In 2010, writer and far-right activist Theodore Robert Beale, writing under the alias “Vox Day,” coined the term “Sigma Male.” The term is a consideration of the pseudoscientific application of the “Alpha Male” behavior in wolves to the behavior of humans in social settings. Initially, what was considered to be valid science with regards to wolf behavior (not human behavior) was popularized by Dave Mech in his 1970 book, The Wolf: Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species. Not only has the science regarding observations of wolf behavior been debunked on several levels, but Mech revised his views and narrowed the behavior down to family-oriented behavior in wolves and considers the term “Alpha Wolf” to be outdated.
Join me in following the genealogy of the term “Sigma Male.” Firstly, the term is an added dynamic to the application of the “Alpha Male” behavior of wolves to the behavior of males in human behavior. Next, This application of wolf behavior to human behavior is already pseudoscientific, so there was never considerable reasoning to believe the behavior of wolves in such a setting should apply to the behavior of human males in substantial ways. Lastly, The once considered scientifically valid “Alpha Male” behavior amongst wolves is now functionally debunked. So, even if you don’t know what a sigma male is, can you see why it’s already so absurd?
Yet somewhere in the absurdity, there is utter intrigue in the sigma male subculture. While some intrigue leads to humorous revelations, there are also darker, more unsettling ramifications regarding men who feel attracted to the caricature–and American Psycho’s Patrick Bateman perfectly represents those men.
The sigma male is a loose definition amongst an already loose umbrella known as the “manosphere.” This encapsulates problematic male identities such as incels. These men are profoundly frustrated with the inability to attract a woman sexually, romantically, or otherwise, MGTOWs (Men Going Their Own Way), men who entirely reject women as nothing but inhibitors to a man’s happiness and success, PUAs (Pick-Up Artists), men who believe they have mastered the ability to get laid, and a slew of other identities I cannot recall off the top of my head. Within most of the manosphere’s perspective on social hierarchies, while the alpha male is the man with the perfect amalgamation of appearance, intellect, sociability, personality, and overall capability leading them to the top of the social food chain, the sigma male is the man who could be the alpha male if he wanted. He could have it all. He has the looks, intellect, social skills, and unmatched ability to climb the ladder any time he pleases, but he doesn’t because he’s too cool for school. The sigma male doesn’t care (allegedly) about society’s rules. He doesn’t need the admiration or adoration of those around him. He is superior to the alpha male because he has one defining characteristic distinguishing him from the alpha male: apathy. While the alpha male at least cares, the sigma male doesn’t. The sigma male cares so little about how others view him; he constantly lets everyone know how little he cares. He cares so little; everyone must know he doesn’t care.
I don’t want to speak broadly, but Sigma males tend to be men who, in a certain way, may deviate from the norm in terms of considering society’s social rules, and there is nothing inherently wrong with that. Over the past few decades, people have defied what it means to be successful or unsuccessful, masculine or feminine, cool or uncool, acceptable or unacceptable, etc. Still, it’s difficult not to catch onto a sense of insecurity among Sigma males disguised as angry confidence. There is also nothing wrong with insecurity. Most people have varying levels of insecurity based on different characteristics. I suffer from issues with insecurity and a lack of self-esteem, confidence, and motivation. While I stated I wished not to speak broadly, it is challenging to have these issues and not be frustrated when encountering men who disguise their insecurities as some mythos of the unseen, dangerous man and disregard the sensitivities and insecurities of others as a result of their disguise. Without going any further, I admit my knowledge of the Sigma male subculture doesn’t scrawl far past what I’ve presented to you already, but what I have seen time after time are Facebook reels, TikTok videos, and sometimes YouTube videos created by Sigma males for sigma males using prominent fictional characters as a representation of the archetype. I’ve seen the same characters funnel in and out of these videos over and over again. Walter White from Breaking Bad, variations of the Joker from DC Comics, Thomas Shelby from Peaky Blinders, a few others, and most pertinently, American Psycho’s Patrick Bateman. Warning: Spoilers from the film, American Psycho.
American Psycho, a dark comedy-horror film from 2000 directed by Mary Harron and based on the novel by Bret Easton Ellis, features Patrick Bateman as its warped protagonist. Interestingly, when describing the film’s premise, Patrick Bateman is always (and must be) described as a wealthy individual with meticulous attention to his physique, appearance, tastes, and behavior who moonlights as a heinous, disturbed serial killer. This is because the most essential facet of the character is a revelation at the very end of the film, and even then, that revelation is technically up for interpretation. That interpretation of the revelation, however, has come to be widely accepted by those who have watched the film–Patrick Bateman never committed any of the murders or violence depicted in the movie. Furthermore, numerous times in the film, Patrick Bateman openly reveals unsettling information about his secret life as a supposed serial killer or even advances violently threatening statements toward people in conversation without the expected response. Still, within the same scenes, there are clear indications he never said these things. I spell this essential element of the film out because I can’t help but wonder, in light of these apparent implications, have the Sigma Males watched the film, and if they have, did they catch on to the mere possibility Patrick Bateman isn’t who he presents himself to be in his narration? The classic unreliable narrator is Patrick Bateman, to a tee.
The reason Patrick Bateman is the perfect depiction of the sigma male is not because he depicts what a sigma male believes themselves to be or aspires to be, but because his behaviors and mentality represent a real-life man who identifies with the sigma male caricature. He lacks awareness of his role in society and his peers; he can’t accept the reality given to him, or, likely, both. Despite the widely accepted interpretation, Bateman never killed anyone. It’s up in the air what’s happening in the violent scenes, but it boils down to whether they are hallucinations, fantasies, or both. My interpretation is that, earlier in the film, these violent scenes are basically Bateman’s fantasies, and he describes them to us in an attempt to “impress” the audience. He wants us to know the uniquely dark and dangerous nature of his true character, but by the end of the film, it seems Bateman has lost himself to the fantasies. He can’t quite distinguish between who he really is and who he believes himself to be, and most important to his characterization in the context of sigma males, his final line speaks to the reality a sigma male might do well to contemplate. “This confession has meant nothing.”
Patrick Bateman’s non-existent homicide does not tell of his characterization and its relation to sigma males. It’s his meticulous attention to his physique, his grooming, his tastes, and his behavior because he has to, as he says to his fiance, “fit in,” but when he says he wants to fit in, in reality, the problem isn’t a lack of fitting in. The problem is that he does fit in but not how he wants to. It’s fairly apparent he’s not a scary wolf but a sick sheep amongst his peers. He is a loser among the winners. He wants to believe his role as an outcast amongst the rich is because of this threatening, dangerous nature he has to conceal. Still, in reality, he’s simply psychologically and socially dissimilar from those around him. The degree of effort he places in self-improvement mimics what Sigma males call the “Sigma Grindset,” a mindset that leads one to believe rising on the social totem pole means constant productivity in terms of physique, social behavior, career efforts, and keen observations from the minute the sigma male wakes up to the minute he closes his eyes to sleep. “This confession has meant nothing” can be interpreted as Bateman’s realization he’s not who he thinks he is. Still, abstractly, it speaks to the idea of reality in terms of how a sigma male views himself. Except for others’ instincts to avoid the person, tolerate the person, be aware of the person, etc., this dark nature and shallow attempts to improve himself will not lead to the dream life. It honestly seems like sigma males’ obsession with Patrick Bateman is his aesthetic and the false assumption he’s attained his lifestyle by this sigma grind set, yet it’s outwardly stated in the film his wealth was inherited, his prestigious career position was bestowed likely by his father as the company belongs to him, and he–never–actually–works. All his mental energy is invested in how others view him, the quality of his business cards, the luxury of his residence, and other shallowly pleasing elements of his life without ever exploring who he wants to be outside of how others view him. His Sigma grind set didn’t get him to where he is, and it’s currently getting him nowhere. His status is a result of circumstances. He was born into it. Most sigma males don’t recognize that and simply aspire to what they believe to be the coolest man amongst boring men who look down on him as a result of lacking knowledge of his true, supposedly dangerous nature. This is how they view Bateman, and this is how they view themselves.
Patrick Bateman’s characterization is most accurately what a sigma male is from the outside. That being a man with mental difficulties to varying degrees, which inhibit him from being socially functional, and he copes by believing his true nature as more complex, more dangerous, and capable of great feats is the reason behind this and not mental difficulties which could and should be addressed. While coping, they believe investing such a magnitude of effort into shallow facets of their person, such as their appearance, their behavior, and their income it will erase the insecurities and mental problems they face. It will liberate them from their unideal circumstances. Bateman’s character perfectly depicts these men on its face and on a deeper, more sympathetic level. His unrealistic mentality and unknowingly fruitless efforts represent the mentality and efforts of the self-identified sigma male. From a wider perspective, he depicts a bitter-sweet truth. No one is immune to downright debilitating mental problems preventing one from enjoying his or her life. A laugh underlines this examination of Sigma males’ relationship with Patrick Bateman. Still, ultimately, the Sigma male would do well to seek psychological help not because he’s a disturbed, sociopathic murderer, but because believing himself to be such a dangerous man is cope with what they don’t realize so many people deal with in other ways which is frustration with the reality given to them and the circumstances they face. One can virtually never eliminate one’s mental struggles, but there are deep-diving, truly reforming methods a sigma male or anyone can seek to help his or herself.
Patrick Bateman is the perfect depiction of the sigma male because of how accurately he represents the sigma male, and if anyone, including a sigma male, can look upon the character with an active mind after understanding he’s not an actual killer, they can recognize the ways he’s trying to overcome his problems, they can recognize and identify their issues, and they can recognize Patrick Bateman’s way is not the way.
Feature image from Flikr
