Get into training animals and you'll find there is no clear dividing line between the dominant or alpha and the submissive individuals. It's all a complicated mix. Let's say individual A is dominant to individual B and submissive to individual C. Now individual C is submissive to individual B. Uh oh we are no longer in a straight line and we can't place C as submissive since they are dominant over our more dominant individual but we can't place them as dominant since they are submissive to our more submissive individual.
Every individual has a mix of dominant and submissive characteristics which leads to some behavior of both. We can try to classify each person by the number of characteristics we see but each person is going to see that individual differently. One woman might describe a man as alpha while another woman might describe the same man as beta. It all depends what traits they think hold a higher value or how they view each trait. It really is a silly way to try to classify people.
A lot of young girls will go after guys that act more like what we think of as alpha. For most of the extreme guys that look easy to place at the top of a dominance heirarchy it really is an act. They look so confident because they are making up for lack of confidence. You'll actually find the most confident, most dominant, and most trustworthy individual whether it be human or animal doesn't really stand out. They look like the submissive beta until someone pushes them or they find it necessary to react. They don't expend effort until they need to because they are actually confident with no need to prove it. Many times what looks like the bottom of the pack or herd of animals is actually the true leader. They just don't feel the need to prove their leadership so are content to watch everyone carry on until they truly need to intervene. Many of what we'd call beta or submissive characteristics are really the result of having true alpha or dominant characteristics.
Is it really at all reasonable to categorise the entire male population of the world - some ~3,353,496,576 people, into these two categories?
I just say this because I don't think I fit into either, nor can I think of any male I know or have ever known who fits into either. These primitive categorisations barely work for animals - and the conscious minds of humans are a lot more complicated than that, so surely dividing the male half of humanity into, ahem, 'alpha' and 'beta' is both somewhat meaningless and a hugely sweeping generalisation?
Or do you more normal people really classify all members of the opposite sex into types 'A' and 'B' and I am the strange one for not doing this?