What Roko keeps on saying -- that women prefer high-status men -- has a lot of truth to it, but there are countervailing considerations:

(1) [deleted for being an unimportant distraction]

(2) Men under 23 or so are given a pass: current income and current social status are not major considerations of most women contemplating a romance with a man under that age. Of course, it helps to seem to have prospects of high income or high social status, but most women are not particularly good judges of male prospects (and know that about themselves) and most men will be able to clear the prospects hurdle just by being a full-time college student or having a degree -- and if that is not enough in the way of prospects for a particular woman, then having a father or even an uncle with high income or high social status will probably be.

(3) Since women who will go for a man under 23 or so typically place a lot of premium on high intelligence, if you are reading this web site, then unless you have some severe romantic handicap, if you make the usual level of effort to initiate romances when you are under 23 or so, there is a good chance that you find yourself in a romance with at least one woman who will want to stay with you for the rest or your life. (Roko is probably not interested in that: he probably wants to have romances with many, many women who scores as high as possible on the criterion most popular with men who want to have romances with many, many women. Hence his strong emphasis on social status.)

(4) Some women do not care much about income or social status. I have had two long-term relationships during a period in which I was chronically ill and my extremely-low income came entirely from Social Security disability payments plus in the case of relationship #2 federal housing subsidies. I was 27 when I started the first of these two relationships and 44 when I started the second. (Both of these women were very attracted to the fact that I was good at science, BTW. One hid the fact that my being good at science was an attractive property (I had to piece it together after we broke up) and even hid the correlated fact that she found science fiction inspiring, but then again I probably never brought sci fi up in conversation.)

(5) Among the women who care about your income and your position in society, most care about your level of social dominance more. The main determinants of social dominance are interpersonal skills that you can probably learn faster and with much less trouble than you can acquire high income or impressive position in society. To help with this learning, classes are available (e.g., in pickup, improvisation comedy (which is largely about status and dominance signalling) and the martial arts).

(6) On the subject of altruism and philanthropy specifically, being around a woman for long periods of time greatly increases your romantic chances with her. For this reason, one of the people who blog about pickup (Roissy I think) advises men to choose work in which attractive women outnumber men. Most kinds of philanthropy are like that. (I attended BIL PIL 2009 (BIL for the medical industry), and there were a striking number of beautful, intelligent, very inspiring women there (half of whom were in philanthropic organizations) -- and one of them seemed willing to continue talking to me as long as I wanted to talk, knowing about me only that I was attending BIL PIL 2009 and that I had an interest (not a career, just an interest, expressed by me with a sense of confidence in my abilities) in the application of computer-science research to philanthropy.)