”

    That is not true, at least in terms flirtation. In flirtation a laugh is like an orgasm, and when a man can induce the former women unconsciously think he’ll have talents producing the latter.

    Like


  129. > as far as female politicos go i think the hottest by far is the failed socialist candidate for president of france, segolene royal, hands down. straight up m-i-l-f. and sarkozy’s wife, though she’s more arm candy, is hot as hell too. american pols are playing in the junior leagues with what they’re pulling.

    I disagree — Yulia Tymoshenko, bar none.

    Like


  130. roissy:

    would you do michelle obama or laura bush?

    I’d have to go with Michelle, but only if she always looked like this:

    But like this?

    Mmmm…not so much.

    Like


  131. Yulia Tymoshenko, bar none

    She’s beautiful, but she’s not hot. Mind you, she’s better than say Madame Royal…

    Like


  132. What happened to make black women more accepting of Beyoncee
    Some people hate just to hate. Black womene aren’t fond of Rihanna either cause she lacks talent.

    Like


  133. Hello said For the record, I think Michelle is good looking, but she’s no Garcelle Beauvais
    This we can agree on. I really need to see Garcelle in a good movie or television show.

    Like


  134. My Immortal Beloved:

    I’m surprised you can’t find anything good to say about Michelle Obama’s appearance. She’s tall and if she’s over-muscled she’s at least slender, but without the ropiness and veins that someone like Madonna has. Her face, though like her body also a bit masculine-looking, is even-featured; she’s got big eyes and a clear complexion. Seems to me that all that is worth more than a 5 rating, if you insist on using that old system.

    Ok…a *6* then.

    But only on the “Last Call” metric.

    Incidentally, if any of you remember Bo Derek, from the movie “10″, how many of you today would see her as an exceptional beauty?

    Not I.

    She had a big bosom but her hips were as slim as a man’s and she had virtually no rear end. Her face was also a bit mannish, with its big jaw.

    You just read my mind.

    Yet she was considered a beautiful woman in her day.

    “In her day”

    Not anymore.

    It’s evolution, baby.

    We can partially thank the Latina Hotts(tm) for the uptick in preferences for bodacious beauty.

    As for attacking women like Scarlett Johannson, I can only speak for myself here, but although I see that she’s extremely pretty I’m not quite certain why she’s attracted so much attention considering the enormous number of pretty women in the movie business.

    THOSE LIPS OH MY GOD THOSE LIPS

    So it’s not that I think she’s not beautiful – I just find myself wondering “why her?”

    I sort of agree. I think she’s a stunner to look at but whenever I see her in interviews where I can get a feel for her personality I get kind of a skanky vibe.

    I’d love to bang her, but I don’t think I’d marry her.

    Personal experience has shown me that women with raspy voices are the ones you need to keep an eye on. Must be an androgen thing. *shrug*

    Like


  135. Black womene aren’t fond of Rihanna either cause she lacks talent.

    I liked Disturbia and Umbrella. 🙂

    Like


  136. Clio:

    Well, Mr T., I also wonder “why her?” about Keira K., who doesn’t seem that interesting to me.

    Clio, don’t take this the wrong way, but my respect for you just fell a few microns.

    Just look at those eyes….LOOK AT THEM

    Like


  137. stc:

    she isn’t much to look at now, but i saw an old photo of hillary from what was probably the early 70s on the campaign trail with bill and i would say, just ignoring her personality completely, she was hittable. wish i could find the photo. i couldn’t believe it. i know it was on WP somewhere.

    Was is this one?

    I would’ve hit that.

    Kind of a Clio-ish bookworm vibe going on there.

    Like


  138. Facially I love Keira K, her face reminds me of a cross between Winona Ryder and Natalie Portman. She REALLY needs to do something about that 13 year old boy vibe her body gives her though.

    Like


  139. Roissy saidwe don’t know what Barack was feeling when he married Michelle. for all we know, he finds her attractive and really loves her. also, keep in mind that at the time they met Michelle was within his social universe, so hooking up was just as much a matter of serendipity and convenience as anything else
    WE agree
    WOW

    @Thursday-to African-Americans having one drop of blk blood makes you blk. Even if your parents are from Africa, the average African-American will still see you as a blk person. For the most part, we don’t sweet the small stuff when it comes to who is what parts African-American. If we were that concerned with who is half blk, half African etc… Louis Farrakhan would not be the head* of NOI. Skin color & hair texture for blks is equal to hair& eye color for whites. Rosa Parks, Malcolm X, Thurgood Marshall , Huey Newton, WEB Dubois, Fredrick Douglass, Mary Chruch Terrell, Stokley Carmicheal, Marcus Garvey etc… where all light-skinned, mix race or not of African-American ancestory. That story of Obama not being blk enough was started by two white reporters who thought-think they know what it means to be African-American. Most people have no idea, including a small number of African-Americans.

    Like


  140. Slick Rick:

    Facially I love Keira K, her face reminds me of a cross between Winona Ryder and Natalie Portman. She REALLY needs to do something about that 13 year old boy vibe her body gives her though.

    I2I T. I2I

    /chic

    Like


  141. After looking at the yearbook photos, Im shocked. Moreso at Michelle’s uncanny ability to get better looking with age, not to say that shes some dime piece right now. But yeah, Laura is easily better, which was never really in doubt. I was surprised though at Laura not looking way better in her HS photo though, I thought she would be hot. The actress who played her in W is way hotter despite being flat. Also, Bo Derek back in the day is hot and anyone who says otherwise is blind. Sure, shes 70s hot, but still. She even looks pretty good in Tommy Boy. Farrah was the money though.

    Like


  142. Rihanna is not even kind of pretty. wtf?

    Like


  143. @ Rick, I have to agree, even though I give Michelle Obama a hard time about her looks, she deserves MAJOR props for improving to the degree she did.

    Like


  144. I don’t think Laura’s looks have ever changed much. I look almost exactly the same now as I did at 13, so some women are like that.

    Like


  145. Hello said Frequently very beautiful and desirable women have trouble making girlfriends because other women are too jealous. Women want friends who are attractive and pleasant, but they don’t want their friends to blow them out of the water. The same thing with actresses: women like actresses like Reese Witherspoon and Julia Roberts who are cute but not beautiful while a stunning actress like Catherine Zeta Jones is more popular among men than women

    Excellent point Hello
    My only beef with Zeta Jones is her lack of hips. Otherwise, she is perfect. Her face is to die for.
    some women can fall in love playing muse to a man’s sugar daddy complex
    Yes and I am one of them. Any high earners here???
    *looks for gold digging shovel*

    @Clio- I’ve noticed that most of the big movie stars are no so good-looking both male and female. For every Orlando Bloom, Johhny Depp, and Zeta Jones, there are 10 average Andies making movies.
    Bo Derek’s face was a ten and she is still very good looking. I notice that she had no hips too. A woman with no hips makes me wonder if she is really a woman. Flat butts were in vogue during that time as were thinner lips.
    T- when was Brittney Spears ever hot? Xtina yes, Britney hell no. Brit’s face is not one of a great beauty. Britney had a nice body. After having two babies in two years, she still looked pretty good figure w

    Like


  146. the0ther
    Rihanna is not even kind of pretty. wtf?

    Rihanna is pretty but Gabrelle Union, Beyonce and Kenya Moore knock her out of the park.

    Like


  147. Bo Derek isn’t really “70s pretty”. Most 1970s models/actresses etc. were not big-bosomed – Farah, Jaclyn Smith et al (Cheryl Tiegs was an exception). Bo Derek came along when the 1970s were nearly over and the 1980s fad for women with no hips was beginning. It was pretty extreme – and it was certainly as much a hetero-male as a gay or female obsession.

    The pin-up girls of the 1980s – Pia Zadora (repulsive to me but men loved her), Paulina Porizkova (a model who appeared in Sports Illustrated), and any number of others I can’t remember were nearly all broad-shouldered women with breasts but with very boyish hips, until Cindy Crawford came along.

    Clio

    Like


  148. when was Brittney Spears ever hot? Xtina yes, Britney hell no

    Britney’s hot if you’re into kinda skanky & trashy Southern white girls. Christina’s hot if you’re into non-porn girls, and she’s much hotter than her contemporary from Louisiana.

    If you’re an average beta male with some balls, when one only takes into account looks, Britney is cute and marriageable, but Christina is what you wished you could get.

