I once read somewhere that we live in a world of false dichotomies — left brain vs. right brain, nature vs. nurture, etc. That much is obvious and for me, the most annoying and persistent myth is the distinction between “alpha” and “beta” males.
According to a bunch of people out there whose only claim to knowledge on masculinity is a reliance on pseudoscience, “Alpha” males are those at the top of the social status hierarchy. Alphas are typically described as the “real men.” while the “Beta” males, seen as the weak, submissive, subordinate guys are the ones with low status, and only get in relationships once women decide to settle down and go searching for a “nice guy.”
By this logic, Ladipo from Ikorodu who turns off his data just so he doesn’t run out of the N3,000 internet he subscribes to is not a real man.
But I digress. I have four questions before I continue…
1. There’s no real concept of an alpha wolf in the wild, but it exists in captivity. What does it mean that men have totally taken on this identity, as being the ‘alpha’ or the ‘alpha wolf’ or ‘alpha male’ when it doesn’t even really exist in nature? That it’s the gold standard of being a human man — being an ‘alpha’?
2. If the ‘Alpha’ idea were to have any credibility in male identity and human relationships, has anyone with half a brain considered that there can be only one male alpha in any animal social group? Just one! Wouldn’t that suggest that this logic is utterly unapplicable to human beings? Abi who would you say is the alpha in your social group since you claim to be one as well?
3. Has anyone considered that female alphas exist? Among wolves and bonobos (also called pygmy chimpanzees) — you have alpha female-led troops to a much greater extent. Females have much more of a say in terms of who gets what, what happens when, and all of that.
4. Why are wolves and less evolved primates the identity yardstick?
I think that these outdated distinctions, which were based on observations among other social animals paint a very simplistic picture of masculinity. Not only do they oversimplify how multidimensional masculinity is, but they also grossly underestimate what a man can become. In addition, these views don’t even get to the heart of what women find attractive.
I’m deliberate about that last bit — attractiveness to women — because, at the end of the day, a lot of people subscribing to the ‘Alpha Male’ school of thought consider desirability from the opposite gender as a key part of being an alpha.
Sadly, by imposing impose just two categories of males on the world — one weak and one strong — we unnecessarily mislead young men into acting in certain predefined ways that aren’t conducive to attracting and sustaining healthy and enjoyable relationships with people around them or finding success in other areas of life. By perpetuating this myth, we also perpetuate an unnecessary reward/punishment system that has nothing to do with the actual value of our shared humanity but with how well men fit into a box. If you don’t suit the template, you’re insulted, bullied, and shamed, while on the other hand, embracing this set of ideals makes you celebrated and acknowledged.
Among human beings, the attainment of social status, and the desirability/attention that come along with it (never mind that in 2022, you may not even be attracted to the opposite gender), can be accomplished through compassion and cooperation just as much (if not more so) as through aggression and domination. Scholars across ethnography, ethology, sociology, and sociolinguistics believe that at least two routes to social status — dominance and prestige — arose in evolutionary history at different times and for different purposes.
According to Scott Barry Kaufman, the dominance route is paved with intimidation and is fuelled by hubristic pride which, along with its associated feelings of superiority and arrogance, facilitates dominance by motivating behaviours such as aggression, hostility, and manipulation. In addition, hubristic pride is associated with arrogance, conceit, anti-social behaviours, unstable relationships, low levels of conscientiousness and high levels of disagreeableness, neuroticism, narcissism, and poor mental health outcomes.
In contrast, prestige is paved with the emotional rush of accomplishment, confidence, and success, and is fuelled by authentic pride. Authentic pride is associated with pro-social and achievement-oriented behaviours, agreeableness, conscientiousness, satisfying interpersonal relationships, and positive mental health.
He goes further to explain that authentic pride is associated with genuine self-esteem (considering yourself a person of value, not considering yourself superior to others). People who are confident, agreeable, hard-working, energetic, kind, empathic, nondogmatic, and high in genuine self-esteem inspire others and cause others to want to emulate them.
If you ever put a man down or see him as ‘less than’ because he doesn’t fit into your descriptors of manliness, now you know where your sense of self is drawing from.
These two routes to male social status have also been observed among the Tsimané (a small-scale Amazonian society). In this society, dominance (as ranked by peers) was positively related to physical size, whereas peer-ranked prestige was positively associated with hunting ability, generosity, and the number of allies.
So, who would you rather be? Someone who is kind, can listen, is firm, conscientious or someone who thinks the only way to be respected is through aggression, intimidation, and domination?
Here, it’s important to note that sensitivity and assertiveness are not opposites. In fact, research suggests that the combination of kindness and assertiveness might just be the most ideal pairing. Across three studies, researchers found that dominance alone didn’t help men in terms of attractiveness, rather, the intersection of dominance and pro-social behaviours is what women were reported to find particularly sexually attractive. In other words, dominance only increased sexual attraction when the person was already high in agreeableness and altruism.
Anyway, this shouldn’t even be something to spell out but since conversations on masculinity and being an alpha focus on qualities that set men up for success and women, there you go.
Also, I think that, ultimately, the alpha male idea propagates the idea that it is only right for men to be in charge. It’s a promotion of the biological agenda, that men have a need to be in charge, while women have a need for men to be in charge, and that successful men are the alphas. It’s a problem on so many different levels. Like, all you need to be ahead is a penis? Okay, but LOL.
That said, I also think that it’s healthier, in many species, to be a beta male (mind you, we’ve established that this idea is nonsense among humans). You don’t have nearly the same levels of stress (which can be measured through cortisol levels).
According to Professor Matthew Gutmann, the author of Are Men Animals? How Modern Masculinity Sells Men Short, who has spent 30 years exploring notions of masculinity across the United States, Latin America, and China, Beta males among chimps are a lot healthier, in many respects because they don’t have everyone attacking them. There are even some studies that say that they have more sex. Sadly, biologists on nature shows, generally don’t care as much about them, because they don’t coincide with the idea that men are in charge and should be.
It’s sad. Also, it does tell you that people who further the alpha male agenda don’t necessarily care about you, they just care about being superior. And that’s all it takes for me to say whatever anyone said about alphas and betas in relation to humans needs to be confined to your nearest trashcan. You’re not a wolf or chimpanzee and dimwits on social media who only rely on data from bad science should not be telling you who you are or what kind of man you should be simply because it sounds more fanciful.
Be you.
