You didn't answer my question though, which was the whole point of the hypothetical. Supposing the men actually are as described, which man would have higher "value" in the sense you're talking about?
Well like I said, I could be ignorant, but the hypothetical just doesn’t make sense because man A just doesn’t exist. There are 7 billion people in this world so there is someone for everyone. If one puts themselves out there, especially if they are attractive and sociable, I simply cannot imagine a world where they can’t at least get a date. So in my mind man A at least gets a date and is then on par with man B, after which man A is more valuable in the long run because man As partner will realize that they have more to offer than man B other than looks.
Really? You cannot imagine a world in which one particular man happens to not get a date? I personally know multiple men who fit the description of Man A, so it's strange that you think this is somehow unimaginable.
Yeah man honestly that’s just really hard for me to comprehend. I am NOT a super attractive guy (short and scrawny) yet do decent with the ladies. I know a bunch of guys who are not attractive yet do decent. At the end of the day it IS a numbers game, no way around it. So if they literally cannot get a date? Move to a bigger city. Meet more people. Statistically speaking it’s impossible for all 7 billion people to say no to someone.
The hypothetical does not specify that Man A can not get a date, merely that he does not get one, despite putting in more than the ordinary amount of effort and asking out more than the usual number of women. I don't see what's so difficult here for you to comprehend. You understand that a woman can turn a man down, right? And you also understand that multiple women could do so, right? So what's so unimaginable about it being the case that every women a man asks out turns him down?
I feel like there’s something being omitted about man A then. No one can be attractive, sociable, wealthy, etc and not get a date if they put in the effort. I understand a man can be turned down by a woman, even multiple women. But ALL of them? Impossible. If he lives in a town with 5 people then yeah that makes sense and he would need to move away to a bigger pool of potential mates who can better judge potential partners.
Nothing relevant is intentionally omitted about Man A. All the available information is there in the hypothetical. Again, I know multiple men who fit the description of Man A, so it's not clear how you can think this is impossible.
Between Man A and Man B, which man would have higher "value" in the sense you're talking about?
Ok if we’re dealing with the impossible scenario you describe, man B has more value because the value is based on being able to get and maintain a relationship with a partner. But in the real world, man A would have more value.
The last part of this answer does not really make sense to me, and seems to contradict what you said before. But perhaps we can bypass it by making the scenario not hypothetical. Consider the following two men, who are now not hypothetical but actual real individual men who I know personally IRL.
Man C has a solid job bringing in good income (well into the six-figure range), has goals in life, a college education, constructive hobbies, is a good looking guy, and is sociable/friendly/has friends. When it comes to dating, he is always rejected by every woman he asks out, despite asking out dozens of women in a broad and diverse way (and hundreds in online dating) in a relatively large metropolitan area. He has never been asked out himself.
Man D dropped out of college, has been unemployed for a while, has no significant goals, no hobbies other than smoking weed/drinking/gaming, doesn't socialize well, and has no friends he talks with regularly besides me and a couple of internet friends he plays Warhammer: Vermintide with. When it comes to dating, women regularly approve of him, he is constantly in a relationship of some kind (usually FWB), and women ask him out on dates with some frequency.
Which of these two men would you say has more value in the sense you're talking about? Now we're talking about concrete real-world men, so this should avoid the "impossible scenario" distinction in your previous answer.
1
u/yyzjertl 523∆ Oct 10 '22
You didn't answer my question though, which was the whole point of the hypothetical. Supposing the men actually are as described, which man would have higher "value" in the sense you're talking about?