Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on December 14, 2022, 4:24 pm

Quote from Grigorio on December 14, 2022, 10:15 am

And to spare men's feelings about height and penile size, thankfully, never seemed like the spirit of the forum. I remember that height has been mentioned but no genitalia. Is it due to crudeness of subject matter? And very importantly, there preference distribution isn't showcased to help assert one's SMV

The closest thing to it is Exceptional Dating, but that's (framed as) for overcoming one's shortcomings, while what I am trying to mention is the misalignment between the median expectation and what nature has to offer, as well as most facial preferences holding the actual variety of preferences rather than the bodies. It doesn't necessarily strike me as fundamental for Seduction University, but learning the real frame of reference seems everyone's monkey brains are working with seems priceless to me, a lot more for women than for men but still

Tl;Dr having an article filled with diagrams showing "the natural distribution of phenotypes VS the distribution of preferences" for any given attraction trait below the neck (as they seem most stable) seems like a unique and high value article to be included

Thank you for your time

It's a great article.

And I still haven't read it fully.

But hopefully enough to make some notes:

"How things truly are": it's (just) the starting point for TPM

Yes, I agree, starting with a great and realistic analysis of what everyone wants and likes is the way to start.

One important approach for TPM is indeed starting from the truth and the general trends.

We have a few of those that still the go-to ones and some of the top results on SERP:

• Sexual market value
• Sexual market place
• The social exchange theory
• ...

All of PU and SU are also grounded on this "how things are".

But that's only the starting point.

As a matter of fact, we highly caution -and criticize- any approach that stops at "how things are" -especially when looking at the general trend without the exceptions-.

After starting from how things are, TPM's main approach and philosophy are:

1. What it means to you (and turn that "reality" of general trends to you as an individual)
2. You can be the exception (self-empowerment)
3. How you can practically use this information (to get what you want, the goal-driven approach)

So starting from "what things are" is only "step 0" for TPM.

(and just to be clear: still a crucially important point, and also interesting to know and read: I definitely want to have more similar articles to the one you linked)

Some information is less relevant for goal achievement (& maybe skipped for maximum ROI on goal-achievement)

With that philosophy, some "truths" fall by the wayside.

Take penis size, for example.
It isn't a major focus for TPM because:

1. You can't easily change it (as someone said: if you don't have a solution, you don't have a problem, but a feature)
2. If you fall within the size ranges where 90% of men fall, you can do great
3. Even if it's an issue with some women, you only need to meet more women until it's either a non-issue, or a plus

Also, personal experience -something that should always go alongside the "data"- supports the "optimum balance" concept and I'm going to skip for privacy and brevity.

Information VS information useful for goal-achievement: what is a woman going to do with dolls' usage stats?

I love learning new things.

But I'm also wary of maximizing returns and keeping TPM focused on practical applications.

And some information also is simply less relevant to goal-achievement.

Sure, you can always find some relevance.
But if it's buried so deep down in terms of priority that by the time you get there you're already flying, then... It's probably time to enjoy your awesome life or move on to something else, rather than wasting hours and hours to get a 0.000001% uplift.

Take men using or not using dolls for example.

How's that information so relevant to a woman seeking to meet a great man?

Not nearly as much as information on "how to be feminine", "how to spot red signs", "how to recognize players", "how to behave well on a date", "if and how to delay sex", etc. etc.

Biases: great article, with a couple of small caveats

Let me say once again it's a top-notch article.

I want more of that here.

Still, in the spirit of total reviewing honest, when I talked about "biases" in the article, I was referring in part to the author's biases, and in part to the biases in the samples he couldn't see.

For example, he says for penises and breasts:

This means that “bigger is better” 

I don't even get why he says that.

Or, at least, why he doesn't add a caveat to it.

His own data shows that, above a certain threshold, it's not true anymore.

Instead, what his own articles shows, is a perfect "law of optimum balance curve", and that for all those features there's an optimal balance and that extremes aren't attractive (or effective: even if 20kg of boobs were attractive: try living with that).

That optimal balance may be skewed in the upper end of the curve and be above the average, that's true. But there's still an optimal balance.

When it comes to biases in his own data, he fails to realize the issues with his sources.
For example, from what I've seen, he treats total dildo sales as total dildo usage by women -not true-, and as if the sub-group of female dildo buyers was representative of total women -obviously, it's not-.

Instead:

• Not all dildos are bought by women: gay men, bi... Hello? I personally wouldn't be surprised if more gay men bought sex toys than women do.
• Not all (bigger size) dildos are bought for use: I used to go to weddings helping my dad. Guess what was one the most popular "joke-gifts"? Huge-sized dildos, vibrators, and various sex toys.
  Besides "practical jokes" we have decoration purposes, photoshoots, advertisements, etc. (I'm sure most of which prefer the bigger sizes)
• Buyers are a self-selected sample who, we may temptatively guess, are more likely to be high-sex drives, experimenters, inhibited, and probably higher partner count

Great article, thank you for sharing Grigorio and thank you for the opportunity of talking about it.

Quote from Grigorio on December 17, 2022, 9:40 am

Okay, so, first of all, on the importance of how things are, check this image

https://putanumonit.files.wordpress.com/2022/12/image-2.png

(Apologies for the link but it’s really tough to include images directly in this UI)

This photo “maximizes engagement”, which is another way of saying that it makes a lot of people irrationally mad

Why? One huge thing that isn’t talked about enough is something called SMV compliance enforcement

Men don't call women ugly or hot because they believe it, they do it as a corrective measure. Men viciously attack a 5 acting like a 9, but they'll relentlessly chase a 5 acting like a 3. They won't rest until she thinks she's exactly as hot as they do

By the same token, women will talk about how attractive they find a shy nerd with a dad bod, but call him an entitled creep if he dares to flirt “out of his league”

People are attuned to others “rising above their station”, to monitor and slap them down. If people assign someone a particular level of status, they will react with immediate violence to that person acting as if they are of a higher level, or even merely wanting or planning to ascend in status. People demand a “status license” of anyone acting important or authoritative, of anyone expressing certainty on any topic, and of anyone admitting to any strong desire

This status compliance enforcement happens in all domains, but doubly so in dating — perhaps fueled by the fact that most other “judgments” of other people’s sexual and romantic pursuits are now taboo to express. Everyone is all “don’t kink shame” and “the heart wants what it wants” and “love is love” until they see a 6 date an 8. The other condemnation that is socially acceptable to express in the romantic realm is of men flirting with younger women (GROOMER!), which is really just the same SMV compliance enforcement.

It’s also a (not the, but in the top 10) big reason why so many previously-happy marriages quickly dissolve when the husband loses his job or the wife gains some weight. The judgment of SMV noncompliance shows in every glance from a stranger, every remark from your aunt and every comment on the couple’s photo on social media. This becomes unbearable for all but the most blissfully ignorant autists.

So given all this, assume we asked a woman "Why do you care to be hot? Why are you putting all this time, effort, and money into following fashion trends, applying make up, stumbling in stilettos, plastic surgery, dieting, skincare made from the mucous slime of snails?"

And lo, the woman repliedeth: we are dressing up for ourselves, not for men.

Obviously this isn't true

But here is the morsel of truth I see in it:

Women are hot to see themselves, through the internalized standards of society’s judgment, as worthy of their relationships and their happiness.

Women are more socially attuned than men, and are aware of both men’s judgment of the man they’re with and of women’s judgment of themselves, both based first and usually foremost on their looks. A woman who doesn’t feel beautiful experiences a world where women may steal her man, and men diminish him. A beautiful woman feels secure and worthy through the status she confers on her mate, enough so that no female dating advice expects her to exert much additional effort.

I think that these judgments and perceptions are so ancient and universal that they are deeply internalized; a woman’s drive to see herself as beautiful doesn’t depend on whether her society or her man expresses them openly. Everyone pays fine attention to what others find beautiful or high status, no one pays much attention to what others claim about the importance of status and beauty.

Of course no simple answer can be the entire answer to a question such as this, and it surely rings true for some women and misses the point entirely for others. I am but a man, neither handsome nor hideous, mostly just curious

(It is at this point where I am wishing there was a formatting tutorial for this UI to create titles and subtitles, as you have correctly pointed out it's more boring and less clear like this)

 

Second of all, Cosmetic Surgery

Liposuction (which, by the way, if you do it when low enough in body fat percentage is permanent as Adipose tissue stops renewing itself in your teens so wherever you remove all the fat, you are never getting fat again), Penis Enlargement, Limb Lengthening (For height), Breast and Buttock Implants and pretty much everything else "immutable" can all be fixed at the price of an expensive car (total, each of them individually is much much less) and 3 months recovery

All this without even mentioning areas of focus for exercise (glutes and thighs for women, everything for men), diet, fashion, cheating clothing (stuffed bras, pants for women or false glutes underwear for men, as well as heeled boots, shoe fillings etc) etc

And all of that without mentioning that so many women see the models and want to take away their precious precious thighs! (Forgive me, but as butt-man myself, when a woman I am with tells me that she wishes to diet to shrink her thighs or butt because she has the misconception it's unattractive I wanna cry) or cut their luscious long hair (Whyyyyyyyyyy?😭😭😭) because society is so incapable of showcasing what's actually attractive

So there's a lot that can be done about it, even if not easily or cheaply or immediately

Knowing what men fantasize about given the sex doll+porn+artistic preferences of the most liberated amongst them will help them calibrate to their mate's reality rather than Social Media's

 

Lastly, biases

"Bigger is better" because just look at this https://www.jsanilac.com/content/images/size/w1000/2022/10/preferencetranslation.png

This is the kind of diagram that I wish I could see shown everywhere. Just look at the percentage of people that fall below. For 95+% of people, bigger is indeed better and that's the scientific cutoff point too and the effect size isn't even small! If the ideal height is 10ft (it isnt, but for the sake of the argument), you can say "Taller is better" and just be right with a tiny asterisk the size of a single pixel

Is it objectively correct? No, I'll take it, obviously a 1 meter long pecker isn't exciting anyone, nor are Z-cups, but if our cutoff point is 5%, he's just right (though I accept the lack of effectiveness in living with cannonballs stuck to your chest or a log reaching down to your knee and giving you an aneurysm to get hard)

Plus https://www.jsanilac.com/content/images/2022/07/poll2.jpg

https://www.jsanilac.com/content/images/2022/07/poll1.jpg

And any other research I have ever seen that ensured anonymity or "implied" to the women that they could tell if they were lying has similar results

I do accept that a higher percentage of gay men buy dildos than women do

But

The percentage of the global population that’s gay men is 3.5% (in 2021 anyway, according to themselves)

Women are roughly 49% of the population

There's some skewing there happening towards gay men, certainly, but it’s an order of magnitude less even if we assume only 2/3 women buy them (which is an ever increasing number as people get ever more sexually liberated)

I similarly agree that pranks and such novelty uses exist but... well, I have no statistics or research or diagrams, merely my intuition saying that that can't be SUCH a huge percentage of sales to even overshadow gay men, let alone take over the entire diagram

No counter argument on the self-selected sample, perfectly agreed... that said, the average man has a higher libido than the average woman (AVERAGE. ALWAYS AVERAGE) so for a long and happy relationship where the libido levels match, one usually does want to skew more towards the higher end of the female population, on average

 

Thank you for your time

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on December 17, 2022, 11:41 am

Hey Grigorio,

I agree with most of what you say.

A bit less on how close to the extreme the "best tradeoff" is.

Quoting from that poll:

If you had a choice for a penis, which would you prefer:

• 32% huge
• 44% large
• 18% average

Looks like a typical "law of balance" curve to me.

Also, what one says or prefers or what's effective is very different.

Huge penises aren't going to fit too well with most vaginas and aren't going to be the most effective for pleasurable sexual intercourse -no matter what those women prefer to "look at"-.
Slightly larger than average is probably the best tradeoff.

My personal experience also corroborates as much.

And form a practical point of view, if most guys cluster around the average, as they do, they don't even have to bother about that if their goal is to date a woman they like -which is what most guys want-.

Anyway, I think our positions are very close.
If you're still not convinced, let's agree to disagree, and let's skip the dick talk (my bad, I should have picked boobs size as an example :) ).

For the picture and I didn't even realize there should have been anything wrong with it -took me two times to see it and read the text-.
And for any guy who "get angry" at that picture, I'd tell them to focus on their lives.

For the rest, we agree with a lot of stuff, and we also agree far more than we disagree.