This will probably get taken down, but I felt so moved by it (not in a good way) that I wanted to comment on it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlqn9yTsDS8&ab_channel=OwenCook
Let’s be clear – Owen is saying something that the community has known since the inception.
-
- Getting Rich doesn’t get you girls
- Getting Jacked doesn’t get you girls
There’s no controversy there at all.
Not from me, and not from anyone that hits the clubs.
He’s essentially got beef with everyone else in the “sphere” that’s pushing this “build it and they will come” mentality. Anyone talking about monk mode IS NOT YOUR FRIEND.
There are plenty of rich guys in NYC who do not have the dating life one would expect from earning half a million dollars or more. Indeed, some ways to make money – are counter-productive to meeting women and being social.
When it comes to getting jacked – You’re a hater if you say it doesn’t get you attention. It gets you positive attention.
I kid, I kid.
Women are still primates, still animals. Showing a strong and healthy body goes right to that part in her brain – however that’s within reason.
The “Face Card” beats the “body card” and the “bank balance ” card. And the offline real world fame card beats them all.
I digress.
Owen (and Madison as well) are addressing this trend in “the manosphere” to use the term High Value Man which they describe as as getting rich and getting jacked.
No.
The person who came up with the term, HVM, was…
- Kevin Samuels
- Was not talking about changing yourself to get women
- Actually went at length to describe the problems with a massive notch count
- And said it might have been his term, but it wasn’t his concept. Across every culture and throughout time – the men who made the world go round had these qualities.
The Criteria as laid about by Kevin.
- Above Average Income (price of admission)
- That income for a sustained amount of time (not a flash in the pan)
- Recognized by others in the fraternity of important money earners
- Had a Network of people, not a lone wolf.
- Utility – Needed by the group
- Visibility – not vague ways of making money and participating in society, but something readily understandable
Kevin, coming from a Oklahoma/Texas and then NYC and ATL – had the dollar figure at 100K, but the number is not so important. 50 bucks an hour in NYC is at the upper end of working class. People that work for the City make that sort of money.
But if you understand who this guy is – it’s not the guy at the club, not the guy with the great instagram.
Value to whom?
To society.
The type of person that’s an HVM is the sort of person called to run for office, or to build their factory in a certain part of town, wanted to speak at charity dinners. That sort of top level stuff, that society only entrusts to certain people.
What about women?
Women aren’t necessarily repulsed by conventional success, but it’s not what gets them going.
In particular, the type of women that men pursue, typically college aged to early career, attractive, no children, etc – they’re not hanging out at Hackathon’s trying to snag the winner.
They want to go to clubs, drink, dance, have fun, and maybe meet an NBA player. I don’t just mean thots, I mean average college educated, has a decent job, type woman that’s attractive.
The desire for financial stability comes with age, but most women don’t care if the guy is a mover and shaker around town. It’s not part of the calculus.
Let’s do a recap before part 2
- Owen is right about money and muscles are not the easy button for chicks.
- Owen is right to criticize the manosphere
- The manosphere is wrong to change the definition of HVM
- But even the proper defintion of HVM is not the “cheat” code for getting broads. (neither getting rich nor getting jacked is easy – so if a man decides to do those things, it should be for himself)