Zone1 Alpha Male vs a Real Man... Are They the Same Thing?

Disclaimer: The following post is just my opinion. So it's OK if we disagree, I'm not stating this as an objective truth that everyone has to agree with. :wink:


Is an "alpha male" and a real man the same thing?

This question came to mind while I was reading another thread where people were describing Trump as an “alpha male.” The premise of that thread seemed to be that women love alpha males…and Trump is an alpha male, so that’s why women love Trump. I was going to reply on that thread, but then I figured this is actually an interesting topic that deserves a thread of its own.


I don’t want this thread to be only about Trump, so the only thing I’ll say about him is this...whether he's an alpha male or not, it always surprises me that people think of Trump as attractive. That got me thinking, what makes a man attractive? Is it simply being an alpha male, or is there something more than that? Then I thought, maybe I don't have the right definition of alpha male in mind.

So I looked up the definition, and here’s what I found:


“In a human context, an ‘alpha male’ is typically defined as a man who is dominant, assertive, and occupies a high social or professional status.”


Ok, so if an alpha male is simply a man who is dominant, assertive, and has a high social or professional status....that's cool, but to me those qualities alone don’t necessarily make someone attractive. Or a real man, necessarily.

Of course, I can’t speak for all women; I can only speak for myself.


In my view, what good is it to be dominant, confident and assertive...or to have power or social status.…if one doesn’t also have truly admirable qualities like honesty, integrity, honor, and wisdom?


I would say that a real man, and a true leader, is someone who has strength of character, integrity, wisdom, courage, and other qualities that people can genuinely admire and respect....and confidence too. But not the kind of confidence that is pompous or arrogant. I think real confidence is paired with humility. And that may not be a quality that people tend to associate with an "alpha male"...but I would say that a real man or a true leader has humility. I mean, look at Jesus. From a Christian perspective, He is the highest power in the world, the King above all kings, yet he was humble and "lowly." (Matthew 11:29)

So I’m curious to know how other people see this.


Is an “alpha male” the same thing as a real man or a true leader? Or are they two completely different things?

And if you're a woman....is someone being an alpha male all it takes for you, or is there something more that makes a man attractive?

Or is this whole idea of "alpha male" a silly and unimportant concept? lol :dunno:
Since this thread is about Trump, there are a couple of things to understand about him. His public persona is a bit different from the private Trump.
Trump is not and has never been an "alpha male". Trump is weak beta who longs to be respected. He is extremely insecure and cannot stand to be questioned, and needs constant praise and gratitude. He humiliates those who disagree with him, and is very vengeful. These traits are never found in alphas.

Trump is easily manipulated. He flip flops and changes his mind based on who he talked to last. He is obsessed with "winning". These are not the traits of an alpha male. And he cannot stand to be questioned, criticized, or challenged.

Alpha males are natural leaders. They don't need to threaten or bully anyone to get them to follow them. The are intelligent, assertive and confident, and they inspire confidence in those they lead.
it is ridiculous to say Trump is a weak leader who bends to others’ will or only wants to be popular. Trump has taken endless shots as on tariffs and stays the course. Same with ICE raids, taking out Maduro, or bombing Iran when they continued the killing. He does what he promised. And he is a natural leader. 85% of Republicans still back him. He is the ultimate Alpha male and a real man.
 
And in general women who do that are failures in life.

I'm going to use a very broad brush to make my point.

Anyone who swoons at any particular stereotype is most likely suffering from some sort of personality disorder.

Over and over you hear about women who choose the wrong sort of man.

That's a problem of the WOMAN, not the stereotype.
That gate swings the other way as well.
Currently the wife's son and one of mine are dealing with festering divorce situations and separations from wife's who appear to have flipped 180.
 
So.... although it may be true that women are attracted to natural leaders.... there has to be something more than just that, in my view. And that gets back to what I said last night, about strength of character, integrity, wisdom, etc. Thanks for your thoughts.
All that virtue aside the attraction is a mystery.
 
I don't tend to think in terms of either, myself.

Was Jimmy Stewart any less of a man than John Wayne in their typical roles? I guess if I would say anything, it would be that alpha males are those who most want to dominate, but "real" men can adopt many different roles.
During WWII Jimmy Stewart was a bomber pilot and commander of a bomber group (3-4 squadrons). He would retire from the Air Force reserve as a general. Yet he rarely played the overbearing version of an Alpha Male in his movie roles, yet was a leader and a "Real Man".

John Wayne didn't serve in the military during WWII (or at all) yet his movie roles/career definitely was Alpha male types.
 
Are you talking about the strange phenomenon of how certain criminals in prison get fan letters from women? Or they get married while they're behind bars? In cases like that, I agree with what Westwall said... it's some sort of psychological disorder.
No, this was before he got caught. Charles attracted several women who virtually worshipped him. This was maybe earlier than you were born. They lived in Southern CA on a dumpy piece of land and he got the girls to murder Sharon Tate who was an actress. Then they killed a couple at their home days later. He was a strange person. He did not kill anybody but was sentenced to death. CA aparently felt sorry for killers and converted their sentences to life in prison where he died.

1773000649276.webp
 
Yes, of course I know that not everyone has the same beliefs about God, and not everyone believes in the existence of a higher power at all. In that post you quoted, I was talking directly to that poster, who had brought up God (from a Christian perspective) in his post.

I don't want to get off topic here, but in response to what you said in that last sentence.... what's interesting to me is that some people assume that a person becomes a believer because of their upbringing or culture. But that isn't always the case. There are a lot of people from other parts of the world (the Middle East, Africa or Asia, for example) who become Christians not due to their upbringing, but for other reasons. And there are a lot of Americans who might come from a Christian background, who identify as agnostic or atheist. But this is actually a topic for a thread of its own, so...I'll just leave it at that for now, and if anyone wants to start a new thread, I think that would be a good discussion.
I was just trying to point out that the definition of "God" is different in the many current religions and those of the past. Those differences have also been the source of a majority of human conflicts and wars.
 
Disclaimer: The following post is just my opinion. So it's OK if we disagree, I'm not stating this as an objective truth that everyone has to agree with. :wink:


Is an "alpha male" and a real man the same thing?

This question came to mind while I was reading another thread where people were describing Trump as an “alpha male.” The premise of that thread seemed to be that women love alpha males…and Trump is an alpha male, so that’s why women love Trump. I was going to reply on that thread, but then I figured this is actually an interesting topic that deserves a thread of its own.


I don’t want this thread to be only about Trump, so the only thing I’ll say about him is this...whether he's an alpha male or not, it always surprises me that people think of Trump as attractive. That got me thinking, what makes a man attractive? Is it simply being an alpha male, or is there something more than that? Then I thought, maybe I don't have the right definition of alpha male in mind.

So I looked up the definition, and here’s what I found:


“In a human context, an ‘alpha male’ is typically defined as a man who is dominant, assertive, and occupies a high social or professional status.”


Ok, so if an alpha male is simply a man who is dominant, assertive, and has a high social or professional status....that's cool, but to me those qualities alone don’t necessarily make someone attractive. Or a real man, necessarily.

Of course, I can’t speak for all women; I can only speak for myself.


In my view, what good is it to be dominant, confident and assertive...or to have power or social status.…if one doesn’t also have truly admirable qualities like honesty, integrity, honor, and wisdom?


I would say that a real man, and a true leader, is someone who has strength of character, integrity, wisdom, courage, and other qualities that people can genuinely admire and respect....and confidence too. But not the kind of confidence that is pompous or arrogant. I think real confidence is paired with humility. And that may not be a quality that people tend to associate with an "alpha male"...but I would say that a real man or a true leader has humility. I mean, look at Jesus. From a Christian perspective, He is the highest power in the world, the King above all kings, yet he was humble and "lowly." (Matthew 11:29)

So I’m curious to know how other people see this.


Is an “alpha male” the same thing as a real man or a true leader? Or are they two completely different things?

And if you're a woman....is someone being an alpha male all it takes for you, or is there something more that makes a man attractive?

Or is this whole idea of "alpha male" a silly and unimportant concept? lol :dunno:
There are as many claimed definitions of what an alpha male is, as their are opinions on it.
In my mind - an alpha male is a man who is a natural born leader, and people gravitate to that state. They take him serious naturally, without ever being told to - it is recognized almost immediately. He takes his responsibilities seriously, and seeks to provide for his circle in a way that ensures they are well.
His confidence is apparent from the first moment you meet him.
 
That gate swings the other way as well.
Currently the wife's son and one of mine are dealing with festering divorce situations and separations from wife's who appear to have flipped 180.
Yeah, that happens too. A good friend of mine was married for 18 years. He told me the first 5 years were great, then his wife got pregnant, and it was all downhill from there.

She was a successful woman, who then threw it all away. My wife figures she suffered a form of post partum depression, but never sought help. They divorced and she is still a basket case.
 
On a related note~perspective;

Robert A. Heinlein famously stated, "A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."

Context​

This quote is from Heinlein's novel "Time Enough for Love," published in 1973. In this work, Heinlein emphasizes the importance of versatility and the ability to perform a wide range of tasks. He suggests that humans should strive for a broad skill set rather than confining themselves to narrow specializations, which he associates with insects.

Interpretation​

Heinlein's quote advocates for a well-rounded approach to life, encouraging individuals to develop diverse skills and competencies. This perspective challenges the modern trend of specialization in various fields, suggesting that being a "jack of all trades" can be more beneficial than being an expert in just one area.

Additional​

 
Since this thread is about Trump, there are a couple of things to understand about him. His public persona is a bit different from the private Trump.

it is ridiculous to say Trump is a weak leader who bends to others’ will or only wants to be popular. Trump has taken endless shots as on tariffs and stays the course. Same with ICE raids, taking out Maduro, or bombing Iran when they continued the killing. He does what he promised. And he is a natural leader. 85% of Republicans still back him. He is the ultimate Alpha male and a real man.
Yesterday I gritted my teeth and talked back to the TV when Trump was on the show. When he brags, it really makes me understand why some hate the man.

But his talk is not who he is as president. As president he clearly is highly motivated, sets goals, achieves his goals and is the admitted leader of his cabinet. I believe were he more like Vance or Rubio, he would up his appeal a lot. "I did something and nobody ever seen it before," pisses me off."

Why am I irritated. I see speech as a tool to use wisely and giving benefits to the listener. Trump will go down as a good president but not like Reagan was. Reagan knew the power of good words.
 
Yeah, that happens too. A good friend of mine was married for 18 years. He told me the first 5 years were great, then his wife got pregnant, and it was all downhill from there.

She was a successful woman, who then threw it all away. My wife figures she suffered a form of post partum depression, but never sought help. They divorced and she is still a basket case.
In the case of our sons, the children are older so postpartum depression doesn't appear to be the factor.

I'm thinking it has more to do with changes in social messaging and psychological influence. :sigh2:
 
Yeah, that happens too. A good friend of mine was married for 18 years. He told me the first 5 years were great, then his wife got pregnant, and it was all downhill from there.

She was a successful woman, who then threw it all away. My wife figures she suffered a form of post partum depression, but never sought help. They divorced and she is still a basket case.
We have among us Democrats who are basket cases. Schumer, and Jeffries are afflicted. So is Brennan, the Face the nation woman and Welker of Meet the press, so women also get afflicted.
 
In the case of our sons, the children are older so postpartum depression doesn't appear to be the factor.

I'm thinking it has more to do with changes in social messaging and psychological influence. :sigh2:
Possibly. I don't know your situation, so will defer to your judgment.
 
No, this was before he got caught. Charles attracted several women who virtually worshipped him. This was maybe earlier than you were born. They lived in Southern CA on a dumpy piece of land and he got the girls to murder Sharon Tate who was an actress. Then they killed a couple at their home days later. He was a strange person. He did not kill anybody but was sentenced to death. CA aparently felt sorry for killers and converted their sentences to life in prison where he died.

View attachment 1228692

Ah ok, thanks for elaborating...I'm somewhat familiar with that bizarre horrible story. That's similar to what I meant when I said it's a strange phenomenon how some criminals become sort of 'celebrities' and actually have women who want to marry them.

I didn't know that he never actually killed someone himself. Gosh, now that I think about it, the way he was able to convince people to commit those heinous murders makes me think there must've been a spiritual (demonic) force at work there. Also, I'm not very familiar with the Jonestown cult story... but in that case too it's probably also a demonic thing. But of course I know not everyone will agree with that. Anyway, I don't want to make a Captain Obvious statement, but I think it's clear that being a "natural leader" in and of itself is not necessarily a good thing always, even if people are attracted to that. Thanks again.
 
15th post
The moral strength of an alpha male can shape the behavior of the group he is associated with, usually without saying a word.
That is true.

What is also true, is that can also be weaponized to brainwash those in that group.

A leader sees the weakness in his group and provides ways of strengthening them on their own terms, so they grow as individuals.
An abuser sees the weakness in his group and exploits it for domination and control over others, in order to carry out his agenda.
 
Trump is not and has never been an "alpha male". Trump is weak beta who longs to be respected. He is extremely insecure and cannot stand to be questioned, and needs constant praise and gratitude. He humiliates those who disagree with him, and is very vengeful. These traits are never found in alphas.

Trump is easily manipulated. He flip flops and changes his mind based on who he talked to last. He is obsessed with "winning". These are not the traits of an alpha male. And he cannot stand to be questioned, criticized, or challenged.

Alpha males are natural leaders. They don't need to threaten or bully anyone to get them to follow them. The are intelligent, assertive and confident, and they inspire confidence in those they lead.

THIS is the exact definition of what Democrat Projection IS.

The strong who oppose them and know how to defeat them are met with catcalls of violence, hate, ridicule, harassment, and slander from the weak.
 
There's a case to be made that some with very high sense of their "self-worth" (I'm better than all the rest) also have a heavy dose of ego.
I wasn't talking about ego, I was talking about the mentality of basic logics of men and women. Men provide for the family, women provide for the home and the husband.

Ego has more to do with being alpha minded than it does being a working man.

Ego can also be detrimental to working men, as they can take the stance of "man of the house" a bit too far.........but then we'd be getting into abuse, and thats not what this particular post is about.
 
On a related note~perspective;

Robert A. Heinlein famously stated, "A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."

Context​

This quote is from Heinlein's novel "Time Enough for Love," published in 1973. In this work, Heinlein emphasizes the importance of versatility and the ability to perform a wide range of tasks. He suggests that humans should strive for a broad skill set rather than confining themselves to narrow specializations, which he associates with insects.

Interpretation​

Heinlein's quote advocates for a well-rounded approach to life, encouraging individuals to develop diverse skills and competencies. This perspective challenges the modern trend of specialization in various fields, suggesting that being a "jack of all trades" can be more beneficial than being an expert in just one area.

Additional​

Specialization:
"Knowing more and more about less and less until you know everything about nothing."
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom