I deeply appreciate the insights I've gained from Alpha Game and other manosphere sites. I've gone from projecting onto women to not only understanding women, but shocking them with my insights.
It's simple. Women aren't men. Duh.
In my case, both of my parents have given me universally terrible advice about women, too my detriment.
Now I can understand women and even forgive them for their treatment of me. I did weak things in the past and got rejected. Sure, I wish they'd been more forthright, but I get it now. And I'm really over being bitter about things. Still cynical, but not bitter.
An example of how I've changed:
My last relationship, 5 years ago, I knew something was amiss. I asked what was wrong and she said "nothing". I knew better. And I'm proud of what I did next.
I looked her in the eye and said "I know something's up. I can tell you want to tell me, but something is stopping you. And that's okay. I'm going to trust that you have a reason for not telling me, and that when you're ready, you'll let me know. And I'll be here to listen."
Her eyes got wide, then she got quiet.
Turns out, a few days later she told me her ex husband wanted to reconcile and she wanted to go back to him for their young son's sake. I let her go to give them that chance.
I thank Vox for helping me become a man that had sufficient insight to see all that. I know I did the best thing I could. I pray they're happy.
There are some subjectivities involved in this status game. Useful anecdote was shared by one of the pastor in my church a couple of months ago. He confessed that he come from not so well-off background but he eventually married to Singaporean wife with wealthy parents with multiple properties.
She and her parents often facilitate this pastor's ministry by free accomodation on her condo, as the wife herself thought that contributing to his husband's ministry as like giving to God. Not sure about the attractiveness aspect of this arrangement though.
From a secular view, high wealth and income are high status.
From a Christian view, serving God as a minister is high status.
Status triggers attraction. Vox has the example of an ugly old super Alpha (Kissinger) becoming the center of attention in the room, more than good looking young Alphas.
So she probably did find him attractive. She married him after all, despite other options. Her family's contributions to his ministry would confirm the value of her husband's work. The cost of that support to her parents proves what he does is valuable and high status.
It is still an interesting case though, one would think that daughter from well-off family is typically spoilt and materialistic, and in this case, that is not true. It is not typical.
The difficult part is how to revert once you know you are wrong.
Theoretically speaking, these ladies can just find more relaxed and less paying jobs, then slowly find the guy who will to settle for her.
But maybe not so easy to downsize once you are accustomed to spend family-supporting salary alone by yourself.
I dated some of these ladies, and obviously the problem is they want to maintain that high salary at all cost, for regular travel, Hermes, and Louis Vuitton.
They want to marry director and CEO who can give them 10k per month. Greed
No; the hypergamy/hypogamy distinction is in relation to attractiveness and/or social status. Women like to date/marry across and up, men date/marry across and down. Whilst there are always exceptions, in general that's how it works. Note too that affairs or casual sex are another matter (see eg: the rich wife & the personal trainer).
Polygamy is a separate matter, and in fact there's some evidence that it's not purely a male desire either - a President Gigachad could quite easily have a number of wives or concubines who would prefer that life (ie sharing one man) to "settling" for exclusivity with a lower-status man.
Then there's polyandry, but the less said here about Reddit the better.
Agree 100%. I'm stubborn and more prickly than a cactus. Trying to date a woman who was "like me" would be two cacti smashing into each other - lots of punctures and bleeding from both sides.
Lesbians are walking cliches. I was doing Uber in Atlanta and two women got in. One had a dress on and was giving the silent treatment to the other one who was, no kidding, wearing a softball uniform and was close to 6ft tall. The whole trip, the butch was asking the femme, what did I do wrong? Why won't you talk to me? It was so much like a married couple argument that I had trouble keeping myself from cracking up.
Spot on. I made the mistake of marrying a woman like this. High IQ. Went to Harvard but dropped out. Independently wealthy. Definitely higher social status than myself. Amazingly, she’s ride or die. But that’s only because I kept coming back after the fits of girl boss anger and emotional gymnastic manipulation.
I can confirm there is no room for shit testing a woman like this. No calling them out for their overbearing control issues. Just an about face and back out to sea.
If I wanted to date an ambitious, well-educated, highly motivated woman with laser precision focus on what she wants from me and from life, I’d just date myself instead. We men don’t want to fight to the death in our domestic lives and relationships. That’s what the real world is for. Men want women who will support the vision they have for their lives, no matter how grand or narrow in scope. Having a woman try to lead me toward her vision, her leadership, and what she always thinks is right is extremely unattractive.
It's a problem with viewing the two human sexes as competitors rather than complimentary halves. A point of view our overlords are more than happy to aggressively push.
It's quite enlightening to see just how many women are trying to outright be men, by being at work all the time, juggling 2 or 3 jobs, spending 4-5 years and an astronomical sum on some niche university course, then wondering why their love lives aren't great. None of them I've ever talked to or tried to go out with are particularly happy about the arrangement given the sheer amount of complaining they do but they still carry on with it.
They are, of course, the most aggressive about constant shit testing too. Because what a man working a gruelling 9-5 really, truly wants is an empowered girlboss playing mental gymnastics with him every minute of the day that he doesn't spend at work.
That persistence and sense of duty can be tapped, if you’re the right man for it. Make her like being around you, make the move, and when you’re in, make her feel safe constantly (less is more, it’s more of a presence than an act)
All of that persistence and duty will transfer towards suddenly wanting to be a woman. I think in the modern world, being a woman is like a reaction. They feel they’re able to “be a woman” if there’s a man that already is a man.
In Europe, people use the Euro. In the US, you use dollars. One is useless and worth nothing if you can't exchange it for what the other deems valuable. If you're not selling what people want to buy, what are you doing? Sell what people need or want.
Guys who eventually get a girlfriend, first learn what girls like. How it's different from what single men are offering. And it's a different currency. You have to accept what you're offering, it's worthless to the other group. But you can find out what the other side is lacking. And to learn to give what they're buying. To negotiate and to sell it only to those who pay for it with enough of the coin you're looking for.
Maybe it’s me becoming older but i find very few women naturally ugly. There are plenty of plain janes who would be attractive enough if they just werent fat. You cant control your face but you can control your weight.
Many women I’ve seen in “successful” careers in higher education end up in roles that have the word “coordinator” in them. Usually that’s coordinator of students or of lower-level employees, and she has little decision-making authority outside of her connection to these people. So she spent 10 years climbing the corporate ladder to become a babysitter.
In corporate as a software engineer, I worked with a several female projects coordinators and project managers. They told me what the customers wanted, set up schedules, and tracked my work progress. They interfaced, organized, and did the paperwork, so the old Delta could stick to the fun stuff. In the 60s, they would have been called secretaries.
In the 1800s only men were secretaries, and it was an esteemed profession.
Bringing women into the work force literally destroyed the value of the jobs they took as they played victim, when previous men were proud to be able to assist.
World War 1 in England killed off masses of young men and created the "extra women" Mrs. Sayers wrote about in approximately contemporaneous fiction. See: Murder will Advertise, et al.
World War 2 in England *required* women in the workforce for England to survive, from secretaries to land girls, to mining. Every area of men's work needed hands to do it. From ERC Lorac's contemporaneous Fell Murder we have a conversation between the protagonist and a hospital matron. I learned that nurses who married would be granted a brief leave, but would not be allowed to not work full time as a nurse, including night shifts, even if her husband was invalided out of the service.
If you are thinking if I'm wondering if both wars were started by people who want us to eat bugs, and own everything... Hmm...
Yep. Reading old books the secretary is always a male. The associated status is reflected in the titles of our federal executive branch department heads.
The mangas often have such cases. Think about detective Conan series where the female (Ran Mouri) is her karate club's captain whereas the male is nerdy detective with rich parents.
