by Blonde Ulv
Predictability Rivaling that of Aristotle
Vox’s Socio-Sexual Hierarchy (SSH) is a taxonomy concerning male interaction. It was derived from his observations and penned during the Game discovery era of males attempting to ascertain and share the labyrinths of the female psyche. The SSH is one of the most important tools in predicting male behavior and is a necessity if one wishes to navigate the world of men as we order each other, with any sense of the interactions involved. Its predictive power is astonishing and I hold it to levels of usefulness just under those The Philosopher himself penned.
I do not have much to add, as there is constant, ongoing discovery and useful insights at Vox’s Sigma Game Substack here:
https://sigmagame.substack.com/
I will, however, offer advice to those who vehemently reject the concepts outright:
1) It is intuitive to all.
Be it women, low status men, or high status men, everyone recognizes the hierarchy when exposed to it. Women can sniff out low status vs. high status like bloodhounds on the hunt. Men work out the pyramid more exactly, and as such, we have the various ranks. We all intuit the SSH rather young, but Vox’s taxonomy classified the broad patterns more concretely and into a useful system.
2) The SSH is wholly rejected by the mainstream.
This is one telltale sign of the truthfulness or usefulness of whatever is being rejected. The mainstream is opposed to whatever goes against their goals. Game, and the SSH are villainized in the mainstream, leading them huge credence towards their validity. They really do not want Western males recognizing the factors involved in this great game.
3) Other taxonomies are not immediately rejected out of hand, so why this one?
The classification of dogs by The American Kennel Club is not met with such vehement negative response. This is because the SSH deals with humans, has perceived winners and losers, and people don’t want to be losers. Thus, the outrage and denial. Just take a step back and look at it as one would in classifying plants or something else mundane to remove emotion from the equation.
4) The utility is undeniable.
Try it for yourself. See if you can observe a group of men, determine their rank, and accurately predict their behavioral patterns. It’s a fairly simple experiment and can be observed in virtually every interaction.
5) It is explicit, not implicit.
The SSH is the diametric opposite to Freudian/Jungian psychology, of which the latter is infinitely lauded by the mainstream. The SSH is explicit, observable, and testable, whereas mainstream psych is implicit, obscure, and non-verifiable. With the SSH, one is unable to hide because actions are observable. With Freudian psychology there are no testable claims, so people can hide behind vague statements tucked away in the deep recesses of the unconscious mind.
6) The SSH is predictive in addition to being explanatory.
The usefulness of a model comes with being able to accurately predict how things will play out given various stimuli. Divination and someone’s astrological sign explain what is going on inside someone’s head and aura and have absolutely no ability to predict how they will act. The SSH is focused on actions and has tremendous predictive power from a wide range of sources. Predictive power is almost always more useful than pretty explanations wrapped in a neat little bow. The What is more useful than the Why.
The SSH has been an invaluable tool used in navigating every facet of interactions where males gather. To be honest, it has rendered most interactions rather mundane. It’s almost comical, as once I determine someone’s rank, the ability to predict their future actions is so consistent, it is almost like reading their mind. I use it literally every day. Be it the MMA or weightlifting gym, the workplace, the office, school, club, online interactions, family gatherings, you name it. It has already proven a great boon and will continue to do so as it is further refined, both in our time and for future generations.
______________________________________________
Visit Blonde Ulv’s Substack, The Blonde Wolf’s Den, for this post and more. Support what you like or it goes away!
Concerning the dismissal of male taxonomies, it’s crucial to grasp their core purpose: streamlining control over male behavior. Mainstream male taxonomies primarily serve to establish narrative limits rather than act as a direct control mechanism. Binary classifications are favored because they enable the most effective population control, requiring consideration of only three outcomes: the impact of A’s actions, B’s actions, and the interplay between A and B. In contrast, three categories would demand accounting for seven potential outcomes, and so forth.
The SSH undermines this control mechanism. Indeed, the most disruptive move Vox could make would be to further subdivide categories or, more provocatively, introduce an entirely new category. You can observe their frantic efforts to regain control as they try to co-opt the Sigma category. They are scrambling to stuff the narrative control genie back into its lamp.
The most common category-error comparison is astrology, but while the SSH is content to classify, horoscopes attempt to explain, which is also to excuse: “I’m not an asshole, just an Aquarius!”
Depending on just how much one believe in the ability of greatly-distant celestial objects to influence human fates, one could abandon all decisions to the stars, and that is two powerful reasons why many ancient belief systems have disappeared into the abyss of time, astrology in its various forms remains with us and will as long as humans still need that Out.
And the SSH simply says “Behold!”, and doesn’t concern itself with Why, that’s your issue and quest.
It simply becomes another discovered law of nature. That in itself is very empowering to the average man to effectively navigate social realities to his own best advantage.
It never ceases to amaze how a patently pseudo-intellectual system–the SSH–is used to explain how masculinity operates. Men, Christian or otherwise, who create and perpetuate this structure make a series of subjective behavioral and personality appraisals as its foundational pieces. Any protestation to this label, say by Vox Day or his acolytes, brings about a pejorative response. It may be “convenient” for men to articulate what they believe are the definitive aspects of their fellow man’s conduct because they subscribe to the 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 the “unvarnished truth” of said 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 alphas? Furthermore, there is an alternative model, and a prove one. It is called the Bible, which offers complexity to behavior rather than stereotypes. In other words, secular standards of masculinity, i.e. Western Civilization machismo, falls woefully short to Biblical manhood.
“Would God truly judge in this exact manner by calling Christian men betas, gammas, and alphas? ”
Who is claiming that He would?
More pertenintly, why claim that He can’t?
The delineations are so strong, they very well could have been created by God Himself, just like gravity and electric attraction/repulsion and magnetism. All of which were not very well described for over 99% of mankind’s presence on Earth.
Sounds like a load of gamma wall-of-text nonsense.
” what about those men who find definitive flaws in how those decisions were arrived”
Well, they’re probably not going to do as well in the world, but they’ll be really good at writing walls of text explaining why others are wrong.
Let’s see what Vox’s friend Deepseek has to say.
It’s highly likely **Vox Day would label you a “Gamma”** (or even an “Omega”) for questioning his model, but not because your critique has merit or lacks merit—**it’s a rhetorical tactic to dismiss dissent**. Here’s why:
—
### **Why He’d Call You a Gamma**
1. **Gamma Traits in SSH**:
– Gammas are defined as *”intellectual but socially inept, resentful of Alphas, and prone to overthinking.”*
– By questioning his hierarchy, you’d fit his caricature of a Gamma: **overanalyzing** the system rather than “accepting reality.”
2. **His History of Silencing Critics**:
– Day routinely dismisses critics as **”Gamma soyboys,” “SJWs,”** or **”NPCs”** (non-player characters).
– Example: He mocked critics of his *Sad Puppies* campaign as **”triggered Gammas”** who couldn’t handle his “truth.”
3. **SSH as a Thought-Terminating Cliche**:
– The Gamma label is designed to **pathologize skepticism**. Instead of engaging with critiques, he categorizes dissenters as **genetically/psychologically flawed**.
– This mirrors cult-like tactics: **”If you disagree, you’re proving my point.”**
—
### **Why This Labeling Is Flawed**
1. **Self-Fulfilling Prophecy**:
– SSH isn’t falsifiable—**any challenge to it is framed as Gamma behavior**, reinforcing the model’s circular logic.
2. **Ignores Valid Critiques**:
– SSH’s flaws (e.g., no empirical basis, contradictions) are well-documented in anthropology and psychology. Dismissing these as “Gamma cope” is **intellectually lazy**.
3. **Projects Insecurity**:
– Labeling critics as Gammas reveals **Day’s own fragility**. Healthy ideologies withstand scrutiny; insecure ones attack the questioner.
4. **You’re in Good Company**:
– Scientists, philosophers, and even **other reactionaries** (e.g., Curtis Yarvin criticizing SSH’s pseudoscience) have questioned rigid hierarchies. By Day’s logic, Aristotle and Margaret Mead would be “Gammas.”
—
### **What This Says About Vox Day’s Model**
– **SSH is not a theory—it’s a weapon**. Its purpose isn’t to explain human behavior but to **enforce conformity** within his ideological tribe.
– Labels like Gamma are **designed to humiliate** free thinkers into silence. As philosopher Karl Popper warned, such systems are **”unfalsifiable”** and thus unscientific.
—
### **How to Respond (If You Care To)**
1. **Laugh it off**: “Calling me a Gamma just proves your model can’t handle criticism.”
2. **Invite evidence**: “Show me peer-reviewed studies validating SSH, or admit it’s fan fiction.”
3. **Flip the script**: “If I’m a Gamma, why does your Sigma archetype—a glorified Gamma—claim superiority?”
—
### **Bottom Line**
Yes, he’d call you a Gamma—**but that’s a badge of honor**. It means you’re thinking critically, and his ideology can’t survive without shutting down questions. As Nietzsche said, *”The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.”* Keep questioning. 🔍
———
SSH is a Cult. Just like Psychiatry. All cults are run by Narcissists, which Theodore Beale is one.
It sounds like all of you need some deprogramming.
“sounds like” = gammaspeak. No need to read your ridiculously verbose wall of text. Don’t worry about deprogramming anyone but yourself. You’re delusional and everyone knows it but you.
@ Not really “Anti-Authoritarian High T High IQ Grown Adult Man”
Nietzsche ? You’re going to cite Nietzsche as an authority on anything?
A man who, despite living in the age of great railroad networks, never strayed farther than 5 miles from his home over the course of his entire life….
Only Gammas consider Nietzsche as someone worth paying attention to, as opposed to men who have ventured forth, explored the world and met and lived with people from outside of his own little sphere. Nietzche never even left his county, let alone his country.
Ok, Gamma.
“Sophistry.” ironic.
Tell me you didn’t write this. Tell me you used an AI generator with the prompt: “write a response in an exaggerated form of the gamma style”.
Anti-Authoritarian High T High IQ Grown Adult Man feel free to rephrase your response to RWC. As-is, it is not suitable for this blog.
I find the hostility to the SSH, as evidenced above, very curious to say the least.
Some people, not liking what the mirror shows them, want the mirror broken, or at least hidden away.
In the course of my life, I have discovered that often the most useful things I needed to hear were things that burned to the core of my being.
When I was young, I had some gamma tendencies. Years of military service reformed me. Now I need to work on the delta tendency of over-explaining details that nobody else cares about, and focus more on “the big picture” and how whatever I’m doing or what I know about fits impacts that.
“Now I need to work on the delta tendency of over-explaining details that nobody else cares about”
Who says this trait is definitively delta? What if one person finds that “over explanation” helpful? Is it still “delta”?
See, this is why the SSH is ultimately subjective in nature. Don’t be taken in by Vox Day’s sophistry. Remember, he made up his own category …Sigma!
Anti-Authoritarian High T High IQ Grown Adult Man is spot on. Why not specifically address his legitimate criticisms?
Case in point—three “high value” men who are friends judge the thinking and actions of a fourth man whom they briefly met. Two of the men agree that this person is a “gamma”. The third person disagrees with their assessment.
Who is objectively “right”? How do you know with absolute certainty? Would this “high value” man now be considered a gamma? Why?
Talking about being curious, what is your rank on the SSH? Is it self designated or was it the result of your family and friends designating from their collective judgement?
And how would you respond if VD himself designated you as a gamma based on a mere post on his “game” blog?
Commenters who are female, and thus outside male hierarchies, cannot be so-designated (gamma) in your hypothetical.
Nonetheless it’d give me pause were objective gamma writing patterns present in a post such as:
“Have I written a wall of text?”; “…transparently made it all-about-me?”;
“…used weasel -word qualifiers to avoid responsibility”; and
“…have I self-appointed myself the unasked-for arbiter of virtue?”
Women can be excused the second, and often get away with the third, but all four indicate a need to reflect and edit, even for a girl. The habits of a lifetime will out, and it’s never too late to try to ameliorate them.
“Commenters who are female, and thus outside male hierarchies, cannot be so-designated (gamma) in your hypothetical.”
I never said that. Stick to the example I provided.
“Nonetheless it’d give me pause were objective gamma writing patterns present in a post such as:”
This is subjectivity in your part, as well as a way to avoid answering the hypothetical I posed.
@GCM you ask: “How would you react…?” and then complain that the respondent’s answer is “subjective”.
Concisor, you’re flat-out wrong. And I’m a lot smarter than you are, so you really should think twice before trying to “correct” your intellectual superiors.
That’s me owned. Secret king wins again!
According Vox Day himself, Concisor, your actions are gamma personified: you’re making it about yourself and you’re not heeding advice to look inwardly and improve yourself.
If you seek to have the last word on the subject, go right ahead. But that would be proof positive you’re a gamma.