>>17304402 that's pretty vague, my man.

>>17304402
You can't. If you were secure in your status, you wouldn't be beta, pretty much by definition.

>>17304966

not really. alphas are the leaders of the world. betas are not. they are the sidekicks, at best.

you can be beta and be secure. not in the new age 4chan only definition of 'WOW WHAT A FUCKING BETA' which implies you are pathetic.

but in the traditional sense of what an alpha and beta are, sure.

the world isnt divided between chads and virgins after all.

>>17304402

OP, if you want to be secure in it, all you have to do is make your life comfortable and enjoyable. if you like your sex partner, you like your job, and do the things you like, what does being an 'alpha' really matter?

>>17304983
Status gets you places you wouldn't regularly, like in the boss's favor or even with connections to people to get you really cool shit.

Then again, I may be mixing alpha up with being cool.

>>17305000

that doesnt contradict what i said in any way.

i was / am a total beta male. not in the horrible pathetic sense but i mean im 5'6" had a chin covered in pimples, bad glasses, couldnt dress for shit, 120 pounds.

walked in and got an office manager job for my first real job.

again the world isnt divided between chads and virgins

>>17304402
While I think the alpha/beta stuff is cringe worthy at times, I thought I'd point out that there's now more than two categories the "manosphere" and TRP blogs are using to describe men. New terms include "sigma" (a rogue alpha), gamma, delta, and omega. Based on what I've read, there can only be so many leaders. Being a leader is hard work and probably not everyone is cut out for it.

Most people are followers. Betas are what you would call successful followers - they aren't socially or sexually ostracized and are still pretty well off and secure. They are not conventionally attractive, but then again most people aren't. They can play their strengths up enough that they've been able to get what they want in spite of not winning the genetic lottery.

Delta is apparently the average frustrated chump type. Not completely shit with women, not incredibly successful either.

Gammas suck with women. They don't suck at life, just with women. This is because they're not very attractive sexually.

Omega is your average /r9k/ stereotype. Kinda just fails at life.


Yeah, I know, these definitions are kinda cringeworthy, but the main point was that being beta is not such a bad thing after all.

>>17305049
Well, thanks for your input on the greek alphabet. Now I know!

But anyway, In think he's talking about being a Beta-Minus. Beta-Average or Beta-Plus is the successful follower type.

You may call it cringe, but doing homework from r/redpill is quite helpful for people who aren't caught up in terminologies.