As a non-straight, the notion that men and women are driven by slightly different interests, that result in different sexual and dating behaviours, is so obvious that I am amazed it would be a revelation to any straight person.
Just look at the relationship patterns of gay men vs. lesbian women. About 40% of gay men in America are in an open relationship. The practice is basically unknown among lesbians. Infidelity is reported as slightly more common among gay men than among heterosexuals. Nearly unknown for lesbians.
Pornography, sex clubs and hookup apps are close to ubiquitous among gay men. To the point some have sardonically argued these things are gay culture. They exist for lesbians too, but comparatively speaking they're niche; lesbian culture is, arguably, centred on poetry.
Left to their own devices without the other sex to mess things up, the pattern is clear enough.
> Just look at the relationship patterns of gay men vs. lesbian women. About 40% of gay men in America are in an open relationship. The practice is basically unknown among lesbians. Infidelity is reported as slightly more common among gay men than among heterosexuals. Nearly unknown for lesbians.
On the flip side though, homosexual men tend to have the highest relationship satisfaction levels nationwide:
While female homosexual relationships tend to have the lowest satisfaction and heterosexual relationships fall right in the middle for both sexes.
There’s probably a lot to do with that (biological imperatives, DINC, etc); but it’s telling that people always point to high incidents of open relationships or promiscuity despite the evidence of happiness.
* Also worth pointing out that this only focuses on binary relationships and not alternative situations (translesbian/transgay, fluid, poly, etc).
The feminist left is convinced that humans are PURE Tabula Rasa and that NOTHING is biological - everything is either a choice or it's a social construct.
Far too many straight people have bought into this nonsense - thinking that men and women are 100% identical, which is not based in science (at all) but in ideology via indoctrination and bullying.
You have to become "red-pilled" (which is primarily a rediscover that there are biological sex differences and they affect behavior) to realize this today as a straight male.
Women only have an incentive to think about it otherwise when they hit the fertility wall and it's (often) too late.
Very, very few other mammals are monogamous. Most birds are monogamous, but even in birds, about half of them mate for life and the others mate seasonally, meaning they find a new mate even season. It would be truly bizarre if we were not only one of the only monogamous mammals, but also mate for life!
Monogamy is, more or less, a female fantasy. All women love the fact that birds mate for life. Meanwhile males fantasise about polygamy. That's why porn exists.
It's no surprise that the original "tinder" was Grindr, a gay app. It's perfect for gay men. Tinder, on the other hand, doesn't change the game at all. If anything it concentrates even more attention on the top men as men swipe right on about 80% of women and women swipe left on 80% of men.
> The practice is basically unknown among lesbians
You must be traveling in some weird circles, because more than half the lesbians I know are in open or poly relationships. (Me, my wife, and most of my social circles are wow, so it's not like I'm basing this off of knowing four lesbians.)
> lesbian culture is, arguably, centred on poetry.
Okay, yeah, I'm not sure you really have met any lesbians.
That's mostly because women can never be openly "on the market", though. They don't openly look for or solicit sex. There must always be reasonable doubt about their motives, hence "I'm just on there for a laugh" or "I'm only going to his bachelor pad for a drink".
I don't think Facebook, Twitter, and other social media sites are good places for randomly asking out anyone due to etiquette. In fact, even offline there seems to be a growing backlash, at least in American society, toward randomly asking out women.
However, what I believe the author meant by using Facebook and Twitter for dating is that if you have already built a community using these sites and if you are active in that community, it may be possible for you to ask out someone else in that community, provided that both of you already know each other and have spent a significant amount of time interacting with each other. I know someone who met his ex-girlfriend via Instagram sometime eight years ago; she saw his Instagram posts and was a regular commenter, and they started exchanging messages.
I think the key for dating, whether it's online or offline, is being part of a community and being valued in it. I agree with the author that the problem with online dating is that the medium for expressing yourself is limited to a profile photo and a profile description; you are reduced to a résumé. When people are reduced to résumés, then whoever has the best-looking résumé ends up getting responses. Not everybody does well under these circumstances. However, if people were able to know a person's desirable traits that cannot be easily captured in an online dating site's profile, then that person's dating chances may improve. Being a part of a community, whether it's offline or online, gives people a chance to see how people in the community behave and what they think.
But, given my limited success in dating, "you don't have to take my word for it" (with apologies to LeVar Burton).
Dating sites - as they are designed - are a game that most men will never win. The best option is to not play it at all or play it by your rules (I remember to read a comment where a fellow HNer assumed to artificially inflate his Instagram followers and getting an huge payoff).
By playing the game, you allow your counterpart to choose instictively/optimally and - digitally and anonymously - reject an huge pool of non-optimal choices. Rejecting in the analog world is difficult and time intensive. This precipitates involuntary/unoptimal choices and the odds of a match for the bottom 80% skyrocket.
Twitter is quite multi faceted. It's a harsh place for accounts in realistic and complete identities, but it goes easier and easier as realism reduces. Looking at people with the balance suitable for "meeting new people" it seem relatively easy to achieve their goals.
A dating app is only as valuable as the number of (attractive) women on it. Men pay the bill because they wouldn't pay it if the women weren't there. So the first priority would make more sense to get and keep women on the platform.
In SwanLove, you can verify your Linkedin profile. Basically you put some random string generated in SwanLove in a public post and tell SwanLove about it. SwanLove will open the webpage and check the username and the random string to verify the ownership of the Linkedin profile.
This way, we can separate people who want to date in Linkedin into a dedicated group. So we don't bother/flirt with other people in Linkedin.
Same idea can be applied to other social medias, like GitHub, Twitter, Strava. Basically SwanLove adds dating to any social media.
> And your attractiveness level is based on this whole gestalt
So I plan to add accomplishments in the dating profile on SwanLove. You can send your payslip to me so I can verify it. Then you can flex your income. You can link your Ethereum account to your dating profile so you can flex your wealth (your Eth balance, your CryptoPunk, your virtual pets in Axie Infinity). You can link your Twitter to your dating profile so you can flex your number of followers. You can link your Chess.com account to flex your intelligence in playing chess. I imagine, there will be a gym which can release a certificate of fitness. Then you can flex your physical fitness. You can link your Kaggle, Toastmaster, etc, to your dating profile. You get the idea.
This way, a man who is not tall and photogenic has a better chance to show his values to women.
I have applied to YC but I don't think I can make it this time. The product is still rough. Perhaps in next batch, I'll have a better chance. :)
It still baffles me when anyone would want to continue to dump personally-identifiable info into these services. Tying together all of this stuff into one dream is just a tsunami-sized data breach waiting to happen at best, and an open marketplace to lure unsuspecting rubes into divulging all of their info.
There is definitely a problem for dating profile services / apps, especially for men (although I can't imagine emotionally healthy women enjoy getting barraged by a wall of "hey gurl. sup?"). I don't think the solution to the problems involve more apps, but fewer.
Going out and being effective in the world is the best way to find a partner (for men or women, but especially for men). I have found all of my past / current partners this way, as honing some craft in a group setting or taking part in some group activity you actually care about (i.e. not showing up to salsa dancing because you're lonely even though you are quite sure you hate dancing) is not only enjoyable, but it gives you a chance to actually connect with people who don't have their guard up in a realm where sexual tension is a given. Best of all dates are usually just doing the same activity you were interested in in the first place; I have gone on about a dozen dates with women I've found at climbing gyms to go climbing only to realize we weren't right for each other, and we just became climbing buddies. Much better than worrying about posturing for some persona one is trying to present to the world online.
Nothing personal. I hope this idea never takes off. Just dealing with linkedin in professional setting in and itself has too many problems like the current employer knows i am on job search etc. To top it off basically you are saying integrating facebook with linkedin, thats doubled fucked.
I believe you'll find that most women are less interested in "flexes" than your post suggests. Every woman is different, of course, but I believe you'll find it won't solve the problems that women have.
They do care about being lied to, so if you claim to be a chess master and you're not, that's bad. But a link to your chess.com account isn't the solution. Playing a game of chess together is the solution. The fact that you can beat other people is of little interest, true or not.
Even if she doesn't play chess, and you can tell interesting stories about chess games, that can be successful. But that's not solved by linking to your account. It's solved by telling stories.
Women hate being lied to about your salary, but to a large degree they just want to know if you're comfortable and not have money be an issue. HN often presents a mercenary view of women, and while I'm sure it does sometimes happen, it's just not true very often.
Yes, it's hard to date when you're poor -- because it's hard to date when you're poor. But you can easily make up for it by being entertaining and interesting, which can be free. Meet in a park and just talk. That means far more to most women than anything you could demonstrated on LinkedIn.
As you say, your experiment will succeed or fail on its own merits, and best of luck to you. But I believe you'll be most successful if you treat women as people who are looking for somebody to spend time with -- from a night to a month to a lifetime. Find ways to present men that emphasize those aspects of them, and I believe you'll have a better chance of connecting men and women.
> You can send your payslip to me so I can verify it. Then you can flex your income. You can link your Ethereum account to your dating profile so you can flex your wealth (your Eth balance, your CryptoPunk, your virtual pets in Axie Infinity). You can link your Twitter to your dating profile so you can flex your number of followers. You can link your Chess.com account to flex your intelligence in playing chess. I imagine, there will be a gym which can release a certificate of fitness. Then you can flex your physical fitness. You can link your Kaggle, Toastmaster, etc, to your dating profile. You get the idea.
Taken at face value, this is incredibly Black Mirror-esque. There is absolutely no way I will participate in this.
LinkedIn is basically Stepford Smiler Central. There is no good argument to link back to a LinkedIn profile for dating purposes vs just saying the other person has a profile as an FYI.
Yeah, this has been known for at least a few years, and, since then, bots, instafluencers, snapchat scammers, and now onlyfans funneling plague the apps.
Approaching them in public is the only viable option now, so hit the gym, brush up on your verbal game and banter, get some fresh style, be hygienic, and work on relaxing and deepening your voice.
[+] [-] retrac|5 years ago|reply
Just look at the relationship patterns of gay men vs. lesbian women. About 40% of gay men in America are in an open relationship. The practice is basically unknown among lesbians. Infidelity is reported as slightly more common among gay men than among heterosexuals. Nearly unknown for lesbians.
Pornography, sex clubs and hookup apps are close to ubiquitous among gay men. To the point some have sardonically argued these things are gay culture. They exist for lesbians too, but comparatively speaking they're niche; lesbian culture is, arguably, centred on poetry.
Left to their own devices without the other sex to mess things up, the pattern is clear enough.
[+] [-] deaddodo|5 years ago|reply
On the flip side though, homosexual men tend to have the highest relationship satisfaction levels nationwide:
https://www.advocate.com/people/2020/2/13/study-gay-people-h...
While female homosexual relationships tend to have the lowest satisfaction and heterosexual relationships fall right in the middle for both sexes.
There’s probably a lot to do with that (biological imperatives, DINC, etc); but it’s telling that people always point to high incidents of open relationships or promiscuity despite the evidence of happiness.
* Also worth pointing out that this only focuses on binary relationships and not alternative situations (translesbian/transgay, fluid, poly, etc).
[+] [-] xyzzy21|5 years ago|reply
Far too many straight people have bought into this nonsense - thinking that men and women are 100% identical, which is not based in science (at all) but in ideology via indoctrination and bullying.
You have to become "red-pilled" (which is primarily a rediscover that there are biological sex differences and they affect behavior) to realize this today as a straight male.
Women only have an incentive to think about it otherwise when they hit the fertility wall and it's (often) too late.
[+] [-] Hackbraten|5 years ago|reply
Pardon?
[+] [-] globular-toast|5 years ago|reply
Monogamy is, more or less, a female fantasy. All women love the fact that birds mate for life. Meanwhile males fantasise about polygamy. That's why porn exists.
It's no surprise that the original "tinder" was Grindr, a gay app. It's perfect for gay men. Tinder, on the other hand, doesn't change the game at all. If anything it concentrates even more attention on the top men as men swipe right on about 80% of women and women swipe left on 80% of men.
[+] [-] fwip|5 years ago|reply
You must be traveling in some weird circles, because more than half the lesbians I know are in open or poly relationships. (Me, my wife, and most of my social circles are wow, so it's not like I'm basing this off of knowing four lesbians.)
> lesbian culture is, arguably, centred on poetry.
Okay, yeah, I'm not sure you really have met any lesbians.
[+] [-] techdragon|5 years ago|reply
Care to elaborate?
[+] [-] AndrewKemendo|5 years ago|reply
I've asked women friends of mine if this was there position, and the general consensus was yes, they agreed - with few caveats.
[+] [-] Impossible|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] globular-toast|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tilolebo|5 years ago|reply
Especially Twitter, were women are routinely harrassed by estranged men and will publicly shame them in return.
I don't think it's a good dating strategy at all.
[+] [-] linguae|5 years ago|reply
However, what I believe the author meant by using Facebook and Twitter for dating is that if you have already built a community using these sites and if you are active in that community, it may be possible for you to ask out someone else in that community, provided that both of you already know each other and have spent a significant amount of time interacting with each other. I know someone who met his ex-girlfriend via Instagram sometime eight years ago; she saw his Instagram posts and was a regular commenter, and they started exchanging messages.
I think the key for dating, whether it's online or offline, is being part of a community and being valued in it. I agree with the author that the problem with online dating is that the medium for expressing yourself is limited to a profile photo and a profile description; you are reduced to a résumé. When people are reduced to résumés, then whoever has the best-looking résumé ends up getting responses. Not everybody does well under these circumstances. However, if people were able to know a person's desirable traits that cannot be easily captured in an online dating site's profile, then that person's dating chances may improve. Being a part of a community, whether it's offline or online, gives people a chance to see how people in the community behave and what they think.
But, given my limited success in dating, "you don't have to take my word for it" (with apologies to LeVar Burton).
[+] [-] galfarragem|5 years ago|reply
By playing the game, you allow your counterpart to choose instictively/optimally and - digitally and anonymously - reject an huge pool of non-optimal choices. Rejecting in the analog world is difficult and time intensive. This precipitates involuntary/unoptimal choices and the odds of a match for the bottom 80% skyrocket.
