Post: #1

This article is from last May, but I did some searches and couldn't find it here. Sorry in advance if already posted:

NYT: Wanting Monogamy as 1,946 Men Await My Swipe

Quote:Leaving Michael’s apartment one Tuesday morning, I smiled and said, “Have a good class today.” That may not sound like much, but I was trying to leave a hint: I was interested in more than our one-night-a-week thing.

Understandably, he didn’t catch on.

So a little later, I texted, “Could you send me a playlist of your favorite songs?”

He sent one, but I still wasn’t sure he got the picture.

I decided to be a little more obvious: “Do you want to go to the Grand Canyon over spring break?”

“Sounds fun,” he replied, “but I’m busy then.”

This was ridiculous. Finally I wrote, “I like you and I want to be with you.” Then I squeezed my eyes shut and pressed “Send.”

Six weeks earlier, Michael and I had met on Bumble, the dating app where women have to make the first move. Our first date had been in a local cafe. Afterward, I told my eager roommate that the date was “just fine,” but “just fine” was fine with me. I wasn’t looking for a relationship, let alone love.

My female friends, who associate dating apps more with the Grim Reaper than with Cupid, warned me against them, saying, “The guys just want to hook up and disappear.”

Again, fine with me. I was graduating in a few months, and attachment would mean a hard goodbye, which would mean tears, tissues and snot. No thanks.

Michael was also graduating. He was tall, thin, looked as if he loved L.A. and routinely announced, “I love L.A.”

Every Monday night for the next month, I would stuff my contact lens solution into my backpack and walk to Michael’s apartment. He’d lean against my shoulder as we watched movies in his barren living room, which he decided not to decorate because he had signed only a one-year lease. “No point when it’s so temporary,” he said.

Everything about us was temporary. We would talk a little, watch a little and then go to bed. In the morning, I would zip up my coat while he asked, “Heading out?”

I would nod and say, “Thanks for the toast.”

There was a rhythm to it. Monday night, pack my bag. Tuesday morning, walk home.

By asking for more, I knew I was breaking the rules. Dating apps allow you to set obvious parameters: age range, distance radius and so on. But there are also unspoken rules: a deadline for the relationship (in our case, graduation); what feelings shouldn’t be expressed, from affection (“Thinking of you!”) to criticism (“It bothers me when you do x”); and boundaries on what shouldn’t be shared about your personal lives (family details, past loves). And you can regulate how much you want to integrate the person into other spheres of your life (not introducing each other to friends).

For a month, I was totally in control. Then one morning, as I returned to my apartment, my hand paused on the doorknob. Instead of considering the warm shower I was about to take, or even dreading the slog of classes that awaited me, I was still thinking about Michael.

I started daydreaming about how the moonlight trickled in while he played me his jazz records, how he chuckled and buried his face in his hands after I explained my odd internships, and how he held up a picture of his family and described each of his brothers. Our kiss was interrupted when he started smiling and then I started smiling.

I was an idiot. Of course I liked him. It was as if I had been carrying an armful of bricks for the past few weeks but only just admitted, “Wow, this is a little heavy.”

I tried reciting my mantra. Hard goodbye. Tissues. Snot. Then I gave in and dropped those hints, which he didn’t get. So I said it flat out: “I like you.”

Within an hour of texting him my confession, my phone lit up with Michael’s reply: “I like you too.”

For a second, my future brimmed with Michael: his records, his quiet demeanor but abrasive sense of humor, his shamelessness in recounting the time he was struck with food poisoning at a hostel in San Francisco. Then another text appeared: “It’s just that I’m apprehensive about the commitment.”

When I clarified that I didn’t expect a long-term commitment, with our coming graduation, he expressed his real concern: “Monogamy.”

My thumbs hovered dumbly over my phone screen. What?

I had known there were other girls. Once, while lying in bed with my head against his shoulder, he squinted at his phone and I caught a glimpse of the name at the top of a text message: Sophie.

Earlier, I had noticed how he’d become Facebook friends with a Sophie, along with a series of girls from other schools. One had cute glasses and a nose ring, and another looked as if she played guitar better than I did. Michael didn’t share mutual friends with them, so I could only assume he had met them on Bumble or Tinder.

I tried to shrug it off. So I was Mondays, and I guessed these girls were maybe Thursdays, Wednesdays or Saturdays. I figured they, like me, were just players of the dating app game, where Michael undoubtedly pressed the proverbial “play again?” button after each successful connection. I thought I could deal with that.

But then Michael started feeling less like a game to me. When he sat across from me, I stopped seeing his face as a “yes” or “no” to swipe on. With the months we had left, I wanted to get to know him, the actual Michael, not the Michael that appeared before me like a selection in an online catalog. I wanted to leave the game behind and develop something special, if only for a short time.

Yet Michael hesitated.

It struck me that the “fling” was dead. Now we have flings, plural, because that’s what dating apps encourage.

Dating apps are the courtship equivalent of next-day shipping, where you don’t have to twiddle your thumbs and wait for an adequate romantic prospect to drift by. They release a flood of potential suitors, your inbox notifications flashing red with heartbeats of their own.

It’s nice to imagine that Michael liked me the most, but even if that were true, I’m not sure what it counts for in a dating scene of instant gratification with seemingly unlimited choice. After all, dating apps never announce, “Congratulations, you’ve matched with everyone you could possibly like!”

They tempt you to keep swiping, and as you whiz through tens, hundreds or even thousands of profiles, you can only infer the obvious. Out of all these people, there’s got to be someone better than the person I’m seeing right now.

Which means that monogamy requires more sacrifice than ever. If offered free travel, why would anyone settle for one place when it’s possible to tour the entire world?

I finally texted Michael back. “You know,” I said, “maybe it would be best if we called it good.” He said he understood. “Good luck with …” I began, a message I would typically end with “… your paper” or “… your test.” But I realized this was the end, so I wrote, “… everything.”

A mere six weeks after our first date, we were over. I’d broken the rules; my glimmer of expressed affection had led to a fatal imbalance in the game.

Feeling a little dispensable, I opened Bumble to pause my account. It was the first time I’d opened it since Michael and I met, and the app had clearly been waiting for me with its arms crossed. A notification flashed, indicating that I had been right-swiped by a few people: 1,946 people.

As the saying goes, there are plenty of fish in the sea, and it turned out my sea held 1,946 of them. The “play again?” button glowed brighter than ever. And yet, almost comically, I wanted to date only one particular person.

Was Michael the best of my 1,946 choices? I doubt it. We differed in too many ways. I showed up to dates five minutes early, while he sauntered into the movie theater five minutes late. I hate Mexican food, and he worships it. But what is “best” anyway?

It’s impossible to know, but that’s what having nearly 2,000 potential dates will make you think about. All I know is Michael lived five blocks away, and he would lean against me and play me his jazz records, and I couldn’t help but appreciate him for all he was and all he wasn’t.

It’s easy to dismiss dating apps as insincere, objectifying and sketchy. But in the end, they did do one thing for me. They introduced me to Michael, someone I was willing to bend the rules for, someone I was actually able to admit I liked. And maybe there is hope in that.

tl;dr-
Author thinks she only wants a fling, meets a guy on Bumble who bangs her once a week, and catches feelings for him. He's banging other girls and doesn't want monogamy. Their fling ends, and she logs back into Bumble after 6 weeks of inactivity to find 1,946 guys queued up who have right-swiped her.

How many assertions that are routinely made here, about online dating and game in general, does this piece touch upon?

-Girls are not cut out mentally for no-strings-attached sex, but wrongly think they are because society no longer discourages it.
-Girls usually choose the alpha who's banging other girls over the regular guy who wants a girlfriend.
-The top guys on these apps are taking full advantage and playing the field like crazy, leaving the majority to compete for scraps. (On that note, which one of you is Michael? )
-Girls on these apps are absurdly picky, and well aware of it, because they constantly feel like something better must be out there among the ocean of suitors.
-There really, really is an ocean of suitors. 1,946?? Jesus fuck.

We're ahead of the curve, fellas.

Post: #2

Additional bullet-points.

-Treats 1,946 suitors as a curse rather than a blessing.
-Vaguely suggests men are in the same boat when even alphas have far fewer options.

Post: #3

Where's that .gif of the chick who just slept with Superman, yet is thinking - "Is he the absolute best I can do?"

