Fucking chads monopolize sex with the majority of girls

Share your experiences with the opposite sex. Suggest ways to improve your success. Analyze the behavior of females in real life and online. Rant and rave about females. Show the importance of looks pertaining to attracting females and other social situations. Discuss aesthetics and the science of attractiveness. Exchange health, nutrition and looksmaxing tips.

One of the common myths about dating is that there's a soulmate out there for everyone. Dating services have made millions promoting the idea that your perfect partner is out there, you just need to try harder to find them. This seems to make sense since there are an equal number of men and women. The reality is that in our promiscuous culture, a small percentage of men now monopolize sex with the majority of women. When this happens, the matching up process does not occur, and singles end up floating indefinitely around the dating pool.

The Attractiveness Hierarchy

In the monogamous marriage system of the obsolete past, the majority of men and women found mates and got married. In that system, singles knew roughly where they were ranked in overall attractiveness and married a mate of roughly equal rank as soon as they could, usually by their early 20's. There were strong economic and sexual pressures to marry early, and this motivated singles to quickly find a mate of roughly equivalent attractiveness rather than wait for their "perfect soulmate." In the monogamous system, if one waited too long, the pool of eligible mates shrank, and it became more difficult to find a quality partner. (See The Pill and the Decline of Dating and Marriage).

In today's society, birth control removes the incentive for singles to settle into their place in the attractiveness hierarchy. Because women freed from birth control can have sex without marriage, they can engage in temporary physical relationships that have no marriage potential while they wait and hope for Mr. Right. These strings of temporary relationships help women meet their short-term emotional needs but delay them from pursuing serious marriage partners. Men have a greater evolved desire for unfettered sex, and generally prefer more sex partners rather than a commitment to marriage and raising children. Because women are willing to have premarital sex, the attractive men who have ready access to many new sex partners have little incentive to pursue marriage at all. They generally prefer to circulate among women rather than settling down.

(Note: Robert Trivers' 1972 parental investment theory proposed that men's stronger sex drive and stronger desire for variety in their partners is the result of a basic biological difference between the sexes. In order to procreate, men need only invest the few minutes to have sex, while women must invest at least nine months of pregnancy to bear the child. From a biological standpoint, sperm is cheap and easy to produce, while wombs are much, much more valuable. Women possess the more valuable reproductive resource, so sex and pregnancy imply a much greater investment on the part of women.

A result of this investment differential was that before the invention of contraception, sex improved the reproductive potential of man much more than it did a woman. When a man had sex with more women, he could have more children. One prolific example, Moulay Ismail the Bloodthirsty, fathered 888 children out of a harem of 500 women. A woman, on the other hand, can have only one child per nine months no matter how many men she has sex with. Because of this differential, over the course of evolution, women became pickier about the quality of their sex partners while men became the more sexually aggressive and less choosy gender.)


Circulating around the Pool

The promiscuous system allows very attractive men to avoid commitment and be continually available for sex. Because these men can have more sex, women have sexual access to more attractive men than they would have been able to attract as marriage partners under the monogamous system. However, there is a downside for many women and men. For most men, it means that the few particularly desirable men at the top of the attractiveness hierarchy can monopolize many of the women. By having many relationships, many sex partners and even multiple wives in serially monogamous fashion, the most attractive men can consume the prime reproductive years of multiple women. For biological reasons, a woman's fertile lifetime is much shorter than a man's, making it even easier for some men to consume an unequal share of female reproductive resources. When some men consume more than their share of women, there will necessarily be other men, lower on the attractiveness hierarchy, who will have no suitable women available for marriage at all. This also means that all of the men who are not at the top of the hierarchy must lower their standards.

Most men don't realize that rampant promiscuity hurts them. They think that the pill and sexual revolution have brought them a sexual boon. They don't realize that promiscuity prevents them from finding high-quality women. The monogamous marriage system allowed a man only one woman, which meant that virtually all men got at least one woman. In the monogamous system, attractive women were more evenly distributed so the majority of men were able to attract more desirable women than they could attract under the promiscuous system.

For women, the transition to the promiscuous system has made it more difficult to find a marriage partner as well. The attractive men don't commit because they have new sex partners constantly available. Lower-status men shun marriage because they hope to gain more options as they gain status and rise into the ranks of the highly attractive. Women who are accustomed to having sex with highly attractive men also don't want to "settle" and marry the kind of less sexy man that would be willing to marry. Men don't want to to be settled for, either. This means that both men and women remain circulating in the dating pool for long periods without settling into marriage. Shows like Sex and the City and movies like Bridget Jones' Diary resonate because this experience is so common among modern metropolitan singles. As promiscuity increases, marriage declines and fewer singles can find lifelong partners
Women seem wicked when you're unwanted



just not seeing it man. i see tons of ugly/average dudes with cute girls whenever i go outside. this idea that women are only having sex with phantom chad is an alex jones level conspiracy theory.

Springfield wrote:just not seeing it man. i see tons of ugly/average dudes with cute girls whenever i go outside. this idea that women are only having sex with phantom chad is an alex jones level conspiracy theory.


it's funny because these theories out of their basements is doing more to keep them incel than any amount of supposed lookism and bias would. and i don't deny there is lookism or bias, i just think these autists are blowing them out of proportions and actually preventing themselves from going out and trying.

it's basically coping to the highest degree. coping for being a big pussy who's afraid to leave the basement. "it's not me that's wrong, it's the world that's wrong"

Springfield wrote:just not seeing it man. i see tons of ugly/average dudes with cute girls whenever i go outside. this idea that women are only having sex with phantom chad is an alex jones level conspiracy theory.

Bullshit, please put down the PUA manuals, they will just confuse you. This whole "oh, I see ugly looking guys with cute/hot looking girls all the time", is a tired, redundant argument which holds no water when the theory is tested in reality.

I rarely see ugly looking men with attractive women, and in the rare instance you do, it's only because money$$$$ is involved.For the most part, most couples you see are looks matched ie. Ugly man with ugly woman, good looking man with his looks match etc, etc, with the odd exception. With rampant female hypergamy, if anything more and more men are dating down, as they have no other choice, the modern woman only dates up.
This is what happens whenever I approach women.
Image
Image

Image
ucp.php?i=172
Image

Image

Image

Life long member of the escort crew

Arabcel crew

Ethnicel crew

Baldcel crew

Oldcel crew

Gymcel crew



chimai wrote:
Springfield wrote:just not seeing it man. i see tons of ugly/average dudes with cute girls whenever i go outside. this idea that women are only having sex with phantom chad is an alex jones level conspiracy theory.


it's funny because these theories out of their basements is doing more to keep them incel than any amount of supposed lookism and bias would. and i don't deny there is lookism or bias, i just think these autists are blowing them out of proportions and actually preventing themselves from going out and trying.

it's basically coping to the highest degree. coping for being a big pussy who's afraid to leave the basement. "it's not me that's wrong, it's the world that's wrong"

And how would you know?, do you know every single member of this forum personally?, do you know what their life story is?, do you know what they look like? No, you don't so STFU, and don't talk shit, unless you can back it up with hard evidence.

The patronising and condescending tone of your post makes you sound like a PUA apologist or a MANGINA (which are basically two sides of the same coin), where by default you blame the man for his "dating failures", when the reality is, as a man irrespective of how well present yourself to a woman, you have no control over the outcome.

Myself, and many other incels used to lead to very active social lives, so we know how the dynamics of male-female sexual relationships work, and the lesson we all learned is that if you don't the pass the looks and race test with a woman, there will be NO chance of a sexual relationship. Us lookists weren't born lookists, we base our views based on what happens in the REAL world of dating and our life experience, not the fantasy make believe world of the so called "PUA community".
PostThis post by cats was deleted by puanewb on Thu Mar 10, 2016 11:26 am.
Reason: Requested via PM



Elements of what Chimai is saying are correct, and elements of what Yoda is saying are correct as well. It is true that plenty of average looking guys get girls. It is also true that most women end up with a guy roughly equivalent to them in sexual attractiveness as well. Both of what you're saying has validity.

nah, yoda's a copecel. i'm a master of redpill enlightenment.
PostThis post by cats was deleted by puanewb on Thu Mar 10, 2016 11:26 am.
Reason: Requested via PM

chimai wrote:nah, yoda's a copecel. i'm a master of redpill enlightenment.

No, you are just a low IQ fuckwit.

Master Yoda wrote:
chimai wrote:nah, yoda's a copecel. i'm a master of redpill enlightenment.

No, you are just a low IQ fuckwit.


cope

chimai wrote:basement theories 101


lmfao, legit.

We've had an innumerable amount of threads on this topic, time to give it a rest, no wonder this place is a barren wasteland as of late.

Icecutter101 wrote:just had to come back and hit that fool huh Yoda?

gotta respect that


Why thank you, I normally have chimai on ignore, but I saw his retarded, smart arse comment to Cat's comment, so I thought I'd give him a taste of his own medicine.

Sexual partners number difference between men and women.

1/10..both virgins

2/10 both virgins..woman maybe loses it in her mid 20's

3/10..woman had a handful of partnees. Male = virgin

4/10..dozen sex partners and dating up..guy may have got lucky 2-3 times, most likely incel

5/10..Dozens of sex partners but no commitment from Chad...man, maybe 6 sex partners and beta provide for a chubby 4/10

6/10..dozens of sex partners..short term commitment from Chad..man a dozen or so sex partners has to date down a point

7/10.. 1000 insta followers sex with Chad when she wants, constant attention...man gets lots of attention but still had to put effort in the gym, job, dating..but many options

8/10 and above...life on God mode for both men and women.

^ You are exaggerating the numbers for males, especially on this one:

Jawanomics wrote:8/10 and above...life on God mode for both men and women.

An average female has a much higher SMV than any chad (unless chad is a Hollywood actor).
Once you have taken the red pill there is no way back.

I think you under estimate the amount of attention an 8.5/10 Chad gets

Jawanomics wrote:I think you under estimate the amount of attention an 8.5/10 Chad gets

A lot more than us, but try to make a fake account of a chad and of an average female. Then compare the results.

It's all a game of chances, and the relationships are not clearly defined. I still believe in the LMS theory. The biggest chunk in the gauss-curve is the Looks-component. That is the most important part for young girls. As they get older the Money-component becomes more important. But like in any population, you have outliers. Off course you can have in some circumstances high status as an ugly Indian weird-talking curry-eating dirty nobody in the eyes of some hot girl. But those chances are minimal. Most of the time, the ugly dude is part of some subculture (like a rockband), or he's a good talker, and the chick just accidentally parasites on his status. Depends on the situation of a subpart of the sexual market in a certain location and time.

Also, don't forget that woman are absolute masters of deception. They have a guy to fuck, a guy to go drink coffee with, a guy they go with to the bar/club, a guy to go running, a guy to go shopping with, a guy to walk the city... And they do the picking. Some guys only go shopping for handbags with woman every different day of the week. Most males are in the big large grey-zone in the sexual and social economy, so they are left without woman and have to fight for every small bit of female attention.

Springfield wrote:just not seeing it man. i see tons of ugly/average dudes with cute girls whenever i go outside.


You are exaggerating, there are exceptions like that but most couples just *match* both in score (looks) and personality type, you can see this irl by observing couples.

The problem with these incels is they only want women out of their league, not accepting they should get an ugly one that looksmatch them.
That's an hard pill to swallow for their self-esteem but that's the truth unfortunately

Cynic4life wrote:I still believe in the LMS theory.

LMS is true but not as you think. To get a woman you need to *match* her looks, money, status and personality.
If you have more money/status than her, she may be interested to you as a provider but without having sexual attraction to you.
So you better look for a girl that matches with you having the same money and status as you (if not more).

If you observe couples, almost all of them match not only in looks, but personality, money and status as well.

guys dating out of their league is because money + they are sharing lot of resources with the slut as exchange for sex

woman dating down = gold digger

there is no PROOF that Chads/the 8 pluses are fucking all the women and its illogical as they simply cannot do it and why would a good looking guy lower himself to the level of women I have fucked (we are talking about 2s 3s and 4s)
The most likely scenario imho is that many women will play the waiting game desperately WANTING that good looker but as they aint in that league they do not get attention. Just because a sub par or even average guy isnt fucking women does not mean Chad is

ihateallwomen wrote:
Jawanomics wrote:I think you under estimate the amount of attention an 8.5/10 Chad gets

A lot more than us, but try to make a fake account of a chad and of an average female. Then compare the results.


THIS
Next

Topic Tags

Return to Shitty Advice

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 93 guests