3 ms·

> Those games only make at least a bit of sense when everybody enters their crush and only when matching both get notified. Even then, among heterosexuals they

> Those games only make at least a bit of sense when everybody enters their crush and only when matching both get notified. Even then, among heterosexuals they will suffer from the same problem as basically every software platform for romance among straight people: the massive asymmetry in interest between men and women. Men would copy and paste virtually every woman they know into the system as a "crush," so they can find which if any of their female acquaintances might be interested, and then they would decide who to pursue.

pessimizer 4y ago
> Men would copy and paste virtually every woman they know into the system as a "crush," so they can find which if any of their female acquaintances might be interested, and then they would decide who to pursue. Smart men would, who know their place in the world. Any of them are good enough for you, really. Take the one that you like the most out of the ones who like you. Is this a problem? If it weren't asymmetric, it would be hopeless. Instead, most men get the choice between one or more interested women, and most women get a response from one or more of the men they were interested in. It's better if one side isn't as picky as the other. The other options are that only a couple of people match up at all, or everyone getting a response from everyone i.e. no signal at all. edit: I mean, isn't that Bumble?
- mikebenfield 4y ago
  I don't follow this, either logically or in practice. Granted I've never dated as a gay man or as a lesbian, but from what I've observed it seems to me a much smoother and more mutual process than straight dating. I've even heard from bi men about how much easier and less stressful it is to date men than women. AFAICT when both parties are on a level playing field, and there's not a massive asymmetry in power, interest, and investment, there's a lot less grief overall. > edit: I mean, isn't that Bumble? Bumble is a valiant attempt to fix this issue but it seems to mostly be a failure. An average man may occasionally get a message (which will usually just say "hi"), but the asymmetry in interest is still there, and it's still mostly men's responsibility to do the real initiating.

pessimizer 4y ago

> Men would copy and paste virtually every woman they know into the system as a "crush," so they can find which if any of their female acquaintances might be interested, and then they would decide who to pursue. Smart men would, who know their place in the world. Any of them are good enough for you, really. Take the one that you like the most out of the ones who like you. Is this a problem? If it weren't asymmetric, it would be hopeless. Instead, most men get the choice between one or more interested women, and most women get a response from one or more of the men they were interested in. It's better if one side isn't as picky as the other. The other options are that only a couple of people match up at all, or everyone getting a response from everyone i.e. no signal at all. edit: I mean, isn't that Bumble?

mikebenfield 4y ago
I don't follow this, either logically or in practice. Granted I've never dated as a gay man or as a lesbian, but from what I've observed it seems to me a much smoother and more mutual process than straight dating. I've even heard from bi men about how much easier and less stressful it is to date men than women. AFAICT when both parties are on a level playing field, and there's not a massive asymmetry in power, interest, and investment, there's a lot less grief overall. > edit: I mean, isn't that Bumble? Bumble is a valiant attempt to fix this issue but it seems to mostly be a failure. An average man may occasionally get a message (which will usually just say "hi"), but the asymmetry in interest is still there, and it's still mostly men's responsibility to do the real initiating.