The Real Beta Revolution

by
This is not terribly well written. I was struggling to get my thoughts expressed clearly. I decided it was time to scrap or “submit.” So for what it is worth this is the result of hitting the “submit” button.

There seems to be a recent growth in discussions of the plight of the beta male. Whiskey, Novaseeker, ‘In Male Fide’, Roissy’s sometimes contains discussions on this. There is even a blog called The Beta Revolution, and A. J. Travis’s 2nd American Revolution (2012).
[I imagine Roissy would shudder at the thought of been part of anything beta.]

Each blogger has a slightly different take and the exact definition of beta varies, but the general consensus seems to be that that feminism and societal changes are hurting him.

Much of the discussion focuses on a man’s ability to find a suitable mate for marriage (or just for fun). However I think that problem is deeper. The real problem is it is hard for a man to find a place in society. By place I mean a position that carries respect or status.

In prior generations marriage provided that place for many men, they were head of a household, provided leadership to their wife and children, and the role of father was given respect and status. For unmarried men there was their career or profession.

In today’s world it is harder to find a place. Deindustrialization has taken many skilled blue-collar jobs, offshoring is taking many skilled white collar jobs, immigration has increased competition for the lower skilled, the H1-B scam has increased competition for many white-collar jobs.

The growth in female employment has again added to the competition (lowering wages and reducing opportunities). It means many men will now be subservient to women.

Globalization and corporatization tends to turn people into factors of production and units of consumption. It is harder for a man to shine when he is one of twenty analysts, programmers, accountants, or whatever.

An important point is that it is not really about women (at least the pursuit of women), it is not even about marriage. It is about gaining respect. It just so happens that marriage was one way a man found that before (as head of household). Feminism and the sexual revolution have made things worse for many men, but they are not the only problem.

It is status and respect (i.e., been “somebody”) and fulfillment of some purpose that will make a man happy. If marriage is not available he will have to find something else. His mission should not be taken because he thinks it will get him a woman or women. His mission is about him, his purpose and his place in the world.
[A handy side effect of finding his mission, purpose, and place is that he just might find a woman on the way. However that should not be the aim, it is only a potential benefit.]

The Non Manifesto

“The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings.”
Julius Caesar (I, ii, 140-141)

The bad news: There is no revolution. There will be no revolution. You are on your own. No one will help you. The cavalry is not coming (we called but it went to voice mail). Other men will not help. They are competing with you. They are competing against you for jobs, wealth, resources, and women. Women will not help. They don’t care. They are also competing against you for jobs and resources. It is just you and the great big inky-black void. There are two things that keep a man fighting: hope and survival instinct. Hope is what keeps you waiting for the cavalry, the revolution, and the woman who will make it all better. It is what keeps you from the fight. Abandon hope and all you have is survival instinct. When it is just survival instinct the claws come out. When the claws come out the fight begins.

The good news: The revolution can begin. It is a revolution of one. It begins with you and it ends with you. It begins when you stop giving a shit about what society thinks or about what women think. Find your mission and purpose. Write your own revolutionary manifesto.

Praise the lord, pass the ammo, and let the revolution begin.
counter for wordpress

22 Responses to “The Real Beta Revolution”

  1. Hope Says:

    Hmm… I wonder if all revolutions, rebellions, uprisings and coups d’états were started by a few upstart “greater betas” who aroused the pissed off other “regular to lesser betas” to enjoin them.

    The French Revolution is basically the story of angry citizens getting revenge on the alphas — the King and the French aristocracy. Then again it turned into the Reign of Terror with different political factions striving for power.

    Silly but fun way to relabel the actors of the French Rev though.

  2. Default User Says:

    @Hope

    Hmmm! A Roissysphere view of history. Could make a college course of that. I suppose you could say that much of history is about battle for status. But I would prefer to avoid historical arguments.

    My fight is with me and not the king (although I have no great faith in the “establishment”). I must define my own knightly quest. If I am to be a leader of men it is only to lead them towards their own quest.

    The alphas are just being alphas. Bringing them down does not bring me up. Our swords may cross but that is not part of the plan.

  3. Hope Says:

    A lot of people would say that bringing others down brings you up. This is what negging is all about. Subtly making yourself higher by bringing the other person’s status down. Negative world view.

    And you konw, PUAs didn’t invent the idea of alpha or beta. They just took it to the sexualized extreme. I don’t think that Robespierre and his group were out to get women… or were they?

    Anyway, you don’t want to teach those Feminazis a lesson? But you should get angry! Get pissed off! The laws are all against you! Fight for Men’s Rights!

    I mean you might even make it to the history books. Won’t the women just flow in then?

  4. Bhetti Says:

    Well, this message is the message.

    For me, I have always understood this intuitively. You’re on your own. How can someone not know this? Society defines your reality and even rejecting society is being part of social reality.

    In fact, I understood it so well that I am constantly surprised when anyone comes to my help and rescue.

    Even then, I know all this support will always be dependent (but to different extents) on my own actions.

  5. Default User Says:

    @Hope

    Is that sarcasm? From Hope?

    I understand that the PUAs did not invent alpha/beta. Indeed they exagerate it, as you say. However, it is a useful metaphor comparing exceptional to mediocre (I include things other than sexual conquests in the term alpha).

    Feminazis are an annoyance along with diversicrats, eco-nuts, multicultutalists, and the entire hoard of swarming busy bodies. They largely did not create the changes; they just used their fat lesbian bulk to shoulder their way to the head of the parade. They were part of larger currents washing through society. It was chivalry more than feminism that gave us unfair divorce and custody laws. It was chivalry more than feminism that gave us affirmative action for women.

    As to my place in the history books: I am not looking for my 72 virgins in the after life and in this life they are a pleasant but secondary concern. History is written by the victors, so who knows…

    Rather then bringing her down “negging” could be described as bringing her to reality. It is a grossly over emphasized trick. Status is vital to a man but he is best to achieve it by building not demolition.

  6. Bhetti Says:

    I don’t know about the rest of the guys, but I’m 100% with mediocre as a label applied to you.

  7. Bhetti Says:

    Correction: 100% NOT HAPPY with mediocre as a label applied to you.

  8. Default User Says:

    @Bhetti

    In fact, I understood it so well that I am constantly surprised when anyone comes to my help and rescue.

    As a woman you will always have chivalry on your side. A woman will not be on her own unless she chooses it. A woman will always have some male to protect her (even if that is some beta/chump “white-knighter”).

    Chivalry means that a woman has the implicit protection of unrelated men. His friends may defend a man, but society as a whole will not care.

  9. Default User Says:

    @Bhetti

    Thanks for the correction. And disputing the label. :)

  10. Beta Prime Says:

    Great post! Agree with everything you say.

  11. aoefe Says:

    Ditto to Beta Prime. Great! I’ll be back to give more thoughts…just running to work…sigh.

  12. Default User Says:

    @Beta Prime, aoefe
    Thanks.

    @Beta Prime
    Beta Prime is that like…
    …alpha?
    Your blog looks interesting. I will check it out.

    @aoefe
    Look forward to your thoughts.

  13. Hope Says:

    Semi-sarcasm. X_x I support a beta revolution. Revolutions are fun! Not so fun things include anger, violence, self-righteousness, etc.

    Bad boys destroy, good boys build.

  14. Default User Says:

    Wow I dragged some sarcasm out of Hope. The revolution really has begun. :)

    A bit of anger can be good, it provides energy.

    Personally there will be a bit of breaking (of my own harmful
    attitudes) but only to allow the rebuilding of something better.

    While I love the idea of being a “bad boy” (it appeals to my
    rebellious, mischievous streak), I am more of a builder.

  15. Hope Says:

    Real Beta Revolution:

    1) Teaching sexually promiscuous and bully macho guys a lesson about sleeping around with so many women and beating up kids on the playground. Make them all have really big wedgies and cower in fear of True Betas.

    2) Rewiring all women by conditioning them from youth to become deeply attracted to Betas. Reforge them into legions of women who prefer nice chivalrous men to big mean jerks.

    3) Installing Betas into the highest levels of government, decrease competition across all fields, shut down immigration, and rewrite completely fair laws for all True Betas.

    You know, come to think of it, once this is all done, the Betas would become the definition of Alphas. Maybe that’s the purpose of the Beta Revolution after all!

  16. Default User Says:

    I think Hope is still in a playful mood. I like it. It is fun.

    I must be in an intellectual mood because I will (sort of) answer your points.

    All though painful for those who do not make the grade, the fight for status is what drives the world forward. Sometimes it drives us in unhealthy ways but without that drive we would go nowhere.

    Female hypergamy and the male warrior spirit are not necessarily bad things. Again, it provides the impetus for progress. Painful for injured warriors but needed to prevent stasis.
    [Female hypergamy can be painful for the beautiful and/or intelligent women who cannot find a suitable match]

    Losing too many battles (or losing them early in life) can crush that warrior spirit and give birth to a beta. The problem is not too much warrior it is too little warrior. The warrior without a fight dies a thousand deaths. The beta begins his journey to alphaness when he finds the warrior within. Life is like a fairy story in that the man must fight for his princess. Life is not like a fairy story because there is no magic wizard to change the way the world works.

    The drive for status if part of our nature. A beta government would quickly develop a hierarchy. Some betas will be more equal than others. Beta good but alpha better.

    Not all, not even a majority of, alpha males are bullies or assholes. Most bullies are not alpha and many assholes are just assholes. Promiscuity (access to many females) is one reward for alpha status. Not every alpha man will indulge. Not every hedonist is alpha, not every alpha is hedonist.

    Torturing metaphors, is that alpha or beta?

  17. chic noir Says:

    Globalization and corporatization tends to turn people into factors of production and units of consumption. It is harder for a man to shine when he is one of twenty analysts, programmers, accountants, or whatever.

    this is very true my love but don’t forget to add in anonymous urban living which plays a very important role in how so many people read young urban professionals are isolated from family and childhood* friends.

  18. Default User Says:

    @Chic

    I agree urban anonymity can create feelings of alienation or detachment. I am luck to have good friends and family I keep in contact with.

    A nice thing about urban living is there is a sense of privacy. You do not feel people are looking over your shoulder (“I saw you and so-and-so talking together, what’s up?”).

    Urban living when you have a group of good friends or family near by can be quite satisfying. It is when you lack those good friends or family connections that it can be hard.

  19. novaseeker Says:

    What I wrote about this on an internet forum a month or so ago:

    I think men’s rights is a dead end.

    There never will be a men’s rights movement. Men are too divided, too addicted to pussy, and too fucking apathetic for there ever to be a men’s rights movement. And it doesn’t matter that many guys my age and older have woken up, because many others have not. And the younger guys … mostly just want to get laid and the first time they get a whiff of pussy all the ideas about men’s issues get thrown under the bus in the afterwaves of the orgasm from her blow job.

    Men *are* weak. TGC is 100% correct. Our weakness is our libido. Women know that. And they exploit it to beat the band. And most men succumb to it. It’s the way we are. No way around that.

    Men .. the only way is to GYOW. It is the ONLY way. That doesn’t mean uniformity. Far from it. It means diversity. It means you find your own solution. It means there is no “movement”, but there is a loose brotherhood of MGTOW. It ranges from anti-government activists like Rob Fedders, to co-alpha separatists like Frank Schmidt, to avoiders like HappyGhost, to people like espio who engage with caution, to pump and dumpers like dontmarry, to sarcastic commentators like Paul, to critics like me., to advocates of expatting like John Nada and on and on. It is diversity in action.

    As I wrote back on the old DGM II board, we must realize that a male version of feminism simply will not work because, as we know, men are different from women. So, feminists told themselves that “the personal is political”, meaning that the state should exert massive control over personal relationships. That’s the female way, as we know, because they are physically weak, and without the state to enforce their will, they would be rounded up and divvied up by the men, period. Enforced monogamy was simply a dressed up way of doing that. Not to diss monogamy — it fucking WORKS. But it is definitely based on men limiting women sexually. Women needed the state to overthrow that, so for women it certainly is true that the personal is political.

    For us, though, men, it’s the opposite. For us, the political is personal. What that means is that our issues are largely legal/social/political. But as women said they had no personal solutions and needed state intervention (they were right … without state intervention, men *will* divvy them up as *we* see fit), we need to realize that for us, there are no *political* solutions. That’s because men do not unite politically to any degree over men’s issues, do not even agree that there are men’s issues, and so on, for the reasons stated above. So a political movement like feminism-flipped-for-men is dead on arrival. No, men, there are no politcal solutions for us. For us, it is precisely the opposite as it is for women: for us, the political is personal. That means that for us there are no political solutions, but only personal ones. And only personal ones that make sense for us. Hence MGTOW. It IS the men’s movement now. It is the only men’s movement that makes any sense. And it is the only way we will realize what we, as individual men, can do to improve our lives, recognizing well that there is no political solution to the legal/social issues we face. For us, men, the political is personal. So, go your own way, in any of the myriad ways we do, and realize that by doing so, you are your own personal revolution.

  20. Default User Says:

    @Novaseeker

    I see one way where game and MRA intersects:
    Nominally game is about attracting a woman. But really this is (partly at least) about gaining her respect. After she can only fall for someone she can respect. While I know there are issues of “gina tingle” at the core all the alpha posturing is about respect.

    A man who has attracted a woman has her respect. If he has her respect, he has control. A woman will defer to a man she respects. As part of his game strategy a man could introduce these topics. If he can influence her she can influence her friends. The group can be a powerful influence for women, win the right woman and you win her group.

    You can see at Roissy’s, that women can be moved to see problems with the current situation. So even as an army of one, you can take part in the battle.

    As more men become alpha, more women become attracted, these women listen to their alpha man, they talk to their friends, and slowly we turn this tanker around (and have fun doing it).

  21. Tim Says:

    Society seems to be set up to create these extreme obstacles to the entry of men or women into the workplace. A college degree doesn’t get one nearly as far as it probably used to, arguably, and large numbers of young people end up going to college for 5-7 years. The 4-year graduation rate at a major local university here is something like 55 percent, and there are people, all over the place, who have been there 7 or more years. This type of thing can’t be good for relationships among young people.

  22. Default User Says:

    @Tim

    I think the college thing has become a scam. The majority of professions should not need a degree. Many graduates will still need on the job training when they start.

    It is sad that people have to spend four years and build huge debt just because employers want a piece of paper that probably says little about an employee’s ability to do the job.

    Given some of the courses offered, college probably does not even offer the intellect expanding opportunities of previous liberal arts education.

    For many it just delays adulthood and the start of their productive life. It adds debt but cuts four years of earning. It has become an industry and thus has gathered all the lobbyists and rent-seeking behavior of other industries.

    As you said, a four-year degree does not get you are far as it used to (the world has not changed that much) so now people have to get a masters just to compete. A one or two-year training course for the occupation of their choice would better serve most.

    I am not down on education. Indeed I feel it should be a constant and continuing part of our lives. It should not be something we are forced to do for four years after which we stop forever. I believe that everyone, to the best of their ability, should try to get a liberal arts education. They should do this by reading and discussing history, philosophy, economics, etc. as part of their lives not as a four-year jobs-training, adulthood avoiding program.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: