Why Women Prefer Betas

[Emerald]

Just now, Raze said:

Right, the guys you are describing as “regular” are not what most of us envison as regular guys. The guys you describe as alpha are not what most of us are referring to. We aren’t talking about massive hypermasculine body builders. 

But the original video is about women preferring a guy with a more averagely strong looking build versus his more shredded after picture.

He doesn't have an Arnold build. But he's worked to make himself more shredded.

And it's the difference between what men find aesthetically pleasing about men versus what women find aesthetically pleasing about men.

And men tend to find more shredded and jacked men more aesthetically pleasing, and assume that's what women like. But women tend to find men who look strong in a more lean or average body more pleasing.

[Emerald]

I was just thinking about how, according to the video, women statistically go for more hyper-Masculine guys if they're hooking up and having one night stands.... and I had mentioned earlier to someone that perhaps more promiscuous women who value one-night stands tend to go for more hyper-Masculine guys.

But most women aren't that motivated towards short-term hook-ups and don't value them much.... even if they have them from time to time.

And that's because these experiences focus far more of the physical experience of sex rather than the emotional experience of sex... which just isn't as interesting for most women, as women are mostly motivated towards sex for the sake of emotional stimulation.

There's just so much more emotional stimulation from being with a guy you have a deeper relationship with where you can experience a far greater range of erotic emotions flowing through you.

To give an analogy, let's say women are like stoners. 

And more most women are like really discerning stoners who 99% of the time won't even get high unless the weed is some special strain of it as she is aiming to have a very specific kind of high that's way out of this world.

But some stoners just enjoy the act of smoking weed and are focused on the act of smoking the weed itself and are less interested in experiencing the high that comes with smoking the weed. So, they're willing to smoke dirt weed even if it doesn't get them that high because they just like smoking weed regardless of how "meh" the high feeling is.

They just enjoy smoking... or perhaps they can't quite connect to the high feeling of the former group.

Women who have a strong attraction to averagely Masculine guys are more geared towards the former... which represents the more profound levels of emotional stimulation associated with a deeply intimate sexual dynamic... and will tend to pine for guys who seem like better longterm partners who they can envision having those deeply intimate emotional dynamics with.

And perhaps, if more promiscuous women are women that enjoy the physicality of sex more than the emotionality, they might be more drawn to more hyper-Masculine guys who are more likely to have a lot of physical prowess and would themselves be more focused on the physical elements of sex.

[Raze]

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

I was just thinking about how, according to the video, women statistically go for more hyper-Masculine guys if they're hooking up and having one night stands.... and I had mentioned earlier to someone that perhaps more promiscuous women who value one-night stands tend to go for more hyper-Masculine guys.

But most women aren't that motivated towards short-term hook-ups and don't value them much.... even if they have them from time to time.

That’s essentially what Lyubov was saying which you dismissed,

The only difference is he’s assuming they prefer the short term guys but go for the long term ones as a consolation prize, and you’re saying they prefer the long term ones overall.

I doubt this as in most cases I think she’d actually prefer the short term guy also had the qualities of stability and emotional intimacy for a long term relationship, but he either doesn’t or does but won’t stick around and give them to her. 

[max duewel]

@Leo Gura  Can you give a rough estimate of how many approaches you have done during the day and during the night? I recently got back into daygame and something weird is happening. My results got worse the more approaches I did, and im failing to build state despite taking action

[Xonas Pitfall]

The whole "alpha" vs "beta" conversation heavily depends on how you define those terms.

Masculinity Scale

1. Physically jacked, possibly on steroids. Aggressive, emotionally closed-off, obsessed with dominance and control, sleeps around, lacks empathy and emotional depth.
2. Confident, attractive, grounded, takes initiative, shows leadership, ambition, drive, charismatic, avoids commitment, lacks depth of emotional connection.
3. Kind, emotionally available, fun, loyal, sweet, attentive, may not be dominant, or sexually intriguing, but brings stability and warmth.
4. Insecure, unmotivated, emotionally withdrawn, physically unhealthy or unfit, spends most time escaping (video games, substances), complains often, lacks ambition or direction
5. Emotionally volatile, overly sensitive in unstable ways, lacks any assertiveness or structure, tries to get affection only through pleasing or emotional manipulation, avoids responsibility, driven by validation-seeking
6. Gay :-) (Joking, lol.)

Femininity Scale

1. Hyper-sexualized, surgically enhanced (lip fillers, BBL, etc.), emotionally unstable, dramatic, constantly seeking attention, addicted to validation, heavily tied to nightlife and partying, high-maintenance, and unpredictable. Often manipulative or chaotic in relationships.
2. Beautiful, hot, sexual, confident, playful, socially charming, flirty, knows her value. Captivating, but not emotionally reliable. May struggle with depth or consistency in relationships, may cheat, but is extremely attractive.
3. Soft, nurturing, sweet, emotionally open, peaceful, supportive. Radiates warmth, loyalty, and care. Often, the “good girl” archetype but not as conventionally beautiful. Not that good in bed - more timid, less fun.
4. Insecure, overweight, poor hygiene or health, emotionally flat or cold, overly passive or avoidant. Lacks confidence and expression, does little to maintain or develop herself. Often feels invisible or resentful.
5. Dominant, aggressive, highly disagreeable. Emotionally walled off, sees vulnerability as weakness. Constantly trying to “win” in the relationship. Often prioritizes control, power, and independence over connection or softness. May be respected professionally, but often struggles with intimacy. 
6. :-)

There’s obviously way more in between, as you can probably imagine. I just gave a few examples on the scale to get the conversation going and illustrate the spectrum.

Realistically, most people, both guys and girls, are looking for someone who falls somewhere between the 2nd and 3rd types on the scale. You want someone attractive, sexually exciting, and who has that "bad girl" or "bad boy" edge that triggers instinctual, lizard-brain horny attraction. But at the same time, you also crave the emotional safety, loyalty, and genuine care that come from the "good girl/good guy" type.

It makes sense that, for short-term flings, people gravitate more toward the second category. In casual situations, you're prioritizing sexual chemistry over emotional reliability. You're not thinking about building a future, raising a family, or who's going to be there for you when life gets hard - you're just thinking about who’s fun, hot, and exciting in the moment.

That’s why guys will hook up with 8s, 9s, and 10s party girls, but might not take them seriously long-term, especially if they have a high body count or give off chaotic energy. Similarly, girls are drawn to confident playboys or "fuckboys" for short-term flings because the attraction is strong, even if they know deep down those guys aren’t likely to stick around or provide real emotional safety.

It’s the Same Old Story: Madonna-Whore Complex and Alpha-Nice Guy Dichotomy

Girls want a bad boy who is only a good guy to them.

Boys want a good girl who is only a bad girl to them.

Most of us are looking for a balance. Someone who is hot and reliable, charismatic and caring, seductive and sweet.

The issue is, people over-identify with one part of themselves and stop working on the rest. They use their strengths as leverage instead of trying to grow into a more well-rounded partner.

• If you have a pattern of being a "nice guy" and you meet a girl you love, try your best to also tap into a more masculine, dominant energy for her. Don’t just sit in your room, whining about how she might cheat on you - develop yourself. Hit the gym, build muscle, learn about dominant play, how to command authority, and maintain frame.
• If you’re a sweet girl who isn’t conventionally attractive but has found a guy you like, don’t give up. Hit the gym, learn makeup, dress well, take care of your scent, and explore being more seductive, playful, and sexual. Let yourself loosen up a bit and focus less on overthinking and being conservative.
• If you’re the dominant, “fuckboy” type of guy and you meet a girl you genuinely care about, don’t hold leverage over her, expecting her to accept cheating or constantly do more to keep you. Stop taking advantage of your charisma. Work on your attachment issues, become a safe space for her, and develop more of the good-guy traits. Think of her - what does she enjoy? Give it to her and genuinely enjoy it. Practice your empathy.
• If you’re a hyper-sexual, party-girl type who knows she’s hot and gets male attention easily, but you meet a guy you like and worry he only sees you for your body and not as wifey material, develop more sweetness and softness. Give him emotional safety. Don’t go clubbing all the time if you know it makes him worry. Become more attuned to what brings him closer to you. Build hobbies and a personality outside the typical “hot girl” stereotype.

The problem with many popular relationship advice videos is that they make people think they only need to be one thing, “the alpha”, "the nice guy", "the innocent", or whatever, and once they achieve that, it’s supposed to be a jackpot. Now, instead of truly caring for the person, some just use the attraction they’ve built to manipulate or demand more from their partner. This only fuels the problems and statistics in today’s dating market. After all the effort you put into self-improvement, you end up hurting the market and traumatizing everyone all over again. It’s the same paradox as poor people resenting the rich, but once they become wealthy, they look down on the poor instead of helping.

It teaches zero empathy. If you ever enter a relationship, you should aim to develop and balance both sides of yourself, the passionate, sexual side and the caring, supportive side. This balance is the greatest gift you can offer your partner, and in turn, you encourage them to do the same. If you’re able to achieve this, you’ll become extremely valuable, and ironically, your relationships will become much safer precisely because it is so rare.

So, I’d say if you’re struggling with attraction, start by figuring out which stereotype you fit into: good girl, bad girl, bad boy, or good boy, etc. Then work on developing the other side of yourself. When you find a partner you feel is worth investing in, grow together and put in the effort to maintain the relationship. And, most importantly, don’t be selfish and use all the attraction and attachment you’ve built to suddenly cheat, throw polyamory demands on them, or stop trying because you think you’re “so high value.” Statements like “I’m a man, I deserve multiple women, deal with it” or “I’m a woman, so you have to give me more money” only hurt others and further damage the dating scene.

[Sugarcoat]

Maybe it doesn’t fully connect to this topic but not every woman can recognize the same high value man. 
 

Why is it that some insecure women are attracted to narcissistic (low value) men? 
The same woman might stumble across a high value man but might not be attracted to him. She might not even recognize him as high value, she might feel she isn’t worthy of him, she might see him as friendly only etc. 
 

So even if a guy improves himself and becomes high value (what that means can be discussed, it’s not so objective) he might be able to attract more women but still far from all. Because it takes for the woman to be kinda high value herself to recognize him as such, such as being secure in herself.

A woman might get with an average guy precisely because she is average herself so that’s what resonates with her. It’s not really true always that women are attracted to men above them, it can feel like they don’t “click” and can’t understand each other, she might even be intimidated, or even judge him somehow.
 

But if you become high value man you’ll be able to attract higher quality women as they’ll resonate with you

Edited June 9 by Sugarcoat

[Xonas Pitfall]

34 minutes ago, Sugarcoat said:

Because it takes for the woman to be kinda high value herself to recognize him as such, such as being secure in herself.

Yes!

[Spiral]

This is just a bunch of semantics and perspectives 

[Value]

@Leo Gura Say hi to Vegas from me 😂

13 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

London is very specific place. I don't like giant cities.

 

[Schizophonia]

17 hours ago, Emerald said:

I am thinking about it in terms of how it would be to be physical with him (cuddling and otherwise) when making that consideration.

And the fleshiness is more inviting than the hardness. It just feels like you can physically connect more if a guy has a layer of fat over the muscle.

Bodybuilder bodies are not natural anyway.

[Lyubov]

6 hours ago, Emerald said:

I'm not an outlier. You just don't understand how women actually operate.

Just look at the data... and you will see that women don't prefer hyper-Masculine guys.

Men prefer hyper-Masculine guys and find them more attractive. But women tend to prefer men who are Masculine but not in an extreme way.

This is also why Hollywood heartthrobs are more like Brad Pitt types rather than Dwayne Johnson types.

Here's some videos that reflect this...

 

I think we are making different points. Brad Pitt is hella masculine, alpha and has tremendous status. I’m not talking about jacked guys vs guys who don’t take steroids. I’m talking about guys who get girls vs don’t (or have very limited choices). In no world do most woman prefer a beta male (guy who does not get girls and has extremely limited choices).  

[Lyubov]

3 hours ago, Raze said:

That’s essentially what Lyubov was saying which you dismissed,

The only difference is he’s assuming they prefer the short term guys but go for the long term ones as a consolation prize, and you’re saying they prefer the long term ones overall.

I doubt this as in most cases I think she’d actually prefer the short term guy also had the qualities of stability and emotional intimacy for a long term relationship, but he either doesn’t or does but won’t stick around and give them to her. 

Women by and large give it to men that in their mind they would want to rope into commitment or they see on a subconscious level as a provider / partner. This is inseparable from female sexuality. It’s simply not in women’s nature to ever consider sex with a man where on some deeper level they see him as weak or unworthy of mating with. This does not apply to men who are programmed to fuck every women, just fuck. Cause they are competing with other men and need to get their seed in as many as possible, their sperm race to the finish line. This is why women that sleep around are such a turn off. What women eventually learn and mature into is that they are hitting above their weight and they come back down after getting ran through by guys who are the prize. What turns them on and they desire isn’t always what they end up committing and setting to because the prize they were chasing had so many more options than them and wasn’t willing to throw that away. I think this is why you gotta be careful who you settle with. Is she basically desperate to settle down after giving it out to a bunch of guys she should of been more careful with or is she catching her prize? Women definitely adjust their standards. It’s why they will then say “I never would have dated this guy when I was younger.” It’s not the same as men saying it which usually means a more beautiful woman due to wealth and statues they acquired, for women it usually means a man that is more agreeable.

[Emerald]

6 hours ago, Raze said:

That’s essentially what Lyubov was saying which you dismissed,

The only difference is he’s assuming they prefer the short term guys but go for the long term ones as a consolation prize, and you’re saying they prefer the long term ones overall.

I doubt this as in most cases I think she’d actually prefer the short term guy also had the qualities of stability and emotional intimacy for a long term relationship, but he either doesn’t or does but won’t stick around and give them to her. 

The bolded part is the very thing that I'm dismissing about what he said, as it is a fundamental misunderstanding of female attraction that frames what women value in terms of what men value.

Men value short terms hook-ups and want to be promiscuous... but women generally do not. And probably half or more of women probably would never even engage in a short term hookup nor desire to be promiscuous.

And no... you'd be wrong in assuming that women prefer the short term guy for a relationship and just settles for the long term guy because the long term guy is open to a relationship and the short term guy isn't.

That would be like saying that men prefer promiscuous women for a relationship over non-promiscuous women, but just can't get them to get into a long term relationship with them... so they settle for the non-promiscuous women.

But the reality is more likely that a man will enjoy sleeping with a promiscuous woman for short term hook-ups, but will usually have deeper feelings for a woman who is not as geared towards short-term hook-ups.

It would seem to me that, if women who value short-term hook-ups (in the way that men generally do) are more interested in hyper-Masculine guys for hook-ups but are more interested in regular guys for relationships... these promiscuous women might be seeing these hyper-Masculine guys in a similar light to how men who are interested in short term hookups tend to see promiscuous women.

Like, perhaps these men are fun to have sex with for a woman who values short term hook-ups but they aren't someone that they'd want to make a life with or bring home to their parents.

That's the only thing I can guess as to why the statistics are that way. But because I don't value short-term hook-ups, the idea of being attracted to some hyper-Masculine guy that you just fuck-and-go and have some emotionless sex with is abstract to me.

Maybe if I were more geared towards the physicality of sex and I was motivated to sex more by the desire for orgasm rather than emotional elation that can only be achieved with deeper levels of intimacy, I would be able to relate better.

But I'd wager that most women (even women who have had short term hookups before) are uninterested in the short term guy and aren't even that interested in having short terms guys as it's just not that emotionally stimulating.

I suspect that this could be where the short-term preference for hyper-Masculine guys comes from and why I can't relate to the attraction... and why most women also don't pick that kind of guy as the most attractive guy.

Edited June 9 by Emerald

[Emerald]

2 hours ago, Lyubov said:

Women by and large give it to men that in their mind they would want to rope into commitment or they see on a subconscious level as a provider / partner. This is inseparable from female sexuality. It’s simply not in women’s nature to ever consider sex with a man where on some deeper level they see him as weak or unworthy of mating with. This does not apply to men who are programmed to fuck every women, just fuck. Cause they are competing with other men and need to get their seed in as many as possible, their sperm race to the finish line. This is why women that sleep around are such a turn off. What women eventually learn and mature into is that they are hitting above their weight and they come back down after getting ran through by guys who are the prize. What turns them on and they desire isn’t always what they end up committing and setting to because the prize they were chasing had so many more options than them and wasn’t willing to throw that away. I think this is why you gotta be careful who you settle with. Is she basically desperate to settle down after giving it out to a bunch of guys she should of been more careful with or is she catching her prize? Women definitely adjust their standards. It’s why they will then say “I never would have dated this guy when I was younger.” It’s not the same as men saying it which usually means a more beautiful woman due to wealth and statues they acquired, for women it usually means a man that is more agreeable.

This narrative does not apply to most women as most women don't have a lot of sexual partners... nor do they desire them.

It may not even apply to any women at all (even promiscuous ones), as it just seems like a dynamic that's purely the brainchild of men who feel bitter and jealous about women being able to get laid more easily than men can... and who feel insecure about their own attractiveness and Masculinity.

Like, "Haha! You let all the other men fuck you and now you're ran through. And now you'll be sorry because you have to settle for a weak little simp (like me ).

Should have been purer and kept your legs closed... and then you'd be able to get married to a real manly man that you ACTUALLY want (because I know you prefer that guy to me ).

You know what they say, a key that unlocks a lot of locks is a master key... but a lock that's unlocked by many keys is a shitty lock.

And now those super high value sexy hot hyper-Masculine alpha player guys with the rippling abs who are the prize don't want you. And it's TOO BAD for you that you're stuck with little weak bitch men (like me ).

And now I'm offended that you're attracted to me because obviously you're just settling because you couldn't get Chad. Stay away from me! Your attraction to me is HUGE insult to me! How dare you?!?!?!?!"

But if women tend APPARENTLY be attracted to these hyper-Masculine "alpha" guys, how do you explain that I've never been interested in hyper-Masculine "alpha" guys... and have always been interested in men who have a mixture of hard and soft qualities?

And how do you explain that, even in my experiences hooking up in my early 20s, that I did so with regular guys who weren't hyper-Masculine alpha player types?

And how do you explain the fact that the men that most women find attractive (like Hollywood actors), don't tend to be hyper-Masculine and that women tend to rate more averagely muscular body-types as more attractive (which they are, imo as well)?

[Emerald]

3 hours ago, Lyubov said:

I think we are making different points. Brad Pitt is hella masculine, alpha and has tremendous status. I’m not talking about jacked guys vs guys who don’t take steroids. I’m talking about guys who get girls vs don’t (or have very limited choices). In no world do most woman prefer a beta male (guy who does not get girls and has extremely limited choices).  

Of course Brad Pitt is Masculine, but he isn't hyper-Masculine. 

That was one of the points that I'm making.

Men will tend to think women are interested in guys that look like He-Man because that's what they like in terms of male aesthetics and they think maxing out on Masculinity is the same thing as maxing out on attractiveness.

But women will tend to rate as most generally attractive guys that look like Christian Bale or Brad Pitt.

But that's just the most generally attractive guys.

Women will also aesthetically prefer more averagely strong guys to super buff hyper-Masculine guys even in more average men who aren't Hollywood sex symbols.

But just consider who gets to be a Hollywood sex symbol and who doesn't, as this will tell you a lot about women's aesthetic preferences... and Masculinity preferences regarding men.

Like, even in his prime... I guarantee you that very few women had pictures of Arnold Schwarzenegger on their wall. He's hyper-Masculine... but most women would say that it's too much Masculinity to find attractive.

But I'm sure lots of people had Justin Timberlake on their wall... who has a mixture of hard and soft qualities.

[AION]

When I see a girl with a beta, I can sense she knows she is with a beta and she is deeply resentful. And just puts up with him because this guy sticks around because all the studs he dated ran a train on her and left. So yes women date these soft guys but they are not happy. It is either that or becoming a cat lady. 

Edited June 9 by AION

[Emerald]

14 minutes ago, AION said:

When I see a girl with a beta, I can sense she knows she is with a beta and she is deeply resentful. And just puts up with him because this guy sticks around because all the studs he dated ran a train on her and left. So yes women date these soft guys but they are not happy. It is either that or becoming a cat lady. 

This is just a projection of the anti-social narratives that men are being brainwashed with at large. And it's causing men to get bitter and repel women... which is causing the male loneliness epidemic.

Go interact with real actual women... and you will find that they like real actual men.

Why is it surprising to you that women are attracted to men?

[something_else]

I think women typically prefer balanced men. It is not really correct to say they prefer betas or alphas. The ideal is a man who is masculine, but not so masculine that they become scary. Confident, but not arrogant. Physically strong, but not obscene looking. You get the idea.

The flawed thinking here is that these balanced men (who women really do prefer) are 'beta'. Or in other words that not being hyper-masculine makes you a beta. This just isn't true. The men who are well balanced overall don't fit the stereotypical definition of a beta, nor the definition of an alpha. 

Generally a beta is a dude who lacks confidence, is kinda boring, doesn't have anything particularly unique or interesting about him. Not many women are going to look for a man like that.

[Hojo]

This video actually proved the incels right that women will fuck the alphas, and then use the betas to take care of the alphas kids. Given the choice to fuck short term, they make the mens face ultra muscular, then for a long term relationship they make it fat. So they have power in every scenario. This video proves woman are lying en mass.

Edited June 9 by Hojo

[AION]

14 minutes ago, Emerald said:

This is just a projection of the anti-social narratives that men are being brainwashed with at large. And it's causing men to get bitter and repel women... which is causing the male loneliness epidemic.

Go interact with real actual women... and you will find that they like real actual men.

Why is it surprising to you that women are attracted to men?

Perhaps in some cases. Doesn’t change the ordeal of women who punch above their weight and trying to get a prize they can’t get. Most women overvalue what they have to offer and demand too much. It is not a good deal for men. Men don’t have a biological clock so we can wait it out. 

Edited June 9 by AION