Comment Of The Week: Sophisticated Balderdash

n/a lyrically reminds the arriviste audience that an old chestnut is just as moldy when a man serves it up on a platter and calls it the main course.

Amused by this thread and its arriviste assumption that ladies with a few more rings in the trunk and some rather shocking sun-damage from their salad days in St. Barts are somehow more “sophisticated” than a sweet pink baby in her last year of high school: the notion is even more comical than it is wrong.

There is no “intellectual” badinage much less intelligent conversation with a woman who is still worth fucking; of all the cliches of romance none better suits the vanity of women and the hard to dispel starry-eyed stupidity of men than the laughable idea that there exist magical hags smarter, more spirited and altogether better at desiccated 40 than they were at moist 20. This is an amazing delusion and a quintessential trope – and tell – of the diehard beta.

The question to ask the woman duly and dully decked in her “Chanel” and knockoff Louboutins is do you have a pretty and naughty daughter? There are indeed rich and bored women who will be anything but displeased to entertain such a question after a few oily martinis and then, and only then, does the hard mug of the accomplished bitch take on the warm glow of lechery. Do not press the issue. Let it scent the air.

This comes close to a perfectly crafted comment, in both substance and delivery. Men who, by dint of limited options, choose to extol the “sophistication” and “worldliness” of the wealthy middle-aged cougar are revealing a classic handicapped SMV tell: that of the man who can’t do any better. It’s the inverse of sour grapes; instead of falsely claiming the sourness of a ripe grape out of reach high on the vine, one insists on the sweetness of a rotting fruit within reach on the ground.

The supposed sophistication of the well-to-do cougar is nothing next to the firm rump, smooth skin and pert tits of the minimum wage 20-year-old barista. Nothing. All the cougarly sophistication cubed will never approach the exponential allure of one evanescent smile from a pretty young babe. And this chaps the hides of the men who are trapped in the cougar pen as much as it does of the defeminized fading trophy harridans who sprinkle their aging flesh with shiny brand name baubles and fuel their egos on the fumes of vaporous entitlement.

The great joke of this charade is that older women aren’t even the paragons of sophistication they and their beta handlers like to claim. Wit is the province of the smart, and smarts are in full evidence by the early 20s. Fluid intelligence declines after the youthful 20s, further degrading the smart woman’s chattering legerdemain. Intellectualism, too, is not age-dependent once past the early neural formative years. The young intellectual woman has at least the advantage of being fun and sprightly along with her occasional bursts of deep thought. The smart cougar is well-versed… and tired.

Even a more generous interpretation of sophistication as a term meaning wisdom is not the boon for the cougar’s self-conception she, or her lovers, think. A wisdom borne of experience riding the cock carousel is a knowingness most men find unpalatable in a romantic partner. Yes, the cougar “knows what she wants in a man”, but what benefit is that to any man in serious contention for her crumbling facade? Perhaps the man she chooses can feel good that, after she has had a spell sampling the boner buffet, the wizened lady honored his pig in a blanket with Best In Show. But that’s like winning a trophy for running the mile in 42 minutes; he is left to wonder just how bad the competition must have been.

No, what a man wants, when he’s alone with his thoughts and he can feel the natural pulse of his viscera, is a young, beautiful woman with a lifetime of reproductive residual value ahead of her. And, knowing what a prize she is, his pride upon winning her will be genuine.





Comments


  1. What does the 20 year old barista today look like in the year 2040?

    [CH: entropy happens.]

    Like


    • If you’re dead then, does it matter?

      Like


      • Heartiste: “a young, beautiful woman with a lifetime of reproductive residual value ahead of her”

        This is the bottom line.

        There is no, and I repeat, NO valid reason WHATSOEVER for getting serious with a chick if you do not intend to be making babies with her.

        Along those lines, there is [or at least there can be] a helluva lotta difference between a 40-year-old chick and a 45-year-old-chick.

        A 40-year-old chick could still have two or three more babies in her future [if she’s on the young side for her age, and if she’s serious about making the babies with you].

        Whereas a 45-year-old chick could very well be entering menopause and be essentially infertile already.

        But if you wanna knock up a 40-year-old chick, then you need to do it NOW.

        You don’t have five years to piss away with her, touring Europe and the Bahamas and Hawaii, until you decide that the time is finally right to try to start a family – as though she were still a 20-year-old chick with a few extra years of fertility to burn.

        Again, there’s not necessarily anything wrong about getting serious with a chick in her mid-to-late 30s, or maybe even her early 40s, but you have got to MOVE QUICKLY.

        Get her knocked up early on in the relationship, and get her to pushing out the live births as soon as possible.

        Like


      • This is a war of the spirit, not a reasonable disagreement to be overcome with argumentation. You will not persuade a man to honor his own dignity and purpose. You are shouting at the retreating sea’s louder and more melancholy roar, urging it to come back:

        http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/arnold/writings/doverbeach.html

        I suppose there’s something to be said for a pep rally against nihilism. But you should be thinking more broadly — and more efficiently. Allocate your resources to the younger generation, and let these elderly know-it-alls traipse happily into the abyss.

        The conversion of souls is the task of the Holy Spirit. Ours is not to secure the victory; it has already been won. Ours is to proclaim it. He who has eyes to see and ears to hear will rally to your example, not your speech.

        When you understand the fight this way, despair becomes impossible. But you flirt with it every time you engage the enemy because you are punching above your (and mankind’s) weight. Men who fight monsters must take care not to become a monster…

        Your latest interpretation of this is Calvinist predestination? The devil will present himself in whatever way exploits your precise vulnerability.

        Matt

        Like


      • @Matt King — LOL at “the devil”………

        ……..but hey — great idea for your Halloween costume!

        Like


      • No he is going as Little Bo Peep,as usual.

        Like


      • Fair enough, but bear in mind that your 40-year-old bride’s body will not recover what little elasticity it has left from even a single childbirth.

        Like


      • Exactly.

        No argument there.

        But the key thing is that you should be in an “LTR” if and only if you are trying to get live births out of the chick.

        And if she’s an older chick [late 30s, maybe early 40s], then you need to get the live births as soon as possible [before her ovaries shrivel up once and for all].

        On the other hand, if you realize pretty early on in the “relationship” that you don’t want to have children by the chick, THEN MOVE ON.

        Don’t be wasting any time on a chick with whom you don’t want to mate.

        It’s not fair to you.

        And it damn sure ain’t fair to her.

        Like


      • “At age 25, a woman has about a 1-in-1,250 chance of having a baby with Down syndrome; at age 30, a 1-in-1,000 chance; at age 35, a 1-in-400 chance; at age 40, a 1-in-100 chance; and at 45, a 1-in-30 chance.”
        http://www.babyhopes.com/articles/birthdefects.html

        Please only shoot blanks at the +35ers.

        Like


      • Gwen Stefani is having another rug rat. She is way old–but still beautiful. I would love to bang her,cougar tho she may be.

        Like


      • Christ man. Are you ever going to let up on this?

        Some people don’t even like kids. Me, I can only stand them in small doses. I can’t tolerate something that demands 100 percent of my attention at all times.

        Stop asking people to fuck up their lives to suit your agenda.

        Like


      • You are obviously white

        Like


  2. on October 28, 2013 at 11:06 am Lucky White Male

    It is the dream of every man to have the nubile years of …. more than one… young woman

    Like


  3. This is the prose that build this house. Bravo, the writing here is lucid and masterful.

    Another couple of important aspects of younger women–they’re far more emotionally available. This has been covered extensively in the manosphere, no need to rehash. However, they’re also more intellectually shapeable, malleable, and more mentally and ideologically open to the influence of an older, iconically masculine, intelligent and articulate alpha male.

    In my MLTR situation, I’m struck by the difference between women aged 21, 24, and 28, never mind the 35 year-olds, in the wide, age-dependent variation in openness to receiving and integrating information, ideas, and experiences from a lover that might shape her worldview. In my experience, it’s looked something like this:

    At 21– her worldview is fluid, open to new ideas and experience. Her mind is almost as fresh as her body.

    At 24–the full brunt of her university-induced worldview has finally hardened her liberal indoctrination into a solid blockade against other new ideas. Only major shocks from adverse life events will allow new ideas to filter in, and it may take a decade or more, at which time its’ too late for any SMV salvage.

    At 28–The early-onset of The Wall, and the ego-bruisings of alpha widowhood may begin to chip away at the edges of her liberal-feminist groupthink, er, mindset. However it’s still solid, barring any big life shocks–an unexpected divorce, or some other red-pill inducing event occurring, and being received in a way that challenges her dogma. The chances of this are low.

    At 35..eh, not all that relevant to this discussion.

    Education fits in here, too. The more time a woman’s spent in higher education, generally the more she’s going to be intellectually damaged by the experience. It seems the artistic types who’ve had a bit of community college have the least mental & emotional baggage from higher ed, with the PhD in gender studies being radioactive, having received defcon 5 level brain damage from all that higher ed time.

    Like


    • “However, they’re also more intellectually shapeable, malleable, and more mentally and ideologically open to the influence of an older, iconically masculine, intelligent and articulate alpha male.”

      This is sometimes called the “Pygmalion complex”. There’s a bit in The Godfather where Michael Corleone marries a Sicilian virgin and after their first night in bed he realizes that they’re so valued for just this reason. As Robert Greene noted, a smart non-virgin plays to this when trying to land her alpha.

      Like


      • Thanks for the term. I had a gander at a couple sites referencing Pygmalion complex, and they say it like it’s a bad thing. I personally see it as bringing the value of a mature, strong male to a young woman who needs some guidance. It’s biomechanical win-win, synergy all around. It’s only mocked by the creeping leftoids with diminished SMV, and those who’ve made poor choices in the mating market.

        Like


    • >The more time a woman’s spent in higher education,
      >generally the more she’s going to be intellectually damaged by the experience.

      Couldn’t have said it better myself…
      except I’d put “emotionally, sexually, and financially” after the word “intellectually”.
      …so maybe I could’ve said it a little better myself

      Like


    • > “In my MLTR situation, I’m struck by the difference between women aged 21, 24, and 28, never mind the 35 year-olds, in the wide, age-dependent variation in openness to receiving and integrating information, ideas, and experiences from a lover that might shape her worldview.”

      DANGER WILL ROBINSON!!!

      Do not overlook the very real obvious possibility of selection bias in your observations.

      I.e. what you could be observing is that all the happy, well-rounded, friendly chicks, with the kind, warm, gentle, loving hearts, are precisely the “nice” girls whom the smart dudes snap up as their lives’ partners early on.

      Whereas the colder, more frigid, more hateful chicks, with the incipient Darkness in their hearts, are precisely the ones whom the smart dudes know – whether they know it consciously [and explicitly], or subconsciously [but more viscerally] – must be avoided like the plague.

      And as you yourself become an older bachelor, you are guaranteed to start noticing that you just aren’t bumping into as many of the “nice” girls amongst your peer group anymore, and that it’s only the chicks with The Darkness in their hearts who are still single [amongst your peers].

      And so eventually you find yourself searching out the younger chicks.

      Only what you are looking for [whether you realize it or not] isn’t so much youth per se, as it is single chicks with kind, warm, gentle, loving hearts, which are not infected with The Darkness.

      And this goes just as well for your hypothetical mid-30s chick who is just now finishing her PhD in Feminazi Studies – it could be that she chose that horribly nihilistic lifestyle for herself precisely because THE INCIPIENT DARKNESS WAS ALWAYS WITHIN HER.

      PS: I honestly can’t even get it up anymore for the young “hot” HB8/HB9/HB10 chicks if I sense that they have The Darkness in their hearts.

      All other things being equal, I would much rather settle down with an HB7, who was packing an extra pound or two, but who had the heart of an angel, rather than with a scrawny anorexic supermodel HB10 with the heart of a Hillary Clinton.

      PPS: “MLTR” == ???

      MILF Long Term Relationship?

      Like


      • Great response. We must be wary of understanding the selection bias and being wary not to over-attribute or under-attribute to it. I still think that if you catch the Darkness early, it is theoretically possible to treat it through benevolent male dominance and leadership. But one must keep the pimp hand strong.

        And of course, else being equal, a good-hearted woman is always going to get more respect and interest from me, and get some comp points for her less than stellar attributes. Now, that’s not to say she’s on a pedestal, mind you.

        PS: MLTR=multiple long term relationships. Polygyny. Spinning plates. A harem with a couple main dames on lock, with new candidates being recruited all the time, some rotate in & out for a few months, others last a longer time.

        Like


      • > “I still think that if you catch the Darkness early, it is theoretically possible to treat it through benevolent male dominance and leadership.”

        I struggle with these questions now almost constantly in my life.

        As a natural romantic, I want desperately to believe that we really do have the freedom of the will – that we really do possess within ourselves the power to choose good, or to choose evil.

        But as an honest observer of human affairs – who is trying to be guided by Truth, and by Truth alone – I have to ask myself whether there might be a wellspring of underlying truths to be gleaned from Darwinian nihilism, and, in particular, whether the majority of our behavioral propensities [which ultimately tend to determine the choices that we make in our lives] might very well be burned into our genes at conception.

        So that, in general, people wouldn’t be “Breaking Bad” so much as they simply would be “Born Bad”.

        In that sense, I honestly feel that Calvinism [and its emphasis on spiritual predestinationism] is the intellectual forerunner of Darwinism [and its emphasis on biological determinism].

        It certainly is a depressing thought, however – to allow yourself to think that if a sperm with an “X” chromosome meets up with an ovum, then almost immediately you could know with some certainty [if only you had a sufficiently large genetic database] whether the woman who resulted from that conception would, fifty years later, have six or eight children of her own, with a healthy serving of grandchildren on the way, or whether, instead, that very same post-menopausal woman would now be childless and barren, living all alone in an apartment filled with miscellaneous stray cats,Toxoplasma gondii, and bookshelves lined with decades of back issues of The Journal of Feminazi Studies.

        Like


      • on October 28, 2013 at 6:52 pm anonymous does not forgive

        Ugly truths are often depressing thoughts.

        Like


      • All girls have “the Darkness” in them, it’s merely a function of age and how much they’re into you vs how much of it they’ll show. As they get older they are more comfortable (or compulsive) in revealing it.

        I’ve seen it in 16yo and 60yo. Even as young as 11yo, when they start fooling around.

        Purge that romantic crap from your soul, for it will destroy you when it leads you astray. Examine it and see it for what it truly is: another tool in your arsenal. I seem to remember CH saying once that skittles from an Alpha is more romantic to a chick than a candlelight dinner with a Beta. Or words to that effect.

        You are the masterful Casanova, the true man who is in control of his relationships. Not the clueless dweeb who is thinking that the woman is the prize. Her only value is her freshness, how much she inspires your erection, and how much she can milk from your member.

        Only if you are so inclined, once your age has set in and you have a good lifestyle, should you bother to find one to push out your children. If you can be arsed.

        Like


      • I get the attraction of genetic predeterminism, and the power of genes over behavior. We see them all the time, especially here.

        However, regardless of our Darwinian inheritance, we have free will. Identical twins separated at birth often share amazing similarities, but one may make wise choices and become a serial entrepreneur & successful businessman, and the other may become a homeless alcoholic. I personally know of several such cases, with perhaps not quite so polar outcomes, but something close to that.

        Two people with an identical genome at birth, with totally disparate outcomes–that tells us it’s not all the genes.

        With women, they don’t have the drive to change and improve that men do. So I think the best we can do is look for women with good genes and a good upbringing–two things that are exceedingly rare, moreso than the fabled unicorns.

        There are a few women with those rare combinations out there, not many, but some exist. One of the many antifragile components of game is that it allows us to screen many, many women and enjoy life in the process, and to remain outcome-independent while that process is occurring.

        Like


  4. it’s a glass-half-full way of approaching a sour grapes situation when you’re stuck with a fading female.

    for me though there’s an even larger pile of bullshit in the whole sophisticated woman claim– i don’t care who it is, i would rather spend time speaking about stuff that matters with the stupidest of my male friends, and get an honest conversation, than any woman. they just aren’t the same. and they have a different role in my life. it’s useless to me if she’s smart or worldly or sophisticated, i just don’t want to find myself spending significant portions of my time listening to that filtered through the female mind.

    Like


    • Ah, you haven’t yet learned the fun of leading the conversation into paths of your chosing, for the benefit of your own amusements.

      In the words of the Joker “why so serious?” Have fun with them. I’ve found it has done wonders for my happiness and serenity to cultivate the mindset that most women I interact with are best handled like a little sister.

      Like


      • ah yes, i can see that. but sophistication is still a wash at best 🙂 an exercise that’s fun is taking a hard core pro-choicer from no-reason-to-ever-tell-a-woman-what-to-do to no-you-can’t-abort-a-baby-for-being-gay in about 5 minutes. good point

        Like


  5. Ugly truth for certain.

    It is a totally feminist meme that “sophistication” is the prize in these aged women. Now, I enjoy chatting with some of them because we’re in the same age bracket. But I don’t fool myself that we’re doing anything more than chatting. It has been my lifetime experience that women both young and old don’t go deep in philosophy, politics, nor religion.

    They may have thought about it, and may have read some things, but generally at best they are able to spout the sayings of someone else.

    Remember this is a feature, not a bug. Enjoy women for what they were created to be. And don’t delude yourself that the older woman is somehow a more attractive prize than the nubile youngster. Accept the pain of realizing you’ve been rationalizing your own cowardice in the face of your own declining SMV. Because embracing pain brings truth and growth.

    Like


  6. Pretty good write up, anyone who thinks 40 yos are sophisticated are deluding themselves, like the last ladies with any class are the ones 60+, but they are good for much beyond conversation, and a longing that modern girls had any value beyond a ONS.

    Like


  7. I saw a personal ad the other day by a young woman announcing that she was “well-traveled”. I think feminazism has mostly erased all the age-old knowledge of how women can actually attract the men they want. (About the only tool left in the box is “be young and hot”, and god knows they’re waging a bitter war on that one.)

    Like


    • My Great Aunt Isabelle visited Egypt in 1912, and brought back a dagger which she gave to my dad, who described it as “swell”. He said she never married, as men found her “haughty and intimidating”. I doubt in those sexually reticent times that she was roguring the deck hands or engaging in other scandalous behavior such as today’s well-traveled ladies might enjoy.

      Like


      • Uncle E, I appreciate having an old cat like you who is thoroughly red-pill and clearly sees the sexual marketplace for what it is, with the advantages of a lot of experience over a long timeline, and an appreciation for deep cultural memory. If it weren’t for guys like you, we’d be missing a lot of great stories and context that helps us modern guys realize that this red-pill worldview isn’t some simple invention of modernity, but a deeply embedded, biological and old-world cultural paradigm.

        Like


      • The ancients knew how it worked.

        GoogleImages(men’s pulp magazine covers).

        Like


    • Well-traveled is a euphemism for having lots of lovers. In the event she isn’t a skank, she miscalculate it going to attract men. Like she is worldly.

      Well-traveled and wordly are descriptions best left for men. Even if a woman is well-traveled for work and not skankery, she shouldn’t be boasting about it too much. It comes across more achieving than most normal men are comfortable with.

      Like


    • You saw *A* young woman advertise herself as “well-traveled?” Dude, travel the primary theme of about 40% of OKCupid profiles. The other 60% are centered around listing out qualifications to deter any man who’s not 6’3″, ripped, pulling in >$50k, living in a swanky city apartment, liberal, and has the chick’s exact facial hair preference.

      Yep, these girls really get it. I’d feel sorry for them being so misled, if not for the fact that they’re inundated with suitors anyway due to sheer numbers.

      Like


  8. A co-worker who had been traveling a lot informed me that he had a profile on match.com and would line up 40+ women in every city he visited. “It’s all the same when you turn out the lights” he contended. He also had another saying “Who has to know?”. I had to admire his positive outlook.

    Like


  9. That comment, and this post, are more or less a slap at Buena Vista after he opened up about his life experiences a few posts ago. And they wilfully misinterpret what he was talking about (it seems to me). I don’t think he, or anyone here, would deny that women at their sexual prime are more physically desirable than women 15 or 20 years older. Older women tend to be more sexually experienced, often more voracious, and more self-aware, sexually and otherwise. If there had been inane feminist doctrine drummed into the head in the college years, usually life has corrected at least some of that. But the stereotype of the bitter, desperate cougar is just that: a stereotype. NACALT. (Although many are.) Sophistication need not mean wisdom narrowly interpreted as wisdom from the cock carousel; it may derive from a whole range of life experiences. Wit and intelligence? 20-year-olds may be open to new experiences, but they are often callow, self-involved, and shockingly uneducated and uninteresting. (If the goal is a SNL, then this doesn’t matter.) These latter two points rest on the assumption, which CH dogma seems to categorically deny, that there is value to being with a woman other than the purely sexual/transactional.

    [CH: wrong. CH claims there is no *sexual* value to women after the Wall. but they still have matronly and social value. stop contrarian trolling.]

    Like


    • OK, but I think BV was talking about women just before or at the Wall, not after. (44 might be the theoretical limit, but the concept applies to women in their mid-to-late 30s.) Also wasn’t trolling or trying to troll- nor even be a contrarian, really. I agree that the younger the better from a purely carnal point of view. Can’t imagine anyone disagreeing. the point was just to bring in some nuance and context from the older thread that had been cut out for the sake, apparently, of dogmatic purity and rhetorical flourish. Both of which are great, as noted, but which also turn a complex and messy subject, like attraction, compatibility, companionablity, etc. into something much simpler- in which real-world variation and nuance are lost.

      Also I see that my last sentence above was a little too sweeping and wrong, I agree. Perils of drafting quickly while multitasking.

      Like


      • “dogmatic purity and rhetorical flourish”

        shitlib speak for “people are people”

        there ARE some immutable truths in this life mon frere. there is no nuance in bio-mechanics at this level, only men and women that fear, can’t partake, and are victims of their own self same delusions.

        Like


    • “That comment, and this post, are more or less a slap at Buena Vista after he opened up about his life experiences a few posts ago.”

      Why did BV put it here if he can’t take the least amount of criticism? People need to develop thicker skin if they’re going to be open here about their experiences.

      n/a comment is not a slap in BV’s face. It was n/a’s opinion on what constitutes a woman’s attractiveness. Most men agree with n/a because BV is also factoring in other aspects besides the 3 most important ones – youth, beauty, and femininity. He likes high achieving females over those women with the 3 most important aspects, calling them sophisticated.

      Sophistication is a euphemism for bitch.

      Most of these women are not sophisticated in the least. They’re man hating bitches and divorcées with money.

      How sophisticated can an old angry resentful bitter hag be?

      And would you rather take the bullshit of a youthful 20 year-old, or the resentment of the 45 year-old bitter hag? Women’s hamsters get worse as they age. I don’t think they become sophisticated, unless they weren’t a feminist in their youth. Nothing worse than an old man-hating feminist.

      Like


      • To many red herrings here, plus a little internet mind-reading, to bear comment.

        Still, Lara, getting slapped around a little bit is just football practice: the upper classmen are going to get their kicks at the expense of the freshman (that would be I).

        Do you really think I spend time with “old angry resentful bitter hags”? Am I that inarticulate?

        Like


      • “Do you really think I spend time with “old angry resentful bitter hags”? Am I that inarticulate?”

        I hope not.

        That said, if you’re dating divorced women, don’t you think there is a tinge in there of the resentful bitter hag?

        Furthermore, if you’re dating unmarried women in their 40s, don’t you think there is a tinge in there of the resentful bitter hag?

        Still further, if you’re dating professional women – doctors, lawyers, pilots, etc….. who have been successful professionally, but not personally, specifically not in the feminine aspect of having a husband, don’t you think there is some tinge in there of the resentful bitter hag?

        Even if you know, but very little bit of female nature, commonsense would dictate, there is a tinge of the old angry resentful bitter hag in such women.
        Of course, it’s not a 100% rule; just a likelihood. It’s very hard to find a good-natured woman of that caliber. And, you deserve a good-natured woman. You’re too good a man to be dating bitches and be subjected to female chicanery.

        You took my words in the “Field-report-the-dushka-and-the-cougar” thread in bad faith, when I am clearly trying to demonstrate to you that dating the same-old, same-old types of women who closely resembles your ex-wife, is just repeating the same mistakes. As I said, I know you like women that are equal to you in education/achievement/wealth, but equal does not have to mean identical. Chemistry is much more important than dating a woman that looks good on paper. I’m sure in your circles, there are many women that are indeed good for you “on paper.” However, if the right vibes are missing, all their money and all their business success and all their fancy degrees are irrelevant. While two people might have little apparently in common, they might still be a magnificent match for reasons that neither of them could ever explain. So don’t discount girls that seem less accomplished. Just because a woman is less accomplished professionally, doesn’t mean she’s stupid or not sophisticated. Maybe she has a different set of values, which might be just the right ones for a relationship.

        Do you see what I am getting at? I am sorry if in the other thread I came across as disparaging. Wasn’t my intention at all. It was more a critique on your choices, which I think are not conducive for a good relationship.

        Anyway, I wish you lots of luck in your quest. May you find what you’re looking for, and may you be happy. At the end of the day, it’s the only thing that matters, not what anyone thinks here.

        Like


      • Lolly, you do a lot of this, which makes your streams of advice tedious:

        “Just because a woman is less accomplished professionally, doesn’t mean she’s stupid or not sophisticated.”

        This is called fighting your way through an open door with both fists. I never said anything about someone being stupid or unsophisticated. You’re projecting these strawmen because, based on column inches, you’re disturbed by the positive descriptions I’ve provided of my ‘type’ of girl. It means you don’t even know what I’m talking about, if you have to fab strawmen in order to win an argument. I think you can be of greater service to other contributors.

        Like


      • “I never said anything about someone being stupid or unsophisticated.”

        You don’t have to say many things outright. They’re already implied from your conversations here. Here is an example. I once asked you why not date the 30 year-old paralegal instead of the high achieving lawyer. Your answer was that you needed to have intelligent conversation with a woman to be attracted to her. That answer implies that you think the paralegal isn’t smart enough for you.

        Here it is, I was able to find it:

        I said:

        “You keep looking for these professional women because you think they are financially stable. They might be, but they also come with a slew of other secondary and unwanted side effects. Those women are independent, feministic, and think their careers or their intelligence should act as a male aphrodisiac, not their looks…………..…. Think about starting to date less accomplished females. They don’t have to be stupid. Just less stuck up. For example, instead of dating lawyers, date paralegals. Do you get my point? Lots of office workers in NYC, if that’s where you’re at. You don’t need the Goldman Sachs investment banker chick, as alluring as her job might sound.”

        Your answer:

        “But it’s not the money, really. I just want to know I’m not going to have to rebuild my balance sheet again. And I sure as hell don’t want to explain to someone who T.S. Eliot is. I paid those dues. So it is the brains…….……… The beauty of discarding post-feminist Good Man rules is that you find women who *do* want a man who says, “Sorry, I’m in Namibia that week shooting big animals.” Some of them have brains and their own checking account.”

        You can read our entire exchange starting here, at https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2013/09/17/the-wall-in-fast-forward/#comment-479134 This way, the above references are not taken out of context.

        It’s funny. Even before I knew your situation as well as I know it now, I basically told you the same things about yourself. You were getting a bit annoyed even then, so I stopped pushing. My aim is not to upset you. However, this time, I have been a bit more forthcoming regarding what I think of your type of woman, and you have become very self-defensive. Why be like this if you are putting your private life here to be analyzed? If you can’t take the criticism, then don’t share it here. If you do, we’ll tell you things you don’t want to hear. Be prepared.
        .

        “you do a lot of this, which makes your streams of advice tedious:”

        Sorry I have to repeat myself. When you say the same things continually in post after post, I realize you haven’t learned anything from your experiences, and follow the same set of rules and approach the same types of girls. LOL. Even a man who likes blondes will occasionally hit on brunettes.

        .
        “You’re projecting these strawmen because, based on column inches, you’re disturbed by the positive descriptions I’ve provided of my ‘type’ of girl. “

        I’m not disturbed by the positive descriptions of your type of girl. I know she is all mirage and no substance, and very low on beauty too. However, if she turns you on, go for it. Although, enough people pointed out that you should try other types as well, as they might be better for relationships.

        Strawmen and ad hominem, you have accused me of one fallacy after another. As you see from the above references, my words are based on what you said a few months ago, not on a need to make up shit against you. Furthermore, I am not here to win an argument with you. How can I win on something that involves different tastes? Your taste in women is not right or wrong. It’s your preference. Maybe you’re disturbed that many of us don’t like your preferences?

        Like


      • @BV — my man, you are right on the money.

        Lily IS tedious.

        She is a perfect example of why women should be limited to posting two paragraphs each of which should not exceed five sentences.

        She is also living proof that women just don’t know when to shut the fuck up.

        Like


      • No, I am the perfect example of using the man’s own words against him, after he insisted a million times he never said “anything about someone being stupid or unsophisticated,” and after he accused me of using strawmen and ad hominem to prove my point. Nothing works better than proof to stop a controversy.

        Unlike you pistachio, I don’t say things I can’t back.

        Like


      • You wrote two paragraphs, one with exactly five sentences, the other with just one.

        Congratulations. You’re learning.

        See how easy that was?

        Like


      • I ain’t planning on reining in anything. I write whatever is needed for a particular comment. In your case, very little was needed.

        Sometimes, yes, I must repeat myself, since I feel like I am dealing with little kids that need to be spoon fed the same things over again, which is what happened with BV.

        I should have just looked for his first comments where he discussed his female preference, after the first time he refuted my observations. It would have saved myself time arguing with him, when all I wanted to do was help him. Too bad he took it the wrong way.

        Like


      • OK, six sentences, not five.

        I’ll give you a pass since you are just learning how to rein yourself in.

        Like


      • Lily is not smart enough to write more than four or five worthwhile sentences. The rest is always meandering junk. It is this way with almost all women, except then they’re writing fiction.

        Like


    • Don’t bother, brother. Dogmatic ideology brooks no nuance. Asking them to dial it back a notch or two is like shitting on their mother’s face. I mean … that prose is so purple it’s asphyxiated.

      When you say, “I agree in general, but consider these possible limitations,” they receive it as a sign of the enemy, the mark of the infiltrating manboob.

      They conceal their dogmatism with overwritten repetition: they find new (and many) adjectives to say the same thing, and it appears fresh to themselves, not to mention the “arrivistes.”

      Beauty is youth, youth beauty,—that is all
      Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.

      (apologies to Keats)

      Such an obvious truth will be defended like a Christian inquisitor defends the Doctrine of the Incarnation: any deviation arouses suspicion of heresy.

      I get their point, though. You can hardly be too careful in a legalistic, militarized, feminist culture. Truth is a weapon against its lie-sustained power. It’s almost understandable that our brothers see feminism in every less-than-total agreement with their position. PC totalitarianism has made it dangerous for dissidents to trust the insufficiently zealous.

      Another indication of ideological litmus-testing is to regard serious disagreement as simply “contrarian.” After all, if you are committed to a set of eternal truths, the simplest way to understand criticism is to dismiss it as patently argumentative. What else would motivate a challenge to the obvious — water’s wet, sky’s blue, women lie — besides trolling?

      n/a is a bit of an old lecher. That’s okay; I want to make the world safe(r) for lechers again, given the insensate demonization of a man’s sexuality in this age of fat dykes and castrated drones. Yes, ma’am, I am in fact looking at your 14-year-old’s ass, because it is in tight short shorts with the word “JUICY” stitched across her just ripening bottom. I got something for yer stinkeye right here…

      So we have to pick our battles. I have a soft spot for those whom feminists call “creepy” because fuck those twats and their culture-annihilating presumptions of immunity/entitlement. You dress your peak-sexual daughter like a literal street whore, and we’re the asshole for not looking away fast enough?

      Still. The brotherhood goes too far when they regard an absence of disclaimers as evidence of wavering loyalty. “Don’t get me wrong, youth is the inarguable standard of beauty, and far be it from me to ever agree with the reality-denying shrews, and you might think I’m getting soft, and you’ll probably take this the wrong way, and … and … and … but ….” When allies make automatic issue of your purity — without extending simple good faith — you have to reconsider the direction the true believers are ultimately going in. They can easily become their own worst enemies.

      Matt

      Like


    • Ooh, so I can be a matron? Let me grab my apron!

      Like


  10. one of the strangest consequences of getting into this section of the internet, is how much I’ve noticed old woman talk about the same stupid and uninteresting bullshit young women do, just often substituting the relationship drama of their children for their own. The most painful revelation was how prevalent this was in the mouth of my own mother.

    Like


  11. on October 28, 2013 at 1:19 pm The Man Who Was . . .

    A few thoughts:

    1. There are a few genuinely sophisticated older women who are a true pleasure to date. But, let’s get real here, the age group we’re talking about is 28-35 and she’d better be 8+ on the looks scale.

    2. Most single women are not boning up on Shakespeare and fine wine; they’re boning up on tequila and random cock.

    3. Sophistication and maturity are good things but they are only two among others, and not necessarily the most important.

    Like


    • I’ve dated a few older broads (mid-thirties) who were sophisticated AND giving, generous women. They make up for the decline in SMV in other ways. That makes them great to date, but absolutely contraindicted for commitment.

      Like


      • Exactly, plenty of older women are a pleasure to be with. For a long term commitment, I don’t blame a man for aiming younger, though.

        Like


      • I personally like older women (30-35) for friendship and casual sex, but when it gets to the point that they want to settle down and be a “relationship”, something in my subconscious expresses “what for?” Especially divorced women with children. They often are very easy to deal with, but it just seems absolutely pointless to develop an exclusive relationship with them. Maybe when I’m in my 50s or something it would make sense, but it still seems like at least on a subconscious level, the point is to knock a chick up, even if you don’t want kids, that should still at least be an option I think. If there’s no chance of having kids with them, I can’t see any reason to form an exclusive relationship.

        Like


      • Possibly because, sadly, you have not yet met a woman of any age who was not interchangeable with others.

        Now, that is depressing, but only because you are a reader here, and therefore ahead of your time at least in thought.

        The few OW/YM relationships I’ve seen work, and they are very few, were between very unique people. Nothing about their situation could be applied in a way that would be helpful to the average person.

        For people who themselves are not interchangeable, it is a harsh reality that generally, one person really doesn’t have much more to offer than another. So when dealing with such people, you really do have no reason to get into an LTR with an older woman.

        If you do happen to meet one who is unique though, take care about the exclusivity thing. If you render yourself a mere object (give the impression that you are interchangeable with anyone else your age and level of fitness and sexual prowess), this is how she is likely to treat you. Men who enjoy being the man and “owning that pussy” don’t usually enjoy being in a pile of miscellaneous broken toys who get rifled through for parts when new ones aren’t available.

        One thing I’ve noticed about older women across the board is that we do become sluttier, and the rotation speed is fierce. We’re also picker about the looks and skills of guys we objectify than guys we care if we see again.

        Those of us who were the marrying kind and just got unlucky are less blunt about it, but still kind of superficial if a guy puts himself in that category. Also, from that category, you may be vamped for ego boosting, and never even smell that old snatch because she already has a Mr. Yeah and three more who are all hotter than you, waiting for a go.

        If you absolutely can’t consider a relationship with an older woman, but you like to shag them and don’t want them pursuing relationships with you, then you need to be pretty, polite, and well hung. If not, you’re kidding yourself, or you will find yourself having to lie a lot.

        Mind you, I’m only telling you this because you’re in the class of different. No need to pass this on to the self destructive masses.

        Like


    • To each his own. I’ve enjoyed dating and boning women in the 40+ range and not necessarily sophisticated ones, just very sexual, sweet, fun and mature women. They do exist..
      Then again, I’m 40+ myself so that influences my perspective.

      Like


    • 3. I submit that “sophistication” is actually not a good thing, as it signifies little more than expensive tastes and unrealistically high dating standards. I know a number of “sophisticated” women who essentially make a second mortgage payment drinking overpriced pinot every night. Tequila is at least cheap.

      Like


  12. on October 28, 2013 at 1:22 pm Cad and Bounder

    Aside from the obvious physical advantages of a younger women, you have to remember that the unmarried 30+ women come pre-filtered, with all the ‘qualities’ that made them fail to get married before 30.

    For a guy above 35-45, its easy to fool yourself into thinking that a woman in her 30s will be more amenable and attractive for an LTR than one in her 20s, but it simply isn’t true. And its about time the media stopped trying to convince women that men want older women’s ‘qualities’.

    Whenever a woman starts this shit with you, show her this pic…

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/19/roberto-cavalli-hosed-down_n_3466438.html

    …and then in return, ask her to show you a pic of a good looking young guy publicly washing the arse of his 72 year old ‘sophisticated’ girl friend. You go girl!

    Like


    • on October 28, 2013 at 2:56 pm The Man Who Was . . .

      Aside from the obvious physical advantages of a younger women, you have to remember that the unmarried 30+ women come pre-filtered, with all the ‘qualities’ that made them fail to get married before 30.