    Like


  149. Paulina Porizkova was a beauty, face that is. Her body was to slim for my taste.

    Like


  150. Barack and Michelle Obama are a genuinely good match. He came from a broken family, grew up lost and confused internally in certain ways, unsure of his ethnicity and identity. Michelle Obama isn’t just black American, she comes from a very rooted and very successful Chicago black family. Her family was loving, solid (her siblings are all successful too), traditional and psychologically healthy, and her father was the respected the patriarch of the family (very important to Barack, who was dealing with huge father issues). Barack was marrying into the best possible version of the black American identity.

    And Michelle Obama is pretty attractive for a woman in her mid-40s…slim, carries herself well, keeps herself up. Yeah, she has some high-T characteristics (somewhat aggressive, large forehead), but she’s hardly a harpy. Her aggressive qualities have led some people here to get down on her, but truthfully she’s loyally gone along with every one of Obama’s decisions, even when they had the potential to disrupt the family. She’s a good politician’s wife.

    Like


  151. Clio,

    Pupu just looked up Bo Derek on line. She looks and shapes like a mermaid. It would be perfect if she also walks on her toes. Pupu finds her both beautiful and intriguing.

    Like


  152. Pupu finds young Hilary quite good looking here:

    and here:

    Like


  153. “Just for kicks, Michelle Obama yearbook”

    god DAMN!!! That shit is just sad. That is a high school outcast omega female.

    Here is the main reason I’m forced to pick Michelle over Laura: Laura Bush is **62** years old. Michelle Obama is 44 years old.

    Michelle Obama can still have children for christsakes — she is still technically a woman. A post menopausal woman is pretty much technically a man. I know I shouldn’t say this, but it’s as unnatural as fucking an 8 year old.

    Objectively is there anything more feminine about the body of a 65 year old woman than the body of a 15 year old boy? Which one shares more traits with a 15 year old female? Thought experiment: If we put a 15 year old boy and a 65 year old woman in a prison, which one would the prisoners prefer as their “substitute” female?

    I don’t agree with conservatives that homosexuality is a “choice”, but I understand how it could be. In a way, old men are engaging in an unnatural lifestyle choice every time they have sex with an old woman. Whatever mental tricks they are using to overcome their natural unattraction to fully androgynous geriatric female bodies, it’s totally plausible that some subset of rebellious non-comformist men could use the exact same mental tricks to convince themselves to have sex with men. It would take about an equal amount of self-trickery.. if not more for the old man. The association between age and erectile dysfunction is an illusion. Old men with 20 year old wives wouldn’t need viagra.

    You can take pretty much any two women on the planet, and I’ll take the 44 year old one over the 62 year old one.

    Like


  154. David Alexander:

    Self-respect is useless if one lives in a delusion.

    I’ve followed this blog for a while, so I’ve seen a bunch of your comments too, and I have to tell you that in your case, your lack of self respect is a delusion. You’re just piling one feeble excuse on top of another for doing nothing with your life. In reality, just the fact that you have U.S. citizenship, no crippling physical or metal handicaps, and no major destructive baggage (like e.g. a criminal record), and you even speak English natively, puts you in a position with better opportunities in life than 85% of the world’s population. It’s only your laziness preventing you from fixing your problems and improving your position.

    I mean, I would maybe understand if you were just complaining about being unable to get any girls. (Although even then, there would be no real excuse for you to whine instead of improving yourself.) But bitching that you have “low IQ”? Give me a break. As far as intellectual abilities go, if you’re able to compose a coherent, logical, well-written 500-word argument (and you obviously are), then becoming an expert even in hard sciences or engineering, let alone softer fields, is only a matter of putting some effort into it. Hell, just with the time and effort you invested in bitching on this blog, you could have acquired some useful and marketable skill. Your entire act is akin to someone who is constantly crying and complaining that he’s getting fat, but obstinately makes zero effort to improve his diet or hit the gym.

    It’s really ridiculous for you to whine that you’ve been dealt a bad hand in life. You didn’t — you actually got an excellent one, and it’s your choice to waste your time complaining to anonymous strangers instead of taking advantage of what you’ve got. Take a sincere word of advice: I don’t know how old you are (from your writing, I’d guess at most 25), but in any case, unless you get your act together, in a few years you’ll have a striking realization that you’ve wasted your best years and missed great opportunities. Then, the emotional masochism that you’re enjoying right now will turn into a tsunami of real depression and anxiety, from which you might not recover at all. Don’t say you weren’t warned.

    Like


  155. stc

    as far as female politicos go i think the hottest by far is the failed socialist candidate for president of france, segolene royal, hands down.

    You’ve never heard of Yulia Tymoshenko, have you? 🙂

    Like


  156. DA:

    Britney is cute and marriageable, but Christina is what you wished you could get.

    Fun Fact: Tupac is is (very) distantly related to Christina.

    Like


  157. MQ:
    And Michelle Obama is pretty attractive for a woman in her mid-40s…slim, carries herself well, keeps herself up. Yeah, she has some high-T characteristics (somewhat aggressive, large forehead), but she’s hardly a harpy. Her aggressive qualities have led some people here to get down on her, but truthfully she’s loyally gone along with every one of Obama’s decisions, even when they had the potential to disrupt the family. She’s a good politician’s wife.

    IOW, she would’ve dropped his ass if he lost the election.

    Like


  158. Vladimir:

    It’s really ridiculous for you to whine that you’ve been dealt a bad hand in life. You didn’t — you actually got an excellent one, and it’s your choice to waste your time complaining to anonymous strangers instead of taking advantage of what you’ve got. Take a sincere word of advice: I don’t know how old you are (from your writing, I’d guess at most 25), but in any case, unless you get your act together, in a few years you’ll have a striking realization that you’ve wasted your best years and missed great opportunities. Then, the emotional masochism that you’re enjoying right now will turn into a tsunami of real depression and anxiety, from which you might not recover at all. Don’t say you weren’t warned.

    He wants a hottie.

    Soma might be his best bet.

    Like


  159. Vladimir:

    You’ve never heard of Yulia Tymoshenko, have you?

    Wow! She reminds me of Clio!

    Like


  160. […] How American Women Are Seen By KazakhsThe survey was conducted by the Gender Studies department at a university in Kazakhstan, and all I can say is that if American gender studies departments were like this one, our college “””educated””” women wouldn’t be so fucked in the … […]

    Like


  161. TKA : “Evolutionary Psychology and Goffman’s work didn’t create Game, it reverse-engineered it”

    You’re right – people need a workable system to follow.

    And Game is the “System” that could only be created due to Evo Psy, Goffman, etc.

    Iceberg Slim expressed a similar Game worldview – “The Man is the Prize”

    But is Slim a system of pickup? I don’t see it.

    The Mystery Method is a system. Game is a system

    Like


  162. on November 15, 2008 at 9:28 am eternalingenue

    And yet this blog is all about women. Makes you think

    Like


  163. on November 15, 2008 at 9:29 am eternalingenue

    I am hello, btw. WordPress cruelly witheld my preferred handle from me.

    Like


  164. on November 15, 2008 at 9:39 am eternalingenue

    In any sort of game “you” are the prize. Women who put good-looking, succesful men on a pedastal get used and mistreated as well. It has very little to do with gender.

    Like


  165. Iceberg Slim expressed a similar Game worldview – “The Man is the Prize”

    But is Slim a system of pickup? I don’t see it.

    The Mystery Method is a system. Game is a system

    No, Slim HAD a system. He just didn’t take it apart and explain it to the reader. But once you consciously understand game and read Iceberg, you’ll see he was always practicing a form of it, even if it was mostly unconscious as a natural. Pimping is a system with an elaborate set of rules called “The Book.” It’s only passed down orally, never fully committed to paper. The book is not ever fully revealed to “squares” (non-pimps), hence the slogan “the game is to be sold, not told.” But it’s very much an elaborate system, and you can get punished by the community for veering outside of that system.

    But back to Slim, look at how he is and you can see many PUA concepts there: push-pull, negs, displays of high value, abundance mentality, generating attraction, building comfort, demanding respect…it’s all there. He just never spells it out in the form of a step-by-step system for the reader.

    There are plenty of people who learn good game without having to learn evo psych or goffman. What makes the PUA stuff so great is that its a great way to sell game to high-IQ intellectually curious white guys who need to understand everything about WHY something works before they believe it. Good game and pimping on the other hand have been popular in the black community for a long time because blacks don’t always need to have everything intellectually deconstructed in order to embrace it. They are happy enough embracing something on instinct and from seeing it work for someone else. One thing I notice about white guys, even if they see a system work for someone else, they still want to understand and deconstruct everything about it before adopting it.

    Like


  166. on November 15, 2008 at 10:34 am ironrailsironweights

    Pupu just looked up Bo Derek on line.

    What’s 10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1?
    Bo Derek getting older and fatter.

    What’s 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10?
    The warpig at the singles bar as you get drunker.

    Peter

    Like


  167. on November 15, 2008 at 10:57 am ironrailsironweights

    The pin-up girls of the 1980s – Pia Zadora (repulsive to me but men loved her)

    I always thought she was odd looking – not ugly, just different, and not in a good way.

    Farrah was the money though.

    Today she has, of all weird things, cancer of the anus.

    Peter

    Like


  168. Pia Zadora was truly an “only in the 80s” sex symbol, along with Shelley Long. Farrah Fawcett was always overrated to me, especially in comparison to Jaclyn Smith. I’m convinced if Jaclyn Smith was blonde too she’d easily have topped Farrah in sex symbol status.

    Like


  169. Guys say Michelle Obama is attractive?? To each his own but what is that big lump inside her mouth under her lower lip ??

    Like


  170. Peter:

    What’s 10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1?
    Bo Derek getting older and fatter.

    Lol

    Today she has, of all weird things, cancer of the anus.

    Yer killing me.

    Like


  171. josh randall:

    Guys say Michelle Obama is attractive?? To each his own but what is that big lump inside her mouth under her lower lip ??

    Skoal?

    Like


  172. T. AKA Ricky Raw:

    Higher power – Game is old, it’s just that society lost its way and moved away from it as men became feminized. Read Iceberg Slim and you’ll see pimps have been practicing these concepts since the beginning of the 20th century. Evolutionary Psychology and Goffman’s work didn’t create Game, it reverse-engineered it and explained it in a way that allowed even the nerdiest person to study it like a lesson plan and implement it like basketball drills.

    While the game obviously works great in practice, I’d say that the accompanying theories based on evolutionary psychology are mostly bunk. There is probably some truth in the basic contrast between female attraction to beta providers and cad alphas, but elaborate evolutionary theories of subtle points in male-female relations that one often reads on game-related blogs and websites are nothing but just-so stories without any scientific validity. Clinging to explanations just because they sound plausible to non-experts of a certain mindset is sheer charlatanism; in real science, reaching justified conclusions is much harder.

    In my opinion, writers on game should drop the entire evo-psych talk, or at least restrict it to a footnote in the basic introduction. Dilettante attempts at theorizing fueled by intellectual vanity will just make them look silly in the eyes of people who know something about science. The principles of game are based on sound empirical observations, and there is no need to ruin the reputation of these excellent results by coupling them with naive pseudoscientific theories.

    As a historical analogy, Michael Faraday discovered the laws of electromagnetism by careful and meticulous experimental work, and thus deserved a place among the greatest scientists of all time, despite being completely clueless about the underlying electromagnetic theory. If he had he attempted to concoct an underlying theory — which would have been beyond his competence, although he was an ingenious experimenter — he would have just came off as silly and soiled his reputation. Fortunately, he was smart enough to just stick to what he was good at. Theoretically overeager experts in game should learn from his example.

    Like


  173. Thanks, Vladimir. This blog needs more of your kind of discrimination between “sound empirical observations” and “theoretical overeager[ness]”. Far too many ad hoc generalizations about evo psych and its role in courtship are passed off here as science.

    Clio

    Like


  174. Pseudoscience gets a bad rap. The intellectual framework that paved the way for many valid scientific discoveries evolved from exploring questions, happy accidents and incorrect theories first posed by plausible pseudoscience. Take how modern chemistry evolved from alchemy for example. As long as they are just presented as exploration of plausible theories and not hard, verified science, it doesn’t bother me.

    Like


  175. You guys seen Britney lately? She’s back to being hot again.

    And I’ve always wondered how “Playboy” Bush ended up with Laura (who seems nice, but isn’t very attractive). At least Michelle is highly accomplished (same as Hillary). But Laura? Eh.

    I kind of wonder the same about Gates too (though his wife is fairly highly accomplished too).

    Like


  176. “Take how modern chemistry evolved from alchemy for example. As long as they are just presented as exploration of plausible theories and not hard, verified science, it doesn’t bother me.”

    I agree, T., but some writers here really do issue evo-psych pronouncements as if they were all equally proven by “hard science”.

    Clio

    p.s. If you stop and think about it, the truth of the alchemists’ theory was eventually established. There is, not a stone, but a form of energy in certain stones, that can transmute base metals into gold – nuclear energy. (I think this is actually a well-known trope, but I thought it up all by myself before I ever heard of it.)

    Like


  177. 14 pics of Sarah Palin from this weekend rocking the short shorts. And she’s 44.

    http://www.celebuzz.com/short-shorts-pics-sarah-palins-s64391/photos-32203891/

    Like


  178. It’s really ridiculous for you to whine that you’ve been dealt a bad hand in life.

    I’m well aware that I squandered a lot, and I don’t have anybody to blame but myself.

    I don’t know how old you are (from your writing, I’d guess at most 25)

    I quietly turned 25 two weeks ago, and admittedly, I do feel depressed that I’ve turned twenty-five with nothing to show for it, while looking at Facebook is an exercise in mental exhaustion due to looking at other people who have done well compared to me. Hell, even my mom pointed out that thirty is only five years away…

    You’ve never heard of Yulia Tymoshenko, have you?

    If I had a daughter, Yulia would be an excellent way on ensuring that our initials stay the same, while creating the same false stereotypes that a Russian name can bring.

    IOW, she would’ve dropped his ass if he lost the election.

    She’s not stupid. If it wasn’t for him, she’d be a quasi-somebody with an Ivy League degree instead of the wife of a Senator.

    He wants a hottie.

    David wants a time machine and a porn star.

    Soma might be his best bet.

    Was a Brave New World the best of all worlds?

    Like


  179. 14 pics of Sarah Palin from this weekend rocking the short shorts. And she’s 44.

    Screw her lucky aging, the prole bitch uses a Dell. Hell, you’d think given her spending habits, she’d buy a Mac or hell, a frigging ThinkPad…

    Like


  180. ***
    The average hotness at beauty school or community college is waaaaay better than what you see at Ivy League and top engineering schools.
    ***
    I don’t really know if your right or not…. I can see where you would be, but maybe it’s pretty situational.

    When I was in Rolla, a long time ago and a galaxy far away, the two hottest women I have ever met… admittedly they were in their prime, but still…. were an engineering student and a computer science major.

    The engineering one actually flirted with me when I used my talent in physics to answer some question that she was talking to a professor about and had written on the blackboard in a few seconds. Compared me to her brother, so yes, she was actually flirting. Unfortunately I didn’t run with the ball back then. Honestly, I was overly intimidated by her absolute hotness. However, she was a tester. Test, test, test… every man I ever saw her with(not many actually, but test, test, test, every one of them). So I probably would have failed at some fairly early stage anyway. The joys of youth and inexperience.

    Anyway, she was the single hottest women I have ever seen in real life, an Italian ball of fire. And she was a real, actual, engineering student.

    Maybe the very low number of women in engineering means that in any group of say 200 engineers you’ll have maybe 40 women… and if those follow the normal looks distribution for women… that would mean there may be no 10s at all.

    But you take 200 normal college students and about 110 of them will be women. Your pretty much guaranteed at least one 10 in the group.

    It’s complicated. Later I’ll internet search to see if anyone has done a real study.

    Like


  181. Well well…a post about something other than fat-women-are-the-devil. Good boy! 🙂

    I’m very aware of how (negatively) American women are perceived, especially those of us of color. In fact, some of the crappiness of my current dating situation is directly related to my peers lending truth to the stereotypes…but the funny thing about being a Black American woman is that outside of the U.S. almost everybody wants to get into our pants.

    Somehow, we are, despite the negative press, on the “things to do before I die” list of the majority of the world’s male population.

    What’s even more disturbing, and I wish there was a study on this, is that it’s not just the sex. Way too many guys seem to be trying to get us pregnant. Somehow we got classed as supersexual and superfertile, and those get related.

    The two (Moroccan) guys who decided I wasn’t good enough because I’m not Jewish, had also previously tried to get me pregnant not so subtly, and the first one succeeded, but fortunatly God was merciful enough not to allow me to carry his xenophobic monkey fetus more than a couple of weeks.

    I believe that alot of the ugliness associated with American-ness (and never you worry guys, people outside the U.S. view American men as overly violent latent homosexuals with control issues whose only attractive feature is financial) is because of White Americans. The Black people I know living overseas are not lacking attention or admiration at all.

    …and even my problems here ceased to be problems once I learned enough about the culture to filter more aggressively. I’ve heard similar from others who live in highly homogenous cultures…that it’s just a matter of who you allow to get close to you, and who you don’t.

    About the new first lady well, I find her unattractive, but not for the reasons some others here do. To me, she looks like an Oreo. What’s unattractive about her is what she has done to de-negrize herself. She should lay off the relaxer, wear clothes that fit, and buy a nice chunk of shea butter.

    I mean, if conformists think you’re ugly by nature already, you might as well be natural. It won’t make any difference to them, but it’ll be healthier and more self affirming.

    Like


  182. T. AKA Ricky Raw:

    Pseudoscience gets a bad rap. The intellectual framework that paved the way for many valid scientific discoveries evolved from exploring questions, happy accidents and incorrect theories first posed by plausible pseudoscience. Take how modern chemistry evolved from alchemy for example.

    I disagree. I’ll happily admit that there is nothing wrong with amateurism, as long as the amateurs are aware of their limitations, and also that the official science published in reputable venues is often worthless rubbish.

    However, real science emerged only when people started looking for data and theories in an intellectually disciplined way — and one of the basic requirements of intellectual discipline is to avoid theoretical flights of fancy, no matter how plausible and satisfying they might sound intuitively. Otherwise, you’ll get nothing but just-so stories without any (except perhaps entertainment) value.

    Don’t forget that historically, it was an extraordinary accident that intellectual elites in the West acquired enough self-discipline to start doing real science a few centuries ago. As soon as that harsh intellectual discipline is lost, all attempts at scientific reasoning will produce nothing but garbage. This has happened often enough in recent history — witness the immense popularity of theories peddled by pseudo-scientific charlatans such as Freud or Marx.

    As long as they are just presented as exploration of plausible theories and not hard, verified science, it doesn’t bother me.

    But quasi-scientific theories that are commonly peddled in writings on game are usually not presented in a properly cautious tone. Instead, they are typically trumpeted as established facts that are just being suppressed by the PC establishment or whatever. However, they have no real basis. Game works, but nobody really knows why. For all I know, yes, some parts of it probably resonate with women’s genetically predetermined instincts, while others likely resonate only with whatever the surrounding culture has planted into their heads. But which is which? It’s stupid and presumptuous when definite answers to this question are claimed by people whose scientific background is limited to trashy pop-science books and internet ramblings. (Realistically, pop-science for general audiences is junk more often than not, even when written by top-level scientists.)

    It’s not just about evo-psych, but other quasi-scientific rubbish as well. You get ramblings about the physiology of sex hormones by people who wouldn’t even be able to list the endocrine glands in human body, let alone say a few coherent sentences about the role of each of them. (Hell, I’d bet most of them probably wouldn’t even know what “endocrine” means without a dictionary.) You get ridiculous arguments over terms such as “alpha male” by people who have never even bothered to consult any scientific literature to learn the meaning of this term and what (if any) application it might have to humans. And so on.

    It’s a pity, because the principles of game obviously work well in practice, and they can teach some very important lessons to both men and women who are suffering from the standard delusions about the mechanisms of human sexual attraction. I’m sure that at least some people who encounter writings and discussions on game don’t stop to think about it because they are repulsed by all the inane quasi-scientific claptrap that often accompanies them.

    Like


  183. Otherwise, you’ll get nothing but just-so stories without any (except perhaps entertainment) value.

    Smart, honest people can get a lot of things right simply by reasoning deductively from the known facts.

    Game works, but nobody really knows why.

    Bullshit. You make it sound like we know _nothing_ about why game works. We may not know in every detail why it works, but we know quite a bit.

    You get ramblings about the physiology of sex hormones by people who wouldn’t even be able to list the endocrine glands in human body, let alone say a few coherent sentences about the role of each of them.

    Dishonest. You don’t need to know all the endocrine glands in the body to know that, for instance, testosterone makes one more aggressive and gives one a higher sex drive.

    For all I know, yes, some parts of it probably resonate with women’s genetically predetermined instincts,

    Rhetorical sneakiness. Evolution shaped the female mind, including what makes men attractive to women. It would be preposterous to suggest otherwise. Deal with it.

    while others likely resonate only with whatever the surrounding culture has planted into their heads.

    Game has been field tested worldwide. With slight variations, it works everywhere, again making evo-psych theories more plausible than cultural ones.

    Like


  184. Vlad and Thursday, it is obvious why game works. It’s just that few are honest enough with themselves to admit to why it works. The reasons are both evolutionary and cultural. An effective PUA uses cultural symbols to make himself seem to be higher on the social ladder, which is the only scale most people have for evolutionary superiority.

    In other words, being the sheep with the biggest horns, gets you the biggest harem.

    It’s all social/cultural. It’s all subjective. The only way for game not to work is if someone is operating on a different scale than most of humanity, and it’s speculated that up to 10% of people are. That 10% being different doesn’t constitute enough of an exception to throw out an entire theory.

    This is something that people trying to operate within the herd should accept and understand. Those operating outside of it, or on the fringes should as well. Everything that exists is so because it can be. If anything could not be, it would not be.

    Where people get mixed up is in whether or not things should be. In my opinion, this is a matter of personal taste.

    Those who don’t rely on the normal scales often try to convert those who do, to their way of thinking. I used to do this myself, but over time I learned that it is best to take the money and run…count yourself blessed that you can see the big picture, and either make a comfortable life for yourself outside of the fray, or if you care enough about others, become a social engineer and profit from it.

    Like


  185. Thursday,
    Has it been scientifically tested enough where it can stand on it’s own as social science? I’m not ragging on game per se as it seems to be quite useful but am genuinely curious. However, while it might work for one night stands and flings over time you will actually have to *be* high value if you want to keep a beautiful woman.

    Like


  186. “The two (Moroccan) guys who decided I wasn’t good enough because I’m not Jewish, had also previously tried to get me pregnant not so subtly, and the first one succeeded, but fortunatly God was merciful enough not to allow me to carry his xenophobic monkey fetus more than a couple of weeks.”

    That is perhaps the most gratuitously bizarre and unsettling self-disclosure I have ever read on this blog, and perhaps anywhere.

    Like


  187. *nodding in agreement* I’m almost frightened to ask but what do you mean by “monkey fetus”

    Like


  188. hello, amen! she says she’s black, and then she’s tossing around racial slurs like a ceasar salad!

    Like


  189. If I were attracted to dark women, I’d be in love.

    Like


  190. Getting back to the wedding ring thing, has anyone tried to trace the neuropsychological pathway of fucked up reasoning that runs through a woman’s mind when she sidles up to the guy with the ring at the bar, when she flirts with him passing up other guys who are ostensibly single?

    Is it because the element of *danger* is an aphrodisiac to women? Is it because she equates “married” with “desirable”, subconsciously assuming that the guy must have sufficient material resources to maintain a marriage?

    Does she equate being married with a higher likelihood of being alpha?

    What exactly is the daisy chain of feminine “””””reasoning””””” at work here???

    Like


  191. Sorry, meant to post that last question on the Wedding Ring thread!

    Like


  192. And I guess these Moroccan guys must have been Sephardic. Her post doesn’t say whether or not they were polyandrous but the post doesn’t clearly clearly say that she wasn’t involved with these two at the same time.

    *falling out of chair*

    Like


  193. jaakkeli,
    Out of curiousity, how dark is too dark? I’ve read Sailer’s theories of darker skintones being thought of as implicitly masculine, but I’ve only known black men to whom a woman’s skintone mattered much. I’ve known women who prefer tanned or dark skinned men, but in general men don’t seem to care as much. I’ve seen white men with Hispanic and Asian women who were darker than they. Some Filipinas are as dark as medium-complected black women yet they still date/marry white men.

    Like


  194. hello, I don’t think it’s about masculinity/femininity. I think it’s about signaling age: people grow darker as they get older, so even simply swarthy whites often look sickly to me. Also, women get darker with pregnancies, so it might be that bit of evo psych, too. I couldn’t get that hot about Sarah Palin, because dark + middle aged isn’t good at all.

    There’s actually a sweet spot at brown skin ie. levels that are never seen here except in immigrants (so that I don’t associate it with age or bad health), but then attraction declines again. I don’t know why.

    Like


  195. Thursday:

    Smart, honest people can get a lot of things right simply by reasoning deductively from the known facts.

    No, they can’t. At best, they’ll occasionally stumble upon some valid conclusions, but they will be lost in a sea of false ones. If things were as rosy as you think, every culture on Earth would have developed science — and as you probably know, only one culture in the entire history of humanity was lucky enough to develop it. (Although others have copied its methods once they saw how well it works.)

    Dishonest. You don’t need to know all the endocrine glands in the body to know that, for instance, testosterone makes one more aggressive and gives one a higher sex drive.

    And how do you know that? Have you ever actually read any scientific literature on testosterone, or are you just relaying old wives’ tales? (The really ironic thing is that you might be relaying echoes of the radical feminist “testosterone poisoning” claptrap.) How do you even know that testosterone always has effects in the same direction, regardless of dose, and that its effects don’t depend on various other factors in the endocrine system? Actual science has to address all these questions (and many more) before forming a conclusion, and if you take a few minutes to google for papers on the effects of testosterone in humans, you’ll see that the issue is much more complex and less clear than your simplistic assertions.

    Rhetorical sneakiness. Evolution shaped the female mind, including what makes men attractive to women. It would be preposterous to suggest otherwise. Deal with it.

    You are the one who needs to deal with reality and reign in your wild optimism.

    I readily admit that humans have inborn behavioral traits shaped by evolution, and that mechanisms of sexual attraction are partly — probably to a large part — based on these inborn traits. However, discovering what these traits exactly are and disentangling them from culturally imprinted ones is an extremely complex task that requires lots of careful, methodologically scrupulous research before causations can be disentangled and some reliable answers given. Even the experts are guaranteed to stumble many times along the way. Of course, such research is guaranteed to uncover some highly politically incorrect truths, and this might retard its progress indefinitely — but this is only one more reason to be cautious and skeptical.

    It’s utterly preposterous to claim that you can sidestep this hard and laborious scientific process by armchair philosophizing. I mean, you can — but then you’ll just end up with a pile of worthless quasi-scientific rubbish like e.g. Freud did. I’d recommend you to read Richard Feynman’s popular writings on this topic; he always emphasized how hard it is to really get to know something without fooling oneself. (Incidentally, he was quite a player, but I’m sure he would heartily laugh at the usual charlatan attempts to “scientifically explain” why game works.)

    Like


  196. hey guys! I amtrying to learn how to be a seducer of women! I have the book :Mystery as well as the Louis and Copeland,Tony Clink’s Layguide,Exploit Her Inner Psycho,and a few others. What books would you recomend for an up and “coming” would be alpha male to begin the process of becoming a rake?? I have heard the names of Valentine,and JOhn Fate,as well as D’Angelo….Anyone?…Anyone?

    Like


  197. No, they can’t. At best, they’ll occasionally stumble upon some valid conclusions, but they will be lost in a sea of false ones.

    You must be totally illiterate in anything except maybe whatever scientific field you are working in. For example, in poli-sci it is remarkable how much Machiavelli and Hobbes got right, before there were any social science data to work with. Adam Smith didn’t need modern quantitative methods to write up the theory of capitalism. He got some details wrong, but he mostly got it right. Not to mention Darwin, who without the benefit of knowing genetics had no idea about how traits were passed down or modified, yet whose books hold up remarkably.

    As I said if smart and honest you can get it right. Freud was not honest.

    But, for every Freud there is a William James. For every Rousseau there is a Hobbes. For every Marx there is a Smith. Some people actually can see what is in front of their noses. If you know anything about literature you will know that people before science had a pretty good idea about human nature. It was not all darkness.

    How do you even know that testosterone always has effects in the same direction, regardless of dose, and that its effects don’t depend on various other factors in the endocrine system?

    Stop being a pedant. You know darn well what the effects of testosterone are in most circumstances. Stop throwing up smokescreens. You are being radically dishonest.

    It’s utterly preposterous to claim that you can sidestep this hard and laborious scientific process by armchair philosophizing.

    Again, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Smith and others have gotten an awful lot right by looking at incomplete data.

    Excessive skepticism is the last refuge of those who don’t like what they see in front of their eyes. You remind me of all those creationists ranting about how the fossil record is incomplete.

    Like


  198. Nicole said I’m very aware of how (negatively) American women are perceived, especially those of us of color. In fact, some of the crappiness of my current dating situation is directly related to my peers lending truth to the stereotypes…but the funny thing about being a Black American woman is that outside of the U.S. almost everybody wants to get into our pants.
    Somehow, we are, despite the negative press, on the “things to do before I die” list of the majority of the world’s male population
    .

    Preech, in my experience this has been the case. I get 5x as much attention as I receive in the states. I’ve been well warned about Scotland.
    jaakkeli
    If I were attracted to dark women, I’d be in love
    lol
    The test for this is finding Gabrielle Union naked in your bed at 2 am. If she “stand up”, you like dark women.
    Hello said: I’ve seen white men with Hispanic and Asian women who were darker than they. Some Filipinas are as dark as medium-complected black women yet they still date/marry white men.
    I’ve mentioned this too and no one has an answer. The truth is social status separates caramel colored Asian or Black woman.
    Jakeeli said: I think it’s about signaling age: people grow darker as they get older, so even simply swarthy whites often look sickly to me
    This throws me too because black women(African-American) have a tendency to not have wrinkles until they are very old if ever. I don’t know(never seen) any thirty year blk women with crows feet.

    There’s actually a sweet spot at brown skin ie. levels that are never seen here except in immigrants
    Sweet spot? Please explain

    Like


  199. The return of Nicole has made my day:)

    Like


  200. Joe T and hello, actually what made it a monkey fetus is that half its genes were provided by a xenophobe. I’m equally cautious of Black men who find me socially convenient. I’m trying to bear the superman, not the gooberman.

    Enough can go wrong in bringing a child into the world without setting them up for what I would view as failure from the start. One has to consider what would happen if say, the child was born with a severe illness or defect, or mentally challenged…would I rather they be disabled and peer dependent, or disabled and independent/mostly self validating?

    Noir, thank you for allowing me to make your day. 🙂

    By the way, Scotland is a place you might want to exercise a little…flexibility. The little experience I’ve had along those lines was worth it just for the experience. The culture facilitates a kind of…all in good fun attitude about such things, but take it seriously enough to be kind. I’d recommend between the ages of 37 and 55.

    The cultural norm is for them to be fun, spirited, but very stone serious about matters of the heart. What might merely bruise an American guy’s ego, could drive a Scotsman to melancholy. It’s not unusual for a guy to cover his broken heart so well that it makes him physically ill. So try to be friendly but treat any affairs with the romance they’re due. Follow his lead. Scottish men haven’t forgotten how to do that…and if it’s going somewhere you don’t want it to, just tell him you don’t want to go any further. Remember, blunt, but civilized, and you’ll be fine. 🙂

    Like


  201. ” I think it’s about signaling age: people grow darker as they get older, so even simply swarthy whites often look sickly to me”

    I’ve never heard of this. I’ve always heard of pale white people looking ill, not tanned or swarthy ones.

    Like


  202. “I’ve mentioned this too and no one has an answer. The truth is social status separates caramel colored Asian or Black woman.”

    Black women would be more attractive to white men if they got thinner (on average) and lost ghetto attitudes and styles. This is why a lot of bf/wm relationships involve black immigrants. A thin middle class black woman who wants to date out will most likely be able to do so.

    Like


  203. and styles
    what styles?

    Like


  204. Thursday:

    As I said if smart and honest you can get it right. Freud was not honest.

    Most people who come up with bad theories are not being fundamentally dishonest — they’re usually fooling themselves quite honestly. As the above mentioned Feynman said, “The first principle [of science] is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool.”

    But, for every Freud there is a William James. For every Rousseau there is a Hobbes. For every Marx there is a Smith. Some people actually can see what is in front of their noses. If you know anything about literature you will know that people before science had a pretty good idea about human nature. It was not all darkness.

