Breaking down social groups - Page 2

Wow, I must admit I agree with this.

Hmm.. last summer holiday with my friends I'd say I was M3. This summer, I was ~M1 with this other friend. I've evolved.

these things can fluctuate, it's not like it's set in stone.

this is true until your friends and yourself begin to really appreciate the rest of the world at large and suddenly the dynamic is no longer set on what your little group is doing. things become more a question of where you each personally need to be going and then if the group's will contradicts what needs to be done, you just shirk it and go about your business.

On August 12 2008 05:37 CrownRoyal wrote: Alright baal i just took a shower and I think I can add this to my theory. In times when M1 is absent M2 will no longer disrespect M3. M2 can be categorized in two variations. Someone who always follows or someone that wants alpha glory. In the first case M3 will very often become the "alpha" of the two and actually act as the leader. Should the M2 have higher aspirations in his triangle, he has dibs on being the acting alpha in the absence of the M1. It seems a very unrare occurrence for the m3 to take alpha over the m2. It seems as though M2's are the only ambiguous personality types. People who are generally M2's and are more of the "mancrush" type will always be M2's. Presumably because anyone who can be an M1 would only upgrade to a higher alpha group quickly in a m3 fashion and/or because m3's are only in the 3 spot because they are leeching trying to gain alpha. in short m2's are generally ambitionless and happy with how things are. M1 and M3 have higher goals. Should the M2 be absent from the group the M1 will no longer disrespect the M3 and the M3 will move up to the spot of M2 immediately.

thats so true! I'm usually m3, but when m1 is gone I take his place