Yes, it does.
This is no different to asking 'does having a ripped body really help getting laid?'.
I think the questions people keep asking are very telling. Often its a form of insecurity, fishing for 'no not much' answers to help quench that insecurity.
You always hear the same old questions: do looks matter? does money matter? does status matter? does height matter? does race matter? does dick size matter? Everyone knows the answer to these questions are: 'yes', and that they have already been asked and answered millions of times, and that there is plenty of proof to back them up.
And yet, the questions remain. And still people answer them with the empirically wrong answers.
'Nah man, height doesn't matter, game matters'. 'No no-one cares about your race nowadays'. 'Nah dick size doesn't matter, any dick can satisfy a woman just as well'. 'Nah money will just attract "gold-diggers"'.
![[Image: hamster2.gif]](https://rooshvforum.network/images/smilies/hamster2.gif)
I think its the male equivalent of girls posting 'I look bad in this' on facebook. Their equivalent of 'nah, only game matters' is 'its what's inside that counts!'.
If these things didn't matter, the same questions wouldn't keep being brought up. The questions are the smoke, and the truth that 'yes, it matters' is the fire.
Putting aside the bulk empirical evidence, and instead using biological first-principles:
If reproductive success could not be improved by resource gathering (capital accumulation), then it would be a failed evolutionary tactic to do so. It would be a superior tactic instead to drive away or exterminate all male competitors from your territory (instead of working with them via division of labour), in the same manner lions, elephants, and gorillas do.
Since we currently live in skyscapers instead of caves, this clearly isn't the case.
The bonobo doesn't accumulate resources because to do so would waste 'banging sluts in heat' time, which would lower its reproduction (there is no female commitment in a bonobo society). The gorilla doesn't accumulate resources because to do so would waste energy better spent guarding his harem.
As a side note, I think this implies: 'capital is a function of female commitment and avoidance of force'. AKA 'less sluts & less government = more wealth'.
I hope this lays to rest the question 'Does money matter?'. I know it won't.
This is no different to asking 'does having a ripped body really help getting laid?'.
I think the questions people keep asking are very telling. Often its a form of insecurity, fishing for 'no not much' answers to help quench that insecurity.
You always hear the same old questions: do looks matter? does money matter? does status matter? does height matter? does race matter? does dick size matter? Everyone knows the answer to these questions are: 'yes', and that they have already been asked and answered millions of times, and that there is plenty of proof to back them up.
And yet, the questions remain. And still people answer them with the empirically wrong answers.
'Nah man, height doesn't matter, game matters'. 'No no-one cares about your race nowadays'. 'Nah dick size doesn't matter, any dick can satisfy a woman just as well'. 'Nah money will just attract "gold-diggers"'.
I think its the male equivalent of girls posting 'I look bad in this' on facebook. Their equivalent of 'nah, only game matters' is 'its what's inside that counts!'.
If these things didn't matter, the same questions wouldn't keep being brought up. The questions are the smoke, and the truth that 'yes, it matters' is the fire.
Putting aside the bulk empirical evidence, and instead using biological first-principles:
If reproductive success could not be improved by resource gathering (capital accumulation), then it would be a failed evolutionary tactic to do so. It would be a superior tactic instead to drive away or exterminate all male competitors from your territory (instead of working with them via division of labour), in the same manner lions, elephants, and gorillas do.
Since we currently live in skyscapers instead of caves, this clearly isn't the case.
The bonobo doesn't accumulate resources because to do so would waste 'banging sluts in heat' time, which would lower its reproduction (there is no female commitment in a bonobo society). The gorilla doesn't accumulate resources because to do so would waste energy better spent guarding his harem.
As a side note, I think this implies: 'capital is a function of female commitment and avoidance of force'. AKA 'less sluts & less government = more wealth'.
I hope this lays to rest the question 'Does money matter?'. I know it won't.