Consept

My bad then, maybe I read into what you said too much. An interesting article I just came across, basically saying that marriage rates are down because women are becoming more educated than men and earning more themselves, so because they are looking for someone who is earning higher its harder to find an 'acceptable' mate. https://www.inc.com/minda-zetlin/marriage-mismatch-husbands-wives-earnings-education-jobs.html

@wwhyWait hold on, you're inferring that I'm blaming the woman for picking a higher status guy, I've never said anything like that. I understand that Beyonce would be forced to choose someone of higher status because of her position. Even if it was a normal girl who picked someone of higher status I wouldn't assign blame. I'm simply pointing to a pattern in society, I've made no judgement on it, what's led you to think I have?

Nothing is 100% true, esp with so many people in the mix. If we're trying to find patterns in society, this is obviously one for the majority

I don't know who any of those women are but I'll take your word they're famous. Looking at the first one she went out with a male model, so not exactly a run of the mill guy, they were also together 14 years so prob before her fame at least and they're now broken up. But I've pointed to the guys who are with the top females that other guys have rated, so I don't get what the argument is, are you saying this isnt the norm in society? Keanu Reeves is quite a trend bucking celeb in general, so I'm not saying everyone follows this script but it is the norm

Point to where I said a woman is superficial and a man's not

I said its a common denominator not that its only based on it. True but these women will also come into contact with many good looking guys constantly, especially when they live in places like LA where everyones an actor, still somehow they all chose the not so good looking high status guy, not the good looking low status, or the not good looking low status guy. The other point is that these guys success has zero to do with their looks so its not a completely even match. Yes Kanye West would marry a woman of lower status, he was in a long term relationship with Amber Rose who was a relatively unknown model before West boosted her stardom. This applies for pretty much all men, they dont care about status, George Clooney, Idris Elba, Matt Damon, Snoop Dogg, the other Jonas brother, loads of high value guys have married women youve never even heard of. Just like the common denominator for women is status, for high value men its looks. Point to where i said that No youve completely read into what i said, a high value man doesnt care about the woman status as i mentioned before and as plays out in the real life examples i gave. If a girl just looks pretty guys will want to get with her, but obviously if she wants a top guy she'd have to have other things going for her, which wouldnt be status but more like how they and how they fit with the guy. Remember he can get many beautiful girls so he can pick what he wants, status isnt usually that much of a factor, at least not as much as other things. But in general it feels like youre trying to hold onto a position in the light of quite obvious evidence. Its not for me to convince you im just presenting an evidence backed argument, if you want to hold onto your argument thats cool

I think your getting caught up here, its not a case of men are bad or women are bad it just is what it is. But lets test the theory with the help of google. So Im going to the website askmen and ill pick some of the most desired women as rated by the readers who i assume are men. This isnt ideal as obviously its women everyone knows not everyday women but we'll just work with it. The assumption is these women can basically have any man they want, theyre not only beautiful but are successful in their own right, lets see who a couple of them choose (im only picking married ones) - no. 2 - Beyonce is married to Jay-Z, one of the richest and most respected black men in the world, not the best looking guy, of course has other qualities no. 3 - Ashley Graham married Justin Ervin who is a talented director and cinematographer worked with netflix, cnn etc pretty high status no. 4 - PRIYANKA CHOPRA married Nick Jonas, both are good looking and high status i would say, but either way she didnt marry a good looking nobody (and neither did he) no. 8 - Kim Kardashian married to Kanye West (they are divorcing) again similar to the Beyonce marriage no. 9 - Margot Robbie married to Tom Ackerly, normal looking guy but just so happens to be a producer and director no. 14 - Emily Ratajkowski married Sebastian Bear-McClard, im sure you can tell by his name hes quite well off and is a film producer So i can go on and on with this list, but the point is these women are highly desirable, the most desirable even, they dont even need a guys resources really but it just so happened they chose quite rich, high status, normal looking guys. Theyre not gold diggers obviously so the attraction obviously comes from status, ambition whatever, there will be other factors of course but these are the common denominators for the men they chose. If the high value women are choosing these men then obviously these are high value men, how did they get to be high value? Well they went to film school, studied hard, broke into the industry, had success and then they met someone like Margot Robbie. Or they become highly successful hip-hop moguls, the bottom line is they did something that most men want to do but were not able to for whatever reason. They were not selected on their looks, the women were, if any of these women had the same success but not the looks, they would not have got these high value men. Gabourey Sidibe, well known actress from the movie 'Precious', shes dating a guy that works at Cameo and has a linked in page, a normal guy basically. Her value is nothing to do with her success. Anyway ill leave you with that

Keeping it simple i think the statement 'High value guy is mostly made, high value girl is mostly born', is generally true in the dating marketplace. A guy whos at the top 2% of desired men is not gonna be some good looking guy who hasnt achieved anything, its gonna be a guy who has worked on himself, has a high status job, brings value to those around him, is respected, well dressed, looks will play a part but not the main thing. Basically most of those things a guy has to work on, they arent god given (you could argue motivation and circumstance is but lets keep it simple). On the other hand the most desirable women, top 2%, in most cases havent had to work on themselves the same way, for one the most desirable woman would be younger so they wouldnt have time to, also what you find is that if they were hot all their lives and were rewarded for that, theres no incentive to work on themselves and so they dont, as humans we all usually take the easy route. They most likely wouldve gotten jobs in which their beauty is the reason behind it, modelling or whatever. Their beauty was god given, or luck in that they grew up in a time where their particular looks worked with societys beauty standards. Now these values are pretty much solely based on what the opposite sex desires, men do not care what job a woman has, you can be a high powered career woman but no guy is dreaming about spending a night with Hilary Clinton. On the other side women desire what i mentioned previously, which is what gives men their value. This is only for the dating marketplace, it doesnt mean youre not worth anything because youre not a top man or woman, most people arent period. Yes there will be some who are attracted to different types of people and thats completely cool, we're talking about generally how things play out, theres people who like nissan micras but generally other cars are more popular.

Brian Rose fighting for some reason, at Dan pena Castle, skip to 2.24

If you're born with no arms you can't catch a ball with your hand

Just thought this was funny

I dont think anyone is saying looks arent a factor for women, i think what theyre saying is looks are more important for men in terms of attraction. Women usually have a longer list of criteria which usually includes physical appearance, whereas for men some can make the selection purely on looks and maybe more conscious or mature men want looks but also have more criteria which theyll need in addition to looks. This of course is for long term relationships, for casual stuff the criteria is obviously much lower on both sides.

Lol I'm not really up on the recent shananigans, but she is pretty outspoken so I'm not surprised. But you know what I mean, a high value guy valued her as a high value woman which is why she's even able to be an outspoken celebrity. He was right as she's brought a massive amount of value to him as well. She also kept on top of her looks (I'm not a fan of plastic surgery but still), kept in good shape etc. A hot but low value woman would just get the ring and not put in more effort.

I think this is a bit off. If you say high value girl that means that that's someone every guy including high value guys would want, not just to have sex but want to marry them or have a long term relationship with. That's specifically what makes them high value, otherwise there's plenty of girls that guys would have sex with and not see again or see again but just for sex, that bars pretty low. So hot yes, but dumb and bitchy, no. If I'm a high value man, why would I choose hot, dumb and bitchy when I could choose hot, co-operative and caring? This plays out in real life as well, if you look at most famous High value guys, they often marry someone who's hot but it's very rare that that woman will be dumb or bitchy model type. It can happen but usually those relationships don't last. In fact a lot of high value guys will sacrifice a little on the beauty side to get someone who can really look after the house, kids and maybe help with their business stuff. Look at rock stars like ozzy Osborne, I'm sure he fucked a ton of models but when it came down to it he married Sharon, he was even a bit chubby at the time and he was at his peak. Why? Because she had a higher value than just her looks in terms of survival. So being hot, dumb and bitchy is not good for survival because, evolution wise the woman has to secure the man with the most resources, having those attributes will not secure a high value man.

I got the vaccine last week, it was over in seconds, my arm hurt a little after but was fine the next day. When I got it I thought, 'this is nothing, its crazy how worked up people have got about this'. In the wider context you could easily just take this and move on with your life, how much mental anguish are people putting themselves through trying by worrying about this vaccine? Yes you should always be aware of what you put in your body, but some of these same people researching every ingredient in the vaccine have probably snorted some coke without a second thought or eaten fast food from a van. I'm just saying do your research and let it go, the amount cortisol being used btly stressing yourself out is probably worse than the vaccine

I love this discussion cos its rooting out a lot of things we all probably havent thought about before. Ive had similar experiences whilst at uni where majority black and asian people would hang out with each other and majority white people would hang out, one thing i noticed though is that it wasnt necessarily along racial lines, it would more likely be what kind of culture you grew up in, so it was very normal for a white person from the 'hood' to hang out with black people or a black person from the suburbs to hang out with white people. So it wasnt a case of we dont want you in our group because of your race, although im not sure if class is any better. The question of is it racist to have a dating preference is very tough especially when you extend it to friends or work mates. It seems to be allowed to say when it comes to dating but pretty racist for the others, so i guess the question is, is it all racist or is it just not racist to say you only want a certain race of friends? Why has society come down so hard on saying you only want white friends but then allowed it to be acceptable to say you only date white partners ?

Yes, maybe racist isnt the word id use but definitely a lot of bias against black women from a percentage of black men in terms of dating preference. The root is obviously the european beauty standards that have been the norm in the western world, it makes sense that the type of people who rule would promote their own people as the most beautiful. This subtle and previously not so subtle conditioning can have a massive effect on people. So much so that a lot of black and south asian women bleach their skin, in fact the global skin lightening market is worth more than $8.3 billion. So you could even make the argument that black women have bias against black women, colourism within the black community is also a thing. So its a very deep topic that is ingrained in the minds of everyone pretty much.

I think it would be impossible to grow up, pretty much in any country, and not have some kind of bias, simply because you were taught by media, parents, friends, peers, school and all of those groups would have bias' especially if its not a very diverse area that you grew up in. These bias' are almost needed for social cohesion and to create an in group, the issue is that we are becoming more unified and globalised so these, once useful ideologies are now becoming more of a hinderance to progress than anything. Yeah this can happen, the reason i see is that when it comes to racism, most people dont class themselves as racist but they see the racism in others. Really i think the solution is looking at where you are racist and understanding that others may have that within them as well, so instead of demonising them, root it out in yourself. If everyone did this there wouldnt be racism, shaming people out of racism may have its uses but i dont think its the best way to approach it.

Ive followed the whole Brian Rose drama since the early lockdown Icke interviews, also being a born and bred Londoner leads me to take an extra interest. I didnt have a strong opinion on him before the Icke stuff, i just thought he was a normal dude and interested in where he was going with the plant medicine, but seeing all this play out i can say hes 100% a con man. It actually baffles me that he managed to fool so many people, i think he was obviously like this before but as Leo said the pandemic has really led to people showing their true colours. The very fact that hes claiming hes 2nd in the race because of the bookies, (which just go off where the moneys going), whilst polling at less than 1% and betting on himself to skew the bookies is actually incredible deception, like hes so far gone. One thing i found interesting is that Dan Pena taught him to really be successful, you have to create movements, you can see this play out, theres a distinct change in Rose after being mentored by Pena. Its fuelled him to go down this road, tbf at first it was almost the perfect con, perfect timing and took everyone for millions, you would think he would stop there, but it can be addictive and i think hes really fallen into that trap. It will be interesting to see where he goes next because theres so much negative sentiment around him i cant see people en masse falling for another scam.

A comparison would be how much could a guy who was around the same level of attractiveness as the girl make on only fans, obviously a male model would make more

It doesnt have to be that someone wants someone solely for looks or solely for money, its not as black and white, the options arent just 'im going to find someone just for survival needs' or 'im going to find someone i have a real honest connection with and thats it'. Usually its a mix of both. Everyone has a baseline that they would accept, some peoples might be different to others. For example you have some kind of baseline in terms of a long term partner, if you met someone who you liked but was homeless and had no ambition to get out of that you most likely wont want to marry them, regardless of your connection. Or maybe theyre too feminine or are not sociable enough for you, or are always broke so you have to pay for everything, the bottom line is we have this criteria when looking for a mate and to deny this would be creating a shadow side of you that you dont want to face. Obviously men are the same but have different criteria. If the baseline is met then other considerations can and do come into play like connection and other deeper things. Probably in our world theres not enough emphasis on the deeper things once the baselines been met, people can be just focused on the baseline which is really a gamble when you think about it.

I'm familiar with some of Kevin Samuals content, he mainly talks about peoples criteria for marriage. So its not necessarily calling out gold diggers but it boils down to this - a high value woman is defined as good looking, physically fit, co-operative, feminine, nurturing. A high value man is defined as masculine, has a respectable and good earning career, has a network and gives value to other high value people, 6 foot or above etc. The value is unconsciously created by the opposite sex and there are quite obvious biological survival reasons behind it ie the woman wants the best genes for her children and to be taken care of with resources, the man wants the best genes for his children and to be taken care of (he's also designed to spread his seed but that's a tangent). Aside from that it does feel good just to be with someone, but in the real world what you see is people who are quite closely aligned, in terms of socio-economic status and attractiveness. Its rare that you see a high value woman going out with someone who works at mcdonalds and its rare you'll see a high value man go out with an unattractive woman. The simple fact is on both sides you'll pick the best option you can, this isn't done consciously, it can be, but usually people will think 'there's just something about them'. This is more just in the realm of getting married, someone will go to someone the perceive as lower value if they like them as a person or its just for fun, but for marriage usually it will be someone at least on the same level. This can get to a toxic stage orange kind of level, so it's good to just be aware of it and not focused on it. I see a lot of guys using it as a way to blame women for whatever. But even in spiritually minded communities like here there are still these value dynamics on play, a potential long term partner would still have to be above some kind of threshold, for example a woman would have to be a certain level of attractiveness for a (spiritual) guy to consider them, the difference being that he might also have other criteria not just physical appearance, he might also be concerned about her spiritual connection. A (spiritual) woman will also have value criteria for potential partners as well, there will be a bottom line of some kind of income or value and if he meets those there will be more criteria about deeper things. So I think it's normal that we try and look for the best deal we can get, because of this set up it means that people push themselves to be attractive to the opposite sex, High value people are not just handed to you because you're you, it has to be worked on. The opposite of this line of thinking is being an incel in which you don't want to improve yourself and you think you just deserve access to women, so you blame the women for not wanting you. Women also do this but not with sex, with relationships ie they blame men for their own lack of success in long term relationships, 'where have all the good men gone' ' men are trash' etc. So it's a bit black and white just to say women exchange beauty for money, it's a bit more nuanced than that. The interesting thing is that people often complain about this 'game' but at any time you're free to not play it and go out with an unattractive woman or an unattractive guy, the reason people don't is because they want a good deal, they just don't want to improve their value to get the deal.

It is fascinating that people are still arguing for trump after all the madness that has happened, there's some interesting psychology behind that as well

@Gesundheit First off apologies for the short answer previously, i did say id come and give a fuller one later, been away for the weekend so its been hard to find the time. I appreciate you also sharing your situation and i do get where youre coming from as ive said previously. What became very apparent to me through this discussion is that we are talking about different situations. Youre talking about being poor in a third world country and agree this situation is like playing life on the hardest level, it is extremely difficult to get out of this situation and realistically there has to be significant change on a society level for it to be the norm that people are able to get out. Even more so if its a political problem like with Venezuela or Syria. Generally it will be a slow process for these countries to improve and, according to trends in poverty, this situation is improving - https://www.vox.com/2014/11/24/7272929/global-poverty-health-crime-literacy-good-news , although i appreciate it doesnt feel like that. I absolutely agree with you that poor people are not required to find solution on a society wide level, even if they did most likely it wouldnt affect much. This of course is what rich people should do and to be fair some do, not all but some. So either way poor people are not in control of this, literally the only thing they can control is their mindset. Now i understand your perspective is tempered by your situation which was out of your hands of course, youve put yourself at a 2 on your scale. When ive talked about mindset what ive meant is that if youre in the western world ie western Europe, USA, etc then most likely youll start at a level 3 or 4 you wouldnt really go lower than that, there are homeless people but these are usually the result of other issues or terrible home lives, its not really the norm. So in the case that you are 3 or 4 mindset can have a huge factor in getting you to 5 or 6 and potentially higher but that wouldnt be the norm. Youve even said if youre at 4 you may have a scarcity mindset, so what would push you up is not having that. I think what youre getting at is that if you buy into this system and just work harder and change your mindset that youre tacitly accepting it and youre part of the problem. The thing is either way you have to be in the system, yes the system is fucked but the question is, were things worse previously and is there more opportunity now? The system doesnt have to be torn down it just needs to work better and give people a better chance. The internet means you can make $ or £s in western markets whilst still living in the third world. You can setup business that can sell across the world. On a more practical level theres more freedom of movement so potentially you can get out of your country and move to one with more opportunities. Theres freedom of movement in the EU, countries like Spain are allowing those from countries they colonised to move there and get residency like Colombia. So i think its better to build on this system that we have and yeah there will always be a small percentage of super rich people as a legacy type thing but i would say things are improving, however i get where youre coming from and it is unfair but hopefully it continues to change.

@Gesundheit I'll give you a fuller response later, but studies have shown a strong correlation between level of education and earning power, this article breaks it down - https://www.qs.com/what-effect-does-education-level-have-on-wealth/#:~:text=There's a clear correlation between,the greater your salary becomes. @integral