Gendernomics: The Female Bubble

tulip-maniaOpportunity costs and sunk costs have been one of the topics that I have returned to quite a few times in various essays, as I consider them central to male issues within the sexual market place. Both of these metrics exist to judge whether an allocation of resources is sound or unsound. Opportunity costs are the costs of the best opportunity foregone, exemplified by getting married, where the opportunity costs are alternative mating with one or multiple other women. The sunk costs represent the time and other resources a man has invested into a relationship with a woman, and the resources that would be loss should the man decide not to pursue a relationship with that women any longer.

I credit my twitter feed with inspiring many of my essays, and this week is no different. Last week Illimitableman tweeted the following nugget of reasoning:

If a man earns $500 an hour and you want 5 hours alpha attention to be fucked, you’re saying your pussy is worth $2500. Overpriced!” @Illimitableman

This got me thinking along the lines of my “Hookers vs Dating” calculations in an earlier post on marginal utility. It is without a doubt that in the world of constant social media validation and where women are raised to view themselves as Princesses that women develop somewhat of a tendency to value themselves very highly. This is a natural consequence of being told that your product is the best in the world and worthy of royalty. Furthermore, having this over valuation validated by a range of thirsty men from the age of 15 does not in any way encourage a sober valuation. One must keep in mind that hype and marketing can drive a low quality or even useless product to immense heights for a time, examples of this includes such fad products as the pet rock and the Dutch tulip craze.  This is one of the value theory observations that the price of a product frequently does not reflect the underlying costs of building this product.

As an example one could argue that the price of an iPhone should be:

A) The price someone is willing to pay for it in an open market.

B) Reflect the cost of building it.

These will obviously be two entirely different prices. In the Gendernomics sense, the former reflects how the sexual market operates, whereas the latter is quite inconsequential. It does not matter if a man invests massively in himself if he does so in a manner that is not market oriented. Thus, the price the woman sets for her sexual companionship reflects that of the market in which she operates, how high a price will the market accept? Continue reading


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  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: 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

Gendernomics : Macro and Micro

macromicroEconomics is normally divided into micro and macro economics. Micro-economics is sometimes referred to as business economics, which deals with business and industry specific economics such as business strategy, marketing or financing. Whereas macro-economics usually deals with national and international economic factors such as GDP, international trade and import/export. Both sections have founding principles in common, but they differ in field of application rather than in principle. For instance, debt for a country and debt for a corporation have many of the same effects. For instance, a corporation can borrow against future income, so can a country, as debt becomes a large portion of financing, paying them becomes a limit to future investment.

The Micro

In the sexual market place, each man and woman can be thought of as a single corporation. Both aim to maximize their income through a series of moves that I’ve spoken about before in the gendernomics series. The major difference comes in that the female corporation is experiencing an asset bubble, while the male corporation has to build its value one step at a time.

I did some statistics based on OKcupid data [2] male most attractive age:

From this statistic, you can see that the male demand for women, tends to be focused in the age demographic of 20 – 25 from the time a man is 20 years old until he is 50 years old. This means that women ages 20 – 25 will always be objects of high demand. If you compare to the female graph:

female age vs males she finds most attractive


Here we can see that the age of the male a woman finds attractive is relative to her own age, in essence ranging from men who are 1 – 3 years older for women in their early 20s, to men who are a few years younger for women in their 40s – 50s. This results in certain implications for both men and woman when approaching the sexual market place and wanting to maximize their profits.

Regardless of the end goal of being a participant in the sexual market place (the relationship vs casual sex likert scale) it clearly shows that each gender has clear demographic preferences in the opposite sex. The good news for women is that they will experience being in very high demand from 20 – 25, but will rapidly see a decline in demand for them as they near 30. The good news for men is that there is still a demand for them as they reach their 50s.

However, from a strategic perspective it has implications for each genders ideal maximization curve in the SMP as outlined by the SMV curve:

Full SMV graph

Full SMV graph

As we read from this graph, female value peaks in their their twenties due to that being the natural maximum of their nature given value, namely beauty and fertility. This when taken in conjunction with the male demand graph, this is also where they are in demand from the largest possible amount of buyers. Male value peaks in their early to late 30s, where they still retain most of their nature given fertility and youthful strength, but have also had time to develop status and wealth. Men in this age bracket are more suited to competing with younger men with better health, due to having more status and wealth, but still young enough to beat out older men with more status and wealth but worse health.

From a marketing perspective, men tend to approach it through gaining status and wealth, women through beauty and fertility, however, there are variants on the competitive strategies that each gender will use. Rollo Tomassi wrote an article on gamer girls [1] that outlines what is arguably a niche strategy, wherein a woman will seek out a community that she faces less competition and thus leverages a higher than average sexual market value, though catering to a very niche demographic. In the same note, many men attempt to employ similar niche strategies, such as being a beta orbiter, in essence trying to fly under the radar by keeping their intentions concealed. Male feminists are a great example of a niche strategy where they are attempting to appeal to a niche segment of women, through distancing themselves from “those damn men“. In essence, trying to drive up their SMV through increasing rarity.

From the perspective of the Miles and Snow strategies, the woman is engaging in what is referred to as an analyzer strategy, where she is seeking out market opportunities in niches ignored by the defenders. The defenders in this case, would be the women who are 8 – 10 in the measuring system, and who a majority of men tend to gravitate towards. The man on the other hand, is engaging in a reactor strategy, where having been rejected by the mainstream he reacts to the rejection by attempting to satisfy whatever he perceives as a market opportunity. The final strategy is embodied by what has been referred to as “Day Game” by the PUA community. Where a small group of men, seeing that competition in traditional sexual market place exchanges are crowded, decide to adopt a prospector strategy attempting to seek out new market opportunities in less crowded venues.

The Macro Perspective

Those of you who are familiar with economics, will undoubtedly be aware that the macro affects the micro. For instance, the current drastic dip in oil price, creates market reactions that go beyond companies with a high exposure towards oil directly. It creates reactions in currency markets, in international exchange rates and many other things.

In the same vein, the macro perspective in gendernomics, affects the micro. For instance, the sexual revolution and the feminist movement, is a macro occurrence that greatly affected the sexual marketplace and continues to do so today. By “liberating” female sexuality, it affected the supply and demand curves of sex, causing them to shift resulting in the price of sex going down for men. However, it also increased the male performance burden, due to females being by nature hypergamous. Since females marry up, a woman with few career prospects and few means of supporting herself, would marry up to a blue collar worker earning an average salary. However, a female CEO, would have much fewer options for marrying up. This results in that the former would have no problem finding a satisfactory mate, while the latter will be dipping her foot into a much smaller dating pool.

Movements such as the “fat acceptance” movement, and the movement against “body shaming” are doing so in order to lower a female performance burden, but creates the consequence that if more women coalesce around the 3 – 4 SMV on the scale, it shifts the scale, giving relatively more power to a a subsection of women, who are above the median. It also creates a situation for men, where the majority of men are left with a decision between two unwelcome choices, unattractive women, or an increased performance burden. As I outlined in my essay on how men compete, we as a gender compete by raising the performance burden on ourselves, which by extension raises the performance burden of all other men. The result of these two in unison is that men increase their performance burden, women decrease theirs, thus resulting in men offering a progressively better “deal” to women.

In essence, the sexual market place on a macro level is a zero-sum game where a gain for females results in an increase in male performance burden, whereas a gain for men, does not affect the female performance burden. This is due to the nature of hypergamy meaning that a woman has to marry up in some manner in order to be satisfied. The core of the argument is that as females gain benefits in society that affects male performance burden negatively (it becomes larger) whereas as when males gain ground relative to females it decreases the performance burden.

Summary and conclusions

The macro and micro of gendernomics shows that while macro dictates the total level of male performance burden as a result of shifting positions in power between the genders, this affects the competitive ability of each male and female corporation on the micro level. This results in that males have faced increasing burdens of performance over the past 50 years since the sexual revolution, whereas women have faced increasingly lower burdens of performance, to the point where any burden of performance on women are now largely removed.

The consequence of this shift is showing itself in multiple facets of our society, most prominently in the form of movements such as MGTOW, and Herbivore men. However, also in the prevalence of “where have all the good men gone” articles, that is the cry of hypergamy gone wrong. In essence, female positions relative to males have increased so much that a significant proportion of women cannot find suitable mates that satisfy their hypergamic needs. This creates an inefficiency in the sexual market place that ultimately creates an advantage for men who are willing to take on the increasing performance burden, who gain access to large amounts of sexual market value. However, it also creates a catch .22 for women,  where they experience the same supply of men, but largely consisting of men who do not satisfy their hypergamic urge. In essence, the supply of men is there, but the female buyers facing starvation are not willing to eat SPAM just yet.

The male corporation is built from the ground up, a man is born worthless and his preference for expending time decides to what level, and how rapidly he can build his sexual market value. His goal is to expand and gradually take over more market share. The female corporation comes into the sexual market place highly valued, yet with little to speak of as earnings, so over time she consumes her owner’s equity, or in this case her sexual market value. Thus, her goal is to find someone who is willing to purchase her prior to having to file for Chapter 11.

Gendernomics now available on


[2] Dataclysm by Christian Rudder

Gendernomics: Risk management, how to avoid getting burned

Risk matrixRisk is defined by ISO 31000 as the effect of uncertainty on objectives. Risk management is focused on identifying, analyzing, and mitigating risk. There are multiple types of risk used in business and there are multiple types of risk in the SMV. You have risk coming from legislation, risks coming from the social sphere, health risks and plate risk.

The most commonly known method for assessing risk is based on a risk matrix where the risk is equal to probability plus impact. For instance high probability and high impact is a high risk. High probability and negligible impact is a low risk. Mathematically this can be done easily too, if something has a 50% chance of happening and if it happened the cost would be $100.000, then the risk is $50.000

Often risks are divided into known known; risks we are aware of, and understand. Unknown known, risks we are not aware of but understand. Known unknown risks we are aware of but do not understand, and unknown unknown, risks we neither are aware of or understand. 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