Online dating has never been worse

[SW15]

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.

This was written in May 2024 by a 51 year old man who has been interacting with younger women about the current crop of 18-27 year olds. I don't agree with everything but it is a good general read for older men about Gen Z women.

Gen Z Isn’t Having Sex – How This Affects You - Alpha Male 2.0

Reading Time – 8 minutes Most people have no idea how infrequent young people are having sex these days as compared to prior generations. My generation, Gen X, was having more sex than the Millennials when we were young, and I’ve commented on that fact...

alphamale20.com

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

That would not have happened when I was 19-20 in 2002-2003. I was 19-20 in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. The immediate aftermath of 9/11 was a big concern in the USA at the time.

 

[corrector]

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:

View attachment 13332 View attachment 13333

I based it 100% on photoreeler, as it pertains to OLD.

You did mention, this is for dating profiles. Would it concern you then, you results from your dating profile, if it's not measuring up to what you expect, then it means the photos have to be better? Unless you can raise your photos up to an 8.5 or higher on photoreeler, then OLD might be a waste of time.

So, this is both encouraging and discouraging at the same time. The plus side, is that you could improve the photos until it's OLD-worthy, and then perhaps we stand to be in the competition and meet women from dating apps.

I would never take stock with photoreeler for in-person dynamics. There is also that "x-factor" we don't know about, and if you reduce yourself to how strangers evaluate you one time, then you might end up missing out on opportunities because this type of thing can hit your self-esteem very badly. I believed I was a 3 based on what place, and thought I was a "special case" here. Now I don't know how I actually stand on the looks scale, lol This would put more pressure on me to self-improve since I'm not as hopeless, lol

 

[BaronOfHair]

That would not have happened when I was 19-20 in 2002-2003. I was 19-20 in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. The immediate aftermath of 9/11 was a big concern in the USA at the time.

We were all still reeling from the shock of 9/11 in the early 2000s. Something to think about: By the mid-2000s, 24 and the rebooted Bond franchise had persuaded large swaths of the public that Big Brother really could save us all from The Bad Guys(The Parallax View and The X Files had things ass backwards), if we would just set aside outmoded ideas like personal liberty, and give BB more unchecked power over our daily lives

Those young adults who bought into such ideas back in the mid-2000s/had kids at around the same time instilled this same glorified view of the state and aversion to liberty in their offspring. Those offspring are now in their teens/approaching their 20s, if not already there

 

[GoodMan32]

I based it 100% on photoreeler, as it pertains to OLD.

You did mention, this is for dating profiles. Would it concern you then, you results from your dating profile, if it's not measuring up to what you expect, then it means the photos have to be better? Unless you can raise your photos up to an 8.5 or higher on photoreeler, then OLD might be a waste of time.

So, this is both encouraging and discouraging at the same time. The plus side, is that you could improve the photos until it's OLD-worthy, and then perhaps we stand to be in the competition and meet women from dating apps.

I would never take stock with photoreeler for in-person dynamics. There is also that "x-factor" we don't know about, and if you reduce yourself to how strangers evaluate you one time, then you might end up missing out on opportunities because this type of thing can hit your self-esteem very badly. I believed I was a 3 based on what place, and thought I was a "special case" here. Now I don't know how I actually stand on the looks scale, lol This would put more pressure on me to self-improve since I'm not as hopeless, lol

Photofeeler comes across as unrealistically hard to please. As I shared in the screenshots of my critiques, one picture was taken too far away, yet another picture was taken too close up.

I recommend using https://attractivenesstest.com/

That's the AI rater that rates me between 5 and 7 (depending on the picture). Free from human bias, an AI rater gives a realistic idea of your potential (In other words, some broads might dislike me for qualities like age, body type, hair color, eye color, ethnicity, social awkwardness, income level, lack of car ownership, etc...but I at least have the potential to be viewed as a 5-7 by the typical woman. And just as some broads might rate me lower than 5-7, some broads might rate me higher than 5-7)

I highly recommend you put some images of yourself through the linked website.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Neither has the quality of men....water finds its level usually.

 

[itouchyou]

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.

Oh I absolutely agree. Money doesn't matter. I said six figures simply as a guideline to give optimal opportunity. More money the better, but it's not needed

 

[corrector]

Photofeeler comes across as unrealistically hard to please. As I shared in the screenshots of my critiques, one picture was taken too far away, yet another picture was taken too close up.

I recommend using https://attractivenesstest.com/

That's the AI rater that rates me between 5 and 7 (depending on the picture). Free from human bias, an AI rater gives a realistic idea of your potential (In other words, some broads might dislike me for qualities like age, body type, hair color, eye color, ethnicity, social awkwardness, income level, lack of car ownership, etc...but I at least have the potential to be viewed as a 5-7 by the typical woman. And just as some broads might rate me lower than 5-7, some broads might rate me higher than 5-7)

I highly recommend you put some images of yourself through the linked website.

