Don’t talk about hypergamy?

It is amazing how much angst that free speech can cause, even in a community of people struggling to be heard on a litany of issues that generally find only hostile audiences.  Case in point, hypergamy, or rather whether we should spend a lot of time discussing it in the MRM.

In a recent interview with AVfM Radio, Fidelbogen proffered the idea, and I am paraphrasing here, that we should avoid dwelling on the subject so as not to alienate potential allies we may find in women.

Aimee McGee was intrigued enough by the idea that she penned an article largely expressing the same sentiments that we recently featured here.

Outrage ensued. Monitors were sprayed with coffee and anger. WTF!! was shouted from the rooftops. Blood was found on many a keyboard.

I have left my ideas on the subject on a few comments, and briefly addressed it on a video exchange with Stardusk:

Stardusk response to Fidelbogen

My response to Stardusk

Stardusk response # 2

Final response to Stardusk

Now I think it is time for me to move out of those relatively obscure shadows and have my say on the matter…let the cards fall where they may.

In my admittedly less than humble opinion, Fidelbogen and McGee, both of whom have and will continue to have my respect, are way, way, way off the mark.

I am not going to dig into a possible 3,000,000 year sociobiological history to debate the precise point of the emergence of hypergamy, or even of what working definition anyone but me should use on a day to day basis. What is I will say is that the general tendency of women in this culture to better deal themselves at the expense of men, without inhibition by moral constraints or social prohibition, which is how I define hypergamy, is something we better talk about a lot more into the future.

Barbarossaaaa, who I think presented the most balanced and well-articulated response to the Fidelbogen interview said, and again I am paraphrasing, that we should not refrain from discussing hypergamy simply because it will offend many women.

I would actually take that a step further. We should discuss hypergamy far and wide precisely because it will offend many women. For the hearing impaired, allow me to say this again. We should discuss hypergamy far and wide precisely because it will offend many women.

Of course, the point is not to draw any personal satisfaction from having offended. It is much more functional than that.

A good way to look at this is that by the very nature of our beliefs here, we also offend many, many men. Do we avoid criticizing chivalry because it will offend white knights? Do we hesitate to speak ill of the sycophancy of male feminists? Do we even hesitate to harshly assess blue pill, average men about the ways they follow rote programming to their own unfortunate end?

Of course we don’t, because if we did we would lose the very message we proffer in a wash of rhetorical obfuscation.

We have made considerable and roundly successful efforts to secure the support of women in this movement. I proudly offer that no other organization who stays as honest about the real issues as we do has achieved this much success. But just like with men we are centered on quality above quantity. In fact, quantity is meaningless in this arena.

For that reason, men or women who cannot handle the discussions on hypergamy should not find this a very comfortable environment for long. In fact, if they can’t handle up front and rigorously honest discussions about the real issues that affect men and boys, then this place should and will make their skin crawl. If we ever get away from that we should be very concerned about what is happening.

I just happen to disagree that one interview and one article from some very thoughtful people challenging this idea is inherently dangerous. For those of you who became outraged, I note with casual interest that the sky has not fallen in.

The fact is that neither the McGee article nor the Fidelbogen interview will have an impact on whether hypergamy is discussed on these pages. It is not because neither person is of importance. They are both valued. It is because the fact is that if you want to make sure MRAs will talk endlessly about something, the best way to get there is to suggest that they self censor. Works every time.

And as we can now see, the thoughtful challenges they posed facilitated renewed interest in the subject, both in the comments and now here. Because of what they said, we now have more active discussion of hypergamy than before. It won’t be the last time by any stretch of the imagination.

Also, I have seen it said in the comments and elsewhere that we should instead focus on disposability in the place of hypergamy. Sorry, but that is like trying to discuss the black hair on a zebra without discussing the white. Hypergamy is disposability. Or rather it is a consequence of it, enabled and fueled by it. Neither can really be distinguished from the other in any meaningful way and both need to be part of our discussions.

Understanding this is critical, vital, to helping us inform the young men who visit this site. And by the way, despite the fact I am an old fart, the majority of the readers of this site are young childless men, 18-24; the very population that most desperately needs to know about the possible pitfalls in modern relationships and who stand to lose the most if they remain ignorant. We won’t make it a policy here to deprive them of that information simply to appeal to women who need to avoid listening to hard facts.

That kind of woman will only become emotional and intellectual deadweight that will slow us down and force everyone to carry their lazy asses forward in this movement. Sorry, but no can do.

I like the women we have here. They kick ass and take names. I don’t always agree with them any more than I always agree with the men, but that is just one of those facts of life things that does not merit an article or for sure a war.

The people, the human beings we have at this site, are by and large the kind of people we need. We attracted them with a fair, uncompromising message, and we will attract more of the same as time goes by. GWW is great, but she is not the only intelligent, articulate woman in the world that loves her sons more than she loves victimhood.

In the process we will deeply and intentionally offend many men and women who want us to play by the rules that directly led us to a sexist society that preys on the rotting carcasses of men and boys. That offense looks good on ‘em, I say.

I will be damned if we are going to stop talking about the real reasons we got here, and ignorance of hypergamy is one of them.

Recommended Content

Skip to toolbar