Gunnar_Zarncke comments on Polling Thread - Less Wrong

12 Post author: Gunnar_Zarncke 22 January 2014 09:14PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (118)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 24 January 2014 05:55:34PM *  0 points [-]

No. That doesn't sound right. We are no looking for Alpha<->Omega i.e. graduation of success at dominance.

We are looking at genuinely desireable (for men) but orthogonal properties in woman.

Men: Alpha = Capability to control others, Beta = capability to provide and care for children

Women: Alpha = Beauty?, Capability to influence others?, Beta = Health? Practical intelligence?

Comment author: Moss_Piglet 25 January 2014 02:04:44AM -1 points [-]

"Genuinely desirable" seems like the problem here, in that it's conflating base sexual attraction with a more pragmatic evaluation of someone's prospects.

Beta males certainly have many admirable qualities; they're reliable productive and civil, usually friendly and loyal as well. But those qualities, while again being very important, are simply not attractive.

Alpha males, on the other hand, are really quite a menace. The Dark Triad traits which make them attractive also mean they are shiftless and poor contributors to society, at least for the most part.

Hence the pattern of "Alpha fucks, Beta bucks." Women want to get the Alpha but will, if forced to by circumstances, trade sex to Betas for resources / security.

In that context, female "Betas" would be the low-risk women men settle for reluctantly while "Alphas" would be high-risk women who are highly sought after.

Comment author: BarbaraB 26 February 2014 03:24:49PM 0 points [-]

Any examples ? Even fictional evidence ?

Comment author: Lumifer 24 January 2014 06:00:39PM -1 points [-]

We are looking at genuinely desireable (for men) properties but orthogonal properties in woman.

Can you rephrase? I don't understand what this means.

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 25 January 2014 12:22:47AM 0 points [-]

Basis is the interpretation of Alpha/Beta citend by Viliam_Bur from e.g. here: http://marriedmansexlife.com/take-the-red-pill/alpha-and-beta-male-traits/ Where Alpha and Beta traits are orthogonal and both independently desirable (not Alpha good, Beta bad).

I am am correspondingly looking for alike orthogonal traits in women that are both independently desirable for men.

Candidate womens traits could be:

  • Beauty, Health
  • Practical intelligence
  • Ability and willingness to care for and foster offspring.
  • Capability to influence others (corresponding to male Alpha trait)
  • Sexual willingsness

The questions is: Are these actually clustered into two orthogonal features? I cannot see such a clustering. And I also see no clear evopsych reason for it.

Comment author: Lumifer 25 January 2014 02:07:04AM 4 points [-]

Ah, I see.

Well, I can come up with pairs of orthogonal traits, but I don't know why would you call them Alpha and Beta. These terms are pretty solidly associated with dominance/status.

But if you want to make up an orthogonal pair, sure: Alpha = sexiness, ability to turn heads on the street, good in bed, bombshell. Beta = keeping house, being a good mother, a good cook.

The parallel is that Alpha qualities make you noticed and attract potential mates while Beta qualities keep them over the long term.