The NS Mens Rights Thread

[Haktiva]

how's the theory wrong, if you care to explain?

In the past, the prevailing view on gray wolf packs was that they consisted of individuals vying with each other for dominance, with dominant gray wolves being referred to as the "alpha" male and female, and the subordinates as "beta" and "omega" wolves. This terminology was first used in 1947 by Rudolf Schenkel of the University of Basel, who based his findings on researching the behavior of captive gray wolves. This view on gray wolf pack dynamics was later popularized by L. David Mech in his 1970 book The Wolf. He formally disavowed this terminology in 1999, explaining that it was heavily based on the behavior of captive packs consisting of unrelated individuals, an error reflecting the once prevailing view that wild pack formation occurred in winter among independent gray wolves. Later research on wild gray wolves revealed that the pack is usually a family consisting of a breeding pair and its offspring of the previous 1–3 years.[86]

that's fair, though the behavior of other animals with sexual dimorphism does seem to contradict this. Then again, I can't tell male and female wolves apart without getting dangerously close(something I don't plan on doing)

[Kelinfort]

The seduction community has a twisted understanding of alpha.

Most of them use a persona and fail to actually be "alpha."

in other words, they all try and be Johnny Bravo

what constitutes an alpha?

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

that's fair, though the behavior of other animals with sexual dimorphism does seem to contradict this. Then again, I can't tell male and female wolves apart without getting dangerously close(something I don't plan on doing)

Almost the entire animal kingdom is sexually dimorphic to one degree or another. Generalizing behaviour across 300+ million years of divergent lineages is just silly.

[May Mays]

in other words, they all try and be Johnny Bravo

what constitutes an alpha?

Loosely defined as:

Socially dominant
Larger than life
Assertive
Relative apathy

It's very much an oversimplification because you can attract women other ways.

But the suave seducer persona I find disgusting because it's just that - a mask. And it's boring.

[Kelinfort]

what constitutes an alpha?

Loosely defined as:

Socially dominant
Larger than life
Assertive
Relative apathy

It's very much an oversimplification because you can attract women other ways.

But the suave seducer persona I find disgusting because it's just that - a mask. And it's boring.

Even so, that would make very few men, "alpha's".

[May Mays]

Loosely defined as:

Socially dominant
Larger than life
Assertive
Relative apathy

It's very much an oversimplification because you can attract women other ways.

But the suave seducer persona I find disgusting because it's just that - a mask. And it's boring.

Even so, that would make very few men, "alpha's".

Well there's degrees to "alphaness."

And no shit otherwise every guy would be fucking nothing but Hollywood actresses.

[Haktiva]

Loosely defined as:

Socially dominant
Larger than life
Assertive
Relative apathy

It's very much an oversimplification because you can attract women other ways.

But the suave seducer persona I find disgusting because it's just that - a mask. And it's boring.

Even so, that would make very few men, "alpha's".

most men are Betas. nothing wrong with that, but they don't benefit from the Alpha's patriarchy system(yet more seems to get done when Alphas are in charge)

[New Ogunquit]

Even so, that would make very few men, "alpha's".

Well there's degrees to "alphaness."

Perhaps we could incorporate the whole alphabet?

And no shit otherwise every guy would be fucking nothing but Hollywood actresses.

I also don't particularly like the terminology, not only because of the oversimplification but also the fact that the definition of "successful" differs from person to person and also people aren't wolves.

[Ashkera]

That, and the research on wolves that the term came from was itself inaccurate, even if we were wolves.

[Kelinfort]

Even so, that would make very few men, "alpha's".

most men are Betas. nothing wrong with that, but they don't benefit from the Alpha's patriarchy system(yet more seems to get done when Alphas are in charge)

I disagree. This sounds very similar to rants about an international Jewish conspiracy or Patriarchy.

[Tahar Joblis]

That, and the research on wolves that the term came from was itself inaccurate, even if we were wolves.

The term is also used in chimps.

Quite aptly. The alpha chimp is #1, the beta chimp is #2. The beta chimp does have more sex, on average, because the alpha is usually too busy asserting dominance. However, they don't have fundamentally different personalities, and the beta chimp is very often a former or future alpha chimp.

That's going to be true of pretty much any large hierarchical pack. Alpha and beta are going to be pretty similar, the low ranking positions will be a bit different. It's sort of funny how the term caught on like wildfire in being applied to men, and how it's suddenly moved out of fashion among feminists in reaction to the use of the term by PUAs.

The simple fact of the matter is that it was never a good classification of human men. We don't break up neatly into two groups. So what did people do when faced with the fact that some men clearly didn't fit either category? Add new groups. So we had some people throwing in "gamma male" (defined variously), "delta male" (usually defined relative to "gamma male," e.g., in systems where gamma = alpha - pack, delta = beta - pack), "omega male" (defined variously), "sigma male," and "zeta male." The "zeta male" term actually is, I suppose, a predecessor to the MGTOW term - it was coined relatively recently to refer to men who aren't interested in playing the game, and circulated some among MRAs.

This is part of a larger phenomenon: A lot of people like men to fit clearly and unambiguously in neat little boxes. Men are supposed to be clearly straight or clearly gay. Men are supposed to be alpha or beta. Men are losers or winners. Men are either bad or good.

Women are allowed to be categorized in much fuzzier ways, but as a general pattern, people like men to be sorted out sharply and clearly. Simply defying categorization as a man invites a hostile reaction.

[Haktiva]

most men are Betas. nothing wrong with that, but they don't benefit from the Alpha's patriarchy system(yet more seems to get done when Alphas are in charge)

I disagree. This sounds very similar to rants about an international Jewish conspiracy or Patriarchy.

IN simple terms an Alpha is just someone who takes charge. TFM pointed out that Steve Jobs was an Alpha, in a sense you could tell he was a guy and he was an ass to everyone, but Apple was ahead of everyone when he was in charge. Then when he was gone, lesser men and women fucked it all up.

[Haktiva]

That, and the research on wolves that the term came from was itself inaccurate, even if we were wolves.

The term is also used in chimps.

Quite aptly. The alpha chimp is #1, the beta chimp is #2. The beta chimp does have more sex, on average, because the alpha is usually too busy asserting dominance. However, they don't have fundamentally different personalities, and the beta chimp is very often a former or future alpha chimp.

That's going to be true of pretty much any large hierarchical pack. Alpha and beta are going to be pretty similar, the low ranking positions will be a bit different. It's sort of funny how the term caught on like wildfire in being applied to men, and how it's suddenly moved out of fashion among feminists in reaction to the use of the term by PUAs.

The simple fact of the matter is that it was never a good classification of human men. We don't break up neatly into two groups. So what did people do when faced with the fact that some men clearly didn't fit either category? Add new groups. So we had some people throwing in "gamma male" (defined variously), "delta male" (usually defined relative to "gamma male," e.g., in systems where gamma = alpha - pack, delta = beta - pack), "omega male" (defined variously), "sigma male," and "zeta male." The "zeta male" term actually is, I suppose, a predecessor to the MGTOW term - it was coined relatively recently to refer to men who aren't interested in playing the game, and circulated some among MRAs.

This is part of a larger phenomenon: A lot of people like men to fit clearly and unambiguously in neat little boxes. Men are supposed to be clearly straight or clearly gay. Men are supposed to be alpha or beta. Men are losers or winners. Men are either bad or good.

Women are allowed to be categorized in much fuzzier ways, but as a general pattern, people like men to be sorted out sharply and clearly. Simply defying categorization as a man invites a hostile reaction.

it's strange how guys do it to themselves too. perhaps that's why there's always a lot of suspicion around guys who seclude themselves or just don't follow society's expected norms. A lot of guys who are single or just not dating are often assumed to be gay, rather than just not interested a lot of times. Why's that?

[Kelinfort]

I disagree. This sounds very similar to rants about an international Jewish conspiracy or Patriarchy.

IN simple terms an Alpha is just someone who takes charge. TFM pointed out that Steve Jobs was an Alpha, in a sense you could tell he was a guy and he was an ass to everyone, but Apple was ahead of everyone when he was in charge. Then when he was gone, lesser men and women fucked it all up.

So by the power of condensing, "Alpha's" have two main qualities: charisma and assertiveness.

This perspective on Steve Jobs ignores the fact he had significant entrepreneurial ability. Lacking this, Jobs would've been moderately successful, but could've driven Apple into the ground and ended up penniless. This is completely divorced from the Alpha concept.

My main problem with this dualistic worldview is its simplicity and the fact that it's a loaded term used to exploit angry misanthropic men for money. Simply put, this concept was brought to importance by charlatans who were looking to make money and not actually give good life improving and romantic advice.

Yet, some men who reject PUA's and negging are still fixated on this duality for whatever reason. It really shows contempt for women and more successful men, or at the very least a disconnect from reality

[May Mays]

IN simple terms an Alpha is just someone who takes charge. TFM pointed out that Steve Jobs was an Alpha, in a sense you could tell he was a guy and he was an ass to everyone, but Apple was ahead of everyone when he was in charge. Then when he was gone, lesser men and women fucked it all up.

Yet, men who reject PUA's and negging are still fixated on this duality for whatever reason. It really shows contempt for women or at the very least a disconnect from reality

It really depends on how frustrated they are.

And the individual. For some, it is a disconnect from reality coddled by the messages of the feminist movement that all men should be "gentlemen." For guys that have had even less success with relationships/sex, they could bear some contempt for women. It all stems from being unable to recognize why you're failing to fuck or get a girlfriend or whatever your goal is. Feminism is counter-productive in this regard. It fails to produce any large quantity of happy, successful males. Which in turn, can lead to contempt for women or misinterpretation of women.

[Kelinfort]

Yet, men who reject PUA's and negging are still fixated on this duality for whatever reason. It really shows contempt for women or at the very least a disconnect from reality

It really depends on how frustrated they are.

And the individual. For some, it is a disconnect from reality coddled by the messages of the feminist movement that all men should be "gentlemen." For guys that have had even less success with relationships/sex, they could bear some contempt for women. It all stems from being unable to recognize why you're failing to fuck or get a girlfriend or whatever your goal is. Feminism is counter-productive in this regard. It fails to produce any large quantity of happy, successful males. Which in turn, can lead to contempt for women or misinterpretation of women.

