Commenter days of game offered the “normie” objection to female hypergamy that I’ve come across from other readers in previous posts on the topic: specifically, both sexes want the best deal they can get in the mate market, so “hypergamy” isn’t limited to one sex.
I don’t understand the manosphere’s interest in “hypergamy.” It’s the most obvious thing… girls are looking for the best opportunity. That’s not girls… that’s everyone.
And then: Eggs are expensive, sperm are cheap. Got it.
So… girls have more bargaining power, and thus… a lot of guys lose (due to low SMV)… and girls hop around (because they can)… as that egg is in demand (until it isn’t).
Why does this need a billion hours of analysis?
This particular research continues the pattern of underwhelm:
A seller with a high-demand product (her pussy), that can find more and more markets (online)… can charge a higher price, and/or burn more potential buyers (for fun or profit).
Econ 101.
When I see guys that get frothy about MUUHHH HYPERGUUHHHMEH… I increasingly read all that as signals of beta reality/paranoia. And a waste of our time as men to go over this again and again.
The cool guy get the girl. Dur.
For a simple concept, a lot of men (and women) dismiss female hypergamy out of hand as having no basis in reality. And that reality is this: There is no equivalent male hypergamy to female hypergamy. “Everyone is looking for the best possible deal” is a trivially true statement which obfuscates the fact that men and women look for mate market deals with differing intensities of commitment and with differing emphases on what constitutes a good deal. These differences are so profound in both a quantitative and qualitative sense that they may as well be representing totally different mate selection strategies (which they are).
I’ll quote myself here on the subject of “male hypergamy”, before illustrating the Fake Comparison of male and female sexual market bargaining using a car dealership analogy,
Some readers would demur that hypergamy isn’t sex-specific, pointing out that men also strive to find the best possible lover they can get.
My rebuttal is two-part: One, men don’t date up based on social, economic, or occupational status. Men, if and when they are able to date up, do so based almost entirely on women’s looks. We’ve all seen or experienced how men trade up when they’ve come into a financial or social status windfall — younger, hotter, tighter women, as the GBFM would put it. So male hypergamy — what is more precisely termed “physiogamy” — is different in kind from female hypergamy.
Second, male physiogamy is also different in degree from female hypergamy. Women are biologically compelled to aim for a man higher in SMV from themselves, and this compulsion is strong enough that many women will accept long bouts of solitude before settling for a man at their own SMV level (usually at the moment when The Wall first looms on the horizon). When men aim higher, they a. don’t aim quite as high as women aim and b. won’t opt out of the sexual or marital market (like women will often do), if they don’t get everything they want in a lover.
Another point of difference between male and female “dating up” limbic algorithms which I alluded to in that quote but didn’t clarify is this: Male SMV is largely contextual and relational. Social, occupational, financial, and prestige status have to be measured against a backdrop of other men all competing along the same metrics that women use to assess male mate worth. Women only have to look young and pretty, which can be accomplished with or without other women to use for comparison purposes.
This has an impact on how each sex dates up. Men will upgrade to a hotter younger babe after they have spent considerable time improving their SMV, either through amassing resources or social/psychosexual capital (Game). Men’s ability to date up is thus limited by the time and energy commitments required to do so. Men respond to this sex-differentiated mate market reality by de-emphasizing dating “up” and settling for dating “as good as possible for right now”.
In contrast, women have to commit relatively little time and energy to improving their SMV, largely because their mate value is set at conception and there isn’t much they can do to improve upon what they were given by their parents. There’s no point working hard to improve that which has only a tiny margin for improvement (unless we’re talking about a fatty who could slim down and gain 5 SMV points). What this means in practice is that women can spend a lot more time and energy “dating up” while their looks are holding up. Their window for primo action is smaller than it is for men, but within that window they have a lot more leeway to entertain suitors and hold out for the best, even if the best is a cad illusion who offers empty promises of commitment (the age-old risk that women take when they hold out for mr right aka mr beta bux and mr alpha fux in one man). Dating up comes more naturally to women because it comes more easily; as long as they aren’t old fat or ugly, women can leverage their looks almost as an afterthought to attract attention from a lot of men, both low and high SMV.
