Misconceptions About The Alpha Male

Reader Joe T. wrote the following comment to my post Screening Girls:

[…]Real alphas, as I’ve said, are not promiscuous in the solitary, alley-cat way. They are self-declared “empire builders” and creating a personal family empire (including marriage and kids) is as natural to them as breathing.

There are many betas who build bigger family “empires” than the typical alpha. See: Idiocracy. The desire for a family is not necessarily a defining trait of alphaness. If it were, there would be hundreds of my sprogs running around. But alphas who aren’t interested in raising bratty little kids who suck all the fun out of life can now have their cake and eat it, too, thanks to contraceptives and abortion.

I think everyone needs to go and re-read my post Defining the Alpha Male. It should clarify the common misperceptions I read over and over from my detractors. In short, the alpha male is best defined by how many hot women want to fuck him. Whatever else a man does with his life is irrelevant to establishing his alphaness. If he leads a small nation but women find him repulsive, well, no dice; he ain’t an alpha. Of course, there is a lot of overlap between the subset of men who can lead other men and the subset of men who could bed a lot of women, owing to the fact that women regard dominance displays by men over other men as one signal of male mate value. But leading other men is not a necessary prerequisite for effectively bedding women. It is just one tactic among many.

Reader PatrickH wrote this comment in response to Joe T. above:

Your alpha, the “empire builder”, has more in common with my manly type, though he’s obviously more ruthless. Most of my remarks wouldn’t apply to that kind of alpha.

I think your point is a shrewd one, however. Real alphas would never shy away from marriage and family simply because the deck is stacked against them by the law, for example. They wouldn’t fear that at all. They would never worry about being cuckolded, wouldn’t fear having another man’s child sprung on them. None of that is alpha…in <i>your</i> sense of the word.

In mine…yes, all of that is “alpha”. Just remember the scare quotes. The “alpha” of this place is a parody, a mimicry of the true leader, the truly excellent man.

“Empire builders” are, in our present-day collectivistically-cushioned, corporately-cordoned and contraceptively-contoured reality, more often than not beta male providers who are second and third choices of the women who settled for them. Many of these “empire builders” get cheated on.

PatrickH’s other points miss the mark. “Real” alphas are motivated by self-interest, not fear, when coming to the logical conclusion that marriage is a raw deal for them. Hint: It’s not the cuckoldry, it’s the divorce theft and enforced monogamy. Is it fearlessness to place a target on your chest and step directly in the path of the bullet, or is it stupidity? Rhetorical.

All “true” leaders started the same way as everyone else — they mimicked (i.e. learned from) their mentors and their personal experiences. Do not make the mistake of letting your envy blur your thinking; the womanizer who chooses to avoid marriage and the “excellent man” are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are more often than most people would admit to themselves, the same man.

Joe T. wrote again:

The term “alpha” came from naturalists and zoologists who studied the behavior of wild animals in nature.

All the animal alpha males that have been studied were truly dominant, and all put reproductive success — having a lot of offspring — first and foremost.

He doesn’t and therefore he’s not really an alpha in the strict, commonly-used scientific and sociological definition of that term.

Actually, the instincts that guide animals put mating success, not reproductive success, first and foremost. Animals are not aware that their fucking leads to offspring, nor are the alpha male animals aware that their violent victories over rivals will grant them access to more females. They just do what their genes tell them to do. Biologists use number of offspring as one measure of an animal’s alphaness, although number of copulations would work just as well.

Strictly speaking, a man who fucks tons of women while using condoms is thwarting his genetic programming, not his alpha designation.

True alphas don’t use game, they just do what comes naturally as an alpha.

This has to be the most dearly held misconception about alpha males. “Naturals” DO use game and have used it from an early age; they just aren’t as self-aware as men who learn game later in life. The only difference between naturals and “non-naturals” is when their journeys began. Opening your eyes to the true animalistic nature of women is best done at an early age, when such knowledge is strongly imprinted in the growing mind. Learning game later in life, when your adult mind is fully formed and burdened with good and bad experiences, will inevitably throw into stark relief a cognitive dissonance that must be overcome before the late learner can begin to use his newfound skills in a more natural manner.

Being alpha isn’t inherently different for humans just because we have the ability to control the outcome of the sex act and thwart reproduction.  Even an alpha human male would naturally, intuitively give a high priority to mating with lots of women to produce lots of offspring.

Correction: He would intuitively give a high priority to mating with lots of women because it feels so fucking good.

Since he isn’t naturally drawn to the family empire lifestyle, he cannot be a true alpha.

Kurt Cobain had one child and killed himself. If you want to argue he wasn’t an alpha by your “empire building” definition, you had better be ready to explain away the throngs of young female fans willing to jump his cock at the first opportunity.





Comments


  1. As someone with a professional background in this, I feel compelled to comment on this.

    All primate species have social structures that favor alpha males (and alpha females for that matter).

    The definition of an alpha is not arbitrary or debatable – it is the individual with the highest social status.

    This includes, but it is not restricted to the number of mates.

    Also, note that research in recent years had proven that alpha-ness is not identical with reproductive success:

    http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE7D81538F93BA25757C0A963958260&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=all

    Like


  2. Women wanted to sleep with kurt cobain to earn bragging rights…they wanted to sleep with his rockstar persona not his real self…deep down, kurt was a beta that happened to become famous.

    Like


  3. Real alphas don’t have to lie to women to get them in bed.

    Like


  4. Kurt Cobain, although not lacking in musical talent, suffered from drug addiction and mental illness. He was pitiful, not alpha.

    Like


  5. You chose to compare human mating strategies to various animal strategies. If so, then you must observe that the mating peak of any individual man is brief; soon replaced by the next virile younger male.

    Like


  6. on October 21, 2008 at 4:31 pm ironrailsironweights

    As I see it, there are three types of Alpha Males:

    1) High-income, high-powered men such as i-bankers and BIGLAW partners, who lead affluent lifestyles, drive alphanumerics, play cartball at exclusive clubs, own NFL season tickets, etc. They attract hott women thanks to their money.

    2) Physically fit, barroom brawl-winning strong men (think Todd Palin) who may or may not earn big money, but engage in physically demanding activities. They attract hott women (perhaps not quite as hott as the women attracted by men in the first category) by virtue of their testosterone-dripping masculinity.

    3) Men who don’t fall into either preceding category yet have no trouble attracting hott women. They are the men who use Game.

    Peter

    Like


  7. By my definition, a real Alpha is someone who convinces a 9 or a 10 to bear him 4+ children. “Beta providers” don’t get 9s or 10s, nor can most of them afford that many children.

    High status Mormons seem to be the most prominent examples in this category, the Steve Youngs, Mitt Romneys and Randy Bachmans.

    Like


  8. “Beta providers” don’t get 9s or 10s, nor can most of them afford that many children.

    Many betaproviders can afford to have as many kids as they want. Lots of betas make a lot of money. This is because many of them were obedient children and students sitting at home studying hard to get into good colleges and grad schools to get good jobs. Meanwhile natural alphas were banging everything in sight. If the beta had lots of pussy options he’d have dropped his schoolbooks in a second and his grades would be totally different. Some people are beta due to their lack of status. But there are also many betas who are beta because they spent too much time focusing on making money and getting status in hopes that such things would compensate for their lack of game once they achieved them. I think alphas are a minority represented at two extremes, the extremely working class tough guys like thugs, goons, construction workers, bartenders, bouncers and scrappy boxers and at the other end, the extremely rich titans like Trump. Betas on the other hand are a majority that is often not as extreme in circumstances as the blue collar alpha or the white collar alpha. Plenty of them are politicians, especially the northeast liberal ones, are lawyers, are computer programmers, engineers, etc.

    I’m willing to bet in terms of sheer numbers there are more betas who can support 4 kids out there than alphas who can do the same.

    Like


  9. Case in point, Barack Obama, soon to be the most powerful Beta provider in the world.

    Like


  10. I love Kurt Cobain, but everything about him screams beta. For God’s sake, out of all the women available to him, he married Courtney Love. Occasionally, some beta genius will create something of such undeniably great substance that it cannot be denied, but that doesn’t mean they have shucked off their beta ways.

    Like


  11. conflating alpha status and reproductive success may seem logical, but it flows from a misunderstanding of natural selection. females see in an alpha male the characteristics they want their offspring to have; this is what makes them desirable mates. reproductive success is an outward sign, but it isn’t the ’cause’.

    Like


  12. Thursday @ 10:

    I totally agree. In fact, I think pop music is now dominated by high-performing betas and very few alphas. Look at herbs like Good Charlotte and Blink 182 and Fall Out Boy and other pop poseur punks. They are basically mama’s boys suburbanites playing dress up as badasses. They get poon from being rich and famous but there’s nothing alpha about them.

    Like


  13. Courtney Love used to be really cute. Not so much out of hotness of face, but there’s something mysteriously alluring about her.

    Like


  14. T:
    I can appreciate your clarification to a point. But notice that by my definition, a true Alpha has to have enough game to get that 9 or 10 and get her to settle down. Resources plus game. The difference between Steve Young and Barack Obama is that Barbara Young is a 9.5 and Michelle Obama is a 5. I should add that the 9 or 10 should be relatively young and not have been screwing around before hand. My 2 cents.

    If the beta had lots of pussy options he’d have dropped his schoolbooks in a second and his grades would be totally different.

    Indeed. Work has suffered, artistic pursuits have suffered, blogging has suffered.

    Like


  15. That’s a 9.5??????

    Like


  16. But there are also many betas who are beta because they spent too much time focusing on making money and getting status in hopes that such things would compensate for their lack of game once they achieved them.

    As one of those former aspirant beta providers, I’ll pretty much admit that my plans for mating with a female were generally based around becoming a solid middle class employee and hoping that my wages would end up “buying” a fellow middle class girl. Of course, as we all know, I fucked up, and those plans are sitting next to the unfulfilled aspirations of many other men. When one is lacking in charisma or any other attractive traits, or one has overwhelming negatives, it seems that the only way to attract and maintain women is by appealing to them as the boring beta provider.

    Mind you, if one is conscious of their ability as a beta provider, one could actually do rather decently. While it’s definitely more expensive than game, aiming for short to medium-term relationships with blatant gold-diggers may actually be a way of getting some decent sex for a charmless beta…

    Like


  17. barroom brawl-winning strong men like Todd Palin?

    My little sister with a badminton racquet could probably beat him up.

    Like


  18. Thursday:

    Resources to settle down? What if you don’t want to settle down. A human alpha does what they want to do. And Resources? What does that even mean, if you live in some small town in the middle of nowhere resources means you have a job, in another part of the world it’s if you’re able to walk… Resources are nothing more than Advertisers and Feminist rhetoric, driven by our need for consumption. Complete nonsense

    Like


  19. Here’s my definition of alpha: He has to not only be able to get pussy but also get it on his own terms without ever having to put pussy on a pedestal above him.

    This is why I don’t think CEOs and I-bankers and BIGLAW are automatic alphas, even when they do get women. They get successful and often marry the first 8 or 9 that gives them some attention. Years later when you see them in divorce court getting half their funds taken away, they look pathetic and sad. Or a hot women comes in and they lose all control and start following her around with their tongues wagging.

    Also, Thursday, as far as betas not getting 9s and 10s, I disagree. I’ve seen a lot of homely beta providers with money score some HOT European golddiggers.

    Like


  20. @ 15

    “anony/dizzy/spungen:
    If so, then you must observe that the mating peak of any individual man is brief; soon replaced by the next virile younger male.

    still being a dumbass, …………. the average woman is stuck with a 15-25 year window……………

    please do try and keep up”.

    who said anything about older women?
    Please do try to stay on topic.

    Like


  21. let me specifty, EASTERN European golddiggers.

    Like


  22. T:

    @24

    Well yeah, if you fly half way around the world to a place where there is a man shortage and don’t mind someone who will cheat like a MF on you, but those are special circumstances.

    Like


  23. MQ – I’m not saying all successful, adored politicians and successful rock stars aren’t alpha, many of them are. I’m just saying that not all of them are automatically alpha. Obama is henpecked by his wife and constantly emasculated by her in print. And she’s a 5. Not only should he not be with her, she should be grateful to the high heavens to, as a 5, have the chance to be married to a young President. Instead she acts like SHE is the prize. And for an example of how a celebrity can still be beta, even WITH scoring a 9, look at Mos Def and his recent divorce:

    http://realtalkny.uproxx.com/2008/07/topic/topic/pictures/stop-the-madness-damn-mos-def-married-a-chick-in-4-days-now-she-caking-off-of-him/

    http://www.mediatakeout.com/2008/24762-shocking_confession_mos_defs_ex-wife_claims_he_abused_her.html

    Like


  24. @24

    “OK, so reading this thread we learn that successful rock stars and glamorous, adored powerful politicians are NOT alpha”

    I don’t think people are saying they’re not alpha but rather that you don’t become alpha because of success in other factors in life. The truth is most of these people are alpha, especially the politicians as they have a very alpha quality, in leader of men. Who they marry shouldn’t signify if they’re alpha or not…They simply have other ambitions and focus on them, and having a wife that fits a specific need helps those ambitions. (And yes true love is ultimately based on your own deep and inner wants and needs, and for most of them winning an election is more than your fairy tale love story)

    “However, random guys who spend their days posting stuff on the internet about how bitter they are toward women and their nights trawling DC bars desperately trying to manipulate some random woman into sleeping with them ARE alpha”

    Manipulate is entirely the wrong word, if you actually have strong game and not some memorized nonsense from a pick up website, you’re not manipulating anyone, the girl is gaining as much or more than you are in your encounter. Most guys want to be alpha and will pretend to be alpha in order to get some. I’m guessing you’re a single bitter woman trolling blogs and the streets of DC looking for your loving, caring, wealthy, alpha guy?

    Like


  25. oh snap!

    IN YO FUCKING FACE!!!

    Like


  26. if you fly half way around the world to a place where there is a man shortage</i<

    Aaaaaaah… it’s great to live in Finland.

    I was in Estonia last week and DAMN I got a reminder of the attractiveness difference. It’s INSANE. EVERY fat chick, and I mean *EVERY* FAT CHICK, inevitably turns out to be a Finnish tourist. And half are hotter than your 9.5 there…

    Like


  27. on October 21, 2008 at 5:50 pm Maxwell Demon

    @jaak–I’m confused. Are the chicks hot in Finland or in Estonia? Both?

    Like


  28. Finland is the land of chicks who’d be totally hot if they weren’t fat.

    Other than that southern Finns and Estonians look identical.

    Like


  29. Yeah jaak, I was confused too?

    Like


  30. Forget it, I just read comment #35.

    Like


  31. @Inescapable….When you learn something new are you just imitating how to do it?

    Some people are more naturally athletically gifted than others, but that doesn’t mean that others can’t become better athletes than them.

    Game works the same way, at first you’ll be worse, but if you practice and get better, eventually you can pass natural skill.

    Like


  32. Finland is the land of chicks who’d be totally hot if they weren’t fat.

    Chubby white girl fat or ugly fat girl fat?

    Like


  33. #32, it’s not just that Obama’s wife is a mid-range 5, it’s that both she AND HE act like SHE’S THE PRIZE in the relationship. That’s just shameful. And beta. If you notice, he even brings her up in speeches and in debate answers as if they are both going to be co-Presidents.

    Like


  34. involuntary lovelessness makes other worldly pursuits unimportant.

    I’d question that premise. Admittedly, I’m the group outlier, but when Wellesley Queen kicked my ass to the curb, I determined that the only way I was going to bring happiness and contentment in my life was not by leeching off friends, but by creating it by myself. In other words, I’d have to adjust to a solitary life with no friends, and make the best of it. If I had the money and vacation days* to do so, I’d probably go travel, explore other places, and engage in my hobbies, photography, railfanning, and roadgeeking.

    *David’s part-time employment prevents him from accruing vacation days or sick days. 😦

    Like


  35. David, dunno. Fat for me may be chubby for you.

    Even with very few Africans around I already have a strong stereotype of slim black man + fat white woman relationships…

    Like


  36. Even with very few Africans around I already have a strong stereotype of slim black man + fat white woman relationships…

    I personally suspect that the main reason that Wellesley Queen lost weight was so she could compete with the other white girls for white men instead of being relegated like a prole to black men.

    I’ve always been leery of that stereotype of black men with either fat white girls or trashy white girls, so even if I found a white girl who was willing to date me, I would still be hesitant due to the social penalty of fulfilling the stereotype. I’ll admit to dumping a fat girl who liked me only because she was fat and white and her family came across as white trash…

    Like


  37. slim black man

    FYI, David is 5’8 and 135 lbs…

    Like


  38. @DA 39

    Depends whether it’s 15lbs too much or 30lbs too much, to judge by the Finnish diaspora, and whether it’s 30lbs too much that she insists is only 15. Everything else is Balto-Ugric, possibly with some Slavic admixture, unless you especially like and pursue the Saami.

    Like


  39. And as in all E. Europe north of Denmark, there are some ethnic Swedish remnants of a high bourgie/ruling class or middlemen, as ethnic Germans used to be in E. Europe from Brandenburg to points south and east.

    Like


  40. So Obama is an alpha, no matter how much Michelle beats up on him, no matter how monogamous he is, no matter how many or how few women he’s ever fucked or ever will.

    I disagree, if he lets his wife beat up on him, she will not respect him. And if your woman doesn’t respect you and follow your lead, you are not alpha. You’re just a powerful beta that a lot of women want to sleep with. For a more extreme example, look at the links to the A-list rapper and actor Mos Def I put in the previous comment. He may have a lot of women wanting to sleep with him and he may have money and fame, but he acted as beta as could be when he married that groupie.

    Like


  41. ‘owing to the fact that women use dominance displays over other men as one signal of male mate value.’

    don’t understand. should ‘women’ be ‘men’?

    Like


  42. PatrickH, forget my last comment. i didn’t realize you were posing a hypothetical until i reread your comment.

    Like


  43. Czar — Humans are far different than other primates. Because of the tool making prowess. Even a weak woman can kill, and often with impunity, the strongest male, with a weapon. A spear, poison, fire, a gun. All can be wielded by the most weak, against the most strong, if the weak are enraged and desperate enough. Even the most horrific punishment is not enough to deter these acts, and the list of very powerful men killed by weaker men (or women) is quite long.

    This makes the “Alpha” far different than other primates — he knows, if he has a brain, that he must sleep, be vulnerable to attack at various times, and weapons of various sorts are equalizers. Therefore successful Alphas build patronage networks to insure protectors, and either kill enemies or convert potential ones to allies. The sort of brutalizing strategies of Alpha primates simply does not apply.

    I don’t think the Corleone or other empire-builder of times past can exist today, regardless if one considers that the true definition of Alpha. In a mostly static, stasis-prone society, it does not look like one can build empires, at most become not Steve Jobs or Bill Gates, but rather Jeffrey Immelt. For those asking “who’s that?” his is the head of GE.

    Like


  44. Humans are not any more different from other primates than Bonobos are from Macaques. There are certain commonalities (including social behavior and mating strategies) that define us as being members of the order Primates.

    And sex appeal(alpha status) > sex appeal(beta status) is one of them.

    R’s satirical exaggerations are a necessary tool to hammer home a point that would otherwise get lost since it is so fundamentally opposed to common knowledge and thinking.

    52 – Tool use has been documented in other primate species, and it is not uncommon that alpha males could be harmed significantly or even killed by physically strong females.

    I linked to this before. Frans deWaal is probably the most prominent primatologist these days. It is worth a listen:
    [audio src="http://podcast.cbc.ca/mp3/currentdonotusethis_20080909_7355.mp3" /]

    The most interesting part is about the different kinds of alpha males. What a lot of guys on here seem to get stuck on is the “bully” (high T) kind of guy being equivalent or a prerequisite to having alpha status.

    This is not necessarily the case. You can gain high social status through other means.

    And it is the high social status that defines the alpha male.

    Also, social status (think: bouncer) and societal status (i-banker) can be two entirely different entities – another reason for why some of this discussion is so off.

    Female brains haven’t evolved to measure social status by materialistic means. That is why a big car does less than certain kinds of body language or power displays.

    Like


  45. the problem with talking about alpha males in this context has less to do with how much of our behavior is analogous to other primates, and more to do with how much more complicated our social structures are. the term refers to the dominant member of a small group. in primates and in early humans the pack/clan/tribe is the only social structure that applies. it’s no longer like that.

    we all belong to any number of social hierarchies, both relatively static ones and ones that change moment to moment. people who have very high status in one area may be complete tools in another. if you’re going to define a person as alpha i would think it important that person have the ability to consistently dominate in a variety of social settings, and be able to consistently attract women of across those settings. one mark of the high achieving beta is the inability to connect with women outside of his specific social circle.

    Like


  46. Eurosabra, if Finns look a little like certain Slavs it’s because certain Slavs are very Finnic. Russia is just what you get when you let a bunch of Finns run a civilization on their own. We’ve always known it and now we have the genetics to prove it.

    Like


  47. on October 21, 2008 at 8:31 pm Gus Musselmann

    “In short, the alpha male is best defined by how many hot women want to fuck him. ”

    So, how do you explain Adam Durtiz?

    Like


  48. @56

    Wow. Where does that leave Karelians? [ducking].

    Like


  49. Kurt Cobain is getting nada. What about Guy Ritchie? Madonna is definitely past her prime, but she’s quoted as saying the sex was fantastic, and he’s getting upward of $60 million.

    Alpha?

    Like


  50. Wait….MQ IS A GUY??!!?!

    Like


  51. Rick, I’m not sure. MQ has some soul-searching to do.

    Like


  52. @ 61 – Jury’s still out on Guy Ritchie. His movies are quite alpha, but he does have some serious beta moments when dealing with Madonna. But then again, Madonna is such an alpha female that getting out-alpha’ed by her may not be such a sign of betaness after all.

    Check this video of Guy getting shut down by madge:

    Like


  53. Even if he’s the Bad Man.

    Women are drawn to bad boys for more than one reason.

    1) They are unattainable. This is also why it is so easy for married men to find a mistress. Women want what they cannot get.

    2) They reverse the compliance-value system set up by society. This is related to the point above, but takes it one step further. It’s the “flipping the script” that pimps do. And it is one of the most basic and important foundations of game:http://www.seductiontuition.com/vin-dicarlo/compliance-value.html

    3) They are free of societal conditioning. This is related to 2), but goes further again. Women feel instinctively that men who set their own rules will surely earn (at least short term) success. The cheater always wins.
    They also have learned to be discreet to cover up their wrongdoings and therefore can be fucked on the side without anybody knowing.
    Being free of societal brain wash also means having zero Madonna/Whore issues. They can finally feel like the slut they want to be without having to fear that they are being judged.

    4) They are high T. This equals physical attraction. High T men tend to be muscular and have a sharp jaw line. The high DHT during puberty guarantees a big dong. These men are rough in the sack, dominant and demeaning. They will demand sex all the time and everywhere. Finally a man who can keep up with the fantasies.

    5) They deliver danger and drama, which equals excitment (which equals wet pussy). For women, it’s all about emotions. And the more extreme and different, the better. Going from mile high to rock bottom is what makes them feel alive. A guy who knows how to make them cry and laugh, feel worthless one second and the most amazing women out there the next offers everything that life itself has to offer.

    6) They are different. Rarerity equals higher value. Women are surrounded by the same type of lame ass guy wherever they go. A serial killer is hard to find. Bad boys stick out.

    7) They are social proofed. Women know that the big tattooted dude who bullies the losers in the club is the one any other woman wants to take home that night. This alone raises his attractiveness and will instigate her sexually competitive spirit.

    Like


  54. > All the animal alpha males that have been studied …

    The original “alpha” male term comes from studies of wolf packs. Researchers blathered on about the alpha male and alpha female. Then it turned out that most wolf packs are basically extended nuclear families and the alpha/beta observations were nonsense because they were comparing father and son.

    > All primate species have social structures that favor alpha males

    Gorillas have “alpha males.” Humans don’t. Closer human relatives like bonobos don’t. Human bands have what anthropologists call “situational leadership.” Ethnographies of human hunter gatherers make it quite clear that THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A HUMAN ALPHA MALE. There’s hierarchy, sure, but nobody is even really in charge let alone alpha.

    The choice of these terms “alpha” and “beta” on this blog is pretty stupid and has no anthropological grounding. You’re talking about lotharios and guys without game. No more, no less. “Alpha” has quite inapplicable zoological connotations and a better word or phrase is in order.

    Like


  55. 65 – Gorillas have “alpha males.” Closer human relatives like bonobos don’t.

    Where is that BS coming from?

    Bonobos do have alpha males:

    http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/109865115/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
    “We collected urine samples from seven male bonobos (Pan paniscus) in the Eyengo community, Lomako Forest, Democratic Republic of Congo … the alpha male had the highest circulating levels of T.”

    Primatologists agree that pretty much all primate species have alpha males.

    Show me some evidence that humans don’t – and stop talking about things you obviously have no idea about.

    Like


  56. Guy Richie was no fan of Madonna’s zero percent body fat physique. He allegedly said” sleeping with her was like sleeping with a piece of gristle”.

    Like


  57. t saidWait….MQ IS A GUY??!!?!

    and a very handsome one at that 🙂

    Like


  58. T saidCase in point, Barack Obama, soon to be the most powerful Beta provider in the world

    😆

    Something tells me that” T” is really Harold Ford JR.

    Ford was the other light skinned African-American man running for Senate that year.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Ford

    Like


  59. jaakkeli
    That’s a 9.5??????

    I was thinking the same thing???

    T- how can Mos Def be blamed for the things his ex-wife says about him in print? Your girlfriend could break up with you tomorrow and next week tell half of NYC that she sleep with your brother, father and best friend in your bed while you were working to buy her a ring. In my eyes, that would not make you a beta.

    Like


  60. Eurosabra, what? “Karelians” are one of the native Finnic groups still left in Russia or a subtype of Finns depending on what you’re talking about.

    Like


  61. Hoo boy, I sense another 600+ comment thread coming on.

    In the interests of kicking off such a thread, let me pose a question. T’s blog recently featured a series of posts relating to the work of Ayn Rand. I’m a long-time fan of her literature, and I would consider her to be one of my primary intellectual influences.

    So how do Rand’s views fit into the paradigm of Game? I ask this in a very broad and open-ended way, because there are a lot of angles you might take it from.

    Things to consider:
    – Are her male heroes alphas? Her female heroes?
    – Is her idea of self-interest an alpha or beta way of looking at it? Alpha because you unapologetically state your beliefs and seek your goals? Or beta because it’s based on rational self-interest and not “status seeking”?
    – Rape fantasies in her books.
    – Her insistence that reason, not emotion, must be the basis of all decision-making. And no, there is no “female” exception to this rule. 🙂
    – Her marriage, where it would seem that she wore the pants.
    – Her view that a woman should not be president.
    – Her opposition to homosexuality.

    Let the flamewars begin…

    Like


  62. on October 21, 2008 at 4:54 pm jonathanjones02

    I’m with Thursday here.
    you are correct that the best measure of alpha is the number of hot girls that want him, but that’s not all. And I think that there are plenty of examples of undeniable alphas who stayed married (more or less) and faithful (these, actually, are the men I admire, because I agree with Michael Corelone that “children are the only true wealth in this world”) : C. Heston, P. Newman, J. Wayne to start.

    Like


  63. @6. ironrailsironweights

    Totally disagree…

    1.) I know enough of your high powered rich guys who can’t get a hot woman if their life depended on it, they’re only able to close deals and answer questions. They’ve mastered a singular art in their work field. Not Alpha.

    2.) How many attractive guys do you see in bars with nothing around them, or a 5 at best? A lot. Looking like a 9 and having the game of a 5 will result in more 5’s than 9’s where the converse also holds true.

    3.) As mentioned these traits can be learned, some people spend a fortune on game classes that teach you how to fake it before you make it, others watch naturals and figure it out, either way someone who really learns the material eventually begins to see their new alpha traits in all aspects of life. The guy who was a mid level performer in the work world, and a beta who learns game, builds the natural confidence of an alpha and begins to speak and act with his new found self worth in his job as well. Guys who are only able to game girls, and nothing else aren’t alpha. Guys who can only make money or only look good aren’t alpha either.

    True Alpha males are in their element at all times. That’s why their are so few naturals, for the rest of us, we had to learn and consciencely work on our skills until they became ingrained into what we do at all times. If you’re always thinking about what to do and what would be alpha, that in turn is beta, but it’s a necessary step. When you just start making the strong alpha move without thinking about it then you’re starting to move into the alpha realm.

    Like


  64. czar:
    The definition of an alpha is not arbitrary or debatable – it is the individual with the highest social status.

    and in human males high social status is an accurate proxy for attractiveness to women.

    Also, note that research in recent years had proven that alpha-ness is not identical with reproductive success:

    i never said it was about reproductive success. it’s about fucking success. and in humans, that benchmark is given more weight thanks to the severing of reproduction from fucking by contraceptives.

    metalhaze:
    Women wanted to sleep with kurt cobain to earn bragging rights

    no, they wanted to sleep with him because he moistened their pussies.
    bragging rights was a nice bonus.

    they wanted to sleep with his rockstar persona not his real self

    do you want to sleep with a hot chick because of her real self or because she looks good?

    deep down, kurt was a beta that happened to become famous.

    “happened”? actually, he had talent and ambition and put it to use.
    “alpha” is not something you have to have from birth. you can earn it through your actions.

    jewishatheist:
    Real alphas don’t have to lie to women to get them in bed.

    do not confuse game for lying. i never said they did.
    but many real alphas do lie, if for no other reason than that they can.

    jajaja:
    Kurt Cobain, although not lacking in musical talent, suffered from drug addiction and mental illness. He was pitiful, not alpha.

    his adoring female fans testify otherwise.

    anony/dizzy/spungen:
    If so, then you must observe that the mating peak of any individual man is brief; soon replaced by the next virile younger male.

    still being a dumbass, are you? men don’t have a mating peak nearly as short as women. the average man can father kids for over 50 years while the average woman is stuck with a 15-25 year window, with rapid reproductive depreciation after the first ten years.
    and those older women aren’t replacing their men with virile younger males. in fact, quite the opposite.
    please do try and keep up.

    thursday:
    By my definition, a real Alpha is someone who convinces a 9 or a 10 to bear him 4+ children.

    you’ll have to find some way to include in your definition those anti-kid alpha males who are enjoying long term sexually gratifying childless relationships with 9s and 10s who love them.

    Like


  65. Ayn Rand??? People! AYN RAND!!!

    You might as well as how game fits in the worlds of Dungeons and Dragons and Star Trek. IT DOESN’T!

    Like


  66. jaakkeli: now, now, you’re just being no fun. Can’t I start a good flamewar?

    Like


  67. The definition of an Alpha Male is largely context based and reflects the values of the person(s) that are doing the defining.

    The way I see it , the traits of an Alpha Male are.

    Intelligence
    Confidence
    Leadership
    Physical Prowess
    Courage
    Respected
    Compassion.

    Like


  68. T- how can Mos Def be blamed for the things his ex-wife says about him in print? Your girlfriend could break up with you tomorrow and next week tell half of NYC that she sleep with your brother, father and best friend in your bed while you were working to buy her a ring. In my eyes, that would not make you a beta.

    Oh give me a break Chic. ALL of it was TOTALLY predictable. Any one with a single ounce of game could have seen it coming.

    She was a video ho and a SELF-PROCLAIMED groupie. SELF-PROCLAIMED. She was an ex-stripper. She had a history of childhood abuse to the point where she was beaten into a coma by an ex and already had a kid with another rapper. She fooled around with his friend Kanye West. She had her back blown out by NBA stars like Shaquille O’Neal, Antwan Jamison, Jermaine O’Neal and numerous others she won’t mention. She slept with a bunch of rappers. She was infamous in the entertainment industry for accepting huge sums of money for a single night. She was also known for accepting huge sums of money to get on a flight to service a celeb and accepting the money while never ever getting on the flight. She admits to all this in interviews.

    SHE WAS A SEVENTH GRADE DROPOUT.

    What did Mos Def do? He fell for her despite her bad rep and despite the fact she was bringing zero to the table beside her looks. He proposed to her the day he met her and married her four days later. She was a biracial 9, sure, but he’s a millionaire A-lister. This is what happens when a beta becomes rich and gets status. He doesn’t become an alpha, he just becomes a beta with money and status. Instead of having no game and no option, he now has no game and plenty of options, a walking mark for golddiggers and hot chicks who DO have game. Even though he has dough and status, because he never had game and is not used to hot chicks, he still views THEM as the bigger prize than him.

    Hence my definition for an alpha: He has to not only be able to get pussy but also get it on his own terms without ever having to put pussy on a pedestal above him. Mos Def can get a lot of girls and has money and status, but that is not alpha behavior.

    Like


  69. @70

    Has the long period of peace and free trade meant that a contested area (like Karelia) “means” something different now? In Alsace-Lorraine, the EU means French sovereignty does not impede Germans profiting in any realm, cultural, economic, or social. There might be some $ flows or $ flow incentives which are unequal, but by and large there is a balance.

    Lots of talk in foreign policy circles about “Finlandizing” Israel or Palestine, which I think even more sinister as Middle East powers are more predatory than even 1939 Soviet Russia. I do not think that word means what they think it means.

    Like


  70. T, what is up with all of your Obama hatred? Obama’s ears must be on fire.

    Are you really Harold Ford Jr., the other light-skinned African-American who ran for Senate that year?

    Like


  71. on October 21, 2008 at 11:28 pm ironrailsironweights

    True Alphas only go for women who have thick, rich, luxuriant bushes, overflowing with limitless arrays of delicious aromas and flavors.

    Peter

    Like


  72. he’s a millionaire A-lister
    T are you aware of the number of children Mos Def has?

    I guess why can add all of the rappers Superhead ran with as well as Biggie to the list of betas.

    Like


  73. *we*

    T I think she really added a lot of stuff to sell a book in the same as superhead. YOu can add Nas BM,Faith and Pepa to the list too.

    Like


  74. I guess why can add all of the rappers Superhead ran with as well as Biggie to the list of betas.

    Most of them didn’t wife Supahead up or make her their steady girlfriends. They blew her back out or blasted off in her mouth and then moved right along. That’s the difference.

    However any celeb who still gets with Superhead AFTER she released her tell-all book is a beta who deserves what he gets. A great example of a celeb alpha is Jamie Foxx. He brought home Superhead from a party without knowing who she was. He got home, they were in the bed, he was getting ready to hit it, he then realized who she was and IMMEDIATELY STOPPED and sent her home without hitting it. He had enough game to know that he was better than that and that any chick was replaceable and not worth drama no matter how hot. Now that’s alpha.

    Like


  75. Women are attracted to alphas, and alphas are leaders, conquerors, and successful people. More women would sleep with Tom Hanks the actor than an anonymous male construction worker who was lucky enough to be as good-looking as Brad Pitt. Now, in taught game, demonstrating value is basically mimicry of alpha behaviour, designed to lead women to infer true alpha qualities. He cannot escape the inevitable: teaching “game” is to teach non-alphas to emulate alpha appearance without actually BECOMING the true alpha that is so fundamentally sought after by women. Now, when women are young they don’t understand that alpha is what they seek, so their crushes are on athletes, musicians and actors. As women age, they realize that they don’t want to have to work, and they become obsessed with financial success and ability to provide. But they seek alpha – more in the financial than evolutionary/biological sense: as in “outperform the market”. Now you can use excellent game to dupe them into falsely believing you are an alpha. And if you do that very well, you can nail alot of girls. But nailing a lot of girls because of a superior ability to impersonate an alpha is not the same as actually being an alpha. He has said ability to bang numerous hot women = alpha. Also, it has been said that true alphas don’t need game. Well, then if you need game to bang hot women, you aren’t an alpha. You are merely an impersonator.

    Like


  76. on October 21, 2008 at 5:48 pm Maxwell Demon

    @Ricky Raw–let’s keep this apolitical, but I think Obama is an interesting case. I agree with the hypothesis that alphatude has a lot to do with options, and in that framework, since Obama could get tons of P (and this has probably been true of him since law school at the latest), he is alpha. You are not wrong to notice that he has not traveled the path of most pudenda, and even if his wife was a 10.5, he would still be forsaking countless other opportunities.

    I still look at him as an alpha because he has chosen monogamy, not had it thrust upon him. The Paul Newman comparison is apt in that respect.

    Equating large numbers of offspring with any kind of male greatness is not a 21st century view. An alpha could get a vasectomy at age 18 and still lead an alpha life.

    Like


  77. If someone thinks a heroin high feels better than anything else in life, he’ll pass pass up a 10 for a chance to shoot up. OK, I’m being facetious, but I think you get the point.

    The poon-uber-alles definition of Alpha assumes addiction-level, no, obsessive-compulsive-level desire for sexual frequency and variety. That doesn’t describe most men, even most high-T men.

    The “empire-building” Alphas find it more satisfying to have a family more than being a single guy who scores a lot. Michael Corleone, Saddam Hussein, Mel Gibson (one wife, eight kids), and Steve Young are all men who apparently channel their Alphaness toward non-sexual endeavors, and presumably woudl fare well with 9s and 10s if they were so inclined.

    I’ll agree with his one metapoint: involuntary lovelessness makes other worldly pursuits unimportant.

    Like


  78. Ricky, from what I can recall, a number of them did put money in superhead’s pocket.I recall Shaq, exzbit*,DMX and popa* running up a large tick tab behind her.

    Jamie Foxx is a ho and he and superhead are two of a kind. I wonder what his daughter thinks about his whorish ways.

    Like


  79. 15 – editor The definition of an alpha is not arbitrary or debatable – it is the individual with the highest social status.

    and in human males high social status is an accurate proxy for attractiveness to women.

    There’s a hen-and-egg problem in your definition.

    True, women will go for the male with the highest social status, hence attractiveness to women/fucking success is in indicator for an alpha male. It doesn’t define the alpha male, though.

    Like


  80. Hmmm…pondering once more. I’m convinced that he has simply defined alpha to mean something, and then smuggled in a hidden premise: the most important thing for a man is to be alpha. The arguments about what is or is not alpha are then arguments about what is really the most important thing for a man to be. R can then simply return to his definition of alpha, while not really engaging with the central dispute: is [insert R’s definition of alpha] the most important thing?

    Now, I don’t think so. I understand his definition of alpha NOT to be how many chicks you bang or how hot they are. Paul Newman is almost certainly mega-alpha by R’s definition, and he was notoriously monogamous.

    The definition is: the more chicks WANT to fuck you, (and the hotter the chicks). And more means both quantity of chicks, and intensity of desire. With intensity of desire being the willingness to fuck while asking for nothing in return.

    R’s alpha definition is immune as a definition from any criticism of the kind that Obama is beta or alpha. Just apply the test:

    How many chicks WANT to fuck Obama? Millions, I suspect.

    How BADLY do they want him? I.e., how LITTLE would they ask for in return for a solid dose of his proto-Presidential ebony thunder rod? Quite badly, for many of those millions, since they would ask for nothing more than an hour or two with the Man of the Hour, and not even expect a phone call in return!

    So Obama is an alpha, no matter how much Michelle beats up on him, no matter how monogamous he is, no matter how many or how few women he’s ever fucked or ever will. Which begins to unveil my objection…if a guy getting the verbal shit kicked out of him by his wife is nonetheless alpha, and massively so…then what is being alpha worth?

    The problem with your defintion is: It’s all in hands of the women, guys. How many, how hot and how badly. Add those up (hmmm…maybe multiply by hotness…T, help me here on the stats…hotness should probably be a multiplicative factor, not just additive, right?).

    Which then brings me back to my original original point (the one Joe T was responding to). R’s definition of alpha can be whatever he wants it to be. Where he goes so badly, catastrophically, metaphysically wrong is the DEFINITION ITSELF.

    He is wrong that being alpha is the most important thing for a man. He is wrong that a man’s worth is determined by how much women want to fuck him. It’s here that the pathetic, parasitical, utterly dependent nature of his value system reveals itself: His sense of worth is entirely derived from what women feel about him. He’s given them all the power, dropped the ball entirely in their court, and left it there.

    That’s the nub of my disagreement. That scale of values–entirely dependent on the feelings of women– is unworthy of a man. Or of a human being. What a sad thing to live for, to derive your sense of worth from.

    Sad. But consistent. Grant him that. But still sad. And unworthy. To be so dependent, so needy. To give others so much power. Sad.

    Like


  81. Being free of societal brain wash also means having zero Madonna/Whore issues. They can finally feel like the slut they want to be without having to fear that they are being judged.

    Except most women don’t look like sluts, so I’ve generally found it safe to presume that they’re sexless creatures. Looking for hints of sexual activity in women is just as pointless as looking for fool’s gold…

    Like


  82. 72 zorgon

    So how do Rand’s views fit into the paradigm of Game?

    Hmm, looks like nobody else is interested. To think that I was planning to hold a similar discussion in a few weeks… oh well.

    Anyway, here’s my two cents. Rand is great for two things: “inner game” (rational self-interest is not beta), and winning battles with nature. However, she doesn’t have the slightest clue how a relationship works. Granted, I may not either, but I can recognize when someone is even more clueless than I am. 🙂

    Have you heard of the book Descartes’ Error? Empirically, human reason and emotion seem to be intertwined, and in light of this, insisting “reason, not emotion, must be the basis of all decision-making” is absurd. I feel like I use mostly reason to plot out ways to reach my goals, but the goals themselves, as well as any sense of urgency in reaching them, are primarily emotionally driven.

    Like


  83. I see your point of view, but kurt cobain admitted in an interview that he only slept with 2 girls in his life. his previous long term gf and courtney love, whom to me is ugly!

    besides every rock band has groupies. I do not see kurt cobain as a good alpha to emulate…what about cary grand, clint eastwood,sean connery, russel crow.

    Btw you should do a post on Stoicism…have you read the meditation by the emperor/philosopher marcus aurelius! a great read!

    best.

    Like


  84. @91

    DoJ – Rand worship is also ceding power to woman (see my post 89). Rand was a fundamentally muddle-headed thinker. She is what I call “pop philosophy for the mean spirited”. Her so-called “philosophy” of “objectivism” is nothing more than so much pseudo-philosophical romanticism, i.e. using the vocabulary of classical philosophy and logic to support the dubious notion that greed is the highest value.

    OTOH, if you want a real radical philosopher with balls who dropped science that can be appreciated by men of both the left and right, try Nietzsche. It’s not greed or even shallow self-interest that’s the highest value, he would say, but the Will to Power. And strictly speaking, the Will to Power not even a value (because for Nietzsche, there are no “values” worth preserving). It’s just the relentless expansion of the individual’s drive to power, not expressed as a value but simply as a phenomenon — a law of nature.

    Since alphas are part of nature, then, they are subject to the laws of nature. The Will to Power being the most obvious.

    If you read N., he was not about self-gratification and pleasure, but about expressing the Will to Power, which can mean different things at different times for the same person. He didn’t decry pleasure-seeking, but neither did he prescribe it as the be-all and end-all, because too much of it corrupts and drains the organism and subtracts from the Will to Power.

    Like


  85. In Japan, there is a huge phenomenon of “bishonen”, i.e., young “pretty boy” actors with effeminate looks, and metrosexual, boderline gay behavior, who are worshipped and lusted after by millions of young women. Incidentally, none of them pursues any kinds of pastimes, behaviors, sports, or interests that are even remotely considered alpha, even in the Japanese context.

    Similar examples of Japanese pretty boys wanted by tons of women but hardly alpha:

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/04/07/japan.geishas/index.html

    http://www.amazon.com/Happiness-Original-Japanese-Version-Subtitles/dp/B000P4Y6CE

    Like


  86. There is nothing more beta than killing yourself.

    Like


  87. There are few things more beta than concerning yourself with who is alpha.

    Like


  88. on October 21, 2008 at 9:50 pm Dave from Hawaii

    OK, so reading this thread we learn that successful rock stars and glamorous, adored powerful politicians are NOT alpha. However, random guys who spend their days posting stuff on the internet about how bitter they are toward women and their nights trawling DC bars desparately trying to manipulate some random woman into sleeping with them ARE alpha. Got it.

    He works way too hard for pussy and is way too bitter about it to be “alpha” even by the pussy magnet definition.

    This has got to be the most entertaining aspect of this blog…the number of women who log on and post about how he is bitter towards women, and that mating strategies are “manipulating” women into sleeping with them.

    The only bitterness I detect are from the women who post this rubbish. I guess they cannot stand having their true natures starkly exposed as he does.

    Where pretty lies perish, indeed.

    The truth drive’s ’em crazy, and they have no sense of introspection or intellectual honesty to admit that the entire game of female sexuality is based on manipulating men with their sexual attractiveness.

    Tell us MQ – if a man learns behavior and conversational techniques to make a woman more attracted to him, how is it any different, or morally inferior (as your contemptuous tone implies) than a woman that uses makeup, products, plastic surgery, push up bras, high heels and other “beauty” products to make herself look more attractive so she can manipulate a man into buying her drinks, taking her out to expensive restaurants or even marrying him so she can cash out in the divorce courts?

    You and your ilk are bitter because so many men have wised up to female manipulations.

    Like


  89. Hoo boy, I sense another 600+ comment thread coming on.

    H:

    This has to be the most dearly held misconception about alpha males. “Naturals” DO use game and have used it from an early age

    Yes, but when you’ve won the genetic lottery you don’t need nearly as much. Sometimes just showing up and breathing does the trick.

    3 JewishAtheist:

    Real alphas don’t have to lie to women to get them in bed.

    Game is not about lying, you fag. It’s about presenting your best self.

    Although, as H pointed out, “real” alphas often DO lie. Because they can. With impunity. People will forgive a lot in order to bask in the presence of High Value.

    15 H:

    metalhaze:
    Women wanted to sleep with kurt cobain to earn bragging rights

    no, they wanted to sleep with him because he moistened their pussies.
    bragging rights was a nice bonus.

    But that still begs the question of why he moistened their pussies. If you know anything about Cobain, and the way he met Courtney in particular, you would know he was rather beta. More precisely, he was insecure and fucked up. She seduced HIM. Without his fame there would have been no pussy moistening. Scratch that — not as *much*, as he was good looking after all. I’m not sure we even disagree. GOD THIS IS SO CONFUSING

    16 jaaklalane:

    Courtney Love used to be really cute. Not so much out of hotness of face, but there’s something mysteriously alluring about her.

    Yeah, it’s called “the slut factor”

    Courtney Love in 5 years = Sara

    28 RJP (to MQ):

    I’m guessing you’re a single bitter woman trolling blogs and the streets of DC looking for your loving, caring, wealthy, alpha guy?

    No, MQ is a guy, but I can see why you thought otherwise. Nag nag nag!

    51 karsten:

    ‘owing to the fact that women use dominance displays over other men as one signal of male mate value.’

    don’t understand. should ‘women’ be ‘men’?

    No, He is saying women look at groups of men and observe who is the leader as their way of assessing mate value.

    55 Lance:

    we all belong to any number of social hierarchies, both relatively static ones and ones that change moment to moment. people who have very high status in one area may be complete tools in another. if you’re going to define a person as alpha i would think it important that person have the ability to consistently dominate in a variety of social settings, and be able to consistently attract women of across those settings.

    Which is why women who are in unfamiliar territory will shut their frontal cortex down and revert to primative primate psychology in determining who is the Big Man. Even if he’s the Bad Man.

    57 Gus Musselmann:

    So, how do you explain Adam Durtiz?

    He runs Sensitive Guy game.

    It helps if you’re rich and famous.

    Like


  90. @96

    Whiskey said:

    “Casanovas and Lotharios are not well respected, and a guy like Marquis De Sade was far lower status than say, Napoleon, Wellington, or Nelson, leaders of men with extensive patronage networks.”

    Very well said. That about encapsulates it.

    Like


  91. 100 Comment_How_American:

    Well, the claim is that Obama is “charismatic.” I will admit, I’ve never actually watched a single speech he’s given. The most I’ve seen is the words scroll by in closed caption when watching TV at the gym.

    So whether he’s actually charismatic or not, I don’t know. I just know that I look at the content of what he says and am rapidly turned off.

    I do suspect that “charismatic” is really just code for “young and unashamedly liberal.” And of course there’s the whole white racial guilt thing.

    Like


  92. 65 Czar:

    They are social proofed. Women know that the big tattooted dude who bullies the losers in the club is the one any other woman wants to take home that night. This alone raises his attractiveness and will instigate her sexually competitive spirit.

    There are few things more arousing to a woman than the stealing of another woman’s man.

    Like


  93. As American’s, are you even capable of understanding the difference between earning something yourself and having it handed to you?

    change the word “Americans” to “modern liberals” and your sentence is right on the money.

    Like


  94. Patrick H @50:

    It seems that you are intrigued by H, mystified by him, that you lie awake in bed at night thinking about him, wondering about him, intrigued by him, by the puzzle that you cannot solve, by the feelings that you have for him, by the way he makes your penis hard and makes you want to stroke it until you come thinking about who this H person is behind the persona, and how he made you fall in love with him.

    Up for some gay love with Patrick H?

    Like


  95. 74 zorgon:

    Re: Ayn Rand

    Rape fantasies in her books.

    I give Rand credit for being brainy and cerebral yet still able to appreciate female psychology for what it was. Even when it was politically incorrect for her to do so.

    – Her view that a woman should not be president.

    See above.

    Like


  96. 81 Peter:

    True Alphas only go for women who have thick, rich, luxuriant bushes, overflowing with limitless arrays of delicious aromas and flavors.

    Yeah, maybe like 50,000 years ago when they didn’t have a choice.

    Like


  97. 86 Chic:

    Jamie Foxx is a ho and he and superhead are two of a kind.

    It’s different for guys.

    Like


  98. 90 David Alexander:

    Looking for hints of sexual activity in women is just as pointless as looking for fool’s gold…

    You’re like someone standing in front of a pile of logs with a matchbox in his pocket saying, “Looking for hints of fire is just as pointless as looking for fool’s gold”

    Stop looking for it and start *creating* it.

    P.S. The Police wrote a song about you:

    The night came down, jungle sounds were in my ears
    City screams are all I’ve heard in twenty years
    The razor’s edge of night, it cuts into my sleep
    I sit upon the edge now
    Shall I make that leap?

    I’m the omegaman
    I’m the omegaman

    The sky’s alive with turned on television sets
    I walk the streets and seek another vision yet
    The echo makes me turn to see that last frontier
    The edge of time closes down as I disappear

    I’m the omegaman
    I’m the omegaman
    I’m the omegaman
    I’m the omegaman
    Always talking to myself
    Oh!

    The time that’s best is when surroundings fade away
    The presense of another world comes close to me
    It’s time for me to throw away this paper knife
    I’m not alone in reaching for a perfect life

    I’m the omegaman
    I’m the omegaman
    I’m the omegaman
    I’m the omegaman

    I’m so tired
    Of the omegaman

    Like


  99. 91 DoJ:

    I feel like I use mostly reason to plot out ways to reach my goals, but the goals themselves, as well as any sense of urgency in reaching them, are primarily emotionally driven.

    Remember: all thinking is motivated.

    Like


  100. 93 Joe T.

    OTOH, if you want a real radical philosopher with balls who dropped science that can be appreciated by men of both the left and right, try Nietzsche. It’s not greed or even shallow self-interest that’s the highest value, he would say, but the Will to Power. And strictly speaking, the Will to Power not even a value (because for Nietzsche, there are no “values” worth preserving). It’s just the relentless expansion of the individual’s drive to power, not expressed as a value but simply as a phenomenon — a law of nature.

    Yes! Bravo!

    To the Randroid who posted earlier: it’s time to graduate from kindergarden philosophy, son.

    Like


  101. 94 Joe T.:

    Maybe that worked in the all-white typical American high school in Iowa or Southern California circa 1950-1980, the archetype from which many a Hollywood myth has been made, but it’s not emblematic of the diversity of world cultures throughout history, and so to really understand what makes an alpha, you have to take the broader view and think of what characterizes this particular human “type” across cultures and timelines.

    Oh, it’s not as relativistic as you think. Look at Sailer’s articles about the phenomenon of white male/asian female pairings. Or black male/white female pairings. They far outnumber the inverse arrangment. Because, women want the testosterone. That is not subject to cultural diversity.

    So, Johnny Football Hero from the 1950’s would only need a makeover to be Top Dog in today’s high-school environment.

    Like


  102. Sorry, I meant to write “brawns-over-brain” in the last post. But I trust you get my point. The default ideology of Main Street USA is anti-intellectualism.

    Like


  103. It’s unlikely Kurt was having any groupies. Heroine use frequently causes erectile dysfunction.

    Did you know Kurt personally? Did you witness tons of hot young things begging to sleep with him? Have you ever socialized with famous rock stars? I doubt it.

    And if you take T’s comment in 49 and apply it to Kurt, then Kurt is a beta.

    Like


  104. Stop looking for it and start *creating* it.

    It’s a waste of time and requires too much work and effort to create it, especially when she will always never compare well with the girls in porn.

    I mean, yeah, I can go try and set the logs on fire, but why waste my time doing that when we have stoves that turn on with a button inside climate controlled homes? In other words, why waste my time trying to make women sexually attractive when I can just get a quick orgasm off jerking off to porn, and then spend the rest of my time doing activities that beneficial or interesting for me?

    P.S. The Police wrote a song about you:

    How cute. 🙂

    Like


  105. on October 22, 2008 at 12:36 am Excellent Post

    This is an excellent post, and I think there is some territory left to cover as to what exactly constitutes the so-called Alpha.

    Let me pose this question to the group:

    If the measure of an Alpha male is ultimately how many women want to fuck him . . . then isn’t it true that the value of a man is ultimately set by a woman?

    The “Game” pioneers – DeAngelo, Tyler, Mystery – they all start from the premise that it has been an ERRONEOUS assumption that the woman is on a pedestal. That the past assumption – due to social conditioning in American society – that the man does not need the woman’s approval is wrong.

    They claim the man should come from the starting point see himself as having more value, a higher level than her.

    But if he is correct that WOMEN are ultimately the arbiter of how alpha a guy is – then it seems the value of a man – his ranking, his alphaness – is set by the woman.

    So the “Game” premise that the man has more value is incorrect.

    Like


  106. @88

    EP – sorry for jumping into this discussion late, since I was apparently the impetus for the whole thang… Busy lifestyle, you know.

    I think you’re exactly right in your diagnosis of what makes his worldview wrong in this case.

    Actually, he is and always has been a jumble of correct and incorrect working assumptions. If you really parse over everything he has ever written about alpha vs. beta, game, etc., it’s very entertaining, extremely well-written and there’s a lot of real insight, but you see that there’s precious little big picture consistency. The whole thing seems to be about as logically rigorous as Sophia Loren in “It Started in Naples”.

    My point with classic alphas, empire building and the family empire model is that a true alpha is defined as being above and beyond the drive for simple self-gratification. It’s about the Will to Power, NOT the Will to Pleasure, got that? The Will to Pleasure is for effete libertines, sophists, navel-gazing, lyre-strumming poets and epicureans (think Oscar Wilde) and, uh… classically in the West, this has been considered the domain of the Fairer Sex.

    So he is redefining al this so that “Alpha” equals the pursuit of sexual pleasure uberalles. Would that it were true. By definition, when a man (or, collectively, when men) puts sexual gratification Numero Uno, he cedes his power to the object of his sexual desires, namely, women.

    I say this as a sociobiologist, because that is the school I subscribe to… as opposed to the vacuous “evolutionary psych” crowd, which by the way is not an accepted scientific discipline, as far as I know.

    Alphaness is not about empire building? How many of the great empires that men have created throughout history would have risen if alphaness were only about the pursuit of sexual pleasure — the feeling your dick gets when being enveloped by a tight pussy?

    If it were ONLY about that, I submit to you that we would now be living in a truly female-dominated society, with female presidents, female majority in Congress, etc.

    Not that I don’t think that’s where, unfortunately, the good ol’ U. S. of A. is headed if it continues on its current trajectory. (And Sarah Palin worship is part of that, by the way…) But that’s another post for another day….

    Like


  107. “True alphas don’t use game, they just do what comes naturally as an alpha.”

    They don’t need game because they ooze sex appeal. It’s gotta be a mix natural charisma and pheromones. It’s more than just looks.

    Like


  108. @92

    Metalhaze – you’re right, Cobain was definitely NOT an alpha.

    If anyone is saying he was an alpha, I think we have entered the realm of the ridiculous.

    The definition of an alpha does not derive simply from being desired by lots of women.

    In Japan, there is a huge phenomenon of “bishonen”, i.e., young “pretty boy” actors with effeminate looks, and metrosexual, boderline gay behavior, who are worshipped and lusted after by millions of young women. Incidentally, none of them pursues any kinds of pastimes, behaviors, sports, or interests that are even remotely considered alpha, even in the Japanese context.

    But millions of young, nubile Japanese women want to get in these guys’ pants.

    SO, what is alpha? I hope you’re not confusing alphaness with just being desired by women. That is the ultimate fallacy, and I think it’s related to our peculiarly American type of status consciousness, which is an outgrowth of high school popularity contests and the whole jock/nerd dichotomy which is ingrained into American kids in grade school and high school. To wit: manly guys and jocks are naturally considered the most sexually desirable by girls, and therefore having their status defines what men should want.

    Maybe that worked in the all-white typical American high school in Iowa or Southern California circa 1950-1980, the archetype from which many a Hollywood myth has been made, but it’s not emblematic of the diversity of world cultures throughout history, and so to really understand what makes an alpha, you have to take the broader view and think of what characterizes this particular human “type” across cultures and timelines.

    Like


  109. Czar, you just don’t understand.

    Tool use that is occasional is something different from total dependence on tool use. Humans are weak, relative to other apes, and totally dependent on their tools and Future Time Orientation. It is why we are so dominant, our tools evolve more rapidly than we do.

    The WEAKEST member of a tribe can kill the STRONGEST with a tool, making that far different THAN ANY OTHER PRIMATE. Considering that nearly all of Modern Human evolution (dating back to 50K years ago when behaviorally modern humans, i.e. jewelry, adornment, etc are found) took place in hunter-gatherer groups, where even the BEST hunter can go dry due to bad luck, social dependence and existence of kin-alliance networks are far more deep, sophisticated, and limiting to the Alpha Male. No men were more “Alpha” than Ghengis Khan and he was killed by an angry slave girl (according to legend). All four of the so-called “Rightful” Caliphs, direct descendants of Mohammed, were murdered by people they ticked off.

    Comparing CHimp toolmaking to Humans is like comparing some kid who plays air guitar at parties to say, Jazz Pianist Ellis Marsalis.

    Even in Hunter-Gatherer or Nomadic groups, kin-alliances create constraints on the Alpha. Take some beta’s wife, and his cousin might just stick a spear in your back when you are asleep or not looking. Considering the 4% annual attrition rates in Hunter Gatherers (from murder) this is an ongoing problem.

    A critical component of Alpha is the construction of patronage networks. Almost every Alpha does this. Cobain was not Alpha. Bill Walsh, certainly was, and so is Pete Carroll, Tony Dungee, and Mike Holmgren. All of whom have a “Coaching tree” with former assistants they promote for Head Coaching jobs elsewhere. Note patronage networks form certain constraints on Alphas — they can push their dominance only so much before it collapses.

    After all, who is Alpha? Bad Boy and homicidal lunatic Ray Lewis, or mild-mannered but far more powerful Tony Dungee? It’s Dungee because he runs a patronage network, and Lewis is about a few years out from jacking people up for spare change.

    I would say that while I agree with his insights on Game/relationships, men have a different value system. Casanovas and Lotharios are not well respected, and a guy like Marquis De Sade was far lower status than say, Napoleon, Wellington, or Nelson, leaders of men with extensive patronage networks.

    Like


  110. DF 73:

    …the way he makes your penis hard and makes you want to stroke it until you come…

    I am moved in a way I cannot describe that you would devote so much of your thought to my penis. That you spend such time as you do entertaining in the theatre of your mind’s eye scenarios of me–Patrick! Me!–ejaculating seminal fluid…well, let me say only that this produces in me a feeling that words are utterly inadequate to convey.

    The next time I pleasure myself–which will probably not be long from now, given my David Alexander level of frequency of bouts of actual sexual intercourse–I hope against hope that thoughts of you thinking of me thinking of H never occur to me.

    If you ruin my masturbatory pleasures, you superannuated Hebe-snuffer, I’ll find you. No matter where in Brazil you’re hiding.

    Like


  111. on October 22, 2008 at 3:45 am Comment_How_American

    It’s interesting that people talk about the Obama phenomeon as if somehow Obama did it all by himself.

    I understand that American’s are trained from birth in the standard English tradition. To look at the rich man four generations back and say ‘how did he do that!!!!!!’ ‘how did he do that!!!!!!!’. As if the old money rich man somehow earned it ‘all himself’.

    Millions of women want Obama because the DNC deliberately stole the nomination from Hillary. Because the Mass Media won’t stop screaming about how wonderful he is. Because he has an army of speachwriters keeping his teleprompter fully loaded.

    Give me a few billion dollars and I could get thousands of women of a certain type to want to have sex with me to.

    And that wouldn’t make me an ‘Alpha’.

    As American’s, are you even capable of understanding the difference between earning something yourself and having it handed to you?

    Like


  112. 48 PatrickH:

    And more means both quantity of chicks, and intensity of desire. With intensity of desire being the willingness to fuck while asking for nothing in return.

    Right. That’s why a chick who requires you to see her more than a couple of times before she fucks has put you in the Provider/Beta category. *Even if you do get laid*

    So Obama is an alpha, no matter how much Michelle beats up on him, no matter how monogamous he is, no matter how many or how few women he’s ever fucked or ever will. Which begins to unveil my objection…if a guy getting the verbal shit kicked out of him by his wife is nonetheless alpha, and massively so…then what is being alpha worth?

    This confusion can be avoided by noting something Czar said: “hot chicks wanting to fuck you” is an *indicator* of alphaness, not a definition.

    And part of the *definition* comes down to being *respected* as a *leader*.

    A charismatic but celibate leader surrounded by groupies is an alpha.

    A rich geek surrounded by scheming goldiggers is a beta.

    A *poor* geek not getting *any* women is a David Alexander.

    He is wrong that being alpha is the most important thing for a man.

    Right. It’s the only thing. 😉

    He is wrong that a man’s worth is determined by how much women want to fuck him.

    Well, it certainly ranks way up there…

    It’s here that the pathetic, parasitical, utterly dependent nature of his value system reveals itself: His sense of worth is entirely derived from what women feel about him.

    A sense of worth is also derived from what other *men* feel about you.

    A sense of worth does not arise in a vacuum.

    He’s given them all the power, dropped the ball entirely in their court, and left it there.

    *He* didn’t. Mother Nature did. Nature has seen fit that human progress is maintained by females mating with the strongest/fittest/best males they can and allowing the loserguys to die on the evolutionary vine.

    If it wasn’t for women (and the men competing for women through displays of their worth relative to other men) civilization as we know it would not exist.

    That’s the nub of my disagreement. That scale of values–entirely dependent on the feelings of women– is unworthy of a man. Or of a human being. What a sad thing to live for, to derive your sense of worth from.

    No amount of money, weightlifting, videogames, reading, movies, masturbation, fine dining, walks on the beach or drug use can make up for the agonizing existence of a loserguy’s inability to sustain a sexual relationship.

    And no, Patrick: looking into a mirror and saying “I’m good enough, I’m smart enough, and doggone it, people *like* me!” doesn’t cut it. 🙂

    Like


  113. 50 PatrickH:

    I have had some conversations with a friend who is conversant with him the persona, and this friend has indicated some degree of agreement with me about what I suspect is a disjunction between “H” and the man who writes these posts.

    Does this “friend” have the initials “A.C.”?

    And yet…what’s on the other side of the disjunction?

    You know that movie Hellraiser, when the guy finds that puzzlebox and thinks it would be cool to discover the secrets it holds?

    It’s like that.

    It’s the persona I disagree with. Not the man behind the curtain. I don’t know him at all.

    If a person were to try stripping the diguises from actors while they play a scene upon the stage, showing to the audience their real looks and the faces they were born with, would not such a one spoil the whole play? And would not the spectators think he deserved to be driven out of the theatre with brickbats, as a drunken disturber?…
    Now what else is the whole life of mortals, but a sort of comedy, in which the various actors, disguised by various costumes and masks, walk on and play each one his part, until the manager waves them off the stage? Moreover, this manager frequently bids the same actor go back in a different costume, so that he who has but lately played the king in scarlet now acts the flunkey in patched clothes. Thus all things are presented by shadows.
    – Erasmus, “The Praise of Folly”

    There are only two ways of telling the complete truth–anonymously and posthumously. – Thomas Sowell

    Like


  114. There’s some confusion here because he uses “alpha male” to mean something other than what “alpha male” usually means, which is a socially dominant male (meaning men who dominate other men). Sexually successful males are usually socially dominant, but not always. That’s because there’s more than one successful mating strategy for men. Read this for some examples in animal species:

    http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/080501_octopusmating

    The “empire-builder” male follows the monopolizing strategy (maybe with some extra on the side). This is the classic alpha male, what people like Jane Goodall mean when they say that a chimp is an alpha. The PUA who pumps and dumps is following something closer to the sneaky strategies mentioned in the link. Both may be alpha by his definition of being desirable to women, and they may push a woman’s buttons in the same ways, but they’re following different strategies.

    In previous times (the vast majority of human history and prehistory), a PUA who pumped and dumped would have to be sneaky, because a woman’s family, or worse yet her husband and his family if she’s married, would kill the PUA. Kind of like what happened to the protagonist from “Menace II Society.” In the modern West, you can get away with it. Notice how our laws favor the PUA – the monopolizers and the betas go to prison if they do anything to him, and the government takes their money and gives it to his bastards and their mothers, and sometimes even compels them to pay child support.

    Like


  115. 89 Joe T.:

    My point with classic alphas, empire building and the family empire model is that a true alpha is defined as being above and beyond the drive for simple self-gratification. It’s about the Will to Power, NOT the Will to Pleasure? The Will to Pleasure is for effete libertines, sophists, navel-gazing, lyre-strumming poets and epicureans (think Oscar Wilde) and, uh… classically in the West, this has been considered the domain of the Fairer Sex.

    Well said, but Game is just as much conerned with improving the *quality* of woman and relationships one has. Game isn’t solely about horndoggin’ it.

    Becoming a better man means one has more choices.

    Like


  116. @115

    2p – Oh, I agree with you on the testosterone gradient thing with respect to WM/AF and BM/WF pairings.

    My point was a rather narrow one. I brought up the bishonen thing to refute his usual argument that desirability to women is the sole sine qua non of an alpha. These guys are about as far away from alpha as they come, yet young women drool over ’em.

    OTOH I think the Johnny Football Hero thing is something that is peculiar to America, and traces back to our expansion from the colonies on the Eastern Seaboard, where there were well-established universities (College of William & Mary was founded in 1693) and lots of intellectuals, across the Great Plains, where small settlements and farming towns were established, intellectuals were very rare, and the paradigm of “education” shifted from relatively cosmopolitan east coast universities, to the one-room schoolhouse where the schoolteacher often had no more than a 4th grade schooling him/herself.

    In the farming society that grew from these frontier settlements, brawn was valued much more than brains, and cultural sophistication was seen as effete (see Sinclair Lewis’ “Main Street”).

    This paradigm is rather uniquely American in that it never existed in the other advanced societies of the West. And it gave rise to a peculiar American brand of anti-intellectualism, that even today is manifested in our politics (see George W. Bush and Sarah Palin.)

    Johnny Football Hero has always been part of that brains-over-brawn, anti-intellectual myth, but with the rise of Asian societies, and increasing diversity in the US, that football hero myth is dying, along with the strangely parochial, American bias that that is what constitutes an alpha male.

    Like


  117. You are confusing what men aspire to be(powerful, rich, empire builders) with what women aspire to fuck. Men have career goals such as these because in ages gone by they insured access to women: kings, warlords had harems. We look up to titans of industry because our genes found this to be an effective strategy for getting pussy. But the ancient king’s supply of women to fuck was made possible by using the threat of violent force to get women in his bed. He didn’t need game to fuck a different girl every night; his minion brought him a new slave girl, who may or may not have agreed to let him penetrate her.

    The high-achieving/no-game men who subsume everything to their career (this includes some of my good friends from college) act according to this model, thinking that wordly success will yield pussy. But it doesn’t anymore: in our society, you can’t force women to sleep with you.

    Like


  118. Quick question, if the definition of alpha is what some define it as (having a hot woman, or having lots of hot women wanting to sleep with you), then why is there a lack of satisfaction, or a constant scramble to acquire more notches once you get one? If a lot of the men on this blog are to be believed, you have these hot women all the time, or at least sometimes, already. So why the “anger” at feminine wiles and machinations, if you already know how to conquer them? Because they exist? Feminine tricks have always exisited, so have “sweet talking” men. If you’re getting these women to fall for you/sleep with you without much effort, haven’t you won the war? Aren’t you alpha already? I would think alphaness would lead to seeing women as dismissive, not a time consuming pursuit, unless said women were necessary to your self, presumably in some emotional context. If you’re already getting all of the prime women so easily, then wouldn’t you spend time on other things, seeing as hot women were always going to be available, and thus not a cause for concern?

    Like


  119. on October 22, 2008 at 2:41 pm ironrailsironweights

    Is it possible that Wilt Chamberlain is ultimately the golden standard of an Alpha Male, rather than John D. Rockefeller, Caesar, Napoleon, or Michelangelo?

    Michelangelo? Wasn’t he gay?

    Peter

    Like


  120. 2) You claim a “Dandy” is not an “Alpha Male” to you? Why not?

    No, I thought that’s what you were saying and was objecting to the placement of Wilt in the dandy category. I misunderstood your point.

    Like


  121. As I’ve said before at some point, I think the “alpha” moniker is being overused or misapplied too often. It’s succinct but I can see why there may be an impetus toward overuse. In the absence of an alpha’s high status, taking advantage of our society’s consequence and guilt free sexual market in which most people toil in relative anonymity, it elevates individuals that would otherwise be devoid of any professional accomplishments to that rarified place. I have to agree in part with d @ 120, an alpha contains a “mosaic” of qualities and significant professional success must be one of them. It is true that success alone is not sufficient but all qualities in aggregate make up the alpha. That is why I’ve said that an alpha is far rarer than we care to imagine because how many men truly possess all of these qualities? Schools of game are teaching men the social intelligence, strategy, and adroit with the opposite sex that have almost exclusively come naturally to alphas. In time you can believe in your own swagger, communicating the masculinity in which alphas have always navigated but a true alpha’s success gives him a wild card, desirability before he even walks through the door.

    I am a relatively successful person and I consider myself a natural having never learned game from a seminar, I learned most of what I know from the men in my family at an early age as well as experience but I can’t say women desire me before I even walk into the room unless they know of me before I had a chance to know them. Is fame or celebrity an alpha trait? Certainly, but it doesn’t mean that a celebrity possesses the swagger of an alpha. See what I’m getting at?

    At the end of the day “alpha” might have to be tossed all together in favor of the more common “player” or “lothario” just to keep things real.

    Like


  122. I agree with others who say that libertine hedonists are an unworthy breed, relative to Leader-of-Men types.

    Yeah but it’s more fun to be unworthy.

    It’s also usually smarter to be a coward, liars are usually better liked and, of course, nice guys don’t get laid.

    For a blog where “pretty lies perish”, guys here have a strange habit of idolizing useless principles whenever people start arguing what “proper” alpha males are like. The point of declared virtues is to amass weapons against other people, not to actually believe in them!

    Like


  123. Eurosabra, if Finns look a little like certain Slavs it’s because certain Slavs are very Finnic. Russia is just what you get when you let a bunch of Finns run a civilization on their own. We’ve always known it and now we have the genetics to prove it.

    What do you get when when Bulgarian priests convert a bunch of Finnic tribes lead by a Scandinavian aristocracy who speak into a Greek religion? Answer: Russians.

    Like


  124. But then again, Madonna is such an alpha female that getting out-alpha’ed by her may not be such a sign of betaness after all.

    Madonna is a crude and crass prole woman with excessively high levels of T. No doubt a highly unpleasant person with an ego the size of Jupiter.

    Like


  125. Madonna is a crude and crass prole woman with excessively high levels of T. No doubt a highly unpleasant person with an ego the size of Jupiter.

    Oh no doubt! Please don’t think I was complimenting her.

    Like


  126. Eurosabra, oh, I thought you meant Karelians as an ethnicity. They exist there far beyond historically contested territory (and we don’t consider most of the people evicted from the lost territories in WWII ethnic Karelians), down to near Moscow. Only the nuttiest Finnish expansionists ever spoke of claiming all of European Russia.

    Hmm, funny how “eastern european golddiggers” turned into me writing about taking back Moscow.

    Like


  127. “Animals are not aware that their fucking leads to offspring, nor are the alpha male animals aware that their violent victories over rivals will grant them access to more females. They just do what their genes tell them to do.”

    Unfortunately, this is true of a lot of people as well.

    Like


  128. Hmm, funny how “eastern european golddiggers” turned into me writing about taking back Moscow

    Achtung! Achtung! Nach Moskau!

    Like


  129. Keep in mind when comparing alpha males in humankind to alpha males in the animal kingdom…society, civilization and laws don’t require and pressure animals to stick around and remain monogamous and spend a lifetime supporting their kids. And their brains can’t grasp the moral obligation involved with such a commitment. So of course they fuck with the aim to have as much kids as possible.

    But to a human male, there are too many monetary, societal and cultural factors in play that may make the cons of procreating outweigh the pros. So to apply the “procreation” standard to human alphas simply because that works for animal alphas is not a good comparison.

    Like


  130. Yup. Weird historical factoid: Finnish-Jewish WW2 vets are eligible for military pensions from the Federal Republic of Germany and to streamline it the Germans turned their cases over to the same subdivision that handles the pensions of the non-German veterans of the Waffen-SS. So you get a couple Israelis with paperwork listing “finnischer Militaerdienst bzw. Waffen-SS” which they would have to file with the Tax Authority (to claim tax-exempt foreign-origin pension income) and that would trigger an automatic war crimes investigation.

    Bureaucracies do not deal well with odd corners of history. I suppose one just cashes the checks.

    Like


  131. 29 said it best.

    Game is mimicry of alpha behavior. True Alphas just be themselves.

    Like


  132. tupacchopra, with arched brow:

    Does this “friend” have the initials “A.C.”?

    No. Neither an “A” nor a “C”. Nice try, though. 🙂

    Like


  133. 96 – whiskey

    Please check the links I posted above and listen to them.

    It’s all in there. There are alpha males that dominate physically and then there are the kind of networkers you are talking about.

    In the interview with FDW, there is a section where he states explicitly that one alpha chimp rained well beyond his prime since he enjoyed protection from the far more feared alpha female.

    It is simply not true that humans are the only species where an alpha could be killed by a female. The fangs of females in many primate species are potentially lethal to males and sexual dimorphisms are not always as extreme as in gorillas.

    My guess is that humans are yet again no exception.

    Finding something that humans are exceptional in (and I am talking about qualitative differences and not quantitative differences) is the holy grail of primatology. Language, morals, tool use – you name it – have all been shown in other primates by now.
    It would be extremely funny if it would be the alpha male issue – of all things! – where humans would turn out to be exceptional. Is all I am saying.

    Like


  134. @ 88, @89

    Is the ultimate judge of a man’s value held by:

    a) a woman

    b) by the man himself.

    Yes, there is a discrepancy between H vs. “School of Game”

    The School of H: Alpha is the man “most widely desired” for fucking

    The School of Game: the Alpha man is a mosaic of DHV qualities (leader of men, dominant, social resources, strong frame, etc. )

    It’s hard to believe that an Alpha Man is simply the guy who the most women want to fuck.

    This view may seem correct to a guy in his twenties, Gen Y, etc..

    But to any man in his thirties, who has been exposed to the real world for a period of time, it seems hard to believe that the Alpha Men of the world – the men most admired, most emulated – are simply the men around us who most women want to fuck.

    When we think about “Great Men” we do not think about how many women wanted to fuck them. We instead think about their deeds.

    Great men achieved Greatness because of * particular deeds* they achieved that had nothing to do with sexual attractiveness to women: Caesar, Napoleon, Michelangelo (homosexual). More recently: George Washington, Rockefeller, Bill Gates (arguably).

    Yet, if we hold his view to be true, Great Men would constitute: Casanova. Don Juan. Wilt Chamberlain.

    ?

    To a guy in his thirties or older, who has been exposed to the real world for a time, the Alpha Male is ultimately a guy who

    1. has achieved substantial impact in the real world, through deeds of some kind: building a successful business, succeeding in a profession, influenced the course of events in his career field, in his city, either on a smaller scale (a guy with formidable expertise/authority of some form people listen to, obey, defer to), or, of course, on a larger scale (politicians, CEO’s, artists successful with general public)

    2. Procreated. There is an urge in ambitious men when they get old enough to have descendants, to have children, regardless of how divorce law is currently rigged against them.

    Please show me an Alpha Male in our society – with the exception of homosexuals like David Geffen- who has not shown the inclination to have descendants. Ultimately, most Alpha Men have an urge to have real flesh and blood descendants, and spread the seed in real time.

    Mystery defines the Alpha as one who possesses a mosaic of DHV qualities (leader of men, social proof, supporter/protecter of those you love – read: father – , nonneedy, social intelligence, strong frame, having interesting knowledge.) This nicely dovetails with the above view. Tyler and David D. say similar things.

    Perhaps people are just misunderstanding what he is trying to say.

    Like


  135. [continued from previous, if anybody’s reading]

    your transparent reframing of the obvious and unavoidable fact of sexual selection into some kind of undignified groveling of beta intrigue that you are too good to play is quite a convenient get out of judgment free card.

    No, my objection is to your reduction of matters of worth entirely to sexual selection as practiced by women. I’ve made no judgments about whether I’m “too good to play”.

    you can choose to ignore that and live in a cardboard box undisturbed by the opinions of women. but don’t expect your triumphant purity of masculine essence living life on your own terms will bring the girls running.

    You seem to be deliberately misunderstanding me. My objection to you is precisely that you define the goal of a man’s life as being to “bring the girls running”. I’m not objecting on tactical terms. It’s your entire set of values I’m opposed to. No-one is suggesting living anywhere in any kind of box “undisturbed by the opinions of women”. Only that there is more to a man’s life to be concerned about than the opinions of women. I have no expectation that “purity of masculine essence” is a better way to get the girls wet.

    I’m not proposing a better way of getting women to want to fuck you. Or me. Or anybody. I’m questioning the central place of that very standard in your value system.

    if being loved by hot women is derivative, then i don’t wanna be the original source!

    It’s deriving your entire identity and sense of self-worth from being loved by hot women that I characterize as derivative.

    men with a working libido are happiest when they have women in their lives. and, conversely, unhappiest when no women want them.

    No doubt having no women wanting you is a cause of unhappiness. I myself don’t recommend it as a way of life at all. I do wonder though if having women loving you is enough for true happiness. At the risk of sounding moralizing, happiness is more dependent on your own capacity to love, not on how many others–men, women, old, young, hot, warpigs–love you.

    Again, it’s a question of ultimate value: is your sense of worth derived from how much you give, create, contribute, do…or from how much others give to you?

    I used the words “derivative”, “dependent” and “parasitical” for a reason.

    Like


  136. “Kurt Cobain had one child and killed himself. If you want to argue he wasn’t an alpha by your “empire building” definition, you had better be ready to explain away the throngs of young female fans willing to jump his cock at the first opportunity.”

    The reason is that Cobain fit into a particular schema of “Lover” vs “Provider” that PUA community know well.

    Specifically, Cobain was subtype of the “Lover” that David DeAngelo describes as “The Artist”. One of 4 types of men that DeAngelo claims are sexually attractive to women for brief flings, one night stands, etc.

    Simply because Cobain pressed some attraction buttons in many women for a one-night stand = Alpha Male?

    Cobain obviously had pretty severe flaws and weaknesses. He was a drug addict, and he shot himself.

    Is this an Alpha Male to you?

    Like


  137. Yet, if we hold his view to be true, Great Men would constitute: Casanova. Don Juan. Wilt Chamberlain.

    I would put Wilt Chamberlain in the bona fide alpha male category, and not in the category of Casanova and Don Juan. He was not a dandy or libertine. He was a bona fide leader of men in his profession, on the basketball court, regardless of whether or not he had children.

    Like


  138. Wolves mate monogamously for life.

    Like


  139. His definition of alpha is particular to how he chooses to view it and deal with the concept in human society. His assertion that animals are interested in mating success and not reproductive success is a false one. Males in many species go to great length to not only mate, but prevent the female from mating with other males after the fact (only of consideration if you want to make sure you spawn). In addition, alpha males have also been known to kill offspring they determine not to be of their own seed. This is also why when a new alpha male takes control of the group, he kills the offspring of the previous alpha male. If he were only interested in getting laid, there’s no need for that. Alphas want to dominate and control well beyond the bedroom.

    The reality is that he cuts himself slack by defining alpha in a way that he can learn to imitate. He’s adamant that he’s alpha, but the measure of that is how he has learned to follow detailed guidelines for the acquisition of sex. That’s easy enough, as he often points out, but doesn’t mean he or anyone else who uses game is a true alpha in the more general sense.

    There has to be an awareness that how “alpha” is used in sociobiological fields is not how he uses it. Much of the disagreement in this discussion and others on the blog result from conflicting definitions of “alpha.”

    Like


  140. 155 – Nullideaofwhatshestalkingabout said:
    Wolves mate monogamously for life.

    “… but also breed polygamously if the male is unrelated to the female and prey is plentiful. Moreover, they sometimes have more than one mate in a lifetime”
    http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/aprilholladay/2005-02-25-wonderquest_x.htm

    “Furthermore, the alpha female sometimes will sneak extra-pair copulations with lesser males, but will not allow her alpha mate to do the same.”
    http://www.bio.davidson.edu/people/vecase/behavior/Spring2004/porter/Mating%20System.htm

    Because:
    “Nearly all monogamous mammals will engage in extra pair copulations”
    http://www.bio.davidson.edu/people/vecase/behavior/Spring2004/porter/Mating%20System.htm

    Like


  141. By his definition, a thief is greater than a king. A thief steals what he wants (sneaking your way into a girl’s pants is a form of theft), and doesn’t necessarily have a whole lot of worldly power, or other men’s fear or respect.

    Saddam Hussein, who seemed more interested in running a regime than chasing women, was a beta while Uday Hussain, who had a “way with the ladies,” was an Alpha, right?

    Kim Il Sung, who seemed more interested in running a regime than chasing women, was a beta while Kim Jong Il, who has prodigious “appetites,” is an Alpha, right?

    I agree with others who say that libertine hedonists are an unworthy breed, relative to Leader-of-Men types. In fact, such sensualists are considered effeminate (or worse) or gluttons who lack mastery over their appetites, like alcoholics.

    Being desired by quality women is a very important indication of Alphahood, not its definition.

    Like


  142. @122

    I never said Wilt Chamberlain does not fit conception of an Alpha.

    I said that, if his definition of Alpha is true, Wilt Chamberlain would become the golden bearer standard of an Alpha Man because of his sexual prowess (20,000 women).

    Is it possible that Wilt Chamberlain is ultimately the golden standard of an Alpha Male, rather than John D. Rockefeller, Caesar, Napoleon, or Michelangelo?

    This is what we’d have to conclude if he is correct.

    2) You claim a “Dandy” is not an “Alpha Male” to you? Why not?

    BTW, Robert Greene (48 Laws of Power) lists “The Dandy” as a seductive type in “The Art of Seduction.”

    Greene: “Women always love a Dandy.”

    Like


  143. @123

    What is a “true alpha”? In the balance, hangs the answer as to whether

    1) a man’s value is ultimately determined by a woman

    2) a man’s value is ultimately determined by the man himself. (The “Game” people).

    The implications are huge. Arguably this question goes to the very heart of this blog, and the entire subject of men and women.

    Like


  144. Tupac 159:

    All individuals are utterly expendable to Nature. No one matters, and reproductive success is a chump’s game. Your genes live on as a pattern in the DNA inside the cells of another organism’s body, said pattern bearing a fragmented resemblance to your own.

    Meanwhile, you’re as dead as all the nerds you out-reproduced.

    Survival of the fittest. Whatever wins, wins.

    That you have to resort to a tautology indicates the emptiness of your position. It comes down to: “Those patterns of DNA that occur in increasing numbers across time, occur in increasing numbers across time.”

    Yes. They do. Now what?

    To know that one is *sexually* desired by hot females is a confirmation and endorsement of one’s genetic worth.

    But the increasing likelihood of a pattern of DNA occurring in the future isn’t proof of any kind of worth at all. Take eight rocks. Then take nine rocks. Where’s the worth, the unworth, any value at all in either group of rocks? Rocks are rocks. DNA is a molecule. Genes are patterns in DNA. All of those things are valuable, matter at all, only in the light of the subjectivity of human minds, which is the source of all value. A material universe has no value, because it has no-one around to value it…not even as material.

    virtually all assertions of worth or value are ultimately arbitrary, subjective and reflect more a person’s inborn preferences than any sort of objective standard.

    Even if this is true, Tupac, how is that you are able to leap outside of your subjectivity sufficiently to make such a blanket statement? Did you research this? Did you examine the logical underpinnings of everyone’s beliefs to determine how and why their values were “arbitrary”? And how can you invoke the word “arbitrary” with any meaning, since you deny the existence of standards against which one can say something is arbitrary?

    Finally, to say that something is an expression of a person’s subjectivity can be true enough. But to say it is nothing but an expression of that subjectivity requires a whole lot more. Just as to say reproductive success is success is not saying that’s it the only kind of success that matters.

    Like


  145. You got a t-shirt?

    You bastard. You lucky goddamn bastard. I hate you.

    Like


  146. 60 Two Pack

    Courtney Love in 5 years = Sara

    Oh, I’m sorry, did you say something?

    Like


  147. Sara don’t let them upset you. I always say, it’s nice to know that they think about you even when you are not around.

    Like


  148. This circuitous worth discussion gives me a headache.

    Like


  149. 164 – Licky, Licky, Licky – when will your harmony-craving anorgasmic brain ever learn?

    This woman is not upset.

    She’s in estrus.

    It’s all over her posts.

    She ignored all the discussions. She’s not here to contribute anything meaningful.

    She just came here after days of silence to pick on some alphas so they give her the spanking she lusts for.

    It won’t work. Nobody’s falling for it.

    Like


  150. Game is mimicry of alpha behavior. True Alphas just be themselves.

    “true” alphas are running game. they just don’t know it.

    Like


  151. Can an alpha fall in love?…or is this forbidden by the idea of alphaness?

    I’ve always had a lot of guys after me, I’m probably a 7 or an 8, and if I get dumped have no problem finding somebody else…but still, if I’m in love with a guy and we break up, I’m pretty torn to pieces.

    So if I was a guy, could I be an alpha, or would my ability to fall in love disqualify me?

    Like


  152. tupacchopra, on an extended roll:

    This confusion can be avoided by noting something Czar said: “hot chicks wanting to fuck you” is an *indicator* of alphaness, not a definition.

    Yes, precisely. A symptom of alphaness is not its essence. An alpha is not defined by women wanting him. Women want him (not necessarily sexually) because he is an alpha. It’s an important difference between your position and his because it leaves open, indeed requires, that alphaness is defined by much more than being desired by women, and can be achieved without reference to the opinions of same.

    His definition of alpha is derivative of and dependent upon women’s desires, which are taken as primary, a kind of unmoved mover. To comport yourself entirely in terms of how women want you to comport yourself is pathetic. It divides alphas into two types: Naturals who just are the way women want them to be, and Game guys, who have learned how to be that way. One’s derivative by luck, the other’s derivative by choice. But they’re both derivative.

    If women’s desire for you is entirely how you define your worth, you are the farthest possible thing from an alpha male. You’re barely male, barely a man at all.

    Like


  153. So if I was a guy, could I be an alpha, or would my ability to fall in love disqualify me?

    jennifer, falling in love is required. no alpha would leave home without it.

    Like


  154. 131 DF:

    Missed this:

    At the end of the day “alpha” might have to be tossed all together in favor of the more common “player” or “lothario” just to keep things real.

    Yeah, it probably helps to distinguish between:

    – the “ladies man” who knows how to short-circuit the process of naturally attracting women

    and

    – the “alpha man” who hews to a different standard, but is still successful in love because of his other virtues

    For myself, I’m interested in being a more powerful man in all aspects of my life, but I still keep an eye out for any tips on being more effective with women.

    Like


  155. 160 PatrickH:

    All individuals are utterly expendable to Nature.

    But some individuals are more expendable than others.

    A small percentage is what allows the next generation to thrive and reach a higher level of organization.

    Your genes live on as a pattern in the DNA inside the cells of another organism’s body, said pattern bearing a fragmented resemblance to your own.

    I.e., immortality. After a fashion.

    This whole discussion will change when science conquers death.

    Meanwhile, you’re as dead as all the nerds you out-reproduced.

    The difference being that in the future, my genes will still be stealing the lunch money of the nerd genes.

    That you have to resort to a tautology indicates the emptiness of your position. It comes down to: “Those patterns of DNA that occur in increasing numbers across time, occur in increasing numbers across time.”

    You seem to be missing that Nature/Evolution does not care about individuals. She only cares about DNA.

    Right now each one of us is living out the fantasies of our DNA while telling ourselves that we are unique.

    But the increasing likelihood of a pattern of DNA occurring in the future isn’t proof of any kind of worth at all.

    Not by *our* standards perhaps. But it surely says *something* significant.

    A material universe has no value, because it has no-one around to value it…not even as material.

    Yes, “value” is a creative act by the individual. It is our glory. But like an ephemeral epiphomenon, it doesn’t possess the same sort of raw solidity as the inanimate processes that gave rise to it.


    Even if this is true, Tupac, how is that you are able to leap outside of your subjectivity sufficiently to make such a blanket statement? Did you research this?

    I’ve done my due diligence.

    Like


  156. 161 PatrickH:

    You bastard. You lucky goddamn bastard. I hate you.

    Speaking of which, I have a favor to ask.

    You pay the occassional visit to Her Elegance, yes? Would it be possible to smuggle in a small digicam and snap some photos of our elusive Muse, to be sent to me? I would be eternally greatful.

    I’ll send you an ampule of the good stuff.

    Like


  157. 163 PatrickH:

    So the definition of alphaness, the final judgment of a man’s worth boils down to this:

    I don’t think anyone is saying that the totality of a man’s worth is equivalent to his reproductive worth. Although it certainly ranks.

    [snip rest of strawmen argument]

    Like


  158. 162 Sara:

    Oh, I’m sorry, did you say something?

    I’m here to avenge what you did to Kurt!!!!!!!

    Like


  159. 165 Scott:

    This circuitous worth discussion gives me a headache.

    Yes, well, the Abyss does tend to have that effect on people.

    Like


  160. 167 Clio:

    I’ve known many men like this. I even dated a few.

    *breaks down into convulsive sobbing*

    I thought you were PURE!!!!!!!!

    😦

    Like


  161. patrickH:
    An alpha is not defined by women wanting him. Women want him (not necessarily sexually) because he is an alpha.

    this is a difference without a distinction.

    It’s an important difference between your position and his because it leaves open, indeed requires, that alphaness is defined by much more than being desired by women, and can be achieved without reference to the opinions of same.

    a man who becomes a CEO but can’t talk to a woman to save his life and hasn’t been laid in ten years is not an alpha in the way the word is used to describe the value of men in the only game that truly matters in this world.

    his definition of alpha is derivative of and dependent upon women’s desires, which are taken as primary, a kind of unmoved mover.

    we do not live in a vacuum. our value derives from the judgments of others, whether you like it or not. and a woman’s judgment of a man’s worth is the ultimate arbiter.
    the same goes for women. they are judged as well by men.
    we are all judged.
    for the record, this ugly truth is not incompatible with the seduction art of assuming a higher value frame for the purposes of attracting women.

    To comport yourself entirely in terms of how women want you to comport yourself is pathetic.

    don’t be deliberately obtuse. your transparent reframing of the obvious and unavoidable fact of sexual selection into some kind of undignified groveling of beta intrigue that you are too good to play is quite a convenient get out of judgment free card.
    so let me clear it up for you:
    chicks dig alphas.
    alpha = power.
    you can choose to ignore that and live in a cardboard box undisturbed by the opinions of women. but don’t expect your triumphant purity of masculine essence living life on your own terms will bring the girls running.
    that’s a fact, jack.

    One’s derivative by luck, the other’s derivative by choice. But they’re both derivative.

    if being loved by hot women is derivative, then i don’t wanna be the original source!

    If women’s desire for you is entirely how you define your worth, you are the farthest possible thing from an alpha male.

    entirely? it is possible to feel good about yourself on a multitude of yardsticks.
    but there’s no escaping that men with a working libido are happiest when they have women in their lives.
    and, conversely, unhappiest when no women want them.

    You’re barely male, barely a man at all.

    as opposed to celibate betas, who are quite the shining examples of manhood.

    Like


  162. patrickH got dragged into the abyss with the demon of his nightmares:
    Why, I trust no one in matters of you. I’m sure you realize that means I don’t trust you, either.

    the difference is that i didn’t implicitly ask for your backchannel trust. my words on this blog speak for me.
    if it’s proof you seek, one way or the other, you will not get it.

    Or especially you.

    there can be only one.

    As I said, you are a practicing ironist, sir.

    keep telling yourself that.

    It would behoove many here not to forget that fact.

    the lurch into the heart of darkness summons soul assuaging disbelief.

    Like


  163. a man who becomes a CEO but can’t talk to a woman to save his life and hasn’t been laid in ten years is not an alpha in the way the word is used to describe the value of men in the only game that truly matters in this world.

    You’re a clever one, aren’t you? Notice how you simply reassert your definition in lieu of argument. Of course a CEO or any other man of the type you described isn’t “an alpha in the way the word is used to describe the value of men in the only game…” That’s necessarily true, given that that is how you use the word. Tautologies abound.

    So since that’s your very definition of alpha, of course he couldn’t be an alpha. My disagreement is with your empirical assertion that there’s only one “game that truly matters in this world”. Alpha as you define it is a goal unworthy of a man…if it’s the only and ultimate goal.

    our value derives from the judgments of others, whether you like it or not. and a woman’s judgment of a man’s worth is the ultimate arbiter.

    Yes, they do derive from the judgments of others. Of course they do. My difficulty with your definition is that it asserts without proof that “a woman’s judgment of a man’s worth is the ultimate arbiter”. And not only the ultimate, the only. Hence my characterization of your definition as dependent on women, to whom it cedes all the power of making judgments of worth.

    And even worse, your definition assumes that women’s judgment of the worth of a man is ultimately and only revealed by their desire to fuck the man. So not only do you confine the sources of judgment of a man’s worth to members of a single sex, and to the young and physically desirable members of that sex, you confine their capacity for judgment of worth to sexual desire.

    A man’s ultimate and only worth is utterly dependent on how many, how hot and how badly women want to fuck him.

    That is your position, no matter how much you try to change the subject.

    [continued, unfortunately, in next comment]

    Like


  164. Thursday – I was going to put Kurt Cobain in my comment, but I decided it wasn’t necessary. All the best-informed commentators seem to agree that the man didn’t actually have much sex, although he could have if he’d wanted to once he got famous.

    I was trying to describe the kind of men who seem to be alphas on the surface (which no one would ever say about Cobain) – confident, charming, outgoing, cocky – but whose underlying emotional problems threaten to destroy them.

    clio

    Like


  165. @149

    “a man who becomes a CEO but can’t talk to a woman to save his life and hasn’t been laid in ten years is not an alpha in the way the word is used to describe the value of men in the only game that truly matters in this world.”

    True that. He’s either David Geffen, or he had the post of CEO handed to him by others, either because nobody wanted it, or they’re setting him up to be the fallguy for something.

    Like


  166. Czar — fangs are one thing. A spear is another. A spear, or poison, or an arrow (what did in the “Iceman” neolithic guy found in the Italian glacier) kills from a distance. No physical contact needed. THAT equation is far different than apes.

    In fact, the proliferation of killing tools gives that advantage to any who become proficient in their use. Making direct confrontation with an Alpha un-needed. Making Alphas much more mindful and less ape-like in dominance, out of sheer survival. Fangs can be deadly but you have to get up close. Not so with a proper killing tool.

    Who was more dangerous, more “Alpha?” Doc Holliday or some big, brawny cowboy? Why Holliday of course, since he was expert in his guns and would and did escalate to killing if challenged.

    Indeed, one might ask, who is “Alpha”:

    Lord Byron, bisexual lover of many, or Lord Wellington?
    Fletcher Christian, dead on Pitcairn after a *series* of murders over women, or Admiral Bligh, respected and decorated commander and heroic navigator?
    Russell Brand, hirusute Brit comic, or General David Petraeus, now-legendary commander of the Iraq Surge, perhaps the greatest feat of US military prowess in a generation?
    Casanova, or contemporary George Washington?
    Ardent lover and romantic John Wilkes Booth, or “Uncle Billy,” William Tecumseh Sherman, beloved by his troops decades later?

    Note that to be a true leader of men, one must dial down the constant appeal to women. Many must remain “off limits” and be treated with courtesy and respect, but distance. A true leader of men, a Petraeus or Washington or Wellington, or even a flawed one like Bligh, must refrain from humiliating one’s followers, give them reason to follow in the first place, provide confidence in his leadership to achieve goals, communicate objectives clearly to all subordinates, delegate where appropriate and take the reins when required, and provide various attributes of success to his followers.

    The Father of Country would be by anyone’s definition “Alpha,” yet he certainly was not a ladies man. Washington was certainly dominant, but his followers loved him because he did not humiliate but rather uplift.

    Like


  167. 1. Unless he’s the CEO of a Saskatchewan mining concern, he’s NOT CEO if he can’t talk to a woman to save his life.

    2. Alphas don’t use game without knowing it, because game is the impersonation of natural alpha behaviour, as I learned from… here. So when REAL alphas do something, its simply not game, and when non-alpha gamers do it, then it is “game”. Even though they are 2 guys doing the exact same thing. One does it naturally, the other mimics.

    3. “a woman’s judgment of a man’s worth is the ultimate arbiter”

    I have admired your wit and intelligence, and your savvy dissection of the complex female mind. But I once thought you an objectivist, like myself, and now I am assured that you are not. Know that the world is built by alphas, and therefore, that it exists for their amusement.

    4. Joe T wrote: Her so-called “philosophy” of “objectivism” is nothing more than so much pseudo-philosophical romanticism, i.e. using the vocabulary of classical philosophy and logic to support the dubious notion that greed is the highest value.

    The self is the highest value, higher than the collective, which is an abstraction without any value at all. Greed is not a value, it is an impulse. You maintain that alphas are conquerors and leaders. Rand’s heroes are the purest of all alphas.

    Like


  168. Tristam 123 said:

    “His assertion that animals are interested in mating success and not reproductive success is a false one. Males in many species go to great length to not only mate, but prevent the female from mating with other males after the fact (only of consideration if you want to make sure you spawn). In addition, alpha males have also been known to kill offspring they determine not to be of their own seed.”

    This doesn’t contradict anything he said. The development of such behavior is an evolutionary adaptation and has nothing to do with any consciousness on the animals’ part. This of it this way: in a prior state, male animals did NOT keep females from mating with other males. Then one day (perhaps by intelligent design, perhaps by random chance–let’s not go there) one exhibited sufficiently jealous behavior, not only resulting in a higher probability of his offspring being born and surviving, but passing along the gene for such behavior.

    Such male animals are no more aware of this behavior contributing to the greater likelihood of their genes surviving than they are that copulation leads to reproduction.

    Like


  169. 153 PatrickH:

    At the risk of sounding moralizing, happiness is more dependent on your own capacity to love, not on how many others–men, women, old, young, hot, warpigs–love you.

    The issue is this: virtually all assertions of worth or value are ultimately arbitrary, subjective and reflect more a person’s inborn preferences than any sort of objective standard. That’s not to say that some standards are more enjoyable or beautiful or elegant than others, but that in the end, they all amount to subjective human preference.

    If we are forced to look closely at what might be an objective measure of value we can’t help but include reproductive success (by way of female mate selection) to be just that standard. Survival of the fittest. Whatever wins, wins. Getting your genes passed on into the next generation to hopefully outbreed other genes is the name of the game.

    To know that one is *sexually* desired by hot females is a confirmation and endorsement of one’s genetic worth. As against all other types of worth which depend on a relativistic set of values that change as the wind blows. In such a situation it is Mother Nature, God Himself, who bestows such a judgment.

    One of the functions of the “civil” in “civilization” is to protect the losers of that society from the knowledge of their own fundamental irrelevancy and utter expendability.

    Gone are the days when a celibate, milquetoast nerd could console himself at home with is stamp collection and polite manner. The media has changed the world forever. With television, formerly insulated losers can now see how the other half lives, and what their women REALLY enjoy. The anonymity of the internet has allowed women to speak candidly about how they REALLY feel about the loserguys in their lives. The lid has been blown off this racket.

    We are entering a brave new world…with H as one of its vanguards.

    Again, it’s a question of ultimate value: is your sense of worth derived from how much you give, create, contribute, do…or from how much others give to you?

    “I gave all my love to Alias Clio and all I got was this lousy T-shirt”

    Like


  170. One of the peculiarities of the definition of alpha I’ve insisted is he isn’t just that it gives all the power to women, it does so only to women that men find sexually attractive.

    So the definition of alphaness, the final judgment of a man’s worth boils down to this:

    A man is worthy insofar as he is sexually attractive to women he finds sexually attractive.

    So not only is worth reduced to sexual attractiveness, the capacity to judge that worth is restricted to that subset of women who themselves are judged as sexually attractive by men. The power handed to them is ultimate–no other standard matters–but it’s also highly contingent on their meeting certain standards…the standards of the men they’re judging.

    So worth is entirely determined by mutual sexual selection by men and women. Sexual chemistry is all. No other worth matters. Worth is nothing but sexual attractiveness, and that includes being worthy to make judgments of worth. No heat between the man and the woman and poof!… they have nothing to say to one another. Nothing at all. How could they?

    Hmmm….I have this image of Escher’s two hands drawing one another.

    It is a kind of nightmare image, I suppose. Solipsistic, trapped inside a self created out of and returning to nothing. Not demonic, but somehow not nourishing. Not for long.

    I still don’t get how being sexually attractive qualifies anybody to make any judgments about worth in general, especially the irrelevance of other kinds of worth compared to sexual “worth”.

    I mean, isn’t that just what the Beautiful People would say?

    Like


  171. Many people in this thread have mentioned those men who are Leader types, but who have no success with women, especially attractive women. It’s true that there are a number of men like this, especially nowadays, but I suspect that they are still fairly rare. Leadership usually requires some kind of human understanding, as Steve Sailer points out in one of his diatribes. The CEO of a high-tech company may not have much – but then, he may not be CEO for very long, either.

    But another kind of paradoxical alpha doesn’t appear in this thread at all. He’s the man who is an Alpha by his definition, who “gets laid” often, whom women seldom refuse – but whose life is a mess in every other way.

    I’ve known many men like this. I even dated a few. They may be “naturals”, or they may learn “game” at an early age; they seldom fail to “score” with the women they pursue; and yet, they are failures in their work; have alcohol or drug problems; their family lives are a mess; and they often die young and tragically, through suicide or recklessness. They depend absolutely on their ability to seduce women as proof of their value, because nothing else in their lives works. Behind closed doors, they need constant maternal-type care from their women.

    If being an Alpha in the leadership sense is not enough to get a man “laid”, being an Alpha in his sense is not enough to make a man happy, or self-sufficient, or successful.

    Clio

    Like


  172. Stick with the word “player”. Everyone knows what it means.

    Like


  173. Was Jesus Christ alpha?

    1) He supposedly didn’t have sex. Definitely didn’t have children.

    2) He is arguably the most influential man in history. In terms of empire building — well, he has more than 2 billions followers.

    Like


  174. 180 Jon:

    Was Jesus Christ alpha?

    “I am the Alpha and the Omega” – Revelations 1:8

    Now if THAT isn’t a mindfuck…

    Like


  175. Clio:
    But another kind of paradoxical alpha doesn’t appear in this thread at all. He’s the man who is an Alpha by his definition, who “gets laid” often, whom women seldom refuse – but whose life is a mess in every other way.

    Well, we did talk about Kurt Cobain.

    Like


  176. on October 23, 2008 at 7:47 am Dog of Justice

    There is much that is arbitrary in this discussion. I side with those who make a distinction between “alpha” and “player,” but whatever, this isn’t my blog. There are worse things than having to remember to speak a slightly different dialect here.

    My conception of “alpha” does still require that a man be able to satisfy their desire for female companionship (and for creation of a “personal empire,” if applicable). But there is nothing wrong if that desire is limited to one woman (at least most of the time), as long as that woman really loves him. Not every man is hardwired to value sexual variety over all else. (I know I’d actively dislike living the player lifestyle, for instance.)

    Like


  177. Tupac: I’ll send you an ampule of the good stuff.

    Our Muse, Her Elegance, La Elusiva, retreats over her own inscrutable event horizon upon each and every attempt at approach. I suspect that Clio and the dismayingly absent in recent days Pupu, the She-Oracle, are if not sisters, than at least sisters in disposition. Both vanish from the grasp just as the hand closes, just as the heart soars with hope that YES! I have her now!

    Nope. No I don’t. Just plain nope.

    So send me an ampule, by all means. Won’t do any good.

    Like


  178. DNA, Tupac, doesn’t tell us anything. It’s a molecule. It lays down the pattern for amino acid formation.

    It’s no more solid than the subjectivities you simultaneously evoke and dismiss.

    I did my due diligence.

    My feelings for you have never changed, Tupac. I doubt they ever will. I remain committed to my view of you.

    And…you haven’t done your due diligence at all. Your materialist/reductionist philosophy is the oldest of the old hat, dusty, misbegotten, forgotten but not gone, decrepit, useless, and hopelessly passe.

    But I must admit that your Jesus crack was pure fucking gold. My nomination for Comment of the Month.

    Like


  179. But at least he cites an example of an alpha male: Kurt Cobain. And this leaves us with a big fat “who cares.” If being this alpha male and scoring chicks doesn’t even make you happyand you kill yourself, then who gives a shit?

    That’s the bottom line.

    A friend of mine likes to divide life into four segments in two orthogonal ways: useful/useless and emotion/reason. Useful in this context means useful as a means to an end such as the satisfaction of a biological urge or fulfilling an obligation. Useless things belong to a sphere of freedom.

    Sex and love are useful matters of emotion. They are engaged in to satisfy hardwired biological urges not unlike the urge to take a shit or breathe. Work is a useful matter of reason. The kind of work we do is not biologically determined and involves the use of our intellectual faculties but the main function of work is to support oneself financially.

    Friends belong to useless matters of emotion. Real friendships have no ulterior value. Hobbies are useless matters of reason. Hobbies are engaged in to satisfy needs at the very highest level of the hierarchy of needs. Hobbies belong to the ultimate realm of freedom. Hobbies often provide a highly reliable, lifelong source happiness.

    Here is the beef: a key to happiness is to avoid neglecting any of the four aspects of life. Work is a necessity for the vast majority of people both financially and psychologically, and the need for sex and love are hardwired and a life completely without them would be difficult to bare. Genuine friendhips provide human contact and perspective without any contaminating influences absolutely no other type of relationships are free from. Hobbies exist on a plane above the mere infrastructure of life. They involve complete autonomy.

    To have no life above the necessary biologically determined infrastructure aspects of life is a truly sad state of affairs indeed. It is essentially slavery. It doesn’t matter whether a man is a 100% devoted family man and a provider or the inveterate player. Children grow up, leave home, and careers end in retirement. Marriage can fail and careers can be ruined. The player inevitably becomes an old fart loathed by the young beauties he has devoted his life to pursue.

    Like


  180. — their monomaniacal devotion to the “endless pursuit of tail” … might cause them to neglect everything else.

    I think that the self-destructive type of Alpha that Clio describes is a case of a guy who already has serious problems, but who also, idependently of his troubles, happens to be good looking and charismatic.

    Such men often appeal to a woman’s nurturing “rescuer” side.

    Like


  181. Also, those guys often aren’t studs in bed. Depression, alcohol, or drugs impair their libido and performance.

    They typically care less about “tail,” than they do about being cared for by a nurse-mother figure. Again, the Kurt Cobain type, who married an earth-mother sort of woman.

    Like


  182. Keith 168:
    Rand’s characters are very “beta” (actually variable-T alphas, in my view) and heroic…

    Actually, [the function of civilization is] so everybody can have decent lives…

    Common sense, insight, concision. Thank you, Keith.

    A lot of this uselessly confusing debate would be cleared away by just retiring the word “alpha” from its role in this place, returning it to its traditional meaning of dominance, high-status in a given social context, and use the traditional English words “player”, “lothario”, etc. Others have suggested this. I think it’s time.

    He has misappropriated the word “alpha” in an effort (IMO) to snag its prestige, its moral worth, for another term, “player”, whose connotations of parasitism, deceitfulness, dependency on women, immaturity, and selfishness renders it a term of dubious praise at best, a term of abuse and contempt at worst. Given his apparent incapacity to be a genuine alpha, and his commitment to the life of the player, it’s not surprising he’d try to grab some of the power and worth and rigor of the term for his own attenuated, etiolated, exhausted, louche, jaded and weary way of life.

    Sorry. Can’t have the word. “Alpha” remains untouched by the attempt to kidnap and reduce it to indentured servitude here. It’s just too powerful to be held captive in the pallid, soft-skinned hands of those exhausted and exhausting urban decadents called “players”.

    Traditional Alpha >>>> Player

    No matter how much players say it isn’t.

    Like


  183. #188 PA,

    I think that the self-destructive type of Alpha that Clio describes is a case of a guy who already has serious problems, but who also, idependently of his troubles, happens to be good looking and charismatic.

    Such men often appeal to a woman’s nurturing “rescuer” side.

    Yes. The thing is, though, that there are far more Alphas in this category than you might think. It’s not likely that they’ll let other men know the weaker sides of themselves, after all. What’s more, I think that among women who are repeatedly drawn to “bad boy” types, this is the one they are most likely to prefer.

    Clio

    Like


  184. on October 23, 2008 at 3:31 pm ironrailsironweights

    But another kind of paradoxical alpha doesn’t appear in this thread at all. He’s the man who is an Alpha by his definition, who “gets laid” often, whom women seldom refuse – but whose life is a mess in every other way. … They may be “naturals”, or they may learn “game” at an early age; they seldom fail to “score” with the women they pursue; and yet, they are failures in their work; have alcohol or drug problems; their family lives are a mess; and they often die young and tragically, through suicide or recklessness. They depend absolutely on their ability to seduce women as proof of their value, because nothing else in their lives works. Behind closed doors, they need constant maternal-type care from their women.

    It could be that they are failures in life because of their success with women. In other words, their monomaniacal devotion to the “endless pursuit of tail” (as Shouting Thomas memorably termed it) might cause them to neglect everything else. Another, somewhat related possibility is that they are deeply troubled and resort to constant sex as a way of escaping their inner demons. I suspect this latter scenario is more common with women, but certainly it must affect some men too.

    Peter

    Like


  185. 190 Clio:

    Yes. The thing is, though, that there are far more Alphas in this category than you might think.

    I think the way it works is like this:

    Hot chicks who have not developed any sort of character due to having thier asses kissed all their lives chase after Mr. BigDick’s seed, regardless if he’s a good father or if he even sticks around. The offspring of such couplings either live with a poor or nonexistent father as well as a spoiled narcissitic mother. The children fend for themselves. So, you end up with good-looking, scrappy and street smart alphas with significant emotional issues. The offspring repeat the pattern of their parents, thereby populating society with more copies of themselves.

    What’s more, I think that among women who are repeatedly drawn to “bad boy” types, this is the one they are most likely to prefer.

    Did I just see you squirm in your seat when you wrote that? 😉

    Like


  186. “you write like a bottom ” – clutch.

    Who finds the energy to debate a term so tirelessly?

    Like


  187. 185 PatrickH:

    DNA, Tupac, doesn’t tell us anything. It’s a molecule. It lays down the pattern for amino acid formation.

    It’s no more solid than the subjectivities you simultaneously evoke and dismiss.

    That’s something old people say.

    And…you haven’t done your due diligence at all. Your materialist/reductionist philosophy is the oldest of the old hat, dusty, misbegotten, forgotten but not gone, decrepit, useless, and hopelessly passe.

    “the lurch into the heart of darkness summons soul assuaging disbelief.” – h

    I’m not doubting the *utility* of various value/belief systems. They are, after all, the means by which man overcomes his dead-end existence. But in the end, all we have are our humble beliefs and fantasies, our four walls and the sound of traffic. Very often the trick is to convince ourselves that our ideas are true — apart from our need to create them — in order to harness their motive power.

    The stronger the man, the fewer his beliefs.

    All of this is to say that the attributions of value people impart to others is often a reflection of their need to believe in their own. This is especially true when the people in question are losers. Those higher up on the food chain know the real score, however.

    “Class is the ability to treat your inferiors with an air of respect” — C.S.H.

    But all the warm assurances and pats on the back do nothing to change the fact that a man who cannot succeed with women is just half a man, if that. The winners can afford such indulgences because they don’t have to think about it more than the 10 seconds it took to blow some hot air into the loser’s belief-balloon.

    Here at Chateau we are not constrained by the strictures of polite society. As a friend of mine puts it:

    “These are the thoughts that, while not often expressed, are all too visible in the eyes of all the people around the
    loser – the cold reptilian gaze hidden under the warm fuzzy lies of the decent people. The hindbrain reaction that can sniff out the filthy death stench of the loser at 12 parsecs. The reaction that causes the stupid, the weak, the obese and the clueless to be discriminated against and oppressed and tormented in a never ending hell matrix of screaming agony, a lifetime of marginalized disutility that ends in the dissolution of death, never to be redeemed, never to be saved, with no Messiah, no God, no justice. Nothing but a lifetime of failure and pain leading to nothing, rewarded with NOTHING, for NOTHING.”

    Have a nice day!

    P.S. Clio wept

    Like


  188. patrickH:
    A lot of this uselessly confusing debate would be cleared away by just retiring the word “alpha” from its role in this place, returning it to its traditional meaning of dominance, high-status in a given social context, and use the traditional English words “player”, “lothario”, etc. Others have suggested this. I think it’s time.

    you seem to be confused. since you are a poetess of very obstinate mind, i will clear it up for you yet again:

    an alpha male is defined as a man who has lots of quality women wanting to fuck him. this does not mean he necessarily acts on his bounty of choices. a successful player is simply an alpha male who gives the women want they want and holds his nose up at monogamy.
    now if you want to make a moral case for monogamy, go right ahead. but dont muddy the waters with the spewings of your inner demons. and don’t expect the amoral ugly truths lurking in the sepulchre of our selfish genes to give your moral taxonomies much consideration.

    he has misappropriated the word “alpha” in an effort (IMO) to snag its prestige, its moral worth, for another term, “player”, whose connotations of parasitism, deceitfulness, dependency on women, immaturity, and selfishness renders it a term of dubious praise at best, a term of abuse and contempt at worst.

    alpha has no inherent *moral* worth. it is a descriptor of a phenomenon of human hierarchy. it is only given moral worth by wilting flowers such as yourself who want to laquer humanity in a rainbow-colored transcendence it does not deserve.
    the rest of your assertions are subjective fluff. many players give women tremendous love and get tremendous love in return. any man’s parasitism is not a function of his sexual lifestyle, but his character.

    Given his apparent incapacity to be a genuine alpha, and his commitment to the life of the player, it’s not surprising he’d try to grab some of the power and worth and rigor of the term for his own attenuated, etiolated, exhausted, louche, jaded and weary way of life.

    false premises — it’s what’s for brunch!
    did you piddle on your thesaurus when you wrote all that?

    Sorry. Can’t have the word.

    it’s not yours to give.

    “Alpha” remains untouched by the attempt to kidnap and reduce it to indentured servitude here.

    and there will be pie in the sky by and by…

    It’s just too powerful to be held captive in the pallid, soft-skinned hands of those exhausted and exhausting urban decadents called “players”.

    you write like a bottom.

    Traditional Alpha >>>> Player

    traditional alpha = loved by women.
    successful player = loved by women.
    the rest is commentary.

    No matter how much players say it isn’t.

    i sense a bit of projection.

    Like


  189. tupac throwing an unusually meaningless quote at me:

    “the lurch into the heart of darkness summons soul assuaging disbelief.” – h

    Okay.

    As for the rest, Performative Contradiction, thy name is Tupac!

    But in the end, all we have are our humble beliefs and fantasies, our four walls and the sound of traffic…

    Except you, of course. How else could you have found out “all we have” except by leaving your four walls, the safety of your belief systems and ventured out into that undiscovered country (by some) called reality? I don’t understand how you’ve attained such generalizable insight into how others are trapped in their own minds without escaping the trap of your own. Where do you get this power of knowledge you deny others? And what do you mean, “we”, brown man?

    Like


  190. avoiding the point:

    don’t expect the amoral ugly truths lurking in the sepulchre of our selfish genes to give your moral taxonomies much consideration

    The question, which you refuse still to answer, is the reverse of your comment: Why should our moral taxonomies give consideration to the “amoral ugly truths lurking in the sepulchre of our selfish genes”? (Why would you describe our selfish genes as a “sepulchre” in the first place?) Which “ugly truths” should we acknowledge and live by? Murder people who look different? Isn’t that one of the ugly truths? Why ignore that one? You’re applying moral taxonomies yourself simply by insisting that certain of our impulses should be indulged and not others.

    You’re a moralist who won’t accept that’s what he is. Your ironism has fooled you. You’re not a nihilist, you’re a preacher of a church of selective self-indulgence. You’re full of “shoulds” and “musts” and “ought tos”, you just mask it in poorly understood half-baked evo-psych. Big deal!

    any man’s parasitism is not a function of his sexual lifestyle, but his character.

    You have attempted to argue that there is no element of character that transcends sexual lifestyle. A man’s worth is determined by his sexual lifestyle and no more, according to you. So how can you go running to notions of “character” when you’ve denied the significance of the whole notion?

    And of course, parasitism can be a function of a sexual lifestyle. Obviously it can. How can you not see that? A man who preys on women unhappy in their relationships, a man who promises more than he delivers all in order to snag an appealing orifice to ejaculate inside…if that’s not a parasite, what is?

    it [the word “alpha” i]s not yours to give.

    Well, for God’s sake, then it’s not yours to take, is it? Or hoard like a miser with his pile of copper coins. “My word! My word! Can’t have it! Mine!” I’m contesting your misappropriation of a word. I’m sorry I upset you, but there it is…

    As for the rest of your “response”, well…

    Like


  191. Perhaps there are higher aspirations, for many men, than being “alpha.”

    Like


  192. 164 Chic

    Sara don’t let them upset you. I always say, it’s nice to know that they think about you even when you are not around.

    Thanks honey, but if I’ve said it once, I’ve said it at least 10 times; this site is pure entertainment. I think they’re more upset that I’m not upset. I forget who said it–maybe PatrickH–that my confidence is completely undeserved and unearned. I couldn’t agree more.

    Like


  193. @ 27 & 40
    Ricky Raw brings up an interesting observation: the readers of this blog know that Michelle Obama’s face looks like she’s been on HGH for her entire NFL career, yet she emasculates Barack in the press by talking about his dirty underwear and generally makes it sound like she’s running the show. the reason Barack has to put up with this is because, quite simply, he’s a liberal–and as such, he is bound and gagged from putting Michelle in her place by various liberal dogmas such as feminism, which basically states that men, because they are the dominant sex, must constantly allow themselves to be mocked and ridiculed throughout pop culture in order to boost the collective feminine self-esteem. this is why Barack must sit there and grin-n-bear-it and swallow it down when Michelle makes stupid, emasculating remarks about him for the world to hear. if Michelle Obama somehow managed to get to where she is now in a country like Russia, where political correctness counts for a lot less, she would quickly be divorced and replaced by a hot young gymnast or equivalent.

    Like


  194. core elements of successful social interaction

    one.

    outmaneuvering others in the group

    two.

    maintaining group cohesion

    desired upshot of prolific social and cognitive intelligence (governed by two distinct neuronal networks) = accomplish both goals with maximal efficiency

    lizard king’s alpha definition is valid.

    for someone who knows the score; know that unflagging self-interest based motivation will further one, possibly at the expense of two

    deploy selectively.

    truly knowing the score is knowing this.

    Like


  195. Omg… I totally thought the date said oct 21 2009! Haha! Blast from the past hm…

    Like


  196. on October 23, 2009 at 6:03 pm gunslingergregi

    riiigghhhhtttt

    Like


  197. on October 6, 2010 at 7:12 pm BetaizedBastard

    How alpha you are is reflected by how you easily you get people to comply with your will/decision-making.

    For most men worth their stuff, that includes how good you are at getting the hottest babes to gobble your cock and let you get her pregnant.

    I imagine it’s possible to be the alpha of the group without banging everything – I know several guys who get laid like rockstars, but in social situations, I can easily imagine them following someone else’s lead.

    Like


  198. You don’t get to choose the definitions of words. If you want to do that, make up your own new words. An alpha is the person who is at the top of the social hierarchy – period. So the leader of a small country who is repulsive to women is the alpha nonetheless. The guy who is attractive to women but who has no traction with his male social group is not the alpha by definition.

    Like