There was a post on here recently talking about numerous models (one of whom was adrianna lima if i recall) who had partners cheat on them. One user quickly claimed that this was predictable as both these women got with "high value men". The rational was simply that even high value super models cannot keep high value men loyal to them, that such men will always have options and always been inclined to act on them even when they have a literal model waiting for them at home.

But surely this can be applied to other strata of men. If a 9/10 man will cheat on a 9/10 woman simply because he has novelous 7/10 options, what's stopping a 5/10 man cheating on a 5/10 woman with 3/10 options? What's more, due to women and men's aging different (assuming they both take care of themselves) he will inevitably always surpass her in RMV(SMV). When those models are in their 50s those 9/10 men will probably still be 9/10 maybe 8/10 for example. The point can be generalised that in a couple where both are of equal RMV(SMV) the man will still be inclined to use his lower SMV options, and even more so when the woman's RMV(SMV) inevitably drops to lower than his.

The obvious solution to this from a female perspective is to date down. Date a man with lower SMV in order to counter his urge to cheat and ensure his lasting interest in you once your SMV starts plummeting faster than his. But as TRP will tell you women can't happily date down, and will invariably cheat or look to branch swing. This seems like a logistics issue. Obviously human interactions are complex and cannot be summarised in simple RMV/SMV values but if this logic is the basis of TRP I wonder what they consider the solution to this apparent problem.