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

Explaining Sex Rate Changes

overcomingbias.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 588 posts

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#331

Post by blockmarker »

telesilla wrote: post #321
jamescostian wrote: post #127

Ask a heterosexual woman in that age range about how many awful conversations she's had with men in that age range via dating apps. She won't say "a few", she'll say "A LOT", and be able to show that the vast majority of messages she gets are either very dry or insanely forward (sexually). If you're a great-looking guy and you can't start or hold a good conversation, you can still get laid on the basis of looks. But…

Speaking as a heterosexual woman who has enjoyed meeting up via dating apps, it's ALWAYS about the conversation that results in an actual date. A less attractive guy can make himself get a foot in the door by using really interesting photos. All you need is the swipe-right then use your confidence and humour to get a date. It works for many of us (women). If it helps to know, a lot of us share screenshots of our conv…

That is helpful. But what does less attractive mean? Because by OkCupid's own stats, women find most men to be under-average(https://web.archive.org/web/20170330131859/https://theblog.o...)

EDIT: By this I mean, how much unattractiveness can actually be compensated for by being more interesting. Specially since you can't do that much with photos.

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#333

Post by shard972 »

enriquto wrote: post #256
raxxorrax wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this problem will be addressed more and more by mail order brides or something like that for males in more prosperous nations, at least at the point when more men realize that they need to capitalize on their economic situation. The poorer countries are left with huge disenfranchised populations that will not be very friendly in the long term.

I doubt this will happen. The women on richer countries would put a very strong pressure against this.

You have obviously never been to Australia then. Mail order brides from Thailand are quite common here.

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#334

Post by shard972 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #80
freyir wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> fewer (proportionately) young men are having sex, Thanks. That's what I meant, but I certainly should have worded it better. I've updated my comment. > If we assume that people with homosexual orientation attempting to conform to a heteronormative society would tend to have more trouble maintaining stable relations and thus cycle through relationships more frequently... So if I understand you correctly, your theory…

> So if I understand you correctly, your theory is that closeted lesbians were sleeping with so many men that it inflated the statistics? Well, it's an effect which would explain the results. It's not really my theory, which is that it's a complex of different things, including several that the author explicitly dismisses without any significant basis (or by citing a basis which seems incorrect.) The homosexuality on…

Have you considered in complex of different things that people like myself are in gay relationships because they couldn't find a female partner?

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#335

Post by stupidthrowaway »

qwsxyh wrote: post #286

The real thing I've learned from this comment section is that Hacker News is full of incels. Maybe if men stop acting so shitty they'd get more sex?

Implication that people who don't agree with you are all "incels", broad-brushed insult aimed at men -- plus a side of victim blaming. lol

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#336

Post by agent008t »

michaelmrose wrote: post #211
abledon wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply — I was thinking more along the lines of ‘schedule 4-7 events through the year’ claim them on your tax return for an extra bonus or something . Maybe the word enforce was too strong — that’s why I’m not a lawyer lol

A government incentive is paid for out of tax payers pockets. It would literally mean taking money out of my pocket, spending most of it on social events, and then giving me the minority of it back. Opting out would mean I was paying for other peoples parties when I can barely at this point cover medical expenses. This remains a terrible idea.

But doing some public works in the community in lieu of a portion of local/council tax? That could work.

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#337

Post by stared »

freyir wrote: post #26

As the article points out, fewer young men are having sex, but roughly the same number of young women are having sex. I wonder if dating apps (Tinder, Bumble, etc.) are leading women to have sex with a smaller cohort of desirable men. Years ago, OkCupid noted that a small percentage of men get an overwhelming percentage of messages from women. With the rise of "swipe right, swipe left" mobile dating apps, where peopl…

"[In Tinder,] the bottom 80% of men (in terms of attractiveness) are competing for the bottom 22% of women and the top 78% of women are competing for the top 20% of men" - from https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments-ii-g... (2015).

I dive a bit it that topic in "Dating for nerds (part 2): gender differences" https://p.migdal.pl/2017/09/30/dating-for-nerds-gender-diffe....

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#338

Post by zimablue »

If you accept the premises: free information leads to higher female promiscuity aimed at top % males

Lower % males will always be aware of this

At some point this leads to increased violence and conflict

There's no way to put any of this back into the bottle (how can you enforce cultural (or even enforced) monogamy given free information and anonymous encounters? It's harder than trying to prevent people doing drugs, incel fantasies aside.

The closest thing to a way out is to try and change the culture of sex as power and status and deconstruct the whole thing somehow? (As in all you change point 3, get low status guys to care less). It seems difficult though, it's beyond politically incorrect to say but I can't imagine guys ever being happy to know that they were a compromise choice by their girlfriend who had to really prove himself after 10 years of sleeping with men far more attractive than them that just had to swipe. Hard to see outside your own culture though, maybe that will just become accepted.

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#339

Post by stupidthrowaway »

maxkwallace wrote: post #297
distant_hat wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Women care less about physical attractiveness - Women are less interested in hookups and enjoy them less - Women are more interested in romantic and emotional connections and long-term relationships This is debatable. This is certainly truer for women in more traditional societies where they earned less than men, but as women climb up the corporate ladders you see them doing the same things in relationships as me…

For sure it's debatable but this is simply not true: > Studies show that women have the same hard coded visceral, visual sexual physiological response as men I don't know what studies you're looking at but you're misinformed. Women don't have the same physiological response to visual stimuli as men do. I don't know what you mean by "doing the same things" but even if we assume that women are doing those things it doe…

The problem referred to by the article is actually predicated on the idea that women want less casual sex, therefore are able to be more selective due to supply/demand advantage.

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#340

Post by skohan »

UweSchmidt wrote: post #303
jamescostian wrote: post #127

Ask a heterosexual woman in that age range about how many awful conversations she's had with men in that age range via dating apps. She won't say "a few", she'll say "A LOT", and be able to show that the vast majority of messages she gets are either very dry or insanely forward (sexually). If you're a great-looking guy and you can't start or hold a good conversation, you can still get laid on the basis of looks. But…

This is another trouble with dating apps. How can you possibly make a meaningful connection with another person through an app? There's nothing but a profile pic and some generic text. These "creepy" guys would likely be totally fine in an informal, real-world situation. They would be all right in the workplace, sports club, college study group or by coming along a group of friends, being introduced in person. They c…

Thankfully I'm currently off the market, but I've spent some time in the Tinder subreddit out of morbid curiosity. The Tinder "mating dance" so far as it's celebrated in that community seems to consist of some combination of the following:

1. Forced puns about the girl's name.

2. Long, extremely high-effort descriptions of hypothetical scenarios to establish how "unique" the suitor is.

3. Awkward double-entendres and transitions to a sexual topic.

It just strikes me what a weird filter this is for who gets to have sex, and how nice it is to meet people in real-life.

I think one of the saddest things, if true, are the reports that younger generations are more likely to view any real-world approaches as inappropriate as the online alternative has now been designated the official channel for meeting people.

Post reply on HN