If you're already high value there's no need to demonstrate it.

[9Volt]

My c0ck stays in my pants. I don't put it in my shoes...Oh you said Cork. Nevermind.

 

[Ronaldo7]

Materialistic? Harsh adjective to use.

It depends what one wants to obtain. One is judged on one's appearance. If one thinks to achieve success with an 8+ woman, without having an impeccable appearance, one is sadly mistaken.

I have a particular taste. I can't settle for less. I need to look in the mirror and want to fornicate with myself. Therefore, one needs to dress accordingly to project the very same vision to women. Yes, that includes 1,000-1,500 USD shoes, depending on what one is getting.

Style recognizes style.

 

[9Volt]

Materialistic? Harsh adjective to use.

It depends what one wants to obtain. One is judged on one's appearance. If one thinks to achieve success with an 8+ woman, without having an impeccable appearance, one is sadly mistaken.

I have a particular taste. I can't settle for less. I need to look in the mirror and want to fornicate with myself. Therefore, one needs to dress accordingly to project the very same vision to women. Yes, that includes 1,000-1,500 USD shoes, depending on what one is getting.

Style recognizes style.

So you dress up to fornicate with yourself in the mirror? Is that while you're trying on 1,500 shoes in the department store changing room?

You're paying full price for 1,500 shoes?

If you are you're the type stores love to take advantage of. They prey on the "big spenders".

 

[Ronaldo7]

So you dress up to fornicate with yourself in the mirror? Is that while you're trying on 1,500 shoes in the department store changing room?

You're paying full price for 1,500 shoes?

If you are you're the type stores love to take advantage of. They prey on the "big spenders".

You seem to have misunderstood the metaphor. It was to highlight the importance of dressing up for the objective.

As @BeExcellent mentioned, the trained eye can differentiate from quality in the perceived target's appearance. Gucci loafers & Valentino shoes do make a difference. One is paying for quality, right?

 

[9Volt]

You seem to have misunderstood the metaphor. It was to highlight the importance of dressing up for the objective.

As @BeExcellent mentioned, the trained eye can differentiate from quality in the perceived target's appearance. Gucci loafers & Valentino shoes do make a difference. One is paying for quality, right?

One should always try to look and present themselves their best. But that isn't the end all be all. Wearing Gucci loafers means little in the grand scheme of things because anyone else who can afford them isn't going to trip over themselves to care. It's those desperate for acceptance and trying to "peac0ck" who care. What people do care about is what are you going to do for them. And if you aren't going to do for them as in the case of multi-millionaires they'll tell you to take your Gucci loafers and take a hike.

Don't think for a second wealthy people aren't checking your spending habits as well as what you actually offer them. You could dress to the nines and some other person could be dressed nice without wearing the top name brand of every article of clothing but actually offer more to what another person is looking for than you standing there wearing the top name brands.

It's like some dude buying the most expensive tools but can't get a job done as well at all as another dude who has slightly less expensive tools but gets the job done and is recommended off his actual work not just flash and fancy nonsense.

Wearing the top name brands etc. is great. The reality is "that's nice" now what do you offer of actual substance besides a just a fancy presentation.

 

[Urbanyst]

My point is that style matters because your style is an indicator of taste.

Apparently you need an extreme example. Ever go to an interview with dirty hair or wrinkled clothing? Why not?

Because companies judge how you will represent them out in the world. Companies don't hire people who are rumpled & need a bath.

My step brother worked for years at what used to be Arthur Anderson. He is 6'4" and once weighed about 350 pounds. He is extremely smart & was angling for an upper management role.

You'll never imagine what his superiors told him...he was told his (obese) appearance did not convey an image in line with what the company values IN AN EXECUTIVE ROLE. They told him he was too fat to be considered for an upper management role! He was plenty smart but his presentation was not up to snuff.

Guess what. He lost 125 lbs and after that he got the VP level position. He never gained the weight back and would be the first one to tell you how you present yourself matters.

There is no shame in having nice things. I presume your dream car is not a 2012 Corolla. I think it is fun to find nice things for very little money relative to retail. I also think labels for the sake of labels is unrefined and garish.

You see clothing in particular carries a subtext as I mentioned earlier. When your appearance is all someone has to go by your appearance needs to say the right things about you as in the interview example I gave above. This is the point you are being obtuse about.

You don't think a woman in the know doesn't recognize Allen Edmond brogues or Gucci loafers or bespoke alligator shoes? Quality has a certain refinement. Get a GQ or Vanity Fair and look through it. If you think that makes me somehow a snob then it just indicates to me you aren't at that level of sophistication. Sophisticated people identify other sophisticated people who they do not already know on style and mode of dress. Grooming and hygiene as well...that should go without saying. Dirty fingernails or bad breath will ruin your impression faster than anything else no matter how beautifully dressed you are.

I appreciate fine things and I can afford such things. However there are lots of things I can't afford, like a Malibu beach house...but I would never run down my friend who lives in a Malibu beach house. I just think it's cool he has one and think it's cool that we are pals.

I like what I like, I do what I do and I could not give a rats rear end what anybody thinks about it. I REALLY don't care.

But for some of the men here who want to obtain the best they can who didn't grow up with taste, manners and style as something you were taught to recognize & value...it can be hard to learn the subtext, the unspoken things that personal flair conveys. Some people have taste and many more do not, but humans tend to gravitate toward "Tastemakers".

So if you start learning and understanding matters of taste and style you put yourself head and shoulders above the masses. And this can be done without going to great expense. In fact it's MORE interesting to pull it off without paying full freight. This will give you advantages with women, in the workplace, among your peers.

Or you can call me a snob & take pot shots. IDGAF. I am already doing just fine. Tell ya what. You're an NYC dude right? Go to Union Square Cafe or head to Balthazar's in the Village...or go to the Oak Bar in the Plaza. Have a drink at the bar. Go see for yourself what the high end men wear and how you do. See if they talk to you. And wear good shoes.

Listen, style matters to me in the way that it tells me about your personality. I like women who dress unique and a little exotic or off beat. I don't like the cookie cutter name brand people all that much. But I care much more about how hot the girl is and her level of hygiene than her clothes.

I also believe fashion is for women and gay men. As a man that should not be a priority. If a woman is going to disqualify me for not having the right shoes then she is really disqualifying herself because she is a vapid, pretentious sheep in my eyes who doesn't understand what is really important in life.

I say go date a homosexual if you want a guy into fashion. I'm into being a productive and valuable member of society. I brush my teeth and smell good. I wear clean presentable clothes that look good on me. That should be more than enough and sleeping with over 60 women proves it.

 

[BeExcellent]

Look. I'm not dissing what you are saying @Urbanyst. Your initial post in this thread is accurate. Glad you slay it with the ladies. That's good. However success with women is not the correct barometer for being a high value man.

Rather the respect from other men is. The ability to lead or influence other men. That is the correct barometer of high value.

As you become more accustomed to moving in more successful circles you'll find subtleties of style and taste actually do matter. And the rules can be broken under 2 circumstances:

1.) You well understand the rules and

2.) You have enough social capital to break the rules without adverse consequence.

Lots of celebrities get away with breaking the rules because they are who they are.

Think of the trader in the Big Short with the drum set in his office. If you haven't seen the movie it's particularly good, by the way. He wears t-shirts to work and plays percussion in his office...but his value gives him Carte Blanche to do so. The suits come to him.

When you are King you set the rules. Until then you disregard the rules to your own disadvantage, and it is on a sliding scale.

I'm not suggesting you need to be a cookie cutter drone nor that you should date cookie cutter drones, not at all. I am simply saying we all benefit by understanding the contexts that we operate in.

I'm about as non-establishment as you could find in some ways. Very eclectic and individual. I break rules to varying degrees. But I am extremely aware of what I'm doing, what the norms are and where the line is between refreshing & obnoxious. I'm also aware of when it is not appropriate. It's fluid. Quality is a constant however.

Which I hope was the point of the OP. When you are high quality you have learned all this stuff already. You don't need to "try" to DHV because you ARE. But all this stuff does matter as you develop into that high quality man.

 

[Atom Smasher]

It is also true that the better a man presents himself, the higher quality woman he attracts.

Urbanyst, you talk about attracting all these women. We'll go ahead and assume you're telling the truth.

You have also mentioned in another thread that none of your relationships have lasted longer than a year. That's not the best track record for a 32 year old. The one year point is the precise point in a relationship when the blinders come off and people realize whom they're really dealing with.

I've found that by presenting myself well, I attract a much higher quality woman. That has facilitated my being able to maintain longer relationships. Your clothing and shoe choices are the "go-to" and obvious barometer by which she decides whether or not to make herself available for conversation.

Step up your game presentation-wise and you will increase your options.

 

[Urbanyst]

Look. I'm not dissing what you are saying @Urbanyst. Your initial post in this thread is accurate. Glad you slay it with the ladies. That's good. However success with women is not the correct barometer for being a high value man.

Rather the respect from other men is. The ability to lead or influence other men. That is the correct barometer of high value.

Neither one is a barometer of high value unless you are a one dimensional thinker.

Value is very complex. But it is primarily based on what you offer the world. Wearing name brand shoes offers the world nothing. It is just shallow horse sh*t.

I'm not stupid enough to come to a presentation at work wearing flip-flops. As I said earlier, there is a time and place for this fashion crap. However, when you are a male, it is not a major factor for getting women to have sex with you unless you are low value.. in which case you need Hollywood set pieces to make yourself more attractive.

As you become more accustomed to moving in more successful circles you'll find subtleties of style and taste actually do matter. And the rules can be broken under 2 circumstances:

1.) You well understand the rules and

2.) You have enough social capital to break the rules without adverse consequence.

Lots of celebrities get away with breaking the rules because they are who they are.

Think of the trader in the Big Short with the drum set in his office. If you haven't seen the movie it's particularly good, by the way. He wears t-shirts to work and plays percussion in his office...but his value gives him Carte Blanche to do so. The suits come to him.

When you are King you set the rules. Until then you disregard the rules to your own disadvantage, and it is on a sliding scale.

I'm not suggesting you need to be a cookie cutter drone nor that you should date cookie cutter drones, not at all. I am simply saying we all benefit by understanding the contexts that we operate in.

I'm about as non-establishment as you could find in some ways. Very eclectic and individual. I break rules to varying degrees. But I am extremely aware of what I'm doing, what the norms are and where the line is between refreshing & obnoxious. I'm also aware of when it is not appropriate. It's fluid. Quality is a constant however.

Which I hope was the point of the OP. When you are high quality you have learned all this stuff already. You don't need to "try" to DHV because you ARE. But all this stuff does matter as you develop into that high quality man.

Its not even that deep. You are so brainwashed by Hollywood and shopping mall advertisements you don't even realize it. But this is expected as women are supposed to care about fashion along with gay men.

It is also true that the better a man presents himself, the higher quality woman he attracts.

Urbanyst, you talk about attracting all these women. We'll go ahead and assume you're telling the truth.

You have also mentioned in another thread that none of your relationships have lasted longer than a year. That's not the best track record for a 32 year old. The one year point is the precise point in a relationship when the blinders come off and people realize whom they're really dealing with.

I've found that by presenting myself well, I attract a much higher quality woman. That has facilitated my being able to maintain longer relationships. Your clothing and shoe choices are the "go-to" and obvious barometer by which she decides whether or not to make herself available for conversation.

Step up your game presentation-wise and you will increase your options.

Track record? Since when is staying in a relationship an accomplishment? And why do you assume all my relationships ended because I was dumped or didn't dress well enough? I dumped some of those women.

Secondly, I dress very clean and presentable. I'm just not into fashion and brand names like a lot of the other materialistic peacocks here. Also, if you think materialism makes a woman high quality, then why don't you just date gold diggers instead of studying game?

 

[BeExcellent]

Obviously you already know everything Glad it's working out for you.

I especially like the assumptions you make about me. You don't see your own arrogance and thus it will trip you at a rather inopportune time. I won't laugh. I used to suffer from the same malady.

Cheers

 

[Atom Smasher]

Track record? Since when is staying in a relationship an accomplishment? And why do you assume all my relationships ended because I was dumped or didn't dress well enough? I dumped some of those women.

Secondly, I dress very clean and presentable. I'm just not into fashion and brand names like a lot of the other materialistic peacocks here. Also, if you think materialism makes a woman high quality, then why don't you just date gold diggers instead of studying game?

You and I are about done here. I'm breaking up with you!

Your emotional amplification of people's points beyond what they are actually saying is truly legendary, as is your inability to see this dynamic within yourself.

Your interpretations of what is actually being said are rather simplistic, because instead of stopping to chew on what another person is saying, you emotionally react (not respond, but react) based upon your own limited knowledge and experience. You are not drawing upon sufficient knowledge and experience to be able to process what others are saying.

I did not imply that your relationships ended because you were dumped. Go back, read, and comprehend. I didn't say that happened because you were not dressed well enough. Go back, read, and comprehend.

I never mentioned brand names, and in fact stated many times that brand names are not necessary. I never stated nor implied that materialism makes a woman high quality. In fact, it makes her low-quality.

You won't understand what I and BeExcellent are saying, because at the ripe old age of 32, you are blinded by your own sagacity.

It occurs to me that you say "I dress very clean and presentable". You might want to ask yourself, "Why?", within the context of what you've been railing against. Most of us here are making the point that it is wise to be clean and presentable, and that women have a peculiar fascination with shoes, and they notice them.

You may have the last word. If I argue any more with you, I will feel compelled to give myself a temporary ban!

 

[Urbanyst]

Obviously you already know everything Glad it's working out for you.

I especially like the assumptions you make about me. You don't see your own arrogance and thus it will trip you at a rather inopportune time. I won't laugh. I used to suffer from the same malady.

Cheers

You still do, having made a lot of assumptions about me too.

I don't know everything, I just know that you can't buy sex appeal.

You and I are about done here. I'm breaking up with you!

Your emotional amplification of people's points beyond what they are actually saying is truly legendary, as is your inability to see this dynamic within yourself.

Your interpretations of what is actually being said are rather simplistic, because instead of stopping to chew on what another person is saying, you emotionally react (not respond, but react) based upon your own limited knowledge and experience. You are not drawing upon sufficient knowledge and experience to be able to process what others are saying.

I did not imply that your relationships ended because you were dumped. Go back, read, and comprehend. I didn't say that happened because you were not dressed well enough. Go back, read, and comprehend.

I never mentioned brand names, and in fact stated many times that brand names are not necessary. I never stated nor implied that materialism makes a woman high quality. In fact, it makes her low-quality.

You won't understand what I and BeExcellent are saying, because at the ripe old age of 32, you are blinded by your own sagacity.

It occurs to me that you say "I dress very clean and presentable". You might want to ask yourself, "Why?", within the context of what you've been railing against. Most of us here are making the point that it is wise to be clean and presentable, and that women have a peculiar fascination with shoes, and they notice them.

You may have the last word. If I argue any more with you, I will feel compelled to give myself a temporary ban!

All you need to understand is you can't buy sex appeal.

This is something men without natural sex appeal will have a hard time understanding.

 

[mikey2012]

Unless you are LeoDiCaprio...you need to show you are high value.