So let's assume that men reasonably adapt to women's new expectations based on technological and political changes. Men aren't working harder than women, or men historically; but their efforts are better calibrated to what women truly want these days. So men are not underperforming.

And let's assume that this is modern life, and there are no real economic or protection incentives here. This is based just on voluntary desire to pair up based on companionship and sexual desire.

So take a 50th percentile woman in SMV as determined by male criteria. What percentile man, as determined by women's modern SMV criteria, is really her match? What is 'fair' or 'appropriate' given our innate biology? What kind of matching would be indicative that something is wrong with our culture or that women's expectations are too high or low, even for her own happiness?

For perspective, since it is accepted that biologically women have evolved to be more sexually selective than men, with some degree of hypergamy as well, a 50th percentile woman was never a match for a 50th percentile man. It is true that the costs of pregnancy and childcare that this asymmetry is based on are much lower now, but they are still there. And regardless, the evolved instincts are what they are; they do not change nearly as quickly as the underlying environment.

So, for example, maybe a 50th percentile female to a 60 the percentile male match is appropriate, but if it takes a 75th percentile man to get a 50th percentile woman, then maybe that is a red flag. And of course, dynamics might not scale linearly up and down the respective SMV hierarchies. Action may be different at the top or the bottom, which complicates conceptualizing this.

Edit: Another complication is timing. Are things different in the 20s as compared to when women get past 30, etc.

At any rate, comments and ideas welcome.