Edited with updates to graphic links.
As much as I am an anti-feminist and sympathetic toward men who are negotiating today’s loaded minefield of the gender wars, I find that I have come to critically examine the latest in “evolutionary” thought as pertains to the different motivations of the sexes.
Ironically, I find the latest evolutionary psychology research to be anti-evolutionary, that is, a method of preserving our calcified aristocracies despite their faulty philosophical values, pyramid schemes, and faulty genes.
As complicated as many of these theories may be, the man who can simplify evolutionary thought for the apparent or perceived benefit of other men can make himself very rich.
There is a well-circulated video going around which you may recognize. It is The Universal Hot/Crazy matrix:
The brilliance of this simplification is of course matched by its humor. However, there are some problems, that is, it would represent the same faulty logic of today’s evolutionary psychologists for the same reasons.
However the very simplicity of the approach makes it ripe for glib and facile analysis. In short, it is just my cup of tea.
As funny and clever as this piece is, I’m expecting the “sign up now” speech at the end enlisting all the bright young energetic members of the male audience into the presenter’s pyramid scheme…Amway?
“Even if you’re ugly, boys, you too can have a beautiful and not-too-crazy wife. All that matters is money and I’m the one who is going to help you get it. Just sign up now. You’ll be inviting me to your wedding.”
I presume that his wife has already availed herself of every cosmetic procedure known to man, he tells her how beautiful she is so often that she has come to believe it, she doesn’t exist (so he hires a model to play “wife”), or she is actually a tranny (I’m old enough to remember when this word was not a “slur” but was rather an empowering group-identification endearment).
The reason why “unicorns” are so rare today is because it used to be that privileged young girls were protected from all the various things (propaganda, traveling salesmen/”educators”, “bad” men, women’s magazines, “the cinema”, etc.) that drive women crazy and ruin their looks today.
Girls were also once taught certain social graces: how to be useful, charming, diplomatic, productive, etc. such as to feel good about themselves and exude that good will toward all who would encounter them.
This example filtered down the classes such that even poor families knew better than to leave their precious little girls unprotected. Unfortunately, this protection was called “oppression” by bitter, crazy, and ugly women of all ages, many of whom joined convents as the last possible refuge for their kind. Others’ joined The Woman’s Movement, The Temperance Movement, held evangelical revivals, or became the very teachers the world depended on to teach their girls some grace. This backfired, terribly.
These wonderful and kind “oppressed” women generously allowed “equal” little girls all the “terrible” things that were denied them by “The Patriarchy” while meanwhile subjecting those girls to a constant stream of shaming techniques for the crime of being young and beautiful.
Such a girl would either grow up terrified of other women (and therefore willing to do anything to be sheltered by some rich man such as to not have to deal with harpies ever again), physically sick, if-you-can’t-beat-em-join-em-butt-ugly-and-crazy, obsessed with her looks well beyond care for her own sanity, or all of the above. A very tiny minority however would become so propaganda-resistant that such a woman would run-for-the-hills to be cared for by the wolves rather than submit herself for “study” by the rapidly burgeoning academic class. Such women, therefore, effectively don’t exist. Of course a beautiful woman surrounded by wolves is not exactly a marriage prospect–even if a beau manages to fight his way past all the wolves, if he were to hurt her wolves she’s likely to kill him and be well physically equipped to do so.
Some women however learned from their experience with the harpies and decided that youth and beauty in a girl was not only not a crime but was a cause for celebration. These women took to “Princess Parties” for their special little darlings with gusto. Whereas girls of all classes once had two fancy dress occasions (“coming of age” and wedding) suddenly every day was a fancy dress occasion, just like for actresses and prostitutes. Everyone was a star. As a result, even boys wanted to be Princesses. Everyone wanted to be a Princess. Princesses are good! Even a “Half-Breed” like Cher can be a Princess.
Isn’t she beautiful?
I wonder whose job it is to tell her this every day?
Here is her beautiful daughter, Chastity. Cher is of course more beautiful because after all she is multi-ethnic; whereas Chasity is also multi-ethnic but “fair game” so to speak:
What? Oh sorry. What a hunk!
Here’s a better pic:
Chaz Bono must have money, obviously. “Real men” don’t need no fancy beauty procedures. What a catch.
Absolutely anyone can be beautiful or handsome. It helps to either have a great attitude or to have lots and lots of money. If you are on top of the pyramid in fact, you set the standard. You define what is attractive and what researchers say is attractive. It’s known as fashion. Evolutionary psychologists today are little more than glorified fashionistas.
While I am sympathetic and understand the confirmation bias held by individuals of all sexual persuasions, ages, economic brackets, etc., if men such as the presenter were genuinely interested in studying or creating “unicorns”, their wives would divorce them and take them to the cleaners faster than you can say “Cinderella”. Besides it isn’t as if most men feel worthy of such a prize (which is why so many beautiful women end up alone). Such is the sad realization of men who divorce their ugly hate-bucket to marry a trophy with less than discerning personality screening skills but then run out of money before bride-number-two’s scheduled facelift.
Rich men, on the other hand, don’t necessarily have the power to marry who they want to marry. It is sad but true that the aristocracy is a prison of sorts. There are only a limited number of eligible brides (but an unlimited number of hopeful Cinderellas). Wouldn’t it be great if there was a reasonable and scientific justification for the sexual behavior of scientific patrons? That would surely save a lot of marriages outside of the aristocracy. As for the calcification within the aristocracy, I’ll bet we haven’t fully seen how that will play out.
Besides, the pyramid scheme is the whole business and is how “beta” men rule the world today. In addition to Amway, there’s also Christianity (of various types), Judaism, Islam, Darwinism, Patriotism, Race-Pride, and Political-Party Pride. The important thing is to build the pyramid with as many suckers as possible, through any means necessary, and then call the result “Providence” or “Evolution” or some other good and natural and scientific name. Demographics and behavioral conditioning studies—as well intentioned as they may be—have the misfortune of actually destroying their own field of research. It’s a paradox. To look at something changes it. There’s just too much money in pinning down the correct answer and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Eventually, tiny little skulls and asthma in a girl will be considered “beautiful” and wars shall be fought in such a fair damsel’s honor.
Ladies and gentlemen, I bring you the most beautiful woman in the world:
Just kidding. Here she is:
Why not just name her, “Chastity”?