There were some good comments on my last article, so I thought that rather writing a few long comments I’d combine them into a post. Again, I’ll just be picking through my brain which will make the structure disjointed.
I’m not trying to lay into the commentors. On the contrary, their messages have helped the cogs in my head to turn and for me to get a better understanding of the situation.
The last disclaimer, before we begin, is that I understand how the nature of the world was never mine to change. I’m writing these posts to get the ideas out of my brain and onto the page and of course there are moments of jealousy based on the grass being greener (in some circumstances, in others we know that our own grass is greener). So yes, in some ways I’m envious, but there’s nothing I can do about it.
To begin with, I agreed: having a lot (a lot) of money means that you can buy the house and the yacht, hire the DJ, provide the alcohol, and throw the party. On a smaller scale it might be the guy in the club with the table and the bottle. Either way, he’s getting social proof.
But then I thought about two things: validation and quality attention.
To begin with, if men get validation from sex (and women from attention), then a man is going to have to hire prostitutes if he wants to purely use money. However, (I hear) that’s not as fulfilling as getting the girls for free, which would mean playing some variety of provider Game and/or exploiting the social proof that the money can generate.
On top of that, barring those who inherited enormous fortunes, you still have to generate the money through some kind of work, plus implement the Game itself. They both require you to work for you to get your validation (sex). On the other hand, a girl just has to show up to get her validation (attention).
But what about the quality of that attention? This links into prostitution. A man can pay for a prostitute but he doesn’t feel as good as if it were “for free”. A girl can get a lot of attention from guys, but will still crave it from a high-quality man. In both cases we see that validation is not a commodity, it competes on quality.
All in all, I agree with Cat but perhaps not in the way he intended. I think that having loads of money is similar because you get a tonne of mediocre attention but still want the top shelf stuff.
The second comment from MDA is one I disagree with. Average looking girls can still get their “alpha fucks” because men will commonly lower their quality standards for casual sex (Evolution of Desire, Buss). By extension, women are getting the validation I talked about in the first response from high quality males.
Who here can say, hand on heart, that they’ve never fucked a girl whose pictures they would be embarrassed to show their friends? And that’s just the ones they’re embarrassed to show the pictures of! Think about how many “average girls” they’ve fucked!
No, they won’t get that attention for a long period of time, but remember you choose the partner for the child, not the partner itself. As far as her body is concerned, she’s got what she came for!
The last part is, I believe, a little unrelated but it brings up a good point: SMV diversification in men. We’re not handed our lot at birth and can work different channels, so that even with average looks we can be considered a top tier prospect.
The last comment was written by some German guy who has a Thomas Crown poster on his wall which he kisses every night before going to sleep 😉 . He’s also clearly never seen this: