Post: #26

(08-08-2015 12:14 PM)kazz Wrote:  

(08-08-2015 07:39 AM)void Wrote:  

Statistics from OkCupid. Take Tinder as OkCupid on steroids and even being in the top 25% does not guarantee any play to a man.

Am I reading this graph wrong or does it show that the medium rated men get more msgs than the most attractive?

That's how I'm reading it too. Which is somewhat perplexing. I can understand that slightly above average looking men might (on some dating sites) get a good chunk of messages initiated by women (though in this case it would presumably be the slight below average men who are mercilessly chased), but that the best looking guys apparently get almost none in comparison is hard to believe.

OKC managed to stamp out hypergamy through clever subliminal web adverts?

Post: #27

^ It's because ugly women don't send messages to the hottest guys. Average guys get lots of ugly women messaging them.

Also, OKCupid did another study that showed the second most attractive guy in their list got the most responses, not the first. Regardless I bet you the hottest guy got the hottest girls.

Post: #28

(08-08-2015 12:29 PM)MikeS Wrote:  That's how I'm reading it too. Which is somewhat perplexing. I can understand that slightly above average looking men might (on some dating sites) get a good chunk of messages initiated by women (though in this case it would presumably be the slight below average men who are mercilessly chased), but that the best looking guys apparently get almost none in comparison is hard to believe.

OKC managed to stamp out hypergamy through clever subliminal web adverts?

It's not perplexing when you realize that only below-average looking women are taking the initiative to send messages on dating sites. Every woman who is better than average looking has no need to do so, as her inbox is getting slammed and she has her pick of guys to choose from already. Ugly women, however, are getting much less attention, and the attention they do get is very low quality. Most women who are 2s, 3s, and 4s have no illusions of landing a man who is an 8 or above. Thus they aim their messages at guys they deem more average looking (and who are technically still above their corresponding SMV) because they correctly assume they will be more likely to get a response.

Post: #29

Considering how many women live in New York, Tinder doesn't really reflect the actual dating market.

Tinder(and other Dating Apps) are artificial environments that usually favor women. It's like playing
an away game(for guys) where you don't always have a home field advantage. You can still win. You just have
to adjust your game.

As for power, anyone man or woman has the power to say yes, no or walk away if they don't like something.
There is no inequality when it comes to dating. Just people making decisions. If a guy can't get dates living in one city
he simply goes to the next one, and the next one. Until he gets what he wants.

If a girl complains she can't find a man, chances are she's not really trying that hard.

Post: #30

(08-07-2015 09:08 PM)CH-Toronto Wrote:  Any girl who feels they have no control in the online dating market is insane.

It's the arrogance and delusion that comes from being power drunk, something that can also be witnessed in tinpot dictators who are shielded from reality by their inner circle of yes men until they eventually bite off more than they can chew and reality bites them on the arse.

Post: #31

(08-08-2015 02:52 PM)Apollo21 Wrote:  Considering how many women live in New York, Tinder doesn't really reflect the actual dating market.

Tinder(and other Dating Apps) are artificial environments that usually favor women. It's like playing
an away game(for guys) where you don't always have a home field advantage. You can still win. You just have
to adjust your game.

As for power, anyone man or woman has the power to say yes, no or walk away if they don't like something.
There is no inequality when it comes to dating. Just people making decisions. If a guy can't get dates living in one city
he simply goes to the next one, and the next one. Until he gets what he wants.

If a girl complains she can't find a man, chances are she's not really trying that hard.

Here's another truth. NYC is much like SF in that the majority of, quite frankly overpaid, soft-skill jobs are only offered to women and good-ol'-boy nepotist finance jobs are offered to a select few men, and this is the vast majority of people living in the desirable areas of the city. Only with SF, replace the nepotist finance types with more of Silicon valley startup scene - although SF has finance of its own - which is bad in other ways.

No one else can afford living there. You will have a few of the artistic class - photographers, models who have agents, musicians, and students who will be gone soon - who will fill out the rest of the closet-sized studio apartments - and that's it.


It's gotten to the point where millennial women get paid MORE than men in these cities: http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/yo...-1.2110245
This article fails also because it uses average, NOT median to determine pay. The skewing of the average is from a select few young men who are making solid six-figure salaries - and *even then* the girls still get paid more.


Both cities have a hidden underclass (Tenderloin and South SFO in SF, and Flatbush and many other scattered parts in each burrough of NY) which are irrelevant until one of the privileged class gets robbed there.


What it does is create an unbelievably great situation for the guys who can afford living there - and you find some guys take up a horrible standard of living just to experience the abundance of women. I can't say too much for NYC because I hated my stay there and only visit for very short periods of time, but in SF oftentimes you would get opened by a girl if you were at the right bar or club. Tinder would work if you are one of the fratty types living in the Marina, but if not you still need not worry.

Post: #32

I'm no online dating expert, but a friend of mine who gets reasonable quality women IRL and through online dating (7s), gets messages from the most butt-heinous, fat, old women to the point where it rattles his confidence.

He's 6'0, 37 years old, slim, decent job and looks, and as I said, pulls at least decent looking, fit women IRL.

But good lord some of the women who message him (he texts me the 'winners'). Many are several years older, many are morbidly obese, or both. It's insane.

There is an overall moral to all of this, and that is as a man, you have to make your own way. It's our natural instincts as hunters/gatherer. I tell him to keep the faith because at least he is fairly successful in the women he pursues and to not let the gargoyles and buffaloes that pursue him to get him down.

Post: #33

(08-08-2015 12:35 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Also, OKCupid did another study that showed the second most attractive guy in their list got the most responses, not the first. Regardless I bet you the hottest guy got the hottest girls.

Can you provide a link?

Post: #34

(08-08-2015 03:43 PM)The Wire Wrote:  

(08-08-2015 12:35 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Also, OKCupid did another study that showed the second most attractive guy in their list got the most responses, not the first. Regardless I bet you the hottest guy got the hottest girls.

Can you provide a link?

http://jonmillward.com/blog/attraction-d...xperiment/
I'm guessing this is the one because it has been written about and cited much in the "'sphere" since it came out.

I do find the "hottest guy" the judges picked the most attractive one of the bunch,

but I don't fully agree with the point Samseau was getting at that girls don't pursue the very hottest men, because the hottest guy voted appears to be mixed race. Reminds me of a better looking Tony Parker. OKTrends also did another study proving the fact that minorities don't do so well in Online dating, and being mixed does not make one immune.

The reason being, I presume, is that there are a few extra cognitive steps made in pursuing relations with a person online versus getting approached in the moment. But this is my opinion and feel free to disagree!

I'm sure he does great in real life, barring confidence/internal issues, but he's probably Left-swiped more often than not on Tinder. Or more likely, his tinder matches don't respond to his messages.

Post: #35

Flip the script and the article title becomes: "How hundreds of women failed to convince these few men to have a relationship."

The real double standard is not asking the men the easy question "what would it take for you to be in a relationship with a tinder girl". Maybe they do ask and the journalistic overlords redact it.

Post: #36

(08-08-2015 03:48 PM)ManVsMachine Wrote:  

(08-08-2015 03:43 PM)The Wire Wrote:  

(08-08-2015 12:35 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Also, OKCupid did another study that showed the second most attractive guy in their list got the most responses, not the first. Regardless I bet you the hottest guy got the hottest girls.

Can you provide a link?

http://jonmillward.com/blog/attraction-d...xperiment/
I'm guessing this is the one because it has been written about and cited much in the "'sphere" since it came out.

I do find the "hottest guy" the judges picked the most attractive one of the bunch,

but I don't fully agree with the point Samseau was getting at that girls don't pursue the very hottest men, because the hottest guy voted appears to be mixed race. Reminds me of a better looking Tony Parker.

The problem is I can't zoom in on the top guy they rated so I don't know what the hell he's wearing or the actual photo situation. The white guy has a professional Paul Janka look going on for him with a button up shirt with a tie on and using a side profile shot. For all I know the other guy is wearing an Affliction tshirt holding a bud light to his chest.

Hottest guys don't get the most emails its the guys with the best pics. Best pics do directly coincide with someone's attractiveness though. Meaning a big fat slob looking like Chris Christie can wear a $2000 suit and still suck. The better looking you are the harder it is for your pics to be unattractive. Also height plays a factor as well meaning women do not get discriminated on with height for the most part but men will lose points probably every inch under 6ft for the most part. If they made the white guy 6'2" instead of 5'10" his responses would go up as would the other guy.

Post: #37

(08-08-2015 04:20 PM)The Wire Wrote:  The problem is I can't zoom in on the top guy they rated so I don't know what the hell he's wearing or the actual photo situation. The white guy has a professional Paul Janka look going on for him with a button up shirt with a tie on and using a side profile shot. For all I know the other guy is wearing an Affliction tshirt holding a bud light to his chest.

Hottest guys don't get the most emails its the guys with the best pics. Best pics do directly coincide with someone's attractiveness though. Meaning a big fat slob looking like Chris Christie can wear a $2000 suit and still suck. The better looking you are the harder it is for your pics to be unattractive. Also height plays a factor as well meaning women do not get discriminated on with height for the most part but men will lose points probably every inch under 6ft for the most part. If they made the white guy 6'2" instead of 5'10" his responses would go up as would the other guy.

Great post. I can't disagree with anything you said here. It does add a confound to the story that I did not fully acknowledge.

*However*, with that being said, the data-conscious folks over at OKTrends have already measured this disparity with a significantly larger sample size than anyone else can provide: http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-r...-you-back/

From personal experience, when I spent a fair amount of time trying to help FA (self-dubbed 'foreveralone') individuals on the bodybuilding forums between 2011-2013, I noticed this trend as well. As such, I advised the white guys I helped out to use Tinder as a supplement their approaching and meeting women, and I advised minorities to stay off the service altogether as I did notice it was doing them a greater detriment to their self-esteem which was furthering their issues. In lieu of internet dating, I advised to spend that additional time in mixed group settings (co-ed sports, for example). In both cases, the young men were using online dating too much. But that's the last I'll say on race to spoil this thread.

I also agree with you on the point about height, but this study kept them consistent:

The Study Wrote:At this point, I had ten profiles with similar sounding usernames, all with the same answers to 25 questions, with the same written profile and personal stats (all heights consistent, the same level of education, etc.), and each account had a different photo of a man or woman.

Post: #38

(08-07-2015 08:25 PM)JayR Wrote:  “It’s a contest to see who cares less, and guys win a lot at caring less,” Amanda says.

I'm pretty sure Rollo Tomassi has said that exact thing.

Rollo has definitely said that women are the gatekeepers of sex, men are the gatekeepers of commitment.

Based on the article, there are a lot of young women going out looking for sex and hoping to land a commitment, and are disappointed that men have caught onto the idea that there's no point buying the cow when the milk is free.

Post: #39

(08-08-2015 04:36 PM)ManVsMachine Wrote:  

(08-08-2015 04:20 PM)The Wire Wrote:  The problem is I can't zoom in on the top guy they rated so I don't know what the hell he's wearing or the actual photo situation. The white guy has a professional Paul Janka look going on for him with a button up shirt with a tie on and using a side profile shot. For all I know the other guy is wearing an Affliction tshirt holding a bud light to his chest.

Hottest guys don't get the most emails its the guys with the best pics. Best pics do directly coincide with someone's attractiveness though. Meaning a big fat slob looking like Chris Christie can wear a $2000 suit and still suck. The better looking you are the harder it is for your pics to be unattractive. Also height plays a factor as well meaning women do not get discriminated on with height for the most part but men will lose points probably every inch under 6ft for the most part. If they made the white guy 6'2" instead of 5'10" his responses would go up as would the other guy.

Great post. I can't disagree with anything you said here. It does add a confound to the story that I did not fully acknowledge.

*However*, with that being said, the data-conscious folks over at OKTrends have already measured this disparity with a significantly larger sample size than anyone else can provide: http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-r...-you-back/

From personal experience, when I spent a fair amount of time trying to help FA (self-dubbed 'foreveralone') individuals on the bodybuilding forums between 2011-2013, I noticed this trend as well. As such, I advised the white guys I helped out to use Tinder as a supplement their approaching and meeting women, and I advised minorities to stay off the service altogether as I did notice it was doing them a greater detriment to their self-esteem which was furthering their issues. In lieu of internet dating, I advised to spend that additional time in mixed group settings (co-ed sports, for example). In both cases, the young men were using online dating too much. But that's the last I'll say on race to spoil this thread.

I also agree with you on the point about height, but this study kept them consistent:

The Study Wrote:At this point, I had ten profiles with similar sounding usernames, all with the same answers to 25 questions, with the same written profile and personal stats (all heights consistent, the same level of education, etc.), and each account had a different photo of a man or woman.

Spot on. Totally agree re: minorities. I recently made a post on that in the Tibder thread as to why minorities don't do well on it and need to stick to IRL, if only because their subpar online results might fuck up their vibe.

Post: #40

(08-08-2015 04:20 PM)The Wire Wrote:  

(08-08-2015 03:48 PM)ManVsMachine Wrote:  

(08-08-2015 03:43 PM)The Wire Wrote:  

(08-08-2015 12:35 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Also, OKCupid did another study that showed the second most attractive guy in their list got the most responses, not the first. Regardless I bet you the hottest guy got the hottest girls.

Can you provide a link?

http://jonmillward.com/blog/attraction-d...xperiment/
I'm guessing this is the one because it has been written about and cited much in the "'sphere" since it came out.

I do find the "hottest guy" the judges picked the most attractive one of the bunch,

but I don't fully agree with the point Samseau was getting at that girls don't pursue the very hottest men, because the hottest guy voted appears to be mixed race. Reminds me of a better looking Tony Parker.

The problem is I can't zoom in on the top guy they rated so I don't know what the hell he's wearing or the actual photo situation. The white guy has a professional Paul Janka look going on for him with a button up shirt with a tie on and using a side profile shot.

I am pretty sure that is Paul Janka wearing the Paul Janka look.

Post: #41

Glad this got posted here.

I have given up Tinder mostly because I don't feel like having my profile out there for everyone to see and because I don't have the time or patience to respond to messages or care about matches. I already have enough options in real life and already have enough distractions on the internet, so I think I'd be better off without it for the time being.

That being said, these guys in the article apparently are having amazing success with getting quick easy sex from women using Tinder. I'm guessing these guys have great logistics and can drop lines like "hey, why don't you come over for a quick drink on my balcony? great view of central park" or something.

I am reconsidering getting back onto Tinder, though.

Post: #42

All the dudes in the article were mid 20s highly successful presumably Caucasian guys living in the good parts of NYC with status jobs(photographer, male model, guitarist, finance, lawyers, even dude that lives at home is a ripped personal trainer)and good looking by the authors admission. Why would anyone expect these guys to have trouble getting laid?

Tinder or no tinder. Do these chicks think these types weren't banging women left and right with little effort in the 90s as well?
It may have gotten slightly easier, but so has everything else from calling an uber, booking a flight, to listening to music.

Post: #43

The article gives us a view of the true solipsistic point of view of women. For an attractive young woman, 80-90% of men are invisible. Non-existent entities/creeps/things. Around 10% of men are the betas. The ones for dinners, dates, movies, coffees, the shoulders to cry on. The top 5%, are the players, the fuckboys, the assholes. The ones they wet for.

The article reflects how the mind of an attractive young woman is incapable of empathy with the 80% of living men who are undersexed and rejected by the female sex. They complain about the top-guys who pump and dump them; and they do that because they can. They have no eyes other than for the alpha cock. That is, until they hit The Wall.

Post: #44

I've noticed a certain desperation in Tinder/online girls I've met the past few years. I usually bang them quickly on the first or second date. Afterwards, I just keep in contact on friendly terms to hook up with them again. I don't really act like a dick.

These girls try to snag me for a relationship with a quickness. I've gotten texts like 'My friend saw you were still on tinder, that really hurt me', 'are you sleeping with anyone else?' etc.

Even while still hanging out with them, they put in a ton of effort both in and out of the bedroom. Maybe it's just the type of girl I attract.

Women have a ton of options, but what's difficult for them is to find a guy who in their mind they truly connect with on a deeper level. So they complain with articles like this. In the mean time they are having fun and getting banged out every week.

Post: #45

(08-08-2015 04:54 AM)Ollave Wrote:  

Quote:There is still a pervasive double standard. We need to puzzle out why women have made more strides in the public arena than in the private arena.”

This gives me chills.

This reeks of a more focused incursion into the actual regulating of interpersonal interactions between men and women, in your "yes means yes" direction. Institutionally and civically there are already some serious bands around a man's behavior. They want into your text convo's, into your phone calls, into your yadstop and ultimately, into what you do with women you have banged.

At least it mentioned the public and private arenas because hitherto, the dating market is treated as a completely different arena to the civil arena.

In the civil arena, women demand that most men be made equal with them. This has the effect of causing these equalised men to become invisible to them in the private (sexual, romantic, relationship) arena until their SMVs drop below to those men they were equal with in their 20s.

Inequality is mostly demonstrated through women's sexual and relationship choices.

The women at my pay grade are in relationship with men at higher paygrades while the men are married to single mothers, women of a certain age or women from the secretarial pool.

Post: #46

(08-09-2015 12:38 AM)RockHard Wrote:  

(08-07-2015 08:25 PM)JayR Wrote:  “It’s a contest to see who cares less, and guys win a lot at caring less,” Amanda says.

I'm pretty sure Rollo Tomassi has said that exact thing.

Rollo has definitely said that women are the gatekeepers of sex, men are the gatekeepers of commitment.

Based on the article, there are a lot of young women going out looking for sex and hoping to land a commitment, and are disappointed that men have caught onto the idea that there's no point buying the cow when the milk is free.

We know how easy it is for women online and with dating apps. What man would 'commit' aka financially invest in a woman who frequented bars dominated by single men every night? Yet Tinder gives her even more access to men who are not restrained by approach anxiety or social mores.

I don't meet a lot of women off Tinder by any means - perhaps 1 or 2 women per month then no-one for a while. I have met a woman three times and I've got laid three times. The sex is good.

After all three nights, I decided to not swipe again until I saw how soon she swiped after leaving me in the mornings. On each occasion, she was swiping for more matches within the day.

Guess what I am going to reply to her if she ever tries to call in her chips and demand a relationship in return for the sex we've been having?

Post: #47

(08-07-2015 09:08 PM)CH-Toronto Wrote:  Any girl who feels they have no control in the online dating market is insane.

The best way to retain POWER without assuming any responsibility is to feign a lack of control and blame men.

Post: #48

(08-09-2015 03:34 PM)Neo Wrote:  Women have a ton of options, but what's difficult for them is to find a guy who in their mind they truly connect with on a deeper level. So they complain with articles like this. In the mean time they are having fun and getting banged out every week.

I don't think that's true. If you're going around thinking "she has fun and gets banged by the tattoo artist every week", that'll kill your mood. I mean, it would surely kill mine if that was true.

I don't think I've ever been with a woman that's been banging a new guy every week, from the women I've gotten to know for a bit of a longer time. Maybe I just don't date outrageous sluts. Sure, I don't know if they lie to me, but I think I've been good at getting an idea of their recent behavior. Most women don't have the energy to go out with new guys all the time. The only girl I know who does that is really desperate to find a man to marry her. I observe that a lot of women go out on five online dates, all the guys are shit and they stop dating for a while.

Post: #49

In reading the article and some of the comments here, I'd like to comment as someone who works in finance.

It's not that a lot of the guys are 'Alpha', rather it's about access. A lot of working in finance is networking, which leads to a lot of events and social gatherings. Women show up for one obvious reason, to meet a guy with money. And the icebreaker is built in, since you're at an 'event' and can start with the "so where do you work?" and go from there. It's so easy to send out an email to every attractive women one knows, even just barely meeting, with a "generic finance/investment company is holding an event at xx, you should come" and chances are they are going to show up.

And while many of the guys aren't alpha, working in this field often requires a level of assertiveness that is also a very attractive quality to women. A lot of the younger guys I work with are on Tinder and attack it with that same assertiveness.

So if you have any friends who work for a financial services firm, the bigger company the better, the bigger city the better, start going to their networking events. They'll be hit or miss, but more often than not, you'll have easy access to attractive women.

Post: #50

(08-08-2015 01:33 AM)Samseau Wrote:  When I was at NYC a few weeks ago for Roosh's conference I was visiting a college buddy of mine and he told me about a girl from Tinder he was going to meet that night. She was an 35 year old East Asian 6/10. He told me she had 3800 matches.

"Did you ask her how she decided to pick you?"

"Yeah man I asked her, 'How the fuck do you decide?' and she said she liked my message. My message was 'Yoo that's a funny pic you got'."

"That's all you said?"

"Yeah my profile description is 'Tom Brady is God' none of it makes any sense bro"


So basically, the women in NYC have thousands of matches. They are like children in a candy shop; is a child being rational when he chooses which candy to eat? They just choose amongst their favorites but ultimately it is random and there is no logic to the process.

As for women who complain they aren't finding Mr. Right? They leave out the part of having thousands of matches. The whole thing is a joke and these sluts are full of shit. They just cannot admit how broken they are.

Samseau, do you produce any regular content, such as a blog? I really enjoy a lot of your contributions.