The manosphere and "alpha male" influencers

[The Hammer]

Of course a leader is the boss. If you don't have a boss you have chaos.

.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

He is the one that has the ultimate authority.

Quite often it is she. Like women in management (they tend to do better than men), or the lioness who does the hunting.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

He is the one that has the ultimate authority.
And among animals, especially predators, that means he's the one that's the biggest and/or toughest.
I can even observe this among my own chickens, the rooster that wins the most fights gets the most chicks.

Human ethology is more complex. While big and tough sometimes means something in certain situations, cooperation has counted for a ton more in human evolution. We are extremely social creatures and understanding emotional and social nuance is handy.

That's not to say there's not something to being tough and determined, but being apathetic to the concerns of others to maintain dominance isn't a great survival strategy for an individual and can be corrosive to a community.

 

[Koldo]

Andrew Tate, Kevin Samuels, And The Fresh & Fit Podcast: How Toxic Male Influencers Impact Loved Ones (buzzfeednews.com)

I came across this story which popped up in my newsfeed this morning. I've seen some of these stories before, most of the time on my visits to Reddit, where there are some subreddits where issues like this are discussed. It talks about the influence of the "manosphere" and how it has affected some people's lives, which was the focus of this particular article.



I had never even heard of Andrew Tate until he was deplatformed, and I've never seen any of his videos.





I don't know how much actual influence any of these "influencers" have, but it does appear to be a sub-set within the overall alt-right phenomenon which has gripped the political culture in recent years. A lot of younger men and boys also seem to be influenced by this - a lot of them may be from troubled backgrounds, dysfunctional families, confused by mixed messages pervasive throughout society, an uncertain future. They become like rebels looking for a cause, and there's always someone out there to provide one.

Trump seems to exude this certain "alpha male" image which many in that crowd tend to champion. I don't think that all who fall into that category are necessarily pro-Trump, though. Most seem apolitical, or at least, their focus seems more social/culture-oriented rather than overtly political.

I've always noticed and have been aware of men who have talked to other men about bad relationships, past breakups, emotional baggage like most of us have. Men write songs about the women who did them wrong; it's been the subject of a lot of literary works and commentary throughout the ages.

So, the topic itself is not really all that new, but there's something different about the way the "manosphere" approaches it. I can't quite put my finger on it, though. I'm not sure exactly what's going on here. I have my own theories as to what the core problem might be, although I'll resist the urge to go on another anti-capitalist rant until I see some other opinions on the topic.

I guess what really gets to me is the terminology they use. "Alpha male" sounds like they're comparing human communities to a pack of wolves. One needs a glossary to be able to understand all the jargon and acronyms they use.

Those guys know how to talk to frustrated men and present themselves as a male role model.

There seems to be a huge lack of progressive men doing the same out there.

 

[vulcanlogician]

Insecure men have been doing it for a long time, where short haired women are an abomination and intellectual men are inherently effeminate and a man must be rough, tough, no manners, no emotion and always in charge.

I don't think that "alpha male-ism" is ALWAYS rooted in insecurity. I do in fact think it is a genuine social attitude that produces the desired results some of the time. And I think there are plenty of men and women out there who prefer to relate to one another in this way. I also think much of this tendency is a big "hand me down" from mother nature. You see it in baboons. You see it in wolves... (as per the article you shared said, some of this has been misinterpreted or over-extrapolated).

I agree with OP, that the "alpha male influencer" phenomenon subsists itself on insecurities and is pretty much toxic.

But the "alpha male attitude" itself isn't necessarily insecure or toxic. Some folks are just like that.

I'm not defending it or anything. I'm a so-called "effeminate intellectual," and I wouldn't have it any other way.

But I don't think the problem is that some guys are unthinking brutes trying to occupy some fictitious "alpha" social position. The problem is when someone says, "This is the way it is, and we should all act accordingly." And that's what these influencers are doing.

It is certainly not the case that alpha-types ought to or necessarily do occupy a genuine "higher social position" than other human males or females. This is a historical tendency, yes, but I don't consider it a brute fact of reality. After all, look at some of these "alphas" lament the fact that society no longer makes such behavior as easy, rewarding, and consequence-free as it has been in the past. Do they need it to be easy and without opposition? What's so alpha about that?

It's pretty much like religion with me. It's okay if people want to live that way (with other consenting adults). But don't dare try to push that nonsense on me or try to get me to accept it as true.

 

[PureX]

I find it kind of silly because it unnecessarily puts men in competition with each other since we all want to be "alpha males," right? If there's an alpha, that assumes there must be a beta.

The interesting thing about all this is that any real 'alpha male' wouldn't care about any of this nonsense at all. So clearly it's all an attempt at exploiting weak self-esteem and poor life skills for personal profit. And the whole phony pro-macho man ideology shtick is really just a put-down to make their victims feel like losers and want to pay for the cure.

If I remember right, there were men's groups in the 70s that focused on men supporting each other in more healthy emotional ways, recognizing that men also need emotional support and can lean on each other for support.

I had a buddy back in the day that was into that stuff and it seems to help him a lot. He had poor male role models growing up and as he was a new father, I think he wanted to be around some men that had better (healthier) ideals than those he was raised with.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don't think that "alpha male-ism" is ALWAYS rooted in insecurity. I do in fact think it is a genuine social attitude that produces the desired results some of the time. And I think there are plenty of men and women out there who prefer to relate to one another in this way.

There is getting results, and then there is caring too much about living up to a cardboard cutout of a human. As social animals we fair better cooperating with each other and our psychology is better off having more of a leader than an alpha/boss.

I also think much of this tendency is a big "hand me down" from mother nature. You see it in baboons. You see it in wolves... (as per the article you shared said, some of this has been misinterpreted or over-extrapolated).

Not always. Bonobos are matriarchal, and humans ourselves were more matriarchal and egalitarian before the agricultural revolution. And of course there are critters like black widows and praying mantises who are female dominated.

But the "alpha male attitude" itself isn't necessarily insecure or toxic. Some folks are just like that.

I have yet to meet one with the balls to show his emotions and talk about them. They typically get over insulted by any suggestion they might be doing something feminine, and they act like homosexuals are lesser men. Those things are very deeply rooted in insecurities.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Human ethology is more complex.

I certainly hope so. Although it often comes down to who has the most power ruling.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Quite often it is she. Like women in management (they tend to do better than men), or the lioness who does the hunting.

It's not a matter of who does better, it's a matter of what they do better.
They both have their strengths and weaknesses.

 

[Wildswanderer]

View attachment 67378

.

Of course we all want a encouraging leader, not a tyrant, but that doesn't change the fact that someone has to have the ultimate authority.

 

[vulcanlogician]

Of course we all want a encouraging leader, not a tyrant, but that doesn't change the fact that someone has to have the ultimate authority.

You heard the man, Adolf. Get out there and give a rousing speech!

 

[The Hammer]

someone has to have the ultimate authority.

Not really. Neither me or my wife have ultimate authority. Deference based on situation instead.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Of course we all want a encouraging leader, not a tyrant, but that doesn't change the fact that someone has to have the ultimate authority.

Maybe if you and the tyrant can't get along.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Maybe if you and the tyrant can't get along.

Ok, so let's get rid of all leadership. Let's not have any heads of committees, any presidents, any Foremen. Let's see how that goes.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Not really. Neither me or my wife have ultimate authority. Deference based on situation instead.

Now you just switched from bosses to marriage?
How did that happen?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Ok, so let's get rid of all leadership. Let's not have any heads of committees, any presidents, any Foremen. Let's see how that goes.

Good leadership isn't ultimate authority.
Ultimate authority is an authoritarian.
Authoritarians are terrible leaders.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Good leadership isn't ultimate authority.
Ultimate authority is an authoritarian.
Authoritarians are terrible leaders.

So the head of a company doesn't have the final say?
Nonsense.
He might be the best boss in the world, but he still is the boss and final authority on what happens.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So the head of a company doesn't have the final say?
Nonsense.
He might be the best boss in the world, but he still is the boss and final authority on what happens.

Often times they don't and they are overruled by boardmembers and shareholders.

 

[The Hammer]

Now you just switched from bosses to marriage?
How did that happen?

Because a wolf pack is a family unit. And a marriage confers a family unit.

 

[The Hammer]

Ok, so let's get rid of all leadership. Let's not have any heads of committees, any presidents, any Foremen. Let's see how that goes.

I'm game.