Secret of the Sperm Bank

Sperm Sample

Over on Dalrock’s blog Anonymous Reader had an interesting insight about the Alpha Fucks – Beta Bucks dichotomy:

Turning to the Missouri sperm donor case, I got to thinking about the whole notion of a sperm bank. Without bothering to search, they seem to be an invention of the 1960′s. I recall reading about the concept in high school biology, and the original justification was to provide infertile married couples with the chance for the wife to bear a child into the marriage. A couple of the matriarchs of my family were absolutely shocked when sperm banks started serving, or perhaps servicing, unmarried women. That was immoral, in their eyes. Looking backwards it should be no surprise that in some progressive, coastal venues men began providing turkey-baster filling for lesbian couples in the 1990′s – it’s not that big a step from “woman goes to specialized OB/GYN for syringe of semen” to “woman and her partner get together with male friend and turkey baster”. Bonus points in some quarters if the man is gay…but I digress.

Let’s look at this abstractly. Man and woman marry, find that she isn’t getting pregnant, determine from medical testing that his swimmers aren’t winning the race. So they pay for another man to impregnate her, although via a medical go-between. The original sperm banks screened donors and pretty much limited them to med students and other college men.

This is “Alpha Sperm, Beta Provisioning”, and nothing less. Putting a tech or a doctor in the middle wearing gloves and a lab coat, and injecting semen with a syringe rather than the usual method doesn’t change that. Sperm banks are therefore a clinical version of AF-BB, and as such clearly serve the Female Imperative in the same manner as a married woman having an affair while she’s ovulating – except that the latter is still sorta frowned upon, while the former has been a part of US culture for 40-50 or more years. I wonder what the time line is – did sperm banks show up about the same time as hormonal contraception, for example?

Now turning back to the sucker in Missouri: what’s his real crime? Sperm donor without a license, I guess, his lesbian friends failed to use the medical go-between, and his ignorance left him liable. But in terms of the Female Imperative, perhaps he wasn’t alpha enough – they could find him – or perhaps he was alpha enough for breeding purposes (paging Mary Daly…) but beta enough for provisioning as well? I have to ponder this one more.

But the sperm bank? That’s obvious now that I wear the glasses, but it’s still kind of startling to realize that it just hit me last night that the whole idea of a sperm bank is a clear, medicalized, fully legal example of the Female Imperative of AF-BB and it’s been right out in the open for at least two generations. And it is totally normal. In fact it was apparently not all that controversial even at the start. Certainly today we all accept it because teh wimmenz deserve their own bay-bee if they want one (or more), no matter the cost to anyone else.

Another case of the Female Imperative hiding in plain sight. Someone alert Rollo.

On virtually any post I’ve made about feminism directly or where the topic of the Feminine Imperative gets redirected to one of how feminism (and previously chivalry) are social structure arms of the Feminine Imperative, one or more commenters invariably post the youtube video about how feminism was conceived to destabilize western society (by the Rockefellers?). I’m not going to speculate about some conspiracy to use the “Women’s Movement” as a premeditated social influence (there are better resources than RM for this if you’re really interested), however the fact that sperm banks were an unheard of development prior to the sexual revolution does give me pause to think that they were a need anticipated to better facilitate and perpetuate a future feminine-primary society.

It’s interesting to note that at the time of their institution, a sperm bank was a shocking development for the culture of that era. Now, a repository of men’s (presumably the best of men) genetic material can be had by any woman seeking to have a child is just part of our social scenery. The inherent hypergamic influence in this long since normalized institution can’t be ignored – just from a pragmatic standpoint hypergamy is going to dictate that women will seek out the best genetic potential for their offspring, whether artificially inseminated or by the ‘traditional’ means.

Institutionalized “Alpha” Fucks

The fact that sperm banks’ existence have been practically ubiquitous for well over 60 years now brings up some interesting social and biological dynamics.

The first of course being what Anonymous Reader observes; the fact that a repository of ‘Elite’ men’s genetic material would exist at all is the final indictment of the Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks dynamic (case closed). Presumably the bank, uniquely instituted to fulfill only women genetic imperatives, would be interested in superior male specimens. What constitutes ‘superior’ or at least good quality stock is determined by a particular bank’s standards, but one might assume they would filter for overall health and viability of a man’s sperm.

I’m no expert, but I would think screening for a family history of genetic diseases, cancer, mental stability and of course HIV are on the list. I may be mistaken, but I’d also guess that a bank would screen for relatively younger men with more fertilization-viable sperm, since there is evidence that a man’s quality of sperm does in fact decay into his later years.

Beyond the biological aspects I suspect women would want a child with at least an imagined potential for future success in life so a personal background would most likely be a part of that screening process. Granted, that may be subjective depending on the demographic of women seeking (and can afford) fertilization, but I think it’s safe to assume that ethnicity, socio-economic, educational and personal success all factor into this assessment. Long story short, hypergamy, at least in the breeding aspect of it, dictates the selection process for women. As Anonymous points out, the original intent of a sperm bank / fertility clinic was to provide a woman (presumably wife) with the sperm of a viable man when her husband’s sperm was inviable – in essence, in vitro cuckolding.

If all this reads as an institutionalization of the Alpha Fucks side of women sexual pluralism (hypergamy) you’re not too far from the mark. It’s really an institutionalized form of selective breeding, entirely beholden to feminine hypergamous interests. But before I go off the deep end here, let me state that I fully realize that there’s never been some mass influx of women making ‘runs on the sperm bank’ to wantonly get themselves pregnant. Given the option, I’m sure most women would rather go with the holistic approach to impregnation (and long term private support), but the operative here is that the concept and institution of a sperm bank available to facilitate women’s biological imperative (at as optimized hypergamy as reasonable) is a normalized, almost ubiquitous social concept for modern culture.

There is really no parallel to this degree of institutionalized sexual selection for men. While there are fertility clinics for couples who may purchase donor eggs, there are no commercial ‘egg banks’, nor are there commercially available volunteer women eager to gestate and birth children to exclusively facilitate men’s biological imperatives. That isn’t to discount surrogate mothers gestating the fetuses of a sponsor couple (another extension of fulfilling the feminine biological imperative), but a man uniquely looking for a donor egg to inseminate and/or a surrogate mother to birth the child for him is all but unheard of.

And really, even if he was so predisposed to it, why would a man go to the trouble and expense? Suspending disbelief, even if he did father the child, the mother could still have exclusive rights to custody with the child if it were pressing enough for her.

From a social perspective it’s interesting to note the era in which sperm banks became normalized in society; immediately after the sexual revolution. Almost as if in anticipation for the unfettering of women’s hypergamy, the facility of insuring a woman’s best optimized hypergamy was institutionalized and normalized. This may sound like conjecture (since the socially proposed purpose was to facilitate pregnancy for an infertile man), but the utility of sperm banks quickly shifted to facilitating the pregnancy of women who wouldn’t be married or had no intention of marrying to start a family.

This was the first institution, legalized and normalized that laid bare feminism latent purpose – strong independent women® could remove the man from the equation of effecting an optimal hypergamy, while at the same time effecting future legislation and social engineering to enlist men (either publicly or privately) in the provisioning of this new breed of motherhood. And with every guy dutifully jerking off into a petrie dish, they effectually contribute one more element to institutionalized Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks.


69 responses to “Secret of the Sperm Bank

  • APL

    “hypergamy is going to dictate that women will seek out the best genetic potential for their offspring”

    OK, from a male and I hope rational perspective, taking on board the whole shit test, fitness testing that females do by instinct. The turkey baster sperm bank thing, seems to me to totally defeat the ability of the female to fitness test the mate – or at the best abrogate the testing to a third party who may be testing for other parameters.

    We know after all, that for women, intelligence doesn’t play well in the flesh, but the whole sperm doners are ‘med school grads’ thing, runs contrary to what women often choose ‘in the field’.

    Nothing against med school grads, by the way. It’s just that in my limited experience women don’t much care about intelligence, once you have engaged their instinctual mating behavior.

    On the AF/BB aspect of sperm banks, yes. And frequent instances where the guy running the show takes on the role of Alpha Male (doner) for his herd/hareem.

  • HanSolo

    Good article.

    The overt AF/BB strategy for single women (not talking about the couples that can’t conceive) can only play out in a society that’s rich and safe enough for a woman to make a living on her own efforts or the gov’ts largesse (paid for by other men, mostly betas, and some women).

    In more primitive settings, a woman getting pregnant and being left alone would be a very risky and dangerous situation.

  • innocentbystanderboston

    Rollo,

    I think it is actually possible now (and even legal) for a woman to “rent out” her womb to birth a child that isn’t hers. And if she does so, she has no legal rights associated with the child that she gestated. Even still, a man that wants to have a child without involving a mother, must find a donor woman to either donate (or sell) to him her egg (and I believe this price is close to $1000 because it requires a small operation in a medial office.) Once “harvested” a medical technition or doctor can inject the egg with the fathers sperm in a petri dish, but the instant this happens, that now fertilized egg must be planted (almost immediately) into the womb of the woman who is “renting out” her womb. There is only a finite amount of time for that fertilized egg can float around not achored to the womb wall because it needs nutrition (or it will die/abort.)

    I think this can happen. A man can pretty much cut the mother out of this process legally, socially, and ethically. Whether or not this is moral is another matter altogether. But if a man wants to be a father and he does not want to get married, we have the science and the technology for him to play God.

  • Laszlo

    APL-
    Interesting point. I think the Med School sperm pool thing is meant to appeal to the feminine method of constant projection. They value credentialism. So check that box. True, in the field, a hawt guy need not be so credentialed or smart as long as he triggers the lizard brain, but in selecting sperm, building the sexy-son, the variable of time is removed. With ample time, she can *feel* good about doing what she wouldn’t necessarily do in the bar bathroom with the tall n fit barkeep. Think of the children!

    My sister went turkey baster. Interesting process. The more you pay, the more information you get regarding the donor; the more you are willing to pay, the “better” on paper, in general. But still, its about $, so it is about marketing, so it is about appealing to women’s base instinct but also providing all of the appropriate rationalization material – preemptively appealing to her desire to look like a good mother. So credentials are a given, with some level of buy-in for the top of the top, but the pre-selection is built in. All of the sperm in respectable markets are the apex of both the Alpha (in physical terms) and the provider (in proxy credentials). Try and find sperm on the market for a man who is under 5’11″. Not happening. There is no market for it.

    In the rare occasions there is light shed into these corners, one can see that even in the all-alpha-all-star-sperm-squad, women will still pick the top 10%. Sperm on the margin only go to those who can’t pay for the top – or in the rare occasion when certain attributes trump. Like a woman with Irish heritage will take the shorter lad because he is also a full-ginger irish. I imagine some husbands in the process will try to select for certain traits that might reflect their own themselves, but these would be secondary I’d imagine, though pure speculation on my part. My sis is a single-mom hero.

  • Fred Flange, You're Having My Booby

    The whole business of not only sperm banks but egg donation and surrogacy is wide open in the USA. No national rules, only some state rules, which vary. All the other major nations think we’re nuts to do it this way. In most Eurpoean countries there are strict limits on all of these methods, particularly limits on getting paid for it. Here it’s a growing (heh) industry! Big bucks for donors! Especially if you are white and, well, not quite Aryan, but, you know… say, a graduate of a better school? An athlete? High IQ scorer? All of these are actual criteria selected by “customers.”

    And you can’t demand it be regulated – you’d be interfereing with the free market, you Communist.

    Now the fun begins, and this has apready happened in the pages of the Mighty O Magazine. Suppose your alpha sperm donor is alpha enough to generate sprogs to order, but the swimmers have a genetic trigger for autism. Which turns up in enough kids gestated from the same sperm bank and same donor to be — what’s the word — actionable?? As in, I got sold defective goods! Forget the anonymity contract – send us the genetic data! And the guy’s indentity, so we can sue his ass for support for HIS defective babies! How dare he! On the other hand if theKids Are Alright, and are A-OK, he would be arrested if after some time he came snooping around to see what his biological progeny were up to.

  • Fred Flange, You're Having My Booby

    Excuse all the typos – auto-correct is not my friend. But this topic really fries my French. In that we Americans are so lackadasical about it.

    Oh yeah oh yeah: Go watch MTV’s Cryodad! A real show! About a real teenager going on a nationwide quest to track down her MANY MANY half-sibs and Looking For Mr. Test Tube 1065 6SJ7GT.

  • innocentbystanderboston

    Laszlo,

    I think the Med School sperm pool thing is meant to appeal to the feminine method of constant projection. They value credentialism.

    They sure do. Which would explain why some sperm is valued over other sperm (regarding the creation of the offspring.) Afterall, if she has to go about building her baby in a manner that is not the old fashioned way, might as well spare no expense and get the designer baby that she always wanted for her perfect (often-husbandless) family.

    I think the concept of the sperm bank was well intended. Yes, there are some married couples who can’t have babies because hubby’s swimmers are too slow and lazy. They wont get where they need to go to get the job done. But wife is begging her husband for a bundle of joy. So they’ll have to have a baby that wasn’t his. But if you fast forward to today (and our medical and technical capabilities) I am not so sure that slow swimming sperm is a pregnancy deal breaker the way it was 60 years ago. Maybe his sperm can’t fertilize her egg in the traditional sense (ejaculation inside of her) because the sperm will never make it. But they can go in and get her egg and fertilize it (even with a slow swimmer) in a lab. It requires an operation if they can’t use the turkey baster with another man’s more verile sperm.

  • boxsterpaul

    The vitro cuckolding story is a mind bender.

    Perhaps I didn’t catch it, but the AF side is understood, but the BB side isn’t. Where is the BetaBucks coming from? Government?

    My guess also would be the technological capability to store and use sperm in the future was also refined in the 1960-70s. Egg donation, is pretty new, but advancing, but there is imperative to advance it. But its used by females to further their imperative?

    Finally, I feel the important point of the Missouri is missed. Will it be a matter of time before FredFlange’s version of the world happens. A mother using a sperm bank, then sues the “father” for support…..

    Would it be wrong morally… perhaps, but genetically/evolutionary wise he should have to support his progeny, as it furthers his genetic material? I would even go on to say thats why he put his sperm “into play”.

    More importantly, shouldn’t a sperm donor be able to reject the use of his sperm?

  • innocentbystanderboston

    Perhaps I didn’t catch it, but the AF side is understood, but the BB side isn’t. Where is the BetaBucks coming from? Government?

    An excellent question, if she is single (and the sperm donor can’t be sued for child support if done the legal way and NOT the way it was done in Mizzou) then he isn’t paying. Who is? Rollo?

  • Rollo Tomassi

    The first obvious one is government subsidies. Beyond that the non-biological father (by design), whether he’s involved retroactively (commits to single mommy) or proactively (husband with no viable sperm).

  • BlackPoisonSoul

    Sheds some interesting light on the movie by Whoopee Goldberg where she went to a sperm bank to get sperm for a son who would be tall, intelligent, and black. One out of three ain’t bad (tall, redneck, white). Social conditioning to help make such thought acceptable and the norm in the future?

    You can see in future, all men making mandatory sperm donations at a young age. Each donation would be genetically assessed and divided into various tiers: “prime”, “secondary”, “tertiary”, etc. The men would then be sterilised. Women wanting to get preggers would pay depending upon the tier of genetic material they want, the complete genetic garbage would be flushed.

    Perhaps there would be the “secret tier”, only for the uber-rich or elite types.

  • innocentbystanderboston

    BlackPoisonSoul,

    Its a brave new world we are entering that P D James hauntingly hinted at in her Children of Men book.

  • ar10308

    It would be vastly better from a marriage-relationship perspective to adopt children from somewhere than to let your wife carry the child of another man.

  • Mr. Factory

    I got curious about whether or not a single man could adopt or even get a surrogate and did some simple googling one evening. Frankly, my biggest fear of parenting a child is dealing with the mother becoming unhaaaapy. I don’t like being held to someone else’s whims.

    It’s actually possible for a single man to have a child with a surrogate and remove the mother’s rights. The MSM has even done stories on it. Historically, this was done for gay men / couples wanting genuine offspring. In recent years, there’s been an increase in single, hetero men taking this route. Whether it’s an MGTOW thing or not wasn’t reported. One man in the report was 57. He didn’t have a hope in hell of adoption but there was nothing legally stopping him from surrogacy. (It varies by state.)

    Any man considering this is warned to get an egg donor and a secondary carrier, as opposed to the classic cases of surrogates supplying their egg. It’s a little extra money but carrying the donor egg A.) removes some rights of ownership by the carrier and B.) removes her interest in claiming any in the first place – it’s not her genetics involved in the child. It’s a six-figure method in the $100k – $150k when all is said and done.

    But that could be preferable to adoption because single, straight men wanting to adopt get the sideways-eye from social workers in charge since all men are creeps. They will always be last in line and will be offered only the “less desirable” children available, which turns out to be older children. From other reading, adoption isn’t that cheap anyway. I’d say the surrogate route sounds great if I weren’t afraid all children were out to get me.

  • Ton

    What type of balless wonder allows his wife to use a sperm bank?

  • jf12

    One reason, a small reason, that women aren’t making a run on sperm banks anytime now or in the future is because of the obvious sneaky f-er strategy that Potentially Beta men could easily employ. Literally about double digit percentages of in vitro conceptions have been from men who didn’t precisely match the catalog descriptions, and especially 20 years ago could easily have been from same-day donors, often the doctor or technician himself.

  • Eris

    The truth is that IVF treatment at its conception (excuse the pun) was intended for infertile men, and later women, rather than for women with deep-rooted problems with men or who simply can’t find one they like, as it is turning into.

    I can’t speak for the US, but at least in the UK, a woman getting pregnant without a man is still somewhat of a contentious issue. Despite this, there is a definite push by feminists and also prominent female figures for single women conceiving to become socially acceptable, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that children, especially boys, growing up in fatherless households, (which make up almost 25% of households in the UK) is detrimental to their development and this is a clear example of the female primacy above all else.

    We’re still at a point where tradition is an overwhelmingly influential factor on women’s decisions on how to conceive but as these traditions are systematically eroded, women, who see their ability to reproduce as central to who they are as a female, will, with ever greater frequency happily trundle off down to the sperm bank when the urge kicks in and have a gaze through the catalogue, where height, appearance and profession of the donors are all mentioned.

    Looking at it from a redpill perspective, I would argue in this case that, more than anything, it is more motivated by money on one side and a strong female desire to conceive at all costs on the other and as with all women’s issues has come under the umbrella of things feminists will stick their oar into.

    I’ll stick the idea out there that while the AFBB paradigm fits perfectly here, perhaps choosing an elite owner of a sticky white liquid from a description may, in fact, prove too intellectual an exercise to stimulate a woman’s hypergamy.

    Nevertheless, single women conceiving is without a doubt becoming more common place around the globe as single late thirty-somethings can’t find a man and are left with no other option but to adopt or go down the IVF route and in these cases we often see a woman’s desire to conceive will trump any ethical issues such as whether or not the environment be suitable to raise a child in, to name one.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1162248/Kate-Spicer-getting-pregnant-night-stand-happy-mistake.html

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Eris, I read you, however as western(ized) women push the age they are comfortable with wanting to start a family further and further past their peak fertility years (in order to facilitate their careers and pay off their educations), combined with an ever decaying SMV as a result, and a lack of availability of suitably status-equal men to pair with, I think we’ll increasingly see women opting for in vitro options to start a single-parent family.

    Aunt Giggles has an interesting study on just this phenomenon this week. Predictably she skews the stats for feminine triumphalism, but ignores the less flattering possibilities that will result from such an imbalance in assortive mating based on status. When fewer and fewer women can find, much less attract “peer equal” men to pair with, hypergamy will demand new social (and medical) contingencies to be satisfied as women find it more difficult to conceive past their prime fertility years.

  • Laszlo

    Thats how I see it. The women who occupy lower socioeconomic strata have already mastered the art of securing top (relative) sperm and the gov’t daddy. I think the subsidy tide will rise up to meet a growing class of women in higher socioeconomic strata, tipping them toward going it on their own, even if they are not in immediate need of such subsidies.

    Those women who wait too long or are otherwise left high and dry as the betabux tide rolls out – be it due to their own SMV/MMV or the fact that beta men are wising up to the betabux scheme and opting out, will find encouragement in both the narrative and in actual cashmoney to make going it “alone” just appealing enough over the thought of no babies or babies with a beta that she sees as too low of an SMV. Especially if family law dials it back and makes those frivorce bux a bit harder to guaranty.

    Whats one more “safety net”? The fact that it might be an incentive to make certain choices that work against social cohesion, etc. is just a rounding error at this point.

    Women who want to be married above all else, find a way. Even if it means blowing it up a few years post-children because she is not happy. Family law provides. The State enforces.

    Women who want babies above all else (including husbands) will find a way. And if there aren’t enough men to feed the frivorce grinder post betabux, Big Daddy Gov’t will make it good.

    My sister got her child. At 42. No man was good enough. So she got one out of a catalogue. She’s check-to-check at best. Owns nothing. Marginal credit. Works for the State in a low-skill gig. If something happens, she’s broke in three heartbeats. Somehow none of that could quell the desire to own a baby nor alter her preceding life choices to better her lie. I can just imagine if there were even a bit more perks woven into the system to preempt the practically inevitable downsides of those decisions. She’s college educated too, for whatever that is worth.

  • David

    I know its all the same- but this case originates in Topeka Kansas- where I went to law school- not Missouri…

  • Jeremy

    Sperm banks are so normalized, I see even red-pill men advocating for their use. The concept of the disposable male is so ingrained in culture that even men who objectively understand how disposable they’ve been made are unable to see how FI-enabling any contribution to a sperm bank is. With all of the government guarantees of support to children and single mothers, sperm banks are essentially the legalized rape of the opportunity of fatherhood en masse. Your donation to a sperm bank guarantees that your fellow man somewhere else won’t find someone willing to settle for him, and that means no fatherhood and potential taxation for it.

    Realistically, if we’re going to expect the same amount of statism we have now, and equality under law, the use of sperm from a bank on anything other than a married female should be against the law.

  • Johnycomelately

    Socially infertile.

    http://www.smh.com.au/national/socially-infertile-thirtysomethings-turn-to-ivf-20121110-2956s.html

    In Australia it’s all the rage, in a nation where 1/3 of college educated women are unmarried what else would you expect.

  • Ton

    Lame. Sterile or no, the man is likely to have genetic kin of his he can take a greater role with. Spending your time, effort, money etc on a blood line that’s is not yours, does not bare your DNA or the DNA of your forefathers is pointless and likely detrimental to your family name and prospects.

    Any man who will knowingly raise another man’s get is beyond contempt.

  • Case

    Requirements couples demand of egg donors are typically quite exacting. Here’s a rough list: http://www.eggdonoramerica.com/egg_donor_become.php. As a practical matter she (the donor that is) is also expected to be an elite university student with top test scores and athletic prowess.

    A man can get an egg donor if he wants to go it alone and she will not have custody rights, particularly since the process implies a surrogate, who also would not have custody rights.

    But in those specifics is the more tangible answer to why this isn’t a thing going on with men in two words is this: three hops – (1) him, (2) donor, (3) surrogate. You’d better be pretty committed and have dollars to boot. On the other hand – a single mom wants a sperm donor: one hop, done. Plus she always expected to be pregnant. How much of your life have you psychologically prepared for the quarter-million dollar 3-hop process and the process itself? Not long I’d bet.

    Still another thing is that men are only now gaining consciousness of the gravity liability that they assume under traditional parentage, such that they would even consider an alternative.

    To date: a woman – committed to a man in some form or fashion, has been a “toll bridge” as we say in the business, to a man’s hopes of fatherhood. Given most men’s pollyanna ideas of marriage and the 3-hops alternative, it comes as little surprise that market forces haven’t generated demand to motivate our venture capitalist class to create a male-serving donor system of any significance.

    This may change. “if you build it (with an economy of scale) they will come”. “Supply creates its own demand”. All of this may change as men opt out of parenthood entirely so long as an economy of scale for male-serving donor clinics remains too long a goal, OR – it may be subject to improved technologies we can’t yet foresee. If I’m calling the odds: revival of traditional marriage: 0.1, men opting out – indeterminably high, development of technology facilitating men-go-it-alone-parenthood – indeterminable. So – either of the latter, but I wouldn’t wager much.

  • Case

    Rollo, I think that your identification of an “imperative” as a force at work is a genuine insight and you deserve a lot of credit for it. The genes have a coding, the coding is instructions, it is a set of commands. If you take a mass of automatons, call them X, and give them coded commands, then you take a mass of another set of automatons, call them Y, and give them coded commands, only slightly different from X, then put the masses together, the individuals operates upon one another following their coded instructions and patterns will emerge – an “emergent property” in the correct use of a term that is often mis-appropriated. A person is not off base to then say that one vector of patterns is the “X” imperative and another is the “Y” imperative and they may appear to be in conflict with one another like opposing poles and the relative strength may create a back-and-forth oscillation that would appear like a seasonally shifting balance of power, or if power became inbalanced, a non-shifting dominance.

    Importantly – neither imperative is conscious, – it is not self-aware, it is just a set of instructions giving rise to a pattern when let loose as and upon multiple individuals, nothing more or less.

    That said – I think there is a danger of ideology in your insight. It’s a powerful insight that probes dynamics of the real world and exposes patterns – but it isn’t the whole truth. It’s one truth, even a big one, in a whole world of co-existing truths. I don’t think you are at risk of being an ideologue and limiting yourself to the confines of the bounds of your own insight, but some of your readers may be susceptible to this so I just caution to be on guard for it.

    But I say all that because of one of the co-existing forces in addition to the imperatives: agency. If a person likes “feminism”, it’s good. If a person doesn’t like feminism, it’s bad. Feminism seems to be whatever people want it to be. For some it is liberation, for others it’s a malevolent force. I say it is neither. Feminism is women, demanding their autonomy without conditions. Sometimes that will seem like a rising X imperative … but long run I think it will look like something different entirely.

    If we model that in a computer now you have three things: X imperative, Y imperative, and autonomy – a wild card and in previous epochs a potential dead end. Add technology to autonomy and the outcome of the model may not be what you expect. What used to be a dead end may take us places we didn’t expect to go at all. If it were just X and Y – you could probably predict a lion’s pride or a beehive. My wager is that it will be neither.

  • monster221

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/university-of-utah-to-offer-free-testing-after-report-ex-fertility-clinic-employee-may-have-used-his-sperm/

    …and we have a winner. this man is a winner at life. looks like a loser, probably lived his whole life as one, but in the end he comes out on top, fulfils his genetic imperative and cuckolds i dont know how many men unbeknownst even to the mother.

    call me sick, but i envy him and would jump at the chance to do what he did.

  • vinay3543

    One real life dynamic that always stands out to me is when a young attractive woman, in relativity to the beta provider husband, looks at a better looking/edgier man and then subsequently kisses her kid. I see this occur when I wash my car every Saturday morning. It’s an interpretation of reassuring her own mind that the decision to have a child was worth the sacrifice of taking a man who doesn’t turn her on.

    Is it me, or is this scenario as explained becoming more pronounced?

    This post is just another point of view to the conundrum of a woman’s path in life, when consideration is made to sexual optimization versus the path on life she desires for herself.

    http://www.vinaywcmd.com/2013/12/here-comes-bride.html

  • Eris

    @Rollo
    That’s a very interesting point and in which case, the sperm bank could become THE solution to the foreseen and much talked about scenario of that ever-growing pool of career women who will be unable to find a man they deem as worthy to reproduce with- both AF-wise but more importantly with regard to BB.

    Case: “I think there is a danger of ideology in your insight….but some of your readers may be susceptible to this so I just caution to be on guard for it.”

    This is a rehashing of points made by Kate and DT. In the free market of ideas, all points view can be presented and then discussed and the best will prevail. This blog contains reasoned ideas that deliberately follow along a particular theme – at no point has any action been called for nor comments moderated.

    From Wikipedia: For Willard A. Mullins, an ideology is composed of four basic characteristics:
    it must have power over cognition
    it must be capable of guiding one’s evaluations;
    it must provide guidance towards action;
    and, as stated above, it must be logically coherent.

    “Feminism seems to be whatever people want it to be.” No. Feminism IS an ideology, but good try.

  • jf12

    @monster221
    I’m telling you all, it’s double digit percentages of all in vitro conception from then.

  • IamMarktoo

    There’s a strange documentary about a Californian beach bum (blue eyes, blonde hair, tall and fit) that donated his sperm hundreds of times back in the 80s for cash. It’s the story of more than twelve of his “kids” setting out to find each other and him. He lives in a van with numerous dogs. Trailer here

  • Water Cannon Boy

    Another way to look at the egg donor thing is, if you’re considering donating, you’re compensated pretty well if you have the characteristics as mentioned. Athletic, nice looking, education. It all means good body, probably won’t get fat easily. Nice looking is self explanatory. Good education means not an air head, you didn’t think about donating on a whim.
    All acceptable to be paid for that. Yet you’re not supposed to be “that shallow” when saying what you want in an actual mate that may or may not lead to having a kid.

  • SGT Ted

    about how feminism was conceived to destabilize western society (by the Rockefellers?).

    The neo-Marxist take-over and operational procedures of the Modern Feminist movement is well documented by their own words and deeds, whether or not you subscribe to the Rockefeller conspiracy mongering. David Horowitz of Frontpage magazine has been documenting this for 40+ years.

    It is a leftist supremacy movement, like all of the leftwing identity politics sub-groups that use the neo-Marxist “oppressor/oppressed” template to delegitimize their targets, whether it’s whites, or males, or whoever. The goal is to overthrow capitalist systems that recognize individual rights and replace them with totalitarian ones that view “rights” as a boon from Government, or as belonging to groups of people segregated by race, class, sexuality, rather than inherent in the individual.

    I think sometimes you try too hard to make everything fit into the hypergamy template, as if it were a Grand Unifying Theory.

    Modern feminists talk like Commies, which points the way to the basis for their political ideology; Communism and the European leftism born of the French Revolution. Not hypergamy, which is biologically driven and rewards competition.

  • SGT Ted

    To expand on my other post: Sperm Banks are based on a particular, long standing Progressive Notion, that the sperm of those deemed more worthy, solely on the basis of the social signaling of superiority via a University credential and social class positioning, is to be made available to women for breeding purposes. It is very much in line with the notions of the Progressive Eugenicists of the 1930s and 1940s.

  • MaleFrom3rdRock

    What are the demographics of women using sperm banks? – Lets get the data on the table about their educational and economics in particular, and what direction the trends are moving. I see plenty of potential for abuse, but what is really happening? Our homo sapiens wiring tends to overweight low probability events especially if those events have extreme emotional content. And the Internet makes it easy to find the examples, but what of the frequency, really. My impression has been that the use of a sperm bank was a rich girl’s game, but are the poor really sucking on the resources of the state for this now? Anyone know how to enlist Dalrock to dig in for the data?

  • Fred Flange, You're Having My Bobby

    Sorry guys, the MTV show is called “Generation Cryo”. Reruns can be found and there is to be a second season now that Breanna 6SJ7GT has gotten some kind of message from Mr. 6SJ7GT Sr., so lookout, BUT WAIT THERE’S MORE, fuck me raw with a pixie straw. As for the TV show misnomer, once again the magic fingers done failed me now.

    I am neither a president of the Hairball Club for Men nor a client. But I take much interest in this topic for all the reasons stated above, but mostly because no one and I mean NO ONE* has thought this shit through and all the possible nightmares that await. First among them is the whole generation of children who will repeatedly ask who their Dad is (even the feminists and Single Mothers By Choice have to admit this always happens, their sites and books devote chapters to it). The answer they get will not be a name or a face, but Reasons.

    Second are the complications when things don’t go exactly as the Beautiful Perfect Free Market promises. Horrors like – and I am not making this up – a court case where the parties are: 1) egg donor who is Not Mom; 2) sperm donor; 3) surrogate womb; 4) husband/spouse of the purported mom-customer; and maybe even 5) a guardian at litem for the Unfortunate Sprog. Maybe even add in some competing groups of would-be grand-parents! All of whom fight and claw and scratch for the privilege of owning this fine young specimen as their Very Own! To be decided by Trial, a process which Ambrose Bierce described perfectly: “The legal process based on the idea that from the clash of lies, the truth shall emerge.”

    And most scary – if you thought Jacking It in San Diego into a cup was a good way to get serious coin for your vacay to Cancun – you find out years later that your swimmers led to a less-than-perfect (or less-than-affordable) product (see O article cited above). Whereupon Aggrieved Somebody gets a court order from the First Chicago Bank of Jizz demanding they produce your history, identity and wallet size, because Your Children Need You and them having your genes You’re It! Your $$$ that is. And that agreement with the clinic guaranteeing you anonymity? LULZ!! Swept away by the Best Interests of the Children principle, their welfare matters more than your privacy, turning you from Mr. 6SJ7GT into Beta Provider forever. You lucky bastard. Not Alpha Fucks – YOU’re fucked.
    *Did I say NO ONE? I meant to say NO ONE.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Read this, carefully. You wanted an example of the Beta Bucks side of this equation, here it is:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/07/opinion/alimony-for-your-eggs.html?_r=1&

    It’s getting to the point where compensatory Beta Bucks will pay for Alpha Fucks retroactively in the legal system.

    In the New Jersey couple’s case, they decided to divorce after undergoing several failed attempts at in vitro fertilization. Mr. Lieberman’s argument is that since fertility treatments were part of the marriage, they should be considered part of the marital lifestyle, which should be maintained as much as possible post-divorce. The only difference is, in the future, she’ll use another man’s sperm.

  • Just Saying

    “screening for a family history of genetic diseases, cancer, mental stability and of course HIV are on the list”

    One would think – but I knew a guy in college that did this for money. The fact that you had to not have sex for 7-10 days prior to “donation” was an instant turn off for me – I was too horny for that non-sense. But the guys that did made okay money. The sperm-banks would ask questions – but no blood tests – at least back then – today I would expect at least some genetic testing.

    The reason I know this is when I was in grad-school there was an incident where a popular donor found out he had a genetic disease and went to the clinic, and found out he was the father of almost 100 children – all of which now had a chance of coming down with this rare type of disease. Turned out that his “father” wasn’t – so all of his “family history” was fiction.