Post: #4

(01-29-2018 10:40 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  Where's that .gif of the chick who just slept with Superman, yet is thinking - "Is he the absolute best I can do?"

Post: #5

Lesson: Even the lowliest hamster gets 1900 thirsty dudes waiting in line.

Post: #6

A woman having that many right swipes isn't very telling, as most women at least a 5 & in decent shape get swiped right. Doesn't matter if it's a faraway pic with sunglasses, snapchat filter, only one pic, she will have countless possible suitors (this is partially a matter of ratio as well - there are more men)..it's just that she happened to like this guy & it surprised her given her nonstop options.

The author probably isn't aware of the reality of online dating for women.

Post: #7

Thank you for reminding me of why I don't use these sites. She gets 1,946 right-swipes in six weeks. I naturally wonder if this is all true.

Post: #8

(01-29-2018 11:36 PM)puckerman Wrote:  Thank you for reminding me of why I don't use these sites. She gets 1,946 right-swipes in six weeks. I naturally wonder if this is all true.

In big cities like LA or NYC, absolutely. I've seen Asian 5's with thousands of matches in NYC. Always wrap up with online hoes.

Post: #9

I'm acquaintances with a shitty slut from childhood and now facebook friend (I don't know why I am, perhaps for occasional hate reading). She's a "send a dollar on paypal and see what you get" tinder user. She posted a screenshot from tinder earlier this month with a notification congratulating her on 20k swipes for the year. She lives in Pittsburgh, which is not a booming metropolis.

She's a 6.5 with a 1 personality and fake tits who posts pics of herself in a thong on tinder.

I'm often as disappointed in American men as I am disgusted by American women.

Post: #10

This lasted 6 weeks. That's 8-9 Michaels over the course of a year. Now imagine that over a decade or two, and these numbers are probably conservative for many women.

These broads are cum dumpsters, and online dating is making them miserable in the long-run.

Post: #11

I'm betting the author is a 6 or less. No pics of her from the source, though.

Post: #12

She screened through 2000 men to find the most attractive guy who would casually sleep with her and is then surprised that he won't commit.

She doesn't think about the fate of all the thirsty dudes she left hanging. It's all about her.

Post: #13

Quote:A mere six weeks after our first date, we were over.....

Feeling a little dispensable, I opened Bumble to pause my account. It was the first time I’d opened it since Michael and I met,

Post: #14

(01-29-2018 11:43 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(01-29-2018 11:36 PM)puckerman Wrote:  Thank you for reminding me of why I don't use these sites. She gets 1,946 right-swipes in six weeks. I naturally wonder if this is all true.

In big cities like LA or NYC, absolutely. I've seen Asian 5's with thousands of matches in NYC. Always wrap up with online hoes.

Remember also that the 'feminist' dating app through which women are 'empowered' to communicate first (often with just a "hi" or even a "." but mostly with no message at all which deletes the match), pimps out attractive women like the best of them.

Upon signing in, the top of men's card stacks are 8s and 9s. These women bank more right-swipes which solidifies their positions at the top of stacks which brings them more right-swipes and Bumble more interest from paying men. It is only after the tenth swipe, do the looks of the women normalise.

I really hope this woman who is complaining of 1946 suitors is one of these women who the designer-feminists at Bumble is pimping out and not a woman at the bottom of stacks.

Post: #15

I think women are in part fooled by those high numbers. Those 2000 suitors are an illusion. Many of them just swiped right brainlessly and have no intention of talking with her, let alone meet her or date her. Not to mention that these 2000 guys probably each like 2000 women.
This is quite dangerous for women. They think ‘so many men like me’ but the liquidity just isn’t there.

Post: #16

(01-30-2018 01:05 AM)Speculation Wrote:  She screened through 2000 men to find the most attractive guy who would casually sleep with her and is then surprised that he won't commit.

She doesn't think about the fate of all the thirsty dudes she left hanging. It's all about her.

I'd say that more than half of the right swipers are not left hanging. They dispassionately played the numbers and forgot about her. Even men with Game are learning to detach their egos and not invest in modern dating and treat it like a video game. There are very few men who could cope with the loss of self-esteem owing to the overwhelming general sense of disappointment that app dating brings if they invested in it.

This is the logical problem for anyone (male or female) using these swipe apps to seek a monogamous relationship: The man and woman both sense at the back of their minds that the woman could be back on the cock carousel within hours of their first relationship argument.

"Michaels" know that they just "got lucky" and there is plenty more where they came from.

Post: #17

(01-30-2018 01:02 AM)Rhyme or Reason Wrote:  I'm betting the author is a 6 or less. No pics of her from the source, though.

A quick bit of googling and by process of elimination, this is the only picture available:

Post: #18

(01-30-2018 08:16 AM)Teedub Wrote:  

(01-30-2018 01:02 AM)Rhyme or Reason Wrote:  I'm betting the author is a 6 or less. No pics of her from the source, though.

A quick bit of googling and by process of elimination, this is the only picture available:

WB.

Post: #19

Your average woman gets swiped on by most guys and bumble has no swipe limit, so while 1900 might be inflated it's not unreasonable either especially for any woman who has used the app for more than a few months. I thought someone was going to point out the real truth hidden in this article but they did not, so I'll enlighten y'all.

Women don't actually want to be making the first move, or really any moves (except when angling for something that truly benefits them in the short/long-term - i.e. money, status, access, security). *Shocker*

This is why Bumble will only work for a select few long term, and fail for the rest of the populace. We all know women want men to take charge. This fact is obviously nothing new for anyone here. It's a tale as old as time by now.

In the above article, the girl earnestly awaits for the guy to respond. Waits for him to say he likes her. Waits for him to commit to her. When it never happens, she finally jumps ship. Typical post 20th century "romantic fling".

Women and modern day feminism have programmed and more importantly, enabled men to act this way, but men aren't doing themselves any favors by riding the poontang bus via "bang" apps forever either. Will western men and women grow up? It's one of the great questions of our time.

Post: #20

Another aspect of female behavior is whining. It seems sometimes like the main reason a lot of women enter into journalism is to whine about not getting what they feel they're entitled to, and then obscuring it by hanging it within a social justice frame, all in the interest of avoiding personal responsibility.

That is the reason why it will never be long before another article like this crops up. The best women seem to be able to do when their life isn't turning out right is pining for sympathy (oh, and downing ice-cream).


"I have 1,946 bumble matches. Boo hoo hoo."

Post: #21

To Michael!

Post: #22

I tried to get through the article but it was too much.

This is the summation from what I read.

"I have nearly 2000 matches. This man should commit to me so that I can grow the sense of safety and self esteem required to monkey-branch up a little higher, inconsequentially crushing him in the process."

Post: #23

“Sounds fun,” he replied, “but I’m busy then.”


The only response to a Bumble Thot.

Post: #24

Out of those 2000, how many can she keep around?

A lot sure, but many don't fit her expectations, so she's left disenchanted, inflated, self assured, and confused all at the same time.

I don't envy these women who have a whirlwind of fleeting power. I used to think it was unfair but they ultimately get their desert before their veggies and cry about sauteed mushrooms and spinach the rest of their lives.

Post: #25

Pretty all of this is known on the forum, I mean we have a dedicated thread to Bumble and to Tinder.

We're definitely the 20% of guys getting the 80% of women, even the guys who do just "ok" online have an advantage compared to the betas, simps, and pro fem soy boys online.

As an early adapter and vet of online dating I've seen it all, nothing suprises me, and I treat all girls like a fling unless proven otherwise, I've found dime pieces, some really good girls, shockingly slutty girls, and LOTS of mediocre boring basic bitches.

I understand why gents here avoid online dating apps, but to do so is to avoid the unavoidable.

Young women know they have power over most men especially online.

It's funny how some will claim "they don't do online" dating but you'll see their profile online - women can hide it easier than men.

Men have to adapt to online dating - and as always - another tool in your game box, not the main source of your game if you can handle it.

We live in an ever increasing world of on demand and instant gratification - this is exactly why online dating apps do so well - and will continue to do so well in an on demand and customization market.

In person approach of course will always be King - but think about how many people are plugged in, glued to their phones, earphones in, and ignoring everything around them.

Every ones connected, no one is connecting.