-
Posts
-
Please forgive my lazy, non-quotey reply.
1) I never mentioned gender.
2) If you Googled, cut and pasted – I’d rather have your opinions (unless of course, the paste reflects exactly your own opinion, in which case thank you).
3) I wasn’t particularly interested in the history of the terminology (I have Google and other resources for that purpose) but rather what the terms mean to you guys, here and now, particularly in relation to chat. Probably should’ve made that clearer, but I’ll survive :)
4) Hi Kenty I’m great thanks (as in very well, not particularly remarkable lol). Hope you’re well too! Xxx
5) Thanks Martin for the clear out!
I think it’s clear by now we all have wildly different ideas of what an Alpha is, in the same way we have different definitions of, say, bullying, banter or trolling. It’s all good.
I’m quite selfish in that I want to hear the opinions of others purely to see if they bring anything new to the table. Perhaps something I’ve not considered before. Something I may even adopt over my current thinking. I may challenge opinions, looking for substance, generally discarding those which appear to have been formed on a whim, but with no desire to put others down, whatever their process.
How enjoyable would it be if we could share our opinions without the need to try foisting them on others, showing off, point scoring, jostling for position or worrying about the image we project? (most often to same gender).
I find something interesting in the majority of board posts (and it’s not always the point that the poster is trying to make). An example would be Scep’s post when he states “TC (me) likes the idea of the alpha male”. I’m intrigued as to how he came to that conclusion, rather than annoyed that he did (with, as far as I can see, no evidence to support it).
For the sake of it, my thoughts regarding the True Alpha (I’ll say male now, simply because it allows me to talk about ‘him’) :
He never aspires to be one – and the process of becoming one happens naturally. Fiercely protective of his ‘pack’ and equally devoted to doing whatever is best for them, he is initially made to feel, and eventually comes to truly believe that there’s nobody better suited to the role than he. His supreme confidence, whilst clear for all to see, is never flaunted. He’ll still invite opinion, as he’s not in the least threatened by it. He has the total trust of his pack, and would never exploit it. He’s totally unencumbered by any self image concerns.
I could go on, but you get the picture. In short, he’s a nice guy who is given and accepts total power and uses it for the good of his pack, nothing else.
Does he exist?
Who knows?
Oh and Scep, Alpha is just label, don’t be worried about what people stick it on :)
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 2 months ago by
OMalleyTheAlleyCat.
1 member liked this post.
TheGuardian has published entire articles were witten by trolls before without realising, I wouldn’t really trust what they have to say about it. Lol.
I think someone who spent three years researching a subject, is worth a listen, compared to someone who hasn’t.
Okie dokie….and yes the word troll is probably overused somewhat on the flip side…I think some of the quieter type of people in real life find a bit of confidence online to voice an opinion (they aren’t usually nasty opninions)
I was lol’in at your reference to the “slut shamer”. Reminded me of comments made recently. The film is more interesting than the article and gets inside their heads. https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2017/mar/10/the-internet-warriors-meet-the-trolls-in-their-own-homes-video
Also agree with your point about “quieter chatters” I know people in the room who would like to chat on the boards, but don’t because they can’t be bothered with the “confrontation”.
Oh and finally, in my opinion the OP’s response doesn’t give an opinion in reference to his original question, nor attempt to. He asked 3 questions about “alpha”, wannabe and bully” in reference to this site and the question was quite specific . What’s the purpose of the thread if he doesn’t provide an opinion of his own and provide an explanation to support his question. Of course it could well be my own Internet paranoia, but having read his response a few times, I distinctly get the impression he threw the hook out and has waited to see what the catch would be, before committing.
Nought as strange as folk.
Oh and finally, in my opinion the OP’s response doesn’t give an opinion in reference to his original question, nor attempt to. He asked 3 questions about “alpha”, wannabe and bully” in reference to this site and the question was quite specific . What’s the purpose of the thread if he doesn’t provide an opinion of his own and provide an explanation to support his question. Of course it could well be my own Internet paranoia, but having read his response a few times, I distinctly get the impression he threw the hook out and has waited to see what the catch would be, before committing. Nought as strange as folk.
Hmmm I must have read malleys post completely differently to you gezza,lol, I think he gave a very full opinion on what he believes a REAL Alpha Male is, and funnily enough , apart from Scep, posters seem to be of a pretty like mind and that the Alpha Male is in fact a ‘ good guy ‘ but tough when needed, doesn’t bully or throw his weight around and is never cruel for no reason. That said surely the ones who do the opposite are , indeed , the bullies and wannabe’s. The ones who shout loudest and longest are not anywhere near Alpha. However I’d like to point out that in my opinion there are other ‘types of bullies’ , apart from the tree swinging abuse hurlers with far too much nose hair ( women inc), there are the sly, inciduous , manipulative bullies, pulling strings and getting others to do the shouting while they sit back looking lilly white…. or maybe they are just sociopaths ……
good thread fleabag
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 2 months ago by mooosey88.
Just my method to keep a topic going that interests me. *smiley face* I agree Moose with your last few sentences, absolutely. However the OP made a set of specific, if you like, judgments. I think a direct response in relation to those specific judgments and the logic behind them is an understandable reaction. Then his view can be directly analyzed, questioned and challenged, or not. In my opinion no one responded to his question directly, because it was so confrontational.
Maybe out of good manners for others on this site, he should explain the difference between an “alpha”, a “wannabe” and a “bully in direct relation to this site and which was the meat behind his initial question. As he asks Sceptical for a further explanation, it is entirely reasonable to expect the same courtesy from him.
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 2 months ago by Ge.
Oh and finally, in my opinion the OP’s response doesn’t give an opinion in reference to his original question, nor attempt to. He asked 3 questions about “alpha”, wannabe and bully” in reference to this site and the question was quite specific . What’s the purpose of the thread if he doesn’t provide an opinion of his own and provide an explanation to support his question. Of course it could well be my own Internet paranoia, but having read his response a few times, I distinctly get the impression he threw the hook out and has waited to see what the catch would be, before committing. Nought as strange as folk.
Purpose to the thread
“I’m quite selfish in that I want to hear the opinions of others purely to see if they bring anything new to the table. Perhaps something I’ve not considered before. Something I may even adopt over my current thinking.”
Throwing out a hook, see what the catch would be
“I’m just after opinions (and definitions). I may well give mine a little later, but in the meantime, I’d like to know what other people think – rather than discussing mine”
…before committing.
See above. Why would I commit, when the whole purpose of my post was to selfishly want to hear what others think. Would I be embarrassed if some of the posts changed my views? Nope. Do you want to know if they did?
Maybe out of good manners for others on this site, he should explain the difference between an “alpha”, a “wannabe” and a “bully in direct relation to this site and which was the meat behind his initial question. As he asks Sceptical for a further explanation, it is entirely reasonable to expect the same courtesy from him.
I don’t recall asking Scep for an explanation, simply stated that his assumption intrigued me.
Again, my post was selfish. They were questions that popped into my head, which I posted for the purpose of discussion. I had very few preconceived ideas, other than what an Alpha is to me, which I’ve since posted. I’m still considering the other questions, when I have a few minutes here and there.
Personally I wouldn’t have linked the question to such an extreme example and then used negative language like “wannabe” and “bully” in relation to that question and indirectly suggest a direct correlation. But you carry, I hope others give you the answers, you “selfishly” seek.
Edit* “Assumptions”. Indeed that was my point as well.
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 2 months ago by Ge.
Shurrup you pansies
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 2 months ago by
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!