Tag: SSH

Reflections on a Gamma Icon

A Gamma wonders if perhaps he might have done better to avoid patterning his behavior on an iconic Hollywood Gamma.

A generation of American male teenagers, me included, saw themselves in Duckie—charming, quirky and overlooked. Duckie belonged an elite gang of best friends “Pretty in Pink” screenwriter John Hughes made the beating heart of his ’80s teen filmography—Cameron Frye in “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off,” Farmer Ted in “Sixteen Candles” and Watts in “Some Kind of Wonderful”—characters who embodied the pain of being young and not yet able to be honest about your own desires.

Beyond Hughes’ other sidekicks, “Duckie” has become synonymous with “weird friend thrown over for safe, popular choice,” adolescent canon reinforced by a generation of boys who mimicked Duckie—in dress, manner and seduction—to joke and serenade their way into the hearts of their dream girls.

Disciples of Duckie, we had it all wrong.

No, you don’t get to be with the girl of your dreams just because you want to. No, you don’t get to avoid telling her how you feel and then resent her for showing interest in another guy. No, it’s not romantic, but rather a little sad that you can only express how you feel to her father and in charming but empty gestures like lip-synching Otis Redding’s “Try a Little Tenderness.” And no, you aren’t an unsung hero because your dream girl doesn’t dream of you. You’re a bad best friend for not respecting her decisions and thinking that means her love for you isn’t worth anything.

Re-watch “Pretty in Pink” and Duckie comes off not as a role model but as a cautionary tale about what we can destroy while growing up: The movie may end happily for everyone — even Duckie, who doesn’t win Andie’s heart but nobly tells her to forgive Blane for canceling on taking her to the prom. Before all that, Duckie comes dangerously close to losing Andie forever: Not 30 seconds after the Otis Redding serenade, Blane shows up to take Andie on their first date. Duckie, not knowing about the date, accuses Andie of disrespecting herself by going out with a rich guy, and then threatens to not be there (i.e., not be her friend) if she gets her heart broken.

Never mind that Duckie doesn’t know Blane and has no claim on Andie, and, since Andie is a smart, self-possessed, attractive young woman, she has probably received this kind of attention before. Since Andie and Duckie have been friends since childhood, Duckie having his world rocked when Andie goes on a date feels less like unfairness and more like Duckie ignoring an entire adolescence’s worth of evidence that Andie isn’t just his pal or his valentine, but a woman and a person in her own right.

“But Duckie’s pain was real!,” I just heard a squad of ex-Duckies cry. I used this excuse to not grieve my own teenage heartbreak but instead make it the heartbreaker’s fault. I wish had known better than to think my high school best friend/crush would fall for me after months of not letting on, and then getting mad when she fell for someone else, and in between trying to woo her with a lip-synch performance (mine was Mötley Crüe’s “Home Sweet Home.” Laugh all you want.).

It strikes me that the primary challenge of the Gamma is overcoming his intrinsic narcissism. Again and again, in fiction and in real life, we observe the Gamma’s total inability to grasp that everything is not about him.

The Alpha jock doesn’t hate you. He doesn’t think about you at all when you’re not actively annoying him or one of the women in his orbit. The hot cheerleader doesn’t despise you. In fact, she would be offended by the very idea that she had any opinion about you at all. The normal people don’t particularly dislike you, they just want you to shut up and leave them alone. The Girl of Your Dreams is not, and will never be, attracted by the strength of your desire for and/or your devotion to her.

And literally no one thinks you’re charming or roguish. Snark and sarcasm are not wit. Neither are movie quotes, however apt. Just stop it already.

The world isn’t out to get the Duckies of the world. It simply doesn’t like them very much because they’re weird and reliably annoying narcissists.

In sum, the Gamma’s emotional pain is no one else’s fault and no one else’s problem.

DISCUSS ON SG

Mailvox: It’s All Nonsense

In which an email is received.

Are sigma males even more dangerous? and what are your thoughts on the ex gamma who are basically thought of sigmas? and I wanna specifically mention you about the “Wise thinker” youtube channel who seems to be fucking completely manipulating the sigma into a now normal man delta, or a neck beard gamma, and also the steve jabba site, that london pua, and the other false acclaimed gamma youtubers who seriously clim to be sigma and not living as one, suck pussies, though anyways, what is your entry of the sigma, I wanna know, and also make sure to look at these lil’ kids at YT

It’s all nonsense. Ignore all of them.

Before the concept of Sigma was introduced, every Gamma was convinced he was an Alpha. Now they’re all telling everyone how Sigma they are when they’re not redefining it to serve their own purposes.

It’s just further confirmation, as if any was needed, of a) how useful the concept is, and, b) how Gammas are going to gamma.

DISCUSS ON SG

Why Women Shouldn’t Lead

The Premier of Estonia demonstrates, with her fascinating example of how to view geopolitics from the perspective of a junior high school girl’s approach to boys. That’ll show that him!

UPDATE: Exhibit 2 on the subject.

Finland has officially announced its intention of joining the NATO military alliance. During a cabinet meeting on Sunday, President Sauli Niinistö and ministers “agreed that Finland would apply for membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO),” a government statement read.

Finnish accession to the US-led bloc would require the unanimous approval of the existing 30 member states, including Turkey, which has suggested it could veto the move. A report on Finland’s planned membership will be submitted to the national parliament once it’s endorsed at a government plenary session, the statement went on to say.

“Our decision is historic. The most important thing is the safety of Finland and our citizens. The decision strengthens security and cooperation between the Nordic countries,” Prime Minister Sanna Marin said.

Nothing like committing yourself to war with Russia on someone else’s say-so to strengthen your security. This also demonstrates that there is no contradiction between evil and stupidity; for this sort of thing, large quantities of both are required.

DISCUSS ON SG

Mailvox: Gammas Never Get It

I can always tell when an email about the SSH is from a “recovering gamma”. Strangely enough, I never seem to hear from any gamma who simply accepts the reality of his behavioral patterns and identifies as a gamma. Anyhow, see if you can spot the fundamental problems in what he describes as his attempt to summarize the concepts “briefly for myself and others.”

I am a recovering gamma currently being purified by becoming a delta. I’m trying to summarize the SSH in one-sentence per role to aid my own understanding.

A gamma is not an alpha because he lacks the necessary abilities to top any hierarchy.

A gamma is not a beta because he doesn’t admire anyone more highly than himself.

A gamma is not a delta because he lacks the humility to realize he is a beginner (a person who lacks abilities), and that a beginner must begin at the beginning of any hierarchy.

A gamma is not an omega because he has enough social abilities to not be rejected as a total outsider.

A gamma is not a sigma because he lacks the necessary abilities to exist independent of any hierarchy, whereas a sigma has enough abilities to not need most hierarchies (except when they are useful to him, in which case he is able to benefit from them by integrating himself into them as needed)

A gamma is therefore defined by the very fact that he is not any other role in the functional hierarchy (delta/beta/alpha or sigma), and refuses to recognize that he must reshape himself into one of those roles and submit to their requirements.

It appears he still has some ways to go, as this would-be-summary is mostly the conventional gamma kerfluffery that seeks to elude the ineluctable: a gamma male is any man or boy whose behavior fits within the parameters of the behavioral pattern described as gamma. And it’s a bit ironic, in that this very attempt to summarize – which is little more than an attempt to redefine and impose the gamma’s self-perceptions on that which has already been defined externally – is very much in keeping with typical gamma behavior.

A gamma is never, ever, going to possess alpha behavioral patterns. Never going to happen. He can, of course, be a situational alpha in a hierarchy of gammas, or in one comprised of mixed gammas and omegas, but his behavioral pattern and his habitual thought processes will remain the same. The “summary” is clearly false, however, because it fails to recognize the fractal nature of the SSH.

As for bravos, forget admiration. Every natural gamma instinct inclines him to contradict the bravo impulse; indeed, the bravo’s primary role is probably cracking down and riding herd on gammas so his alpha doesn’t have to do so.

The omega summary is adequate.

The delta summary omits the key components of competence and the desire for respect. The biggest single observable difference between the delta and the gamma is that if you assign a task to a delta, he’ll get it done with a minimum of fuss. If you assign a task to a gamma, he’ll start telling you why he can’t do it, how it should be done, why it would be better for him to do something else, how he plans to go about doing it, and why you should really just do it yourself; the one thing you can be certain he won’t do is stop talking about it in lieu of actually getting it done.

The sigma summary omits the important element that sigmas are often perceived as, and mistaken for, alphas by others. This is why the gamma pretension to sigmahood is so risible, because even on their best days, no one ever confuses the guys from Revenge of the Nerds for Conan, James Bond, or Hannibal Lector.

But the key point is to recognize that the gamma is not defined by what he is not, but rather, by how others observe him to behave. If you win every argument, if you’re pretty sure that you’re the most clever person in the room, if you think you’ve got a roguish charm, and you believe it is the intensity of a man’s affections that is the prime determinant of whether he deserve their object or not, then you’re probably a gamma.

DISCUSS ON SG

Grindset to Nowhere

An explication of the way in which those pushing self-improvement have managed to completely misunderstand the concept of the Sigma from the SSH:

A little over 11 years ago, Vox Day introduced his breakdown of the social-sexual hierarchy for men. In his breakdown, he introduced the concept of the Sigma male.

This concept has been hotly debated over the years, with many people who analyzed Game either denying their existence or outright declaring themselves to be Sigma males. Generally, I’ve found that anyone who classifies himself as a Sigma is more than likely a Gamma or Omega.

That aside, the concept was largely romanticized by armchair social analysts because they were perceived as the ideal man. They were James Bond, the renegade who was suave with women but also literally went his own way, only settling down with a woman who accepts his disinterest as nothing personal.

More recently, Vox correctly pointed out that Hunter Biden was a Sigma male. This, despite the fact that Hunter had zero qualms about banging his widowed sister-in-law, his niece, Obama’s daughter, and funding Biolabs in Ukraine while smoking crack.

He doesn’t sound like much of an ideal man, does he?

The truth is, the social-sexual hierarchy as laid out by Vox was never meant to be one to be something you can apply morality to. This is a mistake that many men, especially Gammas and Deltas, make, assuming that men higher in status are also morally superior, in some way, with the Sigma being the chaotic good guy, as it were.

The social-sexual hierarchy is amoral. It describes the behaviors of men at different levels of the hierarchy, it does not describe their moral inclinations.

As a general rule, you can be certain that anyone who is particularly obsessed with his SSH categorization and wants to discuss it at length in public is a Gamma, for the same reason that anyone who is particularly obsessed with anything from anime to Star Wars and wants to discuss it at length in public is a Gamma.

While I think it’s good that people are utilizing the Sigma concept to help men self-improve, and while I have no objection to people attempting to put their own spin on things no matter how objectively stupid it might be – don’t be surprised, the individual who literally coined the acronym MPAI is unlikely to have lofty expectations of human behavior – I also think it is important to be sure that those who wish to correctly understand the SSH and utilize it to anticipate human behavior would do well to distinguish between the actual concept of the SSH: Sigma Male and whatever vagaries of imaginative self-puffery have been inspired by it.

Being at the top of the social hierarchy is not indicative of being a good person. To the contrary, in an evil society, most of the people at the upper levels are bad people, with the most wicked tending to rise to the top. And there is no intrinsic value in any of the ranks, they are merely appellations that describe persisting behavioral patterns.

That being said, I do wish those who “just want to ask honest questions” or “get clarification” or “wonder if there might be a need for a new rank” would understand that pretty much everyone grasps that these are nothing more transparent efforts to talk about themselves.

DISCUSS ON SG

Mailvox: Woman Trouble

One reader takes objection to my observations of the obvious options available to the various MGTOW:

You really need to open your eyes more. I was married for 28 years to a “Christian woman” until she decided leaving and taking as much of my stuff as she could was a better option.

Your rants against MGTOW really need to investigate further, though I won’t hold my breath waiting for that.

You won the relationship (etc.) lottery, as you have admitted in the past. Many of us did not. Modern women are not like my grandmother who was committed to my grandfather even after his death.

Am I supposed to pursue a woman to build a family with (my ex-wife was infertile) at 59? I have already been removed from the gene pool, if that matters. Yeah, I should have known better when marrying, that she would not be faithful for the long run, but that is only easy to see now, and things have gotten much worse.

You do tend to ignore things that go against your beliefs, but I wish I had the silver spoon you had. I got the brains (likely not as high in IQ as you, but high enough), but I never had the support myself. I still do what I can, but not much I can do now. Though I guess I should just be smothered by a pillow in your eyes since I was born 2 years before a magical boundary!

You write some well thought out stuff, but then you also write lots of idiocy. You got the faithful trophy wife. I would have been satisfied with just the faithful part!

The reader’s point is obvious and absurd. He completely ignores the fact that I specifically address “risk”, “failure”, and “casualties”.

MGTOW is retarded, self-destructive, and evil, not unlike feminism.

The idea that one should not fight a war to defend the continuation of civilized society because there is a statistically significant chance that some soldiers will be wounded and killed is astonishingly stupid. The reader should be aware that he is allowing the understandable emotions of his having been a casualty in the intersexual wars to color his ability to reason about the subject correctly.

Another reader writes about the fading of a long-term non-marital relationship.

I’m hoping you can give me some relationship advice. I tried finding some stuff on the old Alpha Game Plan website but couldn’t find anything helpful. Today, my girlfriend of 8 years told me that she feels like the spark is gone from our relationship, that we’re not that close anymore, and that she’s not as attracted to me as she used to be. She said that there isn’t someone else, so at least that’s something.

What should I do? I feel floored by what she told me and I don’t want to do something that nukes our relationship rather than saves it.

The reader should break up with his girlfriend and focus on improving himself in order to become someone that another woman can be attracted to. If a woman isn’t attracted to a man, then the relationship is already dead, because female attraction to a man is an effective proxy for female commitment to her relationship with him. As counterintuitive as the advice may sound, breaking up probably his best chance to eventually get her back in the event he still wishes to do so down the post-improvement road.

More importantly, if she was actually the one, he would have married her 6 or 7 years ago. Ergo, he is best-advised to simply break it off and move on in light of her admission.

DISCUSS ON SG

At Least His Feelings Are Safe

A tragi-comedy in three acts.

SPACEBUNNY: Women instinctively hate and avoid gammas – these are all examples of gamma behaviour and are not genuine nice guys. The genuine nice guy might not always get the girl, but he almost always eventually gets a girl, settles down, gets married and has a family. These guys will never have any of that.

MGTOW: I just went MGTOW instead and stop caring about what women consider a nice guy or not. Actually I stopped caring what women consider full stop, my bank account and emotional health has never been better.

VD: And you have also rendered yourself entirely irrelevant to human society until you die alone and forgotten. Congratulations. A hedonistic, coke-addled musician who can’t figure out how to put on a condom is literally more useful to the world than you are, and will contribute more to the future than you ever will. But at least you won’t get your feelings hurt again, and that’s what’s important.

The reality is that the whole Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW) act is little more than gamma posturing. Omegas who have no choice but to go their own way due to social rejection don’t make such a major production of it and are usually quite willing to admit that they are lonely and would prefer that things were otherwise. And most MGTOW will drop the act in a heartbeat if a woman happens to smile at them or say something nice to them, at least until they inevitably say something that causes the smile to vanish from her face and inspires her to flee as quickly as social etiquette permits.

Lifelong loneliness is not a reasonable price to pay for avoiding the occasional rejection by women. And there is no point in pretending you are not lonely, because if you weren’t, you wouldn’t be constantly posting on social media telling strangers how you don’t care what women think about you. And doubling down on the very weirdness that both men and women find off-putting is not something that will increase either your emotional health or your odds of social success.

If your life sucks, then change it. What have you got to lose?

DISCUSS ON SG

Triggering the Irrelevant

All the cowards and incels on Gab were triggered by this.

The future belongs to those who show up for it. Stop whining. Start fighting by getting married, having children, and planting the acorns of the trees in whose shade your grandchildren will play. Yes, there are risks. You might get your heart broken. You might lose half your toys. So what? Action requires risk and risk is inherent to life.

There is no point in whining, blackpilling, or worrying about things you can’t possibly control. If you’re not willing to take risks to build the future, if you’re not willing to live, if you’re not willing to set your face against the entropy of the universe, then you are irrelevant and your inferior genetic line will end with you, due to your cowardly narcissism.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Tribe of Gamma

They simply can’t help themselves. This was one comment thread sparked by one of my posts on Gab. Notice how the gamma adroitly made himself the subject while striking a superior pose and proactively defending himself without even touching upon the actual subject.

Stop crying about how “they’re trying to divide us,” Boomers. They ALREADY divided the USA in 1965 with the Naturalization Act. Now nearly half of all US citizens are not Americans in any meaningful sense of the word. There is no united “we” anymore. So find your tribe and defend it. Because everyone else already is.

My tribe is nerds who have above average IQ and who are curious and who enjoying sharing what they’ve learned. My tribe has different colors. Nerd chicks are most welcome. We don’t care how pretty you are or how much money you have. The funny thing is most people don’t wanna join this tribe. They don’t feel comfortable among us. People tend to mingle with people of their same IQ level.

Yes, I know your tribe. And I, like many people, cannot stand your annoying, posturing, self-overrated little tribe. If you’d all simply focus on the actual learning rather than on constantly trying to share what you think you’ve learned with people who have never shown a scintilla of interest in it, the rest of us might not dislike your tribe so much.

Yeah, well, nerds have more fun. And that‘s cuz we’re not carrying around too much baggage of self-consciousness. Speaking of self-consciousness, you sound kinda angry. Or are you just hangry and need a snack?

But you don’t have more fun. You’re all desperately posturing and showing off your knowledge of useless trivia non-stop in the futile hope that one day, a woman will let you talk at her without turning away from you in disgust.

UPDATE: It just gets more amusing and tragic than you would have imagined.

We found things that are more interesting than sex. Ironically, we’re good in bed and that’s cuz we like to read instruction manuals.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Gamma Postures

If you want to see a prime example of Gamma posturing, look no further than Curt Doolittle’s amusingly inept response to my reference to the mathematical impossibility of evolution by natural selection accounting for the observed genetic variance of modern species. He was responding to my initial post on Gab, which linked back to my recent post on the discovery that Charles Darwin plagiarized Patrick Matthew’s earlier work. Note the way in which his behavior is textbook gamma.

You probably know that evolution is a mathematically impossible fraud. But what you may not know is that Darwin was a plagiarist and a fraudulent anti-Christian psyop from the very beginning.

This was Mr. Doolittle’s response:

@voxday VOX: You aren’t intellectually capable of making that statement, and for those of us who are, it’s one of the dumbest possible statements one could make.

So quite the contrary, evolution is mathematically deterministic because the first principle of the universe is equivalent to the term ‘evolve’.

In fact, the interesting thing about life on earth is that it occurred so quickly in the history of the universe, since it takes so much time to evolve the elements necessary, by generations of stars’ life cycles. And extinction events caused rapid evolution by creating punctuated equilibriums. One of which is ‘humans’ over the past three million years.

No more of your lies.

You’re flat-out wrong, Curt. And I’m a lot smarter than you are, so you really should think twice before trying to “correct” your intellectual superiors.

You haven’t done the math. You clearly haven’t even UNDERSTOOD the math, or the problems it presents to those who believe that evolution by natural selection is capable of accounting for the observed genetic variance in modern species, including homo sapiens sapiens.

Your proposed excuse of “extinction events” is not only obvious, it’s also not viable due to the known near-extinction events and their effects on the genetic variance of affected species such as the cheetah.

You simply don’t possess the knowledge required to even begin discussing the matter, you haven’t done the required work, and it is obvious to anyone who has. Posturing and making snarky comments – your usual modus operandi – isn’t going to suffice here.

By all means, feel free to show us the math that works. Hypothesize as many extinction events and punctuated equilibriums as you like and show us precisely how many are required. You won’t be the first to try and fail, and you won’t be the last.

@voxday There is zero chance you’re smarter than I am. Zero chance you’ve done the math. And an absolute certainty you’re quoting a Yale professor of theology who also claimed he’d done the math. And both of you proving that the function of Abrahamism is to teach adherence to lie so that they can engage in social construction of falsehoods, in order to collectively obtain false confidence is by false pretense of sexual, social, political, economic, military, status, explaining their evasion (or failure) of evolutionary adaptation, precisely because they lack that status by demonstrable means other than social construction of falsehoods.

The female means of lying by undermining truth and social construction of falsehoods: Judaism > Christianity > Islam … Marxism > Neo-Marxism > Postmodernism > PC-Woke.

Same tactics (female undermining of truth) same strategy (social construction of a falsehood that attempts to deny evolutionary superiority) and same result (Dark Age of Ignorance and Superstition).

That’s the truth of why you lie, the history of why you lie, and the technique by which you lie, and the evolutionary origin of how and why you lie, in the female means of anti-social behavior, economic, political, cultural, civilizational warfare, because the female is weaker, and must seduce with false promises (lie) and undermine with disinformation (lie) by fomenting insurrection (war) because of her (your) weakness.

Period. End of Story. So, Accusation Submitted. Argument Presented. Judgment Presented. Conviction Issued. The only question is the sentencing and the punishment for your crimes against humanity.

And yet, I am observably smarter than you are. I have done the math. I am not quoting anyone, let alone “a Yale professor of theology”. Your “absolute certainty” is not only 100 percent false, it is easily proven to be false since the evidence has been public for years.

I’ve publicly debated JF Gariepy about this. The original work has been posted on my blog since 2019. The only one lying here is you, as everyone can easily confirm.

But congratulations on proving my statement that you don’t do the work, you don’t possess the relevant information, and that your modus operandi is nothing more than snark and posturing.

Transcript of 2019 debate

Math behind the mathematical impossibility argument

DISCUSS ON SG