an alternative theory to Hypergamy ™

Okay, looking how so-called MGTOW’s get all but-assed hurt when someone dares question “libertarianism” in a similar fashion to how a so-called feminist loses her shit when someone questions her religious belief in patriarchy, well I suppose some red pill motherfucker is going to lose his shit for offering an alternative to his precious hypergamy…

…and now that I’ve given a trigger warning, or was it a pre-emptive fuck you….

Okay, first things first….

A single man is often told to “stay in his league.” By feminist’s and man-o-spherians alike. Well, if two groups that hate each other agree, it must be right, right?

First of all, this begs the issue, what exactly is a league? How the fuck does one know one is in someone else’s league? Is this a sports team thing? Seriously, how does one know…

Now, let’s use an analogy,applying to jobs-and I must be one evillle objectifying weirdo to compare meeting womyn to applying to jobs but here goes…

Let’s say there is one job that pays $10.50 per hour and involves hard physical labor and then there is another job that pays $16.25 per hour and one should have a degree.

It would seem it would be easier to get the first job, right? Less barriers to entry and a lower payscale would make it seem that the second job has their pick of candidates.

Okay, let’s say there are two women, both 23 and let’s assume single because they are on a dating site after all. Let’s say one is a bit overweight and what a PUA would call a 5.5 or 6. Let’s say another is slim and what a PUA would call an 8 or an 8.5. If a man is to message both of these women, which is most likely to reply? One with a market based, or “league” based mentality would say the 6 is more likely to reply back. One with this mentality is likely to say the 6 gets less messages, therefore, being less desirable is more likely to answer back….

Let’s go back to the jobs analogy. If the man is unemployed and applies to both jobs, which is he more likely to get called back to an interview? If we look upon things with a one-dimensional market mentality, we would expect that the man is more likely to be called back for the $10 an hour job.

But is this empirically the case?

Let’s say the man on the dating site hears back from the 8 but not the 6. How could this happen? Did he just have a huge stroke of luck? Perhaps, both the 6 and the 8 get enough messages that they can be picky. Perhaps, regardless of the number of messages, the 6 is waiting for a man whose profile picture she likes and is over 6 ft tall. Perhaps, this man is 5’9 and didn’t lie on the profile. The 6 merely passed him by. The 8 might merely prefer a man taller than her, she is 5’4 and after surpassing this height,she looks for other things. Perhaps she liked the man’s taste in music or his European fashion sense. If the man in this example is able to arrange a date with the 8, she might share what she liked about his profile or he might be able to find out with a question or two. Likely, he will never find the reasons why the 6 passed him by….

Back to the jobs analogy…

The man applies for the 10 buck and the 16 buck job. Let’s say the 10 buck an hour job passes the man by but the 16 buck job calls him in for an interview. Perhaps the $10 an hour job is waiting for bigger guys with stronger backs because they think smaller guys will have more difficulty with the job and be more likely to quit. Maybe the $16 an hour job reveals in the interview that while the applicant doesn’t have a degree, the applicant has taken relevant coursework. Perhaps the coursework is so relevant that it trumps a degree as most degree holders don’t have the relevant coursework.

Okay, now these are both made up examples….

Maybe not indicators of the real world, and I suppose someone would say even if both examples played out somewhere, we’d have to study it and say does this play out over and over again, creating a measurable trend?

In the wikipedia definition of hypergamy, it states that women marry men who are wealthier or of a higher status….

A feminist will tell you that is patriarchy in action. An MRA will tell you a man has to shackle himself to a role he might despise to be a desirable partner. I’m not here to dispute the wiki definition of hypergamy nor to wrangle with feminists or MRA’s on their cherished dogma. But I do believe that what red pillers describe may be based on some anectdotal evidence but not empirical evidence. There is empirical evidence showing that many men are unable to find partners though. In fact there are more unmarried/never married men than women.

pt. 2 coming if I feel like it…

13 thoughts on “an alternative theory to Hypergamy ™

  1. Also, the 8 could not know/not think she’s an 8, due to “ugly duckling” syndrome or being a humble person. Or the 8 might go on a date simply because she’s nicer, and more willing to give a chance to a guy. Some of the guys back at Spawny’s Space and other blogs have observed that women who are in the 7-9 range often decline an offer to date in kinder ways than those who are 3-6.

      1. Truth.
        Why do you think is it that some women, usually hotter ones, are nicer when turning down offers?

        I personally just don’t see any reason to be mean…it takes guts to put yourself out there in hopes of getting a date, and studies have shown that being rejected (in any form: dates, jobs, college acceptance, etc) actually fires the same triggers in our brains as if we were physically harmed. Hurting others is immoral, so one should make a rejection as polite and kind as possible to avoid causing more pain. The fact that some women actually make it worse by adding in humiliation or scorn is just disturbing.

      2. I really have no idea. I think most womyn are mean spirited and cruel, in fact when I went to sex clubs and had limited success, I had to drink heavily. One of the last times I was there when I didn’t drink a drop, I felt weird and out of place.

      3. I’m glad. Hope that they helped to satisfy something in you. Knowledge is a good thing to have, but it’s even better if it results in a new/improved view of the world.

  2. That will do it…then again I really did not have a sanguine view of humanity from the get go. BTW Stoner are you a fan of Forbidden…I found some old cassettes / cds I thought were gone forever and Forbidden and Metal Church were among them. Hard to believe that music is 30 yrs old now.

  3. Leagues are one of the dumbest concepts ever invented. They’re just absurd.

    The easiest way to disprove it them is sit at a table with 5 people, and get them to rate celebrities. What is a “ten” to John, is a mere “six” to Bob, and vice versa. Works the same way for women.

    One woman’s “cute guy” is another woman’s “uggo”. And then there’s preferences and personality which change the variation even more.

    The only time I’d recognize a league as being real would be if we’re talking about Matt Forney going after victoria’s secret models. But that’s an absurd example as

    – People like him are rare (very few people are ugly & so fat & so stupid at the same time).
    – And then the odds of meeting a victoria’s secret model for such a guy would be like getting hit by a meteor, it’s unlikely to happen

    So he wouldn’t even get the chance to hit on one (i.e. a woman obviously outside of his league). In the real world, 99% of people meet people who are within their league.

    It’s not like you have 60 year old obese men hitting on 18 year old models. That just doesn’t happen. In the real world, people tend to meet & socialize with people within their range.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s