Over the last few days, I've spent a great deal of time explaining the ins and outs of my Gender Role Protection Theory, starting with the actual theory, discussing how it applies to political affiliation, and discussing how it applies to homophobia. In this installment, I'm going to talk about the various facets of this theory and how it applies to men. Seems appropriate for Father's Day, huh?
The goal is to give men a little more insight as to where they may fit within this theory. The very first question we'll explore is which side of the "willingness to engage in violence" horizontal axis do you fall?
Are You Capable of Violence or Not?
Before you answer, it's important to note all of us, assuming we have the physical capability, can be provoked to act violently. History has taught us this with the German population that aided the Holocaust. One of my personal experimental social psychology heroes, Stanley Milgram, also confirmed this idea with his now infamous obedience experiment. The general rule of thumb: You can compel anyone to do pretty much anything if you manipulate the right social and environmental variables.
Now that we have that out of the way, let's answer the question. How do you feel about violence? Ignoring all other information, could you use violence at the drop of a hat with very little provocation? Or are you the type of person that would only use violence as an absolute last resort? People that have the capability to become violent at will do not hesitate to answer this question. There are no qualifiers, there is no discussion. Just an immediate and enthusiastic yes. Those are the folks at the far right side of my graph.
If you did have to pause and consider your answer, you'll likely fall somewhere to the left of those folks. At the extreme left, you'd have people that would rather watch their children get raped and murdered in front of them than resort to violence. Worth noting - that extreme probably does not exist.
Men that are Sheepdogs or Wolves
If you fell somewhere to the right of zero, congratulations! You're violent! Now let's see if you're a Sheepdog or a Wolf. Generally speaking, do you try to help people, or do you try to exploit people? It's okay if you say "it depends"; most of us would answer this question based on specific conditions.
If you absolutely would always help anyone, any time, anywhere and would never exploit anyone for any reason, you're an unequivocal Sheepdog. Your relish the role of virtuous protector, and you do it well. You can sometimes be harsh with the sheep, but it's done to keep them out of harm's way. You know your herd well and are extremely sensitive to and untrusting of outsiders. Sheepdogs also have a willingness to give up their lives to defend the herd. It's important to note that MOST men are sheep, but will assume a Sheepdog role if the situation warrants. One of the eventual goals of my San Diego Man Camp is helping men learn how to mentally, physically, and emotionally prepare to be better Sheepdogs to be able to protect their loved ones if the shit hits the fan.
If you never help anyone else, only think of yourself, and are willing to hurt people to get what you want, you're a Wolf. Given you are not burdened with morality or a conscience, you are the epitome of what we consider "evil." You're a hunter that preys on the weakest of the weak from the herd. The better protected the herd, the more likely you'll avoid it and seek a weaker herd. Wolves also have the willingness to risk their lives to get what they want.
Men that are Sheep or Rats
If your answer landed you somewhere left of "zero", you're either a Sheep or a Rat. I know what you're thinking - "Shit, I don't want to be a sheep OR a rat!" Nobody wants to be a rat because, well, they're creepy scavengers that carry disease and eat the bag of Halloween candy we stored in our garage so our nosey little sister wouldn't find it (yes, my disdain for rats is personal.) But Sheep? Aren't they lovable and cuddly? Indeed, but the Internet age has given birth to the purgative term "sheeple", which is a common retort used when we point out ideas like GMO, chemtrails, or 9/11 conspiracies might, in fact, be insane.
Anyway, if you're nonviolent and prefer to help your fellow human beings, you're a Sheep. You're kind, gentle, and go about your day-to-day routine in as peaceful of a way as possible. You're a bridge-builder that fights for social justice. You help smooth out non-critical problems with nonviolent conflict resolution skills. Your're productive and useful. You are the force that makes our society great. You know there are Wolves out there, but you're confident the Sheepdogs will keep you safe.
