Friday, July 31, 2015


I don't use the Manosphere's "social sexual" hierarchy because it's close to worthless since it doesn't describe reality.

Years ago I read a book by the late Paul Fussell called Class, which made me laugh because it was right on the money.

Here are the classes he described:

The upper class, which consists of the top-out-of-sights and the mainstream upper class.

The middle class, broken down into upper-middles and middles.

The proletarian, or working class (proles, for short), consisting of the high, middle, and low proles.

The very bottom classes, the destitute and the bottom-out-of-sight.

Category X, people who withdraw from the class system and live life according to their own rules. (Category X has nothing to do with Generation X.)

One thing I remember him describing are those who live in trailers and have aquariums. I know people like this. They're the "hoosiers" I spoke about (the word being an insult in the area I was raised). Not exactly white trash, but close.

They're always stupid, poor, addicted to drugs and alcohol and drama. The skinny guys are the ones who screw obese women. When the women aren't obese they're still alcoholics or heroin or meth addicts. Both sexes always have an arrest record and sometimes don't have a driver's license.

When you see some scruffy long-haired guy riding his bike down the street, it's because he lost his driver's license. And they're ones you see scrapping two dollars worth of aluminum cans every day.

They're the truly promiscuous ones and their relationships never work out.

Then this is a class I'm not sure exists anymore. They're the working class/blue collar class who worked themselves up to middle class. Those were my parents, who dropped out of high school. My father was a general contractor and my mother worked nights at the local ER.

I never lacked anything.

The reason I don't think this class exists anymore is because the economy is so bad, has been for a long time, and will be for a long time.

Then there is the middle class, which is in big trouble. They're the ones with the middle class houses, new cars, kids in decent public schools.

My parents were middle class and were married from 1956 to 2013, when both died six weeks apart. That's middle class. They're the backbone of the culture.

I am not all the familiar with the rest of the upper classes, but I noticed when owning a taxi that the old rich live in mansions set very far back from the street, in a rural area, with a private road that looks like just a one-lane blacktop road. (These are Fussell's "Out-of-Sights.")

I went down such a street one time to deliver a letter and suddenly there was this mansion.

I've also found those who drove the Porsches and such cars are the middle class who've worked their way up to the moneyed class and think the old rich drive such cars - which they do not.

The middle classes and above don't want anything to do with the lower classes. The's why the police exist, who spend most of the time dealing with the Dalits - a term originally from India and now sometimes used in the U.S. to describe the lowlifes.

I have never in my life met the Manosphere's description of an "alpha," because they don't exist. I have met homicidal men, but they had nothing in common with the homicidal hatred that is supposed to be characteristic of "Omegas."

I have met many bullies, but they weren't "alphas" with "high self-esteem" and "insane self-confidence." They were big-mouth cowards and I've seen them stomped flat in ten seconds by those they picked on - and then seen them beg to left alone and not to be hit anymore. I'm going to repeat that - beg.

The bigger the mouth, the bigger the coward. The truly scary guys are the quiet ones.

As for my class, very few can tell what I am, and that upsets some people because they cannot pigeonhole me.

The Manosphere's "social-sexual" hierarchy was created by men with little experience in life. I am astonished by the delusion and naivete I encounter.


Quartermain said...

Anymore when people say they are middle class, they're usually talking about their upbringing rather than their financial status.

Anonymous said...

I am perplexed. Why do you reject the fact that some men are made (and sometimes born) to command and are naturally charming while others are born disadvantage and have to struggle in order to compensate? Manosphere's hierarchy may be flawed, but class is even less accurate anyone who has lived more than 20 years in the world has known fearless people of humble upbringing with natural charisma and rich but coward and/or charmless, and sometimes degenerate people. Normally the later are the ones that finish off the dynasty. Men are not equal.

Ecgbert said...

That book is one of my favorites too. One acquaintance criticized it by saying that the X class are really just slumming upper middles.

Anonymous said...

"I don't use the Manosphere's "social sexual" hierarchy because it's close to worthless since it doesn't describe reality."

Your usual bait and switch.

You introduce the topic of social sexual hierarchy, and then talk about the social economic hierarchy, you have produced not one iota of evidence that the former doesn't exist alongside and interwoven with the latter.

If you had, it might have been an interesting post.

Unknown said...

I, and others, have pointed out before that what the Manosphere considers Alphas are really Omegas. Every truly promiscuous man I've met has been a drug addict, a liar - and they always targeted unattractive women. And I've met men with a 100+ notch count. Not one was an admirable man, and every one of them destroyed his life by middle age unless he gave up what he was doing.

Frauds such as Roissy and Vox Day ignore that.

MGTOW'd Out said...

"Men are not equal."

Corrected for accuracy--Some human beings, regardless of race or ethnicity, are naturally inclined when it comes to their physical attributes and mental faculties. Leaders are made based on their experiences.

So, tell me anony, where do YOU fall all on this self-serving socio-sexual hierarchy?

Anonymous said...

That book is one of my favorites too. One acquaintance criticized it by saying that the X class are really just slumming upper middles.

They've been around a long time, and gone by many names: "Muscadins" (Revolutionary France), Trustafarians, Bobo's, etc.

Anonymous said...

@MGTOW'd Out

I am not a leader, I I strive to make my path, but in spite of everything I am a loner, unavoidable, even though I've learned a few tricks to compensate and simulate conversation. Oftentimes I lack charm I guess so one can say I am a higher beta or something like that according to the manosphere. Bottom line: I am not a leader of men, I am not likely to be one, but professionally and so far emotionally I am competent, but not a pushover (learned not to be one the hard way), but I know people who are naturally suited for those things, even braver than me in a fight, other naturally stronger and others naturally weaker than me physically and mentally.

The point is that men are not born a blank slate, everyone is born with different capabilities and indeed I dare say there are better men than others to achieve success in life (according to our earthly metrics ie. financial success, freedom, reproductive fitness et al). In this case the historical, anecdotal and statistical evidence (Murray and Herrenstein anyone) is against you and our host.