Alpha, Beta & Omega Males: An Evolutionary (Astrology) Look
Alpha, Beta & Omega Males: An Evolutionary (Astrology) Look
Posted: 20 Aug 2008, 06:45 AM on The Evolutionary Astrology forum on MySpace:
http://forum.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=messageboard.viewThread&entryID=67029506&categoryID=0&IsSticky=0&groupID=100071296&Mytoken=C4B18A79-E396-4B9D-9C802B931DC97EAD37285848
One of my usual haunts on the Web is a blog called Half Sigma, which I got turned on to while checking in w/another haunt of mine, Steve Sailer’s blog. Half Sigma often takes us themes and issues that greatly interest me, and I suspect, interests others but would never openly so say in public, such as Race, Class & Sex, to name just a few. Yesterday while "thumbing" through his archive, I ran accross something that seems perfectly fitted for a forum entitled "Evolutionary Astrology".
HS posits that instead of usual dichotomy of males, ie, Alpha and Beta, that there was a third catergory, Omega. He suggests that these three catergory of human males are an interesting study in how the human race gets on w/the business of reproducing itself. I agree.
As we all know, the Alpha Male catergory is pretty straightforward, even though we’ve live in an Industrial age now for a little more than a century, and the Alpha Male’s heyday was back during the Hunter/Gatherer and early Agricultural eras. Alpha Males are, simply put, usually bigger, strong, and/or had access to maximum resources so as to be more appealing to and thus, have the most access to femles, especially the choice females.
Beta Males, those second tier guys who weren’t blessed w/such great genes, nevertheless were good guys, reliable, dependable and so forth. Back in the day their only chance of sending their genes off into the future was to hope for the Alpha Male to go off on the hunt or something like that, sneak into the harem and get a quickie before the Big Man came back. Other than that, it was the end of the genetic line for most Betas, until the Industrial Age, when male resources (wages) were more or less equalized and more guys had the chance to get a bride. Although she may not be the cat’s meow, it sure beat beating off for the rest of one’s life.
Oh, btw, Alpha Males make up roughly 10 to 15% of any population; Betas, roughly 70%. And another thing-Alphas do have one drawback, they tend not to be great nuturers, dads, and providers, whereas the opposite is true largely for Betas. This has given rise to what some Evo-types call the "Beta Strategy" where females would hookup w/the Alpha Male to get his genes and then get w/a Beta Male because he can provide better for the Alpha’s seed. In other words, Cuckoldry. But that’s another topic for another time.
Then we have what HS terms Omega Males. Again, these guys makeup about 15% of any given population, and are both lacking in sufficient genetic material AND material resources/social skills and thus are completely out of contention for copulating with females. These are generally the guys who live at home in Mom’s basement doing all kinds of geeky stuff, and looks it. Women wouldn’t give these guys the time of day, and that includes women who hangout in places like this one.
OK, so since we’ve briefly outlined the three types of males, the question becomes-how do we see this astrologically? I have a few theories, but I invite those reading alone (especially the ladies!) to chime in w/their thoughts. It seems pretty clear to me that Sexual Aspects play a huge role here. A male w/a lot of such aspects usually has the corresponding "animal magnetism" to attract females and get them to say "yes" moreso than Betas and definitely more than Omegas. So, when it comes to Alphas in general, that’s what I would expect to see, lots of Sexual Aspects, perhaps w/an additional refinement of said aspects occuring in Beastial Signs: Aries, Taurus, Sagittarius (at least the first half of the Sign anyway LOL), Capricorn, Leo.
Because Betas don’t have the raw Sexual power that Alphas have, I would expect to find an average amount of Sexual aspects at work here, along w/more "nuturing" astro markers-perhaps a strong Moon, or Jupiter, maybe a strong Neptune, something like that.
W/Omegas, hmm. That’s a good one. I suppose I would be looking for "outcaste" signals astrologically, but I’d need a bit more time as to how to formulate a postualte here. This is where we all can really jump in and toss the ball around.
So there you have it, the Three Male Types per Evolutionary Theory as set forth by Half Sigma. I think its a lot more valid than we may want to admit. And, there’s one more thing:
We have to remember that we Humans are only at the top of the foodchain, not apart from it. The Zodiac means literally, Circle of Animals, and we’re a lot closer to the Animal Kingdom than we think. This is especially true when it comes to things like "Synastry" which in so many ways, is a proxy for saying that we want astrology to help us get laid, and/or get laid more often.
Just keepin’ it real, y’all.
OK, that’s it. Discuss, and Holla Back!
Salaam
Mu
Posted: 20 Aug 2008, 06:45 AM on The Evolutionary Astrology forum on MySpace:
http://forum.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=messageboard.viewThread&entryID=67029506&categoryID=0&IsSticky=0&groupID=100071296&Mytoken=C4B18A79-E396-4B9D-9C802B931DC97EAD37285848
One of my usual haunts on the Web is a blog called Half Sigma, which I got turned on to while checking in w/another haunt of mine, Steve Sailer’s blog. Half Sigma often takes us themes and issues that greatly interest me, and I suspect, interests others but would never openly so say in public, such as Race, Class & Sex, to name just a few. Yesterday while "thumbing" through his archive, I ran accross something that seems perfectly fitted for a forum entitled "Evolutionary Astrology".
HS posits that instead of usual dichotomy of males, ie, Alpha and Beta, that there was a third catergory, Omega. He suggests that these three catergory of human males are an interesting study in how the human race gets on w/the business of reproducing itself. I agree.
As we all know, the Alpha Male catergory is pretty straightforward, even though we’ve live in an Industrial age now for a little more than a century, and the Alpha Male’s heyday was back during the Hunter/Gatherer and early Agricultural eras. Alpha Males are, simply put, usually bigger, strong, and/or had access to maximum resources so as to be more appealing to and thus, have the most access to femles, especially the choice females.
Beta Males, those second tier guys who weren’t blessed w/such great genes, nevertheless were good guys, reliable, dependable and so forth. Back in the day their only chance of sending their genes off into the future was to hope for the Alpha Male to go off on the hunt or something like that, sneak into the harem and get a quickie before the Big Man came back. Other than that, it was the end of the genetic line for most Betas, until the Industrial Age, when male resources (wages) were more or less equalized and more guys had the chance to get a bride. Although she may not be the cat’s meow, it sure beat beating off for the rest of one’s life.
Oh, btw, Alpha Males make up roughly 10 to 15% of any population; Betas, roughly 70%. And another thing-Alphas do have one drawback, they tend not to be great nuturers, dads, and providers, whereas the opposite is true largely for Betas. This has given rise to what some Evo-types call the "Beta Strategy" where females would hookup w/the Alpha Male to get his genes and then get w/a Beta Male because he can provide better for the Alpha’s seed. In other words, Cuckoldry. But that’s another topic for another time.
Then we have what HS terms Omega Males. Again, these guys makeup about 15% of any given population, and are both lacking in sufficient genetic material AND material resources/social skills and thus are completely out of contention for copulating with females. These are generally the guys who live at home in Mom’s basement doing all kinds of geeky stuff, and looks it. Women wouldn’t give these guys the time of day, and that includes women who hangout in places like this one.
OK, so since we’ve briefly outlined the three types of males, the question becomes-how do we see this astrologically? I have a few theories, but I invite those reading alone (especially the ladies!) to chime in w/their thoughts. It seems pretty clear to me that Sexual Aspects play a huge role here. A male w/a lot of such aspects usually has the corresponding "animal magnetism" to attract females and get them to say "yes" moreso than Betas and definitely more than Omegas. So, when it comes to Alphas in general, that’s what I would expect to see, lots of Sexual Aspects, perhaps w/an additional refinement of said aspects occuring in Beastial Signs: Aries, Taurus, Sagittarius (at least the first half of the Sign anyway LOL), Capricorn, Leo.
Because Betas don’t have the raw Sexual power that Alphas have, I would expect to find an average amount of Sexual aspects at work here, along w/more "nuturing" astro markers-perhaps a strong Moon, or Jupiter, maybe a strong Neptune, something like that.
W/Omegas, hmm. That’s a good one. I suppose I would be looking for "outcaste" signals astrologically, but I’d need a bit more time as to how to formulate a postualte here. This is where we all can really jump in and toss the ball around.
So there you have it, the Three Male Types per Evolutionary Theory as set forth by Half Sigma. I think its a lot more valid than we may want to admit. And, there’s one more thing:
We have to remember that we Humans are only at the top of the foodchain, not apart from it. The Zodiac means literally, Circle of Animals, and we’re a lot closer to the Animal Kingdom than we think. This is especially true when it comes to things like "Synastry" which in so many ways, is a proxy for saying that we want astrology to help us get laid, and/or get laid more often.
Just keepin’ it real, y’all.
OK, that’s it. Discuss, and Holla Back!
Salaam
Mu
Labels: Alpha, Beta and Omega Males, Evolutionary Biology/Psychology, Half Sigma
posted by Mu'Min M. Bey at
6:06 AM
109 Comments