If you're nonviolent and capable of being productive but prefer to mooch off others? Congratulations, you're a Rat! You're nonviolent, so you rely on petty crime like shoplifting, drug dealing, or jacking cars to pay the bills. Sometimes you may stoop to something like welfare fraud or identity theft. Other times you may mooch off or manipulate Sheep (i.e. - friends and family), beg for cash outside the Piggly Wiggly (or the more white middle class version of panhandling - GoFundMe.) You're generally despised by the other groups because you're unwilling to contribute your fair share. Society tolerates you because, like real rats, you're really fucking hard to eliminate without tremendous time, effort, and expense.
As I mentioned in the original post explaining the theory, there's an important difference between Sheep that want to be productive but, because of circumstance, cannot currently be productive and the Rat that can be productive but chooses not to.
Nice Guys, White Knights, and Social Justice Warriors, MRA's, and The Red Pill
Over the last few months, I've talked about a slew of different "types" of males. I'll explain how each of these groups fits into the theory.
Let's start with "Nice Guys." If you haven't read it, take a look at this post. It's one of my best. "Nice Guys" are Wolves in Sheep's clothing. They hide among the other sheep that are genuinely decent men. They're not interested in robbing or killing their victims; they're interested in fucking their victims. They mold their persona to match whatever their female target is looking for in a man. Unlike wolves that have no need for emotional attachments, "Nice Guys" require female validation and will do anything to get it. Their most common strategy is to give with the expectation of getting their needs me in return.
White Knights are the men that will defend women without being asked. In many cases, the "saving behaviors" are unwanted and intrusive. The White Knight will usually be "saving" the woman from guys HE deems as unfit for her. The goal is t hopefully impress the woman enough so she'll have sex with him. White Knights are Sheep through and through, but they've learned to bark like the Sheepdogs. They can usually be identified by extreme peacocking because they rely on people fearing their threats. If they do get themselves into an actual physical confrontation, they'll back down immediately, thus revealing their true Sheep persona.
Social Justice Warriors (SJW's) appear a bit like White Knights. They're continually defending people, but not just women. They'll defend any minority or oppressed group. Unlike White Knights, SJW's usually have virtuous goals of expanding society to make it better for all of us. The problem with SJW's is their opposition to the Sheepdogs. SJW's believe the world is a fundamentally safe place and believe the Sheepdogs do more harm than good. The problem, of course, is that SJW's have a really difficult time telling the difference between sheep from other herds and the Wolves that are dressed like them.
Men's Rights Activists (MRA's) are an interesting group I don't discuss much here. This is a group of men made up of Sheepdogs and Sheep that recognize the other Sheep do not like the Sheepdogs and will always try to either convert them to Sheep or ship them off somewhere else (like prison?) The MRA's like to blame the other sheep (especially the eweist sheep.) MRA's fail to see that the ebb and flow of safety and danger is what's responsible for the waxing and waning of "men's rights", not a concerted conspiracy carried out by a particular group or movement. They do serve a useful purpose though. They act as a bit of a buffer to between the Sheepdogs and the Sheep that want to get rid of them. SJW's and MRA's, for what it's worth, engage in some bitter but amusing debates.
The Red Pill folks are another group I've mentioned, but haven't really discussed all that much. They're essentially a group of mostly men (there are a few women that are part of the movement) that sort of do the same thing as the MRA's, but with a different focus. At the heart of it, they're men that have realized masculinity is vilified in times of peace and security and attempt to learn, discuss, and share the new rules of the game. TRP folks could occupy any of the four quadrants, so they could be Sheepdogs, Wolves, Sheep, or Rats. I personally I found their insight to evolutionary psychology-based gender and relationship dynamics to be spot-on (this coming from a dude that's studied sex and gender for about two decades.) Following their long-term relationship advice will result in a happier, healthier relationship than following pop psychology relationship advice. However, a lot of their writings are littered with anti-Feminist dogma (some valid, some not so valid) which scares away a lot of the Sheep that could use their message. Many sheep perceive them as wolves, but I've found that's probably the least-represented animal group in their community.
Well men, this post should give you a little more insight to where exactly you fit in this theory. Remember, your position is fluid (it can change over time and with new experiences) and situational (you may be in different quadrants based on what's happening around you.) More importantly, you have the power to learn the roles (hopefully you're a Sheep interested in becoming a Sheepdog... we already have too many Wolves and Rats.)
How would you identify yourself? Leave a comment!