45
46

Feminists are hijacking RP lingo, yet they don't understand who the "Alpha women" are. (self.RedPillWomen)

submitted by satchmoleEndorsed Contributor

Tracy Clark-Flory at Salon.com has been writing a lot about RP and manosphere lately. In her hilariously titled piece, "In praise of the 'beta males'" she cites a new book called "The Alpha Woman Meets Her Match", the thesis of which says "alpha" women -- career minded, strong, independent, blah blah blah women -- need to marry beta males, because they are their "match."

“Challenging gender stereotypes associated with the terms Alpha and Beta, [Rhodes] advises the Alpha woman to look past the overly competitive, domineering Alpha male for a man who is not threatened by her strengths but is communicative, responsible, and collaborative. Just as Alpha women aren’t demanding bitches, Beta men aren’t passive wimps.”

All foolishness about perceived happiness with a beta male aside (which, again, really just means a man who is beneath you on some or all levels), they are missing a key piece here: These women are not alpha women.

Alpha does not mean strong, dominant, powerful, career driven, or any of these things. Alpha means #1. The subtext behind calling strong career driven women alpha is that they are number one, and women who aren't, are behind them. This is another classic case of feminists subversively placing male qualities above feminine ones. Men are not better than women, men are just better and being men than women are. Women who display male qualities are less attractive to men, and thus... Not as good at being women. Alpha men are alpha men because they are number one at being men. Alpha women are alpha women because they are number one at being women. To hijack this is classic feminist ideology at work, placing femininity behind masculinity: Women who are good at being men are #1, and women who are good at being women are #2.

Career driven and independent women are, biologically speaking, beta females. The pairings will always be beta males with beta females, and alpha males with alpha females. Sorry feminists.

Sidenote: In this piece Clark-Flory (any surprise at the hyphenated name?) laments being called an "alpha bitch," by the manosphere, which I highly doubt. Pretty sure they were calling her an alpha widow.


[–][deleted] 29 points30 points  (4 children)

There is no such thing as an Alpha woman in the sense they appropriate it, that's just a dominant bossypants woman hell bent on imitating MEN.

If anyone would be an Alpha woman, she's probably lying on a beach in a bikini in the south of France right now being wined and dined for her perfect youth and beauty.

[–]analrapeage 8 points9 points  (2 children)

I want to add that you can't just chalk it up to beauty. Grace, intelligence, tact, are all qualities that plenty of supermodels don't have. Only idiots think the best women are qualified by looks.

[–]HamHungry 2 points3 points  (1 child)

"Beauty" doesn't have to just be about the physical, it can include personality as well.

[–]satchmoleEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My point exactly :-)

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

[–]SoftHarem 4 points5 points  (1 child)

There are no Alpha females, period. There are, however, women who are high dominance.

[–]redpillschoolModerator Extraordinaire 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They only want what they can get from people, but never consider what they can offer.

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 3 points4 points  (2 children)

I never really liked the term "alpha" and "beta" as applied to females... Because it just doesn't make a lot of sense. "Alpha" and "beta" have to do with social hierarchy. The leaders are the alphas and the followers are the betas. The measure of a successful male is who has has the most in terms of strength, money, intelligence, success, women, etc. In fact, even beta males try to come out on top by choosing to judge by different systems, such as morality. Among any group of men, they determine who is the most trustworthy man, and he becomes a sort of leader of the group. That is the alpha male. These are the same tendencies that tend to attract women, which is why we talk about being an alpha male in TRP.

However women have an entirely different way, and more complicated way, of measuring social value. Women have two orthogonal sources of value, their looks and their personality. A woman can be valuable with high attractiveness and acceptable personality, and with a great personality and moderate attractiveness. A woman's net value to a man is some complicated algorithm between the two. To make it more complicated, women's social groups don't have alphas. Women have more power in groups based on how well liked they are. But, their ability to be liked depends on how many other people they like, and how many other people they give power to. Women are collectivist groups who pass around power to who needs it the most at the time (though they withhold it from those who abuse it). Because of this, a group of women might have several people who might be the "highest rank", but the manifestation of that is that more people "like" them, and not that they lead people, which would be the case with an "alpha".

[–]Agent_Elle 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Hmm I like how you describes the complexity of female social hierarchy. At first I thought an "Alpha Woman" would just be the "leader" among the females... But women operate completely different from men.

For example, among women it is often her problems that bring her status with other women. The woman with the most dramatic problem gets all the sympathy and attention and opinions from the other women... Especially high status problems are things like abuse, rape and cancer...which get her waves of support, attention and "you go girl!"s from other women. A woman who doesn't complain about her problems receives very little attention and other women will even go out of their way to gossip about potential problems she could be hiding because nobody can be that perfect. Thus the need for these "perfect" women to bragplain so that they can get in on the complain train and get their share of status.

Men are very solution oriented, looking for the answers to the problems. An Alpha Male is often one who can solve the most problems in his job or community. But women often hold on to their problems and bemoan them constantly because it is their source of status among the other women.

[–]FleetingWishEndorsed Contributor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't know if I necessarily agree with you. I think the highest status females are the ones everyone else wants to be, i.e the ones that are the most well liked and the most good looking.

I think what you're noticing is a different mechanism. The rubric for becoming liked is showing care and concerned for others. This means that within female groups, they will make decisions by deferring to the person with the most adamant opinion. For instance, if 3 girls kind of want Chinese food, but 1 girl just really wants something else, they will all end up going with whatever she wants. The 4th girl doesn't gain social status by being adamant, but she does get her way. This means that SJW girls, and those like them, have learned that they can get their way just by complaining the loudest. While no one admires them, they get their way a lot of the time.

[–]Agent_Elle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Or is the "alpha woman" simply the one who snags the most alpha man? Feminists would never accept a definition that values a woman based on her man's worth but look around, it's pretty much true!

[–]Kinned 1 point2 points  (26 children)

You make a great point that I often forget. Women trying to identify as alpha are subscribing to male definitions of success and trying to compete wih men on these terms. There's nothing wrong with defining your success as a female on different terms.

[–][deleted]  (25 children)

[removed]

    [–]sierrasechoEndorsed Contributor 1 point2 points  (5 children)

    I think it comes down simply to despite all the lies you've been told your entire life, you can't really have it all. You cannot have a high powered career and a loving, satisfying relationship. Just can't. We understand that in this economic climate, 2 incomes are often necessary. But there is a difference between having a job you go to and enjoy, but leave at the end of the day to go home and be a loving wife/partner to THE MOST IMPORTANT PERSON IN YOUR LIFE. When your career saps your energy, leaves you stressed out, and with no time to focus on your relationship, your relationship will suffer immensely.

    We choose to priorities our partners and families over clawing our way to that corner office.

    [–]Kinned 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Thanks for responding in just the way I would have to the poster. I didn't get a chance to respond before it was deleted

    [–][deleted]  (3 children)

    [removed]

      [–]sierrasechoEndorsed Contributor 5 points6 points  (0 children)

      "Some" women may be able to. I think - though I may be off - that RPW posits that most a/ don't want to and b/ can't juggle as well as the MSM feminist media wants us to believe we can. Many, or even most women, do want to play a nurturing supportive role at home. With young un's, even more so. Few women are pleased to drop their kids off at daycare to be raised by strangers. I can only speak for myself though. You, may very well (currently) want that. RP does not speak for "all" - it is a numbers game of playing to "most". I am also not saying they are "inferior" - it's not what I want for my life, it would not bring me contentment and joy (despite enjoying very much working) and it's not what my SO would want for OUR relationship.

      You can absolutely have a well paid, inspiring Job. I was getting at women who creep north of 40, 60 even 80 hours a week. Something has to give. Most people, men and women, do not have it in them to work a 12 hour day, hit the gym for an hour, cook/clean, and still have time to connect with their spouse and kids at the end of it all. And all too often, it is their primary relationship that gives. Even if things are "working" many of these women are stressed, they feel like a martyr, and their relationships consist of fighting and tension.

      As for saying that men have a greater capacity for balance - I'm not a man, I can't say. I would say a man that works 80 hours a week is not going to have a balanced life either. But our society tends to be more accepting of this. No judgement.

      Just to confirm, you are still a student?

      [–]TempestTcup 2 points3 points  (1 child)

      look on all career-pursuing women as inferior

      So far you are the only one who keeps referring to career women as inferior - please stop. You are being an asshole to all the women here.

      [–]Camille11325 1 point2 points  (18 children)

      There are many reasons why "career oriented/driven" women are regarded with negativity, but I will just highlight a few. So many women assume that having a successful career, awards or multiple degrees raise their status in the eyes of men. They expect the same level of respect and attraction from men that they themselves feel for men with equal credentials. This is just not how attraction works.

      In addition, the type of women who expend all of their energy pursuing promotions, prestige or degrees often do not have personality traits that a man would want in a potential companion. In many cases career driven women approach relationships in a similar manner to how they act in a business setting- vying for dominance with their partners and seeking to please themselves first instead of being soft, flexible, pleasant, giving etc.

      You say that you define yourself based on whether or not you are working to meet your potential and fulfill your responsibilities, which could be a good thing. However, generally speaking, career women have a different understanding of what their potentials and responsibilities are, and often these do not coincide with what is best for the relationship i.e. being the best First Mate to your Captain. It's all a matter of priorities. Certainly there are women who manage to have a career and a relationship, but a man shouldn't have to question which of the two are more valuable to you.

      [–][deleted]  (17 children)

      [removed]

        [–]TempestTcup 4 points5 points  (11 children)

        Why is it acceptable to generalize women as inferior

        No one here thinks of women as inferior or is generalizing that women are inferior; only you are. I don't know why you think women are inferior, but you've said it twice now.

        We have nothing against pursuing a career around here, I'm an accountant and a lot of RPW have careers or own their own businesses. One thing to remember is that your career isn't going to attract a man. It may be a great benefit to the relationship money-wise but also might detract from the relationship time-wise or stress-wise.

        Now, if you want a career, a great relationship, and children, then one of the three will suffer. Unless your career can be achieved working minimal hours, you simply won't have time to spend enough time and energy maintaining children and a husband. If you do manage to spend 70 hours a week at the office, and then successfully juggling husband and children the 42 hours a week you aren't sleeping, then you will probably be stressed out.

        I'm not saying that it can't be done, but I've seen a ton of marriages like that end in divorce. If you have no desire for children, heck have the highest flying career that you want.

        What generally happens though is that a woman spends her best child-bearing years in school and then starting her career. During this time, she is concentrating on her career and doesn't have time for a serious relationship so she will either have a lot of short relationships or she will find herself in her 30s with time running out and no man in sight.

        That's when women will settle for someone lower than her expectations led her to believe she could get. She has a time limit and those hot studs she could get a decade before are all going after women a decade younger. She finally finds a man who almost meets her criteria and she settles. After the kids are out of diapers, she realizes that she isn't attracted to her husband and she Eat, Love, Prays him. Or, she stays with him and makes his life miserable and refuses sex with him.

        This scenario happens more often than you will ever realize; heck, there is even a popular movie about it!

        [–][deleted]  (10 children)

        [removed]

          [–]Camille11325 3 points4 points  (7 children)

          Don't be so hostile, she just wrote you a very detailed response. Take to heart what she (and other women in this thread) have been saying and explore this sub as well as the sidebar. I think you need to do a lot more research and see if the opinions you hold actually stand up to evidence.

          [–][deleted]  (6 children)

          [deleted]

            [–]Camille11325 0 points1 point  (5 children)

            Yes your tone seemed very negative and we get a lot of trolls here who like to act well meaning and then transform once they realise the conversation isn't going the way that they wanted it to. I think you need to do a lot of reading on what feminism actually is, and really think critically about the advice given out in mainstream society as well as the advice of those close to you. From what I've gathered from all of your posts here today, you cling to a lot of generalizations and feel good ideas that don't really mean much when examined closer, and don't correspond well with reality. Fortunately, there are many resources that can help you, both on Reddit and on other blogs. Let me know if you want recommendations.

            [–][deleted]  (4 children)

            [deleted]

              [–]TempestTcup 2 points3 points  (0 children)

              You have called career women inferior THREE TIMES that I count so far. YOU are the only person here who has used that term. Quit it.

              [–]TempestTcup 2 points3 points  (0 children)

              Also, we are not monkeys in a zoo for you to come here "trying to understand" us. That is a troll term much like "I just want to have a discussion".

              [–]satchmoleEndorsed Contributor[S] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

              This sub is about maximizing happiness for women and their husbands. We aren't here to convince you of anything. You either haven't been in the work force long enough to realize that a career =/= happiness, or you're in denial because of the choices you have already made.

              Other women can do whatever they want, and society encourages them to do so today. Despite what I think of this and whether or not it's good for society, that's not what this sub is immediately concerned with. You can do whatever you want. Society already rewards you. The only thing is, your future husband and children probably won't.

              a woman should be able to pursue what she is capable of handling and doing well without being looked down on or viewed as inferior by men or other women.

              That is EXACTLY what my post is about. The fact that feminists TOTALLY misunderstand our "movement" and refer to themselves as alpha women is the problem, and frankly laughable. They are taking "our" language and using it to place themselves above us.

              A final thought: Men. Do. Not. Care. About. Your. Career.

              [–]Camille11325 1 point2 points  (2 children)

              Not only do responsibilities vary from job to relationship, the skills and dispositions required for them are different as well. The type of woman who describes herself as a career woman is not likely to have the traits that make her equally successful in a relationship. She could be a very capable person in the office, but that doesn't mean that she is also capable in a relationship. Her attitude, mindset, motivations, and actions are all important. And feminine skills and talents go a long way as well. How many career women are also as intense about advancing their femininity or domestic prowess? You sacrifice a lot whenever you prioritize one thing so far ahead of all others.

              I'm unclear about what you mean when you say "potential". Potential for what? Just general aptitude? That doesn't really translate to anything on its own, it requires effort. And women who are focused primarily on their careers are going to apply their efforts to the things which further their goals. So as they do this, their potential will likely not remain constant, any self improvement should result in an increase in potential as well. I might not be understanding what you mean so please feel free to expand on this point. Also, I doubt many people have an objective grasp of their actual potential (using my definition), so the idea that "potential remains constant" is useless because you can have an inaccurate idea of what your potential is, or wrong ideas on how to best apply the potential.

              As far as a women being able to pursue what she is capable of handling and doing well, the issue (at least for me) occurs when women overestimate what they are capable of handling, or when they think that they are handling something properly when they're not. Or when they feel entitled or act selfishly in the act of pursuing whatever it is that they want.

              As I said already, a lot of women have the expectation that intensely pursuing a career will make them seem superior in the eyes of men and women. This is not how attraction works, women do not gain status from promotions and degrees. Again, personality and mindset are very important factors when assessing people, a bubbly and friendly person is going to be viewed more favourably than a domineering person, even if the domineering person is an executive . Men are not going to want to date or interact with someone with a poor disposition, and will view them as inferior in comparison to other potential partners.

              [–][deleted]  (1 child)

              [deleted]

                [–]Camille11325 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Glad to hear that you're reconsidering things! Check out the sidebar for more info as well as the top posts of all time on this sub.

                [–]mscleverclocks 1 point2 points  (3 children)

                In nature there are alpha females. Wolf packs for example have an alpha male, leader of the pack, and his partner, an alpha female, synonymous with "first mate" "high value woman" etc. In my humble opinion, an alpha female is someone who knows her self worth, is always improving herself, nurturing (especially if she's a mother or wants to be one), and who knows that her man is the leader - she submits to him while still retaining her confidence and femininity. She knows her place is by her alpha's side and she doesn't challenge him for dominance. She can challenge the dominance of other women if the need arises, but that is where the wolf analogy no longer applies - we are humans after all.

                [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (2 children)

                that would just be a good woman. not the 'alpha woman'.

                [–]Agent_Elle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Or is the "alpha woman" simply the one who snagged the most alpha man? Feminists would never accept a definition that values a woman based on her man's worth but look around, it's pretty much true!

                [–]mscleverclocks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                And alpha men are good men. Beta men aren't - most of them are insecure, whiney, and weak. Beta women are promiscuous, bitchy, demanding, and never shut up. Just more synonyms...

                Edit: I forgot selfish... An alpha trait for a woman is to be compassionate and giving towards her man, not to make him revolve around her "me, me, me" hysterics.

                [–]greycloud24 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                i would describe the relationship between alpha and beta as alpha leads beta follows. what the feminist doesn't realize is that alpha traits are undesirable in women. men aren't attracted to domineering women. and having two people try and steer the ship is just stupid. within the context i actually agree with the feminist. alpha women should find beta men. then the woman is the captain and the man is the first mate. i have a funny feeling that the woman won't be happy with this relationship.

                [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                An alpha woman is one who supported her man in every way she could while he slayed dragons and built his kingdom. She gets to collect the dividends of her hard work just like he does.

                [–][deleted]  (6 children)

                [removed]

                [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (5 children)

                I'll ignore the passive aggressiveness and tell you that the thread was removed after it became littered with useless comments and trolling. We often leave threads up for as long as possible, but after a certain point, the balance tips and everything goes downhill.

                In the future, if you think something has been unfairly removed, it would be far more productive for you to contact the Moderating team directly instead of doing whatever you call this comment.

                [–][deleted]  (4 children)

                [removed]

                  [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (3 children)

                  Read your initial statement and remove the internal understanding and context you bring to it - there's no way anyone would read your comment and think "oh, she said that so the OP will understand why her post might be removed." Your phrasing was short, and vague - and it honestly reads as bitter/disgruntled, which is fine. I'm not going to tell you that your feelings are invalid - only that your comment is out of place and doesn't communicate the meaning that you seem to think it does.

                  When you have a specific message to convey - it pays to spend a little extra time when you're writing your comment to make sure that message is as clear as it can be.

                  [–]satchmoleEndorsed Contributor[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                  Have to say, I love this community so much. The self improvement struggle never ends. Thanks for articulating that. Hopefully she doesn't take it personally, that's not what it's about!

                  [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                  Thank you for the kind words.