A number of people (Sargon of Akkad, Joe Rogan, and Jordan Peterson most notably) have been talking about the creepy unattractiveness of male feminists. Aside from their verbal expressions of morality often covering for manifest immorality in actual behavior, they are simply repulsive on their face to women. Even the genuinely kind ones. Women simply don’t like male feminists.
The problem is that these men have mistaken the ideology expressed by some women for what is demonstrably desirable to women in men, in the real world. Feminism teaches them that men and women aren’t so different, that men really ought to be more emotionally expressive, more feminine, even that masculinity is “toxic.” And so these men become less manly — less strong, less competent, less courageous (“brave enough to embrace their fear” as it may be framed), and above all, openly contemptuous of any notion of honor. And women reject them, instead choosing to date more masculine men, when they can get them. The feminist women’s hatred for masculine men appears to come from a sour-grapes kind of resentment over masculine men rejecting them.
There are two parallel premises we can observe in both male and female feminists which lead to their own dissatisfaction. First:
Attractive young women want young men who are powerful and masculine.
This allows for:
Attractive young women like young men who are cocky.
We’ll get to the corollary by the end of this post.
Note: feminist men may be able to get a girlfriend, but often not the kind of girlfriend that they actually want to date.
If we accept the view of the most empirical scientists in this realm of study — that is, pick-up artists (PUAs) — then we hold that in youth, women possess immensely more social power than men, deriving from the reproductive value which they are born with. Lacking this quality, men by default have very little sexual market value (SMV). They must acquire a compensatory value in the sexual marketplace by acquiring resources and generally, becoming masculine. Thus a high-SMV young man (wealthy, confident, and preferably good-looking too, indicating genetic value) can at least approach the sexual market value of a highly attractive young woman.
But there is a parallel here. Naturally, women want these high-SMV men, and may become bitter when they are rejected by these men — or, as may be the case, are taken on a “date” or two before being turned out, leaving them feeling used. They thought they could get this guy to marry them, but often, they accepted the false feminist narrative about what is attractive to these high-SMV men (or ought to be attractive), and neglected what was actually attractive to them.
Just like male feminists with women.
Feminism teaches women that men want — or should want — strong, independent, and unconditionally self-loving women, who are preferably sassy and sarcastic to boot.
Now, to be fair, this may not be entirely the fault of feminism, or if it is, we can be somewhat sympathetic to the mistake, because this closely mirrors what women want in men. Projection is an empathetic kind of mistake (when it is a mistake). But the asymmetry in youthful power does make this particular projection a mistake, and the most attractive kinds of men tend to reject these kind of “you-go-grl” overconfident women, at least beyond brief flings.
Why is this?
The high-SMV man had to earn his value through sheer effort. The woman, by contrast, did not. Thus the cocky, overconfident feminist woman comes off as unappreciative of the unearned power she has received merely by being a young and attractive female. She takes this power for granted, and may take the man’s efforts for granted too.
Now there are potential two counter-points to make here. First, many women do work tremendously hard, and earn a fair bit of power completely independent of their looks and youthful femininity. Second, there is a kind of advanced social chess-game going on, wherein highly attractive women may play a kind of cocky, overconfident personality because it signals even higher value: no lower-value woman could get away with behaving in that fashion, so a woman who does behave in this fashion might be valuable indeed.
Regarding this second point, this may work at a superficial level, and among women, but women often project (again) the powerful social intuitions they possess onto men, who are — socially speaking — more simply wired. High-SMV men, who are confident in their own judgment, will simply bypass the signaled collective opinion and dismiss the behavior as annoying. We can understand why a woman might do this, but this understanding does not necessarily mean that the strategy works.
On the first point, women’s hard work should be appreciated, and it does buy the right to boastful self-respect to some degree. But acting as a man — in terms of cocky self-assurance — still represents an ungratefulness for the gift of feminine beauty which they did not earn, and which men have to get along without. Moreover, overemphasizing one’s own personal accomplishments over one’s youthful feminine virtue risks the error of projection mentioned before: “men do x, so they must value x in women.” Au contraire, many men work hard to earn money only because it is valued by women. Without female interests to consider, many men would obsessively pursue their hobbies, compete with each other in war-games, and otherwise let civilization fall apart. Men don’t value each other based upon financial success and power to the degree that women do, and certainly don’t value each other in the way that they value women. High-SMV young men tend to value women based upon the gifts women have been given (beauty, compassion, and the rest of the feminine virtues), not upon the skills and accomplishments achieved in the marketplace. Women who take pride in their accomplishments, instead of a graceful acceptance of the great value they have simply received, are leaning into an identity that tends not to be valued by high-SMV men, and out of (even against) an identity that is valued by high-SMV men.
Attractive young men want women who are beautiful and feminine.
Which allows for:
Attractive young men like women who are humble.
The inclusion of “attractive” and “young” is intentional and important here, because the departure of either of these qualities change the equation. Ayn Rand, who was neither young nor attractive at the peak of her fame, had completely earned her popularity through her works, and moreover, was not competing for sexual market value, but for ideological power (i.e., advancing libertarian individualism against communist collectivism). Her cocky cleverness and wit is congruent with her accomplishments, and with the fact that she cannot rely on her sex appeal to reach her audience. Yet even so, her arrogance never reached the levels of the average college feminist, despite having achieved a greater right to such confidence.
In the same vein, consider the work of Lauren Southern.
Here is a highly attractive and young activist-journalist, whose success has, undeniably, been aided by these feminine qualities. The fact that she is relatively thoughtful and modest in her presentation, going the extra mile to do the research (indeed, she is one of the few real journalists left, who actually goes places to learn about the subject rather than browsing Google and Twitter for a few hours), not does not mitigate but rather amplifies her attractiveness. Who knows what her boyfriend will be like when she gets one, but presently, the number of high-quality, high-power men who would marry her in a heartbeat is in the tens of thousands.
By contrast, consider the personality of someone like Ana Kasparian, who is reasonably young and fairly attractive, but whose snarky and from-on-high moralizing and elitist approach to media presentation is at odds with these natural gifts. While her husband is not unattractive (a minor-league baseball player), he is a bit of a goober. Based Ana’s late age in marriage and the need to bring up talking about divorce with her husband (then fiance), in a video, one gets the sense that she may have been settling. Had she been less overbearing, one wonders if her previous relationship of seven years may have worked out better.