    Sure, they knew a lot about human nature; in fact, when it comes to knowing human nature, modern scientists and other intellectuals are often inferior to the best minds of antiquity and Middle Ages. However, I’m not talking about knowing human nature empirically, but about scientific theories of why human nature is what it is, what parts of it are really inborn and genetic, and how upbringing and culture interact with this innate basis in forming the human personality. Science is only starting to give some preliminary results on these questions, and future progress is questionable because it’s undoubtedly a huge minefield of politically incorrect truths.

    In this situation, it’s very tempting to start thinking that because the old blank slate PC orthodoxy has been debunked pretty convincingly, now any seemingly plausible theory must be true if it’s just un-PC enough, and anyone disputing any genetic theories of human traits, inclinations, and differences must be a lefty PC commissar. You can see many extreme examples of this among the commenters on this blog (like e.g. that guy a few days ago who claimed that there can be no cute female scientists, because estrogen makes you stupid). Similarly, once you discover game and realize that what mass media and conventional wisdom say about male-female relations is mostly bunk, it’s tempting to start thinking that any charlatan theory sprayed with buzzwords from biology and evolutionary theory must be correct just because it provides a convenient explanation for why things work differently from what your mom, teachers, and Hollywood were telling you.

    The quasi-science in discussions of game is just a subset of this general “anti-PC PC” trend. Just like lefties invent all sorts of charlatan pseudo-science and perform all sorts of mental acrobatics to defend their ideology and viciously attack and character-assassinate anyone who dares to dispute it, various critics of the PC orthodoxy often make similar intellectual mistakes, only in the other direction. Admittedly, in the particular case of game, it’s more about personal vanity than about ammunition for political and culture wars.

    Stop being a pedant. You know darn well what the effects of testosterone are in most circumstances. Stop throwing up smokescreens. You are being radically dishonest.

    No, I’m being totally straightforward and honest — and anyway, would you dispute that the essence of science is exactly intellectual pedantry and the self-discipline to stop short of making unwarranted conclusions, however attractive they might seem?

    If you want to argue about this particular issue, here’s a relatively recent paper that presents an interesting study and surveys the previous literature in the area:
    http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/89/6/2837

    I’m not saying that the paper contradicts what you’re saying, but notice how much it talks about a myriad of possible confounding factors, difficulties with establishing reliable results, inconsistent results across previous studies, etc. Compare that with the usual simplistic blanket statements one encounters on blogs like this one.

    Excessive skepticism is the last refuge of those who don’t like what they see in front of their eyes.

    Who says that I “don’t like what I see”? I don’t deny most of the ugly truths about human nature discussed in this blog; in fact, my general view of human nature and human affairs might well be even blacker than yours. What I don’t like is charlatanism in scientific matters, regardless of whether it serves to uphold the PC orthodoxy or to satisfy someone’s personal intellectual vanity.

    Like


  205. Vlad,
    Fabulous comment, I agree with you 100%.

    Chic,
    http://www.geocities.com/ghettofabwedding/

    Basically this. I’m not trying to be nasty, but really going over the top, be it in a ghetto way or a Paris Hilton way doesn’t appeal to most white men. And middle class Latinos and Asians in my experience.

    Like


  206. Black women would be more attractive to white men if they got thinner (on average) and lost ghetto attitudes and styles. This is why a lot of bf/wm relationships involve black immigrants. A thin middle class black woman who wants to date out will most likely be able to do so.

    It’s also a major reason why many upwardly mobile black men are also dating outside the race more and more.

    Like


  207. Game is best likened to engineering, not science. Vladimir is right that we don’t really understand it… but the Romans built pretty impressive aqueducts and roads without even understanding F=ma.

    Of course, those aqueducts helped ruin them via lead poisoning, and I think something similar is going on with Game, since I don’t see many healthy marriages arising from it.

    Like


  208. T,
    Is your wife white?

    Like


  209. It’s also a major reason why many upwardly mobile black men are also dating outside the race more and more.

    Of course, if I said that, I’m a bad man, sell out, and oreo who “hates” black women. Ooops.

    Like


  210. Vladimir:

    And how do you know that? Have you ever actually read any scientific literature on testosterone, or are you just relaying old wives’ tales? (The really ironic thing is that you might be relaying echoes of the radical feminist “testosterone poisoning” claptrap.) How do you even know that testosterone always has effects in the same direction, regardless of dose, and that its effects don’t depend on various other factors in the endocrine system? Actual science has to address all these questions (and many more) before forming a conclusion, and if you take a few minutes to google for papers on the effects of testosterone in humans, you’ll see that the issue is much more complex and less clear than your simplistic assertions.

    With all due respect, you’re still throwing sand in our eyes here. A full account of the biochemical/physiological nature of T would undoubtedly include all the details you list here, but all that is hardly necessary to validate the rather more modest claim that higher T is a causal factor in libido/aggression.

    We’re operating at a coarse level of granularity on this blog. We’re not trying to be scientists here.

    Like


  211. on November 16, 2008 at 11:47 pm Comment_Who_Wrote_This

    *******************
    People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary.
    *******************
    Adam Smith wrote it. Adam Smith was a crazy conspiracy theorist. Thursday, have you even read the “central” book Adam Smith wrote? Do you even know what he believed? It’s interesting that beliefs you so casually claim to know are right…. are beliefs you don’t even know. A bit of lack of rigor there. But you do know what other people have told you he believed!

    Adam Smith also wrote this:
    *******************
    If people have not acquired an habit of industry, the cheapness of all the necessaries of life rather encourages sloth. The best remedy is to raise the demand for all necessaries; not merely by premiums upon exporting them, which is often useful too; but by increasing the number of people who consume them; and when they are dear, more labour and application will be requisite in all trades and arts to procure them. Industrious foreigners should therefore be invited to us, and all men of industry should live with us unmolested and easy. Encouragement should be given to marriage and to those who rear a numerous offspring to industry. The unmarried should pay higher taxes as they are not at the charge of rearing new subjects to the state. Any foolish notions of meanness in mechanic arts, as if they were unworthy of men of better families, should be borne down, and men of better condition as to birth or fortune engaged to be concerned in such occupations. Sloth should be punished by temporary servitude at least.
    ********************

    The other poster is absolutely right. Science has severely devolved. A measure of doubt is merely wise when dealing with any new “scientific” “fact”. Especially if some group benefits obviously from it.

    Like


  212. Vladimir:

    I’m not saying that the paper contradicts what you’re saying, but notice how much it talks about a myriad of possible confounding factors, difficulties with establishing reliable results, inconsistent results across previous studies, etc. Compare that with the usual simplistic blanket statements one encounters on blogs like this one.

    Were you aware that until very recently scientists were claiming there was no evidence to show that exogenous steroid use was capable of building muscle mass and enhancing athletic performance (as against the personal experience of tens of thousands of men for some 50 years)?

    I remember hearing a lecture by Tyler Durden where he was teaching his breakdown of female psychology. At one point he alluded to studies demonstrating the cads/dads lover/provider distinction Roissy talks about here. But he quickly dropped the subject with the half-honest comment that “reading too much of that stuff will get you depressed and kill your state.”

    Since a big part of the PUA boondogle is giving omegas the impression they are making progress when they get a girl’s number or go on dates, I’m sureTyler had more than a little hesitation in talking about the cold facts.

    Here at Roissy’s, we keeps it real.

    Like


  213. I ‘ve just discovered that whenever I use the word O-M-E-G-A in my posts, I get the “awaiting moderation” business. Let me try again, sorry for the double post:

    Vladimir:

    I’m not saying that the paper contradicts what you’re saying, but notice how much it talks about a myriad of possible confounding factors, difficulties with establishing reliable results, inconsistent results across previous studies, etc. Compare that with the usual simplistic blanket statements one encounters on blogs like this one.

    Were you aware that until very recently scientists were claiming there was no evidence to show that exogenous steroid use was capable of building muscle mass and enhancing athletic performance (as against the personal experience of tens of thousands of men for some 50 years)?

    I remember hearing a lecture by Tyler Durden where he was teaching his breakdown of female psychology. At one point he alluded to studies demonstrating the cads/dads lover/provider distinction Roissy talks about here. But he quickly dropped the subject with the half-honest comment that “reading too much of that stuff will get you depressed and kill your state.”

    Since a big part of the PUA boondogle is giving lower betas the impression they are making progress when they get a girl’s number or go on dates, I’m sureTyler had more than a little hesitation in talking about the cold facts.

    Here at Roissy’s, we keeps it real.

    Like


  214. Tupac Chopra:

    With all due respect, you’re still throwing sand in our eyes here. A full account of the biochemical/physiological nature of T would undoubtedly include all the details you list here, but all that is hardly necessary to validate the rather more modest claim that higher T is a causal factor in libido/aggression.

    We’re operating at a coarse level of granularity on this blog. We’re not trying to be scientists here.

    I don’t have a problem with that — I’m criticizing people who are attempting to be scientists while lacking both the necessary knowledge and the necessary rigor of method. What I criticized initially — concocting amateurish ad hoc evo-psych theories to explain this or that aspect of male or female behavior, as frequently seen on game-related blogs and websites — is exactly that.

    If you just claim that “higher T is a causal factor in libido/aggression”, I’m fine with that (although even such a claim is a bit problematic, since “aggression” is not a precisely defined term — there is evidence that for hypogonadal men, testosterone therapy actually improves their mood and behavior in ways that could be reasonably said to reduce aggression). But when I read comments that describe someone’s looks, behavior, or mentality as “obviously” influenced by T or whatever other hormone, it’s already crossing into the crackpot zone. It’s not about a coarse level of inference — it’s about totally invalid inferences by people who use scientific terminology without understanding it, believing that their conclusions must be correct just because they feel good.

    Like


  215. Tupac Chopra:

    Were you aware that until very recently scientists were claiming there was no evidence to show that exogenous steroid use was capable of building muscle mass and enhancing athletic performance (as against the personal experience of tens of thousands of men for some 50 years)?

    For all I know, it might be true; I’m usually the first one to point out that rubbish passes for reputable, mainstream science all too often. But this is only one more reason to be cautious and skeptical towards amateurish attempts at science. To pursue your analogy further, I doubt that any of these athletes who used steroids, or even their trainers and physicians, were competent enough to come up with elaborate physiological theories on why and how exactly steroids work, even though their empirical observations were correct.

    Like


  216. Oops.. I misformatted my above post due to a typo.

    Tupac Chopra:

    Were you aware that until very recently scientists were claiming there was no evidence to show that exogenous steroid use was capable of building muscle mass and enhancing athletic performance (as against the personal experience of tens of thousands of men for some 50 years)?

    For all I know, it might be true; I’m usually the first one to point out that rubbish passes for reputable, mainstream science all too often. But this is only one more reason to be cautious and skeptical towards amateurish attempts at science. To pursue your analogy further, I doubt that any of these athletes who used steroids, or even their trainers and physicians, were competent enough to come up with elaborate physiological theories on why and how exactly steroids work, even though their empirical observations were correct.

    Like


  217. David, if it helps, in my opinion, being an Oreo is about one’s discomfort with their own cultural and physical reality, not who or what one likes to shag. The latter is irrelevent, and in fact, the ability to love women who don’t look like one’s mother is a good thing.

    There’s just a limit to how much fakeness for reasons other than artistic expression I can stand to look at before I start to have a similar reaction to hearing the pseudo dub version of Frankie Goes to Hollywood’s _Power_of_Love_.

    Maybe I’ve been overexposed, partly due to working in the field of beauty, to people who’ve gone overboard, or sacrificed more than it was truly worth. Plastic surgery doesn’t change anyone’s genes, and formaldehyde won’t keep you from having “nappy head churrens”.

    I mean, I understand why people do these things. I just wish sometimes that I didn’t. I wish that when I read articles about how these things go wrong for people, sometimes physically, sometimes psychologically, and sometimes both, I could see it as a freakshow like other people, but I know too well that they do it because they feel they need to. It’s not like getting a tongue ring to seem cool to a clique. They feel that something is morally wrong with being what they are.

    …and I suppose this is one reason I’m so unapologetic about what I am. I’m conscious of being ugly in the mainstream sense. I just don’t care enough about it to allow it to steal what little beauty I have from me…and I feel that it is a shame when someone who is overall beautiful, basically dumbs down for what they believe the masses like to look at.

    I don’t personally view 2+ cm of cicatrical alopecia along the hairline as particularly beautiful.

    Like


  218. @Hello- You know there is a white version of this? It’s the trallor park Nascar set who have names like sketter and BeetyJo. The upscale version is a copy of those chics who are on shows like real house wives of orange county.

    TsaidIt’s also a major reason why many upwardly mobile black men are also dating outside the race more and more.

    Now T, you and I know that is only half the reason.
    What are the reasons upwardly mobile blk women are dating out?

    Like


  219. I’ve been following the debate between Vladimir and Thursday, and I have to say i agree with Vladimir completely on this one. I don’t doubt that game works, but all this talk about the effect of evolution on male/female interactions has bothered me for exactly the same reasons. But I’d like to add to the discussion with a few points of my own.

    Human beings have a cerebral cortex, in which resides the mind, which allows us to make choices about how we behave. People don’t have “instincts” in the biological sense, i.e., people aren’t born knowing any higher level skills. People do have certain drives, like the drive for sex and food, but we have the ability to make choices about how, where, and when we pursue those drives. The ability to consciously choose is the basis of all law, and enables a civil society to even exist. The concepts of choice, intent, and knowledge of consequences are the basis of our entire criminal justice system – without them nobody could be guilty of any crime. Hopefully all of this is self-evident so far. If it is, then some have to see that it doesn’t mesh well with all the Evolutionary psychology that routinely gets thrown around this blog. Their claims to greatness notwithstanding, people like Roissy can’t walk up to any woman on the face of the earth and always get a positive reaction out of them, because it’s a two way street. Women have to WANT to be gamed, at least a little, in order for it to work. They aren’t hapless worker ants, walking around waiting for their chemical buttons to be pushed at any time, helpless to the outcome.
    So when you go to a bar, where many people in our culture tend to go to see, be seen, and meet others, is it such a big surprise that a woman would be receptive to you if you’re confident, funny, and interesting? Who DOESN’T want to meet people like that? Establishing causal links between human behavior as affected by culture, and the chemicals that make up our bodies, as affected by evolution, is a huge and daunting task indeed. The gap in our understanding is truly vast in this regard. With our current state of knowledge, trying to explain male-female social interactions by referring to the principles of evolution is like trying to ascertain the history of Europe for the past thousand years by looking at the layout of the European electrical power grid. Knowledge of the latter is many orders of magnitude below what you need to understand the former, and the causal connection between them isn’t even remotely apparent. People who use evolution to try and explain away people’s actions are wholly ignorant of this knowledge gap. In my experience, they are also usually trying to get away with bad behavior. It’s the modern, socially acceptable way of saying “The devil made me do it!”.

    Like


  220. Fabian:

    Reason is the whore of Desire.

    Like


  221. “Reason is the whore of Desire.”

    Ha ha!!!

    Like


  222. Now T, you and I know that is only half the reason.
    What are the reasons upwardly mobile blk women are dating out?

    It’s not an equal phenomenon. In black/white interracial pairings, over 88% of those pairings are a black man and a white woman. 12% or less are black women and white men. 70% of black women of marrying age are single. Black women have traditionally been the least likely gender and race combination to date interracially but i think many of them do it now because of lack of options (lower class black men in prison and upwardly mobile black men dating outside of the race) or because they have revenge issues with black men and feel being with a white man is a way to get back at black men for how they treated her growing up.

    Like


  223. T- I wasn’t talking numbers. As you know many AA women want to hold out for an AA man or die without.

    because they have revenge issues with black men and feel being with a white man is a way to get back at black men for how they treated her growing up
    I say there is a lot of revenge on the side of blk men too. I’ve seen to many isolated white women walking around in the hood with blk eyes are arm bruises. The marks didn’t come from jealous girls but at the hands of her man. The fact that most dysfunctional interracial relationships on TV are between blk men and white women makes one wonder too. I believe it’s a two headed issue thought. A lot of dysfunction but some people may like to see it that way. BTW, why do you dislike blk women?

    I date out too but I won’t date a nonblk to “get back at” blk men. If I date a person, it’s because I generally like the person or at the very least, find them interesting. What’s worse are the women who cheat because their man cheated. I can’t use my boy as a tool of revenge. Sadly, some people don’t think like I do.

    Like


  224. T saidbut i think many of them do it now because of lack of options

    I’ve met blk women who date only white men, not that many but a few are some. If you are from NYC, you are well aware of blk women having relationships with Puerto Ricans(some of the best looking men on earth) and other Latinos.

