Source? Also, even if there were 100 men and 100 women, you'd have 80 women interested in 20 most attractive men. A gender imbalance is not the issue. It's not like all men and women are equally attractive to each other.
This is just not true people have so many interests and diverse tastes - male and female - and those outweight sheer looks, even if it were possible to get 80 women to rank 100 men I suspect you'd find that there was no "best 20" that they all agreed on.
Some women like pretty boys, other women like muscular boys, some like fat men, others like nerds and geeks. It's all so variable, and awesome!
Even if you did sheer looks won't matter if the man wants loud techno, and the woman wants loud rock. Some people want drugs, raves, cigarettes. Others want bondage and pain. More likely some want pop music and fancy meals, and others want yoga and vegan food.
Attraction might matter if you're choosing between people with identical lifestyles and tastes. But there are so many things that are more important (smoking, or not, vegan, or carnivore, metal or pop, pop vs. jazz, drugs vs not, vanilla life vs kinky life, etc, etc.)
I've seen the difference at work. And for those 80% the changes OP is suggesting would be good.
If you want to solve the problem of the typical man having matches that go nowhere, then fine, remove the matches that go nowhere, and he can have no matches instead. Also, the Pareto principle for dating apps isn’t just about physical attractiveness, it’s about all of the factors that women discriminate against combined. If you want to make an app that restricts the ability of women to discriminate effectively, then good luck getting women to use it.
Tinder is more of a hookup app anyway. It's a different market/mindset.
If you showed me pictures of 100 women in my dating age range, I think I’d find around 20* of them attractive on average. That was true when I was 20, 30, or now.
* - That might even be a significant over-estimation.
Women were a huge difference. 80% not attractive, 20% or less attractive.
Because if you read past the first and third graphs, which do more-or-less support your position in terms of how they answered "how attractive would you say this person is?", and look into the "how likely was it that you took action to communicate with them?", the selectivity flips quite hard into something that many of us would probably guess: "women's looks matter more to men than men's do to women".
Or perhaps this one, which used eHarmony data: https://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/news-events/news/new-study-reveals-...
Is what people say when surveyed or what they do when free to act more relevant in dating? I think it's the latter.
Taken from Houellebecq novel Whatever. I agree with the general idea, which is also one of the reasons why I think prostitution should be legal.
Most men don’t get any more fulfillment from having empty ONS than women do.
Thuse if you see an attractive man with an unattractive woman -> online dating unattractive man with attractive woman-> real life dating
It’s all <something/somebody else’s> fault.