A Fool And His Money

A rich man traded in his old wife for a less old pole dancer. Burned by the $7 million bonanza payout to his ex-wife, the man drew up a pre-nuptial agreement with his stripper girlfriend before marrying her.

He married [the stripper] Ms Stelzer in October 2005, but not before a pre-nuptial agreement was signed, stating that Ms Stelzer would receive $3.25 million if the marriage broke down in the first four years.

I bet you can’t guess what happened.

They separated after two.

I used to be amazed how unbelievably stupid smart men could be when dealing with women who make their dicks hard. Obviously this guy was smart enough to amass a small fortune. Also as obvious, he was stupid enough to sign over $3.25 million to a glorified slut with a pre-nup loophole so big she was practically preordained to waltz through it.

Mr Wallace fought to have the pre-nup deemed invalid, claiming that Ms Stelzer behaved fraudulently by making “false promises of love and desire for children”.


Money is not necessarily a marker for alphaness. Many rich men are complete betas. These are the kind of head in the sand romanticists who’ve been spit-shining women’s pedestals since birth, and who really REALLY believe a pole dancer when she tells them she loves them, as the ink is drying on the deal that amounts to a lottery win for her if she bails within four years, with eager assistance, of course, from the anti-male divorce industrial complex.

There are two — just two — safeguards against the insidious predations of women: celibacy, and love. No, not phony declarations of love paid in full with baubles and trinkets. I mean real love, the kind of uncontrollable love women lavish on charming jerkboys. If you have game… if you can play a woman’s heart like a harp… she won’t need to be bought off. She won’t WANT to be bought off. The only scheming she’ll do is convincing her friends and family that you’re really a great guy underneath the rough exterior.


  1. The 3.25M was meant to protect against a greater payday for her!?

    [CH: if that were the case, he wouldn’t be fighting to declare the pre-nup invalid.]


    • David… yes, it was meant to protect his assets by limiting what she could receive if they divorced. But it was ridiculously generous… particularly for a guy marrying a golddigging stripper.


    • No–he was absolutely fighting it. While the prenup was limiting her to 3.25mm, he said she entered the marriage with false intentions, and therefore should not even be entitled to that. He lost.


      • > ‘behaved fraudulently by making “false promises of love and desire for children”’

        Scorsese’s 1995 film, “Casino”, is just about exactly three hours in length:


        So I doubt that I’d be able to find the exact clip on Jewtube [in fact, I doubt that anyone has ever posted that particular clip to Jewtube].

        But somewhere there’s a voiceover in that movie wherein somebody [Pesci’s character maybe?] says that de Niro’s character sealed the deal by FIRST getting the live birth out of Sharon Stone’s character, and only after the live birth of the child did he start worrying about the question of marrying the child’s mother.

        Then later in the movie, de Niro’s character makes DAMNED CERTAIN to get full custody of the child, once Stone’s character goes back to her old [innate?] filthy stinking whoring ways.


      • on December 14, 2013 at 1:10 pm Ed the Department Head

        Yes, I believe it is innate.


  2. on December 13, 2013 at 9:33 am RappaccinisDaughter

    …well, a pre-nup is still a good idea. That is, if you have a *REAL* pre-nup designed to actually protect your assets. Obviously, the one he got served precisely the opposite purpose.

    Note to those of you who may be considering marriage: If she really loves you, she’ll happily sign a pre-nup that leaves her with nothing except any assets she may have brought to the marriage or accrued during it, and provides only for any potential children. If she refuses to sign it, consider that a huge red flag and do NOT marry her.


    • on December 13, 2013 at 9:42 am The Feminist Whisperer

      Beginning to think that all marriages ought to be arranged according to business contracts stipulating expected duties, performance, monetary outlays, responsibilities, etc.


      • A good idea if there are no kids. Without kids I don’t see the point of marriage anyway.

        But with kids, do we make up rules that would look a lot like child support? What’s the alternative?


      • > “Without kids I don’t see the point of marriage anyway.”

        Always trust your instincts.



      • on December 14, 2013 at 1:51 am The Spirit Within

        The 20% of married couples without children might disagree, loudmouth.


      • +1 Bingo!

        There should only be generic contract law. Marriage and banking are regulated by perversive law that transfers wealth and privilege from sucker producers to cannibalist consumers. In such a system, it is not hard to imagine a rich man who is a winnersuccessful business cannibal but a romantic sucker. There is no honor among thieves. Honor is only for members of patriarchy in good standing, are is the benefits of a moral code.


      • Your mistake is assuming women should have legal rights to begin with.


      • Though I champion patriarchy as well, I think your have buried the Lockean concept of freedom, which is freedom to exercise one’s natural agency over oneself, NOT AN A PRIORI FREEDOM OF RESULTS! We serve ourselves to grant natural individual rights of agency and let the ecology distribute means. It is the granting of government agency to individual affairs that is THE PROBLEM, and for that a patriarch keeps to itself political majority of power to decide what delegatory institutional government may do and not do. You prevent cream from rising to the top and culling the garbage when you deny legal rights carte blanche. A class of men with guarantees like any protected ilk become cosmopolitan dead weight garbage in time. Keep government out of choosing domestic winners and losers and instead trust natural selection carte blanche. A fool and her property, business, etc. soon part. It is equal individual power in voting to protect fiat money that has fucked over the men that made Western civilization possible. Institutional guarantee = dependency crutch is NOT the answer. If men are better, let them rise to the top. The tail of men suck worse than the tail of women because the normal distribution is wider.


      • No.


      • Hey Dougie: I am sure you think you sound intellectual by using words from your list of Terminology That Will Make Me Sound Smart, but it has the exact opposite effect. Note that you will never see Heartiste write B.S. posts like the ones you cram out here. He says what he wants to say in a clear language, and is viewed as smarter for it. Read and learn, teen.


      • Matt king, see the above advice by Arbiter.


      • There is no “Terminology That Will Make Me Sound Smart” in his comment; it is just a difficult idea to express. It isn’t written particularly well, but what dashed-off internet commentary is? And if you think CH is immune from overwriting, you’re either oblivious or a suck-up.

        His idea isn’t that hard to decipher if you read it with good will. But you two are so busy declaring yourselves superior that you didn’t notice how insecure such preemptive fart-sniffing makes you look. Clearly you are not used to parsing high-level stuff if you are so quick to mock another’s attempt.

        You’re a couple of dropout niggers getting all uppity because someone be “talkin white” in front of you. Whatchu makin funna me witchu fancy fitty dolla words?


      • His post wasn’t a difficult concept to understand and it wouldn’t be difficult to articulate either. It was given the proper response, minus any snark on my part.
        His appeal was for me to see women as I would see a man; no.
        It’s humorous watching you bounce between rhetorical positionings as the situation calls for, whatever it takes to win, you gotta come out riding me on top huh?
        Do continue sniffing your own farts,
        Oh yeah, this German/Scottish nigger almost forgot….


      • Though I champion patriarchy as well, I think your have buried the Lockean concept of freedom, which is freedom to exercise one’s natural agency over oneself, NOT AN A PRIORI FREEDOM OF RESULTS! We serve ourselves to grant natural individual rights of agency and let the ecology distribute means.

        The solution to this is not trying to discern between Lockean freedom and a “freedom of results” (which isn’t freedom at all but rather egalitarian totalitarianism). The solution is the state enforcement of negative rights — “thou shalt not,” “shall not be infringed,” “no law … prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” And the liberal government thereby does not degenerate into anomic libertinism (libertardianism).

        Besides, the tendency toward absolutizing individual rights is its own self-eating cancer in Locke. It leads to atomization and dissolution of the republic in the name of personal liberty. A kind of concealed relativism that, by now, goes by the name “conservative.”

        It is the granting of government agency to individual affairs that is THE PROBLEM, and for that a patriarch keeps to itself political majority of power to decide what delegatory institutional government may do and not do.

        You’ve put your finger on something, but I wouldn’t confuse the idea with “patriarchs,” which connote feudal self-determination and the savage pusillanimity/stasis of Afghan warlords, who, in the 21st century are best known to be fond of buggering young boys.

        Rather pursue the Roman model of res publica. Replace “patriarchs” with “patricians,” and we may build a model that lasts the better part of a millennium. I’m convinced that a republic cannot survive without the polity divided into a merito-aristocratic nobility (Lords) and a plebeian class (Commons).

        A class of men with guarantees like any protected ilk become cosmopolitan dead weight garbage in time.

        Like you say, the patricians are the guardians of the republic who maintain a golden mean between mobocracy (the democracy that hobbles us today) and tyranny. Popular tribunes, noblesse oblige, patronage, checks and balances of power — all crucial counterweights within the regime.

        If men are better, let them rise to the top. The tail of men suck worse than the tail of women because the normal distribution is wider.

        Easier said than done. By what standard do we officially determine “better,” and more importantly, how do we maintain that standard? In the United States, it was maintained by a devolved and jealously guarded Christian faith, both by the patriarchs and by the institutions of culture. Surveying the ruins today, we must acknowledge that the church goes through her down-cycles.

        Therefore a Fourth Great Awakening is required, but look at how dug-in and petulant the loser atheists are (like your coolguy interlocutors above, who think they can smirk and pose their way through the Nietzschean apocalypse). Rumsfeld called that type “the dead-enders.” Japs in the caves who need to be flamethrowered out. Or waited out as their ancestral lines fade into the abyss they are so fond of proclaiming the sovereignty of.



      • See?
        See what you’ve done, Doug?
        He knows you exist now.

        You’ve put your finger on something, but I wouldn’t confuse the idea with “patriarchs,” which connote feudal self-determination and the savage pusillanimity/stasis of Afghan warlords.

        He was right about this.


      • My message to you is in moderation/Wordpest oblivion, Patriarch. Likely because of my use of the word n!gger.


      • Sometimes I get that.
        It’s usually the length of the post for me.


      • > “moderation/Wordpest oblivion”

        The idiots who write these software packages insist on using LIFO stacks, which means that “First In” comments can take frigging days to re-appear from LIFO banishment.

        It’s particularly horrible over at Steve Sailer’s website, on BlogSpot, where the LIFO stack, in combination with comment approval and a flat-file comment structure [no nesting], can mean that the web page will look like utter gibberish as the comments are approved in an order which is more or less completely random, vis-à-vis the true chronologically-sequential order.


      • At least this forum has the option to reply to each individual post.
        Rationalmale, to my knowledge, is just in chronological order.


      • Matt fancies himself the second coming of Nietzche,
        An ubermensche with a gimp leg, dragging the chains of his slave morality behind him, hoping someone will shackle themselves with him to lighten the burden.
        The correct answer to Douggies pleading with me to treat women as legal equals to men was a quick, precise no.
        You’re getting better and better at rationalizing your limp wristed ineffectual goyim slave conservative position, though. Maybe Bill O’Reilly could have you come on and plug your yet to be written book with his Killing Jesus. You could call it Butchering Neitzche.


      • Wait. What was it you just said about impenetrable, high-minded gibberish?


      • Nope.
        I won that round with Butchering Nieztche.


      • Marriage used to be the transfer of ownership from the father to the husband. Hence the ring.

        Today this no longer works because all cattle (people) belong to the goverment.


      • Well, if we tear apart what marriage has meant since the old days in the forests of Northern Europe, then yeah, what’s left should probably be an explicit contract.

        Or maybe the word should be left to rest on the graves of our ancestors.


      • Food for thought, Peppermint


    • If she really loves you…she keeps the vows. Until death.


    • Taking marriage advice from a divorced chick seems like a great idea.


      • on December 13, 2013 at 10:48 am RappaccinisDaughter

        In what way do you think that was bad advice?


      • on December 13, 2013 at 2:11 pm Hugh G. Rection

        Strictly speaking, this is divorce advice. The gold standard is of course: Don’t get married.

        There’s always the question if the judge will uphold your pre-nup. I’m pretty sure the same line of reasoning, coming from a woman, would have lead to success in court. That’s why the rituals surrounding drawing up such a contract have become so elaborate, e.g. having a lawyer for either side, letting her pick the lawyer, recording the whole thing etc..


    • on December 13, 2013 at 3:06 pm Cad and Bounder

      The problem with a prenup for a man is that it nicely defines a target for the woman. His divorce game is actually about putting/hiding his assets where she can’t find them.

      The nightmare scenario is in the UK, whereby prenups are not completely binding, so the two sets of lawyers can cream money of the man by promising the woman everything he defined for them in the prenup. She just needs to keep the case going, and ruin them both.

      She doesn’t care becase she wants the star prize, and the prenup tells everyone what is up for grabs. And if her lawyer can demonstrate that the prenup was ‘unfair’ on the kids, she could get a whole lot more too.


  3. Any good books/gifts recommended for older dudes (40s-50s) that are game subtle? I have an Uncle who is in his 50s, excellent job, sick car, funny dude that just has no game to speak of. I would like to give him the gift of game, but don’t want to be heavy handed about it. I’ve never seen his interactions with women so can’t pinpoint the problem, but it seems like he should be cleaning up. (Never been married, not gay, fit for his age)


    • it’s too late for him in his life. especially if his momma is already dead.

      he will toss that red pill right up and despise you for even suggesting it.

      don’t do it….


      • thanks, figured as much


      • What does mom being dead (if she is) have to do with it? It may help him move on from being her good boy.

        Who needs a book, steer him over here. The essential idea is just one sentence long and he understands it if he’s using things like a fancy car to attract women. Women’s romantic decision making is from their senses and nether parts (which certainly exist) not their analytical brains (which may not.)

        The rest is just drawing logical conclusions from that principle. Red pill = logic over emotion. He’s a great candidate. I came to game late in life (late 30’s) too, nothing I did then that a guy couldn’t do a little later too.


      • oh dave….i commend your effort.


    • I can pinpoint the problem for you, J: He’s Over 30.
      Means he has been tossed onto the trash heap of unwanted males, at least in the US.
      Realistically speaking, the only ‘game’ that’s going to help your uncle with (attractive and/or younger) women will be either Lotsofmoneygame, ImGeorgeClooneygame or ForeignBridegame.


  4. how do you judge when she is in love? as said here many times, no sexual boundaries are set. it’s all open for business.

    anything short of that and you are raw meat. deal is, you are gonna be objectified for your superior alpha DNA, or objectified for your Beta cash.

    understand it, forgive their little deceptive survival instincts, and manage your risk.


  5. Maybe so … in my experience, people who have millions of dollars at least try to deploy the money strategically. Did he need legal advice to tell him that 3+ mil is a lotta money and he was overpaying? That’s not a lawyer’s job anyway.

    A 38 year old ex pole dancer, sheesh. He was really taken to the cleaners. Or took himself there. How many millions should he have paid for someone to clue him in that he could do a whole lot better?

    You oughta start up a consulting biz on the side, CH.


  6. Don’t get married. Game for sure, but marriage is dead.

    I think Beta’s can be some of the richest men for the same reason they make the best PUA’s. They’re good at learning rules and studying conditional effects. Natural Alpha’s don’t need to study. They just win without knowing why. But Beta’s need to make the effort. So a Greater Beta can be anything provided he puts the energy into it. But until he does so, he’s still a loser in that field.


  7. “There are two — just two — safeguards against the insidious predations of women: celibacy, and love.”

    I’d say there is only one…death.


  8. Do we get that marriage is legal prostitution?
    Do we get that wives have no legal obligation to hold up their end of the deal?
    Do we get that the wedding march needs to be changed to “cha-ching for the bride?”


    • Especially if you are wealthy. Here’s the description of the poor dupe in our story:

      “He was 51 years old, divorced and came into the marriage with an “overwhelming pool of assets”. He has a net worth of more than $16 million.”

      Overwhelming, as in he has too much, they have to divert a good chunk of it to the female.

      But this guy sounds like Henry VIII, he has a lot to give but no kids to give it to. He’s doing his best to get those kids and he just keeps getting screwed.


      • But… how sorry do we really feel for this guy? He knew what he was buying, he knew why she was marrying him. He chose not to adequately protect himself from the risk.

        It’s like me hooking up with someone like Yareally and then whining I want a relationship. It’s hard to feel sorry for someone who puts himself in a risky situation and then is outraged when things go bad.


      • Nah she’s right, in fact it’s worse than her hooking with Yareally. Yareally has a lot of intelligence and personality, and he’s a guy with a lot of sexual experience, which is always better than a woman with a lot of experience.

        Pole dancer! FFS, I cannot understand why anyone would even be turned on by that. Hot body, I am turned on, find out she dances in a strip club, I lose all interest.

        Because SHE is a loser. Any woman who has to strip for tips is a loser. Is it strange that I, as a guy, want my woman to be a winner too?


      • “Yareally has a lot of intelligence and personality, ”

        awww stop it, I’m gettin’ misty.

        “Pole dancer! FFS, I cannot understand why anyone would even be turned on by that.”


      • “Nah she’s right, in fact it’s worse than her hooking with Yareally.”

        Just to clarify, I think the pole dancer is much worse than Yareally, because the pole dancer probably did lie to the rich guy about whether she loved him. I think Yareally has said he is upfront with girls about what he is and isn’t looking for. He’s not deceiving anyone.

        So while I think the rich guy is dumb for believing this woman, I’d be much dumber for not believing Yareally.


      • However you rationalize your savage hatred of loser guys is entirely up to you, sweetheart
        Completely natural.


    • From Dalrock’s site.

      Men looking to marry face the same kind of dilemma ancient merchants used to face. Feminists and their enablers have slowly shaved off the value of marriage for men. Marriage for men no longer means:

      Being the legally and socially recognized head of the household.
      An expectation of regular sex.
      Legal rights to children.
      Lifetime commitment.


  9. @yareally

    Curious how you would handle this situation. Went out last night, hung out with a group at a high end nightclub. Girls at the table are very pretty, hard 8s, five of them. Guys in the group are kind of weak. Notice very pretty blonde (taller, thinner Bree Olson) in our group get man handled by very aggressive guy early in the night. Early 20s, hard 8. Her resistance level was enough low to trigger my taking a mental note of the situation. She shakes him off. Very late in the night introduce myself, we start talking, topic is how guys at a high end places like this are looking to fuck and women are really looking for validation. She agrees, and five minutes into the conversation tells me she’s been married for two years and has secretly fucked 15 guys in the timespan. My vibe is that’s cool, I’m not going to really judge you for that. She says she a bad girl and knows her marriage is going to end, and she’s ok with fucking guys once and that’s that. She says she screens our clingy guys, so it never gets to the point where it’s a problem. Thinking to myself, ok, well she’s DTF. After about 15 minutes invested in the conversation, I tell her let’s leave together now, she says she can’t because her husband is coming back within 24 hours, and she doesn’t entertain logistics like that. I get her number and bounce immediately. She’s hot, wouldn’t mind banging her. Haven’t texted her yet, thinking about holding off until Monday, since weekend is likely husband time, and maybe too early to text. Interesting experience.


    • never ever ever gas up the ego of an attention whore. narcissistic supply and all that.

      delete her number and ignore the shit out of her. don’t even make eye contact if you see her out. IF she texts you, first its “who’s this” and the ONLY thing you are discussing is meeting up. all other conversations are shelved by you saying “hey i’m swamped but i’d love to see ya, ttyl?”.

      IF you wants to bang ya (highly unlikely) then she is filtering you for clingy. she told you as much. pass the test.


      • @Tilikum

        Thanks for the feedback, appreciate it. Respectfully disagree with the proposed strategy. This girl is not an attention whore. She likes to get fucked discreetly.


      • dude. thats what she SAYS but shes a self admitted liar.

        what she is DOING is not banging you.

        swallow it down all the way brother……the weather is nice down here…


      • “what she is DOING is not banging you.”

        sure. not yet, lol.

        appreciate your advice.


      • Bigass reply in moderation. Don’t txt her till next week, read my reply first.


      • ya, I feel relaxed on this one, not itching to text at all…there’s a strong wonder and curiosity element associated with this situation. new territory.


      • It’s quite possible that she’s just an attention whore. So she’s fine with fucking guys “once and that’s that” but has time to “screen out” clingy guys? If what she says is true (somewhat likely), then if she wanted to fuck you you both would have fucked the same night or very shortly thereafter (there wouldn’t be any doubt or need to play games).

        If what she says is untrue (likely), then ya….she’s just an attention whore. It’s quite possible that she’s totally faithful to her husband. You’d be surprised what girls lie about — they lie about experience almost as much as inexperience. They’re cray, brah. Just watch what they do and see if it matches what they say.


      • Granted, I’m not an expert at the whole ‘married woman’ thing….so all I can do is analogize and point out my observations.


      • you don’t post enough. post more.


      • thank you for taking the time to read all of my posts and comment, loyal fan.


    • @darkhorse

      Solid. Don’t txt till next weekend, but don’t delete her number (lol, don’t toss away the secret line of communication she extended to you so that you can arrange a tryst without any of your friends knowing you’re even communicating, wtf lol).

      She viewed you as Secret Society, that’s why she opened up to you, which is great ’cause it means you’re putting out “sex-worthy man” non-judgemental sexual vibes. She wouldn’t be having that convo with a guy who seemed like he’d judge her or who didn’t have a sexual vibe like he’d be a fun romp and understand her situation.

      Usually in those situs in the initial convo I drop in a lot of comfort building stuff about how people in society are too repressed and ashamed about sex and that I don’t really believe in monogamy etc. so she knows I’m on the same page as her and won’t give her drama.

      The funny part to me is her mentioning that she screens clingy guys…’cause from quizzing the taken girls I’ve hooked up with, the hardest part for them isn’t finding guys who’ll fuck them knowing she has a BF/husband, it’s finding guys who will fuck them knowing that AND not fall in love and get all clingy and annoying and txt her too much and risk getting her caught or try to steal her from her husband etc. lol Like that’s an actual huge problem for them, the same way a chick you cheated with showing up banging on your apartment door drunk when your GF is there with you would be a problem.

      Anyway, this is a standard by-the-books thing. You shouldn’t have any problem banging her out…just respect that she has a hubby and has to be secret-secret and can’t have long txt convos and doesn’t WANT frequent txts from you, and probably can’t meet up more than once every 2 weeks or once a month because she has to be a ninja and needs you to understand that she’s not going to be as available as a normal chick.

      She knows who you are, she’ll remember you, she doesn’t pour that conversation out to every random, and she warned you her hubby will be home within 24hrs. Don’t txt her till like Friday before noon (around 10-11am), where you know she’ll be at work and not around her hubby and you can possibly have a txt convo over her lunch hour, or Friday evening where she can pretend it’s one of her girlfriends txting.

      I would txt her “hey it’s darkhorse. Save me as “Anna” lol” as my first txt. It’s not asking any response from her, it’s not being too eager, it’s not trying to arrange a meet-up, but it’s letting her know “I understand your situ and I’m cool with it” and putting the ball in her court for her to say “lol how are you?” and for you to proceed from there. If she doesn’t respond for like 2 weeks, then she’s not interested, but give her a couple weeks to reply (odds are she’ll reply at noon if you txt her in the morning, or that night sometime when she has some privacy).

      When she replies, that means she’s got a window of opportunity to have a private txt convo (she won’t reply unless she has a solid few minutes that she can have a quick chat) so don’t play the “take 24hrs to respond” game with this one…whenever she txts you, reply IMMEDIATELY, because she has logistical shit going on that she’s working around.

      Anyway, so when she replies, skip all the small-talk (that part of Tilikum’s post I agree with) and just get right to the point of asking if she’s free this weekend. Don’t mention her hubby, ’cause that just re-enforces that she’s cheating in her mind, treat her like a single girl who just has a really busy work schedule. If she’s not, handle it like it’s totally cool to you, don’t react butt-hurt at all, and she’ll probably offer up when she IS free. If she IS free, clear out your schedule and make sure you’re available to hook up with her ’cause she probably only gets the chance now and then and she wants someone reliable when she needs her fun.

      You can probably skip a day 2 with her, every night out with a guy having drinks is another chance of getting caught being out with another man by one of her husband’s friends. These chicks are usually cool with, when they have a free night, you pitching to just come over for a drink…you still probably can’t say “want to come over and fuck?” because believe it or not even a girl like this could have some ASD trigger lol, she still wants to feel like a special flower.

      But the catch is that suggesting anything “date” like will make her worry that you’re going to be a clinger trying to date her…so don’t offer to cook her dinner or watch a DVD or anything. Just go with inviting her over for a drink or for lunch (I had one girl who’d come over on her lunch hours to bang ’cause it was convenient for her). She knows what it means.

      Same time tho, if she gets flirty via txt, go flirty too and instead invite her over “to have some fun…see if you can sneak out in that dress from last week, I’ve been thinking about it all week”, ’cause that’s her signal that it’s okay to say that kind of thing (like she’s communicating “look I just want to fuck, are we on the same page?”).

      On the flip side, if she seems totally 100% non-flirty, don’t take that as an indicator of disinterest…her not txting you at ALL is disinterest. Her txting you very clinical and non-flirty is her covering her ass incase her hubby spies on her txt convos one day, so in that situ just keep going but avoid being flirty and just trust that she’s txting you because she wants to bang.

      Anyway, hope that helps lol Fuck her good and she’ll come back to you…15 guys tells me she either has a high sex drive or she hasn’t been fucked the way she wants to yet.

      Usually with married chicks they’re bored of the gay romantic half-dead vanilla sex they’ve been having for 2 years, and the other 15 guys were probably one-timers because they weren’t great lays, so I would test quick for if she’s into rough sex…my usual M.O. is as soon as she shows up at the door, pin her against the wall (remember to put your hand behind her head so you don’t bonk it lol done that a few times lol) and makeout and pull a fistful of her hair as you kiss her neck (no leaving marks remember, especially there) and see how she responds…if she’s into it, then slip your other hand up to her throat (don’t choke hard, and make sure you google how to safely choke obviously), but what I like to do is just hold my hand there in a claw shape loose so it’s holding her there but I’m not actually gripping her neck…it’s a close enough effect for the first time for her to know that if she wants it rough you’re not afraid to go rough, so if she responds well to that, then from there be super dominant with her…don’t leave ANY marks, but defile her lol I like to throat-fuck them (start slow and test for how rough she wants it) ’cause it doesn’t leave any marks but she gets to feel dominated and cry as she gags and all that which is probably something she’s not doing with her husband.

      You can take it from there lol

      Good luck, for what it’s worth: to me from my experience with these situs, you have a 100% green light on this and it’s a super routine operation that should be easy as fuck to pull off. Have fun!

      And for the love of god, whatever you do, do NOT drunk txt her this weekend. Write her # down on a piece of paper and hide it and delete her # from your phone, or download a drunk dialing app that blocks numbers on your phone so you can’t drunk dial them.

      Also if you can avoid it, don’t fuck her at her place. That’s playing too risky a game, ’cause you never know what buddy will do if he comes home from his business trip early to surprise her or some shit.

      Also don’t tell her any details about yourself beyond what she knows now. If she asks you shit just be like “let’s keep things mysterious, it’s more fun that way”. Also see if you can figure out who her husband is with some Googling/Facebook stalking, etc. and try to find pics of him and/or what he does for work and where etc. The more info you know about him the better, in terms of safety. Is he a nerdy beta schlub, or is he a gun collector, ya know? lol


      • great points. was conceptualizing she viewed me as secret society too. wanted to make sure my follow up communication was congruent with her expectations. thx for the technical breakdown on how to progress. very helpful. new territory for me and view it as unlocking a new level.


      • No prob, it’s very familiar territory to me lol It’ll work out fine, just don’t get your ass kicked by hubby and understand that she’ll throw you under the bus to avoid getting in trouble. Play smart lol


      • Also it would surprise most people how many taken chicks are as casual about banging dudes on the side as this girl when they believe you won’t judge them…like, seemingly quality women they would never expect who seem like perfect angels in relationships that seem perfect and are full of Facebook Likes and “omg u guys are soooo cute together!!” well-wishes from friends and family.

        But they only unlock that level and reveal that shit to Secret Society guys. The rest of the normals have no idea that level even exists, let alone how to get access to it, and will vehemently deny it extends beyond drunk bar sluts because it would fuck with their reality too much…if they accept that most girls love cock, how will they ever find that Madonna unicorn they’ve banked their entire future on? It’s a lot easier to just guffaw and chalk stories like this up to slutty bar skanks being whores…that way they never have to worry, ’cause when they find their unicorn she’ll be different. …just like every guy with one-itis thinks his girl is lol


      • So what are the “secret-society” tells that these taken chicks look for, in your view? if I rememebr correctly, “secret society” was originally a Tyler Durdenism.


      • Ya this is the part that I think is beginning to fuck with my head. Hard pill to swallow. First….the M/W complex is way more common than I thought and from all information and belief results in most dudes being pretty terribad in bed. Second of all….chix lie a lot, but that’s because lol….if they tell you the truth — they trust you and everything — but holy shit man. The stuff I’ve shared with these chix and the sides they show and the way things have changed….most guys are better off just being lied to. How the fuck would they handle it? Srs. Rough times rite atm….


      • I am really raining on the parade here, I know it’s exciting to “unlock that level” bla bla bla, but
        (1) you can never have this woman, you have to do all this shit to avoid being thrown under the bus or otherwise losing access, and
        (2) you are directly responsible for making another man’s wife cheat. Sure there may be other guys too, or if it hadn’t been you it might have been someone else instead, but maybe it’s just you and otherwise for this time period at least she would be a faithful wife, whether voluntarily or not.

        I don’t know what I might do to a guy who was fucking my wife if I found out. We would all find out together. You would not want to be that guy, of that I am sure. Why put yourself in such a position by accessing another guy’s wife. See all the shit that “the other woman” puts up with, well that’s you, with a dick.


      • David,
        You aren’t ready for this place yet.


      • jesus christ dude


      • It’s why we need to bring back stoning.


      • Brute force pedagogy. Not everyone can elucidate the handful of relevant principles at work in any circumstance, much less express them briefly or in such a way that a student can then go apply them effectively. So he bulls through every possible outcome.

        It’s a lot like women who have to fill the silence because their minds are going in every direction at once, and men aren’t around to sound a liberating STFU.



        WTF are you, a trust fund baby?

        Your ass is obviously devoting a staggering amount of time to thinking about this shiznat [and then, presumably, acting it out].

        Is your apartment like a futon and a couch and a television and a refrigerator which is largely empty of food?

        I’m sitting here trying to imagine what you do for a living to finance this, ah, “hobby” of yours.

        Now as far us utterly purposeless and nihilistic hate-fucking goes, I can’t really think of anything to add to what YR had to say.

        But if it were me, though, then I’d go for the full enchilada, and start pushing the bitch for children.

        [She obviously doesn’t think that her loser husband “DESERVES” to be the father of them. Poor guy. God, I’d hate to be him, when he finally finds out what a filthy fucking whore he’s married to.]

        Tell her that you won’t be clingy for her crazy ass, but you damned sure will be clingy for the children you have with her.

        You get full custody when it’s all said and done, she gets to return to riding the carousel once her child-bearing year are over.

        PS: Do not ever fall for a crazy cheating bitch like this and start getting “clingy” yourself, because she’s obviously about one loose screw short of being a full-blown hardware store.

        Hell, this one might even have more loose screws than a God-damned hardware store.


  10. Sounds like Wifey #1 is the real winner here. Marry some rich beta sucker for a few years, then retire for life with zero strings attached? I could live with that.


    • “I could live with that”

      Are u rich..maybe i could do that to you? Fuck your plain ass and cuddle you all thru our twenties while you and your mom and dad pay for my mba or med school bills and personal trainers.
      Then its ‘see ya..party time..where be my niggas’ (not real nigs of course..referring to my ivy league buddies) and ‘thanks for the education and condo’


      • Haha no, I’m happily married and have no plans of changing that status. I just know a baller when I see one. And yes I’d congratulate a dude who could pull off a $7 mil heist like that too, quid pro quo.


  11. Do we get yet that marriage is legal prostitution with no guarantee of services from the wife?


  12. If she promised him kids, he should have tied her to the bed and fucked her until she became pregnant.


  13. This afternoon I had an extra 200k to pay an attorney to draft a pre-nup. Instead, I gave it to the two best hit men west of the Mississippi. Whatever happens to this marriage, they’ll still be out there keeping tabs and if, for any reason, you try to ruin me in divorce court a kind of countdown will begin. Maybe a day or so later, a week, a year, when you’re stripping in Santa Fe, or Manhattan, or Prague, or wherever. Talking about your orbiters without a worry in the world. And then suddenly you’ll here the scrape of a footstep behind you but before you can even turn around Pop!


  14. “with eager assistance, of course, from the anti-male divorce industrial complex.”

    I can’t fault the government or lawyers for this one. The government isn’t imposing a mandate on him. The prenup agreement under dispute appears to be simple and straightforward. Mr Wallace made the contract with his stripper ex-wife that covered this precise event (divorce within 4 years). The prescribed event happened and the contract was executed, no more, no less.

    I don’t know Australia’s divorce laws as far as division of the marital estate but I’m guessing they’re relatively friendly to the wealthier party if Wallace believes he’d be better off with the prenup invalidated. Ms Stelzer is way past the wall anyway. A few more years wouldn’t make much difference to her. What if Ms Stelzer had held out for 2 additional years of marriage and made it past the 4 year prenup condition, and then divorced Wallace. Would he then be worse off or better off than the 3.25M prenup agreement? With 4 years married, would he have had to pay Stelzer something closer to the 7M he paid his first wife? Perhaps she could have had an even bigger pay-day but cashed out earlier.

    The smarts and skills to make money don’t equal to wisdom and skills with women. I agree Mr Wallace is a fool and cautionary tale, and Ms Stelzer is, well, she is what she is. But in this case, Wallace is trying to weasel out of his own stupidity using a legal technicality for what appears to be a simple, straightforward agreement. I don’t blame the government or his lawyers for this one. It’s on him.


  15. Agree I try to talk red pill to a couple of 50 year old guys at work and they just look at me cross eyed. Too much work trying to unplug someone.


    • That’s a normal reaction. The blue pill won’t be ejected and the red pill accepted in one sitting like a flash of inspiration. It must be learned, and that takes time and introspection, often repeated, before acceptance.

      You can introduce the red pill to your co-workers, plant the seed, and provide them with the resources to look into it further. From there, it’s up to them to find the ugly truths that match and explain their disappointments.

      After you’ve introduced the red pill, you can make yourself available to them to talk about life as men, but the next step is theirs.


      • lol I recently have tried to teach my super beta dad what I’ve learned on this blog. total no-go. not even close. he would not survive in my world–dealing with Gen X women


      • If he’s happy with his life in the Matrix, the incentive to escape won’t be there. Dead end.

        If he’s frustrated with the state of his life, then you’ve got something to work with.

        Unlike older men, young men can be taught the red pill. The right moment to teach them is when the blue-pill illusion of life has been traumatically shattered by a nice-guy rejection and female betrayal despite his having done everything honorably. Before the scar tissue forms on their broken heart, they’ll have urgent questions that the red pill can answer. I don’t believe preemptive teaching of the red pill to optimistic young betas works; at least, I know it wouldn’t have worked on me. Best to push young men to act on their romantic desires as soon as possible – the more cringingly beta they act, the better for the blue pill to be discredited later. Once they’ve been punished by female reality, they’ll be ready to accept the ugly truths. Then you can pick them up and teach them the red pill.

        However, older men must learn to accept the red pill on their own terms. Like I said, if your dad’s content with his life, then it won’t work. But if he’s dissatisfied, you can introduce the red pill to your dad and show him the way to learn more.

        Give him a selection of posts from blogs like CH, Rational Male, etc, that you’ve tailored to your dad’s life experience and frustrated desires. When red-pill concepts sync with his life experience and frustrated desires, that’s the crossover moment. It’s not something you can put him on the spot and talk him into. The transformation will happen in private while he’s remembering things you said, reading the posts, thinking on his life, and putting it all together in his mind.

        If and when he takes that step on his own, then you and your dad can talk about life as awakened men.


    • Took the red pill in my mid-60s, about the same time I was beginning to understand WN. By no means have I mastered game, but I did not vomit and I keep reading CH. Recovery from a deep funk took a while.


  16. Gents: I have a hot date tonight with HB7 (killer 9 body, butter face — averages out to 7) who seems to have super cool personality. Fun, funny chick. She keeps sending me funny texts which are giving me a slight boner here at my desk. As I have been avoiding rubbing one out lately, I’m ready to go. So tonight actually it’s a firm holiday party and she’ll be smokin’ in heels and a dress. I anticipate boner problems as I’ll be wearing a suit, which doesn’t hold much in.

    Any advice?


    • tuck penis under belt


    • Yeah my advice is to rub it out now (don’t wait til tonight, do it now) so you’re in the right frame of mind for the encounter. Mind over dingdong. Let her be ruled by her pussy, don’t you be ruled by your dick.

      If you score, your dick will rise to the occasion I am sure.


    • Her: awesome, now your getting me excited lol 😛

      Me: Dress. Heels. #winning

      Her: 😉

      Me: Plus we might bail early to play drums so u can kick and hit ur little heart out

      (ed: she knows drums are in my apartment…I’ve been telling her I bet she likes to kick and hit)

      Her: Dang that’s heck of a night lol

      Me: funny girl 🙂

      Me: Friday night we can be a little bit loud 😉

      Her: Just acting silly

      Her: Good because I need to practice for sure

      Me: we all need practice

      (2 hours later)

      Me: hey what is bachata dance?

      Her: that’s Dominican its like merengue but slower, ill show you

      Her: will there be a lot of Spanish music?

      Me: are u a qualified teacher? (YaReally, give me my props brother)

      Her: I might screw you instead lol (YaReally, give it up, dude!)




  17. What happens when an omega male gamer tries to dominate his environment like an alpha? Hilarity.


  18. Love is no guarantee. Fades as well. See the feral four-year female infidelity cycle in the article by F. Roger Devlin: “Rotating Polyandry and its Enforcers”. that essay, along with its predecessor “Sexual Utopia in Power”, is required reading for the manosphere.



    Anyone with kids or an interest in having them should take a look at the second of the links above.


  19. What kind of lawyer would draft such a shit pre-nup in the first place? That lawyer is even dumber than the husband.


  20. Back in high school, sophomore year, I remember a guy telling me he had blown 2,000 dollars on the girls he had been dating a few months. 2k in high school!


    • Imagine how much the girls he was spending the money on had already blown before meeting him.


      • It’s tough for me to wrap my head around just how much money women spend. My mom (I’m a college student, not basement nerd) went to the grocery store while I was out of town one day, and I come back to an empty refrigerator with her telling me she spent 100 bucks on groceries. There wasn’t a damn thing in there! WTF do women spend money on!?

        I can honestly say that I have spent less than 10 dollars taking girls on dates. That’s not 10 dollars per date; that’s total.


  21. The topic of marriage arose in group conversation and my girl–because she believes I have the talent to make a decent living writing fiction–said, when my eyes conveyed dissent at the modern incarnation of the institution, “I promise I’ll sign a pre-nup, your book fortune will be protected.”

    lol I haven’t yet made a dime selling fiction. If I do, and if I wish to marry in the distant future for the sake of raising children, she will be tested for consistency.


  22. on December 13, 2013 at 12:02 pm The Feminist Whisperer

    The modern woman in action – advocate for women’s rights – and pays her nanny less than minimum wages – while falsifying visa documents



  23. I would agree that money does not necessarily equate to alphaness but I would quickly add that it does not mean the opposite either and often it is a sign that the owner of the said fortune posses alpha characteristics of which that money is just a proxy for. Men who do not have money or power will often try to nonchalantly dismiss those who do as a defensive mechanism. Like being tall, money for a man is a good thing no matter what anybody tells you. The fact that this guy won the lottery can only be attributed to good luck the same way getting hit by a car is bad luck. This is why he was soon parted with it. Also, his lawyer should be disbarred.


  24. CH, it appears you have misread the article. The prenup was agreed by the millionaire and the stripper. Then they split and under the bare language of the prenup, she should get paid. She was suing in family court to enforce the prenup, not to void it.

    He was saying she should not be entitled to the payout under the contract. He was asserting a legal theory we in the biz call “fraud in the inducement” meaning here she never meant to carry out the intent of the marriage, but just wanted to split as soon as she thought her legal rights to the money jelled. That is a very difficult claim to prove in any contract case, and it did not work here.

    This sad tale is less about law than about basic investment advice. “Rent things that depreciate; buy things that appreciate.” Here, there is no question the stripper’s SMV was in free-fall. He could have paid “rent”–baubles, trips, etc., that would have hurt far less than this expensive contract payout.

    [CH: i didn’t misread it. that’s exactly what i paraphrased in the post.]


    • I’m curious as to why Mr Wallace believes he would be better off in the divorce without the prenup.

      Wouldn’t invalidating the prenup place his estate at greater risk rather than limit his risk to 3.25M? Like risking a greater pool of assets by removing the ‘firewall’ protection of incorporation or worker’s compensation. Again, I don’t know Australia divorce property laws or the particular circumstances of the divorce, eg, maybe she was a liar/abuser/cheater within the marriage who would have come out with little but for the prenup.

      The gaps in the article confuse the issue. It would seem “fraud in the inducement” would apply to the marriage, not the prenup. If the marriage contract was fraudulently induced, then the prenup could be thrown out with the marriage contract, unless the prenup itself contained that risk. But the article says he tried to invalidate the prenup with a technicality based on an insufficient recording of legal advice with the prenup. Perhaps the article is conflating a fraud charge in the original divorce and then a technicality defense in a subsequent prenup adjudication.


      • The confusing part in the CH synopsis was the statement that she was taking advantage of a loophole in the prenup: “Also as obvious, he was stupid enough to sign over $3.25 million to a glorified slut with a pre-nup loophole so big she was practically preordained to waltz through it.” She was not looking for a loophole. She was trying to enforce the contract they made.

        He was trying to invalidate the contract. He did that by asserting that she never, from the start, intended to truly commit to the marriage–and thus the prenup was obtained by a fraud on her part. Thus her rights under the prenup should be thrown out.

        His argument that he got bad legal advice is flat out stupid. The problem is that he thought a 38-year-old pole dancer was worth $3.25 million, and that she would stick around for one second after she thought she had a right to the prenup money. Go find a ’85 Ford Taurus with primer spray on the doors and a blown transmission. Offer the owner 100k. Hire a lawyer to write up the contract. Same thing.

        Legally, she had the much easier argument–a contract is a contract. It’s just painful–for me at least–to see a guy throw away money like this.

        What pains me–I’m a fossil in my late forties–is this familiar pattern.
        Guys have worked hard and smart. Incomes in the mid/high six figures. Solid investments. They live modestly, given their means. Now many have assets that total 3-5 million. But along comes younger girl friend, then wife, and spends in a way that would make a Roman emperor blush. And it is never enough. Bye money!!! Divorce is often not far behind for our suddenly much-poorer friend. How many nights have I shared single-malts asking guys why they could not rent instead of buy?

        What use are we older guys to you younger guys? To try and show you this tale is real.


      • I get why guys want more of an emotionally invested relationship with a woman than they can get from hiring hookers, but there is a happy medium between hookers and LTR/marriage. If they’re rich, they can sugar-daddy it.


    • Seriously dude Ody can u read?


  25. Betas reaped…Alphas seeked


  26. on December 13, 2013 at 2:21 pm Hugh G. Rection

    So he went down over 70% in net worth over the span of two marriages. Third wife’s gonna be pissed, not a lot left there.


  27. Another post on WHY game is necessary… If this guy had decent game and assuming he isn’t completely ugly he would be banging mid 30s to low 40s hot women all the time without having to put a ring on it… lack of game cost this dude over $3MM.


  28. Our millionaire beta should buy a gun and shoot his lawyer. If I’d drawn up the prenup, I’d have structured it thus:

    Divorce within 1 year: $20,000 payout
    within 2 years: $50,000
    3 years: $100,000
    4 years: $200,000
    5 years: $500,000
    Thereafter: add only $100,000 per year of marriage (because sure as shit, you’re gonna be getting sick of her crap after 5 years and you’ll want to give her an incentive to leave so you can get a fresh model).


    • on December 13, 2013 at 4:19 pm Theodore Logan

      With 500k, dude could have regular rotation of hot lookin’ hookers at only $200-$300 per night.


      • Exactly! I don’t know why dudes don’t understand this… if you don’t have the game/attractiveness to pull decent pussy but have some money just pay for it… even if you get a hot wife that loves you she won’t look hot in the future.


    • on December 13, 2013 at 5:02 pm ain't nuttin but a gansta partayyy


      divorce within 1 year: $the dumb bitch can go fuck herself
      within 2 years: $the dumb bitch can go fuck herself
      3 years: $the dumb bitch can go fuck herself
      4 years: $the dumb bitch can go fuck herself
      5 years: $the dumb bitch can go fuck herself



    • Good thinking. Except for the getting married part.


  29. Betas are the true romantics, and they pay mightily for their delusions.

    Anyway, he should let her keep the money. My guess is within a year he’ll see that was the best revenge.


  30. There are two — just two — safeguards against the insidious predations of women: celibacy, and love.

    what about homosexuality?


  31. Thanks “Chateau Heartiste”, every once in awhile I need reminders of how devious women can be; especially to nice guys, I was one of them back in the day.. Now I just need reminders every so often,,


  32. If he really wanted to have kids, a 38 year old stripper is not the way to go.


  33. “Mr Wallace” May not be that smart after all.

    for a you know he’s a retard heir who is the exact reason why Nathaniel Hawthorne was correct in saying families always rise and fall in America.