On Alpha & Beta, and the misuse of these terms.

Reddit View
January 9, 2018

I suppose it's time for our yearly reminder of what these terms mean, since TRP has the memory of a goldfish. The topic came up here but I thought it would be good to post a review at the top of the forum for all to see.

Alpha is the most misused word on this forum. It's a word meant to describe traits that are attractive to women and satisfy her alpha desires.

Women also seek out beta behaviors. A man who can satisfy both without losing balance is considered the ultimate catch for women.

The big problem is, women tend to grind away at men to bring down the alpha qualities, or test their mettle. They believe they want more beta qualities rather than alpha qualities. This would be a mistake if you fall for this shit test. If you do, you will quickly learn she's on her way to the next branch. This gives men here the impression that beta is all to be avoided.

An example: a father who leads the family and brings home the bacon, is fit, and knows when to say no to his wife. Notice there are a number of alpha traits here, such as fitness and saying no. But buying a house, or feeding your family? Beta traits. Does that make this man "beta" or "alpha" or does this show that these terms are meaningless in this context?

/u/rollo-tomassi suggests to err on the side of alpha. Displaying too many alpha traits is a safer bet than too many beta traits. He even suggests not even considering striking a balance, I suspect because he believes the beta side of things is too easy and natural to men that it will shine through anyhow.

But nevertheless, do not mistake these terms for descriptors of a whole person.

Some people here make shorthand of it to suggest an "alpha" is simply one whose alpha traits outnumber their beta traits. But as you can see, it leads to confusion like this post here.. If you see this shorthand, do not forget what it stands for. If you use it, use it properly. If you're new here, read our glossary in the side bar.

Post Information
Title On Alpha & Beta, and the misuse of these terms.
Author redpillschool
Upvotes 205
Comments 70
Date 09 January 2018 03:31 PM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit TheRedPill
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/48232
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/7p7stj/on_alpha_beta_and_the_misuse_of_these_terms/
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
Rolloalphabetabranch swingingshit testthe red pill

[–]Modredpillschool[S,M] [score hidden] stickied comment (32 children) | Copy

ITT: people who didn't read the very short summary I posted above and continue to try to define the perfect alpha.

[–]I_Tow_My_Own_Line 6 points6 points [recovered] | Copy

If you're at a bar and your goal is immediate gratification...don't send ANY beta signals. If they ask what you do for a living, give them shit "Whoa there, I don't even know you."

Having a balance of alpha/beta traits isn't ideal in most situations other than LTR/marriage...or to occasionally dangle in front of a plate, if need be.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (14 children) | Copy

Is being rich a beta signal?

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

If they can see that's where your confidence comes from and you come off as "Look how much money I have", then yes. Being wealthy is only a part of you, not what defines you. You don't want them thinking you NEED that to get laid or they will see you only as an ATM to be used.

You can be wealthy and let it show a bit but never let them touch it or spend it [think Leykis and the $40 rule].

[–]wataDs5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

I've noticed this. After half a decade in the military I finally returned home with plenty of money in the savings account. Bought a nice sports car, was pretty smug with myself tbqh. Did not wet panties at all as the source of my confidence was pretty much worn on my sleeve. Similarly the specialty I was working in had me travelling all over the world working in an exclusive capacity with my fellow servicemembers. I noticed divulging what I did would simply never work out (I imagine it would come off as me qualifying to her). I've learned to keep the most interesting/exclusive details of my life unmentioned. When I'm giving a chick a ride in my sport mobile I will not draw attention to it in any way anymore. When asked what I do (did) I will say I'm a janitor or something. Relying on material possessions to ingratiate yourself to the opposite sex DOESN'T WORK.

[–]GenieGenius2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

It works to get her attention but not her affection.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy

If I have I high paying job I should never disclose it and just AM?

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

Women in their prime are giving it away for FREE to broke Chads. It also depends on what your goal is. If your goal is to get laid and sleep with women in their prime, keep that info to yourself or make them really work for it. That is a LONG TERM SECURITY trait. If you are looking to get laid, don't send that signal. It will make you look more akin to a beta provider profile on match.com that lists his occupation and income.

Also, since that is LTR information. Don't share that shit until you are vetting her for an LTR...which you DON'T do until after you've fucked her several times and she has demonstrated some patterned behavior from which you can judge her actions more predictably.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

If I drive an expensive car and live in a big penthouse apartment they will often ask me what I do for a living, should my response be "I am a male escort" or something that is more believable? What I mean is should my response show my aloofness towards her view of my money and my job, that I dont care if she thinks I am rich or not. Or should it actually 'hide' the fact that I am rich so she doesnt place me in the beta provider category?

[–]I_Tow_My_Own_Line 1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy

If I assume your goal is to get laid, then she is just some dumb whore to you at the moment. You don't give highly personal information to whores. SHE needs to impress YOU with her long term viability in order to get that information. So, yes, that is exactly what you do; you say you are an escort and have fun with it. Act like you don't see that information as important or having anything to do with your interest in her. If she gets upset, shit test her and tell her you're not that easy lol. Let her demonstrate some patience and willingness to follow your lead. She WILL shit test you about it but if she escalates it to ultimatums, then she disqualified herself for an LTR right there.

If your goal is to look for an LTR...you still need to assume that for now she is just some dumb whore and make her ass earn it.

[–]wataDs1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Can confirm. An aire of mystery (e.g. not spilling all the beans at the first question) will almost always win out. Many men wouldn't put a ring on a woman who spreads her legs at the drop of your witty fun-having hat and women know this. If you start putting too many provider signals out inadvertently, she may switch gears on your ass. A good FR I read a while ago had a wealthy man with a secondary beater apartment to take his 1NS's to as he had a pattern of women LMR'ing like crazy when walking into his beautiful house.

[–]CalculatingWolf0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Not necessarily. If you've worked hard to get that money most likely you have some alpha traits.

[–]gELSK-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

// , It depends on how you use your money.

If you spend money on yourself (e.g. cryptocurrency, investment accounts, hobbies) then it's not beta, because it signifies dominance.

But I think we all know where and when riches are a beta signal.

[–]1Your_Coke_Dealer-2 points-1 points  (2 children) | Copy

Usually. It shows your capacity to provide.

Sometimes not, like if you spend it all selfishly on having fun and she knows she won't get anything provided besides the D.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

I see. How much for an 8 ball though

[–]wheresMYsteakAt-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

250 or free if you are hb5.5 or above if you frequent his bar. He's all out.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 12 points13 points  (11 children) | Copy

If your response to a shit test is to fail it, you're going to fail. Nothing to do with alpha/beta.

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

Asking what you do for a living IS a shit test. If you tell her what you really do for a living, she knows how much you make AND you are using a beta trait to peacock. She then begins to look at you in that way. Instead scoff at that line of questioning or tell her you're a Private Investigator / Amature Gyno.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 6 points7 points  (6 children) | Copy

Asking what you do for a living IS a shit test.


If your response to a shit test is to fail it, you're going to fail.

[–]I_Tow_My_Own_Line -1 points-1 points [recovered] | Copy

I responded due to you saying it had nothing to do with alpha/beta. I wholeheartedly disagree. Knowing whether something sends an alpha or beta signal informs your ability to more effectively respond, given your short or long term goals.

[–]Gandsy7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy

As OP said “Alpha” is a set of traits. It’s how you think and behave. Being rich is neither alpa nor beta. There are rich alphas and rich betas.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy

If you're at a bar and your goal is immediate gratification...don't send ANY beta signals. If they ask what you do for a living, give them shit "Whoa there, I don't even know you."

Having a balance of alpha/beta traits isn't ideal in most situations other than LTR/marriage...or to occasionally dangle in front of a plate, if need be.

Dangling beta traits as a response to a shit test is simply how to fail a shit test, whether you plan to marry the woman or have a one night stand.

Once again, Rollo would normally chime in here and say the only good balance is 100% alpha traits.

In practice this is effective.

He would also describe the optimal mating strategy (albeit an unconscious one) for a woman as:

"For a female of any species to facilitate a methodology for breeding with the best genetic partner she’s able to attract AND to ensure her own and her offspring’s survival with the best provisioning partner; this is an evolutionary jackpot."

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

Some women openly allow themselves to be plates to multiple men as a means of finding one to latch onto, trap or work her way up to LTR. The reason a lot of women predrink before going out is to push down all the negative feelings they have for what they're about to do on the carousel that evening. They know their bat shit crazy emotions aren't built for riding the carousel but the endless stream of validation is too intoxicating for them to do anything else while they are in their prime. They all WANT to lock a Chad down. Giving glimpses of the potential in you for anything other than Chad on a ONS is what makes them want to come over and clean your house, fold your laundry.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

They know their bat shit crazy emotions aren't built for riding the carousel but the endless stream of validation is too intoxicating for them to do anything else while they are in their prime. They all WANT to lock a Chad down. Giving glimpses of the potential in you for anything other than Chad on a ONS is what makes them want to come over and clean your house, fold your laundry.

Yes, I agree with this. I would say that's the point of this entire post. Women have a dualistic mating strategy. Alpha fucks, beta bucks. If they can get beta bucks from a chad, that's their jackpot.

That's why we can't use the term "alpha" or "beta" as simply descriptors of people.

But you and I both agree, she won't see you as a chad if you start failing shit tests.

[–]CalculatingWolf-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

What of she asks where you live? Is that a shit test?

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

Go-to when asked what I do for a living is "male stripping". Usually gets a laugh or smile, radiates confidence, gives you an out to disclosing any actual personal information ("no really what do you do??", "what, you don't believe me?"), lines you up for several follow-up options, AND lines her up for several DOI options

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy

Or any undesirable job.

I clean septic tanks.

I shine shoes.

Janitor of an elementary school.

[–]wheresMYsteakAt-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy

Or if you are truly IDGAF : fluffer

[–]Endorsed ContributorThotwrecker33 points34 points  (2 children) | Copy

Alphas are the individuals who are on top of the sexual/power pyramid. These individuals will in general display a set of shared behavior and traits, and some of these behaviors are directly responsible for their alpha status (ie, ambition), whereas some of these behaviors are correlated with being on top of the pyramid (ie, good body language).

When we discuss alpha traits and behaviors, we're discussing the traits and behaviors that directly or indirectly play a role in climbing / keeping the top position in social groups and sexual marketplaces.

Alpha meaning "traits that are attractive to women" is a fine definition in theory, but in reality most people here are not capable of understanding what "attractive to women" means. Women are emotionally or instinctually attracted to "alpha traits" - their pussies get wet - whereas they are logically and sensibly attracted to beta traits. Both types are a form of attraction and because women often conflate the two, they don't behave in a way that clues (most) unaware men into what traits are causing what type of attraction. We know the theory, but what happens is that the price (lowered attraction) from beta traits is not immediate or at least immediately evident, and often only the immediate logical attraction is what guys pick up on. They do not see the long term attraction calculus that happens when a mix of alpha and beta traits are demonstrated, and they don't know how to seperate out the price paid for each alpha and beta behavior compared to what that behavior gained them.

This is why my belief is that alpha and beta needs to be analyzed NOT in the context of how women react to those traits, but rather, how those traits position you in a social dynamic. Alpha traits increase your SMV and alpha traits through correlation or causation lead to dominance of some social / sexual pyramid. For example, high risk tolerance and prioritization of your own self interests do not directly get her pussy wet - they get her pussy wet because those behaviors will lead you to getting things - things like social status, social rewards, status symbols, social proof, attention, fame, etc whatever it is. And then those things reel women in. If you have social status and fame, there's really no limit to how many beta traits you can have or how strong those beta traits can be - you'll still get pussy. What will happen is that you'll get a twisted web of positive and negative reactions from women, and you won't know how to tease out what is causing what.

For this reason, I think it's best to just understand "alpha as a noun" and more importantly "alpha as an adjective - ie alpha traits, alpha behaviors, etc" as that which leads to increased status and position in the sexual pyramid / sexual marketplace. Beta traits lower your status and position on this pyramid - which may make you a better LTR candidate for a specific woman, yes. But at a very, very high price - and using TRP to evaluate who you want to be by how optimized you make yourself for a specific woman is a cancerous thought pattern. Women do stupid shit and make terrible decisions despite holding many advantages in this game - if you try to learn only by what you see as "getting a good response" from women, you'll wind up pedestalizing both alpha and beta behaviors, and not having any real knowledge of what behaviors and causing what response, and to what degree that response is specific to the unique hamsterings of that specific woman. In short, you'll wind up learning nothing and you'll be on here talking about how "you just think" that women actually prefer X or Y. But the sexual pyramid doesn't lie - (or social / career pyramid - show me a collection of 100 CEOs, we'll find a bunch of common traits that can be understood as the "alpha" traits of the career world). Look at the cool kids in any top tier frat, we'll find traits that lead to success in that environment, and these will be similar traits that lead to sexual success in a different environment.

[–]JohnnyCocktails936 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy

If i could upvote this a million times I would.

When I first introduced myself to TRP, I would wrack my brain trying to figure out the types of traits to exhibit by imitating men who seemed to have a lot of female presence in their lives.

The folly in this is that there are A LOT of guys out there who have tons of female friends, always texting them, but never actually sleeping with any of them. But to a novice, it’s hard to separate female REACTIONS compared to actual RESULTS. My initial first reaction when I would see a guy like that, I would think to myself...look at him - life of the party, all the girls love him, he MUST be getting laid a lot. Maybe I should try doing what he does.

And then I had a roommate in college who was always in the know with a lot of girls...but to my utter surprise, he hardly ever got laid. Real eye opener.

That’s when I realized reactions from women don’t mean shit compared to actual results. Don’t be fooled by surface level behavior. Way better to be the secret lover she doesn’t really talk or tell anyone about compared to the guy she’s hitting up on a Friday night asking where the party’s at.

Excuse any typos, I typed this out on my phone.

[–]Endorsed Contributormallardcove8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

I know in my beta blue pill days I was the same way. I assumed that if a guy hung out with a lot of women all the time, it meant all the women liked him and wanted his dick. I was unable to put 2 and 2 together and realize these guys were orbitters trapped in the friend zone.

I'd see how these guys acted and do what they did. One big example would be to compliment women all the time on social media. I saw guys who always were hanging out with girls doing such things, and I would do the same. And not get laid. And double down on the nice guy act when shit didn't work out. And then wonder why things never worked out.

[–]FirstNamesMusic12 points13 points  (5 children) | Copy

Question. If I were to simplify the terms alpha and beta into small phrases.

Alpha, would be self reliant, giving no thought to outside sources.

Beta would be, provider of comfort at the expense of yourself.

I believe the above alpha definition could be stated better.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 18 points19 points  (3 children) | Copy

They describe traits and behaviors. If you use them to describe people, you lose a lot of nuance.

Our working definitions (in the sidebar) mention that if you use shorthand to refer to somebody as "alpha" or "beta" you're referencing their net balance of said traits.

[–]FirstNamesMusic0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

Though, is it possible to describe the two sets of traits using one sentence?

I'm trying to see if I can do it accurately to test my true understanding of the traits.

For instance, giving "lip service" or not saying what you really think to a woman is a beta trait (obviously), but at it's core is it because you are giving comfort to the woman at the expense of yourself?

Basically doing this to understand the underlying common theme of both groups of traits.

[–]foreveralphablog1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

They are definitely behavioural traits. The way I think about it are that there are pro's and cons to each, and you want the best from each set of behaviours. For example:

Alpha - Dominance, Non-Compliance and Non-Neediness

Beta - Stability, Maturity, Charm, Warmth

There seems to be a stigma against having any Beta traits whatsoever on TRP. Without ANY Beta traits women don't stick around for too long.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

There seems to be a stigma against having any Beta traits whatsoever on TRP. Without ANY Beta traits women don't stick around for too long.

Precisely the point of this post.

[–]tyrone3160 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Alpha could be described as "In case of emergency, break glass."

Beta could be described as "Glad to be of service!"

"Beta" is not a synonym for "doormat", it simply means that the behavior does nothing to advance your attractiveness to women.

[–]HS-Thompson7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy

I think this post is great and helps dispel a common TRP fallacy, which is this idea that alpha is something you are. Clearly that's a misconception. However I think it's still a bit of a misconception to say that you can define alpha/beta by a series of traits.

Being an alpha is not a thing that you are. And it's not defined by a static set of characteristics. It is a position that you hold in a group dynamic. An alpha is a leader, and a beta is a follower. A person can be high quality, muscular, good looking, whatever, but if they are weak within the context of the group they are a beta.

A corporate CEO could be a top notch alpha, end up in prison after a drugged out car accident, and suddenly be the lowest in the hierarchy. But that prison gang member is not the alpha in the room when he's standing in handcuffs being sentenced in a Federal courtroom, the judge is.

A prisoner's physique and deep voice isn't going to do jack shit for him in a courtroom, because the group he is in that day has a dynamic and he is at the bottom of it. The next day, back in prison, that will change again and he'll be a top dog.

The concept of being an alpha is always contextual. It's a position held within a group. There's no such thing as an alpha or beta when it's one person in the woods.

If you're trying to figure out if you're the alpha or beta in the context of interacting with a woman, just ask a simple question: which one of you is actually calling the shots? Are you the leader?

I see this get especially twisted when people talk about money. The idea that wealth makes you beta is ludicrous. Wealth and leadership are highly correlated, and having money gives you power over people and situations.

If you take someone who is an alpha in a group setting and give them more money they'll be more alpha, period.

The problem comes when money is the only thing someone has that is attractive to women (ie beta bucks) so they get exploited. A beta who can't provide either isn't anything at all, he's literally invisible. Giving him some money doesn't make him more beta, it makes him more desirable, obviously.

But in general, physical fitness, wealth, political or social power, celebrity, talent as a performer, confidence, and so on, are all things that are highly correlated with leadership. So they're related. But being an alpha is an effect of those things, it's a rank you achieve in the social group you inhabit.

Alpha isn't a collection of traits, it's a rank you achieve based on the values and dynamics of the group you're in. It is certainly a useful shorthand to list traits that are likely to be correlated with general alpha status in a middle-class western country sort of context, so they way TRP describes them is applicable. But it does always depend on your surroundings. Alpha is an ordinal term, not cardinal one.

[–]Jailhouseredpilled932 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

-They believe that they want more beta qualities rather than alfa qualities-

But why do they believe this? Is this an influence of what Rollo describes as the Feminist Imperative or is the hind brain at work here?

[–]CalculatingWolf1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

They want control and wrapping their hands on resources. Simple as that. An alpha can always deny them. Bang them and leave.

[–]2Dmva1003 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Rollos writings on Alpha being contextual is really the most important point versus trying to coin everything alpha or beta, because that would still depend on context.

[–]BallsMahonie1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I always thought that the concept of what an Alpha is was a fairly straight-forward understanding. People seem to get so caught up in what it means to be "Alpha" that they try to force it into every aspect of their life via emulation. How do I stir my coffee the most alpha? How many decent people do I need to tell to fuck off before I'm alpha? Is a dark grey shirt more Alpha than light grey?

Honestly, if you're truly the master of your own domain, you won't need to ask questions. Almost every single man who truly has mastered many of the traits that align with the "alpha" method of thinking knows that he has his shit together. If you have to think about it, chances are you don't understand it.

As always, read the sidebar. Trust me people, the answers you want are in there.

[–]AshyLarry270 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Very much needed! Got tired of posts utilizing these with one as an insult, and the other as a goal. You need balance, but it is always better to make sure the scale is leaning more alpha heavy

[–]davebrain 1 points1 points [recovered] | Copy

If you don't strike a balance between and alpha and beta and go full alpha you'll go monk. Its beta qualities that deceive you into thinking sex is worth dealing with these harpies.

[–]Endorsed Contributormallardcove0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Your MGTOW posts are getting old. There is an entire sub for that MGTOW garbage, might as well take it there.

[–]imlostfuck0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Bravo bravo. Should be a conclusion rational people come to when giving this some real thought. It all boils down to being the best you possible, and the constant strive to be better. One who considers himself alpha with the traits he has and doesn’t progress any further is only a glorified beta with deep insecurities hidden under his alpha facade. Generalized ofcourse but in a nutshell, nobody is perfect, identify your weaknesses, construct a resolve, execute. There are no work around, no excuses, gut check gentlemen.

[–]brinkleybuzz-2 points-1 points  (6 children) | Copy

But buying a house, or feeding your family? Beta traits.

Taking care and protecting people who rely on you and treat you with respect and deference is not a Beta trait. IMO it's a legitimate expression of manhood. Giving your resources to someone who doesn't give a fuck about you and treats you with indifference or disdain is a Beta trait.

Be a benevolent monarch who rules his kingdom with an iron fist in a velvet glove.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 8 points9 points  (3 children) | Copy

You've bought into the wrong definition of beta my friend. Our definitions are in the sidebar: https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2zckqu/updated_glossary_of_terms_and_acronyms/

[–]brinkleybuzz1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

Beta – Traits of provision: either providing resources or validation to others, women (and perhaps men).

For discussion ... might be time reconsider or refine the definition.

Beta implies weakness and subservience. I see a Beta as someone who defers to women and other men. Someone who provides as a way to win the affection of a woman is subservient to her and therefore Beta.

It is possible to provide from a position of strength though. Think of the head of an organization who rewards those who are loyal to him.

The difference lies in the frame. The Beta provides out of fear and weakness, ex. bribes and covert contracts. An Alpha provides out of benevolent strength. Bottom line, it's all about the frame.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

The Beta provides out of fear and weakness, ex. bribes and covert contracts. An Alpha provides out of benevolent strength. Bottom line, it's all about the frame.

This only works if you use the words to define a person instead of behaviors.

Consider Elon Musk- he's got a lot going for him. He takes charge, he's one of the richest men in the world and undoubtedly he could walk into a bar and get laid on cred alone.

But he married and got divorced from the same woman twice.

There is a case study in this guy, if we really pick it apart. You'll find beneficial traits, and negative traits. But is he an alpha or a beta? That's a contextual question that cannot be answered as a whole.

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

For discussion ... might be time reconsider or refine the definition.

Beta implies weakness and subservience.

That's how you guys are misusing it. Our working definitions haven't changed. Just a bunch of highschoolers came in and started calling each other betas.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

I agree with this.

A man is to provide for his family. He’s also to keep the woman on a short leash for when she gets out of line. And if she gets out of line & doesn’t shape up? Kick her ass to the curb.

Rule with a iron fist. I don’t see that as being a weak male. It might be time to revisit the subs definition.

[–]brinkleybuzz-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

I see it this way. Expression of strong frame = Alpha trait. Weak frame = Beta trait.

[–]HaitianFire-1 points0 points  (5 children) | Copy

I disagree with your statement on buying a house and bringing home the bacon. Those aren't necessarily beta on their own. Doing them for others at the expense of yourself is beta behavior. However, financial stability displays that a person has resources and the ability to take care of themselves. That's an alpha trait.

I would also go further and say that getting married isn't necessarily beta either. If you're alpha, you'll take charge of the marriage and have a good pre-nup as a contingency. Alphas are natural leaders; if they want to lead a family, they can do so. In fact, alphas in the wild are typically the parents of the rest of the group.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy

Buying a house and providing for the kids satisfies one side of her sexual strategy - provisions. Whether you like it or not, this is the "beta bucks" portion of her strategy.

That isn't to say that doing it makes you a sucker. It means that these are provider behaviors and should be understood as such.

[–]HaitianFire0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

Being alpha does not mean that you can't provide for a family. Doing so selflessly because you feel obligated to is beta behavior. An alpha can make an investment in a family as much as they can make an investment in any other institution. If an alpha wants a married life, he can have one. He doesn't have to become subservient to his wife and children, and he can continue to be alpha. If the wife is a high value woman herself, he won't ever have to worry about providing for her, because she can do that herself.

Part of leadership is that others depend on you to survive. When you provide as a beta, it's because you depend on their acceptance to survive. Providing as an alpha father is sustenance. A man should never have to provide for the wife, however. If she agrees to start a family, she agrees to sustain it. If she leaves, it doesn't hinder the alpha's life because he survives emotionally, financially, and physically independent of her. A pre-nup where he makes sure that he has custody of the child is the smart decision and the alpha man can so this without any heckling from his fiancée because he's in charge. Both an alpha and a beta can provide; the main difference is that an alpha can choose to stop providing whenever he wants and keep the same quality of life and a beta cannot.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy

Being alpha does not mean that you can't provide for a family.

I feel as though you are totally and completely missing the point of this entire thread.

[–]HaitianFire0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

The obvious point of this thread is to educate others on what it means to be beta and alpha. In order to properly educate others, both qualities should be accurately described. Provision is not beta behavior; subservience, dependence, and indecision are. If you provide because you serve and depend on whomever is provided for, then you do so because of beta behavior. Unwavering certainty in what you want and the means to achieve it is alpha behavior. If providing for a family is what an alpha wants, then they remain an alpha.

