We recently had a brief discussion about how associating with "lower quality" women might hurt your game with women of "higher quality".
While I agree that you generally don't want to be seen with warpigs, I think a lot of guys underestimate the power of social proof, even if the pivot isn't super attractive or if she might be (subjectively) judged as "lower quality".
I was reading Roissy's blog and came across this quote that supports the argument that it doesn't necessarily hurt your game to be seen with "lower grade" women. Matter of fact, I would go so far as to say that competition anxiety is competition anxiety, to a point.
I also think that it has little to do with the other womans subjective "quality". There has been more than one time that I have had women get catty over another chick and make a comment to the effect of "She's not that attractive/she's a ho/she's a skank. I don't know what you see in her". And I have heard this whether the other woman is attractive/slvtty/skanky or not. Competition anxiety is mainly about WOMEN in general, and has less to do with class or beauty.
The original blog post can be found here here
While I agree that you generally don't want to be seen with warpigs, I think a lot of guys underestimate the power of social proof, even if the pivot isn't super attractive or if she might be (subjectively) judged as "lower quality".
I was reading Roissy's blog and came across this quote that supports the argument that it doesn't necessarily hurt your game to be seen with "lower grade" women. Matter of fact, I would go so far as to say that competition anxiety is competition anxiety, to a point.
I also think that it has little to do with the other womans subjective "quality". There has been more than one time that I have had women get catty over another chick and make a comment to the effect of "She's not that attractive/she's a ho/she's a skank. I don't know what you see in her". And I have heard this whether the other woman is attractive/slvtty/skanky or not. Competition anxiety is mainly about WOMEN in general, and has less to do with class or beauty.
The original blog post can be found here here
Lisa the typical female hater wrote in response to me:
“a man seen with “bar skanks” as you call them will be more attractive to women than a man with no woman at his side.”
Only to other bar skanks.
A fairly common anti-Roissy diatribe is the “like begets like” argument. This is how haters attempt to diminish the achievements of their targets of hate. They reside well above that muck, don’t you see. As with most hate, it strikes a superficially plausible note, but in reality is proven utterly false.
I have observed that women’s preselection programming is a blunt algorithm. That is, when a woman sees you with another woman, she does not filter your quality based on your companion’s beauty as perceptively as a man filters for female beauty. You have some wiggle room in your choice of social proof. If you’re in the company of a 5, the power of preselection will work all the way up to 8s, as long as you are seen to be having a good time with your 5. To other women, the fact that you make your pawn female companion smile and laugh is more important in evaluating your quality as a man than is the exact beauty rating of your companion.
Naturally, there are limits on the applicability of women’s preselection mechanism. If your social proof is an obese 2, 10s will not give you much favor. Women are subconsciously much less forgiving of blubber on other women than they are of the prettiness or lack thereof of other women’s faces. A slender 4 with good fashion sense and obvious enjoyment at being in your company will trigger the preselection switches of plenty of hotter women in a bar.