Socio-Sexual Hierarchy Personality Test (for males only)

[CitizenErased]

All social systems serve the purpose of keeping people "in their place." The lowering of self-esteem is just one of many aspects of the strategy.

Interesting. Well, I'm not a fan of remaining "in my place", unless it's one I decide to be. I find intriguing how, in all aspects, invisible boundaries limit people so much... how much people is attracted to nonexistent, apparent limits. Psychologically speaking, it's worth looking into it.

 

[Pionart]

Delta, expected as much

 

[Luke O]

Delta

You are average in appearance, attitude, and dominance. Women are strongly attracted to Alphas, but Deltas are usually the providers whom they settle down with. They glorify women, but are not entirely at ease with their Delta status (unlike Alphas, Betas, and Sigmas). You are part of the great majority of men out there.

Eh

 

[Mal12345]

Get serious.

I am serious.

 

[Mal12345]

So I changed the gender and did it the same, got Sigma, which looks surprisingly accurate, though I don't know which the theory behind it is. And really, labeling people into stratums, dividing sycophants from guys who haven't memorized Barney Stinson's Playbook is just lame.

Does the test/division serve any purpose other than lowering the self-esteem?

You are already divided into some label, even if it's one of the zillions of LGBTQ labels such as the self-esteem-lowering "cis-hetero" category.

 

[Mal12345]

All social systems serve the purpose of keeping people "in their place." The lowering of self-esteem is just one of many aspects of the strategy.

I'm not following your generalization there. How does this even apply to socio-sexual hierarchies?

 

[violet_crown]

I always found the Sigma designation to be funny. I think the idea of a Sigma is for dudes who know they're not Alpha but aspire to a certain amount of prowess. This test definitely panders to that idea given the results that have been posted.

 

[Mal12345]

I always found the Sigma designation to be funny. I think the idea of a Sigma is for dudes who know they're not Alpha but aspire to a certain amount of prowess. This test definitely panders to that idea given the results that have been posted.

Are you saying that Sigma males seek a partner who will see them as an Alpha?

 

[violet_crown]

Are you saying that Sigma males seek a partner who will see them as an Alpha?

Nah. My point was that--theoretically, at least--Sigmas should be as uncommon if not less common than an Alpha. The should have similar objective qualities to an alpha in terms of attractiveness and prestige, and on top of that, a disposition that makes them disinterested in hierarchy altogether.

To answer your question, though, if a Sigma male seeks a partner that views him "as an Alpha" he is by definition unlikely to be a Sigma. Probably a Gamma, which is what I think a lot of guys who tested Sigma in this thread actually are (and a couple token Omegas). Thinking about this site I may have interacted with one "true" Sigma, or at least he's the only one that comes to mind.

 

[CitizenErased]

You are already divided into some label, even if it's one of the zillions of LGBTQ labels such as the self-esteem-lowering "cis-hetero" category.

1. And how being heterosexual or have any other orientation is self-esteem lowering? It is something given, not something that others put on you.
2. I consider labels as something others "stick" to you, like saying "nerd". If people then decide to address it and believe themselves belonging to a ridiculous stereotype, it's a problem, as I see it. One thing is to say "I'm INTP", which describes me in a general way, and I can learn something from myself, it's something I am not even able to change. Other thing is to say "I'm a loser, I fall under the Omega category" and not only believe it's true, but also believe it's going to be true forever.
3. Considering point 2, I'm not divided in any label, I am me, I don't assign myself any label any other person says I fall under.
4. Regarding the "keeping people in their place", it's clear, like in economy. You have a finite amount of resources. If everyone was rich, the reseources would be finished soon.

I acknowledge there are several hierarchies that rule in society, but I'm not a fan of them. I like this animated short video that illustrates, more or less what I believe it happens when we believe in them too much.

 

[Mal12345]

1. And how being heterosexual or have any other orientation is self-esteem lowering? It is something given, not something that others put on you.

In that respect, I'm just as readily labeled a "cis-hetero" as I am "Gamma" or "Sigma." The former is a label forced on me by the LGBTQ tribe, the latter forced on my by the other tribe. They've all stereotyped me, sometimes against my will, into a category. Doing something against my will is self-esteem-lowering. It's true, I don't have any choice regarding my nature. However, these labels are not my nature.

But, more importantly, they are socially-defined labels seen through various social lenses. The LGBTQ tribe uses its own social lens and a categorization system that is just as valid, on its own terms, as that of the other tribe. Notice that there is competition between tribal labeling systems, as when the resident feminist in this thread immediately rejected the socio-sexual hierarchy of Alpha-Omega males as "garbage" because it excludes the female gender and, probably, because she deems it a product of "rape culture patriarchy" which is "bad" rather than feminist matriarchy culture which is "good."

Self-esteem, while a personal thing, is often defined by one's cultural milieu. In either case above, I am not a perfect specimen, I am not Alpha, and I am not LGBTQ. I am somewhere lower on the male hetero hierarchy. Nothing special, and pretty "lame" from either perspective. So yes, these labels are self-esteem-defining. To be a cis-hetero male in today's society is on the same level as being Black in 19th-century Southern US society. The only advantage to being a Sigma male is that I can thumb my nose at the Alphas sometimes.

2. I consider labels as something others "stick" to you, like saying "nerd". If people then decide to address it and believe themselves belonging to a ridiculous stereotype, it's a problem, as I see it. One thing is to say "I'm INTP", which describes me in a general way, and I can learn something from myself, it's something I am not even able to change. Other thing is to say "I'm a loser, I fall under the Omega category" and not only believe it's true, but also believe it's going to be true forever.
3. Considering point 2, I'm not divided in any label, I am me, I don't assign myself any label any other person says I fall under.
4. Regarding the "keeping people in their place", it's clear, like in economy. You have a finite amount of resources. If everyone was rich, the reseources would be finished soon.

I acknowledge there are several hierarchies that rule in society, but I'm not a fan of them. I like this animated short video that illustrates, more or less what I believe it happens when we believe in them too much.

I'll have to watch that later.

 

[Betty Blue]

I really appreciate your refreshing lack of political-mindedness in a world where supposedly benevolent politics is furthering the repression of freedom, mainly through their nagging and empty, screeching protestations. I prefer my typology to be unpoliticized.

The female gender has an affiliation with a set of social tiers. Tier 1 consists of the girls who would likely make the cheerleader squad. Tier 2 consists of those girls who would likely make it as a flag girl. Tier 3 girls aren't popular enough to be a flag girl, but might be very skilled with the clarinet in the marching band, and this group membership gives them the social satisfaction they need.

Lol, not in my world.

 

[Mal12345]

Lol, not in my world.

That's your reply? Just "Lol, not in my world"?

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Fuck this.

 

[Mal12345]

Fuck this.

Ha!

You posted "Sigma" and then replaced it with "Fuck this."

 

[Bush]

Ha!

You posted "Sigma" and then replaced it with "Fuck this."

I don't blame him. I'd probably have changed my mind and posted "Fuck this" too if I'd posted in an online quiz thread that devolved into bullshit, too.

 

[Mal12345]

I don't blame him. I'd probably have changed my mind and posted "Fuck this" too if I'd posted in an online quiz thread that devolved into bullshit, too.

Of course it did. This is Bullshitcentral.

 

[Betty Blue]

That's your reply? Just "Lol, not in my world"?

Sarcasm and repetition do nothing for me.

 

[Mal12345]

Sarcasm and repetition do nothing for me.

I coulda swore it was mockery, not just repetition. *FAIL*

 

[Coriolis]

The female gender has an affiliation with a set of social tiers. Tier 1 consists of the girls who would likely make the cheerleader squad. Tier 2 consists of those girls who would likely make it as a flag girl. Tier 3 girls aren't popular enough to be a flag girl, but might be very skilled with the clarinet in the marching band, and this group membership gives them the social satisfaction they need.

So what tier is for girls who just don't give a damn, and go their own way, pursue their own interests, and find their own friends outside of schol?