What does Veeky Forums think about hypergamy?

Wise words my man, truth hurts though

Oh wow a woman wants a provider to give her children the best future how selfish!!!!!

It's deeper than that though. Women will reject a man who is perfectly capable of giving her and her children a good future if she can find someone even slightly better.

You don't get it m8

>muh children

ah yes good goy. the child support system benefits children only

They only look for the provider to provide for the child she had in her fuck around years.

This.

t
Roastie

I wouldn't call Buzzfeed the MSM

>supposing an objective, universal standard of attractiveness

Nope

fpbp

Self-pitying men who can't comprehend that they have to work on their flaws before people find them attractive made this garbage up.

>Have you not seeing all the fat women demanding only a slim tall guy in dating sites?

Yeah? And? Most of them are not getting any anyway.

>Have you not seen how the MSM keep telling men to stop having standards while the same thing doesn't happen to women?

Oh, you poor thing. Being paranoid about the media must be so hard for you.

No, I haven't seen that. But I welcome you to post biased anecdotes that fulfill your victim complex.

>what do you think about how much trouble I'm having getting laid

You seem to be having some.

All roasties will hang

No, I get it.

Women cannot control what they are biologically attracted to. Neither can men.

However, society dictates men who behave according to their biological urges are badass, or at very least rationalized (boys will be boys, hehehe). that same society demonizes women who behave according to their biological urges.

Most males have to invest far more time and effort into even hanging out with a woman than the opposite.

You need beta monogamy for a society that looks beyond the present. Otherwise most men don't have a reason to really care and engage with their society.

Female hypergamy is even more destructive when the law supports their whorish ways. A lot of broken families.

And before you say it, prostitution is shamed by far more women than men.

Because their only asset (sexuality) is being depreciated by other women letting men get steam off.

Take it back!

so has cancer

>Most males have to invest far more time and effort into even hanging out with a woman than the opposite.

These are excuses

>He thinks psychoanalysis is real

>both yield the same result
Leave it to Veeky Forums to clusterfuck even the simplest of diagrams

It's the result of biology.
women are supposed to be picky because making a child takes 9 months.
for a man it takes a few minutes.

When was the last time you scolded a girl for not putting more effort into finding a bf?

I've never known anyone to get scolded for not putting effort into finding a partner at all. What is your experience? Your conservative parents?

>Being scolded for not finding a partner
I didn't knew Mormons were allowed to use computers.

I shit on a butch dyke I work with for not trying to get some pussy two fucking weeks ago.

>some annoying people I don't like (mis)use a concept so it must be completely bogus

Society calls gfless men loser virgins all the time. If they logically explain why they cannot you say "excuses excuses".

Socializing and getting a gf comes naturally to normies but a significant proportion of the male population in the modern world are socially excluded and isolated. Why? What changed? It must be an intentional effort to ostracize them. To get rid of the "beta male".

>Society calls gfless men loser virgins all the time.

What?

>a significant proportion

What?

Two faggot threads, a hypergamy thread and a bestiality thread all on the front page together

Shareblue is the best blue

>intentional
>autist can only comprehend rational explanations

?

What the fuck are you talking about? We're talking about sexual strategems.

Women have a value and men have a value in the sexual marketplace. A woman's value is higher than most men. She is the sex that, for the most part, chooses the mate. Men are expendable.

Now talking about excuses, you're going to see Massive backlash when sex dolls become a thing. And it'll probably be led by women.

Men can spend decades in the wilderness without stress. Women can't spend a day without talking to someone.

>Shareblue
>hypergamy
wut

Women are more valuable than men per definition. Fewer and fewer women having children means society will die.

Robots sure love nice, rounded numbers like 80% and 20%. It's typical unsourced bullshit that uses vague references to statistics or science without any of the actual standards that are required for sound empirical methodology.

Brainlets only care about a veneer of credibility and theoretical frameworks when they're used to justify preexisting beliefs they're emotionally invested in. See: /pol/, creationists, new agers, tinfoil hats etc. Actual science depends on peer review and consensus, though, which typically aren't in the brainlets favor. So we see them whining endlessly about how corrupt "modern society" and "the mainstream" is for rejecting their pwecious widdle ideas, as if their unpopularity somehow validates them because they set themselves aside from the masses of idiots - a mass they're in no way a part of, of course, because they were granted arcane wisdom from the internet. If too many people agree with you, they say you're part of the sheeple, ignoring that individual navel-gazing without the input of others often leaves detrimental cognitive biases unnoticed. They will conflate their own apparent moral superiority with alleged scientific rigor in almost every case, and do the same for their enemies, nevermind the implicit Harrisian fallacy of conflating description and prescription with no real suggested bridge between is and ought - they're correct in absolutely every field of human endeavor and that's all you need to know.

