« Markets which only look like an infinite regress | Main | What if the candidates pandered to economists? »
Sebastian Flyte rules
Re XII ‘there is a groupie for every male endeavour’
THIS IS SO MONEY. It is one of the great triumphs of modern capitalism: let a thousand status hierarchies bloom! Unlike in hunter gatherer days, there isn’t one status hierarchy to climb and that’s that, there are endless hierarchies to climb, endless things to specialise in. Roissy’s good buddy, the economist Tyler Cowen, has been pushing this idea for a while now, and the effect this has on human happiness and potential is mind-boggling. Guys can rise to the top of whatever work/hobby hierarchies there are, or at least portray to women that yes, he is in THE PROCESS of climbing to the top. There are obvious caveats: females aren’t impressed by computer game related status, even though leading 30 guys from around the globe in World of Warcraft to quickly and efficiently take down an enemy is actually an impressive accomplishment - I think this will change in the future. But for now, I’ll bet the college ultimate frisbee champ gets some pretty good action.
Here is Sebastian's blog.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on July 12, 2008 at 01:23 PM in History | Permalink
Comments
for now, I’ll bet the college ultimate frisbee champ gets some pretty good action
This type of thinking reminds me of The Tao of Steve, which is not only quite funny, and not only a great date movie (imho), but it tells a story through a reletively unheard of philosophy that is basicaly correct.
One of the best "unseen" (I mean that more or less literally, not in an economic sense "the seen and the unseen") movies of all time.
Posted by: happyjuggler0 at Jul 12, 2008 1:37:45 PM
Curiously, Tyler does not credit the original source of this comment, even though placing it in its proper context would likely be even more stimulating for discussion...
Posted by: johnleemk at Jul 12, 2008 2:07:08 PM
The young Koreans who play the highly popular Blizzard title "Starcraft", which has a quite developed e-sport scene, have lots and lots of female fans who take their video-gaming quite seriously. I doubt they have any problems with the ladies, and their top players make fair salaries (100K for the top tier, up to 600K for the best).
The United States has too much of a machiso culture (not meant to be critical) for a gaming scene like that of the nascent Asian market. As gaming becomes more interactive and coupled with more apparent physical talents, I don't doubt we'll see much of the same thing here though.
Posted by: Billare at Jul 12, 2008 2:30:39 PM
So, Tyler, how are those hot little ethnic food groupies treatin' ya?
Posted by: Keith at Jul 12, 2008 2:36:09 PM
And I do quote Napoleon Dynamite on this issue: "Women like men with skills."
Posted by: Fabio Rojas at Jul 12, 2008 3:05:57 PM
Girls always get hot when I tell them I used to be a Secretary in FCC. Of course, they don't know I'm talking about the libertarian alliance in Cybernations, but who the hell cares!
Posted by: Robert Olson at Jul 12, 2008 4:25:45 PM
Good thoughts from Sebastian Flyte. (For those wondering, Lord Sebastian Flyte" is a character from Brideshead Revisited.)
johnlemmk -- I suspect this is a comment pulled from the Roissy blog, to which TC has previously declined to link.
Posted by: Trieu at Jul 12, 2008 4:28:53 PM
Tyler, just link to the harmless little Roissy douchebag already. What, now you want to out-douche the guy? If so, you've chosen the one dimension where that guy could actually beat you.
On Sebastian's point: I think these little sub-cultures and sub-hierarchies are a very good development. Nowadays, there's much less of a harsh tradeoff for men between pursuing the things they actually just plain enjoy and acquiring social status. This is a very beneficial development.
Posted by: Keith at Jul 12, 2008 4:48:01 PM
"So, Tyler, how are those hot little ethnic food groupies treatin' ya?"
He has blog groupies.
Posted by: Jacqueline at Jul 12, 2008 5:17:17 PM
Jacqueline, are the blog groupies jealous of the ethnic food groupies? I smell a catfight a-brewin!
Posted by: Keith at Jul 12, 2008 5:36:15 PM
This idea sounds like something libertarian think tanks would cook up to please their wealthy backers. It justifies ignoring social injustice and gives intellectual cover to those who oppose badly needed measures to correct excessive inequality of wealth and income.
Posted by: Dirk at Jul 12, 2008 5:49:43 PM
Dirk, either you have just written the most brilliant subtle parody of a paranoid out of touch leftist who turns utterly unrelated discussions into some paranoid plutocratic fantasy, or...I must inform you that Sebastian and Tyler are discussing informal social status hierarchies, and one could agree or disagree with them regardless of one's political views.
Posted by: Keith at Jul 12, 2008 6:10:05 PM
Men can make up all the social hierarchies they want, but women decide which ones count: the Forbes 400 -- Yes. The World of Warcraft Order of the Whatevers -- No.
Posted by: Steve Sailer at Jul 12, 2008 6:10:23 PM
Flyte, Roissy, et al, are inverting the meaning of the biological terms 'alpha male' and 'beta male'. Among primates, the 'alpha' males are the older, more powerful ones with 1 or more long-term mates, while the 'beta' males are the socially marginal ones who get short-term flings when the alpha isn't looking.
If we're going to use these terms here, like the biologists we should apply them without value judgements. The game-players are (succesfully) playing a classic beta strategy. if they were alphas, they would likely rely a lot less on social skills and a lot more on expensive gifts.
Posted by: anonymouse at Jul 12, 2008 8:02:31 PM
Flyte, Roissy, et al, are inverting the meaning of the biological terms 'alpha male' and 'beta male'. Among primates, the 'alpha' males are the older, more powerful ones with 1 or more long-term mates, while the 'beta' males are the socially marginal ones who get short-term flings when the alpha isn't looking.
When used in reference to humans, the definitions normally are as follows:
Alpha = many women
Beta = one woman
Omega (or low Beta) = no women.
Posted by: Peter at Jul 12, 2008 9:56:14 PM
Trust me on this, the chicks don't flock to the collegiate ultimate frisbee champs. Been there, no action.
Posted by: Norman Pfyster at Jul 12, 2008 10:03:16 PM
The frisbee champ is too shy, women scare him. Doesn't know what to do with it...
Posted by: jorod at Jul 13, 2008 12:14:59 AM
Well, there's a world of difference between a hot top-notch computer game player and a, well, not-so-hot one. The top-notch computer player thing on its own will only get you so far.
Posted by: Sia at Jul 13, 2008 1:07:08 AM
I agree with a modified version of what Steve says.
There are status heirarchies among the status hierarchies. Tyler's OP seems to be pushing fake, rosy, egalitarian descriptions of the state of reality.
Posted by: Hopefully Anonymous at Jul 13, 2008 1:12:27 AM
Hopefully, Sailer - I agree completely.
In fact, I've disagreed with Roissy's definition of an Alpha.
There are a lot of status hierarchies to climb, and as Roissy said - girls will be more attracted to guys at or in the process of getting to the top of whatever. I thought it was pretty obvious that not all status hierarchies are equal when it comes to attracting women. Of course being in the Forbes 400 is better than being president of the local... gun club, or whatever you Americans do for fun.
But the president of the local club will still receive healthy, internal, biological validation for standing atop one ladder, and it should increase his success with girls, even just a little. These guys are probably married so the latter makes no difference.
The male brain is rewarded for climbing a ladder in and of itself. This explains the appeal of computer games - a virtual ascent to the top, a whetting of the male status drive equivalent to the satisfaction of the sex drive a man gets when watching pornography. Half Sigma made this point before.
But again, the modern world throws up so many status hierarchies that more males than ever are able to receive the biological satisfaction of having status, even if it's illusory. And women are just as inclined to respond to illusion as males are.
Posted by: Sebastian Flyte at Jul 13, 2008 4:26:13 AM
I have an important point to make, but it's hard to concentrate with one blog-commenter groupie sitting in my lap and another nuzzling my ear...
Posted by: at Jul 13, 2008 11:37:11 AM
30 guys? I am aware of 25 man raids in WoW, and 40 man raids, but no 30 man raids.
Posted by: Paul F. Dietz at Jul 13, 2008 6:25:13 PM
> I’ll bet the college ultimate frisbee champ gets some pretty good action.
Well, as a man working his way up the (club) ultimate frisbee circuit, and one who met his fiancee playing ultimate, I can confirm that this is certainly true. Every decent-sized school with a men's frisbee team has a women's one as well...
Posted by: Bill Mill at Jul 13, 2008 6:53:45 PM
In college I regularly spotted for the NCAA hammer throw champion while he lifed weights (during the unchecked steroid era in college sports). He got a lot of action from young, healthy, attractive women at the gym, and there were plenty of leftovers for his spotter, who had to be pretty strong himself.
Not saying he (or I) got the action that the starting quarterback got, though...
Posted by: Brutus at Jul 14, 2008 8:08:21 AM
Being the college ultimate frisbee champ of your school has its upsides... Though not always so great, if the male to female ratio is 7:3.
Posted by: TheUnrepentantGunner at Jul 14, 2008 8:59:24 AM