Gentlemen? I thought a main factor of feminism was a refusal of chivalry.

Feminism (or the MRM for that matter) is not about maintaining or finding a relationship. Their anger at feminism is only because they feel it's the root cause of their trouble. While feminists have provided romantic advice, this is not the focus of their anger.

Look, I understand many men are frustrated by a lack of success. Failure and being told you are a failure undermines logical thought and leads to anger. The men who believe this theory and act accordingly are almost analogous to Trump voters. They're angry. People selling shit validate their feelings and encourage them to get angry. This means more customers. It has nothing to do with reality and everything to do with a manufactured idea based on semi-conspiratorial beliefs.

[May Mays]

It really depends on how frustrated they are.

And the individual. For some, it is a disconnect from reality coddled by the messages of the feminist movement that all men should be "gentlemen." For guys that have had even less success with relationships/sex, they could bear some contempt for women. It all stems from being unable to recognize why you're failing to fuck or get a girlfriend or whatever your goal is. Feminism is counter-productive in this regard. It fails to produce any large quantity of happy, successful males. Which in turn, can lead to contempt for women or misinterpretation of women.

Gentlemen? I thought a main factor of feminism was a refusal of chivalry.

Feminism (or the MRM for that matter) is not about maintaining or finding a relationship. Their anger at feminism is only because they feel it's the root cause of their trouble. While feminists have provided romantic advice, this is not the focus of their anger.

Look, I understand many men are frustrated by a lack of success. Failure and being told you are a failure undermines logical thought and leads to anger. The men who believe this theory and act accordingly are almost analogous to Trump voters. They're angry. People selling shit validate their feelings and encourage them to get angry. This means more customers. It has nothing to do with reality and everything to do with a manufactured idea based on semi-conspiratorial beliefs.

Alright you lost me at the third bit.

Not Chivalry. But supplication.

[Kelinfort]

Gentlemen? I thought a main factor of feminism was a refusal of chivalry.

Feminism (or the MRM for that matter) is not about maintaining or finding a relationship. Their anger at feminism is only because they feel it's the root cause of their trouble. While feminists have provided romantic advice, this is not the focus of their anger.

Look, I understand many men are frustrated by a lack of success. Failure and being told you are a failure undermines logical thought and leads to anger. The men who believe this theory and act accordingly are almost analogous to Trump voters. They're angry. People selling shit validate their feelings and encourage them to get angry. This means more customers. It has nothing to do with reality and everything to do with a manufactured idea based on semi-conspiratorial beliefs.

Alright you lost me at the third bit.

Not Chivalry. But supplication.

Supplication? You mean like pursuing someone?

[May Mays]

Alright you lost me at the third bit.

Not Chivalry. But supplication.

Supplication? You mean like pursuing someone?

Making yourself a girl's bitch in the hopes that you'll get laid.

[Kelinfort]

Supplication? You mean like pursuing someone?

Making yourself a girl's bitch in the hopes that you'll get laid.

I have not seen this advocated by any feminist publications, even the more radical ones.

Could you give some sources?

[May Mays]

Making yourself a girl's bitch in the hopes that you'll get laid.

I have not seen this advocated by any feminist publications, even the more radical ones.

Could you give some sources?

Not so much the feminist movement as much as tumblr I suppose.

I really wish I could, but I haven't actually used tumblr for two years now.

[Kelinfort]

I have not seen this advocated by any feminist publications, even the more radical ones.

Could you give some sources?

Not so much the feminist movement as much as tumblr I suppose.

I really wish I could, but I haven't actually used tumblr for two years now.

From my personal experience, my current partner is feminist through and through. I don't feel like I'm being demeaned or being made a bitch. And we fuck...a lot.

[May Mays]

Not so much the feminist movement as much as tumblr I suppose.

I really wish I could, but I haven't actually used tumblr for two years now.

From my personal experience, my current partner is feminist through and through. I don't feel like I'm being demeaned or being made a bitch. And we fuck...a lot.

Well bear in mind the fact that a lot of these tumblerinas are misandrists who just support the feminist movement.

[Kelinfort]

From my personal experience, my current partner is feminist through and through. I don't feel like I'm being demeaned or being made a bitch. And we fuck...a lot.

Well bear in mind the fact that a lot of these tumblerinas are misandrists who just support the feminist movement.

Well yeah, they're just as angry at men as red piller types are at women. In fact, the two groups should hate fuck.

[May Mays]

Well bear in mind the fact that a lot of these tumblerinas are misandrists who just support the feminist movement.

Well yeah, they're just as angry at men as red piller types are at women. In fact, the two groups should hate fuck.

TRP's don't have it all wrong.

It's just their attitude is literally the exact opposite of the advice they give. If you're always bitter about life and the world, and have this air of hate and negativity around you you're never going to attract anything.

They talk big about 'not giving a fuck' and proceed to give 3 page dissertations in a single reddit post on how many fucks they don't give XD