SMV Ratios & Attachment

Print

Since I produced the SMP graph last year I have had more than a few earnest readers and irritated critics call me to the carpet about the variables involved in estimating even a rough sketch of the modern, western, SMP landscape. Before I get into today’s post let me reiterate that my SMV chart is an imperfect tool; sexual market evaluation doesn’t happen in a vacuum, I know that, but it is a necessary starting point and framework against which we can better understand social, behavioral and psychological dynamics between the genders.

One of the larger messages this SMV life-overview brings to light is the rise and fall of an individual’s sexual market value according to their age and the personal implications that phase of their life has on affecting that valuation. I originally published the SMV chart with the intent of enlightening men as to what their future SMV (should) will be in relation to women’s faster burning SMV, and the social conventions women, and the feminine imperative, have established in order to derail that awareness to better service women’s sexual priorities and hypergamy. However, since then I’ve seen this chart passed around the manosphere and into outside forums as an example of other related gender dynamics. The chart has other uses than my original idea.

The Ennobled Beta

With this in mind I was debating the idea of secure attachments in relationships with a friend over my summer hiatus. He’s what I’ll call an ‘ennobled Beta’, not necessarily guilty of outright white knighting, but is steeped in his Matrix conditioning enough to conflate a prescribed male role in egalitarian equalism with masculinity. In other words, to him, to be a ‘supportive husband’ ® is to presume a position of absolute equalism in his relationship. Since he subscribes to the feminized notion of an historic condition of ‘male privilege’, generally this means he believes that limiting his inborn masculine nature allows his wife to be “more equal”. To him, real manhood is repressing his innate masculinity (such as it is) so that his wife will feel less inhibited in becoming something more than what a ‘masculine’ society will permit.

Yes, it’s classic Beta Identification Game; nothing I haven’t engaged already in the past decade. And yes, it’s also the classic feminist boilerplate that feminism has bred into contemporary males for over 50 years now. What hit me during this conversation is the presumption of an idealized equalism that can in some way be realized between a man and a woman in an LTR. The reason the topic came up with us was due to his wanting for his wife to be more aggressive with him sexually. He simply couldn’t grasp that his wife didn’t want to take the initiative with him in the bedroom. Here he was explaining the virtues of being a ‘better male’ in his playing fair and even with his wife, yet for all his giving her space to grow, she wouldn’t be the sexual instigator with him despite his equalist expectations that she would feel comfortable being that instigator. In a way he subscribes to the Relational Equity fallacy – he believes she ought to appreciate him sexually because he’s invested so much of himself in ensuring she  feels like his equal.

True Neutral

The problem he’s dealing with is the result of his belief in true gender neutrality. Learn this now, taken to its logical extreme, the end result of true gender neutrality is androgyny. No sexual dimorphism, just simple homogenous androgyny. Fortunately for us, nature abhors homogeny and has always found dynamic ways around the dead ends that the inbreeding of androgyny produces.

My friend’s wife’s sexual passivity (and general disinterest) is one such dynamic. Try as he may, no amount of social equalization will prompt his wife’s biological sexual impulse – in essence he’s attempting  to negotiate her desire with himself.

For all his frustration and inability to accept red pill truths I have to thank him because it was from this conflict that I had a starting point in estimating relationship attachment theory and its relation to SMV.

Roissy once proposed that the strength and security of any relationship rests in the disparity between each person’s sexual market value. While I endorse this principle entirely, I’m going to take it a bit further. As a general principle it works well for the guy wanting to maintain his frame in an LTR, however there’s more wrapped up in that SMV disparity than I think has been explored thus far.

As I began here, SMV doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Men may have an Alpha dominance established only to have it knocked back down after failing a particularly bad shit test. He may rate lower or higher depending on a social status that’s in flux. A woman must find ways to cope with an ever decaying SMV once she reaches her SMV peak and begins her decline towards the Wall. Childbirth and rearing, weight gain, satisfying a security need, and many other factors may also accelerate this process.

What I’m going to do here is propose a general outline for SMV disparity based on the ratio between both sexes. Before you read my outlines, keep in mind the Cardinal Rule of Relationships: In any relationship, the person with the most power is the one who needs the other the least. The overarching concept here is that the person in the relationship with the superior sexual market value will at least be perceived by the person of lesser value to need them less than the other. If it is established by concrete social proof that one person is of higher SMV than the other, it’s usually an accepted reality of that relationship, but bear in mind that it is the fluctuating perception of SMV that has more influence on the attachment and strength of that relationship.

Finally, from a feminine perspective it’s important to remember that Hypergamy is a game of perceptions, testing, confirmations and retesting new perceptions. This process has a pronounced effect on SMV evaluation, which is then influenced by a woman’s own self-perceptions.

1:1

This is the position of Tue Neutral I illustrated with my friend’s situation above. I’m starting here because this ratio is the mythological ideal every equalist will tell you they’re striving for. Be they male or female, what adherents of equal balance fail to consider is that real, sustainable equilibrium in SMV is an impossibility. What every modern woman and gelded male in an LTR will tell you is that they believe they are common examples of that SMV equilibrium. The truth is that their ego investment in that equalist idealism wont allow for the real introspect necessary to accurately evaluate what their true individual SMV really is –both in relation to themselves and the greater whole of society in their demographic.

A 1:1 SMV doesn’t exist. I’m sure there will be naysayers who feel they “play it fair” with their wives or girlfriends, but the fact remains that SMV is always in flux and doesn’t allow for a true, sustainable equilibrium. Hypergamy is an easy example; fail one too many shit tests and your equitable 1:1 ratio slips to 2:1 in a woman’s favor. A man getting to the gym more frequently or getting a promotion in status may be enough to upset that 1:1 balance. There are simply too many variables in a contemporary relationship to take the notion of SMV equilibrium seriously. Furthermore, we must consider the effect that social media plays in women self-evaluations of their own SMV. And this is only one (albeit significant) social distortion that can upset the idealistic equitable balance.

Even in the most stable and SMV balanced pairings, the simple fact that both sexes’ SMV peaks occur at differing phases of life makes the notion of a contented balance laughable. However it is important for a Man to bear in mind that his SMV will eventually exceed that of any woman if he continues to improve himself and grows personally, physically and financially into his SMV peak years. There will eventually come a time when a woman’s SMV will decay to the point that her necessitousness will exceed her value. In other words, due to her fast burn-fast decay SMV, and recognized or not, she will eventually need a Man more than he needs her when he enters his peak SMV phase and she’s declined to the Wall of her own.

It’s during this critical phase that a woman must rely on her man’s socially expected love, charity, obligation and parental investment to maintain his secure attachment to her in the face of an obvious SMV imbalance. As I’ve covered before, women fundamentally lack the capacity to appreciate the sacrifices men make to facilitate women’s reality – and once those facial wrinkles and cellulite can no longer be disguised by makeup or collagen, women will still persist in the expectation of monogamous obligation, in preference to the genuine desire, love, devotion, etc. a man may legitimately feel about her regardless of her wrinkles.

2:1

Roissy has defined this ratio in the past as the golden mean of SMV between the genders – so long as the man is on the beneficial side of it. The most successful, stable and loving relationships don’t result from being equally yoked – they result from a mutually acknowledged SMV superiority of a positively masculine male and his adoring, yet subconsciously anxious, woman who’s up to a point below him in SMV evaluation.

Some guys get to this position by default. Either by genetics, prior hard work or simply being single at the phase of life when his SMV is peaking while hers is in decline, a man can prolong this ratio far longer and far more realistically than the 1:1 idealization. This isn’t to say his SMV can’t be reduced by failing a shit test or by unfortunate personal circumstances, but the durability and resiliencey of his higher SMV affords him more leeway in recovering from these missteps or calamities.

A man need not necessarily be an Alpha cad to establish this ratio, all that’s required is an acknowledged recognition of this SMV imbalance and the appropriate appreciation and adoration from the woman involved. There are plenty of Betas who enjoy (or eventually will enjoy) the benefits of a 2:1 ratio even when they don’t (or refuse to) recognize an SMV imbalance that weighs in their favor.

From a female side a 2:1 ratio is generally what most modern women find themselves dealing with; through realized fact or by self-deluded overestimation of their own SMV, most women already presume they are the party with the higher SMV. These are the naggers, the brow beaters, the women who wistfully to aggravatedly wish their men were more than they are. They crave the SMV imbalance that a dominant Alpha would satisfy, yet through their own ego investments, or due to their inability to lock that Alpha down, must relegate themselves to being the less necessitous person in their LTR.

3:1

While this is a tenable situation for a Man it borders on the unhealthy. Marginal fame, notoriety or an actualized condition of widely acknowledged social proof can make for a 3:1 SMV ratio. These are the Men who other women can’t help but be attracted and aroused by, and other men aspire to be in one way or another. The women they do pair off with are faced with two options: either maturely accept this inequity and rely on feminine wiles (and sexual performance) to create a situation of ‘value added’ emotional investment and secure his monogamy, or accept that she will only be a short term breeding option for him before a woman who’s a better SMV option presents herself to him.

Only the most secure of women in this ratio pairing don’t suffer from an state of passive dread. While a 2:1 pairing may force a women to deal with marginal self-doubt and underlying competition anxiety, a woman in a 3:1 pairing will have to confront the dread of loss that accompanies a less stable pairing. From a Hypergamic perspective, she’s hit the evolutionary jackpot – sexual pairing with a mate she wouldn’t normally have access to. Fat women who garner the drunken attentions of an out-of-options man of higher SMV make for the most common occurrences of a 3:1 pairing. Irrational jealousy and ‘accidental pregnancies’ are not uncommon in this pairing.

I should point out that a 3:1 pairing may also be the result of a 2:1 pairing that lasted into a man’s peak years and bumped him up a point, or more likely, the woman depreciated down a point or more as she hit the Wall.

From the female side, a 3:1 ratio is generally only a temporary condition. Leaving a man who is recognizably a full 2 points beneath her in SMV is really only a formality. Generally this female-side pairing is the result of an extreme circumstance, a particularly materialistic woman or a man who convinced a woman he was more Alpha than he seemed only to backslide into abject Betaness once he mistakenly thought he could get comfortable with her and expected her to love him for just being himself.

It should also be considered that a 3:1 female-side pairing may also be the result of a post Wall professional woman pairing off with the only Beta so intently conditioned in feminine-primary psychology that she would consider him preferable to celibacy.

4+:1

We’re pushing into the improbable here, but these pairing do exist. Your first thought may be the famous celebrity or musician who marries a ‘commoner’, but the more likely scenario is one where a previously more equitable pairing was solidified and one partner decayed so dramatically that this extreme imbalance resulted. It’s easy to find online before and after examples of women progressively fattening  from a trim sexy girl of 19 to a 200lbs+ landmonster of 26. I wish I could say these were outliers, but as all too many bloggers in the manosphere will attest, it’s increasingly common.

Women in the ‘before-and-after’ demographic who find themselves in a 4+:1 are often the most dependent upon the feminine social convention established to delimit men’s sexual selectivity. The Body Fat embracers and the ‘shallow’ men shamers are the most obvious examples.

Other than for the most egregious of gold diggers a sustainable 4:1 balance from the feminine side is a virtual impossibility.


83 responses to “SMV Ratios & Attachment

  • Mr. Grundy

    Your prose style coach is impressed at the augmented limpidity of your prose; this is getting towards the level of clarity of a Steve Sailer, another great modern master of explication. Sailer himself, by the way, touts Pat Buchanan as an even greater explainer.

    (Mr. Grundy wants to see Rollo become internationally known. Many people around the world now can read English, but they need it as clear and simple as the material will permit. And the clearest prose also makes translation easier.)

    ["Prose should be architecture, not interior design." – Ernest Hemingway]

  • Revo Luzione

    As a man in the fat-peak of his SMV range, with a burgeoning career and a commitment to health, fitness, and game–this information feels almost like cheating, as if Rollo’s my blackjack dealer, who watches with a nod & a wink as I extract another pair of aces from each of my sleeves. Life is good, and it is good to be a man.

  • bloody knuckles

    *slow clap*

    Resplendent. I’ve semi-consciously maintained a 2:1 ratio in all my relationships since coming across that roissy breakdown years back…now it makes since how every time I’ve unconsciously dipped into a 3:1 it was time to abandon ship.

  • greenlander

    Great post.

    When is your book coming out?

  • Socialkenny

    Nice analysis and compilation Rollo; although you admitted at the top that you cannot give a next to accurate ratio of the SMV. Sounds logical to me. And the irony is, although this is a woman’s world (sounds crazy but I meant that men are pussies), it’s ironic that a woman’s SMV decreases way earlier than men, while the guy’s sorta increases before the decline.

  • M3

    Everything Revo said above about a man in the fat-peak of his SMV range.

    My girlfriend has shown my picture to all her office co-workers.. who thusly begin to salivate and tell her they’d want to fuck me hard.

    When she tells them some of my many talents in bed, they begin to swoon and ask her when she’s going to bring me into the office to show off so they can ‘meet me’.

    I’m at the true 2:1 ratio right now. I did put in the hard work and was single at the time. My GF, Asian cutey that she is, even she recognizes she’s hitting the age limit. She is very feminine and not a brash ball busting nagger. She dotes upon me and goes out of her way to please me.

    Contrast to my ex-wife whilst married to her, she was the female 2:1. I inflated her SMV by constantly telling her how beautiful she was and how much i loved her, even when she ceased being wifely or trying. My sniveling groveling beta supplicating to her made her feel so far above me in SMV rank, kicking me to the curp to satiate her hypergamy was in fact ‘the logical’ thing to do. She wanted me to be more than her, but browbeat me and emasculated me to the point that i would never reach that state again. Terminating the marriage was the only option left on the table.

    Tho cynically i should thank her. Without blowing the marriage up and chasing the hypergamous dream.. i’d never have found the sphere, learned enough about game, evo.psych and putting into motion the changes i needed to live the MGTOW dream and change my life for the better. And by better i mean being with a cute athletic girl who has the same interests as me, does not challenge me or engage in combat with me, ball bust me or nag me, and has a higher sex drive than me which i am more than willing to endure :D

    Beats sitting on the couch crying that my wife doesn’t love me and won’t have sex with me and being to scared to walk away.

  • lovelost

    you do take time to put your thoughts and when you do it’s a masterpiece.

  • Jeremy

    Yes, it’s classic Beta Identification Game; nothing I haven’t engaged already in the past decade. And yes, it’s also the classic feminist boilerplate that feminism has bred into contemporary males for over 50 years now. What hit me during this conversation is the presumption of an idealized equalism that can in some way be realized between a man and a woman in an LTR. The reason the topic came up with us was due to his wanting for his wife to be more aggressive with him sexually. He simply couldn’t grasp that his wife didn’t want to take the initiative with him in the bedroom. Here he was explaining the virtues of being a ‘better male’ in his playing fair and even with his wife, yet for all his giving her space to grow, she wouldn’t be the sexual instigator with him despite his equalist expectations that she would feel comfortable being that instigator. In a way he subscribes to the Relational Equity fallacy – he believes she ought to appreciate him sexually because he’s invested so much of himself in ensuring she feels like his equal.

    ^^^ This, is what first led me to start questioning the dating world around me a long time ago. I met a lot of women who professed a huge desire for absolute equality in a relationship, but absolutely refused to take sexual initiative. Discord in my thought process over blue-pill did not exist until I saw this conflict. I didn’t immediately start questioning everything, but it was an unresolvable puzzle that directly conflicted with blue-pill understanding. My thoughts about this did not coalesce into outright mental rebellion, but it was the first hint of land on the horizon after decades at sea.

  • sogood

    Lol you idiot, do you even what a ratio is? The number before the colon represents a multiple of the number after the colon.

    So your “golden mean of SMV ratio” would mean that the best match ups are a 10 man with a 5 woman, or an 8 man with a 4, or a 6 man with a 3, lol!

    So a 10 man should be with the barely fuckable, an 8 with not even that, a 6 with a land whale that has a decent face, etc.

    No wonder your major was “psychology”. And it doesn’t seem you learned much anyway. Or maybe you learned too much and it’s clogged up the brain channels.

    Not to mention that this whole line of thinking is retarded. You might as well try to calculate how many angels might fit on the head of a pin. Ratings in the SMP are not just objective because different people look for different things. A slut who’s a 10 to a pua looking for a fuck drops points to a man who doesn’t want a slut, and vice versa.

    “Prose should be architecture, not interior design.” – Ernest Hemingway”

    Lol, if Hemingway’s prose was architecture, yours is more akin to a shitty, one man game of Jenga.

  • Random guy

    This is absolutely brilliant. Still he best writing in the manosphere.

  • treylesnorth

    Just read an article:

    http://m.guardiannews.com/media/2013/apr/12/news-is-bad-rolf-dobelli

    Substitute “news” with “manosphere” and related terms it reads pretty much like typical anti-game, but a good reminder all the same.

    Kinda like this one on Return of the Kings:

    http://www.returnofkings.com/9291/take-a-break-from-the-manosphere

    Sometimes I just want to do whatever I choose and empty my mind of every contradictory opinion I have rumbling around in my head–and rid myself of the need to come up with a reason why I or anyone else did anything (“The Story of Me”).

  • treylesnorth

    …though I suppose it could just be framed as me being Cipher. Maybe should just trust my own judgement of things for once instead of relying on bloggers opinions to confirm my actions… much like we say women can’t go through with a decision without their hamsters requiring confirmation.

    Checkout anytime you like. But you can never leave

  • Saluki

    This is what I’m dealing with:

    “… by self-deluded overestimation of their own SMV, most women already presume they are the party with the higher SMV. These are the naggers, the brow beaters, the women who wistfully to aggravatedly wish their men were more than they are. They crave the SMV imbalance that a dominant Alpha would satisfy, yet through their own ego investments, or due to their inability to lock that Alpha down, must relegate themselves to being the less necessitous person in their LTR.”

    Insofar as her estimation of the SMV ratio drives her behavior, I wish you would discuss ways that the the hustling LTR MAP’er could help his ‘better half’ to see reality in a more accurate way.

  • DM

    Great article. Only issue that I see is that women wildly overestimate their own SMV. Sassiness, career, independence, masculine energy, and ambition do NOT qualify them for mating. One of the greatest benefits of red pill blogging that I see is helping men identify these women as poor relationship and marriage material (contrary to our cultural conditioning).

    This site in particular has absolutely saved me from a life of misery, as the focus on SMV and Hypergamy on Rational Male is the best on the net by a long shot. Entering my late 20’s, women are starting to really throw themselves at me (there’s a strong beta: lock him down!), and without this kind of SMV (and Hypergamy) knowledge, I would be a very high risk for being knocked down to the hapless provider of an alpha widow that will never be happy. Knowledge is power, and it really should be the responsibility of all of us to educate our cousins, little brothers, and other men about these things.

  • Fred Flange, Ivanovich

    The first rule of acting like the Man is do not talk about your acting like the Man.
    Which stands to reason. If you’re only talking it, you’re not doing it.

    This was the lesson I had to learn (unlearn) in order to upgrade myself from Mr. Enlightened Beta, who frankly sounds like every other baffled married schmuck (me included) who luckily stumbled onto Athol’s site, and then to these parts. If I stay super-nice and respectful of her BODY and BOUNDARIES, she’ll read my mind and sex me up by grokking the telepathic message I sent her by way of my covert contract. Paging Dr. Glover?

    Pull this lesson off right, and all your wife knows is you’re more present somehow, more together. Mine would probably tell you, after she thinks about it, perhaps I’m a bit more strident and forward, maybe it’s something to do with my advancing maturity. Sure, whatever. That’s the ticket.

  • anotheronetakesthepill

    The main problem I see is with this :”Roissy once proposed that the strength and security of any relationship rests in the disparity between each person’s sexual market value.”

    It’s not the same your objective SMV and your girlfriend/wife’s SMV as examined by someone neutral than your gf/wife self-perceived SMV.

    I’m starting to think that either you take a girl with self-esteem problems or every girl is going to self-inflate her SMV (by means of beta male attention, social media attention whoring, etc) making her hypergamy go wild

  • anotheronetakesthepill

    Ok … I had not read your post completely when I wrote my comment before. You got everything covered!

