Tinder is basically 5/100 guys getting all the matches per 90/100 women.
In short, males looking for females are very even in their rating of women along a bell curve. Females looking for males heavily skew towards the top 20% of males, while considering the bottom 80% "below average".
Tinder, and every other dating app, absolutely take advantage of this deep truth of human psychology and milk the bottom echelon of desperate men for every penny they can.
I don't deny that using these apps as a man is a more difficult experience in actually landing a date, but many women are also frustrated by the tons of crappy/creepy men out there (e.g. "dickpics" and such). Being in the "top 30/20%" is easier than you'd might think.
The biggest challenge is that Tinder can be an emotional rollercoaster and really screw over your self-esteem.
You're doing a lot of mental gymnastics to redefine terms like "average". Ah yes, it is perfectly fine for women to consider 80% of men to be below average in attractiveness, because those 80% are just a no-brainer "no" because they are not attractive and math is hard.
> I don't deny that using these apps as a man is a more difficult experience in actually landing a date, but many women are also frustrated by the tons of crappy/creepy men out there (e.g. "dickpics" and such). Being in the "top 30/20%" is easier than you'd might think.
Perhaps you are in the top 20% of men so you feel that it is easy to be in the top 20% bracket, but men who are not up there don't really have a path to get there. You imply that men should simply stop sending dick picks (and stop doing other, very obviously bad things), but the proportion of men sending unwarranted dick pics is vanishingly small.
> you are in the top 20% of men
Not at all.
You're missing the point. The major finding in that OkCupid post was that (according to that post) women have an unrealistic expectation of the attractiveness of men. They demonstrated this by showing that the majority of women consider the majority of men to be below average in attractiveness. This claim is not refuted by your observation that some men send unwanted dick picks, and it's not refuted by your observation that some men use badly lit photos. I don't know why you feel like these observations somehow refute this claim? Even if 100% of men were sending dick pics and 100% of men were using badly lit photos, this still wouldn't change the fact that 1+1=2, or the fact that top 50% of men in terms of attractiveness are above the median in terms of attractiveness. If a person holds a world view to the contrary, their world view is factually incorrect.
I've been married for a long time so thankfully don't need to use Tinder, but this reported rating distribution squares with my memory of the dating market in meatspace. 90% of women go after the top 20% of the guys. Online probably doesn't change this.
There are "dating" sites that specialize in connecting wealthy/successful people (mostly older men) with young, beautiful people (mostly women). They do charge quite a bit and make bank.
The Jeff Bezos / Leonardo DiCaprio scene clearly shows that money can’t buy sexual attraction.
Sugar dating is very much a transactional one. It’s a more affordable version of sex work.
It mostly has to do with the gender ratio. If there are women on there (common enough on many forums) or any guys who’ve never experienced any amount of sustained sexual frustration (uncommon but happens) - the incel talks start coming out. Mostly due to willful ignorance on their part.
Funny thing is religion and monogamy were built to solve this tinder problem. Society has known about it for a long time
i'd say rather than not allowed, it's more an uncomfortable truth that people are too socially stigmatized to agree or say.
I think as society sheds such stigma, over time, society becomes more progressive and "free".
- Hunter Biden laptop wasn't allowed on social media before the election under the guise of "hacking" and "misinformation".
Maybe I wasn't supposed to answer this question...