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.
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.
October 25th, 2013 at 1:05 am
Rollo,
Here they come! :)
It is amusing to me all these types have the same argument structure. Lots of snark, sarcasm, dash of profanity, but absolutely zero logical counterpoints.
October 25th, 2013 at 4:38 am
Science degree in what?
October 25th, 2013 at 9:45 am
PeeZee Myers’ hoard, also known as “baboons”, is one of the saddest bunch you’ll witness online. Typical anti-science liberals with enough emotional/psychological issues among the bunch to fill a whole new volume of the DSM.
PeeZee is pretty fucking sad himself though. He’s like a castrated version of pre-fall Hugo Schwyzer. Since he has no balls, he’s burning out at a much slower rate, but burning out for sure.
October 25th, 2013 at 10:32 am
Hell, you shouldn’t need a science degree to see through the bullshit in that made up graph…
https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/5092370944/h9680C161/
You MRA dumbfucks don’t actually take this shit seriously do you?
October 25th, 2013 at 10:58 am
Surely even knuckleheads like the MRA crowd can understand that calling someone a “10” or a “7” is not a scientific measurement of anything.
Bro, Nickelback is totally the best band in the world, I give them a 9.5, science, bitchez!!!
October 25th, 2013 at 12:43 pm
On “science” as the ultimate ace of spades, see:
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/science-and-non-science-in-liberal-education
October 25th, 2013 at 1:44 pm
PZ Meyers, a 2 married to a 2 can’t see the SMP. In other news, Tom Brady is still banging Gisele Bundchen, and Bratt Pitt is with Angelina Jolie.
October 25th, 2013 at 4:04 pm
I’ll just leave this here for PZ’s trolls to ruminate over:
http://iconicmen.wordpress.com/2013/10/24/smv-is-it-real/
October 25th, 2013 at 5:00 pm
Your SMV chart makes sense to me if the y-axis is the amount of the potential reached. Your 23 y old woman is at hot as she can be (a 10/10 fraction of potential), and a man at 38 is as hot as he can be. Although I tend to think everyone peaks slightly earlier.
October 25th, 2013 at 8:00 pm
Nope. No corroboration whatsoever of any study indicating men 36-38 are in the prime of their SMV,…
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/society-and-culture/why-women-lose-the-dating-game-20120421-1xdn0.html
Where is your God now, SJWs?
October 25th, 2013 at 10:06 pm
I didn’t see anything about any such “study” in that last little fluff article.
Here’s a hint Rollo;a reporter’s opinions are not data…the writer is really is really working to shoehorn any tangentially relevant number into a predetermined narrative. Don’t you know you shouldn’t believe everything you read?
This was an interesting observation though:
“there are similar numbers of single men and women in their 30s overall”
October 25th, 2013 at 11:25 pm
I see the trolls aren’t even trying. Sad, and expected.
October 26th, 2013 at 9:15 pm
These trolls are used to frequenting a blog where the guy that owns it allows them to basically run shit, and where he quickly bans anyone likely to get a rise out of them by doing things like asking tough questions or even hinting that they may disagree with their SJW-ism. Intellectually, they’re worse off than fish out of water when they dare venture out of that little ideological echo chamber of theirs.
Dunning-Krugger is in full effect, of course, so don’t expect much in the way of rational responses from them…
October 26th, 2013 at 10:44 pm
“Dunning-Krugger” Ooooh look. Little Jackie learned a new catch phrase…and spelled it wrong..
You little wankers are so cute when you’re pretending to know stuff.
October 27th, 2013 at 9:11 am
I find that in my late 30s, I am more attractive than I was in my 20s. This is partly due to having preserved my looks and partly because of my confidence and awareness that I did not have 10 years ago. I get plenty of attention from teens (who I don’t pursue), and with early 20 somethings my age is not an issue and doesn’t get raised.
Most people, men and women, go for people they are attracted to without thinking about age too much (except maybe on the web). Most men in their 30s will be open to dating women in their 20s and 30s. But based on attraction alone, they will gravitate towards early 20 somethings if they are available.
In addition to looks and confidence and awareness, an older man has a lot to offer a woman if she is looking for a long term relationship with children.
I am not saying that men in their late 30s should all only chase after early 20 somethings, but they should certainly not rule it out.
I think that many men in their 30s may be ruling themselves out of potentially good relationships with young women out of a sense of guilt that they are doing the young lady some harm. Thinking like this is a big mistake. If the man is looking for a long term relationship with children, he is doing her potentially a huge amount of good.
The fact is that most young 20 something women today have a poor future. Large numbers will never marry and end up being used up empty shells by the time they are 35. If things seem bad for women in their 30s now, they will be worse for the 30s women of 10 to 15 years time.
If the 30 something women of today had settled down with a man 15 years older 10 years ago, today they would far more fortunate than if they had remained single till now. This is particularly true if the man is an aware and sensitive man with some alpha traits.
If you are a younger man, I would recommend acquiring the confidence and awareness that an older man would have. The sooner you acquire this, the better your life chances are. This requires experience and making mistakes.
Most importantly, at whatever age, while being aware, you should never be a bitter or angry person. This requires learning from mistakes while letting go of the bad experiences of the past. If you have warmth and compassion for a woman, (without being stupid or lacking any awareness of the warning signs or risks), then you will have a lot to offer a younger woman.
The younger 20s age cohorts are both very different from women 10 years older than them, but they are also more diverse (in attitude, cultural/national origin, expectations, etc) and different from each other. This creates many more opportunities for an older man to fish from this pond.
Also, there are fewer rules and expectations of people than ever before, making it easier to go against whatever social expectations other people may have of you or her.
I’m not saying that it is easy. In addition to the effort required to chase, there are requirements like being confident, well adjusted and physically fit but these can all be cultivated and are all worthwhile goals in their own right. Aiming for younger women gives an incentive to self improve.
October 27th, 2013 at 11:25 am
If they’re hating you’re doing something right.
October 27th, 2013 at 12:35 pm
http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2010/08/12/the-difficulty-of-gaming-women-by-age-bracket/
October 27th, 2013 at 8:27 pm
All will be made clear.
Just check out my blog and new post please.
http://the40yearoldredflag.blogspot.com/
November 23rd, 2013 at 8:44 pm
[…] Look at marriage as a project: the economic rationale for marriage is such that the net present value of the marriage (economically) is greater than the costs of courtship in time and money. If courtship is extended, then the costs are extended, and the NPV of the marriage needs to be much greater than it would otherwise have been. Marriage NPV is much higher for young men than for older, more established ones, so men reap economic benefits (e.g. wealth) from marrying sooner rather than later — and women get a higher NPV from marriage by marrying proven, potential-maximized men. […]
December 17th, 2013 at 8:19 pm
After reading Ms. Walsh’s response article, I think that her point about women preferring men closer to their own age is being deflected without good reason. A 38 year old man has a high SMV if you look at the number of women across the spectrum who would consider him a good catch. But his SMV will not be high with the women he views as being at their peak (the 18-23 year olds).
So even though more women want the 38 year old man than men want the 38 year old woman, the 38 year old man still has long odds of nabbing the woman of his “ideal” choice–the one in her early 20s. This is even more the case if the woman in her early 20s is particularly attractive. Pretty much every man younger than the 38 year old down to her own age will be more attractive to her on face value and she will easily be able to get them.
The implication of this is that men who wait until their late 30s to settle down will likely end up with a woman in her 30s (this actually is borne out by the stats on marital age differences). Possibly late 20s, but more likely 30s. And it’s on this basis that I think SW argues that the decline of a woman’s SMV isn’t what it would seem. Because even if the 32 year old isn’t the 38 ear old man’s SMV ideal, she is what he, more likely than not, will ultimately perceive to be what is best available to him–especially when you take social circles and general maturity into account along with the fact that the women who want him most will be those closer to his own age.
December 17th, 2013 at 9:28 pm
Oh, and I wanted to add: It seems that the LAMPS factors are factored into SMV as if they all weigh the same in creating a composite value. But for women at least, age heavily influences which LAMPS factors she’s most attracted to in a man. The man who is 38 and has a higher SMV than when he was 28 likely owes this to his increase in financial stability–maybe he owns a house and has a well-funded 401k. But here’s the thing. 401Ks are awesome to women in their 30s and nearly irrelevant to women in their early-mid 20s. Maybe not in theory, but at least in practice. 401Ks are for old people; or at least for people old enough to accept that they need to plan for their retirement. Most young women are not concerned about such. And owning a house is great too. But what is the practical significance of homeownership rather than renting? Young women may appreciate the accomplishment in theory, but in practice it might mean little to them. Older women, however, do get it.
Furthermore, age related decline in attractiveness is hitting men by that age–particularly the things they can’t control. If male pattern baldness runs in the family, he’s probably started balding by that point or will soon start. Same with premature greying. These are precisely the things that can make a younger woman think “old” and discount him as a potential. But the older woman will be more forgiving. So the 38 year old is losing what the younger woman values more (looks), and gaining what the older woman values more (money).
Couple this with the fact that women will prefer to date a man closer to their own age (even if older) and I would posit that the rise in the 38 year old man’s SMV over his past decade of life is due more to his increase in attractiveness to women also in their 30s than to his increase in attractiveness to women in their 20s. His financial comfort/career is much more effective in making him attractive to older women than to younger women. The 23 year old will give him a couple of bonus points for having his stuff together. The 33 year old will give him scads of points because those factors are more relevant to her life in a practical sense. The 23 year old will be less forgiving of whatever signs of aging she does see in him, and the 33 year old will be more forgiving of those same signs.
So I think you have to adjust according to who is viewing the man. Who he will end up with will ultimately be the best woman he wants who also wants him. I think if you take this into account (how women of varying ages view him) a man is really at a sweet spot at about 32-34.
December 17th, 2013 at 10:13 pm
Denise, you’re making the same false assumptions SW does. While ideally it may seem that a man in his SMV peak (34-36) would be most attracted to and opt for a woman in her own SMV peak (22-23), nowhere do I make the presumption that either would realistically be expected to do so.
Some do. Game savvy men and men with the right degree of preselection certainly parlay their understanding into getting with their idealized SMV woman – the late Paul Walker (40) and his longtime GF (23) is a recent example – but the mistake you and SW are making is presuming that like would necessarily attract like in the SMV. Nowhere to I make the assertion that optimizing SMV is the norm; actually far from it.
I do however point out that women on the downslide of their SMV decay (27-30) have a stronger urgency to opt for men already experiencing their SMV peak, or have the potential to capitalize on that SMV peak within a few years (30-33). A simplification of this is a simple question, who is a woman of 30 more likely to consider the best long term partner for her (and her future children’s) provisioning – a 25 year old man with uncertain potential, for whom she’ needs to wait until she’s 40 for him to realize his peak SMV, or, the 35 year old man who’s already arrived or is arriving at his own peak SMV?
December 18th, 2013 at 4:16 pm
I understand your point about men not necessarily going for the 23 year old. But what I’m trying to get at is what makes the 38 year old “peak” at that particular age. Yes, the 30 year old woman would prefer the 35 year old man over the 25 year old. But the 25 year old woman would probably not. The 27 year old woman…eh, it’s a crapshoot and would depend on personalities and individual priorities.
I’m guessing that the 23 year old woman is at her peak with respect to her competitiveness against other women in attracting the most men. If the same principle is applied to men, he will probably be most attractive to the greatest number of women in his early thirties.
Perhaps this has been written already, perhaps not; but the factors that receive the most weight in making a man attractive change according to the age demographic of women you speak to. So a man’s highest level attractiveness will necessarily be only in relation to a certain age spectrum of women. I might even argue that women rarely look at men in purely physical terms IRL (celebrities don’t count because they might as well be fictional), so I’m not sure that a woman’s SMV and a man’s SMV can really be talked about in the same terms. A man is, more often than not, going to be automatically perceived as a combination of SMV-MMV. Yes, women will play the hookup game, the FWB game or whatever; but more often than not it’s a strategy to get a man’s further commitment.
April 19th, 2014 at 1:14 am
one of the most ridiculous things I hear is when guys label a lot of the imbeciles who women fuck as “alphas” most of them are far from alphas…dudes need to reexamine what they call “alpha”
May 5th, 2014 at 10:14 pm
[…] There is a rule I heard somewhere which basically says take the man’s age, divide by 2, and add 7, and that gives you an idea of the floor that a man could still potentially attract. If we used George’s age of 52, we would get 33 so Amal is pretty close to that age. In his case though because of his celebrity status, the rule doesn’t even apply to him. I have no doubt he could attract and bang plenty of 22-25 year olds. But for the non-celebrity man who maximizes his potential SMV (successful, stays in shape, etc.) dating women 10-15 years younger is very possible. And the reason for that is because of the different rates in decline of SMV over time. […]
September 10th, 2014 at 12:18 am
[…] Sex, Lies and Statistics […]
October 6th, 2014 at 1:26 pm
“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.”
Why?
October 13th, 2014 at 12:10 am
[…] I’ve gone into explaining the loose metrics I’ve based this graph on several occasions, I’ve added some arrows here to illustrate a point that often gets missed or simply blown […]
November 13th, 2014 at 7:19 pm
[…] Below is the target of her criticism, Rollo’s sexual market value over lifetime chart. […]
December 3rd, 2014 at 8:12 pm
[…] There are few things more amusing than watching a Gamma attempt to criticize some aspect of Game. In this case, PZ provides a fascinating critique of Rollo’s SMV graphic: […]