Gendernomics- Building Value Read online

  The Sexual Stock Market

  The best analogy to the sexual market is a stock market. A company that is publicly traded will have multiple valuations at the same time based on the perception of traders, there are those who think the company is over-valued, those that find it under-valued and those who find it valued correctly. The valuations that these three groups have made, are all based, to some extent on the expectations they have about the future of the company, based on the information they have available to them, their time horizon, and various other factors. The Efficient Market Hypothesis in the hard formulation states that the present share value reflects all information both public and insider, whereas the softer formulation states that it reflects public information.

  This is why information is so powerful in the markets, because if you have better information than anyone else, you can make a more accurate valuation than your competition. The Hot-Crazy scale, the relationship between how attractive a woman must be in order to make up for a certain level of crazy, is a great example of such information, because one's valuation of a woman's SMV will always be influenced by a man's awareness of her level of crazy. The intangible assets referred to in an earlier part, affect the valuation of her tangible assets and vice versa.

  Within every market companies fall into varying categories, "Blue chips" are large companies that often have a long history of stability, operate in sectors that are experiencing little growth, and that are perceived as having less risk than "Growth companies" that often have a shorter history, operates in sectors with high growth and that are perceived as having higher levels of risk. Over time shares of the Blue chip variety will experience less volatility (less fluctuations of share value) than "Growth Companies", however they may experience less peaks in popularity.

  As shown in Dataclysm there is more variety to men's sexual market valuations, as the range of partner preferences among men are more diverse than those of women. Thus, it is natural that valuations made by women of men are less varied, and thus that men should expect less volatility in the market valuations of their SMV. On the same note, as male valuations are more diverse, it means that your average woman will experience higher volatility, but less variability in men's valuations of her.

  If one draws on company valuation, multiple valuations exist at the same time:

  The market value of the company's equity as listed on a stock exchange

  The value of the company's assets less its debt as shown by the company's accounting.

  The market value of the company's assets less its debt as actually achieved as a sale of all its assets as part of an arms length deal

  There are also 2 additional modifiers, there are those that think the results of the valuation methods above are too optimistic and those who regard them as overly pessimistic.

  Which one of these is the correct valuation method to utilize and what modifier is the correct one to apply?

  In the sexual market, every single person is represented by a stock ticker, that has among others the current offer price, current selling price and the last sold price. These are in constant flux, as trades are made, offer values adjusted, and all the other factors constantly play off each other. There are the macro factors such as the distribution of males to females, divorce laws, demographics, social conventions and rules. There are also micro factors such as an individual's sexual market value, and general level of performance, in addition to whether the value is declining or increasing.

  These are constantly playing off each other to ensure that sexual market value is never a static rate, but an amalgamate of the different values that were outlined earlier in this essay:

  The sexual market value of the person both for a short term hookup.

  The sexual market value of the person based as calculated by their ex.

  The sexual market value of the person based on a valuation by someone evaluating them for a long-term relationship.

  After all, one must keep in mind that a person will at the same time be evaluated in terms of sexual market value by different people and with different ends in mind. The short-term value is largely based on tangible assets, the long-term value as calculated by a potential suitor in an arms-length transaction is based on a mixture of tangible and intangible assets based on public information. The long-term value as calculated by one or more ex-partners will be based on tangible and intangible assets but include both public and private information.

  The first value would be what decides the results a person gains on Tinder or a similarly superficial medium where the primary factors are reduced down to the base necessities to make a decision with few if any long-term consequences. If one applies the law of large numbers one would expect such valuations in aggregate to land at a mean which would be a fairly accurate reflection of a persons worth within that context. As with all valuations there will be some debate regarding the accuracy of such a valuation, and whether it's an accurate reflection of underlying drivers of value, or whether it is a reflection mainly on popularity. As author of the intelligent Investor Benjamin Graham puts it:

  “In the short run, the market is a voting machine but in the long run, it is a weighing machine.”

  This brings us to the last two types of valuation and those that would more accurately reflect those of a more fundamental bent.The reason for the two types of fundamental analysis, is to reflect one where the person conducting the valuation has insider knowledge and one where they have only publicly available information. A person's ex has more information about them, but will have a more negative or positive slant depending on how the relationship ended, in a sense they have more information than they need to make this valuation, where the person conducting the second valuation have less than they need. While a person externally, can observe most of the tangible assets in their current state with quite a high degree of accuracy, the intangible assets are more up for debate, only a person with insider knowledge can accurately value them.

  The distinction between tangible and intangible assets is a sensible one when utilized in sexual market valuations, where tangible factors would be those of a physical nature and intangible those of a psychological nature. The depreciation of tangible assets can with some degree of accuracy be established, using the sexual market graph among other things. However, those of an intangible nature are more challenging to approach. A person's mind rarely appreciates or depreciates with the same predictability as does their physical shell, thus, while one can form a judgment about the present state, the nature of change is more difficult to accurately value. A solution to this conundrum that has been utilized by value investors is to view the intangible assets combined with their contribution to creating barriers to entry.

  A barrier to entry is a value that a company has that acts as a barrier between the company and outside forces. For instance, the brand recognition of Coca Cola is an intangible asset that differentiates their product from that of their competition, and if the market for soft drinks should shrink it will help maintain the market share held by Coca Cola. A second dimension often utilized by value investors is to view the history of the company, for instance if a company has a 50 year history of always paying a dividend the probability that they will stop doing so is lower than a company with no such history beginning to pay a dividend. Past or present behavior is by no means a guarantee but in humans habit and "how it has always been" is a strong anchor. This does in no way guarantee that your sweet, virginal church-girl won't run around cheating on you, or just because she doesn't drink now that you won't find her hiding with wine in the laundry room in a couple of years, but her habits serve as barriers towards poor behaviors.

  This is in a sense how the social, cultural, religious and familial norms worked to secure stability prior to the sexual revolution. They were very strong barriers to behaviors that have negative effects. The consequences of such behaviors socially, religiously and within the family would act as a discouragement from acting out. As these norms have been
largely eroded, the only guidance available would be a woman's history.

  My reason behind writing this essay was to demonstrate the many factors that goes into determining a person's sexual market value, and why one will never be able to create an iron-clad framework to ensure 100% success rate. While some argue that economics is perhaps not the ideal system to apply to the mating market, due to the irrational nature of human mating decisions, I do not consider human mating decisions to be irrational. In my view, humans act in the mating market as rational actors, meaning that they are goal oriented, reflective and consistent as opposed to being irrational, namely random, impulsive, conditioned or imitative. For example, most people tend to have a "type" of partner that they display a preference for, which demonstrates consistency. There is a tendency for people to act in a goal oriented manner seeking out partners based on a range of characteristics such as relationship type, partner type or various others. People tend to reflect as they gain experience on which characteristics they do not want in a partner as well as which characteristics they want, which demonstrates reflective evaluation.

  If partner choice was truly a case of being random, impulsive, conditioned and based on imitation, one would not expect to see many if any patterns, yet every piece of advice written on how to improve ones romantic life is based on the observation of patterns. However, one must keep in mind that rational behavior as per rational choice theory, is not the same as conscious and deliberate behavior. When an economist uses the term "The rational actor" he is not stating that people consciously sit down and compare the specifications of every single vacuum cleaner that is available to them, list out their choice criteria in a bullet point list, weigh them out, evaluate each product against the choice criteria and his budget for a new vacuum cleaner. He is stating that people evaluate their options and elect the one that is utility maximizing often subconsciously, and demonstrate a preference over time.

  My goal was to elaborate on some of the underlying factors that affect such largely sub-conscious evaluations that we conduct every single day and that affect our mating behaviors. As I was writing this essay, it started to become clear that creating an iron-clad, objective system for valuation within the sexual market place is somewhat of an impossibility. While it is entirely possible to outline the major variables that will be involved on both sides in such an equation, and while it is also possible to understand the aggregate level strategies of both men and women, the interaction between variables is infinitely complex. Furthermore, the inherent limitations of rational choice theory, have been covered by authors such as Daniel Kahneman and other researchers into decision theory, and to put this in the terms Kahneman utilizes in his book "Thinking fast and Thinking slow", a majority of mating decisions are most likely made using system 1.

  Predictable vs. Probabilistic

  Some of the factors that play into a female valuation of a man as a prospective sexual partner include ovulatory shifts, her age, her social status, her life-stage and various others. While educated guesses can often be very accurate, the fact of the matter is that the only way to determine if a woman is receptive is to approach and screen her. One cannot determine whether a prospective buyer is interested in the product until contact is made on some level with the buyer, even if that buyer fits the target demographic and consumer group one has defined. One can identify market groups that tend to display interest and thus target them for more aggressive sales and marketing, and probabilistically speaking one will have a higher degree of success with targeted as opposed to randomly marketing a product to the population. This is probabilistic rather than deterministic, and "Not all X are like that, but all X have a higher probability of being like that".

  To structure a process that to some extent will lead to predictable outcomes, it is necessary to begin in the aggregate, it is very difficult, if not impossible to predict the action of a single human, but with large enough sample sizes, it is possible to predict the actions of groups. Thus, if one can identify the choice criteria utilized in a purchasing process, then one can engage in deliberate action to satisfy a majority of those choice criteria to a larger degree than the competition. This is in many ways how companies go about designing a product for a new market, identify a need, identify the salient criteria of a product that would be desired by that market, prototype/test market, and then analyze the results.

  Marketers and product designers are well aware of the fact that a product will not be valued equally across every demographic and consumer group, the goal is to either target a narrow group, or to target the mass market. In niche product design, one seeks to learn as much as possible about one consumer group and then to create a product that would be tailored very specifically to appeal to that group, meaning that it would represent very high value to that group. Alternatively, if one seeks mass market appeal one would seek to create a product that appeals to the most general and shared characteristics of a group and avoids those characteristics that are controversial. Restaurants represent a very good example of both approaches where there are mass market products such as major fast food chains, which few people would hold up as their favorite, but which a diverse group can agree to utilize because the offers have no characteristics that any group find excessively disagreeable.

  There are also niche products such as expensive gourmet restaurants that appeal to a very narrow market, but seek to create massive value for their targeted group. A Michelin restaurant is expensive, often avant garde, often has low-volume for money, and requires an advanced palate in order to see the value being offered. This means that many will eliminate it as an option based on price, some for the upper-class atmosphere, some on a value perspective and some due to the food being "advanced" or "over-engineered. This is the intent of the business.

  A Deterministic Solution to a Probabilistic Problem

  Many men find the manosphere after searching for solutions to a specific problem, in many cases how to make themselves an offer their one-itis cannot refuse. This is the equivalent of asking someone "How do I design a product that represents an offer of value that my one targeted customer cannot refuse". While it is possible to do so in very generic terms, for instance everyone would accept an offer of value in exchange for nothing, this does not represent a realistic offer, there is simply no such thing as a free lunch. Perhaps the best example is that companies such as Facebook and Google that offer "free" infrastructure monetize the data they gather from their "users". If a company offers something for free, then you are the product.

  This is in many ways what men offer women when they agree to a "lets just be friends" proposition from the woman. The woman is stating "I'm not going to offer a return, but you are free to invest in me". The man front-loads investment in the woman, expecting a return that will never come.

  The various characteristics that I covered in this essay, from the various applicable definitions of value, that we often use interchangeable in daily dialogue. For instance, if one were to say that a woman is a 10, does one mean "She is in the top 10% of women worldwide based on the following criteria" which would be an objective valuation, or is one saying "She is in the top 10% of women worldwide for me, based on my subjective choice criteria", which is a subjective valuation.

  The major problem faced by the engineer minded man is that he is seeking an objective solution to a subjective problem. In order to reduce the probability of rejection to zero, every woman would have to have identical choice criteria, weighted in the exact same manner, be in the same context, think in the exact same manner, be at the same stage of her ovulatory cycle, have the same tangible and intangible asset preferences and so on. This is obviously an impossibility. While science has been able to identify some preferences that women have for qualities in men, these differ based factors among others intent (Short term vs long-term mating). Thus, a man who is a perfect fit when the woman is in the follicular phase may not be in the lutheal phase.

  The eternal downside of positivist research, on
e can arrive conclusively at an answer, but that answer is merely a fact based on a large sample size. From this answer one can derive a probability, but depending on the probability itself it may not guarantee an outcome. One can state that "90% of women want a man with a sense of humor", but this is no guarantee that the specific oneitis of a man wants a man with a sense of humor. General advice can be offered, be in shape, in control of your emotions and your psychology, climb a dominance hierarchy, and many others, but this merely increases the probability that someone in your intended market will find your offer enticing, not that everyone in your target market will, or that they'll accept the offer.

  This search for an objective solution to a subjective problem is in essence the attempt to eliminate probability of failure, and thus risk. One could theorize that this is perhaps due to catastrophizing the consequences of rejection, as Mystery once put it, hitting on a wrong woman in a stone age tribe could get you kicked out of the tribe or killed. Alternatively, it could be due to viewing the world on a binary scale, where there is no step between novice and master.

  Male Value

  The concept of male value is a function of the dual female sexual strategy of seeking out optimal genetics and long-term security. This is colloquially referred to as “AF/BB” or “Alpha Fucks/Beta Bucks”, but perhaps my favorite is “Alpha Seed/Beta Need” as the latter reference is very direct and object oriented. A woman mates with an Alpha because of superior genetics, and a Beta because of superior provisioning ability.

  Ideally, a woman would want the same man to embody both, the best example would be a King or tribal chieftain who is both the highest ranked man in terms of his genetic advantages, but who also was the man best positioned within his tribe to ensure her long-term security. This is the female unicorn, an Alpha male, with just enough beta traits to make him manageable.