Feminists and Alpha Males vs. Civilization

by Female Masculinist on April 29, 2010

One of the big puzzles of feminism is how it ever got off the ground at all. Men run the world and always have; men are smarter, stronger, and more aggressive than women; feminists could never have gotten anything they wanted if men hadn’t permitted them to have it. So why did men give up their position of power?

This is only partly answered by the inventions and discoveries (made by men) that made female independence remotely possible. Birth control methods were unreliable until a few decades ago, when scientific advances by men improved them. Before a man discovered penicillin, sexual experimentation could lead to horrific incurable diseases; the well-founded terror of syphilis, not “men’s need to control women’s sexuality”, was what used to keep the unmarried chaste. And before the many machines men invented, a lot of work required more musclepower than women have; their engaging in it was impossible before men made it easier. Not to mention that men’s labor-saving inventions created enough prosperity to create more jobs that were not back-breaking manual labor. I would have a great deal more respect for feminists if any of them ever thanked men for these gifts which have made all of their current privileges possible.

The reason men allowed feminism to progress is that alpha males are not harmed by feminism, and it is alpha males who have the power to grant women the privileges of feminism.

In fact, alpha males often benefit from feminism. If women have contraception and can sleep around without censure, this means the alpha males have harems who don’t whelp children he will then have to support. If women have disposable income of their own, they can and will buy piles of junk from companies owned and headed by alpha males. If women are permitted to vote, they will vote for the alpha males who 1) make them tingle and 2) promise to steal lots of stuff from the beta males and give it to them. This is what motivated alpha males in government to allow such atrocities as default mother custody, alimony, ludicrous “domestic abuse” laws, and sex discrimination lawsuits. Really, women were only given the vote because alpha males in government knew that they would win the next election or two based on the gratitude of the females they enfranchised, i.e. women would vote for the men who gave them the vote. That another decade down the road they would have to find more bread and circuses to trade for votes, and that allowing the irrational sex to vote would progressively damage the country over the years, did not concern them; politicians do not take a long view of consequences, they care only about winning the next election. In the next couple of decades we will see politicians extending the vote to twelve-year-olds so that said twelve-year-olds will vote for them.

PUA websites frequently conflate the terms “beta male” and “omega male” (or “mangina”). This is a grave error. A mangina is a doormat. A beta male is not the dominant stud who can melt a woman’s panties off with a glance, but he is far from a doormat. Furthermore, beta males are the foundation of civilization.

Really, civilization could get along without alpha males if we were not hierarchical creatures; psychologically, we need to have a figurehead playing the part of leader, even if their role is ceremonial, which it often is. The fact is that beta males not only do most of the work, they make most of the discoveries and advances. Alpha males don’t do this because they’re too busy convincing everyone around them that they are alphas. Most of the time, the only useful functions alpha males serve is to hold the ceremonial place of “leader” and to make ginas tingle.

Polygyny and female hypergamy is the natural human social system. Women will claim that they want a man all to themselves, but what they want is the wealthy handsome playboy from the Harlequin romances to stop playing the field and commit to them exclusively. When he won’t, which is almost always, women will and do settle for sharing one alpha male with several other women. On a personal level, this is more in their interest; an odalisque in a harem with two dozen other women will be better provided for than a peasant’s only wife, and so will her children.

It is an irony much remarked on by PUAs that the “sexual liberation” of women has lead to a harem system: “Women want the top man…so the top man fucks lots of women. That’s right – the sexual revolution, feminism, etc has resulted in a return to harems. Women, at the mercy of their own emotions, are volunteering for the modern-day equivalent of harems.”

But while the sluts and alphas are having fun, this is not a good system. Polygamous societies are notoriously politically unstable. They are prone to civil wars. Further, they tend to have high levels of poverty and crime and very little scientific advance or artistic achievement.

The most that any government (authoritarian or otherwise) can do to control the behavior of its citizens is to threaten them with death. From an evolutionary psychological perspective, as Rubin himself (2002, 120–21) recognizes, the threat of death does not carry much weight for young men in highly polygynous societies faced with the distinct possibility of total reproductive failure because of a lack of reproductive opportunities. From the perspective of the genes, total reproductive failure—not leaving any offspring—is death. Thus, for the same reasons that polygyny (and a consequent lack of reproductive opportunities) inclines men to murder, rape and assault, despite the distinct possibility of state criminal penalty, the same desperate situation can lead them to wage civil wars for potential reproductive opportunities (Kanazawa 2007). There is very little the state can do to control the behavior of young men in polygynous societies even with the threat of death.

Evolutionary Psychological Foundations of Civil Wars by Satoshi Kanazawa

Why? Well, because of their treatment of the people who make both social stability and cultural advance possible: beta males. As Roger Devlin pointed out, “No one has ever discovered a better way of employing [young men's] time and energies than by making fathers of them.” With children of their own to raise and provide for – or at least the reasonable hope of such – young men will educate themselves, work hard, and submit to mind-blowingly dreary jobs instead of robbing, rioting, and raping. (Note that those three activities are common pastimes of young Muslim men, the ones always referred to by left-wing journalists as “youths”.)

By denying the majority of males any stake in civilization, any incentive for good behavior, feminists and alpha males are conspiring to create a world in which violent crime is commonplace and scientific advance is doomed.

Note: For some pro-beta material, check out these links:

The Roissysphere and its moral and intellectual objectives: a proposed manifesto

The Beta Revolution

The Alpha Male, the Beta, and Pitcairn Island, or Watch Your Back

Why the Beta Male Exists

{ 11 comments… read them below or add one }

Human-Stupidity October 8, 2010 at 09:31

Very interesting. A few serious doubts, though.

I wonder what support you have for your theory that alpha males conspired with feminists to exploit beta males.

Very interesting your quotes from Kanazawa. Now, the problem is not polygyny. The problem is unsatisfied men who don’t get laid. Or cannot get a family.

A very serious problem that is hitting China with its selective female infanticide and lack of women. Also modern serial monogamy is creating a lack of young nubile women, and an excess of divorced older women.

Now there could be other solutions to solve polygyny’s problems;
* Prostitution can keep men happy and satisfied.

* Polyandry several men share one women

* Changing the sex ratio. Having more women then men.
Isn’t that what feminists always wanted? And it will be paradise for men. Alphas get 10 women, betas 1-2, all others have to settle for one.

Food for thought.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
J October 18, 2010 at 07:01

Alpha and Beta males. Hmmmm, lets see, I am what many men and women would call an ALPHA! I use to be a beta, I guess, whatever you think it is..is different to me. Most “alpha” men, are BETAS! usually, they have something everyother man does not! For example, I can gab at just about anyone, physically, I am no small specimen! I am athletic, not bad looking, but not Brad Pitt. I have many options to attain anything……and all this nonsense about alphas VS betas is very disturbing. AND WRONG!

You are missing the point! A man you call a beta is lacking a fundamental “element” in his chemistry! Many things in chemistry will show you that common everyday things, if manipulated correctly, can make our life a nightmare. If used correctly, they can be very useful…in my liking..BOTH! But I digress!

Speaking of chemistry, you my friend have a serious two elements missing in yours! Skill and confidence! If you develop your talents you whine about as unvalued into SKILL….YOU WILL GET NOTICED! In turn, this will make confidence…WHICH IS UNSPOKEN!!! No more secrets dude.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 15
Nico November 17, 2010 at 01:13

I like this paper.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
C.V. Compton Shaw January 14, 2011 at 18:49

Thank you for the interesting and informative original article. What I have noticed is that women and weak base men tend to form political-economic-social alliances to dominate,denigrate and exploit men who have character and self respect. You will see the same in the work place and in the scholastic environment in the USA . The same, unfortunately, is now occurring in the US Military. The same has and will continue to result in the socio-political-economic decline of the USA and other nations which allow the same to occur.
As I have stated repeatedly: “Women, at least American women, have little tolerance for any man who has any self respect and/or character. They will, collectively and individually, discriminate against, denigrate, and oppress the same. They seem to only tolerate men who are base and weak.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Anonymous January 31, 2011 at 18:13

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 23
69Geeforce February 11, 2011 at 16:28

The days are coming when alpha males will not be able to get sex from all these stupid hoes without a pimp coming in from behind and collecting a hefty fee out of their asses so that them hoes get paid.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
DC Handgun Info April 13, 2011 at 12:42

Dear Anonymous, above (“This was obviously written by a less- than beta male…”): Curb your ignorance by reading Female Masculinist’s blog, malechauvinist.blogspot.com. She explicitly identifies herself in her “nom de plume” above: FEMALE + MASCULINIST (pro-male). She is a lesbian who’s been screwed over by the women in her life, and who supports male supremacy! It’s awful and stereotypical that all you can do is insult her personally without offering any counterarguments.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
National Enquirer January 24, 2012 at 16:58

Why does a man need to assume a female identity in order to write about masculinism and misogyny? Inquiring minds would like to know!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Worthless Bitch April 10, 2012 at 22:42

So where are all these alphas and their harems? This is great theory, but your article makes it seems like a few men are monopolizing all of the women, while in fact many if not most people are living in contented monogamy. And I’m sick of the alpha-beta debate and the moronic phrase “gina tingle.” It is no less offensive than saying “men think with their dicks” or other misandrist drivel. Most on the manosphere would call my husband a “beta provider” because he didn’t “pump and dump” me and treats me well. If that makes him a beta then being an alpha must suck. Like women saying “where have all the good men gone?” well, the same place all the good women are, in stable, loving, and often traditional marriages.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
Shredder September 19, 2012 at 12:32

Well, I guess author to be American. In continental Europe beta-males have won. Now you have dull societies with implicit control, enforced by neighbors over neigbors. But you have more humane treatment for criminals and laws tend to be applicable to everybody in roughly comparable way.

In contrast, US and Mexico are examples of countries where alphas have won. You can see huge difference in income, laws apply differently to different castes of society and so on. But US seems to still be powerful state. And this is thanks to one thing alphas are good for: it is war, plunder and rule by power.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Hans August 28, 2013 at 14:06

Mr Shredder does not know where he talks about.

In Europe women prefer men from Islamic Macho cultures.
The decline of Europe will happen in a much faster pace then the USS

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 7 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: