I’ve always hated the alpha v’s beta personality categorization. It seems so absurdly reductive. People normally have many different strands to their personality. Which ones emerge at any given time depends a lot on context, history and the specifics on a situation. It also leads to ridiculous generalizations where alpha or beta status is equated to things like financial success, education level or social skills.
A good example of that last kind of stupidity can be found in this article arguing that alpha women should marry beta men. It correctly states that the labels can be problematically stereotyped, and then a paragraph later equates alpha status to getting a graduate degree. It also suggests that to marry a beta is to marry beneath an alpha, and finishes by suggesting Meryl Streep and Don Gummer are an example alpha/beta pair. Presumably being a talented actress somehow makes you an alpha while being a successful sculpture is only beta material. I hadn’t realized artistic fields were also categorized this way.
The labels often pop up in D/s discussions, either to conform to the stereotype (alpha as dominant), or to contrast to it. Stabbity has a post talking about that latter type – the submissives who assert their alpha status. I’ve some follow-up thoughts on her post, but I’ll save them for tomorrow. Until then I’ll leave you with an image of a happy couple. Is this an alpha woman with her perfect beta mate? Or is this an alpha submissive taking care of his mistress before heading off to shout at minions while managing his hedge fund? Or is the whole labeling concept a bunch of crap?
I found this via the On My Knees tumblr. I’m not sure where it’s from originally. It looks like a mainstream photograph rather than something explicitly kinky, but I’ve not tracked down a source.