Alpha Wolves Exist

So I read constantly online that "alpha" wolves don't exist, yet I have watched https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4vFBXOoHs0
this video very clearly shows alpha behavior.

why the FUCK do people claim alpha wolves don't exist? fucking stupid

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Yes it's called the "alpha pair", technically. The idea of an alpha male that is supremely dominant is false, it's a rarity/aberration. The dominance of the alpha pair is their birthright. Their behavior to the rest of the pack can be helpful, benevolent, and playful. Lone wolves can be permitted to join the pack by the alpha pair, and they join because they love and respect the alpha pair, not because they are beaten into submission. They are only dominated when they try to move out of their place without truly deserving it.

    Basically how it ACTUALLY is with humans. The dominance of an "alpha" male is his birthright. Alpha males are adult men with children. More children, more alpha. His willing subservients become his extended family through their shared respect of his success. "earning" it with violence is an aberration and a fragile arrangement. Wolves and humans are quite similar in that way.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    the "muh there are no alphas wolfs, packs r just a family xD" is reddit/deviantart-tier smartassery. Even in family units there is social hierarchy. in groups of wolves, related or not, there is social hierarchy. Some individuals are above others in the pecking order. In the end, the alpha argument is all about semantics.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Just like you were bottom rung in your family’s pecking order XD

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Unironically the first time I've ever heard that alpha wolves don't exist. Where did you hear that?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/b5njx6/til_wolf_packs_do_not_have_an_alpha_wolf_nor_do/ is one example

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        the "muh there are no alphas wolfs, packs r just a family xD" is reddit/deviantart-tier smartassery. Even in family units there is social hierarchy. in groups of wolves, related or not, there is social hierarchy. Some individuals are above others in the pecking order. In the end, the alpha argument is all about semantics.

        You're missing the point. Lizards have status competitions too but they mostly don't organise into permanent dominance hierarchies because its a moment to moment outcome. Nobody thinks wolf packs aren't hierarchical in the sense of seniority but that's very different from saying "le wolf is angry, therefore wolves are the same as my shitty /LULZ/ life"

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          its baffling to me how the word alpha can be associated with psychopathic behavior.
          Just because someone is competent enough to be a leader doest men he has to abuse his followers wtf! Why are americans like this?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Rudolph Schenkel - who first coined the term and described the behavior - recanted the idea when he realized it was all based on captive wolves, and observed that wolves in wild behaved differently.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Captive wolves and wild wolves behaving differently doesn't change the fact that hierarchy exists within packs. Even in wild wolves, each pack behaves differently. There are even wild packs that include unrelated individuals.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          No one a guess hierarchy does not exist.
          What does not exist is the struggle for that hierarchy, and fights leading to a change in dominant breeder pair.
          That struggle only came about from forcing unrelated wolves into close proximity.
          >Even in wild wolves, each pack behaves differentl
          So this would lead an honest person to even further discount some alpha wolf standard.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >a guess
            "argues"

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            So the word 'alpha' can only be used if a battle for the role of breeding pair exists in every single group of an animal species?
            Big doubt.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              It should be changed to avoid confusion with the recanted social structure, as most biologists have done in favor of "dominant breeding pair".
              The problem is the dishonesty you and others show in "familial structure seen in most packs isn't universal, therefore we should use terms and understandings that are observed in even less common occurrence."

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >The problem is the dishonesty you and others show in "familial structure seen...
                Wrong. I think the word alpha can apply to familial structures.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You are allowed to think wrong things.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Nobody says there’s no hierarchy. Alpha is not a term applicable to wolves, there’s a better argument for the term in things like chimps and baboons

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Alpha is not a term applicable to wolves
            It can be applicable. Unless you want to be a dumbass and pretend that the word has a different definition for wolves than it does every other animal because reddit says so.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              It has the same definition, wolves just don’t act in the traditional sense of an alpha by dominating all the weaker wolves through brute force

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                That's not the definition. It never was.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Not really. The dominance models that use the term alpha is better seen in walruses or chimps. Using those terms for wolves that generally organize in a very different way only obfuscates. The only reason to keep it is because people have translated the false model to humans and want to keep it as a form of legitimization.
              The people that talk constantly about "alpha wolves" for some strange reason don't want to identify as "alpha chimp."

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                [...]
                You're missing the point. Lizards have status competitions too but they mostly don't organise into permanent dominance hierarchies because its a moment to moment outcome. Nobody thinks wolf packs aren't hierarchical in the sense of seniority but that's very different from saying "le wolf is angry, therefore wolves are the same as my shitty /LULZ/ life"

                Yes it's called the "alpha pair", technically. The idea of an alpha male that is supremely dominant is false, it's a rarity/aberration. The dominance of the alpha pair is their birthright. Their behavior to the rest of the pack can be helpful, benevolent, and playful. Lone wolves can be permitted to join the pack by the alpha pair, and they join because they love and respect the alpha pair, not because they are beaten into submission. They are only dominated when they try to move out of their place without truly deserving it.

                Basically how it ACTUALLY is with humans. The dominance of an "alpha" male is his birthright. Alpha males are adult men with children. More children, more alpha. His willing subservients become his extended family through their shared respect of his success. "earning" it with violence is an aberration and a fragile arrangement. Wolves and humans are quite similar in that way.

                It should be changed to avoid confusion with the recanted social structure, as most biologists have done in favor of "dominant breeding pair".
                The problem is the dishonesty you and others show in "familial structure seen in most packs isn't universal, therefore we should use terms and understandings that are observed in even less common occurrence."

                So yeah, just semantics about the connotations of what alpha means like

                the "muh there are no alphas wolfs, packs r just a family xD" is reddit/deviantart-tier smartassery. Even in family units there is social hierarchy. in groups of wolves, related or not, there is social hierarchy. Some individuals are above others in the pecking order. In the end, the alpha argument is all about semantics.

                says

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    THEY EXIST!!!!!!!!!!!

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *