I'm Touring The United States! Starting in June, I'm conducting private events in 23 American cities. Click here for full details.

Post Reply 
Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
Author Message
spydersuit Offline
Banned

Posts: 399
Joined: Oct 2016
Post: #251
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
(12-10-2018 09:28 PM)The_e_man Wrote:  
(12-09-2018 08:23 AM)BadBoyGamer Wrote:  Attractiveness is not only determined by looks. I would say that when it comes down to looks (psysical appearance as in muscle, fat, face, hair, grooming, clothes) only a certain "treshold" needs to be obtained. Once this point has been reached other qualities get priority. And I do not see any evidence for this "threshold" to be particulary high.

Or to put it into other words: As long as you are "not bad looking".

Other attractive qualities that are important are: dominance, strength, pre selection, initiative taking, self confidence, risk taking, fearlesssness, social freedom, emotional control, etc.

In a real life face to face interaction these qualities become a whole lot more important than looks. And when it comes to sex these qualities become even more important.

To put it into other words: A "hot" submissive guy is unattractive.

I would even say that these qualities can entirely negate "uglyness". Or in the negative completly negate "hotness".

On other hand money and social status have little to do with attractiveness. These are simply practical considerations which belong in the "Beta Bux" category. If money or status where attractive, I expect girls to masturbate to pictures of Mark Zuckerberg.

But I do agree that Tinder gives you a good idea about where you stand looks wise. However as I said, this be a biased dataset. Biased towards looks primarily and biased for girls that primarily select based on looks.

Oh boy. I like your posts and I like your logical approach to the game, I really do.
In fact I even recently gave you a rep point a few days ago.

So please take this sincerely when I tell you that you have it completely wrong. The first part of your post was ok, but then you started losing me. I have a feeling you're wrong because you are basing too many things in the theoretical world in your mind, and you still don't have enough real world experience of the game (high notch count, experience with harems / LTRs with hot girls, etc).

Social status, to some girls, can be KING when it comes to attraction. Especially the young hot party girls that are being picky on tinder. And status is certainly not a "beta bux" trait. Keep in mind, when I say status I am talking about the status that girls care about: popular, cool guy, at the top of the social food chain, with lots of fun connections. Not the department chair at the astrophysics society. And even then, the department chair of astrophysics has enough relative status in his little niche that he can actually be killing it as well - just not with the young party girls but obviously a much more different demographic of women.

Also keep in mind that some of the best looking guys are usually the high status guys in their social circles. Yes, yes exceptions exist. There's stories of ugly guys killing it and good looking guys shooting themselves in the foot and never getting pussy. But let's get the extreme anecdotes out of the way and look at general trends.
Physical attractiveness and status are tightly related and intertwined, and it's no surprise girls very much care about those two things when it comes to pure attraction.

Somebody should create 2 accounts with the same photos!!! Then use the text to portray a fun, risk taking, social, party animal in Profile 1. In profile 2. a stable provider - Energy company engineer. (c'mon we all know which profile will win today in most large cities of the US). I have actually done this with varied results. I find there to be a strong urban rural and socioeconomic status divide between which profile does better (internationally and domestically). Wealthy cities party animal Chad does well. In poor rural areas not too risky stable Fred does well.

Of course this is all complex, and the location and the other options (men) available in the marketplace to the women are a factor.

-----
But OP - marketplace economics to answer your question as others have said.
12-10-2018 09:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes spydersuit's post:
Built to Fade
The_e_man Offline
Chubby Chaser
**

Posts: 532
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 27
Post: #252
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
^ interesting point.

If I were to take an educated guess as to why that be the case, I would say it's because women that live in a big cosmopolitan city care more about looks and status and fun (Pure attraction) whereas women that live in rural areas care more about a stable provider (transactional attraction).

Grant me serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference
12-10-2018 09:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes The_e_man's post:
Built to Fade
corsega Offline
Alpha Male
****

Posts: 1,044
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 31
Post: #253
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
(12-10-2018 08:21 PM)StrikeBack Wrote:  I am actually one such example, but I can't give you evidence over the Internet as that's just stupid. I can and have shown men who've met me in person the examples.

You're telling me you are a regular guy, a "5", and have banged and retained 9s, in the hardest Western country for Game (Australia)?

Yeah nah.

Either they weren't 9s, or you aren't regular (more likely).

(12-10-2018 08:21 PM)StrikeBack Wrote:  In saying that, why would you downplay status, money and social circle?

Because you mentioned a regular guy. A regular guy has average status, average money, and an average social circle filled with average girls.

Sounds like you're redefining the term "regular".

(12-10-2018 08:47 PM)Shemp Wrote:  I've known at least two short, bald morbidly obese guys with beautiful wives (also short). Facially the guys were fine, 8 or above. But short, fat and bald should knock their score down right?

People are really obsessed with the anomalies, I gotta say. This video explains my thoughts on the matter (start at 2:20 for literally the exact example you just gave, haha):




Also, morbidly obese with an 8 face? That's impossible. Obesity ruins your facial aesthetics.

My blog - skeptical, data-driven takes on daygame, online game, and more
(This post was last modified: 12-11-2018 02:35 AM by corsega.)
12-11-2018 02:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes corsega's post:
Built to Fade
StrikeBack Offline
True Player
*****
Gold Member

Posts: 2,113
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 91
Post: #254
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
I said regular, as in terms of looks. I have never said that I'm a "regular" guy in a complete sense. I am anything but average when it comes to other qualities. Women I've dated all think I'm handsome, but I'm also only 5'7" (5'6" after squatting at the gym!), hairy, built like a small bulldog, no six packs and Asian. Pretty sure I tried hotornot once when I was younger and got rated a 3. You tell me what women would rate me at, looks-wise. Yet I've dated plenty of European girls who look way out of my league and are almost always taller than me, including my wife. One key thing every one of them has told me is that I am the most interesting man they have ever talked to, that's always been my hook.

I'm not a casual sex guy, I nearly always get into relationships. But that's also because I'm normal man, when I get a pretty girl, I want to at least bang her regularly for a while, and I'm not out there trying to rack up big numbers to impress Internet people.

I only brought this up because you lot keep yapping on and on about looks being everything, when my experience shows that it's clearly not. If looks mattered that much, I'd probably be one of those incel MGTOWs whining on the Internet after trying looksmaxing for a month. As men, we have so many other venues to improve our attractiveness, and this should give all of us hope. Stop this obsession with looks.

StrikeBack's Wife School
12-11-2018 04:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 8 users Like StrikeBack's post:
Ouroboros, Tactician, Built to Fade, Saweeep, Zoso, DJ-Matt, Dalaran1991, Cyr
BadBoyGamer Offline
Chubby Chaser
**

Posts: 281
Joined: Sep 2018
Reputation: 8
Post: #255
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
corsega Wrote:In the 20-24 age range, over 60 percent of women (e.g. most women) have had between 1 and 4 partners: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5795598/

There is no way of knowing how many sexual partners people have had. People are known to lie about these things. The idea that most woman only have had between 1-4 sexual partners is ridiculous. Unless you count old people.


"normal looking men getting beautiful women"

It all depends on how you define "beautiful woman" and how you define "normal looking men".

The_e_man Wrote:
BadBoyGamer Wrote:On other hand money and social status have little to do with attractiveness.

Social status, to some girls, can be KING when it comes to attraction. Especially the young hot party girls that are being picky on tinder. And status is certainly not a "beta bux" trait. Keep in mind, when I say status I am talking about the status that girls care about: popular, cool guy, at the top of the social food chain, with lots of fun connections. Not the department chair at the astrophysics society. And even then, the department chair of astrophysics has enough relative status in his little niche that he can actually be killing it as well - just not with the young party girls but obviously a much more different demographic of women.

I agree with you. I wass refering to something else. Might be using the wrong words by calling it "social status". I was referring to other kinds of "social status". Like indeed the head of the astrophysics club, manager of a company, doctor in hospital or the lawyer.

A soccer coach might have lots of social status at the local soccer club, but girls do not give one bit of a fuck about this form of status. Same for the CEO of a company. The guy might be having huge status inside the company, but once he enters a bar the bartender can be having more (from female perspective).

Usually the popular and cool guy on top of the social food chain, with lots of fun connections, is on the top because he displays the qualities I mentioned earlier.

The_e_man Wrote:Physical attractiveness and status are tightly related and intertwined, and it's no surprise girls very much care about those two things when it comes to pure attraction.

I attribute all of this to earlier mentioned qualities. I highly doubt a guy can be physical attractive without having at least a subset of these qualities.

Only three ways to do something: "The right way. The wrong way. Or my way. Obviously my way is best."
(This post was last modified: 12-11-2018 05:29 AM by BadBoyGamer.)
12-11-2018 05:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like BadBoyGamer's post:
Built to Fade, Donfitz007
spydersuit Offline
Banned

Posts: 399
Joined: Oct 2016
Post: #256
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
(12-11-2018 04:18 AM)StrikeBack Wrote:  I said regular, as in terms of looks. I have never said that I'm a "regular" guy in a complete sense. I am anything but average when it comes to other qualities. Women I've dated all think I'm handsome, but I'm also only 5'7" (5'6" after squatting at the gym!), hairy, built like a small bulldog, no six packs and Asian. Pretty sure I tried hotornot once when I was younger and got rated a 3. You tell me what women would rate me at, looks-wise. Yet I've dated plenty of European girls who look way out of my league and are almost always taller than me, including my wife. One key thing every one of them has told me is that I am the most interesting man they have ever talked to, that's always been my hook.

I'm not a casual sex guy, I nearly always get into relationships. But that's also because I'm normal man, when I get a pretty girl, I want to at least bang her regularly for a while, and I'm not out there trying to rack up big numbers to impress Internet people.

I only brought this up because you lot keep yapping on and on about looks being everything, when my experience shows that it's clearly not. If looks mattered that much, I'd probably be one of those incel MGTOWs whining on the Internet after trying looksmaxing for a month. As men, we have so many other venues to improve our attractiveness, and this should give all of us hope. Stop this obsession with looks.

You are missing the point of what a few of us had said brosef. The point is, if you took the same "inner you" and placed it 2 different bodies; 1 hot body, and 1 ugly body. The hot body would outperform the ugly body. Do you understand? If you don't think looks matter you are high. It is what opens the door the fastest to most women. After that point, yes game matters. Up until that point some women won't give you the time of day. Hot guys need to put in much less effort than ugly ones.
12-11-2018 09:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 3 users Like spydersuit's post:
Built to Fade, zatara, The_e_man
AneroidOcean Offline
International Playboy
******
Gold Member

Posts: 3,282
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 79
Post: #257
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
(12-11-2018 09:39 AM)spydersuit Wrote:  
(12-11-2018 04:18 AM)StrikeBack Wrote:  I said regular, as in terms of looks. I have never said that I'm a "regular" guy in a complete sense. I am anything but average when it comes to other qualities. Women I've dated all think I'm handsome, but I'm also only 5'7" (5'6" after squatting at the gym!), hairy, built like a small bulldog, no six packs and Asian. Pretty sure I tried hotornot once when I was younger and got rated a 3. You tell me what women would rate me at, looks-wise. Yet I've dated plenty of European girls who look way out of my league and are almost always taller than me, including my wife. One key thing every one of them has told me is that I am the most interesting man they have ever talked to, that's always been my hook.

I'm not a casual sex guy, I nearly always get into relationships. But that's also because I'm normal man, when I get a pretty girl, I want to at least bang her regularly for a while, and I'm not out there trying to rack up big numbers to impress Internet people.

I only brought this up because you lot keep yapping on and on about looks being everything, when my experience shows that it's clearly not. If looks mattered that much, I'd probably be one of those incel MGTOWs whining on the Internet after trying looksmaxing for a month. As men, we have so many other venues to improve our attractiveness, and this should give all of us hope. Stop this obsession with looks.

You are missing the point of what a few of us had said brosef. The point is, if you took the same "inner you" and placed it 2 different bodies; 1 hot body, and 1 ugly body. The hot body would outperform the ugly body. Do you understand? If you don't think looks matter you are high. It is what opens the door the fastest to most women. After that point, yes game matters. Up until that point some women won't give you the time of day. Hot guys need to put in much less effort than ugly ones.

Jesus guys. He's saying this emphasis on looks matter above all else is silly. Looks are always a factor, but he's saying they are not the end all and be all for men, far from it. It's a WAY less important factor vs what it is for women. Seriously.

He's not saying looks don't matter at all. You guys are making a strawman argument.

Read My Old Blog - Subscribe To My Old Blog
Top Posts - Fake Rape? - Sex With A Tranny? - Rich MILF - What is a 9?

