Man, I just don’t get pieces like this. Ostensibly it’s arguing for some sympathy for the problems young men face, but it really just turns around and says it’s up to them to fix it.
“Young women got better”. How? I’ll tell you - massive government and social support. Major financial incentives. Workshops. Programs aimed at them. Do these equivalents exist for young men? I never knew of any when I was younger. Where’s the social investment for men’s issues? There isn’t any. Even talking about it is still framed in a context of, “this is bad for women”.
There’s also a bit in here that acknowledges women’s inflated view of themselves versus the majority of men. But then nothing after that. Does anyone really believe they can understand the phenomena of men checking out without also meaningfully analyzing women’s behavior? Quite a lot of women are not great people, even if they look accomplished on paper and look healthy on a financial spreadsheet.
I agree, but I've written several other pieces about women. Check out "The Sad Truth of Modern Feminism" on my page.
Ultimately, however, it is our fault. "Men."The great comedian Patrice O'Neal once said, "It’s your F’n fault. This is what they do," meaning women are the market and only doing what's in their nature. Of course they want to pick the best genetics (hypergamy) to date. Yes, this modern age has made that MUCH more extreme, but it's downstream from what's always existed.
It's why these Fresh and Fit dating shows get tiring. Complaining about women won't change anything, even though they do have a laundry list of problems they're still the market. It's why the only options left are 1) Men say screw it and abandon them (as I write in the article), 2) Build ourselves up like never before because women are richer and more selective.
Speaking for myself, I've been uninterested in dating for a long time and fall into the #1 camp. I'll be interested in a serious relationship when the time seems right.
Wouldn't it be more fair to say that the market actually is bidirectional, and that part of the dysfunction stems from the acculturated feminist belief that the only consumer that matters in the dating market is the woman? Don't men actually have to WANT what women offer, beyond only the availability of sex? Also, when you say that women got better, that may be true... From a woman's perspective. In reality, the only reason her education/earnings/etc might matter to a man, generally, is because across America, it's actually pretty hard to have a family on a single income. Most men don't perceive her educational or professional achievements as an enhancement to her value as a girfriend/spouse/mother of shared children. But men keep screaming that men should ignore all of their preceding evolutionary programming in favor of the product which too many women currently offer: obesity with a girlboss attitude, long on entitlement and short on duty and responsibility, secure in the knowledge that they can, after marriage turn into a fat, lazy neglectful, shrill, entitled pathological selfish and solipsistic harpy and if their man doesn't (and often, even if he does) accept it was stoicism then she is entitled to, with the support of the state, take half his stuff, his kids, his dog, his future retirement and probably having cheated the the Chad or Tyrone around the corner. Men have no interest in buying a defective product and are leaving the marketplace.
I agree self-improvement is a good idea for men in general. I would never argue against it. The problem is everybody does that we're all back where we started, because if men all work twice as hard the women will just raise their standards again (and feminists will not allow us to pull ahead in pay again).
You articulated this very difficult to articulate issue as well as I’ve ever seen anyone do it.
None of the gains that women made were gained on a level playing field. Feminists have facilitated a decades long campaign of denigrating men, hoarding resources and denying men opportunities. This campaign has facilitated a massive devaluation, emasculation and dehumanization of men in the eyes of women.
I’m 47 and I belong to a generation of men raised and educated entirely by women to be tweed ensconced college boys because our mothers weren’t gonna have no plumber for a son. And about 30 seconds after we were handed our degrees the whole of the world’s heterosexual female population looked us square in the eye and unironically asked, “why aren’t you a lumberjack?”
At least 50 years worth of western men have been set up for failure and the goalposts are mounted on greased rails.
But it is up to them to help themselves. While I don’t agree with the new paradigm, those women helped themselves through lobbying and government legislation. It’s everyone’s, own responsibility to make themselves desirable and marriageable.
Women demanded. Men responded. That’s how it works in our homes and societies (at scale). There was a tipping point where elevating women became the right and fair thing to do. And men enabled it. We started agreeing that women should be paid more, have better jobs, access better opportunities. That was men (in power) acting fair and honorable - but let’s be clear - in RESPONSE to loud and clear demands from women. Men didn’t just wake up one morning in the 60s and say “we think it’s time for women to rise”.
Sadly, change (at scale) comes from friction. From organized friction. From demands. From leverage. From determination. From focus. From leadership hell bent on correction. From zeitgeist vibes that are far from content. This is Trump. And men’s support of Trump. It is the beginning of a social correction. One that’s long past overdue.
Yes exactly. "men have lots of problems and see to be getting the short end of the stick. Men need to step up and do better". Sorry but that message doesn't resonate.
If women think 80% of men are unattractive, why would I ask a woman out? So she can pretend that she might have a passing interest in me until she gets her free dinner? Over 50% of marriages end in divorce and divorce courts are notorious biased towards women, so why would I ever want to get married? The simple fact is this: the juice isn't worth the squeeze. It's not worth the time, money, and effort.
