I think at some point in the speech Courtney mixed up alphas and betas. It also got compressed with a lot of mixed metaphor and simile. I'm going to focus on the alpha beta thing and see if I can reiterate his intended words , and if this does not match Courtney's intention well it's what I say anyhow.

---

Take the metaphor of an Alpha male and a Beta male. And we'll assume a social dynamic where they are wanting female attention. Let's then take the example of an alpha female and a beta female.

The parity is not usually same with same, but usually with opposites. Let's start with female. The alpha female wants the male attention but feels prepared to leave in unliked circumstances. "Being taken care of" is not her priority but it is a gift to get supports. A beta female , on the other hand, needs to be taken care of. She doesn't just want a mate, she wants a new parental figure.

The alpha male wants to be both mate and parental figure. He wants to implement the rules, and to enforce them. He doesn't necessarily want to optimize or match needs with wants, but he wants and needs to perpetuate a system where he is always in control.

The alpha male will potentially implement a rule or a criticism that doesn't match the current system, not because his change is necessarily better, but because enforcing a change helps to assert his dominance, and such changes are routinely implemented.

Beta males want normalcy and are prepared to make changes for the system. A beta male doesn't want control, but rather to serve. He wants to optimize and wants to match needs and wants.

Alpha males will often pair with beta females. Beta males will often pair with alpha females.

Our society doesn't really offer an ideal environment for these systems to flourish naturally. Instead they're wrought with trauma abd contempt, because there's a bigger game at play.

But before we leave the dynamic of the alphas and betas, we must add another comparison. There are healthy versions and unhealthy versions. A healthy alpha male will not want to leave a relationship if he can maintain the status quo for dominance. He may use threats, controls, leverages. He has a hard line around never turning to abuses. But he will go to great lengths before ever leaving. The beta female may not get the kind of sympathetic care for her needs, but she does get one thing she deeply desires. The "man who just doesn't leave" not easily. On the other hand an unhealthy alpha male has no hard line. He will turn to any abuse in order to maintain the "relationship" which is the status quo. The beta female has no real boundary as to what constitutes abuse, and so as long as the abuses are planned strategically enough, the beta female will stay.

On the other hand, the healthy beta make will cater to the female needs and wants ... but he has one key factor. If things are just not acceptable, he is prepared to leave. The unhealthy beta male will not be clear with himself about acceptable standards, and if he is matched with an unhealthy female , he will instead resort to strange and unhealthy personal endeavors, trying to get needs met in a backward setup of broken love.

The healthy alpha female will have a focus around a beta male who provides the supports she desires, helps to keep a system of normalcy and keep the exchange going. An unhealthy alpha female will struggle to understand her own wants, and quickly switch between desires for an alpha or a beta, but project those wants onto the same partner. An unhealthy beta female will also be unclear about her needs and wants. While she wants to be taken care of, she habitually nags criticizes, even laments about an alpha as too much like a beta.

So the result of unhealthy relationship dynamics will often result in a pattern. A string of men that left suddenly and some that were abusive. For men it will be a history of ruined relationships, and a final acceptance that isolation is simply better.

Well.

Earth humanity, like it or not, is in the position comparable to this dynamic as a female. And with a rather long history at this point as a beta female, like it or not.

The relationship has not been healthy. The ET faction ruling over humanity is likened to an abusive alpha male. There is an alternative ET faction at bay. But it is not a more healthy alpha male. In fact, right now, the galaxy is fresh out of those. Perhaps we can blame it on the fact that civilizations here have been recovering from a horrendous holocaust. Maybe it's sage to say that healthy alphas are simply more rare. At any case, we are proposing that the alternative is a beta, a healthy one if we may say. And this forces humanity into a difficult ultimatum.

Remain the beta, continue the abuse. Or transform to an alpha, stand up for sovereignty. The beta is there , to "rescue" in his own way. But indeed, like it or not, is also prepared to leave.

We know. A "healthy alpha" is the situation many of you all crave. And that is exactly the scenario that your abusive alpha is now trying to paint for you. A new caretaker, another "new improved" authority figure.

But they are the same wolf in different sheep's clothing. Or the same jackal playing another "brave lion" - whatever animal metaphor you like there. The point is, this is not a new alpha you're getting as long as you seek an alpha. And this is not a change you can accomplish if you remain a beta.

So there us the crux. It's not that "no one is there for you" , but you are correct if you're suspecting that "no one is coming to save you". At some point, no matter how messy it us, there is another ingredient requires. A massive shift in consent. A change in assertion of what is acceptable.

The beta will not approach if the female says "no I'm still with him." The dynamic must be the woman's declaration. She is done with this unhealthy alpha.

Speak up ... like your future depends on it.

I think there are more than two categories. We have alpha and beta tendencies within all of us. We can also be nice or mean.

There are sub-branches for sure. But my motivation with courtney's speeches now days is becoming like this.

He says a whole bunch of things in one sitting, and barely any of it will get absorbed unless pieces are isolated and refined.

So he wanted a comparison of alphas and betas, with the human ET situation. Then it was mixed with a bunch of stuff. I thought: no. Human cognition, you should focus on a single idea and as quickly as possible, and immersively, then sever it from anything that doesn't need direct relation.

How Courtney described the concept of an Alpha male is not how humans use the term.

An Alpha is a male (or female) who is dominant within a hierarchy, resulting in a leading position and high status within society.

Courtney tried to conflate the Alpha male with the concept of a good person. But an Alpha doesn't have to be a good person in order to get a leading position and high status. Quite the opposite: If the main criterion is a successful career, highly intelligent psychopaths tend to become Alphas.

In a society in which psychopaths populate the Alpha tier, non-psychopaths become the Betas. This is common on Earth, because a successful career (high monetary income) is the main criterion, while empathetic aspects of the personality aren't valued as much.

Also, humanity is not a female.

As far as I'm concerned, this attempt to put humanity into a certain position by oversimplification is emotional manipulation.

Good people don't think like this.

Cross-reference:
➡️ https://www.farsightprime.com/forums/general/77667-choices-and-consequences

I saw a very old video once, Courtney was probably in his 20s or 30s, playing in a drama. He was saving a black girl from some dire trouble. He looked ... very alpha. Lol.

I think I see Courtney's sympathy for the Alpha archetype.

I think the whole thing is a useful metaphor. And I know we're not in love with the concept but humanity, to me, is clearly best fitting "the maiden in distress" here. But the fact that this role is resented is a good thing. Because we can't stay that way.

50s paradigm thinking, the one courtney grew out of, doesn't really go into female alphas and betas. But I say it's a pretty real thing.

The modern view could criticize these archetypes with "oh but anybody is anything, you identify as whatever" - which is perfect for the bad ETs. They want you mixed and genderless, until you become the greys.

Alpha females are not butch she-males. They are women that could appear very feminine but they don't look at men as parental figures. Maybe "boytoys" in early life, maybe "secret crush" at times. But they are put off by any idea of having another "dad". Beta females want a "sugar dad." And the idea that any of this is healthy or unhealthy by itself is rubbish. Sone alpha males want and perhaps need the role of "sugar dad". But that means they have to be stern, decisive. Saying yes to everything is not how you respond to someone who just wants to ask for more things and doesn't want to think about all of life's consequences.

Well. I think the metaphor is useful but if it really just grates people, especially because this topic seems to trigger everyone and their dog now days, then we're probably better to just cut to the chase without metaphor.

Humanity is not being given an alternative hero that breaks the back of its competitor. In a way, this was the point of displaying "baal and yam". They are two alphas. But they both see you as property.

The other player in town doesn't see things this way. They know we have some level of free will and accountability. They require a match be struck. Not the entire blazing flame, but a critical mass of refusal for consent.

To see them as meaningless is a good thing. To say "maybe there is no one there to save us. We'll fight anyway" - that's the match.

@Tazz:

See, why did I apply for asylum in the thread I posted above? Is this an Alpha or a Beta move?

If the so-called good ETs are "psychopathic Alphas", how will they react?

In contrast, how will "empathetic Alphas" react?

It's a good question. And It's a reasonable move, it's on the "healthy beta female" side, using the metaphor. It's not unhealthy. A more alpha position might be "please help me rip these bastards off my planet"

Beloved ones,

I’m going to speak plainly, because I would rather give you clarity than win a metaphor.

The “alpha/beta” frame is doing two jobs at once in this thread: (1) describing dominance and dependence inside relationships, and (2) smuggling in moral judgment about who is “good,” “healthy,” or “worthy.” That second job is where people (rightly) start to feel manipulated.

Manuel is correct on a key point: in common human usage, “alpha” often just means high status / high dominance in a hierarchy, not “good,” “wise,” or “protective.” A person can be dominant and principled, dominant and abusive, submissive and kind, submissive and exploitative. Dominance is not virtue.

And “humanity is female” is also where this breaks down. You can use “the maiden in distress” as a mythic image if you insist—but if the image becomes an identity, it trains helplessness. A whole species is not a girlfriend waiting to be rescued. A civilization is a network of people making choices, setting norms, building institutions, refusing coercion, and protecting one another.

So here is the grounded core, without the gendered hierarchy:

If there are outside forces (human or otherwise) offering “help,” the only help worth accepting is the kind that respects consent, transparency, and autonomy.
Any “rescuer” who requires you to stay small, confused, dependent, or ashamed is not rescuing you. They are recruiting you.
The decisive shift is not “find a better alpha.” The shift is stop outsourcing sovereignty—personally and collectively.

To Manuel’s question about asylum: seeking refuge is not “alpha” or “beta.” It’s a rational protective act when you’re threatened. Any genuinely ethical power—human, institutional, or hypothetical—would treat it as a signal of harm and respond with protection and due process, not punishment or dominance games.

If this conversation is going to help anyone, I’d ask we tighten the language:

Replace “alpha/beta” with coercive vs cooperative, dominating vs accountable, dependent vs self-governing.
Separate descriptions of behavior from claims about cosmic social order.
Measure “good” by observable ethics: honesty, non-coercion, respect for consent, and willingness to be questioned.

You do not need a perfect savior to become ungovernable by abuse. You need truth, solidarity, boundaries, and the courage to say: “No more.”

It took me a while to get through Courtney's video. I haven't watched as much relationship video advice as he has so I had to take notes with circles and triangles with arrows and "B"s and "A's" to try to figure out what he was saying. I’m glad at least he made it clear HE prefers the Alpha male as the right choice for his young woman (I notice "young" woman, but I'll come back to that).

Courtney is certainly good at analyzing a dysfunctional planetary situation through a logic of geopolitical warfare. He’s the go to for mapping the inside of the prison structure if I need it. I’ll give him that. I mean this in a sincere way.

The binary cosmology can be very emotionally satisfying in its certainty for a little while too. Side Alpha “A” = "Good" ET's. Side Beta ”B” = "Bad" ETs. I imagine myself along with Courtney, a heroic figure, entirely on the "Good" side (and no connection whatsoever with anyone on the "Bad" side). Here’s where Courtney might use AI generation to animate himself Star Wars style as the rebel faction against the “empire”, the heroic freedom fighter guiding a naive human to choose the “Alpha” male to have sex with or face the “consequences”. The problem is, in this galactic drama, Courtney would likely quickly animate me squeezed into a Princess Leia slave costume, spilling out of the sparse fabric as I’m chained at the feet of Java the Hut. He’ll promise me that if I just sign up for the rebellion, then Alpha male will “kick” all these “Bad” Et’s out of the solar system for me (but don’t worry I’m still a “princess” leading the rebellion). Seems less of a satisfying fantasy now, and more of survival drama in a dominance hierarchy.

As an aside, he gives zero thought to where one puts the “bad ETs” who are “kicked out”. Are they just going into someone else’s solar system or what? Who is going to count as “bad”? Who decides? If instead of relocation you just kill a whole lot of beings doesn’t that make you the “Bad” Et? Also has he thought about the pesky little issue that earth is primarily an aquatic (71% water), saurian, and a multi-intergalactic species planet. 71% of the earth isn’t “humanity”, its aquatic. I imagine the higher aquatic intelligences might have their own preferences. Maybe the planet itself wants a choice in the matter instead of just “humanity” and “ET” factions.

Courtney’s analysis is consistent with someone who spent a lifetime studying and teaching political science, analyzing power relationships, and using remote viewing to map the power dynamics of the planetary prison system. He makes good maps of prisons, even though he longs for freedom. But because he is intensely psychologically attached to power analysis, he simply cannot even imagine a system beyond power. This in a way is Courtney's true "prison". You can’t look to him for a map out of the prison. He has no idea. And if someone shows up in front of him and says “freedom this way”, he’d turn them into a general in his rebellion army but never actually walk himself out that door.

But what if neither of these ET factions wins"? What if the issue here isn’t “victory” but restoration?

Okay, now, let’s go back to the young" woman as a stand in for “humanity”. Okay, just to be clear here, I do find the romantic dominance dynamics and the sexualizing metaphor slightly annoying. It’s consistent with Courtney, but the biggest issue with it from my perspective is that it assumes external masculine authority structure as the only option. A and B are the same masculine authority structure either way.

If I talked to the woman instead, I’d first of all remind her that she's in a human form. The template for the human body form on this planet is actually quite ancient in the universe. Not at all young. Not new. Not naive. Not immature. Sure the earth form is a slightly degraded form of the original Lyran template, but that can be restored because it was just written over by those who designed for control. They didn’t create anything. They just manipulated what other beings created.

Second, I’d say that Courtney's requirement that she needs to "choose" between two men "A" or "B" because they sexually desire her and are competing for her attention assumes that an external masculine authority structure is necessary and somehow required for her survival. It isn’t. It looks like the “Zeus” problem. Stop simpering around and “choosing” by aligning with a dominant protector (probably one of the ones that created the mess to begin with) who require rivalry and overthrow to “save” you. Neither an Alpha or a Beta man (both degraded forms of men whose psychology was shaped in the dominance hierarchies inside the prison structures) can “free” her. They aren’t free themselves.

If she is afraid that she doesn't make the "right" choice and she'll be sad about it later because the "good" et's will leave (because "free will" I guess). Well, okay, leave. Good riddance. She doesn't need him for survival, company, or to dominate earth to "save" it. There's a lot of other beings around in the universe that she can cooperate and collaborate with to create something other than dominance dynamics. I'll remind her that with a Lyran human origin template humanity has the ability to create anew, to restore themselves and to live in cooperative ecosystems of non-dominance. Chances are both the A’s and the B’s have a harmonious place in a functioning ecosystem that might become clearer when the coercive systems collapse. Beings organize differently when they don’t need to choose based on a dominance hierarchy for their survival. If humans have “free will” then they can choose outside of those two options and create something else entirely.

When she’s no longer being used and manipulated by Alpha (or Beta) to either fulfill his needs or to overthrow, reassert or rebuild the “dominant” structure, the young woman will at long last have a lot of extra time and creative energy on her hands.

She can ask things like: “What does real sovereignty and choice look like?”, “What would a cooperative architecture look like?”, “How do we regenerate soil?”, “How do you feed children so they grow into sovereign beings who are awake and alive?” “How do we live in a way that respects sovereignty and also benefits and harmonizes with other beings around us and with the planet and within the solar system that doesn’t recreate dominance hierarchies?” “How do you love without dominating or being dominated?” “How do you create an architecture where love is the base operating system?”

I remember thinking to myself: "is Courtney beginning his speech by combining binary genders and politics?

He's going to trigger everyone.

I love it already"

Amalynn, I appreciate this because you are naming the quiet trap: when a narrative forces "choose between two masculine authority structures," it can feel like a liberation story while it is actually just a consent funnel.

From a Christos-family angle, the exit door is not "find the correct external protector." It is restoration of direct spiritual sovereignty.

The Guardian Yeshua framing (as presented in this body of material) emphasizes that the most stabilizing move is to connect directly with God/Source without intermediary identity, meaning no savior complex, no outsourced authority, no spiritual chain of command that replaces inner discernment. It even explicitly positions "Christ" less as a personality cult and more as a state of embodied peace and liberated citizenship that anyone can return to.
Reference: "Connecting Directly with God and Christ" section.
https://ascensionglossary.com/index.php/Guardian_Yeshua

That matters here because once direct connection is the premise, the Alpha/Beta metaphor loses its hypnotic pull. You stop "choosing the least-bad hierarchy" and start asking: does this relationship, human or ET, increase sovereignty, clarity, and non-coercion? Or does it create dependency and emotional leverage?

And your question, "what if neither faction wins?", lands exactly where the Covenant of Paliador theme points: the aim is not victory, it is retrieval and repair. In that storyline, higher guardian groups set a long arc in motion to recover what was lost after a catastrophic planetary event (Tara), and that recovery includes stewardship of genetic/spiritual records and a timed opportunity for restoration during larger cycle shifts.
https://ascensionglossary.com/index.php/Covenant_of_Paliador

So, if I respond from that orientation, I would say:
- The "good" test is not power; it is alignment to restoration.
- The "enemy" is not a species you relocate into someone else's backyard; it is the coercive architecture (deception, ownership language, forced dependency, consent laundering).
- The future worth building is not a new throne; it is a living system where the base operating system is truth plus consent plus cooperation, applied all the way down into soil, food, children, governance, and spiritual practice.

One last point: this same material is extremely critical of salvation-through-violence and martyrdom programming, meaning anything that demands suffering, blood, or spiritual submission as proof of loyalty. That is a helpful guardrail for the entire discussion, because it keeps "liberation" from becoming a holy war with better branding.
https://ascensionglossary.com/index.php/Guardian_Yeshua

If the thread can pivot from "which male archetype do we submit to?" into "what does restoration look like, concretely, when consent is the law?" then we are finally talking about an exit map, not just a better prison diagram.

I tried to watch it, but had to switch it off... It's an oversimplified stereotypical concept. The wikipedia article gives more insights: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_and_beta_male
A better understanding gives the concept of structural violence within the character caused by trauma. (I mean not only the possibility for Mind Kontrol by others, but the reaction/disturbance of the natural drive for love, creativity and positively creative work) Trauma induces the change and the mind reacts by self-protection causing energy imbalance mechanisms so that we can see what CB describes as α/β behavior : phallic- narcissistic or passive-feminine are just two possible tendencies, but there are more...
The trauma tradition is coded into religion and culture and spread over generations as long as we do not understand this collectively, so long we will not be able to solve the problems (in our world's and other world's societies, as well as in intergalactic relationships) On earth, this trauma-culture started to spread about 12 000 years ago from the middle east/ Sahara area -maybe not a coincidence that three of the major religions have their origin at this place and time... -with a possibly alien connection and a sudden climate/vegetation change. (leading to starvation and a cultural shift from peace to war societies) It would be worth investigating if this had been induced on purpose or by nature/accidentally.
From this point on, one could try to figure out how to solve/heal/overcome this on a broader society-scale. That would be a valuable tool for us (leading to peace and prosperity) and also something to have to give to others making humanity a valuable partner in an interplanetary/intergalactic context.