Something I've noticed around the internet lately is a tendency to refer to guys who have no luck with women and constantly get friend zoned as "beta males," and the people who get all the chicks as "alpha males." This seems to be biologically off to me; they have alpha mostly right, but in scientific terms, the beta male is the alpha's second in command, the one who knocks sense into the alpha when no-one else can or will, and the one who steps up to the alpha position when it is either vacant or filled by an "alpha" who has proven to be inept. The loser at the bottom of the hierarchy is actually the omega male, not the beta.
Going by this definition, I am a proud beta male; I'm happy to follow someone who is truly qualified to lead, but I am also willing, ready, and able to step up to a leadership role whenever necessary. If nobody else is willing to lead, I'll do it. If the current leader is inept? I'll take over, against his protests if necessary. If he's doing a good job? I'll help him out, and make sure what needs to be done gets done. I don't, however, have some idea that I'm perfect leadership material and people must follow me; that's alpha territory, and one of the most annoying traits associated with the type.
Because of this, I find it hilarious whenever someone on the internet says they're "beta as fuck" like it's a bad thing. Those guys aren't betas; they're gammas at best, Omegas at worst. For discussion value, do you guys have any idea how the terms got confused? Also, where do you think you fall on the scale, or alternatively, why do you think the whole thing is a load of BS?
Edit: This is cast in the male sense, but it's not meant to be sexist. These terms are just used more often in a male sense than a female sense, and they tend to have slightly different connotations between the genders. I will say that the second paragraph especially should be gender neutral; take it from someone who has had a leadership role usurped by an alpha female.
Going by this definition, I am a proud beta male; I'm happy to follow someone who is truly qualified to lead, but I am also willing, ready, and able to step up to a leadership role whenever necessary. If nobody else is willing to lead, I'll do it. If the current leader is inept? I'll take over, against his protests if necessary. If he's doing a good job? I'll help him out, and make sure what needs to be done gets done. I don't, however, have some idea that I'm perfect leadership material and people must follow me; that's alpha territory, and one of the most annoying traits associated with the type.
Because of this, I find it hilarious whenever someone on the internet says they're "beta as fuck" like it's a bad thing. Those guys aren't betas; they're gammas at best, Omegas at worst. For discussion value, do you guys have any idea how the terms got confused? Also, where do you think you fall on the scale, or alternatively, why do you think the whole thing is a load of BS?
Edit: This is cast in the male sense, but it's not meant to be sexist. These terms are just used more often in a male sense than a female sense, and they tend to have slightly different connotations between the genders. I will say that the second paragraph especially should be gender neutral; take it from someone who has had a leadership role usurped by an alpha female.
