Archive for the ‘The Id Monster’ Category

I’m convinced Jordan Peterson, perhaps Canada’s only shitlord worthy of the appellation, is a long-time reader of the Chateau. Watch this video of him discussing the reality of female hypergamy (a topic covered extensively at this blog) and its influence on the dating market and you’ll see why I think that he’s been a guest at the Chateau under a pseudonym.

1:26 — “human females engage in hypergamy…women mate across and up dominance hierarchies, men mate across and down”

1:49 — “the socioeconomic status of a woman determines almost zero of her attractiveness [to] a man, whereas the socioeconomic status of a man is a major determinant of his attractiveness to a woman”

“and it isn’t his wealth [that’s attractive to women]… it’s his capacity to generate and be productive and to share”

Welcome to the Chateau, Jordan. I’m sure you’ve enjoyed your stay here.

Game is learned charisma. Another way to look at it: Game is male hypergamy, allowing men to date “across and up” in the instinctual manner that women date. The art of charisma and social dominance is essentially a flip of the evolutionary script, in which the savvy man pulls the same biomechanical levers that the average woman pulls to satisfy her urge to date up or at minimum to date across.

A good metric for determining whether your Game is Tight is to keep a mental tally of the quality of women you bed compared to your pre-Game dating life. If the number of times you dumpster dive is decreasing and the number of times you successfully grab the HBrass ring is increasing from what you used to pull in your beta days, then Game has been your friend in fitness maximization.

PS Here’s Jordan on “the shackles of marriage”:

I laughed at this because it’s a backhanded and cynical defense of marriage. JP is saying that the benefit of the marriage shackle is that you’re forced to surrender the illusion of romantic idealism for the low expectations of a humdrum honesty. Hence, the popularity of Fifty Shades of Bullwhip with married women.

Read Full Post »

One oft-ignored or unremarked upon consequence of proximal Diversity™ is the feedback loop it establishes with rootlessness. Rootlessness — aka social atomization — can enter a dissolution spiral when racial diversity passes a numerical threshold in which its social impacts are widely perceived and even more widely denied by anyone caught within its vibrancy perimeter.

White homeownership is probably the best economic indicator of the social connectedness that has defined Heritage America until 1965; most people buy homes for the long haul, so they expect to spend many years living side by side with neighbors they hope to tolerate, if not warmly befriend. If neighborhood churn is too high and demographic transitions from White to non-White are the norm across America rather than isolated trends, there will be a White generational retreat from home-buying because no one wants to invest in a neighborhood that may turn to shit in ten years time. Occurring alongside this retreat will be an increase in the numbers of Whites willing to roam the country and temporarily settle far away from friends and family for the promise of affordable rents and glimmers of a past homeland unfractured by racial shock waves.

So what happens in a Diversitopia is an increase in the White rate of renting and in the years spent renting before buying, negative trends which an obstinately pro-diversity, open borders government will try (and fail: cf 2008 housing crash) to artificially reverse. Juvenilia, urban coccooning, ideological cuckery, and arrested psychological development can be seen as ego-stroking accommodations to expanding diversity and the disincentive it creates to home-buying. If age of first home purchase and age of first marriage and first child are delayed, then a suite of emotionally regressive adaptations to the changed reality will help Whites rationalize their lowering living standards.

As the native White share of America’s total population dips below 50% in the coming decades, expect the juvenalization trend to accelerate.

Read Full Post »

Recently, researchers have discovered what yer ‘umble proprietor of this scandalous Chateau was telling you long long time: chicks dig violent, rape-y, dominating sex because it is in the nature of women to feel incredibly aroused submitting to a powerful, even sadistic, man, and this feeling is universal among women.

Credentialist (((cipher))), 2017:

The popular feminist narrative would have you believe that porn is largely consumed by men, and that depictions of violent — or at least rough — sex would be a primarily male-dominated interest.

This is untrue, states researcher Seth Stephens-Davidowitz, who says that porn featuring violence against women is significantly more popular among women compared to men. […]

“The rate at which women watch violent porn is roughly the same in every part of the world. It isn’t correlated with how women are treated,” he stated.

Perspicacious Heartiste, 2010:

Romance novels, read almost entirely by women, are flush full of rape fantasies. If fantasy (or as I like to call it, “hyperreality”) didn’t reflect reality then we would hear and read of fantasies by women featuring beta males, short dweebs, nerdos, fatsos, and charmless stutterers in the role of desired man. But we don’t. Women’s fantasies, like men’s fantasies, provide a window into a wished-for reality where all options are available, all choice catered to, all desires quenched. Rape fantasy, despite the protestations to the contrary of the “fantasy is different than reality” crowd, is as much a reflection of real female desire as any other form of sexual fantasy.

Women fantasize about a lot of things that no one argues don’t reflect reality if that reality were an option. What fantasizing woman wouldn’t truly want to be a princess who gets swept off her feet by a prince living in a castle? What single woman who dreams it wouldn’t sleep with Johnny Depp in real life if he propositioned her? These are common fantasies of women which they never argue aren’t reflections of how they wish reality were. So why should we grant a plenary indulgence to rape fantasies? How is it that rape fantasy is the one glaring exception to the reality-reflection rule? Men also fantasize about stuff like threesomes with supermodels, but no one in their right mind would argue that men don’t actually want threesomes with supermodels in reality, if having them were possible. (Wives or girlfriends, don’t bother asking your partners. You won’t get an honest answer.) […]

Rape fantasy reflects a deep, inborn, uncompromising sexual desire by women to be rendered helpless, almost childlike, by a more powerful man. It is the submissive scrawling of their hindbrains, a message in a novel sailing forth from the female limbic labyrinth. And from submission to a dominant male force is born the strongest love.

I loved that he was so powerful I was nothing.
– O

Does this mean women would be sexually turned on by real life rape? It is a question not so easily dismissed when we begin to examine closely the sexual fantasies of women. Dismissed it is, though, because no one — man or woman — wants to creak open the vault door that houses such primeval female decadence. For if women do harbor secret desires for dark seductions, then what is left of the pretext to chivalry? Women benefit from some amount of cultural pedestalization. *Societies* benefit. There is no room in a healthy, functioning society for mischievous inquisitors to lay bare the true soul of woman.

If you want to read the raw uncut ugly truths about women before they’re regurgitated in opaque chunks by big data nerds and media whores years later, you read at Chateau Heartiste. Accept no substitute.

Read Full Post »

This study was published in 2014, so maybe it’s already been discussed at the Chateau, but if it hasn’t this post will rectify that oversight. (If it has, it’s worth revisiting.)

Criminal offending as part of an alternative reproductive strategy: investigating evolutionary hypotheses using Swedish total population data

Criminality is highly costly to victims and their relatives, but often also to offenders. From an evolutionary viewpoint, criminal behavior may persist despite adverse consequences by providing offenders with fitness benefits as part of a successful alternative mating strategy. Specifically, criminal behavior may have evolved as a reproductive strategy based on low parental investment reflected in low commitment in reproductive relationships. We linked data from nationwide total population registers in Sweden to test if criminality is associated with reproductive success. Further, we used several different measures related to monogamy to determine the relation between criminal behavior and alternative mating tactics. Convicted criminal offenders had more children than individuals never convicted of a criminal offense.


Criminal offenders also had more reproductive partners, were less often married, more likely to get remarried if ever married,

Because of criminal jerkboy impulsiveness, or because criminal jerkboys have more women begging them for marriage?

and had more often contracted a sexually transmitted disease than non-offenders. Importantly, the increased reproductive success of criminals was explained by a fertility increase from having children with several different partners.

So criminal jerkboys have to prove themselves worthy of more women’s pussies than do law-abiding betaboys, and it appears the criminal jerkboys have won that pussy-approval contest.

We conclude that criminality appears to be adaptive in a contemporary industrialized country, and that this association can be explained by antisocial behavior being part of an adaptive alternative reproductive strategy.

The killer line, right there. (heh)

Basically, what this research has rediscovered:

Hard men create good times.
Good times create weak men.
Weak men create hard times.
Hard times create hard men.

Why does the industrialized modern gynarchy improve the reproductive fitness of criminal jerkboys? An old CH post based on nothing but a clear-eyed LAYman’s view from the dating trenches offered an explanation: compassion creates more cads.

Bleeding heart compassion has cursed blessed the country with layers of safety nets that subvert the natural cleansing of losers from contributing to the next generation. The result of all this government largesse is the substitution of handouts for husbands. When provider males who are predisposed to marry and support a family are worth less on the market than they used to be they are slowly replaced by playboys taking advantage of the sexual climate. Women who have their security needs met by Big Government (in combination with their own economic empowerment) begin to favor their desire for sexy, noncommital alpha males at the expense of their attraction for men who will foot the bills.

Prediction: As women’s financial status rises to levels at or above the available men in their social sphere, they will have great difficulty finding an acceptable long-term partner. The men, for their part, will turn away from emphasizing their ability to provide as they discover their mediocre-paying corporate jobs are no longer effective displays of mating value. They will instead emphasize the skills of “personality dominance”.

Sex skew plays a role as well. If the natural culling of expendable men — from fetal development onward — is thwarted by human intervention and technological hazard mitigation, then perishable women have more sexual market options, which can mean that criminal cads offering something different and exciting from among the masses of mediocre betas find their star rising with economically independent women. Men navigating an unfavorable mate market saturated with male competition that concomitantly devalues beta provider traits will be under immense pressure to emphasize a caddish attitude toward women and a charming, physical presence over a dependable, agreeable personality.

Of course, mass Dirt World open borders immigration of primarily reproductive-aged swarths will exacerbate an already stressed and fracturing sexual market in the West. Women will begin to appreciate the very special charms of the native criminal jerkboy when waves upon waves of foreign jerkboys are crashing her homeland’s shores and pissing in her brunchtime mimosa.

Not that me telling you this will change anything, but I at least get the pleasure of saying I told ya so when the fires lick the gates of our encircled ruling class.

Read Full Post »

The greatest disconnect between whom a man claims to love and whom he really loves is that produced when asking him his thoughts on the superiority of the virgin bride. You’ll hear variations of the following from him:

“Hey man, I don’t care who’s she’s slept with as long as I’m her last dick.”

“Nah don’t matter, as long as she’s spreading for me.”

“How can I ask a girl to be a virgin when I have so many notch counts?”

“I want an experienced woman, not a dead fish.”

“What’s the diff? Pussy is pussy.”

These are all male hamster rationalization droppings, intended to conceal a deep truth that most men are uncomfortable revealing to themselves, let alone to any women they’re sizing up for long-term commitment. Men prefer virgins, and the preference is universal. The gynarchic West may have made it inconvenient to satisfy that male preference, or to even announce that preference out loud without threat of job loss and social pariah status, but that doesn’t mean the preference has been abolished. The primal code isn’t trifled with.

The CH explanation for this innate male preference to be the sole pumper of a virgin (and the numberless dumper of a slut) has been to invoke the paternity certainty clause: Men don’t get pregnant and bear children, so they have to be sure the women they choose to make honest are the sort to stay sexually faithful and guarantee any children of their unions are in fact fused tissues of their own seed.

And ¡SCIENCE! has been bearing this maxim out: Slutty women are a bad bet for marriage. The likelihood of marital disruption is greater if you have hitched your sunk opportunity costs and roughhoused wallet to a veteran cock carousel rider. Cheating is a surefire way to disrupt marital harmony.

Over eons of mutually co-evolving love and romance and righteous dickings, the virgin bride was prized by men (and prized as a condition to retain by women) because men could be near-certain that a child with a virgin would be his (and virgin women could be as nearly certain the love of an alpha male was theirs). Bedding down in legal limbo with a slut whose snatch has scarfed up a scud missile’s length of schlong is asking for a cucked effacing, a divorce raping, or a dignity scraping. The slut may put out sooner, but she’ll make you pay for it later.

Tantalizingly, ¡SCIENCE! may have stumbled on another, related, reason to explain why men prefer virgins.

Male Microchimerism in the Human Female Brain

In humans, naturally acquired microchimerism has been observed in many tissues and organs. Fetal microchimerism, however, has not been investigated in the human brain. Microchimerism of fetal as well as maternal origin has recently been reported in the mouse brain. In this study, we quantified male DNA in the human female brain as a marker for microchimerism of fetal origin (i.e. acquisition of male DNA by a woman while bearing a male fetus). Targeting the Y-chromosome-specific DYS14 gene, we performed real-time quantitative PCR in autopsied brain from women without clinical or pathologic evidence of neurologic disease (n = 26), or women who had Alzheimer’s disease (n = 33). We report that 63% of the females (37 of 59) tested harbored male microchimerism in the brain. Male microchimerism was present in multiple brain regions. Results also suggested lower prevalence (p = 0.03) and concentration (p = 0.06) of male microchimerism in the brains of women with Alzheimer’s disease than the brains of women without neurologic disease. In conclusion, male microchimerism is frequent and widely distributed in the human female brain.

63% of women tested had male DNA in their brains. The primary culprit in this study appears to be male fetuses, but prior studies have found male DNA infusion from other sources, and though it’s speculative at this point the possibility exists that one source of male microchimerism is sexual intercourse.

In conclusion, data suggest that male microchimerism in young girls may originate from an older brother either full born or from a discontinued pregnancy or from transfusion during pregnancy. We speculate that sexual intercourse may be important but other sources of male cells likely exist in young girls.

If sex implants tiny cargo holds of male DNA into a woman’s body — a big if at this stage of research — then it’s plausible that the male preference for virgins ensues from a subconscious desire of men to avoid having children with a skank whose vagina has hosted a spunk parade that could festoon his precious DNA-carrying vessel with the spermtastic spangles of past dangles.

The gbfm summary:

lotsa cockas, bastard totsas.


FYI chimerism is one of the leading theories to explain the persistence of low levels of homosexuality despite the huge reproductive hit the condition incurs in those afflicted (pathogens and genetic susceptibility are the other contending theories). The chimerism theory states that early in pregnancy the winning fetus absorbs genetic material from the losing fetus (which is never born), and in some cases this will mean female fetus DNA embeds in the male fetus’s brain, somehow altering the sexual orientation of his brain architecture. Just putting it out there.

Read Full Post »

Psychopathy and Diversity™: are the two like oil and water or match and fuel leak? The answer to this question isn’t so clear. There are two competing forces that complicate analysis.

  1. Psychopaths exploit high trust societies, preying on dupes. Diversity erodes social trust and makes everyone warier of each other, reducing the number of dupes to scam.
  2. Psychopaths are skilled at manipulating the natural antagonisms between people and groups for their personal benefit. Diversity increases the number of groups fighting for resources and representation and thus enlarges the field of play for psychopaths.

FYI I define Diversitopia in any Western nation as majority-minority White plus Other. The US is currently sitting at 63% White, and the true number is worse than that, because there’s a big uncounted demographic market of beaner illegals and a fertility bulge of minority births cresting on the horizon that dwarfs the White birth rate.

Psychopaths would have a rich vein of culture rot to excavate in a Diversitopia because there would be so many tribes to play off one another. But, psychos would have a counter-current to swim against in the form of society-wide lowered trust that would increase the difficulty of finding gullible marks. It’s hard to tease out which way the psycho winds would blow, but my impression is that they are currently thriving in the interregnum between wide-eyed Joke Whites still clinging to their pathological altruism and virtue sniveling and squinty Woke Whites casting suspicion in every direction. Soon, though, psychos may find it tough to extract any more nuggets of self-aggrandizement from a dying America.

PS It’s useful to distinguish generic psychopaths from ashkepaths. The latter is a supercharged subspecies of Genus Psycho and undoubtedly thrive in Diversitopias….at least until they’re ejected from their 6 gorillionth host nation. So if you’re waiting passively for Diversity™ to sufficiently crater trust levels in the body politic and deprive ashkepaths of their nutrition, you’ll wait a long time.

Read Full Post »

The topic of this post could easily bloom into an oceanic algae field of effortful analysis, but I intend to keep this particular foray succinct.

Libchicks HATE HATE HATE Meaty Intruder Trump because he is iconic maleness.

It’s Trump’s unapologetic masculinity — and by association the happy masculinity of his supporters — that gets under the speckled hides of the Femcunt Fuggernaut.

The general direction of Western Civ over the last decades has been away from masculinity and toward androgyny. Femininity is under attack as well, but so far has avoided the kind of vitriolic (((propaganda))) that’s been leveled against all forms and expressions and attitudes of masculinity.

Trump is a direct rebuke to the anti-masculinity and anti-male agenda. Precisely, the anti-White male agenda. He is the distillation in one man of everything that drives bitterbitches crazy with hatelust.

He speaks his mind.
He never grovels for approval.
He refuses to regurgitate the symbolic catchwords of feminist and antiracism cant.
He loves women with sexually explicit vigor and remorseless objectification.
He has a child with a much younger, beautiful model wife.
He has multiple children by former wives he has continually traded up for fresher pussy.
He uses his wealth, charm, and power to seduce women.
He tacitly reminds women that they are complicit in his seduction, welcoming his advances when they are young and not in the employ of hillary clinton’s shadow orgs.
He holds a mirror up to women’s rapacious, animalistic sexual natures.
He is a chad who loves being a chad.
He is a doer instead of a talker.
He builds, rather than blathers.
He is a Gizmo, not a Paperwork and Lawyering drone.
He has Game.
He mocks liars, gossips, and degenerates.
He fights, and shames cowards.
He has ridiculed feminist beliefs and representatives and come away unscathed, even stronger than before.
He reminds women that their own men — their very own beta male bootlickers — may think the same things as Trump and pursue the same pleasures if they had Trump’s stones and Trump’s options.

Iconic Maleness embodied by Trump is the hot branding phallus that penetrates the hunchbacked ids of bitter women and the manginas who are fated to settle for them. Trump and his Trumpericans spotlight and magnify the romantic failures and futility of the Nasty Women and the Girly Boys. It’s no wonder they hate him; he’s a Big Beautiful TruthWall looming high above the muck and blocking their desperate ego-soothing escape into self-deluding fantasy.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: