The college hype is unreal, true players get how overrated it is.

[SW15]

college parties sound miserable

It depends. I do think that they don't live up to the hype for the vast majority of men. There's a difference between not living up to the hype and miserable.

Even in Greek Life, there's a reason why the fraternity and sorority members tend to form committed relationships. It's easier for them to get sex that way. If you're a guy in a top tier fraternity at a given school, the parties might be better for getting more frequent, uncommitted sex. Members of the top fraternities are even in the minority among fraternity members and even some of them get into LTRs from top sorority sisters.

The non-Greeks who party tend to go to random off campus apartment complexes or single family houses with parties. Most of those parties don't amount to much but intoxication for the majority.

The better way to play the college game as a non-Greek is to use the far less sexy options of after class approaches, extracurricular clubs, social circle building, and then some on campus daygame to form a committed relationships. Greeks can use Greek Life as their social circle building.

 

[CornbreadFed]

As someone who's never been drunk (and has no desire to get drunk), college parties sound miserable (and I am glad I never went to a college party)

I got laid at pretty much every college party, but you are better off meeting them in class tbh.

 

[SW15]

I got laid at pretty much every college party, but you are better off meeting them in class tbh.

That's impressive that you got laid at the majority of college parties that you attended. I was still in nice guy recovery from my upbringing during at least part of college and I think that impacted my outcomes at college parties, especially in freshman-sophomore years. There were other factors too.

Why do you think meeting women through academic classes is better? What about the on campus clubs?

 

[GoodMan32]

It depends. I do think that they don't live up to the hype for the vast majority of men. There's a difference between not living up to the hype and miserable.

Even in Greek Life, there's a reason why the fraternity and sorority members tend to form committed relationships. It's easier for them to get sex that way. If you're a guy in a top tier fraternity at a given school, the parties might be better for getting more frequent, uncommitted sex. Members of the top fraternities are even in the minority among fraternity members and even some of them get into LTRs from top sorority sisters.

The non-Greeks who party tend to go to random off campus apartment complexes or single family houses with parties. Most of those parties don't amount to much but intoxication for the majority.

The better way to play the college game as a non-Greek is to use the far less sexy options of after class approaches, extracurricular clubs, social circle building, and then some on campus daygame to form a committed relationships. Greeks can use Greek Life as their social circle building.

Since (as I said) I've never been drunk (nor do I have any desire to), that's the main reason I said college parties sound miserable. For me, the purpose of a college party would have been to get action (yet as you pointed out, action is unlikely for non-Greek).

In addition to the story I shared about a girl from class I had to dump after a week, there were a few other approaches on girls from class.

• There was a girl in one of my electives I developed a flirtatious dynamic with. Yet the dynamic failed to go any further.
• There were 2 girls from my major program I expressed interest in. One gave me a hard no; one gave me a maybe which became a no next time I followed up.

I belonged to an extracurricular club. There was a girl in the club freshman year (she was also a freshman) I was into. Yet my fear of rejection stopped me from making a move.

Social circle: The clique I settled into had 2 females and 6 males (including me). The 2 female members of the clique each ended up dating multiple male members at one point or another (yet never me)

I guess I was unlucky in the sense I had to rely on tech methods.

 

[Solomon]

So this was what 2013? I don't think girls back then were as dedicated about fitness and dietary habits as girls today that grew up with tiktok. So the girls I been with thus far have none of the cons you listed above

I do agree that you do have SOME younger women who take her of their shape and work out more. I noticed in my experince with Gen-z women they tend have better bodies if they work out that are more fit. However this generation you have a lot of women who don't hence the landwhales are at an all time high among young women compared to previous generations

 

[CornbreadFed]

That's impressive that you got laid at the majority of college parties that you attended. I was still in nice guy recovery from my upbringing during at least part of college and I think that impacted my outcomes at college parties, especially in freshman-sophomore years. There were other factors too.

Why do you think meeting women through academic classes is better? What about the on campus clubs?

Connection is better and most girls are going to be put off to drunk one night stands to a random guy at a party unless the timing is right.

 

[SW15]

I guess I was unlucky in the sense I had to rely on tech methods.

That is a waste of the college experience. The on campus experience that a college/university can offer should make the tech methods not necessary.

The tech methods were starting to become relevant when I was in college. During the 2001-2005 era, there were dating websites. Plenty of Fish started in 2003, OkCupid started in 2004, and Match.com had been around since the mid-1990s. This was the era in which online dating websites were first becoming de-stigmatized.

In freshman and sophomore years (2001-02 and 2002-03), use of AOL Instant Messenger (AIM) was significant. I remember in freshman year dorm that a lot of us were using AIM to send text-based messages to each other. This was a epre-cursor to cell phone based text messaging.

In 2004, both MySpace and Facebook launched too.

Outside of AIM, almost none of that tech was necessary to actually meet people.

Tech methods are more necessary for post-college working age adults than college students. I've also made the point that tech methods are a bad idea even for the post-college working age adults.

Connection is better and most girls are going to be put off to drunk one night stands to a random guy at a party unless the timing is right.

I agree. It's more difficult to get the drunk one night stands than the media has portrayed over the decades. I was that random guy at random parties in apartment complexes many times. It was easy to find a party at my school when you knew which apartment complexes tended to have parties. Some of these party complexes were walkable from on campus housing and that's a factor that helped freshmen get to parties.

There is an importance in the connection for many reasons. It is good to see another person who thinks that non-party methods are better.

 

[GoodMan32]

That is a waste of the college experience. The on campus experience that a college/university can offer should make the tech methods not necessary.

The tech methods were starting to become relevant when I was in college. During the 2001-2005 era, there were dating websites. Plenty of Fish started in 2003, OkCupid started in 2004, and Match.com had been around since the mid-1990s. This was the era in which online dating websites were first becoming de-stigmatized.

In freshman and sophomore years (2001-02 and 2002-03), use of AOL Instant Messenger (AIM) was significant. I remember in freshman year dorm that a lot of us were using AIM to send text-based messages to each other. This was a epre-cursor to cell phone based text messaging.

In 2004, both MySpace and Facebook launched too.

Outside of AIM, almost none of that tech was necessary to actually meet people.

Tech methods are more necessary for post-college working age adults than college students. I've also made the point that tech methods are a bad idea even for the post-college working age adults.



I agree. It's more difficult to get the drunk one night stands than the media has portrayed over the decades. I was that random guy at random parties in apartment complexes many times. It was easy to find a party at my school when you knew which apartment complexes tended to have parties. Some of these party complexes were walkable from on campus housing and that's a factor that helped freshmen get to parties.

There is an importance in the connection for many reasons. It is good to see another person who thinks that non-party methods are better.

You're right, a total waste of the college experience. But since tech methods were the only way I got laid in college, that'd suggest I couldn't have gotten laid any other way.

Had I been born 20 years sooner (or even 10 years sooner), I likely never would have gotten laid in college (as the internet was nonexistent 20 years prior...and in its infancy 10 years prior)

Between squandering the college experience, combined with the fact I'm not even using my degree (and I've never even made so much as 40k per year), college was pretty much pointless for me. The only real benefit I got from college was getting away from my parents.

 

[Solomon]

The thing is, in the midwest these women do not have as inflated of egos. Meanwhile, go to the Bible Belt where the average woman is fat and usually not white either (mostly black), the egos of these women goes through the roof. It is why Atlanta is one of the worst cities in the country if you like white girls, the white girls there think their $hit don't stink because they are somewhat rare compared to other races.

I talk a lot about

• Logistics
• Access
• Retention

These things have made a huge difference for me personally especially in the last 4-6 years.
Your location (Logistics)) makes a huge difference if a place doesn't work for you dating-wise then you may want to venture out. I have mentioned it to the likes of @SW15 who seems to dislike Dallas. IMO nowadays you can find a decent or great remote job depending on your field of work or college experience. In 2024 a man should not be relegated to one area if it doesn't yield him fruit of success in dating. People will say moving cause of dating or women is simping. That's disingenuous babble, a healthy dating life can do wonders for a man's psyche and self-esteem. Let's be frank there are certain areas of the country or world that don't suck but there are too many opportunities in 2024 to be stuck in an area where the women are stuck up or don't give you any play. I'm not telling men to become a passport bro but I certainly understand why passport bros have exploded in the last 3 years. If I were in that situation(Thank God I'm not) I would find a remote job and depending on my finances save money and get the **** outta doge. For some guys this may take 6 months for others a couple of years but would you rather be miserable in ATL, Dallas or LA or be happy AF in Salt Lake City Madison or Lincoln Nebraska . You are the master of your destiny, choose wisely!

I can't speak for everyone else's experiences but I think most adult men would struggle to match the opportunities afforded to them in college. I lived in a co-ed dorm for two years and there were young, hot, eager to have fun girls everywhere. In the lobby, roaming the floors, in the men's rooms, you name it. Not really an adult equivalent to any of that unless you're a mogul of some sort who can create that environment on your own. Of course that doesn't mean it has to be all downhill as an adult but let's not get carried away about college being overrated compared to the lives most 50 year old men are living, especially with regards to proximity to attractive young women.

Highly underrated post, I was thinking of a reply but nothing else needs to be said. I think that as a man you have to create opportunities for yourself does it become harder as you age? certainly but there are niche pockets that can yield fruit depending on what you are into lifestyle wise etc.

The overwhelming majority of 18-20 year old girls, in 2024, not back in your day type sh1t, are sexually inexperienced. Does that mean every girl that age has only 1-2 partners? No. There are exceptions. There's this chick in my gf's circle that was banging guys left and right her freshman year. Who is now in a sorority and has a boyfriend that she's loyal to. Just because those girls exist, don't mean they represent the majority.

I can believe this and the stats actually back up what up what you say.
A lot of people especially these RP youtubers are using outdated talking points once you do your own research and more importantly, hit the field you will realize a lot of people tend to repeat themselves or regurate RP nonsense that isn't based on personal experience.