The Problem With the High-Value Man/Woman Trend

Dating coaches and influencers love the concept of a high-value man or woman, and I can see some positive qualities to it. Setting high expectations of a potential partner might protect us from wasting our time in dating and it might help us avoid red flags. Holding ourselves to the expectation of being high-value provides us with a boost of confidence in an area that we are often very lacking in confidence - nothing fills us with more vulnerability than love.

I know for many folks, something doesn't seem quite right about trying to find or be high-value man or woman. But then, it doesn't seem quite wrong either. If you're also feeling conflicted about this trend from dating influencers, read on for my take and a more nuanced way of thinking about dating.

What is a High-Value Man or Woman?

A high-value man is defined as:

• Attractive, well-groomed and well dressed,

• Successful in career and education, often wealthy, and

• Charming, great communicator, and knows what he wants.

A high-value woman is defined as:

• Confident in her worth outside of external validation,

• Attractive and fit, and

• Feminine/Passive: allows herself to be pursued and lets men take the lead in relationships.

We can easily recognize the high-value man in romance novels and movies. The males in Sarah Maas's A Court of Thorns and Roses book series, Ryan Gosling's character in the movie Crazy Stupid Love, and more recently, Pedro Pascal's character in The Materialists all fit this description.

The high-value woman is a little more elusive in pop culture: the woman typically must undergo some kind of transformation in order to fit the definition. The female protagonists in A Court of Thorns and Roses series are either passive and attractive, achieving confidence through a male's commitment, or they are confident and attractive, eventually softening to a male. Sandra Bullock's character in Miss Congeniality is very confident and fit, but must be made-over to be attractive enough for Benjamin Bratt. Dakota Johnson's character in The Materialists may be the closest.

Included in the definition for high-value men (HVM) and women (HVW) is a commitment to personal growth and not settling for relationships that are so-so (which is my thing!).

So to start, there isn't anything inherently wrong with valuing any of these qualities. If you're here, reading my work, you are probably very invested in personal growth, in being a great communicator, and in not settling for crappy relationships.

So what's the issue? Why does it still feel off? Read on to find out.

It Promotes Perfectionism

In reading influencer and dating coaches takes on the HVM or HVW, refusing to put up with less than what we deserve or maintaining high standards is the norm. I believe this leads to people being perfectionistic about their partner and themselves. An intolerance for our fallibility as humans creates an air of superiority, which feels and looks like confidence, but is really a cover-up for insecurity.

On one hand, I do see how this can be healthy boundary setting: if someone is exhibiting red flags for abusive behavior, then refusing to be on the receiving end of it is clearly good. On the other hand, I truly believe that we all exhibit behaviors that are red-flag adjacent, if not outright red flags.

For example, a famous TikTok couple recently broke up because the male was found to be flirty texting with another woman. He was the "golden retriever boyfriend" (more about this later), so their followers were shocked that "even he" cheated. Many interpreted this to mean that there's no hope for a great relationship.

The female in the couple ended their engagement publicly and dramatically. But if I had been working with this couple, I would encourage her to be more curious about him and about their relationship:

• What was he getting out of this flirty conversation?

• Is there something missing between them that led to this?

• How has she contributed to that dynamic?

These are highly mature questions requiring a lot of compassion, nuance, and curiosity. It is far easier to cancel people who disappoint, hurt, or embarrass us, to shame them so that we can avoid the shame of recognizing that we co-created the environment that led to our hurt.

The couples who share the most depth and intimacy are not the ones who never hurt each other. They are the ones who bring humility, compassion, curiosity, and expectation into balance.

It's Based On Persona

Our Persona is the image that we cultivate in order to fit in and belong. It's the mask we wear to ensure that we're acceptable to others and ourselves. When we're dating, we're initially attracted to one another's Personas. This is normal and healthy.

But relationships require meeting and loving one another's Shadow as well. Once the Honeymoon Phase is over, we start to get triggered by one another. Suddenly our perfect partner annoys, embarrasses, hurts, or angers us.

