Is it possible that hypergamous selection patterns are at least partly responsible for why so many feminists believe in the patriarchy theory?

Deadlocked02 · 2021-09-11T02:30:07+00:00

From all things they could care about, the fixation on CEOs specifically in feminist rhetoric is always the most jarring to me. I’m always baffled by their incapacity to acknowledge average men or those at the bottom of society. It’s always about power and money. So yeah, I tend to agree that this tunnel vision contributes to the their understanding of what constitutes patriarchy.

I also believe there’s a lot of projection that goes into patriarchy theory. Deep down, many feminists know that if it they were the ones calling the shots in society the way they believe men do, they’d benefit women over men. Except that’s pure projection, since men lack the in-group bias that feminists assume they have. But this is all conjecture, of course.

Apexander1 · 2021-09-11T07:05:25+00:00

Yeah they dont seem to realise that most people are under the thumb. When they complain that women were forced to stay in the home, they rarely complain that men were forced to give up their lives to figh tin wars and do other dangerous jobs. I don't think coal miners and peasants are really in any postions of power to exploit the downtrotten.

HogurDuDesert · 2021-09-11T06:03:35+00:00

It's indeed something I've been thinking about although I would a couple nuances to it.

Status: It's mostly status that some women are seeking. And Money in our highly capitalistic world is on of the prime status indicators but is not the only one depending on which sub-circle you evolve. A prime exemple of where status is achieve in a different way than with money would be the artistic community, most people in there are broke, so you achieve status by being the considered the one who's the alternative/eclectic or gas the most original/interesting artwork. Nonetheless whichever status marker is required, it seems indeed heterosexual men need to be part of "the best" or "better" in order to be visible to potential feminine partners. I'm actually quite wondering how this works out in gay/lesbian circles. Like do they feel that parts of this system are retained somehow or not? Maybe our gay/lesbian redditors could chip in?

Self-reinforcement: you main point was about perspective, women see only the men above them and it is how they think we live in a patriarchy. I would say though there's not only perception at work here. Because women have a tendency to marry up, men internalise this and therefore from an early age start working their ass of in order to get if not ahead of the whole pack including men, at least as ahead as possible in their field in order to get as high as possible and hence been seen as with a worthy status to as many women (and I would say people in general, I think not only women look at status but men as well) as possible, and therefore by that indeed well getting more powerful than them in some ways, because of the status they gained.

Jazzlike-Parsley-566 · 2021-09-11T12:55:48+00:00

Everyone: Men are worthless unless they are successful.

Dating standards: it is understood that men will likely not find love unless they are successful.

Feminists: ugh why are there so many successful men?!

LeonDeCool · 2021-09-11T19:00:49+00:00

I feel like most complaints about the patriarchy fall apart very quickly once you include all men and not just the top 10%. Getting high-paying, cushy jobs, getting away with sexual assault/harrassment, getting STEM degrees, owning more property, etc. Those advantages are conferred primarily to men of high social status and wealth.

Even if you just remove white men with college degrees from the equation, those advantages go up in smoke real quick and suddenly being a woman looks much better on paper. 95% of men are not the 5% of men patriarchy theory rails against, and those men don't own the world because they're men, they own it because they're rich and have friends in high places, which has nothing to do with being a man.

I don't think that feminists hyper focus on those men for reasons of hypergamy though, I think it's just necessity. Focusing on all men makes it apparent that patriarchy is bullshit. It's hard to argue men have it better using a poor white boy from appalachia as an example. Can't argue that using a black man, or an immigrant, or a man without a degree, or a disabled man, or a man with six kids to provide for, or a man who's been in jail for smoking pot, or a man who etc etc. You HAVE TO ignore those men just to keep believing in patriarchy theory, since patriarchy can't explain how those men (who are most men) could possibly be doing just as averagely, or poorly, as the women in the same social circles and tax brackets as them.

BluesForBoltzmann · 2021-09-11T15:11:44+00:00

I think you're right. And I've heard this idea before. Essentially: whenever women complain about men across various dimensions of complaints, it seems like they're only focusing on the men they're attracted to because those are the only men they really see.

This video summarizes the idea and its consequences: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5u13\_Bdw5eY

I don't subscribe to all of Grace's views, but I think he was spot on in this deconstruction.

iainmf · 2021-09-11T05:37:56+00:00

The Male-Female Pay Gap Driven by Coupling between Labor Markets and Mating Markets

Males often get paid more than females for the same work. This male-female pay gap has been observed throughout the world over many years. The most commonly cited explanations focus on gender oppression and workplace discrimination. We agree that discrimination contributes significantly to the pay gap; however, other factors may play important roles in how the sexes compete in the labor market. We use observations from psychology and concepts from biology to show how aspects of mate choice may influence labor markets. With a mathematical model, we analyze how mating preferences for partner wages affect the differences in wages between males and females, and in turn how wage differences affect mating preferences. If some extrinsic force, such as discrimination*, creates an initial bias in wages, then coupled feedback between mating preferences and wages creates and maintains excess mating preference and wage biases. This model demonstrates how coupling between labor markets and mating markets can lead to outcomes that do not occur when analyzing either market in isolation from the other.

* Or sexual selection

SchalaZeal01 · 2021-09-11T14:56:51+00:00

For what it's worth, I think MGTOWS and redpillers fall into this same trap: being shallow, they often attract shallow women that only care about resources, and they generalize all women based on that just like feminists generalize all men based on their ex as well.

It's not about 'all women being like that', its about the system siding with one side unfairly. So if by bad luck you are with one of those women, she can easily, legally, ruin you.

Sleazyridr · 2021-09-11T13:56:32+00:00

I read a long time ago that in a survey women thought 50% of men are over 6', when the reality is closer to 10%. You're either one of the top men, or you're invisible.

jesset77 · 2021-09-11T19:29:56+00:00

I don't believe that perceived lower value men are actually completely invisible to women. When a woman wants to cross the street to avoid someone on the sidewalk, they obviously at least know that person is there. And when women complain about men, that guy is one of them that get complained about as well. The guys that women complain about approaching them, catcalling, "manspreading", these are all examples of what the lower rungs of men look like to them.

So "men, ugh!" are defined as whatever qualities of whatever echelon of man make them the most upset, and "men! *swoon*" are defined as the opposite of that.

Non-feminists are equally likely to have a similar view of women when we don't sit and think hard about it, but the problems being discussed with feminism are intimately related to when feminists (including the male ones and/or "allies"!) do this by viewing men (or "other men") through a gynocentric lens.

anonymouslionn · 2021-09-11T18:49:20+00:00

Hypergamy explains patriarch theory and the (false) theory of male privilege

The top 1% of men live a completely different life than the bottom 99%. Feminists need to redirect their focus. Clearly we know where they focus currently.

Also, they sometimes attribute something such as being able to walk at night to ‘male privilege’, which is clearly safer for men, but can still be dangerous, and it’s safer only for biological/physical reasons, not societal/cultural/etc. Similar to the idea of male privilege being attributed to the ability to pee standing up…

throwaway2222aa3 · 2021-09-14T02:28:53+00:00

Yes, feminism is a kind of psychological disavowal or outward projection of narcissistic impulses.

NorthHelicopter- · 2021-09-11T21:25:28+00:00

ironically many Feminists have desire for men who have these so called "patriarchal traits", this leads to families having children (if they are male) that have strong chances of inheriting a lot of their personality from their fathers, due to genes having an underestimated influence on ones personality. And thats not even taking account on social encouragement and expectations by ones peers and the general world they live in. Essentially theres a huge chance feminists are just making scapegoats of men for their own choices.

88mmAce · 2021-09-11T22:12:10+00:00

Incels worked this one out in a much more blunt manner. Something along the lines of 'sub-7/10 men do not exist to women'

As a man struggling with autism and physical deformity, I can't really say they're that far off in this case

dejour · 2021-09-11T17:35:30+00:00

What you are saying is definitely true.

That said, I do think it's fair to say that in some ways it goes the other way too.

When men talk about female privilege, very often they are thinking about young, pretty women. I'm sure that obese, unattractive women often think that they benefit very little from being a woman. They might not have people rushing in to protect them from harm. They might not be able to flirt their way out of a traffic ticket. They might not get the shorter prison sentences that other women would get.

There might be a difference in the degree of bias though if women are more selective than men in dating. If women form their impressions of men based on 20% of men and men form their impressions of women based on 50% of women, both will be biased, but not to the same degree.

august-mane · 2021-09-11T15:20:37+00:00

iirc the feminist complaint is not a straightforward wage gap but that women are often encouraged to go into different (lower paying) jobs from men, and in jobs where men and women work together women tend to get passed over for promotions in favor of men- the latter may have something to do expectations of childcare as well.

charcoalblueaviator · 2021-09-11T17:35:38+00:00

Interesting. Might be a biological driven sampling bias. But much more likely in my opinion is that their sample set itself is small. People are often aware and interested about individuals that are better off than them. Might be a gender independent factor. They probably look at the list of all popular powerholders through means that are availbale to them and notice a bias against their gender. While at the same time failing to notice the bias against the other gender. Might be true for both genders in their own exclusive ways.

There are problems with this though.

The gender of the elite category would not decide the outcome of their decisions by much.Typically Most individuals with a certain set of desirable traits reach the top and most of these intrinsic qualities are masculine in nature.

Hyper aggressive, competetive, highly driven beyond what is necessary, disagreeableness, ability to walk over your competetors, risk takers

I know women pretty up the food chain that have as much of these traits as their male counterparts. Their decision driving process pretty much goes through a similar chain of thought.

More propensity to risk taking, along with the above mentioned qualities also create a lot of casualties. Individuals who fail in their endeavours or take the wrong path to get rich or powerful. These are the bottom rungs which are once again populated mostly by men. These are the people that feminists often forget.

sakanak · 2021-09-11T20:37:53+00:00

Bruh, I thought this sub was different.

Title	Is it possible that hypergamous selection patterns are at least partly responsible for why so many feminists believe in the patriarchy theory?
Author	BloomingBrains
Upvotes	154
Comments	59
Date	September 11, 2021 1:29 AM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/plxzzd/is_it_possible_that_hypergamous_selection/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/is-it-possible-that-hypergamous-selection-patterns.1069357 https://theredarchive.com/post/1069357

Comments