In my philosophy, which is highly logical, there are no ‘alpha males’, a much-vaunted term for those contemporary males perceived, rightly or wrongly, as womanizing competitors, who may or may not also be macho and athletic, not to say glamorous and aesthetic.


Such males, it has to be said, are hardly christian and sensible, but then, anachronistic exceptions to the general rule notwithstanding, this is not an omega-oriented age but one that is still – as has been the case for a number of decades - alpha-stemming in its female-hegemonic, film-besotted sensuality.


Even if such so-called alpha males were quasi-alpha, or quasi-bitches, they would be exceptions to the rule in exceptional – and rather unattractive – circumstances.  To put it bluntly, the typical contemporary male is a kind of pseudo-omega ‘sonofabitch’, or subordinate pseudo-male to a female hegemony, whether the latter be metachemical and noumenal or chemical and phenomenal, ethereal or corporeal.  He is either a pseudo-metaphysical pseudo-male living under metachemical hegemonic pressures or a pseudo-physical pseudo-male living under chemical hegemonic pressures, both of which kinds of pressure would correspond to alpha-female objectivity.


For, in overall gender terms, the female is most decidedly alpha, or rooted XX-wise in a vacuous objectivity, and the male omega, or centred XY-wise in a plenumous, so to speak, subjectivity, despite appearances to the contrary which may or may not be – but usually are – societally conditioned.


This so-called alpha male is really either pseudo-omega or, more exceptionally, quasi-alpha, which would be the morally less acceptable ‘male’ position, since patently immoral rather than, in more standard ‘sonofabitch’ pseudo-omega vein, unmoral, the victim of a female hegemony whose morality will, in general terms, be either superheathen in its metachemical somatic (bodily) freedom or heathen in its chemical somatic (bodily) freedom, neither of which kinds of morality would be condoned by a christian/superchristian male disposition, which will fight shy of the unholiness associated with an unmoral ‘fall guy’ and/or ‘sonofabitch’ pseudo-subjective (pseudo-omega) status, the all-too-contemporary ‘male’ predicament, given the persistence, under alpha-stemming criteria, of female hegemonies.


I, for one, do not condone the pseudo-omega pseudo-male, still less his departure, via antimetaphysics or antiphysics, from a subordinate ‘locked-in’ position to a quasi-metachemical or quasi-chemical, depending on the class and/or elemental context, quasi-alpha sell-out to ‘free bitch’ criteria, such that usually results in the worst of all possible metachemical or chemical worlds, so to speak, whose ratio is the converse (of free soma to bound psyche) of anything obtaining in the properly – and female – hegemonic contexts.


The only solution to this predicament, which, no matter how seemingly ‘locked-in’, will remain vulnerable to a quasi-alpha departure, via anti-omega anti-subjectivity, from the pseudo-omega under-plane unmoral position (and usually as a consequence of amoral pressure, i.e. of a quasi-pseudo-omega descent from above), is his deliverance, via salvation (in the case of the pseudo-physical pseudo-male), from his subordinate status to one that was unequivocally hegemonic over a pseudo-female (and therefore pseudo-alpha) position at the northeast point of the intercardinal axial compass in relation to a church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial polarity with his own lowly pseudo-physical pseudo-omega position, thereby elevating him to a metaphysical subjectivity in a genuine omega that spelt the end of subjection to female dominion in what, with perfect  sync with the male gender prerogative of free psyche and bound soma, free mind and bound body, would amount to the blessedness of moral holiness in grace and wisdom.


Such ‘saved’ pseudo-males, now fully and properly male, would be at peace with themselves (their self, or psyche) and free from the guilt of sin and folly, bound psyche and free soma under chemical hegemonic pressures, the upended male (pseudo-omega) gender predicament that follows from a female hegemony in which, contrary to male criteria, the objectivity of alpha-stemming criteria, rooted in a sensual vacuum, rules a free somatic/bound psychic roost, to the detriment of male gender innocence and self-respect, given that the male ratio of soma to psyche, even in the corporeal depths of phenomenal relativity, will be the converse of the female ratio and thus more bound than free, more sinful than foolish, and thus, in pseudo terms, more ignorantly painful than knowledgeably pleasurable.


Only the salvation of the pseudo-physical to metaphysics will lead to the correlative counter-damnation of the chemical to pseudo-metachemistry, the ‘first’ (equivocally hegemonic) becoming ‘last’ (gender subordinate), and thus to the overcoming of the world (at least in its chemical/pseudo-physical manifestations) in the interests of otherworldly/pseudo-netherworldly deliverance.


As to the subsequent damnation of the metachemical to pseudo-chemistry and correlative counter-salvation of the pseudo-metaphysical to physics, that is a matter for state-hegemonic/church-subordinate axial societies, and not therefore immediately germane to the fate, or respective fates, of those whose worldliness is traditionally characterized by church-hegemonic/state-subordinate axial criteria, wherein alpha phenomenality has the hegemonic advantage over pseudo-omega phenomenality, alpha corporeal females (feminine) over pseudo-omega corporeal pseudo-males (pseudo-masculine), to the detriment, as noted above, of the latter, whose sinful/foolish predicament requires divine intervention from a metaphysical standpoint if it is to be superseded by the blessedness of grace and wisdom in the holiness of inner peace. Yamen.