I’ve tried to stay out of this but I can’t help myself. No, not any woman or even any woman above a 2 can get it any time she wants. At least not from me, maybe other men are different. I won’t sleep with a woman who I consider less than a 7. To me it’s not worth it when you factor in the possibility of disease, unwanted pregnancy, crazy women (okay, they’re all crazy, we know this), time required to bang, e.g., I might need to spend time with her first and ain’t nobody got time for that for less than a 7, etc. I’m sure at one point I would have eagerly banged a 6 but those days are long gone. Quality > Quantity.
To clarify, that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t at least think of banging a 6 immediately upon meeting her (especially if she has big boobs), it just means I don’t think it’s worth the effort and risk. Even if I just have to take her out to drinks one time, that’s still too much effort for a 6.
We are Bogleheads. We don’t pick and choose, any broad(s) index works. 6+ demand higher premium, that’s all.
Bro runs the long/short fund, long if 6+, short if 2-. Although to be truly short he would go out of his way to insult the 2- which I doubt! So maybe just an active long fund manager.
There’s a difference between occasionally thinking it might be fun to get naked with a friend of whatever sex you prefer, and being so obsessed with the idea that you can’t interact in a normal or friendly way with someone.
I don’t think an occasional “what if?” fantasy is anathema to maintaining a friendship, provided it is just a discrete private fantasy and doen’t pop into your head every time she gets within 20 meters of you.
As for whether women have more superficial friendships than men, I’m not sure that’s true or not. I suspect those figures are roughly similar, although women may have larger numbers of friendships/acquaintences than men on average. But I do think that women are more likely to take a new acquaintance and and act as if they’ve been best friends for years, whereas men may enjoy their new acquaintences, but generally won’t portray them as super-close friends until they have built up more credibility.
Yeah couldn’t even get a chubby for below 5. Think of how embarrassing that would be too – you would have to live with that for the rest of your life even if no one found out. Ehh, I’m planning to live for a while, I don’t need to regret that for the next 60 years.
You can’t really “invest” in the US dating market. The problem is there is no value. The value investing equivalent would be a 5 who has a decent face, just got a gym membership and is very motivated, and will be getting fake boobs 6-12 months from now. That would be a good one year trade (tax efficient!) with low risk. But that doesn’t really happen in real life, only the stock market. Buy 5 with momentum, sell 8. In reality though, I wouldn’t want a 5 at any price and 8s are priced like 10s because of the structural problems the US presents (obesity). It is not a value market and buy and hold is dead. It is a zero sum short-term swing trading market.
Some girls are simply unbangable (even a 6 or 7 can be unbangable because she may be a whore who has slept with 2,000 men)…would you want some of that even if she was hot? I have no problems being friends with these kinds of chicks.
You asked about the dreaded friend zone. I feel like this image explains to you what us men have felt at some point in our lives:
As for my marriage, I purposely limit the amount of time I spend with my wife. This way, she knows that when the weekend/vacation time comes, we don’t have time to waste and debate where we want to eat, what movie we want to watch, or what we should do for fun.
@bro, above. I kinda agree, it’s just not worth the effort (and risk) sometimes. One time, when the bar had fallen really low, I slept with one chick I’d put at about a 4-5 on the scale. Not one of my proudest moments, but it happens. But I generally won’t expend effort and time on a woman that I don’t think is at least above average, so 6-8 range. I’m self aware enough to know that going above that range just isn’t worth the effort for me due to the incredibly low chance of success. Though I once went out with this chick from okcupid couple years ago, she was a solid 9. Beautiful southern blond, reasonably interesting and smart to talk to, and was pretty happy when she basically dragged me into my own bedroom on the 2nd date. Sadly she never wanted to see me after that. haha. Guess I now know how women feel when guys do that.
I would be curious to see what kind of lifetime numbers all of these dating all-stars that claim they would not bag a sub-5 or 6 have to show.
It’s anything less than triple-digit cumulative or hacksaw.
To express the point more clearly, let me throw this thought experiment to the AF crew. Is it better to have a lifetime total of 10 chicks that were all 9+ or is it better to have a lifetime total of 50 where there were 20 that were 9+, but there was also some chaff in the mix? I invite other observations on distributional characteristics.
What makes you think that the same person would get more 9+s due to accepting fatter tails, both literally and figuratively. Are you assuming some sort of network affect, such as social proof? Some PUAs would argue lowering your standards could have negative network impacts, resulting in a lower amount of 9+s . Whereas having high standards would have positive network impacts over time.
^Fair points, in theory. In practice, smashing dimes is a contact sport, a numbers game. If you are a practiced swordsman, you will have no problem approaching women of any quartile. I see it all the time – there’s a guy who’s in the mix chatting it up with whoever, approaching mark after mark, he’s not successful sometimes, but that guy always goes home with someone, and occassionally, it’s an off-the-charts hit. Meanwhile, guys who are holding out for that unicorn play are smugly sipping on their drinks talking to other guys “with high standards” and going home empty-handed.
Disagree. I think by engaging with the sub 6’s allows you to build the confidence to talk to the 9’s, as well as perform well with the 9’s.
End result…if P(banging a 9)=C where a is a constant, and the number of people you bang is N, then the number of 9’s that you bang is equal to NC. So all you have to do is bang tons of women and you will be banging tons of 9’s.
And if you beleive my first conjecture, then P(banging a 9) = f(N), an increasing function of n, then the number of 9’s that you bang will grow faster than the number of people you bang.
Either way, the number of 9’s you bang will approach infinity with N.
Well there are some assumptions here we need to flesh out. I took this as we are taking a competent practitioner going for two strategies – not someone who is trying to go up the learning curve. I agree with the above if you are learning, but I was thinking if Bro went with the two seperate strategies.
That is true, but you are assuming that the lower number means less approaches. This may not be the case, just because you aren’t going home with them doesn’t mean you sit in the corner and chat with other guys. The guy in the corner with ‘high standards’ doesn’t really have high standards, he just has a more socially acceptable excuse not to approach.
