Aug 172009
 

One of the problems with the whole “alpha” and “beta” concepts is that everyone has different definitions of those ideas. In addition there is a difference between how “alpha” is defined by men and by women. This comment from In Mala Fide explains it:

Mark, I dont know how far the alpha terminology goes, as there are different ways of describing it.
i have two descriptions;:
Alpha defined by male
and
Alpha defined by female
In the absence of social economic support, birth control etc, these two definitions coincide.
and these are the men you see in the pictures of the previous centuries.
Leaders of men, honorable men, who were also wanted by women.
Yes, you had cads also, but life was more difficult for them.
And these leaders of men may have had harems also.
Today, the alpha definition by male still stands: leader, honor, etc
The alpha definition by female has changed (maybe not even reverted to natural, as birth control is not natural, so we dont exactly know what the natural tendencies are when women are restricted by the risk of pregnancy) so that alpha means “socially dominant”, or simply “wanted by other women”.
These two different defitinions can create a problem when one is trying to define alpha.
Alpha as defined by how many women one can bed definitely fits the female definition.

  3 Responses to “Alpha defined by male & Alpha defined by female”

  1. The male definition of alpha makes much sense than the female one. Just because a man can bed many women does not mean he is a leader or respected by his peers. If anything, he might be looked down upon by many men. If alpha is being defined by the male version you mention, of honor, wise leadership, and respect from other men, many "beta" men I know would fit this definition better than, say, PUA style alpha. ;o)

    Ultimately, though, in the male defined alpha, does success with women necessarily come into the picture? Haven't there been men who have been respected by their male peers who may have been celibate (by choice or otherwise) or so forth? Or perhaps men who never fathered children but passed on immense knowledge to younger men, via something like apprenticeship/etc or the equivalent, or even serving as a "Wild Man" ala Bly's book to the younger generation of men? The idea that a man should be deemed "successful" by his sexual power alone seems bizarre and demeaning IMHO, for there is so much more men offer the world than what happens in a bed.

  2. Opps, I meant "Iron John". Serves me right for not proofreading before hitting enter.

  3. The whole notion that having sex defines Alpha is very tenuous. A great many Uber-Alphas throughout history (Alexander, Napoleon, Hitler) had very little sex and very few children (if any). In fact, a sexual preoccupation is rather 'working class' in that the working class has no status from any political/occupational/educational source, thus having to rely on sex as their sole form of status.

Leave a Comment. (Remember the comment policy is in force.)

Cheap Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Cheap Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Cheap Jerseys Cheap NFL Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Wholesale Football Jerseys Wholesale Jerseys Wholesale NFL Jerseys Cheap NFL Jerseys Wholesale NFL Jerseys Cheap NHL Jerseys Wholesale NHL Jerseys Cheap NBA Jerseys Wholesale NBA Jerseys Cheap MLB Jerseys Wholesale MLB Jerseys Cheap College Jerseys Cheap NCAA Jerseys Wholesale College Jerseys Wholesale NCAA Jerseys Cheap Soccer Jerseys Wholesale Soccer Jerseys Cheap Soccer Jerseys Wholesale Soccer Jerseys
Translate »
%d bloggers like this: