Yo, dudes: Alpha males are a myth, according to actual experts on wolves

Wow, WTF is that “Thought” Catalog article?

straw not star

No copy pasta for me, thanks.
I’m off for a picnic.
Toodles!

Sounds more like feminism. Woman want equality! But still want the door opened for them, meals paid for on a date, of course (!), and get on the life boat while the men stay behind cause there’s not enough space, etc etc etc. Woman want equality while keeping all of the benifits the traditional woman gets.

Women are a hivemind! Some women are traditionalists who want doors held for them, and other women are feminists, therefore all women want both liberation and tradition! Science!

(That was sarcasm, Robert, in case you couldn’t tell. I’ve never seen a feminist demand doors held or meals paid for, since we tend to think of those things as rooted in the belief that women are inherently weak. Don’t even get me started on the lifeboat thing; that wasn’t actually maritime custom, it just got famous because they did it on the Titanic)

All people were not created equal. It’s that simple. All this feminist propaganda isn’t going to change millions of years of evolution. The feminist goal of destroying the alpha male amongst other aspects of socoiety is disgusting. And weak people latch on. Feminism, the new religion, thank you feminism, for without you, we wouldn’t have the Fat acceptance movement. Laugh. Feminists accept and respect a womans choice (!), unless it’s wanting to be a stay at home mom.

Feminist feminist feministfeministfeminitsts…are you invoking Bloody Mary or something?

All people were not created equal. It’s that simple.

I’d ask for citations, but based on the above, you don’t even seem to know whether your sources agree with you or with the commenters here, and I’d hate for you to embarrass yourself further.

Feminism, the new religion

Do you even know what religion is? Feminism is missing a rather crucial element. Can you guess what it is?

without you, we wouldn’t have the Fat acceptance movement

I’m not sure whether to be annoyed that you find fat acceptance laughable, or amused that it’s apparently the worst consequence of feminism you could come up with.

At this point it’s pretty clear you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. Your criticisms of feminism are literally decades old and don’t reflect actual feminist thought – which is what happens when you get all your information from people pushing an anti-feminist agenda instead of reading or talking to actual feminists. That you expect to be taken seriously while waving your ignorance like a flag indicates either a massive fucking ego or a disconnect from reality.

I’ve provided plenty of proof alphas exist. Alpha males are not a myth. Bye.

NotMe, I challenge YOU.

I am the Robert here. Please pick a different nym; even Robert2 would do. But if you’re going to stick around, we need a better way to tell us apart.

@emilygoddess

In case you didn’t know, this site you’re posting on and spreading this false information that alpha males are a myth, is a feminist website.

But still want the door opened for them

No. I am perfectly capable of opening a door for myself. If someone wants to open a door for me, I say thank you. I also open doors for other people quite often. Sometimes even for dudes.

meals paid for on a date, of course (!)

No. I always offer to pay for my own meal on a date. The only reason I ever don’t is when the man is insistent I don’t.

and get on the life boat while the men stay behind cause there’s not enough space, etc etc etc.

No. There need to be enough lifeboats for everyone.

Signed,

A feminist
Is your head exploded yet?

@ The fake Robert

I’ll see your alpha male lions and raise you a clan of hyenas!

Also, that Body Language University (lol) link has bullet points that make ‘alpha males’ sound like assholes, abusers, and rapists.

For example:

“He freely touches others in the group, without expressed or implied permission”
and
“He might intimidate by staring, or he could simply use the unnerving tactic to demand attention”
or
“He’ll unapologetically interrupt conversations or monologues.”

Yeah, all of the red flags. ALL OF THEM. And it’s so full of so much debunked evo psych bull shit, none of which is cited, that it’s hard to believe it isn’t a parody.

From the about page “Hi, my name is Tonya Reiman. I am the author of “The Power of Body Language” and a media expert. I am the featured body language expert on The O’Reilly Factor.”

The O’Reilly Factor… That makes sense! Alpha males are like the tides! You can’t explain that!

And that pdf you linked to?

“Our results suggest that dominance hierarchy formation is a much richer and more complex phenomenon than previously thought…”

a much richer and more complex phenomenon than previously thought
a much richer and more complex phenomenon than previously thought
a much richer and more complex phenomenon than previously thought

You mean, like, it can’t be distilled down to ALPHA MALES?

Dear CheapKnockoffRobert – You are boring. You are also not an “alpha”, because they don’t exist. Even if they did, you wouldn’t be one, because you’re much too whiny and annoying. And also not a wolf. Now go make your own sandwich.

No love,

Feminism

Alpha males are not a myth. Bye.

Welp. I’m convinced. :rolleyes:

tl;dr – a shorter fake Robert – Alphas are REAL cuz my fee fees tell me so (facts are misandry), how dare you break the dream!!!1!!1!

It’s OK, little FakeRobert buddy. You can listen to Winds of Change and whistle along with your lighter held aloft while pretending that feminism is the Berlin Wall if it makes you feel better.

@grumpycatisagirl

1. Lets not pretend that most woman in the western world don’t expect men to open doors for them on a date. Equality with all the female ‘privileges’.

2. Have you ever insisted on paying for the date?

3. Society expects men to sacrifice themselves if a situation arises where only one can live. If the man saves himself he’ll be seen with disdain from many and if the woman lives she’d be showered with sympathy and support.
_______________________

@fromafar2013

So you agree alphas exist in lions?

As for the .pdf.

“Linear hierarchies, the classical pecking-order structures, are
formed readily in both nature and the laboratory in a great range of species including humans.”

“a much richer and more complex phenomenon than previously thought”

Simply means it’s not as simple as physically fighting and winning thereby becoming the leader.

“You mean, like, it can’t be distilled down to ALPHA MALES?”

You’re reading comprehension is not strong and your understanding of the term ‘alpha’ seems very limited to chest thumping.
_______________________

@cassandrakitty

Resorting to personal attacks, I guess that means you’ve reached your intellectual ceiling.

Much love,

Robert

Keep the dream of future alphaness alive, little buddy!

So, Not-Robert has stated both this:

You feminists aren’t fooling people with your double standards and hypocrisy.

And this:

All people were not created equal.

So, Not-Robert has accused feminists of talking about equality and not treating others as equals and expecting women to be treated better, for instance, having doors held open. This is bad of feminists. This makes them hypocrites.

Then Not-Robert goes on to say not all people all equal.

How sad that Not-Robert has to grasp at straws like this. How full of hate-rage Not-Robert must be.

@OtherRobert:

All people were not created equal. It’s that simple. All this feminist propaganda isn’t going to change millions of years of evolution. The feminist goal of destroying the alpha male amongst other aspects of socoiety is disgusting. And weak people latch on. Feminism, the new religion, thank you feminism, for without you, we wouldn’t have the Fat acceptance movement. Laugh. Feminists accept and respect a womans choice (!), unless it’s wanting to be a stay at home mom.

@OtherRobert’sReadingOfThePaperOnCichlidFish:

Linear hierarchies, the classical pecking-order structures, are
formed readily in both nature and the laboratory in a great range of species including humans. However, the probability of getting linear structures by chance alone is quite low. In this paper we investigate the two hypotheses that are proposed most often to explain linear hierarchies: they are predetermined by differences in the attributes of animals, or they are produced by the dynamics of social interaction, i.e., they are self-organizing. We evaluate these hypotheses using cichlid fish as model animals, and although differences in attributes play a significant part, we find that social interaction is necessary for high proportions of groups with linear hierarchies. Our results suggest that dominance hierarchy forma-
tion is a much richer and more complex phenomenon than previously thought, and we explore the implications of these results for evolutionary biology, the social sciences, and the use of animal models in understanding human social organization

@TheActualPaperOnCichlidFish:

Linear structures should not be
assumed to result simply from variation among individuals or
from cumulative conflicts among pairs of individuals. Instead, to
account for the common occurrence of linear hierarchies and
provide more accurate accounts of how individuals acquire their
ranks, we must look at patterns of interaction across whole
groups and understand how these patterns produce hierarchy
ladders. Even in dominance hierarchies among simple creatures,
in which individual differences in raw physical power, aggression,
and strategy might seem crucial, interaction processes are vital
in providing the typical forms of social organization that we
observe. Simply put, the formation of dominance hierarchies is
a richer and more complex phenomenon than has been thought
previously

ie: “Alpha” is a meaningless term in dominance hierarchies in fish, because the expected hierarchies change a statistically meaningful amount of times (which means no One True Alpha Fish exists, but the state is fluid), which means that the process is a combination of social dynamics and individual characteristics, which apply even more when the process is applied to human beings, which you’ll find that the authors of the report also state at the very end.

Also that more than merely 0 % of the time, a non-linear hierarchy developed. And what that does to the theory is profound in its implications.

OMG, there’s game for fish! Do they have their own Chateau Fartiste too? This totally proves that game works.

