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

121–130 of 150 posts

Re: A Million First Dates

#121

Post by eru »

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…

I am about your height, and did not find it too hard to find dates in Britain.

(Oh, and after moving to Singapore, I can tell you it's now actually harder to avoid the attention of women than to get them.)

Re: A Million First Dates

#122

Post by return0 »

philh wrote: post #120
return0 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't buy into the evolutionary psychology BS. Human relationships are mostly defined by cultural norms, not genetics, or else short people would have been selected out millions of years ago. Women incorporate the same things that all of us do, our culture: imaginary (and largely delusional) hollywood fantasies about ideal romances. The truth is both men and women are equally lost in the dating game when indiv…

> Human relationships are mostly defined by cultural norms, not genetics, or else short people would have been selected out millions of years ago. I think that humans are taller than we were millions of years ago. So yes, in some sense short people are getting selected out. (Though I don't have data. I'm actually more confident that we're taller than we were thousands of years ago, than that we're taller we were pre-…

Sure, and males are taller and stronger than women. But one doesn't have to be the strongest and the tallest. In fact if we observe the variation in today's population the minimum viable height and strength bar seems to be quite low, and since the distribution is approximately normal, it doesn't seem like evolution favors tall people more than short.

Curiously, sexual dimorphism may have something to do with our mating habits

  The sexes differ more in human beings than in monogamous mammals, 
  but much less than in extremely polygamous mammals.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_dimorphism

Re: A Million First Dates

#123

Post by mesozoic »

snprbob86 wrote: post #69
danso wrote: post #16

This article is a good read, but this following excerpt is an angle I would love to see a more expanded look into: Indeed, the profit models of many online-dating sites are at cross-purposes with clients who are trying to develop long-term commitments. A permanently paired-off dater, after all, means a lost revenue stream. Explaining the mentality of a typical dating-site executive, Justin Parfitt, a dating entrepren…

OK Cupid's OK Trends blog had an article titled "Why You Should Never Pay For Online Dating", but they removed it after they were acquired by match.com, a paid dating site. You can Google around and find a few copies of the article.

The irony is that their profit model is based on advertising which has the same incentive to not get you into a long term relationship.

Re: A Million First Dates

#124

Post by snprbob86 »

mesozoic wrote: post #123
snprbob86 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK Cupid's OK Trends blog had an article titled "Why You Should Never Pay For Online Dating", but they removed it after they were acquired by match.com, a paid dating site. You can Google around and find a few copies of the article.

The irony is that their profit model is based on advertising which has the same incentive to not get you into a long term relationship.

OK Cupid has (had?) both ads and an ad-free A-list subscription package. However, I doubt either of those were their primary sources of income. OKC has an extremely robust survey platform baked into their question and answer system. I suspect that the demographic and market analysis data is extremely valuable and that selling it to advertisers, consumer packaged goods companies, etc. would be very lucrative.

Re: A Million First Dates

#125

Post by Mz »

singular wrote: post #112
Mz wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hesitate to post this because I am not interested in being hit on and I am not interested in adding to the pile on of people criticizing you. But I spent all this time writing the damn thing. Sigh. So here it is, fwiw: You know, I have gotten a crapload of rejection and hostility in recent years, not in a dating context but in another social context. So I am very familiar with how hard it is to remain open and do t…

Don't worry, I'm used to being criticised on this topic. People don't like the idea that there might be factors rendering pursuit of this as not worthwhile, I find. I'm sorry to hear that you have experienced rejection + hostility, and of course I've not exactly had fun with this, but I can't rule out what I've seen in terms of my own rejection, and having read about many others' experiences re: height. Of course all…

I think the closest thing for women is not weight but age. Older women tend to do really poorly on dating sites. That has been discussed on hn before. As a 47 year old woman who has been alone by choice for some time, this year I finally seem to be getting the hang of deflecting male attention. It makes me wonder if I am merely getting "too old". So I am facing the possibility that if/when I again want a relationship, I might have trouble finding one. However that sort of irony seems to be the norm for my life. The universe seems to have a sense of humor and seems to like making me the butt of the joke. Still, the age discrimination that women face only gets worse over time and then gets compounded by the fact that women tend to live longer than men. So being a lonely old woman, no matter how in demand she once was, is a very real possibility for all women.

Have an upvote and best of luck, whatever you decide.

Re: A Million First Dates

#127

Post by singular »

Mz wrote: post #125
singular wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry, I'm used to being criticised on this topic. People don't like the idea that there might be factors rendering pursuit of this as not worthwhile, I find. I'm sorry to hear that you have experienced rejection + hostility, and of course I've not exactly had fun with this, but I can't rule out what I've seen in terms of my own rejection, and having read about many others' experiences re: height. Of course all…

I think the closest thing for women is not weight but age. Older women tend to do really poorly on dating sites. That has been discussed on hn before. As a 47 year old woman who has been alone by choice for some time, this year I finally seem to be getting the hang of deflecting male attention. It makes me wonder if I am merely getting "too old". So I am facing the possibility that if/when I again want a relationship…

Thanks, I appreciate your comments, especially good to get a female perspective.

You're right I think age would probably be the equivalent comparison, and equally frustrating + galling.

I wish you well in the future also, should you decide to pursue a relationship later on :-)

Re: A Million First Dates

#128

Post by colmvp »

eru wrote: post #121
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…

I am about your height, and did not find it too hard to find dates in Britain. (Oh, and after moving to Singapore, I can tell you it's now actually harder to avoid the attention of women than to get them.)

Depends on your race.

White Males have no trouble everywhere.

Asian males on the other hand...

Re: A Million First Dates

#129

Post by tdfx »

lotharbot wrote: post #115
potatolicious wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Do we have to become someone we hate to attract people we like?" What part of the list above is worth hating? All of the qualities listed seem very morally benign. Well dressed, well spoken, to the point, confident, and smells nice. Any baggage that comes with those descriptors are your own. Nobody is making you buy the jagerbombs and popped collars part.

> "What part of the list above is worth hating?" On the surface, "don't be nice" appears pretty douchey. I suppose it's possible the poster just poorly communicated, and there's a reasonable concept (like "don't be 'fake-nice', be genuinely kind") hiding behind that bad phraseology. If so, it's up to the prior poster to clarify.

> On the surface, "don't be nice" appears pretty douchey.

Very true, but I think the broader point is to avoid being the stereotypical "nice guy" towards women. For better or worse, being "overly nice" or eager to please is a low-confidence move, something that does not appear to be valued by many women.

Re: A Million First Dates

#130

Post by philh »

return0 wrote: post #122
philh wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Human relationships are mostly defined by cultural norms, not genetics, or else short people would have been selected out millions of years ago. I think that humans are taller than we were millions of years ago. So yes, in some sense short people are getting selected out. (Though I don't have data. I'm actually more confident that we're taller than we were thousands of years ago, than that we're taller we were pre-…

Sure, and males are taller and stronger than women. But one doesn't have to be the strongest and the tallest. In fact if we observe the variation in today's population the minimum viable height and strength bar seems to be quite low, and since the distribution is approximately normal, it doesn't seem like evolution favors tall people more than short. Curiously, sexual dimorphism may have something to do with our mati…

> In fact if we observe the variation in today's population the minimum viable height and strength bar seems to be quite low, and since the distribution is approximately normal, it doesn't seem like evolution favors tall people more than short.

I don't follow. If a trait is sexually advantageous, that doesn't mean the trait won't be normally distributed at any given time. It just means the trait will tend to increase with time. And I claim that this does in fact happen with height.

I also predict that if you did cross-cultural studies, you would find: in almost every culture, when people are free to choose their mates, taller males have more dating/marriage success, on average, than shorter males.

Of course you don't have to be the tallest and the strongest, but it helps.

Post reply on HN