Historically, for men to socially progress it required either strength or smarts in themselves, leading to wealth, leading to more partners, whether as official wives, side mistresses, or serial marriages like Henry VIII.

But historically what women needed to socially progress was not strength or smarts in themselves, but to hook up with men who had them. Of course, some strength and smarts help hook up with better men, but ultimately her success was tied to that of her husband rather than independent.

But the combination of strategies meant that, since a man's success is his, he is free to marry up or down as long as his wealth or power sustains. While a woman, whose success isn't hers, has necessarily to marry up. This ultimately leads to men tending to be more polygynic the higher up you go, even with the tolerance of the women involved. It also leads to lower class women having every man at or above their class, which is most men, as possible partners, depending on her strength and smarts; while elite women have a more limited pool of partners - which leads to many of them being sold for political alliances or choosing monastic lifestyles.

So the alpha male and female may coincide in being alpha, but do not coincide in how or why they arrived to an alpha position, will not hold the position for the same underlying reasons and have different strategies to follow both to achieve and keep the status.

However... this is only true as long as there are environmental stressors.

Remove the environmental stressors, as we have done in the West, and now women can progress on their own. Which means they now ALL have less options to marry up and less incentives to settle for seconds. And there you have delayed ages of marriage, the more so the higher up the social ladder you go. While men still can ostensibly choose among any social class equal or lower than their own.