Pages

Thursday, November 25, 2010

Alpha, Beta & Omega


Recently I've been noticing a trend in some blogs to use a terminological approach to classifying men. The people tend to be your typical internet douchebags, who spend more time talking about being cool and being smarter than everyone else, and far less time actually doing... well, anything with their lives.

The three terms that crop up the most are: Alpha, Beta, & Omega.

 I shall deconstruct!

Alpha) Synonymous with assholes. Specifically, assholes who get hot chicks with low self-esteem but high beauty product content.



In the context of the conversations where this term appears, Alphas (also known as Alpha males) are typically defined as guys who have confidence, game, style, skill, charisma, intelligence, etc. They are akin to Alphas in the animal world, possessing both physical & mental superiority to those around them.

However, in practice they are actually just assholes.

Beta) The exact opposite of Alpha. Synonymous with loser. Specifically losers who are nice, sensitive guys who typically get used a lot.


In the context of the conversations where this term appears, Betas (also known as Beta males) are typically defined as guys who have low confidence, no game, no style, skill, charisma, or much intelligence. They are like wolves in the pack who aren't allowed to mate -- because they're pussies, wussies, bitches, and other words having to do with being traditionally un-masculine.

However, in practice they are actually just smart people who are nice.

Omega) The bottom-ladder rung. Synonymous with tools. Specifically tools who are so low on the social scale that even Betas walk all over them.


In the context of the conversations where this term appears, Omegas (also known as Omega males/females) are typically defined as people who are unworthy of your time because they basically suck. They are isolated as those who disgust, repulse, and offend others.

However, in practice they are actually just people who prove them wrong on a daily basis.

Now, the funny thing I notice is that in these conversations that incorporate these terms, there seems to be an unspoken assumption that all the guys participating in the conversation are Alphas. This is funny because by their own community-based definition of male-hierarchy, the guys in the conversation are actually Betas and Omegas.

Here are some examples:

"It’s never a good idea to “hit it” where your money is. If you do, it will almost always end badly for you.
Only if you are a mewling beta. If you are an alpha, you can get away with it, and your advances (as always) will even be welcomed."

"Ya gotta love these traditionalist “real man” throwbacks leaving their drive-by comments at the Chateau castigating the players for their “black and white” view of the “false dichotomy” of alpha males and beta males, while a steady drumbeat of scientific studies flies in the face of their indignant assertions. Here is yet another one of those studies providing support for the view expounded at this blog that there really are objectively identifiable traits — physical, emotional and behavioral — that distinguish alphas from betas. And that you… yes, you the reader… can learn those alpha traits, apply them, and become alpha yourself."


(It is important to note that their definition of Alpha does not match-up with traditional masculinity, though the attempted connection is made. These commenters conflate the two, hence my deconstruction continues.)

The reason why is because Alpha-males do not spend their time bitching & moaning on the internet about how the world sucks and nobody understands them or is smart enough to "get" the things that they "get". Hyper-masculine men in the traditional sense that these commenters are operating under do not haunt blogs talking about their shitty jobs, the double-standards against them, or even other people's lives. They, like Clint Eastwood, Denzel Washington, Harrison Ford, Bruce Willis, and others, go out and fucking win.

So, if the system is to remain true to their discussions, then the guys they typically attempt to lambast are actually the Alphas, due to being so completely disinterested and successful at their lives in ways that contradict the beliefs and ideologies that these commenters support. In short, by virtue of their notorious happiness they win, and transcend these Betas & Omegas who spend their time obsessing over them!

Also interesting is that the definition of Betas seems to be reminiscent of stereotypical nice-guys who most would consider to be good people, and yet they are shunned by this crowd of commenters. It makes one wonder if they value their douchebaggery over compassion? Also of note, Omegas are often made synonymous with females, especially Feminists. The problem with this is most of the women they call Feminists are actually not. And the inherent misogyny explains why they obsess over them too. (Horny haters make for bad company.)

Typical places where such people can be found are among HBDers, wannabe MRA's, Stormfront racists, and myriad religious groups. They tend to be pseudo-intellectual, utilizing faux-scholarship and quakademics to support their twisted bigotry and hatred by pretending their cultural commentary is not in fact well-constructed jealousy.


I shall continue to observe these trends for more prejudicial bigotry and ignorance. Saboteur Academia FTW.


Cheers

6 footnotes:

Mira said...

To be honest, I don't understand this thing about alphas, betas and omegas.

I mean, I do get that most of the guys think they are alphas, unless they think they're betas and believe it's the best way to go.

I also understand women classify men as following: alphas- good for sex but nothing more, betas- the guys you love and marry, omegas- avoid like the plague.

(Which brings us to the interesting question: WHY aren't nice, decent & boyfriend material guys considered to be great in bed? "Alpha" males usually think only on themselves and their pleasure - and that's not sexy at all. But I digress).

Classifying, even self-classifying types of men is actually a form of objectification and is as harmful as men objectifying women based on breast/butt size or whatever. It's so not cool, people.

PS- That being said, I agree about alpha males being assholes. You want to avoid them at all costs.

Zek J Evets said...

haha, i think alpha males being assholes mean we need to redefine what it means to be alpha male. honestly, the hierarchical systems being used to classify people is about as reliable as a house of cards in a storm.

Eurasian Sensation said...

The PUA crowd that is obsessed with this shit is interesting, psychologically.

My theory is that they have a real deep-seated fear of women's power to crush a man's ego through rejection. So, they make it their life's mission to always have the upper hand over women.

Does this lead to happiness in relationships? Possibly, if your happiness is defined by succeeding in a power struggle with your mate.

Of course, I'm just a beta male, and therefore not really worth shit by their standards, so what the fuck do I know?

Zek J Evets said...

@eurasian: i know, it's extremely strange!

but alas, us beta males will just have to be happy with nice girls and high self-esteem =)

Mira Buva said...

One question... Who/what decided that you two are beta males? Or is that your self-identitifcation?

Zek J Evets said...

@mira: nah, it's just what they'd call us because we don't fit into the PUA scene all that well.