True. My financially modest bravo fiancé will never be Donald Trump or Vladimir Putin, but he is one of the kindest, most sensitive, (about others, not himself) selfless, gentle, reasonable, wise, even-keeled, strong, emotionally tough, empathetic, understanding, decent, happy-go-lucky-lucky, responsible, helpful, initiative-taking, thoughtful people that I know, and there's NO ONE I would rather spend the rest of my life with.
Since his goal is the Eastern Orthodox priesthood, he will likely never be rich or famous or politically powerful on earth because his treasures will probably only come in the afterlife, unless you count a house full of children and a doting, grateful, appreciative wife. Being a king at home and the lowliest servant at his parish may just have to do for him in this life, I'm afraid. 😂
"utlimately alpha ness and sigmaness is about willingness to bang other men's wives."
Alphaness is the ability to LEAD men, which comes with the side benefit of being attractive to all the women in your hierarchy.
Sigma is the lone wolf who gets confused for an Alpha due to his leadership ability, despite not being part of the group.
Willingness to bang other men's wives has no correlation to Alpha/Sigma-ness. Even Deltas and Gammas can become willing adulterers. The Alpha has more temptations to do so and is more likely to commit that sin, but his social rank does not come from that moral failing and is not defined by it.
Christianity is entirely based on the concept of Man being fallen. The level of stupidity you reveal is a disheartening reminder of the Biblical reminder not to put pearls before swines. You clearly don't know the first thing about the religion you supposedly espouse.
The idea that the truth is "really repugnant to Christianity" is literally inverted. You're permanently banned.
I suspect that the Sigma SSH type overlaps with the INTJ (Introverted, Intuitive, Thinking, and Judging) personality type: both types are given the highest and rarest position on both scales; humorously, they both have received the greatest amount of hype.
Returning to this piece after some personal reflection, I see that Vox has revealed part of the deeper nature of the Sigma male.
What really distinguishes the Sigma is that he has a personal mission. A special mission. It could be said that the Alpha also has a mission, but it is of a different nature. Bravos, Deltas, Gammas, etc. do not have a mission. Now, the Gamma has a mission—in theory—but it exists only in the realm of pure fantasy.
A Sigma is like James Bond, while an Alpha is the commander of the royal infantry.
"Kuragin is based on a real man, Anatoly Lvovoich Shostak, who successfully seduced Tatyana Bers, the younger sister of Tolstoy’s wife who was the model for the character of Natasha."
Can anyone refer me to more information about Tolstoy's background that talks about this more?
Most people cannot separate the logical from the emotional, so a neutral approach to discussing behavior patterns without ascribing some morality to them is a hurdle most people can’t jump over. The simple statement of “the SSH is amoral” just does not compute with most rhetoric-driven people, so they jump to talking about something that helps them process the concept emotionally, such as morality, which completely forays the original discussion.
Most people cant talk about a topic. They talk about what they wanted to talk about, once the topic was brought up.
Staying on topic is a skill that most dont seem to want to learn, so dealing with the SSH not including morality would take time to separate that from what they already know, and they dont want to.
As with "Science" the new generation will adopt this, but unlike "Science" it makes the world easier to understand so doesnt have to be forced on people.
The recalcitrants refuse to see it as anything different than what they already know with a rebrand.
On that note, I think Vox once said that a lot of people don't listen during conversation but rather think about what to say next. It's likely the same way with staying on topic.
But going back to the Coffee Guy Chris' statement, to be fair there are some desirable qualities in certain SSH roles that many men want to emulate. The flip-side being how some people "jump" to concluding that Gammas are automatically the worst evil imaginable, even though morally good gammas exist like CS Lewis. The fact that many people use their emotions as a substitute for a moral compass or moral discernment may have something to do with the entanglement between the emotional and moral.
Gammas aren't evil, they are annoying and disruptive. They can cause bad things and ruin situations, but i would clearly separate that from evil.
Of course there can be evil gammas, and one of them here admitted to maliciously destroying any group that allowed him to join, if he didn't respect them.
Thats evil, but it's minor league evil. Its nowhere near as bad as the Wolfy Tubman, who is also lower on the evil scale than others.
Better to not confuse a bad outcome with evil, as bad outcomes should be avoided, but evil should be hanging from the city gates.
Since Buddhism was mentioned at the beginning I started wondering how to classify Buddha. By the time I finished reading I thought its possible he could be a sigma, even being a monk. Singular dedication to his mission of founding a monastic religion, situationally mistaken as an alpha in at least being a leader (among celibates though); views women as always trying to seduce men, which implies at least some women are attracted to him but they're contrary to his mission so must be resisted. I don't know. Is there a better classification?
"The Sigma always has his mission, and it is of absolutely no concern to him what others might make of it or whether they approve of it. And his lack of interest in what others perceive to be in his self-interest is invariably confusing.."
In a world where social pressure and rank are of the utmost importance to 98% of the humans who inhabit it, coming across a man who neither cares nor is pressured by others' opinions of him would be frustrating, or seem downright crazy. And since the Sigma sees himself apart from society and having a different purpose, of course others' opinions are going to be, for the most part, incorrect and antithetical to his life mission, so 9 times/10 he will be vindicated in ignoring the populace, sometimes even those closest to him.
Greyjoy, you might be right. It’s been a while since I’ve read/watched so don’t remember all the details. Bolton seems like the worst kind of gamma to me. Well, whatever he was, he was the worst kind of it. I don’t think he attracted anyone. He was just a rapist.
Iron man a sigma? " there's nothing to sign. there is the next mission and nothing else". Captain america, alpha. Hence there conflict together. Again proving the reliability of the social sexual hierarchy. The authors have no direct knowledge of the social sexual hierarchy yet they are writing about it same as Tolstoy.
Gamma text wall incoming. Here's my gamma take. I think there could be many good gammas out there so to speak. The bad ones are the ones that get all the attention because of the obvious reasons discussed frequently. I have a wife and kids. I have done some of the cringe things in the past, and I have learned. My wife and kids love me. I have a valuable role at my ICU nursing job that I have discussed here before. I don't believe I am special in this regard just based on statistical probability. I am only one gamma that I can speak for though.
St. Augustine of Hippo and C.S. Lewis are often cited around here as two examples of “good” (aka moral) Gammas. I can’t explain why they’re Gammas—maybe someone else can—but they showcase many virtuous qualities even a man of the lowest status can emulate.
About Augustine, check his writings, most specially those in which he rephrases an adversary's argument before proceeding to debunk it. He's quite vicious, and tends to go personal, not restricting himself to address solely the claim he intends to debunk like Aquinas does.
Augustine seems to have been successful with women and also well-regarded among men. His baptism was handled personally by the Archbishop of Milan and then he was made a bishop not long after his ordination. I think our genial sigma host here has displayed some amount of personal vindictiveness toward certain people and I would say Augustine was also a sigma. I think the tone in which it is done (calm vs. anger) is important. Do you get the sense in Augustine that he is angrily pining after acceptance or righteously crushing a heretic?
Oh, please; that is nowhere near a Gamma Wall of Text. However, I do find it noteworthy that you self-identify as a Gamma and you do work that is traditionally coded as women's work
choosing nursing was 100 percent gamma move. Low self esteem to take on the responsibility of being a doctor. Choosing the medical field was a way to attempt to control my fear of death. Thank you for pointing out that I wasn't gamma text walling. I was apologizing unnecessarily to avoid conflict.
"And his lack of interest in what others perceive to be in his self-interest is invariably confusing and sometimes even upsetting to others, especially those who are what passes for being close to a Sigma."
People often make the leap from being impressed/struck by a sigma to having high hopes for him. Especially for those who resemble any sort of mentor for a young sigma, they often feel let down when it becomes apparent the sigma has no interest in carrying the torch they intended to pass to him.
The disappointment for the Sigma is equally disheartening.
Imagine having people drawn to you and your endeavours at every turn, eagerly awaiting your guidance, when that was never your intent. And insomuch as you provided guidance, it was largely circumstantial, as your eyes were fixed on the goal first and foremost.
That's not to say the Sigma doesn't have expectations (or even aspirations) for others, but it's often wished that followers had hitched their cart to a competent Alpha horse.
Not that I'm anything close to a Sigma, but I was a leader in my mediocre high school. I can't tell you how many of my teachers I disappointed because I had no interest in further study in their chosen fields. To me the science fair was checking off a box, not an exploration that would lead to any great discovery, much to his dismay.
To this day I think that people who crow about "finding their passion" are putting me on
What they probably want is drive, and for that, they require a mountain to conquer. Must be difficult not being able to find any mountains anywhere you look...
True. My financially modest bravo fiancé will never be Donald Trump or Vladimir Putin, but he is one of the kindest, most sensitive, (about others, not himself) selfless, gentle, reasonable, wise, even-keeled, strong, emotionally tough, empathetic, understanding, decent, happy-go-lucky-lucky, responsible, helpful, initiative-taking, thoughtful people that I know, and there's NO ONE I would rather spend the rest of my life with.
Since his goal is the Eastern Orthodox priesthood, he will likely never be rich or famous or politically powerful on earth because his treasures will probably only come in the afterlife, unless you count a house full of children and a doting, grateful, appreciative wife. Being a king at home and the lowliest servant at his parish may just have to do for him in this life, I'm afraid. 😂
"utlimately alpha ness and sigmaness is about willingness to bang other men's wives."
Alphaness is the ability to LEAD men, which comes with the side benefit of being attractive to all the women in your hierarchy.
Sigma is the lone wolf who gets confused for an Alpha due to his leadership ability, despite not being part of the group.
Willingness to bang other men's wives has no correlation to Alpha/Sigma-ness. Even Deltas and Gammas can become willing adulterers. The Alpha has more temptations to do so and is more likely to commit that sin, but his social rank does not come from that moral failing and is not defined by it.
Christianity is entirely based on the concept of Man being fallen. The level of stupidity you reveal is a disheartening reminder of the Biblical reminder not to put pearls before swines. You clearly don't know the first thing about the religion you supposedly espouse.
The idea that the truth is "really repugnant to Christianity" is literally inverted. You're permanently banned.
The Sigma mouse Dag in *Hypergamouse* is an interesting enough character to warrant his own spin-off. Thoughts?
No. Lacey has enough to do as it is.
I suspect that the Sigma SSH type overlaps with the INTJ (Introverted, Intuitive, Thinking, and Judging) personality type: both types are given the highest and rarest position on both scales; humorously, they both have received the greatest amount of hype.
Returning to this piece after some personal reflection, I see that Vox has revealed part of the deeper nature of the Sigma male.
What really distinguishes the Sigma is that he has a personal mission. A special mission. It could be said that the Alpha also has a mission, but it is of a different nature. Bravos, Deltas, Gammas, etc. do not have a mission. Now, the Gamma has a mission—in theory—but it exists only in the realm of pure fantasy.
A Sigma is like James Bond, while an Alpha is the commander of the royal infantry.
"Kuragin is based on a real man, Anatoly Lvovoich Shostak, who successfully seduced Tatyana Bers, the younger sister of Tolstoy’s wife who was the model for the character of Natasha."
Can anyone refer me to more information about Tolstoy's background that talks about this more?
When, for the first time in her life, her father took her to St.
Petersburg, she met a distant cousin, Anatol Shostak. Tanya char-
acterized him this way: “He was one of those people one often
meets in society. He was self-confident, unaffected and free of all
embarrassment. He loved women and was popular with them. He
[172}
knew how to approach them directly, caressingly and boldly. He
knew how to make them think that the force of love endows one
with rights, that love is the greatest satisfaction. No obstacles existed
for him. He was not good but he was good-natured. In money mat-
ters he was honest and even generous. In society he was witty and
br illian t. He was adept at languages and had the name of being
an intelligent youth.”
https://archive.org/stream/in.ernet.dli.2015.67548/2015.67548.Tolstoy-a-Life-Of-My-Father_djvu.txt
do sigmas have a super ego?
Desperado, why don't you come to your senses?
You've been out ridin' fences for so long now
Oh, you're a hard one
I know that you got your reasons
These things that are pleasin' you
Can hurt you somehow
It is interesting to read chapter one where Prince Vasili describe his two sons and accepting the fate for what it is.
He describe Anatole has an active fool who costs him 40,000 rubles a year.
Most people cannot separate the logical from the emotional, so a neutral approach to discussing behavior patterns without ascribing some morality to them is a hurdle most people can’t jump over. The simple statement of “the SSH is amoral” just does not compute with most rhetoric-driven people, so they jump to talking about something that helps them process the concept emotionally, such as morality, which completely forays the original discussion.
Most people cant talk about a topic. They talk about what they wanted to talk about, once the topic was brought up.
Staying on topic is a skill that most dont seem to want to learn, so dealing with the SSH not including morality would take time to separate that from what they already know, and they dont want to.
As with "Science" the new generation will adopt this, but unlike "Science" it makes the world easier to understand so doesnt have to be forced on people.
The recalcitrants refuse to see it as anything different than what they already know with a rebrand.
On that note, I think Vox once said that a lot of people don't listen during conversation but rather think about what to say next. It's likely the same way with staying on topic.
But going back to the Coffee Guy Chris' statement, to be fair there are some desirable qualities in certain SSH roles that many men want to emulate. The flip-side being how some people "jump" to concluding that Gammas are automatically the worst evil imaginable, even though morally good gammas exist like CS Lewis. The fact that many people use their emotions as a substitute for a moral compass or moral discernment may have something to do with the entanglement between the emotional and moral.
Gammas aren't evil, they are annoying and disruptive. They can cause bad things and ruin situations, but i would clearly separate that from evil.
Of course there can be evil gammas, and one of them here admitted to maliciously destroying any group that allowed him to join, if he didn't respect them.
Thats evil, but it's minor league evil. Its nowhere near as bad as the Wolfy Tubman, who is also lower on the evil scale than others.
Better to not confuse a bad outcome with evil, as bad outcomes should be avoided, but evil should be hanging from the city gates.
Good Gamma: writes enormous walls of text against really evil things.
As a Monk preferably.
Since Buddhism was mentioned at the beginning I started wondering how to classify Buddha. By the time I finished reading I thought its possible he could be a sigma, even being a monk. Singular dedication to his mission of founding a monastic religion, situationally mistaken as an alpha in at least being a leader (among celibates though); views women as always trying to seduce men, which implies at least some women are attracted to him but they're contrary to his mission so must be resisted. I don't know. Is there a better classification?
"The Sigma always has his mission, and it is of absolutely no concern to him what others might make of it or whether they approve of it. And his lack of interest in what others perceive to be in his self-interest is invariably confusing.."
In a world where social pressure and rank are of the utmost importance to 98% of the humans who inhabit it, coming across a man who neither cares nor is pressured by others' opinions of him would be frustrating, or seem downright crazy. And since the Sigma sees himself apart from society and having a different purpose, of course others' opinions are going to be, for the most part, incorrect and antithetical to his life mission, so 9 times/10 he will be vindicated in ignoring the populace, sometimes even those closest to him.
Over time, and I mean decades, you start ignoring stays symbols because they are without worth and impede your mission.
Euron Greyjoy and Ramsay Bolton are evil Sigmas.
Greyjoy, you might be right. It’s been a while since I’ve read/watched so don’t remember all the details. Bolton seems like the worst kind of gamma to me. Well, whatever he was, he was the worst kind of it. I don’t think he attracted anyone. He was just a rapist.
Ramsay Bolton wasn't a gamma. Terrible person, yes. Gamma, no.
Game of Thrones isn't a great SSH measure because Martin can't help but harm his high status characters to the benefit of his low status.
Wasn't Bolton obsessed with being approved by his father and being in charge?
Bastards without the father's big name, they choose do a lot in order to get the freedom which comes with the name.
Iron man a sigma? " there's nothing to sign. there is the next mission and nothing else". Captain america, alpha. Hence there conflict together. Again proving the reliability of the social sexual hierarchy. The authors have no direct knowledge of the social sexual hierarchy yet they are writing about it same as Tolstoy.
Iron man is an Alpha, not a Sigma. Captain America and Iron Man's conflict is that of two Alphas, not a Sigma-Alpha conflict.
Thanos is the Sigma. All about his mission, after that he becomes a farmer.
In a similar vein, a Gamma can be a good person as long as you aren't trying to lead them and they aren't trying to date you
Such are probably more often life-long bachelors like the Omegas.
Gamma text wall incoming. Here's my gamma take. I think there could be many good gammas out there so to speak. The bad ones are the ones that get all the attention because of the obvious reasons discussed frequently. I have a wife and kids. I have done some of the cringe things in the past, and I have learned. My wife and kids love me. I have a valuable role at my ICU nursing job that I have discussed here before. I don't believe I am special in this regard just based on statistical probability. I am only one gamma that I can speak for though.
St. Augustine of Hippo and C.S. Lewis are often cited around here as two examples of “good” (aka moral) Gammas. I can’t explain why they’re Gammas—maybe someone else can—but they showcase many virtuous qualities even a man of the lowest status can emulate.
Mr. Lewis was popular among his peers, fought in WW2 trench warfare, and never in his life committed a wall of text.
Perhaps people think he was gamma because they view the Shadowlands movie as real?
About Augustine, check his writings, most specially those in which he rephrases an adversary's argument before proceeding to debunk it. He's quite vicious, and tends to go personal, not restricting himself to address solely the claim he intends to debunk like Aquinas does.
The City of God is full of those.
Augustine seems to have been successful with women and also well-regarded among men. His baptism was handled personally by the Archbishop of Milan and then he was made a bishop not long after his ordination. I think our genial sigma host here has displayed some amount of personal vindictiveness toward certain people and I would say Augustine was also a sigma. I think the tone in which it is done (calm vs. anger) is important. Do you get the sense in Augustine that he is angrily pining after acceptance or righteously crushing a heretic?
Ironically, Augustine is the ultimate heretic
Ok Lance, I'm biting on the bait -- why's that?
In Lewis' case, you can see his mentality with Edmund in the first Chronicles of Narnia book.
Or Mark in That Hideous Strength.
He writes about the self interested but redeemable person.
Oh, please; that is nowhere near a Gamma Wall of Text. However, I do find it noteworthy that you self-identify as a Gamma and you do work that is traditionally coded as women's work
choosing nursing was 100 percent gamma move. Low self esteem to take on the responsibility of being a doctor. Choosing the medical field was a way to attempt to control my fear of death. Thank you for pointing out that I wasn't gamma text walling. I was apologizing unnecessarily to avoid conflict.
"And his lack of interest in what others perceive to be in his self-interest is invariably confusing and sometimes even upsetting to others, especially those who are what passes for being close to a Sigma."
People often make the leap from being impressed/struck by a sigma to having high hopes for him. Especially for those who resemble any sort of mentor for a young sigma, they often feel let down when it becomes apparent the sigma has no interest in carrying the torch they intended to pass to him.
The disappointment for the Sigma is equally disheartening.
Imagine having people drawn to you and your endeavours at every turn, eagerly awaiting your guidance, when that was never your intent. And insomuch as you provided guidance, it was largely circumstantial, as your eyes were fixed on the goal first and foremost.
That's not to say the Sigma doesn't have expectations (or even aspirations) for others, but it's often wished that followers had hitched their cart to a competent Alpha horse.
The Halo Effect is extremely powerful.
Not that I'm anything close to a Sigma, but I was a leader in my mediocre high school. I can't tell you how many of my teachers I disappointed because I had no interest in further study in their chosen fields. To me the science fair was checking off a box, not an exploration that would lead to any great discovery, much to his dismay.
To this day I think that people who crow about "finding their passion" are putting me on
Passion is for a night.
What they probably want is drive, and for that, they require a mountain to conquer. Must be difficult not being able to find any mountains anywhere you look...