The Alpha Buddah, Corey Worthington.
What I’m about to type here is not going to make me any new friends. I know because any discussion of what constitutes Alpha characteristics in a Man always becomes clouded by the self-perceptions of how well we think we align with them. As I’ve covered in prior postings, the ‘community’, the ‘manosphere’, the new understanding of gender relations that’s picked up momentum for the last 12 years has always generated it’s own terminologies for more abstract concepts. The danger in this is that these terms lack real, universal definition. For purposes of illustrating a concept these terms are usually serviceable – we have a general understanding of what makes for a ‘Beta’ or a Herb, or a man who falls into a ‘provider’ mentality. Even ‘Alpha’ in a specific context is useful as an illustrative tool, when the subject isn’t directly about ‘Alpha-ness’. It’s when we try to universally define what constitutes Alpha that the sparks start to fly. So before you continue on reading further, think about what you believe makes a guy Alpha. Got it in your head now? Good, now put all of that aside, purge that from your head, and read the next few paragraphs from the perspective that you don’t know anything about Alpha.
I was first introduced to the Alpha Buddah courtesy of Roissy and this post “Umm, sorry?” You can go ahead and read this from the Chateau’s perspective, and I think the analysis is pretty good. I call Corey the Alpha Buddah not in the hopes that men will aspire to his almost Zen like ‘being’ in Alpha, but rather to provide an example of Alpha in it’s most pure form. He literally IS Alpha, unclouded by pretense, afterthought, or conscious awareness of any influence that could have a hope of prompting introspection about his state.
Corey Worthington is a piss poor example of a human being, but he’s a textbook example of Alpha. I could use a lot of adjectives to describe this kid, but “beta” wouldn’t be one of them. What’s funny, and a bit ironic, is this kid has probably never come across Mystery Method or “the community” or even heard of ‘peacocking’ and he gets naturally what millions of guys pay small fortunes at PUA seminars to acquire over the course of a lifetime. He’s a selfish little prick, but what makes him insulting to ‘normal’ men is his having the natural, internalized Alpha bravado so many AFCs wish they had. If you could bottle and sell this Alpha essence, you’d be rich beyond imagine.
Right about now all of those self-affirming preconceptions you had about Alpha-ness (that I told you to stow away before reading this) are probably yelling to be let out of the mental box you put them in. “,..but, but Rollo, how can you possibly think this arrogant douchebag kid could ever be an example of anything remotely Alpha?!” You’ll be pleased to know I fully empathize your outrage. You work hard to be a “better man”, you put in the self analysis, you paid your dues coming to terms with unplugging and reinventing yourself. You’re a success, Corey is fuck-up. Corey’s not a better Man than you are, however, he understands Alpha better than you do.
Alpha is mindset, not a demographic.
Alpha is as Alpha does, it isn’t what we say it is. There are noble Alphas and there are scoundrel Alphas, the difference is all in how they apply themselves. There’s a tendency to approach every “Alpha” argument from what a guy thinks is righteousness; ergo, his personal definition of Alpha is what appeals best to his sense of virtue. He earned his Alpha cred, played by the rules, and by God people (women) should respect that. However, the sad truth is that prisons are full of Alpha males who simply channeled their drive toward destructive and anti-social endeavors. There are plenty of examples of indifferent Asshole Alphas who you wouldn’t say are upstanding moral leaders at all, yet women will literally kill each other (or themselves) in order to bang them because they exude a natural Alpha-ness. Just as Corey does here. There are Alpha drug dealing gang leaders, and there are Alpha husbands, fathers and leaders of industry. It’s all in the application. Genghis Khan was Alpha as fuck, and a leader-of-men, but probably would be on most people’s douchebag list for that era. Here’s an illustration:
Guy’s like Corey infuriate men who have invested their self-worth in the accomplishments of what they think ought to be universally appreciated and rewarded. So when they’re confronted with a natural Alpha being undeservedly rewarded for brazenly acting out of accord with what they think the rules ought to be, they seethe with resentment. The natural response in the face of such an inconsistency is to redefine the term ‘Alpha’ to cater to themselves and their accomplishments as “real men” and exclude the perpetrator. The conflict then comes from seeing his new definition of Alpha not being rewarded or even appreciated as well as a natural Alpha attitude and the cycle continues. Your respect (or anyone else’s) for an Alpha has nothing to do with whether or not he possess an Alpha mindset. 3 failed marriages and 100+ lays has nothing to do with his having or not having an Alpha mindset. There are many well respected betas who’ve never had a passing thought of infidelity, or may have 300 lays either with prostitutes or because they possess fame or stunning good looks and women come to him by matter of course.
The take home message here is that you are not Alpha because of your achievements, you have your achievements because you are Alpha. You possess a mindset you either had to develop or it came naturally to you. I constantly field questions from young men asking me whether some action or behavior they displayed to a woman was Alpha, or Alpha enough. The real answer is that Alpha behaviors are manifestations of an Alpha mindset. And just like Corey the Alpha Buddah, the introspect required to wonder if something was or wasn’t Alpha wouldn’t ever be a consideration enough to ask. You almost need to have a childlike understanding to really appreciate what Alpha really is. Kids get Alpha. Even the picked on, introverted, beta-to-be kid has a better understanding of Alpha than most adult men do because he lacks the abstract thinking required to rationalize Alpha for himself. Most men, by our socialization, and to varying degrees, lose this in-born Alpha mindset over time. The naturals, the Corey’s of the world, have a better grasp on it’s usefulness and repurpose it; either to their adulthood advantage or their detriment.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:24 pm
Chuck.
Yeah, this is quite perplexing.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:34 pm
The incontrovertible fact that money is an attractiveness trigger is barely and weakly argued against on PUA blogs. The argument against it is not that money is not an attractiveness trigger, it’s that for some people with some sexual strategies in some parts of their life don’t really need it. Which is true.
