I just saw yet another YouTube clip where some woman got “owned” by a guy using a “Female Delusion Calculator” (of which there are several online).
Here’s the problem with that, and why guys need to be realistic about what the results mean. It’s basic math, and we should be embarrassed to put this nonsense on blast. Plenty of women are plenty delusional… we don’t do ourselves any favors by screwing up 8th grade math.
Assuming that the calculators are based on accurate census data (and I have no reason to doubt their accuracy), the resulting percentage only signifies how common such men are in the population.
Most of the time the question is phrased as what the woman wants rather than what she would accept in the flesh. Even when the question is asked correctly, many women will say that they’re describing their ideal man rather than the men they would actually consider. That vastly skews the results, and we all know that what matters is what women do rather than what they say.
Another problem is that it doesn’t take into consideration how many people the average woman knows.
I’ll use the unmarried version of myself as an example of scarcity: early 60s, 5’7”, no kids, extremely fit, $100,000 per year, homeowner with no debt, white, Christian, post-graduate.
By most measures I’m a HVM in my age group (especially with regard to MMV). When I plug in the unmarried version of myself, I get anywhere from 2-6%, depending on which questions are asked and exactly where I set the upper and lower parameters. So let’s say that around one man in 25 is in the same demographic subset with regard to age, height, race, income, and fitness. That doesn’t mean that a woman who wants a guy with my traits is a “cat lady in waiting” or will soon be buying boxed Chardonnay from Costco.
The average person knows about 600 people at any one time, and half of them are men. That means that the average woman knows about a dozen men who fall into the same demographic category as I do. If she enlists the help of even a handful of friends and relatives, she could easily get access (and introductions) to 20 or more suitable men who have already been pre-screened to some degree. It’s not delusional to think that a woman who works to maximize her own mate value could snag a man whose mate value matches mine (on paper, anyway).
To make it useful, it’s probably better to assume that the woman has access to 500 men (guys she knows and guys she could meet through her network with minimal effort), and get a number of men based on the calculated percentage.
If 2% of men meet her criteria, she has access to 10 such men. That doesn’t mean that she has to be a “Top 2%” woman, either, because many of her competitors are looking in different age categories. Since I’m in my early 60s, there aren’t many women in their 20s looking for the unmarried version of me, but I suspect I could get more than a couple of takers among women in their 40s, and nearly all the single women in their 50s and beyond. (Not that I would be looking in that category much.)
A clever 40-year-old woman would have an excellent chance for the simple reason that she wouldn’t be competing against younger women, while a 70-year-old woman with the same parameters would have better odds winning the lottery.
Delusion comes into play when women want men who are near the top of multiple categories: income is usually inversely proportional to age, for example. It also appears when women who have low mate value demand men with much higher mate value, which is usually the result of women having their egos constantly fluffed. Nobody is going to tell a fat nerdy guy with no game that he deserves a supermodel, yet people will tell an obese baby-mamma with maxed out credit cards that she deserves a 6/6/6/6/6/6 man.
whytehorse2021 5mo ago
My contention with the calculators, and Aaron Clarey had the same problem when writing "Book of Numbers", is that these things aren't mutually exclusive. So a short, fat, broke guy can have a bunch of traits all in one person, but same applies to a tall, rich, fit guy. So you can't just multiply a bunch of percentages together.
Other than that it's nice to be able to show these to women one at a time so that they can see what a limited pool of men meet their "standards". Like if they would date guys 5'6" and up they'd have way more options(50% of men).
Typo-MAGAshiv 6mo ago
1) This is less a problem with the calculators themselves, and more a problem with how interviewers phrase questions
2)
Most women have no idea what they'll accept in-person until they're in the middle of accepting it. Their attraction triggers are based on too many variables.
lurkerhasarisen 6mo ago
All the more reason to stop taking the calculators seriously.
Typo-MAGAshiv 6mo ago
They're a handy tool, but yes, many YouTubers etc lean on them rather heavily and ask poorly-phrased questions.
Where it has been used well is by Rollo and a few others who will sometimes plug a married woman's husband's info into it to demonstrate how rare of a man she locked down, and you can see that she has a newfound appreciation for her husband.
Lone_Ranger 6mo ago
What most women fail to realise is that their demands mean a cumulative or exponentially diminishing pool of 'acceptable' men. This is what needs to be explained to them.
So for example, they all say they want a guy that is over 6"2, earns more than $250k and has abs.
They think that such men are about 1 in 10, and since they are a ten (don't you dare disagree you sexist, racist piece of shit!!!) then they deserve such a man, and its only a question of putting yourself out there and never settling and 'being the best version of my self' before they find one. That is what they seem to believe.
What they fail to realise (because women suck at stats) is that she needs to multiply the variables. Which would be something like
0.04 x 0.03 x 0.02 = 0.000024
Which is 24 men per million. Which is one man in every 41,667.
(For simplicity, lets put away silly debates about the frequency of six packs, income, height etc, these are just estimates to illustrate).
I'm also being very kind to the hoes in that I am giving an example which 'only' has 3 demands. In reality, they list of plenty of others, like that he
If you add in the further demands, the multiple becomes one man in every million very very quickly.
And then you have to account for the fact that they are only interested in single guys no more than about 5 years older than they are. Which makes it more it so close to zero that it doesn't matter. You are looking at that point staring at basically less than a whole number. If you did the maths, you will find that there is statistically less than 1 man that meets their criteria in a country the size of the USA.
Why are women so bad at this? Because they have very poor maths skills, but also because they are seem to have a much harder time perceiving reality. They look at the tv / movies / tiktok and think that the men they see there are representative. They also see rich men like George Clooney and fail to realise that he would not qualify (much too short, dad bod, not single etc). Their imagination colours in the failings for guys in their dreams (media) but not for guys they see in reality.
TLDR: women are dreamers. What they expect is that a 1 in a million man is going to swoop down from nowhere and fall for their averageness.
Hamza99 6mo ago
"TLDR: women are dreamers. What they expect is that a 1 in a million man is going to swoop down from nowhere and fall for their averageness."
And push aside all his options for her because she is a "bad bitch 10/10 queen"
wswZtyqNGQ 6mo ago
There's a huge world of difference between having access to such a man and having the ability to get married to such a man (and have him give her 50% of his wealth). The delusion calculator is accurate in that it shows these women what they can expect from marriage and, more importantly, explains why their hypergamy will wind up making them alone and miserable for the second half of their lives.
Lone_Ranger 6mo ago
It's actually not 2% of men that meet their criteria (see my other post). And here's the thing ... those man are all gone.
lurkerhasarisen 6mo ago
To estimate the odds of a woman marrying a man who meets her stated criteria, all sorts of things would have to be considered about the woman herself. Criteria that would be delusional for one woman might be easily obtainable by another.
These calculators are useless as-is, even for their stated purpose of determining the odds of a woman coming into contact with a man who meets the criteria. Giving a percentage is meaningless unless you know the size of the group to which the percentage applies. For the average woman, the universe of men to whom the percentage applies is probably about 500.
Even then, you have to consider what the men in that group tend to screen for themselves, and whether the woman taking the test meets those standards.
A woman who looks like Emily Ratajkowski can easily have her pick among extremely desirable bachelors, while a woman who looks like Trigglypuff couldn’t get laid in a male prison, yet the calculator would call them equally delusional if they input the same criteria.
Typo-MAGAshiv 6mo ago
* Google image search
Time to do something I haven't done in a while....
Edit: https://www.trp.red/feed/status/198371
Intrepid_Place53900 6mo ago
ya, I don't really like the calculators and I'm a heavy science guy.
I mean they give a good idea of , your scarcity or whatever you want to call it.
The money topic for example, I don't want women to know how much I make or how much I'm worth. I'm only interested in women who are physically attracted to me. Women only consider the $$, with a guy they want to LTR.
So, the calcs are really for LTR/marriage, not what she's attracted to really, what she wants to settle down with.
Also, there's no way to gauge your attractiveness really, like wow I'm 6ft tall, but do you look like a Quasimodo?
So, ya, generally it shows your scarcity in the world for LTR/marriage minded women.
I mean shit, especially if you are over 40, if you aren't fat, you are in the top 20% from what I see walking around. Guy or girl.
Vermillion-Rx 6mo ago
I think the calculator is good for showing how utterly scarce their ideal preferences in demographics really are, but then again it's not really a calculator, but a census at the point.
That being said, past that as others have mentioned then you have looks, personality, game, status, etc.
So really whatever base number they get from the calculator is probably reduced by multitudes of available men.
So, in essence, it's basically only as good as saying "look ladies, your market (at best) has like 2% of men meeting your bare criteria out there" which again might as well just be a set of facts laid out, not really a calculator
ObliviousDuck 6mo ago
I'm curious, what would a man answer to such a question. Probably something along the lines of: "Good looking, a bit younger than me, loyal, can cook or whatever". No fat loser will tell you: "I deserve the super smart 23 years old virgin housewife, hot 9.5 with perfect face, boobs and ass." Hell, most guys just know they couldn't keep up with the lifestyle required to catch, maintain and keep such a woman.
It doesn't really matter though. Because for each 0.1% guy, there are 1000 women who will compete for him. If she is looking for a top 0.1% man, she better be a top 0.1% woman. It doesn't matter how many such man she knows, what matter is if she can outcompete the other more beautiful, well adjusted and younger women who also know those guys.
The older one has better chance because the younger women are higher percentile than the guy though. However, a truly high value man will get the younger girls. That's the whole point of the thing.
One point I can somewhat agree on is that you can't simplify all the different attributes to a single percentage scale which is what that calculator does. And you are right that the delusion calculator doesn't directly give you the chance that you will get married to such a man. However, it gives you an approximation, based on undoubtly faulty census data, how rare the men they think they deserve are.
However, what those video often showcase are bottom 50% percentile women casually asking for top 0.01% percentile man which is totally demented. Some of those idiots are not even 4s and they think they deserve a triple 6 with a yatch.
No-Stress-Cat 6mo ago
I love the money question.
Her: "What do you do for a living?"
Me: I am...a CREATOR!
Her: "Oh! What do you create?"
Me: STUFF! I create STUFF! But enough about me....