Gendernomics: The 8Ps of Sexual Market Value

Most start-ups have a core mission that relates to how that company makes or is going to make money. For instance a software start-up often consists of a team of coders and very little else, much like the TV-show “Silicon Valley”. In this company everyone is focused on the product-side of things, building the product, fixing the product, improving the product and so on. There is a group of people and they are all focused on the same thing, which is the company’s “raison d’etre” or reason to exist. This is often due to necessity, with limited resources available a company has to strictly prioritize how they spend what little they have in order to obtain the maximum effect. This often leads to the founder(s) of the company filling a range of roles from administration, accounting/financing, sales, marketing, product strategy, development, operations and delivery. This is rarely a good plan in the long-run because as I once heard someone say “Multi-tasking: The art of doing twice as much as you should, half as well as you could“.

When the company starts to get more resources, it will trend towards a higher degree of specialization within the core functions. As a result of this, a need will emerge for support functions. In order for those who make the product to maximize the amount they can make, they must specialize in manufacturing, in order for salespeople to sell as much as possible they must focus on their area, and so on. This means that tasks that must be done in order for the company to run smoothly, such as invoicing and ensuring that suppliers are paid have to be handled by someone else. Thus, one starts to hire people to fill the support functions.

In the sexual market place, this same effect can be seen among many men at varying stages of their journey. When one first finds the manosphere there is an arsenal of content one can consume and utilize in order to improve one’s sexual market value. There are game tips, style tips, weightlifting tips, diet tips, grooming tips, and many others. Within each of these there are differing perspectives and both for strategy, tactics and methodology. Continue reading

Advertisements

Red Pill Logic: Blue Pill Axioms

I recently had a conversation with Rollo of The Rational Male. Rollo is somewhat unique in that he is one of the few manosphere authors who have actually touched on the topic of unstated axioms and their consequences when applied to the interpretation of the sexual market place. Most frequently he will refer to this as the error of egalitarian equalism, which is a contraction of two elements.

A) Egalitarianism meaning that both men and women are considered equal in their worth as human beings.

B) That there are no biological differences between the sexes and that any difference results from social influence.

The former would be the Enlightenment interpretation of egalitarianism, that form the foundation of the statement, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” from the Declaration of Independence, where one must interpret the meaning of the statement, in context of commoners that had lived in societies where rights and duties were dependent upon your social rank at birth, as “Nobody is born with more or less rights, duties or worth as a human being than anyone else”.

The Second would be the belief based in the Tabula Rasa that there are no meaningful psychological or behavioral differences based in biological evolution among the sexes or other characteristics, and that all differences that do manifest are a result of social influence. From this it follows that men and women think, reason, and value the same information, that they make decisions the same way, and that any representation within a field of endeavor other than the demographic one is  the result of discrimination in some form.

In this case, “egalitarian equalism” is an axiom that has formed, and still forms part of the foundation upon which analysis of intersexual and intra-sexual dynamics is based.

In classic philosophy an axiom is a statement that that is so evident and well established that it is accepted without controversy or question. These come in two varieties, stated and unstated. For instance in mathematics the results of elementary arithmetic are considered unstated axioms, meaning that one does not need to state these explicitly when making an argument. Stated axioms on the other hand are those that are made explicitly clear, when making an argument. For instance, if I begin an argument with “For the purpose of this argument I will consider [insert statement/fact/statistic as being representative, accurate and true] I’m stating a premise that will be utilized within the logical framework of the argument.

The former often takes place where a field or a discussion has statements, facts or otherwise that are so fundamental that only extremely pedantic people may challenge them. The latter is often necessary when making an argument on principle or where there are statements that may be challenged. In order to avoid these protests and make an “If it is so, then it follows” style argument, one states that “for the purpose of this argument, this axiom is considered to be true“.

The Red and Blue Pill are both interpretations of observed reality. In the case of both framework, persons have observed an event or multiple events, and have formed arguments and conclusions around those events. For instance, a man may make an observation that the 437 point checklist a woman lists on her eharmony profile, is only applicable to a certain category of men based on the woman’s history of dating, mating, and associating with men who do not fulfill the criteria on the list. Furthermore, he may add inductively, that if she has such a checklist and it applies only to a subset of men, she must also have a list of sorts for the remaining subsets of men. After all, if every man is considered a potential intimate partner for a woman, and the 437 bullet point checklist is only applied to 80% of men, then there are really only two options:

A) The remaining 20% of men are not considered intimate partner prospects

B) The remaining 20% of men are evaluated using a second list

If he adds to this the observation that the 20% group appear to jump through less hoops, can escalate the relationship faster and generally appear to get better treatment, then attempting to decipher the items on this second list, and utilizing his knowledge would gain him benefits in the sexual market place. The Blue Pill Analysis of the same situation would yield a much different result, as the 437 point checklist is viewed as being true, while the remaining 20% of men to which it does not apply are considered mistakes the woman must make in order for her to learn that she should stick with her list. Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: Beginning the Journey

The red pill logic series is where I tend to outline those thoughts I have about intersexual dynamics and various related topics that do not fit into the more strict Gendernomics definition. Where Gendernomics is often largely descriptive, in that it describes and explains various sexual market mechanics, red pill logic occasionally moves towards the prescriptive route of offering concrete advice on how to approach a given problem. One of the more common questions I see from newly red pilled men is where to begin. There is a mountain of theory out there that could bury a man for months if not years in reading, listening to podcasts and watching youtube, when in reality the key is to gain a balance of experience and theoretical knowledge.

One of the most challenging factors that I run into in my day to day life is the split between people who are brilliant when it comes to theory, but have virtually no experience, and people who are highly experienced but have no knowledge of theory. The latter are often the most challenging to work with, because they may have had quite a bit of success but lack the ability to explain why a given approach worked, while at the same time fearing that if they alter their approach, it will lead to lower success rate. The former can be very easy to work with provided that they are humble and realize that not all theory is applicable.

This train of though lead me to wondering about what path a newly red pilled man should take in order to maximize the efficiency of his red pill journey. When I first became familiar with game, the recommendation was to go out and do 100 cold approaches, which can be great advice as it will eliminate much approach anxiety, get you used to approaching, talking to girls and most importantly get you immediate feedback on your level of game and sexual market value. However, it can also be like having a person who has never worked out in their life do a 100 squat challenge that leaves them sore to the point where they can’t walk for a month, and determined to never again enter a gym.

On the other hand, a man who has some success already, getting fairly regular relationships and occasional one night stands, or getting regular one night stands but struggling with making them into something more, may have progressed beyond the 100 cold approaches already. For him, this becomes like taking someone who has trained with weights for a decade and putting them on a low-volume, low intensity recovery program. This means they are not progressing at the optimal rate, they may experience getting weaker and most importantly it wastes their time.

I wondered for a bit whether I should break this down by the socio-sexual hierarchy, alpha, beta, delta, omega, gamma and sigma, however Alphas and Sigmas are unlikely to be looking for basic advice on how to apply the red pill, except for in situations where a blue pill alpha recently got hit with “I’m not happy” or something similar. Breaking it down by sexual market value seemed to be a more appropriate form, as sexual market value to some extent is de-coupled from a man’s position in the dominance hierarchy. Continue reading

Gendernomics: Creative Destruction

The concept of creative destruction was popularized by the Austrian-American economist Joseph Schumpeter in the early 20th century. The concept was defined by Schumpeter as “process of industrial mutation that incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one“. The idea behind the concept is that capitalism will inevitably lead to innovation and progression within industries, constantly finding new and better ways to cater to the needs and wants of the market, stakeholders and owners, which would destroy the existing investment to create new investment. A good example would be how digital photography annihilated the large market for film and disposable cameras dominated by Kodak.

To summarize creative destruction, historically one sated a need through a solution, at present one may sate that need through another solution which usurped the throne from the previous solution, and in the future we may sate that need through a new solution that took over the kingdom from the previous one. A side-effect naturally, is that the present way of life, thinking and infrastructure is constructed around the present solution, which means that for a time-being this must also be reconstructed.

For instance, prior to the advent of the light-bulb, many cities lit their streets using torches or gas, this resulted in a high demand for gas, the companies that produced the streetlamps, and a large industry of men who’s job was to walk around when it got dark and light all the lamps. Once Edison came around with the light-bulb, much of the investments made into gas-based street lights and related industries was rendered obsolete (thus destroyed), by the new creative solution, however new industries blossomed to fill the needs of the new solution. Continue reading

Gendernomics: Game as a Value Multiplier

A multiplier is a very simple concept, it’s an added variable that either serves to increase or decrease a given value. When you benchmark between industries it’s not uncommon to establish revenue multipliers for mergers and acquisitions, for instance the purchase value in one industry may be x4 of revenue, and in another x12 of revenue. This is normally done by analyzing previous deals in the same industry, establishing a “normal” multiplier and then applying that to the present deal, with or without modifications. If there is a large discrepancy in market capitalization for the two, or growth estimates are vastly different, then adjustments may be made, if the companies are very similar, they may not.

Perhaps the multiplier that most will be familiar with is marketing. Now marketing in and of itself does not create tangible product value, for instance an Iphone does not get objectively better because it comes in a nice box. However, the nice box helps it appear higher value and quality due to playing with our perception. The bottle- and logo design of Coca Cola does not make the drink more refreshing, more healthy, or a host of other concrete product variables, however it does make it stand out on the shelf.

In a recent tweet, I wrote:

Game is a value multiplier, not a value creator, treat accordingly.

The reasoning behind this is quite simple, and comes from my analysis of the early seduction community argument that “only game matters”, summarized as, “one need not concern oneself with becoming interesting, dressing better, developing the right mindset, going to the gym or a myriad of other avenues of self-improvement, just buy whatever product I’m selling and you will become successful with women”. Perhaps the most obvious example of the flaws in this methodology was the program “The Pick-Up Artist” that aired on VH-1 some years ago, where it rapidly became clear that even personal coaching and training from Mystery in his methods, failed to improve those men who had the lowest value, much if at all. Those who did indeed become successful, were those men who were the male “She’s all that” versions, guys who were average or above average value, but who failed to display that value in some regard. Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: Embracing the Dark Side

In Jung’s writing the dichotomy of ego and shadow is perhaps the most interesting one, as this is the split between those behaviors that a man uses as part of his identity and those behaviors he rejects. I briefly covered Jung’s preference for figurative dichotomies in an earlier essay, and perhaps more important than the feminine/masculine is the Dark side and the Light side. Take one of the “Good Boys” for instance, he has adopted those behaviors which society has overly communicated as desirable in a “good man”, and rejected those that he has perceived society and deeming unfit in a civilized world.

However, as I outlined those behaviors, while carrying some benefits also have detrimental aspects to them, as they are a trade-off, where the good boy gets social validation, because his behavior benefits society more than it does himself. Thus, these behaviors are venerated by society in theory, but in practice those that engage in them sacrifice their own best interest for the best interests of the community in which they live. This has been popularized in the meme “You vs. The Guy She Tells You Not To Worry About“, and is very symptomatic of the super-ego completely dominating his psyche.

Perhaps the most famous example in literature is “Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” by Robert Louis Stevenson, however a more interesting exemplification comes in the Star Wars series. In this series “turning to the dark side” meant giving in to those emotions that are deemed negative by the Jedi, such as fear, anger, passion and strength, but more importantly determining your own path, rather than the one determined for you by the force. This is an interesting allegory to the ego and the shadow, where the ego are those conscious behaviors that make up much of our identity, such as being dutiful, polite, nice, rule-abiding and various pro-social behaviors that a man has adopted due to social conditioning, and the shadow represents those behaviors that a man has rejected from his personality.

Adopting the Red Pill requires to some extent the negotiation between the shadow and the ego, for the former’s inclusion into conscious identity. A man is incomplete without those shadow behaviors in his arsenal. Yet “The Good Boys” have had those aspects of their personality hidden by defense mechanisms all their life. Continue reading

Gendernomics: Means, Ends and Hypergamy

The concept of hypergamy is what one finds at the bottom of the rabbit hole, the reason why female behavior is how it is observed. Myself and many others have taken swings at explaining hypergamy, what is it, what does “peak hypergamy entail” and many other views have been explored.

Yet there appears to be many misunderstandings out there regarding the various manifestations of hypergamy, furthermore, to how it manifests in each female. It would be no catastrophic admission that it varies from woman to woman, with some manifesting stronger variants others less severe variants. That what is optimal hypergamy for one woman is perhaps not optimal hypergamy for another, based on a range of variables. If hypergamy manifested in an identical degree and manner in every woman regardless of other factors, then one would expect to observe identical mating behavior by every female.

The implication of hypergamy operating in such a manner is that to females, males would have an objective value, a male 10 would be a male 10 to every woman, and a male 1 would be a male 1 to every woman. This would also mean that one could easily break down the variables that constituted male sexual market value, and create male 10s en masse, without much effort. However, this completely disregards the subjective aspects of female mate choice, that are influenced by various individual and contextual factors. It is the influence of these factors that create the variable aspect of female mating judgments.

This should come to no surprise to those that have read the section regarding value theory and the rational actor in “Gendernomics” where I write:

The former category, subjective value theory is much more applicable to the Sexual Market Place. This is because rather than being based on the intrinsic value of an object, good or service, the value is determined based on the value placed on the object by a rational actor for the achievement of his own ends

A man who is thirsting is will value a glass of water much higher than the man who has an unlimited source of clean water. If everyone agreed that objects held the same value, based on underlying factors such as the cost of production or rarity, then it leaves very little room for individual preference. Even in the largest markets in the world, such as various stock markets, the price of an asset reflects not only underlying value, but the judgments of many buyers and sellers regarding the underlying value. Generally these values are within a range, and it’s rare to see large spreads on the value of an asset, unless an exceptional case is presenting itself.

As the sexual market place appears to be governed through many of the same factors any other market, it follows that individual choice, and the value placed on a man or woman by a rational actor for their own ends, is a significant influencing factor. Continue reading