Alpha-widowed? Maybe it's time to become an alpha.

Reddit View
July 15, 2015

Alpha-widowed is a term we see often on TRP that refers to a woman who met her male alpha match and can't have him back and won't take anything lower (and for alpha widows that becomes, "won't take anyone else"). Maybe he was a one night stand, maybe an ex. These women are considered damaged goods by the community.

Gay men infatuated with a masculine superior who no longer gives him any notice have a vantage point that women don't however. They can make the man of their dreams out of themselves. Not just in a feel-good way ("Well Dan isn't answering my texts anymore, but check my new mile-running time!") but actually feel his love for that masculinity go towards himself as he becomes it, and the bygone alpha-Dan becomes objectively substandard to his new self. He doesn't have to miss moaning under the Masculine; he can be the Masculine in even better form, channeling it better than Dan.

Straight RP men actually have the same solution. Making yourself an alpha male draws all your pheromones to think you are really, really awesome, that the guy in the mirror is really, really awesome, and bitches become a fun occasional side gig, girlfriend included, an inferior priority to the god that is YOU. We preach this on TRP all the time.

Gay men though, have the whole masc/fem, bottom/top thing going on so masculinity can be a little more complicated. Anal semantics aside (literally and figuratively), my whole schpeal regarding gay sex/dating is and has been that masculine/feminine polarization is just as an important dynamic sexually between straight partners and gay partners. One is the player providing masculine value, the other is the screening playful more-feminine one looking for Mr Guy. An initiator and a receptor. Otherwise it's two dudes planning a mutual wank playing who can get their tongue down further the other's throat, or two drag queens planning a Lady Gaga shasay into the ground.

Being a feminine receptor to a straight-guy-type is fun because you are going mostly off of your looks (you don't necessarily have to lift), the other guy initiates if you're lucky ("he wants me, oh my!" is a familiar and fun feminine endorphin) and the guy, if you're lucky, is muscular, taller, and actually likes that you are easier to handle/carry and boss around. It's also fun because you will probably deal with less catty gays and instead guys who just act more like guys. Less drama, more interesting conversation, and, if you're into missionary, chizeled abs going thump-thump right above your pelvis. I accept.

But I've found that moments where I catch myself at my most masculine offset a joy I didn't know I had. So when a twinkier, cute, light-haired guy shows interest in me and I'm basically down despite him not being Captain America, I follow the push and pull, and practice being the oak tree that the bottom-monkey climbs on and feeds off of.

It only sucks because in the position of the masculine, you're more likely going to be with more ostentatiously feminine guys (or go through the trouble of screening them out if you're on a mission for a masculine submissive), you deal with shit tests, which are hard -- basically, they're not expecting to buy you a drink (but they do, if you let them). Being the guy is so much eeeasier than being the girl, right?!

I had a plate who was cute and an insider into our industry, which I found very interesting, so the conversation was mostly that. He did text a lot though so I kept him at a distance and ignored his empty openers ("you're cute"; "hi"). When we were among others and he wasn't worried about concentrating on conversation that fancied me, I couldn't help noticing the similarities between being a girl and being a feminine gay bottom type. I mostly am a gay/skinny(toned)/feminine guy to be honest, but I like to think I'm more grounded and curious than this generic type I'm about to elaborate on:

I noticed that when he was talking to others, he would always go on about himself without exception. His tone was always gossip-y and whenever he talked about others' actions, it was always with a "wow! can't believe they went there!" because someone else would certainly judge that, the status quo had been clear to him but not to the dissenter in question, or something else had set the rules and garlfriend wasn't following! Scandal! Judgment decries them! Moments alone for this girl-fellow were an instantaneous flight to Instagram where, with an almost somber expression, he would Like almost everything on it; he was therefore one with the group and 'with it.' More sad are the femme gays who I have actually seen get off to some kind of 'empowerment' by double-tapping Insta posts by celebrities who have never heard of them and who will never notice their 1 second Like-contribution. What all of these have in common is that the Instagram, the gossip, even the hair-tossing (for whom?), all swirl and dance around a phallic symbol, like a big wide open vagina worshipping a Penis so deep inside of it that it can't see it: the Penis, a based protagonist, a rule-setting, phallic beast that is the rule, the status quo, the man. And when Penis says "WHAT is this!" or anything goes against Order/Rules/Society (i.e. Penis) and Penis's silence echoes the dissonance between the offense and It, social media and chicks go " Oh no they didn't. Literally can't. Hashtag not doing what everyone else is doing even though Big Phallic Center Of Gravity says to and we all follow it. Also that dress? What will people (Penis) think? Also, the other day Louise ignored Michelle in front of everyone when she said hi [expecting huge reaction from person she is telling]. (Penis says to try to be nice, as we all know, and this is a violation of Penis.)" "That's nothing: Matt said something racist." (She couldn't give less of a shit about hurt feelings or discrimination; Penis says it's bad though and that makes all the girls go "oh! ohh Penis!") These peter pan girly gay boys are putting on a show for an invisible judgmental distant man all the time. They are the true Charlie's Angels.

