ProfD Posted May 6 Report Posted May 6 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: I disagree completely. And in some regards, this goes back to an alpha male's own upbringing and the kind of women in his early development as well. Women cannot teach a male how to be a man. 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: True. I agree however, an alpha male will still fight over women nonetheless. Just to be clear...there's a difference between protecting a woman from hurt, harm or danger and fighting another man *over* her. Otherwise, an alpha-male doesn't have to fight another dude to win over a woman. He's got too many choices to pick from in women.
Chevdove Posted May 25 Report Posted May 25 On 5/5/2025 at 11:28 PM, ProfD said: Women cannot teach a male how to be a man. And your point? I do not understand what this has to do with how Alpha males conflict with other males over females. Women do influence males in their early development, however, in no way would I imply that a female can teach a male how to be a man. On 5/5/2025 at 11:28 PM, ProfD said: Just to be clear...there's a difference between protecting a woman from hurt, harm or danger and fighting another man *over* her. I agree, however, the example that I gave was evidence in that an alpha male will fight another man over a female. Cause David did just that. He not only fought to protect women and children, but he fought/conflicted with other men over certain females. Yes he did. Let me explain a little about one particular incident. There was one of his wives that was taken from him and was given to another man and later, David went back to get her. He definitely challenged that man. And that man, 'if I remember correctly' followed behind David and that woman as David led her away from him. That man did not challenge David any further, but obviously David was ready to fight over her, if it came to that. Alphas males do fight over women. On 5/5/2025 at 11:28 PM, ProfD said: Otherwise, an alpha-male doesn't have to fight another dude to win over a woman. He's got too many choices to pick from in women. I absolutely disagree.
ProfD Posted May 25 Report Posted May 25 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: And your point? I do not understand what this has to do with how Alpha males conflict with other males over females. Women do influence males in their early development, however, in no way would I imply that a female can teach a male how to be a man. When ypu mentioned upbringing and early development, my point was women cannot teach males how to be men. A mother definitely shouldn't teach her son to fight *over* a woman. Especially when there's no shortage of them. 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: I agree, however, the example that I gave was evidence in that an alpha male will fight another man over a female. Cause David did just that. He not only fought to protect women and children, but he fought/conflicted with other men over certain females. Yes he did. Let me explain a little about one particular incident. There was one of his wives that was taken from him and was given to another man and later, David went back to get her. He definitely challenged that man. And that man, 'if I remember correctly' followed behind David and that woman as David led her away from him. That man did not challenge David any further, but obviously David was ready to fight over her, if it came to that. Interesting story. Doesn't read like there was no reason to fight *over* her. 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: Alphas males do fight over women. As I mentioned, alpha males don't have to fight *over* women. They have several choices in high value women. 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: I absolutely disagree. You're certainly entitled to your belief. Makes the dialog more interesting.
Chevdove Posted May 25 Report Posted May 25 1 hour ago, ProfD said: When ypu mentioned upbringing and early development, my point was women cannot teach males how to be men. A mother definitely shouldn't teach her son to fight *over* a woman. Especially when there's no shortage of them. No one should need to teach a male to fight over a woman, however, to objectify women and believing that there is no shortage of them would not define an alpha male. A positive and confident male would not see it as a benefit to settle for women that would be 'easy'. 1 hour ago, ProfD said: Interesting story. Doesn't read like there was no reason to fight *over* her. Perhaps because the male that David took her from was not an alpha type male? Nevertheless, David was definitely ready to fight *over* her and he was definitely an alpha male and that is the real point, here. 1 hour ago, ProfD said: You're certainly entitled to your belief. Makes the dialog more interesting. Thanks!
ProfD Posted May 25 Report Posted May 25 23 minutes ago, Chevdove said: ...however, to objectify women and believing that there is no shortage of them would not define an alpha male. How does recognizing there is no shortage of women objectify them? 23 minutes ago, Chevdove said: A positive and confident male would not see it as a benefit to settle for women that would be 'easy'. Where was it suggested that alpha males look or settle for *easy* women? The point is alpha males have options when it comes to high value women. They don't have to fight over them.
Troy Posted May 25 Report Posted May 25 Playing devils advocate for a second, I think there are many women that can raise a boy into a man better than many men could. A cis-gendered heterosexual male is ideally raised by both parents. A boy raised without the influence of his mother is at a deficit. Most guys are not alpha males. It is difficult to make that term apply to a modern day man. Anybody with a lot of money will have many options when it comes to getting women and you don’t have to worry about getting your butt kicked because you can hire bodyguards. There will never be a shortage of sycophants and lackies at your beck and call. Donald Trump and Elon Musk are the ultimate alpha males in the scenario. They are not the strongest, best looking most righteous, but they are leaders of men. Donald Trump summoned Jim Brown and Jim kissed the ring. Sure he was an old man by then but still… 1
Chevdove Posted May 25 Report Posted May 25 6 hours ago, Troy said: Donald Trump summoned Jim Brown and Jim kissed the ring. Sure he was an old man by then but still… I'm laughing at this part! But I'm happy you chimed in to show this aspect! 6 hours ago, Troy said: A boy raised without the influence of his mother is at a deficit. Yes! I absolutely agree. 6 hours ago, Troy said: Playing devils advocate for a second, I think there are many women that can raise a boy into a man better than many men could. I think that a women can raise a boy to a point but it would come to a time when a malefactor would need to connect with a positive malefactor in order to be a mature male. By nature males become distinct and this may not be obvious in the American world today but on a global scale, if the American government collapsed, it will become obvious. 6 hours ago, Troy said: Most guys are not alpha males. It is difficult to make that term apply to a modern day man. Yep. This is the reality! 6 hours ago, Troy said: Donald Trump and Elon Musk are the ultimate alpha males in the scenario. They are not the strongest, best looking most righteous, but they are leaders of men. Definitely agree here.
Chevdove Posted May 25 Report Posted May 25 8 hours ago, ProfD said: How does recognizing there is no shortage of women objectify them? Ah! This question is the key to why I think that this subject is a really great one to discuss! You know, I think that in terms of understanding just what is 'an alpha male' is dependent upon their origins and how this type of male would indeed mature to that point. When I earlier said that it would depend upon their origins, you responded that 'a woman cannot teach a male'. You know, I think that this issue of how alpha males come to exist is a big issue and yes, it may reveal a bigger issue, especially with the Black African Americans today in how we have come to exist here in America. From my position and understanding and seeing this issue being based on cultural origins, when Black men think that 'there is no shortage of women for alpha males' then, what I see is how Black men have been made to view 'easy' women as being how they view themselves as being important and this is a huge revelation. From my point of view, having no shortage of women who flock to males, is not a guideline for being an alpha male. In other words, a true alpha male would not be defined based on having a bunch of women who throw themselves at him. That kind of mindset is seeing women like that as 'objects' or 'trophies' that make them believe in a false reality in that they are important. Just because a male may be desired by a lot of women does not make him important, but it would be the kind of women that he desires and views as a valuable person to have a relationship with would define him as being 'an alpha male' IMO. In other words, unless an alpha male is defined by a confident and well balanced female, then he is not 'an alpha male'!!! That is my belief. An alpha male is defined by a well balanced female, whether or not that kind of woman would be defined as 'an alpha female' I don't know what the term would be though. But, IMO, this is the very problem with the Black African American culture as it developed here in America. We've been devalued and therefore, we have learned to devalue each other and this goes back to an early origin. An alpha male could not develop unless he values women of his culture as being 'worthy' so therefore, his development depends on his origins and the earlier women of his culture. The Bible refers to this concept as 'Urim and Thumim'. You can't have an alpha male without their women-kind being a valuable part of their development. If males do not view the women of their own culture as being worthy then they cannot be alpha males. Women should not be throwing themselves at males, but should view themselves as worthy of attention and praise of which an alpha male will do and provide. A true alpha male will fight for a valuable woman's attention! He will not settle for the kind of women that throw themselves at him. That would be sort of like 'a concubine'. Solomon broke that down very well in his writings. Women need to be viewed as valuable and not just 'easy' for an alpha male to be defined as such. Males are defined and based on the welfare of their own woman kind! This is Urim and Thumim! You are no better than what you have come from and African Americans have been exploited here in America and fooled to believe that this is not important. Until we can respect each other, culturally, we may even have a difficult time if we choose to have relationships with other cultures. In other words, you can't throw your own mother down and expect to bond with another kind of spouse and it not become a conflict with future generations. I don't know if I'm making sense, but this is a great subject IMO and needs to be discussed more and more. 8 hours ago, ProfD said: Where was it suggested that alpha males look or settle for *easy* women? The point is alpha males have options when it comes to high value women. They don't have to fight over them. A high value woman would not be an option for any male. I don't think you understand what I mean here. But an high value woman would be in demand just as an alpha male would be in demand. A high valued woman would be approached by a worthy male and would allow that kind of man to show her the kind of attention that would let her know he would be there for her and that she could trust him. That kind of man would have to court her and show her some kind of character to let her know that he would value her as an asset. I believe that an Alpha-typed male would indeed have the kind of personality that would lead him to be ready to fight over a 'worthy' female that is indeed worthy of his attention and they don't come 'a dime a dozen'. That type of female would be well bred and matured culturally and therefore, 'a true gem' that would cause a positive male to want to compete for her attention because that kind of woman would be a good prospect for building up the future. An alpha male would see that his kind of relationship is worthy of fighting for when it comes to making a relationship, especially if the future generation is part of the picture.
ProfD Posted May 25 Report Posted May 25 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: Ah! This question is the key to why I think that this subject is a really great one to discuss! You know, I think that in terms of understanding just what is 'an alpha male' is.. A high value woman would not be an option for any male. Right. It is a whole subject unto itself which starts with how alpha-males and high value women are defined. The universe usually brings alpha-males and high value women together.
Troy Posted May 26 Report Posted May 26 Is trump’s Eddie s high value woman, or did she become one after she married him? Mellody Hobson, a high value woman, is married to George Lucas. Is George Lucas an Alpha male? Again, it’s not like we are silverback. Gorillas maintaining the alpha position based upon physical strength. Alpha males as it applies to modern humans is a subjective social construct much like race, and probably not a valuable descriptor unless one defines it in context in context.
ProfD Posted May 26 Report Posted May 26 55 minutes ago, Troy said: Is trump’s Eddie s high value woman, or did she become one after she married him? Mellody Hobson, a high value woman, is married to George Lucas. Is George Lucas an Alpha male? Those types of rich people don't really *need* each other for survival or status. Many marriages are functional arrangements for status, appearances, legal representation, etc. The Clintons are a good example of a functional arrangement. 55 minutes ago, Troy said: Again, it’s not like we are silverback. Gorillas maintaining the alpha position based upon physical strength. Right. We've evolved a bit such that *strength* comes in different flavors beyond physical. 55 minutes ago, Troy said: Alpha males as it applies to modern humans is a subjective social construct much like race, and probably not a valuable descriptor unless one defines it in context in context. Sure. The descriptor doesn't matter much to most people.
Chevdove Posted May 26 Report Posted May 26 23 hours ago, ProfD said: The universe usually brings alpha-males and high value women together. I agree. True love will find a way. 10 hours ago, Troy said: Is trump’s Eddie s high value woman, or did she become one after she married him? I don't follow Trump's life but I think because he is the president, he would be a good person to compare and contrast on this subject. I also don't know about his 'wives' but I've heard people say that the First Lady is from Europe and perhaps Hungarian[?]. I also heard that Trump has a lot of sons, so therefore, I think that Trump chose his mates carefully and they are definitely considered high value. 10 hours ago, Troy said: Mellody Hobson, a high value woman, is married to George Lucas. Is George Lucas an Alpha male? I think that the entertainment industry is secondary in this government and so, George Lucas would be viewed by Black Americans who love that kind of stuff as being a high value male. But he would not be on the same level as Trump. 10 hours ago, Troy said: Again, it’s not like we are silverback. Gorillas maintaining the alpha position based upon physical strength. Alpha males as it applies to modern humans is a subjective social construct much like race, and probably not a valuable descriptor unless one defines it in context in context. Yep. As it applies to 'modern humans' it is subjective. But universally, it goes back to it origins and how big governments have formed today. This world does not run on weak people.
ProfD Posted May 26 Report Posted May 26 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: I don't follow Trump's life... POTUS OJ has had 3 wives with 5 childen spread across them (3 sons and 2 daughters). 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: I also don't know about his 'wives' but I've heard people say that the First Lady is from Europe and perhaps Hungarian[?]. Mail order bride, er, FLOTUS is from Slovenia. 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: I think that Trump chose his mates carefully and they are definitely considered high value. Not really. A narcissistic, megalomaniac surrounds themsleves with people who feed it. 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: Yep. As it applies to 'modern humans' it is ssubective. But universally, it goes back to it origins and how big governments have formed today. This world does not run on weak people. Right. The world runs over weak people. The powerful use weaker people to get things done.
Troy Posted May 26 Report Posted May 26 2 hours ago, ProfD said: POTUS OJ has had 3 wives with 5 childen spread across them (3 sons and 2 daughters). Like the silverback alpha gorilla Trump gets to mate with multiple women. Perhaps his behavior harkens back to our more primitive nature. Unlike the silverback, Trump's power is derived not from strength but power. 12 hours ago, ProfD said: Many marriages are functional arrangements for status, appearances, legal representation, etc. The longer I live the more I realize this should be a strong factor in who you decide to marry. @Chevdove call me cynical (unmarried with kids from two different woman), but marrying for solely love is overrated -- particularly if wealth accumulation and preservation is not a factor. You can come to love anyone you with whom you come to share mutual respect.
ProfD Posted May 26 Report Posted May 26 10 hours ago, Troy said: Like the silverback alpha gorilla Trump gets to mate with multiple women. Perhaps his behavior harkens back to our more primitive nature. Considering the orange tan POTUS OJ prefers, I'd imagine he identifies as an alpha orangutan. 10 hours ago, Troy said: The longer I live the more I realize this should be a strong factor in who you decide to marry. That's partially the reason folks consider their 2nd marriage the *best* especially if both parties have been there, done that. The 2nd marriage isn't built around kids and picket fences. They have different goals and expectations. 10 hours ago, Troy said: ....marrying for solely love is overrated -- particularly if wealth accumulation and preservation is not a factor. You can come to love anyone you with whom you come to share mutual respect. Right. Cultures that practice arranged marriages subscribe to the belief that a couple can fall in love if that's what they want to do after being married. They laugh at the belief that people marry for love.
Troy Posted May 27 Report Posted May 27 Yeah, arrange marriages make a lot more sense than marrying someone because they have big boobs and butt 4 hours ago, ProfD said: That's partially the reason folks consider thdir 2nd marriage the *best* You might be referring to people whose second marriage actually succeeded. The reality is second marriages are more likely to fail than first marriages.
ProfD Posted May 27 Report Posted May 27 11 hours ago, Troy said: Yeah, arrange marriages make a lot more sense than marrying someone because they have big boobs and butt Younger men get a pass for the 1st marriage being based on those physical traits. The head scratcher is when older dudes are still falling for and marrying women for physical appeal versus status, financial, companionship, etc. 11 hours ago, Troy said: You might be referring to people whose second marriage actually succeeded. The reality is second marriages are more likely to fail than first marriages. Right. I'm referring to successful 2nd marriages. Not the can't get right marriages where people marry for the same stupid reasons as mentioned above. The sooner we teach folks that marriage should be a functional arrangement i.e. business-like, with clearly defined expectations and goals, they might be more *successful* on several levels. 1
Chevdove Posted June 14 Report Posted June 14 On 5/26/2025 at 10:59 AM, ProfD said: Mail order bride, er, FLOTUS is from Slovenia. Oh okay. I thought it was somewhere in that area. Interesting. On 5/26/2025 at 1:14 PM, Troy said: Unlike the silverback, Trump's power is derived not from strength but power. Okay. I have to ponder this concept of strength versus power. So, he relied on power not strength. Interesting. Power, as in influence? On 5/26/2025 at 1:14 PM, Troy said: @Chevdove call me cynical (unmarried with kids from two different woman), but marrying for solely love is overrated -- particularly if wealth accumulation and preservation is not a factor. You can come to love anyone you with whom you come to share mutual respect. Yes. I agree.The ancient writings have presented many examples of relationships, love and marriage bonding. I think that love is subjective but when it comes to human relationships, perfect love should initially be developed in how we connect with the higher powers and not humans. So then after developing an understanding of love and commitment on a spiritual foundation, then can we develop human relationships on the basis of love. But falling head over heals over a human based on how they look or how much wealth they have acquired is bound to end up being a big regret. On 5/26/2025 at 7:15 PM, ProfD said: Considering the orange tan POTUS OJ prefers, I'd imagine he identifies as an alpha orangutan. You need to stop! On 5/26/2025 at 11:27 PM, Troy said: You might be referring to people whose second marriage actually succeeded. The reality is second marriages are more likely to fail than first marriages. Yes.
Chevdove Posted June 14 Report Posted June 14 On 5/25/2025 at 12:29 AM, ProfD said: How does recognizing there is no shortage of women objectify them? I want to make sure that I don't miss this point. To answer this question would be to say that it would be the same way from a female perspective too. For example, my sister-in-laws feel the same way about Black African American men too. They believe that they come 'a dime a dozen'. Now granted; you may feel that there is so such concept as an 'alpha typed woman', but I believe that, although the term may differ, a confident woman who becomes noted as being an obsession to many men will have no shortage of men who desire to be with them too. I just don't believe though, that kind of attention defines 'an alpha-typed person' who would fight for a relationship. I am saying that an alpha-typed man would fight over a woman. The fact that 'alpha-typed' people would draw much attention from others who desire to be with them does not define them though. I think that one character that would identify 'an alpha typed person' would be the kind of relationship that he would choose to embrace and be willing to fight to have. And women that tend to throw themselves down for an alpha man would be a turn off IMO. So even though, as you say, those type of men have no shortage of women who desire to be with them, however, he would more likely want a woman that would be worth fighting for his attention and, a type of woman that other men would identify too as being high value, therefore subject to cause competition. But when men or women objectify others, IMO, it doesn't define them as being alpha. So too finish making my point about certain women who can have that same type of reaction; My sister-in-laws are very light skinned and they have learned to believe that they are better than darker skinned Blacks and so, from that perspective, Yes, I am a witness to the kind of attention they have received from Black men, however, from my point of view, it's only dark skinned men that do that to them. No matter, they have been conditioned to believe that they are better off due to that kind of attention that they receive from many Black men. But that does not make them alphas IMO at all. In fact, I view them as complete losers. LOL. If they came out of their comfort zone and put themselves around lighter skinned males, they would not get any attention at all. LOL. And the kind of Black men that obsess over them are ugly too. I think that they have conveniently chosen the kind of Black men that they can dominate and control for a very serious reason. They witnessed their mother being severely persecuted by their father who is a very light skinned man and they don't want to suffer like she did, therefore, they chose Black men that are not flashy and are matriarchal in every aspect. So just because certain men come 'a dime a dozen' for them does not make them alpha typed. Just because there is no shortage of women that obsess over a certain type of man, does not make him 'an alpha man'. Therefore, to objectify people is not a good way to identify an alpha typed person, IMO.
ProfD Posted June 15 Report Posted June 15 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: To answer this question would be to say that it would be the same way from a female perspective too. For example, my sister-in-laws feel the same way about Black African American men too. Your sister-in-laws are delusional. Their tunes might change as they age out of the program. 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: But when men or women objectify others, IMO, it doesn't define them as being alpha. Alphas do not have to objectify anyone else nor do they have to settle for anything. 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: And the kind of Black men that obsess over them are ugly too. I think that they have conveniently chosen the kind of Black men that they can dominate and control for a very serious reason. Reads like those sister-in-laws have chose beta males definitely not alphas. 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: Just because there is no shortage of women that obsess over a certain type of man, does not make him 'an alpha man'. Average women obsessing over him isn't a flex for an alpha-male. Same applies to high vakue women. An alpha-male on his purpose; taking care of himself and handling his business doesn't have time to *fight* over a woman. 1 hour ago, Chevdove said: Therefore, to objectify people is not a good way to identify an alpha typed person, IMO. I have never written nor do I believe that objectifying people is a trait or alphas. Being an alpha has less to do with other people and is moreso about being the best version of oneself....self-actualization.
Chevdove Posted June 15 Report Posted June 15 32 minutes ago, ProfD said: Your sister-in-laws are delusional. Their tunes might change as they age out of the program. 33 minutes ago, ProfD said: Alphas do not have to objectify anyone else nor do they have to settle for anything. idk about this. 34 minutes ago, ProfD said: Reads like those sister-in-laws have chose beta males definitely not alphas. Yep! 35 minutes ago, ProfD said: An alpha-male on his purpose; taking care of himself and handling his business doesn't have time to *fight* over a woman. Yes. True. I agree, but I believe that it's in their nature to want to fight though. 36 minutes ago, ProfD said: Being an alpha has less to do with other people and is moreso about being the best version of oneself....self-actualization. Absolutely agree.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now