    Like


  225. Fabian, though I agree that human beings have more freedom of choice, I don’t believe that culture has totally overridden instinct. If this were so, I would still be a virgin because I am so very not mainstream pretty, and never have been.

    Very few people are mainstream “ideal” for their gender, and yet humanity hasn’t died out, and there is still a pretty wide variety of diversity in looks. So, with few exceptions, our perception of beauty remains largely based on nature.

    This is one reason why game works. Most people have some beauty and some redeeming quality, so all one has to do is use their respective culture’s success/health/beauty indicators to boost their already apparent natural markers. People respond to it regardless of their surrounding culture’s instruction.

    How they will respond is the unknown, but I know from personal experience that talking to the caveman/woman gets you farther than talking to the societally programmed facade.

    My only real problem with this is the possibility that someone may get something from it that they don’t really want, but I don’t deny that it works.

    Like


  226. Nicole – Your message is such a mess of convoluted logic I don’t know where to begin. So I won’t. The amazing thing is, I just gave women more credit than many on this blog do, and you still didn’t get it.

    Like


  227. Fabian, I do have a strange way of seeing things sometimes…but one thing about me you should know is that I’d rather deal with an ugly truth than a pretty lie.

    See, women are people, and people are stupid. Humanity is a vermin on the world right now, so it’s natural that we destroy ourselves. I would hope that we’d do it pleasantly or at least quietly until there are few enough of us that we’re not crapping on our own table anymore, but in the meantime, it’s an interesting show to watch.

    I do still care for my species in general, but giving women credit…credit for what? Look around.

    I’ve known children whose moms did drugs during pregnancy, and abandoned them after. One kid my mom used to teach was sniffing glue in grade school.

    Where was the woman who bore him?

    There are many like this. Don’t give women credit for anything.

    If humans were so above their base urges, people wouldn’t sell their children for a chemical.

    I want to help people have a better life who actually want that. In order to do that, I’ve had to face some rather inconvenient truths about humanity in general, and about my own gender. The ones with the strongest reality win. They’ll be the ones left when sexbots take most men too frightened to get involved with live women anymore, out of the gene pool.

    It may seem like convoluted logic to you, but well…like I said, people are stupid, and I have no faith in the general anything…only in individuals who really do exercise their freedom of choice.

    Most people obviously do not.

    Like


  228. Nicole – I’m sorry you hate yourself as a human being so much. I went to school with a bunch of enviro-wackos with views like you. They secretly hoped for the extinction of the species, so the whales could be “happy”. But I’m not interested in debunking the nihilistic bankruptcy of that argument today. The whole point of my long post was to point out the Enlightenment principle that people have CHOICE. What makes evaluating human actions tricky much of the time is that people can choose not to choose. Or they can choose without realizing they made a choice. That’s the case with game today. Whether they realize it or not, men and women have chosen to be led by their crotches and flit from one stimulating delight to the next in an endless masturbation fest. But the key is, it’s there choice. Evolution and biology didn’t force them. Since it’s their choice, the consequences are their responsibility. And making things better is also their responsibility. Humanity has overcome untold horrors and insults over the eons to get to the point we’re at today. I don’t think it’s impossible to adjust male-female relations back to a more democratic, egalitarian mode while preserving much of the freedoms of men and women. But we’re not going to get to work doing that if everybody’s denying their responsibility by saying, “It’s not my fault….evolution made me do it!”

    Like


  229. Fabian:

    Should in one hand, shit in the other. See which one fills up first.

    Like


  230. Fabian, I’m going to put the calling me an enviro whacko who hopes for the extinction of mankind aside for a moment, and focus on the part of your argument that is actually relevent, and that is freedom of choice.

    What makes you think humans really have a choice in their behavior?

    Whether or not you place any stock in it, it has been scientifically proven that the source of all action is either conscious or unconscious thought, and that the source of every thought is :: drumroll :: a person’s capability of thinking it.

    I mean, philosophers have been saying this a long time, but now they’ve proven it.

    This means that a person is limited by their potential. When they’re presented with a situation, what they can think of it determines what they will think of it, and how they will behave.

    So you take the average woman whose thoughts around sex are a certain way, and run the right game on her…she has no choice but to respond according to her potential. The brain isn’t some magical source of infinite perspective that can truly examine all possibilities. It has limits based on that person’s intelligence, experiences, prejudices, etc.

    If there was true freedom of choice, nobody would ever get addicted to anything, or try anything that has a high chance of killing them or wrecking their lives.

    Getting laid with a responsible partner using protection is not a particularly dreadful thing. It can be very pleasurable and fun. Barring some physical problem or extreme social consequences, there’s no solid reason to avoid it.

    …and sometimes it happens even though there is a high liklihood of severe consequences.

    People aren’t choosing to be led by their crotches just because it’s modern and trendy. People have been led by their crotches all along, with few exceptions.

    The only difference now is that there are less severe consequences for the careful, and without a designated disposable class around, the majority exploit their peers instead.

    It was easy not to use free women for sex, when there were slaves and plentiful prostitutes around. It was easier to cheat on your husband and get away with it when there was no genetic testing.

    It’s easy for guys all around me to preserve their reputations among their own people, when their throwaway girls are from a different ethnicity with little interaction aside of sex and work. People will screw, and people have been screwing, and always will, in unsanctioned ways. Such is life.

    If people had a choice, this world would look very different.

    Individuals who are the exception, and have a higher potential than most, can see more options and therefore, have more choices.

    Like


  231. Nicole, how do you even get out of bed in the morning? That is perhaps the saddest, most pathetic outlook on life I’ve read here or elsewhere. It’s the same tired liberal philosophical argument, that people are all victims and no matter what they do, they can’t make things better for themselves or anyone. Well, I’m afraid neither I nor anyone else can reach you. You have to figure it out for yourself. Maybe you never will. In the meantime, you go right on thinking like a powerless slave.

    Like


  232. Ah, but Fabian…I, personally, am not a powerless slave. You, personally, may not be either. This does not however, mean that most people are not basically powerless slaves.

    I find statements like this one funny:

    They choose to allow their government/family/whatever other people to control them, because they lack the will to do otherwise.

    Know why?

    How does someone who lacks the will to do other than what they are told, chose anything? They’re not choosing. They’re being controlled. They don’t have what it takes to do something other than what they’re told, so they have no choice.

    Yes, it does kinda make people in general, victims of those who control the information and resources…but this is nothing new.

    It’s not particularly grim for me or people like me because we’re outsiders. Barring a nuclear war or something, we’ll survive because we have the will to choose not to be controlled by external forces that are counter to our survival.

    …but then again, perhaps we aren’t actually choosing either, but acting out based on our capability.

    So not everyone is a victim…just that well, most people seem to be built for victimhood.

    Like


  233. […] How American Women Are Seen By Kazakhs « Roissy in DC – The body language, the aloofness, the cockiness, it’s all there. There’s one scene where he pats a girl on the ass and says “Run along. Man talk.” and then talks to his buddy. It’s gold, really. Of course the problem is that most guys … […]

    Like


  234. Stereotypes are allways reality based,but just show a part of the picture .
    Fortunately spanish women are not in this survey.
    Anyway maybe should we tell about what we think of arabic-muslim society and how we see their women .
    Anyone who dares could be killed.

    Like


  235. Alias Clio–

    So it’s not that I think she’s not beautiful – I just find myself wondering “why her?”

    What she has said about herself is quite insightful. She says it’s not her beauty that men seem to be so attracted to, because she says she’s not really that beautiful, compared to many others. It’s that men think she’s sexy.

    Ah yes. She is a 9 in the beauty department anyway, but she also looks incredibly sexually responsive. She looks very easy to bring to multiple orgasms. She looks sex hungry. She fairly drips with smouldering sexuality.

    That and she’s young. Very young. Think about that. Most hot beauty queen stars don’t get real big until they’re pushing 30 or over it. Scarlett got very big when she was pushing 20.

    Yes Lindsay Lohan is still very young but what a mess.

    Like


  236. I should have identified that Clio and I are talking about Scarlett Johanssen in my immediately prior comment.

    Like


  237. […] How American Women Are Seen By Kazakhs « Citizen Renegade. […]

    Like


  238. […] also posted several links to his previous posts about American women, especially this one, “How American women Are seen by Kazakhs“, which me and CR( Crazy Russian) couldn’t stop […]

    Like


  239. All I can say is that after being married to a Tatar, I won’t mind burning in hell through all of enternity. It will seem a paradise compared to the last 13 years…

    Like