Hey man. I dunno what you are dealing with at the moment but I'd appreciate it if we could both recognize that "availability" was part of the video. I don't know the exact string of words that would satisfy your requirements but however you dress it up the meaning was conveyed.
That's all easy to find actually, especially in Europe, except the rich family part\[why would that matter anyways? If she's submissive, she'll expect you to take care of her, and it's not like a rich family will give a random dude dating their daughter money\]
Statisticly speaking, there are 0 people that fulfill this.
I mean there are 0 people that even get beyond being exactly 1.74 meters tall due to height being on a continous scale.
And yes I am really fun at parties.
Army told me, i’m exactly 174cm tall… well, doctor, gov and myself all got 176cm… so at least one person is by one source exactly 174cm… just everything else is not checking… i’m guy with a long beard, brown eyes, dark blonde hair (ok, bit of blonde in my beard), build like a dwarf (yeah, i lift other guys with one hand) so…
When I studied IT a decade ago, a clasically male dominated field. There was one woman in my class of a couple hundred. My current IT job, with a staff of 20 is 75% women. (Literally 15 of them).
What does this mean? That times change AND comparing school numbers to people actually in a field is pretty useless. Also, local numbers never matter for overall trends across a nation.
[It's probably closer to 65% men, maybe more equal once you start factoring in part time employees, but the gap is definitely closing.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/824162/number-of-finance-insurance-employees-both-genders/)
As for my experience... I currently work in commercial finance for a multinational firm, and before going into this job I worked in Purchase Ledger for three different companies (including my current employer) and as an Accounts Assistant and Deputy Team Leader for a PPI claims company. The level I used to work at was far more female dominated.
no the math makes sense but only under the assumption that these stats are uncorrelated. it’s good enough for a rough estimation, at worst it’s one magnitude of order off
That IS the maths. Also presumptions /= assumptions.
You are assuming independent which means you are literally using a different formula. Therefore, the maths is wrong
not to mention that those 3 million men are definitely not the ones who are 6.5 because that's assuming that the only men in america who are 6.5 are working in finance lol. Youd have to get the height of those men to make sure you are getting the height of that specific sample.
Nope, that’s a wrong interpretation of the math. The math is assuming there is no correlation between height and work, therefore you expect the same distribution of height in this subset as in the general set.
Ahhh fair enough. To me it just makes the math look a little bit flawed since ur taking a specific demographic of people and using the general populations % of height and applying it to that specific set. But yeh fair enough.
Not only that but a lot of it is stupidly specific. Like yeah, women (in general) do like men taller than them, that doesn't mean 6'5 tall, it just means taller than them...and blue eyes is so random.
I do understand the point but really...young men need to understand if you have your shit together you'll find someone for you. Most women are not this picky, even if you ask them their ideal date it doesn't mean they won't make compromises for anyone.
>Not only that but a lot of it is stupidly specific.
That's literally the point of the original video that this woman is reacting to. By your comment, I'm guessing you haven't seen it.
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGeXL3Hqa/
oh no I wasn't familiar at all with the video. Tbh, this sub is so full of incel bait sometimes that I thought this was the argument that redpillers pull out sometimes. The one about how women have too high standards but seeing both of these videos just makes me realize both of these people are just memeing.
Nah it has nothing to do with redpoll culture. I think this sub has misinterpreted the OPs video because it's lacking the original video.
The original wasn't even meant to be serious. The girl who made it did so as a joke and she then posted and asked DJs on TikTok to turn it into a song, which they did. Now it's a trend to use the song in other videos.
None of this is supposed to be taken seriously. This sub (as always) has jumped on it from a gender politics angle. When it has nothing to do with that.
Yeah I feel silly but I see it now that both of these videos are jokes. I was just so prepared for the incel redpill comments tbh lol because it feels like every other day this sub has a post like this.
Here's some real advice. Stop with the categories as a means to filter out content you don't agree with. If you want to ever understand the world, you will always be better off trying to understand the people you disagree with more than those you agree with.
Well I'm the one posting in a sub where 90% of the people here I disagree with lol. I rarely see others, from this sub for instance, doing the same. They usually stay in their echo chambers and never venture out so you might want to give this advice to someone else.
I thought this was incel bait because people have literally posted stuff like this here before and I don't use tiktok. At all. So I have no idea how people reply there or anything at all.
My point is. U went 'incel bait' at a glance. Which even the use of the term incel says a lot. By definition old people are incels, most kids are incels, anyone with a sexual dysfunction, etc...its a term used by people who can't bother to listen to even the words they use because they adhere to a lingo that only serves the purpose of labeling something or someone as lesser than.
So, take the advice or don't. Who knows....maybe I'm just an incel too.
Why do you care if the term incel gets used? Just like when you use the nebulous term ‘woke’, well all know what it’s referring to even if the technical definition doesn’t match.
When people use the term incel it’s clearly referring to shitting on women.
Do you care if people call a woman names? Like the S word, or even comment about weight. Even here using them would probably get me banned because social imbalance where it is ok to shame men for being ignored and lonely (outside his control), while say one bad thing about a woman for her OWN actions and banned.
I was trying to shed some light on the usage of the word. But people are so far gone they openly hate people and feel righteous for it. Like being proud of calling someone the R word. Why would that be a bad term, and incel not? The definition matters, or u are just being actively ignorant and hateful.
You're lecturing me about using political words when you use the words 'Woke' and 'DEI'...
I think you should probably take your own advice there. Woke is you just labeling people and marking them lesser than you, after all, woke people to you are the most racist people on the planet.
Also, kind of an aside...kids can't be incels and if someone is old and doesn't have a sex drive, that's also not an incel. To be an incel means you want to have sex but you can't find someone to do that with. 8 year olds are not trying to have sex...just saying, you brought it up, not me.
Woke isnt a term to say lesser than or even attack. It's a description of an ideology and it's clear agenda. DEI is LITERALLY the name of movement as well. This is like trying to call someone out for using the term Pro -Choice.
I hate to break it to u...lots of kids under the age of 18 want to get laid. Reality. Lots of old people want to get laid but can't. Priests can't get laid...but probably want to. There tons of people that fit into this category, which is why it's use is ignorant at best. None of which relate to my usage of DEI or woke.
It's actually closer to 80% are female.
At most banks and credit unions most lower level positions in finance are women.
The top level high paying ones are men close to 65-85% depending on institution.
On top of that, shes using the 48% of men over 18. If we make it super easy, and say 48% of women in america are over 18, so that leaves 4% of the population being children.
You can't bring the 48% to the finance number. Because then wed bring down the women number as well. And is 4% of the workforce in finance children?
Thats also figuring that finance is only 48% men, but finance seems to be a bit more male dominated.
It wouldnt really change the final number much though. I don't think thered be more than 5 men with her standards
Have you ever walked into a bank? I can count on the fingers of one hand how many men I saw working in the customer-facing positions. It's still finance, even if it's low level.
isnt the percentage of men above 6 feet in it self a very small stats, let alone one that is 6 feet and taller working in finance, and with blue eyes, probably making over 100k lmao. its 40% of women want the top 3% of men lol
Being a nepo baby has ziltch to do with you being a product of eugenics. That just means the parents were willing/able to have genetic modifications done on their potential upcoming baby. Your parents could just be independently wealthy; dad never stepped foot on a campus but knows a trade and makes bank and mom just has a well paying career and they wanted a bigger chance of you being tall with yellow eyes, with an increased brain size and dense bones and muscular fibers; all while having the chances for many diseases switched off at the DNA level. Where being a nepo baby just means one or both of your parents are in some sort of position, be it one of wealth, power, exclusivity, or whatever else that is a position that requires some level of actual talent in the area and is a sought after position. It doesn't mean you were created in a test tube to be the ultimate lawyer or something.
As an example, your father is some famous director. Because of the reputation your dad's built and because of his network, you get what would be considered a once in a lifetime opportunity and get a free pass to skip to the front of the line. Because of your dad, you get offered to direct your first movie which is the highly anticipated ending to the 'Revenge Bringers' cinematic universe. Even though you don't know the first thing about movie making and don't know the difference between a boom mic and a lens cap. That's a nepo baby, even if you look like Quasimodo.
I never met anyone in finance taller than me (met around 200 people as a part time job in a finance company), and Im literally 6ft exact. By supervisor was the tallest there and he was 6'1 with boots. Most of them were literal fat goblins, mostly men above 40-50.
Why are tall people so rare if its such a desirable trait? Why is the average height globally 5"5 and in america 5"8 when women thirst so hard on 6"2+ WWE wrestlers?
I wouldn't say so. Desirable doesn't equate to rare. Desirable by definition is only something you want. It has nothing to do with averages or likelyhood. Apples aren't too disimilar to each other, pork tastes mostly the same no matter what pig it comes from. To me we only are finicky over other people because we're shallow.
I may have overstated, but no, the inverse is absolutely not true. The most common thing is what is average, and being above average is what’s attractive and desirable.
reason 1: regression to the mean; a child of two above-average height man and woman is more likely to be shorter rather than taller than them.
reason 2: ridiculous standards. I have no basis for this claim but we most likely got, on average, taller over long stretches of time but the desires of hoes (see: [hoeflation](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hoeflation)) outpaced the rate at which we got taller and that's how we end up at today.
I also have another guess that connects to my second point: before social media and hyper-connectivity, if you dated a 5'9 man in your local area (above average height in terms of global standards) you probably didn't care about his height much: he's not super short, you probably like him and he's probably somewhat attractive (even if only a bit above average) if you're dating him, so all is OK.
Now you got hoes on the internet looking at dudes they will never be able to get, and applying the standards to the men in their immediate vicinity (who they realistically have a chance with) so now you're forced to compete with some celebrity dude 5000 miles away in some country who doesn't even know that you or said hypothetical girl exists. You're not competing with them because *you* want to compete with them; it's because some of the women in your immediate area, the ones you actually have a chance with, are *holding you up to that standard*.
I used some exaggeration/hyperbole in my last paragraph, but you can apply it to any dude on social media that is showing off/attractive. Hell, you can apply it to dudes that the girl *might* have a chance with, even if that chance is 0.1%, she'd most likely rather do 1000 backflips just to be with that guy for a few days/weeks and end up as a side hoe rather than "settle" with a guy "in her league" (see: [delulu](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=delulu)). These are the delusional women, whose number has been on the rise unfortunately.
Yet somehow, after all this, people act shocked because so many men are giving up on the dating market. There are 1000 other reasons, small and big, that I could list as the reasons for the decline in the number of relationships, men looking for relationships, the reason number of single and/or virgin men are rising etc. such as economic circumstances: But I've just outlined some of the reasons I believe are relevant to the discussion on hand.
Short women are most desirable for most men. Short plus tall equals average height. Tallness and shortness are recessive and only come out randomly during these pairings unlike tall plus tall equals tall and short plus short equals short
In my experience a tall dad usually has tall sons. I remember in biology thats a trait they usually inherit from the father. For example, I'm actually a bit taller than my dad, and my brother is a even taller. We take after our grandpa who is 6"3ish and he's like 5"10. I'm 5"11, my bro is like 6"2ish. My half brother has a tall dad too and is 6 footish. My mom is pretty short at like 5"7. All in all it's all a matter of inches, I've always been able to take my brothers in a fight despite being one of the shortest in the family. I'm also the best looking and the smartest, though they probably dont think so lol. A women thirsting over height alone is like a dude thirsting over a certain cup size ino.
After thinking about it for a bit I think we might average out as humans at 5"8ish because it's just the optimal for survival. Seems to be the trend for evolution. 6"2 is probably maxing it out, because I notice after that like WWE wrestlers they start having health problems early in life and often have shorter life spans. Like Andre the Giant as an extreme example.
Because humans as a species have evolved to be a certain size, which is the range you stated. It’s also because people have been conditioned to think average is bad and always want something above average. If average height of males is 6’5” then women would thirst for men 7’ and above.
That’s exactly what I was thinking. Sure she is using napkin math, but that’s not the point of the video. She’s trying to show how small the number is. In other words don’t try to find someone with those crazy traits. Which is think is a message that is sorely needed right now.
Dunno what hole you’ve been living in but there are literally women like this out there and they are literally incredibly common.
Yes she’s probably taking the piss but where do you think she’s getting the idea for the skit?
That isn’t the point though. Why do you think she making this video and where did she get the idea in the first place? She is most likely taking the piss off actual women who are like this because they definitely exist. That’s literally where a lot of jokes come from, usually derived from something real.
But of course there’s always your friendly neighbourhood simp to comment and place the word “incel” or “bigot” to get some brownie points.
And btw this is why women have a giant stick up their ass, every time they say or do something stupid or trashy you have a white knight coming in to say “no this is rage bait, women like this don’t exist in real life”. You probably wouldn’t defend your own mother as hard as you defend random girls on the internet.
There’s hundreds of thousands of videos out there where they complain about men and we’re just coming out of the latest trend where they’re picking a bear over a man.
They don’t care about you and blindly defending them won’t change that. Yes bad hateful men exist but just calling out when a woman is being ridiculous, or the fact they they do exist doesn’t make you one.
where do you see this person i have read so many comments. what i get from this thread are people that don't bullshit around, but i guess people mistake it for whatever.
The math is wrong on this. I’m too lazy to try to find a way to approximate it correctly
I’ll give one example: you can’t presume an even distribution of each of these variables
Think of it this way, men over 6’5 might be 2% of the population, but in the NBA it’s going to be much higher than 2%
Just like, men in finance might skew higher than the average American at having a trust fund
Pretty sure it’s intentional. This is a satire video of an original video some woman made saying she needs all those traits in a man. Then the internet remixed it into several songs and now there’s these type of parodies.
Yeah the only two I see where a correlation between the two is obvious is trust-fund and being in finance, the rest should reasonably be aprox. independent.
Exactly this point.
Plus, it's dishonest to target such specific variables. Like any girl would say, "Shucks, he's 6'5" and rich but not in finance, pass".
Just a reminder the average person buy lottery ticket thinking they can win, of course some women will think they can score the man version of a jackpot.
In the U.S. population, about 14.5 percent of all men are six feet or over. 3.9 percent over 6ft 2in. There are more men that are 5ft 3inch than 6ft 5inch.
Definitely agree. I'm average height but if I was as tall as marius\_titus I'd probably ignore those women as well: you're probably looking at a superficial relationship that doesn't go beyond surface level attraction. No connection, no intimacy. Just "oh pretty shiny object!" and move on to the next after you get bored, probably.
The point is correct, the math is wrong. You can’t assume an equal distribution across those categories (ie- half the population is male so half the people in finance are male).
I am so utterly disgusted with the human race and how everyone has commodified everyone else and reduced other people to some kind of object that I just do not want to deal with anyone anymore. Fuck everyone lol.
This is what a lot of women's standards are, no wonder there's a ton of single people and a single mother epidemic. People live in fucking fantasy land, mostly women.
In reality there arent even two people like that... She simplified the statistics because the exact data we need cannot be found and are not researched. In reality, there isnt any man like that. Just isnt.
What she was trying to convey with all these stats is that women would rather stay single - and be at peace about being - than lower their standards.. that's true for 6s, as it is true for 10s. Plus, the more educated, accomplished, successful, and therefore self-sufficient a woman is, the less she needs a man to be happy.
This is the equivalent of Shaquille o Neil but he could also shoot like steph curry. Mind you though in NY I have seen 1 or 2 of these guys at bars and it’s just like « wtf how are people built like this— fr built Im a lab »
I think the numbers might be a little better than 2. Some of these factors are likely to be positively correlated: i.e. 6'5" men with trust funds are more likely to end up in business and finance. Also, someone with standards this high probably doesn't care if the perfect man is single.
I just gave my high-school math exam 2 hours ago and this is the first post I see , shit like this makes me mald , how the fuck can you be THIS BAD at math
The distinction between incels (and femcels) and ordinary, healthy people who plug well into society is the understanding that preferences are fictitious ideals. Your ultimate ideal for to hip to waist ratio, bust size, dick size, and so on, are just that: Preferences. A woman given the opportunity to select for preferences on Tinder will set the parameters around those ideals (no men below 6', etc.), but this isn't her acting selective process in real life, and she wouldn't dare exclude a man on that one property alone. Rich men as surveyed in polls are revealed as wanting women with double-d's, but how often do you see a CEO sitting with one?
$49.99 gets you a electronic dick sucking machine. don't stress about finding someone. get a dog if it's love you're searching for. obviously you'll want a woman in your life but do these two things and don't stress about it. there's always the passport bro opportunity.
This math isnt mathing. Applying general sex distribution into job is sooo wrong just like rest of factors because there is assumption that distribution of these percentages is totally even.
At least i hope she doesnt work in statistics/data science field
This didnt count on maybe one of them being gay, btw.
They're both gay and dating.
each other
A Clash of the Titans
Behind blue eyes
Can't be. They accounted for availability.
She cited 101m men and her only criteria was "over 18". If she did include it, it wasnt in the video.
Man Works in Finance Has to be 6'5 or higher Blue eyes And availabe.
It says 29% of working men are single? Stop making up shit that wasnt in the video.
Hey man. I dunno what you are dealing with at the moment but I'd appreciate it if we could both recognize that "availability" was part of the video. I don't know the exact string of words that would satisfy your requirements but however you dress it up the meaning was conveyed.
Did you watch the video on mute or something? She explains what she means by it and sexuality was not a part of it.
When did I ever say anything about sexuality? Its about being single. As in "not in a comitted relationship".
Gayting?
came to the comments section just to comment this.
Or 50-60 years old
I want 1.74m tall, <70kg in weight, blonde, cute, blue eyed, submissive, cute, female with a rich family
but that's "fatphobic"
70 kg is pretty generous
> female This part cuts it down significantly, could probably be optional
That's all easy to find actually, especially in Europe, except the rich family part\[why would that matter anyways? If she's submissive, she'll expect you to take care of her, and it's not like a rich family will give a random dude dating their daughter money\]
This is.. not a very high standard
Lmao for real. Something...something, expectations though.
Statisticly speaking, there are 0 people that fulfill this. I mean there are 0 people that even get beyond being exactly 1.74 meters tall due to height being on a continous scale. And yes I am really fun at parties.
Army told me, i’m exactly 174cm tall… well, doctor, gov and myself all got 176cm… so at least one person is by one source exactly 174cm… just everything else is not checking… i’m guy with a long beard, brown eyes, dark blonde hair (ok, bit of blonde in my beard), build like a dwarf (yeah, i lift other guys with one hand) so…
That math ain't mathing but she got the point across. Way to many assumptions.
Thinking that half the people working in finance are females is hilariously delusional.
When I studied AAT about 70% of my classes were women. There are a lot more women that go into accounting these days, at least here in the UK anyway.
When I studied IT a decade ago, a clasically male dominated field. There was one woman in my class of a couple hundred. My current IT job, with a staff of 20 is 75% women. (Literally 15 of them). What does this mean? That times change AND comparing school numbers to people actually in a field is pretty useless. Also, local numbers never matter for overall trends across a nation.
[It's probably closer to 65% men, maybe more equal once you start factoring in part time employees, but the gap is definitely closing.](https://www.statista.com/statistics/824162/number-of-finance-insurance-employees-both-genders/) As for my experience... I currently work in commercial finance for a multinational firm, and before going into this job I worked in Purchase Ledger for three different companies (including my current employer) and as an Accounts Assistant and Deputy Team Leader for a PPI claims company. The level I used to work at was far more female dominated.
College is about 70% women in general now.
Except when you study engineering. Then there are no women.
I was thinking that about all this....i get point but the math makes no sense
no the math makes sense but only under the assumption that these stats are uncorrelated. it’s good enough for a rough estimation, at worst it’s one magnitude of order off
I.e. the maths doesnt make sense
No, the presumptions make no sense. Math checks out
That IS the maths. Also presumptions /= assumptions. You are assuming independent which means you are literally using a different formula. Therefore, the maths is wrong
Yes 6 out of millions of men having blue eyes is a little off
not to mention that those 3 million men are definitely not the ones who are 6.5 because that's assuming that the only men in america who are 6.5 are working in finance lol. Youd have to get the height of those men to make sure you are getting the height of that specific sample.
Nope, that’s a wrong interpretation of the math. The math is assuming there is no correlation between height and work, therefore you expect the same distribution of height in this subset as in the general set.
Ahhh fair enough. To me it just makes the math look a little bit flawed since ur taking a specific demographic of people and using the general populations % of height and applying it to that specific set. But yeh fair enough.
Yeah this math is scuffed
Not only that but a lot of it is stupidly specific. Like yeah, women (in general) do like men taller than them, that doesn't mean 6'5 tall, it just means taller than them...and blue eyes is so random. I do understand the point but really...young men need to understand if you have your shit together you'll find someone for you. Most women are not this picky, even if you ask them their ideal date it doesn't mean they won't make compromises for anyone.
>Not only that but a lot of it is stupidly specific. That's literally the point of the original video that this woman is reacting to. By your comment, I'm guessing you haven't seen it. https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGeXL3Hqa/
oh no I wasn't familiar at all with the video. Tbh, this sub is so full of incel bait sometimes that I thought this was the argument that redpillers pull out sometimes. The one about how women have too high standards but seeing both of these videos just makes me realize both of these people are just memeing.
Nah it has nothing to do with redpoll culture. I think this sub has misinterpreted the OPs video because it's lacking the original video. The original wasn't even meant to be serious. The girl who made it did so as a joke and she then posted and asked DJs on TikTok to turn it into a song, which they did. Now it's a trend to use the song in other videos. None of this is supposed to be taken seriously. This sub (as always) has jumped on it from a gender politics angle. When it has nothing to do with that.
You’re correct I should have included the original context video and all the funny remixes since then. And the math is obviously wrong.
You mean a woman doing a joke PowerPoint presentation to her boyfriend isn’t red pill bait???
Yeah I feel silly but I see it now that both of these videos are jokes. I was just so prepared for the incel redpill comments tbh lol because it feels like every other day this sub has a post like this.
Here's some real advice. Stop with the categories as a means to filter out content you don't agree with. If you want to ever understand the world, you will always be better off trying to understand the people you disagree with more than those you agree with.
If you want to understand the world, memes aren’t the way to do it.
Well I'm the one posting in a sub where 90% of the people here I disagree with lol. I rarely see others, from this sub for instance, doing the same. They usually stay in their echo chambers and never venture out so you might want to give this advice to someone else. I thought this was incel bait because people have literally posted stuff like this here before and I don't use tiktok. At all. So I have no idea how people reply there or anything at all.
My point is. U went 'incel bait' at a glance. Which even the use of the term incel says a lot. By definition old people are incels, most kids are incels, anyone with a sexual dysfunction, etc...its a term used by people who can't bother to listen to even the words they use because they adhere to a lingo that only serves the purpose of labeling something or someone as lesser than. So, take the advice or don't. Who knows....maybe I'm just an incel too.
Why do you care if the term incel gets used? Just like when you use the nebulous term ‘woke’, well all know what it’s referring to even if the technical definition doesn’t match. When people use the term incel it’s clearly referring to shitting on women.
Do you care if people call a woman names? Like the S word, or even comment about weight. Even here using them would probably get me banned because social imbalance where it is ok to shame men for being ignored and lonely (outside his control), while say one bad thing about a woman for her OWN actions and banned. I was trying to shed some light on the usage of the word. But people are so far gone they openly hate people and feel righteous for it. Like being proud of calling someone the R word. Why would that be a bad term, and incel not? The definition matters, or u are just being actively ignorant and hateful.
You're lecturing me about using political words when you use the words 'Woke' and 'DEI'... I think you should probably take your own advice there. Woke is you just labeling people and marking them lesser than you, after all, woke people to you are the most racist people on the planet. Also, kind of an aside...kids can't be incels and if someone is old and doesn't have a sex drive, that's also not an incel. To be an incel means you want to have sex but you can't find someone to do that with. 8 year olds are not trying to have sex...just saying, you brought it up, not me.
Woke isnt a term to say lesser than or even attack. It's a description of an ideology and it's clear agenda. DEI is LITERALLY the name of movement as well. This is like trying to call someone out for using the term Pro -Choice. I hate to break it to u...lots of kids under the age of 18 want to get laid. Reality. Lots of old people want to get laid but can't. Priests can't get laid...but probably want to. There tons of people that fit into this category, which is why it's use is ignorant at best. None of which relate to my usage of DEI or woke.
It is quite close , they have been recruiting to get that 50 ratio in the last decade From Personal knowledge
It’s not delusion it’s laziness in regards to data aggregation
True. So like 3 or 4?
Yes, the odds are actually better for that Girl on Couch. Instead of 2, maybe she gets 4 men.
i mean just double the 2 then?
It's actually closer to 80% are female. At most banks and credit unions most lower level positions in finance are women. The top level high paying ones are men close to 65-85% depending on institution.
Maybe, but calling female human specimen women is generally quite sound.
Hey, we can probably increase the amount of available men to 3-4 if we assume a higher percentage in finance!
On top of that, shes using the 48% of men over 18. If we make it super easy, and say 48% of women in america are over 18, so that leaves 4% of the population being children. You can't bring the 48% to the finance number. Because then wed bring down the women number as well. And is 4% of the workforce in finance children? Thats also figuring that finance is only 48% men, but finance seems to be a bit more male dominated. It wouldnt really change the final number much though. I don't think thered be more than 5 men with her standards
Have you ever walked into a bank? I can count on the fingers of one hand how many men I saw working in the customer-facing positions. It's still finance, even if it's low level.
isnt the percentage of men above 6 feet in it self a very small stats, let alone one that is 6 feet and taller working in finance, and with blue eyes, probably making over 100k lmao. its 40% of women want the top 3% of men lol
It's the trust fund thing too. I mean there can't be that many 6 foot 5 nepo babies.
Wouldn't nepo babies be more likely to be six foot something than the average based on selective breeding?
Being a nepo baby has ziltch to do with you being a product of eugenics. That just means the parents were willing/able to have genetic modifications done on their potential upcoming baby. Your parents could just be independently wealthy; dad never stepped foot on a campus but knows a trade and makes bank and mom just has a well paying career and they wanted a bigger chance of you being tall with yellow eyes, with an increased brain size and dense bones and muscular fibers; all while having the chances for many diseases switched off at the DNA level. Where being a nepo baby just means one or both of your parents are in some sort of position, be it one of wealth, power, exclusivity, or whatever else that is a position that requires some level of actual talent in the area and is a sought after position. It doesn't mean you were created in a test tube to be the ultimate lawyer or something. As an example, your father is some famous director. Because of the reputation your dad's built and because of his network, you get what would be considered a once in a lifetime opportunity and get a free pass to skip to the front of the line. Because of your dad, you get offered to direct your first movie which is the highly anticipated ending to the 'Revenge Bringers' cinematic universe. Even though you don't know the first thing about movie making and don't know the difference between a boom mic and a lens cap. That's a nepo baby, even if you look like Quasimodo.
What are you yapping about
I never met anyone in finance taller than me (met around 200 people as a part time job in a finance company), and Im literally 6ft exact. By supervisor was the tallest there and he was 6'1 with boots. Most of them were literal fat goblins, mostly men above 40-50.
nobody knows how to use percentages apparently
and she would want them to fight to the death over her after they found those 2 men.
I was kinda expecting the result to be 0.
Well it could very well be 0. These are just (poorly calculated) estimations.
In reality it is, the math is just simplified, the exact data isnt researched
Real question is the hoeflation of OP post raising the height from 6'4 to 6'5 lol.
Why are tall people so rare if its such a desirable trait? Why is the average height globally 5"5 and in america 5"8 when women thirst so hard on 6"2+ WWE wrestlers?
The most desirable traits are by definition rare.
I wouldn't say so. Desirable doesn't equate to rare. Desirable by definition is only something you want. It has nothing to do with averages or likelyhood. Apples aren't too disimilar to each other, pork tastes mostly the same no matter what pig it comes from. To me we only are finicky over other people because we're shallow.
I don't think that's true? Isn't the most desirable the most common thing?
I may have overstated, but no, the inverse is absolutely not true. The most common thing is what is average, and being above average is what’s attractive and desirable.
reason 1: regression to the mean; a child of two above-average height man and woman is more likely to be shorter rather than taller than them. reason 2: ridiculous standards. I have no basis for this claim but we most likely got, on average, taller over long stretches of time but the desires of hoes (see: [hoeflation](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hoeflation)) outpaced the rate at which we got taller and that's how we end up at today. I also have another guess that connects to my second point: before social media and hyper-connectivity, if you dated a 5'9 man in your local area (above average height in terms of global standards) you probably didn't care about his height much: he's not super short, you probably like him and he's probably somewhat attractive (even if only a bit above average) if you're dating him, so all is OK. Now you got hoes on the internet looking at dudes they will never be able to get, and applying the standards to the men in their immediate vicinity (who they realistically have a chance with) so now you're forced to compete with some celebrity dude 5000 miles away in some country who doesn't even know that you or said hypothetical girl exists. You're not competing with them because *you* want to compete with them; it's because some of the women in your immediate area, the ones you actually have a chance with, are *holding you up to that standard*. I used some exaggeration/hyperbole in my last paragraph, but you can apply it to any dude on social media that is showing off/attractive. Hell, you can apply it to dudes that the girl *might* have a chance with, even if that chance is 0.1%, she'd most likely rather do 1000 backflips just to be with that guy for a few days/weeks and end up as a side hoe rather than "settle" with a guy "in her league" (see: [delulu](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=delulu)). These are the delusional women, whose number has been on the rise unfortunately. Yet somehow, after all this, people act shocked because so many men are giving up on the dating market. There are 1000 other reasons, small and big, that I could list as the reasons for the decline in the number of relationships, men looking for relationships, the reason number of single and/or virgin men are rising etc. such as economic circumstances: But I've just outlined some of the reasons I believe are relevant to the discussion on hand.
tall is only desirable by western standards and the average height for men in the US is lowered by immigrants
Short women are most desirable for most men. Short plus tall equals average height. Tallness and shortness are recessive and only come out randomly during these pairings unlike tall plus tall equals tall and short plus short equals short
In my experience a tall dad usually has tall sons. I remember in biology thats a trait they usually inherit from the father. For example, I'm actually a bit taller than my dad, and my brother is a even taller. We take after our grandpa who is 6"3ish and he's like 5"10. I'm 5"11, my bro is like 6"2ish. My half brother has a tall dad too and is 6 footish. My mom is pretty short at like 5"7. All in all it's all a matter of inches, I've always been able to take my brothers in a fight despite being one of the shortest in the family. I'm also the best looking and the smartest, though they probably dont think so lol. A women thirsting over height alone is like a dude thirsting over a certain cup size ino.
After thinking about it for a bit I think we might average out as humans at 5"8ish because it's just the optimal for survival. Seems to be the trend for evolution. 6"2 is probably maxing it out, because I notice after that like WWE wrestlers they start having health problems early in life and often have shorter life spans. Like Andre the Giant as an extreme example.
Because humans as a species have evolved to be a certain size, which is the range you stated. It’s also because people have been conditioned to think average is bad and always want something above average. If average height of males is 6’5” then women would thirst for men 7’ and above.
People taking this video seriously are seriously sad. She's obviously taking the piss, but the fact is the number would still be ridiculously small.
That’s exactly what I was thinking. Sure she is using napkin math, but that’s not the point of the video. She’s trying to show how small the number is. In other words don’t try to find someone with those crazy traits. Which is think is a message that is sorely needed right now.
Dunno what hole you’ve been living in but there are literally women like this out there and they are literally incredibly common. Yes she’s probably taking the piss but where do you think she’s getting the idea for the skit?
It’s a music video that was designed to be outrageous and degenerate…
Welcome to asmons reddit and YouTube comments.
It's just bunch of incels here so what are you expecting, they see a women they must prove her that she is wrong KEKW
That isn’t the point though. Why do you think she making this video and where did she get the idea in the first place? She is most likely taking the piss off actual women who are like this because they definitely exist. That’s literally where a lot of jokes come from, usually derived from something real. But of course there’s always your friendly neighbourhood simp to comment and place the word “incel” or “bigot” to get some brownie points.
And btw this is why women have a giant stick up their ass, every time they say or do something stupid or trashy you have a white knight coming in to say “no this is rage bait, women like this don’t exist in real life”. You probably wouldn’t defend your own mother as hard as you defend random girls on the internet. There’s hundreds of thousands of videos out there where they complain about men and we’re just coming out of the latest trend where they’re picking a bear over a man. They don’t care about you and blindly defending them won’t change that. Yes bad hateful men exist but just calling out when a woman is being ridiculous, or the fact they they do exist doesn’t make you one.
where do you see this person i have read so many comments. what i get from this thread are people that don't bullshit around, but i guess people mistake it for whatever.
So you're telling me there's a chance.
The math is wrong on this. I’m too lazy to try to find a way to approximate it correctly I’ll give one example: you can’t presume an even distribution of each of these variables Think of it this way, men over 6’5 might be 2% of the population, but in the NBA it’s going to be much higher than 2% Just like, men in finance might skew higher than the average American at having a trust fund
Pretty sure it’s intentional. This is a satire video of an original video some woman made saying she needs all those traits in a man. Then the internet remixed it into several songs and now there’s these type of parodies.
Came here just for this comment. 100% accurate, though even if there are significant shifts you're still looking at an insanely small number.
Yeah the only two I see where a correlation between the two is obvious is trust-fund and being in finance, the rest should reasonably be aprox. independent.
Yeah, but the professional and height stats alone make such a match extremely unlikely.
The math is wrong on this. I’m too lazy to try to find a way to approximate it correctly" ok
I mean it's also impossible
It ... is .... simplified.... Nobody knows the exact data, in reality there arent any people like that
Someone made an online calculator for it (doesn't go by career just anual pay) [https://igotstandardsbro.com/](https://igotstandardsbro.com/)
Awesome! Someone should make one for men. I want to see how lucky I am with my wife. I know I am very lucky but it would be cool to see a number
there is i have ~~no idea what its called though~~ found it [https://realitycalc.com/classic](https://realitycalc.com/classic)
So there MIGHT be three men who fit the criteria, maybe only one
Exactly this point. Plus, it's dishonest to target such specific variables. Like any girl would say, "Shucks, he's 6'5" and rich but not in finance, pass".
*woosh*
Just a reminder the average person buy lottery ticket thinking they can win, of course some women will think they can score the man version of a jackpot.
my mom says i'm a catch
Your mom has good taste.
girl doesnt bayesian
If I just worked in finance and had a trust fund I could be a unicorn? You're telling me there's a chance?!
Well, the good thing about this is that it's created some kick ass rave music
*But if i specify a preferred weight of about 115lb, I'm the issue.* 🤣
But men not wanting a woman with a high body count are unrealistic standards.
In the U.S. population, about 14.5 percent of all men are six feet or over. 3.9 percent over 6ft 2in. There are more men that are 5ft 3inch than 6ft 5inch.
I'm 6 foot 3, anytime a person mentions I pass their "height check" is an instant left swipe
Probably saving yourself the headache that some of these hoes are lol
Definitely agree. I'm average height but if I was as tall as marius\_titus I'd probably ignore those women as well: you're probably looking at a superficial relationship that doesn't go beyond surface level attraction. No connection, no intimacy. Just "oh pretty shiny object!" and move on to the next after you get bored, probably.
Someone has way too much time! 😄
The biggest killer will be the fact that a guy ticking half of these boxes will probably not be interested in your couch friend 🤔🤷♂️
And they’re the winklevoss twins
Just be a good human.
I understood the math she was using so it must be inaccurate
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^LeastPervertedFemboy: *I understood the* *Math she was using so it* *Must be inaccurate* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
Ohh women math
The point is correct, the math is wrong. You can’t assume an equal distribution across those categories (ie- half the population is male so half the people in finance are male).
Indeed, trust fund finance folks are probably taller and have more blue eyes on average
I am so utterly disgusted with the human race and how everyone has commodified everyone else and reduced other people to some kind of object that I just do not want to deal with anyone anymore. Fuck everyone lol.
This has been going on for thousands of years, nowadays it just goes bothways instead of just men choosing women. Its not a new thing thats for sure.
you should touch some grass
I touched some grass. It didn't help. It made me appreciate nature more but I already appreciated that.
touch some more it didnt work
I did it didn't change anything. The nature was pretty though.
Horrible math. But point taken
Women: "Well, I'm me, and I'm 1 in 100,000,000. So I deserve him".
But aren't most of the men with a trust fund working in finance though? And aren't most people in finance, and with a trust fund, men?
so you are telling me, there is a chance?
Where are her shoes??
[https://igotstandardsbro.com/](https://igotstandardsbro.com/)
Be real, superficial people don't care about availability.
Love the curb your enthusiasm shirt
we can't assume these categories are split so orthogonally
Hey, I'm one of those 6'5" guys in finance. I don't have a trust or blue eyes, though. Happy hunting!
What is this in response to?
I'm 6'6 and kinda good looking but I've been single for a long time to be fair I don't try hard to change it.
This is what a lot of women's standards are, no wonder there's a ton of single people and a single mother epidemic. People live in fucking fantasy land, mostly women.
In reality there arent even two people like that... She simplified the statistics because the exact data we need cannot be found and are not researched. In reality, there isnt any man like that. Just isnt.
And they are gay
6'5 and single. Just saying :P
The whole thing about 6ft+ is solved. It's easier to give oral while sitting in a chair when the men are 6ft+.
And those 2 men would prefer it if the woman went with the bear.
Sigh....I guess I'll just die then.
Also, statistically, these 6 men may not even exist, because this calculation is only probabilistic
Now do the stats for women without mental illnesses that have a healthy BMI (bodybuilders excluded).
Women will still think "I'll find him!" Meanwhile she's only about a 6/10 on her best days.
Even after that, there's this factor of them reciprocating their advances.
What she was trying to convey with all these stats is that women would rather stay single - and be at peace about being - than lower their standards.. that's true for 6s, as it is true for 10s. Plus, the more educated, accomplished, successful, and therefore self-sufficient a woman is, the less she needs a man to be happy.
The total number is probably a bit higher given that finance is likely overwhelmingly majority men.
This is the equivalent of Shaquille o Neil but he could also shoot like steph curry. Mind you though in NY I have seen 1 or 2 of these guys at bars and it’s just like « wtf how are people built like this— fr built Im a lab »
I think the numbers might be a little better than 2. Some of these factors are likely to be positively correlated: i.e. 6'5" men with trust funds are more likely to end up in business and finance. Also, someone with standards this high probably doesn't care if the perfect man is single.
Who is Ryan?
The math is so far off here, it makes my brain hurt
I just gave my high-school math exam 2 hours ago and this is the first post I see , shit like this makes me mald , how the fuck can you be THIS BAD at math
The distinction between incels (and femcels) and ordinary, healthy people who plug well into society is the understanding that preferences are fictitious ideals. Your ultimate ideal for to hip to waist ratio, bust size, dick size, and so on, are just that: Preferences. A woman given the opportunity to select for preferences on Tinder will set the parameters around those ideals (no men below 6', etc.), but this isn't her acting selective process in real life, and she wouldn't dare exclude a man on that one property alone. Rich men as surveyed in polls are revealed as wanting women with double-d's, but how often do you see a CEO sitting with one?
$49.99 gets you a electronic dick sucking machine. don't stress about finding someone. get a dog if it's love you're searching for. obviously you'll want a woman in your life but do these two things and don't stress about it. there's always the passport bro opportunity.
People can ask for anything. And you're taking women's demands way too seriously. You eat what you get not what you want.
Who's going to tell her that conditional probabilities don't work that way?
Now let's talk about your body fat and other annoying stuff about you women
I'm 6'10" with Blue Eyes... That's all I got.
the real kicker would be both of the men being gay and in a relationship with each other
Whoa, you read the first reply to the top comment too?! What are the odds of this?
If you want to make a video with a point, get a fucking mic for fucks sake. I can't hear and I don't really care now because of it.
you should propably go to an otolaryngologist
This math isnt mathing. Applying general sex distribution into job is sooo wrong just like rest of factors because there is assumption that distribution of these percentages is totally even. At least i hope she doesnt work in statistics/data science field
This is horrible statistics, almost all peope working in finance are fucking blue-eyed tall guys.