Life is tough for the beta male. During his twenties, as Manosphere dudes never tire of reminding us, women reject him, choosing instead to throw themselves wantonly at caddish alpha males.
Only after these cruel, callous women have squandered their youth and beauty – by the age of 30 if not earlier – do they turn at last to the betas, who’ve been patiently waiting in the “friend zone” the whole time. Those poor betas, nice guys and good providers all, are then lured into marriage with these now-ugly shrews, who are no longer interested in sex, and want only their money, often used to provide for kids sired by alpha males. (See here for Holly Pervocracy’s more detailed analysis of the “Greek system.”)
But life can be tough for the alpha male as well, driven to exhaustion by nearly constant sex with an incredible array of horny twentysomething women. The movie trailer below will give you some idea of just what the typical alpha male has to deal with on a daily basis.
Well, he’s got shitty ilk, then. Something else to think about. Also, a totally gross sounding phrase.
@ Magpie
@ Mags
It was our latest PUA troll who decided that Pecunium is an “alpha”. He’s just pointing out that, indeed, no such thing exists.
@ CassandraSays – Dear lord, I’ve lead a sheltered life!
Cassandra: sorry for the delay, I was sleeping.
http://www.comicsalliance.com/2012/02/10/ine-special-batman-vs-the-pickup-aask-chris-mystery/
I like vsh, he answers most direct questions!
Next questions:
– what’s the point of sex? (outside reproduction, which is a very tiny part of it thanks to contraceptions and abortions)
– Is the guy who married Megan Fox also a beta? (assuming they’re monogamous)
– You explained me why no sex is better than monogamous relationship. But that wasn’t exactly my question. How about poly/open relationships? Certainly, it should provide you the best of both: regular sex without decreasing your value since you can still increase your something-count.
Hi. You are not just a misogynist/sexist; you are also probably a sociopath, and certainly a sad freak. Okay. Bye now.
http://www.salon.com/2002/03/27/dodson/
In which Betty Dodson, pioneering feminist sex guru, at age 72, has a 25 year old dude “groupie” together with her for three years.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-hitchens/margaret-thatcher-iron-lady_b_1199269.html
In which Christopher Hitchens writes of Margaret Thatcher’s “Iron Lady” sex appeal. He was far from alone.
You need to get out more.
OK, I’m back on the laptop instead of the iPad, so I can have a closer look at trollboy’s blatherings.
The fundamental problem with this kind of reductiveness is that it completely eliminates nuance – and in my experience (and, I dare say, that of most typical adults), human relationships are all about nuance.
For instance, I strongly suspect that the phrase “enjoys women” relates exclusively to sexual relationships. The notion that men might “enjoy” women for other reasons – intelligent and stimulating company, good conversation, a fresh and possibly unexpected perspective – doesn’t enter into this universe at all, despite the fact that it forms the bedrock of the overwhelming majority of my relationships with my female friends.
I know this may be hard for someone so evidently sex-obsessed and presumably sex-starved to grasp, but when I talk to a woman I don’t spend my entire time either fantasizing about what she looks like naked or working out how to get her into the sack. In fact, I very very rarely do – and here’s the punchline: I didn’t when I was single either. At any given moment, the overwhelming majority of women simply won’t be my type for various reasons, and I usually recognize this very quickly (I have no doubt that they do too). But, having recognized this, it’s often the case that we’ll remain friends, and often very good friends, or at least people I’m happy to hang out with.
But I’ve also had female fuckbuddies – an arrangement based on a mutual enjoyment of sex for the sake of it, with certain ground rules that if anyone more suitable as life-partner material comes along, the arrangement ceases. One of these fuckbuddies remains one of my closest friends to this day, and my wife is fully aware of our past – but I’ve promised her we won’t revive our arrangement, and I’ve kept that promise (which is pretty easy to do, as she lives sixty miles away, and I strongly doubt that our casual sex, while enjoyable enough at the time, can compare with what I get now – I certainly don’t intend to put this to the test).
So how does this fit the alpha/beta system? I don’t treat women like shit, so I don’t fit the alpha stereotype – but I’ve also frequently wanted sex for the sake of it, and have found partners who feel exactly the same way, with no guilt or shame on either side.
I don’t know what “growing up in the matriarchy” means in your context. Not least because my experience was almost totally opposite – I grew up in a large family where the men and women were equally strong-willed, and this taught me (not least via plain common sense) that treating people with respect (or “being nice”) absolutely is the way to succeed in life. “Pursuing status relentlessly” seems to me to be a certain formula for dashed hopes and unrelenting misery, not least because you’re not going to get a lasting relationship of any value if you treat your would-be partner like shit. Unless she’s some kind of masochist.
Women? What, every single woman? I’m not a woman, so obviously this is second-hand, but that’s not remotely been my experience. When my wife and my last girlfriend fucked around, they did so because they enjoyed sex, not because they wanted to be socially and physically intimidated by their partners – in fact, I get the strong impression that this would have been a major turn-off. Not least because as highly intelligent and strongly independent-minded women, what would they get out of hanging around with people who regard them with contempt, when there are so many more agreeable alternatives?
No, absolutely not. You be respectful and become friends with women because that’s the decent thing to do, and it helps make you a rounded human being. In the overwhelming majority of cases, sex will not follow, either naturally or otherwise – but that shouldn’t be a problem. I don’t want to have sex with any of my male friends, so the fact that I don’t want to have sex with the vast majority of my female friends really shouldn’t be a concept that’s especially hard to grasp.
I don’t think he’s sex-starved, I think he’s emotionally stunted.
Well, this is where you and I differ. I do like women. A lot. And I strongly suspect that it’s the fact that I so clearly like them and treat them as human beings that accounts for the fact that I’ve rarely wanted for sex – and in most cases repeated, increasingly high-quality sex.
Again, you say “women” as though it’s something they all do. But as the many, many first-hand accounts in this thread attests, backed up by my own extensive experience of talking frankly and honestly with my wife, girlfriends and numerous female friends, this simply isn’t true of such a huge proportion that your sweeping claims are meaningless. Believe it or not, a quite a few women don’t want sex at all, and others are very happy with a monogamous relationship, provided the sex is of sufficiently high quality.
One thing you people never seem to understand, because you simply don’t have either the experience or the mindset to grasp it, is that high-quality sex with the same partner over years and decades, can be infinitely more mind-blowing than casual sex with a different partner every night. The challenge is hooking up with the right person – one of the reasons my wife’s first marriage didn’t work out was because of sexual incompatibility with her first husband: they married too young and were too inexperienced. Which is why she very sensibly spent her late 20s and early 30s “riding the cock carousel” – not because she sought male dominance (I get the impression that she wasn’t especially choosy at that point in her life) but because she simply wanted to catch up with the experiences that she missed out on earlier. And having had those experiences, and having found a far more compatible partner, she’s been very happy to settle down.
What do you mean by “all of the sex”? I’ve had tons of sex over the last twenty years, most of it of extremely high quality, and I don’t remotely think that I’m either an alpha male or “low status”.
If you genuinely believe any of that, you’re looking at decades of increasingly desperate loneliness, and it will be your own deluded fault.
Like so much else that you write, this is so demonstrably untrue as to be hilarious. One of the happiest marriages I know is between my brother and sister-in-law, both geeky academics in a particular specialised field – they met as fellow students, they did their PhDs at the same time, they teach similar subjects at universities of similar status and have the same circle of friends. I’m really struggling to think of any area in which they’re not completely equal – and of course they treat each other with total respect, because that’s how successful and lasting relationships work.
I’m afraid the only brutal reality here is that you’ve been gulping the MRA/PUA Kool-Aid by the gallon, oblivious of the fact that these are people who by their very nature are wildly unsuccessful in and dissatisfied with their lives, and whose genuinely practical knowledge of how women think could be written on the back of a postage stamp in blunt crayon. So what could you possibly learn from them that’s of any lasting value?
Cassandra:
“And once again, even if that was true, you can’t just fake status. No woman is going to think you’re super-mega-alpha and want to fuck you just because you’re an asshole and you try to boss her around.”
But you’re basically agreeing with my (and the entire game/pua) thesis, that women’s raw sexual attraction (and not relationship type attraction) is for men with status. Where we differ is that you (like most women) simply believe this to be righteous and that betas should just accept their low station in life and move on.
Game is not just about bossing women around or faking status. But about actually achieving status, self improvement and being more dominant/unavailable in social and sexual interaction. (And if you can’t get alpha action then be omega and avoid the beta path which only gives wome what they want and feeds the matriarchal beast.) About ignoring “what women say” (about wanting equality, sensitivity, etc) and reacting to what women do (have sex with alphas and bad boys). And in the short term you can fake status to some extent, i.e. “fake it til you make it”. The point of game in the short term isn’t to turn betas into uber alphas, but just to get more of the action than they get now and raise their sociosexual status. Alphas under matriarchy get to feast on most of the women/sex, but at least with game you have lots of men now challenging the structure and exposing it in the process. Status is not static but dynamic. Status only exists because the group acknowledges it and allows it to exist. Men have been clueless as to the true sociosexual wealth distribution, and game is about raising “ass consciousness” so that the feminist/alpha structure can be brought down in the long term.
What we now know about female sexual psychology and the sociosexual marketplace will have wide ranging implications for society in the coming years. Feminism/matriarchy forces “men” (aside from alphas) to be equal to women, thus forcing us to be unattractive and low status. Betas have to share their rights, jobs, money, power, roles in society etc with women – and are thus emasculated and reduced to proxy-women themselves, and (straight) women aren’t attracted to women or weakness. While the alphas somehow manage to wiggle out of this and are rewarded with copious amounts of young/pretty (feminine) sex partners who simply spread their legs and make no demands about feminism to such men. IOW, feminism is a sexual utopia for women and alphas, but slavery for betas.
Perhaps society should give ALL men (not just alphas) much more status, rights, money and power than women. IOW, society should be male dominated. No man should have to follow feminist rules. Then most men (and not just alphas) would be considered sexy and high-status by most women. This is not the world most men want, it would be much better if women were attracted to/respected equal men – but this isn’t how women are hardwired.
Calling Ami – “women are hardwired” alert! 🙂
No. She isn’t. “Even if that were true” =/= “What you are saying is true.”
Reading Is Fundamental.
-Kyrie
“-what’s the point of sex? (outside reproduction, which is a very tiny part of it thanks to contraceptions and abortions)
-Is the guy who married Megan Fox also a beta? (assuming they’re monogamous)
-You explained me why no sex is better than monogamous relationship. But that wasn’t exactly my question. How about poly/open relationships? Certainly, it should provide you the best of both: regular sex without decreasing your value since you can still increase your something-count.”
Kyrie – the point of sex in the age of birth control and feminism is pleasure, happiness and sociosexual status. Women themselves view the men who have lots of sex as more cool and attractive simply because they have a higher notch count. IOW, sexual partners gives a man status, and status gives him partners. When women (including feminists) are angry we see their true feelings: the men who “can’t get laid”, who have little dicks, who are “fags” and pussies, dorks etc – i.e. beta and omega traits are viewed to have less value by women, whereas the alpha traits are glorified. Women (more specifically the female sex drive) control the wealth distribution within the sociosexual market. Women determine ultimately who is alpha, beta and omega via the sexual acts, the quality, how feminine they are – for the various men. Women want to be feminine and sexy and give sex to the alphas, whereas women only show the betas/omegas the harsh, feminist, mannish side and very little or no sex compared to what alphas get..
The guy married to Megan Fox is of course an alpha (has high sociosexual value to be able to get her). Even if she was not rich and famous, any male who could fuck a woman that looks like that is an alpha, and by virtue of the status achieved as a result, lots of similar and lesser looking (but still pretty/young) women would be chasing to fuck him because of this. Female “preselection” in action, which is why game teaches men to have hot female friends even if you can’t fuck them. The other women see you with hot women and then chase you as a result. I highly doubt any guy who can get the likes of Megan Fox is monogamous with her – he can if wishes but he doesn’t have to – that’s the point. And I’m sure he’s banged tons of women before her, and will definitely be able to bang tons of women after her (he’s already proved to women he can get the top amongst them).
Poly/open relationships are high status if the man is the one allowed to bang on the side, but the wife/gf has to remain faithful and the good wife/mother. IOW, to have both the madonna and the whores. This is the setup most alphas have, since the wives/gf’s of alphas know that women are constantly throwing themselves at such a man. Tiger Woods, Kobe Bryant, Bill Clinton, JFK and on and on – their wives know and accept they have sex with lots of different women on the side. And most of the women will never consider this arrangement degrading, but a compliment, as women’s true desire is to be in the harem of the alpha male.
and wtf is “raw sexual attraction, not relationship type attraction?”
just shaking my head here.
vsh42, do lesbians exist?
When you fall in love with someone, their “status” rises in your eyes. So in a way every man I’ve rooted was a super-dooper-alpha. 😉
Scratch that. Have you ever met a woman, vsh?
belledame – that a few ugly/old powerful women have a younger guy or two with a granny fetish is not the same thing as alpha/groupie scenario. We’re primates after all, and women (especially those with the highest evolutionary value – young, pretty, fertile) are hardwired to give themselves to the alpha males. IOW, all women are groupies to varying degrees. That’s why we need a society that gives all men (and not just alphas) much more power/status than women – so that most men (not just alphas) would be attractive to women. Feminism/matriarchy forces most men to be equal (betas) to women – thus allowing the few men who are superior (alphas) to clean up on all of the sex/women.
belledame222, I’m pretty sure the answer to that question is no.
In other words, no matter what evidence is presented to you, you will continue to insist on your world view.
belledame – raw sexual attraction means the woman just want to fuck you and give you the hot sex without expecting relationships, money, dates, etc – ie. the way alphas have it. Alphas only have committed relationships (wife, gf, etc) when they want to have kids, etc – while still having sex on the side.
lesbians exist – hot femme ones in my fantasies. lol jk. Of course they exist, but the lesbian or gay sociosexual marketplace is not really something I can speak to, the dynamics are different to hetero.
magpie – a man’s status can only rise if the woman falls in love with him but he doesn’t fall in love with her, and she gives him free sex (not expecting committed relationship before giving sex) while he continues to bang other women and never gives her anything.
Love and relationships in the age of feminism is low-status for men – beta boys who mow the lawn while the woman really wants to bang alphas. There is no love – women don’t love men, they love status. Relationships have become too gynocentric and laiden with feminist rules – none of the male’s needs/wants are taken into account anyway. Also, there is far too steep of a sociosexual distribution amongst men – you have alphas bangin hundreds of women – there’s no sense in getting “slowed down” by having committed relationships. Much more sense for men to invest in themselves – in working to achieve status and power – and then reap the rewards (lots of hot women). To paraphrase Chris Rock, “if you chase women you’ll lose all of your money and women – if you chase money/power you’ll get money and women.” get money, fuck bitches.
You can’t even speak to hetero ones, dude. You haven’t presented evidence beyond your fever dreams, which have no credibility outside of your head.
In other words, lets take women’s rights away so all men can have guaranteed sex with whoever they want.
Hahahahahahahahahaha…No. Sex is not a fundamental right and I couldn’t give two shits about some guy’s status, all that matters to me are my rights. Go fuck yourself dude.
There is no love – women don’t love men, they love status.
Okay, we’ve already established that you’ve never met lesbians or women. At this point, I’m pretty sure you’ve never met people. THERE IS NO LOVE, you guys. No one, anywhere, in the history of the world, has ever loved anyone else. Because that is totally a reasonable and thought-out view of reality!