Coin flip on whether she'll actually agree to a date. Coin flip on whether she'll go on a second. Coin flip on whether she'll stick around for the six months to decide if you'll propose or not. Coin flip if she'll marry you. Coin flip if she'll divorce you. Coin flip if she'll take half your stuff if she does. If I enjoyed gambling that much, I'd be better off going to Vegas.
Agree. I did a lot more dating earlier in my life, but at this point, I am just doing what I want to do (travel, work, leisure) and do not care about a serious relationship.
I honestly believe more men would be better off this way and can pursue a serious relationship later in life if they want.
This job only accepts 1% of all candidates who apply, so why would I apply? Coin flip if traveling to another country will actually be a life-changing experience or just meh. Coin flip if staying out until 5 am will be a fun experience or scary. Coin flip if moving to a new city for a new job will improve my life or no. Coin flip if that new restaurant is worth trying or a waste of money. Coin flip if that new coworker is worth befriending outside of work. Coin flip if this concert will be fun or overpriced. Coin flip if this party where I don't know anyone will end in new connections or another awkward experience.
You people are so scared of living life, it's pathetic.
This is life. There are no certain outcomes. Ask out no women out of fear of rejection, and you will never have a relationship. If you convince yourself that not having a relationship is better than being in love, I’ve got every longitudinal study showing that relationships are the single best predictor of one’s happiness. So good luck with video games and porn, I guess. Just know that there is a lid for every pot, but not if you stop looking.
Lots of men zero themselves out after a divorce. Lots of men lose everything in divorce and are forced to pay ruinous amounts of alimony and child support because ex submitted a false domestic violence charge.
The initial question actually either misrepresents or misapprehend the data point which is this: the majority of women believe 80% of me are LESS ATTRACTIVE THAN AVERAGE. Which is both statistically and factually impossible. The data pont actually indicates that most women have wildly distorted perceptions of what is, in fact, average. Plenty of follow on research shows that generally what women believe they are entitled to in terms of mate selection actually represents a staggering small percentage of the population, sometimes even a fraction of a percentage of the populace. Consider that, for many, their starting point for selection of a man is that he be 6 feet tall - about 14 percentage of the population if men, single, married, unavailable, gay, etc. Too many women exclude by default 84% of the population of men and then look around in their later years, having been intractible on this one prerequisite alone, and wonder why they are still alone.
Thank god women haven't required a man to get a credit card since 1972, because if anyone was financially dependent on YOUR skills, they would fucking starve. How do you not know the difference between a median and a mean when you're out of middle school? It is actually perfectly statistically possible for 80% of a population to be below the mean (it's time to google what a long tail distribution is, sweetie), and, furthermore, this 80% statistic comes from rankings of the subset of men on a dating app (and from a period in time when dating apps weren't particularly common), where it actually makes a lot of logical sense that it would be a right skewed distribution, especially when compared to a general population mean.
Men like you seem to always focus on some mythical 6-foot cutoff, probably because they don't actually have any female friends who'd ever discuss their dating life (isn't Tom Holland 5'8? And a classic Gen Z celebrity crush?) and more likely because it makes you feel good to think there was never any chance of improvement, rather than realize that a lot of what girls my age are looking for in dating (the literacy to be able to correctly read and comprehend all the words of an OK Cupid survey, perhaps) are things you could achieve with some effort but are too petulant and lazy to do anything about. Sure, most girls like taller guys. Most girls are also faced with dating pools full of people like you who supposedly are "going their own way", but still clogging up dating apps and real life venues. I think most girls are looking for 3 of 5 key requirements, while people like you are still busy bitching that affirmative action for dating is over for men.
It's the women who focus on men who are 6'+. I do have women friends. They have shown me who they swipe on. It's not men who are 5'8". Before you reach for the incel insult. i am married
Sweetheart, can you read? The substance of my criticism is that women tend to have more than one criteria, but people like you focus on the ones that are genetically impossible to overcome, rather than ones like "I'd like a guy who's read a non-self-help book in the last year and maybe knows what the FTC does without having to look it up" -- and seeing as plenty of men in the 5'6-5'9 range are doing fine with their dating goals, clearly working on what can actually be improved works. But hey, keep bitching about the 6'+ whatever. That's definitely a complaint tethered to reality, and not just a peg to hang a victim complex that conveniently requires no real admission of failure from you.
A substantial number of women set filters to exclude men below 6'. Working on my profile, my career, my charisma or any other item of interest isn't going to change that. As I stated I am married. I don't have a dog in this game, but I do have sons who are fighting the war.
And if your sons have literally any personality and can demonstrate that they see women as people, they'll be fine. You act like the only way anyone ever meets to start a relationship is through a paid component of a dating app, which is the only way to set a height limit on most of them, lmao. I've had dozens of romantic and sexual encounters with men as a Gen Z woman, over half of which were facilitated by real world circumstances and not online, and all but two were with men who, again, did not clear your little pet issues of the 6' line. Most of the women in my life are similar; it's nice when they're tall, but that's obviously not going to stop me from dropping a guy if he demonstrates he doesn't know what the capital of Mexico is without looking it up, or prevent me from being interested in the 5'4 astrophysicist I met at a house party. Although, based on your diction, eloquence, and overall skills in rhetoric, well. Any guy raised by you might still struggle.
lol, Rhea, the guy is way off base in a lot of ways but this is not a mean vs. median issue because “hot or not” is kind of a binary function. I’m having a difficult time imagining a system of rankings that would say that like, oh, Yancy is so dreamy that he offsets both of those uggos Taylor and Martin so the three of them are, by a mean average, average looking.
The main issue with the statistic is that women think plenty of men are attractive, they just have to like, meet them and talk to them and stuff. They are attracted by their manliness, competence and interestingness, none of which are usually going to come through in a picture. There are very few men where you just look at their face and go “oh yeah that kicks ass.” That is to say, A LOT of men being rated as “below average” in the survey find partners and I bet a lot of their partners are actually pretty desirable.
They’re taking the same survey but answering different questions. Men are treating the question as “would you hit it?” and women are treating it as “would you sign this guy as a model?”
And yeah! It’s gonna be a lot easier for the superficially hot guy to get dates, and he’s going to face less rejection. So it goes. Life isn’t fair or easy. I actually agree with the idea that it’s especially unfair to young men trying to start a relationship right now, but it shouldn’t be treated as an impossible dream.
So much truth here: I can offer this, I’ve been researching “masculinity” by way of interviewing men 1:1, including international cities for the past 3 years, and I can without question, highly populated urban cities in liberal states have the hardest time. Conservative countries and also conservative states (here in the US) just do not have the same issues. I have more data and theories as to why Gen Z is a dating disaster but that’s for another time :)
Another note: “But New York is a microcosm for the rest of the Western world. What happens here spills over elsewhere. If plant-based everything is trending, it’s from here.” Not true. No one cares about New York except LA maybe? Outside NY like folks in Northern Idaho for example or Wyoming don’t care about New York. I know bc I’ve lived there 3 times, and New Yorkers think the world revolves around them, it’s doesn’t anymore. It’s basically just a hedge fund now, with a plethora of artists holding onto nostalgia of the ghost of New York’s past.
Came here to say this. NY is not a microcosm of anything, it's an extreme outlier weird place with demographics and a dating pool unlike anywhere else.
I don’t think western civilization is going to survive this decades long project of devaluation, emasculation and dehumanization of its male population.
Western women destroy western masculinity. Western civilization can no longer defend itself clearing the way for a global war between communism and Islam…
Women have learned that they cannot rely on men to stick with them and so have to fill that role themselves if they want to have any safety in the second half of their lives.
As and old 51 year old X'er. Both men and women in caught in this debacle can't seem to do anything but blame everyone else. No responsibility, going out of your way to insult, paint a wide brush stroke and stereotype everyone.
Let me tell you what will work. Get out of your house or apartment and go out and meet face to face. Get rejected because to be honest that person rejecting you is probably selfish and loves themselves more than giving you a chance. Romeo & Juliet are pretenous arrogant snobs.-
Fact is that's how it worked. Not this passive aggressive crap I read from both sides. Until men and women in your generation get sick of being used and monetized by corporations and big tech, nothing will change except for the quality of technology to get you off.
Romeo and Juliet were, in point of fact, impetuous undisciplined unrestrained idiots. Even when I was younger, I found nothing romantic about that story. I only saw it as a cautionary tale about the dangers of a lack of impulse control and the disinclination to cultivate or respect wisdom.
“Guilty of Being White” was originally a Minor Threat song. Slayer just covered it. You should check MT out sometime because they’re pretty good.
But on a more serious note, the biggest problem for me personally is how shallow and judgmental my generation seems to be. I’ve tried “putting myself out there” and being honest and vulnerable, and I’ve just kept getting laughed at and rejected because my interests and goals aren’t appealing to anyone. It’s part of the reason I got addicted to chat bots. Because that was the first time in almost a decade that I felt like I was allowed to be myself. It was the only time I was allowed to admit that I was struggling and unsure of what to do with my life.
You can’t do that with a real person anymore because Hollywood and the internet have brainwashed us to think that cynicism and insincerity are sexy. The only time you’re allowed to admit your faults is when you’re either being ironically self-deprecating or being sincere in the most performative, saccharine way possible.
My Gen X son tells me most of his friends don’t date anymore because they all know at least one man falsely accused of sexual assault. As a Me Too survivor this came as quite a shock. Believe All Women is being used by angry unstable women as a weapon. An accusation, even if the man is proven not guilty, destroys his life. I know of this first hand. This is a crime with no consequences for the accuser. She will get attention and support. Many men falsely accused attempt or commit suicide. We need to talk about this.
