I'm so glad I'm a Beta

[Placid Dingo]

I'm so glad I'm a beta

Except that I'm not. Glad that is. But I'm very much what you'd call a beta type.

I used to be one of those guys who complained about how girls only liked arsehole guys. I wasn't really socially brilliant. Girls told me I was cute and told me I'd make someone happy, but they were always talking about someone else.

I got over that shit. I got more assertive. I realized that its ok to riff on sex with girls around. I upped my confidence. I stopped waiting for a super obvious indication of interest before I dared to indicate any myself.

I got into Myers-Briggs and Keirsley. This was super useful because it pointed out to me that what I was thinking of as social retardation was really just introversion/NT-type personality.

So far so good.

But,

There's things I hear, on this forum and generally that niggle at me. 'if you have to ask how to be an alpha, you'll never be one.' 'you should stick to people with the same attractiveness and social skills as you.' I'm not unattractive, but I'm short, which for some people seems to count as worse. And like I've said, I'm not socially mangled but it's not automatic; I dislike new social situations and find them draining, I can't do small talk (I'm the guy who asks you about your life plan and political ideology in the first five minutes.

The comments made as literary criticism in my work pointed out my character wasn't alpha, he was a beta faking it. That's possibly very true, and makes sense to me because I don't know what it's like in the head of someone who just 'gets it', but I do know what it's like to be someone who has had to learn those skills in the same way other people learn to get good at poker or playing the violin. There's a difference though, is what we're saying, between a social extravert and someone who's learned the skills to succeed in a social environment. So again where does that leave me? Is there an expectation that I stick with the beta crowd rather than inconveniencing the genuine alphas with my second rate imitation of social skills?

What does that mean for me? I should stick to the socially semi-coherent not-overwhelmingly-attractive types? It might seem to make sense to say that when you're gorgeous and extraverted but I can't accept it. I don't get another life. I can't rely on being beautiful and extraverted next time around. I need to get everything I can out of life; everyone does (if you were so inclined I suspect you could regard it as Dharma) but I wonder, after people make comments like the ones I've discussed, what do they expect this social 'caste' to do? Because no matter how fake my social development may be, it gets me further than my 'real' introversion, and I'm happy with that.

TL;DR
Telling people they can't be alpha or should stick to a lower class of people they belong to (the unattractive, socially limited etc) is frustrating advice because it asks you to go against your inclination to succeed in life.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

TL;DR
Telling people they can't be alpha or should stick to a lower class of people they belong to (the unattractive, socially limited etc) is frustrating advice because it asks you to go against your inclination to succeed in life.

Who said anything like that?

[Salty]

I AM genuinely glad I'm a beta. I don't need or want to be on top.

Applying myself to situations I can overcome requires absolutely zero alpha skills, I guess. I just don't need or want them. Being beta is a skin that I am comfortable in and I'm not going to pretend I'm something I'm not. That game King of the Mountain, I can let people play that all day long while I take care of my shit.

As far as dates and ladies and such...I think a lot of them aren't necessarily looking for an alpha and do in fact get tired of it. Being assertive doesn't necessarily mean being completely on top. I think it's about doing what you do well when you do it. Then again, I don't think being a beta is about taking everyone's shit either.

In a hierarchy, not everyone can stand at the top. I personally don't like anything about being on top, though I enjoy competition I don't have this pressing need to dominate.

I also try not to separate myself or others into alpha/beta though.

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

These social categories are far more fluid than you think.

Cue RAW's winner and loser script/self-fulfilling prophecy.

[Salty]

I think this goes right along a lot of gender issues. You have to ask: What makes an alpha an alpha? Is there something inherently good in being an alpha? Is an alpha in one situation an alpha in all situations? Just how should these roles apply to primates with a highly developed, complicated sense of higherarchy? Should these roles be applied?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I AM genuinely glad I'm a beta. I don't need or want to be on top.
.

I don't give a shit about being on top.

But nobody treads on me.

