There's no such thing as an alpha male

Eric Trump recently suggested that when his father, Donald Trump, bragged about grabbing women's genitals without consent, it was an example of " two alpha guys in a thing."
In addition to shedding some light on how Trump's son views his father and manhood, it's also interesting because "alpha males" aren't actually a thing.

As the writer Saladin Ahmed pointed out, the concept of "alpha male" wolves that assert dominance over their pack through aggression comes from a debunked model of lupine social groups.



David Mech introduced the idea of the alpha to describe behavior observed in captive animals. Alphas, he wrote in his 1970 book "The Wolf: Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species," win control of their packs in violent fights with other males.

But, as he outlined in a 1999 paper, he's since rejected that idea in light of research into the behavior of wolves in the wild.

In nature, Mech writes, wolves split off from their packs when they mature, and seek out opposite-sex companions with whom to form new packs. The male and female co-dominate the new pack for a much simpler, more peaceful reason: They're the parents of all the pups.

Mech writes on his website (with the lovely title Wolf News and Info) that his original book is "currently still in print, despite my numerous pleas to the publisher to stop publishing it."

Another Twitter user, Mike Westphal, pointed out another paper on the misuse of the phrase "alpha males" to describe breeding roosters.

In the 2003 book " Sexual Selections: What We Can and Can't Learn about Sex from Animals," the biologist Marlene Zuk points out that social groups of hens do have "pecking orders." That is, hierarchies among the females with dominance asserted through pecking.

But roosters are not part of those social groups, Zuk writes, and the idea that the top hen is somehow an "alpha male" bizarrely misgenders the dominant bird.

All of which is to say: Humans who enjoy the idea of "alpha males" might want to keep in mind that there isn't really any such thing. And to the extent the term has any meaning at all, it describes the behavior of captive, lonely creatures.


https://www.businessinsider.com/no-such-thing-alpha-male-2016-10?r=US&IR=T&fbcli...

mothra wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 7:06pm:


Poor horse-boy   

Quote:





you just destroyed horse boys world.

Horse and Hammer doth protest too much.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 8:29pm:
You are a beta pecca, you have as much ability to understand what constitutes an alpha male as a 2 dimensional flatlander has of understanding a 3 dimensional world.

rhino wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 8:30pm:



You mean the study on which the construct of the human alpha male was built?

Yes, even it's own researchers ran away from it, so flawed it was.

mothra wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 8:33pm:


I love it when rhino gets owned in just a single post.

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 8:26pm:



that might have something to do with the fact that women and boys didn't go into battle. 

John Smith wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 8:38pm:


Plenty of women went into battle. The Viking Shield-Maidens for example.

And more than a token amount of them led.

John Smith wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 8:41pm:



Is the village to be blamed for it's idiot?

The ALPHA FEMALE is somebody you would never want to have a relationship with ...

rhino wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 8:44pm:



Poor Rhino. Have a bit of a read and get back to me, yeah?

rhino wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 8:45pm:



no, he really didn't. I'm not surprised you fail to see what's in front of you though.

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 8:50pm:


Not very few at all. There have been numerous egalitarian cultures over our history.

Just because it's new to you, doesn't mean other people haven't thought of it before.

mothra wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 8:52pm:

BS.

flip

Setanta wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 9:21pm:



you should take care not to shoot your load before you've even got your pants off. She corrected me.

mothra wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 8:39pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 8:50pm:
Thats you 2 owned in this thread alone, Lol, Im not even trying.

John Smith wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 9:59pm:




That would be you lot, especially Gregg.

Setanta wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 10:00pm:



I guess coming second is normal for you

rhino wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 10:02pm:



of course rhino ... that's why you claimed you owned me. 

John Smith wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 10:02pm:


Don't set your sights so low, I'm also beaten by the rest of your lot when it comes to marking one's own homework.

John Smith wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 10:05pm:
Without trying, you missed that part. 4 times.

rhino wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 10:09pm:


There were certainly woman warriors and leaders, there's no doubt about that. On the other hand as I have pointed out to Mothra they were not the norm, a small minority. Barely a hand count as leaders go, they must have been quite exceptional people.

Setanta wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 10:15pm:
There is considerable debate over whether or not the Viking shield maidens even existed, there is little historical evidence for it apart from mythology.

John Smith wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 10:19pm:

trying to gaslight me wont work Guido, I havent "continuously" told you Im not trying,. I told you once in response to your claim. The only one looking desperate here is you. .

John Smith wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 10:19pm:


Let me guess... Marking your own homework?

Setanta wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 10:35pm:


How is that marking my own homework? You don't even know what the term means do you? 

John Smith wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 10:42pm:


Laughy faces in every post don't make you clever or right. It's plain to see you are marking your own homework as well as gaslighting.

Setanta wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 10:48pm:



who said they did? In my world a laughing face means someone is laughing. Then again, I don't spend my time in a stupor so things might be different in your world.

Setanta wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 10:48pm:


again, you have no idea what the term means. 

Setanta wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 10:51pm:



A laughing face typically means someone is laughing.

Someone going to bed typically means someone is going to bed (although if they say so with a woman in tow it might mean something completely different..... but we'll save that for next weeks lesson).

Is there anything else you need explained to you choo choo?

People like Moth would like us to believe that we can all stand around holding hands and loving each other singing Kumbaya.

But that's just not how we evolved.

We evolved in small groups of about 100 for literally thousands of generations. Everyone we met in that group was Kin. They were brothers sisters cousins second cousins uncles and aunt's and so our default was to hold hands with them and sing Kumbaya because they all carried the same DNA as us.

You can't just scale that up to a city of million people and expect the same principles to apply they don't

We have ample evidence of tribalism and vicious behaviour going back just one or two generations. The behaviour of the Germans the Americans in the civil war the Russians the Chinese under Mao the Japanese in China the rwandans.
That's incredibly recent behaviour in evolutionary terms.

We are in no way ready to change a fundamental behaviour in the course of one or two generations. It is sheer lunacy to wish otherwise.

Also moth may wish to consider this.
I think she has the vision of the nurturing feminine.

Jane Goodall study chimps extensively. She noticed that chimp mothers past their babies around to other mothers.
Initially she thought that they were engaging in group nurturing.

But closer inspection revealed that the mother's would eye gouge and try to mutilate babies that we're not their own.

We are evolutionary creatures there is no denying it

We are constantly trying to climb the hierarchy.

Even the lovies from the left spend all their time on this forum trying to climb the hierarchy. It is inevitable. That's just what we are like. To deny the alphas and betas exist is just naive Bayes

aquascoot wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 6:46am:



Oh for the love of god shut the smack up.

What is with you people compulsively relegating any question of your insular little worlds to the ridiculous?

It's just about accepting all people have worth. Why is that so hard for you?

PZ547 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 7:41am:




Good lord!

PZ547 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 7:50am:


Nah. You're like, proper bonkers.

I'm sure Horse Boy is glad of the support though. I don;t think he;s discerning.

There's a lot of that going around.

Good post there P z.

There have been some very good anthropological studies of groups of people who were shipwrecked and the emergent qualities of leadership

It would appear that you are spot on with your analysis in terms of what happened

mothra wrote on Jul 1^st, 2019 at 7:05pm:


Complete and utter nonsense..........but what's new....

Not only is the Alpha male the result of total dominance, but guess what Mothball.......there's an Alpha Female as well.............training dogs is based on domination and reward, the trainer/handler establishing him/herself as the dominant (Alpha).........you know fuq all.....

mothra wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 8:29am:


I've trained working (police) dogs for 25 years.........you are the comedian Mothball..........incidentally.....it's now call positive and negative reinforcement......not the Alpha thing, however domination still plays a part.......

You're an idiot......

mothra wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 8:29am:


As if that response cements your case in your original post that's there's no such thing as an "Alpha" male.

The fact remains that there is ... changing it to dominant male or dominant female is just semantics ....

the use of Alpha or beta males & females is still used along with dominant.

The most successful wolves are not many small breeding pairs. They are larger packs.

A lot of the split aways don't survive ... some who lose their mate return to larger "packs".

The same applies to lions, hyenas, african wild dogs, Meerkats, chimps, gorillas, etc etc etc who are lead by either an alpha male or female.

PZ547 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 8:04am:



Yes   

Gordon wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 9:31am:



Oh? Effort in what?

Is giving 100% enough to make you an alpha ? Fuzzball has been at the same job for 25 years and thinks he's an alpha. Horse Boy and Peez do to. Grap's all over it.

Hands up around here who's not an alpha?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 9:35am:


Not a beta among them.

mothra wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 9:36am:


If someone has to continually tell people that they're an alpha male, they ain't no alpha male.

mothra wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 9:06am:


We are in a community of "delegators & doers" ...

some delegators are alphas others are bludging betas using doers to cover their arses.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 9:35am:


So it was just another baiting exercise?

Gnads wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 9:48am:


Here's a good exercise:

For sure the situation does matter.
If I was mustering in the northern territory with Aboriginal Stockman and lost my bearings I would defer to their Alpha status they are more confident in that situation then myself.

But if I take on some employee in my business they must defer to me.

If you want to be Alpha you have to work on your competencies. You have to be a full before you can be a master. You have to go out into the world and have adventures. You have to fail a bunch of times. You have to learn from your mistakes and master the situation. You have to push through barriers. Do you have to learn never to complain. You basically need to put behind you all those little bitch behaviours.

Modern society does not encourage you to do this at all. It encourages you to remain mediocre. Hence my Maxim

Garbage is the norm.
Failure is the default.

The alpha accepts this totally.
He never wants a dollar he didn't earn.
And he certainly does not want a ribbon at school for coming last

rhino wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 11:59am:



Oh Rhino. I know how important these small victories are to you but do you think i might have decided it before?

And my arse, despite your best attempts, remains all mine.

mothra wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 12:01pm:
quite honestly, Im bored with demolishing your arguements in one post. Try harder.

rhino wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 12:03pm:



I swear, i don;t know who between you and Grappler most deserve the Dunning Kruger award.

It's such a toss up.

How about you two fight for it?

Australia

Sport: Females = Alpha, Males = Beta
Politics: Females = Beta, Males = Alpha
Art: Females = Beta, Males = Alpha

...and so on in other Industries of Australia.

Sport is the glaringly obvious one.
The females are more professional and can even conduct themselves in high-impact sports with 'minimal violent behaviour'.
It's the Females in Sport that are giving Australia a good reputation Internationally and with far better results for winning. Aussie males on the other hand: scandals, cheating, violence, corruption, chokers, losers, whingers, cry-babies, grubs, etc.

South America is much like Australia (unlike Oceania & Africa) in the 'South'. The males are not good Sport's role models, but the Samerican Women are.


You see - there is a 'Pattern' of Alpha/Beta for all things around the world.

Politics in Africa has shown to be corrupt and BETA via the Males (black or white) - but the Females are bringing it back into better light.

What works in one region, doesn't make it work in another. 

aquascoot wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2019 at 3:11pm:



You're right, all day

Hawke was alpha.  Keating tried to be

since then, they've given us dough-boys, one after another.  Fits their relentlessly unfolding agenda

no one has their eyes on Shorten, nor, sad for him, on Albo

no one regards Morrison as a leader and nor was Turnbull.  And for all his worship of men in  uniform, nor was Abbott when he finally got the chance

beta men, circling the drain