[Simeon_Strangelight]

(07-12-2017 03:12 AM)Suits Wrote:  

(07-12-2017 03:06 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

^ Point taken, Suits. I've given this forum a lot of time and free content over the years...

That's a good thing.

Quote:

These particular socio-sexual patterns of behaviour are obviously a topic of contention for many members - it seems to a reliable irritant - so if I've bored and annoyed people discussing this, I apologise.

I doubt this. Your posts are forum favourites.

(07-12-2017 03:06 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

I'll take this a sign to temper myself and take a break from the forum for a while.

No need to do this, unless it's necessary for personal health and/or focus on other areas of your life.

You're not a lone wolf and you're contributions to this forum are evidence of this.

Like many here, it's been a struggle for you to find people in every day life that you can relate with.

A lone wolf is someone who prefers his own company.

Lone wolf's are generally a net loss for society, no matter how cool the term sounds.

I'll second that. I have had also plenty of time due to my activities mostly being concerned with making minor adjustments on the other computer and then watching my positions for hours.

A lone wolf does not necessarily mean that you need to be alone for weeks. It means in my opinion someone who likes solitude. As Bukowski put it - he thrives on solitude and needs in it at least for a few hours a day. That does not mean that you don't want to be social at other times. A lone wolf does not mind spending time alone, but cares for good company.

[Conscious Pirate]

The members here who are criticising all this discussion & calling it horoscopes or mental masturbation are really just showing more of themselves than they would care to admit.

Brass tacks. All this stuff is a model & applies in micro & macro planes & should be treated as such.

I have found great value in the response from all who took this thread seriously, especially Comte's negatives (great value here & a rep point pending). Absolutely enlightening & much to think about.

[Leonard D Neubache]

(07-12-2017 03:06 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

^ Point taken, Suits. I've given this forum a lot of time and free content over the years - it was a very good distraction at my old workplace from a job I could do in my sleep - and get impassioned about certain topics when my curiousity is aroused to a point past the patience of others. That's the curse of being an INTJ: pulling together the predictable patterns and behaviours of people into theories that interest me rarely interest others - which is why I have to perform as a guy much, much less intelligent than I am in reality to have a strong social life.

I only ever hit post on about one third of the posts I actually write. I recognise most people won't care.

These particular socio-sexual patterns of behaviour are obviously a topic of contention for many members - it seems to a reliable irritant - so if I've bored and annoyed people discussing this, I apologise.

I'll take this a sign to temper myself and take a break from the forum for a while.

Hopefully this will be the only AB post to get zero likes.

Go AWOL and I'll see you stuffed in the brig, soldier.

[Conscious Pirate]

^ yeah, fuck that AB.

You only just came back. didn't you?

[Fortis]

AB, lighten up, will ya?

[Tex Cruise]

(07-12-2017 03:49 AM)Conscious Pirate Wrote:  

All this stuff is a model & applies in micro & macro planes & should be treated as such.

[Suits]

(07-12-2017 03:20 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

A lone wolf does not necessarily mean that you need to be alone for weeks. It means in my opinion someone who likes solitude. As Bukowski put it - he thrives on solitude and needs in it at least for a few hours a day. That does not mean that you don't want to be social at other times. A lone wolf does not mind spending time alone, but cares for good company.

That's half the population.

I think you have to be a little more extreme than that to secure yourself a cool descriptive metaphor.

[Blaster]

(07-12-2017 02:19 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Ultimately all those classifications are irrelevant. Maybe sometime in the future when Game and real sexual behavior finally gets added to psychology, then some scientists can take apart the human mating behavior and come up with the right nomenclature for this. But we are a long stretch away from this - currently "science" is busy "proving" that genders don't even exist, let alone that men and women differ greatly - heh.

Dominance and dominance hierarchies are a real phenomenon, studied in animals under ethology (study of animal behavior). Humans are very complex, so it's harder to study. Most animals have mating patterns that are relatively simple compared to human behavior. Either you have territorial males, a rutting season, or male display + female choice. Then you have "alpha pair" dynamics in wolves and "Queen bee" dynamic in social insects. In humans, though, both sexes exercise mate choice and there are billions of humans in the world with enormous potential for social hierarchies.

Quote:

A lone wolf does not necessarily mean that you need to be alone for weeks. It means in my opinion someone who likes solitude. As Bukowski put it - he thrives on solitude and needs in it at least for a few hours a day. That does not mean that you don't want to be social at other times. A lone wolf does not mind spending time alone, but cares for good company.

I think the key distinction between a true lone wolf and a mere introvert is the relationship to social hierarchy. An introvert likes solitude, but may still be a member of the social hierarchy. A lone wolf doesn't just like solitude, but either rejects or is rejected by the social hierarchy. A lone wolf only qualifies as a sigma after he has substantial mating success while remaining outside the society of the women he bangs.

In the wild, being a lone wolf is typically a temporary state that lasts until the wolf pair bonds with a suitable female and becomes the alpha of a new pack. But some wolves never join a pack. They mate with lower ranked females in established packs, without forming their own. They're known as "Casanova Wolves." They don't have the benefits of pack membership, the lifestyle is risky and requires abundant resources to be viable, but ultimate reproductive success can be significantly greater than a typical alpha.

Narcissistic as it may appear, this forum is heavily-oriented towards a sigma mentality. Traveling from country to country planting your flag in local sluts and writing about it before moving on to the next country is undeniably a sigma mating pattern that triggers the hell out of native or blue-pilled alphas.

[Comte De St. Germain]

I think people mistake what a lone wolf is. It's keeping your circle small and doing as you wish. Disappearing for months at a time to enjoy something else elsewhere always with new people and new ideas. A lone wolf is never truly alone as he can always find others to interact with.

It's a term I'd use to describe the more transient members of the forum who don't post often. Guys like Courage Reborn and Slubu who were one place then the next logging on to post reports and meet new guys. I wouldn't use it to describe any of you guys that are quite settled in one location as a main base.

I think all this thread has now devolved into is a horoscope thread more or less. It's less discussion of ideas and more "I'm this because I have these one or two traits." You can't call yourself something that is deeply embedded in your personality. You have to be labelled it. Self-reflection although important and good for establishing habits and having a realistic worldview isn't damning enough to describe your innermost self. Only someone outside your frame that can fully criticize is more able to do so. That's why I highly recommend having a close friend to confide in about yourself that gives blunt advice.

All I see are people describing the positive aspects of Sigmas, Alphas or what have you then labeling themselves it. You're not all Sigmas, Alphas, or whatever. There's a fair representation from each social class here on the forum. Of course some noticeably smaller than the others.

[estraudi]

"All I see are people describing the positive aspects of Sigmas, Alphas or what have you then labeling themselves it."

I know I also jumped on the positive bandwagon side of this self-described type of person this thread is to represent.
Hardly have discussed the negatives or downsides. But I think the "normal" downsides like isolation, non-connectivity to many others, small circle and other things are sacrificed and accepted as par for the course.
In other words losing what we would like to have in order to do what we want(that we really enjoy) seems like an already processed and counted for cost/benefit analysis to our lives. Win some, lose some. Have a fulfilling social life, have a chaotic(to others) isolated life. Shit, at times I can barely cope with the isolation but I've always done the isolating. The pushing away. Is that to be reconciled in some way?

I wish this thread would go in that direction, or so I hope.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(07-12-2017 01:02 PM)Comte De St. Germain Wrote:  

I think people mistake what a lone wolf is. It's keeping your circle small and doing as you wish. Disappearing for months at a time to enjoy something else elsewhere always with new people and new ideas. A lone wolf is never truly alone as he can always find others to interact with.

It's a term I'd use to describe the more transient members of the forum who don't post often. Guys like Courage Reborn and Slubu who were one place then the next logging on to post reports and meet new guys. I wouldn't use it to describe any of you guys that are quite settled in one location as a main base.

I think all this thread has now devolved into is a horoscope thread more or less. It's less discussion of ideas and more "I'm this because I have these one or two traits." You can't call yourself something that is deeply embedded in your personality. You have to be labelled it. Self-reflection although important and good for establishing habits and having a realistic worldview isn't damning enough to describe your innermost self. Only someone outside your frame that can fully criticize is more able to do so. That's why I highly recommend having a close friend to confide in about yourself that gives blunt advice.

All I see are people describing the positive aspects of Sigmas, Alphas or what have you then labeling themselves it. You're not all Sigmas, Alphas, or whatever. There's a fair representation from each social class here on the forum. Of course some noticeably smaller than the others.

Well - by that Lone Wolf definition pretty much no one here is one I guess.

As for the Sigma/Alpha/Beta definitions - it is correct that they should rather be made by assessment of others. I have personally no idea where I find myself. I can only assess certain skills and characteristics. Based on what I perceive and heard from AB, I would call him a Sigma, but who knows - he may be something else altogether and more Alpha than he thinks.

I only did once a personality assessment test via focus groups and the results were more surprising to me than it seemed - I was far more introverted than apparent at least in certain situations.

Either way - aside from broad definitions this discussion indeed does not work in the way of self-definition.

[Tim in real life]

Just a quick glance of the first page, it seems that having the flexibility to go Alpha/Sigma is the best way to go in the real life.

Trust me, before I hit 30, I have learned tons of hard lessons that either induced emotional apathy on my end or be the willing Nemesis.

[Comte De St. Germain]

(07-12-2017 02:17 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Well - by that Lone Wolf definition pretty much no one here is one I guess.

That's the point. They're probably a tenth of a percent of the US population give or take. They're not common and few/far between both in the human and animal world. The fact that we had a quite a few on the forum was luck in and of itself and I'd say they built the travel section more or less.

I'd say that's kind of the problem with humanity these days. A lot of us do think we're a bit more special and unique than anyone else. What's worse is that especially for forum guys that's reinforced in real life too.

Not to say we aren't better off but we should consider our humanity.

Quote:

As for the Sigma/Alpha/Beta definitions - it is correct that they should rather be made by assessment of others. I have personally no idea where I find myself. I can only assess certain skills and characteristics. Based on what I perceive and heard from AB, I would call him a Sigma, but who knows - he may be something else altogether and more Alpha than he thinks.

I talked with him over PM about this but I don't think these categories are open and shut. There's a lot of crossover and I guess being an alpha or sigma or what have you is a tendency overall rather than a simple metric.

Quote:

I only did once a personality assessment test via focus groups and the results were more surprising to me than it seemed - I was far more introverted than apparent at least in certain situations.

Well generally the problem with that especially in relation to our social skills is that we kind of set our own standard for what we consider properly social. A lot of that has to do with comfort level.

I honestly can't even tell if I'm an introvert or an extrovert. Some days I feel like hell and want to be alone. Other days I have to indulge myself in humanity or I'd feel suffocated.

Quote:

Either way - aside from broad definitions this discussion indeed does not work in the way of self-definition.

I guess this is why it's better to stick to it as a theoretical framework for how the world works. Only issue is that you can't help but want to know where you stack up irrespective of who you are. Though it gets tedious when you get down to the exact minute details.

(07-12-2017 01:32 PM)estraudi Wrote:  

"All I see are people describing the positive aspects of Sigmas, Alphas or what have you then labeling themselves it."

I know I also jumped on the positive bandwagon side of this self-described type of person this thread is to represent.

I came off harsher than I intended. It was more a sense of boredom than a condemnation. As I stated earlier in this post I think it's only natural to want to know where we stack up. It's just really really hard.

Quote:

Hardly have discussed the negatives or downsides. But I think the "normal" downsides like isolation, non-connectivity to many others, small circle and other things are sacrificed and accepted as par for the course.

Isolation and non-connectivity is actually I think what effects everyone regardless of where you stand. Who's my real friend? Am I wanted? Etc. Those thoughts are perfectly natural and all humans assume they have a really small circle.

Problem with that is that we take these things for granted. I think more people than we would like to believe would show up to our funerals. That's the thing when taking stock of your social level in the world. The key question is:

How many people have you effected and continue to effect?

If we look at the hierarchy

Alpha>Beta>Delta>Sigma>Gamma>Omega>Lambda.

May have been unintentional but that to me looks like the order of how many people are truly effected deeply by dealing with them. The Delta effects more than the Sigma because he has a larger inner circle than them that they continuously effect. Of course the forum shouldn't count as we're anonymous faces but I believe in real life it rings very true.

And I think a lot of us do have people we effect more than others out in the real world. There's a good mixed bag here and I'd be loathe to believe we're questionably moral sigmas with no effect on others.

I guess one last downside is in order. They're footprints in the sand. They come in and out of a lot of people's lives and naturally move on while others move on from them. They're transients not physically but they go through a high volume of people they'll never see again because their relations although seemingly powerful are hollow.

Quote:

In other words losing what we would like to have in order to do what we want(that we really enjoy) seems like an already processed and counted for cost/benefit analysis to our lives. Win some, lose some. Have a fulfilling social life, have a chaotic(to others) isolated life. Shit, at times I can barely cope with the isolation but I've always done the isolating. The pushing away. Is that to be reconciled in some way?

I wish this thread would go in that direction, or so I hope.

I guess that's where I'm at too. I crave a group of people I can ride out into eternity with through thick and thin. I've never really had that in my life.

Forum's the closest I've got strangely enough.

Ever since I've discovered this place I don't believe in goodbyes I expect to see someone I've met and had good rapport with once again at some point. Pass them by the street somewhere in NYC and give nod then grab a drink. And strangely enough I've had a lot of that as of late in my life.

Maybe that ideal group is not such a far off idea.

[AnonymousBosch]

Just for clarification, as I've seen signs I've been misunderstood: I wasn't attacking or 'smacking down' RhymeorReason earlier in this thread when I was amused by his Sigma Tendencies, and thought that was clear enough in my post that I like the guy. He's got strong opinions, but he's always capable of clearly-explaining his beliefs if pressed for further-clarification and I always understand why he comes to the - allowable - conclusions that he does. I have a lot of respect for him artistically and intellectually, admire the hard-won knowledge he has accumulated and have been shown that he a personal integrity lacking in many of his generation. He's a damn good man.

Thanks for letting me clear that up.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(07-12-2017 02:17 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

I only did once a personality assessment test via focus groups and the results were more surprising to me than it seemed - I was far more introverted than apparent at least in certain situations.

Either way - aside from broad definitions this discussion indeed does not work in the way of self-definition.

Actually that is a misspelling - maybe Freudian, but probably not.

My personality tests proved actually that I was far more extroverted than it seems. I was just shy and moody when young for various reasons.

I am still sometimes moody, but when I did the tests it became clear that I was far more extroverted than it seemed.

Ah well - enough of that.

[The Catalyst]

I've realised a big source of conflict, maybe even on this forum to some degree, is due to something I'll call the Alpha/Sigma divide.

The Sigma's nature is to stir shit especially if: other people do/say things that don't make sense, do/say things that seem bullshit, and/or otherwise make him bored. The Alpha's nature is to treat any dissent as AMOGging as that's his language. He also does that himself. And it's also the Alpha's nature to some extent to "not know how to read" and say things that the little details are wrong, simply because they value the whole "alpha vibe" more than being totally and utterly correct(read: Trump, as much as I like him).

The Sigma's nature is also one that makes the most sense, and the Sigma has a better grip on reality/better perception than any of the other types. Everyone rationalises but the Sigma's rationalisations are more sophisticated. But when the Alpha(or Beta?) does some obvious bullshit the Sigma feels compelled to call it out. The other types are more comfortable with things not making sense as they don't analyse situations or the world around them as much as Sigmas do, so they often don't even realise when things don't make sense.

This is also why Sigmas can't really function in Aus/NZ. The bogan environment produces Alphas/pseudo-alphas that keep trying to tool(AMOG) people in ways that when you think about it don't make sense(in the US and other normal countries, when alphas try to tool you, it makes sense at least to some degree). The Alpha dislikes the Sigma if he doesn't understand the Sigma nature. Because without understanding, the two natures naturally conflict. And Aus/NZ culture is the king of not-understanding things in general(anti-intellectualism).

[bgbusiness]

Really good posts so far and I consider myself as sigma. Everything that I read about it applies to me accurately.
And it's not about rationalizaition. My past girls are telling me about this, my friends/family are confirming it.
Not that I give a fuck if they think that I am a sigma or not.

Here is my story in a succinct summary.

Although I had somewhat of alpha characteristics ever since I was little such as being outside thinker, rebellious, ambitious AF, doesn't talk AT ALL unless asked a question (mysterious, but I wasn't trying to do it on purpose, my attitude was always like, "The fuck do you want?", but isn't uncomfortable speaking his OWN MIND.

I was raised by a single mother who was an avid Christian. That made me grow up in a beta household w/o a strong father figure starting elementary school. After high school, I started living by myself due do harsh circumstances, providing all financial aspect of my life, taking all the responsibility of myself for several years. This made me GROW UP super quick since the area that I was staying at was not the safest neighborhood in Chicago. Yeah, a lot of reflection, lonely nights...

However, I came out strong as I learned game, had some HARSH breakups, learned some life lessons the HARD WAY, red pilled and got rid of those beta traits that was holding me back and added on more hardcore personality from living by myself at the age of 18. It's been 5 years since graduating high school. What a fucking journey. I can't wait for 2018, 2019...

Feel free to understand or not understand where I come from, it's hard to just describe all this shit online just by few paragraphs, but the guys who are sigma males would be able to tell.

Entrepreneurial, lone-wolf, blunt AF, not giving a FUCK, still going to social events with a hot chick on my arm when I first meet a new social circle. Starting to realized that "I am that sigma guy..." as I enter mid-20s

Yeah, a lot of people might think that ALL of this shit is mental masturbation, but I don't really give a shit.
Everyone has their own opinion. You can think however you want. At the end of the day, I know who I am and I will know more of myself as I enter my 30s in 6years.

[AnonymousBosch]

(12-23-2017 10:40 PM)The Catalyst Wrote:  

This is also why Sigmas can't really function in Aus/NZ. The bogan environment produces Alphas/pseudo-alphas that keep trying to tool(AMOG) people in ways that when you think about it don't make sense(in the US and other normal countries, when alphas try to tool you, it makes sense at least to some degree). The Alpha dislikes the Sigma if he doesn't understand the Sigma nature. Because without understanding, the two natures naturally conflict. And Aus/NZ culture is the king of not-understanding things in general(anti-intellectualism).

I think the Sigma Tell is this: When conflict arises to the extent that things might get physical, the Gamma backs down and tries to pretend he was only joking. The Sigma always chooses to makes the situation worse.

If you've never been in a physical fight, particularly one that could have been easily-avoided with diplomacy or reason, then you're probably not a Sigma.

Another tell: you've were repeatedly-threatened with your Permanent Record. (Teachers want the Alpha's approval).

[david.garrett84]

(12-24-2017 03:32 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

I think the Sigma Tell is this: When conflict arises to the extent that things might get physical, the Gamma backs down and tries to pretend he was only joking. The Sigma always chooses to makes the situation worse.

If you've never been in a physical fight, particularly one that could have been easily-avoided with diplomacy or reason, then you're probably not a Sigma.

Another tell: you've were repeatedly-threatened with your Permanent Record. (Teachers want the Alpha's approval).

I definitely describe myself as a sigma and so do a lot of other people, without using the word itself.

I know the rules I am expected to follow, the customs, the compromises, the established norms, but I regularly show my contempt for them. In the following story, I am meant to be a delightful foreign gentleman, yet I can't give a quarter of a fuck.

I had a very messy break-up with an Eastern European girl. Her family became involved and refused to hand over my stuff. Then, actually quite surprisingly, some friends and I started fielding threats from a neighbor of theirs when we were going about trying to retrieve my stuff.

It was just really fucked up shit he was sending in messages (I had never met him, making it more bizarre still), like how he said he was going to carve me up with a knife, beat up (female) friends of mine (threats to girls were his first mouth-offs), and all this other crap. It turns out that this neighbor had a history as a teenager (and from the age of about 10) going around and sexually assaulting some of the local girls, akin to a deranged gamma. Not tentative/not sure accusations, confirmed ones. We're talking Jon Venables/Robert Thompson-lite shit, except it's the Czech Republic and no one is going to institutionalize warped people as often as should happen. Even my ex's father admitted some of the outright fuckery that went on with this retard. But, being neighbors, the adults involved swept all the incidents under the carpet at the time and went about their lives, including attending church every Sunday as if nothing had happened.

I had no intention of avoiding the areas where my ex lived, which I regularly frequent because Slovakia is a stone's throw away. I like the areas, I'd lived in them for a long time, so I was going nowhere. I spend up to a third of the year there. A more "reasonable" person would say, "David, just go about your business and keep a low profile."

Nope, nope and nope. My friends and I went on to refer to the neighbor as a sexual molester every time he made threats. He didn't know how to react, began to panic and then pandemonium set in, with repeated denials from his family, shrill screams that the I the Westerner was a liar and troublemaker. When that happened, we showed people proof, confirmations from people who knew about what went on, detailed descriptions and the like, plus the accounts of witnesses who confirmed that people, like my ex's dad, had said that this guy was going around being Molesty McMolest Face. How the fuck the fathers involved didn't act at the time is beyond me.

"You're a crazy man, we'll go to the police!"
"Okay, go," I said. "At least I'm not covering up how children were sexually abused and I did nothing. Shame on you people. Go fuck yourselves."

*They didn't go to the police*

"Just wait, crazy Westerner, we'll go to the police this time! We promise!"
"Then go, but please tell me for what, as I don't know what I could have possibly done."

*They didn't go to the police*

This repeated itself about eight times with references to court documents, the "secret police", "defamation" and police reports. This guy was making threats to maim and/or kill me and others (even before we raised the sexual abuse topic), but whenever I said, "Hey, that's a bit ironic coming from someone who needs to sexually abuse pre-teens and teens to get a girl", his family did the whole autistic screeching thing about how good and kind their boy was/is.

Eventually, after they said again they'd "filed" a police report, I called the non-emergency line to the local station and asked, knowing what answer I would probably receive, where this report was. Of course, no police report and the cops interviewed me about the sexual abuse stuff from the past because they were curious. They've asked me to present more information in written form in the future.

The end result has been that dozens of people now know about this whole incident. The dumbass making the threats deleted or hid his social media profiles. His family members, some of them, stopped talking with him.

I recall a few times we would hear stuff from people about how this guy wanted to stab me, blah blah blah. So we called his house and, naturally, his mother and sister answered for him, refusing to put him on the phone. Then he'd make another threat online, we'd call back and his mother and/or sister would answer again.

He's sent emails threatening to kill or maim me, or written to others, but he's never texted or called me.

I and family members of the other people he has threatened (mostly female friends of mine) have offered multiple times to meet with him. No response.

If I had no investment in this area of Eastern Europe, we wouldn't have engaged him. But I'm not relocating or shying away because a guy who went around grabbing girls by the pussy in a criminal sense wants to ironically white-knight.

I fully admit to thinking of these people, the ones doing the bitching or other crap, as peasants. They screech whenever I'm gone but they're silent when I return. I know I am meant to be the polite ex-boyfriend according to Western or Eastern Europe customs but I'm not doing it.

I have to say that I find it hilarious that this guy makes threats and then has panic attacks from what his neighbors tell me when his past boomerangs back to him.

[bgbusiness]

(12-24-2017 03:32 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

I think the Sigma Tell is this: When conflict arises to the extent that things might get physical, the Gamma backs down and tries to pretend he was only joking. The Sigma always chooses to makes the situation worse.

If you've never been in a physical fight, particularly one that could have been easily-avoided with diplomacy or reason, then you're probably not a Sigma.

Exactly.
I used to get into fights many times in school, not giving a F.
Yeah, it might sound stupid, yes, but that was how I was.

Then when it came to college, I realized that I can't get into a fight or I will get suspended and dropped out of school. Then, I started being more calculative like a sigma would do. Ex. verbal assaults, a little bit of pushing, but not pushing too far to the level that they can arrest/suspend me from school.

It's like a sigma male is like trying to just be himself, but he has to work around the society and it's own rules because at the end of the day, he is still a part of it whether he likes it or not. However, he can operate being almost invisible to the society.

All the time, my mentality has been, "Know the rules of the game to break the rules or to hack the system" Fine the loopholes if you will. After knowing the things I can get in trouble for and not get in trouble for, I will just push to the edge just enough so that I am not in trouble, but people can't fuck around with you.

Most of the time this doesn't happen to a sigma because they are aloof and are lone-wolfs. They don't socialize as much as others, but people would just see them from the outside and observe the "surface" of the guy and think that he is a "normal" guy for the MOST PART.

[the1element]

Honestly, the whole Sigma male thing just sounds like self-masturbation.

And I don't think you can really break down someone into a "sigma" and "alpha", Picasso was a sigma but he was also gregarious, Steve McQueen was a sigma he did what he wanted and disregarded authority however he had a lot of alpha traits as well.

I will say, the sigmas that I know have an intensity about them.

Just look at pictures of Picasso, you can tell how intense he is just by looking at his eyes.

Same with McQueen if you get listen to people who spent time with him what he was like, he was very intense.

Aryton Senna too, listen to interviews watch the videos the man was fucking intense.

Serge Gainsbourg another dude that was intense

But I think trying to be a "sigma" or even self-describing yourself as one is idiotic.

I think you would get much more mileage out of being a genuine as possible to your character.

[Easy_C]

(12-24-2017 03:32 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(12-23-2017 10:40 PM)The Catalyst Wrote:  

This is also why Sigmas can't really function in Aus/NZ. The bogan environment produces Alphas/pseudo-alphas that keep trying to tool(AMOG) people in ways that when you think about it don't make sense(in the US and other normal countries, when alphas try to tool you, it makes sense at least to some degree). The Alpha dislikes the Sigma if he doesn't understand the Sigma nature. Because without understanding, the two natures naturally conflict. And Aus/NZ culture is the king of not-understanding things in general(anti-intellectualism).

I think the Sigma Tell is this: When conflict arises to the extent that things might get physical, the Gamma backs down and tries to pretend he was only joking. The Sigma always chooses to makes the situation worse.

If you've never been in a physical fight, particularly one that could have been easily-avoided with diplomacy or reason, then you're probably not a Sigma.

Another tell: you've were repeatedly-threatened with your Permanent Record. (Teachers want the Alpha's approval).

Eh....I dunno I've known a lot of biker types, which almost by definition includes a lot of Sigma personalities, and very few of them will ever try to escalate a fight. Most of them are polite but standoffish. They usually don't get into physical fights because they don't provoke those situations to begin with or don't have a hard time scaring punks into backing down.

The people who will always escalate a fight stupidly are insecure Deltas trying to prove something.

[TheFinalEpic]

If you've read Musashi, you know what an archetypical sigma male is.

[Comte De St. Germain]

(12-24-2017 06:32 PM)TheFinalEpic Wrote:  

If you've read Musashi, you know what an archetypical sigma male is.

The most archetypal in the East would be bar none Lu Bu if you ask me.

[Killer Joe]

I identify as a Six Sigma Neomasculine Red-Pill Dark triad Machiavellian narcissit Psychopath.