Dominance hierarchy

From Incel Wiki
(Redirected from Alpha, Beta, Omega)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

A dominance hierarchy is an arrangement in a group of animals in which each member has a rank or status that everyone mostly agrees on.

Letters from the Greek alphabet are used to refer to different ranks. Alphas are the most dominant animals, followed by betas, followed by gammas, and so on. Omegas are the least dominant animals, often socially excluded and depressed. For simplicity, all non-alpha animals are often called betas. Dominance does not necessarily mean aggression, but simply superiority.

Incels mainly see ranks in terms of sexual status and looks because incels think these play a widely underappreciated role for social acceptance. Incels use their own terminology to refer to different ranks of each sex: Chad, Normie, Virgin, Stacy and Becky. The female virgin is not a low ranking female because virginity is only detrimental to men, and actually beneficial to women.[1]

Overview[edit | edit source]

Social animals naturally compete for access to resources and mating opportunities which are limited in quantity and quality. Rather than fighting each time interests are in conflict, the animal of higher status gets to decide in a dominance hierarchy. This enables cooperation by reducing chances of aggression which may explain why such behaviors have evolved in many animals.

Dominance hierarchies are regulated by various innate abilities, emotions and behaviors, for example the ability to remember and recognize one's own and other's ranks quickly and reliably, as well as emotions like status drive (envy, admiration), signaling behaviors of high rank (confidence, intimidation) and signals of acceptance of lower rank (withdrawal, submission, blushing, smiling, depression and anxiety). Humans who pretend to have higher rank than they deserve are put into their place, or at least challenged. For this reason, confidence is a hard-to-fake signal of high status. The event of someone's status being challenged arouses high interest and excitement from everyone in the group. This partly explains why watching sports is exciting.

In many species, the alpha animals have some interest in maintaining alliances with lower ranking ones to avoid a beta/omega uprising.

Redpillers and PUAs focus on dominance in game and confidence. Blackpillers and incels rather focus on dominance in looks, financial capital and other factors that are largely predetermined and cannot be fixed with one weird trick. Redpillers and bluepillers tend to recommend to "be more confident", "take a shower" and "stand upright" to improve one's dating success, but blackpillers regard faking confidence as a fleeting solution at best, and as unnatural especially for introverted, autistic, ugly and other omega males who lack real status or significance on which they could base their confidence on, also fearing bullying for appearing overconfident and awkward.

Human dominance hierarchies[edit | edit source]

In most animals, rank is only decided by strength and health, but in others also by ornament or courtship display. Humans have the most complex behavior of all animals and a wide variety of things determine status such as competence, looks/ornament, strength/intimidation, humor, power, prestige and resources. Everyone is part of many status hierarchies at the same time, which are either formal or informal.[2]

Modern human status hierarchies are larger, more anonymous a lot more formal than the natural ones in hunter-gatherers.[3] In modern hierarchies, status is regulated by laws and represented "on paper" e.g. by income, occupational status and educational qualifications, often within large organizational or economic systems, possibly spanning the entire world. But much of the ancient ways of organizing smaller hierarchies exist nearly unchanged, e.g. the way people automatically respect tall and strong men, and also good and dominant looking men[4] and individuals who have achieved a high level of competence.[5] Large formal hierarchies, such as economic hierarchies are not as directly tied to emotional, physiological and mental states (confidence vs anxiety) as informal hierarchies e.g. among coworkers, classmates or social circles.

Both men and women have a hierarchy, but the criteria and mechanisms that determine them are very different except for the importance of beauty. Women are much more gossipy and manipulative, and compete more by looks and a non-slutty reputation. Men are more cooperative and concerned with resource extraction.[6] Men's hierarchies revolve more around the ability to extract resources, but also looks. Since men benefit from cooperation in resource extraction, their intrasexual competition is more productive and cooperative than women's. Women's hierarchies revolve around looks and a reputation of sexual loyalty (non-sluttiness) and related traits that men desire in women. Women's intrasexual competition mainly consists in destroying one another's reputation as well as gossiping about looks because women do not gain as much from cooperation as men.[7]

Humans have various behaviors that are involved in status negotiation and signaling, most of which occur subconsciously.[8][9] Some of them are listed below.

Status signals in humans[edit | edit source]

Erectness of posture[edit | edit source]

More dominant individuals have a more erect posture.[10] For example, the grade received after an exam predicts changes in erectness of posture (r = 0.6 to 0.8) and people intuitively infer dominance from erectness of posture. (Erectness before the exam, however, does not affect the grade.)[11]

Confidence[edit | edit source]

Ten months old toddlers are able to infer dominance relations between simple geometric objects by observing relative confidence and forcefulness in the object's movements.[12] Since babies exhibit this behavior before socialization could have taken place and since one can observe similar behaviors throughout the animal kingdom, one can only conclude that such behaviors are innate rather than cultural.

Subtle poses like nods, arms behind head, manspreading and certain facial expressions are also signals of confidence and status.[13][14] This observation underlies the chad vs virgin meme. Showing skin is a dominance signal, especially regarding looks, for both men and women, as it exposes skin smoothness and muscle tone to the judgement of others and hence signals confidence in one's expectation to receive positive judgements.

Related to confidence is coolness as well as stoicism.

Bravery & stoicism[edit | edit source]

Bravery and war heroism appear to be male-specific dominance signals.[15] Also stoicism, i.e. the downplaying of hardship and disease is a way to maintain dominance, and women have plausibly selected men to have this trait, as men who showed weakness were more likely discarded by them.[16]

Desperation and trying hard[edit | edit source]

Showing despair and trying too hard are a reliable signal of low status and weakness. By hiding hardship men can maintain their status and hence access to females.[17] Analyzing social interactions may perceived as a low status activity because it may be perceived to imply that one cannot get by without it due to some flaw (trying too hard).

Eye contact[edit | edit source]

Another simple dominance signal is eye contact. One study found that people pay more attention to photos of men with high status cues (attire in this case). Interestingly, neither men or women pay more attention to women with such high status cues.[18] The attention paid to more dominant individuals is particularly noticeable during speaking and here women with higher authority get more attention too. More dominant people more often look away when someone is speaking, perhaps because they can afford to ignore less dominant people speaking, which is related to the effect in the previous study about the high status cues. Conversely, more dominant people also keep eye contact when speaking, perhaps because they do not fear being judged as overconfident hence do not need to divert attention by looking away.

This can be measured by the Visual Dominance Ratio defined as VDR = (% eye contact while speaking) / (% eye contact while listening). Dividing the two terms cancels out differences in individual propensity for holding eye contact and combines both in one number. Being more dominant, increases the denominator and decreases the nominator, hence increases the ratio.

Examples for VDR ratio[19]
A B VDR of A
ROTC officer ROTC cadet 1.06
ROTC cadet ROTC officer 0.61
psychology undergrad low-achieving high school senior 0.92
psychology undergrad college chemistry honor student 0.59
expert man (speaking about their own field) non-expert woman 0.98
expert man (speaking about the listener's field) expert woman 0.61
expert woman non-expert man 1.04
non-expert woman expert man 0.54

Smiling and laughing[edit | edit source]

Smiling signals positive emotion, benevolence, submission/compliance/appeasement and absence of threat. For example, people often smile in cases of excuses and embarrassment.[20] Dominant individuals smile less, perhaps to maintain the threat of their dominance and because it acts as a costly signal of their status in that they do not need to fear being judged not needing to signal compliance.

Higher levels of testosterone are associated with dominant behavior and less smiling.[21] Also, smaller (less dominant) football players displayed more smiling than larger (more dominant) football players (F(1.41, 38.10) = 111.80, partial η² = .81).[22]

Men smile less than women because men have higher status and women are more agreeable/compliant, presumably related to women's more child-like, shorter and weaker stature.[23] In social encounters women smile 87%, but men only in 67% of the time. In portrait photographs from high school and university yearbooks, women do not smile 8% of the time, but men do not smile 41% of the time.[24]

Laughing simultaneously seems to act as a signal of acknowledging someone's status. For example, people more often laugh about jokes told by a more attractive man[25] and attractiveness is moderately related to status.[26]

Voice[edit | edit source]

Main article: Voice

Deep voices are generally perceived as more dominant.[27] Other dominance signals include loud rapid speaking tempo and clear articulation which is related to confidence.[27]

In one study, low status individuals accommodated their voices to the voice pitch of their higher status partners in an experiment.[28] Similar to status differences in smiling, this provides evidence that lower status individuals use signals of appeasement to avoid conflict and accept their position in the hierarchy.

Looks[edit | edit source]

Main article: Beauty

A single glance of 100 ms is sufficient to form reliable, consensual first impressions about social status (α = .90 to .95 for male status, i.e. very high inter-rater agreement), suggesting that humans are hardwired to tell social status largely based on their looks.[29] Inherited from primate ancestors, broader faces with a wider jaw and smaller ratio of eye size to face size and larger noses are also perceived as more dominant as these are gerontomorphic (i.e. non-neotoneous) and masculine features.[30] Baby-faced round, soft and large-eyed, small-nosed faces are perceived as less dominant (weak and submissive).[31]

Height and bulkiness[edit | edit source]

Taller and bulkier people are perceived as more dominant and authoritative.[32][33][34] Related signs of dominance are rapid gait, firm and strong stances, confident gesturing, as well as clothing or hair styles that create a bulkier appearance. [35]

Material status signals[edit | edit source]

In particular, men who display cues of wealth are regarded as more attractive and higher status by women.[36] As such, expensive cars, costly world travels etc. act as status symbols, enabling access to sex and social contacts (social resources). Women engage in material status signaling too, mainly to appear favorable among close female friends and to get access to Chad's social circles.

It has been suggested that the importance of men's signaling by such cues for sexual success is one factor preventing male engagement in low-consumption lifestyles.[37] Of course the main factor is the Prisoner's dilemma that retreating tends to result in being taken advantage of by others who don't.

Dominance ranks in human males[edit | edit source]


Alpha males[edit | edit source]

One can become an alpha by a dominance strategy (by aggression and intimidation), by a prestige strategy (by skill and reputation), or simply by good looks, muscularity and tallness.[38][39] Some alphas are tyrannical, but others are genuinely good people. Life is good for them, so they have little to gain from competitiveness having already achieved easy access to high quality females. Such alphas can rather strengthen their status by maintaining alliances with betas and avoiding beta male aggression against them. Examples for human alphas include: A fortune 500 CEO who marries a female underwear model, a rockstar with groupies, kings, gang leaders, almost any popular athlete, an unemployed good-looking thug who has women be his provider. Not all alphas are Chads, for example Adolf Hitler was now excessively good looking, but very dominant.

Beta males[edit | edit source]

Main article: Beta male

Beta males are moderately sexually successful and typically followers. They are usually subservient to alphas. Traditionally, they usually exchange loyalty to alphas in exchange for alphas not hoarding all the females. However, modern day betas tend to not (vocally) care much about getting laid nor who is ruling them. Beta is a near synonym for "normie" or, "average male". They generally have to work to bribe women with resource/job security, unlike alphas.

Omega males[edit | edit source]

Main article: Omega male

Males who are totally unsuccessful with women are Omega males. They are often socially excluded and hence never get laid.

Criticism[edit | edit source]

Do not take advice from this wagecuck and alpha male about how humans work

Hyper-liberal media and academia have challenged the notion of a human alpha male recently, saying applying animalistic concepts to humans is pseudo-science.[40] However, there is nothing pseudo-scientific or non-obvious about the fact that men differ in their social, romantic and material success. With differential ability and success, it is inevitable that someone will be the best one and there is a host of evidence that women choose the best man of the ones that convincingly show interest (hypergamy). What is special about humans is that they compete in a wide variety of ways and culture determines to which degree physical aggression as in animals is involved.

Contrary to, for example, U.S. comedian and TV host Adam Conover who famously claimed "alpha males do not exist" (see image),[41] the term "alpha" is indeed used sporadically in academia to genuinely describe humans, not just non-human animals.[42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50] High-ranking males, such as kings or other leaders have been considered as alpha males in academic publications,[51] as well as males with high sexual success.[52] Sometimes alpha traits refer to traits associated with human male sexual success such as masculinity and extroversion.[53]

Some have argued that the Alpha/Beta/Omega hierarchy is illegitimate, in that it bases sexual success too much upon behavior and status instead of looks. Lookism theorists suggest using the Slayer/Incel hierarchy instead. Still the terminology could as well be used for social hierarchies that are primarily based on looks.

The terms status, dominance, prestige, reputation, rank, popularity are all highly related. Some authors use dominance and status synonymously, other's don't.[54][55] All of these terms involve the evaluation by others and likely all of them tie into innate human emotions and behaviors that regulate human hierarchies. PUAs often use the term sexual market value in place of status. In the former PuaHate and SlutHate communities, the term "DOM" is usually used to describe a masculine face, but it also could refer to a large build or social dominance.

See also[edit | edit source]

References[edit | edit source]

  16. S G Brown. 2018. Female choice and male stoicism. [Abstract]
  20. Ekman, P.& Keltner, D (1997). The social function of "smile" and "laughter": Variations across primatespecies and societies. In U. C. Segerstraleand P. Molnar (Eds),Nonverbal communication: Where naturemeets culture, (pp. 27-46). Hillsdale, New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum.
  21. Dabbs, J. M. (1997). Testosterone, smiling, and facial appearance.Journal of NonverbalBehavior,Vol.21,pp.45-55
  23. LaFrance, M., Hecht, M. A.,andLevy Paluck, E. (2003). The contingentsmile: A meta-analysis of sexdifferences in smiling.PsychologicalBulletin,Vol.129,pp.305–334
  27. 27.0 27.1
  41. Adam Ruins Everything - Alpha Males Do Not Exist | truTV. 953,882 views (as of Fri 25 2019), Aug 4, 2017.



GameNeggingSMVBeautyFashionBetabuxBullyingLMSPUAAssholeTalk therapyIOIDominance hierarchyIODSocial circleSlayerN.L.P


CoolCharismaStoicAssholeNice guyAnxiousConfidentAsperger's Syndrome

Pick Up Artists

Ross Jeffriesr/TRPReal Social DynamicsRooshVOwen CookPlayer SupremeWinston WuList of fraudulent people in the seduction community


HypergamyHomosexualityHomocel hypothesisCasual sexReproductive success

Other theories

Females are socially ineptWomen-are-wonderful effectHalo effectMaslow's hierarchy of needsAdverse effects of inceldomPolitical correctness‎



Biological essentialismTraditional conservatismFatalismBlackpillScientific BlackpillBehavioral sinkHypergamyBeautyDominance hierarchy


SlutMonogamyMarriagePolygynyPolyandrySexual sublimation




It's over

Cope or ropeCopeLay down and rot

L o o o k s


Looks theoryLookism.netLooksmax.orgLooksBeautyDecileFacial Aesthetics: Concepts and Clinical DiagnosisThe WallScientific Blackpill



Looks levels

ChadChadliteBradGigachadTannerPretty BoyBeckyStacyGigastacy


EthnicelJBW theoryRicecelCurrycelBlackcelArabcelWhitecel



Body Parts

EyesLateral orbital rimLipsLower thirdMandibleMaxillaEyebrowMoustacheBoobsFeetBrowridge

Body Characteristics

MacrophallismMidface ratioNeotenySexual attractivenessSexual dimorphism Facial Aesthetics: Concepts and Clinical DiagnosisFashionAntefaceFiveheadFrameFWHRCanthal tiltCompact midfaceGay FaceDeep-set eyes