I found myself thinking, about the concept of “maximum pleasure, minimum pain” often called the pleasure principle from Freudian psychoanalysis. This is the instinctual seeking of pleasure and avoidance of pain to satisfy biological and/or psychological urges. Which made me wonder if women are happier with an Alpha and date/marry Beta males out of necessity. Leading to both a miserable life for the woman after she gets married (Alpha widow) and a miserable life for the Beta before (and often after) he’s married.
One of Freud’s cardinal concepts is the breakdown of the psyche into ID, Super-Ego and Ego, where the Id represents the instinctual desires, the super-ego the rules and socialization from our parents/community and the Ego the moderating influence between the two. To create archetypes of the three, one could cast the ID as the ultimate hedonist, strictly following the pleasure principle. The ID has little patience for putting off gratification, little capacity for long-term productive behavior and offers no thought for the future. The Super-Ego is the ultimate authoritarian, seeking to shape and maintain a person as a “Good person” according to the society in which he lives. The Ego is the self, the one who moderates the unbridled hedonist and the rule-bound authoritarian.
The reason why Hobbes named his classical treatise on Government “Leviathan” was that he noticed how government would emerge as a force for the collective will of the people, but over time would morph into a thing in and of itself, that would grow until it had become much larger than ever intended. Government left to its own devices grows and becomes an uncontrollable monster, that no longer responds to the collective will of the people. In nature a person will seek only to satisfy themselves, their behavior dictates whether they live or die, procreate or become extinct, evolve or devolve, in short, their incentive is that their behavior is largely in control of their faith. They may set their sights on goals they desire, ignore goals they have no interest in, and keep the proceeds of their effort to themselves alone.
If we travel back to when we lived in tribes or packs, it was natural that men sacrificed themselves for women, as the loss of men will affect the loss of tribal population less than a loss of females. After all, each female may only get pregnant once pr year, while one male in theory could impregnate hundreds of women. Thus the reproductive bottle-neck is not in the form of sperm, but in the form of eggs. Thus we get “Eggs are expensive, sperm is cheap“, however from a perspective that also includes the resource requirement in order to carry pregnancies to term and raise children to adulthood, it becomes a question of obtaining resources external to the tribe. Through hunting and gathering at first and then agriculture. Furthermore, as the pregnant human female is vulnerable, it follows that she needs protection, human children are vulnerable, and if a tribe is conquered by another tribe, infanticide may follow so that the new leaders of the tribe are not investing scarce and valuable resources in the offspring of other men.
However, as we moved towards larger societies, the open hostilities between tribal groups of men to obtain females and resources became a bottle-neck in itself, in that maintaining the peace and cooperative effort is required in order for a civilization to grow.
When we transitioned from small family groups where incentives were naturally aligned between the group and each individual. Furthermore, where barriers to exit were non-existent and unfair treatment of members would most likely lead to the break-up of a tribe, or at worst to total slaughter in a winner takes all “Red Wedding” style massacre, it was critical to ensure that members followed and agreed to a certain rule-set. This rule-set had to be developed in such a manner that it balanced the needs and desires of the collective with those of the individual. In a group where everyone is related, such a balance tends to arise, as altruistic behavior towards relatives is more likely than towards total strangers. In addition to being raised in close proximity tends to lead to a higher level of empathy and in-group emotional ties.
However, with the explosion in group size, many of these incentives fall away and thus the reliance on social programming becomes much stronger. In a nation composed of tribes (families) it is natural to view government taking resources from one family who is doing well, to benefit another family that is not doing well, as doing a disservice to the former. Therefore, social programming steps in and utilizes whatever means necessary to shape public opinion in a manner, which advocates solutions that undermine the best interest of the individual. Media outlets, politicians, “influencers”, and others with high social power are enlisted to re-program the minds of the masses to fall in line with the best interest of the collective (at best) or the interests of a ruling class (at worst).
The first major step in social programming was religion, it enforced a set of rules and laws that came from a divine source (argument to authority) and was merely enforced by the current ruling class. Rather than having the collective group provide for each female and her offspring, marriage came about, which allowed the provider burden for a female and her offspring to be the responsibility of the father of said offspring. This mimics the pattern within a tribal group. The man has an incentive to engage in pro-social behavior, that balances his need for procreation with the need of the female for provision. Protection at this point also was part of his responsibility but part of it was outsourced to the state who protects by proxy.
As we move into our modern society, females may assume the role of provider for them and their children, in addition to ample support from the collective. The collective protects them at the cost of the collective. However, this means the collective has to gain the resources to do so from somewhere. Enter the worker bee.
The Construction of the Male Super-Ego
The programming of our Super-Ego starts at birth, as we grow up we are told that it’s wrong to hit other children, sharing is good, throwing food around is bad, running around naked is bad, listening to our parents is good, listening to authority figures is good and many other things depending on community. The goal of this programming is to turn us into good pro-social citizens, to act as fertilizer to the out of control Leviathan. The principal step of this Leviathan is to teach us to value the collective good over our own good. When we are told to share our toys with other children, it is in fact a way of saying “Those who have much, should share with those who have nothing, as this increases overall total happiness”. Rather than make the tacit assumption that each individual acting in a utilitarian manner will result in the highest collective happiness, one elects to enforce utilitarianism on a collective scale.
Beta males are raised on a steady diet of “Women are fragile flowers”, “Women should be supplicated to“, “You should negotiate attraction“, which only works once a woman reaches her epiphany phase and starts searching for a steady Beta Male provider. The insidious aspect of this is that society also communicates that men should embody certain virtues. Being a man of your word, which translates into consistency. To do your duty, which translates into self-sacrifice. To be a man of honor, which translates into a man who lives in accordance with the prescribed values of the society in which you live.
This ensures that males are raised to have a very strong super-ego, that frequently is utilized to override his rational self-interest to the benefit of the collective. Women talk, men do, women have the liberty to change their mind any time, a man stands by his word.
The Demonization of the male ID
The destruction of the male ID, and the demonization of male sexuality is central, as it is a force, which is inherently self-interested. It cares only for sensory and hedonistic pleasure or brutal violence. The role of the ID is to control your baser drives, such as the libido, self-preservation and thus self-interest. The demonization of male sexuality takes place in “consent classes” that have the tacit assumption that all men are rapists. Boys who engage in “roughhousing” in schools or kindergartens are admonished for their uncivilized behavior and encouraged to employ emotions and discussion rather than violence and shamed for fighting.
While society seeks to validate and recognize the emotions of a female, her preferred way of expressing her ID, men are viewed as defective for our natural manner of expressing our ID, namely action. Female emotionalism is an expression of her ID in the same manner that male actions are expressions of his. Thus, by undermining and presenting a male’s base instincts and drives, it follows that this will make him uncomfortable with them, in addition to them being overrun by the super-ego.
The Destruction of the Male Ego
The ego, serves 3 masters, reality, the ID and the Super-ego. Thus it follows that by controlling the perception of reality through narratives, building up the super-ego and undermining the ID, one master gains the upper-hand, the one that is focused on the male’s role according to the super-ego structure.
Add to this the many new communications to the male super-ego during formative years, “All men are pigs“, “Boys are stupid throw rocks at them” and “Boys are just defective girls” serve to damage the construction of the male ego, which serves the role to moderate between the former psychological structures, thus attempting to build an automaton of sorts, operating purely of super-ego programming, at the expense of both ID and Ego. By denying a man his ego, his ability to govern and view the self as a separate entity apart from the collective is reduced, and rather than being a person he becomes a thing.
When feminists speak of masculinity being fragile, they are usually referring to an ego-reaction from a male who is fighting back against the undermining of his ego and ID. By disconnecting a man from his ego, they remove his ability to relate to relate and think of long term consequences of indulging his super-ego and ID.
The Effect of Narratives on Male Development
One of my favorite expressions is “We are born free but ordered to be healthy” as a summation to the position of the Abrahamic religions. The Red Pill perspective, allows a man who is willing to put forth the effort, not to build but to regain his birthright, the balance of his ego and ID, with the needs of the tribe in the form of his super-ego. It is in the best interest of the collective from a utilitarian perspective to ensure that the men within that society act in accordance with the needs of the collective. Men are the engine within a society, and if men acted purely in their own interests and according to their own sexual strategy, the collective would bear the consequences. MGTOW may withdraw from interactions with women, marriage and the associated drains on their prime resource. However, so long as they earn money within a collective, they are supporting the structure through their taxes.
A man when he adopts the Red Pill perspective, demands an alignment between his effort and his reward. As the Leviathan has grown, it has learned that by encouraging the male super-ego, while disparaging the male ID and Ego, while at the same time encouraging the female ego and ID, it has created a situation in which, male super-egos demand that men satisfy the female ID and Ego demands, thus rather than having two individuals, they become one.
For while, the social narratives and programming for a long time have driven to strengthen the male super-ego, at the cost of his ego and ID. The same programming has sought to free the females of the species from their super-ego, and the super-ego in aggregate that makes up social values. Thus the red pill, seeks to mimic the female condition in some respects, among others to free the man from the sense of duty put upon him by society, and replace it with a sense of duty to himself and those he elects. To permit the man to freely accept his ID, rather than force it into the deepest recesses of his mind.
A General Introduction to Psychoanalysis by Sigmund Freud