Tag: women

180 seconds

That’s all the time you have, gentlemen. So, figuring out how to make the optimal impression in that time is the only place your efforts should be concentrated if you are seeking to meet women:

They say you should never judge a book by its cover. But when it comes to the opposite sex, it seems that’s exactly what women do. It takes a woman just three minutes to make up her mind about whether she likes a man or not, a study has revealed.

The average female spends the time sizing up looks, physique and dress-sense as well as taking in scent, accent and eloquence of a potential suitor. Women also quickly judge how he interacts with her friends and whether he is successful or ambitious. It also emerged most women believe 180 seconds is long enough to gauge whether or not he is Mr Right, or Mr Wrong.

The study also found women rarely change their mind about a man after their initial reaction – and believe they are ‘always right’ in their assumptions and judgments.

It would appear that women become emotionally invested in their decisions about whether a man is attractive or not, which means that in most cases, a man will have no need to worry about keeping up whatever false front he projects in order to win the 180-second window.

How you apply this is up to you. I suspect overly outrageous exaggeration will backfire, unless utilized with irony. The important thing to keep in mind that if an attribute isn’t going to come across in less than 180 seconds, it may as well not exist. The second thing to conclude from this is that if you haven’t lit a spark in those first three minutes, the marginal return on your time investment will drop off a cliff. This means a man should never give any woman more than five minutes of his time unless she provides him with a definite indication of interest.

It is perhaps useful to keep in mind that women are usually less interested in those who openly express interest in them.

“Women who believed the men liked them a lot were more attracted to the men than women who thought the men liked them only an average amount. However, the women who found the men most attractive were the ones who weren’t sure whether those men were into them or not.”

Men are the real romantics

Betas, Deltas, and Gammas may do well to keep this interesting fact from the Pew Research Center in mind the next time they hear a woman sailing off on what they believe to be her heartfelt romantic fantasies:

Men (31%) are a bit more likely than women (26%) to say that every person has only one true love.

In other words, nearly three-quarters of women don’t buy into the Disney myth by which many men believe women live. This is one reason it often surprises men when they discover how ruthlessly calculating women can be, especially when those men happen to buy into the Disney myth themselves.

Never put a woman on a pedestal. Never put anyone on a pedestal. Statues belong on pedestals, not living people.

Mailvox: the inexplicable antics of women

Drew is a bit discombobulated:

This is my first time writing to you, but I have followed your blog for about 6 months now. I was directed to your blog by a female friend after she quoted you on facebook. Many of your entries on politics and the economy are way over my head, but I do learn something from time to time. The articles that i find most applicable to me are the ones on women. Which is why I’m writing to you today.

One of my female friends has never seemed the least bit interested in me. Until two days ago, when I made it known that I will be moving out of state for a job. All of a sudden, she’s been all over me, totally out of character. I’ve talked to one of my friends, and he said he’s experienced the same thing when he was about to move away. What is it that makes women ignore guys until they no longer have a shot? Is it the “you always want what you can’t have” principle? Or is it something more sinister at work?

I don’t know if I would describe it as anything sinister, as it is probably the same reason women are so much more sexually accessible when they are traveling away from home than when in their home environment. I suspect she is sufficiently attracted enough to you to be interested in no-strings sex, but not enough to want an actual relationship. This is most likely because your status in the socio-sexual hierarchy is insufficient to impress her friends. Never forget that women are not pack animals by nature, they are herd animals until they emotionally bond with a man, at which point they abandon the herd in favor of a pairing that can form the nucleus of a new pack.

So, since you have already made it clear that you’re not going to be around in the future, she is free to pursue a dalliance with you without having her association with you judged by her herd and harming her status with it. This is why skilled male predators always make a point of cutting off a woman from the herd, because their chances of success with her always increase dramatically once she isn’t performing for her public.

But there is no reason you should take my word for it. This is a predictive model which we can test. I recommend that you perform a service to your fellow men and do the following experiment: Tell her that the plans for your job may be falling through and that because she is more important to you than any job could ever be, you are planning to turn down the job so that you can stay and be with her. If my interpretation is correct, she will be aghast at your response and attempt to convince you to take the job. Her unexpected attraction to you will also vanish as rapidly as it appeared.

If, on the other hand, I am incorrect and she reacts to the news with tears of joy before falling into your arms, well, you may want to actually reconsider taking the job and moving away. It’s always possible that she was just very shy and didn’t dare indicate how she felt until the last possible moment. Remember, it’s a lot harder to find a good woman who truly loves you than it is to find a job.

When White Knighting is permissible

If you’re not only a Gurkha, but a Gurkha who clearly has Samuel L. Jackson-style Oedipal references inscribed on your khukari, you can white-knight all you like. You can, in fact, arguably do whatever happens to suit your fancy and no one in his right mind is going to be inclined to tell you otherwise:

Bishnu Shrestha, a brave Gurkha soldier in Indian Army, defeated 40 train robbers while returning home after a voluntary retirement…. While in the train, Maurya Express from Ranchi to Gorakhpur on September 2, 2010, 35 year-old Bishnu saved a girl about to be raped by train robbers, in front of her helpless parents. After looting the train, when the robbers started stripping the 18 year old girl in front of him, he couldn’t contain his calmness. He took out his khukari and attacked the group of 40 robbers, alone. In the fight, he killed three of dacoits and injured eight others. Remaining looters ran for their lives.

The police arrested the eight injured dacoits and recovered Rs. 400,000 in cash, 40 gold necklaces, 200 cell phones, 40 laptops and other items left by the robber while fleeing the train.

I don’t think the lesson we can take away from this really has a whole lot to do with white knighting, so much as the extreme importance of never messing with a Gurkha.

The political malleability of women

Marriage not infrequently causes even the most elite women to come to their political senses:

Only two years ago Mrs Bruni-Sarkozy had claimed that she was “instinctively left-wing” after at one stage supporting her husband’s Socialist rival in the 2007 presidential elections. She had also publicly opposed Mr Sarkozy’s plan to conduct DNA tests on immigrants…. But in Monday’s interview with Le Parisien newspaper, she said her previous political persuasion was only due to her belonging to a “community of artists.” “We were bobo (bourgeois bohemians), we were left-wing but at that time I voted in Italy (her native country).” I have never voted for the Left in France and I can tell you, I’m not about to start now. I don’t really feel left-wing anymore,” she said.

Not that I’m a fan of Sarkozy, of course, but he is certainly less objectionable than the French Socialists. But the observation points to an obvious problem in the West. As marriage rates continue to decline, we should expect to see women moving even further to the political Left. Since men are moving steadily to the right in the USA, this will likely create a situation where most women, blacks and immigrants are the core of the party opposed to the other one consisting of native men and the minority of women married to them. This is unlikely to make for a stable political system or a stable society.

Of course, the economic Fimbulwinter should render all of that irrelevant long before it becomes an actual problem.

Death of a White Knight: Episode III

Another would-be White Knight manages to get himself killed unnecessarily:

Wednesday night during a fight outside his Conejo Valley apartment, authorities said. The suspect, who was injured in the fight, was arrested and booked into Ventura County Jail on suspicion of murder, Ventura County sheriff’s officials said. Authorities declined to comment on what sparked the fatal fight. The victim’s daughter said relatives were told he was stabbed while intervening in an altercation between a woman and man….

Barnes died of stab wounds to his torso, said Michael Tellez, a deputy medical examiner. It was unclear if Otal and Barnes knew each other, officials said.

So again I will advise all the deltas and gammas prone to white-knighting: if a man and woman are engaged in a verbal or physical altercation, stay out of it! It’s not your concern and if the man doesn’t attack you, the woman probably will. On a tangential note, it would be very interesting to know if those who thought a woman is justified in aborting her child in order to save herself to raise the rest of her family also believe that it is right for a man to intervene in domestic altercations.

Loads of time

You really have to wonder about the feminist claims to be “pro-woman” considering how readily they have fed false information to young women in what has proven to be a serious obstacle to the long-term objectives of many of them:

Doctors have issued a stark warning to couples not to leave it too late to try for a baby. With more and more women pursuing careers, they and their partners are leaving parenthood to at least their late thirties. But women aged 35 are six times more likely to have problems conceiving compared to those ten years younger, warns a major study from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.

The report says older parents are making it harder for themselves to have children – and increasing the likelihood of serious medical complications for both mother and baby. By the age of 40, a woman is more likely to have a miscarriage than give birth.

In light of how drenched in feminist propaganda and false biological horologies most young women are today, it is probably necessary for more scientifically astute and family-friendly individuals to take the literal offensive when confronted with the mindless “I’m still young, I have plenty of time” mantra of the average college-educated woman. The correct response is, “of course you do, darling, so long as you don’t mind having two miscarriages and a retardspecial needs child.”

Dating up means dating older

John Molloy offers some advice to women looking to get married that is based on real world statistical behavior rather than Disney movies and HBO television shows:

One of the most common mistakes young women make is to assume that because they’re ready for marriage in their early- or mid-twenties, the men they date are, as well. But as the above research shows, that’s usually not the case. If a woman is seriously trying to find a husband, she should date men who have reached the age of commitment. She can date men slightly before they reach that age, because by the time she’s gone out with a man for a year, he may have reached the point of being receptive to the idea of marriage. But this is taking a gamble that the man is typical, because the figures I’ve just given are educated estimates. Not all men mature at the same rate, and other factors can and do affect a man’s readiness to marry.

His advice corresponds pretty well with my own observations of my friends who have and have not married. Both logic and economics dictate that women should not get involved with men of their own age unless they are planning to marry between the ages of 18 and 20. The problem is that because women hypergamous, those who want to start thinking about getting married around the age of 27 after riding the carouselhaving fun for a few years face the choice of a) pursuing men of equal or higher status and competing with younger women who are more focused on getting married than they are, or b) pursuing men of lower status. Game theory – of the logical sort, not the sociobiological variety – indicates that the correct play for a woman is to be the younger woman looking for marriage among the men at the next higher age of commitment.

This means a woman who is not going to college should look for men who are twenty-three or twenty-four, while college women should look for men who are twenty-six or twenty-seven. Women over the age of thirty should look for men who are thirty-eight to forty, while those over forty should look primarily at divorced men and widowers since men who haven’t married at all by forty have become confirmed bachelors and seldom want to get married or are capable of altering their lifestyles to accomodate it.

These are general guidelines, not hard and fast laws, but they should help women significantly increase their chances of having relationships that blossom into marriage rather than a series of disappointing ones that never go anywhere.

Numerology

As much as most women absolutely hate it, the evidence that there is a statistical correlation between past and future behavior is remorseless. The Audacious Epigone goes through the GSS and uncovers the following data related to the number of men with whom a woman reports she has had sex and the percentage of married women who admit that they have been unfaithful:

00.0% 1 (by definition)
10.4% 2
14.9% 3
17.7% 4
21.6% 5
26.0% 6-10
36.7% 11-20
46.8% 21+

It’s interesting to see that most married women still do not report cheating regardless of their personal history; one might have imagined the 21+ crowd to surpass 50%. Some of the other interesting data derived from the GSS data is that male atheists are the most likely to be unfaithful (30.2%) while women who are vaguely spiritual and believe in Some Higher Power are the worst risk (25%). And only 2.6% of Slim women report cheating while married versus 15.7% of Stocky ones.

On a related note is what young women tend to deprioritize in terms of what they want in a man. And unsurprisingly, it isn’t what they will later prioritize in a marriage.

“A second measure is the number of sex partners that “sub-optimal men” have had. I define that group as men who are 22 years old, dropped out of high school and don’t have a full-time job — men who don’t have a lot going for them. We compare the number of partners they’ve had with the number of partners of a male college graduate who is employed full-time. Theoretically, if sex is valuable to her then she’s not going to trade it away to just some crummy man, and when we look at the data, we find that those sub-optimal men report a lot more partners than men who actually have a lot going for them.”

As with most things, it all comes down to economics in the end.

The science of cuckoldry


I don’t mean to suggest that women are not biologically programmed to be ruthlessly deceptive cheating machines who only manage to surmount their programming by rigid self-control, religious dedication, or cliterectomies and the threat of stoning, but I think the scientistry on display in this video is less than entirely convincing. Seriously, what can reasonably be concluded from a woman who is self-consciously attempting to gyrate in front of a blue screen and an elderly German scientist armed with a camera? And there is a serious self-selection bias as well, given that the great majority of women who were not choosing to go out on the town were excluded from it. It hardly seems surprising that attached women who go out clubbing sans mate are more inclined to cheat than the average single woman… no doubt science will next tell us that recently divorced women are more readily available than the norm too.

Anyhow, it would be a rather more informative metric to combine the skin display percentage with observations of which women a) got physical with someone in public and b) left the club with a man rather than their friends. The observed connection between skin display and ovulation/attachment is potentially significant, but it’s incorrect to assume that skin display is necessarily tantamount to an increased interest in sex.

Perhaps it is a sign of the science fetish that pervades modern society, but the thing that too many men and women alike tend to forget is that we are not at the mercy of our biology. It can be a powerful influence, yes, of course. But the more we intellectually understand these various biomechanical influences, the more we can reduce their ability to dictate our behavior. Or, alternatively, make use of them to manipulate other people.

Courtesy: Biology Department, The Chateau