One of the biggest paradigm shifts in the past decades happened relatively unnoticed by most people, first-world societies have largely shifted from a masculine model of value to it’s feminine counterpart.
Understanding the dynamics behind such value models is the key towards gaining better insight into the various dysfunctional ideologies, paradigms and behaviours that we see in soceity today. It will also allow you to better understand how your Blue Pill acquaintances think, which will give you an advantage in social interaction.
So what is Masculine and Feminine value? They are basically two very different paradigms by which people evaluate things to make a value judgement. Each model of value approaches it’s accounting of value in a different way, and this consequently affects the way people react and assign value judgements.
The masculine value model is extrinsic- value is something that is found based on how well sometime proves itself to be valuable. Masculine value models require proving and meeting outcomes in order to be qualified as valuable. This is the value-system that has most traditionally be associated with men, for men are not considered men until they have proven themselves in one way or another to be useful to the tribe.
The Feminine value model on the other hand, is intrinsic. Value is assumed to be intrinsic to the subject with no, or only minimal proof required. Feminine value does not need to be worked for or proven, given by nature in the same way a female is automatically considered valuable on basis of what biology has given her. Unlike a man, a woman does not need to go through any rite of passage or journey of strife to prove herself a woman- she only needs to go through puberty, a process that is entirely out of her control and bestowed upon her by nature.
Hence the saying “women are born but men are made”. Women already have value the day they are born, men need to strive in order to be recognised as such.
This also leads to different ways in which people who adopt either value paradigms behave. In the masculine value model, a man has to constantly prove his worth in order to be considered valuable, his journey is a constant one of strife.
A woman does not have the pressure of constant proof as her value is intrinsic, but her real pressure comes from defending this intrinsic value against the ravages of time as she ages. A woman’s real fear comes from realising that her value, while given to her by nature without any work, is also depreciated and taken away by it.
How does this have wider implications for soceity?
Generally civillisation starts with a masculine value model as the dominant model of value judgment. When resources are scarce and there is a pressing need to survive and build, tangible milestones and outcomes most relevant to these are prioritised. There is no assumption of the intrinsic value of any behaviour, idea or person unless they have proven themselves useful in some way. A soceity in the building phase is highly competitive and masculine in it’s value paradigm.
As things become more affluent and a soceity enters it’s apex phase, the abundance of resources, safety and comfort encourages a shift towards a more feminine paradigm of value. There is less of a pressing need to focus on external existential threats, and paradigms shift to be more navel-gazing.
In such an environment, empirical proof of tangible value becomes less important and more esoteric, subjective value models that do not require proving become more attractive, especially if they offer a means for people to acquire value and it’s associated benefits without much work or competition. The population starts to shift towards more feminine intrinsic value models. In such an environment you see ideas like human rights, equality, feminism start to take root.
Yes, all this folds quite well into r/K selection theory- the masculine value model is K-selected while the feminine value model is r-selected.
A soceity that is shifting towards the feminine in it’s value judgement of things will start to view everything as possessing intrinsic value, with no need to prove or achieve anything in order to be qualified as valuable.
This gives rise to what we see today as snowflake culture where everybody is assumed to be equally special and valuable, with the suggestion that this value needs to be earned an extremely offensive. We also see the rise of equalist notions that all behaviours, cultures, and groups are the same, and consequently, an ever-expanding demand for intrinsic and unalienable “rights”.
Welcome to the land of the rabbit-snowflake-everyone-is-equally-special people.
We can see this happen even right here in Singapore, where the population itself was highly pragmatic during the development phase of the nation, choosing to valuate things based on the tangible outcomes they could provide towards meeting our existential needs. Things like National Service, financial prudence, realist social engineering came from the masculine value judgement system by which Lee Kuan Yew swore by.
As Singapore got more affluent however, the feminine value model started to take over. Many Singaporeans assume they are valuable just for being born here, and we are starting to see the rise of various ideologies that have an intrinsic value judgement model at its core. Cue the rise of the Strawberry Generation.
But reality itself has no consideration for people declaring themselves to be of value just because they said so. Sooner or later real life will come back biting hard and no amount of self-declared value is going to tide them through the day.
An emphasis on the feminine value model is also why soceity as a whole is failing it’s boys- they have forgotten that boys need to be taught how to be men, that their value as men is measured in how well they can travel the masculine journey.
Instead they are denied this hard truth, sold soft soap and lies that they are just valuable the way they are and will find future success in life and love just by being themselves. This usually leads to a descent into confused, frustrated mediocrity for boys when they grow up, having some sense that they are lacking something in their lives but never being able to put their finger on it.
What about the girls? Decades of feminism has been pushing soceity to evaluate women through a feminine model of value as much as possible, assuming intrinsic value in places even when it is not appropriate.
Feminist dogma forces people to believe by necessity that dysfunctional single mothers are as valuable to soceity as functional traditional family unit, that poor female life choices do not affect their value in any way whatsoever.
Feminist push the notion under the feminine value model that if women ever fail, it was due to the fault of others not recognising their value instead of them not being up to scratch. It is always someone else’s fault because their value is assumed, and any mismatch in outcomes comes from external oppressions.
They can afford to run these cons because they can extract the surplus resources, safety and wealth built up from the times when soceity was running the masculine value judgement script to patch over these glaring divides between ideology and reality, the time time is coming soon when they will not be able to do this anymore.
You need to be aware of the value models of people around you. It is highly likely that a person who holds a feminine value model (of which most people are nowadays) will be bad company, because they have lived their entire lives in the fantasy land of assuming that they have value without needing to qualify for it.
These people are likely to be unreasonable, easily offended, lazy, and unhelpful when real work is needed for meeting outcomes. Cut these people out of your life.
As a masculine man, you need to realise that having a feminine model value will only harm you. The masculine journey is defined by finding your value in rising to meet challenges and overcoming them, not assuming you are valuable just for existing and demanding that the world recognise that.