Provider Male vs. Alpha??

[CAPSLOCK BANDIT]

I think there are a lot of women who have moments of weakness, then there are just plain weak women.

A woman isn't the source of our strength so it shouldn't be the focus behind wielding it but when it is, it always leads to ruin, then you jump every hurdle and theres still some orbiter trying to cack block you anyways.

A man simply cannot just pursue in this market today, you have to be able to pull and push, that's what an Alpha is, it's the silence behind the tough love, it isn't a negotiation, it is a reality, one we merely adopt for its benefits, but the position also comes with responsibility, to simply resist change.

An alpha knows when to resist, when resistance makes him look weak and strong, when she says "I have a boyfriend" and he says "What's that got to do with me?"

 

[Bokanovsky]

The alpha/beta thing is a false dichotomy. Really this just sounds like a mess. Yes the woman is triangulating and playing them.

This is why you wear a rubber and also why you keep your woman on her toes.

The words “alpha” and “beta” have basically become stand-ins for “winner” and “loser”.

 

[Bokanovsky]

They are not mutually exclusive.

An alpha should be a provider male. That is our biological imperative. There is nothing “beta” about protecting and providing for one’s biological offspring.

Stepchildren are a different story. We know what happens to bastard children of another male in the animal kingdom….

I think it depends on your definition of “providing”. If you mean providing a measure of safety by ensuring that she’s not raped or killed by fellow cavemen while trying to raise your offspring, I would agree. If you mean providing in a modern sense (i.e. providing her with a luxury lifestyle so that she doesn’t have to work and can spend her days on shopping sprees and spa visits) I would storing it disagree that it’s my biological imperative to enable her hedonistic lifestyle.

 

[zekko]

John is at least in good shape and not a pushover but he mainly gets laid from money and status rather than purely on looks.

I've never understood the knock on money and status, as opposed to looks. Money and status is something you earn. Looks are basically a genetic gift. Yeah, you can work out, but that alone does not make up "looks". You seem to be saying that getting laid on looks is better than getting laid on money and status. Why are you valuing something you less control over? John has at least accomplished something, as compared to a guy with looks, who is basically getting by on luck.

I might add that as you age, money and status will stay with you longer than looks.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

The problem isn't the fact he is a provider, the problem is he is boring.

Boring is what causes this to happen more than anything else.

 

[The Duke]

I wouldn't consider my friend John to be beta at all. He typically dates girls in the medical field. His job status is what carries the day for him.

I don't know the other guy. Yes the other guy does have kids with this woman.

 

[pipeman84]

I've never understood the knock on money and status, as opposed to looks. Money and status is something you earn. Looks are basically a genetic gift. Yeah, you can work out, but that alone does not make up "looks". You seem to be saying that getting laid on looks is better than getting laid on money and status. Why are you valuing something you less control over? John has at least accomplished something, as compared to a guy with looks, who is basically getting by on luck.

I might add that as you age, money and status will stay with you longer than looks.

Because true attraction, chemistry and eventually love are based on looks, your demeanour, how you carry yourself. The eyes alone say a lot, they're the window to the soul.

Having money and status is all well and good, but if the woman is primarily with you for those, then it's not a real relationship and she'll be probably gone if you lose them or if she finds a guy with more money/higher status.

 

[zekko]

Having money and status is all well and good, but if the woman is primarily with you for those, then it's not a real relationship and she'll be probably gone if you lose them or if she finds a guy with more money/higher status.

Don't agree with you. There's nothing higher than status when it comes to attracting women. That's why famous people can pull the hottest chicks. Women are about looks, men are about action, what they can accomplish. To rely on looks is to rely on the feminine.

 

[HaleyBaron]

I've never understood the knock on money and status, as opposed to looks. Money and status is something you earn. Looks are basically a genetic gift. Yeah, you can work out, but that alone does not make up "looks". You seem to be saying that getting laid on looks is better than getting laid on money and status. Why are you valuing something you less control over? John has at least accomplished something, as compared to a guy with looks, who is basically getting by on luck.

I might add that as you age, money and status will stay with you longer than looks.

As men, we should not be making excuses for things out of our control. Looks absolutely make a difference in getting laid. You are making the argument that because we cannot control it, we shouldn't value it as much. And yet, we have constant evidence that changing a man's fashion sense already elevates his sexual attraction to other women.

Someone who says looks doesn't matter comes from a position of defeat.

 

[pipeman84]

Don't agree with you. There's nothing higher than status when it comes to attracting women. That's why famous people can pull the hottest chicks. Women are about looks, men are about action, what they can accomplish. To rely on looks is to rely on the feminine.

Status and/or money attracts on a transactional level, in other words, the woman will be with you for the kind of life you offer her or the media exposure, whatever, even if she feels repulsed by you.

On the other hand, a woman who is with a struggling artist/entrepreneur must've gotten with him for his looks and stayed because she likes who he is as a person.

If you're interested in a genuine, authentic connection, then you can't let your status/money lead your interactions with women. There was a story told by Doc Love about one of his students, a dentist in California who for the first couple of months of dating a woman would say he works in construction. That's taking it a bit too far IMO, but you get the meaning.

 

[zekko]

Someone who says looks doesn't matter comes from a position of defeat.

I've never said looks don't matter. I said I don't understand why men should value having looks over status and money.
I also said that of the three, status is the most important.

Status and/or money attracts on a transactional level, in other words, the woman will be with you for the kind of life you offer her or the media exposure, whatever, even if she feels repulsed by you.

It's all transactional, even if she's with you because of your looks. What makes a man exceptional however, is not how he looks, but rather what he can achieve. Women are attracted to successful men because they have the ability to succeed, not simply for what they can provide. The traits that enable a man to succeed are attractive in themselves.

 

[HaleyBaron]

I've never said looks don't matter. I said I don't understand why men should value having looks over status and money.
I also said that of the three, status is the most important.


It's all transactional, even if she's with you because of your looks. What makes a man exceptional however, is not how he looks, but rather what he can achieve. Women are attracted to successful men because they have the ability to succeed, not simply for what they can provide. The traits that enable a man to succeed are attractive in themselves.

Looks and status is cyclic. One will only make the other better.

 

[member162951]

Status and/or money attracts on a transactional level, in other words, the woman will be with you for the kind of life you offer her or the media exposure, whatever, even if she feels repulsed by you.

On the other hand, a woman who is with a struggling artist/entrepreneur must've gotten with him for his looks and stayed because she likes who he is as a person.

Totally agree @pipeman84 . A woman is first drawn to a man's looks, his style and dare I say his "vibe/energy." After that, it goes to who he is as a man. His purpose.

Women are attracted to success but not for the reasons most men think which is money and status. It's about his ambition, his drive to succeed which are masculine qualities and extremely attractive to most women.

A man with family money or who won the lottery doesn't have the same level of attractiveness as a man with ambition and drive who came upon his success on his own for that reason. Having family money/winning the lottery are NOT masculine qualities.

Women who place status and money no matter how it was achieved above all else are superficial and most likely with you for the reason stated in first quote above by @pipeman84 .

Best to stay away from them.

 

[zekko]

Women who place status and money no matter how it was achieved above all else are superficial and best to stay away from them.

And I suppose women who place a man's looks above all aren't superficial?

I agree with the rest of your post, however.

 

[member162951]

And I suppose women who place a man's looks above all aren't superficial?

Huh? Where did I say that? I didn't.

I said a woman is first drawn to a man's looks, the initial attraction. After that it's about who he is as a man - his drive, his purpose. And I forgot one, his personality (who he is as a person).

@pipeman84 was spot on about this.

 

[pipeman84]

Hey @JoyDivision1990 great minds think alike.
@zekko when I say looks, I'm not referring to how the guy combs his hair or the brand of suit he wears. Those are inconsequential, he could go bald and wear shorts and generic t-shirt and it wouldn't affect him. By looks I mean how he carries himself, his body language, his body shape, the aura he gives off.

 

[member162951]

Hey @JoyDivision1990 great minds think alike.
@zekko when I say looks, I'm not referring to how the guy combs his hair or the brand of suit he wears. Those are inconsequential, he could go bald and wear shorts and generic t-shirt and it wouldn't affect him. By looks I mean how he carries himself, his body language, his body shape, the aura he gives off.

Thanks man. I bolded "his body shape" because from talking to women and my own experience, women place a higher value on a man's physique than his face. I mean face IS important but a great physique can make up for an average face.

Reason being and I think @zekko touched on this but a man's face is something he's born with.

A great physique is something a man achieves on his own through hard work, self-discipline and a desire to be fit and healthy, which in addition to ambition and purpose, are extremely attractive qualities to most women.

Being in great physical condition is also HOT aesthetically so that helps.

 

[zekko]

Huh? Where did I say that? I didn't.

Okay, but we were contrasting looks, money, and status. And for my part especially, I was asking why men seem to place a greater value on looks than the other two. Even if you did not say it, there's a current of thought here that goes something like "I am a real man, because I attract women with my looks", when looks aren't generally earned or achieved by a man, it is more a gift. Building a great physique is a separate question, of course, but even in the case of that, there is variability from man to man as far as his aesthetics go, because of genetics. So why should a man be more proud of his looks than his money or status?

 

[pipeman84]

I bolded "his body shape" because from talking to women and my own experience, women place a higher value on a man's physique more than his face. I mean face IS important but a great physique can make up for an average face.

Yes, the total package, the face being just a part of it.
When you think of guys like Clint Eastwood, Jason Statham, JCVD ... the body shape, how they carry themselves send one kind of message whereas Leo DiCaprio, Justin Bieber, David Beckham a different kind, although they were all born with an attractive face.

 

[member162951]

So why should a man be more proud of his looks than his money or status?

I don't think he should; looks (a face he's born with, a gift as you said) is what initially attracts women, just a fact of life, so it's nothing to feel particularly proud of

Re success, money, status, it depends on how those things were achieved. If achieved though hard work, perseverance and a genuine desire to succeed, then yes absolutely he should feel proud!

On the other hand, if given to him through family, inheritance or a lotto win, then I don't see how that would be anything he should feel proud of. Do you?