Post: #1

A lot has been written about so-called female hypergamy, but not about male equivalent of the same. I'm curious to hear your thoughts on it.

Is the male hypergamy a real thing, and if so is it fundamentally different from the female one?

I for one freely admit that, hypothetically speaking, if I had a chance to trade any *regular* current girlfriend/wife for Natalie Portman, or Britney Spears, or a 40-year-old wife for a 25-year-old one, I would do it in a Hollywood minute. The only uncertainty is whether I would be be bad enough to leave them even while they are pregnant with my child. I would like to think that I would draw the line there.

Now, the only question is whether I'm hardwired this way, or is this cultural// monkey do what monkey sees kinda thing?


Here are some more public examples of male hypergamy in action:


Donnie Wahlberg and Ronan Marley upgraded their aging wives for younger models.

Marley and his new squeeze.


Tiki Barber exchanged his pregnant-with-twins wife of dozen years for a 23-y.o. blonde intern.

Tiki consequently knocked up his new item.


Tom Brady ditched pregnant Bridget Moynahan for the ubersupermodel Gisele Bundsen.

Kevin Federline fled his six-month pregnant girlfriend for Britney Spears.

Billy Crudup replaced his seven-month pregnant wife Marie-Louise Parker with a 15-years-younger and more famous Claire Danes.



Dean McDermott dumped his wife for Tori $pelling.

Most infamously, Brad Pitt traded Jennifer Anniston for Angelina Jolie.

Johnny Depp switched from a 40-year-old long-time partner to a new 27-year-old flame.

Benjamin Millepied instantly departed his cool girlfriend for Natalie Portman.

Post: #2

Just because they left, that doesn't mean they are upgrading, ala being in a hypergamous state.

A males natural state is polygamy, so he'd keep something valuable in tow.

There could be the reason that the prevailing female is an utter cunt, and he left.

Thinking about it.. western female, utter cunt.. it's not implausible.

Post: #3

Let's take a quick look at the case of Benjamin Millepied. He is a Frenchman dancer who was living and working in New York for many years. Just a short while ago he was basking in a successful professional arts career in a ruthlessly competitive biz and enjoying fruitful relationship with a fellow pro dancer/ballerina Isabella. By all objective parameters he was pretty much on top of the world.

Isabella and Benjamin in happier times.


And yet even that isn't enough.

Next thing you know, as a choreography consultant Benjamin meets Natalie Portman in the course of Black Swan film production, and drops Isabella like a hot potato. He not only hooks up with a famous actress, he has a child with her, and is about to convert to Judaism (Natalie is big on that.) In other words, Benjamin engages in all tell-tale actions of a hypergamous female slut.

Here's more on his relationship with his ex:

"Although Natalie Portman, 29, is "indescribably happy” about her engagement to 33-year-old French dancer Benjamin Millepied, the one person who is heartbroken is his former longtime, live-in girlfriend, dancer Isabella Boylston. Just a year ago, Isabella and Benjamin were traveling the world together and in love.Benjamin and Isabella had an apartment in NYC’s East Village. In August of 2009, the couple and a group of friends vacationed in Martha’s Vineyard together. A September interview with Benjamin in The New York Observer noted that he had also recently taken Isabella on vacation in the Caribbean.

“He had his head sets on at the beach the whole time,” Isabella said in the piece. In October of 2009, Isabella joined Benjamin in his hometown of France where the two went sightseeing around Paris together and visited famous Parisian landmarks, Monte Marte and Moulin Rouge. Benjamin was happily posting pictures the happy couple took of each other each day on his Facebook to document the travels. Benjamin proudly accompanied Isabella to the Princess Grace Awards where she was awarded the prestigious dance prize. Benjamin adoringly snapped pictures of his girlfriend at the ceremony.

“I feel like I’m heading in the right direction,” Isabella told Pointe magazine at the time. In November of 2009, Benjamin posted what could possibly be the last picture of the happy couple. It was a Polaroid picture of Isabella and Benjamin smiling together. Just a week later, Benjamin began work as a choreographer and actor in The Black Swan, where he met Natalie and started a relationship with the star."

Post: #4

You should distinguish between the trade-in and the upgrade. Hypergamy usually refers to the upgrade.

The upgrade involves going from a lower status mate to a higher status mate, while the trade-in involves getting a younger mate who's similar to the previous one. To continue the car analogy, an upgrade means going from a Cadillac to a Maybach, while a trade-in is replacing your old BMW with a new BMW (or other similar car). Women typically upgrade, and men typically trade in.

Some of your examples involved trade-ins (Depp, Crudup, Barber), others were upgrades (Brady, K-Fed, Millepeid).

