Talk:sexual market value

Tea room convo


Per utramque cavernam 11:52, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

RFD discussion: June 2018–March 2019
DTLHS (talk) 20:43, 30 June 2018 (UTC)


 * What is the deletion rationale? Doesn't seem entirely SoP to me, based on market value. I have linked the abbreviation SMV which we already had. Equinox ◑ 21:19, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Strong keep Popular term that deserves inclusion, there is no reason for why it should be excluded. Amin (talk) 11:04, 1 July 2018 (UTC) I can think of only three reasons:
 * I'm not convinced it should be deleted, but you haven't provided any reason for why it should be kept either. Per utramque cavernam 11:14, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
 * It should go the other way: Giving a reason for deletion, then seeing if it applies, is convincing, and no reason given = no reason for deletion.
 * 1. not politically correct, immoral, offensive - which is no reason for deletion.
 * 2. It doesn't exist, isn't attestable (WT:CFI) - this would be a matter for WT:RFVE and not of WT:RFD.
 * 3. SOP. The parsing question might be a reason for keep. Is it sexual market + value (~ Germ. *Wert auf dem sexuellen Markt oder Sexualmarkt, *Sexualmarkt-wert) or sexual + market value (~ Germ. *sexueller Marktwert).
 * -80.133.107.120 12:48, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
 * >"you haven't provided any reason for why it should be kept" -
 * I did; "Popular term" Amin (talk) 18:56, 1 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Leaning delete…I also see results for "emotional market value", "romantic market value", "intellectual market value", "nutritional market value", "environmental market value", "political market value" etc etc etc. Ƿidsiþ 19:07, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I think you accidentally proved my point that sexual market value deserved to be included lol. I searched for the terms you mentioned, here are the results.
 * Google search results:
 * "sexual market value": 35.000
 * "emotional market value": 22
 * "romantic market value": 338
 * "intellectual market value": 24
 * "nutritional market value": 765
 * "environmental market value": 21
 * "political market value": 6
 * Amin (talk) 02:52, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
 * "Sexual market value" only gets 500 hits on Google Books, an order of magnitude less than, say, "intrinsic market value" or "real market value". Should those have entries as well? Ƿidsiþ 07:39, 4 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete, it may appear non-SOP because of the overly narrow definition that specifies a "dating market", but the term can also describe any sex appeal or attractiveness in non-dating contexts. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  08:15, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per Ƿidsiþ and Bingo. --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 01:14, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Abstain. Also (not that it really has any bearing on this RFD request), : should we parse this as sexual market] + [value or sexual] + [market value? sexual market place (sexual marketplace?) seems pretty clearly to be sexual] + [market place. Per utramque cavernam 11:55, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * It's sexual + market value, with the latter often being used figuratively. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  14:15, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep: Not SOP with respect to market value. Market value is a price expressed in currency; sexual market value as defined is not a price expressed in currency, unless it were the value of the sexual market, like the revenue or the net profit of all whores and the porno industry united. Our definition of market value matches the definitions found in . Google Ngram Viewer finds nothing: ; it does find sexual market. Alternatives to keeping would be to create sexual market or expand market value with another sense; I wonder what sexual market really is. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:53, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Leaning keep. It seems to be specific PUA/incel/online misogynists jargon, refer to Google Groups for examples. The mentioned abbreviation SMV imo also contributions to its worthiness of inclusion. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 16:15, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks like there's also sexual economics as research field, where they talk about the sexual marketplace, so it's not just incel jargon. – Jberkel 01:23, 14 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Attested term. PrussianOwl (talk) 00:51, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Kept. bd2412 T 16:14, 3 March 2019 (UTC)