Board index › Coping in life › Love and Dating

20% of men get 80% of women?

Page 11 of 16 [ 248 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ... 16  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Yigeren
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,606
Location: United States

22 Mar 2016, 3:23 am

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Yigeren wrote:
Too much focus on outward appearance here. I could never just date somebody that I only found physically attractive. No matter how attractive a man might be, if I dislike his personality, he instantly becomes unattractive to me. And a conventionally unattractive man could become attractive to me if I liked his personality.


Here you go again, Ms. President, speaking for the majority of people.


I've seen you make a sweeping generalization about women based on statistics found from dating sites. It's not a simple random sample representitive of the entire population of women who date. It's only representative of the women that use dating sites. You used stats from Tinder to make the claim that women are pickier than men.

314pe wrote:
Yes, but also if his personality is amazing but you don't him attractive at all. Would you date him? Would you marry?


If he was repulsive to me, I wouldn't. I think being attracted to a person's personality can actually make me physically attracted to that person. Obviously some physical attraction has to be there.



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,085
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

22 Mar 2016, 3:41 am

Quote:
I've seen you make a sweeping generalization about women based on statistics found from dating sites. It's not a simple random sample representitive of the entire population of women who date. It's only representative of the women that use dating sites. You used stats from Tinder to make the claim that women are pickier than men.


Oh please.... Tinder data is huge, you see a all kinds of women on it, 42 percent of Tinder users aren't even single, it's very representative.
Image

Okcupid showed similar stat results (women find 80% of men unattractive), and most WP members are on it.



314pe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Sep 2014
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,013

22 Mar 2016, 3:49 am

Yigeren wrote:
If he was repulsive to me, I wouldn't. I think being attracted to a person's personality can actually make me physically attracted to that person. Obviously some physical attraction has to be there.

Unfortunately, for some it works the other way too. Love is not rational.



Yigeren
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,606
Location: United States

22 Mar 2016, 3:57 am

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Quote:
I've seen you make a sweeping generalization about women based on statistics found from dating sites. It's not a simple random sample representitive of the entire population of women who date. It's only representative of the women that use dating sites. You used stats from Tinder to make the claim that women are pickier than men.


Oh please.... Tinder data is huge, you see a all kinds of women on it, 42 percent of Tinder users aren't even single, it's very representative.

Okcupid showed similar stat results (women find 80% of men unattractive), and most WP members are on it.



That only means that the demographics are varied. It doesn't take into account individual personality. People with certain personalities will be most likely to use online dating. Those that are not willing to participate will not be represented at all.

What percentage of women in general, of the typical ages where women likely to want to date, actually use dating sites?

For it to be representative, you'd actually have to gather statistics from all of the major dating sites, and also include a simple random sample of those who use other methods of dating. And using voluntary or solicited polls to get this information only takes into account those who volunteer to answer the questions, or those who are willing to answer when solicited.



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,085
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

22 Mar 2016, 3:58 am

The most common two words you see on women's profiles of tinder: No Hookup.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

22 Mar 2016, 5:40 am

Dating sites are not real life.

Those samples merely are people looking at other people's pictures. Pictures are usually not actual, real representations of the person being pictured. In real life, one gets a "picture" of a person from all angles. A photograph doesn't have that advantage.

I like Yingeren's take on this. She's my choice for Ms President :wink:



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,085
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

22 Mar 2016, 5:51 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
Dating sites are not real life.

Those samples merely are people looking at other people's pictures. Pictures are usually not actual, real representations of the person being pictured. In real life, one gets a "picture" of a person from all angles. A photograph doesn't have that advantage.

I like Yingeren's take on this. She's my choice for Ms President :wink:


I agree that the pre-dating bonding element is missing in dating sites



Aspie1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,749
Location: United States

22 Mar 2016, 6:09 am

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
The most common two words you see on women's profiles of tinder: No Hookup.
These are just words. The ones that will go out the window if/when a strong alpha male comes along.



AR15000
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

Joined: 19 Jan 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 429
Location: Right behind you

22 Mar 2016, 9:46 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
Dating sites are not real life.

Those samples merely are people looking at other people's pictures. Pictures are usually not actual, real representations of the person being pictured. In real life, one gets a "picture" of a person from all angles. A photograph doesn't have that advantage.

I like Yingeren's take on this. She's my choice for Ms President :wink:



On the other hand, a dating profile may not show *exactly* what someone looks like IRL but it DOES give you more information about who they are and what they're into than when you see them as a passing stranger. :wink:

The cynicism from those who are already married and have been so for a long time, particularly those from previous generations when online dating did not exist is rather tiresome though....The dating game is something that changes drastically from one generation to the next.



rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,096
Location: Sweden

22 Mar 2016, 10:53 am

AR15000 wrote:
The cynicism from those who are already married and have been so for a long time, particularly those from previous generations when online dating did not exist is rather tiresome though....The dating game is something that changes drastically from one generation to the next.


Although I didn't follow the rules of dating at the time when I did meet wife, so that is a non-argument. Besides, I know for sure that people meet offline even today, and in your generation too, so that too is a non-argment. No time period ever had a fixed pattern of how people met that everybody used. There sure are common ways to meet a partner, but not everybody follows those in any generation.



arielhawksquill
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,830
Location: Midwest

22 Mar 2016, 11:00 am

Here's a chart of how it works. Interestingly, while the majority of men low on the chart get no love at all, there's also little chance for the highest ranking women to find partners, because there's nowhere for them to go in terms of "dating up".

Image



AR15000
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

Joined: 19 Jan 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 429
Location: Right behind you

22 Mar 2016, 11:11 am

arielhawksquill wrote:
Here's a chart of how it works. Interestingly, while the majority of men low on the chart get no love at all, there's also little chance for the highest ranking women to find partners, because there's nowhere for them to go in terms of "dating up".

Image


That chart is incorrect because the hottest females usually date the hottest males. If you are a male at the top of the heap you can *afford* to date the most desirable women and quite often that's what happens. Men want sexy women just like women want studly men.
A lot of those HotBabe10's go around shagging the alpha males and aren't exclusive to just one.



TheSpectrum
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2014
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,121
Location: Hampshire

22 Mar 2016, 11:15 am

If the arrows were pointing the other way around, there'd be a heck of a lot of arrows :lol:


_________________
Yours sincerely, some dude.


AR15000
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

Joined: 19 Jan 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 429
Location: Right behind you

22 Mar 2016, 11:17 am

rdos wrote:
AR15000 wrote:
The cynicism from those who are already married and have been so for a long time, particularly those from previous generations when online dating did not exist is rather tiresome though....The dating game is something that changes drastically from one generation to the next.


Although I didn't follow the rules of dating at the time when I did meet wife, so that is a non-argument. Besides, I know for sure that people meet offline even today, and in your generation too, so that too is a non-argment. No time period ever had a fixed pattern of how people met that everybody used. There sure are common ways to meet a partner, but not everybody follows those in any generation.



The bold statement is correct. I have tried the more common/traditional/offline ways to meet a partner but those have never worked for me. Not even ballroom dance classes(did those in college for 6 months). Online dating works the best.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,921
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

22 Mar 2016, 11:24 am

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Yigeren wrote:
Too much focus on outward appearance here. I could never just date somebody that I only found physically attractive. No matter how attractive a man might be, if I dislike his personality, he instantly becomes unattractive to me. And a conventionally unattractive man could become attractive to me if I liked his personality.


Here you go again, Ms. President, speaking for the majority of people.


Since when does referring to ones self and their personal preference/opinion imply they are speaking for the majority of people.


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,921
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

22 Mar 2016, 11:34 am

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Quote:
I've seen you make a sweeping generalization about women based on statistics found from dating sites. It's not a simple random sample representitive of the entire population of women who date. It's only representative of the women that use dating sites. You used stats from Tinder to make the claim that women are pickier than men.


Oh please.... Tinder data is huge, you see a all kinds of women on it, 42 percent of Tinder users aren't even single, it's very representative.
Image

Okcupid showed similar stat results (women find 80% of men unattractive), and most WP members are on it.


Are you basing that women find men unattractive on how many 'matches' or whatever that they skip? I know whenver I looked at that section where you like or skip profiles...I skipped plenty where the guys physical appearance was attractive but didn't seem like we'd have anything in common that was my thought process.

Also dating site stats and places like wired.com need to be taken with a grain of salt, I mean seriously its like silly tabloid stuff that you take absolutely seriously.


_________________
We won't go back.