wahine Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 So I've had a repeated, (in my opinion, fascinating) conversation with one of my good friends, and I wanted to expand that to gain some of your opinions here. According to my friend, there are 4 different aspects of your personality that exhibit your dominance/submissiveness or alpha/beta-ness (for lack of more updated and sophisticated terminology, I'm just going to keep it simple). These can be altered slightly, but they're basically: work, academia, personal relationships, and sexuality. Person A could be alpha in the workplace and in the bedroom, but beta when it comes to academics and personal relationships, while Person B can be beta in all of the rest, but alpha at academics, etc. etc. He says that you can only be dominant at a maximum of ¾ aspects at any time, but you can be submissive at all of them at once (although there are very few people who are like that their whole lives, it's usually just a phase, thankfully), and up to this point, he and I have both broken down many of our friends categorically, and agreed that this is the case. We've also discussed which aspects may work to a huge advantage/disadvantage (while giving false good first/bad impressions and mixed signals), leading to some very unfair occasions in the dating world, many of which have probably sparked some of the discussions here, assuming we're correct. We concluded that the most blatant DISadvantage would be someone with a C personality. Person C is dominant at work, academia, and in personal relationships, but submissive with their sexuality, and because of this, they will have an unfair disadvantage in the dating world. This person, due to their confidence in all other areas, may be falsely perceived as disinterested, or even a non-entity if they're not as overt when it comes to someone that they are sexually attracted to. My friend and I then concluded that the Person C applied to all of our friends who were great catches, and should be the “first ones” in romantic relationships, but for whatever reason, they're still single and have bad luck in the dating world. So, if you're still with me (sorry that this was a bit wordy), what are your opinions on this theory? Do you have any first-hand experiences that lend to or debunk it? I'd love to hear them...
fortyninethousand322 Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 I think alpha and beta are colloquial expressions used in a way that they should not be used. Some sociologist used the terms present in canine social behavior to describe human social behavior. Humans do not have the same kind of social interactions that canines do so it's a bad comparison. But the terms have evolved over the years to have a very different meaning. Think of an alpha as a socially attractive person and a beta as a socially unattractive person. Sometimes an alpha can be a jerk, sometimes he can be a generally pleasant person. The point is that he's a socially attractive person that pretty much never has a hard time getting dates. The beta on the hand is the opposite of that. Sometimes betas can be jerks too though. 1
Author wahine Posted January 22, 2013 Author Posted January 22, 2013 I would like to know how someone displays "alphaness" in academia. Is Johnny-Know-It-All who knows every answer and looks like a smart Alek "alpha"? Or is the person who seems like a slacker who doesn't answer any question in class yet still gets the highest grades in the class? That's a great question. From my understanding, an alpha in academia was the person who was able to stretch their mind enough to succeed in any class. Like if the person was mathematically inclined, but didn't have stellar reading and writing skills, but was still able to study hard enough to achieve an A in an upper level Lit class, that would be an academic alpha. It's solo success achieved by working your own mind, versus for example being an alpha at work, where you have to use your brain, but most likely, are asked to use time management and cooperation/leadership skills more often than attained intelligence. An academic beta would be someone who basically took the easy way out. They could get straight A's, but if those A's were all in Lit classes and the person was a reader/writer, they'd be a beta, because there's no challenge and self betterment. And I totally agree that the alpha identity is very dynamic, and there are certainly varying degrees and circumstances. However, I personally still don't know a single person who I can honestly say is a true alpha in every regard mentioned. They'd certainly be a fearsome thing to behold.
charlietheginger Posted January 22, 2013 Posted January 22, 2013 (edited) This is not true in all aspects. I have a alpha body. I can walk into the gym keep My game face on. Other guys move outta my way And i can tell a guy that ask "are you using this" Yes and when im done you can use it after me. I can kick stomp a smart mouth guy down to the ground But im gentle so if a guy is talking crap ill make them Submit by twisting a wrist or disloacting his shoulder may Even swipe his leg out from under him and knee him In the stomach. I dont drink so in a bar situation i put Smart mouth alpha wannabes in there place. I dont care If he is 6 ft 6 or 5ft 6 . Talk **** and you seconds away from Being on the floor with something dislocated or broken Ive studdied all forms of martial arts entering grappling hand To hand fighting and submission holds. Im strong fast flexable Agile and have fast reflexes. All of this is becuase i was Beaten and picked on as a child. So learning how to make Any opponent submit is something i was forced to learn Not by choice but for survival But im very submissive to women very shy open doors Massage their feet and back. Pull out chairs and so on. Love kissing cuddling just over all affection . so im alpha untill it comes to women then im a shy beta So the spectrum varies Edited January 22, 2013 by charlietheginger
Recommended Posts