The Sexual Marketplace: A Primer

Much like Alek's article on the Secret Society, this will be a theoretical entry, meant to improve your understanding of large-scale gender dynamics.

Let’s begin with a definition:

The Sexual Market Place, or SMP, is the invisible battlefield on which intrasexual competition is constantly waged, in order for every individual to maximize the chances of passing their genes onto the next generation successfully.

The Sexual Marketplace

Both men and women are in constant war with the other members of their respective sexes in order to fulfill their genetic prerogatives, which are to survive and replicate. This underlying warfare drives nearly all of human competition and progress in the world.

For both genders, there are only two ways to improve one's standing in the Sexual Marketplace:

  1. Raise your own Sexual Market Value (SMV)

  1. Lower the SMV of competitors

And that's literally all there is to it. For the remainder of this article, I'm going to point out common ways that each gender utilizes each option, highlighting certain social norms and forms of intrasexual aggression meant to facilitate those ends.

Let's start with the men.

How Men Compete in the Sexual Marketplace

For guys, option 1, to raise your own SMV, comes with a few choices:

Dominating women is easy; most guys can do that. The way the male hierarchy works, rather, is to climb the ladder by being more dominant than the other men.

Trust me, guys -- women determine your "alpha-ness" based not only on you treat them, but mostly on the way you are perceived by other men. They want to know where you are in the pecking order, and watch your interactions with other men in order to determine your status.

Option 2 is to lower the SMV of competitors, which for the sake of pragmatism, we can consider "all men who are not you." You can lower another man's SMV by:

  • Getting him fired, thus lowering his access to resources,
  • Disabling him physically, showing that you are dominant over him, or
  • Insinuating that he is an unfit mate.

Let's take a moment and focus on that last option -- insinuating your competitor is an unfit mate -- since that's a topic we'll come back to when I discuss female strategies. There are many ways to do this, most of which are automatic and we don't even realize why we're doing it.

Here are some common ways to imply that another man is an unfit mate:

  • Asserting that he "treats women badly" to females. The subtext is that he will not provide for and protect them, and hence would be a poor choice of pair-bond.

  • Accusing him of being gay. This is very rarely "homophobia," and is far often a jab which indicates that his genes will not survive into the next generation.

  • Asserting that he has mental health issues.

  • Asserting that he is a very sensitive guy (accusation of femininity or weakness, regardless of whether that's accurate).

All of these are used to knock the impression of a man's reproductive fitness or value as a mate down a peg or two -- ideally leaving the knocker-down a leg up over his competition in the eyes of the women he's trying to impress.

How Women Compete in the Sexual Marketplace

Now that we've covered some basics for how men compete with each other in the SMP, let's consider how women do the same.

For a woman to raise her SMV, she has fewer options than men do:

  1. She can improve her looks (which, as well known to all women, will cease to work as well once she hits a certain age range), or

  2. She can learn how to better seduce and keep men around.

In our modern sociopolitical climate, what we are observing is the loss of female understanding of how this works. We see prioritizing of career and job prestige -- which increases male SMV -- over keeping oneself fit and being a good wife and mother -- which increases female SMV. All this stuff about "strong, independent women" is just a tragic confusion which tries to make women more masculine, seeking to compete in the masculine hierarchy. This is why many have noted that women outside the Anglosphere tend to be so much more feminine, submissive, and easy to get along with.

In their efforts to "do everything men can do," many have forgotten what it means to be a feminine woman. In their efforts to improve their SMV along the male hierarchy, they have dropped out of the race of competing in the female SMP. The short haircuts, hairy legs and armpits, aggressive attitudes and constant shit-testing have essentially dropped their SMV to zero. Straight men are not attracted to women who seek to be men.

Of course, many women recognize what's going on and consciously remove themselves from such a toxic female atmosphere -- because that is the smart play. By disassociating themselves from such women, they are ramping their own SMV through the roof by comparison.

Is it any wonder the thin, beautiful, feminine women with long hair (the women with the highest SMV) end up with the richest, most powerful men (the men with the highest SMV)? Their competitors have removed themselves from the race.

However, there are several more fascinating phenomena going on right now in the confusion that the SMP has become in recent times. I'd like to address some of those here, in light of the SMP competition.

Thin Shaming vs. Fat Acceptance

The Sexual MarketplaceAll over the Westernized world, certain groups of women have taken a campaign to shame thin women while deifying fat ones. As is obvious to anyone who's encountered such women, the women doing this aren't exactly what anyone would call "attractive." (and somewhere in the distance, a feminist shrieked)

These women, who are coming into the competition with little to no SMV of their own, are undertaking an enormous deception that nobody's falling for. They accuse thin women of being "objectified," with the intention of getting men to stop thinking of attractive women in a sexual way by shaming us for doing so. (Subtext: think of me instead! That's what a good man would do!)

They accuse thin women of being unhealthy, which if you remember from a few minutes ago -- is another way to lower a competitor's SMV. By asserting that thin women are unhealthy, they are attempting to lower the SMV of beautiful women by convincing men that they would not make genetically fit partners.

On the other side of the equation, we see the enormous culture of "fat-acceptance" (pun fully intended). These are the people who will chastise you for correctly noting that obesity is an indicator of poor health, and will tell you that the only reason you aren't attracted to land whales is because of "the media."

By this fallacious assertion, they are attempting to raise the SMV of lazy, unhealthy women who refuse to work on themselves by convincing people that they're secretly really attractive, and we've simply been brainwashed into thinking the opposite. Much to their chagrin, it isn't working.

What's interesting to note is that, as you may have noticed, many beautiful women are fully supportive of the "fat-acceptance" movement. Now, why is that?

Quite simple. All women know that men don't find fat women attractive (there are outliers of course, but I'm talking about the vast majority of us). Thus, it is very much in the best interest of beautiful women, for more women to believe that being fat is attractive. That way, more women will misguidedly make themselves into wildebeests, raising the SMV of the attractive women even further up the scale while knocking off more competitors.

In our cultural narrative, this is all couched in Social Justice Warrior "oppression / beauty is in the eye of the beholder / objectification / sexism" language, but when you think about what's going on behind the scenes, the true motives are quite easy to identify. And they are vicious... as nature designed them to be.

Slut Shaming vs. Slut Acceptance

This is a very big issue in our current sociopolitical climate. On the one hand, we have most men in the world preferring their female partners to have low partner counts.

Slut-shaming, the topic du jour, is something that is mostly done by women against other women. It is ironic, since they accuse men of doing this, when in reality it's just defensive projection (just like "objectification").

Slut-shaming, or the idea that a woman has a lower SMV due to her promiscuity, is at the forefront of "things the Social Justice Warriors hate." All women know, deep in their hearts, that nearly all men will consider them less "worthy as people" if they are promiscuous. For the record, if this is you, I encourage you to change your attitude. It does weaken their chances of being in a successful monogamous relationship, but it does not lower their value as human beings.

The women running these "anti-slut-shaming" campaigns are doing the same thing as those running the "fat-acceptance" campaigns: attempting to raise the SMV of women whom they believe don't have a lot to spare. In my experience, most men love the girls that some people call "sluts." No man is upset by easy access to sex. It is mostly women who, implicitly, assert that sluttiness is a bad thing -- by promoting the idea that it's actually a good thing (which assumes it must not be).

However, just as with the first example, there is more going on here than meets the eye. Just like thin women love the idea of more women believing in "fat acceptance," so too do chaster women outwardly promote the idea of "slut-acceptance."

Because of their beliefs that "sluts" have a lower SMV than chaste women, they want more women to be slutty -- because this raises their own SMV by comparison and means more competitors are out of the running.

No matter what social issue regarding sex you're looking at, it always comes back to this: raising your own SMV while lowering that of competitors. Old women calling young ones trashy? Yep, a desperate ploy to knock off competitors. Good-man shaming? An attempt to trick males into investing resources into women with low SMV.

Guys, it is critically important to understand such dynamics so that you don't accidentally wind up indoctrinated and buying into the superficial motives often pushed by those partaking in such actions. You know what you find attractive, and there's a good reason you do. Don't let a small but loud group of people convince you that there's anything wrong with what you find attractive in a woman.

So in quick summary, the Sexual Market Place is where men and women size up each other’s Sexual Market Value in order to determine whom it would benefit them to pair-bond with, and who is not worth their time and investment. To improve yours, assuming you're a male reading this, keep doing what's taught right here on this site.

The Sexual Marketplace

My hope is that now that I've shown you some more insight into this larger-scale dynamic, you will begin to easily recognize the attempts of others to either raise their own value or lower your own, as this is constantly happening all around you. An understanding of these dynamics will allow you to play the field even more wisely, and avoid traps that women with low SMV will set for you!

Play smart,


Drexel ScottAbout the Author: Drexel Scott

Drexel overcame the stifling social difficulties of Asperger’s syndrome and fast proceeded to sleep with over 140 girls. He gets dates and gets laid almost entirely through girls he meets at work, at parties, and in social circle. He can coach you over the phone to pull of the direct, blatant sexual game he uses, or you can pick up a copy of his Casanova Key and study his method at your leisure.


Get Your FREE eBook on Texting Girls

how to text girls pdf

Sign up for our email insights series and get a copy of our popular ebook "How to Text Girls" FREE. Learn more ...

Related Articles from


Zac's picture

YOu must have read Selfish Genes by Richard Dawkins?


Mischief's picture

Super article, Drexel-- thank you! Helps explain why I have had a thing for asian girls since high school. In the city where I live (college town where I got my own degree), we get a new batch of Korean/Chinese females every year, and they are absolutely easier to meet and get along with than the average caucasian. I avoid the green card hunters by only taking on the ones who DON'T try to showcase me with their friends-- mutually assured discretion... :) In fact, I am due to cook an Italian dinner for a Korean girl in my apartment tomorrow evening, so wish me luck!!


Well… one does what one can.

Allen's picture

Great article, Drexel. I've been reading the site since the summer but this is the first article I've commented on. It includes many points that are shockingly obvious yet most people don't think about, yet we use and observe these tactics every day subconsciously. I am working on finding some lyrical topics to write about since I am a musician and I plan on writing about the SMP and the way our western society is attempting to trick us into buying into the "fat acceptance" and slut shaming/acceptance" movements. Which brings me to my question. Are women promoting the shaming or acceptance of promiscuity? I had always thought society is shaming it which you mentioned, but you also said chaste women are promoting it?

jack's picture

This is a good summation of the philosophy that Roissy has been diseminating for the last 6 years. I think it was he that came up with SMV theory, although it was percolating since the early seduction community.

As for "strong independent women", I'm glad you pointed out that that is not something men want. Men want feminine, submissive women. When a women is "strong" and "independent" I know that that is FemSpeak for a "royal bitch". Chase always talks about dating "strong independent" women. I wish he would stop using those terms. That's not red-pill language.

Drex's picture

Hey Jack, thanks for the thoughtful comment!

A couple points.

I believe it was Rollo Tomassi who first dissected the ideas of SMP and SMV, and Roissy has certainly done a fantastic job of his own. I'm not sure who the ideas originated with, but their philosophies have informed a lot of my own work.

Second, it's very important to make a distention between truly strong, independent women--who I think are awesome--and women who brand themselves with the "strong and independent" label--who are masculine nightmares.

I've been fortunate to know and date several strong and independent women (in the sense that they think for themselves, don't go with everything the herd says and make their own choices). Not one of them was a Feminist, and not one of them ever felt the need to declare how "strong and independent" she was.

If you hear those words leave a girls' mouth, she isn't one of them.

Add new comment

The Latest from