4 - An alpha in a pond is an omega in an ocean. The females who tried to monkey-branch to the alpha end up mating with the highest-ranking male (5). This male now has an abundance of options, making him the top G. He then rejects most of the females. Males ranked 6-11 now have an opportunity to mate, while the male ranked 12 can't transfer his genes to the next generation.
The alternative mating strategy is to wait and breed (sneaky fucker game). Even a faulty clock is right at one point in time
If you integrate the Observed curve on the chart to find the area under the curve, you can determine the more successful mating strategy. MR1-4 are only 43% of the area while MR4-12 are 57%. Assuming the sample size is large enough to demonstrate significance across the whole population, this would indicate that lower ranked males who succeed at mating are more successful maters overall.
In human terms, this suggests the average man is better off learning the strategies of the lower ranked succeeders than learning to emulate Alphas.
The steep drop from MR1 to MR4 also suggests that when the higher ranks fail, they fail precipitously. If you're in the lower ranks, it's better to work on improving yourself to a 5 and settling for the women you can get than wasting time and energy on Alpha Game and a high chance of precipitous failure.
Are you dumb or just duplicitous? The top 25% of males taking up 43% of the area vs the bottom 75% taking up 53% of the area makes the bottom males *more* successful? Take your cope and leave, you are obviously too short for this ride.
That's an idiotic response. The top four ranks are not '25% of males'. Rank does not equate to quantity and ranks are not equally distributed in a population. If you're going to parrot boss-sounding epithets, at least make sure they fit.
Did you read the study? The reason there are 12 ranks is that the studied population had 7-12 males through the studied period. It is in fact linear with one male per rank at any one time, though not always the same male.
Your overall point is incorrect, as are your assumptions and understanding of the material.
I prefaced my point with "assuming the sample size is large enough to demonstrate significance across the whole population." Obviously, if it isn't, no such conclusions can be drawn.
I liked your first reply better. "Why not just offer your correction like a man rather than fling shit around like an incontinent chimpanzee?"
In all honesty, I comment here to practice my rhetoric and try to get past my natural inclination to dialectic. Hence the "boss-sounding epithets" (sic).
There are many other people wrong here, you were just wrong enough to stand out. Please don't take it personally.
Hunting provides interesting similarities. Getting a bull or cow tags matters. Their behavior is very similar to what happens in bars. The cows follow the bulls anywhere. No matter what. Shoot the bull while in his harem, and the cows literally stand around until until humans come around. SIL bagged a great buck while the bull was very busy with a cow, Hopefully he left her with his progeny, he was a big good looking 6 pt buck. Literally went out with a bang. His Alpha head is nicely displayed now. He had quite a harem. But they moved on to other bulls.
This post reminds me of a joke about an older bull and a younger bull as they sit on a hilltop overlooking all the cows in the pasture. The younger bull says, “I’m going to run down the hill and go ‘F’ a cow.”
The older bull says, “Why run down the hill and ‘F’ one, when you can walk down the hill and ‘F’ them all?”
That alternative strategy is pretty simple. Convince females that their life/status is improved with the male.
Some do this through manipulation or lying, others through Game, and some through honesty.
It works for low status males because there will always be some females like Charlotte from Pride and Prejudice. They know they're plain and getting older, and a relative Mr Collins who does have a good sponsor would be able to keep them comfortable.
From the abstract of the paper: "Tests of the model have produced variable results, probably because..." the researchers did not take the time to familiarize themselves with the SSH and incorporate that into their hypothesis.
As the late American physicist Richard Feynman is quoted as saying:
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing — that's what counts. I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something.”
Exactly, the alpha still gets the top catch, but by giving up the next females in line for his subordinates he ensures their loyalty and societal peace, while avoiding that weaker males collude (politics) to scheme his fall behind his back.
All the way to the societal scale. The vast majority of men want to be with a reliable woman who isn’t a carouseled-out roastie or amorphous ab-human. Or both. Everyone knowing everyone basically will pair off is so much healthier.
Some ancaps are really favourable to the idea of paying a woman a downpayment and a salary to have and raise their child, maybe this could be one of the "better" alternative male strategies
I'm not all that surprised that the Alpha did a bit worse and the lesser did a bit better than the model. Some of it surely is alternative strategies, but some of it seems to be explainable by simply the short half-life of chimp alphas. In other words, female chimps making "reasonable" decisions that Alpha Chimp might not be there next year and that this Bravo Chimp is a good candidate for the top spot.
I know you guys will hate me, but Alphas shoot their shot. And also the obesity crisis. Obese men and women throw themselves out of the market. Also the fact that men are no longer forced to settle down I.e. get married...leads to all this nonsense
Vox, could you talk a little about islamic societies in the lens of the SSH? I don't know much about them and it just came to mind, thinking that their Alphas can and will have multiple women in a legal and socially encouraged way.
It has been said before that Christianity has a social role to make lower status males have access to a wife, but I don't know what to think or feel about that, from what I see it comes mostly from gnostic aristocrat types attacking Christianity than defenders of Christianity saying it is a good thing.
Islamic societies analysis frequently overlook the fact that in a way similar to the hindu society, they are stratified in castes. There's very little mingling between different social classes, and as they are strongly patriarchal societies with arranged marriages, it is easy for patriarchs to ensure the continuity of family business and assets over generations.
Besides that, in practice there always stark differences between, gulf state arab muslims and let's say, Pakistani or Bangladeshi.
Working in the gulf states was a revelation to me.
It is not exactly a cast system. It is more like a very rigid socio-economic stratification. If you wealthy and powerful in the arab word, chances are your family has been wealthy and powerful for centuries and will continue doing so for the foreseable future.
The book “The Arab Mind” discusses the issue that the son of a mother treats the children of his sisters better than the children of his brothers as he knows his sisters children are definitely related to him. They culturally understand the Hypergamic nature of females.
Second, the British NHS has done various studies on the problem of first cousins marrying. The issue disclosed how property is passed on within families and the desire to keep it within the family. The study was driven by the high number of retards born among the Pakistanis immigrants.
"They culturally understand the Hypergamic nature of females." I always felt that they had it more figured out regarding women in a traditional sense, since they stuck to the tradition much more than the west, thanks for citing the book, i'm really interested in learning more about it.
"The study was driven by the high number of retards born among the Pakistanis immigrants." This is a tad bit hilarious while also kinda tragic.
It’s a great book. It should have been required reading for anyone dealing in the Middle East. My copy was dated 1983, and I believe that is the latest version. The cultural and religious and family explanations are very beneficial . Made my job a lot easier. Wish I had found it earlier. The rules on Honor killings are very interesting,
To the first comment: That's not true among Westerners, as the brother's children will tend to look like the brother when he was a child... but I guess Arabs are already so inbred they can't tell.
Islamic world is very weak classification. Go to work in one of the gulf states for a year, and you will see that there's very little in common between arabs and our average big city pakistani cab-driving immigrant.
Maybe in more backwards places like Pakistan, Afghanistan or Bangladesh this is true. But in the arab gulf states poligamy is usually reserved to the upper-upper class nowadays, the monarchic nobility basically, and they are smart enough to ensure that the Deltas required to run their societies have access to females.
The same in Iran, which are not Arab but Persian.
I actually enjoyed the time I worked in a gulf state, but they have very closed ethno-centric class based societies, and no matter how much money you manage to make, being an immigrant there will always suck in some level, because they are very protective or their group against foreigners.
But really, you can't take the muslims from hellholes like Pakistan or Indonesia, specially the losers that tend to become economic immigrants and take this as the baseline for all muslims or extrapolate those groups as being the same as arab, persians or palestines.
You know, in my time overseas in Germany my best friends were Islamic Turks despite being German myself, but raised in Brazil. Most Germans felt too squary and close minded to anything outside clown world's narratives.
Even though I felt a lot of regard and friendship coming from them, it was clear to both of us we were not "the same thing", I can imagine how much more this would be something if it is me on their country instead.
Sure, but there may be a racial and IQ aspect to that too. Arab Christians (Assyrians, Maronites, etc, maybe not Copts since modern North Africans are roughly 1/8 black) are functionally Europeans, with IQ ~ 100 — noticeable in Israel where they’re actually more likely to be in high-functioning professions such as doctors, lawyers, and university graduates than the Jewish majority. Islam seems to have a roughly 10 point IQ penalty, so Arab Muslims, Turks, Persians, Bosniaks, and Albanians are IQ ~ 90. Not sure if it’s due to the history of inbreeding, or the anti-intellectual aspect of Islam, or, yes, polygamy — most non-Muslims doing polygamy are in low-IQ Sub-Saharan Africa, and polygamy logically reduces the genetic diversity in a population — but it’s definitely a thing.
Yes, it could a lot of things, but I tend to believe is just pure poverty.
Argentina is probably nowaday one the whitest countries in the world, as europe has been flooded with immigrants, and yet, compare Argentina with any Western European country and you see roughly the same 10 points penalty.
What sticks out to me the most in Argentina compared to Brazil, even the southern states that are mostly German heritage, is the cleanliness of the streets, how things are organized.
But I absolutely can't stand spanish as a native portuguese speaker, it is something akin to the thing between Germans and the Dutch, the languages being close enough but different enough where it has some kind of uncanny valley feeling that is a bit disturbing.
Argentina isn’t actually all white — it suffers from the same Latin American flexibility in considering who’s white, it’s in reality about 85%. The northwest of the country, places like Tucumán or Jujuy, are just as mestizo as Peru or Chile. Although it is true that it has suffered from a dysfunction that I find mystifying, I chalk it up somewhat to bad luck regarding corruption, a bit like with Ukraine.
I think there is a lot to unpack there, also comparing to China where from what I know it seems like women value more the financial side than personality aspects.
Thinking about Christian denominations that allow polygyny like Mormons also.
Mormons are not a Christian denomination. They are a break-off from Christianity in the same way that Jehovah's Witnesses are. Grouping those people in with Christians is a big mistake.
Just to clear things up for you, "Mormons" -- i.e., the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints -- do NOT allow plural marriages (they haven't since 1890). There is an offshoot group that came from the original Church that does, maybe you are thinking of them; but they, and the marriages, are not at all recognized by the actual Church. Further, Gordon B. Hinckley's "The Family: A Proclamation to the World" (1995) states that marriage is between one man and one woman. Hope that helps!
I had absolutely no idea about this! My only interaction with Mormons was with some guys doing missionary work that rang my bell once, but culturally it is kinda assumed and joked about socially whenever the conversation about multiple wives comes to the table around here.
If a chimpanzee in the wild exhibited the human equivalent of omega or gamma behavior he would soon be dead, either by his own troop’s alpha, by another troop or by a predator after being excluded. Humans can get away with this behavior because of the rules of our current society, which prohibit beat downs, much less culling, of tub cuddlers. Some of the data distortions concerning mating behavior is likely due to the fact that even the lowest ranking adult male would still be a reliable delta in human terms.
Vox is right to focus on what the study says about the alpha chimp, and not the rest of them. The biologists' model does not fit the data for the low-ranking chimps at all. The biologists' model predicts that the bottom half of the males would father 5 % of the babies that survived to be semi-independent two-year-olds. They actually fathered about a third of them.
The blackpillers were always really about envy and hedonism: "if I can't have the absolute cream of the crop women, I'm not going for any women at all and I'll just sit here and complain that the world is unfair because I don't have a chiseled jawline like Chad".
They aren't really taken seriously by a lot of the redpill community.
MGTOW had a similar problem in that it didn't address the core problem of casual sex. Men going their own way would usually say that they would avoid relationships and marriage while continuing to fornicate. It's no surprise that the MGTOW movement collapsed and left the the incel movement as the corpose of the manosphere.
4 - An alpha in a pond is an omega in an ocean. The females who tried to monkey-branch to the alpha end up mating with the highest-ranking male (5). This male now has an abundance of options, making him the top G. He then rejects most of the females. Males ranked 6-11 now have an opportunity to mate, while the male ranked 12 can't transfer his genes to the next generation.
The alternative mating strategy is to wait and breed (sneaky fucker game). Even a faulty clock is right at one point in time
If you integrate the Observed curve on the chart to find the area under the curve, you can determine the more successful mating strategy. MR1-4 are only 43% of the area while MR4-12 are 57%. Assuming the sample size is large enough to demonstrate significance across the whole population, this would indicate that lower ranked males who succeed at mating are more successful maters overall.
In human terms, this suggests the average man is better off learning the strategies of the lower ranked succeeders than learning to emulate Alphas.
The steep drop from MR1 to MR4 also suggests that when the higher ranks fail, they fail precipitously. If you're in the lower ranks, it's better to work on improving yourself to a 5 and settling for the women you can get than wasting time and energy on Alpha Game and a high chance of precipitous failure.
Are you dumb or just duplicitous? The top 25% of males taking up 43% of the area vs the bottom 75% taking up 53% of the area makes the bottom males *more* successful? Take your cope and leave, you are obviously too short for this ride.
That's an idiotic response. The top four ranks are not '25% of males'. Rank does not equate to quantity and ranks are not equally distributed in a population. If you're going to parrot boss-sounding epithets, at least make sure they fit.
Did you read the study? The reason there are 12 ranks is that the studied population had 7-12 males through the studied period. It is in fact linear with one male per rank at any one time, though not always the same male.
Your overall point is incorrect, as are your assumptions and understanding of the material.
I prefaced my point with "assuming the sample size is large enough to demonstrate significance across the whole population." Obviously, if it isn't, no such conclusions can be drawn.
I liked your first reply better. "Why not just offer your correction like a man rather than fling shit around like an incontinent chimpanzee?"
In all honesty, I comment here to practice my rhetoric and try to get past my natural inclination to dialectic. Hence the "boss-sounding epithets" (sic).
There are many other people wrong here, you were just wrong enough to stand out. Please don't take it personally.
Hunting provides interesting similarities. Getting a bull or cow tags matters. Their behavior is very similar to what happens in bars. The cows follow the bulls anywhere. No matter what. Shoot the bull while in his harem, and the cows literally stand around until until humans come around. SIL bagged a great buck while the bull was very busy with a cow, Hopefully he left her with his progeny, he was a big good looking 6 pt buck. Literally went out with a bang. His Alpha head is nicely displayed now. He had quite a harem. But they moved on to other bulls.
I recall a documentary years ago that helps explain the success of the non Alphas.
They stick to their targted female like glue, and when she is ready to mate, he is there on the spot, while the Alpha is off doing Alpha things.
Opportunism is a success strategy for many animals it seems.
This post reminds me of a joke about an older bull and a younger bull as they sit on a hilltop overlooking all the cows in the pasture. The younger bull says, “I’m going to run down the hill and go ‘F’ a cow.”
The older bull says, “Why run down the hill and ‘F’ one, when you can walk down the hill and ‘F’ them all?”
I have a feeling that subjects 5 and 9 didn't put females on a pedestal. Here's another example of an Alpha in the wild. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlMDFedpi4M
That alternative strategy is pretty simple. Convince females that their life/status is improved with the male.
Some do this through manipulation or lying, others through Game, and some through honesty.
It works for low status males because there will always be some females like Charlotte from Pride and Prejudice. They know they're plain and getting older, and a relative Mr Collins who does have a good sponsor would be able to keep them comfortable.
If you are trying to convince them you already lost.
From the abstract of the paper: "Tests of the model have produced variable results, probably because..." the researchers did not take the time to familiarize themselves with the SSH and incorporate that into their hypothesis.
As the late American physicist Richard Feynman is quoted as saying:
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing — that's what counts. I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something.”
In a nutshell, why monogamous marriage was central to Western cultural success.
Exactly, the alpha still gets the top catch, but by giving up the next females in line for his subordinates he ensures their loyalty and societal peace, while avoiding that weaker males collude (politics) to scheme his fall behind his back.
It’s amazing how much even a middling relationship deflates an ocean of Gamma and related dysocial nonsense.
Benefits Alphas and Bravo's by securing the Loyalty of Delta's in group competition.
All the way to the societal scale. The vast majority of men want to be with a reliable woman who isn’t a carouseled-out roastie or amorphous ab-human. Or both. Everyone knowing everyone basically will pair off is so much healthier.
Alternative male strategies, Bill Cosby enters the chat
Some ancaps are really favourable to the idea of paying a woman a downpayment and a salary to have and raise their child, maybe this could be one of the "better" alternative male strategies
Ancaps are such losers.
They always seem to reinvent things like marriage, don't they?
I'm not all that surprised that the Alpha did a bit worse and the lesser did a bit better than the model. Some of it surely is alternative strategies, but some of it seems to be explainable by simply the short half-life of chimp alphas. In other words, female chimps making "reasonable" decisions that Alpha Chimp might not be there next year and that this Bravo Chimp is a good candidate for the top spot.
I know you guys will hate me, but Alphas shoot their shot. And also the obesity crisis. Obese men and women throw themselves out of the market. Also the fact that men are no longer forced to settle down I.e. get married...leads to all this nonsense
Go back a few days and read the article on the connection between female education and hypergamy. The short answer is feminism is dysgenic.
As Heartiste said, men have involuntary celibacy, and women involuntary solitude.
What you are saying is basic and kinda obvious, only a gamma would hate you for it. This is not the average redpill space.
Vox, could you talk a little about islamic societies in the lens of the SSH? I don't know much about them and it just came to mind, thinking that their Alphas can and will have multiple women in a legal and socially encouraged way.
It has been said before that Christianity has a social role to make lower status males have access to a wife, but I don't know what to think or feel about that, from what I see it comes mostly from gnostic aristocrat types attacking Christianity than defenders of Christianity saying it is a good thing.
Islamic societies analysis frequently overlook the fact that in a way similar to the hindu society, they are stratified in castes. There's very little mingling between different social classes, and as they are strongly patriarchal societies with arranged marriages, it is easy for patriarchs to ensure the continuity of family business and assets over generations.
Besides that, in practice there always stark differences between, gulf state arab muslims and let's say, Pakistani or Bangladeshi.
Working in the gulf states was a revelation to me.
I was not aware that they too had a caste system like that, thanks for chipping in!
It is not exactly a cast system. It is more like a very rigid socio-economic stratification. If you wealthy and powerful in the arab word, chances are your family has been wealthy and powerful for centuries and will continue doing so for the foreseable future.
Two comments
The book “The Arab Mind” discusses the issue that the son of a mother treats the children of his sisters better than the children of his brothers as he knows his sisters children are definitely related to him. They culturally understand the Hypergamic nature of females.
Second, the British NHS has done various studies on the problem of first cousins marrying. The issue disclosed how property is passed on within families and the desire to keep it within the family. The study was driven by the high number of retards born among the Pakistanis immigrants.
"They culturally understand the Hypergamic nature of females." I always felt that they had it more figured out regarding women in a traditional sense, since they stuck to the tradition much more than the west, thanks for citing the book, i'm really interested in learning more about it.
"The study was driven by the high number of retards born among the Pakistanis immigrants." This is a tad bit hilarious while also kinda tragic.
It’s a great book. It should have been required reading for anyone dealing in the Middle East. My copy was dated 1983, and I believe that is the latest version. The cultural and religious and family explanations are very beneficial . Made my job a lot easier. Wish I had found it earlier. The rules on Honor killings are very interesting,
To the first comment: That's not true among Westerners, as the brother's children will tend to look like the brother when he was a child... but I guess Arabs are already so inbred they can't tell.
Half of the Islamic world is inbred. Genetic bottlenecks from polygamy over centuries has consequences.
Islamic world is very weak classification. Go to work in one of the gulf states for a year, and you will see that there's very little in common between arabs and our average big city pakistani cab-driving immigrant.
70% of Pakistan is inbread. The Arabian peninsula is at 30% inbred. Differing sure, yet still arguably the largest problem for both.
It would make sense that polygamous societies are more stagnant because the Deltas are denied buy-in via wives.
Maybe in more backwards places like Pakistan, Afghanistan or Bangladesh this is true. But in the arab gulf states poligamy is usually reserved to the upper-upper class nowadays, the monarchic nobility basically, and they are smart enough to ensure that the Deltas required to run their societies have access to females.
The same in Iran, which are not Arab but Persian.
I actually enjoyed the time I worked in a gulf state, but they have very closed ethno-centric class based societies, and no matter how much money you manage to make, being an immigrant there will always suck in some level, because they are very protective or their group against foreigners.
But really, you can't take the muslims from hellholes like Pakistan or Indonesia, specially the losers that tend to become economic immigrants and take this as the baseline for all muslims or extrapolate those groups as being the same as arab, persians or palestines.
You know, in my time overseas in Germany my best friends were Islamic Turks despite being German myself, but raised in Brazil. Most Germans felt too squary and close minded to anything outside clown world's narratives.
Even though I felt a lot of regard and friendship coming from them, it was clear to both of us we were not "the same thing", I can imagine how much more this would be something if it is me on their country instead.
Sure, but there may be a racial and IQ aspect to that too. Arab Christians (Assyrians, Maronites, etc, maybe not Copts since modern North Africans are roughly 1/8 black) are functionally Europeans, with IQ ~ 100 — noticeable in Israel where they’re actually more likely to be in high-functioning professions such as doctors, lawyers, and university graduates than the Jewish majority. Islam seems to have a roughly 10 point IQ penalty, so Arab Muslims, Turks, Persians, Bosniaks, and Albanians are IQ ~ 90. Not sure if it’s due to the history of inbreeding, or the anti-intellectual aspect of Islam, or, yes, polygamy — most non-Muslims doing polygamy are in low-IQ Sub-Saharan Africa, and polygamy logically reduces the genetic diversity in a population — but it’s definitely a thing.
Yes, it could a lot of things, but I tend to believe is just pure poverty.
Argentina is probably nowaday one the whitest countries in the world, as europe has been flooded with immigrants, and yet, compare Argentina with any Western European country and you see roughly the same 10 points penalty.
What sticks out to me the most in Argentina compared to Brazil, even the southern states that are mostly German heritage, is the cleanliness of the streets, how things are organized.
But I absolutely can't stand spanish as a native portuguese speaker, it is something akin to the thing between Germans and the Dutch, the languages being close enough but different enough where it has some kind of uncanny valley feeling that is a bit disturbing.
This might be why the English used to hate the Dutch so much.
Argentina isn’t actually all white — it suffers from the same Latin American flexibility in considering who’s white, it’s in reality about 85%. The northwest of the country, places like Tucumán or Jujuy, are just as mestizo as Peru or Chile. Although it is true that it has suffered from a dysfunction that I find mystifying, I chalk it up somewhat to bad luck regarding corruption, a bit like with Ukraine.
I think there is a lot to unpack there, also comparing to China where from what I know it seems like women value more the financial side than personality aspects.
Thinking about Christian denominations that allow polygyny like Mormons also.
Mormons are not a Christian denomination. They are a break-off from Christianity in the same way that Jehovah's Witnesses are. Grouping those people in with Christians is a big mistake.
Thanks for the comment! I am still learning a lot about this, leaving atheism just a couple of years ago. I will definitely keep this in mind.
May God bless you.
Just to clear things up for you, "Mormons" -- i.e., the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints -- do NOT allow plural marriages (they haven't since 1890). There is an offshoot group that came from the original Church that does, maybe you are thinking of them; but they, and the marriages, are not at all recognized by the actual Church. Further, Gordon B. Hinckley's "The Family: A Proclamation to the World" (1995) states that marriage is between one man and one woman. Hope that helps!
I had absolutely no idea about this! My only interaction with Mormons was with some guys doing missionary work that rang my bell once, but culturally it is kinda assumed and joked about socially whenever the conversation about multiple wives comes to the table around here.
Didn’t MBS marry his first cousin? He is a very smart man but not super good looking, balding and portly before 40. Genetics not so good.
Pretty much sounds like how Hindus do it, as well.
I like those happier stories. Several I've heard went more like, "I went home for a holiday, they married me off in exchange for some goats."
One went, "She was dating an attractive Christian guy, and her parents were so furious they married her to this ugly construction worker."
Interesting, seems even Alien compared to what we are accostumed to in the west. Thanks for the reply Ed!
Or the Alpha gets kind of adopted by an upper class older Bravo, if he is lucky.
If a chimpanzee in the wild exhibited the human equivalent of omega or gamma behavior he would soon be dead, either by his own troop’s alpha, by another troop or by a predator after being excluded. Humans can get away with this behavior because of the rules of our current society, which prohibit beat downs, much less culling, of tub cuddlers. Some of the data distortions concerning mating behavior is likely due to the fact that even the lowest ranking adult male would still be a reliable delta in human terms.
Vox is right to focus on what the study says about the alpha chimp, and not the rest of them. The biologists' model does not fit the data for the low-ranking chimps at all. The biologists' model predicts that the bottom half of the males would father 5 % of the babies that survived to be semi-independent two-year-olds. They actually fathered about a third of them.
"about a third of them."
This undermines black pill claims that the majority of men don't pass on their genes, and any kids they have are actually products of adultery.
Chimps don't have the concept of marriage and the Alphas still don't monopolize the next generation.
That might be because every male chimp can overpower the female chimps; not exactly known for their smooth lovemaking.
This was a thoroughly enjoyable read.
The blackpillers were always really about envy and hedonism: "if I can't have the absolute cream of the crop women, I'm not going for any women at all and I'll just sit here and complain that the world is unfair because I don't have a chiseled jawline like Chad".
They aren't really taken seriously by a lot of the redpill community.
MGTOW had a similar problem in that it didn't address the core problem of casual sex. Men going their own way would usually say that they would avoid relationships and marriage while continuing to fornicate. It's no surprise that the MGTOW movement collapsed and left the the incel movement as the corpose of the manosphere.
The black pill is just the blue pill with the saturation turned down
Borrowing that one
Deltas have access as long as they are willing to wait for woman to begin to lose their desirability.
How dare you say something so hurtful yet so true! 😂