As always, the gamma belief that he is an unsung hero, the man of vision. "Those Man": The gamma, the chosen one, the one who can see through the veil, the bringer of the light. The courageous challenger of the status quo.
The most telling piece of the whole post is that he never actually articulates a criticism. Never mind a valid one. He literally is just handwaving “that bad! Badly bad! Me no like!” In a rather effeminate fashion, I add.
"Considering that God separates men into wheat and chaff, and sheep and goats, and also distinguishes Christians on the basis of their performance in the Parable of the Talents, I think it’s safe to say that while He might not judge in this exact manner, He obviously has no problem with distinguishing between various men or various Christian men."
Shepherds and false teachers. Apostles, Prophets, etc. There is a clear hierarchy in scripture not just among men, not just among angels, but even our Lord Jesus Christ acknowledged a hierarchy when he said he does nothing but what the Father wills.
I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me. — John 5:30 KJV
"At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.’”
Luke 12: 48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.
Yes, God has a cost to enter Heaven that we all must pay to receive fellowship. that cost is the same regardless of man. likewise God gives gifts great and small and will expect a return on that investment.
I like this 'stack. I find it refreshing. Bold and well written. But the idea that women are psychologically different than men because they are physically different is preposterous. It does make a good story though.
Everybody is different. I meant no disrespect. I do believe in maternal instinct for example, nurturing, care-giving and general tidy and cleanliness. But femininity is a construct to some extent. I recently came across a 'stack by a woman in which she was talking about never having felt particularly "feminine" and it made me think. I played quite a bit with my sisters as a child and I never felt there was a psychological difference between us. They were a lot better than me at skipping though. :)
Just because you "feel" your sister and you have the same psychological makeup doesn't mean it's true. It also doesn't change the observable reality of most men and women.
Wow. As a woman, the fact that I am indeed psychologically different from men is something I've never questioned since the day I was born. Exactly how we are different is up for debate, but we are indeed different.
The IQ gap manifest. Impostor syndrome always seemed inexplicable. You know what you can do or are. Or are delusional, in which case there’s no self-doubt regardless of deficiency. I should have considered self-conscious frauds hiding behind webs of lies.
Words have meanings, and if you’re not an intellectual, I’m not sure who is. What is sure is [how some dim rando feels] isn’t part of any normative definition of the term.
I don't think it's the IQ gap. My personal hypothesis, which I've tested a lot with most SSH ranks, and it appears to be correct, is that the way SSH ranks respond to the taxonomy is pretty much fixed.
TL;DR:
1. IQ doesn't appear to play into this at all
2. This is a very good way to confirm one's SSH rank, especially on the internet. The statement "If you disagree with the SSH, you are low-status" might not go well with the low-status, but it's essentially true.
Alpha - Has zero issues with it. I've barely needed to talk to alphas about what is written here. From what I've seen alphas have no problem identifying the SSH ranks pretty much immediately, without being familiar with the SSH at all. IQ is never an issue.
Bravo - Similar to the alpha, with the caveat that the bravo sees the SSH ranks as a lot more fluid than they actually are. One annoying trait that bravos I know have is that they are always trying to help some loser, who's way beyond their help, and it usually ends up embarrassing for the bravo.
Delta - The delta doesn't see it, his narcissism prevents it. I usually broach the topic to clarify some SSH related faiure of a mutual acquaintance the delta just doesn't get. One was wondering why a girl he liked preferred the alpha bum who treated her badly instead of him. He just never quite understood that all the traits he viewed as undesirable were exactly the ones that the girl was attracted to. The delta doesn't have an issue with the SSH, but views it as a self-improvement program. He also has issues correctly identifying the different SSH ranks, because of his narcissism. An alpha he doesn't like is a gamma, another delta he likes is an alpha. Has issues with how women are portrayed, but they mostly stem from his inability to differentiate them from himself. Stuff like that.
Gamma - His issue is his low sexual status. The gamma will try to rationalize it, and if he can't manage it, he rejects it out of hand, like this particular commenter. If he succeeds, here comes the sigma larp. Even if he manages to hide it, it's there in his head. He's completely incapable of applying the SSH correctly, because in his head it's not a taxonomy, but a confirmation of his imagined superiority. Once I tried to play dumb and asked one about it, it's pretty obvious. According to him, as long as he dismisses people's opinions about him, he's a sigma. There has been several cases of gammas here who have been around since the alphagame days. It is simply astonishing how they will engage in the exact same self-humiliating behavior, exactly as it's described, after reading about it for years on end and witnessing the negative reaction of their peers multiple times from the sidelines. I guess IQ plays a role here, as the more intelligent the gamma is, the more delusional his rationalization can be.
Women - as long as you don't make it personal, and if the woman in question considers you high status, she doesn't have issues with it. If she does it's either a shittest, or she's butthurt because she's surrounded by losers.
Everyone who is interested is welcome to try it and share the results of their experiment, I'm pretty curious about the outcome.
Possibly there are critiques of the system of taxonomy that is SSH as a description, as a management technology, etc. Unlike the author of the quotes, I make no such claim. At worst, I would say that myself (and others) are imperfect observers and therefore imperfect in our application.
These quoted excerpts, of course, neither present or attempt to present any substantive or systemic critique. Instead, we get sniping in the form of "what if ..." or "what happens when ..." questions and related attempts at mind-reading God.
The SSH is useful. But it's a map not the territory.
The SSH describes behavioural types, but we all face fractal/situational hierarchies requiring us to perform roles we aren't suited for, female desire has multiple influences beyond personality and status, and people have to earn a living. Reality doesn't necessarily conform to the SSH, as there are married Omega's, Celibate Sigma's, and everyone hates when they have a Gamma boss.
People can unlearn bad behaviours, although in stressful situations bad behaviour can resurface.
All that said, the SSH is a very useful taxonomy and the map is more accurate than it isn't.
The cartoon reminded me of an incident on the job where I had to tell a guy who was whining about no one listening to him, "If no one is listening to you it means that you aren't saying anything worth listening to. The fault is yours, not theirs."
Strong men understand that the world is violent, and that life is a competition. They accept this reality, and accept responsibility - to varying degrees - for their outcomes.
Tools that help them better understand the world, and outperform their competition are to be celebrated.
"The two key surviving protagonists in this long saga stand testament to the fact ... The measure of a man is unlikely to be governed by his position within a said hierarchy and more likely to be governed by his actual ability to lead" - From the last chapter of Batavia by Peter Fitzsimmons. Talking about how a simple soldier lead the survivors of a ship wreck to safety and won the love and respect of everyone, whilst the commandeur of the Dutch East India trading company and leader of the expedition fled back to Java in the only life raft, where he became known for having "lost the ship and left the crew". Meanwhile, the psychopath who tried murdering everyone for his own survival; died on the Gallows after failing to poison himself; vomiting and shitting himself, with both hands cut off, denying the existence of God and declaring his own self righteousness.
I think God has and the SSH can, most certainly cast judgement there.
Notice the rhetorical flourish "acolyte." In fact, the whole piece is mostly rhetorical and doesn't offer much substance. This person thinks he is smarter than everyone else. However, anyone with an ounce of wisdom can see right through it. I think the response was pretty measured, and even charitable, after such a passive aggressive attack.
"What happens when those men challenge the structure by arguing the “unvarnished truth” of said structure is in reality a set of assumptions predicated on sophistry? Would God truly judge in this exact manner by calling Christian men betas, gammas, and alphas? Furthermore, there is an alternative model, and a prove one. "
He knows enough to treat the SSH as a model for which there are alternatives.
Dictionary definition of "model": "a usually miniature representation of something"
Engineering models create a mathematical representation of reality to design solutions. Note that engineering models are *always* wrong. They simplify real world relationships to something that is easier to understand and design solutions for. The measure of a model is if it is usefully wrong.
To complain that a model is inaccurate is failing to understand the purpose of a model. BMI is wrong, but it's still useful for telling a fatty to lose weight.
Midwits not understanding the implications of the word-concepts they use.
There's also a lack of meaningful alternative provided. The typical gamma thing, which really burns my biscuit, is the person who criticizes everything but adds nothing. Like, sure man everything sucks do you have anything better to step into the arena with?
As always, the gamma belief that he is an unsung hero, the man of vision. "Those Man": The gamma, the chosen one, the one who can see through the veil, the bringer of the light. The courageous challenger of the status quo.
Boring predictable fuckers.
The most telling piece of the whole post is that he never actually articulates a criticism. Never mind a valid one. He literally is just handwaving “that bad! Badly bad! Me no like!” In a rather effeminate fashion, I add.
"Considering that God separates men into wheat and chaff, and sheep and goats, and also distinguishes Christians on the basis of their performance in the Parable of the Talents, I think it’s safe to say that while He might not judge in this exact manner, He obviously has no problem with distinguishing between various men or various Christian men."
Shepherds and false teachers. Apostles, Prophets, etc. There is a clear hierarchy in scripture not just among men, not just among angels, but even our Lord Jesus Christ acknowledged a hierarchy when he said he does nothing but what the Father wills.
