> "Many women say they want more “alpha” husbands"

That's true, but they are often mistaken. What they usually want is a "submissive Alpha": a man who's strong, powerful and self-assured, but that still caters to her every need.

Suffices to say that "submissive Alpha" is an oxymoron: an Alpha is dominant, i.e. the opposite of submissive. You're either one OR the other (*).

Women wanting a "submissive Alpha" are like the men wanting a horny sex-crazed partner who's also a virgin, prudish and chaste with everybody else. It's crazy :-)

(*) Or, one could be somewhere in the middle: partially Alpha (dominant) and somehow submissive. But in these cases he might be perceived by women as not Alpha enough, and/or not submissive enough.

***

> "A lot of women ... want a man who ... will defer to the woman and give her ultimate veto power."

Again, that's submissive behavior: the opposite of Alpha. An Alpha is a leader, like a CEO who's running a firm: he could be caring and attentive, but he will NOT defer to his employees (in Nature, an Alpha is the “top dog”, the leader of the pack). An Alpha may love you, but he will not defer to you.

***

Looks like most women "want it all": a man with all the qualities. And yet no such man ever exists, not just because humans are limited, but also because some qualities are opposite (like dominant and sensitive).

They have to choose what they want more. They have to choose if they prefer "being the CEO", or "having a CEO" partner.