One of terms they bandy about is Alpha Widow. This is a term basically concocted to give moral justification to Game/PUA punks who can then fantasize that they were the best sexual partners women ever had and flatter their egos by imagining that other men are jealous of them; and that these women still think about the Gamers and long for them. The Red Pills blame the women for this situation, of course. Now, Rollo Tomassi, a.k.a. The Rational Male, has written a long article on the subject of Alpha Widows. Naturally, he considers himself an expert on such things, and gives a definition of how this 'phenomenon' comes about:
"To understand the phenomenon of the Alpha Widow we must look at women’s evolved mating strategy – Hypergamy, a woman’s intrinsic desire to balance the best quality sexual/reproductive male with the best provisioning/parentally invested male. Since a woman’s mating strategy centers on quality in a long term partner(s) women tend to focus on ideals in men. The imperative drive for mate quality extends to both sides of women’s Hypergamous equation; the best genetic, sexual experience and the best long term security potential."
This is completely false; in fact, it's projecting male mating instincts upon women. There is no such thing as female hypergamy. It is men who are biologically and psychologically fixed to mate and reproduce with the best quality females. Tomassi afterwards claims that "only females are hypergamous" but that assertion doesn't even make logical sense. Why does anyone suppose that men are consistently attracted to young and physically beautiful women? It's because such women are---biologically speaking---best fitted for reproductive capacity. Since it's men who pursue women sexually and not the other way around, hypergamous tendencies in women would serve no biological purpose.
Understanding of this basic fact is the reason why civilized cultures practice monogamy. An example of the social disasters which follow among peoples who don't can be seen in the Middle East, where powerful Sheiks and oligarchs amass harems, leaving a large swath of alienated men who channel their frustrations by joining Jihadist cults. In monogamous cultures where men have a wife and a stake in society, they channel their surplus libido into productive pursuits. If we look at American history---especially of the 18th and 19th Centuries, it's noteworthy that the most productive leaders of our culture also typically had large families.
Tomassi continues: "Hypergamy never seeks its own level – it is always seeking a better-than-merited exchange in SMV compared to her own...When a woman misses the opportunity to consolidate on a confirmed, high SMV (sexual market value) male that man becomes the new standard for what she believes she can attract as a potential mate."
This is also false. The late 'Sir Guy' of the blog What Women Never Hear wrote extensively about how feminine idealization of men evolve. It has nothing whatsoever to do with a man's so-called 'Sexual Market Value'.
Women develop a concept of a male ideal before they even reach puberty. While this ideal might have some physical component, it is primarily based on a man's character and how he fits a girl's emotional needs. Tomassi seems to be utterly ignorant of the fact that women's sexual needs are subordinate to---or, at the very least, highly dependent upon---her emotional needs. With women these two things are not separable. Even in pathological cases like Nymphomania, it's been demonstrated that the craving for sex is related to an unfulfilled emotional or psychological problem.
Tomassi further expounds that:
"Even if a woman’s perception of her own SMV isn’t realistic her Id wants what it believes it can get...The worst existential prospect for a woman is to have her mating strategy superseded and controlled by that of a suboptimal man."
First of all, in the course of normal human development, the Id doesn't play much of a factor after a child reaches about 3-4 years of age. Tomassi clearly knows nothing about Developmental Psychology, but---like most of his stripe---picks up and throws around scientific jargon which he doesn't understand himself to confuse and impress his credulous followers.
The statement which follows, i.e. that women subconsciously dread mating with a sub-optimal male is contradicted even by casual observation. Women not only often settle with a fairly average man, oftentimes they will choose relationships with some worst and least suitable men. This is because a woman's worst existential fear is not centered on the man with whom she reproduces: women's greatest fear is being unable to reproduce at all. In women who mate with thugs or have multiple children with different men, this fear has typically reached the level of absolute terror. Some women can sublimate this fear and lead productive lives though they remain childless---for example, nuns like Mother Teresa---but probably the majority of women can relate to this fear as fact.
The remainder of Tomassi's article is based on these premises, and since the premises are false, his subsequent arguments carry no weight.
The real danger in philosophies like Tomassi's is not simply that it turns men into embittered fools---many of his followers were already at that point and Tomassi only helps them refine their embittered foolishness. The real danger is that it erodes the bonds of trust between the genders and incidentally exacerbates all of the damage that Feminists are already causing.
The good news for men though is that Alpha Widows---like most other Red Pill chimeras---don't really exist. For men who do worry about things like past lovers, the best solution is to focus on actually being the best man your girl's ever had and most of these fears will dissipate.
No comments:
Post a Comment