More recently, in FF XIII games, they have Lightning (female protagonist, police woman) with her boyfriend, Hope, 7 years younger, but science prodigy and professor.
Definitely, such series are marketed for Gamma. However, 'Gamma' in that series are situational only in his romantic relation. Those 'Gamma' male have high social status or high competency which still sufficient to attract his 'Alpha' girlfriend.
Point to note: hypergamy is still valid for 'Alpha' female, if you are Gamma you can only date them if your social/family class is higher than them
That’s a case of role reversal. The woman wears the pants in those types of relationships, except in rare cases. Usually, a high-performing, extroverted woman will choose a mid/low-grade, introverted man who himself would never have talked to her. The woman then walks all over him and he submits because he’s too afraid of losing sex, companionship, or someone cooking him meals, all of which are things men at the bottom of the hierarchy usually lack.
I deeply appreciate the insights I've gained from Alpha Game and other manosphere sites. I've gone from projecting onto women to not only understanding women, but shocking them with my insights.
It's simple. Women aren't men. Duh.
In my case, both of my parents have given me universally terrible advice about women, too my detriment.
Now I can understand women and even forgive them for their treatment of me. I did weak things in the past and got rejected. Sure, I wish they'd been more forthright, but I get it now. And I'm really over being bitter about things. Still cynical, but not bitter.
An example of how I've changed:
My last relationship, 5 years ago, I knew something was amiss. I asked what was wrong and she said "nothing". I knew better. And I'm proud of what I did next.
I looked her in the eye and said "I know something's up. I can tell you want to tell me, but something is stopping you. And that's okay. I'm going to trust that you have a reason for not telling me, and that when you're ready, you'll let me know. And I'll be here to listen."
Her eyes got wide, then she got quiet.
Turns out, a few days later she told me her ex husband wanted to reconcile and she wanted to go back to him for their young son's sake. I let her go to give them that chance.
I thank Vox for helping me become a man that had sufficient insight to see all that. I know I did the best thing I could. I pray they're happy.
There are some subjectivities involved in this status game. Useful anecdote was shared by one of the pastor in my church a couple of months ago. He confessed that he come from not so well-off background but he eventually married to Singaporean wife with wealthy parents with multiple properties.
She and her parents often facilitate this pastor's ministry by free accomodation on her condo, as the wife herself thought that contributing to his husband's ministry as like giving to God. Not sure about the attractiveness aspect of this arrangement though.
There are many different status hierarchies.
From a secular view, high wealth and income are high status.
From a Christian view, serving God as a minister is high status.
Status triggers attraction. Vox has the example of an ugly old super Alpha (Kissinger) becoming the center of attention in the room, more than good looking young Alphas.
So she probably did find him attractive. She married him after all, despite other options. Her family's contributions to his ministry would confirm the value of her husband's work. The cost of that support to her parents proves what he does is valuable and high status.
It is still an interesting case though, one would think that daughter from well-off family is typically spoilt and materialistic, and in this case, that is not true. It is not typical.
The ideal of equality between the sexes was all along the negation of male and female. That so called "Ideal of Good" was actually evil all along.
And likewise their notion of inequality=abuse,evil
Admitting you've been on the wrong track for years is very painful. Much easier to convince yourself that the world is the problem.
The difficult part is how to revert once you know you are wrong.
Theoretically speaking, these ladies can just find more relaxed and less paying jobs, then slowly find the guy who will to settle for her.
But maybe not so easy to downsize once you are accustomed to spend family-supporting salary alone by yourself.
I dated some of these ladies, and obviously the problem is they want to maintain that high salary at all cost, for regular travel, Hermes, and Louis Vuitton.
They want to marry director and CEO who can give them 10k per month. Greed
Lacey always nails it!
I think this is the very reason women are completely clueless about men and politics.
And men about women.
I know that men are hypogamous, but I thought the main male equivalent of female hypergamy was polygamy.
Women want the best absolute man, while men men want all women above a certain threshold of attractiveness.
Of course neither tends to work out very well. The average woman can't get the absolute best man, and the average man can't have a harem.
No; the hypergamy/hypogamy distinction is in relation to attractiveness and/or social status. Women like to date/marry across and up, men date/marry across and down. Whilst there are always exceptions, in general that's how it works. Note too that affairs or casual sex are another matter (see eg: the rich wife & the personal trainer).
Polygamy is a separate matter, and in fact there's some evidence that it's not purely a male desire either - a President Gigachad could quite easily have a number of wives or concubines who would prefer that life (ie sharing one man) to "settling" for exclusivity with a lower-status man.
Then there's polyandry, but the less said here about Reddit the better.
The personal trainer is up the ladder, just an incomplete accounting.
Once one realises you are trying to date a member of the opposite sex, and not yourself, it becomes much better.
You aren't that great. You x2 would be hell.
Agree 100%. I'm stubborn and more prickly than a cactus. Trying to date a woman who was "like me" would be two cacti smashing into each other - lots of punctures and bleeding from both sides.
That's a hilarious image!
Lesbians are walking cliches. I was doing Uber in Atlanta and two women got in. One had a dress on and was giving the silent treatment to the other one who was, no kidding, wearing a softball uniform and was close to 6ft tall. The whole trip, the butch was asking the femme, what did I do wrong? Why won't you talk to me? It was so much like a married couple argument that I had trouble keeping myself from cracking up.
Cate would also now be permanently mad at Mari
No one can stay mad at Mari. Especially not Cate.
Spot on. I made the mistake of marrying a woman like this. High IQ. Went to Harvard but dropped out. Independently wealthy. Definitely higher social status than myself. Amazingly, she’s ride or die. But that’s only because I kept coming back after the fits of girl boss anger and emotional gymnastic manipulation.
I can confirm there is no room for shit testing a woman like this. No calling them out for their overbearing control issues. Just an about face and back out to sea.
What things made you decided to marry her at that time?
If I wanted to date an ambitious, well-educated, highly motivated woman with laser precision focus on what she wants from me and from life, I’d just date myself instead. We men don’t want to fight to the death in our domestic lives and relationships. That’s what the real world is for. Men want women who will support the vision they have for their lives, no matter how grand or narrow in scope. Having a woman try to lead me toward her vision, her leadership, and what she always thinks is right is extremely unattractive.
It's a problem with viewing the two human sexes as competitors rather than complimentary halves. A point of view our overlords are more than happy to aggressively push.
It's quite enlightening to see just how many women are trying to outright be men, by being at work all the time, juggling 2 or 3 jobs, spending 4-5 years and an astronomical sum on some niche university course, then wondering why their love lives aren't great. None of them I've ever talked to or tried to go out with are particularly happy about the arrangement given the sheer amount of complaining they do but they still carry on with it.
They are, of course, the most aggressive about constant shit testing too. Because what a man working a gruelling 9-5 really, truly wants is an empowered girlboss playing mental gymnastics with him every minute of the day that he doesn't spend at work.
They don’t call it puttering around in the yard or garage for nothing.
That persistence and sense of duty can be tapped, if you’re the right man for it. Make her like being around you, make the move, and when you’re in, make her feel safe constantly (less is more, it’s more of a presence than an act)
All of that persistence and duty will transfer towards suddenly wanting to be a woman. I think in the modern world, being a woman is like a reaction. They feel they’re able to “be a woman” if there’s a man that already is a man.
Kinda sucks, but c’est la vie
Men want a home. They want a homemaker and a helpmate.
My favorite line in Bio likes was "Philanthropy".
Just normal 49ers.
Yes, exactly
The amount of times women have asked me "why can't xx get a BF, she's got a great job, she likes travel, she's educated".... "she's ugly".
Coin of the realm.
In Europe, people use the Euro. In the US, you use dollars. One is useless and worth nothing if you can't exchange it for what the other deems valuable. If you're not selling what people want to buy, what are you doing? Sell what people need or want.