[+] [-] numpad0|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] akvadrako|5 years ago|reply
What men want is more women on the sites and less men, so that's what the successful sites focus on.
[+] [-] 93po|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] langitbiru|5 years ago|reply
> Using social media for dating
In SwanLove, you can verify your Linkedin profile. Basically you put some random string generated in SwanLove in a public post and tell SwanLove about it. SwanLove will open the webpage and check the username and the random string to verify the ownership of the Linkedin profile.
This way, we can separate people who want to date in Linkedin into a dedicated group. So we don't bother/flirt with other people in Linkedin.
Same idea can be applied to other social medias, like GitHub, Twitter, Strava. Basically SwanLove adds dating to any social media.
> And your attractiveness level is based on this whole gestalt
So I plan to add accomplishments in the dating profile on SwanLove. You can send your payslip to me so I can verify it. Then you can flex your income. You can link your Ethereum account to your dating profile so you can flex your wealth (your Eth balance, your CryptoPunk, your virtual pets in Axie Infinity). You can link your Twitter to your dating profile so you can flex your number of followers. You can link your Chess.com account to flex your intelligence in playing chess. I imagine, there will be a gym which can release a certificate of fitness. Then you can flex your physical fitness. You can link your Kaggle, Toastmaster, etc, to your dating profile. You get the idea.
This way, a man who is not tall and photogenic has a better chance to show his values to women.
I have applied to YC but I don't think I can make it this time. The product is still rough. Perhaps in next batch, I'll have a better chance. :)
[+] [-] _huayra_|5 years ago|reply
It still baffles me when anyone would want to continue to dump personally-identifiable info into these services. Tying together all of this stuff into one dream is just a tsunami-sized data breach waiting to happen at best, and an open marketplace to lure unsuspecting rubes into divulging all of their info.
There is definitely a problem for dating profile services / apps, especially for men (although I can't imagine emotionally healthy women enjoy getting barraged by a wall of "hey gurl. sup?"). I don't think the solution to the problems involve more apps, but fewer.
Going out and being effective in the world is the best way to find a partner (for men or women, but especially for men). I have found all of my past / current partners this way, as honing some craft in a group setting or taking part in some group activity you actually care about (i.e. not showing up to salsa dancing because you're lonely even though you are quite sure you hate dancing) is not only enjoyable, but it gives you a chance to actually connect with people who don't have their guard up in a realm where sexual tension is a given. Best of all dates are usually just doing the same activity you were interested in in the first place; I have gone on about a dozen dates with women I've found at climbing gyms to go climbing only to realize we weren't right for each other, and we just became climbing buddies. Much better than worrying about posturing for some persona one is trying to present to the world online.
[+] [-] paper743cut|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jfengel|5 years ago|reply
They do care about being lied to, so if you claim to be a chess master and you're not, that's bad. But a link to your chess.com account isn't the solution. Playing a game of chess together is the solution. The fact that you can beat other people is of little interest, true or not.
Even if she doesn't play chess, and you can tell interesting stories about chess games, that can be successful. But that's not solved by linking to your account. It's solved by telling stories.
Women hate being lied to about your salary, but to a large degree they just want to know if you're comfortable and not have money be an issue. HN often presents a mercenary view of women, and while I'm sure it does sometimes happen, it's just not true very often.
Yes, it's hard to date when you're poor -- because it's hard to date when you're poor. But you can easily make up for it by being entertaining and interesting, which can be free. Meet in a park and just talk. That means far more to most women than anything you could demonstrated on LinkedIn.
As you say, your experiment will succeed or fail on its own merits, and best of luck to you. But I believe you'll be most successful if you treat women as people who are looking for somebody to spend time with -- from a night to a month to a lifetime. Find ways to present men that emphasize those aspects of them, and I believe you'll have a better chance of connecting men and women.
[+] [-] selfhoster11|5 years ago|reply
Taken at face value, this is incredibly Black Mirror-esque. There is absolutely no way I will participate in this.
[+] [-] fakedang|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] temp5565_65|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] renewiltord|5 years ago|reply
It is also amusing because it's totally How To Draw An Owl.
[+] [-] anand-bala|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shabonkerz|5 years ago|reply
Approaching them in public is the only viable option now, so hit the gym, brush up on your verbal game and banter, get some fresh style, be hygienic, and work on relaxing and deepening your voice.
[+] [-] Borrible|5 years ago|reply
We know that at least since Adam Smith, don't we?
They are build to generate revenue, silly.
Of course they are.
We know that at least since porn began.
They are build exactly to exploit male mating quirks, silly.
And it works.
Honestly, you can stop any time taking that drug, can't you?
So, pay for the lottery ticket of the chance for soulmateship, companionship, love and mating or give up.
Come on, you want it...
;-)