The article for today at Athol Kay’s fine blog is What’s Alpha and Beta… For A Woman? My nerves always get itchy when I read about the distinctly male categories of alpha and beta linked to women because there’s a lot of confusion out there about this subject.
The core of the problem is that there are two different meanings to the word “alpha”, which are tied together when talking about males. These words are: dominant and attractive. When we say that a men is “alpha” it means he’s dominant and attractive, because these two characteristics are tied together very closely. But this is not true in the case of women. This is a source of a lot of confusion.
Women’s eternal solipsism and limitless capacity for projection is well-documented by now. Those are the culprits this time too. Women know and see that there’s a social hierarchy amongst men (corresponding to those men’s attractiveness) and they think that there’s a social hierarchy for women too. Of course there’s no such thing but they wouldn’t grasp this for the life of them.* On a side note, this is why lots of them dress according to the latest trends and put on makeup to win against rivals, not to impress men. They think if they beat the other girl they will rise in their imaginary social status hierarchy and will get better men.
So, if you use the word alpha when talking about women, it should be asked: which meaning of the word “alpha” do you use? Dominant or attractive? Because the two has nothing to do with each other in women. Berlusconi might bed 18 yo models without paying them directly but Hitlery Clinton never will, that’s for sure. She’s dominant but she’s as unattractive as it gets.
There is no such thing as an “alpha woman”. What is a coherent concept about males is fractured beyond any meaningfulness when used on females. Feminists pushed women into the hierarchy of men by forcing women into the workplace but they didn’t realize that by doing this they actually became men in a way: the status they acquired is men’s social status to attract a wife, and it can not be used to attract a husband. They fought for status but didn’t recognize that the price for it was way too high. It’s not a difficult concept to understand though; the more they fight to rise in the male hierarchy, the more male-like they have to become, thus losing their feminity and in turn they become less and less attractive to men. Dominant women are unattractive to men, I’d even say outright repulsive. Not because “men are afraid of strong women” – which is the usual feminist BS showing they don’t understand even the most basic concepts about relationships – but because a dominant woman is a pain in the ass. Evolution is a tricky business; it shaped men to fight against anything to protect his family. But dominant women fight against everything, including their family. No sane man wants that at home. Dominance in women is not a positive trait, no matter what feminists say.
So, what’s an alpha women? An illusion at best. When feminists talk about it they mean dominant women. They use the hierarchy of men as a benchmark and don’t quite get that men and women are different and can’t be measured on the same scale. When Athol talks about it he means attractive women. But this makes the whole excercise a little bit meaningless because instead of saying “female alpha”, which is a bit confusing, he could actually say attractive woman – this is what he means, isn’t it? The feminists and Athol both take one half of the original concept and try to project that half onto women using the original phrases which are obviously too complex to survive this assassination.
Now of course I understand that Athol uses his own “tweaked” alpha-beta concept here which kind of translates to alpha=attractive + beta=comfort , completely ignoring how it relates to the social hierarchy. Still, using the male-originated concepts on women are confusing. What’s attractive in a woman is totally different from what’s attractive in a man, so using the same expression for both is a bit odd.
* There is a hierarchy amongst men because there are leaders and there are followers – it’s impossible for everyone to lead. But it’s different for women. Every women can be attractive (theoretically) and female attractiveness has nothing to do with status. Men don’t give a sh*t about women’s imaginary status hierarchy. I’d say that 95% of men don’t even realize that women think there’s such a thing as a social (attractiveness) hierarchy for women.