The analogy of female hypergamy is this:
A man goes to a car dealership. He’s a sensible fellow, and just needs a commuter vehicle. He sees a cherry red Corvette center stage. He salivates. He walks over, runs his hand across the finish. Maybe he asks to sit in it and dream, gripping the leather steering wheel. But he knows he can’t afford it, so he quickly focuses his thoughts and leaves fantasyland behind, to browse the boring sedans. He consoles himself with the hope that maybe, someday, he’ll have made it and can return with enough to buy that Corvette. In the meantime, he haggles like a champ with the seller to drive down the price of his sedan and maximize the amenities at his budget. No undercarriage rust protection, thank you! Finally, he signs on the dotted line, and drives off content that he got the best deal he could, and as he’s heading home he thoughtfully itemizes all the good things about his new car. The smell! The climate control! The gas mileage! He’s happy for himself.
A woman goes to a car dealership. She’s a sensible lady (for a lady), and just needs a commuter vehicle. She sees a cherry red Corvette center stage. She salivates. She walks over, runs her hand across the finish, sits in the car, applies lipstick in the rearview mirror, lays across both front seats in a languid pose, asks to take it for a test drive, motors giddily around town for an hour until the seller has to gently chide her to call it a day, returns and labors some more over the Corvette, sighs heavily as a penny drops out of her purse, shuffles over to the boring sedan and gives it a perfunctory once-over, noting with depressing self-encouragement that it gets 35 mpg on the highway. She haggles with the seller for five grueling hours before announcing she needs more time to think on it. (meanwhile, the seller wonders why she’s shit testing him.) On her way out, she stops by the Corvette again, for one last flirtatious hand graze. Over the next six months, she stops by the dealership weekly to cavort with the Corvette, until her current rust bucket dies in an intersection to a thousand honking cars and sheer embarrassment drags her shamed butt back to the dealer to grudgingly trade in her dead clunker for the boring beta sedan. She resents her new car the second she rolls off the lot in it, and abuses it daily with cigarette butts, spilled coffee, and unchanged oil, until she has to repeat the process, except next time with even less money in her pocket, which forces her to browse the sub-compacts. Oh lord, what will her friends think?! They’ll know she settled because she waited too long. Maybe she can get a bike instead and rationalize it as environmental activism. One night, in a horny and desperate mood, she sneaks into the dealership and fucks the Corvette’s stick shift. She slumps spent, in the love puddle she left in the bucket seat, and whimpers softly for a romance that will never be.
***
I hope that clears things up.
[…] Is Male Hypergamy Real? (No) […]
LikeLike
Nailed it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Women want the Corvette and in waiting too long, end up with the Chevette.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have to disagree with this post. Eggs only matter if pregnancy is desired. For recreational sex, which is most sex, pregnancy is off the table.
What matters more is that sex with alpha is the most desired. Women’s arousal spikes higher than the normal male desire for sex. From a demand side, there is more desire for a particular alpha than alpha desire for a particular woman.
Alphas can pick and choose. There are far fewer alphas than there are women. There are far fewer alpha dicks than vaginas. Even looking at the sexual marketplace purely from a supply side, your argument fails.
There isn’t any male Hypergamy because there’s no compelling reason for alphas to be exclusive.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The reason hypergamy needs “a billion hours of analysis” is that regardless of how clearly, obviously, repeatedly, articulately, and creatively it is explained someone refuses to accept or understand it.
LikeLike
You can’t explain it to women at all bcs it suggests that they may be deluding themselves about their SMV, but if they accepted that then they wouldn’t be women any more, because to be a woman is to believe that you always deserve better than what you have…
And you can’t get bugmen and soyboys to accept it because “muh equalism”.
LikeLiked by 2 people
ASD, female hypergamy [which quickly devolves into outright polygamy] works because many/most/all* women are ready & willing to SHARE a quality Alpha amongst themselves.
Whereas there’s no way in he11 that an Alpha will share a woman with anyone.
Ergo no hypergamy for men.
LikeLike
*The extent to which women are willing to share their Alphas is going to be strongly racial & ethnic, with, very roughly, African women always sharing their Alphas, Oriental [j00ish/muslim/g00k] women often sharing their Alphas, and [at least until very recently] White women largely refusing to share their Alphas.
LikeLike
Cap’n, you’re obviously not out in the field. White alphas share women alla time. White alphas tend to avoid LTRs or not be monogamous when they are in one. They’ll be hitting some beta’s LTR…ergo, they share the beta’s poon.
LikeLiked by 1 person
ASD, I need to think about that.
There’s a question of awareness involved – is the Beta aware that the Alpha is dipping it in the Beta’s woman? Or is the Beta blissfully unaware? Because all the chicks in the Alpha’s harem are well aware that they aren’t alone.
LikeLike
Pregnancy is always the goal at a primary instinctual level. Recreational sex only teally took off once birth control became readily available, that’s 50 years ago now? The god of biomechanics made sex very enjoyable so we would want to do it a lot and produce a lot of babies, not because he wanted us to have a good time. That is just a means to an end.
LikeLike
So the moral of the story is either way women well most likely end up with the ‘sedan’
LikeLike
The best thing that can reasonably done in the face of hypergamy is to raise the attractiveness of all women, which is possible because female hotness isn’t a positional good. Cutting soda and fast food, and going to the gym more often, are low-hanging fruit ripe for the plucking.
Of course, if you relax the “reasonableness” thing—just a tad—White Western Sharia law works too.
LikeLike
Western society would be much better off if they stopped giving women student loans and gave them loans for plastic surgery/gym memberships/diet and weight-loss aids, etc. The payoff would be better for women too.
O/T – I just heard Stephen Pinker in a talk mention how the violent crime rate for Irish-Americans was higher than any other group 100 years ago. That fact doesn’t make sense to me.
LikeLike
Jim Crow forced the ch!mpanzees to behave?
Also, j00 crime never showed up in the police blotters because j00 psychopaths like Meyer Lansky were vastly more intelligent than the detectives who should have been trying to catch them [but probably didn’t even know of their existence].
LikeLike
In the 19th Century, there was a j00 psychopath, named Adam Werth, or Adam Worth, who so terrorized European & American society that he is said to have been the inspiration for Sherlock Holmes’s arch-enemy, Professor Moriarty. And the irony there is especially apt, since Arthur Conan Doyle was dumping the blame for Ashkepathy on all the poor southern Irish papists [named “Moriarty”]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Worth
LikeLike
This is basically what Pedowood has been doing with the Mafia movies for the last 40 years or so – glorifying the Italian & Irish thugs – but carefully concealing the fact that they were merely the frontmen sent out for public consumption, with The Tribe [in the form of Lansky, Louis “Lepke” Buchalter, Dutch Shultz, etc] actually running things behind the scenes.
LikeLike
Yeah, I’ve been trying to explore this topic. And the best answer I received is that you can’t compare violent crime before 1962 and after 1962 since the crime code was much different.
100 years ago, I imagine that the Italian vs the Jewish vs the Italian mobs racked up significant homicide and attempted murder crimes vs the blacks after WWI.
Too bad Lansky couldn’t keep the Communists from taking all his hotels and casinos in Havana.
LikeLike
Oh, and of course, obligatory (((Steven Pinker))).
LikeLike
OT,
Modern liberated woman or a fag in S. FL. ? Take a guess, I’ll let you guys know tomorrow 🙂
LikeLike
btw, saw this few days ago and again today when leaving work. i see this car on regular basis lately. oh how our culture have degenerated….
LikeLike
My guess is liberated woman. She’s trying hard, not just with the vanity plate, but also with it being adorned with the Miami Dolphins logo.
But it’s hard not to choose fag solely based on the fact the car is a Jetta.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Definitely a woman. No fags watch football as Sundays are for Ikea trips. Actually, I’d rather go to Ikea myself (and I HATE Ikea) than watch kneelball so I guess I have that in common with them.
I saw a 55-65 year old ugly as Hell woman driving a Nissan Joke…err…Juke with an Impeach Trump sticker on her car. I guess she thinks her cats can read?
LikeLike
Or we can just look at the entertainment industry, especially Pedowood.
There is no film about a middle-age man who dumps his loyal, but boring wife due to of a mid-life crisis, goes to a foreign country, adopts a new religion, and hooks up with a younger, hotter girl and lives happily ever after.
Films geared toward men tend to have the male characters emphasize their loyalty and devotion to their wives (William Wallace, Leonidas, Rob Roy), even when they don’t deserve it (John McClane).
Divorce porn is an exclusively female-directed genre. Even in the days when divorce laws were either balanced or favorably towards the husband, men didn’t see it as something to celebrate in books, plays, and films. In fact, it was considered scandalous.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Divorce porn is an exclusively female-directed genre.”
Well you know what they say – there’s no greater misery & torture for a woman than to realize that she m@rried beneath herself.
LikeLike
Beautiful analogy CH. Well done.
LikeLike
The ‘having your cake and eating it too’ concept comes to mind when dealing with a lot of modern women (remember this expression comes from Marie Antoinette as she justified lavish courts and indulgences while the populace starved. She basically said that the nation should just forget about sustaining the society and indulge their immediate desires).
Back to my point. For a woman to ‘have her cake’ she has to commit to a man who is fully eager to lavish her with attention, truth, love etc etc. Basically, what women are telling us poor shlubs that they want. When a woman is ‘eating her cake’, it means she is keeping him in her orbit but not being truthful and taking the commensurate steps to develop a relationship. This cake is no longer appealing to the man, and he rightly pulls back and away (in order to protect/not squander his investment).
It does go both ways, I believe. Women don’t want to ‘put out’ if she thinks the guy is going to pump and dump her (at least that’s what she is telling herself. Go to the average meatmarket aka nightclub, however, and the young nubiles usually fail to follow this instinct). Either way, this ‘dance’ is one of each party giving and taking on a somewhat balanced level. Otherwise, one side is left ‘holding the bag’ (cake crumbs).
LikeLike
“Women don’t want to ‘put out’ if she thinks the guy is going to pump and dump her…”
…but, as above, she will put out if the guy won’t pump and dump her, even if that means she has to SHARE him with her fellow hypergamous sisters who also don’t want to be dumped by him.
At which point, you can say hello to [effective] Polygamy.
LikeLike
“Women don’t want to ‘put out’ if she thinks the guy is going to pump and dump her…”
THINKS is the operative word here.
The men that actually can and do pump and dump are the ones their most attracted to…and make he THINK theyll pump and stick around. lolz
LikeLike
But my point is that hypergamy quickly leads to polygamy when all the hypergamous sisters agree [either tacitly or explicitly] to SHARE the Alpha so that He won’t dump any of them.
LikeLike
That’s what’s going on when you’re juggling three or four different plates in a rotation – all the plates know that you’re out catbirding on them – but they’re willing to put up with it because you’re so much more masculine than all the soy boy alternatives to you.
LikeLike
@CapnO
This is what MAGA is truly about. Bunz -> oven.
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2017/08/08/white-births-a-us-majority-again/
LikeLike
LikeLike
(((The director))): “Yuri Baranovsky is a Russian-Jewish refugee of the USSR, coming to the US when he was five with the rest of his family.”
EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. pic.twitter.com/Ln33N0rp2h
— ♡• weiß •♡ (@heebbbq14) January 5, 2018
LikeLike
LikeLiked by 1 person