All in the Family featured the curmudgeonly Archie Bunker. Archie was television’s most famous grouch, blunt, blustering, straightforward and untouched by the PC crowd. He was the archetype of the conservative male. Michael desprately tried to reeducate him, but he persisted in his breviloquence.

Looking back at the last 40 years, we realize: ARCHIE WAS RIGHT!


Thoughts on Sigma

One of the reasons I like reading Vox is because he puts my thoughts into words.  Another reason is that sometimes he puts into words thoughts that I might have had, had I actually taken the time to think about it.  The social-sexual hierarchy is one of those thoughts that I didn't have but after reading about it, makes sense to me.

When you've got a list of categories you want to see where you, and others fit into it.  I saw that going on when he introduced the concept of Sigma.  It seemed like several fellas wanted to paint themselves into that picture.

You almost have to go back to Jr High and High school to come up with a universally recognizable picture of a sigma.  Here's my attempt at a description.  A sigma is the guy that:

Plays sports,
Is in the chess club, or drama, band, etc

Is into typical guy stuff,
Doesn't care who knows that he likes poetry, or classical music etc.

Likes learning,
Hates school/the system.

Loves to read,
Can't be bothered to apply himself.

Is smart,

Will fight black kids
Be friends with the biggest black guy in school
Take out the sister of one of the guys he fought.

Likes having fun, especially when it means taking risks.

Will go to a party at an unpopular kids house because he wants to, even if the rest of the class blows it off.

Will ask out the hottest girl in school
Get turned down,
Show up with another date that turns heads.

When his date is asked where she goes to school, she will say "I'm a sophomore at State", because she is.

He will care deeply
Say it doesn't matter
No one will know which is true.

At 17 his date will get carded at the bar
He will not
She is 21 and the doorman assumes he is too.

The sigma will drink a beer with the stoners, the jocks, the band geeks, the brothers or his first period teacher because that's who he wants to have a beer with.

He will date a dumb girl and the class Valedictorian, on the same night. 

He will not go along to get along.

He will not snitch.

The sigma is a guy who doesn't fit "in" because he isn't exclusively "in" any group, but he isn't excluded because he's basically cool with everybody.  He's the guy that likes what he likes and does what he wants to do.  Girls go along with it.


  1. Susan9:11 AM

    What I have learned over the literally years of reading his blog is to not always accept something you read at first blush. 9 out of 10 times you miss some very important information.

    When I read comment threads at Breitbart and other places, that training he has pounded into my head has actually made me a more aware and thoughtful person. I can spot the ones immediately who don't have good comprehension or they blew through an article and did not see the points that the author was trying to make.

    Milo Yianopoulos articles are a case in point. He is like Vox's cheeky gay alternate personality with hair sometimes. I can see why those two get along.

  2. Anonymous10:37 AM

    I have to admit, that while I need to heavily qualify the following statement by noting that while from time-to-time I have been remarkably successful with women I have had more periods of non-success than success, that, again, just about everything here describes me perfectly.

    I'm always shocked when people *aren't* like this. But I've never understood status-seeking. I suppose that's what makes guys like me "outside" the system, so to speak.

    It's not the best place to be, as desireable as the qualities read. People just don't know what to make of you and I've recently realized that I was accidentally pissing a LOT of people off.

    For example, in law school, I did very well. I finished just a few places out of the top 10% but landed probably one of the 5 best jobs coming out of law school of my class of about 80 new lawyers. In class, I really enjoyed the subject matter and loved engaging with the professors, arguing. I had no trouble pissing off some of them, especially my Criminal Procedure professor.

    It was years later that I found out that there was a LOT of resentment towards me because I didn't care if I was top 10%, didn't care what the profs thought, hung out with "losers" and with "winners", got elected to law review by a wide group of folks without ever lobbying or asking for votes, etc.

    I was shocked to find out how much some of these folks hated me. I just thought I was being a regular guy.

    1. Susan1:47 PM

      IMO, status seekers tend to be more shallow/superficial about "things". They don't really make an effort to plumb the depths as it were. So the fact that you are succeeding with little effort and not caring about what they care about, well that just makes their little hamster wheels turn in fury. Somehow, in ways we do not understand, they perceive mockery of their life choices by the way you live your own life.

      You WERE being a regular guy Jourdan. It is just that regular guys don't fit in with the crowd anymore. That is why it always cracks me up to read at Vox's place, all the comments from the guys who are sick and tired of being treated like they are evil because they are white.

      Then the same guys will mock those of us who remember when being white was not a bad thing to be. Can't have it both ways guys.

    2. Anonymous8:48 AM

      Susan - I think that is exactly right, very well put. There is this huge divide between "superficials" who take the world as is without much questioning and play by its rules without examining them, and the "deeps" who find the whole thing more than a little absurd.

      In that sense, I give thanks to God that I'm not one of them. I'd probably be happier and more content, but, ugh, no thanks.

    3. Susan9:18 AM

      Jourdan, When one goes against one's basic nature, trying to keep up with what the peers think you should be doing, you will not be happier nor will you be content.

      You will always be better off following your own drummer, which sounds attuned to God, rather than man. It is hard to stand strong sometimes against that peer pressure of "things = success". But trust us older folks here, you will do better in the long run by listening to God, then you will listening to man.

      If there is a success out there for you, God knows about it, and most likely it is in His plan for you.

  3. I think its telling of us as a society that we now have to define what kind of a man someone is. There was a time when you said a man was "good" or "bad" and everyone knew what you meant. Companies would look to hire "a family man", because that description told them what they needed to know about his character.

    A man was a man. He was known as smart, or hard working, loyal etc. Sometimes he was called no account. There wasn't a need to have an established social-sexual hierarchy to describe how well he was going to score with the ladies, because he wasn't in competition. They were lucky to get him, because he was a man.

    1. Susan4:14 PM

      Amen. This is why it just cracks me up to see the mocking about how us boomers wish we were back in 1945. Well if those punks would stop to think about it, it was pre-AA, welfare and obnoxious behavior and it was just fine to be white in America.
      Morals, ethics and decency were the theme of the day for the majority of people, and we pretty much all knew our neighbors.
      What on earth is wrong with that, and why should we not want to have that back?

    2. Susan4:15 PM

      I guess that should say "we boomers" instead of us boomers. I really did learn English in school. Honest.

    3. Anonymous6:50 PM

      Public school?

  4. Stilicho10:44 AM

    Too few males qualify as a man these days, Res, so I suppose further qualifying descriptions are needed just to keep up with the variety