Great discussions in this thread. It really depends how you want to define things - hypergamy could be overblown, or you could just be defining it incorrectly.
The definition I go with, is that value is in the eye of the beholder, and when women choose a mate, they are choosing the highest value mate they can get in their circumstances. By this definition, every choice they make is hypergamous, and they're solving a complicating value equation to associate with a man who meets their needs.
That being said, I think it's easy to get overly negative and pessimistic. You could be in a better spot than you realize in a relationship, because "value" is composed of many factors. If you're a 7/10 and get with a girl (e.g. based on LMSG looks-money-status-game), and pair bond emotionally, that could raise your relative value in her eyes to a 9/10, for e.g. the first 6 months of your relationship. That's awesome! She won't value an 8/10 more than you. I think we subconsciously realize this, and get to "chill out" more in the beginning of relationships before our "mate guarding" instincts start to kick in.
But now let's say you're married for 5 years, novelty wears off, so the "bonding bonus" dissipates and your value in her eyes may regress down to a 7.5/10. Or worse, if her priorities change (e.g. she needs financial stability and that was never your biggest selling point), you may look like a 6/10. Now if she gets to know a 7/10, he has you beat, and she may evaluate and plan to monkey branch.
That's why it's so key so always be striving for improvement, especially if you get into a relationship. Security and stability is NOT a thing in modern feminist societies where women have tons of choice and freedom.
But also I want to give a mention to @Steno 's comments on vetting. Super important, and IMO really is 80% of the work. Many relationships are over before they even start due to screening, even if you are high value. You think rich hollywood celebrities inspire supernatural loyalty from women due to their high value? Wrong - many of them still date the wrong girls and get royally ****ed over. Some smart ones (Matt Damon comes to mind) seem to vet really well and pick an 'unknown' chick that works well for them.
In our version of things, we need to also avoid girls chasing status and fame - no instathots as a first step. But then the list keeps growing for factors that will help: very low bodycount, young and innocent (less baggage), no degenerate beauty markings (tattoos, dyed hair, etc), and modest activities (no frequent clubbing, drinking/drugs, etc). These are just some obvious starter examples; unfortunately, this already is disqualifying a large proportion of women.
So I'd conclude by saying: it's tough, hypergamy is absolutely real, but we can also be overly negative about it; a great way to minimize its impact on your well-being is through strict screening before beginning a relationship. And even then fellas, you gotta keep your value up and be ready for it to end and move on.
The definition I go with, is that value is in the eye of the beholder, and when women choose a mate, they are choosing the highest value mate they can get in their circumstances. By this definition, every choice they make is hypergamous, and they're solving a complicating value equation to associate with a man who meets their needs.
That being said, I think it's easy to get overly negative and pessimistic. You could be in a better spot than you realize in a relationship, because "value" is composed of many factors. If you're a 7/10 and get with a girl (e.g. based on LMSG looks-money-status-game), and pair bond emotionally, that could raise your relative value in her eyes to a 9/10, for e.g. the first 6 months of your relationship. That's awesome! She won't value an 8/10 more than you. I think we subconsciously realize this, and get to "chill out" more in the beginning of relationships before our "mate guarding" instincts start to kick in.
But now let's say you're married for 5 years, novelty wears off, so the "bonding bonus" dissipates and your value in her eyes may regress down to a 7.5/10. Or worse, if her priorities change (e.g. she needs financial stability and that was never your biggest selling point), you may look like a 6/10. Now if she gets to know a 7/10, he has you beat, and she may evaluate and plan to monkey branch.
That's why it's so key so always be striving for improvement, especially if you get into a relationship. Security and stability is NOT a thing in modern feminist societies where women have tons of choice and freedom.
But also I want to give a mention to @Steno 's comments on vetting. Super important, and IMO really is 80% of the work. Many relationships are over before they even start due to screening, even if you are high value. You think rich hollywood celebrities inspire supernatural loyalty from women due to their high value? Wrong - many of them still date the wrong girls and get royally ****ed over. Some smart ones (Matt Damon comes to mind) seem to vet really well and pick an 'unknown' chick that works well for them.
In our version of things, we need to also avoid girls chasing status and fame - no instathots as a first step. But then the list keeps growing for factors that will help: very low bodycount, young and innocent (less baggage), no degenerate beauty markings (tattoos, dyed hair, etc), and modest activities (no frequent clubbing, drinking/drugs, etc). These are just some obvious starter examples; unfortunately, this already is disqualifying a large proportion of women.
So I'd conclude by saying: it's tough, hypergamy is absolutely real, but we can also be overly negative about it; a great way to minimize its impact on your well-being is through strict screening before beginning a relationship. And even then fellas, you gotta keep your value up and be ready for it to end and move on.
