An early 20s woman is afforded many luxuries over an equivalent guy, merely due to abundance.

Gravel_Roads · 2019-02-04T11:33:53+00:00

It sounds like you're basing your view of how things work for everyone on your own anecdotal experiences.

I had no problem with girls even when I was working in retail. In fact I straight up flirted with all the cute girls and got some numbers/Instas etc.

Once I put up an ad on a site similar to Craigslist to sell used phones and ended up hooking up with a girl who bought one haha can't believe I forgot that one. How we got to that from talking about purchasing a phone I have no idea... but did I have status no I was some guy selling used phones. And she was flirting with me on WhatsApp before she even saw what I looked like.

I'm not anywhere near six foot or rich nor do I make an effort to entertain anyone, although people tell me I'm just fun to be around. I don't make any effort though.

Oh also a lot of the girls I've been with were in university and myself am a dropout. Didn't seem to be problem.

So my own anecdotes out of the way here's what I think...

I honestly think guys on PPD make a mistake when they want to put their failures down to only one specific factor. Here you're blaming everything on not being high status enough. But life is never so black and white. A multitude of factors will affect if a woman finds you attractive. Your job and education is only one element. If you are only looking for ONS or FWB it's a fairly small one too, although it does matter much more in the RMV.

If that really is your problem every time, maybe stop going after UMC types who inflate the value of university and fancy jobs and go for working class women instead.

PPD has an issue with this too where it's all only in extremes... either she is a stereotype of Stacy the rich sorority girl or a broke single mum. No there's plenty of space in the middle. Go for those. They tend to be more grounded.

Gravel_Roads · 2019-02-04T09:59:00+00:00

I think there's more benefit to focusing on the unique problems each individual faces rather than assume the problems of an entire demographic.

SOME women in their 20's are in the same socio-economic demographic as you. Some of them are happy, some of them aren't. Some are in a lower social sphere as you, and they're happy. Some are higher than you and they aren't happy.

Some women in their 20's are raised in poverty -- I would guess they have fewer luxuries than the average white male living in the suburbs, yanno? Do black women have more luxuries than white men? Do lesbians have more luxuries than straight men? Do white disabled women have easier times than black queer men?

You also have to define what luxuries you're referring to... Not everyone values the same thing. I don't personally consider a legion of desperate incels wanting to have sex with you to be much of luxury, yanno? I really enjoy the fact that, as a dude, my value tends to be placed on what I'm capable of -- women are rarely inherently valued for what they work hard at so much as what their bodies are shaped like. For a woman who has little skill but was born with a pretty face, this might be a plus.

But for women who work hard at their craft or trade, I can see how that would be extremely discouraging. It seems very YMMV and dependent on what you personally value from society.

EDIT:

In my experience, a guy basically has to be the entertainer on a date. Often, to try to be entertaining, guy will talk too much. Or, they will be totally dull to not act 'weird' or too comfortable or whatever. Either way, the fact that they have to 'win over' the counterpart already puts them at a disadvantage

BOTH people on a date should be entertaining. Just because you are feeling pressure to perform doesn't mean SHE isn't as well. Women are equally awkward and nervous-feeling on a date. Assuming they aren't is a sign that you are still pedestalizing women. They aren't secretly in control of anything -- they're as uncertain as you are. They also don't know when to talk, or how much to talk, or if they're talking too much, or if they're being annoying, or if they're making you uncomfortable.

Some people are just more nervous in social situations than others. Some people are not nervous, but they're still awkward. Some people are secretly nervous and you might never know, because they hide it.

Aaren_Augustine · 2019-02-04T09:50:20+00:00

Once you get the TRP concepts, you need to stop talking like you are still learning the concepts because it sounds ridiculous. Date women that are going to be into you. These women will do cool shit in bed; not star fish your ass and then call you unimpressive.

Undervalued girls? Some of these incel like mentalities are straight up hypergamous like they want a hot chick as an accessory to inflate their vaginal ego. Now you can afford many luxuries dating a 'undervalued' woman and why would you go and put a number on that? Why would you call that undervalued; YOU'RE being over valued by a woman.

And live on you own. Why the hell are you living with your parents if you have a good job?

LoseMoneyAllWeek · 2019-02-05T01:44:29+00:00

Full stop:

Women want someone better than they are. Women do not in anyway prefer an equal.

For them it’s a status symbol, like a purse.

GridReXX · 2019-02-04T13:37:40+00:00

Abundance is only part of it.

The biggest factor that leads to this disparity in thirst is that women don’t thirst in the same way men do. We don’t have boners. We don’t see an objectively hot guy walking down the street and have a physical reaction that makes us think, “must fuck!”

See how a guy with low-T and low sexual virility behaves. I’m sure he’s a lot pickier and seemingly disinterested. Probably takes a lot to pique his interest. Probably doesn’t take much to turn him off, as he doesn’t have a throbbing dick encouraging him to stay the course.

And I guess some women do thirst for relationships. But those women behave differently than women who are genuinely attracted to you. Though I think women who are desperate for relationships for the security and parenting and comfort aspect are the best match for certain BB guys.

babyfacedOle · 2019-02-04T23:58:13+00:00

In my experience, a guy basically has to be the entertainer on a date. Often, to try to be entertaining, guy will talk too much. Or, they will be totally dull to not act 'weird' or too comfortable or whatever. Either way, the fact that they have to 'win over' the counterpart already puts them at a disadvantage

This line of thinking is what leads people to advise you to "just be yourself, man". Unless you're dating way out of your league, it's a two way game. You're getting to know one another. It really isn't any more complicated than asking her about herself, finding out ways you can relate etc. Chemistry either is there or it isn't.

-Guys get penalized way harder for social standing measures. I'm a dude with a really good job compared to most peers, but I've been living at home for the first year following college grad. Girls who do live on their own seem to be very unwilling to date a guy in my situation. But I don't think the inverse would be remotely salient. The same goes for education level, I know many girls who are either in low earning potential career or have outright dropped out, and it doesn't seem to hurt their prospects

Agreed - but it's part of a bigger picture. To most men it's irrelevant whether or not a woman lives by herself in her early 20s. But to women, it's unattractive if you do so. Still, you could probably get a pass if you're very physically attractive. It all adds up.

1) Women will likely set the standard at guys who showed them interest, but were not relationship interested. Therefore, they think that's their true level, when it's really below that.

This seems to clearly be the issue for some women yes. Far from all of them though. Terms such as "fuckboys" or "players" kind of symbolize how women understand that certain men only want them for sex.

2) For many women, their peak is in early 20s. Therefore, they look at the past and that sets their expectation for how hot and socially valuable they are, without realizing that it is quickly fleeting.

I think this is very dependent on socioeconomic status. Women who do a lot of tanning, smoking, don't work out etc (typically low SES) quickly lose their looks after their early 20s. Women who take care of their looks remain attractive for far longer. Women with a higher SES are typically more intelligent as well and understand the concept of sexual market value.

What do y'all think?

I think you'd change your mind if you moved out. Living at home both lowers your attractiveness directly through it's implications, and indirectly through it's effect on your confidence. Women are risk averse when evaluating a dating partner. Living at home is a huge potential red flag, even if it's a false one for you.

J_Milton_Jr · 2019-02-04T10:07:12+00:00

I guess this is mainly an argument about how a 6 or 7 guy has it way worse than a 6 or 7 girl.

For a certain time yes, from a certain age, the whole thing turns around.

But at a young age (up to 29ish and some women beyond) women are clearly on the longer lever.

From an evolutionary point of view, this also makes sense (in modern times, however, the reproduction of the "bad" genes is promoted instead of prevented) even in the animal kingdom, the male usually courts the female, and not vice versa.

Title	An early 20s woman is afforded many luxuries over an equivalent guy, merely due to abundance.
Author	babyfacedOle
Upvotes	9
Comments	78
Date	February 4, 2019 4:32 AM UTC (7 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/amy1eu/an_early_20s_woman_is_afforded_many_luxuries_over/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/an-early-20s-woman-is-afforded-many-luxuries-over.257460 https://theredarchive.com/post/257460

Comments