Post: #1

In order to bang a woman you must satisfy her minimum looks threshold.

In Second and Third World countries, men can use money and status to compensate for looks. Since these women are poorer and dependent on men for resources, the minimum looks threshold is quite low.

In the Anglosphere, young women earn more than men and have a social safety net. Consequently, women are increasingly selecting men less on their resource provisioning abilities and more on the basis of their looks. And technology has compounded this trend.

I first started online dating in 2009. Back then, I'd get numbers and dates with young girls using cornball pickup lines, and you could get girls to engage you with witty messages. Pics weren't a dealbreaker. Girls I number-closed from POF would text me constantly and blow up my phone even before meeting them. Second and third dates were easy to get. There was far less flaking and fading.

Today, the advice given to men for online dating is vastly different. Less emphasis on message content, more emphasis on pictures. Pics are everything. If she doesn't like your pictures, she won't write you back.

How did things change so quickly?

1. In 2009, most girls didn't have smartphones. In 2015 every girl does.

2. In 2009, there were fewer good looking guys doing online dating due to stigma. Now a lot of good looking guys are online .

3. In 2009, the "numbers game" trope wasn't pervasive. In 2015, more guys today are spamming and playing the numbers game.

4. In 2009, social media was still in its infancy. Facebook was just opened to the masses and Instagram didn't exist. In 2015, girls have become more looks-driven due to the explosion of visual social media like Facebook and Instagram.

5. In 2009, there was no Tinder and no dating apps giving girls instant access to high-caliber guys they never had access to before in their pockets.

As a result of this evolution, the minimum looks threshold required for men to "game" women has gone way up in the last 5 years. If you don't make the cut in terms of looks, you're not getting it in. And the looks bar has been raised higher than ever.

Not only is this true online, it has also translated to all cold approach situations - bars, clubs, and during the day. The only way to transcend this high looks threshold bar is to build familiarity through work, school, mutual friends and social circle.

Thoughts?

Post: #2

You're not wrong bout any of this.

Just like in the animal kingdom those species that adapt and evolve will survive and thrive.
The fact we are aware of this going on puts us ahead of the guys who are stuck in the past believing the media bs on relationships.

Tinder is basically dead now. It's filled with attention whores, single moms and fat girls looking for relationships.
The next big "thing" won't be another tinder or another facebook/instagram. It'll be the evolution of intense validation of the social media vampires.

Post: #3

My thoughts are - men accepted the female narrative instead of fighting it and creating their own.

When men come out and say they want a traditional marriage where the woman cooks and cleans and takes care of the children, what happens? He gets his head ripped off by feminists calling him sexist, out of touch, chauvinist, etc.

If a man expresses interest in thinner women or women with big tits and/or a big ass - same shit. "All women are beautiful you shallow asshole," and so on and so forth.

But when women make physical requirements online, like height or race or whatever, instead of facing backlash, dudes were just like "oh, that's cool. Yeah we all have things we're attracted to." And if a guy speaks up about it, he'd face backlash from even his own gender. "Stop focusing on your looks bro, be confident, that's all you need. People like what they like."

Instead of challenging women and their just as shallow views, we accepted it. We've accepted everything, while in return get nothing.

We're looking at a generation of women that largely seem to be losing femininity while at the same time asking for more masculinity from their men than ever before.

That's what game is. Game is a response to the female condition. It merely responds, but does not create. Game is based around trends that attract women. Whether it's a new grooming trend like growing a beard, or fashion trend, or lifestyle trend, whatever. Game teaches you how to use it to your advantage but does not allow for you to control what's attractive and what isn't. Instead of creating a narrative of our own where we say "no, this is what we're willing to give you, so take it or leave it," we just continue to play along. Some may see an average guy and think "well yeah, he's nothing special, if he wants to get laid, he has to improve himself." - Women have done the opposite for themselves. They've essentially said "we're gonna be who we want, and do what we want, and if they don't like it, we'll just vilify them. Either by calling men who oppose us shallow, or sexist, or whatever other buzzwords we can think of."

You now have women bringing less to the table and demanding more. And all we can blame are ourselves.

We're living in a world where "big boobs only please" written in a man's profile would yield him zero results, even from big boobed women themselves, because it would turn them off, but "please be tall" or "men under 6 feet need not apply" are perfectly acceptable and are usually the first line of the girl's profile, above all else.

Post: #4

"In order to bang a woman you must satisfy her minimum looks threshold."

False premise. More game denialism.

But bigger than that, reality denialism.

And folks should really give Chris @ Good Looking Loser props for coming up with the term, as wrongheaded as it might be in my estimation.

This whole "sky is falling"/internet armageddon analysis HELPS NO ONE.

Social programming at its finest, and now we have an agent of the oppressor amongst us.

Internet messages and movie themes have men convinced that they have to look like African (or Norse/Greek) gods in order to bang frumpy fives. His life has to be more exciting than a secret agent/ninja/pirate. More money than Carlos Slim and Bill Gates.

Meanwhile, there are many examples of average men sleeping with women in general, hot women in particular, in their DAILY lives.

Men are choosing not to see it.

They choose to believe that they can not live that reality that is in front of them.

Most of these guys who manage to live these "miracles" don't know a lick of game.

I'd go so far as to say, the average man doesn't need game AT ALL.

Game is for guys that want more than to just "bang a chick". It's for high #'s or getting next to dream girls. (all of which is ego stroking, most of which only provides a momentary thrill. But we've told those tales before)

What does the average man need?

He needs courage. That's it.

That courage, that bravery, that sense of self worth continues to be beat out of you at every angle.

Posts like these, Men's Health Magazines, Blogs and internet products willing to sell you the secrets for $597.00 bucks.

No.

Just no.

The truth is that most men aren't even approaching women with the volume and frequency necessary for a simple sexual relationship. A couple of swipes on Tinder, a few copy and paste messages on OkCupid, some drunken awkward approaches at the end of the night at some horrible weekend dance club - is not enough. Nor is crushing on girls he grew up with, work with, or sees in his daily life.

He is scared of really going after what he wants in life.
Many guys who frequent game forums and buy products and have long debates are also afraid.

If a man is to afraid to stop a girl from worshiping her glowing LED god, he deserves whatever he gets.

And so does she.

WIA

Post: #5

(05-08-2015 01:31 AM)Mister X Wrote:  My thoughts are - men accepted the female narrative instead of fighting it and creating their own.

When men come out and say they want a traditional marriage where the woman cooks and cleans and takes care of the children, what happens? He gets his head ripped off by feminists calling him sexist, out of touch, chauvinist, etc.

If a man expresses interest in thinner women or women with big tits and/or a big ass - same shit. "All women are beautiful you shallow asshole," and so on and so forth.

But when women make physical requirements online, like height or race or whatever, instead of facing backlash, dudes were just like "oh, that's cool. Yeah we all have things we're attracted to." And if a guy speaks up about it, he'd face backlash from even his own gender. "Stop focusing on your looks bro, be confident, that's all you need. People like what they like."

Instead of challenging women and their just as shallow views, we accepted it. We've accepted everything, while in return get nothing.

We're looking at a generation of women that largely seem to be losing femininity while at the same time asking for more masculinity from their men than ever before.

That's what game is. Game is a response to the female condition. It merely responds, but does not create. Game is based around trends that attract women. Whether it's a new grooming trend like growing a beard, or fashion trend, or lifestyle trend, whatever. Game teaches you how to use it to your advantage but does not allow for you to control what's attractive and what isn't. Instead of creating a narrative of our own where we say "no, this is what we're willing to give you, so take it or leave it," we just continue to play along. Some may see an average guy and think "well yeah, he's nothing special, if he wants to get laid, he has to improve himself." - Women have done the opposite for themselves. They've essentially said "we're gonna be who we want, and do what we want, and if they don't like it, we'll just vilify them. Either by calling men who oppose us shallow, or sexist, or whatever other buzzwords we can think of."

You now have women bringing less to the table and demanding more. And all we can blame are ourselves.

We're living in a world where "big boobs only please" written in a man's profile would yield him zero results, even from big boobed women themselves, because it would turn them off, but "please be tall" or "men under 6 feet need not apply" are perfectly acceptable and are usually the first line of the girl's profile, above all else.

The things is that as early as first wave feminism, the narrative was that women's needs were not being properly taken care of, that men were taking advantage of women.

In reality, men have always liked women and tried to give them their fair share. That's why once the suffrage movement began, it really did not take long for women to gain the vote, once they actually asked for it and many did not.

The absurd argument that women are and were mistreated has continued, despite all evidence to the contrary. Legitimate dark triad men are the real exception and few many have ever been unfair to women.

Thus, once the feminist narratives began to take root, men have been eager to demonstrate that they do not want to hold women back and women have in turn walked all over these men.

The idea that women have been consistently oppressed is ridiculous. RVF members will no doubt that oppression again women has and does exist. On the other hand, throughout history, your average man has also been oppressed by the few people who held all the power.

In reality, within Western civilization women haven't been any more oppressed than men in quite a long time.

However, as the feminist narrative became an increasingly powerful talking point, men had a choice between either calling the women they loved liars or agreeing with their foolish statements.

They chose wrong.


Once upon a time...

Post: #6

Exactly WIA. This forum seems to be becoming more and more obsessed with looks as time goes on.

OP turn off social media, turn off the TV, stop online dating (where looks are obviously going to play a bigger part as you only have pictures and words on a screen to work with), stop exposing yourself to the bullshit threads here (Simp Street Playboys etc) that will have you thinking you need to be 200 pounds, 6% body-fat and a millionaire to get good looking girls, and go out and talk to some.

Post: #7

(05-07-2015 10:32 PM)Jaffna Wrote:  In order to bang a woman you must satisfy her minimum looks threshold.

In Second and Third World countries, men can use money and status to compensate for looks. Since these women are poorer and dependent on men for resources, the minimum looks threshold is quite low.
....
As a result of this evolution, the minimum looks threshold required for men to "game" women has gone way up in the last 5 years. If you don't make the cut in terms of looks, you're not getting it in. And the looks bar has been raised higher than ever.

...
Thoughts?

Yes - my first thought is that you are an obvious Game denier. My second thought is that you really don't approach in any decent volume or get laid - neither in 2009 nor in 2014. If you have to put "game" in quotation marks, then it is obvious.

Another point is that there are less prosperous countries where local men are good-looking and thus the country-wide looks-threshold is higher. However those variations are more in other areas that you did not mention and they have not changed that drastically. If most men start working out and the beach body is visible all year long, then it may have some impact on it, but that process happened over years and years (Brazil).

But I don't think that the looks-threshold is raised by any noticable degree through modern media. Sure - she may have had access to the muscular good-looking guy on Tinder once and he may have fucked her when drunk, but she would not be able to secure anything from him.

The looks-threshold as promoted by GLL has some valid points, but it manifests itself in almost complete instant rejection. If you don't get that instantly then you always have a foot in the door. For a worldwide male looks-threshold to be raised you would need all the men get a bump up in workout, in facial beauty etc. - this certainly has not happened.

As WIA pointed out - Tinder-swiping a model is not getting approached by a model on a daily basis. And Game-deniers are bad at dispensing knowledge.

The new technologies have impacted flakiness, because through online apps women seem to have more options on the fuck-ladder, also it scatter-brains them more. The numbers Game is prevalent online where any Omega can send hundreds of messages to hotties - that very same bloke approaches zero women in real life and probably spends his days sifting through blogs and then writing comments against Game while going on forum like this one and putting "game" in quotation marks.

What definitely has happened is that many online dating sites have become much worse due to the mentioned mass-swiping of men. When hot girls tell me that they delete apps, because they get 200 messages in some hours (!) and they consider putting up more ugly pics of themselves, then this part of the dating world has indeed become much worse. So yeah - I'll give you that - the online dating looks threshold due to massive spam clicking has decreased, because getting 300 dick-offers a day makes women more selective. But the same broad is not getting approached even once in the real world, so it has a limited effect in reality.

Also Mixter X - Game is not a trend - the Game teachings are ancient - they would have resulted in bangs in Rome as well as in the court of Louis IX. Grooming trends and wardrobe change, but not Game itself. If you have optimized your look, then you have just done that - you have not learned Game at all. The MGTOW going your own way and "rejecting all sluts" won't change a thing. Women can happily fuck 40% of the male population while 60% can be MGTOW. The 40% will just have harems. This is not a viable alternative.

Post: #8

^A guy who has platinum looks is obviously going to be at a huge advantage in a world where women chose their "OMG, I can't believe we just had sex" hook-ups off of apps where potential sexual partners are rejected at a rate of one swipe per second.

This isn't a question of the looks threshold being higher, but that women have more convenient access to men who reach a higher standard.

However, if you are man enough to approach, the bar is much lower and the completion thinner.

If you approach, you only need to reach a certain level of presentability, before good game will more than make up for any deficits you have in the looks department.

A perfect example of good game overcoming limitations that many men would see as being just too much to overcome:

Post: #9

You should stop visiting SlutHate.

Listen man, i look a lot like Ian Somerhalder, i'm a very good looking guy and up until a couple months ago i was very popular. Yet im here, reading up on game, lifestyle and self-improvement because my shit's fucked up. I have been blown out of the water many times by guys less good-looking and less popular than me. You're just a denialist.

Also stop with trying to impress girls on social media, if you aren't a celeb or Dan Blizeriang that shit no girl is gonna be very impressed.

Post: #10

(05-08-2015 02:37 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  "In order to bang a woman you must satisfy her minimum looks threshold."

False premise. More game denialism.

But bigger than that, reality denialism.

GAME used to be more or less all that was 'required'. All that's being said here is now mixture of game AND decent looks are needed. It should also be noted that I think that this more or less a "Western society thing". And again - what Mister X and Jaffna are talking about- is being with girls of QUALITY, not an 'average girl'. It's become 'accepted' to see a good looking guy dating/being with a girl 2 or more points BELOW HIM. Yes, obviously there are exceptions to the rule, but I'm not talking about exceptions- I'm speaking about the AVERAGE.

Roosh wrote this FIVE years ago, and it's scary how accurate it's become.
http://www.rooshv.com/the-future-of-game

Post: #11

Women care more about your appearance than your looks. Big difference. Being attractive is a choice. The way you dress, walk, talk, smile is all part of your appearance. An ugly dude with a hot girl on his arm is more attractive than a good looking guy in the corner. You are what you pretend to be.

Post: #12

(05-08-2015 02:37 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  "In order to bang a woman you must satisfy her minimum looks threshold."

False premise. More game denialism.

But bigger than that, reality denialism.

You can guess which one is the OP, and which one is WIA.

I said this recently in the weightlifting thread:

(04-27-2015 03:46 PM)jariel Wrote:  Guys who are weak at night game usually have a variety of things working against them, but one thing that will dead them from "go" is that they're too inside their heads.

They'll look around at other guys and say, "That guy is jacked", "That guy is better-looking than me", and maybe those things are true, and maybe other women notice those guys, but you know what?

The only game that woman can play is the game that is presented to her.

If the good-looking guy, the well-dressed guy, the jacked guy, if none of those guys approach her, she's not fucking any of them, so you might as well approach, and if you get the opportunity, and she's down, you have to fucking seize the moment.

When it comes to scooping girls, it's great to check off some of the desired boxes, but none of them mean a damn thing without balls.

Guys who get a lot of tail have balls, they also get rejected a lot, but because they're willing to face the possibility of rejection, they're also the ones getting the slam dunks.

Post: #13

I think the OP is right, in terms of online dating specifically. I don't think its any 'society is going down the toilet' reason though, I think its just market saturation.

I'll refer specifically to what I'll call the golden age of online dating. 2001 to 2006, which also coincides with the decline of myspace. During this time you could drop into an 'adult chatroom' on yahoo messenger and find maybe 1 bot/spammer, a few internet savvy/game poor dudes and a solid handful of curious girls and cheating housewives. The competition was very low to begin with and pussies got wet just at the conversation because online dating itself was 'taboo' at the time. Add that with a dick pic..which again pre-smart phone was a rarity and it was regular that if I jumped online at 11am I could be balls deep in a pussy by 3pm. Now, everybody is online, there is no novelty to it and so chicks have super bitch shields and dudes spam the hell out of it. I concur that online game is harder now, than it used to be.

The flipside is that with everyone being into their phones, social skills have crashed and so has 'in person' game. I remember being a teenager and being in awe at my friends that were naturals and would just cruise the mall, or the movie theatre lines and get numbers. Also, because every dude was at the mall or the movies, the spammers and dudes with bad game ruined it and chicks were often total cunts in those venues.

Now, its rare that I see a bad cat caller on the streets or in the mall. Gone are the days are packs of girls loitering in public spaces and now you have single girls wandering on their own zoned out with white earbuds. There is low competition again, and guess what else...approaching a girl in person, during the day is also becoming 'taboo' like online dating used to be, especially signaled by the fact that anyone approaching chicks poorly is often labelled 'creepy'.

I think online dating is saturated, but the old cheesy venues are open once again. When women expected to be hit on during the day, as when I was younger they wouldn't be caught dead out of the house not looking their best. Now a chick treats the streets like an extension of her living room...dressing like she is going to the fridge for a bowl of cereal, or on her way to the gym at best.

Daygame is in my opinion, the venue with the lowest competition in america right now. Put down your phone and start talking to girls, with emphasis on not scaring the cat.

Post: #14

If men just stopped giving out compliments, everything would fall back into place.

Post: #15

I was going to post this long-ass rant, but I think this says everything I want to say, albeit more succintly:

"Lord grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
the courage to change the things I can, and
the wisdom to know the difference."

-- Saint Francis of Assisi

Post: #16

The situation we're dealing with isn't as cut and dry as some people would like to believe.

The game isn't just about being able to check off a couple of boxes and then automatically you get success.

I'm a night game veteran, every jacked guy doesn't leave with something, every good-looking guy doesn't leave with something, every well-dressed guy doesn't leave with something, in fact, that is their reality MOST of the time.

I have 1,000 different night game stories that I can tell, but I can tell them because I had to go out 10,000 nights just to get there.

Night game where I am has changed COMPLETELY.

My city used to be about the party. The party meant where could I get fucked up, where could I meet someone I'd be attracted to, where could I hear the dopest music, and where could I do it without having to spend a lot of money.

My city is no longer about the party.

It's about the story.

People want to be able to tell others, "I was at LIV on Sundays last night for Rick Ross's b-day party", "I went to Story last night and Tiesto was spinning", "I'm going to E11even for the NYE Party with Usher and DJ Irie", people go places now to be seen and then to be able to brag to their loser friends about it to make them jealous.

The party, the good time, doesn't have shit to do with it.

Now you go to dance clubs here and you have girls who don't dance, you have girls who will dance salsa and bachata together while turning other guys down left and right for dances, and this is a phenomenon that I have ONLY seen in the U.S., and specifically here in Miami.

I have partied in several different Latin American countries, and I have never seen two girls dancing together to Spanish music. It. looks. fucking. weird. Other guys are asking them to dance, yet they rather dance with each other. I did ask a girl once why she was dancing with her friend and she told me they wanted to dance and no guys had stepped up to ask, okay, cool, that warrants a pass, but anything else, seems retarded.

The biggest hurdle I'm noticing that we're facing isn't our looks, money, style, etc. it's the fact that when we're out trying to create relationships out of thin air, women look at us as strangers.

We're fucking strangers.

They don't know us, and that fact is often held against us.

This goes back to the change in mentality.

Where I'm at, it used to be that people went out to party and meet strangers, now people go out with people they already know and are comfortable with and have no intention of meeting anybody else.

I was at a club recently, and there was a mixed group of about 10 people, they came separately but they all knew each other. The group was about 4 girls, who ranged from 5-7, and a bunch of below average looking dudes.

None of them were couples, none of them were smashing.

I don't remember the back story, but they were either all co-workers or from the same salsa class or some shit.

So I go up to one of the girls, because I knew she wasn't there with her man, and I asked her to dance, and she smiled at me, but then she said something like "Um, I can't right now, I'm sorry", and I heard the worst-looking girl in the group say to her, "What is your problem, he's fine as hell," and then two minutes later she goes off to dance with this donkey-face looking dude who's in their mixed group.

Just as I'm looking at them, like what hmm ok, this older Colombian chick grabs me and says, "Papi, baila conmigo" -- we recently smashed.

I'll be in the streets again tonight, if you've never been to Miami, you can feel the energy on a Friday, the car washes are packed, the barber shops and hair salons are thick, we're getting ready for tonight and the rest of the weekend's festivities, but I'm a player playing a game with very few willing participants, part of that is exciting, every club is like an arena, and I'm stepping onto the court ready for gametime, but part of it's frustrating, because it feels like sometimes, the ball never goes up into the air.

Post: #17

Well said, Jariel.

I would also add that the "look" that works in each city can vary quite a bit (fashion wise). Like you said, it's not a cut and paste job where you put quarters in the game machine and get a 10.

Post: #18

I agree with the OP. Even if you disagree on the particulars, there is no question to me that there has been a strong trend OVER TIME as the OP says. It's like asking, is it hard to get laid? Relative to what? Relative to when? Relative to where? As the OP says, things have gotten worse over time. Several decent forum players have decamped from my hood, Los Angeles, due in part to diminishing returns here. The ones remaining have been rather disenchanted as well, and I don't think it's just nostalgia.

To be sure, girls aren't going to convents and abstaining from dick. But the obstacles to getting laid as a pure stranger seem to grow by the year. Which is what Jariel said, even as he professes to disagree with the OP - I see that as agreeing with the OP. These asexual big mixed social groups keep proliferating, netflix and eggs benedict brunch become more appealing than getting fucked by a cool stranger.

Post: #19

(05-08-2015 06:16 PM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  I agree with the OP. Even if you disagree on the particulars, there is no question to me that there has been a strong trend OVER TIME as the OP says. It's like asking, is it hard to get laid? Relative to what? Relative to when? Relative to where? As the OP says, things have gotten worse over time. Several decent forum players have decamped from my hood, Los Angeles, due in part to diminishing returns here. The ones remaining have been rather disenchanted as well, and I don't think it's just nostalgia.

To be sure, girls aren't going to convents and abstaining from dick. But the obstacles to getting laid as a pure stranger seem to grow by the year. Which is what Jariel said, even as he professes to disagree with the OP - I see that as agreeing with the OP. These asexual big mixed social groups keep proliferating, netflix and eggs benedict brunch become more appealing than getting fucked by a cool stranger.

Yeah I'm with Basil here, I think the OP does have a point and I think some of you guys beat up on him a little bit, although I think W.I.A. is right as well and made some good points.

I've never been at the pinnacle of game, but I've had some decent runs and been into "game" for about 4-5 years now, I got to say that meeting new girls and trying to get your dick wet, often times feels like a major chore, if not an outright job.

I think the "looks threshold" has gone up, I think bodybuilding overall has become more popular over the past 5-10 years and competition amongst men is increasing.

It's like supply and demand economics, when there is a limited supply of really hot single women, as a result the demand sky rockets, which makes "competition over resources" incredibly stiff. Men have always fought and competed for resources, and in my mind beautiful women are quite often a "limited resource."

Obviously location makes a huge difference, I'm in a small town in NorCal, if I were in Bogota, Colombia, or Kiev, Ukraine I may be in a location with a greater abundance of "resources" (vagina), and thus more limited competition.

I think the point has been already touched on in great depth here, but online dating definitely skews things, because now women have an infinite supply of cock at the touch of their finger tips with the countless dating sites and apps on their phones.

We're all aware of the 80/20 principle, and to deny it's existence in my mind is just as great or a greater mistake than game denialism. We all know a tall handsome dude that doesn't have to try and has hot girls throw themselves at him, but for every one guy we know like that, we know 10 other "average nice guys" who aren't getting laid more than a couple times a year, and are perpetually wanking it to pornhub.

Sure we'll say that all those "average nice guys" need to learn game, hit the gym, work on their look, etc. Sure I agree with all of that, but that in turn creates more competition, which perpetuates the cycle. Now I'm not saying that game and going to the gym is going so mainstream that every guy is delving into it, that is certainly not true, most guys aren't willing to put in the work in either realm to really get good at either, plus a lot of guys aren't willing to look into the mirror and identify the issues they need to work on.

Any how back to online dating, since women have such infinite choice, and so many guys are so thirsty, thus it creates an imbalance in the sexual market place where a woman who is a 6 can easily fuck or date up with a guy who'd rank a 7 or 8. Sure an 8 guy may pump and dump a 6 chick, but there's always going to be another 8-guy for her to fuck, and as long as she's riding the carousel she's going to keep grasping for higher caliber guys, which just reinforces the 80/20 principle.

Definitely every so often I see a really hot girl with a guy who is just average or doesn't match up to her in terms of SMV, sure it happens, but it is the exception and not the rule. Quite often they are high school sweethearts, they met through social circle, etc. I personally know guys like this, and sure they may get lucky with a hot young one, but they often get married young, and they haven't had sex with any other women.

Maybe the grass is always greener, what is worse marrying a sweet cute young chick at 22, the one you lost your virginity to, and be relegating to one vagina your whole life. Or be like me a 31 year old single man who's run through a bunch of sluts, got a decent notch count, and a lot of wild sexual experiences, but often feels lonely and like something is missing at the end of the day.

Post: #20

(05-08-2015 08:30 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  I think the OP is right, in terms of online dating specifically. I don't think its any 'society is going down the toilet' reason though, I think its just market saturation.

I'll refer specifically to what I'll call the golden age of online dating. 2001 to 2006, which also coincides with the decline of myspace. During this time you could drop into an 'adult chatroom' on yahoo messenger and find maybe 1 bot/spammer, a few internet savvy/game poor dudes and a solid handful of curious girls and cheating housewives. The competition was very low to begin with and pussies got wet just at the conversation because online dating itself was 'taboo' at the time. Add that with a dick pic..which again pre-smart phone was a rarity and it was regular that if I jumped online at 11am I could be balls deep in a pussy by 3pm. Now, everybody is online, there is no novelty to it and so chicks have super bitch shields and dudes spam the hell out of it. I concur that online game is harder now, than it used to be.

The flipside is that with everyone being into their phones, social skills have crashed and so has 'in person' game. I remember being a teenager and being in awe at my friends that were naturals and would just cruise the mall, or the movie theatre lines and get numbers. Also, because every dude was at the mall or the movies, the spammers and dudes with bad game ruined it and chicks were often total cunts in those venues.

Now, its rare that I see a bad cat caller on the streets or in the mall. Gone are the days are packs of girls loitering in public spaces and now you have single girls wandering on their own zoned out with white earbuds. There is low competition again, and guess what else...approaching a girl in person, during the day is also becoming 'taboo' like online dating used to be, especially signaled by the fact that anyone approaching chicks poorly is often labelled 'creepy'.

I think online dating is saturated, but the old cheesy venues are open once again. When women expected to be hit on during the day, as when I was younger they wouldn't be caught dead out of the house not looking their best. Now a chick treats the streets like an extension of her living room...dressing like she is going to the fridge for a bowl of cereal, or on her way to the gym at best.

Daygame is in my opinion, the venue with the lowest competition in america right now. Put down your phone and start talking to girls, with emphasis on not scaring the cat.

I was just talking about this a few days ago on another thread.

But I want to add to your post that what really took all the fun out of online dating (or online anything, for that matter) was the switch from "handles" to real names that came with Facebook. This bled into online dating because once people found your real identity, they could then locate you on Facebook and public shaming came into play.

It's easy to forget this now, but when Facebook required real names, that was a big deal. Few of us ever used real names online before that.

Anyway, now that we can be tracked online by our real names via Facebook we're all "public figures," so to speak, so women's preferences have changed to reflect that.

Most of them no longer see online dating as a way to indulge fetishes or preferences they couldn't do in public. Now online dating is public, in a way, so they behave like they did in school. They might not like the dumb jock but he looks the part, so that's who they date.

It's no longer "Who can secretly spank me like I always wanted?" but "Who will look best in the beach photos I plan to post for all my work cronies?"

I liken this to summer vacation ending.

If any of you were "outliers" in high school, you know that over the summer you could meet a girl above your station and develop a pretty intense relationship when it was just the two of you outside the realm of social pressures and expectations.

But once school was in session, all of a sudden the context changed. You were both back with your crowds, and things ended or at least changed in a subtle way. (This scenario was depicted at the beginning of the 1986 movie "Lucas.")

Facebook is now our school, or our church, depending on how you see it. It took all the mystery and fun out of being online. It cast a long shadow on online dating and changed that.

Finally, while there are alternative sites like FetLife, those are for alternative people. The beauty of the old days is that you'd get the average girl who wanted to cross the line to the dark side and be her real self, the self she kept hidden from everyone. Serious connections were made that way. No longer.

Post: #21

(05-07-2015 10:32 PM)Jaffna Wrote:  As a result of this evolution, the minimum looks threshold required for men to "game" women has gone way up in the last 5 years. If you don't make the cut in terms of looks, you're not getting it in. And the looks bar has been raised higher than ever.

Not only is this true online, it has also translated to all cold approach situations - bars, clubs, and during the day. The only way to transcend this high looks threshold bar is to build familiarity through work, school, mutual friends and social circle.

Thoughts?

Yeah. I think what you are alluding to, that as time passes and people are more superficially connected to a larger group (through smart phones, online networks, etc), competition in dating which was previously local, has grown to a larger pool. This amplifies ANY advantage, not just looks. The extreme example of this is found in the Dubai thread.

This applies not just in dating, too. The same can be seen for any product or service one is trying to sell, or influence one may have. More connectivity (albeit superficial) will amplify any advantage, and scale relative to the size of the network.

This has both ups and downs. It also foments greater envy, jealousy, efforts to continually keep up. In years past, people lived their lives more or less day to day, in a small circle, without much idea of what others were doing when not in their immediate vicinity. Now, people can literally see where others live, what they do, where they go, with who, etc. This is probably not good. But it's here to stay. We will have to deal with it.

Post: #22

(05-08-2015 05:08 PM)jariel Wrote:  My city used to be about the party. The party meant where could I get fucked up, where could I meet someone I'd be attracted to, where could I hear the dopest music, and where could I do it without having to spend a lot of money.

I'll be in the streets again tonight, if you've never been to Miami, you can feel the energy on a Friday, the car washes are packed, the barber shops and hair salons are thick, we're getting ready for tonight and the rest of the weekend's festivities, but I'm a player playing a game with very few willing participants, part of that is exciting, every club is like an arena, and I'm stepping onto the court ready for gametime, but part of it's frustrating, because it feels like sometimes, the ball never goes up into the air.

sounds like a great place

Post: #23

I very recently came face to face with this harsh reality.

One date I had recently was with an OK-looking girl, perhaps a 7 or 7.5 tops. For one of the less attractive girls I dated since I started gaming, she was very iffy and flaky before the date. When the date did happen, it went very well, yet she was strangely non-committal, then flaked from the next date and nexted me.

I wasn't sure why it happened. A couple of weeks later, I realized online dating is fairly popular in my new location, so I went online, and ran across her profile on one of the popular dating sites. She has good pictures that hide her flaws and emphasize her strengths, upgrading her looks to 8-9. I could tell she was very popular there, getting a ton of messages from attractive guys every day. Mystery solved.

Game is based on the exploitation of inefficiencies: guys don't approach enough, so an 8-9 can't get her equal, because her equal doesn't have the balls / gumption / resolve to approach her. So she goes with the less attractive guy who did. Inefficiency presented opportunities for us less attractive guys to get laid far above our level of attractiveness, both qualitatively and quantitatively.

Online makes the dating market efficient, so the girl above doesn't have to settle for a less attractive guy. She can have her pick of guys at her own attraction level, or even higher if she is willing to settle for pure sex - which is exactly what most of us are after.

It's especially a problem for players like me, who get laid purely on balls, because balls mean nothing online. You don't need balls to send a message, so me and a guy who can't say hi to a stranger offline are put on equal footing. My advantage has been effectively neutralized. Online makes dating much easier for good looking guys, and cancels the advantage of ballsy guys who approach.

Post: #24

That's true to a degree, but I disagree that the looks threshold is higher. The sexual market place is just changed - more r-selected, pussy flowing stronger to the top at least in the party years. Above a certain age then the whole thing shifts and it's a missing chair game for women.

Online does not make the market "efficient" - there is nothing efficient about that crap. It just means that a female fat 4 can get 30 dates a month by more attractive men than her - and more attractive not only in looks, because you are still sort of mixing the 2 together with men. Attractive men get easily laid via online dating and many more women get banged out by them in the party years.

I would estimate that an even greater destructive force in the sexual market is the fattening in the US/UK. Plenty of girls do online dating in Eastern Europe - I would estimate that it is the majority. But you don't see the destructive tendencies so much partly because the attractive (slim) gender ratios in the ages 18-30 are quite balanced. It keeps the fattening in check and makes it easier for men to get laid. Technology of course impacts the market place as well making it more difficult even here, but that in itself is not making it "efficient".

The women doing that get jack shit out of it besides being pumped and dumped and becoming Alpha Widows. In the West dating has become more difficult not because attraction thresholds have been raised, but because of the following reasons:

- deteriorating gender ratios among the young due to immigration (worse than in China in many US/UK cities)
- diminishing stock of attractive slim women (50% fat - impacts women more than men)
- online dating apps making access to higher Alphas much easier - women sometimes get laid by one NFL player and then blue-ball everyone for the next months, because she is not going to lower her standards so soon - there are other elements which impact that - pussy due to online apps flows unimpeded up.
- social media and online dating at the top shelf and money level is being seduced by worldwide sugar-daddies and celebrities (the 8s+ are getting offered over social media to party in Cannes and get shit on in Dubai) - that further decreases the access for most men

I don't deny those destructive tendencies making it harder for a man to compete in the West, but the preamble of the attraction threshold being raised goes too high. The same women are perfectly willing to settle for the same guys they reject in the party years - and if they were honest about it those men would have passed their attraction threshold even then. She just has other options and possibilities when young. Unfettered Hypergamy is brutal.

Post: #25

^ Yes. To further formalize: it's the gender imbalance you have in plain old nature, reincarnated in this high-technology form.

The new point of balance might well be a bunch of 9-10 guys, each with a harem of 7-10 girls. The girls will be satisfied, because once every 1-2 weeks they get banged well and hard by an experienced guy they find hot. The guys are obviously satisfied since they get to bang a different cute girl every day of the week. Guys who are 7 or lower get nothing.

The main concern is that there will be enough 9-10 looking guys messaging all the 7-10 girls to keep those occupied. In the past, players - especially those with less than 8 looks - relied on the fact that a lot of guys in the 8-10 group didn't approach. But you don't need game to send a message online and rely on your pictures to do the rest of the work.

The concern is that online is going to negate the advantage of game, especially stuff like the ability to boldly approach. It's going to be all about the pictures, and maybe some clever text.

That's a legitimate concern, in my opinion.