5 ms·

Dating on the internet is a flawed concept and no kind of hacks are going to fix it, because it is human behaviour that is the issue. If hypothetically, you ha

Dating on the internet is a flawed concept and no kind of hacks are going to fix it, because it is human behaviour that is the issue. If hypothetically, you had a benevolent dating website, and then you had 100 attractive men and 100 attractive women on it, that would work just fine. BUT, that is not what you have with dating websites. Most women don't have trouble meeting men, and don't need to take the additional risk of meeting a stranger on the internet. So the women on dating sites are already self selected in many ways, and in any case there are too few of them in comparison to the men. I mean, I already frequented an engineering university with 25% female students and that was brutal enough. I do not need to go online on some stupid website to keep experiencing exactly the same bullshit. At least the quality of women at the university was decently high.

datethrowaway0 4y ago
I think that characterization only applies to young people: no standards, no idea of what they want or what they're looking for, but imagine that someone else in their life will bring clarity. Yes, it's quite easy for your average woman to be bombarded with men on OLD. But after a certain age, it starts becoming a problem when you're looking for something more serious. You have a better grasp of who you are, and what you want, and the majority of the men flooding in are not "up to snuff." A simple progression of tastes. You may have been able to stomach junk food and boxed wine everyday in younger days, but now it revolts you -- and you need something different. Something with subtlety and depth that adds to your life, rather than getting in the way of it. The majority of people using OLD are young, and shallow, and so the platforms cater to them: creating an experience that's quick, and without depth. Tinder and Bumble the obvious examples. Compare to OkCupid (before it was bought out by Match.com, and completely destroyed): you could find people and filter through all of them based on a very large amount of aspects you considered important (values, lifestyle, beliefs, etc.) -- to cut down on the wasted time. Hinge is probably the only dating app I can think of at the moment that creates an experience that isn't so shallow (but it lacks vision, and pales in comparison to what could be -- likely due being developed, once again, by Match). There's no conclusion here, just my thoughts.
- undulatingwaves 4y ago
  I think there needs to be a dating experience that feels mutual/equal and doesn't have completely different experiences for different genders. Like you say 'the majority of the men flooding in are not "up to snuff"'. That's one (common) perspective, but I don't know why anyone thinks that someone from one gender is generally better than the other. Maybe one has different expectations, but that doesn't mean that the other gender is garbage like a lot of messaging around dating implies. Yet dating apps and strategies kind of assume that men put in the effort up front before they really know who the other person is. They are put through a bunch of time and money hoops. Some people may feel they have no other option and feel pressure to act a certain way, which can lead to resentment later on. As a guy it can feel like you are constantly proving yourself with costly signals for the first month (that women don't have to do), so it's hard to relax and open up and can feel defensive. I think dating should require equal commitment from the beginning. It doesn't have to be exactly 50/50, but as a guy, when you have to do the legwork in the apps (send 100s of messages, etc) and a significant minority of women label you a cheapskate if you don't pay for the first few dates, it's hard to not feel like you are being taken advantage of in dating. This probably starts by not having a mentality that most men/women you meet aren't going to be human garbage. Of course, don't accept shitty behavior. Women have issues of course and dating sucks for everyone, just my perspective as a man.
