Sex, Lies and Statistics.

iamaten

Ok I’ll admit it, I had originally intended to go a bit off brand and write a take down piece about Aunt Giggles’ ludicrous post last week about how my infamous SMV graph wasn’t statistically viable, but the ABC 20/20 hit piece that never aired on Friday had the lion’s share of my attentions. To call that post flimsy would be an understatement, but when her site traffic starts heading south consistently enough she always resorts to taunting the manosphere to increase views and comments she’ll only delete. It must be a lot tougher a gig for her now that the HuffPo owns Hooking Up Betas and she’s expected to drive site traffic for revenue regularly. Gone are the days of the 1,000+ HUS comment threads when you’re only interested in hearing your own voice.

The abject stupidity of Susie quoting a single, unverifiable “PhD in statistics” comment on Dalrock’s site (from April of 2011 no less) to build a post refuting sexual market evaluation should be enough to tell the story about HUS’s commercial rebranding; not to mention Giggles’ desperation for viewership in an already saturated demographic. In other words, when your rebrand is essentially 17 Magazine for the 55+ female demo, you’ve got your work cut out for you. Advice for you Suz; go back to pretending to be red pill — there’s a hundred other bloggers on Jezebel, and a hundred HuffPo ‘psychologists’ who’ve been doing your schtick longer and better than you.

Print

All that said, I can’t help but recognize the nerve that my SMV chart has struck throughout the internet. I’m not just talking about the manosphere proper here; from recognized psychology sites (generally for comparison) to BodyBuilding.com, this chart is easily the most linked-to picture from Rational Male. Whether it’s about refuting its accuracy or comparing how my instinctual understanding of SMP valuations gel with more scientific studies, that graph has become a benchmark, or at least the starting point, for a better understanding of comparative SMV over the course of a subjective lifetime.

A lot of that original post’s intent gets misconstrued, usually as the result of bruised egos still invested in blue pill social conditioning, but also women who are understandably threatened by the prospect of having their long-term sexual strategy chronologically laid bare for men to prepare themselves for. I’ve restated this repeatedly, but this graph was never the result of some scientific analysis, rather it was the result of observation and correlation. And I daresay (even to my surprise) that my graph lines up scarily close to most ‘statistical’ studies.

Nonetheless, Aunt Sue’s plea for site traffic prostitution made me aware that I should address some of the most common criticisms of the Tomassi SMV graph. So lets start with ‘Doctor’ Kelly’s assertions:

Those graphs are wrong because, with a fixed number of people in the world, equal between the sexes, you have to scale the curves so that the area under each one is the same. E.g. the top valued man is not a “10,” ever. He’s some relatively lower value scaled by the fact that men’s sexual prime lasts longer. Why is this, for the non math geniuses out there? Because if there are 50 men who are 7.5′s, and there are only 30 women, then men’s actual score and actual value on the dating market is downgraded because he can’t just choose a 7.5 and take her. He is downgraded by competition in the market.

You can read Kelly’s entire comment at Dalrock’s, but her analysis is fundamentally flawed for the same reason the 3 year old OK Cupid graphs are flawed (or statistically limited). This flaw is the assumption is that SMV evaluation is in anyway relatable to whom a person is actually pairing off with in the short or long term. As I’ve stated many times before, “wants” got nothing to do with it. Desirability, and peak sexual market value (and capitalizing upon that peak) have nothing to do with monogamy – however this is exactly the context I would expect from solipsistic women relating any and every detail of the SMP to how it fits into a feminine narrative. Though it might be a tall order I’d love to see a study done of how women’s menstrual cycle influences their short term breeding with who they pair off with in long term monogamy.

This was from a couple of comments he made on the Curse of Potential:

…with regards to the SMV graph–are you saying a 40 year old guy is gonna have an easier time picking up a 22 year old girl (at her SMV peak) at a bar than, say, a 27 year old? I dunno if I’m reading it correctly, but it appears to show a man of 40 as having almost twice the SMV as a man of 27, which doesn’t sound right to me. Almost all the hot young chicks I know are with other, young (maybe couple years older) douchebags, not forty year olds (or even 38 or 35 year olds). I mean, unless you’re Leonardo DiCaprio or something…obviously there are exceptions, but–even outside my circle friends, when I go to the beach, the movies, bars, etc. I don’t see a lot of young girls with way older guys, as your graph would suggest. Advising us to wait till we’re in our late thirties to settle down, and promising we’ll land 22 year olds if we keep up our Game, seems like bad advice–not to mention, you’re giving a lot of single dudes in their 20s false hope–like, hey, can’t pick up a girl at 29? Just wait till you’re 40! They’re gonna be all over that. Girls definitely hit the wall harder, and sooner, than guys, but if men really peaked at the age you say, then–again–most, or at least a sizable minority, of the hottest, youngest chicks would be with them, and they’re not.

SaladDays misunderstands the premise of men’s potential here. One of the most common criticisms I get, especially from disgruntled women, is Salad’s observation; “as a mid-20’s girl, there’s no way I’d ever be attracted to some older guy.” Once again, pairing and mutual attraction has nothing to do with SMV, and especially so when a woman is experiencing her peak sexual market value. The feminized-thinking presumption here is that like should attract like. The 22 year old SMV peaked hottie should be attracted to and interested in settling down with the 37 year old, in-shape, potential maximized, Game-aware man.

SaladDays continues:

If SMV is indicative of one’s ability to attract the most desirable members of the opposite sex, then presumably those in the upper echelons of SMV would want to pair with other, equally sexy mates–and, according to the graph, we infer that the hottest 23-year old girls will generally hook up with 38-year old men.

And, as much as I would like that to be true, 27 years of experience tells me otherwise. Girls that age don’t tend to date men that old (there are exceptions– they have father issues, or the guy is really wealthy & some girls dig that, though they’re certainly not my type).

I believe it was Aristotle who said the best years to marry were 18 for women and 38 for men. In a vacuum, this might be an idealized situation, but the mistake is comparing female peak SMV with male peak SMV. A woman of 22-23 has nothing like the benefit of life experience a potential-optimized man of 38 will have. The comparison shouldn’t be made between peaks, but rather within the peak SMV span between the sexes. Even Aunt Giggles concedes that when polled, most women will say they want to marry between 27 and 30 years of age. Conveniently this is exactly the point at which men’s SMV is (should be) on its ascendancy and women’s SMV drops to an equitable level.

What’s ironic is that for all the handwringing about how a female 23 year olds should or shouldn’t be attracted to older men, no one has anything to say about 28 year old women being attracted to or wanting to settle down with men of 36-38 years old. They titter and giggle about the Half Plus Seven rule while it’s advantageous to their sexual strategy in their phase of life, but only insofar as it benefits women’s sexual pluralism:

When the age ratios of the ½+7 formula are strategically favorable to the feminine sexual strategy, the response by the feminine is one of enthusiastic embracement. Once that ratio progresses to the point it becomes a sexually strategic liability, or even the source of anxiety, the response is one of scorn and shame for men.

When a 28 year old woman declares she’d like to marry an older man, her intellectual and financial status equal, we applaud her for her prudence, but when a 38 year old man declares he’d like to marry even a 27 year old woman to have children with he’s accused of ‘trophy-bride’ hunting and is scared of the Strong Independent Woman® of his own age.

The point is that SMV, in as rough a form as I illustrate with the graph, is that monogamy or even desire has little to do with actualized SMV. Hot, 22 year old coeds with big boobs will always sell more beer than comparably hot 32 or 42 year old women. What gets lost in the translation is that SMV for each sex is determined by the opposite sex, not what that sex would like it to be for themselves. An SMV peaked 22 year old has so much opportunity to capitalize on that peak it becomes distraction. She’s not (as) interested in monogamy with a 37 year old SMV peaked Man, because she has very little motivation to pair off with anyone during this phase of life, much less having the life experience to know a great long term catch when she sees one.

However, when a woman is properly motivated by a more pronounced need for long-term provisioning (be it emotional, financial, etc.) and begins to acknowledge her decaying SMV and lessened capacity to compete in the SMP (i.e. the impending Wall) we conveniently see 27-30 year old women preferring and pairing with men who are, or are just, experiencing their SMV beginning to appreciate. This is a pretty remedial lesson when you consider women of this age’s popular frustration in finding and pairing off with men they deem “their equal”. This is really just a euphemism for ‘man who can provide long term security’, but I’m focusing on the mechanics of the SMP here.

While it might be a popular concept to think of cougars as women looking for idealized, younger, lovers, the reality is one of women seeking men of equitable maturity, and certainly the same, or preferably more, means and status than herself to support her idealized lifestyle. At 27 and older women are motivated to seek the Man who’s realized his potential most fully, while men of 37 who’ve become Game-aware and have in some way capitalized on their slower burning SMV are still attracted to the youth and physicality that they were in their 20’s. The question isn’t about who’s SMV is making them more acceptable for pair-bonding, it’s about which sex’s motivation takes priority when their SMV is peaked and the phase of life the other sex finds themselves in.


126 responses to “Sex, Lies and Statistics.

  • The40yearoldredflag

    Well done. Im there now and loving it.

  • Senior Beta

    That sure didn’t take long. You know red meat when you see it. Would like to see you weigh in on the 20/20 fiasco. Matt F must be worn out by now.

  • BC

    Hamsters gotta hamster

  • Carlos

    What is the 20/20 piece you’re referring to?

  • donalgraeme

    Another great post Rollo.

  • Rusty

    Thanks, Rollo. That post almost made my head explode…

  • Tampa

    I’m currently banging a pretty hot 27 year old blonde. Probably one of the hottest girls i’ve banged. Funny post.

    Me: 35, making 165k, no kids, in decent shape, full head of hair, 5-11.

    Your analysis is pretty spot on.

  • Ras Al Ghul

    60% of women have “daddy issues” and as the single mom’s increase there will only be more.

    In my experience, 26 plus (though you can pull younger) seems to be the sweet spot for pulling women as you get older

  • threeLegDog

    55yo and recently jettisoned the 50yo wife, who was withholding sex and having affairs.

    having the time of my life right now! Yay SMV curve!

  • YaReally

    Field experience says your graph is rock-fucking-solid dead on. No defending it necessary. Anyone who disagrees with it hasn’t opened their eyes and looked around.

  • Mike

    Rollo you are my hero

  • A Man in Asia

    Out here in Japan land, nobody cares except older women.

  • Jack

    55yo and recently jettisoned the 50yo wife, who was withholding sex and having affairs.

    having the time of my life right now! Yay SMV curve!

    What age are the girls you are going with? I’m curious.

  • orion

    Rollo,

    if I understand you correctly. your graph does not describe the SMV in full, it shows the shift from short term strategies of young women to long term strategies of older women.

    A liitle hyperganaut that is a 6 can get a drunken roll in the hay with a male 9, maybe a STR with an 8 and a still somewhat uncommitted LTR with a 7.

    When it comes to marriage though, even a 7 means pushing it though.

    Now, as women get older and more relationship oriented she must face the reality that she is not quite the hot commodity she once thought she was.

    Meaning, the more she wants out of a man the stronger his bargaining position becomes,

    That means however that your graph not so much describes raw sexual appeal but in part the shift from a hook up market to a marriage market with everything in between.

  • hoellenhund2

    > In other words, when your rebrand is essentially 17 Magazine for the 55+ female demo

    Not exactly, IMO.

    The core demographic of HUS can be described as:
    – belonging to roughly the bottom 60-70% of the female socio-sexual hierarchy
    – engages in ONSs and casual sex with more or less frequency, got burned more than once
    – prefers serial monogamy and the delaying of marriage
    – is in college or has just graduated
    – single
    – has a disproportionately high chance of being nonwhite
    – increasingly jaded and bitter due to her inability to elicit commitment from the men she’s sexually attracted to
    – self-declared non-feminist or even anti-feminist, but de facto feminist
    – psychological aversion to the Red Pill
    – of average or below-average knowledge of the current SMP

    Walsh is shrewd for a female blogger. She knows young women are increasinly averse to old-school sex-positive feminism. But she also knows they want none of the harsh truths of the Red Pill. So she incorporates enough Manosphere wisdom into her posts as to keep her distance from Jezebel and the like, but not so much as to start alienating her female audience. She also makes sure her message is, by and large, aligned with the tenets of modern cafeteria feminism. This provides her a place in the MSM. She’s basically pushing Game 2.0.

  • hoellenhund2

    My prediction is that she’ll keep occasionally criticizing the kind of rabid feminists that are high-profile but pretty much intellectually discredited, just to remind her readers that her site is not the carbon copy of Jezebel.

  • Vi Nay

    I’ve always gone along with the SMV graph in the main. I’d add a couple of points, some that were touched on from other links:

    1) The SMV, for men, is definitely based on potential rather than absolute. That is, most 30+ year old men do not reflect even close to the physical potential they could attain. Due to their accustomed mentality (fear of being alone) of settling down with women early and having the stress to deal with what goes with it – financial, work, kids – they are way past their physical best. The better resources and job he will likely possess would not make up for the more accepted and younger competition of a less wealthy man in his mid to late 20s, when striving for the hot 23 year old woman.

    2) Women like Susie take such disgust towards the reality (or potential) of the SMV because they are interested in the same men who are peaking in their 30s. The problem with women like this is that not only do they see a good looking man, but they also view his highlighted personality, charisma and resources to match. This attracts a woman, even up to 40, towards men of this kind. They foolishly and naively believe high calibre men in their late 20s or 30s need more than a pretty female face, and are more interested in a woman’s’ lower maintenance and more appealing persona. Men in this category do want other metrics, but an honest man will always tell you his predilections are heavily weighted to her hotness, and hand in hand youthfulness. If you ever date a woman in her late 20s who finds out about your reputation fin dating younger exes, the hostility and anger can be quite amusing.

    So in essence, a younger woman of 23 would, in 8 or 9 cases out of 10, pick the man nearer her own age. I can’t deny this. But she would pick a high quality older man who has maintained (or enhanced) his physique and facial features over nearly all guys her own age who are run of the mill (as most of them are). Needless to say, all things equal, if the majority of metrics were of parity then she’d take the younger guy.

    So, by enlarge, there aren’t many 38 year old men with hot 23 year old women because they can’t offer them enough to eradicate the perceived negative stigma that women may feel due to a 15 year age gap. But if he can bridge the visual gap (look much younger than his birth date), and offer other desirable factors, she will not refuse with a moments hesitation. And we haven’t even mentioned game, and the knowledge to how women work, in all this.

    If many men had their time again, they would wait longer to endure the rigours of settling down early with an average woman who now looks far worse.

  • thegreatshebang

    I’m in my early 40’s but women have said I look 24-34.

    Game ON!!

    Thx Rollo for the SMP graph. BTW women from their teens to 23 (peak SMV) from poor socio-economic backgrounds and broken homes do seek out men in their mid 30s to 40s. But of course the Jezebel writers only discuss their own personal view and don’t study ALL women.

  • Donttreadonmatt

    I think the graph illustrates men’s rational evaluation of both female and male SMV potential. To attempt to draw a graph illustrating female evaluation of SMV would have 14 different axes, with each axis variable and dependent on another, maybe throw some differential equations in there, and it would wind up looking like some pink and blue Rorschach test – i.e. whatever they feel it is in the moment, which can be manipulated by a game aware man.

    Men determine female SMV, but they also determine their own, through hard work, confidence, wisdom, humor, etc. We can’t just hit the gym every once in awhile and be pleasant like a peak female in her peak years. Even just understanding and knowing that you improve with age increases your SMV.

    I’d also say that the graph shows male tolerance for putting up with female bullshit. A man will put up with a lot of bullshit to bang a young hottie, especially when young and at a lower SMV himself. As a man increases in age and SMV, the less bullshit he puts up with, except with the hottest of hotties.

  • deti

    Here’s the main point of the graph to my mind, and the thing that men and women need to grasp. In general, this graph accurately portrays the general trajectory of the sexual market value of the average man and the average woman.

    The average woman’s SMV rockets upward and peaks in her late teens or early 20s. At its peak, her SMV then begins a steady and rapid fall. At some point, that average woman will hit The Wall. It is to her advantage to lock in a man at her SMV peak. It is this truth that Susan and her commenters will not accept and will not face.

    The average man’s SMV starts out in high school in the basement (heh) and increases somewhat in his early 20s. He plateaus out during his 20s and then it rises again around 30. He peaks around 35-37. His SMV declines, but that decline is generally slower and more gradual. The average man can maintain some SMV until he is around 50 before it really begins falling off. It is to the man’s advantage to lock in a woman (if he wants to do that) when his SMV is highest, in his mid to late 30s.

    Is it possible that the female SMV decline is more gradual? Sure. Does that mean the average woman is advised to put off marriage past her SMV peak? No.

    Is there a wide range of ages at which women hit The Wall? Yes, absolutely. I ‘ve seen some women who at 23 had already smacked into it. I’ve seen one non-celebrity woman who at 48 still hadn’t hit The Wall. However, most women in their 40s who have not yet had their dates with The Wall are celebrities, on nutrition plans, and work out six hours a day.

    That having been said, the average woman will hit The Wall somewhere between the ages of 27 and 33, give or take one or two years.

    What’s going on here is that Susan does not want to acknowledge that one of the main reasons it’s a good idea for women to seek early marriage is because most of those women will not be able to attract higher status men as they age. And the reason for that is because as they age, they themselves are losing sexual market value. These women are not as attractive or as valuable as they were when younger.

    And that’s a truth that Susan and her commenters do not want to face.

  • biff

    Well, I stuck up for HUS here once a few months ago, before everything was moderated there, more or less on the theory that those who aren’t against us must be for us and because Susie seemed to have some red pill knowledge.

    Wrote a pretty level headed response to Susie’s post, referencing your graph and some thoughts. I don’t completely agree with everything you’ve written about the graph (e.g., I don’t necessarily disagree conceptually with having areas under the curves being equal), however, I wanted to politely point out that men in fact do prefer women in the late teens to early 20s and that men are programmed to want a woman who can have multiple babies not just one (which is why 27 isn’t as attractive as 22).

    Anyway, my post never made it through, apparently. Sometime later, Susie said she was keeping a lot of unhelpful comments off the site.. I guess disagreeing with the author is no longer permitted, particularly if it might be offensive in any way to any women.

    Lesson learned for me.

  • Team-Red

    ‘Potential’ is key here. The graph is obvious relative as each individual needs to assess their own value in the SMV at any given stage of their life. Outliers are always involved in statistics, people seem to forget that. So naturally if an outlier views the graph from their own perspective they can call bs losing sight of the study at large. Generally speaking, the graph is quite accurate because women are valued by looks and men by status, success, and confidence. It only makes sense.

  • hoellenhund2

    Re: biff

    I’d say roughly 80% of men and 95% of women in this world have absolutely no desire for meaningful and honest discussion/debate about anything, much less the sexual marketplace. The large majority of human beings in general have no real intellectual curiosity in them. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that – it’s just the way the human race is. Susan’s ruse is that she claims to belong to the 5% whereas she actually belongs to the 95%. And that’s not right.

  • hoellenhund2

    > The SMV, for men, is definitely based on potential rather than absolute. That is, most 30+ year old men do not reflect even close to the physical potential they could attain.

    I’m pretty sure the same applies to women. As far as I can tell, most young women make little or no effort to raise their own SMV and realize their full potential. They don’t bother to stay thin, work out, eat healthy, keep away from harmful practices like drinking and smoking, dress well etc.

  • nick42983

    I spent 6 months in Poland last year and the dating landscape and perception of SMV seems much different to me. California girls in their early 20s are not thinking of marriage (unless they are first generation Americans or immigrants). In Poland it’s common for girls this age to get married and have 2-3 children by their late 20’s. I also saw and met couples with at least a 10 (even 20) year age difference.

    This line in the article struck me the most, “she has very little motivation to pair off with anyone during this phase of life”. I think this should be qualified as applying to women indoctrinated with heavy doses of feminism from an early age, namely in America and western Europe.

    If guys want to maximize their SMV potential I think they’re wasting their time on American and other western girls in their early 20’s. Of course there are exceptions, but even the exceptions will be influenced by their environment. I’m 30 now and assuming I get married in the next 10 years, it will not be to an American girl. My recommendations are Eastern Europe or Asia, given the femininity of the women and traditional roles that they are overjoyed to play. If you don’t travel to these areas then seek out these women where you are.

  • Obsidian Files

    @RT:
    KA-BOOOOOM! You have truly outdone yourself, sir.

    I can’t believe this sort of thing is actually being seriously debated; all it takes is one good eye and the commonsense God gave a billy goat to see how things go down out here on these SMP streets. Any Man who takes care of himself and makes something of himself, while also possessing a bit of Game, can pretty much run the table. I say this borne out of experience – I know what it’s like to have a live-in girly when she was 19 and I was in my mid-30s. And could do the same thing right now, if I wanted to.

    As a matter of fact, Rollo, and anyone else reading along: if you run up on another of these Bitter Blue Pills talking smack about the graph, all you need say to them is two words:

    Black. America.

    Tell them to spend some time there, and let their own lying eyes be the judge. As always, we’re the canary in the coalmine.

    Keep on keepin’ on, Rollo!

    O.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    I didn’t included it in this write up, but one thing that really bothers me about Suz bit is this assertion:

    2. Fertility declines very gradually between the ages of 27 and 35.

    In a study of 782 couples:

    They found that women between the ages of 19 and 26 with partners of similar age had approximately a 50 percent chance of becoming pregnant during any one menstrual cycle if they had intercourse two days prior to ovulation. For women aged 27 to 34, the chance was 40 percent.

    3. Fertility declines more dramatically after 35.

    Even then, female fertility hardly goes to zero:

    For women over the age of 35, the probability dropped to 30 percent.

    Notice how the male sexual value begins its precipitous drop at around 36, after declining gradually for five years. Not much difference.

    She knows this is flagrant, potentially damaging, bullshit, but posts it because it makes good copy for her rebrand and her ignorant girl-world readers will eat it up. I say it’s flagrant bullshit because she knows better and has posted about it in the past:

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/12/15/relationshipstrategies/the-grim-beeper/

    And that was around the same time I wrote the Myth of the Biological Clock:

    http://therationalmale.com/2011/12/02/the-myth-of-the-biological-clock/

    That sure didn’t take long. You know red meat when you see it.

    @Senior Beta, well at least you can take comfort in knowing your comments wont be censored here.

  • John

    I agree with all of it.
    I am 32, cancer survivor and currently in danger of having a recurrence.

    My fiance is 23 and even with my medical history, she wants to getting married young and have 2 kids before she’s 27.

    Why is she taking this chance with me? I assume because I look 25, physically in shape and have money and she seems to understand the SMV.

  • HanSolo

    I think there are (at least) two ways to think about SMV. One is to simply in terms of a 1-10 rating of the woman’s looks and I think this is how the term is often used. She’s an 8 or she’s a 6. And women (perhaps restricted to a certain age range) would probably populate some quasi-bell curve like distribution, with the most in the 5-6 range and declining numbers to both sides (5.5 is the mean value of a 1-10 scale, where 1 is the min; (1+10)/2).

    The other way is to think of how valuable sex with a given women would be to you. This reminds me of a post I believe I saw at heartiste on how sex with a looks-8 woman would be 5 times (or some factor) more valuable than with a looks-7 woman. It is in this fashion that I can make sense of Rollo’s graph above.

    Clearly, the typical woman’s looks rating doesn’t usually get cut in half in going from 23 to 30–an 8 in looks doesn’t become a 4 in looks, unless she gets really fat or something. More typically, the 8 at 23 might decline to a 7.5 or a 7, assuming she doesn’t get fat. Let’s assume she reaches a 7 in looks. For me, I think that the 8 in looks is probably at least 2x as desirable to have sex with than a 7 in looks, all else being held equal. So that is how I make sense of the graph. The woman’s looks didn’t get cut in half but by declining say a point in looks makes her half as desirable to have sex with. This doesn’t mean that she wouldn’t be or isn’t still highly desired for sex by most men; just much less than when she was at her peak look of 8.

    Each man will have his own function of looks and it won’t just be a straight line; perhaps for men that have only gotten with female 3’s, there’s litttle marginal value in going from hypothetical sex with a 7 looks woman to an 8 since both are so far out of reach and would be highly prized. Meanwhile, for a top male who can easily get 8-looks women, the relative value of a 7-looks woman might be less than half as much, only 5% as much to him, so low in fact that he wouldn’t even touch her.

    I think that some confusion over the graph results from some people interpreting the Rollo graph as saying that the woman’s looks are cut in half (though he does point out that she can still be highly beautiful even as her looks have started to decline) from 23 to 30, instead of the meaning I get out of it in that by declining by a point or so a woman provides maybe 50% of the sex value she would have when at her peak.

    It would be interesting to see if there is any correlation with price charged and looks of prostitutes. Last night on tv I saw a program about crack and heroin whores who looked like about 3 and 4’s in looks and were only charging $20. Meanwhile, hotter women are charging several hundred.

    Thoughts?

  • HanSolo

    Sorry for not removing the word ‘to’ from my 2nd sentence. It should read:

    “One is simply in terms of a 1-10 rating of the woman’s looks”

  • BuenaVista

    I had an interesting experience with the Half Plus Seven algorithm last week, which you have to be older to have. I’ve known a woman since she was 19; I am 18 years older. We have cycled in and out of amorous, sexual, and even speculative LTR/marriage conversations. She has always had very high SMV: airline pilot, athlete, long and lean, very good with men, big personality.

    She’s hitting the wall now at 37. Actually, I would say she hit it two years ago, but hey, I’m in my 50’s, so whatever. (Theory: when does a woman hit the wall and realize it? That day she gets a puppy and starts posting endless updates on PuppyLove on FB.) Anyway, as the transport aircraft that is her life is starting to lose power, she’s looking again at me for that long, safe runway on which to land. Which means in the last two weeks I’m getting the nude selfies and invitations to romantic weekends again.

    Here’s the strange fact, and I would say that the sex with her previously would rank in the top three experiences of my life: I’m no longer attracted to her. Some of it is physical — she needs to cut 20 pounds — and some of it is behavioral (see above: dogs are just like children, or something), and some of it is moral (two years ago she threatened me when I cancelled a weekend). Half-plus-seven would seem to have predicted at least the physical side of this dis-attraction. We were at that numerical intersection five or six years ago, when indeed I might have married her. Now it’s gone. My overriding emotion today? Relief.

    Oh, and when I declined a weekend on Nantucket last week, she let loose a barrage of contemptuous texts, generally along the lines of I’m a pale pathetic shadow of my former physical self — this from a woman who had sent me boob shots and full frontals earlier in the day, and was cooing promises of love rejoined. I probably deserved some of that; I did indicate that I preferred to date women who didn’t appear to be approaching my size.

    To Rollo’s post, perhaps this anecdote serves the point that HUS rejects: that an SMV curve reflects what men want, not what women believe men should want. This insight consistently evades most American women with whom I interact. If they didn’t evade it, and consistently trot out counter-examples (“My much-younger trainer thinks I’m hot, therefore all men my age (or younger) prefer sassy women just like me”) that don’t mean anything, they’d have better results. I’m attracted to some women who are much older than a peak female SMV woman, and I’m attracted very much. I would say they are distributed at a ratio of much fewer than 1 in 100, though. And these women know that they are great-looking but unable to compete with a 30 year-old on looks alone. This would seem to prove, not disprove, the insights provided by the sequential attractiveness curves.

    I have to say I’m pretty shocked by the change in tone over at HUS. SW was kind and thoughtful in blog-based and private communications with me. I learned a lot over there for a while. So I assume this is a brand-positioning thing, or at least I hope it is.

  • Stingray

    On some level, everyone knows this graph is true. They may not be able to (or want to) overtly explain it, but the anger that is thrown at it shows most people at least unconsciously see it’s truth.

    For those who don’t like it, conflating men’s attraction cues with women’s doesn’t help in the least.

  • Obsidian Files

    @Han:
    I think you hit on something that is rarely discussed anywhere – the very real reality of the variability of Male orgasm(s), which is rooted in the attractiveness of the Woman in question. A lot of people – and this includes professional researchers and the like – are under the assumption that, because most Men can bust a nut fairly easily and with most Women, Male orgasms don’t need to be studied.

    But every Man here reading this knows that there ARE differing levels to busting that nut. And that’s completely correlated to the hawtness of the chica in question – or, to put it another way, the Hotter the Chick, the Harder the D*ck.

    There have been studies done on other animals in this regard, where the males have been observed to bust much larger nuts when copulating with much more desirable females than when they mated with lesser desirable ones. In fact, the Coolidge Effect is linked to this, to some extent.

    I say all this to say that I agree with you, and think the variability of the Male orgasm plays a huge role in this as well.

    O.

  • Obsidian Files

    @Stingray:
    BOOM!-the Truth, does hurt, don’t it?
    ;)

    O.

  • BuenaVista

    HS, I totally agree that the scale is linear, but attractiveness (SMV, MMV) is non-linear — maybe logarithmic. There’s a huge, almost incalculable (to me) difference between difference between an MMV 7.5 (these are women I could call up today and marry tomorrow, in many instances) and a MMV 9 (I’ve known two, and you don’t call them up and expect anything for tomorrow). The rudimentary scaling disguises the non-linear nature of attraction and value.

  • Morpheus

    I don’t completely agree with everything you’ve written about the graph (e.g., I don’t necessarily disagree conceptually with having areas under the curves being equal),

    Biff,

    There is absolutely NO sound, logical, mathematical reason the areas under the curves must be equal. That is just made up gobbledlygook

  • Obsidian Files

    @BV:
    Yo, the chica you’re dealing with is an A1 Psycho. Dump her with the quickness.

    Pronto.

    O.

  • HanSolo

    Obs, that would certainly be an interesting way to study female SMV! lol

  • Obsidian Files

    @Han:
    LOL, it would indeed; but really, do we need “studies” to confirm this? Just about every Man here (and those ladies reading along who are brutally honest about it) knows what I’m saying is true – the hotter chicas you got with you more than likely bust a much stronger nut than those lesser gals you played with. I’m just saying.

    This is why I’ve always Aimed High, like the Air Force. I value my climaxes too much to be busting in/on/around a lesser gal. Again, I’m just sayin.

    O.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Actually Heartiste had a post about the evolutionary function/necessity for Beta men to produce higher sperm volume due to lower rates of sexual instances. I’ll see if I can find it, but the logic is that betas produce more sperm because they have more riding on fertility with less sexual frequency.

  • BuenaVista

    Morpheus, I think that if one is controlling for attractiveness, a valid model samples the two cohorts equally. So the underlying populations should be equal. It doesn’t matter to me if they are not in the graph, because it’s more metaphor than a backtested, double-blind research result. As metaphor it rings the bell.

    O, no worries. I’m naive but not that naive.

  • HanSolo

    BuenaVista, if we assumed that every 1 point step up in looks made her 2x as valuable then we could write her SMV as the following equation, 2 raised to the power of her looks:

    SMV = 2^looks,

    and for simplicity I’m not putting any constant in front of the 2. SMV would be an exponential function of her looks, or her looks would be a logarithmic function of her SMV.

    Same thing for for MMV 1-10 rating and her actual value to the man. Like you said, what we term 9 in MMV has far more utility than being 20% larger than 7.5.

    Of course, the simple formula above doesn’t hold over all scales for a given man because below some threshold, say the boner threshold, she has basically no appeal and could even hold negative, repulsive value. Likewise, far above his threshold and ability to get, the marginal utility could be very small in going from a looks 9 to a 9.5.

    So the utility that a man gets out of increments in looks likely follows somewhat of an S-curve shape. At the lowest levels, below his boner threshold, the utility would be near zero (or even negative), going along at a flat or very low slope. Then as the boner threshold is reached, a woman’s sexual utility enters a steep slope increase and then as his hot-enough-to-marry-and-be-happy-with-her-looks threshold is passed and left behind the slope of utility then becomes less and less steep.

  • HanSolo

    Rollo, related to your point on higher sperm levels would be how a lot of men will cum quickly if they get with a hotter woman because they are programmed to know that they better cum quickly before some hotter or stronger guy comes and kicks him out or she changes her mind halfway through.

  • HanSolo

    BV, having underlying “equal” populations still wouldn’t lead to the conclusion that the area under the SMV curves of men and women should be equal. It’s not like either men or women have a total amount of SMV fuel that can be “burnt” at a high but short-lived rate or at a lower but longer-lasting one.

    Looking at the more simple variable of looks, one simply would measure how good a woman looks (perhaps as voted on by a group of 1000’s of men every month or week or whatever) over time. More elaborate experiments could be imagined to determine how much the men actually would value sex with her.

  • Obsidian Files

    @Han:
    “Rollo, related to your point on higher sperm levels would be how a lot of men will cum quickly if they get with a hotter woman because they are programmed to know that they better cum quickly before some hotter or stronger guy comes and kicks him out or she changes her mind halfway through.”

    O: Boom – I’ve long thought this to be the case, just from/on the intuitive level; I mean, think about it, from an EvoPsych 101 POV, it makes perfect sense what you’re saying, and would explain the whole “premature ejaculation” thing – maybe it is indeed a “quirk” in the Male evolved sexual psychology software that prompts males to bust a nut with a desirable female quickly, for precisely the reasons you cited. Again, researching such a thing academically, especially if the results are indeed in line with what we’re saying, would be Chernobyl-explosive, LOL. Hence why there is no such studies in existence on the topic…

    O.

  • DeNihilist

    Deti, gotta disagree there. Turned 55 this summer, yeah I let myself go somewhat after 42, but was not fat, being a tradesman, kinda hard for that to happen. Have gotten back on the program, lost 20 pounds and am working out for tone. The looks, smiles and approaches I am getting from younger women now are revealing. The health kick that started 20-30 years ago has really made 50 the new 40 and so on. For those who put the time in.It seems that like wealth, for us older folk, there is no more middle “class”, you either work to be fit and attractive, or you blimp out.

    I think in ten years time, Rollo is going to have to adjust his chart to reflect this.

  • Lucky White Male

    Rollo

    You are 100% on money with this post.

    It may be true it is the minority of 38-40 yr old men who have the social status, looks, socio-sexual standing (alpha, high beta, sigma) to actually pull mid-twenties girls. Most 38-42 yr old men even in the prime of their SMV are not very attractive at all

    But there are certainly men who are. I owe you for your revelation of the SMV and your honest discussion, feminists be damned. I’m 38 and can only imagine I knew of you 10 yrs ago. So many men have been fooled by the age 30 marriage, by the bullshit of the Feminine Imperative

    Keep it up. By the way I read your book – reading your best posts thematically in one shot only makes you understand it better.

    Without hyperbole, a lot of it is life changing stuff for a man

  • Obsidian Files

    @DN:
    Again, you’re living proof of what I’m talking about (and as a Blue Collar Brotha, I can fully relate to what you’re talking about in terms of fitness; I’ve done tradesman work all my life and like you said, it’s kinda hard to get fat that way LOL). If you’re fit, dress well/well groomed, and have just what The Fifth Horseman called “moderate Game”, you can and will clean up as an older guy (I’m talking about the solid 50s and above here), because at that point you’re able to appeal to both the younger, same-age and even slightly older cohorts of ladies. “50 is the new 40″ indeed…

    O.

  • Obsidian Files

    @RT:
    “Actually Heartiste had a post about the evolutionary function/necessity for Beta men to produce higher sperm volume due to lower rates of sexual instances. I’ll see if I can find it, but the logic is that betas produce more sperm because they have more riding on fertility with less sexual frequency.”

    O: Hmm…well, the theory would be sound, from an EvoPsych POV; after all, Betas would not have as many opportunities to mate as Alphas would in the ancestral environment; it would make sense to make every busted nut count in a copulation, because they were so relatively infrequent.

    Hmm…

    O.

  • HanSolo

    @Obsidian

    And the flipside of that is if a man can last long then he isn’t afraid that the woman will get bored and leave or that some stronger male will kick him out.

    The man who can last longer must be of relatively high value, according to a woman’s subconscious. If orgasm bonds women (and I have no doubt it does to some extent), then the woman doesn’t want to bond to an “unworthy” man. So, staying hard long enough to show that you’re not afraid of other men kicking you out, or of tigers coming along, is a DHV! lol And being able to last long enough to make her orgasm, let alone, to do it well, is another test.

    And taking it even further and reversing the role of tester and testee (lol, pun not intended), if the man can be totally confident and enjoying it and make her cum but not cum himself (yet) then she starts to want to get him to cum. Wanting a desired man to cum is a powerful feeling for women and excites them a lot. Not that I’m awesome or anything, but there have been times where the woman was highly excited and I was lasting a long time and she really wanted me to cum. “I want you to cum inside me,” they’ll say with panted breath.

    And perhaps her vaginally orgasming is her way to make the desired male cum.

  • Archon

    HUS targets perimural (that’s “around-the-wall”) women of average looks, telling them the lies they want to hear: no, they’re not average; yes, they are the equal of the 9s and 10s they hook up with; and that once they find “the right guy” he’ll commit to her.

    It’s a fool’s errand, for reasons amply detailed by Rollo throughout this blog. Giggles is doing her audience a lot of harm.

    As for the graph, I’d take it at an individual level. For most women, their attractiveness will peak in their early 20s. For most men, their attractiveness can rise until their mid 30s. Obviously there’s outliers, and good genetics and good habits can change things. As has been pointed out, it requires work to get up to a high score; it’s not like Rollo is saying that every 38-yo guy is a 10.

    There are two important points to the graph: MEN, work on your body and your game and life will get better. WOMEN: you’re not getting hotter. Five more years doing medical billing, maxing out your credit card on french cigarette posters and cocktail dresses, and collecting baggage from ONSs is not going to make you more attractive.

  • Obsidian Files

    @Han:
    Again, all of what you’re saying makes perfect sense from an EvoPsych standpoint; can’t disagree with none of it. And to be fair to the eggheads, the Science of Human Mating has only been around for a few decades at best; not even 30 years old!-so we do have to cut them a bit of slack.

    There have been studies into the female orgasm of late, with some interesting early findings; checkout Buss’ The Evolution of Desire for more on this. But I’ve always maintained that the male orgasm is a grossly misunderstood dimension as well, and merits its own investigation.

    My guess is that we WILL have the answers to all of these questions, definitively, within the next decade or so…and then watch the fireworks really begin, LOL!

    O.

  • HanSolo

    @Obs

    There is also some debate about whether the vaginal orgasm helps retain and propel sperm through the cervix into the uterus and up the fallopian tubes. But if that were true then it would mean that a woman could subconsciously assist in who she got pregnant by by vaginally orgasming with certain men so as to cause them to cum (that part doesn’t depend on whether vaginal orgasm helps push sperm into her cervix) and also assist the sperm upwards.

    The guy who has sex with her and she doesn’t orgasm would have to have his sperm work harder, if the part about vaginal orgasm assisting sperm is true, which I don’t know if it is. I read that it is but then that it may not be so need to research it more.

  • LTlurker

    Maybe I’m an outlier. But experientially I have found no reliable correlation between the hotness of sexual partners (generally within a four point range) and the strength of orgasms (except in a few cases below the range). Nor have overweight women always been a non-starter (as long as they still have real curves)–that is, re SMV as compared to LTMV. The woman’s skills and responsiveness have mattered more to the outcome than sheer aesthetic appeal.

    Based on reports from other men, though, I recognize that I’m relatively easily aroused in flagrante. Still, I’m surprised that more men apparently aren’t like this.

  • Obsidian Files

    @Han:
    Yup, I’m quite aware of the “upsuck” theory; it makes sense to me, as does your idea of a Woman’s orgasm “coaxing” a Man to orgasm himself – again, I think we can attest to this in our own experiences, heh heh. And, your notion that for those Men who *don’t* cause Women to have orgasms, it would make sense for their sperm to “work harder” to make it to the egg…after all, we ARE talking about survival, here.

    Again, who’s gonna do the research that just might bear us Red Pills out? ;)

    O.

  • Obsidian Files

    @LT:
    Well, we have to keep in mind that our evolved sexual psychology, both in the aggregate (I’m speaking as a Man personally and for Men in general here; not for Women in either case) is quite complex and context dependent, so there’s that. Second, there’s the fact that, despite what so many in the sphere may say, “plus sized” Women don’t seem to have that much of a problem finding willing sexual partners (now of course, “plus sized” has a range as well, which goes to your point about “as long as she has curves”, i.e., a discernable “hourglass” figure – the WHR still holds for Women in, say, the 16-20 dress size range, albeit bigger all the way around, of course); this fact alone bears out the much lower sexual standards Men have versus Women, all things being equal; and third, you DID mention a point at which the intensity of your orgasms declined (you mentioned a four point variance). So, your experience does indeed track well with what we’re discussing – just with a few “tweaks” and “caveats”, which is to be expected, given what I’ve noted above…

    O.

  • LTlurker

    @O:

    Fair enough. But I find little acknowledgment (among men who generally have options) of the “tweaks” and “caveats.” Instead, there is a lot of hype about never going more than 2 points below one’s own estimated SMV. When I’m limited by time, energy, or access, I’d rather go lower and get some. Still, as you note, there is a limit even for my type.

  • Obsidian Files

    @LT:
    LOL, yea we all hear lots of smack talking from the fellas in the sphere and IRL – but just take a walk around. Just apply what Rollo’s talking about here with regard to the ladies to the fellas, because trust, a lot of guys be talking out they arse too. Five will get you ten there be much plus-sized gals out there with guys walking beside them – and just as many pushing baby strollers, etc. And let’s be clear here, not all the guys are busted Beta Herbs, either; quite a few are what many Women would consider to be fairly handsome, etc. And that’s not even talking about short term hitting it on the downlow.

    This is why when it comes to Red Pill knowledge, I go first and foremost to what the experts have to say, and THEN, and only THEN, do I take it from there. Checkout The Evolution of Desire, by Prof. David Buss. It’s essential reading for any Man looking to upgrade his seduction skillset.

    O.

  • Self Believer

    I’m 46 and pull plenty of girls under 25. You’d be surprised what happens when you are the most interesting guy in the room.

  • Morpheus

    Oh, and when I declined a weekend on Nantucket last week, she let loose a barrage of contemptuous texts, generally along the lines of I’m a pale pathetic shadow of my former physical self — this from a woman who had sent me boob shots and full frontals earlier in the day, and was cooing promises of love rejoined. I probably deserved some of that; I did indicate that I preferred to date women who didn’t appear to be approaching my size.

    Ouch. That probably could have been left unsaid :)
    Still, and I’m sure I don’t even need to tell you this, but clearly this is a woman who is not psychologically stable given the extremes of behavior. I’m not sure I’d have much if anything to do with her, even just casual hook-ups….she sounds like the fatal attraction type. I have to imagine it is an incredibly difficult transition for the woman who was super hot in her 20s to lose all that sexual power as she approaches 40 and beyond. It probably would be akin to being rich and then being homeless.

    I have to say I’m pretty shocked by the change in tone over at HUS. SW was kind and thoughtful in blog-based and private communications with me. I learned a lot over there for a while. So I assume this is a brand-positioning thing, or at least I hope it is.

    You and me both. I think it is more than brand-positioning perhaps much much more….things better left unwritten.

  • Jeremy

    Those graphs are wrong because, with a fixed number of people in the world, equal between the sexes, you have to scale the curves so that the area under each one is the same. E.g. the top valued man is not a “10,” ever. He’s some relatively lower value scaled by the fact that men’s sexual prime lasts longer. Why is this, for the non math geniuses out there? Because if there are 50 men who are 7.5′s, and there are only 30 women, then men’s actual score and actual value on the dating market is downgraded because he can’t just choose a 7.5 and take her. He is downgraded by competition in the market.

    This reasoning is flawed just at face value, simply because fewer men are alive than women at almost all age groups above 30. This means that there are more women competing for fewer men at the higher age ranges, meaning a mans value is naturally inflated, just by surviving.

    …with regards to the SMV graph–are you saying a 40 year old guy is gonna have an easier time picking up a 22 year old girl (at her SMV peak) at a bar than, say, a 27 year old?… Just wait till you’re 40! They’re gonna be all over that. Girls definitely hit the wall harder, and sooner, than guys, but if men really peaked at the age you say, then–again–most, or at least a sizable minority, of the hottest, youngest chicks would be with them, and they’re not.

    Again, a huge logical fallacy known as a red-herring. People are reading into the graph what is not there. The graph does not say who has an easier time picking up who, it says who has the greatest SMV. If SMV alone were the major determining factor for who picks up who, women would not wear make-up and men would never need to learn game.

  • Mr. Roach

    Just some anecdotal data:

    Me: 38, Single, Never Married, $175K+, Decent Shape, Have Hair (increasingly gray), Not Tall, Funny, Smart, On the Polite/Complimentary Side with New Chicks

    GFs/FBs in last five years (as best I remember):

    22 Stripper Super Hot 9+ (this weekend in fact!)
    20 Stripper 8+ (Daddy issues galore on both)
    29 Bartender (9+, gold diggerish vibe, but fun)
    26 Hairdresser 7+ (still friends, not really that hot)
    31 Hostess/Waitress 7+ (not hot enough, kind of annoying)
    26 Lawyer (Pretty hot 8-9, former fitness model, still friends, 2NL)
    28 Stripper/Tattoo Artist (7+, Daddy issues in extremis, dad doing life sentence, FNL, dropped her due to unstable lifestyle probably BPD)
    29 Insurance girl (Hot 9+, two kids/divorced, 2NL, good times but fleeting)
    33 Computer IT (Hot 8+, FNL on business trip to Nashville)
    28 Schoolteacher (Hot 8+, smart, but slipped away, booo)
    37 Schoolteacher (Hot 7+, but crazy, divorced two kids (but 36 D chest, pretty legit))
    33 Lawyer (Nice enough, but not hot enough, 6-7, gold-diggerish vibe)
    23 Grad student (Hot, fun, easygoing, 8+ and a two year relationship (met when 30))
    24 Paralegal (Hot, 8+, FNL)

    Notice something: None older, and this is more and equal or better quality action than I got in my 20s when I was busting my ass at school and surrounded by nerdy, careerist types. Started to change at 25 when I went out with numerous hotties after I moved to Texas–24, 29, 36 (liked older back then, but she was hot/sexy), 28, 19–but it’s only gotten easier after 30. I can say right around 35 it seemed some of the youngest and hottest ones started to slip out of reach, but that did motivate me to hit the gym. But I bet a similar story by a 38 year old 6-7 in looks (which is about all I consider myself) is a tale of decline.

  • Mr. Roach

    I want to add strippers are some of the hottest, loneliest, and easiest girls around. By them a pack of Newports and be cocky but show a tiny bit of decency and sensitivity and you’re prince friggin’ charming, driving them home and they’re giving you a BJ for your troubles. No joke. Happens regularly.

    [Strippers]

  • Laguna Beach Fogey

    I love these comment threads where the geeks get hard-ons for the statistics. lol

    Nerds, please.

    I’m approaching middle age–successful, fit, look at least 10 years younger–and I’m getting girls starting in their mid-20s. Granted I’m also banging hot women in their 40s.

    Interestingly, I often see older men in their 40s-50s with much-younger wives/gfs–and with babies.

    For older men who keep themselves in good shape, these are good times indeed. Life is great.

    Younger guys are fucked.

  • archerwfisher

    Something has dawned on me, after multiple dates:

    If I’m on a date with the idea, “I want to screw this girl ASAP,” and I focus, use what game I know, things can be okay.

    If I’m on a date with the idea of “I just want to get to know this girl as a potential girlfriend, not trying to bang her immediately” then I’m screwed every time, because she will say some variation of “I just want to be friends/there’s no spark.”

    My fellow college age girls are such sluts, they’ve done so many one night stands/screw a guy in the parking lot, that the idea of a guy treating them like sex can wait until date 3–it’s so boring, no spark, because he’s not putting the moves on to screw them in the next 45 minutes. You literally have to fuck girls on the first date to get a second date, because otherwise, you’re boring and friendzoned. This is pathetic.

  • Dave

    It’s even worse when you consider Marriage Market Value. MMV is the integral of SMV (the area under the SMV curve) from current age to death. That’s why girls used to get married shortly after puberty. Those late-20-something A-list actresses the tabloids fawn over are less attractive than half the girls in a typical suburban high school.

  • Karl

    >> The guy who has sex with her and she doesn’t orgasm would have to have his sperm work harder, if the part about vaginal orgasm assisting sperm is true

    true, but many/most ancestral scenarios involved a single Alpha KEEPING a harem of women who only ever sex’d with HIM. So, if he didn’t knock her up one occasion, it would be a later one.

    Male sex without orgasm? I was late 30’s before I ever experienced such a thing. It can still happen now at 50, but it’s not routine. Almost never happens during Morning Wood.

  • Karl

    >> Marriage Market Value. MMV is the integral of SMV (the area under the SMV curve)

    no, MMV is much different. MMV is the future opportunity costs the man is willing to pay to lock down THIS opportunity RIGHT NOW.

  • Pup

    Dead on brilliant graph! I have lived this graph (38 now) and so has my wife (38 as well). What’s funny/ironic is that my wife and I met at 30 as “equals” and were both about 7’s. We recently discussed our sex rankings. Now I’m still a 7 and she concedes she’s a 5.5 or 6. It happens, there is no denying it. But what she lost in raw sex appeal, she makes up in being an awesome wife and lover.

  • Not Carrie Bradshaw

    Archon said :

    As for the graph, I’d take it at an individual level. For most women, their attractiveness will peak in their early 20s. For most men, their attractiveness can rise until their mid 30s. Obviously there’s outliers, and good genetics and good habits can change things. As has been pointed out, it requires work to get up to a high score; it’s not like Rollo is saying that every 38-yo guy is a 10.

    Yes. There is a physciality to it all. Men “age” better due to their physiology and the fact that their skins tend to be thicker and oiler (does not wrinkle as much). The male curse of acne at age 17 will serve him well as age 47. There is also a divergence in how “age” is perceived in men and women. Men mind wrinkles on women. Women tend not to mind wrinkles on men as much as long as he remains physically fit.

    Women’s physical peak is associated with her childbearing while men’s physical peak is associated with the stage at which his body starts to break down faster than it is repaired. This means men would go for youth much more than women would, since youth is not necessarily associated with physical peak for men.

    And yes, detractors of Rollo’s SMP graph deny one crucial thing – the old chestnut – apex fallacy. Women are assuming that ALL men enjoy the benefits of “alpha” status, which they (the women) are constantly comparing their lot to. In this scenario, ALL 38 year old men will get hot nubile nymphettes when in reality only a very small percentage of top 38 year olds who do.

  • HanSolo

    Rollo, take a look at my latest post where I respond to Susan’s ridiculous claim that my post on the 1-in-4 rape myth is full of deceptive “machinations” and show her to either be devoid of logical capability or simply trying to smear me, or both.

    http://www.justfourguys.com/hus-accuses-me-of-deceptive-machinations/

  • Xavier

    I think Men reach their physical and financial peak more around 30/32

    But saying that we reach our peak sexual value at 38 is far from the truth.

    Its way easier for a hot and fit man to get laid with a young girl at 30 than at 38, no matter how much money you make. Your BMW and your big condo, wont make a difference if shes craving a hard dick, chiseled abs and a head full of hair lol

  • Not Carrie Bradshaw

    xavier. I thought Rollo’s graph illustrated physical peak and sexual peak in the physical sense, as both go hand in hand with each other. But sexual peak can mean anything. To men, it probably means function – ie arousal, performance, endurance etc, which is more correlated to physical fitness. To women, it is more the satisfaction women derive from the act, which tends to increase with age and experience.

  • Johnycomelately

    An interesting verification of the graph is the fact that the ‘marriage age gap’ (the age difference between men and women at marriage) increases as men age.

    If the graph wasn’t correct you wouldn’t get the ‘Man Up, Peter Pan, Man Child and Adulescent’ trope that is ostensibly being driven by aging women falling on the wrong side of the SMV curve.

  • Johnycomelately

    “To Rollo’s post, perhaps this anecdote serves the point that HUS rejects: that an SMV curve reflects what men want, not what women believe men should want.”

    Brilliant observation.

  • sunshinemary

    I have a question. I don’t keep up on the goings on at Mrs. Walsh’s place; I don’t generally agree with her but I have no particular animosity toward her either. However, I was curious about what Rollo’s post was about, so I read the piece at HUS that he was responding to. This sentence from Mrs. Walsh’s post was interesting to me:

    At 37, for example, she is likely to receive very different ratings from men aged 17 and 57.

    I’m curious to hear men’s response to this. As you have aged, have you found older women more attractive? I had assumed this was not the case. I had assumed that men’s attraction cues were mostly set – no matter what their age was – for younger women. But is that true? Would a 19-year-old man rate a 40-year-old woman lower than he would rate a 40-year-old woman when he himself is fifty? I’m talking purely from an SMV stand point, not from a MMP stand point, where issues of compatibility and mutual interests come into play.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Well, lets put it this way, the cosmetics, fashion and plastic surgery industries didn’t become the multi-trillion dollar corporate juggernauts they are today as the result of an overwhelming demand to make women appear older.

  • Morpheus

    I’m curious to hear men’s response to this. As you have aged, have you found older women more attractive? I had assumed this was not the case. I had assumed that men’s attraction cues were mostly set – no matter what their age was – for younger women. But is that true? Would a 19-year-old man rate a 40-year-old woman lower than he would rate a 40-year-old woman when he himself is fifty? I’m talking purely from an SMV stand point, not from a MMP stand point, where issues of compatibility and mutual interests come into play.

    SSM, I think the answer is yes, but by a fairly marginal amount. At my workplace, there are two mid-40s women who work the corporate gym. They’ve maintained their figures. I think I find them MORE attractive now at my age of 39 than I would have when I was 25 but this is hypothetical and like I said I think it is marginal. A 40-year old is going to find a 20-year old more attractive than a 40-year old all else being equal, but most 40 year olds realize they don’t have a much of a shot with a 20-year old.

    I read comments from a number of women indicating they thought they were sexiest in the their 30s because they were approached more. LOL. Total solipsistic ignorance. Men are actually much more realistic and pragmatic than many women apparently give them credit for. There is a certain level of “hotness” where a woman becomes essentially unapproachable for most men. Hell, less than probably 10-20% of men do cold approaches and rely entirely on connections to meet women. So actually as a woman declines in attractiveness, but is still reasonably attractive, more men will consider her approachable. So she may actually be approached more at 35 than 22 because a lot more guys consider her in his league.

  • Tin Man

    I’ve been off in my own world for the past week or so…but all I can say, congrats on creating a shit storm. Change happens on the edges – not in the middle. As many Men here have stated (and there have been many debates within these walls with unbelievers) you can decide to believe the stats or get out in the world and see it for yourself.

  • OffTheCuff

    SSM: “Would a 19-year-old man rate a 40-year-old woman lower than he would rate a 40-year-old woman when he himself is fifty?”

    Very true for me. I see my age peers as attractive-enough, that their *apparent* SMV goes up, even though I know it can’t really be so. But their younger competition goes up, too.

  • Water Cannon Boy

    Time machine Christie Brinkley vs. current Christie Brinkley-

    Both 19 yr old and 50 yr old will say current Christie looks good
    Both 19 yr old and 50 yr old will prefer time machine Christie

    50 yr old is less likely to not say current Christie looks good with the words “for her age” at the end.

  • DeNihilist

    SSM, one of my sayings for the last twenty years to the younger dudes has been, ” the nice thing about getting older is that the age range of woman you will bang increases.”

    So for me yes, I find woman up to 60 now attractive. But still like looking at the 20 somethings too.

  • Tin Man

    I say bullshit to both men and woman — let’s get to some real hard thinking on this (completely from a man’s perspective)…

    Scenario:
    (1) You have one day left to live.
    (2) You have one choice, to spend the day with a 18-25 year old woman — OR — you have the choice to spend the day with a 45 to 55 year old woman.
    (3) Looks are approximate (let’s say, both are well within your perception of good looking and “I’d do her” standards) – goes for face and body (clothed of course, no peeking).

    Now – who do you choose? It’s one or the other – and who you are, how old are and what your looks are not a factor.

    Strip away all the BS, and we know who we’d choose. The debate is worthless, because we just know.

  • Anonymous Reader

    Giggles has never been very good at reading anything too sciencey. I cannot tell if this is incompetence or indifference to the truth.

    But she’s not the first Warton MBA I’ve run across who was essentially innumerate for numbers greater than 5…

  • DeNihilist

    Tin man, if my wife is that 45-55 year old, hands down her!

  • lavazza1891

    I don’t really understand the chart.

    Is it showing how sexually attractive (intensity X number of people interested) an average individual man or woman will typically be during their life time, if they are not taken out of the race by marriage/children?

  • doubtthat

    Nothing I love more than sanctimonious babble about “rationality” and “science” from someone touting a chart with a Y-axis that is completely made up (not that the X is any better, but at least an age is an age).

    Or maybe that’s just my innumeracy. I’m sure you folks can link to the data used to generate this awe-inspiring graphic sure to forever legitimize the twisted chimeras born of your feelings of inadequacy.

  • A Hermit

    Let’s see; if we project that pink line the author pulled out of his ass further to left on that chart it appears that he finds women’s “sexual market value” at age 10 is about the same as it is at age 35…

    Better keep this guy away from your children everyone…

    (PS did you know that 79.8% of all statistics on the internet are just made up?)

  • ianfc

    The SJW’s have arrived to tell us all about science.

  • ianfc

    Social justice warriors, The graph has received some attention on PZ Myers blog.

  • ianfc

    These ones think that topping a women’s glass up is almost rape.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Thanks, that explains the dontlink.com traffic I get when cowards link to me.

  • Tin Man

    I was curious where the new troop of trolls (ToT) were coming from. Most interesting…Only those who seek and are open to the truth, will find it.

  • Tin Man

    OK – I have to admit it – after only getting through a few comments on the post, I was suddenly struck by the fact that IF I had not spoon myself on what is presented within this blog and others, I would probably have some of the same types of responses. We are so conditioned to “no see the truth” that once it is presented (not force feed) – there’s an almost physical reaction to rage against it. Because it just can’t be the truth – because if it is, then not only is my wife (GF, SO, ex) that way, but even my Mom is that way – and my sisters, and my daughter. We’ve said it around here before, it is easier to just get mad, re-justify our position and then walk away smugly, than to stop and really (I mean really) consider it as (possibly) true.

    I know where they’re coming from – but they are delusional. All I can say is…welcome to the cold, hard world of reality.

  • ianfc

    Try commenting there and see how long before the squawking starts to have you banned.

  • Anonymous Reader

    Elusive Wapiti attempted to engage Susie Giggles with reason, and the banhammer dropped on him.

    http://elusivewapiti.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-one-way-spin-on-campus-sexual.html

    Looks like the link-love for HUS is gone from EW. Also Vox Day finally took the link to HUS off of Alpha Game.

    Too bad that the average HUSsie won’t post here. Not even after a couple of margaritas…

  • Anonymous Reader

    Let’s all get screenshots of PZ’s posting, just, oh, because…

  • doubtthat

    Oh no, people with science degrees are showing up to scrutinize your childish horseshit. Hurry, hurry, everyone get together and convince each other that this absurdly stupid graphic based on nothing but the fevered imagination of a bunch a dumbasses is “science.”

    If only those fucking feminist hadn’t hijacked the scientific method so you fuckers can’t use it anymore.

    Or just show me the survey data you used. Easiest way to quiet the skeptics is to show that there was some rigorous methodology applied to this bullshittery. Of course, there wasn’t. This is just the back-of-the-envelope slap-dickery of a group of fanatics.

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 5,006 other followers

%d bloggers like this: