Online dating has never been worse

[GoodMan32]

How easy is it for you to meet women on Tinder? OLD is for people who have social/psychological deficits but look good. In theory, you should get allot of matches and at least one date, no second date encounters if that is the case. If you are really good looking, then you might have more first dates then you have time to arrange for. If your looks are good more women will select and match with you.

The social/psychological deficits come mainly with in-person meeting on the first date and will likely result in allot of first meet-up crash and burn failures but you should have ease with arranging dates in the first place. If you have a large volume of first dates, then eventually out of 5-10 women, one of them might find you attractive enough to them to overlook your social/psychological deficiets or take a more active role in leading things and making it easy for you. How is that working out with you then?

I've never used Tinder.

I had a decent amount of success from craigslist and various dating sites when I was 20-23. My looks (especially at that age) undoubtedly made up for my social deficits. It also helped that when I was 20-23, dating/hookup platforms weren't oversaturated yet when I was 20-23.

I don't really use online dating/hookup platforms anymore (as has been said on this forum, they've become extremely oversaturated unless you're a top 10% man). I joined Feeld and FetLife this summer (per the recommendation of my therapist). No luck. I deactivated my accounts.

I've also used Bumble at various points from the ages of 25 to now (I don't currently have an account). I got some broads to chat with me. Nothing further.

 

[SW15]

I don't really use online dating/hookup platforms anymore (as has been said on this forum, they've become extremely oversaturated unless you're a top 10% man).

You've made the right decision there. You have to be 90th percentile + to compete on Tinder/Hinge/Bumble. Tinder is 76% male, Bumble/Hinge 65%. It's tough to compete for most men due to that oversaturation.

I think some middle of the bell curve men are realizing the competitive disadvantages they have on the swipe apps now.

 

[corrector]

You've made the right decision there. You have to be 90th percentile + to compete on Tinder/Hinge/Bumble. Tinder is 76% male, Bumble/Hinge 65%. It's tough to compete for most men due to that oversaturation.

I think some middle of the bell curve men are realizing the competitive disadvantages they have on the swipe apps now.

Yes, but he is in the top 10-15% of men if other women are rating his looks 9/10 or 8.5/10. I mentioned, that if he has the looks, and other women have rated him highly, then he should be successful in the dating apps.

I wonder how his chats on Bumble went, and wonder why they didn't go any further?

 

[Divorced w 3]

I will keep photoreeler in mind.

About the 8.5 rating from an ex, that was when I was 20 (Obviously a 20 year old will, in most cases, look better than a 33 year old. It could be that I was an 8.5 at 20 but have plummeted as the years have passed)

Another thing to keep in mind is every woman has a type. Even if the typical woman wouldn't rate me an 8.5 or a 9, it's possible a small cohort of the female population thinks I'm an absolute hottie.

The AI raters have rated me between a 5 and a 7 (depending on the picture). You're one of the few on here who has seen what I look like. I think the 7 is pretty accurate.

Lastly, you might be underestimating how much a psychological/social deficit can hurt a man's chances (even if he has good looks). Elliott Rodger was a good-looking guy. Yet we all know what his fate was.

I would never game over IG - it’s fvckboy land - men get phone numbers, and that will never change. Plenty of 20’s women gave me their numbers and engaged me on them.

I got rid of IG exactly for the stupidity of ratio and grid / story cultivation bull**** - but it’s absolutely true one’s ratio must be 1.x+ followers to following - you must delete whom you have to in order to achieve that. And keep it private! Private means exclusive and it also makes it infinitely easier since all you need is a good photo and a super, super short bio.

 

[GoodMan32]

Yes, but he is in the top 10-15% of men if other women are rating his looks 9/10 or 8.5/10. I mentioned, that if he has the looks, and other women have rated him highly, then he should be successful in the dating apps.

I wonder how his chats on Bumble went, and wonder why they didn't go any further?

The 8.5 and 9/10 ratings were outliers (and took place when I was much younger; 20 and 25)

I'd say the 7/10 that the AI looks rater gave to a more recent picture of me is more realistic. Which puts me in the top 30%. I'm unable to compete with the top 10-15% (especially with my baggage)

Interestingly, the way I got my affair with a married woman back when I was 23 was: I posted a Craigslist ad venting about how hard it is to get laid for a man. The married woman replied to my ad, told me she's looking for an affair, told me getting laid as a woman isn't as easy as I think (granted, she was 45 and fat). After seeing a picture of me, she said I had good looks (and she was shocked I had a hard time getting laid). The rest is history.

On Bumble, the 2 chats I remember most:

-A woman close in age to me was talking about dogs, talking about how she doesn't like to meet men at bars, etc.

-A 50 year old doctor was talking to me about books. Even with her old age, that's extremely impressive a doctor reached out to me. The best part: I prefer her age bracket anyway.

In both cases, I'd venture to guess the gender ratio on Bumble simply meant they had plenty of other options (and that's why the discussions died down)

 

[SW15]

the gender ratio on Bumble simply meant they had plenty of other options (and that's why the discussions died down)

Bumble is 65% male/35% female. Women have abundance on Bumble. They are seeking and often believe that they are entitled to a 90th percentile + man.

Here's an example of a woman who is roughly a '6' (somewhat cute) who has been riding the penis carousel with men who are 85th-90th percentile +. This is what happens on Bumble, as well as Tinder and Hinge.

 

[GoodMan32]

Bumble is 65% male/35% female. Women have abundance on Bumble. They are seeking and often believe that they are entitled to a 90th percentile + man.

Here's an example of a woman who is roughly a '6' (somewhat cute) who has been riding the penis carousel with men who are 85th-90th percentile +. This is what happens on Bumble, as well as Tinder and Hinge.

The part of the vid where the male narrator said "It's a disaster because you're going out of your league and he doesn't really want you" made me laugh.

As for Bumble, it's totally true that many a broad can get men above her SMV on Bumble.

What about the 50 year old doctor who reached out to me on Bumble though? I honestly don't even remember what she looked like. Suffice to say, however, a 50 year old broad isn't anywhere near the top of the SMV hierarchy. And unlike a mid-tier 25 year old woman, Chads are less likely to get with a 50 year old woman (even as a short-term smash piece)

Come to think of it, even with the gender ratio being what it is on Bumble, it's shocking the 50 year old doctor stopped chatting with me. It couldn't be my age (the fact she reached out to me in the first place means she's on board with large age gaps)

 

[FlexpertHamilton]

Most men struggle to get followers on IG, either with their private or public profiles. It's far easier for women to get IG followers.

Most men don't have an IG profile that is going to generate the kind of following necessary to utilize IG well for finding dates and sexual partners.

I don't think it is as easy to get responses to DM's as you think that it is. A man who has 100 Followers on IG but is Following 400 accounts isn't going to get responses. His Followers-to-Following ratio is crap. Most men don't have enough quantity of Followers and they have a lousy Followers-to-Following ratio. Neither impresses women. Women are looking for men with substantial Follower counts (around 1,000+ is good) and men with more Followers than Following. A man with 100 Followers but Following only 60 accounts might be impressive enough with his ratio to warrant responses despite his low Follower count.



I agree this is a problem on both swipe apps and on IG.

This compounds the Followers-to-Following ratio problem and the quantity of Followers issues raised above.

I don't think it really matters that much. 500-1000 followers is more is enough; your pics also matter a lot. Ratio of followers:followees and likes:followers probably matters too but I don't give a shvt an d I've put like zero effort into mine besides my pics (which are the same as OLD plus pics of parks and stuff) but if I tried to build it up it would probably work even better for me.

It would take a lot of work to build that up, and I won't try to argue it's worth it unless you really think you can make a system from it. Some men do. Just an alternative strategy. Ultimately it is just a numbers game though...

 

[itouchyou]

The six figures fairytale again. We

Source: Google. According to the latest figures by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, the average salary in USA per month is $5,677 or $68,124 per year. As of 2023, the gross minimum salary in the USA is $32.75 per hour. Salaries range from $32,916 to $112,268 per year and include housing, transport, and other benefits.


Most Americans can't pull a thousand for emergency cases. And. Meanwhile some Gonzalez dude sells flowers or street food and yet comes home to a loving family.

But I am the one who's brain washed? Oops there goes gravity, back to reality..

I don't understand what you're trying to say here. Are you saying six figures aren't needed?

 

[Gamisch]

I don't understand what you're trying to say here. Are you saying six figures aren't needed?

That's exactly what I say.

Not only that, 6 fig isn't realistic most men /people, and not even necessary. In Europe an experienced carpenter makes a little less than 4 k per month. That's heavy middle-class, buying a nice house, car and the ability to save money.

The six figures indoctrination comes from women. We've heard so many women say that, that unconsciously we saved it on our harddrives.

Don't get me wrong; I've been through the trenches of dating and now all I do is making money. But I also know that money won't define me.

I'd even say that I had the baddest bytches when I was broke broke. When I started making money I lost that sharp raw edge. Why ? Because a broke man will compensate for his lack of materialism by getting women, which is a catch 22 because in order to date you need money.

I do however agree that it's not bad to AIM at 6 figs, but it shouldn't define you. My new strategy is to act like I'm not making money, don't show off to women unless absolutely necessary.

 

[MatureDJ]

OLD should be treated as nothing more than a mobile game. Swipe and keep it moving. If the game gets boring just uninstall.

Problem is, men are taking it serious.

I sometimes go through Tinder while I have some Chaturbate gal in a side window.

 

[MatureDJ]

As a 33 year old who prefers 45+, hearing you say 30-ish men are desired by 45+ broads sounds like music to my ears.

Why would a 33 year old man prefer a 45+ one? When I was that age, the age-range that I was interested in started going down, such that by age 39, I was most interested in 19 year-olds.

 

[MatureDJ]

Agreed, online dating is at its worst right now.

Incidentally, I found out about a live speed-dating event in my neighborhood today. I am attending. I anticipate it will be better than a swipe app (the in-person aspect alone will give me a major edge I wouldn't have on an app)

Do you have in your profile that you are looking for a nice older broad?

 

[BillyPilgrim]

Why would a 33 year old man prefer a 45+ one? When I was that age, the age-range that I was interested in started going down, such that by age 39, I was most interested in 19 year-olds.

19 year olds in the 90's were cool, the ones these days are dorks. Also, where OP lives is prob the best place for older women in the U.S.

 

[SW15]

Why would a 33 year old man prefer a 45+ one? When I was that age, the age-range that I was interested in started going down, such that by age 39, I was most interested in 19 year-olds.

19 year olds in the 90's were cool, the ones these days are dorks.

When I started to get into the 30-35 range, I started to notice that I was getting interested in women who were 5-7+ years younger than I was at that time. Many 35-44 year old men are into the 18-24 year old women.

The 18-24 year olds of today are Generation Z. Generation Z 19 year olds in 2024 aren't as cool as Gen X when they were 19 or even early Millennials around that time. As a early Millennial, I was 19 in 2002. The 19 year old females I knew in 2002 would have more interesting from a personality standpoint as compared to 19 year olds now.

 

[GoodMan32]

I don't get why you are struggling at all with women, like you are potraying yourself on here. Even if you have a psycho-social problem, women tend to be forgiven and even initiate with you if this is the case. However, from your posting it is not the case and perhaps the people who rated you were not being honest with you.

I find that when you try a site like photoreeler, and spend a little money, you'll get an honest rating. I got rated a 3/10 there on average, but there were outliers that rated my looks both higher and lower. It's clear that I'm not conventionally attractive (ie I don't need a site like that to know that, but it confirms it). However, based on your posts and how you are so far with the ladies, I would seriously doubt the 9 rating by that broad, and the 8.5 by the ex, as it's too personal when it's one person doing such a rating. Maybe they want to spare your feelings and are holding back what they really think. Try photoreeler and let us know how that goes.

After checking out photofeeler, turns out I already have an account (and have used it before). My attractiveness ratings on there range from 3 to 4.

If photofeeler is why you say you're a 3, I'm telling you right now: Don't believe it.

Photofeeler's so-called "attractiveness" ratings are more about whether the rater thinks it would make a good dating profile picture. For example, the following critiques I got have hardly anything to do with my actual looks:

 

[GoodMan32]

Why would a 33 year old man prefer a 45+ one? When I was that age, the age-range that I was interested in started going down, such that by age 39, I was most interested in 19 year-olds.

I've mentioned before that I'm terrified of pregnancy (that's why I prefer 45+)

Even in my early 20s when I was college, I managed to get it up for (and climax with) a smelly 54 year old woman I wasn't even attracted to. If early 20s me was capable of that, surely 33 year old me could easily get it up for a reasonably attractive 45 year old cougar.

 

[GoodMan32]

Do you have in your profile that you are looking for a nice older broad?

I deactivated all my dating/hookup profiles.

On FetLife (I dabbled with FetLife this summer), I mentioned I prefer 45+ (but am open to all legal ages)

Incidentally, a 49 year old on FetLife sent me a message inviting herself over. Unfortunately, our schedules failed to match up (she's only available at times when I'm away at work)

 

[GoodMan32]

When I started to get into the 30-35 range, I started to notice that I was getting interested in women who were 5-7+ years younger than I was at that time. Many 35-44 year old men are into the 18-24 year old women.

The 18-24 year olds of today are Generation Z. Generation Z 19 year olds in 2024 aren't as cool as Gen X when they were 19 or even early Millennials around that time. As a early Millennial, I was 19 in 2002. The 19 year old females I knew in 2002 would have more interesting from a personality standpoint as compared to 19 year olds now.

For obvious reasons, I'm probably biased...but I'd say even those born in the middle of the Millennial generation were cooler at 19 than today's 19 year olds. Those from my birth year turned 19 in 2010; there was a big difference between a 19 year old in 2010 vs a 19 year old today.

 

[BaronOfHair]

The 19 year old females I knew in 2002 would have more interesting from a personality standpoint as compared to 19 year olds now.

Dunno that 19 year olds were "more interesting" then, nonetheless their definitions of things like "safety" and ideas on personal liberty were very different than those of many 19 and 20 year olds today https://www.cato.org/blog/nearly-third-gen-z-favors-home-government-surveillance-cameras-1 It's tough to have a rational conversation with folks who've gotten up on such bandwagons, as they operate from a frame of reference that's far more reminiscent of Maoist China than anything else