>sister asks me why I have no gf
>tell her I have no sexual market value
>she asks me what that is
>explain it to her
>she says SMV is unfair to women and very patriarchal
>mfw
unfair to them in what way? women have smv just by existing.
![latest[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/mNgs8GN.jpg "latest[1].jpg")
>they stop asking
>>29871514
makes them seem mean :(
>>29871495
Disgusting roastie. She will be smitten by KEK when the beta uprising happens. Ri
This is now woman hate bread
>>29872473
tinder's userbase number is pretty static. it's not advertised as such but it only works for a certain strata of people - which is why they're having trouble growing. of course they haven't revealed their data but it is a known fact they can't attract more than maybe 500,000 active users. tinder really has nothing to keep you coming back unless it is working and as OP has stated smv dictates that the app would only work for a small group of people. they've started branching out into tinder group dates, which is in beta atm, to hopefully get more users. i'm not sure if it will work. it all really depends if chads start bringing robots on these friend dates but i'm not sure if it will be big enough incentive to attract a larger base. if tinder wishes to be the premier market though, they will have to find a way to deflate those with higher smv and inflate those with lower smv. a market system being choked by the demands of an even bigger market system. tinder will want to grow like all corporations, unfortunately for them they will have to figure out a way to game the sexual market for everyone if they wish to accomplish. will be interesting what they come up with
>>29872651
Whoa.. that's weird to think about.
Tinder might end up helping us after having nearly crushed us?
>tfw human sexuality is being regulated by computers
I don't like that desu... :/
>>29871495
The number of people who understand these types of concepts, which are both complex and disconcerting, are very low. Half of the people who do not understand are just low IQ. The other half simply don't want to understand. Obviously it is not half and half but those are the two categories I would place them in.
>>29871533
>they never asked
>>29871514
For instance, a woman won't date a man who doesn't have a driver's license but if a woman doesn't have a driver's license, the man couldn't give a flying fuck.
The system doesn't acknowledge the woman's achievement but it will do so for the man.
>>29873635
>The system doesn't acknowledge the woman's achievement
What?
The system does not REQUIRE the woman's achievement.
Their value is already so high, it can't be significantly raised anymore...
They are pretty much always wanted. Chads will fuck their brains out. Betas will shower them with attention, and women can settle down with them whenever they choose.
But men need all sorts of achievements on top of everything else.
You gotta take into consideration the actual consequences of the system too... We're the ones getting left out in the dirt.
You're right that a woman's achievement should matter more, but right now it's not possible because their overall value is already nearly maxed out.
I'll be honest, I could barely bring myself to even care about this. I guess they would tend to have better personalities and character. This I would really care about though. But social status stuff and money, nope.
>>29873635
my boyfriend doesn't have a drivers license and I drive him around
>>29874544
Yeah, but you're cool... that's why.
>>29874544
You must be really unattractive or he must be rich.
>>29873635
How do American men without licensees in suburban areas work? I can't ride a bike.
