> Basically, dating in our modern world of few meaningful social connections is a vicious cycle for women. Men rate attractiveness on a normal distribution, wom

> Basically, dating in our modern world of few meaningful social connections is a vicious cycle for women. Men rate attractiveness on a normal distribution, women rate attractiveness on a pareto distribution. (ie. 80% of men are "meh" or worse to women.) Is this based on the OkCupid blog? My speculation is what men on average look for (appearance) is easily communicated via online dating, but this is less so than women. I'd be interested to see what the same chart would look for people known in person, rather than just online. > I've seen this in action in my personal and professional lives. Smart, attractive women end up implementing (knowinginly or unknowningly) a complex rules engine for screening an endless pool of available men. (Male criteria for engaging a woman online is very low.) When you are a 29 year old female only considering seriously dating attractive jewish/catholic/athiest, asian/black/hispanic/irish/white/etc men 6'1" or taller in professional jobs (generally speaking or a specific gig) who have attribute X, Y, or Z, you're screwed. There's data showing that women care more about "dating up" in education/social class, which has negatively impacts college educated women and men without a college education. This is due to the widening gap in college degree attainment in the US between men and women[0]. The book "It's Not You, It's Biology" does a good job of going into this. [0]: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/11/gender-education-gap/546677/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/11/gender-...