Are you an Alpha male (female)…???

[Isis Kali]

Originally Posted by mattsonn

Uplift, I'm probably more of your type of person. I'm very cooperative and around others I naturally act very humble.

Well, I recommend TuckerMax.com. Shamou, prepare to be thrilled, Uplift, prepare to be horrified.

Even if I'm the opposite, I still have a ton of respect for that guy.

That's the thing, though. Being alpha doesn't mean being gross, ridiculous, and disgusting...Tucker Max is just- ick. He's may be alpha, but I think he's a good example of using the power for evil instead of good.

[llong]

Originally Posted by Isis Kali

Anyway, a true alpha wouldn't indulge in stupid shows of power for the simple reason that they're a waste of time and energy.

This is not the case in biology, where the term came from.

[Iksander]

The term did not come from Biology.

Humans enjoy complexity, it is entertaining - so if you want to write a whole book about this subject; that to me is summed up with one or two words (as I mentioned in an earlier post,) then go ahead.

If this thread has at all been followed - it has been stated clearly and repetitively that 'Alpha Male' is being referred to in a positive manner. It is not the word we are necessarily talking about - but the concept.

Discuss the concept and not your feelings about the word - it obviously doesn't matter since as far as I can tell the concept has been represented in a positive manner.

By the way, what is wrong with cowboys?

[dastrovia]

So are we supposed to just ignore the negative aspects of alpha ism ??

It would appear there is a fine line between one being a good versus a bad alpha. Hitler, Hussein, Mussolini, are clear examples of where an alpha went to an extreme we wish not to see repeated. I would prefer we find a way to get along with leadership that does not have the potential to morph into such alphas and thus why I guess I am in the minority anti alpha. It is not just a word but a lifestyle which I would never choose nor wish anybody I care about to consider. Leaders yes, but alpha leaders no.

[Iksander]

Yes, ignore them because if you focus on them you activate them.

[llong]

Originally Posted by Iksander

The term did not come from Biology.

I thought it came from the study of chimps?

[dastrovia]

Originally Posted by Iksander

Yes, ignore them because if you focus on them you activate them.

That just seems a bit too simplistic for me. History has proven what happens when things get ignored. I would rather the trait just be eliminated so we do not have to worry about re occurrences. Striving to be the ultimate alpha in the modern age is far too dangerous considering the potential for negative forces to emerge. If something can not be held in check it would seem to further advance societies best interests to eliminate the trigger. Perhaps in concept it is ok to have alphas but it seems in practice there are too many negatives to ignore. Others may disagree but I prefer to rely on data from reality rather than concepts. For example Communism on paper was not all the bad a concept but when put into practice my view is that has been a abysmal failure.

[Iksander]

It came from the study of animal social systems, which isn't biology

Although I am sure the term can be applied to biology.

[Iksander]

Too simplistic? That is the point. To make it simple.

If reality is what you make it - then relying on reality for data is making your reality very much the same over and over.

The concepts in your mind are, in fact, more real than what your senses perceive. Why is this? Because concepts exist directly within the mind and thus experienced 'directly', however, external reality must go through the faculty of the senses which then must be imprinted upon the consciousness which opens up whole realms of odd interpretations - whereas direct conceptual foundations are interpreted only ONE way, which is YOUR way because you conceived of it.

Indifference is a powerful tool and is rarely wielded by the majority of people (that is what makes them the majority!).

[Shamou]

Originally Posted by dastrovia

That just seems a bit too simplistic for me. History has proven what happens when things get ignored. I would rather the trait just be eliminated so we do not have to worry about re occurrences. Striving to be the ultimate alpha in the modern age is far too dangerous considering the potential for negative forces to emerge. If something can not be held in check it would seem to further advance societies best interests to eliminate the trigger. Perhaps in concept it is ok to have alphas but it seems in practice there are too many negatives to ignore. Others may disagree but I prefer to rely on data from reality rather than concepts. For example Communism on paper was not all the bad a concept but when put into practice my view is that has been a abysmal failure.

Have you read, "Don Quixote" by Miguel de Cervantes...??? Fighting alphaism is like fighting those windmills... you can't win...

Alphaism has existed since the dawn of time... and will probably exist until the end of it...

It is not something that was introduced to man or animal... it is an inborn trait... (though it can be developed)

I prefer to rely on data from reality rather than concepts.

What data are you talking about...???

.

[Shamou]

Originally Posted by Uplift

Well Shamou, since you ask...(or perhaps bait the trap). Instead of blindly forcing our kids down the same path that the Mongols, Huns, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Britons etc took, to their, and the cultures they came in contact with demise, we could try encouraging and fostering childrens imaginations towards creating new, lasting ways of living. There are plenty of genious's around. Imagine if we had a totally different common goal, one where it isn't okay to force yourselves on others you consider inferior to solve things. One that values people differently. Earlier you stated that you dont equate Indigenous Peoples with the homeless. Where do you think they lived before they were brutally invaded and disposessed?
Look at what kids can do, if their imaginations are inspired. Even a simple skateboard becomes a source of wonder and miracles for them. I'm not saying it would be easy, or that I have the answer. But there will be other people out there that are perfect for and would love to create the solution, if they were given the inspiration and chance. Remember Bill Gates actually had to leave Harvard to take his part in linking the planet. It was beyond the institution or its teachers comprehension. Our kids need light at the end of the tunnel. Obviously something isn't working. Why champion and drum a style of thinking that has fostered and resulted in an endless succession of wars and death down their throats, and then bemoan the crime and shootings? Or wonder at Iksander's love of war and conflict?
I believe there was another shooting today.

The story of mankind... is the story of alphas... granted... we are not in a perfect place... but, we are slowly moving in the right direction...

The operative word is is "moving"... and when anything moves... someone of something has to lead... that's what alphas do...

We have two choices... alphaism or anarchy... I, for one, prefer alphaism...

.

[Shamou]

The best way to grow into alphaism…

The wheel has already been invented… and the fire discovered… no need to spend any time on those two items… same thing with alphaism… it already exist in a most evolved form… so, all that anyone who aspires to alphaism has to do to learn the tricks of the trade is to emulate… and to associate…

What you do is find someone who’s leadership you admire… find out everything you can about them… and emulate those leadership characteristics… plus, if you can visualize yourself as being one of the “big boys” it will certainly help…

Personally my models have been (among others) Donald Trump… Anthony Robbins… and Arnold Schwarzenegger…

.

[madgeylou]

uplift, i hear you and completely agree with what you are saying.

the idea is that uplift's view of "alpha-ism" (and what is with equating alpha-ism with "male spirit"? that's crap!) involves domination. it's man vs. nature, which is the major theme western societies have been acting out for the last few thousand years.

this dualism (man vs. nature, man being separate from nature, nature being something to be dominated) is largely ABSENT from aboriginal worldviews. for hundreds of thousands of years, human beings lived on this earth as every other animal does -- in harmony with it, in accordance with its laws.

since humans became "civilized" (which began with food surpluses and locking them up, according to daniel quinn), we have been "alpha"ing the crap out of it -- deciding which species live and which die; forcing our way of life on other humans or killing them if they would not accept it.

i believe what uplift is saying (and please correct me if i'm wrong) is that obviously this thought-mode of domination over nature and each other has not stood us in good stead. i mean, we are in a huge environmental crisis right now.

maybe the disconnect on this thread is that some of us feel "alpha" is about domination, whereas others feel it is about having a vision, sharing that vision, and inspiring other people to help make it reality.

i like the latter type of person much, much better myself. and i think that is what true leadership is about -- figuring out the solution that will work best for everyone, then carrying it out.

[Iksander]

I edit my post, I feel you very aptly described what I have been asserting, madgeylou.

"about having a vision, sharing that vision, and inspiring other people to help make it reality."

I still can see that as being dominant though... It depends on how you define the words we are using.

[madgeylou]

possibly off-topic, but i feel the need to say something anyway ...

i have to say, the tone of this thread? striking me as awfully sexist.

first page talks crap about leadership being a male trait.

third page talks about how much girls like it when you tell them what to do (but of course they wont admit it).

now we have another example of a man exerting his alpha-ness by deciding not to pick up his friend's girlfriend, but a different hottie instead.

where is the woman's agency in any of this?

are you guys all so young that you cannot see women as FULLY FORMED creatures with our own ideas and desires? are we really just there so you can assert how powerful you are by being able to pick us up?

i am getting pretty disturbed by this. i know that a lot of really young men hang out on these forums, but dang. i'd like to see a little more perspective and realization that women are ACTUAL PEOPLE! JUST LIKE YOU! not just trophies to be collected or challenges to be surmounted so you can level up in your personal development.

(men feeling as though they have to dominate women is the classic case of 'the lady doth protest too much.' scared of female power much?)

[madgeylou]

Originally Posted by Iksander

I edit my post, I feel you very aptly described what I have been asserting, madgeylou.

