This feels like an incel talking point. It reductive that "tinder Elo" == "attractiveness". Especially considering that tinder controls algorithm and will just do whatever makes the most money. Hard pressed to say this is the "nartual" behavior of young people these days.
I mean, it is... because it's a fairly consistent finding across all dating apps. It's not uncommon for women to get hundreds of matches, whereas it's extremely common for 'average' men to get nothing but bots.
Whether this is indicative of people's "natural" behaviour is somewhat irrelevant because perception is reality, and the reality for many young men is that they don't feel attractive or desired by anyone. Swiping right hundreds of times and not receiving a single match is incredibly dejecting; of course, many don't realize that they're being manipulated and that "Tinder matches" != objective desirability.
> Especially considering that tinder controls algorithm and will just do whatever makes the most money.
Spot on.
I think it's also worth mentioning that the Match Group, which owns Tinder, has been aggressively purchasing dating apps and monetizing them in ways that intentionally sabotaged people's ability to find a partner. I believe the success of Tinder has also lead to them copying the same shallow and problematic mechanics (quickly swiping yes/no based on a picture) into other apps which previously tried to find meaningful matches for people.
Online dating has rapidly replaced traditional methods of meeting romantic partners. For many people, this (intentionally) dysfunctional system is all they've ever known, and is considered normal.
I am interested with the derision people react with by even pointing out that the world of casual sex is not egalitarian particularly for men. I find it interesting that is a stigmatized fact.
I think you're probably right that it's a common talking point, but it is factual based on the data. Maybe that's why they consistently reference it?