"Failure is just practice for success"
12-11-2018 04:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 4 users Like AneroidOcean's post:
corsega, jselysianeagle, Built to Fade, Cyr
corsega Offline
Alpha Male
****

Posts: 1,044
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 31
Post: #258
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
(12-11-2018 05:24 AM)BadBoyGamer Wrote:  
corsega Wrote:In the 20-24 age range, over 60 percent of women (e.g. most women) have had between 1 and 4 partners: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5795598/

There is no way of knowing how many sexual partners people have had. People are known to lie about these things. The idea that most woman only have had between 1-4 sexual partners is ridiculous. Unless you count old people.

So we should just discard all this data entirely and believe... what, exactly?

All women are sluts, despite zero evidence for that side of things and a lot of evidence for what I posted?

I highly doubt many women are going to lie about their n-count on a private survey.

(12-11-2018 04:18 AM)StrikeBack Wrote:  I said regular, as in terms of looks. I have never said that I'm a "regular" guy in a complete sense. I am anything but average when it comes to other qualities. Women I've dated all think I'm handsome, but I'm also only 5'7" (5'6" after squatting at the gym!), hairy, built like a small bulldog, no six packs and Asian. Pretty sure I tried hotornot once when I was younger and got rated a 3. You tell me what women would rate me at, looks-wise. Yet I've dated plenty of European girls who look way out of my league and are almost always taller than me, including my wife. One key thing every one of them has told me is that I am the most interesting man they have ever talked to, that's always been my hook.

Sounds like you are far above average. So, unfortunately, not really a good example for the original claim of "regular" guys getting with "beautiful" girls.

My blog - skeptical, data-driven takes on daygame, online game, and more
(This post was last modified: 12-11-2018 04:45 PM by corsega.)
12-11-2018 04:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes corsega's post:
Built to Fade
BadBoyGamer Offline
Chubby Chaser
**

Posts: 281
Joined: Sep 2018
Reputation: 8
Post: #259
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
Yes, they are going to lie just like the males. No matter how you ask the questions. And I am not saying "all woman are sluts". Simply that I think the number might be a little bit higher. Or the number of woman a little bit lower. Or more likely a combination of the two.

Only three ways to do something: "The right way. The wrong way. Or my way. Obviously my way is best."
12-11-2018 05:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes BadBoyGamer's post:
Built to Fade
Jetset Online
True Player
*****

Posts: 2,323
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 41
Post: #260
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
(12-11-2018 04:41 PM)corsega Wrote:  So we should just discard all this data entirely and believe... what, exactly?

All women are sluts, despite zero evidence for that side of things and a lot of evidence for what I posted?

I highly doubt many women are going to lie about their n-count on a private survey.

It took me a long time to realize that women lie very differently than men do.

A man will usually lie strategically, making a calculated choice to deviate from his own memories in order to achieve a goal.

When a woman lies, she has altered her own personal space-time continuum. In much the same way that consensual sex can be revised into rape, if she doesn't want to have fucked him, SHE DID NOT FUCK HIM. NOTHING HAPPENED.

This will not even be experienced as "lying", because it's just a natural part of promoting the version of themselves that they wish were true, that must be true, and is part of the reason they choke up like Windows Vista when they are confronted with the hard evidence. They are not fully prepared, psychologically, for the possibility that their own lie is not true, where a man would typically be planning for that because he knows reality still exists.

I guarantee, no woman tells the truth about vacation dick or that fat guy she blew for weed and concert tickets on an anonymous internet survey, because that shit DID NOT HAPPEN. Clicking it would be to acknowledge it.

Hidey-ho, RVFerinos!
(This post was last modified: 12-11-2018 05:38 PM by Jetset.)
12-11-2018 05:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 5 users Like Jetset's post:
Built to Fade, Saweeep, Donfitz007, Oak, The_e_man
Ouroboros Offline
Chubby Chaser
**

Posts: 266
Joined: Mar 2016
Reputation: 6
Post: #261
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
(12-11-2018 04:18 AM)StrikeBack Wrote:  I'm not a casual sex guy, I nearly always get into relationships. But that's also because I'm normal man, when I get a pretty girl, I want to at least bang her regularly for a while, and I'm not out there trying to rack up big numbers to impress Internet people.

I only brought this up because you lot keep yapping on and on about looks being everything, when my experience shows that it's clearly not. If looks mattered that much, I'd probably be one of those incel MGTOWs whining on the Internet after trying looksmaxing for a month. As men, we have so many other venues to improve our attractiveness, and this should give all of us hope. Stop this obsession with looks.

This may be where some of the disagreement is coming from. You're arguing (I suspect) with people who are mainly aiming for casual sex/notches through online game and cold approach. Women obviously date up much more (in terms of looks) for such encounters than they do for social circle-derived LTRs.
12-11-2018 05:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 3 users Like Ouroboros's post:
Built to Fade, corsega, Aszhaeleos
corsega Offline
Alpha Male
****

Posts: 1,044
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 31
Post: #262
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
(12-11-2018 05:22 PM)BadBoyGamer Wrote:  Yes, they are going to lie just like the males. No matter how you ask the questions. And I am not saying "all woman are sluts". Simply that I think the number might be a little bit higher. Or the number of woman a little bit lower. Or more likely a combination of the two.

Cool. Let's say it's 33% higher to deal with lying and bad data. So we have 60% of women having <6 partners by age 24.

Not exactly ALL WIMMINZ DO STUFF U WONT BELIEVE BRAH like our dude was mentioning earlier.

My blog - skeptical, data-driven takes on daygame, online game, and more
(This post was last modified: 12-11-2018 06:12 PM by corsega.)
12-11-2018 06:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes corsega's post:
Built to Fade
spydersuit Offline
Banned

Posts: 399
Joined: Oct 2016
Post: #263
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
(12-11-2018 05:48 PM)Ouroboros Wrote:  
(12-11-2018 04:18 AM)StrikeBack Wrote:  I'm not a casual sex guy, I nearly always get into relationships. But that's also because I'm normal man, when I get a pretty girl, I want to at least bang her regularly for a while, and I'm not out there trying to rack up big numbers to impress Internet people.

I only brought this up because you lot keep yapping on and on about looks being everything, when my experience shows that it's clearly not. If looks mattered that much, I'd probably be one of those incel MGTOWs whining on the Internet after trying looksmaxing for a month. As men, we have so many other venues to improve our attractiveness, and this should give all of us hope. Stop this obsession with looks.

This may be where some of the disagreement is coming from. You're arguing (I suspect) with people who are mainly aiming for casual sex/notches through online game and cold approach. Women obviously date up much more (in terms of looks) for such encounters than they do for social circle-derived LTRs.

Agree

Bam you nailed it. Their (women's) own perceived value and status is higher so they aim for higher value men. I firmly believe the women that are 7 and below and are window shopping participate in online dating sites to elevate their self esteem by rejecting guys. In real life, men do not approach these ho bags because they can't hide their guts, huge asses, and double chins in person. This is why you guys should stop using these stupid apps and just go approach. Less deceitful fatties and (we) men call the shots.

Tinder and other dating apps are a feminist's dream.
12-11-2018 10:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 3 users Like spydersuit's post:
Kid Twist, Donfitz007, Built to Fade
BadBoyGamer Offline
Chubby Chaser
**

Posts: 281
Joined: Sep 2018
Reputation: 8
Post: #264
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
A lot of girls be doing stuff most guys cannot belief. A whole lot more girls than most think and a whole lot more nasty than most think. No point in trying to figure out the exact numbers. Also plenty girls who want to do nasty, but do not get the chance for it.

Only three ways to do something: "The right way. The wrong way. Or my way. Obviously my way is best."
12-12-2018 05:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes BadBoyGamer's post:
Built to Fade
Oak Away
Beta Orbiter
*

Posts: 101
Joined: Jun 2018
Reputation: 5
Post: #265
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
(12-11-2018 05:36 PM)Jetset Wrote:  It took me a long time to realize that women lie very differently than men do.

A man will usually lie strategically, making a calculated choice to deviate from his own memories in order to achieve a goal.

When a woman lies, she has altered her own personal space-time continuum. In much the same way that consensual sex can be revised into rape, if she doesn't want to have fucked him, SHE DID NOT FUCK HIM. NOTHING HAPPENED.

This will not even be experienced as "lying", because it's just a natural part of promoting the version of themselves that they wish were true, that must be true, and is part of the reason they choke up like Windows Vista when they are confronted with the hard evidence. They are not fully prepared, psychologically, for the possibility that their own lie is not true, where a man would typically be planning for that because he knows reality still exists.

I guarantee, no woman tells the truth about vacation dick or that fat guy she blew for weed and concert tickets on an anonymous internet survey, because that shit DID NOT HAPPEN. Clicking it would be to acknowledge it.

Excellent analysis of the hamster. Women lie to reconcile their self-image with their actions.

e.g 'I'm a good girl' vs. fucking the guy with a face tattoo within 2 hours of meeting

They do this by actually changing their objective reality, e.g. I was raped/it did not happen.

It's often said that women are illogical and irrational and although they are less so than men, if they had no commitment to logic or reason they would not need to literally change objective reality when it contradicts their self-image.

It's more accurate to say that they have no commitment to the truth except when it suits them.

(12-11-2018 06:12 PM)corsega Wrote:  Cool. Let's say it's 33% higher to deal with lying and bad data. So we have 60% of women having <6 partners by age 24.

Not exactly ALL WIMMINZ DO STUFF U WONT BELIEVE BRAH like our dude was mentioning earlier.

I said most to be fair.

And I think the point is that the true statistics are completely unknowable. There's no formula you can apply. Even if you waterboarded a woman it would be difficult to get their true notch count out of them due to the power of the hamster Jetset described.

Most young women have done crazy stuff that would make you look at them very differently. It may only be once or twice in their lifetime, but every girl is capable of it.

Some evidence

https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-51980.html

https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-47762.html

Too much bluepill coping ITT
12-12-2018 08:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 2 users Like Oak's post:
BadBoyGamer, Built to Fade
spydersuit Offline
Banned

Posts: 399
Joined: Oct 2016
Post: #266
RE: Please explain to me where this 80/20, Chad theory comes from
(12-12-2018 08:05 AM)Oak Wrote:  
(12-11-2018 05:36 PM)Jetset Wrote:  It took me a long time to realize that women lie very differently than men do.

A man will usually lie strategically, making a calculated choice to deviate from his own memories in order to achieve a goal.

When a woman lies, she has altered her own personal space-time continuum. In much the same way that consensual sex can be revised into rape, if she doesn't want to have fucked him, SHE DID NOT FUCK HIM. NOTHING HAPPENED.

This will not even be experienced as "lying", because it's just a natural part of promoting the version of themselves that they wish were true, that must be true, and is part of the reason they choke up like Windows Vista when they are confronted with the hard evidence. They are not fully prepared, psychologically, for the possibility that their own lie is not true, where a man would typically be planning for that because he knows reality still exists.

I guarantee, no woman tells the truth about vacation dick or that fat guy she blew for weed and concert tickets on an anonymous internet survey, because that shit DID NOT HAPPEN. Clicking it would be to acknowledge it.

Excellent analysis of the hamster. Women lie to reconcile their self-image with their actions.

e.g 'I'm a good girl' vs. fucking the guy with a face tattoo within 2 hours of meeting

They do this by actually changing their objective reality, e.g. I was raped/it did not happen.

It's often said that women are illogical and irrational and although they are less so than men, if they had no commitment to logic or reason they would not need to literally change objective reality when it contradicts their self-image.

It's more accurate to say that they have no commitment to the truth except when it suits them.

(12-11-2018 06:12 PM)corsega Wrote:  Cool. Let's say it's 33% higher to deal with lying and bad data. So we have 60% of women having <6 partners by age 24.

Not exactly ALL WIMMINZ DO STUFF U WONT BELIEVE BRAH like our dude was mentioning earlier.

I said most to be fair.

And I think the point is that the true statistics are completely unknowable. There's no formula you can apply. Even if you waterboarded a woman it would be difficult to get their true notch count out of them due to the power of the hamster Jetset described.

Most young women have done crazy stuff that would make you look at them very differently. It may only be once or twice in their lifetime, but every girl is capable of it.

Some evidence

https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-51980.html

https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-47762.html

Too much bluepill coping ITT


Too much bluepill coping ITT

Laugh7
12-12-2018 04:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes spydersuit's post:
Built to Fade
Post Reply 


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Advanced Peacocking Theory Heuristics 20 1,836 04-13-2019 02:21 AM
Last Post: Heuristics
  Maybe someone can explain this sluts behavior. Met her in a bar. Rusplaya 54 18,110 04-12-2019 12:05 PM
Last Post: Darth
  Endgame- the PUA Theory I_luh_durian 4 1,274 01-23-2019 01:56 PM
Last Post: subterfuge

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | RooshV.com | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication