Blackpill The 105:100 male to female ratio is one of the most brutal blackpills

[Ricecel Sungnodius]

I don't know why I don't see more users talking about this, but the 105:100 male to female ratio is probably one of the most brutal blackpills. It's brutal since this means that there will always be a surplus of males, so it's guarenteed that a portion men will never have a partner. Since we're at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to smv, that portion most likely includes us. This is so brutal because this means that your fate is sealed, and that there's not "someone out there for everyone". This is probably a major reason as to why women get more attention than men. Since women are a scarce resource, while there's a surplus of males.

Now, when you factor in hypergamy, it gets even worse. Since there's a surplus of males, and females only go for high-smv males, this will make the problem even worse, with even more males without a partner.

This is so blackpilling that I'll never attempt to ascend, since I know how futile it is. There will always be men without a partner, and that includes me.

 

[ihatelife2]

Wow, didn't know about this. The 5 are the ugly subhumans like ourselves

 

[anon65]

I study demographics sometimes and came across this statistic too. Truly brutal that the ratio remains until about 40 years old when it flips to females being more numerous in older age.

Assuming all relationships are monogamous, and even if we assume women aren't very hypergamous, statistically they are allowed to be hypergamous from birth through maturity & during their fertile years. This is of course because males are a 5% excess globally, and less valuable due to basic supply & demand.

If each individual person born desires a monogamous looksmatched relationship, it is simply impossible due to our biology. (The 105/100 ratio is likely genetically encoded).

The ratio allows for women to BARE MINIMUM completely disregard the bottom 5%+ as they are not necessary for a perfect equilibrium in relationship forming.

Now obviously we don't live in a perfect world and most recently in the 20th-21st centuries, a multitude of factors contribute to female hypergamy in heterosexual relationships, and scarcity of women beyond the natural order of the aforementioned 5% difference.

According to statista, women are about twice as likely to be LGBT as compared to men in the USA. (8.5% vs 4.7%). Let's assume that being LGBT removes you from the heterosexual monogamous relationship forming process. Calculating the new ratio for Men to Women (seeking a heterosexual relationship), it changes from 105/100 to a staggering 109.4/100.

Cisgender/Heterosexual males exceed their female associates by 9.4% and growing, in the United states.

By stacking this statistic on top, it makes complete sense why males are ignored, rejected, and less valued than women. Bare minimum, 10% of men will never be needed by women.

It never began for us in this modern age.

 

[Ricecel Sungnodius]

Calculating the new ratio for Men to Women (seeking a heterosexual relationship), it changes from 105/100 to a staggering 109.4/100.

It's so over.

 

[Robocell]

Before 30 women don't care about the bottom 80% of men.

 

[electricSon90]

But but "tHeRe's sOmeone Out therE fOr EverYonE"

 

[Flagellum_Dei]

I don't think it's proved to be always occurring ratio, but rather a broad one; so it's probably environmentally caused.

 

[Qech__]

I study demographics sometimes and came across this statistic too. Truly brutal that the ratio remains until about 40 years old when it flips to females being more numerous in older age.

Assuming all relationships are monogamous, and even if we assume women aren't very hypergamous, statistically they are allowed to be hypergamous from birth through maturity & during their fertile years. This is of course because males are a 5% excess globally, and less valuable due to basic supply & demand.

If each individual person born desires a monogamous looksmatched relationship, it is simply impossible due to our biology. (The 105/100 ratio is likely genetically encoded).

The ratio allows for women to BARE MINIMUM completely disregard the bottom 5%+ as they are not necessary for a perfect equilibrium in relationship forming.

Now obviously we don't live in a perfect world and most recently in the 20th-21st centuries, a multitude of factors contribute to female hypergamy in heterosexual relationships, and scarcity of women beyond the natural order of the aforementioned 5% difference.

According to statista, women are about twice as likely to be LGBT as compared to men in the USA. (8.5% vs 4.7%). Let's assume that being LGBT removes you from the heterosexual monogamous relationship forming process. Calculating the new ratio for Men to Women (seeking a heterosexual relationship), it changes from 105/100 to a staggering 109.4/100.

Cisgender/Heterosexual males exceed their female associates by 9.4% and growing, in the United states.

By stacking this statistic on top, it makes complete sense why males are ignored, rejected, and less valued than women. Bare minimum, 10% of men will never be needed by women.

It never began for us in this modern age.


View attachment 1700113

Combine this with the fact that men have higher libidos and therefore are the ones chasing women instead of the other way around, and you realize finding a relationship is just brutal.

 

[yeetbender_]

An abominable statistic. It ought to be changed, but there's no pretty way of doing this.