Hypergamy vs...Something Else?

[beastman_wacko]

Greetings all; not sure if this is the right subforum for this question, so if it isn't, kindly send it to the right one.

Been listening a lot of Rollo on youtube (haven't bought his book yet), and I've heard many attributes of female hypergamy. There's something I'm not quite understanding and I wanted to run it across you experts and get your take on it.

Rollo has, many times, equated (or defined) FH as "alpha ****s, beta bucks" or, "dads before cads".

The textbook/dictionary definition of hypergamy is "marry a person of a superior caste or class". I realize there's a nuanced definition of how Rollo uses the word, replacing "marry" with "currently have a sexual relationship with". Under the textbook definition, both men and women can practice hypergamy, though Rollo has stated there's nothing concomittant in the male sexual strategy with female hypergamy.

What I eventually came to realize is that Rollo is not saying "Alpha ****s OR beta bucks". He's saying that women want "alpha ****s AND beta bucks".

Assuming I have that right, "hypergamy" seems to be the wrong word to express this particular aspect of the female reproductive strategy/imperative.

It seems like what this is, is "bi-directional duplicitous polygamy"; ie, the result of cultivating 2 mates, one for sexual pleasure and one for childrearing fundamentals, probably in a deceitful way, AND grooming society to both accept and masquerade this female charade as well.

Thoughts? Or am I still missing something?

 

[Ranger]

What I eventually came to realize is that Rollo is not saying "Alpha ****s OR beta bucks". He's saying that women want "alpha ****s AND beta bucks".

Thoughts? Or am I still missing something?

Nope. You are correct. A woman wants BOTH at the same time if she can’t find it in one man. (Extremely And almost impossibly rare)

That was rather astute of you to pick that up. Most men miss that nuance completely.

What do women want?
“Optimized Hypergamy with men remaining clueless”
Don’t ever forget this. Even if she is not consciously aware...her biology forces her to follow this imperative.


Your distinction above is the right usage to follow. They want BOTH at the same time if they can’t find the very rare optimized man who is both.

 

[behimo]

In his first book, the rational male, he discusses this topic.

how women in the prime of their SMV seek out genetically superior men and then in the waning half of SMV seek out the Beta providers and how feminism allows for this.

Greetings all; not sure if this is the right subforum for this question, so if it isn't, kindly send it to the right one.

Been listening a lot of Rollo on youtube (haven't bought his book yet), and I've heard many attributes of female hypergamy. There's something I'm not quite understanding and I wanted to run it across you experts and get your take on it.

Rollo has, many times, equated (or defined) FH as "alpha ****s, beta bucks" or, "dads before cads".

The textbook/dictionary definition of hypergamy is "marry a person of a superior caste or class". I realize there's a nuanced definition of how Rollo uses the word, replacing "marry" with "currently have a sexual relationship with". Under the textbook definition, both men and women can practice hypergamy, though Rollo has stated there's nothing concomittant in the male sexual strategy with female hypergamy.

What I eventually came to realize is that Rollo is not saying "Alpha ****s OR beta bucks". He's saying that women want "alpha ****s AND beta bucks".

Assuming I have that right, "hypergamy" seems to be the wrong word to express this particular aspect of the female reproductive strategy/imperative.

It seems like what this is, is "bi-directional duplicitous polygamy"; ie, the result of cultivating 2 mates, one for sexual pleasure and one for childrearing fundamentals, probably in a deceitful way, AND grooming society to both accept and masquerade this female charade as well.

Thoughts? Or am I still missing something?

 

[beastman_wacko]

Thanks Ranger.

So, to further assist (myself and others) with understanding the nuances, here, I'd like to pinpoint that the "aha!" moment (mind-blown) is that;

-she will be deceitful both to herself as well as you that she really wants (and is willing to) cultivate 2 mates to meet her reproductive strategy (ie, cheat on you...easily in fact).
-will work socially in fairly clandestine ways to obfuscate the fact that she (and all other women) also pursue this, consciously or otherwise, as a viable (indeed, proper) reproductive strategy.
-plenty of men (white knights, manginas, beta orbiters) are all too happy to play along with this arrangment because it gets them at least some sexual access.

As an aside I don't like the term "hypergamy", and really don't like "trading up" because it suggests that polygamy at any point along is not ALWAYS on the table as part of their strategy. (Ie, if I "trade up" a mate, it suggests I'm getting rid of the old one and keeping just the new; that's not what hypergamous women do, they in fact cultivate both)

 

[Ranger]

In his first book, the rational male, he discusses this topic.

how women in the prime of their SMV seek out genetically superior men and then in the waning half of SMV seek out the Beta providers and how feminism allows for this.

True. Personally, that difinition is true but very limited indeed.
In fact you can throw out the standard definition of Hypergamy as it can confuse people.

The definition should say...
“Her biology will seek to find its equilibrium with the acquisition of the man who will not only spark her breeding circuits but will also ensure her future survival is seen to. One man or two men or even more...makes no difference to her. She will act on it and then rationalize it later. Her imperative seeks an optimized level by use of her endocrine system to drive her impulses. Contract, marriage or moral codes have little or no effect at squelching her imperative. Civilization structure means nothing to the imperative.”

 

[Ranger]

She knows what she's doing, I've had plenty of women admit dual mating strategy to me:

1. "I'd have a one night stand with him only but he'd cheat in a relationship"
2. "the type of guy I like would beat me up for stuff I do so I date nicer guys"
3. "sure we sleep with guys like that but we won't marry them(they think being "worthy" of marriage is a selling point lol)

Pure example of both types of men. That breeding circuit can never be underestimated. They think it’s just them. LMAO
They only operate on what they feel. Then rationalize it later. What they feel is generated by the endocrine system. Biology.

 

[lamath]

Here is how i see it relationship wise.


Imo Rollos version of hypergamy is on the more pessimistic side, however he is spot on many things with social media and OLD it is more in evidence than ever.


Its all about how the women perceived you
At start of relationship lots of men will be seen as somewhat Alpha by their gf.
As relationship goes on and they get to know each other better, her imaginative version of the man or of his SMV potential will get a hard dose of reality, lots of men will also let them self go because alot less effort is needed to get sex.

Then the perceived Alpha status will slowly dwindle into Beta territory because of familiarity, depending on the women this might turn into resentment then its trouble.
I think its just the natural evolution of relationship and i dont think its all bad.
I dont agree that all LTR are losing proposition, even if the men turn out to be seen as a beta.

 

[beastman_wacko]

True. Personally, that difinition is true but very limited indeed.
In fact you can throw out the standard definition of Hypergamy as it can confuse people.

The definition should say...
“Her biology will seek to find its equilibrium with the acquisition of the man who will not only spark her breeding circuits but will also ensure her future survival is seen to. One man or two men or even more...makes no difference to her. She will act on it and then rationalize it later. Her imperative seeks an optimized level by use of her endocrine system to drive her impulses. Contract, marriage or moral codes have little or no effect at squelching her imperative. Civilization structure means nothing to the imperative.”

Ranger, thanks, this confirmation is exactly the response that elucidates the imprecision I find with the "hypergamy" label. And the only thing I'd add to this definition is the complicit nature of society in general to endorse and obfuscate her feminist imperative.

 

[guru1000]

You hypergamy fans, don't get too crazy.

She goes nowhere if you meet her needs. If a need is met, it collapses.

The most alpha, or best looking, or richest is a fallacy insofar as you meet her alpha-enough need, rich-enough need, handsome-enough need. And this is quite easy to do with the bulk of women and harder to do with top-tier women. So choose your poison accordingly.

 

[Ranger]

You hypergamy fans, don't get too crazy.

She goes nowhere if you meet her needs. If a need is met, it collapses.

The most alpha, or best looking, or richest is a fallacy insofar as you meet her alpha-enough need, rich-enough need, handsome-enough need. And this is quite easy to do with the bulk of women and harder to do with top-tier women. So choose your poison accordingly.

Yeah I’m not even a fan of the word itself.

 

[mrgoodstuff]

Yeah I’m not even a fan of the word itself.

Use of the word is "victim" speak.

 

[Ranger]

Use of the word is "victim" speak.

In most cases for sure. It is also inaccurate when used for a woman spinning plates or having side meat.

There are plenty of women who have no intention whatsoever of leaving her man yet has that need to fuk that breeder and go home to her provider.

What many men don’t realize is that a woman can love you and still get pregnant by another man and it’s just a passing thought.