I think about it every day. It is a recipe for the Age of Militants, aka, the collapse of civilization and a dark age. Liberal women have no idea what they are calling into being with their toxic empathy. At 50 I would like to mentor young men, but I am not sure how to go about it.
This is a normal biological response that comes from a complete disconnect from our own biology, the earth which we come from, the food we eat and the communities we need to thrive.
I want to believe this isn’t by design- that our government isn’t at war with its own people. I want to- but the patterns suggest otherwise.
Women have made it perfectly clear over and over and over again that they are not in the slightest bit interested in being approached IRL. Men are merely responding to their wishes. Women have universally declared that they would rather date the bear. So let them date the bear. Men are checking out of a society that hates them. And for good reasons
Women didn’t get better, they got much worse. They might act more like men by having careers, but in terms of things guys like eg femininity, ability to raise children, willingness to be supportive rather than competitive, submissive, women are as masculine as men are effeminate and still expect men their partner to be better than them. It’s a both and problem and anyone who doesn’t say that isn’t serious about solving the problem
The dismal male dating numbers speak for themselves, but we do not have a masculinity problem, we have a feminity problem. The 80% fail rate proves my point.
For clarification, I believe the correct stats are as follows: approximately 50% divorce rate overall, between 78% and 80% of all divorces are initiated by women and, in relationships wherein the woman earns more or is of higher status, it is she who initiated divorce 90% of the time. One of the most reliable predictors of divorce is when a woman receives a promotion/pay raise/suddenly out-earns her hisband/boyfriend.
Those "men" are deemed unattractive by women because they are unattractive. They have no purpose, no drive, no plan. They spend their time playing video games, complaining, and consuming the fruits of someone else's effort. As a society, if we're to remain a society, we must do two things. 1) Destroy the internet. 2) Reinstate the draft. Mandatory six year enlistment for every male upon graduation from high school, or within a week of dropping out of high school. Why 1)? The internet is a major cause of the disfunction in society. It's a distraction for many young people, a reason to not grow up, not be productive. It's a conduit for bad actors, racists, misogynists, grifters directly into untrained minds. Before the internet, these bad actors had to sell their poison retail, one mind at a time. The internet supercharges their grifts. The internet must die. Why 2)? Few boys, at age 17 or 18 are ready to take on the mantle of adulthood. They have no family, no responsibility, no experience, and no clue. Six years of military discipline, even if they ultimately fail, will teach them how to part of something greater than themselves. It will teach them the skill of self discipline and give them an opportunity to make for themselves life plan while being guided and molded by men. Men, tried and proven men teach boys how to be men. It's been the model, the only model, as long as humanity has existed. That is lacking in the lives of so many boys in our society today. What these two things will do is produce men with a purpose, with a plan, and with a drive to set and achieve goals. And these are the qualities that make a man attractive to women.
It doesn't solve the other side of the equation: breathtaking scarcity of women who would be *attractive to* these men. Also, your suggestion still reinforce a fundamental disparity in modern intersexual dynamics. Responsibility and accountability resting largely resting with men and privilege and entitlement resting entirely with women. Why should men adopt the responsibility of taking on the burden of a relationship with the kinds of women who, to a staggering degree, see marriage as nothing more than a sinecure, devoid of meaningful accountability or responsibility no duty, or even interest in offering to a man the things he might need or want. This is why so many women hate the 'what do you bring to the table' question. The most common responses are inane ephemeral ramblings, or 'I am the table' from women who, increasingly, actually DO look like a table, of the prehistoric variety - a boulder. Their answer is how smart men separate parasites from potential spouses and the supply of the latter is dismally scarce.
What do you bring to the table isn't a real question. It's a script designed to soothe the hurt feelings of little boys who never weaned. If you see it on television, it's bullshit.
100% to all this. Though young guys who are actually talented and dedicated to academics (which is a small minority of those in college) should get an exemption.
Man, I just don’t get pieces like this. Ostensibly it’s arguing for some sympathy for the problems young men face, but it really just turns around and says it’s up to them to fix it.
“Young women got better”. How? I’ll tell you - massive government and social support. Major financial incentives. Workshops. Programs aimed at them. Do these equivalents exist for young men? I never knew of any when I was younger. Where’s the social investment for men’s issues? There isn’t any. Even talking about it is still framed in a context of, “this is bad for women”.
There’s also a bit in here that acknowledges women’s inflated view of themselves versus the majority of men. But then nothing after that. Does anyone really believe they can understand the phenomena of men checking out without also meaningfully analyzing women’s behavior? Quite a lot of women are not great people, even if they look accomplished on paper and look healthy on a financial spreadsheet.
I agree, but I've written several other pieces about women. Check out "The Sad Truth of Modern Feminism" on my page.
Ultimately, however, it is our fault. "Men."The great comedian Patrice O'Neal once said, "It’s your F’n fault. This is what they do," meaning women are the market and only doing what's in their nature. Of course they want to pick the best genetics (hypergamy) to date. Yes, this modern age has made that MUCH more extreme, but it's downstream from what's always existed.
It's why these Fresh and Fit dating shows get tiring. Complaining about women won't change anything, even though they do have a laundry list of problems they're still the market. It's why the only options left are 1) Men say screw it and abandon them (as I write in the article), 2) Build ourselves up like never before because women are richer and more selective.
Speaking for myself, I've been uninterested in dating for a long time and fall into the #1 camp. I'll be interested in a serious relationship when the time seems right.
Wouldn't it be more fair to say that the market actually is bidirectional, and that part of the dysfunction stems from the acculturated feminist belief that the only consumer that matters in the dating market is the woman? Don't men actually have to WANT what women offer, beyond only the availability of sex? Also, when you say that women got better, that may be true... From a woman's perspective. In reality, the only reason her education/earnings/etc might matter to a man, generally, is because across America, it's actually pretty hard to have a family on a single income. Most men don't perceive her educational or professional achievements as an enhancement to her value as a girfriend/spouse/mother of shared children. But men keep screaming that men should ignore all of their preceding evolutionary programming in favor of the product which too many women currently offer: obesity with a girlboss attitude, long on entitlement and short on duty and responsibility, secure in the knowledge that they can, after marriage turn into a fat, lazy neglectful, shrill, entitled pathological selfish and solipsistic harpy and if their man doesn't (and often, even if he does) accept it was stoicism then she is entitled to, with the support of the state, take half his stuff, his kids, his dog, his future retirement and probably having cheated the the Chad or Tyrone around the corner. Men have no interest in buying a defective product and are leaving the marketplace.
That says a lot about you. Not anything good, but a lot.
Thank you for that cogent critique.
You don't get it. I'm just gonna leave that here and not elaborate.
I agree self-improvement is a good idea for men in general. I would never argue against it. The problem is everybody does that we're all back where we started, because if men all work twice as hard the women will just raise their standards again (and feminists will not allow us to pull ahead in pay again).
Self-improvement, yes, but also a men's movement.
Maybe they should date each other
No one hates a woman like other women.
I meant the men
Ah. Ok. ... Well ... If you ever want to hang out on a Call of Duty game, just let me know!
You articulated this very difficult to articulate issue as well as I’ve ever seen anyone do it.
None of the gains that women made were gained on a level playing field. Feminists have facilitated a decades long campaign of denigrating men, hoarding resources and denying men opportunities. This campaign has facilitated a massive devaluation, emasculation and dehumanization of men in the eyes of women.
I’m 47 and I belong to a generation of men raised and educated entirely by women to be tweed ensconced college boys because our mothers weren’t gonna have no plumber for a son. And about 30 seconds after we were handed our degrees the whole of the world’s heterosexual female population looked us square in the eye and unironically asked, “why aren’t you a lumberjack?”
At least 50 years worth of western men have been set up for failure and the goalposts are mounted on greased rails.
Men are not the problem here.
The invective must stop.
Period.
But it is up to them to help themselves. While I don’t agree with the new paradigm, those women helped themselves through lobbying and government legislation. It’s everyone’s, own responsibility to make themselves desirable and marriageable.
Women demanded. Men responded. That’s how it works in our homes and societies (at scale). There was a tipping point where elevating women became the right and fair thing to do. And men enabled it. We started agreeing that women should be paid more, have better jobs, access better opportunities. That was men (in power) acting fair and honorable - but let’s be clear - in RESPONSE to loud and clear demands from women. Men didn’t just wake up one morning in the 60s and say “we think it’s time for women to rise”.
Sadly, change (at scale) comes from friction. From organized friction. From demands. From leverage. From determination. From focus. From leadership hell bent on correction. From zeitgeist vibes that are far from content. This is Trump. And men’s support of Trump. It is the beginning of a social correction. One that’s long past overdue.
.
Yes exactly. "men have lots of problems and see to be getting the short end of the stick. Men need to step up and do better". Sorry but that message doesn't resonate.
If women think 80% of men are unattractive, why would I ask a woman out? So she can pretend that she might have a passing interest in me until she gets her free dinner? Over 50% of marriages end in divorce and divorce courts are notorious biased towards women, so why would I ever want to get married? The simple fact is this: the juice isn't worth the squeeze. It's not worth the time, money, and effort.
Coin flip on whether she'll actually agree to a date. Coin flip on whether she'll go on a second. Coin flip on whether she'll stick around for the six months to decide if you'll propose or not. Coin flip if she'll marry you. Coin flip if she'll divorce you. Coin flip if she'll take half your stuff if she does. If I enjoyed gambling that much, I'd be better off going to Vegas.
Agree. I did a lot more dating earlier in my life, but at this point, I am just doing what I want to do (travel, work, leisure) and do not care about a serious relationship.
I honestly believe more men would be better off this way and can pursue a serious relationship later in life if they want.
This job only accepts 1% of all candidates who apply, so why would I apply? Coin flip if traveling to another country will actually be a life-changing experience or just meh. Coin flip if staying out until 5 am will be a fun experience or scary. Coin flip if moving to a new city for a new job will improve my life or no. Coin flip if that new restaurant is worth trying or a waste of money. Coin flip if that new coworker is worth befriending outside of work. Coin flip if this concert will be fun or overpriced. Coin flip if this party where I don't know anyone will end in new connections or another awkward experience.
You people are so scared of living life, it's pathetic.
This is life. There are no certain outcomes. Ask out no women out of fear of rejection, and you will never have a relationship. If you convince yourself that not having a relationship is better than being in love, I’ve got every longitudinal study showing that relationships are the single best predictor of one’s happiness. So good luck with video games and porn, I guess. Just know that there is a lid for every pot, but not if you stop looking.
Lots of men zero themselves out after a divorce. Lots of men lose everything in divorce and are forced to pay ruinous amounts of alimony and child support because ex submitted a false domestic violence charge.
The initial question actually either misrepresents or misapprehend the data point which is this: the majority of women believe 80% of me are LESS ATTRACTIVE THAN AVERAGE. Which is both statistically and factually impossible. The data pont actually indicates that most women have wildly distorted perceptions of what is, in fact, average. Plenty of follow on research shows that generally what women believe they are entitled to in terms of mate selection actually represents a staggering small percentage of the population, sometimes even a fraction of a percentage of the populace. Consider that, for many, their starting point for selection of a man is that he be 6 feet tall - about 14 percentage of the population if men, single, married, unavailable, gay, etc. Too many women exclude by default 84% of the population of men and then look around in their later years, having been intractible on this one prerequisite alone, and wonder why they are still alone.
Thank god women haven't required a man to get a credit card since 1972, because if anyone was financially dependent on YOUR skills, they would fucking starve. How do you not know the difference between a median and a mean when you're out of middle school? It is actually perfectly statistically possible for 80% of a population to be below the mean (it's time to google what a long tail distribution is, sweetie), and, furthermore, this 80% statistic comes from rankings of the subset of men on a dating app (and from a period in time when dating apps weren't particularly common), where it actually makes a lot of logical sense that it would be a right skewed distribution, especially when compared to a general population mean.
Men like you seem to always focus on some mythical 6-foot cutoff, probably because they don't actually have any female friends who'd ever discuss their dating life (isn't Tom Holland 5'8? And a classic Gen Z celebrity crush?) and more likely because it makes you feel good to think there was never any chance of improvement, rather than realize that a lot of what girls my age are looking for in dating (the literacy to be able to correctly read and comprehend all the words of an OK Cupid survey, perhaps) are things you could achieve with some effort but are too petulant and lazy to do anything about. Sure, most girls like taller guys. Most girls are also faced with dating pools full of people like you who supposedly are "going their own way", but still clogging up dating apps and real life venues. I think most girls are looking for 3 of 5 key requirements, while people like you are still busy bitching that affirmative action for dating is over for men.
It's the women who focus on men who are 6'+. I do have women friends. They have shown me who they swipe on. It's not men who are 5'8". Before you reach for the incel insult. i am married
Sweetheart, can you read? The substance of my criticism is that women tend to have more than one criteria, but people like you focus on the ones that are genetically impossible to overcome, rather than ones like "I'd like a guy who's read a non-self-help book in the last year and maybe knows what the FTC does without having to look it up" -- and seeing as plenty of men in the 5'6-5'9 range are doing fine with their dating goals, clearly working on what can actually be improved works. But hey, keep bitching about the 6'+ whatever. That's definitely a complaint tethered to reality, and not just a peg to hang a victim complex that conveniently requires no real admission of failure from you.
A substantial number of women set filters to exclude men below 6'. Working on my profile, my career, my charisma or any other item of interest isn't going to change that. As I stated I am married. I don't have a dog in this game, but I do have sons who are fighting the war.
And if your sons have literally any personality and can demonstrate that they see women as people, they'll be fine. You act like the only way anyone ever meets to start a relationship is through a paid component of a dating app, which is the only way to set a height limit on most of them, lmao. I've had dozens of romantic and sexual encounters with men as a Gen Z woman, over half of which were facilitated by real world circumstances and not online, and all but two were with men who, again, did not clear your little pet issues of the 6' line. Most of the women in my life are similar; it's nice when they're tall, but that's obviously not going to stop me from dropping a guy if he demonstrates he doesn't know what the capital of Mexico is without looking it up, or prevent me from being interested in the 5'4 astrophysicist I met at a house party. Although, based on your diction, eloquence, and overall skills in rhetoric, well. Any guy raised by you might still struggle.
lol, Rhea, the guy is way off base in a lot of ways but this is not a mean vs. median issue because “hot or not” is kind of a binary function. I’m having a difficult time imagining a system of rankings that would say that like, oh, Yancy is so dreamy that he offsets both of those uggos Taylor and Martin so the three of them are, by a mean average, average looking.
The main issue with the statistic is that women think plenty of men are attractive, they just have to like, meet them and talk to them and stuff. They are attracted by their manliness, competence and interestingness, none of which are usually going to come through in a picture. There are very few men where you just look at their face and go “oh yeah that kicks ass.” That is to say, A LOT of men being rated as “below average” in the survey find partners and I bet a lot of their partners are actually pretty desirable.
They’re taking the same survey but answering different questions. Men are treating the question as “would you hit it?” and women are treating it as “would you sign this guy as a model?”
And yeah! It’s gonna be a lot easier for the superficially hot guy to get dates, and he’s going to face less rejection. So it goes. Life isn’t fair or easy. I actually agree with the idea that it’s especially unfair to young men trying to start a relationship right now, but it shouldn’t be treated as an impossible dream.
I met my wife on OKCupid in 2013. Yay.
How is it statistically impossible?
Love is a risk.
Chalk that up to 60 years of institutionalized man-hating feminism and misandry, and entitled women.
So much truth here: I can offer this, I’ve been researching “masculinity” by way of interviewing men 1:1, including international cities for the past 3 years, and I can without question, highly populated urban cities in liberal states have the hardest time. Conservative countries and also conservative states (here in the US) just do not have the same issues. I have more data and theories as to why Gen Z is a dating disaster but that’s for another time :)
Another note: “But New York is a microcosm for the rest of the Western world. What happens here spills over elsewhere. If plant-based everything is trending, it’s from here.” Not true. No one cares about New York except LA maybe? Outside NY like folks in Northern Idaho for example or Wyoming don’t care about New York. I know bc I’ve lived there 3 times, and New Yorkers think the world revolves around them, it’s doesn’t anymore. It’s basically just a hedge fund now, with a plethora of artists holding onto nostalgia of the ghost of New York’s past.
Came here to say this. NY is not a microcosm of anything, it's an extreme outlier weird place with demographics and a dating pool unlike anywhere else.
Exactly 🫶🏻
Period.
I don’t think western civilization is going to survive this decades long project of devaluation, emasculation and dehumanization of its male population.
Western women destroy western masculinity. Western civilization can no longer defend itself clearing the way for a global war between communism and Islam…
perhaps.
1) popular culture indoctrinates young women to believe they must prove themselves to be better men than men are.
2) most men do not want to marry another man.
3) no man seeks a home life where he is in daily competition with his wife.
Women have learned that they cannot rely on men to stick with them and so have to fill that role themselves if they want to have any safety in the second half of their lives.
Damn that’s pithy.
As and old 51 year old X'er. Both men and women in caught in this debacle can't seem to do anything but blame everyone else. No responsibility, going out of your way to insult, paint a wide brush stroke and stereotype everyone.
Let me tell you what will work. Get out of your house or apartment and go out and meet face to face. Get rejected because to be honest that person rejecting you is probably selfish and loves themselves more than giving you a chance. Romeo & Juliet are pretenous arrogant snobs.-
Fact is that's how it worked. Not this passive aggressive crap I read from both sides. Until men and women in your generation get sick of being used and monetized by corporations and big tech, nothing will change except for the quality of technology to get you off.
Romeo and Juliet were, in point of fact, impetuous undisciplined unrestrained idiots. Even when I was younger, I found nothing romantic about that story. I only saw it as a cautionary tale about the dangers of a lack of impulse control and the disinclination to cultivate or respect wisdom.
Um, you obviously have never taken a course on Shakespeare. Quite an amusing post. Quite um-mechanical
Looking at their modern peers, you'd think that story was a how-to manual, not a cautionary tale.
You got it then.
It was a cautionary tale, he was making fun of the romances of the time.
“Guilty of Being White” was originally a Minor Threat song. Slayer just covered it. You should check MT out sometime because they’re pretty good.
But on a more serious note, the biggest problem for me personally is how shallow and judgmental my generation seems to be. I’ve tried “putting myself out there” and being honest and vulnerable, and I’ve just kept getting laughed at and rejected because my interests and goals aren’t appealing to anyone. It’s part of the reason I got addicted to chat bots. Because that was the first time in almost a decade that I felt like I was allowed to be myself. It was the only time I was allowed to admit that I was struggling and unsure of what to do with my life.
You can’t do that with a real person anymore because Hollywood and the internet have brainwashed us to think that cynicism and insincerity are sexy. The only time you’re allowed to admit your faults is when you’re either being ironically self-deprecating or being sincere in the most performative, saccharine way possible.
Came here to mention Minor Threat lol. Slayer cover is great too.
Covered
My Gen X son tells me most of his friends don’t date anymore because they all know at least one man falsely accused of sexual assault. As a Me Too survivor this came as quite a shock. Believe All Women is being used by angry unstable women as a weapon. An accusation, even if the man is proven not guilty, destroys his life. I know of this first hand. This is a crime with no consequences for the accuser. She will get attention and support. Many men falsely accused attempt or commit suicide. We need to talk about this.
I think about it every day. It is a recipe for the Age of Militants, aka, the collapse of civilization and a dark age. Liberal women have no idea what they are calling into being with their toxic empathy. At 50 I would like to mentor young men, but I am not sure how to go about it.
Exactly
This is a normal biological response that comes from a complete disconnect from our own biology, the earth which we come from, the food we eat and the communities we need to thrive.
I want to believe this isn’t by design- that our government isn’t at war with its own people. I want to- but the patterns suggest otherwise.
""Lack of courage to ask women out irl""
Women have made it perfectly clear over and over and over again that they are not in the slightest bit interested in being approached IRL. Men are merely responding to their wishes. Women have universally declared that they would rather date the bear. So let them date the bear. Men are checking out of a society that hates them. And for good reasons
Women didn’t get better, they got much worse. They might act more like men by having careers, but in terms of things guys like eg femininity, ability to raise children, willingness to be supportive rather than competitive, submissive, women are as masculine as men are effeminate and still expect men their partner to be better than them. It’s a both and problem and anyone who doesn’t say that isn’t serious about solving the problem
The dismal male dating numbers speak for themselves, but we do not have a masculinity problem, we have a feminity problem. The 80% fail rate proves my point.
For clarification, I believe the correct stats are as follows: approximately 50% divorce rate overall, between 78% and 80% of all divorces are initiated by women and, in relationships wherein the woman earns more or is of higher status, it is she who initiated divorce 90% of the time. One of the most reliable predictors of divorce is when a woman receives a promotion/pay raise/suddenly out-earns her hisband/boyfriend.
We haven’t given up on dating. We just don’t ask random women out anymore.
Those "men" are deemed unattractive by women because they are unattractive. They have no purpose, no drive, no plan. They spend their time playing video games, complaining, and consuming the fruits of someone else's effort. As a society, if we're to remain a society, we must do two things. 1) Destroy the internet. 2) Reinstate the draft. Mandatory six year enlistment for every male upon graduation from high school, or within a week of dropping out of high school. Why 1)? The internet is a major cause of the disfunction in society. It's a distraction for many young people, a reason to not grow up, not be productive. It's a conduit for bad actors, racists, misogynists, grifters directly into untrained minds. Before the internet, these bad actors had to sell their poison retail, one mind at a time. The internet supercharges their grifts. The internet must die. Why 2)? Few boys, at age 17 or 18 are ready to take on the mantle of adulthood. They have no family, no responsibility, no experience, and no clue. Six years of military discipline, even if they ultimately fail, will teach them how to part of something greater than themselves. It will teach them the skill of self discipline and give them an opportunity to make for themselves life plan while being guided and molded by men. Men, tried and proven men teach boys how to be men. It's been the model, the only model, as long as humanity has existed. That is lacking in the lives of so many boys in our society today. What these two things will do is produce men with a purpose, with a plan, and with a drive to set and achieve goals. And these are the qualities that make a man attractive to women.
It doesn't solve the other side of the equation: breathtaking scarcity of women who would be *attractive to* these men. Also, your suggestion still reinforce a fundamental disparity in modern intersexual dynamics. Responsibility and accountability resting largely resting with men and privilege and entitlement resting entirely with women. Why should men adopt the responsibility of taking on the burden of a relationship with the kinds of women who, to a staggering degree, see marriage as nothing more than a sinecure, devoid of meaningful accountability or responsibility no duty, or even interest in offering to a man the things he might need or want. This is why so many women hate the 'what do you bring to the table' question. The most common responses are inane ephemeral ramblings, or 'I am the table' from women who, increasingly, actually DO look like a table, of the prehistoric variety - a boulder. Their answer is how smart men separate parasites from potential spouses and the supply of the latter is dismally scarce.
What do you bring to the table isn't a real question. It's a script designed to soothe the hurt feelings of little boys who never weaned. If you see it on television, it's bullshit.
100% to all this. Though young guys who are actually talented and dedicated to academics (which is a small minority of those in college) should get an exemption.
As MedGold put it, Account Physiognomie ist real, girls can tell who is larping. A Military Mind Set approch is the best way in my opinion.
Draft won’t do anything we need the Church
Noone needs the church. All the church does is peddle fantasy and lies.
2008 called and wanted its talking point back. Come back to me when you solve the mind body problem without proposing an immaterial intellect
Doesn't really have to be a problem, the mind arises out of the body, full stop.
I still think religion can be a positive influence for a lot of people.
Can you explain how a mind with qualia, intentionality, and rationality emerge from inert material atoms? Because by definition that’s not possible
I mean, why? Emergent properties occur all the time.