Back in my Blue Pill days, I went through my Gamma phase. I'm not proud of it. It only lasted a couple of years before I snapped out of it. But it happened. I can admit that now. In fact, snapping the Gamma was one of the first steps on the road to Breaking Beta.
If you're not down with it yet, go study Vox Day's brilliant Socio-Sexual Hierarchy, listing social descriptions of all manner of men on the hunt for women. Gammas are the "male feminists", the manboobz, the "I can be manly while I hold my wife's purse at a party while she talks to another guy" dude. Gammas, in their evolved form, become self-loathing White Knights like Hugo Schwyzer, professional Mangina. Essentially, Gammas have come to believe that all things male are inherently bad, and that all things female are inherently good -- sacred, even.
Typical presentations of the Gamma include low self-esteem buttressed with a "if I kiss enough female ass I'll be accepted!" attitude that can be pathological in its intensity. Gammas are the true "Beta Orbiters". When they do mate, it's usually with the female equivalent or lower -- except in those hilarious cases where a low-number Gamma inexplicably marries a higher-level woman. Those things tend to be short and painful.
But this guy over at Salon is pitching a particular bitch-fit over the lustful thoughts he has about strange women, and how he feels genuinely offended on behalf of his twin daughters and his Tiger Mom, MD wife. As he pathetically confesses the righteous indignation he feels at his own penis' mindless objectification of women (let's ignore the fact, for the moment, that a dude usually only gets in such a state when his sex life is in "IV drip mode") his tone is clearly pleading for affirmation and acceptance.
It's the Gamma Rabbit Trap: capitulate to the idea that women are superior to men, in all important ways, under the theory that such sniveling capitulation will gain you acceptance, love, and pussy.
Brother Rabbit, it don't work that way.
The Gamma Rabbits are like Black Republicans: you can't figure out how anyone would labor and advocate for a position so blatantly -- proudly! -- against their best interests. You see, this obvious ploy of appeasement is designed to make him feel better about his "lustful, sexually objectifying" thoughts, because feminism has told him since birth that such thoughts are evil. Andy has voluntarily confessed and repented of being part of "rape culture", and fervently desires a non-sexist, non-threatening world. A Blue Pill world, where words like "hypergamy" and "infidelity" never exist. Where "regular sex" is timed by the moon, not by the clock.
So . . . this guy should be crawling with feminist support and admiration, right? Because that's clearly what he expected: affirmation for his progressive feminist views and the acceptance of him as a man because of his recognition of the inherent evils of owning a penis.
Only . . . not so much. Poor bastard.
Not just one, but two scathing reviews of his Gamma-laden posts were made by feminists. The thing is, they didn't take issue with his political perspective. They took issue with . . . him.
In New York Magazine, in an article entitled, "I'm a Woman, I read Slate, I Write Violent Thoughts About A Man Who Writes About Being Horny. How Can I Stop That?" (when, clearly, she has no desire to stop), Maureen O'Conner conflates her hatred of male sexuality and fatherhood in a screed that - if the genders were reversed - would land her in anger management counseling or fired and escorted from the building by security. In part Ms. O'Conner's violent misandry over male feminist Andy Hinds' admission that yes, he too has a penis (although he's very ashamed to admit it) goes something like this:
". . . deep in the vaginal recesses of my female imagination, I fantasize about tearing Slate writer Andy Hinds limb from limb. "
"If I had more respect for Andy Hinds, I might indulge my fantasy about punching him in the gut so hard that he doubles over in pain for a moment. "
"Unfortunately, like Andy Hinds, I too am but a prisoner to my instincts, no matter how hypocritical or rude. The heart wants what the heart wants, and my heart wants violence. "
"Sure, I may want to throw Andy Hinds and [professional Mangina] Hugo Schwyzer into a tank full of hungry sharks, but . . ."This, Andy, from your feminist "allies".
Oh, but it gets worse.
From Jezebel, the Industry Leaders In Organized Misandry, in a post entitled: "Daddyblogger Controls His Boner With 'Imaginary Burqas'" by Katie Baker, which goes beyond the violent imagery above and just resorts to humiliating, shaming and effectively destroying this man for sharing his confusion about his sexuality in the feminist-approved way:
But it's not sexist to think about boning strangers, and it's horrifying, really, to resort to mentally censoring women so you don't have to consider the possibility that you're not actually as much of an "enlightened" feminist as you think but a dude with a latent Madonna-whore complex (Hinds could ask his wife how she feels about all this, at least?)
This is actually worse that O'Conner's piece, because not only does she emasculate him for self-emasculating, she further emasculates him because he doesn't have his wife's permission to think these thoughts. And then she goes on to state that she agrees with all the violent misandrist crap in O'Conner's post.
Way to go, girls. Another win for our side.
See, Gentlemen, when the poor Gamma Male Feminist Rabbits do try to talk about how proud and dedicated they are to non-sexist culture and gender equity, the moment they poke their head up out of their hole the feminist lawnmower rolls over it. Andy is an almost complete Scalzi, but he's already getting hammered for his "enlightened" attitude by the very feminists he's trying to identify with.
In his own blog, he frets over the comments from the "Men's Rights Movement" and being misunderstood, not quite understanding that it wouldn't matter how clear and concise he had been, any time a "male feminist" says something out loud, he will and is always castigated roundly by a plurality of female feminists.
It's like a law of nature. Just see how much respect professional Mangina Hugo Schwyzer has in their circles.
Andy, what you have to realize (and probably wont) is that regardless of the kicking-around you feel in the Manosphere among "Men's Rights Movement" and "Right Wing" trolls, the fact is that we're a lot more forgiving than the feminists are. We're always willing to help a brother out, if he's willing to admit that the bullshit disguised as political theory known as "feminism" has less to do with equality as it does with female entitlement. The ladies at Slate and NYMag feel utterly entitled to bash you and your life, your lifestyle, even your wife and kids with impunity, because they know you won't defend yourself. Even that "What I meant to say" pieces will be ridiculed . . . if it's even noticed.
Here's the thing, Andy: you will never be accepted as a "feminist" by feminism, because you are Male, and therefore part of the "Patriarchy" and oppressive "Rape Culture" that you, yourself, have been trained to loathe. Fear, guilt, and early indoctrination convinced you that male sexuality was "bad", and feminism has compounded that feeling by publicly ridiculing your sexuality even as you struggle with it. On the other side, your unwillingness to admit and embrace the fact that a) you have a penis b) there's no inherent shame in that fact and c) any group who espouses equality and then indulges in such nasty bits of misandry is so intellectually dishonest at its core that your "alliance" with them resembles more a prostitutes alliance with a pimp, not the honest and equal intellectual partnership.
Read these posts again, Andy. Feel how much they scorn and despise you? You are contemptible to them . . . because you propose to agree with them. If they were truly dedicated to a non-sexist world they would have applauded your admission, not condemned it. But they treated you like a thuggish rapist for admitting that you had illicit thoughts.
Here's the Red Pill truth, Andy: illicit thoughts about random women are part of your evolutionary heritage, and attempting to eschew that so you can make a couple of bitter feminist bloggers happy (when they are predestined not to be happy) with you is just stupid. You really area Beta Dad, and no, I don't mean that in a "good" way. In fact, you're less Beta and more Gamma. A White Knight. Just the kind of dude feminists love to throw under a bus until you howl . . . which they then point to as proof that they were right all along.
Look, I'm sure you have a spiffy marriage and your kids are adorable. But Andy, if you don't clue into some stuff real quick, I prophesy a divorce or estrangement within a decade, and then you'll be here, bitter, and wishing you had listened to us.
First, ditch the fear of women. As much as you love your wife and daughters, that does not extend to the millions of women that would be happy to falsely accuse you of rape, take advantage of your gender in the workplace, or yawn with boredom when they hear of your death in an industrial accident on the news. The idea that feminists have any male's rights or issues in mind is demonstrably false. Your continued adherence to this self-destructive, genocidal ideal is going to bite you in the ass even bigger than it has, mark my words. (Go ahead. Mark them. I'll wait.)
The Red Pill Truth, Andy, is that your wife earns more than you do, which means (if the stats are correct) that despite everything else, you have at least a 40% chance of divorce in the next decade if it continues. The truth is that feminists will never accept you, they will always reject you no matter how "nice" you are, and in fact the nicer you are, the more they will despise you. Gamma Rabbits don't fit into their program unless they need votes or someone to take out the garbage.
It kinda sucks you have daughters, because you're all awash in "girl power" feminism. If you had sons, then you'd have a much different perspective. One in which you would see your son's achievements and performance retarded and belittled because of his gender. One in which your son would not matter even in the abstract to most feminists, because he's "part of the problem".
If you're smart, you'll start reading the Manosphere, Andy. Not the PUA stuff, but the Married Man Sex Life Blog/books/forum by Athol Kay. No More Mister Nice Guy. And my own humble blog. You'll discover that being Beta -- or worse, Gamma -- gets you respect from neither gender. The only ones who love Gammas are other Gammas . . . until you stop acting like a Gamma. Then they turn on you and devour you.
Seriously, dude. You're a good dad, that's obvious. You want to be a good husband. Feminism will help you with neither of those things. Don't believe me? Count the number of feminists you know who have been in long (15+ years) happy marriages to the same man. Go ahead. I'll wait.
Didn't take long, did it?
That's the dirty little secret feminism doesn't want you to know. Feminism is not a reproductive strategy designed with a long-term relationship, much less marriage, in mind. In fact, it celebrates divorce and the estrangement of children from their fathers as a matter of course. You might disparage the "MRAs" as a bunch of bitter boobs, but the chances of you being there someday, if you keep doing what you're doing, are better than hitting the Pick 6. Ever.
So Andy, I invite you to seriously reconsider your position. In fact, just to be a good guy about it, I'm going to send you a review ecopy of the Manosphere book as an introduction.
But for the love of Zeus and Hercules, stop acting like you raped someone because you popped a boner over some babe. It's embarrassing, harmful to your fellow men, and even your wife -- as sympathetic and empathetic as she's likely being about it right now -- isn't going to find you any more attractive because of this. Quite the contrary.
Welcome to the Manosphere, Andy. Learn how to Break your Beta. We can help you be a better man. Hell, it might just save you.