It's all about options as presented thru social media. Women have always had more options.. before SoMed. These were limited to visual in person contact. Now with the dating apps eye.. her options have exploded.
I was married for a long while. I never experienced anything indicating my wife or the women in her social circle were hypergamous.
After my divorce I dated mainly through the apps. I experienced some of the issues men associate with hypergamy for the first time - not every time, but often enough that I could describe general traits and tendencies consistent with such theories.
I never went all the way in on it as a theory of love or the sexes generally, however - I never swallowed the redpill - because I had the counterexample of my first marriage. I also had that of my parents, who were happily married and in love for 44 years until my mother passed away in my father's arms.
Your framing explains my experience and observations of the data, or at least significantly and helpfully advances my theories and understanding. Merci
"Men can be everything from extreme peaches to extreme lemons, and it isn't easy to see who is who."
Seems like there would be an easy way to solve this: community. Men will have reputations, it's not easy for a guy to completely hide who he is for long from those who know him.
What is ironic is that if you look around, this exact method by which women might ascertain this knowledge is considered "creepy" or "the wrong way" to get relationships now. That, I think, is the more interesting story in how and why is it seen as the preferred way to connect is a completely random stranger approaching out of the blue.
This article doesn’t say anything which decreases the importance or relevance of hypergamy to the current dating market. It simply justifies and explains it. Anyone with a good foundational grasp of red pill or evolutionary psych/bio would already know that hypergamy is a feature, not a bug.
That said, I do still think that unfettered hypergamy is a primary cause of current dating woes. Peaches and lemons applies to women too.
I can see why women would want a man like Ted to be content with his fellow homely bride. But women caricaturize how important looks are to men. Yes, they’re important, but hoe_math’s categories of “personality“ and “purity“ make a big difference too, if we’re talking relationships and not hookups. And our feminist gynocentric culture ensures that most women are lacking in these areas. His bride probably got pumped and dumped by the same Alpha Chads that the hotties he was simping for got heartbroken by. And his bride probably sees herself as settling for him, rather than seeing him as being of equal SMV.
And just because a minority of women are on dating apps, doesn’t mean they’re not hooking up. It’s just seen as part of growing up nowadays. And even the pick me’s don’t really understand or sympathize with men beyond a superficial level, let alone the typical woman. The lies of blank slate equalism and social constructionism in a gynocentric order make that impossible.
Is there a minority of chaste, understanding women out there somewhere? Probably, but you’ll never know who they are.
So then it’s a stalemate, right? Uncertainty about a partner’s internal qualities is pushing both sexes to overvalue the certain, external ones, right? Everyone is to blame?
Not in my opinion. The sexual revolution didn’t happen because of men’s lack of commitment or their pursuit of casual sex. What changed was birth control, and their agreeability towards casual sex. Women remain the gatekeepers of sex, in virtually all cases except for the top 4.5% of men that women find attractive enough to pursue. It is these top men, and the majority of women, which together are responsible for the shift towards more casual sex, and the subsequent decline in relationship quality.
"Surveys reveal that men are much more likely to use dating apps than women. Tinder, for example, is estimated to have about 75 percent male users and 25 percent female users. "
To take an even more extreme example, when the Ashley Madison user files were leaked, it turned out that nearly all the users on the site were men. About the only women were hookers and bots, even though women could join and message for free. This was especially underhanded, as men needed to pay to be able to read and send messages.
Anyway, as you pointed out, women don't use dating sites as much as men. Sort like how, a female in heat spreads her scent around. She doesn't need to go looking. The tomcats come to her.
Well I'm referring to attitudes while dating, not how receptive someone is to having sex. I'm also very hetero presenting. In my experience the women I've dated either think it's hot or just don't care. I also mostly date women so I'm pretty sure I'm more attractive/approachable to women than men.
The difference is see between men and women in relationships is in effort and entitlement. Women these days seem to see themselves as a prize and often act like dating is 'for them'. They expect the guy to make the moves, make the plans, put in most if not all the effort in an attempt to 'win them over'. Men, straight or otherwise, simply don't have that attitude.
Yes. My guess is that many women are on the casual or semi-casual dating market exactly because it is possible to have such an attitude there. Numbers are on their side. That probably attracts some women who simply like it where numbers are on their sides.
It is interesting, because it is so unlike the way those of us who were dating 20 years ago were: The general mood was still a certain desperation to be liked.
As a bisexual who has tried dating both on and off apps, women are absolutely too picky. It comes from a culture of telling every women she is a "queen" which is great for confidence building but has led to many women thinking they are more attractive or valuable (in a relationship) than they actually are in reality.
1. Homosexual men are known to be much more promiscuous than heterosexual women. How is it possible to know that it is not just that the men are more promiscuous?
2. How do you know that it is not you that appeal more to men than to women? I'm clearly no expert, but from what I have read, homosexual men tend to have certain tastes (I have read about tastes for dominant men and heterosexual men). Meanwhile, although I have no numbers I believe heterosexual women tend to prefer straight men to bisexual men.
>Those women tended to see Ted as a safer alternative to those macho men who had exhausted them emotionally.
Only a woman could possibly think that being the retirement plan for a used up pseudohooker by being a shoulder to cry on is a W
Keep talking ladies let the worker bee middle class men know they're wasting they're time doing anything but cumming in whatever is open and then deleting number
Women want men who commit because they believe in commitment. Not men who commit as long as they are forced to.
More women telling on themselves lol how much they hate the stability they claim to love. Duty, obligation, honor, these are the borrrrriing not filthyspatonholetingling glue that make society function
Whatever just go ahead and report me already truth is truth
Lower mate value men who commit because they know they are low mate value are not especially attractive to women. Women don't want men who commit because they realize that they can't get sex otherwise.
No one wants a Camry just because they can afford it 😂
Silly women lucky for you that the society you need to stop you from becoming rapebait for the highest bidder isn't dependent on even a modicum of rationality
>Is there any reason why this mindset would not be evenly spread across physical types of men? And across income categories?
Women telling on themselves, love to see it
Is there any reason why a billionaire would be less happy with a night at Applebee's?
Because people tend to adapt to what is reasonably available to them. The top men that all the women want, well women are fucking idiots who chase their tingles and that's why patriarchy kept them locked away and passed off like chattel from father to husband etc. it's cool I mean the tradeoff of idiocy is not that bad so long as there's comfortable first world democracy
I looked up Applebee's because I had never heard of it, but unfortunately they ban Europeans from visiting their homepage so I still know nothing about Applebee's...
They want to build something serious. Maybe not with this guy or that guy they date right now
Have their fun when they're actually worth a damn, is not, and then retirement plan when they're not longer hot lmao spat on pseudohookers. Real functional society you got there
Give women welfare for their bastards/ divorce rape and they will use that freedom to slut around with 6ft tall chads.
It's all about options as presented thru social media. Women have always had more options.. before SoMed. These were limited to visual in person contact. Now with the dating apps eye.. her options have exploded.
I quite like this framing.
I was married for a long while. I never experienced anything indicating my wife or the women in her social circle were hypergamous.
After my divorce I dated mainly through the apps. I experienced some of the issues men associate with hypergamy for the first time - not every time, but often enough that I could describe general traits and tendencies consistent with such theories.
I never went all the way in on it as a theory of love or the sexes generally, however - I never swallowed the redpill - because I had the counterexample of my first marriage. I also had that of my parents, who were happily married and in love for 44 years until my mother passed away in my father's arms.
Your framing explains my experience and observations of the data, or at least significantly and helpfully advances my theories and understanding. Merci
"Men can be everything from extreme peaches to extreme lemons, and it isn't easy to see who is who."
Seems like there would be an easy way to solve this: community. Men will have reputations, it's not easy for a guy to completely hide who he is for long from those who know him.
What is ironic is that if you look around, this exact method by which women might ascertain this knowledge is considered "creepy" or "the wrong way" to get relationships now. That, I think, is the more interesting story in how and why is it seen as the preferred way to connect is a completely random stranger approaching out of the blue.
This article doesn’t say anything which decreases the importance or relevance of hypergamy to the current dating market. It simply justifies and explains it. Anyone with a good foundational grasp of red pill or evolutionary psych/bio would already know that hypergamy is a feature, not a bug.
That said, I do still think that unfettered hypergamy is a primary cause of current dating woes. Peaches and lemons applies to women too.
I can see why women would want a man like Ted to be content with his fellow homely bride. But women caricaturize how important looks are to men. Yes, they’re important, but hoe_math’s categories of “personality“ and “purity“ make a big difference too, if we’re talking relationships and not hookups. And our feminist gynocentric culture ensures that most women are lacking in these areas. His bride probably got pumped and dumped by the same Alpha Chads that the hotties he was simping for got heartbroken by. And his bride probably sees herself as settling for him, rather than seeing him as being of equal SMV.
And just because a minority of women are on dating apps, doesn’t mean they’re not hooking up. It’s just seen as part of growing up nowadays. And even the pick me’s don’t really understand or sympathize with men beyond a superficial level, let alone the typical woman. The lies of blank slate equalism and social constructionism in a gynocentric order make that impossible.
Is there a minority of chaste, understanding women out there somewhere? Probably, but you’ll never know who they are.
So then it’s a stalemate, right? Uncertainty about a partner’s internal qualities is pushing both sexes to overvalue the certain, external ones, right? Everyone is to blame?
Not in my opinion. The sexual revolution didn’t happen because of men’s lack of commitment or their pursuit of casual sex. What changed was birth control, and their agreeability towards casual sex. Women remain the gatekeepers of sex, in virtually all cases except for the top 4.5% of men that women find attractive enough to pursue. It is these top men, and the majority of women, which together are responsible for the shift towards more casual sex, and the subsequent decline in relationship quality.
