Hypergamy
When I first started this blog, I predicted that I'd run out of things to say about politics quite soon, and could carve up a nice niche by talking of East Asian issues from a neoreactionary perspective. At the moment I've been lucky enough to find a good audience just by speaking my mind on politics in general, and I don't intend to stop just yet, but I sometimes think I'd be more useful by bringing forward some real data on what's going on in this part of the world.
Jim's been making a series on women and why they shouldn't be treated as adults. It goes without saying that I mostly agree. I myself did a post long ago on the issue. Allow me to introduce a data point.
Jim linked to the hilarious video of a fake celebrity generating gina tingles in an American mall. Seeing all those hot teens swooning for a fake alpha. Yet alpha is alpha, and a fake alpha is better than a real beta. A lot of oldies and game denialists say that that's modern Western society that has changed women into inmoral skanks. The women of old were more virtuous, as are women in other, more traditionalist countries, such as those in Asia.
Hah. It always cracks me up. So those Asians don't swoon over Alphas? Well allow me to introduce the supreme Alpha male in Japan. Fukuyama Masaharu. Some singer with a grave voice. 44 years old. Unmarried, thought not known to be gay. He's come out as a TENGA user, so perhaps he doesn't care about women anymore. Anyway, see what happened when Fukuyama went live on a popular noon TV show.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player\_embedded&v=ilTHTMZVEbE\]
See all those women? All those shrieks, all those faces of excitement? You can even smell their vaginal fluids flooding out of their pants. And you know what's funny? This show, Waratte ii tomo, starts as 12:00 PM, noon. Who watches TV at that time frame? Single women in Japan are overwhelmingly either on school or employed. So 12:00 PM means it's housewife time. Yes, I'd bet my house that 80%+ of those tingling bitches going to that studio are married and have children. And there's no doubt in my mind that they would throw everything away for the chance to sleep with Mr. Fukuyama.
So yes, hypergamy is a basic, universal component of the female brain. Given the existence of mass media, this kind of mass gina tingling madness is simply unavoidable. And given the overwhelming alphatude of Mr. Fukuyama, statistically only a small fraction of men will be able to control their wives' and daughters' instincts. We can't all be rich, and we can't all be alpha.
41 comments
replySo, uh, I hear that men have been known to hoot and holler at strip clubs. And they sometimes sleep around. So remind me again what the argument for female disenfranchisement is...?
-
reply
The argument as I understand it is that (1) politicians in general are overwhelmingly alpha men, and the State itself plays a masculine psychological role; and (2) men and women have different cognitive biases: men tend to view alpha men as threats, whereas women tend to view alpha men as opportunities. Thus men tend to have much more realistic attitudes towards the State (and politicians). By the same token, it has been argued that banks that are "too big to fail" should be run by women, who tend to be more risk averse than men. Statistics appear to support at least the first point (e.g. John Lott writing about "the gender gap" in _Freedomnomics_).
-
reply
Spandrell, I'm interested in your thoughts on Japanese sexual dysfunction. They struck me as rather fucked up when I was over there, but I wasn't really that curious about it to learn to much.
-
reply
Well if you're a consistent hedonist, with no religious heritage to stop you, and you live in a technologically advanced, tolerant society... You get tons of kink and TENGA. Get used to that from puberty and it's no wonder they find women not worth the trouble. Once you control for that I'm surprised people have sex at all.
-
reply
>Baker It amazes me to no end that a resident of Hong Kong is not a staunch enemy of female emancipation. HK women are famously annoying, and what's more important, infertile. HK gender relations are a big monument to the unsustainability of feminism.
-
reply
> It amazes me to no end that a resident of Hong Kong is not a staunch enemy of female emancipation. Misjudged. You should've noted that I never said that feminism is good. I was describing what I see as scientifically as possible. Emotionally trashing feminism doesn't yield anything useful. Understanding the root cause of feminism is male competition in a saturately developed society, does give you a better understanding of why and how of the world and help you better navigate this environment. A root cause of princess-ification of Hong Kong female, besides the British influence, is that the number of male exceeded female in an earlier period due to sex-asymmetric immigration, intensifying male sexual competition. > HK women are famously annoying, and what’s more important, infertile. HK gender relations are a big monument to the unsustainability of feminism. Correct. But also note that Hong Kong males are overwhelming pussified. The majority of Hong Kong males are quite comfortable with feminism.
