Avoiding the male hierarchy is a major part of men’s rights activism and zeta-male culture. And for a good reason I might add. This hierarchy is what causes division and conflict between men, by encouraging them to compete for status, while objectifying them on the basis of their utility to women. Yet, are there other even deeper reasons for us to opt out?
This can be answered by comparing the male social hierarchy to the hierarchy of the Indian caste system. The Brahmans (or the priest class) created the caste system in which they placed themselves at the top. Then, secondly, the soldier-ruler (Kshatriyas) caste, third the farmer, craftsman, merchant (Vaisyas) caste, and fourth the labourer or slave (Sudra) caste.
Under the caste system, the Brahmans lived a life of privilege. They were prohibited from manual labour and have the belief that they are inherently of greater moral purity than members of other castes. They alone had control over certain vital religious tasks giving them great power.
Although they were the highest caste, they did not normally hold official political positions (kings and rulers were all of the Kshatriya caste) yet due to their prestige and religious power, Brahmans had great influence over secular affairs from behind the scenes.
At the other end of the spectrum, Sudras were denied the privileges of the higher castes. Because of the degrading work and pitiable occupations to which they were assigned, such as cleaning waste and disposing of contaminated dead animals.
They were considered unclean and not fit to touch or come in contact with anyone of a higher caste, in fact, the untouchable was required to cross the street or get off the road entirely when the occasion demanded so that his shadow would not fall on anyone of the Brahman caste and in fear of contamination.
[quote]Women, like Brahmans, also live a life of relative privilege in comparison to men. They have been socialized from an early age to believe that as women they are morally superior to men.[/quote]
The Brahmans cleverly kept this order by teaching the castes below them that observance of the rules and restrictions of caste without violation constituted the highest religious fulfilment and would make possible being born again into a better life. Thus the duties and obligations of caste were stressed rather than human rights, and through this system Hindu society was kept stable for over three thousand years.
How does this relate to the male hierarchy? I will explain how by simply by swapping the castes: Kshatriyas (2), Vaisyas (3) and sudras (4) with Alpha male, Beta Male and Omega male respectively and finally Brahmans (1) with Women.
The role and status of each category are almost identical to those of its corresponding caste. Alpha males, like the Kshatriyas, are the protectors and rulers of society, and are top of the list when it comes to female approval. Beta males, like the Vaisyas, are the skilled workers of society and act as the cronies to the alpha males. The omega males (or the modern “losers”), like the Sudras, are at the bottom of the pyramid and receive almost no attention from women. They do the most degrading yet necessary work.
Women, like Brahmans, also live a life of relative privilege in comparison to men. They have been socialized from an early age to believe that as women they are morally superior to men. They are protected from all dangerous and degrading jobs. Although they don’t often hold official positions of authority or political office they wield a great deal of power due to their control over access to sex. (“fusion with them (women, or the feminine) is the root of all desire” (Schwartz, 2010)).
Like the Indians who were fooled into these roles through the false promise of reincarnation to a better life, men have been made to believe that protecting and serving women (or being the nice guy) will eventually reward them through sex and approval. This is maintained by women (consciously or subconsciously) because of the service these men provide them. However as we know many of these guys (prominently the two lowest classes) are getting screwed, and have been throughout history.
So by comparing our social hierarchy to the caste hierarchy, we see that women don’t just encourage the male hierarchy, but like Brahmans, they are at the top of it. They dictate the rules and perpetuate a system whose ultimate purpose is to serve them. This means that the hierarchy not only just values men by their utility to women, but rather only allows men to be given value exclusively by women. As a consequence the alpha males in power have no incentive to treat the males below them with any respect (does this sound familiar?) as men of lower status have no say in what qualifies one to lead.
However, there is something very positive we can learn from this example. I spent a few years of my life in India and am happy to say that the caste system is quickly becoming a thing of the past. This is due to something quite simple; the people of India were given alternatives. Over the last century new ideas have flooded the country in the form of religion, philosophy and culture, ending the Brahmins’ monopoly on information.
These alternatives have allowed the Indian people to find value in themselves aside from the oppressive caste system. These ideas were accepted firstly by the lower castes, which was all it took to make the caste system irrelevant, leaving only the Brahmans holding on to their futile claim to status.
We are offering an alternative to the men of this culture. For the first time in recorded history men are refusing to comply with a system that objectifies them according to their utility.
They are refusing to have their value externally dictated to them but now argue that it is intrinsic and personal. The solution to this problem is the regaining of male space, in terms of physical space and also the separation of masculinity from feminine definition.
Let’s gain some back.
[box type=”info”][1] Howard S. Schwartz Society Against Itself: Political Correctness and Organizational Self-destruction London: Karnac, 2010. 240pp
[2] C. J. Fuller, Kerala Christians and the Caste System Man New Series, Vol. 11, No. 1 (Mar., 1976), pp. 53-70[/box]
