all 185 comments

[–]Cypher211 121 points122 points  (65 children)

/u/illimitableman had a really great quote from one of his submissions which I think can be perfectly applied in this context:

Be powerful if you want to be loved, or you will never be loved. You will be held in contempt for being weak.

Men generally don't have a lot of safety nets. Society won't give you the same sympathy as a man that it would if you were a woman going through hard times.

[–]Endorsed ContributorRS73 72 points73 points  (42 children)

Just look at the homeless population. Something like 75% of them are male.

[–]Cypher211 66 points67 points  (40 children)

Yep, and don't men dominate the suicide statistics as well?

[–]Endorsed ContributorRS73 66 points67 points  (17 children)

Sure do. I think about that kind of thing when everything from the local supermarket to the football players on tv are covered with gigantic pink ribbons for breast cancer.

[–]exoduslife 25 points26 points  (14 children)

Now that you mention breast cancer, I have rarely seen a female making solid attempts to bring to the forefront the plight of men and testicular cancer.

[–]PedroIsWatching 18 points19 points  (0 children)

A good friend of mine that has a bit of a following online (he's a funny online writer) once made a post criticizing how much effort and money is spent on breast cancer, while there is nary a peep about the other more deadly forms of cancer. His nonsmoking mother had died of lung cancer the year before, which is what prompted the post. Lung cancer has 3x the annual deaths compared to breast cancer.

Some jackoff commented on the post with a long winded spiel about how the unnecessary attention to breast cancer was in fact warranted, and condescendingly implored him to go start a lung cancer month if he cared so much.

My friend replied, "you just proved my point. Next month is lung cancer awareness month, it's been around for 15 years and absolutely no one knows it exists."

[–]Nebulose11 16 points17 points  (12 children)

FYI: September is Prostate Cancer Awareness month. But you wont hear about that in the media.

It's all about pinktober.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Prostate_Health_Month

[–]alpha_n3rd 1 point2 points  (11 children)

I thought it was Movember? http://us.movember.com/

[–]Nebulose11 0 points1 point  (10 children)

Cant tell if that is satire or for fucking seriousness!

[–]450k_crackparty 13 points14 points  (6 children)

Movember is actually pretty big where I live.

[–]aitchfourex 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I know where you're talking aboot

[–]waylandertheslayer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It was very big last year in my school (UK), several teachers grew mustaches. Probably bigger than Breast Cancer even, in terms of awareness, but they raised much less money.

[–]Uzinero 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's been pretty big for the past couple of years in the UK.

[–]loddfavne 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here in Norway many people participate in Movember. Including me.

[–]hippydippybs 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Movember is a very serious attempt at raising awareness for male-specific cancers without talking about testicles or prostates.

It takes the male virility marker, the beard, and forces you to pay attention to the plight of men suffering from cancer.

The person behind movember was no slouch. I raise a glass to their intellect.

[–]Nebulose11 0 points1 point  (0 children)

After researching it a bit it seems like an interesting strategy.

[–]1whatsazipper 28 points29 points  (1 child)

Yeah, by at least a factor of 4. Society is pretty damn quiet about it too.

[–]RedSpectrum 5 points6 points  (19 children)

Men use more violent means in attempting suicide which leads to an increase of it being successful.

Women attempt suicide more than men, however. If any of you have taken college psychology courses, especially abnormal, this is also taught there.

Edit: Here is a wiki page on the topic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_differences_in_suicide

[–]2 MRedPillWatchTower 41 points42 points  (0 children)

Women attempt suicide cry out for attention more than men, however.

FTFY. I've personally known crazy bitches who "attempted suicide". They've all done it in manners that they knew wouldn't be successful, like pills or cutting. I often feel these women just lack the proper training on how to get the job done right. See how much women need to be led? They can't even off themselves the right way without proper guidance.

[–]1whatsazipper 53 points54 points  (0 children)

That's the common spin but it doesn't check out. Women are making a cry for attention. Men are sending themselves to the grave.

[–]2elysius 15 points16 points  (4 children)

Yeah, I had an ex who tried to commit suicide after we broke up. She started cutting her wrists, gave up because it hurt too much and went to the E.R. That's the kind of bullshit that goes into the "stats" for attempted suicide of women: drama and attention-whoring.

There's a reason men use more violent means than women: they want to fucking end it. So they blow their brains out, take a dive or hang themselves: all methods with little to no opportunity for them to change their minds and change course, all methods with absolutely no romance. They are going to look awful to whoever finds their corpse, and will probably have a funeral with a closed casket. They don't fucking care. They just want to GO. NOW.

These exact same methods are just as easily available to women, but they deliberately ignore them, opting instead for wrist-cutting and taking pills. Why? Because it gives them an opportunity to change their minds, once the catharsis is over. Because it looks romantic. Because these days, they can do it and broadcast it live, gobbling sympathy and desperation, feeling appreciated before someone inevitably calls in help for them and the firefighters break down their door and carry them to salvation. And even if they succeed, they're going to look like the Sleeping Beauty to whoever finds them. In the funeral, everyone is going to be looking at them and wondering why did she had to do it, she was so beautiful... It makes them feel special.

I also had a friend who attempted suicide twice in her teen years. She lived on the 11th floor and constantly talked about how irresistible it felt to just climb on the window and let go, she got depressed frequently and loved to talk about how one of these days she would do just that. Yet both times when she actually did something, she just tried overdosing on some sleeping pills. Meanwhile, Elliot Smith fucking stabbed himself in the heart. She got into the statistics twice, he only got in once. Both are part of the statistics as if what they did was equal. It wasn't. She grew out of whatever trip she was into during her teen years and is a person with a regular attitude now.

So you won't find sympathy for the inflated stats on female suicide from me. I actually studied Psychology for two semesters and I recall reading about how male and female depression are manifested differently, but there is a bias in psychology to only regard as "depression" the symptoms for the classic female depression: a sad mood, lack of energy, interest or pleasure, feeling numb, hopeless, worthless. But depression in men most often manifests in increase in reckless behavior, obsessive or compulsive tendencies, substance abuse and feelings of anger and nihilism. Many, if not most, depressed men are not even aware of their depression, since they don't fit the mold of depression as it's typically understood, and it's very, very common for men to kill themselves "out of the blue", from the perspective of their friends and family. Only in retrospect do their recent behavior seems suspect.

So I'm much, much more inclined to think that we live in a society that normalizes and even glamorizes female suicide attempts, almost as a rite of passage for teenage girls and young women, than to believe that women are twice as depressed as men and just happen to choose less deadly suicide methods for reasons just coincidentally not at all related to their efficacy.

[–]egoisenemy 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Do you remember the sources for these differences between men and women? Based on those symptoms, I think I am depressed

[–]2elysius 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I couldn't find the main paper I remember reading, but this Harvard article has some similar info and I think references the same research.

An analysis of the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study, one of the largest investigations of depression in "real world" settings, found that while men and women shared some symptoms of major depression (such as low mood), the overall pattern of symptoms varied by gender. Women were more likely to gain weight when depressed; men were more likely to lose weight. Women reported symptoms overlapping with anxiety disorders; men reported symptoms more typical of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Women felt less energetic; men became agitated. Men were also more likely than women to develop alcohol or substance abuse in conjunction with major depression.

Other research has found that because of cultural pressure to act "manly," men may feel that it is weak to show despair or self-doubt. As a result, symptoms of depression may masquerade as anger or irritability. Research by the National Institute of Mental Health revealed that many men were not aware that physical problems such as headaches, stomach problems, and chronic pain might be symptoms of depression.

Men also may be reluctant to admit to depression because they are worried about how their boss, co-workers, or neighbors will react. Because of these concerns, when men develop depression they may actually work longer hours or engage in more volunteer activities — all in an effort to avoid confronting or revealing symptoms of depression.

This kind of difference is still very much unknown to the general public. Even the article of the National Institute of Mental Health on male depression doesn't acknowledge this. Even that article I had to find it on cache, because it was not available online anymore. Later check this out to get an idea on just how fucked up the issue is. So get help! Because no one is going to try to help you.

[–]egoisenemy 0 points1 point  (1 child)

No worries, I've been working out more and eating better as part of my personal development. So I have been feeling a bit better but seeing these just made everything click. Definitely not suicidal. Thank you for this.

[–]Dopamine37 82 points83 points  (2 children)

I'm pretty sure the women's suicide attempt are mostly attention seeking while men try to actually get the job done.

[–]asdfghjkltyu 16 points17 points  (1 child)

Its fairly common to hear from women that they have had suicide attempts. I can't accurately put a number on it, but I'd say something like 20% of women will tell you about their attempts at their own life.

Women don't fear being seen as weak, if anything they love to tell their stories.

[–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 24 points25 points  (0 children)

They want to be the victim, they crave attention, they make attempts so they get sympathy not because they'd rather be dead. When a man wants to die enough, he kakes it happen and he doesn't leave an option to be saved. Women almost always have a way of being saved, how can she yet sympathy if she's dead?

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 12 points13 points  (0 children)

    High places, remote hanging, down the road rather than across the street, large caliber firearms, self decapitation, high speeds, but definitely self inflicted gsw is the popular one.

    [–]RPenetrate 11 points12 points  (0 children)

    IIRC the main reasons women are less successful and choose less violent means (among those who actually wanted to commit suicide) were:

    • Vanity - they tend not to choose methods that will disfigure their corpse, especially their face.
    • Consideration - they don't want to leave a big mess that someone will have to clean up.

    [–]DAD_FISTER 4 points5 points  (5 children)

    It's because men know how to get something done.

    [–]MattyAnon 9 points10 points  (4 children)

    Stats bear this out. Most suicide ATTEMPTS are by women (3x more than men) Most ACTUAL suicides are men (4x more than women)

    Actual, per 100k population: 17.6 male, 4.1 female. (ie >4x greater).

    All data from: http://www.suicide.org/suicide-statistics.html

    [–]2Red_August 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    Thanks for digging this up. Just a quick pro-tip however: it would be even more useful, and convenient to us all if you could add which population this number is for. The US? Cambodia? Worldwide? What year was this collected, and perhaps even a flavour of the source or methodology if it's contentious, or what not. Remember that you have a world audience with TRP. Saves us all a trip down the interwebz tubes to work it all out for ourselves. A valid contribution nevertheless.

    [–]MattyAnon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    This information is all in the link for those that are interested.

    [–]bluedrygrass 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    The vast majority of "suicide attempts" from females are just facades like simulating rape etc.

    [–]Dark triad expert: - http://illimitablemen.com/ - [3 Points]IllimitableMan 40 points41 points  (20 children)

    Yes, it's point 7 from the red pill constitution:

    http://illimitablemen.com/understanding-the-red-pill/red-pill-constitution/

    [–]iatepussy 16 points17 points  (1 child)

    thank you for your time /u/IllimitableMan

    you are an immeasurable asset to this community

    [–]tulio2 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    that might have been the best thing i ever read.

    [–]MrEddyKempSir 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I love and hate it at the same time.

    [–]Masonjarteadrinker2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Yup, perfect example is the homeless, ton of men and not not many women, most women get help from somebody.

    [–]abdada 50 points51 points  (45 children)

    The funny thing is, a lot of Hollywood's famed actors use both Bosley and elevator shoes. So it's definitely better to keep these things to yourself because females want good genes, not hard work and parlor tricks. It's also why I tend to avoid women who have to get all glammed up before going out.

    I met a famous singer who everyone (and himself) says is 6'1". He was at a pool party. He was about my height (5'8"). Oops.

    [–]lordofthejelly 50 points51 points  (31 children)

    Also, if a girl finds you attractive, she will often overestimate your height in her own head. I work with a guy who's roughly 5'9" (and jacked), and I overheard HR ladies estimating his height at 6'2". He's an attractive dude, but I'm 6'1" and he's at least 3 inches shorter than me.

    [–]Endorsed ContributorScumbagBillionaire 33 points34 points  (24 children)

    I noticed this in my workplace.

    I have a gay co-worker who constantly mocks and makes fun of our other male co-worker for his height. He's really merciless about it.

    But even though I'm the same height as the other guy, he never mocks me and he talks about me like I'm average height even though I'm 5'7". I'm somewhat jacked and I have a more domineering and stern personality. It's like he tricks himself into thinking I'm taller or something.

    [–]Crashed_a_Previa 15 points16 points  (23 children)

    what's with the pre-occupation for height? As a man of 6'2 I'd like to share that I have never and do not think I am superior to other men for being taller than avg. I admit though that being tall has its perks in crowds/concerts. And I'm sure I've unintentionally intimidated other men for being tall buts its not like its intentional.

    [–]Endorsed ContributorScumbagBillionaire 71 points72 points  (18 children)

    It's not "preoccupation". It's a fact of attraction and perception.

    Women like taller men. Period.

    It has nothing to do with how much or how little I'm preoccupied with my own height because reality doesn't give a fuck about my personal thoughts or opinions. I am not a woman and I do not let my own personal biases completely shape my perception of reality.

    Taller men have an easier time getting jobs, they have an easier time getting promotions, they get more female attention, they make more money, etc. This is because society consciously or subconsciously sees taller men as more deserving of respect.

    I'm not intimidated or fearful of tall men. I may be a bit jealous but I don't fear them. I just understand that they will naturally command more female attraction than me.

    There's nothing wrong with recognizing these facts without obsessing over them. Short men should be able to recognize this and tall men should be able to acknowledge their own natural advantages.

    I see no issues.

    [–]Areimanes 7 points8 points  (1 child)

    Just shy under 6'1'' here. Taller men definitely have it easier. There's no denying it. However, you can't let that be a limiting factor in your beliefs.

    That said, being muscular as a tall guy also gives you a commanding presence that much shorter and much more jacked men can't compete with.

    I know a guy who is 5'7'', jacked and shredded with tree trunk legs, former ranger and oozes confidence. Put him next to another mate of mine who is 6'5'', also muscular (though not shredded) and he pales in comparison.

    Life isn't fair.

    [–]Purecorrupt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Hmm I can think of 2 recent examples myself. I'm somewhere between 5'8" and 5'9". My dad was pretty convinced I was taller, because he respects me. I was like wtf hell no I'm not. And he got closer to me and was like "oh". I had a similar moment with a girl who I don't respect. She's 5'6", but she always equated closer to 5' to me.

    [–]through_a_ways 4 points5 points  (14 children)

    Taller people also have (a very slight) advantage in IQ, assuming everything else ceterus paribus.

    Unfortunately, they also die earlier.

    [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 16 points17 points  (0 children)

    I wonder if the IQ thing is more about opportunities, support, and they way they are treated. I'm short, was very short until 9th grade, and I was treated like an idiot by teachers and everyone else. They were surprised and offended when I showed my intellect, and I was beaten and bullied until I was 16 because of it. At 16 I was strong enough and had considerable experience so I was able to end the abuse. Now people only see a meathead short guy, and they are amazed when I explain complex concepts from myriad disciplines in laymans terms. How can a short guy with no neck know so much and explain it so easily?

    Almost everyone who knows me thinks I'm taller than my 5'8. Most tall guys I have met know fuck all about jack shit, and they really get defensive when I'm not only stronger, but smarter than they are. I'm constantly explaining things to my tall friends. How much is nurture, how much is bias? Newton, Beethoven, Einstein, Tesla, and Da Vinci were not tall men. Oppenheimer was relatively tall ar 6', but many of the great minds were no taller than I am. Could it be wishful thinking, confirmation bias, or simply a myth/urban legend?

    [–]ihaphleas 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    This is true in many species ... within the species, the larger individuals have shorter lives. Perhaps they're more intelligent too ... I can convince myself that a German Shepherd is smarter than a chihuahua.

    [–]through_a_ways 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    Yeah, big dogs like Great Danes and Irish Wolfhounds typically have half the lifespan of normal sized dogs.

    I don't think small dogs are necessarily dumb, I think they're more neotenous. Puppies bark a lot more than adult dogs, which bark more than wolves.

    [–]ihaphleas 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Obviously, I was joking a bit about the intelligence. Yes, you are correct. All domestic animals display some of this ... even humans.

    [–]serb1991 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    But this is only true because many of the men below average height are that way due to malnutrition, not genetics (which hinders brain development)

    [–]An_All-Beef_Engineer -4 points-3 points  (7 children)

    Where did you get that man? That's a really bankhanded compliment/insult depending on your side of the fence.

    [–]through_a_ways 3 points4 points  (6 children)

    It's just facts, no insult or compliment intended

    It's surprising how palpable these things are if you actually pay attention, though. I was at a historic, old, WASPy university (not Harvard or ivies, and I'm referring to status here more than IQ), and I was regularly seeing "old money" type guys who were at least 6'6".

    I've also heard lots of stories about friends' exceptionally tall relatives dying in their 40s and 50s.

    [–]DrXaos 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    I attended an Ivy league undergrad---the white guys, especially East coast money, were very tall.

    [–]An_All-Beef_Engineer 0 points1 point  (4 children)

    Never got a reliable source for that, always anecdotes. Are you sure you and your friends ignore their normal/short relatives who die under 50?

    Perhaps the tall deaths are more noticeable because that's the only remarkable thing about them.

    [–]garlicextract 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    Don't be butthurt. It's a fact across species. More back problems as well.

    However, animal and human data suggest thatlarger body size independently reduces longevity.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1071721/

    Again, stop being butthurt. No tall guy would choose to be short in exchange for 3 years of longer life. And many short people (me included) probably wouldn't mind giving up a few years at the end of life for 6" of height.

    [–]garrettruskamp 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Aren't there diminishing results for tall people over 6'2 or 3? There is a certain height that is too tall because of its abnormality if I'm not mistaken

    [–]RedForMe 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    5'7" or 8" checking in.

    I don't think it's fair to call it a preoccupation, but to the extent it is, it's because if you are below a certain height, your height becomes your defining "first impression" physical characteristic even if it is not necessarily an abnormal height.

    Further, it's really the only male trait that can be easily boiled down to a single, well understood number, which makes it useful as a filter. It's hard to quantify whether a guy is a 6 in looks or an 8 since a lot of taste is involved. A guy who weighs 200 lbs can look like a fatass or look trim and fit. There's no arguing about height, you are what you are.

    I think you hear a lot of complaining about height because it's a truly immutable characteristic. You can lift, you can dress well, you can cut your hair, you can clean up, you can earn more money, but your height is yours forever. For a group like RP that is focused on relentless self-improvement, it's kind of a fly in the ointment that one of the metrics is unchangeable.

    It's definitely not the end of the discussion about physical attraction, and it's 100% true that if you don't disclose your height you will often find that women estimate you to be 2-6 inches taller than you are if you carry yourself in a confident, assertive way that projects success. It's just something that has to be overcome if you aren't blessed by genetics.

    EDIT:

    This is an explanation only. If you use your height as an excuse, I have no sympathy for you.

    [–]asdfghjkltyu 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    You don't notice the advantage because you live it every day. The reactions and the beneficial behaviour of being tall are just what you see as 'normal'.

    [–]pilledwillingly 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    I've found that people look to the tall person if the group for direction, first. You've just gotta put a little more effort to overcome height as an obstacle. If you are a short leader, you've gotta compete with 'He's an angry little man' or 'that dudes got a napoleon complex' whenever you assert yourself.

    You're also a target. People will assert their social position by trying to push yours down, you have to be a lot more careful with escalation, and working out is that much more important, since you don't have height, you can only really work on muscle.

    [–]Endorsed Contributorcocaine_face 15 points16 points  (0 children)

    I once had a girl at work who was 5'10 and attracted to me tell me I was tall.

    I'm 5'8". I looked at her like she was crazy.

    [–]GabeTheImpaler 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    dude this is such a weird phenomenon. I'm 5'9 and women will say 'no you're not, youre at the minimum 5'11', and if I argue with them they will tell me I should be lying about my height, and that I'm wrong/prob around 6'0.

    The female hamster will end the world as we know it. Mark my words.

    [–]abdada -5 points-4 points  (1 child)

    I am 5'8" solid although my doctor measures me at 5'9". I tell people I'm 5'6" because fuckificare.

    I have more than one woman in my life who thinks I am 6'. I don't wear elevators (boots don't count), but I'm lithe and agile bodied and look much taller in photos.

    For years I had my height at 5'5" on my Okcupid account (was a mistake that I never corrected) and I still got opened because I had strong photos and a hilariously short profile. I'd meet randoms who opened me and they'd say "You're not 5'5!"

    [–]RPenetrate 11 points12 points  (0 children)

    Interesting approach. You should also say you're unemployed and have a 3" penis on your profile. The strong commitment to hilarity may improve your chances further

    [–]UnamusedPunk -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    Can confirm. My girlfriend tells me she thinks I'm tall. I'm only 5' 10".

    [–]RPSigmaStigma 18 points19 points  (0 children)

    How you carry yourself has a huge impact in this. I'm 6'3" and pre-RP I didn't really get a lot of attention from women, but I was scrawny and walked around in a slouched and awkward way. And even slouching, I'm probably at least 6'1". Since RP, I've been lifting and I've really filled out (as much as a tall ectomorph can in a few months), worked significantly on my posture and learning to own the space around me, instead of trying to shrink away for fear of being too intimidating. It's orders of magnitude different. Now I have girls literally finding cheap excuses to touch me, or no excuse at all. I walked up to a 5'6" chick at a bar who was probably a solid 7/10 and she instantly gave me the doggy-bowl eyes. I stood as tall as I could and literally leered over her giving her the most obvious bedroom eyes. Within the first few sentences back and forth she announced overtly that she's single and asked about my status (which I deflected with a cocky sneer, obviously). That kind of shit has never happened to me before RP. Height isn't a sure-fire pussy slaying, you have to use it and own it.

    [–]2 MRedPillWatchTower 11 points12 points  (10 children)

    Women fucking suck at estimating height. I am 6'1", objectively, on a doctor's office tape measure. Women often estimate me at 6'3". Remember, the average 5'6" woman is looking up at you, even if you are 5'9" or 5'10". Tell her you are 6', she will not question it.

    [–]RedPillProphet 6 points7 points  (2 children)

    People suck at estimating height. What they notice is overall volume.

    I am 6'0. About 2 years ago I dropped a solid 35lb and went to an anorexic looking low of 152lb. Suddenly many of my close friends, some acquaintances and even a few dates brought up the topic of my height (without me saying anything), asked how tall I am and implied that I am lying about being 6ft tall. I never got that in my life before and it never happened again after I gained back all that mass.

    [–]CornyHoosier 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    Happens all the time to tall people. I've decided that it's because all the shorties tell people inflated numbers and put doubt in people's minds.

    Fact of the matter is that anything over 6'0 doesn't matter as you're taller than most of the human population. I'm 6'4 ... who gives a shit? Why would I lie about that? The difference between 6'4 and 6'0 is peanuts. It does not matter.

    [–]garlicextract 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I've decided that it's because all the shorties tell people inflated numbers and put doubt in people's minds.

    Lol what? First of all that's dumb as hell, because when someone is short it's immediately apparent. We already get enough of the "Napoleon complex" insults, so exaggerating your height is the worst thing you can do.

    It's likely the average height guys doing this. Guys who are 5'10, 5'11" claiming that they are 6' tall.

    I don't go around telling people I'm 5'9" when I'm really 5'7". I tell them I'm 5'7".

    [–]1whatsazipper 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Yeah, people often forget that women are measuring height from their perspective and how they feel in response to the difference, not an objective tape measure.

    In general most people are bad with measurements, and women especially so because they use feelings in constructing their estimates.

    [–]garlicextract 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Remember, the average 5'6" woman is looking up at you, even if you are 5'9" or 5'10".

    The "looking up" part has absolutely nothing to do with it. I'm 5'6" myself and am excellent at estimating heights to within an inch, and quite good at estimating weights as well. I too am "looking up" at most people. Your first statement is true, just not the explanation for it.

    [–]asdfghjkltyu 2 points3 points  (4 children)

    Remember, the average 5'6" woman is looking up at you, even if you are 5'9" or 5'10". Tell her you are 6', she will not question it.

    People tend to be better at accurately guessing heights only if its similar to them. Just as a guy wouldn't really notice if a woman is 5'6 or 5'3 as they're just 'short' you would see the same thing between guys at 6'1 and 6'4', they're just 'tall'.

    Women tend to see men in four categories, short (~5'5), average (5'5-5'11), tall (5'11-6'4), freakishly tall (6'4+).

    [–]Panda_Poof 2 points3 points  (3 children)

    I think your categories are flawed. I'm 5'5", definetly short, but I think that anywhere equal or below to a girl in heels (about 2in?) is "short". For a 5'7" girl, 5'9" is "short". For a 5'3" girl, 5'5" is short. In the United States, the average girl is 5'5".

    Givent this information, I suggest the four categories be modified to:

    short (~5'7"), average (5'7"-6"), tall (6"-6'4), freakishly tall (6'4+).

    [–]Vodkas21 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    In the wikipedia link it's got the tallest average American women(20-39 years old) at 5'5.

    [–]asdfghjkltyu 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    Givent this information, I suggest the four categories be modified to:

    Thats fine. My point was more that there are four general categories that women see, they aren't really picky over a few inches. They instantly assign you to one of those categories and that's all that really matters.

    Men should aim for 'tall' as freakishly tall can also be a negative.

    [–]rockoverchicago 64 points65 points  (10 children)

    dildo = female sexual empowerment!

    flesh light = loser who can't get laid!!!!

    [–]jmg83 6 points7 points  (6 children)

    I've never understood this. I guess women resent feeling redundant, so they say things like that to cover it up.

    [–]Endorsed Contributorcocaine_face 13 points14 points  (4 children)

    Male sexual gratification when he hasn't proven himself "worthy" is odious to women.

    [–]jmg83 4 points5 points  (3 children)

    Fuck those women. Or don't fuck them, as the case may be.

    [–]Endorsed Contributorcocaine_face 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    I'm not about to become celibate.

    [–]jmg83 4 points5 points  (1 child)

    I meant those particular women, not women in general.

    [–]Endorsed Contributorcocaine_face 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I know what you meant. I reiterate my statement. This is pretty much a universal among women.

    [–]rockoverchicago 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    They don't like competition.

    [–]TimPartendale 5 points6 points  (1 child)

    While I don't agree with the double standard, this is a part of the whole slut vs stud debate. A high value man who can get a lot of sex is a stud = good. A woman who has a lot of sexual partners devalues herself. This is why nobody cares that she has a dildo. In fact, some guys will watch porn of solo girls pleasuring themselves with dildos.

    I'm publishing an article about this in the near future.

    [–]rockoverchicago 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    For a man to be successful with women he has to have skill... for a woman to be successful with men she just has to say yes.

    That's why there are studs and sluts.

    [–]loddfavne 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Work on joining the top 20%, but keep your work in the shadows.

    This quote is taken out of context from the OP, but I guess it can apply to sextoys for men as well.

    [–]1Padre55 13 points14 points  (1 child)

    All the more reason to not give two damns what society thinks when it applies to oneself. One of Greene's dictums, law 25, never let others define you. As soon as you then you are doomed, fits the female imperative to a "T".

    Too short..no you are to tall ya Amazonian wench etc etc

    [–]Endorsed Contributorcocaine_face 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    I once told a short coworker girl she was short.

    She was like, "I'm short? You're short!"

    And I was like, "I know, and girls love it"

    And she was like, "No, we like tall guys!"

    And I was like, "Not when I'm around"

    We had a good vibe going, but she was married and I couldn't bring myself to fuck her at the time.

    [–]OakTr3E 14 points15 points  (0 children)

    Feminist thinking in italic

    Well it´s the female+feminist narrative extrapolated unto society.

    Beauty is a female trait but with female hamstering men and women are alike. Therefore beauty is a human trait and women "must be forced" to put on make up via patriarchy while men get away because they are not oppressed.

    So the male population is both accused of oppressing women while women get the power of artificially raising their SMV through beauty products. Women - Men, 2 - 0

    Power is a male trait but with female hamstering men and women are alike. Therefore power is a human trait and since top people (bottom people are ignored) with power are male "the patriarchy must give men an advantage".

    So the male population is both shamed for opressing women and women get free stuff from the government and the white knights in everyday life. Women - Men, 4 - 0

    And as you say. If you advertise how much effort you put in towards self-improvement you will be seen as low value and women will discard you mentally (forgotten). Hence why successful men know to shut up about their hard work (be humble and/or proud, don't explain) and therefore seem like "men have it easier", reinforcing the idea of the patriarchy.

    Different outcomes for different genders are seen as proof for discrimination. Not as proof for our big differences. Women are jealous of what men achieve but do not see the drawbacks. They think we have it all. All their benefits + the extras that comes with VIP membership in the patriarchy (being a white cis-male).

    You can't reason with these feminists :)

    [–]redpilltom 11 points12 points  (1 child)

    Compound this by most women's gut reaction to men giving each other actual advice that works to be more attractive to women (aka stuff that is field tested and proven to work and not "be yourself, just be sweet and nice, worrying about getting laid is lame and vain, aim to be marriage material) and you get a perfect concoction to keep men from upwards mobility.

    I remember reading a story about a Chinese (I believe) man who dumped his wife after she gave birth to an ugly baby, finding out that she had loads of plastic surgery. Women were bemoaning him as a horrible, superficial man who should love his wife despite how she got to where she is. I guarantee these same women would think very lowly of their partner if they found out he learned PUA stuff to get her.

    [–]jmg83 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    When you select a mate, to some extent, you're choosing them for their genes. Granted, the Chinese guy went a bit too far, but in a way, he was cheated.

    [–]mormon-nigger 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Women have been pushing up their boobs for hundreds of years. What a lot of guys don't realize is they can use similar things to improve their appearance and hence attractiveness. Hair and makeup can do wonders for a girl. Hair and clothes can do wonder for a guy. Play to your strengths

    [–]RAGING_ERECTION 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Even though there are way more low SMV men than women (80/20), low SMV women have plenty of safety nets and systems in place to either raise their SMV or give them the same power that those 8's, 9's and 10's have (this is a major part of feminism - giving low SMV women power, hence why the majority of feminists are fatties).

    If you are a low SMV man you have absolutely NOTHING to help you. All you get is disgust from everyone around you. This is why male homelessness and male suicide rates are though the roof. Either you are constantly improving your SMV or you will end up homeless, jobless and will probably end up killing yourself.

    [–]SlickBlackCadillac 15 points16 points  (10 children)

    It makes sense. A man is capable of siring 100+ children is his lifetime. Society doesn't need or want that many kids from a man that relied on said parlor tricks.

    A woman may be capable of having ~6 kids in her lifetime by comparison. Does society really care if we let a few uglies slip through the cracks?

    [–]through_a_ways 20 points21 points  (6 children)

    Does society really care if we let a few uglies slip through the cracks?

    They should, because it's the woman who hasn't been "improved" by evolution.

    You can see this quite easily if you just look at the diversity of mitochondrial vs. Y chromosomal DNA. Essentially, all the females get to pass on their genes, but only invading tribes/nations of men get theirs.

    European light eyes evolved through an unprecedented reversal of the selection process, with males becoming so valued that they had their pick of the litter, and they chose to provide for the lighter eyed/haired girls.

    Ask yourself this, why do short people exist? Because tall guys don't mind wifing extremely short girls. If you could hypothetically prevent all short women from giving birth, average heights would skyrocket.

    If you could hypothetically prevent all short men from giving birth, well...I don't think that's all that different from what's going on right now :)

    [–]blandboringusername 11 points12 points  (2 children)

    Ask yourself this, why do short people exist? Because tall guys don't mind wifing extremely short girls.

    My father's people are taller, bigger boned and stronger than my mother's slightly built people. I'm in the middle.

    Why aren't we all built like Brock Lesnar if the Brock Lesnars throughout human history could take their pick of any woman, or several? I lift, but no matter what I do I will never have his jawline. I'll bet his normal test is much higher than average.

    The reason is because teensy tiny little Ellen Page is hot. Give her a Y chromosome but don't change anything else, and she would have spent her childhood getting her ass kicked every day.

    [–]unsuckable9335 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    The reason is because teensy tiny little Ellen Page is hot. Give her a Y chromosome but don't change anything else, and she would have spent her childhood getting her ass kicked every day.

    I've made this observation before. It's really interesting, and counterintuitive. Evolution as a whole is counter-intuitive because it's not a conscious or planned process. There is no goal, it just happens.

    A gene, like height, which adds to male SMV subtracts from female SMV. It's a perfect explanation for why short people are still around. The gene is counterbalanced by the male/female dynamic.

    [–]redpill-lurker 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    Why aren't we all built like Brock Lesnar[1] if the Brock Lesnars throughout human history could take their pick of any woman, or several?

    Humans, like all species, will produce many individuals with different mutations. It's especially true for those of us with the Y chromosome, which is why the intelligence of the male population varies more than that of the female population. The people with the highest intelligence (and with the lowest intelligence) are always made up mostly of men, while women tend to be more average. Logically, this must be true for physical attributes (as well as different behavioral ones) as well.

    In terms of evolution, women are more like the rock that keeps humanity in a certain direction, while the variability of men allows the species to continue changing and adapting.

    [–]smokingmonkey420 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Or because taller people are not necessarily dominant in all factors. Yes, they are stronger. But they're also typically slower, less agile and have less endurance. I'm not convinced that height is necessarily an instinctual attraction trigger. I think a lot of shorter men simply give away their power due to cultural pressures.

    [–]1cover20 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    Short man here, well it's true that I didn't give birth. But my wife did, to my kids.

    Height is nice but not necessary. A man's success is only somewhat affected by his looks. I don't know how much, but not enough to stop me once I figured a little game out.

    [–]Endorsed Contributorcocaine_face 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Yeah, shortness really isn't that big of a deal.

    [–]1cover20 4 points5 points  (2 children)

    Did you ever think that the so-called "naturals" are relying on learned behavior and parlor tricks too.

    We imagine there's such a thing as a natural. They don't bother to disabuse us of the notion. Or, it's been so long since they developed their game, it feels natural now and they don't want to think about the awkward learning process.

    Parlor tricks? Technique? Call it what you want.

    [–]SlickBlackCadillac 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    Any man that is capable of copulating with a woman during her fertile time is worthy of having his genes passed on. Whether he is "natural", a learned natural, or good at wearing shoe lifts and hiding that fact at least until conception is attained, does not matter.

    He is what Charlie Sheen would call "winning." Even if he was Belichicking it, a win is a win.

    Broadcasting how you edge yourself towards the top 20% is not sexy. Women have more leeway because the 20/80 rule does not apply. So paint on your pretty face ladies... we don't care.

    [–]DaegobahDan 8 points9 points  (7 children)

    this is a hundred percent the result of society being feminized. the reason it's unacceptable to do this kind of thing isn't because society hates low value men, it's because women don't want to be tricked into dating a low value man. because women are currently controlling the social dialoguedialogue, it's their opinions are the ones that matter. in older more quote "traditional" societies, low value men still had a very important social purpose as workers, as soldiers, as providers for low value women,and as general followers of high-ranking men (i.e.it's hard to be a leader with no one to lead).

    [–]tallwheel 1 point2 points  (4 children)

    The current situation is actually closer to the default. "Patriarchal" institutions had to be set up in order to give acceptable mating opportunities to low-value men.

    [–]DaegobahDan 2 points3 points  (3 children)

    Yes but in exchange for being productive members of society. The hatred of low value men can with women starting to take over.

    [–]tallwheel 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    I beg to disagree. Low value men have always been disliked. The threshold for what qualifies as low quality has just been raised.

    [–]DaegobahDan 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    you can disagree all you want. Men don't hate lower value men. They control them, they use them, maybe just ignore them. But they don't hate them. Why would they? Women, on the other hand, hate low value men. As society becomes more and more feminized, we see more and more examples of low value men being shamed just for existing.

    [–]tallwheel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Good point. There is a difference between being hated and being used as a means to an end.

    Still, men need to be aware of this, and I still believe it has always existed. "Feminism" didn't just bring this about over the last decades.

    [–]1cover20 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Well of course they want things to be "natural". But it also means they are quite vulnerable to an act. Their vagina doesn't know the difference, and that's what issues the tingles.

    Fake it til you make it. You might be surprised and make it the very first time you dare to fake it, if not keep at it. It's fun anyway to get MORE than you feel entitled to, for once!

    [–]DaegobahDan 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    I mean all that is true, but its not really germane to the point. We are talking about why society shits on low SMV men when they are already down and out.

    [–]BlueFreedom420 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    Government loves low value men. They try so hard to buy into the system. New age serfs.

    [–]bobbatosakosanose 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Society uses high value men as tools. Same shit. Fuck society.

    [–]Dronitto 5 points6 points  (3 children)

    Despises low value men- yes. But what about low value women? Well, they'll give them anything. Look at social services. Look who they support mostly. In 99% social help is a fucking mistake.

    [–]brotherjustincrowe 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    And who runs for office, pandering to the low-value women's vote all the way? With promises of taxpayer-funded handouts and enabling of the shitty welfare-queen lifestyle?

    [–]BoyMeetsHarem 4 points5 points  (1 child)

    In 99% social help is a fucking mistake.

    You know, there's a difference between understanding the underlying animal/evolutionary urges that point to an optimal mating strategy and believing that we should just let lower value human beings die in extreme poverty and squalor.

    We don't have to run civilization like it's lord of the flies, there is plenty of wealth on this planet to give everyone a basic level of shelter and subsistence.

    It may be an unpopular opinion here, but I continue to believe this sub should stick to discussing topics around male/female attraction and leave politics out of it.

    [–]Dronitto 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Well, you can ignore it but still, its all connected. Even politics. In Europe its even stronger. Its one of the reason its falling apart.

    [–]twistedbrother2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Get rudimentary: men are supposed to not be girlish, vain narcissists who obsess over their looks. Men aren't supposed to care if they're bald or short, they're supposed to be men and move on.

    [–]paracog 2 points3 points  (3 children)

    In the past, there were monastic orders for lower value men to take refuge in. I think the MGTOW movement has some of that spirit and wouldn't be surprised if some sort of secular version of that sort of support and edification social structure started crystallizing. Edit: I've been checking out the historical phenomenon of mutual benefit societies, and the idea of those for men is appealing. Free-standing, no attached to any larger organization where oppression can be brought to bear, self sustaining... I guess men's clubs like the Elks, Shriners, etc have some element of this, but I'm thinking much more independent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benefit_society

    [–]contrafagotto 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    That's fascinating about the monastic orders. Could you give a source or some other hints about how I might research that?

    [–]paracog 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Some interesting links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Monasticism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peripatetic_school http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benefit_society I think the idea of male benefit societies or guilds has a lot of juice for going forward in a world which seems to want to push us out. Avoiding attachment to outside organizations keeps them free from aggression. Early Alcoholics Anonymous was like a mutual aid society, because at the time feminist led Temperance movements were widely shaming alcoholics and the early AA's had to pretty much meet in secret to avoid being harassed by temperance workers who considered themselves the authorities, in spite of doing no good.

    [–]drkstrs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    MGTOW has some of the highest value men actually. There is some relationship though to monasticism for some. There are MGTOW who have had no resource constraints of any kind so they naturally place themselves first and go their own way.

    [–]4_YRT 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Have you ever noticed how there are all these products designed to cover up women's flaws (makeup, hair extensions, push-up bras) and that they are socially acceptable and even encouraged, while the select few products that exist to cover up men's flaws (Bosley, shoe lifts) are mocked.

    a feminist would cite this as evidence of the Patriarchy. Women are taught that they have to achieve some artificial standard of beauty by covering her flaws, where men are mocked for doing the same.

    [–]GhostOfAladdin 1 point2 points  (6 children)

    That's what fuels consumerism. Put down the males, so they need to buy stuff to make themselves temporarily feel better.

    I see males going into the beer store down the street at all times of the day.

    [–]BoyMeetsHarem 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    Are you serious? Do you know how much makeup, fashionable clothes, high heels in every color, pushup bras, and all of the jewelry and accessories they wear costs?

    Women's insecurities and need to compete for high value males completely drives the consumer economy. Dudes buying beer isn't even a drop in the bucket.

    [–]GhostOfAladdin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I am not disagreeing with you. I am talking about the psychology on why humans buy insignificant things to make them temporarily feel better.

    [–]t21spectre 1 point2 points  (3 children)

    This is true for both men and women. The cosmetics industry in the U.S. generated $56 billion in profit in 2012 alone.

    [–]GhostOfAladdin 1 point2 points  (2 children)

    Yup. Buy shit we dont need to impress people we don't like mentality...

    [–]t21spectre 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    A great 3 part series on how modern consumerism culture came to exist:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Century_of_the_Self

    [–]HauntedBeepers 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    It's more about men not being allowed to show insecurity. When men show insecurity, women totally lose interest. Makeup, Bosley, shoe lifts....all of these things announce insecurity through a megaphone.

    [–]QuidulusBroQuo 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    I think that this has more to do with those products displaying insecurity. If you aren't confident in what you were given then you aren't a true alpha. It shows that you care too much about what others think of you, a trait that highlights low value.

    [–]1cover20 4 points5 points  (1 child)

    No, you do what works. Nothing wrong with it. As usual women don't want men to be able to put on an act, all the time they are constantly putting on this or that little act. Because the woman wants to make her selection with maximum information, and she knows she is quite vulnerable to an act.

    Such acts are legally allowed. In my opinion they're morally fine too, from men as well as women.

    [–]QuidulusBroQuo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I'm not saying using such products is bad. I get acne if I don't use the skin care products from the store for example. I was simply saying that people vocally make fun of these products because they point to an insecurity someone has.

    [–]cocoguard -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    Yeah, it's like the idea that all toupees look bad because we can only tell the bad ones apart. We also make fun of women who try to use makeup and look like a crayon factory exploded.

    [–]HAQ_be 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    About flaws: check kim dotcom's (now ex-)wife. It doesnt matter.. these flaws are created by women for women imo

    [–]-Tyler_Durden- 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    When it comes to humans, nature does her experimentation with males. We have a larger standard deviation on all the physical and mental variables.

    As compared to women, there are more male geniuses and more male dolts. There are more extremely tall men and more extremely short men (when the average 5" gender difference is taken into account). There is just more variety when it comes to the male of the species.

    The 80/20 rule is engrained in our DNA. Before civilization, a mediocre male was ejected from the tribe and was left to live a solitary life with little or no chance to reproduce. The mediocre females were kept because eggs are expensive and the difference between the average female and a top quintile female wasn't that significant.

    So yes, the low value man is despised. They are the worker drones for our society; they are the most disposable.

    [–]1Zackcid 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    They are the worker drones for our society

    Nicely put. I could be completely wrong, but IIRC bee drones and ant drones are exclusively male. Ironic (but not really) that the males of are species are considered by society as a whole as being the drones as well.

    [–]csmass -3 points-2 points  (4 children)

    Height isn't important if you are 5' 7". That is the cut off line, and even that is due to our culture. Think about it, 50-100 years ago the average height for men was 5' 6" - 5' 7". Many men back then weren't even close to 6', and they still married and had children. This whole be 6' thing was only pushed recently, and anything past 5' 7" is a bonus in women's eyes. As long as you have good game, take good care of yourself, and don't take shit from others you will be fine.

    [–]we_r_legun1993 -1 points0 points  (1 child)

    Height isn't important if you are 5' 7"

    anything past 5' 7" is a bonus in women's eyes.

    lmao stop kidding yourself. I've talked to girls who are 5'1" who swear they would never date a guy shorter than 6'. Height definitely matters as much as facial aesthetics.

    As long as you have good game, take good care of yourself, and don't take shit from others you will be fine.

    This is all you needed to say.

    [–]smokingmonkey420 7 points8 points  (0 children)

    Actions speak louder than words. We all know that.

    Personally, I agree with him. I think this height thing is way overblown. A lot of short men are taking women's words at face value and giving up making it that much easier for the taller men. It could be another form of social conditioning that we are just unaware of.

    [–]LongtimeRPLurker -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    You are talking about the past. Environments change and so do the characteristics of attraction. It's not about your actual size, but about your height compared to others. If the average height was 5'4'' then 5'7'' would be considered attractive. Here's a clip from a documentary about attraction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNjKg3FrnxU&feature=youtu.be&t=36m58s

    "Tall is good. Tall is healthy. Tall is successful. So, don't bother about going to the gym. Don't bother about putting on new flashy clothes. Be tall."

    [–]Meto1183 -2 points-1 points  (4 children)

    The fact is men who don't do much aren't needed. If 20% of guys can satiate the chicks (and we absolutely know they can) and keep the economy moving (they definitely can) the rest of the guys are regarded as useless, not for no reason.

    [–]bobbatosakosanose 14 points15 points  (2 children)

    Buddy. Bill gates was an 80%er. So was Tesla and newton. Want civilization? You need guys with brains. And that is not correlated with sexual attractiveness. In fact its usually opposite historically. Aristotle, Socrates weren't getting laid. Drunken Phillip the second was. Arab kings are top 10%. What innovations have they come up with? Faraday puts them to shame. Women are not gods. They don't know what's best for civilization as a whole. They only care about petty dumb social issues. We would be living in caves if men were like the males of angler fish, allowing women total control of the destiny of our species. And like the prior poster said: top 20% is relative. If the top 20% from the 1600's were dropped into modern day Manhattan. They would not stand out. Its relative. If you were CEO and got rid of all the men under you, would you still be the same powerful CEO? And women aint gonna maintain your electrical grid or drill your oil, heck even fix your computer. And the top 20% guys would all be bartenders, drug dealers, musicians or athletes. lol.

    [–]Meto1183 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    My bad, I didn't make the distinction, you're absolutely correct that the intelligent guys are important. However, I think my meaning still stands, because society for some reason only really cares about or appreciates the top 20% of many in any given talent/ability/contribution etc. My point is if you don't have real value in something, you don't really get partial credit from society. The ugliest dude and the average guys are treated a lot more similarly than the best looking dude.

    [–]yummyluckycharms 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    He is also stressing reproductive value to society. Of course, intelligent males are valuable to a society, but AF/BB model clearly illustrates that healthy alpha traits are the preferred choice for females.

    Also, remember - humans living longer is relatively recent - while mating patterns tend to be hard coded that take far longer to change. So, from a biological perspective, if life expectancy is 35, chances are the smart guy wont have a lot of time to make that next scientific breakthrough, while AF can improve the gene pool relatively quickly and repeatedly

    [–]WarmApfelPi 7 points8 points  (0 children)

    It's self-adjusting because it's relative. 80% of men die tomorrow. Fine and dandy, then 80% of the 20% of survivors become the new 80% of losers. The bandwidth of value drops and the scale of perception tares to the next lowest SMV. It's like being the highest SMV in town and going to a town where all the guys are higher SMV than you, you'd be invisible. You might say society wouldn't allow the economy to die after that killing it, but societies rise and fall.