Guys who eventually get a girlfriend, first learn what girls like. How it's different from what single men are offering. And it's a different currency. You have to accept what you're offering, it's worthless to the other group. But you can find out what the other side is lacking. And to learn to give what they're buying. To negotiate and to sell it only to those who pay for it with enough of the coin you're looking for.
Maybe it’s me becoming older but i find very few women naturally ugly. There are plenty of plain janes who would be attractive enough if they just werent fat. You cant control your face but you can control your weight.
Average healthy woman is attractive.
It's the combination of unhealthy body, mind, and attitude that lowers her past the "I wouldn't mind her" line of the average man.
And many average men are willing to make that line low.
Add unpleasant and overweight to the ugly, and it is the complete deal breaker.
Also the jobs these women have usually aren't great, and while degreed, they usually aren't well educated.
Many women I’ve seen in “successful” careers in higher education end up in roles that have the word “coordinator” in them. Usually that’s coordinator of students or of lower-level employees, and she has little decision-making authority outside of her connection to these people. So she spent 10 years climbing the corporate ladder to become a babysitter.
In corporate as a software engineer, I worked with a several female projects coordinators and project managers. They told me what the customers wanted, set up schedules, and tracked my work progress. They interfaced, organized, and did the paperwork, so the old Delta could stick to the fun stuff. In the 60s, they would have been called secretaries.
In the 1800s only men were secretaries, and it was an esteemed profession.
Bringing women into the work force literally destroyed the value of the jobs they took as they played victim, when previous men were proud to be able to assist.
Putting my tinfoil hat on (again):
World War 1 in England killed off masses of young men and created the "extra women" Mrs. Sayers wrote about in approximately contemporaneous fiction. See: Murder will Advertise, et al.
World War 2 in England *required* women in the workforce for England to survive, from secretaries to land girls, to mining. Every area of men's work needed hands to do it. From ERC Lorac's contemporaneous Fell Murder we have a conversation between the protagonist and a hospital matron. I learned that nurses who married would be granted a brief leave, but would not be allowed to not work full time as a nurse, including night shifts, even if her husband was invalided out of the service.
If you are thinking if I'm wondering if both wars were started by people who want us to eat bugs, and own everything... Hmm...
Read popular old books. They're eye-opening.
Yep. Reading old books the secretary is always a male. The associated status is reflected in the titles of our federal executive branch department heads.
This is because, at the same time, the ladies who did the same job had the much higher title. Wife.
"He held power as General Secretary of the Communist Party from 1922 to 1952"
Name the famous mustache man. (Not the failure)
Many filler jobs created for women.
Yep. it's normally a boring job and their degree has either "arts" or "science" in the name... ie a BS degree
The mangas often have such cases. Think about detective Conan series where the female (Ran Mouri) is her karate club's captain whereas the male is nerdy detective with rich parents.
More recently, in FF XIII games, they have Lightning (female protagonist, police woman) with her boyfriend, Hope, 7 years younger, but science prodigy and professor.
Definitely, such series are marketed for Gamma. However, 'Gamma' in that series are situational only in his romantic relation. Those 'Gamma' male have high social status or high competency which still sufficient to attract his 'Alpha' girlfriend.
Point to note: hypergamy is still valid for 'Alpha' female, if you are Gamma you can only date them if your social/family class is higher than them
Average for outliers is difficult, but when I was a young Omega, I expected I'd be claimed by a domineering woman and resigned myself to that fate.
American culture dissolves the traditional cultures of immigrants, so those women aim higher and wait in vain instead of settling for lower men.
That’s a case of role reversal. The woman wears the pants in those types of relationships, except in rare cases. Usually, a high-performing, extroverted woman will choose a mid/low-grade, introverted man who himself would never have talked to her. The woman then walks all over him and he submits because he’s too afraid of losing sex, companionship, or someone cooking him meals, all of which are things men at the bottom of the hierarchy usually lack.