Why Do Betas Push Theory That Insults Them?
Alpha or Beta?
By Catfish and Georgia
Some guys who call themselves “betas” (gentler, less macho men) complain that women want dominating “alphas,” not them.*
These betas insist that evolution controls the phenomenon: Alphas just have better genes. Sob.
Yet a University of Tennessee study published by PNAS found that most women prefer more generous and reliable “betas.” I know I do.
I’ve wondered why some “betas” push a theory that puts them down and leaves them no hope?
In a prior post I suggested a few ideas like, “Does giving up remove a burden — nothing can be done so why try?”
Catfish, one of my readers, suggested a few of his own theories, which I found interesting:
- It is simple
- It sounds “sciency” and plausible
- It appears that there are many other guys around in the same boat, which confirms the theory even more
But it is likely that in reality each self-identified beta has a combination of issues that prevents them from successfully dating, like:
- Untreated depression
- Social anxiety
- Any kind of psychological trauma from the past, ranging from being bullied to being rejected by women in the early adult years due to crappy luck (it does happen)
- Habits/beliefs that they inherited from their parent(s) that set them back. For example, some men on the past looked down on personal grooming and attempts to dress stylishly because it was not “masculine”. If their sons inherited this habit then guess what happens
- Messed up sexuality
- Poor social skills
- Challenging economic background of their families
- Whatever you can imagine
Of course it is easier to believe in a simple theory than to accept and deal with all those problems.
Thoughts anyone?
_________
* It turns out that the original “alpha vs beta” theory is based on a faulty study. Researcher L. David Mech points out that the alpha and beta wolves being studied were not all adults. Those originally labeled “alpha” wolves actually turned out to be parents to “beta” pups. So of course the parents were dominant and the pups more docile. Adults are also much better at finding mates, pups… that’s not their thing yet.
Related Posts
Women Want Betas
Guys Are Getting More Romantic
It’s Not Easy Being A Man
Share this:
Posted on June 10, 2019, in men, psychology and tagged alphas, betas, men's psychology. Bookmark the permalink. 208 Comments.
BroadBlogs 
Prior to reading this post I actually believed that the terms “alpha” and “beta” (and so on) were mainly used by men who would identify with the former. I had no idea that men would describe themselves as betas since the term “beta” is definitely used more in a derogatory way. It’s possible that some men use it as a scapegoat to describe themselves when they find failure in the dating scene. The “women always go for the bad boys” excuse has been around for ages and it only contributes even more to the “beta theory”. I also believe the term “beta” is also a term that describes men from the (supposed) perspective of women, which, in my opinion, is a bit sexist. Then again, “alpha” and “beta” males can be defined as simply “the more masculine” one and vice versa, but from what I’ve seen, it’s usually used to describe a male’s appeal to women.
We associate “beta” men with gentleness, non-dominating demeanor, and reliability. As the post points out, the betas do this association themselves. Apart from culture and/or nurture, betas blame nature and evolutionary genetics for their condition. Nature just didn’t hand them the alpha genes that are necessary for independence, autonomy, intellect, enterprise, and patriarchal domination that women supposedly crave for in men – so think the betas. Men themselves didn’t pick the betas for cultural, economic, political domination – why would the women. Betas are saddled with compassion, empathy, caring tenderness, dependency, and reliability – stuff that women already have in plenty, so why would they need the betas to add to those. Women need men who are custodians and enforcers – not supplicants who suffer from social anxiety and other psychological shortcomings. This identification of “beta” is a cultural construct. Unlike the agrarian and industrial ages where physical strength was valued, the modern age does not need physical strength as much. So, betas blaming genetics for their betaness doesn’t work. The other attributes required for alphaness are all cultural expectations – that have medieval roots – of the knight in shining armor kind. Women desiring alphas too is a cultural myth that comes from the same pool – that women are weaklings who seek refuge in the strong alpha’s dominion.
When thinking of this beta and alpha theory, I personally wonder what it means in the end. It’s not to say that I don’t understand the superficial aspect of it, but more like the in depth meaning of anything really. This being no different, I wonder what it is about our human nature to immediately label something in order to understand it. When I think of these dynamics, I don’t think of attractiveness or a sense of allure when it comes to an individual, especially men. Instead I think of power and intelligence. In the manner in which I perceive my world, physique means nothing to me unless there is some form of intellectual connection between myself and the person.
When I think of “betas,” my thoughts immediately go to my cousin. This is not based on my own view, but on the theory implemented by the majority. He is a young man who defines himself as metrosexual. He is feminine, and quite confident in himself when it pertains to his femininity. Due to this, even if he were called a beta, he would never devalue himself as any less capable as an “alpha.” His sense of vulnerability and his compassionate and gentle nature are not something he sees as demeaning, but instead that of a human experience. In the end, this theory of beta and alpha dynamic is simply a human invention just like our society, it’s simply a manner of teaching young men and even women that masculinity (as well as femininity) do not have a concrete form, but is versatile in meaning if we are taught this. The idea of an alpha and beta dynamic will continue to persist if men and women are not taught the differences of toxic masculinity and that of a simple comfort in one’s own flesh.
Regarding why we label things,it is because the world is so complex and we can’t capture everything and so we simplify. But the simplification of course Creates oversimplifications, and Confusion If there is confusion about what a particular label means to different people. Looking at confusion here, if you read the other comments you’ll see that different people have different ideas of what alpha and beta mean. The scientist defined it as one way but in popular culture people have heard it in other ways. So yes there is confusion.
Also, while we have cultural and subcultural ideas of what words/labels mean, individuals can reject the notions, as your metrosexual cousin does.
The Beta theory is indeed very widespread in pop culture. An example of this is the Nice Guys song by Youtuber NigaHiga, a lyric of which is “nice guys finish last…you only date bad guys so I’ll give it my best true to treat you the way you want me to”.
I think that many men do not understand the difference between assertiveness and the toxic masculinity referred to in this post. Women like it when men are confident in themselves because it garners trust from others to be confident in them, too. Men who are not confident may or not naturally assertive may try to overcompensate, come across as abrasive, and then claim that they were unable to find a date because they were beta, rather than not confident or overly intense. These men equate beta with powerlessness and passivity and use it as an excuse to avoid critical self reflection.
“I think that many men do not understand the difference between assertiveness and the toxic masculinity”
That’s something I have had to deal with a lot with this post. And it’s a problem out there in the real world too.
When I read the title I automatically thought of computer engineers. I did Lyft for a while in San Jose and I picked up a lot of betas about 90% of them were engineers. We would have conversations about women because I am easy to talk to and it’s just us two in the car, so there is a trust level I build with being polite and a careful driver. About 50% of them have girlfriends or married and the census was they got their partner because they both had the same gentler energy. The other percentage wanted wild women that are dominant but they don’t know how to approach them. They don’t have the physical confidence but they have the financial confidence to be a stable provider. One guy has his own 4 passenger plane in San Carlos and would fly to Monterey for a day in Monterey for fun. I told him most women would love that. And if he got turned down that woman did him a favor because you don’t need that type of energy in your life and he smiles. I think some betas might just need a hype woman to reassure them that they are awesome and a lot of the time opposites attract.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing about these conversations.
The idea that men have to be ‘macho’ in order to receive female attention, is an idea I wish would die completely. I am happy to say that acceptability of the kind of behaviors that come along with the alpha mentality is declining, but not nearly as fast as I (as a woman who likes being un harassed in public spaces) would like it to. If I try to understand it from their perspective, I do have some sympathy for them- if somewhere along the way they were trained to act like this or had some kind of rejection trauma like the author suggests, they are simply a product of circumstance. However, they should still be held accountable for their actions, and that’s where the “Me Too’ movement really come into play. Pretending to be someone you’re not to the extent that toxic alphas do, is not just reserved for men. I know too many women who as a result of men like this think that in order to feel wanted, they have to play (for lack of a better word) the “dumb blonde”.
I think that beta theory is strange and a theory that has garnered a lot of attention without people fully understanding it. I used to read posts on reddit’s Incel and Redpill communities because they got banned/quarantined. I think that what women would describe as an alpha male is very different than how self proclaimed alpha males would describe themselves. I have never actually heard a single female claim they want an “alpha male” but the description of one, in their minds would consist of a man that is physically and mentally strong, bold, and opinionated. Perhaps successful in the workplace, too. However, the way i’ve seen “alphas” describe themselves on these subreddits consist of taking complete control of the relationship, emotional abuse, cheating, and making sure the woman they were with knew that they were not worthy of the man’s time, trust, or fidelity. While the redpill subreddit encouraged male promiscuity to the point of making it known to the “alpha’s” significant other that they were being “cucked,” this subreddit at the same time looked down upon female promiscuity and basically very explicitly claimed that women are worth nothing more than what they can offer as a sexual being. In fact, these self proclaimed “alphas” truly believe that this mindset actually made women respect them more and feel under their control. So there is clearly a huge divide between what some women actually want (a man who is confident, bold, all while being caring and reasonable) and a self proclaimed “alpha male” (sexist, degrading, and emotionally abusive).
Sure. But even with the definition you give researchers have found that women prefer he more monogamous man who is kind and generous.
“…researchers have found that women prefer he more monogamous man who is kind and generous.”
Of course!!!! Unless a woman is poly herself as most are not so, she is going to want a monogamous man. Only stands to reason. However, that does NOT mean these said men are sexually attractive to most women. It simply is not true.
A short story…I have a good friend who is married. She is a White woman. Her husband is White. They are in the process of going through a divorce.
She is currently dating a Black guy. She has also dated some other Black men. These guys all look the same: tall and bald with dark skin. Most are total losers. She is lending them $$$. They are just using her in my opinion. The sex is good to her I guess. Anyhow I digress. Apparently, she has a thing for tall and bald men. Not just tall and bald Black men. When it comes to men, it is first and foremost about sexual attraction for her. But, she also loves $$$$.
Yesterday she text me to say she was having dinner with this White guy who assisted her when her car broke down on the road last week. This morning she text me saying, “Don was a nice guy.” Right then and there that told me she found him sexually unattractive. What did she like about him? Owns a business and has a house on 25 acres. In other words, he is man “who is kind and generous.”
The funny thing is this guy Don is probably just like her husband: kind and generous. But, sexually unattractive.
You just seem to minimize this kind of thinking and behavior on the part of most women.
Well I don’t know that your friend is like most women. I personally don’t know any women who behave have like her. But of course there are women like her out there. It sounds like she’s cheating on her husband and giving them money. You would think that alphas would have money. It’s also true that we eroticize male dominance. But at the same time there are so many romantic comedies where the guy is a nice guy. The TV show “this is us“ the leaders a fabulous guy and a nice guy and attractive. I’m watching a TV show on PBS called Poldark where a wealthy woman is attracted to a poor it kind man. Totally rooting for them to get together. And of course the blockbuster hit, “sleepless in Seattle.” Women tend to prefer to marry kind, monogamous men, like of my friends have and all of my friends and me.
@Anna
“….in their minds would consist of a man that is physically and mentally strong, bold, and opinionated. Perhaps successful in the workplace, too.”
“So there is clearly a huge divide between what some women actually want (a man who is confident, bold, all while being caring and reasonable”
These two statements represent what I have long believed. Your first statement is more of the true alpha male. Then in your second statement you added “all while being caring and reasonable.” The second statement is what I would call an alpha male with some beta qualities.
I think the ideal man for most women is the alpha male with some beta qualities. However most men are NOT alpha males with some beta qualities. They are either total beta males which are repulsive to most women (i.e, male feminists etc) or beta males with a few alpha qualities.
Hence, this is why I continue to argue that most women find most men unattractive. This is why I also believe we have record numbers of women who are single (excluding the Boomer women who are divorcing in record numbers). These beta males are just not attractive to women in any regard. Women only date or marry them (beta males) for $$$$ and/or other financial reasons. Women will marry them for temporary periods to have kids etc only to later divorce the man. I cannot tell you how many articles or books I have read where you have married women saying “oh he is great father, a great provider….and I love him.” Yet, they want a divorce because he is really not sexually attractive.
Well, in our culture both women and men prefer confident people, which you would probably think of as alpha.And kind and generous people. And it is possible to get that whole package of course. But an off a lot of people aren’t like that.
But one problem is that, probably because women’s sexuality is more repressed than men’s, it is harder to get women interested, and so they tend to be less sexually interested in someone they have been with for a really long time. Although a very close intimate relationship can keep sexual interest higher in long-term monogamous relationships.
Yes, sex appeal is definitely important. Just saying that for women to line up for sex you would need to have a sexually appealing rock God.”
But doesn’t rock god really suggest or atleast to me, great fame and success? Like it’s not just a mainstream actor, but like A list, like Tom Hanks celebrity or George clooney with acting or the hemsworth who are quite known.And for music, it’s a legendary, iconic band with great success and everybody seems to know even if they don’t like that genre of music or even listen to the band. Bon Jovi is a rock god, because of how popular he is and the band. Guns N Roses were rock Gods, Kiss, Steven Tyler for Aerosmith is quite famous, and legendary band. The Beatles, I say Ac/DC too, though younger generation might not know. Metallica. INXS had some hits , but like “lower tier” as far as bands goes.
They make me think of the band Live, who had some hits but weren’t iconic even if they had one or two super popular song. You ask people if they know the band Live and they probably don’t recognize the name. I even didn’t realize it was them or the band’s name for the popular song, Lightning Crashes (good song btw). Whereas, much more people even if they don’t listen to that music will be like, I’ve heard of that band like if bring up Metallica or Nirvana, Aerosmith, etc. That’s Rock God status to me.
So just showing how visuals play a big role for sex appeal combined with music status. IMO, the better looking the musician the guy is, the less success he needs as far as being iconic to having women all over him for sex, compared to the ugly looking dude needing much more fame, The singer to INXS had the confidence and charisma that brought his sex appeal, but his looks played a big role too. Gene Simmons could try being or acting all sexy like the dude was to women in the music video. Even if Gene Simmons had such charisma, it just would not carry over as well as singer for INXS because of GEne’s lack of looks compared to INXS singer’s looks. Gene’s simmons sex appeal to women I feel is mainly or purely from his band’s great fame and women lining up for sex. Whereas, INXS singer is part fame and talent (the band was mainstream, but like not that famous) And also just as much if not more the physical/visual/eye candy appeal to women. Gene Simmons definitely did not have eye candy appeal to women ha
What do you say makes sense to me.
I’m reminded of that woman who lost her virginity to JFK and then married some other guy who kept making an issue out of it. I’m sure he felt beta compared to the president of the united states who could literally blow the whole world up in a nuclear holocaust if he wanted.
Maybe so.
I’m sure that sex appeal also plays into it. But women rarely “line up” to have sex with men other than “rock gods,” or something similar, where status and personal identity are involved. And that’s because the motivation isn’t strictly sex. And because women are routinely still shamed for “promiscuity” but in some realms, like that that of the rock gods, the rules shift. Also, jealousy. for most people it’s just too hard to share your partner.”
You don’t think George Clooney, Channing Tatum and the Hemsworth bros don’t have women come on to them constantly or a ton just being out in public? So basically lining up to have sex and they aren’t rock gods. It can’t be just because they are famous or charming, which is a good part, but the physical plays a big role too. Because there are other male actors just as charming or possibly famous who are hearth throbs and a good part is because of the good looks and physique in the case of Tatum and Hemsworth bros, etc.
I do think they constantly have women coming onto them. They do fit into the category of “rock gods.“
When women have sex with gods, the stars, whatever you want to call them, they feel like they take on a certain deification, themselves, they are almost famous, they get bragging rights… it’s a huge self-esteem boost.
True, but like I said, it seems less fame is needed by the actor or musician if they have a physical sex appeal with their looks/body. Gene Simmons was a rock god and maybe a charming personality, but he was desired despite women even knowing her personality. But I feel he had sex and was with so many women because of how legendary and iconic the band was. Here’s an example, this band which I liked their music. They had hits and a mainstream band, but they were nothing like the caliber of Kiss. Part could have been the short time they were around because I think the lead singer died young, of drug overdose? But this dude was a hearthrob, sex symbol to women and you should see the women’s comments on youtube ha just gushing over his gorgeousness and how sexy he was. The dude did have natural swagger and confidence that wasn’t forced or fake and genuine which is why it came off so well and women eating it up.
As much women were crazy for gene simmons, this dude I think had just as many women wanting him despite the band being not the caliber of the band kiss. And I do feel as much as women wanted Gene Simmons, it would have been ridiculous how many more women would have wanted this guy over Gene Simmons if the band was legendary like Kiss. The band I’m talking about is INXS. Remember them? They had hits, but you ask people, if they know the band INXS, and many won’t know. Tons still know the band Kiss, as Kiss is or was a more recognizable, mainstream marketed band.
I’m secure with myself and I can admit he was quite a handsome guy, the lead singer for INXS. Remember this song and music video?
Yes, sex appeal is definitely important. Just saying that for women to line up for sex you would need to have a sexually appealing rock God.
Yes, sex appeal is definitely important. Just saying that for women to line up for sex you would need to have a sexually appealing rock God.
That’s my point though, this guy many saw as handsome and you saw the appeal he had despite not having the hits or iconic status like Kiss did. Gene Simmons, very talented, but I think most can see Gene was not…the best looking guy.
Yup
I’m not aware of any women lining up for sex other than prostitutes who get paid for it.
Well women do that to high status men. You don’t think there aren’t or wouldn’t be women lining up to have sex with famous, charming and very handsome George Clooney? He’s got to be almost 60 right and women are still wanting him, and one’s probably half his age and then some and drop dead gorgeous too. Some might not be doing that for other men, but make exceptions if the guy is seen as great enough prize (famous, super talented, successful, wealthy, good looking, etc)
The exception is “rock gods” by which I mean cultural stars whether in music, movies, the arts… Women get a lot of status by being with these men and I wrote a note to huggy about how women who are groupies have sex with these guys — or deities in their minds – they feel like they are having intercourse with the gods, and achieving some level of deification in that way. Fame creates a sense that you are more special than other people because everyone’s eyes are on you, so you must be important right? When Cameron Crowe toured with Led Zeppelin he said that the groupies felt almost famous by association. That’s the source of the title for his movie “almost famous.“
Well I think, even though men are told to be more superficial and visual with their sexuality. I think looks and body play if in addition to the fame. Because then you have sex appeal added to the fame. Look at it this way as far as actors. You’ve heard of heart throbs right? Weren’t these men whether in the 80s, 90s, current times, good looking, fit guys? You know who comedian Kevin James is? Famous, funny comedian/actor. He was in funny show King of Queens and was in Grown ups movie with Adam Sandler, etc. He’s a husky, average looking guy. I like his shows.
I’m not saying there aren’t women going after him. but who do you think has much more women linking up to have sex with him. Chris or Liam Hemsworth, Channing Tatum, George Clooney, vs Kevin James? You know and I know much more women are desiring liam, Channing and George vs Kevin james. Adam Levine is slim, and pretty decent looking guy, better looking than Singer Meat loaf for sure. I know he’s old now and I’m sure he had women. But I feel much more women would be going after Adam Levine for sex compared to Meatloaf. Notice, no matter how famous, Actors who look like and built like Kevin James aren’t heart throbs or sex symbols like men who look like George Clooney or Hemsworth with bodies like Hemsworth? So the fame is big, but apparently aesthetics paired with that fame play a role too otherwise, kevin james would be the heart throb and sex symbol like Brad Pitt and such.
I’m sure that sex appeal also plays into it. But women rarely “line up” to have sex with men other than “rock gods,” or something similar, where status and personal identity are involved. And that’s because the motivation isn’t strictly sex. And because women are routinely still shamed for “promiscuity” but in some realms, like that that of the rock gods, the rules shift. Also, jealousy. for most people it’s just too hard to share your partner.
@Bob..
“Well women do that to high status men.”
Yes, but we need to ask why do they like high status men AND for what purpose. When it comes to raw sexual lust, a woman will have sex with a mass murderer. Just a fact. A man can be totally broke (as is the case of my personal trainer) but have hoards of women including married women throwing themselves at him for sex.
Being high status gets you “activity.” But, is it authentic? No! You are serving a purpose for these women. Usually sex is at the bottom of their motivation. There are some women who are genuinely turned on by say the ugly drummer or rapper. However, what I have discovered in life is that while I would agree (in the end) women want the beta guys, they do not want them for sex. They want them for the comfort they bring to their life. They want them for non sexual reasons.
Yes, in the end women “prefer” the more generous and reliable betas it all based on non -sexual motivations. All I am asserting is that such is just misguided. I find very few married beta men who are happy. Why? They are sexually miserable. Women do NOT enjoy sex with beta men. That’s why they struggle with their sexuality with these men. The author would have us believe the source is sexual repression. I strongly disagree with her on this ponti. The real reason is a very simple one: there is a lack of sexual attraction. There is no lust for a beta male by most women.
There is a fundamental difference in being attracted to someone vs being sexually attracted to someone. A woman might be “attracted” to a high status man. But, she also might be sexually un-attracted to the same man. Do you really think Harvey Weinstein’s ex wife found him sexually attractive? Do you think Jeff Bezos new wife finds him sexually attractive?
Too many men are just oh so happy to be with an attractive woman. They sacrifice their masculinity and sexuality just be have an attractive woman. So, what good is an attractive woman with only marginal sex with her? I say NONE.
Chiming in here, what I wrote to Bob also applies here:
women rarely “line up” to have sex with men other than “rock gods,” or something similar, where status and personal identity are involved. And that’s because the motivation isn’t strictly sex. And because women are routinely still shamed for “promiscuity” but in some realms, like that that of the rock gods, the rules shift. Also, jealousy. for most people it’s just too hard to share your partner.
2. women who are most likely to be promiscuous are those who have low self-esteem and are trying to feel a sense of worth from men wanting them”
If women have low self esteem who are promiscuous or atleast are so with high status men because they feel a sense of worth from men wanting them. Do you believe that, many men infact have more self esteem issues than women, because much more men aim to be promiscuous or aim to be so. Women who have high numbers of partners, often I feel don’t do so because that’s what they want, but just dating a bunch of men hoping to have a long lasting relationship. But the guys they are with eventually break up or the woman breaks up with the guy. Even if some women have casual sex, I feel even they acquire most of their “high count” via relationships that were long and didn’t last or multiple short ones. Whereas, it’s dudes purposely racking up the number count on purpose and going after casual sex and continue to do so for the ego stroke and lust.
I think that both women and men act promiscuously to boost their self-esteem. But women are in a bind because they are punished too, whereas men are only congratulated. Thinking back on the three women who wrote about having sex with men to boost their self-esteem, one thought her friend Warning about her reputation was just being jealous, and the other two didn’t seem to be telling other people about what they were doing. Just having sex with the men made them feel wanted and beautiful – beauty being one of the measures of a woman’s status in our culture.
Yeah but is is always insecurity? For guys bragging to others about it, yeah. But it seems like a human need for not to be loved, but also desired. Love being the biggest important, but we wanted to feel desirable too. Nobody wants to feel undesirable and not lust worthy either. The thing is for women, that’s usually just given and not having to have sex to know they are because guys are so direct, less selective and just hornier. Guy’s on the other-hand, don’t know if they are desirable until they actually have sex because a woman checking out a guy , flirting, going on a date doesn’t mean as much because it takes more for a woman to jump from that to want to have sex.
There’s more steps needed to take to her her there, whereas, generally not so much for a guy to decide and be willing to have sex with a woman. So it really means nothing because of that and how women can flake when initially seeming attracted or interested in a guy. Therefore, the true indicator for a guy that’s he’s desired is when it becomes intimate and she enthusiastically consents of course. It might not have to be sex, but maybe oral sex she gives him, but it’s that confirmation that he’s sexually attractive to her. So you have that and other women having sex, a guy gets the validation that he’s an attractive guy to women. And because of that validation it can go one swing to the other. Some guys getting a lot of sex can get all the ego stroke and feeling good, whereas, other guys struggling and not getting much sex can feel like shit.
But I do believe women do go after the validation too but it’s in regard to getting attention, but can provide the ego stroke like for guys but a woman not needing to have sex to feel that. Dating apps are good proof of the divide. I’ve read how women who might be down from a break up and not feeling so attractive may go on tinder or Bumble, not because they plan on meeting any guy but to boost their ego again and apparently it helps. It’s where women who are otherwise cute but fairly average can swipe past guys betting looking than them and only on the hottest guys, but get an inflated feel of attractiveness and ultra picky because of the tons of dudes liking and matching them. Whereas you can have good looking guys with funny profiles, but yet not get many matches or sporadic likes but not get a date. Online dating might not be good for people’s feelings in general. But I saw reports and polls done on girlsaskguys as far as who feels bad with online dating. Women voted their take and men did for there’s. The majority of male votes were about them feeling bad and much much more men voted about feeling bad compared to women and feeling undesirable as a result whereas, less women voted they felt bad or other women neutral and a decent number feeling attractive. I still have the apps but I just glance here and there but I don’t take them personally anymore and go be irl experiences more so. But I used to when first using them feel like shit, especially when some friends I knew were getting dates and I couldn’t get any from it.
I can’t remember the exact quote you were referring to but here goes.
Of course everyone wants to feel attractive and desired, but people achieve that in different ways. But since women are more likely to be flat-shamed they are less likely to seek a sense of value in that way. On the other hand, it’s common for the most confident men to have the most sex simply because they can tolerate more rejection. For men, the more sex they have is correlated with asking the most women to have sex and putting up with a lot of rejection.
For women there is more of a mixed message such that women who have a lot of sex are often shamed. And the women who are most likely to have a lot of sex are, historically, and in the aggregate, more likely to be on the insecure side. It’s more like desperately seeking information. That doesn’t make them bad people because they have sex or because they need affirmation. And more recently that trend could be changing where women are less likely to be shamed, although all of my students have witnessed slut-shaming in high school. And even more recently some girls have killed themselves over it, so it’s pretty tough.
As a guy you can’t take online dating personally or else it could definitely effect your self esteem and get depressed
I think it’s important to point that out.
“You seem to always meet women of the latter category yet you say you prefer to be in the former. I don’t know why that is.”
Simple: I love sex. The women of this latter category offer me easy and great sex. There is mutual lust.
I am not willing to be subjected to this female double standard of making some men earn sex while allowing other men very easy access. If a man enters into a LTR or marriage with a woman like this, he is ALWAYS going to be subjected to having to “earn” sex. Why? Because there is no genuine lust present. If there were lust present, he would not be subjected to this standard.
“Only about 10% of College student bodies like casual sex in the hook up culture.”
Hmmmm. Well it really depends on your definition of “like.” Maybe they are simply acting on a biological need? While only 10% say they enjoy it (I have my doubts), nevertheless they engage in it, frequently. People don’t engage in things they don’t like or enjoy unless they are compelled to do so.
I guarantee you they are engaging in it far more often with the alpha men as opposed to the beta men. As these college age women get older and become more mature in their thoughts, they will seek out the beta men for LTRs and/or marriage.
Btw, I am interested in knowing if you agree with that study that was in the media asserting that marriage rates are falling due to a lack of financially stable men?
Cheers!!!
Much of the reason that married women lose interest in sex is because we punish women’s sexuality in a way that causes a loss of desire, generally, so that it takes more for women to be interested. For non-monogamous women a new partner spikes her interest. But most women still aren’t lining up to have sex with high status men because they are greatly punished for promiscuity – whore, skank, slut etc. – words I have heard you use yourself. Both because of the immediate punishment and because long-term punishment of this sort dampens women’s sexual desire. Take a look at what I wrote to Bob.
If there is a double standard like you described it is because of the sexual double standard that celebrates sexual men and punishes sexual women. It makes women very picky when they are sexual desire is diminished.
men have a tendency to think that women experience sexuality the way that men do. But most women’s sexual desire has been dampened because of widespread punishment, so much so that half of American women have major sexual dysfunctions like pain, difficulty with orgasm, and most commonly Low to no desire.
Even “good sex” is defined differently by men and women. Men tend to think of good sex as freaky, he had an orgasm. Women are much more likely than men to think of good sex as “it didn’t hurt.“ The vast majority of women also think that good sex involves emotional intimacy. Which may well be socially conditioned and not biological. But that’s completely different from lining up to have sex with a high status man. Yeah, most people don’t engage in things they don’t enjoy. That’s largely why most women don’t behave terribly promiscuously. They aren’t all lined up to have sex with a few lucky man because it’s actually not that enjoyable. 10% of college students like hook up culture and most don’t engage in it. Over the course of eight years most students have an average of seven partners. They think everyone else is engaging in hook up culture, except for them. But really, most people just don’t engage in it.
I think it’s true that marriage rates are falling due to a lack of financially stable men. As a society we are used to thinking of men as being the breadwinner and feel mostly fine with women staying home and caring for children. That feels natural and normal on some level to most people when couples set up their marriages that way. But most still don’t tend to be OK with women being the breadwinner and men staying home and taking care of kids. Because of gender inequality it still tends to feel uncomfortable for most men and women, although the numbers of stay at home dad’s are increasing along with feminism. And qualitative data on this suggest that a lot of women feel like it’s a lot of time and energy to put into someone who isn’t contributing by either earning money or taking care of the household.
“But most women still aren’t lining up to have sex with high status men because they are greatly punished for promiscuity – whore, skank, slut etc. – words I have heard you use yourself.”
I respectfully disagree with you here. So, you would have me believe women are lining up to have sex with weak beta males? Laughable. Seriously.
I think you have a very and overly simplistic view of the sexual dynamics out here between men and women. First, let me say this: women have a highly sexually duplicitous nature about them. I have lived it. I have experienced. I see it on a regular basis. These are not emotionally damaged women. These are very NORMAL and WELL ADJUSTED females. Period.
Men need to understand and accept this fact. Stop bitching and complaining about how women behave. Hell, I don’t like it any more than any other man. But, it is what it is!!! It is like a zebra complaining about a lion seeking to kill and consume it. Isn’t that what lions do? Of course. Same with women. They do what they do.
The best example using the alpha vs. beta thesis is how women will break rules for an alpha man while making rules for a beta man. I remarked on this before. So, I am an alpha man. Why? Most women like me. I am charming, confident, at times quite arrogant, intelligent, successful, and very outspoken.
I have been in bars and/or restaurants in conversations with other men and women where damn near every guy was agreeing with everything bullshit comment out the women’s mouths. Me. I forcefully call bullshit on what one of the women was talking about. Not only did I call bullshit on it, I dared her to deconstruct MY position. She could not.
I was able to get the phone number (that evening) from one of the women. Two weeks later I have enjoying some good ass sex with her. Mutually great sex! How did she break her rule? Because she stated that she normally likes sex in a committed relationship. Ditto! She broke her rule for me. Those other beta males clowns she had ZERO interest in fucking. NONE. She told me what made me attractive was how I forcefully challenged the 8 or 9 people at that table AND was able to defend my position in a very succinct and eloquent manner. Further, she thought the other guys were just agreeing because they were HOPING to get laid. Weakness! Beta men are WEAK. This is why it is hard for most women to get aroused by beta men. It has ZERO to do with this female sexual suppression/repression you are always talking about.
On the other hand, pornography tends to portray women as lining up for sex, but it’s all a fantasy. A lot of men try to increase their status by bragging about all of their sexual conquests. It’s made up but other men believe it.
Negging as you describe it does seem to work with some sexiest women. But interestingly it is based on her insecurity.
Using Insults to Pick Up Women
https://broadblogs.com/2012/08/27/using-insults-to-pick-up-women/
(You will see that I edited your comment because it got a little crass)
“pornography tends to portray women as lining up for sex, but it’s all a fantasy”
Plenty of women are “lining up for sex”, but not enough to bring equilibrium. It’s like a stock on Wall Street. There’s always buyers and sellers, but if the buyers outnumber the sellers, the price will rise and the perception will be a shortage, nevermind that there are plenty of keen sellers. It only takes that modest imbalance to put women in the sellers’ market, yet here we are. But I will say this… there are places you can go in the world where it is a buyers market, and those fantasies are not far off the mark.
I’m not aware of any women lining up for sex other than prostitutes who get paid for it.
“I’m not aware of any women lining up for sex ”
They line up to have sex with pop stars and Hugh Hefner. That’s in the literal sense.
In a less literal sense, they’d rather go out with a high status man it’s doubtful they can keep, than a low status man they can keep. So they end up being in an invisible line of all the women the high status man dates.
You haven’t read Holly Madison’s memoir yet have you?
I read a memoir of a playboy bunny, it might have been Holly it was a while ago. But look… Holly lived there 7 years and literally lined up to have sex with Hugh. Was she joyful about that? No, BUT SHE DID IT ANYWAY.
And BTW, she describes that she becomes “disillusioned”. That implies that in the beginning she was illusioned. If Hugh wasn’t such an ass, she never would have left. But I guess, why shouldn’t Hugh be an ass, there were plenty more girls where she came from.
She talks about the women being grossed out by the sex, and hoping to avoid it. He isn’t attractive. What’s attractive are the opportunities, fame, etc. associated w/being associated w/him.
“She talks about the women being grossed out by the sex, and hoping to avoid it. What’s attractive are the opportunities, fame, etc. associated w/being associated w/him.”
So a fairly typical boy girl relationship then?
That’s the whole point, women are rarely in it for the sex, they’re in it for money, fame, status, resources. And for that, they’ll line up for sex with the top dog, especially if they can delude themselves they can push out all the other contenders.
You really should read Holly Madison’s memoir. And Holly Madison isn’t like most women anyway. Most women would not be interested in taking on the role she played. But some women who are desperate for fame will do that sort of thing.
“Most women would not be interested in taking on the role she played”
Sure… shacking up with the head of the playboy empire is an extreme trope. But tropes exist for a reason, that women will shack up with you if you have resources. It may not last forever, but it lasts long enough to fool the average man that a woman cares about you, when they actually care about resources. And this is where incels go wrong. Women fake their beauty with an endless stream of beauty products. Incels need to learn to fake their attractiveness by faking the appearance of resourcefulness. You spend a lot of time on this blog railing against the cult of female beauty, why don’t you rail against the cult of male wealth and alpha males as a criticism against female shallowness rather than a commentary against men?
The blog has a point of view. This is a feminist blog. I don’t complain about everything. Even though there’s a lot to complain about.
Abrahamic religion considers female pleasure sinful. It acts to limit female pleasure and sexual expression wherever possible. One of the ways it does this is by convincing women that the highest-value men are harmful rather than simply sexually wealthy. This explains why women don’t maximize the return on their sexual transactions and spend their sexual capital on betas of low sexual value when they don’t have to.
“convincing women that the highest-value men are harmful rather than simply sexually wealthy”
I’m not familiar with this idea even though I grew up in a Judeo-Christian tradition. I’m not sure what you’re talking about.
“I suspect that pornography lies behind your perspective.”
Why would you think this? I don’t even watch porn. I always advise young men to stay away from pornography. I also believe it is exploitative of women even though most do it voluntarily.
What women desire in a man varies according to the nature of the relationship. If a woman is seeking a casual partner, she could care less who else he is having sex. Alternatively, if she is seeking a long-term relationship or marriage, she is LESS likely to be into “man sharing.” Yes, jealousy and resentment are likely to occur.
You know being “out here” in the dating world I have experienced quite a lot of things. The behavior of women is radically different than say in the 1990s when I got married. Some of my male friends argue that the behavior of women is NOT different. Rather, that behavior is simply out in the open. Perhaps the truth is somewhere in between.
I really do not believe women are “naturally” more monogamous than men. I also have come to experience women’s very powerful sexuality. It’s been great for me! What is troubling is just how little sexual discipline women possess, especially when it comes to alpha or high value men.
Last year I dated this very very good looking woman. The relationship was casual/short term. I make it clear to ALL women I have ZERO interest in any kind of serious relationship. Just upfront about things. She was 39, never married, professional, no kids. She told me that she never wanted any children. When she told the men in her life this, they moved on to other women. Anyhow, while we were “dating” she was also seeing other men. She was on this dating site. The reason she was on that site was that she was seeking a long-term partner. She made those guys work for her sexual attention while I did nothing but just show up.
So, the above is very common with many women. Lots. They will have an ongoing sexual relationship with a man (or two) while also seeking a long-term partner. The weird thing is they will hold out on having sex with these other men. However, I have access to them sexually without commitment. It is this kind of behavior by women that has turned men off and soured men on long-term relationships. They simply do not really know what they are getting.
Women complain about the double standard. But, women too have a double standard. They give men like myself easy access to sex. Yet, the men whom they desire as long- term partners, they make sex difficult. So, a lot of men today are skeptical of women. Many who present themselves as “wholesome” are really “whores” in the eyes of men. I can see why they think this. Also, having gone through what I suffered while being married, I know it is true.
When you are a short term/casual fuck buddy to a woman, you are usually NOT the only one. This is how I know women do not care if that guy is sexing other women. So, this is why I believe women have very strong poly tendencies when it comes to a high value man. It is not unusual for women today to be “seeing” two or three different men at the same time.
Maybe you don’t Watch pornography but men who are in your social circle, personally or online, probably do and they also have this view that women all have sex with Alvin in and not them.(And I do appreciate your views on porn.)
Porn portrays women as seeking casual partners but research doesn’t bear it out in real-life. Only about 10% of College student bodies like casual sex in the hook up culture. And have you seen these posts?
Men Watch Porn, Women Read Romance. Why?
https://broadblogs.com/2011/05/16/men-watch-porn-women-read-romance-why/
Twilight vs. Porn
https://broadblogs.com/2012/11/19/twilight-vs-porn/
What Women Want: Twilight
https://broadblogs.com/2012/11/14/what-women-want-twilight/
Women Want Emotionally Connected Sex. Why?
https://broadblogs.com/2011/07/20/women-want-emotionally-connected-sex-why/
I don’t think that women are naturally more monogamous than men either. Women are socialized very differently from men when it comes to sexuality. They are much more punished for instance. That said, about half of women and half of men prefer monogamy while the other half of each sex prefer more than one partner. You seem to always meet women of the latter category yet you say you prefer to be in the former. I don’t know why that is. (Btw, because women’s sexuality is more punished it takes more to get them interested and for the nonmonogamous a new partner creates excitement. The monogamous are drawn to deep intimacy.)
Some women also have sex with many men because they think it demonstrates their value: men want to have sex with me, therefore I am valuable. Have you seen these posts?
Sex with Men, Hoping to Feel Beautiful
https://broadblogs.com/2011/06/20/sex-with-men-hoping-to-feel-beautiful/
I Wallowed In Self-Pity, Yet I Was A Bombshell
https://broadblogs.com/2013/11/13/i-wallowed-in-self-pity-yet-i-was-a-bombshell/
Huggy might be wrong in some ways, but I’m not sure if he’s wrong in his assessment of how women can have a double standard and annoy men being told they may not be hot enough or special enough to be lusted after and wanting sex. It’s good to wait sometimes and really know someone, but it’s sometimes nice to have the ego stroke that a woman wants you so bad, because you’re so sexy, hot and charming that she’s not actually promiscuous, but is open to casual sex if tempted enough. So it seems like many women want relationship and maybe many do. But those same women who do that, make exceptions for the “hot guys” or high status guys like huggy has said. They don’t have to be rich like huggy said, but a confidence, and maybe combined with looks, charm and swagger.
Like I said, my best friend who’s had a past with many women, had the confidence and gift of gab with people as well as women found him good looking too. Back when he was working out he had a heck of a strong v shape physique too. And it’s not like he was meeting women at bars where maybe women hook up there compared t women you met elsewhere. It would just be wherever he did because he’s such a social guy and knows so many people and many people know him. But the odds are the women he met were women who probably wanted relationships or had other guys be in a relationship with them before having sex.
But they’d initiate it with him. Decent guys stress about getting sex but not like hurting a woman’s feelings and so no lying or anything but being upfront which often can lead to a woman ending things if he just wants something casual. So a guy caught in a catch 22. But some guys can talk and flirt and text and it’s the woman that’s texting him to come over to her place, so he doesn’t have to deal with that guilt because he’s so hot to her, whereas other guys don’t get that benefit and in a way it’s telling other guys they are lesser in desirability. And maybe they are, but it’s why some guys who are actually quite the catch, but this happens to, to be annoyed, considering the same chick probably not only didn’t make a particular guy wait, but did some while freaky sex with said guy or a threesome. So in a way it’s like this site or such shames guys so wanting porn star sex, but yet they see other guys getting that treatment from the same woman? So they are like, why does he get this but not me? He’s better than me? Yeah that dude’s ego and well like every verified account of his view if actually valid (so many guys think they are hot stuff but they aren’t, but some actually do have valid views of their appeal) says such guys aren’t better and it’s actually the opposite. That hasn’t been an issue because I’ve just been back on dating scene, but I would admit to sometimes be suspicious if said woman was making me wait. If it’s legitimate and she’s that way that’s fine. If didn’t make a particular irresistible guy wait because she felt he was so hot or something but I have all these hoops to jump. Then I would be annoyed
I don’t know anyone personally who behaves this way, I don’t know anyone in college who behaved this way, and I haven’t seen much research on this behavior other than these two pieces of information: 1. There are some sub groups of women who get status by having sex with what they see as high status men, increasing their status with their friends. Those groups are limited because generally women are punished for having promiscuous sex 2. women who are most likely to be promiscuous are those who have low self-esteem and are trying to feel a sense of worth from men wanting them. If you look into that subcategory they probably would be drawn to men who are considered high status because having sex with a high status man seems to rub off on your own status.
Fraternity boys do the same thing. They get more points for having sex with high status girls. So it’s not just a gendered thing. Men who want to come across as high status frequently embellish their sexual exploits in terms of both quantity and quality, and other men tend to believe them, Which makes these other men feel less-than.
In this regard groupies are an interesting thing to study. One woman who was a groupie, and who wrote a book about it — I think it’s called “I’m with the band” — said the women did it because the musicians were “rock gods“ and having intercourse with the gods made the women feel higher status themselves. Cameron Crowe also toured with Led Zeppelin and wrote the movie “Almost famous” based on his experience and discussions with groupies, some of whom he developed a close friendship with. Think about his title, “almost famous” — by having sex with these rock gods the women glow in their reflected glory.
What is high status still depends greatly on your culture and some culture more than genetics. Victoria’s Secret models are very high status but they don’t have enough out to be able to reproduce. In other cultures obese women are high status, but far from healthy. Confidence can seem high status and people can grow more (or less) confident over time.
Generally women are more “picky” because they are more punished for having casual sex. So that’s a direct reason. And an indirect reason is that constantly being punished for being sexual makes women dampen their sexual interest, and after a while sexual desire diminishes and it just takes more to get women interested.
I’m not sure how you think I’m shaming men for wanting porn star sex. I’m just saying that porn star sex skews men’s ideas about reality. In porn they see women easily having sex and doing freaky things and then get mad at women who don’t do that with them. But porn is a fantasy and doesn’t reflect reality. Porn even creates desire for sexual behavior that women typically don’t do – which is great for porn because it keeps men coming back because they can’t get it in real life. Creating a desire in men for something they can’t get in real life creates a great market.
Sorry but you are dead wrong on this…Judaism REQUIRES that a man have sex with his wife. It also REQUIRES that he satisfy her. I know for a fact that Judaism is a very sex positive religion. In fact it was Jewish Law that outlawed the harem/concubine and polygamy system because the “alpha” men were taking too many wives and concubines. It was leading to social problems.
Now Islam is a different story. I know the Left has this love affair with Islam. However, it is by far the most sex negative religion of all as it pertains to female sexuality. Enough said.
Women, in general, love high value men . Period. I would argue that most women have no problem being a member of a harem for a high value man. If Leonardo DiCaprio were put out a post on social media seeking women to be part of his harem, thousands would apply. Maybe millions! Look at the late Hugh Hefner of Playboy. Look at all the women who willingly became members of his harem.
Hi Huggy,
No religion is really the problem. Each religion has a spectrum of sex-negative, gender unequal rhetoric on one end and increasingly sex-positive and gender-equal perspectives at the other end. One perspective is hurtful while the other lifts everyone up.
I know you think that all women want high-value men and are willing to live in polygynous situations to get them but I’m not sure why that perspective make sense to you or why you value it so much.
I suspect that pornography lies behind your perspective. Michael Kimmel studies men and masculinity and he notes that pornography presents women as anxious to have sex with men (high value? Not sure) but they have all the sex on screen and men watching it think that this reflects reality. “Gosh, all these women are having sex with these men, but they are not having sex with me,” and I suppose that the next thought is “I guess they are high-value and I’m not.”
But have you thought about jealousy? Even if women might want what you call high-value men how can they take the jealousy and loneliness? Women in Muslim countries have been surveyed on how they feel about polygyny and they pretty much all hate it. A historian friend of mine used women’s letters and diaries to write a book on early Mormon polygamy and entitled it “In sacred loneliness.”
And what is a high-value man? Tom Hanks in “Sleepless in Seattle”? Billy Crystal in “When Harry Met Sally”? Women flock to those movies but I don’t think that they are the type of men you are talking about. Bill Gates? He’s smart and rich, but not too good-looking. Rhett Butler is better looking but does he actually reproduce any better than Bill Gates? Recent studies have found that looks don’t correlate with reproductive ability. Victoria Secret models are too skinny to reproduce but they are considered highly attractive in our culture. High-value varies from one situation to another so the high school jock is highly valued when you are 16 but not so much when you are 30. Are high value men kind and generous?
I don’t understand the fidelity you have to this theory.
A high value man is one perceived to be strong, confident, powerful, rich. Check as many as possible. It’s nearly impossible for Tom Hanks to appear as anything other than those things because we all know who Tom Hanks is. He’d have to purposely make himself Forest Gump.
Now show me the romcom where the man is kind and generous, but broke with no prospects, and by the end of the movie or show is a kept man, while the woman goes off to work. Despite the endless “woke” rubbish coming out of Hollywood, I don’t remember seeing that story line.
Right now I’m in the middle of watching the Big Bang Theory series, and when Penny finally realises her acting career is going nowhere, she decides well, I’d better marry Leonard because she needs the provider in her life. There’s your typical romcom story line. Pretty but talentless woman marries successful man.
“Victoria Secret models are too skinny to reproduce”
That’s body shaming. Nobody is too thin to reproduce. You can starve yourself till you can’t reproduce, but not everybody who is thin is starving. Some are naturally thin.
When women watch Sleepless in Seattle or When Harry Met Sally they are thinking about Tom Hanks or Billy Crystal. They are wrapped in the story. Neither of these characters seem especially strong, confident, powerful, or rich. In the rom com Knotting Hill the Cinderella story is reversed — a rich famous woman marries a man who owns a humble bookstore and lives in a dull, cluttered apartment. I don’t remember what job Meg Ryan has in SIS but in Harry-Sally she is a self-sufficient journalist. Despite the Big Bang theory women typically have pretty decent jobs in the rom coms that women flock to. Who watches big bang? I doubt it’s too many women lusting after men.
Victoria’s Secret models actually are too thin to reproduce, as are storefront manikins (modeled on real women).
Even if this were true it still imposes monogamy which artificially restricts the sexual marketplace. All abrahamic religion is the same regardless of your post facto rationalizing. It suppresses sexual desire as well as mental curiosity to produce zombies who will kill on demand. It keeps women from being rational economic actors in the sexual marketplace resulting in lives of misery. Why would you defend it?
All fundamentalists religions punish women’s sexual desire. And all religions have a fundamentalist side, it’s just that some are stronger and more widespread in that fundamentalism and sex-negativity (for women at least) than others. I agree with your point and this question: “It keeps women from being rational economic actors in the sexual marketplace resulting in lives of misery. Why would you defend it?”
Looks like alphas and betas aren’t a real thing in humans. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4yz-P94n0Q
Right. And not even in nature, if you note the last part of this blog post.
Still, it’s interesting that men who think they are betas make arguments that are so insulting to themselves.
Sexual capitalism explains why a woman would desire a beta male. After she has spent her sexual capital on as many encounters with alpha males as she can, she leverages her remaining sexual capital towards using a beta male for his financial capital. She is acting as a rational economic actor in this case. Another possibility is that she has been traumatized by abrahamic Indoctrination into desiring an inferior male who is unlikely to initiate sexual transactions because of his own deficiencies.
abrahamic indoctrination?
Women rarely choose partners based on economics anymore since they can make their own money. They’re much more likely to want to be happy, have a happy relationship. They’ll have a more satisfying life overall by choosing that way, and know it. So women seem to be partial to kind, generous men, not domineering types. I believe men would also be partial to kind, generous women, not domineering types.
Kind and generous is superior to domineering.
It is precisely those well educated women making their own money who care the MOST about a man’s financial status.
Your name used to fit you better than it has lately. I had thought we were friends. Please be respectful in the future if you want me to respond. I don’t even read insulting posts, which is why I didn’t get past this part — After a quick skim.
We have a culture that values men and masculinity over women and femininity so that both men and women tend to be uncomfortable when the woman makes more money and is higher status than the man. But we are less patriarchal than we used to be. With greater equality both men and women are comfortable marrying people of equal status and wealth. That’s why women who make a lot of money and have high status marry men who make a lot of money and have high status.
“So women seem to be partial to kind, generous men, not domineering types.”
Only after their sexual capital has been exhausted chasing after alphas.
Nope. In fact on tinder women tend to avoid the best looking men because they think they will be stuck up and self-centered.
“Women rarely choose partners based on economics anymore since they can make their own money. ”
You would think, but women can’t defy their biological instincts.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2016-who-marries-whom/
“High-earning women (doctors, lawyers) tend to pair up with their economic equals, while middle- and lower-tier women often marry up. In other words, female CEOs tend to marry other CEOs; male CEOs are OK marrying their secretaries.”
Right. That’s because of patriarchy, not biology. We have a culture that values men and masculinity over women and femininity so that both men and women tend to be uncomfortable when the woman makes more money and is higher status.
We are less patriarchal than we used to be. Not so long ago men didn’t want to marry women who made any money at all because that threatened their masculinity. With greater equality both men and women are comfortable marrying people of equal status and wealth.
Culture. Not biology.
“That’s because of patriarchy, not biology. ”
Shouldn’t you admit at least, in the name of responsible academia, that this is merely your pet theory, and not one you can support with data?
What is more likely, that women would defy their biological imperative to reproduce and find companionship in the name of some supposed cultural conditioning, when all of society is completely beholden to feminism and telling women they can do anything a man can do… or is it more likely that despite the endless feminist bombardment, women can’t defy their biological inclination to find a higher status man? I know I can see the obvious answer here.
There is plenty of evidence that what is considered high value varies from culture to culture and even situation to situation. The high value guys in high school were football jocks. Those same guys aren’t so valued when you’re 30 years old. In some cultures men who are really good fishermen are valued but not so much here. Do they have the best genes or not? Bill Gates probably wasn’t very valued when he was in high school and yet he is very smart and very rich today. And I still don’t know how many women would want to have sex with him. Donald Trump is probably someone you would consider high-value and yet in one study most women had no interest in having sex with him at all — and this was years ago before he ran for president, but while he was still rich and back when it wasn’t so clear that he is not overly bright, despite his big brain and the very big words he uses – he knows the best words, you know? Sure, he has married three attractive women but did/do they want him because of his genes or because of his money?
The more money women make the more men care about women being able to make money. That’s a big cultural shift. Women who made money used to be threatening to men. The more money women make the less they care about a man making money. In the 1940s women didn’t care so much about look for love as does he make money. Now it’s the reverse. Who is the high-quality man?
And patriarchy is correlated with these things. In patriarchal cultures men are more threatened by successful women. We are less patriarchal now and men are less threatened by successful women.
I don’t get why you are so attached to your theory.
” The high value guys in high school were football jocks.”
Yeah, because if you’re a teenage girl, your biological instinct is that the strong / powerful / popular man is going to be good at acquiring resources. However then teenage girls grow up and realise that jocks are usually broke, then they suddenly lose interest. We don’t live on the Savannah anymore where the strong tough guy is needed to kill the Zebra. Isn’t it obvious what is going on here?
” In some cultures men who are really good fishermen are valued but not so much here.”
Yeah, so if you live on an island, and the primary resource is fish, then the one good at acquiring fish resources is popular with women. See the commonality?
“Do they have the best genes or not?”
Best genes only has meaning in a paricular environment.
“And I still don’t know how many women would want to have sex with Bill Gates”.
Judging by the harem that Hugh Hefner had into his 90s, I’d say plenty of women would if there was resources to be acquired.
” Donald Trump is probably someone you would consider high-value and yet in one study most women had no interest in having sex with him at all ”
I don’t buy it. Hugh Hefner kept a dozen hot 20 years olds as a harem when he was 90. Women go all starry eyed when face to face with money and fame. I mean, is the study comparing Donald Trump to other celebrities and he came off 2nd best? That’s not the issue, the issue is Donald Trump compared to the average man.
“Sure, he has married three attractive women [Ed: case closed] but did/do they want him because of his genes or because of his money?”
They want him because of his money! Just like all women they are attracted to the male who can acquire resources. Of course someone good at acquiring resources almost by definition has good genes, because that’s the circle of life, acquiring resources for your children.
“The more money women make the less they care about a man making money.”
Not exactly. Women can’t help themselves in being attracted to resource gatherers. However women will dump men a lot quicker if they have alternative sources of income. Once the romance dies off, if there’s another source of resources they’ll do a runner. Some evolutionists have suggested this is women’s way of spreading their genes. Have a child with a man. Acquire his resources. Then run to another man to do more gene mixing.
“I don’t get why you are so attached to your theory.”
Mmm, because I read the research and I’m not blind to the world around me?
I agree that it is common for both women and men to seek out high status partners, as you define them in terms of cultural preferences. As you mostly say, it is all more about culture than biology. If girls were interested in jocks in high school because of biology that would continue once they get out of high school. But it doesn’t. It’s common to seek out high status people for romantic partners and for friends as well. It’s an ego thing. “If I can get that person I am pretty great.“ But I don’t agree that women lineup to have sex with high status men. See what I wrote to huggy bear and Bob.
The women who were with Hugh Hefner were with him because they were seeking career opportunities. He had contact with a lot of celebrities and such. But they detested having sex with him. I saw an interview on CNN with Hugh Hefner and his three girlfriends and two of them said that they wanted to reserve sex for his number one girlfriend – no doubt to avoid having to have sex with him themselves. All the women disliked having sex with him. It’s part of the reason he was so fond of Quaaludes. You can read Holly Madison‘s memoir. You can also look up an interview where are the woman who eventually married Hugh Hefner told Howard Stern that she didn’t like sleeping with him. She knew he was old and would die soon and she was hoping to get his money. She didn’t say that last part out loud but do the math. It’s not about his superior genes. And Donald Trump didn’t just come out second best, women adamantly said they did not want to sleep with him.
If someone who is good at acquiring resources by definition has good genes then why is what people value varies from place to place? The genes themselves should determine what is attractive, not what is moneymaking in a particular place. And not too many women want to have sex with Bill Gates. Or Hefner Hugh Hefner.
As women can make their own money they are less interested in men who make money. This is a social pattern that has shifted with women’s moneymaking. As women make more money men are also more drawn to women who make money.
I don’t understand why you are so drawn to your theory when there is so much evidence that goes against it.
It was the first time for me to hear “alpha” and “beta.” I do not know if this theory is right or not, but to me it sounds like beta people make it easier for themselves to escape from facing their problems by making that theory. I do not think that beta people are inferior to alpha people, but I think lack of social communication skills is what they need to improve to build good relationships with women, such as asking for dating, talking to draw women’s attentions to have them know about beta people, and so on. Also, I do not think is right to conclude this problems as the outcome of evolution. Some women may prefer alpha men, but others may prefer beta men as the founding of University of Tennessee study. In these days, there are more beta people than alpha people than before, and they may face problems that alpha people do not face. They should understand this and try to improve their problems before looking themselves down and conclude that alpha people are better than beta people in terms of dating women.
I agree with your interpretation that beta men support this theory because it is easier to accept than the fact that their own problems prevent them from finding someone. No one wants to accept that they are the problem and that they need to change themselves or get help in order to solve it. Placing the blame on alpha men and women validates their current behavior. It makes them feel good. The irony is that the theory is unfounded and false. If these men did more research, they would probably realize they might have issues that need sorting out. The list of issues in the blog posting are very serious. Due to mental health stigma, it can be difficult to acknowledge that there is a problem, let alone seek help. Some things, like habits from their parents or poor social skills, men might not know that they have because it has been passed down through their family. Behavior that we inherit and grew up from family is the hardest to change.
Not all men are the same nor are they raised the same way. Those who were raised in a rough environment act in an alpha way. Yet that is not always the case because some actually come out to be much better than how they were raised (ie. passionate, caring, honest). So what determines if they are beta or alpha? I believe each person has their own way of dealing with problems wether it’s from growing up or from outside the household problems. I grew up in a moderate household with small family problems. But outside my house there were more problems like street gangs. But what help me be the person who I am today is all thanks to my mom because she taught me right from wrong. Taught me to respect others even if they didn’t respect you although there was a limit to what they could say or do. Eventually I grew out of the problems I had and did better. In which I consider myself a beta male.
Interesting to bring up the cultural angle. Thanks.
It is the first time for me to know about that men have expressions of alpha and beta. I feel that the alpha and beta features originate from genetic or personality differences. I don’t know if this category is really logical, but at least people who look around without being addicted to self-expression, men who spend as so-called beta are likely to be trusted by women and are certainly preferred I can sympathize. This is because people who are aware of authority and who are rich in self-expression are considered to be highly competitive and difficult to coexist with. Also, some of the people who can be positioned as beta can also lead people. The attitude of being upright and trying to lead women as men is still very good impression for women. I have not understood much about those definitions, but I can understand the tendency. After all kindness is important regardless of gender
The term beta man refers to men who are usually more sensitive and less aggressive. They are known to be very kind and usually more introspective and nerdy. They also tend to be more “wing-man” material. This definition helps put a light onto why “beta” men believe things that they known puts them down. They don’t have the resolve or the courage to try to push the envelope to argue back, instead they simply accept the role that has been given to them. In fact, this may actually make it easier for them to cope with their shortcomings. They most likely gain these traits though life when they try to expand their emotions and open up to others but in return they are turned down. This then most likely leads to them subconsciously fear that same reaction and in turn fear opening up to others, thus they become more introverted and shy. From there, it isn’t that far of a stretch for them to just accept that because of their personality they will never be special and they will never find that special someone. From my personal experience, I can say that what they are feeling is real and it is hard but that isn’t how it is or has to be. I am an introvert and I have always been one. I was always the wing-man to my extroverted friends and in a way I was simply the guy girls asked me to get information about other guys. I even faced multiple rejections and trust me each one hurt. But I never gave up, I never blamed my circumstances or my personality for my own short comings and eventually I found success. That’s why I know that being a “beta” doesn’t mean anything when it comes to dating and related stuff. The acceptance of theories that just serve to push betas down only further pushes them down when they need to be uplifted. It is must easier to just give up and blame the world for their problems, but if they are able to find the resolve to push against the stigma and stand up for each other then I believe they can push back and get rid of the whole “beta” term entirely.
People need to be aware of natural alphas (fit, good looking, dominant men) as opposed to artificial alphas (rich or powerful men who wouldn’t naturally get to mate). Natural alphas activate a woman’s lizard brain which causes her to fully enjoy her experience with him. Her body wants it so bad that even if a beta or artificial alpha has her attention she will get rid of them quickly when a natural alpha enters the room. Women only tolerate artificial alphas because they have something she wants like money or access to power. Her lizard brain is repulsed by him which makes the overall experience bad and the sex horrible.
You should take a look at romantic comedies. Women watch them over and over again. Not seeing a lot of alphas in there: Sleepless in Seattle, When Harry Met Sally, my big fat Greek wedding, Knotting Hill…
That’s because the purpose of romantic comedies isn’t to show the world as it is. They are to give betas hope and to brainwash women into acting against their natural wiring.
Hmmmm, Then why is it that women are such fans of romcoms?
The patriarchy that gave us romantic comedies was not invented for alpha males. Once more beta males started to survive rather than getting eaten by predators or dying of disease all the males got together and agreed to create a social system to keep gender relations in balance. Alpha males don’t need patriarchy. A woman will want them of her own free will.
OK, this makes no sense.
First, if you watch romantic comedies – the sort of things that women flock to — you will see that the lead is not an alpha male. Go and rent Sleepless in Seattle, and some of the others I mentioned before.
Me and all of my friends married kinder, gentler betas.
A study of tinder found that women avoided the best looking men because they thought they would be narcissistic and selfish.
Patriarchy is defined by worshiping the alpha male. No wonder so many patriarchal men want to worship the alpha male.
Marriage never works with an alpha male. There is too much variety in the world for him to be satisfied with one person for life. Women who have shaken off the influence of beta patriarchy also are never satisfied with just one partner. They go from partner to partner collecting children as they go. Beta patriarchy brainwashes women into thinking they need to bind themselves to one person for life but that’s not how humans work.
About half of both men and women prefer multiple partners and about half of each prefer one partner. Maybe it’s time to let people be who they are so that we stop pairing monogamous and nonmonogamous people together.
“Patriarchy is defined by worshiping the alpha male. No wonder so many patriarchal men want to worship the alpha male.”
Patriarchy has created Great Nations and Great Societies.
Matriarchy thus far has created Big Ghettos and Weak Men.
Ohio Ham Gets It!!! He or She speaks the real TRUTH.
No. First, there are no matriarchies that are equivalent to patriarchy, with female dominance. Rather, partnership societies. Like the Cherokee and Iroquois or Minoan Crete. And they were not societies of weak men or women. Agriculture created both great societies and patriarchy — under which women suffered.
Here are some theories about why patriarchy emerge from agriculture. And it’s ironic since women are probably the ones who created agriculture, having been the gathering side of the hunter gatherers. Agricultural deities/grain goddess are typically female, too: Demeter, Ceres, Brigid
https://broadblogs.com/2016/08/05/gender-inequality-emerged-from-agriculture/
“Not seeing a lot of alphas in there”
Really. I Googled “characteristics of alpha males”, took the first Google hit..
1. “The alpha male is persistent” …. People have actually said that romantic comedies promote stalking because they often involve a very persistent male.
2.” The alpha male can defend himself and his family.”… How many rom coms involve the guy defending his girl against the badies? Like most of them?
3.”The alpha male is in peak physical shape.” … This is Hollywood, the home of the beautiful people
4. The alpha male is courageous. He doesn’t lack fear, rather, he accepts that it exists and faces it at every opportunity. .. Bridget Jones’ Diary anyone?
5. The alpha male can entertain…. Of course, this is Hollywood.
6. The alpha male has stories to tell…. When Harry met Sally? Fully of stories.
7. The alpha male can laugh at himself. … 50 first dates?
8. The alpha male is humble…. That fooled you didn’t it, all those humble rom com leads.
10. The alpha male is a man’s man. He’s tough, often quiet, composed, but can joke.”.. isn’t that every rom com lead?
The difference between romcom romantic leads and real alpha males, is just that the movie frames the man as being unsuccessful in love, whilst still being in all other respects an alpha male. Why? Because the real alpha male would be onto the next woman the next day, and that doesn’t satiate the female fantasy. Who really believes that Tom Hanks or Hugh Grant are living celebate beta male lives until miss wonderful came along? That’s the romcom fantasy, framing an alpha male as living a beta life waiting for miss right.
Fred, you need to watch a romcom.
You need to meet an alpha male.You seem to have images of a big, over-muscled emotionally comatose guy who’s generally mean to women, but still somehow gets them to like him. Show me the romcom where the guy is a loser George Costanza type character. No, they always cast heart throbs like Hugh Grant. In the old days it was Cary Grant, or Clark Gable, Rock Hudson or James Stewart. These are the alpha males of Hollywood. The romcom leads.
Hugh Grant is good looking but not an alpha male. you should watch Nottinghill, 4 weddings and a funeral and music and lyrics. He’s not an alpha in any of them. But women loved those movies. Jimmy Stewart is not an alpha male. In gone with the wind both Vivian Leigh and Clark Gable are alphas. at least at first. By the end he is nice to Scarlet — and quite the family man. But with Clark Gable his main attraction is that he is attractive and confident, which are characteristics that Americans like in both men and women and qualify as healthy human beings, not dominant alphas.
But I will say that when it comes to symbolism/fantasy we do live in a culture that eroticizes male dominance so that it can seem sexy, so long as it doesn’t apply to you in your personal life. I have two friends who wanted to marry dominant men, both did, and now both are divorced. My brother used to think it was funny that our friend Kelly was attracted to Jay because he was dominant and then divorced him because he was dominant. Because we eroticize male dominance it can’t seem sexy in fantasy but it’s much less attractive in real life.
You say Hugh Grant is not an alpha male, but he’s been seen with dozens of hollywood type starlets. You’ve become confused about Chimanzee alpha males versus human alpha males. Humans become alpha males by being charming, confident, self deprecating etc. No matter how much some Hollywood film puts an alpha male in a beta story line, they are still an alpha male.
Tell me, when a boy watches Molly Ringwald in Pretty in Pink, what does he really see, a geeky unpopular, ugly, despised schoolgirl, that all the cool guys hate? Or does he see a beauty he falls in love with, with the fantasy stroking his ego that hey, maybe he could have this girl because she’s the unpopular girl in the class? It’s the same with Hugh Grant, putting the alpha male in the beta plot, makes him accessible, but it’s a suspension of disbelief from what we know to be true. Making the teenage heartthrob of Molly Ringwald as the geeky ugly girl, is a fantasy, not the reality of Molly Ringwald’s persona.
I’m not talking about the real-life Hugh Grant but the roles he plays that women like so well. I love him in those roles. Would never want to be with the real guy.
One more thing: it gives a clear ideal to strive for. I guess one of the reasons these theories exist is helping “beta” men to get out of their situation. A lot of men are completely lost in their lives and have no idea how to fix themselves. For most of them there is no guiding hand to help. Men rule the world, so they don’t need any help, right? So this alpha-beta male theory can be seen as an attempt to create such guidance.
BTW, recently Guardian created a very interesting series on modern masculinity: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfPKMurs-OY
I like how you get to the root problem which would create healthier and happier men if these issues were addressed:
Untreated depression
Social anxiety
Any kind of psychological trauma from the past, ranging from being bullied to being rejected by women in the early adult years due to crappy luck (it does happen)
Habits/beliefs that they inherited from their parent(s) that set them back. For example, some men on the past looked down on personal grooming and attempts to dress stylishly because it was not “masculine”. If their sons inherited this habit then guess what happens
Messed up sexuality
Poor social skills
But, depending on how it’s defined I don’t think “alpha” is the best role model. And it seems like these guys just give up: I’m not an alpha.
I think the video is well worth watching.
“I like how you get to the root problem which would create healthier and happier men if these issues were addressed:…”
Personally, I think at least 50% of the ills and dysfunction you see in men today revolves either directly or indirectly around women.
Solutions:
1) Men MUST be socially de-programmed from all the lies and miseducation.
2) Men MUST lower their expectations with women.
3) Accept the fact that MOST women are simply incapable of loving a man the way he
needs to be loved. They love their kids and themselves, ONLY.
4) Men NEED to cleanse their minds and bodies by rejecting this feminist ideology. Flat
out REJECT it.
5) Related to #4….Focus on being the BEST MAN you can be. Embrace what has been
labeled as toxic masculinity. It creates MEN. Men create great nations and societies.
6) Lastly, I would suggest that men need to have a spiritual life. It can be religious or
whatever. I believe in God. I study and read lots of Judaism as it it the root of both
Christianity and Islam. So, I think God should be central.
If men would adopt these suggestions, their lives would dramatically improve. The simple key is to make women (not sex) a much lower priority. Sex with women is widely available today. There are men I know who work 60-70 hours a week to “stay in good graces” with a woman who really does not love him. He is merely just an ATM.
Why so upset with women? We are wonderful 🙂
Why embrace toxic masculinity? Toxic masculinity shows up in atrocities like mass murder, barroom brawls, battering, rape, sexual harassment. There are good things to embrace about masculinity — that both men and women would do well to embrace within themselves. That’s not the toxic part.
I guess you have had some bad experiences with women. Just like many women have had bad experiences with men. That doesn’t make all men or all women the problem.
“Your example actually doesn’t make sense because women don’t prefer big cocks. Despite what porn suggests. In fact, one study in Africa found that women married to men with large cocks were more likely to cheat, and the reason was because sex less likely to hurt. So in a way a preference for smaller cocks is not learned it’s a matter of less pain.
But give me an example of something that I claim is learned that you say is not.”
I already gave you an example: Why women like tall men. Why women like men with money and status is another example.
When you assert that such behavior is learned by women, you are in effect denying that women have the mental faculties to merely express their preferences. You are invalidating their choices.
So, you have to go to Africa to find a study to attempt to rebutt my assertion that women prefer cocks that are larger than average? Well, I don’t know about Africa, but women here in America are far more likely to cheat on their husbands or any other man if he is just average in the cock department. I have had women say this to me. I have asked several women about this issue. Over 90% stated the “ideal” cock for them was around 8 inches and with girth. Oh I guess that is learned behavior not preference?
Lastly, my apology for being offensive. But, I am not sure just what I said was offensive. Whatever.
When I have brought up the topic in class some of my non-African students have made a similar comment.
There is a cultural preference for tall man but that doesn’t mean every woman prefers Tallman. I have more than one short male friends who have tall wives And I have been attracted to both the short and tall men.
For all the railing against the old world, ways, and the supposed advances of modernism, supposed feminism, liberation defined by the smallest possible group, thereby being subjugated the most by everyone else, supposedly, etc., no one seems the slightest interested in the fact that their liberation socialist, psychologic duality based philosophies, if you could call them that, are also the extinction in a can.
First, people in gender equal societies have not gone extinct. And you can find gender equal societies among the forgers on every continent.
Second, I don’t approve comments unless I read them and yours was pretty long and arduous so I posted the part I read. See my comment policy:
https://broadblogs.com/comment-policy/
Complete censorship of my comment when you post 1/20 th of it because you disagree with it; totalitarianism isn’t feminism.
It wasn’t censorship. I won’t post anything that I won’t read. And I won’t read long, arduous posts. Or too many posts even if they’re shorter.
Actually, writing long, arduous posts is self-censorship because no one will wade through all that.
If you care to make your point using fewer words and simpler language I’ll read it (so long as it’s not insulting). If you read through comments you will see that I do post comments that disagree with me.
While a discussion about the rise of beta male identity must touch on the perception of gentleness and hopelessness, I feel like this discussion is missing an deeper analysis of how these self-described beta males interact with masculinity. The first sentence of this post mentions how beta men are less macho than their alpha men counterparts. Assuming we buy into this inherently ethnocentric/western and binary depiction of masculinity, beta males are still recipients of patriarchal dividends and benefit from structures of sexism. In my opinion, it sounds like these beta men are jealous and bitter. This jealousy seems to comes from not being “competitive” to get women.However, I believe that the root of this bitterness comes from not receiving the women that these beta men believe that they deserve. Beta men and incel (involuntary celibate) narratives are built on the commodification of women’s bodies as well as entitlement (both sexist and heterosexist).
The author wonders why these beta men “push a theory that puts them down and leaves them no hope?” I believe that its rooted in sexism. Painting oneself as a victim who can’t get a woman paints the picture of a struggle that doesn’t necessarily exist. Through festering about how beta men suffer from not being macho, beta men have managed to elude their participation in sexism and the patriarchy while still reinforcing patriarchal narratives. To continue the discussion of beta men with questions framed by beta men is to continue normalizing their entitlement to the women’s bodies they commodify.
Well we must be able to discuss things, even if the patriarchy brings them up.
But if you think that discussing this strengthens the patriarchy (and I’m still not clear on your reasoning of how it would do so) I guess you shouldn’t have added to the conversation. I actually think that not discussing these things emboldens the patriarchy. Then they are the only ones who have a say and no other ideas can counter them.
No, you’re right and I worry that I didn’t word my thoughts effectively. I’ll try once more.
Yes, we must discuss things that the patriarchy brings up. However, we must consider whether we are entertaining or critically confronting their assumptions.
Beta men speak of how frustrated they are with not being able to “get” a woman, unlike their alpha men counterparts. Your post offers possible reasons why beta men can’t get women. While it is an interesting post, it doesn’t confront the fact that these beta men aren’t entitled to women’s bodies to being with.
I believe that the “beta male” identity functions as a smokescreen to mask their sexist entitlement to women’s bodies. After all, does the construction of the beta male identity serve women? To me, the frustration of beta men echoes sentiments like “why don’t I get women like the alpha males? I am a man and I deserve women too!” To assume men deserve women’s bodies is both sexist and heterosexist. We’re caught up discussing the alleged deficiency of beta men instead asking why they believe they are entitled to women in the first place.
I was hoping that your post would offer a more critical response confronting their misogynistic entitlement in the first place. Omitting such a response can be read as complicity supporting their entitlement to women’s bodies.
The point of this post was not to discuss why so-called “beta” men can’t get women. It was to discuss why they are drawn to a theory that insults them. That is a different frame than the one that they use, by the way. And I don’t see how discussing why so-called beta men are drawn to a theory that insults them helps patriarchy.
I believe someone is not completely a “beta” or an “alpha”. People tend to put themselves or other people under one term, however a person can be either on a given day or situation. Some people act more alpha when they are intoxicated, around friends they are trying to impress, or around people they feel they need to change their personality for. In the same way people may act beta when they are uncomfortable for any reason. When around people they don’t know one may act much more alpha, or much more beta. Over time people can also change from a mostly beta person to a mostly alpha person, and vice-versa. I agree that people tend to give up and call themselves beta, which is not a good mindset. It is possible to be an alpha introvert sometimes and be a beta introvert others. I do not think classifying yourself as one or the other is a healthy way to think.
I completely agree that the “beta” classification is accepted by people dealing with stress, problems, and personal struggles when it is truly not something that you are born into. I don’t think that you are born either an “alpha” or a “beta”. I think a lot that these classifications have to do with is your unique upbringing and societal stereotypes. Those who fall under the “alpha” category display stereotypical characteristics of masculinity, being outgoing, not being afraid to pursue, and asserting dominance. I think that the only reason these identities have grown is because we have allowed for the alpha stereotype to grow while also allowing the alpha stereotype to dominate the image of “a guy a woman will go for” when in reality that is just not true. I just think its not necessary to flaunt your masculinity to win over a girl or to try and make yourself seem superior to those that choose to stay more reserved or are dealing with their own personal battles (and not worrying about what others think).
It feels as though some of these ideas have also stemmed from the media. Most of the times the guys who are forward and muscular and jock like always get the girl. The nerd or the beta shows up and usually just helps the girl find herself. And I think people may think that the more they self depreciate the more attention they will get or bring to the subject causing their status in the eyes of other people to rise. Beta or Alpha though woman and men both have preferences and it just reads into life game of trying to find the spot you fit in and to find your own spotlight. With that said I completely agree with the findings that this comes out of being rejected at an early age as well as depression. I wonder exactly how far people are willing to push this argument that there are only betas and alphas.
Yeah, I don’t know if it’s true that there are betas or alphas, and the study that first coined the idea was faulty, but given what people mean by them as personality types, some people seem to fit more one than the other.
One thing that I thought of while reading this was what an Alpha and a Beta look like to most people. The things that came to mind that surprised me were that people see Alphas as confident and Betas as cowards. This is definitely not the case. This is also one of the main reasons why there is such a negative connotation with being a Beta. Being confident has nothing to do with whether you come across as an Alpha or a Beta. Self confidence is just a good quality to have regardless of who you are. Most people prefer someone who knows how to be gentle and affectionate. I don’t think this makes you an Alpha or a Beta; it just makes you a good person. To me, the difference between being an Alpha or a Beta is whether you’re the loudest person at the party. Nothing more and nothing less.
It does seem though that it’s always or often men who who have to work on their social skills and it’s put on them if they aren’t attracting women or something they aren’t doing right. Granted, many times guys are doing something wrong, whether it be too timid or then in the complete opposite way and be too aggressive or “thirsty” , etc. But women have just as much to fix themselves, but it’s never on women to work on their part because they don’t have to even if their social skills are quite lacking even though they may think they are hot stuff.
Gender roles create advantages and disadvantage is for each gender. What you are describing occurs because we put so much burden on men to pursue, but to do it in just the right way. And also because we punish and repress women’s sexuality, so that it takes quite a bit for women to be interested. I don’t really like gender roles.
Answer me this: why do women like tall men? Surely because a tall is more dominant over the other males.
Because it’s learned. My sister-in-law just got back from Pompeii where the average person was short and tall men were forced to be gladiators – Which is quite a like being a prisoner.
Why does our culture prefer tall women? Because we prefer dominant women? Actually, the preference for tall women didn’t take effect until we came to associate attractiveness with Fashion models on runways. And fashion models are tall because it’s easier to see the clothes on a runway with a tall person wearing them.
Oh boy, back to the “everything is learned” theory. Who teaches us this? I never had a school class teaching us tall men are better, I never saw a movie claiming that. In fact many top actors are very short. The only time I hear about it is when someone does a socialogical study about what women want, that this always tops the list. In fact, I wish I’d actually known this when I was in my 20s, because I’m 6″4, that would have been a confidence boost. But this is a secret women mostly keep in their heads.
I don’t believe our culture cares less about tall women. You go ask some men their top 5 wish list for women, I don’t think being tall will make the cut. Culture does not revolve around fashion runways. I’ve never even been to a fashion runway, how can that be influencing me?
Cultural differences clue us in to what is learned. And that is one of the main things that sociologists study. I don’t know how much men care about women’s height but our cultural notion of female beauty is that taller is better. Most male movie stars are paired with tall women. Our culture values height in men — Taller men make more money, for instance — but Pompeii did not share that value, primarily using tall men for fighting entertainment.
“Cultural differences clue us in to what is learned.”
No, cultural differences clue us into divergent evolution. Prove me wrong. Here’s your big chance.
“Most male movie stars are paired with tall women”
That’s only because you get a nice tight shot when both heads are in the frame. I bet Tom Cruise isn’t paired witha very tall woman.
“but Pompeii did not share that value, primarily using tall men for fighting entertainment.”
Gladiators were slaves, so that’s hardly a rational comparison. And it wouldn’t make sense throwing a small man to the lions as an equal fight. In any case, by slave standards, a gladiotor is prestigious.
Tall man in Pompeii were basically enslaved and forced to fight as gladiators.
Here’s a cultural difference for you that clearly it is not evolutionary. American Indian women were not shamed for sexuality, nor pacific islanders, and you don’t find the Victorian pattern among them. But when Europeans came with Christianity and greater power their culture completely changed To a more Victorian mindset. We are now leaving the Victorian mindset and women sexuality has changed along with it. Culture changed, not a huge evolutionary shift.
Or, do you really think that Scottish men once wore kilts (skirts) because of some evolutionary genetic trait that was unique to Scottish men – when they hardly ever wear them anymore, but do sometimes for cultural reasons?
I could go on, and on, and on …
“Because it’s learned.”
What?! That makes no sense to me.
I guess women preferring men with bigger cocks as opposed to smaller cocks is learned behavior too?
Your example actually doesn’t make sense because women don’t prefer big cocks. Despite what porn suggests. In fact, one study in Africa found that women married to men with large cocks were more likely to cheat, and the reason was because sex less likely to hurt. So in a way a preference for smaller cocks is not learned it’s a matter of less pain.
But give me an example of something that I claim is learned that you say is not.
By the way you will notice that I edited your comment. Typically when someone is disrespectful I just don’t answer at all, but I decided to edit and respond here.
I’m ONE HUNDRED PERCENT beta and am loved by the ladies !
I think confidence makes someone attractive, and many who exude confidence do so out of arrogance or practice in portraying confidence, whereas many who lack confidence are simply more aware of life’s complexity.
It makes arguing with people difficult, because the honest debater wants to be sure of the facts, and appears hesitant and uncertain, whereas the dishonest debater knows the trick is to keep the topic changing fast.
What we all want is someone who has both confidence and honesty…
I agree. Confidence plus honesty is a great combination. And oddly enough I think one can fake it until they make it when it comes to confidence — simply because I think that all of us come imbued with the potential for high self-esteem. Children seem to have high self-esteem, unless they are abused, for instance.
I agree with the author of the blog that social and mental health issues are contributing factors that prevent betas from successfully dating, like untreated depression and poor social skills. I believe there is a lot of pressure for men to look and behave like an alpha male in order to get a woman. However, this is not true like the study indicated and many women prefer non-egotistical men. In our society, men are not allowed to be “weak” and so the appropriate and necessary resources/support are not in place for men to get the help that they need. Moreover, there is competition amongst men themselves and toxic masculinity is a main contributing factor and sadly, betas get bullied or emasculated in front of other men like, “oh, why are you such a pussy?” Betas using the evolution theory is too simple and does not take into account the complexities that men face in modern society today.
Thanks for offering your thoughts on this.
I think it is a way to justify their circumstances without it being their responsibility. The people that say this are often single, and they say this as a reason as to why they are single…not always but often. Now, if I assume what they are saying is right, women prefer alphas, then it isn’t my fault I’m single….I just got the biological short end of the stick. If women prefer betas, and I’m a beta AND I’m single…. that’s a whole can of worms. What’s wrong with me then, what am I doing wrong or not doing. Saying it’s the beta theory puts the onus outside ones self, and that’s safer for people in general, men and women.
Also, Adam ruins everything did a piece about alphas and betas and that whole theory is based on a very bad study of wolves that was disproved later. Men, by in large, are not alphas or betas, but an expression of either one depending on the situation. So, the premise of that argument is also off.
That makes a lot of sense.
This read was very interesting because i have heard of this before amongst my friends and it is something that I have seen personally. I think that there are a couple things that go into this. One thing that I have noticed is these guys comparing themselves to other guys that might work out more and be more athletic which from the start might discourage someone because they do not think they are as good looking. with this lowered confidence these guys might also just be very nervous talking to people and not want to talk to them because they dont feel like they are enough so they use this beta theory to say that girls only want people who are alphas when in reality its just people that are approachable friendly and confident. in my case for a long time I was very nervous talking to people, I didn’t not know what people would think of me on a first impression so I would try to avoid meeting random people but when I went out I noticed that other guys that might be considered alphas did not have this issue and noticed that they would talk to a lot more people than I typically would.
Interesting thoughts. Thank you.
In fact, on Tinder women prefer the less attractive men because they think the more attractive men are likely to be selfish stuck up snobs. Certainly not necessarily true but a common belief. And men are much more likely to all want the most attractive women on OKCupid — but that’s not true of women.”
I’m going to pretend that’s why I haven’t had any luck on tinder. Well not really on any, but some reason I’ve had more matches on bumble whereas not much on tinder. I can’t figure that one out. Same profile and pictures about so not much different. And I’m one that will of course swipe right on pretty, cute and hot women. But have and also swiped right on average looking women who seemed cool by their profile. I can’t do that for every woman, I have to find her somewhat attractive, but it’s not just like hot women that swipe where other guys may do that. But in saying that, seriously there;s a weird difference too. Yes there have been women I didn’t find attractive on bumble, but more often cute, pretty and some hot women matching with me. But never getting much from tinder, the women who would like me on it. Well “Buzz’s girlfriend” (home alone), she’s been and her gfs been making their way on tinder for whatever reason. I mean I’m glad being liked so it’s like conflicting, but man ha. I think I might’ve even reenacted it one time as in “Buzz’s gf, woof!” and then for some reason lightly slam my phone face down like Malcullaly Culkin put down the portrait of buzz’s girlfriend in the movie. So basicallly buzz’s girlfriend liking me on tinder, meanwhile I’ve been matched women looking like and pretty like “Bernadette’ from Big Bang Theory. So yep Buzz’s girlfriend be trying to get in my dms while, Bernadettes all over that bumble. If you can make sense of this contrast, let me know because I can’t make sense of it.
I wonder if more men use tinder which would make it harder for any man to get a match? I don’t know.
I have to agree that more beta men agree with the idea that women prefer alpha males instead of betas, mainly because they do not accept their insecurities and jump to conclusions. When in the contrary more females prefer betas proven by a study. I believe that as a society we have learned to be the alpha male or in my Mexican culture a macho man. If and individual does not fit this description they already look down on themselves and feel inferior. But in reality there isn’t a difference, just personality traits are different and peoples ego. Most alpha males are super egotistical and rude individuals. That is not something women necessarily want or prefer in their lives. Overall betas do struggle with dating due to their social anxiety and shyness due to insecurities and lack of confidence. Lack of confidence is what brings betas to conclude the false theory of alphas being superior.
Thank you
But a lot of research has shown that women care much more about emotional connection in sex than men do. I don’t know that that is innate, Rather, we live in a culture that punishes women’s nonmonogamous sexual behavior. And actually both women and men prefer emotionally connected sex, but it’s easier for men to do it and come out unscathed – probably because women are more punished for the same behavior (as you indicate by suggesting that a promiscuous woman will try to act like she is monogamous even to a promiscuous man).”
I don’t know if I believe huggy all the way. It’s anecdotal, but also this. Many women will not want to sleep with a guy if they want a relationship even if they are attracted to him and even if he’s upfront about wanting just sex. I feel it well send off “he’s just like every other guy signal and she will end talking to the guy. I think it’s why there are male players. I don’t think it’s right to do. It’s weird, I think even women who are open to casual sex. I think respect is stil important too. So I keep hearing “hook up culture”. and like young people in their early and mid 20s don’t date or something. And I’m thinking, well it depends on what you consider a date. If you go on tinder which many early 20s and mid 20s use now and meet up with the girl, well that’s a date. It doesn’t matter if it leads to sex that night. It seems like date often is attached to “set up for relationship” when it can be many things. It can be a way to know each other deeply to set up a relationship, friendship maybe, or to just have fun or out of boredom. It can be to see the person and go out somewhere even when the intentions are both casual. Guy’s may want to just talk and then have a girl netflix and chill. But I don’t believe that happens a ton even for women open to casual sex. And the reason is because I feel women want to feel respect even if they just want sex too.
The way a hook up happens is like meeting a girl at a party and drinking and a guy is hot or charming and just a strong attraction and later that night a one night stand or making out or oral sex happens. Or at a club or bar. Like where there is good time where both know each other from the social situation. But most guys even the casanovas don’t get all or probably not even most of their sexual experience just from that. A lot is getting a girl’s number or giving her that you met whether in a classroom, at the mall, from friends, work or cold approached somewhere. That means the talking was not that long and so many minutes to where there was flirting and attracting. From there the girl or guy texts each other the next day. And even if it becomes flirty, usually it would back fire on the guy upon that if he asks the girl if she wants to come over for a movie after he’s only see her in person for a few minutes which they exchanged numbers. I haven’t done that and it’s because I don’t let my thrist take over and realize most women don’t want to feel like nothing but a fuck toy, even if they are up to sex. That;s why the same girl who declines a guy she’s talking to, his netflix and chill request, may go out for drinks with another guy who asks her to come out with his friends. And if upon meeting said guy out at party with said guy or bar or concert and the connection is hot who she is seeing in person and connecting with. She may later that night have sex with him and hook up. I feel even for casual sex, more often it’s the latter or just from meeting someone new at a party or someone you already been talkng to or seeing and they go out with you and it leads to sex. Rather than it happens that much with simply getting a girls number and talking and then she comes over to fuck just from texting after only having talked tot he guy in person a few minutes upon getting numbers. I think even promiscuous women prefer meeting up or a date like event with the guy first, face to face not as his home before anything sexual were to happen eve if she doesn’t want a relationship.
And hook up culture tends to be alcohol-filled, partly so the guys can work up the courage, and partly so the girls can tolerate it – or so I read from research in a New York Times piece.
A lot of people feel pressure to hook up in college because they think that’s what you’re supposed to do. And yet on average one university survey found that while everyone believed everyone else was hooking up every weekend it turned out that by the end of college people had had only seven unique sex partners, which is much different from what hook up culture is supposedly about.
Well I’m saying exclude college out of it. This means for 20 something year olds whether it be in college or not in college or someone 24 is often out of college unless graduate studies. But that term isn’t just for college students but millennials in 20s or such. But like I said, that’s not true because that would mean the only sex guys are having would be from party hookups or bar one night stands. The reality is that it’s not a very good option for regular sex for even the hot Casanova’s. So it’s false. Guys who are casonovas and promiscuous May want all one night stands.
The reality is most guys even ones doing well? Will not stick to just one option for getting laid. Which means they aren’t going to have parties or bars be their only option for sex. It’s a numbers game and it’s a slow rate of hoping for sex often at parties. It’s alcohol but often timing. It’s like meeting a girl who might’ve had hormones going strong to where she was horny of more so than usual. Like just perfect chemistry and timing that is fleeting. A girl can normally not be about fucking most often but the perfect storm of stuff and the guy meeting the girl who just happens to be at party with something prior to where she was horny and he happened to have a look that reminded her or someone really sexy to her, she has alcohol taking away her inhibitions. It’s more constant for guys, so it’s like you’re counting on a lot of things as a guy to have that happen. So that means a lot of the other sex has to either be from relationships even if short or fwb, but these often come not from a one night stand but getting each other’s number and then meeting out somewhere which may lead to sex.
The Netflix and chill often comes from a fwb situation but that came from the guy and girl first going out of meeting out at a party with friends or wherever which lead to sex and then keeping in contact and coming over to hook up after that. Like how many girls even promiscuous ones will just come to a guys place who she only spoke face to face for a few minutes? And then just text or talking on the phone? Most still need to want to see him in person not at his place before having sex even if they want or are up to casual sex.
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I can’t actually remember what the prior conversation was about though. From what I read about hook up culture women who are newer to campus are more likely to engage in it because I think it’s part of the college experience but tend to use alcohol to tolerate it. FWB is a little different situation Since hopefully you are at least friends and she trusts the guy. Well the one woman who had painful experiences with hook up culture described FWB as being without the friends part. And numerous studies have shown that women are much less likely than men to have sex with a random person they don’t know. They tend to need more emotional connection, maybe because of the way they are socialized. There is also more fear of male strangers.
@ Bob..
“Many women will not want to sleep with a guy if they want a relationship even if they are attracted to him and even if he’s upfront about wanting just sex. ”
This makes no sense to me, at all. So, just when WILL a woman want o sleep with a man? When she is NOT attracted to him or when she does NOT want a relationship? The only time a woman will sleep with man when she is NOT attracted to him is when that man is offering her something else in return (i.e., money, status, non sexual companionship, transactional sex etc.).
No It didn’t come out that, since many women want relationships even if they are open to sex. They as a result, women, don’t want to just come over to a guys house they hardly know. And a guy being upfront about wanting sex with a woman whom he just got her number after a few minutes of convo. And they text a few times.
Even if it’s going well and she is attracted to him. 90% of the time, him asking her to just going to her place for sex when they only seen if each other face to face a few minutes. Well most women other than straight big time thots aren’t coming over even if they are women open to casual sex. Most want to see the guy they’ve hardly talked to face to face a bit more out somewhere that’s not his home. You see party and bar hook ups are where a guy and girl are usually talking face to face and flirting for atleast an hour but often a couple hours. But most guys if they want regular sex can’t just rely on the same well and network and go various ways which includes a cold approach, being introduced to women by friends, dating, relationships. Hook up culture is exaggerated, if it was all or most sex would be had from mostly and nothing but one night stands at parties, bars or clubs.
Dating, relationships, even just short ones count just as much if not more for the ways young men are getting sex.
I found this post to be fascinating because it introduces the rationale behind certain relationship dynamics between men and women. There is a common phrase that is often asked to couples, “Who wears the pants in the relationship?” However, it is never asked why the individual wears the pants. I found it interesting that some men would prefer not to be an alpha, however, the rationale behind it makes sense. In a relationship, there are two individuals with two totally different lives that impact how they interact with one another. The reason why a man may want to be the beta in the relationship or in general is that without knowing it they have developed certain traits and/or life experiences that prevent their dominance. When reading the post, it was refreshing to see that there are some men who do not want to be an alpha. However, I do believe that the key to any relationship is mutual understanding, respect and equality overall. Therefore, when there is an alpha in the relationship it prevents both individuals from understanding one another. If one person is making all of the decisions, whether it be as simple as choosing what to have for dinner it can take away the value of the other individual’s voice. Connecting back to the Beta theory, it has immense value because it allows one to be vulnerable and understanding of one another; however, it can also be toxic because of the issues behind them (“untreated depressions”, “social anxiety”, “poor social skills”, etc).
Thanks for your thoughts. But it seems like most of these men that I’m talking about are actually complaining about being betas.
Correct!! They are complaining because they know in the real world that women only prefer beta males later in life for marriage and long-term relationships.
Just look at major college campuses. Right off the bat, most women reject 60%+ of the men. Why? Too beta. They lack sexual attraction. This extends in to adulthood. Women only want beta males for relationships and marriage.
They do not want these beta men for sex. That’s why when the average man (a beta male) gets married, the sex disappears. Why? Because the woman NEVER found him sexually attractive in the first damn place. Yes, she had lots of sex with the man BEFORE marriage. This was just to “get him.”
I have seen these BS surveys of married men who talk about how sexually satisfied they are being married. It’s BS. If so, then why the growing numbers of sexless marriages? Why are men often complaining about the lack of sex in their marriages?
It does not add up because it is just untrue.
Where do you get your data from?
Studies show that only about 11% of the student body likes hook up culture – straight sex.
Studies consistently show that women prefer emotional sex (and so do men) which you don’t go with alpha males.
Studies also shows that most people think that others are hooking up a lot when on average students have only seven unique partners over four years of college. That isn’t a whole bunch of Women flocking to alpha males for sex
How does your “11% like hook up culture” statistic refute the points that were made? Yes, women don’t want to just hook up with the alpha males, they want to rope him in for themselves to keep. They probably won’t pull that off, but that’s what they are angling for. Then when the women say they “don’t like the hook up culture”, what they actually mean is “I liked hooking up with the alpha male, but it really sucked when he dumped me the next day, ergo I don’t like hook up culture. BTW, tomorrow I’m going to the beer hall with another alpha male”.
“Studies also shows that most people think that others are hooking up a lot when on average students have only seven unique partners over four years of college. That isn’t a whole bunch of Women flocking to alpha males for sex”
That’s the average, what is the median? It sounds to me like the alphas are hooking up with 50 women, and the betas are getting nothing, resulting in an average of 7.
If some people are looking up a lot but overall the average is only seven new partners in four years than your average population is having very little sex. That definitely doesn’t fit the “all women want to have sex with alpha males” scenario.
And on your other point, there’s no clear data that women prefer alpha males — well I’m sure some women do —but I have offered some evidence that many prefer so-called betas.
Ies — well I’m sure some women do —but I have offered some evidence that many prefer so-called betas.”
You’ve already been shown a ton of data. The fact that only half of men in history have reproduced. The clear statistics about women marrying up, and the divorce rate when they marry down.
I’ve never heard of women waiting in line to have sex with an alpha male.
I don’t know what data you’re talking about.
As I’ve already noted, we live in a patriarchal society that is unconsciously internalize by both women and men so that men tend to feel uncomfortable being paired with a woman who is financially superior to him and women tend to feel uncomfortable being paired with a man who is financially inferior to her. So it works both ways. With feminism it would no longer be a problem.
Well obviously they are not aware that they are waiting in line. They are metaphorically waiting in line, because they won’t sleep with the betas, but they have to wait until they get the attention of the alpha male. Then they delude themselves that they might be anything but a passing fling to them.
“With feminism it would no longer be a problem.”
Feminism can’t change millions of years of evolution. It doesn’t change how people feel. You might be able to sometimes get an authoritarian government to legislate your ideas, but you can’t change what people feel. It will be very difficult to study this question though, because successful men won’t marry feminists, and feminists, in part are anti-marriage.
You seem to continue to live in the dream world where millions of years of men being the hunters has had no effect on biology. How could that possibly be true?
People are already more comfortable with women making more money than their male partners than they used to be. That’s because of feminism, not authoritarianism. And the shift wouldn’t be possible if it were biological. But because we still have patriarchy we still find the discomfort I was discussing though.
And like I said, there’s no evidence of women clamoring to have sex with alphas.
Women Want Emotionally Connected Sex. Why? https://broadblogs.com/2017/07/06/women-want-emotionally-connected-sex-why-3/
Men Watch Porn, Women Read Romance. Why? https://broadblogs.com/2011/05/16/men-watch-porn-women-read-romance-why/
I feel that Betas push theory that is insulting to them because they lack the confidence and security in who they are. There are so many factors that hinder anyone from having self-confidence and I think in this case, it is the culture that serves as a huge influence. Men, just like women, have an established image in society. Women must be sexy with curves and men are seen as strong with muscles. When we do not fulfill these requirements, it can all too often become a feeling of obsoleteness. When paired with another factor such as untreated depression or social anxiety, it is easy to dismiss women to only wanting dominating “alphas.” It is much easier to write off women this way than it is to admit and healthily resolve one’s own mental illnesses or underlying issues. To truly reach self-awareness and achieve a growth that overcomes these issues is a journey that many do not even make in life. There are many adults who still live with these internal struggles because of the stigma it has in society. Society ridicules men that get in touch with their feelings and perpetuate the idea that men must be tough. This also translates to unhealthy coping mechanisms and difficulties in relationships.
Thanks for your thoughts. You make some interesting points.
After reading this post, I found it interesting to see the insecurity behind how betas think regarding not being wanted compared to alphas. I think this issue demonstrates the problematic imagery of what is considered to be “masculine” and because of that they do not feel as though they are not good enough in the eyes of women. Considering the fact that all women have different tastes in men both physically and personality wise, I find it quite disappointing how betas assume that “all women” want to be with alphas and that is what they prefer. It is the fact that betas are insecure of what it means to be “masculine” and because of that they tend to look down upon themselves. After reading what the combination of issues that many betas experience in dating, I think that it is completely human nature for men, in fact every human, to experience issues like social anxiety or poor social skills when they date. I feel like just because a man has these issues does not make him less compared to a man that does not. I bet that there are women who completely understand how the man feels and probably finds it more comforting to know that the man she is dating is not full of himself like a typically alpha male would. As a result, the root cause of the insecurity that so many betas feel is due to the stereotypical image of what masculinity is. Due to this, it causes men who do not have certain traits that fit this one-sided image of masculinity to feel as though they are not worthy, which is completely unfortunate.
Good points.
I think it is interesting that we have found a need to label men either “Alpha” or “Beta”. I do not think it is healthy for men to be put into these different categories as it can bring many issues to society and to individuals. Most men think that they need to achieve this “Alpha” male title as in they are strong, dominating, aggressive and powerful. Then there is the category of men who consider themselves “Beta” who are seen as less then, less powerful, not as masculine and dominating. Having men view themselves as a “beta” lowers their self esteem creating many other issues. Not only does having these labels affect how society sees these men but also how they view themselves. There should not be labels and categories of men as we should move towards all men being able to not have to fulfil this stereotype of being a dominating, aggressive, masculine role, but at the same time not be seen as less than if they do not fit the stereotype.
And it is mostly betas who insist on this label for themselves!
But given how they define “alphas” and beta I prefer “Betas.”
I am not surprised by the findings from the University of Tennessee study; I would expect most women would want to be with a gentle, loving, and supportive partner. I wonder if many beta men push a narrative that puts them down and assumes that women prefer alpha men because of the culture of “locker room talk” and often alpha men dominating these situations and taking control in social situations. I think that it is more likely that alpha men would boast or brag about interactions with women so beta men hear these stories but other beta men don’t as often bring up or brag about their relationships with females. In addition, this post made me think about the porn industry, where often times men are depicted as alpha, being controlling and strong towards the women and the women appear to enjoy it. Perhaps this leaves men with unrealistic expectations or beliefs about what a real woman actually wants.
This makes so much sense to me: “I wonder if many beta men push a narrative that puts them down and assumes that women prefer alpha men because of the culture of “locker room talk” and often alpha men dominating these situations.”
Alphas are all about dominating others. Not only are they all about sexually “conquering women” (Getting them to sleep with you) as an expression of that dominance, Like bragging about it in the locker room is another form of dominance – you’re dominating other men.
Meanwhile, even though it’s almost all made up, a lot of men seem to believe the lies.
Porn is completely realistic to real life in so far as men control like 95% of what is going on in the bedroom. Women are mostly just lying there while you do to them what thing or position that you want. The only exceptions to that are when women complain that such and such a position is becoming uncomfortable, or those rare women who enjoy taking control of the situation.
We do train men to take the leadership role and for women to be more passive both in and out of the bedroom.
I missed the training course on how to act in the bedroom, and so did everyone else I’ve ever met. Despite the old Monty Python sketch “Monty Python, The Meaning of Life, sex education” this remains yet another fantastic notion promoted by the social constructionists.
You’ll have to tell me what it says in the Monty Python clip. Didn’t feel like confirming I was old enough to watch it.
LOL, are you too prudish for Monty Python? In the sketch there is a room full of school children, and the prim and proper British school teachers, remove their clothes to give a clinical demonstration on how to perform sexual intercourse.
Not to prudish. Just didn’t feel like giving YouTube information about me.
The scene has nothing to do with the social construction of gender. Sex is biological, gender is a social construction (gender is what each society makes of sex differences – and varies from place to place).
Firstly, the topic was your claim that society tells us how to act in the bedroom. Nobody has ever told me such a thing. The topic wasn’t the social construction of gender.
Secondly, if gender is a mere cultural social construction, why is there so much commonality between cultures that have absolutely no cultural links? I found it fascinating when I was in Russia that when the European peoples made first contact with remote Siberian peoples and traded money with them, the women took the coins and made elaborate collars and torso decorations of coins strung together. Similarly in native american tribes, beads were primarily a thing for women, in fact in some tribes only women were allowed to make them. These cultures have absolutely no contact but time and time again, we see women are far more interested in adorning themselves with decoration. Yet you won’t recognise the only thing they actually have in common is biology.
We do have sexual scripts about how to act in the bedroom, and they have been changing. Look at any sociology 101 textbook and you’ll see a whole discussion on this. But for instance, PIV used to be the only acceptable act and anything else was illegal in United States. (not sure how they policed this — mostly arrested gay men). You see sexual scripts very in from religion to religion. Is masturbation okay? Depends who you you ask. In some societies it’s okay to have sex outside — not so much for the Masai https://www.academia.edu/6864116/Sex_and_the_Tribes_An_Anthropological_Overview
And I guess you haven’t read this blog post which shows how much societies vary, like how decorated men v women are. Or men in some societies or subcultures v others. https://broadblogs.com/2012/05/25/my-son-likes-girl-stuff-is-he-gay/
“I am not surprised by the findings from the University of Tennessee study; I would expect most women would want to be with a gentle, loving, and supportive partner.”
Most women (not all) will only want such a partner when they are looking for just that: a long term partner etc. When it comes to sex, the alpha wins hands down.
You should read Daniel Bergner’s book , “What Do Women Want?…..” You will get the real story!
I can tell you from experience that there are things a woman will do sexually with an alpha male that she would not do for her long term boyfriend or husband. You would be shocked at the things women do with certain men. I often say to myself that if most men knew: 1) the type of men their wives have screwed and 2) the things they have done with and for other men sexually they would cry.
The beta male will NEVER experience the sex that a woman will give an alpha. NEVER.
His book doesn’t say that women want alpha males, it says that they want to men who desperately want them.
It also shows that while women may fantasize about a man “taking them,” experiencing that in real life can be scary or unnerving if it is a man she doesn’t know and trust.
And even if women can be drawn to so called alpha makes for sex that doesn’t mean they want to share these men or that women are actually having a bunch of sex with these men.
And women tend to put a lot of thought into who they are drawn to and will have sex with
https://www.google.com/amp/s/broadblogs.com/2011/05/16/men-watch-porn-women-read-romance-why/amp/
Any discussion of this topic needs to start with a definition of Alpha and Beta men.
When I speak of alpha male, I use it in the context of sexual alpha. Here we are talking about a man who is deemed the most sexually desirable by women. A Beta male I would refer to as a man who is most highly desired for his non-sexual qualities.
When a woman meets a man for the first time, she is going to “slot’ that man into one of the categories below:
1) Pure Alpha Male. He is only going to be considered as a casual lover/ fuck buddy etc. This man is prized by women for his sexual qualities ONLY.
2) Alpha Male w/Beta Traits. This is a man that is desired primarily for sexual attention he provides BUT he also possess SOME beta qualities that a woman finds appealing. This is long term boyfriend material for most women. We’re talking maybe 60/40 or 70/30 Alpha/Beta.
3) Beta Male w/Alpha Traits. This is a man who is primarily valued for his NON SEXUAL qualities. Here we are talking the opposite #2. This is the type of man MOST women value as husband material in my view. I would say he is valued at 80% Beta/20% Alpha by a woman.
4) Pure Beta Male. This is a man for whom women view as strictly a platonic friend. It is 100% Non Sexual.
5) GTFOH!!! This is a man whom a woman wants absolutely nothing to do with. Period.
Most men MUST avoid being placed in categories #3,#4, and #5. I was once in #3 while married. Since my divorce, I have conscientiously re-made myself as #s 2, and #1. My primary interaction with women is about 80% sexual and 20% non sexual. I am very upfront and explicit with women about my intentions…”I am going to primarily be your lover and NOT your long term boyfriend.” I have very little interest in spending lots of non-sexual time with a woman.
Men MUST know just why a woman prefers him or chooses him. If a woman wants a long- term boyfriend or husband, it means she is saying she wants YOU primarily for your NON SEXUAL attention and qualities. The man has been “slotted” for #3. This man is HIGHLY likely to end up in a sexless marriage. Also, he is HIGHLY likely to get cheated on by his wife. This should be a major red flag for most men. Why?
Most men tend to OVERESTIMATE their sexual value to a women. Likewise, most women tend to OVERESTIMATE their non sexual value to a men. In these long-term relationships, especially marriage, women are going to place a primary emphasis on the non sexual aspects of the relationships. This is usually at odds with the wants/needs and desires of most men.
It is for the above reason(s) why I have become so hardened in my attitude against marriage or even men entering into long term relationships. It is by far, in my opinion, one of the most emasculating things a man can possibly do to himself.
Yes, women prefer beta males for marriage and long term relationships. I will admit that such a man is good for family life and rearing kids etc. However, he is going to get the short end of the stick. When it comes to sex, the alpha male is the most preferred. Any woman who says differently is simply being dishonest.
Hi Huggy, Long time no see, so to speak.
But I don’t get this: “I am very upfront and explicit with women about my intentions…”I am going to primarily be your lover and NOT your long term boyfriend.” I have very little interest in spending lots of non-sexual time with a woman.”
I thought that you preferred the non-promiscuous for you and your partners. Has someone stolen your ID? Or have you changed you mind?
“I thought that you preferred the non-promiscuous for you and your partners. Has someone stolen your ID? Or have you changed you mind?”
Yes, I have changed my view(s). Unfortunately, I had to come to grip with reality. It is something that bothers me morally. But, I think this change was necessary to get what I need and desire from women. I am convinced it is BEST to be a lover to a woman rather than a husband or long term boyfriend.
It is impossible to discern the promiscuous women from the non- promiscuous women today. I have discovered through experience that most women who represent themselves as non promiscuous are indeed promiscuous. They are just more secretive about it. I have indeed encountered women who were very open about their sexuality. I actually have a lot of respect for them. They are more honest and forthright about things.
I am not saying most women are promiscuous. However, most women do engage in casual sex (usually with the more alpha men) in varying degrees. I will also say that what a woman views as promiscuous behavior is different than what most men consider promiscuous behavior.
So, it is impossible for a man to really know a woman’s sexual past or even current sexual behavior until after the fact. I have discovered this aspect of many women. A woman will engage in casual sex with an alpha male. But, when she meets a beta/alpha or alpha/beta male whom she sees as potential boyfriend material, she will “pretend” not to engage in casual sex. I have seen this with my own eyes.
I was the casual sex partner of this good looking woman. All the while she was on a major dating site looking for a long-term boyfriend. Personally, I did not care because I was not about to become her boyfriend. I made this very clear from the beginning. For all I know, I might not have been her only fuck buddy.
There are indeed women who are NOT promiscuous. They will have sex with a man ONLY within the confines of marriage and/or a long term relationship. I think they are probably 15%-20% of women today. It also depends on age. Usually these women have strong religious beliefs and high moral values. They are RARE.
If alpha males are having sex with everyone why would women feel like they need to hide their promiscuity from them? They are only doing what he is doing.
But a lot of research has shown that women care much more about emotional connection in sex than men do. I don’t know that that is innate, Rather, we live in a culture that punishes women’s nonmonogamous sexual behavior. And actually both women and men prefer emotionally connected sex, but it’s easier for men to do it and come out unscathed – probably because women are more punished for the same behavior (as you indicate by suggesting that a promiscuous woman will try to act like she is monogamous even to a promiscuous man).
“If alpha males are having sex with everyone why would women feel like they need to hide their promiscuity from them? They are only doing what he is doing.”
They are not hiding it from the ALPHA male. They hide it from the beta males. Most alpha males are non judgmental of women when it comes to sex. They get the BEST treatment from women. So, why would they have issues with women? They do not!
However, most women know most men (who are beta males) have real issues with a promiscuous woman. It is understandable. I can defend the beta males here. Very few men want to know that their girlfriend (or wife) has a sexually sordid past. They just do not.
But, as I said above with women you never know…Because you cannot know, you have to assume the worst. This is how I now approach things with women.
You had a bad experience with your ex-wife but she is not representative of most women.
“women care much more about emotional connection in sex than men do.”
Because, women are hoping to snag the man who will provide resources to the children. It doesn’t matter that now we have birth control, these impulses are biologically determined over millions of years. As for men, it’s a better reproductive strategy to just have lots of children and let the women figure out where to get resources.
Yet you don’t find this patten in every culture.
Are Women Naturally Monogamous?
https://broadblogs.com/2010/12/20/are-women-naturally-monogamous-2/
Are Women Culturally Monogamous?
https://broadblogs.com/2010/12/22/are-women-culturally-monogamous-2/
the math doesn’t work:
Are Men Really More Polygamous?
https://broadblogs.com/2013/06/03/are-men-really-more-polygamous/
Why We Lie About Sex Partner #’s
https://broadblogs.com/2013/06/05/why-we-lie-about-sex-partner-s/
I personally think that the problem is our mind and self-confidence. I don’t believe anybody has a particular “Alpha” or “Beta” feeling everyday. It rotates, sometimes you feel Alpha and sometimes you feel Beta. Generally, men feel “Beta” when they have bad luck with girls, when they feel like they need to fix something on themselves. For example, when you go to night club and you have bad luck with girls, you get upset at some point and people around can feel it. Most of the time, the “Beta” is the person who gets involved in a nightclub fight. I a speaking from experience, i had a 4 friends who were in the same kind of situation. The self-confidence is definitely a great factor that plays in someone perception of himself as Alpha or Beta.
Self-confidence is an adjustable feeling , therefore, that Theory has no solid foundation.
I early mentioned “mind”. Sometimes, eye contacts can play with your mind. Human being have the habit to look in other people eyes. When it happens between two people of the same sex, it is always electric, unless they friends. When it happens, someone end up feeling dominated by the other. That how you end up feeling like a “Beta”. Again it’s an adjustable feeling.
I do think that people can shift “who they are” in reaction to situations in the presence of others. All I can say is I don’t really like dominating people, of any sort.
It shifts the blame on to someone or something else other than their own behaviors.
That said, a man with a few good beta qualities is ideal. Who wants chest beating alpha Chad? Not me.
I prefer the beta qualities too.
Yes, but just a FEW beta qualities.
The bottom line is MOST women prefer a more Alpha man. Period. I challenge ANY woman to prove me wrong.
The hard reality is MOST men are NOT primarily alpha. Most men, especially younger men, are probably 70% Beta and only 30% Alpha. This does not cut it for most women today.
I would argue that this is why so many women today are single. I know this is true because of my many conversations and experiences with single women. Most women today would rather share an alpha or alpha/beta male with other women than deal with a primarily beta male.
Today, most women want a man that is at least 70% alpha / 30% beta. But, most men available today are the exact opposite. Thanks largely to feminism….This is why so many women are rejecting these beta men during their prime years. As they get older, say 35+, these women are willing to “settle” for the beta males w/a few alpha qualities. It serves her purpose (marriage, family, financial security etc). The man is simply being used in this case. There is no romantic love or sexual attraction here. NONE.
I don’t know any women who want to share an alpha male, or any male. Where do you get this idea?
In fact, on Tinder women prefer the less attractive men because they think the more attractive men are likely to be selfish stuck up snobs. Certainly not necessarily true but a common belief. And men are much more likely to all want the most attractive women on OKCupid — but that’s not true of women.
Walk around and you’ll see plenty of women paired with betas. Me and all my friends married betas.
“on Tinder women prefer the less attractive men”
That’s not true. “Guys, unless you are really hot you are probably better off not wasting your time on Tinder — a quantitative socio-economic study”
“It was determined that the bottom 80% of men (in terms of attractiveness) are competing for the bottom 22% of women and the top 78% of women are competing for the top 20% of men.”
View at Medium.com
“I don’t know any women who want to share an alpha male”
Of course they don’t WANT to share an alpha male. But they end up doing it, either wittingly, or unwittingly. That may be because they are one of their serial conquests, or because they are being played with other women in the rotation, or whatever.
And that is why Charlize Theron “can’t get a date”. Of course she CAN get a date, but won’t date what is available to her.
“Walk around and you’ll see plenty of women paired with betas.”
How do you know they are paired with betas just by looking? You can’t tell by looking.
No. Charlize Theron says that men won’t even ask her out.
Your tender researcher isn’t a professional. This research is professional and says that women avoid the most attractive men on Tinder.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/tinder-men-too-attractive-women/%3famp
I don’t know any women who would rather share an alpha male than have their own guy. The jealousy alone would be the opposite of pleasurable. And I don’t see that you have any research that suggests otherwise.
Jeanne-Marie has a theory that makes sense to me. Take a look at hers and my response.
Alpha men want to dominate everyone. They perceive sleeping with a lot of women as “conquering women.“ And then they dominate men by bragging about their “conquests.” (I’m better than you because of all the women I get.) BUT all this bragging is mostly made up. But beta guys believe it.
“I don’t know any women who want to share an alpha male, or any male. Where do you get this idea?”
Do you really think the alpha male is monogamous and having sex with only ONE woman? That’s what makes him an alpha male. Women know this and don’t care. They only want the good sex he provides. They share this with their girlfriends and other women. He becomes the resident stud for these women. A real harem to be honest.
I know you cannot be this naive. I am sure you can ask some women or female friends about his and they will confirm what I am telling you. The only time a woman is NOT willing to share an alpha man (him be non monogamous) is when that man is her boyfriend or husband. But, a real alpha male will never be a woman’s boyfriend at least not long term. Alpha men are for sex only. They are not relationship material. Some of these men might have a casual short term relationship with a woman. But, that is rare.
“In fact, on Tinder women prefer the less attractive men because they think the more attractive men are likely to be selfish stuck up snobs.”
This is untrue. If you look at the research and metrics for Tinder you will find:1) women swipe right far less than the men, 2) women tend to swipe right on the most attractive men (so do men), 3) women are the most selective. Tinder is all about visual appearance. So, how can what you are saying be true given the metrics?
“Walk around and you’ll see plenty of women paired with betas.”
TRUE! They are with them primarily for their non-sexual qualities. There simply are not enough alpha/beta guys to go around. So, women must settle for the beta/alpha guys. No woman wants a 100% total beta male.
I think in the decades past women had to settle down with men whom they neither loved nor found attractive. Today they do not have to do so. Their mothers did so. But, they are not going to do it. The problem is the most attractive men have options just as the attractive women.
This research says that women prefer less attractive men on tinder
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/tinder-men-too-attractive-women/%3famp
And I have heard women say that exact same thing: men who are too attractive or perceived as arrogant and narcissistic.
I don’t know any women who would rather share an alpha male than have their own guy. And I don’t see that you have any research that suggests otherwise.
Jeanne-Marie has a theory that makes sense to me. Take a look at her Siri and my response.
Alpha men want to dominate everyone. They perceive sleeping with a lot of women as “conquering women.“ And then they dominate men by bragging about their “conquests.” (I’m better than you because of all the women I get.) BUT all this bragging is usually made up. And then beta guys believe it.
Would be nice if you could link the actual study, so we could see what you are talking about.
The commonly understood theory about women and “alpha males”, is not that women SAY they want alpha males, instead of steady reliable boyfriends, it’s based on what they DO. So is the study based on what women say or do?
You could probably ask men what they want in a mate, and they’d say a steady reliable woman, but when push comes to shove in reality, they’ll pick who’s hot.
I thought the alpha/beta thing came from the study of chimps, not wolves. Either way, I think everyone knows it’s just common terminology, not some science based description of male humans.
If for no other reason, women go for “alpha” males, because women are passive, and the alpha males are propositioning. So goes the old joke, a certain man asks every women he meets to sleep with him. His friend inquires, “but surely, you get your face slapped a lot’?, ‘yes I do, but also I sleep with a lot of women’.
Furthermore, women are not good at interpreting who is generous and reliable. A dominant man is successful and has access to resources. That makes him appear like he has potential to be generous. A dominant and successful man has the potential to be reliable, because he has money, even if in fact he is just a player.
Back to the issue of hypergamy. Women will not marry down no matter how generous and reliable you are. If you aren’t more successful than the woman, how generous do you have the potential to be anyway? How reliable are you, when you are earning half the money in a dodgy job? “Alpha” males, give the impression of success, whether it is real or not. Women will not go for men who are not successful.
According to the census bureau, when women marry down, they are so ashamed of it, they will lie to government agencies. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/working-papers/2018/demo/SEHSD-WP2018-20.pdf
According to the University of Chicago, when the woman earns less, the marriage is less likely to form, and more likely to end in divorce if it does. https://www.nber.org/papers/w19023
Surely the cold hard stats don’t lie. Men want hot bodies, women want big success.
This post is based on data from a prior post: https://broadblogs.com/2013/08/12/women-want-betas/
Other data come from just looking around. Plenty of “betas” are in relationships. And me and my friends actually prefer them and are all married to them.
It’s true that the more women a man asks to sleep with him the more women and a man sleeps with. That’s just a matter of numbers. Don’t know if it’s related to alpha or beta.
Hypergamy theories are silly in that there is just as much hyper“man”y. This is really about unconscious learning of gender. Both men and women unconsciously internalize the notion that men are supposed to be the primary breadwinner, because that’s what we grow up seeing so it becomes embedded in the brains of both women and men. And even in relatively egalitarian society is like ours patriarchy is internalized on the part of both women and men. So yes, women are reluctant to marry down but men are equally reluctant to marry up.
If a woman says she’s a low paid flight attendant she will get way more offers from men than if she says she is a high paid attorney. Look at movie stars and you find men stars having no problem getting married but female movie stars can have quite a problem because men don’t want to marry up. Charlize Theron is talking about how hard it is for her to get a date!
With regard to your last sentence take a look around and you’ll see plenty of women who don’t have hot bodies who have partners. Better yet, they attract better men who aren’t so superficial.
“If a woman says she’s a low paid flight attendant she will get way more offers from men than if she says she is a high paid attorney. Look at movie stars and you find men stars having no problem getting married but female movie stars can have quite a problem because men don’t want to marry up. Charlize Theron is talking about how hard it is for her to get a date!”
First, that Theron woman is full of crap!!! There are many men who would want to date and f*&k her. She is not NOT interested in them. She is 43. Most men her age are NOT looking for a 43 year old woman. Just the harsh reality of nature. It is what it is!!! Funny how Heidi Klaus could find a man but she cannot. Laughable.
“If a woman says she’s a low paid flight attendant she will get way more offers from men than if she says she is a high paid attorney.”
Offers for what? Men, generally speaking, do not care about how much money a woman makes. It is irrelevant to most men. Women for some reason just cannot understand this…But, I tell them it is the same natural force that causes women NOT to want marriage down. Personally, I think men need to pay LESS attention to a woman’s looks and MORE to other qualities. The worst thing a successful man can do is marry a much lower income/status woman. He is more than likely going to pay a heavy price financially.
“With regard to your last sentence take a look around and you’ll see plenty of women who don’t have hot bodies who have partners.’
Of course! They have to partner with someone, so the beta male is their ONLY option. These women cannot attract an alpha or alpha/beta man. As for superficiality, women are far MORE superficial than men.
For example, a woman is far more likely than a man to date or marry a guy due solely to his status, his wealth/income, or his family name etc. Men could care less about either of these things. Both men and women can be superficial, but in terms of DEGREE, women have it hands down. Again, i will use Harvey Weinstein. His wife is a beautiful women (maybe ex wife now). He is a disgusting looking slob in my opinion. Yet, she chose to marry the guy. Why? Well, you can answer that one! I attended a event where Treasury Secretary Mnuchin was present along with this wife. Honestly, the guy is ugly. Yet he has this gorgeous wife. Why? It’s about status and $$$. Very few men would marry a woman because of her $$$ or status. Very few.
We live in a patriarchy that believes in male superiority, a concept that both women and men unconsciously internalize, leaving both women and men somewhat uncomfortable with a match where the woman is more successful. Yes, some people don’t describe to this view but many, many do.
Audrey Hepburn and Goldie Hawn both talked about how difficult it was to find a man who could handle her success. James Taylor divorced Carly Simon because he couldn’t handle it when she became more popular than him. Same thing with Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman. And then there is this https://www.google.com/amp/s/broadblogs.com/2013/08/30/man-chops-off-wifes-fingers-because-shes-more-educated-than-him/amp/
So many factors associated with this Alpha & Beta male concept. I think success is an attraction. If an Alpha is successful (however the observer cares to define success), he probably attracts interest. If the Alpha is unsuccessful, I suspects he probably attracts disgust. If a Beta is successful, I suspect he draws even more interest than the successful Alpha. If the Beta is unsuccessful, I suspect it may be possible that he attracts even less interest than the unsuccessful Alpha. I suspect everything I just said is subjective and other views are as valid.
If just focused on success (whatever that means, as you say) that makes some sense, I suppose. But there are other ways to attract, like empathy, introspection, wide reader and being interesting… Me and all of my friends married men like that. Not an “Alpha” among them (thank the gods).
Being a beta myself, I feel that the alpha existence is largely limited to cinema, sports, and the ramp. There are not many alphas in other walks of life, where people leave their marks by their achievements. Eventually what counts is the societal footprint.
Maybe that’s why so many of us prefer so-called Betas.
Every time I hear blokes complain that women only want these 10/10, alpha males I think, “have you not ever been to a shop or just been outside generally?” You only have to go out into public and you will be surrounded by ‘just okay’, looking, ‘beta’ men happily walking hand in hand with their just okay looking girlfriends! Their theory falls apart literally the moment they walk out of the house.
It’s true.
Maybe they are thinking of the hot women instead? Maybe they are thinking as far as casual sex and hook ups? But like you said, it might not be these guys are more attractive to women. But these guys take more chances. A mediocre baseball batter is going to get more hits on base from going up to bat many times than a more naturally talented batter, but who hardly goes up to bat right? I have both qualities. I have the introverted, reflective, have some social anxiety. But I have a cocky/funny humor/ charm in a playful way naturally alpha guys often have that kind of ‘swag’. I’m not afraid to tease and fiirt and can get away with stuff that others trying would be seen as obnoxious.
But it’s because I’m aware of how and when to say things and not over doing it, and the person’s personality, etc. There’s psychology involved based on feeling out who I’m talking to and their sense of humor and how they react to things. And social skills can be like a muscle, something others might have naturally, but just trial and error and get better at from talking to people and taking chances and improving. These guys are too busy blaming women than trying to work on themselves or just take the chances to get better that the alphas have done. I think many people are often their worse enemies. That has been for me, being analytical. Things can be worse than they actually are to me. I’ve never blamed others though as in doing so is saying you’re unattractive or whatever. I never felt that way and feel the opposite, I have to keep to myself sometimes as there aren’t too many guys that aren’t like high status that I feel are more attractive than me lol. Yes there are definitely better looking guys, but there’s so much that counts for sex appeal and attraction. Intelligence, personality, ambitions, humor, etc. I know I’m very high on the other area, so it all adds together for guys I feel in this complete sex appeal package combination. Guy’s who are sexy to women are not simply good looking. It’s not the hottest guy, but like I said wit, charm, intelligence, confidence all wrapped up together. I feel a good looking guy that’s strikingly witty has more sex appeal to women than a model, ridiculously good looking guy, but is dumber than a box of rocks. Sure ‘himbos’ will probably get laid at times, but I think the former would peak interest for women both in regards to relationship or hook ups.
“These guys are too busy blaming women than trying to work on themselves or just take the chances to get better.”
That sounds right to me. I’ve seen some of these guys complain that women are so horrible, when they, themselves, are such nice guys – proving that they are not at all nice and are, actually someone who is angry and who you really want to avoid.
“I’ve seen some of these guys complain that women are so horrible, when they, themselves, are such nice guys – proving that they are not at all nice and are, actually someone who is angry and who you really want to avoid.”
So, are you saying there are fewer horrible women than men? I really don’t know the answer. But, I can tell you there are most certainly a lot of horrible women out here. But, it would appear that saying as much is unacceptable. It is “hate speech” or whatever else nonsense we hear uttered today.
Yes, there are many angry men out here. Many have every right to be angry. There are also lots of men out here who have encountered horrible women who have done horrible things to them. However, our legal system, as well as society in general, condons the bad behavior women often exhibit towards men.
No sex has a monopoly on being horrible.
I think there are plenty of horrible women and men out there. My only point is that a lot of guys complain that women don’t like nice guys like them when they come across as being really hostile. I don’t know the women complain about guys not liking nice women like them. Although I do know women who are horrible who complained that other people don’t like nice people like them.