Tuesday 25 August 2009

Alpha male

"Alpha male" - a term originally coined for depicting the leader of a wolf pack, turns out to be an inaccurate and faulty view of the "biological and social role" of the animal (here).


Researchers now have understood that wolf packs in natural settings are merely family groups formed exactly the same way as human families are formed. This alpha male phenomena only occurs in artificially built groups such as putting captivated wolves from various places together. This new finding appears to be a closer analogy to how our human society organises itself. Families equating to packs and when males (and female) are being put together in an artificial setting, like a work place, an alpha male/female emerges. For that reason, even though science has proved to work, the terminology can stay.

To finish on a lighter note, whilst googling what definitions people have given to the term "alpha male", I came across a few rather amusing interpretations.

"...who seems most at ease with women and can essentially marry or date any woman of his choice...who join math teams or play chess at lunch are usually the beta males and may be thought less attractive by girls. It should be noted that "nerds" are becoming increasingly popular. As long-term mates or boyfriends, they stereortypically on average tend to be nicer and more respectful to girls..."

"...being cocky and teasing a woman a little can get past her initial, 'Is this just another loser guy?' screening tests..."

3 comments:

  1. Got an axe to grind there, IQ? ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Haha, no. I was somehow bogged down by my comment "science has proved to work". It made perfect sense initially but I am doubtful this is how science actually works or at least works to its best. I do not have anything very tangible to support that. I will have to go and grab hold of a copy of Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions or more philosophy of science related stuff. Any good suggestions? In any case, back to primary school for me. ;P

    ReplyDelete
  3. I don't quite understand your problem. Could you elaborate?

    ReplyDelete