Hi, I guess I wanted to ask red-pill men... But unfortunately you have to join that group in order to post there, so I'll just ask you girls, instead.

Do you think SMV (Sexual Market Value) is something that actually exists, or is it more so a kind of illusion... Something that is used to justify ageism, sexism, ableism, and promiscuity?

I know the theory behind SMV is supposed to reflect certain biological realities — but those realities exist for the purposes of 'Natural Selection,' of procreation, and aren't necessarily relevant to the way Red Pill uses the theory.

An example would be of the talented Sabrina Carpenter — She's young, youthful, traditionally attractive, and healthy/fit — but the biological reality is that she's under 5 feet tall, and that's not a trait that is generally bred for. She's dating a man under 5'10", and would probably have to have a husband over 6' in order to have tall children. (Don't get me wrong, I know it's possible for short women to have tall kids, and to have tall fathers or tall men in their family — it's just less likely.) I know she's not perfect, or anything, she doesn't have an ideal "waist to hip ratio" or anything like that, but still, she's pretty cute... And really, no one is perfect. Though, for all intents and purposes, she's essentially an ideal Redpill female — mostly for her slightly child/like appearance.

There are tons of other examples, as well, of SMV theory not necessarily working in reality.

Not to brag or anything... But when I was younger I used to always stop traffic, but now my walks to the store are pleasantly quiet, with only the occasional honk (from a probably much older man, that I wouldn't be interested in) to disturb me on my journey... Though, even though I've always dressed modestly and have a good figure, none of these honks, or jump-scares, while walking down the street... Ever resulted in actual dates for me. The type of guys that would approach me were generally over-confident guys, with not a lot going for them, (except for maybe they worked out, or something, to justify or explain their overconfidence) and these guys would always give me weird stalker vibes, and try to "knock me down a peg" in order to approach me. (Not my type, to say the least!)

My mom was absolutely beautiful when she was younger, she used her "SMV" (insomuch as it theoretically exists) as an advantage when she was a cocktail waitress, making huge tips every night — and eventually married my father, a millionaire, who essentially left her (and us) penniless in their divorce. And I so I never thought of a man as a way of making money, but rather as an obstacle to having money... And besides, doesn't it make more sense for a woman to make a lot of money and then date a younger, more attractive man, already in her new income bracket — than to date an older man who has money, that can easily be denied or taken away from her?

In my experience "SMV-Theory" is generally used by uneducated, blue-collar guys to try to convince blue-collar women that they should be financially dependent on them... Or for more accomplished men to justify dating much younger women, (from either the same or a lower income bracket) but never does it suggest that either of these outcomes are ideal, for either the man or the women, and if these things reflected actual biological reality — Then wouldn't the goal of SMV be raising children, versus "having a high body count?" (Especially if you're a male?)

In short... Does SMV actually add up to something real, something you can take to the bank?