Much of my rant here is about a theory that is known as the Market Value Theory (markkina-arvoteoria). It is somewhat similar to the Ladder Theory in that it is devised to explain why you, a pathetic nerd beyond hope and salvage who reads blogs about little girls’ Japanese cartoons aren’t getting some sweet lovin’. Spearheaded by researcher Henry Laasanen mostly via his blog on Uusisuomi.fi and based on various theories on erotic ranking that have been devised since pretty much the beginning of time, it divides the male population into three specific groups: Higher Level Males (YTM, ylemmän tason miehet), Mid-Level Males (KTM, keskimmäisen tason miehet), and Lower Level Males (ATM, alemman tason miehet). Especially the latter of these is wildly popular in the Finnish relationship blogosphere and media jargon, describing the lowest of the pack. Also, most males who are the loudest trumpeters of this theory tend to identify themselves in this class like the Heroic Warriors for the People back in the Finnish Civil War.Sikariportaassa jyllää äijäkerho | Taloussanomat
Now make no mistake, I’m not saying the theory is bullshit. Pretty much everything I personally know supports the Market Value Theory, and it requires nothing more than a quick use of pure logic. But you know what the Market Value Theory also is? I’ll let ya’ll in on a secret right here, listen up:
It’s also fucking common sense.
When I first heard of this theory and took a closer look at it, I was honestly let down a bit. Not because it shows how cynical and cold the world of relationships really is, but rather because I had already figured all that shit out by myself long ago.
Schumpeter: Womenomics | The Economist
Satunnainen toisinajattelija: Kysyntä ja lahjonta, osa 2
Naiset kertovat, mikä ystävässä ärsyttää: "Hän kohtelee miestään kuin pikkulasta" - Ihmissuhteet - Hyvä olo - MeNaiset.fi
feminist+booty+shorts.jpg (JPEG-kuva, 308×1470 kuvapistettä)
Miksi MRA idiootit ovat maailman pohjasakkaa?