Manosphere attitudes as a function of the gender integration of power (hetero only version)
When searching for the typology of manosphere movements, which usually were divided approximately into PUA, MRA, Mgtow, Incel, or maybe also Traditionalists, the failed attempt to locate any rigorously classified typology with conceptual clarity and mutually exclusive categories finally prompted me to come up with something original. The following classification is inspired by the Weberian ideal type and Mertonian strain theory. This manosphere classification with two separate conceptual orientations can also explain the movement a man may experience from one type to another and the misogynic tendency that will develop as a function of the change. All men are created equal, but our unequal endowment in physical and institutional advantages produced a mismatch from our hearts’ desire, and consequently how much the gynocentric society is responsible for our pitiful failures or hated successes.
Men can be categorized into four ideal types in regard to their relative position in interaction with women, similar to Gutentag and Secord’s notion about dyadic power.
First, I develop this ideal type based on two distinct dimensions that most human activities will derive their relative easiness and momentum from: the physical and the social. Humans are social animals, thus naturally our capacity to successfully engage with fellow human beings and the extent to which environmental limits can be overcome depends on the concrete advantage in our physical capacity and an institutional advantage bestowed to us through heritage, or achieved by us in a series of social mobility attempt to increase our socioeconomic status.
When it comes to inter-gender interactions, physical capacity manifests as simple as physiological traits, attractiveness, height and weight, size of the dong, the overlapping degree between our appearance and society’s beauty standard. The more advantages a guy possesses in physical capacity, the more power he gains in any typical dyadic interaction with a woman.
Social capacity refers to the level of means one can mobilize from socially generated advantageous sources to exercise his will or power. This relates to Merton’s notion about institutionalized means: the actual distribution of opportunities for achieving certain goals. This includes all types of socioeconomic status, assets and capital, cultural etiquette, education.
Four types of men are present in Fig.1 according to whether or not they possess advantageous physical and social capacities. Note these classes are Weberian ideal types. Men may vary with a huge grey area in reality, but the tendency to fall into each category remains strong. For example, Beta diaosi is ugly and fat, he also doesn’t have much money or the art of talking to make up for his lack of attractiveness. Simp bob is ugly and fat, but he holds a satisfactory job with some admirable achievements in education. Bob makes a perfect provider.
Capacities in social and physical realms set a limit on how much relative power one possesses when facing a female, how much he can woo her and get laid, and the general motivation a woman falls for this guy. For example, Playboy gets laid because he is physically attractive, but for women at a certain range of age desiring stability and wishing someone may support her offspring, bob may start to get laid more than steve.
One’s capacity in physical and social domains constitutes an important realistic constraint on the rational choice strategy to conduct inter-gender interaction and the general constitutive mechanism to determine the context of the occurrence of such interaction. Without considering the capacity’s dimensions, one may not be able to clarify why guys face different options and make different choices. However, before the realistic physical and social capacity, any human action is oriented towards a goal meant to him and can be understood by him. This is Weber’s argument that all human actions are directed by meaning. Things are meaningful to us only if we intend the state of a being at a historical occasion under a spatial context through the understandable reason that we have socialized to form a congruent cognitive and emotional state. Therefore, a man’s action is oriented towards some goals that he understandable desires according to his reasonable principle.
When it comes to actions oriented towards another gender, similarly two different desires may arise: physical and social. Men, out of natural instinct, want to get laid and spread their seeds to as many women as the interval between their recovery time can physiologically afford. On the other hand, gender interaction is highly scripted by social norms and the way we learned through socialization. Therefore, men also try to engage with women for social desires: getting married, feeling good before other guys, having social status, improvement of his own financial status, etc. Along these two dimensions, physical and social desires, of the intended orientation of inter-gender interaction, we can now come up with four ideal types in Fig.2. Again the types are ideal, and nomenclature may be problematic, but conceptual clarity is more important for understanding the distinction. The names are self-explanatory.
Now the more interesting breakthrough of my model on the typology of guys is not the static classification of people into different ideal types based on a combination of their capacity or desire. The more exciting thing, imo, is we can systematically understand how collective male personalities dynamically move between different types as their desires don’t match the capacity and how that dynamic change prompts a social evolution of our attitudes towards women.
Now in an efficient mating market in which interactions between genders happen to fulfill each gender’s need, the possessors of different levels of capacity and desire will self-sort to meet each other’s demand. Men with higher levels of desire will also have to show a compatible level of capacity in order to: beat other competitors who demand for the desired goals; match the demand of the woman who requires the compatible level of capacity in exchange of her provision for his desire.
When a society has a distribution of desire and capacity in a match, meaning that if the exact group of men who have bluepilled desire also possess alpha chad capacity, then the men are content with their position and do not hold grudging attitudes towards women. However, this idealistic scenario rarely happens in reality, and the extent to which the match between desire and capacity exists is a question of degree, a degree that varies across social classes and across time. In most patriarchs, cultural norms tell people to follow a configuration of strong social desire as well as strong physical desire, in which men want women to satisfy carnal needs and also to fulfill social duties such as being a submissive wife who does chores and flatters us in public. But in reality, constrained by social capacity or physical attractiveness, most of us guys miserably fall into either Simp bob or Beta diaosi type.
Only Alpha chad’s capacity configuration is compatible with the Bluepilled desire configuration. If the society unanimously indoctrinates men with the Bluepilled desire configuration, men have to become Alpha chad to make it happen. Now let’s assume that each type of capacity requires a fixed level of resources, either physical or social. To move out of one’s own type of social capacity requires exercising effort to achieve an additional level of resources. Now go back to Figure 3, in any one step to climb the ladder, one can only move to the next category that shares a border with his own current category. When the movement across categories happens, one needs to exercise specific number of resources as defined in Figure 3.
For example, for Simp bob to become Alpha chad, he needs to up his game by acquiring 1 more unit of physical capacity. For Beta diaosi to become Alpha chad, he needs to first move to the next unit with a common border, that is Simp bob or Playboy steve. If taking the Playboy route, Beta needs to first increase his physical capacity by 1 unit, and then increase social capacity by 1 unit. If taking the Simp route, he needs to first improve social capacity and then physical capacity. These two different routes will fundamentally influence his interaction with other women during the progress to becoming an Alpha: one route involves more casual experiments and a coldhearted Macheavelian sex game, the other somewhat settles him down with his carefully chosen woman. However, no matter which route he chooses to become Alpha, because the entire process requires upward mobility by accumulating higher levels of resources to win women, the process from a lower capacity number to a higher capacity number always generates more resources for women. Therefore, women generally benefit from men’s upward mobility and their competition to become members of a more capable/resourceful category.
A lot of other times, the movement across categories is not upward and may involve a downward or lateral change of the male types. If a large number of men have decided to eschew the social desire of having a woman but retained physical desire for them, then the configuration of desire type becomes the class of Fuckboy. Now, for Beta diaosi, to fulfill his Fuckboy type of desire means he has to become Playboy steve. Beta still needs to exercise efforts and improve his physical capacity in order to traverse into the Playboy type. A significant number of women will benefit from Beta’s improvement in physical capacity by riding the cock carousel and using this metamorphasing Beta as a dildo or some symbolically honorific body count. This is because we have theoretically assumed that any upward improvement from the male side will benefit females.
However, when lateral or downward movement happens, a sense of different types of misogyny will occur during the course. If Alpha chad has to move to Playboy steve category in order to match with the Fuckboy desire configuration, Alpha needs to decrease his social capacity by subtracting 1 unit. In plain language, Alpha doesn’t need to exercise any social capacity and be responsible for his pure carnal action. As a result, women bear the cost of Alpha forgoing his social responsibility and become pure slut material for him. For the lateral move from Simp bob to Playboy steve though, the process requires first an increment of 1 unit of physical capacity and, then, a decrease of 1 unit of social capacity. Or Simp bob can also take the route via Beta diaosi. During the procession of either two-steps route, some women will benefit from the increase in effort, but other women will bear the cost. If Simp first becomes a Beta by forgoing his social capacity, women who could have benefited from this walking wallet will no longer have access to the free dinners and gifts. But in the next step, Simp bob will metamorphosis from Beta to Playboy, during which some women can enjoy him as a body count. Generally, when upward movement between male types happens, women benefit; when downward movement happens, women suffer from misogyny.
By this principle, we may conclude that the purest form of misogyny and an unfavorable condition for women’s exploitation of masculine resources exist when the configuration of desires in our collective world becomes the Monk type, or in other words, the MGTOW type. Men have gone their own way, wanting neither physical satisfaction nor social fulfillment from women. When men hold this combination of physical and social desires, all possible forms of movement from all types of men, no matter what their capacity is, are the downward movement. Therefore, MGTOW is the purest and crystalized form of misogyny, and also the highest stage of masculine awakening and independence.