As for the morality aspect of it, why would you do something for someone who wouldn't do the same for you? I understand that leaving a girl while pregnant is a different case, but you mentioned Pitt leaving Aniston to go with Jolie and Benjamin Millepied leaving his ballerina to be with Natalie Portman. But do you think that the ballerina would have stayed if Vincent Cassel came calling before Millepied ran off with Portman?

Post: #5

Haha, what about these new broads he's trading in with? So much for female camaraderie when stud dick is on the line.

Post: #6

^ Exactly, it's just what is known as the 'younger model', which obviously originated as a play on words back in the 70s or something.

Post: #7

Interesting discussion. I do think that some guys are just as willing to trade in for a new model as some women are willing to trade up.

I mean if I could afford it, I'd get rid of my wife in a heartbeat.

Post: #8

Yeah my dad did the same thing. Would marry, have a kid, then look for the next wife who could make money.

Post: #9

There's no such thing as male hypergamy. We go for the hottest girls and that's a given. Modern hypergamy is women acting like men and being aggressive. Think about bitches like snooki. Her dad probably put her on a pedastal.

If you are a father, don't put your daughter on a pedastal. You are condemning her to a life life of cats.

Post: #10

Men are not hypergamous, because they are polygamous. When a man seees a newer hotter woman then the one he already has, he tries to add this new woman to his harem, as a mistress in monogamous scieties or as another wife in polygamous societies. He doesn't feel the need to sewer the relationship with the previous woman especially if she is a mother of his children.

The social norms of too strict monogamy hurt men and their previous women by forcing men to leave one woman for another. Therefore men might act as if they are hypergamous, but they are not.

In contrast, if a woman develops feelings for another man, she starts feeling disgust with her current man, because she must be sure that the best sperm impregnates her. A woman will leave her previous man with cruelty and ruthlessness, robbing all the resources she can and adding them to the resources of the new man.

A man can actually love multiple women, while in a womens heart (womb) there is place for only one man. She can manipulate multiple men, but love only one. Therefore men are polygamos, but women are hypergamous.

Post: #11

(01-31-2014 04:58 PM)Bacchus Wrote:  You should distinguish between the trade-in and the upgrade. Hypergamy usually refers to the upgrade.

The upgrade involves going from a lower status mate to a higher status mate, while the trade-in involves getting a younger mate who's similar to the previous one. To continue the car analogy, an upgrade means going from a Cadillac to a Maybach, while a trade-in is replacing your old BMW with a new BMW (or other similar car). Women typically upgrade, and men typically trade in.

Some of your examples involved trade-ins (Depp, Crudup, Barber), others were upgrades (Brady, K-Fed, Millepeid).

Getting a younger mate is not just any plain trade, but complete upgrade. There are no trade-in similarities between 40-something with rough leather, saggy tits, bum knees, stretch marks, and huge child-birth vagina and a 20-something with no kids, unblemished skin, perky tits and tight ass. Their differences are enormous both practically and symbolically. Hence, much younger girlfriends and wives are normally referred to as 'trophies' which aptly suggest how they are considered in social circles/hierarchy.

Bacchus Wrote:But do you think that the ballerina would have stayed if Vincent Cassel came calling before Millepied ran off with Portman?

Obvious, but then where do we men draw the line? I'm afraid there's no line. if we 'act like them' then = 'we are them'. That's the whole point of the post.

(02-01-2014 04:22 AM)Mage Wrote:  Men are not hypergamous, because they are polygamous. When a man seees a newer hotter woman then the one he already has, he tries to add this new woman to his harem, as a mistress in monogamous scieties or as another wife in polygamous societies. He doesn't feel the need to sewer the relationship with the previous woman especially if she is a mother of his children.

The social norms of too strict monogamy hurt men and their previous women by forcing men to leave one woman for another. Therefore men might act as if they are hypergamous, but they are not.

In contrast, if a woman develops feelings for another man, she starts feeling disgust with her current man, because she must be sure that the best sperm impregnates her. A woman will leave her previous man with cruelty and ruthlessness, robbing all the resources she can and adding them to the resources of the new man.

A man can actually love multiple women, while in a womens heart (womb) there is place for only one man. She can manipulate multiple men, but love only one. Therefore men are polygamos, but women are hypergamous.

This is excellent! You are basically saying that some men may only seem hypergamous when they are upgrading, when in fact they are only choosing limited (obvious) choices in the larger context of a severely restricted playing field (monogamous society). In other words, men's hardwired polygamous instincts are forced to be subdued under the oppressive cultural conditions. If it was otherwise you are saying that men of this world would gladly accommodate multiple women as lovers/mothers of their children. And perhaps equally so, there would be no radical difference between the wives, all would be just about equally welcome under the sheikh's tent.

I don't think there's much that can be added here as you've pretty much hammered the proverbial nail on its head.

However I'm now interested in the realities of that severely restricted limited playing field (monogamous society). And the choices made there.

In The Curious Case of Benjamin Millepied he is going so far as to change his religion to suit some famous piece of ass. How's that different from Marilyn Monroe converting to Judaism when she married Arthur Miller? Changing religions to suit their husbands is totally female thing. And Benjamin is doing this even after he ensured permanent connection with Natalie (already had a child with her.) Of course, "being in love" as a reason to change his religion could be just a pretext as I'm sure he's doing this in order to further his artsy career. But, again, that's what women do.

In the context of severely restricted monogamous society it seems to me that men behave no differently then women when presented with enticing stimuli/options. That may be not our hardwired nature, but that is small consolation when everything else we do is the same as what women would do. This is obfuscated by the fact that vast majority of men (being betas and omegas) are in no position to act on their natural instincts. So when these (majority) men do change partners they trade them for the same type (plain Jane for another plain Jane), or worse. Which is then mythologized as men's virtue/exceptional characteristic (itself borne out of lack of options.) The minute any man has any significantly better option he's out of there getting that better option just like any other hypergamous slut.

Again, this is not exactly how we roll naturally, but for all practical purposes this is how we are forced to roll culturally.

Post: #12

Other than what Mage said (men often just cheat rather than jump ship), it needs to be said that I don't believe that men are inherently more moral or more cautious about their hypergamy, but they certainly have less opportunity for it. This renders the word "hypergamy" meaningless for them.
How many 40-50 year old men do you know how have the attractiveness and ability to pull a hot 25 year old woman? What about even a 40 year old woman? Again, not many. It has never been easy for a vast majority of them. However, a woman has spent her whole life living in the land of opportunities, and she is used to it. It's natural that she will be able to jump the ship if she wants, whereas a man might remain stuck. Being "hypergamous" is the province of almost all women, but only a tiny minority of men.

Women have always engaged in hypergamy a bit more (30%?) than men simply because of their inherent greater ability to do so. But the current large disparity (100%?) is just due to the lack of consequences. You must not forget that hypergamy is inherently risky too, and many women nowadays would choose not to do it if they lived in a normal land where they were subject to consequences rather than showered with child support, alimony, parental custody and society's approval. I don't think there are any other factors at work. If men had the same opportunities and were similarly shielded from consequences, they'd be doing it at similar rates.

Post: #13

Don't read too much into the concept of "hypergamy." It's an interesting model and theory but it's mostly just turned into a word that means the female sexual strategy.

Hypergamy basically means women desire the highest-status, most dominant male they can get pregnant by, whoever that high-status male happens to be at the time, and generally feel no desire at all for non-dominant males. In other words hypergamous is satisified by only one a time, but always the best. So the focus of her desires can change easily if her perception of the status of the men around her change. My main issue with the model is that women, especially young ones, repeatedly demonstrate capacity to "spin plates" and fuck multiple men simultaneously, so long as all of the men are sufficiently high-status. Apart from that, it's a pretty reasonable theory.

It's not as useful to describe male sexuality in those terms. Men aren't so driven by female status. Sexually, they're driven by physical attributes, appearance, and novelty. Men want hot pussy and they want new pussy. When it comes to wives and girlfriends, men are (in theory) able to be more rational and select based on specific attributes that matter to them, like status, kindness, nurturing instinct, domestic sensibility, cleanliness, and so on.

So basically, while sexual drive is easy to predict(hotness + novelty), possibile motivations for dumping or divorcing a wife are endless.

Post: #14

Males and females exercise sexual selection, question is what drives their sexual selection. How many men with lots of options, OP's list, ever dumped their current Mrs for a woman with higher statusl!!

The answer is close to zero, they select on the basis of fertility triggers or what might be called hate-biology. They go younger, slimmer curvier etc etc. How great must your life be to be able to dump an attractive woman, now pregnant, for a better looker with little negative consequence? No doubt millions of women who'll never get alpha (in all its various manifestations) sperm outside of a sperm bank, will hate on them but these guys can get virtually whatever the fck they want, and any bird who got a shot is gonna be all loving forgiveness when their alpha past is shone upon their aching genetic lineage tunnel.

Alpha spills the beans, "things wernt working out" lol!!!!! An alpha-like male gets to spout what sounds like rationalizing female beta rejection. In being able to reject attractive women with beta rejection language he draws attention to his higher status. When a man has the capacity to lie, and unashamedly not apologize, without pussy consequence, he has hit the fucking evolutionary jackpot. His contented smile reinforces his selection value and omegas weep millions of internet tears.

And cunts like that make me want to leave the room! Hahahaha omega doom part 1

Apologies for shite grammar, I'd love to blame my uber lefty english teacher Eddie Eyeball, but I've had twenty years to write better can't blame it all on that simple cunt. I'm also drunk, and I love this forum.