Post: #1

Men:
Status
Resources
Game
Looks

Women:
Beauty
Youth
Fertility
Virtue

And the idea is that a man must have at least equal or greater SMV to have sex with a woman.

But I think it's much more complex.

You could argue a 21 year old dude with a high SMV could hook up with a hot 19 year old, but he could struggle to hook up with an average 30 year old, who is obviously lower value than the 19 year old. Why?

Marriage Value vs Sexual Value

Obviously, a woman looking to settle down is going to look for different things than a party slut. The party slut doesn't care about resources, while the 30 year old doesn't care about game.

Another thing is Status.

A girl could be a 9 but not have a huge social circle while the other could be a 7 sorority girl. You actually would need more status to get the 7 sorority girl, which tells me that not only does a man's status matter, but it also has to be compared to the girl.

Plus in a club a virginal girl has little value while the slut is at the top, while the opposite is true in marriage.

Obviously SMV is complicated, but I think it's more complicated than a few simple traits and we also must consider marriage vs hookup value.

Post: #2

Good points. Good creation of a new nahuatl (indigenous Mexican) word too, comolicatec (lol)

Post: #3

A virgin may or not have high SMV in the club. Is she hot?

Then she has high SMV.

She may also have high relationship value.

I think you're conflating the two. Most men seem willing to sacrifice some SMV for a steady relationship, but would prefer higher SMV if they are confident that they won't lose her or she won't cheat.

A woman's hotness/fertility is completely unrelated to her relationship value as long as she passes the boner test.

If her hotness and fertility has a long term projected value for the boner futures market, then it may be worth investment if her personality is stable. But my boner has never cared much for a girl's relationship value.

Post: #4

You're saying SMV is fluid and situational.

It is.

This forum has delved deeply into that topic. A young American man's SMV in America is very different from his SMV in Colombia.

We don't simplify the concept of SMV here too much, on the contrary, we've explored every nuance of it.

Post: #5

All those things matter but in varying degrees to each person. Plenty of hot women are with dead broke ugly losers. As for guys, are they looking for LTR or ONS?

Post: #6

(12-24-2016 07:46 PM)StephCurrybeast Wrote:  Men:
Status
Resources
Game
Looks

Women:
Beauty
Youth
Fertility
Virtue

And the idea is that a man must have at least equal or greater SMV to have sex with a woman.

But I think it's much more complex.

You could argue a 21 year old dude with a high SMV could hook up with a hot 19 year old, but he could struggle to hook up with an average 30 year old, who is obviously lower value than the 19 year old. Why?

Marriage Value vs Sexual Value

Obviously, a woman looking to settle down is going to look for different things than a party slut. The party slut doesn't care about resources, while the 30 year old doesn't care about game.

Another thing is Status.

A girl could be a 9 but not have a huge social circle while the other could be a 7 sorority girl. You actually would need more status to get the 7 sorority girl, which tells me that not only does a man's status matter, but it also has to be compared to the girl.

Plus in a club a virginal girl has little value while the slut is at the top, while the opposite is true in marriage.

Obviously SMV is complicated, but I think it's more complicated than a few simple traits and we also must consider marriage vs hookup value.

At the age of thirty, a chick might be interested in locking down a beta provider, but she certainly hasn't stopped caring about game. She'll begrudgingly fuck a beta to keep a roof over her head, but her 'gina will still tingle for alpha cock. Sooner or later, she's going to step out on Mr. Beta Bucks and guess who it'll be with.

Post: #7

LeoneVolpe is right. A thirty years old girl do care about game, but she's at an age that she knows great alpha mean are rare and won't have a lasting relationship with her (why would they? They can have a 20 year old fresh pussy). Trust me, I met a lot of girl in that situation that gave me this impression that they know that their value (as in SMV) at their age is only going downhill. So they have two choices : either she decreases her criteria and settle down with a provider or she stays alone and whine about the poor quality of men.

Post: #8

There is also a layer of personal preference involved.

What your target finds attractive can vary, some place higher weightings on looks, cash, race etc.

It is a great general rule and the basics of increasing your SMV are solid, but its not black and white.

Post: #9

To build on RutInTheWoods's point about how women's preferences can vary, I would add that even the same individual woman's attraction triggers will usually be pretty fluid as they move from one situation to another (or from meeting one man to another). Even women with a strong idea of what their type is often end up getting seduced by someone that's almost the opposite.

Post: #10

The the idea is that a man must have at least equal or greater SMV to have sex with a woman is flawed and inaccurate. There are countless other factors at play that the enthusiasts of this concept ignore or are straight up unaware of.

Post: #11

I agree...SMV is a construct that tries(and often fails) to predict behavior...people behave irrationally
and almost always have their own internal criteria.

And to throw the cherry on top, people don't always date based on their best interests...
So being rich or good looking may or may not help you depending on individual whim
and pure chemistry.

Post: #12

Hard to say, but in my opinion it's overcomlicated more than anything.

Seems that the common "theme" regarding traits considered high value in men is independence, as opposed to dependence. Seems the one thing all men who are 'players' with women have in common is independence.

Things like wealth, high status in one's career, physical strength and courage are all things which represent masculine independence, like a wild mustang.

While things like being a fake "nice guy", lacking money, being physically weak, being out of shape, or having low status at one's job represent a theme of dependency, like a domesticated gelding horse.

Which of course makes sense from a pure survivalist perspective, since our subconscious instinct still thinks like a hunter-gather tribesman, and women's best odds of survival would always be better with an independent man who could fend for himself and her, than a weak or spineless man who had to be taken care of by others.

Even the physically attractive traits in men seem to tie into this theme, since they tend to represent good physical health and fitness, which would better allow a man to fight and defend others and therefore mantain his 'independence' if he were hunter-gather on the battlefield.

---

For what it's worth, it also seems musical or creative talent and success with women also seem to hand in hand, seems that it's genuinely guys like musicians, actors, or 'performers' of some type or another (which can include sports or martial arts) tend to be the most natural with women, as opposed to guys like bankers, corporate execs, etc who usually end up being more of a 'sugar daddy' kind of guy than a natural Casanova.