Gendernomics: Compounding Sexual Market Value

compound_interestThis post was prompted by a post by Ed Latimore entitled “30 for 30: Lessons from 30 years of life” [1], which got me thinking about how the actions and choices I made in my teens and twenties are affecting me in my thirties. Furthermore, if I could go back, what would be my primary focus for each decade, and what advice would I give to a son who just entered his teens.

Einstein is quoted as saying that the most powerful force in the Universe is compound interest. The concept can be explained in a fairly intuitive manner as earning interest on your interest year after year. What this means is that every year, the interest is added to your principal, and the amount of money you earn from interest will increase. In the short term the amount of money will seem to be minuscule, but compounding rewards those who are patient and who continue to contribute to their principal on a fixed basis.

Many retirement funds are focused on this perspective as they are accounts often started in a person’s thirties, with the goal of enjoying the results when that person retires 20 – 40 years later. Perhaps one of the things that has not been talked much about in terms of male sexual market value is how it is affected by compounding and investments that are made prior to the SMV peak. The classic SMV graph merely shows that a man’s value starts to increase in his early to mid thirties and the continues to increase as he nears his mid to late thirties. However, as I cover in the upcoming Gendernomics book (read a sample here), and have on this blog before as well, male SMV and female SMV are different. Female’s are born with their reproductive value “built in“, males build theirs with little of it being gifted by nature.

This means that a male who wants to realize his maximum possible sexual market value has to make contributions to it over many years prior to realizing it fully. Naturally, some men are able to realize an above average sexual market value prior to their mid-thirties. High School athletes, wealthy heirs and those who find celebrity young for instance, however, what is unique about them as examples is their attainment of the societal merit required for high SMV at an age that represents a statistical outlier. The high school quarterback attains high sexual market value early, due to demonstrating a combination of genetics, leadership ability and gaining a massive amount of social proof very early in life. In addition, his success at a competitive endeavor will translate into much increased confidence in other areas. The wealthy heir will be born into an advantageous social position, that permits him to gain experience at a faster level, for instance through travel, partaking in business deals well above his weight, and the social proof that goes with it. The celebrity, will gain the massive social proof that comes with fame, in addition to a demonstration of high ability compared to his peer group.

This essay is not written as a foolproof guide, but as a series of reflections on how one ideally should dedicate time across 3 decades of life, ages 10 – 20, 20 – 30 and 30 – 40. Continue reading

Gendernomics: IQ and the Sexual Market

iq-articleThe idea that the stupid are out-breeding the intelligent appears to have reached the mainstream a few years ago by way of the movie “Idiocracy” intended as a dark comedy, this movie does has its basis in fact. IQ has long been seen as having a negative correlation with fertility, but a positive correlation with the survival of offspring [1]. This has also been confirmed to be an international phenomenon, and thus is not just relevant for the United States [2].

I’ve also observed this first hand, in that some of the men who struggle with getting laid the most, are the most intelligent. An example in popular culture as of the past 5 years has been the television show “The Big Bang Theory” about a group of highly intelligent physicists, who never the less seem to struggle with the simple concepts of friction and tension. Continue reading

Gendernomics: Book Value

dataRecently I came across some statistical tables from Our World in Data that outlined how the preferences for 18 traits had changed in women and men seeking a prospective partner from 1938 until 2008. This was an interesting data cache, because 70 years is only 2- 3 generations, and thus it is unlikely that any change in the underlying biological framework of our species would have changed in any meaningful way. However, our society and culture in the West has changed markedly. From 1938 until today, we have had World War 2, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, The Cold War, 2 Iraq wars, the war on terror, 6 – 7 serious stock market crashes, The War on Drugs and the War on Terror. We have seen the second and third waves of feminism, the rise of globalism, the entry of women into the workplace, the rise of easy divorce, and we have seen the anti-establishment hippies take over the establishment. Finally, the initial survey was done right at the end of the global depression (1938) and the second survey was done on the start of the 2008 financial crisis.

This means that it gives us insight into how people’s partner preferences have been changed throughout one of the more change prone periods in recent history. One marked especially by changes to the gender dynamics that had been dominant for most of written history. Continue reading

Gendernomics: The male sexual strategies

The RoninIn our early days as a species on this earth, it is likely that we largely mimicked our cousins, the other primates in our approach to mating. Might makes right without the rule of law, and therefore the first sexual strategy that evolved was the physical one. In a world that consists largely of physical trials such as hunting, it follows that evolution would select for those who had the best genetics for this life. To explore this, I decided to see what the status is among our primate cousins who are living in a much more natural state than humans. While humans have come a long way from our hunter-gatherer past, through the agricultural revolution, our mating behavior is most likely less adapted.

The three closest relatives to humans genetically speaking are Chimpanzees, Bonobos and Gorillas. In Chimpanzee society, there are two dominance hierarchies, one among males, and one among females. The male hierarchy is controlled by an alpha male, and the alpha may be the most physically dominant, but may also be the one most skilled in manipulation and gaining allies. Males gain mating opportunities through status, females gain access to resources. Females will on occasion collude to remove an alpha male in favor of a new one if they perceive that it will benefit them. [1]

Bonobos appear to be a matriarchal society, where everyone has sexual contact with everyone except mother and son. A son gains his social status from his mother. Quite unique to bonobos, females will engage in sex with many males indiscriminate of social rank or age. This results in a situation where no male can know which offspring is his and parental care rests solely on the female. [2]

Gorillas live together in groups called troops, presided over by an Alpha male Silverback (over 12 years old), and often consists of a Silverback, multiple females and the offspring. On occasion groups with multiple males can exist, where the Silverback is the Alpha and the other males are younger and serve as support for the Silverback. The troops form in order for the females to gain protection and mating opportunities. [3] Continue reading

Gendernomics: Female sexual strategies part 2

Female Sexual StrategiesIn part one of this series I outlined the overall framework and how this model works. As you can see from the chart above, hypergamic optimization (The goal of every female sexual strategy) is broken down into 2 major groups. The Ultra Girl adopts either beauty or nurturing, and puts a spin on it in order to increase the perception of scarcity and to differentiate itself from the rest of the market. This has the purpose of targeting a specific demographic of men more closely than a generalized Strategy.

The Anti-Girl rejects one or more aspects of typical feminine traits in order to create a new strategy. The Ant-chick strategies seek to manipulate the perception of beauty and scarcity in order to target a specific demographic. Whereas the “Cool chick” seeks to manipulate the male performance burden and investment costs to target another demographic. Continue reading

Marketing and the sexual market place

marketingIn the last month or so I’ve written multiple articles dealing with the sexual market place and how the genders seek to control and manipulate it. I would recommend reading the following articles before this one to get the whole picture.

Exploring the sexual market value

How men compete: Building the better mousetrap

Why Women Slut Shame: Hypercompetition

The SMV game is largely focused around marketing. This is the preferred female approach, and this is reflected in their attention to clothing, make-up perfume and other sensory aspects that draw male attention. Therefore, a lot of men have started to emulate this, embodied most strongly by the “metrosexual” movement where men in essence adopt female modes of dress, and grooming. However, far from being purely about the physical, women (and to a lesser degree men) also adapt their personalities when around a potentially attractive partner. Continue reading

Gendernomics: A deeper look at supply and demand

supply_and_demandIn my gendernomics series, I reference supply and demand theory a lot, and will continue to do so in future posts, as it is my argument that many behaviors are linked to this basic economic function. To serve as a foundational post, I figured a deeper look at supply and demand was in order, even though many of us understand it intuitively. The fundamental variables considered in supply and demand are quantity and price for two different variables. The quantity is normally displayed on the horizontal axis, and the price on the vertical axis, the intersections between these two variables on the Cartesian plane, form a curve. A supply and demand graph is usually built to cover a single product, but they can also cover entire sectors or groups of products if the data is comparable.

The Demand curve is usually downward sloping, meaning that as price goes up, demand goes down. This is a result of a few different things, but primarily that fewer people have the funds to make a purchase, or they elect to buy substitute products.

The Supply curve is usually upwards sloping, meaning that as price goes up, supply goes up. This is due to the fact that more suppliers of a good will be willing to supply it if it commands a higher price, due to higher margins. It also tends to mean that producers who previously could not compete within the product area, will become competitive.

 

Continue reading