[JayR]

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2015/0...-of-dating

“If he texts you before midnight he actually likes you as a person. If it’s after midnight, it’s just for your body,” says Amanda. It’s not, she says, that women don’t want to have sex. “Who doesn’t want to have sex? But it feels bad when they’re like, ‘See ya.’ ”

“It seems like the girls don’t have any control over the situation, and it should not be like that at all,” Fallon says.

“It’s a contest to see who cares less, and guys win a lot at caring less,” Amanda says.

[Suits]

[CH-Toronto]

Any girl who feels they have no control in the online dating market is insane.

[Travesty]

All you NYC super players are living on Whore Island, just sayin'.

This article still shows though girls saying 90-100% of guys are players, they are all fucking the top 5%. With a large trickle down by sheer numbers in NYC to the top 25%.

This article does not mention once that these girls are all sport fucking way above their pay grade in most cases. Even before any Internet Man Stuff (better than manosphere), my advice to any girl having guy problems was: are you batting out of your league and getting fucked and tossed? Girls can't register that.

[Rompetoto]

(08-07-2015 09:16 PM)Travesty Wrote:  

Girls can't register that.

It's not that they cant register that, it's that they refuse to register that in their fantasy world.

[Sumanguru]

I just started reading and I already hate this article. Let's explore that.

Quote:

“Ew, this guy has Dad bod,” a young woman says of a potential match, swiping left. Her friends smirk, not looking up.

“Tinder sucks,” they say. But they don’t stop swiping.

Again, look at what women do, not what they say.

Quote:

At a booth in the back, three handsome twentysomething guys in button-downs are having beers. They are Dan, Alex, and Marty, budding investment bankers at the same financial firm, which recruited Alex and Marty straight from an Ivy League campus. (Names and some identifying details have been changed for this story.) When asked if they’ve been arranging dates on the apps they’ve been swiping at, all say not one date, but two or three: “You can’t be stuck in one lane … There’s always something better.” “If you had a reservation somewhere and then a table at Per Se opened up, you’d want to go there,” Alex offers.

“Guys view everything as a competition,” he elaborates with his deep, reassuring voice. “Who’s slept with the best, hottest girls?” With these dating apps, he says, “you’re always sort of prowling. You could talk to two or three girls at a bar and pick the best one, or you can swipe a couple hundred people a day—the sample size is so much larger. It’s setting up two or three Tinder dates a week and, chances are, sleeping with all of them, so you could rack up 100 girls you’ve slept with in a year.”

They're talking to fucking Wolves of Wallstreet as if they represent the vast majority of men? Most men would be happy with just one decently cute, not obese girl who's nice to them, and will never be bad ass Wallstreet Alpha Males. But the article needs to present the sexes as being "equal" in the current dating market, otherwise you have to admit that women are the ones with all the power and all the control (and therefore their own unhappiness is their own fault, see the first quote in this post). And since only Alphas have the dating problems of plentifulness that women do, they have to present the Alphas in place of all men.

Quote:

“It’s instant gratification,” says Jason, 26, a Brooklyn photographer, “and a validation of your own attractiveness by just, like, swiping your thumb on an app. You see some pretty girl and you swipe and it’s, like, oh, she thinks you’re attractive too, so it’s really addicting, and you just find yourself mindlessly doing it.” “Sex has become so easy,” says John, 26, a marketing executive in New York. “I can go on my phone right now and no doubt I can find someone I can have sex with this evening, probably before midnight.”

Truly, this article represents the opinion of the average man in America.



Meanwhile, the bullshit accumulates:

Quote:

It is the very abundance of options provided by online dating which may be making men less inclined to treat any particular woman as a “priority,” according to David Buss, a professor of psychology at the University of Texas at Austin who specializes in the evolution of human sexuality. “Apps like Tinder and OkCupid give people the impression that there are thousands or millions of potential mates out there,” Buss says. “One dimension of this is the impact it has on men’s psychology. When there is a surplus of women, or a perceived surplus of women, the whole mating system tends to shift towards short-term dating. Marriages become unstable. Divorces increase. Men don’t have to commit, so they pursue a short-term mating strategy. Men are making that shift, and women are forced to go along with it in order to mate at all.”

Yes, it's MEN that have all these options now.

Because men = Alpha Men. And as for the 90% of other men, well, they don't really exist.

Quote:

Now hold on there a minute. “Short-term mating strategies” seem to work for plenty of women too; some don’t want to be in committed relationships, either, particularly those in their 20s who are focusing on their education and launching careers. Alex the Wall Streeter is overly optimistic when he assumes that every woman he sleeps with would “turn the tables” and date him seriously if she could. And yet, his assumption may be a sign of the more “sinister” thing he references, the big fish swimming underneath the ice: “For young women the problem in navigating sexuality and relationships is still gender inequality,” says Elizabeth Armstrong, a professor of sociology at the University of Michigan who specializes in sexuality and gender. “Young women complain that young men still have the power to decide when something is going to be serious and when something is not—they can go, ‘She’s girlfriend material, she’s hookup material.’ … There is still a pervasive double standard. We need to puzzle out why women have made more strides in the public arena than in the private arena.”

The article just can't bring itself to blame women for anything, can it? Instead of women being the ones who control the dating market, they're actually victims of it, since men are the ones who decide when a relationship becomes serious or not. Right.

Of course, the article fails to mention that all women have to do is stop using Tinder, say they won't have sex with any man they haven't dated for six months, then actually NOT have sex with any man they haven't dated for six months. Boom, problem solved. Even Wall Street Wolf Alpha Alex would give in and get in a committed relationship if it was the only way he could get sex. It isn't, so he won't. In the meantime, the rest of men are getting fucked by the dating market (but not by women, sadly enough).

Quote:

A "fuckboy” is a young man who sleeps with women without any intention of having a relationship with them or perhaps even walking them to the door post-sex. He’s a womanizer, an especially callous one, as well as kind of a loser. The word has been around for at least a decade with different meanings; it’s only in about the last year that it has become so frequently used by women and girls to refer to their hookups.

“What percentage of boys now do you think are fuckboys?,” I asked some young women from New Albany, Indiana.

“One hundred percent,” said Meredith, 20, a sophomore at Bellarmine University in Louisville.

“No, like 90 percent,” said Ashley (the same as mentioned earlier). “I’m hoping to find the 10 percent somewhere. But every boy I’ve ever met is a fuckboy.”

Remember that thread on RVF asking if women knew about the incel movement among men?

Pretty sure the answer is no.

Women have no concept, or empathy, as to what the average man goes through. Don't ever expect a woman to understand your circumstances.

[Dismal Operator]

I like this bit:

Quote:

“For young women the problem in navigating sexuality and relationships is still gender inequality,” says Elizabeth Armstrong, a professor of sociology at the University of Michigan who specializes in sexuality and gender. “Young women complain that young men still have the power to decide when something is going to be serious and when something is not—they can go, ‘She’s girlfriend material, she’s hookup material.’ … There is still a pervasive double standard. We need to puzzle out why women have made more strides in the public arena than in the private arena.”

1. The powerlessness women are feeling with respect to top tier guys casting slutty 7s aside like yesterday's paper is mirrored by the legions of incels created by chubby tattooed women who post Marylin Monroe quotes and think holding out to the bitter end for Ryan Gosling is a viable strategy.

2. That the sexual revolution represents 'strides' forward is the starting point for a calamitous chain of beliefs. If sexual liberation (especially for women) is such a grand idea, then banging new dudes from tinder every day should represent a great lifestyle. Except it doesn't, the girls feel like trash on some level. This feeling that something went wrong is totally at odds with her indoctrination, given that these actions are meant to be 'empowering.' So why does she still feel like shit, helpless and used?

This disconnect between her gut feeling and the 'truth' in her head can only be reconciled by the realization that she's been 'wronged' somehow. Either internally her chemicals must not be aligned properly (hence record numbers of American women on prescription meds), or externally someone must have done this to her ('rape culture').

3. There is no room for the conclusion that the girls have done it to themselves. Rather, the demonizing of thousands of years of normal gender relations by their foremothers has artificially absolved them of the consequences of bad actions, at least in the short term. All this does is create an individual wholly incapable of functioning in the harsh realities of the real world, which do not give a fuck who you are. Walking around like your shit doesn't stink because you've been told so for 25 years is a great way to ensure that you will walk straight into a buzzsaw and not have a clue what hit you. The irony of professors at our supposedly elite institutions of higher education 'puzzled' by truths which are older than the dirt their ivory towers sit on is quite something indeed.

[Ingocnito]

(08-07-2015 09:35 PM)Dismal Operator Wrote:  

I like this bit:

Quote:

“For young women the problem in navigating sexuality and relationships is still gender inequality,” says Elizabeth Armstrong, a professor of sociology at the University of Michigan who specializes in sexuality and gender. “Young women complain that young men still have the power to decide when something is going to be serious and when something is not—they can go, ‘She’s girlfriend material, she’s hookup material.’ … There is still a [u]pervasive double standard.[/u] We need to puzzle out why women have made more strides in the public arena than in the private arena.”

1. The powerlessness women are feeling with respect to top tier guys casting slutty 7s aside like yesterday's paper is mirrored by the legions of incels created by chubby tattooed women who post Marylin Monroe quotes and think holding out to the bitter end for Ryan Gosling is a viable strategy.

2. That the sexual revolution represents 'strides' forward is the starting point for a calamitous chain of beliefs. If sexual liberation (especially for women) is such a grand idea, then banging new dudes from tinder every day should represent a great lifestyle. Except it doesn't, the girls feel like trash on some level. This feeling that something went wrong is totally at odds with her indoctrination, given that these actions are meant to be 'empowering.' So why does she still feel like shit, helpless and used?

This disconnect between her gut feeling and the 'truth' in her head can only be reconciled by the realization that she's been 'wronged' somehow. Either internally her chemicals must not be aligned properly (hence record numbers of American women on prescription meds), or externally someone must have done this to her ('rape culture').

3. There is no room for the conclusion that the girls have done it to themselves. Rather, the demonizing of thousands of years of normal gender relations by their foremothers has artificially absolved them of the consequences of bad actions, at least in the short term. All this does is create an individual wholly incapable of functioning in the harsh realities of the real world, which do not give a fuck who you are. Walking around like your shit doesn't stink because you've been told so for 25 years is a great way to ensure that you will walk straight into a buzzsaw and not have a clue what hit you. The irony of professors at our supposedly elite institutions of higher education 'puzzled' by truths which are older than the dirt their ivory towers sit on is quite something indeed.

Whew, surgically spot on +1.

Re: Quote ~ Gender inequality and pervasive double standards are buzz terms from just that, a female sociologist. The pervasiveness is that the inequality manifests itself by women not being held accountable for a few decades (ironically starting notably during the 'decade of decadence', a term commonly referring to the 80s.. especially used in the early 90s as the grunge bands reset the scene essentially vocalizing "we know the world's fucked up, but we didn't do it, so don't blame me."

RE. 1) The perpetuity of the snowball effect, both mirrored and making extremes even more prominent until a level of critical mass is achieved... if ever. Again, devoid from any logic whatsoever in dating strategy other than by the female her Koolaide they're force fed like the Heaven's Gate mass suicides.

Re. 2) Blaming men (rape culture) insulates the ardent entitlement attitudes of their gender. Blaming women in any sense would of course, give the entire female gift-with-laws-backing regime serious indigestion. Any substantial rise against women, by women, would prove they've been far entitled past that of men long ago, and incur some level of acquiescence by the mass of females, insinuating taking responsibility for actions of individuals and as a group. An intra-gender civil uprising.. not happening.

A particular Tinder plate I released a few months ago, 7-7.5 Puerto Rican, I'd remained friends with since she hooked me up with her friends after her. I explained to her endless cock-hopping and trendy bi-sexuality are internally created comfort facades (during indoctrination) that will erode her soul and make her a bondless, slut nomad if done for too long. 3 days later she had a break down in front of friends and family (the knowing somethings wrong and feels like shit deep down doing what she does apparently arose, my little talk likely struck a nerve.. just by giving honest friendly advice).

Re. 3) Then naturally, she further proved she doesn't give 2 shits about me.. even if just as a friend, by trying to separate me from a friend of her's I've gotten along quite well with, whose also distanced herself from her destructive ways. The friend saying;"Ashley is way more 'wild' than I am. I've had my moments as you know, but nothing on her level." Thus, Ashley justified guys like me are the problem, and right back to her indoctrinated, destructive ways. So be it. There's no puzzling truths. Women take the path of least resistance 99% of the time. Dating apps just increased the flow of that path and decreased the resistance.

As far as these "Wall Street Players" racking up 40-100 yearly notch counts in the NYC metropolitan area (20.4m people sample size), that must make me comparatively an Ultra-Uber-Mega player taking down 10-20 yearly, with a sample size of 450k in my meager midwestern city (most in the 6.5-8.5 looks range). Laughable article. Fuckboy out.

[ManVsMachine]

Geez there is a lot going on in this piece. Great comments above me.


When the top 20% of guys gets funneled down to the top 3% on the dating apps, some predictably strange things start to happen. All of their problems could be solved by simply looking up from the screen, but they just can't. Perhaps its just my city + the ones I visit, but I'm not seeing the entire young population on Tinder. This situation in the piece is almost foreign to me, particularly after Tinder went "premium." I see a lot of girls at bars still craving to be opened. Very welcoming until the jealous friend swoops in (go in groups unless you can isolate )



Finally, This did read very much like a Rolling Stones fake piece. Short metrosexual living with his mum is definitely not juggling girls unless he's a serial liar. More likely, the author herself is the serial liar. Take this piece with a dish of salt. It was meant to sell the situation as being miserable to women. Many of the comments reflected it above, but the guys who are legitimately slaying in that city on this app don't need to waste their time doing an anonymous Vanity Fair interview on the cheap.

[Suits]

Every once in a while a news article comes out that unintentionally sums up everything we've been saying all along.

This is one of those moments.

[Bacchus]

Fuckboy is the latest annoying term that American girls have adopted.

[Samseau]

When I was at NYC a few weeks ago for Roosh's conference I was visiting a college buddy of mine and he told me about a girl from Tinder he was going to meet that night. She was an 35 year old East Asian 6/10. He told me she had 3800 matches.

"Did you ask her how she decided to pick you?"

"Yeah man I asked her, 'How the fuck do you decide?' and she said she liked my message. My message was 'Yoo that's a funny pic you got'."

"That's all you said?"

"Yeah my profile description is 'Tom Brady is God' none of it makes any sense bro"


So basically, the women in NYC have thousands of matches. They are like children in a candy shop; is a child being rational when he chooses which candy to eat? They just choose amongst their favorites but ultimately it is random and there is no logic to the process.

As for women who complain they aren't finding Mr. Right? They leave out the part of having thousands of matches. The whole thing is a joke and these sluts are full of shit. They just cannot admit how broken they are.

[JayR]

(08-08-2015 01:05 AM)ManVsMachine Wrote:  

More likely, the author herself is the serial liar.

She lives in NYC with her daughter, "Zazie" born in 2000.

http://www.nancyjosales.com

What's up with that photo on her home page? Looks like the cover for a "This is rape culture!" pamphlet.

Wiki says she was married from 2004 to 2006 to "radical Episcopal priest" Frank Morales.

Serial liar? I don't know. But poor Zazie, no Dad, and "Frank, My Step-Dad" from age 4-6 is gone, too...

Future Daddy issues....

[CactusCat589]

The bar for Tinder as a guy isn't that high. Just an average 7 - good facial aesthetics and medium height, or tall height and athletic build and somewhat below par face - is good enough. I've literally seen guys who fit that profile set up dates and obtain nude pics in real time. 8 and above and they can have their pick.

It may not be the multiple thousand matches that decidedly subpar women have automatically, but it's still more than they can text and game in a week. So I have no problem believing that a lot of guys enjoy abundance on Tinder that we typically attribute to girls.

[mikado]

(08-08-2015 01:37 AM)CactusCat589 Wrote:  

The bar for Tinder as a guy isn't that high. Just an average 7

Reaching that bar isn't that easy. Even if you work out, you can still need many years before even approaching that.

Especially since many guys are not bad-looking IRL, but are non photogenic.

[Foolsgo1d]

(08-07-2015 09:08 PM)CH-Toronto Wrote:  

Any girl who feels they have no control in the online dating market is insane.

Any girl can get fucked, keeping a guy is what they have no power over if he is playing the field and knows it.

If any man were given 100 women to fuck over a year I doubt he will remember most of them. If she is a freak she will be remembered but you try telling a girl you're only with her because she can suck like a vacuum and she will lose her shit shortly afterwards.

Like someone has said, these girls shoot for the stars and run out of fuel.

[Thoroughbred]

So much fire in this thread. Like a UV lamp at a crime scene, shit is getting lit up.

(08-07-2015 09:35 PM)Sumanguru Wrote:  

They're talking to fucking Wolves of Wallstreet as if they represent the vast majority of men?

(08-07-2015 09:35 PM)Sumanguru Wrote:  

And since only Alphas have the dating problems of plentifulness that women do, they have to present the Alphas in place of all men.

(08-07-2015 09:35 PM)Sumanguru Wrote:  

Truly, this article represents the opinion of the average man in America.

(08-07-2015 09:35 PM)Sumanguru Wrote:  

Quote:

Men are making that shift, and women are forced to go along with it in order to mate at all.”

Yes, it's MEN that have all these options now.

Because men = Alpha Men. And as for the 90% of other men, well, they don't really exist.

Sumanguru is nailing it. I'd like to draw attention to the theme he has identified here -

Apex Fallacy.

Quote:

Most of this narrative stems from 'feminists' comparing the plight of average women to the topmost men (the monarch and other aristocrats), rather than to the average man. This practice is known as apex fallacy, and whether accidental or deliberate, entirely misrepresents reality.

Pulled from one of the manosphere's seminal writings, The Misandry Bubble. Posted in 2010, I landed on this before Roosh, Citizen Renegade and Rollo. If you haven't read it, I invite you to:

http://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/t...ubble.html

Long, but comprehensive and a good overview of the cultural trends that led us to where we are. It's a fundamental premise upon which the gender/cultural war is propagated and justified.

Quote:

There is still a pervasive double standard. We need to puzzle out why women have made more strides in the public arena than in the private arena.”

This gives me chills.

This reeks of a more focused incursion into the actual regulating of interpersonal interactions between men and women, in your "yes means yes" direction. Institutionally and civically there are already some serious bands around a man's behavior. They want into your text convo's, into your phone calls, into your yadstop and ultimately, into what you do with women you have banged.


Equality everywhere. We demand it.

It will get worse before it gets better.

[Biologist]

In this piece it is said that generally the guy has the power to decide whether the interaction is going to be casual/short-term or a serious long-term commitment. Really?

