"Alpha, beta, delta, gamma, omega, sigma" personality archetypes

[Asa]

nevermind, I deleted it, prob shouldn't talk for others

Just to be clear, I was asking you to explain your POV, not trying to argue, but it's your prerogative to delete it, too.

 

[Wyote]

It's funny to me how the narrative shifted for guys (among guy groups) about how we are all now Sigma instead of Gamma or Omega.
Gotta be the coolest most self reliant badass out there, ya know, cuz that's what the ladies dig.
Like we are just going through the greek alphabet here trying to one up each other.
I'll just go ahead and declare myself Psi. Why not.

 

[aeon]

The combination of pop psychometrics, social gatekeeping, women-as-sexobjects, and performative measure of ability is fun, like signs of the zodiac.

Because when it’s not, it’s just another dick-measuring contest.

I’ve got aspects of many of those descriptions (only the best parts, natch), but I am none of them.

For I am λ, lambda.

Cheers,
Ian

 

[Asa]

I’ve got aspects of many of those descriptions (only the best parts, natch), but I am none of them.

At first glance (because this isn't my thing) it seems like men could be many of these depending on their current state of mental health, who they are with, and where they are on any given path.

For example, if a man is currently suffering from depression, he will be a different label (lacking ambition, low self-esteem, etc) than he is when at his best. Fewer people are attracted to mental health issues, so that will lower his desirability. The same man, when in a healthier state of mind could be a healthier, more confident label. Or, perhaps a man is an alpha at work, but not on the field with his weekend football team, or in a band where he is the bassist behind a showy frontman, or even in his family, where his alpha dad is always busting his balls. Or maybe you know a guy who peacocks socially and seems to have loads of charisma, charm, and confidence, but his career is underwhelming. Even socially, a man can be the center of attention with one group of friends and a hanger-on with another. If a guy claims to be at the top of the hierarchy (or avoiding the hierarchy) in every setting, he is either bullshitting or delusional. It's currently popular to fall into a trap of believing a person who has authority in one area has authority in all areas, which isn't true. Being an expert (and alpha) in one field does not qualify a person in other fields. As people age, they grow into different roles as well. Just my perception of this, but I don't know much about this system.

 

[Competently incompetent]

What do you think of this theory of behavior (usually ascribed to males but could also fit women)? Do you think there's validity to the theory? If so or not, please explain why or why not. Various sites especially forums have people who have written their own versions of each archetype. Many seem to find the descriptions helpful, somewhat accurate, and use the descriptions to find compatible partners when dating and to manage dominant/submissive relationship dynamics. Do you see these descriptions reflected in everyday dating or relationship dynamics? Do you see yourself more as dominant or submissive or a mix of the two? What would you see as the flaw in the theory if you someone adheres to this too rigidly? Which figures in society, pop culture, or media do think are good examples of each type?

Below are three descriptions I found which are similar but also a bit different, showing how the archetypes are being understood differently depending on the person and the reasoning used to rationalize the theory.



http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2011/03/socio-sexual-hierarchy.html

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=160378801&page=1

http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/a...mma-or-sigma-male-descriptions-itt.250127262/

The entire concept is shallow and superficial and the only people who describe themselves or others as such really need to consider wheather or not categorising people as such is worthwhile and/or find a better passtime than keeping up with social media because the human lifespan is finite and shouldn't be wasted focusing on the illusion given to us by Hollywood because people are people nothing more nothing less.