I think what you've said about how points shouldn't want to be players is a really insightful description of the way many men look at women. I read something a while back from a guy who talked about getting to date a really beautiful woman when he was in Italy. He didn't really even like her all that much, but she was a trophy, someone he could show off to other men. Andrew Tate says the same, that it's not that he likes sex so much, it's that beautiful women around him are an indicator or success and prowess.

Many of the guys who complain about not being able to get a woman (not you Gareth, but many others) aren't talking about not having a relationship, they are mad about not being able to have that sort of game piece in their game. I mean, players are owed game pieces, so why can't I get a game piece like I was tacitly promised by society? They aren't thinking about what they can bring to a deep connection with another human being, they are thinking about what having those points brings to their game. And until the 1970s, this was how both men and a lot of women viewed things. Women's magazines were filled with articles about how to be a good point for your man. That's what women are there for - to be a helpmate and to bring pleasure and enjoyment. I'm 58, so I was in elementary school in the 70s. It sounds like a long time ago, but a lot of people who are still quite involved in the culture either grew up with that same messaging like I did, or they had the subconscious dregs of it from their parents or grandparents - who learned it overtly. No wonder these beliefs are still quite alive and well. And the transactional nature of hook-up culture has only made it worse. Younger men may see women more as equals, but there's still this transactional element that is a huge problem.