"about having a vision, sharing that vision, and inspiring other people to help make it reality."

I still can see that as being dominant though... It depends on how you define the words we are using.

what i'm describing is actually the opposite of dominance. it's inclusive, it's collaborative, it's symbiotic, like nature itself is.

someone has to be the "leader", sure, but the leader is no more important to the functioning of the team than the accountant is, or the sewage treatment worker for that matter. everyone has a critical role to play.

and, as the very cool quiz linked to earlier in this thread suggests, there are different kinds of leaders. some are visionaries, some are implementers -- really all roles need to be filled for a project to be successful.

good, effective leaders realize this. bad ones dominate.

from the american heritage dictionary:
"dom·i·na·tion
n.
Control or power over another or others.
The exercise of such control or power."

not what leadership is about, unless you favor totalitarianism.

[Iksander]

I actually very much look forward to the day when I find a woman that is intellectually and physically gratifying for me as a companion. I simply prefer more casual interactions at this time.

I also never engage in any interaction with a woman unless she is fully aware that I just want her for the sex - I do not like toying or teasing women emotionally.

Who ever said leader-ship was a male trait? I said it was a masculine trait that is present in BOTH women and men, and is used everyday by both women and men! In a post I specifically implied that both genders contain sub-genders within themselves, both masculine and feminine.

[Iksander]

I like that, collaboration. But, who brings the collaborative effort together?

[Erki]

I think the term "Alpha male" is way overused, main culprit being the PUA community. When I see the the term "alpha male" somewhere, my first reaction is that he's a PUA or player or something like this.

I like the term "being his own man" much better, but then again that doesn't imply leadership very much, it's more about independence, but if you're a leader then you're not really 100% independent, you depend on the people you are leading. Still, I don't think it's too far off either.

[madgeylou]

Originally Posted by Iksander

I actually very much look forward to the day when I find a woman that is intellectually and physically gratifying for me as a companion. I simply prefer more casual interactions at this time.

I also never engage in any interaction with a woman unless she is fully aware that I just want her for the sex - I do not like toying or teasing women emotionally.

Who ever said leader-ship was a male trait? I said it was a masculine trait that is present in BOTH women and men, and is used everyday by both women and men! In a post I specifically implied that both genders contain sub-genders within themselves, both masculine and feminine.

you missed the point.

the point is that women do not exist to be your companions or your "casual interaction" buddies. we are people with minds and thoughts and decisions and personal power of our own in this world, regardless of whether we engage with you.

you (and many others on this site) talk about us as though we are aliens, or possibly products you can either choose to take off the shelf, or not. as though we were a separate species. and we all know how well alpha males treat other species!!

why does leadership have to be a masculine trait? why do we have to give traits genders? if we were speaking spanish, i could understand but right now i dont.

[madgeylou]

Originally Posted by Iksander

I like that, collaboration. But, who brings the collaborative effort together?

the leader. that is precisely the leader's role.

but it is no more or less important than the roles filled by others. otherwise, there would be no collaborating, just dictation.

[Iksander]

Yes I do think of everyone and everything as a product on a shelf. You either want it or don't want it.

I never said women exist to be my companion or sex partner.

[EDIT]
That actually gave me an interesting thought, what if that 'person' really did just 'exist' in that moment for the reason you were desiring (assuming all actions and feelings were mutual)?
[/EDIT]

You do have a good point though as to the gender assignment of leadership. Since gender is something only we really conceive of - it can be anything you choose it to be.

I do however feel that there is an obvious distinction between a receptive state and an active state, don't you?

I too feel the world 'Alpha Male' is ambiguous and that is why I provided a number of alternative terms so I might be understood a little bit better.

[mattsonn]

Ugh, I don't feel that I'm getting enough attention on this thread, particularly not from Uplift. I think it's time for me to go alpha and stop visiting internet forums.

[madgeylou]

Originally Posted by Iksander

Yes I do think of everyone and everything as a product on a shelf. You either want it or don't want it.

I never said women exist to be my companion or sex partner.

the only references you have made to women in this thread are as things to be picked up, or not.

Originally Posted by Iksander

I do however feel that there is an obvious distinction between a receptive state and an active state, don't you?

yes i do. i feel assigning "active" to maleness and "receptive" to femaleness, though, is quite deceptive and unfair to both men and women.

it's also inaccurate -- anyone who has seen linda fiorentino in "the last seduction" can attest to that. she is definitely, hmmm, both very active and very female in the chain link fence sex scene.

[madgeylou]

Originally Posted by Erki

I think the term "Alpha male" is way overused, main culprit being the PUA community. When I see the the term "alpha male" somewhere, my first reaction is that he's a PUA or player or something like this.

I like the term "being his own man" much better, but then again that doesn't imply leadership very much, it's more about independence, but if you're a leader then you're not really 100% independent, you depend on the people you are leading. Still, I don't think it's too far off either.

hi erki.

i like someone "being his own man" or "being her own woman" better than the "alpha" designation too.

reason why is, when you start talking "alpha" it sounds like youre talking biology, like alpha dogs (which are readily observable in nature!) when you are really talking ideology and metaphysics.

a lot of harm has been done by mistaking ideology for biology! for instance, used to be women were thought too hysterical and emotional to own property or vote. hmmm, if i wasnt allowed to own property or vote, i'd be pretty hysterical too!

there's also the horrible statement that pops up every now and then about intelligence being linked to race. sure, if my race is the one defining what "intelligence" means, then i would expect my race to come out ahead in any measurement of it. but it doesnt mean it's biologically true.

someone "being his or her own person" is a much better way of getting the idea across that it's about decision making and ideology, not hard-wired biological imperative.

[dastrovia]

Originally Posted by madgeylou

hi erki.

i like someone "being his own man" or "being her own woman" better than the "alpha" designation too.

reason why is, when you start talking "alpha" it sounds like youre talking biology, like alpha dogs (which are readily observable in nature!) when you are really talking ideology and metaphysics.


someone "being his or her own person" is a much better way of getting the idea across that it's about decision making and ideology, not hard-wired biological imperative.

I think I agree with you. An alpha trait in animals is probably necessary and is built in as a protection for the species. However humans have the ability to reason. We do not need the dog eat dog mentality of leading the pack like animals do to survive. So I say get rid of it. It is also to a degree in humans though unfortunately but maybe over time we will evolve where we no longer have to deal with it.

[Uplift]

I just feel that if all of us, and the planet we live on are going to flourish, then we need some type of mindshift. Human...humane...is supposed to mean something special, a reflection of Spirit, where all is special, where there is no need to feel dominant, or inferior. Our thinking can be whatever we choose it to be. The present style, based on Darwinism, and individualism hasn't turned out right. Our true friends, or those we truly admire or respect, are those that we truly, totally trust. When we feel someone honestly has our interest at heart, equal to theirs, we trust them, and we are able to get along, woman, man, race, culture. Then we feel as valued as the next, we are the ultimate team. I wish I could express myself better, my point is that we are not chimps, termites, whatever, we are capable of something awesome, a planet we respect, full of people we respect, trust and love. I just don't see that that the alpha style of thinking has resulted in that. But then, neither has my expressing myself here. I have no doubt whatsoever that Shamou's deep intention is to inspire and help, nor that he successfully has inspired and helped plenty, most importantly, himself included, and don't have the slightest wish to undermine or devalue that, as it is something I truly respect. But whilst somehow trying not to be arrogant, I am adamant that we need to think carefully about our culturally based beliefs, and where and how they formed, as they have and are often intentionally, but also often unintentionally causing a lot of pain to a lot of people and cultures.
This website is awesome, a sea of information, but how time consuming is it if you aren't carefull! I have to go and do something!

[Shamou]

Originally Posted by madgeylou
it's man vs. nature, which is the major theme western societies have been acting out for the last few thousand years.

I do believe that you are mixing ecology with alphaism here…

This is the definition of alpha male or female… “In humans, the alpha male often refers to a man who is powerful or high on the social ladder, similar to hegemonic masculinity.” (from here)

If you can see a definition of alpha where it says that it man’s domination over nature… I would certainly like to see it…

.

[Uplift]

To sum up, any in depth, honest inquiry quickly reveals that the formation and foundation of our cultural beliefs, which is inclusive of our concept of alphaism, and our understanding, is based on fear, anger, retaliation and domination. The founders had the goal of dominating all before them, and were terrified of all they could not understand. Primative to the extreme. As in any form of self development, we need new foundations, new goals, to form new thought patterns, ultimately resulting in new actions and outcomes. Out comes mirroring trust, respect and love.

[madgeylou]

shamou,

man's dominance over other people translates into a need for dominance over nature. for 2000 years our culture has been based on men dominating other men, and men dominating nature, rather than people working together and with nature.

one of my beliefs is that in learning how to deal with each other in a collaborative way, humans learn how to deal with the planet in a collaborative way. dominance is not required or rewarded in this new paradigm, but ingenuity is.