The Beta Male Pandemic, Part 2: The Vagina Takeover
Society Functions Largely For The Benefit Of Women
AKA The Feminine Reality, female-centric norms, or "The Matrix".
Because the core belief that women deserve more and better has pervaded and perverted society, it has resulted in the mass emasculation of men. We are a generation of beta males--pussies desperate for pussy. We let the power of the vagina control us.
But the Vagina Takeover is not quick and forceful, no. It creeps in like a thief in the night. On the surface it seems to empower man, telling us that for too long women have been oppressed by men. Herding the vast majority of supporters to their side of the fence by playing the injustice card.
The Rational Male puts it this way,
"The feminine sexual strategy is victorious because even under the contrived auspices of male oppression, it’s still the female goal-state that is agreed upon as the correct effort."
The correct effort...?
Now I'm not saying that I believe in social inequality, as many would be quick to assume. But I believe that the bid to further gender equality (i.e., the feminist movement) has taken things too far. Under the guise of "equality"--and we know how people like to take words and twist them to suit their needs--what they really want is not to be equal with men in general, but the top men; the alpha males; the kings of the hill.
Presumably, it is because they themselves are unable to mate with these alpha males.
Feminism is an emotional crusade disguising itself as a rational cause. And in order to rise to the top, they gladly step on a few heads to get there--these heads being the domes of unwilling (and willing) beta males.
I have absolutely no problem with that, though. I believe that everyone has a right to their opinions and beliefs even if I don't agree with them. But it is sad to see men being pulled and manipulated like puppets on a string by social convention. They buy into the social narrative of boy meets girl. They believe in "the one" or soul-mates. There is a huge recruitment in the army of niceboys running around frustrated and unhappy.
They hold fast to their women because they don't believe they can get anyone better. They build an ego around their status, women, and how people view them. Cuckoldry is the term. They buy into the concept of monogamy, thinking that it is the way to go. Too often have I gotten the question, "Do you have a girlfriend?"
Why does it even matter if I do? Of course they retreat to the defensive by saying that they were "just asking". But one just not "just ask" anything. The intention is to use the question as a measure of presumed social worth and status in their reality. In other words, they want to know where I stand in relation to them based on their framework of reality.
When I explain that I don't buy into monogamy or exclusivity, it doesn't register. Social conditioning has told them that when you like a girl you have to be with her and her alone for eternity because love cannot be shared. Because she is "the one". Majority of music, movies, books, and online influences propagate this idea that women hold the power and deciding factor in relationships. But does this result in a successful relationship? I think not. A lot of relationships do not last for the very reason that men give up their power and purpose to pursue the vagina. They become the women in the relationship.
You might be questioning the validity of the above assertions. And so I invite you to consider this:
The female interest and desire is considered normal and the male desire, abnormal.
What beauty is to men, confidence and purpose is to women. I think most people would agree that women are less likely to judge how suitable a man is based on physical traits. In fact, there are studies that show that women are more likely to go for men who are lesser in the looks department.
But men, on the other hand, value looks above everything else.
If that sets of warning alarms in you, think about this: The equivalent of a fat, ugly woman who doesn't take care of her looks is the same as a lazy, unfocused man without a purpose in life. Most people are quick to counter-argue against men who judge women based on looks, saying that "inner beauty" is what really counts.
They are both important, but physical beauty IS important. And it is only natural for men to want the best-looking women. Unfortunately, we've been conditioned to think that such a desire is a bad--wrong, even. Women are quick to judge a man who merely goes for hot women as shallow, superficial, and chauvinistic. They will then almost always carry on say something along the lines that hot women have ugly personalities.
And it is always the less desirable (read: ugly, old, fat) or insecure women that react this way. Don't believe me? Try that on the next girl.
On the flip side, it is socially acceptable (an imperative, even) for a woman to leave a man who is needy (not confident) and unfocused (lack of purpose). This is not even an issue about social equality: we are trying to overwrite our biological tendencies based on a few people's idea on "equality" and morality.
You as a man have to shed these propaganda and stand for what you want. The beta male is the one who buys into it--and will inevitably come out the losing end when women have had their fun and decide to settle down with you. You will be the victim of cuckoldry.
The term here is "hypergamy". Women want to be matched with the cream of the crop (AKA alpha males). It's only natural. But when they lose their "value" over time they are left lonely, bitter, and desperate for security. This is where the beta males come in. The beta male is the provider. When the woman realizes she has to settle down, and that her genetic prime is overdue, she panics and looks to lock down a beta male for security.
That being said, I don't believe all of these happen all the time on a conscious level. These thoughts and desires register subconsciously--it's instinctual. But it bears illumination.
And thus I leave you with this quote,
"One is apt to think of moral failure as due to weakness of character: more often it is due to an inadequate ideal." - Richard Livingstone
Until next time.