Board index › Coping in life › Love and Dating

Beta males - why do woman dislike them?

Page 7 of 20 [ 314 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 20  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

jkrane
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 737
Location: 39uqlksdj3ujadlskd

18 Aug 2015, 10:08 am

Homer_Bob wrote:
Like others have said, Betas are becoming the new normal and make up the biggest percentage of men. The difference is Betas are the average Joe's that are like sheep who follow orders. The Alphas are the select few with above average traits who usually lead. It's the Omegas now that are seen as the freaks and undesirables by women, not the Betas. Omegas are like Alphas as being a select few but the difference is they are the select few nobody wants and the ones who refuse to conform to normal society. Do a lot of people with Aspergers fit this trait? Probably yes.


lol, I love that picture of Ron Swanson in your avatar. That man is alpha as f**k.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

18 Aug 2015, 11:13 am

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Catlover5 wrote:
It's important to remember that every female is different. Everyone has their own "type". Yes, there are some women who just want a stinking rich sugar daddy or a wall-to-wall-muscles-washboard-abs hunk but those kinds of women are not good to be in relationships with because they don't love you as a person, they just want you for your "good bits". There are women who do like "beta males", but there's much more to loving someone than that, it's just another stupid "stereotype". No matter what, both people in a relationship should love the other person for who they are. If not, they shouldn't even bother with each other.


No, that's nonsense...all us females are exactly the same regardless of neurotype and have the exact same taste in guys, want the exact same things and there is no variation among it period. lol, joking but it would seem some people believe that.


According to my tinder experiments, women within the same culture are clones :P.

The variation is extremely little.


So based on experiments you did on 'a' website...you have deemed all women regardless of neurotype in a given society/culture are all clones of each other. Somehow I'd think it would than follow that all men are the same, but I imagine you feel every male is a unique special flower up against hoards of female clones who all act exactly the same apaprently. lol...


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

18 Aug 2015, 11:20 am

314pe wrote:
CommanderKeen wrote:
A lot of girls that complain that guys expect too much and shouldn't expect sex, are the same ones that will lead a guy on. If you have no interest in a guy, there is no reason you should let him buy you dinner, or spend money on you.

I agree. If I'm not interested in a girl, I would never accept an invite from her for a romantic date. Paying isn't a good indicator for me because I prefer liberal people.


Yes however not interested, and would prefer to get to know the guy before having sex....aren't the same thing, like some people seem to think.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

18 Aug 2015, 11:40 am

Kiriae wrote:
It doesn't mention Beta anywhere, it only compares Alpha and Omega.

Beta is a friend of Alpha. He is second in command, if Alpha doesn't want/can do something Beta gets it. Beta position is not a bad one at all. Just one step away from the leading position and he can even influence Alpha. Women who can't get Alpha go for Beta.

Omega is the bottom of hierarchy, everyone is over him and he is considered nothing by most of society. Forever bullied. No woman wants Omega even if Alpha and Beta are unavailable.


What about other 'omega' females? Or do those not exist?


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

18 Aug 2015, 12:06 pm

314pe wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
No, that's nonsense...all us females are exactly the same regardless of neurotype and have the exact same taste in guys, want the exact same things and there is no variation among it period. lol, joking but it would seem some people believe that.

It would be helpful if you provided some examples in what way are your preferences different. Are you specifically looking for someone shorter than you? Or maybe you'd like a boyfriend who makes less money?


I'd say the are different from a lot of what society over-all dictates common preferences are. I actually don't really go for the clean cut appearance I like a rougher appearance so there is that, if they look more like a viking than a business man that is a plus. As for shorter, well I would not reject a guy on being shorter than me...but beings how short I am chances of finding a guy even shorter are kinda slim basically I don't have a height preference. As for making less money, again not something I care about.

Basically I am more after someone I'd enjoy spending time with and doing activities together...and bond with to the point say we both ended up totally broke on the streets instead of telling each other 'f*** you for not having enough money' we'd try and get through that together, share whatever money/resources we can get with each other. I mean I'd rather be on the streets with someone I care about who cares about me, than in a big fancy house with a better off guy who I don't really have much in common with at all.

I cannot describe an exact perfect look, or exact personality I'd go for...that varies, so the above is the best description I can give at the moment.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,278
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

18 Aug 2015, 12:18 pm

trayder wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
trayder wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
sly279 wrote:
whats an omega?

in things like wolves, it is the bottom-ranking pack member, the first to be ejected from the pack in lean times, and the prototypical "lone wolf." many aspie males are quasi-omegas.


Instinct driven species run on base coding, their BIOS so to speak. Consciousness or self aware species run on additional software coded for time, space, cause and effect and logic is thus contemplated by evolution in how they relate to one another. Humanity is a WIP.

can you please couch that in more lay terms?


Animals do not know why they act. They act to advance the survival of their genetic coding and understandably, the male of the species fittest enough to impose his coding on the rest, wins. Humans however can contemplate cause and effect and are aware of their actions and their consequences. In other words, nature his overwritten our base instinct coding with coding that overrides it in the world of self awareness.

Therefore, it is not quite correct to compare our social relations as a conscious species with that of our instinct driven brethren. In actuality, is is fairer to argue that the new man is neither alpha nor omega but pure logic.


So are you telling me when my cat comes and meows at me, jumps up on my desk, goes over to his water dish, keeps trying to drink from cups on my desk....You don't think it occurs to him this behavior might case me to get up and fill up his water dish? Or if he is by the door and looks at me and meows and looks back at the door you don't think he's consciously aware he's trying to get me to open the door? Now granted my cat is much more instinctual than people are but I question the idea that animals are soley driven by instinct....I mean obviously the cat has learned a consequence of meowing at the door when he wants out is me letting him out. Also I have seen when dogs try to deliberately disobey their owner when they know perfectly well they aren't supposed to do what they go try to do. Perhaps people have more awareness of actions and consequences and are more self aware....but I have seen too much from animals to the contrary of the idea they're solely driven by instinct to believe that about them. I mean my cat knows why hes acting when bothers me to fill up his dish...I am pretty sure.


_________________
Tis the time to melt the Ice.


314pe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Sep 2014
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,013

18 Aug 2015, 12:29 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
314pe wrote:
CommanderKeen wrote:
A lot of girls that complain that guys expect too much and shouldn't expect sex, are the same ones that will lead a guy on. If you have no interest in a guy, there is no reason you should let him buy you dinner, or spend money on you.

I agree. If I'm not interested in a girl, I would never accept an invite from her for a romantic date. Paying isn't a good indicator for me because I prefer liberal people.


Yes however not interested, and would prefer to get to know the guy before having sex....aren't the same thing, like some people seem to think.

I don't know. Maybe it's really important to have sex as soon as possible for NTs, but that has never been a problem for me. I just don't like when people give someone false hope. If you know you can't possibly ever like that person, don't accept the invitation.



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,664
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

18 Aug 2015, 2:35 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Catlover5 wrote:
It's important to remember that every female is different. Everyone has their own "type". Yes, there are some women who just want a stinking rich sugar daddy or a wall-to-wall-muscles-washboard-abs hunk but those kinds of women are not good to be in relationships with because they don't love you as a person, they just want you for your "good bits". There are women who do like "beta males", but there's much more to loving someone than that, it's just another stupid "stereotype". No matter what, both people in a relationship should love the other person for who they are. If not, they shouldn't even bother with each other.


No, that's nonsense...all us females are exactly the same regardless of neurotype and have the exact same taste in guys, want the exact same things and there is no variation among it period. lol, joking but it would seem some people believe that.


According to my tinder experiments, women within the same culture are clones :P.

The variation is extremely little.


So based on experiments you did on 'a' website...you have deemed all women regardless of neurotype in a given society/culture are all clones of each other. Somehow I'd think it would than follow that all men are the same, but I imagine you feel every male is a unique special flower up against hoards of female clones who all act exactly the same apaprently. lol...



You reply like all WP women.

Clone! :P



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,217
Location: the island of defective toy santas

18 Aug 2015, 3:24 pm

I would vastly prefer another omega.



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

18 Aug 2015, 4:32 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Kiriae wrote:
It doesn't mention Beta anywhere, it only compares Alpha and Omega.

Beta is a friend of Alpha. He is second in command, if Alpha doesn't want/can do something Beta gets it. Beta position is not a bad one at all. Just one step away from the leading position and he can even influence Alpha. Women who can't get Alpha go for Beta.

Omega is the bottom of hierarchy, everyone is over him and he is considered nothing by most of society. Forever bullied. No woman wants Omega even if Alpha and Beta are unavailable.


What about other 'omega' females? Or do those not exist?

if the classification system is real then likely yes, though I imagine they could get betas or even maybe a alpha still.



Peacesells
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Sep 2014
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,915
Location: Anzio, Italy

18 Aug 2015, 4:45 pm

Homer_Bob wrote:
Like others have said, Betas are becoming the new normal and make up the biggest percentage of men. The difference is Betas are the average Joe's that are like sheep who follow orders. The Alphas are the select few with above average traits who usually lead. It's the Omegas now that are seen as the freaks and undesirables by women, not the Betas. Omegas are like Alphas as being a select few but the difference is they are the select few nobody wants and the ones who refuse to conform to normal society. Do a lot of people with Aspergers fit this trait? Probably yes.

Didn't know this omega thing so I looked it up on Urban Dicitonary. From what I read it doesn't seem that at all, these omegas seem like cool guys who don't conform to society and are even more independent than alphas. It sounds very positive if you read there.
Also a lot of people with Aspergers seem to have normal lives and to not be "the ones nobody wants" or "the ones who refuse to conform to normal society". Perhaps the number is higher among NDs, though.



Peacesells
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Sep 2014
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,915
Location: Anzio, Italy

18 Aug 2015, 4:55 pm

It seems that losers don't even get a cool Greek letter to describe themselves.



trayder
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Age: 1950
Posts: 280
Location: New Zealand

18 Aug 2015, 6:13 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
trayder wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
trayder wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
sly279 wrote:
whats an omega?

in things like wolves, it is the bottom-ranking pack member, the first to be ejected from the pack in lean times, and the prototypical "lone wolf." many aspie males are quasi-omegas.


Instinct driven species run on base coding, their BIOS so to speak. Consciousness or self aware species run on additional software coded for time, space, cause and effect and logic is thus contemplated by evolution in how they relate to one another. Humanity is a WIP.

can you please couch that in more lay terms?


Animals do not know why they act. They act to advance the survival of their genetic coding and understandably, the male of the species fittest enough to impose his coding on the rest, wins. Humans however can contemplate cause and effect and are aware of their actions and their consequences. In other words, nature his overwritten our base instinct coding with coding that overrides it in the world of self awareness.

Therefore, it is not quite correct to compare our social relations as a conscious species with that of our instinct driven brethren. In actuality, is is fairer to argue that the new man is neither alpha nor omega but pure logic.


So are you telling me when my cat comes and meows at me, jumps up on my desk, goes over to his water dish, keeps trying to drink from cups on my desk....You don't think it occurs to him this behavior might case me to get up and fill up his water dish? Or if he is by the door and looks at me and meows and looks back at the door you don't think he's consciously aware he's trying to get me to open the door? Now granted my cat is much more instinctual than people are but I question the idea that animals are soley driven by instinct....I mean obviously the cat has learned a consequence of meowing at the door when he wants out is me letting him out. Also I have seen when dogs try to deliberately disobey their owner when they know perfectly well they aren't supposed to do what they go try to do. Perhaps people have more awareness of actions and consequences and are more self aware....but I have seen too much from animals to the contrary of the idea they're solely driven by instinct to believe that about them. I mean my cat knows why hes acting when bothers me to fill up his dish...I am pretty sure.



Instinctual states are not by definition inferior. They are one state of cognitive functioning. Consciousness is another. Consciousness is an evolutionary state with its own spectrum as it essentially takes a species out of the broader spectrum into its own self awareness order. But we know nothing about what each state constitutes to make value judgements.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,217
Location: the island of defective toy santas

18 Aug 2015, 6:52 pm

Peacesells wrote:
It seems that losers don't even get a cool Greek letter to describe themselves.

huh? :huh: then what is THIS? - Ω
embrace the Ωμέγα! :bounce: :star: :bounce:



Peacesells
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Sep 2014
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,915
Location: Anzio, Italy

18 Aug 2015, 6:55 pm

auntblabby wrote:
Peacesells wrote:
It seems that losers don't even get a cool Greek letter to describe themselves.

huh? :huh: then what is THIS? - Ω
embrace the Ωμέγα! :bounce: :star: :bounce:

It's that I looked omega male in Urban Dictionary and the expression doesn't seem to be about losers at all. Hence my comment about losers not getting a cool Greek letter to describe themselves. :D



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,217
Location: the island of defective toy santas

18 Aug 2015, 7:10 pm

Peacesells wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Peacesells wrote:
It seems that losers don't even get a cool Greek letter to describe themselves.

huh? :huh: then what is THIS? - Ω
embrace the Ωμέγα! :bounce: :star: :bounce:

It's that I looked omega male in Urban Dictionary and the expression doesn't seem to be about losers at all. Hence my comment about losers not getting a cool Greek letter to describe themselves. :D

if you study how omegas function in things like wolf packs, the metaphoric link becomes clearer.