What PUAs get wrong about ‘alpha wolves’



Alpha means being a Patriarch – married, traditional, monogamous, loyal, fertile.

They’re trying desperately to signal K-selected traits with an r-sexuality.
That’s why it fails. No, you fail, you’re inferior socially, found wanting.
It’s easier to signal being a good father and run (cowards) than to actually become a man.
There is also the matter that Alpha is an animal aristocracy, not only are you born into it but high fitness isn’t limited to males, there are Alpha females obviously because the Alphas of the pack are K-selected aka the Alpha Male only lies with his female. This isn’t a lion/pride arrangement and in prides, the lionesses hunt (work).
Protean displays as mixed messages?
Protean displays are done by defensive cowards when faced with a predator…. actually yeah, PUA < most women.

‘But it’s the alpha/beta hierarchy that’s really having a renaissance online. And its current use completely ignores the science behind it. So I went to a wolf park to study their “on the prowl” behavior.
“[Alpha is] a term that was coined in biology, just the first Greek letter in the Greek alphabet, just a convenience thing,” says Monty Sloan, senior animal curator and staff photographer at Wolf Park. “And it’s been kind of undermined by public perception of what that might mean.” First of all, wolf packs have two alphas: a male and a female. “There’s always two alphas in a pack. That’s what defines a pack. The pack might be two wolves, but socially, they are dominant. They are alphas. If more wolves enter the pack, they’ll submit to those two. And what you’ll see is a linear hierarchy develop.”‘

Like a ….class system?

Alpha is a power couple.

If you’re not married to an alpha while being one yourself, you’re not Alpha with a capital ‘A’, at most potential.

I’ve been trying to correct them on the ethology for years.

‘These two alphas are usually a breeding pair, and in wolves found in the Midwest, wolf packs are usually a nuclear family. This is why some wolf researchers have abandoned the term alpha altogether, like David Mech, whose book The Wolf popularized the idea of an alpha wolf in the 1970s. “[T]hey are merely breeders, or parents, and that’s all we call them today,” he writes on his academic website. Rather than one alpha male having some harem of lady-wolves at his beck and call because he’s so strong and butch, the alpha male is daddy.
You don’t fight to get to the alpha position, you usually inherit it. You’re usually in the right place at the right time,” says Sloan. “All you have to do is have offspring, and the offspring are going to grow up submitting to their parents. That’s all it takes.”‘

Genetic superiority, proven by wits.

Genetic suicides or deadbeats can NEVER, EVER BE ALPHA.

I’ve mentioned the Darwin of why on here, it’s the Parental Investment theory.

Do they listen? No. That would involve real self-improvement and the sunk cost fallacy of bullshit e-books has wormed into their brain. Love is not a game unless you’re crazy. Taylor Swift crazy.

‘According to To Be An Alpha, a website dedicated to helping men become the alphas of their pack, alpha males that take control are “vocal and loud” and “aren’t afraid to get physical.”‘

Obnoxious and boyishly immature? Entitled?
They’re trying to rebrand a gobby chav teen as the epitome of masculinity?

‘Dominant breeding wolves aren’t afraid to get physical, but they don’t start fights either. “You don’t typically see a dominant wolf going around, parading around acting tough and aggressively confronting the other wolves,” says Sloan. “When you do see that, it’s usually a sign of a lack of confidence. Ironically, the animal is not very confident if it’s doing that, and it’s not comfortable at all.”‘

Freud. Signalling masculinity, like talking about it, means you aren’t. You’re lying and hoping people won’t forget you exist. That’s narcissistic, that’s solipsistic (wait, no, just egocentric and selfish). The abuse of ‘solipsism’, which funny at first as intellectual posturing, now grates.

Any man who must say I am King, isn’t a King?

If you insist on picking a sex that leads the Alpha debate, it’s female.

Another major misconception is that alpha males are dominant over alpha females. “The dominance between the sexes is not that important to them,” says Sloan.
The wolves I visited at Wolf Park were a group of siblings: Kanti, Bicho, and Fiona. Kanti is the alpha male, Fiona is the alpha female. She is also dominant over Kanti. “If there is an altercation between the female and Kanti, Kanti is on his back submitting,” says Sloan. “Even though she is much smaller than him, she is the dominant wolf in the pack.” This is typical of the packs in Wolf Park.’

tfw literal animals are more socially intelligent than you, Roosh V
It’s Bateman’s Principle, the mother makes babies and in K-terms, that’s all that matters. Eggs > Sperm
Women are more selective, women need to be protected but this is from other males, sexual competition.
How many men would die for their woman/children? How many of those are men?
Yet they claim they want a Patriarchy. Surrrre. Patriarchy isn’t male liberty, it’s male enslavement to women. At least, in Darwinian terms but at least the good men survive biologically. Women’s lib was liberation for the sexuality of men to fuck and run. Sexual Revolution was terrible for women, great for men. If you take away our vote and retain your own, all the legs will be shutting. And then other men will take yours, based on history.