    But then, women don’t care – or they care abstractly, but it’s like the ones I bed. They don’t grill me on family history – they have a beta that will support them, so they want a stud to knock them up – it really is that simple. Too many people credit women with more thought than that. They just like to have their pipes used regularly, and it turns them on to know another man knocked them up. I assume that those that go to a sperm-bank get the same kick those that I bed do on cuckolding their beta.

  • Fred Flange, You're Having My Bobby

    I saw this article back last fall, must admit I probably preferred not to recall it directly until you just now re-posted the link. I have read this and other similar tales from the darkside far more carefully than I would have cared to. Even if my screed is snarkier, regardless, the point is: this is stuff to make your head explode. This story is indeed another perfect example of the scenarios no one has thought through in these IVF/sperm donor horrors, and is what I meant by “YOU’re fucked”, as in Beta-Bucks. No we have not seen the last of this by any means. Word to the Wiseguys.

  • jf12

    @Rollo. Would it be good for the gander? Let’s replace a few words and see. “since fertility treatments were part of the marriage, they should be considered part of the marital lifestyle, which should be maintained as much as possible post-divorce. The only difference is, in the future, she’ll use another man’s sperm.” becomes “since sexual activities were part of the marriage, they should be considered part of the marital lifestyle, which should be maintained as much as possible post-divorce. The only difference is, in the future, he’ll use another woman’s vagina.”

    Somehow, though, I foresee a valid counter. “I have a right for my ex-wife to pay for my prostitutes” would be countered by the (presumably conceded) claim that they had stopped having sex prior to divorce.

  • Bachelorocles

    That the sperm bank is institutionalized hypergamy there is no doubt. However, the sine qua non of the AF-BB dynamic is this (and we see this animals (even in the notoriously monogamous female wolf and female graylag goose)): the female causes beta provider to bond to her (what we call love) and then dupes that beta into believing the alpha’s child belongs to the beta. That dynamic is typically absent in the sperm bank phenomenon. When a couple attends a sperm bank, the man isn’t being duped. He simply wants a child as if he were adopting a child.

    To say that women actively seek out the best DNA is to misunderstand the process of natural selection. Natural selection operates via raw human desires. We desire good food (salty and fatty proteins, sugary foods, etc) because it tastes good and it tastes good because humans in our past who ate such food and who had a desire for such food were placed at a survival advantage over those who did not. Because they were at a survival advantage, they survived and passed that desire to their offspring. We today inherited the desire for such food – even though such food today prematurely kills millions. So when I see a slab of sizzling BBQ ribs I don’t think: “I want to eat those ribs because it will give me a survival advantage.” I say: “I’m going to tear into those ribs because they look fucking good!!” Woman feel the same about alphas.

    Why do women want alphas? Not to garner their DNA – women simply desire to please them. Period. And women don’t necessarily want fuck them — although they do. But why do women so easily give blowjobs to rock stars, actors, professional athletes, and wealthy men (as opposed to fucking them)? To get their sperm? No. They blow them because they simply desire to, because alphas make women weak in the knees and wet and their mere presence makes women sexually submissive. From a biological perspective, women want to please alphas and they get feelings of sexual submission before alphas because women in the past who had that desire, who had that sexual response to alpha males achieved a survival advantage by 1) making alphas her allies (they will protect her, look out for her, share resources with her, and she can share vicariously in their high social status), 2) if she fucks an alpha, by getting superior sperm to her uterus increasing the probability her children will survive to reproduce, 3) and if she fucks an alpha, by making him an ally of her children thus giving her children a survival advantage (because an alpha will suspect her children belong to him – and thereby she dupes the alpha?). And women today desire to please alphas because women in the past who had that desire, who had that sexual response to alpha males were more likely to survive and produce offspring which survived to reproduce. Her female offspring inherited this desire and specific sexual response to alpha males. Women today simply inherited this desire and sexual response. Women don’t consciously want superior DNA – they simply want to please alphas and receive an intense sexual response from alphas.

  • fakeemail

    Sperm banks are immoral. No infertile married man should allow his wife to get knocked up by another man. They should get divorced, adopt, or have no kids. No single woman should have the option of having kids without a father; especially if she’s going to harness beta bucks via the government.

    Fertility treatment should only be used to impregnate a woman with her husband’s baby.

    Finally, I call Thomas R. Lippert a hero. He was a loser and knew he was a loser, but found a way to win whatever means necessary. None of the women he impregnated would ever give him the time of day. What he did was monstrously evil (especially since the couples were married), but it was his only option. He went for it. And he got his the only way he ever could. Hell, I’d do the same thing if I were in his position. He’s a goddamn magnificent sneaky bastard.

    I don’t believe they allow men to work as technicians in sperm banks, anyway. And men shouldn’t waste their time looking to donate, unless they are white, six-feet and above, full head of hair, clean bill of health, and have a high status profession.

  • jf12

    @Bachelorocles “From a biological perspective, women want to please alphas and they get feelings of sexual submission before alphas because women in the past who had that desire, who had that sexual response to alpha males achieved a survival advantage by” not being killed by him by letting him have his way. The term of art is “preparation hypothesis”, as I just learned.

    Note that by alpha traits, all of it boils down to dominance, specifically dominance of women. Your dominance is, roughly, the ability to make the other person back down from conflict through the belief that it would rougher for them than you. IOW that you have a greater capacity for brutality than they do. There is nothing else to it.

    Similar to the desire to please alphas, fear also makes women weak in the knees and wet in the panties. This can’t be coincidental.

  • Bachelorocles

    @jf12

    As with anything pertaining to evolution and natural selection, it’s never simple. All evolved human responses and evolved human desires have multiple causes. But yes – stockholm syndrome in women . . .

    As for raw brutality . . . . I would say alpha-ness is a function of multiple factors: social status, wealth, physical strength, physical grace, height, attractiveness, attitude, intelligence, extrovertedness, social intelligence, etc. Yes, physical dominance is one factor. But I guarantee the little, skinny, effeminate Mick Jagger scored 100x more tail than the brutal Sonny Barger or any mafia don. I’m told college professors score like rock stars.

  • BlackPoisonSoul

    I notice a glaring lack of women in these comments. They’re not even trying to defend – zip, zilch, nada.

    (It’s kind of refreshing.)

  • Eris

    Having come into contact with a similar situation, I can say that the reason men agree for their wife to try IVF and be impregnated with another man’s sperm is the shame he feels for not to being able to get his wife pregnant, the judgment that would be passed on him by others were they to find out, coupled with the fear that his wife would reject his demands and leave him for a fertile man just as they were trying for a baby. So much of a man’s value is hopelessly wrapped up in how he can be of use the female that men see little other option.

    Despite man’s great achievements, be it calculus, the combustion engine, the Newtonian laws, Darwinian theory or even the singular traits that the human male is endowed with compared to other species, it appears that for some commenters, the true heroes of the human race are none other than those who get their seed into as many random females as they can.

    If that were the case then your average down and out UK chav who has been banging girls since his early teens and knocked up more of them than I could count on my hands and feet together, would be a model to which men, from craftsmen to university professors, should aspire.

    Suggesting that a human male’s primary objective is breeding with the maximum number of females possible and that all else be secondary to his existence, is not only completely mindless and commits the naturalistic fallacy, but is also a basic premise that virtually all blue-pill men buy into and which has a habit of knocking their self-esteem when they, for some reason, be it circumstantial or personal, don’t gain access to as many females as they feel real men should. There is no surer way of a man propping up the female imperative than him agreeing to value himself purely on how far he can spread his seed, something which is, for the moment, solely under the dominion of the female – rather than something detached from the female.

    Being many years into a LTR myself, I realise that, as vital as I believe it is that a man understand the way women and society work in order for him to attain some level of stable contentment in his life and with the women around him (and hence the value I place on Rollo’s writings), however positive his relationships with women may come to be by way of the red pill and game, a man must learn to place his actual self-worth outside the domain of the female and to not do so is to build his castle upon a foundation of sand.

  • Rol

    It’s actually really tough for me to think this one through.

    It seems like a genetic dead end, trying to circumvent Nature in this way, but we’ve probably done that many times over already with modern living.

    Bachelorocles:

    As for raw brutality . . . . I would say alpha-ness is a function of multiple factors: social status, wealth, physical strength, physical grace, height, attractiveness, attitude, intelligence, extrovertedness, social intelligence, etc. Yes, physical dominance is one factor. But I guarantee the little, skinny, effeminate Mick Jagger scored 100x more tail than the brutal Sonny Barger or any mafia don. I’m told college professors score like rock stars.

    I agree.

    The alpha stereotype exists for plausible reasons, but it rarely plays out in such strict terms in everyday life. We use more varied strategies to succeed. As long as you have a certain minimum level of physical appeal you can punch a couple points above your weight with enough value in other areas.

    I saw an amazing clip years ago of a cuttlefish interloper.

    They’re experts at camouflage. An alpha male was guarding a female and another much smaller male shows up, having altered his appearance to mimic a female. He was then able to get close to the female and she willingly mated with him right underneath the alpha.

    I had to tip my hat for that one.

  • Tam the Bam

    “If that were the case then your average down and out UK chav who has been banging girls since his early teens and knocked up more of them than I could count on my hands and feet together, would be a model to which men, from craftsmen to university professors, should aspire.”
    Absolutely, but then I personally am not in the business of breeding hordes of orcs. Or the winner of the 3:30 at Wincanton.
    Let them flourish, Fucks, I give not one.

    My own children get my 100% commitment, whatever any random woman may think. I’m extraordinarily parsimonious with my rare and antique jizz, even though I’m so fertile I can impregnate a roomful of women merely by sneezing without a kerchief.
    But this y-profile has seen some hard times, wouldn’t want to let the side down. We’re better than that.

  • Johnycomelately

    Re- Compensatory beta bucks.

    India is great example of the value of men and women, when men are scarce familys have to pay ‘dowries’ and when women are scarce families pay a ‘bride price’.

    I think no fault divorce is simply the Western version of this price mechanism, for a multitude of reasons (flat birth rates, technology, cheap energy, money supply etc.) the price of men in the West is low and men are paying a ‘bride price’ through divorce, child care payments and asset stripping.

    In fact the price is so low that in some parts a man must compensate a woman for simply cohabitating.

    Whereas in India the price is upfront, in the West the price is for services rendered.

    Now the question is how low can the price of males go and what will be the mechanisms used to extract the price for interactions with females.

    I find the feminists attempts at seeking confirmation texts of voluntary sex as being a future method of compensation for individual sex acts rather than relationships.

    So, how low can they go?

  • D-Man

    According to this: http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm , attributes among males are more widely distributed, meaning there are more exceptional males, and more at the bottom, where the bell curve for women tends to be narrower and taller.

    Can this be extrapolated to the gametes themselves?

    Anyway, we live in a changing world that appears to be taking a colossal shit on k-selected, civilization-building types…

    freddy flange well done I thought I was reading circa 1971 Harlan Ellison

  • Aragorn

    A reader of the manosphere, an average man with good social standing, one day gets sick of the feminine imperative and its social narrative, decides to make a stand.

    He stays single, gets all his legal ducks in a row, saves up ~$20,000 and heads to The Rotunda Clinic. He completes the necessary steps to conceive a child, obtains 100% parental rights, and returns to America (or Canada perhaps).

    After not too long, he begins to receive attention from co-workers, friends, and extended family. News of the responsible, successful, single male parent spreads through the community and reaches the ears of the local news, as well as a few local feminist groups.

    Prepared for the fall-out such as Clyde in Law Abiding Citizen, he parries all comments and concerns with pre-digested statistics, knowledge of law, precedents, wisdom from blogs such as this one, and presents them in full public view.

    By candidly sharing his views and prerogative, or alternatively choosing to reject personal questions in the public eye, our man very subtly spits in the face of, and rips myriad holes in the fabric of the feminine prioritized society we live in.

    He goes on to happily and successfully raises his child autonomously (or with a maid/daycare), all without threat of divorce, chailmony, loss of parental rights, etc.

    Further implications are left to the imagination.

    Our man in this example may find he receives such strong (male) support, that he is inspired to work towards reversing one sided policies in public office for the greater good.

    Or he might not be bothered to give a fuck.

  • hoellenhund2

    “I recall reading about the concept in high school biology, and the original justification was to provide infertile married couples with the chance for the wife to bear a child into the marriage.”

    I don’t know much about this issue, but yes, I suppose that’s how it was. It was still a manifestation of the AFBB rule, but it’s important to keep in mind that the “beta fucks, beta bucks” strategy was not a option for the men in question.

    On the other hand, I reckon reading that ancient Sparta had a practice akin to the sperm banks of the bygone days, namely that married couples could seek out the service of fertile men, both married and unmarried, if the husband was infertile for whatever reason.

    As far as I’m concerned, I think a couple should divorce if they find out either of them is infertile. That’s the only honest and mutually beneficial approach.

  • jf12

    @Rol Re: “I had to tip my hat for that one.” The sneaky f-er strategy is by far the most productive beta strategy, even though marginal, since it’s the only thing that works at all for many betas. In humans it manifests as the friendzone, and its marginal *successes* are what keep the strategy alive.

  • The Surgeon

    Interesting perspective. I totally agree that sperm banks are in-vitro AF/BB for the new Y generation. It allows women to satisfy their hypergamous urges.

    However…

    “There is really no parallel to this degree of institutionalized sexual selection for men. While there are fertility clinics for couples who may purchase donor eggs, there are no commercial ‘egg banks’, nor are there commercially available volunteer women eager to gestate and birth children to exclusively facilitate men’s biological imperatives.”

    Men don’t have (as strong) a desire to *have and rear children* as women do. Our biological imperative is to spread the seed and have sex with as many of the fittest mates as possible. In return then, we have institutions which give us unlimited access to those women- porn, prostitution, etc. In the same way as infertile women/couples who can’t find an alpha to have kids go to sperm banks to find the quality sperm for children, the dregs of men who can’t get laid in the SMV (due to low value) go to porn/prostitution to satisfy their biological urges to find the fittest mates to fuck.

    Of course, this is an over-simplification, and very wealthy good looking men I’m sure use prostitutes, virtually all men watch porn and lesbian women who would easily attract an alpha I’m sure go to sperm banks. But it’s how much reward the individual receives for their effort in the sexual market place and ease of access to those rewards that determines these peoples life choices, not their external qualities like money or looks.

    Hence, game is the largest personal quality that gives men Alpha SMP rewards. A body and face like Kim Kardashian’s (for me) is the women’s quality. Wouldn’t wife that up for the world though.

  • Linkage (Sex Edition) | Uncouth Reflections

    […] Rollo Tomassi on the Missouri sperm donor case, and how sperm banks (and sperm donation in general) are a sign of the feminine-controlled times: […]

  • Will Best

    A buddy of mine who is 34 has bladder cancer. Before he started chemo, he made several deposits into a sperm bank in order to ensure that his seed would be available for him if he a) beats the cancer and b) finds somebody.

    So while the Sperm Bank is primarily there for women, it can also aid men in special circumstances. But the AF-BB primacy of the sperm bank is on show where women tend to gravitate toward the same guys and you occasionally see stories where one guy has sired 100+ children.

  • Luis

    I think this article makes the wrong assumption that when treating couples, the sperm used in artificial insemination is always that of a donnor. In many cases it is the partner’s sperm that is used in IVF, which albeit not being of optimal quality, is often still good enough to impregnate the woman through IVF. By using the partner’s sperm, the male’s “demand” for a biological child is also satisfied. In addition, the selection process for potential donors is largely based on sperm quality and quantity (or rather density), i.e sperm count, which is highly dependent on environmental conditions. Obviously some background health information is also required but the main “filter” for donors is the sperm count. Personally I wouldn’t go as far as saying that just because a man has a high sperm count, he is automatically an Alpha male and therefore the impregnated woman achieves hypergamy.

  • Johnycomelately

    Off topic but addresses Rollos’s, “Beta Bucks will pay for Alpha Fucks retroactively in the legal system.”

    Posted by Jericho One at Heartiste observing British women.
    “When you’ve got state power on your side — inflating your true human value and putting you beyond social scrutiny — there are no limits to personal degeneracy.”

    Interestingly, rural North India has a dowry system (families pay the groom money to take their daughters) while moderately industrialized South India has a bride price (groom’s family pays for the price of a bride).

    So in industrialized societies (more centralization and state power) woman have a higher value than men whereas in rural societies men have a higher value.

    So the higher value sex dictates the terms, I guess beta bucks and alpha fucks will continue unabated.

  • Water Cannon Boy

    A body and face like Kim Kardashian’s (for me) is the women’s quality.

    Glad you qualified that for yourself.

  • FullyAwake

    Let women impregnate themselves in any way they choose. Tis better to let them impregnate via sperm donor. Artificial wombs and surrogacy are also the way to go for men. Let the fight for dominance continue with artificial wombs and droid lovers.

    Hell hath no wrath…so…give the devil her due. Women will not stop in their quest to dominate, enslave and subjugate men – even if the end of that quest results in their extinction. Such is the hypocrisy of feminism. All nations fall.

  • FullyAwake

    This is how women procreate:

  • FullyAwake

    This is your worth as a man. Don’t like it? Man up, beeotch! Don’t be a sissy, beeotch! Fight for and protect women and children! Don’t be a wimp!

  • Raja

    Man rollo, you gotta do an article lampooning those pussies at askmen. They say to get a hot chick i gotta talk about topics that she is likely to be interested in. And i gotta be so good looking that it “captures her imagination”. As if women are heavenly angels with their rectum full of virtues. And i gotta be some artsy-fartsy academic and look like that fag brad pitt to hold conversation with a chick. Its pathetic. I once heard a patistani comedian say when women are 20 you mention a man they’ll ask what does he look like. When they are 30 you mention a man they’ll ask what does he do. When they are 40 you mention a man they’ll ask where is he. When i was young i used to be mad for pretty girls. Now i see a pretty girl i think to myself would be interesting to see what she looks like few years down the line. Would be interesting to see what jennifer lawrence looks like few years later. I like women but they are grossly overrated.

  • David Carter

    Does standing in a cubical, wanking into a beaker really sound like the actions of a self respecting alpha male?

    So what kind of man would give away his Sacred-Seed without any say in what happens to it?..

    *Desperate
    *Delusional
    *Foolish
    *Psychotic
    *Beta

    Donated sperm is defective sperm.

  • Morpheus

    Rollo,

    From the article you linked:

    And it helps rectify one of life’s greatest biological injustices: that men but not women can typically start a family well into middle age and beyond

    “Biological injustice”? Ponder the absurdity of that one. The feminine imperative must trump biological reality.

  • Luke

    My wife and I did the whole egg donor/gestational surrogate thing. We have two very healthy kids not quite 2 years old. Some observations:

    1) Egg donors cost more like 3000 – 8000 dollars, not counting agency fees (several grand at least).

    2) Unfertilized ova aren’t “stored in advance” BC they don’t survive freezing well (due to large cell size, unlike the cells in fertilized embryos of a few hundred cells). Not many fertility clinics freeze unfertilized ova at all (<10%), and are the pricier ones.

    3) Most fertility clinics only do married couples for IVF. There certainly are ones for gays and single women, and not just in California.

    4) Our fertility clinic (in TX) only agreed to handle us since we were married AND one of us was under 50.

    5) A gestational surrogate (her fees only) is around 30K. If you go for one via an agency for "convenience", add at least another 10K.

    6) Egg donors are moderately screened in most cases. They're under about age 28 max (we wouldn't even look at any over age 24).

    7) Universities are the cheapest IVF clinics, but give you worse customer service than the IRS. (The one we talked to wouldn't even let us see pics of potential egg donors, the top reason we went to a private clinic.)

    8) There probably are single hetero men using their own sperm + egg donors + gesational surrogates to get a child that's frivorce-proof, but I've not heard of any specific cases in the U.S. The ones of which I've read, were done in India, and then there's a real PITA possible re bringing the kid back to the U.S.

  • Lightning Round -2014/02/05 | Free Northerner

    […] The sperm bank as in vitro cuckolding. […]

  • Castaigne

    This is “Alpha Sperm, Beta Provisioning”, and nothing less. Putting a tech or a doctor in the middle wearing gloves and a lab coat, and injecting semen with a syringe rather than the usual method doesn’t change that.

    What the shit is this?
    Look, from football accident in high school, I’m sterile. No wigglies, no ability to have children, nada, zip, nothing. The ONLY way I’m going to get to have a kid is by having my wife fertilized from a sperm bank. That’s it. There’s no other way.

    Basic biology. I’m sterile; I want a kid; my wife gets fertilized using science. And that makes me a beta male? What the shit do you think an alpha is supposed to do, invent a goddamn time machine to undo the accident?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,644 other followers

%d bloggers like this: