19 Jan 2008, 3:32 pm
Ah ok, thank you for clearing that up. 
19 Jan 2008, 3:38 pm
19 Jan 2008, 3:41 pm
19 Jan 2008, 3:46 pm
19 Jan 2008, 4:12 pm
19 Jan 2008, 5:39 pm
19 Jan 2008, 6:21 pm
WurdBendur wrote:
0_equals_true wrote:
We aren't pack animals. We aren't even troupe/group animals anymore because we have a high degree of individuality and preference.
Oh, how you misunderstand humans. We've lost nothing since we first left the savannah. Have you ever noticed the phenomenon of mob mentality / herd behavior? That's what happens when humans form packs.
We generally organize ourselves in social groups smaller than 150 (Dunbar's number), even in incredibly dense arrangements and within the larger societal construct which is our civilization. These groups exist to feed our individual preferences, not in spite of them. And civilization is formed by links between these social groups because of shared members, not by a concentrated effort of all of humanity.
It's important to understand in situations like this that humans are just another kind of animal. We're not surprisingly different from other primates. "Individuality and prefenence" are things that apes have just the same. They have personalities, and the alphas are just the more assertive individuals who take charge. The same applies to humans.
But let's just say that the assumption that alphas will only pair with other alphas is WAY off. Strong personalities don't usually get along so well. They often need someone less assertive to get along with. Likewise, those who are not as assertive may need more assertive partners to provide direction.
Ah well my neocortex must be deformed then because there is no way I could support 150 interpersonal relationships.
On a serious note I don't think we are disagreeing because apart from those expelled from group or being a traveling male, etc other great apes tend to stay within their social group and define their territory accordingly. orangutans are more solitary than this, and the female travels to flanged males or and an unflanged male tries to force copulation.. Whereas with human our social groups overlap heavily out of necessity, which supports my assertion the alpha concept is much more of relative thing as I think you are suggesting. I agree the wars and divisions and so forth show that this is imperfect.
Yes I am aware of mob behavior, though in humans it isn't quite synonymous with the swarm/group behaviors of bees, locusts, ants, etc. With them it could be something as simple a single chemical signal that would create an automatic and synchronized reaction.
Note: I put 'could be' because in locusts swarming appears to be a response to overcrowding:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1455 ... stractplus
19 Jan 2008, 7:18 pm
0_equals_true wrote:
Ah well my neocortex must be deformed then because there is no way I could support 150 interpersonal relationships.
The theory does say that in practice the number will be far smaller unless the group is under great pressure for survival. It's a maximum number, after all, not an average.
0_equals_true wrote:
Yes I am aware of mob behavior, though in humans it isn't quite synonymous with the swarm/group behaviors of bees, locusts, ants, etc. With them it could be something as simple a single chemical signal that would create an automatic and synchronized reaction.
Who said anything about swarming? We're talking about herd behavior, which is a different thing.
techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,593
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
19 Jan 2008, 7:33 pm
19 Jan 2008, 8:12 pm
lonelyLady
Snowy Owl
Joined: 19 Sep 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 166
Location: behind a very old computer
19 Jan 2008, 10:33 pm
i_Am_andaJoy
Supporting Member
Joined: 27 Sep 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,268
Location: Ocala, FL
19 Jan 2008, 10:39 pm
19 Jan 2008, 11:20 pm
lonelyLady
Snowy Owl
Joined: 19 Sep 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 166
Location: behind a very old computer
19 Jan 2008, 11:51 pm
i_Am_andaJoy wrote:
lonelyLady wrote:
juliekitty wrote:
There are lots of submissive men looking for dominant women.
where???
why? you want one? i've got one you can have.
(look for a NT "nice-guy" who is always stuck being "just friends' with women, and there ya go.)
I have one--he isn't submissive though, just a nice guy who is "just friends" with me. I am madly in love with him, I've never wanted anyone as much as I want him. He doesn't care 2 cents for me though
19 Jan 2008, 11:59 pm
now see, from all the feminism I was raised in, the idea that there were 'alpha females' instead of a solidarity gynocracy was seen as sexist...
I'm not an expert, but I read a book in the past that seemed to intimate that groups of women work to achieve a consensus, rather than one woman browbeating the others into submission. There's a name for women like that, and the ones women use are even snarkier..
i_Am_andaJoy
Supporting Member
Joined: 27 Sep 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,268
Location: Ocala, FL
20 Jan 2008, 1:46 am
lonelyLady wrote:
I have one--he isn't submissive though, just a nice guy who is "just friends" with me. I am madly in love with him, I've never wanted anyone as much as I want him. He doesn't care 2 cents for me though
oh.
are you sure?
and is his apathy related to your "alpha-ness" or lack thereof?