I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me. — John 5:30 KJV
What are the tells of an Author's SSH ranking? Gamma seems obvious from the secret-King with-super-special-powers self insert.
Is there a way to tell if an author is Alpha, Bravo, etc...?
Alphas only write their own autobiographies. Deltas write action thrillers: see Chuck Dixon, Larry Correia.
Do Bravo's write romance novels?
That guy: What kind of God would sort people? (Gotcha!)
The Bible: Absolutely full of sorting.
"At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.’”
Matthew 24:30
Luke 12: 48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.
Yes, God has a cost to enter Heaven that we all must pay to receive fellowship. that cost is the same regardless of man. likewise God gives gifts great and small and will expect a return on that investment.
I like this 'stack. I find it refreshing. Bold and well written. But the idea that women are psychologically different than men because they are physically different is preposterous. It does make a good story though.
Everybody is different. I meant no disrespect. I do believe in maternal instinct for example, nurturing, care-giving and general tidy and cleanliness. But femininity is a construct to some extent. I recently came across a 'stack by a woman in which she was talking about never having felt particularly "feminine" and it made me think. I played quite a bit with my sisters as a child and I never felt there was a psychological difference between us. They were a lot better than me at skipping though. :)
Just because you "feel" your sister and you have the same psychological makeup doesn't mean it's true. It also doesn't change the observable reality of most men and women.
True. I should have left the link. Interesting and thought provoking, for me anyway.
https://open.substack.com/pub/kryptogal/p/femininity-is-fake-but-masculinity?r=17osle&utm_medium=ios
Wow. As a woman, the fact that I am indeed psychologically different from men is something I've never questioned since the day I was born. Exactly how we are different is up for debate, but we are indeed different.
And thank God for that!
Yes!
Why are you gay?
"preposterous"
Everyone is disgusted when you dress and act like a woman.
Example of application of my hypothesis written below. You are a delta.
The IQ gap manifest. Impostor syndrome always seemed inexplicable. You know what you can do or are. Or are delusional, in which case there’s no self-doubt regardless of deficiency. I should have considered self-conscious frauds hiding behind webs of lies.
Words have meanings, and if you’re not an intellectual, I’m not sure who is. What is sure is [how some dim rando feels] isn’t part of any normative definition of the term.
I don't think it's the IQ gap. My personal hypothesis, which I've tested a lot with most SSH ranks, and it appears to be correct, is that the way SSH ranks respond to the taxonomy is pretty much fixed.
TL;DR:
1. IQ doesn't appear to play into this at all
2. This is a very good way to confirm one's SSH rank, especially on the internet. The statement "If you disagree with the SSH, you are low-status" might not go well with the low-status, but it's essentially true.
Alpha - Has zero issues with it. I've barely needed to talk to alphas about what is written here. From what I've seen alphas have no problem identifying the SSH ranks pretty much immediately, without being familiar with the SSH at all. IQ is never an issue.
Bravo - Similar to the alpha, with the caveat that the bravo sees the SSH ranks as a lot more fluid than they actually are. One annoying trait that bravos I know have is that they are always trying to help some loser, who's way beyond their help, and it usually ends up embarrassing for the bravo.
Delta - The delta doesn't see it, his narcissism prevents it. I usually broach the topic to clarify some SSH related faiure of a mutual acquaintance the delta just doesn't get. One was wondering why a girl he liked preferred the alpha bum who treated her badly instead of him. He just never quite understood that all the traits he viewed as undesirable were exactly the ones that the girl was attracted to. The delta doesn't have an issue with the SSH, but views it as a self-improvement program. He also has issues correctly identifying the different SSH ranks, because of his narcissism. An alpha he doesn't like is a gamma, another delta he likes is an alpha. Has issues with how women are portrayed, but they mostly stem from his inability to differentiate them from himself. Stuff like that.
Gamma - His issue is his low sexual status. The gamma will try to rationalize it, and if he can't manage it, he rejects it out of hand, like this particular commenter. If he succeeds, here comes the sigma larp. Even if he manages to hide it, it's there in his head. He's completely incapable of applying the SSH correctly, because in his head it's not a taxonomy, but a confirmation of his imagined superiority. Once I tried to play dumb and asked one about it, it's pretty obvious. According to him, as long as he dismisses people's opinions about him, he's a sigma. There has been several cases of gammas here who have been around since the alphagame days. It is simply astonishing how they will engage in the exact same self-humiliating behavior, exactly as it's described, after reading about it for years on end and witnessing the negative reaction of their peers multiple times from the sidelines. I guess IQ plays a role here, as the more intelligent the gamma is, the more delusional his rationalization can be.
Women - as long as you don't make it personal, and if the woman in question considers you high status, she doesn't have issues with it. If she does it's either a shittest, or she's butthurt because she's surrounded by losers.
Everyone who is interested is welcome to try it and share the results of their experiment, I'm pretty curious about the outcome.
That matches my limited observation so far.
That entire wall of text boils down to
1. Its too simple and
2. We shouldn't call men names they'd object to
On these:
1. feature not a bug
2. also a feature not a bug
Also using the term, “Beta” when it is not a part of the SSH.
They can't' even be bothered to understand that which they are criticizing.
Possibly there are critiques of the system of taxonomy that is SSH as a description, as a management technology, etc. Unlike the author of the quotes, I make no such claim. At worst, I would say that myself (and others) are imperfect observers and therefore imperfect in our application.
These quoted excerpts, of course, neither present or attempt to present any substantive or systemic critique. Instead, we get sniping in the form of "what if ..." or "what happens when ..." questions and related attempts at mind-reading God.
Overall, this is counter-convincing.
The SSH is useful. But it's a map not the territory.
The SSH describes behavioural types, but we all face fractal/situational hierarchies requiring us to perform roles we aren't suited for, female desire has multiple influences beyond personality and status, and people have to earn a living. Reality doesn't necessarily conform to the SSH, as there are married Omega's, Celibate Sigma's, and everyone hates when they have a Gamma boss.
People can unlearn bad behaviours, although in stressful situations bad behaviour can resurface.
All that said, the SSH is a very useful taxonomy and the map is more accurate than it isn't.
The cartoon reminded me of an incident on the job where I had to tell a guy who was whining about no one listening to him, "If no one is listening to you it means that you aren't saying anything worth listening to. The fault is yours, not theirs."
Strong men understand that the world is violent, and that life is a competition. They accept this reality, and accept responsibility - to varying degrees - for their outcomes.
Tools that help them better understand the world, and outperform their competition are to be celebrated.
Weak men cry foul.
Great point.
"The two key surviving protagonists in this long saga stand testament to the fact ... The measure of a man is unlikely to be governed by his position within a said hierarchy and more likely to be governed by his actual ability to lead" - From the last chapter of Batavia by Peter Fitzsimmons. Talking about how a simple soldier lead the survivors of a ship wreck to safety and won the love and respect of everyone, whilst the commandeur of the Dutch East India trading company and leader of the expedition fled back to Java in the only life raft, where he became known for having "lost the ship and left the crew". Meanwhile, the psychopath who tried murdering everyone for his own survival; died on the Gallows after failing to poison himself; vomiting and shitting himself, with both hands cut off, denying the existence of God and declaring his own self righteousness.
I think God has and the SSH can, most certainly cast judgement there.
$63 for a used paperback on Amazon. Must be quite a story.
Defragged History did a decent job if you like the format https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ie880Ps5DI&list=PL5kdplBvGykV0m6aWm-6hDoleMWtiHFth
Absolutely brilliant
I remember watching a video regarding that incident. What a wild story.
Notice the rhetorical flourish "acolyte." In fact, the whole piece is mostly rhetorical and doesn't offer much substance. This person thinks he is smarter than everyone else. However, anyone with an ounce of wisdom can see right through it. I think the response was pretty measured, and even charitable, after such a passive aggressive attack.
This was my takeaway. Thanks to Vox I now get the inner voice saying 'This is rhetoric. It contains no information'.
"What happens when those men challenge the structure by arguing the “unvarnished truth” of said structure is in reality a set of assumptions predicated on sophistry? Would God truly judge in this exact manner by calling Christian men betas, gammas, and alphas? Furthermore, there is an alternative model, and a prove one. "
He knows enough to treat the SSH as a model for which there are alternatives.
Dictionary definition of "model": "a usually miniature representation of something"
Engineering models create a mathematical representation of reality to design solutions. Note that engineering models are *always* wrong. They simplify real world relationships to something that is easier to understand and design solutions for. The measure of a model is if it is usefully wrong.
To complain that a model is inaccurate is failing to understand the purpose of a model. BMI is wrong, but it's still useful for telling a fatty to lose weight.
Midwits not understanding the implications of the word-concepts they use.
There's also a lack of meaningful alternative provided. The typical gamma thing, which really burns my biscuit, is the person who criticizes everything but adds nothing. Like, sure man everything sucks do you have anything better to step into the arena with?
Re. engineering models, indeed. Much like the difference between map and territory, or blueprint and building.