The Red Pill is partially about accepting that female sexual strategy not only exists, but exists to the disadvantage of males. Because of how females reproduce, it is advantageous for them to both attain the best possible offspring and have someone to provide for it. Thus, "alpha fucks, beta bucks." This is correct insofar as this is only the wish of the female. Becoming the provider of another males' offspring is detrimental to a male in sexual strategy. That's why one would normally refrain from providing for a family. That's why a wise male does not allow himself to be trapped in such a way. Paternity tests, pre-nuptual agreements, and legal divorce allow a male to respectively know that offspring is his, maintain custody over him or her, and to dissolve a relationship if the offspring is not, in fact, his. A wise alpha who wants a child knows this and will use it to his advantage. A beta and a natural alpha ignorant of the world will become the losers in sexual strategy and provide, not because they want to, but because they've been manipulated by the female into doing so. If the main purpose of the Red Pill is to outline the advantage of women's sexual strategy, then the wise use of it is for men is to counter it.

Being an alpha will never be disadvantageous because it includes the traits that allow both survival and prosperity. Women and men alike are drawn to it. If an alpha man deems it worthy of his time to invest as a provider, then they will do so sagaciously and not to their detriment.

Think of it this way; putting profits back into a company as the CEO to produce increased revenue is the alpha male; while continually paying the company for their services as a client is the beta male. The former is investment, and the latter is dependence.

[–]Low_Cost_Chimp_Meat-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Girls love a good effeminate beta. When you talk about feelings, or cry during a romance comedy film together, it makes her pussy as wet as a monsoon! Bonus points if you are chubby and play video games. Neck beards are also a big plus for any chick in HB8-10 range.

Follow my advise gents and it will all seem effortless....

[–]Jonlife-4 points-3 points  (2 children) | Copy

Alpha: think good genes. Brad Pitt looks. Women will still fuck you regardless of whether or not you can provide for them. You passed the genetic lottery.

Beta: These men need to have money and resources. They aren't as strong or good looking an alpha male (under 6 ft tall, balding etc). Women get with them for financial security. These guys get cheated on alot and usually get fucked over in divorce court. Blue pill cucks are very beta. But they know how to provide and earn a good living.

TFL'rs: these guys have horrible genes and also fail at knowing how to make good money. Women don't even give these guys the time of day. Prostitution is good to these men (think neckbeard living in his grandparents basement).

[–]2mental_models1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

This reads like a lazy/sloppy adoption of 'eugenics'.

this isn't even 'cola' to eugenics' 'Coke'... this is Aunt Jemima mixed in seltzer water

[–]Jonlife0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Glad you like it

[–]WTHub-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Couldn't have picked a better time with Stan Lee trending today.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Thanks for this. I've only been here for about a year and for a while I was in the mindset of 'gotta always be alpha, if im beta for even one second im a total faggot'. Balance is always the goal, and the terms 'alpha' and 'beta' are meaningless, you shouldn't get caught up on it.

[–]1Entropy-7-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

I think there is a bit of 80/20 with this. Either go 80% alpha with a dash of beta qualities, or 80% beta with enough alpha qualities to not be a doormat.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

I understand the premise that there are beta traits which are inherent in the existence of married providers. My issue is that many here are all-too-ready to label anyone in in an LTR as beta-pussy personified. If we are to assume that the labels here should be based on the overall balance of traits, then bashing our brothers in committed relationships because of those beta traits only is intellectually dishonest. I am an Alpha married man. I know of two other married men whose Alpha traits surpass their beta bases ... out of dozens. If you saw us in our respective contexts, beta is not what you would remember.

[–]Throwawaysteve123456-3 points-2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Haha, no. It's more black and white, there are people that are entirely alpha, or entirely beta, no exceptions. An alpha is alpha in all situations, and a beta is beta in all. They are not relative terms or anything. There are just two positions in the social hierarchy for humans, alpha and beta, and this 100% explains human sexuality.

[–]sokiahlee-4 points-3 points  (1 child) | Copy

Be an alpha for the rest of your life, don't kow-tao to anyone. IDGAF's attitude is vital

[–]2mental_models-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Some men struggle to wield tools of power, resulting in a mix of both alpha and beta traits...

Other men struggle even to wield cliches, and manage to miss the mark even with a few cliches in a short sentence...

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

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter