Instigator / Pro
11
1587
rating
182
debates
55.77%
won
Topic
#4691

Resolved: Universal Male Hierarchy is a myth.

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
6
Better sources
4
4
Better legibility
2
2
Better conduct
2
2

After 2 votes and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

FishChaser
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Rated
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
10,500
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Minimal rating
None
Contender / Con
14
1526
rating
65
debates
54.62%
won
Description

Resolution only deals with the wolf archetypes in relation to humans & society.

Essentially Pro argues that this hierarchy spectrum is nonexistent in crowds/communities. These hierarchies exist only in cliques and cults.

This debate is determining the accuracy of “Bro Science.”

Socio-Sexual Male Hierarchy:

Alpha- Alphas are confident, dominant, charismatic, and natural leaders. Highly attractive to women. Alphas are extroverts & highly successful in their careers. They thrive on challenges.

Sigma- The introverted Alpha. Sigmas are confident lone wolves who do not seek social attention. Immensely confident & highly attractive to women as they are mysterious & charismatic.

Beta- Followers of the Alpha. Betas play safe and avoid risks. They lack self esteem and confidence. Betas worship women and blindly obey orders. They are reserved and idealistic.

Delta- The average normal guy. They are hard workers who lack drive & ambition and struggle with attracting women. They are society’s worker drones who don’t believe in self-improvement.

Gamma- They are unattractive, bitter & introspective. Confused with the hierarchy, they fail to follow social rules. Unsuccessful in attracting women and tend to be obsessive lovers, stalkers & narcissists.

Omega- Polar opposite of Alphas, Omegas are Social Outcasts. Mostly nerds, they are needy, clingy and avoided by everyone. Being undesirable & damaged, these social rejects fail to attract women.

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: RationalMadman // Mod action: Not Possible to Remove
>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
>Points Awarded: 3 to con.
>Reason for Decision: See Votes Tab.
>Reason for Mod Action:

The vote was borderline. By default, borderline votes are ruled to be sufficient. However, votes cast against someone during an open feud receive extra scrutiny.

It's immediately noticeable via word search that a vote based on lack of analysis of the definitions of myths vs theories, was not an argument raised within the debate.

The voter acted in such a way to suggest they did not give fair weighting to the debate content.

Any awarded point(s) must be based on the content presented inside the debate rounds. Content from the comment section, other votes, forums, your personal experience, etcetera, is ineligible for point allotments.
https://info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy#based-on-outside-content
**************************************************

-->
@Sting

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: Sting // Mod action: Not Removed
>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
>Points Awarded: 0
>Reason for Decision: See Votes Tab.
>Reason for Mod Action:

Null vote, so meaningless to remove. It would otherwise be problematic had it assigned any points.
If in any strong doubt as you begin voting again, assigning no points and asking for reviews on the RFD is a good way to go.
**************************************************

-->
@Barney
@whiteflame
@oromagi

Votebomber here again

"Betas are not risk-avoidant, deltas are. You don't understand the types. Deltas are the most cowardly, betas will take huge risks for their alpha(s) and allies, willingly."

The definitions were borrowed from a source on the web.
In my argument, I pretty much explained that the definitions for these terms change quite frequently because this typology/spectrum (whatever it is) isn't even a legitimate one.

Horoscopes have more consistency.

Betas are not risk-avoidant, deltas are. You don't understand the types. Deltas are the most cowardly, betas will take huge risks for their alpha(s) and allies, willingly.

I would be willing to do a different resolution that has a fairer wording and/or BoP distribution for Con.

I also think FishChaser explained the underedeveloped thesis to you. Your definitions are extremely biased and degrading even to some types while overflattering alphas and sigmas both of whom have significant flaws.

neither debater defined myth by the end, as far as my skimread tells me

Fishchaser may actually win this if he plays Round 3 correctly.

Pro is making some queerphobic weird ass kritik where one is aan or a failure to be a man as some countercase to alpha and beta typology xD...

-->
@Intelligence_06

There are female versions of all the types.

Also, the ranking discriminates against omega males. It is one thing to categorize, the other to put it in a hierarchy. I mean, have you tried ranking races of people over others? How's that?

Also, the so-called male hierarchy objectifies women, as how it is being described here. In all seriousness, given the amount of overpopulation everywhere and the need for everything else, "women" is not and should not be the top-most priority for all men.

Winston was also the man who starved an entire India because he didn't want to waste money and food. "Masculine".