AD1980 Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 Yeah i dont get how now alpha is also a look lol its supposed to be personality I guess any good looking man tall with a nice build is labeled "alpha"
Almond_Joy Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 Speaking of alpha males, has anyone read or heard of this book? I never heard of an alpha male until I started looking for information on guys like my ex, because I'd never met anyone like that. And he fit 80% of the criterion in this book. It's one man's perspective, but compared to the other material floating around out there seems as objective as can be expected on a subect like this. I do think it takes a certain type of woman to be happy with an alpha for the long term. It doesn't mean alphas can't be husband material or that non-alphas are non husband material. And just because a guy isn't alpha does NOT by any stretch mean that he cannot please a woman in bed! That's crazy. In fact, I'd think most alphas are WORSE at sex than most non-alphas, but the general magnetism of the alpha guy leaves the woman with the impression that sex with an alpha is better. I agree that people generally don't fall wholly into extremes...but they can lean strongly towards fitting in one category or another. I hate labeling people, and being labeled, but it's true.
kaylan Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 True. I'm not sure, because my first exposure to "PUA" culture was here on LoveShack, but I think the concept of "Alpha Male" has been convoluted by that. I believe I know true Alpha people who are not in any way players or egocentric narcissists; they are natural leaders in whatever field they choose. People accept their leadership. They are more dominant than submissive. They often have a quiet power, and are not the cocky dudes usually used as examples of "Alpha Males" in dating conversations. The "Alpha Male" is husband material (as long as we are not using the term to define the cocky conceited player), for the right type of woman. Like any other type, this one needs to find the right kind of complementary match. The PUA community are the ones who put all this crap about 'being Alpha vs being a Nice Guy' into guys heads. Its ridiculous to try and describe modern humans using terms that we generally use to describe wild animal behavior. We are much more complex than that so terms like Alpha, Beta, etc, dont apply that well. I think people miss this point all the time. Another thing is that the term "Alpha" can be pretty subjective. Whats Alpha to one person may not be to another. Culture and upbringing have a lot to do with this. The reason the PUA community obsesses over whats "Alpha" or whats "AFC behavior" is because they are over-analytical, insecure guys. They need to just learn how to live life without all this mental masturbation.
fortyninethousand322 Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 Oh please. So, all husbands are alpha? Doesn't the word alpha imply scarcity by definition? THEY CAN'T ALL BE ALPHA. Not necessarily. Alpha implies leadership qualities, desirability etc. In the past, these qualities were scarce, but through whatever means (evolution, etc.) the number of desirable males has increased over time. The low quality males who are left in the world are merely left overs of accidental reproduction (or forced reproduction, who knows). So yes, the vast majority of men who get married (at least in the western world) are in fact alpha. The non-alphas usually end up as the 40 year old virgin.
xxoo Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 You do all of that as well, I'd assume. You're alpha too? I don't know what makes someone "alpha"... Not really... Confidence and standing up for himself comes much more naturally to him than to me. He stands up for me even when I'm doubting myself.
kaylan Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 Speaking of alpha males, has anyone read or heard of this book? I never heard of an alpha male until I started looking for information on guys like my ex, because I'd never met anyone like that. And he fit 80% of the criterion in this book. It's one man's perspective, but compared to the other material floating around out there seems as objective as can be expected on a subect like this. I do think it takes a certain type of woman to be happy with an alpha for the long term. It doesn't mean alphas can't be husband material or that non-alphas are non husband material. And just because a guy isn't alpha does NOT by any stretch mean that he cannot please a woman in bed! That's crazy. In fact, I'd think most alphas are WORSE at sex than most non-alphas, but the general magnetism of the alpha guy leaves the woman with the impression that sex with an alpha is better. I agree that people generally don't fall wholly into extremes...but they can lean strongly towards fitting in one category or another. I hate labeling people, and being labeled, but it's true. Its easy to look at a few people and then write about it and try to sell a book. It doesnt change the fact that people are diverse and complex beings. Dont get sucked into buying into all of that nonsense. I almost did a while back, and it actually made me worse with people and women. Once I went back to my regular routine and grew up some, is when things got better.
AD1980 Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 The fact that a look can make a women think your alpha proves its about IMAGE with most women and these stupid labels and as long as you outwardly project an image theyre attractd to wheter or not you have those traits youll attract them..
kaylan Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 ^I agree with this. Looks are what draws people in initially and can trump any other traits most of the time if the person is damn attractive to us. Men and women arent as different as we like to assume.
Author GoodOnPaper Posted February 18, 2012 Author Posted February 18, 2012 I certainly don't view it as a choice between one or the other. The choice is between a stable LTR and an unstable casual relationship that's not necessarily going anywhere. That doesn't say much about the personality types involved - just what they're looking for at that particular point in time. An "alpha" can be involved in either one of those types of relationships. But a husband-material guy can't -- it's either an LTR (or the road toward it) or no sex at all. At least that's my experience. Hence, the paradox -- if a guy can't attract any women for a ONS or FWB situation, what's the draw for a woman to sleep with him for years or decades in an LTR? Is there just not as much of a physical draw and she's OK with that? Wouldn't that be settling? My thanks to everyone for their replies -- obviously, as much as my analytical nature helps me in my profession, it's not-so-helpful in social and emotional matters. Thanks for your insights.
Almond_Joy Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 Its easy to look at a few people and then write about it and try to sell a book. It doesnt change the fact that people are diverse and complex beings. Dont get sucked into buying into all of that nonsense. I almost did a while back, and it actually made me worse with people and women. Once I went back to my regular routine and grew up some, is when things got better. If I had no first hand experience to corroborate what I was reading, I'd have dismissed it as BS. Just because a guy fits a criterion of alpha traits doesn't mean he can't be diverse or complex. As I said, a person can't wholly fit into any one description. They can, however, exhibit a lot of behaviors that are commonly associated with a particular established type of people.
xxoo Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 But a husband-material guy can't -- it's either an LTR (or the road toward it) or no sex at all. At least that's my experience. Hence, the paradox -- if a guy can't attract any women for a ONS or FWB situation, what's the draw for a woman to sleep with him for years or decades in an LTR? Is there just not as much of a physical draw and she's OK with that? Wouldn't that be settling? A husband material man can choose monogamy. "Husband material" does not require having no other options. In fact, I'd much rather a husband who chooses marriage and monogamy, over a man who gets married because it is the only way he can get sex
Author GoodOnPaper Posted February 18, 2012 Author Posted February 18, 2012 A husband material man can choose monogamy. "Husband material" does not require having no other options. In fact, I'd much rather a husband who chooses marriage and monogamy, over a man who gets married because it is the only way he can get sex But without options, it's not really a choice, is it?
xxoo Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 But without options, it's not really a choice, is it? True. But it sounded like you were saying that "husband material" men have no option for sex outside a relationship. That's not true. Not always, anyway.
Star Gazer Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 Sure, alphas can have it all anytime they want . . . but can a "husband-material" guy ever have the allure of an alpha -- at least in the eyes of one woman? That's my big question. When a woman is in a place where she's truly looking for a husband, yes. Absolutely. Before that, unlikely. But I agree that some Alphas can be husband material, but most men who prefer to dominate and control (a real Alpha) aren't.
mesmerized Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 The fact that a look can make a women think your alpha proves its about IMAGE with most women and these stupid labels and as long as you outwardly project an image theyre attractd to wheter or not you have those traits youll attract them.. It's the image + confidence. And most very attractive guys who also have had some achievements in life seem to have that confidence because women want them/run after them!
ThaWholigan Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 It's the image + confidence. And most very attractive guys who also have had some achievements in life seem to have that confidence because women want them/run after them! It's sad, I feel sorry for the guys who think they can't become confident, attractive guys, it's highly possible for most.
AD1980 Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 It's sad, I feel sorry for the guys who think they can't become confident, attractive guys, it's highly possible for most. Confidence has become a vague fluff cliche word now in the dating world..Of course a guy whos handsome and sucessful is "confident" because women throw themselves at him.. People make confidence out to be some magic potion that can transform a ugly or average dude into a hearthrob and its bs.. A confident ugly guy is labeled a creep..We tested this with two of my friends one very good looking who does great with women the other not so much.. My ugly friend made some agressive comments and was almost hit and thrown out of places..My good looking friend got laughs and was told how funny he was..