[Salty]

Right. And in regard to OP, which seems to have a focus on meeting people, not letting people step on you is all the confidence you really need. Few enjoy the company of a doormat.

[BabylonHoruv]

Alpha's don't generally hang out with other alphas.  They end up butting heads.

That need to be in control of a situation, to be the one that the attention is on, isn't something that can easily coexist for long with someone else with those same urges.

Alpha's aren't better looking than betas, they aren't more socially apt either, they are just the ones that lead and that get the attention.  There's good and bad in that but any social group is going to have both, and is going to have more betas than alphas.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Alpha's don't generally hang out with other alphas.  They end up butting heads.

That need to be in control of a situation, to be the one that the attention is on, isn't something that can easily coexist for long with someone else with those same urges.

Alpha's aren't better looking than betas, they aren't more socially apt either, they are just the ones that lead and that get the attention.  There's good and bad in that but any social group is going to have both, and is going to have more betas than alphas.

ONCE AGAIN, THE NOBEL PRIZE-WINNING SOCIOLOGIST AND CYBER-MASTURBATION FREAK BABYLON HORUV STEPS IN TO TELL THE IGNORANT MASSES HOW PEOPLE WORK, AND MANAGES TO DO THIS DESPITE HIS HANDICAP OF NOT HAVING A SINGLE FRIEND IN THE ENTIRE WORLD.

HOW DOES HE DO IT?

[Cainad (dec.)]

Who needs Alpha status when you have "Bob"?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Who needs Alpha status when you have "Bob"?

"Bob" is actually a beta.  The True Pipe is the alpha.  And it smokes "Bob".

[Cainad (dec.)]

Who needs Alpha status when you have "Bob"?

"Bob" is actually a beta.  The True Pipe is the alpha.  And it smokes "Bob".

Do I even want to know who's the Gamma in this context?

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

This "alpha" and "beta" stuff is just one lens to look at socializing through.

How is it useful to you Dingo?  If it's not, perhaps there are better elements of the social experience for you to focus on.

Though the terms might be somewhat accurate in describing social phenomena, it's not the be-all end-all dimension of peopling.

I don't find it very interesting or conducive to having a good time with other people.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

TL;DR
Telling people they can't be alpha or should stick to a lower class of people they belong to (the unattractive, socially limited etc) is frustrating advice because it asks you to go against your inclination to succeed in life.

Who said anything like that?

Nobody.

He's wildly misinterpreting what I said about manipulative poseurs having a self-imposed social ceiling because they're icky.

And what I said about people being able to find other, similar people to partner with.

And what I said about betas who think they are mimicking alpha behaviors coming off as creepy jerks.

I don't think he understood the takeaway lesson of what I was saying, at all; he honestly thinks that "Alphas" are horrible people, and that in order for "Betas" to become "Alphas" they need to manipulate and humiliate people. The truth is almost the exact opposite; people who are naturally dominant try to put others at ease and make sure they are doing OK. They don't use people, and they're comfortable in their own skin.

You can get there, but it takes a bigger change than just pretending to be a dick.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Who needs Alpha status when you have "Bob"?

"Bob" is actually a beta.  The True Pipe is the alpha.  And it smokes "Bob".

This raises the question, can an alpha have Slack™?

Also, what Net said about it being a lot more fluid than most people think. A "natural" alpha is just someone who is not trying, and simply is. It has nothing to do with an inborn nature, and everything to do with being in their element and comfort zone. Have you ever seen what you thought was a meek, shy person walk into, say, a workshop or lab or library and suddenly be at home in their domain?

Most people seem to associate being "alpha" with being most at home in bustling social situations. But someone can be alpha at a party and beta in the office, or vice versa.

The alpha isn't always the guy or chick you think is running the show, either. If you watch people's social interactions very carefully, you can often see that the loud confident blustery guy is usually not the most dominant person in the room. The most dominant person in the room is very much not making a show of it, while the blustery guy is trying too hard. Look for the quiet person who is relaxed and smiling, especially if they frequently defer to others.