8 ms·

Modern casual sexual encounters are assessed purely on subjective ratings of the opposite party's sexual attractiveness (secondary sexual characteristics, behav

Modern casual sexual encounters are assessed purely on subjective ratings of the opposite party's sexual attractiveness (secondary sexual characteristics, behavior, social status, etc.). Furthermore, constant saturation into the full range of these behaviors and characteristics across humanity through the internet and dating applications creates a endless "could I get a better mate?" feedback loop in the minds of both men and women. You're no longer competing within a social group, you're competing within every social group. Notice that the per the article, the population of "sexless" men has grown nearly three times as much as the population of sexless women. Fewer men are having more sex; it's practically on-demand for them, and they are usually tremendous specimens when compared to other men. If you are not aware of this, I would bet that you do not know any men who are on the "winning" side of the new dating economy. If you do know men like this and you disagree with me, please elaborate. I have heard a great deal of insight into "the dating market" ranging from the perspective of attractive athletes (both male and female) to the perspective of unattractive nerds (both male and female) and this pattern is clearly visible through their stories. The women tend to retreat from casual sex because they don't want it (and not only because the pickings are subjectively slim, but also because the expectations for them to 'put out' are very high); the men tend to retreat from casual sex because they can't have it.

cashewchoo 6y ago
One thing I'm deeply thankful for is that I was engaged coming out of college to the woman of my dreams, and that Tinder didn't really fully catch on until I was already seriously dating my now-wife. The modern dating market sounds like one of the most depressing aspects of modern adult society.
- quacked 6y ago
  It is an absolute nightmare and I wouldn't wish it on anyone. Modern "dating" is frightening, dehumanizing, demoralizing, ahistorical, amoral, and devoid of meaning.
  - durnygbur 6y ago
    How tall are you? [unmatches]
  - nickthemagicman 6y ago
    It's literally Capitalism hidden under the guise of dating.
  - volkk 6y ago
    honestly it's all extremely subjective. my experience with modern dating (read: endless tinder dates) was mostly positive. of course i had plenty of heartbreaks, a LOT of wasted time. but mostly, i got to meet some really interesting people and create some wonderful connections, even if they were brief. ultimately i met my now girlfriend of 4 years. there were periods i would have 0 matches, and then out of nowhere would get 10 in a day. the algorithm is extremely inconsistent and i would play the game of deleting my account/restarting to get that boost to be on top of people's feeds. ultimately I've found the best combination of pictures that worked pretty consistently/well.
    - AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
      How can you look at a system you had to constantly gamify and say that it was a positive experience?
      - volkk 6y ago
        because i understand it's not perfect, and probably never will be. so i adapted. i think all of the positive experiences that i had outweighed all of the negative. that's all there really is to it for me. it also allowed me to meet my now gf. something i've noticed from people that didn't have much luck on these apps is that they fall into two buckets. unfortunately for some, it's really tough since they might not have the social skills/looks that dating apps really select for which i truthfully have no answer to. hopefully one day someone smart will solve for this. there's a reason that most of /r/tinder (or at least 4 years ago they did) subscribes to the "two steps" aka "1. be attractive 2. don't be unattractive" ... unfortunately that's just how these sites operate. i would argue, however, that's how real life tends to work a large percentage of the time. good news is you can do some really really basic stuff to look better even if you're not "conventionally attractive." I currently work for a major dating app and we are trying to help people from posting pictures that are honestly just really really bad. mirror selfies, blurred pictures, low light ones, in their cars neck up looking at a camera, etc. the other bucket are people who have looks to get matches but don't get any luck because they have little experience interacting in a flirtatious/interesting way and therefore just give up or become extremely jaded/salty and start creating a negative persona which provides even worse results. for this group, which i think i fell into for a period of time, i can say that the only way out is to just play the game and put on a fake smile until you start seeing results. you can moan and groan and complain all you want, and it's your prerogative but don't expect any results if that's the path you want to go down in the dating app world. broken? sure. no ones forcing you to join these apps, but my hypothesis is this: a very not insignificant distribution of the people complaining and having 0 success on the apps probably also fall into the type of person that wouldn't have much success in real life scenarios as well.
tweetle_beetle 6y ago
> The women tend to retreat from casual sex because they don't want it (and not only because the pickings are subjectively slim, but also because the expectations for them to 'put out' are very high); I'm not sure I follow. Women don't want casual sex because their potential partners do?
- DC1350 6y ago
  The point is that every woman can easily find casual sex so opting out is a choice.
- quacked 6y ago
  Everyone with a sex drive wants sex, but they want it from the right person. The heuristics surrounding the "right person" selection process have been destroyed. The women I know who have retreated from dating have almost unanimously expressed frustration with both the poor selection of available men (because their standards have been artificially inflated) and the constant push from the available men for the women to engage in casual sex (the men no longer have meaningful and safe road maps for how relationships should progress).
  - watwut 6y ago
    The article is about casual sex specifically. That has nothing to do with women who don't want casual sex in the first place, because they are willing to have sex only in committed relationship.
    - Dirlewanger 6y ago
      Well, that starts to get into the hairy territory of what women say they want vs. what they actually want. And due to inflated standards from dating applications (constant swiping due to thinking there's something better around the corner), I think you see what I'm getting at.
      - imbnwa 6y ago
akamaka 6y ago
> If you do know men like this and you disagree with me, please elaborate. I think your hypothesis is mostly correct, except for the idea that the men who are having more sex are “tremendous specimens”. I don’t think they need to be especially attractive or powerful. It could be cultural or psychological differences that make some men put more energy into their pursuits. For example, compare Jimmy Carter to Bill Clinton.
- quacked 6y ago
  You just mentioned two of the most powerful and charismatic men in history. Can you elaborate on the comparison?
  - akamaka 6y ago
    They’re both very similar in good looks and success, but one is known as a faithful husband, and the other is a prolific womanizer. We could perhaps simplify the hypothesis to say that modern dating, enabled by apps, has made it easier for men who have a high desire to sleep with many women to do so.
    - quacked 6y ago
      Ah, I understand. That's an interesting point you make. I am inclined to agree with you. It would have a similar reality-distorting effect; Carter influenced one women, Clinton influenced many.
  - mywittyname 6y ago
    Carter is a very pious individual whose actions always seem to be consistent with that belief system. Clinton is a well-know womanizer whose exploits were known long before his presidency. They are both powerful, and influential. But one seemed to put a whole lot more effort into getting laid, to the point of destroying his career.
    - quacked 6y ago
      I see. I was misinterpreting the parent comment. The general point here is that Carter could have been Clinton had he desired to, but he did not.
hirundo 6y ago
I have a nephew who looks like Chris Hemsworth and when he travels to a new town, doesn't bother with a hotel. He just shows up at a singles bar and waits for an overnight invitation, and his usual problem is choosing among them. The price he pays for the bed is not burdensome to him. To him, I'm the strange one for bothering with the hotel. I don't think that the attractiveness 1% are much less oblivious of their privilege than the financial 1%.
- Balgair 6y ago
  To each their own, of course. But, wow, that's putting oneself at a lot of risk. Granted, when I was that young, risk wasn't a four-letter-word, so to speak.
- quacked 6y ago
  In the extreme sports circles I run in we call them "hobosexuals".
testfoobar 6y ago
I agree with you to a point. "could I get a better mate" is absolutely true when you can swipe across hundreds of profiles. Where it is not true is that attraction is a multi-dimensional process that is very poorly captured by online dating. Men in particular are disadvantaged by it. This is well studied. The false conclusion to draw is that if you fail at online dating, you will fail at real life dating. This false conclusion stops many young men from even trying in the real world. There are so many dimensions on which attraction is developed that many, many who are currently alone could easily and successfully find partners. It makes me sad. I have absolutely seen 5'4" men who would catastrophically fail in the online dating market meet, date and marry successful, intelligent, kind, beautiful women. I have absolutely seen many nerdy men, goofy men, brown men, asian men succeed effortlessly with women. It all requires real-world interactions though. In the real world, people respond to so many more signals. You have to go out there, meet people, learn and develop yourself. This is the process I encourage my single friends to follow: become the person someone else would be thrilled to meet, proud to befriend, excited to date and overjoyed to marry. But to do so, you must first go out in the real world and make friends. Don't go out with any expectations of getting a date or a hookup. Learn to make friends with a diverse array of people. This is key. Each different type of person will help you learn about yourself. Dating will emerge naturally as you get beter at making friends.
- PrefixKitten 6y ago
  > become the person someone else would be thrilled to meet, proud to befriend, excited to date and overjoyed to marry. The 3 most recent exes of mine all had begged me to marry them at some point in the relationship. One even offered to buy me a ring and propose. But in the last 6 years I haven't had a single relationship... The enormous contrast in outcome has me totally bewildered.
  - quacked 6y ago
    Are you over 30?
- quacked 6y ago
  I agree with you that attraction is a multi-dimensional process which is very poorly captured by online dating. What I am trying to explain is mine and others' observations that men who don't succeed at present-day online dating , that would have succeeded at real-life dating in the past, are not succeeding today in real life. I am blaming online dating and social media for this phenomena, and attempting to use that rationale as an explanation for why the percent share of sexless men has grown from 18% to 30%, as indicated by the linked study. Have you seen these "conventionally unattractive" men that you describe succeed in a totally open and free dating market as young 20-somethings, or are there extenuating circumstances (early 30s, string of failed relationships, etc.). I will fully admit that you are observing something I am not observing and that my rationale must be flawed if you're witnessing 5'4" nerdy, goofy men lacking in charisma and stature experience consistent success in real life dating between 18-26. Of those I saw who did achieve some success, I've witnessed a lot of them get cheated on by their "girlfriends", but I haven't witnessed a lot of them experience free-market success and dating freedom of choice, at least not compared to the 6' high-power athletes I know. I disagree with you on a few other counts here, but most strongly with the statement "dating will emerge naturally as you get better at making friends". That is patently false. Dating will emerge naturally as the peer-relative superior status of your reproductive and companionship potential becomes obvious. Dating is not a process by which to make friends, it is a process to determine who will have a chance at impregnating whom. "Getting better at making friends" will net you a fraction of the returns that "getting muscles that show through a t-shirt" will, all other things being considered equal. Overall, I do agree with you that men who fail on dating apps need to try different approaches in real life, though.
testfoobar 6y ago
It is absolutely not true that men who succeed are "tremendous specimens". Sure - some are. But the vast majority are not. It is an erroneous and harmful conclusion to decide that "tremendous specimens" are hoarding all the sex. This false conclusion prevents young men from seeing the actual reality that attraction is multi-faceted and multi-dimensional. I know any number of guys who are not tremendous specimens who have no trouble at all getting dates or meeting new women for hookups. Each brings something to the table - something that attracts partners. Each guy has learned about themselves and works to develop themselves.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
  > This false conclusion prevents young men from seeing the actual reality that attraction is multi-faceted and multi-dimensional. The thing is that nowadays the expectation is that you date using an app, and the apps are absolutely 100% one dimensional single-faceted gamified systems. Ideally the solution is to stop using apps, but the problem people run into there is that they don't really know how to interact any other way because they never learned.
  - testfoobar 6y ago
    Apps are terrible for most men. Do things. Organize activities. Invite friends. Encourage them to invite friends. Learn to be social. Learn to make friends. Be fit. Be active. Be interested in other people and become interesting yourself. It all seems kinda cliche. But it works.

cashewchoo 6y ago

One thing I'm deeply thankful for is that I was engaged coming out of college to the woman of my dreams, and that Tinder didn't really fully catch on until I was already seriously dating my now-wife. The modern dating market sounds like one of the most depressing aspects of modern adult society.

quacked 6y ago
It is an absolute nightmare and I wouldn't wish it on anyone. Modern "dating" is frightening, dehumanizing, demoralizing, ahistorical, amoral, and devoid of meaning.
- durnygbur 6y ago
  How tall are you? [unmatches]
- nickthemagicman 6y ago
  It's literally Capitalism hidden under the guise of dating.
- volkk 6y ago
  honestly it's all extremely subjective. my experience with modern dating (read: endless tinder dates) was mostly positive. of course i had plenty of heartbreaks, a LOT of wasted time. but mostly, i got to meet some really interesting people and create some wonderful connections, even if they were brief. ultimately i met my now girlfriend of 4 years. there were periods i would have 0 matches, and then out of nowhere would get 10 in a day. the algorithm is extremely inconsistent and i would play the game of deleting my account/restarting to get that boost to be on top of people's feeds. ultimately I've found the best combination of pictures that worked pretty consistently/well.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
    How can you look at a system you had to constantly gamify and say that it was a positive experience?
    - volkk 6y ago
      because i understand it's not perfect, and probably never will be. so i adapted. i think all of the positive experiences that i had outweighed all of the negative. that's all there really is to it for me. it also allowed me to meet my now gf. something i've noticed from people that didn't have much luck on these apps is that they fall into two buckets. unfortunately for some, it's really tough since they might not have the social skills/looks that dating apps really select for which i truthfully have no answer to. hopefully one day someone smart will solve for this. there's a reason that most of /r/tinder (or at least 4 years ago they did) subscribes to the "two steps" aka "1. be attractive 2. don't be unattractive" ... unfortunately that's just how these sites operate. i would argue, however, that's how real life tends to work a large percentage of the time. good news is you can do some really really basic stuff to look better even if you're not "conventionally attractive." I currently work for a major dating app and we are trying to help people from posting pictures that are honestly just really really bad. mirror selfies, blurred pictures, low light ones, in their cars neck up looking at a camera, etc. the other bucket are people who have looks to get matches but don't get any luck because they have little experience interacting in a flirtatious/interesting way and therefore just give up or become extremely jaded/salty and start creating a negative persona which provides even worse results. for this group, which i think i fell into for a period of time, i can say that the only way out is to just play the game and put on a fake smile until you start seeing results. you can moan and groan and complain all you want, and it's your prerogative but don't expect any results if that's the path you want to go down in the dating app world. broken? sure. no ones forcing you to join these apps, but my hypothesis is this: a very not insignificant distribution of the people complaining and having 0 success on the apps probably also fall into the type of person that wouldn't have much success in real life scenarios as well.

tweetle_beetle 6y ago

> The women tend to retreat from casual sex because they don't want it (and not only because the pickings are subjectively slim, but also because the expectations for them to 'put out' are very high); I'm not sure I follow. Women don't want casual sex because their potential partners do?

DC1350 6y ago
The point is that every woman can easily find casual sex so opting out is a choice.
quacked 6y ago
Everyone with a sex drive wants sex, but they want it from the right person. The heuristics surrounding the "right person" selection process have been destroyed. The women I know who have retreated from dating have almost unanimously expressed frustration with both the poor selection of available men (because their standards have been artificially inflated) and the constant push from the available men for the women to engage in casual sex (the men no longer have meaningful and safe road maps for how relationships should progress).
- watwut 6y ago
  The article is about casual sex specifically. That has nothing to do with women who don't want casual sex in the first place, because they are willing to have sex only in committed relationship.
  - Dirlewanger 6y ago
    Well, that starts to get into the hairy territory of what women say they want vs. what they actually want. And due to inflated standards from dating applications (constant swiping due to thinking there's something better around the corner), I think you see what I'm getting at.
    - imbnwa 6y ago

akamaka 6y ago

> If you do know men like this and you disagree with me, please elaborate. I think your hypothesis is mostly correct, except for the idea that the men who are having more sex are “tremendous specimens”. I don’t think they need to be especially attractive or powerful. It could be cultural or psychological differences that make some men put more energy into their pursuits. For example, compare Jimmy Carter to Bill Clinton.

quacked 6y ago
You just mentioned two of the most powerful and charismatic men in history. Can you elaborate on the comparison?
- akamaka 6y ago
  They’re both very similar in good looks and success, but one is known as a faithful husband, and the other is a prolific womanizer. We could perhaps simplify the hypothesis to say that modern dating, enabled by apps, has made it easier for men who have a high desire to sleep with many women to do so.
  - quacked 6y ago
    Ah, I understand. That's an interesting point you make. I am inclined to agree with you. It would have a similar reality-distorting effect; Carter influenced one women, Clinton influenced many.
- mywittyname 6y ago
  Carter is a very pious individual whose actions always seem to be consistent with that belief system. Clinton is a well-know womanizer whose exploits were known long before his presidency. They are both powerful, and influential. But one seemed to put a whole lot more effort into getting laid, to the point of destroying his career.
  - quacked 6y ago
    I see. I was misinterpreting the parent comment. The general point here is that Carter could have been Clinton had he desired to, but he did not.

hirundo 6y ago

I have a nephew who looks like Chris Hemsworth and when he travels to a new town, doesn't bother with a hotel. He just shows up at a singles bar and waits for an overnight invitation, and his usual problem is choosing among them. The price he pays for the bed is not burdensome to him. To him, I'm the strange one for bothering with the hotel. I don't think that the attractiveness 1% are much less oblivious of their privilege than the financial 1%.

Balgair 6y ago
To each their own, of course. But, wow, that's putting oneself at a lot of risk. Granted, when I was that young, risk wasn't a four-letter-word, so to speak.
quacked 6y ago
In the extreme sports circles I run in we call them "hobosexuals".

testfoobar 6y ago

I agree with you to a point. "could I get a better mate" is absolutely true when you can swipe across hundreds of profiles. Where it is not true is that attraction is a multi-dimensional process that is very poorly captured by online dating. Men in particular are disadvantaged by it. This is well studied. The false conclusion to draw is that if you fail at online dating, you will fail at real life dating. This false conclusion stops many young men from even trying in the real world. There are so many dimensions on which attraction is developed that many, many who are currently alone could easily and successfully find partners. It makes me sad. I have absolutely seen 5'4" men who would catastrophically fail in the online dating market meet, date and marry successful, intelligent, kind, beautiful women. I have absolutely seen many nerdy men, goofy men, brown men, asian men succeed effortlessly with women. It all requires real-world interactions though. In the real world, people respond to so many more signals. You have to go out there, meet people, learn and develop yourself. This is the process I encourage my single friends to follow: become the person someone else would be thrilled to meet, proud to befriend, excited to date and overjoyed to marry. But to do so, you must first go out in the real world and make friends. Don't go out with any expectations of getting a date or a hookup. Learn to make friends with a diverse array of people. This is key. Each different type of person will help you learn about yourself. Dating will emerge naturally as you get beter at making friends.

PrefixKitten 6y ago
> become the person someone else would be thrilled to meet, proud to befriend, excited to date and overjoyed to marry. The 3 most recent exes of mine all had begged me to marry them at some point in the relationship. One even offered to buy me a ring and propose. But in the last 6 years I haven't had a single relationship... The enormous contrast in outcome has me totally bewildered.
- quacked 6y ago
  Are you over 30?
quacked 6y ago
I agree with you that attraction is a multi-dimensional process which is very poorly captured by online dating. What I am trying to explain is mine and others' observations that men who don't succeed at present-day online dating , that would have succeeded at real-life dating in the past, are not succeeding today in real life. I am blaming online dating and social media for this phenomena, and attempting to use that rationale as an explanation for why the percent share of sexless men has grown from 18% to 30%, as indicated by the linked study. Have you seen these "conventionally unattractive" men that you describe succeed in a totally open and free dating market as young 20-somethings, or are there extenuating circumstances (early 30s, string of failed relationships, etc.). I will fully admit that you are observing something I am not observing and that my rationale must be flawed if you're witnessing 5'4" nerdy, goofy men lacking in charisma and stature experience consistent success in real life dating between 18-26. Of those I saw who did achieve some success, I've witnessed a lot of them get cheated on by their "girlfriends", but I haven't witnessed a lot of them experience free-market success and dating freedom of choice, at least not compared to the 6' high-power athletes I know. I disagree with you on a few other counts here, but most strongly with the statement "dating will emerge naturally as you get better at making friends". That is patently false. Dating will emerge naturally as the peer-relative superior status of your reproductive and companionship potential becomes obvious. Dating is not a process by which to make friends, it is a process to determine who will have a chance at impregnating whom. "Getting better at making friends" will net you a fraction of the returns that "getting muscles that show through a t-shirt" will, all other things being considered equal. Overall, I do agree with you that men who fail on dating apps need to try different approaches in real life, though.

testfoobar 6y ago

It is absolutely not true that men who succeed are "tremendous specimens". Sure - some are. But the vast majority are not. It is an erroneous and harmful conclusion to decide that "tremendous specimens" are hoarding all the sex. This false conclusion prevents young men from seeing the actual reality that attraction is multi-faceted and multi-dimensional. I know any number of guys who are not tremendous specimens who have no trouble at all getting dates or meeting new women for hookups. Each brings something to the table - something that attracts partners. Each guy has learned about themselves and works to develop themselves.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
> This false conclusion prevents young men from seeing the actual reality that attraction is multi-faceted and multi-dimensional. The thing is that nowadays the expectation is that you date using an app, and the apps are absolutely 100% one dimensional single-faceted gamified systems. Ideally the solution is to stop using apps, but the problem people run into there is that they don't really know how to interact any other way because they never learned.
- testfoobar 6y ago
  Apps are terrible for most men. Do things. Organize activities. Invite friends. Encourage them to invite friends. Learn to be social. Learn to make friends. Be fit. Be active. Be interested in other people and become interesting yourself. It all seems kinda cliche. But it works.