Beta males, softies and metrosexuals why would you want a life with one?

a reply to: Bloodworth
Facial hair? Yes we have that too and some more and some not. Some care about it, some not and everything in between. It is not something new

Also arms, legs, and elsewhere, it is natural. We all were more hairy creatures once, more or less, depending on current popular science theories.

I can very well imagine that and to a part I know some factors. For example the daily pill against pregnancy. All the hormones go down the toilet and back into the cycle. It's a problem in some regions already.

Some additives might not help it and I can see conspiracies about selecting just the right one to -oops- make sure there is that benefit.

The steady drop carves the stone.

BTW Duck,

I would like to wish you a ...

fröhlichen Valentinstag

on this 14th of February!



Cheers

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2
Thank you

Hope you had a good day too, totally unrelated to this day

a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

Happy Valentines day!!

I can very well imagine that and to a part I know some factors. For example the daily pill against pregnancy. All the hormones go down the toilet and back into the cycle. It's a problem in some regions already.

Along with all the viagra, and other erectile disfunction meds...

I love the smell of irony in the morning.

a reply to: olaru12
Thank you and a nice day to you, too

haha maybe some cancel out each other.

Is it the increase in femininity in males thats the issue, or the oft included demonization of masculinity?

Its interesting, because how these concepts tend to be understood is with an underlying weakness/strength theme.

Is it just simple weakness masquerading as femininity? Can a feminine male be strong? Can a masculine female be weak?

From what I see, even though this is frequently connected to gender roles & norms in discourse.. it actually has very little to do with them.

I believe we are dealing with a rise in outright weakness that is simply misidentified as having anything to do with gender, sex, or gender roles at all. Probably partly because we have turned gender roles into some of the dumbest crap imaginable, where colors like pink indicate femininity.. and therefore weakness & being deserving of derision. Of course, it can seem silly when stated outright like that, but its an underlying hum to the vast majority of discussion on the topic (and I love that it was already brought up too).

So, rather than having anything to do with actual gender roles, it seems that weakness is being adopted as a "good" thing while strength is being adopted as a "bad" thing. These are frequently framed in terms of femininity and masculinity, but I think that might just be adding to the confusing nature of it all rather than being accurate. This would be quite an effective way to weaken a society/culture for subjugation, and they will be too busy fighting over gender & sex to correctly identify what is actually going on.

Can a male who puts on makeup, nail polish, spends 30 minutes styling their hair daily, and gets manicures/pedicures be a strong person?

I absolutely believe so, and have met some. Its just that many who do so also tend to adopt the "Tenets of Weakness" running rampant in our society, so the true nature of the issue gets obfuscated and conflated. Part of those Tenets is that typical "strength" is identified as undesirable or toxic, frequently misattributed as masculinity.

The other side is really just the inverse of this, but they play by all of the same rules. Even the vast majority of the social groups that claim to want to change gender, like gender abolitionists, perpetuate the very systems they think they are deconstructing. They just complicate it so much they miss the forest for the trees, and end up strengthening the paradigms they decry.

a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

Where do those of us with the caveman gene fit into the spectrum of modern males?

a reply to: burdman30ott6

IDK, cavemen is just another label to describe it, we would need to break it up at talk about how and why you define yourself a cavemen.

originally posted by: ThatDamnDuckAgain
a reply to: burdman30ott6

IDK, cavemen is just another label to describe it, we would need to break it up at talk about how and why you define yourself a cavemen.

Sloping brow, large grinding jaw, calloused knuckles from dragging, ability to make fire without modern implements, proposing to my wife 20 years ago by actually saying "you're my woman," a distinct skillset that includes being able to perfectly convey my mood to anyone present utilizing monosyllabic grunts and facial expressions...

In seriousness, I find the true qualities of manhood to be sadly slipping away in this modern era. True men have an innate ability to communicate complicated messages to others without ever saying a word. A somewhat silly example of this (which any real man will almost certainly relate to immediately) can be found in two men quietly sitting somewhere outside and spotting an empty can 8-10 feet away. The first man, saying nothing, picks up a small stone and tries to flick it into the can. The second man watches this and instantly recognizes that a challenge has appeared, he picks up a pebble and also tries to toss it into the can. This goes on wordlessly until one of the men successfully tosses a stone into the open can at which time smiles are exchanged, possibly some grunts and even a high five before silent contemplation resumes.

Another great example, two men are standing in a store. A buxom woman walks by, both men exchange knowledgeable yet scarcely perceptible glances regarding what they've seen. No words necessary, no grand displays of vulgarity, just a basic "did you see what I saw, aw hell yeah you know you did" man code cypher.

A man emerges from the auto parts store and sees another man standing with the hood of his truck lifted, ball cap in hand, scratching his head clearly trying to parse an engine issue. Far too often I see the man walk out of the store in his own world and walk right by his brother, never even acknowledging the fact that a hood is raised and a problem is being troubleshooted.

The small threads the once held men together in a society which valued traditional manhood are being cut and too many so-called men seem to neither care that those threads are cut nor have any idea of how to knot them back together again. We have men preoccupied with their grooming products, men entirely centered on style over substance, words over actions, how total strangers will judge them based on their ability to reject all things traditionally centered on manhood in favor of embracing this newly valued antimanhood that's running rampant in western society.

I don't get it nor do I particularly want to get it.

ETA: I really like this guys videos. He's a smart man, not coincidentally he's also a modern day Viking. I've sat my 15 year old son down to watch more than a few of his videos.

Delete

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ThatDamnDuckAgain
a reply to: chr0naut
Please point out the words that hurt your feelz so we can talk about it.

So did you identify with the softie, the metrosexual or the, what we now know is really an omega mail? To avoid you getting triggered again, you can just say the number. Top would be 1, omega would be 3.

I'm not hurt.

I am an older guy now and have out-achieved nearly all of the people I meet and interact with. But I didn't do it with aggressiveness, and manipulation. I did it with the agreement of those I work with, with intellect, planning, hard work, and with a lot of persistence.

Human societies are enormously more populous than families of mountain gorillas. An alpha, in human terms, would be a tyrannical oligarch. I am strongly opposed to anyone who rules by aggression, militaristic power, fear, and manipulation of others.

Considering what I have achieved in my life, things such as being a founding member of a political party that governed a country in coalition for three political terms, my technical and business outcomes, and my trusted positions of responsibility in social groups, I would guess that I am a strong beta male.

Additionally, those that give deference to 'alpha' types are submissive sycophants, who are granting power to people who have no proven capability to achieve anything but bluff.

You wouldn't take the medical advice of someone who was unqualified, just because they were bullying and loud, so why would you give leadership to the unqualified just because they are obnoxious and aggressive?

Some of us aren't pack animals driven by mindless instinct.

This whole thing reads like someone who is the exact opposite of what they're trying to project

a reply to: Aurashake

Then consider what was established already that these are just terms to begin with, to have something to orientate about

I guess that went over your head?

originally posted by: Aurashake
ThatDamnDuckAgain:"Yeah and that's where you should go back and read the OP and the conversations again. Because you went down the complete wrong path thinking I equate Alpha = brutal, cave-menish and violent.

None of these attributes are what defines an Alpha, for most it isn't. It's just YOUR impression, so, go back and read the OP, you could have spared the time writing that answer... But it shows how BIASED you went into this."

Except...that is exactly what a alpha male is, regardless of your own made up definition. So no you are 100% incorrect on this.

No it's how beta males define alpha males because they are threatened by them. Be it imagined or no.

They look at males like us who can handle themselves well and for all purposes grew up doing "manly" things and learned what it is to be a man..

They aren't like that and they are more meek and instead of embracing their nature or hell even trying to learn how to be more masculine, they throw out the "alpha" thing whole sale as just "baser instinct" males. When that couldn't be farther from the truth

I mean the fact they make up this narrative of alpha males like they do, is an extremely beta thing to do

In other words. Show me you're threatened by me w out telling me it outright lol

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Good points, this ties in with Serdgiams post about masculine / feminine and Bigburgh's wordless raised finger about men in suits.

They look at males like us who can handle themselves well and for all purposes grew up doing "manly" things and learned what it is to be a man..

Can handle themselves well, correct. And if that means ironing or washing, cleaning... so be it! Nothing womanly about doing this as a man. In the end alpha means many things, first and foremost having the own # together like daily life, finances and also loving oneself I guess.

That seem to be a pattern shining through, with a lot of men that are either wanna be alpha or despise them. I attribute a lot of it to toxic feminism though, as insecure men hate themselves because of it, in turn projecting their own insecurities on others, as we see. For the alpha/not alpha I think it comes down to self respect, self consciousness and leads to an aura of natural dominance. Navigation in life is more steady, movements, the words, the way of walking, the posture, clothes, it's very much visible just watching someone buy groceries and interact with the world.

Let me find an example for us, so it's fair and not just men bashing. Ah like the housewife without a sex life, despising other women that are sexually free. No offense or judgement about the housewife's circumstances though. But being open sexually is not the same as promiscuousness. Open in terms of experiencing new things, not having countless sexual partners or running around half naked.

Both is a threat for each gender in terms of finding a partner. However I think there is at least one fitting lid for every pan and other way around. Like for instance, someone real dominant may subconsciously not want a dominant partner. Or someone dominant in work, might want a more dominant partner in life, for balance.

Or any other kind of combination. Also like, men that like to submit to women on part time, like @home or in bed are more alpha than those that say "I am too dominant for this, I do not take orders from anyone", because it takes a lot of mental power and braveness to really submit in trust and without questions.

It's all interwoven, but I see as the pages progress with all the nice input here, we are deep in the swamp of it all, love it.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ThatDamnDuckAgain
a reply to: chr0naut
Please point out the words that hurt your feelz so we can talk about it.

So did you identify with the softie, the metrosexual or the, what we now know is really an omega mail? To avoid you getting triggered again, you can just say the number. Top would be 1, omega would be 3.

I'm not hurt.

I am an older guy now and have out-achieved nearly all of the people I meet and interact with. But I didn't do it with aggressiveness, and manipulation. I did it with the agreement of those I work with, with intellect, planning, hard work, and with a lot of persistence.

Human societies are enormously more populous than families of mountain gorillas. An alpha, in human terms, would be a tyrannical oligarch. I am strongly opposed to anyone who rules by aggression, militaristic power, fear, and manipulation of others.

Considering what I have achieved in my life, things such as being a founding member of a political party that governed a country in coalition for three political terms, my technical and business outcomes, and my trusted positions of responsibility in social groups, I would guess that I am a strong beta male.

Additionally, those that give deference to 'alpha' types are submissive sycophants, who are granting power to people who have no proven capability to achieve anything but bluff.

You wouldn't take the medical advice of someone who was unqualified, just because they were bullying and loud, so why would you give leadership to the unqualified just because they are obnoxious and aggressive?

Some of us aren't pack animals driven by mindless instinct.

This whole thing reads like someone who is the exact opposite of what they're trying to project

I'm an aspie, and individualist, a loner who's happy to do their own thing, who doesn't get caught up in games of social position and ranking. Even in my other ATS posts, I am usually standing against those who feel everyone must conform to the group-think. From that attitudinal standpoint, I see little of actual value, to anyone, in 'alpha' stereotypes. I see alphas as intellectual pipsqueaks following now functionless primitive instincts, and their enablers as similarly motivated by something pre-cognitive and inappropriate for intelligent beings.

Yes, you basically again prove the ManBehindTheMask to be correct. He just told you it's more than "functionless primitive instincts".

Yet you again bash on it instead of asking what that means. You equate alpha with primitive, because that's what you think it is.

Bickering about about their intelligence because you yourself can't see further and grasp that there is more, is somehow ironic.

originally posted by: chr0naut
. . . I see alphas as intellectual pipsqueaks following now functionless primitive instincts, . . . . .

DB flings poo at chr0naut's avatar.

No further poo flinging here please! See the hearts above in the forum icon?

I have no objection watch you two in the mudpit though

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: chr0naut
. . . I see alphas as intellectual pipsqueaks following now functionless primitive instincts, . . . . .

DB flings poo at chr0naut's avatar.

Ah, an avatar fertilizer.

It takes all types.