“It turns out, not even peacocks truly peacock. We may think their visual display is pretty enchanting, but peahens aren’t always looking at the display. They’re listening. Peacocks vibrate their tail feathers in two distinct patterns; they twerk, essentially.”

shh, I enjoyed letting them make fools of themselves and it makes them easier to avoid
God Bless Ed Hardy for that.

Peacocking is actually about male attractiveness, genetic beauty i.e. the gym does nothing, lookism is real.

The illusion of Alpha and the Socio- in Sociosexual Hierarchy


PUAs HAVE to move on after a certain time with a woman. The lies come out about needing to move onto other women from novelty or the bare-faced lie of leaving a woman better than he found her (while admitting that promiscuity is self-mutilation, for women only to them).


And why do they obsess about AMOG? (Getting bitchy with a man like responding in kind to shit-tests with a woman, which is also bitchy gay behaviour, but they seriously think giving it a different name will make it appear less feminine).

In a State of Nature, you don’t AMOG. You get into a fight. You probably die if you do this repeatedly. Most of these guys wouldn’t dare AMOG someone who looks like they could take them out. Herein lies proof of their cowardice.

Their sexual power is up for debate, since the Wife Material women (women, not immature girls) run a mile at the slightest whiff of their tricks.
Their social power is non-existent. Some would argue actively repellent. 

Think about it – what is the motive, for investing emotional and social time in somebody who either wants to use you physically without remorse (like a free hooker and all the insult that implies), or use your friends and yourself as if you’re objects to get to the women they want to use up and discard?

The 21st century allows a nomadic culture for these bastards. In any other time, they’d be murdered. Nowadays, shunned. THIS is why they must continue travelling. Like Gypsies, because we know how peaceable and well-received they are wherever they go.

No motive at all to accommodate them. Urban areas don’t allow for as much social proof requirements before social mingling but they correct too. Considering the overt grandstanding you can see from the other side of the room (I don’t mean peacocking, I mean their invasive body language and intrusive rude mannerisms or lines), is it any wonder they’re avoided?

And think of the excuse they give for being isolated (typical narcissists). If it’s a woman, she suddenly becomes an ugly bitch. If it’s a man, he’s a jealous beta. .…Riiiiight….

arrogant smug uhuh aww yes yeah mhmm sexy bamf hugh jackman

….I bet he doesn’t have chlamydia though. The really nasty kind that’s untreatable.
HPV, maybe? A ripe Africanized versions that’ll practically definitely give you cancer at some point?

It’s a game to them. It’s a sad little game. As kids, I bet they were the type to rack up points, spending all their money on pointless games without proper skill, and actually thought reaching the leaderboard was an accomplishment, instead of something to be ashamed of. A gargantuan waste of time. Conservation of energy applies to life direction. If you waste your energy, it isn’t worth anything.

Based on observation and much discussion with other people from a range of backgrounds, even with club promoters (who see these people as easy marks and cash cows for pandering to their delusions)…..

This is the internal response everyone has to socialize with this type (and word gets around fast).

omg shut up stupid dumb idiots argh ahhhh hiddleston facepalm deep blue sea

They bitch at the men, smart enough neither to hit them (not worth it) and to score points with EVERYONE else by letting the loser wind down on weak ‘lines’ and think he’s won so he bloody LEAVES, the response you’d give to a CHILD. They puff out their chest, walking like a gorilla and rolling on their feet like a clown. We just wish they’d go away. The rest us can then continue to enjoy a quiet drink without fear of being drugged, dance at a party without getting sexually assaulted or socialize, like normal people, without an instrumental goal in mind like a penny-grade-psychopath. Talking, just talking pleasantly, without being verbally harassed for numbers. And they bitch about getting fakes? No wonder they refuse to believe a “No” is actually a “No” – it’s spergy.

Women aren’t ‘flaky’. They hate you. It’s called passive-aggression, you prick. It’s our version of a punch to the face. You can see our phones in our hands, right? It’s a choice.

Women aren’t slot machines. You don’t keep trying your luck on one thinking you’ll get a different result. That’s the definition of insanity. If a woman isn’t interested, she will say so. Move on. That’s it. It isn’t up for discussion, it isn’t a negotiation, there is no way to “win”.

Women don’t like being treated like horses either. Where you try to get one, it runs away, and you go through the whole lineup hoping for a response. You know what that looks like to everyone? Desperation. Like a woman going around begging to be loved, this is the male version, begging for free sex. Such a DLV. Continue to laugh at the fat girls who’ve done nothing to you, we’re laughing at you guys when you’ve left.

And they say women are narcissists! And they abuse the term solipsism, which to me is far worse.
A woman who isn’t interested in fucking a random loser isn’t self-involved – she’s smart. You could be a serial killer. One day, you might be. All serial killers report pent-up sexual frustration combined with narcissism and a tendency to use people for instrumental gain.

All normal healthy humans are programmed by evolution to be averse to this type.

There’s nothing wrong with them.

Blaming other people is the action of a child.

In short, the mature true Alpha responses are the mark of a K-type. ALL Alpha males are K-types. They do not need to “rack up points” to prove anything to other people or their ego – they get the best woman and keep her. PUAs and other extreme r-types are INCAPABLE of this. They’re as bad as the virgin MGTOWs who are truly misogynistic, try to hurt women out of sadism, and say women are the Devil and marriage is a deal with one. This is why they’ll end up lonely old men creeping on college girls, as pitiable as the militant feminists they mock. Men hit the Wall. After 40, less nubile women will care. After 50, cougars. After 60, have fun gaming the old folk’s home. Old “players” don’t have burnout, they ARE burned out. By women. The sex with sexual choice.

It’s a fate worse than feminism.

Ever-changing Alpha – is it an illusion?

Inspired by http://uncabob.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/the-lost-boys-of-manosphere.html

The animal examples do not cross-apply to humans, for many reasons, including technological society and free will. However, just because they aren’t perfect doesn’t mean they’re useless as a metaphors. The constantly changing opinions on what constitutes Alpha is likely a wish-fulfilling escapism. These men dream of a better world, one they deserve, and to lighten the pain of this mess, they imagine an Idealized Masculine, who can be distilled into one word: potency. 

Our society shames male power, the label of Alpha is a convenient newspeak way of signalling pride in their own sex and its abilities. For this reason, I do not see the concept of an Alpha as shameful, excepting those who, cowardly, use it as an excuse to justify behaviours, as a poor Christian to God, or a feminist to “social justice.” I believe that is the dark pit the manosphere could fall into, they may become so set in their ways e.g. denying men have a Wall or declining quality of fertility, in spite of science, or that sleeping around reducing bonding capability applies to female and male brains, that they are the polar opposite, albeit just as bad and insufferable as the feminists. An Alpha needs a woman like a fish needs a bicycle. 

There are social dominance hierarchies, and I see the Alpha-Omega listing as a rough attribution of particular behaviours along that line, so no man is Alpha, they’re chasing an impossible dream, and I believe they enjoy it that way.

It begs certain questions, which fall in line with a few feminist myths e.g. all men want the same thing, all men should follow the same path, the opposite/desired sex is always bad/this way, the use of emotions like shame to silence dissent, and a peculiar self-defensiveness which betrays the insecurities of the movement and its members.

In short, I think the concept of an Alpha (m/f) is a just one, in theory, but the term in practice has been corrupted by those who wish to soothe their guilty conscience and make idols of their poor impulse control. The mark of truth is the notable absence of prominent middle-aged Gamers and above. Players “age out” or burn out with drugs, alcohol, STDs, who knows what else. Games are for the young and anyone claiming to care about the wellbeing of men shouldn’t have a cutoff point in age. It is undeniably sad to see someone chasing their youth, m/f, and I hope the manosphere matures into a space where men can address the changing considerations brought about by aging, not least the loneliness and acute pain of no genuine, lasting human connection in one’s winter years. It is the feminists who denied male feeling. The manosphere should be the tactics and skillsets arming men to take personal control over their lives back, and how to manage the fruits of those powers. It shouldn’t be a blame-avoiding exercise, as feminism has become or an excuse to check out of any external responsibilities, where they exist. Being an adult confers certain expectations, and it is childish to throw tantrums at the downsides when you readily indulge in the upsides. The responsibilities are the price you pay and you know this, you know there is nothing for free (unlike the feminists). For this, I believe MGTOW are the future of the manosphere. Rather than blame women for being women, a futile exercise, they forgo women until they perceive a good deal, if ever. A healthier society would have been full of such prospects for these clear-minded men.

Fucking one hundred sluts who would have fucked someone anyway is not morally superior to raising one healthy son in this broken world who will care for you in old age. Do not lock yourself up in a closed option without knowing what you discard and certainly for something better than the lure of a sated ego (it is insatiable and begins to eat its host). Pretending you feel no pain, as a sociopath (or natural) will turn those damaging impulses inward.