Your Omega, Orion, sounds a lot like someone with some sort of avoidant personality disorder.
[quote]LoRez wrote:
Coming back to an earlier point, I’m interested in if women even distinguish between alphas and sigmas.
Once he’s engaged her and they’ve built their own private world, does how he relates in the real world even matter?
I imagine that for a genuine LTR, that life with an alpha is quite a bit different than life with a sigma though.[/quote]
I can’t imagine they’d be able to “know” the difference, but the LTR would certainly be different.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Kakarat wrote:
How would you place someone who is thought to have done “work” but who is questioned by their opposing response?
This has happened to me quite a few times by both men and women outside my immediate social group who have thought I’ve been with more women than I have.
[/quote]
That does not place you anywhere, except in an excellent position to plant your flag if it is a woman.
She is basically telling you that you are the shit. [/quote]
It used to surprise me but I now see it for what it is, opportunity.
[quote]orion wrote:
I think you are confusing “alpha” with “guys I like”.[/quote]
Fair enough.
Let’s see if I can focus on the facts and leave my feelings out of it:
Arnold was a fantastic entertainer.
Had enough charm to sell to all the all the women in the feminist movement in America.
Was extremely, extremely hard working and dedicated to being the best at what he did.
Had charisma oozing out of his pores.
Had his career in Bodybuilding facilitated by Weider: Weider was his pimp who not only eliminated the competition for Arnold but used him as his bitch to sell his magazines and supplements.
Led by following. ( I heard Arnold, as a Republican politician, danced to the tune of the Democrats.).
To you and all reading this thread:
Does that sound like an Alpha Male to you?
I am specially concerned with a man being under another man to take him/help him get to the top, and in not so “scrupulous” ways ( cutting corners? ).
And leading by following: not Alpha behavior at all, in my opinion.
I know that a lot of you guys are blinded by his charm so try to step outside that emotional loop Arnold creates with his audience so well ( yet another quality ).
Do all these things make him Alpha or does it make him a supreme Beta in Alpha’s clothing?
Or something else entirely?
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
Your Omega, Orion, sounds a lot like someone with some sort of avoidant personality disorder. [/quote]
That was what I thought also. But mostly a kind of dissociative disorder; I don’t know if avoidant would fall into or extend into dissociation.
This is an exert from the description of Jung’s introverted sensation type:
“Seen from the outside, it looks as though the effect of the object did not penetrate into the subject at all. This impression is correct inasmuch as a subjective content does, in fact, intervene from the unconscious and intercept the effect of the object. The intervention may be so abrupt that the individual appears to be shielding himself directly from all objective influences. In more serious cases, such a protective defence actually does exist. Even with only a slight increase in the power of the unconscious, the subjective component of sensation becomes so alive that it almost completely obscures the influence of the object. If the object is a person, he feels completely devalued, while the subject has an illusory conception of reality, which in pathological cases goes so far that he is no longer able to distinguish between the real object and the subjective perception. Although so vital a distinction reaches the vanishing point only in near-psychotic states, yet long before that the subjective perception can influence thought, feeling, and action to an excessive degree despite the fact that the object is clearly seen in all its reality. When its influence does succeed in penetrating into the subject because of its special intensity or because of its complete analogy with the unconscious image even the normal type will be compelled to act in accordance with the unconscious model. Such action has an illusory character unrelated to objective reality and is extremely disconcerting. It instantly reveals the reality alienating subjectivity of this type. But when the influence of the object does not break through completely, it is met with well-intentioned neutrality, disclosing little sympathy yet constantly striving to soothe and adjust. The too low is raised a little, the too high is lowered, enthusiasm is damped down, extravagance restrained, and anything out of the ordinary reduced to the right formula-all this in order to keep the influence of the object within the necessary bounds. In this way the type becomes a menace to his environment because his total innocuousness is not altogether above suspicion. In that case he easily becomes a victim of the aggressiveness and domineeringness of others. Such men allow themselves to be abused and then take their revenge on the most unsuitable occasions with redoubled obtuseness and stubbornness.”
[quote]pushharder wrote:
…
[/quote]
Just wanted to thank you for making me laugh with some of your replies!
The “Man Kills…(insert animal here)” made me chuckle repeatedly!
Sorry guys, no PM function and I really wanted to let Push know I appreciate this aspect of his Alphaness, also.
If you really want to “have/be Game”, don’t leave your sense of humor at home.
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
Fair enough.
Let’s see if I can focus on the facts and leave my feelings out of it:
Arnold was a fantastic entertainer.
Had enough charm to sell to all the all the women in the feminist movement in America.
Was extremely, extremely hard working and dedicated to being the best at what he did.
Had charisma oozing out of his pores.
Had his career in Bodybuilding facilitated by Weider: Weider was his pimp who not only eliminated the competition for Arnold but used him as his bitch to sell his magazines and supplements.
Led by following. ( I heard Arnold, as a Republican politician, danced to the tune of the Democrats.).
To you and all reading this thread:
Does that sound like an Alpha Male to you?
I am specially concerned with a man being under another man to take him/help him get to the top, and in not so “scrupulous” ways ( cutting corners? ).
And leading by following: not Alpha behavior at all, in my opinion.
I know that a lot of you guys are blinded by his charm so try to step outside that emotional loop Arnold creates with his audience so well ( yet another quality ).
Do all these things make him Alpha or does it make him a supreme Beta in Alpha’s clothing?
Or something else entirely?
[/quote]
I’m not a bodybuilder or Arnold fanatic or anything, and he’s certainly made some mistakes, so I cannot deny your logic in not siding with him.
However… This post doesn’t paint a very representative picture of who the man really was. Nobody believed he could possibly make it as a bodybuilder and they encouraged him to give up on his dream. Instead when he was 18 he slipped out of a military base, snuck into another country, and won the Jr. Mr. Europe bodybuilding competition and obviously went on to be about as successful in bodybuilding as you could possibly be. Then everyone told him to give up trying to be an actor. He had a ridiculously thick accent and an unpronounceable last name. Again, he didn’t listen, and he pretty clearly made it pay off. Say what you want about what he did as governor, but yet again, that was something that people told him was a fool’s errand to even attempt, and he accomplished it anyway.
You don’t have to agree with the man’s moral compass, but in my opinion, he was no follower.
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
We lift weights because that is an expression of our Alpha-ness.
Lifting weights is an expression of our strength.
I have said in this site before that I lift weights because I like to experience myself as a powerful woman.
When what we do is an expression of who we are, life is art.
You are creating your own experience at every moment, with every choice that you make.
It touches into the exercise of free will to express and recreate and redefine your self.[/quote]
That’s very cool to hear. I’m always fascinated by the different reasons people have for lifting weights. I like your reason. Some people do it as a kind of therapy (like Dave Tate I think). My own personal reason is almost the opposite of your’s though! I’ve never thought as lifting as an expression of Alpha-ness. I lift only to gain strength so that outside of the gym I can enjoy the utilities of being strong and express my strength in non-lifting environments. One of those benefits is no small measure of self confidence, which I think helps anyone express their Alpha-ness in all kinds of situations.
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
I think you are confusing “alpha” with “guys I like”.[/quote]
Fair enough.
Let’s see if I can focus on the facts and leave my feelings out of it:
Arnold was a fantastic entertainer.
Had enough charm to sell to all the all the women in the feminist movement in America.
Was extremely, extremely hard working and dedicated to being the best at what he did.
Had charisma oozing out of his pores.
Had his career in Bodybuilding facilitated by Weider: Weider was his pimp who not only eliminated the competition for Arnold but used him as his bitch to sell his magazines and supplements.
Led by following. ( I heard Arnold, as a Republican politician, danced to the tune of the Democrats.).
To you and all reading this thread:
Does that sound like an Alpha Male to you?
I am specially concerned with a man being under another man to take him/help him get to the top, and in not so “scrupulous” ways ( cutting corners? ).
And leading by following: not Alpha behavior at all, in my opinion.
I know that a lot of you guys are blinded by his charm so try to step outside that emotional loop Arnold creates with his audience so well ( yet another quality ).
Do all these things make him Alpha or does it make him a supreme Beta in Alpha’s clothing?
Or something else entirely?
[/quote]
It makes him a man willing to do whatever is necessary to get the job done.
Served him well too, because he made it to the absolute top in not only one but three professions.
One quote from him that encapsulates this pretty well is that if he would have to eat one pound of shit for every pound of muscle gained what separates him from the rest is that he would do it.
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
Your Omega, Orion, sounds a lot like someone with some sort of avoidant personality disorder. [/quote]
That was what I thought also. But mostly a kind of dissociative disorder; I don’t know if avoidant would fall into or extend into dissociation.
This is an exert from the description of Jung’s introverted sensation type:
“Seen from the outside, it looks as though the effect of the object did not penetrate into the subject at all. This impression is correct inasmuch as a subjective content does, in fact, intervene from the unconscious and intercept the effect of the object. The intervention may be so abrupt that the individual appears to be shielding himself directly from all objective influences. In more serious cases, such a protective defence actually does exist. Even with only a slight increase in the power of the unconscious, the subjective component of sensation becomes so alive that it almost completely obscures the influence of the object. If the object is a person, he feels completely devalued, while the subject has an illusory conception of reality, which in pathological cases goes so far that he is no longer able to distinguish between the real object and the subjective perception. Although so vital a distinction reaches the vanishing point only in near-psychotic states, yet long before that the subjective perception can influence thought, feeling, and action to an excessive degree despite the fact that the object is clearly seen in all its reality. When its influence does succeed in penetrating into the subject because of its special intensity or because of its complete analogy with the unconscious image even the normal type will be compelled to act in accordance with the unconscious model. Such action has an illusory character unrelated to objective reality and is extremely disconcerting. It instantly reveals the reality alienating subjectivity of this type. But when the influence of the object does not break through completely, it is met with well-intentioned neutrality, disclosing little sympathy yet constantly striving to soothe and adjust. The too low is raised a little, the too high is lowered, enthusiasm is damped down, extravagance restrained, and anything out of the ordinary reduced to the right formula-all this in order to keep the influence of the object within the necessary bounds. In this way the type becomes a menace to his environment because his total innocuousness is not altogether above suspicion. In that case he easily becomes a victim of the aggressiveness and domineeringness of others. Such men allow themselves to be abused and then take their revenge on the most unsuitable occasions with redoubled obtuseness and stubbornness.”
[/quote]
Not having done any formal study of psych. I’m going to have to read that one a few times lol.
In regard to someone like Arnold. Is he an alpha because of his accomplishments, or are his accomplishments because hes an alpha?
Edit* Example: “I don’t hate you because you’re fat, you’re fat because I hate you”
[quote]Kakarat wrote:
In regard to someone like Arnold. Is he an alpha because of his accomplishments, or are his accomplishments because hes an alpha?
Edit* Example: “I don’t hate you because you’re fat, you’re fat because I hate you”[/quote]
Someone who could make people fat by simply hating them… I’d say that’s pretty alpha
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
Your Omega, Orion, sounds a lot like someone with some sort of avoidant personality disorder. [/quote]
That was what I thought also. But mostly a kind of dissociative disorder; I don’t know if avoidant would fall into or extend into dissociation.
This is an exert from the description of Jung’s introverted sensation type:
“Seen from the outside, it looks as though the effect of the object did not penetrate into the subject at all. This impression is correct inasmuch as a subjective content does, in fact, intervene from the unconscious and intercept the effect of the object. The intervention may be so abrupt that the individual appears to be shielding himself directly from all objective influences. In more serious cases, such a protective defence actually does exist. Even with only a slight increase in the power of the unconscious, the subjective component of sensation becomes so alive that it almost completely obscures the influence of the object. If the object is a person, he feels completely devalued, while the subject has an illusory conception of reality, which in pathological cases goes so far that he is no longer able to distinguish between the real object and the subjective perception. Although so vital a distinction reaches the vanishing point only in near-psychotic states, yet long before that the subjective perception can influence thought, feeling, and action to an excessive degree despite the fact that the object is clearly seen in all its reality. When its influence does succeed in penetrating into the subject because of its special intensity or because of its complete analogy with the unconscious image even the normal type will be compelled to act in accordance with the unconscious model. Such action has an illusory character unrelated to objective reality and is extremely disconcerting. It instantly reveals the reality alienating subjectivity of this type. But when the influence of the object does not break through completely, it is met with well-intentioned neutrality, disclosing little sympathy yet constantly striving to soothe and adjust. The too low is raised a little, the too high is lowered, enthusiasm is damped down, extravagance restrained, and anything out of the ordinary reduced to the right formula-all this in order to keep the influence of the object within the necessary bounds. In this way the type becomes a menace to his environment because his total innocuousness is not altogether above suspicion. In that case he easily becomes a victim of the aggressiveness and domineeringness of others. Such men allow themselves to be abused and then take their revenge on the most unsuitable occasions with redoubled obtuseness and stubbornness.”
[/quote]
That is a very cerebral zinger!
Nice!
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
Your Omega, Orion, sounds a lot like someone with some sort of avoidant personality disorder. [/quote]
That was what I thought also. But mostly a kind of dissociative disorder; I don’t know if avoidant would fall into or extend into dissociation.
This is an exert from the description of Jung’s introverted sensation type:
“Seen from the outside, it looks as though the effect of the object did not penetrate into the subject at all. This impression is correct inasmuch as a subjective content does, in fact, intervene from the unconscious and intercept the effect of the object. The intervention may be so abrupt that the individual appears to be shielding himself directly from all objective influences. In more serious cases, such a protective defence actually does exist. Even with only a slight increase in the power of the unconscious, the subjective component of sensation becomes so alive that it almost completely obscures the influence of the object. If the object is a person, he feels completely devalued, while the subject has an illusory conception of reality, which in pathological cases goes so far that he is no longer able to distinguish between the real object and the subjective perception. Although so vital a distinction reaches the vanishing point only in near-psychotic states, yet long before that the subjective perception can influence thought, feeling, and action to an excessive degree despite the fact that the object is clearly seen in all its reality. When its influence does succeed in penetrating into the subject because of its special intensity or because of its complete analogy with the unconscious image even the normal type will be compelled to act in accordance with the unconscious model. Such action has an illusory character unrelated to objective reality and is extremely disconcerting. It instantly reveals the reality alienating subjectivity of this type. But when the influence of the object does not break through completely, it is met with well-intentioned neutrality, disclosing little sympathy yet constantly striving to soothe and adjust. The too low is raised a little, the too high is lowered, enthusiasm is damped down, extravagance restrained, and anything out of the ordinary reduced to the right formula-all this in order to keep the influence of the object within the necessary bounds. In this way the type becomes a menace to his environment because his total innocuousness is not altogether above suspicion. In that case he easily becomes a victim of the aggressiveness and domineeringness of others. Such men allow themselves to be abused and then take their revenge on the most unsuitable occasions with redoubled obtuseness and stubbornness.”
[/quote]
That is a very cerebral zinger!
Nice!
[/quote]
I sported a cerebral chubbie after reading that.
[quote]imhungry wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
Your Omega, Orion, sounds a lot like someone with some sort of avoidant personality disorder. [/quote]
That was what I thought also. But mostly a kind of dissociative disorder; I don’t know if avoidant would fall into or extend into dissociation.
This is an exert from the description of Jung’s introverted sensation type:
“Seen from the outside, it looks as though the effect of the object did not penetrate into the subject at all. This impression is correct inasmuch as a subjective content does, in fact, intervene from the unconscious and intercept the effect of the object. The intervention may be so abrupt that the individual appears to be shielding himself directly from all objective influences. In more serious cases, such a protective defence actually does exist. Even with only a slight increase in the power of the unconscious, the subjective component of sensation becomes so alive that it almost completely obscures the influence of the object. If the object is a person, he feels completely devalued, while the subject has an illusory conception of reality, which in pathological cases goes so far that he is no longer able to distinguish between the real object and the subjective perception. Although so vital a distinction reaches the vanishing point only in near-psychotic states, yet long before that the subjective perception can influence thought, feeling, and action to an excessive degree despite the fact that the object is clearly seen in all its reality. When its influence does succeed in penetrating into the subject because of its special intensity or because of its complete analogy with the unconscious image even the normal type will be compelled to act in accordance with the unconscious model. Such action has an illusory character unrelated to objective reality and is extremely disconcerting. It instantly reveals the reality alienating subjectivity of this type. But when the influence of the object does not break through completely, it is met with well-intentioned neutrality, disclosing little sympathy yet constantly striving to soothe and adjust. The too low is raised a little, the too high is lowered, enthusiasm is damped down, extravagance restrained, and anything out of the ordinary reduced to the right formula-all this in order to keep the influence of the object within the necessary bounds. In this way the type becomes a menace to his environment because his total innocuousness is not altogether above suspicion. In that case he easily becomes a victim of the aggressiveness and domineeringness of others. Such men allow themselves to be abused and then take their revenge on the most unsuitable occasions with redoubled obtuseness and stubbornness.”
[/quote]
That is a very cerebral zinger!
Nice!
[/quote]
I sported a cerebral chubbie after reading that.[/quote]
One head follows the other. Just depends on which one is quicker.
Completely different subject, but I’ve been meaning to PM you a response to the inquiry you had on making babies later in life in the cell phone pics thread. It’s just that every time I remember to do it and sit down to type, the little Skyz needs fed and re-diapered.
Speaking of which…
[quote]anonym wrote:
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
…will practicaly spread their legs instantly if you can push her “omg,omg, sexworthy genes” buttons. [/quote]
OK, so let’s take a poll:
Women of T-Nation: after reading the various threads on how us guys can effectively mack your kind, how badly do alpha-Orion’s posts make you want to practically spread your legs instantly for him???[/quote]
How about: No.
:)[/quote]
We’re gonna go ahead and count this as a Yes, since it has already been established that women don’t actually know what they want.[/quote]
LMFAO
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]imhungry wrote:
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
Your Omega, Orion, sounds a lot like someone with some sort of avoidant personality disorder. [/quote]
That was what I thought also. But mostly a kind of dissociative disorder; I don’t know if avoidant would fall into or extend into dissociation.
This is an exert from the description of Jung’s introverted sensation type:
“Seen from the outside, it looks as though the effect of the object did not penetrate into the subject at all. This impression is correct inasmuch as a subjective content does, in fact, intervene from the unconscious and intercept the effect of the object. The intervention may be so abrupt that the individual appears to be shielding himself directly from all objective influences. In more serious cases, such a protective defence actually does exist. Even with only a slight increase in the power of the unconscious, the subjective component of sensation becomes so alive that it almost completely obscures the influence of the object. If the object is a person, he feels completely devalued, while the subject has an illusory conception of reality, which in pathological cases goes so far that he is no longer able to distinguish between the real object and the subjective perception. Although so vital a distinction reaches the vanishing point only in near-psychotic states, yet long before that the subjective perception can influence thought, feeling, and action to an excessive degree despite the fact that the object is clearly seen in all its reality. When its influence does succeed in penetrating into the subject because of its special intensity or because of its complete analogy with the unconscious image even the normal type will be compelled to act in accordance with the unconscious model. Such action has an illusory character unrelated to objective reality and is extremely disconcerting. It instantly reveals the reality alienating subjectivity of this type. But when the influence of the object does not break through completely, it is met with well-intentioned neutrality, disclosing little sympathy yet constantly striving to soothe and adjust. The too low is raised a little, the too high is lowered, enthusiasm is damped down, extravagance restrained, and anything out of the ordinary reduced to the right formula-all this in order to keep the influence of the object within the necessary bounds. In this way the type becomes a menace to his environment because his total innocuousness is not altogether above suspicion. In that case he easily becomes a victim of the aggressiveness and domineeringness of others. Such men allow themselves to be abused and then take their revenge on the most unsuitable occasions with redoubled obtuseness and stubbornness.”
[/quote]
That is a very cerebral zinger!
Nice!
[/quote]
I sported a cerebral chubbie after reading that.[/quote]
One head follows the other. Just depends on which one is quicker.
Completely different subject, but I’ve been meaning to PM you a response to the inquiry you had on making babies later in life in the cell phone pics thread. It’s just that every time I remember to do it and sit down to type, the little Skyz needs fed and re-diapered.
Speaking of which…
[/quote]
Ok, that’s cool. Hopefully I can receive PM’s.
[quote]orion wrote:
It makes him a man willing to do whatever is necessary to get the job done.
[/quote]
So do psychopaths.
Does that make them Alpha?
[quote]orion wrote:
Served him well too, because he made it to the absolute top in not only one but three professions.
[/quote]
And dropped right back down.
Is that the mark of an Alpha?
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
It makes him a man willing to do whatever is necessary to get the job done.
[/quote]
So do psychopaths.
Does that make them Alpha?
[/quote]
Arnold’s a narcissus through and through. But not a psycho as far as anything I’ve seen or read about him.