Harsh Truth: Women pursue the men that they want

[SW15]

What holds me back the most is my crippling phobia of risking a rejection from a woman I need to run into again.

If a man lives in a reasonably sized city, this should not even be a consideration.

Men who set up dates from swipe apps in bigger cities are very unlikely to ever randomly run into a woman from a "1-2 date, no sex, no extended relationship" interaction.

Men who set up dates from most in-person approach venues are also very unlikely to ever randomly run into a woman after 1-2 failed dates.

Men who approach women in real life in bars and generic non-bar venues like grocery stores and malls also aren't likely to ever see a woman who rejects their approach ever again.

I have had to deal with seeing women who rejected me in my gym before. That wasn't pleasant but it wasn't enough for me to change gyms. The women eventually did change gyms or I changed gyms eventually but not due to rejections. There have been very rare instances where I saw a woman I had a failed date with again somewhere around the city.

 

[Hamurabimbi]

No matter how much a woman hates initiating, once the reality set in that no single woman would ever get a date or sex again (under my proposed societal shift) unless she makes a move, they'd start making move.

I don’t believe ‘women hate initiating’. When I’ve had women initiate, they usually seem happy, confident & as if they are enjoying themselves.

 

[deadmasterx]

I don’t believe ‘women hate initiating’. When I’ve had women initiate, they usually seem happy, confident & as if they are enjoying themselves.

I agree with that. But my experience tells me that almost no man will experience a woman approaching them because it will either be "exclusive" to someone they're really attracted to (regardless of how actually attractive that guy is) or a very "sex positive" woman, that will literally open her gates for you to come and get her. Usually the second kind of women will either be the love of your life or the dirtiest s--- you have ever been with. Some women just go for what they want.

I think that every guy should once make a fake female account on any dating site to understand how the female reality feels like. The overwhelming amount of likes and messages you get goes from amusing to boring real fast. Most average girls won't even need to approach a man at all. There are dozens, hundreads, even thousands of men just constantly throwing themselves their way. Even when I made that experiment (not gonna lie, I just wanted to joke around at the time) I felt disgusted by how a considerable amount of men behave. No wonder most men are left on seen.

 

[Hamurabimbi]

I agree with that. But my experience tells me that almost no man will experience a woman approaching them because it will either be "exclusive" to someone they're really attracted to (regardless of how actually attractive that guy is) or a very "sex positive" woman, that will literally open her gates for you to come and get her. Usually the second kind of women will either be the love of your life or the dirtiest s--- you have ever been with. Some women just go for what they want.

Women do approach.
But (at least in my case) it certainly isn’t an everyday occurrence.

I think that every guy should once make a fake female account on any dating site to understand how the female reality feels like. The overwhelming amount of likes and messages you get goes from amusing to boring real fast. Most average girls won't even need to approach a man at all. There are dozens, hundreads, even thousands of men just constantly throwing themselves their way. Even when I made that experiment (not gonna lie, I just wanted to joke around at the time) I felt disgusted by how a considerable amount of men behave. No wonder most men are left on seen.

My first Tinder date had 60 guys messaging her, in just the ten minutes while we were setting up our date.

 

[GoodMan32]

If a man lives in a reasonably sized city, this should not even be a consideration.

Men who set up dates from swipe apps in bigger cities are very unlikely to ever randomly run into a woman from a "1-2 date, no sex, no extended relationship" interaction.

Men who set up dates from most in-person approach venues are also very unlikely to ever randomly run into a woman after 1-2 failed dates.

Men who approach women in real life in bars and generic non-bar venues like grocery stores and malls also aren't likely to ever see a woman who rejects their approach ever again.

I have had to deal with seeing women who rejected me in my gym before. That wasn't pleasant but it wasn't enough for me to change gyms. The women eventually did change gyms or I changed gyms eventually but not due to rejections. There have been very rare instances where I saw a woman I had a failed date with again somewhere around the city.

It's true that we're highly unlikely to organically run into a woman from a swipe app.

It's also true that we're highly unlikely to run into a woman we meet through daygame or night game.

That being said, it's been pointed out on the forum that we live in the worst possible time period for men on swipe apps (with how oversaturated swipe apps are)

As for daygame and night game, while it is possible to succeed using these methods, I recall starting a thread where I asked about the rejection rate of posters. Multiple posters said they have pretty high rejection rates.

The type of woman I'm probably most likely to succeed with is a woman I already know in person. Yet, unfortunately, that's also the demographic I'm most likely to run into after a possible rejection. This sh1t sucks.

 

[GoodMan32]

I don’t believe ‘women hate initiating’. When I’ve had women initiate, they usually seem happy, confident & as if they are enjoying themselves.

I believe what you're saying.

It's been said on this forum that a woman with high interest levels will initiate.

I suppose the difference between dudes and gals is: We'll initiate if we're even marginally attracted to her. On the other hand, they have to be extremely attracted to us in order to initiate.

