My perspective is empirically demonstrated on a repeated basis, that a man's status (demonstrated by his social network and communication skills, and markers that implicate class and a willingness to share those resources) play a primary role in a woman's selection of a man for sex. Other important traits are also perceived by women as valuable, which are mainly markers of genetic health which they can identify with smell and sight. A less important, but still significant, trait that women look for is commitment. They judge this by how much a prospective option invests his time in her and his fidelity. While events like self-disclosure and shared interests aid to build a dopamine rush when exposed to a particular person, the popular interpretation of mate selection is nebulous bs. ROFL at anyone who thinks love is anything but a chemical reaction in the brain.

In short, how attractive a man is to a woman primarily depends on his status and how "hot" he is. Women will also select the option they consider the best value relative to their perceived value of themselves.

Nothing about this theory is limited. It's observed and repeatably tested by professionals more dedicated than I am, and any person can observe that the predictions of the theory are correct almost all the time. You may on occasion find an exceptionally beautiful and wealthy woman dating a poor, disfigured and overweight loser, but it's very rare that you will.

Now since you seem so interested in my history with women, I'm happy to oblige. The first girlfriend I had was when I was 18/19, and what was amusing was that she was Christian and had a purity ring. What was also amusing is that what got us started was when she asked me why guys masturbate as we were watching "Phantom of the Opera." The second relationship was when I was 19/20ish to a girl I met in college, but we never went all the way and broke up at the end the semester. The third was when I was 20/21 to a girl I also met in college. She was smart too, and she almost moved in to my apartment. What separated us was that she was involved in the community too much. Since then I have had two other dates that never became relationships, a few lost causes, and also a few missed opportunities. Nothing impressive, but then I'm focused on my academics and have other outlets. Women also take up too much time. But I will tell you that applying those principles I mentioned earlier were instrumental in attracting my dates. When I tell a girl with above average looks on campus that I intend to be a lawyer, when I show her my 1 bedroom apartment, and spend mad $ on her at the mall, then she's usually sucked in. Hell, my last girlfriend even cooked for me. Talking big has failed a few times ofc, like with that Chemistry major I tried to seduce in one of my classes this semester lol.

Now on topic. Avo, people's clothing suggest their status, and men with higher status have better options when it comes to women. While I don't buy Nike in particular and haven't bought Nike since I was like 15, if morality stops you from purchasing goods then you're just weak. A good consumer only considers the utility and the price of a product, and not where it came from or the conditions of the people who made it.