A simple Wikipedia check should suffice.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_male_(slang)
"Beta male, or simply
beta, is a term for men perceived as weak and emasculated. The term has been frequently used in the
manosphere and was later adopted by
alt-right activists who question
feminist views on
gender roles, masculinity and manhood."
First off, Wikipedia isn't a valid source as it can be easily edited by anyone, and when it comes to political topics, it's often shown bias leaning toward one particular side of the spectrum.
Second off,
"Question feminist views on gender roles and masculinity and manhood."
I think that's a fairly valid point for people to argue/question, considering how ineffective feminism has been at addressing issues faced by men, despite its preaching about it being about "gender inequality issues" and not just female empowerment. Hell, I'd even go as far as to say modern feminism fails at addressing ACTUAL issues of inequality faced by women around the world, and veered its focus toward first world problems and entitlement issues. But that's a whole nother topic all onto itself, and not one I'm willing to delve into ITT.
The manosphere is not all bad, although I'd imagine the part that uses terminology such as "beta males" and "alpha males" tend towards the pick-up artistry and/or antifeminist part of the manosphere.
If your view of masculine behavior is that narrow, I'd argue you'd not have much experience interacting with other men in groups. It's part of male behavior to be rude, straight to the point, and even dig and tease people a bit when you're close with them. It's how we express familiarity with people. Yes, it's in masculine spirit to try and be masculine and competitive.
As for the 2nd part, the only problem with PUA is that it's mostly made to sell **** to people, so they'll never tell anyone the whole truth of things. They'll just bait them around with empty promises and half-truths, but the core values at the center it all stem from far outside PUA, and have to do more with self-actualization, which is something I'd certainly argue is NOT negative in the slightest.
Actually, you're wrong, people didn't start using those terms for humans until the mid 90s. Also, not to mention that alpha and beta males might not even exist in the animal world.
Wrong, term's been in use since the 1950s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_(ethology)#Controversy
"Researcher
L. David Mech, one of the primary creators of the Alpha male hypothesis for wolves, later found additional evidence that the concept of an Alpha male may have been an erroneous interpretation of incomplete data and formally disavowed this terminology in 1999. He explained that it was heavily based on the behavior of captive packs consisting of unrelated individuals, an error reflecting the once prevailing view that wild pack formation occurred in winter among independent gray wolves. Later research on wild gray wolves revealed that the pack is usually a family consisting of a breeding pair and its offspring of the previous 1–3 years.
[16]
Researcher
M.W. Foster investigated primates and found that the leaders were more likely to be those who did more for those around them instead of being determined by strength.
[17]
In humans, the concept of an alpha male was challenged as being largely nonexistent per an article by
Dean Burnett, who found that human leadership roles vary wildly based on the current social context, and traits attributed to an "Alpha" might be exhibited in one scenario, and traits attributed to a "Beta" might be exhibited in a different scenario by the same individual."
Yes, I saw the silly College Humor video too, the one where the guy used the ultimate strawman to try to convince others of his point.
We don't need to look at animals in order to analyze the term. We're speaking about humans, not animals, and the behavior between the two is very different, though the core tenets of it do see some overlap. Also, don't just cherrypick the parts of the Wikipedia article that suit your POV, lol, read the whole thing, it goes in depth into the research in regard to apes and other animals. But again, animal hierarchies differ drastically from that of humans. Idk why you'd try to use that side of the argument in order to try to disprove the existence of the term, when the term isn't referring to animals, when humans have seen this separation in hierarchy throughout ALL of history, and any man who's ever grown up has experienced this firsthand.
I've given my definition for what constitutes an alpha male already. Literally just look around you, and the type of men who attain success. Do you think UFC Fighters or professional athletes are beta males?
What was the argument used in that CH video? An alpha in one environment is a beta in a different one, and he placed his strawman in a table of nerds to get "bullied" by them? Lol. No, an alpha is an alpha wherever he goes, as its innate and natural. It ties to your testosterone levels which affect your sex drive, which is what PUSHES you to DO **** in life. It's literally that simple. Beta males are men with low drive. It's mostly genetic, but it can be influenced by external factors such as diet and exercise. Being out of shape and not doing exercise will kills your testosterone levels, and kill your drive, turning your into an unproductive, unmotivated sloth with no creativity. There's a reason why having a healthy exercise routine will ENERGIZE you despite it being something that expends energy. Because it boosts your testosterone levels.
I can think of a lot of unmasculine men who are very successful.
If your definition for masculinity is being "MACHO" then I'm sure you can find many examples with a narrow definition like that. But I deliberately went out of my way not to define it like that, because I'm well aware of that strawman. I define it by drive, and said that it comes in all shapes and sizes for a reason.
For example, I'd say Freddie Mercury was most definitely an Alpha male, despite the fact that the dude liked to rail other dudes.
Shouldn't women also be the very best they could be?
Lol, don't make this about women. They were never a part of this discussion. I never said they couldn't be, and yes, alpha females also exist. Women have every right to be the best they can be, and by all means, they should. But that was never a part of this discussion. I was attacking your offhand comment at what seemed a jab at masculine roles.
I see what you're trying to do. Stop it.
I don't get your obsession about being "masculine". A lot of men are effeminate these days and are still doing fine.
Because there is most definitely a trend in the mainstream these days with trying to emasculate men, and do away with masculine roles. Labeling masculinity as "toxic" and your comment certainly seemed in tune with that. That's what this entire tirade was about. It was a questioning, and attack at your comment, nothing else.
There is nothing wrong with the use of the terms "alpha and beta", there is nothing wrong with masculinity, and there is nothing wrong with men embracing their masculinity, and expressing themselves as MEN.
If men want to explore their effeminate sides, or try to be more feminine or emasculated, all the power to them. Everyone is free to do as they please, but the reverse is also true, and I very much stand with the notion that men should be ENCOURAGED to be masculine, and masculinity is something to be celebrated, rather than pushed aside.
Throwing out a term like "no, you shouldn't say that unless you're being ironic," because that's what the mainstream leftist consciousness is pushing these days, trying to make people push masculinity aside... yeah, I'm gonna call you out on that, because you're flat out wrong.
A few questions: Would you rank the following as alpha or beta (or something else): Oscar Wilde, Wolfgang Amadeuz Mozart, Albert Einstein, George Takei, David Bowie?
I generally wouldn't rank celebrities who had to suck a lot of **** to get famous (if the current Hollywood/Harvey Weinstein controversy is anything to go by) as alpha males. They didn't attain success through a lot of effort, they merely rubbed elbows with the right people who put them there.
As for everyone else, rank them yourself, I already gave my definition.
I should also note that there's nothing wrong with being a beta male. Not everyone can be an alpha male, just the same as not everyone can be a leader. Too many captains sink the ship, it's unsustainable. In my eyes however, there is indeed a problem with beta behavior though. And yes, there is most definitely a difference between an alpha/beta male, and alpha/beta behavior.
