THE BOOK OF NUMBERS:
Analyzing the ROI on the Pursuit of
Women
By Aaron Clarey
To Charlie, Craig, Ben, Adam,
Youngblood, and Alexei
who knew all too well
what the ROI was
long before I calculated it.
Copyright © 2020 by Aaron Clarey.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including
photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods,
without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the
case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain
other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law. For
permission requests, write to the publisher, addressed “Attention:
Aaron Clarey,” at the e-mail address below.
CAPTcapitalism@yahoo.com
Please e-mail any typos or errors to CAPTcapitalism@yahoo.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 – THE QUESTION
CHAPTER 2 – THE ASSUMPTIONS
CHAPTER 3 – THE MODEL
NOTE ON CHAPTERS 4-6
CHAPTER 4 – THE CHANCES: THE PERCENT OF WOMEN WHO
ARE MARRIAGEABLE
CHAPTER 5 – THE CHANCES: THE PERCENT OF WOMEN WHO
WILL MARRY “AVERAGE JOE 5”
CHAPTER 6 – THE CHANCES: THE PERCENT CHANCE YOUR
MARRIAGE WILL BE A HAPPY ONE
CHAPTER 7 – THE CHANCES: REAL WORLD NUMBERS
CHAPTER 8 – THE COSTS
CHAPTER 9 – THE ROI
CHAPTER 10 – THE STRATEGY
ONLINE MODEL AND DOWNLOADABLE CHARTS FOR AUDIBLE
LISTENERS
VISIT THE AUTHOR!
OTHER BOOKS BY THE AUTHOR
Research, Data, and Resources:
CHAPTER 1 – THE QUESTION
A Libertarian in Minneapolis
Allow me to tell you the odd origins of how this essay came into
existence.
It was the early 2000’s and like any other 20-something man I
wanted to get laid. I was in Minneapolis at the time and it was the
pre-social media/pre-COVID culture to meet girls at bars, nightclubs,
dance halls, etc. However, due to the harsh and long Minnesota
winters, house parties were also very common in the Minneapolis
dating scene. You’d show up with a bottle of booze, perhaps toss a
couple bucks to the host, and you were let in to enjoy a night of 90’s
music, potluck booze, painfully mindless 20-something
conversations, and mingling with the local lovelies. And though I
was no Cary Grant, I was charming and charismatic enough that
over an evening I would score some numbers, land some dates, and
once every blue moon get laid.
The problem, however, was this was Minneapolis. And if you knew
anything about Minneapolis culture (let alone 20-something
Minneapolis culture) it was that it was completely leftist, completely
biased, and so thoroughly so that absolutely no quarter or
consideration was given to anybody who was not a democrat. This
mindset was so universal it was more of a cult than one’s mere
political belief, and so pervasive it affected all young Minneapolitans’
minds in complete totality. And so being libertarian I knew to keep
my mouth shut, avoid talking about politics, just smile, and agree
with that cute, well-endowed redhead that, yes, “Wouldn’t it be nice if
we just had free everything.”
Unfortunately, there was this one prick in the house-party-going
community. I never figured out who he was, and had it nailed down
to a handful of suspects, but regardless of the man’s true identity, he
knew I was NOT a leftist, a liberal, or a democrat. And just as soon
as I was making good progress with a young lady, or even starting to
become too popular at the party, it would somehow be leaked that I
was (gasp!) “a republican!” And now instead of wooing a cute
redhead from Edina to come check out my sweet bachelor pad
replete with a 5 disk CD player, I had a whole house of hostile 20something Minneapolitans arguing against me, calling me a nazi,
wondering why I hated black people because I voted for George W.
Bush.
As you could imagine, this didn’t bode well for my chances to woo
cute redheads back to my place. Matter of fact, things would
become almost downright hostile because anybody who is a
republican is obviously for slavery, hates the Jews, and is a
misogynist (in spite of me trying to explain I was, in fact, a
libertarian). But regardless of how baseless these accusations were,
it didn’t change the fact that I was the libertarian bump that would
knock the party’s needle off of the record. The libertarian turd in the
party’s punch bowl. And if I didn’t want to be blacklisted from any
future parties, I would have to come up with some kind of
contingency plan the next time I was accused of being (gasp!) a
republican (even though I was...once again...a libertarian).
Thankfully, I did have one trick up my sleeve, and that was I was an
economist. And in being an economist, I naively figured that if I
could just prove to people empirically that I was right or at least had
my arguments supported by data, they would respect my opinions,
leave me alone, allowing me to preemptively and quickly quell any
political arguments before they started. The party would continue
uninterrupted, I may even score some intellectual points along the
way, but most importantly I would be able to return to my pursuit of
well-endowed redheads. And so this being the early 00’s I would
burn some key economic statistics and charts to a CD, and should
any political argument come up, I would simply put the CD into a
computer, pull up the data, and “poof” – argument ended! Now let’s
get back to partying and drinking!
This did not go as well as first hoped.
First, computers from the early 00’s took a while to fire up, throwing
off the cadence and thus killing the mood of the party. Second, even
though I’d cite my data, people wouldn’t believe my figures anyway.
But above all else, third, people couldn’t believe some schmuck
brought a CD full of economic charts and data to a house party. And
though ironically these CD’s did have the intended effect of stopping
political debates in their track, it had the equally bad effect of
officially making me the party’s weirdo.
That was until 2004.
Because in 2004 I heard about this new website called “Blogger.”
And what blogger allowed you to do was write and post data on this
relatively new and burgeoning thing called “The Internet.” And while
at the time I was still in awe of CD-burning technology, it dawned on
me that if I had my own “blog” I could have some key data and
statistics conveniently and readily available on the internet, allowing
me to ditch the awkward CD’s that made me look like the party
weirdo.
To this extent the idea actually kind of worked. A blog was less
jarring to the rhythm of the party than some schmuck whipping out a
CD saying “See I have charts!” Blogs also lent some kind of air of
authority to the data I was presenting as I was viewed more as a
“professional” with “research” on “his website” than some CD-totting
weirdo. And though this blog did have its intended effect of politely
assuaging political disagreements at parties, it had a secondary
unintended effect. It became my official blog – “Captain Capitalism”
– which sent me down the career path I have today.
I Created a Monster
The blog itself had its own organic evolution. Because it’s original
purpose was to host economic data, it become a depository for key
and important economic charts. This then morphed into more
complex analyses and treatises on economics and politics. And
soon it became a rather established economics site for professionals
or anyone interested in economics or politics. But over the early
years of my blog I realized two key things:
One, I could post the most compelling, conclusive, empirical data,
couched within the most succinct, clear, eloquent writing and people
still wouldn’t believe it. I realized humans absolutely do not care
about the truth and believe in only what they want to believe. So all
that time I spent compiling data, making charts, running correlations,
etc., was essentially wasted because it was falling on deaf (and
willfully ignorant) ears.
Two, posts I wrote where economics overlapped with topics that
were more social or culturally popular were more popularly read.
Especially when you started talking about the sexes. And so
whereas my economic analysis was nothing short of brilliant on
topics such as:
“Calculating Inflation without the Velocity of the M2 Money Supply” or
“Substituting Dividends for Earnings as the True Measure of Cash
Flow in the Valuation of Stocks”
I would easily get 5 times the readers and traffic on topics such as:
“The $750,000 Opportunity Cost of Paying for Her Wedding” or
“Prostitution is $435,000 Cheaper Than Marriage”
This pulled my research, as well as my interests, towards where the
sexes and economics met. It also pulled in more readers as the
topics were saucier and sexier. And while it did somewhat abandon
what would be considered “classical, traditional economics” in
exchange for something more “pop economics,” I didn’t mind this
cheap trick as nobody was taking my original economic work
seriously anyway. Furthermore, there was very little economic
research done on the sizable field where economics and sex
overlapped, which made these topics much more interesting and
intellectually stimulating.
Still, this change resulted in one of the most common complaints of
my blog and remains so today – that I “no longer write about
economics like I used to, and all you do is talk about girls, marriage,
and dating.” Which is somewhat partially true. However, the switch
from boring classical economics to the new “sexy” economics wasn’t
a conscious choice. It happened quite naturally, even
unconsciously. And it never felt like I left economics behind to write
middle school girl slop a la a Conde Nast publication. Economic
theory and economic analysis was still being used in my work,
though the topic had changed. But it wouldn’t be until my blog was
10 years old would I have an incredibly important epiphany. An
epiphany that made me realize I never abandoned serious economic
work in the first place. Because while the focus of my blog did
switch from things such as “deficits as a percent of GDP” to “how
much more strippers make than liberal arts majors,” I realized
something most economists didn’t – nearly all of economics is about
sex. And for once at least one economist was studying the right
thing.
Economics is Sex
To prove this, take a moment to look out your window. Take in
everything you see in your purview. The buildings, the roads, the
electrical lines, the cars, the plane in the sky, the landscaped
grounds, the window you’re looking through itself. EVERYTHING
you see, except for perhaps the sky itself, has been touched by
human hands. Human labor has been expended in one way or
another to shape, form, and create nearly all that is in your view.
However, this amazing mural of economic production didn’t happen
by itself. Houses and cars and planes and vaccines didn’t just –
“POOF” – form in a vacuum. There had to be a reason for all this
economic production to spring into existence. And the reason it did
was sex.
It is here we must accept an inconvenient truth of nature.
Specifically, that nature has shaped the male and female sexes into
having very specific roles so that the human race might survive and
thrive. Nature gave women the ability to birth children, as well as the
breasts to feed them. While nature gave men the physical strength,
aggression, and mass to not only provide for their women and
children, but protect them as well. However, nature also provided
the sexes with something that would prevent them from
overpopulating - lopsided sex drives. Men have sex drives
(estimated to be) 9 times that of women, while women...do not. And
this lopsidedness prevents everybody from breeding kids they can’t
afford because if women had the same sex drives as men the
human race would out-breed its food supply in a week. But there is
also an ancillary benefit to such mismatched sex drives. Because in
forcing men to meet the finicky and higher standards women require
to have sex, it forces them into an evolutionary arms race of
perpetual competition and self-improvement. And thank god for
society it does, because without that powerful sex drive and the
commensurate work ethic that comes with it, absolutely NOTHING
you see today would exist.
This massive, nearly incomprehensible economic miracle you are
witnessing outside your window is due to one group of people and
one group of people only – men. And it was a transaction (the most
important and original economic transaction) that incentivized men to
make and build nearly everything on the planet - sex for resources.
Men build things, women give them sex. Men produce things,
women give them children. Men accrue wealth and resources,
women continue their genetic line. Sex (or more Darwinistically
speaking, progeny) is what gets men out of bed in the morning, off to
school, into rush hour, off to the office, off to the factory, off to night
school, off to war, or off to the lab to make money so that they might
someday attract girls. If there was no sex, if there were no women, if
there was no female youth and beauty, men would still be living in
caves, only mustering their resources to perhaps create beer and
poker to bide the time. Alas, the ONLY reason you have planes,
trains, and automobiles, the only reason an economy exists, the only
reason anything outside the sky exists, is because men built it. And
men built it in exchange for sex.
Now admittedly, this economic relationship between the sexes has
drastically changed over the past 60 years. Feminism, technology,
capitalism, and government policy have upended traditional male
and female roles, completely obsoleting them in some cases.
Technology and capitalism has made it that physical strength is no
longer required to work, as much as it is intelligence or a skill,
opening up the labor market to women. Feminism has encouraged
these advancements making it legally as well as socially acceptable
for women to work, own their own property, support themselves,
even form their own families as men no longer have a monopoly on
economic production. And government policy (at least within the first
world) has completely replaced men as the ultimate provider for
women and children with the welfare state. But these past 60 years
of sociology doesn't undo 2 million years of biological programming.
Additionally, these newly formed independent roles do not undo
history. And so the men of today are just as genetically compelled to
be the primary engine of economic growth, industry, and innovation
as their forefathers were. And so whether it's 2020 A.D. or 2020
B.C., sex still drives nearly all men to spend their lives in the pursuit
of it, predominantly in the capacity of work.
Unfortunately, this results in another inconvenient and politically
incorrect truth – that men are going to continue being the dominant
producers and innovators of the economy. Men are going to
continue to be the wealthiest and most financially successful of the
sexes. And until women have the same sex drives as men (heh) the
wage gap between men and women will continue. But for all the
enviable privileges and benefits that come with being male, there is
an unseen, but equal cost that comes with it. Because for every
ounce of production, wealth, and riches men have, there is an equal
and opposite price men must pay. For every ear of corn grown,
there was an hour of time tilling the fields. For every car welded, a
bead of sweat from the welder. For every bridge built, 4 years of
youth spent studying calculus, physics, and civil engineering. Down
to every penny of GDP there is a specific caloric expenditure of
labor. And when you tally up all this effort, the price men pay for sex
is nothing short of “their entire lives.” So, yes, men may have
created nearly everything you see in the world today, but the price
they paid was everything.
This then behooves an important question – is it worth it? Is the
pursuit of women and sex worth the complete and total price men
must pay? Furthermore, and more importantly, does this economic
transaction make sense today in light of what the past 60 years has
done to traditional gender roles? Because while the price men are
required to pay hasn't changed, what they get in return definitely
has.
For better or worse, at one time a man could be reasonably assured
his wife would not divorce him, “take him for half,” or destroy his
family. He wouldn't have to compete against a multi-trillion dollar
government to be considered an adequate financial suitor. He would
also have his wife's undivided attention invested in himself and
children, instead of divided across her career, her education, her
politics, or her Eat, Pray, Love midlife crisis. And he was somewhat
guaranteed his wife would remain somewhat svelte or physically
attractive, as opposed to the morbidly obese people we have today.
And that's just marriage.
This says nothing about dating, courting, or the actual pursuit of
women. And here what was once considered the “fun” part of
courtship has now become a painful, even risky chore. Feminism
has warped young women's attitudes towards men to such an extent
men are viewed as competitors at best, sworn enemies at worst.
This attitude has also replaced the traditional and cooperative loving
relationship between men and women with a victim-oppressor
mindset, ruining dating with the politics of distrust. Men get to face
an increasingly threatening environment where things like false rape
accusations or “sperm jacking” are all too real. And do not even ask
what perverse and warping effects social media has had on dating.
Whatever traditional accord men and women had with each other is
now irreparably broken, with its benefits replaced by incredible
financial, legal, emotional, and psychological risks. Yet the price
men must pay still remains the same – everything.
And thus the point of this essay.
To date no serious economic analysis has been conducted on what
is nothing short of the most important economic question facing
men. And since men will likely account for the majority of economic
production and technical innovation in the future, this also makes it
the most important economic question facing the world. However,
while the economic ramifications of men's pursuit of women are truly
global, this essay has no grandiose ideas of convincing the world, let
alone the economics profession, about the importance of whether it's
in men's best interests to continue this pursuit. It only cares about
the individual man reading this essay and whether the pursuit of
women is personally worth it to him. In that regard this essay aims
to inform the reader about the real mathematical chances of success
he faces in the pursuit of women, as well as the modern day risks, so
that he may make an informed economic decision as to how he best
invests his life. It also aims to align the reader's expectations with
reality so his life is not ruined by delusion or hope, both of which
have ruined millions of lives in the past. But in short, this essay is
nothing less than the most important cost-benefit analysis any man
will read, which makes it mandatory reading for any man who wishes
to take his life seriously.
And I most certainly hope you do because you only get one of them.
CHAPTER 2 – THE ASSUMPTIONS
In full intellectual honesty and disclosure I do not believe in the social
sciences or sociological studies. I think the fields are completely
bunk and bogus, and are more of a welfare jobs program for
unemployable hacks who have political agendas rather than any
serious study into society with the goal of helping - let alone
resolving - the sociological problems that plague it. If there was any
veracity in the social sciences, we would have solved poverty, crime,
divorce, racial/sexual gaps, unemployment, etc., long ago, and the
fact these scourges continue to exist – and are in most cases,
worsening – is proof enough these “fields” are of no value, perhaps
even damaging to society.
However, this study is not so much sociological as it is actuarial. It
may be sociological in nature, and it certainly pulls from a myriad of
social science studies, but it makes no claims or attempts to “solve”
a problem or explain whatever social phenomenon we are
witnessing. It is merely a statistical analysis to assess the chances
and risks involved with the largest economic investment men are
going to make with their lives.
Additionally, this study is the first of its kind. And in being so has no
lofty goals of measuring things down to the decimal point, calculating
whether “Steve” will get laid that particular night, or whether “Bob” is
going to get divorced that month. It merely aims to introduce
numbers and statistics to a very important economic decision where
there were none before. Therefore, this study claims to be nothing
more than a first attempt, a prototypical effort, replete with all the
inherent weaknesses, drawbacks, errors, and flaws that plague not
only pioneering studies, but the social sciences as well.
With that disclaimer the following assumptions/declarations are
made:
Best Effort – This essay represents a best effort to assess the risks
and rewards men face when engaging in the pursuit of women, not a
perfect effort. The model, the assumptions, the decisions, and the
calculations were all made in intellectual honesty, with the goal of
trying to assess these risks and rewards as accurately as possible.
No doubt there are errors, mistakes, and flaws in this study, but this
is more of a function of a lack of data, lack of better
statistical/mathematical tools, and the pioneering nature of this study.
Flight of the Phoenix – As per the movie, this study works with
what it's got, not what it would like. There were several instances
where a particular data set would have been ideal for running
calculations, but simply didn't exist. This resulted in having to
extrapolate data from other data sets/studies, infer data from other
data sources, forecast trends, and resort to unscientific polling
methods fraught with statistical errors. And while the model is
believed to be sound, there is no doubt better data could be fed into
it to improve its accuracy.
Ballpark Estimate – Consequently, this study does not make any
claims to be statistically valid by actuarial or professional statistical
standards. It only aims to be in the ballpark, giving men some
ballpark figures where there were none before. A rough tool to
gauge risk and return as opposed to none at all. Still, do not worry.
The model used in this study is just as accurate as any COVID or
global warming model in use today, which should make it
unquestionably valid in many people's minds.
Outside Confirmation – Though a first effort, the results of the
model and different scenarios we ran using the model were
surprisingly corroborated by anecdotal evidence and real world
phenomenon. Of particular note was the 1 in 100 women that are
marriageable based on informal sampling, especially those men who
were serial daters, dating in excess of 100 women. This doesn't
mean this model is 100% reliable, proven to accurately predict
everything in a man's love life. But it does seem to meet the low
“ballpark figures” hurdle set forth for this study.
Time/Inter-Generational Distortions – As this study defines
“success” as “happily married” there are problems applying marriage
statistics to the single men and women of today. Namely, marriage
(successful or not) is a long process, and to assess success rates of
marriages requires going back 30, 40, even 50 years. This means
we are applying Boomer, even Silent Generation marriage statistics
to Gen Z and younger generations who are of course in a completely
different sociological, romantic, dating, political, and economic
environment. Further complicating matters is the increase in
cohabitation, which is neither single nor married, and the data of
which is not consistently measured. A best effort attempt was made
to accurately and logically account for these factors as much as
possible, as well as erring on the side of caution.
Literal Interpretation of Data – This study deals with populations in
the hundreds of millions, making scores of assumptions, over the
course of decades. This results in some interesting statistics as well
as some confusing concepts. It behooves the reader to CLEARLY
read and understand the title and descriptions of these statistics so
you know what these statistics do and do not measure. Where
applicable a real world translation or example is made to help the
reader better understand these numbers, but it can still be confusing.
Analyzed from Male Perspective – This study is intended to be for
men and for the benefit of men, and in being so really gives no
consideration to women. Additionally, in being written for men, the
tone of this essay is expeditiously blunt, direct, and curt, allowing for
no misinterpretation of the data or wasting precious time beating
around the bush. This may cause umbrage or offense, even
accusations of sexism, but that is not the intent of this book. It is
simply written for a male audience. That being said, a separate
study on the pursuit of men is being conducted and in intellectual
honesty the numbers are equally damning of men. Regardless,
women are certainly welcome to read this study, but would probably
benefit more from the future publication analyzing the ROI of the
pursuit of men.
“Average Joe 5” – In order to draw some concrete numbers and
conclusions, some assumptions had to be made about the men
these statistics apply to. And since men's success with women is
heavily dependent on variables such as height, income, weight, and
looks, for the sake of simplicity and to apply to the widest range of
men possible, we assumed in every scenario the male subject would
be average. This introduces the concept of “Average Joe 5” who is
average in every way. He is of average height, average income,
average status, average education, and average looks. Some
scenarios will be ran in “The Strategy” chapter of this book to show
men what would happen to your chances if you were an “8” or made
“$100,000,” but nearly all the analysis in this book has been
conducted with your average American male in mind.
18-35 Year Old Demographic – As men's pursuit of women is
primarily and genetically concerned with fertility in the form of female
youth and beauty, this study focuses exclusively on women between
18-35 - the age range where women can legally marry up to the
point they start to lose their physical beauty and fertility. Not all of
the data on women perfectly aligned with the 18-35 age cohort, but
best approximations were made when possible. Additionally, while
all men are no doubt interested in women between 18-35, this study
is more intended for younger men who have yet to marry, generally
assumed to be 45 and younger. For men who are older than 45,
already married, already divorced, or just have no interest in women
this study is intended to be more of an academic or intellectual
pursuit rather than an instructional one.
Traditional Marriage/Happily Married – While men's interest in
women can range from a simple date to having a harem of women,
“success” is defined in this study as a traditional marriage, where
both spouses are happily married. While this does simplify the
analysis by clearly stating an objective goal, measuring “happily
married” is nearly impossible. Still, this study defines success as
finding a woman, getting married (or cohabitating), and being happily
married till death do somebody part, not “getting laid on Friday” or
“getting her number.”
Doesn't Consider Chemistry or Personality – Without reading
ahead, it will probably shock no one that the numbers are already
dire. Personal experiences, anecdotes, all of which have been
shared by billions of men over the internet for the past 20 years has
unscientifically formed most men's opinion about this matter. But it is
even worse when you consider this study does not consider the
required personality or chemistry to fall in love. In other words, this
study likely presents a “best case” scenario to be further pared down
with the unquantifiable variables of love, romance, personality, and
chemistry. However, just as this study does not consider these
intangible variables, it is certainly possible personality, chemistry,
and love can overcome the cold, callous statistics and assumptions
in this study. For example it is possible for politically misaligned
people to fall in love and have a happy marriage. It is also possible
for a rich woman to fall in love with a poor man. It's not likely, but if
the Vikings can win a Superbowl, anything can happen, and this
study acknowledges that possibility.
Actuarial Audit – An actuary was hired to audit this study to ensure
its accuracy and integrity. The actuary was also employed to
conduct additional statistical analyses, specifically as it came to
backing out the co-correlation that exists between different “deal
breakers” that would preclude women from being marriage material
(obesity, debt, mental illness, etc.). This was all done to ensure the
veracity of this study.
Criticisms Welcomed, But - All constructive criticisms, critiques,
and objections are welcomed, but they will only be heeded under two
conditions. One, there is an actual flaw or error you'd like to correct,
not something you merely dislike or politically disagree with. And
two, you provide the data to remedy that error. As stated before
there are indeed gaping flaws and errors in this study, but it was
usually due to a lack of data. And these flaws cannot be fixed
without data. Many hours were spent searching for data that simply
didn't exist, but if you happen to have such data or better data, it
would be greatly appreciated.
All Statistics are Wrong – It is guaranteed that the numbers
presented in this essay are not the actual numbers in the real world.
No statistical study is 100% accurate, meaning all statistics are
wrong. However, these numbers are not meant to be taken as the
bible, but rather ballpark approximations to help men calculate the
ROI of the pursuit of women. Do not read too much into them or
over-analyze them. Use them more as guidelines.
CHAPTER 3 – THE MODEL
“ROI” or “return on investment” is a simple financial concept. You
take the profits an investment generates and divide it by the cost of
that investment. A simple comparison of “what you're going to pay”
versus “what you're going to get.” So if you have a bond that pays
$5 a year in interest and it costs $100 for that bond, your ROI is:
$5/$100 = 5%.
This then allows you to decide whether a 5% rate of return is worth
the investment of your $100. Again, a simple comparison of what
you're going to pay versus what you're going to get.
However, when it comes to the pursuit of women, what you're going
to pay versus what you're going to get gets a little more
complicated. So complicated in fact this is what the original formula
used to calculate the ROI on women looks like:
Further complicating matters is terminology and definitions. What
defines “return?” What defines “success?” Is it having sex with
more women than the average man? Is it dating hundreds of
women? Is it getting married and managing to be one out of every
two men who don't get divorced? What if you're married, but
completely miserable?
And this also says nothing of costs.
How do we measure the price you pay to pursue women? Is it only
your explicit cash outlays? What about time? Have you ever paid a
mental or emotional price pursuing women? Do psychologist bills
count? And what about opportunity cost? What could you have
done with your life had you not spent your entire 20's buying girls
dinners on dates or drinks at night clubs? It's very easy to look up
the price of a bond and the interest it pays on the Wall Street
Journal. It's not so easy doing a cost benefit analysis on the pursuit
of women.
To that end we need to define two things. One, the terms we're
using to define things like “success” and “costs” so that we may do a
cost benefit analysis. And two, the formula or “model” we're using to
calculate “what you're going to pay” and “what you're going to get”
when it comes to calculating the ROI of women. And though
certainly there may be some academic disagreement on both, it's at
least a starting point and gives us a model to work with.
Definitions
“What You're Gonna Get” - aka - “Success,” “Benefits,” or “Profit”
“Success” in this study will be considered to be the traditional
measure of romantic success throughout human history - “happily
married.” This could be in the form of a traditional marriage,
cohabitation, or any form of committed relationship. But to be
“successful” according to this study you must be committed to a
relationship and happy in it. The reason for choosing “happily
married” is because this is what most men have invariably wanted
over the course of human history. Certainly modern day sociological
fads such as polyamorous relationships or 31 flavors of genders
have entered the realm of human relationships, but we are going to
focus on what 2 million years of evolution has defined as “success,”
not what is politically popular on college campuses this week. It is
assumed you want a traditional marriage, where you marry the
woman you love, stay married, and are happy in that marriage,
hopefully until death does somebody part.
“What You're Gonna Pay” - aka - “Costs,” “Price,” or “Investment”
“Costs” in this study will be defined as ALL resources men use in the
pursuit of women. This is a comprehensive and theoretical
definition, but it simply aims to measure “what price will men have
paid in all forms of resources had they not been pursuing women.”
In this sense, it is a classical “with vs. without” comparison of your
“Average Joe 5” versus a confirmed bachelor, where one guy
expends the normal amount of effort any man would pursuing
women, versus a theoretical man who had no interest in women at
all.
Since there are various forms of resources (time, money, energy,
sanity, etc.) there are going to be various measures of “costs” which
will allow for their own individual insights and analyses. But they will
become increasingly amorphous as you cannot put a financial price
tag on things such as “stress,” “emotion,” “suffering,” or “confusion.”
These intangible forms of “costs” will not allow for economic
analyses of the ROI of the pursuit of women, but will prove incredibly
useful in subjective ones.
The Model
Though the model above looks like chaos and chicken scratch, in all
that chaos and chicken scratch the simple formula for calculating the
ROI of women remains the same - what you're going to pay versus
what you're going to get. And as long as you don't make it more
complicated than that, you will be able to follow along and assess
whether the pursuit of women is worth the investment.
Still, a simplified overview of the model above will prove useful in
understanding the statistics and methodology of this study.
Furthermore, in understanding the individual-calculations that have
gone into the overall calculations of this study, you will be able to
more precisely understand what does and does not increase your
chances of success with women, translating the chaotic chicken
scratch above into specific actions you can take in your life to
improve your chances with women.
To that end, the model can be broken down into those same two,
classical pieces of the ROI formula; “What You're Going to Get” and
“What You're Going to Pay.”
Model Part 1 - “What You're Going to Get”
Since “success” is defined as “happily married” the first part of the
formula focuses on the chances your “Average Joe 5” will be happily
married. Keep in mind “what you're going to get” is NOT
MARRIAGE. And it certainly is NOT a HAPPY MARRIAGE. It is the
chance you will be happily married. This is an incredibly important
distinction to make because what you are really doing in pursuing
women is more akin to playing the lottery than a guaranteed
investment. If you pursue women you are NOT guaranteed of being
happily married. Just like a lottery ticket, you are merely guaranteed
to have a chance at being happily married. And so the model
focuses on those chances.
Specifically, the model does this by looking at three sub variables
that go into calculating the overall chances you will have a
successful marriage:
1. The supply or “percent” of women that are marriageable.
2. The percent chance said women will want to marry you in
return
3. The percent chance that marriage will not end up in divorce
or misery, but a happy one
We then take the percent chance you will find a marriageable
woman, multiply that by the chances this woman will in turn want to
marry you, and finally filter it through the wringer of marriage/divorce
to see if your marriage will achieve the status of life-long marital
bliss.
Simplifying the above, the first part of the model looks like this:
This will be reviewed in Chapters 4-6 of the book.
Model Part 2 – “What You're Going to Pay”
With the “benefits” of the pursuit of women calculated we can now
move onto the second part of the formula - the total cost men can
expect to incur in this pursuit. This is broken down into three subcategories of costs, resulting in a total cost figure.
“Explicit Costs” are your actual financial expenses men will incur in
their pursuit of women. This includes common things such as dates,
drinks, dating services, etc., but also includes often unforeseen-butno-less-real costs. Things like divorce settlements, alimony,
increased housing costs, increased car costs, unnecessary
schooling, wedding rings, weddings, even bailing out their theoretical
fiancée of her student loans for her “Sociology” degree. This may be
the narrowest measure of the price men pay, but it still is a significant
price.
“Opportunity Costs” are what men passed up on had they invested
the money and/or time mentioned above into other things. This
could be additional education, more hours at the office, an
entrepreneurial venture, the S&P 500, or even something as simple
as leisure. And though the mind can fantasize about investing in
“Bitcoin” or “Tesla” in 2005, simply ask yourself how much you would
have today had you invested all the money you spent chasing girls
into a boring ole S&P 500 mutual fund instead. Admittedly, this is a
theoretical cost, but the money would have gone somewhere else
had you not spent it chasing women, making it a very real cost.
“Intangible Costs” are all the undefinable costs men pay in their
pursuit of women. Though not tangible, nor measurable they are
nevertheless very real. The mental pain and agony when you get
stood up or divorced. The arguing or fighting that comes with the
mandatory bipolar girl every man is seemingly doomed to date at
least once nowadays. Thinking you're mentally ill when you were
just dating a psychopath. Hours of nagging or being denied sex in a
“happy marriage.” Even something as simple as the torture of
feigning interest in what a woman has to say only because you want
to get laid. A numerical price cannot be put on the time, effort,
emotion, or sanity these men are never getting back, but it was a
price paid nonetheless.
When you add these three costs you get a total cost – aka “the price
you're going to pay” - to pursue women. And though with the
inclusion of “intangible costs” we cannot put a financial price tag on
it, analyzing each of these sub-costs will help immensely in
calculating the ROI of the pursuit of women from both a
mathematical and subjective perspective.
This will be covered in more detail in Chapter 8 of the book.
The Bottom Line – ROI
With both the costs and benefits of pursuing women calculated, it is
merely a simple matter of dividing the benefits by the costs to
determine your ROI. Because of the various and intangible
measures of both, you will have many estimates for the ROI of the
pursuit of women, none of which are right or wrong. But understand
they are numbers where there were none before, and we now have
the ability to run “worst, expected, and best” case scenarios. This is
an infinite improvement over what men had before to make this
ultimate economic decision in the past, which was nothing.
NOTE ON CHAPTERS 4-6
As described in Chapter 3, the three underlying statistics used to
determine the percent chance of you being happily married were:
The percent of the female population that is marriage
material
The percent of those women willing to marry you (as defined
as “Average Joe 5”), and
The percent chance this marriage would remain a happy
one.
However, since a fair amount of detail and minutiae has gone into
each of these underlying calculations, a separate chapter will be
dedicated to explaining each of them, how they were derived, and
the underlying assumptions behind them. Therefore, Chapters 4 - 6
will be:
Chapter 4 – The Percent of Women Who Are Marriageable
Chapter 5 – The Percent of Women Who Want to Marry an Average
Man
Chapter 6 – The Percent Chance Your Marriage Will Be a Happy
One
Keep in mind this only covers the first half of the formula, with cost
calculations being covered in Chapter 8. So to avoid confusion and
be able to follow the math you may want to reference this “Map of
the Model” as we go along.
CHAPTER 4 – THE CHANCES: THE
PERCENT OF WOMEN WHO ARE
MARRIAGEABLE
If you have tried dating in the past 25 years you know that it has not
only been difficult, but increasingly so. And while many people (both
men and women) may date for fun, inevitably the majority of people
date with the end goal of marriage and perhaps forming a family.
But while men's and women's biological drives compel them towards
this evolutionary goal, society in a bevy of ways has delayed,
postponed, even outright obstructed men and women from achieving
this goal. This has come in the form of making college an
unnecessary condition of employment, crippling young people with
student debt so they can't afford a family, indoctrinating young
women to put more value on their careers and education than
men/children/family/love, obesity that has rendered 70% of people
physically revolting, and a war of the sexes that makes cancer seem
friendly. Both sexes - women for men and men for women - have
been ruined for each other by society, resulting in abysmally few
people who are marriage material. And you didn't need a study to
tell you that.
But how do you measure “marriage material?” How do you
determine whether a woman is of high enough caliber to marry?
And what traits would you consider to make this judgment? There
are no correct answers, but this study employs three methods to
estimate the percent of the female population that is marriageable:
1. The “Deal Breaker “ Method
2. The “Online Dating Profile Survey” Method
3. The “Dates Per Marriage” Method
An average of all three will then be used for this piece of the ROI
puzzle.
Method #1 – The “Deal Breaker” Method
The “Deal Breaker Method” attempts to measure (based on surveys,
polling, and other data) what percent of the American female
population has no major deal breakers. What qualifies as a “deal
breaker” is certainly up for debate. Loudly smacking her chewinggum may be considered a deal breaker for some, but not at the
same level as say a woman with herpes. So to determine what were
critical deal breakers that would indeed disqualify a woman from
being marriage material we had to focus on critical flaws that were
not merely unlikable, but would make a happy marriage an
impossibility. And while no doubt this list could be unlimited, we
focused on 8 deal breakers deemed to be the most poignant,
comprehensive, and relevant to the success of a happy marriage, as
well as the interests of men.
#1 Obesity/Being Overweight
Despite what fat acceptance “activists” and an increasing percent of
American women want to believe, being big is not beautiful. It is
disgusting. It's gross. It's physically revolting. And as it just so
happens it's unhealthy. But more importantly, as it pertains to
whether a woman is marriage material, it immediately destroys the
number one thing men seek in women – physical beauty. And
though women may howl at the moon and claim that a man should
love a woman for who she is on the inside, we already have a name
for women we like, but just aren't physically attracted to - “friends.”
Regardless, since physical beauty is a must, this eliminates the
59.6% of young American women who are obese or overweight as
marriage material. Certainly, yes, many men are fat themselves.
And yes many men marry fat women, have wives who get fat on
them, or even manage to have kids with them. But remember the
definition of “success” in this study is happily married and you
simply cannot be happily married to someone you're not physically
attracted to.
#2 Worthless Degrees
While the world celebrates that there are now more women in
college than men, nobody has bothered to ask whether it's for
something sensible like Accounting or a colossal waste of time like
the Liberal Arts. And when you consider whether the degrees
women are getting are worthwhile or merely an excuse to attend a
very expensive 4 year party, unfortunately 80.5% of the time it's an
excuse to party.
However, it is not so much the degree itself that excludes women
from being marriage material as it is what it comprehensively says
about them. First, it's a declaration as to how realistic and serious
women are about their careers, their professions, and their work
ethic. Yes, it would be nice to solve poverty, but usually when a
young woman majors in the social sciences it's to avoid real work or
rigor, at minimum a delusion to “follow her heart and the money will
follow.” You WILL be subsidizing her life as she simply lacks the
education and skills to command a self-supporting wage. Second,
there are HUGE financial consequences for majoring in the wrong
thing. Namely, the tonnage of student debt she's incurred and
unable to pay off, making her a HUGE financial liability for any future
suitor. Third, many of these worthless degrees are simply rank
indoctrination, brainwashing women to value their careers, politics,
feminism, educations, etc., above love, which is simply antithetical to
marriage. If you marry someone with a “Genders Studies” degree
they are not going to be a loving supporting wife, but likely an
obstinate, nagging shrew that loves her cultish politics and career
more than you or your children.
This isn't to say a nice, sweet girl who's majoring in education to
become an elementary school teacher is going to be some nagging,
confrontational harpy. Nor is it to say that every girl goes to college
(only 72.5% of women do). But it is to use women's choice of majors
as a proxy as to where their priorities in life lie, how realistic they are
about finances, how realistic they are about life, as well as the
chances they will be a political, financial, or even emotional liability to
your marriage.
* The data for worthless degrees was calculated using the NCES
data for all bachelor degrees conferred in 2018. Every degree that
did not have an obvious job or profession attached to it, or were
notoriously underpaid professions (education, sociology, etc.) or
were typically unaccredited degrees that target poor/disadvantaged
groups of students (criminal justice, culinary school, etc.), were
deemed worthless.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/tables/dt18_318.30.asp
#3 Percent Financially Delinquent
As financial problems are cited as the number one cause of divorce,
finding a woman who has her financial act together is a must.
Furthermore, a woman who cannot pay her bills on time is simply not
mature enough to marry. And while no doubt young women today
have the added financial pressures of student loans for completely
unemployable degrees, no self-respecting man can marry a woman
who doesn't pay her bills, or worse, is one of the 6% who declares
bankruptcy, upgrading themselves to thieves.
Using “ever delinquent” as the metric in a Federal Reserve study to
determine fiscal responsibility, 31.6% of women between the ages of
18-35 have been late at least once paying back their debts. Men are
only a few percentage points better, but nearly 1 in every 3 women of
marrying age have finances that are prohibitive to marriage. This
leaves roughly only 2/3rds of women fiscally responsible, and
presumably responsible enough to marry.
Data was an average between two age cohorts from 21-30 and 3140. The study can be found here:
https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/genderrelated-differences-in-credit-use-and-credit-scores-20180622.htm
#4 Leftist/Socialist/Feminist Politics
While one could make the argument (and be right) that leftist or
feminist politics shouldn't be considered a deal breaker (there are
democrat men after all), leftist politics are considered a deal-breaker
in that they play a role in young women's lives today that goes
beyond mere government policy, to that of a political-ideological cult
that renders many of them unmarriageable.
In the 1960's when your mother or grandmother, even your
curmudgeonly grandfather would vote democrat, it was usually to
nobly “help out the little guy” or to perhaps reel in the powers of
corporate America. And whether you agreed with them or not, it was
to exercise their right to vote and do their part to make America as
great as it could be. But for whatever reason they voted democrat it
wasn't because they solely valued themselves as “democrats” or
derived some kind of life purpose and meaning from it. They were a
“housewife” or “plumber” first, who happened to vote for JFK. But
today left-leaning politics, and certainly feminism is not about giving
the little guy a break or something as mundane as balancing the
budget. It has become a substitute for purpose, meaning, value,
even love in many young women's lives today. So much so many
young women will simply refuse to date non-leftists as a matter of
policy, screaming “SWIPE LEFT IF YOU'RE A REPUBLICAN!!!!”
(when, in fact, you might be a libertarian).
This makes politics (like other things) a higher priority in leftist
women's lives than love. And to truly fall in love (let alone be happily
married), you need to put the other person ahead of yourself, and
that includes your cultish politics. But worse, this unhealthy
obsession with politics, as well as abusing it as a substitute for
purpose in life, has many young women flirting with mental illness
where they literally hate you because you dare advocate lower
taxes or refuse to use made up pronouns. Therefore, it is not the
political positions of the democrat party, socialism, or feminism per
se that makes these women unmarriageable, but the fact they put it
at the center of their lives that render them so. And though this
ideological obsession provides left-leaning men a HUGE statistical
advantage when it comes to dating (as 65% of young women identify
as “democrat” or “feminist”), it will forever sow a seed of doubt as to
whether your leftist wife loves you or her politics more.
#5 Single Moms
This variable is very simple. Men don't like raising other men's
children. Men are genetically repulsed by other men's genes. Men
are also not kosher with being the #2 guy in a woman's life, let alone
playing second fiddle to some other guy's kid. And unless the
woman was a widow, being a single mom is indicative of poor
decision making in the past.
Admittedly, if you're an older man you may not have the luxury to
pine for, let alone, hold out for a childless woman. Over time most
women will have children and with a 50% divorce rate single moms
are an inevitability in every middle-aged man's life. But since this
study focuses on younger men who are yet to be married, as well as
young women who are not at menopause's door, it is perfectly
reasonable and self-respecting to demand your future wife not have
another man's kid.
Unfortunately, what you want and what you're going to get are two
different things as nearly 40% of single women between the ages of
18-35 are single moms. Worse, the better looking a woman is the
higher percent chance she has a kid in tow (this phenomenon was
particularly noticeable when surveying online dating profiles in rural
areas). The fact is, whether you like it or not, beautiful women attract
handsome men and the result is children. Sometimes these people
stay married, sometimes they don't, sometimes they were never
married at all. But the end result is the average young man today is
looking at a dating pool where 4 in every 10 women have some other
guy's kid.
#6 STD's
STD's present an interesting problem. What is considered an STD?
Is it HPV which nearly half the population will get, yet for the most
part is asymptomatic? Is it a death sentence like AIDS? What if it's
curable like gonorrhea or chlamydia? What if it's not like herpes?
It's hard to pin down what a “deal breaking STD” is.
Furthermore, there are complications when it comes to measuring an
STD rate among young women. For instance, the data just doesn't
exist for the specific age cohort we're interested in. Different
diseases come and go in waves over generations making a stable,
usable number an impossibility. And a significant percent of the
female population has multiple STD's. There is frankly no way to
apply a specific number to the percent of women who have a
marriage-disqualifying STD.
Therefore, for the purposes of this study a “marriage-disqualifying
STD” was conservatively defined as whether a woman had herpes or
not. There are certainly some shortcomings in using this metric, but
having herpes is a pretty applicable standard when it comes to
marriageability. Most men will adamantly refuse to marry (let alone
sleep with) a woman who knowingly has herpes. Herpes is not
curable. And there's enough social stigma associated with the
disease it's a death knell to your dating life and, consequently, your
chances of marriage. A shocking 25% of women are estimated by
the CDC to have herpes (though the vast majority of these women
are asymptomatic). And remember, that's just one STD. The
percent of women with deal breaking STD's is likely higher.
#7 - Mental Illness
Like STD's mental illness also presents a measuring and statistical
problem. Do you consider women who ever had a mental illness?
Do you only consider women who are chronically mentally ill? Do
you consider something serious and permanent like schizophrenia?
What about something as minor as dyslexia? Does the suite of
“designer mental illnesses” Millennials popularized to get attention in
high school count? What about ADHD or “social anxiety disorder?”
And who cares if she's faking being bipolar for attention. Isn't that in
itself a deal breaker for most men?
Like STD's, an assumption had to be made to simplify the math and
just get us into the ballpark. This assumption was that the 25% of
women who are on antidepressants are a reflective (though low end)
estimate of the overall population of women who are mentally ill to
the point they are unqualified to be wives.
#8 - Body Mutilation
The final deal breaker was body mutilation. Like STD's and mental
illness, this was also amorphous and intangible. However, mutilating
one's body is a pretty clear sign of several things. Mental illness.
Bad decision making skills. Immaturity. Financial instability. A lack
of purpose and meaning in life. And conformity (especially among
women from 18-35). Additionally, physically marring your body not
only ruins the number one thing men seek in women (beauty), but
can also be visually identified, making it an easily identifiable red flag
for any serious seeker of marriage.
But like other metrics, what qualifies as “bodily mutilation?” Is the
discreet Chinese proverb tattoo nearly every 20 something girl has a
sign of mental illness? Are the “tramp stamps” nearly every Gen X
woman got the same? And what if she was a military vet and got the
tattoo with her unit in Iraq? Therefore, for the purposes of this study
“body mutilation” was considered somebody who had 4 or more
tattoos. Non-traditional piercings or other forms of body mutilation
(ear gauges for example) were not considered, largely because
there isn't enough data about the female population that has them.
But there is research (see below) showing the more tattoos women
have, the more mentally unstable they are, rendering them for the
purpose of this analysis, unmarriageable.
Nearly 1 in 6 (15.3%) of the female population is estimated to have
4+ tattoos.
* Studies/sources for reference:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6347139/
https://www.courierpostonline.com/story/news/local/southjersey/2018/07/17/national-tattoo-day-south-jersey-show-ustattoos/791417002/
https://www.foxnews.com/us/fox-news-poll-tattoos-arent-just-forrebels-anymore
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1440783318755017
https://medium.com/daliaresearch/who-has-the-most-tattoos-its-notwho-you-d-expect-1d5ffff660f8
https://www.reference.com/world-view/statistics-body-piercingf5db4efae39e98ef
https://blog.bodyjewelry.com/statistics-of-body-piercings-in-the-u-s/
Backing Out Dependence/Co-Correlation and Finalizing the Number
When you tally up the numbers above you get the following
statistics:
And while you may be tempted to merely multiply these variables
together to get the remaining percent of the female population
without a major deal breaker (which would result in .54% - roughly
one-half of one percent of the female population), this number is
misleading because of the co-correlation between these 8 deal
breakers.
For example, it may shock you to find out that a feminist with a
worthless degree might also...
have 4+ tattoos
have financial problems
be on antidepressants
and also be fat.
This results in a Venn diagram where one woman can account for
several of these traits, overstating the percent of the female
population that is unmarriageable and understating the percent of
the female population that is.
To account for this overlap
two statistical methods were employed to back out this cocorrelation. These methods resulted in two estimates of the
marriageable population - 1.1% and 1.4% - averaging to around
1.25%.
This adjusted number is
the finalized number we will be using for Method #1 in calculating the
percent of marriageable women – 1.25%.
Method #2 – The “Online Dating Profile Survey” Method
To get the second number used to measure what percent of the
female population was marriageable a more direct route was taken.
I merely borrowed my friend's Match.com account and went through
900 profiles of women, asking the simple question: “Does she have
any major deal breakers?”
These 900 profiles were sampled over three states and within each
state further divided across city, suburb, and rural zip codes at 100
samples each. The three states/major metros were:
Dallas, Texas,
Minneapolis, Minnesota, and
Denver, Colorado
So using Texas as an example, 100 profiles were sampled from
“Dallas,” 100 profiles sampled from “Plano” (a suburb), and 100
profiles sampled from “Van Horn” (rural). This methodology was
repeated in Minnesota and Colorado as well.
Simple and direct as this method may have been, it was not without
its challenges.
First, most online dating services or “apps” do not have those same
8 deal breakers conveniently listed on a woman's dating profile. This
required spending HOURS pouring over the details, reading
hundreds of individual profiles to see if there were any deal
breakers. Second, online profiles are not totally disclosing, meaning
just because she didn't mention prescription meds didn't mean she
wasn't mentally ill. This means this method likely understates the
number of women with deal breakers, and thus overstates the
percent of marriageable women. Third, women put in an amazing
amount of trickery and deception when it comes to their pictures.
Blurry pictures. Pictures from far away. Pictures where she's
wearing sun glasses so you can't see her face. Pictures where she's
in a group of women making it impossible to tell who she is. Some
women didn't even post pictures at all, but instead pictures of
landscapes or painfully stupid calligraphic sayings. And the amount
of close-up facial shots, pictures from 1996, or outright photoshop
jobs was appalling. It was assumed that any kind of trickery when it
came to pictures was merely a fat woman trying to hide the fact she
was fat, resulting in a hard no in the analysis.
Still, one week and 900 profiles later, the results were very eye
opening about the world of online dating.
Apparently all children of single moms not only “come first,”
but are also all “amazing.” Surprisingly there are no
average or stupid kids in America. Only “amazing.”
Nearly every girl likes to travel, despite the unpleasant chore
we all know traveling to be.
A lot of women are “done playing games” and “ready to
settle down” which when translated into English means,
“We're not having any of that fun, frivolous sex I gave to all
the previous fellas.”
Nearly everyone is a “fur momma” to a “fur baby.”
For some women (notably in Texas) Jesus is not just
“merely important” but “soooooper important.”
Most women are bi-lingual as they are fluent in “Sarcasm.”
And a good percent of women are apparently criminals
because they're all looking for their “partner in crime.”
Still, out of all the clichéd and banal dating profiles there were 50
quite admirable women who had no obvious deal breakers. And (at
least on paper) looked to be of marriage material. These 50 women
accounted for 5.4% of the 900 profiles surveyed.
This is the finalized number for Method #2 in calculating the percent
of marriageable women – 5.4%
*It should be noted that this 5.4% figure likely overstates the percent
of marriageable women in that not all deal breakers can be
ascertained in a mere dating profile.
* It is acknowledged that Match.com is only one dating site and more
modern dating sites/apps are in use. Notably Bumble and Tinder.
However, these apps have very limited data on their profiles as each
profile must fit on a phone screen.
* It is also acknowledged that online dating is not the only source for
dates. One can meet a girl in public. However, especially under
COVID, nearly all dating is done online today, especially for the age
demographic of 18-35. Therefore Match.com is assumed to be
reasonably representative of the true dating market men face today.
Method #3 – The “Dates Per Marriage” Method
The third method used to estimate the percent of marriageable
women is actually quite simple. It simply asks how many women
men date before they marry. You take the number of wives men
have had, divided it by the total number of women they've dated, and
that should give us a rough approximation of the percent of women
men deem marriageable.
There were several problems with this measure. First, the polling
was highly unscientific, fraught with selection bias and other
common polling errors (additional data on this would be
tremendously helpful in improving this study). Second, this ratio
most certainly overstates the percent of marriageable women in that
men have presumably already selected for beauty when asking
women on dates, not randomly asking out random girls in public
regardless of their physical appearance. However, third, this is
ameliorated by the fact this measure does not account for the
instances where the man wanted to get married, but the woman did
not, yet still resulted in a date (note – this effect also affects women,
which will be addressed later). Fourth, the distribution was bimodal
where the majority of men had dated 10 or less women before
marrying, though the mean average was brought up significantly by
“serial daters” - men who had dated in excess of 100 women.
When the total
amount of dates was divided by the total amount of marriages, the
average man will date 67 women in their life before marrying,
implying only 1.5% of women are deemed marriageable by men.
And while an argument could certainly be made to back out the
“serial daters,” the serial daters are nonetheless part of the dating
community, plus they technically have statistically sampled those
women. Furthermore, various dating sites, dating coaches, as well
as serial daters themselves have anecdotally reported a rule of
thumb of only 1 in every 100 women being marriageable, roughly
corroborating the data above. Still, it is acknowledged that if we
considered a median number of dates instead of the mean, this
number would be significantly higher, but for the sake of analysis we
will stick with the 1.5%.
This is the finalized number for Method #3 in calculating the percent
of marriageable women – 1.5%.
The Final Number for the Percent of Women Who are
Marriageable
Taking the three estimates from the three methods:
The “Deal Breaker “ Method
The “Online Dating Profile Survey” Method
The “Dates Per Marriage” Method
1.5%
1.25%
5.4%
we get a simple average of 2.72%, or 1 in every 37 American women
do not have a major deal breaker. This 2.72% is the first of three
variables we will need to calculate the percent chance you will be
happily married – aka - “What You're Going to Get.”
CHAPTER 5 – THE CHANCES: THE
PERCENT OF WOMEN WHO WILL MARRY
“AVERAGE JOE 5”
With the percent of the female population that is marriageable
calculated we now need to consider whether any of these girls would
want to marry you. However, “you” are an individual man. You could
be a really tall, good-looking fella. Or you could be some fat, short,
ugly NEET living in his mom's basement. Here we employ our
theoretical friend “Average Joe 5” so that we can not only run some
statistics, but apply these statistics to the widest group of men
possible.
The methodology used to calculate the percent of women who want
to marry the average guy breaks down into three sub-calculations or
variables:
“The Spinster at 35 Ratio”
The Percent of Women Willing to Date “Average Joe 5,” and
The Number of Men Women Date Before Marrying (the
exact same “Dates per Marriage” calculation we did for men
in Chapter 4)
The logic behind this is that we first need to remove the percent of
women who have no interest in marrying (thus “The Spinster
Ratio”). And the women who remain will then need to both want to
date and ultimately marry you to be considered in this statistic. This
then results in the percent chance your average woman will end up
dating, and ultimately marrying, “Average Joe 5.”
The “Spinster at 35 Ratio”
If you look at polling data nearly every woman claims she wants to
get married. But here it's important to distinguish between what
women say and what they do. Because though nearly 100% of
women say they want to get married, what happens in effect is that
only about 70% of them do by 35. Therefore, the remaining 30%
who do not marry by 35 need to be backed out from this calculation
because (though some women certainly do marry after 35) most
men don't have an interest in them after that age, removing these
women from the marriage market.
This means that right off the bat we lose 30% of women, forming a
baseline of 70%. However, even this is likely an overestimate as this
trend is worsening. The original data used for this calculation came
from this site:
https://flowingdata.com/2017/11/01/who-is-married-by-now/
which showed only 26% of women at 35 were never married.
However this data was from 2015. More recent surveys (cited
below) show between 30-35% of women never marrying by 35.
Also, according to the study “The SHEconomy” by Morgan Stanley,
they expect the percent of never married women to increase
significantly, where 45% of women between 25 and 44 will be single
(though admittedly that is “single,” not “never married”).
Regardless, you can safely assume AT MINIMUM 30% of women
from 18-35 have no effective interest in marrying and need to be
removed from this calculation.
*Additional sources for “The Spinster at 35 Ratio” can be found here:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/livingsingle/202009/record-number-americans-have-never-married-andnever-will
https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-share-of-never-married-americans-hasreached-a-new-high
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/09/24/record-share-ofamericans-have-never-married/
The Percent of Women Willing to Date
“Average Joe 5”
The next step is calculating what percent of the remaining 70% of
women are willing to date “Average Joe 5.” And here we look at
three variables:
Looks
Income, and
Status
Specifically, we look at what women's requirements are of men to
meet these thresholds/standards, and then calculate the percent of
“Average Joe 5's” who actually do.
Looks
Though it is a bit dated, the dating site “OK Cupid” published a study
in 2009 that showed women rated 80% of men “below average”
when it came to attractiveness.
This study obviously made headlines, but corroborated other studies
and phenomenon on the matter. One such study (of which I could
not find, only remember) had 100 college girls and 100 college guys
rate whether they would sleep with each other. The results showed
men were willing to sleep with women of equal attraction or higher,
but 80% of women were only willing to sleep with the top 20% of
guys. Regardless of the study, this Pareto distribution where only
20% of men are deemed attractive by women is pretty much the
industry standard when it comes to human attraction. With men's
sex drive at 9 times that of women, women can afford to be choosy
when selecting a mate, insisting on only the top tier of men.
However, while this is great for the George Clooneys of the world,
this bodes very poorly for “Average Joe 5” as only 20% of women
will find him attractive, relegating him to only 1/5th of the female
population.
Income
An equally popular study was released by Cornell in 2020 titled
“Economically Unattractive Men.” It surveyed single women of
marrying age about what requirements they had of men before
marrying (employment, education, income, etc.) and then compared
those requirements against what the available pool of bachelors in
America had. They found that in addition to more education and
more employment, women hypergamically insisted on men having
incomes 58% higher than what the average American bachelor
made. This predictably caused a cascade of gossip columns in the
media about how “Men need to grow up!!!” and “Where have all the
good men gone?!” and other tiring lamentations of women.
However, in that study there was an insightful nugget of information.
Namely, that the average bachelorette required an income 58%
higher than what the average bachelor made. And using data from
the US Census Bureau's 2019 Annual Population Survey, we were
able to calculate that this translates into $64,231.
Of which only 15% of single men between 18-45 make.
*Studies cited above:
https://www.human.cornell.edu/pam/spotlights/economicallyunattractive
https://techcrunch.com/2009/11/18/okcupid-inbox-attractive/
https://www.census.gov/data/datasets/2019/demo/cps/cps-asec2019.html
Status
The final variable needed to assess whether a woman would find a
man attractive or not is his status. This is intangible and cannot be
easily measured, but the obsession young women today seem to
have with a man's education is particularly interesting. A plumber
could make $90,000 a year, but most women wouldn't give him the
time of day because “he's a plumber.” A mechanic could make 4
times that of a social worker, but because she has a “Masters
Degree” she will still deem him beneath her. Furthermore, women
themselves seem to irrationally value their education more than the
income it can generate, often times putting their education at the
core of their lives. So education was selected as a proxy for status.
It is here we assumed that women would insist on a man with an
equal-or-higher education to hers. And when you account for all
levels of education, if men and women of equal education were to
pair up, only 75.2% of women would have an equally-educated
partner, leaving 24.8% of women refusing to date their lowereducated male counterparts. This means your “Average Joe 5,”
unless highly educated, can expect to meet the status requirements
of women only 75.2% of the time.
Finalizing “The Percent of Women Willing to Date 'Average Joe 5'”
When we consider:
only 20% of women find “Average Joe 5” attractive enough
to date.
only 15% of single Average Joe's meet women's income
requirements, and
only 75.2% of Average Joe's will meet the
status/educational requirements of women
this implies only 2.26% of women will even entertain a date from
your “Average Joe.” However, since we selected education as a
proxy for status, it should surprise no one that both income and
status correlate positively with one another and this co-correlation
needs to be backed out. When this adjustment is made, the percent
of women willing to date your average American man increases to
2.93%.
An Alternative Measure – Online Dating Data
While for the purposes of this study we will be using the 2.93% figure
to gauge women's interest in dating “Average Joe's,” it needs to be
noted that today the vast majority of dating is conducted online. This
provides us with an alternative venue by which to measure women's
interest in dating, as online dating platforms allow us to collect data,
run experiments, and calculate statistics. The argument could even
be made that this data would be more accurate since 80% of dating
is done online.
Interestingly enough, three men conducted their own experiments
using different dating platforms to measure their success in dating.
And while not official studies with proper control groups or variables,
the results were very interesting just the same.
“500 Days On Cupid”
https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/7oqygb/my_500_
days_on_okcupid_oc/
“My 28 Days on Tinder”
https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/83ttdq/oc_my_28
_days_on_tinder/
“117 Days of My Tinder Profile”
https://towardsdatascience.com/117-days-of-tinder-in-data755fe9ed853e
You can certainly read through the studies above, but the short
version is this: After 10's of thousands of swipes, hundreds of
messages, and scores of flirtations, a paltry few ended up on an
actual date. Months (in one guy's case, over a year) of online dating
and the average guy got 4 dates. And when you delve into the data
what you'll find is a shocking lack of interest in dating on the part of
women.
After normalizing the data from the above studies, it took 32,600
swipes to get 11 dates. Assuming these guys were “Average Joe
5's,” this implies the percent of women interested in average men is
.03% (Not 3%. Point-zero-three percent). Of course, this is likely
more of a function of online dating where women get thousands of
matches and simply don't have the time to sift through all their
requests. It's also a function of a tactic where men just swipe right
on every profile as a means to save time, foisting the job of
screening onto the women. But even accounting for that, if you take
the number of matches this generated (571), the 11 dates implies
only 1.93% of women are interested in dating an Average Joe.
Though the 2.93% figure will be used for the rest of this study, keep
in mind the 1.93% statistic could be used as a theoretical lower limit
to gauge women's interest in dating average men.
The Number of Men Women Date Before Marrying
In Chapter 4 we calculated a “Dates Per Marriage” ratio to figure out
how many women a man will date before marrying one of them. We
now apply this same logic to women because just because a woman
decides to date a man, doesn't mean she's going to marry him. And
whereas men will date 67 women before marrying, women are not
as choosy, dating only 10.4 men per marriage (though this is likely
because women are much more picky when it comes to dating,
screening more thoroughly at the dating stage). This implies if you
make it past this higher hurdle, women tend to marry 9.6% of the
men they date.
This provides us with the final number we need to calculate The
Percent of Women Who Will Marry “Average Joe 5.”
The Final Number for “The Percent of Women Who Will Marry
'Average Joe 5'”
When we:
Back out the 30% of women who will simply not marry
before 35
Account for the fact only 20% of them will find your average
man attractive
Account for the fact only 15% of single men meet women's
income requirements
Account for the 25% of men who will fail to meet women's
educational/status requirements
Adjust for the correlation between 3 and 4, and
Assume women only marry about 9.6% of the men they
date
we come up with .197%. Not 1.97%. Point-one-nine-seven
percent. Just shy of 2 tenths of 1% of women are statistically likely
to marry the random average Joe.
This is the second of three variables needed to calculate whether
you will enjoy a happy marriage.
CHAPTER 6 – THE CHANCES: THE
PERCENT CHANCE YOUR MARRIAGE
WILL BE A HAPPY ONE
It is here it would pay some dividends to review what we've
calculated and, more importantly, what it means. Because as the
percentages become increasingly small and the number of decimal
points increases, context is necessary so we don't get lost in the
numbers.
Thus far we have calculated two statistics from Chapters 4 and 5:
The Percent of Women that are Marriageable – 2.72%.
The Percent of Women Willing to Marry “Average Joe 5” - .197%
And the reason we calculated these two statistics was to calculate
not only the percent of the female population you would want to
marry, but the chances that one of them would want to marry you in
return. So when you combine the two together, your average man is
facing a .00536% chance of these two events happening.
At first this may seem impossible. A .00536% chance? It's
practically hopeless. But keep in mind two major factors.
One, this is in a country that has a population of 320 million, our
target demographic of which numbers 44 million. Yes, the
percentages are very small, but they are being applied to
populations that are very large, which will result in more realistic
numbers.
Two, in calculating the percent of the total female population that is
marriageable, this implies you would be selecting from the total
population, asking completely random girls out on dates. Obviously
this would not be the case as you would select for beauty,
intelligence, femininity, or at least variables you can visually identify.
So the .00536% number is NOT your actual chances of getting
married. It's the chance of you asking a random woman on the
street out for a date and it ends up in marriage, which is both
improbable and impractical.
Still, the real world numbers are pretty dire.
If we were to apply the statistics we've calculated thus far in a more
practical manner, it is true that only 2.72% of American women have
zero major deal breakers. This means of the 44 million women
between the ages of 18-35, 1.2 million of them are considered
marriageable. Of that 1.2 million, only 2.93% of those women are
willing to date “Average Joe 5's” which means there's 35,160
“unicorns” out there for your everyday American Joe.
The problem is, how many everyday, average American Joe's are
there in the US?”
If you assume a linear distribution and define “5” as truly average,
there's about 4.4 million single “average American Joe's” in the US.
These 4.4 million are chasing after the only 35,160 women that
might consider dating them, meaning there's 125 “Average Joe 5's”
for every unicorn. This means there's a .8% chance you'll date one,
and this says nothing about whether you'll be one of the 9.6% of
men she might marry. It's a drastic improvement over the dire
.00536% chance unrealistically provided by the model, but it's still
not great.
But bad as they are, these real world, practical numbers introduce a
CRITICAL factor that we've yet to discuss. A factor, that when
accounted for, has more bearing on your success with women than
the statistics themselves. Action. And when we factor in action, it
turns these statistics on their head.
While there's no denying the numbers are indeed dire, they are not
futile in that men do not throw themselves at the mercy of these
statistics, casting fate to the wind, sitting at home with their thumbs
up their asses. Men have agency. They have control. They can
take action to improve their chances. So yes, the baseline statistics
may be impossible, but this assumes men do nothing to improve
their chances with women. And though there are a thousand things
men can do to improve their chances with women, one of the
simplest things men can do to dramatically increase their chances is
ask a lot of girls out.
Mock the serial daters all you like, but in asking out thousands of
women to get hundreds of dates, over decades of years, they move
that decimal point 1, 2, maybe even 3 places to the right, drastically
increasing their chances into the realm of possibility. And this says
nothing about whether you work out, get a better degree, put in OT
at the office, which would also dramatically increase your chances.
So say you start working out, you put on some better clothes, and
commit yourself to asking 100 girls a year out. Soon your chances
are no longer the .8% chance you'll ever date a unicorn, but more
like 80%. Who knows, you might even marry one. So when you
factor in the fact men can take actions that will increase their
chances, there is real hope you might actually find a quality woman
to date, maybe even make one your wife.
There's just one, minor, tinsy-winsy problem.
Let's say you do all the work, ask out 1,000 girls a year, hit the gym,
and maybe even get lucky and find yourself your one true love. And
let's say you get extra lucky and she's not only a unicorn, but you
guys decide to marry. You're sitting there on your wedding day with
your best friend delivering his speech, looking lovingly into each
other's eyes, giddy with excitement about what the future brings
including the crotchless panties she bought for that night. The future
is nothing but bright. But before you start feeding each other
wedding cake and pontificate about what you're going to name your
children...
what are the chances that marriage is going to last, let alone be a
happy one?
Factoring in Divorce and Unhappy Marriages
Since the goal of the pursuit of women is to be happily married we
now get to run the gauntlet of marriage. And in running that gauntlet,
men get to face that classic Baby Boomer American Past Time –
divorce.
It is no secret that 50% of marriages end in divorce today. It is also
no secret that between 70-80% of the time it is the woman who
initiates the divorce. And while successive post-Baby Boomer
generations of men have tried to mitigate this risk by cohabitating,
only 50% of cohabitating couples remain together, presenting the
same effective divorce rate.
However, remember our goal was not “to not get divorced.” It was to
be “happily married” and this presents an even bigger challenge.
Because while you at least have a roulette's chance of staying
married, remaining happily so is even more elusive.
Here reliable data and research are hard to come by. What qualifies
as a “happy marriage?” Is it both spouses reporting being happily
married? What about measuring error where you ask a husband in
front of his wife if he's happy? Do people lie to themselves and tell
pollsters they're happy? What about Herman and Ethel who were
married for 40 years when Ethel decided to file for divorce on the
41st year? There is simply no reliable way to measure what percent
of couples are happily married. Still, the best data that could be
found comes from a “Psychology Today” article that cites two
statistics from two books. One estimates the percent of happily
married couples to be 17% while the other is more optimistic at 40%,
averaging to 28.5% of couples being happily married.
But keep in mind 28.5% is not the chances of your marriage being
happy. You have to account for the fact that 50% of marriages end.
When you factor that in, your chances at a happy marriage are half
that chance – 14.25%. And though that's not terribly good news
(depressing actually) it does provide us the final number we need to
calculate the statistic we've been working towards these past three
chapters - “The Percent Chance You Will Be Happily Married,”
aka
“What You're Going to Get.”
Finalizing “The Percent Chance You Will Be Happily Married”
aka – “What You're Going to Get”
When we take the following statistics derived from the following
chapters:
Chapter 4 – The Percent of Women Who are Marriageable
2.72%
Chapter 5 – The Percent of Women Who Will Marry Average Joe 5
.197%
Chapter 6 – The Percent Chance that Marriage Will Remain a Happy
One
14.25%
we can finally calculate the first half of the ROI formula. And if you
remember correctly, this “benefit” or “what you're going to get” was
not that you would be happily married. Like a lottery ticket it was a
chance you'd be happily married. And when you multiply the
numbers above that chance is .00076283%.
That's it.
That's all.
This is what the pursuit of women is all about.
When you pursue a woman, you get a .00076283% CHANCE of
success.
But while infinitesimally small, keep in mind what this statistic does
and does not say. It does NOT say you stand a .00076283% chance
of ever being happily married. It says that if the “Average Joe 5”
asks “Average Jane 5” out on a date there is a .00076283% of that
particular instance ending up in a happy marriage. And if it doesn't
that's alright, because there's a pool of 44 million more women
between the ages of 18-35 to choose from. In other words that
.00076283% chance is “per event” or “per girl” a guy asks out. And
as discussed before, it's within men's power to take action to
increase their overall chances of being happily married, the least of
which you can do is ask more girls out.
This re-emphasizes the importance of action.
Instead of the 2 girls your average cowardly American man asks out
every year, get the balls to ask out 100. Instead of waiting for a girl
to give you a very clear sign at a bar, man up, walk up to her and
start talking. Instead of waiting till the last day of class to ask a girl
out, ask her out the first day and if she says no, sit next to a different
girl the second day of class and try again. And if you see a cute girl
at the grocery store you'd like to ask out, then do so.
Furthermore, there are things you can do to improve your chances
beyond increasing the number of “events” you have with women. Hit
the gym. Get some nicer clothes. Lose weight. Learn to ballroom
dance. Develop the gift of gab. Be educated. Get a good degree.
Get a good career. Work more. Earn more. Invest more. Develop
a devastating personality. Be charming. Be fast. Get a hair cut.
Put on nice cologne. Move out of the house. Get a job. Listen to
jazz. Borrow a puppy. And learn to wink. You are not a hapless
twig at the mercy of some raging river.
But while all those actions above will no doubt certainly increase
your chances of success with women, there's an interesting
philosophical and ironic consequence to the nature of “action.” An
opposite side of the action coin if you will. Because while you're a
young man hustling at work, making six figures, getting your
masters, bucking for promotion, taking salsa classes, all while
religiously attending the gym, there's a word for all those actions
you're taking to get the girls.
“Work.”
And all that work you put into chasing women comes at a great cost.
The cost of which will be tallied in Chapter 8.
CHAPTER 7 – THE CHANCES: REAL
WORLD NUMBERS
The problem with the .00076283% number is not that it's so small.
It's that it's impractical by itself. A man's success with women is not
“.00076283%” as that number merely measures the percent chance
a single event will lead to success. A man's success with women is
a function of both that .00076283% and the number of events he has
with women over the course of his life. And while there are certainly
other factors that go into success (which will be addressed in
Chapter 10), it would prove very beneficial to run some scenarios to
not only measure the efficacy of this model, but to get an idea of
what the average man can expect in terms of “success” with women
in the real world.
To that end we are going to run 2 real world scenarios using this
model where the first is the return your average man can expect in
his pursuit of women, and the second scenario is that of a “serial
dater” who puts forth significantly more effort towards dating. This
will give us both “average” and “optimistic” real world estimates of
what you can expect in your own personal pursuit.
Average/Optimistic Scenarios and Assumptions
Though we could vary
many variables and run unlimited scenarios with these two men,
we're going to solely focus on how many women each man will ask
out over the course of his life, assuming they start at 16 and go till 36
(2 decades worth of asking women out). The “normal” man asks out
about 3 girls per year while the “serial dater” will ask out 100. We
are also going to make an assumption that only 20% of women will
say yes to dates to both the serial dater and the normal guy. The
reason it is not the 2.26% calculated in Chapter 5 is because that
does not account for pre-selection. When men choose to ask a girl
out on a date it's not at random and he's usually selected a girl who
is more likely to say yes. Real world dating experience puts
women's responses closer to 20%.
Under these two scenarios the results are not only expected, but
roughly corroborated with what we witness in the real world. The
man who puts significant effort into his dating life, approaching it
even to the level of a part time job, can expect to date 11 unicorns in
his life. Of course, not all of these women will want to marry him, but
because of his volume of dating, he can fully expect to be married to
a unicorn (1.04 unicorns in fact). Of course, there's only a 14.25%
chance he will be happily married, but that is significantly higher than
what his average American male counterpart can expect.
The average American male only asks out about 3 girls a year.
Certainly this varies, but to be perfectly honest, your average
American male is a coward, putting little-to-no effort in his pursuit of
women. The results are not surprising. He will only ask out 60 girls
over the course of his life. Date 12 of them, resulting in having only
a 3% chance of being married to a unicorn. This is what you'd
expect your chances to be if you were a normal, overweight
“average Joe 5” - a near zero chance.
However, differences between your average American male and
serial daters aside, the key statistic to pull from these figures is the
number of men who are happily married “per '000.”
Even if you're a player and date 400 women in your life, the chances
of being happily married are still only about 15%. You've beaten the
near-impossible odds of finding a unicorn and marrying one with the
significant work you've put into dating, but marriage is just not that
happy of an institution. Only 1 in 6 players are going to be happily
married. But what is even more convincing of the veracity of this
model is what the average guy can expect in terms of being “happily
married” which is only 4.5 in 1000. And this is what we see
commonly...or rather, all too infrequently...in the real world – a truly
happily married couple.
If you were to be honest, you could count on one hand the number of
truly happily married couples you've witnessed in your life. The ones
where the wife always looks at her husband with beaming eyes and
giddy adoration. The ones where the husband still pinches his wife
in the ass even though they're approaching 70 and they're probably
still having sex. And especially the ones where the husband makes
an off colored joke, evoking a giggle, an eye roll, or a little backhanded slap to his chest from his wife. But for every one of these
couples how many thousands of “normal” unhappy couples have you
seen? Probably too many to count.
Thus, the phenomenon of “happily married couples” is so rare it only
exists in a “units per thousand” basis because such people and such
love are so rare. And thus, while your dedicated player can expend
his life to boost those chances to 1 in 6, your average American
male can accept his 4 in 1,000 chances of attaining this true
American dream.
And that is the point.
This is truly what you get in your pursuit of women. For most of you,
a mere fraction of a 1% chance at marital bliss given the amount of
effort your average man puts into it. And on the optimistic side, a
player, who dedicates the equivalent to a 2 decades-long part time
job to find his unicorn, upgrading his chances to 1 in 6.
We all want that loving, doting wife who maintains her physique for
us and loves us for who we are. We all want to make a flirtatious,
but mischievous comment that earns us an “oh you!” as she backhands us in the chest. Sadly, this is the one-in-a-thousand exception
that proves the rule. The rule that over 99% of American men will
suffer a wife they really don't want to be with and certainly don't want
to fuck. And don't get cocky, because she doesn't want to fuck you
either. This is the state of marriage in the US. This is the standard
you can expect in the pursuit of American marriage.
This is really “what you get” when you pursue women.
* It should be noted the numbers above may already be outdated as
it assumes a traditional form of dating where men ask women out in
person. Online dating has revolutionized this, making the numbers
much worse, even changing the nature of dating itself. The “event
unit” is no longer a man asking a woman out, but a man swiping right
on an app. Further complicating matters is women's responses to
swipes are nowhere near 20%, but are effectively 0%. Additionally,
as evidenced in some of the online dating experiments before, only 1
in 4,000 swipes results in a date necessitating a whole new slew of
statistics. And worse still, the nature of online dating has itself
evolved in a mere short 5 years, going from one where men and
women would date, to that of a tool women just use to get attention.
Therefore, the numbers above are intended to show how much
success a man can expect with a general amount of “effort,” whether
that effort is in person or online.
** It should also be acknowledged that if a man selects for women
missing those 8 deal breaking variables, this would no doubt
increase his chances of a happy marriage. The problem is no such
research exists showing what kind of effect a man selecting for
traditional values (let alone the ones previously discussed) has on
his chances of being happily married. Any insight, research, or data
that might provide an estimate of this effect would be appreciated.
CHAPTER 8 – THE COSTS
In having the benefits of the pursuit of women calculated, we now
need to move on to the price men pay for this pursuit. And as
discussed in Chapter 3 these costs can be broken down across
three general categories:
Explicit Costs
Opportunity Costs, and
Intangible Costs
Not all these costs have finite, financial price tags attached to them.
Nor does the fact some of these costs are intangible mean they're
not real or that men do not pay/suffer them. But to provide context
and reference so that men can see just what price they pay to stand
a 4 in 1,000 chance at being happily married, measuring or at least
acknowledging these costs is vital to calculating the ROI of the
pursuit of women.
Explicit Costs
Explicit costs are the actual, cash expenses men will incur in their
pursuit of women. Some of these are obvious like dates, dinners,
cover charges, and fancy shirts. Others are not so obvious, but very
real nonetheless.
For example, what about college? Would men attend college
anywhere near the levels they do if there were no women to woo
with their engineer salaries?
What about auto expenses? If you're interested in transportation, a
reliable used car only costs about $4,000. But if you're looking to
impress girls (like most 20 something men are) you'll gladly drop
$36,000 on a new car and another $30,000 in interest payments on
a car you technically can't afford.
Do you waste $3,000 a month on some schwank bachelor “pad” to
impress women, when in reality you could probably rent a room for
$500 if you weren't pursuing women at all?
And what about weddings? Wedding rings? Engagement rings?
Honeymoons? And the 50% guarantee you'll be paying for the
divorce costs that come with them? Do these costs factor into your
analysis of the pursuit of women?
When you add it up, men blow an inordinate amount of money on
the pursuit of women. Easily three times what they need to survive.
And so a serious, thorough calculation needs to be done estimating
how much men spend that they wouldn't have otherwise had women
theoretically never existed. Thankfully, the field of finance breaks
down explicit costs into three general sub-categorizes that will help
in our calculation:
Pursuit Costs (or “Acquisition Costs”)
Maintenance Costs, and
Disposal Costs
And when you consider these sub-costs you can see just how much
cash-money men spend on women.
Pursuit Costs
Pursuit costs are considered the costs men incur when they're
chasing women. This can include anything from cover charges to
dating to fancy shoes, but any and all expenses they would not have
incurred otherwise needs to be considered. This can run the gambit
because what part of a young man's life isn't at least tangentially
associated with chasing girls? Would men go out as much to the
bars if there weren't girls there? What about the gas to get there?
Technically, if you weren't chasing women, shouldn't all your clothes
be purchased from Goodwill? Therefore, for the sake of the study
we focused on eliminating the following major expenses that would
likely go away if men didn't pursue women:
average annual dating expenses (est. at $1,855/year)
half a man's higher education expenses
half the annual interest costs on the average man's student
loans
additional annual car costs men incur above women
half the cost of weddings, wedding rings, and honeymoons
Additional adjustments were made to account for young men not
having as much money as when they are older and other variables,
but when it's all said and done the average man can expect to pay
$67,900 in pursuit costs from 18 to about 30, at which point the
average man marries. This is very likely a low-end estimate as any
man will confess to easily blowing through that much money in his
single years chasing girls.
Maintenance Costs
Just because you're married does not mean the work is over. Quite
the contrary, many married men would claim this is just when the
work is about to begin. And so even though you and your beloved
are married, doesn't mean the wooing, dating, courting, or expenses
are over.
Conservatively, your average married man still has to spend $1,600
annually on dates, taking his wife out and courting her proper. This
also assumes a man will disproportionately subsidize his wife's living
expenses as women do not make as much as men, but still are
going to insist on the “SUV” or the “trampoline for the kids.” Don't
forget millions of men inevitably pay for their wives' student loans.
And none of these figures consider the real expenses many other
men will incur “keeping up with the Jonses” such as finished
basements, granite countertops, boats, and the potpourri of other
expenses that ensure a “happy wife, happy life.” But in the end, the
average man can expect to shell out an additional $80,000 in lifetime maintenance costs to continue courting his wife (again many
married men will contest this is a very, very, very low estimate).
However, there is some good news.
Only half of these men will incur these maintenance costs till death
do them part because the other half of men will get divorced. And
though this ends the costs of maintaining a wife, it introduces a
whole new set of costs - disposal costs.
Disposal Costs
The cost of your average divorce is surprisingly difficult to track
down. It depends on the state you're in, cost of living, what the
spouse made, what the other spouse made, and a whole host of
other state laws. But ever so roughly the average man can expect a
divorce rate of 50%. The average divorce will cost him $20,000 in
legal fees. And the average man at the age of 40 can expect to
forfeit half his estimated net worth of $125,000 to his soon-to-be-ex.
And this says nothing of the alimony you can expect to pay, which
roughly ends up being $6,000 per year for 5 years. When you tally
up the total figure, your average American man can expect a 50%
chance of paying $113,000 in “disposal” costs.
Total Explicit Costs
When all is said and done, starting from the age of 18 to your dying
day at 78, the average man can expect to shell out in EXPLICIT
CASH EXPENSES $260,785 in his pursuit, maintenance, and
disposal of a woman. And this optimistically assumes you do NOT
get married (and divorced) a second, third, or fourth time. Just your
average man marrying once and divorcing once will spend over a
quarter million dollars in CASH EXPENSES pursuing
women...almost half of which are disposal costs. Admittedly, there is
a 50% chance you do not get divorced, in which case you will only
incur $148,000 in lifetime expenses. But whether it's $260,000 or
$148,000 both are more than enough of an initial nest egg to fully
fund the retirement of a single man.
Opportunity Costs
Ask yourself a simple question. Even though you may not be
married or some middle-aged 50 year old right now, how many of
you would go back in time to tell your 18 year old self to:
Spend less time chasing girls,
Spend that time instead working more and making more
money,
Take said money and invest it in the S&P 500?
And even though you may not know the precise math of it, it's pretty
much a guarantee every man reading this book, let alone every man
in the world, wishes he could tell his younger self to have done
precisely that. Invest more in himself, less in women, and park the
savings in the market.
This “opportunity cost” is theoretical. Neither you, nor I, nor most
men in the world had the wisdom or maturity to stop wasting money
chasing girls and invest it instead in the stock market. But it is still a
price we paid in that if we did not chase women the resulting savings
technically would have gone somewhere, some of which maybe into
an S&P 500 indexed fund. And though we could debate that we
would have likely frittered it away on video games or travel, to attach
a price tag to the “opportunity” we forfeited, theoretically parking said
savings into the S&P 500 is a very logical and financially sound
assumption.
And so had you...
taken the $260,000 you spent chasing women and
invested it instead in the S&P 500 index,
starting at 18,
with an inflation-adjusted 8.64% return per year,
until you lived the average male life expectancy of 79 years,
you would have...
$9,685,096.
$9,424,311 more than the $260,000 you spent chasing girls. That
$9.4 million is your opportunity cost in chasing women (though if you
avoided divorce, this drops down to only $6.9 million).
Of course the real opportunity cost is not necessarily the money, but
what you could have done with it. $9.4 million is of no value to a 79
year old man because he's almost dead. But over the course of your
life what could you have done with that $9.4 million? Could you
have traveled more? Could you have pursued more hobbies? What
about work? What about an entrepreneurial venture? Would you
even need a job unless you wanted it? And what about all the
psychological and physical health benefits that would come with the
financial stability, peace, and calm that such money could afford? All
those months you were worried about “making rent” or “affording
groceries” would have never happened had you not been chasing
girls. It's hard to put a price tag on such things.
Intangible Costs
Finally, there are intangible costs.
Ask yourself another question - what would you pay to go back in
time to prevent your 18 year old self from suffering all the mental
pain, anguish and misery that came from being led on, being stood
up, being strung along, being flaked on, being subjected to girls' fake
bipolar episodes, being cheated on, the petty drama, the petty
arguments, the stupid questions, the wife getting fat, the wife
spending money, the arguments about money, the hoarding of
worthless shit, arguing about the kids, being nagged, being told
where to park, getting divorced, going through divorce, suffering from
divorce, and being hounded about who does more household
chores?
And what any man who has the slightest bit of experience with
women will tell you is that money is only one form of price you pay.
Arguably the smaller of prices, as men pay an incredible mental and
emotional price when it comes to pursuing women. From the time
your little heart is kicked in when you're first stood up by a girl at 14,
to the crushing depression that comes when your ex won't let you
see your children as she's banging the guy she left you for, there is
absolutely no doubt that men pay dearly in terms of stress, strife,
frustration, heartache, confusion, and other mental suffering.
Unfortunately, these intangible costs are often played down by
society, including men themselves as they instinctually throw up the
facade of invincibility or machismo. But the prices they pay are very
real. When a 15 year old boy is stood up by a girl who lied to him,
you might laugh at that today, but it was devastating to you then. We
do the same when we jokingly reminisce about the mandatory
bipolar girl every American man must date once, but in the thick of it,
it was nothing short of psychotic and traumatic. We can roll our eyes
when a man complains about his nagging wife, but nagging is
nothing more than the slow murdering of his marriage via a deathby-a-thousand cuts. Related, your wife getting fat can be expected,
even laughed at by your buddies, but it's nothing short of your entire
sex life ending. And unless you've been there, you can't even
fathom just how completely destructive it is to a man's mental health
to get cheated on, get divorced, and lose his kids.
When you consider that these are everyday normal things nearly
every man will face in his life, your average man is incredibly
fortunate if he comes out of life suffering mere “anxiety” or
“depression.” Most men are guaranteed to suffer a crippling bout of
depression. Most men are indeed going to suffer actual trauma.
Most men have a constant cortisol dump into their adrenal system.
Consequently, most men today are likely suffering from some lowlevel form of PTSD resulting from their pursuit of women. And it
should shock no one that as a consequence men die earlier either of
“natural causes” or, more tragically, by their own hand.
These intangible costs cannot be measured, but they can be
acknowledged. You are guaranteed to pay some kind of mental,
psychological, or emotional price in your pursuit of women. But if
you need to somehow put a price tag on these costs, it is almost
guaranteed most men today would gladly pay the cash price of
$260,000 or opportunity cost of $9.4 million to have avoided
suffering these costs in their own lives. Losing your family, having no
sex life, nagging, getting strung along, or just the torturing confusion
all men suffered in their youth is enough to ruin any man's life. And if
your life is ruined, then you really have nothing at all.
Total Costs
When you consider the explicit, opportunity, and intangible costs, the
total costs of the pursuit of women can be summed up in one word –
total.
We can bat around cleverly-calculated numbers, speculating about
theoretical financial concepts like “opportunity costs,” but when you
tally up the average amount a man will invest in the pursuit of
women, both in terms of time, money, and mental energies, the price
is total. It is complete. Men will essentially spend their entire lives in
the pursuit of women.
And this is perfectly expected as men are more or less compelled to.
Disagree with it all you want, men are inextricably linked to women
(and women to men) through genetics and biology. This dooms you
to at least pay some intangible, amorphous price to them because at
minimum you are forced by nature to be attracted to them sexually,
some of which you will fall in love with romantically, and be vested in
the children you have with them genetically. Due to the binary
nature of the sexes, men are compelled to derive most of their value
from women (and women men) which means nature will force an
unavoidable price upon you.
The real issue is whether the costs are now so great, and the return
so little, it's enough to override a man's biological programming.
That the economics of the proposed transaction is so bad and so
risky, it pits a man's survival against his desire to reproduce or fall in
love. And when presented with this modern day “Male Black Widow
Paradox” it should surprise no one if most men ignore the 2 million
years of human evolution screaming at them to breed, and instead
maybe just pour themselves a scotch as they enjoy a quiet night
watching Kelly's Heroes. Because while it would be nice to have a
supporting, loving wife, who remains svelte and takes care of the
children, that lottery ticket is not only increasingly rare, but openly
mocked and detested in today's society (just ask young women
today if they want to stay home and raise the children while cooking
you a meal). Instead most men are nearly guaranteed a costly life of
penury, destitution, divorce, poverty, headache, heartache, nagging,
confusion, and technical-enslavement, coming from an obese
woman no less. And when you consider that statistical reality, the
whole point and purpose of human existence be damned. Not at
those prices.
CHAPTER 9 – THE ROI
The ROI of the Pursuit of Women
In having both the price men pay for the pursuit of women, as well as
what they get in return, we now have the two variables necessary to
calculate ROI.
The price men pay can be anything on the low end from $260,000 in
explicit costs, to a more theoretical (though no less real) cost of $9.6
million in lost economic potential, to an intangible “everything” when
you consider all the mental, psychological, and emotional costs men
are expected to pay.
What men get in return is cryptically calculated to be a 4.5 in 1,000
chance of being happily married, which can be optimistically
increased to a 15% chance of being happily married if a man
decides to dedicate a lifetime of part-time work to this endeavor.
Because the return is not financial, we cannot get a numerical
“percent rate of return” as you would in finance or investing. But this
does allow men to calculate an internal ROI to see if the product is
worth the price. And so the entirety of this study boils down to one
simple question:
“Is a 4.5 in 1,000 chance at being happily married worth $260,000 in
cash?”
Or, if you take a more comprehensive approach to cost:
“Is a 4.5 in 1,000 chance at being happily married worth your entire
life?”
And the answer is, “Probably most certainly not.”
Because while we can talk about microscopic chances of success,
costs going into the millions, and the countless decimal points that
result, what we’re really talking about are theoretical mathematical
numbers that we're asymptotically approaching. Numbers like 0 and
infinity. And though we can cutely pull statistical numbers from the
behaviors of the female population, and actuarially derive what
theoretical chances of success this translates into for men, it’s much
more simple and practical to bluntly translate all of this into plain
English:
You effectively stand NO CHANCE at being happy in your pursuit of
women.
AND
That pursuit will cost you EVERYTHING in life.
Thus the real ROI of the pursuit of women is:
0/∞= 0%.
And the price is $∞, aka “your entire life.”
In short, from an economics perspective, you are a fool to dedicate
your life to the pursuit of women and, frankly, you really ought to find
something better to do.
But there is an opposite side to this actuarial-philosophical coin.
Additionally, we are humans, not economists, and everything is not
about numbers. Because to be intellectually honest, we know not all
women are deal-breaker-riddled, STD-infected, student loan
indebted, tatted-up single moms. We do know good women exist.
We have seen happily married men with our own eyes, and the
wonderful, lovely women these lucky men are married to. We may
have even had a “one that got away” ourselves. So the fact these
women do exist (admittedly in near zero-numbers) means we do
have to factor them and their value into our pursuit. And when their
small numbers are combined with the fact men will pay nearly
“infinity” for them, this makes these rare and precious women one
thing and one thing only...
priceless.
And though this study may sound to have a pessimistic tone towards
women, the numbers we just went through proves just how valuable
a good woman is in today’s world. And if you're one of the few lucky
men to have one, then you really ought to appreciate that rare
woman as she's technically infinitely-valuable.
Thus, the true economic nature of the pursuit of women is more of a
gamble than it is an investment. A gamble whose statistics of which
are not too unlike winning the lottery. And like the lottery there is a
smart way to play it and a dumb way to play it. The dumb way to play
the lottery is to spend all your money to the detriment of your life,
naively and stupidly hoping you’re going to win. But if you’re smart
you'll realize there’s a small-but-real chance you’ll win. And it might
be worth some token effort to play the lottery on the off-chance you
do. But as long as it doesn’t come at the expense of destroying your
life, that is about the best way to play this lottery if nature is going to
force you to play it.
Therefore, it is not so much whether the ROI of the pursuit of women
is worth it. It's that if you're going to pursue women you do so
intelligently and with the full knowledge it is likely you still won't
succeed. And in playing this lottery wisely you will ensure you don't
pay the horrific costs most men do, while still standing the outside
chance you might find one of those “infinitely-valuable” women.
But don't kid yourself. It's still like winning the lottery. Your chances
are absolutely abysmal.
Alternative Measures of ROI
Claiming women have a 0% rate of return can easily be dismissed
as cynicism, bias, even misogyny. And certainly the premise of this
study is unconventional. But do not let civility, politeness, politics,
closemindedness, or men's inclination to defer to women blind you to
that fact that something is going on in the real world. Men may joke
about the ROI of women being low, or roll their eyes when talking
about nagging, or laugh at their life-crippling divorce. But make no
mistake about it, the love between men and women has been
destroyed by society and things are that bad.
This necessitates revisiting some of the other numbers we calculated
along the way so that you might take the rose-colored glasses off
your face and see the real world for what it is. A metaphorical slap
across the face that wakes you up to the realities about pursuing
modern day women. Because while theoretical numbers like
“infinity” or “zero percent rate of return,” or esoteric philosophizing
about modern day women's nature being that of gambling may make
a larger philosophical point, looking at some of the underlying
numbers we calculated to get here will provide some real, sobering,
but above all else eye-opening numbers. And it's up to you to have
the courage and intellectual honesty to not only see them, but admit
what it says about the state of men and women today and apply
them in your own personal life.
Take for example, single moms.
Are you nuts? 40% of single women between 18-35 are moms?
Just sit and think about that. Out of all the single women out there, 4
in 10 already have some other guy's kid. And what's worse is they
don't see a problem with that. Worse than that, society and certainly
single moms themselves celebrate single motherhood. And even
worse than that, since single moms make up such a large percent of
single females, most men today have resigned themselves to
cuckoldry, reluctantly accepting they might have to settle for a single
mom. 100 years ago not a single self-respecting man would
consider dating, let alone marrying a woman with another man's kid.
Now, they're not only celebrated, but you're shamed, even accused
of misogyny if you dare state your preference to eschew single
moms.
Obesity is another perfect example. 60% of women between 18-35
are fat. They're not even old yet and the majority of young women
are already physically unattractive. And discomforting as it may be,
physical attraction is vital to the survival of the human race, and 6
out of 10 women don't have it. And though, admittedly, men are no
better (being equally obese to women) at least they're not delusional
enough to celebrate it.
Like single motherhood, society's response to female obesity is not
about getting women's weight down, or heart health, or concern
about stroke or diabetes. It's one of celebration.
“Fat acceptance.” “Big is beautiful.” “Body positivity.”
And if any man dare state the obvious - that men are not attracted to
overweight women - he is immediately crucified in society. The only
thing that makes this more of an Orwellian nightmare is some
women actually believe they can shame men into overriding their
hard-wired biological programming to prefer thin women,
claiming “female beauty is a social construct.” But all it really is, is
proof that society has lost its collective mind. Coincidentally, it's also
proof that your primary interest in women (female beauty) is being
completely ignored by women, even purged from the female
population, drastically lowering your ROI in the pursuit of them.
STD's anyone? 1 in 4 women have herpes.
I'll say that again in case you didn't hear it the first time.
1 in 4 women have herpes!
Yes, men have an infection rate of 1 in 10. And yes, most women
are asymptomatic. But what does that say when 25% of women
have just ONE of the more serious sexually transmitted diseases?
How much do you want to roll the dice? How much of a risk are you
willing to take? Just like obese women, many men resign
themselves to knowingly dating women with STD's because they're
just that large a percent of the population. But these statistical
realities aside, look at what you're lowering yourselves to. Look at
what you've become. You are dating or marrying someone with
herpes.
We could go on.
80% of women are financially impaired with tons of student
loans for completely unemployable degrees.
40% of women aposematically have tattoos.
At minimum 1 in 4 are being treated for a mental illness.
Worse, an unknown, but significant percentage of them are
faking it.
If you're an “Average Joe 5” only about 2% of them will
consider dating you.
And you're expected to wed yourself to this risk pool with a
50% chance of divorce and an even smaller chance of
happiness.
At some point you have to stand back, unplug yourself from The
Matrix, and critically assess the quality and caliber of the women in
front of you. And if you're honest with yourself, you'll realize this isn't
some WWII generation of lovely, supporting, feminine women,
worthy of your life, love, and time. This is a cesspool. And your
chances of finding a quality wife in it is the same as pulling a prize
muskie out of the sewer.
Expect the ROI to Get Worse
Bad as it is, expect things to get worse as there are three trends
currently pushing women further away from men.
Capitalism, Technology, and Government
We first discussed this in the introductory chapter of this book.
Capitalism has allowed for such technological and economic
advancements in society that labor is now more skills and
intelligence based than mere strength. This has not only opened the
labor market up to women, but also enabled them to earn their own
money, therefore making them less dependent on men. Capitalism
has also allowed for a significant welfare state to be financed. The
original intention of this was to provide a sort of social insurance
against poverty and hungry, but it also had the ancillary effect of
completely removing women's dependency on men.
Keep in mind, however, these aren't necessarily “bad things.” The
technological and economic advancements in society have made
things better for everyone. Very few people work in the mines or toil
in the fields, but instead do accounting in air conditioned offices.
And doubling the labor force with women has certainly increased
production, significantly increasing standards of living. Furthermore,
you wouldn't want women to be financially dependent upon men.
Not only because of the moral argument for individualism, freedom
of choice, and volunteerism, but most men would prefer women
WANT to be with them, instead of being FORCED out of destitution
or desperation. So yes, advances in the economy and government
policy have technically “pushed” women and men apart, but only to
the extent of eliminating co-dependency and replacing it with
volunteerism and genuine desire to be with each other.
The two remaining trends, however, are absolutely toxic for malefemale relations and are guaranteed to not only worsen the ROI of
the pursuit of women, but rapidly so. These are the cult of feminism
and social media.
The Cult of Feminism
Feminism originally started as a political movement for the equal
treatment of women. Today you are going to have a hard time
finding a man against that. However, over the past 50 years it has
gone from a movement about equality to that of a socialist cult, the
two main pillars of which are victimhood politics and having women
replace men with themselves as their sole point and purpose in life.
In terms of victimhood politics, feminism is trying nothing new. The
aim of victimhood politics is to take a trait you were born with and
then claim people without that trait are oppressing you, keeping you
down, which therefore entitles you to recompense, preferential
treatment, and lower standards. But because of the binary nature of
the sexes, people “without the trait of being female” means “men.”
And because there has to be an “oppressor” or “villain” in victimhood
ideology, that squarely identifies men as the oppressor/villain in
many young women's minds today. Unfortunately, this means many
young women view men as “competitors at best, enemies at worst,”
the antagonistic attitude of which renders these women completely
unmarriageable.
Even more effective than turning men and women against each
other has been feminism's success in giving women a whole new
value system by which to derive purpose and meaning in life.
