A friendly reminder that applying 'alpha and beta' as a one size fits all to social situations is a pseudoscience and...

A friendly reminder that applying 'alpha and beta' as a one size fits all to social situations is a pseudoscience and everyone should take it with a grain of salt.

Other urls found in this thread:

reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/2vzbeo/thoughts_on_sigma_males/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Well it's actually alpha, beta and omega so it's a bit more complicated but it's definitely real.

Reminder that "alpha" and "beta" have nothing to do with personality.

It's all looks.

A guy like OP's pic will never be considered beta no matter how he acts.

>A friendly reminder that applying 'alpha and beta' as a one size fits all to social situations is a pseudoscience and everyone should take it with a grain of salt.
Typical beta talk.

it's not as black and white as you put it but in a nutshell you're right.

It is real, but the problem is that people are misusing the concept and applying it for bullshit situations e.g. "You lost that girl because you weren't alpha enough", it's gone from a component of pack hierarchy to a pseudoscience.

But some people will say it's about attitude or self-esteem, this is why i doubt it so much because of how contradicted everyone's opinions are.

pic

>he doesn't know about alpha, beta, gamma, delta nad sigma males
>not realizing that categorizing people as just alpha or beta is a (((trick)))

s m h
t b h
f a m

I have a great deal of respect for Roissy, the various contributors at the Chateau, and many of the other theoreticians and practitioners of Game. However, I think the stark division of men into successful alphas and unsuccessful betas is too simplistic and reflects an artificial limitation on the broad applicability of Game beyond the sexual imperative. The inutility of the binary division should be obvious, since even those who subscribe to it tend to subdivide the categories into Greater and Lesser Alphas and High and Low Betas, while some also add the Omega category.

When we examine any conventional human social circle, we reliably observe a broader range of distinctly identifiable social archetypes that go well beyond mere sexual activity. And it is based on these observations that I have expanded the Alpha-Beta division into a hierarchy that covers the broad spectrum of socio-sexuality.

Alpha: The alpha is the tall, good-looking guy who is the center of both male and female attention. The classic star of the football team who is dating the prettiest cheerleader. The successful business executive with the beautiful, stylish, blonde, size zero wife. All the women are attracted to him, while all the men want to be him, or at least be his friend. At a social gathering like a party, he's usually the loud, charismatic guy telling self-flattering stories to a group of attractive women who are listening with interest. However, alphas are only interested in women to the extent that they exist for the alpha's gratification, physical and psychological, they are actually more concerned with their overall group status.

Lifetime sexual partners = 4x average+.

>Beta:
Betas are the good-looking guys who aren't as uniformly attractive or socially dominant as the Alpha, but are nevertheless confident, attractive to women, and do well with them. At the party, they are the loud guy's friends who showed up with the alcohol and who are flirting with the tier one women and cheerfully pairing up with the tier two women. Betas tend to genuinely like women and view them in a somewhat optimistic manner, but they don't have a lot of illusions about them either. Betas tend to be happy, secure in themselves, and are up for anything their alpha wants to do. When they marry, it is not infrequently to a woman who was one of the alpha's former girlfriends.

Lifetime sexual partners = 2-3x average.

It's not pseudoscience, it's simply bullshit created by insecure faggots.
My point exactly.

>Delta:
The normal guy. Deltas are the great majority of men. They can't attract the most attractive women, so they usually aim for the second-tier women with very limited success, and stubbornly resist paying attention to all of the third-tier women who are comfortably in their league. This is ironic, because deltas would almost always be happier with their closest female equivalents. When a delta does manage to land a second-tier woman, he is constantly afraid that she will lose interest in him and will, not infrequently, drive her into the very loss of interest he fears by his non-stop dancing of attendance upon her. In a social setting, the deltas are the men clustered together in groups, each of them making an occasional foray towards various small gaggles of women before beating a hasty retreat when direct eye contact and engaged responses are not forthcoming. Deltas tend to put the female sex on pedestals and have overly optimistic expectations of them; if a man rhapsodizes about his better half or is an inveterate White Knight, he is almost certainly a delta. Deltas like women, but find them mysterious, confusing, and are sometimes secretly a little afraid of them.

Lifetime sexual partners = 1-1.5x average

It's 100% about looks.

If you're tall and masculine looking you'll be perceived as alpha.

If you're short, out of shape and effeminate you'll be seen as beta.

A beta looking guy with an "attitude" will just be seen as a tryhard or compensating. A handsome guy can literally be autistic and people will respect him.

>Gamma:
The introspective, the unusual, the unattractive, and all too often the bitter. Gammas are often intelligent, usually unsuccessful with women, and not uncommonly all but invisible to them, the gamma alternates between placing women on pedestals and hating the entire sex. This mostly depends upon whether an attractive woman happened to notice his existence or not that day. Too introspective for their own good, gammas are the men who obsess over individual women for extended periods of time and supply the ranks of stalkers, psycho-jealous ex-boyfriends, and the authors of excruciatingly romantic rhyming doggerel. In the unlikely event they are at the party, they are probably in the corner muttering darkly about the behavior of everyone else there... sometimes to themselves. Gammas tend to have have a worship/hate relationship with women, the current direction of which is directly tied to their present situation. However, they are sexual rejects, not social rejects.

Lifetime voluntary sexual partners = .5x average

>Omega:
The truly unfortunate. Omegas are the social losers who were never in the game. Sometimes creepy, sometimes damaged, often clueless, and always undesirable. They're not at the party. It would never have crossed anyone's mind to invite them in the first place. Omegas are either totally indifferent to women or hate them with a borderline homicidal fury.

Lifetime sexual partners < 2

>Sigma:
The outsider who doesn't play the social game and manage to win at it anyhow. The sigma is hated by alphas because sigmas are the only men who don't accept or at least acknowledge, however grudgingly, their social dominance. (NB: Alphas absolutely hate to be laughed at and a sigma can often enrage an alpha by doing nothing more than smiling at him.) Everyone else is vaguely confused by them. In a social situation, the sigma is the man who stops in briefly to say hello to a few friends accompanied by a Tier 1 girl that no one has ever seen before. Sigmas like women, but tend to be contemptuous of them. They are usually considered to be strange. Gammas often like to think they are sigmas, failing to understand that sigmas are not social rejects, they are at the top of the social hierarchy despite their refusal to play by its rules.

Lifetime sexual partners = 4x average+.

>Lambda:
Those men who have quite literally no interest in conventional male-female sexual relations. They clearly have their own hierarchy of sorts, but I can't say that I know much about it other than it appears to somehow involve youth, free weights, and mustaches.

Lifetime sexual partners = 10x average+

Now, it is important to keep in mind that it serves absolutely no purpose to identify yourself in some manner that you think is "better" or higher up the hierarchy. No one cares what you think you are and your opinion about your place in the social hierarchy is probably the opinion that matters least. There is no good or bad here, there is only what happens to be observable in social interaction. Consider: alphas seemingly rule the roost and yet they live in a world of constant conflict and status testing. Sigmas usually acquired their outsider status the hard way; one seldom becomes immune to the social hierarchy by virtue of mass popularity in one's childhood. Betas... okay, betas actually have it pretty good. But the important thing to keep in mind is that you can't improve your chances of success in the social game if you begin by attempting to deceive yourself as to where you stand vis-a-vis everyone else around you.

This.

are you high or something?

Okay, here's where i start to doubt, can you link me to the scientific papers etc. from which this was cited from?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAAHHAAHAHA

INSECURE RETARDSS!!!!!!!

Generally meaningless terms, loved by feminists to create tension among males, but even more so do value/de-value certain traits of men. Notice, there is essentially zero discussion of the terms in regards to women, this is because society has to somehow justify why women should fuck retards with a pretty face and big cock, heaven knows looks have nothing to do with your brain. It's a slow bleed to promote a primal society, which is why you see many women fucking outside of their race, they have no concept of proper value, so they fuck them men who will in turn will fuck them over, because that's "alpha".

>loved by feminists to create tension among males

this

there is none you idiot. all this shit is just a simplistic way to deflect personal self-improvement and have something "objective" to put blame onto.

the only people who are obsessed with this stuff are people who are insecure and are looking for answers to simplify the world that makes this so

I read this a while ago here:

alphagameplan
[dot]
blogspot
[dot]
com
/2011/03/socio-sexual-hierarchy.html

also theres a couple of good [spoiler]reddit[/spoiler] threads if you google "sigma male".

reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/2vzbeo/thoughts_on_sigma_males/

Praise kek, read the voice of reason.

Alpha/Beta etc. are social definitions.

For example, I know a dude who was alpha as fuck in highschool but is now a human failure.

A man is not "alpha" and that's it.

A man is "alpha" or not in a determined social situations.

literally no girls i known or have met have even heard of these terms

most of of these girls are implicitly feminist, because you'd have to be brain dead not to stand by some general ideas produced by feminism, which btw is not such a concrete block of thought, while being a woman in the world

what is all this conspiracy bullshit? do you even interact with women? serious question

>alphagameplan
>/r/TheRedPill

Alright, just face it.


The whole alpha/beta thing is designed to rob you of your self improvement and throw you into a rut where you are convinced you cannot improve yourself because you are in a particular artifically created class

>I have never met a girl who knew about these terms
>this means feminists can't love these terns, clearly

Die

Actually feminists use the Alpha term too, i was forced to read this article in uni (kill me) about a feminist blog post complaining about alpha males in lego, not fucking kidding

where is your source? love? hahaha

i find it hilarious that you you've manage to squeeze this very broad school of thought into one group, and then managed to attribute an obsession (love) of these terms to them

you clearly have an insufficient understanding of feminism, and you clearly don't have anything resembling a friendship or relationship with women in your own life

i have both of these things. where does your authority come from?

It's a matter of Sexual Market Value vs. Actual Value.

Traditional cultures used to push women into looking for men with high AV, and everyone was happy. Now feminism is urging them to follow their primitive cavewoman instincts instead and seek out men with high SMV (instinctive vagina tingles), and everyone except asshole alphas are worse off.

"Feminism did away with Traditionalism and traditional gender roles. By removing traditionalist guidance to women, women have defaulted to their primitive instinct, and unsurprisingly are pursuing men and relationships in the way they did pre-traditionalism. Feminism banned slut-shaming. It also removed the father and family from guiding the woman towards suitable long-term mates and appropriate dress and relationship behavior. It claimed that women should own their own sexuality- which might make sense in theory, but in practice it meant women discovering that slutting it up earned them the attention they craved, even if it didn't ultimately lead to positive outcomes (and it even earned them points as a "feminist".) It encouraged women to "listen to themselves" (their instincts) and get what they wanted and not be reigned in by patriarchal traditionalism which sought to make them a "good housewife" to any man. Women responded by claiming "the heart what the heart wants" and similar expressions - all code-phrases for pursuing primitive instinct without social stigma. Though the idea of society influencing the female mindset on relationships seems heavy handed, it became apparent that women deciding for themselves often meant lousy outcomes for women and men alike (at least in terms of quality of LTRs). Nevertheless, this the current and likely future."

>i have both of these things

lol no one gives a shit

maaaaannn. okay, let's get one thing out of the way. i think these "nerd" feminists who complain about harassment in video games and so on, are missing the fucking mark. they're superimposing a general non-controversial idea of dissolving inequality into some situation they had where some assholes ruined lego?

this sounds silly, and like something that the people i know who accept principles of feminism would laugh at

i don't give a shit either you goof, i only mentioned it to demonstrate where my sources of information come from. in order to be taken seriously about something you need some authority on the matter

you just threw some bullshit out here, i called you out on it asking you for a source, and you respond in "lol's" and "die"

i guess that would make you a "beta" according to your own thought?

>people i know who accept principles of feminism would laugh at

Are you a feminist?

What's the likelihood that Sup Forums is populated by omegas?

Any male with Actual Value is now a liberal cuckold for the most part. Thanks to discriminating against White Male (™) and Republicans in general. A lot of us are forced out of jobs we would normally have. You can't blame women for that.

So now what has happened is a reverse. We have all of the Republicans and White Male (™) who are pick-up artists because we cannot get Actual Value anymore. This has been going on for most of my life.

This is also common sense, hate to break it to you. It's hilarious to me because it just goes to show you can't fuck up society and expect women to all of the sudden be attracted to total beta male idiots. It's hilarious to women as well since they actually understand all of us are the way we are because of discrimination, so they happily cheat on their boyfriends, husbands, etc with us because they realize it's totally unfair.

That's at least how it is in America.

i would never make a claim of being a "feminist"

to me, identifying in that way with the term only makes sense when someone is an advocate capable of garnering mass mobilization, or an educator, or someone who can basically introduce this general idea of dissolving inequality among men and women

i believe testosterone is a real thing and that there will always be biological difference between men and women that cause difference NOT necessarily inequality

i believe in trying to get to a world no one group is deprived by another group for the purposes of maintaining power

>That's at least how it is in America.

It is, for now.

When will you notice that every stage in history, everytime within a civilization women get a hold in affairs, it fails shortly thereafter?

i don't know, maybe when i come to appreciate the mass destruction of human lives and civilizations by world powers

We're in the same housing block as /x/ and /r9k/, omegas are a main social tributary running through here as it diverts away from the pea/k/s