      Yup.

      Like


  13. on October 28, 2013 at 1:24 pm Cad and Bounder

    Aside from the obvious physical advantages of a younger women, you have to remember that the unmarried 30+ women come pre-filtered, with all the ‘qualities’ that made them fail to get married before 30.

    For a guy above 35-45, its easy to fool yourself into thinking that a woman in her 30s will be more amenable and attractive for an LTR than one in her 20s, but it simply isn’t true. And its about time the media stopped trying to convince women that men want older women’s ‘qualities’.

    Whenever a woman starts this shit with you, show her this pic…

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/19/roberto-cavalli-hosed-down_n_3466438.html

    …and then in return, ask her to show you a pic of a good looking young guy

    Like


  14. Unfortunately, reality does not conform with this poster’s idealism. Yes, hot young 20s SHOULD be the best bets out there for female companionship. Unfortunately, if she’s hot, in today’s US of A, she is more than likely a slut. She probably has had or has an STD of some variety.

    I know, NAGALT, there are those shy, beautiful virgins who somehow stay outside of the societal current. But as a resident of a college town full of beautiful 19-23 year olds, who has been with a few of them, there are benefits to older girls. Their lifestyles aren’t nearly as stupid as a beautiful college girl. Their cellphones are not buzzing literally every 5 minutes with some guy offering dick to them. They aren’t concerned with what girlfriend of theirs is going to be out at x on a given evening. Not only are they unable to cook, they have no interest in learning. They think babies are cute but say they aren’t going to have them until they’re 35.

    No offense, but this worship of the 19-24 year old chicks kind of sounds like old men pedestalizing something that doesn’t exist, like a unicorn or something. These girls have great bodies and like sex. That is about all that can be said for them.

    Like


    • on October 28, 2013 at 9:59 pm Hugh G. Rection

      And you really delude yourself into thinking 10 years makes a difference?

      Like


    • 30+ year old women don’t want to pay for shit even if they have $50,000+ year jobs. Girls 18-24 will actually pay for shit even though they work as a hostess at Jimmy Buffett’s Margaritaville. Just on a financial basis, young chicks make more sense to date, let alone the nicer body and fewer miles on the odometer.

      Like


  15. The real unicorn is the man who actually has the choice between dating young women and old women and yet chooses the older set.

    Does. Not. Exist.

    Like


  16. I could see such comments as Sidewinder only possible in the absence of proper range of experiences, a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy.

    Like


  17. onetime a well now cock carusell driver end 20″ (she dont have me als another
    notch in her belt) came to me and plant a kiss in my mouth…me: no reaction…

    she: freez , 3 seconds later(when she first aknoledge i m not intresting)
    she said:
    …mature woman have experience…me: “experience” have myself.

    Like


  18. I don’t assume BS on SW’s part, nor on BV’s part (as the Boss and some of his accolytes never called on them). It looks like a rather case of getting into a mindset that becomes its own fulfillment. Nothing that getting to actually know some nubiles (e.g., what angoisse is the shallowness covering?) would not cure, tho.

    Like


    • Yeah, it’s always fun to be an object of derision on the internet, but I should have thought that it was obvious to me as it is to everyone that, side-by-side, nubility is more sexually attractive than maturity.

      I’d have to go into much personal detail to rebut both the poster (returning his favor, incidentally, and going ad hominem because I know so much about him from an internet posting) and CH, and that’s not going to go well, is it? It’s his microphone. And besides, if derision is my tuition, fine. I got a lot out of the prior discussion, including an insight from CH that was very striking.

      I think if one plots the elements of desire over time, however, it’s not a two-dimensional graph of a single attribute — as it was at age 20. This idea does not comply with the core syllogism of CH, which I know and which I’m happy to get knocked around for believing to be a subset of desire in sum over time (whoo, I know a big word, just like ‘arriviste’); syllogisms are limited to simpler models (all men are attracted to women with functioning vaginas; nubile women offering functioning vaginas are more appealing to men; therefore all men are attracted to nubile vaginas and nothing else matters). Thankfully, I’m working on a larger problem set, because I understood this nubility syllogism approximately 30 years ago. It’s not worth going into, and again, never argue with a man who owns the microphone.

      Like


      • Deneuve was hot in her forties because she still looked young, not because of some personality traits she accrued by dint of aging. Poise, grace, sophistication and intelligence were all on display in her twenties. If the appearance of a youthful countenance had absolutely nothing to do with nubility, if, for example, a race of space aliens gave women pretty faces just to fuck with us, we’d still respond the same way. Nubility comes into the picture as an explanation, not as a description of the subjective experience–although ymmv.

        Like


      • I don’t know what the point of “If the appearance of a youthful countenance had absolutely nothing to do with nubility” is. There’s no such thing as nubility that lacks “youthful countenance.”

        Like


      • Also, in the event I have Miley Cyrus topless crawling across the floor and demand I lower my pants so she can fellate me, and I have Deneuve standing by the front door gesturing for me to accompany her to dinner, I’m going to dinner. I’ll get the BJ on the way home, after we have spent three hours with our friends in deep conversation. While I’m clearly not of the core demographic of this blog, I’m not sure it’s always helpful for guys MIley’s age to make statements about life and women they have never experienced. But whatever.

        Like


      • Deneuve at 21 was a more interesting public figure than Miley Cyrus, and she was also an exhibitionist. Who knows? One day you might find that Miss Cyrus has truly blossomed.

        Like


      • Jesus wept. Leave the man alone. Who cares what type of women he prefers? Do any of you have a personal stake in this? Some of you seem so offended I’m wondering if you’re really 20 year old girls who feel dissed by his opinion. I’m not in his preference range either, but if that’s what a guy likes, salute. Why not just help him get what he wants?

        Like


      • He goes against the Gospel. He must be terminated.

        Like


  19. Sad Clown and Gro Haila, I don’t know how old you are, but I actually know more than a few men in their 30s and 40s who have quit the undergrads as well. It is kind of a running joke that all the divorced guys we know have their mandatory post-divorce relationship with an undergrad before moving on to someone serious.

    If you guys are 30 or younger, then I agree wholeheartedly with you. You shouldn’t waste your time with a girl over 25. If you’re over 35, then go out with a 21 year old. And not just some frumpy 21 year old that doesn’t fit in with her peers. Go out with a hot 21 year old. It isn’t all its cracked up to be.

    Like


    • I’m 37, and I find the sweet spot for females (for me) to be 23-28. I’ve gone as young as 19 in the past year (and she was part-time model/student), but girls that young just can’t be chased within a sustainable framework for me – too much effort for too little return. I can get them, but only by burning through massive numbers. When opportunities present, I’ll still chase though, I just know the score and don’t expect much.

      But, to get back to topic, I’m obviously a bit older and have had a range of life experience (probably a bit beyond my age – traveled a ton, wide range of social circles, etc. etc.), but have yet to know a single, high-value man who had the ability to pull (and keep) younger women opt for older ones instead.

      Seriously. I have never seen it.

      Like


      • You just said yourself that the baggage that comes along with dating a 19 year old wasn’t worth it to you. That’s exactly what I’m saying. I would rather date a gal in her late 20s than early 20s.

        Like


      • To date 25+ years younger reliably when you’re over 45, you have to have massive value– genetic alpha, wealth, fame–such that you don’t go through the overt 50-1 odds against the Old Guy sad clown described.

        Like


  20. How’s this “youngsters are eevel” different (except in age range covered) from the occasional frustrated visitor’s “all wymin are eveel” posting?

    Like


    • Who is saying they’re evil? For all the reasons well-documented on this site, young women at the height of their sexual market value are not behaving in virtuous ways. Ever heard of the cock carousel? They are being deliberately raised and socially conditioned in our country to be self-indulgent, self-centered and pulled away from nurturing a relationship and ultimately a family. They see that as boring, and always available to them. I’d say they’re still a little cognizant of slut-shaming, but not much. Most seem pretty unashamed of their promiscuity.

      Like


    • They’re just more work, or at least should be.

      Like


      • No, its a lot more than just “work”. I was with a girl who was on the dance squad at the university (big D-I school). Not only was she a raging slut, but nearly everyone on the dance squad had had an abortion or two. The only “work” that seemed to get any of them to settle down, was one that got knocked up by an NBA player. Of course, that relationship didn’t work out for her…

        I realize these are the 9s and 10s of the university, and dancers are probably on the far end of the self-centered spectrum, but they are a pretty good example of girls who could literally get any man they wanted. I can tell you from personal experience, they aren’t making good choices. As nice as it was to sleep with her, no thank you.

        Like


      • As a male dancer I can assure you that they are definitely way way out there on the self-centered spectrum. To the point now that I only dance with girls I am fucking.

        Like


  21. Daily reminder that college educated women are to be ignored or mocked, but not bred. I wrote a post on it but I’m not a good writer. Even so, it is not in a man’s best interest to be fucking around with college-educated women. Get one younger than college age, if possible, and teach her well. Or if you’re in one of those fascist states where the AoC is 18, move.

    Wanna know why I don’t have to deal with the kind of bullshit described in n/a’s comment? Because my girl isn’t a brainy broad with a uni-inflated ego, and she’s young; that’s why. She’s a redneck girl, and if you aren’t looking for same or similar, you are enabling the indoctrination establishment by giving it’s clientele the α-fucks they crave. If you are accommodating college broads, you are part of the problem.

    By the time a bitch gets out of college her labia minora will resemble shower curtains from the plowings she’s received. Her mind will be a mess of re-re-regurgitated communist memes made solely of feels and intentional misunderstanding; her actions will be illogic and unladylike. The prognosis for your relationship with her is not likely to be good, because by the end of a four-year session, she, herself will be incapable of having a healthy relationship. We must make this known, for the good of civilization itself.

    I don’t get any advantage from telling you this; I’m saying this for the longterm benefit of everyone involved. I’d benefit most from you all if you’d keep chasing these college girls: less competition for me. But if college girls are your game, for God’s sake, reconsider. you’re not doing yourself any favors; you’re reinforcing the toxic idea that women can get what they want outside of patriarchal society.

    Like


  22. These seems to be two rather important factors left out of this equation.

    1) It is obvious to me that we are not talking about LTR material. In which case Youth trumps All. We know this. However… if you are talking LTR material I’ve found there does seem to be a happy medium. But it sure as fuck ain’t 35-40. Women who mature faster than men anyways are generally out of pop-culture as God phase by the mid 20s or so. If they are not, then you will pick up on that within 5 minutes or less of conversation. And if not, then you immediately know you need to use her for the intended purpose of such a vapid creature.

    If you detect a higher intellect and some manner of sophistication, then you may proceed on your course for LTR. Sophistication does not equal pretentiousness and that seems to be lost in translation for many. You can know the difference between a Malbec and a Merlot without being a haughty cunt about it.

    2) Where is she from? For what I just said above, subtract ~5 years if she is from a culture that hasn’t been poisoned by the Western Agenda for the last few decades. Every foreigner I ever dated/banged always said they same two things almost on queue. a) Why are American women so fat? and b) Why are American women so immature? I didn’t feel like explaining the harsh reality of it so just shrugged it off.

    You go get a south east Asian, EE, or South American 23 year old and I’ll show you the American equivalent of a 30 year old maturity wise but with the tightened up package of the early 20 something.

    Like


    • Aside from the time horizon (LTR solution approach) issue, which you mention in your item 1), there’s the virtue or morality filter that is increasingly important to a man over time.

      In a transactional sexual environment, the CH syllogism is self-evident. There’s no reason to solve for virtue, just as there is no reason to assume that youth alone assures that a woman is capable of or knowing of virtue. This is another of my comments in which I /shrug and say, “Your time, gentlemen, will one day come.”

      It’s useful, though, to reflect on the idea that one’s tastes have been corrupted by the culture, and that one might be selling oneself short. That idea, mentioned by CH the other night, is very useful.

      Like


      • Listen dude— I understood, in technicolor, where you were coming from on the prior thread and I posted as such. You are like a few CH readers which is why I visit this place vs. some “PUA/MRA” sites. You are of exceptionally above average intelligence. I know this why? You have lived and functioned in DC for 2+ decades. You live in rarified air both physically (piloting requires smarts) and culturally (Georgetown / Milano requires social intelligence). So with that big ass disclaimer out of the way—

        I truly have no agenda. You can be only attracted to and want to seduce one-legged midget transsexuals. At the end of the day, this affects me not one iota. As Matt King said, there are indeed some unwashed masses here and some bootlickers. You’ll find this anywhere you frequent on the “manosphere”. But contrary to that position I actually find the -majority- at CH to not be that at all. Perhaps Matt has confused CH with RooshV, et. al. Not certain… and don’t care.

        Where I am going to call you right up on the red carpet of truth however is this– “It’s useful, though, to reflect on the idea that one’s tastes have been corrupted by the culture, and that one might be selling oneself short.”

        You are positing then, the following theory? Youth obsessed culture has absconded overall Western culture to the point that we are forgetting some older culture and values? Is this your position? Please retort… but I’ll respond preemptively.

        I think CH had you pegged on the last thread. You long for this time that is lost on modernism. A time where a Greta Garbo, a Rita Hayworth, etc. had this amazing level of intelligence, sophistication, sexiness, and allure. Am I right? Just say “No you aren’t” if I’m wrong. That was a short chapter in the history of mankind.

        Do you know the “geologic” timeline of mankind? Prior to say the early-mid 1900s? Most men of means had marriage arranged to women between teens and early 20s. Men of significant means often took brides who weren’t even in puberty and that was going on from the 19th century until Mesopotamia at least. You would then shape and sculpt these girls into intelligent, well-read, pious, virtuous, elegant, feminine, and upper class women.

        Like


      • Hey, Jay, peace out. Actually, the cultural corruption comment relates to CH telling me the other night that I was selling myself short and might have confidence issues, in regard to interacting with women. And you know what? I’ve been thinking about that pretty hard and I think he’s probably right. I have to be careful — realistic — as an older guy, but I definitely have been selling myself short, I think. Just the rudiments of game, a few months of study, and my dating pipeline is out of control. (I’m going back to plate spinning for a bit to forget about the girl I broke up with last week.)

        I think you took my statement really as opposite of that, and that I was saying that some of the adherents of game here were corrupted by our culture. Well, the whole point of the red pill is to vaccinate one against the culture. So I think we’re more realistic and knowledgeable.

        I have zero issue with guys my age dating Miley Cyrus. I won’t be, no interest, I’m too cerebral, and I filter too hard for virtue and trust. Yes, I romanticize a bit about the elegant sophistication of a golden era star — but I have experienced something of that love in this era. And even then I undervalued myself, as CH noted the other night, and sabotaged the experience with insecurity, so I am acting now on that insight.

        I can’t figure out if I’m moderated, banned, or allowed to post here, because I’m getting all three experiences. Hope this gets through. Appreciate your comment and insights.

        Like


      • To support your point Ava Gardner was only “intellectual” because Artie Shaw demanded it and trained/ridiculed her until she met his expectation to be that. Same for Greta, Rita etc..

        Interesting insight about that is that shaping process left more of an impression on her than Sinatra ever did.

        Like


  23. how i became aware of positive SMV for men:

    when i was teenager, i look 5 years older
    then i was, its works very good for me, not just women but everything (alcohol,
    clubs,etc)
    when i was 30, i score a 10` 20 years jung. whit 35 was the time for a
    21 moist pussy…then i was 43 and take the service from a 28 very good
    in shape.(8).Now in my 50″ i dont now what older woman feel like… my older piece of snatch

    of snatch was 38..and just one.. and no more. today i look 15 years younger
    (for real). the best afrodisiac for mature men istn viagra and co, its just a jung
    woman. Amen

    Like


  24. This area isn’t very long on sophistication, period, but the most sophisticated female I remember coming across in recent years was 19 at the time, should be 22 or so by now. She’s a Gaugin-inspired painter (pretty good, actually), has lived and worked (!!) in Europe, speaks passable French and went to school and work on a bicycle. In America.
    Which gives her more sophistication points than any 30-,40-, or more-something prune who calls herself a ‘lady’ – right after she cusses you out for not being a ‘gentleman’ (= buying her stuff)……..
    There a LOTS of guys (most of them, actually) who endlessly beat their heads against the walls of their ‘peer group’, they are solidly cowed and browbeaten into believing they should never even look at a girl who is more than maybe 2 years younger than they are.
    Granted, most of those guys aren’t exactly prizes themselves.
    Far as I’m concerned, the biggest problem with young women in this area is the fact that if she’s from here, older than 16 and even just a little bit cute, she’s almost guaranteed to have at least 1 kid.
    By 22, she’s got 3-5, a divorce or 2, 1 or more Ex’s in jail/on the lam/dead and a drug/booze/credit card habit.
    Recently met a 36-year old grandma, early arthritis, paunch, the whole bit.
    Obamacare was created for her.

    Like


  25. Cougars are occasionally the chimeric cash cow.

    Or as one of the founding fathers Franklinly spake: “they are so grateful”

    http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/bdorsey1/41docs/51-fra.html

    Gold flowed freely from France to the US during our revolution as …

    Like


  26. BV – Remember, most of the readers here are lothario wannabe’s and keyboard jockeys who are butthurt at being losers in life.Currently I’m dating a young Serbian girl who is very beautiful, cooks food to bring to me when she visits, and stays out of groupthink/mainstream culture.

    When I was in my earlier 20’s, a girl like this would have been boring and wanted too much commitment.At this point, I can appreciate her 7/8 looks and relative inexperience mixed with her more traditional values. Most guys WON’T be able to sleep with many women, and so CAN’T appreciate it from both sides. They merely get butthurt that girls are being sluts with OTHER guys, and STILL don’t want to settle down with them years later.

    Remember, the average guys is just that – average. Which currently to women is not compelling in the least. There is no way to avoid the bitching and whining, or talking sense to most people – they are unaware little fish being pushed around in a large school, swimming a tide and they have no control.

    The anger isn’t just bitterness, it’s helplessness..

    Like


  27. IN DEFENSE OF MATURE WOMEN

    Do not confuse Cougars with mature women. Cougars are ultra feminist beasts from hell who use power, wealth, and status to control and dominate younger men. The average mature good looking woman is not a cougar and would be highly offended by the term.

    I have dated both and prefer the older ones. Young girls today are too into their feminist religion etc. The older women have seen the true emptiness of their lives as a result of feminism and turned against it. Obviously they are in good shape, exercise, etc.

    Young Women are scatterbrained children until they reach 30 or so (the Romans knew this and that is why they needed a legal guardian until 35). If all you want is a fuck toy go ahead. I dont want just a fucktoy when I can get much more with a mature woman (and yes the sex is freaking awesome). Dont get your information from some guy on a blog. Let’s see what Ben Franklin advises young men–yah remember the guy who harnessed the power of lightning, numerous inventions, founding father, and professional ladies man says. In the link below he advises young men to take older women as mistresses because of their numerous advantages over younger spoiled brat girls(who according to the author are at their most witty).

    This is a must read

    http://grammar.about.com/od/classicessays/a/franklinmis.htm

    More importantly and Franklin addresses this–they are more grateful for your company than young feminist termagants. They know how to value a man and want a strong male presence. When I come over

    SEX

    Young women use sex as a tool to get something from a man. Mature women see it as an opportunity to prove their worth.

    Sex with mature women is better and on demand anytime anywhere. In fact every time I see her I get sex (3 days a week). Blow Jobs with swallowing every time without hesitation (with the occasional demand to for me to cum on her face), anal anytime I see fit. Also mature women are pretty adventurous. Blow Job on the 405 freeway in dense bumper to bumper traffic. At one point I had to put the car in park in the middle of the freeway to finish.This was not even my idea–she initiated it after I had removed her panties and fingered her as a tease in the car.

    Handjob in an ultra fancy restaurant (with a security camera overlooking us) while I fingered her and tasted her sweet essence.

    Quality of life When I see her Tues after work. She has a gourmet home cooked meal waiting for me with my favorite craft beer. After proper digestion we retire to the bedroom (naturally). I joke that all I need is my slippers and pipe and I would be in heaven.

    RESPECTS BOUNDARIES

    I dont get 10 texts per day from some desperate clingy girl who is unable to put together a complete sentence. Nor do I get phone calls or unexpected pop ins at my place. 1 text per week is about it. Very low maintenance in this way.

    Not a bad deal overall if done correctly. Rule–never date a mature woman who describes herself as a cougar. I had to lie about age to even get a first date with mine.

    Like


  28. Never met an unmarried woman over 30 who didn’t have a touch of the madness. Most are just completely fucking out of their minds.

    However, I do think women in their late 30’s-early 40’s who have held up their attractiveness are very alluring. I realize I’m an outlier, and I know they are a rare breed.

    But that combination of experience and cattiness just kind of works for me. So there you have it older ladies, stay fit and I’ll be happy to take you to bed.

    Like


  29. […] The supposed sophistication of the well-to-do cougar is nothing next to the firm rump, smooth skin a… […]

    Like


  30. I don’t think most guys who sing the praises of older women are sour graping. I mean, how many guys really really have no choice but to resort to an older woman. There are many, many less than stunning young women.

    What they’re doing is backwards rationalizing a desire.

    Humans, in general, work however they work, but some things are more socially acceptable than others. Any self reported behavior has to be viewed in that context.

    Historically and still, the few available and willing older women provide drama and mostly pregnancy worry free sex to young men, and for some strange reason, many find this appealing. Every once in awhile, a guy will encounter one who isn’t a cookie cutter copy of the next, and get attached, as guys tend to do when someone is giving them and receiving from them, phenomenal orgasms. He’ll then try to find logical reasons for his attachment to pull out for conversation with other guys who have issues with his choice because for some screwed up reason, guys today like to gossip like girls.

    When a guy actually tells you that he’s shagging “an older woman” as opposed to “a woman”, he is either seeking your approval or trying to get you to talk him out of something he hates himself for liking, both of which are disgusting displays of near faggotry.

    So I can’t really knock the author for getting the impression that these approval seeking dudes are, by and large, weak.

    However, lots of hot male tail who have choices, bang older women. We’re just one of many in the variety like the fat, the tall, the differently ethnic, the ginger, the differently able, the ones who like handcuffs, etc. Dudes with choices use them. Dudes with limitations nitpick and gossip about other people with choices’ choices.

    Like