Traditionally, a loving husband and children is what gave women
point and purpose. Love from other human beings is what made life
worth living. However, one of the key principles of feminism is to not
rely on men. And while this predominantly meant financially, it also
meant spiritually. Women cannot rely on men for anything, including
their happiness, purpose, or meaning in life as that would define
them by men. You toss in a dose of victimhood politics, and
feminism has been tremendously successful in removing men from
the number one position in women's lives, replacing them with the
values feminism told women to have instead.
Careerism.
Education (beyond the point at which you benefit financially).
Leftist politics.
Charity/non-profit/volunteer work.
Crusaderism.
Even feminism as a religion itself.
And so what has happened is you now have 3, coming up on 4
generations of young women, steeped in feminist ideology where
they are programmed to NOT put men at the center of their lives, but
instead themselves, and vicariously so through their careers, politics,
hobbies, feminism, dog rescue teams, advanced degrees, volunteer
work, etc. etc. (again, look at any online dating profile). And if still
you don't believe that, simply look at what they're told and what they
say. They literally say,
“You don't need no man,”
or
“You can't rely on a man,”
or
“Men are toxic.”
Think about the absurdity of that. You aren't needed. You are also
toxic.
And this isn't some fringe radical element saying this. This is what
your rank and file young women today are told from kindergarten to
college, and what they regurgitate over their lives.
Women may have an underlying biological programming or desire to
want a man. But it is indisputable that society is currently and
actively programming them against it.
Social Media/The Internet
The second toxic force pushing men and women away from each
other is social media. An entire book could be written about the
many and wide-ranging effects the internet and social media has had
on dating and the sexes. But when you boil it down to its basic
elements, what you are witnessing is the economic phenomenon of
a substitute good. Traditionally men and women met, dated, and
courted in person. Now that is rapidly being moved online and the
consequences have been dramatic.
First, the volume of potential suitors has increased exponentially.
100 years ago you were relegated to whoever lived in your local
farming village and maybe a town or two over. Today you have
access to EVERYBODY ON THE PLANET, bar a billion or so people
who've yet to be hooked up to the internet. That has cast women
into a perpetual dating cycle where there is ALWAYS the potential for
a better man just a click away. Additionally, the global supply of men
has flooded women with an indigestible amount of digital attention.
This misleads them into thinking the supply of marriageable men is
limitless, blinding women to any quality man standing right in front of
them.
Second, the risk in dating has dropped dramatically. Women no
longer have to worry about whether a man is a rapist or a stalker,
fully vetting men online before committing to an in-person date.
Additionally, women don't have to be pained with the chore of turning
a man down in person. Now they just simply don't respond to the
message in their inbox and the man on the opposite end isn't too
terribly offended. Men also avoid significant risk in their dating lives
as well. They no longer have to build up the courage to ask a girl out
in person, facing rejection. Instead they mindlessly swipe right on
girls they want to bang, and she is forever forgotten unless she
contacts him in return. This lack of risk, personal interaction,
rejection, and general “skin in the game” has not only forged lower
caliber men and women, but now men and women value expressedinterest from one another a lot less.
Third, with an unlimited supply of men/women and the elimination of
risk, the value each of the sexes have for one another has gone
down. Previous to the internet 70% of women would think nothing
of standing a man up, but at least that was 30% who would show
up. With online dating, even if women match with a guy, only 2% of
them will inevitably go on a date, representing a 98% divestment
from men. Men also no longer value women. They didn't have to
put anything into the pursuit, merely a swipe right, fibbing about their
income on a dating profile, and picture with a puppy. Furthermore,
women's propensity to flake on men has resulted in a self-fulfilling
prophecy where men now fully expect women to cancel at the last
minute, rarely setting up a date that exceeds anything past coffee.
There is no longer the instance where a young man has to strategize
over a week in class to talk, flirt, and woo a girl he likes into a date
on Friday. Nor is there the instance where a girl dresses cutely,
gives subtle hints, or encourages an interested man in return.
Flirting is now cold, callous, removed, and digital. And it's often
done while sitting on the toilet. That is how much men and women
value each other.
Fourth, speaking of coffee, this lack of value has resulted in a lack of
investment and effort from both sexes. At best you will see a “C-”
effort put into dating profiles with confusing pictures and half-assed
descriptions. This is corroborated by the “D-” effort most young
people put into their physical appearance as they go out in public
wearing sweats and crocks. Unfortunately, this causes a negative
feedback loop because (discomforting as this may be) you need
physical attraction to fire up the passions of the opposite sex.
Instead today men are greeted (either online or in person) with an
obese, debt-ridden, slovenly-dressed Ramona Flowers. While men
return the favor by swiping right on a dating app as they stand in line
at the 7-Eleven to buy some Cheetos and Mountain Dew on their
EBT card before they go back to their mom's house to play video
games.
Obviously, this race to the bottom in American beauty pushes men
and women further apart. But there is an interesting side effect.
Because while the internet presents the illusion of abundance, this
illusion has begat less effort from both of the sexes, resulting in a
rapid and continued physical deterioration of the sexes. And
ironically, even though you can meet anybody online in the world,
this deterioration in beauty standards has created in an impasse
where only a tiny fraction of the massive effort men and women put
into online dating translates into a real-world date. And therefore
with it being so hard to land a date in the real world, with little hope
that person is going to be who they represent themselves to be
online, many people give up any hope of flipping a digital relationship
into a real-life one.
This then relegates these people to the digital world for their love
lives. They are further incentivized to remain there as things like
“swiping right” is easier than “hitting the gym.” And when you
consider that social media has grown to such an extent there is a
whole world online, replete with effective and functional digital social
lives, even romantic ones, the temptation for many people is to
remain there, ne'er setting foot in the real world again. And so
ironically, even though this online world with its false promises of
“unlimited abundance” was the cause of all these problems, a
significant percentage of the modern day population will cowardly
resort to...
Fifth, a substitute good. Specifically, replacing traditional, real world
relationships with digital fake ones.
And here you can see a Twilight Zone nightmare, eerily similar to the
movie “Surrogates,” where all your relationship needs are met online
with digital substitutes.
If a man wants sex he doesn't have to hit the gym or ask 10 girls out,
to hopefully court 3, of which 1 he'll inevitably sleep with. He can
just spend 2 minutes jerking off to porn, and save himself weeks of
time and hundreds of dollars. Or if he wants the real thing he can go
to a sugar daddy site and essentially rent himself a mistress by the
month.
If a man needs attention, he doesn't have to develop a personality,
build a career, or improve himself as a man. He can just go to
FansOnly and for a monthly subscription fee have his favorite
camgirl text him how much she loves him and enjoys his (virtual)
company.
If a man needs to find a date he doesn't have to come up with
something quick and clever on the fly before that girl catches her
train. He can just sit on the toilet and swipe right.
And if you want to go on a date, why chore yourself by physically
going somewhere? Find a girl online, go on Skype or Zoom, and
form yourself a “Coromance” (a romance formed online during
Corona). Never mind you'll never meet the girl in person as she's
too afraid to leave her safe and secure digital world. But neither of
you were there for any of that “real-world in person stuff” anyway.
Certainly men are settling for a substitute good through the internet,
but this alternative digital reality has huge ramifications for ROI of
women as well. And beyond what was discussed above, men
REALLY need to understand just what a game-changer the internet
is. Because while men might get their porn fix online or their
attention fix from a webcam girl, women can now get EVERYTHING
THEY WANT FROM A MAN without having to meet him.
If a girl wants attention, she doesn't have to dress up, look cute, or
go out in public. She just posts “I'm feeling so ugly today” on
Instagram and a flood of “OHHHH NOO, YOU'RE SO
BEAAUUUTIFUL!!!!” messages will come from the THOUSANDS of
simps following her.
If a girl wants a meal, she doesn't have to go work for it. She can
swipe right on enough guys' profiles and in 3 hours be eating sushi.
If a girl needs money, she doesn't need to wife up and marry some
well-to-do guy. She just has to go down to Best Buy, drop $250 on
some webcam equipment, set up a Paypal account, and show her
titties on the internet. Maybe, even going to the extreme lengths of
getting her lighting right.
And even though women have 1/9th the sex drive men do, if they're
in need of a good fucking, all they have to do is go online, find a
good-looking guy, swipe right and unless she's really ugly, what guy
is going to deny her?
The end result is that the internet has allowed women to digitally
compile a synthetic superman, capable of satiating her every want
and desire, and is superior to you or any other individual man in all
regards. If she needs money there are billions of men out there, at
least some of which have more money than you. If she needs a
meal, there are billions of men out there, at least some of which can
afford better restaurants than you. If she needs attention there are
billions of men out there, at least some of which who are more
charming and better conversationalists than you. And if she just
needs a good fucking there is always somebody hotter, taller, and
more ripped than you up to the challenge. There is no one man, but
the best of all men in each regard compiled into one digital being.
An undefeatable Voltron of sorts that no individual man can outcompete.
And that is why the ROI on the pursuit of women will go down in the
future. Forget the fact the illusion of abundance on the internet has
rendered most people ugly. Forget that both men and women are
heavily disincentivized to become what the other wants. These
certainly lower the ROI (of each other, in fact) on their own. It's the
fact you are competing against this digital synthetic superman who
will likely keep women off the market well past the age of 35, to the
point they'll be desperately freezing their eggs. And while no doubt
the welfare state, careerism, and all the man-hating feminists in the
world are actively lowering the ROI of the pursuit of women as well,
they all pale in comparison to this synthetic superman the internet
has provided women.
CHAPTER 10 – THE STRATEGY
Taking in all the statistics, numbers, and chances, as well as
considering there's another entire sex involved with their own
preferences and desires, you'll realize that any strategy you're going
to use to increase your ROI in the pursuit of women is going to at
least partly employ stoicism. The truth is you don't even control 10%
of these statistics or the forces behind them. Nor do you control
50% of the participants in this dance. And admitting this reality is a
critical first step in accurately assessing the challenge that lays
before you.
And so while when it comes to strategy it would be nice to say:
“Do X and do Y”
“Don't do A, but definitely do C”
“But if she does Q, then absolutely do K,”
there's only a handful of strategies for a young man in 2020 to play
the incredibly shitty hand he's been dealt.
No, You Are Not Insane
The first step is to realize that, no, you are not insane. What you are
experiencing today is not normal, is not acceptable, and that voice
you hear in the back of your head saying “something's wrong” is
100% right.
Previous to the internet, men didn't have a central depository or
forum by which to compare notes. Sure they would discuss amongst
themselves. Sure, they'd exchange observations about their
girlfriends or their wives with the guys at the factory. But most men
for the most part would assume it was a localized phenomenon, or at
least specific to them. This meant any problems a man had with his
wife/women was squarely his fault and therefore it was up to him to
correct the error of his ways.
That is until now.
Because 20 years of the internet has provided us with the largest,
open-source, sociological study on women. And with terabytes of
data and unlimited case studies through blogs, posts, vlogs, etc., a
fully-functional model has been created, explaining the incentives,
preferences, desires and behaviors of women (I'd recommend “The
Rational Male” by Rollo Tomassi to see a best-attempt at explaining
this functional model). But more importantly, it has exposed a
hypocrisy within society. Specifically, the contradiction between what
society tells both men and women about each other, versus what
nature has made us to be.
You have 2 million years of your ancestors' experiences culminating
into the instincts, preferences, and desires that you have today. And
for 99.999% of those 2 million years, you have wanted a svelte wife,
who would give you some kids, support you, and maybe even love
you in return. That is now running headlong into what social-science
charlatans, political activists, and marketers have decided what
women should want for the past cheap 50 years. And no matter
what the completely fabricated “social science” rationale they come
up with is, it does not undo your programming or your 2 million years
of human evolution (nor women's). “Feminism,” “socialism,”
“careerism,” and dating advice columns be damned. Men and
women haven't changed. And while the whole world may be telling
women they don't need men and that they can internally derive all
their purpose and meaning and life from themselves, all of that is
lies. And the proof is in the low-quality women they're demanding
you marry into that we've discussed before:
40% of single women being moms is just not acceptable.
Celebrating a 60% overweight rate among young women is
delusional.
It is not acceptable behavior to stand up or flake on a date, let alone
at a 70% rate.
A 25% minimum serious STD infection rate is mind-blowing.
A cultish addiction and obsession with one's career is simply insane.
And choosing work over children, family, a husband, or love is
inhuman.
No, you are not insane. Women today are objectively wrong about
what matters most in life, and their life decisions which have led to
the creation of the poor dating options you face proves it. It may not
be what you wanted to hear, but at least you know (in this one regard
anyway) you're not the one with the problem.
Align Your Expectations with Reality
Perhaps the most common question I get in my consultancy is young
men asking “How do I find a quality girl?” To which I answer, “You
don't.” And it isn't because of cynicism or pessimism. It's just
statistics. It's merely reality.
Out of the 44 million women out there, only 2.72% are estimated not
to have any major deal-breakers. This leaves 1.2 million women to
be fought over by the equal population of 44 million marrying-age
men. And keep in mind this says nothing about personality or
chemistry. Just whether she doesn't have 5 tattoos, a ton of student
debt, an STD, and some other guy's kid in tow. By musical chair
math, at minimum 97% of men are just not going to find a wife that
will make them happy. And though there are certainly things you can
do to increase your chances, it is absolutely necessary for the sake
of your own mental health that you acknowledge and realize the
statistical reality of the women before you.
Thankfully, however, there is a bit of good news in that you are not
going up against 44 million George Cloonies to compete for those
1.2 million women. As mentioned before, when you look at the
statistics of men they are not much better. But men need to
understand that there has never been a time in human history where
women have been so purposely and artificially conditioned to
become so unmarriageable or so anti-family. Women today are
programmed to be workers, taxpayers, debtors, and socialists. They
are not programmed to be supporting wives or loving mothers. Men
need to accept this reality. Men need to adapt to this new normal.
Not hope and dream that someday they will win the “Quality Woman
Lottery.” Because if they don't, they will doom themselves to a life of
misery.
Leave a Line in the Water
In spite of the statistics, your natural biological programming is still
going to compel you to chase after girls anyway. And truth be told,
there's actually nothing better to do in life. It really is the only game
in town, it's a fun game, and it's better than any Xbox game you'll
play. But if you're going to do it, do it wisely just like we discussed
about playing the lottery. And thus we can all learn from the story of
“Black Calamity Jane.”
“Black Calamity Jane” is a female friend of mine of the black
persuasion. And her story is as interesting as her name. Originally
hailing from New England, she grew up under an effete upper-middle
income liberal black household that the democrat party officially
allowed them to have. However, while her family may have been the
officially approved and sanctioned “liberal black household,” she was
a rootin' tootin' six-gun shootin' American girl who loved her guns,
loved America, and loved Texas barbeque. She wanted to find a
man, and by god, she was going to find him.
And so being smarter than the average bear, she casted a very wide,
but equally fine net on her dating app. She set the range to all of the
United States, but was VERY clear that she was looking for a
husband, looking for a Christian, who must love guns, and must be
serious about settling down. And upon finding 6 potential suitors
across all the fruited plains, she bought an RV and traveled to
different gun shows and barbeque competitions to meet these
various men.
Six months later, she inevitably found her true love and married him.
Of course...they still ended up divorced, but the point still remains
about the efficacy of her strategy.
Even though online dating is a toxic, cancerous, demoralizing timesuck, the technological abilities of online dating empowers the
individual to cut to the chase. If you are a man who is serious about
marriage (or finding a quality girl), you can simply declare your
intentions online, set a fine, but wide net, and the internet will do the
work for you.
This, however, necessitates a change in dating strategy.
You need to realize that just because a girl may live 500 miles away,
doesn't mean she isn't dateable or marriage material. And by the
time you factor in going out with a dozen local unqualified bi-polar
girls, it costs you more to date locally than out of state. And had you
spent the *whopping* $200 to fly out and meet a genuinely qualified
girl, you'd not only stand a better chance of finding love, but you'd
avoid the pain, agony, and suffering of dating the local, but
conveniently located, trash.
This isn't to say to pin your entire hopes on online dating, but rather
to leverage the technology it offers to thoroughly and rapidly screen
for that 1.2 million qualified girls who are out there. Stop wasting
time entertaining a coffee date with some average girl who “has
$100,000 in student debt for her social work degree” just because
she's within a 20 minute drive. Take that time instead to purposely
and mathematically zero in on the country-wide supply of quality
women looking for a traditional relationship with a real man. And
upon finding such a promising candidate, be willing to do the least of
courtesies and drop the money to fly out to meet her.
Pursue Excellence
Dire as the statistics might be, you are not dead either. You're still
here. And while you would have liked an order of “Traditional Wife
with a Side of Kids,” that option is just not on the menu of life. This
presents every man a choice about his life - what are you going to do
with it now? And while there are a limitless number of things you
can do in life (boating, fishing, motorcycles, hunting, etc.) all these
non-wife/non-family things fall into two general camps: debauchery
and excellence.
Debauchery is pretty much what every young man has settled for
today. Most men have given up on life, become slovenly, don't work
out, and waste their lives living in an alternate reality online. They
play video games more than they work. They spend more time
watching porn than they do with real girls. And when you consider
the student loan bubble as well as historically high rent prices, most
of them can barely support themselves financially, often times living
at home. The bright spot in their lives are usually a cheap vice be it
junk food, pot, or booze. And though an easy, even blissfully
ignorant life, when they die their lives will have ultimately been
wasted because they achieved nothing and did nothing.
But if you prefer not to waste your life, and demand that this
infinitesimally small blip of existence not be squandered, then the
other choice is “excellence.”
Though women were the fuel that historically prompted men to
achieve their best, men have to pursue excellence whether there is a
muse invigorating them to do so or not And the reason has nothing
to do with anything philosophically noble or lofty. It's really more
about economics – you're here. You got about 78 years on this
planet. And if it isn't a wife and kids, then what are you going to do
with all that time? And while debauched men who choose the easy
path in life will squander it, men who choose excellence will achieve
the most important thing in life outside of love.
A legacy.
What that legacy is, is up to the individual man. But it is important to
understand that a legacy is not so that a man is egotistically
“remembered.” It's that he didn't squander his life and he made it
count. His life was not the typical one that was no materially
different than the tens of billions of men who died before him. It was
a life full of accomplishments, achievements, and successes as well
as challenges, failures, and pain. A journey that told an interesting
tale of a man who had agency, took control of his life, overcame
challenges, and wrestled success and achievement out of life. And
while for some that may mean climbing Mount Everest or escaping
poverty or building a business, your average man can pursue
excellence in 7 general categories (though this is obviously not an
exhaustive list). And though not the “loving wife and kids” you
wanted, this is the next best use of your life:
Physique – Staying in excellent physical shape is not just good for
your health, but it is your statement to the world that you are going to
insist on excellence as physique is visually identifiable. It is also
making the declaration that you have discipline, control, and are
willing to put forth the effort to achieve your goals. Certainly there is
a bit of vanity in this pursuit as who doesn't like looking sexy, but
maintaining physical shape is one of the key traits that separate
debauched men from excellent ones.
Profession – Every man needs a profession. Not just so he can
bring value to society, but so that he knows he has value. This
doesn't mean a man's value only comes from his job. You can be a
good uncle, a great friend, or a good Samaritan. But for the most
part, the biggest contribution you will make to society is your
profession. It doesn't have to be a highly-compensated profession.
It doesn't have to be anything exciting. But whatever it is, you must
be excellent at it as it's the number one way you will leave your mark
in society. So when people ask about you, others will say,
“He was a great plumber.”
“He was a great accountant.”
“He was a great programmer.”
giving you pride over the course of your life and career.
Adventure – Every American is going to:
go to college
go into debt for an overpriced car
overeat and get fat
visit, but not hike the Grand Canyon
and watch TV for fun.
Life is too short and too precious for that. Every man must have
adventure in his life.
However, this isn't to say you go on an adventure to brag that you
“traveled the world” or “biked across America.” Adventure is a
statement as to how you define your life as it's what you do with your
most precious resource – free time. It's the paint that excellent men
use to create their mural of life. And like any work of art it takes
effort, which once again separates debauched men playing a
“mountain climbing video game” versus that of excellent men hiking
a real one. Of course, you don't have to be some adrenaline junkie,
jumping out of planes, shark-hunting, or tornado chasing. But having
a handful of adventures colors your life and breathes life into it.
Don't be the guy who says, “Yeah, we binged on 'Breaking Bad' this
summer.” Be the guy who says, “Yeah, I rafted from Rock Springs,
Wyoming to the Hoover Dam.” Besides, you have nothing better to
do.
Comradery – Friends are the only other social outlet you will have
aside from your romantic partner. And even better than most
romantic partners, you can be honest with your friends. Your friends
don't want to fuck you. Your friends don't want your money. Your
friends willingly choose to hang out with you, because you're you.
This is the single greatest compliment a person can receive because
other people are willingly choosing to spend their most valuable
resource on you – their time. But friends are also a confirmation that
you are a good man. That you have not wasted your time. That you
have invested in yourself to become a person that compels others to
want to hang out with you. And therefore if you want to have
excellent friends, you have to first make sure you are an excellent
person. You will never find a higher ROI in life than having quality
friends. That pursuit alone is worth choosing the path of excellence.
Passion – Though the word is overused, every man should have a
passion outside of his profession, even his family. Something that
you truly excel at and can put your heart and soul into. It could be
cooking, art, or rebuilding classics cars, but something that when
you're done there is a physical product at the end. In the ideal world
your passion would be your profession, but it is more likely to be a
hobby you pursue in your free time. Regardless, while you're
sequestered in your garage or basement, banging away at your
passion, ensure to leave the world with at least one magnum opus it
can enjoy.
Intellectual Pursuit – Hitting the gym, going on adventures, while
excelling at your craft is all certainly well and good. But it does
nothing for your mind. And unless you have a particular distaste for
philosophy or intellectual discussion, every man should have an
intellectual endeavor they pursue. It could be researching
philosophy itself, mastering stoicism, perhaps understanding
economics. It could even be something spiritual like finding religion
or merely studying the different religions of the world. But whatever
it is, your mind needs a diet of intelligent thought to grow, not a plate
of brain-cancer like Oprah, The Young Turks, or Sports Center.
Furthermore, a researched, intellectual man is much more capable
of having an intelligent conversation, making him a much more
interesting man, and thus of more value to the world. Do not die on
this planet as a man only capable of talking about sports.
Morality – When you're young, you will likely be poor and foolish, the
combination of which will tempt you to cut corners in life. And cutting
these corners will often come at other people's expense. It could be
an actual crime against somebody, lying to somebody to get what
you want, or just being lazy and not putting forth your best effort. But
if you play your cards right, what will inevitably happen over time is
you will become successful. Money won't be so tight. And you'll rise
above the lower levels of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, allowing your
mind to take a break and reflect upon your past. And depending on
just how many corners you cut, how many people you hurt, or just
how poorly you behaved in the past will determine how heavy a
burden of guilt you will carry with you for the rest of your life.
It may not make sense now, but to enjoy an excellent life your
conscience needs to be clean. And while no man lives a sinless life,
try to commit as few sins along the way so you do not burden your
mind, lessening your life in the future.
The Irony
“Chase excellence, not women.”
-Rich Cooper, Author of “The Unplugged Alpha”
While the tone of this book is no doubt dour, cynical, even defeatist,
there is a bit of ironic hope. Because in abandoning women for the
pursuit of excellence, you ironically dramatically increase your
chances of success with women. Because while things like morality,
passion, adventure, and physique are worthy of pursuing in their own
rights, attaining those things will forge you into a man most women
want. Women don't want supplicant, obedient, sensitive, conformist,
feminist men. They want (as they've always wanted) strong,
successful, rich, independent men who answer to no one and strike
their own path in life. Therefore, in a counter-intuitive sense, if you
want to get women, the key is not to chase them, but instead ignore
them and focus on building up yourself. And in doing so you
ironically do more to increase your ROI in the pursuit of women by
not pursuing them at all.
To prove this just consider three variables, all of which are under
your control and fall under the realm of excellence:
Looks
Income
Effort
Thus far, all the statistics and scenarios we've ran in this study are
assuming you're the “Average Joe 5.” But the “Average Joe 5” in
America is a loser. He lives at home or at least on a
government/parental subsidy. He's overweight, incapable of running
a mile. He's a coward, incapable of walking up to a woman and
making his intentions known. And instead of putting forth the effort
to forge himself into what women want, he takes the easy way out,
opting instead to eat Cheetos, play video games, and get lost in a
digital world that really doesn't exist. Besides, feminism has told him
women don't need him anyway. So you can't really blame the guy.
But what if he were to hit the gym?
What if he were to go to night school and learn to code or wrench on
diesel engines?
What if he learned to ballroom dance and asked out at least 10
women per month?
When you factor in these variables (looks, income, and effort), men
are not powerless beings, incapable of influencing or controlling their
destiny. They wield significant control over their success with
women. And if a man were to invest in three things:
Work out to the point he's an 8.
Go to school/training to the point he makes $65,000 a year.
Ask out 1,000 girls over the course of his life
he drastically increases his chances of finding success with women.
If a man takes the 85 minutes a day he spends on dating apps and
instead works out, puts on decent clothes, and presents himself as
an 8, nearly all women will find him attractive. This increases a
man's chances of success with women by 500%.
If men dedicate a fraction of the effort they do on video games to an
employable trade or skill, your average man can easily earn $65,000
which seems to be the magic number women need men to earn
before committing to them. Attaining this level of income increases
your chances with women by 514%.
But perhaps the single biggest factor in man's success with women
is how much effort he puts into the pursuit of them. I understand
asking women out, getting shot down, and getting rejected is not
fun. But boring and unromantic as it may be, the pursuit of women
really is just a sales job. And the more doors you knock on, the
more success you will have. And assuming 10% of women you ask
out go on a date, if the average guy were to ask out 1,000 girls over
the course of his life, 100 of which agree to go out with him, he
increases his chances of being happily married by 3,300%.
You combine all these factors together, and commit to achieving
excellence in these regards, you increase your overall chances by
850 times (and if you're willing to lie about being a democrat, it goes
up to 1,400 times) putting the goal of being happily married well
within the realm of feasibility.
And this is the most important lesson to learn from this entire study.
Pursuing today's modern women is a near-guaranteed waste of your
life. Most modern women are not capable of a traditional or happy
marriage, more or less being completely indoctrinated and
programmed to love their careers, educations, and themselves more
than any other human being. And while you are hardwired to chase,
capture, and fall in love with women, you need to have the
intellectual fortitude to acknowledge your chances of success are
very low, and prepare for the very real contingency that you may not
find a loving wife. Alas, you only live once, and with no other point or
purpose in life, you need to place excellence at the core of your life.
But in the ultimate of ironies, in doing so you will dramatically
increase your chances of finding “true love” and “happiness.” So
much so, if you're willing to put in the effort, being happily married is
a very real and likely possibility. Thus, the only course of action
men have in life is to be the best man they can possibly be. This
way you not only maximize your chances of success with women,
but failing that you ensured you did not waste your one and only
finite life, leaving a legacy of excellence, making the only thing you
had in the universe count.
Make sure you live your life to the best extent possible.
And if some nice, sweet girl happens along the way, all the more
power to you.
THE END
ONLINE MODEL AND DOWNLOADABLE
CHARTS FOR AUDIBLE LISTENERS
The model used in this study will be uploaded online to:
www.assholeconsulting.com/mychances
For a rather low price, it will allow people to plug in their own
variables like looks, income, education, etc., to see what their
various statistics and chances are.
Additionally, for audio-book listeners a PowerPoint that contains all
the charts and graphs in “The Book of Numbers” is available for
download here:
www.assholeconsulting.com/data
VISIT THE AUTHOR!
If you found this interesting please check out some of Aaron's other
works and sites below!
Consulting:
www.assholeconsulting.com
Books:
https://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
Podcast:
https://soundcloud.com/aaron-clarey/
Blog:
http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com
YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
OTHER BOOKS BY THE AUTHOR
How Not to Become a Millennial:
A postmortem analysis of the largest sociological disaster in
American history – the Millennials – that pulls vital lessons for ALL
GENERATIONS to learn.
Bachelor Pad Economics:
The financial advice bible for men that address all major and minor
financial decisions a man will make from the age of 14 to 74.
Curse of the High IQ:
A book that delves into the maddening problems of being a smart
person in a world designed for the common and average.
Worthless – The Young Person’s Indispensable Guide to
Choosing the Right Major:
Make sure you or a loved one doesn’t waste 4 years and $100,000
on a worthless degree that will financially cripple you into your 40’s.
The Black Man’s Guide Out of Poverty:
A sole, single book that has raised more black men out of poverty
than all the democrat party ever did.
Poor Richard’s Retirement:
Retirement for everyday Americans, especially those who haven’t
started saving for it yet.
Sanity is the Future of Wealth
A short, but vitally important economic and philosophical essay
about how technology and innovation will effectively eliminate
poverty. But instead of celebrating this success, it will drive people
insane as simple human jealousy will drive people to become
envious over pettier and pettier things.
Achieving Minimalism in Theory and Practice – The Key to
Success and Happiness in Life
This is a seminar, not a book, available through Teachable.com. It
is simply designed to get people to spend less than they make. It is
VERY EXPENSIVE…but so is bankruptcy, student debt, and failing
to save for retirement.
Research, Data, and Resources:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/contemplatingdivorce/201709/are-you-among-the-growing-number-unhappymarried-people
https://www.healthline.com/health/womens-health/average-weightfor-women
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/tables/dt18_318.30.asp
https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/genderrelated-differences-in-credit-use-and-credit-scores-20180622.htm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/feminismproject/poll/
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/07/07/61-of-u-s-womensay-feminist-describes-them-well-many-see-feminism-asempowering-polarizing/
https://www.vox.com/2018/6/20/17480930/millennial-womendemocrats-midterms
https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2019/demo/families/cps2019.html
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6347139/
https://medium.com/daliaresearch/who-has-the-most-tattoos-its-notwho-you-d-expect-1d5ffff660f8
https://www.foxnews.com/us/fox-news-poll-tattoos-arent-just-forrebels-anymore
https://www.foxnews.com/us/fox-news-poll-tattoos-arent-just-forrebels-anymore
https://www.courierpostonline.com/story/news/local/southjersey/2018/07/17/national-tattoo-day-south-jersey-show-ustattoos/791417002/
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Financial-Hardship-andObesity-%3A-The-Link-between-AverettSmith/202a475087aed36e8cd4a6ee7e0a5ecca27bfda4/figure/3
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4692249/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3852604/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1913935/
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1440783318755017
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6982282/
https://towardsdatascience.com/117-days-of-tinder-in-data755fe9ed853e
https://www.reference.com/world-view/statistics-body-piercingf5db4efae39e98ef
https://blog.bodyjewelry.com/statistics-of-body-piercings-in-the-u-s/
https://flowingdata.com/2017/11/01/who-is-married-by-now/
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/marriagblemen-release.pdf
https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/incomepoverty/cps-hinc/hinc-01.html
https://dqydj.com/income-percentile-by-sex-calculator/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/241488/population-of-the-us-bysex-and-age/
https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/prediction-no-graduation-speakerwill-mention-the-29-gender-college-degree-gap-for-the-class-of2018/
https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments-ii-guysunless-you-are-really-hot-you-are-probably-better-off-not-wastingyour-2ddf370a6e9a
https://www.vox.com/2018/3/21/17144602/gender-gap-democratliberal-women
https://www.vox.com/2018/6/20/17480930/millennial-womendemocrats-midterms
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/feminismproject/poll/
https://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/401804-poll-less-than-half-offemale-millennials-identify-as-feminists
https://www.healthline.com/health/womens-health/average-weightfor-women
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/02/young-women-have-higher-creditscores-but-carry-30-percent-more-debt.html
https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2019/demo/families/cps2019.html
https://divorce.lovetoknow.com/Divorce_Statistics_and_Living_Toget
her
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/soloish/wp/2017/04/13/hereshow-much-average-single-americans-spend-on-their-dating-life/
https://www.gobankingrates.com/saving-money/budgeting/howmuch-average-american-spends-daily/#7
https://smartasset.com/checking-account/millennial-moneyspending-habits
https://www.businessinsider.com/what-the-average-americanspends-on-cars-in-every-state-2019-7#missouri-4092-26
https://www.credible.com/blog/statistics/average-time-to-repaystudent-loans-statistics/
https://www.theknot.com/content/how-much-to-spend-onengagement-ring
https://www.statista.com/statistics/309461/us-adults-online-datingsite-usage-age/