Quote: (05-26-2014 11:42 PM)Samseau Wrote:
Quote: (05-26-2014 07:18 PM)Dismal Operator Wrote:
Quote: (05-26-2014 06:24 PM)Samseau Wrote:
Quote: (05-26-2014 06:21 PM)bacan Wrote:
I disagree. More guys meeting women's basic threshold of attractiveness will mean the wealth of pussy gets shared a bit more evenly.
Why would the fundamental hypergamous nature of women change just because men become more attractive?
No matter what kind of men exist, women will naturally gravitate to the top 20-30% of men. Improve the men and then the women increase their standards.
Hypergamy wouldn't go away, what would change is the cost benefit analysis for women in actually acting out on the hypergamy. If the top 20-30% of guys aren't so far removed from average, the risk of breaking up a stable relationship/family becomes too great to be worth the extra benefit a top guy might offer. Visually, the quality ladder of men probably looks something like this now, in order of high quality to low quality:
The Dos Equis Guy
Top Tier Alpha Types
Average Guys
Dregs
A girl with an average guy can easily justify leaving for a top tier type and above because there is so much more value to be attained that whatever collateral damage can be dealt with. In a dating market after all men improve themselves, it probably looks more like the following:
The Dos Equis Guy
Top Tier Alphas
Average Guys
Dregs
The problem with this analysis is that it assumes men are setting the standards, when in fact it is women who set the standards for what they want in men.
Thus the gap will never be closed. If you want pussy, you will need to be near the top tier alpha range, and the barriers to entry will always remain sky-high.
I certainly agree with the emboldened. I'm not so sure about your second statement. Why do you think the value of women would increase with the value of males, precluding any gap from being closed?