The 80/20 percent thing

Post Reply New Topic

An anecdote I've read about:

Robert Pattinson, of Twilight fame, definitely checks off the boxes of young, athletic, attractive, rich, famous, etc - things supposedly prioritized by most women.

Pattinson shares a story where he had a female stalker, hounding him for a date, relationship, etc. So he accepted, took her out to dinner, and spent the whole night just complaining about stuff. She never contacted him again.

Complaining is all it took to override all that other stuff, from a previously obsessed fan.

The tate-petersons of the world likely changed the percentages to 90/10 or 99/1 cos 80/20 still means a one in five chance, and that doesn't sound nearly scary and demoralizing enough. They need men to feel completely hopeless, if they're gonna properly gaslight them into buying their schtick.

It also helps mislead the ego. If they convince the red-pillers that women need men to be in the top 20% to be interesting, and women don't find you interesting, then you can't possibly be rated any higher than the top 80%, or even 70% or 60% or 50%, depending on how much you believe women are willing to "settle". And a guy who's only in the top 50% doesn't get to pretend they're amazing.

But if they say women only want the top ONE percent of men, well, mr incel redpill gets to believe he could still be in the top 95% of manly excellence, while still not being "good enough", which sounds unreasonable and picky. It helps get them to believe they deserve this and that, cos they know they're good enough already - even if they most definitely don't, and aren't.

If you actually go out in the word, and look at all the people who are in relationships, it doesn't seem like it's possible for those numbers to actually play out. Even simple stats like the marriage rates in america for both men and women being above 50% seem to fly in the face of even 80/20, to say nothing of 90/10 etc.

Disregarding any further distortions of the pareto principle, if there was a way that it would or could apply, it might be in that only 20% of your behaviors are responsible for 80% of the reactions you get. The fewer good behaviors, and the more bad behaviors, the less likely you are to have that 20% be positive things vs negative things - resulting in fewer positive outcomes and more negative outcomes.

The issue is, incels red-pillers and manospheriens tend to think / have been convinced that their behaviors are not negative or inappropriate - and that their positives are greater in breadth and depth than they actually are.

Above I mentioned individuals downplaying their faults and exaggerating their attributes - your friend above sounds like he falls into that category. One does not typically get called a mama's boy simply for "loving one's mother". It's usually applied to individuals who have an unhealthy attachment or dependency on their mother, into adulthood.

Not to be too presumptuous, but between that and the part where you mention that he couldn't hold a conversation, seems to me like he had little to no personality other than being his mother's son, and vague generic adjectives like "nice" and "polite", which are sort of basic expectations, and not exactly special features.

As for it seeming like singles dry up after 30, that possibly has an easy explanation. It probably has to do with where you're looking. Up to the age of 18, most of us are largely forced into social situations, by proxy of school. We meet people by merit of our daily unavoidable routine. After highschool, this may continue into college, with the same or different people - or may continue at other venues that are common to younger people, such as bars and clubs.

The thing is, most people go to bars and clubs less and less as they age into their 30s and later - if they ever did bars to begin with. You won't find them there - but y'all keep looking there for some reason. It's like somma y'all think the only place single people can exist is bars n clubs. Not saying anyone specific is doing so right here right now, but enough members here bang on about bars n clubs that it seems like y'all don't know that other places exist.

By their 30s, a lotta people have more advanced hobbies than just drinking and partying. They're into hiking, or boats, or sports, or fitness, or cooking, or gardening, or landscaping, or painting, or crocheting, or collecting venetian glass, or ballroom dancing, or any of the plethora of things people do in this world. You'll find them on nature trails, or at gyms, or on fields, at thrift shops or flea markets, at hobby supply stores or craft seminars, at gardens or plant nurseries, at art galleries, in dance studios - the kinda places I get the distinct impression that not many people here go to, let alone go to regularly. Which would explain why y'all aren't finding them.

Maybe the “social activist type females” you met weren’t interested in dating but, like other humans, plenty are and always have been.