Are the terms beta-male and alpha-male sexist terms?

[Kikikenobi]

cause it kinda seems like it. what are your thoughts.

yes [explain your reasoning]

no [explain your reasoning]

[farscryer0]

No, they aren't. It is a social classification based upon male-to-male posturing and confirmation/affirmation of leadership. We guys are ingrained to do this from birth, we are encouraged to do this as children, and we are pressured to continue it when we grow into adults. This is a "guy problem," and women need not apply. Not because women can't "hang" but rather because you see this behavior most often in male-dominated professions and social groups.

Let me explain.

Guys are, by and large, defined by how they act and by what they do, career-wise. In fact, even in our self-image, we are what we do in daily life (a fireman is a fireman BECAUSE he is a fireman). Any tests of that self-image from anybody or anything will provoke a response. Amongst guys, this is resolved via bluster, skill, wit, and occasionally (when all else breaks down) by physical violence. This is masculinity in a nutshell, any dispute or challenge over who we are and what we do MUST be resolved, else we lose face in front of our peers, which in its most extreme of examples may result in a short-lived career and/or life.

Again, women need not apply unless they are within a male-dominated environment, in which case, the aforementioned resolutions and challenges shift to accommodate a female presence. Unless, of course, she too is willing to play ball on masculine terms, in which case, depending on the outcome, she could very well wind up on the top of the pecking order, so to speak.

A good example: I have a female friend that joined the Army around the time I did, though she chose a different MOS (or job). She was always a tomboy throughout high school and that didn't change when she was in the military. She liked to hang around guys and was also attracted to them, although she made a point of never dating friends. Ever. She described her Army career as a trial in getting the boys to accept her as one of them, to see her essentially as "a guy that just so happened to have tits." As an lower enlisted, she busted her ass to eventually become an NCO, and she flat out humiliated any dude that said she was incapable of doing her job, to the accolade of the rest of her friends (again, mostly guys).

Eventually, she got out, but she played the game as best she could and to this day, no one could say that she wasn't an "alpha" at her job, even when she failed at times.

My point is that its all about confidence and mindset, which is something many guys struggle with, daily.

[Bandit74]

It's categorizing different type of me and has nothing to do with women so I don't see how it's sexist.

Essentially Alpha is just a label for guys who have more dominant traits and Beta is a label for guys who are more passive and submissive.

I've heard of Sigma also being used which is a dominant guy who is more secretive and manipulative while Alphas are more in your face.

[GirlScout]

Since they refer to one gender separate from the other then I wouldn't say they are sexist. As I understand it, sexism is based on gender. This is based on people with regards to their relationships with the same gender, within a hierarchy.

But I think its all bullshit. You don't get such things now, just men who wish they were.

[Ulyss]

The ones that call it sexist or get offended by it are cringy white knights, neck beards etc
40.media.tumblr.com/.../...f9TUS1skt0mlo1_1280.jpg

[legslover79]

i still picked yes even though there was not the third one i could pick. which would be other. but the "alpha" males are actual faggots in hiding. just for the fact that they are working their male hardness very good. either that, or they have 5 different types of std and they dont care cuz they just want every single girl they can get thats weak in the head. i just wonder how many whacked ass worthless fool are going to be mad at my post

[sinful1620]

I don't think they're inherently sexist but just descriptors of behavior just like calling someone "aggressive" or "introverted."

However the way those words are used today is typically to shame men into submission, and yes it's incredibly sexist.

[aficionado]

They're not sexist, but they're certainly idiotic terms to classify men. We are not wolves!

[Ulyss]

You're technically right but we're still animals

[aficionado]

@Ulyss

'Technically' we are animals, but 'logically' we are not. And alpha, beta etc. are nothing but greek alphabet for us. In fact, it was us humans who even gave the name of alpha and beta to wolves. Makes no sense, whatever way you look at it.

[BackInGame]

coping.

[Ulyss]

@BackInGame dude we are here just to reproduce "it's that humans like to complicate it a lot" isn't reproducing what animals do?

[BackInGame]

@Ulyss "coping" was reffered to @aficionado, while you're right.

[ConsultantIsBack]

I don't think there's a firm hierarchal structure per se. But I do agree with the many studies out there that attractive people are given preferential treatement. In dating, in job interviews, in group dynamics, and so on.

[brain5000]

I don't think of them that way, nor have I ever seen or heard anyone say so before. Would you post an update explaining why you feel they might be?

[Sjeggy]

no
alpha=dominant
beta=recessive
both males and females have alphas and betas
alphas are more leaderlike and beta are more following

[farscryer0]

You have to follow before you can lead. Also, its a matter of mindset and people change throughout life. No one stays an alpha or beta all their life.

[Sjeggy]

of course but i used leaderlike as an example. dominant people generally lead and if you have 2 dominant ones they will clash which was what i meant

[CountVronsky]

Not really. Both terms don't even include the opposite sex, to begin with: it's just a way to classify men, wrong or not.

[Krillanr]

I don't find them sexist, just ridiculous.

Human complexity is a fair bit more extensive than pack hierarchy.

[bubbletrouble]

no. women separate the two subconsciously. whether people want to admit or not is totally different.

[BackInGame]

Who cares what they are. What's more important is that they exist.

[tynamite]

Some men have a choice of multiple women. Some men don't. There's nothing sexist about that.

[Anonymous]

Who cares? They're terms that have meaning in the context in which they are used.

[justbanANNAz]

i dont know but i find them soooooooo stupid.

[TheGuyFromMiddleEast]

Nature is a sexist organization. So, duhhhh.

[aliencreature]

you never hear them in the context of women

[ThatBritishLad]

Nah. They sound stupid though.

[Kirah]

Yes, they are.