This one goes out to the 'Beta Males' among us

If you are content with yourself, and know where you are at, you'll strike out into the world from a solid stand point.. Even if you are deficient in some areas. You'll get nasty betas like those at Buzzfeed chopping at you, but this won't phase you because you know where you are at, and will reveal their own impotent nastiness. The fact you are unphased will likely make them cower like an ashamed dog.

All the guy had to do in the video was say 'hi' back to the girl in the elevator with surety, no need for anything else. The stuff with the watch etc was a joke, and barely anyone would do that.

I just want to say don't take any of it to heart, the type of person that would make a video like that with such palpable ill will and malice is a very sad person.

Other urls found in this thread:

hooktube.com/watch?v=Zr5qzV-8Zkc
youtube.com/watch?v=MMAMQLYWlZs
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Jesus chriat I hate this Western mentality bullshit.
Theres no such thing as 'alpha' and 'beta'.
Just be a man goddamit

The fact that you have to say that contradicts your 2nd statement.

>Just be a man goddamit

I think that is what I am getting at actually. I am just referring to the title of the Buzzfeed video.

He's right though. The alpha/beta dichotomy when applied to humans is mostly a Sup Forums invention. In reality, most men carry a mixture of both 'alpha' and 'beta' traits, and women are not solely attracted to alpha traits. For example, most 'alpha' men are prone to cheating and abuse, and women are aware of this fact. As social psychology has confirmed, human relationships are much more complex and dynamic than animal relationships.

women won't care, they don't see alpha and beta, they see a though guy and a wuss and the though guy to them is definitely hotter, they'll rather take the risk of getting cheat on for the sensation, or they'll just have a one night stand
alpha and beta works, but you shouldn't assume others know about alpha and beta, they'll react to that and then it falls apart

but you're trying to explain this on Sup Forums.
KYS beta cuck

Mulla on hikka :(

Youre not helping, fatty.

What the hell are you talking about? Put the relevant information in the OP, god damn it.

This video man.

hooktube.com/watch?v=Zr5qzV-8Zkc

The Beta/Alpha male shit is a load of bollocks.
I'd say there's beta and alpha qualities in everyman to be honest. Just depends on how you use them. Don't fall for the (((narrative))) they are pushing.

To me your status in life does not determine whether you're an alpha or a beta. It's your relationship with women in general. If you're that fag sucking up to women, comprising your males values, reading the feminine mystique, then you're a beta male

>there is no such thing as alpha/beta

Yeah I do agree with you, the video says a lot about the content creators as much as it does any of the people they are targeting.

Quit watching buzzfeed.
>Office
>Elevator in office
>Office elevator
>Anyone entering is a coworker
>Don't dip your pen in company ink
>Elevator is quite time, desu
>Talking while in the elevator is rude
Shouldn't be talking to every skank that walks by you. Especially if they are a jew, SJW, or coal burner. An SJW would think it's rape. Coal burners are degenerate. And jews are deamon spawn of the devil.

Attractive/Unattractive? There is more to a male than being attractive, trust me. Being attractive opens the door to girls, but you still have to seal the deal. I have been quite an attractive guy with a lot of attention from women, but I know a guy that is ugly as fuck that has been with more women than me due to other characteristics.

Guarantee the people who made it are extremely insecure about themselves and made it to make them feel better about how much of a whipped bunch of bitches they're.

very redpill bro
lulz

This is mostly correct.

There is, actually.
Men are alpha, women are beta.
This is the natural way.

Yeah, I have to say. If you have to pick on the weakest people to try and seem higher, you are just a lowly being in general. I mean it might have been better if there was some humor or just taking the piss in general, but the ill will in this video was palpable. What a sad 'beta' Henry is, that girl probably has mental issues also lmao.

Stop false flagging you cuckfeed shill. People at your workplace, cuckfeed, are the ones projecting their illnesses in this video....it makes me laugh cuckfeed making a video about themselves(the real "beta cucks") and their sorry life. Not only that feminazis ag cuckfeed are sad too(as pointed out in naked apes accurate video), their cunts have gone dry and even the beta males like you that rejected her don't want to do anything with her, because she's an ugly old bitch whose market value, that is, her sexuality has gone down rapidly. Stay cucked, cuckfeed.saged

To my bros here, don't give these shills any attention

Okay, that was sad. He's quite clearly autistic and has no social skills. I didn't quite get the point of the video though. Are we supposed to laugh at such people? Can't be, since leftists are the empathetic ones. Is it trying to tell us all 4channers are like that? Can't be, since leftists don't generalize. Confused.

Hence this post >Just be a man goddamit

Male and female for sure.

The guy was an /adv/ browser. The point of the video was to chop at the weaker among Sup Forums to feel above Sup Forums altogether, being weak people themselves. It wasn't about humor.

In general people treat other people with the same standards they treat themselves, this is why bullies tend to have fucked up personal histories.

(Pic related: Guy who made video)

What's the point of the video? Is it supposed to be a boring mockumentary about autists ?

He put pussy on a pedestal and paid for it. Now he will just continue to fail to beat the vibrating still image game and fap to MSpaint drawings until his eventual suicide.

Just an insecure bully picking on the weak in an attempt to elevate themselves. No honor or humor, just nastiness.

>leftist don't generalise
You fuckin wot m8? Visit Sup Forums after you're wise enough to comment about the world
>leftists are the empathetic ones
No they are the stupid ones. They are children who don't want to believe that world is full of chaos, and you need to sort your life yourself to bring order in the midst of chaos. No government can do that for you. They are lazy, both physically and intellectually. They are not empathetic as seen from their actions towards their own people, they are just faking being empathetic or are just plain stupid

I don't see it as buzzfeed bullying the weak, rather criticizing the otherwise untouchable.

I will have to disagree, it was done with the type of malice of a bully. It would be different if it was just taking the piss, having a laugh, but the conclusion of this video ended with a dull thud of condemnation and ill will. Like any bully, these are sad people.

Alright I'm actually not gonna be contrarian. The video was done poorly and doesn't target the actual psychotic outcasts that most definitely exist here.

>muh alpha
>muh beta

Cut this shit out for fucks sake. This is such a toxic and dehumanizing state of mind to have, over simplifying human beings to the level of animals.

We are more then just animals, we are more complex then that. Animals can't create pieces of art, or construct great wonders.

I swear this whole bullshit alpha/beta dichotomy is a psyop that got started on here. There is no alpha, there is no beta, only people.

Just focus on your own shit and live a full productive life, you do you. don't let anyone try to label you like some kind of stupid beast.

quality post, if only more men in Britain spoke to uplift their fellow man, we would not be in this mess.

I like that Indians have none of feminist's shit.

Simple categories are easier to understand though

Does it matter? Can't we just attack them? Did you watch the video, it's a total attack at all of us.

I do understand the archetype of the guy that isn't grounded as a man so doesn't know how to communicate with girls and then blames them instead, but this video took this as an opportunity to kick a lost guy on the ground, the conclusion of the video was condemnation and malice, not mockery or critique.

Yeah if the guy gets a shit storm so be it, like a bully in the playground, they tend to sow their own karma.

I agree with you but they can be grounded as men.

Just looking out for other guys out there, especially /ourguys/.

Anyone who works for buzz feed has gone mentally insane. That's a fact.
But if you have to make a person feel shit to make yourself feel better you're a cunt.

>But if you have to make a person feel shit to make yourself feel better you're a cunt.

Straight up.

Feminazis won't let us be gentlemen anymore.

lulz

Women aren't totally in the wrong here. The big problem with 'beta males' is that, more often than not, they give off the impression that they're trying to guilt you into sex.

"B-but I paid for our date, I bought you flowers and an expensive necklace! D-don't you want to have sex with me? I'm a gentleman!!1"

Women hate that shit, and rightfully so. Most would prefer a good, honest fucking, without the added baggage of feeling indebted to a man who spent a fraction of his paycheck on some trinket to woo you over.

Fucking this, why more people don't understand is beyond me.

Stay in shape as best as you can, be honest with not only others but yourself. Be loyal to your friends, and when shit goes south stand up and do what is right no matter the situation. Show up on time and do what you say you'll do.

You can be a 6'2'' stud that gets laid every weekend, but if you are afraid to get your hands dirty, lie, and don't do what is right then you are a piss poor sample of what a man is supposed to be and therefore a raging faggot. It's not all about getting pussy, it's about taking the harder path and doing what is right.

quality post

Ugly repulsive cow

She would've never called back regardless if he didn't even bring up sex or staying the night.
Nowadays you have to be a nigger to get a white girl.

Very redpill bro

>spotted the black

subtle

Dude that was sarcasm

It's the nugget of wisdom that women provide with their disdain from beta behavior. It fundamentally stems from a lack of honesty, beta behavior stems from a lack of honest self evaluation, and/or an ability to act on it. For a variety of reasons something is preventing them from improving themselves. I suspect that an exterior locus of control is a large part of this. If you believe that something is keeping you from acting, or that taking an action will not be successful because of some outside factor, you end up timid and listless. And man or woman, who would choose to stay around someone like this if they can recognize it?

My point is that an honest person values someone who is able to honestly appraise themselves and actively pursue the virtues that they hold important. A good, honest woman values a good, honest man. Honesty is a two way street, and an honest man can admit when he was wrong about a woman's honesty as well.

I think you guys have hit onto something pretty well here. There was a period when I was a teenager where I was pretty lost, I and other people assessed myself as just 'not having enough confidence', but this wasn't an accurate assessment as 'confidence' is something that grows from being forthright, having honest self reflection and applying that to yourself (As I said here >know where you are at), what some might call being a man. If you have this, when people try to trash you that is on them, as you are just who you are, it's take it or leave it.

youtube.com/watch?v=MMAMQLYWlZs

The sheer amount of idiocy in this thread is staggering, this is autistic screeching at its finest. I'm genuinely impressed at how fucking little each and every one of you know and if you'll permit it; allow me to simplify this very basic concept and bring into light why each and every one of you poor, stupid motherfuckers are wrong.

To begin; to be alpha in the most basic of terms is to lead by example and garnish a following which is to some degree subservient to your opinions and decisions. To be beta is to closely follow the alpha's example in hopes of someday surpassing the alpha becoming the alpha of your own, respective group. Most of the examples within this thread (and many others similar to it) are not indicative of betas; they are either deltas (complacent, pathetic people largely incapable of improvement) and omegas (actually incapable of change, they are genetic failures).

Alphas (and the subsequent labels) can still retain their status and display negative traits. You are free to influence the world around you however you wish; it is the end result that will determine how much control you have had and how others see you. In spite of how you decide to keep thorough control over the situation (taking Stacy out on a date and fucking her asshole versus punching Stacy in the face and raping her asshole until she develops Stockholm Syndrome) you are still alpha for exerting that degree of influence and succeeding in your endeavors.

A more specific example of this may be found in typical beta behavior. To be beta and display positive traits is to look up to the alpha and his accomplishments and wish to match them for the sake of self-betterment. Another positive outcome would be the beta striving to improve for the sake of improvement; no dick-sucking or hero-worship involved, just a drive to succeed.

Ok if we are going to get caught up on the exact definitions your are correct of course. The misconception of the term is rooted in the mislabeled title of the Buzzfeed video this thread is referencing.

That guy in the video is an idiot, you should always just bee yourself and everything will work out. If you simply get out of that cycle of self hate and become confident then the girls will come to you.

Tell us more senpai.

What a load of utter bullshit.
Keep it to yourself, faggot.

>being alpha relies on others being subservient to you
>taking Stacy out on a date and fucking her asshole versus punching Stacy in the face and raping her asshole until she develops Stockholm Syndrome) you are still alpha for exerting that degree of influence and succeeding in your endeavors.
If you've got the right understanding of the alpha/beta dichotomy, it's not a very useful concept. Outright stupid I'd say.

It relying on others being subservient disqualifies fucking Napoleon during exile. It's an insane proposition. If it's to be sensible and practical, the definition must be of the internal qualities of a man. Second, men are not subservient, that is not in our nature. Even in the same group of people, who leads in one moment depends on the context. Men do act subservient, to different people in different contexts. Are not, act. I think a more useful definition is the qualities of man that makes others willing to follow him.
Whether anyone would follow you depends on your interests and your competency. For anyone to believe his interest matches another, he must act consistently. He must be moral, and transparent with his principles. Honest. Else you cannot put your faith in him, and are limited to cooperating when mutual benefit is clearly evident. Faith in a man's integrity, his interests and principles, is integral for a man to follow another. Then, he must be competent as well, that should be self-evident. No one would follow a man with the right goal if he can't believe him capable of reaching it, no matter how certain you are that someone will not stray from his path you will not follow if you don't have faith in his ability to choose the right path to his goal.

cont.

Alternatively, a beta could refuse to improve as he believes he has been cheated. The beta may blame the world for his own shortcomings and harbor unrest (undue or otherwise) towards any alpha present within his own social group. He may attempt to gain favor through more distasteful means (subterfuge or assault, possibly) and if he attains success; has become the alpha.

This example not only provides an insight into the behaviors of betas, it also highlights the making of an alpha which displays negative traits (an alpha-negative). If anything; this should also highlight the vicious cycle that can occur should any malicious entity be introduced to a social hierarchy.

There is no doubt that this new alpha-negative will continue to exert influence through the means with which he initially rose to power. He is very clearly favorable towards the familiar; too impatient to make headway at a great enough pace to render his previous methodology obsolete. Newer individuals introduced to this group will be more likely to display negative traits as those who wish to emulate his success will mimic his behavior. Alternatively; those who scorn his leadership may harbor good intentions but will most likely fall into the same petty jealously.

Though real-world examples are vastly more fluid than the definitions and examples I have provided, it bares an uncanny resemblance to certain predominant traits among various cultures.

>There is no doubt that this new alpha-negative will continue to exert influence through the means with which he initially rose to power. He is very clearly favorable towards the familiar; too impatient to make headway at a great enough pace to render his previous methodology obsolete. Newer individuals introduced to this group will be more likely to display negative traits as those who wish to emulate his success will mimic his behavior.

Is this the reason for kids emulating the 'lowest common denominator' (i.e the biggest piece of shit). You see this play out in play grounds where an asshole tries to bully people, but then you have like the toughest most alpha good guy that challenges them, what is happening here is a fight for the top of the dominance hierarchy between positive and negative alpha.

stop devaluing your stealth-rare status

post less

Regardless of how "alpha" you are, you will not boss around a specialist at work in his domain. That's a good way of losing people's faith in you, dismissing you as stupid or power-hungry. If you show yourself willing to try and browbeat people into following you where you lack competency and better options are available that will only inspire doubts as to why you are taking command in a situation. Is it because you believe should lead, or because you want to? Therefore an unreasonable unwillingness to let go of power cannot be "alpha", as it forces people to question your competency. If you instead show yourself consistently willing to let others lead, or yourself be led, in such a situation it will give men confidence in your choice of taking command. Being humble will make people assume your competence when you take charge.

So far I've touched on 4 points, 4 qualities that must be "alpha" with my initial premise. That a man be moral(act consistently), that he be honest(to his men, at least), competent and humble.

A humble but incompetent man will never lead, and a competent but overbearing man will be questioned on taking charge, so he must have both. A dishonest man cannot be trusted to lead you to where he says, and an immoral but honest man can be trusted in choosing the right end but not means. All 4 must be present to a considerable degree.

>English subs
YES!
>white text
>most of the screen is usually white
Goddammit, I wanted to understand.

>fendom cuck detected

I must disagree with your stance on a natural subservience not being present within man (the delta personality comes to mind) and while you do provide a suitable example of the ideal alpha-positive I cannot in good faith agree with the notion I believe you are presenting.

While the traits and ideology you provide are apt given the context and very much observable in the real world it is not representative of the entirety of leaders throughout history (those of merit and success, I mean to say). I suppose I have used an egregious display to differentiate the alpha-negative from its opposite but keep in mind the scope of each respective situation and the man facing it.

To elaborate; to garnish power is not so simply to shove dissenters out of the way, there will always be a use of either deceit or brutal honesty in order to gain trust. Leaders on any scale can still be licentious and strong-willed simultaneously, albeit leaders within a much smaller scope are not bound by the same restrictions on behavior as they have marginally less power.

I am humbled by your faith and expectations of man, sweedanon. I suppose my overtly pessimistic views may have warped the information I have provided to some minor degree.

"Western Mentality" take off your Burka/Hijab Mrs Guptar. Every middle eastern country and more are rules by one ALPHA MALE!!!! This is observable to no end.
REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

No, I agree. I went to type it out after your first post. I thought you were painting a broader picture than you were with your alpha-negative example. My definition definitely has a big blind spot there. I still believe it's a mistake defining "alpha" externally, instead of internally by the person's traits. An external definition makes it far too volatile, too circumstantial to be at all useful, and possibly also too broad as it ends up including most any case where one man exerts his power over another. A man threatened doesn't follow, he's being forced. A man paid doesn't follow, he's being hired. I think tying it too closely to power is a mistake. I doubt you'd intuitively call Trudeau more alpha than most NCOs, but he's more powerful. Maybe he's not more powerful, as a person or as a leader, but he does wield more power. That's circumstance, it muddles the definition when defined externally as such.
It's not really about optimism or faith in mankind, I'm just trying to eke out a definition I think's more useful.
>I must disagree with your stance on a natural subservience not being present within man (the delta personality comes to mind)
I can't agree to that. Completely subservient men are rare, and they are a very unhappy and frustrated lot. I can't think of anyone content with always being subservient, they try and fail, lash out in frustration and cling onto the little they manage to hold onto. Even cucks can be described that way, clinging to their role as emotional and financial support when they believe themselves so sexually inadequate they completely forfeit that domain. I think viewing complete subservience as a natural part of man, rather than just a natural outcome is a mistake and may not be very useful in trying to understand your pitiful deltas.