11 ms·

I propose not distinguishing the "winners" and "losers" by sex to understand who has the upper hand, but by those who act on what they want and those who don't.

by spodek 13y ago

I propose not distinguishing the "winners" and "losers" by sex to understand who has the upper hand, but by those who act on what they want and those who don't. I suspect the people who end up not getting what they want tend to be the ones who don't put in the effort, especially taking the emotional risks in attracting others, initiating relationships, and making the relationships work the way they want. Many men and many women put in this effort. Many men and many women also don't put in this effort. I suspect the former group has much more success than the latter group in the long run whether male or female, though I suspect they face a lot more rejection and emotional pain in the short run. I suspect the latter group faces less short-term pain and rejection, but is lucky to get what they want from relationships if they ever do. The emotional challenges of making yourself vulnerable are harder for most than pursuing a career or hobbies so many men and women go the emotionally easier route of working hard at their jobs. In my experience, along with overcoming those challenges comes tremendous emotional growth. (Btw, I disagree with the zero-sum mentality of winners and losers because people can have more than one deep, meaningful relationship and relationship come in many forms, but adopted it for consistency with the article).

fidotron 13y ago
I'm not convinced this is the case at all. A lot of the problem comes down to expectations, so people can persuade themselves that they're just looking for what they want when being totally unrealistic. My anecdotal experience would be people that have had the most trouble are those that actually seem to be trying.
- protonfish 13y ago
  Tomorrow I am marrying a girl 17 years my junior. I tried to date women my age but they were not interested. I think when dating changes from having fun to a search for the perfect mate the qualifications for application become impractically high. The only people that meet expectations then are the top few percent of men (who are extremely in demand) and sleazy liars.
  - wj 13y ago
    Congratulations on your wedding!
galapago 13y ago
Why is dating a game?
- tomkarlo 13y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory
  - galapago 13y ago
    I'm saying why we should see it as a game from game theory and how that will be good thing for people in general?
    - bluecalm 13y ago
      Nobody is saying it's good for people in general. It's just an observation that there is conflict of interests in dating/mating dynamics and it's not easy to get what you want so you need strategy to improve your chances hence "game".
    - theorique 13y ago
      You can look at it any way you like. Some of the features of the way dating and mating operates can be modeled in a game theory fashion. It isn’t good or bad for people - nor does it have to be - it’s just a way of interpreting the data in front of us. Now, the way you guide your own dating life, should, presumably, be done in a way that is good for you and not harmful to others, but this is more of a Golden Rule thing rather than a game theory thing.
    - tomkarlo 13y ago
      I don't think it's a matter of "seeing" it as a game. It is a game, in that definition. (As opposed to the "things done for entertainment" definition.) It's a good thing to look at relationships and coupling as a "game" because too often we treat finding our partner as a "fairy tale" story where it's just a matter of "meeting the right person". That myth does a disservice to everyone: both the couples who find someone but then need to work on the relationship, and the people who have unrealistic expectations and end up alone. Also, even if it doesn't inform individual choices, it's useful for looking at things in terms of broad demographic trends. If the article is right, it means there's a potential demographic shift coming of fewer children, fewer people with supporting family structure, etc. Understanding the dynamics behind that can be important for planning a society's future.
enraged_camel 13y ago
>>Effort Well, sure, effort is important. But there are also many "hard-coded" factors outside one's control. For example, I'm 5'9", which makes me average in that category. To make up for it, I need to dress extra nice and be athletic/muscular. Whereas someone who is, say, 6'2" will be attractive to women solely on the virtue of being tall.
- candydance 13y ago
  >>Whereas someone who is, say, 6'2" will be attractive to women solely on the virtue of being tall. Lol no. As a 6'2" man with social anxiety, being tall is not some magical doorway to getting the ladies. Effort is more important, grooming is more important, being able to hold a conversation is more important, etc. edit: I'm not saying height isn't an advantage. I'm saying that there are MANY other factors which matter MUCH more than just height.
  - rfnslyr 13y ago
    People who are short look as height as "the key". It's really not and it truly doesn't matter if you don't have other features to compliment height. If you're overweight and 6'2, it doesn't matter.
    - candydance 13y ago
      Exactly. The most successful lothario in my university class was a short guy who went to the gym 5 days a week, had exceptional grooming and was extremely confident/comfortable around women. Height is a very small factor in these things. Not to mention fringe benefits of being short. Relatively, EVERYTHING IS BIGGER. This idea alone makes me want to try being smaller for a day. Fitting on beds, fitting in airplanes, all food portions are bigger, cars are more spacious. Also, you'll live longer statistically.
    - bluecalm 13y ago
      Maybe it's better to say: height is great advantage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness#Height_and_erect_posture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness#Height_...) but it's still possible to screw it up. I don't agree that it's "truly doesn't matter". Yeah you won't be a rockstar popular guy if you are fat or have bad social anxiety but your position and prospects would be even worse if you were short as well. >Exactly. The most successful lothario in my university class was a short guy who went to the gym 5 days a week, had exceptional grooming and was extremely confident/comfortable around women. Height is a very small factor in these things. It really puts me on tilt reading things like that. Yes, height is not the only factor, yes it's still possible to achieve great things without it, yes you can be attractive/popular without it. Yet it's still very important factor which puts you at great advantage in both dating and career game. Just because there are some shorter guys who "outperformed" taller guys doesn't mean it disproves the height=advantage theorem.
capkutay 13y ago
I think the author is saying that women have to put in the effort and act on what they want long before men do if they don't want any sort of repercussions. A man can just play the field and focus on his career until his mid 30s without losing much desirability to women ages 25 and up. It doesn't necessarily work the other way around, right? You don't hear about 25 year old men marrying successful 30 something women because the lady is successful and charming. Not to say it doesn't happen, but its certainly rare.
- mistermann 13y ago
  > I think the author is saying that women have to put in the effort and act on what they want long before men do if they don't want any sort of repercussions. I'd argue that women in their prime dating age don't have to put in that much effort, they just have to show up. A woman has to make herself available, and men will pursue her. The article is about the women who wanted others things (career, etc) first and thought the advantage they enjoy while they are younger would last forever, but too late they discover how fleeting this dating advantage is. > You don't hear about 25 year old men marrying successful 30 something women because the lady is successful and charming. Not to say it doesn't happen, but its certainly rare. This isn't because there aren't 25 year old men who are willing and able to marry these successful women, it is the woman who is making the decision.
  - PeterisP 13y ago
    Umm, it's not purely the woman who is making the decision - while some of them do marry this way (one of my friends has a 15 year older wife), you'll clearly see that a majority of 25 year old men significantly prefer 25 year old women to 35 year old women, and 20 year old women to 40 year old women.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
nether 13y ago
"It's not a gender thing, it's an effort thing." Then why are there vast asymmetries along gender lines in virtually all aspects of dating? Look at OkTrends (http://blog.okcupid.com http://blog.okcupid.com), or Dan Ariely's posts on the subject (http://danariely.com/tag/dating/ http://danariely.com/tag/dating/), or this post from a woman http://www.alternet.org/why-online-dating-sucks-men http://www.alternet.org/why-online-dating-sucks-men) which indicates high dating success for women putting in low effort. Are men and women just putting in different amounts of effort? The question is then, why is that the case? And that case arises from historical gender roles. It is a gender thing. Your "many people ..." statements are platitudes that are true no matter what follows ("Many people are smart; many people are dumb."), and do nothing to support what you "suspect."
- EGreg 13y ago
  Um, it's pretty explainable by the following theory: "Men put more work up front -- making the first move, taking the women out and showing them a good time, etc. Women put more work once the relationship gets going (i.e. after much sex has been had). They put up with their guy's frustrating habits and work to advance the relationship forward." Now, this is a description of the MAJORITY of interactions, not all, of course. And of course there's this: http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm
  - drzaiusapelord 13y ago
    I think its sexist to portray men as dumb sex-starved creatures and only the feminine mystique of women can lead to fulfilling relationships. I hate the political correctness that is popular today. Essentially, men and boys are punching bags to the feminist activists and attitudes like yours aren't helping.
    - EGreg 13y ago
      Why do you have to characterize it like that? You're attacking a straw man. Men are attracted to women based largely on factors that are more immediately apparent -- such as physical appearance. Women get more attracted the more they invest into a relationship. This follows from biological differences - see that article.
phreanix 13y ago
Is it just me who noticed a possible messaging discrepancy? The articles covers what women have been taught ("world is your oyster", etc.) and how that has affected their eventual search, yet glosses over what men have been conditioned with all this time. Suppose there's "messaging" disconnect? Women in this generation (and last's) have increasingly been conditioned and taught by their parents and various peers and mediums to be independent, pursue careers, and become all they can be. What has changed with how men are raised? Maybe they're still getting the same traditional message and lessons that they are meant to be the head of household, to provide, to find a woman who will bear their children (and not a whole lot else)? Then it would make sense that men and women will have almost diametrically opposed POV's and not find common ground?
- Camillo 13y ago
  Messaging for men in the mainstream media seems to be "do whatever will make women happy". Note how this article, while being surprisingly equitable in at least considering men's point of view, has a completely different attitude towards resentment in men and women. Women who dated in their 20s and want to marry in their 30s are resentful of men who now want to date. Meanwhile, men who were unable to find love in their 20s now want to date in their 30s. They grew resentful when they couldn't find love, much as 30-something women now do. I see a lot of symmetry here. However, when resentful women say "these men are assholes", that is taken at face value: it's obvious that these men are indeed assholes, and that these women are being wronged. On the other hand, resentful men are called misogynists and brutes, and what they really think ("these women are sluts") is considered unfit for print. It seems hypocritical, and I don't think it's conducive to improving things.
  - eli_gottlieb 13y ago
    >However, when resentful women say "these men are assholes", that is taken at face value: it's obvious that these men are indeed assholes, and that these women are being wronged. On the other hand, resentful men are called misogynists and brutes, and what they really think ("these women are sluts") is considered unfit for print. Of course it's unfit for print. Those men are looking to date around, aren't they? They're looking to slut it up, so they've got no right whatsoever to look down on someone for doing or having done the same damn thing. Reverse Disclosure: I'm engaged and have been "off the market" for so long I've stopped giving a damn.
mellifluousmind 13y ago
I have beef with your statement, specifically emotional risks. In today's world, from a male's perspective, too many women are self-entitled and biased (different skin color, race, height, whatever) when it comes to natural selection and the progression of blood line. I mean that's their every right to do so, but it often means that emotional risks are far greater for men that women wouldn't fancy for a date to begin with. And lets about the return on putting in efforts. For a man that puts in effort (dress nice, be approachable, with smile and the whole nine yard), I can tell you that the return is often zero and nada. It would be insanity to keep trying and keep failing, especially when I keep lowering my standard into what I want from a relationship. Now I am in my early 30, and I can tell you that this dating game isn't worth of my time and emotional effort. I am much happier be left alone than chasing after women in general. The article suggests that women in their 30s are getting more anxious to settle down, but lets not forget that their entitlement remains quite intact actually. Even if they settle down with a beta, in their mind, there is no equality. They still look down at the beta like I am above you (and that translates into seeking thrill and cheating if an "alpha" opportunity pops in). So fuck that. They can dry up their eggs for all I care. Lastly, lets be honest about "alpha males" The article fails to mention that a lot of these women are in market for "white alpha males" I can't remember how many times women slip out shit like the following during a date "oh I find white guys very attractive...I love talking to white guys." Again, I am telling it as is. The world isn't about fairness. If you picky, that's not my problem when you are antsy about your offsprings.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
pohl 13y ago
I propose not distinguishing the "winners" and "losers" by sex to understand who has the upper hand, but by those who act on what they want and those who don't. It sounds like you didn't make it through the article, because you didn't manage to capture the central model it discussed. (I can't say I blame you.) Nevertheless, the central model isn't about winners vs losers: it's two functions: sexual-market-value over time by gender, and what people want over time by gender, and how each gender selfishly maximizes in a way that leaves older women out in the cold. Really, it's just a re-hash of the ancient maxim that "women grow old; men grow distinguished".
- Zimahl 13y ago
  While I am happily married, I have seen the 'sexual-market-value' change first hand now that I'm in my mid-30s. The women my age who are attractive but unmarried and childless seem to now be with men who they would've probably never even considered 10 years ago. They've been passed up for whatever reason - bad relationship choices, too picky, etc. - but still want a family so are willing to lower their standards. I thought this was funny: Naomi explains: "He's 36 years old and is definitely someone who falls into the alpha-male category: excellent job in finance, PhD, high income, six feet two, sporty and very handsome. And he's an utter sweetheart." Just clueless. That guy, if he even exists and isn't already married, has the resources to date a nice girl in her late-20s. Again, it's a symptom of the problem. Many women waited for the perfect situation and never found it. And even if they found their white whale we all know how that story ends.
  - ahoy 13y ago
    The idea of being 'settled for' upsets me greatly.
    - Zimahl 13y ago
      Let me rephrase what I was saying. Not every woman out there is settling on a least-common denominator. Some women are single because they were too picky (like the text I quoted) but some are just single because of bad luck.
ahh 13y ago
Cool story, bro! Your success is surely due to your hard work and Alger-like moral superiority, and not the fact that you're tall, attractive, and suave. Your advice is worse than useless for the average dateless loser, who will never succeed no matter how much "effort" they put in. But this way you don't have to feel bad for them--it's their own fault they'll die alone, because they didn't _work_ hard enough. I hope some day you actually learn what it's like to fail through attributes outside of your control, and have everyone blame you for it anyway.

by spodek 13y ago

fidotron 13y ago

I'm not convinced this is the case at all. A lot of the problem comes down to expectations, so people can persuade themselves that they're just looking for what they want when being totally unrealistic. My anecdotal experience would be people that have had the most trouble are those that actually seem to be trying.

protonfish 13y ago
Tomorrow I am marrying a girl 17 years my junior. I tried to date women my age but they were not interested. I think when dating changes from having fun to a search for the perfect mate the qualifications for application become impractically high. The only people that meet expectations then are the top few percent of men (who are extremely in demand) and sleazy liars.
- wj 13y ago
  Congratulations on your wedding!

galapago 13y ago

Why is dating a game?

tomkarlo 13y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory
- galapago 13y ago
  I'm saying why we should see it as a game from game theory and how that will be good thing for people in general?
  - bluecalm 13y ago
    Nobody is saying it's good for people in general. It's just an observation that there is conflict of interests in dating/mating dynamics and it's not easy to get what you want so you need strategy to improve your chances hence "game".
  - theorique 13y ago
    You can look at it any way you like. Some of the features of the way dating and mating operates can be modeled in a game theory fashion. It isn’t good or bad for people - nor does it have to be - it’s just a way of interpreting the data in front of us. Now, the way you guide your own dating life, should, presumably, be done in a way that is good for you and not harmful to others, but this is more of a Golden Rule thing rather than a game theory thing.
  - tomkarlo 13y ago
    I don't think it's a matter of "seeing" it as a game. It is a game, in that definition. (As opposed to the "things done for entertainment" definition.) It's a good thing to look at relationships and coupling as a "game" because too often we treat finding our partner as a "fairy tale" story where it's just a matter of "meeting the right person". That myth does a disservice to everyone: both the couples who find someone but then need to work on the relationship, and the people who have unrealistic expectations and end up alone. Also, even if it doesn't inform individual choices, it's useful for looking at things in terms of broad demographic trends. If the article is right, it means there's a potential demographic shift coming of fewer children, fewer people with supporting family structure, etc. Understanding the dynamics behind that can be important for planning a society's future.

enraged_camel 13y ago

>>Effort Well, sure, effort is important. But there are also many "hard-coded" factors outside one's control. For example, I'm 5'9", which makes me average in that category. To make up for it, I need to dress extra nice and be athletic/muscular. Whereas someone who is, say, 6'2" will be attractive to women solely on the virtue of being tall.

candydance 13y ago
>>Whereas someone who is, say, 6'2" will be attractive to women solely on the virtue of being tall. Lol no. As a 6'2" man with social anxiety, being tall is not some magical doorway to getting the ladies. Effort is more important, grooming is more important, being able to hold a conversation is more important, etc. edit: I'm not saying height isn't an advantage. I'm saying that there are MANY other factors which matter MUCH more than just height.
- rfnslyr 13y ago
  People who are short look as height as "the key". It's really not and it truly doesn't matter if you don't have other features to compliment height. If you're overweight and 6'2, it doesn't matter.
  - candydance 13y ago
    Exactly. The most successful lothario in my university class was a short guy who went to the gym 5 days a week, had exceptional grooming and was extremely confident/comfortable around women. Height is a very small factor in these things. Not to mention fringe benefits of being short. Relatively, EVERYTHING IS BIGGER. This idea alone makes me want to try being smaller for a day. Fitting on beds, fitting in airplanes, all food portions are bigger, cars are more spacious. Also, you'll live longer statistically.
  - bluecalm 13y ago
    Maybe it's better to say: height is great advantage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness#Height_and_erect_posture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness#Height_...) but it's still possible to screw it up. I don't agree that it's "truly doesn't matter". Yeah you won't be a rockstar popular guy if you are fat or have bad social anxiety but your position and prospects would be even worse if you were short as well. >Exactly. The most successful lothario in my university class was a short guy who went to the gym 5 days a week, had exceptional grooming and was extremely confident/comfortable around women. Height is a very small factor in these things. It really puts me on tilt reading things like that. Yes, height is not the only factor, yes it's still possible to achieve great things without it, yes you can be attractive/popular without it. Yet it's still very important factor which puts you at great advantage in both dating and career game. Just because there are some shorter guys who "outperformed" taller guys doesn't mean it disproves the height=advantage theorem.

capkutay 13y ago

I think the author is saying that women have to put in the effort and act on what they want long before men do if they don't want any sort of repercussions. A man can just play the field and focus on his career until his mid 30s without losing much desirability to women ages 25 and up. It doesn't necessarily work the other way around, right? You don't hear about 25 year old men marrying successful 30 something women because the lady is successful and charming. Not to say it doesn't happen, but its certainly rare.

mistermann 13y ago
> I think the author is saying that women have to put in the effort and act on what they want long before men do if they don't want any sort of repercussions. I'd argue that women in their prime dating age don't have to put in that much effort, they just have to show up. A woman has to make herself available, and men will pursue her. The article is about the women who wanted others things (career, etc) first and thought the advantage they enjoy while they are younger would last forever, but too late they discover how fleeting this dating advantage is. > You don't hear about 25 year old men marrying successful 30 something women because the lady is successful and charming. Not to say it doesn't happen, but its certainly rare. This isn't because there aren't 25 year old men who are willing and able to marry these successful women, it is the woman who is making the decision.
- PeterisP 13y ago
  Umm, it's not purely the woman who is making the decision - while some of them do marry this way (one of my friends has a 15 year older wife), you'll clearly see that a majority of 25 year old men significantly prefer 25 year old women to 35 year old women, and 20 year old women to 40 year old women.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

nether 13y ago

"It's not a gender thing, it's an effort thing." Then why are there vast asymmetries along gender lines in virtually all aspects of dating? Look at OkTrends (http://blog.okcupid.com http://blog.okcupid.com), or Dan Ariely's posts on the subject (http://danariely.com/tag/dating/ http://danariely.com/tag/dating/), or this post from a woman http://www.alternet.org/why-online-dating-sucks-men http://www.alternet.org/why-online-dating-sucks-men) which indicates high dating success for women putting in low effort. Are men and women just putting in different amounts of effort? The question is then, why is that the case? And that case arises from historical gender roles. It is a gender thing. Your "many people ..." statements are platitudes that are true no matter what follows ("Many people are smart; many people are dumb."), and do nothing to support what you "suspect."

EGreg 13y ago
Um, it's pretty explainable by the following theory: "Men put more work up front -- making the first move, taking the women out and showing them a good time, etc. Women put more work once the relationship gets going (i.e. after much sex has been had). They put up with their guy's frustrating habits and work to advance the relationship forward." Now, this is a description of the MAJORITY of interactions, not all, of course. And of course there's this: http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm
- drzaiusapelord 13y ago
  I think its sexist to portray men as dumb sex-starved creatures and only the feminine mystique of women can lead to fulfilling relationships. I hate the political correctness that is popular today. Essentially, men and boys are punching bags to the feminist activists and attitudes like yours aren't helping.
  - EGreg 13y ago
    Why do you have to characterize it like that? You're attacking a straw man. Men are attracted to women based largely on factors that are more immediately apparent -- such as physical appearance. Women get more attracted the more they invest into a relationship. This follows from biological differences - see that article.

phreanix 13y ago

Is it just me who noticed a possible messaging discrepancy? The articles covers what women have been taught ("world is your oyster", etc.) and how that has affected their eventual search, yet glosses over what men have been conditioned with all this time. Suppose there's "messaging" disconnect? Women in this generation (and last's) have increasingly been conditioned and taught by their parents and various peers and mediums to be independent, pursue careers, and become all they can be. What has changed with how men are raised? Maybe they're still getting the same traditional message and lessons that they are meant to be the head of household, to provide, to find a woman who will bear their children (and not a whole lot else)? Then it would make sense that men and women will have almost diametrically opposed POV's and not find common ground?

Camillo 13y ago
Messaging for men in the mainstream media seems to be "do whatever will make women happy". Note how this article, while being surprisingly equitable in at least considering men's point of view, has a completely different attitude towards resentment in men and women. Women who dated in their 20s and want to marry in their 30s are resentful of men who now want to date. Meanwhile, men who were unable to find love in their 20s now want to date in their 30s. They grew resentful when they couldn't find love, much as 30-something women now do. I see a lot of symmetry here. However, when resentful women say "these men are assholes", that is taken at face value: it's obvious that these men are indeed assholes, and that these women are being wronged. On the other hand, resentful men are called misogynists and brutes, and what they really think ("these women are sluts") is considered unfit for print. It seems hypocritical, and I don't think it's conducive to improving things.
- eli_gottlieb 13y ago
  >However, when resentful women say "these men are assholes", that is taken at face value: it's obvious that these men are indeed assholes, and that these women are being wronged. On the other hand, resentful men are called misogynists and brutes, and what they really think ("these women are sluts") is considered unfit for print. Of course it's unfit for print. Those men are looking to date around, aren't they? They're looking to slut it up, so they've got no right whatsoever to look down on someone for doing or having done the same damn thing. Reverse Disclosure: I'm engaged and have been "off the market" for so long I've stopped giving a damn.

mellifluousmind 13y ago

I have beef with your statement, specifically emotional risks. In today's world, from a male's perspective, too many women are self-entitled and biased (different skin color, race, height, whatever) when it comes to natural selection and the progression of blood line. I mean that's their every right to do so, but it often means that emotional risks are far greater for men that women wouldn't fancy for a date to begin with. And lets about the return on putting in efforts. For a man that puts in effort (dress nice, be approachable, with smile and the whole nine yard), I can tell you that the return is often zero and nada. It would be insanity to keep trying and keep failing, especially when I keep lowering my standard into what I want from a relationship. Now I am in my early 30, and I can tell you that this dating game isn't worth of my time and emotional effort. I am much happier be left alone than chasing after women in general. The article suggests that women in their 30s are getting more anxious to settle down, but lets not forget that their entitlement remains quite intact actually. Even if they settle down with a beta, in their mind, there is no equality. They still look down at the beta like I am above you (and that translates into seeking thrill and cheating if an "alpha" opportunity pops in). So fuck that. They can dry up their eggs for all I care. Lastly, lets be honest about "alpha males" The article fails to mention that a lot of these women are in market for "white alpha males" I can't remember how many times women slip out shit like the following during a date "oh I find white guys very attractive...I love talking to white guys." Again, I am telling it as is. The world isn't about fairness. If you picky, that's not my problem when you are antsy about your offsprings.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

pohl 13y ago

I propose not distinguishing the "winners" and "losers" by sex to understand who has the upper hand, but by those who act on what they want and those who don't. It sounds like you didn't make it through the article, because you didn't manage to capture the central model it discussed. (I can't say I blame you.) Nevertheless, the central model isn't about winners vs losers: it's two functions: sexual-market-value over time by gender, and what people want over time by gender, and how each gender selfishly maximizes in a way that leaves older women out in the cold. Really, it's just a re-hash of the ancient maxim that "women grow old; men grow distinguished".

Zimahl 13y ago
While I am happily married, I have seen the 'sexual-market-value' change first hand now that I'm in my mid-30s. The women my age who are attractive but unmarried and childless seem to now be with men who they would've probably never even considered 10 years ago. They've been passed up for whatever reason - bad relationship choices, too picky, etc. - but still want a family so are willing to lower their standards. I thought this was funny: Naomi explains: "He's 36 years old and is definitely someone who falls into the alpha-male category: excellent job in finance, PhD, high income, six feet two, sporty and very handsome. And he's an utter sweetheart." Just clueless. That guy, if he even exists and isn't already married, has the resources to date a nice girl in her late-20s. Again, it's a symptom of the problem. Many women waited for the perfect situation and never found it. And even if they found their white whale we all know how that story ends.
- ahoy 13y ago
  The idea of being 'settled for' upsets me greatly.
  - Zimahl 13y ago
    Let me rephrase what I was saying. Not every woman out there is settling on a least-common denominator. Some women are single because they were too picky (like the text I quoted) but some are just single because of bad luck.

ahh 13y ago

Cool story, bro! Your success is surely due to your hard work and Alger-like moral superiority, and not the fact that you're tall, attractive, and suave. Your advice is worse than useless for the average dateless loser, who will never succeed no matter how much "effort" they put in. But this way you don't have to feel bad for them--it's their own fault they'll die alone, because they didn't _work_ hard enough. I hope some day you actually learn what it's like to fail through attributes outside of your control, and have everyone blame you for it anyway.