Science vs Social Circle - The Michael Sartain Podcast

[MUSIC] >> Welcome back guys. I'm really, really excited to do this episode. So there are several Ivy League and really, really prestigious university academics that either contacted me or joined the Men of Action program and asked a lot of questions specifically because when it comes to this space, at least to my knowledge, I haven't seen another program that does as much rigorous research when it comes to evolutionary biology, evolutionary psychology and sociology in terms of mating and dating. And so because of that, we've had several people come either full professors, PhD graduates or graduate students or just previous academics, sex researchers, et cetera, come and ask questions to me or try to compare notes. Because there are certain things that we can do in practice, like for instance, I have 4,300 clients and we actually go out in field and we talk to women and set up social media profiles and go over workout routines, nutrition, et cetera. I have so many people in practice in field that I can sort of run experiments, quote unquote, that normal academia cannot. So joining me today, we have an Ivy League academic named David. David is going to be under a voice modulator for his own identity because he's still involved with certain academics and some of the stuff we talk about, obviously on this space, for this is considered manosphere talk. Some of it is not the most politically correct and so because of that, we're not going to turn his camera on. But he definitely has some awesome questions he wanted to ask me, he and I have had some previous discussions that are extremely thought-provoking. So this is what I want you to do. Any of you guys out there who are just like you're very much scientifically based, you're very evidence based when it comes to understanding these concepts when it comes to mating and dating. If you want the most rigorous, scientifically, the most rigorous scientific data sought after of any program, please tell your share this video with your friends. Stay tuned. Watch this video. I think you guys are going to really appreciate it. He's got some really cool questions. We're going to bring up a lot of studies. This is for the eggheads. This is for the nerds. This is for the people who really want to add. If you're sick of trust me, bro. If you're sick of some guy who's on TikTok or giving you dating advice about what you're supposed to do on Tinder, and clearly he doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about. And you're sick of the trust me, bro advice. This video is for you. Those of you who look at peer-reviewed academic studies and want to use that in order to understand how the guy who's a five can hook up with a girl who's a 10. If you've always wanted to understand that, there's data behind it, and we're going to expose some of that data here. David, take it away, man. Sounds great. An analogy that I've approached all the work that you want I'm all we have done with is if you're trying to-- let's say you have someone who's sick, do you go to an academic biologist, or do you go to a doctor who's seen 1,000 patients with empathy or whatever it is? And doctors who have intervened in patients' lives give a lot of empirically useful experience that might not be easy to quantify in whatever it is, survey data or whatever, you know, form, tireless reform that you want to put data in. But a doctor's going to know how to get someone from empathy, not to know empathy, not, or from sick to healthy. And also, as everybody who's participated in not going to make medicine knows, the practice of medicine informs the theory of medicine and theory of biology as well. So in the social sciences, there's not really this link to practitioners as much. You know, end of the day. You've got, if I work with a survey that has five doctor respondents, per cent over the moon, and there's, you know, anthropologists call it "pick description," where you immerse self-reconvening, you know, a lot of this high-dimensional, family-rich data. And what I'm really interested in is, you know, only do you have a lot of knowledge of these guys' lives, the lives of the men that you work with, but you would be able to intervene and get outcomes that no academic people to get, because you can't run this by an IRB. Yeah, no. Yeah. Yeah, because my experiments, if you will, are result driven. Like, I have a result that I'm looking for. And so the data, for me to, you know, as Anne approaches infinity, central-limit theorem, I have to, like, for each individual client, I have to make the results he's looking for. So I'm looking for the best possible way to do it. Here's another thing that's a little different about the way I attack the problem versus the way academics would attack a problem. So the problem would be an average-looking man dating a very, very beautiful woman who, through a sort of mating, would be out of his league, quote unquote. And that's the problem. That's the main problem I have. The invisible men being noticed by the beautiful women. In order for me to solve this problem, one of the things that I do that I, you don't see much in academic research is I find the guys first who've solved the problem. Does that make sense? So I find the guys who I see who are very average dudes dating very beautiful women. Now, one of the things I'll control for is wealth, because I don't need the guy to just money whip the girl into dating him. That doesn't count. That is not what I'm teaching that. Though extremely physically attractive guys, again, I don't need that. I'm sort of the extremely famous guy. So the streamer with 4 million viewers or 4 million followers or someone like that who's a professional athlete or whatever, I have to exclude those guys. And I also exclude, like say, the drug dealer. Okay? Those guys I do not include in my survey, if you will. And from that, I've met several guys who, for, for, they punch out of their league with the women that they date and I, I reverse engineered what they did. That was the first thing I started doing, maybe 25, 26 years ago, as I started noticing which one of these guys, because I worked in nightlife and I was like, okay, which one of these guys who are dating women that are out of their league? And I excluded the drug dealers, the rich guys, the super good looking guys. And what I found was a number of, you know, common attributes where it is charisma or its humor or of the biggest one I saw was pre-selection, otherwise known as make-choice copying in humans. I saw relevancy in whatever they were doing and competency. So I've heard women say I enjoy men or I find men who are intelligent to be attractive. I don't think that's accurate. I think they, they find men who are competent to be attractive because when you take intelligence and then you use competency and effort, that's what generates wealth. And I think that's why they find those things to be so, so attractive. And so those are the triggers that I look. And then the other one that was really big, but Dr. Bus talks about this at the end of evolution of desire. He talks about men throughout history who have had stronger social alignments, have, had more access to resources and more, more sexual abundance. And it's just been true. It's one of the things, one of the nine attraction triggers I teach in my course is access to scarce networks. And so that's why I teach a social circle course based on what I've learned mainly from Dr. Bus, but also from several other academicians. Yeah, and that's, you know, I remember when I first came across your work, you said in Dr. Bus's name, Professor Bus, I should say, but you kept going and a lot of people in the probably speaking, the dating space, even just networking space, social coaching space cannot do that. So, you know, I think when it comes to system academics, you know, that's what you just gave was pretty much stereo. You know, there's a fallacy in the academy that people talk about in the academy about this, the lead is them, whether it's a professional fallacy, hey, little fact, social capital, yeah, whatever you want to call it. And I'm personally inspired by Ashley Mears, who I think is now at the University of Amsterdam, then her book is innovation. Yes, she's that answerable. So for those, you know, she's a, she was a runway model who got her PhD in sociology. She was a Boston University. I did not realize she went to University of Amsterdam. We had, we had sent some emails back and forth. I don't know that her political beliefs or her academic career aligned with my podcast. She had, we had toyed with the opportunity of with the idea of having a discussion. She has been on Chris Williamson before. I mean, she's also very, very beautiful woman who obviously, you know, she was a runway model who went underground as a bottle rat for two years. And I don't say a bottle rat to be, to be as a pejorative. It's just that's what we call them here in Las Vegas. Those who jumped from one table to another and she did this for two years and she, her description of the night, the excesses in night life are the best descriptions I've ever seen in my life. I don't think her, her interpretation was correct, but her description was to her. Yeah, I mean, she immerses herself in a world that most academics, you know, have never considered touching from bookweathers because of her seat style, see, a lead isn't whatever. And, you know, I think social scientists could do, you know, advance both their field and generally the podcast space, I think, by learning more broadly. That's a no-track dynamics to the weekends and the audience. There's lots of learning here. By the way, credit to a couple of guys. Mac and Murphy and I have discussions often, same thing with myself and William Costello. I plan on going to Austin at some point and just, you know, sitting down with William. I don't, we, again, there's a problem because we're on opposite side. Of this scale, I don't know what the term, this arena where he's kind of on the Chris William side and I'm more on the Rollo Tomassi side, although like I actually probably agree with more. I don't think of a single thing I've heard William Costello say that I disagree with, like not a single thing other than like him going at Rollo on Twitter. His findings academically, I tend to agree with all of them. Mac into a certain extent. And then, and then the main ones, Steven Stewart Williams and I, we shared messages on Twitter yesterday. So he's coming out with this book this summer called A Billion Years, such a difference. And I'm going to be interviewing him hopefully for that. So I'm excited to get to deep, to delve deeper into this whole space. And of course, one of my favorite books, two of my favorite books that actually from this psychology or evolutionary psychology space that very clearly described what I do is the second half of the book, Mate by Jeffrey Wilson and Tucker Maxx and the book, very important people by Orion Teraban. Orion Teraban goes into using social media in order to build a social circle. Now he's not an evolutionary psychologist, but he is a licensed psychologist. And in the case of Jeffrey Miller, they go over the same thing. How do you social media in order to level up your prestige and be able to meet more women and friend zoning women and stuff like that? They go over that in the book, mate. And so because of that, I love those books and recommend them as well to people. And then also, you know, also the main books by Dr. David Bus, including the murderer next door. I would highly recommend that book as well. When I tried to find the book, meet is a paranormal romance novel about a woman with a human wearable hybrid. So that's hilarious. Like like a Jeffrey Miller and Tucker Max. The Jeffrey. There we are. Yeah, yeah. It's a G for Jeffrey. Okay. Yeah. We're going to talk on that. Yeah. Awesome. Sorry. I got a few questions for you. Should we dive in? It's all I'm excited, man. Sounds good. So do you want to start with sort of the mating or dominance hierarchies? Is two, we can do like all these questions. All right. Let's do dominance. So the background here is that there's a lot of economic work on the hormonal finger prints and signatures of the position of human and non-human animal primates. So us and our good cousins as a were and the relationship position and status hierarchies and sex on us. There's also an increasing large literature on the mitochondria and the mythom interact with social status and social support. There's a lab at Columbia led by Professor Martin Picard. He really should work on this and the central gist of it is that so we're just to sex among the testosterone cortisol and this all I'm that new body for conoxytocin. The higher a male is in hierarchy. And this is also what they were able to experimentally test this by having artificial interventions that basically lower nil's for perceived status and even with the temperature of the yellow and lower testosterone. Which these men are we talk about the animal studies because I know they've done these studies with like lobsters and serotonin but like at what which studies are we talking about. This is a mehta and Joseph's 2010 in hormones and behavior. Can you tell if you have paper, testosterone and cortisol jointly regulate dominance evidence for a dual hormone hypothesis. Okay. And that's with human males, non-human animals. Okay. And so all this is to say, um, you know, the theme there is that if you're going to allow the interventions that you can do tends to be different in various and a lot of ways with a lot of controls but they're temporally bounded. When you see a difference in your brain, rise in certain cortisol from artificial lowering your men's status, that is not answering the question of what happens if you write a change in men's status. And now beyond that, you know, we're not getting this whole other thing but we there's this theory that the status hierarchies are determined by dominance and prestige in humans where it's mostly dominance in our chimpanzee ancestors. It's the whole other thing. Um, which is going to find this maybe to status hierarchies but um, in M-A-A, you know, let's assume that, you know, if I were to do, does any experiments to bring a man from low status to high status, I probably haven't made more money, making more doubt. Whereas M-A-A intervenes very directly on the status, the social status component. So the questions there are, when you bring a man from lower status to high status, I think you've used the term social deficit to social abundance. What else does it do to a man's psychology to see a minor g? This is just change how he is in the world. This is probably the extent of the studies that I've looked at when it comes to this. There's a one called the winner effect. There's a book called the winner effect, which goes over how a man's neurology changes whenever they consistently win over and over again. And there's, there's data on this where basically, so one of the things I do often, whenever I start my workout, I'll go into the gym and I'll stand three feet away from the basket and then I'll shoot a free throw from three feet away. Then I move out to six feet away, then 10 feet away, then 15 feet away. And the more I see the ball go in the basket, there's several basketball players who've talked about this before. Getting to see the ball go in the basket raises your confidence. So I go for small wins, small wins, small wins, and I get this winner effect. It's like playing chess. You learn to play chess. You play against the computer on novice, then intermediate, then you go, you're strong or strong until you get to chess master. It's the same kind of situation. The studies that I have seen specifically dealing with testosterone have to do with the University of Nevada at Las Vegas, where they studied men when placing bets when they were beautiful women around, when they were beautiful women around their testosterone serum went up and the size of the bets that they placed were increased. Actually, let me see if I can find that. Let me see here. As a subverte, if I could ask this another way, let's say you, and I think all you use probably got this in like in history, if you bring a man from low and the social hierarchy to a lot higher, is there any with the digital social media, Nicolas, G'dayas, that was intense? Do you notice his voice changes? Maybe he's able to put a muscle more in his league. Do you have more energy? Okay. So have I noticed this empirically? It's hard to say and I'm going to tell you why, because my clients are over the age of 35, and they're having a problem with their voice not being very deep. So if, so here's why this is a little bit bias study here. If I have a client that's over the age of 35 and he has a high-pitched voice, or he comes off as like a feminine when he talks to women, or he's not able to put on muscle mass, the first thing I'm going to have him do is go talk to an endocrinologist, or a urologist, or more likely to go to a TRT clinic. In doing so, one of the things that's happened, and this is actually a really interesting study, and especially in your area, because I know you're in the evolution field, is looking at the drop in the rate of testosterone since 1950. You bick with it. Let me tell you something, David, it's ubiquitous. It's like every single client that I have, when they get to me, and I know there's no scientific way for me to actually be able to tell this, and this may come off as anecdotal, but I'll have a client, and he'll be like, "Michael, I don't know why the. " No, actually do a little better impression here. "Michael, I don't know why the girls don't listen to me when I'm in the club. I don't know what the problem is. They just go out there and I talk really loud and they don't hear me." And I'm looking at the guy, and generally, here's another thing, I see big eye, their eyes sit big in their head, which is a sign of estrogen, while they're puberty, and very, very high-pitched voice, no upper body muscle whatsoever. And I'm pretty much, I think I'm like 50 for 50 at this point. "Hey, man, go get your testosterone checked, and every time I'm right, every time the guys in the 200s or the 100s, a high-bogoanatism is becoming more and more of a problem because of the estrogens that we find in our perfumes, in our soap, the estrogens that we find in our water. People don't understand. Estrogen is not like a bacteria. You can't boil it out of water. You can't kill it. It's a molecule. You can boil water and it can still have estrogen in it. It comes from our fish. There's just so many things that comes from our pesticides. It's hyperestrogenating men. And so this is the reason why I can't answer your question. It's because so many times when a guy has that problem, I get him on TRT. That's a very, very healthy choice. I think at this point, 15 million men in the United States on TRT. And when they get on there, use quickly notice deeper voice. Arms get bigger. They're able to use the protein that they eat. The amino acids to build muscle much quicker. And then their level of confidence goes up. Their facial structure actually changed. You started to see a more defined brow, more defined jaw. Actually, when I started got on TRT, this patch of my hair here would not grow in until I got on TRT. Then it grew in. And here's another one. And I can't, I don't know if this is actually the reason. I had a lot of gray hair before. Not a lot, but more than this. I got on TRT. My hair got blocker again. I don't, I can't prove. Maybe it was the eight, maybe it was the IGF, maybe it was the HCG, maybe it was something else I was taking. But I've noticed a lot of, my skin got better. A lot of things happened with the TRT. So this is a different discussion. We definitely should have this discussion. But for me, if I see a man with low testosterone, because the solution to that is so prevalent and so easy, that's generally what I recommend. I never tell men to take TRT. I tell men to go to a clinic. And then they go to the clinic. And they sit there and they have the testosterone level of a 70 year old when they're 32 years old. And the doctor then tells them, "Obviously, what I would have told them if I could, but I cannot responsibly, because I'm not a doctor, I cannot responsibly tell them to take TRT." But they often do. So that's generally why I can't really answer that question, if that makes any sense. Now, have I seen guys get more confident in general? Here's what I've seen. So one of the things I do in my course is I make guys do what are called man on the street videos. So there used to be this really bad problem about many years ago with this stuff called hidden infield. Do you remember this? The pickup artists? They would hide cameras, low-right cameras in purses, or they would hide them in their jacket or whatever. And they would film each other going up and talking to women in a nightclub, but it was hidden infield. And the guy would have a microphone on. There's morality issues with that. And a lot of that hidden infield was taken down back in 2017 on YouTube. Since then, it's all been put back up. You see a lot of guys doing hidden infield now. I was looking at a coach Kyle. He's doing it now. They don't seem to be any problem doing hidden infield anymore. But I still have an issue with it. And so what I do instead of hidden infield is I have my clients go out with a camera, with a light on it, with a microphone, and start asking questions like man on the street, reporter style questions, in places like old town Scottsdale, or in places like Broadway, in Nashville, or Sixth Street, in Austin, they'll go out to these places and they'll just ask women questions. And in doing so, I can watch their behavior. And this is kind of-- this may lead to an answer to your question. Generally, the first couple times these guys do the Q&As, it's like, hey, how are you guys doing? It's so great to see you and they'll turn and completely face the girl. It's so great to see you. Awesome. Yay. Awesome. And it's a little bit of feminine. And then when I work with them for a while, it becomes a little bit more serious. Hey, good to meet you guys. Where are you guys from? It beacuse the voice stays deep. It doesn't crack. The head movement isn't quite as a feminine. They don't turn their whole body towards the woman showing way too much intent. Their eyes don't get big. And this comes with time. And so I have seen with experience, the behavior change. but I cannot speak specifically to their test office. - Mixed out a sense and also your intervening on probably a number of variables at once to get a very difficult results. That makes sense from the process standpoint. - Let me ask you a question. I'm gonna ask you a question, something that would be very difficult to describe scientifically, but yet you and probably everyone watching this would know this to be true, okay? So here's my face. I'm the average guy. I'm stressed. I don't know. God, I got money problems or I'm trying to figure out what my job is. I'm having a hard time finding a date, kind of stressed. This is the look on the face that I get with a lot of my clients. They come to me, they get this, what I call crisis face. Just kind of worn out, kind of tired. Sometimes the eyes get big because everything's like a big disaster for them, okay? And then I tell all my clients, there'll be 20 clients in a room when I do immersion and I'll have them all close their eyes. And I'll take the two guys with the most crisis face and I'll put them on each side of me. And I'll tell the guys, they'll be like, okay, you guys with the crisis face. I want you to sit right here and I want you to look out there. Now, everyone out in the audience, I want you to close your eyes. They all close their eyes, okay? Now, I want you to imagine that I just put, that you just found out through a business transaction, someone put $10 billion in your bank account. And watch, it's David, it's crazy. They're faces, they just start to change just a little bit. They go from just a little bit of a change, okay? Now, I want you to consider that now, there are three beautiful women in your home right now, cooking and cleaning your place that cannot wait for you to get home. So the three of them can rip your, these girls are perfect tens. They cannot wait to rip your clothes off as soon as you get home. And then all of a sudden, David, everyone in the room is like, their eyes are so close and they're like, and I'm like, that, that, why can't you just look like that all the time? Get that crisis look off your face and just look like that. Is that method acting? What is that called? Is that mere neurons? I don't know what that is scientifically, but yet you know empirically, like you know deep down that what I just said would work. We've had those thoughts in his mind and actually have that artificial confidence, the way he would approach other people with this relaxed like, yeah, look on his face like, yeah, everything's cool. That look on his face is going to make him more approachable and more social than the, I'm so stressed out. I'm so like the stressed out look on the face like, oh my god, that girl's gonna reject me. Like that look is not attractive to women. And I like, how do I, how do I describe that scientifically? I don't know. I don't know how to describe that scientifically, but yet you know it to be true. And I think that's kind of where the rubber meets the road where we get to the extent of where academia and peer reviewed studies can go. And then we go a little past that with the experimental stuff. - Yeah, and you know to phrase it formally, you're able to intervene in multiple variables at once. So there's a lot of variables that are, you know, particularly in my line of work. - Yes. - It's very difficult to operationalize. - Yes. - You know that's like a work of sort of a bit of trackiness. But I think it's so small side about, you know, there's a literature meditation, which I think you've just tapped into with like a, you know, that literature meditation tends to focus on, you know, not necessarily envisioning your self-room full uniform, but it actually works. So I believe it, but you're somewhat sure. I'd rather be for meditating and gun bunnets, that's it. - There's, my point is there's no way you don't believe that would work. But when I told the story about the two guys sitting next to me and I told the guys you got $10 billion and three women for you, you, like if you have a brain in your head and you're not completely autistic, you should know what the reaction of those men should be. D, I can see their faces change. And then I, I tell this, and again, this is not very scientific, but I tell people, you decide what look goes on your face. How do I decide to go to the gym more? I just go to the gym more. How do I decide to relax the muscles in my face and just smile and look happier and more confident? It's a decision that I internally make, right? So, but I don't know how to make scientific data or how to do a study on that, but what I do know is it's true. And then anyone who, when I explain it to them, they're like, yeah, that sounds right. That makes sense. It's like, oh, in the NFL, what are the catch? A catch is something that should look like a catch. You know, when Des Bryant caught the ball against the Packers, it's a catch. It looks like a catch. In this situation, if a man looks more confident, would that be better for him to go talk to women? Well, yes, but how do you survey that scientifically? It's very difficult to do that. Also, you know, when it comes to other kinds of data on dating apps, how do I do? How do I show success with dating apps other than matches? What about if I match with a girl and turns out she's a catfish? She's either morbidly overweight or turns out that she's a man? How do I do? How do I put that into the survey? Well, I'm never going to admit that I went on a date with a man. So how I'm never going to-- it's never going to make it into the survey. So now, like, there's this massive limitation. And then the third one, the third limitation, which is a really great point, is that I can change multiple variables at once because my end goal is the result. Whereas when you're in doing a scientific survey, you can only change one variable at a time, which slows down the process pretty drastically. Yeah, there's a social scientist trying to talk about the beta hats. The X-Perminage, the X-Perminatorial variables, the regression model, and computer scientists are going to focus on why hats, the predictions. And then to me, it's a little bit like that from other angle. So if we also, a small side of the pickup, I noticed somebody in the English department who was willing to write a book on the history of pickup from my textual narrative standpoint. I think that would be cool. I think someone-- we talked about testosterone as the Zeobarm marker. And if you're intervening in that, that makes a lot of sense, just because if you want the best results for your clients, that's just where you're going to intervene. And I don't think there's a single social scientist who would disagree with that. Beyond the testosterone, we also have as you mentioned lobster start to our work. I'm not familiar with that literature. But there's also the mitochondrial work. I mean, there was just a paper literally today saying negative social ties as emerging risk factors for our cyberdiction information and multi-morbidity. And the proceedings-- yeah, it was in P and S. We had all twice the proceedings in our account of my sciences. That was today. But the crazy-- It's just a little privacy. It's just great stuff, David, that I don't keep enough up on, which is the evolutionary biology stuff. Because what you're talking about right now is how-- so what I do is I only focus on the positive factors that social circle and having a strong network of friends and beautiful women in your life, the benefits of that, how it leads to dating and better networks and making more money, growing your business, et cetera. When you talk about this, like when it comes to, you know, heart function, cardiopulmonary function, neurological function, I don't keep up as much. But this is great stuff. Like I love hearing this because again, it kind of supports the idea that throughout history, that this is the best way I like to explain it. I'd be very curious if you pass this along to other academics and see what they agree with this. Man becomes the apex predator on planet Earth, not when a single man can kill a lion, a tiger, or an elephant. Yet when groups of men come together to kill the lion, the tiger, and the elephant, the man is not the apex predator. Groups of men are the apex predator on planet Earth, working together in concert because of an ability to have verbal speech, facial expressions, and hand cues to direct one another to work in concert in order to take out other apex predators. Yeah, there's not my field. This is an E.O. Wilson wrote this amazing series of books on this. And I think the final one in the trilogy was called the Social Conquest of Earth, and it was just good about that. You know, here at Cleveland, it's not the most like a peer at Cleveland, it's more of a systematic work, but Social Conquest of Earth, great, great title. Yeah, but here's the thing though, if us working in concert made us the apex predator, then what you should have, and then this is something David Busser, Joe Heinrich would talk about, is that those genetic proclivities would get passed on. Me socializing makes me the apex predator, which increases fitness and survival. So therefore, socialization should then lead to better outcomes, better feelings, better neurology, better hormones, better neurofinephrine, better serotonin, better dopamine. I should get an improvement in those areas. If evolutionarily, the people who were better net workers were more advantageous hunters, better at building fortifications, better at protecting and providing for their tribe. If that was the case, that's just the way I look at it. Very simple, how did we solve these ancestral problems? If the way we solve the ancestral problems led to survival, then when homosapiens do certain things in modernity and in the present day, they should get those good feelings. That's why it feels good to have sex with a beautiful woman because those feelings were rewarded. The men who did that previously had the strongest children, have the strongest offspring, and they passed down that genetic proclivity to have sex with beautiful women. That's where I think a lot of this comes from. For me, first principles is always, how did whatever this thing we're doing or trying, how did it fit to solve an evolutionary problem? Let's just go over this because I just mentioned this a couple of seconds ago. What about the testosterone study from UNLV, a key UNLV study on poker, and UNLV study 32 participants play 101 poker and a lab, saliva samples were taken before and after to measure testosterone. On average, testosterone increased significantly during the poker competition, but the rise was similar in winning in winners and losers, suggesting the act of competing and gambling rather than outcome drives the acute testosterone level. Now, I want you to think about what that means, right? Throughout history, if 80% of women and only 40% of men have reproduced, then in order for men, that means women in general do not need to take risks in order to reproduce. Men do. What is the hormone that controls risk-taking? Osterone. Men have 17 times as much testosterone as women do. So when we get into a risk-taking behavior, like poker, poker is not something that we would have done in the ancestral environment, but some sort of gambling, some sort of risk-taking, jumping off a cliff, going into the basement after a predator animal, that's an interesting thing to do. And so in that dangerous moment, my testosterone serum would increase. Why is that? [BLANK_AUDIO] Evolutionary adaptation for me to take more risk. What does that more risk do? It helps me provide and protect and a provision for my tribe. What do I get as a result of that? Higher status and higher sexual selection. It all seems to just fit perfectly when you look at it this way, which is why rule number two in the men of action program is that evolutionary psychology explains all human behavior. And so a lot of people find that part to be very offensive especially those social scientists who believe that everything is about nurture. And so that's the reason why, I try to use that. And by the way, I haven't found a single study that disagrees with any of the stuff that I teach. Not a single one. And so that's why I love this discussion about where we compare academia. Not to be too cross here. Guys getting it on with girls and academia. I'm trying to be the bridge point between the two. I'm trying to like, whereas Dr. Bus or Steven Stewart Williams or Jeffrey Miller is having it or even Gatsat or having a discussion about what the theory says and what the study say. I'm the guy out here with 20 to 50 clients every month in field introducing them to women, watching them get married, watching them get into incredible relationships, watching them meet amazing women that they want to love and have children with when the majority of men are now becoming, not majority, but a greater, greater number of men are becoming invisible to women in general and you can see that with some of the dating app data. Yeah, I mean, if somebody could, this is a question for later, but if somebody could basically like swab the cheap small-to-guising program, have a giant survey, yeah, that data said, it was like 1520, in minimum, nature, science, tier, papers in there. That was like, you know, give like four people tenure at America's Best Business Schools, regarding this to solve some questions. So we, David, I want you to think about like, in my lifetime, like me going to, when I know I'm about to have sex with some of the most beautiful women I've ever seen in my life, if you were to be able to, like, how can you measure my saliva in those moments? You can't, like, you understand what I'm saying? Like, there's no way to do this study, do it justice. You can in a controlled environment with two guys playing poker, you can do it there, you can do it with two men getting into a race car and seeing their testosterone serum rise, you can measure the saliva before and after, but in reality, it's like, you can't, okay, let me see if I can explain this. When I, when I, one of the girls I'm seeing right now, when I first met her, I was like, this is one of the most beautiful women, it from my standpoint, I could not be more physically attracted to a woman than I was to her. The first time we were together, the first time we were intimate, I guarantee you my testosterone levels when as high as humanly possible for me at that point in my life. Now, I can't prove it to you, but I know for a fact that it is the case and it would be shocking to me if we were to find anything other than that, yet that isn't a scientific survey. You see what I'm saying? - Yeah, I mean, you know, listen, I'm there to hit the result. I would be lucky to spit, you know, wherever I need to. - Okay, so that's just, we're gonna do David, do you have a comment here today, and we're gonna get the live samples from all of the guys before they go out and then when they're, when they have a stripper on the ground. We'll get another scientific data. - Exactly. - We'll get another saliva swab, scientific data. - Yeah, indeed. I mean, you know, there's, we'll start to get an unanswered question in the hormone where, and just for the endocrinological, which I'll make, you know, very brief, which is that, we know that there are certain things that lower basal testosterone emails in the long term, like, cuddling with children increases to pro-lactin, which is a ton of relationship with testosterone, so basically holding babies killed your testosterone. So we know that also just in the act of pursuing women in polygene societies, there's a lot of, you know, in hard to believe, but there's a lot of really good work on this among warmins, particularly the more conservative, still polygeneous warmins, and also a number of small-cell societies in some sort of Africa. And I think people in New Guinea, but they do show that in polygene societies, testosterone declines vastly lower where across the life course. - So let's go over that real quick. I think that's a great one to go over. Yes, across many studies, men who are married in long-term partnerships tend to have lower average testosterone than single men, and men who have actively involved, who are actively involved fathers, often show additional drop, especially around the birth and early caregiving period. What the research shows is that married or partnered men usually have moderately lower testosterone than unmarried men of the same age. Do you guys remember what I said before, which is the concept of, "Man need to take risk." If I have a woman, she's committed to me, she's my, she's my, I have a pair bond with her, and we're having a child together, the amount of risk I need to take to have children has now decreased because I have a child, proof of concept, show me the baby. Now I have the baby. For me to go out and take more risks, in dangers, the likelihood of me being able to provision and provide for this child and my pair bonded partner. And so because of that, what is the necessity evolutionarily for my testosterone levels to drop so that I take less risk? That makes sense. And that's why you also see men in those positions tend to put on more body fat as well. And so that's one of the things, well, you know, what can we do to counter that? It's kind of interesting. Well, men can get married, have kids, and then get on TRT, and maintain those higher levels of testosterone. Now here's the, here's the downside. And this is an obvious question. I don't, we don't even have to look up these studies, but we can if you want to. Men with higher testosterone, more likely, more or less likely to cheat. What do you think David? - So I just saw a study, literally today, about women who are put a home on replacement therapy that includes testosterone, are more likely to have extra care aggregation. But it's a, so I mean, yeah. So what is a higher testosterone are more likely to cheat, and men with higher testosterone are more likely to cheat, men with higher grip strength are more likely to cheat, 'cause grip strength is a sign of testosterone, and probably, for those of you don't know, the greatest dimorphic difference between men and women, physically is upper body strength. And so the way testosterone is measured for a lot of men is by grip strength. And so men with higher grip strength are more likely to, where I have more upper body muscle, they're more likely to cheat. And so obviously that's something we find out, also Satoshi Kanazawa in his book, The Intelligence Paradox, tells us that men with higher IQs are also more likely to cheat. So we go back to the whole thing where you talk about status hierarchy and behavior. This is where we get into a little bit of a problem because as men become more accomplished, they grow higher in status because of their intellect, their upper body muscle, their ability to garner resources, their speaking voice, their physical appearance, their physique, et cetera. When all those things happen, they become more likely to want short term sexual options. Dr. Bus talks about this in societies, whether it's more men than women, women are more open to short term sexual options in societies where there are more men than women, women are less open to short term sexual encounters, they want more long term. And so what does that happen? When you're a man and you're very wealthy, high status, et cetera, you're actually putting yourself into environment, right? You have the pre-party at your penthouse and there's a bunch more women than men that come by, right? You get invited to the mansion party where there's like four girls for every guy. You get to go to the New York Fashion Week where there's a ton of beautiful models. You get invited into those environments and in those environments because there's more women than men, these men choose short term sexual options. Now, the women when they express preferences, what are the preferences they're expressing? More height, more money, more intelligence, more competence. All these things better looking. And then these men that we just described, they want their less interested in long term monogamous relationships. These women are more interested in those men. And then we get into the situation we're in now where about two thirds of men under the age of 30 are single, but only one third of women under the age of 30 are single because there's a large group of men at the bottom that are being left out. Yeah, makes all the sense. Then the sexual violence is a blame that. And a small pause that I can argue 'cause I don't think how figured out 'cause the two people that took the figure out is we know that in situations of risk, liquid and allergic hormone, organcymating hormone, antithrustrum, the testes probably both of these chemicals and a pulse cell passion, when there is risk. But we also know that there's also a chronic. So if you take a random man's blood anytime, the morning does this lead to chronic increases in testosterone? So that's an unanswered question. Beyond the structure. I think there's gonna be a, I think, for lack of a better term, I think there's a limit to what your testicles can do. And so I think there's a genetic factor when it comes to that. But now because of exogenous testosterone being so outrageously easy to get a hold of now. And by the way, watch out for that. I can definitely see, I can definitely see people, anti-masculinity, anti-male agenda, very much not liking the fact that you're getting 45-year-old men with the testosterone of a 19-year-old. I think that we're gonna, we might see this level of exogenous, it's very easy for me to get exogenous testosterone right now. I can order four or five bottles at once. It's crazy, like how easy it is in the United States. And I could see that becoming a bit more controlled. Because what happens is now, there's an academic I know. He's at a very prestigious university. He is a professor. And he was also a medical doctor previously. When he worked on the floor as a resident, because he had a very deep booming voice and high levels of testosterone. This guy was very, he's very high testosterone individual. Because of his voice, the deepness of his voice, one of the problems that had happened in the nurses were complaining is that a lot of the faculty started listening to him when he would give direction as opposed to the doctors. Because you might have a doctor who, yeah, and he said it was something he had to really work on because of the level of the base and the confidence in his voice was causing there to be a problem where certain other residents and the nursing staff would listen to him instead of a doctor. And it was great, he explained this whole thing. Now he's made it through his residency. He's a full-fledged MD now. But there was something that he mentioned before. And I know this guy, he's a very healthy high testosterone individual and that's part of the reason why that happened. You know, now he's a he's a full professional. at a university, not very far from you by the way. And so because of that, that's one of the reasons why it's worked out so well, or that's one of the things that he had to notice. And I can see that being a problem, because what's supposed to happen to us as men, David, is that we're supposed to slow down. We're like, I'm 48 years old. If you look at Carol O'Connor, when he starred in the show, all in the family, he was 47 years old. Carol O'Connor looked like someone today that was on his deathbed. Also, beyond just us room, we have a. Whoa, let's look at the next question. Let's look at this real quick. This is what 47 looked like back in the 1970s, okay? And then let's do this real quick, okay? Tom Brady. This is what 40, let's find it commonfixed. This is what 47 looks like in 2026. So Tom Brady now is older than Carol O'Connor was when he played Archie Bunker. This is one of the massive differences that I'm talking about. In this situation is what the B. And Tom, maybe he doesn't want to admit it, Tom is clearly on TRT and HGH. I know he's. People are saying, oh, he's denying that happened. If you look at the doctor who does this TB12 method, the guy literally was arrested for a scandal where he had a bunch of HGH. It's very obvious what Tom's doing. And I don't mean to call him out. You see the same thing with the Rock, the Rock's 51, 52, 53. He's clearly taking massive levels of steroids in order to weigh 270 pounds. And you see men that are able to maintain this muscle mass and it makes them just look. A lot of them, it makes them look younger and healthier. And so this is something that we can control. Maybe a lot less testosterone, but instead you take IGF1 or stem cells or something like that, the level of biohacking. And by the way, there's a lot more data that we need to find out on these subjects, but the level of biohacking that you could do today rather than what Carol O'Connor could do in 1970, somewhere in the 1970s, it's so much different that now what happened is I am now supposed to be. What the natural order of things, and cestrally, is that a man my age is supposed to step aside and then younger males are supposed to come in and they're supposed to be the breeding, fighting males for the tribe. And because of advances in healthcare, now what's happened is instead of me stepping aside, my current, the girl I'm dating now is 18 years younger than me. And my girlfriend before her was 24 years younger than me. I'm sorry, I don't care who that offends, but that's the case. And both of them chose me. I did not go out and chase out them. They both chose me. And the reason why is because I've chosen to stay in really good shape as a 48-year-old man. I've chosen to stay relevant as a 48-year-old man. Now, what I just explained is anecdotal, it's not scientific. What I see across all of my clients is those who choose to take care of themselves, younger, more attractive women tend to find those men more attractive. I don't know how to explain it, and I don't know how to express that in a peer-reviewed scientific study because there's so many variables, but yet at the same time, I know it to be true. Yeah, I have a few colleagues who work on mating markets in other parts of the world where this sort of status exchange has just got a little more open-made. But yeah, that is, 47, looks very different now than I used to, for instance, say that. But you're coming to your clients beyond just testosterone. We also have the cataclysmine to look at, looks at our toning, but beyond that, there's just, I saw this wild paper figures ago. It comes from the woman, the lab of ours, which is really brilliant on someone I really look up to and then Jenny Tongue. It was in a couple of different places. I think she should fit Mark Plong. Max Plong Institute was a tongue twister there. But it is social affiliation predicts mitochondrial DNA copy number and female recessed macaques. And without getting into the weeds of what empty DNA copy number means, basically, it is a measure of female recessed macaques and said overall, a healthier mitome when they were in higher conditions of hierarchy and they have more connections. And so, you know, so let's try to break this down and make it a little bit simpler to those of who don't understand what we're talking about. First off, recessed macaques are monkeys. I think a lot of people don't know that. You're watching. The next thing is when we talk about mitochondrial DNA, we're talking about DNA that is passed through the female line, right? Yeah, mitochondrial DNA will just say, like, I'm doing mitochondrial function. Female certain monkey with mitochondrial function is tightly correlated with social health. Yeah. Basically incredible. Yeah. Yeah, which is nuts. And then there's some of the Martin Tricard at Columbia is-- and I think it's always forget if it's a professor Sunday at Ecoleplacidic in Switzerland, there's been work on the mitochondria in general. So if you intervene on testosterone with your clients and they just want testosterone and things move, do you notice as the social health increases, do you notice that they just have more energy? Or there is just a way that they behave in the world that is different that might be the kind of testosterone that's good if I know? They're less affected. The answer is they're more stoic. Again, this is something that comes with age and maturity. But it's like-- and I can only express this to you. So again, I'm going to use an anecdotal example, although I have hundreds of other examples of this. I used to work in a gentleman's club as a DJ after college. Oh, once I graduated from college, MCI World Common and Ron had gone out of business. I was living in Texas at the time. There were no jobs. I couldn't get a job anywhere. I went to work at a strip club. They made me a DJ. When I was a DJ as a strip club, every day I would go to work. I would walk into the dressing room and there would be 40 plus women in there completely cat-calling and sexualizing and objectifying me every single day. And I don't know if it felt very much like being in a woman's prison. They would come in. They would group me. They would grab me all this kind of stuff. They would be walking around naked. And it got to the point where their nudity had absolutely no effect on it. It actually affected my dating life. Like really, like the things that other men would find alluring or attractive about the woman's physical form, I was seeing so much of it that I just got to the point where I was totally and completely unaffected by it, which had the crazy effect of making some of the women even more attracted to me because I was not affected by their sexuality, their sexual nature, their groping, their nudity, their physical form, any of it. And so all I can tell you is it's immersion therapy. Just like if you wanted someone to get over their fear of spiders, you would take them to an aquarium where they would see spiders or snakes that they were afraid of, afraid of someone who would jump out. Again, if you have a horrible fear of heights, you jump out of an airplane. Let's say you jump out of airplanes six times in one day, your fear of heights is gonna be next to nothing by the end of it. So it's an immersion therapy that you have that causes you to lose those extra curricular behavior that extra, that extra, what it flittery, fluttery energy that you have when you're around a beautiful woman, that kind of gets burnt out of you for lack of a better term and you start to see a little bit more stilisism. So there's a great interview I like to show if you guys wanna look it up, Michael Sartain interviewing Lindsey Pellas and Lindsey Pellas is like one of the most beautiful women in the world. And she comes and does an interview with me at the Super Bowl and I don't look at her and she starts bending over in front of me and like showing off her dress. If you watch the video and we can even turn the sound off. If you watch, she's a stunning woman but because I've been around so many stunning women, you'll notice I'm not, I'm not, there's no behavior, there's no change in behavior. She at one point during the video, let me see if I can pull it off right here. She actually bends over, let me see, I don't know where it is. Okay, maybe I'm crazy, is it right here? Anyway, there's one part in here where she actually turns around and bends over and at no point do my eyes ever drop from her face and the reason why is because even though I, yeah, there it is, like I don't look down, the reason why is because even though I understand she's a beautiful woman, her beauty does not affect me to the same limit because I'm around beautiful women all the time because of the constructs I built, you know, having the social circle in Los Angeles and Las Vegas. And so that's why this works so incredibly well. And so that's what I, when you say, what do I see as far as changes in behavior, that's the main one. When the woman gives the attention or shows off the sexuality or the flirting, the guys in my program don't react to it as quickly as like a young guy. Oh my God, let me get your number. Let's go on a date. They don't jump for it. They don't jump with these little morsels, these little crumbs of attention. Instead they wait for actual compliance and signs of attraction from women before they move forward and make a move. - I think a term that you've used for this is calibration. You guys, we can calibrate it in the presence of very high status, could then should talk to women. Do they identify differently around high status sort of same sex altars, high status men? - It's a case by case basis. I've definitely seen guys who are good at talking to other men, so these would be guys who are very astute professionals and whatever field they're in. This may be, and let's say a cardiologist who gives regular talks. I go once a month I go to the astronomy department over here at UNLV and I'll listen to one of the professors there, give a talk on a lecture on astronomy 'cause that's what I studied in college. And these guys are really good at speaking to other men. They have no issue whatsoever talking to other professionals, especially entrepreneurs or people who work in high ticket sales. They have no talk, these are men who have no problem talking to other men. When I put them around very beautiful women, most men have a problem with it and that number is only increasing after the pandemic when things became a little bit more virtual because of the zoomification of a lot of our business. We're having Zoom interviews, you and I are talking virtually because of social media that's probably the biggest single one and because of dating apps. Because of that there's a virtual nature and because of that virtual nature. Men suffer from this separation more than women do not need to be as socially. Women in general, women in general are more socially acute than men and women don't suffer from lack of social acuteness as much as men do. And what I mean by that is a very attractive woman who could be very socially awkward, other men are still going to want to talk to her and ask her out on dates and other women are going to want to associate with her in part because of her physical attractiveness. Men do not in general have the same advantage And so the separation between people partially like because of the pandemic, social media, et cetera, it hurts men more than it hurts women. Because women, because men do need social acuity in order to be calibrated around the opposite sex or around other high status individuals. And if they don't have that acuity, if they don't have that experience, then you start seeing what we see now, which are these really, these idiot streamers running around, just getting blown out by women, having Noah. Basically, everyone has turned into Takashi 6.9 or Neon or a machine gun Kelly or a clavicular, just very weird, very awkward, very socially unattuned individuals. And that's what we're seeing in this younger generation because they grown up with a cell phone and they do business over Zoom. - There's someone who has launched a career writing papers on that, but I'll leave for somebody else to pick up. Beyond that, something that I've heard from some of the men in the program is that a lot of the MOA strategies are designed for use in really difficult environments. With high status people, a lot of noise. - Yeah. - So people that, you know, like let's say I'm a normal guy and I'm an academic going to conferences, would be able to perform well in high noise. So you feel like verbal cues, a lot of nonverbal cues. And you know, these different access to high status environments. Would that help me as like an academic conference for a dinner with some other peers? - More chaos helps you deal with less chaos. I don't know how we could, this goes back to the immersion discussion we had earlier. If I jump out of an airplane six or seven times in a row in one day, let's just say I try to break the record, jump out of an airplane 10 times in one day. By the 10th time, there's no more adrenal rush. It's gone. Your body is so used to it. If I, let's say David, I was trying to get you into weightlifting competition and we were gonna see how many reps you could do of 225 pounds. It's about 100 kilos, a little bit more than 100 kilos. How many times you could do that? Should your max be a hundred, 225 pounds or should your max be something like 315, 415 pounds? So what it is is your lifting weight that's heavier than what you're competing at. Another example would be when you have a boxer who's training for a fight, so he's gonna do a 12 round fight. What'll happen is he'll put 12 different sparring partners in with him. So in the first round, he's fresh, the other guys fresh. The second round, he's a little tired, the other guys fresh. The third round, he's more tired, the other guys fresh. What are we doing? We're making practice harder than the actual competition. What do we do with the military? We put military, especially infantry men, we put them behind them. We have live fire rounds go over their head. Actual bullets. You can hear them whistling over their head. At first, the guys are freaking out. After a while, after several minutes of the bullets getting fired over your head, your heart weight starts to slow down. You become more calm now because you've created this chaos in practice, when you get into a real life situation, you're able to deal with this chaos in a much better manner. What is it, John F. Kennedy said? Why is it that race plays, university of Texas, and we want to go to the moon and all those other things? We want to do them not because they are easy. We do them because they are hard. One of the things that my program's called minibaction. We do things that are harder than they need to be so that when we come back to the conference, the academic conference, the 10X conference, when we come back to the 10X conference, when we come back to the real estate conference, when we come back to CES, whatever it is, and we have to deal with these social chaotic situations. We're so much more attuned at doing so because this is a joke. Because if you can bench press 300 pounds, then you can bench press 200 pounds. And so that's what I consistently try to enforce on my clients, is that we practice perfect, and we practice in scenarios and environments that are more chaotic than normal, so that when we go back into actual real life environments, instead of being at Omnia nightclub on a Saturday night, when Calvitt, or I'm sorry, when Tiesto was playing, instead of doing that and dealing with that level of chaos, tonight I think it's a Steve Aoki. Instead of dealing with that level of chaos, now they go back to Wichita, Kansas, they're at a conference there, and now they're louder than everyone can hear them, because they're used to being in loud chaotic, highly stimulating environments, and being able to conquer those environments. - That makes sense. And I think whether or not you necessarily intentionally frame it this way, it seems like there's a sliding scale in your head of socially, of social difficulty in various environments. That's really interesting. - Yes. - There's a physical social, yeah. In every one of these environments, it's how are you relating to stimulus initially? If you put a bunch of snakes in your room and you weren't accustomed to being around snakes, your heart rate's gonna go up. This is just one of the things that's survival characteristic, but if you're used to being around snakes every day all the time, you don't see this problem anymore. This is the same type of situation. You can use immersion to change your behavior in high status, highly chaotic, high stimulus situations, and when you do so, you come off as a man who's used to being around beautiful women. You come off as a man who's used to talking to high status men without cracking your voice, your eyes getting big. You're using lots of verbal crutches or unnecessary head and hand movement. Those things go away because you are immersed in being in those high stimulus, highly chaotic situations. - And then you go to the conference and you dominate the conference. - Yes. - Makes sense. - Exactly. You've seen Dr. Bustard's famous TEDx speech that he gives. I have no doubt whatsoever the reason why he did so well in that speech is because he's given that presentation or parts of that presentation to a room full of students with hundreds, I went to UT Austin. Those classrooms are massive. He probably has a room with 150 students and he gives them and there's probably very attractive female co-eds looking at him. And he's been doing this for a long time. His PhD candidates and his TAs are all staring at him or whatever and he's gone out and he's delivered this speech over and over again. Then he goes to the TEDx conference and he crushes it. Of course, he would crush it. - Yeah, which makes sense because those are more or less isomorphic environments. They're always always always very similar. But there's this idea that if you master something that's harder, you can then pop into an easy environment and nail it. And I have seen essentially zero work on the social mastery of being within a single environment and I've seen absolutely nothing on social mastery, transiting across different environments and especially across environments, if it's a difficulty. - Yeah, I'm a very interesting-- - We could find data on like practicing a thing and getting better at that thing. I bet we could find that landing an airplane 275 times you get good at landing an airplane. I bet we could find that, but you'll write specifically on this. It's like I give speeches in front of big groups of people which makes me better at talking to women, probably not directly that because there's too many variables there. - Yeah, I'm the-- - The general effect is there. Sociality. Let me say this explicitly. Talking on getting good at talking on stage will make you better at talking to women. 100% it will make you better at talking to women. - Which one do you think is more difficult in talking public speaking, watch crowds or talking to convention factor one? - Talking, public speaking is more difficult to most people. To me, there's no difficulty. For some reason, whatever the genetic people talk about fear of public speaking being their greatest fear, I've never had that fear. I remember being in sixth grade going in front of the whole auditorium and giving a speech. I just don't get nervous in those situations. I will say in general for most people, the fear of talking is like greater than the fear of public speaking exceeds the fear of death. And so I would say that's probably a bigger one. I actually feel more comfortable in group situations where most people would feel more comfortable talking to a person one on one. But talking to a group of women who a man might think is out of his league is going to be up there as far as some of the more fearful situations. Let me ask you a question. I've always wanted to ask you this. So this is something that Eric Juan Markovic mystery said to me a long time ago. And it made sense to me from an evolutionary standpoint, but I haven't looked up the data on this. And this would be this idea. Do you tell me if there's any standing in this? So now Dunbar's number, which is about 150 people in a tribe, the anthropologist Dunbar's number, but it's gonna be about 150 people in Dunbar. - Yeah, I'm gonna do this. So most humans can only keep about 150 names or faces in their head at one time. You know, they're active RAM. And then generally military units are about 150 people at max. That's generally how they work and then they separate from there. And so my question is if a man was growing up in this 150 person unit, and then there were high status men who were older who had multiple wives, and then there were a group of boys that were his peer, his age, maybe just gone through puberty. And then there were a bunch of women that have just gone through puberty. If you do the mouth, you do the mouth. It comes out to somewhere like eight to 12 women that they could possibly breed with. So like, imagine your whole, you go out to a bar, you'll meet eight women in a night. Imagine meeting eight women, eight to 12 women you could breed with in your entire life. And so because the necessity to not screw it up with those eight women, because like again, if I go to a bar and I screw it up, I could just go to another bar. I live in a liberal democracy. I can go anywhere I want. I can go to any city I want and just talk to more women. In this society that we're talking about, this ancestral society, traditional society, there's only 150 people I'm ever going to encounter in my entire life unless we're trading with another tribe. And so because of that, there's so few women for me to talk to that for me to go up and talk to them, I would have a great deal of nervousness or anxiety. Or in addition to that, what if I accidentally talk to the tribe leader's wife and then he clubs me over the head? You understand what I'm saying? - Yeah, I'm trying to get under the chair. - Correct. Social interactions for men with women in an ancestral environment seem to be extremely important. And so that's why men would have what's called approach anxiety when going up and talking to women. And I think the approach anxiety that men experience today is an ancestral artifact, an evolutionary artifact of men being very concerned about screwing it up with the eight or 12 women in their tribe that they could possibly breed with. What do you think about that? - Yeah, a little spilt on that. In the sense that, I would rely on an accurate reconstruction of the deep human past. I don't think we necessarily have yet. We'll never have it. That's on my point. My point is, do you, what I'm saying is, the reason it makes sense to me is because it solves an ancestral problem. In that, my other thing is that most tribes across the industry, there's generally some sort of exogamous outmarriage component. So, you know, where there's a numbers number, which we'll look back in a second, and it enters down to about 8 to 12 potential mates. Practice that pool's generally been a lot bigger. And so, I, well, this looks like something to that. I would, if I had to put my finger on the primary genre of the approach anxiety effect, it could be like every issue on hijacking, you know, where it's like this, you know, involves some circumstances that we're used for one purpose, namely hunting, fighting, whatever, or just hijacking something else. So, it's a fear of rejection. That's a bit of a difference. If you have sexual rejection, or maybe sexual rejection had consequences in the ancestral environment, there were maybe non-necessarily tied to 8 to 12 being two-man. But still, but still, you understand that there are houses. So, my point is, in general, the men that I work with have an irrational fear of rejection from women. They have an irrational level of approach anxiety. Like, if I go approach a woman in a bar or in some social setting, I have this fear, but I outweigh her by 100 pounds. She's not going to kill me, hurt me. She's not going to steal my money. There's really very little risk in comparison to the immense level of fear. I'm not talking about me, but for an average guy, the immense level of fear. I see these guys shaking when they go up and have to talk to women. Something, what I'm saying is this must be on some level in evolutionary mismatch. Men should not be that afraid to go and up and talk to women. And I'm talking about even before the pandemic. And so, the answer I believe must lie somewhere, ancestral. Maybe it's not the 8 to 12 number. Maybe, maybe it's just in general. You see boys, especially when they're younger, taking more risks. They're jumping their bike over a mound or they're doing tricks with their skateboard to show risk taking behavior or their quarterback on the football team to get more attention from the women that are their age. Yeah, which I mean, I think, you know, if everybody's about to be mad at that approach anxiety, if we can call that, this day fear that has roots in the ancestral environment and has roots in the deep human past, in the next law sense, whether it's due to the, with a number of total lifetime breeding partners or potential breeding partners, or whether it's due to the fear of ostracism. And so it's essentially a social fear of fear of being exposed from the group. Yes, maybe telling the joke that, you know, systemally public speaking, potentially, you know, is being so much approach anxiety. We just just got stuff. That makes us sensitive to me. I, you know, it couldn't say 100% but this is, you know, academics squabble over things like this. Yeah, it's almost certainly evolved. But Dumbar is number. Ruben Dumbar has this amazing look that was just right, but his career. And one of the more interesting findings is the architecture of relationships across people's lives tends to be universe across cultures, where there's one really close relationship, maybe three to five close friendships. And he remarked that was the thing that really surprised and not necessarily the number that it's attributed to him and the 150 to 750 range. Yeah. This is the architecture of relationships is startling the common across cultures. It was the thing that really shocked him in memory serves. The very impactful figure of evolution, man. Yeah, I mean, that is that is a big one. And then the other one that you've mentioned before and probably what I think is the biggest kick in the teeth to anybody who is still promoting this dating app or, or cold approach culture as opposed to social circle is the data showing that made choice copying has more of an effect on younger women. A lot of guys who they're complaint is that well, those made choice copying because you're showing that you are experienced with women would only make other experienced women want to be with you. And the answer is quite the opposite. And that you you were the one who told me this data in the first place. And it blew my mind and I looked it up and I did more research on it. And it's mind blowing. It's basically this idea. And it's these are peer reviewed studies. I wonder if you could pull them up. The ones that you showed me before that shows that made choice copying works on women who are less sexually experienced and it works more on women who are younger. That's the opposite of what a lot of judgmental people who haven't taken my course believe. They think that no Michael the fact that you're out with beautiful women would only make highly sexually experienced women want to hang out with you. And it's quite the opposite. What it does is, for instance, you as an academician, there were probably more advanced experience academicians that you followed in order to learn how to write a paper, how to do a study, et cetera, et cetera. You were taught these things in school. You don't iterate and just try to run the experiments on your own. You look at previous experiences, previous experiments and other people who've been successful. It's the same thing with women women who are less experienced and younger. They're going to look for social cues from more experienced women to see which one of these men is a safer bet and probably a better mate. And so because of that, that's why I kind of felt that that was true. But I didn't when you when you brought that those stats up that really blew my mind. Yes, it's there's one really cool paper about that shows that matrix copying works for evaluations of hands and feet and modern art as well as for mates, which is really cool. It's just a generalizable architecture. But I think I took it back briefly. The idea that approach anxiety may be a social fear. The tie is to what you teach. That would mean that it is a portuguese idea is less a sex thing and more a social thing. So improving a man's social status or teaching social skills is a much more direct and effective way to reduce a portuguese idea than doing 100 gold broaches, for example. I think it'd be specifically wanted to ask on that front was what two or three findings that are new to academics and I'm always discovered do you think should be published in sciences best journals? That's a that's a very interesting question. I don't know that because of the fact that we don't put off enough scientific rigor or because we control we don't control variables we we change too many variables at once. I don't know that anything specifically that I've found should be in a scientific journal. What I do think is that people could look at some of the the things that I have found that aren't scientific and then say hey this is a great place to provide a hypothesis and the mechanisms for an experiment. I think that would probably be a better way to do it. Dr. Busch talked about when I interviewed him about the idea of maybe looking at the the number of matches that a man gets based on the number of Instagram followers he has. Now I don't think that that's a viable way to do it because you can buy Instagram followers but it was an interesting idea. It's an interesting plausible idea for a possible experiment. So what I think could happen is a lot of people could go off and say okay guys who show pictures with attractive women on social media are they more less likely to get women to follow them. Okay this is an interesting subject. Now here's the problem even with something like that when my clients post pictures with attractive women obviously showing make choice copying and the cheerleader effect what generally happens is women who are less attractive stop following them and women who are more attractive start following them. So I don't know again now I've got two variables because the number of women who are following them might be the same but what they found is that their ex-girlfriend who was not that attractive who they've leveled up from she's not following him anymore and now there's a bunch of beautiful models and swimsuit you know swimsuit models that are following him now and now so from his standpoint more like they're more attractive women are following but the same number of women are following and so there's all this nuance that you would have to include in something like that and if I'm a man and I'm dating more beautiful women from my standpoint it's working regardless of how many women are following me it's working and if women my ex is my mom my family even people I work with are complaining about the stuff that I'm posting but I'm dating more beautiful women I don't really care what other people think because it's working and so that's that's where we got to get into a weird situation. I think the best thing we can do is possibly check out other studies and then say okay what have we observed here at MO in the MOA laboratory to compare to that number one and number two for us to come up with theories and hypothesis and then have someone out there go out and try to test it obviously using way fewer variables than we do that's the best answer I can give I don't think I don't think I've done anything that that's worthy of that yet I mean I can tell you I mean I don't know how you would do a study on this but a man getting broken up by a woman and then he starts dating a more attractive woman his previous partners reaction to that is generally very angry and violent how do you do a study on that I don't know but it's something that I've never been not work I've never every time I've seen that happen where a man gets broken up by a woman then he starts dating someone more beautiful than her every time I've seen the previous partner lose her shit but I don't know how to do a study on that the basically matrix copying works on women with lower direct sexual experience okay so let's go to that real quick okay so here it is the matrix copying in humans human nature 2007 by David Wayneforth is an empirical paper testing women huh it's going to canonical just very very good citation got it okay I didn't understand what you meant by canonical I thought you meant like a cone but you mean like canon got it like a canonical but yeah got it day is an empirical paper testing whether women in particular in particular are more attracted to men who have already been chosen by other women i.e. whether human mate choice shows the same kind of copying effect seen in other species the core idea hole in methodology broad strokes main findings the studies report evidence that women do show mate choice copying men portrayed as having been chosen by other women were evaluated more positively than identical men without such cues the pattern was not uniform results were consistent when the idea that copying is conditional stronger or under certain circumstances when the information about the men is otherwise limited or when the model is higher in make value, when they say model, the female model in the photo with the guy, right? Is that what we're talking about here? The higher's make value, rather than simple, always on bias. Okay, cool. So to go back to what does that mean, right? When we talk about that, what does that mean? That means that guys who sit there and make ad hominem attacks against me in my program, one of the problems that they have is that the science doesn't agree with them. And there's been people who've done that specifically. So I mean, if we go right here, they're going to tell you that me posting a picture like this is going to hurt me with women. But the problem is I can tell you absolutely, and you can see the women actually commenting on it, that this is the opposite. Every guy that I know that does stuff like this, they're less attractive women, stop following them and more attractive women start following in them, and they start dating more attractive women. This is not a lascivious photo. I'm going to suit these women are in dresses, these women are in gowns. Again, same thing. If you look here, like again, these are the women in the photo, and then the person commenting on the photo is a model who looks like this. But yet I'm supposed to understand that this type of content is somehow hurting me or making me look too much like a player. Again, this is, this is Safron. This girl is gorgeous, okay? And there's Safron is liking the photo that I was supposed to hurt me. This is supposed to, again, let's look here. Oh, who is that? Shelby Corpie. Shelby Corpie is a maximum, she's a maximum cover model, liking the photo of me here. But yet I'm supposed to believe that photos like this hurt me or make me look try hard. And yet let's go back to the data you just showed. The data we just talked about, which is when we go here and look at screen, meet you, look at the main findings, is that study report, the evidence that women do show, may choice, copying. Again, I'm showing you the proof in the comments and the likes, and then the data is supporting what I'm saying. And yet this is the single thing I get attacked more about than anything. Well, actually no, female friends is the single thing. But next to that, it's this one. - Which is related. - Yeah. - Which is related, it's very much related. So it's one of these situations and I'm not gonna say which, but in those photos that I showed you, I had dated multiple women in those photos, like two or three, not at the same time, but over time I'd actually been in relationships with them or at least flames. And I'm telling you, it's never hurt me in the slightest. Never, not one time. In total, are there women who don't like the idea that I post with a lot of other women? Certainly, have I seen that? The thing is that that's an anecdote that I'll answer. I have 43 hundred clients. At some point, I should start getting clients telling me, hey Michael, I did what you said about the Make Choice Copping Photos and it's just hurt me with women and women don't like. At some point I should get that result. I don't ever get that result. Now maybe there's a bias in my, there's a sample bias because these people are involved with my program, but I've never seen it not work. Now how do I study that? I don't know, I'm not exactly sure. We can look at the cheerleader effect, which is another study. So let's do something real quick. And I don't know if we can do this in academia. You tell me if we can do this in academia, but let's look at, so we just looked at the Make Choice Copping Study. Let's look at the cheerleader effect study, okay? - I think, yeah, what is interesting, I'm also funny, there was a comment from one of them in the photo, I think that it was, it said a blink twice if you're being black, no, exactly. Exactly. We're changing the parameters. Okay, so let's do this real quick, okay? Let's just, let's do this. And I don't know if we're cheating by doing this, but you tell me, because you're the academician, the cheerleader effect is a cognitive bias where people rate an individual as more attractive when they're seen in a group than when alone. So now let's look at what that says, right? Let's go back to this, okay? Cheerleader effect is a cognitive bias when people rate individuals as more attractive when they are in groups, okay? And then we can look at the evidence and the practical implications. The effect shows up for male only mixed groups and across a range of group sizes, beyond small groups, bigger isn't necessarily better. And I found that to be the case too. I get the most likes when there's four girls in a photo with me, when there's four girls in a photo with me. So let's look at the two things that are happening. If I have a group of women with me and we're using the cheerleader effect, these women in general look more attractive because people look at the average of their faces. Now, me as a man, I'm in a photo with women who look more attractive. What is that going to do for me in a mate choice copying setting? It's going to make more look more attractive. Sorry, oh, you male models telling guys that they should post pictures of women. Sorry, the data does not agree with you. In fact, I looked up, I wanted a bunch of AI models and I looked up, say, is there any data showing that men who are photographed with attractive women or men who show that other women choose them on a regular basis, mate choice copying? Is there any data showing that they have less success with the opposite sex? And there's not one single shred of evidence showing that. Again, sorry, male model data. - There is not. - Yeah, sorry, they're male model dating coaches who keep saying that the photos look try hard. The data does not support your findings. - The specific area where, and this is where the demo is gone very far in contributing to the literature, I'll be in fun with it in a period of the very rigorous way, is that the specific instrument in the criminal instrument and the Wayne Fourth paper that we just discussed is that it was, show a man with a, I think it was printed as a girlfriend. It was just the two people in the same photo. Previous papers had used a wedding ring as the instrument to show that the man was a couple of years old. - So we could go over, we could do that. Let's go a hold on, keep talking. We're gonna do the wedding ring effect because that goes along with the cheerleader effect. Yes, keep going. - Yes, but the wedding ring effect, and there were, I think there was one really big paper, big as in a lot of impact. So it was, I talked about a lot. - It was a Oklahoma State, or it was, or it was a camera member with university. - But there was an idea, - It kind of meant that it's a fact. - Yeah, there's, but there's another, finding that when they used a wedding ring instrument, one paper that used a wedding ring instrument, finding a horrible fact, another paper found no effects. But then there was another set of work, set of papers on this that showed that if the relationship between the man and woman in the photo is unclear, the matrix copying effect is bigger. So, okay, then if we have a very clear signal of the unknownness of the relationship, and then the instrument that you use is, 'cause you have to pick an instrument, and you have to use the unit you appear to start, there's gotta be a very limited scope of intervention that you have. If you use the most single known type of relationship, the most single definite type of relationship, which is marital bonds, conical bonds, what can one make sense if they didn't find the fact for that? And so, I'm curious, this is from a way, we, a big hole in the matrix copying literature, is if a man is with one woman versus two to three to four to five to six, they have done some work on animals where they modulate a number of partners that they've been able to show them with, but they haven't done that with humans. And beyond that, there's this interactive element where these women who, what I can tell all evidence points the fact that these people you genuinely are friends with, and genuinely care about, I don't need to be said, but these people are commenting on the photo, and so there's this interactivity where there's social proof that extends beyond the photo itself, but that to me is really interesting. There's no academic work on this, where this either includes the interactivity piece, or that includes the modulation of the number of women the photo with the men, that's ever been tested in humans. - Yeah, I mean, that's the thing with the, hold on. Okay, so this is another one that I love that we can bring up here real quick, and then you tell me what you think about this one. 'Cause I don't remember if you were the one who sent this to me, or who it was. Course study, you describe a group of 49 women were shown men's faces and asked to rate each man's attractiveness on a scale of 1 to 100. After they rated the experiment, experimenters showed them what the other women had supposedly given them. These were not, these were made up findings, by the way, as attracting the scores for those men. The women were then asked to rate the men again, not now knowing that these other women's ratings, but they found when participants saw that the other women had rated the man as higher than they did, they tended to increase their own rating. Guys, if there's anything you take from this video, it's this, okay? Women want what other women want. I know there's mixed reviews on the wedding ring effect. I can tell you, the first study that showed the 30% difference, I tend to believe that one more. I know there are other studies that have shown a null difference. I haven't seen a study that shows a negative correlation, but maybe there is a null correlation, tend to not believe. I, empirically, from the thousands of experiments I've seen, afraid men do get chased after more by women because it's proof of concept. Men got an attractiveness boost from others approval. Guys, just like seriously, take this, put this into your head, and then just start asking yourself, is your text game course gonna help you with this? Is your cold approach course gonna help you with this? Is your dating app course gonna help you with this? Is the basic, like, Madam prostitute matchmaker that you're going to, is she going to help you with this? Or is social circle going to help you with this? Ask yourself the question. The data is showing you what the answer is. The same conformatory effect showed up when rating abstract art two. Suggesting a general tendency to copy others preference, not just in made choice, including lesbians and bisexual women didn't change the pattern, which implies it's not strictly about how a mate pursues, but about social influence on attractiveness judgments. So it makes sense. We call it made choice copying. I've always thought of made choice copying as a subset of social proof. It's just a set of social proof, just in court. Again, I bought a cyber truck because several of my friends bought cyber trucks, and let me tell you, one of the greatest purchases I've ever made in my life. This is very much non-scientific, but it's very clear to me when Elon developed this truck, he developed it for men to take women on dates, 'cause this thing has infinite easter eggs and toys and stimulus, all of it. Like, you don't even have to leave the car to have a party. It's incredible, but I did so because, my best friend who's a female, she's a, she's a playboy model with like four million followers. She said, "The cyber truck's the greatest thing she ever bought. I bought one and I can completely agree." So the social proof of having someone who I consider, who I trust in his high status, telling me to do something, caused me to do it. But that was not a sexual subset. A sexual subset of, of, of social proof would be mate, choice, copying, and humans, which we can see over and over again. And by the way, anybody who's made it this far in the video, if you're still doubting this, I don't know, I don't know how to help you. I really don't. I really wish anybody who kind of disagrees with my overall, because we haven't even gotten into female friends. We haven't even gotten to that. Anyone who just disagrees with my overall viewpoints or the things that we teach in this program, just show them this video and just say, just like, we're just pounding the the research in the data, pounding it over and over again. And their response is, "Trust me, bro." No, that's not right. Or making personal attacks against me. If you guys have any, like, I don't know, loyalty to academic research, to scientific rigor, to any of it whatsoever, to peer reviewed research, you can't look at this and then just conclude that I'm making this shit up. You just can't do it at this point. And again, ask yourself, why do it, and again, David is one of them. Why do so many other academics? Why do we connect on the level of discussing this? It's because I'm trying to be academically honest when trying to find a scientific way, or once again, a man who's a five to data girl who's a 10. The man who's invisible to be noticed by most women. I'm trying to find a scientific way to make that happen. And again, multiple studies have shown how to do that, especially is it the Lucy Hill or Lucy Hunt? I believe it's Lucy Hunt, right? Yes. Now you're listening to our stuff, right? The Dean Study, which is my favorite, which is one of my favorites, Lucy Hunt. 2015. I think the study that you just cited, I'm not mistaken, was from Professor Little, he's in the UK, I forget where, but it was little, little in 2008, social influence, even face preference, many women are influenced more for long term, then short term attractiveness decisions. So social influence is more important, matrix company is more important for long term meeting, then short term meeting. Interesting. I was in El Luce, you made your great journal. This is great here. So core findings, this is the Lucy, this is the Lucy Hunt study. The study found that when partners know each other for a short time before they start dating, typically met, met felt mutual attraction started dating scenario, couples tend to be assortatively matched on physical attractiveness, meaning the best way to meet a girl who's a 10 and immediately date her is for you as a man to also be a 10 more attractive people pair with more attractive people less attractive with less attractive, the core findings. When the partners know each other for a long time, ready, friend zone, before they start dating, ie friends, classmates, co workers, one more time, the data support, I didn't make this shit up guys, I didn't make the friend zone shit up. The data supports what I'm doing here, that matching on looks becomes weaker. Remember, the guy who's a five dating the girls who's a 10 people of difficult of different levels of objective attractiveness are more likely to end up together. Again, guys, if you're the five, if you guys know that you're not chapped and you want to date a girl who's a really, really beautiful, read the study, you want to see a program that inculcates that study fully in the fibers of what I teach, come to men of action. Just, just, just, just watch the videos. Just all I talk about. And yet, there's one of the great reasons why I wanted to have David on here is because again, whenever I talk to researchers about these subjects, they rarely disagree with me. Now, they don't really like the way I present it because sometimes it's like Andrew Tate or Rollo Tomassi sitting across from me or Meir and Gaines. And so that kind of pollutes the message, but the message is still true. It's trueness is still there, regardless if you don't like the way that it's delivered. So I'm trying to, the reason why we wanted to do this today is to give it to you in a more digestible academic, digestible academic appetite delivery so that you can see it and say, okay, I agree or disagree. Let me send this video to one of my friends who just agrees with these fundamental ideas and then just sit there and have them look up these studies and be like, God damn, you know, everything that Michael said, it looks like there's actually data supporting it. And when I look around at all these other dating courses, none of them do anything that's supported by science or ever they ever cite any academic research whatsoever. So that's what we're trying to, if at the very least you guys don't understand when it comes to this space of intersectional dynamics and social circle and networking, we're the only group, the only group that is using scientific peer review data in order to come up with our hypothesis. There's no one else. If there's someone else, please put it in the comments and then let's compare how much scientific data and how many papers they're using in order to build their program. And then let's show their 4,300 testimonials. Okay, I don't know what else to do. I've been trying to pound this into your guys heads for six years now, 18 years now actually that's how long I've been coaching. I'm just interested to see what the reaction is to this. What else David? Did you have any other questions? I think the technical term is that Chad Thunder penis, I think that was a joke. Yeah, it's been revised. But yeah, it's, uh, we say your girls going to get taken by it's Chris the Coat dealer, Steve the male stripper, Victor the VIP host, Brock the bartender and Chad Thundercock. And it empirically, there's a lot to learn from that, you know, like, I mean, I think the, you know, if we discussed for some years that the club promoters seem to do well, I wonder what that is. One of the craziest parts about that club promoter, the club promoters calling the girls family, that's friend zoning them. If you guys didn't understand. And my favorite one of the lines that stuck with me from the book, the book is called a very important people by Ashley Mears was when she was talking about club promoters having to sleep with the hottest girl in the friend group in order to get the group of friends to come out, even in some of these guys were having so much sex, they didn't want to sleep with these women, even though they were like really attractive. They're like, I have to have sex with them in order to keep these women coming out to the night clubs with me. How are you, do you understand the average man? You have to have sex in order to make money. Do you understand how outside of a paradigm that is for 90%, 95% of men out there? That's insane. And yet she was, this is an academic describing what she saw. And yet she still want to push back. Why can't you guys just concede? I'm right. Like, I don't know, or at least debate me on the facts here. This is the way to the works. Women choose who other women choose. That's it. That is just the fact showing that other women choose you while it may come off as disingenuous or try hard. It may feel try hard. The fact is it's more effective than showing your six pack abs or your Lamborghini. Those things do not work as well as make choice copying period. That's just the case. Now, if you show those other things, I'm not saying you won't get attraction for being a very good looking man. You can get a lot of attraction from a lot of women. But what I find with a lot of those guys is as soon as they get the attraction from the women and because they don't you they don't have any game, for instance, they're not they're not socially calibrated. They don't have to be because they're just really good looking men. It's like a seven-foot tall guy telling a six-foot tall guy to be play center in the NBA. Just be seven feet tall like me. It's these really good looking guys saying, hey, I just go up and talk to women and then they just like me. The issue with it, the issue that they don't seem to understand is that what I find is that really good looking guys don't tend to be able to hold frame when talking to beautiful women. Meaning, they're getting the sex from the women because the women like them. But whenever the women are like, I don't like that you talked to the women are like, sorry, I don't like that you talked to that girl. I don't like to take those pictures down with those other girls. I don't like that all these other girls know you. Now the guy because he's so good looking, he doesn't have enough mental frame and mental fortitude to recognize that she's complaining about the very things she's attracted to. And so because of that, he changes, he takes all those photos down, he cuts off all the female friends that he had previously and his attractiveness level goes down and I said this before and I know there's no way you're going to do a scientific study on this. But I said this before, if you do everything a woman wants in a relationship, she's just going to train you to become the man she eventually cheats on. Sorry, I know I got a little offensive there, but I've seen that happen more than a hundred times as well. And so that's what happens is these male model dating coaches instead of accepting the frame that make choice copying is the thing that generates attraction, they've lost frame and instead they get their advice or anecdotal advice from something that a woman they're sleeping with told them. The, to a couple of a bit, one thing the book for pressing is in, by the way, it's a Princeton University Press book. It's very prestigious in university press. New grad students climbing over each other to get their books published, their thesis, adopted books and published in, consumerist press. It's like almost like a matrix copying reverses where it goes from matrix copying, you know, leading to more attraction, but at some point it's like the attraction. The friendship requires sexual attraction to be sustained. It's like this almost reverse, which is crazy when you put it like that. But yeah, the, uh, it's, uh, this, uh, Orion Terabon is also talking about, I think this idea of consumptive love is how he phrased it. Uh, yeah, but the, uh, I believe it might be called a shit test. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that's interesting. If, if women have an, uh, an algorithm in their mind that can, again, there's the, there's the, there's the love and the feeling and the companionship that you get. You can study it scientifically or not. You know it's real. If you've been in love, you know, it's a real thing. You want to be near the person that you love. It makes sense. Okay. But then there's this other part of the human, the human condition, if you will, the part that's always pattern recognition is the reason why astrology was invented because we made up patterns of stars that had nothing to do with the reality, but we're always looking for patterns. This pattern recognition is always comparing A to B and B to C. This tree is taller than that tree. This flower is prettier than that tree. And then it goes to that woman's prettier than that woman. That man's more handsome than that man. That woman has more, has bigger blood than this girl. This guy has more money than this guy. This comparative nature. is also running in the background of the Homo sapien brain while they're in the relationship. So you're in a relationship with a woman, and yes, another attractive woman walks by and you might notice her, especially if you have still have high testosterone. You're a woman and you have your man with you, and then you notice on social media, all these men who are better looking than your man, richer, taller, et cetera, funnier, have more status, and you're noticing these other things. And that's why that's where hypergamy comes from. It's not wrong, it's not bad, it's not unnatural, but here's why I don't update David, I'm wondering what you think about this one idea, and that is with the hypergamy algorithm, the reason why I think it is more pervasive and actually more damaging for women than it is for men, because men have, it's not hypergamy, but they have a certain level of hyperandry that manifests itself in watching pornography or whatever, or fantasizing about some attractive woman. The difference is average women, because of social media, can now compete for very, very high status men, because of social media, okay? And what's happened is a lot of these average women are actually getting to meet these high status men, and they're sleeping with them. It's happening in droves, it's massive numbers of this happening. I talk to women all the time about, and they tell me celebrities are in their DMs, rappers, these are women or not, they're not of exceptional attractiveness, these are of average attractiveness women. And I see this constantly, yet with men, so basically the woman has this fantasy of the man she could get, or she can't get to settle down, but she can have sex with, and she's actually fulfilling that fantasy, which is actually unhealthy, because she can't get that guy to settle down. Men on the other hand, they have the fantasy about the star or the model, and that woman wouldn't put on him if he was on fire. They never meet, do you understand? So they're like, the real, there's a ceiling to his fantasy. It goes up to here, and then it stops, because he can't actually, he can't sneak into Megan Fox's DMs and smash, whereas an average woman can't sneak into Miss Inga and Kelly's DMs and smash. Do you see the point I'm trying to make here? How it's actually a little bit more pernicious for women? - Yeah, I mean, as far as male polygamy, I think it would be polygamy in this case. I forget what the Greek gamie, gammas means. I think that's just marriage, whereas polygamy is like one of the only ones. Yeah, the thing might be, polygamy is multiple women, polyanders, multiple men, polygamy is like the gametes, the mating. - Oh, that's the same. - I believe polygamy is multiple women and one man. - Yeah, and then polygamy is multiple marriages. - Yeah, polygamy. - Yeah. - Of course. - Yes, if men have this, I'm not sure that we call hyperginek or hypergamous nature as well. I think hyperanders would be like hyper male, more male. - Right, so hypergamy means women moving up in a social cast. Though hyperandry would mean men moving up as well, but in hyperandry, the way hyperandry would manifest is the 25 year old guy who marries a 25 year old woman. They get married, have kids. They both turn 40, he divorces his wife and then he marries another 25 year old woman. That would be an expression of hyperandry, whereas hypergamy would be an expression of a woman is dating a man of normal means and she gets a boob job and a blow out and a glow up and she starts getting attention from men with more money and more status and she cheats on her partner with the higher status man. That's hypergamy. That would be the difference. - If we can put the expression of the two things. - I think that this idea about, to put this in more general terms, I think I read through the literature on a sort of a meeting and status exchange and all this going back to 1970s to the present and the Soviet data that a lot of academics use. And even though I'm particularly, there's, which we can talk about around this out at the end, is there's something so macadamia without an access to dating app data. - Yes. - Yes. - Even still, if I'm trying to understand this, I can look at Soviet data from 10 years ago and I didn't look at the real world and it seems like we're just upshed creep without battle. Like there is just lost and this is this, this is this mail strong of information. - This is not scientific. This is not scientific, but I'm telling you guys right now, any dating coach who tells you to use a dating app is not a dating coach. They have no eye for men. They have no idea what they're doing. They don't know how to help you. And so they're telling you to use a dating app. Dating apps, nine men for every woman on Tinder, the average man gets six matches for every 1000 right swipes. The average woman on 100 matches for every 1000 right swipes, 68% of men on these dating apps report they're matching up with women and then getting friend zone, meaning non-romantic relationships afterwards, a quarter of these men report getting scammed. These women are catfishing them or trying to get them to go down, try to go down their sex funnel, their only fans funnel or these women are sex workers. And then again, I don't have the data on this, but a lot of women with mental disorders. It just doesn't make sense, guys. You just take any, if you just take any logic and reason, if I have any empathy for other people and just ask yourself, why would well adjusted mentally stable, attractive young women ever be on a dating app when it requires no force for them to get sex? It doesn't make any sense. And so I've interviewed hundreds of women on this and whenever these women are young and attractive and I ask them, are you on a dating app? The answer is never. It's 0.00, never, never, never. The only time I see attractive women on dating apps is when they're over 35, 38, 40 years old, then I'll see that. So it's madness. It's absolute madness that people are still preaching this nonsense. This is not only has it decimated men and it's not an effective way for men to date. It's also changed women's perception of how attractive they are to the opposite sex because they're getting so many matches and they think a lot of these men that they're swiping left on that they could get these men to commit or they could date them. And the reality is they could definitely have sex with them, but they can't get these men to commit. And so now we get in this massive evolutionary mismatch in part because of the perceived dilemma of choice that these women have. They think they can choose from all these men that they cannot. Yeah. And there's just, I don't know, I'd like to get your thoughts on the dating app stuff. Also just for just a small aside, it is just why I'm beginning. They give you any reference to the signs of all dating apps are just not good. It's very hard to argue that they are not positive for either men or women or people who are serious, not by their identities. It just doesn't seem to be doing anything good for anybody. I wish you could get in a bit, but I mean, if I'm trying to understand as an academic right, like you can go to Miami and go to South Beach and just look, you can go to Las Vegas and look, you can go to anywhere in America or call on poor Singapore, Hong Kong, Nairobi, Berlin, or wherever it is. And you can look at the real world for 10 seconds and realize immediately, okay, yeah. Like everything that's been published in the Journal of Political Economy on dating and dating the past few years is just something that is not is not being captured. And it is like the single quickest sniff test like any social scientist should be able to do. Yeah, so we want to learn. We have to broaden our horizons. Say I as far as into the is this fantasy more harmful for women because it is actually a terrible for women, I believe it. You know, I think of course the academic answer is absolutely think about it for, you know, a month. Again, she could fulfill her fantasy by sleeping with her favorite movie star. The guy can't fulfill his fantasy by sleeping with his favorite model. Like it's just, it's 100,000 to one. And I'm telling you, I see women who are very, very average looking, getting with like $50 million a year center fielders. No, they're not dating them, but they're sleeping with them. Frequently, very average, something just shockingly average looking women and they're getting attention from these men and they're just creating a conveyor belt and assembly line of women that these men sleep with. There's no, there's no, it's not like a 53 man roster on an NFL team. There's an infinite roster if the guy wants it, okay? Q half-ner, Dan Belsarian, an infinite roster if they want it. And it's really, really screwing up a lot of women to because where they believe that because they can get a man to have sex with them, they can get that same man to commit and they can't. And so what's happened instead is they end up with a guy who is a multi-millionaire and they think, well, then that's my standard now. I'm only going to marry a guy who stimulates me like this multi-millionaire did, this high status athlete, movie star, et cetera. And then now what happens, in other way, I know it's an exception, I'm not most women don't sleep with movie stars. But it is, is the woman who ends up sleeping with the personal, she works at the hooters in which Todd, she sleeps with the most, the wealthiest personal injury attorney who cheats on his wife with her. She thinks that she can now marry this guy and he's not interested in marrying her. So on every level, hypergamy, what it's doing is it's really causing unrealistic expectations for women. And then Dr. Bus, he does a 2016 survey where he talks about women pricing themselves out of the dating market because as they make more money. So from a dating aspect, women are getting taller. And from a dating aspect, men are getting shorter. And women are not interested in men who are metaphorically shorter than them as far as money and acclaim and all these other things status. And so because of that, there's fewer and fewer men for these women to choose from. And these men up at the top that are getting chosen are having limitless options. And then there's a bottom quartile or a third of men who are basically being left out. We have reverted to the hunter gatherer pattern of knitting and dating basically with the like the upper just a small band of men commends access to almost all many opportunities. Yes. Speaking of, we have dating apps. Should we end on this? Yeah, let's do it. Man, so there is pretty extensive literature on dating apps. There's a really big paper in general sociology by Lynn and BloodQuest 2013, which talks about this sort of-- it's about racial identity, primarily. And then also a Christmas education and messaging patterns within the groups. I mean, just essentially, it's Graham out there. There was probably the most interesting and fairly reasonable data computational work is BRUCH and the Newman 2018 Aboriginal Preschool of Mates and online dating from science. advances. Very, very, very, very good journal, which is a pretty incredible design. I don't know what app they got access to the data from. And by the way, this was, it's generally known that Host 2020, especially Post 2023, I've gotten hellish. Pre 2020, there were not as bad. So this was like probably given the way that I can use this company after 23rd June 2016, if I had the guess. Don't tell you what after was, but it looks at basically a lot going on there. Both for example, a little excerpt is that men and women rights from South should longer messages to more desirable partners up to twice as long in some cases. That is interesting. And that's, uh, you know, all about status messaging, so I got into our teachers, but there's tends to be super enormous to desire ability gaps that are meant. So, uh, yeah, it's about 17 to one. It's about 16 17 to one. You know, it just happens. Yeah, it's one. But one of the one of the most telling stats is if I were to take the median woman on a dating app and say, okay, the number of matches she gets per rights wife, and I would compare her to what, what, uh, quartile or what percentile of man, it's the top 10% of men. So the top 10% of men will get 10% matches, meaning 100 matches for every 1000 rights wives, the median woman will get that. The top 10% of men will get with the median man, uh, woman gets the top 20% of men on these dating apps are getting 63% of the rights wives. The top 40% are getting 83% of the rights wives. The top 60% of men are getting 96% of the rights wives. It's, it's incredible how weighted it is towards the top. And so that's why you end up in the situation. And the other thing that happens, and this is one of the reasons why I recommend guys go on social media and not use dating apps is because if I'm not that physically attractive and I get on a dating app and the algorithm determines that I'm not that physically attractive, it starts showing me less and less and less attractive women. This is true. I believe Austin Dunham literally did an experiment on this and showed it like two different guys in the same area and like because he's a male model, he was getting way better, he was getting way better matches on on social media that doesn't happen. You can't block me from seeing an attractive woman because I'm not deemed to be as attractive. But if I'm an attractive man and I have incredible social alignments, she see who's who comments on my stuff, who follows me and she sees that I'm at the most exclusive events and the best networking deals. Now I'm a man who's a five who can data grow who's a 10 once again. That's it. This is how it works. And if you have any questions about it, I mean, the most frustrating part of all this David for me is that all the testimonials that I have on m.o.a. mentoring.com for success testimonials. Guys can literally go see the the guys with the women. It's irrefutable and then they're still getting this pushback. And I mean, I'm looking right figure three figure one of the paper I just cited. You said you're doing it. Yeah. I mean, it is just like you look at the distribution of messages perceives. It's literally the distribution of messages per perceives versus fraction and for the moment. Go ahead. There we go. Let's show it. Let's give me one second. So the, I mean, I would not publish this word because this is not a technical term, but the distribution for the messages for this sort of histogram essentially. Yeah, right there being pingo. Look at how much fatter the distribution is for the women. It is just that tail so much longer. The area under curve is just so much juicier. Whereas if you're a man, it is just like that job off is so sharp. Look, it's like what how many men are receiving 10 messages that's like maybe 2% whereas for women, that's probably five times the amount doing that correctly. And then the authors also note that the most popular individual in the four cities that he was a 30-year-old woman living in New York received 1,504 messages during the period of observation equivalent to one minute every 30 minutes or one message every 30 minutes day and night for the entire month. I mean, like, and then there's figure three, which is the deserability gap. This, oh my worst. Yeah, here we go. Yeah, I mean, number of messages, messages sent because our ability gap, I mean, it's yeah, looks pretty good. Yeah, what is the date on this data set? And this is the paper was published on your team. I would assume that they were getting data somewhere between 2013 and 2017 at the latest. I had to do public 2016. Yeah, you guys can see. Yeah, this is pretty crazy. And I mean, the mentors need to be getting up to the past two years. It's and on worse. Yeah, it is. It's incredible. People are like basing their entire industry around like trying to help men on these dating apps. It is one of the craziest things I've ever seen. I just don't understand. And like, I don't and like yet the stuff that we're talking about in here is very easily applicable to using social circle. So when this is again, this is not a scientific survey, but I have asked hundreds of women this question, how do you meet the last five guys you dated? And the answers are never, ever dating apps and they're never matchmakers and they're never speed dating and there's never cold approach. It's never some guy came up to me a bar and started talking to me and so I ended up dating it. It's always a friend introduced me to a guy. I met him at an event, an exclusive event where we both were or we met on social media. That is the only when I'm talking about women under 30 who are attractive who are not sex workers. When I ask them these question, these are the three exclusive answers. I can think of like maybe one percent of women and these are older women, but one percent of women under the 29 who said that they met someone under dating app. Now, when I survey women who are over 38 frequently, they meet men from walking up and doing cold approach or from dating apps because most likely they come from a generation where that was more accepted and more likable, but it's just not that way anymore. And I just don't know why I continue to have to. And again, you know, one of the reasons why I show so much evidence on my website and on my Instagram is to continue to show you over and over again that this works, you know, consistently, but it's not scientific. And that's why I wanted to bring you on here to just kind of like square of the circle as what does the data say and does it agree or disagree with the hypothesis that we have in this program. And what you should know by watching this video is that the hypothesis that I have in this program, the theories that I have in this program come from the data. It's not that the data agrees with me. I literally originated the ideas from reading the data in the first place, which is why this program has been so successful. Yeah. And I mean, if you want to keep dunking on dating apps, I mean, I did a whole literature review on this from my own education, I could practice maybe made sure it's copied into the extent it is just, I mean, the literature is so inclusive on this. It is almost going to get some time we're talking about it. And it is that comic reconslusive for people throwing on all sorts of fancy statistical methods to prove things that you can literally just get with the table. But all this to say a question that I have for you is this is more of a, yeah, I think that we're going to get some theory from it. But if you were coaching men on how to use dating apps in 2026, given that you coach social circle, you coach men on, you know, fix the Instagram and use the Instagram as a fun to go social proof, how would you coach them in to use a dating app if at all? Yeah. Definitely. I would give my dating app profile to a virtual assistant. I would have the VA sit there and every time he saw a girl, he liked right swiped on the girl and it was only a certain type of girl. And then this is going to sound crazy. But if I really like a girl, what I'm going to do is I'm going to try to find her on Instagram. So using dating apps to collect women to build your Instagram list in order to get groups of women to invite them to different events or invite them to different parties. That's what I would use dating apps for to try to find girls like that. Are these going to be the best women? There might be attractive women on there. They're probably going to have a mental disorder, but hey, they're fun to go to parties with, I guess, or you might find a girl with a, you know, a 900 body counter, something like that. But I'm saying, if I was going to use dating apps, that's how I would use them. I would use them in a manner. I would definitely put post good photos of myself up there. But I would use the matches in order to put basically what I just described is exactly what every club promoter in Miami, Los Angeles, Las Vegas and New York is doing currently. They're using dating apps in order to collect women for a group so that they have, you know, they go out on a yacht party or they go out on a barge or they all go to some comp dinner where they all go to a nightclub and get a comp table there or they go to some mansion party. That's how they're collecting. That's how I would use dating apps to grow the number of women that I can invite to different events. That's probably what I've seen is the best way to do that. So if I'm interpolating this correctly, if I'm hearing you write, culprimotors in Miami and all that essentially apart from people in the way, performance practitioners of the social circle theory stuff are using dating apps to build social circles. That's interesting. Well, they're not social circles. They're ways to make money. Although your social circle will always, it's almost always going to make you more money. If you actually, you know, use it correctly, it's going to make you more money. Your social circle, again, a lot of times you're going to get into the right university because you knew someone on the faculty or staff, like there's, you're going to get become a coach on an NFL team because someone on the staff knew who you were. You're going to get end up dating a beautiful girl because one of her friends said something about you being attractive. It is social circle and networking that gets you almost every opportunity more so than merit. Let me say that again, more so than merit. Your social circle exceeds your merit. Almost in every case, it's not a meritocracy. Donald Trump did not put the cabinet members around him because they were the most meritocracy human individuals. He picked them because they he thought they'd be loyal to him. That's why that's how that's how networking works today. You put people around you that you have a trusted testimony about that because that's what social proof does. Social proof because it provides a feeling in homosapiens exceeds merit. Now, there are some exceptions. Right, if you're getting a PhD in mathematics, I'm sure that merit probably has a ton to do with it. But for other things, it's like the most likable guy. It really is. That is how it works. So your social circles should help you with that. That's another thing that we're important. Now, most people come to me for dating advice. So it's it's able to or social circle in regards to dating, but what I try to elevate them to or graduate them to after the first six months of my program is to use social circle and networking in order to build a business or build a brand. That's to show levels of success and to have more financial freedom. I try to teach them how to do that, but that's more of the advanced mastery stuff I teach in my course. It's cool to hear about the runway looks like for the program. But so the true long didn't read is dating after the build of social circle. What would be like specific tax of a message to be like in a small dating app, but would it be like, you know? So most women aren't going to respond, especially the most attractive ones. So one of two things, either the message that I like to send is, this is a big one. This works so well. And I can't believe I'm even saying this on here, because this is outside the balance. You know what I was saying? We're having $100,000 bikini competition this June in Las Vegas, would you like to compete? That's one of the openers. The other opener is, have you ever walked a runway show for Nalu-based swimwear? Those are generally the two openers that I would use on the dating apps. And then you're going to get a response, then you quickly get to Instagram and you just put those girls on a list. You just put those girls on a big old Google spreadsheet, and then you invite thousands of them out to different events. You have your VA do it. It takes you four minutes to write the message. And then that's it. That's what I've been doing. That's what I've been teaching my clients to do. And they have outrageous limitless success from doing this. Incredible. Better than the dating apps I'm sure is. We literally just saw. Like I've been on dates with girls from dating apps. And I was like, wow, she's really attractive. And whenever I meet them, there's always something really, really fucking wrong with them. It's like, do you understand if you're a young attractive woman and you're on a dating app, meaning you could just walk outside and have men hitting on you at the shopping market? There's something so wrong with that. That means every relationship you've tried to be in, you've somehow fumbled the bag or screwed up something. There's generally some sort of extreme, extreme level of insecurity or extreme level of mental illness that causes you to not be able to make this relationship work as a woman. Because women are being pursued. Like only fans did $6.6 billion in revenue. Women are being pursued like no other time in history. And you can't find a man. It's because there's something wrong with you. That's how you ended up on a dating app. Normal, well-adjusted, mentally sound, young attractive women are never on dating apps. Period. Even if you know, you know, I've certainly known people who have found the part of the dating apps 10 to 15 years ago, right? Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Let me talk about this. If you're a 70-year-old man, you're trying to date a 50-year-old woman, dating apps are probably the way to go. I'm not sorry. I let me caveat this. Most of my clients are looking for women under the age of 35 who are very fit and attractive. Then dating apps are a bad idea. If you're talking about women, if you're really open to, you know, there's nothing wrong with this. You're 55. You want a data woman who's 42. Yes, go for the dating apps. I'm not. I really should have left that caveat in there. Older women, they are definitely normal older women that are on dating apps 100%. The, you know, even if it's a pesky scenario, there's just such an imbalance in addiction. It's the other, you know, the evidence of a woman. Ken Hulling and Longquist, I forget one of his first name, both professors who specialize in this, it's their study. They have a whole book. I said it. They're American Sociological Paper on this, which is a canonical citation for online dating. They have a book, which is more today, which is just, I mean, it is the dunk after dunk after dunk on dating apps. And we just learned if you use dating apps, social circle approach, they may actually work sort of. So no, they could. I would, I think it's, I think it's a waste of time, personally. But I'm saying if you wanted to use dating apps, I've had clients do this. They'll go to like one of my clients. He moved to Tulum. Okay. And then when he did was when he got there, he again told his VA, he's paying his VA $4 an hour. He said, okay, I need you to go through on my account. And then he'd you to write, swipe on all the girls into LUME that look like this girl. So he was looking for a certain type, certain phenotype. And then when he found those girls that look like that, he would swipe right on them. And then he'd, he'd, he'd, they'd like screenshot the girls. And then they would go find their Instagram and then put those girls on a list. Or the girls would respond and they'd put them on the list. And then he'd invite the girls from his account. And his account, he looks like a f*ck baller because he took my advice. My, my, I have two brand managers in the program. One's Casey Herzog and the other one's Charmogel. They'll teach you guys how to fix their Instagram to where you look extremely high status without using money or looks. And so now the, he's writing the girl on Instagram and getting a response, whereas he wasn't going to get that response on the dating app. And, and so now he collects all these girls, puts them on a list. And then he started, he showed me videos of him throwing like boat parties into LUME with all the girls that he met. It works every time. There we go. Yeah. Yeah, I think the, like a couple years ago, the dating app stopped laying out allowing people to link their Instagrams. Which is the same. I don't know. Oh, but it, because they were losing money. Exactly. You would get off there very quickly. They are dating apps are aware of their own toxicity. And so the best way to get over the toxicity of the dating app is to get the match and get off the dating app as fast as possible. You doing that, though, doesn't work. Like it's again, this is a very similar situation that's happening with only fans. There's guys, there's women on only fans who are giving up their phone number so they can continue to charge the man and not give only fans the 20% fee to get off only fans. Only fans will suspend you for doing that. Right? They'll suspend you. So this is the same type of situation. The dating app wants you to maintain the conversation on the dating app for the most part. I know there's one dating app that says that the point of this dating app is to delete the dating app. Which is cool. It's fun to say. I don't think it's right. It don't think it's true. But yeah. And by the way, dating apps, dating apps when they first came out were great because when Tinder first came out, it was 50% men and women. It was probably a great place. When a bumble came out, when hinge, whatever the newest dating app is going to be better because there's fewer jaded women on there. But as they get older, they just get progressively worse. I heard was phenomenal for guys who could get on there because there was more women than men. But now it's not like that anymore. They've loosened up the restrictions because they want to make more money. There's a new one called blush but they have to financially qualify you in order to get on this dating app. You have to be rich. What a great idea for me to go on a dating app where women are only concerned about money. What a winner. What an incredible-- Yeah. You're a busy male professional who wants to save time. You mean I want hookers? Is that basically what you're saying? It's like, yeah. So again, that's what they're all doing. And it's-- So this is one other thing. And I'm getting so much shit for this. Because some of these people are my friends and I don't mean to call them out. And I don't even think it's their fault. But the difference between being a madam, pimping out prostitutes, and being a female matchmaker is about zero. These female matchmakers are getting a cut for matching up women who are only interested in a man's money with men who are not that attractive who have a lot of money. I have been watching these-- I'm friends with Patty Stanger. Like, I've seen this over and over again. And I can't tell the difference between a male, pim, and a female matchmaker. I can't tell the difference. If you can tell the difference, you let me know what it is. Because that's what I've seen over and over again. I have seen matchmakers-- from what I've seen for matchmakers, is rich men have quick short-term flings with women who want the man for his money. And that is the usual result of what happens. I can't think of a single attractive woman. I know that's like, yeah, I met my husband through a matchmaker. Not one. Yeah, there was a dude who was going to do a service while back. He was called Hypergamy, which is basically a matchmaking service. Called Hypergamy. It's awesome. That is a great-- oh my god. A matchmaking service called Hypergamy. That is a great name. Anyway, we should probably wrap up. Probably what we'll do in the future is we'll probably find some clips online of, like, say, Mac and Murphy or William Costello or other people. And we'll react to that. I'll have you react to the clip and see how you think it's verifiable scientifically. We'll go over stuff like that. I'm looking forward to doing this. I want to continue this discussion. There's a lot of things we briefly touched on that we could do going to much more in depth. Guys, I try to go full nerd on this one. Those of you who stayed with us to the end, I really appreciate it. Hopefully, for me, this is the kind of video I've always wanted to make. I know I have to make these short concise through the point videos with the CT at the end. I wanted to make a long video, long form video, going over detailed explanations. Why? What we do is more scientifically back than anyone in this space. Let me say that again. What we do at Men of Action is more scientifically based than anyone in this space. If you want to contend or contest that, put in the comments the content creator who is more scientifically based when it comes to actually getting average men dates with beautiful women than we are. Not the trust me bro dating coaches. Not the trust me bro. Use this dating app. The trust me bro text game guys actual peer reviewed scientific data in order to get average men to date beautiful woman. We are the we're not just the leaders. We're the only people doing this. So I really appreciate that. I would love to hopefully this start spark some discussions. Maybe we can have some debates. David, maybe you and me can do a live debate with someone else on some of these topics. I think that would be great. I really appreciate you guys. Oh my god. You want to do that? You want to be a lot of fun. Yes. No, I'm not. You know, OK. No, for me, I'm saying I'm sure. All right. Nice. Nice. All right. We're going to do this one again really soon. We appreciate you guys checking us out and make sure you like, share, and subscribe. And we'll see you guys all next week. Beautiful. [MUSIC PLAYING]