Do women want alpha males or Beta males?

[Wade Lamare]

The thing with alpha male is that most people have the wrong definition of what is an alpha male. A real alpha male is not domineering and arrogant he is just confident, persistent, protective, proud, he is also humble, grounded, quiet and hard working.

 

When I hear people talking about alpha males as men that come and take, are domineering, arrogant, aggressive, loud, they just got it all wrong.

 

I always take the wolf pack example. The alpha male of a wolf pack does not bark, or fight, or act arrogant and defiant. He does not need to. He leads with his stamina and charisma. It's the insecure pack members that bark, defy and fight because they live in fear. In humans world fear is called insecurity.

 

So to answer your question yes I want a man that is confident, persistent, protective, proud, humble, grounded and hard working. If you are asking if I want a man that is arrogant, aggressive, loud, domineering, than the answer is no. I do not want a wannabe alpha male.

 

Totally agree.

 

As I said earlier all these websites seem to have their own definition of what the different letters mean so it is difficult to pin the true definition down.

 

I also think that beta is misrepresented too. Some people confuse a male who displays beta traits with a doormat or a fat lump kinda guy.

 

Beta ≠ Doormat.

[SammySammy]

The thing with alpha male is that most people have the wrong definition of what is an alpha male. A real alpha male is not domineering and arrogant he is just confident, persistent, protective, proud, he is also humble, grounded, quiet and hard working.

 

When I hear people talking about alpha males as men that come and take, are domineering, arrogant, aggressive, loud, they just got it all wrong.

 

I always take the wolf pack example. The alpha male of a wolf pack does not bark, or fight, or act arrogant and defiant. He does not need to. He leads with his stamina and charisma. It's the insecure pack members that bark, defy and fight because they live in fear. In humans world fear is called insecurity.

 

So to answer your question yes I want a man that is confident, persistent, protective, proud, humble, grounded and hard working. If you are asking if I want a man that is arrogant, aggressive, loud, domineering, than the answer is no. I do not want a wannabe alpha male.

 

Is that true?

 

It seems that wolf society has a pecking order. That pecking order is established through competence - who is best suited to ensure the pack survives - but, it is affirmed and reaffirmed through aggression and micro-aggressions. Wolves are constantly testing each other to see where they fit in the pecking order. It's usually resolved with a brief fight or skirmish until fighting is no longer necessary. Alpha males and females don't charm themselves into their positions. They get there and stay there because of the ability to kick ass or even kill if necessary.

 

With that said, beta males and females also play a role in pack survival. They just don't get to pass on their genes to the next generation with the best of the opposite sex.

 

In humans, I do believe there are alpha males and females and that they tend to be drawn to each other. I also believe true alphas - male or female - are few and far between.

 

However, like in wolf society, I believe betas have value and a role to play.

 

We all want to live the best life possible and want our kids to live the best life possible. A critical part of that is being the highest quality person you can be and finding the highest quality mate you can find. I believe we all do that to some extent whether consciously or subconsciously.

[OneLov]

Is that true?

 

Wolf packs in the wild are families. The idea that there's one dominant wolf, and he is constantly defending his alpha status is a product of research of unrelated wolves in captivity. That's not how wolves behave in the wild.

 

In the wild, they act much like humans. There's a breeding pair and the rest of the pack is made-up of the offspring. Once the offspring get too old, the parents chase them off to start packs of their own (hmmmm, sounds similar to us). They will display social dominant behavior situationally. But much of what we understand the "alpha" male to be is misleading.

 

Why everything you know about wolf packs is wrong

 

 

""The concept of the alpha wolf as a "top dog" ruling a group of similar-aged compatriots," Mech writes in the 1999 paper, "is particularly misleading." Mech notes that earlier papers, such as M.W. Fox's "Socio-ecological implications of individual differences in wolf litters: a developmental and evolutionary perspective," published in Behaviour in 1971, examined the potential of individual cubs to become alphas, implying that the wolves would someday live in packs in which some would become alphas and others would be subordinate pack members. However, Mech explains, his studies of wild wolves have found that wolves live in families: two parents along with their younger cubs. Wolves do not have an innate sense of rank; they are not born leaders or born followers. The "alphas" are simply what we would call in any other social group "parents." The offspring follow the parents as naturally as they would in any other species. No one has "won" a role as leader of the pack; the parents may assert dominance over the offspring by virtue of being the parents.

 

While the captive wolf studies saw unrelated adults living together in captivity, related, rather than unrelated, wolves travel together in the wild. Younger wolves do not overthrow the "alpha" to become the leader of the pack; as wolf pups grow older, they are dispersed from their parents' packs, pair off with other dispersed wolves, have pups, and thus form packs of their owns."

Edited May 19, 2019 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[Gloria25]

Gloria25...That is just a great post.

 

Yes we men love to be taken care of and a lot of women just don't care. I frankly have never had time for the ones that don't.

 

But you know, that goes both ways as well. I tend to dote on women in a lot of ways, just dote on my wife now though.

 

I enjoy cooking for her, and taking care of her as well. I always open doors for all women. I always make sure that she is safe and happy.

 

I don't know, it just seems like the thing to do. It is not that women are weak but I just feel the need to care for and protect them for some reason.

 

And it should be a constant back/forth. You give/do freely for one person, and in return they give/do for you.

 

Problem is, now a days, things that typically fell on women as an expression of care, nurturing (cooking, cleaning, tending to husband/kids), now must be split between man/woman in RL, or eliminated all together cuz men are needy, entitled and "alpha" if they expect women to do these things. But funny how things typical to men (cutting grass, vehicle maintenance, handiwork) still is his to do. .

 

I've read the responses and yep, IMO, "modern/progressive" women want beta males...a "pet". Cuz an alpha wouldn't tolerance such nonsense and actually wouldn't settle for a woman who would treat him with any less.

[Gloria25]

It seems that wolf society has a pecking order. That pecking order is established through competence - who is best suited to ensure the pack survives - but, it is affirmed and reaffirmed through aggression and micro-aggressions. Wolves are constantly testing each other to see where they fit in the pecking order. It's usually resolved with a brief fight or skirmish until fighting is no longer necessary.

 

Agreed...

 

Cuz if you ask me, a beta woman might consider another beta male an "alpha" in her eyes (and vice versa), cuz water seeks its own level.

Edited May 19, 2019 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[normal person]

i met my spouse long before all this alpha and beta crap was a thing. I will say that before I met him,I dated a man who would fit the definition of alpha. It was part of his being extremely abusive both mentally and eventually, physically.

 

It's been a "thing" long before anyone put labels on it. It occurs naturally in nature. Call it whatever you want, but in my mind there are people with resources like safety, comfort, money, etc, that other people are dependent on, and there are those dependents. "Alpha-ness" is having resources that people need, and therefore power, choices, freedom, etc and "beta-ness" is being dependent or deferring to those people. I'd argue that being abusive is a much more "beta" quality as someone who does it probably feels insecure, like his control or power are circumspect or threatened. If he was truly confident, comfortable, secure, and reliable ("alphaness"), he wouldn't need to be abusive.

 

If I were to go looking for someone to date, it would not be an "alpha" type person, as to me, that is now a code word for a big, bullying jerk.

 

Respectfully, I think you're wrong here with your perceptions of what these terms mean. "Alpha-ness" is not synonymous with abuse. Abuse is a manifestation of insecurity or a struggle for power and control, perhaps a struggle for "alpha-ness" rather than a byproduct of it. People who are very "alpha" are typically in control and secure with what they have.

 

Confidence is quiet, insecurity is loud.

 

I think a lot of people might be conflating masculinity with "alpha-ness." An alpha is not necessarily the biggest, most threatening person. It's just the one with the most reliable, salient, resources. Bill Gates is not an image of what most people would call "masculine." But how many people could he control, feed, protect, etc with all his money? His resources make him "alpha." And Barrack Obama doesn't have anywhere near as much money as Bill Gates, and people still defer to him because he controls resources and decision making processes because of his position.

 

Also, these positions and titles are fluid. If you're hunting in the woods with Bill Gates and Barrack Obama and you see a bear, Bill's money won't stop the bear from charging at you, nor will Barrack's political influence. Yet if you have a gun, they both will probably defer to you and cower behind your back because you have a resource they don't that's crucial for their survival in that moment.

 

All this being said, I think there's a concurrent discussion to be had about masculinity rather than alpha/beta, as I think the two topics are being confused here. Not every woman wants a man coursing with testosterone these days, in fact, it would seem there's a larger affinity for more well tempered men. I heard something interesting on the most recent Cracked podcast (highly recommended, by the way). I forget the context but it was something like this: a study suggests birth control use is very high these days, and it affects womens' hormones so that they prefer men who they think will be better caretakers for their kids rather than the stereotypical muscular lethario, and that's why we're seeing a rise in popularity of male figures who aren't quite as aggressive, large, etc. Just food for thought.

[SammySammy]

Wolf packs in the wild are families. The idea that there's one dominant wolf, and he is constantly defending his alpha status is a product of research of unrelated wolves in captivity. That's not how wolves behave in the wild.

 

In the wild, they act much like humans. There's a breeding pair and the rest of the pack is made-up of the offspring. Once the offspring get too old, the parents chase them off to start packs of their own (hmmmm, sounds similar to us). They will display social dominant behavior situationally. But much of what we understand the "alpha" male to be is misleading.

 

Why everything you know about wolf packs is wrong

 

 

""The concept of the alpha wolf as a "top dog" ruling a group of similar-aged compatriots," Mech writes in the 1999 paper, "is particularly misleading." Mech notes that earlier papers, such as M.W. Fox's "Socio-ecological implications of individual differences in wolf litters: a developmental and evolutionary perspective," published in Behaviour in 1971, examined the potential of individual cubs to become alphas, implying that the wolves would someday live in packs in which some would become alphas and others would be subordinate pack members. However, Mech explains, his studies of wild wolves have found that wolves live in families: two parents along with their younger cubs. Wolves do not have an innate sense of rank; they are not born leaders or born followers. The "alphas" are simply what we would call in any other social group "parents." The offspring follow the parents as naturally as they would in any other species. No one has "won" a role as leader of the pack; the parents may assert dominance over the offspring by virtue of being the parents.

 

While the captive wolf studies saw unrelated adults living together in captivity, related, rather than unrelated, wolves travel together in the wild. Younger wolves do not overthrow the "alpha" to become the leader of the pack; as wolf pups grow older, they are dispersed from their parents' packs, pair off with other dispersed wolves, have pups, and thus form packs of their owns."

 

Wolves are predators. They kill to survive.

 

While it's true wolf packs are primarily families, you don't get to be a family by being charming and charismatic. They don't protect and defend their families by being charming and charismatic. Likewise, order is not maintained in the pack simply through being charming and charismatic.

 

Mates are chosen based on the likelihood or demonstrated ability to provide food and protection for each other and their offspring.

 

Also, wolf packs are not just made up of nuclear families. Mother, father, and kids. They can also include extended family and even unrelated wolves.

 

Sure, wolves are not fighting each other 24 hours a day, but even the article you quoted admitted "situational" aggression was used to maintain order. Yes, they are loving, doting and protective parents and families, but aggression is used at times within the family to maintain order and definitely outside the family to ensure survival.

 

To suggest alphas don't fight and only betas fight because they are "insecure" is just not the case. Alphas do fight and they are usually the best at it.

[Gloria25]

 

All this being said, I think there's a concurrent discussion to be had about masculinity rather than alpha/beta, as I think the two topics are being confused here. Not every woman wants a man coursing with testosterone these days, in fact, it would seem there's a larger affinity for more well tempered men. I heard something interesting on the most recent Cracked podcast (highly recommended, by the way). I forget the context but it was something like this: a study suggests birth control use is very high these days, and it affects womens' hormones so that they prefer men who they think will be better caretakers for their kids rather than the stereotypical muscular lethario, and that's why we're seeing a rise in popularity of male figures who aren't quite as aggressive, large, etc. Just food for thought.

 

So being a limp D makes a man a better dad?

 

Wow...

 

Now, I agreed with the rest of your post - before the portion I quoted above.

 

Sorry, now a days there's no respect for the difference between the sexes. Women want a female with a penis (well, not a penis for sex, just to knock her up). They want men to ait down and watch Steel Magnolias and cry with them...they rather spend an evening "talking" than having sex....they want an emasculated "beta".

 

The masculine things you mentioned (hunting, bravery) along with strength in fitness are frowned upon. We don't declare war on ISIS, we must talk it out....ok, whatever . Any man displaying genuine alpha traits (stoic, strength, bravery) are told they must 'open up, cry, talk about their feeeeelings, and leave those barbaric practices behind for manicured nails and sitting at a computer screen at a desk and/or play video games instead.

 

Thing is, male and female traits come together for a healthy balance. Say a child scrapes knee on floor....dad says 'Get up, dust off, let's go' (instilling strength, perseverance), mom says 'Oooh, lemme kiss your little boo-oo' (instilling nurturing, comfort, compassion).

Edited October 14, 2016 by Gloria25

[SammySammy]

Thoughts from one woman:

 

Emotionally stable, healthy outlook, witty, caring, intellectually curious, don't take things personally or too seriously, financially responsible, loyal, open-minded and genuine. And single.

 

What letter of the Greek alphabet does that fall under?

 

Kappa.

 

[elaine567]

fact, it would seem there's a larger affinity for more well tempered men. I heard something interesting on the most recent Cracked podcast (highly recommended, by the way). I forget the context but it was something like this: a study suggests birth control use is very high these days, and it affects womens' hormones so that they prefer men who they think will be better caretakers for their kids rather than the stereotypical muscular lethario, and that's why we're seeing a rise in popularity of male figures who aren't quite as aggressive, large, etc. Just food for thought.

 

That certainly is food for thought and I guess probably has some truth to it, but I guess most men living in Western countries in safe spaces are all becoming less aggressive and rugged as there is little need for brute strength and strong minds, when life is easy, everything is mechanised, there are no predators lurking in the undergrowth and he is not literally fighting his fellow man for survival.

I realise that is not the same for every section of society, but your average Joe is going to become a lot smoother at the edges when there are no real enemies to fight, he works in a controlled environment, he earns a decent wage to feed his family, he buys his food from the supermarket, he doesn't have to build a home and he is not hungry or cold.

[Gloria25]

That certainly is food for thought and I guess probably has some truth to it, but I guess most men living in Western countries in safe spaces are all becoming less aggressive and rugged as there is little need for brute strength and strong minds, when life is easy, everything is mechanised, there are no predators lurking in the undergrowth and he is not literally fighting his fellow man for survival.

I realise that is not the same for every section of society, but your average Joe is going to become a lot smoother at the edges when there are no real enemies to fight, he works in a controlled environment, he earns a decent wage to feed his family, he buys his food from the supermarket, he doesn't have to build a home and he is not hungry or cold.

 

Regardless of modernization, strength and skills at certain things are still needed of a man.

 

When I look around my hood and see the "men" that can't even maintain a lawn like I can...total turn off.

 

I can't even stand scrawny guys. I need a guy to have some muscle tone. Some athletic hobby/skill.

[PrettyEmily77]

Kappa.

 

 

So I googled it and came up with a frat brotherhood that seems a bit dodgy to me .

 

In any case, it's really hard to see the value in labelling people, men or women, in that way.

 

The simple thought of a guy entertaining that sort of crap and giving it any value one way or the other would likely see me flee and it's come up exactly zero times in conversations with female friends.

 

OP, rest assured that most well adjusted people simply don't care about alpha/beta stuff - they're just busy liking whoever they like.

[Wade Lamare]

So, sorry for the long rant, but I feel it was necessary to make my point.

 

 

Well that's not for me.

 

I'm a grown man not a boy. I'm fully capable of pulling my weight in our household. I can make sandwiches, cook, clean and make coffee.

 

My mom used to look after me, make my sandwiches, wash my clothes etc.

 

I have a wife not a mom. I like having wild passionate sex with my wife not my mom so I certainly do not want a mommy substitute in my home.

 

My wife is a person in her own right not my domestic skivvy.

 

I don't care if that makes me alpha, beta, not alpha enough, epsilon, theta or whatever other greek letter you can think off. I'll just simply carry on being me doing the best for me and my family.

Edited May 19, 2019 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[preraph]

Doesn't matter. Stop reading books and just concentrate on being your best self and presenting your best self to everyone. I have known one woman at least who liked the less dominant guys, but to put it in perspective, they were still all musicians with a lot of options with females, just the quieter sort. It's confusing talking about alphas because it's really a term for animals, and in the animal kingdom, for example with domestic cats, it's the quiet steady ones who are the alpha of the house, not the one who's going around fighting and causing trouble.

 

Women like confidence and accomplishment and speaking only for myself, it can come in many different packages.

[normal person]

Sorry, now a days there's no respect for the difference between the sexes. Women want a female with a penis (well, not a penis for sex, just to knock her up). They want men to ait down and watch Steel Magnolias and cry with them...they rather spend an evening "talking" than having sex....they want an emasculated "beta".

 

I agree with you -- this is what I was reporting. Women these days seemingly want the less aggressive, less masculine guy. In the podcast mentioned it was suggested that it was a result of hormonal changes as a result of higher rates of birth control use.

 

The masculine things you mentioned (hunting, bravery) along with strength in fitness are frowned upon. We don't declare war on ISIS, we must talk it out....ok, whatever . Any man displaying genuine alpha traits (stoic, strength, bravery) are told they must 'open up, cry, talk about their feeeeelings, and leave those barbaric practices behind for manicured nails and sitting at a computer screen at a desk and/or play video games instead.

 

Thing is, male and female traits come together for a healthy balance. Say a child scrapes knee on floor....dad says 'Get up, dust off, let's go' (instilling strength, perseverance), mom says 'Oooh, lemme kiss your little boo-oo' (instilling nurturing, comfort, compassion).

 

I agree with you, personally. I think the this dilution of masculinity that we're seeing isn't a particularly good thing. There's going to be a whole generation of ineffectual guys out there if these keeps up. That being said, I feel like there's also a certain kind of "beta" woman who desires this kind of man and reinforces the market for it. She's the kind of woman who prefers a guy with a "dad bod" rather than six pack because she thinks the ripped guy will cheat on her, and because she feels bad about her own body, or wants to be "the good looking one." She could just go to the gym herself and raise her standard to a guy who's at least in shape, but that'd be too much work. It's the female equivalent of a guy who'd rather his wife not have a job or make any money so she has to stay under his thumb and become dependent on him, because he's insecure about his own ability to earn and provide.

 

It's the mentality of settling and not improving or staying on your toes -- I hate it. I'd much rather people push themselves and achieve things rather than just settle for someone who's similarly out of shape and mediocre so no one's feelings get hurt. At the base of it, I feel like it's antithetical to human progress.

 

I think of JFK saying "We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they're easy, but because they're hard." That willingness and boldness to do the impossible, to find a way, to improve, to push yourself; that same sort of mentality that's engrained in America is being diluted by people like those I described above who actively prefer and reinforce "beta-ness." The men and women who don't want to push themselves out of their comfort zones and would rather just be "good enough" and do the easy things rather than the hard, rewarding things.

 

That being said, this weaknening of men will probably provide more voids or niches for a group of guys who don't subscribe to the mentality to attain "alpha-ism." How that will be seen in the future is up for debate.

 

Just my two cents.

[JustGettingBy]

Thoughts from one woman:

 

Emotionally stable, healthy outlook, witty, caring, intellectually curious, don't take things personally or too seriously, financially responsible, loyal, open-minded and genuine. And single.

 

What letter of the Greek alphabet does that fall under?

 

Theta, Sigma, Iota.

[planning4later]

The answer is simple.

 

Prior to approximately age 30 (or the age of marriage), women want alphas. After this, when financial security takes priority over physical satisfaction, women want betas. However, a woman would still choose an alpha over beta if both had the same financial status. It's just that, when all other things are equal, women prioritize security past age 30.

 

Women are quite simple actually.

 

I know this is kind of vulgar, but it all comes down to this slogan:

 

"Alpha f-cks, beta bucks."

[planning4later]

Regardless of modernization, strength and skills at certain things are still needed of a man.

 

When I look around my hood and see the "men" that can't even maintain a lawn like I can...total turn off.

 

I can't even stand scrawny guys. I need a guy to have some muscle tone. Some athletic hobby/skill.

 

Then you wouldn't like me. I'm very skinny. But I also was a great athlete in school and could hit a baseball 400 feet. Better than most buff guys. You'd be surprised how many athletic-looking men are awful at most physical endeavors. They just have the look.

 

Ever heard of Tim Lincecum? He was the most awkward, scrawny looking professional baseball player in recent history, but he absolutely dominated baseball last decade.

Edited October 15, 2016 by planning4later