Implications of the Apex Fallacy

by zed on January 10, 2011

Elusive Wapiti recently mentioned the Apex Fallacy in this comment.

For those new to the MM, this is such an important concept that it probably needs some explaining. Understanding it will explain a lot of the issues men deal with today.

First, one needs to understand female hypergamy. For those who may not have yet run across the concept and had it explained to them, I’m sure that some of our loyal readers will provide good links. What it boils down to is that women generally only consider men for potential mates who are least equal to them, and preferably above them, on the wealth/status pyramid. They are always “looking up”, never down, so men at their own level and below are simply invisible and women do not even realize that they exist – except to the extent that such men annoy them by actually seeking their attention. As many have said, most women absolutely hate beta males.

If you take such statements by women like “MEN run the world”, that is true for them because the only men they can see are the ones who do “run the world.” Statements like “most CEOs are men” are true both in fact and in perception. (The reasons this is so are beyond the scope of this particular essay.) However, the implication of the converse that “most men are CEOs” is obviously not true to men. It does seem to be true for a lot of women, because most of the men that they can see are CEOs. While the women are looking upward and only see CEOs, the men at their level and below see a lot of nose hair.

The old cultural practice for dealing with female hypergamy was the generalized practice of giving most jobs to men, and creating social roles that demanded men work – by incorporating the “provider” role into their male identity. Thus, most marriages ended up being hypergamy because a man with a job could provide a much better life than a woman without one. There was also the benefit that with normal female hypergamic tendencies mostly neutralized, people tended to sort themselves out in the dating/mating pool along lines of compatible social class. It was rare, for example, for the scion of a wealthy banking/finance/business family to marry the daughter of a waitress or coal miner. The coal miner’s daughter (thank you, Loretta Lynn) would most likely marry another coal miner, and living on the income someone else made by crawling into a hole in the ground every day, and risking death every day plus eventual death due to black lung, was far preferable to having to make that income herself.

The fairly large middle class gave women a lot more options. The daughter of a shopkeeper, for example, could get a job as a receptionist in a doctor’s office, and end up snagging the doc and retiring. Even another reasonably successful shopkeeper allowed her at least a lateral move.

However, as women entered the workforce en masse, their fixation point on the wealth/status pyramid drifted upward. With each increase in her income, the number of men at and above her own level shrank geometrically. If I felt like putting in the time I would create a diagram, but I don’t, so I’m going to rely on people’s imaginations. Imagine a pyramid stacked with 10 levels. The first level is 10×10 or 100 potential mates. Up one level and it is 9×9, or 81 potential mates, then 8×8 or 64 potential mates – all the way to the top layer where there is only 1 man.

A woman who is herself at level 7, and will only consider men at levels 8, 9, and 10, restricts herself to a universe of 1+4+9 potential mates, or 14 total. A woman at level 2, has 1+4+9+16+25+36+49+64+81=285 potential mates – more than 20X what the woman at level 7 has. Given the fact that men are not, as a general rule, hypergamous, any woman at or below his level is a potential mate, so a man at level 7 has 16+25+36+49+64+81+100=371 potential mates, or 26.5X as many potential mates as a woman at his own level has.

It’s just not fair!!! (Evil grin)

So, when EW says that alpha men have benefited a great deal from feminism, this is what he is talking about. The men at the top of the wealth/status pyramid only have each other to really compete with, while all the men lower down have to compete not only with each other, but also with the apex men who do not need a woman’s own wealth, because he has his own, and instead may opt to trade his wealth power/status for a woman’s beauty power/status. Male doctors are still more than happy to marry their receptionists – if they are cute. But, no female doctor would be caught dead marrying the orderly who pushes gurneys around.

The situation for women is reversed. A woman at level 7 only has 14 potential mates, but 371 competitors. Given that she spent the years while her own beauty power and fertility were at their peak chasing career and riding the alpha cock carousel, while she may be a 7 on the wealth/status pyramid, she has dropped to a 3 on the beauty/status pyramid. However, since

  • a) she got used to riding the alpha cock carousel when she was younger and much hotter than she is now, her ability to pull men who were 9s for one night stands have made her believe that she is a 9. So, she is still going to try to enter the pyramid at at least level 7, skipping levels 4, 5, and 6 entirely. and
  • b) men in general are not in the least bit interested in her accomplishments, and do not see them in any way as adding to her SMV,

“the best she can get” today is much less than the best she could have gotten years before, so all her chasing of achievement has not only been a waste of time, it actually resulted in her throwing away all the advantages she did have at one time.

Wah!!! It’s not fair!!! There are no good men!!!!!

Previous post:

Next post: