[phkahler]

>> So it's quite possible (but uncertain) that women are attracted to dominance and leadership but not so much to physical violence itself, especially if the women does not think it serves any purpose, or if it shows weakness

Somewhat agreed. Some women enjoy watching physical male violence in various forms and circumstances - particularly if it involves protecting them or their children. Confidence pushed to the extreme ends to look like arrogance. Taking action can look like aggression. Face it, if you're a female and want your genes to survive, who should you mate with? Someone who can make their own way in the world and can defend himself against threats. The undesirable (to others) extreme of that is to leave a path of carnage in your wake (excessive dominance).

>> The thing is that if you are an established "alpha male" either in the hierarchical sense or in the sense that you are self-sufficient, there is little need to engage in intra-group aggression...

There may not be a need for it, but if that's what it took to get established what makes you think someone is going to turn that crap off? See Trump as an example. There's a lot of overlap between the desirable and undesirable traits - so much so that I don't think biological "instinct" is refined enough to tell the difference in many cases.