Post: #1

My father is a d-bag who is overly controlling, and as a result he had a couple marriages that failed because of his douche behavior. He gets angry and controlling over trivial things that freaks women out.

The opposite side is, if you're a pushover meek bitch (which most men today are), she doesn't respect you and shits all over you.

What is the fine balance between leading your woman and enforcing certain behaviors vs being a controlling douche who repels her?

I'm having a hard time articulating the exact difference between an alpha that leads, has boundaries, and is a fun dick in a playful way, versus a controlling d-bag.
I think there's a very fine line between the two, and a lot of newbies overcompensate by being a dick over trivial matters. This is particularly relevant with flaking. When I first got into game I was way too hard on girls over things like returning texts and whatnot. What you think is assertive can be really repulsive if not done correctly.

How to be masculine and enforce boundaries without being a controlling d-bag. Any input appreciated.

Post: #2

(02-13-2017 07:19 PM)Disco_Volante Wrote:  I think there's a very fine line between the two, and a lot of newbies overcompensate by being a dick over trivial matters.

I dunno either. I wonder the same shit myself.

But I know this... Every time I've ever smacked a guy in his stupid face at a bar or was just a complete asshole in public, I got laid afterwards.

Not sure why it works. It's baffling.

Post: #3

(02-13-2017 07:25 PM)BrewDog Wrote:  

(02-13-2017 07:19 PM)Disco_Volante Wrote:  I think there's a very fine line between the two, and a lot of newbies overcompensate by being a dick over trivial matters.

I dunno either. I wonder the same shit myself.

But I know this... Every time I've ever smacked a guy in his stupid face at a bar or was just a complete asshole in public, I got laid afterwards.

Not sure why it works. It's baffling.

Girls love violent men. It gives them tingles and is a sure way to show that you are not afraid of controlling the space.

Post: #4

I try to avoid the alpha/beta stuff whenever possible because:

(01-15-2015 07:18 PM)Cobra Wrote:  Thinking too much about alpha vs beta is beta.

I think there are big differences between leaders and controlling assholes.

A leader is going to do more to understand other people's needs and desires because when this is done (within reason) it increases the respect people have for the leader. A leader is going to maintain emotional control when enforcing boundaries while a controlling asshole will fly off the handle. A leader will seek to avoid drama while most controlling assholes secretly love drama. Ultimately, the biggest differences are probably that a leader is emotionally stable and effective while a controlling asshole is not.

Leadership is something that should be talked about a lot more in the manosphere. If you really want to learn something then read a good book on leadership and report back here.

Post: #5

I think the difference between being an alpha male and a controlling douchebag is intent. The douche comes across as needy and insecure, trying to control the woman because he's afraid of losing her. The alpha male genuinely doesn't give a fuck, he states his preferences and doesn't care about how it's received.

Think of saying something and vague as "don't do that". If a guy is controlling and has a scarcity mindset, it's going to sound insecure and turn the girl off. Now think of the same phrase being said by a guy who gives zero fucks. It will be received differently.

It all comes down to mindset. When you have your shit together and tell somewhat what to do, it's received much better than when people view you as a douche.

You need to genuinely not give a fuck. And a leader practices what he preaches. Being 100% congruent does wonders for persuasion.

Post: #6

You want to put yourself first, but without making others to knee down so you can win. You say, lets do this, and if they dont want to do it you go by yourself and do it alone. This is a leader, people want to follow you because you put all of your energy on what you are going to do, not because you force them to do your will. As wi30 said, you want to propose cool things to do, but whilst not giving a fuck if you are followed, you just want people to have fun with you, but its on them, you are going to do your thing either way.

If anyone is interested there is a powerful theory on personalities developed by Timothy Leary, that explains this situation very well. Basically, there are four ways of interacting with the outside world: I'm bad you are bad (omega, we would say), I'm bad you are good (beta), I'm good you are bad (alpha asshole), and I'm good you are good (your alpha leader). He develops it very well, and then adds on this creating a very interesting and powerful model of personality that will help anyone to design his own inside his natural limits. I did certainly changed myself thanks to some of his work, I was a controlling asshole, now I like to think I'm on my way to being someone that my friends look up to.

Post: #7

Omega sounds pretty self aware.

Post: #8

The difference is someone else's opinion.

Some people think I'm a douchebag for smacking my child across the face when he throws a tantrum. Others consider it a good thing.

It's just perception and opinion.

Post: #9

(02-14-2017 12:46 AM)wi30 Wrote:  I think the difference between being an alpha male and a controlling douchebag is intent. The douche comes across as needy and insecure, trying to control the woman because he's afraid of losing her. The alpha male genuinely doesn't give a fuck, he states his preferences and doesn't care about how it's received.

This.

Big difference in being a jerk and being yourself.

Post: #10

A lot of newbies play the "controlling dbag" frame as a sort of fake-it-till-you-make-it trip. They read that alpha men do what they want, say what they want, and make others do and say what they want and they think the way to go about that is to be stubborn and stern and cold with their delivery. That comes across as sociopathic not alpha.

You can make requests and draw boundaries tactfully without being mean about it. Please and thank thank you works for starters. Be playful/teasing. Voting with your attention is another one. Instead of scolding a girl from breaking your rules, just withdraw attention.

Example: girl is texting/facebooking constantly when out with you.

You reach over and drag your fingers across her screen. This is playful, breaks her distraction, and reminds her she is being rude by staring at her phone instead of paying attention to you.

Also wi30 is spot on about mean/asshole dudes are generally insecure and it manifests itself into stubborness and bitterness.

Post: #11

An Alpha leader simply gives 0 fucks. A woman must know that if she upsets him in some way, he'll drop her like a rock and find another female to fulfill his needs. He doesn't NEED to control her behavior because she knows if he is giving her attention then she must be doing something right. Any mishap on her end and she is gone. She knows this.

A Controlling asshole displays neediness by constantly checking up on her and trying to dictate her behavior. She will sniff this out and determine he is weak/beta. He lacks confidence in his own actions and behaviors. Why does he care? Is his happiness contingent on HER actions and behavior?

Post: #12

(02-13-2017 07:19 PM)Disco_Volante Wrote:  My father is a d-bag who is overly controlling, and as a result he had a couple marriages that failed because of his douche behavior. He gets angry and controlling over trivial things that freaks women out.

The opposite side is, if you're a pushover meek bitch (which most men today are), she doesn't respect you and shits all over you.

What is the fine balance between leading your woman and enforcing certain behaviors vs being a controlling douche who repels her?

I'm having a hard time articulating the exact difference between an alpha that leads, has boundaries, and is a fun dick in a playful way, versus a controlling d-bag.
I think there's a very fine line between the two, and a lot of newbies overcompensate by being a dick over trivial matters. This is particularly relevant with flaking. When I first got into game I was way too hard on girls over things like returning texts and whatnot. What you think is assertive can be really repulsive if not done correctly.

How to be masculine and enforce boundaries without being a controlling d-bag. Any input appreciated.

Spend a few years in the military and it'll be obvious the difference between the two. The one who shouts the loudest, threatens the most and cracks the whip the most often is rarely the best leader, and usually doesn't last long. By contrast, being a good leader does not mean winning a popularity contest. If the troops have faith that the leader knows what the hell he is doing, they can generally accept some level of unpleasantries as they are usually not doled out gratuitously. Leaders who feel the need to control everything and flip out over trivialities do not inspire followers.

Translated into game - does your girl get the feeling you know what the hell you're doing? Then you've inspired respect (not fear) and you're doing it right.

Post: #13

^This

Manosphere tough talk doesn't work as well in real life as it does on the Internet.

Example of an alpha leader from real life:

Post: #14

(02-15-2017 03:36 PM)SlickyBoy Wrote:  Spend a few years in the military and it'll be obvious the difference between the two. The one who shouts the loudest, threatens the most and cracks the whip the most often is rarely the best leader, and usually doesn't last long. By contrast, being a good leader does not mean winning a popularity contest. If the troops have faith that the leader knows what the hell he is doing, they can generally accept some level of unpleasantries as they are usually not doled out gratuitously. Leaders who feel the need to control everything and flip out over trivialities do not inspire followers.

Translated into game - does your girl get the feeling you know what the hell you're doing? Then you've inspired respect (not fear) and you're doing it right.

Great fucking point. I hate to reference a movie, but take 300 for a good example. Who was the better leader: Leonidas or Xerxes? One man inspired his men to die for him while the other man had to use whips and brutality for his men to do his bidding.

Post: #15

I think it's a fine line if you are doing either intentionally. Naturals at both are pretty easy to feel out because their behaviour isn't always concious and so by nature incongruent behaviours make themselves more apperent.

A few key differences in being a strong man and good leader and a weak man that relies on manipulation to achieve his goals:

Leading by example instead of leverage and classic manipulation tactics.
Non verbal cues instead of verbal commands (can't tell you how important this one is)
Dedication to achieving goals comes from internal motivations instead of exterior motivations
Disobedience and cooperation is met with appropriate consequence*

*You will find throughout all of human history most people in leadership positions know almost instinctively how to handle disobedience and how to treat people who help acheive their goals. This is a key part of leadership.

With women if you're an "alpha" (hate that term) 9/10 the best thing to do when a girl disrespects you or is disobedient is to withdraw to varying degrees, because simply put; there are many women out there willing to comply. Women have an innate high value but one that refuses to comply (through no fault of your own) is worthless as a mother, homemakier, and partner. You make her complience a necessity because of your value and her being easily replaced.

If you're a needy controlling "beta" you will try (with varying degrees of success) to control a women in an unintuitive fashion by shaping her world view to match yours using various psychological tricks which her mind will naturally reject at first and then come to accept if you're succesful. It works sometimes but the results are usually temporary as it's hard to undo years and years of psychological development.

So when women say "he's so controlling" what they are really saying is "he succesfully manipulated me but i resent him for it". An obedient women would never say "he's so controlling" they would simply act correctly in the first place knowing full well that it's in her best interest to do so.

Post: #16

The alpha leader will be in charge, but not a dictator.

When an issue comes up, ask yourself if it is important, or if it is ambiguous.

The controlling asshole will demand that his way is followed each and every time. The alpha leader gives some leeway on the trivial and ambiguous questions. Who cares if we have pizza or spaghetti for dinner? Let her decide on that. If she asks, tell her your opinion.

Important matters are a different story. Say you disagree on whether you should buy a car or not. Well, you can try to persuade her through argument (rarely works). Or, you can state your opinion, and tell her you will talk about it later on after you do some research or sleep on it. If you still disagree, your decision overrides.

Doing it this way works well, she will remember all the times you approved her trivial decisions, and be more likely to agree with your decision on the more important things without your disagreement becoming an argument.

Post: #17

Alpha leader can be appreciative supportive and caring when she deserves it as well as dismissive critical and distant towards her when it's appropriate.

Controlling asshole is mostly negative douche acting tough most of the time.

That how I see it.

Post: #18

(02-15-2017 03:49 PM)birthday cat Wrote:  ^This

Manosphere tough talk doesn't work as well in real life as it does on the Internet.

Example of an alpha leader from real life:

....wonder why

Post: #19

If you want to be a good leader then the most important quality, from which all others flow, is control over the environment.

This is not something you just do intuitively from day 1 - this is a conscious, planned, meticulous process that over time becomes natural.

Good leaders pay attention to the details that put them in a position to exhibit confidence. This is why if you find yourself in an important meeting with someone who is a real star, every little thing will have been taken care of - their office will smell right (there'll be a percolator going, for example), there'll be pastries, or biscuits for you. Their chair will be slightly higher than your own, but yours will be comfortable and relaxing. All the tiny details go to giving someone complete control of an environment.

A lot of the advice that gets given on 'frame control' and other such stuff is too clunky to be of much use - it requires too much varied and deliberate thinking on the fly, which is impossible to do whilst still devoting proper attention to the real matter at hand. This is why control of the environment is so important, because it sets a frame that is very difficult to break. So, for example, this is the real reason that picking a bar you like, and are liked in, is good for getting laid - it's not so much the social proof of the bartender calling you Joe when you walk in - it's the fact that everything reinforces the idea in the other party's head that you are in complete control of proceedings.

What I would say is that, though this works incredibly well for business, it is not always true that women are drawn to a man who has perfect control of himself and his environment. Women like to see how they will fit in your world. If you world continues to operate seamlessly without them in it, then for some girls that can be a real turn off, and they are actually pretty astute at recognising when this is the case. With girls, it pays to deliberately introduce an element of vulnerability, however subtle. Of course, you're still controlling the interaction by choosing the terms on which you demonstrate that vulnerability, but it should be sincere.

'This guy has no use for me beyond fucking me for his satisfaction' is actually a real pussy killer. Being an excellent leader in business or the military is more forgiving of perceived perfection, whereas with most women most of the time, they need the merest hint of a flaw, or vulnerability, that lets them peak behind the curtain and imagine a world there hidden from view, in which they become the ingénue.

Post: #20

(02-15-2017 03:36 PM)SlickyBoy Wrote:  Spend a few years in the military and it'll be obvious the difference between the two. The one who shouts the loudest, threatens the most and cracks the whip the most often is rarely the best leader, and usually doesn't last long. By contrast, being a good leader does not mean winning a popularity contest. If the troops have faith that the leader knows what the hell he is doing, they can generally accept some level of unpleasantries as they are usually not doled out gratuitously. Leaders who feel the need to control everything and flip out over trivialities do not inspire followers.

Translated into game - does your girl get the feeling you know what the hell you're doing? Then you've inspired respect (not fear) and you're doing it right.

Definitely the best example. Yet this thread is for me another case of "alpha is the answer" aka attribute any and all qualities to alpha. An alpha male isn't perfection on earth (it doesn't exist, right?) and has shortcomings. So please stop answering "be alpha" to anything.

So back to the topic: let me tell you about symmetry in psychology. It's when someone is angry in an interaction, then he makes the other one angry which in turn make the 1st person more angry and so on... When you adopt this strategy (the controlling asshole), people will not be receptive to your message and will league against you because they think you're bad/stupid/etc. That is a bad way to "control" a person.
On the other hand, when you coldly explain to the person why you don't like their behavior (by providing rational arguments, even maybe make a fake smile), they will receive this message tremendously differently. They can't blame you (you're calm, you provide arguments) so they have no choice than to blame themselves: what is wrong with me? Is he right? As a result, they are more receptive to influence, you can control them better. You are the alpha leader. Trust me, I use this stuff a lot...
In addition I agree: alpha leader do tolerate minor inconvenience. The controlling asshole doesn't because his behavior is just another form of neediness: he knows he's fighting a losing battle.

Post: #21

A controlling asshole demands compliance because it stokes his ego, and deep down they usually lack real self confidence. The asshole will demand compliance ALL the time over unimportant things or capriciously.
A true leader demands compliance on things that are important and has confidence that he knows what is important. A true leader will communicate clearly where the line is drawn and be consistent.

It's easier for followers to tell the difference over time, as the asshole discredits themselves and the leader builds credibility. So part of being a leader is knowing the fucking difference between what is important and not ... fake it till you make it isn't what anyone wants in a leader.

Women (on average, varying by individual) like to be controlled up to a point, especially sexually. They will often be drawn to an asshole because he turns them on, but for a relationship things will wear thin, especially if he doesn't bring a lot else to the table. I think women have a hard time finding a man who will be as firm as they would like in certain ways, but not be an asshole and make their life unlivable. They want someone who will tell them what to do in bed, who is man enough to give them some boundaries, but who won't scream at them every time dinner is 5 minutes late, or take a bad day out on them.

That's another asshole identifier. If you are a real leader, and you have a bad day, maybe your boss shits on you or whatever, you don't take it out on the people under your control (assuming it wasn't their fault.) An asshole in a bad mood will bully people under them just to make themselves feel better.

Post: #22

(02-13-2017 07:19 PM)Disco_Volante Wrote:  My father is a d-bag who is overly controlling, and as a result he had a couple marriages that failed because of his douche behavior. He gets angry and controlling over trivial things that freaks women out.

The opposite side is, if you're a pushover meek bitch (which most men today are), she doesn't respect you and shits all over you.

What is the fine balance between leading your woman and enforcing certain behaviors vs being a controlling douche who repels her?

The biggest and probably only real difference is that the controlling man has no control over his emotions. He's swayed by anger, jealousy and other strong emotions. His orders and decision making have no strength nor commitment, more like a reaction to his lack of control over himself.

The leader is different: he has control over his emotions and himself. His leadership is then perceived as fair and just, and his decisions are respected.