Instead of

"Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus"

it should be

"Men are Companies, Women are Venture Capitalists"

Why?

- Men have a long tail of life outcomes. Most are average, some are exceptional.
- Men focus on stuff and achievement, women focus on judging and manipulating men, finding one to invest in.
- For men, women are generic, like money. "Is she hot?" (i.e. young, healthy).

- For women, only the very best man will do.
- Women are seeking alpha, men are seeking funding.

"Females, on the other hand, are convinced that fully 80% of men (on the dating site, anyway) are less attractive than average."

In this analogy, "funding" = working womb and eggs. Women either have it, or don't. Some have it more (above average beauty), but that's nice-to-have, not essential for a man to "take a funding round".

One of the most famous and talented women of the 21st century is Elizabeth Holmes. To the untrained eye she might look like an exception: a college dropout/genius out to change the world.

But what she really did was use her beauty and charm to convince a bunch of famous but horny old men to lend credibility to a no-product pyramid scheme disguised as a tech company. All she did was manipulate a bunch of people. But she did it masterfully.

All these horny, thirsty old toads were subconsciously trying to get into her panties (I don't blame them, she's gorgeous).

Meanwhile the mainstream/feminist establishment was fawning over the "female steve jobs".

But really she *was* the female version of Jobs or Einstein; she maxxed out the female utility function: maximum financial investment from high status males, in exchange for minimal sexual access. This is what winning as a woman looks like.

She only fucked up by being greedy.

Let me add that truly understanding the difference between the sexes doesn't equate to "hating women".

It's best to just appreciate the elegance of femininity for what it is - like a beautiful orchid crossed with a graceful tiger. Life would be extremely boring without it.