Is this all about where your style of alpha rates in the world?
Does it irritate you that women go for men who you deam low value?
Well, if they do, then of course men will learn how to get women that way.
And if they don’t, PUA blogs would not exist.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:37 pm
Check my stuff bro, you might find some of these answers.
http://www.yohami.com
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:38 pm
I can’t help but get the impression that some people are against knowingly and deliberately and specifically being charming and seductive by any means other than becoming a high value male under the definition that meets their personal view of their self, and are against talking about it and are against teaching it.
They think that themed blogs that discuss any other tactics should not exist and at least not have that theme.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:41 pm
Ya, I was going to ask you to check out your blog also.
http://yohami.com/blog/2011/10/04/if-you-want-to-debate-like-you-are-a-feminist-you-have-to/
You debate like a feminist.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:46 pm
Shut up. And do check my stuff.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:50 pm
That’s a very weird reply Yohami. Mr. dissimulation.
I just linked to YOUR blog, and you tell me to read your blog.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:51 pm
Yes, shut up and read.
October 23rd, 2011 at 11:53 pm
I don’t have enough respect for you to read more of your blog.
You are welcome to read my blog if you like.
But I don’t see that your thinking process could be of any value to me. Or anyone.
October 24th, 2011 at 12:01 am
Drop that gay flame wars routine and check my stuff.
Im already reading your stuff.
October 24th, 2011 at 12:07 am
No, I’m serious, your thought processes don’t warrant more attention. Your ideas are disjointed and jumbled and full of internal contradictions. Plus you don’t respond to alternate ideas. It’s pointless to discuss things with you, because you don’t meaningfully engage.
If you have something on topic to say that is of value, say it here, and I may respond.
October 24th, 2011 at 12:09 am
Are you in Asia? whats the deal.
October 24th, 2011 at 12:33 am
This was a thought provoking post, Rollo; especially the Venn diagram. Thank you for all of it.
Being the man I am (focused on results benefiting personal improvement), I find it most efficient to simply define Beta and avoid such behaviors.
In short:
I never worry if my choices are Alpha – on occasion, I worry if they’re Beta.
This may seem like splitting hairs but, in practice, I find it a path much more readily traveled.
I doubt myself far less than I would otherwise.
Also, the real issue at heart (regarding female relations) is that Beta behavior is nothing more than communicating (in femme-speak) that one is NOT a viable candidate for sexual congress.
Heterosexual women are programmed to want to have sex with males. And, like the children they often seem to be, they need to be TOLD what to do. They are built with a deep-seated desire for externally imposed direction and supporting encouragement.
The reason they loathe Beta’s so very much and with such vitriol is that they are being led (again, in femme-speak) to go against everything they WANT to do.
Were I to tell a Man to do something against his very nature I would get – in terms of results – the same effect.
That’s my 2¢ on the matter.
October 24th, 2011 at 12:39 am
Because game blogs never mention internalizing an alpha frame.
October 24th, 2011 at 12:58 am
Jesus Christ….how about we all just whip our dicks out and measure to see who gets the final word on alpha.
Frankly, I think it was nailed right here:
The classic example of defining, say, “courage” is the golden mean between two equally malignant vices, which are “rashness” and “cowardice.”
Alpha is the golden mean between indifference (sociopathy/solipsism) and over-investment (beta obsequiousness/dependency). So rather than having a single opposite, like a two-dimensional virtue, alpha lies at the center of many opposites, like an interior focal point of a multi-dimensional sphere.
Seems to me that arguing over and over whether alpha is alpha because it is alpha or whether it produces some measurable, empirical outcome (gets girls, gets pussy, generates attraction) is almost a sort of mental masturbation “how many angels dance on the head of a pin”. I think the point which I fully agree with is that the emphasis should NOT be on getting pussy. It should be acting, interacting, verbaliiziing with the right frame, right body language, etc. Getting pussy just flows from that.
I think the money, status, etc. just confuses the issue. Is Mark Zuckerberg an alpha? Really? When I was bouncing, I worked with a guy who didn’t have shit besides his motorcycle who was probably the most alpha guy I’ve ever met in my life. Would he be the same level of alpha in a tuxedo cocktail party discussing modern art? Probably not. So yeah, alpha is contextual.
In terms of achieving the conventional “trappings of success”, someone should do that if they want that FOR THEMSELVES. I think the problem is a lot of guys want that stuff because they think that stuff will get them laid. I think the counterargument which I think is right is that having Game will get you laid just as easily if not easier then rolling up to the club in your Porsche, and it is a helluva lot cheaper so pursue that stuff because you want it for you, not to get laid.
October 24th, 2011 at 1:04 am
And how can you have a meaningful and useful consensus of what is “right”, unless it is measurable against the real world of outcomes?
And why would you want to?
Don’t you realize that game blogs are about game, and what the purpose of game is?
Or do you think PUA blogs are about being the best person you can be?
Why are people against having a goal and getting it done? Why MUST pussy only be a side effect?
October 24th, 2011 at 1:20 am
“Why MUST pussy only be a side effect?”
Because when pussy is the holy grial, pussy chooses to go with somebody else.
Because when pussy defines whats valuable, you end up with no value.
Because when pussy sets the rules, you become a follower.
Because when pussy is worth working for, it makes you work – instead of jumping on your lap when you least expect it.
Because pussy wants to be your side effect, pussy doesnt want to be your goal.
Because pussy IS a side effect.
Because pussy comes easy when pussy is not the objective.
Because pussy is looking, itself, for a big cock, and your cock is bigger when you´fe focused on other stuff other than pussy.
Because investing 20% of energy on pussy brings 80% of the pussy, assuming you use that remaining 80% to work on your big cock.
Because pussy has its own programming, and its programming is about to catch the real deal, and pussy is always bussy trying to taste and catch the best cock around, and the best cock is always at the top of each circle pussy can gain access to. So if you capitalize any of these circles or create your own, pussy will find you. In hordes.
Because its easier to work on your cock and let pussy come, than chase pussy.
Because when you chase pussy, it runs away.
Because pussy only deserves a second place.
Because your own life is more important.
————–
Actually. Scratch that. This is not a “MUST”. You can do whatever you want. This is just common sense advice.
Women are looking for your big cock. Use your energy to make your cock really big, instead of using it to chase pussy. Pussy doesnt like to be chased. Pussy doesnt like the pedestal. Pussy. Oh man. Pussy is so hungry.
But other than this debate about what should be effect of what, of course, learn every trick on the book about how to deal with pussy. Learn to understand pussy, how to handle pussy and how to make pussy come. Because pussy has a different language. And pussy can and will get angry often if you miss the cues, and if you have a big cock and you have lots of pussy around, you better be prepared to deal with them.
These hordes can do damage.
October 24th, 2011 at 1:21 am
I trade financial markets (stocks, futures, options, etc.). One of the things that took me the longest to internalize (years) was to focus on the process of correct trading, not the final profit/loss of an individual trade. In fact, you can do the right thing and lose money and wrong thing and make money on an individual trade.
If you read interviews with any of the great traders, guys who have made millions or even billions like a Paul Tudor Jones, they all say focus on doing the right thing, not making money. Making money flows naturally if you trade correctly. You either get this or you don’t. But you can’t obsess on making money instead of using the right process to trade.
I think what some have been saying here is getting pussy/getting laid is the wrong focus for “being alpha”. Being alpha precedes the getting pussy part. That said, I don’t think a person can just imagine up in their head their own personal fantasy of alpha, and for example if they can’t pull redefine alpha to suit their own circumstances.
October 24th, 2011 at 1:22 am
“Why MUST pussy only be a side effect?”
Because when pussy is the holy grial, pussy chooses to go with somebody else.
Because when pussy defines whats valuable, you end up with no value.
Because when pussy sets the rules, you become a follower.
Because when pussy is worth working for, it makes you work – instead of jumping on your lap when you least expect it.
Because pussy wants to be your side effect, pussy doesnt want to be your goal.
Because pussy IS a side effect.
Because pussy comes easy when pussy is not the objective.
Because pussy is looking, itself, for a big cock, and your cock is bigger when you´fe focused on other stuff other than pussy.
Because investing 20% of energy on pussy brings 80% of the pussy, assuming you use that remaining 80% to work on your big cock.
Because pussy has its own programming, and its programming is about to catch the real deal, and pussy is always bussy trying to taste and catch the best cock around, and the best cock is always at the top of each circle pussy can gain access to. So if you capitalize any of these circles or create your own, pussy will find you. In hordes.
Because its easier to work on your cock and let pussy come, than chase pussy.
Because when you chase pussy, it runs away.
Because pussy only deserves a second place.
Because your own life is more important. Putting yourself first will make you happier.
————–
Actually. Scratch that. This is not a “MUST”. You can do whatever you want. This is just common sense advice.
Women are looking for your big cock. Use your energy to make your cock really big, instead of using it to chase pussy. Pussy doesnt like to be chased. Pussy doesnt like the pedestal. Pussy. Oh man. Pussy is so hungry.
But other than this debate about what should be effect of what, of course, learn every trick on the book about how to deal with pussy. Learn to understand pussy, how to handle pussy and how to make pussy come.
Because pussy has a different language. And pussy can and will get angry often if you miss the cues, and if you have a big cock and you have lots of pussy around, you better be prepared to deal with them.
These hordes can do damage.
October 24th, 2011 at 1:31 am
Getting any particular pussy is a focus that can detract from game.
Getting pussy in general is not.
There is nothing about having a goal that is incompatible with holding an alpha frame.
But you know that. In fact it’s what you just said.
Internalizing an alpha frame is covered completely well within the framework of being attractive to women.
You don’t need to bring in anything else.
Because an alpha frame is attractive to women, there is nothing about having a goal of being attractive to women that detracts from having an alpha frame.
October 24th, 2011 at 1:41 am
You guys have already agreed that an alpha frame is attractive. So there seems to be no disagreement that alpha traits can be described accurately as traits that are attractive to women.
You just don’t want to be consciously aware that alpha traits are attractive to women, and don’t want to know if some traits are not attractive. Because you just want to “be yourself”.
October 24th, 2011 at 1:47 am
…
October 24th, 2011 at 2:06 am
“Being alpha just coincidentally happens to match up 100% with having traits that are sexually arousing to women, but if I’m aware of this it will destroy my ability to hold an alpha frame”
Well done guys.
October 24th, 2011 at 2:10 am
So close! here:
“Being alpha just coincidentally happens to match up 100% with having traits that are sexually arousing to women, but if MY ONLY GOAL IS TO BE SEXUALLY AROUSING TO WOMEN, this it will destroy my ability to hold an alpha frame”
Perfect.
October 24th, 2011 at 2:13 am
Did anybody anywhere ever say or imply that those interested in being charming and seductive should not have or do not have other interests and goals?
Is there anything incompatible with having the goal of getting pussy and getting pussy? Is there anything incompatible with with having the aim of being charming and being charming?
I think you don’t really get the whole logic thing.
October 24th, 2011 at 2:19 am
And did anyone say being “aware” was a problem? you´re the one with a beef against an imaginary enemy here bro. I checked your blog, you are ok guy and not a crazy fucker. I liked your entries from some years ago. For some reason, though, you are arguing like some religious crappula against non existent religion haters. Like you were in the middle of manboobz fighting with some rain of human spit. You´re not. Relax dude.
Nobody here is hating game, at least not today. I have my contempt for PUA but the discussion is not even about that.