-
reply
I understand that, and that's the reason I don't post much on feminism and the like. It doesn't help to get too bitter and emotional. See how I ended my post. But it helps to write about it once in a while. Male bonding maybe. HK males just drink too much 豆浆, but that's just my theory. Your "saturately developed" notion seems to me could use some elaboration.
-
reply
> Your “saturately developed” notion seems to me could use some elaboration. In an unsaturated society, male competitiveness is directed outward into building new stuffs, the best builders get best reward. Social mobility is high so talent is appreciated by female in itself. Males compete by demonstrating their creating, dominating attributes. Once saturated, the easiest way to get power is rent-seeking / vote bidding / brainwashing. Women, children and submitting men are the easier groups to buy off and mind control, creative men are marginalized. Talent is useless without social mobility, and there are not many new things to build anyway, so males who cannot climb the social ladder must resort to sex begging, and females who cannot marry the social elites begrudgingly marry the best beggar. Males compete by demonstrating their serving, submitting attributes. The difference can be well contrasted in nowadays Mainland and Hong Kong. In both situations, male competition is equally fierce, and there are similarly many failed males, similar amount of enjoyment and suffering. Just that there are different rules for winning and failing. > HK males just drink too much 豆浆, but that’s just my theory. And the theory is?
-
reply
豆浆 saps the testosterone out of you. Your saturation theory is interesting, and does seem to apply well to China and overseas chinese communities. But what about Japan and Korea? It's as saturated as anywhere else, or more so. But the women there aren't as princess-ish, the men aren't as pussified, fertility only slightly higher, but sex relations are on the whole more traditional, i.e. advantageous for the man. Why do have to beg for sex while Japanese men don't have to? I'd say it's something particular to Chinese culture rather than some necessary byproduct of the economic environment.
-
reply
I lived in Japan for a while. Korea, only a few day trip. > Sex relations are on the whole more traditional, i.e. advantageous for the man. Men's life sucks in Japan as much as in anywhere. The traditional etiquette in marriage is a facade only. Japanese wives control all the money, their husbands work to death. They have little sex, if any at all. Japan may has the most developed male escort industry for housewives. The extremity of japanese AV is a manifestation of how repressed Japanese men are. Korea has a very strong tradition of male authority, their historical insecurity and feeling of self-inferiority against China and Japan, and now also fear of North Korea, probably fuels their male aggressiveness. Also, only very recently can Korea be considered a fully developed country. In contrast, Japanese lost most of its masculinity after the WWII defeat, but some say its repressed masculinity and economic down spiral make it a dangerous bomb. > Why do have to beg for sex while Japanese men don’t have to? You sure? Japanese men do things to save their face socially. In private it is another matter.
-
reply
>They have little sex, if any at all. Japan may has the most developed male escort industry for housewives. The extremity of japanese AV is a manifestation of how repressed Japanese men are. That's bullcrap. Hosts aren't for housewives, they're for single women mostly. And in 99% of cases don't have sex. And the size of whatever entertainment for women there is in Japan is 1/10000 the size of sex industry that caters to men. Married couples don't have sex because neither party wants to. The guy is already well sexed outside the home most of the time. Not to say that being a man in Japan is a good deal, as you say the wife spends the man's money and he works his ass off every day. But even before marriage, women are way more pleasant and nice to men during courtship. And they take care of themselves, they try to look nice. It's really no question compared to HK. The other side of the issue is that 30% of men have no sexual partners at all, and no marriage prospects. Those are the big AV and Tenga consumers.
-
reply
> That’s bullcrap. Hosts aren’t for housewives, they’re for single women mostly. And the size of whatever entertainment for women there is in Japan is 1/10000 the size of sex industry that caters to men. Married couples don’t have sex because neither party wants to. The guy is already well sexed outside the home most of the time. I assume you have Japanese friends so your information should be more accurate and my memory is wrong. Though I do recall reports of housewives visiting some sort of similar service, not necessarily for sex, but also for mental entertainment. All in all I doubt the marriage life for the average japanese men is a better deal than other places I've lived. > But even before marriage, women are way more pleasant and nice to men during courtship. And they take care of themselves, they try to look nice. It’s really no question compared to HK. I never interact much with japanese women so cannot really comment. Perhaps their overt demeanor looks more attractive to westerners due to higher contrast to their western counterpart. Not so much for me, feels rather superficial.
-
reply
Oh since we are talking about why feminism doesn't look like Hong Kong in Japan. My heuristic answer is that: Japan has a much stronger male authority tradition than Hong Kong. Japan enforce traditional etiquettes, including female etiquette. Japan men has a much stronger traditional of saving life. However these are all rather superficial. Considering their low inter-marriage sex, low fertility, harsh husband life, the percentage of male out of sex market, the overall loss of masculinity in the new generation, etc, it is no better than Hong Kong in essence.
-
reply
typo: saving life -> saving face
-
reply
"A root cause of princess-ification of Hong Kong female, besides the British influence, is that the number of male exceeded female in an earlier period due to sex-asymmetric immigration, intensifying male sexual competition." That's an interesting thought. It might not be general but i can see it being a factor. In bluecollar environments with sex-asymmetric immigration the surplus of men compete with violence and life for girls in that environmnet is not very pleasant at all. However in whitecollar environments the competition would take other forms and one possible form of competing for women is putting up with BS i.e. competing on being a wimp. As immigration is almost always sex-asymmetric and as the US has been the prime destination for both bluecollar and whitecollar immigration for a long time that would provide a neat explanation for the ever-more jungle like bluecollar environments contrasting with the ever more pussified whitecollar ones. It's a neat theory, probably wrong but neat.
-
reply
>Baker Your conclusion sounds reasonable. But I digress in that Japan has a much stronger face saving tradition. I think China reigns supreme in that department, 面子 and all that. It's amazingly pervasive in China, whatever you do. Japan/Korea are more rule, ritual based in their behavior. But for some reason Chinese don't fear losing face in front of their women, while Japanese (and Korean) men still do. And very strongly. It has probably to do with your old class system. I remember being amazed on how quickly rich chinese gentry were sending their daughters to school in the 19th century. Japan only did that after WW2, and still most girls go to girl-only colleges where they learn how to be a good secretary.
-
reply
Firstly, Hong Kong =/= China. Even provinces within Mainland varies greatly in their cultures. Traditionally, Chinese women enjoyed a higher status than Japanese women. Only during the Ching dynasty that chinese women hit a new low in status, but it recovered after it. Chinese women can be quite capable and it is not uncommon to see women outperforming their husbands (without affirmative action), and I can personally testify several cases. As for male escorts in Japan here is the first google result of "日本 牛郎店" that supports my claim. http://baike.baidu.com/view/1671540.htm . I cannot vet for its accuracy but it doesn't worth my extra effort.
-
reply
Yeah, as I thought, you're talking about what they locally call "host". Most of the customers are high earning hostesses or single women. And actual sex is *very* rare. What do you mean with "outperform". Earn more money? Surely men and women have comparative advantages at different kind of jobs, as anywhere else. As you said before, the modern economy means that many jobs are becoming dull bureaucratic tasks that are done better by women. And it happens that somehow, Chinese women are more willing to put hours and effort into their jobs that women elsewhere. I can testify to that myself. It's disturbing.
-
reply
Did you read the whole article? It claims that many housewives do do naughty things. Also, sex is not really the point. 心理出軌 is a big sin and shame for asians, it would be face blowing to a chinese husband, even for Hong Kong man-pussies. > What do you mean with “outperform”. Just being more generally capable in building and maintaining 家業, the task traditionally supposed for husbands. No, not comparative advantages, just plainly superior in enterprial and social abilities as a person. And no, not necessarily in modern environment, since a few cases I can testify were marriage around 1950s. I still sense the women's weakness in planning and achieving great things, but not many people goes out of the way to do great things anyway. For building and maintaining a normal 家業, the women are indeed quite capable.
-
reply
"心理出軌 is a big sin" Nah, no big deal over there. As long as it's discrete. I can imagine the outrage in China though. But the article is a big pile of shit, as you would expect from Baidu. When will China get that journalism is about sources and not creative writing?
-
reply
I concede the Baidu article is untrustworthy. But I doubt that japanese housewives has lower extra marital affair than say, Hong Kong. From the impression I got from reading multiple sources of info, > 20% is a fair guess. Anyway, the reason that I brought up the "host" phenomenon in japan is as an example of feminism in Japan, and the reasoning still stands. New generation japanese girls are also extremely vain. Japanese men are not well sexed. They have among the lowest average rate of sex in the world. Prostitution is very expensive. Japanese wives see their role as ritual duty, but they don't love or care much about their husband, and they refuse to have sex with them due to their beta-ness. Unless you are one of the high income manager in your 50s who can frequent prostitutes and enjo kosai, I feel that married lives for japanese men are quite miserable.
-
reply
So I made my first blog post. Since I linked to you at one point I figure I'll post there. If your going to comment, then comment there. http://anastasiusx.wordpress.com/2013/05/12/hbd-is-an-egalitarian-concept/
Sperm is cheap, eggs are expensive. Married men don't do their shit in public. Men go for relatively objective standards (beauty), women go after manufactured crap such as fame. If you need more arguments head to Jim's blog. It's linked in the article.
Do women really have much different criteria than men? I think it's much more symmetric between the sexes than web rightists construe. Everybody wants a good looking mate who is socially facile and demonstrates some sort of skill. This alpha/beta and hypergamy stuff is a load of bullshit as far as I can tell. I have not an alpha bone in my body (thoroughly neurotic, in fact) and minimal social skills yet have been essentially followed back to my hotel room by a stranger on four occasions because I'm blessed with a nice face and height.
There's a subset of women who do fall for male beauty, but is not as universal as in men. What all women fall for is fame. Let me remind you that the original siamese brothers were married with two women and had a big bunch of kids with them.
"eggs are expensive" Hence why all this nonsense about hypergamy doesn't apply to *reproductive* sex (except among the welfare underclass). . "women go after manufactured crap such as fame" Women go after physical attractiveness and/or the ability to financially support children with the emphasis very much on the latter (because eggs are expensive) except when very young. Ergo prime males have both looks and money e.g. film stars, pop stars and sports stars. It's not manufactured. It makes perfect sense.
Explain hybristophilia.
I only figured it out recently. Protection - or at least the ability to protect. Women will be sexually attracted to whatever traits their great-greatgggggggg etc mothers were attracted to in men which had any positive reproductive effect - which includes not only having healthy children but those children also reproducing - and were thus passed down the generations. I would suggest one of those attractive male traits would be a willingness to punch dangerous things in the face. What "bad boys" do is overtly flout a societal rule in front of male and female witnesses basically daring a response from the other men. What they're doing is displaying their abiity to protect by showing other men are scared of them. Women with a particularly high shake of those type of genes get uncontrollaby attracted to dangerous men. The more violent the environment the bigger this effect. The less violent the less. Cops get the same thing all the time - especially after a fright like a burglary.
An example. In gangbanger dominated environments there's a huge amount of gang-rape which never gets reported. A lot of girls flock round the gangbangers who do it. Are those girls attracted to them because they are gang-rapists or because going with one of the gang is the only protection from gang-rape? For violent men making the environment as dangerous as possible gives them a reproductive advantage and vive versa for non-violent men.
Criminals and successful alphas share a large set of attributes and attitudes. It is usually their cognitive and execution abilities and luck that differentiates them. It is not much of a stretch to say that technically all self-made kings are successful criminals. I especially object to using selected examples to "prove" the supposed superiority or failure of a group. Men also go crazy around beautiful girls and there are full of idiotic men. There are all sorts of -philia. Hypergamy simple means women select their perceived best mates. Big news. It is not a problem for women, this is their evolutionary duty; it is a problem for men in the sex competition market.
Not arguing for "superiority" here. I love women as they are. Just highlighting basic biological differences that make impossible for men and women to cooperate in equal terms. Giving women access to political power is simply toxic for men, and at the end of the day, most production depends on men, not women. So women are also better off if they don't have access to power.
Women never truly have power though. All their power and given by men who see it facilitative to do so. By facilitative it usually means beneficial to their own power and/or sex competitiveness. As a employer I would consider hiring some women even if they are less productive, if only to made the workplace more appealing for the beta men. The degenerative effect of feminism can be seen as the attritional cost of war among men.
Evolution is amoral. Civilization, at least any that we look upon as "good", has a moral component. The goal of civilization is to help people overcome their negative evolutionary impulses in a way that leads to better societies. If you worship evolution alone then you have to worship people like the recent Boston bomber brothers whose "alpha" actions have created enormous female sexual interest.
Evolution, in the general sense, means how things evolve according to law of physics. Modern civilization is still part of the evolution, and everyone's desires and actions are part of the evolutionary force. Some forms out-compete others. It just happens that female selecting the best mate they can have results in evolutionary competitiveness, therefore it be. What you people are saying is that, you are [i]hypothesizing[/i] that 1) banning female hypergamy impulse will result in a civilization you prefer (subjectively better), and 2) the system you prefer is evolutionarily fit to out-compete others (objectively better). Both are pretty big hypotheses.
Baker, They are obvious conclusions. Let us propose a "best mate". What is a best mate? A best mate is one that will kill, harm, lie, cheat, and steal in order to advance his interests. Such a person will have more kids because they can procure more resources and mates. People evolved mechanisms to combat such things, but those mechanisms are only geared towards small scale tribal units (say, under 1,000 people). Lying, cheating, stealing, and killing ordinarily trigger reprisal when everyone knows everyone and relies on everyone. That was the case in hunter gatherer times. However, mass civilization (the last 5,000 years) is not hunter gatherer. It is largely anonymous. People who lied, cheated, and stole in a hunter gathered context would be shunned by the tribe and die. People who do that in a large anonymous civilization simply melt into some other part of that civilization. Evolution has not caught up to the circumstances of large civilization. How could it, its such a limited timeline in an evolutionary scheme. That is why we came up with things like religion which sought to promote rules of conduct to protect anonymous society against evil individuals. Industrial society is an even shorter timeframe then civilization, and technological society shorter still. It seems readily obvious that evolutionary defense mechanisms would not keep up. That is why civilization rules are needed.
> A best mate is one that will kill, harm, lie, cheat, and steal in order to advance his interests. Such a person will have more kids because they can procure more resources and mates. Here is a lapse of logic. A best mate is one who can procure most resources. But kill, harm, lie, cheat, and steal doesn't necessarily result in having more resource. If you live in modern society, there is still a high chance that you will end in total failure if you do such things. A woman who chooses a random murderer as her mate is just stupid, her "best mate" detector is faulty, and therefore evolutionarily unfit. Modern problem is more about cad dads, who doesn't provide resource because the government provides it. But this is not hypergamy.
Cads provide genes. They tend to be physically stronger and more attractive. Their dark triad traits make them good at procuring mates (sexy sons). "If you live in modern society, there is still a high chance that you will end in total failure if you do such things." There is also a decent chance it won't end in failure. Especially if you demonstrate to ability to do evil acts strategically (work the system). Also, the punishment for failure just isn't there anymore (see the story about the female prison guards in Baltimore becoming a harem for a drug dealing murderer). "But this is not hypergamy." Of course it is. For most of history "good genes" meant you were a large, muscular, and coordinated killer. Some bonuses for being able to handle court intrigue, but basically its about being a strong brute. Women's genes want top select for that, not whatever nerd genes make you a good computer programmer (something that has only been useful for a few decades and can't possibly be evolved for).
You are talking about different things. From thefreedictionary: Hypergamy: The practice of marrying into an equal or more prestigious social group or caste.
"Hence why all this nonsense about hypergamy" I don't think it's entirely nonsense. I think back in the jungle hypergamy was the norm but thousands of years of high latitude monogamy had an effect too so women have both sets of traits and which are dominant varies with the woman, the environment she's in and whether it's reproductive sex or not.
You really think women react differently with reproductive and not reproductive sex? That doesn't make any sense. Your lizard brain doesn't know that. Think of it the other way, if men had a different instinct for non-reproductive sex, why would we be so horny?
Only since contraception and easily available abortion. In the post-jungle past they would have *had* to control those urges or they wouldn't have had someone to help feed their kids. It's not just an opinion. You see it everywhere. How much of pua sex is reproductive? Almost none except among the welfare underclass where the state takes the place of the provider (i.e. mirroring the jungle environment where females could gather enough food for their children so a male provider wasn't neccessary). How much of reproductive sex is "beta?" Almost all of it. That's not to say women don't have a lizard brain. I've no doubt they do. I'm saying in the thousands of years of high latitude monogamy women developed traits that *suppress* and *control* it to a large extent because it was *neccessary* It makes perfect sense. Like you said sperm is cheap - eggs are expensive.