Fake Crew objects to the socio-sexual hierarchy.
It never ceases to amaze how a patently pseudo-intellectual system—the sexual-social hierarchy—is used to explain the glaring mistakes for a man to marry a bi-racial, older, divorced woman, when their impending nuptials is of little or no personal consequence to the detractors. Men, Christian or otherwise, who create and perpetuate that structure make a series of subjective behavioral and personality appraisals as its foundational pieces. Any protestation about this label or refusal to act in the prescribed manner brings about a pejorative response. It may be “convenient” for men to articulate what they believe are definitive aspects of their fellow man’s conduct because they subscribe to this hierarchy, but what about those men who find definitive flaws in how those decisions were arrived? What happens when those men challenge the structure by arguing that the “unvarnished truth of the structure” is in reality a set of assumptions predicated on sophistry? Would God truly judge in this exact manner by calling Christian men betas, gammas, and situational alphas?
First, there is nothing “pseudo-intellectual” about the socio-sexual hierarchy. In fact, it is every bit as scientific as any other system of taxonomy which encompasses the description, identification, nomenclature, and classification of organisms. Second, the impending nuptuals between Harry and the Half-Blood Princess are not of no personal consequence to the detractors. Symbols matter, and the English monarchy is one of the most powerful symbols of Western civilization, so the conquest of the prince by the part-African girl is deeply symbolic of the invasion of the West by the Global South in general and Africa in particular. One need only read the coverage of the royal engagement by the pro-invasion press to observe as much. Consider its significance in light of how a much less significant act of anti-Western symbolism is being trumpeted:
Grammys shut out white men in album of the year category for the first time
From Frank Sinatra in the 1960s to Paul Simon in the 1970s to U2 in the 1980s, ’90s and early 2000s, one set of musicians has long had reason to feel secure in its privileged position at the Grammy Awards.
Well, roll over, white guys, and tell Beethoven the news.
For the first time in the ceremony’s six-decade history, a woman and people of color have squeezed the Recording Academy’s go-to demographic from among the principal artists in contention for album of the year, the flagship category in nominations announced Tuesday for the 60th Grammys….
It’s about time.
Third, there is no “prescribed manner” in which men must act. Fake Crew has it backwards. Men act as they act. We merely observe, describe, and label that behavior. Having done so, we can use our observations to provide the basis for a predictive model, which in this case has proven to be an astonishingly reliable guide to future human behavior.
Fourth, no one cares about the opinion of those men “who find definitive flaws in how those decisions were arrived” because those men have offered no competing system of analyzing and successfully anticipating human behavior. No one, to date, has even offered any serious criticism of the socio-sexual hierarchy nor has given anyone any reason to doubt the existence of the behaviors observed or the relevance of those behaviors to male socio-sexual status.
Fifth, nothing happens when the structure is challenged by being labeled “a set of assumptions predicated on sophistry” because the statement itself doesn’t even rise to the level of sophistry. The statement is obviously incorrect about the observations being assumptions, and is therefore also wrong about the basis of these non-existent assumptions.
Sixth, God’s judgment is irrelevant because God does not respect human status, just as the CEO of a Fortune 500 company does not respect high school status. But high school status exists and is deeply relevant to high school students nevertheless. The man who ignores the realities of the socio-sexual hierarchy, whether he believes it exists or not, is making life difficult for himself in much the same way that men who ignore the realities of traffic laws do.
Fake Crew is making the same mistake here that various elements of the Fake Right frequently make when they object to various aspects of the 16 Points. I am no more inventing these concepts than zoologists were inventing zebras, giraffes, and okapis when they first encountered them in Africa. I am merely describing the behavioral patterns I observe and labeling them. It no more matters what one happens to call “gamma” is called than whether one says “monkey”, “Affe”, or “scimmia”; it is only the behavioral pattern that is relevant. While one can quite reasonably argue that there should be more or fewer gradations, one cannot credibly argue that male social status does not exist, that male social status is entirely unrelated to human sexuality, or that there are not common behavioral indicators of an individual man’s social status that can be readily observed by others.
Anyone attempting to disprove the relevance of the socio-sexual hierarchy must deny all three of those statements. I certainly invite Fake Crew, or anyone else, to do so, and more importantly, to explain the logic supporting that denial. However, he has to stop using someone else’s name and create a new one for himself first.