Women Gossip To Compete For Men

Feminists are gonna blow an ovary reading this study. Perfect.

Although most researchers acknowledge the speculative nature of evolutionary arguments in this area, social aggression among reproductively viable females is usually interpreted as a form of mate competition. Hess and Hagen, for example, suggest that the sex differences uncovered in their study would likely have been even more pronounced in a younger group of participants. Evolutionarily, historically, and cross-culturally, they point out, girls in the fifteen- to nineteen-year-old range would be most actively competing for mates. Thus, anything that would sabotage another female’s image as a desirable reproductive partner, such as commenting on her promiscuity, physical appearance, or some other aberrant or quirky traits, tends to be the stuff of virile gossip.

File under: Women are the world’s worst misogynists.

So now science has come along to (re)prove what we all knew anecdotally: women, particularly younger women who are most desirable to men, gossip viciously as a means of tearing down the female competition for high quality men. So gossip is analogous to a woman stitching a verbal scarlet S (or F or H) onto the blouses of other women who would compete for the men she likes.

Stay classy, ladies.

You’ll notice as well that the sort of stuff women primarily gossip about — sluttiness, infidelity and fatness — to cut down their female competition, are exactly the character flaws and vices that feminists claim should be free from judginess, and accepted by everyone, especially men. Why do feminists focus on these things? Because they know they matter. Men really are less likely to commit to sluts, whores and fat chicks. And for good evolutionary reasons. (Not to mention good aesthetic and tactile reasons.)

An interesting question is why, if gossip is, presumably, evolutionarily adaptive as a means of reducing the mate value of sexual competitors, men don’t do the same thing? Where are all the male yentas tearing down the competition?

First, men have their own version of gossip; it’s called winning. Men kneecap male competitors by fighting and defeating them, physically, mentally or socially. Second, women are more intuitive than men are about reading subtext in gossip. A man who gossips about another man’s sexual prowess, or social savviness, or whatever, in the hopes of reducing his mate value is likely to be perceived by women as a second tier beta clumsily trying to undermine better men than himself. And gossip just doesn’t sit right on men; women are liable to think you’re gay if you prattle on about other men a lot.

Personally, I think a lot of female gossip is much less effective than believed by women. Men mostly judge women by how they look, so a guy is not going to stop boning out for a hot chick just because some mother hen gossiped about her disloyalty. But gossip is universal and still with us, so it must offer some mating advantage to women. My guess is that gossip which distills to slut smears (“she’s got crabs!”) is probably the most effective at handicapping a woman’s ability to snag a high value man into a long-term relationship. This is why women who aren’t broken losers are so mortified at the thought of being labeled a slut.

Like feminists who claim otherwise, they know it matters.





Comments


  1. Good post. This is universal too. Women make the same smears their rivals everywhere you go. The true value of this blog is its exposure and explanation of womens’ animal nature.

    Like


  2. Pyervi!

    Like


  3. Can’t believe this even takes a scientific study to demonstrate, this is just filed under “no duh” for any teenager or parent. Are social sciences so corrupt by the virus of feminism that this is even contested?

    Like


  4. This is why I wrote in the last thread a few times that I don’t need to be a control freak with some of the younger women in my MLTR who can’t stay away from the night clubs.

    I know their own friends might cut them down (rat them out) if they had a ONS.

    Just give one of their friends a bit of hope that she could someday be a replacement. That girl then becomes your spy, with the contract being unspoken an unsolicited.

    Like


    • I want to follow up with your comment from last thread here, because it may get lost on the other page. You said “They either willingly abide by my rules, which I lay down upfront, or they go elsewhere, voluntarily or otherwise.”

      Give me you reaction to 2 things.

      1) First what do you say to the idea of “giving ultimatums is beta and needy” https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2012/07/27/reader-mailbag-first-things-first-edition/

      Isn’t what you’re doing “laying it on the line,” how do you pull this off without looking insecure

      2) Nick Savoy re: managing a multiple relationship (a girl in a rotation). Claims

      ‘Never have an explicit conversation about starting a Multiple Relationship. This will turn women off because you will look like a player….

      Instead – somewhere between the 2nd and 5th time you sleep with the girl, tell her a story you’ve experienced in your recent past…. Tell a story where, embedded in the story, basically she can read between the lines where you were seeing multiple girls… and the girls basically enjoyed themselves and there was no weirdness. This will plant seed in her mind ahead of time.

      The reason not to have an explicit conversation, He says, is that girls generally only think a relationship is right if it ‘evolves naturally.’ So when you come up with a list of demands, it looks contrived and you look like a player.

      Even though no relationships evolve naturally (the guy makes it happen through game) a girl wants to think it just happened magically (Roosh has also posted on this)… so you have to frame the whole situation like it just evolved naturally… and that you’ve been through it in past (embedded story)… and you get her thinking on her own that she wants it

      Most important, about other guys, you cannot tell her not to see other guys. The reason is you are having your cake and eating it too, so she’s going to think she has the right to

      However he says ‘If you are good enough – if you are giving a girl everything she needs emotionally — many girls in a Multiple Relationship WILL NOT actually go after other guys…. even though they could’

      http://relationshipdvd.com/a

      Like


    • That is some good evil genius there. You could causally indicate to her less attractive friend that perhaps if you were not attached.. but you have to make sure she is not a lunatic or if she decides to sabotage your reputation to loosen things up as well.

      Like


  5. Personally, I think a lot of female gossip is much less effective than believed by women. Men mostly judge women by how they look, so a guy is not going to stop boning out for a hot chick just because some mother hen gossiped about her disloyalty.

    Women don’t gossip so that men will change their perceptions of them, they gossip to lower or raise the hierarchy of themselves and women within their own group of women. This gossip will knock another woman down a couple of pegs in the woman’s social group therefore raising another woman in her place.

    Yes, women will try to include men into this gossip, but she knows she runs the risk of looking like a bitch in doing this. The gossip she tells a man will be very different in tone and words than the gossip she tells a man.

    Like


  6. *Great* post- love having my eyes opened to a whole new aspect of women’s psych.

    Especially the correlation with youth. It’s pretty bad with married women too- the stakes are higher and they’re better at it.

    Like


  7. Surprised people needed a study for this. I thought it was just known that when one chick starts talking shit to you about another, it’s because she perceives a threat. With me it’s gotten to the point where if a woman starts viciously bad mouthing a friend/acquaintance, my interest level in the friend/acquaintance increases because I figure she must (a) be pretty awesome or (b) be interested in me to inspire that kind of hard core hating.

    Like


    • I think the gist of it is Woman A badmouths Friend B to cut down Friend B’s reputation, and to get Friend B to feel less confident and attractive, and less energetic about snagging one of the more desirable guys.

      Most women are mean girls to one extent or another, if you scratch the surface deeply enough.

      Like


    • Surprised people needed a study for this.

      Dirty little secret: we don’t need “studies” for any of this.

      We need art, literature, debate, aphorism, wit, rhetoric, theory, criticism, and first-hand observation. Quantifying a behavior whose righteousness we already feel in our gut is an attempt to lend our instincts the patina of “science,” which indicates a lack of confidence in the project, which indicates a failure of nerve.

      I say feminism is wrong, and then I proceed to demonstrate the truth of my assertion. Relying on nerds in labcoats to proclaim it for me undermines the foundation of this nascent movement. We don’t march to battle when Stephen Hawking’s Voice-O-Matic cries “‘Havoc! and let slip the dogs of war” from his crumpled frame in a wheelchair.

      Rather, we fight like we fuck. Methodically, yes, for what else would you call game besides a “method”? And, yes, we discipline our desires to properly satisfy them. But when the method becomes the foundation for our passion nine-times-removed, and when we discipline ourselves for the sake of discipline, the march to the martial drums becomes a saunter becomes a mope becomes a mass falling-off.

      Gameboys don’t fathom the danger of overcalculation, which goes with my theory that reformed omegas — seemingly the majority of PUAs — are tempted to retain an element of their former life as an incentive not to drift back to the bad days. That element manifests itself in applying old (and effective!) methodologies to new ends: instead of memorizing the rules of Dungeons & Dragons, they find satisfaction in new scriptures and new idols.

      Both D’n’D and Flirting for Dummies manuals carry a whiff of nerdishness for a reason. Men assert and demonstrate their will. They do not constantly analyze it or justify themselves. To the degree that “the unexamined life is not worth living,” yes, bring on the philosophical self-examination. But when that examination conflicts with manly assertion, it becomes counterproductive to the very ends that examination is attempting to bring about.

      Deferring one’s wisdom to scientists (and pseudo-scientists, at that) is a species of submission. Genghis Khan didn’t draw up Excel spreadsheets before he engaged in plunder and rapine. Alexander the Great slashed the Gordian Knot, he didn’t hand it off to a committee to study its twists and microfibers.

      Matt

      Like


      • How did rhetoric, theory and wit work out against feminism during the last half-century?… Rhetorical.

        Only game and “pseudo-science” succeeded to wake up a respectable number of men.

        Like


      • Why do we studies like this?

        To piss off feminists, not cause we don’t know any better.

        Like


      • Not to convince feminists. You’re not going to sway deranged women by well-reasoned argument. You might as well attempt to teach a rabid poodle to do calculus.

        That said, all the argument and mountains of scientific evidence presented here serves a vital and definite purpose. That purpose is to get the men who are currently indifferent to or on the fence about feminism (and other forms of manboobed blank slatist ideology) to wake up and realize that the folks who peddle the fembot ideology are:

        1. full of shit
        2. hateful deviants trying to screw up the lives of men and their families, by any means necessary
        3. a clear and present danger, because they have been quite successful at it thus far

        Like


      • Hey, whatever gets the truth out there. And because ABC News has been peddling scientism as the One True God for a half-century, perhaps we will have to translate it into the “science” idiom to reach the duller cohorts.

        But if you are going to use a tool, understand its limitations. A nail clipper is not a good instrument to chop down a tree. A chainsaw isn’t the best way to carve a pot roast.

        Men aren’t as dumb as the feminists assume them to be. So why do we engage in the pseudoscientific superstitions that originated and sustain the feminist movement? It’s because most men have been educated in this hateful climate to think there is nothing out there with the legitimacy to challenge feminist dogmas.

        “The ‘latest science’ says men are equal to women, except for the penis! Which is useless! Since turkey basters were invented! It’s the End of Men! Doctor Phil told me, and he is a doctor!”

        “I don’t care what Dr. Phil, your BFF, or your cuckold husband says. I say they are full of shit. How do you know that? Because I am the authority and you listen to me. The end.”

        If you haven’t had the pleasure of instructing a woman thusly, you are missing an important part of your alpha mojo.

        If you do not already intuit that this is how feminism will be, as Machiavelli says, beaten back into place like a woman, then you are beta by natural disposition and you have much work yet to do. “Fortune is a woman, and if you wish to keep her under it is necessary to beat and ill-use her; and it is seen that she allows herself to be mastered by the adventurous rather than by those who go to work more coldly.”

        Dorks take pride in being the fact that their special brand of intellectual bootlicking pays dividends these days because pseudoscience is the fad-idol of the age. But submissiveness is submissiveness, intellectual or physical.

        There is no dishonor in submitting to the truth! Just make sure it is in fact the truth, and not the emanations of omega-stink wafting up from the laboratories of obsessive gradgrinds.

        So you haven’t factored in this complication. Fine. But for the thought never to have occurred is an indication of one’s rank in the natural order of men. As long as you are beholden to philosophies you have not explored, have failed to understand, or worst, are not even conscious of, you will remain their bitch.

        “For my part I consider that it is better to be adventurous than cautious…” prefaces Machiavelli.

        I agree. Deep down in the tingly places, women do too.

        Matt

        Like


      • on August 28, 2012 at 2:44 am Mr. Pointyface

        Nice. Holding up Genghis Khan, Alexander the City-Slaughterer as ideals.

        Now we know what life will be like under people who would rule like you think.

        A spirited palette of genocide, medieval religion enforced Gubmint, and– well we’ll think of a LOT of things that SO SADLY NECESSARY to do before we…. get dragged off like Qadaffi…

        Like


  8. I wouldve thought gossip is more about women trying to up their status in the female pecking order.

    Like


    • Same difference, if you know what I mean

      Like


      • No it’s not. Woman who get all the attention from dudes usually get nothing but claws and death stares from other chicks. The chicks in relationships especially. They think everyone wants to steal their man.lol

        Like


    • The two are the same thing.

      The Female Social Matrix has evolved to keep any one woman from dominating the group (it only takes two women to form a node of the Matrix) and destroying the perceived consensus. The whole point of the Matrix is to safeguard the genetic health of the tribe, enable a “distribution” of males to females in an orderly way, and essentially control mating in a group through female solidarity and consensus.

      That’s why women need five forms of confirmation that Johnny is “the One” before they believe it themselves. That’s also why undermining another woman’s mating status by gossip is so prevalent and so easy: every woman is poised to believe the absolute worst about another woman in the Matrix in the belief that it will improve her mating position by comparison. Since positions in the Matrix are not absolute (say, as men position themselves through achievement and respect) but relative to each other, then establishing one’s place within the Matrix through comparison is essential.

      So destroying even a low-ranking member of a given Matrix will elevate a woman via hamsterbation by putting a greater relative distance between the two within the Matrix. As in, “sure, I’ve slept with a lot of guys…but Jenny had a threesome! That slut!” or “you wouldn’t suspect her of it, but that whore has slept with four other women’s husbands! I mean, I had that one fling, but he was a stranger, not some friend’s man!”. Hence the intense scrutiny of celebrity gossip mags and other periodicals: they are an evolved form of tribal gossip.

      Like


  9. It has to do with subconscious control. Being under someone’s thumb makes you less likely to voluntarily act outside of the controller’s own patterns. It is a purposeful control play to waste the most fertile years of a girl’s life.

    No feminist is encouraging young girls to marry early. You could easily associate that with simple emnity.

    Like


  10. “Evolutionarily, historically, and cross-culturally, they point out, girls in the fifteen- to nineteen-year-old range would be most actively competing for mates.”

    Walking through the mall last night, was struck once again by how so many girls peak at 15-16 y/o, then its all downhill for them. No wonder they’re so fucked in the head.

    Like


    • Yeah it’s really sad. I’d like to think all the hot girls are just off at college or hanging out in bars or some shit but then I see pictures of the cute legal aged bar girls when they were just 1 or 2 years youiger and it’s so sad. They were gorgeous little barbie sluts and now they’re white trash beer guzzlers.

      After 21, it’s an express train to The Wall, which in my opinion, is an overrated album despite having a few GREAT songs.

      Like


    • Which reminds me..”Dogs”, by Pink Floyd is an excellent song about what traits you need to exhibit in order to be successful in this cut throat world.

      And I’m also reminded that I should stay away from malls because I’m tempted to grab a few of those 16 yr old pink-as-a-bunny-nose-pussies and go to town.

      Like


    • Quite true. 50+ years ago one would be very hard pressed to find a teenage skank in Anytown, USA. You would really have to dig through the trashiest part of town. Now the country, formally known as America, is overrun with teen whores.

      Like


  11. […] Women Gossip To Compete For Men: Feminists are gonna blow an ovary reading this study. Perfect. Although most researchers acknowledge the speculative nature of evolutionary arguments in this area, social aggression among reproductively viable females is usually interpreted as a form of mate competition. Hess and Hagen, for example, suggest that the sex differences uncovered in their study would likely have been even more pronounced in a younger group of participants. Evolutionarily, historically, and cross-culturally, they point out, girls in the fifteen- to nineteen-year-old range would be most actively competing for mates. Thus, anything that would sabotage another female’s image as a desirable reproductive partner, such as commenting on her promiscuity, physical appearance, or some other aberrant or quirky traits, tends to be the stuff of virile gossip. […]

    Like


  12. “First, men have their own version of gossip; it’s called winning.”

    Now there’s some gossip I’m willing to invest in.

    Like


  13. This also explains why when a woman tries to set you up with her friend, the friends is inevitably tragically flawed. And if her friend is hot, she’ll say, “oh, you don’t want to date her, she’s crazy”.

    Introduce me to the crazy girl, please.

    Like


  14. Female reader here, nodding a lot. Love this study — it makes a lot of sense.

    Another evolutionary/social perspective I read about that clicked was the use of gossip as a form of social control; women are constantly monitoring the subtextual emotional and moral response of the other women listening to their story. In addition to feeding women one of their prime forms of emotional crack (aka Righteous Indignance) gossip allows women to learn what’s “okay” and what’s “not okay” in the eyes of ‘society’… which will always be the eyes of the group of women they’re associated with.

    Women lie, confabulate and embellish a lot when they gossip, too; it’s not just a straight exchange of scandalous facts. I think it’s a subconscious way to run a virtual reality scenario — a test of whether some kind of status-seeking behavior would be approved of or not, and to what degree.

    It’s not just schadenfreude or the enjoyment of taking another woman down a few notches with a gossipy story — it’s also a pure vicarious thrill, an imagined secondhand experience of being the kind of girl “who could get away with it”. (Aka, a higher-value, hotter girl.)

    Like


    • Yeah woman talking is like men fighting.

      Like


      • I would say, rather, more like men competing. We can usually find a non-violent way to metaphorically whip out our genitals and decide who’s bigger. But once that’s established, it’s usually fairly set. Women, on the other hand, have an expiration date on their mating behavior that enforces a constant awareness of the opinions and actions of other women. They are, by nature, more subtle and more duplicitous than men.

        Like


    • No-one else moderately surprised by her post? A woman showing insight and offering a good contribution….rare and welcome.

      Like


      • Even a blind squirrel finds an occasion acorn.

        Like


      • I don’t know. That post looks more like fetal exposure to some kind of androgen that causes unusual rational thinking for her sex. It happens.

        Like


      • The name “Katrinka” suggests she’s Eastern European.

        Like


      • on August 26, 2012 at 11:50 pm driveallnight

        That, or she’s just stupid and really hates New Orleans.

        Like


      • Corvinus – This is my middle name, given for my great-grandmother, who was Swedish. I’m an American citizen, though I spent most of my life overseas.

        Like


      • No. She fits the female researcher profile. Grad student or PHD hopeful in some sociology type major is my guess.

        Like


      • Evilalpha – No, I’m not an academic. And thank goodness — grad school’s a 200k coffin. 🙂

        Like


      • Yup, but official academic or not, all your accumulated diehard Feminism means you walk and talk like that duck. It’s easy for everyone here to see you were an insider of some sort. Note the response.

        Like


      • Thanks for that, LD. I don’t think my observations are particularly original (and Ian Ironwood restated/expanded on them much more succinctly than I ever could) and I very rarely comment on manosphere blogs because 1.) I don’t think it’s my place or right to do so, and am generally unimpressed by the way women try to elbow their way into these conversational spaces, and 2.) My personal opinion is simply irrelevant to the larger arc of the conversation.

        The only worthwhile contribution I feel I have to offer on occasion is a confirmation, or a mirrored viewpoint from deep behind enemy lines, so to speak. Since I’m female, it’ll always be filtered through the solipsism of my personal experience, which happens to be specifically well-suited to some of the topics that come up in the manosphere. (To paraphrase from Liam Neeson’s character in ‘Taken’: What I _do_ have are a very particular set of experiences.)

        Whether or not those contributions are considered worthwhile is completely up to the rational discretion of the reader(s). The interest in commenting, for me, stems from altruistic gratitude: I’ve learned more about myself, my family and the underpinnings of the modern world from thinkers like Heartiste than I have from any parent, schoolteacher, therapist, book or ideology. If there’s something I can offer respectfully in return, I will occasionally hit ‘Post’ to do so.

        …And then go back to shutting the h*** up, as I should.

        Like


    • No-one else moderately surprised by her post? A woman showing insight and offering a good contribution….rare and welcome.

      Not at all. “Red pill” women are a sorely underutilized resource in the gameomanopuasphere.

      Segregation is still important: a man needs a place to unwind without the temptation of female presence. Consciously and otherwise, women wind-up men just by being around.

      However, 1) these girls amount to “double agents.” They observe feminism as practiced (or ignored) in the ladies’ room, and they share it with us under our terms. This is valuable information that we cannot obtain any other way.

      And 2) female presence rightly understood serves as a check on masculine excesses, like mindless tall tales and locker-room talk from insecure commenters engaged in pissing contests. Not to mention that they act as a governor on the hyper-quant habit of vivisecting a phenomenon with numbers, theories, and jargon, the sublime but frequently deleterious trait of (especially white) men who dorkify living things to death, producing either nuclear weapons and landings on the moon, or Rotisserie Baseball leagues and Star Trek Wikis. Feminine judgment used to make the world go round — until we officially institutionalized it in a fit of political drunkenness.

      Just as men act differently in the presence of a woman, especially a gorgeous one, women act differently in the presence of even one man, even an unattractive schlub omega. And, contrary to common metrosexual wisdom, this applies to fag hags too; though gay men devoutly desire differently, they are still Y-chromosome among the X’s. In a gaggle of hens, the penis is an interloper, a foreign substance swimming with the estrogen antibodies. Women adjust accordingly, subtly, involuntarily. Therefore, external observation of women inside their element is skewed by the very presence of the male observer — a kind of Schrödinger’s pussy paradox, where interaction itself corrupts the sample. Outsider reports are nothing compared to the observations of an honest woman who is uncorrupted by feminism.

      However, as the very few women who frequent these sites tell me, they have to deal with spastic, quasi-reformed betas attempting to “neg” them constantly. The alpha wannabes make themselves pests in an attempt to prove, mostly to themselves, that they can get under a woman’s skin online. Not only is this practice pointless, counterproductive, and ignorant of the uses and abuses of negging; it drives away valuable information from women who are on our side.

      Matt

      Like


      • I don’t write star trek wiki but I do love memory alpha lol Having said that there are currently two 18 yr old cuties browsing uni courses next to me in the library who are into sci-fi and horror sci-fi ooooing and ahhhhing at the lgbt and indie music societies….so apparently sci-fi is now ‘cool’…

        Like


      • Sci fi is cool… star stek isn’t. Unless it’s the new J.J. Abrams movies, those are cool too – but just to watch, not to obsess endlessly about (as I gather the nerds have done with the TV show/s).

        Like


      • There is nothing useful or original women can say on the matter of game. Every time a woman does say something useful, it is something that has already been stated/discovered by another man. If CH started suddenly teaching us to become beta males, the women here would simply agree. They would not jump forward to correct his errors. So, let the negs drive women away. The women here either agree to fit in, or disagree to lead men astray. Why else would women come anywhere near this blog?

        “Dont listen to what women say. Look at what they do.”

        Like


      • I admire your focus but you’re being dogmatic, Iron John.

        Like


      • >> “Why else would women come anywhere near this blog?”

        John –

        I can’t speak for any other women, but as for myself: I come to this blog and others like it for a good bracing dose of the truth, a metric ton of reality checks (they’re in short supply out there in the rest of the world) and some insight into how I can better support the men in my life, directly and indirectly.

        Like


      • Matthew King –

        Your Point #1 is the primary reason why I chose to break silence in this instance to comment.

        I’m very aware of the importance of segregation, and consider such sites to be sacrosanct male spaces, regardless of how much personal value I derive from reading quietly along. I’ve noticed the ‘wind-up’ effect you mentioned with past female commenters, and I don’t want to contribute to that cycle, which is why I’ll be withdrawing shortly.

        I don’t expect anyone to roll out a welcome mat for me. And rather than being ‘chased off’ by negative comments — it’s more that I know this isn’t my space to set up camp.

        Unfortunately, in 2012 it’s almost a physical impossibility to encounter a woman totally uncorrupted by feminism unless you reach into deeply isolated societies. (Also doable, but difficult for the sake of discourse.) Some of us are committed to excising the corruption as far as we can be made aware of it in ourselves, though.

        Like


      • “Unfortunately, in 2012 it’s almost a physical impossibility to encounter a woman totally uncorrupted by feminism” – ironically, being an anti-feminist from an early age requires a girl to have reduced conformity tendencies and the ability to think for herself, given how the schools brain-wash kids about how girls are just as intellectually capable, pushing them towards science, and all that (though the fact that they’re actively doing that in the first place shows exactly how there isn’t equality between the sexes – otherwise it wouldn’t be necessary in the first place!). This might be expected to correlate with reduced femininity, but given how extreme feminists are more masculine while still being exceptionally herd-like, those qualities may actually be independent. Anyway, just my 2 cents.

        Like


      • Katrinka, don’t abandon this community because your presence is contrary to the ideal. The movement is too young for us to nitpick and ostracize over idealisms. The recently-liberated former-chumps who despise your opinions and your very presence do not reign here. Even a woman’s erroneous conclusions are valuable to the cause. And if you slip into trollery, we can handle it.

        I have control of myself; I can generally filter out the woman’s “wind-up,” and so your presence is nothing but positive for me. At the same time, the unwashed masses are thrown off by the slightest sign of La Différence, so I appreciate the selflessness and foresight animating your thoughts of withdrawal.

        I encourage you to start your own forum or join the growing number of “red-pill” women at places like Stingray’s site.

        Bless you, sister, and godspeed.

        Matt

        Like


  15. PS: If anyone ever wonders what the draw to feminism might be for some women, given that it’s completely irrational and obviously harmful pseudoscience, remember: Disapproving indignance, and the experience of having it mirrored back to you, is chick crack.

    Take the words and specifics out, and you’ll find that the “tone” and conversational tactics are no different between a group of girls discussing the Kardashian show, and a group of women in an ‘intellectual’ political meeting.
    .

    Like


    • Good observation.

      Like


      • Good observation for a woman, but not for a man. This should be elementary knowledge for us.

        Like


      • Why should it be elementary knowledge? Does it actually matter for any practical purpose?

        Like


      • Yes it matters. Simplification saves a man time and energy. Women in the office… act like women on the street…. act like women in politics…act like

        Like


      • Oh sure, you can see how they act, just the ‘why’ bit (the “indignance”, which was the point of comment) hardly matters – only thing that matters is how you deal with it.

        Like


      • @anonymous

        If you don’t know the ‘why’ then the “how” is too often blind luck. Understanding is much more practical than wrote

        Like


    • That’s a fascinating idea! Take any group of women talking on video and mute it before you know what they’re talking about. Then try to guess the subject based on their group dynamic and individual performance. I’m guessing that the changes in dynamic would reflect each woman’s level of security and confidence about the particular subject (nerd girls being more aggressive and competent in some areas, while less confident in others) but would all follow the same consensus building/consensus betraying pattern.

      Something else that’s chick crack? The perception of consensus and solidarity, with the possibility of being able to personally control that consensus.

      Like


    • It’s so sad when a poor unsuspecting girl posts an original idea that triggers the indignant disapproval of her peers. She was totally expecting validation and is completely taken off-guard by the hostility.

      Like


      • It’s all about frame.
        By posting an original idea, she imposes her frame on us, and admitting that she’s right and insightful means entering her frame and handing her a bit of authority.

        I, and others, refuse it. I prefer to die rather than taking orders or being under the authority of a woman, no matter how smart or commanding she is.

        The extension of this is refusing to acknowledge the “accomplishments” of a female, other than giving birth, raising/protecting children and supporting a husband. Those are the only accomplishments that would earn her my respect and that I would wholeheartedly applaud.

        Like


    • You just solved the link between pederasty and educational institutions of antiquity.

      chick crack is boy crack
      therefore boys like boy crack

      Like


  16. Other women’s sexuality can be threatening, so it needs to be controlled. Being too provocative is the quickest way to make other women dislike you. Women need other women throughout their lives. If a woman can’t find a way of bonding with other women, she is an inferior mate choice.

    Like


    • Or it can work in your favour as a woman. If a woman is all provocative and a powerful, well connected man is somehow caught in her trap, being friends with her can have its advantages – as long as she knows you are not after her man.

      Like


    • I find that beautiful, sexy women tend to be lonely for female friends so if you play your cards right and play down your own looks to be friends with them, you can share in their benefits without having to nab a man yourself – like going on shopping trips or girlies weekends away, courtesy of her rich boyfriend.

      Like


      • Are you for real? Play down your own looks to be someone else’s tagalong? Forget that! Play UP your own looks and get your own man 🙂

        Like


      • Girlies week-ends getaways… rich boyfriends footing the bill?

        Sheesh, don’t interrupt her while she’s two-thirds through her Sex In The City marathon.

        Like


      • I’m not saying a vacation with friends wouldn’t be fun, I just don’t think anybody should be sublimating their own chances at happiness to be some sort of female eunuch friend. Personally, I refuse to be a fat, ugly, slut (which is what *some* women would prefer I be) in order to blend into the social fabric and not be a threat to them. The sacrifice is *some* female companionship. But, ultimatly, do i fantasize about one day finding that perfect female friend to vacation with or about having a husband. Pretty simple choice.

        Like


      • But, ultimatly, do i fantasize about one day finding that perfect female friend to vacation with or about having a husband.

        Didn’t you get the memo… you’re a fabulous, empowered woman with no need to compromise… in short, you can have BOTH!

        /and hubby pays the freight!!!

        Like


      • Nope, I have never gotten the memo. If I did, I threw it away as junk mail. If I am ever again safely married, it would likely follow that certain women would be more pleasant.

        Like


      • I don’t know why I’d have to play down my looks. I wouldn’t go after her boyfriend, anyway. There’s plenty of other men out there.

        Like


      • 90% of whom aren’t ‘attractive’

        Like


  17. “Personally, I think a lot of female gossip is much less effective than believed by women.”

    I suspect that in the evolutionary frame such gossip could result in lethality – women certainly seem to play it as if it is a deadly game.

    Imagine a foreign woman who comes into the tribe and becomes the Alpha’s number 1; the women of the tribe would be highly motivated to bring her down, kill her children, and instill one of their cousins or sisters on the throne.

    Even if it doesn’t turn lethal, it prevents individual women from rising above the herd; nowadays it also helps guarantee that they all go down together as broken sluts, by targeting healthy relationships..

    Like


    • One little problem with that is we no longer live in tribes. The whole scenario is borderline irrelevant. Gossip never gets very far and people have played telephone and know not to take everything at face value.

      Like


      • No longer live in “tribes”? Really? Ever heard of facebook?

        You are stupid.

        Like


      • What is it with you guys and facebook? Do you think my whole life is on facebook or anyone elses? Shit talkers become known as shit talkers i.e. the Boy Who Cried Wolf. Y’all just get mad when one of us alerts the others to your m.o. what everyone does with that info is on them. No need to get mad there will always be dumb bitches who won’t listen or in the case of dudes ; dudes who think with their dick instead of listening to people who have no reason to lie but that chick being a psycho bitch.

        Like


      • “Gossip never gets very far”
        Then
        “Y’all just get mad when one of us alerts the others to your m.o.”

        Bitch is crazy.

        Like


  18. “Take the words and specifics out, and you’ll find that the “tone” and conversational tactics are no different between a group of girls discussing the Kardashian show, and a group of women in an ‘intellectual’ political meeting.”

    Very insightful. Should be in the running for comment of the week.

    Like


    • Comment of the week? For a chick? On CH?

      I’m not feeling it, bro. It could create a vortex.

      Like


      • Mine? Good gravy, no. I’ve already read ten or fifteen comments in the last three days alone that’d make MUCH better CotWs.

        But, speaking as a recovering former feminist who spent the early half of the 2000’s in more ‘young radical organizing’ meetings than I want to count, I can assure you: those conversations sound exactly the same as a sorority house discussing reality television, right on down to vocal modulation. The tones of voice, the opinion-policing, the nitpicking over word choice, the endless “I feel” monologues, the thinly-veiled teardowns of “women with more privilege” (aka, the more skinny/feminine/pretty/white ones), the circular emotion-focused hamstering … it’s all there. The only difference is the surface subject matter: feminists and activists get their Indignance-Porn fix from politicized news stories and academic theory, as opposed to People magazine. Same covert female jockeying and dopamine rushes, different vocabulary.

        I only wish I’d had the red pill foresight to record some of those meetings and conversations. Simultaneously lulzy and horrifying.

        I finally hit ‘eject’ because I was sick of being made to feel guilty for being thin, white, and having a healthy respect for my father. Any ladies reading: you haven’t truly experienced “the sisterhood” until you’ve felt the poisonous silent burn behind the eyes of a woman when you say _anything_ positive or admiring about a man in your life who uses his authority. (And I could write a thesis about what happens when you’re heterosexual and openly attracted to truly masculine men.) You will be stamped with the scarlet letter of “internalized misogyny” forevermore.

        I’m going to hold off from ranting about how hypergamy, hamsters, and pure Game principles play out to the *letter* in groups of women who think they’re lesbians, beyond the “gender binary” or “polyamorous”, but… suffice to say: CH, I am one of the walking wounded from deep behind enemy lines, and let me tell you: You’ve got it right.

        Like


      • Fascinating! Why did you join that radical feminist organization in the first place, if I may ask? What was the draw?

        Like


      • Using “fascinating” makes you sound like a fanboy.
        Just sayin’…

        Like


      • Noted. I used it to mean “this scenario significantly deviates from scenarios I’ve encountered so far, seems like there’s much that could be learned from it” – didn’t know there’s a particular social connotation for the term.

        Like


      • Anonymous –

        It wasn’t so much a specific feminist organization (there were many groups that I worked for/with at various times) as much as a loose-knit social activist “scene” stretching up and down the West Coast, with pockets in places like Austin, New Orleans, as well as the liberal East Coast metropolitan areas. They were booming at the time, and the growth pattern could probably be paralleled to the “Occupy movement” now.

        …The “why” is multifaceted, and I know I only have a limited ability for self-awareness in hindsight, given my personal hamsters.

        I can try to answer the “what was the [external] draw?” question, though:

        1.) I was in my pre- and early teens. As everyone already knows, teenage girls, in the absence of enforced guiding principles from an outside authority, make terrible decisions for themselves. Due to the fractured state of my family structure, I was a very introspective kid, with the primary question in my mind being, “How am I supposed to conduct myself correctly in the world?” In the absence of any strong response to this question, the faux-moralizing of feminism (with all of its attendant fake do-good “shoulds”) presented itself as the loudest contender for _some_ kind of moral framework. And since Western society was already well on its way in being femi-washed, particularly in the lefty-liberal areas where I was located, there was nobody to question or challenge the “bleeding edge” of feminism — there was only tacit approval from the outside.

        2.) I was starving for real, healthy, feminine continuity. I grew up without grandparents (they all died young) or access to any extended family. I had no cross-generational female role models outside of my alcoholic post-‘Second Wave’ mother and her friends, who were the first generation to begin to ride the cock carousel of the sixties and seventies before settling in to torment their husbands because they “weren’t haaaaaapy”. I _knew_ with the intuition of a child that something was wrong, though I couldn’t put my finger on it.

        One of the unspoken (and broken) promises of feminism is that somehow, somewhere there is a room full of women of all ages — grandmothers, mothers, young women — sitting together at relative peace with themselves, supporting each other and their families and teaching each other how to really _live correctly_, with value, in the world. I very badly wanted to find that room, that sense of intergenerational wisdom and cultural authority that might help me navigate feelings and urges I didn’t know how to handle as a child or a teen.

        Feminism, with its “rooms full of women”, offers a twisted mirage of that place, while simultaneously undermining all of the things that might make it possible. But it doesn’t exist in the feminist world; there’s only fighting and more fighting, backstabbing the very people (men) who make modern life possible, with a rewriting of the “script” every decade or so. I’m not sure that that room I was looking for exists, even in the more traditional corners of Western society, at this point — the only place I ever found an inkling of it was in some of the societies of non-Western countries where I traveled as a child. And even those are being threatened by the spread of Western cultural globalization.

        3.) Alphas. This might seem counterintuitive at first glance, or maybe something that CH readers are already aware of, but: the feminist activist movement is _full_ of women directly aping male alpha behavior, mannerisms, and visual presentation to varying degrees. Many of them are pulling off the facsimile so well that they can “out-alpha” men in certain milieus, particularly in lefty-liberal areas. This is why stories of suddenly-emerging bisexualism or girls leaving their boyfriends/husbands for other women is on the rise. Change the pronouns on 16 Commandments, and you’ve just described the very women who are considered highest-value, “top of the heap” and running the ‘lesbian’ SMP, and by extension feminist activism circles. This might seem irrelevant to Game, but it actually reinforces every principle of it: women aren’t attracted primarily by looks, so it doesn’t matter how objectively unattractive that super-butch dyke is: if she knows how to display a shadow version of alpha traits, she can be pussy catnip, both to low-SMV women who might not otherwise ever *have* the chance at alpha attention, and to higher-SMV women who never get crossed or challenged by their environment. (And very few people in this day and age can neg a woman more naturally than a woman.)

        For myself, I was operating in a masculinity vacuum; a combination of the high school I was attending, a personal wariness of alcohol that made the ‘partying’ guys in the available social circles register as ‘poor self-control’ rather than attractive, and no male authority figures outside of a handful of (very supplicating, lefty/liberal) teachers. In hindsight, it was absolutely no surprise that I practically fell over with a case of the tingles when a 6’2″ 19-year-old dyke running pure, cold James Dean game showed up and started talking about “activism” and “the patriarchy”, _and_ had the temerity to tell me when she thought I was wrong. My visceral response to the display of even a female imitation of alpha behaviors was so strong that I thought it must mean I was gay… and of course, I started tagging along to meetings.

        In other words: Game, and red pill concepts, are what brought me to the door of explicit feminism. (They’re also what snapped me out of it. But that’s a longer story.) I can’t speak for other girls, but after observing various trends and tendencies from up close and afar… I highly doubt that I’m a special little snowflake.

        Like


      • Quite interesting. So in theory, to get out of the current state, we need not only to fix #3 (which CH and other manosphere writers are working towards), but also #1&2, which mean giving young girls good feminine role models to look up to. The main problem is that any proper feminine women would have no real desire for power over others, but rather would prefer to just stick to caring for their partner/family. Maybe this is the sort of thing you’d have ideas about? You seem like a girl with a good head on her shoulders (don’t listen to guys who say that this can’t be true because you’re a woman, being introspective aware of your own biases is by itself pretty major), so while you may not have much to contribute to the topics regarding the promoting of male alphaness, you might actually be able to contribute to the female end of things (since attacking feminists, no matter the method, isn’t likely to change them, but the younger girls perhaps could still be saved from going in that path, by giving them a good alternative that would resonates better with their girly sensibilities). For kids in particular, it’s not enough to tell them that some action/direction isn’t good, it’s important to provide a good alternative.

        Like


      • Bully for you!

        Gentlemen, let us barbeque a fatted calf in celebrating the return of our prodigal daughter!

        Like


      • How could you even take those people seriously? If I were your father, I would have stopped talking to you.

        Like


      • Nah. A couple sessions with the belt would have put her on the path to wellness.

        Like


      • Matthew King —

        It probably would have! My father shied away from corporal punishment, though, since his dad was full-on ‘dark triad’ and he spent most of his childhood trying to protect his mother and siblings from house-smashing drunken rages. (I think due to this he lost sight of the fact that ‘dominant’ does not mean the same thing as ‘destructively domineering’.)

        Really, though, I respond to masculine authority so well that all it would have taken with me was a couple stern talkings-to and maybe some punctuating table-pounding to get the point through. That authority still needed to be _displayed_, though.

        Like


      • Now there’s a good girl.

        We don’t only use your bottom for punishment. Sometimes we give it a slap for encouragement, and you’ve earned yourself two.

        Matt

        Like


      • Tyrone –

        That’s a good question, and one that I still have trouble answering for myself. Mostly, I think I was a young stupid teenage girl with very few critical thinking skills in place, and no external authority. I also outlined the initial ‘draw’ in response to Anonymous’ question above — it was a long comment, so I think it’ll take another half-day to get through the filter and post.

        My father was gone most of the time due to work, which took him to the other side of the world for two to three months at a time. My mom (alcoholic) “ran wild” in his absence and I had to be there to pick up her pieces and make sure dinner got made for my siblings.

        I think he didn’t really understand the depth or negative impact of my involvement–he was just exhausted when he came home and relieved that I wasn’t getting pregnant, in rehab, partying or riding in cars with boys he couldn’t vet or trust. He just saw it as some “extracurricular” thing I was doing that would keep me out of other forms of more overt trouble, and look good on a college application.

        Years later, during a particularly difficult conversation about a different past issue, I asked him as gently as I could, “Dad, why didn’t you tell me ‘no’?”

        His response was: “Your mother would have gutted me.”

        This was part of a pattern.

        Like


      • Congratulations for seeing those groups for what they are – the true “hate” groups that hide behind victim-hood…

        Like


      • Interesting. I have noted before that attractive women often cannot congregate with unattractive women and generally report a preference to being around men. Now it seems obvious the pull on the one hand, but less obvious is the ejection from female circles. This is probably behind the fag hag effect and beta male friend phenomena.

        The reason why they hate you from a power dynamic perspective is that you have control and access to that male authority. A particularly attractive girl benefits from male power immensely. Consider ladies the fate that awaits you in the sisterhood where your status will not only cease to be high, it will actually put you on the bottom of their order.

        Like


  19. on August 25, 2012 at 3:00 pm Popo the Entertainment Monkey

    Funny, our local womans magazine had article “Why women backstab and slander each other, now more than ever?” Reason according to article was because of…..drumroll…equality.

    Like


    • “Equality” is hamstereese for “the perception of consensus”. Women all want to be equal. They merely want to personally be slightly more equal than all the others. Every woman strives for consensus in public while plotting for control or influence of the perceived consensus in private.

      Like


  20. on August 25, 2012 at 3:21 pm ThatNorwegianGuy

    “First, men have their own version of gossip; it’s called winning.” Made me laugh out loud; best Heartiste quote in a while.

    Like


  21. This study reminds me of the academic paper… “Cultural Suppression of Female Sexuality” by Baumeister & Tweng in Review of General Psychology, vol 6 (2002).

    Baumeister doesn’t disappoint. In brief, the authors show how the slut shaming that double-standard-hating-feminists complain about, comes from… wait for it… comes mostly from other (esp. younger) women.

    You can’t find a better quote than this one here from the paper’s abstract:

    “Instead [of men doing the slut shaming], the evidence favors the view that women have worked to stifle each other’s sexuality because sex is a limited resource that women use to negotiate with men, and scarcity gives women an advantage.”

    Like


  22. “Feminists are gonna blow an ovary reading”

    Not going to happen.

    The approaching hazard is the collapse of their hallowed husk of an ovary that already struggles to produce usable estrogen from its sludge .

    Like


  23. A wise man once said:

    Females call their competition “sluts”.
    Males call their competition “losers”.

    If you consider the roles of the sexes, this makes perfect sense.

    Like


    • Both terms are meant to reference what the opposite sex values most – at least for long term relationships.

      Like


  24. “why, if gossip is, presumably, evolutionarily adaptive as a means of reducing the mate value of sexual competitors, men don’t do the same thing?”

    PUAs stole some of this tactic from women for one of our AMOG tactics. We do it really subtle so it’s not as blatantly jealous/catty/gay as when girls do it. If a guy is talking to a girl I’m into and it looks like it’s going well, I’ll go to her friends and laugh as I drop a “wow who’s that creepy guy Sarah’s talking to?” comment to her friend. “oh, what? She LIKES him? lol oh my mistake then, never mind. I just saw him talking to some other girls earlier so I figured he was one of those creepy pickup guys. (totally sincere voice tone) It’s cool, I’m sure he’s really a nice dude, forget I said anything.”

    Then I sip my drink with this face on:

    …and let the girls start gossiping about the guy and looking at everything he does through the lens I gave them (while I 180 and completely defend the guy because I know that will just make them more adamant about how creepy he is till its to the point where I’M the one going “no he’s a nice guy he just likes her” and THEY’RE the ones going “no you don’t understand, this guy is up to something!!” lol) and inevitably they cockblock him, leaving me free to game her (plus now I have a bond with her friends, AND I wasn’t talking shit about the guy so I’m in the clear on all fronts “ya I don’t know why your friends scared that guy off, he seemed cool we did a shot earlier. Well maybe he has a GF or something and didn’t want to fight with your friends, who knows, hey it’s last call let’s all go get some food”).

    He has no idea what happened and I don’t get my face punched in lol and I pick up where he left off and transfer her buying temperature from him to me:

    http://www.seductionbase.com/seduction/cat/advanced/271.html

    This was one of my main AMOG tactics because I don’t like getting into fights and, really, this is pretty funny to watch in action. It’s very consistent and follows pretty much the same pattern each time. Dance for me, puppets! lol

    Like


  25. Thank you. I just shared this with my new niece-in-law and all her Air Force pals.

    Like


  26. Great post

    Another aspect of the clucking of hens is that gossip is rationalization hamster ego feed.

    When women engage in nasty gossip about a rival female, they are also making themselves feel superior to the target of their slander. The more they know deep down that the object of their derision is better than themselves (better looking, nicer personality, more popular with desirable men etc.) the nastier they’ll get with their gossip.

    Like


  27. on August 25, 2012 at 7:47 pm Johnycomelately

    Grit
    Great analysis.

    So from an evo psych perspective feminists, as a mating strategy, are trying to devalue competing females (young and nubile) by holding up flaws as virtues so as to increase their own market value.

    Like


    • on August 26, 2012 at 2:47 pm Thinkingaboutit

      I think its much simpler than that. Most leading feminists are ugly, dykes or both. These characteristics would result in them being at the bottom of the social order in a traditional society. Therefore, by bringing down marriages and healthy relationships, they reduce the magnitude of their relative disability in society. It has worked extremely well so far. Honestly, one cannot blame them for it – it is what any sane person would do if cursed with physical attributes that condemned them to a life of inferiority.

      Like


      • There are more noble ways to spend one’s life than making envy into an art.

        Understandable? Perhaps… as much as Satan’s desire to be like God is understandable, and failing that, making an effort to bring down His entire creation.

        But no, it is not blameless… nor is it sane.

        When you explain it away as “normal” or justify it as “understandable”, you’re an enabler, at risk for an equal share of guilt.

        Like


      • on August 26, 2012 at 10:14 pm Thinkingaboutit

        The feminists were among the earliest to take Nietzsche to heart, and basically the dykes put their self-interest above everything else. They deluded the straight chicks to go along with them, even though hot straight women had little to gain from feminism and much to lose. I am not supporting the feminist cause, I am merely saying that what they do makes complete sense from their perspective. The oppressed members of the underclass have little to lose from tearing down the social structures which keep them there.

        As members of the heterosexual majority, it is up to us to battle feminist ideology. Not because we are more “sane” or “better people” or “on the side of God”, but because it is in our best interests that our society not devolve into a feminist utopia. It is not a Manichean Good vs Evil fight, it is a much more primal Us vs Them fight. I’d prefer the latter any day, honestly. It is a zero-sum game and either they win or you win.

        Like


      • A few hundred targeted secret detentions would probably solve the problem.

        Like


      • Men of the West don’t have the stomach for battle anymore… because they’ve come to worship their own intellects and lusts, instead of God.

        It’s always Good versus Evil… that’s why the enemies of the West, foremost the ones within our own midst, describe anything to do with the so-called white patriarchy as ‘evil’… and attempt to define every iota of the fray in terms of their side having the ‘moral high ground’.

        Like


      • on August 27, 2012 at 1:29 am Thinkingaboutit

        Western emasculation is a result of the destruction of Graeco-Roman religion, which celebrated masculinity, strength, family and honor. The real problem stems from widespread public acceptance of the core moral philosophy preached by Jesus Christ – a message of weakness and softness that basically aims at castrating society and turning everyone into de-facto women.

        Modern American Liberalism is just Jesus Christ’s core teaching minus the appeal to a God. It is blatantly obvious to anyone who wasn’t raised a Western Christian. That’s why Darwinism appeals so much to the Manosphere, although they don’t realize it – Darwin is the antidote to Jesus. These liberal morons who are pumping for teaching evolution in schools don’t realize that widespread public understanding of Darwin will blow their silly liberal ideas out of the water.

        Like


      • Good observation. Christianity didn’t used to be as feminine as it is today however, either. Modern progressivism grew out of evangelical Protestantism and merged with marxism, which is also owes a big intellectual debt to Christianity.

        Like


      • It’s become fashionable to blame Christianity for the ills of the West… ironically, though, white men pretty much conquered 80% of the planet with a gun in one hand and a Bible in the other, back in the day… and created some of the most sublime art, in multiple genres, for hundreds of years.

        Hmmmm… seems to me, the message went astray somewhere along the line… probably something to do with getting fat and happy, and being more afraid of losing one’s lifestyle than losing the favor of God.

        Like


      • Thinkingaboutit wrote:

        Modern American Liberalism is just Jesus Christ’s core teaching minus the appeal to a God. It is blatantly obvious to anyone who wasn’t raised a Western Christian. That’s why Darwinism appeals so much to the Manosphere, although they don’t realize it – Darwin is the antidote to Jesus.

        Yes, modern leftism is Christianity without the Christ, but it does not therefore follow that “Darwin is the antidote to Jesus.”

        Darwin is no more the “antidote” to Christianity (as if one were needed) than is Marx himself, or Freud, or Hegel, or feminism, or materialist-positivism, or postmodern existentialism, or fill-in-the-blank nihilism — each of which deal in various ways with the Death of God. Nietzsche comes closest to an “antidote” by first diagnosing the catastrophe of deicide for what it is and by respecting Christ’s thorough “Revaluation of All Values,” the achievement that the shut-in omega/insane syphilitic dreamed of equaling with the fabricated mythology and comic-book,Also Sprach Zarathustra, a graphic novel without the colorful drawings.

        Your idea that Jesus requires an antidote is based on the same liberal error you claim to be solving for: that “the core moral philosophy preached by Jesus Christ [is] a message of weakness and softness that basically aims at castrating society and turning everyone into de-facto women.” This is more than simply false. This is a deliberate misinterpretation of the entire Christian message in its fullest expression, best understood in zen meditation on the Alpha and the Omega, the Victim and the Redeemer, the Crucified and the Risen, the Lamb of God and the Lion of Judah, the child-king in the stable and the God made flesh.

        Christianity rightly understood was stripped of its masculinity for a very deliberate, very specific reason. One guess why Nietzsche and his daughter, 20th-century feminism, would want to turn their enemy into a pussy.

        Your superficial treatment of a creed spanning twenty centuries will not do. If you want to make a case that Christianity is “softness,” please go ahead. But don’t report rumors based on your latter-day, unconscious feminism. What you and your sisters know about Christianity is a Bowlderized hash based on Jesus Seminar/Jefferson Bible-style redaction. “You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it.”

        There is a reason why the Beatitudes are torn from context and given prominence in our era, even as the entire book of the Apocalypse is ignored. The paradox of Christ is only a contradiction to those who have already blindly denied his divinity and thereafter manipulate the portions of The Word that fit with their predetermined program. The devil quotes scripture best of all.

        Darwinism “appeals to the Manosphere” for the same reason feminism appeals to the Womynosphere: superficial scientism is our god, and to question its authority is to be apostate. Dig a little deeper and then we can talk. I will hold Augustine and Aquinas up to your standard sub-Nietzschean frivolity any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

        Matt

        Like


      • “Western emasculation is a result of the destruction of Graeco-Roman religion, which celebrated masculinity, strength, family and honor.”

        Which is exactly what early Christianity did… minus all the Graeco-Roman goddesses.

        Fuck you.

        Like


      • Don’t forget WW2 and 1, the men who would die for a cause, have already died for one, and his genes didn’t spread.

        Like


      • on August 27, 2012 at 6:15 pm Thinkingaboutit

        Don’t get me wrong, Matthew King and Evil Alpha. Christianity has played an admirable role in the development of Western civilization to its current position of global supremacy. However, I believe the credit lies more with the Church, the glorious succession of Popes, and with figures such as Aquinas, than with Jesus Christ himself.

        It is the same situation with great Buddhist empires and civilizations. The Buddha’s core message was very similar to Jesus’ teachings – he too taught softness, nonviolence, detachment and otherworldliness. The Buddhist monastic orders, on the other hand, are quite right-wing (like the Catholic Church). A king who truly followed Jesus or Buddha in spirit would never be able to mount a Crusade or build a great monastery. .

        That is why I have a grudging respect for Mohammed. He was clear in his directions to his followers – it is Us versus the world, we are better than everyone else, we need to keep the women in check, don’t shy away from violence, don’t be ashamed of exerting power over your enemies, breed like there’s no tomorrow, give the death penalty to traitors, don’t waste time on song and dance when there are conquests to be made and Kaffirs to be slaughtered. Islam is custom-made to be a world-conquering philosophy, perhaps the most rapacious in history.

        The spread of Islam is a good thing for other cultures as well, since having such a hypermasculine aggressive culture in our midst will awaken our own dormant masculinity.

        Like


      • I think if people today saw Jesus Himself throwing profane worshipers of Mammon out of their church, headforemost, they would say that that wasn’t a very Christian thing to do.

        The lukewarm will be spewed out.

        Like


      • What do you make of this passage?

        And behold, a Canaanite woman of that district came and called out, “Have pity on me, Lord, Son of David! My daughter is tormented by a demon.” But he did not say a word in answer to her. His disciples came and asked him, “Send her away, for she keeps calling out after us.” He said in reply, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” But the woman came and did him homage, saying, “Lord, help me.”

        He said in reply, “It is not right to take the food of the children and throw it to the dogs.”She said, “Please, Lord, for even the dogs eat the scraps that fall from the table of their masters.” Then Jesus said to her in reply, “O woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish.” And her daughter was healed from that hour.
        Mt 15:21-28

        The more I read about it the worse it sounds: http://newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2011/08/why-did-jesus-call-canaanite-woman-dog.html

        Like


      • That particular blog is full of incorrect information and assumptions that put the Lord in ill light and do not satisfy a person of good will seeking truth.

        I wouldn’t pay heed to that one, rather, there are many solid and scriptural interpretations of this passage from other sources on the ‘net. Read a few others and you may find this whole “dog” issue not quite so disconcerting.

        But know that, during these times, both today and 2000 years ago, where Satan holds sway of ‘this system of things’, that the rebukes and tests of the Lord are harsh, for good reason. “Whom I love I chasten and rebuke.” The secrets of the kingdom are not given willy-nilly, lest they be cheap and unappreciated, like Adam and Eve showed their lack of appreciation. “”The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that, “‘though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not understand.’

        Blessed, indeed, was this woman’s humility and faith… there was no covenant with the ancient enemies of the house of Israel, namely, the Canaanites… and Jesus’ direct mission for the short time He had on the earth was directed towards that house… it was not yet the ‘time of Gentiles’.

        But her great faith AND humility allowed the door to be opened a crack, prematurely, and Jesus foreshadowed the blessings that would be given to all, even enemies of old.

        Like


      • on August 28, 2012 at 8:05 am Dr Van Nostrand

        That is why I have a grudging respect for Mohammed. He was clear in his directions to his followers – it is Us versus the world, we are better than everyone else, we need to keep the women in check, don’t shy away from violence, don’t be ashamed of exerting power over your enemies, breed like there’s no tomorrow, give the death penalty to traitors, don’t waste time on song and dance when there are conquests to be made and Kaffirs to be slaughtered. Islam is custom-made to be a world-conquering philosophy, perhaps the most rapacious in history.”

        That is true , Islamic is hyper aggressive and ultra macho faith which militarizes all its followers with promises earthly and heavenly booty(in all meanings of the word).But heres the problem…once Muslims are defeated by non Muslims…despair sinks in REAL FAST and its very deep.

        This is why the Muslim world hasn’t been the same it expelled the Crusaders.This was followed by a beating by the Mongols and ,loss of Spain ,Central Asia ,India ..to the current sorry state today.

        Living in Dubai ,I have dealt with Muslims from all over the world and many of them were quite tough indeed ,especially Chechens but it was not Islam that gave them strength anymore.Living in Muslim countries-one gets the impression that its a defeated religion.

        This is why Muslims who control entire continents frantically (and pathetically) struggle to gain back postage stamp sized territories such as Palestine,Kashmir and Kosovo.And also practice demographic aggression in Europe.But is going less successfully as more French Muslim women choose to marry native French men than vice versa.And no the French men don’t convert to Islam!

        Also Muslims in general have no honor, see how when push comes to shove they escape dressed as women, they pretend to be unarmed and surrender and then stab, and don’t get me started on their ambush tactics-what was 9/11 if the typical Arab Muslim desert style ambush on a large scale?

        Iranian women have the lowest birth rates and are notorious being whores and sluts.
        GCC Arab women have similar reputations and low womb ROI but re the former, they are more discreet.

        In other words, when it comes to the battle of religions..Islam is Sparta and the West is Athens..Spartan military organization was impressive and formidable but it takes more than just hard men to win wars..technology,engineering,capital,logistics,morale,propaganda were as crucial during the Pelopennesian wars as they are today.

        As for Jesus, Sermont on the Mount was not the alpha and omega of his teachings.His campaign was not political but spiritual and must be judged accordingly.
        It most likely was not meant for wordly people to emulate but just those in his immediate flock.
        Lets not forget the Jesus of revelations was a different figure altogether.
        The amount of slaughter he indulges in would put Mohammad to shame.

        No, thank you. I associate Islam with rape of non Muslim women.

        Like


      • ‘repressed’ yes, ‘oppressed’ no. A small but important difference.

        Like


      • All the Abrahamic religions are shit, but analysed for utility they’ve incorporated a few interesting cult control tricks, promises, codexes, etc. like scientology and ‘clearing’. Of all three, judaism give the best leg up on exploiting ‘the other’, christinsanity on the other hand is so fuckin’ evil.. even Nietzsche’s ‘Anti-Christian’ cannot condem it enough. It is absolutem Grade A rat poison.

        Like


      • I would say that it’s time for men to learn a lesson from Nietzsche and use the situation to their advantage – like many of us are doing. Basically, the feminists have been successful in their goals to destroy a functioning system – and the replacement they advocate can be subverted to be in the best interest of men, as long as you do not make the mistake of letting your guard down. Marriage is for chumps and suckers. So are LTR’s – it may not be pretty, but it is the new normal – and when you factor in all of the minuses to marriage, higher taxes, chance of losing everything you’ve ever worked for, having your name added to a sex-offender’s list because of a woman that doesn’t want you to have anything to do with your children, only being able to f*ck one woman – you can see that marriage is dead.

        Today’s men have to embrace the advantages of the new situation, and like Nietzche work to turn it to their advantage. It is only to your detriment if you want what has been destroyed – if you only want a woman for use, it is paradise… Just never make the mistake of thinking that anything is for longer than a few months, or women are for more than to satisfy your needs – that is the way to use the present system to your advantage. It may not be nice – but it works quite well…

        Like


      • Nietzsche was an advocate of the overman and new tyrants. Somehow I don’t think he was for ‘second-fiddlin’ behind the laydee train; but whatever floats yo’ boat doc. Some guys get off on sloppy 300s and 400s.

        Like


      • This guy is a fucking joke of a man.

        Like


      • This tactic is used by all the “protected groups” to gain status by dragging down their competition. Feminism has also done this to make men less competitive with then as well. Good observation.

        Like


      • We knew that 40 years ago. And forget the traditional society nonsense because these females are at the bottom of the barrel today and would be in any age. That’s what they’re so mad about lol

        Like


  28. I believe the social control argument more than mate competition. The problem is that “talk is cheap.” It is easy to gossip but even easier to not believe it. So this can’t be a credible signal in terms of competition.

    Like


    • Agreed. if the point of gossip is competition over men, then it can only work if men to listen and believe in it – which it appears men do not.

      Like


      • No, the point of gossip is social control, particularly attempts by the lower-ranking members of the Matrix to undermine higher-ranking members through subversion…it’s about relative positioning, with no crab able to rise to the top of the basket without being pulled down by all the others. Whether men believe it or not isn’t important. The attempt is to control the Matrix, which controls mating behavior in the tribe, After you can control the Matrix, you can influence the distribution of men in mating.

        consider: I may have heard that Jane is a slut, but as a dude that doesn’t bother me much on the surface because I know it may not be true and I’m secretly hoping it is true, but either way it won’t make much difference to me. If my girlfriend declares that Jane is a slut, on the other hand, then I have to agree with her out of social necessity because to do otherwise would violate the emotional terms of our union and cut off my pussy supply. Jane may not be a slut, but if I do not tacitly approve of my girlfriend’s declaration, then I risk my mating privileges. Therefore it doesn’t matter whether or not I think Jane is a slut, the perception of sluthood thus stated is enough to alter the perceptions of the group and control the narrative. Jane is a slut, everyone knows that.

        And if I catch you hanging around Jane…well, everyone knows she’s a slut so the only reason you’d do that is if you were thinking about cheating…

        Like


      • You lost me with that last part. When your GF bitches about another girl being a slut, you say “cool!” And nothing else.

        That is why you lose your mating privileges in the first place. She knows she can control you. If you had hand, you would be telling her its cool her frien’s a slut and she would be aggressively giving up the booty because she’s afraid to lose you.

        Like


      • You do realize you are pussy whipped right?

        Like


      • “cut off my pussy supply” = beta

        Like


      • which it appears men do not.

        correction – alpha males do not.

        Like


      • It’s not just about getting the attention of men, its also about streamlining the attention of women.

        Eg. A new woman shows up at a local business. Unlike the other women at that business, she’s 5’8″, 150 pounds of solid muscle and ungodly levels of feminine fat (let’s say, 39DD-26-39, Catwoman measurements.) As soon as the other women see the newcomer, the slander begins.

        Lower class-“She must be a slut, look at that body!”
        Middle class-“Well, she’s kinda fat. I mean, she’s gonna blow up after she has kids…”
        Upper class woman-“I’ll bet that she’s the type that cheats. I mean, the guys here are already drooling all over her…”

        The new woman hears enough derogatory comments, then she begins to cover herself up, wears less make-up, exercises more (to slim down) or gains weight (to appear less extraordinary). Due to her diminished looks, guys who would have considered her “out of my league” begin to hit on her/hook up with her/date her. By accepting male attention from “beta/ghetto-lower class alpha” guys, the established alphas at the job begin to slot her in the “get her while she’s hot, then dump her”, category. Soon, male attention drops on and off the job, lowering her self-esteem even more. The more-established women have removed a threat to their own upward mobility, while emblazoning their own “better wife candidate” bonafides on their sleeves because the new girl followed the exact path that the gossip mill “predicted”. Wash, rinse and repeat.

        Like


  29. It’s not just for women to tear each other town. Gossipping is also exactly why a man does not need to clarify to people that he is single or taken (unless, perhaps, he moves to a new town where he’s not known).

    Like


    • Jane Austen, anyone ? In such cases, gossip serves the purpose of indirect communication when direct communication is not deemed appropriate or impolite.

      Like


      • I’m such a loser women don’t recognise me as a man at all. A plus side is that they don’t stop talking with each other when I’m in proximity….you’re sure not kidding about ‘impolite’…the brutal social machinations and normalisation of sexual kinkiness that goes on in gossip sure ain’t for open conversation.

        Like


      • From what I know about Jane Austin, to an extent, but I think it’s more to it than even that. Gossip serves as a way for women, who organize themselves into friendship networks, forming a kind of matrix (for lack of a better word), to manipulate men into the “correct” network.

        First, we have CH’s post deals with women tearing other women down. That’s just one way. That happened to me, for instance, when a woman who wanted to screw me mentioned “casually” that a certain rather loose woman (who subsequently went on to have a third child with a third different man) had given her last BF the clap twice. (The woman who gossipped to me was rather fat, pushing 30, and has been screwing the biggest dumpster diver in town for a long time, so I figured she may have the clap too!)

        Another reason is to clarify the status du coeur of a given desirable man that I just brought up (women usually don’t care about undesirable men).

        Another facet is tied into the previous post, which goes into how women crave emotional exclusivity with a man. If a man blurts out his emotions to a woman who has been wanting him, the woman’s friends will take him in as a friend and tell all other women about what happened. How do they “know” that this woman is the one he wants? Naturally, real men will not leak their emotions to a woman unless they’re under extreme duress, and because it’s unmanly to broadcast it, will keep it under wraps as an embarrassing episode. Other women who hear about him blowing off his emotions to a certain woman — and, it seems, no others — will treat that man rather similar to how men would treat a prim-and-proper girl whose virginity was taken by a man. In other words, this is how an otherwise attracitve man becomes undesirable “sloppy seconds”… by gossipping.

        As far as I can tell, women gossipping is rather similar in many ways to how single-celled organisms use chemicals to talk to each other and move around. In other words, it’s an animal instinct. Men gossipping is, plainly, unnatural.

        Like


      • Woman don’t spend our time controlling men or trying. Some woman may try to control one specifically but most of those eventually realize the futility of it. Some find it amusing and continue. Manosphere is the male version of gossip. Men sitting around talking about chicks and strategics is the flip side of woman sitting around talking about shoes or whatever. If woman talk about men it’s to laugh or complain to sympathetic listeners. Then they spend 30 times as much time talking about other things. Men approach woman we don’t need strategies and ploys unless you count make up .

        Like


      • Manosphere = Male gossip? You sound like a shitty wingwoman unless you suck cock on dry nights.

        Like


      • Women gossiping is usually done one to one. It isn’t meant to be heard by the person being talked about. It sometimes involves who is doing what with who. It could be about avoiding people in the case of gossiping about guys or being informative or entertaining. So it is a lot like the manosphere in that sense. In the sense that m sphere wants to make money and push whatever their various agenda is that probably differs a bit.

        No in so many words. Dry is only how I like my martinis.:)

        Like


      • No. This blog is a special case. Outside of this blog, I hardly ever talk about women.

        Like


      • Of course honey, you just need to spread your legs. And not be fat.

        Like


      • You should be able to disagree about something petty like whether homegirl is a slut with a girlfriend without her cutting you off.

        Like


      • Your last paragraph about female behaviour being unreconstructed from the days of humans being ooze in a puddle is gold and is exactly what I was thinking this morning. However: Steve Austin, Jane Austen.

        Like


  30. Men are (usually) not plugged into the gossip Grapevine, but women are.

    Could it be the point of the gossip (e.g., labeling a woman an STD carrier) is not so much to inform Mr. Desirable directly, but rather indirectly.

    In other words, infect the minds of Mr. Desirable’s sister and mother (who are genetically plugged into the Grapevine, with a Gigabit Ethernet connection).

    These socially influential women will, in turn, have the ear of Mr. Desireable, due to their social proximity and gravitas.

    Like


  31. This pecking by other women has a consequence of lowering another woman’s status and it plays into the hands of men who might be hovering about. Knocks the princess down a peg or two, wings her, makes her more receptive to a man’s charms. Girl: ‘I hate those bitches ..they’re so mean…sob sob blah blah’. Man: ‘yeah bitches be crazy…(insert charms)…..let’s get outta here’.

    Ultimately a counterproductive strategy for females to employ.

    Like


  32. They want, what they think they want, until they got it, then they don’t want it.
    Today, at the buffet, my lunch date went for some more food, wanted me to give her some of my fried rice, I’m like no, I’m going to eat it. Then, she never even finished the food she had taken anyways. I then explained to her how her mind works, and she says I’m sorry, your right I’m wrong, I say, it has nothing to do with that, this is just the way you are, and it’s the sole reason I’ll never marry any of you girls. You’ll just run me over every chance you get, take everything that’s mine, and throw me away when your done, it’s just the way you are, you’ll never change because your programmed by feminism, and it’s by your side, and on your side only.

    Now, regarding feminism, it’s not a term we need to use loosely any more. It’s ingrained into our society, TV, at work, in the courts, on the street, in your home, in our schools, in any woman’s conversation, inner circle, and now, completely seated into every girls’ mind. It’s a dirty, rotten filthy way of getting what you want in life, and btw I have no problem with it because I don’t tolerate it.

    Like


  33. http://www.bakadesuyo.com/does-wanting-a-baby-make-a-woman-more-likely

    Of note:

    “Clue #1: Twin-based evidence shows that orgasm frequency has a modest heritable component. Uncomfortable as it may be to think of your flush-faced grandmother moaning in ecstasy, there is a clear genetic contribution to female orgasm. Hereditary factors account for only a third of the population-level variance in female orgasm, however.”

    and

    “Clue #3: Educated women are more likely to report having masturbatory orgasms— but are no more likely to experience coital orgasms than are less educated women. Religiosity is another social mediator: religious women tend to have less frequent orgasms than nonreligious ones (or at least they report having fewer).”

    Like


  34. […] Chateau Heartiste – The First SWPL President, Hot Girls Need Your Best Game, The Allure Of Male Dominance, Older Man Game, Comment Of The Week, Women Gossip To Compete For Men […]

    Like


  35. Spot on analysis, as usual. Watch this Onion video. It’s funny ONLY because it resonates with us so well. Were it two high school guys slut shaming their peers on TV the whole thing would fall flat.

    As a general rule, only things that are true can be funny.

    Like


  36. C’mon women there’s no need to fight because there’s plenty of men to go around. Oh wait they’re fighting because of the shortage of Alpha males. Dang.

    Like


    • Shortage of alphas?

      To hear the boasts here, you’d think that a dead cat couldn’t be swung without hitting one.

      Like


      • From the ectodweebs? 🙂

        Like


      • Am I the only one who thinks that the comments are pretty truthful?

        Sure, there may be a few keyboard jockeys, but most don’t deny their beta past, share their experiences about being rejected/cheated on or their failed seduction attempts.
        And going from a beta to a post-red pill lesser alpha is believable, I’m not gonna talk about myself but I saw what the mystery method and seduction bootcamps can do to a man.

        We’re all potential liars here, but I think the proportion of self-declared super alphas is low enough to maintain a satisfactory level of credibility..

        Like


      • You’re right that there’s a goodly number of “I have seen the light” honest posts.

        I was just having a bit of sport… directed at the types who take no small pains on nearly every post to speak of their alpha-idity. 😉

        Like


      • I still don’t really get the whole alpha thing…apart from those men being as narcissistic and deluded and sexually depraved as women are on the inside, there’s not much attraction.

        Like


      • There are two competing schools of thought here at the chateau, in re ‘alpha’.

        One is the peacocking, shit-talking, anything-goes-just-bang-that-ho faction. Think de Valmont of Dangerous Liasons… but without the elan, elocution, and fancy wardrobe.

        The other holds more to the traditional idea of a man’s man, for whom the concepts of quality and conscience still hold a bit of sway. Think Athos, before Milady soured him.

        Like


      • In response to Greg, both those types have their appeal.

        Like


      • Thank you, Madame Obvious.

        The fact that the first type enjoys a certain admiration from the ladies, often to the detriment of the second type, and nearly always to the chagrin of well-intentioned and civilization-building beta providers, if why the manosphere exists… and why the sentiments expressed on this forum are often (and rightfully) misogynistic.

        Like


      • Alpha is defined here as getting the hottest, regardless of how you do it, so you don’t have to be like Valmont to be one nor any kind of a man’s man. But Valmont is a very good example of an alpha. A very good role model, until the end of course when he stupidly got one-itis.

        Like


      • I just wanted to follow up on this. I am one of those “I have seen the light” types that Greg mentions. I found this site and the “manosphere” last year when I was staring down both barrels of a really messy divorce.

        I was born a natural alpha (I know this is true, because my 7 year old son is annoyingly a natural, as was my father, so I must be too…right?) but I had that blue pill beaten into me at a young age. AND I believed it, since it was reinforced by everything I had ever heard/read/seen in the modern media/feminism…

        Got married, had kids, got the job/mortgage/ etc. Mr. Beta… Wife got unhappy, blah, blah, we’ve all been there…

        So, I’m lookin’ at my soon-to-end marriage, when I find this place. Read the whole archives…found some other sites, too. So, I didn’t really believe it (I had too much invested in the blue pill perspective), but being an empirical person (i.e. male) I had to test it…

        So, last year, my wife and I had an invite to a holiday party for some people she knew. We were still trying to put up a good front, since neither one of us had pulled the trigger on actually serving the papers, yet, but we both knew it was coming…probably after the holidays…

        We went to this party, which was hosted by/attended by successful middle-class late-30’s to early 50’s SWPLs. The children of the hosts (late teens/early 20’s) were providing service (bar/food/DJ/etc.). And I had just finished reading about how to be an “alpha.”

        So, I gave it a try… I didn’t tell anybody, I just did it.

        Got to the party, I strolled in like I owned the place, head high/chest out/slow movements/etc. (Believe me, it was hard. My stomach was in knots and it felt fake, but almost nobody there knew me…), got a beer for a prop, then I sat down in a chair right on the end of a couch (the closest thing to a throne in the whole space).

        I leaned back, while “spreading out” (I leaned my arm onto the arm of the couch next to my chair). I spread my legs and rested my beer bottle between my legs like it was my erect member I was holding. From there, I didn’t do anything. I looked around the room to observe any reactions.

        I would talk to people that would come up to say hi, but I wasn’t like my normal “puppy dog” trying to get everyone’s approval…

        So, I was introduced to a woman in her mid-40’s. She sat down on the coffee table in front of me. She was married, with an adult kid (who was working the party…) We start to talk, and I did everything I would never do, because I was taught (blue pill) that it was “rude.”

        I talked to her while looking around the room. I didn’t lean in, even when it was hard to hear over the music. I didn’t turn my body toward her. I didn’t smile at all, until I heard something that I liked and wanted to “reward” her. I let her try to impress me, rather than being worried that she wouldn’t like me. I tried to adopt the attitude of “the king”and she was someone seeking my favor…

        So, we are talking for several minutes, and I’m doing my “alpha” thing, and she says something that I like and I decide to try the reward thing. So, I smile, and turn toward her (it wasn’t much, maybe a 1/4 inch movement in my shoulder and head) and I extended my leg a little toward her (again maybe a 1/4 inch) and I looked directly into her eyes with solid eye contact…

        WOW.

        I was able to see her pupils dilate until her iris was almost impossible to see… Then, she pops off the coffee table, with a “let me get you another beer.” (I had just finished the one I had been using as a “prop.”) She delivered the beer, and I got to see the hamster spinning. She decided it was “safer” to talk to someone else at that point…

        No woman had ever spontaneously offered to get me a beer like that, not even my wife…it was spooky…

        I look around the room. I see this HB9/10 blonde checking me out. She was early 20’s working the beer/wine table, and easily the hottest woman in the room.

        Every time I turned around she was giving me the “come-and-get-me” eyes. It was kind of spooky. I mean everything I had read about here at the Chateau was pretty much on the money as things were playing out.

        I keep looking around. On another couch across the room, there was a mid-30’s guy with his arms over his head in an inverted “4” shape (one arm straight up with the other one up and bent over his head to grab his elbow). He was just sitting there hanging out with a HB8 on either side of him, both snuggled in close…

        I noticed that the women in my peer group (40’s) (that I thought were “hot”) would look me over, then get the nose in the air and turn back to the other guys they were talking to (betas like me…). I got the distinct impression that their attitude was “sour grapes.” (I could also see that hamster spinning away.)

        And every time I look at the HB9/10 blonde in the short little cocktail dress/heels, she is trying to get me pregnant with her eyes.

        Knowing what I know now, I am perfectly confident that I could have been banging’ her in her car outside, if I had just walked over and told her “let’s go…” But, like I said before, (for a beta) it was spooky…

        I almost couldn’t believe what was happening…

        AND that night, my wife started to change her attitude toward me (she initiated sex after a months long dry spell)(With 20/20 hindsight, I think it was her subconscious recognition of pre-selection effect and my potential options that triggered her behavior), and by continuing to apply the stuff I’ve learned here, I am well on my way to being in control of my marriage.

        So, I am one of the “seen-the-light” guys. That red pill was BITTER!! And you ALL know what I mean…

        I can say with all honestly that this site (with the commentors) as well as the other manosphere blogs like MMSL, have helped me save my marriage, and avoid a messy and costly divorce.

        Thank you guys!

        Like


      • Another diamond in hearty’s crown.

        Good on ya, mate! And welcome to the fray.

        Like


      • My life is so different from yours, but I still see great similarities in our transformations.

        I’m just a 30 year old single wage slave. I recently went from having a 70K a year career back to making maybe 30K. I don’t have prospects to speak of. I’m a waiter/bartender and a delivery driver. I drive a old car. I’m average looking. Despite all of these things, I’ve been doing VERY WELL in the dating market with women much better looking that I could have ever thought possible.

        I almost want to kick myself, because it is so easy. It’s all attitude. I’ve read the archives here too. If I had to sum up everything I’ve learned over the last couple years in one word it would be: attitude. Conscious projection of alpha traits. Making statements and issuing direction. Knowing I will get what I want. Floating through a room with irrational self confidence. Sure I still fuck up here and there, but in the grand scheme of things I’m a changed person, still changing for the better every day.

        I used to spend hours trying to gauge a woman’s interest in me (usually losing it in the process). Now I just ask for her number early on. I used to be terrified of initiating physical contact. Now i just go for it. I used to send beta texts like “Hey this is so-and-so from that place we met. Are you free this weekend? Want to meet up?” Now I send “This is xxx. I’m free this Saturday. Let’s get drinks.” Simple and direct statements and requests. I can’t believe I bought the feminist/leftist blue pill “nice guy” bullshit for so long. I feel like I didn’t become a man until my late 20s.

        The funny thing is, you can still be a nice guy. Not “the nice guy” pussy beta orbiter or frustrated chump. “Nice guy” has become synonymous with these things… but you don’t have to be an asshole to act like a man. A lot of guys miss this point I think. You can treat a woman well and still hit the right alpha buttons at the same time.

        Anyway, thanks for everything. Stumbling across the Chateau has been one of the best things to happen to me (IIRC, it was the 16 commandments). You’re doing important work here. I sent an acquaintance here a few weeks ago, and I already see little changes in him.

        Like


      • You’re right, but since most guys have been indoctrinated under the “nice guy”=pushover regime, they need something extreme to unfuck themselves, so it’s best to err on the douchebag side.

        Like


      • Great testimonial. This is exactly what was missing from your marriage. Now that you’re being alpha, you can have both your wife and the 20 something. Women are easy once you know how to push their buttons.

        Like


      • Several.

        Like


  37. And, lol, now I know why my grandpa never made my grandma get her drivers license, or ever feel the need to leave the house (without him), to subsequently, and independently run with the girls, and be…all….that! She did not need it, she might not be the brightest cookie in the jar, but they’ve been happily married for 65 years now.

    Like


  38. As a long time married man, I find that wives don’t gossip about each other. Rather, they protect each other in the presence of husbands. That is, that cover up for each other.

    Like


    • True. I probably wouldn’t criticize another woman my age for cheating on her husband.

      Like


      • After all, it’s the lout’s fault, isn’t it?

        Like


      • Always.

        Like


      • That said, if you give a woman the big O each and every time you have sex with her, she will usually follow you around like a dog and be hard to get rid of. You will always have hand. Just as men are slaves to their dicks, women are slaves to a big orgasm.

        Like


      • You’re enabling women’s marriage disloyalty if you blame it on the husband’s shortcomings, either real or imagined.

        I’ve always found that women pretty much decide who and where they’re gonna get their big O’s from… if the chemistry is there, the man pretty much just has to show up… if not, a man can (in the words of Costanza), “work like a dog” for very little return.

        It begins, and pretty much ends, in her head.

        Like


      • My women always come and come hard. Most men are crappy lovers too. I don’t really care if I’m enabling marriage disloyalty. I’m simply telling you how to keep them loyal and eating out of your hand.

        Like


      • You sound crappy in bed.
        Read sex god method.

        Like


      • There’s no such thing as a cold fish, eh?

        Like


      • The always mens’ fault was tongue in cheek, BTW. But there would be fewer divorces and more respect for her man if men gave their woman a big O regularly. Its usually reciprocated in spades as well. I have trained several women to give me blow jobs on demand because of this. They love doing it too because they’re reminded of that big O. I get blow jobs about 2-3 times a day. Tell me whether it works or not?

        Like


      • I think cold fish exist, just as there are men who don’t care about sex. More often its an individual lack of compatability or interest and is expressed that way. A cold fish with one man can be hot blooded with a different one.

        Like


      • Does you woman have a clit in the back of her throat?
        If she has a big orgasm EVERY time you have sex… then you’re whipped.

        Like


      • @Matt
        I had to research to find the humor. But funny indeed.

        Like


      • That’s fascinating! Can you elaborate? Why wouldn’t you criticize her for behavior you’d find reprehensible in a stranger, an enemy, or a celebrity?

        Like


      • Sisterhood trumps all… deep-down, most women are in an “it’s us against men” mentality… especially AFTER they’ve lassoed a meal ticket and can afford to drop pretense.

        Like


      • I think it’s an equilibrium between “sisterhood trumps all” and “every sister for herself!”. It’s in their best interests in terms of the Matrix to appear to be consensus-seekers, but self-interest and solipsism encourage them to use sisterhood as a convenience, not an ideology.

        Like


      • Exactly, hence the ‘amoral’ aspect of women… sisterhood when solidarity is to her benefit, stand-by-her-man when the wind blows from a different direction, and “bow before your queen!” when she’s able to lord it over both sexes.

        Like


      • solipsism= female reproductive autism.

        Like


      • Women carry daggers for each finger. I agree here. They need cooperation much more to survive in life in the wild. Face it, if you were the tiger, who would you rather hunt and eat? Women will form teams when they have to do hard work because several of them can often replace a man in even heavy construction or hard physical labor. So they talk in order to bond and this carries over to their methods of conflict as well.

        Like


      • It’s hard for an older woman to play a younger woman’s game. If she can do so successfully, I’d admire that.

        Like


      • It’s hard to rob a bank, too… but admiring that sort of chutzpah is strictly for the silver screen.

        Like


      • Bad girls in books or movies are often the best characters. In real life, they usually aren’t quite as charming.

        Like


      • Its a lot harder to criticize people you care about and with whom you probably sympathize than absolute strangers. There’s also no risk of losing their friendship. People may not out and out throw rocks at an adulterer, but they might simply withdraw their time, interest, support, etc., which subtly indicates to the outer world that something is amiss.

        Like


      • So why are so many wives often more compassionate, in word and deed, to complete strangers over their own husbands?

        Ah, I see… you did mention “with whom they sympathize”.

        Like


      • Paradoxically, sometimes its easier to be nicer to people you don’t know.

        Like


  39. oh comment moderation, we meet again. Tune in next week maybe for my contribution to this topic lol it tells you how to use gossip to get rid of AMOGs.

    Like


    • Funny you say that, I just successfully turned a sister off a guy I don’t like via pressing gossip buttons.

      I had three points:
      – Why does he live alone? Even his friends can’t stand him.
      – Classic sociopath, manipulative
      – Clown, inferiority complex

      The first one was what did it. Two hours after we spoke, she said on her own “I’m glad you said that, I shouldn’t be going out with someone who has a bad reputation especially since I just moved here.”

      Knowledge is power.

      Like


      • Plant the seed and they’ll water it for you.

        If you harp on what a loser he is, she’ll get mad at you and it’d push her even closer to him (no one wants to admit they made a bad investment). But let her come to the conclusion that he’s a loser herself (via your planting the seeds) and she’ll ditch him and make like it was her decision.

        Fascinating stuff all around. You can use this technique for some pretty twisted shit, if one were so inclined.

        Like


    • on August 27, 2012 at 12:22 pm hiphopanonamous

      Kick ass Seabass

      Like


    • Agreed. The moderation/spam filter here is a wet blanket on developing conversations. It drives good commentary away.

      Like


  40. Male gossiping is also rampant in feminized environments such as Encorpera.

    Like


  41. “Men have their own version of gossip; it’s called winning. Men kneecap male competitors by fighting and defeating them, physically, mentally or socially. Second, women are more intuitive than men are about reading subtext in gossip. A man who gossips about another man’s sexual prowess, or social savviness, or whatever, in the hopes of reducing his mate value is likely to be perceived by women as a second tier beta clumsily trying to undermine better men than himself.”

    Sometimes I want to hire out Heartiste to reprogram the entirety of my 31 years on Earth…. someone save me from my own loserness. Heart’s gems are by turns incredibly relieving and mortifying….

    Like


  42. When I speak to my female friends about things like “sluttiness, infidelity and fatness,” whether we are speaking about men or women, we are speaking about things we all universally disagree with. Those conversations are more moral reconditioning, reinforcing our mutual belief that doing wrong by another person is an unacceptable way of acting.

    This blog seems to assume that all human beings are shallow, hypocritical, and completely self-serving. If you really are trying to alleviate bad social conditioning, Heartiste, maybe you should be encouraging the good in people rather than assuming the worst about everyone. By doing so, you merely reinforce morally despicable actions, offering no recourse but for others to counter such actions by becoming all the more despicable.

    Like


    • Well, it is the old good news and bad news joke.

      Bad news: Women are amoral and deceptive.

      The Good News: Women are amoral and deceptive.

      Now, just don’t let the joke be on you.

      That is the take home lesson of this blog. You can live in denial if you like. It might be possible in a closed and controlled society to keep women from indulging their amorality, but in the open Western world that just ain’t happening.

      If you think this blog is bad, you should read some women’s blogs.

      Women are sexual creatures. The simple biology is that most women consider most men below average. If they need the economic security, they will do what they hate most and “settle.” If not, well, you see the results all around you, unless you shut your eyes and cover your ears.

      Once you adjust to the situation, you might realize that it is not so bad.There is no Santa Claus, there is no Easter Bunny, and there is no chaste woman.

      Like


    • Adam Curtis has great documentaries on why this is going back to 1950s social engineering and beyond.

      Like


    • “maybe you should be encouraging the good in people rather than assuming the worst about everyone.”

      The outcome is likely to be the same. It’s just a matter of which method is more effective.

      Like


  43. the greatest alpha (Neil Armstrong)of all time died. The first man to land in moon is no more..

    Like


    • Oddly enough, he was a self-described ‘nerd’… and certainly didn’t give off a great alpha air… very introspective, mild-mannered, and somewhat plain in appearance.

      Not to take away from the worthy fellow… but he may have merely been one of those ‘lucky’ examples to whom Fate and History bestowed their graces… after all, a trip to the moon was not accomplished by the will and daring of one man… and the choice as to who would ‘be the first’ could easily have gone to many of the worthy men of NASA.

      Like


      • I must respectfully disagree. According to his official biography all of the astronauts had a ton of respect for him. He was definitely a leader in a high-status pack even before he was named the commander of the Apollo 11 flight.

        Like


      • I was talking about his persona and “look” to the outside world… let’s face it, he could have been the equivalent of a rock star, post landing… he remained aloof, leastwise, as much as was possible in his position.

        I’m well aware he was well-respected among his peers, otherwise his name wouldn’t even have been in the unofficial lottery to see who gets to step out first.

        Point is, pretty much each and every peer with equivalent credentials and experience was likewise well-respected. Calling him ‘the greatest alpha’ is a bit of a stretch… especially how ‘alpha’ is deemed on a PUA site.

        Like


      • http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/26/opinion/seymour-armstrong-appreciation/index.html

        Interesting article about the “laconic” Armstrong. Perhaps it was his very lack of overt alpha characteristics and his sang froid in earlier training mission danger situations that won him the coveted spot.

        Makes sense. If anything was going to go wrong, better the near-robotic lack of emotion than some high-spirited hot dogging.

        Like


      • A big part of Alphadom is being in control of your emotions. Armstrong had that to the ultimate degree. By all accounts he was the most clear-headed man ever.
        Remember when he lived and grew up. The Second World War meant that a huge number of American men had been off doing dangerous and heroic things (and a lot of boring things too). Alphadom in the mid-20th century was underplayed, and Armstrong was a prime example.
        I suppose that’s another form of Game most of us can’t aspire to: Genuine Achievement Game. That’s where you actually do something monumentally awesome and stop worrying about how Alpha you are because you know it precisely.

        Like


      • I don’t get it. Armstrong was only alpha if he scored the hottest females and remained capable of scoring the hottest until the end (in a nursing home an alpha could be expected to get friendly baths from the nursing assistants at least for remuneration – it’s his entitlement, follow through and the results). Alphas lose their alpha status when they are no longer capable of or interested in scoring the hottest.

        But you can be paralyzed from the waist down or lose your prostate and still be alpha. It’s not coitus that counts as the score. It’s her climax that counts.

        Like


      • Correction: It’s not necessarily coitus that counts as the score, for instance if the alpha is paralyzed.

        Like


      • He was an accomplished test pilot. That is one of the reasons he was chosen.

        Like


  44. Does CH have a spam filter/moderation for longer comments? I can’t tell if mine just got eaten.

    Like


  45. Does CH have a spam filter/moderation for longer comments? I can’t tell if mine just got eaten.

    I’ve had longer posts fail to upload.

    Like


  46. One young woman explained it to me thusly: “Every time a woman gets engaged to be married, that means there is one less marriageable man in the pool for every other woman.”

    Regardless of the lip service about sexual revolution, getting married is a status symbol to most women. It means they have snagged in a man. And given that women generally marry up, it also means more wealth for the bride-to-be down the line. It’s a competition for position among one’s peers, as well as material security. And these fights get bloody. Therefore, it is in a woman’s interests to bring down all other women who are competing with her.

    This is not the case for men.

    Females are competing for a smaller pool of males than are men competing in the pool of women. Again, females tend to marry up, or chase after a limited number of alpha males. Males have a much broader perspective on with whom they will mate. If a woman gets married, there are statistically more women remaining in the marriageable pool. For example, say that men see 50% of women as desirable; women might see 20% of men as desirable. When a couple get engaged, to males there are now 2% fewer available females; to females, there are 5% fewer. A 250% difference.

    When a man gets engaged, other men may show sympathy for a comrade who is losing his freedom (and in these decadent days, much of his wealth upon the statistically probable divorce). To be cynical, for a man, every marriage-hungry female taken out of circulation via a walk down the aisle is one less female who will victimize a single man down the line with wedding vows.

    Like


    • You missed the point. The SMV of men does not necessarily decrease with age as there are more factors in play for his SMV besides looks. So with every year a new generation of women become available for him to game as they come of age. That is why “abundance mentality” is not just effective strategy, it’s also simple common sense. Even if tomorrow you were to magically and permanently fail with every living woman on the planet over the age of 18, next year a new crop of 18 year olds will be available.

      OTOH, a womans’ SMV constantly decreases with age (her appearance reflects her fertility). So in general she is usually looking for men who will accept her SMV value. Usually this translates into men older than her. Not b/c of the SMV of the men, but because there is a possibility that they themselves will have less of a sense of their ability to attract high-SMV (read young and hot) females.

      Bottom line: For women, every man that gets married is in fact a man taken off the market. At least in non-polygamous societies.

      In a polygamous society this situation gets reversed. As one man can technically dominate every woman around, leaving nothing for all other men. And every woman will technically have the ability to gain access to the highest alpha.

      That is why I believe polygamy is absolutely inevitable. The entire institution of monogamy was created for us betas. And haha, who gives a fuck about us, eh?

      Like


      • Polygamy tends to occur in societies with a very young age structure, which has lots of 18 y.o. girls for a much smaller number of older men… Africa, the Arab countries (and there it’s waning), etc.

        With an older age structure, polygamy becomes impractical.

        Like


      • Yes, but eventually polygamy would erode after people see the consequences. Monogamy was not invented as a handout to be merciful to beta males. It was made to appease beta males and other alpha males who happen to not be at the top. Males become extremely violent when they are denied the chance to pass on their genes. Yes, some males are the passive type who would accept it. But even if 30% of the males are the aggressive type who want to cause a ruckus to increase their status, that’s not sustainable for a society.

        Also, today isnt it something like 20% of the men are getting all the women?. In that case you would have a large number of alpha males/potential alpha males who will be pussy starved because one alpha at the top is hogging most of the pussy instead of it being spread out equally among alpha males. It goes without saying that atleast a quarter of these alphas have dark triad traits. These amoral dark triad alphas would not hesitate to do everything in their power to take the head man down. That includes killing his children, starting gangs, starting revolts, kidnapping or killing his women etc. Anything to take him down or spite him no matter how morally wrong it is.

        While monogamy is a tough price to pay, it is to everyone’s benefit. Even though alpha males at the top will have less access to women. More of their children will survive, males will hesitate to revolt when they have a family to take care of, low crime rate, and society will be prepared to
        compete/defend themselves from other groups, instead of fighting amongst themselves for pussy and opening themselves up to be conquered by a more united group.

        Like


    • No, men could see women getting married as fewer marriageable women for them. So the first paragraph just views it from the woman’s perspective.

      Marriage is a bigger deal for women because of their shorter shelf life. A wife is a net liability to a man, which produces other net liabilities (kids), which is why her sexual availability to her husband has been traditionally demanded. In the old Catholic Church, it was a mortal sin for a wife to refuse to give her husband sex (or vice versa, although women are the passive sex, so the vice versa wouldn’t happen as much). As a corollary, it also would be a mortal sin for the wife to get disgustingly fat, just as it would be for the man to be a deadbeat. But since 1960s, the Catholic Church doesn’t talk about sin at all because it’s Not Nice.

      Like


    • I don’t feel sympathy for men who get themselves conned into the worst contract on earth. I write the fuckers off as idiots.. that is, until the divorce. If that doesn’t wake them up. There is such a disparity between us that ‘friendship’ is an absolute impossibility.

      Like


  47. Yuri
    the greatest alpha (Neil Armstrong)of all time died. The first man to land in moon is no more..
    ————————————————————————————————
    And he may have taken the greatest secret of all time with him to the grave.

    Like


    • The secret? you mean the secrets of Alphadom or suspicion over moon-landing..please…

      Like


      • Thwack’s secret is that niggers made it to the moon first, but that raciss whiteys stole the spotlight.

        Like


      • You guys had to fall for the bait… sigh.

        Geez, never was a troll so well-fed.

        Yon Shrek hast a lean and hungry look.

        Like


    • Are you talking about their Apollo 11 crew seeing aliens on the moon? There is some decent evidence that actually happened. Several minutes of the communications with the crew were cut out to keep this a secret. The mission communications director admitted it before he died.

      Like


      • My grandfather used to say that he saw the Norse gods in his back yard. Thor would swing for hours like a little girl. Of course, my grandfather was batshit crazy…

        Like


      • Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong both saw alien craft shadowing them. Buzz Aldrin even got out a “What the hell is that”? before he was cut off.

        Like


      • It was probably the red-eye flight of a Nazi UFO doing its daily run between Antarctica and the dark side of the moon.

        They been collecting the aliens and bringing them here to earth in preparation for The Final Battle.

        Useful allies, those aliens… they eat negroes and piss gasoline.

        Like


      • Piece of a satellite or soviet stuff or whatever…

        Until aliens decide to make contact, worrying about ufos is clownish and retarded.
        And if aliens do ever make contact and that a former ufo conspirationist starts jumping like a kid yelling “SEE I TOLD YOU SO!!” just tell him to shut ther fuck up.

        Like


      • WATCH THE SKIES, I TELL YOU… JUST KEEP WATCHING THE SKIES!

        Like


      • Supposedly they saw these things from a close distance. Besides, they would have recognized what they saw as the things you claim them to be if that were truly the case. These men knew the difference.

        I don’t really care, although I believe we have other intelligent life forms in the universe. When someone like Buzz Aldrin sees them, its no longer easily explained by calling him a crackpot. Neil also admitted seeing them. Neither were excitable types prone to hyperbole and both were highly experienced and well trained pilots.

        Like


  48. If anyone ever wonders what the draw to feminism might be for some women, given that it’s completely irrational and obviously harmful pseudoscience, remember: Disapproving indignance, and the experience of having it mirrored back to you, is chick crack.

    Take the words and specifics out, and you’ll find that the “tone” and conversational tactics are no different between a group of girls discussing the Kardashian show, and a group of women in an ‘intellectual’ political meeting.

    This is so. And is something which ought to be explored. Feminism is not simply about an ideology. I’d even say the ideology is largely irrelevant. It’s a social norming ritual for females. They can all get together and agree on something, tearing to pieces females who compete with them — especially traditional women who have a better position in the marriage market.

    Feminism is also a sh*t test to sort out the beta men from the alphas. Any guy who is dumb enough to agree with a feminist is also out of the picture, or is placed on their “To Manipulate” list.

    We’ve had several decades of feminism, and we have seen the destruction of much of traditional marriage. Many Western women who would have otherwise gotten married have been dragged down by the Sex and the City syndrome: they have taken themselves out of the market for marriage by waiting until they are middle aged to settle down with a man. But by middle age, most women have lost their value as a marriage partner. Middle aged men, on the other hand, can retain their marriage potential owing to vast biological and psychological differences between the sexes.

    This is something which young women who are thinking about jumping into the feminist swimming pool ought to contemplate. There just may be no ladder to get out, once you have reached the deep end.

    Like


  49. Wow, I mean so what, my comments were blown away, guess you just lost a reader, plenty of similar blogs and forums with less ego than this place. good bye.

    Like


  50. I work with a fat older broad (30s) who has no friends and so tries to get all the younger workers (18-22) to be her buddy. The younger guys gossip with her like old biddies—it’s sick. I realize they still have a lot of testosterone to imbibe, but watching them prattle on like little girls about everyone makes me wonder if they even pee upright.

    Also, niggers suck.

    Like


  51. Men and women evolved over millions of years in an environment where the number of people they came in contact with over their lifetime was miniscule. This is especially true for potential mates. It is quite possible that someone today could see more people in a day than one of our ancestors saw in their entire lifetime. 20,000 or more years ago, the average bachelor or bachelorette had a choice between probably no more than 3 or 4 eligible partners. Using gossip to elbow out even one competitor in such a milieu could have a huge impact on successfully reproducing. What once was a necessary tool in one’s survival arsenal, like the ability to store fat, is now just a relic of a bygone time.

    Like


  52. Gossiping is huge in Chinese society…when I was going out with my ex, all her friends started gossiping about me:
    “He is always chasing girls”
    “He was with so and so before”
    and so on….

    My ex would never stand up for me, just kind of listened, then would raise it with me.

    It never occurred to her that the girls who were gossiping were hitting a wall, were jealous, were frustrated with their own blokes….

    And when you started defending yourself you look…defensive.

    It’s one thing to know the motivation, but how do you counter this stuff?

    Like


    • Korean women gossip like mad too. They are some of the nosiest women on earth.

      My theory: It’s got something to do with their deeply xenophobic traditional culture — making sure that nobody in the tribe has her eye on that cute Japanese occupier.

      Like


      • I think it has more to do with having a high average intelligence which led to a highly developed civilization at an early juncture, which in turn, led to high population density and more severe competition for scarce resources. Smart people will seek alternative means of conflict if they know they will get their asses kicked by direct confrontation.

        Like


      • My theory: It’s got something to do with their deeply xenophobic traditional culture — making sure that nobody in the tribe has her eye on that cute Japanese occupier.

        There may be something to that. Aloof alpha assholes = Japs while they were running Korea

        Like


      • Exploitation alone is no way to run an empire. Koreans hate the Japaneses’ guts. For good reason.

        Like


  53. Kate Fox, an anthropologist specialising in British behaviour, did an investigation into differences in gossip between the sexes a while back in her book called “Watching the English”. As an aside, it’s worth reading the book; very interesting stuff.

    Her findings were that depending on how define gossip, men and women gossip similar amounts. The difference is that when men gossip, it’s an exchange of information; lots of facts and minimal speculation. “So last weekend I discovered this new cocktail bar. They’ve got a hot waitress and the drinks are cheap. Dave got wasted going up to the bar to buy loads of drinks just to talk with her.”

    She found that women gossip tends to focus much more on the interaction; less a tale of what happened and more a recount of; so he said and she said then he said etc.

    Like


    • I read a quote recently by a female when talking about how she didn’t like books written by men; the gist of it was “I don’t like them because the protagonists go around noticing things instead of just being and existing. “

      Like


    • This whole ‘gossip’ thing isn’t merely about talking.

      Men like to throw the bull about every and any subject… there’s no ulterior motive in re planting seeds in the minds of other men about this guy or that guy, or moving up the pecking order with mere wind.

      THAT’S the difference between women’s gossip and men’s bull sessions.

      This isn’t rocket science.

      Like


  54. Anonymous
    Am I the only one who thinks that the comments are pretty truthful?
    ————————————————————————————————

    No, you are correct, just look how that white hampster gets spinning without any prompting. Some of these white guys have “nigger on the brain” disease; they are completely preoccupied with black dick. Theres a nigger around every corner and under every bed…

    And then these same white guys get mad when white women want to find out for themselves

    Like


    • Doan know about ’round de corner or under de bed… but Lawdy, they sho’ ’nuff be a nigger in the woodpile here at de chateau.

      Like


    • “And then these same white guys get mad when white women want to find out for themselves…”

      Agreed, thwack. Based on his comments, if Greg Eliot has a daughter, there’s approximately a 97% chance (+/- 3% margin of error) that she has been, is now, or will be fucking a black man.

      And there’s approximately a 100% chance that he will never know about it.

      Like


      • lol. I love when lefties project their sexual cuckhold fantasies on anyone who dare criticize the negroids.

        Like


      • Jason is familial duty-bound to cover his brother-in-law’s back.

        Like


      • Ha. Win.

        Like


      • on August 27, 2012 at 3:54 pm Mr. Pointyface

        Great. Another paranoid, racist wingnutter. Have a nice two minutes’ hate.

        I know , I know–you can never back down. That’s the way paranoids are.

        Like


      • Poor wittle wiberal. Did I hurt you wittle feelings, telling the truth about the darkies that you fantasize will someday rape your mother and produce a real man, and not a sackless dweeb like your self?

        Remember how these nigger-lovers would never call a black man paranoid, racist, or dumb. They are the superior race, concha know? Just look at their communities! Seig Heil, Mein Obama!

        Like


      • I just find it highly amusing that they throw around the “paranoid wingnut” epithets our way and don’t say a peep on the moon-bat and Afrocentrist theories.

        Then again, that just bolsters my feeling that it’s all the same sock-puppet attempting to appear as some sort of brigade.

        Like


      • If I recall rightly, it was a leftie whore with leftie parents who produced Obama.

        Like


      • Don’t project your wife’s history and/or inclinations onto your betters.

        Just make sure that she keeps those oft-boasted-by-you blonde curtains color-coordinated with the rug.

        Like


      • The best part is how these lefty sackless dweebs actually BELIEVE Hollywood movies about how “you shouldn’t ban teenagers from doing things, they’ll just do them anyway. Freedom for all teenagers is good.”

        Because Hollywood is famous for its well-adjusted children.

        Then again, its clear they believe that blacks are exactly the same as all non-blacks. So its no surprised they swallowed other bits of the propaganda.

        Like


      • if you’ve seen the kids born in the mid 80s onwards, you’ll see how that works out. It’s easier to count the teenage girls who aren’t fucking dogs than are.

        Like


      • on August 27, 2012 at 4:06 pm Mr. Pointyface

        Yes, yes!!! Delightful.

        Dregs Eliot’ adorable little girl will be the one chick that it will be a riot to find out is gleefully fucking a big black guy, while saying internally “Fuck you , daddy, you racist creep,.. I LOVE IT I LOVE IT AHHHHHHHHHH!!!.””

        Oh, my that would be truly poetic two-tone justice.

        Don’t you want to check, Greg? Ask her? Oh, no you might put the idea in her mind. You’re “sure” of her right? Sure she’s a racist tool like yourself?

        Like


      • Going after a man’s family is a low blow.

        And speaking of low blows, how’s your son?

        Okay, I admit, that was a dirty crack.

        And speaking of dirty cracks, how’s your mom?

        Like


      • Showing a little too much glee there, Pointyphiz. Careful you don’t snort the bone from your nose.

        Like


      • lol. Note again the two part left wing fantasy:

        1. Black male on white female—they just get off on this.

        2. The idea that children naturally will do what their parents most hate, which is why parental authority is bad.

        So we have destruction of white males + destruction of the family. It’s a win, win in the sackless lefty world.

        Like


      • Family values… if you happen to be the Manson family.

        Like


      • Leftoids always start to sound like foul-mouthed teenage boys, given time.

        Several years back on some other message board, I read a post talking about how a buddy of the poster’s who worked in a porn store reported that the vast majority of those who bought BM-on-WF porn were white males. (The brothas usually chose either black on black or white on white. White women were not too common, but they usually chose white on white also.)

        Given Pointyphiz’s and Jason’s remarks, we may surmise the political orientation of those white males.

        Like


      • You guys are sad — anybody who disagrees with racial hatred is quickly labelled “Marxist” (Tyrone), “inane Fifth Columnist” (Dregs Eliot), or “sackless nigger lover” (whorefinder).

        Oh well. It’s useless to expect nuanced thinking from a guy who names himself “whorefinder” — an all-but-total admission that he has zero game.

        Sorry, fellas, no twisted racial sexual fantasies here, and certainly no wishful destruction of white males, since I am one, you morons.

        Please, someone teach me how to walk around grinding my molars into powder at the sight of black people. It sounds like so much fun.

        But thanks for the comments — this alpha loves to fight.

        Like


      • lol. Gotta hate a lefty—-they will always deny reality.

        “anybody who disagrees with racial hatred
        —the term is “race realism.” Noticing reality is good for your health, boy.

        is quickly labelled “Marxist” (Tyrone), “inane Fifth Columnist” (Dregs Eliot), or “sackless nigger lover” (whorefinder)”

        —And you have done nothing to dispel those labels.

        Oh well. It’s useless to expect nuanced thinking from a guy who names himself “whorefinder” — an all-but-total admission that he has zero game.

        —-lol. Actually, it’s from the night I met your mom.

        Sorry, fellas, no twisted racial sexual fantasies here,

        —–so you admit that your desire for a black man to rape your mom is twisted. Good, admitting it’s the first step.

        and certainly no wishful destruction of white males, since I am one

        —-Of course not, uncle tom. Like when the white father of Jane Fonda’s child said he hoped for the destruction of the white race. Or when Bill Ayers screams about how whitey is keeping darkie down.

        someone teach me how to walk around grinding my molars into powder at the sight of black people.

        —its more about getting angry at black social dysfunction and crime and how you blame whitey for it all, and about refusing to take the blame for black people’s failings any longer.

        It sounds like so much fun.

        —a lot better than going to the vagina monologues and occutard rallies.

        this alpha loves to fight.

        —-LMAO. Oh, bless his little heart.

        Like


      • It’s official.

        The prize for Biggest Non-Alpha Asshole on this website goes to … whorefinder.

        And the prize for Most Rhetorical Fallacies In A Single Argument also goes to … whorefinder.

        Start drinking fish oil, hater, and let’s talk again when your neocortex is a bit more developed.

        This alpha loves to fight. You’re now in the waiting room, but I’d like to get you in better mental shape first.

        Like


      • @Jason:

        Boy, you are one funny retard.

        It’s official.
        —Congrats on coming out.

        The prize for Biggest Non-Alpha Asshole on this website…

        And the prize for Most Rhetorical Fallacies In A Single Argument also goes to … whorefinder.

        —ooowie! That hurts so much, little boy. I mean, an insult award from a sackless loser nigger-cock-sucking dweeb like you really hurts. No really, that’s not sarcasm. we all know sarcasm only comes from the likes of your hero, Jon Stewart.

        Start drinking fish oil,
        —-Because its just too evil and “masculine” to eat actual fish. Go vegan, like Jason! Feel your balls shrivel up into your pelvis!

        hater
        —Note how the nigger-worshiper now uses black slang, because he cannot comprehend how certain behavior is socially destructive and therefore worthy of criticism, and therefore bows to dumber black men, who also cannot fathom the same (and do not care anyway).

        and let’s talk again when your neocortex is a bit more developed.
        —-When you develop a spine and your testes drop, call me.

        This alpha loves to fight.
        —lol. Note how the whiny little lefty tries to “assert” he is alpha, because his actions and words betray otherwise. Like all lefty fags, he thinks if he keeps merely repeating a Big Lie, it will magically come true.

        It’s so cute how he thinks this is a “fight.” Like most lefty men, he has no idea what the word “fight” actually means.

        You’re now in the waiting room, but I’d like to get you in better mental shape first.

        —Bless his heart. Jason is like a kid in special ed challenging the math team to an IQ test. Jason literally cannot fathom how dumb he really is.

        Like


      • @whorefinder

        Bile = omega.

        And I use my own name.

        Peace,
        Jason

        Like


      • @Jason:

        Bile = omega.
        —At least you admit what you are.

        And I use my own name.
        —-No, you do not the word bitch.

        Peace,
        —-Hippie.

        Note how our little omega-lefty can’t even respond. He’s just throwing up his hands and going back to his feminazi-vegan meeting, where he hopes to finally score with the unwashed, intergender “Leslie.” Maybe he’ll get a pegging tonight!

        Like


      • @ whorefinder

        Someone’s gone off his meds.

        One compliment: Your comments are very imaginative. Have you thought about wriitng a book about what it’s like living deep inside your own spaced-out head?

        But again: Your insane bile marks you as omega. Please, keep commenting, so that everybody here can see exactly how nutso you are.

        Jason

        Like


      • @Omega Jason:

        Someone’s gone off his meds.
        —Your estrogen pills didn’t come in the mail yet, eh, sonny boy?

        Your comments are very imaginative.
        —when you think instead of regurgitating your women and black studies professors, they tend to be.

        Have you thought about wriitng a book
        —Did. Called “I am Awesome.”

        But Again: Your insane bile marks you as omega.
        –Actually, that was the first time you said that. Before, you were just admitting your own omega-nature.

        Please, keep commenting,
        —Don’t need your permission, boy. But the please is a nice bow to your daddy.

        exactly how nutso you are.
        —They keep agreeing with me and denigrating you, sonny boy.

        Jason
        —lmao. You feel the need ot “sign” your comments now? You do realize your handle is in the title of every comment, right?

        Wait, pointing out the obvious to a liberal is a dangerous proposition. I might be called a racist.

        Like


      • @ whorefinder.

        Have you ever made a constructive argument?

        Like


      • @ Omega Jason:

        Have you ever made a constructive argument?

        —Have you ever not masturbated to a fantasy of your mom being raped by a nigger?

        Like


      • Don’t liberals generally think racist parents have racist daughters? Yup.
        What then makes this Greg Eliot case different? Oh nothing.

        STFU

        Like


      • Don’t look for logic… they’re just attempting to get my goat, from the safety of their keyboards.

        Like


      • “Climate of hate” and all that, of course. Turns them toxic. But then it doesn’t when 1) they’re trying to create their fantasies; or 2) when we talk about how the black “community” spews nothing but hate /blame whitey/attack whitey to its “citizens.”

        Like


    • Ah, yes, the continual dysfunction of the brothers must never be commented on, unless one is blaming whitey.

      Behold and bow down to P.C., the almighty!

      lol nigger lover.

      Like


  55. Exemplified perfectly, as always, by Seinfeld:

    ELAINE: Why do they call it a wedgie?

    GEORGE: Because the underwear is pulled up from the back and… it wedges in.

    JERRY: They also have an atomic wedgie. Now the goal there is to actually get the waistband on top of the head. Very rare.

    ELAINE: Boys are sick.

    JERRY: Well what do girls do ?

    ELAINE: We just tease someone until they develop an eating disorder.

    Like


  56. Yuri
    The secret? you mean the secrets of Alphadom or suspicion over moon-landing..please…
    —————————————————————————————————
    The landings.

    As far as I know, NEIL Armstrong, never addressed his skeptics the way LANCE Armsrtong did?

    The best evidence that it was faked, is the reaction people had to the event; One ginormous pep rally, that continues to this day. All the other “evidence” is unnecessary.

    In many ways it reminds me of 911. People were presented with a myth they wanted to believe because the alternative is too horibble to contemplate.

    If you tell someone the were raped by their father, they won’t believe you even if it true, because their entire “frame” is built around identifying with their father. If you destroy that, most people have nothing.

    And its not over.

    I hear rumours the chinks are going to attempt a moon landing.

    Do you think nonwhite people will be allowed to fake it?

    Like


    • > As far as I know, NEIL Armstrong, never addressed his skeptics the way LANCE Armsrtong did?

      Maybe because anyone who believes it was a hoax is a complete nutbar. Just guessing…

      Like


      • on August 27, 2012 at 11:48 am andronicusrex

        Nutbar, whackadoodle, bat-shit crazy. Everyone knows both Neil and Lance Armstrong are 3rd level Thetans.

        Like


      • I’ve heard that. Did you know that Dick Nixon is still alive and secretly running the US government from a bunker under the Nathan’s hotdog stand at Coney Island?

        Like


      • Naw, that’s where JFK’s brain is being kept alive.

        Nixon’s over by the Wild Mouse.

        Like


      • Dude, give Nixon more credit for taste than that. After seeing the shithole that is coney Island (unsurprising, given the large black population there), I now know Nixon’s off in Hoboken with Jimmy Hoffa.

        Like


      • I imagine that the USSR would have let the cat out of the bag.

        Like


      • Ding ding ding! My point exactly.

        Like


    • If you saw it on TV in 1969, you don’t doubt for a second that it happened.

      Like


    • guys, think of it..even if you feel first landing was fake why would the govt. try to fake another four or five…I mean is not it enough to fake one…

      Like


      • I can’t believe this folderol is even being discussed… unless it’s a sub rosa plot to get the last few cogent posters here to abandon the chateau altogether.

        Like


      • LOL! that is what wished when I posted my comment…but somebody came up with his nonsense conspiracy theory..BTW u seem 2 be the most active chap here.

        Like


      • I enjoy some of the repartee here at the chateau, and currently have a lot of “open windows” during the day to check in and out.

        Like


      • Indeed..it is the best place in Internet I guess..oldest pages are the best I see. I have been here for four here and enjoyed everything that happened..some old dudes are missing and new ones come in every now and then but that is a part of every movement..

        Like


    • lol. The paranoid mind of the left knows no bounds; its also called projection.

      p.s. shit for brains. The Soviets were in the moon race too, and wanted to embarrass the U.S. at every turn. So the easiest thing in the world for them to do would have been to scream, “Fake!” and demonstrate to the press it was.

      They didn’t. They just packed up their space gear and went home.

      And you’re a 9/11 nut job? Unsurprising. Yes, Bush masterfully blew up the towers in a fake attack to invade Iraq. Wait, no, he invaded Afghanistan, big mistake! It took 2.5 more years to get us into Iraq, complete with months-long debates and a skeptical press corps. If he’d only planted the Al Queda evidence in Iraq, like Cheney said to!

      Or….you’re just a paranoid delusional moonbat desperate to blame Bush and suck Obama’s cock.

      Next!

      Like


  57. on August 27, 2012 at 11:41 am andronicusrex

    When two women kiss, it reminds one of nothing so much as two prizefighters shaking hands.
    – HL Mencken

    Like


  58. Tyrone
    If you saw it on TV in 1969, you don’t doubt for a second that it happened
    —————————————————————————————————
    I saw Lance ARMSTRONG win 7 tour de france titles on tee-vee?

    I saw a nigger become president on tee-vee?

    Matter of fact, I saw a nigger be president on tee-vee BEFORE one actually did become president in real life.

    Tyrone, you seem simple?

    are you a black person?

    Like


  59. New article in the Daily Mail today shows that obesity is linked to increased Breast Cancer occurrence and mortality.

    From the article:
    “‘We found that obesity at diagnosis is associated with about a 30 per cent higher risk of recurrence and a nearly 50 per cent higher risk of death, despite optimal treatment,’ he said.”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2193897/Being-thinner-helps-beat-breast-cancer-Risk-disease-returning-rises-step-weight.html#ixzz24lZ6yUFW

    It just goes to show that all those feminist heifers who want us to accept and reward obesity in women, despite all the pink ribbon posting and breast cancer “awareness raising” (whatever the hell that is) activism they do, are the ones who are shoveling large portions (yeah, I said it) of their beloved sisterhood into early coffin naps.

    Yes gents, if you get called a misogynist for telling chicks to slim down, just know that after all is said and done, “misogynist” is evidently the new term for one who keeps women from getting sick and dying horrible deaths.

    I guess I am a proud misogynist then – anything to keep the women I care about from the hell that is cancer.

    Like I said before:

    Fat Shaming – its a celebration of life.

    Like


  60. Tyrone
    Lance really won them too and Obama is our president. Why do you doubt we landed on the Moon?
    ————————————————————————————–

    For the same reason you think “we” did:

    *I saw it on tee-vee*

    Like


    • on August 27, 2012 at 3:32 pm Latent Sadist

      “we” is refering to our country. Nothing incorrect about his grammar. Nice and smug of you though, you racist cunt. even though you’re just as dull in the brain.

      thwack likes mens assholes!

      Like


      • You fail.

        Black people don’t own TV’s.

        Well, unless they stole it in a riot. Or Obama bought one for ’em.

        Like


  61. Feminazi-ism run down your competition’s fidelity, looseness and figures then gett ’em to be sex-positive sluts to reduce their SMV while you know better… You Go Girrrrl!

    Like


  62. 40 COMMENTS BY GREG ELLIOT ON A TOTAL OF 220.

    STOP FUCKING COMMENTING THAT MUCH. 20% OF THE COMMENTS ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME????

    Like


    • Been a slow day today…

      Besides, I didn’t know there was a limit here…

      Or that you were the official hall monitor.

      Try not to shout so much, there’s a good little dweeb.

      Like


    • He is pretty entertaining, though. I have to admit that.

      Like


    • I’ll be out of town the next two days, so you and your hen buddies will get your chance to have a real pecking party then.

      Like


    • on August 28, 2012 at 12:46 am FuriousFerret

      Greg is so insightful though.

      I think I could actually make a Greg Eliot bot that would accurately mimick the guy.

      ‘Blah blah…… it’s the black people’s fault’

      ‘Blah blah….. fuck women’

      ‘Blah blah … Greg Eliot is the fucking man’

      ‘Blah blah …. ‘

      I nomiate Greg Eliot for ‘Hater of the Year’. with ‘Attention Whore of the Week’ for good measure.

      Like


  63. Tyrone
    Supposedly they saw these things from a close distance.
    ——————————————————————————————-

    Well, his name is BUZZ Aldrin

    Like


  64. Greg Eliot
    Going after a man’s family is a low blow.

    And speaking of low blows, how’s your son?

    —————————————————————————-
    Touche’ mr Eliot, you sound like you were in the military? Thats a good one, can I use it?

    You’re lucky I like my crackers salty

    Like


    • on August 28, 2012 at 2:30 am Mr. Pointyface

      But a man’s race is fine, eh?

      Like


      • Hey Greg-O; didn’t get an answer to my question there: going after a man’s family is taboo, but going after his race is just fine, right? That’s your value system, right? Just checking.

        You know, there is always the possibility you’re wrong too. Of course, you could never admit the possibility of the need for change, could you?

        Like


  65. Men and women evolved over millions of years in an environment where the total number of people they came in contact with over their lifetime was miniscule. This is also true for potential mates. It is quite possible that someone today could see more people in a day than one of our ancestors saw in their entire lifetime. 20,000 or more years ago, the average bachelor or bachelorette had a choice between probably no more than 3 or 4 eligible partners. Using gossip to elbow out even one competitor in such a milieu could have a huge impact on successfully reproducing. Gossip is a genetic relic, like efficient storage of calories into fat, that is a holdover from before the time the big gulp was invented.

    Like


    • Message to Prof. Woland,

      Evolution hasn’t stopped. Competition for mates has likely intensified in the last 20,000 years, as humans became more numerous. With a high population density, there is more competition for all resources, including human. Compare a Chinese city to the African bush circa 1900. Which of these two areas would see more intragroup competition?

      Like


      • We did a lot more evolving prior to 20,000 years ago then we have since. And when I said, 20,000 years ago I was just pulling a number out of a hat, the same was true 5,000 years ago and for some cultures and races 200 years ago. The competition for mates has always been high because it is the most important thing every human who has lived has competed for. If we did not have women there would be no reason to fight over anything.

        Like


  66. corvinus
    Several years back on some other message board, I read a post talking about how a buddy of the poster’s who worked in a porn store reported that the vast majority of those who bought BM-on-WF porn were white males. (The brothas usually chose either black on black or white on white. White women were not too common, but they usually chose white on white also.)
    —————————————————————————————————

    Exactly, because thats where the money is and always was.

    Same thing with rap music. Rappers didn’t start making real money until white people started buying.

    I think its Chris Rock who has the piece about black people making you famous, but white people making you rich?

    White people are always the target market if you want to get rich because they have the greatest disposable income. It reminds me of pay-per-view porn sites. Ive never met any blk guys that use that, and I know a gank of niggers. That whole industry was built off white men with good credit.

    Same thing with Apple computers; sucessful because its got that white demographic that has no problem opening its wallet everytime they want to do something.

    So the porn industry is no different, what you see, is not “what you get”;

    its whatever white males want.

    Cause thats where the money is.

    Like


    • Chuck Berry said something like, “Why should I make a penny playing for black people when I can make a dime playing for white people?”

      Great quote. He even reflects white-black population distribution at that time too: about 9 to 1.

      I think he was also trying to explain why he wrote “My Ding-a-ling”, which was such a stupid song that (to his mind) only white people would buy it.

      Like


      • White people thought it was funny because it was assumed he was talking about his cock and balls in the song.

        Like


    • The Asian male market looks very promising. You know why.

      Like


    • And whitey’s on the moon.

      Like


  67. Go Topless Day…………
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2194208/Go-Topless-Day-2012-From-New-York-California-American-women-solidarity-womens-rights.html

    why most of them do not have perky ones or all trash is gathered here to bother us!

    Like


    • the reason why the vast majority of women at these types of events are ugly is because it’s their only chance to bask in the spotlight. during the course of their normal lives, they’re invisible. attractive women get attention all the time; they have no need to parade around like the fuglies do.

      Like


    • what’s even more disgusting than the floppy-tittied hags are the men wearing bikini tops.

      Like


  68. What about women/dates gossiping about other guys or guys who give them attention during dates with you, in order to create some kind of jealousy reaction/shit testing?

    Like


  69. CH, you have any advice for status disparity game? There aren’t always 10’s at the bar, and sometimes — sometimes — you end up cutting your losses and going home with a 4 or 5. Why lie?

    You know as well as I do, though, that this can be harder to pull off than an 8 or 9. “Why is this alpha into me? I began shooting for lesser betas long ago and assumed the coquettish rules of the de facto celibate years ago.” I ask because it’s 4 am and I just got LMR’d by a chubby girl that I easily would have fucked if she were 2 points more attractive. Any tips?

    Like


  70. on August 28, 2012 at 8:09 am Dr Van Nostrand

    boy am i a knucklehead, i put my email address in my place of a nom de plume…do me a favor and correct it please thanks

    Like


  71. on August 28, 2012 at 6:24 pm | Reply King A (Matthew King)
    This video made my day.

    I will now randomly incorporate “but whitey’s on the moon” into conversations going forward.

    Do you think your children will live as well as you did?

    I predict your white children will come up with their own version of this when you are dead. They may not use the term “whitey”, but the concept will be the same.

    Like


    • My children will not be adults of the Grand Ressentiment. It would be impossible for them: they are not slaves, never were, and never will be, preferring death to bondage. That minimal dignity, made in God’s image, is enough to inoculate them against the victimology that has putrefied your race.

      Matt

      Like


      • Thus saith Scripture: “Those who honor me I will honor, but those who despise me will be disdained.”

        Like


      • Speaking of putrefaction, “King”, let me paraphrase my favorite schizophrenic poetic genius:

        “before you remove the pimple from my face, remove the massive tumor of proud, unChristlike hatred from your heart.”

        Like


  72. […] Impolite Graph Of The Month; The Alpha Male Look; Hot Girl Crazy; Women Gossip To Compete For Men; Comment Of The Week: Precision Analogies […]

    Like


  73. How do you “blow an ovary?” That’s too funny.

    Like


  74. […] [Women Gossip To Compete For Men] […]

    Like