I said this: defining Alpha by its effects is misguiding to get there. Got it? its a simple line. Now you can disagree with it, thats welcome. But if you are to disagree, at least be in the same page and disagree with a counter argument. Are we on the same page finally? this:
“Being alpha just coincidentally happens to match up 100% with having traits that are sexually arousing to women, but if MY ONLY GOAL IS TO BE SEXUALLY AROUSING TO WOMEN, this it will destroy my ability to hold an alpha frame”
Is that something you agree with? or something you dont agree with?
October 24th, 2011 at 2:46 am
“Being alpha just coincidentally happens to match up 100% with having traits that are sexually arousing to women, but if MY ONLY GOAL IS TO BE SEXUALLY AROUSING TO WOMEN, this it will destroy my ability to hold an alpha frame”
You never answer any of my questions, so I see no reason to answer yours.
But I’ll be generous.
I disagree with you. It is possible to have in the moment the only goal being to sexually arouse a woman, and to sexually arouse her.
And in general it is physically impossible to have that as your only goal in life.
There is nothing whatsoever incompatible with that goal and holding an alpha frame.
Of course no one is advocating it as the one and only be all and end all of existence. I never did. You never did. No one ever did.
It’s just not a problematic goal.
October 24th, 2011 at 2:53 am
“It is possible to have in the moment the only goal being to sexually arouse a woman, and to sexually arouse her.”
Yes, it is possible to have, at any moment, the only goal of arousing a woman, and arousing her. But that wasnt the question.
October 24th, 2011 at 2:56 am
Is it imcompatible with “being alpha” to have as part of your motivation to be alpha to realize the positive effects of being alpha as being attractive to women?
In other words, can an alpha want to be alpha in order to attract women?
October 24th, 2011 at 2:59 am
That wasn’t the question. I answered something else because I said “in the moment” instead of in general.
Bullshit. I answered your general question. I said that your question is meaningless because no one can in general have that as their aim all the time.
Look, it’s simple. Wanting to get laid and knowing how to do it does not get in your way. Being alpha in order to get laid is fine – it won’t stop you from knowing how to be alpha or from being alpha.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:00 am
“Is it imcompatible with “being alpha” to have as part of your motivation to be alpha to realize the positive effects of being alpha as being attractive to women?”
Wanting women is compatible with being alpha, and compatible with the driven of being alpha. Its a big chunk of it. The presence of women pushes the competition.
“In other words, can an alpha want to be alpha in order to attract women?”
Theres nothing wrong with wanting to attract women. It only becomes “wrong”, with quotes, when thats the sole motivation to be alpha -> it clashes with the attributes that make alpha attractive in the first place.
Short answer, no. Long answer, women are part of the motivation.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:03 am
“That wasn’t the question. I answered something else”
Yes, thats what you did.
“Wanting to get laid and knowing how to do it does not get in your way.”
Wanting to get laid and knowing how to do it doesnt get in your way, thats correct. Thats not what we´re discussing though.
“Being alpha in order to get laid is fine”
Nope, logic crumbles there.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:06 am
You can have any idea of “to be alpha” and motivation for it that you want.
I don’t care if I’m “alpha” or not. It means nothing to me.
I care about attracting and manipulating women.
Your alpha means nothing to me.
And my interest and ability in attracting women in no way gets in the way of achieving that.
This is a purpose specific interest.
I have no interest in your vague notions of alpha. I could care less about that idea.
The whole reason to talk about alpha, is ONLY to talk about attracting women.
That is the purpose and goal. There is no other purpose and goal. You don’t need any other purpose and goal.
If something is attractive to women, and you want to have that, then get it.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:13 am
Thats fine bro. You dont have to care. Enjoy the ride.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:17 am
The whole reason to talk about alpha, ****is ONLY to talk about attracting women.****
That is the purpose and goal. ****There is no other purpose and goal.**** You don’t need any other purpose and goal.
OK. Thought experiment.
So in your world, if an all powerful magic genie made all the women disappear and the population was 100% men, you believe the concept of alpha would lose all meaning and distinction. In a world with no women, there is no difference between the alpha and non-alpha? Is that what you are saying?
October 24th, 2011 at 3:19 am
You have a platonic notion of alpha as a thing. I have a functional notion of it of a thing that does something.
My reason to use the concept is functional, and only functional. It has meaning only in relation to the function.
I use the word as part of a toolbox of tools to do a specific thing.
I mentioned from the beginning. The concept, from a PUA point of view, is useful as a tool. This is why people use it. As a tool.
If you have ideas about being the uberman and following interests that don’t relate to being attractive, that is fine. Do that. But let people have a concept that means olpha.
Just let people have and use that concept.
It’s a tool, and only a tool.
Olpha.
It’s a functional idea used ONLY to perform a function.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:21 am
To me, yes.
I care nothing about having status among men. I can’t fuck them and they smell wrong.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:27 am
“My reason to use the concept is functional, and only functional. It has meaning only in relation to the function.”
Thats fine. Alpha (not Olpha) is functional too. Just not functional about getting women “only”. It has other functions, other roles, and it stars with roles/functions amongst men and the men ladder and hierarchies. Alpha translates to dominance, resources, power, power, power. And ultimately it expresses through behaviors / traits. But its all 100% functional. In my personal case, Alpha is allowing me to do greater stuff than the people around me, and makes me really privileged. So, it isnt just a romantic thing. If I make it big, its going to be not because of my inner and born traits or faculties, but because I developed Alpha. Alpha opens every door out there. Functional. Very.
“If you have ideas about being the uberman and following interests that don’t relate to being attractive, that is fine. Do that. But let people have a concept that means olpha.”
Yeah, Im on my way to Uberman. Along the way, women jump on my lap. So when I see other guys trying to get laid, hey, Im generous see?. If anyone want to make getting women easier for themselves, they might try the Uberman road. But its not for everyone. You can use what works for you.
“It’s a functional idea used ONLY to perform a function.”
No beef with that.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:27 am
To me, yes.
I care nothing about having status among men.
OK then. I think we just identified the key point of disagreement. The diagram above has something about “leader of men”. But yeah, I think what you are talking about is olpha. Alpha is something else I think more along the lines of what Yohami and I are thinking of. Olpha, alpha. Go for whichever works for you.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:31 am
This is why I entered the conversation suggesting a different term.
People have specific attributes in mind when they say alpha.
But seduction is not always about those attributes.
Seduction needs a term that means all the qualities that women are attracted to, and how they are displayed attitudinally.
Seduction requires that term.
It is already currently social convention to use the term alpha for that. I’m sure you don’t disagree. That’s how it is commonly used and generally accepted to be used.
The concept needs a word.
So put aside your idea of alpha, when you want to join in on the discussion where people use the word alpha. They don’t mean what you mean.
They mean olpha.
Now we can get on the same page and talk about how to seduce women.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:36 am
The easiest way to seduce women is being an attractive high value guy and let them fight for you. You put the effort on being that high value guy, they put the effort of jumping on you lap.
The other way is to go on each one individually and convince them you are one they would like to fight for. Then strong legs for running when the shitstorm comes.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:37 am
Now we can get on the same page and talk about how to seduce women.
But that isn’t everyone’s singular objective. I’m not reading this blog and commenting “to seduce women”. I’d go to fastseduction.com for that. Rollo can correct me if I am wrong, but I think the scope here is a bit broader than “to seduce women”. I think here we are trying to learn more about being alpha not olpha.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:37 am
And of course every aspect of your Alpha that is attractive to women is by definition olpha.
Every aspect of your Alpha that is neutral or not attractive is not olpha.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:39 am
Every aspect of Alpha is attractive to women, even the negative aspects of it. Nothing neutral about Alpha.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:39 am
What? This entire blog is about nothing other than relating with women.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:40 am
“being an attractive high value guy” = being attractive to women = having and displaying the traits that are attractive to women = olpha.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:42 am
Nope, because all of the rest of the stuff about status among men, hierarchies, power, and the behaviors / traits that those imply, are all attractive.
You can have some of the behaviors and traits and learn how to do that, but, without the day-to-day reality to back your behavior on, its a hard thing to do. Been there done that. Hard work.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:45 am
I don’t see how or where or why you are disagreeing with the definition of alpha traits being the traits that are attractive to women.
Draw two circles. In one circle put all the traits that are sexually attractive to women. Label that circle olpha.
In another circle put all the traits that you consider alpha.
Do the two circles coincide 100%?
If not, what is different between the two circles? Where do they not overlap?
October 24th, 2011 at 3:50 am
“I don’t see how or where or why you are disagreeing with the definition of alpha traits being the traits that are attractive to women.”
All the Alpha traits are attractive to women. What I´ve been saying is that Alpha are really about other things, and happen to be attractive to women as a side-effect. So if you want to be Alpha (not Olpha), which includes men dominance leadership and the whole koolaid, having the objective as being attractive, as the main motivator, isnt a good motivator for Alpha (as opposed to Olpha)
“Do the two circles coincide 100%?”
The circles coincide 100%. But having pussy as your main drive is not one of the attributes of the circle. Women are not attracted to that specific trait. When that trait is the predominant one, it sabbotagges the whole crusade.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:52 am
What? This entire blog is about nothing other than relating with women.
Relating /= Seducing
Again, I’m not the author, but this below seems to be more to me than “how to get laid by displaying X, Y, Z”
http://rationalmale.wordpress.com/category/positive-masculinity/
October 24th, 2011 at 3:54 am
Yohami
Great! Then we’ve agreed that the definition of alpha traits are the traits that are attractive to women!
Phew!
That took a long time!
October 24th, 2011 at 3:56 am
Do the two circles coincide 100%?
If not, what is different between the two circles? Where do they not overlap?
You JUST got done telling me that being a leader of men doesn’t matter to olpha because “you can’t fuck them and they smell wrong”. So right there, is one thing where they don’t overlap.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:56 am
Ok, relating then.
This blog is about relating with women, and on all the blogs where alpha is used in relation to relating with women it is primarily used in the context of and for the function of talking about relating with women.
October 24th, 2011 at 3:58 am
Oh come on. From the get go I put into the circle as the very definition all traits that are attractive to women.
You asked me personally if I would care about being a leader of men, if being a leader of men no longer attracted women.
Personally, no, I would not care.
That doesn’t mean I don’t recognize that as an attractive trait to women.
October 24th, 2011 at 4:01 am
What Mike said.
October 24th, 2011 at 6:50 am
Frank became rich because of motivation A.
Bill became rich because of motivation B.
Frank worked out and got his body into tip top condition for motivation A.
Bill did the same for motivation B.
Frank learned a wide variety of social skills for motivation A.
Bill learned a wide variety of social skills for motivation B.
Cindy comes up, and meets Frank and Bill. Oh, Bill! I’m not attracted to YOU! You have all the traits I’m attracted to for the wrong reason!
Frank! I love you!
October 24th, 2011 at 6:55 am
Bill, because you know exactly what you want and are going after it directly, instead of indirectly, you are a complete fake!
Frank, because your motivation was not aimed at the goal, only YOU can get the goal! Me! Because you refused to be conscious that I was your goal all along, I may be your prise! Hooray for unconscious motivations! Consciousness will only get in your way and hamper your progress!
I can only love a man who doesn’t try to be attractive on purpose, but is attractive for any other motivation other than being attractive.
I love men for their motivation, not for their money or fame or social skills or body or fucking ability. I love the real inner man. That’s what really counts to me!
October 24th, 2011 at 1:58 pm
“The easiest way to seduce women is being an attractive high value guy and let them fight for you. You put the effort on being that high value guy, they put the effort of jumping on you lap.
The other way is to go on each one individually and convince them you are one they would like to fight for. Then strong legs for running when the shitstorm comes.”
Exactly.
When you experience what it is like to have women begging for a piece of you instead of having to spend hours each week collecting phone numbers and dealing with flaky bitches, you will know. The universe opens up and exposes all of its secrets. You go from being a victim of hypergamy to being its beneficiary.
I have been watching Entourage reruns on Spike. All of the guys in the crew get laid, but it is Vince (the famous actor) who is banging waitresses in closets ten minutes after meeting them.
You don’t have to be an actor who gets paid $10million per film. ALl it takes is having SOME kind of social status. That’s why guitarists in shitty indy bands do well.
October 24th, 2011 at 9:06 pm
At least you aren’t saying that if your motivation to get social status was pussy then it wouldn’t work.
But at the same time I don’t see how you are saying anything that hasn’t been noticed and agreed with a million times on any pua board.
They just also talk about other methods.
Which apparently is somehow or other distasteful to you, even if you can’t quite put your finger on why without sounding ridiculous.
October 25th, 2011 at 2:03 pm
YOHAMI: Your words are clear and you are correct. Most of the repetitive misunderstanding is willful: a will to misunderstand to avoid honest acknowledgment of a superior point. Very common in rhetoric. This is Socrates vs. the sophists. The dialectic doesn’t always end with a clear acknowledgment that an interlocutor’s mind has been changed. It’s largely their own problem.
October 25th, 2011 at 2:48 pm
xsplat wrote: “If you were to spend time on a blog that spoke of ice cream, would you also get the impression that people there were ONLY concerned with ice cream and were unable to appreciate or persue anything other than ice cream?”
If the ice cream blog regularly discussed politics and science and race and economics, as Roissy’s does, and then sought to connect it to ice cream then we would be able conclude something about the author’s opinion on the vital importance of ice cream. I won’t bother citing the many posts (and many more comments to posts) that assert a blind faith in the idea that sex is the engine of the universe — because the sentiment is repeated so frequently there (and here on Rollo’s blog as well). Heck, I’m sure the research-inclined could even dig up an xsplat confession to that effect.
This is largely a function of age. When you’re sowing your wild oats the experience is the profoundest of your young life, and you seek to attribute all truth to that experience. Then you mature and realize there is more in the world than dreamt of in such a philosophy, and it’s not all the consequence of a waning libido. (Do men’s libidos ever really wane, by the way, or is deterioration assumed and therefore treated as a fact of age?) Roissy in his honest moments admits to this, but he has a reputation to uphold as well.
Now add in the frat-boy mentality that is suspicious of anything above a young pledge’s sexual liberation and enlightenment, and you get monomaniacal, elementary-level discussions of the nature of man.
PUAs have accidentally split open a very deep but very narrow truth, and they are plundering this vein of gold with all they know how for instant gain. Jolly fucking good on them!
Game 2.0 is strip mining, applicable across the entire field of social and cultural dynamics beyond the catclaw ruts of rutting. We are not satisfied with a handful of nuggets or a flash in the pan. We’ve come with heavy machinery to get the whole fracking motherlode. Flirting with bizarre evo-psych constructs and libertarian (and racial) paranoias that so infect the discussions beyond pick-up is like using tinker toys on a granite mountain. Amateurs and dabblers have limits.
Look, like anything else, men are baited by pussy. What is the phenomenon that has always driven the bleeding edge of technology, from printing to telephony to videotapes to the internet? Access to VAGINA. Same with Game. Men happen upon a hidden truth of the social dynamic — and a truth that has been purposely concealed for a century — their first inclination will be to use this found wisdom to lever some pussy. And in this free-for-all early-century cock carousel? To obtain access to the street-magic that gives the schlubbiest of schlubs the possibility of harem? It is a very, very special interregnum for us early adopters, before the rest of the culture catches up to all the Pretty Lies Perishing.
You can either go with the rapidly developing revolution, be at the forefront and lead it, or you can be the aging frat president, who still wears the styles that were fashionable in his prime, pretending the entire world hasn’t passed you by. At a certain point you will become an object of fun. Without even noticing.
October 25th, 2011 at 2:55 pm
Mike C wrote: “One of the things that took me the longest to internalize (years) was to focus on the process of correct trading, not the final profit/loss of an individual trade.”
Most illuminating and most apt metaphor yet. Perfect.
October 25th, 2011 at 3:05 pm
YOHAMI wrote: “Because investing 20% of energy on pussy brings 80% of the pussy, assuming you use that remaining 80% to work on your big cock.”
This combined with trader Mike C’s testimony above explains the origin of the term, “Big Swinging Dick.”
Great, great book.
October 25th, 2011 at 3:35 pm
xsplat: look up the term casuistry.
Here, I did it for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casuistry
Yohami and Mike C and Good Luck Chuck believe the actual is superior to the mimic, both in essence and in effect.
You alternate between arguments. At times you claim the actual alpha and the alpha mimic are distinctions without a difference. And other times you claim the that actual alphaness is irrelevant outside of sexual conquest (which you back up by repeated references to the focus of pick-up blogs, which is sexual conquest).
The only real disagreement between you and them boils down to your priorities: pussy is the the only conceivable reason to discuss alphatude on a site like this, just as kittens on kitten sites or ice cream on ice-cream sites. Your protest has been noted. We beg to differ.
But what’s amusing to us is the self-appointment pew-patrol vibe of true-believers like you, as though anyone who brings up his interest in game beyond the applications of pick-up are anathema and must be rigorously debated into acknowledging the One True God, Pussilaya.
I am absolutely with Good Luck Chuck with regard to the limits of Roissy’s Peterpanism. It just gets old, and precocious initiates inevitably begin wanting to move up from the kid’s table. Roissy is doing yeoman’s work, like a brilliant high school coach who has a great track record of getting his rough-hewn ghetto kids into top academic colleges. There is a certain virtue to mastering the basics so well that you can bust thousands of men out of their betatude. None of us have what he has. But it’s still just the basics. And many of us are ready for grad school.