I have a similar 5-7 rating. Most of it was 6. But sounds better than 3.

 

[corrector]

It's interesting that in my photos, if I take a side-angle shot, it rated higher compared to a face shot. Indicating that if you angle your photo the right way, you might come out dramatically more attractive. If I take a plain face shot (ie not bike helmet, straght to the camera, it comes across as a 5. Even if you take the average that it's 6 rating. It seems that if my potential, as you say, is at best (ie as likely as it sounds) a 6, that's assuming I put the best foot forward, gymmaxx, and looksmaxx, that's still below the baseline of 6.5 because my face itself is not that handsome based on the AI (if staring directly to the camera).

That being said, there are still outliers. In your case, even if you had a 3-4 on photoreeler, there are some women in that group that probably rated you like a 7-8. It's just means at 5-7 we are not conventially attractive enough to see great results from OLD, or in-person cold approaching. That is despite your "disorders", or despite my situation. But not to the point of being able to claim a "truecel". Meaning some effort and self-improvement could net some results but would be an uphill battle. (ie your "disorder" is a big issue holding you back, and my living situation, would be the big issue with me).

 

[Learning Curve]

Flaking, girls looking much different than their pictures, randomly ghosting after conversations seemingly going well, boring personalities, I can go on and on.

There is nothing that can supplant in person chemistry, reading body language, subtle facial cues, versus texting on a 6 inch screen.

Communication is mostly nonverbal anyway, this is proven, so the chances are while you are swiping away, some guy in person is actually eliciting a far superior emotional response with your "e-girl" in person.

I have recently had some promising leads on insta and hinge fall through the wayside for no reason really, got a dog ate my homework type excuse for flaking on an already agreed to meetup. So I'm not speaking from my high horse, I'm experiencing the downsides of OLD, whereas in person I can get much better, hotter, younger prospects. @Bingo-Player I believe opened my eyes to this phenomenon here, not that this is breaking news, but in a completely technologically dominated world, it seems in person interactions are making a comeback.

Welcome to the new world of dating.

And this is only going to get worse.

You have to become a filtering expert in order to filter women effectively and remove narcissistic personalities.

I always told guys, look at a women's instagram. If she has 100 pictures of her face then run away as quickly as possible.

Instagram can actually show a-lot of signs of a women's personality. Does she have a dog which she has 100 pictures of? again women who love their dogs too much they can't associate the same emotion with a real human being. They also have narcissistic traits.

Also women with a-lot of tattoos are usually very insecure.

 

[GoodMan32]

It's interesting that in my photos, if I take a side-angle shot, it rated higher compared to a face shot. Indicating that if you angle your photo the right way, you might come out dramatically more attractive. If I take a plain face shot (ie not bike helmet, straght to the camera, it comes across as a 5. Even if you take the average that it's 6 rating. It seems that if my potential, as you say, is at best (ie as likely as it sounds) a 6, that's assuming I put the best foot forward, gymmaxx, and looksmaxx, that's still below the baseline of 6.5 because my face itself is not that handsome based on the AI (if staring directly to the camera).

That being said, there are still outliers. In your case, even if you had a 3-4 on photoreeler, there are some women in that group that probably rated you like a 7-8. It's just means at 5-7 we are not conventially attractive enough to see great results from OLD, or in-person cold approaching. That is despite your "disorders", or despite my situation. But not to the point of being able to claim a "truecel". Meaning some effort and self-improvement could net some results but would be an uphill battle. (ie your "disorder" is a big issue holding you back, and my living situation, would be the big issue with me).

So it turns out we're pretty similar looks-wise.

To test out my hypothesis that my looks have possibly gone downhill with age, I put 3 images of myself through the AI rater yesterday (one from age 18, one from 23, and one from my current age of 33)

The verdict: My looks have faded (but not by a whole lot)

I was a 7.49 at 18, a 7.25 at 23, and a 6.56 in the most recent selfie I took (earlier this month)

Unfortunately, I forget exactly how old I was in the image that got rated a 5-something the first time I used the AI rater.

There are 2 things that aren't adding up (and I'm not doubting the AI rater; all I'm saying is reality is strange):

1) Seeing as I was a 7.49 the summer after I graduated high school, it's shocking I had a reputation at the high school I had recently graduated from of being the freaky creep no girl would possibly want. Yeah, I know I was socially awkward in high school (even moreso than today)...but you'd think being a 7.49 would have prevented me from getting branded the freaky creep. Also shocking is the fact college wasn't much better.

2) If the 2 of us range from 5-something to 7-something, we should (statistically) succeed 50-something to 70-something percent of the time (as we're in the 50-something to 70-something percentile in terms of looks). Yet I get rejected over 90% of the time (and from the sounds of it, so do you)

I really don't think your living arrangement fully explains your bad luck, nor do I think my ASD fully explains my bad luck. A broad you meet through online dating or a cold approach isn't going to know your living arrangement. Even broads you meet through other methods might not know about your living arrangement (depending on how well they know you)

As for me, you and the other poster I shared the YouTube vid with appear to be in agreement I don't give off any surefire tells of having ASD in a first impression.

 

[corrector]

I really don't think your living arrangement fully explains your bad luck, nor do I think my ASD fully explains my bad luck. A broad you meet through online dating or a cold approach isn't going to know your living arrangement. Even broads you meet through other methods might not know about your living arrangement (depending on how well they know you)

To clarify, when I speak of living arrangement, I mean a whole host of things that do not make it condusive for me to meet or take out women for a date. For example, if your finances are in bad shape, you are generally poor and are working at a low-wage (relative to recent inflation/no raise to off-set cost of living costs) full-time job, and then you are also a caregiver for your folks, there is generally no time to get involved with anyone without it rocking the boat. It's almost to the point I would want a woman who could help take care of my mom/folks rather than even getting intimate. This is a small home as well and there is little area for even another person to live here. (Ie if it didn't work for my ex-wife in 2014, then I'm basically doomed "poor parents, poor low-wage full-time job, caregiver for parents). It's not a simple case like @needimprovement250, or your case where your folks have money/wealth and can take care of themselves. It's really bad.

 

[Gamisch]

Question to the both of you;

How long will you let your insecurities run you? Is there a set day in the future you plan to break free? Or do you already resigned ? Roll over and die?

The major difference between the "new" you and the old you is that now you've studied game. If you have to deal with a woman intensively, you'll be ahead of the older version of yourself.

Why study cars of you never look under the hood? At the end of the day women are equally easy as they are difficult. It's time to put shyte in action gents.

 

[GoodMan32]

To clarify, when I speak of living arrangement, I mean a whole host of things that do not make it condusive for me to meet or take out women for a date. For example, if your finances are in bad shape, you are generally poor and are working at a low-wage (relative to recent inflation/no raise to off-set cost of living costs) full-time job, and then you are also a caregiver for your folks, there is generally no time to get involved with anyone without it rocking the boat. It's almost to the point I would want a woman who could help take care of my mom/folks rather than even getting intimate. This is a small home as well and there is little area for even another person to live here. (Ie if it didn't work for my ex-wife in 2014, then I'm basically doomed "poor parents, poor low-wage full-time job, caregiver for parents). It's not a simple case like @needimprovement250, or your case where your folks have money/wealth and can take care of themselves. It's really bad.

I see, that puts it into perspective.

I wasn't aware you and your wife lived with your parents when you were married. You're right, if the small living space wasn't enough for her, it won't be enough for the typical woman (more importantly, even in a larger house, the typical woman doesn't want to live with a boyfriend/husband's parents)

 

[GoodMan32]

Question to the both of you;

How long will you let your insecurities run you? Is there a set day in the future you plan to break free? Or do you already resigned ? Roll over and die?

The major difference between the "new" you and the old you is that now you've studied game. If you have to deal with a woman intensively, you'll be ahead of the older version of yourself.

Why study cars of you never look under the hood? At the end of the day women are equally easy as they are difficult. It's time to put shyte in action gents.

The only thing that could fix my phobia of rejection is if my rejection rate (percentage-wise) plummets.

I hear many a man (and many a broad) tell me "The best way to get over your fear of rejection is to ask out more broads. You'll see that you won't die if the woman says no."

Here's the thing though: I'm aware I won't die if a woman says no (I never claimed I'd die from hearing the word no)

As long as I continue to get rejected over 90% of the time when expressing interest in a woman, however, the words from high school "you're a freaky creep no girl would possibly want" will always play on a continuous loop in my head.

Your question of when I'm going to break free is difficult to answer, as it depends on external factors beyond my control (I have no control over what a woman will say when I make a move on her)

I don't expect a 0% rejection rate (0% would be unrealistic; even an NFL quarterback gets rejected sometimes). If I could get my rejection rate down to 50%, I'd be ecstatic (and would no longer fear rejection)

 

[Gamisch]

The only thing that could fix my phobia of rejection is if my rejection rate (percentage-wise) plummets.

I'll get to that I sec.

I hear many a man (and many a broad) tell me "The best way to get over your fear of rejection is to ask out more broads. You'll see that you won't die if the woman says no."

Here's the thing though: I'm aware I won't die if a woman says no (I never claimed I'd die from hearing the word no)

Great. Because you literally won't. You might actually feel more alive.

As long as I continue to get rejected over 90% of the time when expressing interest in a woman, however, the words from high school "you're a freaky creep no girl would possibly want" will always play on a continuous loop in my head.

Heres the thing. There are a few archetypes, right. Tbe incel, Chad and Tyrone, Pookie. Even the mythical Chad gets his fair share of rejection. Not always direct but when a woman strays because she is curious about some new sausage that imo a rejection.

90 % of men will get rejected 90% of the time. The thing is that the most successful men know this. A successful salesman knows that 10 or even 5 or 3 % closing rate isn't that bad. But it's a fairytale you gonna get 1 on 1 successful results. The art is 1to make sure you diminish your rejection rate. This can parlty be done by knowing your bracket. 2. By being such a best version of yourself that even IF you get rejected it happens gracefully. (Imagine a man having to reject a hb9, or 8 or even 7).

You ( and any man including myself) will feel its actually UNNATURAL to abstain from women. That's why you are here looking for answers.

Your question of when I'm going to break free is difficult to answer, as it depends on external factors beyond my control (I have no control over what a woman will say when I make a move on her)

WRONG. This qoute summarizes your problem. You wait for a woman to enter your life and take away your insecurities. And how did that work out so far?? It's similar to a kid waiting for his bully to stop by being nice. The bully won't stop untill he faces his biggest fear; fighting back.

You gotta be so self-confident that you firslty realize that these factors are within your control. You control how women respond to you. Evey thing you do or don't do will determine how women and people in general respond to you.

I don't expect a 0% rejection rate (0% would be unrealistic; even an NFL quarterback gets rejected sometimes). If I could get my rejection rate down to 50%, I'd be ecstatic (and would no longer fear rejection)

Not realistic. Bring it down to 90. So you gotta make sure the PROCESS becomes fun. The reason why a salesman might happily wake yo is because he needs one or 2 sales to make a huge profit. That is your case. You need 1 win to boost yourself. Not 50.

 

[BillyPilgrim]

I'll get to that I sec.

Great. Because you literally won't. You might actually feel more alive.



Heres the thing. There are a few archetypes, right. Tbe incel, Chad and Tyrone, Pookie. Even the mythical Chad gets his fair share of rejection. Not always direct but when a woman strays because she is curious about some new sausage that imo a rejection.

90 % of men will get rejected 90% of the time. The thing is that the most successful men know this. A successful salesman knows that 10 or even 5 or 3 % closing rate isn't that bad. But it's a fairytale you gonna get 1 on 1 successful results. The art is 1to make sure you diminish your rejection rate. This can parlty be done by knowing your bracket. 2. By being such a best version of yourself that even IF you get rejected it happens gracefully. (Imagine a man having to reject a hb9, or 8 or even 7).

You ( and any man including myself) will feel its actually UNNATURAL to abstain from women. That's why you are here looking for answers.


WRONG. This qoute summarizes your problem. You wait for a woman to enter your life and take away your insecurities. And how did that work out so far?? It's similar to a kid waiting for his bully to stop by being nice. The bully won't stop untill he faces his biggest fear; fighting back.

You gotta be so self-confident that you firslty realize that these factors are within your control. You control how women respond to you. Evey thing you do or don't do will determine how women and people in general respond to you.



Bot realistic. Bring it down to 90. So you gotta make sure the PROCESS becomes fun. The reason why a salesman might happily wake yo is because he needs one or 2 sales to make a huge profit. That is your case. You need 1 win to boost yourself. Not 50.

Snowbird Grannies arriving by the thousands daily in Arizona!

 

[Bokanovsky]

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.

45? Isn't that a little young?

What's wrong with 65 year olds? Nothing sexier than a woman who can cash a social security check.

 

[BillyPilgrim]

Neither has the quality of men....water finds its level usually.

So do water analogies

 

[BadBoy89]

When women go online, they have to use the logical portion of their brain to find a mate. “Tall, dark and handsome + rich”. Why? Because there are no time constraints or the feeling like they are losing something.

Suppose a guy online was average height, average look, ok money, and did some exciting stuff. He would like a very limited amount of responses online from women.

Take the same guy and have him meet the same woman in an elevator. He’s got 2 min to spit game and ask her out. There’s a good chance he could do it and she would say yes. Why? Because her emotional brian kicks in, she has no time to reason or think about or he’s gone.

But hey, I know some people who met online and got married and are very happy together too.

 

[GoodMan32]

45? Isn't that a little young?

What's wrong with 65 year olds? Nothing sexier than a woman who can cash a social security check.

I'd go for 65 too.

45 is my lower limit.