The Sad Truth About Women's Economic Value

It was with much ballyhoo (and a wink and a nod) that the world passed around the story about VietJet, an airline that is going to make Vietnam's first female private sector billionaire.  Ms. Nguyen Thoa, the founder and majority owner of VietJet, has a very impressive background making her first million at 21 selling rubber and fax machines.  However, the reason for the global wink and a nod is a service the baby boomer generation made sure to get rid of from American-based airlines long ago.

Young pretty women.

Not only has VietJet reintroduced young, pretty women into the aviation world, they also have them scantily clad in bikini's, heels, and lingerie.  And degrading and disgusting as many feminists, even non-feminist western women may find this, the reality is the free market has rewarded Ms. Thoa's airline with a $1 billion valuation.

However, while this story may ruffle the feathers of a few prudes and get a couple discreet smirks from the few men in the world with red blood, there's a very valuable economic lesson here that all women, but especially western one's need to learn.  And that is what determines their economic value.

I have said it before, and I'll say it again, and the reason I'll do so is because it's true, but the most valuable commodity in the world is not oil or gold, silver or diamonds, copper or plutonium.  The most valuable commodity in the world is female youth and beauty.  And the reason why is very simple.

Because it's true.

No other commodity in the world is in as high of demand as female youth and beauty.  And the reason why is that half the world's population (the would be men) demand it. And not only do they demand it, they demand it highly.  They demand it so much that they built civilization to afford it win it over, so much so to the point we could say nearly all of human civilization and global historical GDP was created to get it.

In short, women hands down, have ownership and agency over the world's most demanded commodity, and Ms. Thoa's VietJet airline is just another bit of empirical data to prove it.

It is here women really need to stop themselves from defaulting into their preprogrammed state of thinking, going on a tirade about how women are not objects, and there's more to women than beauty, and beauty is a social construct, etc. etc.  They need to view this from a purely economic, empirical, and clinical point of view that I'm trying to make, otherwise the vital economic lessons that lay within will be lost on them and it will be their loss. Regardless, whether you like this fact or not does not matter.  It is a fact.  Half the population (that would be men again) demands and will pay a pretty penny for female youth and beauty.  And there's really nothing you can do about it.

This presents women a paradox.  There is what they may want to do or become when they get older and then there's what the world is willing to pay them for.  Men largely don't face this problem because our youth and beauty is nowhere near pursued or in demand as women's, but because there is such demand by men for women's looks and beauty AND men produce the vast majority of economic production in the world, whatever other skills, talents, desires, and ambitions a woman has, there just isn't going to be as much demand for them compared to youth and beauty.

For example Cindy Crawford was originally a chemistry major until she became...well...Cindy Crawford.

Hedy Lamarr (an actress from the 40's) was not only a stunner, but also a scientist on the side.

But both were neither known for their STEM backgrounds and were much more highly compensated for their looks.

The key thing for women to realize, however, is that this is not an "either or" decision.  Choosing to major in electrical engineering or going on to become a computer scientist does not mean you must forego modeling, acting, or simply benefiting from female beauty, and vice versa.  Being the most demanded commodity in the history of the world is an added bonus and additional choice conferred upon pretty, young women in addition to the same career choices men have.

There's just one problem

The majority of women choose neither.

Based on declared college majors and a simple walk in the public, the majority of women are neither majoring in STEM nor maintaining their beauty.  They are instead opting to major in the liberal arts and eschewing the gym, neither of which are in demand in the real world.  And the reason why is very simple.  Hitting the gym and studying math is hard.

To maintain your physical beauty you have to diet, eat right, run, work out and exercise.  Additionally for women they must comport themselves accordingly, wear the right fashion, all of which is an effective and taxing part time job.

To get a successful career you have to offer society a valuable skill most people do not have.  This is done by mastering difficult and boring subjects, subjects that most people are not going to tackle.  And most western women aren't doing that either.

You may find this insulting, you may find this offensive, but the real world of economics does not care about your feelings or what you'd like.  The real world demands engineers, computer programmers, doctors, accountants, plumbers, and electricians.  And if you happen to be female you have the additional option of translating your youth and beauty into money. The only other option is what nearly 75% of women choose and that is to pursue fields where they need to beg, plead, and pull teeth to get funding.  So whereas Intel will willingly pay a female computer science graduate $80,000 a year for a job in Silicon Valley, or a rich husband will willingly set up a beautiful woman for life, the ugly women's studies or communications major has to literally go begging to non-profits for charity or lobby the government to force taxpayers to pay for their pointless career that nobody ever demanded and does nothing to benefit the world.

Now I know the immediate response on the part of many women in the western world and most of them on the left will be to point out that this is why we need to change men's perception of women.  That we need to re-program men to not view women as sex objects and to shame it out of existence.  But here is the problem with that.

Do not men have the right to like what they like?  Are they not allowed to be free to have tastes and preferences?

The problem in thinking there's something wrong with men for being attracted to female youth and beauty (as they have been since time immemorial) is that it is women forcing their desires on other people.  It is telling them, nay, demanding others want what they want them to want.  Not what the individual wants.  And you can call it whatever euphemistic phrase academia has concocted to make it sound valid, good, and noble, but when you boil it down, it's nothing more than rank tyranny.  Refusing to accept people's opinions, even if it is whether they want to hire you, date you, marry you, have sex with you, or have an opinion about you, and daring to force them to think otherwise is not only tyrannical, but delusional.

But the real issue here is simply one of sanity.  Do women want to live in reality?

The reality is that the world demands STEM type majors.  Not the touchy feely malarkey that passes for the liberal arts.  And if you don't like that, women (unlike men) have a fortunate alternative option.  An enviable "Plan B."  You can use your looks and youth to score a husband, resources, a career, and other financial advantages men simply can't.  Beyond that, there are no other options.  And no matter how much you fight it, claim there's a "Plan C," or simply write this off as "misogyny," your 50 years of cute feminist theory is not going to undo 2 million years of human evolution.  This is the real world.  This is reality.  This is why Ms. Thao is infinitely richer than all the world's women's studies professors combined (and probably much happier too).

I suggest while you're here on the planet you live in the real world.  It will not only prove more profitable and close the wage gap, but you'll live a happier life as well.  Otherwise you can look forward to living a happy and fulfilled life just like all those aged, dying, and lonely 1970's feminists, perhaps the pinnacle of which would be Hillary Clinton.
_____________________________
You can check out Aaron's other evil, hate-filled sites below!
Podcast
Asshole Consulting
YouTube
Twitter
Books
Amazon Affiliate