Gamma is as gamma does

Earlier this week, I banned a monomaniac calling himself Wild Man from VP, since he was prone to intellectual dishonesty and insufficiently tall for the ride there. The wisdom of that decision was subsequently proved by his all-too-typical response of the gamma scorned, which was to a) continue trying to spread his gospel of Western egalitarianism while b) bitterly complaining about the wrongs done to him in a revisionist account of events.

Of course, he picked the wrong venue for this when he decided to run to the sympathetic embrace of the readers at Chateau Heartiste. This is what a classic Gamma run-for-sympathy looks like:


Lucius Somesuch
Having read your “existential ontological” scribblings at Vox Popoli, Wild Man, with all of your buttkissing “please help me to understand, Good Sir” bowing and scraping, we see what a (((cucky))) midwit trolltard you are.

John Locke is dead. You’re a fucking idiot.

Oh, but a liar too– saruh is that YOU?! lzolzoz . . .


Wild Man
Lucius Fuckwad – you be so dumb …… to confuse the shiv for buttkissing. What else goes over you head buddy? Fuck ….. I bet you be owned by the women in you life.

John Locke inconsequential as to western institutions? …… fuck you stupid (like Beale).


Hesiod
Wild Dude, you got your arse handed to you by Vox Day. Retreating to another blog to cry your gamma dreams of being the once and future king were unjustly robbed does you no good. It’s embarrassing, in fact.


Wild Man
Hesiod – VD didn’t engage – just goes girl-like hissy-fits, except where he tries to counter claim in the most inane way, which is not actually even worthy of sorting out for him it is such nonsense (penguins and satellites are not categorically similar!? -so fucking what; corporations don’t die!? – so fucking what; but forms of life do!? – so fucking what; cognitive science specifically denies even the theoretical possibility of conscious self-agency!? – which is untrue, and besides the point in any event , because the condition of “belief” that I hi-lighted in that respect makes clear the intended phenomeno-ontological aspects of self-agency I was hi-lighting). VD completely misses every point. Voom – goes completely over his head – and I’m apparently the idiot. Hahaha – that be just too rich! His lame attempts for counter claim all fell completely, flat – really stinky-like. I grok that VD has a big problem with respect to understanding information-systems algorithmic approaches – calling for nested categorizations. I think his grasp of logic is actually back somewhere pre-Greek (which is really funny, because he does think he can make claims around the nature of the Graeco-Roman legacy – but apparently he doesn’t have the philosophical chops for that).

Look Hesiod. I was pretty shocked when I saw his post this morning with respect to some of my comments. His handling of the subject matter was just so utterly inept I actually felt bad for the guy (cause you know he is always so much about muh IQ all the time). So …… to ease the discussion towards an equitable (hahaha – VD hates that word) conclusion ….. I ignored the inanity for the time being, and refocused his attention to the one question that just might allow him to see the light (the question around his Alt-Right claims on the Christian legacy). And he freaked again, went all hissy-fit again, and banned me, and avoided the question for the 3rd time. Because he can’t answer the question without modifying one part or the other of his overall narrative. That’s why he didn’t answer. Hesoid – watch – he won’t ever answer that question. To prove it to yourself why don’t you ask him again to see what happens? (the question I put to him at the end of my comment #71). And it’s all because he is a white supremist who wants to pretend he is better than that. So he will fuck himself logic-wise just for the sake of some feelz around virtue-signalling. Jeez – that just be lowly for a man to do.

Hesiod – your man is a poser. That is pathetic. And fuck-off on the gamma shit. I outlined my reasons for posting here as per the first sentence of the first of my comments on this thread.


I leave it to you to decide if I a) failed to engage, b) just went girl-like hissy fits, c) completely missed every point, or d) am a white supremist who wants to pretend I is better than that.

Gamma face

What is remarkable is the way you can see it even at an early age, such as in the case of this poor little boy:

A heartbroken mother has penned an emotional post after no one turned up to her little boy's ninth birthday party. The mother-of-six, who goes by the pen name Kristen Layne, shared the post on her blog, Life on Peanut Layne, and described her son Mahlon as 'bright, sensitive and caring.' He is also 'naturally funny, easy to please and looks at life with hope and optimism... the kid who would give the shirt off of his back to a stranger, hand over a beloved toy to make another child smile.'

But despite this, not one single child attended his birthday party.

Not despite, because. Boys who are desperate to please usually become low-status men who are strongly inclined to pedestalize women. Look at the face and the nature of the smile in particular, and note the way it doesn't match the eyes. That tight, sad-eyed, self-deprecating smile is the hallmark of a gamma-in-the-making.

Furthermore, note the way that the mother appears to be overbearing. She certainly doesn't hesitate to ensure that his humiliation will last forever on the internet, all so she can vent her personal outrage. And it's probably a bad sign if your son's favorite books are "The Diary of a Wimpy Kid" series.

If you see a boy with a face like that, encourage his parents to get him into contact sports and physical challenges to raise his testosterone levels and his social status ASAFP. But it's probably too late for this kid.

"the little boy plans on working for a company to make sure that 'each and every child has a very happy birthday and that no one feels sad and lonely on their birthday.'"

Any doubts concerning how SJWs are made?

Objective: Delta

Someone commented that we spend a lot more time talking about Gammas than Alphas despite the fact that the blog is named Alpha Game. That's true, and there is a good reason for it. First, as with VP, the focus of the blog has evolved over time. Second, there are no shortage of other blogs telling men how to increase their status, how to make themselves more attractive to women, and how to get laid more. But very few are doing much to help those on the bottom end of the male hierarchy, much less seeking to understand why they are there.

I don't like Gammas myself. And from what I've learned, most Gammas aren't too thrilled about themselves either. So, we both have a motivation to help them understand the factors weighing against them, helping them deal with those challenges, and giving them the means to increase their socio-sexual status so that they will become happier, better-adjusted men who are less annoying to those around them.

I've never forgotten the behavior of one Alpha who did not reject me when I was an Omega, and who, in his own blithe way, signaled to the social hierarchy that I was all right. Perhaps that is why, when I see a Gamma preening and posturing and generally making a complete ass of himself, I feel a desire to help him stop doing that, in addition to feeling the normal human urge to kick him.

Not everyone can be an Alpha. But nearly every man is capable of Delta. That's the real objective.

Gamma is a downhill slope

One of the dangers of lying to yourself is that it gets easier the more you do it:

Scientists have uncovered an explanation for why telling a few porkies has the tendency to spiral out of control. The study suggests that telling small, insignificant lies desensitises the brain to dishonesty, meaning that lying gradually feels more comfortable over time.

Tali Sharot, a neuroscientist at University College London and senior author, said: “Whether it’s evading tax, infidelity, doping in sports, making up data in science or financial fraud, deceivers often recall how small acts of dishonesty snowballed over time and they suddenly found themselves committing quite large crimes.”

Sharot and colleagues suspected that this phenomenon was due to changes in the brain’s response to lying, rather than simply being a case of one lie necessitating another to maintain a story....

Twenty-five of the volunteers played the game while having their brain activity monitored by an MRI scanner. This showed that the amygdala, a part of the brain linked with emotion, was most active when people told their first lie. But while the untruths escalated in magnitude, the amygdala’s response gradually declined - and larger drops in brain activity predicted bigger lies in future.

The researchers said this adaptation effect was similar to those seen in basic sensory experiences. A scent becomes less potent when smelt repeatedly, for instance.

This is fascinating, especially in light of other research that suggests Gammas may have smaller, less developed amygdalas than higher-status men. On the other hand, it also suggests that my advice to ruthlessly tell the truth may be a reliable way out of Gammatude, as it stands to reason that refusing to tell lies will also alter the brain's response, but in a more positive manner.

The more a Gamma tells the truth, the easier it will become for him, and the more reluctant he will become to construct a delusion bubble to defend his pride from contact with reality.

Apology accepted

Allen Ayler apologized and removed his "review" of SJWs Always Lie:

I apologize for my unprofessionalism. I was not necessarily approaching this like I typically do, since in my mind I wasn't "applying" for a job. Regardless, I should have kept my demeanor and offense in check. 

It's fine. Accepted. It happens. I hope, in the future, when someone offends him or upsets him, he'll be able to look back on this minor episode and use it as an object lesson to count to 10, or wait 48 hours, or do whatever is required to avoid taking a private disagreement public.

That being said, I will retain that I have zero interest in working with anyone who says, " If you can't deal with the fact that the big dogs on this project are insanely busy, you won't fit in. There simply isn't space for divas and egos on the team" to people trying to help. It's a completely asinine and hypocritical response, and was uncalled for. I am honest enough to admit my fault, yet all I hear is unaccountability and yet more insults from Vox. I can tell you, if you didn't insinuate I was a diva ego we would be square and I would never have popped off. I would have apologized for my pushy request for a response after getting ignored and dicked around for two weeks. 

As I said previously, Allen is obviously not psychologically suited to work in the high-trust, high-pressure, high-performance environment of the sort we have in the Vanilla Fork/Neapolitan Spoon project. That's fine. Most people aren't. It's an unusual and uniquely challenging project and there are probably plenty of other projects for which he is perfectly suitable. Not only do we not want him in the project, but he is absolutely right to not want to be a part of it. Not being a good fit should not be seen as a form of rejection, merely as a recognition of the obvious.

Allen, with all due respect, you are a bit of a diva. You expect to be treated a certain way, and when you are not treated that way, you blow a gasket and throw a fit. Most people simply don't do that. Now, maybe you're right and you don't deserve to be treated that way, or maybe you're not, but regardless, you would have been treated that way in the project and you would not have handled it well. I'm not about to change the way that I do things, because, whether you like it or not, it works for me and my various teams, all of which are extremely high-performance and not given to giving any consideration to anyone's feelings about anything.

I don't regret any of this, not even that you took the discussion public, because it was a very clear demonstration of the importance of psychological and socio-sexual fitness within a team project. And I'm glad to learn that you don't have anymore interest in working with us. It is MUCH better for everyone that this sort of incident took place before the project was relying upon you for anything. If nothing else, you avoided wasting your time and we avoided a future disruption. That's a win-win for both sides.

But let me dissect this a bit, you say an alpha just doesn't respond to gammas, and gammas just use baseless insults and never stop messaging looking for revenge, right? How does that differ from you posting my info so you can have your biased minions seek me out and attack me? Basically you are taking the weight of the gamma work off your shoulders and having every here do it for you. Gammas use baseless insults, but nearly everyone who simply disagrees with you, you call a gamma, yet that is not a baseless insult in and of itself? Everyone clearly sides with Vox here, yet I didn't open up the dialogue with insults.

Allen, you erroneously see my actions through the filter of your own gamma mindset. My "insults" are not baseless nor are they intended to insult you, I am not seeking any revenge upon you, I am not trying to hurt your feelings, and to be blunt, I don't give a damn. I didn't post your "info", most of which you had already posted publicly, and the remainder you twice gave me express permission to post, in order to have anyone seek you out and attack you. I posted it in order to give you a wake-up call in the hopes that it would cause you to realize what you were doing so you would stop doing it.

You're not the first person I have seen who has behaved in this way. You will not be the last. I know what I'm doing in this regard because I have over ten years of experience in dealing with it. And, if you'll notice, it worked, whereas simply ignoring you did not.

Gamma is not an insult per se. It is a clearly defined, clearly observable male behavioral identity. Nor do I call everyone who disagrees with me a gamma; men of all socio-sexual ranks disagree with me, many vociferously. The relevant fact of the matter here is that your pattern of behavior is familiar and predictable, because that is simply how gammas tend to react in certain situations. And the reason that it gets called out so often is because non-gammas don't behave in that way and therefore don't require being addressed in a similar manner.

Every gamma would do well to recall three things:

• You don't get any say in how other people treat you. You can only control how you respond to it. People will judge YOU by that response, not the people to whom you are responding.
• When angry or upset, keep your mouth shut until you cool down.
• \When you screw up, stop digging. Just stop.

And just to be clear on the subject, my site traffic is currently running at a rate of 3.1 million pageviews per month, 452,374 of which are here.

No Gammas allowed

Here is an object lesson in why you should avoid permitting Gammas to join your team or your organization if at all possible. With the announcement of Infogalactic, we have a lot of volunteers coming forward who want to help, but as you can imagine, we're extremely busy, so we've been practicing a form of triage with regards to whom we get back to. Just to put this in context, since we've decided to bite the bullet and write our own engine, our current needs relate more to below the hood stuff than the paint job.

So, the initial contact is fine. It's a generous offer to help out on a big project. Nothing wrong with that.

Hey there, yea so, I am passionate about the cause, and I'de love to help out. I do graphic design and web design mockups for developers to code. Most of my web work in the last year is not up on my portfolio, been too busy. 

Now, I should have responded sooner, but I've been just a little busy, what with launching Infogalactic, Clio & Me, and MAGA Mindset all within eight days. So, nine or ten days later, he quite reasonably sends a follow-up:

So how about dignify me with a response. "Yes, no, moved on, found someone else, my work sucks, my work is fantastic, you're a pick," anything will do.

Or not quite reasonably. I've developed fairly sensitive Gamma radar and I picked up on an amount of passive-aggressiveness in the first sentence. There is also a just a hint of a lofty sense of entitlement, which is why my response began with a warning.

First, you need to lose the attitude if you want to work with us. I had three hours of sleep last night, because in addition to launching Infogalactic eight days ago, I just edited and published two books this week, one of which is currently in the top 250 on Amazon. If you can't deal with the fact that the big dogs on this project are insanely busy, you won't fit in. There simply isn't space for divas and egos on the team.

Answering the 100s of emails I get a day is something I do when I can get to it. It's not the top priority.

That being said, your work looks good. It's a little bit too soon for us to think about this, since we just decided to modify the roadmap and create a whole new MediaWiki engine replacement that doesn't suck and wasn't designed by brain-dead people. Send me your phone number and I'll give you a call next week. If you don't hear from me by Wednesday, ping me. And if you want to play around with concepts, read the roadmap. The link is on the front page.

He didn't lose the attitude.

Fucking asinine prick, you want to talk about egos and "big dogs on the project" all in the same sentence? I asked to be dignified with a response, even if it's "no thanks," since ya know, I was trying to volunteer my professional design services. How the fuck does that equate to an ego? Answer: it doesn't. What a hypocritical statement, talking about how you are a big dog to a small fry trying to humbly donate his time. Brilliant. 

"If you can't deal with the fact that the big dogs on this project are insanely busy." <-- the world revolves around egos, as if you are the only one in life that is busy. 

Then you proceed to tell me to give you my number and do some concepts. Listen here, I am not your little small fry trying to work for a big dog, and I have zero interest in donating my top notch professional design services to anyone who thinks they can talk like that to me. You have your world backwards, big dog. If you can't handle me requesting a hint of communication, then you are right, I certainly will not fit in with the team. Looks like to me it's you who needs your ego dismantled. "Divas and egos," you are a real fucking asshole. 

Glad we got this settled. Good luck, self-deluded self-important egotistical hypocritical prick. Maybe think a little longer before you respond when you are on 3 hours of sleep so as not to unnecessarily outlet your stress on people for no reason. And value the time your next volunteer will sacrifice for YOU, because we are all busy outside of your little inflated world. 

At that point, I realized we'd gotten off easy. I'd much rather have a Gamma meltdown when he's on the outside looking in than do so when he hasn't gotten his way on something in the middle of the project.

Glad we were able to weed you out at the start. 

I was unsurprised at both the posturing and the multiple responses. I've dealt with too many Gammas blowing up on the blog to not know what to expect. So, I just let him rant without responding. First, he started with the fake amusement and false sympathy.

BAHAHAHAH what a joke. So much appreciation. You refuse to acknowledge that you were unnecessarily and asshole because you perceive yourself as someone people are lining up for and begging to work you, which is also known as an ego diva big dog. 

Oh no, anyone calling themselves big dog has no ego at all. You just wish I was upset that you weeded me out, again like someone with an ego would do. You couldn't handle me being straight forward and asking for a response so you thought you could talk to me like a real piece of shit, then when I do not submit and kiss your ass you "weed me out." 

Honestly, are you fucking serious????? Man I tell you what, I do feel bad, but not because I cannot donate the time I barely have to your site, but because you are an outright fucking asshole. This conversation would not be happening if you were to be trying to talk to me like a piece of shit to my face. 

His next email moved on to the minimizing and belittling.

Oh wow two whole books selling on the top 250, good for your ego. 👍 

And the email after that consisted of the belated reframe of the reframing.

And you didn't "weed me out," you asked for my number, derp. I weeded YOU out, dim wit fake pseudo crusader asshole. 

The next day, not having received any response, he decided to take it public, on Gab, in a series of posts.

@voxday You follow just 32 people. Must be your egotistical self importance.

@voxday How exactly again did you "weed me out" after asking for my number and saying you were gonna call me? I weeded you out, because you were a pure uncalled for asshole. Go cry about it. You don't put someone down then ask for their number. You've been dismantled. Glad I didn't donate my time.

@voxday Careful, I see your ego showing yet again, in pretty much every exchange, how hypocritical. I will try to not let my "ego" encourage me to volunteer the time I really don't have. My huge inflated "diva ego" made me want to donate. My bad. Carry on "big dog alpha." 

@voxday Never in my professional career have I ever hear anyone talk about themselves like you did. You have a hard lesson to learn, but instead you will play alpha games and unwittingly prove my point about your level of mentality. All the best to infogalactic.

@voxday Post the fucking email you hypocrite self-deluded asshole. How do you feel smug for talking like that to people trying to give shit to you free out of selflessness? All I asked for was a response, even it was a "fuck you your work is shit." Then you call yourself a big dog, and me a diva ego

@voxday I called you out for what you are after you called me a "diva ego" then immediately called yourself a "big dog." You took your stress from lack of sleep out on me man, admit it. After your response I was no longer concerned about being "professional." You asked for my number, I declined. smh

@voxday Yea, when you try to belittle me, I tend to not be suitable to work with you. Unless of course I bent over and begged for more like u expected as a "big dog."  One, I was not looking for a job. I have two. Two, I already do work with a high profile dev team, much bigger than yours.

@voxday The fact that you went straight there and assumed I am some unemployed small fry do nothing shows how important you think of yourself. Pretty ignorant. How do you justify initiating a bitter dialogue them proceed to blame me for getting bitter? You need mental help.

@voxday I've worked with technology companies, marketing companies, brands, startups, I've been around the block, "big dog." I live in startup driven Portland Oregon's huge design community. I've met countless design professionals, and only about one had the arrogant ego rudeness you have.

@voxday Stop blaming people for reacting negatively to the rude way you treat them, then maybe you can find "suitable" volunteer shit ons

Then, to top it all off, he rushed over to Amazon to leave a fake review about SJWS Always Lie. Why, oh why, would we not want someone like this on the Infogalactic team?

By Allen on October 21, 2016

First off, when someone introduces themselves with a lie, even if it its a somewhat harmless lie, It really gives a bad impression and you cannot feel that comfortable assimilating their information. It makes you approach their book verya very skeptical perspective, and does indeed hurt any credibility.

Author claims between the two of his sites he gets over 3 million views, yet it clearly shows the amount of views he has on Alpha Game, which is just about 300,000 a month.


So unless Vox Day is getting a whopping 3 million views a month, which is extremely unlikely considering the content and the caliber, the author is inflating his credentials, no doubt due to his incredible ego. Most of the content is pseudo intellectual generalizations, which is your first clue to steer clear.

Have a look at the sidebar. Notice that it currently features a number in excess of 400,000. Those of you who can do the math will soon realize that means VP must get traffic of more than 2.6 million pageviews per month. Which, as it happens, is the case.

Anyhow, this is why it's best to avoid having Gammas on your team. You have absolutely no idea what will set them off, but you can rest assured that something will trigger their insecurities at some point along the way, usually to disruptive effect. And Gammas never forgive and they never forget. They will wait years just to take a petty shot at you in revenge for some slight you've completely forgotten.

If you're a Gamma, it's very important to learn two concepts. First, don't expect anyone to value you as highly as you value yourself. Nobody else sees you for the Secret King you are, that's why it's a Secret. Second, stop digging.

The unsalvageable

Nicholas Peake describes the casualties in the War on Men at Return of Kings:

Over the years I’ve known a few friends (and, sadly, family) who at some point I began to see in a different light—these were men very close to me who eventually revealed themselves to always make bad decisions, avoid personal change and self improvement, fail with women (or get with terribly low-tier ones), and periodically need my help to get themselves out of a hole they had dug for themselves.

At the very least it was slightly annoying, but after bailing them out numerous times I become angry and frustrated with the lack of personal responsibility. I came to understand that these are broken men.

What I now call the “loser mentality” is not reserved for extreme cases like drug addicts, felons, and so forth.  Sometimes otherwise nice, decent people are actually living a “loser” life; not everyone is necessarily “bad” but sadly are still a net negative and will drain us of money, motivation, time, and more if we don’t make the hard choice to walk away from them.

There appear to be common traits among these types which serve as telling indicators of those who your good intentions are wasted on.

It's a perspicacious article and he makes some very good observations. But the key one is this: Never expect help when you really need it from those who have the loser mentality.... Losers cannot be counted on.  Ever. 

That's why I am very wary of placing any trust in gammas or omegas. They are like wounded dogs and won't even hesitate to bite the hand that is feeding them. And the moment I sense that I'm dealing with a gamma, I do my best to extricate myself from their web of drama and delusion.

Often, the fact that they have been mistreated and they do merit pity leads both men and women into misguided sympathy. But it is best offered in the abstract and from afar.

You can't cure any man with a broken mindset. About the most you can do for a man like that is give him a copy of MAGA Mindset, by Mike Cernovich, and hope for the best.

Alpha Mail: Gammas in the Wild

From a reader:

Spotting Gammas in the Internet wilds is relatively easy. Whenever there is a debate, they always hedge their arguments in a sort of supposed plausible deniability. Rather than directly addressing a point, and crafting a counterpoint, they deliver some kind of sarcastic reply that, if they are challenged on, they will claim wasn't aimed at the original post. The format is like this:

OP: The sky is blue.
Gamma: You know, so many stupid people think the sky is blue.

If challenged on the attack, the Gamma will try to escape with "oh, I wasn't talking about YOU," even when it is clear that he was. He'll then spin himself as the victim when the OP replies with a counterattack. He seems blissfully unaware that this sort of passive-aggressive behavior generates a raging desire to throttle the crap out of the Gamma. He must also be unaware that anyone with intelligence sees right through him. The Gamma thinks this kind of thing is supremely clever, when in reality it demonstrates in full public view just how much of a Dunning-Kruger idiot he really is.

Yes, if there is one thing, just ONE thing that I could convince every Gamma of, I would choose to convince them that they are not fooling anyone. For some reason, they seem to believe that their transparent little tactics are opaque to everyone else, and that no one realizes what they're doing.

I think this may be part of why women hate Gammas so much. Gammas often use female tactics, but when they do, they tend to use them ineptly. So, women tend to feel contempt for them in addition to feeling that the Gamma is invading their turf and playing the game wrong.

I think it must be difficult to live life as a Gamma, though, in that they're direct-conflict-avoidant and yet are constantly trying to pick fights. All I know is that once I recognize a man as a Gamma, I don't argue with him or even discuss substantive things with him anymore. I have no interest in their constant quibbling, dramatic posturing, and silly theatrics. You can't always punch them in the face, but it is very easy to cut them out of your social circle, because no one else really wants them around either. After that, it's easy to ignore them.

DU or GTFO.

Gamma to the end

Gammas can't even kill themselves without looking ridiculous:

A 22-year-old man shot himself dead live on Facebook after accusing his girlfriend of adultery and telling her he could not live without her. The shocking video was streamed on the account of Turkish man Erdogan Ceren.

According to local media he lived in the Osmaniye Province in southern Turkey and was at home when he shot the video at around 3pm. Before the act he also shared a poem that he had written to his allegedly adulterous girlfriend, saying:

"Our love was going to be a saga, our eyes were not going to shed tears, now tell me love, are you leaving, will my hands burn without you."

Speaking to the camera, the man says: "No one believed when I said I will kill myself - so watch this."

He then explains that he plans to commit suicide because his girlfriend ended their relationship.He adds: "Watch this."

His first attempt at pulling the trigger of what appears to be a shotgun fails when the weapon appears to jam, and then he tries again. He readjusts the camera, points the weapon at his chest, and then there is a gunshot and he is no longer visible on camera.

What are the chances he didn't even write that stupid little poem himself. Anyhow, he certainly showed everyone who didn't believe him.

That's a real win, champ!

See, this is why you don't want to wallow in gammatude. Even dead, people will make fun of you.

Government by gamma males

This exchange at Instapundit concerning Donald Trump's Alpha talk about women 11 years ago sums up the dire straits of US society:

disqusisass"So Trump speaks like all men behind closed doors, and is somehow a pig?"

Ruy Diaz
I've never spoken like that. Not even thought it.

disqusisass
Well then you are in a very small minority. Or a Priest. Or Nun?

Ruy Diaz
I'm a better quality of man than you are.

This summarizes the gamma male. He's a better quality of man because he doesn't even think about women in a sexual manner.

Of course, he's not even a man at all. If we referred to him in German, we'd need to say "das gamma" to reflect his neutered state.

Gamma Fantasy Novel One

Act 1

GP (Gamma Protagonist) is awkward, unattractive, and misunderstood, but smart and snarky

GP discovers the heart of the misunderstanding is his previously unknown incredible gift

GP enters a whirlwind of an adventure of discovering his gift as people are suddenly after him

GP defeats some minor foes with his gift but doesn’t know how

MV (Male Villain) is introduced, an ass for no reason, is a jock, and good looking

MV has control over seductress Female Villain (FV) The FV is shown not totally responsible for being a villain

Act 2

First confrontation with MV who wants gift to be a bigger asshole, GP escapes

FV sent to seduce GP

GP has the greatest moral victory of all time, he turns down a hot woman with dark hair, and large breasts

FV found GP sincerity and respect for women attractive but must obey the MV

FV killed by MV since she failed and MV captures GP relishes being an asshole, brags about it, and has sex with hot slave women in celebration

Act 3

GP escapes with the help of a spunky, quirky, FR (Female Rogue) who doesn’t realize how pretty she really is

FR helps GP unlock his gift but is better at everything else than the GP and is more intelligent and wise. Effectively the FR has no flaws

FR beds GP unexpectedly and loves GP for his snark, mid-level intelligence, and ignores his stupidly childish antics, weird personality, and total lack of friends

FR and GP team up to beat MV

GP discovers in the final battle that his gift allows him to be powerful as the gods but he’s magnanimous about how he uses it

GP tells the FR a stupid joke at the end, she rolls her eyes, and kisses him

Talking around

Harry Cassandra thought he was being "casually witty" when he suggested "nibbles" to a woman. (The fact that he shouldn't have been pursuing her in the first place is not relevant to this analysis.)

Haus Frau explains the effect that being "casually witty" has on women:

Cutesy crap and try-hard witty snark are both kryptonite. Cutesy is far less tolerable between the two. My husband used to baby talk to me when teasing. As in I would be playing with one of the kids or mention something they did and he would go into the baby talk voice "aaaw momma loves the little babies..." and this would just go on.

I quietly told him more than once to stop doing that habit but it just didn't seem to register with him that I really meant it. One evening after he indulged in a few drinks he kept doing the baby talk thing and I basically verbally snapped his head off. He was hurt. I felt bad and apologized. It was bad. He really didn't get how white hot pissed that habit made me.......the moral of the long-winded anecdote being that repeated cutesy shit like using the word "nibbles" for snacks creates such a level of seething irritation that you might as well have sewn up her vagina with a bear trap.

The reason is pretty simple. Men use "casual wit" in order to verbally sidle up to women. They do so in order to talk around their intentions and thereby avoid risking the sting of rejection that being straightforward entails. It's all very cowardly and feminine, which is precisely why it arouses such contempt in a woman.

All men are capable of making this mistake, but Gammas are particularly prone to it because they live in a near-constant state of delusion concerning their ability to fool everyone about their real feelings and intentions. What they don't realize is that they pull their slick moves off about as convincingly as the bug wearing the skin of a man in Men in Black managed to mimic normal human behavior. It doesn't matter if you were "playing a role" or not, she still rejected YOU. Yes, you. Deal with it.

Women are extraordinarily sensitive to male cowardice, risk avoidance, and fear of rejection. They even subject men they have already accepted to regular tests in order to smoke it out. They sniff out male weakness and insecurity like a shark scents blood in the water. So, as a general rule, if you think you're being cleverly casual, know that it's not hiding anything. It's better to just be succinct and straightforward, and accept her response with taciturn grace no matter what it is.

Alpha Mail: going down the right way

Two days ago, I posted an exchange between a Gamma who wanted to know if that was how it was done or not and requesting a score. I pointed out that he had already been turned down, which he was reluctant to admit, observing that he was still theoretically in the game.

However, he was Delta enough to send me this last exchange and concede that my read on the situation had, in fact, been correct.

So...8pm tomorrow.  Small cooler of wine/beer, nibbles.  Inhaler. Towels.  Swimsuits optional.  You in?

That sounds great but I just realised evenings are not going to work out for me. The best time for me would be during the day so could we do lunch instead? Thursday would be good and I'm happy to go anywhere.

Fortunately, he had the good sense to recognize this as a rejection, and a demotion to the Friend Zone, and declined her suggestion. He also did a better job of keeping his communications shorter than hers, although I would not recommend mentioning either "nibbles" or "inhaler" in the future. The former is too cutesy and the latter is too indicative of being genetically defective.

His other mistake, although irrelevant at this point, was to explain WHY he was declining. NEVER explain your actions to a woman who has turned you down. Setting their hamsters to spinning in order to make sense of your words is half the battle, as it gets them thinking and thinking and thinking about you and wondering if perhaps they made the wrong call. I've had women who turned me down show up at my door after midnight in tears demanding to know why I only said "all right" and hung up. Women are insatiably curious creatures. Strangely enough, shutting the door yourself can sometimes inspire them to open it themselves.

There are few better displays of high value than the easy, taciturn, and genuinely nonchalant acceptance of rejection by a woman. Don't say something cute. Don't try to show her that you aren't disappointed or that you don't care. Don't try to slip in that little verbal stinger. Women can sniff out wounded male pride as well as sharks scent blood in the water. Just say "all right," and leave it at that. And if she tries to get back into the picture when you subsequently cut contact and focus your attention elsewhere, remember that she is doing so on your terms.

Remember, the difference between the Alpha and the Omega is that the Alpha only fails two-thirds of the time. This was an excellent learning opportunity for the Gamma, and I expect that if he is ruthlessly honest with himself, and applies the lessons he learned here next time, he'll continue to make positive progress towards Delta.

Special might be destroying you

A man should feel pride in his accomplishments, but Special is thinking oneself better for no real reason. It’s the difference between actually doing something which is measurable, and taking a position or posture on something which requires no real effort. An example would be in high school where most kids like one of the popular music genres, but a Gamma declares his love of Classical music and derides any other type of music as inferior. Liking a music genre takes zero effort and isn’t an accomplishment, but can make one feel special. Since the Gamma has no other accomplishments, his position on things becomes a substitute. The man doing this puts himself in an extremely vulnerable position emotionally. As soon as his position on something is threatened he has to defend it as his very worth is at stake. The posture is personal.

Even worse, actual successes become irrelevant or unnoticed as he’s built a bubble of attitudes and a self-concocted set of metrics for success which are unattainable since they only exist in the Gamma’s head. I’ve witnessed this first hand, multiple times, where a Gamma suffers from depression, talks of Impostor Syndrome, or feels unsuccessful regardless of having actual accomplishments.  Getting a middle-class job, successfully raising children, even getting and staying married are accomplishments, but typically the Gamma takes no pride in these things. The reason is that they aren’t special, and the Gamma must be Special.

If you are down about your life for whatever reason, take stock of yourself and situation. I’d wager you have some accomplishments already, but if you have very few then set some goals for yourself. Some ideas:

• Clean up your finances and get out of debt.
• Hit the gym and get in the best shape of your life.
• Learn a new skill or expand your knowledge in your work.
• Pick up a hobby which has some metrics for success.
• Most importantly fail horribly at something, and try something else.

The best way to counteract Special is to accomplish something with your life with actual metrics. You won’t have to rely on obscure trivia, lame jokes, or the superiority of your favorite music genre to feel good about yourself. If you need to, set a realistic goal that by the end of this year that you will accomplish something to be proud of. In January when everyone else is setting a New Year’s resolution, you can quietly smile to yourself know you are already a step ahead, and your resolution can be even a bigger triumph.

Alpha Mail: is this how it's done?

A reader wants to know if this is how it is done:

I would appreciate your score on this.  I'm yet to see it through to fruition but it seems promising.  I would appreciate criticisms.  Bear in mind that I would deliberately go out for a cigarette and leave about 7 minutes between most posts.
It was a joy to meet you tonight.  You are a fascinating and beautiful woman.  Hope to see you again some time. With a great sense of humour, I should add...

Hi X, thanks so much for your compliments. I'm really glad I got to meet you.

You're leaving soon? That's a shame.  I'm not interested in breaking up marriages but I would have enjoyed flirting with you. Flirting with an unavailable 9 is good practice.

 yes A 9 only??😳😃 ok I guess that's pretty good.

It's the game.  You twig their insecurity by calling them less than a 10, while also observing their desire to be seen as perfect.  Had I not brought you in on the strategy, I would be more attractive to you now than I was 24 hours ago, simply because you now want to be seen as a 10 in my eyes.
It's all psychology...

The sexy lesbian look does suit you, but overall the long blonde hair in your photos does you the best justice.  Although I cannot fault the figure.

Yes indeed on the psych stuff. Interesting what you think about the blonde. There were only one or two people in my world that shared your opinion. I just had to find out if blondes have more fun.

The hair colour isn't the issue, so much as the length.  There's a rule of thumb among unattached men that short haired women are damaged.  Girls that have been in bad breakups and are angry at the male gender in general, often cut off all their hair.  Women know that men prefer generally, long hair, so cutting it off is an act of hostility, masked as self empowerment.  It's a red flag.  Mind you in your case, the short hair drew attention your other assets, which were ample.

I would not have guessed you are a mother, twice over.

Yes. It was a very tough decision to go short. In my case it was not related to any of what you had mentioned but I can most certainly see how it may have been reasons for others who have gone short. 

Thank you for the compliment!

No, that is not how it is done. I'd give it a score of three, and that only because the "9" comment provoked a reaction, but "7" would have been better. First, way too flowery and complimentary. Second, way, way, WAY too wordy. This guy is turning Roissy's 1-3 ratio on its head and multiplying it by two.

The shaking-my-head aspect is that he thinks he's doing great because she's thanking him for the compliments, not realizing that he's being openly blown out. She's graciously accepting his homage, she knows she has no need to qualify herself to him nor any interest in him.

Look, talking about Game to women is not indicative of being a masterful player who is an expert on the fair sex, it simply informs them that you're a sperg who doesn't understand what he's read. That's like a woman telling a man, "you like my big breasts? Well, they're really just a push-up bra. And see, look how under my makeup I've actually got a really awful complexion."

Now, the guy showed the courage to put himself out there, he clearly attempted to outkick his coverage, he did (subsequently) push for a get-together, and he is seeking to improve via feedback. Hence the three. We're not talking hopeless here, but we are talking about Gamma based on the pedestalization and excessive floweriness. This means that the route to improvement and eventual success will begin with the self rather than the mechanics.

Care to predict how this will turn out?

Gamma theology and the one sin

Contra Thomas Aquinas and other great Christian theologians of the past, the Churchian theologians of today have determined that woman, being only barely fallen, are capable of only one sin:

We live in an age obsessed with women’s self esteem.  Feminists assure us that all (or nearly all) of our problems would be solved if only women held themselves in higher regard.  This is closely tied to the idea that women being “true to themselves” is a central virtue.  According to our modern thought process women are innately good, so if they have the confidence to be true to themselves they will point men towards virtue.  Instead of looking to God for our moral compass, women are to follow their hearts and men are tofollow women.  These ideas are contrary to the Bible, yet they have been widely adopted by modern Christians.

In Matt Walsh’s letter to his daughter, his greatest fear is that she will grow up to lack self esteem because our society will tell her she isn’t good enough:

That’s why I wrote this letter. For the times when the pressures of the world — the constant, deafening din, screaming “you’re not pretty enough, you’re not good enough” — become a little too heavy to shoulder. Whether it’s 7 years from now, or 17, or 70 — whenever you need a reminder, here it is:

You’re beautiful.

Similarly, Glenn Stanton teaches parents that unlike their sons, their daughters will naturally develop virtue, so long as society doesn’t get in the way:

What are the essential qualities that transform our daughters into mature, secure women?

As you read through the qualities described below, please keep in mind that much of this is innate, but because our culture seems to fight so hard to suppress certain natural tendencies, it’s our privilege and responsibility as parents to watch out for opportunities to nurture and guide in these areas.

Christian women are of course hearing the message, as the blogger at Drurywriting discovered when teaching college students about sin.  In Do Women sin? he explains that while his students have no trouble identifying a list of sins men are tempted by, they are reliably stumped when he asks them to list sins women tend to be tempted by.  After he sets only the women in the class to come up with a female sin, they eventually find one:

Lack of self esteem

I expect that the Game-aware Christian will recognize that this is not Christian theology, but rather the Gamma corruption of Christian theology, which stems from the primary Gamma motivator: the idea that through steadfast pedestalization and obsequiousness, a woman might one day be willing to let him have sex with her.

Alpha Mail: the Gamma mindset in fiction

A reader recognizes a fictional portrayal of Gamma:

Although I certainly don't share all your views I will always acknowledge and appreciate that I owe a lot to your development of the gamma concept. As a recovering gamma the fact that I recognized myself in your description of the typical gamma mindset and behaviour gave me a powerful incentive to work my way out of gamma territory and self-absorption and to choose the path of self-honesty and realistic feedback. In this respect I also owe a lot to the articles of Nick Krauser, who took up your gamma concept and developed some further interesting views on it.

So I was fascinated when I read a short story by T. C. Boyle yesterday and found what I now recognize as a masterful description of the thought-process of a gamma mind. The gamma we're dealing with here is a man overwhelmed by his envy on another man going for the same woman and beating him in the process, leading to obsessive and delusional white-knight-fantasies. Maybe you check it out sometime. It's called "Termination Dust" and contained in the short story collection "After the Plague".

I love to receive this sort of feedback. It's great to see men, whether they agree with me or not, choosing the painful, but ultimately rewarding path of self-honesty and reality over their Gamma delusion bubbles.

I shall have to look it up, as it sounds potentially illuminating.

If you're not clear on the concept

One of these men is Alpha. The other is Gamma. I leave it to you to work out which is which. Then keep in mind that this is the Alpha's woman.

The dead end of MGTOW

Corey Savage addresses the unproductive nature of MGTOW at Return of Kings:

MGTOW may have started with the right intent of defying the gynocentric system that exploits men, but it has quickly turned into a congregation of young men who come together to validate each other’s bitterness and frustration. Instead of doing anything to improve their lives, the majority of MGTOW feel the need to attack anyone who suggests self-improvement because it reminds them of their own lack of effort (just note how often they come to this site to spew their hatred instead of staying in their own sphere).

And for all the cries about society “shaming” them, the members of the MGTOW are the most vitriolic group today (along with the feminists) that constantly shames men for sharing tips on improving their lives. I can somewhat accept bitchy behavior from feminists as they’re women, but to watch these “men” throw a hissy fit over articles on attracting women or becoming a better man (none of which they were forced to read) is both hilarious and cringeworthy at the same time.

Ask yourself: what compels a man who has supposedly “gone his own way” to come to a site they claim to hate, read an article on attracting women which they clearly don’t care for, then leave a comment to “shame” and attack other men? Simple: jealously and insecurity.

MGTOW also claim that their group isn’t about rejecting sex altogether, but as soon as another man makes even the slightest effort to have a relationship with a woman, they go apeshit about how he is a “slave to pussy” or a “PUA loser” (for some reason, they think anyone who has sex with a woman is automatically a “PUA.” I’m sure only a very small number of writers and readers of ROK are actual PUA’s).

Many of these men have a twisted worldview where all relationship between men and women are either slavery through marriage or a charade by men dressed like clowns who are desperate for sex. Some even develop more bizarre conspiracy theories where every word or action of another male group is an effort to force marriage or sell books on pick-up. Their mind is so warped that simply having a different perspective on man and society gets interpreted as advocating hatred or violence against the entire male population “just to get laid.”

To escape this men-rejecting-women-not-being-rejected-by-them club, you must recognize that the MGTOW inseminates damaging ideas about life and the world and poisons the soul with negativity. Just as feminism grew beyond from a movement equality, MGTOW has grown beyond its original purpose.

Translation: what started with Omegas has grown to include Gammas, and was then warped by the latter in their attempt to turn it into a movement that can rival the social hierarchy.

There is nothing wrong, indeed, there is much to be admired about the Benedict Option. But if you're going to transform yourself into a secular variant of a monk for reasons of principle, you shouldn't behave like a nasty-minded nun sent to a convent for bedding the stableboy.

And Savage makes a good point. If you're simply going your own way, then you should stop trying to interfere with everyone else's.

Alpha Mail: Gamma and the banned trolls

Since a few people apparently don't understand why it is necessary to limit the access of problem commenters from time to time, I figured it would be a good idea to directly address the critics:

I think the more important question is why Vox Day is such a cunt that he feels the need to block people.

The reason it is necessary to block certain troublemakers is because failing to block those people would entirely destroy the comment system. It has nothing to do with my character, my opinions, or my preferences. The purpose of a troll is to disrupt the discourse, and their tactics range from artfully attempting to provoke reactions from the blogger and the commenters in order to change the topic to spamming the comments with tens of thousands of comments. There are others, usually politically motivated, who make a round of blogs posting the exact same comment at each of them. Most readers are unaware of how persistent these attempts at disruption are, or how destructive they would be if left unchecked.

For example, in one case, the troll commented 12,000 times in a single hour, posting messages that were so bizarre and disturbing that when I contacted the police in his hometown and sent them a copy of a few hundred of them, they sent an officer out to his house immediately. It turned out that it was a guy off his medication who might well have been a risk to himself or others.

Do you seriously think any site could possibly survive that level of disruption by mentally unstable individuals intact? Because it does happen and that is what you're going to get if you permit unrestricted comments on a sufficiently popular site.

I've been blogging for 15 years. I have learned how to quickly identify those commenters whose objective is to a) disrupt the discourse and cause problems, b) sell something, or c) work out their psychological issues in public. Since none of those objectives are even remotely in harmony with my own, I will quickly ban and spam any commenter who falls into one of those three categories.

I started a blog to be an extension of my presence on some forums. I got banned by two of them, and since I had no platform to argue my case from, I used my blog to examine what happened and the nature of the moderators. Afterwards, I would continue to examine moderator issues on my blog, gaining some readership--not to mention moderator criticism--in my posts.

My model for this: Vox Day's reaction to the SFWA. I was trying to emulate what he had done.

After I started to realize the moderators would not respond to me, and that most forum members simply didn't care that I was gone, I figured my reaction was ineffective from the beginning. Though, to her credit, there was at least one forum member who seemed to change her ways after some blog-to-forum dialogue.

In any event, after being ostracized and not really having any kind of a regular contact with my old online associates, I feel like it's all just wind and fury signifying nothing. I've been shutting down the blog in spite of growing traffic numbers. The whole thing just seems to be an exercise in gaining "atta boys," which doesn't interest me.

But this post and one on Vox Popoli does cause me to ask a question: Why isn't Vox's reaction to the SFWA considered a gamma response?

The most basic reason is that I'm not a gamma. The second reason is that the larger part of my "reaction to the SFWA" was demanded by the SFWA. They published a very long report and required me to respond to it, which I did in detail. The only thing I did that was unusual was do it all in public rather than behind closed doors as they preferred. They actually filed a DMCA takedown notice because they were so desperate to hide their embarrassingly absurd report. The third reason is that I can't simply accept my being "expelled" from SFWA for the obvious reason that I wasn't. It never happened.

The rules for expulsion that were applicable at the time are very clear. First the SFWA Board had to vote. Then the entire membership had to vote. No vote of the entire membership ever took place, nor has SFWA ever declared that I was expelled from the organization. All SFWA has ever declared is that the Board voted to expel an unnamed individual. And that's true. It did. But that's as far as the process ever went.

I'm not a Gamma who is upset at being rejected from a group, I am a Sigma who is exposing a complete charade that was perpetrated on the science fiction community by a very small number of people abusing their positions. Moreover, the conflict has been very good for me and for the publishing house for which I work, so I have no reason to ever let it end.

Vox, you usually post some good articles, but lately you've been dropping the ball. First off, if you are banned from a website/forum, you aren't able to comment, AT ALL. If the user is able to comment then he isn't banned. Second, a person who bans someone for having their views challenged is the definition of a coward since he fears confrontation and his views might not be as strong as he believes, this is basically SJW in a nutshell, SJWs love to block, shame and use guilt tactics to shut other peoples arguments.

First, that's very naive. For example, one troll at VP was known to use 31 different pseudonyms. There are at least two others who have utilized more than that; there are currently 39 different trolls in the autovanish list. Trolls also make use of different IP addresses to avoid IP blocks. Second, I don't ban people for challenging my views, as should be readily apparent by looking at almost any comment thread on either blog.

Trolls who are banned for their bad behavior often complain that they are being banned for challenging the site owner's views, but since so many others are not banned for doing so, that's obviously a false claim. What they are being banned for is their unacceptable, disruptive, and often intentionally destructive behavior, and that's the only reason.

Free speech cannot survive one person shouting everyone else down or constantly redirecting the subject to what they prefer to discuss. Free speech is an ideal, not an absolute or a practical policy. Maximal free speech is achieved by applying the minimum amount of moderation required to permit everyone their chance to speak. It is not achieved by allowing everyone to shriek as loudly as they can as often as they want.

As I already mentioned, I've been doing this for a long time, and never more successfully than now. So, there is absolutely no reason to change what is quite clearly working, and I am not going to change it. Either abide by the guidelines I have established and pay heed to any warnings you are given or you will not be commenting here. It is as simple as that.

It's a big Internet. No one is forcing you to be here.