The Hypergamy Synthesis

[ebracer05]

There has been a lot of talk on this board about hypergamy lately; many opinions have been discussed but no one has articulated a comprehensive view of the complex issue set men are dealing with in hypergamy. Rollo, Atom Smasher, Danger, Backbreaker, and others have contributed to the discussion and it is time to amalgamate everything they have discussed.

Hypergamy in its purest form is an unbridled competitive force that drives the sexual marketplace (SMP). It is analogous to the "invisible hand" that Adam Smith asserted drives any free market economy. The SMP assumes its participants make decisions out of rational self interest and will pursue their best outcomes to their logical conclusions. For clarity's sake, rationality in this context does not refer to a person's mental sanity but rather, to their desire to maximize their return on their investment in a market economy or the value of their mate in a sexual economy. Under hypergamy, an individual balances the costs and benefits of a given scenario in order to maximize their advantage. This typifies many otherwise "insane" behaviors as rational because if for instance, cheating on one's monogamous partner, flaking on a second or third date, or acting sexually wh*rish maximizes whatever advantage an individual is attempting to obtain, it is rational under this definition.

It is important to note that individuals definitions of rational self interest will not always coincide. Beta men have a very hard time with this idea because they are not able to see beyond their own paradigm. In their view, they have acted rationally, perhaps irrationally rationally in their relationships, providing, nurturing, purchasing, investing, and doing whatever else they view is necessary in order to maintain the relationship. In their view, they have been rationally self interested because they view their relational actions as sustaining mechanisms for their relationship.

This view often falls apart however when viewed from the female's perspective. Her view of rational self interest probably has very little in common with the man's; where he seeks to provide security for his relationship through practicality and colloquial expressions of endearment, the woman's rational self interest is probably not aware of this anymore than necessary to take advantage of it. She will take advantage of the beta man's generosity, but not because it endears her closer to him, but because it would be irrational for her not to. Refusing his security and provisions would not maximize her advantage.

We look to evolutionary psychology as a major source of information for what it is that informs a woman's sense of rational self interest. Richard Dawkins would probably assert that it is silly to consider that a woman actually engages in any sort of decision making and that it is her genes that are acting rationally self interested. The agent, be it the female or a component of the female, making the decisions does not matter so much - it is more important to discern what the mechanism of decision making is.

Evolution has created genetic "programs" in humans that fall in line with hypergamy. It is in our species' best interest that we maximize our survival value and are able to breed, recombine our genes, and allow evolution to continue through successive generations. These evolutionary programs in our mind are easy to discuss regarding men. In what has been called "the economics of sex", it is easy to see why men tend to seek large numbers and variety among their sexual partners. Through their sperm men are able to fertilize more than one woman per day and will maximize their reproductive success by mating with as many women as possible.

Women on the other hand cannot have multiple children per day, and thus must use different mating strategies in order to maximize their genetic potential. Pregnancy is one of the most energetically expensive activities a human can engage in, and if a woman is to become pregnant, it is in her best interest to ensure that not only will she obtain help from the lucky male during her pregnancy and child rearing years, but also to ensure that she is combing her genetic material with a worthy males. Because of the method of fertilization available to men, it is in their best interest to use the "shotgun method" and fertilize whatever is available. Genetically speaking, it is more advantageous to assume that one of many females will have worthy genes than to waste the time necessary to sufficiently interview every prospective female. Females on the other hand, in the interest of rational self interest, must interview prospective male suitors in order to ensure that her much larger investment will not be for the sake of lousy genes.

Both sexes engage in short term and long term mating strategies that are interesting to read about but not something I am going to write about. Read the book Evolutionary Psychology by David Buss for more information.

That is a simplified overview of the human mating selection process. Models like this help explain why women select for behavior traits in men that would not otherwise make sense according to rational self interest. Why would it be against a woman's rational self interest to leave the beta man who has done nothing be invest himself in their relationship and provide nice things for her? It is because the personality characteristics he embodies do not correlate with the genetic maps that have been reinforced in her brain for the last several hundred human generations.

We have to remember that human civilization as we know it is an extremely recent phenomenon. For most of our history as a species (this correlates with Christian beliefs too), humans were nomadic and lived in a much more dangerous world. There is a reason why Thomas Hobbes wrote that life was "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." Given a woman's necessary physical investment alone in perpetuating her genes, think about the attributes that would be most beneficial to her to seek in a mate.

Confidence to defend her while she is in a weakened and energetically poor state.

Strength to back up the confidence that gives the man authority to stand as a legitimate threat.

Sexual History/Mastery to validate other women have already chosen him. Think about it - the more women that have been receptive to his copulation advances, the better catch this man must be. If it were not so, why would all of these women choose to bear his children? (This is the major tenet of the Good Genes theory)

Intellectual Ability that may manifest itself as whit, charm, humor, intelligence, or any number of other things. This demonstrates that the man has the capabilities to find alternative solutions to problems and quickly resolve bad situations, not only through violence, but perhaps nonviolently (and more safely) due to his intellectual prowess. (This is the central thesis of Geoffrey Miller's book The Mating Mind)

Of course there are other characteristics, but these are easy to see.

One of the problems humans are facing in their evolution is that the evolution of human culture and society has dramatically outstripped the development of the actual humans. We live in a drastically different world than our ancestors of old did, but our minds still function under the same set of programming. And this is why it is in a woman's rational self interest to leave the beta male provider for the ****y and confidence drug addict, despite all of the nice things the beta male did for her. In fact, it would probably be more-so in a woman's rational self interest for her to stay with the beta male and allow him to keep providing for her while she copulates with the ****y and confident drug dealer secretly - it is rational for her to have an affair.

This is why Rollo says hypergamy does not care. Hypergamy cannot care, it is not a sentient being, it is an undirected process. To say hypergamy cares what investment a man has made in a woman would be analogous to saying evolution cares how much a species wants to stay in existence.


Given that human cultural and social evolution has vastly outstripped actual human evolution, that does not mean human culture and society have failed to influence humans. Going back to our beloved foundation of evolutionary psychology, we must remember that humans are still governed according to programming that was best suited for a much more brutish form of living... not modern society. Our impulses to accept peer pressure, group think, and the influence from what we perceive to be popular has its roots in these programs.

When humans were nomadic, the bands they traveled in were perhaps not so much unlike the social circles we have today. They had leaders (alphas) who were in charge, copulated with most or all of the women, and led the group. The difference between a prehistoric band of humans and a modern social circle is that expulsion from a modern social circle feels bad but probably doesn't carry any tangible consequences. Expulsion from a prehistoric band however probably meant death to whoever was cast out. They became independently responsible for their survival against the environment, wild animals, and other bands. Why would another band have any interest in allowing an expelled human to join them. If the person was of any real value, would it have been in the original band's rational self interest to expel him or her?

 

[ebracer05]

Most people have at least one alpha in their life who at least partially gives some direction to what they do. It may be a work authority, law enforcement officer, or leader of a social circle. All people have one alpha in common however, and that is the media. The media has undergone sweeping changes in the last decade, but despite the naysayers, it is still a massively powerful alpha in society. It's through television, the internet, and other forms of media that help people form their viewpoints and impressions of several different things, from acceptable forms of behavior to their social norms and mores.


The television is not required to live a certain length of time, recombine and pass on its genes, and repeat this for multiple generations in order to evolve - it can evolve in the course of a series' season. None of us have any doubt that feminism has rooted itself deeply in society and has a grip that seems only to get stronger. Women are already naturally programmed to pursue behavior deleterious to males and modern conventions of morality - glamorizing the more extreme examples of hypergamy on television for an increasingly younger viewing audience of females and males has not done anything to resolve the problem.

Instead, as a result of the feminist philosophy that has pervaded society and the media, any portrayal or description of positive masculinity is presented in such a way as to activate the prehistoric programs in the brains of males and females that helped keep us from being expelled from a band (and by extension, die). Feminine behavior, at least the most deleterious forms of female behavior, are lauded and presented as normal in the same mediums. As a result, human behavior is changing such that the worst qualities of females are exaggerated and the best qualities of men are suppressed. In many cases, masculinity has become completely suppressed in favor of androgyny or negative femininity. What is worse is that this view has not only become the fundamental portrayal of "real life" in the media, but humans have by and large accepted it as a real premise and life accordingly.

In the midst of this social change, the state did not sit idly by and continued to do what it does best - seize power. The rational self interest of humans regarding their sexuality is to maximize their potential to have intercourse; in governments, the rational self interest is to seek and consolidate power. As the feminist movement began to gain substantial social ground, the government began enacting statutory law that became essentially "state sponsored hypergamy" according to Danger. However, I feel this description is inaccurate because it presumes the state simply codified a description of the competitive nature of the SMP.

This is not what happened. As State governments and the Federal government enacted laws that changed the legal landscape of male/female relationships and State and Federal courts decided case law in areas ranging from family law to tort law, an inequality emerged. Historically, women have not enjoyed equal legal standing with men and this inequality was one of the foundational platform planks of the earliest feminists they sought to redress. Legal gender equality is not a bad thing, but that is not what the government created. The government created a system that in essence excuses females from deleterious sexual behavior and forces men to deal with and pay for their consequences. To quote Danger:

What do we do if we get a girl pregnant? Western law has fortified hypergamy at the expense of men by allowering her the full right to decide the life of the child, or take it away. The man only has the responsbility.

What do we do about the ever increasing tax dollars going to fund the hypergamous actions of women? Having babies with alpha cads while forcing ALL taxpayers to foot the bill. Western law has fortified hypergamy by making everyone pay for her to have the alpha children.

What do we do about a false accusation of rape? Western law has fortified hypergamy allows women to renege on their consent if they find it inhibits their ability to secure another mate, or gives the ability to receive monetary gain and fulfill their security need.

What do we do about false charges of domestic violence? Western law has fortified hypergamy by giving women the ability to remove any offending man from her life (or house) by simply declaring she felt threatened.

What about shopping for your child in a children's store? Western law has fortified hypergamy by creating the perception that men are predators by nature and are automatically assumed guilty just for being male.

This is not state sponsored hypgeramy, it is state sponsored misandry.

All classical liberal economists assert that in order for a market to operate according to "rational self interest" and to be "free", the market must actually be free. That sounds like an obvious statement, but its application to the SMP is not always so obvious to men. In classical liberalism, equality in opportunity is guaranteed, but equality in outcome is not.

In a society living under state sponsored misandry, we do not have equality in opportunity as men. The "deck" is stacked against us from the start and throws off our senses of rational self interest before we're able to make an initial evaluation. Just like in economics, the rules of a truly free market do not apply exactly the same way as they do in a mixed economy; the extent the principles apply depends on the extent the economy is "mixed". In the SMP, men must therefore understand that they are not competing on a level playing field and thus, not dealing with pure hypgergamy. The competitive forces in the SMP are not the only forces at work in a man's life in today's society.

It is not enough for a man to be successful, to have accomplished great things. Enough "men" have been placated in to a form of beta-complacency through the influence of the feminine media that it gives the illusion of eroding real masculinity whenever it is displayed in public. Women are drawn to it per their ancient brain programs, but as Rollo has noted, this is the big threat. A man who recognizes his value as a man and something less (a beta) in society is the biggest threat to a woman's sexuality. And how do women respond to threats?

Robert Greene asserts in The Art of Seduction that danger is an aphrodisiac to women. Maybe this is a result of their evolutionarily programmed interest in men capable of great danger. But there are also good evolutionary reasons for women to flee from danger because of what it could represent to them in their state of pregnancy or because it could cause them to become pregnant with a less than ideal genetic match in possibly less than ideal circumstances.

There are some women who do not require a "real man" anymore because the media has created so many feminized, beta men who will constantly supplicate and provide for the woman (we call these orbiters). When the real man challenges the women on her deleterious behavior, what loss is it of hers if she reacts ambivalently or even disrespectfully? Who cares? For that one man she has 10+ beta orbiters who will continue to give her attention and meet many of her needs without so much as a single complaint.

I'm getting tired and am not going to write anymore right now.

In short, we don't live under pure hypergamy, we live under feministic hypergamy. Legally, we live under a sort of state sponsored misandry. There are several confounding problems that fallow all of the points I've made and if there is sufficient interest, I can address them.

What you have to ask yourselves though as men is this: Why doesn't it p*ss me off to no end when a man can go to jail for years, be required to pay money, become disqualified from several jobs, all for something he did not do, only on the word of a woman?

Why aren't men getting upset about the lack of positive masculinity in society and its demonization in all forms of media? Why doesn't it evoke a sense of rage in men that social mores and values are changing such that the essence of a man is something that goes against society's values?

And women's deleterious sexual behavior... I didn't address this, but would it be in a woman's rational self interest to continue to act the way most do if men exerted a higher standard over them? It would be impossible because they would not have the opportunity to mate and pair bond (as if many women are capable of actually pair bonding anyways).

This isn't the sort of essay that is necessarily going to help you get laid. But ti's the sort of essay that should make you think and make you mad. Society isn't going to change because a group of guys on a message board on the internet got p*ssed off about something.

So what are you going to do?

 

[guru1000]

Ebracer, you have too much time on your hands. Finish med school, earn a couple of mil, and bottom line, you won't give a fvck.

 

[backbreaker]

ebracer05 ur a pretty intelligent guy. You have probably always been known as the smart one or the nerd and that's where you get your reaffirmations from society by people telling you that you are smart and intelligent.

My posts, I babble pretty bad at times, but in general my post don't get that in depth. I am a pretty meat and potatoes type guy, not because I'm not smart and not beucase i can't make seriously thought provoking posts, but beucase I truly believe the greatest form of intelligence is action.

I don't think, well I do think, but i don't philosophize and that's why, beucase it never will get you closer to what you want to achieve. taking action will get you closer to whatever it is you want to achieve.

In other words, right now you are at the proverbial fork in the road in your dating life, you have been given this pill so speak and you have 2 very dicsinnt paths that you can take. You are seeing things clearly for the first time when it comes to women and dating and you are being made aware of the pit falls of women and men.

you are at a point where you can either take the understanding that you have and try to maximize your dating efficient and get better plates, i know you are in a relationship but id ont' know what you want, but whatever it is you want you can get there. or you can use the information to become bitter and self righteous.

I think we all tend to struggle with the 2 some more so than others.

I am not saying that I don't see how messed up things are, I assure you I do. From being accused of sexually assaulting a girl i never touched, literally, never touched beucase i rejected her and NO one taking my side even though the girl had just got out the phyc hospital for trying to off herself, from seeing how the same women who did not want **** to do with me when i was broke, start to come around and tell me how great i was once i got in shape and put some money in the bank. Throw rough in the fact that I am African American, from the south at that and my tastes tend to be leggy petite women, who are usually Caucasian, and i assure you if I wanted to go down the "this **** is messed up" route I could. But I don't make excuses and I don't ***** about how unfair the world is, i adapt and move forward.

