By Jay Batman
The issue of promiscuity among men may be summed up as a matter of quantity; for men, the issue is how many women they have bedded. The issue is quite simple, because sleeping with women means being chosen by women. It is affirming to be chosen by as many women as possible. In this way, men achieve validation.
The issue of promiscuity among women may be summed up as a matter of quality; for women, the issue is who they have managed to bed. Sleeping with a man to a woman means selecting the best of the bunch and getting him to select you in return. For a woman, this equivalent to quality acknowledging quality, and there are no small amounts of arrogance and hubris at play.
The problem for women is that everyone covets quality. Many different women desire a man who is deemed handsome, or intelligent, or wealthy, or some amalgam of the three, especially the first and the third, simultaneously. What women entertain is a fantasy in which they monopolize the best for themselves, because their secret desire is to see themselves affirmed as the best through their exclusive possession of the best.
This does not happen. Alpha males have options, and no single woman can overcome this obstacle to exclusivity. What intelligent men realize early in life is that even for an alpha male, there will always be a bigger, faster, stronger, smarter, and wealthier male. What unintelligent men believe early in life is that love, fidelity, honor, and decency matter to women.
When it comes to institutions like marriage, such ideals do matter, but women are in a state of constant aspiration. They are always looking to move on and up. For women, there’s always a better deal on the horizon or a better deal that got away. Contentment with the present is simply not possible with women.
Beta males do not understand this precisely because they entertain unrealistic beliefs about women. Chivalry ought to die because it has nothing to do with success in mating or life. It is an antiquated ideal that has no place in fulfillment for men. It simply renders men into a shoulder for women to cry on; rather than being a full human being, you become an emotional crutch when their first option falls through.
But what is more, beta males have to understand that status is a matter of choice rather than destiny. In an earlier article, Anarcho-Misogyny Revisited, I examined the African cichlid fish Haplochromis burtoni, specifically the males, because they are grouped into two subsets: territorial and non-territorial males. The territorial males are brightly colored, with testes three to four times larger than that of non-territorial males. The non-territorial males are so colored and sized as to be similar to the females of the species. What is relevant about H. burtoni for beta males is this: at any time where a territorial male is struck down by disease or predators, a non-territorial male undergoes physiological changes in his brain neurons and in his body morphology to transmogrify into a territorial male. The territorial males, when moved into proximity with larger territorial males, undergo a reverse transformation into non-territorial males.
Beta males are so pale, so appallingly dull when compared to their alpha peers, as to be almost feminine in their mannerism. They are the girlfriends who pick up the pieces when an alpha defies a female’s attempts at hypergamy and refuses to commit to exclusivity.
Human males have a choice as to their lot in life. We are not cichlids whose lives are defined by the evolutionary decrees of necessity in ratios of dominant to non-dominant males. The answer for beta males is to reject a value system that consigns them to a life of disappointment and second-class status, to recognize that the spark present within alphas is also present within their kind. The difference is that the switch is off in a beta male, whereas it is on in an alpha male.
We have only to look at the sorts of men women choose in order to see what women value. Each man, at some point in his life, has been embittered to realize that women prefer men who can rightly be characterized as louts. If you wish to be preferred, you have a behavioral choice to make.
Your brain physiology, like that of the cichlid fish, will change with your decision. In the article Practice-related Changes in Human Brain Functional Anatomy during Nonmotor Learning, researchers noted that a simple variation in a task (either repeated an appropriate verb for a visually presented noun or simply repeating the visually presented noun) could change the brain circuits used to accomplish either variation. This was possible with less than 15 minutes of practice.
Moreover, when you learn new behavior, you gain brain cells in your hippocampal neurons, which are associated with associative memory formation. Simply put, the more you learn, the greater your neurogenesis is. You are as fully formed as your decisions make you. The idea that we should be resigned to our present roles has no foundation in brain physiology whatsoever. There is always room for change, room to learn and develop more and more.
As a human being, the options available to you are endless, but your decision must be to pursue a destiny of your own devising. Anarcho-misogyny is quite unlike any other system that touches on race and gender in that it does not have a victim myth. We believe in only one form of victimization, and that is self-victimization.
Society may be oppressive, culture may be degrading, but that is the fault of whatever class is being oppressed or degraded. You are only entitled to the respect you have earned through due diligence and the accrual of strength as a deterrent. If you are so weakened as to be easy prey due to your own complacency and apathy, you should not be surprised that society sees fit to construct a scapegoat myth out of your group or class. The maintaining of rights is a constant chore, and the only way rights transcend paper and ink is when individuals and groups accumulate the strength necessary to force tyrants and demagogues to acknowledge rights as actual limitations on their own power.
Anarcho-misogyny does not seek to negotiate from any position besides one of overwhelming strength. Those who share in our commitment to equality before the law, defensible inequality based on one’s own merit and effort, and the abolition of privilege for classes within the law recognize the necessity to labor for strength. What is strength? From an individual and a class perspective, it is capital.
Economic self-determination is the only self-determination that matters, and with women now making more than men in 148 of the largest 150 markets, we can see why the tide has shifted where the media message on men is concerned. Simply put, the denigration and vilification of men is both profitable and popular. Advertisers and members of the creative class who do so are tailoring their message to accommodate a class with means.
To some degree, the problem confronting males in today’s current climate is an attitude of resignation and utter confusion as to what being a man means. Many of us grow up with less than ideal role models as men. Some of us have no consistent male influences in early life at all. We are feminized as a result of our circumstances. We either don’t know who our fathers are, or we have absent fathers.
Men have a duty to other men to re-define what it is to be a man, to free future generations of matriarchal influence that seeks at all turns to feminize men into beta males. Simply put, being a man involves self-determination, confidence, and mental and physical strength. Power is both a means and an end in and of itself.
Masculinity is self-control; the rejection of feminine efforts to force men into a constantly reactionary position whereby we appear petulant and even churlish when faced with the baiting of women. Moreover, masculinity involves the ability and willingness to accept constructive criticism when it is offered, and the pride to reject belittling criticism when women put it forth in the guise of legitimate criticism. Certain tones and tenors used by women to make otherwise valid points ought to be torn apart immediately. It’s not what they’re saying; it’s how they say it that betrays their ultimate intent, which is not to help a man grow and progress, but rather to demean him with his shortcomings and relegate him to a role of subordination.
Moreover, masculinity must become militant self-esteem. There is a lot men could learn from women in this area, especially given the developments of the past forty years. When advertisers appeal to women, they do so by calling out to goddesses and queens and princesses. They do so by appealing to a sense of power and entitlement. You are worth it.
In confronting hypergamy from a standpoint of power and militant self-esteem, men are entitled to exercise discretion over their own bodies in the extreme. Advances in vasectomies have given men the option of having a vasectomy in their single years with the possibility of reversal later on. In this day and age of uncertain paternity and women who derive significant income from child support, my advice would be for men to undergo a vasectomy as a form of birth control.
The decision to do so is ultimately private and need not be shared with prospective sexual partners, girlfriends, or even wives. A woman is not required to notify her husband of an abortion, and her husband is not bound to notify her that he had a vasectomy before they got married. Additionally, having a vasectomy gives a man a degree of reproductive self-determination that a woman cannot influence. A man can have a child at his leisure and discretion. Moreover, should he not wish to have a child, he can appear compliant with the desires of his mate in their attempts to do so without being castigated.
Should a man choose a polygynous existence, he can do so knowing that he is free from the concern of impregnating any girlfriend or mistress he might have. He is free to enjoy sex on his own terms, to be affirmed by it as he sees fit without facing exploitation from a former lover.
Beta males who choose to morph into alpha males may do so knowing that their actions will not give rise to reproduction later on, and a medical history that includes a vasectomy will give a court pause in any proceedings on paternity. At the very least, a paternity test can be order that would likely exculpate the male who has undergone a prior vasectomy.
A man is entitled to make these decisions of his own volition without the input of any woman. After all, what woman asks a man for permission to procure an abortion, or makes her decision to carry or terminate a pregnancy entirely contingent upon the consent of her partner?
A woman can still achieve the status of having slept with a desirable male, but other than a status increase, she is not likely to gain either child-support or alimony from the exchange if reproduction is removed as a possibility. It’s your body, your money, your sperm, and your life, men. Do as you please with all of it, and take all necessary steps to protect what you’ve earned and what you have as a man.
There are innovations from other cultures that we might import here as we restore our political power and voice. We might take the example of Iranian Muslims who enter into a contract called the sigheh, where a type of temporary marriage is entered into. The conditions are spelled out at the beginning, from the amount of support that will be provided to the amount of sex that will be given. The contract can be anywhere from a few hours to months or years in duration, and it is renewable.
This seems like a far more reasonable arrangement for men to pursue than the antiquated institution of full-blown marriage. If either partner fails to meet the other’s standards or expectations, the contract need not be renewed. Both parties, therefore, have an incentive to maintain themselves and behave in an upstanding manner. If they do not, the contract is voided and the benefits are lost.
Sigheh represents the best of what marriage has to offer without any of the finality or restrictions. It benefits a woman by providing her access to a man’s means, and it benefits a man by providing him an outlet for sex and companionship on terms that are mutually agreed up and binding at the outset. Additionally, the breach of the terms by a woman does not a result in costly court proceedings or a division of property for the man.
Additionally, a pre-nuptial agreement ought to be a requisite for every man at the outset of a marriage. Property should be partitioned, with pre-marriage assets placed entirely off-limits. Property accrued as a result of joint purchasing, where the man and the woman have paid for the item in equal or divided amounts should be divided according to the contribution. If the property cannot be divided physically, it should be liquidated and the proceeds divided according to each party’s contribution.
Every man should insist on ruling out alimony altogether as a condition of his prenuptial agreement. Moreover, should the woman fail to compromise on any tenet or codicil fundamental to the man, the man should get up and walk away from the entire relationship. Economic self-interest has to trump emotion for a man’s well-being and self-interests to be represented. That may sound harsh, and avowedly unromantic, but the simple truth is that a divorce proceeding where the division of property is left at the discretion of a judge is far harsher to the interests of men than women.
The final piece of the strategy in confronting hypergamy is for men to start looking realistically at what women are. Simply put, a male in his twenties is better suited to pursue a relationship with an older woman. A woman hits her sexual peak in her thirties, and a man at that age ought to realistically assess what he wants from a relationship and pursue it without shame. Moreover, older women have their own means and their own status, and the introduction of a younger man into the networks they’ve already established can be important to later success in employment and business. Your peers in the same age group cannot offer you either the status, the connections, or even the same sexual competency as an older woman because they don’t have any of those things.
The economics of the matter do not lie. The older someone is, the more likely they are to have a better economic footing. And let’s be realistic: we’ve all seen older women that we’ve entertained carnal thoughts about. At various points in my life, I was attracted to Arianna Huffington, Nanette Hansen, and others. They were intelligent, attractive, successful women.
In essence, one of the answers to hypergamy is for men to start realizing that it has merit, and to practice it on some level themselves. If you’re a beta male, it isn’t because you’re oppressed or society has forced you into anything. You are a victim of your own resignation, and just as quickly as you resigned yourself to a fate as a less attractive, less successful, and subordinate mound of self-pity, you can change.
Go to the gym, read a book, and watch what you eat. Start dressing differently and adapting your life to getting what you want out of life. Do what works to get what you want out life on your own terms. Maybe you won’t get exactly what you want, but who does? It’s not a matter of whether or not something is wrong per se, but whether or not it has practical utility to your life and your ambitions. If it does, do it, so long as it isn’t illegal and doesn’t put anyone’s life at risk.
But most importantly, realize that the brotherhood you have with your own kind will be key to resurgence in male self-determination. We need to mobilize in this country to combat misandry. We need a National Organization for Men to promote men’s reproductive self-determination, equality for men in custody and divorce cases, and the abolition of misandry that pigeonholes men in those areas.
We need to organize boycotts of products that make fun of men and denigrate us as dumb, sex-obsessed morons. What’s so bad about being sex-obsessed, anyway? Sex is good, isn’t it? It’s the basic drive that compels us all. Why wouldn’t you want it in greater quantities? Why would you feel ashamed of having it? The people who want to put taboo restrictions and attach unreasonable expectations to sex are the ones with the problems, and their puritanical and dogmatic approaches to sexuality have been ruining the sex lives of others throughout human history.
This is clearly seen in the way we refer to those people who “overly” enjoy sex: freaks. The same pejorative we use to refer to someone with an extra toe or an animal with two heads is used to refer to individuals who aspire to have sex on their own terms, for their own edification, and for their own enjoyment. Does this not seem a bit absurd?
It’s time to reject this line of thinking, and to take concrete steps to achieve sexual self-determination and pride for men on their own terms. It’s time to empower men to define their own lives however they see fit, to remove the institutional and social obstacles to men who seek to live life as an alpha male by their own merits. Moreover, it’s time for other men to celebrate their achievements and that of their brothers, as opposed to acting resentful and envious to the point of being bitchy. Cattiness has no place on our side of the fence. If we can stand in the stands at an NFL game and cheer for men whose abilities enable them to aspire to achievements on the gridiron that we simply cannot match, we can recognize greatness in our peers and celebrate when they realize their potential. Just as it isn’t to the exclusion of our own potential when an NFL quarterback throws a sixty-yard pass across his body under pressure, it isn’t exclusory to our potential when one of our co-workers gets a promotion.
He’s realized his potential, and we simply have to work to realize ours. If our bosses aren’t giving us a fair shake, we aren’t precluded from seeking employment elsewhere. Men have to stop buying into the victim myth and start believing that self-determination comes from effort and a refusal to accept marginalization. Each individual man has his own gifts and abilities, and it’s in our interest to bond together to achieve a world where each individual man can realize those gifts and abilities not through privilege, but instead through hard work that leads to the reward of personal achievement.
For women, the interest is clear: having strong, confident, and proud men around is conducive to better sex, stronger friendships, and yes, better relationships. A man who is secure in who he is isn’t going to be threatened by who you are. Anarcho-misogyny is concerned with reviling feminists, but we have nothing against women who argue for equality rather than privileged standing to the exclusion of men. We’re after a world where merit and personal achievement are the only justifiable bases for inequality.
Confronting hypergamy through an honest assessment of what it is, how men can utilize it to get what they want, and how men bear responsibility and face the consequences for their own choices can only lead to a better outcome in the future for men. Identifying and recognizing misandry and its religion of feminism does not entail whining about how you’re oppressed; it entails identifying your opponent, their strengths and weaknesses, and formulating a strategy to go forward and achieve success. That’s the manly thing to do.
