DAE think the female delusion calculator is inaccurate?

Anonymous_fiend · 2023-10-16T01:52:05+00:00

It’s pretty accurate but it’s a generalization. If you’re in a HCOL area there’s more higher earning men- vice versa for rural areas. But if your social circle is lower you aren’t likely to date or marry someone who makes 6fig or even 75k even if you live in a hcol area.

Men don’t marry too far down socially and usually stick with someone with a similar background or in their extended social circle. Raising social status is more important than just making more money. Trophy wives often feel excluded. Their children may not fit in the same too. Even women looking to be sahms to high earners tend to have degrees or a business. But they’ll match on every pretty woman. Men tend to swipe more and then filter out matches vs women who filter out men and only swipe on ones they’re interested in. These men matching you just means you’re above their baseline requirement and not that they’d marry or even date you.

In day to day life (not in fancy restaurants/clubs/social spaces) how many rich, tall, not fat, unmarried men do you actually see? Women tend to filter out average men irl too. There’s tons of average Joe office workers, tradesmen, restaurant staff, drivers/transport, retail workers, etc. There’s also plenty of married and/or shorter high earning men.

Glittering-You-1534 · 2023-10-16T07:01:13+00:00

My take is that it's a pointless issue. If you're marrying someone because they're over 6 ft and earn over a certain amount, your marriage is doomed anyway.

Life can and does happen. Your 6 ft guy could end up in a wheelchair and that $100,000 could become a disability pension. And if those things happen and there's not a deep connection between the two of you built from something real, you're both screwed.

And I say this as someone who's 6'3 husband ended up on oxygen 24/7 after rapid onset Lupus destroyed his lungs and while he's better now he still can't work and will be dead in the next 5 years most likely.

We've been married for 28 years, but our foundation was made on something real. Does he have money? No. Is he physically strong and healthy? No. But he loves me more than any human on this earth ever has, he supports me in everything I do. He grows with me, teaches me, learns from me, he is the best human I have ever met. And I would have missed out on him if I'd been looking for money.

ecstaticfenatic · 2023-10-16T01:28:14+00:00

On the surface, it seems WILD that only 1 in 100 American men between the ages of 24-29, including all races, meet the following standards:

Not married 6 feet tall Not obese Earns 70k or higher

But when you consider each point one by one, it makes total sense:

<15% of the male population is 6 feet tall. This is a known fact. So when women say "gotta be 6 feet", they instantly vaporize 85% of male prospects.

About 35% of American men in this age range are obese. And far fewer are actually fit.

And to be making $70,000 a year in your mid to late means you very likely went to college and picked a technical, high demand major. Or you're in a management or high-demans trade field. These will generally be older men.

Well, only about 30-35% of men in this age range have even graduated college. This is also a well known fact. And fewer still got a degree in a high demand field.

And to put it all together, if you're a tall, physically fit, and high-earning (yes, 70k is high earning for a man in his mid to late 20s) man... You have a good chance of having already been snatched up!

It's called the female delusion calculator for a reason. Many women, naturally, can NOT believe it to be true.

Because...well... Many women are deluded... Or at least have a very distorted perception of the dating market.

Think about how many men you swipe left on without a 2nd thought on dating apps. Hundreds. Thousands.

Think about how many men are obese hermits binging on junk food and video games after pulling their 10 hour night shifts. The number is many.

Women must get this through their heads:

Successful, competent, fit, wealthy men are RARE!

Taco-Beans · 2023-10-15T23:22:30+00:00

It is inaccurate because it's about how many men like that exist, not how many you will meet/attract.

Tiamingthx · 2023-10-15T23:25:46+00:00

Yes and no. If it was more localised to areas, cities, suburbs then it would be quite accurate.

capsuccessful1294 · 2023-10-16T05:13:55+00:00

Lol the problem is - can you actually land a guy like that? Just because they matched doesn't mean they want anything besides sex from you.

Suitable_Ad5971 · 2023-10-16T08:29:15+00:00

I tried it on myself. I had the man be single 5ft making 10k a year. I still got 3 cat bags. The only way to get the 0/1 cat bag. Is to accept anything. Married, any race, any age or any income.

lIllIlllIl · 2023-10-16T00:10:37+00:00

Just because someone matched with you does not mean that they would marry you. Most men just swipe right until they reach the end without even looking at the photos.

youllknowwhenitstime · 2023-10-15T23:24:13+00:00

The calculator makes a pretty basic statistics mistake. Traits clump together, especially traits for which you'd expect there to be an evolutionary reason to co-occur. For example, 60% of Fortune 500 CEOs are over six feet tall, compared to just 15% of the general population. The calculator's formula would have it saying only 15% of those CEOs are over six feet tall, underestimating the co-occurrence of the traits by 4 times.

Also, you're probably young, not overweight, and not a financial wreck yourself. If you're easily hitting 100 matches that meet that criteria, you're probably very high SMV.

Even if you adjust the parameters to a reasonable 5’10 and $75,000

That number is twice the average male income in the US. You're also probably in a HCOL area where only men who have that earning potential stay.

VasiliyZaitzev · 2023-10-16T05:21:04+00:00

matches

Those are guys who (might) want to bone you, not guys are necessarily going to wife you up. Men also tend to use the “shotgun” approach to dating apps. How many of those men did you message? How many message back? Because of the “economics” dating apps, it might be a high percentage, but I would not be surprised if it was less than 100%.

I’m further guessing that you live in an HCOL area, and that salaries are therefore skewed higher.

MoonShimmer1618 · 2023-10-16T10:32:50+00:00

not really, it’s only adapted for US. ex average height is a lot higher in europe. i set it to min 5”9 and 25k and it said only 7.6% match, which is absurd. i wish there was a female version too

mistressusa · 2023-10-16T02:20:26+00:00

I think it's accurate for the population as a whole but, depending on where you personally fall as a women, you may not see it. For example, I would say almost every single man in my daughters' sphere is over 6 ft and is either still in college or making $100k+.

Mighty_Wombat42 · 2023-10-21T02:26:45+00:00

I think that the biggest inaccuracies will be due to things the calculator can’t account for: percentage of men who actually want a monogamous (or open with any restrictions) LTR, and percentage of men who are not married but not looking for another relationship (cohabiting, multiple girlfriends, polyamorous unmarried, volcels). I do think the “cat bag” thing is highly inaccurate. For example, I get 3 cat bags running female delusion calculator with the restrictions of “not married, not obese, income 5K (the minimum)”. This sets me with 30% of the male population in the US. Now, if I go run the “male reality calculator”, I get 3 red pills for criteria that shows me 3.8% of US women (18-25, no mothers, no overweight or obese, white and Asian only, income over 50K).

More importantly, it doesn’t really matter how many men exist who meet my minimum requirements on paper, if I don’t meet theirs. My attempt to come up with equivalently delusional male requirements to the female 666 (white or Asian, not overweight, no kids, age 18-22, height 4’11” to 5’6”, earning over 100K) gave me the number of 70,200 US women who meet that standard. But the percentage of them who are actually romantic options will depend on the man: is he an NBA player, or 40+ living in his mom’s basement? Likewise for me, I used to be obese and I know 30% of the male population was not willing to date me at that point. Since I’ve lost weight, my odds have improved. Still, a lot of those men will either not be attracted to me or be incompatible for any number of reasons.

And the reasons are honestly way more important than the numbers. Which reasons can I do something about, and which should I? Losing weight did nothing to improve my delusion calculator score, but it did a lot to increase my prospects IRL. Likewise, including married men would make me less delusional on the calculator, but would hurt my chances of finding a man willing to be my lawfully wedded husband.

InevitableKiwi5776 · 2023-10-15T23:42:05+00:00

I thought it was very inaccurate, then I realized that I think guys who are 5’8” are tall, so I don’t know anymore lol

TheBunk_TB · 2023-10-16T13:16:36+00:00

Are you shooting in a proverbial barrel or a proverbial lake?

StillWatersLily · 2023-10-18T18:55:43+00:00

I think the percentages generally make sense, but the editorilazation of "how delusional" you are based on that percentage is what's silly. Put in literally no requirements on height, age, weight, income, etc and just select for men who aren't married. Does the level of delusion that it calculates make sense? Is it at all delusional to expect a man to be single if you have absolutely no other requirements? If I say I want someone not obese and not married between ages 18 and 26, it says I'm less delusional than saying I'm looking for any man who isn't married.

leosandlattes · 2023-10-16T03:34:20+00:00

I don’t think it’s inaccurate at all. In fact I think it’s probably very accurate — like 30% of men are obese, 18% make above 100k, and 15% of men are 6’+. You’re eliminating a large chunk of men even just searching for those criteria.

But girlie your matches means you’re high in value — the kind of woman who tall, non-obese, financially successful men would go for. That’s why your dating app results look like that! They’re not in short supply for women who are physically attractive to some degree and are usually also successful in some way, lol. :)

When was the last time you saw a doctor/lawyer/engineer go for a heavier-set chain smoking woman working part time at Burger King? They tend to go for women in their own social proximity, who reflect on them highly among their peers.

I have a lot of high income earners in my family, and they allllllll married people on “their level” so to speak. Even knowing their wives were going to be SAHMs for some years, they still wanted a beautiful, successful partner in her own right.

My engineer dad is married to my nurse mom. My physical therapist uncle is married to his physical therapist wife. My physician great uncle is married to his physician wife. I work in UX design/research and my fiancé is an engineer. You get the idea!

aussiedollface2 · 2023-10-17T10:34:11+00:00

It’s as ridiculous as if they made one for men. Imagine, all men want slim 5’8 nice natural long thick hair, low body count, never married, no kids, under 28, eats a lot but never puts on weight, a good cook, and has a college degree, fertile, smart but not smarter than them. LOL. What percentage of the population is that.

LocalCap5093 · 2023-10-16T07:23:47+00:00

Im ngl- idk if it’s true or not but all my partners have shown up as like 0.0005% or similar crazy numbers and it gave me an internal ego boost lol like maybe I am doing something right 😅🫠 so I just believe in it because good

LateralThinker13 · 2023-10-16T19:52:56+00:00

However, before I deleted my dating app earlier this year, I had close to 100 matches who met this criteria.

LOL you think all the profiles and matches on OLD are real? Seriously? The services themselves have been shown to radically manipulate it to get people to subscribe. It's mostly targetted at men, but those "attractive 18-30 year old women near you waiting for you to swipe!" are almost always nonexistent. For women, men will swipe damn near half of all matches; women, about 5% if that. It's... shocking.

Also, please for the love of God stop confusing a match with a potential relationship. OLD matches only show you your sexual market value, NOT your relationship market value. IOW, how many men are willing to pump and dump you.

Stop mistaking matches for validation. Matches mean nothing.

Now all that being said, YES, the delusion calculator's math is a bit wonky but not completely wrong. 14% of men are 6'. 17% of men make 100k+. 63% of men are not obese/overweight.

The calculator cannot tell how much those three overlap. Just multiplying them together gets you 1.5%. They also solve for age, offer ethnicity, married status, etc. But it's not unrealistic to point out that you're really selecting for a small portion of men. Just on height alone, if you require 6', you're down to 1 in 7 men in the US. And height doesn't predict for relationship success, viability, or really anything useful other than superficial appearance. You're invalidating 6 in 7 of men over something they cannot control and is not relevant to the quality of a relationship with them: if that isn't self-sabotage, what is?

The FDC is there to make you understand not the true odds, but to understand that all your requirements for a potential mate RADICALLY limit the chances you will find one. Womens' arbitrary and often stupid checklist of male attributes they think they have to have are only hurting their chances of ever finding a life partner.

AutoModerator · 2023-10-15T23:10:39+00:00

Title: DAE think the female delusion calculator is inaccurate?

Full text: The calculator makes it seem like there’s a .0005% chance of finding a man who is single, over 6 foot, and makes over $100,000. Even if you adjust the parameters to a reasonable 5’10 and $75,000, the numbers don’t change much.

However, before I deleted my dating app earlier this year, I had close to 100 matches who met this criteria. Most of my exes have as well. So t doesn’t seem like tall, high earning men are in that short of supply.

What is your take? I think I heard someone say that if you live in a decent sized city, .0005% is still hundreds or thousands of men.

^{This is the original text of the post and this is an automated service}

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Title	DAE think the female delusion calculator is inaccurate?
Author	ComfortableHeron947
Upvotes	34
Comments	73
Date	October 15, 2023 11:10 PM UTC (2 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/RedPillWomen
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/178rss2/dae_think_the_female_delusion_calculator_is/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/RedPillWomen/dae-think-the-female-delusion-calculator-is.1235257 https://theredarchive.com/post/1235257

Comments