"The Wall is Softer Than You Think"

[Blue SkiesParticipant 15665]

clearly Roosh V Mr. Mangina hasn’t visited this thread…
mgtow.com thread

MGTOW is not a movement, it is a way of life.

[Anonymous 1]

@rockmanioff – your avatar makes me think ur an introvert, you’re topic makes me think u like to play devils advocate, and ur lack of response since makes me think ur a dickhead.

[AFTParticipant 2726]

I believe this graph was first presented by Rollo Thomassi :

https://therationalmale.com/2012/06/04/final-exam-navigating-the-smp/

Firstly we need to realize this chart refers to Sexual Market Value NOT Marriage worthiness.

A female’s sexual value is determined by her physical beauty. She is at HER peak from 14 to 24, and things go downhill from there. Each individual female has a differing sexual peak according to their physical looks. So a fat ugly girl is going to hit a lower peak, (which will still be a maximum for her) they are never going to get to an objective 10, merely a subjective peak.

Woman’s innate value is bestowed upon them via nature, they merely have to preserve their value, whereas a man has ZERO intrinsic value to start with and must develop his value through time.

A male’s sexual market value is determined by his looks, wealth, social confidence, wisdom and experience. That’s why a teenage boy is sexually unattractive even though he may be physically good looking. He has not had a chance to develop himself yet. An older man has had the opportunity of time to develop himself, however whether he has actualized this opportunity is another matter. But generally a guy that has followed a good path and got himself set up and maintained his health and looks is going to be far more desirable than his younger self. Sure he may never be a 10 Chad Stud, but he will get a lot more play as he matures.

Most notable the women around his own age that ignored him in youth will now all of a sudden vie for his attention. This puts him in a position of power, as long as he doesn’t let himself get tied down.

TaxGuy wrote:

The chart is going to be true for a certain percentage of men, but not for men as a group.

True a drug addict with no teeth, no money bad health etc isn’t going to actualize his SMV peak.

Beer wrote:

some women simply lack sex appeal and will never have a high SMV.

True, it’s subjective, some fat, ugly cows will get to actualize a lot lower but most average women will peak well when they are young. Have you ever notice an attractive younge girl say 18 – 22 and thought I wonder how well / poorly she’ll age?

Anonymous wrote:

Does the wall not refer primarily to looks?

Hell yes, for women because that is the primary commodity of value they have to offer. It’s biology, it just is. So for those MGTOW’s that are going to say they are out of f~~~s, kool this is just a theoretical framework to understand social dynamics, to better help us understand and stay red pilled.

It’s amazing when you speak to women and they 100% confirm all your worst suspicions.

When the war cemeteries are half full of the corpses of dead conscripted women, only then will women have earned the right to speak of equality. Sidecar “A man is a success if he gets up in the morning and goes to bed at night and in between does what he wants to do.” - Bob Dylan

[RockmaninoffParticipant 1641]

Anonymous wrote:

you’re topic makes me think u like to play devils advocate

Of course. Questioning one’s premises is always productive. I often do it on these forums.

Not so much in this case though. Part of me wants to believe the SMV graph, but the other part of me thinks that it’s just just-world hypothesis.

Anonymous wrote:

ur lack of response since makes me think ur a dickhead.

Also of course.

". . . elle, suivant l’usage des femmes et des chats qui ne viennent pas quand on les appelle et qui viennent quand on ne les appelle pas, s’arrêta devant moi et m’adressa la parole"—Prosper Mérimée

[KeymasterKeymaster]

Rockmaninoff wrote:

I know a lot of you guys don’t like Roosh V and don’t want to give his website hits. I post it anyway for discussion, because I think you guys are smart enough to realize that just because you don’t like the man doesn’t mean he has nothing to say or anything worth discussing.

And I would agree. I have nothing against Roosh V – PERSONALLY. I don’t like the way he conducted himself on 3 separate occasions and believe it to be unprofessional, but otherwise I have read him and can point to 5 articles (from memory) that I would consider essential reads.

Having said that…..

You are not 41. Yet. And you have 2 decades to find out.

In my experience, that SMV curve (and the women I have known intimately) syncs up with my experience and observations – perfectly. I wrote about that yesterday.

Not until I was 32 did my options REALLY start to open up and GREATLY increase. Exactly just after the point where the women’s “value” began their decline and their options began to narrow. The “dynamic” had begun to do a 180 about-face. And the script had changed.

18 and 19 year old women (babes!) who would NEVER have dated me at 21 were showing up at my door and even following me across the country. I actually had a woman – who was not my lover or girlfriend(!) – buy an airline ticket to have an affair with me in another city.

Never would have happened at 21.
I had ONE “fling” at 21 who made the first move.
That was it as far as easy options. Changed MUCH later.

This is not true for all men and women of course.

I know an Olympic Medalist (athlete) who was way hott to women at 25. Especially his gorgeous young wife. He was no longer hot to her at 45…. and his wife was banging slightly younger men. She hit the wall VERY late. At 35 she was still a “babe” but she was rare and looked young and in PERFECT shape at 35.

The chart is not chiseled in stone.
But it makes clear a very universal truth and explains alot.

It explains why a woman 28-32 will aggressively try to lock a man her age down before he recognizes his true potential. Business, famous, powerful and SUCCESSFUL men at 45 will tell you they have it made compared to when they were 25.

Sexual market value… doesn’t mean “sexual” for men the way it does for women.
That’s the part you can’t take too literally.

He may not be “sexually” as attractive to women, but women won’t necessarily f~~~ rich, famous and powerful men “for the sex”. For men, having a high SMV doesn’t mean you are more ripped, have more hair, or are more handsome than when you were 21. Because women will want you, chase you (and f~~~ you) for OTHER reasons.

Examples of this SMV chart are EVERYWHERE in the real world. The same woman who scoffed at you – a junior furniture mover – at 21, will be back when you’re 41 and you have your own moving company with 20 trucks and 40 employees. Just look around.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[Anonymous 0]

Jan Sobieski wrote:

Interesting. However, the wall thing only matters if you care about females anymore.

I think of it as schadenfreude. And interesting thing about human psychology, etc.

So some females are less narcissistic than others…some men are shorter than others. So what.

I rate my SMV as 0 and don’t care because I ain’t gonna go back.

+1for Jan

I think he has it right. It only matters if you are going back.

[Anonymous 1]

I apologise for my drunken, moronic comments on here yesterday.

@rockmaninoff – Sorry.

[narwhalParticipant]

Although I think the chart is accurate, the variations are so wide that making any practical conclusions from it is useless. The author is correct. Young guys really can’t look at the chart and think their time will come, guaranteed. Nor can a woman be guaranteed to lose her value at an older age. Odds may be pointed in that direction, but so many other factors are at play and can be manipulated that it’s basically irrelevant.

Using myself as an example, I’d say my market value has decreased in general, but has improved to quite a few. For the younger women, there is the social taboo of going after an older guy, and don’t come off as the guy that she could have kids with. For the older women, I’m a catch in that there is no social taboo based on age, I have enough money, could deal with kids if she has them, etc.

I also am most attracted to women around my age. It surely has a lot to do with social taboos, but even if she just a 21 year old 10, I have little interest. I see a boring immature conversation. I see her wanting kids I won’t have. Sure the sex would be great and if that’s all it is, fine, but I’d still prefer a hot older woman.

If I go to the gym, I find that I usually cannot tell the age of the women around me. Some are obviously young, and some are obviously older, but for the most part I would be surprised if I’m 7-8 years off when guessing their age. Too many ways to live your life, too many ways to improve or sabotage you’re own SMV.

Ok. Then do it.

[KeymasterKeymaster]

Anonymous wrote:

I apologise for my drunken, moronic comments on here yesterday.
@rockmaninoff – Sorry.

Joller, I really enjoy your comments. Even the “drunken moronic” ones.

Cheers, my friend.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[Anonymous 1]

Keymaster, I’ll drink to that, Put a smile on my face.

[BeerParticipant 11832]

narwhal wrote:

Too many ways to live your life, too many ways to improve or sabotage you’re own SMV.

Definitely. I find myself getting more attention from women at 32 than 22. I’m pretty sure 22 year old me was just as, if not more attractive than 32 year old me. I took care of myself…no drugs, no smoking, light drinker, and I look young for my age. I also got an education and a good career and am financially stable…so I think this chart holds true for me…my SMV has definitely gone up over the last 10 years.

On the other hand…there is a local guy still in the area I knew while growing up. He was a stud in high school…varsity athlete all seasons, always partying and enjoying himself, always getting pussy and was one of the guys all the girls were competing for. High school ended and as we all now your high school athletic career is meaningless at that point, he was too dumb for college and never tried in school anyhow, the partying didn’t end, and now the guy is overweight, looks worn out and old for his age, drives a piece of s~~~ car, has a s~~~ty job, and probably lives in a dump. His SMV has dropped considerably…he peaked from 18-22 and soon as people our age started finishing college and getting into careers, all the women suddenly realized how dead end and worthless this guy was because he lost his athletic look and had no income potential or ambition. None of the guys wanted to hang out with him anymore because he’s a leech that always wanted to show up to a party empty handed and drive home drunk unless someone wanted to physically wrestle his keys from him.

I guess I just kind of look at the chart as a distribution more so than you will follow that specific pattern in life. Most people are going to fall somewhere in the shaded area for any given age although you very well will have exceptions or people that don’t follow the generally up/down trends for their sex based on lifestyle choices, for example even among women a hot 22 year old isn’t going to have a super high SMV if shes a single mom already compared to an equally hot 22 year old with no kids.

[AFTParticipant 2726]

AFT wrote:

Firstly we need to realize this chart refers to Sexual Market Value NOT Marriage worthiness.

Beer wrote:

a hot 22 year old isn’t going to have a super high SMV if shes a single mom already compared to an equally hot 22 year old with no kids.

Why?

SMV = F~~~-worthiness not Marriage-worthiness.

I think many of us still conflate the two (F~~~able and relationship worthy) on some level. A blue pill concept that’s buried deeply in us that is hard to shake off.

A single mother desperate to secure a man slave, will be down for far more dirty depravity, that makes her a super lay.

If she’s young hot and slim I’d f~~~ her. Forget relations~~~s that’s never on the table.

Beer wrote:

exceptions or people that don’t follow the generally up/down trends for their sex based on lifestyle choices

Exactly.

Your point is lifestyle choices effect SMV. The graph describes the life cycle of SMV in general, and the exceptions just prove the rule, people not actualizing their potential SMV through bad decisions.

The main take away point of this whole SMV theory is that men’s SMV is based on their developed worth, accomplishments and success, whereas women’s SMV is based almost solely on her youth (fertility) and beauty.

This is the first theory that opened my eyes to the red pill, after I got divorced and surfed the net for answers, this lead me to PUA, and finally MGTOW.

I follow the authors blog. because human nature interests me, and I find this cathartic, understanding why they do s~~~, as I pump and dump more than ever before.

When the war cemeteries are half full of the corpses of dead conscripted women, only then will women have earned the right to speak of equality. Sidecar “A man is a success if he gets up in the morning and goes to bed at night and in between does what he wants to do.” - Bob Dylan

[BeerParticipant 11832]

AFT wrote:

Why?

SMV = F~~~-worthiness not Marriage-worthiness.

I think many of us still conflate the two (F~~~able and relationship worthy) on some level. A blue pill concept that’s buried deeply in us that is hard to shake off.

A single mother desperate to secure a man slave, will be down for far more dirty depravity, that makes her a super lay.

If she’s young hot and slim I’d f~~~ her. Forget relations~~~s that’s never on the table.

I think a large component of SMV isn’t just you are f~~~able…but what quality partner are you capable of getting, and a lot of guys wouldn’t touch a single mom with a 10 foot pole even if she is hot. Sure you might find a hot single mom who gets pumped and dumped by a lot of low quality guys, or a single mom who lands a good beta provider…but the amount of interested parties declines sharply as soon as she gets pregnant and decides to keep it. I know a lot of disgusting landwhales capable of getting pumped and dumped just as often as a decent looking single mom and I’d never consider them to have a high SMV.

I think you sort of answered your own question…the single mother desperate to secure a man slave will be a super lay. If she had a high SMV she’d get her man slave instead of having to f~~~ like a porn star to keep a guy around for more than a night and have the guy tell her f~~~ off soon as the sex slows down. Or even worse…how many single moms do you know that have a whoops pregnancy soon as they get themselves a good beta dumb enough to raw dog them? If they had a high SMV they wouldn’t have to trap a guy in that manner…which is the same game a lot of 30ish year old women play when they know they are on the decline. How could they ever manage to make it through their primes without forgetting their birth control and having a whoops baby but soon as the decline starts it happens.

If I was considering marriage-worthiness they’d all be zero.

[Author]

Posts