 

[GoodMan32]

I agree with that. But my experience tells me that almost no man will experience a woman approaching them because it will either be "exclusive" to someone they're really attracted to (regardless of how actually attractive that guy is) or a very "sex positive" woman, that will literally open her gates for you to come and get her. Usually the second kind of women will either be the love of your life or the dirtiest s--- you have ever been with. Some women just go for what they want.

I think that every guy should once make a fake female account on any dating site to understand how the female reality feels like. The overwhelming amount of likes and messages you get goes from amusing to boring real fast. Most average girls won't even need to approach a man at all. There are dozens, hundreads, even thousands of men just constantly throwing themselves their way. Even when I made that experiment (not gonna lie, I just wanted to joke around at the time) I felt disgusted by how a considerable amount of men behave. No wonder most men are left on seen.

The last time I had non-escort sex, the woman knocked on my door. Then we banged.

I'm not sure I'd count that as the woman initiating. Her actions weren't totally out of the blue. I had kissed her (my idea) earlier in the day. I also had flirted with her off and on for 2 years.

As for the experiment you recommend, I set up a username on a chatroom once where I pretended to be a woman. Even with no picture, I got lots of attention from men.

The extremely thirsty behavior you describe in men is a catch 22. When social norms dictate the man is supposed to initiate, and when you have to be a top 10% alpha male in order to easily do well with the ladies, of course the end result will be a lot of thirsty men shooting their shot. This is where my proposed societal shift (where the woman making the first move becomes the norm) would do wonders.

 

[SW15]

As for daygame and night game, while it is possible to succeed using these methods, I recall starting a thread where I asked about the rejection rate of posters. Multiple posters said they have pretty high rejection rates.

Rejection rates while approaching strangers in the real world are high. The rejection rates are more acceptable for 80-85th percentile + men. That's men who are 8+ level.

Men who are anywhere below an 8 will be taking high rejection rates when approaching strangers in any venue. The rates might be slightly below his Tinder/Hinge/Bumble rejection rates, but will still be very high and he will have to leave his home looking presentable to achieve those very high rejection rates.

The type of woman I'm probably most likely to succeed with is a woman I already know in person. Yet, unfortunately, that's also the demographic I'm most likely to run into after a possible rejection. This sh1t sucks.

The typical man has his best options within his social circle. If a man can find a girlfriend from his social circle, then he's going to be motivated to do that. He will get less grief and frustration by doing that as compared to approaching strangers.

Men resort to approaching strangers and using swipe apps when they have no social circle options.

 

[GoodMan32]

Rejection rates while approaching strangers in the real world are high. The rejection rates are more acceptable for 80-85th percentile + men. That's men who are 8+ level.

Men who are anywhere below an 8 will be taking high rejection rates when approaching strangers in any venue. The rates might be slightly below his Tinder/Hinge/Bumble rejection rates, but will still be very high and he will have to leave his home looking presentable to achieve those very high rejection rates.



The typical man has his best options within his social circle. If a man can find a girlfriend from his social circle, then he's going to be motivated to do that. He will get less grief and frustration by doing that as compared to approaching strangers.

Men resort to approaching strangers and using swipe apps when they have no social circle options.

On a post yesterday (when I asked you where you'd say you fall on the 1-10 scale), your reply was essentially "Ratings are meaningless unless they come from a woman"

I then mentioned that I can only ever recall getting a numerical rating from a gal 3 times (8.5, 9, and 1)

If we take the average of the 3, I'm a 6.1

If we exclude the 1 (since she, a high school classmate, was obviously rating my social standing at school moreso than my actual looks), however, I'm an 8.75

If I really am an 8.75, there's no reason for me to struggle as much as I've struggled (even being an autist, 8.75 would offset the ASD)

In addition to getting a woman through a social circle, what would you say about getting a woman you know in person, yet isn't necessarily in your social circle? Asking because that's the type of woman I have in mind when I say I'd probably have the highest success rate if I went for a woman I already know in person.

 

[SW15]

I then mentioned that I can only ever recall getting a numerical rating from a gal 3 times (8.5, 9, and 1)

If we take the average of the 3, I'm a 6.1

If we exclude the 1 (since she, a high school classmate, was obviously rating my social standing at school moreso than my actual looks), however, I'm an 8.75

If I really am an 8.75, there's no reason for me to struggle as much as I've struggled (even being an autist, 8.75 would offset the ASD)

It's a sample size of 3. A sample size of 3 is not going to be reliable in any way. Your sample size from women would need to be much larger.

If you could get your photos only rated by 500 - 1,000 women between ages 22-32, your sample size would be more reliable. It is highly unlikely that you wouldn't be an 8.75 off of that. Those ratings would only consider your looks and nothing else about you.

If you could get photos and somewhat extended videos of you behaving rated by 500 - 1,000 women ages 22-32, you would get some number as well, one that is not likely to be near 8.75. In this setup, the videos would give female evaluators some sense of your personality, so you'd get a review on looks and personality. If your annual salary and/or net worth were included in the data surround you, it would be even more accurate. Your SMV rating is dependent on looks, money, status, and personality.

If you got your face/physique rated by Wheat Waffles, it would be Wheat Waffles' opinion of your looks based on a comparison with thousands of men based on factors indicating attractiveness (jawlines, muscle size, etc.) and his assessment of how he thinks women would rater you.

 

[GoodMan32]

It's a sample size of 3. A sample size of 3 is not going to be reliable in any way. Your sample size from women would need to be much larger.

If you could get your photos only rated by 500 - 1,000 women between ages 22-32, your sample size would be more reliable. It is highly unlikely that you wouldn't be an 8.75 off of that. Those ratings would only consider your looks and nothing else about you.

If you could get photos and somewhat extended videos of you behaving rated by 500 - 1,000 women ages 22-32, you would get some number as well, one that is not likely to be near 8.75. In this setup, the videos would give female evaluators some sense of your personality, so you'd get a review on looks and personality. If your annual salary and/or net worth were included in the data surround you, it would be even more accurate. Your SMV rating is dependent on looks, money, status, and personality.

If you got your face/physique rated by Wheat Waffles, it would be Wheat Waffles' opinion of your looks based on a comparison with thousands of men based on factors indicating attractiveness (jawlines, muscle size, etc.) and his assessment of how he thinks women would rater you.

I looked up Wheat Waffles. I selected the $15 option (where he gives a rating plus analysis)

It will be interesting to see what he says. Before getting the rating, I am skeptical though. When looking him up, I found a reddit comment that said Wheat Waffles is a failed pizza delivery boy who's learned to make a living by insulting other men. Either way, $15 is cheap enough I was willing to take the chance.

When I was in high school, I met/added a decent amount of girls from other schools on Facebook (through various Facebook games). Many of these girls indicated they found me attractive (without giving an exact 1-10 rating). My experience on these Facebook games in high school would suggest my looks weren't the problem; my freaky creep stigma at my own school was the problem (seeing as plenty of girls from other schools found me attractive)

As for where I currently stand, I'm aware most 33 year old men would prefer 22-32 year old gals. In my specific case, on the other hand, wouldn't it make more sense to get rated by older gals (as that's my preferred demographic)?

What good does a rating from a 22-32 year old woman do if I'm more interested in getting with their moms?

 

[SW15]

I looked up Wheat Waffles. I selected the $15 option (where he gives a rating plus analysis)

It will be interesting to see what he says.

It will be. His opinion will have more merit than mine.

Male raters who are good will consider what women would typically say about the man.

I'm aware most 33 year old men would prefer 22-32 year old gals. In my specific case, on the other hand, wouldn't it make more sense to get rated by older gals (as that's my preferred demographic)?

What good does a rating from a 22-32 year old woman do if I'm more interested in getting with their moms?

It's an oddity.

It's difficult to get at least 500 women in a specific target age range to rate you. The only way it could be done is online and even getting that done online is going to be a challenge.

If you could get 500-1,000 women in the 45-54 age range to rate you (unlikely), it will have limited meaning. Most 45-54 year olds would be married and not actively looking. It's very hypothetical for them. Unmarried 45-54 year olds could rate you but would also be unlikely to date you. It's also hypothetical for them. This is likely to impact the outcome and the analysis of results.

If you used a sample size of 22-32 year old year old women who were never married, far more would be likely to date you. It's true that some of the 22-32 year olds participating in the rating effort would be in relationships and not actively looking. They are more likely to hit the market again at some point. It's a little bit less hypothetical for them and that helps.

 

[GoodMan32]

It will be. His opinion will have more merit than mine.

Male raters who are good will consider what women would typically say about the man.



It's an oddity.

It's difficult to get at least 500 women in a specific target age range to rate you. The only way it could be done is online and even getting that done online is going to be a challenge.

If you could get 500-1,000 women in the 45-54 age range to rate you (unlikely), it will have limited meaning. Most 45-54 year olds would be married and not actively looking. It's very hypothetical for them. Unmarried 45-54 year olds could rate you but would also be unlikely to date you. It's also hypothetical for them. This is likely to impact the outcome and the analysis of results.

If you used a sample size of 22-32 year old year old women who were never married, far more would be likely to date you. It's true that some of the 22-32 year olds participating in the rating effort would be in relationships and not actively looking. They are more likely to hit the market again at some point. It's a little bit less hypothetical for them and that helps.

Wheat Waffles' opinion still isn't worth as much as a woman's opinion. He can guess what a woman would say...but that's still not the same as getting an opinion directly from a woman.

It's true a 22-32 year old woman is less likely to be married. It's also true a 22-32 year old woman is less likely to disqualify me based on age alone. When all is said and done, however, if I were to ask out 100 22-32 year olds as well as 100 45-54 year olds, I wouldn't be shocked if I had a similar failure rate among both demographics. The only difference would be why they rejected me (The older ones would, in many cases at least, automatically reject me solely based on age...before they even gave any thought to my social awkwardness/baggage. The younger ones would reject me because of my social awkwardness/baggage)