I suppose it's inevitable, but one of the things that I find irritating is the way that men who learn about Game in general, and the socio-sexual hierarchy in particular, immediately going about attempting to rationalize a way that they can assign the highest perceived value to themselves. First everyone's an alpha. Then everyone's a sigma. I have no doubt if some new Game blogger concocted a brilliant new system in which Oompa Loompa was the top category, we'd be seeing all sorts of men fall all over themselves to describe themselves as Oompa Loompas.
Now, this doesn't bother me because I'm determined to put myself forward as a special snowflake and nobody else gets to be a sigma. Sigma, as I've pointed out before, is a less dominant and lower form of ALPHA. So, I'm doing precisely the opposite of what the Oompa Loompas are doing. The reason it bothers me is because it is self-sabotaging behavior every bit as counterproductive as going out and asking your girlfriend's mother how you should treat your girlfriend.
If you're in the position of S, an introvert who hates social interactions and wants to know how to approach women, thinking yourself a sigma is arguably the very worst thing you can do because it allows you to pretend that your failed strategy is the correct one. The sigma can afford to stay in and blow off the world because the hot girl will show up at his door, unannounced and uninvited. You can't and therefore because that's not your socio-sexual rank, you need to comport yourself differently and adopt different tactics.
Men who are socially or sexually dominant, (or better yet, both), can regularly get away with things that deltas can't ever imagine doing. For example, when one of my best friends made junior partner at his law firm, the firm threw him a cocktail party to celebrate. My band was playing downtown later that night and I didn't want to cart around a change of clothes, so I showed up in the ripped jeans and t-shirt I was planning on wearing on stage. In addition to being the only man there not in a suit and tie, I was sporting the only mohawk. My friend introduced me to everyone, most of whom were perfectly pleasant, but when the attractive secretary half-rolled her eyes at my appearance, I took the opportunity to tell her, as we were shaking hands, that I wasn't wearing any underwear.
I said it loud enough for everyone in the vicinity to hear it too. Everyone except her howled with laughter, including my friend's father, who was a top executive at one of Minnesota's Fortune 500 companies. Those who understand game won't be surprised to hear that the next time I showed up at the law firm a few weeks later, still very much underdressed, she was as deferential as if I was a corporate executive wearing an expensive Italian suit. She got the message from their reaction: the normal rules don't apply to this guy.
Does this mean you should start going commando, dressing inappropriately, and ignoring the rules of social etiquette? Not at all. What worked well at one particular time for one specific individual in a certain group of people probably won't work if any of those variables are different. What it means is that you have to know yourself and know how you are comfortable behaving before you can start to stretch yourself and expand your behavioral patterns.
Game is very effective. But you can't expect to use it and successfully imitate the behavioral patterns of higher ranking men if you place most of your effort into rationally justify your existing ones. Delta is not failure. Even omega is not failure. They are starting points.