everywomanshero
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- May 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,814
- Reaction score
- 36
One thing that comes up a lot when we discuss attraction is value. What the hell is value anyway?
A) Does a famous actress have more value than a similar looking woman who is poor?
B) Would you be more likely to invite a homeless man into your home or a man who is a self-made millionaire?
Now, the answers will vary somewhat. For example. if you're suffering from LSE, you might choose the latter on A (poor woman), and if you're a true religious nut (not a TV preacher) you may well choose the former on B (homeless man). However, I think it is reasonable to conclude a typical person (read: most people) will choose just the opposite.
WHY?
We are socially conditioned to see people with certain positions, forms of dress, and behaviors as more valuable. It runs an entire gradiant from Dr. 90120 down to somewhere really low, like I dunno, a homeless guy or Tom Cruise. I know, I know, someone will say "I'd let a homeless guy in before Dr. 90120"... but the real reason you'd do that is Dr. 90120 have enough value to bang your wife, whereas the homeless guy doesn't
There is also a cycle going here: People look at others' behaviors to determine how to think/feel/act in an ambigious situation. Over time this means that once a trend gets started it will be hard to break and can be explioted.... but that's another topic.
HOW?
To be honest I am still trying to understand this one. Deductively, I think we can understand some of it quite easily, though.
Money: Very rich people (all other things equal) tend to have higher status than poor people. They are rich so they can afford lots of toys, are generally esteemed in their hoodz, can afford to get problems fixed (acne, teeth, mental health), gain further economic advantage through networking and better schools, have less anxiety to deal with, and can afford to swoon women. Nonetheless, despite all this many rich men are still lonely due to bad beliefs or a little too much swooning and not enough understanding! However, being "rich" (subjective by location, obviously) is something that makes one stand out to many women. If he combones even a small amount of game, dressing well, and social skills, then he almost certainly has lots of women wishing to reproduce with him, therefore, he is a challenge to win over.
Fame: Fame doesn't have to be outrageous fame like a great actor. Fame can be locally famous also: a known seducer, a local band, an athelete at college, etc. Fame implies preselection, social acceptance by *relevant* peers, in some cases the disapproval by certain "types" of people (parents, bores) may even be appealing, it can imply richness (see above), and it implies an interesting life that will add value to her's should she form an alliance. Whether locally or internationally, being famous is something that makes one stand out. It is interesting. He is certainly a challange because he has many choices.
Sheep Effect: It's been widely realized in the "community" that being seen with other women alone (giving the appearance that other women selected one) generates a good deal of value. In an ambigious situation (who you are and your social status) women look at how other women treat you to help determine how to respond. This is known as a cognitive shortcut, we use hundreds of similar ones each day and could not function effeciently in modern society without them. Even if a woman knows about this, she will not likely be able to stop herself from being effected by it. I have personally witnessed the extreme power of this effect. It is truly amazing. The guy who has 3 women chasing him down stands out. He is certainly a challange because he has many choices.
The pattern in all of these is that these guys stand out, they are seen as something valuable to obtain (granted in somewhat different types) by peer groups, and they are assumed to be a challange because they *should* be valuable and desirable to lots of different women. They are a scarce resource that is in demand. They are automatically triggering preselection switches, scarcity switches (if she isn't careful someone else will get him), and so on.
The men are deemed the selector in these cases. The women have to win him over. This fundementally changes the whole thing right from the start. One of the "enemies of attraction" as DeAngelo would say is being a game who was won before it ever started. Women want to be desirable, not the last resort of desperate men.
I hope this won't send anyone into depression, because it's worth mentioning that being able to have a great conversation with women is incredibly valuable to them (also a scarce resource), and also sends a preselection switch. If you can do that with her, then she knows that many women will be willing to sleep with you.
Something we almost never talk about is reciprocity and liking. With many women just letting them know you like them in a unique and desirable manner is enough to generate similar feelings. You have value because you were the one guy secure enough and savvy enough to do that and give her that feeling. Imagine, you are doing kareoke and you point an average woman out in the audience and sing to her.... hey, she may or may not go home with you but it certainly makes her feel good and her friends are envivious and she loves it. If nothing else, she will likely think highly of you. Just like we know in groups there will often be one who will try to act aloof when she sees her two friends first start to swoon, there are many situations where simply revealing attraction can add value, but this almost always assume you have some basic value to begin with (well groomed, interesting, etc). Since most women do care about their social status and have standards just like we do, there are certain guys, there are some guys who reciprocity just won't get a mutual response.... just like if a 500lbs woman start trying to chat one of us up... well, except for maybe someone with a amazon woman fetish.
This is only the tip of the iceberg on the subject, but I really have to get going.
A) Does a famous actress have more value than a similar looking woman who is poor?
B) Would you be more likely to invite a homeless man into your home or a man who is a self-made millionaire?
Now, the answers will vary somewhat. For example. if you're suffering from LSE, you might choose the latter on A (poor woman), and if you're a true religious nut (not a TV preacher) you may well choose the former on B (homeless man). However, I think it is reasonable to conclude a typical person (read: most people) will choose just the opposite.
WHY?
We are socially conditioned to see people with certain positions, forms of dress, and behaviors as more valuable. It runs an entire gradiant from Dr. 90120 down to somewhere really low, like I dunno, a homeless guy or Tom Cruise. I know, I know, someone will say "I'd let a homeless guy in before Dr. 90120"... but the real reason you'd do that is Dr. 90120 have enough value to bang your wife, whereas the homeless guy doesn't
There is also a cycle going here: People look at others' behaviors to determine how to think/feel/act in an ambigious situation. Over time this means that once a trend gets started it will be hard to break and can be explioted.... but that's another topic.
HOW?
To be honest I am still trying to understand this one. Deductively, I think we can understand some of it quite easily, though.
Money: Very rich people (all other things equal) tend to have higher status than poor people. They are rich so they can afford lots of toys, are generally esteemed in their hoodz, can afford to get problems fixed (acne, teeth, mental health), gain further economic advantage through networking and better schools, have less anxiety to deal with, and can afford to swoon women. Nonetheless, despite all this many rich men are still lonely due to bad beliefs or a little too much swooning and not enough understanding! However, being "rich" (subjective by location, obviously) is something that makes one stand out to many women. If he combones even a small amount of game, dressing well, and social skills, then he almost certainly has lots of women wishing to reproduce with him, therefore, he is a challenge to win over.
Fame: Fame doesn't have to be outrageous fame like a great actor. Fame can be locally famous also: a known seducer, a local band, an athelete at college, etc. Fame implies preselection, social acceptance by *relevant* peers, in some cases the disapproval by certain "types" of people (parents, bores) may even be appealing, it can imply richness (see above), and it implies an interesting life that will add value to her's should she form an alliance. Whether locally or internationally, being famous is something that makes one stand out. It is interesting. He is certainly a challange because he has many choices.
Sheep Effect: It's been widely realized in the "community" that being seen with other women alone (giving the appearance that other women selected one) generates a good deal of value. In an ambigious situation (who you are and your social status) women look at how other women treat you to help determine how to respond. This is known as a cognitive shortcut, we use hundreds of similar ones each day and could not function effeciently in modern society without them. Even if a woman knows about this, she will not likely be able to stop herself from being effected by it. I have personally witnessed the extreme power of this effect. It is truly amazing. The guy who has 3 women chasing him down stands out. He is certainly a challange because he has many choices.
The pattern in all of these is that these guys stand out, they are seen as something valuable to obtain (granted in somewhat different types) by peer groups, and they are assumed to be a challange because they *should* be valuable and desirable to lots of different women. They are a scarce resource that is in demand. They are automatically triggering preselection switches, scarcity switches (if she isn't careful someone else will get him), and so on.
The men are deemed the selector in these cases. The women have to win him over. This fundementally changes the whole thing right from the start. One of the "enemies of attraction" as DeAngelo would say is being a game who was won before it ever started. Women want to be desirable, not the last resort of desperate men.
I hope this won't send anyone into depression, because it's worth mentioning that being able to have a great conversation with women is incredibly valuable to them (also a scarce resource), and also sends a preselection switch. If you can do that with her, then she knows that many women will be willing to sleep with you.
Something we almost never talk about is reciprocity and liking. With many women just letting them know you like them in a unique and desirable manner is enough to generate similar feelings. You have value because you were the one guy secure enough and savvy enough to do that and give her that feeling. Imagine, you are doing kareoke and you point an average woman out in the audience and sing to her.... hey, she may or may not go home with you but it certainly makes her feel good and her friends are envivious and she loves it. If nothing else, she will likely think highly of you. Just like we know in groups there will often be one who will try to act aloof when she sees her two friends first start to swoon, there are many situations where simply revealing attraction can add value, but this almost always assume you have some basic value to begin with (well groomed, interesting, etc). Since most women do care about their social status and have standards just like we do, there are certain guys, there are some guys who reciprocity just won't get a mutual response.... just like if a 500lbs woman start trying to chat one of us up... well, except for maybe someone with a amazon woman fetish.
This is only the tip of the iceberg on the subject, but I really have to get going.