Friday, July 24, 2015

"Hypergamy" and Narcissism

My experience with "hypergamy" is that the more "hypergamous" the woman, the more narcissistic they are.

Take the story of "The Fisherman and His Wife" (posted HERE). The wife wants to be God. Everything she gets is not enough. She wants More&More&More and ends up back in her hovel, poverty-stricken.

The story is essentially a retelling of the story of Adam and Eve. The "serpent" targets Eve with promises of "being like God," and she falls for it. Then a weak Adam listens to her, and they go from Paradise to our fallen world.

I've met a few wealthy men, who wives these men allow to spend and spend and spend, and the wives always wanted more. They were never satisfied and never grateful. The men were weak, like Adam.

"Hypergamous" women are better explained by the Seven Deadly Sins: greedy and lazy and envious. They covet, like Eve.

I've mentioned I read Tom Wolfe's Back to Blood a few years ago, when it first came out.

I recently reread it, and part of the novel is about a "hypergamous" woman and how she wrecks her life.

Her name was Magdalene and she was a Cuban-American, raised in what Wolfe calls a "Low Rent" district of Miama.

She's beautiful but not smart, and under Associative Mating (which is what people really do) her mate should be Hector, a Cuban-American cop who is very much in love with Magdalene and wants to marry her. (As for Hector's brainpower, let's just say he'll never make detective, and sergeant if he's lucky).

But while seeing Hector she is also involved with an rich "Anglo" doctor, so she tells Hector no. Hector of course has a fit, because he never saw it coming.

Then she deludes herself some billionaire Russian crook is interested in her. Not just interested, but fascinated.

He has sex with her one time and dumps her. She has gone from Hector to the doctor to a billionaire.

So she calls Hector, trying to get back together with him. She says something interesting: "Just as I started to feel something for him..."

What matters to her is what she feels. She has problems with boundaries, which is a problem all narcissists have.

Magdalene devalues Hector when he dumps him, she devalues the doctor, she idealizes and then devalues the Russian.

At the end Hector has already found another woman, one actually somewhat smarter then Hector, and who is good for Hector because she makes him a better man.

Magdalene ends up with no job, no boyfriend to support her, no money and no hope. Her life has turned into a living hell. And she never had any gratitude for any of these men. Her attitude was that she deserved it - was entitled to it - and they owned everything they had to her.

Magdalene's story is also a retelling of Eve.

Notice that Hector ends up with a woman who is good for him and makes him a better man.

"Hypergamous" women, being consumed by envy and covetousness and laziness, will bring down every man they get involved with.

It's a more humble, self-aware woman, who wants the man to be happy and be the best he can be - those are the ones who make the best wives.

Not a greedy, lazy, covetous, "hypergamous" woman who's imitating Eve in everything she does.

15 comments:

Mindstorm said...

A retelling of Eve? Not Lilith? :)

Anonymous said...

Hypergamy means "mating up". Only rare women can ever be attracted to a man unless they feel outclassed by him, and that kind of attraction (Liz Taylor and her pool boys) isn't much like normal female attraction.

A woman may be attracted to a rich man, but once she starts to consider him weak, once she finds out she can be the dominant figure in the relationship, she feels contempt. That's the phase where she demands more and more and is less and less satisfied. That's the classic relationship failure mode when a man lets a woman get the psychological upper hand.

It's characteristic of you that you waste so much time attacking fantasy definitions of words you don't understand at all.

Anonymous said...

The only reason women didn't divorce more often in days past is because of the stigma of divorce and because they were financially dependent on men. That's the only thing that kept their naturally entitled, narcissistic, hypergamous natures in check.

The no-fault divorce law was written by the National Association of Women Lawyers (NAWL) for the express purpose of making it easy for women to divorce their husbands while simultaneously allowing them to keep their husbands assets and income. Of course, the white knight, captain-sa-a-ho, mangina governor and legislature (Ron Reagan) voted no-fault divorce into law. What followed over the past five decades is the the destruction of tens upon tens of millions of American men's lives. Ever year, tens of thousands of men commit suicide and NOTHING is done to help at risk men. One need only look to the Veteran's Administration to see how little men are cared for.

The same life destruction will be wrought against men with "Yes Means Yes", aka "Affirmative Consent". There's a huge push by the hyper-gynocentrists (feminists) to have "Yes Means Yes" pushed up to the criminal justice level - effectively reversing the constitution and removing men's rights to presumption of innocence and due process.

We live in a deeply misandric society in which both women and their mangina supporters jump at the chance to destroy naive men to get what they want. This misandry is so common that no-one even notices it anymore. It's literally expected that men perish for the benefit of others.

Women are not sugar and spice and everything nice. Quite the opposite, actually.

Bob Wallace said...

"Hypergamy means "mating up"."

The word means nothing because there are so many definitions of it.

Anonymous said...

Regarding women and "hypergamy":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ow3CXWd4r4s

Bob Wallace said...

Men "mate up," too. Each is supposed to make the other person the best they can be. That's what Associative Mating is supposed to be. The Evo-Psych explanation of "hypergamy" is dysfunctional.

Anonymous said...

Women document their hypergamy openly online for all to see. They write jovially about the fall of men and how women are out-earning them in education. They write about how they won't settle for a lower earning man and how they don't want to marry down. They write about how they've freed themselves from the slavery of marriage - leaving out the part that they're still living on their X husbands assets and income. Yet still, there are naive men, faced with mountains of data that supports the existence of hypergamy - that will claim hypergamy doesn't exist.

Bob Wallace said...

It's better explained by hubris, greed, envy and laziness.

No one will understand human nature, male or female, until they understand the Seven Deadly Vices. "Evo-Psych" changes day to day and some of the concepts have been completely overthrown by newer ones.

You might want to read the story of the Garden of Eden, which points out at the end women want to rule men but men must always rule woman.

Anonymous said...


Hypergamy is one of the biggest fallacies in the manosphere.

I've seen too many instances of attractive women with dipshit guys that were far from "alpha." They were short, not particularly good looking, seldom charismatic, and definitely not leaders of men or patriarchal.

I agree that human pairing tends to be assortative (like being attracted to like). If the woman is screwed up, most likely she will be attracted to likewise screwed up men.

Hypergamy is women just being lazy and greedy.

Normal, emotionally-healthy women are respectful and supportive of their men, and likewise with men for women.

Anonymous said...

People eschew the idea of hypergamy for the same reason they eschew the idea of MGTOW. The same people that deny hypergamy shame MGTOW for opting out of marriage and commitment. They have good reasons for doing so, too. The biggest reason is that their well being is dependent on successfully shaming men into "manning up" and marrying. In other words, the people here that are eschewing the idea of hypergamy do so because they have something to lose by men opting out of marriage. The idea is to keep men basing their self-esteem and ego on women's approval (through marriage) and naive as to the true nature of women.

Marriage - The deeply misandric contract men willingly sign to be cuckolded, stripped of their assets and income and forced into poverty and despair. Why do men keep signing that most man-hating of contracts? Shaming by white knights and gynocentrists.

MGTOW exist because a minority of men aren't naive morons. MGTOW exist because basing your self-esteem and ego on the approval of a woman is one of the most self-destructive things you can do.

MGTOW exist because, as each hour passes, more and more men wake up to the man-hating, rigged game that we call "marriage". MGTOW exist because hypergamy is real.

Anonymous said...

"MGTOW exist because hypergamy is real."

Call it whatever you want, MGTOW exists because, in part, that there are women that are selfish, lazy and greedy.

Bob Wallace said...

"Call it whatever you want, MGTOW exists because, in part, that there are women that are selfish, lazy and greedy."

Exactly, which is why it is more important to under the Seven Deadly Vices than Evo-Psych. And as far as I'm concerned, the more science advances, the more it confirms ancient wisdom thousands of years old.

By the way, there are two versions of evolution right at the beginning of Genesis.

Anonymous said...

"And as far as I'm concerned, the more science advances, the more it confirms ancient wisdom thousands of years old."


The ancient philosophers and our forefathers were scientifically and technologically ignorant, but they understood human nature (especially female nature) very well - even much better than modern people today I believe.

Black Poison Soul said...

"And as far as I'm concerned, the more science advances, the more it confirms ancient wisdom thousands of years old."

"The ancient philosophers and our forefathers were scientifically and technologically ignorant, but they understood human nature (especially female nature) very well - even much better than modern people today I believe."

It is my personal belief that the ancient philosophers and our forefathers actually took the time to sit down and think deeply about things.

Unlike our modern ADD-addled pseudo-expert-worshiping modern society, who are brainwashed from birth to go running frantically after the next shiny bauble on the Christmas-tree.

Anonymous said...

"It is my personal belief that the ancient philosophers and our forefathers actually took the time to sit down and think deeply about things."

I wholeheartedly agree.

I also believe that they had a lot more common sense than people today.