  • Marky Mark

    @DM

    I completely agree with you man! As a ‘greater beta’ who has (hopefully) ascended into ‘lesser alpha’ territory in my late 20s (I’m 28) it’s hell dealing with these women who have hooked up with a million guys and expect someone to marry them. I had a couple of girls bring it up over the past few years but I know they secretly are trying to take advantage of me. The way things are today… I think you should only marry a woman if you met her in your early twenties and dated her for 5+ years otherwise you are at risk… and most of them don’t look that good after 27 anyway so theres no point lol.

  • Ed Roy

    Rollo Tomassi is no idiot, but sogood is right above, this post shows a complete misunderstanding of the term ‘ratio’. Instead of…

    – ‘1:1′, it should read ‘even’
    – ‘2:1′, it should read ‘+1′
    – ‘3:1′, it should read ‘+2′
    – ‘4:1′, it should read ‘+3′

    Rollo, if I were you, I’d REPOST THIS ASAP and remove all references to the term ‘ratio’. RATIO IS THE INCORRECT TERM. As ratio is a concept we all learn in high school, this post is HIGHLY EMBARRASSING to an otherwise very smart man.

  • treylesnorth

    George Zimmerman Treyvon Martin shooting trial has an all women jury

    http://m.nydailynews.com/1.1378193#bmb=1

  • Mark Minter

    So you guys in your 50s might be asking,

    “Rollo, how can get me some of this SMV equality of 1:1 or even better, some of that 2:1 with her on the high side?”

    “A 55 year old guy should be hooking up with a 34 year old, both by the above graph and as well as by the old ‘half +7′ rule. But all these women in this age bracket all think they should getting someone the same age as them, or millionaires. And usually they have a wealth of other options chasing them around on their Smart Phones.”

    “I mean, I read “The Game” by Neil Stauss. I been practicing my “Day Game” at the Walmart. I been going to the gym. Ok, well I drive by it every day. And I am about to sign up for online classes in Air Conditioner repair, but the best I can pull of is a fat 4 in this age bracket or a ‘forty 5′ with cats.”

    “But isn’t there another way I can pull down a quality woman that matches up with me on the SMV age chart? A way to pull down a 34 year old HB7 like the chart says I deserve?”

    And I would reply to this guy, “Your fucking doing it all wrong.”

    So what you need to do is fucking comment.

    Make a name for yourself as a comment writer in the Manosphere.

    And don’t half-step here in your comments. No way. Declare yourself to be the NUMBER 1 WOMAN HATER in the internet. Write the most virulent and vitriolic anti-woman comments you can come up with. Get slammed on ManBoobz. Get your stuff re-posted and get some Google links to come up high when your name is searched, “AIrConditionerMan Layeth the Smackdown”, “AirConditionerMan Strikes Again”. Stir up so much shit that it gets back to your ex-wife and she threatens you with court and criminal action if you another word about her.

    And most importantly, be known as one of the most vocal and virulent anti-marriage posters, that you bash every conceivable aspect of the institution, equate it to slavery, say it is the most foolish way a man can spend his life, “the idiocy of married life”. Make your motto a broken record like “Pump them, Dump them, Next them”.

    Then sit back.

    And your attractive 34 year old HB 7 will find you, some how, some way, and she will get in touch with you.

    And trust me, for some strange ass reason, she is gonna want to marry you.

    Go fucking figure women

    Now, when she sends that first message to you, don’t go all goo goo beta on her just because you got a live one here.

    Here, review this for your response. Heartiste’s list of Alpha Text Responses.

    http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2013/05/31/the-best-all-purpose-alpha-male-text-response/

    I am not really sure if the number 1 winner in the poll, “Gay” is good here, but it was the winner, so you could feel confident about that when using it.

    She will probably write something about liking your writing so maybe use one that isn’t one the list

    “Thnx”

    One that I sort of like but didn’t use was:

    “Look bitch, if you’re troll or fucking secret agent from Jezebel then you can just fuck off now”.

    Let me know how that one works out, K?

    Now be quick about implementing this strategy or else it will get used up and tossed on the heap with “Hey, I can only stay a minute, but I wanted to ask you …”

    I mean it should work for you. It worked for me.

  • Kate

    Be careful, Minty. That girl sounds crazy! ;)

  • Mark Minter

    And I think she’s allow following me around.

  • Marky Mark

    Minter has the ultimate alpha badboy game!

  • Marky Mark

    I realized if your a beta don’t get married b/c girl will end up bitter she didn’t get the alpha she REALLY wanted divorce you and try to take your shit… and if your alpha you don’t need marriage to get coochie so either way DONT GET MARRIED!

  • eon

    One definition of “ratio” is “the relation in degree or number between two things”. The two things here are the units of hotness in the man, and the units of hotness in the woman.

    Now the two retards on this thread can go figure out their dumbass ratio.

  • M Simon

    SMV:

    Men can last a lot longer than 70 yrs. And their SMV is as high as their attitude. Well OK it declines a lot. Just not as much as the chart pretends. If you keep your game. Of course run of the mill the chart might be correct.

  • Mark Flowers

    1. Mark Flowers is a true dedicated Christian but a non denominational and non church going Christian, a praying man upon his knees and he gives all credit to his survival to a personal relationship with Jesus Christ as his savoir and protector of him and his loved ones. Mark has to continually break all curses in Jesus Christ’s name, sent by witch craft and the Satanic agenda.

    2. Mark Flowers is a fighter, a man that will never bow to any evil corruption, to DEATH.

    3. Mark Flowers has had the fatherhood of his children stolen by the masons / system / The Australian Government.

    4. Mark Flowers is a survivor of more than a decade of intense murderous Freemasonry Gang Stalking {a term he coined} and raised in the Federal Magistrates Court Parramatter Sydney Australia in 2009 & 2010 whilst defending his rights to father his children.

    5. Mark Flowers has had so many attempts on his life in the process of Freemasonry gangstalking that they are too numerous to list, most have been whilst driving in road traffic accident setups by gangstalkers . But all manner of threats have come against Mark Flowers, One time a sour mason wielding a hammer at Mark’s head got a lesson in respect and kicked off Mark’s property. The police always fail to follow such death threats against Mark Flowers.

    6. Mark Flowers has self-represented in some 60 appearances in the Federal Magistrates Court, the District Court and the Supreme Court in Australia and all with nil formal education, in fact Mark left school at 14 years and first job was in a lumber yard.

    7. Mark Flowers is a Father first, and a former children’s safety film producer, but the dogs of gangstalking were released on him for doing so. Mark has been fighting ever since and will never give in, as the eternity in spirit and fear of God through Christ Jesus motivates him to be fearless against evil.

    If I fall in this good fight it will be into the arms of my saviour Jesus Christ.

    Brother Mark

    http://www.markflowers.org/

  • Immediate

    The ratio thing only seems like a problem if you directly relate a “1 to 10″ scale number to it. I don’t think that was exactly the intent, it was more a relational ratio like eon mentions.

    Didn’t Roissy in his version of the power imbalance decide that a two point gap was the ideal? So if you are an 8 and you want to have a LTR or do serial monogamy then your best bet is a 6 woman. Now, if you really are an 8 male (and some of us can over rate ourselves as bad as women, though sadly many under rate ourselves badly…hence the manosphere) you may not want to settle for sixes. In which case you should be gaming for pump and dumps. But in general the power imbalance as a rule of thumb seems very solid.

    The biggest issue is going to be for guys who are physical fives and don’t have enough assets and game to really boost themselves more than a point. You think the red pill itself is bad, settling for threes has to be a tough one to swallow.

  • Immediate

    Everything M3 said for my personal situation. Leaving behind a lifetime of beta torture at the hands of a BPD harpy and now realizing my massively inflated value compared to her is pretty amazing. And I have this site more than any other to thank for opening my eyes properly. I went looking for message boards first and found So Sauve, which eventually led me here and then to browse the other big names. RM remains the best to me though.

    Now having a girl who lets me lead (and realizing how valuable and actually easy leading is) and finding that being a man doesn’t mean you have to be henpecked and just shrug your shoulders and exclaim how unknowable women are…..well its like I’ve rebooted my whole life.

    I just hope more young men get this information earlier and earlier so they waste less of their life and time than I did. But I almost feel like we are doomed as a gender to screw up throughout our 20’s and early 30’s, to end up either coming to the truth or getting stuck in marriage servitude. There’s some exceptions but bulk of the male population seems to go through it in similar ways. Maybe the manosphere can chip away at this over time, I hope so.

  • sogood

    One definition of “ratio” is “the relation in degree or number between two things”. The two things here are the units of hotness in the man, and the units of hotness in the woman.

    Now the two retards on this thread can go figure out their dumbass ratio.

    Lol you dumbass, when you express the ratio as two numbers separated by a colon, the “degree of relation” is obtained by diving the first number by the second. Did you pass grade 8 math?

    Anyway it isn’t really important. It’s just funny because it shows how far Rollo still has to go before his metamorphosis into the figure of his fantasies – High Brow Professor of Poon – is complete. Mistakes like this just reveal his origins as a beer slinging frat ‘bag taking girl classes and hoping to coast through college without having to think too hard. Gorilla in a suit.

  • BC

    Re: ratio…

    I believe the word some aspies may be looking for is…

    differential

    ±1 differential in SMV
    ±2
    ±3
    ±unicorn oh whoops i meant ±4

    hope that helps kthxbai

  • Generation 21st Century

    “Rollo Tomassi is no idiot, but sogood is right above, this post shows a complete misunderstanding of the term ‘ratio’. Instead of…
    – ’1:1′, it should read ‘even’
    – ’2:1′, it should read ‘+1′
    – ’3:1′, it should read ‘+2′
    – ’4:1′, it should read ‘+3′
    Rollo, if I were you, I’d REPOST THIS ASAP and remove all references to the term ‘ratio’. RATIO IS THE INCORRECT TERM. As ratio is a concept we all learn in high school, this post is HIGHLY EMBARRASSING to an otherwise very smart man.”

    “differential
    ±1 differential in SMV
    ±2
    ±3
    ±unicorn oh whoops i meant ±4″

    This. I was initially quite confused by the descriptions of a male 10 against a female 10, 5, 3.3 and 2.5…

  • jamesarr

    I’d move the female peak to left a couple/three years and the male peak to the right a few more.

  • Kate

    Mark Minter wrote: “And I think she’s always following me around.” I’m just following the leader! :)

    Marky Marke wrote: “Minter has the ultimate alpha badboy game!” He is pretty dreamy :)

    Now since Mark Minter was so kind as to share the secrets of his success, I thought I should write one for the ladies.

    “So what you need to do is fucking comment.

    Make a name for yourself as a comment writer in the Manosphere.
    And don’t half-step here in your comments. No way. Declare yourself to be the NUMBER 1 MAN SUPPORTER in the internet. Write the most compassionate and idealistic pro-man comments you can come up with.

    Then sit back.

    And your attractive 57 year old stud muffin will notice you, some how, some way, and he will make funny replies to your innocent messages
    .
    And trust me, for some strange ass reason, he is gonna want to put a bun in your oven.

    Go fucking figure men.

    Now, when he sends that first reply to you, don’t go all cray cray clingly on him just because you got a live one here.

    Now be quick about implementing this strategy or your marlin could break the line.

    I mean it should work for you. It worked for me.”
    <3

  • Immediate

    So Kate you’re banging Mark Minter?!?!?

  • Adam

    PS — this is not math class, nerds.

  • Ed Roy

    Rollo fucked up on the ‘ratio’ thing and needs to fix it. He looks like someone who does not have a grasp of 9th grade math…

  • eon

    “Lol you dumbass, when you express the ratio as two numbers separated by a colon, the “degree of relation” is obtained by diving the first number by the second. Did you pass grade 8 math?”

    “Rollo fucked up on the ‘ratio’ thing and needs to fix it. He looks like someone who does not have a grasp of 9th grade math…”

    I really hate having to waste time arguing with aspie fuckwits, but these dweebs have fixated on trying to make Rollo seem dumb, when he is one of the smartest writers around.

    Okay, listen up, you mentally “special” people:

    1) Words can be used in different, but still legitimate, ways. You have heard of a dictionary, right?

    2) This is not your remedial math class. Were you admiring your toes for hours and hours, and then lose track of where you were?

    3) Rollo is writing social commentary, and he is using constructs as they should be used, in ways that clarify and explain.

    4) Yes, you can divide the numerator and denominator of a fraction by the denominator, or by pi or e or any other fucking number that you want. But if you are talking about SMV, then you must use the equivalent numbers that match the common understanding of SMV, otherwise you will create a fundamental disconnect and inevitable confusion.

  • M Simon

    eon
    June 24th, 2013 at 1:26 pm

    Well it is not an engineering report that is for sure. But the author talks arithmetic differences (plus one) while touting ratios. It is confusing.

    I wouldn’t necessarily fix it. Its just a blog post after all. But I’d check my premises better next time.

    Me? I do technical writing for a living.

  • joker

    I guess a way to see the dating process is through SMV differentials: you have to present yourself as +3 to pick her attention among other men, then lower it to +2 if you aim for marriage or LTR. For men interested on short hookups, keeping it on +3 is recommended, as this differential seem to be the better context to dump a woman.

  • FuriousFerret

    @Adam

    Shouldn’t we be applauding women bashing nice guys? What better, quicker way is there for men to wake up than for being abused for doing what feminists said to do?

    They are reaching too far this time. They are cooking the golden goose here. The now want men to simply bow down to their desires and lap up emotional/financial support while at the same time not even letting the beta hope for sex. You dun goofed ladies. You take away even the fantasy and it’s over. Even betas won’t stand for that. A good beta orbiter shepherdess always will offer a carrot that’s just out of reach.

  • eon

    “Well it is not an engineering report that is for sure. But the author talks arithmetic differences (plus one) while touting ratios. It is confusing.

    I wouldn’t necessarily fix it. Its just a blog post after all. But I’d check my premises better next time.”

    “Me? I do technical writing for a living.”

    Congratulations!!!!! So you have heard of a dictionary?

    Me? I am nine feet tall and my penis is the size of three beer cans stacked one on top of the other.

    This is neither an engineering report, nor a technical blog post about engineering topics, so using an approach that is not the most mathematically rigorous is completely acceptable.

    Rollo’s use was casual in an illustrative way to tie things together, but still completely in keeping with dictionary definitions, and it was not central to the topic.

    Let me repeat that last part, in case you missed it: ratios, per se, are NOT central to the topic. Rollo could remove them completely, use something else, or even make something up, and NOTHING would change. THAT is why casual, but effective and not improper, use was perfectly acceptable.

    This whole thing started with a pretentious blowhard trying to puff himself up by tearing down a respected writer, using bullshit, and tangential and inconsequential bullshit, at that.

  • Treize

    +1 @ Eon. People trying to semantically tear down Rollo (and incorrectly too) on such a minor, inconsequential aspect of the post are totally not in the spirit of these posts and reader discussions. We’re all about positive enlightenment to our predicament in this age – this self-indulgent ‘schooling’ is pathetic and completely against the communal ethos here.

  • Revolg

    Lot of engineering major hater nerds up in here…

    Better correct this term ASAP!!! it is an emergency rollo… Some retard might misunderstand a free blog post.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    My apologies to the STEM demographic aside, try to think of this in terms of cooking instead of algebra; 2 parts of one ingredient to one part of another, etc.

    I’ll be sure not to use the term ‘ratio’ in the future, and you also have my promise not to use allegorical references to physics, covalent equations, the periodic table or chaos theory.

    That said, I aint rewriting shit.

  • Mr_Grundy

    Rollo, you don’t have to put such limits on your writing (your reply above, of June 24 11:23 pm). A little extra research is usually all that’s needed to make competent journalistic reference to scientific things, so as to satisfy everyone except a few assburger misfits. If you’re working on a seriously science-based idea, it is easy to solicit advice from qualified people (as long as you keep your inquiries brief) or grad students; I’ve written to a few and they are usually completely mature and helpful.

    Science, properly done, is one of the ways of truth, after all. Don’t neglect it, just approach it with proper caution and awareness of your own limitations, and everything will be fine (and the poor assburger unfortunates can scream all they want.) This reminds me actually of a Steve Sailer anecdote; it seems that many years ago he did a post with a lot of philosophical speculation, and a shitload of professional philosophers avalanched him with expert (and harsh) criticism, and he never messed with it again!

    In your case, however, the grown-up math people who read your blog (I’m sure there there must be quite a few) didn’t even bother to write in and criticize because a) they know you’re not a mathematician and b) your points are perfectly clear notwithstanding a bit of inexpert terminology.

    So: If you get taken to task by clearly mature and expert people, that is worthwhile constructive criticism. If the people criticising you are not mature, or have obvious mental/emotional/developmental defects, then you are entitled to pay them very little attention EVEN IF THEY ARE CORRECT. That is because for every aspie shithead that correctly criticizes you, there is a real grownup with the same competence; and if you don’t hear from the grownups, it probably means they see nothing seriously wrong.

  • M Simon

    “This whole thing started with a pretentious blowhard trying to puff himself up by tearing down a respected writer, using bullshit, and tangential and inconsequential bullshit, at that.”

    Well I bow to your superior beer can dick. Maybe you got it confused with your other head.

    I try to get the technicals right to avoid detracting from the point I wish to make. Given your beer can head (pick one) and superior writing skills I guess being sloppy is of no consequence for you. My editors wouldn’t stand for it. I generally avoid such mistakes. Maybe that is why they keep paying me.

  • M Simon

    “That said, I aint rewriting shit.”

    Nor should you.

    BTW I’ll see your chaos theory and raise you a quasi periodicy. I’m fondest of male and female mating connectors. I always like to keep my objective in mind. Even when discussing technical subjects.

    Ratios are different from differences. Objectively.

    Assuming a Gaussian distribution (usually not a bad assumption) a 9.5 is likely to be 10X as attractive as an 8.5. And so on. Rankings are a binning system. Bin 1 is probably 1E6X different from bin 10. Maybe more.

    That said you also see the same thing relative to IQ and mating. A difference of greater than 20 points says that a LTR (Long Term Relationship) is unlikely. You also need to consider the differences in distribution M vs F. Although brains (nerds) are a lot more popular than they used to be. So that helps. Except for LTRs.

  • M Simon

    “except a few assburger misfits.”

    I earn a living being an assburger misfit. It pays quite well if you can get the technical details correct.

    I pity the normals. But sloppy is the norm. Which is why not being sloppy pays well.

    So do you want some guy obsessive about details repairing you auto or would you prefer sloppy?

  • Bully

    I really have no interest in marrying someone that is 1 or 2 points below me – it’s ridiculous on its face. Women are the primary benefactors of marriage and risk far less than a man of their level and yet, they’ll only accept someone HIGHER than them for terms of stability? Where exactly is the benefit for men? I can already STR or serially date 1 to 2 below me. When I bring commitment to the table – which is a sacrifice on my part – what precisely do I get out of doing so?

    Marriage should be 1:1 or even with the woman a point higher. I know hypergamy doesn’t care about what it “should” be, but with more and more men refusing to enter the marriage game, a market correction will have to take place if women want to get married at all. Hypergamy’s hand is forced at the prospect of hitting the wall without suitors.

    Marriage is already a risky and often disastrous deal for men as it is. Women shouldn’t be looking for ways to make it even worse.

    My rant here is mostly academic as I have little drive or incentive to marry anyhow but women are subject to the market just as much as men are. If their demands are untenable then they will end up missing out on what they desire.

  • Ed Roy

    The ‘ratio’ issue is not minor or inconsequential…it is highly confusing and undermines what would have otherwise been a typically great Tomassi post. You have to read and re-read the post and train yourself to translate what he’s saying in terms of +1, +2, +3 ‘differentials’…

  • Immediate

    “Marriage should be 1:1 or even with the woman a point higher. I know hypergamy doesn’t care about what it “should” be, but with more and more men refusing to enter the marriage game, a market correction will have to take place if women want to get married at all. Hypergamy’s hand is forced at the prospect of hitting the wall without suitors.”

    Doesn’t matter, this already happens. Women just settle for a submissive mate a couple points below them and then put them through hell while having affairs on the down low.

  • AP

    Hello Rollo, I have a question about looks. I think I remember you wrote something in your blog once upon a time but I may be wrong. Here is my question:
    When it comes to an attractive body vs an attractive face, do females have a preference? In other words, which one do they place higher importance? I have known guys that have fallen in love with a girl just because of the body. And others have fallen in love with one specific facial (like the girl’s eyes). But what about females? Do they behave in the same way? Does this vary as they approach the wall? Thank you.

  • Yep It's Me

    OK all I can say is “Fuck Me” – that’s just a general comment on spending my first 50 years wearing the wrong colored glasses and seeing everything from a blue tint.

    @Mark Minter
    I like your stuff – and the anger angle is one way to go – keep writing and pulling the good stuff on the free market. I’m just waiting for the Tshirts to come to market with a really cool graphics for “Mark says ‘Pump, Dump, Next’ “. I aspire to be as eloquent as you.

    @Rollo
    Fuck it,..Ratio, Parts, Points, Scale – you got your point across at least to me – Equality is untenable and will fail, a wide seperation is untenable and will fail, a Man behind a woman is untenable and will fail, a Man ahead (but in close proximity) works,

    Now for my real comment – which is probably off topic – but once again, fuck it….

    I married at the age of 31, married a very good looking 26 year old. Although I’ve never been “true” Alpha, as I look at “how I was then” I was at least in my upper range of Beta – and at that time, I lead, she followed. But (everyone has a but), the marriage, the kids, the stress, a few mis-steps here and there, a failed business – and a hugely bruised ego (I know all those are on me), and the little sidesteps down the Beta ladder took it’s toll. I’m not one that hates marriage, or my STBXW – hell, if anything, she tried everything in her limited arsenal to get me to MAN UP. My story is not unique, there are thousands of Men that travel the same path – and some end up reading this blog, or others, and are completely befuddled by their lack of knowledge and understanding about “the way the world really works”. We thought we had a partner in our marriage, we were wrong. We thought we had commitment in our marriage, we were wrong. We thought these lovely ladies would/could do never hurt us, we were wrong.

    Even if this looks like a “poor pitiful me” comment – it’s not. It’s really just a statement of fact. Manning Up is full time job – regardless of your marital status, your looks, your income, your occupation – it is not something that can be “misplaced” for a while. Being a MAN is active and it never stops – if you think you can rest, you can’t. As soon as you sit to rest, some shit will happen to get you going again. Being a real Man is hard work, and is like sprinting a marathon. Add Kids to the mix and now you’re sprinting the marathon while wearing a 200 lb backpack.

    The SMV stuff is interesting – but it really doesn’t matter if you’re not willing to be THE MAN in your own life. Being a PUA / DJ is fun, but without taking notice of your life, your mission, your passion – it’s really just masturbation with external stimulus. Get the MAN stuff right, stay on track, keep yourself and your buddies centered on it – and everything else takes care of itself.

    From personal experience – throughout my life – when I was THE MAN, I had a lust for life – not just women.

  • Mark Minter

    @AP

    Roissy did a piece on this:

    “f a man is presented with a choice between a butterface (ugly face, hot body, everything “but her face”) and a myspace angle (cute face, ugly body), his decision will depend in part on whether he’s down for a short-term fling or if he’s seeking a long-term lover.”

    http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/body-men-vs-face-men/

    The short term fling will opt for the body.

    The man looking for a mate will opt for the face.

    I

  • Mark Minter

    Also I found this while searching for a relevant joke to post in this thread. It’s not really a joke but relevant.

    THIS APPEARED ON CRAIG’S LIST NY

    What am I doing wrong?

    Okay, I’m tired of beating around the bush. I’m a beautiful (spectacularly beautiful) 25 year old girl. I’m articulate and classy. I’m not from New York . I’m looking to get married to a guy who makes at least half a million a year. I know how that sounds, but keep in mind that a million a year is middle class in New York City , so I don’t think I’m overreaching at all.

    Are there any guys who make 500K or more on this board? Any wives? Could you send me some tips? I dated a business man who makes average around 200 – 250. But that’s where I seem to hit a roadblock. 250,000 won’t get me to central park west. I know a woman in my yoga class who was married to an investment banker and lives in Tribeca, and she’s not as pretty as I am, nor is she a great genius. So what is she doing right? How do I get to her level?

    Here are my questions specifically:

    – Where do you single rich men hang out? Give me specifics- bars,
    restaurants, gyms

    -What are you looking for in a mate? Be honest guys, you won’t hurt my feelings

    -Is there an age range I should be targeting (I’m 25)?

    – Why are some of the women living lavish lifestyles on the upper east side so plain? I’ve seen really ‘plain jane’ boring types who have nothing to offer married to incredibly wealthy guys. I’ve seen drop dead gorgeous girls in singles bars in the east village. What’s the story there?

    – Jobs I should look out for? Everyone knows – lawyer, investment banker, doctor. How much do those guys really make? And where do they hang out? Where do the hedge fund guys hang out?

    – How you decide marriage vs. just a girlfriend? I am looking for
    MARRIAGE ONLY

    Please hold your insults – I’m putting myself out there in an honest way. Most beautiful women are superficial; at least I’m being up front about it. I wouldn’t be searching for these kind of guys if I wasn’t able to match them – in looks, culture, sophistication, and keeping a nice home and hearth.

    * it’s NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests

    PostingID: 432279810
    THE ANSWER
    Dear Pers-431649184:
    I read your posting with great interest and have thought meaningfully about your dilemma. I offer the following analysis of your predicament. Firstly, I’m not wasting your time, I qualify as a guy who fits your bill; that is I make more than $500K per year. That said here’s how I
    see it.

    Your offer, from the prospective of a guy like me, is plain and simple a cr@ppy business deal. Here’s why. Cutting through all the B.S., what you suggest is a simple trade: you bring your looks to the party and I bring my money. Fine, simple. But here’s the rub, your looks will fade and my money will likely continue into perpetuity…in fact, it is very likely that my income increases but it is an absolute certainty that you won’t be getting any more beautiful!

    So, in economic terms you are a depreciating asset and I am an earning asset. Not only are you a depreciating asset, your depreciation accelerates! Let me explain, you’re 25 now and will likely stay pretty hot for the next 5 years, but less so each year. Then the fade begins in earnest. By 35 stick a fork in you!

    So in Wall Street terms, we would call you a trading position, not a buy and hold…hence the rub…marriage. It doesn’t make good business sense to “buy you” (which is what you’re asking) so I’d rather lease. In case you think I’m being cruel, I would say the following. If my money were to go away, so would you, so when your beauty fades I need an out. It’s as simple as that. So a deal that makes sense is dating, not marriage.

    Separately, I was taught early in my career about efficient markets. So, I wonder why a girl as “articulate, classy and spectacularly beautiful” as you has been unable to find your sugar daddy. I find it hard to believe that if you are as gorgeous as you say you are that the $500K hasn’t found you, if not only for a tryout.

    By the way, you could always find a way to make your own money and then we wouldn’t need to have this difficult conversation.

    With all that said, I must say you’re going about it the right way.
    Classic “pump and dump.” I hope this is helpful, and if you want to enter into some sort of lease, let me know.

    Brian Wilhite
    Nollenberger Capital Partners
    Corporate EVP/Director of Capital Markets
    101 California St. #3100
    SF, CA 94111
    Direct- 415.402.6010
    Mobile- 415.717.0424
    Aim IM: Bwilhite NCP

  • AP

    @Mark Minter

    Thanks for sharing that. It makes sense. But what about the girls? Do they place the same importance to face vs body as we guys do? What makes THEM fall in love?

  • Yep It's Me

    @AP

    I may get flamed for this, but go read Athol Kay’s book – Married Man’s Sex Life Primer (MMSL). He is a niche player in the Red Pill game (I like his stuff, but he (along with a bunch of “men” on his forum) panders to women too much for my taste on his site). You should be able to figure out the “what happens” and then figure out “how to do it”

  • Kate

    AP: Maybe I can help with your question? Men are looks oriented and women are personality (dominance) oriented. That is why each side faces consternation in accepting that for men personality is not that important and for women looks are not that important.

    I have cared for short men, tall men, average height men. Bald men, short-haired men, long-haired men. Very fit, somewhat fit, not really that fit. Never extremely unfit or very slim. The kind of “look” that is important to women is one of protection and providership.

    As far as face versus body, I feel body is more important. Face is what you’ve got, body is more what you make of it. Strong arms are my favorite feature. A man’s appearance will change in a woman’s eyes depending on how she feels about him. An ordinary man will become the most handsome woman in the world. Many women are probably taken in by the classic tall, dark, and handsome stereotype preference. However, I have often gotten to know someone over time and while initially hesitant about their look have said to myself. Don’t worry about it. Eventually, depending on how you feel about him, he will appear more attractive. And that has always been the case. Sometimes attraction is immediate and permanent, sometimes it is immediate and fades, sometimes it builds over a period of time and is lasting, and sometimes it builds but later reverts. The way you are viewed depends on how you treat her: dominant.

    Hope that makes sense :

  • Kate

    Actually, Immediate, I’m at culinary bootcamp brushing up on my cooking before the big bang :) Evidently, my future life is going to consist of baking bread and wearing lingerie. Oh, its so hard to be a woman! :)

  • AP

    @Kate… hey, thanks for your sincere opinions. Along the lines of the “look” that represents protection to a female, what if I guy has a well built body through training,but his face is a bit on the feminine side (he’s always looked less manly), that is, no strong jjawline, no prominent brow ridgem etc? And let’s say there is a guy who is a bit out of shape but his face is more manly with more prominent features (he’s always looked more manly after adolescence)? I;m gussing the face does too speak out “protection” in a way. Would the body still rule over face?

  • optometrybythebay

    ps hope your bootcamp goes great… learn how do pastas too if you can.

  • Kate

    AP: You’re welcome:) Tough question. How do these men treat me? What do they talk about? I am thinking of two men: one is a beefcake trainer who is a bit of a stereotype “player,” and the other is far less fit but has strong facial features. The trainer has sort of made his body a work of art, but it doesn’t do much for me. The other makes me laugh and listens to my little troubles, is authoritative and I delight in teasing him mercilessly. The second one I consider far more “attractive.”

    ps: Thanks :) I learned to make spatzle!

  • AP

    @Kate. Got your point.

    In my search for more info, I found this info. Check this out if you have a chance. I thought it was very interesting.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2099804/Forget-muscles-men-healthy-skin-attractive.html

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2780675/

    Spatzle heh? You go girl

    as for me…. I am gonna go buy the biggest bag of carrots I can find! lol

  • Kate

    Interesting. Haha. Good luck out there!

  • Zattazar

    “A woman must find ways to cope with an ever decaying SMV once she reaches her SMV peak and begins her decline towards the Wall”

    Does she hit The Wall at age 30 or 35?

  • The Career-Oriented Life and Marriage | Anarcho Papist

    […] Women are, in their early 20′s, at their highest sexual mating value. If she isn’t leveraging that to get herself the highest value man she can, later on she will […]

  • Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez | Growing stronger as the story progresses

    […] social awareness, physical development, etc. Justin looks like a teenage boy, nowhere near his SMV prime. He reminds me of high school days. Selena looks like a woman in her SMV […]

  • Aristotle

    Two suggestions.

    Start an email list for notification upon release of your book.

    Write the book.

  • Pandora’s Box | You So Would...

    […] English. She’s also very socially switched on – she’d even figured out the whole SMV peak vs age disparity of men vs women all by herself (and had been trying futilely to make her female friends, pissing away their youth, […]

  • Leo

    Well , I am 27 , I always looked to this question without cinism , and therefore always was ruthless criticized by most of people whom I discussed the topic. I Must say I agree completely with the women chart… However… The men’s Value Chart doesn’t seem accurate… I believe men’s value reach top at 31-32 and them falls way quicker than that… Several 20 year old women set um 30 as the top age they would date a man… A 40 year old man , FOR SURE , wont have advantage over mid 20s …. ask any 40 yearold man if it is easy to get a woman with less than 30 …

  • Beta Fucks |

    […] that familiarity. Strong Frame control is the lynchpin to a good relationship, ensuring that your SMV is above that of your wife or LTR, and knowing the power this has can keep an Alpha impression […]

  • Preventative Medicine – Part I |

    […] of her life. The most secure, monogamous attachments women will make are with Men they perceive are 1 to 2 degrees above what she perceives is her own relative […]

  • RedPiller

    You graph is incorrect, sir. Women hit the wall right after 23. That is why most alpha men reject 24 year old females

  • Balancing Act |

    […] for a better-than-market optimization. Thus the ideal ‘balance’ is one where there is a greater than 1-2 SMV degree difference between that of a man and the women he spins as plates or considers to become intimate with in the […]

  • Required Reading Units 2.1-2.5: The Rational Male Series | R.P.U.

    […] | Final Exam – Navigating the SMP & SMV Ratios & Attachment | therationalmale.com […]

  • What Is A Recovering Beta To Do? | dcllive

    […] Tomassi of TheRationalMale The Preventative Medicine Series – Part I Part II Part III Part IV SMV Ratios & Attachment – Sexual Marketplace Landscape Final Exam – Navigating the […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,325 other followers

%d bloggers like this: