Marc MacYoung on Gamma males, and defining SSMV by resource production

No Nonsense Self-Defense is one of the top five websites on the internet. Bookmark it and read everything.

Here’s an explanation of what Gamma males are as a function of resource scarcity (mindset) and greed, using selected quotes from the article Alpha Behavior, which I’ve rearranged in a logical sequence.

A layman’s definition of stress is: The belief that you don’t have the resources necessary to deal with a problem.


Alphas Allow Others Their Place
It is perhaps here that the absolute worst misconception about alpha behavior is made. It is also one of the fastest ways to spot a beta trying to ape an alpha. One version of this attitude is “I’m the alpha, I get the best, you get the scraps.” Another version is “Everything is mine and you have no place.”

Realize humans are social animals. We need other humans in order to exist. The nature of the social hierarchy is two-fold. One is so the greatest number of people can ‘get by’ in order for the group/species to survive (it organizes and protects the group). Two is it allows individuals within that group a place of security to obtain what that individual needs in order to survive.


Before you can understand what an alpha is, you first need to understand something about the nature of power. Namely: Power is granted to you by the group. You don’t have power unless other people give it to you.

Here’s the catch, the group gives you power on the condition that you look out for their needs. That’s the deal. You get extra power to serve them. If you violate this trust then you will be stripped of your power by the group.


Basically Caesar [Milan]’s summation of an insecure alpha is a beta dog that is thrust into a leadership position. This dog lacks alpha attributes. Most of all it doesn’t have the calm assurance of a true alpha. As such it is unstable and overly aggressive. An additional problem with this is other dogs in this situation also become unbalanced and aggressive.

This resource-hoarding anxiety explains why even birds hate Gammas.

DArCni7XcAAk0-v

(H/T Vox at Alpha Game.)

Therefore I propose that the male SSMV hierarchy may be reduced to two binary factors (a 2×2 matrix) ranked as follows:

Secure Alpha
Secure Beta
Insecure Beta (Delta)
Insecure Alpha (Gamma)

Then you also have:

Secure outsider/introvert/foreigner/alien (Sigma)
Insecure outsider/introvert/foreigner/alien (Omega)

What it comes down to is that purely male hierarchies, e.g. hunting parties, are chiefly concerned with getting work done, defending the common resources, and redistribution by the high-ranked member(s).

If you introduce even a single fertile woman, it changes this dynamic from “insiders against the world” to intragroup competition. But of course you can’t have civilization without women, which we define as the organized, collaborative protection of the insiders’ women and children; the trick appears to be keeping women away from the workplace to encourage male cooperation rather than rational, psychopathic competition.

Lambdas are interesting because they can collaborate with male hierarchies in the workplace, but they will refuse to collaborate in the protection of women and children, who are not worth dying for if you’re gay. In mass society they are hyper-competitive, comparable to Jews, because they practice nepotism. I worked at a kitchen once where all six of the managers were gay, and their boss was a woman.

Advertisements

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

52 Responses to Marc MacYoung on Gamma males, and defining SSMV by resource production

  1. MM says:

    Unhappy alphas often act much closer to a gamma than a beta. They enter a state of frustration, no acceptance/learned helplessness.

    Point is, “Happiness” is the state of mind tailor made for securing resources- social and otherwise.
    You can still succeed by using willpower to provide people with things they need(Social as well as material) as well as faking social skill (key of which is instilling goodfeels in the people you talk to) but alphas need to be happy for the real magic to happen.

    Will be done with a review of a great book on happiness soon.

    • MM says:

      Most of them know this btw. People obsessed with an area (Trump and Real Estate)= “you gotta love what you do, follow your passion”. Then there are the more systems-based Scott Adams types who tailor their mindset to what they are doing(This is unnecessary for anything you succeed at- ‘passion’ will naturally follow)

    • Akuma says:

      “Unhappy alphas often act much closer to a gamma than a beta”

      Thats a Sigma.

      • MM says:

        An “unhappy alpha” is an alpha that is unhappy. That’s what was meant.

        new post btw ya’ll
        https://fightfailure.wordpress.com/2017/07/22/skill-with-people/

      • Aeoli Pera says:

        Sigma is an unhappy Alpha? That’s not even plausible.

        • Akuma says:

          Yes it is. Sigmas have higher IQs than Alphas and can see the flaws in the Alphas game. A TT Sigma is not gonna be happy because hes stuck dealing with an Alpha that probably doesnt go home and read the technical manuals.

          Hes viewed as Alpha, but not the leader so people notice the mistakes or expects him to make them because hes not the leader (like a gamma makes without knowing), that if he were the Alpha leader hed get away with.

          Remember how authority figures hate Aspies. A Sigma is an Aspie that can mask it, but still clicks the circuits. He gets a pass for the Aspieness, but not the rest of the stuff the Alpha gets a pass for. If the Gamma is a leader the viciousness directed his way is ten fold.

          An MT sigma will be able to mask the Aspieness much better, as his mental models of social reality are parietal based so he knows how to play the social game better. However, he will still stick out like a porcupine in a balloon factory if he gets passionate about something.

          • Lizard King says:

            Since when do alpha’s get free passes? I think you’re confusing dick-sucking betas thrust into leadership positions through nepotism with alpha males. Alphas take tons of flak in the modern world because they care about their tribe being the best. Also, you aren’t an alpha if you aren’t a leader so how could a sigma be seen as an alpha sans leadership?
            This all comes down to leadership levels.
            Alpha – leader
            Beta – guys second in charge who keep the group in line
            Delta – normal dudes who do most of the manual labor
            Sigma – that guy who you forgot was on the payroll but gets shit done and disappears
            Gamma – sad sad sad person who thinks that he’s the “real alpha” and doesn’t get any work done because he’s thinking about his high IQ and masturbating with his waifu body pillow. Everyone hates him because he is a loser and he refuses to fix his bad behavior so that the tribe can benefit.

            The idea of a gamma being a leader is quite funny.

            You’re confusing asshole for alpha. Assholes are betas and gammas put into positions of power. Alphas are only dickheads if they have to be.

            I’m not trying to pick your comment apart but I think you may have some of your syntax confused from reading too many PUA blogs.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >Point is, “Happiness” is the state of mind tailor made for securing resources- social and otherwise.

      This is not precisely true, but it points to something true. Happiness is the state of mind where resources are increasing, and this yields momentum in a society where resources disproportionately go to happy people because they’re more pleasant to be around.

      • MM says:

        >Happiness is the state of mind where resources are increasing.
        aka “Success causes Happiness”. Its what most believe!
        The book I’m reading says it’s other way around, except in cases the goals are truly high in purpose.

        It takes 3 happy interactions, events, etc. to make up for one bad one. And the ideal for (team) productivity is a 6 to 1 positive-to-negative ratio. Thus, avoiding negative art, experiences, and interactions is actually more important to happiness than doing things in the positive like goal achievement.

  2. Lazer says:

    “Lambdas are interesting because they can collaborate with male hierarchies in the workplace, but they will refuse to collaborate in the protection of women and children, who are not worth dying for if you’re gay.”

    Im not gay, but following 5GW Atomized Identity Warfare if the feminists wanted to disrupt the cis-gendered white males way of life, it is only in our best intrest to disrupt theres as much as possible. All is fair in love and war, and one could make the argument that men go to war whereas women make war.

    Also, Overt Feminism (the way most people use the word) and Covert Feminism (The Red Pill) are two entirely different things. The belowl is something I posted at Heartiste in relation to Alpha with the typos fixed:

    From the article:

    “The brain region, called the dorsal medial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC), was already known to light up during social interactions involving decisions about whether to be assertive or submissive with others.”

    Its been noted elsewhere that women find men with high foreheads attractive. This study is the nail in the coffin of the theory of Alpha narcissism. The FCortex is also known as the seat of civilization. Narcissism is a mimic of dominance, and it probably comes from the interplay between the ACC and dmPFC. Women are actually sexually selecting for men that probably have faulty wireing. Dominance is subtle. It also means that Alphas are most likely only viewed as ruthless in our modern environment because they are surrounded by beta males (inverted narc) who think to win one has to assert “dominance” i.e. be an asshole.

    Alphas only assert this type of dominance when the betas have made it impossible to operate any other way. Usually the Alphas true dominance display is based in reality, whereas the betas is based on a malaligned threat response (i.e. higher cortisol from status anxiety), and an inability to know when NOT to run game.

    Alphas high testoserone has them acting honorably across domains, but the betas are being cheap all the time. So the Alphas have to adapt to win in the modern environment. This is probably why they are stressed all the time.

    When you are surrounded by men whose biology doesnt allow for high status behaviors naturally itll cause someone to go insane or act like an evil chimp. Watch how two Alphas or Sigmas interact. They are deeply attuned to social reality, but understand that they can both play in the sandbox together. Theres a competitive cooperation.

    Beta: Gets drunk and threatens people with a weapon
    Alpha or Sigma: They are a weapon (or walk around with something that could be used as one) so their presence is threatening, but puts others at ease at the same time.

    • Lazer says:

      “If you introduce even a single fertile woman, it changes this dynamic from “insiders against the world” to intragroup competition. But of course you can’t have civilization without women, which we define as the organized, collaborative protection of the insiders’ women and children; the trick appears to be keeping women away from the workplace to encourage male cooperation rather than rational, psychopathic competition”

      I disagree. In unhealthy work environments this is true. In a healthy work environment women fall into support roles that would be staffed by betas if the women werent around:
      -Secretaries
      -Nurses
      -Kitchen Staff
      -Hospitality
      -Customer Service
      -Records Keeping
      -Library Science

  3. Edenist Whackjob says:

    I’ve had the experience of being Alpha – it very much comes down to having the ability to answer real questions about how to get things done, as well as being charismatic.

    Having the answers but no charisma = Sigma

    Having charisma but not answers = Voxian Beta

    Having both = Alpha

    Having none = Delta

    I keep lapsing back into Sigma though because generating charisma seems contrary to my particular intelligence – ie charisma requires being “wet” and “hot” whereas my brand of thinking of very “dry” and “cold” – don´t know if that makes sense but to me it makes sense.

    Anyway, if you want to be Alpha, you have to “have the answers” (able to lead a team to real results in the real world, not just theory-land) AND be warm and loving yet fatherlike in that you´re a bit strict as well. (Modelling a charismatic military figure was often one of my mental goto´s, going as far as actually saluting my underlings sometimes).

    • Edenist Whackjob says:

      However, I think my Sigmaness is actually down to Pride a lot of the time. I desire so desperately to be the “smart guy” that I use all my brain-power for that, when I clearly have the charismatic circuitry to inspire people (at the cost of having to accept that things are simple, rather than being a clever egomaniac).

      Maybe a natural Sigma, who doesn´t suffer Pride, is a thing as well.

      • Edenist Whackjob says:

        In my defense, I HAD to be the “clever guy” sometimes, just to survive and get things done. Ie I was the the warm & charismatic guy for periods of time, but realized I was being retarded and not using my problem-solving circuitry, and I made a conscious decision to back out of Alpha and use my brain for a change. However, I never managed to perfect a balance between “warm” and “cold” – charisma AND problem-solving.

        • Edenist Whackjob says:

          Maybe that should be my new personal development resolution – perfecting Alpha without suffering the intelligence penalty… Hmmmm… intriguing…

          • Edenist Whackjob says:

            I must say, my auto-dialectic style, where I unlock answers through writing replies to self, is a very odd phenomenon. Must be something going on with my brain where my inner mechanism for simulating that is broken somehow. So bear with me :)

            • Aeoli Pera says:

              >I must say, my auto-dialectic style, where I unlock answers through writing replies to self, is a very odd phenomenon. Must be something going on with my brain where my inner mechanism for simulating that is broken somehow. So bear with me 🙂

              I understand this because I’m also INTJ with internal intuition and external thinking. When you express things in writing it allows you to absorb the thoughts as external phenomena, and then reflect on them as memories.

            • Edenist Whackjob says:

              “I understand this because I’m also INTJ with internal intuition and external thinking. When you express things in writing it allows you to absorb the thoughts as external phenomena, and then reflect on them as memories.”

              Well put, dear Aeoli.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          One thing that may help is to ask yourself in the moment “Is this the time for thinking?” Then come up with two koans, one for each attitude. (E.g. “Can’t stop WINNING.”)

          • Edenist Whackjob says:

            Yes, those work to some extent, but were never fully capable of tipping me permanently into moral victory territory.

            The Alpha is naturally drawn to moral victory – will, grit, persistence, inspiration, rallying the troops.

            The Sigma is drawn to technological victory – cleverness, intricateness, architecture, trade-offs that give you “free lunches” (defying TANSTAAFL through IQ is the Sigma´s core ethos), etc).

            Alpha: thumos

            Sigma: intellect

            For me, the ultimate koan seems to be boredom. Realizing that, yes, tech is very effective, but that there is also nothing left to prove in that domain. And then suborning tech to will – ie I can deploy tech solutions on the fly when necessary, but it should not be the prime mechanism. When the brain stops OCDing over clever solutions, the cycles naturally returns to the social / will / thumos centers, and Alphaness returns.

            Alphaness = men want to follow you, women want you, you have a natural way with words that inspire people.

            Sigmaness = you have the above, but you can´t fully commit to it, because you´re addicted to cleverness and deconstruction – IQ alienates you from being social

            • Lazer says:

              So in essence Alphas need people and the tribe. Sigmas need tools. Which means Alphas weak point is his people. Better step up the jock bashing game then.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >I keep lapsing back into Sigma though because generating charisma seems contrary to my particular intelligence – ie charisma requires being “wet” and “hot” whereas my brand of thinking of very “dry” and “cold” – don´t know if that makes sense but to me it makes sense.

      I’ll translate for you. Wet means messy, complex systems with many details, as in the difference between biology and physics. Expressing a truth in a messy system is more about drawing a line between types of things. Hot means exoergic, meaning other people are energized and happy because you’re around (i.e. my future is better and more secure because this person is here).

  4. Lizard King says:

    “What it comes down to is that purely male hierarchies, e.g. hunting parties, are chiefly concerned with getting work done, defending the common resources, and redistribution by the high-ranked member(s).”

    This is how it SHOULD be, but isn’t.

    This is the person who gets put in charge:

    “I’m a pussy. I suck at leading. Since the only thing I’m good at is sucking, I’m going to learn to suck a mean dick. That way someone will recognize that I love sucking cock and put me in a leadership position!”

    This is the person who should be in charge:

    “Wow, being a leader is quite the burden. I’m good at this and me being good at this helps everyone in the group to live up to their potential. I sure don’t want to be like those guys who suck dick all day. I’m glad that I’m not like them and I can tell higher leadership to fuck off if they want to do something that would hurt my people.”

    • Lizard King says:

      Also, I like the binary system of sorting Alpha, Beta, Sigma into either secure or insecure. I came up with a similar one but it was more along the lines of living-up-to-potential/not-living-up-to-potential. I mean, your syntax is less wordy…and means essentially the same thing as mine. :D

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >This is how it SHOULD be, but isn’t.

      Moralizing is not problem solving. The trick, as I see it, is to reverse engineer between simple phenomena (tribal patterns) and complex systems (SCALEd society) and determine what produces the adaptivity of cocksucking. Ultimately the problem is that people are inventively evil, but we can at least hack a local solution or two.

      • Lazer says:

        Yes, it is. People hold Sigmas to higher standards because of the IQ and the Independence. Best to scorch the earth and give the assholes a dose of their own medicine. Even the Alphas get pissy when your brain starts cooking.

      • Lizard King says:

        “but we can at least hack a local solution or two.”
        Ooooh, I like talking solutions. I don’t think this problem is really anything new though. It all comes down to the pyramid scheme of modern society. The system is too complex to work with natural tribal dynamics. We don’t have a homogeneous society so cocksucking is the easiest answer if you want to win. You can fix things locally fairly easily, but it doesn’t last.

        Fixing things locally just comes down to having relationships with people, gaining their trust, being a good person, and then teaching them why all the shitty leaders in their past were shitty. If they can see the natural order of things then they can apply it to their own lives. Of course, that involves them wanting to be good people too. That’s why being a good leader to them is so important. If they see that you can make things work better than the last guy, and the only reason is because of teamwork/tribal-mindedness, then maybe they’ll fulfill their role as alpha/beta/delta whatever. I dunno, maybe that’s just me being idealistic but I’ve seen it happen.

        I feel like people just get too hung up on “nuh uh, I’m the alpha cuz I’m the bestest in my mind lol” or “I’m teh most sigma dude cuz i’m teh outsiderest lolol benis”. Really, you know where you fall into the tribal dynamic if you are honest with yourself. Become who you are. Fulfill your role. Things work out a lot better that way. Learn from good leaders what to do, learn from shitty leaders what not to do (you learn more from bad leaders IMO). That way if you get put into a position of leadership where you don’t really belong, you can make the best of it for the sake of the group.

        Or just nuke it from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.

  5. Lazer says:

    @MM I once threw scalding hot coffee in a Gammas face one time, if that counts as cold steel.

    • Edenist Whackjob says:

      Ways to deal with Gammas:

      The “right way”: make them believe in the adage of “mission before ego” – give them the gift of being a a good Delta soldier in your army, in a way which circumvents their ego mechanisms. Everyone likes feeling likes a man, and it is manly to be a respected part of the mission under a glorious leader (even to a debased Gamma). It can be done, and I´ve done it, but takes some ego-jutsu.

      Mean way: if they´re not that open to that, though, just remind them that they are outgroup and will be found out by the group. More of a nuclear assault on their egos, but could lead to amygdala stimulus prompting them to give up their bullshit and fall in line.

      Meanest: if you want to be REALLY mean, you can torch the ego by insinuating that they are unmanly and have female natures, and that they are bound to stay that way unless they stop [insert bullshit they are trying to pull].

      You’ll find that Vox uses a mix of these.

      • Edenist Whackjob says:

        The thing that unifies all Gammas is their egos – if they didn´t have huge egos and resentment complexes, they would by definition be Deltas, Betas or Sigmas, right? So find that ego vulnerability, assault it, and then lead them on to the proper self-less path which is service to mission and the shot of gaining glory by actually, you know, playing ball and doing good for the team. It can be done, but can be tricky. I´ve done it to Gammas, but requires finesse and social knowhow (and also a true beleif in the Mission, which means you have to be in the “hot” / “wet” Alpha mndset, not dry / cold Sigma calculation, which doesn´t deal in moral values like Missions and what not).

        • Edenist Whackjob says:

          In general, going from “being right” (ego) to “producting results” (mission) solves a LOT of things, and causes a lot of dysfunction if you don´t get it right. I got the model from this page: http://www.mind-trek.com/reports/tl10-2.htm

          • Edenist Whackjob says:

            One big cause of “being right” conflicts: extrapolated ability.

            So if I can clearly knock someone out in a fight without effort, there´s no point in arguing about it. Same if I am clearly outmatched. But if there is a POSSIBILITY continuum and I still want to win, despite lack of absolute certainty, that´s where I am going to crank up my certainty function and starting distorting “I could maybe win” into “I can kick your ass!” – ie ego.

            Same with politics fights – if I am 100% convinced I am right, I won´t really argue it. If I do, I will easily win anyway, or I won´t care if the opponent doesn´t listen. After all, I am right in the territory so what do I care. But when there is UNCERTAINTY, that´s when ego steps in. Then I start to care about being right, because I have my map and the other guy has his, so now we´re in a map-fight. Whereas if I just stuck to the territory, I would not need to fight it out at all.

            Note: one can stay in in the territory, even if there is uncertainty variables, as long as one preserves epistemological status through all chains of communication. So I can be 50% certain that manmade global warming is not correct, but I won´t crank that up to 100%, causing ego-fights, as long as I retain that 50% probability variable in all my comms – of course, retaining probability in your comms is not an NT thing to do, which is why most rock-solid / humble NT guys will stick to facts that they CAN know. Aspies can have epistemological uncertainty and still stay in territory, but NTs will go ego if probability is introduced into the mix.

            Thoughts?

            • Edenist Whackjob says:

              The way an Alpha does map-conflict: humor. Instead of being personally attached to a value-system and trying to jam it against someone else´s value-system, is able to juggle two thoughts, see the absurdity in the clash, and laugh it off for the greater good of all.

      • Lizard King says:

        “The “right way”: make them believe in the adage of “mission before ego” – give them the gift of being a a good Delta soldier in your army, in a way which circumvents their ego mechanisms.”

        Yes! This is good.

        • Edenist Whackjob says:

          Indeed – it’s my go-to, but like I said, requires a lot of finesse and psychological understanding :)

  6. Pingback: Alpha is a neurochemical addiction to WINNING | Aeoli Pera

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