Post: #26

Funniest thing is, muscles don’t mean anything when it comes to women. I’d been lifting hard from 19-28 and was pretty big - women never gave me the time of day.

At 28 I got shredded and my face completely changed. I also looked like a twig. It’s as if I became a male model, I would get random, beautiful women smiling at me and some older women would aggressively pursue/eyefuck me to the point where it felt creepy.

Muscle means nothing unless you have the facial aesthetics to back it up.

Post: #27

(11-07-2018 03:34 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  Funniest thing is, muscles don’t mean anything when it comes to women. I’d been lifting hard from 19-28 and was pretty big - women never gave me the time of day.

At 28 I got shredded and my face completely changed. I also looked like a twig. It’s as if I became a male model, I would get random, beautiful women smiling at me and some older women would aggressively pursue/eyefuck me to the point where it felt creepy.

Muscle means nothing unless you have the facial aesthetics to back it up.

That's the thing, girls do like muscle but not alot of it. The biggest most women would want is an Adrien Peterson or at the VERY biggest Zyzz.

Aesthetic bodybuilding has a point however. They focus on areas that women do indeed love. Shoulders, upper chest, back, forearms. Throw in Glutes and you have the perfect body for most women.


The best comic book example I can come up with is this, Most men try to look like batman or superman, Most women want guys that look like Nightwing.

Post: #28

(11-07-2018 01:44 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  You saying that a man’s SMV is affected by women? The only thing a man’s SMV is affected by is himself, IMO.

In any market, you can increase your value by offering the market a better deal, but the market can move around you making your deal less or more valuable.

(11-07-2018 01:48 PM)corsega Wrote:  Yet if you think about it logically, "the decline of male SMV" makes no logical sense.

My personal perspective is for looking for attractive women for a relationship. I'd rather a high seven plus on tap than giving up a lot of my time for the chance at a six.

According to UCL the number of 26 yo virgins has doubled in about fifteen years and rates of sexual activity for millennials are down to 1920s levels. There are others that show the same. So there is an decline for a considerable number of people.

I read your site - 2017 - 28 bangs, average 6.03. I can tell you're smart and I'm assuming you are a 7.5+; yet in 2017 you banged one 7.5. That's what I am referring to by the decline of SMV. No doubt it's been a topic here for years, but it seems to be in decline. I haven't read much of Roosh's Game yet, but my main takeaway from it was his analysis of how streams of validation towards women from thirsty men and alphas has over inflated their value. But I think it's more than that, as Russian women also get it. In Russia I can meet attractive girls without a problem. Here, I can't even be bothered. Just waiting to get out to Colombia. In The West from what I've seen access to women of your own level of attractiveness is difficult from anything other the social circle validation.

I don't have the interest in investing huge amounts of time in crunching huge numbers of women through apps. I invest my time in myself: business and when I wasn't injured fitness. 23 flakes per year = a considerable amount of lost income. It would be my value going down the toilet for sixes' attention whoring. The only solution that doesn't erode my real value to myself is an aeroplane.

(11-07-2018 02:20 PM)Montrose Wrote:  Commitment from men has decreased to zero, so men must compensate with increased resource payment. If you ignore the commitment variable, you think that cost of pussy has increased, but it has not, because commitment has gone to zero.

It's a very interesting way to put it. Recently I was sent some conservative dating sites by Tiger Man. Too busy to use them, but put up a profile to see what would happen. These are mostly girls who are expecting to become baby machines ASAP. The site hardly had any users, but got more messages than I could get Tinder matches here (rural). They're still in The West, the difference is they're in the market for commitment and they except to find it. Tinder girls don't even really know what they're in the market for. Hence 61% flake rates.

Post: #29

(11-07-2018 01:55 PM)montrose Wrote:  The demand for pussy is huge, yes, but I’m not aware that it has changed in recent years. So that can’t be the reason for the perceived increase in cost of pussy.

Is the perceived increase in cost of pussy real though? If you think in the past a man had to go to war to win status and get women, even business success and working out would have done little for him, he had to pay a dowry...arguably pussy is cheaper than ever.

