[RedPillUK]

(08-19-2016 06:27 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

No, I won't let this go.

Vox's best argument doesn't get promoted enough. He says that Liberalism can be reduced to five contradictory ideals: Tolerance, Equality, Progressivism, Inclusion, and Diversity. To combat Liberalism, one must reject all instances of those ideals in every part of one's life, no matter how small.

Since your correction implied that I and DonnyGately are equally to blame, I won't let this go. We're all better off if you say that you've never moderated any forum, and so even though you had good intentions, you still over-reached.

Yeah Kaotic, that was really out of line saying that an argument might be coming and implying MMX had anything to do with that. That cannot be justified. He did not have any blame! It was all that other poster! He is not letting this issue go and rightly so.

I bet you've never even moderated a forum before, you loser. Next time you want to say something, don't. Seriously, I know you had good intentions, but I agree, we're all better off if you just disavow what you did and admit;

- you've never moderated a forum before,
- you lack knowledge on how to do it,
- MMX was right and DonnyGately was wrong
- and sincerely apologise for all your transgressions.

And then maybe RVF can move on.

[MMX2010]

Kaotic,

Exactly. There wasn't a stronger leaning upon the low-ranked forum member who was breaking the rules. There was an equal leaning upon him and me. I rejected, and will continue to reject, every possible justification you present for equally calling out both myself and DonnyGately.

Since you asked me to write about Vox's ideas, I'll add on to what I said before. Liberalism is reducible to Tolerance, Equality, Progressivism, Inclusion, and Diversity. And fighting Liberalism requires you to reject all five of those ideals, in all areas, no matter how small.

The clearest and simplest way to do so is to assert the importance of Hierarchy and Rules. The Liberal way of making "peace" involves calling on everyone EQUALLY to stop fighting, but the Conservative way of making peace involves making everyone respect the Hierarchy and the Rules.

I'm sure you can match your attempt at peacemaking to the Liberal approach, but I hope that RedPillUK's renewed involvement in this thread makes you realize that the Liberal approach can't work. Once you equally empower the rule-breakers and rule-followers, you degrade the Rules and Hierarchy that a community requires.

[Comte De St. Germain]

[Huey]

[dispenser]

This definition of Beta makes sense for noobs.
The /r9k/ crowd are inclined to what he calls gamma status, but they see the sexual market as divided between "Chads" and "betas," and they include themselves in the latter category.
If they realised there are actually degrees to socio-sexual dominance, maybe they'd stop sitting on their hands and try to improve themselves.
Instead they sob about not having been the captain of the football team. Dreadful people, but the world would be better if they had fewer reasons to whine.

Myself, I see status as a matter of perception and degree. You can be anything to anyone if you play the right part in the right setting.
Nothing parches panties or kills sales like reality does; I have no use for it.

[Saweeep]

It's an internet forum; get a grip gents.

[Travesty]

I was really hoping there was a Horndog Douchebag option.

Looks like I can't vote.

[Akwesi]

I think the main thing to ask is not whether the scheme is "right" or "true", but whether it can be useful to us in game and life. In my opinion it is mostly helpful if you have gamma tendencies. You can learn how to identify them and try to avoid them. You can learn to act more "normal" (beta/delta) in work situations and more "cool" (sigma) in social situations. When I go to a job interview, for example, I know I am smart and know my shit, but I also know that I can say original things that come off as weird. A hardcore gamma would just "be himself", not get the job, and blame the world for being unfair (been there). Now I actually just focus on "pretending to be normal" in interview situations because I know my country emphasizes conformity and because, let's face it, nobody wants to hire a weird guy. This strategy has been very successful.

And like others have pointed out, this is very situational. Thanks to this and other sites in the manosphere I can even play a decent alpha when necessary - dominate some types of women and some types of work and social situations. I'm not a natural at it, but I keep getting better, and that's really what it's all about.

[DarkGable]

Omega for now. Work is in progress though

[The Man w/ the Golden Gun]

This thread in the Game forum is about "game", but it's not about game. Big difference.

These guys said everything else already:

(08-17-2016 05:31 PM)kaotic Wrote:  

This is like horoscopes for bitches.

(08-18-2016 04:03 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

I don't buy into this. Male standing isn't like female beauty which is fixed. It's largely situational.

The Alpha on campus becomes a Gamma on a Saturday night if he doesn't know how to handle himself in the city. The Beta becomes Alpha when the storm hits and he's the only one who knows what to do.

...
While men do slot into categories, they're far more slippery than people seem to realize. Leave the categorizing of humans to Jezebel. It's not that simple because the people who brought you the computer, the car, and the use of backwards tapes on records aren't that simple.

(08-18-2016 06:49 PM)JacksonRev Wrote:  

It's not F = MA, it's just something to be used to improve your life. Are Venkat's sociopaths, clueless, and losers the be all and end all of work? No, but they're still quite useful in understanding organizations.

If the socio-sexual hierarchy doesn't help you, that's great. You have a much greater intuitive understanding of human behavior than I do, and I'm sure you're well prepared in every social situation.

[MMX2010]

Dispenser,

I agree with you about the danger of having only two categories. When you think of everything in terms of Alpha and Beta, your every move (and outcome) becomes prone to extremist thinking: you're either a total success or a complete failure, and there are no such categories as "slightly successful" nor "moderately successful".

When your every social interaction is viewed through an extreme lens, you're also more likely to both lie and try to control other people's perception of you.

[MMX2010]

One of the most reliable Gamma tells is that they accuse others of being "worked up" or "thin-skinned", rather than discussing the substance of the disagreement. Rather than pursuing the disagreement to the end, where someone must Win and the other must Lose, the Gamma accuses the other person of being "worked up" so that he can "win" by not fighting.

One of my favorite books (and Martin Luther King's) is called Moral Man, Immoral Society. And the most important passage differentiates between Peace and Justice.

Peace is the feeling of no one fighting anyone, but Justice is the condition of fair-distribution of valuable things like money and respect. Peace without Justice is never peaceful at all, because Injustice is the greatest threat to Peace.

Calling people "worked up" when they aren't, (and especially when you can't prove that they are), is a form of Injustice. So is telling someone that they're "hiding behind the rules". So is telling someone to "get a grip" - because you don't know and cannot prove that they "lost" their "grip".

The reason that Hierarchies and Rules create Peace is that they also attempt to create Justice, rather than unjustly imposing the "Let's nobody every fight again!" condition.

[brobrobro]

Most RVF members: Gamma.

[Il Bersagliere]

(08-20-2016 03:34 PM)brobrobro Wrote:  

Most RVF members: Gamma.

Speak for yourself, man.

[MMX2010]

I wouldn't say that most RVF members are Gamma, but I will say that this topic brings out a lot of Gamma behavior. Seeing Vox handle his critics in his typical strong and cutting manner has been educational.

More interesting, the majority of RVF members claim to be Sigmas. Sigmas!? If I remember correctly, Vox has said that Sigmas are the rarest type. And my sense of them is that they're at least +1 SD in IQ, but they don't intuitively grasp the majority of social interactions, particularly those which create large scale social bonding.

In a large random sample, the majority of men (70% or more) would be Deltas. But RVF is not a random sample of men, so the idea that we're mostly Sigmas is interesting and funny.

[pancakemouse]

(08-20-2016 04:35 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

I wouldn't say that most RVF members are Gamma, but I will say that this topic brings out a lot of Gamma behavior. Seeing Vox handle his critics in his typical strong and cutting manner has been educational.

More interesting, the majority of RVF members claim to be Sigmas. Sigmas!? If I remember correctly, Vox has said that Sigmas are the rarest type. And my sense of them is that they're at least +1 SD in IQ, but they don't intuitively grasp the majority of social interactions, particularly those which create large scale social bonding.

In a large random sample, the majority of men (70% or more) would be Deltas. But RVF is not a random sample of men, so the idea that we're mostly Sigmas is interesting and funny.

Keep in mind that Sigmas would be more likely to be the type of guys that would seek out a forum to talk about Game on the internet.

I'm a Sigma, and I'm not surprised that many (most) other guys are as well.

[MMX2010]

Corsega,

I agree with you.

But if what you say is true, it's also true that the internet's most politically and socially astute community is mostly comprised of individuals who couldn't understand the most basic social and political rules that create group-bonding.

Think of how ironic and funny that is.

[TonySandos]

..

[TonySandos]

"This is stupid/doesn't count/Vox Day is a beta"

All these type of responses have the intent of redirecting the discussion or faultily leveling criticism against this scale system. Of course this scale is overly reductionist and not calibrated perfectly, but strong refusal to self label and acknowledge negative realities about yourself is beta/gamma as it gets. If anyone feels called out it that's too bad. This is reminiscent of all alpha/beta dichotomy pushers failing to realize that them ascribing to it as a life philosophy cements proof of their 'beta-dom'.

Brokenarrows said he this it's not universally accurate.
What I think is off about this chart or scale is that the wrong measurements are being applied to position peoples positions on this scale. "
There's no such thing as a situational" anything to me as I vehemently believe not only the source of life outcomes, but how adaptive someone is to achieve success is relating to mindset or total life perspective.

There's probably rich gammas, there's disgraced alphas, there's very sociable sigmas, but they're all firmly rooted in there personality category.
Take our favorite alpha example as of late; Donald Trump. If he did end up going bankrupt next year, would he turn into a beta, delta, gamma, omega or sigma? No, he never will. Even if Trump experienced a large personal tragedy, his will power would still be present. His charisma would still be there. His survivor mindset would still be emplaced. All of this is irrelevant to the amount of women he would have as prospects. His will to power would still be a force of nature that separates him from nearly all men, allowing him to win it all back again. It's laughable to think he could be purged into another category.

Many of you get so stuck on seeing life as scoreboard of sex-numbers where running up a tally gets your name put up there. You're passed without notice by these other powerful traits that separate the common man from the ones that are extraordinary. The fixation on sex itself is a sign of a lower caste man as the lower caste man lacks a mission that is exceptional; something that is to be achieved beyond the abilities of the common man.

Paraphrasing Vox Day;
'...but in certain situations women won't even look at me when in other situations they're groveling at my feet!'

Women have always been irrational, fickle ignorant and absurd. Success with them is telling, but no means a measurement since we've crawled out of the bronze age. The combination of: happiness, mindset, finances, time, achievement, women and success measure the all around man to me.
-----------

A letter to the first guy that responds to me with accusations and ad hominem;

You passionately rail against what I've written here because it pertains to you and you know it. Though you pass yourself off as a "alpha", "beta" or "sigma", the truth is you feel inadequate and this community helps fill that void by converting life into a game of duck hunt with women as the other factors fall to the wayside. You probably frequent many of the alpha/beta dichotomy threads or mention it often. What you're unintentionally doing though is hurting the progress and self actualization of other men here. It obscures truth and admission of strangers on the internet with false advice and entrapping mindset to justify something about yourself in the group forum. Admittance of our caste in life is healthier and more forgiving in the long run than denial and living a lie.

[MMX2010]

TonySandos,

I agree with everything you wrote.

This is Vox's latest article that directly mentions Roosh. I think it's one of the best articles he's ever written.

It cites a commentator who asks, "Would you rather have a couple more years of being sexually libertine, or would you rather save Western civilization? Those are the stark choices being presented to us now."

[TonySandos]

I.......


I was just trying to make commentary on what it is to judge a man holistically against measuring him to some materialistic means alone. Also call out some frauds. You went from zero to "save western civilization!" fast (lol), but I did read and appreciate the article MMX

[Robert Plant]

According to these criteria, the RVF guys I've met are mostly Sigma's with a few Beta's thrown in. If you are truly an Alpha you would probably not be here.

[Tim in real life]

Just reading this makes me objectively think of Sigmas as legit delinquents, but savvy enough with loopholes.

Sure, I reserve my contempt on Anglosphere women who deserved and earned my contempt, but seriously, at least I have the emotional mastery to NOT go Norman Bates.

[RoastBeefCurtains4Me]

I voted delta, but before taking the red pill, I had a lot of gamma and omega tendencies. The big aha moment for me in taking the red pill was to realize that women get wet for aggressive, dominant men, even though they say they want nice guys. I realized I always have had a part of me that was aggressive and dominant, but I was purposely suppressing it because I thought it was wrong to act that way.

As soon as I realized this, I changed a lot of my behavior, but I still had many bad habits. Vox has had a series of posts on how to avoid gamma behavior. He also has a guest poster call Delta Man, whose work I've found useful.

For example, I used to be very snarky and smart mouthed. I now realize how lame this is in most cases. It's best to speak directly rather than using backhanded comments all the time. This is just one example.

There are several posts earlier in this thread about learning to recognize and eliminate gamma behavior, and I strongly cosign the value of doing this. Hopefully many of the guys here were properly socialized as young men, and never developed into the gamma personality. However, I was socially awkward as a teen, and have only learned social skills gradually over the years. Having things broken down the way Vox does it has been useful to me.

I will say that I was never a full on nerd like the Comic Book Store Guy in The Simpsons. I dated several women and eventually married, and have had quality, non-nerd friends all my life. However, I had plenty to learn, and I've gotten a lot of value from Vox Day's work.

[TonySandos]

I don't think omegas can be converted to a healthy mindset. That's the difference between the other groups above them and real life omegas. If you're here, I don't think it's possible that you're an omega