Aaron Clarey nails it: women have ruined the best places to find good man

[SW15]

The powers that be want to force everybody onto OLD.

Out of all deep state activities to destabilize the population, the least concern of mine is OLD.

Tech-based arranging of dates/mating options is a very easy way to destabilize the population. If there's an intention to destabilize a population and destroy family formation, tech-based arranging of dates is a good way to do it.

Compare what happens in the presence of tech-based arranging of dates/mating options vs. the absence of tech-based arranging of dates/mating options.

In a world where tech-based arranging of dates/mating options is present.....

The top 10% of men (90th percentile +) achieve an abundance not possible in the absence of it. When sex is that abundant, there's not that much an incentive to settle down with one woman and creating a life together for 30+ years. In the past, an elite man had more an incentive to long term pair off with an elite looking woman in her early 20s. There would be a decent chance she'd remain attractive (with a mild drop off in looks) into her 40s. Now, there's less of an incentive for this to happen. An elite level man can have sex with many women, including elite looking women and average/cute women on slow nights. These men have more access to sex and are often using condoms to prevent pregnancy. In addition, while they are using condoms, many of the women they have sex with are using birth control.

Men in the bottom 90% suffer to varying degrees. The second tier, well above average men can do ok in this world. This is what I'd call the 75th-89th percentile of men. There are still enough options for them. The condoms/birth control sentence I used above also applies to them. The 45th - 74th percentile of men suffer a lot in this world. These are the guys who used to get average to slightly above average girlfriends for longer term relationships and form families with them. These guys are now more ignored than ever, and they are often getting by on scraps and some of their LTRs are shorter. In the few LTRs they have, the use of male condoms/female birth control is reducing the chance of accidental pregnancies too.. They are less likely to be forming stable families. The bottom 44% are even more invisible, especially from bottom tier women.

Women at all levels have more abundance. They are not needing to settle down with any man longer term and form families. The college educated ones are also using more birth control.

There are other factors at play too, as women are also incentivized in Western nations to exit longer term marriages. There's a common argument that women are only programmed for temporary monogamy biologically (monogamy for something like 5-10 years, which is long enough for her to have children and have them raised to a point of semi self sufficiency). After that, women want more penis variety. There were cultural factors that restrained this biological factor for centuries, but those aren't present in a system with no fault divorce and cash incentives for exiting marriages.

Everyone I know or work with did not meet their other on old or social media! Mostly school, via friends, hobbies, few times work. Not this old crap. Couple times I've seen it via old it was very fat coworkers.

No one's social circle is a representative sample.

More of the longer term couples in my social circle formed off of real life interactions. I have some longer term couples that I know that formed in the late 2000s/early 2010s from dating websites before swipe apps took off.

The broader trends from representatives samples are below. Basically, social circle arranged couples have been replaced by swipe apps and social media DMs.

Old is 90 percent ugly women these days. If you're using that to meet women you're lowering your standards.

A lot of men have to lower their standards to get laid when using a tech-based method. This is true for both long and short term arrangements.

This was also true in the era where dating websites (think 2004-2012). Swipe apps replaced dating websites and bolstered all of the bad trends from the website era. A main difference between the 2000s and 2010-present in tech-based dating is that a larger percentage of the single population uses tech-based methods now as compared to the 2000s.

match llc is losing money.

Match Group Inc is not doing a good job creating shareholder value as a publicly traded company. Here's the 5 year stock performance trend.

 

[I_have_BDE]

Tech-based arranging of dates/mating options is a very easy way to destabilize the population. If there's an intention to destabilize a population and destroy family formation, tech-based arranging of dates is a good way to do it.

Compare what happens in the presence of tech-based arranging of dates/mating options vs. the absence of tech-based arranging of dates/mating options.

In a world where tech-based arranging of dates/mating options is present.....

The top 10% of men (90th percentile +) achieve an abundance not possible in the absence of it. When sex is that abundant, there's not that much an incentive to settle down with one woman and creating a life together for 30+ years. In the past, an elite man had more an incentive to long term pair off with an elite looking woman in her early 20s. There would be a decent chance she'd remain attractive (with a mild drop off in looks) into her 40s. Now, there's less of an incentive for this to happen. An elite level man can have sex with many women, including elite looking women and average/cute women on slow nights. These men have more access to sex and are often using condoms to prevent pregnancy. In addition, while they are using condoms, many of the women they have sex with are using birth control.

Men in the bottom 90% suffer to varying degrees. The second tier, well above average men can do ok in this world. This is what I'd call the 75th-89th percentile of men. There are still enough options for them. The condoms/birth control sentence I used above also applies to them. The 45th - 74th percentile of men suffer a lot in this world. These are the guys who used to get average to slightly above average girlfriends for longer term relationships and form families with them. These guys are now more ignored than ever, and they are often getting by on scraps and some of their LTRs are shorter. In the few LTRs they have, the use of male condoms/female birth control is reducing the chance of accidental pregnancies too.. They are less likely to be forming stable families. The bottom 44% are even more invisible, especially from bottom tier women.

Women at all levels have more abundance. They are not needing to settle down with any man longer term and form families. The college educated ones are also using more birth control.

There are other factors at play too, as women are also incentivized in Western nations to exit longer term marriages. There's a common argument that women are only programmed for temporary monogamy biologically (monogamy for something like 5-10 years, which is long enough for her to have children and have them raised to a point of semi self sufficiency). After that, women want more penis variety. There were cultural factors that restrained this biological factor for centuries, but those aren't present in a system with no fault divorce and cash incentives for exiting marriages.



No one's social circle is a representative sample.

More of the longer term couples in my social circle formed off of real life interactions. I have some longer term couples that I know that formed in the late 2000s/early 2010s from dating websites before swipe apps took off.

The broader trends from representatives samples are below. Basically, social circle arranged couples have been replaced by swipe apps and social media DMs.

View attachment 10857



A lot of men have to lower their standards to get laid when using a tech-based method. This is true for both long and short term arrangements.

This was also true in the era where dating websites (think 2004-2012). Swipe apps replaced dating websites and bolstered all of the bad trends from the website era. A main difference between the 2000s and 2010-present in tech-based dating is that a larger percentage of the single population uses tech-based methods now as compared to the 2000s.



Match Group Inc is not doing a good job creating shareholder value as a publicly traded company. Here's the 5 year stock performance trend.

View attachment 10858

What explains old and so many ugly women now? Why less hot women on old in general?

 

[SW15]

What explains old and so many ugly women now? Why less hot women on old in general?

I'm astounded that these 2 questions are your only reaction to my long response.

I haven't been on swipe apps in a while. For women that want to use tech-based methods to meet men, I would think that these women are more likely to obtain their digital prospects through their DMs on Instagram instead of through swipe apps. Instagram is an informal and unofficial date arranging platform. Also, a lot of the top level of women also have enough options from their in-person lives.

A woman who is a 7.5+ receives enough approaches in non-bar venues, at the bars, and from her DMs on Instagram to not need to use swipe apps.

The typical attractive female on a swipe app is in the 6-7.4 range. A woman in the 6-7.4 range is respectable, but not elite.

 

[Solomon]

Everyone I know or work with did not meet their other on old or social media! Mostly school, via friends, hobbies, few times work. Not this old crap. Couple times I've seen it via old it was very fat coworkers.

Old is 90 percent ugly women these days. If you're using that to meet women you're lowering your standards.

I've noticed in my town once quarantine was done women got da fucc of OLD and went outside. OLD is like @SW15 says for the top 20% if you're not that you're wasting your time.

I got banned of Tinder last week no clue why, but honestly it's a blessing the quality the last 2 years I was matching with has been depressing

 

[I_have_BDE]

I've noticed in my town once quarantine was done women got da fucc of OLD and went outside. OLD is like @SW15 says for the top 20% if you're not that you're wasting your time.

I got banned of Tinder last week no clue why, but honestly it's a blessing the quality the last 2 years I was matching with has been depressing

Spring 2021 old went down. When most places were mostly opened.

 

[NoFear]

How is being a manlet as a pua that has a good record wheter he has been out of the field some time a bad thing?
In any case it just proves that despite his disadvantage in height he can still pull.
Some of the white knights in this thread just prove that if it wasnt for their looks they would be eunuchs waiting for death.
This forum is full of covert feminism.

 

[FlexpertHamilton]

Tech-based arranging of dates/mating options is a very easy way to destabilize the population. If there's an intention to destabilize a population and destroy family formation, tech-based arranging of dates is a good way to do it.

Compare what happens in the presence of tech-based arranging of dates/mating options vs. the absence of tech-based arranging of dates/mating options.

In a world where tech-based arranging of dates/mating options is present.....

The top 10% of men (90th percentile +) achieve an abundance not possible in the absence of it. When sex is that abundant, there's not that much an incentive to settle down with one woman and creating a life together for 30+ years. In the past, an elite man had more an incentive to long term pair off with an elite looking woman in her early 20s. There would be a decent chance she'd remain attractive (with a mild drop off in looks) into her 40s. Now, there's less of an incentive for this to happen. An elite level man can have sex with many women, including elite looking women and average/cute women on slow nights. These men have more access to sex and are often using condoms to prevent pregnancy. In addition, while they are using condoms, many of the women they have sex with are using birth control.

Men in the bottom 90% suffer to varying degrees. The second tier, well above average men can do ok in this world. This is what I'd call the 75th-89th percentile of men. There are still enough options for them. The condoms/birth control sentence I used above also applies to them. The 45th - 74th percentile of men suffer a lot in this world. These are the guys who used to get average to slightly above average girlfriends for longer term relationships and form families with them. These guys are now more ignored than ever, and they are often getting by on scraps and some of their LTRs are shorter. In the few LTRs they have, the use of male condoms/female birth control is reducing the chance of accidental pregnancies too.. They are less likely to be forming stable families. The bottom 44% are even more invisible, especially from bottom tier women.

Women at all levels have more abundance. They are not needing to settle down with any man longer term and form families. The college educated ones are also using more birth control.

There are other factors at play too, as women are also incentivized in Western nations to exit longer term marriages. There's a common argument that women are only programmed for temporary monogamy biologically (monogamy for something like 5-10 years, which is long enough for her to have children and have them raised to a point of semi self sufficiency). After that, women want more penis variety. There were cultural factors that restrained this biological factor for centuries, but those aren't present in a system with no fault divorce and cash incentives for exiting marriages.



No one's social circle is a representative sample.

More of the longer term couples in my social circle formed off of real life interactions. I have some longer term couples that I know that formed in the late 2000s/early 2010s from dating websites before swipe apps took off.

The broader trends from representatives samples are below. Basically, social circle arranged couples have been replaced by swipe apps and social media DMs.

View attachment 10857

Those are fair points, and I never considered that OLD/social media makes actually makes it far easier for top tier men to maintain a harem of women effectively worldwide. Before this, such a thing was considerable harder without having social influence in a large city with lots of beautiful single women.

 

[corrector]

Interesting video, it looks like everywhere is inappropriate to meet women unless you are a chad/chadlite. Some normies are losing motivation because of diminishing rates of return on OLD. Obviously a population collaspe, like or worst than Japan is inevitable.

 

[corrector]

Bingo. Feminism and its millions of tenticals.
They want the incels dead so to speak

I don't think there are many incels using OLD. I don't use it. If you know it's not going to work for you then why bother with an exercise that will just make you feel bad. It's better to just use OF because at least you feel good. Only Chads/Chadlites feel good with OLD.

 

[MatureDJ]

Tech-based arranging of dates/mating options is a very easy way to destabilize the population. If there's an intention to destabilize a population and destroy family formation, tech-based arranging of dates is a good way to do it.

Compare what happens in the presence of tech-based arranging of dates/mating options vs. the absence of tech-based arranging of dates/mating options.

In a world where tech-based arranging of dates/mating options is present.....

The top 10% of men (90th percentile +) achieve an abundance not possible in the absence of it. When sex is that abundant, there's not that much an incentive to settle down with one woman and creating a life together for 30+ years. In the past, an elite man had more an incentive to long term pair off with an elite looking woman in her early 20s. There would be a decent chance she'd remain attractive (with a mild drop off in looks) into her 40s. Now, there's less of an incentive for this to happen. An elite level man can have sex with many women, including elite looking women and average/cute women on slow nights. These men have more access to sex and are often using condoms to prevent pregnancy. In addition, while they are using condoms, many of the women they have sex with are using birth control.

Men in the bottom 90% suffer to varying degrees. The second tier, well above average men can do ok in this world. This is what I'd call the 75th-89th percentile of men. There are still enough options for them. The condoms/birth control sentence I used above also applies to them. The 45th - 74th percentile of men suffer a lot in this world. These are the guys who used to get average to slightly above average girlfriends for longer term relationships and form families with them. These guys are now more ignored than ever, and they are often getting by on scraps and some of their LTRs are shorter. In the few LTRs they have, the use of male condoms/female birth control is reducing the chance of accidental pregnancies too.. They are less likely to be forming stable families. The bottom 44% are even more invisible, especially from bottom tier women.

Women at all levels have more abundance. They are not needing to settle down with any man longer term and form families. The college educated ones are also using more birth control.

There are other factors at play too, as women are also incentivized in Western nations to exit longer term marriages. There's a common argument that women are only programmed for temporary monogamy biologically (monogamy for something like 5-10 years, which is long enough for her to have children and have them raised to a point of semi self sufficiency). After that, women want more penis variety. There were cultural factors that restrained this biological factor for centuries, but those aren't present in a system with no fault divorce and cash incentives for exiting marriages.



No one's social circle is a representative sample.

More of the longer term couples in my social circle formed off of real life interactions. I have some longer term couples that I know that formed in the late 2000s/early 2010s from dating websites before swipe apps took off.

The broader trends from representatives samples are below. Basically, social circle arranged couples have been replaced by swipe apps and social media DMs.

View attachment 10857



A lot of men have to lower their standards to get laid when using a tech-based method. This is true for both long and short term arrangements.

This was also true in the era where dating websites (think 2004-2012). Swipe apps replaced dating websites and bolstered all of the bad trends from the website era. A main difference between the 2000s and 2010-present in tech-based dating is that a larger percentage of the single population uses tech-based methods now as compared to the 2000s.



Match Group Inc is not doing a good job creating shareholder value as a publicly traded company. Here's the 5 year stock performance trend.

View attachment 10858

It's OVER for MiddleTierCels.

 

[Luni]

he's a cornball and I exposed him years ago by pulling his card

exposed him? pulling what card? truly curious

 

[BergischerLöwe]

The powers that be want to force everybody onto OLD.

That's what I keep saying. We're being herded into the slaughterhouse cattle chute of OLD and there's a huge psyop to demonize talking to women in public. Makes me scared to even try approaching myself

 

[Mike32ct]

That's what I keep saying. We're being herded into the slaughterhouse cattle chute of OLD and there's a huge psyop to demonize talking to women in public

Precisely. You explained it a lot better than I could have. “If you will not accept OLD, we will shame you (in-person approachers) until you do.”

 

[MatureDJ]

Tech-based arranging of dates/mating options is a very easy way to destabilize the population. If there's an intention to destabilize a population and destroy family formation, tech-based arranging of dates is a good way to do it.

Compare what happens in the presence of tech-based arranging of dates/mating options vs. the absence of tech-based arranging of dates/mating options.

In a world where tech-based arranging of dates/mating options is present.....

The top 10% of men (90th percentile +) achieve an abundance not possible in the absence of it. When sex is that abundant, there's not that much an incentive to settle down with one woman and creating a life together for 30+ years. In the past, an elite man had more an incentive to long term pair off with an elite looking woman in her early 20s. There would be a decent chance she'd remain attractive (with a mild drop off in looks) into her 40s. Now, there's less of an incentive for this to happen. An elite level man can have sex with many women, including elite looking women and average/cute women on slow nights. These men have more access to sex and are often using condoms to prevent pregnancy. In addition, while they are using condoms, many of the women they have sex with are using birth control.

Men in the bottom 90% suffer to varying degrees. The second tier, well above average men can do ok in this world. This is what I'd call the 75th-89th percentile of men. There are still enough options for them. The condoms/birth control sentence I used above also applies to them. The 45th - 74th percentile of men suffer a lot in this world. These are the guys who used to get average to slightly above average girlfriends for longer term relationships and form families with them. These guys are now more ignored than ever, and they are often getting by on scraps and some of their LTRs are shorter. In the few LTRs they have, the use of male condoms/female birth control is reducing the chance of accidental pregnancies too.. They are less likely to be forming stable families. The bottom 44% are even more invisible, especially from bottom tier women.

Women at all levels have more abundance. They are not needing to settle down with any man longer term and form families. The college educated ones are also using more birth control.

There are other factors at play too, as women are also incentivized in Western nations to exit longer term marriages. There's a common argument that women are only programmed for temporary monogamy biologically (monogamy for something like 5-10 years, which is long enough for her to have children and have them raised to a point of semi self sufficiency). After that, women want more penis variety. There were cultural factors that restrained this biological factor for centuries, but those aren't present in a system with no fault divorce and cash incentives for exiting marriages.



No one's social circle is a representative sample.

More of the longer term couples in my social circle formed off of real life interactions. I have some longer term couples that I know that formed in the late 2000s/early 2010s from dating websites before swipe apps took off.

The broader trends from representatives samples are below. Basically, social circle arranged couples have been replaced by swipe apps and social media DMs.

View attachment 10857



A lot of men have to lower their standards to get laid when using a tech-based method. This is true for both long and short term arrangements.

This was also true in the era where dating websites (think 2004-2012). Swipe apps replaced dating websites and bolstered all of the bad trends from the website era. A main difference between the 2000s and 2010-present in tech-based dating is that a larger percentage of the single population uses tech-based methods now as compared to the 2000s.



Match Group Inc is not doing a good job creating shareholder value as a publicly traded company. Here's the 5 year stock performance trend.

View attachment 10858

Ironically, had someone "shorted" MTCH, he would have made up for the loss of being short at Match.com.

 

[MatureDJ]

That's what I keep saying. We're being herded into the slaughterhouse cattle chute of OLD and there's a huge psyop to demonize talking to women in public. Makes me scared to even try approaching myself

As a dedicated carnivore - and a descendant of many men in the cattle biz - I like this analogy.

 

[BergischerLöwe]

Precisely. You explained it a lot better than I could have. “If you will not accept OLD, we will shame you (in-person approachers) until you do.”

What really sucks in my case is that literally everything I know about meeting girls is in the context of apps and idk how to escape that of if it's even possible to do so. As a teenager I never learned how to meet and approach women irl and it's really come back to haunt me. I've never had a successful approach irl but then again I've always been afraid to try and I doubt the results I'd get out of it would be an better than what I'm used to with OLD. Furthermore the learning curve with irl approaching is too steep and ill suited to an introvert like me. There's so much wrong with apps but they're the only way I can even be visible to women. If it wasn't for tinder I'd very likely still be a virgin. But apps give me increasingly diminishing returns as the years go on and I have no way to meet women irl. So there's very little I can do

 

[BergischerLöwe]

As a dedicated carnivore - and a descendant of many men in the cattle biz - I like this analogy.

View attachment 10862

View attachment 10863

That analogy really sticks out in my mind, especially since I personally don't eat beef

 

[MatureDJ]

What really sucks in my case is that literally everything I know about meeting girls is in the context of apps and idk how to escape that of if it's even possible to do so. As a teenager I never learned how to meet and approach women irl and it's really come back to haunt me. I've never had a successful approach irl but then again I've always been afraid to try and I doubt the results I'd get out of it would be an better than what I'm used to with OLD. Furthermore the learning curve with irl approaching is too steep and ill suited to an introvert like me. There's so much wrong with apps but they're the only way I can even be visible to women. If it wasn't for tinder I'd very likely still be a virgin. But apps give me increasingly diminishing returns as the years go on and I have no way to meet women irl. So there's very little I can do

The only thing you can do is CopeMax.

 

[BergischerLöwe]

The only thing you can do is CopeMax.

Seems like it

 

[itouchyou]

I don't think there are many incels using OLD. I don't use it. If you know it's not going to work for you then why bother with an exercise that will just make you feel bad. It's better to just use OF because at least you feel good. Only Chads/Chadlites feel good with OLD.

OF = onlyfans?? wtf