Initial attraction: Beta Male Body Language

Post Reply New Topic

By "in general", I meant that they practiced true altruism and didn't do good when it had a side benefit for them. Doing good is easy when it rewards you.

Eugenics. Yuck. They may be derived frm social darwinism, but they are not social darwinism. And re-read the last sentence of my previous paragraphto find what I think about the last sentence of your previous paragraph.

I haven't ascertained that one myself. If a parent gives their life for their son, I'll sometimes tell to myself "well, he'd rather die for them than live with the guilt he didn't do what he could" (I know the "must take care of own genes" explanation but... I'm not that cold ) but... there is people who would kill someone because it's fun, people who can give a lot while receiving little themselves, even though it makes them feel good and thus is not completely altruistic, and a lot in between. So if there is someone whose reward for helping others is the good feeling of doing something right, I'll settle for that. I just reached that conclusion btw, those last days have been really insightful

Actually it's not ... the most succesful strategy ever devised for the iterated prisoner's dilemma is Tit for Tat, which is (mostly) about cooperation with the other prisoners. If you betray a Tit for Tat player, you are guaranteed he'll betray you in return. But he's cooperative as long as you are. Facing a Tit for Tat player, your best outcome is always to cooperate.

Last edited by edgewaters on 25 Jun 2012, 9:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Yeah, I follow tit for tat myself by default, with people I know nothing of. But in a single iteration, without prior knowledge and without knowing there will be more iterations after, betraying is the best options. And tit for tat relies on infinite iterations, or not knowing which the last one will be, because otherwise betraying in the last one is always the best option too. And there are times so much is at stake, where a single iteration is more important than all the ones that will come, or even so important that a mistep means there will be no more iterations, that trusting the other player will do the right thing, blind trust, blind faith, is the only think keeping us from dejecting, in hopes the other one does likewise.

I discussed once with my girlfriend about the nature of love, and got stuck around this part. I'm sure she'll love to hear about the new conclusions I've reached. Right, wrong? Keep me sharp

Staring at a woman or looking at her isn't creepy necessarily. A lot of women get turned on a little bit if you look at them in the right way; staring for twenty seconds off on the side and not saying anything is different, though, and is usually considered creepy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_%28Ayn_Rand%29

This is a wound inflicted on the United States and it is now starting to go septic.

I hate to say it but you can learn a lot from this... I know I can...

Wolfheart > really? Its a movie bro. Those are actors. That is a complete ridiculous exaggeration of real life, and those are junior high students, not even in high school. That was a bad example.

This is getting really ridiculous. We need to stop with the alpha and beta nonsense already. This isn't helping anyone here.

Fact: talking about alpha and beta behavior means your not an alpha and will never be, if you really want to go there. I said it.

Look we are all born with different circumstances.

I was definitely born with an in-born temperament, 95% certain AS, I had a rough childhood, very few friends, terrible social anxiety in high school, love-shyness, and now horrible depression, loneliness, anxiety, manic thoughts, terrible insomnia, possible OCD and other health problems that can manifest when s**ts not right.

Its not impossible for me to be "the man", or to eventually become popular with the opposite sex, or to find my groove, but to be "alpha" in that sense as you and other guys think about it, NO. I will never be that, I was never meant to be that, and none of you will ever be that. I'm telling you what you vision as "alpha male" is a different person, and I guarantee nobody here is that.

With my set of problems, it is important to recognize them, and work with them to try to keep improving. I know I can be successful, I know I can be popular someday, I know I could be a rockstar if I found musicians to start a band. But I have to work with my problems, trying to become this "alpha" so I can get over my fear or rejection and finally have success is just delusional. Its garbage, and its the wrong way of thinking about it. IF it works for you or anyone else then do what works for you.

Yes don't walk up to and stare at a girl like that. Lol nobody do that.

If we're comparing movies, is this approach better?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LLo5tsAOi0[/youtube]

What about this one
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmGNT7x3zBI[/youtube]

omg that is so alpha! Just watch his technique as he saves her and then moves in for the kill

I dislike Social Darwinism too. It's not a scientific theory, just some allegory for ideal human behavior.

Darwin was an awesome scientist, and I doubt he would have enforced this ideology, especially now that we've discovered so much more about biology. Competition is an important piece in the puzzle of evolution, but co-operation is just as critical.

Just look at the fungus in lichen. I'm sure some would call it beta, but it still managed to adapt to lots of extreme environments--because of its symbiotic relationship with algae. And there are so many other examples. Our cells are one good example, considering the endosymbiotic theory that our mitochondria was once a separate organism from our general cells.

And who's to say who is alpha or beta in a symbiotic relationship? Are both members alpha? I don't really understand enough about these terms to think I know.

I could come up with tons of allegories for human behavior in symbiotic relationships found in nature, but I won't call them theories, nor will I slap Darwin's name on them to give them undue credit.

But I really do agree with the OP that body language is important in the initial attraction.

I'll make a, not so well thought out, analogy between male body language and female dress and makeup. It's really pathetic, so if you bear with me, I will try to understand your pain (in a non-personal way).

When I was a kid I really tried to rebel against gender roles. There were times when I wore no makeup, dressed in second hand men's (or just generally unusual) clothing, and refused to engage in flirting. I really had no interest in flirting, or understanding of it.

Personally, I've come to believe that most of us cannot fully escape our socialization, and even good, deep thinking people will have their attention peaked by superficial crap that has nothing to do with the actual value of a person.

I wrote about my supervisor in another thread--how I was surprised to notice how he seemed attractive, yet not my type, but still--and when I analyzed his body language I found that he did a lot of "dominant," and "confident" behavior. And he's not someone I would fall in love with--just someone who I deem "attractive." I'm almost certain that he practiced this body language too.

So my analogy is that male body language is like female dress (and also body language). It's superficial, and it really doesn't reflect who the person is at first, at least not in any definitive way, but it can peak someone's interest, regardless.

A woman who gets her attention peaked by a man who tends to use large body language isn't necessarily going to want or expect him to start trivial fights with other men, or to bring home giant dead animals for dinner.

While I think this whole "alpha/beta male" thing is mainly used by people as an excuse to either be a total jerk, to belittle others or as an excuse for not trying, there is a point to it: You don't get a second try at a first impression (well... sort of, there are ways, but they are difficult to execute).

Feeling good for doing good is one way to interpret it, but it's only 1 way this applies.

Consider these examples.

1) I bought 2 boxes of girl scout cookies. It cost $7, which is a token amount. I did some good, but it really didn't affect me any more than tossing 50 cents into a Salvation Army pot by one of their bell ringers. There is a reward for a trivial cost.
2) I donated more to a cause, but I get a tax deduction. It's even more powerful if the items I donate for a cash value have a decent market value, but are useless to me. I don't have to go through the effort to sell them and I get the write off.
3) I can donate to the NRA-ILA. Since they lobby for laws that affect me, it is still in my self interest and not because of some inherent altruism.
4) Many parents donate to schools and get a write off. They donate to the school their children attend. By doing this, the directly benefit from their donation since it improves their own children's education. It's killing 2 birds with 1 stone.
5) Sometimes it's securing a better spot in history. If Bill Gates donations lead to eradicating malaria, he will be known even after people have forgotten him for Microsoft and his riches and long after Microsoft has been lost to history.

The most altruistic example above is #1 and it's generally done because it doesn't affect the giver much.

Right but most situations in life are at least potentially iterated (if not outright iterated) and there's no way of knowing which the last iteration will be. Often the iterations are in ways you don't see coming.