1. Lets not pretend that most woman in the western world don’t expect men to open doors for them on a date. Equality with all the female ‘privileges’.

WTF. They’re just doors, dude. I can open them. Also “woman” is not the plural of “woman.”

2. Have you ever insisted on paying for the date?

Yes.

3. Society expects men to sacrifice themselves if a situation arises where only one can live. If the man saves himself he’ll be seen with disdain from many and if the woman lives she’d be showered with sympathy and support.

This is the least of the things wrong with your logic here, but society =/= feminism.

You feminists aren’t fooling people with your double standards and hypocrisy.

You’re not fooling anyone with your rank stupidity.

1. Lets not pretend that most woman in the western world don’t expect men to open doors for them on a date. Equality with all the female ‘privileges’.

Citation needed. I find it incredibly awkward when people hold doors open for me. I also don’t understand how a social custom based on benevolent sexism is “female privilege.” Or that feminists are fighting to maintain the all-important “female privilege” of having doors held open for women, rather than reproductive rights or closing the gender wage gale or encouraging girls and women in the STEM fields or anything like that.

2. Have you ever insisted on paying for the date?

Yep. I just paid for my family’s meal this Tuesday. Your point?

3. Society expects men to sacrifice themselves if a situation arises where only one can live. If the man saves himself he’ll be seen with disdain from many and if the woman lives she’d be showered with sympathy and support.

Again, citation needed.

Resorting to personal attacks, I guess that means you’ve reached your intellectual ceiling.

Oh no, gumdrop, this is mocking. You’re sad little world-view is being torn down by people who are much smarter than you.

No no, we can’t open doors. You see, the door-opening gene lives on the Y chromosome, right in between the not listening to anything women say gene and the trolling feminist blogs when you feel sad and insecure gene.

And Cool Robert, don’t worry. None of us could possibly confuse you with Not Cool Robert.

@OtherRobert:

3. Society expects men to sacrifice themselves if a situation arises where only one can live. If the man saves himself he’ll be seen with disdain from many and if the woman lives she’d be showered with sympathy and support.

@OtherRobert’sLinkToSocialGroups:

http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/primate-sociality-and-social-systems-58068905

The least gregarious primates have what is often referred to as a solitary dispersed social system. In these primates, an adult male’s territory overlaps the territory of one or more adult females, but each individual forages alone and maintains social contact mainly through vocal and/or olfactory communication. These primates are typically nocturnal, foraging at night and sleeping in trees during the day. The mating system in these primates is usually polygynous (i.e., each male mates with multiple females). This type of social system characterizes galagos, lorises, some lemurs, some tarsiers, and orangutans. Notably, orangutans are the only anthropoid primates with a solitary social system.

Titi monkeys, owl monkeys, some callitrichids (marmosets and tamarins), and many hylobatids (gibbons and siamangs) are characterized by a pair-bonded social system. Here, one adult male and one adult female form a small social group and defend a territory from other pairs. The mating system in these groups is usually monogamous (only one male mates with only one female), though extra-pair copulations have been observed (Palombit 1994), and the male usually participates in offspring care, which is unusual for male mammals (Fuentes 2002).

OH MY GOD, NOT ALL PRIMATES ARE THE SAME? The male usually participates in off-spring care, unusual for male mammals? Differentiated social organization models varying between classes of genus? I feel faint! I must be getting the vapors! Forsooth!

Many marmosets and tamarins live in one-female multi-male groups characterized by cooperative breeding. In this type of system, usually only one female breeds, and that female suppresses the reproduction of any subordinate females via aggression and/or pheromonal (olfactory) signals. Usually there is more than one breeding male, thus the mating system is polyandrous, a rarity among mammals. Some or all of the individuals in these groups participate in offspring care and this social system is thus often called cooperative polyandry.

Huh. I know several subsets of the internet dedicated to that topic and some very odd slash fiction.

One of the most common primate social systems is the one-male group, which characterizes most colobine monkeys, most guenons, patas monkeys, howler monkeys, and some gorillas. Here, a single resident adult male defends a group of (usually) philopatric, related females from other males and, while his tenure lasts, enjoys exclusive mating access to those females (i.e., polygyny). Sometimes called harems, these groups are always at risk of takeover by non-resident males, who typically form all-male groups while awaiting their chance to become a resident male. Often, takeovers are accompanied by infanticide, in which the new resident male kills the young infants in the group. This behavior has the effect of bringing the mothers back into estrus (sexual receptivity) sooner than they would have otherwise.

Yeah, that’s more like it. That’ll prove the thesis. Now I just gotta forget about the titi monkeys, owl monkeys, the marmosets, the tamarins, the gibbons and the siamangs.

Also common among primates are multi-male multi-female groups, in which multiple individuals of each sex form large social groups in which the mating system is usually polygynandrous (i.e., both males and females are polygamous in that they mate with multiple members of the opposite sex). These are the largest groups of primates, and usually quite complex socially, with differentiated social and kin relationships among group members. This type of social system characterizes many monkeys, including macaques, most baboons, vervet monkeys, mangabeys, capuchins, squirrel monkeys, woolly monkeys, and some colobine monkeys, as well as some lemurs-most notably the ringtailed lemur and sifaka. In most of these species, females are philopatric and males disperse.

Similar to multi-male multi-female groups are the fission-fusion communities of chimpanzees, bonobos, spider monkeys, and some other ateline monkeys. Fission-fusion communities are less cohesive than typical multi-male multi-female groups. These groups occupy very large home ranges in which temporary foraging parties cleave and coalesce over time with changes in resource availability and female reproductive condition. These social systems are typically characterized by female dispersal and male philopatry.

The most complex type of social system found in primates, and in mammals as whole, is the multi-level society (also known as a hierarchical or modular society) characterizing hamadryas baboons (Figure 4), geladas, snub-nosed monkeys, and a few other mammals such as elephants. In this type of system, there are at least three levels of social structure: the one-male unit (OMU), the band, and the troop or herd. The OMU is the reproductive unit and consists of one “leader” male, sometimes a follower male, and several females; the band is the ecological unit that forages and sleeps together, and the troop or herd is a temporary aggregation at a sleeping site or foraging area. In hamadryas baboons, there is a fourth layer between the OMU and the band, the clan, which consists of OMUs and bachelor males linked by social bonds and possibly kinship among males. In geladas, bachelor males join together to form all-male groups. Reproduction in these societies is usually polygynous, and OMUs are always at risk of takeover by bachelor males, who may commit infanticide after taking over females with young infants.

…. and the macagues, baboons, vervets, mangabeys, capuchins, squirrel monkeys, wooly monkeys, sifaka, ringtailed lemur and the colobine monkeys (Who are not from Colombine, interestingly enough).

Moreover, one must be careful not to make assumptions about a species’ mating system simply upon observing its social system. For example, multi-male multi-female groups of gorillas may have an age-graded dominance structure in which only the oldest, highest-ranking (alpha) silverback male is allowed to copulate; in this case, the mating system is not polygynandrous (as one might expect in a multi-male group) but instead polygynous (Robbins 2011). Another example can be found in guenons, which live in one-male groups. During the mating season multi-male influxes occur in which outside males come into the group, copulate with the females, and then leave again (Cords 1988). The mating system in this case is not polygynous, which one would expect, but polygynandrous. Finally, gibbons and siamangs were first thought to be monogamous, but then observations of extra-pair mating (i.e., copulations with individuals outside of the pair-bond) confirmed that they are not always monogamous but sometimes polygynous, polyandrous, or both (Palombit 1994).

Holy fuck this topic is complex and not at all a simple little “Feminists want to destroy alpha males which is why weak men flock to their debased religion!”.

Didn’t even know we had geunons.

Also those gibbons are right rat bastards

1. Lets not pretend that most woman in the western world don’t expect men to open doors for them on a date. Equality with all the female ‘privileges’.

Let’s not pretend you wouldn’t complain just a much if a feminist told you “I don’t need you to hold that door for me, thanks”.

Wait, Not-Robert’s ace-in-the-hole to prove that feminism is wrong; alpha males do exist, dammit(!); and that all people are not equal is a paper on the social hierarchies of cichlid fish.

And the paper doesn’t say what he thinks it says, but exactly the opposite? That these hierarchies are fluid and based as much on social interactions as inborn characteristics? And that non-linear social hierarchies are possible?

That is hilarious. That just kinda made my day.

Oh, also.

@OtherRobert:

All people were not created equal. It’s that simple. All this feminist propaganda isn’t going to change millions of years of evolution. The feminist goal of destroying the alpha male amongst other aspects of socoiety is disgusting. And weak people latch on. Feminism, the new religion, thank you feminism, for without you, we wouldn’t have the Fat acceptance movement. Laugh. Feminists accept and respect a womans choice (!), unless it’s wanting to be a stay at home mom.

http://thoughtcatalog.com/amy-glass/2014/01/i-look-down-on-young-women-with-husbands-and-kids-and-im-not-sorry/

@FromThoughtCatalog:

I hear women talk about how “hard” it is to raise kids and manage a household all the time. I never hear men talk about this. It’s because women secretly like to talk about how hard managing a household is so they don’t have to explain their lack of real accomplishments. Men don’t care to “manage a household.” They aren’t conditioned to think stupid things like that are “important.”

Huh, interesting viewpoint, I guess… although.
Wait.

What’s this?

@FromThoughtCatalog:

Doing laundry will never be as important as being a doctor or an engineer or building a business. This word play is holding us back. TC mark

Amy Glass’ identity and reasoning behind this article revealed here.

Why would I want to know about the reasoning behind and identity of a person who seems perfectly willing to be obnoxious?

Oh well, I guess I might learn something.

Hi, I’m Amy Glass. I wrote this article [Ed.note: “I Look Down On…”, that is]

Do you think I’m really ignorant now? A monster?

The real story is that I used provocative language to start a conversation.

After I published my article, Thought Catalog published seven responses criticizing the article and Amy Glass. It also published two pro-Glass responses as well as one that largely reserved judgment, but presented good arguments for both sides of Glass-gate.

Do you know who solicited and formatted most of these articles? I did. They’re just as important as the original Glass article. Together, they create a conversation.

This isn’t backtracking. This is intellect. It’s the ability to explore ideas from multiple perspectives. It’s understanding and promoting the power of dialogue. It’s real. It serves the same function as fiction, whose authors create characters with different values, and as college professors, who educate their students about multiple sides of an argument.

I facilitated the resulting debate in a way that highlighted the diversity and complexity of realities that make up any singular idea.

Not really learning anything here, other than fabulation and the fact that someone was being obnoxious to make a point, which doesn’t excuse the obnoxiousness but certainly does make the point. Even if I disagree.
Which it turns out lots of other people did.

And yet, here we all are, someone is going: “Cichlids prove that alpha males exist and that feminists want to destroy them! Look at this feminist writing bad things about stay at home mothers! Here’s some stuff about primate social systems which completely prove my point in some way despite several social systems differing by miles and oceans and fucking planets from the point I was trying to make!”.

I’m glad everyone came back an schooled the troll while I was on my lunch break.

Hey AssholeRobert, my reading comprehension needs work? I’ve written and published biological research papers. The paper does not say what you think it says. Your confirmation bias is blinding.

And the ‘alpha male lions’ line was a joke, which I guess must have went entirely over your head.

You’re reading comprehension is not strong

Ha ha.

New Robert, why didn’t you address any of my points? Are you gonna tell me how feminism is a religion, or why you think women are a hivemind?

Wait, is fake Robert saying feminists oppress fish???

Let’s not pretend you wouldn’t complain just a much if a feminist told you “I don’t need you to hold that door for me, thanks”.

Right?

1. Lets not pretend that most woman in the western world don’t expect men to open doors for them on a date. Equality with all the female ‘privileges’.

a) no we don’t. ask us next time.
b) Okay, i’ll open doors for you if i get paid more than you for the same occupation and education and i have a chance of suffering less violence by intimate partners and people like me represent me in government instead of people of your gender. sound fair?

mmmmmmmmmm i’m groaning at totallyNOTrobert’s shtick on how we are not equal. when has that ever not been code for abledwhitecisman is the best and everyone else sucks?

@EvoPsychDudebroRobert

Sex is a social construct originating from the discourse of patriarchy. It does not exist as a binary beyond social context. You and your shitty science have no ground to stand on in regards to proving the existence of patriarchy or or the existence of intrasexual social hierarchy like the alpha/beta/whatever hierarchy.

ALL HAIL THE ONE TRUE ROBERT!

The One True Robert is Cool Robert! Beware of Not Cool Robert, who will bore you to death with his teal dear herd!

Out of curiosity, does anyone even know where that “the divorce rate in California is 75%” stat even originates from? Because I did Google it as Not Cool Robert suggested, and I’m mostly getting the Web sites of California divorce attorneys who don’t say where they get their info from.

Sooner or later it all comes down to “I’m better than everyone else.”

I’m rating that flounce 3/10, but it’s already down to -1/10.

HAIL!

Also, that Body Language University (lol) link has bullet points that make ‘alpha males’ sound like assholes, abusers, and rapists.

Sounds about right. People who believe that humans have alpha males and being one is desirable are always assholes and they always are either abusers and rapists or apologists for them.

Isn’t the point of the evo psych’s version of an alpha male that he gets to spread his genes by mating with many of the best females? By definition MGTOW can’t be alpha males because they aren’t mating with any females, right? Yet they talk about alpha males a lot.

LOL at using thought catalog as a citation. That site is full of idiots. Using a shitty thought catalog article as evidence that feminism is bad is like using Justin Bieber as evidence that all Canadians are assholes.

Thanks for the support, all. It is very reassuring.

” Using a shitty thought catalog article as evidence that feminism is bad is like using Justin Bieber as evidence that all Canadians are assholes.”

As a Canadian that made me lol

Robert (the twitty one): Body language university? really? This is your idea of a rebuttal citation?

Lions don’t have alpha. There is no “top dog” there is one male per pride. Moreover people are socially gregarious; lions aren’t.

Are there “boss” lionesses? Yes. How does this apply 1: to male lions? 2: to humans?

Wow… you linked to the study this post was based on… to refute this post.

So your “citations” make for three whiffs. Three pitches, three strikes.

You’re out.

In your second at bat: Our results suggest that dominance hierarchy formation is a much richer and more complex phenomenon than previously thought and we explore the implications of these results for evolutionary biology, the social sciences, and the use of animal models in understanding human social organization

Pop-fly to first, out.

Looks like you need to spend more time in the minors.

Robert (the twitty one): You’re reading comprehension is not strong and your understanding of the term ‘alpha’ seems very limited to chest thumping.

Dude…

You’ve just defined any meaningful use of “alpha” out of existence.

You see any dominance hieratchy as proof.

Any example of non-alpha (esp. in re the context of the study mentioned in the OP, which negates the “Alpha-Wolf” model the MRA/MRM/PUA types tout as, “the way it is) you then say shows Alpha is real.

You have a religious fervor. Got it.

You need to believe in the mythical “Alpha”. Got it.

You are a clueless, self-delusional idiot with zip for reading comprehension, the fallacious idea that someone else writing something you agree with makes it valid, and a need to pretend you are innately better than others.

Got it.

None of this is material to the facts at hand, and all your blather won’t save you from the unpleasant (for you) truths.

1: People are not wolves.
2: People have a complex social structure which doesn’t have a rigidly defined heirarchy (see the paper on fish for more detail on this, as it refures your claims about it).
3: People are going to judge you on how you function in your society.

I’m going to guess that number three is the real problem. You aren’t getting the deference you think you deserve, and you want to believe it’s because of “alpha”. So if you can learn the “tricks” which make you “alpha” you will get deference

Ain’t

Gonna

Happen.

While I do agree that Alpha males in the strictest sense of the word in humans does not exist. I do believe women do actually ride the ‘cock carousel’. I am in nightlife a lot, mostly because I am a musician. I notice it are almost always the same guys that leave the bars and clubs with girls. They do almost exclusively sleep with the most desirable men, being a musician doesn’t help, being rich doesn’t help, all that helps is being good looking as far as I see it from my surroundings.

@MC2

You know the vast majority of sex that happens in the world isn’t through meeting at clubs, right?

Yes, that is what everyone says until they are in the presence of a true Alpha male. Their body gets flooded with hormones of which they have no control and they engage in one of two actions: Either they completely submit through subtle cues (eye darting or if eye contact is made for longer than a half of a second, a nod is quickly returned before removing their gaze), or they engage in forced power plays in an attempt to quell the flooding of hormones associated with submission.

Males will ask forced questions. Questions which can be answered with simple observations. If they are present with a woman and the alpha male is in their area, the threatened male will instantly show affection to the woman in an attempt to show the alpha that that woman is his property. Little does the threatened male know is that the alpha wasn’t interested to begin with.

You women will know it is the alpha because the minute you are in his presence, all your guards will have dropped. The assertive, take charge attitude you cling passionately to will disappear and you will be reminded of the purest expression of your femininity. If you are in a professional environment it will take all of your mental energy, while in the presence of the alpha, to maintain a professional aura. It will take the full usage of the frontal lobes to keep the limbic system and the inevitable lust for his manhood in check.

You will do things for his attention. And when you finally get it you won’t know what to do with it. You will freeze. You might grin slightly. You will be aroused, and the alpha is instantly aware of it. He knows you are aroused and there is nothing you can do about it. If the alpha wanted to, he could gently take your hand and lead you wherever he wished, and you would gladly go.

Just being in the presence of the man, frees you of every worry. Every anxiety is released and you experience what it is to be a real woman.

But no… no, the alpha male is a myth.

Damn! The Wargies missed one 🙁