The Four Manospherian Archetypes

This post outlines four different Archetypes of men, and includes the authors own experiences of each.

Targeted Readership: All

First off, a heads up to one of the newest bloggers in the Manosphere (besides myself) and maybe one of the youngest too, Gunner Q. This guy has a perspective that is somewhat different from most of the mainstream Manospherian views (as diverse as we might be anyway). But after reading many of his posts, I have concluded that he is digging at the hardcore bedrock of Truth, and that is the fundamental, characteristic element of Red Pill awareness, as well as true Christianity.

At present, I am presuming that the uniqueness of Gunner’s perspective is mostly due to generational differences. The grand majority of the Manosphere’s greatest megaphones are X’ers, and I will guess that Gunner is a late Millennial, or an early iGen/Zyklon. Anyhow, it’s young guys like him that will pass the torch of the RP Truth into the future when the original smack daddies start drooling their applesauce.

[Eds. note: I was mistaken! Gunner Q is an X’er! See his comment below.]

The Four Quadrants of the Manosphere

Gunner Q’s original post, The Manosphere’s Greatest Divide (December 20, 2017), typecasted two types of western men: Mr. Success and Mr. Frivorced. Deep Strength augmented Gunner’s observations in a post delineating his own interpretation, found on his site, Christianity and Masculinity, and titled, The Great Divide (January 4, 2017). Both posts discuss and typecast different kinds of men who frequent the Manosphere. Gunner and DS described the following four types roughly according to their SMV rating and their progress or efficacy. As quoted from DS,

  1. 8-10’s — Mr. Successes that get all of the attention when single and have wives that adore them
  2. 5-7’s — Frivorced or struggling and still married but don’t know how to long term relationship
  3. 4-6’s — the average clueless guy who sometimes get dates and relationships but can’t sustain a long term relationship
  4. 1-3’s — the Incels that are unwanted and ignored

Here, I want to further expand this typology by pointing out that a man’s SMV/MMV rating is not always a fair indicator of his sexual efficacy or his progress in his life, and a man’s SMV/MMV can change for the better over time. A man’s SMV/MMV is a lot more fluid and elastic, especially when compared to a woman’s SMV/MMV, which, for 90+% of all women, only goes down over time.

The Fluidity of a Man’s Experiences

Deep Strength self-identified as ‘your average single clueless guy’. I’m going to take that as a facetious jab at modesty, because I don’t see how any major Manospherian kingpin could ever be considered ‘clueless’.

Personally, I think I could identify with all four types at different phases of my life. I’ll tell my readers a little bit about that. When I was younger, say 15-25, I was tall and handsome (i.e. supposedly high SMV?), but as a Christian, I wasn’t dating to the point of getting laid, so ladies always passed me over for the other guys who would dribble their @ss*s in a game of Big Balls (yes, even ‘Christian’ <ahem> ‘ladies’). I was essentially unwanted and ignored, in spite of my attractiveness, and I was very angry about that. I was not aware of game, hypergamy or the 80/20 rule, which remained a feminine ‘secret’, and was unheard of back then, so I fit the ‘clueless guy’ description as well. Furthermore, since I had made up my mind to marry by the age of 24 (yes, sooo idealistic – I finally married at 33), I was in this predicament for much longer than I preferred. So I feel like I can also identify with the Incel crowd.

Fast forward a few years of being confused about why my ex targeted me with vicious venom, and losing a lot of sh*t tests out of ignorance. I found myself in the second category, Mr. Frivorced, with all the shameful rites of passage. I was still rather clueless about the feminine imperative and women’s nature, but well aware of the feminine machinations. But after being divorced in mid-life, I was thrust into the current SMP. Since I was at my peak SMV at the time, I quickly discovered that I was highly demanded by many hot, salacious females. So I ‘enjoyed’ being Mr. Success for a time, being pursued by females of relatively higher quality, and in greater quantity, which fortunately gave me a lot of choices in the way of a wife. I capitalized on my opportunity, and so now, I am happily married.

The Four Archetypes

Based on Gunner’s and Deep Strength’s original types and their important distinctions, I think it might be advantageously pragmatic, not to typecast men according to their present state SMV, or their dynamic socio-sexual efficacy, but rather by the challenges they face in their present condition. To this end, I here introduce an empirical system of archetypes as follows.

  1. Master (corresponds to Gunner’s, Mr. Success, and DS’s type 1) Getting a woman is not a problem, but getting satisfaction comes to the forefront of their attention.
  2. Hardcore (corresponds to Gunner’s, Mr. Frivorced, and DS’s type 2) Getting control of one’s life is the primary focus.
  3. Novice (corresponds to DS’s type 3) Learning and developing himself to become a better man, and/or to determine which life path to take.
  4. Vanguard (corresponds to DS’s type 4) Men who choose an alternate or unconventional life path, e.g. Incel’s, MGTOW’s.
  5. Qualified – Men who renounce Blue Pill, but who face inordinate somatic challenges, such as chronic illnesses, physical disabilities, autism (Asperger’s), and perhaps below normal T levels as well.

[Eds. note: I thought for a long time about a name for the fourth type, Vanguard, because I wanted to find a name that ascribed a sense of honor, dignity and purpose – things that many of these men don’t get from society. Finally, I chose the name, Vanguard, as being a sufficiently rugged and daring descriptor of the Incels and MGTOW pioneers waging the RP war on the frontiers of society.]

[Eds. note: Looking Glass made some excellent comments under DS’s original post, concerning how a man’s health greatly impacts the expression of his masculinity. I don’t want to leave any RP brothers out. So in response, I’ve added a fifth group, Qualified, to recognize those who bravely face these greater challenges, after a similar consideration of the name choice.]

I plan to label my future posts into selected categories of designated readership, and mark my future posts according to which audience it is best suited towards. This will help readers identify posts that are helpful towards building whichever Frame they are presently in, or which they seek to move into. In addition to the four archetypes described, I will add another category for the female readership.

Pink – Women who earnestly pursue RP awareness, respect men, and eschew toxic feminism.

If I find that all of my posts are being marked for the same audience, then I might stop this protocol and just update the description in the About page. But either way, I’ll become more aware of the nature of my site.

Conclusions

By presenting these cases, I am in no way saying that women don’t have any latitude or adjustability to their SMV/MMV. But I haven’t bothered to mention those points here, since they are regular topics of discussion elsewhere in the Manosphere. To be concise, I just want to point out the following.

  • A man’s value is not as dependent on his SMV as it is for women.
  • Men have different experiences in life, compared to other men.
  • A man’s present experience changes slowly over time, often for the better.
  • Men can look for pockets of exceptions having the potential to offer opportunities to get around the stacked system.
  • Men who are in different phases of life, with different experiences, have different goals and mindsets.

I’ve put up a poll to collect some demographic data on these Archetypes. Please select the Archetype that you belong to, and click on ‘Vote’. Thanks for your participation.

Related

About Jack

Jack is a world traveling artist, skilled in trading ideas and information, none of which are considered too holy, too nerdy, nor too profane to hijack and twist into useful fashion. Sigma Frame Mindsets and methods for building and maintaining a masculine Frame
This entry was posted in Identity, Organization and Structure, Self-Concept and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to The Four Manospherian Archetypes

  1. Stephanie says:

    You know, I read both posts… coming from being married to a man who definitely considered himself to be a novice (even though he really did have some natural game and success with women – he just didn’t have that level of pure confidence he has now), and watching him become a “Master” of owning his masculinity and sexual prowess throughout our marriage… I just think that both DS’s post and Gunner’s are missing that piece of the puzzle where the Master WAS a Novice and therefore DOES have some very good information to impart to people. In other words… maybe the gap isn’t as wide as they think.

    Maybe they meant men who were always natural gamers, but I’ve realized most weren’t that at all (and the ones who truly were, they don’t typically get married).

    Anyway… it just sounded like they totally dismissed someone who is at that level of “Master” outright, not understanding that masculine development into adulthood (especially 20’s-30’s red pill awakening) can bring someone to that level, and therefore they’d have worthwhile advice.

    That whole Russian proverb or something that says “If you want to marry a General… marry a (up and coming position),” is true. And there’s something about a man having a wife who is good to him, faithful and admires and respects him (and shows this through having amazing sex with him constantly), that increases his confidence and “Master-sense” of it’s own as well ❤ A few years of that, and a man who didn’t have as much confidence, will find he’s very confident in himself and his ability, and I think that’s how it should be.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Sigma Frame says:

      Stephanie, thanks for your heart-touching comment. I agree that a woman can be a very important influence in a man’s development, but too many women have the consumerish, ‘testing’ mindset, and too few women these days have that mindset of ‘investing’ into the relationship. You’ve definitely earned your husband’s loyalties – the Pink Pill badge of honor!

      Liked by 1 person

      • Stephanie says:

        Thanks Sigma. I just wanted to point out that sometimes the Master’s advice is hard-won 🙂

        And about the loyalty… it is true that being that way earns you a man’s loving loyalty, and for a woman, that is so romantic. I just wrote about that (kind of) this morning!

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Boxer says:

    I’d like to think of myself as a typical vanguard. I’m an INTJ, too. I find these sorts of exercises fun but especially meaningful in that the attempt to pigeonhole someone into a category often motivates him them (paradoxically, perhaps) into breaking out of established channels of thought.

    Stephanie writes:

    That whole Russian proverb or something that says “If you want to marry a General… marry a (up and coming position),” is true. And there’s something about a man having a wife who is good to him, faithful and admires and respects him (and shows this through having amazing sex with him constantly), that increases his confidence and “Master-sense” of it’s own as well ❤ A few years of that, and a man who didn’t have as much confidence, will find he’s very confident in himself and his ability, and I think that’s how it should be.

    It’s refreshing to see old truths retold. Women used to know such stuff. Most of our great grandfathers were mediocre, until some woman came along, and made something out of them. Men are inherently very simple creatures. At her best, our grandmother got what she wanted from grandfather without nagging or making his life a living hell. Often his good ideas originated with her, and she knew how to lead her man to greatness. Such artistry has gone almost completely by the wayside, today; and contemporary women reduce themselves to nagging and fighting, when such stuff is not only counterproductive, but totally unnecessary.

    Boxer

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Gunner Q says:

    In point of fact, I was born in the late 70s. My life experiences have simply been unique, to the point I would describe myself as a Christian mystic if it didn’t make people give me strange looks. It’s pleasing to hear you think me younger because I try to speak for the younger guys. It’s hard to have a voice of your own when you’re starting out.

    BTW, I have a “four archetypes” post of my own planned. It’s unrelated to this and keeps getting delayed because of tweaking. Maybe I’ll wait on it a little longer.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. earlthomas786 says:

    Novice…but here’s the thing I’m finding out: You grow more as a man through sacrifice and dependence on God’s power working through you. The sphere seems to overwhelmingly give the idea that all a man has to do is become more selfish and assert his will on everyone. That’s hit or miss at best. It was no wonder that my short live successes eventually fell apart…but then again nobody ever thinks being selfish and domineering is the reason why.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sigma Frame says:

      You grow more as a man through sacrifice and dependence on God’s power working through you.

      God’s power is what we need to get us back on track. But the knowledge of God’s power is severely underrepresented in the Manosphere, and almost totally absent from society at large. Most people don’t have any idea of what God’s power is, or what it looks like. I hope my blog can help fill this void.

      Like

    • Gunner Q says:

      “The sphere seems to overwhelmingly give the idea that all a man has to do is become more selfish and assert his will on everyone.”

      The selfishness is mostly a counterstrike to the pathological altruism that’s tearing the West apart. Humans are naturally selfish creatures and that’s something to be tapped, not shunned. Why am I a Christian? Because God is real and I don’t want the punishment I deserve… can’t say there’s any nobility in that decision.

      The wish for dominance is because thugging up is the only allowed path to getting sex. (There’s no path at all to marriage.)

      Liked by 1 person

      • earl says:

        I agree about the pathological altruism in the West. However those who are the biggest cheerleaders of it are more of the…’altruism for thee, not for me’ types. They are plenty selfish too. Those in gated communities don’t want refugees in their homes or as neighbors.

        When I speak of sacrifice…I do mean more for those you love.

        ‘The wish for dominance is because thugging up is the only allowed path to getting sex.’

        Women want authority, but they don’t want authority.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s