A woman attracted to alpha men is not a bad thing. Indeed, most women are attracted to alpha men, but it becomes problematic when that repetitive attraction becomes ultimately unsatisfactory or even deleterious. There are a lot of appealing characteristics to alpha men. Changing a woman’s attraction to non-alpha men might be possible, but that process would take a very long time and will probably not be successful. That’s too much of a change. Basic personality traits are indelible and resist change. But there is hope. The goal should be to realize that there are many kinds of alpha men and to figure out what subtype isn’t working.
A model that might be useful in this analysis of subtypes is Moore’s archetypes. Each archetype in its full potency can be viewed as a subtype of the alpha male. There are four subtypes: King, Magician, Lover, and Warrior.
The King Archetype
A woman who feels she is a trophy or a subordinate is most like under the influence of the King archetype. Kings are authoritarian and at best authoritative. They are hierarchical in their interactions with others. Kings want followers and subordinates to serve their purposes. Women attracted to king archetypes are often captured by a Cinderella complex (Jung) that can be difficult to undo, as often it is buried in early development. Even women who want to be taken seriously admired for their minds and accomplishments and wanting to be independent find themselves still compulsively drawn to the king subtype of the alpha male, because they have not truly emancipated themselves from the desire to subordinate their beings and be taken care (Cinderella complex). Their attraction to the king subtype seems natural, true, and compulsive, with the result that these women sabotage their adult desires to be treated like an equal, respected, and independent.
The difficulty in resisting the king subtype is more pronounced when also the lover archetype is to some degree present, though subordinate to the king. The king then comes across as very caring
and supportive, but not as an equal but in a maternal and paternal manner (hierarchical). The lover archetype fashions an image of caring and intimacy, but at the service of a disguised king-to-subordinate relationship.
The Magician Archetype
The archetype most opposite of the king is the magician. In rare instances, king and magician are combined, but even they are, generally, not for long. Magicians are creative; kings use creative people. Magicians rebel against hierarchy, desire relationships of equals, and are anti-authoritarian. When the magician is dominant in an alpha male, they are powerful in their “magic,” that is, their artistic or intellectual creativity, but will not be as successful as a king in terms of wealth, followers/subordinates, or building an organization. Kings run kingdoms—their partners serve the kingdom; magicians explore the cosmos—their partners are co-adventurers. King subtypes are very alluring because of the stability and security they provide. But there is a cost: your subordination.
The Lover Archetype
The lover archetype can also be strong with the magician archetype, though in a much different way than the king-lover combination. The lover archetype for the magician is based on equality and is not maternal or paternalistic. A magician wants a companion, not a trophy or subordinate. Both kings and magicians can be devoted lovers, but again in contrasting ways. The king is devoted to his female so long as the female is subordinate and performs the duties he requires, such as sex, management of the house, boat, etc. The magician is devoted also, but unlike the king, in terms of empowering the female. The downside to this desire to empower is that the magician may at times become critical. This criticalness is a sign of respect to an equal, that the equal can handle conflict and change. In contrast, the king tries to minimize or avoid conflict (he wants a stable kingdom) and so is not open but what he really thinks and feels. Kings are always holding their cards, that is, secretive; magicians are transparent about them. Kings are trying to “take care of the little woman,” and so are ultimately condescending. Magicians care but they want to cultivate strength.
The Warrior Archetype
This brings us to Moore’s fourth major archetype, the warrior. Kings generally don’t want their significant other to be a warrior, and if they do, a warrior that serves the kingdom and so the king. Magicians, on the other hand, often incorporate the warrior so they can have the discipline and resolve to carry out their “magic,” while also wanting their companion to be strong and resolute also.
I could go further on about this and discuss the lover and warrior subtype of the alpha subtype, but I think these can be easily figured out.
What could you do?
If a woman is physically attracted to the king subtype of alpha males and this attraction feels compulsive, how does that woman who wants to end that psychological attraction also end the physical attraction?
The most direct but also the most difficult way to do this, is to not trust or follow through on a physical attraction that seems “natural” or “compulsive” or “true,” since that attraction invariably involve the subtype that hasn’t worked out before (insanity is repetition). In short, don’t allow yourself to date the men you are naturally attracted to. That can feel like denial of one’s authentic self, but as argued in another article (Chemistry as Mythology), dogmatic authenticity is not authentic, only compulsive.
Sometimes, the only way we can unlock aspects of ourselves, to evolve and become more authentic, and change compulsions, is to do what you normally don’t do. This is a method of change, breaking automatic patterns, even those physiologically conditioned is called not-doing. Simple examples would be washing your face first on the left instead of the right, if this is what you habitually do, putting on the left shoe before the right shoe. There are zillions of these little habits. The practice of changing them can prepare you to open yourself to the infinite.
Physical Attraction
In physical attraction, not-doing would mean dating alpha subtypes who you are not strongly attracted (there should be some attraction, even if not mildly physical). This would enable you to get to know other subtypes, desensitize your strong attraction to the wrong subtypes, and slowly develop physical attraction to these other subtypes, that you have generally ignored as a possible, future sexual partner or companion. This kind of change happens sometimes in friendships, that overtime become physically attractive, because the person involved sensitizes to what is valued in the friendship and slowly this becomes classically conditioned to the sexual/pleasure drives.
Pleasure is an important factor here, because the pleasures we experience, like emotions, are fluid. Mental pleasure flows into sexual pleasure and vice versa. The pleasures of a friendship—respect, caring, adventure, trust, etc.—become gradually connected to sexual pleasure. Another example of the development of sexual attraction, when it was absent or minimal to begin with, is arranged marriages. The randomness of the dyad often excludes immediate sexual attraction, which is based on history and learning as previously described. Typically, the people in such unions confess that they were sexually attracted to someone else. This someone else may be good or not good for that person, if they had the power to choose their mate. But in an arranged marriage that works, it’s the friendship that initially brings pleasure and then leads to sexual pleasure, so that the relationship is a positive and mutually enhancing one. Randomness here stops the not-so-good physical attraction that is blinding.
Poker Anyone?
On slightly related issue, quietness by women is often interpreted by men as a sign of not being smart, submissiveness, and mysteriousness—all of which can attract the bad alpha subtype. In any case, these men will massively project on the quiet women and feel a pull to be dominant, possessive, etc., though the clever charmers may try to appear otherwise. On way to test this is to experiment with being contrary or disagreeable on something they think you should be doing, thinking, etc.
Another way to test is to play the disclosure game. What I call upping the ante (in poker). Each disclosure by two people often necessitates more revealing disclosure. As you may guess, I personally like this game. It’s downside, is that the disclosures are apt to be interpreted as more intimacy, but this can be a form of confirmatory bias. When disclosing, people often read into and project upon any statements or behaviors the discloser may make. The actively select what confirms what they desire and ignore any information that is contrary. This is also hard to perceive when you’re in the middle of active disclosure. I’ll have to ponder more about how to counteract this. Some of the previous methods may be helpful.
THE FOUR ARCHETYPES OF RELATING:
KING/QUEEN, WARRIOR, LOVER, & MAGICIAN
ARCHETYPES—What type of person are you?
We have mixtures of King/Queen, Warrior, Magician, and Lover archetypes but in different amounts. Always one is dominant. It is rare when all four are quite strong. In general, they are hierarchical in their power and influence, with one most dominant, a second with some development, and the other two with little or no development. A secondary or tertiary archetype is often used by the dominant one to enhance and/or disguise itself. This is typical of a person with a dominant King archetype that is enhanced/disguised by the lover or magician archetype so that females can be more easily attracted and seduced. But once “owned” by the King, the secondary or tertiary archetypes are often abandoned so that the King archetype becomes clearly dominant, much to the chagrin of the now “owned” female.
King/Queen
To understand a king type is to understand everything is about maintaining, enriching, expanding his kingdom. Loyal first to the kingdom and secondly to its people.
Decisive, strong, and self-confident; fatherly
Once won over, you are part of his/her kingdom—another minister, though an important one
Likes managing people/groups
Hierarchical; into ownership
Demands respect of his/her authority
Loyal to others who follow his commands
Autocratic
Fears not being in control or disloyalty of subjects
Warrior
High in Getting Things done through physical or mental abilities
Follows orders, compliant, dutiful, disciplined, self-sacrificing, loyal to the boss
Kings need good warriors; warriors need kings to accomplish things
Fears not having a mission; not interested in ownership
Will leave all relationships if so ordered; relationships are secondary to the goal
Magician/Creator
Transformative, rebellious, contrary, creative, anti-hierarchical, trickster, poetic, sensation-seeker, adventurer
Willing to take high risks for the truth; not loyal out of duty like the warrior but loyal to the truth
Desires equals, not subordinates like the King
Most opposite to the King; against being owned by anyone
Democratic
Not interested in a kingdom but in liberating its inhabitants
Fears loss of independence; guards that
Lover
Other focused, compassionate, attention seeker, collaborative/cooperative
Motherly
Willing to do anything for the perceived benefit of the other
Can be irrationally loyal and subordinant; open to being owned
Fears abandonment
Will do anything for love and romance
Opposite of the Warrior
Comentários