BTW What's up with Tinder granting for free global in discovery settings? I am the only lucky one? Never have I had an opportunity to swipe on so many single mothers 3000km away. I think I will start to charge Tinder for my time...
huh, that's neat.
The stable marriage problem and modern dating
121–130 of 224 posts
Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because long term marriage is a lot about your tendency to create long term emotional ties to people. It is also about your willingness to think about relationship itself and put work on it. It is also about selection, but much more about ability to weed out abusive people and selfish people and so on. Of course also compatibility, clean freak will never be happy with messy person. And those abilities form a lot in c…
Looking at divorce statistics you find that pattern doesn’t really hold up. There are spikes around various life transitions like retirement which still occur even with long term emotional bonds. Long term relationships are a continuous negotiation as people’s want’s and needs change. Edit: Collage education and getting first married at an older age significantly lower the odds of divorce. Which suggests having multi…
You are not offering evidence against the hypothesis.
Divorce spikes around various life transitions occur because predictable events create predictable stresses that predictably are hard on marriages. Examples include the death of a child, children leaving the home, financial crisis, retirement and long-term illness.
Pairs who proved compatibility by settling down fast last longer because they are more likely to survive these stress points. However stress points are still stress points and "more likely to survive" still means that lots won't.
Personal disclaimer. I married at 20 to my second girlfriend. I was her first boyfriend. We did divorce..but only after 25 years. You can decide for yourself whether a 25 year marriage is evidence that we were more or less stable than an average couple.
Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating
#123I am interested in how dating apps are changing humanity. Starting with three assumptions: 1. Over several generations of successful partnering, Human cognition has become really good at estimating someone's "rank" as a potential mate (in the stable marriage problem sense). 2. Language, modern UX design schemes and dating apps do not have sufficient bandwidth to communicate all the signals needed to "rank" a potentia…
A contest is only an evolutionary advantage if the winners reproduce more, or more successfully, than the losers.
So assuming you're not having babies with everyone you match with on tinder, having a large number of matches isn't actually an increase in fitness. I haven't seen any evidence that people who don't do well on dating apps don't actually end up reproducing... in fact it's possible less success in that realm could be correlated with stronger relationships when you do find someone - since you don't feel you have a million other options waiting in the wings.
Now having large number of matches means you have more to choose from, so perhaps you're likely to get a "better" partner - but this seems like it would be a fairly weak and therefore slow-acting selection bias.
Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> (it's since pivoted to a brewery run by active gang members) Would this be an appropriate place to share that story? Because I'm intrigued
Looks like it's this one: https://trucolors.co/ Based on OP's description, it sounded like a company taken over by gangs, but it's really a for-profit social enterprise.
This is the first time I have seen a hero page with gang signs. Not the best choice to be honest.
Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "the top 20% of men hold 80% of cumulative attractiveness in the eyes of women" - OKCupid stats Also seems to hold up on Tinder: https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments-ii-g...
This is to be expected because, due to biological differences, male and female mammals have different mating strategies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_pluralism
However, humans are markedly different from other mammals, so maybe it isn't to be expected!
Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating
#126I used to work at a dating service pre-IntarWebz. Still had a matching algo. I started privately running some analyses looking to confirm or disprove my hunches. I will say this: it's still brutal out there.
Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm aware of the negative selection bias there I'm guessing those marriages are likely correlated with strong shared religious beliefs[1] and closeness to extended families that help share the burden of raising children. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2857783/#:~:tex... .
That’s definitely not true in my circle of friends. Of my 6 closest high school friends (all female), the ones who didn’t date in high school all married first, to either their first or second partners. The ones who dated a ton are still dating in their early 30s. None of us are very religious, and we all live in traditional (American) families with commensurate amounts of support.
Fits what I see too, with "married" often replaced with unmarried partnership, so definitely not a purely religious thing.
Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
No solution to what
I think they're referring to the "stable marriage problem" where every person is gonna get married come hell or high water, no takebacks. That problem cannot be solved in general if individuals can give a hard no.
Hard no's are fine in the classic stable marriage problem. "Remain single" gets added as an option to each person's preference list, then you can run Gale-Shapley deferred acceptance more-or-less as normal with each person on the accepting side starting with "remain single".
Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
No solution to what
I think they're referring to the "stable marriage problem" where every person is gonna get married come hell or high water, no takebacks. That problem cannot be solved in general if individuals can give a hard no.
Are you sure? What if you inventing a "phantom partner" for each person, who represents "not getting married". The preferences for that phantom partner would be
1. The person they are phantoming
2-N+1. All other phantom partners
N+1-2N+1. All other people.
If the person prefers not being married over all other available partners, then that will necessarily be a stable marriage. If they don't then the phantom partner will be able to find a match among the other unmatched phantom partners.
Re: The stable marriage problem and modern dating
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gay male with a fiancé here, and I love the boyfriend twins analogy. My partner and I are (gratefully) described as similarly good-looking -- curious store clerks like to ask us if we're siblings but then quickly realize we're probably a couple. > I'm attracted to men in the same way straight men tend to be attracted to women See, we wouldn't know how to answer this! Certain ways our straight friends describe their l…
>See, we wouldn't know how to answer this! Certain ways our straight friends describe their love interests sound foreign to us.. That sounds intriguing. Care to elaborate at all with any examples?
GP of the thread here. Things that straight people stereotypically do that gay men stereotypically do not understand:
- Treating every person you date like a potential spouse instead of a potential friend
- Getting upset when your partner finds someone else attractive
- Caring about how many sexual partners someone has had in the past
- Remaining sexually monogamous in a relationship that has lost its sexual energy (i.e., 'dead bedroom')
Again, generalizations. I think straight people have been thoroughly indoctrinated with the values of western religions and government institutions that demand couples settle down indefinitely and singularly in high-stakes marriages. Soo much rests on finding the right partner, which can be very stressful, especially for women. They think that their desires have to be suppressed or changed to be happy, and have internalized ridiculous messages about sexual purity and how love is 'supposed to be'. However, us degenerates have always been shunned by those institutions and therefore can see the silliness in it, not that we don't have a huge heaping of silliness to deal with ourselves.