ThaWholigan Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 Most of the guys that I have met who are really good looking (former Abercrombie models and aspiring actors in L.A) aren't really alpha in pesonality to be honest; most aren't dominant and don't have a need to be in control etc. Many are sensitive and thoughtful and genuine; more so than the below average guys who are bitter because they can't get any. These guys can't help that they are good looking so it means a lot of women are attracted to them but that alone doesn't make them "alpha". Even if they sleep around a lot when single that doesn't necessarily make them alpha since many of these guys are not "leader of the pack" types. They can't help that they are "good looking" so most people assume they are alpha (because they look like they are) even though some are more the sensitive kind that just happens to look like Brad Pitt etc. I don't think these super hot guys even think about things about alpha or beta; they are good looking and don't have to try hard to get women so they don't care. They simply are themselves. It's mainly the below average or desperate guys that are into these labels. Also, these "super good looking guys" tend to be more genuine than below average guys who think they are nice and call themselves "nice guys" because they have no motives and aren't desperate to get laid. Many of these really good looking guys are actually REAL nice people and more genuine. The ones who can't get any girls and go on the PUA Forums THINK they are nice guys; however, not being able to score does not make you nice by default. Agree, had entertained this many times and came to the same conclusion. It does not stop me feeling sorry for them though, I could never be so hopeless. Am I delusional for thinking I can be a confident, attractive guy? I don't think so........ Elaborate so I can get a clearer standpoint on their improvement from you (curious).
mesmerized Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 Also, these "super good looking guys" tend to be more genuine than below average guys who think they are nice and call themselves "nice guys" because they have no motives and aren't desperate to get laid. Many of these really good looking guys are actually REAL nice people and more genuine. The ones who can't get any girls and go on the PUA Forums THINK they are nice guys; however, not being able to score does not make you nice by default. lol, I LOVE the bolded part, sooooo true. You see tons of these supposedly nice guys on forums and they don't seem nice or genuine in the slightest. Often when they post pictures of themselves they are just not attractive and when they're told that they have to take care of their looks, they get upset and talk about how women should just want them for their nice traits!!!
Author GoodOnPaper Posted February 18, 2012 Author Posted February 18, 2012 But it sounded like you were saying that "husband material" men have no option for sex outside a relationship. That's not true. For me it was true. Hence my lack of perspective on this issue. I've always imagined the "purely physical" attraction associated with ONSs and FWBs to be so much more powerful than anything I've experienced.
Mme. Chaucer Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 For me it was true. Hence my lack of perspective on this issue. I've always imagined the "purely physical" attraction associated with ONSs and FWBs to be so much more powerful than anything I've experienced in LTRs or marriage. Well, you've only experienced one side of the coin. I'm sure many people who have been promiscuous and also been in a successful LTR will tell you that the experience of having sex that includes deep emotion is frequently the most powerful type of physical liaison.
xxoo Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 For me it was true. Hence my lack of perspective on this issue. I've always imagined the "purely physical" attraction associated with ONSs and FWBs to be so much more powerful than anything I've experienced. Grass is always greener on the other side
ThaWholigan Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 I don't understand your question. Do you mean what the below average guys can do to improve themselves? I honestly have no idea. I guess to be well rounded and develop their own hobbies and a strong network of friends.... Is that what you are asking me? I don't think being alpha has anything to do with looks either; it's mainly a personality trait. Below average looking guys can also be very alpha if they like to be dominating. You mostly find these types working as lawyers or investment bankers or in business etc. I would rather have a hot guy who is nice than some alpha jerk. I don't like controlling/dominating men at all whatsoever. I prefer to do the dominating. I don't think being Alpha has to do with looks either. I don't think being Alpha necessarily have to do with being controlling, just that they themselves cannot be dominated (hence the nice guy=doormat theory conjured up by many). I was asking you how a below-average guy could improve in terms of his looks. I think that most guys don't know how to carry themselves physically and don't groom and dress as well as they could. Not to say that they should be all metro, but still they could make massive improvements to their appearance IMO. I just feel very badly for these guys really. I'm not in a great position but I'm aware that it's my bad, and I'm aware of what I need to do to become an attractive guy. I'm just trying to gee up those in a similar position but I don't think they get much proper encouragement outside of someone like me (and PUAs ).
alphamale Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 Are we "husband-material" guys really THAT clueless and bumbling in bed? Are we fools for thinking that we can possibly make a woman truly happy in an LTR? pretty much, yes
Mme. Chaucer Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 pretty much, yes You're clearly biased. 3
Recommended Posts