How true is this?

Guys don't even acknowledge ugly girls exist, which is clearly the cases for the creator of those highly unscientific "charts".

Yes.
It was even true BEFORE "sexual liberation".
Also known as destroy women's bodies and soceity with over prescription of birth control and wealthy dyke backed academia and media.

But there is one curious thing about this.
They are the first ones to bitch about prostitution being legalized and raising the age limit and shit talking men who go to prostitutes and younger women.

Interesting isn't it?

Change the men with cars. Have the top be a Ferrari, on the left column rank people after social economic status. What you'll see is that everyone want the Ferrari but they dont have enough money to buy it so they just have to settle for whatever shit they can afford.

You get whatever value you can afford. Chads do turn down fuglies and fuglies have to settle for whatever is in their reach. I've seen the most beta outcasts get pussy and however unattractive my peers where they still managed to get pussy within their league.

>Guys don't even acknowledge ugly girls exist
Uh, excuse me? If an ugly girl walked up to me and asked me for sex, I'd happily oblige. But I'm not gonna go out of my way to pursue her.

True.

Nope. Call it projection if you want, but there are clearly much more virgin men now then there ever has been any time in the past.

Start nofap and I garantee you that ugly girl will become more desirable

Nope but I'm friends with some.

It's quite frankly obscene.

>What you'll see is that everyone want the Ferrari but they dont have enough money to buy it so they just have to settle for whatever shit they can afford.
>You get whatever value you can afford.
Me walking and rarely taking the bus.

same, he sends me nudes that girls send him so I can't complain

But why would I want to make myself fuck ugly whores? Shit's disgusting.

kill all m*n

>there are clearly much more virgin men now then there ever has been any time in the past
What are you basing this assertion on, besides your sample size of one?

feminist always have no curves lol

Notice how she has her hair up and done, her make up on and her ass in the pic?

That cunt knows what's up.

you see it's a fundamental human right to suck dick for money without anyone saying anything about it

Sounds about right. In my circle of friends, the number of women the guys have slept with would go something like: 3, 2, 6, 4, 80, 140, and 90.

No kidding.

Men compete among themselves within the male dominance hierarchy.

The women then "pick from the top" as most of the work is done for them.

Men don't pick from the top as the females don't compete among themselves in a fashion that sets out clear winners and losers... So they select their mates by trial and error.

Those who were "picked from the top" discard one woman and are then selected by another. Until whatever it is that falls into place does.

Eventually as the women age, women start picking from the middle and eventually even lower down as a strategy to limit the chances of being discarded.

So in a way, yeah. That's how it works in your picture for young people before everyone starts getting married and options become more limited and time starts creeping up on them.

I'd rather fuck and ugly girl than jerking off alone in the dark

True enough for it to have measurable genetic consequences (8000 years ago, 17 females succesfully reproduced for every male that did). Those saying it is not true are a bunch lf retards.

Think about this: You have twice as many female ancestors as you do male ancestors. In theory this shouldn't be possible. But it is. In fact it's easy. All women have sex, and by extension, children, but only half of men have sex. Now, remember, this was back when people lived in fairly isolated societies. Now, with technology, women can always find a mate. It literally doesn't matter what they look like. There was a study done on online dating: A 5/10 woman will reject anything below 8/10 men. And of course, now what premarital sex isn't nearly as taboo, most women won't be virgins. And who will they be flocking to? The 10/10, 9/10, and 8/10s. And by the laws of math, the vast majority of men will not be having sex.

This is false. We reached peak virginity aroubd 8000 years ago. It is still bad today though, but not as bad.

True enough but the mental state of a woman is influenced by men. So even if she would in a neutral state want better looking men than you you can simply ignore it.

You're almost always the driving force in a relationship as a man.

>A 5/10 woman will reject anything below 8/10 men.
you must be a sad bitter virgin

Very

heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/technology-and-female-hypergamy-and-the-inegalitarian-consequences/

Call me whatever you want, but it's the truth.

You seem to be forgetting a few things

1.Women compete and fight over those top men all of the time
2.Women don't select shit, men do the selecting and occasionally the taking
3.Only the top women are chosen with any regularity the fugsters and lower level women will go as far as to throw themselves at and pseudorape said top men

And michrochimeraism means that all of those children have something from every single male she fucked or was fucked by.

At 14 I dated a girl who wanted to remain a virgin we decided to have anal sex bc I wanted to fuck we did this weekly for about a year then when I was 15 I broke up with that gf and got a new one who I had vaginal sex with did I lose my virginity at 14 or 15?

We are still restricted by other things, such as distance, time, convenience and whatnot. So I would say we now have it better since “convenience limited” bubbles are created and within those bubbles the pattern you mention happens, untill enough time goes on and leftovers start scanning lower valued males. Although I would still expect for there to be a significant portion of males reaching death without getting pussy. What the other user said regardin 17 females making it for every male 8k years ago is legit.

You're assuming monogamy. Women might fight for top men in terms of relationships, but in terms of sex, your model is a little flawed.

Women are definitely the gatekeepers of sex. To say otherwise is to be ignorant of fundamental human biology.

The standards to get into the top 40% of men are ridiculously low. 73.7% of men are overweight or obese[1].

Work out, wear clothes that fit, get a haircut that suits your head. If you can't do it then you only have yourself to blame unless you're literally deformed.

1: niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statistics/overweight-obesity

pareto distribution

>You're assuming monogamy
user, I'm definitely not.
Nowhere in my post did I hint at monogamy.

I'm talking about sex.
As for gatekeeping. Women will open their gates and put up neon blinking signs for those "top" males and even the men who flips their switch at the moment.

Welcome to reality.

Just because they didn't reproduce doesn't mean they didn't have sex.
They probably pounded out those women who had those children on the reg.
The children that were sired by another man have something of them inside of them.

Microchinerism and the phenomenon you mention is not confirmed to be due to that. Other possibilities are cells from a previous pregnancy, having an older brother, and other two i do not remember. Also they would have to have sex without condom for this to even male sense.

It has been confirmed user.

And yeah, that tends to happen and before condoms were created, it happened a lot.

It's very true. Of course the picture doesn't show the whole story.

Women date up while men date down. In the US, women have extremely inflated egos, due to beta men throwing themselves at them, which makes them think that they're more attractive than they really are and so it makes that chart a reality. Once women's looks fade over time, they realize that they're not as attractive as they thought they were and start to date lower on the totem pole with men who are slightly higher status than the women.

I am not saying they did not have sex because they did not reproduce, but some of thos that did not reproduce, did not have sex. Also microchimerism as a consequence of previous sexual prtners is not confirmed (as in that potential cause has not been firther studied with aupporting results) and there are other, more plausible hypothesis.

>women compete and fight over those top men all of the time

They fight over men who have been selected though.

Men compete and essentially form in a line from most desirable to least desirable. Allowing women to pick from the top.

Women select and then get into fights with each other.. Which doesn't chance the selection. In fact, the man/men being fought over usually fucks them all anyway... because the competition between women has no influence over their desire.

>women don't select shit, men do the selecting and occasionally the taking
Read up about male dominance hierarchies.. It's extremely interesting and informative.

If you're talking about men approaching women rather than the opposite.. then we're talking about completely different things.

3. Only the top women are chosen with any regularity
This isn't even almost true... Average and ugly women get laid just as regularly as 9/10s.

It has not. Link to the study so I change my mind. The study I read offered it as one of the potential causes, but it had no further studies to support that possible cause specifically.

user...

You seem to live in this fantasy world where men all fight to prove they are the bestest of the best and stand in a line to be selected by all women. Then even the ugliest bitch on the planet will end up getting some dick because the man was chosen by her.

Are you okay?
Do you need to get some fresh air?

Not at all. I'm a 7/10 and my gf is a 9/10. My ex was hot too. I don't have money either.

Not that user, but he is right. There is fucking genetic evidence of this mating pattern. Keep debying reality.

Status is not reduced to money alone. It just happens that money is the easiest most straightforward way of demonstrating status. Also you could be a statistical anomaly.

8x6 then
Or tall

incels making baseless infographics to just make themselves even angrier is my favorite genre

do you really expect a bunch of autists to a) admit theyre wrong and b) understand social dynamics such as dating?

why do threads like these always pop up on Veeky Forums? nothing in this thread is about fitness

No, there is not.
There is just this sad fantasy where men are all the same rutting apes from a documentary and we all stand in line so we can be picked like so much cattle to be ridden into the sunset by even the most disgusting heffer.

That's not how it works user.
Fucks sake you even deny that men have a choice in the matter.

I think you need to go out and do something with your life.

It's somewhere in between. There are virgin men obviously, but there are women who aren't fucking around and only have sex in committed relationships.

Life isn't that extreme.

Isley is the top pink...at least until he hits a respectable Diddle in the near future

Except that’s literally how reproductive selection works. Maybe it’s less obvious among humans because instead of literally displaying our feathers or doing a mating dance, we like to dress it up with words like “compatibility” but in the end it’s literally what’s going on.

And to your last point, yes. Even the ugliest women can find a mate.

Read the linked study in this article if you can understand it, but the article does a good job of putting it in layman terms.

psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success

This is about fitness. Reproductive fitness.

Also grow up, manchild. Pokemon sucks.

>Not reproducing = not having sex.
user...

I don’t think we’re thinking on the same scale here. Think about it like this: a 5/10 has no trouble finding mate when she’s a female, but it’s almost impossible to find a mate when he’s male. If you’re looking at the very top the the distribution, then of course you’re going to find wacky stuff.

Some of thise that did not reproduce did not have sex. Besides I am presenting evidence for the mating pattern here explained, not for the whole virginity thing. Hurrrr.

>Reproductive fitness
that would be in relation to the reproductive organs, like the autist that posted his smega covered dick earlier today. But I get it, ill let you shit it up here.

It's fake, it's what virgins tell themselves as an excuse to not approach girls
IRL even uggos can get qt gfs. On tinder OP's pics might be true but tinder isn't real life

Yes, the average can find dudes who want a quick fuck. But if the "10/10" men you know the top males in your example, want to fuck then he'll go for the top females. Not waste his time on an average chick.
See what I mean?
Lastly, 5/10 men have no problem with getting laid either. It's just a bit harder.
But there's always escorts, sluts, and girls with a temp case of slut.

For those still denying the hypergamous mating pattern, just check out the stats made with dating sites data and how male and females rate each other extremely differently. For the female population, the average dude, that given a normal distribution should be a 5, is a 2 for them.

No that's reproductive health.

Reproductive fitness is sexual selection as Charles Darwin described.

That's because men and women are different user.
That's just how we are.
Stop believing in the gender equality myth and start understanding and living by gender reality.

Sexual selection doesn't matter as much in human societies.
It also ignore epiginetics and self selection.

Chads fuck average chicks on a mediocre day, but itbi not the norm.

It is fale if it implies most males will die virgins. It is true if used to represent the fact that is hypergamous mating patterns.

I didn't need to hear this.....

u guys are fucking losers lol u deserve this fate

I know we are different. In fact that was implied in my post and all the posts I made in this thread.

its extremely true.

PROTIP: you think big gains will get you at the top but they wont

It still matters. A lot. It just happens that we select not only for obvious traits, since we are rather smart.

Epigenetics is not relevant for the point I made.

top tier men have standards. that means low tier women have limited access to quality men. same as low tier men, though obviously not as apparent because pussy is pussy.

>but there are women who aren't [openly] fucking around and only have sex in committed relationships.

Please respond
In my family most of uncles and aunts are either divorced or cheating on each other, even my parents are going through divorce. How common is this? All these people are much older and I'm wondering if it has something to do with this.

You conveniently left out the part where women message men that they consider "below average" at a much higher rate than men message women who they consider "below average".

Women always settle.

Stop worshipping cuckolding memes.

what's pics name again

Dang you guys sound like experts on women. You must fuck a lot

Maybe I'm that top male on the right and that's why I enjoy the tears and delusion in these threads.

That is because men value looks to a greater degree while females assign value based on status (although looks are still relevant. There are studies that show this (and it is not dependent on female status, surprisingly). It is also because a lot of those women are already lowering their expectations.

After reading this there is a high chance you're not in the '5/10 male' category.
What score would you give yourself? And be honest here I'm just curious

No, it's just because men always aim for the best of the best and so they message women rated between 8 and 10.

Dang you sound like experts on animals. You must have a lot of pets.

That is how retarded you sound.

Again, on dating profiles you can onnly evaluate looks and superficial aspects of their personality. Since that is the data available and males select based on looks mostly, that is how shit is going to look.

this might be the worst analogy ive ever heard lmfao

Pretty untrue because I don't think anyone thought that beautiful women would somehow for some reason choose to fuck uglier men when they can fuck more handsome men whenever they want. How stupid is this picture? No one actually thought it was gonna mean what it says on the left.

>I am retarded
We know.

I’ve often found that it’s the exact opposite of what you’re saying. Men will often message women that are below average, while women won’t even look at men that Are the same level as them.

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/016230959290021U

And there are plenty like this lne, retard.

Luckily your anecdotes mean nothing.

>doubling down on your retardation
Brave or foolish? Who knows?

I have to disagree to an extend

The 'top tier' guys I know only have real standards for relationships but not for hookups or fwb's. Mostly they don't care who exactly they take home and go by convinience of the situation. They know that they won't have a problem getting a high tier girl when they really feel like it so it doesn't matter to them if they only take home average girls for this weekend.

>non arguments
You can pretend you have a point. I allow it.

The problem is that you thought I was claiming that men aren't visual creatures. It's not my fault you're illiterate m8.

This.