Alpha Tells

Alpha Tells

For as long as I’ve been writing in the manosphere, the definition of “what is Alpha?” has been the number one point of contention I’ve had to state and restate the most often. I’m not going to rehash this now as I have several posts on the nature of Alpha already linked in the sidebar, so if you’re looking for my take on Alpha that’s where to find it.

However, to lead in to today’s post I need to address the basis of what I believe are the most common misunderstandings about the term Alpha.

Well before the inception of this blog, in the early beginnings of what would evolve into the manosphere there was a need of terminology to describe the more abstract concepts developing in the ‘community’. Some of these analogies and terms are still with the manosphere today, others have morphed into more useful abstractions; Alpha Widows, Hypergamy (in its true nature), the Feminine Imperative, even Red Pill awareness are all examples of established terms or analogies for understood abstractions. Among these are also the concepts of a man being Alpha and Beta.

From The Unbearable Triteness of Hating at CH:

5. Etymology Hate

Hater: Your definition of an alpha male is false. In the animal kingdom, the alpha male is leader of the pack, not a cad/badboy/jerk who pumps and dumps women.

Isn’t it just like a nerd to get hysterical over the appropriation of a narrow-sense scientific term to conveniently illustrate broader truths about men and women.

One of the most common disconnects men encounter with the Red Pill for the first time is equating the term Alpha with its usage in describing the mating habits of Lions, Wolves or Silver Back Gorillas. It’s easy to ridicule or simply dismiss a valid, but uncomfortable, Red Pill truth when you’re simplistically comfortable in defining ‘Alpha Male’  in literal etymological terms.

This is the first resistance blue pill men claim they have with the Red Pill. They have no problem understanding and using abstractions for blue pill concepts they themselves are ego-invested in, but challenge that belief-paradigm with uncomfortable red pill truths and their first resort is to obstinately define Alpha (as well as Hypergamy) in as narrow, binary and literal a sense as they can muster.

“Get in Touch with Your Feminine Beta Side”

The next most common misunderstanding comes from conflating the abstractions of Alpha and Beta with masculine and feminine traits. In this (often deliberate) misdirection, the concepts of being Alpha or Beta become synonymous with being masculine or feminine. This is the personal basis of Alpha and Beta many Purple Pill advocates (really blue pill apologists) comfortably redefine for themselves, to suit themselves.

This purple pill conflation is really just a comforting return the the curse of Jung – anima & animus – if the complete man is an even mix of Alpha and Beta, masculine and feminine, then all the worst aspects of his “betaness” can’t be all bad, and he reinterprets what really amounts to a complete androgyny as “being the best balance”.

Unfortunately, and as blue pill chumps will later attest, the feminine expects to find its paired balance in the masculine, not an equalist idealization of both in the same man. Thus women, on a limbic level, expect men to be Men.

This one of the missives of an equalitarian mindset; that an individualized, egalitarian balance of masculine and feminine aspects in two independent people should replace the natural complementary interdependence of masculine and feminine attributes in a paired balance that humans evolved into.

What purple pill temperance really equates to is a 21st century return to the 20th century feminized meme “men need to get in touch with their feminine sides”… or else risk feminine rejection. 60+ years of post sexual revolution social engineering has put the lie to what an abject failure this concept has been.

What they fail to grasp is that an Alpha mindset is not definitively associated with masculine attributes. There are plenty of high-functioning, masculine men we would characterize as Alpha based on our perception of them in many aspects of life, who nonetheless are abject supplicating Betas with regard to how they interact with, and defer to women.

Whether that disconnect is due to a learned, Beta deference to the feminine (White Knighting), some internalized fear of rejection, or just a natural predisposition to be so with women, isn’t the issue; what matters is that the abstraction of Alpha isn’t an absolute definitive association with the masculine.

Likewise, Beta attributes are neither inherently feminine. As has been discussed ad infinitum in the manosphere, 80%+ of modern men have been conditioned (or otherwise) to exemplify and promote a feminine-primary, supportive Beta role for themselves and as many other men they can convince to identify more with the feminine.

The Beta mindset isn’t so much one of adopting a feminine mindset as it is a deference to, and the support of, a feminine-primary worldview.

The reason purple pill (watered down red pill) ideology wants to make the association of Alpha = Masculine, Beta = Feminine is because the “get in touch with your feminine side” Beta attributes they possess in spades can be more easily characterized as “really” being Alpha if it helps make him the more androgynously acceptable male he mistakenly believes women are attracted to (if not directly aroused by).

Alpha Tells

From jf12:

The sexual alphaness of a male towards a female is exhibited by her wanting to please him, and the sexual betaness of a male is exhibited by him needing to please her. A man’s alphaness obviously and definitionally does not cause her to more require him to please her (i.e. alphaness does not rub off like that). And also, betaness is not transferrable, no matter how much we betas wish that our women-pleasing caused women to want to please us.

Moreover, the social dominance of a male in a male hierarchy is barely correlated with his sexual alphaness, and certainly not causal. There are far too many counterexamples, such as Bill Gates, Napoleon Bonaparte, Horatio Nelson, and the list is very very long.

However, and this is a key sociologically empirical point, the social dominance of a *female* human (the best kind!) in a *female* human hierarchy is extremely correlated, in this precise way: A woman to whom women cater to will 99.9% of the time demand to be catered to by her man. This is why women believe man-pleasing women (I admit there are some) are “lesser”. It is also why men (e.g. me) who have tended to be mated to females who are socially dominant in a female hierarchy are invariably betas. It’s simply false that female-dominant women tend to choose men who demand pleasing.

What critics of an Alpha/Beta dichotomy conveniently sweep under the conversational carpet is that the dichotomy they want to debate only exists in their convenient, personal interpretations of Alpha or Beta mean to them.

From a male perspective we can endlessly debate (from our own personal biases) what we believe constitutes an Alpha state (remember, an abstract term, stay with me here) and the expectations of which we think women should respond to according to those expectation. But it’s women’s instinctive behaviors around Alpha men (or men they contextually perceive so) that provide us with the tells as to how she perceives a man’s Alpha or Beta status.

For as much as we believe women should respond to our definition of Alpha – and despite how women will explain they agree with those self-prescribed definitions – as always, it is their behaviors when in the presence of, or in a relationship with men they perceive as being Alpha (or of higher sexual market value than themselves if you prefer) that they bely their true, instinctual recognitions of Alpha.

In a social environment where men are conditioned to believe that women are as equal, rational agents as men, the belief men put their faith into is that women will appreciate their intrinsic qualities and base their sexual selectivity upon a man’s virtue, bearing, intelligence, humor, and any number of attractive intrinsic qualities. However, the truth of what women base their sexual selectivity upon (arousal) is far more evident in their instinctual, unconditioned behavior when around Alpha men – as well as men’s instinctual sensitivity to that behavior.

There are many examples of this Alpha reactive behavior. I’ll make an attempt to illustrate a few of them here, but I expect there’ll be many more offered in the comment thread an I’ll encourage a discussion of the behaviors that serve as Alpha tells. Rossy/Heartiste has made a sport with his ongoing “spot the Alpha” series of posts in which he analyzes a picture or video of a woman’s reaction to a man who she is obviously has an Alpha interest in as her body language and subcommunications suggest. (h/t to CH for today’s image)

The common criticism of these images is that red pill men would read too much into these displays, but the underlying message in that criticism is rooted in understanding and willfully ignoring what our instinctual perceptions of them are. We know Alpha when we see it, but need an explanation to protect our own ego’s Alpha assessment of ourselves.

The Real Selection

For all the delighted ego ’empowerment’ of women boasting they are the sexual selectors in this life, there is still a nervous uncertainty about being found acceptable themselves to an Alpha lover of higher SMV status than they might otherwise merit. This is where the illusions of an assortive mating model break down for women. If feminine-primary sexual selection were the only element to mating there would be no need for the behaviors women are subject to in seeking the approval from men they perceive as Alpha.

There’s a look, an attitude and a presence women will give to Men for whom they have a natural deference to. I don’t just mean blatant sexual subcommunications like casually biting her lower lip, or the hair twirling that’s almost cliché now. It goes beyond the sexual into a kind of meta-attraction/arousal. While the sexual urgency for an Alpha is strong and manifests in a woman’s forwardness toward him, the meta-attraction is both of submission and a subconscious desire for his approval of her.

Men predisposed to a Beta mindset also display many of these same behavioral cues with the women they hope will appreciate them in the same fashion a woman does for a Man that her hindbrain instinctually knows is of a higher SMV. In Beta men we see these behaviors as evidence of “clinginess” or “neediness” and is an identifiable Beta tell; but in women this natural and unprovoked leaning in to a Man, this desire to submit for his approval, is a positive indicator of Alpha attraction.

This is why, as third party observers, we instinctually find such behavior in men distasteful; we subliminally sense a complementary imbalance between the man and woman.

When a woman makes an unforced effort to please a man with subtle words, unintentional wide-eyed contact, and body positioning / posture you’re dealing with a woman who is compelled to defer to you as Alpha.

That isn’t to say this can’t be faked. In fact strippers, good ones at least, are not just physically arousing, or more sexualized, but are in tune with the deficit most men feel when it comes to this Alpha deference. Beyond just the sexual aspect, one thing that makes strippers so enticing and seductive is that the majority of men are simply unused to the fawning affections and Alpha interest (albeit feigned) of any woman, much less an attractive one.

This is also one reason men become so prone to ONEitis both inside and outside this contrived, transactional, sort of attraction. Men are the True Romantics, they want to believe a woman’s sincerity in her Alpha deference to him.

Does the girl you’re interested in come to you, or do you go to her?

I’ve emphasized the importance of establishing and maintaining Frame for years now, but I sometimes wonder if the importance of holding Frame isn’t lost on most men.

To an equalist mindset this Frame establishment seems like I’m advocating men be domineers of their relationships and a man rely on some dark manipulative psychology to enforce his will in that relationship. That’s not what I’m suggesting for the simple reason that it’s too effort consuming, and genuine desire is unsustainable within that constant effort. Maintaining Frame demands a voluntary, uncoerced, desired compliance.

What I’m suggesting is that men simply not invest themselves in women whose Alpha interest in them is mitigated by doubt or an obvious SMV imbalance. This is difficult for most men as it conflicts with our want for an idealized romance with a woman – a want for a love that requires a mutual definition with a woman lacking the capacity to realize this with him. And it’s within that idealized desire men lose Frame and excuse the behaviors of Alpha deference.

The Medium IS the Message

As I’ve written in the past, the Medium IS the Message with women. On some level of consciousness men instinctually understand their relative status with a woman based on the behaviors she directs toward him.

Is she affectionate without being prompted or only when circumstance makes your comfort needed for her?

Is Amused Mastery an easy default for you, or does she resist even playful attempts at it?

Does she initiate sex with you, or is your provocation only ever the precursor to sex?

Is sex even a priority for her (with you)?

Does she make efforts to make things special for you (you both) or is your relationship one of her grading your efforts in qualifying for her Alpha approval of you?

What most guys think are ‘mixed messages’ or confusing behavior coming from a woman is simply due to their inability (for whatever reason) to make an accurate interpretation of why she’s behaving in such a manner. Usually this boils down to a guy getting so wrapped up in a girl that he’d rather make concessions for her behavior than see it for what it really is. In other words, it’s far easier to call it ‘mixed messages’ or fall back on the old chestnut of how fickle and random women are, when in fact it’s simply a rationale to keep themselves on the hook, so to speak, because they lack any real, viable, options with other women in their lives. A woman that has a high interest level in a guy has no need (and less motivation) to engage in behaviors that would compromise her status with him. Women of all ILs will shit test, and men will pass or fail accordingly, but a test is more easily recognizable when you consider the context in which they’re delivered.

Are you making psychological concessions with a woman who’s never displayed an Alpha deference to you?

3.8 6 votes
Article Rating

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

Speak your mind

210 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@eon re: “The precise interaction evolves over time (to never be demeaning), but it can indefinitely remain the flip-side of the “baby sister” dynamic that men can have even with their older sisters.”

Good point. Us caretaker-men are always always betas. As I mentioned, (natural) alphas are coddled by females, and I believe the reason that most men are betas is because very few women bothering coddling boys babies.

eon
eon
6 years ago

“A baby’s authority is evident as soon as he opens his mouth to cry: mommy then obeys.”

Well, unless the baby slaps his mother’s ass and says “make me a sandwich”, we are using the idea of “obedience” to mean different things.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

re: “we are using the idea of “obedience” to mean different things.”

No, you’re merely wrong, because of being confused, because of the FI. “Me want bottle NOW! NOW! NOW!” is extremely authoritative.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

Her enjoying treating him like a baby, cutting up his steak and feeding it to him = he is alpha

Her complaining that she doesn’t want to treat him like a baby, and she not treating him like a baby = he is beta

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

The lioness bringing a wildebeest leg to feed to him = he is baby = he is alpha

bbb
bbb
6 years ago

The “urgent” needs of her man are always subordinate to the “urgent” needs of her child and the latter gets the benefit of the doubt – every, single, time. Hell, but even an incoming text has priority.

eon
eon
6 years ago

“No, you’re merely wrong, because of being confused, because of the FI. ‘Me want bottle NOW! NOW! NOW!’ is extremely authoritative.”

Are you being serious?

When you are joking, you need to indicate that in some way, since people also come here to learn.

The natural drive of a mother to preserve her progeny by nurturing a helpless baby is in no way equivalent to the natural drive of a woman to submit to the authority and power of a man who is superior to her.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

re: “is in no way equivalent”

What is your proof? Your assertion, because you don’t like the implications otherwise? Your feelings are hurt? I ain’t your momma.

What is my proof? I ask: in what way do the nurturing behaviors of women towards babies and women towards alphas differ?

FYI almost all betas are superior to almost all women, but the women do not nurture betas.

eon
eon
6 years ago

“Her enjoying treating him like a baby, cutting up his steak and feeding it to him = he is alpha.” The point that you seem to be missing is that it only appears, externally, to some, that she is “treating him like a baby”. She is actually enjoying submitting to him by serving him, and the idea that he is a “baby” is the furthest thing from her mind. Her mindset is totally different, even though her actions are coming from the same limited toolbox that she uses for everything. The moment when she starts to consider him to be… Read more »

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

In the photo, the reason that Bottom Boy’s babyish posture is coming across so beta is because *she* isn’t nurturing him. In contrast, if Top Dog were leaning back more passively while she pleasured him he’d come across as even more alpha.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@eon re: mindset vs behavior.

I’m all about the behavior.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

re: women’s limited toolbox.

One big reason that a woman having a baby makes the father more beta is that her toolbox runs dry. She uses up her scant nurturing on the baby, then she complains when her man wants dinner.

Badpainter
Badpainter
6 years ago

eon – “The natural drive of a mother to preserve her progeny by nurturing a helpless baby is in no way equivalent to the natural drive of a woman to submit to the authority and power of a man who is superior to her.” Not the same but the responsive behavior is similar. Admittedly jf12’s metaphor is a bit clumsy as referring to Alpha as a baby would seem to imply weakness and helplessness on his part. However, the weakness/helplessness is on the woman’s part in this model. A mother is helpless to avoid caring for her child, a woman… Read more »

eon
eon
6 years ago

“In the photo, the reason that Bottom Boy’s babyish posture is coming across so beta is because *she* isn’t nurturing him.”

Actually, she isn’t doing anything, because she is asleep.

Do you understand the point of including that photograph?

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

Badpainter spikes my set up for the score. “A mother is helpless to avoid caring for her child, a woman is helpless to avoid serving her Alpha. Remember this metaphor is not about how any man behaves but how the woman behaves in response.”

Evidently I’m not making my points clearly enough, but I keep trying.

eon
eon
6 years ago

Badpainter, “Not the same but the responsive behavior is similar. Admittedly jf12’s metaphor is a bit clumsy as referring to Alpha as a baby would seem to imply weakness and helplessness on his part. However, the weakness/helplessness is on the woman’s part in this model. A mother is helpless to avoid caring for her child, a woman is helpless to avoid serving her Alpha. Remember this metaphor is not about how any man behaves but how the woman behaves in response. “I would extend this a bit further to suggest that central to the idea is how the Alpha or… Read more »

Badpainter
Badpainter
6 years ago

jf12, Your metaphor is obvious to me because that’s the house I grew up in. My father, Darth Dread, was something of a natural Alpha, my mother served him. Much like a mother doting on an infant. There was occaisional baby talk on her part. Occaisional infantile whinniness on his. Such doting as applied to myself and my brother ended about age three. My brother and I were raised to be the perfect beta chumps, and we served Mom’s ego by virtue of our good boy behavior. Our lives were very tightly controlled and the highest priority was to avoid… Read more »

Brody
Brody
6 years ago

Yeah, the baby comparison is a ridiculous dud, behavior- or intent-wise.

When her baby cries, the mother consistently runs to comfort it.
When her man cries, the woman may or may not comfort him, but if he cries repeatedly like a baby, she’ll not be impressed.

Repeated displays of weakness and helplessness from a man, unlike from a baby, will cause his woman to lose respect for him, and instead of nurturing impulses, like with a baby, will evoke contempt and rejection.

Does this really still need to be said?

Bob Aldesco (@Boldesco)

You are the one who conflates Jung’ anima concept with ‘inner femininity” – not Jung! You conflate these transpersonal “demons” or “psychic factors” with sociological definitions of masculinity and femininity because of your fundamentally extroverted, rationalist outlook. The “soul”, i.e. the psyche, or Anima is the feminine principle, the principle of relatedness, while “logos,” reason or Animus abstracts and generalizes the individual. The conscious integration of the Anima does not lead to MORE feminine, infantile sentimentality, but to the opposite – a confident masculinity grounded in the Self. The disappearance of the feminine (Chinese “Yin”) principle in Protestantism, including the… Read more »

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

of carts and horses.

When a woman *behaves* servilely to a man, her behavior will cause her to respect him. It is when she *stops* behaving servilely that his ineffectual complaints evoke her contempt.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

“Ooh baby, you’re my snookywookums” said the female to her alpha, and said the beta to his female.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

Primate alpha = female brings bananas to male and grooms bugs out of his hair

Primate beta = male brings bananas to female and grooms bugs out of her hair

Primate mom = female provides food to baby and grooms bugs out of baby’s hair

Does this really still need to be said?

Brody
Brody
6 years ago

jf12:

“I’m all about the behavior.”

That’s your mistake.

Similar or same behaviors can have different intents and purposes. A woman nurturing her alpha man nurtures *his strength,* not his weaknesses.

Her displays of care are designed not to comfort him in his weakness, like with a baby, but to show her appreciation for his strength. If he loses his strength, her care may disappear too.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

No matter how often the error is pointed out, folks will still keep trying to be “Well, he’s an alpha because he’s the provider” and “Well, he’s an alpha because he’s the protector”. In reality, women provide for alphas, and women protect alphas.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

re: “In a condition of Alpha deference that caregiving is framed as “just something a woman ought to do for her man” and is even a point of pride she uses against women who are frustrated with their Beta men’s lack of respectability.”

Yes, but I’m contending it’s not really the mindset of the woman that makes the difference but instead her actual behavior. When she complains that she has a revulsion to care giving, then she is not actually care giving.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

The FI has condensed from its smoke monster form into a writhing serpent and I’ve got a death grip on its neck.

If you make the man responsible for making her feel like serving him, instead of just making her serve him, then you have conceded the fight to the FI.

Badpainter
Badpainter
6 years ago

Brody – “Similar or same behaviors can have different intents and purposes. A woman nurturing her alpha man nurtures *his strength,* not his weaknesses. Her displays of care are designed not to comfort him in his weakness, like with a baby, but to show her appreciation for his strength. If he loses his strength, her care may disappear too.” Interesting, true, and not relevent to the point. If the observed behaviors bare significant similarity than likening them metaphorically is valuable in that it illuminates these “Alpha tells” which may heretofore have been misunderstood as such or not observed. In this… Read more »

Brody
Brody
6 years ago

jf12:

“If you make the man responsible for making her feel like serving him, instead of just making her serve him, then you have conceded the fight to the FI.”