Post: #30

(11-07-2018 04:33 PM)Jefferson Wrote:  

(11-07-2018 01:55 PM)montrose Wrote:  The demand for pussy is huge, yes, but I’m not aware that it has changed in recent years. So that can’t be the reason for the perceived increase in cost of pussy.

Is the perceived increase in cost of pussy real though? If you think in the past a man had to go to war to win status and get women, even business success and working out would have done little for him, he had to pay a dowry...arguably pussy is cheaper than ever.

Yes pussy is cheaper than ever, its easier in EVERY way to get pussy.

My observation concludes that many men want something of more value, whether that be a LTR or a girl who is committed to them. Men want something special, as in not an easy whore.

Every man wants The Virgin princess that they saved from the dragon after fighting an entire castle of skeletons.

Every woman wants to be that princess that put the Knight/Prince through Hell.

The problem is, The value of women have declined. Now instead of an innocent virgin feminine princess, they get a shell of that.

The knight/prince isn't perfect either but that's due to the decline in value.


Ofcourse this is just my observation, of normal guys. Not the alphas playboys and womanizers on this site.

Post: #31

(11-07-2018 04:41 PM)Donfitz007 Wrote:  My observation concludes that many men want something of more value, whether that be a LTR or a girl who is committed to them. Men want something special, as in not an easy whore.

Every man wants The Virgin princess that they saved from the dragon after fighting an entire castle of skeletons.

Every woman wants to be that princess that put the Knight/Prince through Hell.

The problem is, The value of women have declined. Now instead of an innocent virgin feminine princess, they get a shell of that.

The knight/prince isn't perfect either but that's due to the decline in value.


Ofcourse this is just my observation, of normal guys. Not the alphas playboys and womanizers on this site.

Agreed. It's what Rollo Tomassi wrote about so well, every man wants to be loved absolutely and unconditionally. But a woman can never provide that. When I read that and understood the implication of it, not gonna lie, it was a harsh truth to take. Men can never be loved the way they crave, the absolute and total way the woman of their dreams would love them.

Yes, and I think it's fair to say every man wants that. Even Roosh, after proving he can get the girls went for the LTR, his youtube video on how he got rid of a girl he was in an LTR with, his articles almost yearning for a woman worthy of being a wife, I think it's understandable. In the end you want to pick one.

I think I want to be careful and not be like women, to be too picky. But then I don't want a fat chick that's stupid with 48 ex boyfriends either, you have to have some standards. It's finding that nice balance of standard and what is achievable in reality that's so hard, plus women change, we change. As soon as you pick one though THAT's when the price of pussy goes up dramatically. Some men are ruined by it. Getting the pussy is not so expensive. It's keeping it that is.

Post: #32

(11-07-2018 01:48 PM)corsega Wrote:  Until women figure out a way to reproduce by themselves, male sexual market value will remain constant. It is not in decline.

But that's the thing. They have convinced themselves that their biological imperative is no longer to reproduce. They think they are much more than baby making machines and even revolt at the idea (despite what biology says).

Their new imperative is validation. How much can they get in a day? In an hour? In a minute? There is no limit. It's insatiable.

Feminists and weak men have allowed us to get to this point.

Post: #33

(11-07-2018 02:20 PM)Montrose Wrote:  I think the question is not well framed. Consider an analogy with dowry. In certain countries (India), women (or her family) must pay the husband to get married. In other countries (Islamic), the husband pays money to the bride family. Marriage brings value to both participants, but depending on the culture either men or women must pay the cost of the deal.

Using that analogy we see that on certain sex markets, men must pay (in money or in time and effort) a certain amount to get pussy. Call that the cost of pussy. That amount depends on the market and varies with time. In a market where men are very horny/desperate and women very prudish, we expect the cost of sex to be very high (or in OP’s terms, the SMV of men to be very low). Conversely, in a market where women are ugly and easy like the West now, we would expect the cost of pussy to be very low or negative, but that is not the case. Cost of pussy seems to have increased. This is a paradox.

Also:

Women in the East = Pay up front. Cash.

Women in the West = Pay later. Credit with huge interest. (divorce rape)

Post: #34

(11-07-2018 03:34 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  Funniest thing is, muscles don’t mean anything when it comes to women. I’d been lifting hard from 19-28 and was pretty big - women never gave me the time of day.

At 28 I got shredded and my face completely changed. I also looked like a twig. It’s as if I became a male model, I would get random, beautiful women smiling at me and some older women would aggressively pursue/eyefuck me to the point where it felt creepy.

Muscle means nothing unless you have the facial aesthetics to back it up.

What did you do to all of a sudden become shredded?

Post: #35

Unfavourable Demographics in the First Place + Feminism + Social Media = It's Over

Post: #36

(11-07-2018 05:15 PM)Cheetah Wrote:  

(11-07-2018 03:34 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  Funniest thing is, muscles don’t mean anything when it comes to women. I’d been lifting hard from 19-28 and was pretty big - women never gave me the time of day.

At 28 I got shredded and my face completely changed. I also looked like a twig. It’s as if I became a male model, I would get random, beautiful women smiling at me and some older women would aggressively pursue/eyefuck me to the point where it felt creepy.

Muscle means nothing unless you have the facial aesthetics to back it up.

What did you do to all of a sudden become shredded?

If you're referring to my gym routine, nothing different than before, except I pushed far beneath my usual bodyfat percentage. It's extremely hard work getting that low.

Post: #37

(11-07-2018 02:40 PM)Montrose Wrote:  Cost of pussy is increasing and pussy quality is declining. Women are responding rationally to the impossibility of obtaining commitment on the sex market by raising prices and lowering quality.

this ^

(11-07-2018 02:52 PM)RatInTheWoods Wrote:  Welfare.

cultural marxism and this ^

(11-07-2018 02:48 PM)tomzestatlu Wrote:  ((()))

because of this ^

Post: #38

(11-07-2018 04:02 PM)gework Wrote:  

(11-07-2018 01:48 PM)corsega Wrote:  Yet if you think about it logically, "the decline of male SMV" makes no logical sense.

I read your site - 2017 - 28 bangs, average 6.03. I can tell you're smart and I'm assuming you are a 7.5+; yet in 2017 you banged one 7.5. That's what I am referring to by the decline of SMV.

OK, I see what you mean now. That's very generous of you, but I'm a 6 at best. 5.5 face, 8 body. So I'm shooting at about my level.

Post: #39

(11-07-2018 01:55 PM)firat113 Wrote:  ...

Take a look at what i found during my one day experiment on tinder, i couldn't handle this fake shit anymore but this is what i screenshot before i deleted the app. (private information censored with red)

...

Damn, I'm not moving back to Denmark . At least here in Bulgaria only about 1 in a 100 actually bothers to write anything on their profile.

Post: #40

I don't like to admit it, but the main answer comes down to one thing:

They don't need us.

They get their base income from jobs, they get their validation from social media and friend group, they party with their friends, they get a dick once every other week, could be the same guy for a couple months.

A large portion of young and beautiful women (in the NY metro) are single for long periods of time, while they have hundreds if not thousands of men on tap through their apps and friend group. They want to hold out for a huge alpha (pro athlete, world traveling IG star, etc) and continue the rest of their life.

My market value in my area is very high-but I don't have status or fame. I can't seem to lock an 8+ girl down, but I get a good amount of bangs and dates with 8-9 range. So I have access to a lot of hotties on my social media accounts, and most of them are not in "public" relationships. What that means is they might have a boyfriend on the sly, but they keep him off their instagram so she can still field orders.

The solution is to actively screen for women with a plan, women with a timeframe of family and children. You don't want to be convincing modern women to steer out of their fast lane lifestyle.

Post: #41

It's simple, the ratio of males to females now leans more towards males. In the prime ages for dating and hook-ups, mainly your 20s and part of your 30s, single men outnumber single women in almost all major US cities. Now what this does is it simply creates thirst because most men are simps with no game, they pander to average women which in turn inflates the ego of a lot of women out there.

In old times, most prime aged men went off to war which led to a lack of men hence the game was rigged in favor of men. Now, we have a lot of prime aged men hopping on the internet and social media to kiss up to women, send them cringey love messages, whiteknight for average looking women and come on to most women with thirst. What this has done is left women on guard and given them that massive ego, men let women get away with a lot more and that includes stuff like radical feminism and the war on masculinity, all for just five more minutes of her time.

Its kind of ironic, we fight for manhood and masculinity but at the end of the day, as a gender we face setbacks due to the fact that there are too many of those of our gender out there. I always tell men that most men are not your friends, they will backstab you in a heartbeat for some pussy, the whole bros before hoes does not apply to most guys. Most guys are misguided tools who will turn into simp for any woman who is remotely attractive and the fact that we are in a society where single men are outnumbering single women has led to this phenomenon being amplified.

But, you're in more control as a guy than you may think, a couple posts on the first page especially by Corsega are pure gold.

You can go out there to adjust to the times which means building your social media following, taking good photos, representing your life in an awesome way and making an awesome life for yourself.

You can control where you live and what city you move to.

If you cannot control that, you can work towards being financially independent or at least having some options there. Have an excuse? Get the fuck out, the game isn't for wimps anyways.

Most of all, you can capitalize on the fact that your fellow man sucks.

Your fellow man will continue his downfall, he will not improve his life or his situation. As cold as it sounds, let most of your fellow men who will backstab masculinity itself in a heartbeat fall on their own swords. Let them perish in unemployment, a whiteknight mindset and a mediocre life.

You can go out there, accept the reality for what it is, do something about it and absolutely dominate in the game.

No matter what anyone says about online dating, it is legit and here to stay.

I am a minority (Indian) and I have managed to absolutely kill it on online dating. At my peak, I could schedule multiple dates a week with above average looking women. I took good photos, portrayed my life in an awesome way and got plenty of action from dating apps. Even in recent weeks as I have improved my life, I have continued to do well in online dating. Find the solution, don't whine about the times.

Post: #42

I voted for girls overestimating their SMV due to apps/online. However, all of this (welfare, LBGT, indoctrination education and so on) has come about over the last century due to women getting the vote along with tech in the last decade.

Post: #43

(11-07-2018 08:54 PM)a beer is enough Wrote:  It's simple, the ratio of males to females now leans more towards males. In the prime ages for dating and hook-ups, mainly your 20s and part of your 30s, single men outnumber single women in almost all major US cities. Now what this does is it simply creates thirst because most men are simps with no game, they pander to average women which in turn inflates the ego of a lot of women out there.

Is this really so? I've heard it mentioned a lot on this forum that the gender ratios in the West are unfavourable to men, but the evidence I've seen contradicts this:

New York: 47% male, 53% female (http://newyork.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm)

London: 48% male, 52% female (https://www.london.ca/About-London/commu...d-Sex.aspx)

Toronto: 48% male, 52% female (http://worldpopulationreview.com/world-c...opulation/)

And in every Australian capital city except Darwin, females outnumber males - http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/3235.0

It's possible that some of these stats are distorted by age distributions (maybe there are way more older women than younger ones) but I'm not so sure - men are more likely to emigrate, join the military and be posted to some remote base, be rural farmers, or work in mining; women are more likely to go to the major cities to pursue university education and jobs in service industries and government bureaucracies.

Certainly the ratios are unfavourable on dating apps and in nightlife venues, but I haven't seen much evidence that this is replicated across the broader population, particularly in the major capital cities in the West.

Post: #44

(11-07-2018 09:40 PM)Ouroboros Wrote:  

(11-07-2018 08:54 PM)a beer is enough Wrote:  It's simple, the ratio of males to females now leans more towards males. In the prime ages for dating and hook-ups, mainly your 20s and part of your 30s, single men outnumber single women in almost all major US cities. Now what this does is it simply creates thirst because most men are simps with no game, they pander to average women which in turn inflates the ego of a lot of women out there.

Is this really so? I've heard it mentioned a lot on this forum that the gender ratios in the West are unfavourable to men, but the evidence I've seen contradicts this:

New York: 47% male, 53% female (http://newyork.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm)

London: 48% male, 52% female (https://www.london.ca/About-London/commu...d-Sex.aspx)

Toronto: 48% male, 52% female (http://worldpopulationreview.com/world-c...opulation/)

And in every Australian capital city except Darwin, females outnumber males - http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/3235.0

It's possible that some of these stats are distorted by age distributions (maybe there are way more older women than younger ones) but I'm not so sure - men are more likely to emigrate, join the military and be posted to some remote base, or be rural farmers; women are more likely to go to the major cities to pursue university education and jobs in service industries.

Certainly the ratios are unfavourable on dating apps and in nightlife venues, but I haven't seen much evidence that this is replicated across the broader population, particularly in the major capital cities in the West.

Bold = absolutely true

Scroll down on this link to find that it only starts to favor men after the age of 35.

Post: #45

(11-07-2018 05:19 PM)LexisNexis Wrote:  Unfavourable Demographics in the First Place + Feminism + Social Media = It's Over

We over complicate it, but the real core issue is unfavorable demographics. That is it. Even a small shift in demographics can create havoc.

More men than women means the rise of feminism - where men will suffer. More women than men means the rise of masculinity - where women will suffer.

This dynamic has been going on since the beginning.

In the end it is nature that corrects the matter no matter how hard we artificially try to do so.

Right now nature is already balancing itself out by likely creating more women and less men in the next generations.

Men movements have already started and have created the ground work. Once the demographics change to favor men -- there will be a powerful surge in masculinity and putting it back in control of the social order.


We can talk all about the various grand theories of why there is low male smv -- but it will mean little in the end.

All we can do is wait and allow nature to re balance itself. In the mean time keep up with game.

Post: #46

(11-07-2018 09:48 PM)a beer is enough Wrote:  Bold = absolutely true

Scroll down on this link to find that it only starts to favor men after the age of 35.

If this data is correct, it still wouldn't be the major factor that has caused the SMP to alter so drastically since the early 2000s 'PUA Golden Era' - unless gender ratios have changed equally drastically in that same time period.

Post: #47

(11-07-2018 09:40 PM)Ouroboros Wrote:  

(11-07-2018 08:54 PM)a beer is enough Wrote:  It's simple, the ratio of males to females now leans more towards males. In the prime ages for dating and hook-ups, mainly your 20s and part of your 30s, single men outnumber single women in almost all major US cities. Now what this does is it simply creates thirst because most men are simps with no game, they pander to average women which in turn inflates the ego of a lot of women out there.

Is this really so? I've heard it mentioned a lot on this forum that the gender ratios in the West are unfavourable to men, but the evidence I've seen contradicts this:

New York: 47% male, 53% female (http://newyork.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm)

London: 48% male, 52% female (https://www.london.ca/About-London/commu...d-Sex.aspx)

Toronto: 48% male, 52% female (http://worldpopulationreview.com/world-c...opulation/)

And in every Australian capital city except Darwin, females outnumber males - http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/3235.0

It's possible that some of these stats are distorted by age distributions (maybe there are way more older women than younger ones) but I'm not so sure - men are more likely to emigrate, join the military and be posted to some remote base, be rural farmers, or work in mining; women are more likely to go to the major cities to pursue university education and jobs in service industries and government bureaucracies.

Certainly the ratios are unfavourable on dating apps and in nightlife venues, but I haven't seen much evidence that this is replicated across the broader population, particularly in the major capital cities in the West.

I have lived in London and Toronto.

I would have to disagree with those stats, the two cities aren't even close.

London has a huge influx of foreign girls that move from other countries to live their permanently.

Toronto doesn't have the luxury of so many foreign girls moving here, we get a few girls that come from other towns/cities in Canada.

I don't know what are the age demographics are for those stats.

Post: #48

delete

Post: #49

Do you think a disease suddenly striking your country and making every woman suddenly gain 20 lbs would have an effect on female SMV? How about if it commonly came with disfiguring marks like smallpox. That's the net result (on men) of the cultural changes and splits being encourages by the TPTB. They've succesfully made every man on earth "fatter" and uglier" by continually portraying his function in society is an evil predator taking advantage pf women on multiple levels or a clueless buffoon, instead of a vital partner that protects your family the cold hard reality out there and offers sage advice. Endless "make work" jobs for women have had the desired effect of convincing wonen they're far more "independent" that they are in real life, and that it's the men that are the dead weight.

Women have to engage in unrestrained hypergamy because they've been been suddenly convinced is what they have to do to find their "equal". Make not mistake, it's a war we'er fighting, and there are casualties.

Post: #50

I would say all of the above.