The Myth of High Value Males, Leagues and Alphas... Debunked

[SweedyPie]

The term high value man/Alpha Male as it is perpetuated in social media is by no means a positive thing. Don't be fooled. These are umbrella terms people hide under to feel like they belong. Yes, for each person the words high and value together hold various meanings but I am speaking of the slang term "high value man/alpha male".

For the people who think such things exist I say to each his own. However, notice that humans are prone to trying to find ways to separate who is better and who is not worthy then subsequently prone to creating a type of cult based upon what you can do to be worthy of being in the group of "better ones".

Do you remember Animal Farm by George Orwell when the pigs said that all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others?

Leagues, High Value and Alpha male are all bases upon which tyranny is created and accepted. Look at history, history reminds us of what happens when people get to having a mob mentality that they are somewhat better than others.... 400 years of slavery, the holocaust.

Every human has intrinsic value. The ones you choose to mix with are your choice but that has nothing to do with whether your life or my life is more valuable based on our lifestyles.

Beauty is subjective not objective. To each human their definition of what is beautiful and attractive will differ. Because although we are all experiencing a life on the same earth, our interactions with other humans, our experiences, our environments are different. 7 billion people are experiencing earth each in a different way. Obviously it would be unrealistic to then assume that all people find the same type of physical characteristics and personality traits as attractive.

Each person's limitations of what they believe they can and cannot do in life is based on their own mindset which they have developed through their life. If I set out into the world believing myself to be less than others, chances are people will treat me as less than. That has nothing to do with being an Alpha Omega Phi or Lambada believe it or not. Pushing yourself into these types of boxes society creates for you to fall into is not what I would reccomend.

At the end of the day, to each his own and I hope you all learn to love yourselves, value yourselves as you are and relinquish the chains of brainwashing into such ridiculous mob mentalities. Just live your life, love who you love and walk in peace.

Warmest regards,

SweedyPie

[Anonymous]

I feel like you didn't debunk anything but have a need to debunk these term for whatever reason. All I get from this is that you think its unfair.

High value male A high value man, or HVM for short, is a man that is seen as highly valuable either to society or in a relationship (romantic/familial/friendship) to the opposite sex (women). In most cases, the term is used to refer to a specific caliber of men that women value the most in the dating market. These men often fit certain archetypes of an alpha male; or have acquired certain attributes that fit into the currently-desired interpretation of a modern man. These men are typically high-earners, of a high social status (or simply, not low status), traditional, fit or in shape, a desirable height, hygienic, successful in their own right or with a clear future vision of success, confident, assertive and masculine; funny, likeable, caring, intelligent, loyal, spontaneous and level-headed/emotionally strong. Typically these men will not fit all these characteristics, but for most women, an acceptable amount or the most important of these will suffice and classify them as a HVM depending on their preferences. Usually these men play the field and do not settle down or inversely don’t date at all; unless they find someone truly viable as a life-partner. There is a shortage of these men and a surplus of women who desire them, which is what often encourages being non-monogamous. “Who’s that guy over there?” “Oh him? That’s Calvin, he’s an attractive, young, high-earning entrepreneur that embodies everything else a women could want in a guy. A ‘high value male’ if you will.” Alpha Male Many people beleive an Alpha Male is a man who is the leader of a pack, dominant, or an agressive male. Fuck these stone age definitions. I will define a true ALPHA MALE in modern society, simply in three parts:1. A known statistic today is, for every 1 male who has sex there are 2 women having sex, the reason for this statistic is becuase alpha males are the ones who are having all sex, while Beta males sit on the side lines watch this happen.2. Modern Alpha males dictate their own reality, Alpha's effortlessly change brain patterns of poeple around them, women and men around alpha's feel their strong character and charisma and naturally gravitate and follow thier leadership skills, this is why women beleive everything we say is knowledgable or humerous and subconsiously fall into our laps.3. Alpha's are frequenlty being considered self-centered assholes. However this could not be further from the truth. We as Alpha males do not cater or sympathize to emtional garbage from insecure women and Beta males, that is not a part of our reality. We see situations in life as our personal stage and have full knowledge and understanding that we control the reality around us, there for the ladys will always have sex with us and the guys will always want to be us. Becuase I am an Alpha Male I can make friends with lots of women and have sex with all of them and not one of the women would feel devalued or any less of a friend to me

https://youtu.be/UMvwYcZXRVY

[jennifer_bloom]

I know people who look good on the outside, but their morals and souls and confidence is totally trash inside and they abuse those they date, so it’s better to look at character and not status, some high status people beat up their lovers.

[ManOnFire]

I too get sick of hearing all of these kinds of titles and groups that are really spawns of MGTOW and Red Pill talk. Most of these guys' definition of "high value men" are more often than not based on the image of a wealthy man who looks like James Franco or some dude. It does not equate to being a good man in character or personality. Most alphas are not even great men, they're just men who try to force their power and like to poke at other men but alphas usually get in their feelings really bad if you do to them what they do to you. That's not strength, and it's not being a man either.

[MrOracle]

No one said that "high value men" were "good" or moral - most are not. Regardless, the market - women - still almost universally assign high value to such men, and the dynamic they have with such men, and vice versa, is markedly different than with other types of men. That's a thing that exists and is easily proven.

Of course there will be exceptions - there are always exceptions to any generalization - but that doesn't invalidate the rule.

One of the most common things that people do when they don't like the facts of a generalization - usually when they perceive that the generalization works against them - is to attack the validity of the generalization as a whole.

Generalizations exist because the generalization WILL apply to the vast majority of people. Everyone wants to believe that they are the exception, but history shows that the rule almost always turns out to be true.

Those billion dollar mega hotels in the Nevada desert are a testament to the fact that lots of people think they are an exception to gambling statistics, and yet they leave lots of their hard earned money behind.

[ManOnFire]

@MrOracle And that's okay. But my mantra is always to not even try seeking women who want those "high value men." One thing I can attest to in my own life is that when you have these women in your atmosphere regularly like at work or school, when you pretend they don't exist, they start getting interested in you. However, I don't want them and would never try to jump through hoops to bevwhat they want.

[MrOracle]

I agree with you, but the reality is that the number of women seeking such men is so high that most men have ONLY those women available to them (to try to date - they rarely date long-term if at all). That's why Kevin Samuels, after years of coaching men to be better, switched to coaching women - he recognized that nothing he could do for men would change anything with women nearly all going for the most in-demand men. These are real problems that need to be addressed.

[ManOnFire]

@MrOracle I like that the best women are few, because I'm not attracted to the general consensus of women anyway, so the few great women are even more special, and I look out for those.

I really hate Kevin Samuels, but very true point on his reasons for coaching women, yeah. Women are not learning anything or becoming better because they believe they don't have to, so definitely agree on that.

[RandomGuy1030]

"I dont seek women who want high value men." That is pathetic. I want a woman with high standards for me that makes me feel like Im a loser when I am a loser. So i can make myself a winner.

[DWornock]

@MrOracle Your 5 paragraph post, tells it like it is. Everyone should read and understand what you stated. It is a pity that most don't.

[Chthou95]

Beauty is subjective, yet women find 80% of unattractive. All women are hypergamous to an extent you need money and other resources to attract them. Men have to create value, women must protect the value they automatically have

[SweedyPie]

Your logic is flawed. Also, when you consider that different parts of the world have different cultures, norms and values, you cannot generalize all women into that made up statistic. I for one am not like that at all.

[Agagagagaga]

Women are hypergamous across all cultures.

The 80%-20% Pareto distribution tends to apply to just about everything in life.

[Chthou95]

In general is a real thing. Women in general go for certain things. And you can't use exceptions to dismiss the general rule

[SweedyPie]

That's true about exceptions. Can I ask which country you are from?

[SweedyPie]

Also, of everything I wrote, can you point out in which ways the other parts of my argument are flawed in your opinion? Also, being that you said the phrase "to an extent" you do realise that defeats the purpose of your argument since it's a huge range we are talking about? And goes back to my point about it being subjective... aka for each person it will be different. To be quite honest, I see theses concepts of leagues and alpha and high value as modern day dick measuring contests. No offense intended. It is what it is whether or not you choose to see the truth beyond the lies.

[Chthou95]

No one said high value is a good thing. But it's how the world really works. Men have to have value to be someone women want to date. There's a saying "You chase women, you'll run out of money. You chase money, you'll never run out of women". Of course money is not the only thing, but it very much helps a lot. I don't know how me saying to an extent defeats my argument though and in from the U. S although i have a feeling i already know what you're going to say

[slatyb]

"yet women find 80% of [men] unattractive" Isn't it the same for men? I expect that men find 80% of women unattractive. Men pretend to rate women from 1 to 10 but rate an average-looking woman a 2 or 3 because about half of all women are completely invisible to them.

[Chthou95]

Not really. High value don't notice average women. But plenty of average men notice them. Men and women are not the same. We play the dating world on different fields

[SweedyPie]

Heyy, I've been a bit under the weather. Came back to message someone and saw I have hundreds of notifications sigh. Lol. Thank you for taking the time to respond. I don't have the willpower to even stay on long or to discuss this right now, but I am going to follow you, feel free to follow me back. Whenever I come back on gag I'll try to revisit this and respond properly. Have a good night/day ^_^

[Lliam]

I tinink some characteristics that make up a high value male would be being masculine, gentlemanly, bright, motivated, hard working, energetic, capable, kind, compassionate, understanding, generous, honest, loyal, protective, authentic (not affected), communicative, fun loving, funny, ... stuff like that.

Notice that I didn't mention height, 6 pack abs or six figure incomes because, although those things might be a bonus, they aren't what it takes to get a high value woman unless one's definition of a high value woman is a materialistic, beauty queen, gold digger.

I think using the term leagues is valid. It has to do with things like looks, charisma, and wealth.

There are different levels, just like in sports. A lot of guys might play baseball, but very few are going to make it to the minor leagues – Low A, High A, Double A, Triple A – let alone the major leagues. Some guys aren't good at baseball at all.

So there are different leagues in each sport, but there are also other sports.

The same with life. Some guys are just super handsome. Some have a lot of charisma. And some are born into wealth or are successful at making money. And there are different levels within those categories. Some guys are high level in more than one. But just like in professional sports, people have different opinions on who is the best.

Face it, even the prettiest girl from a small town is never going to marry a prince. And their chances of marrying a business mogul, celebrity, major league athlete, or a guy who was born into wealth are slim.

There nothing wrong with aiming high. It shows ambition and healthy self esteem. But some people make themselves miserable whining about their inability to get a partner who is out of their league. They focus on externals like looks and wealth at the exclusion of more important human qualities.

People with wholesome values and modest lifestyles are often happier than those who are driven to achieve wealth and status.

People who want to be "alphas", to dominate, to have more, more, more, with multiple estates, expensive cars, yachts, private planes, expensive planes, jewels, expensive clothes and high status are often rotten on the inside. Their self esteem is dependent upon dominating others.

I’d rather play sports (life) for fun and have a happy life rather than shooting for fame and fortune. I don’t care about the opinions of critics. It’s not a competition. Alphas can have their lives as long as they don't try to dominate me.

[ObscuredBeyond]

There are some objective baseline standards to beauty. Beyond that, specific interest modifiers are subjective.

I don't like to assign anyone a label of Becky or Stacy, until she does something extreme that puts her in one of those categories.

I have noticed what makes me attracted in a gal, versus what keeps me from walking away, versus what makes me walk away faster.

First attractors:

- Has an IQ of at least 110. Derps have a harder time keeping me interested.
- Body rating of at least 4.5 / 10. Will trust a 6 or 7 more than an 8-10, but won't refuse the higher ratings if she has sufficient good character to go with them.
- Youthful soul / energy
- Introverted, but not to the extreme.
- Nerdy interests, but not to the extreme.

Secondary hooks:
- Common beliefs / politics
- Committed
- Honest
- Common interests
- Slow to judge
- Nurturing
- Wise with money
- Dependable
- Eloquent
- Determined
- Rational

Red flags:

- Flaky
- Dishonest
- Cheater / overly promiscuous
- Manipulator
- Irresponsible
- Stasher
- Childish
- Excessive materialism
- Excessively judgmental
- Hoarding disorder
- Excessive vulgarity
- Incorrigible
- Ungrateful

Labels like "Becky" and "Stacy" grossly oversimplify matters, and don't allow for inspection of all parameters.

I've notice that even the infamous site "Incel Wiki" has made its category system more complex, to account for the fact that the more popular labels don't account for much.

Based on that site, I'm a high-tier Tanner or a low-tier Brad. Full-blown Stacy, I instinctively don't trust. Stacy-Lites, I'll consider.

Given how the terms evolve on Reddit, however, within a month of me writing this, my use of the labels might no longer be accurate. One reason I try not to get all my life advice (or even most of it) from Reddit.

None of these terms seem to have a place for describing men who had a loved woman that was close, lost her to some tragedy, and can't quite find it in him to move on, in spite having tried. The "married to a ghost" type. Just nothing in the scales to account for it.

Which tells me the scales were written by someone shallow, who bases everything on looks, money, and volatile material success.

[WalterBlack]

This reply is helpful, informative and thoughtful.

[Ghostluck]

I don't live or even respect the Alpha/Beta crap, but unfortunately far too often people will use that as their meta for an argument, in which forces you to play along. I never felt I belonged in either of those categories because honestly, I do my own thing. I am a loaner.

Here is my thoughts if we were to assign a real definition to Alpha/Beta.

Alpha: A Man who will not only protect his woman and children with his very life, but will provide for them as well. He puts his family before all else. He is brave, will defend at all costs.

Beta: Your typical thugs and wannabes. Usually very vocal about being a dominant male and almost always doing things that makes them appear to be one. Sadly, they are hiding the truth, that they are Beta Males. These are the men who beat their women, who feel they must control their women, who must dominate them in the bedroom and make them call him, "Daddy." in the bedroom. He will never protect her, he would throw her in front of a bullet if it would save his life. He would sacrifice her to save his own skin. He does not respect her, she is a tool to him, but yet he continues to pretend that he is dominant and an Alpha. The truth is, he has no idea what an Alpha Male's role truly is.

Then you have men like me, a woman once called me a Sigma Male. She explained it to me, but I had to look that one up. Sigma Males don't give a damn about societal standards. We live alone, prefer to be alone. We are not followers nor do we allow anyone to follow us. We do our own things. We do not compare ourselves to others because no other can compare as far as we are concerned. We are not interested in the hierarchy. We typically have jobs where we work alone, no boss over our shoulders, no men to command under us. We are protective of our loved ones and will live and die for them. Sexually we can be whatever we like, because we don't hold ourselves to a certain standard. We have things in common with true Alpha males and nothing in common with Betas. We are not a part of the pack like Alpha Males, we dwell alone, without a pack until we create a family of our own. We don't follow Alphas, we don't try to lead them either. We go our own way and make our own life. We have nothing to prove and don't give a damn either way.

Now, that is just if I had to actually put real meaning to the terms. Otherwise, I don't subscribe to any of that nonsense.

[bamesjond0069]

"make them call him, "Daddy"

Clearly no woman ever called you Daddy. We don't have to make them, girls just feel it and do it when you've earned their respect generally. Its called being a leader in your personal relationships.

[Ghostluck]

@bamesjond0069 You are trying to convince me? How pathetic for you. Don't even try me, man. You're talking to a man, not a naive girl. Take that silly nonsense to away from me, my man.

[bamesjond0069]

You seem like a naive girl. My bad.

[Ghostluck]

@bamesjond0069 Oh, did I hurt your feelings? Heh...

[bamesjond0069]

How would one hurt someones feelings with words typed out online? Personally never understood this. Just trying to correct someone who clearly has no idea what they're talking about.

[Ghostluck]

@bamesjond0069 So you're Betasplaining... how sad for you.

[bamesjond0069]

"I don't subscribe to any of that nonsense [terms]."
"So you're Betasplaining..."

So you don't believe in betas except when claiming someone else is a beta. Contradictory statements come from being overly emotional, similar to a girl. What unique people one finds online. 🤣

[Ghostluck]

@bamesjond0069 "but unfortunately far too often people will use that as their meta for an argument, in which forces you to play along"

I guess you missed that part; in which you played in to when you brought up the "daddy" thing and started white knighting the idea of "daddy" being associated with Betas.

You're boring me now, keep it sleazy, my man.

[bamesjond0069]

Yeah i mean you clearly don't even know what a white knight is so i have doubts you know what any of the other words mean as well.

[MCheetah]

I can understand the logic and rationale of what you're saying, but my own subjective life experiences says otherwise. It's like trying to say women don't like men who are tall, men who are arrogant, men who are successful, and so on... Yes, SOME women may like men under six feet tall, men who are modest in personality and don't brag, and men who work at Target or SUBWAY... But they are not the norm.

Whether you call the most prideful and successful men "Alpha Males," High Value Men," "Chads," or anything else, is irrelevant. Society, especially women, rewards these people, while people who can believe they're excellent all they want, will get ignored, for not fitting into society's norms. Hell, I know this ALL too well! I think I have an exceptional, albeit imperfect, mind. I'm not some know-it-all, and many may disagree with my opinions, but I do think I am not the run-of-the-mill Joe Schlub or sheep in society. Do women, or society at large, care? No.

I also don't believe that most people believe that "every human has intrinsic value" either. Most people treat each other like trash, and always have. Most human beings are selfish, stupid, and opportunistic, in my opinion. Not to sound Blackpilled; I just happen to co-exist among them every day on this planet.

"At the end of the day, to each his own and I hope you all learn to love yourselves, [and] value yourselves as you are."

That's a very nice, sweet message. Not a very realistic one. But a nice one.

[AlwaysBelieving]

Interesting thought. I think there are leagues and the like for those who believe that there are. I used to think this way. Not anymore. This (leagues) causes despair and suffering. Because you want to be like someone else. This is comparison. The only comparing you should be doing is "am I better today than I was yesterday?"

Other people have said I'm handsome. I just say "thank you" and be on my way. In college, women (I've been told) were checking me out. I didn't notice (I've gotten brain dusters because of it (https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=brain%20duster ).

As you alluded to, we are all more than just a label. While those are easy to use and put people in a box, it doesn't capture the true essence of a person. It takes time to discover who a person is, what they're capable of, what drives them, etc.

@Lliam does make some valid points though.

[slatyb]

I used to say there are no leagues but in some ways there definitely are. People are attracted to their equals in intelligence and emotional maturity.

[Kaamraj]

The article is a statement with nothing to back it up. Humans are highly heiarchial and have been such for millions for years along with their closes relatives, apes, monkeys, and most mammals which live in packs. If you study evolution you will find that until marriage and monogamy was made popular, for most of human history nearly all females reproduces while only 10-20% of males got to do the same, meaning most of the children were fathered by the same 10-20% of men with the rest of them losing and genetically dying out.

If you look at wealth distribution, you will find that it's highly unequal, political power, also unequal, female attention, also unequal. Nothing in this world is moral, you have to take whatever you want and end up with what you deserve.

Now returning to female attention, and the assertion that "beauty isn't objective" - that is easily debunked by studying female swiping patterns on dating apps, where it was found that most women (the average woman) found most men (average man) sexually unattractive. Meaning their selection was highly skewed or only 10-20% of men were attractive.

[OpenClose]

Great stuff!

I think in terms of our own "leagues" and "rankings", I think we can still look to the myth of the "Alpha wolf". As you likely know, the "Alpha wolf" myth was disproven by the very guy who came up with it originally. He realized that this harsh hierarchical structure came about because he was observing unrelated wolves in captivity, not closer-knit wolves in the wild.

While the conclusion was disproven, I think how it was disproven still applies to us. I think a lot of issues we have are related to the fact that we are surrounded more by unrelated strangers than we are friends and friends-of-friends. So we tend to do the same thing. Create hierarchies, and at the tops of those heirarchies, the people who can best create immediate appeal to a total stranger. Hardly a grounds for actual desirability.

We tend to rely more on peacocking gestures like dressing up extra sexy or being loud, suave, and drawing attention to ourselves.

But for the majority of our history, this was NOT how we formed relationships. We were mostly in tribes of people we knew, or villages made up of a few extended families. Like picture Hobbits in the Shire. Chances are, they've known the person they end up with since they were children.

Personally, I prefer women who AREN'T super "high-ranking". Not just because my taste doesn't seem to jive with what other guys seems to consider the hottest, but also because the "hottest" one who just "knows" she's the hottest one doesn't seem worth dating for me. I'd much rather lift up the cute girl who doubts herself than inflate the ego of a woman who thinks she's all that.

[VanillaSalt]

Your perspective seems very knowledgeable. I like the insight you provide on the subject however your wrong. The fact is some people are better than others, some men attract more women, and labels are best used to group similar somethings not to find a niche where you fit it. For example labeling yourself a player is not the same as people labeling you a player.

There are people with higher value then others. I do not carry the same worth as Michael Jordan, Bill Burr, or other men that have accomplished more in their like i have or have any interest in accomplishing.

Alphas exist too though they get categorized wrong so often it seems they dont. Fact is Alpha is also a labeling term that covers a wide variety of traits showing men as better then most. At what point does a man have enough traits or even enough of a trait to qualify?

These labels have verifiable traits their linked to so their not debunked or anything of the sort. Real truth? When men get confident it goes to their head. Women like men with confidence by hate the arrogance that comes with it. Women want the good and then get angry when they have to suffer the bad. For example standard beauty being what it is most men arnt seen as handsome while most women are seen as beautiful. Women can't understand when a mans wanted by most women why should he settle with you? You have to beg and bribe him to be yours thats how it works. Dont think you dont have to earn and keep him the same as he does you...

[mantelk]

The whole alpha male beta male nonsense is a certain sick unaesthetic mentality that has been created. I consider myself a sigma male if anything. I don't want to have anything to do with such classifications. An alpha male is more often than not a bully (which are weak people on the inside) and a beta male is supposed to be a weak person. You classify people into such stupid categories and deprive them of the respect and love they deserve. I know in American cultures being a meathead is revered but a lot of these kinds of people belong more in zoos than in society. The man who came up with the term Alpha Male, talked about all this. It was a scientific term based on observing animals (particularl chimp) behaviour. Almost never is the Alpha Male the biggest and strongest physically. They are rather the wisest who have more say in the tribe. It is usually a wise older chimp that everyone respects. If the biggest toughest chimp was to attack this wise chimp, the entire group would attack him. It is not about power and money and status and physical strength. It is about wisdom. Human beings have their own individuality. You can call someone a beta male and make them feel bad and call someone an alpha male and make them feel good but the truth is they are both good at different things. You keep judging fishes by their ability to fly and birds with their ability to swim you are going to degrade and damage everyone. Instead of seeking to be meatheads or falling in love with them or overvalueing them perhaps work on your awareness and consiousness. Deep down you guys know what is right and what is wrong but somehow in the age of pimps and whores everyone has fooled themselves into thinking all the nasty things are appropriate. Have some class people. Grow up alittle bit.

[Friendlybro79]

I think everything you said about alpha males, or the idea of this, can be true to those particular males that behave this way, but are pretty universal to the potential in all people to behave such a way. You even make a mention to "notice how humans"... humans being all not just males. Although you mention the idea of a high value male you also make mention to human behavior in general. Not sure what there is to debunk.

I will challenge everyone to notice how segregated into groups we place ourselves.
Men vs women
Race vs RacePoor vs RichHaves vs have notsIt's a terrible human trait that many perpetuate by constantly categorizing ourselves onto "teams" almost. I think it's partly impossible not to do this to a degree as to describe each other's but the sooner we get to the idea we're actually more alike than different, then we will see less complaints about each other. We're never going to all think the same but again we need a more united human interest group thought than every man for themselves. Eventually our species will have a moment where we either join together or go instinct. Survival of the fittest will apply to the entire species one day not just some of us if we continue the way we are going.

[Kiran_Yagami]

"Beauty is subjective not objective." is the real lie. If there were true, then there wouldn't be such things as beauty pageants or fashion models. In reality, the vast majority of people have a consensus on what is beautiful and what is not. There are a few contrarians here and there, but they are in the minority.

"Each person's limitations of what they believe they can and cannot do in life is based on their own mindset which they have developed through their life." It's ironic that you say there "no such thing as alpha" yet adhere to the alpha mindset. There is no such thing as equality in this world. There is what a man can't do, a what a man can't do. If you aren't 6'4" or taller, then you can't be a professional basketball player. Maybe you should try to be a lawyer or a CEO instead. Elon Musk will never win a boxing match, but his measure of success is greater than most men who have ever lived. Success exists on multiple avenues for multiple types of men, and your mindset and how you work within your own limitations will ultimately decide whether you end up at the top or the bottom.

[ChrisMaster69]

Good My Take.

Personally always hated these Alpha male bollox things.

If you look at Military Rank structure, there is pretty much always someone holding the ‘lead’

A Private might swagger around town showing off his muscles and 6’6 body and say he’s an Alpha, however his 5’6 Corporal owns his ass and he says he’s an Alpha, equally the Sergeant at 5’6 and slim in HER girlie body owns both of their arses.

Invariably these people that use it are only Alpha in their own little doggy minds.

The same applies to the rest of the stupid names.

it is also used by guys to do that toxic shit of shaming other guys, which is just pathetic.

If a person is a leader, decent manager, they never need to say they are an Alpha, as people respect them naturally and just do what they say when they say it.

Respecting others and others respecting you is what it should be about.

[SkipPerk]

Actually, one can tell if a species has “alpha males” based on the size differentials between males and females. If males are larger, then it is a polygamous, alpha-male species.

Are human males larger than females?

Almost all academic research on sex partners confirms that women tend to like the same handful of “alpha” males. Traditional societies based on monogamous relationships create social stability and wealth (see Europe, Japan). Polygamous societies are unstable because unmarried males have nothing to lose.

Homo sapiens are an “alpha” male species. Human females are attracted to high stays males. In the absence of cultural norms (such as marriage), women will compete to sleep with a handful of high-status males, while most males are celibate. This is science, not an opinion.
the result of the collapse of marriage will be greater competition for status among males (income inequality) and instability (crime).

[bamesjond0069]

But people are not wolves. They are people! 😂 Always going to be those idiots saying that. Good science based explanation. Marriage is clearly going away and polygamy is becoming normalized.

[TwinTonyz]

"Every human has intrinsic value."

It's unlikely many people, OP included, truly live by this standard. We set the value of our families above that of strangers. Coworkers we stand to gain from and with take priority over others who might be more deserving of our companionship and efforts. The intrinsic value of humans can be affirmed, but it's hardly actionable.

You respond to people's value in your life based on where you place them in your own hierarchy. That's already been influenced by your culture's same larger general hierarchy. To operate intrinsically alone demands that I and your partner be treated identically because we are both humans. It's a nonsense notion. Some people are more valuable than others.

[CubsterShura]

This! I don't understand why it's so hard to grasp the idea that one person's trash is another person's treasure, instead of worrying about being high value or low value, be yourself and find someone who values you for who you are because we all have value inherently. I haven't come across a single person in my life who believes in this high value BS and wasn't unhinged in one way or the other.

Men think about everything from the position of wanting to get women. They think what's the point in this or that if women don't find it desirable, why should I allow myself to be vulnerable if women don't like it. They project the same mentality on women and get very confused when they realize not everything we do in life revolves men. No we're not working to compete with men, no we're not dressing a certain way to attract or repel men. No we're not marrying late to hold back some man's right to a young fertile partner. The sooner men realize this, the better they will be.

[Oigit]

I think the idea of a high value man or woman isn't as clear cut as people tend to make it out to be. Because a ideal partner would complement us as a individual. Meaning if you are bad at B a high value partner would be someone that is better at B the yourself. The more a potential partner complements you in that way, the more high vale that person is as a partner. Because you and that person would naturally play of each others straights and weaknesses. Thus providing you with a better quality life as a couple then you would on your own.

[bamesjond0069]

"Because a ideal partner would complement us as a individual." This is your opinion. You are a male and therefore probably way more rational than the average female. Women do not think like this. They want something else and the demand is far greater than the supply. Thats what creates the high value.

[Oigit]

@bamesjond0069 Men can think like that as well. But when people are so focused on finding a high value partner they set themselves up for a whole host of issues. Because they idea of having a high value relationship with their high value partners tends hardly factors in. So people wind up finding their high value partner or dream person and end up wondering why their relationship is crap. Simply because they don't ask themselves or even their high vale partner relationship based questions before partnering up with them. So important questions are not asked and red flags are ignored. Simply due a person being so wrapped up in the fact they found a high value man or woman to ask the important questions or see the red flags.

[bamesjond0069]

Yes they ought to but in reality they dont thus the marketplace rewards what it rewards.

[Anonymous]

Nonsense. An obese, neck bearded depressive basement dweller is not going to be considered as high value Vs the outgoing gym rat that owns his own business. Just because a truth is uncomfortable, it doesn't change that it is a truth. This is a good reminder as to why men should never get dating advice from women.

I've seen women walk into a room with all eyes on me a soon as they got through the door, and not once, have I seen them even glance at the unhealthy looking males for even a split second. It's like they don't even exist! I've observed this so many times. I have spotted micro expressions from women so it's not like I'm missing it...

[This_Is_My_Opinion8]

If the second one is an abusive narcissist and the first a good guy what great sense of humor I can promise you more women will want the first one.

[Moose304]

Exactly! I have seen this many times. Not just in the US, but in Europe, and in Australia.

[Opinion Owner]

@This_Is_My_Opinion8 More women will want the neckbearded obese one?

[Moose304]

@This_Is_My_Opinion8 You are using VERY extreme options on both ends of the spectrum to try to prove a point. I am rejecting the options as you laid them out. The options in most situations are not that black and white. I have been on this planet for 64 years now. I have spent years as a young man in high school as well as College. I have observed females for years. The thing is this is thought of as a negative IT IS NOT. In the wild, in a lot of different animals, the females are selective about who they mate with. Why should human females be different? I have observed this many times over the years. In fact it is so common I am shocked this is even being debated.

[This_Is_My_Opinion8]

What @moose304 said.

[Dargil]

Alphas and Betas surely exist. Word salads do not debunk it.
He was an Alpha on screen and in the field at Parris Island. I saw them at Fort Benning and did some of it when I was called to.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/JmBDhz1XduA

It is an affected style like many Jack Nicholson characters.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/MMzd40i8TfA

It is character acting and can be learned. But you can control it. It's a capacity that many men have. Women do not and just come across as arrogant harridans.

[Кураж]

So you are saying a promiscuous, verbally and physically abusive, jobless man, who loves Trump, hates women and minorities and cheats in every relationship is equally as valuable, good and worthy as a charismatic, well put together man with egalitarian values a stable career and a postgrad in medicine?

[Anonymous]

Good stuff.
One thing i learned is that big money or dick doesn't make a guy special to the opposite sex. That stuff is merely the surface level of things and no part of the recipes for love.
Personally i would stay away from guys, who subscribe to such weird terms like alpha or beta unless its used in a scientific context outside of social science.
What they refer to as high value men seems to be the big baby men, who are looking for a mommy v2 type of girlfriend , who is nothing more than an obedient housemaid. Naturally i would keep my distance from them too.