Remember the GRB in the TikTok couple? This is the persona of the "Nice Guy." These men really value relationships and are supportive and loving boyfriends. But because he needs to be seen as nice, he will often struggle to express challenging emotions to his partner, like when he feels angry, deflated, or hurt by her. Invariably, this leads to behaviors to help him avoid those feelings - in this case, finding another girl to text with. This is the Shadow.

HVMs and HVWs all have Shadow as well. True love is not about finding a partner with no (or even tolerable) flaws, it's about being courageous enough to see ourselves in what bothers us most about our partner, and being curious enough to question the definition of flaws. So often the people I work with discover their greatest opportunities for growth in the most challenging aspects of their relationship.

All relationships take effort, regardless of how perfect our partner seems (or how perfect we're convinced we are). It's through navigating that effort together and creatively that we grow truly close to each other.

Immature Definition of Femininity

The high-value woman's passivity fits into an immature definition of femininity. The immature feminine is the maiden, the damsel in distress. She might use her wits to get herself out of trouble, but she's ultimately waiting for a hero (the immature masculine) to rescue her.

The archetype of the maiden does not know what she wants. She's not confident - she looks to others to tell her how she should feel and what she should do. She's obedient. She is always "good" and "nice." This passivity of the high-value woman is at odds with the confident and self-assured side that's expected of her, which is why pop culture struggles to create her in a compelling way.

The idea of being a high-value woman might be appealing to high-achieving women because they usually have the confidence and attractiveness down pat. They are offered a simple solution to their singleness: just "lean back" more, let him be the first to call, be the prize he has to win. There can be something intoxicating about taking control in this way. It feels akin to having power.

And yet, aren't these the same games that women are tired of men playing? Doesn't it seem risky to pull power plays in order to get into a relationship? What happens once we're five years in? Seems exhausting, and it absolutely won't lead to true closeness and intimacy.

Mature femininity has room for confidence and assertiveness (as does the mature masculine). Queens rule their domains with a King and don't need backdoor power struggles in order to feel powerful. They just are powerful.

Because most of us have not had healthy conflict modeled for us, we think that in order for a relationship to work, only one person can lead. This couldn't be further from the truth. Two people acting as respectful and valued leaders in their relationship can create much more extraordinary things than one that takes charge while the other plays a supporting role.

(PS - I can't tell you how many guys I've worked with that deeply value a woman who can say clearly what she wants or needs. Not all men want a passive woman.)

Consumerism disguised as Personal Growth

A spin off issue with the HVM and HVW is the hijacking of personal growth work by capitalism and consumerism. In order to be high-value, you have to pay.

Tons of influencers proclaiming their own high-value are selling complex and expensive beauty and fitness routines to HVWs. Part of the ethos of the HVW is how unattainable she is: she is always beautiful, always made up, is never bloated, and never has wrinkles. SkinnyTok and "wellness" influencers convince us we need the latest trend.

We're again in the realm of Persona: needing to be seen as put together or gorgeous all the time, and if we ever "fail," we're not high-value. But we can buy this new shapewear or face cream and keep trying.

Same goes for the HVM. Podcasters and Youtubers talk about being shredded and disciplined and hitting the gym, and let me be clear, as a fellow gym rat, fitness in itself is a wonderful thing. But when it turns into a need to be seen as high-value, we're now trying to buy our worthiness, and this makes us vulnerable to getting taken advantage of. (Enter the completely out of control supplement market!)

I believe personal growth is an innate desire we all have - some people meet it and others defend against it, but it's there for everyone. When we rise to meet growth opportunities, we transform our destiny. But if our growth is based on persona, on convincing ourselves and potential dates that we're worthy, high-value, or a catch, we're actually bypassing real growth.

Real growth is based on our life purpose and does not care what anyone else thinks. It's unconcerned with appearing high-value or being popular. True growth is valuable only to ourselves, and it's priceless. It's where we create our destiny from.

Tired of all the noise of the dating industrial complex? I've got a clear and simple free guide for you: Which ABC Are You? Find out where on the Attraction-Bonding-Commitment spectrum you're getting stuck in dating. Click the button to get it!

Which ABC Are You?