Prestige based status and Dominance based status

[–]drok007Not white enough to be blue pill2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (40 children) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago* (39 children) | Copy Link

[–]drok007Not white enough to be blue pill2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXit be like that1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]drok007Not white enough to be blue pill1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

How is this a flaw in our thinking ?

Prestige = Hypergamy. It's our number 1 thing. The thing you guys always argue against the hardest. That women go for that prestige in the same way men go for youth.

Dominance outside of the status/prestige is a secondary thing for us. It's a way of emulating the traits of those high prestige men.

Women (like all humans) are attracted to things that are easily discoverable "tells" for the real traits their genes want, but which are frequently less discoverable than the "tell".

So genes key off the fact that "Highly dominant men are likely to be so because they have high prestige". In the evolutionary environment you couldn't BE a highly dominant man without having that status, someone would put an axe in your head.

Get or create the prestige... And you're covering all the bases.

BUT if you don't have that prestige then having the dominance in isolation "spoofs" the genetic system. Genes essentially think "Well, high prestige males are very dominant, and this guy is very dominant, Seems to me like he's a high prestige male. So lets fuck him".

Its the same mechanism as "negging" very high SMV girls.

Only very high SMV guys are "indifferent" to high SMV girls. Only very high SMV men are not supplicating to them, or are not trying obviously to curry favour (they don't need to).

So high SMV women kinda train themselves that "The high SMV guys are the ones who can be negative towards me. All the low SMV guys never are. Not being supplicating to me is an indicator of a high SMV male".

Then along comes a PUA or an RP guy.... And negs her... Or doesn't give her the pedestal placement that other medium/low SMV guys have always given her in the past. And because this is a trait of a high-SMV guy her genetic algorithms key off of that behaviour.

Do the equivalent of saying "Well, he's acting like a high-SMV guy would act. Therfore, maybe there is something I'm missing. Maybe he is a higher SMV guy afterall, he acts like one. Maybe we should fuck him despite our initial assessment of low/med SMV".

It's the same kind of spoofing of the system.

It's also why no-one around here ever understands how negging works. Because all of the chicks are mid/low SMV chicks (more or less). To them negging doesn't work... because they haven't had the same life experience of the high-SMV girls (plenty of people, not just high-smv guys, are dismissive of low SMV chicks).

They don't understand that for the very high-SMV chicks a neg is a very strong tell that "This guy might be more desirable than I initially thought, he is acting like the highly desirable guys do".

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

when an academically accomplished and/or popular and/or well connected guy AND girl get together that assortative mating not hypergamy. hypergamy is the notion that a girl of equal status won't be attracted to you, that you have to be better than.

No. The girl will be attracted to the guys prestige (hypergamy) but the guy will be attracted to the womans youth and beauty.

They may be matching on "equal value" but how they calculate that value is totally different. Different qualities have different values to each sex.

hypergamy is the notion that a girl of equal status won't be attracted to you, that you have to be better than.

Yes, you have to be "highest in status she can get" .... and she has to be "young looking and as beautiful as he can get"... Thats how it works.

Doesn't mean you have to be higher status than her. Just you have to be highest status she can get.

So an ugly as fuck female CEO can be happy with a male middle manager.... and a male CEO can be happy with a pretty-as-fuck waitress.

this study would suggest otherwise, women/genes can discern dominance and prestige.

I bet they can. genes are TRYING to not fall for the "false flag" and get the "real deal". Doesn't mean they can't be spoofed.

Mens genes want the prettiest/youngest female... and they can tell the difference between made up and not made up.... But the makeup STILL spoofs the genetic triggers.

It doesn't hit them as hard as "the real deal beauty"... But the triggers can help firing a fair amount anyway.

Enough for it to be a big assistance in the SMP.

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPoleObjectively Pro-moderate filth0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

then why is the average age difference of married couples a couple of years?

Because a couple of years (women almost all dating up in age) is what it averages out to. There are other factors at work. It's not infinitely malleable 15 yo's don;t go for 65 yo's... It's status within a fairly loose age range. I think that something like 80% of marriages are within a 5-6 year age difference.

and why is the rate of divorce higher for each year of age difference?

Thats an interesting question. I'd like to see the stats on that. At the moment I have no idea.

if your theory was true, why don't relationships reflect that?

They do... On average a male marrying a female is 2 years older... because men want the youth that offers, and women the status going the other way.

Some gaps are bigger, some smaller, but the average is that 2 years.

why isn't an older prestigious male and a young female the most viable relationship?

It is. Hence the 2 years.

But it's not infifnitely stretchable. Women also want a "high status partner roughly within their age bracket". Men are different. They want early 20's. Period (as revealed by perference data). Women in this instance are setting the boundaries of the market.

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPole1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]taiboworks1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPole1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

because the start and end of puberty are related to your entree into the romantic world. if women are two years ahead of men because of earlier starting and ending puberty they are developmentally two years ahead of men, making a 26yr old female (two years ahead) the same romantic development age as a 28yr old male (two years behind)

But why would that make a difference to the age of the man you had selected to marry 14 or so years later ? She's not presented with men from only that cohort, but all cohorts. If she were not attracted to "older men" in some way or another she could grab one her own age, or younger.

There is a systematic bias to older men. When science tries to find out why... It appears to be the men's higher status. That's what hypergamy is. This isn't remotely controversial.

Yeah, the 5% is where it starts to make a difference. Maybe taking your overall chance (first marriage) from 30-35%. But that's a small difference for a big gap. You have to go to insane gaps to really make a dent.

And men like youth. So we're prepared to take the risk to get the youth. Why would we change ?

[–]taiboworks1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPole1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

There is a difference, but those males lived those years. They aren't less experienced at anything but having urges towards females and a hairy ballsack.

They're as old and as experienced in being human beings as the females. This is a piss poor explanation. Compared to scientific survey evidence that women do respond to status but nothing I've ever seen that says "according to our study age of puberty was a correlating factor" I'm disinclined to believe something on such a shitty rationale.

And I don't care what it is at 4 years, because I'm quite happy that 5 years isn't a serious issue either.

You might as well tell women that "tall, strong, confident, witty, muscley men" are 18% more likely to divorce them.

They won't give a shit either.

Guys like younger girls. Percentages that low aren't going to scare anyone.

[–]taiboworks1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPole1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]taiboworks1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Maoist-Pussy2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]taiboworks0 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TheGreasyPole1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]drok007Not white enough to be blue pill1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]drok007Not white enough to be blue pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]drok007Not white enough to be blue pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]drok0071 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]taiboworks1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]drok0071 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]taiboworks1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]drok0071 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]taiboworks1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]epicasusual0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]drok007Not white enough to be blue pill1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]epicasusual1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]drok007Not white enough to be blue pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]epicasusual1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]alreadyredschoolRational egoism < Toxic idealism1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]2012Aceman4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

I feel that this is a common misconception with TRP: it does encourage both forms, but it places Prestige above them. How so? Prestige is value, it is the SMV, Prestige is what makes people want you and want to be around you. Prestige is the end result of hard work in your career or personal life that has now paid off in such a way that everyone is immediately drawn to you.

Dominance is also important, because Dominance is what keeps people from getting taken advantage of. The problem with Prestige and philanthropy is that the givers have to set limits, because the takers never will. I've been wholeheartedly a giver in the past and it got me nothing. Most people in this world mistake kindness for weakness, so the Dominance is there to ensure that only the right people have access to you, and to keep them interested. Sure women say that they like to be pined after, who doesn't, but that doesn't mean it's a successful approach. You'll be following them forever, giving to them constantly, and it will not matter. What they want is what they cannot have, whatever you're withholding, and that turns the game around where they follow you. No person is complete without both halves. The Dominant asshole who doesn't have the skills to back it up won't get far, and neither will the Prestigious doormat.

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]2012Aceman2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]2012Aceman1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

This assumes that every man who comes to the RedPill is already some alpha "deviant" beforehand, and that is untrue. Most men that come to TRP ARE the "prestige" men. They are the guys who believed that they could be liked and loved for who they are, for what they contributed, for how nice and charitable they were, and for how non-offensive they were. Then they realized, each of us in our own way, that that did not work. They were the bees that were making all of the honey, but it was the humans, not the bees, who got to enjoy the fruits of their labors. And when a guy is giving away all he has and all he is in a desperate attempt to be loved he realized eventually two things: nobody else likes him, and he doesn't like himself because he is nothing without others.

This is where TRP comes in. TRP says it is okay to live for yourself, to value yourself, and that if you want to have any satisfaction in life that is the only real way of attaining it. The reason why TRPers are angry is because they WERE the prestige men and they felt they were lied to about the benefits of prestige, and are thus angry at being taken advantage of. TRP tells you to stop being everybody else's toady, and to start being your own man with your own goals and your own pursuits. And surprise surprise, when you start valuing yourself and treating yourself as an equal instead of a servant, when you start believing that you can be and end to yourself instead of somebody else's free-ride, that's attractive.

EDIT: To be fair to you, TRP is sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy in what you described. The only men who will join TRP are those who are willing to live for their own satisfaction. Those who are "blue pill" in that they are content to be somebody else's prize would never think to join TRP, and thus would not water down it's image as a "high status asshole" environment.

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

This assumes that every man who comes to the RedPill is already some alpha "deviant" beforehand

no, a low status asshole is just a deviant. you can't be alpha if you are low status.

And when a guy is giving away all he has and all he is in a desperate attempt to be loved he realized eventually two things: nobody else likes him, and he doesn't like himself because he is nothing without others.

selfless people don't change their nature very often. selectively going after women you are obsessed with and getting angry when it doesn't work out doesn't make you a nice, friendly, selfless person.

The only men who will join TRP are those who are willing to live for their own satisfaction.

exactly, high accommodating men would never want to live like that. they are not wired like that.

Those who are "blue pill" in that they are content to be somebody else's prize would never think to join TRP, and thus would not water down it's image as a "high status asshole" environment.

high status assholes < low dominance high prestige types. so if you care about smv, you are doing it wrong.

[–]2012Aceman0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]2012Aceman0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Skitterbird 2 points2 points2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Skitterbird3 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I don't know; if I had to make a few wild ass guesses:

As someone else said, dominance is faster to attain than prestige. The very first self improvement principle of TRP is "Lift", something that starts building dominance fast. You can't change height, but lifting can and does build mass, change your facial aesthetics, increase your testosterone, and so on.
Dominance comes from the self (by choosing to behave a certain way), as opposed to prestige which is earned from others (from one's own accomplishments). TRP is big on things that come from the internal as opposed to the external.
TRP is (supposed to be) based on evolution and biology. Their definition of masculinity is based on the physical and behavioral effects of high testosterone, often associated with dominance and aggression. It should be no surprise they value this so highly.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin🔪Yeetus that Feetus🔪1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin🔪Yeetus that Feetus🔪0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mcconnelldemasi 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DietCokeImOnMyKnees80% Red / 20% Beta Bucks0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]taiboworksrational idealism > toxic egoism[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ppdthrowawaiRed Pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Prestige based status and Dominance based status
Author	taiboworks
Upvotes	8
Comments	63
Date	July 28, 2015 12:09 AM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/3eu503/prestige_based_status_and_dominance_based_status/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/prestige-based-status-and-dominance-based-status.280708 https://theredarchive.com/post/280708

Comments