If we could drop some of the more poisonous attitudes ("entitlement" is key) and rid ourselves of many of our ideological blinders (men and women are totes the

If we could drop some of the more poisonous attitudes ("entitlement" is key) and rid ourselves of many of our ideological blinders (men and women are totes the same and have the same dating needs, unless this is a conversation where I can say the opposite to win the argument) we could have some real discussion about this. There's just some basic things at play that we should stop denying, and I think the most important of which might be formulated like "Men are more 'thirsty' than women are." Of course, we would have to season every sentence with some statistical weasel words ("tends to," "more likely to," "on the average," and so on) and we would have to risk bumping up against someone's carefully crafted worldview in an injurious manner. So be it. Recall the now-vanished (Thanks, Match.com!) OKCupid blog posts regarding the different statistical spreads between the sexes. The more we try to obscure these differences, the more warped the strategic arms race between The Algo and the Lonesome Losers* will become, as The Algo will try to hide any unfairness and keep you playing. However, there are a lot of different parties who are quite invested in avoiding bald statements about the reality of the situation. I don't see this changing. * Lonesome Losers, named after the Little River Band song, strike out but they still keep on trying. They will, however, try to adapt. (As a side note, "shadowbanning" is just gaslighting by moderators and/or The Algorithm. It's gaslighting, pure and simple.)