How Can I Approach a Pretty Girl at My University Despite My Social Anxiety?

[Pythagorean]

Just curious...I might give me some insight on your opinions. Also...what's your rank? Are you more Alpha...mid-pack...or Omega?

*sigh*

I am a straight male, my wife is a bisexual female. We are swingers, we are entrenched in the polyamorous and kink communities. Needless to say, I have lots of hands on experience with human sexuality. Your labels are so idiosyncratic as to be useless to our subculture.

 

[psparky]

*sigh*

I am a straight male, my wife is a bisexual female. We are swingers, we are entrenched in the polyamorous and kink communities. Needless to say, I have lots of hands on experience with human sexuality. Your labels are so idiosyncratic as to be useless to our subculture.

Interesting. I am a one woman kind of guy. What suprises me is that you off all people should undstand the hierarchy.

I agree to disagree with you. Your idea of love is sleeping with the world. Not mine.

 

[Pythagorean]

Interesting. I am a one woman kind of guy. What suprises me is that you off all people should undstand the hierarchy.

I agree to disagree with you. Your idea of love is sleeping with the world. Not mine.

Have you considered the possibility that I find your understanding of the hierarchy limited and static, when in actuality it's much more dynamic and versatile than you give it credit for?

I have the advantage of having experienced more than one lifestyle and I've found that different subcultures have different customs and values. In my current subculture, intellect and open-mindedness are valued over dominance and material value (not to say dominance isn't valued, but it's merely a contributing factor).

"Sleeping with the world" is a pretty bad mischaracterization... but that is the crux of our people; most of society doesn't get it; meanwhile they are cheating on each other and keeping their sexual fantasies bottled up.

 

[mesa]

I am routinely surprised by some of the content I find on PF and the last few posts on this thread are certainly no exception. I applaud you Pythagorean for your candor and straight forward nature in order to help others understand a culture few of us get to see. You are a good Scientist.

 

[lisab]

I am routinely surprised by some of the content I find on PF and the last few posts on this thread are certainly no exception. I applaud you Pythagorean for your candor and straight forward nature in order to help others understand a culture few of us get to see. You are a good Scientist.

It surprises me, too. Especially on a science forum. Part of a being (or becoming) educated in science is learning to honestly (and sometimes painfully) question things "everyone knows to be true". It takes maturity to do that, though.

Pop-psych fads, such as the "alpha male", are great for making a few authors a lot of money. Live long enough and you'll see these fads come and go.

 

[Rick21383]

Pop-psych fads, such as the "alpha male", are great for making a few authors a lot of money. Live long enough and you'll see these fads come and go.

This doesn't make any sense. Are you claiming that there are not certain traits which most women find desirable? (i.e. confidence, charisma, etc.)

This isn't an opinion, it's a fact.

and possessing these traits is what we're calling "alphaness"... Which part exactly do you not agree with?

 

[nuuskur]

I find someone who is so damn attached to this whole alpha-beta-omega theory heavily injected with insecurities and self-awareness issues. What women find desirable is of no concern to me.

 

[Pythagorean]

This doesn't make any sense. Are you claiming that there are not certain traits which most women find desirable? (i.e. confidence, charisma, etc.)

Nobody's denying that, but this is a different claim from there being an alpha "controlling the room" - besides it's a bastardization of what alpha, beta, and omega mean in behavioral biology - the equivalent of an alpha in human social structures would be heads of household, community leaders (including criminal and gang leaders) - that would make just about every male in my social circle, including myself, an alpha male - when we go out together for fun, who's the alpha male now? Nobody's controlling resource distribution between us, decisions are made democratically, nobody's capitalizing on the females (because they're not possessions/resources in much of human society).

"Alpha males" are the members of a small group that control distribution of resources, which does often include female reproduction in their tribe/clan/gang. There are some human social structures that are similar (more traditional tribal social structures). Some species are matriarchal, like hyenas and bonobos, where it's an alpha female that controls resources. In human society at large, social structures are much more fluid and based on sociopolitical structures that change frequently. There's less emphasis on hard-wired biological traits (of course they still contribute, but not as strongly as in most other animals) and titles like alpha, beta, and omega fit only fleeting comparisons through loose associations. You won't find much scientific literature (if any) in human behavioral biology that uses those terms. And no, I've never witnessed a single male controlling a room - some people are more shy, some people are more confident, and obviously the confident people have more success because they actually try.

 

[Rick21383]

I find someone who is so damn attached to this whole alpha-beta-omega theory heavily injected with insecurities and self-awareness issues. What women find desirable is of no concern to me.

You seem to be missing the point too. People that are "so damn attached" to the whole "alpha-beta" thing do tend to be dorks that aren't going to be any better off just because they read "The Game" or watched some youtube clips of "pickup artists". I totally agree with that.

However, the people that claim this doesn't exist are clueless of how the real world works when it comes to interactions with members of the opposite sex.

Having no concern of what women find desirable is actually a good thing to have when dealing with females(in many cases). Not giving a S**t generally works to our advantage and causes girls to want you more.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Nobody's denying that, but this is a different claim from there being an alpha "controlling the room"...

So, what do you think an appropriate term would be for the kind of guy being misnamed as "alpha male"?

 

[Pythagorean]

So, what do you think an appropriate term would be for the kind of guy being misnamed as "alpha male"?

I don't know for certain what people are referring to - it seems like somebody who gets a lot of tail? It's easy to lower your standards to get a lot of tail, or you could exploit statistics to your advantage and trick females with canned behaviors. Or it could be a matter of sexually aggresive females and the male's personality traits are less important (they just have to be physically attractive to the female). I think there's a problem of degeneracy: the outcome (lots of tail) can be due to any number of biological, social, circumstantial, or novelty factors - to blame a person's bed count on their character alone appears to be a "fundamental attribution error", whereby character is overemphasized and circumstance is underemphasized.

 

[Pythagorean]

You seem to be missing the point too. People that are "so damn attached" to the whole "alpha-beta" thing do tend to be dorks that aren't going to be any better off just because they read "The Game" or watched some youtube clips of "pickup artists". I totally agree with that.

However, the people that claim this doesn't exist are clueless of how the real world works when it comes to interactions with members of the opposite sex.

Having no concern of what women find desirable is actually a good thing to have when dealing with females(in many cases). Not giving a S**t generally works to our advantage and causes girls to want you more.

This is extremely heterocentric and patriarchal view of human seuxality and severely limited to only particular subcultures - in my experience, it's typically ultraconservative subcultures (I was raised in both rural Alaska and rural Oregon where this mentality is typical). My current city is culturally diverse and my chief subculture is academia, so it's much more liberal and "alpha male" archetypes aren't significantly favored over artsy, sensitive, intellectual, or feminine males.

Anyway, my greatest issue with your world view is that alpha males pertain to fixed power structures - whereas human power structures are much more fluid and circumstantial.

 

[Rick21383]

This is extremely heterocentric and patriarchal view of human seuxality and severely limited to only particular subcultures - in my experience, it's typically ultraconservative subcultures (I was raised in both rural Alaska and rural Oregon where this mentality is typical). My current city is culturally diverse and my chief subculture is academia, so it's much more liberal and "alpha male" archetypes aren't significantly favored over artsy, sensitive, intellectual, or feminine males.

Anyway, my greatest issue with your world view is that alpha males pertain to fixed power structures - whereas human power structures are much more fluid and circumstantial.

What are you rambling about? Your opinion of this behavior is irrelevant. How a cultural anthropology book defines an "alpha male" is also irrelevant.

Just because you don't like or agree with something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It is a FACT that males who possesses certain traits are more successful at attracting women, as well as grabbing the attention of strangers (male or female) than those who lack these traits.

"Alpha" is now used to describe this in our society.

You said yourself "I don't know for certain what people are referring to" so why are you even trying to argue any of this? If you don't know what we're referring to (in this context) when using the term "alpha" then it's pointless for you to say any more on the topic.

 

[Pythagorean]

It's a blatant abuse of the already defined terms with a loose association to the original terms; it's no different than a popsci author writing a book about "quantum spirituality" - alpha, beta, and omega are established terms that draw on loose associations - like poetry, it allows people to mold their own network of definitions to their established world view. It has no unified and established terminology in literature. Different pop culture authors describe it differently depending on what they're trying to sell you and laymen on human sexuality all have personal definitions based on their pop culture exposure.

It's the oldest pop sci trick in the book, really... it's called pseudoscience for a reason - because it attempts to emulate science by trying to look like it in order to establish authority when it has none.

 

[Rick21383]

It's a blatant abuse of the already defined terms with a loose association to the original terms; it's no different than a popsci author writing a book about "quantum spirituality" - alpha, beta, and omega are established terms that draw on loose associations - like poetry, it allows people to mold their own network of definitions to their established world view. It has no unified and established terminology in literature. Different pop culture authors describe it differently depending on what they're trying to sell you and laymen on human sexuality all have personal definitions based on their pop culture exposure.

It's the oldest pop sci trick in the book, really... it's called pseudoscience for a reason - because it attempts to emulate science by trying to look like it in order to establish authority when it has none.

Again you're rambling, and failing to make a single point.

I said:

1.) males who possesses certain traits (such as confidence, charisma, etc.) are more successful at attracting women, as well as grabbing the attention of strangers (male or female), than those who lack these traits"

2.) the term "Alpha" is now used to describe this in our society

What do you not agree with? Like Lisa, you are trying to argue that something doesn't exist simply because you don't agree with the concept. And you're refusing to answer my simple question. Which of the 2 points listed above do you think is false?

 

[Pythagorean]

Again you're rambling, and failing to make a single point.

I said:

1.) males who possesses certain traits (such as confidence, charisma, etc.) are more successful at attracting women, as well as grabbing the attention of strangers (male or female), than those who lack these traits"

2.) the term "Alpha" is now used to describe this in our society

What do you not agree with? Like Lisa, you are trying to argue that something doesn't exist simply because you don't agree with the concept. And you're refusing to answer my simple question. Which of the 2 points listed above do you think is false?

You've backpedaled so that there's no disagreement anymore - except that that's not how "alpha" is described by pop sci authors. Instead, they sell you unrealistic fantasies like being the only male in the room "controlling the whole room" which was the tune you were playing earlier - this plays on the biological definition (where there is generally only one alpha) and puts dominance (i,e. "controlling" the room) as the determining factor.

So you've created now a third definition to just mean confident and charismatic in order to maintain your position that alphas are a meaningful human archetype.

 

[Pythagorean]

Also, Rick, please try to remember:

PF values civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience and diplomacy while debating

 

[Rick21383]

You've backpedaled so that there's no disagreement anymore - except that that's not how "alpha" is described by pop sci authors. Instead, they sell you unrealistic fantasies like being the only male in the room "controlling the whole room" which was the tune you were playing earlier - this plays on the biological definition (where there is generally only one alpha) and puts dominance (i,e. "controlling" the room) as the determining factor.

So you've created now a third definition to just mean confident and charismatic in order to maintain your position that alphas are a meaningful human archetype.

I'm not back peddling at all. I listed 2 traits that an alpha male would typically possess. Hence the "etc". I was trying to simplify it for you because you keep posting rambling screeds that aren't even relevant to what I'm saying.

People that are considered alpha do control the room. If you haven't seen this then you've just not been aware. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen... but you seem to be taking that way too literally. I'm not saying that if an alpha male walks into a room with a bunch of people, that everyone will stop talking and immediately stare at that person like in a bugs bunny cartoon.

 

[zoobyshoe]

People that are considered alpha do control the room.

I have my own idea of what it means to "control the room." What do you mean by it?

 

[lisab]

Again you're rambling, and failing to make a single point.

I said:

1.) males who possesses certain traits (such as confidence, charisma, etc.) are more successful at attracting women, as well as grabbing the attention of strangers (male or female), than those who lack these traits"

2.) the term "Alpha" is now used to describe this in our society

What do you not agree with? Like Lisa, you are trying to argue that something doesn't exist simply because you don't agree with the concept. And you're refusing to answer my simple question. Which of the 2 points listed above do you think is false?

You've given no proof about your claims. Just because a topic is a hot seller on Amazon does not pass muster here as proof that it is generally accepted as credible.

Do you know of any peer-reviewed literature that we can discuss that would bolster your beliefs? Because I think you're forming your opinions based on feelings, not facts.

 

[nuuskur]

I still can't take this recent argument too objectively since it is Absolutely INSISTED that this alpha figure is some godlike figure in our society. I can agree to an extent that there are people who DO steal the room ( cough* Bill Clinton *cough*). Labeling alpha and beta and omega and gamma and who knows what else is still like an inner cry if anything, an attempt at imitation, a severe insecurity.

All cruelty springs from weakness - Seneca :)
Labeling is cruel and unjust.

 

[zoobyshoe]

You've given no proof about your claims. Just because a topic is a hot seller on Amazon does not pass muster here as proof that it is generally accepted as credible.

Do you know of any peer-reviewed literature that we can discuss that would bolster your beliefs? Because I think you're forming your opinions based on feelings, not facts.

His claim #1 was backed up by the link posted by Pythagorean. The point that site makes is that it is not "dominance" that makes the most popular guy the most popular, it is his being "prestigious" :

The dominance route is paved with intimidation, threats, and coercion, and is fueled byhubristic pride. Hubristic pride is associated with arrogance, conceit, anti-social behaviors, unstable relationships, low levels of conscientiousness and high levels of disagreeableness, neuroticism, narcissism, and poor mental health outcomes. Hubristic pride, along with its associated feelings of superiority and arrogance, facilitates dominance by motivating behaviors such as aggression, hostility, and manipulation.

In contrast, prestige is paved with the emotional rush of accomplishment, confidence, and success, and is fueled by authentic pride. Authentic pride is associated with pro-social and achievement-oriented behaviors, agreeableness, conscientiousness, satisfying interpersonal relationships, and positive mental health. Critically, authentic pride is associated with genuine self-esteem (considering yourself a person of value, not considering yourself superior to others). Authentic pride, along with its associated feelings of confidence and accomplishment, facilitates behaviors that are associated with attaining prestige. People who are confident, agreeable, hard-working, energetic, kind, empathic, nondogmatic, and high in genuine self-esteem inspire others and cause others to want to emulate them.

http://www.artofmanliness.com/2014/07/07/the-myth-of-the-alpha-male/
His claim #2, if not already true, seems to be becoming true. The concept is becoming more widely known.

 

[psparky]

Glad I could spur such deep conversation.

Say you take 10 random women on a week long camping trip. Let them all interact over a weeks time in the woods. Eventually, the alpha female will make her presence known. Sometimes, she makes her presence known right away...lol.

Now say you take 10 random men on a week long camping trip. Same thing...eventually the alpha male will show up.

Now that the rankings have been established...Alpha, beta, omega and everything inbetween.

Now, let's put the 10 men and 10 women together in an additional week long camping trip. Let's assume everyone is single.

The alpha will go for the alpha, the beta will go for the beta, omega...omega...etc. And of course there would be small variations, but for the most part it will be true.

Same is identical in any Lion Pride, pack of wolves, etc...

 

[Pythagorean]

Glad I could spur such deep conversation.

Say you take 10 random women on a week long camping trip. Let them all interact over a weeks time in the woods. Eventually, the alpha female will make her presence known. Sometimes, she makes her presence known right away...lol.

Now say you take 10 random men on a week long camping trip. Same thing...eventually the alpha male will show up.

Now that the rankings have been established...Alpha, beta, omega and everything inbetween.

Now, let's put the 10 men and 10 women together in an additional week long camping trip. Let's assume everyone is single.

The alpha will go for the alpha, the beta will go for the beta, omega...omega...etc. And of course there would be small variations, but for the most part it will be true.

Same is identical in any Lion Pride, pack of wolves, etc...

In the wolf and lion packs, the alleged alpha gets all the females and sires most of the children. But did you know alpha wolf theory was debunked? It turns out alpha behavior only emerges in captivity.

In the wild, wolves pack into families: a father, a mother, and their children.

http://www.whole-dog-journal.com/issues/14_12/features/Alpha-Dogs_20416-1.html

So this pseudoscience of alpha males for humans is based on bad science for wolves. Also, you told us a story about camping, you didn't provide evidence.

 

[Pythagorean]

And if there was any question that alpha theory for humans wasn't based off of wolves, just look at the pua community:

http://www.pualingo.com/alpha-male-alpha/

You can see the pseudoscience seeping out pretty clearly there and you can see that the "social dominance" trait is an important factor to pua theorists - which we've shown in the literature not to have as big of an impact as prestige.

Also, for convenience - here's a list of common characteristics of pseudoscience. How many can you find in this thread?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Pseudoscience#Characteristics_of_pseudoscience

 

[psparky]

Again, I totally respect your opinion. I'm just going by what I've seen in my brief 45 years on this planet.

That camping scenario I gave would be a fascinating study for someone. Just do it with 18 year olds fresh out of high school. Although the same thing would happen with 40 year olds as well. Come to think of it, 80 years of age would be same thing.

Just my opinion. Either you agree, or you don't. Its ok either way.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Glad I could spur such deep conversation.

I think your point with this remark is to redefine your berserker posts in this thread as "controlling the room."

"Berserker" is an exaggeration, but it's pretty easy to get people's feather's ruffled by not listening and reacting to what they actually say, continuing to assert your stance dogmatically, as Pythagorean pointed out. You jumped into the thread spewing advice without even realizing the OP had already "gotten the girl," meaning you hadn't even read the thread past the OP, and you didn't seem to have read the article he linked to based on studies that debunk the idea women are attracted to mere 'dominance'.

You said, finally:

Just my opinion. Either you agree, or you don't. Its ok either way.

But as Lisab pointed out, when your bluff is called here, on this forum, you have to provide scientific back-up to your claims and/or opinions. Don't suggest we perform a study, you scower the internet and find the study that supports your assertion.

 

[psparky]

I think your point with this remark is to redefine your berserker posts in this thread as "controlling the room."

"Berserker" is an exaggeration, but it's pretty easy to get people's feather's ruffled by not listening and reacting to what they actually say, continuing to assert your stance dogmatically, as Pythagorean pointed out. You jumped into the thread spewing advice without even realizing the OP had already "gotten the girl," meaning you hadn't even read the thread past the OP, and you didn't seem to have read the article he linked to based on studies that debunk the idea women are attracted to mere 'dominance'.

You said, finally:


But as Lisab pointed out, when your bluff is called here, on this forum, you have to provide scientific back-up to your claims and/or opinions. Don't suggest we perform a study, you scower the internet and find the study that supports your assertion.

Ahhhh...so everything about women is scientific fact...and if I really want to find the truth about something I need to look on the internet.

Gotcha. Thanks for the amazing advice.

And if you read re-read carefully, Lisa B mentioned that to Rick B...
Rick B and myself totally agree. I'm ok with that.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

This doesn't make any sense. Are you claiming that there are not certain traits which most women find desirable? (i.e. confidence, charisma, etc.)

This isn't an opinion, it's a fact.

and possessing these traits is what we're calling "alphaness"... Which part exactly do you not agree with?

Sure, but all alphas die at the altar.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The definition of alpha male seems to be in dispute. Zooby suggests that it refers only to dominance. But as mentioned, there are concepts like confidence, decisiveness, leadership, success...

Then again, it is said that women want to sleep with alphas but marry betas.