If "alphas" are at the top of the food chain why does feminism and the current state of the Western world even exist?

mrsamsa · 2013-10-07T11:37:49+00:00

To start out, 'alphas' have never been a single unified identifiable group of people who are able to act in their own collective interests. In fact, many 'alphas' are identifiable by their strong personal ambition for their own success and wealth. So while an individual alpha may be a leader of his community, they could not establish an oligarchy as an other group of people, such as rich people forming the aristocracy.

Speaking of aristocracy - this is what feminism really started rebelling against. And it was composed of many alpha males. Feminism has done great things, but it has always been by and for well-to-do white women. In the 10-20's, the middle-upper class white women wanted to have the privileges of upper class white men. Voting, fancy schooling, etc. Nevermind the fact that the average man at the time was piss poor, poorly educated, and spent his time doing back-breaking labor.

This is a key thing to understand when feminists speak of 'privilege'. They speak not of men in general, but of the small elite group of men that they wish to overtake. They see the men above them (the men that they desire to be with) and want to have their same rights. Not responsibilities though. As Barbie echoes, "Math is hard, let's go shopping!"

Even now - how many times have you heard of the 'wage gap'? Did you know that by the same metrics used to find the '77 cents', white women outearn black men and hispanic men? No one wants to talk about that though.

The support for feminism spread because if someone asks you "would you like to have increased power and status in society at no cost to yourself?" then no one really turns that down. And many men supported it in the spirit of making America a 'true democracy' - one person, one vote. But that's all feminism fights for - giving people increased power for nothing. The glass floor still exists, and the women are just another story away from those gross dirty working men.

If you are truly superior and more logical

Who said an alpha is more logical? An alpha of a group isn't the smartest, he's the most assertive, confident, and strongest. Brains alone are not alpha.

If women want alphas and betas want to be/follow alphas

The first part of that sentence is the key I touched on earlier. Women did not look to their average man in plight during the depression. They used their hypergamy to crane their necks up at the men they DESIRED. Then they said "why can't I have all those privileges without having to be with a man and do a man's work?".

Betas do want to be/follow alphas, but more importantly in this society, they want to be with a monogamous woman. Monogamy was still big back then, supported by society and the church. And betas loved it because most of them were guaranteed a wife. And they supported that wife and allowed her to rule the house he paid for, and make all the decisions to spend the money he brought home from his hard labor. And families did pretty OK from that.

But women would rather share an alpha than have a loyal beta. So feminism taught women that being tied down is bad. Being a housewife is bad. You have the right to choose (and we made the choice for you!) to work instead of raise a family.

And so that brings us to today. Women have rights, men have responsibilities. And while men continue to do >95% of all demanding and dangerous jobs just like the old days, children are growing up damaged by broken single-mother homes at a record rate.

Luckily feminism is here to tax the men to give these women money to support their broken families. The government makes a good absentee beta.

nicethingyoucanthave · 2013-10-07T11:18:08+00:00

Why would alphas allow women to have rights other than the basic right to live?

This question conflates sexual strategy and political philosophy.

In other words, you mention "alpha" (which is a male that women want to have sex with) and then you talk about rights (which is a political question). You're assuming an overlap that doesn't necessarily exist. Being an "alpha" doesn't imply a particular political belief. As a quick example, Barrack Obama is most definitely a high-status male. Even if he wasn't president, you can see it in the way he talks and carries himself. His status doesn't imply his political beliefs.

Either of these two questions make sense:

If women really prefer "alphas" then why do "betas" still exist? Why hasn't female mate selection bred them out?
If patriarchy really exists, why did it allow women to have rights? Why did it allow feminism to get started?

But what you've done is to take the first half of the first question and stick it onto the second half of the second question. That doesn't make sense.

[deleted] · 2013-10-08T05:44:31+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Hayleyk · 2013-10-08T01:55:34+00:00

I'm not redpill, but this article might help you out:

http://no-maam.blogspot.ca/2008/02/questionators-should-women-have-right.html

Basically, in nature, only the alphas would breed and the betas would be cast out, but civilization ended this. These natural alphas would not try to control women, but women evolved to like that treatment because it meant they could score an alpha. Women are all very high value, because babies, but they only want alpha babies, so what alphas want is what evolution provides. By the time the first civilizations were emerging, beta males had evolved to be much more advanced than females because of their low chance of breeding, but still inferior to the top few males. Tribes wanted to keep these men around to work, but men don't do anything without sex, so the women's sexuality had to be restrained and distributed evenly (which, according to the article, is absolutely NOT communism, because that's for females). It had to be restrained extra hard so betas could be sure they weren't unknowingly raising alpha children, as nature intended. This worked great for thousands of years, but feminism has induced chaos, allowing women to revert back to their alpha-fucking ways, leaving betas disillusioned and unwilling to contribute to the civilization that has failed them. Nature is not ideal, but it is nature. Civilization was great, but as we can clearly see (pauses to look out window), human advancement has come to a halt.

The blog I posted is MGTOW, and this is mostly from them, but I have seen repillers occasionally say that they are learning game to take advantage of the new chaos and all the sluttiness it has created.

Comments