You are not responsible for making anyone feel anything if you don’t so desire. But if you believe that your behavior has no effect on women’s responses toward you, then you are living in a bubble.

Of course you can stomp your foot in anger and whine that she should serve you because alpha. Good luck.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

re: “I’ve known far too many Beta husbands whose wives would browbeat them privately, but put them in a social setting and they’d praise his loyal, dependability as the highest form of Alpha other women’s ‘lesser’ husbands ought to aspire to.”

Maybe especially on fakebook. My wife is married to the alpha of all alphas, according to her fakebook posts. She also cooks and cleans a great deal more on fb than irl.

Badpainter
Badpainter
6 years ago

Rollo,

Public vs. private is a valuable distinction.

Then one utility of knowing the tells is to compare and contrast public and private behavior. But the tells must be known. For the improving man having good metrics is invaluable for measure progress.

Now if there’s a different set of private tells…..

Badpainter
Badpainter
6 years ago

Brody – “Of course you can stomp your foot in anger and whine that she should serve you because alpha. Good luck.”

jf12 is clearly enjoys pointing out the transparency of the empress’s new cloths. In this case he routinely, obliquely, and perhaps quixotIcly points out that while the manosphere calls on men to self improve there seems to be no call for woman to change anything. I think he finds fault with a surrendering resignation to the idea that women are what they are, which strongly implies they can’t be anything more or better than that.

kfg
kfg
6 years ago

” . . . women do not repond properly to the Golden Rule: a man treating a woman like he wants to be treated, does not work.”

Hence revealing the essential failure of – the Golden Rule.

Tinder Master
Tinder Master
6 years ago

Alpha Tells: Tinder Edition. There’s also some Beta Tells at the end there, too (hint: regret).

This is just for you guys:
http://www.uploadhouse.com/viewfile.php?id=20156062
(Just click the side of the picture to enlarge it a bit.)

DeNihilist
DeNihilist
6 years ago

Hey Rollo, if I am reading this right –

“Prolactin provides the body with sexual gratification after sexual acts:”

Could this be why during foreplay, caressing and chewing and sucking on the old ladies titties, tends to lead to more passionate fucking?

By manipulating her titties before and during the fuck, could this boost the Prolactin release?

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

The Golden Rule works great when desires are not disordered. For example, it wouldn’t be good for a masochist to go around treating others like he wants to be treated.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

Anyway, being a beta, I enjoy doing for my woman. It’s like, my Special Purpose

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymucqmjJs20

I just wish she’d more like to do for me.

S
S
6 years ago

Rollo, are you available for personal consultation?

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

My math says a match rate (co-right-swipes) of 14 million out of 1.2 billion swipes is 1.2%, rounding up.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenbertoni/2014/11/04/exclusive-sean-rad-out-as-tinder-ceo-inside-the-crazy-saga/

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

Given a believablish number like about 14% of right-swipes for women, then if all those women are choosing exactly the same few alphas and if those alphas are as picky as the women are, i.e. right-swiping on about 14%, then the math works out.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

Prima donna = alpha

AnonS
AnonS
6 years ago

So doesn’t this leave 80% of men trying to find the <10% of women that are not so corrupted that the man can be a situational alpha? Otherwise its unhappiness all around. How do you get through the cultural wall for beta girls that they should never let a man tell them what to do; how much is a disguised shit test and how much is a persistent belief not to upset the herd even if it makes them unhappy? Women have zero resources (including Christian ones) telling them how to be submissive, if 80% of the guys go along… Read more »

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

Actually, we can make stronger bounds on women’s and alphas’ Tinder pickinesses. With x the percentage of The Few Chosen men who bother swiping right on a woman, and y the percentage of Very Ordinary women who swipe right on a very ordinary man, then from the published numbers
1.17% = x * 14% + 46% * y

A fine example is x = 5% and y = 1%. Alphas are even pickier than women are, and ordinary women really really really will not choose ordinary men.

Brody
Brody
6 years ago

Re: cutting up his steak as an alpha tale

That’s baloney. Excessive nurturing de-sexualizes a woman. If you want to kill her libido, the sure way to do so is to treat her like your mommy or nurse. Don’t blame me for being the messenger of the obvious; it’s probably one of nature’s ways to prevent incest: she is going to recoil from exhibiting the same behaviors toward her lovers as she would toward her children, brothers, or father.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@Rollo, re: outgiving.

LOL at the princess concept of “Let’s you and him compete to see who can be more deferent to me.”

And yet that used to be the major component of courting – the boy convincing the girl (and her parents) that he would treat her better than other boys. Clearly, this process only works if she has almost no freedom except to say “yes” once and only once.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@Brody re: nurturing.

The existence of the honeymoon period proves your “baloney” assertion to be wrong. The (almost inevitable) loss of a woman’s libido in a LTR *accompanies* her ceasing to be nurturing. In other words, her nurturing behaviors and her libido are correlated in the exact opposite way that you (and other women) claim: There was a lot more nurturing from her when her libido was higher.

Brody
Brody
6 years ago

Tell, not tale.

Brody
Brody
6 years ago

Not the cutting up steak kind of nurturing.

There is a difference between sexual and nurturing behaviors. Even when they overlap (“Baby, let me do that for you”), there is no mistaking sexual nurturing of lovers for the nurturing reserved for non-sexual family members.

If you turn your woman into your mother, she will stop being your lover. That’s where your behavior plays a role; but don’t take my word for it — you can try it out IRL.

kfg
kfg
6 years ago

” . . . this process only works if she has almost no freedom except to say “yes” once and only once.”

The Scarlet Letter

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

I rest my limited toolbox.

Bluepillprofesslor
Bluepillprofesslor
6 years ago

Rollo takes the perspective of selecting fresh meat and there are pounds of flesh in his post. However, what of the frigid wife who was previously deferential and submissive and is now a raging, bitchy, cold fish?

The Alpha tells are important to establish where you are in the marriage but Rollo leaves out that if you become more Alpha, the deferential submission and boatloads of eager sex can return.

Badpainter
Badpainter
6 years ago

Brody – “That’s baloney. Excessive nurturing de-sexualizes a woman.” Only because you’ve missed the point. Alpha is assumed here. The behaviors described are not requested, or expected by the man but a spontaneous response on the part of the woman to her Alpha. Those actions are her choice and at her discretion. She does these things because she wants to, because her attraction/desire/arousal/whatever compells her to. Nothing at all is implied about the behavior of the man other than to say whatever he is doing inspires the observed response. Alpha is assumed. Nothing being described here suggests a course of… Read more »

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

re: Tinder percentages. Yes, OT, but alpha related. Even in my limited imagination, the only way that Tinder could possibly have gotten more women more involved is if the choice of men that were displayed to the women were highly skewed towards the more desirable men. This ranking scheme is probably both the easiest and most effective to implement: after accounting for time-on-site, the more right-swiped a man is, the more often he is presented as a possible match. This is the only way for more women to think they might have more of a chance at the rare desirable… Read more »

kfg
kfg
6 years ago

“Those actions are her choice and at her discretion. She does these things because she wants to, because her attraction/desire/arousal/whatever compells her to.”

And strange things can happen if you tell her to knock it off.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@Badpainter re: “you can’t even do this right”

said by more women to beta men who are trying to serve her.

eon
eon
6 years ago

“I think he finds fault with a surrendering resignation to the idea that women are what they are, which strongly implies they can’t be anything more or better than that.” Dealing with reality, in the form of evidence that has become impossible to avoid, is not “surrendering resignation”. And being realistic is the necessary first step toward … well … anything. The truth, which has been described repeatedly throughout history, and now shoved in our faces directly and blatantly for the past 50 years or so, is that women are what they are, and almost all of them can’t be… Read more »

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@eon re: “What women crave is the “feelings” that they believe men experience as they do manly stuff.”

Yes; I’ve called this Freudian libido-envy, but there is more to it. Also, quoting myself, alphaness doesn’t rub off.

I’m certain the key to being a happy woman is to find an easy man and treat him as if he were a stern man. Conversely, the key to being a happy man is to be an easy man that gets treated as if he were a stern man.

kfg
kfg
6 years ago

” . . . when men want more than matriarchy in mud huts, they have to envision, build, protect and maintain it themselves.”

And it ends up looking something like brotherhood in a deer camp.

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

Deti is holding frame valiantly over to the Donal’s place. This behavior is NOT causing the women to fawn all over him cooing and telling him how right he is and how cute he looks when he gets all worked up.

Badpainter
Badpainter
6 years ago

eon – “Dealing with reality, in the form of evidence that has become impossible to avoid, is not ‘surrendering resignation’. And being realistic is the necessary first step toward … well … anything.” This is true. I agree with everything you’ve said.  But accepting reality and liking it are two different things.  In fact I’d argue disliking reality in the face of acceptance is the primary cause of innovation, and invention. It’s what men do best, although often imperfectly. What men don’t do well, or at all, is fundamentally change women. The best we can accomplish is to place controls on… Read more »

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

I read something elsewhere and now I’m feeling all vindicated.
“If you’ve put genuine effort into dating women and have either been rejected in spite of your efforts and validity as a candidate or have been a good husband, only to discover that your spouse is wretched and/or nagging, congratulations: you have earned the right to complain about women.”
But this basically doesn’t narrow it down, since most men are thereby congratulated for having the right.

Badpainter
Badpainter
6 years ago

“But this basically doesn’t narrow it down, since most men are thereby congratulated for having the right”

Just lie youth sports we all get a trophy.

jacklabear
6 years ago

“… input on the meta behaviors from the commentariat..”

Even though she is easily orgasmic, does she offer sex for your pleasure only more often than she wants to be pleasured herself?

Although she is plenty assertive when not with you, does she prefer you to order for her in restaurants?

Glenn
Glenn
6 years ago

As I’ve shared before, I was unconscious of my good looks, which varied over time as I gained weight and lost it. I would go up and down 20 lbs over most of my life and at a certain level of being overweight, it was like the power went out in women around me. But when I leaned out, the eyefucking would begin again. Like Tinder guy says, it’s there in the eyes if you are looking – all the time. And it doesn’t matter if she’s with another guy, if you are better looking than him, she will steal… Read more »

RevLifestyleDesign
6 years ago

Great piece. For me the definition of Alpha is unashamedly putting yourself first. If you take care of others, you’re a great leader, if not, a tyrant.

DeNihilist
DeNihilist
6 years ago

Rollo, was thinking more along the lines of putting one in the chamber.

Re-read and see it is for post coital.

DeNihilist
DeNihilist
6 years ago

So last week me and the old lady are going at it on a Sunday morning romp, the third session in less then 36 hours. I was having one of those times where the feeling to cum was intense, but the trigger was rusty. I am sure the old lady was sore by now, so she starts pushing on my chest and says “stop”. A deep guttural voice jumped out of my throat, “I CAN’T STOP!” Fuckinhell, her hands dove down to my butt, she pulled me in deeper as her back arched. My hard on became a piece of… Read more »

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

re: “Although she is plenty assertive when not with you, does she prefer you to order for her in restaurants?”

Of course. So she can change it. From what I’ve observed my whole life the only reason women claim to want a leader is so they can rebel.

M Simon
6 years ago

Thoroughbred November 3rd, 2014 at 6:28 am I actually want my LTR to know that in any interaction I have with a woman, I’ve already imagined fucking her That works so well I use it 20 or 30 times a day. The first mate automatically bonds closer. I tell her that reality works nothing like what she was taught in “girls school”. She agrees. Today she asked why we couldn’t have a “girls school” relationship. I pointed out to her that it didn’t work. She had to agree. Reluctantly. But I did give her hope. “If you can stay bonded… Read more »

M Simon
6 years ago

DeNihilist
November 4th, 2014 at 10:57 pm

A deep guttural voice jumped out of my throat, “I CAN’T STOP!

That is called your “Kath Voice” in some systems. It comes from your power center. You might want to look it up. An interesting subject. A good search term is “Kath belly power”.

New Yorker
New Yorker
6 years ago

Very important tell is whether she is more focused on your pleasure or hers during sex. If she is bonded to you, she will derive her pleasure from your desire and selfish pleasure from her body.

Also telling is how she makes small, unsolicited gestures in body contact and doing small things for you, making sure you are not hungry, etc. These imply a deference and a desire to make you happy just because she is happy to be around you.

jacklabear
6 years ago

“jf12

November 4th, 2014 at 11:53 pm

re: “Although she is plenty assertive when not with you, does she prefer you to order for her in restaurants?”

Of course. So she can change it. From what I’ve observed my whole life the only reason women claim to want a leader is so they can rebel.”

That would be my ex-wife. So I nexted her. My gf knows that and she doesn’t do it. How about retro-active dread?

ScuzzaMan
ScuzzaMan
6 years ago

@Brody: You wrote “Similar or same behaviors can have different intents and purposes. A woman nurturing her alpha man nurtures *his strength,* not his weaknesses. Her displays of care are designed not to comfort him in his weakness, like with a baby, but to show her appreciation for his strength. If he loses his strength, her care may disappear too.” You’re completely missing jf12’s point. Firstly, babies are not weak. Not mentally. They are incredibly focused and single-minded and almost impossible to shift from their desires. And that focus is uniformly and unerringly about “ME!”. jf12 wasn’t ever talking about… Read more »

scuzzaman
scuzzaman
6 years ago

“I’m certain the key to being a happy woman is to find an easy man and treat him as if he were a stern man. Conversely, the key to being a happy man is to be an easy man that gets treated as if he were a stern man.”

And the reason why there are few couples like this is that most people would rather be right* than happy.

(*i.e. maintain their entirely fictional self-image of being justified in continuing to do what does not work, because it is ‘right’… )

jf12
jf12
6 years ago

@jacklabear re: “How about retro-active dread?”

LOL great concept. I’m taking it literally. My ex, who never remarried, now likes to claim that the reason she was dissatisfied with a nice-guy husband was that she could tell we were going to get divorced and that I would have other women (I remarried 10 yrs later).

trackback
6 years ago

[…] began the Alpha Tells post with the intent of recognizing how a woman behaves when she’s in the presence of a Man […]

Bluepillprofessor
Bluepillprofessor
6 years ago

@ Carlos: “I have read the book, “The Laws of Seduction” and it talks about men showing male and female attributes for attraction…” That would be “The ART of Seduction” which is not to be confused with “The 48 Laws of Power” by the same author. You reading is faulty. The Dandy is ONLY effective if the man is overwhelmingly Alpha and exhibits SOME feminine traits. If you have the body of the incredible Hulk (or you are a movie star as illustrated in the book) you can afford to cry a bit on your SO’s shoulder and even be… Read more »

trackback

[…] Rollo Tomassi has written plenty about his own views on attraction. So far as I can tell he hasn’t formulated a system or model as specific as mine. What he has done is use different terminology and approach attraction from a different light. Rollo uses the terms arousal and attraction to describe what I call attraction and comfort/security. Here is a sample of his use of those those terms from his post Alpha Tells: […]

bear
bear
6 years ago

Rollo : I really enjoy your insights. I am new to your site but continue to learn a lot. You seem like an extremely astute guy. Can you answer this: I am in a marriage relationship. My wife always works to take care of my needs ( cooking cleaning etc..) despite working out of the home. She also defers to me when she has decisions to make – never acts unilaterally. However, when it comes to sex I find I am the one always initiating. Nine out of 10 times she says yes, but it bothers me that she never… Read more »

Lone Survivor
Lone Survivor
6 years ago

I am surprised to see that Rollo does not realize that the concept of “alpha” is by itself an oxymoron. Based on two premises: 1. the definition of “alpha” has always been placed using women as frame. That is, a man who meets certain criteria is “alpha” in the contex of women. Isn’t the “alphaness” of a man supposed to be independent of female approval or success with women? 2. I am too lazy to look for it, but the person who created the “alpha” concept was a zooligist/behavioral ecologist/biologist in the SIXTIES. A few years ago he explicitly mentioned… Read more »

Lone Survivor
Lone Survivor
6 years ago

An addendum to the video you posted on the bodybuilder. That guy is not “alpha” (such a disgusting primitive and emasculated term) due to his muscles, but due to the fact that he won a tournament.

Women are attracted to achievers, something you already discussed in “Men are to perform”, his body did not award him the attention of women, it was his first place in the tournament.

trackback

[…] Тоа значи дека Алфа е што Алфа прави, да го парафразираме господин Роло Томаси. […]

trackback
5 years ago

[…] went into some of the subtle ‘tells’ about a man’s SMV in Alpha Tells and Beta Tells and the subcommunication messaging that transfers between men and women. In these […]

Noemi
Noemi
5 years ago

How do I awaken the alpha in a man? I am a very feminine, submissive woman. I want a man who makes decisions, and has his way with me. I am currently dating a man who is amazing, but he is too nice sometimes (he tells me I can have what I want, he texts me all day). While I appreciate his strength, and his gentleness toward me, I want to please him as well. I also want a man who can be king of the bedroom. How do I awaken this desire in him?

Lucian Popescu
5 years ago

I can list the following: 1. BEFORE ANY CONTACT: you notice how your person makes her behavior erratic. 2. YOU LOOK AT HER: she reacts with submission (looking down, waving hair, battling eyelashes). 3. YOU APPROACH HER: she enters a frenzy of emotion (she feels hooked) 4. YOU TALK TO HER: she either eats your words and never lets conversation end OR she tries a stupid LMR (sometimes nasty words) because they hate how insecure they feel. If #2, simply ignore! Do NOT give up (like I did so many times): if 1-2-3 are true, there CANNOT possibly be a… Read more »

trackback
5 years ago

[…] more sexually proceptive (she wants to fuck more) with you at times you may think odd. These are Alpha or Beta Tells. A woman’s preoccupation with guarding you from other women is a prime […]

rugby11
rugby11
4 years ago

Qcurtius
http://wp.me/p5MelF-1Ax

trackback

[…] is expecting you to communicate as she expects a man will communicate. In fact this is an excellent Alpha Tell if you have the skill to recognize it. In the early stages of interacting with a woman you will […]

trackback

[…] is expecting you to communicate as she expects a man will communicate. In fact this is an excellent Alpha Tell if you have the skill to recognize it. In the early stages of interacting with a woman you will […]

Lex
Lex
4 years ago

It’s all a massive shit test. If fear of her approval makes you change who you are, you weren’t really who you are in the first place = not manly = lose the girl.

Tom
Tom
4 years ago

Some belters in this thread. Yes us betas have learned that pleasing a woman does not cause her to please you. It is indeed not transferrable. She only pleases us for her own ends. And the need to please an alpha whilst requiring zero in return explains why the local attractive and semi attractive girls spent their teens sucking off unhygienic, unwashed criminal cock leaving the good looking boys who actually went to school in bemusement. Also depressingly true of the “nice” misunderstanding. Women being nice are being manipulative, selfish and weak so assume this of us when we’re being… Read more »

j gromash
j gromash
3 years ago

Well, he is a “good man”, self-sacrifice is to be expected when it comes to supporting the feminine imperative, right?

It should be called “the good cuckold project”.

https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/cuckolding-and-hotwifing-a-straight-mans-fantasy-lbkr/

This ain’t even the first pro-cuckolding article they have written. They want to turn liberal males into cuckolds then every other male. Degenerates.

trackback

[…] Rollo Tomassi, Alpha Tells on The Rational Male (November 2014).] The trouble is, given his exclusive focus on […]

trackback

[…] Tomassi has written that the core difference between an alpha and a beta is an abundance vs. a scarcity mindset. When you have an abundance mindset, she’ll […]

trackback

[…] last August here. For the most part these guys wanted me to determine what they were seeing were Alpha Tells or Beta Tells in the body language between the couple. In the majority of these shots, the Beta […]

210
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
%d bloggers like this: