Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Million First Dates

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 150 posts

Re: A Million First Dates

#41

Post by arjunnarayan »

mr_luc wrote: post #5
aes256 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument goes that internet dating has made commitment less attractive, and divorce more common. That's not necessarily a bad thing. In the future we will have fewer people clinging to abusive partners and putting up with destructive relationships. Online dating provides more options. On the other hand, a lot more children are going to grow up without both their biological parents. Is that such a bad thing? I'm n…

Counterpoint: I'm young, but I still measure my core friendships in decades ... I'm not going to settle for a life where 'romantic partner' is not a core friendship, one which I can rely on in the same way as my lifelong friends and close family. I think that a lot of people feel the same way. To me, that's more persuasive even than the 'think of the children argument', and much less likely to change. The 'think of t…

> But maybe society can solve that problem! For instance, if a kid's parents are divorced, but are constantly in caring relationships, maybe society can evolve to a point where those kids aren't disadvantaged, and where they have a relatively stable upbringing.

See Sweden: where there are a lot of single parents but (unlike the US) children do not suffer from worse outcomes.

Re: A Million First Dates

#42

Post by singular »

TinyBig wrote: post #40
singular wrote: post #27

For a certain subset (perhaps minority) of the population, these sites are nothing but a bait-and-switch. And I think dating sites attract many of us (as I am indeed a member of this subset.) I'm talking about people who lack the pre-requisites women require for mate selection which if not fulfilled, no other characteristics typically matter. Firstly - height - if you are significantly below the national average, you…

"From what I have read, the general experience of dating sites is that men get very few replies, and women are inundated, so the task for a man is to do anything to stand out, and the task for women is to filter." How is this different from regular/non-online dating?

It's not, just exaggerated, as facing 100 emails in your inbox vs. some guy face-to-face is a different proposition I think.

Perhaps a distillation of my point is - 'do dating sites give false hope to undateable people?'

I'd love to see the data on people who get few/no replies, and what % of income they produce. It'll differ between ad-supported + paid I expect too.

Re: A Million First Dates

#43

Post by AJ007 »

jacques_chester wrote: post #24

FWIW, the Portland regulars on /r/OkCupid complain that it's an inversion of the classic pattern everywhere else. Men are apparently in the position of scarcity. NYC OKCers talk about the scourge of "trade ups". Still, living as I do in Perth, this all seems like hearing about the problems of people living on Planet Donuts. Oh, you can't settle down because there are just sooo many choices ? No no, please continue, I…

Weird, from what I've seen male friends who were fairly attractive (over 6 feet tall, blonde) would consistently land with girls that were one to three notches below what they would get "offline."

I've attempted to use dating sites on and off several times over the years and barely could get the attention of ugly women. In the end I found it amusing considering the girls I date tend to be models that have appeared in magazines starting with the letter P.

Re: A Million First Dates

#44

Post by mattchew »

aes256 wrote: post #12
mr_luc wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counterpoint: I'm young, but I still measure my core friendships in decades ... I'm not going to settle for a life where 'romantic partner' is not a core friendship, one which I can rely on in the same way as my lifelong friends and close family. I think that a lot of people feel the same way. To me, that's more persuasive even than the 'think of the children argument', and much less likely to change. The 'think of t…

People change; they come and go. To me, the notion of marriage flies in the face of this basic observation. How can you possibly commit to spending the rest of your life with someone when you know so little about how they will change, intentionally or not? > The 'think of the children' argument is pretty strong here. We all know the stats: kids from single-parent families tend to grow up in more negative environments…

> Conversely, abusive relationships and unhappy marriages also provide negative environments for children to grow up in. A future in which relationships are more fluid could reduce the number of children growing up in these environments.

Maybe in the completely imaginary world where the parents who have stable long term relationships are the ones most likely to be abused and unhappy.

In the real world, parents who have "fluid" romantic attachments with people who "come and go" are the ones more likely to be raising their children in negative and abusive environments.

Re: A Million First Dates

#45

Post by theorique »

shubhamjain wrote: post #7

This article considers only the people whose aim in relationship is to aid in their lonliness, find someone to be with, blah blah. What about those who want to have kids, and a family. I dont think anyone will have the same line of thought after having kids.

The goals may change, but lots of people leave their spouse even after having kids, so it's not a perfect guarantee. Not saying that is right, or desirable, but it's definitely something that happens.

Re: A Million First Dates

#46

Post by Retric »

singular wrote: post #36
dusing wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should really try a pay site, OKC in my experience has just been for hookups. People are way more judgemental there. Also I would think a dating site where you could search for shorter girls would be helpful than real life, no?

Have tried many, paid/non-paid, with same outcome. And shorter women hilariously still generally prefer >= av. height men. It seems to be a major genetic thing. I shouldn't gonzo myself into this too much, as I've decided to give up on relationships altogether, so this isn't about me finding some site that'll work (not feasible IMHO, since real life is equally impossible), but rather whether people like me are being…

That's true in both online and offline dating. My suggestion if you want a far easier time hooking up is to simply get into very good shape. Height, weight, completion, and dress are all vary important in first impressions. But surprisingly weight / fitness is by far the most important.

Re: A Million First Dates

#47

Post by toumhi »

singular wrote: post #27

For a certain subset (perhaps minority) of the population, these sites are nothing but a bait-and-switch. And I think dating sites attract many of us (as I am indeed a member of this subset.) I'm talking about people who lack the pre-requisites women require for mate selection which if not fulfilled, no other characteristics typically matter. Firstly - height - if you are significantly below the national average, you…

You're creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

You believe you lack pre-requisites women require. Truth is, there are loads of short guys, ugly guys or otherwise challenged guys that get what they want out of dating, whether it's lots of random sleeping around, or a committed relationship, and everything in between.

Please don't talk about giving up on relationships. Online dating might actually not be the best choice for you. It creates the illusion of control and comfort from your living room. As you saw, it's tough work and you don't really learn much from it, not as much as you could learn if you spent the same amount of time outside meeting women.

Try to meet women in your day-to-day activities. Join classes. Get active. Go to bars and parties. I don't know where you're coming from, but if you're shy and lack confidence, make a point to talk to other people, and that includes attractive women. Also, you need to have a mindset of abundance, not of scarcity. There are plenty of women that'd like to be with you, if you go out to meet them and show them your true self and get your act together.

You'll get vastly better over time. But it does take time, so don't give up after 1 week :-)

Re: A Million First Dates

#48

Post by singular »

jacques_chester wrote: post #37
singular wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think anybody owes me anything, sure, of course. Personally, I took the attitude of optimising profile, contact endless women using advice from those successful on the site to elicit replies, play the numbers game. My point is that there are a subset of us who have such low odds of response that it'd be better not to be on there at all. I wonder how many of us fund these sites... I have heard of seedier sites…

I've done all that stuff too. It sucks for me because the pool is pretty modest hereabouts. I haven't sent ~150 unanswered messages, for example, because there aren't 150 women I'd message in Perth. When I stopped taking it seriously, my results improved. Periodically I get bored and close my account for a few months. When I come back I rewrite my profile. It's fun. Very liberating. Try it. (There's also the time-hon…

Yeah, the thing is, after that many messages sent, done thick-skinnedly, in a big pool, with a friend who also is short, though slightly taller (5'7"), with him doing significantly better, and after lots of previous attempts AND lots of attempts in real life, I am at the end of my tether with the inevitable emotional pain involved.

There has to come a time when you think the cost of an activity exceeds any possible benefit, and the EV of this is starting to look pretty bad.

Re: A Million First Dates

#49

Post by pyre »

AJ007 wrote: post #43
jacques_chester wrote: post #24

FWIW, the Portland regulars on /r/OkCupid complain that it's an inversion of the classic pattern everywhere else. Men are apparently in the position of scarcity. NYC OKCers talk about the scourge of "trade ups". Still, living as I do in Perth, this all seems like hearing about the problems of people living on Planet Donuts. Oh, you can't settle down because there are just sooo many choices ? No no, please continue, I…

Weird, from what I've seen male friends who were fairly attractive (over 6 feet tall, blonde) would consistently land with girls that were one to three notches below what they would get "offline." I've attempted to use dating sites on and off several times over the years and barely could get the attention of ugly women. In the end I found it amusing considering the girls I date tend to be models that have appeared in…

  | the girls I date tend to be models that have appeared
  | in magazines starting with the letter P
Like Pyramid[1]? Did you paint the models before you dated them? Did any of them leave you for a Space Marine?

Please leave this chest-beating off of HN.

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_(magazine)

Re: A Million First Dates

#50

Post by mykosmos »

toumhi wrote: post #47
singular wrote: post #27

For a certain subset (perhaps minority) of the population, these sites are nothing but a bait-and-switch. And I think dating sites attract many of us (as I am indeed a member of this subset.) I'm talking about people who lack the pre-requisites women require for mate selection which if not fulfilled, no other characteristics typically matter. Firstly - height - if you are significantly below the national average, you…

You're creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. You believe you lack pre-requisites women require. Truth is, there are loads of short guys, ugly guys or otherwise challenged guys that get what they want out of dating, whether it's lots of random sleeping around, or a committed relationship, and everything in between. Please don't talk about giving up on relationships. Online dating might actually not be the best choice f…

Great post. Being a short yet confident man is way much more appealing to a woman than to be the 6' average joe.
Post reply on HN