The craziest part was when this other guy was talking about another guy like "oh he's showing interest in me!" soullessly like a little whaddya know status show instead of any kind of connection, and his girlfriends would be like "ahmaga good job." My only inner response was, wait, seriously? That's something to be proud of? It was obvious that for this particular guy the only thing going through Mr Chad's mind was "sure I'll stick my dick in that." (This was the Instagram one btw.) I never thought TRP would make me laugh at a chick/bottom's self-congratulation of being with a worthy guy, but that's the thing -- the guy is the worthy one. Not this leech.

For the truly and pathetically femme gay men, power is always by proxy. Tagging Beyonce in tweets, showing off that they saw Cher on the street -- it's one thing to do something like this occasionally and in good taste or humor, but for many gays this is life as they know it, and settling for anything else is a [RuPaul pun regarding the word "no"]. Including with the manly men they seek -- a manly man is power and status for them, these gays have made luxury items1 of themselves. Feminine people need validation, need to put someone down, and this all depends on someone else's judgment/decisions/values, the status quo of their society, the firm regulations that are like a holy book that fall hard on a surface and make the feminine person go "oh!" (in both acquiescence and pleasure).

Be the status quo. Be the rule. Make your own values. It applies to relationships too: gay men don't have to revel in the cat lady status that women so often do once Chad sees their expiration date is up. They can be men.

And now for something uncanny:

The Pervert's Guide to Cinema talks about, among MANY things, this phenomenon of a figure not being able to leave your life; it comes out either in your imagination, or an impression you do. This phenomenon has come up a lot in movies as a creepy Other that sometimes becomes you. In almost all cases it is the person, or an untapped energy inside the person that the person refuses to dig into. A very interesting and humorously made documentary for its own sake. Are you ignoring your masculinity and projecting it onto other inferior boys?

Man up :]

1 Linked because of this quote: "There is one great advantage which women have over men: they have a choice – a choice between the life of a man and the life of a dimwitted, parasitic luxury item. There are too few women who would not select the latter." Funny that gay men have this choice too, and too often select the latter.

Edit #343234575: I noticed that I only dealt with oneitis towards more masculine/dominant guys. I guess becoming more alpha is still the answer, as it is with TRP, even if your oneitis was more submissive/feminine. Bitches ain't shit, and oneitis is feminine anyway; it depends on the other person etc. Become the rule.

Post Information
Title Alpha-widowed? Maybe it's time to become an alpha.
Author should_
Upvotes 13
Comments 11
Date 15 July 2015 06:57 PM UTC (5 years ago)
Subreddit altTRP
Original Link
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
alpha widowalphaChaddramaplateshit testONSdominanceliftthe red pillPUA

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (4 children) | Copy

It's probably too late to comment, but I am most definitely, for certain, a masculine sub. But I'm the kind who is kind of a chick inside. In a good way, I think.

You're the most amazing writer and I wish you would write a book on this subject.

I'm completely masculine appearing and acting and in the way I dress and speak and my work and everything else. But when it comes to men, what I really want is a guy who is going to treat me the way a straight guy would treat his girlfriend. It's really all I've ever wanted.

[–]should_[S] 1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

Thank you for the high compliments! I had been on and off writing something like a book, but my drafts have a lot of PUA blunder from my earlier days. I'll have to revisit and see what angle I want to put on -- more RP than PUA for starters. Anything you'd like to see in particular if I were to get back to it?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

Thank you for the high compliments! I had been on and off writing something like a book, but my drafts have a lot of PUA blunder from my earlier days.

Oh, God, you deserve it. You write wonderfully and with tremendous insight. You need to write a book.

Anything you'd like to see in particular if I were to get back to it?

Let me get back to you on that. I'm just reading and absorbing so much right now.

I might even have some stories to contribute.

[–]should_[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Cool man! Happy to hear, stay in touch!

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

"There is one great advantage which women have over men: they have a choice – a choice between the life of a man and the life of a dimwitted, parasitic luxury item. There are too few women who would not select the latter."

It's so wrong that I want that but I really want that.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (6 children) | Copy

It only sucks because in the position of the masculine, you're more likely going to be with more ostentatiously feminine guys (or go through the trouble of screening them out if you're on a mission for a masculine submissive)

That's what I'm looking for. The masculine sub. I've screened out a ton of feminine bottoms and I'll keep doing it. Better to have nothing than something you don't want.

Very good write up though. This is what I like to see here on alt-TRP. At some point I'll write something up, but I'm not ready to yet.

[–]Jobby_jabber 3 points3 points [recovered] | Copy

I'm increasingly of the belief that the masculine sub does not exist. There are varying degrees of effeminate, but there will always be the trace of female behavior in the places that matter. I don't say this in a sour grapes sort of way (Though the pursuit has wasted a good deal of my time and energy). I say this because I think it's functionally impossible.

The dom/sub and masc/fem dynamics that we talk about here exist in the way light/dark or north/south do. Its not necessarily that gay men walk around with a polarity setting and seek out a partner of a complementary disposition. That is one way of looking at it, sure. But I think the dynamic is much more...Dynamic than that. Once in the dynamic the roles become amplified.

Once two men engage each other in a sexual relationship they discover and adopt their roles. Even an otherwise dominant masculine man may find himself sub if a Greek god walks by. The role of sub is inherently feminine and must be played with feminine strategies. So while in a different relationship with a different man he may find himself with no use for these feminine traits, in this case it is hand he is dealt. If he rejects that "Feminine energy" the relation enters into a power struggle and is no longer viable. If he embraces them some great chemistry can happen.

A more concrete example of this is how power is exerted within a relationship. Over the course of a relationship with a relatively masculine sub I witnessed him using increasingly covert and manipulative measures to obtain commitment from me. This behavior was not pronounced early on in our interactions. I suspect that once the dynamic was established he found those to be the only tools left to his disposal. At the same time he gave increasingly female vibes. Sex got better. He was falling into his role

On the opposite side I have felt the pull of obtaining commitment from masculine men I desire. I have noticed myself nearing the covert strategies employed by women. I knew what being bitchy was for the first time. Its a desire to address a perceived grievance mixed with a total lack of power to do so. At the same time other positive feminine signals I sent had positive effect on his attraction to me.

I'm not saying that subbing will turn men into conniving effeminate flamers. Certainly those types exist in the state they do for reasons unique to themselves. What I mean is that any man in the submissive position must be maintained in the same manner you would a woman. Their needs in that position are the same as those of a woman and their strategies to get what they need will be similar to a woman's. This is because you have already monopolized the masculine lane of expression. There's no shame in it, just a reality.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

I definitely see what you're saying. I do believe that the sub in a relationship will have to employ female sexual strategies. And I also believe that the sub can be bottom or top. It's less the sexual strategy I'm concerned about then the mannerisms - I'm not interested in the conniving effeminate flamers that you pointed out.

I haven't been in a long relationship though. Longest I dated a guy was for less than two months. I still have a long way to go before I'll be ready for a good relationship. Still have to enter my career field, have large student loans, need to get into better shape, etc. I think that because of this, I'll probably be relegated to the submissive role in nearly any relationship I enter, so now isn't really the time.

[–]Narrowminded2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

The role is mostly a state of mind. There's total submissive bottoms out there that're senior technicians at major computer corporations, there's total submissive bottoms out there that're police officers, firefighters, paramedics, and everything under the sun. Name the manliest profession you can think of and there's probably some submissive's in it. The career does not define you. It does not define anybody.

Most everyone has student loans - some more than others, but even still, it's a fact of life. Unless it's impacting you in such a way that you're legitimately struggling financially, then it shouldn't be viewed as a concrete reason to not date.

Getting into better shape is a good point, but you'll find that's a slippery slope. I was three-hundred pounds last year as a 5' 11" male. I dieted properly and exercised religiously. I am now 175 and my weight-lifting routines are paying off immensely. If you'd have told me I would be this way today, last year, I'd have laughed at you and said it was absolutely impossible.

What's my point? My point is that, even so, I'm still not in "good shape". No. Not in my eyes. When will I be in good shape? To be honest with you, I don't think I will ever think that I am. There's always room to get into better shape. It begins and never truly ends until you give up on it, or are forced out due to medical reasons or life obligations. Don't wait.

Waiting is a mistake.

The pool of guys out there perpetually changes. Just because you meet Ben today and are in less-than-ideal shape, doesn't mean you should've waited because by the time you thought you were ready, Ben would've been long gone, and now you have Eric. Nobody said Eric's an inferior choice, but my point is that you've got nothing to lose. People enter and leave the market all the time. If you desire a relationship, seek one. If you wish to be the dominant in a relationship, then do it. That's all there is to it. It's a state of mind.

I might get laughed right out of this sub, but I've seen a couple of people who're wildly out of shape and worse than I used to be own it up in the bars and the clubs and have a great time. Confidence and charisma goes so much further than fitness and beauty alone ever did.

[–]Jobby_jabber 2 points2 points [recovered] | Copy

Female strategy and behavior are the same thing. Women don't act the way they do just to be bitches. It works for them. It gets them what their biology tells them they need. My last LTR ended because the guy was honestly pulling the "When will you be home from the bar, honey?" schtick. It wasn't because he wanted to act like a nagging women, it was because he felt powerless and afraid and that's how women express those emotions. He tried to gain compliance and commitment from me by guilting me. He couldn't have said "I want you home at this hour" because I would have just laughed. He knew my mind wouldn't be changed so he reverted to manipulation.

As for yourself, there's no time like the present to get started. I fully understand a desire to work on one's self. And going monk mode may be hugely beneficial to you at this time. I know I'm thinking of giving it a try for a while. But don't think that just because you aren't up to your own standards just yet you can't lead a relationship as a masculine male. You'll find given the right mindset the other credentials don't matter so much.

[–]Narrowminded1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

There has to be a balance. Saying that your last relationship ended because the guy was asking questions like when you'd be home is ridiculous. It's an honest question, unless it was asked fairly regularly. If you and I were in a relationship, and I asked when you'd be home, and you took that as a problem, I'd look into a new relationship fairly quickly because that's not being masculine nor dominant - that's just being dramatic.

Communication is important and it's key to not get too caught up in the mindset of what's submissive and what isn't because it ends up being a lot of vitriol and typically ends in self-fulfilling prophecies where your hunt for unicorns never ends and your position as one of two in a good, working relationship never happens.

Sometimes, sacrifices have to be made for the greater good and I think we all know by now that in order for the dynamic to be met, the concept of two people getting along 110% just isn't in the cards.

Often, a problem I have with /r/altTRP is that people don't actually know what they want. They think they know, but when they have it, they aren't sure anymore. My definition of something that works is getting along with someone on a personality-level. Everything else is foreplay. Sometimes, I wonder what there is really to understand. A shitty boyfriend is a shitty boyfriend, and there isn't much more to it. Incompatibilities happen. Every time I see a discussion (d)evolve into submissives incorporating womanly tactics, I have to ask if that's where the problem lies, because if it is, you're going to have a bad time with this dynamic you praise so much to begin with because that's just essentially how it is, by design.

What is actually the problem? The lack of power bottoms? That's not it, because then that'd be the power struggle you speak of and you don't want that. Okay, so we know it's not an issue of bottoms not being dominant, but it seems like the issue is one where the bottoms are being submissive. They're either going to be submissive or dominant - I'm not entirely sure I follow on what the exact issue is. It seems like there's no real victory to be had, here. It's all semantics. To be submissive is a problem because it's too much of a feminine persona, yet to be dominant is a problem because there's only room for one dominant character.

Help me out there.

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter