Preface: I have written posts on this topic in the past. While my position on this subject is largely unchanged, it has undergone a nuanced evolution. An evolution I hope to adequately convey with this post.
The term “sexual market value” (SMV) has become popular in online dating discussions and the manosphere, often used to rank men and women based on their perceived attractiveness, status, or desirability in the dating pool.
Proponents argue that dating works like a marketplace where everyone has a “value” based on what others are willing to “pay” (invest emotionally or physically). Critics, however, say SMV oversimplifies human relationships into cold, transactional terms.
My previous post on SMV mirrors this critique, but I think it is worth taking a somewhat deeper look at the validity of the concept of SMV.
So, is “sexual market value” a valid concept—or just another internet myth?
What Is Sexual Market Value?
SMV is typically described as a person’s overall attractiveness in the dating world, often determined by physical appearance, age, charisma, confidence, and social or financial status. For example, some claim women’s SMV peaks in their 20s due to youth and fertility, while men’s SMV peaks later due to career and resource accumulation.
While there are elements of truth—people do evaluate potential partners based on desirability—reducing human relationships to a “market value” is overly simplistic and ignores emotional and psychological complexity.
The Valid Aspects of SMV
People Do Have Preferences:
-Attraction isn’t random—certain traits like confidence, fitness, or kindness consistently rank as desirable across cultures.
Age and Timing Play Roles:
-In certain dating contexts, younger women or more established men may receive more attention.
Scarcity and Competition Exist:
-In high-demand dating pools (e.g., attractive or high-status individuals), competition can feel like a marketplace.
The Problems With SMV
It Reduces People to Commodities:
-SMV focuses solely on external traits like looks or status, ignoring deeper qualities like emotional intelligence, humor, or loyalty.
It Ignores Subjectivity:
-What one person finds highly attractive, another may not. A “10” for one person might be a “6” for someone else.
It Promotes Toxic Comparisons:
-Obsessing over “value” can erode self-esteem and lead to resentment, jealousy, and transactional thinking in relationships.
The Reality of Attraction
While there are general patterns of attraction, long-term relationships are built on much more than SMV factors.
Emotional connection, shared values, and trust are what sustain relationships—not simply who is “high value” in a perceived marketplace.
So, Is SMV Valid?
It’s partially valid as a way to describe initial attraction dynamics in a competitive dating environment, but it’s incomplete and often misused.
Human beings aren’t products on a shelf; we’re complex individuals with unique emotional, psychological, and spiritual needs. Treating dating like an economic marketplace often leads to shallow connections and dissatisfaction.
Final Takeaway:
SMV can help explain why certain traits are attractive at first glance, but it should never be the sole lens for understanding relationships.
Real value comes from character, emotional depth, and compatibility—qualities that don’t fade with age or fluctuate with trends.
-The Rational Ram
The Rational Ram 