"Surveys reveal that men are much more likely to use dating apps than women. Tinder, for example, is estimated to have about 75 percent male users and 25 percent female users. "
To take an even more extreme example, when the Ashley Madison user files were leaked, it turned out that nearly all the users on the site were men. About the only women were hookers and bots, even though women could join and message for free. This was especially underhanded, as men needed to pay to be able to read and send messages.
Anyway, as you pointed out, women don't use dating sites as much as men. Sort like how, a female in heat spreads her scent around. She doesn't need to go looking. The tomcats come to her.
Well I'm referring to attitudes while dating, not how receptive someone is to having sex. I'm also very hetero presenting. In my experience the women I've dated either think it's hot or just don't care. I also mostly date women so I'm pretty sure I'm more attractive/approachable to women than men.
The difference is see between men and women in relationships is in effort and entitlement. Women these days seem to see themselves as a prize and often act like dating is 'for them'. They expect the guy to make the moves, make the plans, put in most if not all the effort in an attempt to 'win them over'. Men, straight or otherwise, simply don't have that attitude.
Yes. My guess is that many women are on the casual or semi-casual dating market exactly because it is possible to have such an attitude there. Numbers are on their side. That probably attracts some women who simply like it where numbers are on their sides.
More than some and more than just in casual dating. It is a real problem, hence why it's a topic for many men right now.
It is interesting, because it is so unlike the way those of us who were dating 20 years ago were: The general mood was still a certain desperation to be liked.
I agree, it seems completely flipped from the dynamic I saw in my parents growing up.
As a bisexual who has tried dating both on and off apps, women are absolutely too picky. It comes from a culture of telling every women she is a "queen" which is great for confidence building but has led to many women thinking they are more attractive or valuable (in a relationship) than they actually are in reality.
That seems difficult to compare, for two reasons
1. Homosexual men are known to be much more promiscuous than heterosexual women. How is it possible to know that it is not just that the men are more promiscuous?
2. How do you know that it is not you that appeal more to men than to women? I'm clearly no expert, but from what I have read, homosexual men tend to have certain tastes (I have read about tastes for dominant men and heterosexual men). Meanwhile, although I have no numbers I believe heterosexual women tend to prefer straight men to bisexual men.
If even he didn't want them, who would ever want them then?
NO ONE UNLESS ALL ARE MARRIED OFF AT PEAK YOUTH AND FERTILITY AS RHEY USED TO BE
THATS NOT SEXY BUT ITS THE ONLY WAY A SOCIETY CAN FUNCTION SORRY SPAT ON SLUTS GINEYTIMGLES ARENT A GOOD ORGANIZING PRiNCIPLE
>Those women tended to see Ted as a safer alternative to those macho men who had exhausted them emotionally.
Only a woman could possibly think that being the retirement plan for a used up pseudohooker by being a shoulder to cry on is a W
Keep talking ladies let the worker bee middle class men know they're wasting they're time doing anything but cumming in whatever is open and then deleting number
Women want men who commit because they believe in commitment. Not men who commit as long as they are forced to.
More women telling on themselves lol how much they hate the stability they claim to love. Duty, obligation, honor, these are the borrrrriing not filthyspatonholetingling glue that make society function
Whatever just go ahead and report me already truth is truth
Lower mate value men who commit because they know they are low mate value are not especially attractive to women. Women don't want men who commit because they realize that they can't get sex otherwise.
No one wants a Camry just because they can afford it 😂
Silly women lucky for you that the society you need to stop you from becoming rapebait for the highest bidder isn't dependent on even a modicum of rationality
Btw love your writing, so with that being said
>Is there any reason why this mindset would not be evenly spread across physical types of men? And across income categories?
Women telling on themselves, love to see it
Is there any reason why a billionaire would be less happy with a night at Applebee's?
Because people tend to adapt to what is reasonably available to them. The top men that all the women want, well women are fucking idiots who chase their tingles and that's why patriarchy kept them locked away and passed off like chattel from father to husband etc. it's cool I mean the tradeoff of idiocy is not that bad so long as there's comfortable first world democracy
I looked up Applebee's because I had never heard of it, but unfortunately they ban Europeans from visiting their homepage so I still know nothing about Applebee's...
Take my word for it, you don't want to know.
They want to build something serious. Maybe not with this guy or that guy they date right now
Have their fun when they're actually worth a damn, is not, and then retirement plan when they're not longer hot lmao spat on pseudohookers. Real functional society you got there
Women have never been picky and they still aren't.
Tinder is for people looking for hook ups and short term flings. People looking for long term and marriage don't use it.
What do people who are looking for long-term and marriage use these days?
Apps that are focused on that or they just meet people in real life through social circles or whatever.