They show Mr. Holland’s Opus on a loop at Le Chateau.
October 25th, 2011 at 7:18 pm
Complete nonsense.
Where does the circle not coincide 100%, and in what way does having the motivation to be attractive stop a person from internalizing an alpha frame.
October 25th, 2011 at 7:26 pm
If you have a concept of alpha that does not coincide 100% with the concept of olpha, please explain with concrete examples and details.
And then great – congratulations for having a different concept. Which as I’ve repeated and repeated and repeated is FINE!
My point is that it is pragmatic and useful and a tool to have for a purpose the concept of olpha.
You are welcome to any idea of alpha that you want.
But no, that’s not good enough for you. The very idea of olpha to you is an idea that gets in the way of being a real man. Because the motivation is wrong.
He he he. Crazy anti sex wackos. If you want sex as a motivation to learn something, that something is therefore tainted with impure thoughts.
October 25th, 2011 at 7:34 pm
And yet without the underlying motivation to make money, he’d never have the incentive to learn that skill of trading.
Without the underlying motivation to get chicks, many a great guitarist would never have picked up the guitar.
October 25th, 2011 at 7:43 pm
“Which as I’ve repeated and repeated and repeated” x100
Try reasoning between these repetitions though. There´s an argument on the table.
October 25th, 2011 at 7:46 pm
Oh ya, and I can’t wait for you to come up with an example of how the olpha can’t get the same women that your alpha can, with detailed examples of why.
I’m anticipating more nonsense, but surprise me.
October 25th, 2011 at 7:57 pm
For the purposes of attraction, an attraction based concept of alpha is sufficient.
That’s my premise and if you want to argue against my idea of alpha/olpha, argue exactly against that.
October 25th, 2011 at 8:00 pm
“Oh ya, and I can’t wait for you to come up with an example of how the olpha can’t get the same women that your alpha can, with detailed examples of why.”
Women are attracted to the leader of the men´s group, the most valuable guy in the room, the guy every other man looks up to, the man every other man wants to (or dreams to) challenge. Being that man = Alpha.
You said you dont care about that part… so you tell me.
October 25th, 2011 at 8:41 pm
You are deliberately obtuse.
You just described the olpha. You KNOW you did. You did it on purpose.
You obstinate cunt.
October 25th, 2011 at 8:42 pm
Man you´re really funny.
October 25th, 2011 at 8:53 pm
Still waiting for 8 paragraphs of references to dead philosophers, King.
October 25th, 2011 at 9:00 pm
Are you gonna answer that or…
October 25th, 2011 at 10:58 pm
You use an attraction based definition of alpha to argue that using an attraction based definition of alpha is not accurate.
You’re just dumb.
October 25th, 2011 at 11:07 pm
No. This is not a definition based on attraction:
“the most valuable guy in the room, the guy every other man looks up to, the man every other man wants to (or dreams to) challenge. Being that man = Alpha.”
But attraction what girls feel when they see that guy.
So, answer please. How is Olpha going to generate the same level of attraction as that guy.
October 25th, 2011 at 11:15 pm
Do you have bitch tits? You show no evidence of a testosternonized brain. Logic completely eludes you.
October 25th, 2011 at 11:16 pm
You keep talking about yourself. Care to engage in the argument?
October 25th, 2011 at 11:20 pm
It’s pointless to talk to you yohami. Simple logical statments elude you. You are a man without the faculty of rationality. I’m done wasting my time with you.
October 25th, 2011 at 11:34 pm
No? alright.
October 26th, 2011 at 4:44 am
King A said:
“There is a certain virtue to mastering the basics so well that you can bust thousands of men out of their betatude. None of us have what he has. But it’s still just the basics. And many of us are ready for grad school.”
You need to start a blog brother.
I don’t want to come off a a braggart or a blowhard, but I always feel like I am one step ahead of the prevailing wisdom. This whole masculinity movement has evolved over the past decade. Stuff that I see roissy and others posting today I was writing about two or three years ago and getting chastised for it.
Here’s a prophecy for you.The last domino to fall will be the one that defends American women and tells men that they are bitter, misogynistic losers if we refuse to accept their terms.
Mark my words.
October 26th, 2011 at 8:04 pm
What the fuck is an “olpha”?
You can’t make up words and treat them as sufficient arguments.
Your indignation is clouding your thinking. Who has time for to correct for your weird and random outbursts? I’m amazed at Yohami’s stamina.
October 27th, 2011 at 3:46 am
King A
For the purposes of attraction, an attraction based concept of alpha is sufficient.
That’s my premise and if you want to argue against my idea of alpha/olpha, argue exactly against that.
I’m not arguing against your idea of alpha. You can have any definition of alpha that you want.
I’m supporting the current usage of alpha on PUA forums, and in supporting it suggested the new use of a new term, in order to avoid battling over what alpha really means. You can have alpha mean whatever you want.
The term used on pua boards is a tool, and only a tool, not a thing. Current usage is used for a purpose – not for a definition of a thing.
So if you want to argue against that usage, argue against this and only this:
“For the purposes of attraction, an attraction based concept of alpha is sufficient.”
If you refuse to do that then fine, as I’ve said a hundred million times – you can have any definition of alpha that you want.
Don’t bother seeing if my concept is functionally valid and lacking in internal contradiction. Go with your gut and refuse my concept any validity, irrespective of logic and reason.
And assume that only your concept is allowed to exist.
Even if I label my concept with a different name, and tell you 100000 times that this concept is NOT the same as your concept.
I’m NOT debating what alpha means with you. Is it possible for that to sink in? Can that register in your synapses? No?
I’m positing a different concept (that co-incides with current usage on PUA boards) that means something different than whatever you want alpha to mean.
If you want to disagree with my concept, you must show how it is logically inconsistent. You can not compare it to your concept, as your concept is DIFFERENT. You can’t say that my verb “to open” is not a valid concept because you have a different concept which means “entrance”. Is my verb meaningful and useful? Great.
In order to avoid this debate over whether your term is correct usage, I sidestepped it altogether. Debate me on if olpha is a useful and meantingful term for the use that I have defined for it. That’s it. You can have whatever meaning you want for alpha. Apparently I must mention that 1000,000,000,00000000,0000000 times before your synapses can register it.
Olpha means ALL traits that are sexually attractive to women, including traits that men don’t necessarily hold IN ORDER to be sexually attracted to women. This includes of course being a leader of men. It includes fame, wealth, and power. And good looks. ALL of it.
The concept of olpha (or, interchangeably, the concept of alpha when used on pua boards in a pua context) is that “for the purposes of attraction, an attraction based concept of alpha is sufficient.” Whatever is sexually attractive is labelled alpha, and this is a sufficient definition for the purposes of learning attraction and manifesting attractive behaviors. ALL of them. Including being a leader of men, or whatever you can imagine that is attractive.
October 29th, 2011 at 4:42 am
I don’t see what’s so evil about this Corey guy. He had a party, it got out of control, he didn’t actually do any of the vandalism. And he said he was sorry he just wasn’t willing to grovel and humiliate himself. I expected him to be way worse than he was in that video by the description.
October 29th, 2011 at 4:52 am
But see, really it’s the ‘everyone’ who hates on the alpha that is in the wrong unless he’s seriously hurting people. Betas have no sense of self and find their identity in the group, whatever the majority’s values are. No one should be persecuted for being themselves. That’s why some call these type of people ‘sheeple’.
October 29th, 2011 at 1:18 pm
Agreed
October 29th, 2011 at 5:24 pm
Who’s dropping the ten-paragraph posts on us now?
xsplat wrote: “I’m supporting the current usage of alpha on PUA forums…
That is nonsensical. Alpha is a borrowed term from a much older concept, a concept your interlocutors are trying to reestablish around the smaller context of sexual conquest.
Your forced neologism reminds me of the nerdish taxonomy of Vox Day, who was too cool for the three-part alpha-beta-omega distinctions and had to expand them into a dozen categories, like Gamma and Sigma and Lambda and all kinds of irrelevant, inexplicable, confusing jargon that nobody uses except him.
We don’t have any difficulty keeping the concepts separate without assigning them special little wordflakes. You do. Your further difficulty is refusing the possibility of applying the truths of game more broadly into a social or political dynamic, which leads you to your own personal confusions that nobody cares about much less shares.
“I’m NOT debating what alpha means with you.”
Take your sophistry to the Platonic dialogues then. There you will learn that the very most basic requirement for communication is a mutual agreement on definitions. Otherwise we are all speaking our own private languages past each other, holding fast to preconceptions without ever subjecting them to the test that demonstrates their veracity.
October 30th, 2011 at 4:46 am
I take it that you are granting that the concept of olpha is meaningful, useful, and logically consistent for the purpose defined.
Your concept of alpha, in case you didn’t notice, must logically be a limited subset of olpha. Certain attractive traits are valued above others, and only those subset of attractive traits get to be labelled as “real alpha”.
Of course PUAs discuss amongst themselves about internalizing alpha traits, and about gaining skills and money and a strong body and all other external alpha traits. So it’s not like you have some grand new idea about being real versus being fake.
But your “real” alpha is a subset of olpha.
And that’s fine by me. You can have any definition of alpha that you want.
November 21st, 2011 at 11:10 am
[…] kill their inner Beta, I’d be rich beyond my wildest dreams. Just as I said with about the Alpha Buddha, if I could find a way to bottle the essence of Alpha I’d be set for life. The real truth is […]
March 6th, 2012 at 11:52 am
This guy is a total badass. I want to get some of that essence.
May 18th, 2012 at 12:20 pm
[…] the Alpha mind doesn’t care about feminine priority. He may occasionally say “uhm,…sorry?“, but his first thought isn’t to ask permission from the […]
June 29th, 2012 at 12:10 pm
[…] in as personally identifying a manner as they can muster. In this humble blogger’s estimation Alpha is a state of mind, not a demographic. The manosphere will endlessly debate the qualifications of what is Alpha, but I think for the most […]
July 2nd, 2012 at 11:22 am
[…] with varying shades of Alpha-ness.” Ironically this is exactly the case I make for the Alpha Buddahs of the world – they are blissfully unaware of the latent Alpha ambience they broadcast. It’s just how […]
August 15th, 2012 at 12:08 pm
[…] label for many men, both for the ego and it’s promises of access to unlimited hot girls, there are competing and often self-serving definitions. I’m not immune to this but I do find alot of misleading rubbish it written on the term. […]
August 22nd, 2012 at 12:58 pm
[…] with an assortment of charismatic but unreliable alpha males and “bad boys” who make their vaginas (or just ‘ginas) tingle. Then, sometime in their mid-to-late twenties, these women “hit the wall,” with their so-called […]
August 29th, 2012 at 2:12 pm
[…] Alpha […]
September 23rd, 2012 at 9:59 am
[…] Corey Worthington [trust fund baby game] – http://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/alpha/ […]
October 5th, 2012 at 10:43 am
[…] until KISS had become a music business, show and merchandising juggernaut. In the same vein as the Alpha Buddah, Corey Worthington, Gene is the walking embodiment of the zen-like Alpha essence. Unlike Corey […]
November 12th, 2012 at 10:56 am
[…] have no doubt that manosphere readers subscribing to the “Leaders of Men” definition of Alpha will have their rationales about how Petraeus was never really Alpha, or his actions prove his […]