The Gamma Paradox

Vox Day’s Socio-Sexual Hierarchy nomenclature receives plenty of criticism from some people, and much praise from others. The split itself is telling. Those men who have observable patterns of behaviour most associated with being Gammas reject or try to redefine the entire hierarchy to somehow position themselves as the real “tops”, which is why Vox refers to them also as Secret Kings.

A recent comment on my own post about rapey idiots in glass houses expresses what many normal (Delta) Type men believe:

These famous rich guys who drug women like Bill Cosby and this Danny Masterson must be particularly depraved because being rich and famous they could surely get women without doing so.

This idea shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the inner world of the Gamma and what drives them, in the context of being rapists or at a minimum creeps. I have observed their behaviour for years, with the same kind of disgusted fascination one might observe some parasite burrowing under an innocent’s skin.

The behaviour first became more prevalent and obvious on the internet in the mid 1990s, where frustrated men in alt-dot forums expressed a vitriolic hatred bordering on the psychotic towards any form of female rejection they experienced. Then I saw it in the flesh too and mostly it got told to me by pretty much almost all the women I was with in my life.

At first I though the behaviour of rage, when rejected, must apply to only a small percentage of unbalanced losers, but as I was told the same type of stories, by woman after woman after woman, and indeed saw it with my own eyes at times when a girl I was seeing was being hit on by some guy who usually was unaware she was with me in the specific context. As soon as she made it clear she was with me and therefore not available for his advances, some of these guys went into an obvious instant red-hot hatred. Because I look like I do, they usually just left, very occasionally making some sarcastic jab before slinking quickly away. On some occasions I even got an after-event report. One girl I was seeing for a time was a student at university and we had very much an on-off relationship. She was very pretty and was always surrounded by hangers on that thought they might eventually get with her if they just kept being in her orbit. One guy in particular went overboard with the “friends” cover. Whenever this girl and I were not seeing each other for a couple of days he would go over and try and “keep her company”. All of it was non-sexual “let’s watch a film together” or whatever, but his intent was obvious to me and I think to her too, though we didn’t really discuss it, because frankly, he was a non-entity and there was no chance she would do anything with him. It had not anything to do with looks or money either. He was just that sort of milque-toasty guy that really no woman wants to be with by choice.

Anyway, during one of these “pauses” in our relationship she later told me the guy was at her place for two days straight, during which she bitched to him about me and my uncompromising ways. She was marinated in British Feminist theory, and I simply have never had anything to do with it, nor ever accepted any of their absurd ideology. Her feminist theory invariably failed when confronted with her natural instincts concerning me and she would inevitably return to me with some very intimate ways to “make up”. Over time she would try to get me to bend to some insane feminist idea and I would once more simply reject it. Anyway, after her bitching about this for two days to this guy and his enthusiastically agreeing with her, and finally beginning to think this was his way to finally get with her, I believe, from memory that she recounted to me how her conversation went in the final stages. She had just said that I was impossible and drove her crazy with how I just made arguments she couldn’t really counter and it pissed her off and she “hated” me for it. He nodded and said something along the lines of “yeah, he sounds terrible, you should forget about him.”

To which she replied: “Yes, he’s terrible, makes me so mad… And yet… I can’t do without him. I’m going to go over to him now and be completely on his cock.”

And she did. Now, in that case, I can see the guy being frustrated, in his mind he had been sidling up to her like a proper gentleman of the woke variety, and was agreeing with her all the time and was obviously the “better” man, what with being all woke and pro-whatever feminist crap she spouted, and he affirmed and supported all her patriarchal suffering, or whatever, and then, she promptly announces that she’s off to do the very things he desperately was hoping to get from her with me.

You can see how he’d be upset. But the reality is he was more than just dejected. He was furious. Luckily he did not react physically against her, but the next time I saw him several days later, you could tell he had a murderous rage all about him towards me and her too. He never spoke to her again, as far as I know, which was just as well.

Now, in the above case you can sort of sympathise with the guy a little (not about the rage) at least everyone has felt a little sad or frustrated at being rejected by someone they really liked. But in my case, really that is as far as it has ever gone. Ultimately, if a person genuinely has no attraction for you, how can you get angry at them for that? The idea is just absurd to me. It has never computed and never will.

The reason I recounted that chapter of my life was to try and give you some insight into the fundamental difference of internal mechanism that a Gamma has from other archetypes.

The difference is in the internal world of the Gamma from that of a Delta or an Alpha or a Sigma.

The Alpha may actually get quite stung at rejection, especially if it is public and from a high status woman. His ego and need to be seen as the Alpha may in fact also cause him to be quite caustic or dismissive, but if so it will be generally only in the moment and temporarily. After all, no real Alpha wants to be seen as a pitiful shadow of a man that is pining after some woman. Besides, there are usually several waiting in the wings for him, happy to heal his broken heart. In the Alpha mind, getting angry at rejection from a woman is essentially below his dignity and status to do. He may privately be quite hurt, but rage, even to himself, goes against his nature, which is essentially generous and expectant of plentifulness (be it women, business, fame, and so on). The Alpha is a reacher for things, including women, but usually not a desperate grabber in the normal course of affairs.

The Delta is more of a balanced individual and generally will take rejection on the chin, be hurt, then move on with his life and try and find peace where he can. These are the majority of well balanced men.

The Sigma is a special case and may not care at all about the rejection, or be a freak on which the rejection is really the least of his concerns. Keep in mind that both James Bond as well a the character in the series Hannibal are Sigmas. These are not people who follow normal social conventions, but precisely because of that, their internal world, strange as it may be, is founded on a solid bedrock of self-reliance and hence self-knowledge. While they might be professional killers for hire, they are probably unlikely to get angry at a woman for rejecting them. A case in point from fiction may be Dexter. He killed bad guys with abandon, but was always a loyal boyfriend to the women he was with, and took their rejections or bad behaviours with calm resignation.

The Gamma however has wholly different internal mechanisms and they end up being the really creepy and dangerous ones, even if they present as easy-going, liberal, modern metrosexual men in touch with their feminine side. In almost diametric opposition to Sigmas, the Gamma has a profound (and un-admitted) lack of self-confidence. This is a root cause in their very core and they try to cover up that existential hole in their soul with all manner of fakery. Be it money, status, recognition by the masses for their achievements (real or most often imagined or “manufactured”), it is never enough to really fill that essential lack of self-truth.

A Gamma can be a billionaire (see Bezos) and still behave in a completely creepy/loser/gamma way with women. It is true that an Alpha or a Sigma or even a Delta, that is really a millionaire or billionaire can have his pick of women willing to be his sexual partners, and many of those women, initially attracted by the power, wealth and status, may even end up having genuine feelings for the man in question, but there is a core difference in the dynamics with a Gamma.

The billionaire alpha, sigma or even delta, may be perfectly aware of the sexual liaison with women being purely transactional. Their temporary thrill at being on a private jet, or even just seen with the billionaire in question, is enough for them to permit sex between them. The Delta will eventually be a bit sad at such an arrangement and over time get disillusioned with this woman or perhaps even women in general if the pattern repeats. An Alpha may even prefer the situation to be transactional and be fine with it and get a new “performer” once he bores with the first one, or have multiple ones in play or make a proper business contract out of a “marriage”. A Sigma may do the same or become a pimp, or a celibate monk by choice. But a Gamma will simply think that his material wealth gives him the right and the authority to do what he imagines Alphas do or get away with doing. And this is the tragic error.

An Alpha, whether a billionaire or homeless, will have a woman act towards him intimately because she wants to. Because the man’s internal sense of self is strong and she responds to that, ultimately, aside from his exterior, worldly, if you like, trappings. I have personally known (in my hedonistic days) beautiful women, married to extremely wealthy men, who, nevertheless would get naked and have sex with a man that had no money to speak of, but a sense of self that was of a different order from their husbands. This type of effect cannot be bought. The effect it has on women cannot be replicated nor faked very effectively even by the women themselves. So, what happens when a Gamma has reached some perceived pinnacle of power, wealth, fame or combination thereof, in his abysmal understanding of the female mind and heart, he thinks he is now “entitled” to the female attention that he imagines Alphas and Sigmas get (and in fact do get). When, to his utter shock and horror women continue to dodge him like radioactive plague, his natural emotion is rage. In his broken understanding of “life” he is rich, he is successful, he is famous, EVERY woman OWES him sex at will. HIS will. And if they don’t give it of their own volition, why, they must be defective, and/or it doesn’t matter, because in the Gamma’s mind Alphas just take what they want anyway and the women always go along with it.

And this is how you get the Danny Masterson of the world, the Bill Cosbys and all the other wealthy and powerful executives that end up getting caught groping angrily at unwilling secretaries and colleagues. So, no, the money is not enough. The fame is not enough. The status is not enough. And gammas simply will never get that.

Because all it takes is what in Italian is commonly referred to as “balls”.

And like real courage, real, intimate self-knowledge can’t be faked. And women can sense it.

[ X ]

This entry was posted in Gammas, Relationships, Social Commentary. RSS 2.0 feed.