I'm not saying that, we should not strive for change or should let things go unoticed "that's the way things are",

all i am saying is look; whatever reason you came to this forum I am 99% sure that the above essay isn't going to get you any closer to the goals that you wanted to achieve when you came here.

As many know I'm not very good with words, so I tell stories. I will use this example as to best make clear what I am trying to say.

In a previous life, during the first year of my own company, we were flat broke and I had to still put food on the table. So I took a job selling cars. It turns out, I actually had a knack for selling cars. I actually enjoyed it for the most part.

Anyway, the first day of real work, there were I think 3 of us, and the new car manager gets us together and just look, I know you just went through all these classes and listened to 2-3 days worth of instructions, fvck all that. I want you to do, exactly what I tell you to do, and if you do I promise you that you will get a nice commission check here your first month. don't' think at all, don't shoot from the hip. Say exactly what I tell you to say, do exactly what I tell you to do.

So, it happenst ehf rist weekend was this thing called car wars where everyone in the city gets together at the big staidum and has this huge tent sale. I went there, and the manager would just say "backbreaker, see that guy there, go to him and say this, if he says this say this if he says that say that. And I did this all weekend, and I will be fvcking damned if i did not sale 5 cars in 3 days. I thought i was the ****. and all i had to do ws do exactly what he said. wheni bourght back a deal to him to work he told me exactly what to say when i went up there. this went on for about 2 weeks. he liked me beucase i had no problem going out and hussling the lot to get clients, then i would let him work his magic and boom car deal.

anyway, 2 weeks past. I think i sold like 12 cars in 2 weeks. so now I see how easy this is , i remember saying to myself I don't need his help, i got this. i know what I am doing.

lol i didn't sale another car for the entire month lol. and for the life of me i could not figure out why. the manager had a talk with me and he said look you sold 11-12 cars. if you would have kept listening to me you would have sold 20-25. you started over thinking **** and you thought yourself or worked yourself out of deals left and right.

we went back to me not thinking lol and again, bam.

now, in due time, i did figure out what i was doing, to the point where i would even close deals for other car salesman. But the point is this:

to get the maximum results, the best method is a middle ground of keep it simple stupid and having about what is going on. if you are too stupid you wn't sale ****. if you are too smart you will over think it.

that's why I don't get that in dept beucase when you do so it is taking you further away from what you want to do, because you get to the point where you are over thinking everything.

Just.. just keep it simple. ask action related questions, read the DJ bible. don't get overwhelmed by the hypergamy talk it's not going to get you any closer to what you want to do whatsoever. in fact it will take you further away.

it's good to know what it is, if not mandatory, but your time is better spent cold approaching or working out or finding a hobby.

 

[zekko]

Lol. The title of this thread sounds like an episode of The Big Bang Theory.

 

[Jitterbug]

Ebracer, you have too much time on your hands. Finish med school, earn a couple of mil, and bottom line, you won't give a fvck.

Let's just pick a recent example... Tom Cruise is richer than any guy here, he didn't give a fvck about state sponsored misandry and hypergamy, until he got held down by those forces while his ex-wife robbed him of half his wealth and his child, while having her grinning photos on magazines all over the world.

It's good for ebracer to be aware of those things now before he does anything too stupid to recover from.

 

[hithard]

Let's just pick a recent example... Tom Cruise is richer than any guy here, he didn't give a fvck about state sponsored misandry and hypergamy, until he got held down by those forces while his ex-wife robbed him of half his wealth and his child, while having her grinning photos on magazines all over the world.

It's good for ebracer to be aware of those things now before he does anything too stupid to recover from.

I don't know.... I think it was more to do with Tom being a moon unit from the planet zultan, or whatever they filled his head full of.

 

[Zarky]

I think the problem is that when people whip out the word "hypergamy," suddenly everyone thinks it's a complex topic.

I prefer to say: Everyone wants someone out of their league.

The trick is to convince her you're out of her league.

EDIT: I just finished reading the OP and it doesn't seem to be about "hypergamy" per se, but rather a rant about evil liberals? Anyway, my analysis stands.

As I've said 1478 times here before, if guys would spend as much time making themselves better as they do ranting about ill-conceived fantasy ideas of "feminism," they'd have a whole lot more success, they'd actually get laid, and they wouldn't be so damn bitter. Just MHO.

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

I think the problem is that when people whip out the word "hypergamy," suddenly everyone thinks it's a complex topic.

I prefer to say: Everyone wants someone out of their league.

The trick is to convince her you're out of her league.

Yea, it's not difficult. Women want an older, wealthy man. Men want a young, attractive woman.

The great thing about being a dude is that while we get older, wiser, wealthier, and acquire more social skills, young hot women will ALWAYS be the same age.

 

[ebracer05]

@Zarky

I am not a bitter guy. Inequalities in society p*ss me off and are what led me to initially want to be a lawyer and politician. If you didn't think this was about hypergamy, you didn't actually read it or you didn't understand it. The 2 principles underlying hypergamy are that we exist in a sexual market place that uses sex (male/female) as its currency and rational self interest in order to decide how to use its currency. In every instance of my essay, I brought everything back to how the concept of "rationality" from the rational choice theory fuels decisions that are relatively rational from the perspective of one individual, and relatively irrational from the other's perspective. Maybe I should have called this the hypergamy theory of relativity

@Backbreaker

Before I decided to become a surgeon, I spent 4 years of my life studying law. Academically, I was always a smart guy like you said. I don't know that I derived anything positive from it socially... actually I really hated it because I felt like it really held me back and kept me from achieving what I wanted, not unlike what you said in your car sale story. I started college before I finished high school and finished my bachelor's degree in 3 years. I'm not super young but given that I'm only 25 and have completing multiple courses of studies (I have degrees in political science, history, biology, and chemistry) and am in the middle of becoming a doctor... I'm pretty happy with that.

I write these things for the reason that I initially wanted to become a lawyer and politician. Actually, of all things, initially I wanted to be a minister! Philosophy has always interested me and I like to understand the mechanics of how things work. I was reading authors like Hume and Rousseau, teaching myself higher level mathematics, and reading books on quantum physics (and understanding a good deal of it) in my free time when I was in 6th grade. I was a nerd and I couldn't relate to my peers at all. They wanted to play sports, they wanted to do whatever it was that 12 year old's did. They watched TRL on MTV and I didn't even know what that meant!

Anyways, I'm in the middle of a pretty intensive and regimented study program right now. I have breaks every now and then and I can usually think about more than one thing at a time. When I take my breaks, I obviously do something else and it usually involves music, reading something that is unrelated to advanced chemistry, physics, and biology, or writing.

I have always loved to write and with as cluttered as my mind is right now, I don't think I'm very good at it. But it helps me make sense of things and I enjoy putting words on paper. I started to writing the most when I started reading theology, which is just philosophy applied to religion. Then I started to read political and economic philosophy and I wrote about that. I got burned out with the entire political process and the US government in general though throughout my years of studying, participating in internships, and working on a few US representatives campaigns. I don't want to get in to a political discussion and have tried to avoid discussing politics as much as possible since I stopped studying it, but the reason I quit was because I just don't believe that an individual who isn't rich or born in to a powerful family can actually affect real change in the system. And even if a person was, I still don't know that they could. And ultimately if I was, I wouldn't give a sh*t.

So I write about this stuff because it gives me a diversion. I don't post everything that I write and I certainly don't post it because I'm looking for people I've never met on the internet to inflate my ego. I figure that like Pook said, it helped me figure some things out and maybe it can help someone else figure it out too.

I used to want to change society from an administrative standpoint to fix what I saw were problems. I don't feel like I can do that anymore, so I don't worry about. I don't know that I can affect any meta level change in the social forces of human sexual interplay, but I feel like I can affect personal change in myself. That is why I challenge myself and drive myself to the extent that I do. I haven't let my issues stop me from achieving my goals. I have had people tell me I will not succeed because I'm too ADHD, I have a sleep problem, I think too much, I don't think like I should, and any number of other reasons. And yet, 2 years in to college I got accepted to the College of William and Mary's and the University of Chicago's law schools. I didn't go.

My first year studying biology, I went to my professor to ask him some questions about the material we were going over. He was a total @ss and flat out told me that a career in medicine wasn't for me.

When I was in middle school, I had the "popular guys" who played football telling me that I would never have a girlfriend and that since I didn't have one, I must be gay.

I had girls writing me notes as a joke telling me they liked me just to get a reaction from me.

I have heard a lot of BS over the years, and I'm sure we all have. But the reason why I think about this stuff is because it has application in broader areas than hooking up with a beautiful woman at a bar. This website isn't just about become Don Juan with women, it's about becoming a DJ, the master of your life. One of the things that drives me as I continue to trudge through the mountain of work I have are those voices in my past from people who said I wouldn't succeed, and every step closer I get to my goals is one more middle finger I can shoot up at those demons. And don't get the impression that I'm living my life for no other reason than to somehow excise revenge against a bunch of 15 year old's who made fun of me. Despite what people say though, words matter. And you can either allow them to help you or hurt you. I'd rather have them help.

Basically though, to get back on track, I think you're right and I do need to stop thinking so much about the mechanics of what I'm doing when I'm not trying to solve a science problem. There is a distinct difference between your car selling story and my day to day life - I don't have some experienced manager standing behind me telling me exactly what to say and how to say it. We have this site obviously, but it's not quite the same thing.

And so again, that is why I think about things like this. You can't quantify love, attraction, men, women, or human behavior, but I do think you can develop models that will help you to accurately predict general trends. And at least in my experience, the better you understand something that doesn't pose an imminent threat to your life, the less threatening and fearful it is. This isn't going to help me become a heart surgeon, but it does help me clear my head - that will help me become a heart surgeon.

So far as I am concerned right now, and as I've said before in things you've read, my life's path is my concern right now. Unless my GF becomes a liability in my life and starts hindering my progress, now is not the time to deal with it. She can stay and I'm happy with things. If she starts unduly distracting me, keeping me from my work, or hindering my progress, it's time to go. A better time to reassess whether or not my love like is bringing me closer to or further away from where I ultimately want to go will be once I get things with my career further stabilized.

Until then, que sera, que sera.

 

[ebracer05]

So hypergamy exists. What are you guys doing, day to day, to harness it?

Look at the rational self interest model. In what ways can a man improve himself in order to maximize his value in the SMP? It's right there in the female's perception of rationality.

Note: This does not mean forsaking yourself in order to become what you think a woman wants you to be. It means acknowledging the SMP and hypergamy for what it is, considering it, and intelligently improving yourself in a way that will maximize your advantage.

The shorter answer is the common stuff that everyone here should already know:

Work out, get a better body

Work out some more, get a great body

Broaden your intellectual horizons in whatever field(s) your are interested in

Find a new hobby, something you're genuinely interested in. And don't be afraid to step out of the box and try something more unique than following some TV show. Learn to love nature, hike, rock climb, martial arts, music, writing, painting, the stuff you see people do while you're watching them live their life on TV (as fictitious as it may be) and start doing that.

Practice your social skills and make them as sharp as possible. This usually requires guys to force themselves in situations they are not comfortable in at first.

Develop confidence through making peace with your religion, your self, and others around you. Then learn how to do it with strangers.

Find passion in life, somewhere. Tyler Durden from RSD was exactly right when he said people exist in a walking daze. Don't be like that.

Learn how to speak properly. Anyone can say words but can you captivate people (women) with your voice tone, vocabulary, and other mannerisms? When someone asks you how that hike you just went on was since you're trying to find a new hobby, are you that person who just says "good"... or can you give detailed descriptions of what it was like. The colors, the sounds, the smells. Maybe it had just stormed and the air had that special smell it gets right after a rain. You saw animals and plants of that reinforced to you the essence of beauty found in the natural world. And after you were finished, you were left feeling as though you had stumbled upon only the cusp of something great. You have a thirst to go back and experience this again in new contexts, ect ect ect. And does it sound like authentic interest when you talk or patronizing BS?

Any guy who could do a few of those things well would be in a very good position to benefit from hypergamy.

 

[guru1000]

Let's just pick a recent example... Tom Cruise is richer than any guy here, he didn't give a fvck about state sponsored misandry and hypergamy, until he got held down by those forces while his ex-wife robbed him of half his wealth and his child, while having her grinning photos on magazines all over the world.

It's good for ebracer to be aware of those things now before he does anything too stupid to recover from.

O' poor Tom Cruise; now he has only 200+ mil to proliferate with.

 

[betheman]

O' poor Tom Cruise; now he has only 200+ mil to proliferate with.

right now, there are thousands of women who would f cuk TC, and yet, one woman knocks him down, until she did, he was still prime estate, he may follow a spaceship religion, but he has more 'game' than anyone on this site, even by default. he has improved himself, he works out, dresses well, has massive social proof and he is f ccking loaded!

even men are hating this guy, this world of SS is crazy

 

[yuppaz]

"Why aren't men getting upset about the lack of positive masculinity in society and its demonization in all forms of media? Why doesn't it evoke a sense of rage in men that social mores and values are changing such that the essence of a man is something that goes against society's values?

And women's deleterious sexual behavior... I didn't address this, but would it be in a woman's rational self interest to continue to act the way most do if men exerted a higher standard over them? It would be impossible because they would not have the opportunity to mate and pair bond (as if many women are capable of actually pair bonding anyways).

This isn't the sort of essay that is necessarily going to help you get laid. But ti's the sort of essay that should make you think and make you mad. Society isn't going to change because a group of guys on a message board on the internet got p*ssed off about something.

So what are you going to do?"

Interesting write up and I find a lot of it to be true.

What to do? uhhh nothing. Why wouldn't men get together to fight all this? Because if you have your sh*t in order in life you have better things to spend your time worrying about this. At the end of the day, if you value yourself and take what you want there is little that you can't have..society be damned. Why should I really give a f*ck about guys being little orbiters with girls if at the end of the day they want my c@ck over the orbiters? Why waste my time? If the name of the game is survival of the fittest, I teach my kids to be the fittest and there will be a lot of other young adults not so fit...oh well better / easier for my kids....savvy?

 

[Jitterbug]

O' poor Tom Cruise; now he has only 200+ mil to proliferate with.

Yeah but if I had that kind of money and some b1ch stole half... Do you like losing half your wealth in a legalised robbery?

And what about losing access to your children? Fun, yes?

 

[Buddha_Mind]

ebracer,

I thought you wrote a really intellectually dense observation of some current trends in our system. I did feel things kinda fizzled out towards the end where you lost your writing focus -- but you have the start to a really good essay that could be refined and revised to drive home your points.

I think we demonize things a bit here. I do agree that we live in a state-sponsored misandric system, or if not per say misandric, definitely female-favored (in regards to divorce and child custody). We see lots of men victimized. In defense of women, many had the sh!tty end of the stick for centuries--but overcompensating is not correct, if anything there needs to be equality in the courts not based on gender, but based on character.

If anything it's the CHILDREN in all of this who are really fvcked. Mommy wants money$ and custody, daddy wants custody, these kids are just getting tugged back and forth and the father often foots the financial expenses....this definitely is not "fair" to anyone.

The basic premis here however, if you believe all women are hypergamous, is that FAIR isn't even a variable in the equation. Does nature care what is FAIR? Does evolutionary or sexual selection care what is FAIR?

Perhaps our desire for fairness is the problem. But sure, women definitely have the upper hand. In MOST relationships I see the women have the upper hand. And there are some very seedy bishes.

But how do you expect a woman to want to be 'devoted' to her man when society is preaching the GO GIRL attitude?

1950's society preached a different cultural message. Whether or not women acknowledged or actually utilized this message is another story (sure maybe there was less divorce..but maybe just as much cheating...more people stayed together because of the social 'leprosy' of a divorcee back then).

Today we call things like devotion to a man or woman or commitment as 'old fashioned', or even here on this board to some extent some regard any commitment as AFC.

We are definitely victims of our culture.

 

[guru1000]

Yeah but if I had that kind of money and some b1ch stole half... Do you like losing half your wealth in a legalised robbery?

And what about losing access to your children? Fun, yes?

Cite your evidence evincing that Cruise lost half his net worth and full access to his children.

But, let's move closer to your point... do some men get railroaded in divorce? Yes. And?

If you lack the authority to effect change via divorce case law, quit the finger-pointing and focalize your time and will into augmenting your own value. Don't change the rules of the game; just understand the game ... and be the best player.

 

[Burroughs]

It makes me laugh when I see men even consider a woman's point of view in any matter..

why even do it?

its absurd.

remember 80% of the women who have ever lived have passed on their genes while only 40% of men have done so....hypergamy has always been there so historically men have demoted women to lesser societal status to compensate for this... to the betterment of men as whole...

why?

because men are the cannon fodder and the builders of civilizations yet somehow in the 'modern' age we submit to $hit tests or pua our way around them...nonsense and a waste.

this exists because the modern age is a age of plentiful food and resources...once that ceases to be a fact then women will once more have to be subjected to rule under men if men are to be motivated to leave their x-boxes and pick up hammers and drills...if this does not happen, women continue to wallow in arrogance and hypergamy is not contained the have not males will continue to stagnate and society will crumble....never to be rebuilt.

 

[backbreaker]

ebracer,

I thought you wrote a really intellectually dense observation of some current trends in our system. I did feel things kinda fizzled out towards the end where you lost your writing focus -- but you have the start to a really good essay that could be refined and revised to drive home your points.

I think we demonize things a bit here. I do agree that we live in a state-sponsored misandric system, or if not per say misandric, definitely female-favored (in regards to divorce and child custody). We see lots of men victimized. In defense of women, many had the sh!tty end of the stick for centuries--but overcompensating is not correct, if anything there needs to be equality in the courts not based on gender, but based on character.

If anything it's the CHILDREN in all of this who are really fvcked. Mommy wants money$ and custody, daddy wants custody, these kids are just getting tugged back and forth and the father often foots the financial expenses....this definitely is not "fair" to anyone.

The basic premis here however, if you believe all women are hypergamous, is that FAIR isn't even a variable in the equation. Does nature care what is FAIR? Does evolutionary or sexual selection care what is FAIR?

Perhaps our desire for fairness is the problem. But sure, women definitely have the upper hand. In MOST relationships I see the women have the upper hand. And there are some very seedy bishes.

But how do you expect a woman to want to be 'devoted' to her man when society is preaching the GO GIRL attitude?

1950's society preached a different cultural message. Whether or not women acknowledged or actually utilized this message is another story (sure maybe there was less divorce..but maybe just as much cheating...more people stayed together because of the social 'leprosy' of a divorcee back then).

Today we call things like devotion to a man or woman or commitment as 'old fashioned', or even here on this board to some extent some regard any commitment as AFC.

We are definitely victims of our culture.

My point, and I believe Rollo's entire premise is this.

this idea that women were somehow better 50 - 70 years ago is a load of bullocks. 50-70 years ago the world was a much smaller place. There was no internet, **** there was barely phones. lol think it's bad picking up women trying to ask for a phone number, try asking a woman where she lives so you can take her out on a first date. there is no facebook. if you are living ****hole county Georgia, dammit guess were your dating prospects are all going to come from? even more so, interracial dating today is for the most part accepted but a woman's prospects were basically cut in half again because both major races very much so shunned interracial dating.

so if you are a 22 year old HB 8 living in **** hole country Georgia, **** probably the best you can do is the rugged good looking guy who works at the paper mill and brings home a steady paycheck. you can't go anywhere to meet anyone else.

Because there are less options, the hyperganmic tree doesn't have as many branches thus more women are content with their lives and what they have; that's all they see.

with more technology comes more options. phone, internet, **** i can get on a flight for 60 dollars and go from Arkansas to Dallas in 45 minutes on southwest airlines.

I will give you that it was much harder for a woman to leave a man 75 years ago than it is today; our laws make it much easier for women to leave on a whim, but even with those laws, they don't practiced without widespread use of technology; there is no one to practice your new found freedom to leave with.

It's like some guys make not having options a virtue; you have people here who are making lack of options a virtue when it's not. it's just a lack of options. you are prasising this non existing era of womanly goodness. women were steady and faithful beucase it was in their best interest to do so, not beucase they were somehow better bred than they are today.

again, it's just too much. I hate this topic. I really do. with a passion. it gets nothing done. the guy who comes here and hasn't had a GF in 2 years after 6 months of reading this **** isn't going to get any closer to getting his knob polished. and i'm all about guys getting their knob polished. this gives you very little practical field knowledge. a ll it does is provide you with ammunition for your excuses after you got next'ed. instead of honing your game or hitting the gym harder or practicing you start sobbing and crying hypergany.

I mean, every day.. I see normal ass dudes with very cute girls. every guy in our social circle has what i would deem a cute girl and you couldn't find a more clueless avg group of guys if you scrounged the entire country. u guys are making this 10000x harder than it has to be. seriously man come on.

just.. take care of you. stay in shape, get out the house, dont' be a bum and you will find your share of nice looking/ well adjusted women.

 

[ebracer05]

because men are the cannon fodder and the builders of civilizations yet somehow in the 'modern' age we submit to $hit tests or pua our way around them...nonsense and a waste.

this exists because the modern age is a age of plentiful food and resources...once that ceases to be a fact then women will once more have to be subjected to rule under men if men are to be motivated to leave their x-boxes and pick up hammers and drills...if this does not happen, women continue to wallow in arrogance and hypergamy is not contained the have not males will continue to stagnate and society will crumble....never to be rebuilt.

That was one of the very last points I made. That is the expectation men have stopped exerting upon women. I didn't offer a rational for it. I'm sure it has something to do with plentiful resources. When you aren't going to die if you can't make it in to the woods to kill something for food and can go to Walmart and buy quite a bit of food on a day's wage... well, if we still have even a remnant of our former programs running through our brain, why should we even get out of bed???

But it's more than that. I will tell a story Backbreaker style to illustrate this:

I have always liked video games but I just haven't had time for the over the last few years. My younger brothers spend WAY too much time on them though, and so they are available when I would like them. Well I wanted something new to waste some time on at the beginning of the summer so I found a game they have I hadn't played, Empire Earth II. It wasn't so bad.

It's a computer program. And you know what the thing was, I installed it, after some looking I found the CD key, got everything up and running and when the game started I realized I had no f*cking idea how to play it. It's the only game I've ever played that I had to go through the tutorial in order to understand how to play it.

And that's brings up an important point - just because you have a program in your brain doesn't mean you intuitively know how to use properly when it's running. When I first played Empire Earth II I died like 5 times very quickly before I realized nothing was going to change unless I figured out what I was doing.

I believe guys still have programs that are nearly the same as our ancestors, as I said in my OP. But one of the results of feminism has been the erosion of men's understanding of those programs. That's probably the biggest reason for what you're talking about... forget access to resources, most guys just flat out don't have their lives together! They don't know how to be men and probably don't have any real desire to be men. It would be like me playing that game, dying quickly, and not realizing there was a problem. I think that's the way the program is supposed to run.

That is why men don't leave their X-boxes. I don't know that the hammer and nails are so bad, but men in general have an attitude of complacency and are beta. What is missing? What differentiates the average beta guy from a Bill Gates, a Wilt Chamberlin, or Douglas MacArthur? They are anatomically men, but as Pook said, in the beta there is no man actually inside of him. They have the same programs running that alpha men do, it's not like they don't want to have sex with women and never get erections upon seeing a beautiful naked women (albeit, that may only happen in the form of internet pornography). They probably have dreams about doing great things, maybe not building nations, corporations, leading an army or playing a professional sport... but they still have dreams. It is part of our programming. Masculinity is the instruction set that allows us to use those programs effectively and to their logical conclusion.

I have said it several times and I still believe it to locus of the issue... not with hypergamy, sexual inequality, misandry, DJing, or any other issue here... this encompass them all:

Until positive masculinity is restored in society, these problems will not only persist, but they will get worse.

Burroughs, you start your post by saying that it is foolish to even consider a woman's point of view but what do you think is left when you remove masculinity from society? You have a sexual vacuum that is replaced by what remains, femininity. Femininity is the fire that fuels a woman's point of view.