Recently, in the comments to my Secret Life as a Group of Women post, our old friend evilwhitemaleempire offered this intriguing theory as to why I started this blog:
Your just a runt.
You put up that picture of Charles Altas so folks will think your not.
Your entire adult life has been about coping with the aggressive sexual displays of bigger, taller, more attractive men by throwing anti-male grenades at them. That’s why your a feminist. … you support the false rape/harassment industry because it acts to jail all those better men you can’t compete with.
You and your mangina ilk are what you have always been since high school. Nerds who think they can win the cheerleader if they can get the football captain jailed as a rapist.
I can’t fault his logic here, though evil here is making several incorrect assumptions that call into question his conclusion. One, I don’t actually support sending innocent men to jail on false rape charges, even if they were the captain of the football team in high school. Two, even in high school, I was never interested in the cheerleader type; as a nerdy alternative-music-loving slacker guy, I was much more interested in the girls who listened to The Jam rather than Journey. Also, the high school I went to was basically a high school for nerds; even the cheerleaders were a little nerdy. We didn’t have a football team; our basketball team was legendary for the length of its losing streak, while our chess team, meanwhile, racked up victory after victory.
But enough about my high school. The key point here is that manosphere dudes have somehow managed to convince themselves, despite massive evidence to the contrary, that sexual attraction is a very simple and straightforward thing: men want cheerleaders and Hooters waitresses; women want jocks and thugs. These are iron-clad rules, and apply to everyone, including the nerdiest of nerds and the feministest of feminists. (By everyone, of course, I mean cis heteros; manosphere dudes have no real theories about lgbt sexuality, and tend to forget it exists.)
So evil assumes that I (and presumably the rest of the feminist guys out there) have adopted feminism as a way to get into the pants of the cheerleaders who wouldn’t date us in high school. On the flip side, manosphere dudes often assume, bizarrely, that feminist women are all secretly obsessed with boning thuggish jocks.
In reality, of course, people tend to be interested in and attracted to people basically like them: gym rats go for gym rats, nerds for nerds, goths for goths, lawyers for lawyers, and so on, and so on, and scooby dooby doo.
To illustrate this point, I’d like to present some relevant anthropological data, in the form of video footage of the “aggressive sexual display” of one “alpha male” of a certain subspecies of homo sapiens. You will notes that this mating dance has attracted the attention of a female of the same type — and not a feminist. Unfortunately, as far as well can tell from the video itself, the dance did not result in successful copulation. In the end, our subject finds himself competing against the aggressive display of another male of the same type.
I noticed that Futrelle neatly skirts the question of how his actual personal status. I’ll give you the answer.
Futrelle is an omega. The difference between betas and omegas is that betas are usually accepted by alphas. They won’t get as much action, but they are permitted to run in the alphas’ circle and thus can utilize this foothold to more often score with beta women and perhaps even an occasional alpha woman. So, in the end, it’s not TOO bad to be a beta- you get action, and though you’re not dominant, you can always succeed in other areas of life (financially, etc.)
However, omegas- again, such as Futrelle- lack even this outlet for their sexual frustrations. They are completely shut out sexually, unless they want to stoop to female omegas (fat chicks). This is the kind of person you feminists flock to as a leader. Is there a status below omega? There should be.
Ah, that just goes to show how fiendishly cunning David is! He’s used his feminist mind-control mojo to convince Ew-Me that he’s not a group of women to disguise the fact that he really is a group of women! We’re beyond the looking glass, people!
I don’t understand the hamster thing. These MRA people mention it a lot, but where does it come from and what does it mean?
The new format is already better. We’re on comment 16 and we’re still talking about the hilarious quote, and not disproving the point “feminists invented divorce in order to slaughter male fetuses.”
Hey everyone, just approved a big batch of comments here. I have the blog set up to send comments from new commenters to moderation, so if it’s your first post here that’s what happened. I think it determines newness from IP addresses, so if you’re posting from somewhere else from where you usually post you get moderated. At least I think that’s why some of you who have already posted here are getting stuck in moderation.
What “Men’s Rights Activist Lieutenant” said is satire, right? It has to be.
Graham: I don’t understand the hamster thing.
You would no doubt get a different answer from an MRA, but here’s how I understand it. MRAs have noticed that women do something that is very similar to what they know as “thinking” and “reason.” However, they know that women are subhuman and thus are not equipped for actual thought. So they have likened this activity instead to a hamster running on its wheel, which seems a more suitable description for the behaviors of such a simple creature.
MRAL: You do realize that no one outside of the MRA/MGTOW lobby actually thinks about people in those terms, right? Categorizing people by their perceived worth using Greek letters and psuedoscience is pretty much reserved for you bargain shoppers of easy-to-swallow ideas, and ignored by everyone else.
Personally, I’m an epsilon female. Because I’m really really short.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon#Math_and_science
Also, I love how “fat chicks” are the lowest of the low, that even the least desirable man wouldn’t consider dating. This is, of course, a bunch of hateful bullsh*t, which in no way corresponds to real life.
But given that the MRA/MGTO crowd probably think anyone over a size 8 is disgustingly fat, their contention that there are just not enough dateable women to go around makes a twisted kind of sense…
Ooh! And I forgot to mention that I am undoubtedly an “omega” by the “woman who is not skinny” standard. And…I’m in a relationship. Huh.
I assure you I am entirely serious. I know it’s hard for you wishy-washy everyone’s a special snowflake feminists, but you can essentially boil down men into the alpha, beta, and omega categories. Alphas have their pick of women, and usually choose the most attractive and charismatic- the “alpha female”. Beta men can occasionally utilize their wiles and proximity to the alphas to perhaps “fool” (for lack of a better word) an alpha woman into thinking he’s an alpha man and thus obtain some action. However, it is rare for a relationship to develop along these lines because eventually he will be outed as a beta. Thus, beta men are found in serious relationships with beta women- who may still be attractive, just not gorgeous. Thus, as I said before, being a beta is not an intolerable position.
And of course, the omega men and fat chicks are left out in the cold. They could hook up, but omega men usually find abstinence more appealing than degrading themselves with a fat chick.
I also disagree with the use of those crazy terms to categorize people. At least, as much as a cis-gendered heteronormative recipient of class privilege from the kyriarchy can do so. And don’t go ableist on me either! 😛
Also, isn’t the omega man too busy fighting off crazed mutants to worry about dating anyway?
@Ion: As someone with a mental health diagnosis I don’t find your use of the word “crazy” ableist. MRAs fit the definition. I don’t. I’d rather have them associated with the word anyway. So soldier on, I suppose 🙂
Are the MRAs assigning themselves military ranks now? Because the General beat them to the punch a long time ago.
MRAL: Okay, I’ll give you the serious response that your post doesn’t deserve.
You’re just making unsupported assertions here. Aside from suggesting that we’re all stupid or emotional or whatever to “get it,” you don’t provide any evidence, not even anecdotal evidence, that this is true at all.
Other people on this thread have shared personal experiences, which point to what common sense would also indicate: People mostly get together with other people who have similar interests and attitudes. There is no one type of guy (or girl) that every girl (or guy) in the universe wants, any more than everyone has the same favorite food or movie.
And, dude, in real life people are not divided into discrete levels. You’re thinking of Brave New World again.
@MRA thingy:
Urk. I was gonna write a serious response, but four paragraphs later I realized that everything about you is so wrong one could write a novel on the order of the dictionary that would be as informative and as tedious. Alpha, Beta, Omega yadda yadda are not real distinctions; they do not exist. They are terms invented wholly to put the blame of not being happy in relationships from “I don’t know how to communicate/empathize/sympathize/enjoy the company of a woman” to “I am born a certain way, and therefore its not my fault I don’t get any.”
There are no Alpha males out to get you poor Beta and Omegas, and your classification of the whole human species solely in terms of attractiveness (and YOUR version thereof) only shows how obsesssed you are with one very VERY tiny aspect of your life.
Go outside and get some fresh air. Go hiking, build little models of ships, write some goddamn poetry for fucks sake! Just don’t come whining about how you personally can’t seem to click with the people around you, and therefore there is some evil conspiracy of hot people aiming to keep you enslaved.
Your shallow and narrow view of women (and men) doesn’t give you some useful insight into the human condition; it just makes you blind to what is really the problem with your relationships. YOU!
Man, I’m getting really cranky these days… I’m gonna go look at some cute pictures of kittens.
Katz, weak and/or deluded people (such as feminists) don’t like to THINK of themselves as in terms of the Greek hierarchy, but it’s all there. “Hooking up with people of similar interests” is just code (knowingly or unknowingly) for settling at your level. Band geeks hooking up with band geeks? It’s likely that you’ve probably got two betas. Hot athletes hooking up with cheerleaders? Really, it’s just alphas. Stoners? Likely a case of an omega and a fat chick. You understand me now?
Yes yes MRAL, because the only thing that matters is having high status and apparently no fat.
Okay, let me paint a picture of Futrelle, it’s very easy, he’s a stock omega. Not knowing the guy at all, here’s a projected profile:
Age: 23
Height: 5’6
Weight: 135 or so- skinny but not too skinny
Hair color: Brown, but with black “streaks” in his hair to give him “individuality”.
Futrelle grew up in a solidly middle class town, probably borderline upper-middle class. Likewise, his family was well-off but not rich. Suburbs, I would guess… maybe suburbs of Boston? He probably wasn’t bullied per say, but simply ignored. Tried to make friends, especially with the opposite sex, and they were put off by his glasses, high voice, acne, and general awkwardness. Before college, his acne cleared up and he got contacts. He hoped to reinvent himself as an alpha or at least a beta, but unfortunately, his nerdiness and lack of social skills remained, shunting him immediately down the status ladder into omega territory. Futrelle was angry, very angry, and directed his rage at the alphas that had socially isolated him. Usually his abnormally developed writing skills, he took the fight to the internet, and we see Man Boobz a result of his sexually frustrated toils.
I bet I was pretty close.
Also, your little diagram falls apart when one looks at me-according to you I am an omega because I am not skinny.
But my intelligence makes me a beta. Then my life’s work makes me an alpha. So which am I? Or am I an alphabetaomega? Or are you full of crap?
I suspect it is the latter.
Correction, after your last post, I know it is and was the latter.
Honestly? Not to be rude, but since you’re fat, you’re an omega. The levels are flexible, but not that flexible.
@MRAL:
Lets move past your high-school notions of hierarchy and look at the real world, shall we? Who is more of an alpha, a renowned boxer or a respected college professor? Who is more of a beta, a rock musician or a tech guy working behind the scenes at a fortune 500? Are the guys working in a factory omegas because they have shitty jobs, or betas because they have jobs at all?
As I recall, Oprah had some big stink about weight, where she gained a lot then lost it. Did she undergo some grotesque metamorphasis from alpha to omega, then back again? Is your outlook on life so simplistic that you think that not only does attractiveness determine ones place in society, but it somehow (presumeably) sums up their entire potential and worth?
Grow up.
(I really need to stop now.. My poor heart…)
But unlike your level of intelligence MRAL-I can lose the weight.
You shall always be stuck in omega level intelligence.
Age: 23
Height: 5’6
Weight: 135 or so- skinny but not too skinny
Hair color: Brown, but with black “streaks” in his hair to give him “individuality”.(Men’s Rights Activist Lieutenant)
Are you serious? This could have described several of the MMA fighters on the UFC card last night. Oh, and by your definition they would probably be Alpha.