>sexual strategems

Wow, you need to actually get laid instead of playing grand strategy games.

>men can spend decades in the wilderness without stress

Yeah I'm sure Joe McFatfuck would be totally calm if you dropped him in the woods naked for a few days.

>when sex dolls become a thing

Bit behind on the news there buddy. Of course, if you see sex as having no emotional dimensions you can live with a doll for your whole life like a fucking loser otaku.

>It's typical unsourced bullshit that uses vague references to statistics or science without any of the actual standards that are required for sound empirical methodology.
That's why it belongs on Veeky Forums not Veeky Forums.

And all robots will end up killing themselves out of self-hatred. So it all works out.

(1/2)
>Women are more valuable than men per definition. Fewer and fewer women having children means society will die.

Nice projecting but not a sediment about women in most of the world. A common misconception about East Asian notions of womanhood and femininity is that women over there are viewed as fragile and delicate and something to be protected. Actually, that's an extremely western view. East Asian peoples viewed women as far more expendable than they did men, which from a western perspective, given the way biology functions, seems absurd - our notion of women being delicate and fragile and vulnerable for example, makes sense even from a radical right wing perspective because those are the beings that essentially carry on the lineage of your kin/clan/race.

East Asians by contrast have a kind of contempt/disinterest for women. It's not a malicious hatred like Muslims do, it's just a sort of... disinterested disregard for them. I recall some Confucian proverb about how you're meant to let the son sleep on the padded cot, while the baby daughter sleeps among the "shards on the ground" to remind her of her place even as a baby.

My feeling is that because patrilineal descent is emphasized so heavily in China/East Asia (women aren't even part of traditional imperial family trees), the idea is it doesn't even matter who the mother is. East Asian peoples, especially Chinese, are actually heavily mixed on their maternal side. South Chinese are the result of Han colonizers breeding with the native women.

Europeans/Whites really are a very unique group of people in some respects. We don't really see this uniqueness because we project our own psychology/culture on other groups.

(2/2)

It's probably more to do with the fact that East Asia has always been really densely populated compared to the rest of the world. Women make babies, men make food. Women's value is always tied up heavily in their ability to bear children, so in places/times when there is room for expansion women tend to be valued highly. When resources become scarce over a long period then the person producing more mouths to feed is going to experience a drop in their social standing.

By the 19th century Chinese peasants were being forced to subdivide their plots of land so small that they were barely enough to sustain the farmer. If a farmer has five sons and divides his plot into five, and then the sons who inherited only a 5th of the land their father had then have five sons of their own, it's not hard to see how living standards can drop dramatically over just a few generations. Hence in 19th century China there were baby towers for unwanted female babies in virtually every village. And population growth causing misery has been a fairly common theme in Chinese history, hence the embedded ambivalence towards females.

This is one of the advantages of Europe's system of primogeniture. Instead of subdividing their lands ad infinitum, European fathers forced their younger sons to take greater risks in order to survive. Not so great if you were a younger son, but society won whatever the outcome: either the son would find a way to support himself, or he would take one risk too many and remove the problem entirely. This is why European men took insane risks in sailing thousands of miles in search of gold, spices and new lands while China didn't. Because unlike China, Europe always had a huge pool of surplus males available for side projects.

>what is quantitative history
>what is formal logic

You can't have empiricism or analytic knowledge without philosophy, bud.

People often use war as an example of males being expendable, yet childbirth was just as dangerous in the old days, and few people had qualms (or a concept of) marital rape. Women weren't valued in and of themselves, reproduction was. They were often disposable instruments for breeding just like men often were for power.

itt: virgins

kys

t. chad

It was actually orders of magnitude more dangerous, in large part because it was so much more frequent. Pretty much all women would at least try to give birth. War wasn't constant in anything less than a continent scale, so wherever an individual happened to live might be swept past. You also have armies that are much smaller than the population, and it's only the losing side that usually suffers mass casualties.

Considering the danger of childbirth before proper sanitation (discovered by men) is biological i fail to see the conflict. If people had a magic button to make childbirth safer i'm sure they would have pressed it. It's no ones fault childbirth was dangerous.

Disprove this
>women need less effort to be with a man they are attracted to. Women have to look somewhat passable and not be absolutely crazy, while men have to be good looking, earn decent money, be a good entertainer, self-confident and last but not least need to be active and initiate everything.

Muh ugly poor black thugs

Pro for the woman. Because women has it easier to get laid then the women. The man is gonna have it much harder. But its degenerate and against the Bible.

...sorta

Women care more about dominance, charisma, and social status/popularity than looks or being "funny". Women will laugh at anything you say if they already want you. Being handsome is just a garnish to a nice meal. They don't feel the same type of lingering sexual hunger men feel when they see a beautiful woman. It's like "wow, he's fucking hot...well, let's see if he's alpha enough." This was proven by biologists studying human arousal patterns.

Of course those things only matter when a woman wants to BREED with a man. That is, during her fertile ovulation period. It's also the time of the month when most women cheat, they unconsciously seek out dominant males.

When a woman is infertile, afraid that her mate will be violent towards her offspring, or no longer attractive enough to attract alpha males she will seek out beta males who are nice enough to care for her and any children she's already had. Men with smaller testicles and lower testosterone levels on average make tender and caring fathers. Generally poor protectors though.

>hypergamy is a meme

What the actual fuck? Its an easily observable fact.
Are you perhaps confused as to the meaning of the term?

I didn't say it was. War is also borne from biological impulses to gather and spread and kill just like the yearning to reproduce compels us to breed, but women hardly had more choice in it than men did, and although most women had kids the majority of men didn't fight in wars (with the exception of endemic war and certain cultures). I'm willing to bet plenty of people would have pushed a button to end war, swords to ploughshares and all, and its not like women were the primary supporters of militarism and spooky honor codes throughout history - upper class men were.

Not to mention chivalry was pretty much bullshit and women/kids would fight and die during a siege like anyone else. Even in cases like Joan of Arc, she wanted to fight in the vanguard but was only allowed in the rearguard.

>somewhat passable

I assure you they put hours more into their appearance than you realize and are much more harshly judged if they're ugly. Average girls have it better than average guys but nobody wants an ugly bitch. Women are (usually) way more forgiving of shit looks if you have a personality they dig.

Egalitarians believe that men and women have the same mating strategy. No seriously. They think there is no difference between how male and female brains work.

Truly ugly women are about as rare as the truly beautiful. The overwhelming majority of people are painfully average.

>Europeans/Whites really are a very unique group of people in some respects.

But in Serbian/Balkan cultures women are traditionally treated like shit too. Women aren't allowed to sit for dinner, women aren't included in the family tree, women need to do all of the house work and the traditional wedding is a woman being kidnapped or bought from her father.

Also if they are caught cheating the traditional punishment is called the Lapot: they have to bake a bread and their husband smashes a mallet over their head through it.

Lad

The foreveralone female Reddit board is invite only to keep out "creeps".

M8, physically deformed women with no money still have guys lining up to bone them. It's like you don't live in reality.

A woman can be a fat ugly slut, a man cannot be a fat ugly stud.

>A woman can be a fat ugly slut, a man cannot be a fat ugly stud.
The new double standard.

All men must have six-packs and be gorgeous.

All women are allowed to be obese ham beasts because

>ARE YOU FAT SHAMING A WOMAN YOU EVIL SEXIST BASTARD?!?!?!?

It's a theory some nerd invented to absolve himself of his inability to get laid.

That's basically how it was in Ancient Greece and Rome as well.

The idea of women as precious flowers to be protected is an invention of bored 19th century nobles. Even Schopenhauer noted this. Women were a liability.

I attribute this to the Internet. IRL women gauge men by dominance capacity, popularity, and height before looks. With the internet they get to have infinite men slobbering over their plain jane bodies and get to pick out the absolute highest tier men. Without the ability to judge his other attributes, all she has are looks to judge with. And women already think 80% of men are ugly.

When guys say "there's no girls at this party" they mean it's a literal sausage fest.

When girls say "there's no guys here" they mean there's no attractive guys.

The massive increase of beta males these past decadeds clearly shows that hypergamy is cancerous and needs to be stopped
>inb4 meme
Kill yourself, to whoever thinks that way, hypergamy is hurting society, there is not one society that has survived shit like this and feminism.

>while men have to be good looking, earn decent money, be a good entertainer, self-confident and last but not least need to be active and initiate everything.

All of which can be easily faked and/or doesn't take any skill to do except will power.

It's all in action - if you take action and not give a fuck - you have 100% more chances of getting the girl than the "alpha" who doesn't take action. 99% of guys don't take action while sober.

Female or male troll trying to act like a female.

>you have 100% more chances of getting the girl than the "alpha" who doesn't take action. 99% of guys don't take action while sober.

Taking "action" is an alpha thing.

>All of which can be easily faked and/or doesn't take any skill to do except will power.

Because the bone structure of a person's face is SO easy to fake all the time.

That's assbackwards.

Women are FAR more shallow in terms of looks in a potential date than men.

They will excuse every fucking flaw on the book if the guy looks handsome.

They are literally more shallow than men when it comes to making snap judgments on looks.

A handsome guy can have every mental illness in the book. As long as he's handsome.

An ugly guy will either be pitied or hated.

>disagree with someone
>call them a troll

At least I'm not the one making threads whining about being a virgin.

>sex having an emotional component is trolling

Damn son. That's fucking sad.

I didn't make the thread.

And the reason why "sex having an emotional component" is complete bullshit other than stupid faggot apes tingling over a burst of oxytocin

You'll see how "emotions" turn out for you when the body gets used to the bursts of oxytocin and goes back to normal.

>muh oxytocin is looovee meme from armchair

>Taking "action" is an alpha thing.

Than to be "alpha" is just to redpill yourself and do shit not caring about the reaction.

Because most stereotypical "Alphas" today don't even approach girls they find attractive - most meet them through social-circle. Like betas.

>Because the bone structure of a person's face is SO easy to fake all the time.

Wtf? Women don't care if you're not good-looking, they only care that you take action. Only men truly care about looks, but we project our own view onto women.

Look, would you gamble $500 for a doctor to induce lowered levels of oxytocin and dopamine?

If it's such a meme...well would you be willing to show how 'meme" it is by subjecting yourself to such a procedure?

The pragmatic value and the truth value of an assertion is far better ascertained when you put the possibility of an actual sacrifice for your precious truth.

If you are a beta male and "take action" you will be labeled a "creep" and expunged even if you are far less "pushy" than the average man. Feminists and women actively participate in getting rid of them.

>Wtf? Women don't care if you're not good-looking, they only care that you take action.

You're a clueless idiot.

Try something on Tinder. Put a picture of a handsome guy on your profile and then put a picture of a 3 to 5 out of 10 on another profile.

The handsome guy will not only get a shitload more swipes back BUT he can unload flaw after flaw with the woman trying to sucker up to him.

The ugly guy will not only get fewer hits but any mention of mental illness will make women unmatch you in a moment.

>A handsome guy can have every mental illness in the book. As long as he's handsome.

I hear plenty of men say they want to "fuck a crazy girl" because she's hot, or alternatively "don't stick your dick in crazy". Your logic seems to imply that not-stigmatizing the mentally illl is somehow more shallow than rejecting them offhandedly just for having a mental illness. Also, not all mental illnesses are personality disorders, but whatever.

>They will excuse every fucking flaw on the book if the guy looks handsome.

People in general do this. You seem extra salty about it though, not because of the actual ostracism and discrimination that comes from lookism, but because it deprives men of sex they're apparently entitled to. Boo hoo. The difference is that most women actually put hours of effort into their looks and men don't.

This is anecdotal, as was you example, but I've seen way more fat or conventionally ugly guys with attractive girlfriends than the other way around. It's not common, but its way more common than seeing some "chad" with a fat chick.

>"induce lowered levels of oxytocin and dopamine"

Objective proof you have no comprehension of how the reward pathway functions and think emotions literally boil down to MUH DOPAMINE AND MUH SEROTONIN.

PS: Doctors "induce lowered levels of dopamine" all of the time. Antidopaminergics are powerful antiemetic drugs. They don't cross the BBB, but then again, you don't understand basic neuroscientific concepts so I'm wasting my breath.

>Your logic seems to imply that not-stigmatizing the mentally illl is somehow more shallow than rejecting them offhandedly just for having a mental illness

You fucking idiot. The point was that "looks" trumps almost everything in female selection. Even questions of mental stability.

>but because it deprives men of sex they're apparently entitled to. Boo hoo.

Fucking retarded women I fucking swear.

> The difference is that most women actually put hours of effort into their looks and men don't.

Yep you're a fucking retarded woman. You don't think men risk life and limb in far more risky situations on an everyday basis?

Hypergamy means fugging for resources, the presented in OP's picture has nothing to do with it

I asked you. Would you gamble $500 for an alien doctor to perform such a procedure on you? We'll say it's fucking magic so we avoid surgery.

In a universe with magic surgery, of this sort, would you bet $500 that personal phenomenology would change drastically?

The difference between a creep and a genuinely socially awkward person is whether they push peoples boundaries after being rejected. If you're not malignant you wouldn't have the need to come on Veeky Forums and whine about how it's everyone else's fault you can't get laid, you'd analyze your own behaviour and see how it upsets people.

Very often women have given the wrong man the benefit of the doubt and don't want to take chances. They have more at risk than you do concerning pregnancy, physical strength, being labelled a slut etc. I can tell you're an angry person and nowhere near as respectful as you make yourself out to be, though, because women's opinions and feminism are just punchlines to you. You don't actually give a shit about how they feel. You want sex and lash out at rejection, and they can tell.

>If you are a beta male and "take action" you will be labeled a "creep"

Any guy, "beta" or not, will be labeled a creep by the girl if she just doesn't happen to be into him in that moment. Why care how woman will react?

>tinder
>real life

pick one faggot.

go out and talk to women you find attractive IRL and then learn.

>The difference between a creep and a genuinely socially awkward person is whether they push peoples boundaries after being rejected.

Nope, I'd be willing to gamble my dick that 90%+ of the time, it's a matter of bad "looks".

Yes, women are not only "that shallow" but they're unwilling to merely say "he's ugly". Instead they call the guy some socially ostracizing name ("creep") to get the attention of a beta away.

>go out and talk to women you find attractive IRL and then learn.
top kek

Literally only chads can do this, honestly tinder contrary to popular beliefs helps an average guy more than it helps, statistically you're guaranteed to match with a below average girl, charm her, meet up get her drunk and fugggggg

>pick one faggot.
>go out and talk to women you find attractive IRL and then learn.

Well IRL hooking up is a bit easier IF you can find a woman who doesn't have a tinder account.

The problem with social media is that the range for "handsome men' extends far beyond the localities that were the range in older times.

Now you're competing with the top 20% of ALL men in a 60 mile radius.

The only people not using tinder are middle aged or old.

>You fucking idiot. The point was that "looks" trumps almost everything in female selection. Even questions of mental stability.

Aren't you lovely. Of course something like mental illness should instant disqualify someone for love, and anyone who disagrees must have lower intelligence than you. I wonder what your heartfelt conversations with people are like.

>Fucking retarded women I fucking swear

ur le dumby dumb dumb xd

>don't think men risk life and limb in far more risky situations on an everyday basis?

Lol, because all men are super heroic comic book firefighters and soldiers with big moustaches that fight crime. Okie dokie mister mad as fuuuuck :p

You stupid fucking bitch.

I'm saying that women are FAR more forgiving of flaws in a 8-10/10 man.

>ur le dumby dumb dumb xd

Fucking retarded women i fucking swear

>Lol, because all men are super heroic comic book firefighters and soldiers with big moustaches that fight crime. Okie dokie mister mad as fuuuuck :p

Says the stupid bitch whose idea of commitment and investment is painting her face like a whore.

You're butthurt asf.

Women don't care about looks, they just care about confidence and swag.

Confidence and swag stems from looks you dumb chucklefuck

Protip: women don't call men beta, the only people using that term are self-pitying redpillers that like swearing at women on the internet and talking about how shallow women are for rejecting someone as nice as themselves, because a core value of niceness is being super duper tutti frutti petty SBD blaming any of your personal discontentment on that omniblameful specter of S O C I E T Y that represents everything you hate ;3

You retarded bitch.

Make two profiles on tinder. Or make one, run the experiment, and then switch profile pictures.

If they didn't care about looks, they'd be frightened away at the first suggestion of problems with depression and bipolar.

Instead you'll find that the attractive man is given excuses for his illnesses in a positive way ("Oh yeah I've been depressed before").

When you switch the profile pic to a guy who looks "ugly", they will not only never match you but the few matches you get will be driven away by the reveal of mental issues.

>confidence and swag

A 5'3" asian will not bag a white chick, no matter how much confidence and swag he has. Money...maybe. But no, that guy is not going to get laid until he finds a white woman with an asian fetish who also doesn't mind men with a shorter stature.

>Confidence and swag stems from looks you dumb chucklefuck

it's the other way around you stupid fuck

how does seth rogen get laid. (don't say money/fame because we all know he was getting laid before he became famous)

>women don't call men beta, the only people using that term are self-pitying redpillers that like swearing at women on the internet a

Of course they don't use "beta", that's entirely an invention of the male game scene or whatever bullshit.

But they'll act so differently that in everything, but name, they'll adhere to behaviors AS IF they knew what a "beta" was.