The "Beta" provider

TrueReligionGenes · 2020-01-13T16:25:13+00:00

All it takes to disprove your assertion is the fact that college aged women dont sexually select for provision, hence the smart STEM professional fresh out of school will still struggle to get intimacy.

resolutions316 · 2020-01-13T16:07:38+00:00

Alpha = creates sexual desire in women.

Stable resource provision is not what does this. There is no porn about being provided for. Your paycheck doesn’t make anyone wet. Schlubby dudes in LTRs who pay the bills don’t get fucked more often than anyone else.

Thus, alpha =/= being a provider.

Is it good for landing an LTR? Sure, probably. Also not the same thing as Alpha.

You are confusing your sense of virtue with what is sexually successful. This is a common misunderstanding stemming from the myriad of ways people define “alpha.” If your goal is to engage with the red pill, however, alpha = sexually attractive to women is the most widely accepted definition.

Not everything that is sexually successful needs to be pro-social, moral, or even desirable on a personal level.

NockerJoe · 2020-01-13T16:11:08+00:00

I have no problem with dudes who want to be a provider if it works for them.

What I have a problem with is the wealth of delusional motherfuckers who think attraction exists where it obviously doesn't. There's no shortage of balding overweight sugar daddies or awkward weird looking dudes with money who think their girlfriends weekly starfish session is equivalent to a woman who can't keep her hands off a man.

MuleFool42 · 2020-01-13T17:25:34+00:00

As women are making their own money, they are not looking for beta providers as much. They want the hot guy for sex to have the kids with. If they can nail down commitment from him as well, then yes, they've got their 'alpha provider' as you've described. That will happen for a small percentage of women going after the 20% of men who would qualify as an 'alpha provider'. But it's less because a good percentage of those men will never marry.

So the definition of the 'beta provider' is really the guy who agrees to take on the role of provider and parent to another man's kid for a woman who wasn't able to nail down commitment from the biological father. That may seem 'alpha' to you, but in the TRP, PPD, MGTOW, worlds, it's nowhere close.

It's men trading time and money to raise a child that's not theirs, and a woman trading sex as barter for some stability and added income to her own.

This is why there are more subs advising men to not sign on to a raw deal like that. They're just being used and they will always be secondary in the family - the kids will always be first. It's not that they don't have high paying jobs, maybe some work at Burger King, but a lot DO have high paying jobs. The recommendation is for them to live their own lives, keep their money, and never commit to a situation where you'll always be secondary. It's good advice.

Zippo-Cat · 2020-01-13T16:30:15+00:00

When a man is operating in his true nature, his masculine, it is in his nature to provide for his woman and his offspring. He is the hunter gatherer. The alpha. This is how it has been for all of human history.

You know nothing of human history.

NeedingAdvice86 · 2020-01-13T16:22:01+00:00

I have a friend who does 'beta game' and he is brutal.

Somewhat short, not very good body but does have a pretty good personality....thing is that he meets women and gives off a whiff of beta by doing all sorts of things with money...buy for spa packages, drives a convertible, lives in an exclusive neighborhood BUT the thing is that he does it just long enough to fuck then he is OUT.

And the thing is that he is good at attracting women but is absolute horrible at relationships....he is very much a narcissist who has learned women's triggers along with those searching for a beta...he capitalizes on it to smash. The few actual relationships he has are full of shit tons of drama and fights because he can't turn off the hints of beta so that it takes a while for the women to figure out that he actually doesn't give a shit if they stay or not. So these girls hung around for a while expecting him to become what he is constantly hinting at but he isn't going to which leads to massive fights and drama. One of his LTRs was around for awhile with constant fights and battles waging war about him becoming the beta he would occasionally hint at in his behavior....until she was hospitalized for a week and he never went to visit, called or even checked to see where or why she was in the hospital....brutal. Her parents came and collected her belongings from his place when it was over...and she had some real problems afterwards.

I think part of it is that he also tends to filter out for girls who have been alpha-ed so his beta game is what they are searching for at the time....he really fucks some of them up with the ease of how the mask drops after he has smashed for how ever long he wants then ghosts or drops.

Brutal.

TheColdestHand · 2020-01-13T17:03:16+00:00

Your bias is clear, let me respond.

You've touch upon third wave feminism 'poisoning' the idea of women. Naturally, the 'progression' (change) of society affects both men and women. (some) Women have the idea today that men should pay 100% (i.e. not 50/50), while not being able to cook or clean, nor wanting to. First L

From my modern perspective, 50/50 is mandatory. The idea that anything else, flipped in any persons favour is fair ... well by definition isn't true. The fact that you said ' woman is only giving them %50 of the respect ', essentially justifying it, is incredible. Second L

I've been on many dates, I've never, ever had to pay for my date. So, while I hear other men talk about how they had to pay x y z to get a women, or women expect you to pay for them ... from my experience.... simply isn't true. Finance, including gifts has no part in a relationship of a rational male or a rational female. Otherwise, you're paying a subscription for love. Third L

Million-Suns · 2020-01-13T16:39:18+00:00

it is in his nature to provide for his woman and his offspring.

Except the woman is never his and sometimes the offspring isn't his as well.

He is the hunter gatherer. The alpha. This is how it has been for all of human history.

Well, nope, you're confused. Alpha is the leader. Even Omega males had to go hunting otherwise they would starve. Later on in history, alphas did not even hunt, minions did it for them. Observe the lions. Lions do not hunt themselves, lionesses hunt for him.

They don't have the drive, ambition, resilience, hustle to strive for a high paying job, the work ethic to acquire a high earning career, thus they stay in menial labor positions making menial salary

So they aren't the perfect wage slaves buying into the narrow definition of success , the fruit of the propaganda by the LifescriptTM, and you word it as if it is a bad thing. If you're free from the control of the Pussy and have no plans to have a family, then why killing oneself for some corporate overlords? Going One Own's way, is more fulfilling than slaving off for family.

These are the same guys that do the "50/50" thing with women. They split the date fees 50/50. In a partnership they probably split the rent 50/50. But usually this means whether they won't to admit it or not, the woman is only giving them %50 of the respect. Because they are not a real alpha provider. She still has to work. Help make ends meet, AND expected to wash the dishes, cook, clean, nuture the kids, give great sexual pleasure to the man, while splitting the rent and bills 50/50 with the man?

Wake up. We're no longer in the 1950's, in which only one income could sustain a whole household. Women can pay for their own shit, and they worked hard to be treated as "equal", so 50/50 is the natural consequence.

I think trad cons who glorify a time then weren't even born in, are the most delusional.

Have fun killing off yourself by working hard to earn a lot, having a SAHM who then will fuck the "alpha" gardener, then leave you, taking the kids and half of your hard earned assets. You will deserve to be shamed indeed.

Eastuss · 2020-01-13T16:17:24+00:00

Men, and especially alphas, don't want to provide for women when there's nothing on the plate. I want to provide for my wife if she stays home taking care of the house and of the kid, not when we were mere bf/gf not living together, that would be net money loss for no reason.

This whole "men need to prove they can provide" is just women trying to get a better deal. Which is to be ignored.

TL;DR: being selfish is alpha, being selfless is beta. Underselling yourself is beta as fuck, and so are beta bucks.

CaliKop · 2020-01-13T16:51:45+00:00

[deleted]

acron5n5 · 2020-01-13T16:49:47+00:00

Providing is definitely not alpha if the man is not alpha. For the beta providing is not a choice and that's seemingly the problem for most guys talking about it. The alpha could provide as well if he wants, no doubt, whereas the beta NEEDS to do so in order to get into any romantic relationship. The beta himself is undesirable and most men simply couldn't get over it, the eternal thought of someone having sex just because he is attractive while you have to work your ass off and still are very unlikely to have sexual life of same quality can drive anyone mad. In my opinion accepting your invariant undesirability (yea yea English isn't my native language) and realizing providing is a legit strategy for majority of the male population is a good step but very few can actually swallow that pill. We all want to be loved, that fluffy romantic stuff, you know.

NPC55 · 2020-01-13T17:17:21+00:00

As a man, being a "beta provider" is not very appealing. I have/had attractive friends, I know how women behave when they are with someone they are genuinely attracted to. I also know that because I have money that I have something to put on the table for the relationship "transaction." On my side of the transaction, I am to provide with resources. But the genuine love and interest from the woman will never be there. So as I am sure you can imagine, being a "provider" when you aren't already attractive is more like a business deal than a real relationship. Trust me, it certainly is not "alpha."

alluringjustice · 2020-01-13T16:31:57+00:00

First point, men weren’t hunter gatherers. Men were hunters, women were gatherers. Men hunted periodically, their main responsibility was protection again other tribes/animals. Women provided just as much food, just in the form of berries, nuts, herbs, water gathering and also raised and looked after kids. So if we look at humans from that first perspective we can say that men hunt and protect, women gather and nurture. Hunting and gathering has been replaced with earning money. It would be fine to expect both men and women to contribute equally to that provision if they were both still fulfilling their other requirement - for men, protecting and for women, nurturing. However men don’t protect anymore. They are not in constant danger and willing to lay down their life for their tribe. Women, however, are still the nurtures. So I don’t necessarily think that a man has to provide 100% of the income to be ‘alpha’ because men have never been the sole providers. I just think he needs to find a way to be more useful to make up for his now lost role of protector. A man that provides 50% of the income but is also a very involved father and takes on a part of the nurturing role, or a skilled handyman that could build and repair an entire house or an excellent cook that loves preparing dinner for his family every night, helps with the cleaning, makes sure his wife is just as sexually satisfied as he is - that’s an alpha man in my eyes.

wtknight · 2020-01-13T18:29:10+00:00

The problem is that, since agriculture, providing (beta) and protecting (alpha) are no longer synonymous, and beta traits in men have become much more devalued, especially in western, economically privileged societies in which feminism has a strong toehold and where women can provide for themselves.

Aaren_Augustine · 2020-01-13T16:04:29+00:00

There's nothing wrong with providing, from a position of abundance. I guess lots of men probably just see it as an investment that wouldn't pay off if your wife of ten years runs off and fucks some other guy for whatever fucking reason.

I would think the best way to be a provider, is to do so without expectations or covert contracts. ie: "I pay the bills, you better remain faithful."

I think if a man could have the self respect to think "fuck her, if she cheats, she's gone." And not even think twice about what he's "put in." That would be the best case scenario.

Idunno, I'm just thinks ng out loud.

CaliKop · 2020-01-13T17:07:21+00:00

Coming from a woman, older at that, I agree with your post. Do I desire the alpha male you've described? Yes! Would I stay home and providing there and not have to work?? ABSOLUTELY YES!!! It's hard to be that in a "HookUp" society that places 99% of a human being's value in physical looks. I'll continue to write my fantasies about it. It's safer that way.

AutoModerator · 2020-01-13T15:59:14+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

amwfhunter · 2020-01-13T16:05:18+00:00

I think the misconception derives from guys who pay for everything just to have the woman cheat on him with a guy who doesnt pay a damn thing. Another example is a woman who is finally ready to settle down and finds herself a safe man who can provide for her after riding the cock carousel. In a LTR or marriage obviously finances are going to cross lines. There is a huge stigma with that. I think it is all relative. I dont have anyone whom I'm attached to but I have multiple plates. I make close to 30x to 100x what my plates make so many times for me to pay for things is a drop in the bucket relative to how much relative cost it would be for her to pay. In some senses I might be considered a beta provider but I dont pay for her living either. I also am aware that i am not the average person so these terms may not even apply to me.

2020-01-13T17:36:35+00:00

who is also god fearing, wouldn't leave a man who is a true alpha provider. She will always submit to him.

Now a woman who is sinful, and very wordly, of course they can cheat on you at anytime for any reason.

The type and quality of the woman is important.

You know, until pretty recently there was a whole complex of social and legal mechanisms in place to enforce and encourage those qualities (God fearing and "never leave" and all that goes with it).

Now that those mechanisms are gone, how can you expect your perception of a woman as having those qualities to be in any way reliable?

You are gambling. We are in a transition. The retail worker may never become an alpha

(which, whatever it may have been in other eras with mechanisms of control to make it worthwhile, currently means "able to get sexual access with minimal or no investment)

but he is better off working toward that end, or dying trying, than the gambling you encourage in your post (and it's not just gambling financially, because doing so is in this context is also gambling emotionally).

gimpgirl555 · 2020-01-13T20:15:14+00:00

When a man is operating in his true nature, his masculine, it is in his nature to provide for his woman and his offspring. He is the hunter gatherer. The alpha. This is how it has been for all of human history.

Where do you get this from? Human nature is that men provide for themselves and women trade sex and beg for the scraps. It's in women's nature to grovel, beg for scraps, and bang anyone for a burger.

These are the same guys that do the "50/50" thing with women. They split the date fees 50/50. In a partnership they probably split the rent 50/50. But usually this means whether they won't to admit it or not, the woman is only giving them %50 of the respect. Because they are not a real alpha provider. She still has to work. Help make ends meet, AND expected to wash the dishes, cook, clean, nuture the kids, give great sexual pleasure to the man, while splitting the rent and bills 50/50 with the man?

Alphas don't provide. That's ridiculous. "When a man is a slave to a female he's actually really alpha". Do you expect men to fall for this in 2020?

Joey_Lopez · 2020-01-13T22:50:47+00:00

It's not the provider that is beta. It's the beta part. A beta provider is the guy that women are not actually attracted to and only get transactional sex.

A beta provider is the man that gets the girl after all the alphas don't want her anymore. He only gets maintenance sex once a week or so in exchange for his money. He is the guy that doesn't get BJ's or anal. He's the guy that gets the short end of the stick. She isn't attracted to him and she doesn't respect him.

I personally don't think their is something wrong with providing for your family as long as you are her alpha.

LeJacquelope · 2020-01-14T00:22:46+00:00

You're training men on how to be targets of cuckolding and being stripped for resources in divorce court. That's the fate of a beta provider. Lots of high earning providers find themselves stuck with alimony and paying child support for a kid that's not theirs.

joesmithasdf · 2020-01-14T03:57:00+00:00

Providing is possibly fine in a functional, conservative marriage.

Now this bullshit of paying for dates to earn “100%” respect... lol? What the actual fuck. Let’s check, you mean from a western pov? In 2020? In a world full of phones, apps, social media? Why would any sane man pay for dates if he doesn’t have to? Women are having casual sex after some coffee and drinks, and I bet they do it with other guys. That’s fine, it’s her choice. But why would I pay for an expensive date?

blackedoutfast · 2020-01-14T21:35:01+00:00

ok beta

CosmicBioHazard · 2020-01-15T10:57:48+00:00

The male imperative abhors providing for someone else's child, and it abhors offering much of anything in the way of commitment to a woman who's had her fun elsewhere; i.e. he's not special to her.

Beta providers are the stepdads; they're the men who stepped up and married a woman who's already had her fun.

Providing for a virgin woman? Perfectly Alpha. Marrying an ex party girl? Beta.

rus9384 · 2020-01-13T19:39:40+00:00

men who call providing "beta"

No, providing itself is not always making you beta. There are alpha providers - alpha bucks.

When a man is operating in his true nature, his masculine, it is in his nature to provide for his woman and his offspring. He is the hunter gatherer. The alpha. This is how it has been for all of human history.

Or maybe not? Maybe men just collectively killed large animals then divided the prey among the tribe members?

Its only the men who are under the influence of this new age feminism that has hijacked and confused the minds of young men everywhere in regards to the desires of a woman.

Nowhere near that. Casanova preceeded new age feminism.

I see them working their job at burger king, Chick fil A, Target, restaurant waiter, (Insert any job) etc making at best just a tad bit above minimum wage.

Okay, that is not cool. Being a bartender or a DJ is far better.

These are the same guys that do the "50/50" thing with women. They split the date fees 50/50.

I can agree, 50/50 is retarded. The one who can afford to pay more usually pays more. A woman who can only afford to pay 0 is a bum.

TDLR: Providing is alpha not beta.

Providing can be alpha or beta.

Edit: I am 99% sure you are a man and this post shows you just feel uncomfortable being called a beta. That is it, you are acting wimpy.

corey_trevorson · 2020-01-13T16:57:24+00:00

When a man is operating in his true nature, his masculine, it is in his nature to provide for his woman and his offspring. He is the hunter gatherer. The alpha. This is how it has been for all of human history.

I fully agree. TRP loves to distort meanings and use deceptive terms to push their ideology. However if there weren't so much male resentment as a response to being held down by feminism, there wouldn't have been this opening for TRP in the first place.

Providers are alpha because they produce the most successful offspring (the state of psych research is that growing up without a father has several risk factors associated with it). So with that being the case, the alphas are indeed the providers. If they are good providers and not just clinging to their woman like a leech, yeah the woman will be sexually attracted to him too.

Title	The "Beta" provider
Author	CaliKop
Upvotes	1
Comments	111
Date	January 13, 2020 3:59 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/eo5yxr/the_beta_provider/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/the-beta-provider.310961 https://theredarchive.com/post/310961

Comments