5 ms·

I think the willingness to meet in person has more to do with logistical issues of physical security rather than some underlying difference in desires to defer

by type-r 4y ago

I think the willingness to meet in person has more to do with logistical issues of physical security rather than some underlying difference in desires to defer / accelerate IRL meet-ups. I think if you were able to assure both people that the other person wasn't going to go crazy on them, we'd see similar willingness to meet in-person. I do agree with you that when in the app, there is an inherent lack of desire to really understand the other person. In my experience, however, that goes away when we are able to meet face-to-face and share our true selves more authentically. So, this desire is reasonable, I just think that trying to use technology again to try to solve it (google doc instead of hinge) really isn't very different, and we need to change modalities to actually get anywhere on this issue.

BlargMcLarg 4y ago
Statistics don't exactly line up with that idea. Strangers don't cause problems as much as people like to believe. Men in general have gotten a lot softer while women are the ones pulling more weight on this security. The people causing problems are generally people you already know, or people with existing relationships. The problem is largely hearsay and doesn't line up with the behavior people exhibit (if stranger danger is so big why use dating apps at all).
- goethes_kind 4y ago
  The statistics are exactly this way, because women are super wary of strangers already. If they started trusting strange men into their lives that would change very quickly.
  - BlargMcLarg 4y ago
    No, these are your assumptions made through fearmongering and looking away from what is actually happening. Women are not fragile flowers being super selective with strangers out of security. They are increasingly hooking up with strangers compared to before, and they specifically select men in populations which are more likely to have psychopaths or men with dark intentions. Your average woman has plenty of suitors and friends able to set her up with dates, and she chooses not to. The entire notion falls flat the moment you look at the actions of women and men as a whole, and take a moment to remember what ideals 80s and 90s coming-of-age movies showed.
    - mejutoco 4y ago
      I think OP has a point, which does not contradict yours. https://xkcd.com/795/ https://xkcd.com/795/
      - snovv_crash 4y ago
        I don't get the XKCD analogy. Are you inferring that women who are aware that the actual statistics say that they will be murdered by a loved one are more likely to be killed by a stranger?
        karpierz 4y ago
        The implication is that the statistics are what they are under the condition that women take the precautions that they do. In other words, the 1/X statistic is conditioned on the average person's precautions (like not walking outside in a lightning storm), and by not applying on those precautions, you're using the statistic outside of the distribution that it applies to.
        snovv_crash 4y ago
        The issue that GGP brings up though is that women actually aren't following these guidelines since they date complete strangers via these apps.
        godelski 4y ago
        The analogy is about an aggregation error when using statistics. While the statistic is true it is not accounting for the environment one is in (it has aggregated all environments). Of course there's a big difference asking a girl on a first date on a hike in the woods vs meeting at Starbucks. (A lot of statistical paradoxes are because of aggregation errors. Conditional estimation matters a lot)
        snovv_crash 4y ago
        It's also a risk/reward thing though. Putting an obstacle to the first date is a great filter to remove people who aren't particularly interested or who would have incompatible lifestyle. From this respect a hike might be far preferably to Starbucks.

by type-r 4y ago

BlargMcLarg 4y ago

Statistics don't exactly line up with that idea. Strangers don't cause problems as much as people like to believe. Men in general have gotten a lot softer while women are the ones pulling more weight on this security. The people causing problems are generally people you already know, or people with existing relationships. The problem is largely hearsay and doesn't line up with the behavior people exhibit (if stranger danger is so big why use dating apps at all).

goethes_kind 4y ago
The statistics are exactly this way, because women are super wary of strangers already. If they started trusting strange men into their lives that would change very quickly.
- BlargMcLarg 4y ago
  No, these are your assumptions made through fearmongering and looking away from what is actually happening. Women are not fragile flowers being super selective with strangers out of security. They are increasingly hooking up with strangers compared to before, and they specifically select men in populations which are more likely to have psychopaths or men with dark intentions. Your average woman has plenty of suitors and friends able to set her up with dates, and she chooses not to. The entire notion falls flat the moment you look at the actions of women and men as a whole, and take a moment to remember what ideals 80s and 90s coming-of-age movies showed.
  - mejutoco 4y ago
    I think OP has a point, which does not contradict yours. https://xkcd.com/795/ https://xkcd.com/795/
    - snovv_crash 4y ago
      I don't get the XKCD analogy. Are you inferring that women who are aware that the actual statistics say that they will be murdered by a loved one are more likely to be killed by a stranger?
      - karpierz 4y ago
        The implication is that the statistics are what they are under the condition that women take the precautions that they do. In other words, the 1/X statistic is conditioned on the average person's precautions (like not walking outside in a lightning storm), and by not applying on those precautions, you're using the statistic outside of the distribution that it applies to.
        snovv_crash 4y ago
        The issue that GGP brings up though is that women actually aren't following these guidelines since they date complete strangers via these apps.
      - godelski 4y ago
        The analogy is about an aggregation error when using statistics. While the statistic is true it is not accounting for the environment one is in (it has aggregated all environments). Of course there's a big difference asking a girl on a first date on a hike in the woods vs meeting at Starbucks. (A lot of statistical paradoxes are because of aggregation errors. Conditional estimation matters a lot)
        snovv_crash 4y ago
        It's also a risk/reward thing though. Putting an obstacle to the first date is a great filter to remove people who aren't particularly interested or who would have incompatible lifestyle. From this respect a hike might be far preferably to Starbucks.