151–160 of 222 posts
[1] http://techcrunch.com/2015/02/18/dating-app-coffee-meets-bag...
(I have no interest in this company nor have I used it; I have been told it works well for higher quality dates by male friends)
God I wish I was in NYC. The stories I've heard from buddies there! West coast scene is not like this at all, especially not in Man-Francisco or Man-Jose (unless you like men of course).
Seriously. I flew out to NYC for a job interview. Was there for just 2 days and I got laid. I wasn't even trying at all, I was just there for an interview! And this was after a 2.5 year dry streak in SF. My god I want to go back.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find it interesting that usually those who claim simple explanations for mating choice are those who are least likely to benefit from this knowledge.
You're being cryptic and I don't understand. I'll assume you're ugly and dress poorly.
Thinking caps come in a range of fashion colors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I went to university with that guy. I genuinely did. It was unbelievable to watch, he was so brazen. He just didn't give a damn about rejection.
Did he get laid eventually?
He was Danish, we called it the 'Scando Sweep'.
But others lament the way the extreme casualness of sex in the age of Tinder leaves many women feeling de-valued. “It’s rare for a woman of our generation to meet a man who treats her like a priority instead of an option,” wrote Erica Gordon on the Gen Y Web site Elite Daily, in 2014. If a woman doesn't want to feel like an option, shouldn't she stay far away from Tinder? It's not like there isn't a million other way…
However, as someone said, the door swings both ways, but the way women devalue men is far more subtle. From the perspective of the heterosexual female, the goal is to acquire mating capital (i.e. "catch a husband or sugar daddy"). What's mating capital? It's a man who is an ideal mate: good genes and conditions to be a provider (good job/career or money/power).
A guy being primarily interested in a woman because she has a great body and a pretty face is really no different than a woman being interested in a financially stable guy with a good job that is taller than her.
The double standard in articles like the one posted is that somehow it's bad if heterosexual men are out to acquire sexual capital but somehow it's totally acceptable for women to seek out mating capital.
How often do you see that it's perfectly acceptable for a women to reject a guy based on his height or the fact that he might be showing early signs of male pattern baldness. I'm tall and still have my hair, so I benefit from such "de-valuing", but I also recognize that for the same crap that guys get judged negatively for.
I recently came out of a relationship where I was clearly not a good fit long term for my partner because we had different values, life goals and lifestyle preferences. For example, I'm poly and she was monogamous. I eventually persuaded her to date another guy, who ended up meeting her needs in all the ways I didn't. Yet she still preferred me because I "had my shit together" and was a better option when it comes to raising a child. Because of that she couldn't imagine being with the other guy.
At the end of the day, heterosexual women treat men as options too. The difference is that the capital that heterosexual women seek in men needs to be far more "durable" value than that which heterosexual men seek in women.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"...Even the best looking of men has been a whale-rider in his time..." Just... wow. Do people really think like this ??? I mean... this isn't even true. For instance, I can, pretty much, guarantee that even when he was a QB and Captain in High School and at the University of Michigan... Tom Brady was NEVER as indiscriminate as you intimate. His women were ALWAYS top 1% of those available. That's just how the world w…
But sometimes, you don't have a supermodel around... just a hosebeast lurking off in the corner. The end result is often shame and disgust for the man, but doesn't stop it from happening all the time. There are a ton of guys who keep a fat chick on bootycall. You'd be surprised. A better looking woman, at least in markets not as saturated with women as NYC, will not put up with that as easily.
> hosebeast
Please don't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely. Anyone who doesn't want to feel like a commodity product that gets evaluated in two seconds should not be on Tinder. But I find it strange that the women are apparently such willing participants. If they don't want to get dick pics from the "fuckboys" (as the article calls them), why are they hanging out online with these people?
> feel like a commodity product that gets evaluated in two seconds Everybody constantly gets evaluated in two seconds. Mates very nearly are commodities. People claiming otherwise are just uggos, or class-ists. Once we get video of some interaction + voice + smell, that's really 99% of the mating game. Nobody really gives a shit about anybody's resume. They may claim to when asked, but in reality we're dealing with s…
>Nobody really gives a shit about anybody's resume.
... and wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What you are saying is that not every human is created equal?
Obviously not, when it comes to sex. Men pay for sex, women get paid for sex. That's all you need to know about the demand and supply dynamics in the sexual "market" (which Tinder embodies).
Some.