"Alpha fvcks Beta Bucks" is the most retarded sht I've ever heard.

[anounymous012]

ex love back spell casting +2348155425481

nitially I was skeptical of your services. I had been to other spell sites looking for fame and fortune and all I got was empty promises and no results. I finally found you and I could not be happier. I am greatly enjoying my time in the spotlight. I love people recognizing me in the street. You and your real fame and fortune money spell casters at Doc Obodo templeofanswer@hotmail.co.uk
are amazing and I cannot thank you enough.

~ name restricted, United States, Hollywood, California

 

[zekko]

"Alpha fux beta bux" is just a slogan to promote PUA products. Think about it, who is most likely to seek PUA products? Probably the guys who are 18-24, the same age where the corresponding girls SMV is highest. These guys are also most likely to have the least amount of money. So they say that it is a positive not to have money because only the "betas" have money. Never mind the fact that in romance fantasy fiction, the male lead is always loaded.

In this phrase, "alpha" simply means "good short term/bad long term" risk. Which means he may be fun and have the looks but isn't good for the long haul.

Women are genetically wired to respond Protectors and Providers. For some reason, PUAs seperate out the "Provider" component of this and assign it to the weak beta. When in actuality, in primitive times, the strong protector would also be the strong hunter provider who brings home the saber tooth tiger meat.

The long term "provider" is always portrayed as being someone a girl will "settle" for and isn't really attracted to. This is horsesh!t, because I will say this: I have never had a girl interested in me in a long term way, for boyfriend material or whatever, who's panties weren't absolutely soaked when it came time to have sex. The body doesn't lie.

 

[Mike32ct]

The long term "provider" is always portrayed as being someone a girl will "settle" for and isn't really attracted to. This is horsesh!t, because I will say this: I have never had a girl interested in me in a long term way, for boyfriend material or whatever, who's panties weren't absolutely soaked when it came time to have sex. The body doesn't lie.

This is a very interesting topic. I'm glad you brought it up.

A female doesn't want to date a guy that she wouldn't want to F. 5String said it best in the "Female Translator":

"I'd date him = I'd F him.
"I dated him = I F-ed him.

Where things get complicated is the ONS vs. LTR thing. Guys in the game are usually big into ONS'. I get that. ONS' are obviously hot and a lot of fun. But the other side of the coin is that such guys may feel "cheated" if they have to wait for sex or show $$ / career potential first to date a chick while the hot club guy that took her home didnt have to do much of anything except spike up his hair and wear a tshirt a size too small lol.

So some guys might feel like her LTR requirements are sort of a way of "compensating" for not looking like the J ersey Shoar club guy. Or the club guy got her for a much cheaper price. He didn't get to keep her, but he got a cheap "rental" lol.

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with that. But some guys see it that way. Then, as properly pointed out, PUAs play into this insecurity by using "provider" almost in a derogatory way.

Anyway, I'm on the fence on this one. I see some good arguments on both sides.

 

[HumbleNinja]

"Alpha fux beta bux" is just a slogan to promote PUA products. Think about it, who is most likely to seek PUA products? Probably the guys who are 18-24, the same age where the corresponding girls SMV is highest. These guys are also most likely to have the least amount of money. So they say that it is a positive not to have money because only the "betas" have money. Never mind the fact that in romance fantasy fiction, the male lead is always loaded.

In this phrase, "alpha" simply means "good short term/bad long term" risk. Which means he may be fun and have the looks but isn't good for the long haul.

Women are genetically wired to respond Protectors and Providers. For some reason, PUAs seperate out the "Provider" component of this and assign it to the weak beta. When in actuality, in primitive times, the strong protector would also be the strong hunter provider who brings home the saber tooth tiger meat.

The long term "provider" is always portrayed as being someone a girl will "settle" for and isn't really attracted to. This is horsesh!t, because I will say this: I have never had a girl interested in me in a long term way, for boyfriend material or whatever, who's panties weren't absolutely soaked when it came time to have sex. The body doesn't lie.

AGREED. This "beta bucks" reminds me of a "cover" these broke azz wannabe "alphas" use as a way to excuse away the fact they don't have money to do anything and or are cheap fvks regardless. As if because you have money or take a chick out once in a while because YOU like to go somewhere nice you are "beta bucking" to chicks and simply paying all chicks to "like" you "buying their affections" is friggin hilarious.

I'd be willing to bet the same dudes that use that "beta bucks" slogan don't do much in life requiring spending money.

 

[HoneyHitter]

Awesome! This is why I love this site. It reassures me why I shouldn't be worried about ravaging and knocking up any b!tch: there's no shortage of guys willing to enjoy my sloppy seconds. It's also funny to see how these hoes filter thru my complete friendlist and then end up posting marriage pictures just a few years later. :crackup:

 

[gravityeyelids]

"Alpha fvcks Beta Bucks" is the most retarded sht I've ever heard.

What so-called "Alpha" is going out banging all quality chicks...and never spending a dime on them?

What KJ squeezed out that brain fart?

As if some imaginary "Alpha" is going around banging all "betas" girlfriends and never spending a dime on them, never having a girlfriend or if he does never spending a dime on her. Yet these are all "quality" women this "alpha" is banging. LMAO

Maybe one or a few times a GODLIKE looking dude pulls that off with a quality chick (and not a string of lowlife h0es) but sorry I've never in my entire life known or heard of dudes doing that through their lifetimes or even for any length of time. Sounds like a good fragile ego boogeyman story.

If you honestly think some "Alpha" dude is out there who's just banging top quality chicks and never taking them out and spending anything on them, you = :crazy:


There's nothing wrong with taking a chick out and treating her. The key is to invest wisely in a quality chick as she should you. (And not just with pvssy payments either.)

You're confusing alpha with *******/jerk. A DJ is an alpha. And you're wrong on many counts. But that's fine. I guess people need a way to rationalize their beta mentality

 

[HumbleNinja]

You're confusing alpha with *******/jerk. A DJ is an alpha. And you're wrong on many counts. But that's fine. I guess people need a way to rationalize their beta mentality

If I asked 100 different dudes what is the meaning of "alpha fvcks, beta bucks" I'll get different viewpoints on it not ALL the same exact answer. It's like Zekko said in his post and I feel the same way. It's thrown out there as almost like some "shame" tactic by broke dudes who are control freaks: If you spend any money on a chick you aren't "Alpha", but let's all believe spending nothing will lead us to banging strings of "quality" women. Same dudes who cry constantly on how bad and materialistic "ALL" western chicks are.

If you're a dumbazz enough in the first place to be buying chicks things all the time in an effort to get them to "like" you then get pissed and think "Oh I'm not doing sht for ANY chick now" but just going to FVK all "quality" chicks you're off your rocker and lack common sense.

It's pretty much the same as with a friend. If you keep trying to buy a "friends" friendship who never reciprocates then YOU are the IDIOT being used. But to then turn around and become a bitter clown shoe and think: Oh fvk that! I'm going to never do ANYTHING but USE all my other friends (who none of them may be like the first) you're one confused sorry soul and no "alpha" but an idiot. Even moreso if there's a string of that happening with you through life.

A DJ is an Alpha??? REALLY? LMAO with countless threads of "what do I do here?" "BPD alert!" "I'm dating a wh0re!" I'll be a PROUD "Beta" if that's what being an "Alpha DJ" leads to.


I'm my own man. Not some self proclaimed spiffy title to boost a weak ego.

 

[CrimsonPanther]

I'm my own man. Not some self proclaimed spiffy title to boost a weak ego.

to my understanding THIS is the trait of alpha-ness. it is weird how so many here use women as a measure, and say that alpha is a person who many women want to fxck, and gets easy lays. many betas do the same if they are good looking.
usually, being alpha is very situational. you can be perceived alpha in a situation, and the same person can be the lowest in a rank, in another situation.

what is considered alpha tells mostly about the guy defining it, betrays his values or the lack thereof.

if you really feel alpha, you are alpha. for others you may not be, but you don't really care. don't strive to be alpha. strive to be a MAN. to be someone you'll be proud of when you see him in the mirror. not for women. and don't let female attraction be the judge of your worth. that means jack shyt. it is a nice bonus, and it feels good to be loved, but female love is never really love. at the risk of sounding like a sexist pig, i dare to say that women are not capable of pure love. i wish they were though. but they are not. their love is totally conditional, and can change in a whim.

as for the topic, it can be both true and false, because you can both pay and fxck, but the difference is that you may reward good behaviour on women if you feel like it. BUT some men reward first, without the woman being ever reuired to do something for it. some men reward women just for them being a woman. this applies to social media also, ex. when a girl posts a pic about herself and gets lots of male attention for it in the hope they will get to be noticed. in this case they all "beta bucked" even if they didn't spend any money. the beta bucks for his own value being dropped. not to reward something he already recieved. chivalry is beta buck, white knighting and cpt. save a hoe is beta bucking. it's not just about money. it's about you raising or lowering your value.

 

[zekko]

it is weird how so many here use women as a measure, and say that alpha is a person who many women want to fxck, and gets easy lays. many betas do the same if they are good looking.

The logic in this place is so screwed up.

Most guys here will say that you shouldn't use women as a measure.
Yet they will tell you that women will be all over a real alpha.
So if women are not all over you, then you must be beta.
And betas are roundly despised and held in contempt here.
And we know you're a beta because the women aren't all over you.
But you shouldn't use women as a measuring stick....

You can go round and round in circles with that one.

Here's the problem:
PUAs took a nice little example like "alphas and betas" as a way to make an interesting point about male/female dynamics. However, over time they have taken this nice little example and blown it all so far out of proportion that some people can only view life through an "alpha/beta" filter. As a result, it's all practically become little more than parody. Reminds me of the old "What does an alpha eat for breakfast?" threads.

 

[Vice]

Other posters have already covered the details of my response, so I'll just reiterate the summary:

Money is irrelevant, HumbleNinja. You have this limiting belief/"story" that you need money to get top quality chicks. My experiences in South Beach have smashed any remainder of the idea that you need money to get chicks. Dudes driving circuits around South Beach in rented Lamborghinis hoping to score chicks and wearing seemingly expensive clothes don't get ANY play in the club when actual game is involved. You can't bring your car into the club. And women can't tell if you have an Armani suit or just a simple Jos. A. Bank suit in the dark, drunken stupor of the club.

There's the lover and the provider type of guy. The "lover" is the dude that f*cks the girl in the bathroom of the club, while the provider is the one she wants to have a longer term relationship with.

At the end of the day, money should be for YOU and your desires, not for some woman.

Every once in a while a girl will ask me for a drink and I'll get one for both of us (club soda with lime; it's cheaper and non-alcoholic since I don't drink, but tastes like alcohol) so she can rationalize going home with me.

 

[zekko]

There's the lover and the provider type of guy. The "lover" is the dude that f*cks the girl in the bathroom of the club, while the provider is the one she wants to have a longer term relationship with.

PUAs glorify the guy she fvcks in the bathroom.
PUAs demean and shame the guy she wants to have a LTR with.
Why is this?
Consider the source.

IMO, the long term guy has greater value. When I was in my oat sowing days, spinning plates with FBs and one night stands, I could get laid easily. But I couldn't keep their interest long term. It was only once I built my value that I could keep women's interest long term, without even trying. Women want a guy who has his sh!t together, and until I got my sh!t together, I was just a short term guy.

 

[Vice]

PUAs glorify the guy she fvcks in the bathroom.
PUAs demean and shame the guy she wants to have a LTR with.
Why is this?
Consider the source.

IMO, the long term guy has greater value. When I was in my oat sowing days, spinning plates with FBs and one night stands, I could get laid easily. But I couldn't keep their interest long term. It was only once I built my value that I could keep women's interest long term, without even trying. Women want a guy who has his sh!t together, and until I got my sh!t together, I was just a short term guy.

Exactly.

The thing is that some guys have their sh*t together and are qualified as the long term guy, but they want to be the short term guy for a while.

 

[CrimsonPanther]

The logic in this place is so screwed up.

Most guys here will say that you shouldn't use women as a measure.
Yet they will tell you that women will be all over a real alpha.
So if women are not all over you, then you must be beta.
And betas are roundly despised and held in contempt here.
And we know you're a beta because the women aren't all over you.
But you shouldn't use women as a measuring stick....

You can go round and round in circles with that one.

Here's the problem:
PUAs took a nice little example like "alphas and betas" as a way to make an interesting point about male/female dynamics. However, over time they have taken this nice little example and blown it all so far out of proportion that some people can only view life through an "alpha/beta" filter. As a result, it's all practically become little more than parody. Reminds me of the old "What does an alpha eat for breakfast?" threads.

^^ QFT.
THIS is why preach to be a MAN FOR YOURSELF.
although i see logic in this. to some extent:

it is true that women feel more attracted to alpha/leader/independent/MAN types. women wanna fxck alpha because they are alpha, but they are not alpha BECAUSE women want to fxck them, if you get what i am saying.
you can get women into bed while being a beta, or even an omega if you play your cards right.

alpha/beta mentality should only be a topic in the context of "manning up", but never in the context of just getting girls. only for self improvement.

IMO one can be a DJ/PUA/womanizer as equally while being both alpha or beta. we all know examples to this.

it doesn't even have anything to do with being a winner/loser. there are alcoholic/junkie alphas who get to be losers in life, and there can be betas who will get to be presidents.

so who's the alpha or the beta? do we really care? all we want is to feel good being us, and evolve towards feeling even better, and into MEN who have control over their lives. at least to the amount possible with this fxcked up social system. to not depend on others, especially on creatures like women who cannot be trusted, because even they themselves wanna rely on a man who can lead them through life.

we, in this virtual community strive to be / are DJ's. people who at best control women, but are not controlled by them. some want stable LTR's, some want to poke the punani, others just want to be more sociable. you can do that to an extent as alpha or beta regardless. even the "shaming" here as i saw here is kind of a "tough love", aimed for the target as a wake up call to snap out of it and man up for his own good. i advocate instead of using alpha/beta the use of DJ/AFC/WK, since these cover our goals more accurately anyway because these ARE measured by the ability to get and keep the wyminz folk

 

[zekko]

The thing is that some guys have their sh*t together and are qualified as the long term guy, but they want to be the short term guy for a while.

Understandable, and that's his choice. That's the best of both worlds right here. However, it took me awhile to get my sh!t together lol, so in the meantime I had my fill of being the short term guy.

it doesn't even have anything to do with being a winner/loser. there are alcoholic/junkie alphas who get to be losers in life, and there can be betas who will get to be presidents.

Yeah, I keep hearing presidents being brought up as examples of being "top males", but there are a lot of people who view the president as simply a puppet figurehead for the corporate bosses who pull his strings.

And like you say, you can be an alcoholic junkie but be the alpha in your little part of the world. Also, upper level betas can get a lot of tail.

 

[CrimsonPanther]

i read something interesting and new for me (since i usually don't read stuff on what is alpha and what is not), so i will quote it here, without any comments.

"Alpha males" as defined in this corner of the internet comes in three basic packages.
Bull Alpha = non monogamous, bangs a lot of chicks, is a general stud who is strongly desired by other women and lives life on his own terms.
Wolf Alpha = a man who runs a disciplined family unit in which he is the undisputed leader, and his wife his submissive and obedient partner.
Bear Alpha = a man with a mission, largely unconcerned with sexual/romantic relationships because he "doesnt have time" or they distract him from his grand goal.

it was written by cody stark under this article (also a good read):
http://www.returnofkings.com/19689/7-most-common-feminist-insults

 

[HumbleNinja]

Other posters have already covered the details of my response, so I'll just reiterate the summary:

Money is irrelevant, HumbleNinja. You have this limiting belief/"story" that you need money to get top quality chicks. My experiences in South Beach have smashed any remainder of the idea that you need money to get chicks. Dudes driving circuits around South Beach in rented Lamborghinis hoping to score chicks and wearing seemingly expensive clothes don't get ANY play in the club when actual game is involved. You can't bring your car into the club. And women can't tell if you have an Armani suit or just a simple Jos. A. Bank suit in the dark, drunken stupor of the club.

There's the lover and the provider type of guy. The "lover" is the dude that f*cks the girl in the bathroom of the club, while the provider is the one she wants to have a longer term relationship with.

At the end of the day, money should be for YOU and your desires, not for some woman.

Every once in a while a girl will ask me for a drink and I'll get one for both of us (club soda with lime; it's cheaper and non-alcoholic since I don't drink, but tastes like alcohol) so she can rationalize going home with me.

Money is not completely irrelevant as otherwise a betas bucks wouldn't matter at all. The chick would still (as most chicks who are good looking should have a decent amout of options) go for a dude who is more towards the "Alpha" or manly side with a decent amount of money making to possibly settle down with in the future. Not too many chicks or dudes are going to settle for ANY broke person unless they either have low self esteem or see a lot of other potential in them as well as possibly making money at some point.

I agree money isn't completely important to simply meeting chicks or the end all be all to getting them obviously but for dudes simply to think they can be any kind of "alpha" they want without other factors coming in to play is ridiculous.


And I've been to South Beach many times. Have friends all over Florida, relatives all live down in Florida near there etc. And it's not that difficult to pick up chicks in South Beach so long as you look good, can talk to various people, and aren't a friggin a-hole or weirdo.

Just because a dude may be able to nail a few drunk chicks in a club yet may've gotten blown out by several other chicks doesn't make him an "Alpha". I've known several damn good looking dudes who've banged lots of chicks, some have money, some didn't yet in the end no one cared and those same dudes are pretty much fvcked in the head. Even though they've fvcked more chicks a lot weren't the types of chicks I'd go for or even thought were good looking etc. to bother with period. But if that's the type of dude who's "Alpha" ok..

A true "Alpha" to me would be the type of dude who's got all his sh1t together for himself yet has several or even a few chicks who'd want to marry him and lock that mofo down for themselves. Not simply because he has money either.

 

[Vice]

Money is not completely irrelevant as otherwise a betas bucks wouldn't matter at all. The chick would still (as most chicks who are good looking should have a decent amout of options) go for a dude who is more towards the "Alpha" or manly side with a decent amount of money making to possibly settle down with in the future. Not too many chicks or dudes are going to settle for ANY broke person unless they either have low self esteem or see a lot of other potential in them as well as possibly making money at some point.

I agree money isn't completely important to simply meeting chicks or the end all be all to getting them obviously but for dudes simply to think they can be any kind of "alpha" they want without other factors coming in to play is ridiculous.


And I've been to South Beach many times. Have friends all over Florida, relatives all live down in Florida near there etc. And it's not that difficult to pick up chicks in South Beach so long as you look good, can talk to various people, and aren't a friggin a-hole or weirdo.

Just because a dude may be able to nail a few drunk chicks in a club yet may've gotten blown out by several other chicks doesn't make him an "Alpha". I've known several damn good looking dudes who've banged lots of chicks, some have money, some didn't yet in the end no one cared and those same dudes are pretty much fvcked in the head. Even though they've fvcked more chicks a lot weren't the types of chicks I'd go for or even thought were good looking etc. to bother with period. But if that's the type of dude who's "Alpha" ok..

A true "Alpha" to me would be the type of dude who's got all his sh1t together for himself yet has several or even a few chicks who'd want to marry him and lock that mofo down for themselves. Not simply because he has money either.

From what I've read, you've got it down really well.

But you need to get this "alpha" vs. "beta" BULLSH*T out of your mind. Forget intellectualizing what "is" and "isn't" "alpha" and GO YOUR OWN WAY. It's irrelevant and a waste of time.

 

[HumbleNinja]

From what I've read, you've got it down really well.

But you need to get this "alpha" vs. "beta" BULLSH*T out of your mind. Forget intellectualizing what "is" and "isn't" "alpha" and GO YOUR OWN WAY. It's irrelevant and a waste of time.

I'm not worried about it. Hell I don't even use those terms except for on SS extremely randomly and or in this thread.

Just a thought on that statement "alpha fvcks beta bvcks" Zekko pretty much summed it up what I felt about it. It seems more like some shaming tactic or brainwashing attempt to make dudes think if you spend any type of money on a chick you are "beta" and should only be "alpha" and try to fvck any chick without spending anything on them like some PUA weirdo who's full of sht.

 

[zekko]

I see a lot more Athletes with the young one's than I do Accounting majors.

What's wrong with an athlete who is an accounting major?

I have a good friend, I wouldn't say he was a great athlete but he was on the football team in high school (lineman). Also an accounting major. And he has done very well for himself, both financially and with women.

When we were younger and went out to pick up women, the ladies all seemed to want him, even though I was the one who had the guts to approach, while he just sat back and said nothing. Damn, that used to p!ss me off, lol.

You think about an accountant and you get a mental image in your head of a bent over balding guy with horn rim glasses and a pocket protector. That's the main thing I dislike about this place, all the stereotypes. Move beyond the stereotypes and look at real people, who are usually mixed bags.

It seems more like some shaming tactic or brainwashing attempt to make dudes think if you spend any type of money on a chick you are "beta" and should only be "alpha" and try to fvck any chick without spending anything on them like some PUA weirdo who's full of sht.

I don't think you have to spend money on a girl to fvck her. But if I do spend some money on a chick I'm not going to sweat it. If I spend money on a girl it will be because I want to, and not because I am trying to make her like me, or because I am trying to bribe her into having sex with me. I don't understand all these guys who have the attitude of "Let me buy you something so you will like me". I don't get where that comes from, who teaches that?

I do think the "alpha fux beta bux" is kind of a shaming tactic to try to get people to accept PUA theories. Here's how it goes:

Let's see, a girl turns 30 so suddenly she's desperate and wants to marry a guy because she's hit the wall. Won't she want to get the most "alpha" guy with money that she can find (i.e. the strongest, most manly male)?

Well, no, she has just spent her 20s being screwed over by alphas so right now she wants the weakest beta guy she can find with the most money so she can manipulate him. And of course she despises this guy so she can go out and fvck more alphas behind his back.

What does this say about guys in thier 30s who have solidified their careers and have made some money, guys who have chiseled themselves into being good catches? Sounds pretty insulting to me. It also sounds like this whole thing is largely a wish dream of would be "alphas". And the definition of alpha is? Here's your real answer: "PUA Wannabe".

 

[zekko]

But the whole point being......that is a very rare combination, as I am sure you will agree.

I don't know how rare it is, but I think it is the best thing to shoot for. If you're going to aspire to something, why not aspire to be the total package instead of just the short term guy?

The mistake you and others are making here, is that you assume she is going for the "weakest" guy. Nobody makes such claims......

You haven't seen guys claim that women will hit the wall and find a rich beta that they can manipulate and sponge off of while they fvck the alpha on the side? Obviously that beta guy is pretty weak, and it's probably the more cynical crowd, but I've definitely read those posts.

I honestly think most of the problem stemming from the anti-PUA's here is one of absolutism. Black or White thinking, without honestly thinking about the statements being made.

I just think that a lot of the statements are overstated and exagerrated. But look at it this way: Is it worse to look at a statement as black and white and reject it? Or to look at a statement as black and white and accept it and run with it?

Given the sex drive of men in their late teens and 20's, and the difficulty most men have in securing sex, doesn't it strike you as odd that so many men reach their late 20's or early 30's not married yet? Or having only just now found "the right one"?

Well, in my case, I was a late bloomer, I suppose. I didn't really find my niche until my late 20s/early 30s. I was actually on plan C, my plan A and plan B both failed. I know it's more inspiring to hear about people who focused on their plan A and stuck it out and stuck it out until they made it a success.

But for me, at some point I realized my plan A wasn't working and it was time to try something else. Once I finally was able to find something I could make work, and work well for me, it gave me the confidence that I had been lacking before, and I was able to build up some value. When I was a young adult starting out, it seemed like most guys I knew were making more money than I was. It was nice to finally reverse that.

I think there are a lot of guys who don't really come into their own until thier late 20s/early 30s.
Guys need some time to build themselves up, unlike women who just sprout breasts and look cute.

Also, I wasn't looking to get married at a young age. I thought that statistically, the longer I waited, the better my chances of avoiding divorce. That didn't work out, unfortunately.

Let's break this down into order of desirability of men for women in their hottest, youngest years.....

1. Protector/provider combination
2. Protector men
3. Provider men

Nice list.
But keep in mind that there are guys lower on the list who are good at neither.