These days most of the women I meet are between the ages of 21 and 27. The vast majority of these women are university educated or are still students at university. Some are local and some of them were born overseas and migrated here. It just seems that the vast majority of them aren't interested in having a serious, committed long-term relationship or getting married. However, they seem to be fine with having a short-term fling/mini-relationship or being fuck buddies. Most of them are focussed on working on their education/careers and jumping on a new cock every couple of months.

Also, I have actually met multiple women who sincerely believe that as a women, they have no control over their dating/relationship life. It's mind-boggling.

[Phoenix]

Mindboggling. The arrogance of American women... I just can't get my head around it. Their egos are so massive that nothing short of 100% control of the most elite of men is satisfactory to them. They demand the impossible, and accept nothing less, to the detriment of them and everyone around them. I'm so glad men like Roosh are out there spreading the word. The more America men withdraw from American women, the less injustice will continue to be done.

I think the religious prudes are ultimately going to be vindicated. Promiscuity is clearly a symptom and support of social degeneration.

[Suits]

(08-08-2015 06:04 AM)Biologist Wrote:  

In this piece it is said that generally the guy has the power to decide whether the interaction is going to be casual/short-term or a serious long-term commitment. Really?

These days most of the women I meet are between the ages of 21 and 27. The vast majority of these women are university educated or are still students at university. Some are local and some of them were born overseas and migrated here. It just seems that the vast majority of them aren't interested in having a serious, committed long-term relationship or getting married. However, they seem to be fine with having a short-term fling/mini-relationship or being fuck buddies. Most of them are focussed on working on their education/careers and jumping on a new cock every couple of months.

Also, I have actually met multiple women who sincerely believe that as a women, they have no control over their dating/relationship life. It's mind-boggling.

It's not that they actually want a serious relationship (until the wall approacheth), they just want the ego boost of being the one doing the rejecting.

[iamdegaussed]

"I call it the Dating Apocalypse,” says a woman in New York, aged 29."

Heh. That says it all.

[void]

Statistics from OkCupid. Take Tinder as OkCupid on steroids and even being in the top 25% does not guarantee any play to a man.

[Gmac]

Guess it's good to be an average looking man. Works (aka working) for me.

[ManVsMachine]

(08-08-2015 02:45 AM)mikado Wrote:  

(08-08-2015 01:37 AM)CactusCat589 Wrote:  

The bar for Tinder as a guy isn't that high. Just an average 7

Reaching that bar isn't that easy. Even if you work out, you can still need many years before even approaching that.

Especially since many guys are not bad-looking IRL, but are non photogenic.

Fully agree.

The most attractive pictures of guys to women are of them with girls (preselection) and guys out doing interesting and fun things.


In both cases, most guys aren't around taking pictures like the hens are. I have a very close friend who understands this and he will always group up girls together and take a picture with him. Can't knock his hustle! . If you climb a mountain for a gorgeous view, you aren't taking a picture of yourself, you're taking a picture of the beauty of nature. However, the girls will. Probably doing some stupid yoga pose on a mountain top.

To men, the background and nature is the medium. To women, they themselves are the medium.


It's very "guy vs girl behavior" only in this case, guys are in some ways shooting themselves in the foot. Couple that with the fact that most guys don't know how to take pictures, or don't sit around snapping themselves several hundred times until they get the right one. Have you watched a chick take a snapchat "selfie"? It isn't a one-and-done deal. Even in groups, hens will repetitively take pictures like they had OCD until they got one they liked .

Finally, female standards for looks are much higher than male standards for looks.....see the graph above, and the full study here: http://blog.okcupid.com/index.html/your-l...ne-dating/

Quote:

Females of OkCupid, we site founders say to you: ouch! Paradoxically, it seems it’s women, not men, who have unrealistic standards for the “average” member of the opposite sex.

[kazz]

(08-08-2015 07:39 AM)void Wrote:  



Statistics from OkCupid. Take Tinder as OkCupid on steroids and even being in the top 25% does not guarantee any play to a man.

Am I reading this graph wrong or does it show that the medium rated men get more msgs than the most attractive?