There was an interesting post on the Rational Male blog recently regarding creative intelligence and financial success, and how they work to attract women:
http://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/0...elligence/
The gist of it is, women overwhelmingly picked the starving artist for short-term relationships, and the currently impecunious but previously successful businessman for long-term ones, out of four archetypes. They preferred men that showed innate talent rather than being successful through luck.
This tallies quite well with my experiences... I make a decent amount of money (for my age anyway) but never talk about this to girls – I focus on my artistic side and independent lifestyle, and this works well for me in getting them into bed. I don't see any difference from when I was much poorer than I am now. Most of the time we think about all these positive attributes as being generically effective 'DHVs', but is it possible some of them push us towards a girl's fuck funnel while others actually move us into the husband funnel and spoil our chances of a fling?
As girls have complete freedom to sleep around, for as long as they want, most of the young ones are going to be looking more for the starving artist archetype and putting off the providers till later. Even the ones that have moved into find-a-provider mode are still going to be susceptible to starving artist game, as they're being told that they can wait practically forever before settling down.
Of course, the missing archetypes are the currently rich businessman with high creative intelligence and the talented and wealthy artist – probably they blow everyone else out of the water. My gut feeling is that having ready cash is useful for short-term relationships to the extent that you're willing to throw it around and create excitement for the girl using it, and it's probably a bad idea to insinuate wealth without splashing it around.
http://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/0...elligence/
The gist of it is, women overwhelmingly picked the starving artist for short-term relationships, and the currently impecunious but previously successful businessman for long-term ones, out of four archetypes. They preferred men that showed innate talent rather than being successful through luck.
This tallies quite well with my experiences... I make a decent amount of money (for my age anyway) but never talk about this to girls – I focus on my artistic side and independent lifestyle, and this works well for me in getting them into bed. I don't see any difference from when I was much poorer than I am now. Most of the time we think about all these positive attributes as being generically effective 'DHVs', but is it possible some of them push us towards a girl's fuck funnel while others actually move us into the husband funnel and spoil our chances of a fling?
As girls have complete freedom to sleep around, for as long as they want, most of the young ones are going to be looking more for the starving artist archetype and putting off the providers till later. Even the ones that have moved into find-a-provider mode are still going to be susceptible to starving artist game, as they're being told that they can wait practically forever before settling down.
Of course, the missing archetypes are the currently rich businessman with high creative intelligence and the talented and wealthy artist – probably they blow everyone else out of the water. My gut feeling is that having ready cash is useful for short-term relationships to the extent that you're willing to throw it around and create excitement for the girl using it, and it's probably a bad idea to insinuate wealth without splashing it around.