  - nradov 4y ago
    You're not going to get very far complaining about inequality and telling people to alter their behavior. Different genders have different expectations. Whether that's due to culture or biology or other factors doesn't really matter; the situation isn't going to change any time soon regardless of how dating apps work. It is what it is. Expectations are also heavily influenced by the gender ratio in a region. If you're living somewhere like "Man Jose" then you're automatically at a disadvantage. Try somewhere else. https://www.kqed.org/news/11231284/does-san-jose-deserve-the-nickname-man-jose https://www.kqed.org/news/11231284/does-san-jose-deserve-the... There are apps where women have to initiate contact. If you want to put in less effort then just use those.
AtlasBarfed 4y ago
What? You were a (presumably male) student at a 25% female college and don't see the point of a dating app that would drastically increase the pool of women you could interact with? What am I missing here? Unless you were in the apex male top 5% at the college, that just sounds nuts. Women may meet a lot of men regardless of dating apps, but everyone wants a bigger better deal. Dating apps provide access to many people, such that a better quality mate is possible. Again, you may be flawed by being in university. In the real world you meet a far wider range of people in demographic, socioeconomic status, age, education, etc. So the people you meet that may match what you want is drastically lower that university, which will generally function as a filter for socioeconomic status, demographic, location, and especially intelligence. At a technical college, it even preselects for area of interest.
- somethingreen 4y ago
  Dating services are not representative of general population. Even biggest most well established slow dating platforms have m/f ratio of about 2. Young people dating - parent would be lucky to get into a 4:1 pool. Like he said, it's the same thing, except more shallow and at a higher pace.
- paulryanrogers 4y ago
  IIRC the OkCupid data indicated that women pursued the top 20% of men almost exclusively, rated by physical attraction. Men pursued the top 50% of women. Online is a stacked deck, though I'd agree it can still widen an IRL pool. Met my SO through an online site. Though it still took years and I was using 4 sites at a time, occasionally paid ones too.
  - escapedmoose 4y ago
    I have to wonder if some of this is due to women wearing makeup and more flattering clothing, so that the top 50% of women are as attractive as the top 20% of men. IME as a bisexual on dating sites, women typically have more game, or at least know how to flaunt it better. Back in the day I certainly reached out to many more women than men… though in retrospect, that’s also because women are less intimidating; it was easier to break the ice with them.
heleninboodler 4y ago
> an engineering university with 25% female students Try computer science in the early 90's if you think that was brutal. More like 2.5%.
- Der_Einzige 4y ago
  My CS degree was 5-9 men per woman, and in some courses (automate theory) had ZERO women in it. If you do a CS major, you're trading social skills and dating prospects for earning potential. Seriously, never ever mention you're a tech bro if you're at a bar or club. Doesn't matter if you make 300K+, doesn't matter if you've got a fat title. Always say lawyer, doctor, or anything else. Just don't be stupid enough to out yourself as a stemlord.
  - heleninboodler 4y ago
    > Seriously, never ever mention you're a tech bro Where I am, it could either be an asset (for people after your money) or a liability (for those who aren't in tech and hate us for the economic impact), but I date old enough that regardless of money, the women generally dig a stable nerd with a sexy responsible streak.

datethrowaway0 4y ago

I think that characterization only applies to young people: no standards, no idea of what they want or what they're looking for, but imagine that someone else in their life will bring clarity. Yes, it's quite easy for your average woman to be bombarded with men on OLD. But after a certain age, it starts becoming a problem when you're looking for something more serious. You have a better grasp of who you are, and what you want, and the majority of the men flooding in are not "up to snuff." A simple progression of tastes. You may have been able to stomach junk food and boxed wine everyday in younger days, but now it revolts you -- and you need something different. Something with subtlety and depth that adds to your life, rather than getting in the way of it. The majority of people using OLD are young, and shallow, and so the platforms cater to them: creating an experience that's quick, and without depth. Tinder and Bumble the obvious examples. Compare to OkCupid (before it was bought out by Match.com, and completely destroyed): you could find people and filter through all of them based on a very large amount of aspects you considered important (values, lifestyle, beliefs, etc.) -- to cut down on the wasted time. Hinge is probably the only dating app I can think of at the moment that creates an experience that isn't so shallow (but it lacks vision, and pales in comparison to what could be -- likely due being developed, once again, by Match). There's no conclusion here, just my thoughts.

undulatingwaves 4y ago
I think there needs to be a dating experience that feels mutual/equal and doesn't have completely different experiences for different genders. Like you say 'the majority of the men flooding in are not "up to snuff"'. That's one (common) perspective, but I don't know why anyone thinks that someone from one gender is generally better than the other. Maybe one has different expectations, but that doesn't mean that the other gender is garbage like a lot of messaging around dating implies. Yet dating apps and strategies kind of assume that men put in the effort up front before they really know who the other person is. They are put through a bunch of time and money hoops. Some people may feel they have no other option and feel pressure to act a certain way, which can lead to resentment later on. As a guy it can feel like you are constantly proving yourself with costly signals for the first month (that women don't have to do), so it's hard to relax and open up and can feel defensive. I think dating should require equal commitment from the beginning. It doesn't have to be exactly 50/50, but as a guy, when you have to do the legwork in the apps (send 100s of messages, etc) and a significant minority of women label you a cheapskate if you don't pay for the first few dates, it's hard to not feel like you are being taken advantage of in dating. This probably starts by not having a mentality that most men/women you meet aren't going to be human garbage. Of course, don't accept shitty behavior. Women have issues of course and dating sucks for everyone, just my perspective as a man.
- nradov 4y ago
  You're not going to get very far complaining about inequality and telling people to alter their behavior. Different genders have different expectations. Whether that's due to culture or biology or other factors doesn't really matter; the situation isn't going to change any time soon regardless of how dating apps work. It is what it is. Expectations are also heavily influenced by the gender ratio in a region. If you're living somewhere like "Man Jose" then you're automatically at a disadvantage. Try somewhere else. https://www.kqed.org/news/11231284/does-san-jose-deserve-the-nickname-man-jose https://www.kqed.org/news/11231284/does-san-jose-deserve-the... There are apps where women have to initiate contact. If you want to put in less effort then just use those.

AtlasBarfed 4y ago

What? You were a (presumably male) student at a 25% female college and don't see the point of a dating app that would drastically increase the pool of women you could interact with? What am I missing here? Unless you were in the apex male top 5% at the college, that just sounds nuts. Women may meet a lot of men regardless of dating apps, but everyone wants a bigger better deal. Dating apps provide access to many people, such that a better quality mate is possible. Again, you may be flawed by being in university. In the real world you meet a far wider range of people in demographic, socioeconomic status, age, education, etc. So the people you meet that may match what you want is drastically lower that university, which will generally function as a filter for socioeconomic status, demographic, location, and especially intelligence. At a technical college, it even preselects for area of interest.

somethingreen 4y ago
Dating services are not representative of general population. Even biggest most well established slow dating platforms have m/f ratio of about 2. Young people dating - parent would be lucky to get into a 4:1 pool. Like he said, it's the same thing, except more shallow and at a higher pace.
paulryanrogers 4y ago
IIRC the OkCupid data indicated that women pursued the top 20% of men almost exclusively, rated by physical attraction. Men pursued the top 50% of women. Online is a stacked deck, though I'd agree it can still widen an IRL pool. Met my SO through an online site. Though it still took years and I was using 4 sites at a time, occasionally paid ones too.
- escapedmoose 4y ago
  I have to wonder if some of this is due to women wearing makeup and more flattering clothing, so that the top 50% of women are as attractive as the top 20% of men. IME as a bisexual on dating sites, women typically have more game, or at least know how to flaunt it better. Back in the day I certainly reached out to many more women than men… though in retrospect, that’s also because women are less intimidating; it was easier to break the ice with them.

heleninboodler 4y ago

> an engineering university with 25% female students Try computer science in the early 90's if you think that was brutal. More like 2.5%.

Der_Einzige 4y ago
My CS degree was 5-9 men per woman, and in some courses (automate theory) had ZERO women in it. If you do a CS major, you're trading social skills and dating prospects for earning potential. Seriously, never ever mention you're a tech bro if you're at a bar or club. Doesn't matter if you make 300K+, doesn't matter if you've got a fat title. Always say lawyer, doctor, or anything else. Just don't be stupid enough to out yourself as a stemlord.
- heleninboodler 4y ago
  > Seriously, never ever mention you're a tech bro Where I am, it could either be an asset (for people after your money) or a liability (for those who aren't in tech and hate us for the economic impact), but I date old enough that regardless of money, the women generally dig a stable nerd with a sexy responsible streak.