Two Camps

I thought this was an interesting take from Striver in this week’s comments. I think this part has some merit…

Once gut level violence is tempered, men want to be the hero, the doer, who is rewarded for his deeds by a woman or women. Game is inherently feminine, an admission that women have won. Game involving talking and “communication” – does that sound masculine?

However, I disagree with him here…

As far as whether Game is necessary, any sex that doesn’t produce surviving offspring is just recreation. If your n count is 100, and no babies are produced or all potential babies are aborted, then it’s the same as n count 0 except for how it makes you feel. If women choose to sleep with the alpha players, then have babies with the beta shlubs, that’s the COMPLETE game.

This fundamentally ignores the biological root of women’s Hypergamy. The ideal evolutionary outcome is for a woman to optimize Alpha Fucks and Beta Bucks. Ideally a woman who breeds and consolidates on monogamy with a man best exemplifying these aspects is the evolutionary “winner”. If that’s not possible, or not optimal, the ideal evolutionary winner is the woman who breeds with an Alpha Fucks man, and consolidates provisioning with a Beta Bucks man.

A lot of Blue Pill men feel a sense of vindication for the Epiphany Phase “success” they finally get with women once their long-term usefulness to women finally outweighs women’s ability to attract more Alpha Fucks ideal men. It’s a validation of their self-styled perseverance and some qualifier of  what they convince themselves is the ‘real‘ attractiveness women have for that self-righteous Beta provisioning.

The fact is that this is an old-order, old-SMP misbelief. In all of the eras preceding the advent of unilaterally feminine controlled birth control both sexes shared in the social responsibility of controlling women’s innate Hypergamy (AF/BB). However left to her own, unconditioned, expectation to responsibly assume control of her Hypergamy, women default to separate ideals for Alpha Fucks and Beta Bucks.

In other words, women prefer a breeding model that separates men into two different varieties – the kinds of men women want to fuck and the kind they want to marry – or “the kind of man your mother wants you to marry and the kind of guy you leave him for to be with.”

So ensaturated into our social fabric is this understanding that even men will reinforce the archetypes. I have a 16 year old daughter, and even Rollo Tomassi would want his girl to be with ‘truck guy’ instead of ‘girly car guy’. Across all generations it just makes better sense, right?

I’ve mentioned this before in the Myth of the Good Guy. It’s amazing to me that men still seem to think they can embody the nobler aspects of both the Alpha Jerk and the comforting Beta to become a mythical Good Guy that women will naturally recognize, appreciate and prefer in comparison to the Jerkish Alpha Bad Boy or the Sympish Beta Nice Guy. The sell is one of combining the best of both archetypes and thereby satisfying women’s need for an optimized Hypergamy.

The mistake in this, of course, is presuming women have the foresight to identify and appreciate the aspects that should satisfy an optimized state of Hypergamy. What Good Guys don’t consider is that women simply don’t have the depth of experience with men needed to recognize or appreciate ‘the best of both types’ at various phases of their maturity.

For instance, young women in their peak SMV years (22-24) are simply not the demographic of women who complain of men’s lack of maturity, their unwillingness to commit or how they need to Man Up and accept some ‘grown up’ responsibilities. Peak SMV age women aren’t concerned with long term commitments or provisioning from nice, dependable, Beta men – they’re too preoccupied with enjoying that SMV peak with Alpha lovers, and understand that offers of commitment from Beta men are cheap and plentiful.

Yet even for an older, presumedly wiser, generation, the resourceful Alpha “has more sex appeal” than the sensitive, attentive, comforting Beta Herb male.

“I’d Rather Cry Over An Asshole Than Date A Guy Who Bores Me”

At least with the dick, there’s a spark there — even if it’s just one you’re trying to catch. At least with the asshole, you’re wasting your time on someone entertaining. At least with the guy who’ll bring you undeniable rage and pain, there’s a feeling there.

The problem with Good Guy ambitions of being the best of both Alpha excitement and Beta comfort is that women are incapable of appreciating either of these aspects simultaneously. The predominant need women feel for Beta comfort, dependability and provisioning during their Epiphany Phase just prior to the Wall is unrelatable to a woman in her peak SMV years when her predominant sexual focus is on exciting Alpha recklessness.

I speculated in Myth of the Good Guy that in today’s sexual marketplace women simply don’t believe the average man is capable of being the best of both types. I still hold to that assertion – only apex Alpha celebrity men are in anyway believable, but mostly due to women creating this optimized character for themselves. However, and probably more importantly, women aren’t interested in Alpha excitement and Beta trustworthiness in the same place, in the same man, at the same time.

This separation of Alpha exciting men from dependable (but boring) Beta men is a direct result of the social “empowerment” women have been afforded, and socially engineered by the Feminine Imperative, for the past 5 generations.

This separate-guys-for-separate-purposes is the end game for Socialized Hypergamy – left to the unilateral control of women, Hypergamy doesn’t recognize men who embody a long term optimization of Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks. Instead Hypergamy, unfettered by social restraint, prefers short term mating with exciting, but dangerous Alpha genetic potential, and an enforced long term responsibility to the cuckoldry of parentally invested, emotionally invested, dependable Beta providers.

The separate need for these archetypes does not occur at the same time in a woman’s progression of maturity. In fact the only area of overlapping need for these types is exactly the pre-Wall ages of 29-31 for women (i.e. the Epiphany Phase), the age range when the majority consensus of women agree that they want to marry and settle down.

From a strictly evolutionary perspective Striver’s assertion that Betas get the last laugh in the genetic olympics is correct. Nice Guys may finish last, but no one says they don’t finish at all. But do they finish best?

Unfortunately, on a subconscious level, women’s sexual strategies, which then translate into social doctrine, develop contingencies for duping Betas into provisioning for children not their own, or are ‘outsourced’ as parents once they’ve been removed from the family unit. Either that or they’re relegated to progressively sexless status of nominally male providership and parental investment.

A Beta fathering children is common, but there’s more to raising a child than just the combining of alleles.

Are Cads Outbanging Dads?

You’ll notice I titled this post “Are the cads outbanging the dads?” That was deliberate, because there remain questions about whether cads are actually breeding more or less than dads. Outbanging is different than outbreeding. A woman could casually ignore potential beta dads throughout her teens and 20s (her prime years) for a sterile ride on the cock carousel with alpha males, only to settle down later with a beta male and bear him 1.8 children. Cheap and easy contraceptives thwart the natural procreation advantage that alpha males would normally have over beta males in the state of nature, so it is very possible that alpha males could be winning the Banging Sweepstakes while losing the Breeding Sweepstakes.

Evidence that cad outbanging and supercharged female hypergamy is occurring resides in the later age of first marriage rates, and the lower overall marriage rate, as well as the higher STD rates among women.

And there is evidence for cad outbreeding as well. Serial monogamy — which is a form of soft polygyny — is on the rise, and men who have had more than one partner have more childrenthan men married to one woman.

On the other side of the debate are the GSS (General Social Survey) gurus who marshal self-reported evidence that dads are winning the breeding wars over cads.

I remain skeptical of the GSS data, but give it its due. My contention has never been that cads are having more children, but rather that cads are having more premarital sex than dads with higher quality (read: better looking) women when those women are in their sexual primes. This, not the discrepancy in fertility rates between alpha and beta males, is the contraceptively-aided shock wave that is roiling the sexual market and upending organic rules thousands, perhaps millions, of years old.

A society of both cad ascendence and civilization is unsustainable and incompatible. One or the other will go, and the pendulum with either swing back to dads or civilization will regress to accommodate the rise of women choosing cads. All social and economic indicators (particularly the debt overhang), and my personal experience in the bowels of the dating market, lead me to be pessimistic about a happy resolution to this building tension. Hopefully, I’m wrong, but in the meantime I’ll do what is necessary to secure my pleasure.

If the Chevy Colorado commercial is any gauge of our current sexual marketplace (and I realize it was supposed to be satirical), the female meta-desire for Alpha breeding opportunities far outstrips any notion that more Beta men are the preferred long-term parental mating choice of optimized Hypergamy.

This commercial is yet another shinning example of mainstream society’s increasing comfort with Open Hypergamy. In that post I outlined the conflict that occurs between women comfortable and prideful about revealing the duplicity of their sexual strategy, and the women less able to capitalize on that openness and cling to a secretive Hypergamy. However, men too are invested in that conflict.

When laws mandate a father be held financially and provisionally responsible for children that are not biologically his own (either by his choice or a woman’s overt cuckoldry) you can see how Hypergamy is literally an imperative that directs men’s lives to optimize it. In a social order founded upon women’s unrestricted Hypergamous influences no man, Truck Guy or Prius Guy, is ever truly the father of his child.

5 2 votes
Article Rating

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

Speak your mind

226 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Kevin
5 years ago

This is one of the few posts I’ve had to read a few times and let it digest because of the implications. Before reading your post I too believed that women want the “best of both worlds in a man”: one who is strong and dominant, but also nurturing and supportive when necessary. I still think this way to a degree. The problem I have with this post is it seems too “one-sided”; that women only want to fuck an “all alpha”, and they only want providership from an “all beta”. No in-between, no balance of the two. Unless I’m… Read more »

Kevin
5 years ago

After re-reading my post I noticed that some of the wording might cause confusion. My post appears to suggest that anything a man does for a woman outside of sex is beta. I don’t mean that. Similar to your concluding paragraph on The Myth of the Good Guy, I know that it’s possible for a man to care for and nurture others and still be alpha. The point I was trying to make in the above post is that I don’t think women want two separate men indefinitely, but that when she seeks commitment she wants an alpha for more… Read more »

Anonymous Reader
Anonymous Reader
5 years ago

You could try asking this in the current thread, rather than one that is 2 years old.
Probably would get more responses that way.

SJF
SJF
5 years ago

“1: Why do women chase alphas first for commitment when they approach the wall before giving up and looking for betas? Why don’t they go straight to looking for betas?” If Occam’s razor was applied to those questions, I would think that the simple answer is: “Because they can” “Maybe it’s not so much that women want separate camps, but that men in LTRs become progressively betafied in a way that makes women want to cheat or cuck them. For now I still think women want a balance of alpha/beta qualities in an LTR.” Yes, that is true. Women’s normal… Read more »

kfg
kfg
5 years ago
Blaximus
Blaximus
5 years ago

@ Kevin

Who says Will Smith and Trump are alphas?

How do you know this to be true, not knowing anything about them other than what you’re allowed to see and know?

theasdgamer
5 years ago

Relationship status and testosterone in North American heterosexual and non-heterosexual men and women “Longitudinal analyses indicated that changes in partnered status were not associated with changes in testosterone concentrations; instead, women and men with lower T at baseline were significantly more likely to be partnered at follow-up. These findings thus suggest that partnered status is associated with stable, trait-level T values, rather than current state. Furthermore, the observed effect is limited to individuals (male or female) who are oriented toward female partners. ” tl;dr Lower T is associated with people who are more likely to partner with women (either het… Read more »

trackback

[…] and “provider” are now feminist ideals that helps it divide men into two camps: Alpha Fucks and Beta Bucks; the “bad”, “domineering” men who women want […]

Stoic101
Stoic101
5 years ago

What I don’t understand exactly is why the ‘alpha’s’ don’t simply lock the girl he fucks down…??? If she ‘loves’ the alpha badboy so much, and lets say the alpha wants a family, than isn’t that having the best of both worlds??? Is she simply attracted to the fact that ‘he doesn’t want her’ and THAT and THAT alone is what turns her on? Like the distinction seems a bit vague to me. I don’t know why a man wouldn’t be able to swing it both ways. Say the girl is like 26 or 27 and not in her peak… Read more »

Stoic101
Stoic101
5 years ago

I just don’t see how being a dad and providing for your offspring and keeping them alive is consider beta…??? I read some other posts on it and it sounds like Rollo sayin if the goal is to make the two people equal than it becomes beta and also if it comes from a feminine centric mindset…I agree with that, if the the goal is one of equality its from a beta mindset…but when you have children and offspring to me thats the most alpha thing you could ever do, your literally passing on your genes and keeping yourself ‘alive’… Read more »

Stoic101
Stoic101
5 years ago

How I see this divorce scale (if even remotely accurate) I see it as similar to what it would take for a wife to leave oyu. To me what the numbers represent is something like other men. Like for example take the first one: 0 kids = 50% chance of divorce What this means sort of to me is it will only take ONE alpha guy to swoop in and steal your girl if you don’t have her locked down properly. Basically a 50% chance of divorce to me correlates to the fact that women stray half the time. If… Read more »

boulderhead
5 years ago

@Stoic101 One question at a time. “What I don’t understand exactly is why the ‘alpha’s’ don’t simply lock the girl he fucks down…???” Say an alpha walks into the lunch line at the cafeteria,first day back to school. He has good posture,muscle,good looks and carries himself well with confidence. Every girl he looks at returns the favor with a smile, he can have his pick. If he gets in a relationship and gets serious he will likely get shut down, with no means of support to follow through. Now the cycle begins of casual sex. He will need to learn… Read more »

226
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
%d bloggers like this: