Why Aren’t More People Getting Married? Ask Women What Dating Is Like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a guest editorial in NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/11/opinion/marriage-women-men-dating.html

I agree with the DCUM consensus that women can now afford to be picky because they have higher educations and incomes. But the author suggests that modern men are not emotionally available. Nonsense, - men were not emotionally available in previous generations either, but people still got married! The author calls for policies such as supporting single parents and higher ed cost reform. If you subsidize single parents, then you get more of them. If you want to increase marriage rates, then you need to start burning witches, bachelors, and spinsters.

Are women too picky? The article mentions an anthropologists book about egg freezing that mention "online ageism" and has a taxonomic Table 1.1 of cads. Or consider the author's college friend, who must be in her forties now:

One of these friends, with whom I went to college, would like nothing more than to be married. She’s beautiful and successful, and not, as far as I can tell, overly “picky.” She has had long-term relationships in the past, and cherishes the intimacy and stability they provide. To that end, she keeps a post-it note on a bulletin board. On it, she has drawn out 10 lines of 10 circles each. Every time she goes on a date with someone new, she fills in a circle. She’s committed to going on at least a hundred dates as she searches for a male partner with whom she can have a family. In two years, she’s filled in nearly half of the circles, and she’s still single. It’s like an SAT test form where every answer is incorrect. When she asks her male friends to set her up with their friends, they consistently tell her that no one they know would be good enough for her. “It’s like, how bad are you guys?” she marvels.

Yes, this friend sounds too picky.

Look it's all relative. The article described the lucky friend as beautiful and successful. Of course they didn't print her picture or provide her resume. A truly beautiful successful woman simply does not have these kinds of ongoing chronic problems getting dates, even if she is a total head case.

Remember the MSM has warped the definition of beauty to include basically anything that satisfies the woke agenda. You cannot trust articles like this at face value. The entire point was to portray the lonely women as victims of misogyny and patriarchy. Nothing is their fault. Have an out of wedlock baby with a thug absent baby daddy? Not her fault. Etc.

Males haven't drifted anywhere. If a woman is sweet.kind sexy and loyal, not extremely and openly promiscuous and not insane, she will have no trouble finding a good man to wife her up. That's pretty much the way it's always been. If she has unreasonable expectations of reality that is not realitys fault and it's not the fault of men. Sorry but most guys don't want an obese illiterate low income baby mama nor do they want a neurotic whacko refugee from a woody Allen movie who thinks drawing a bunch of circles will solve her problems.

You have even seen it in some of the bitter nasty responses in this thread from these kind of women.

Lies. THere are plenty of traditionally and exceptionally beautiful women who are perpetually single and/or have trouble dating despite being sane and perfectly nice. Sandra Bullock comes to mind and there are plenty of other celebrity women who fit this mold. you just want to believe we live in some kind of fairytale where everything magically works out for everyone perfectly fairly

Nope! The prior poster is exactly right. If you have unreasonable expectations, have a terrible personality, and think you are attractive (but really are average), you will be single forever until you give up and embrace cat collecting and boxed wine.

More cope. The reality is that life is unfair and sometimes things dont work out. And many attractive women rightfully have higher standards and arent willing to settle as much for the ugly guy, so they stay single. It is what it is. It's a fiction to imagine that life works out perfectly fairly and everyone finds their exact match.

I am a reasonably attractive guy. I often date slightly less attractive women. Their personalities are soooo much better than women who think they are attractive.

Normally the better looking a women thinks she is, the meaner her personality is. 20 years from now the pretty woman won't be that attractive. The women with a great personality will still be beautiful.

And see, this is something a lot of guys think. That all beautiful women are secretly mean, probably because they have some trauma of being rejected in 8th grade or something. This is the reality for ACTUALLY beautiful women- having some kind of weird projection of a personality beamed onto you by total strangers who resent you for your looks. I'm glad someone posted it, because it's a phenomenon I've observed many times that truly, strikingly attractive women have to contend with. That's one of the reasons they have a harder time dating than average looking women

Nonsense. "Truly, strikingly attractive women" are not anyone you personally know. You know nothing about their lives. The people you work with who are single and blaming it on men are not truly, strikingly attractive women. The truly attractive women already got married or if not they are in a profession where physical beauty is critical and do not lack for male attention.

It's like some ppl who gave the example of sandra bullock. She's rich and famous but not particularly attractive.

What planet are you on that you think Sandra Bullock is not attractive? I guess Charlize Theron who is single is ugly too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a guest editorial in NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/11/opinion/marriage-women-men-dating.html

I agree with the DCUM consensus that women can now afford to be picky because they have higher educations and incomes. But the author suggests that modern men are not emotionally available. Nonsense, - men were not emotionally available in previous generations either, but people still got married! The author calls for policies such as supporting single parents and higher ed cost reform. If you subsidize single parents, then you get more of them. If you want to increase marriage rates, then you need to start burning witches, bachelors, and spinsters.

Are women too picky? The article mentions an anthropologists book about egg freezing that mention "online ageism" and has a taxonomic Table 1.1 of cads. Or consider the author's college friend, who must be in her forties now:

One of these friends, with whom I went to college, would like nothing more than to be married. She’s beautiful and successful, and not, as far as I can tell, overly “picky.” She has had long-term relationships in the past, and cherishes the intimacy and stability they provide. To that end, she keeps a post-it note on a bulletin board. On it, she has drawn out 10 lines of 10 circles each. Every time she goes on a date with someone new, she fills in a circle. She’s committed to going on at least a hundred dates as she searches for a male partner with whom she can have a family. In two years, she’s filled in nearly half of the circles, and she’s still single. It’s like an SAT test form where every answer is incorrect. When she asks her male friends to set her up with their friends, they consistently tell her that no one they know would be good enough for her. “It’s like, how bad are you guys?” she marvels.

Yes, this friend sounds too picky.

Look it's all relative. The article described the lucky friend as beautiful and successful. Of course they didn't print her picture or provide her resume. A truly beautiful successful woman simply does not have these kinds of ongoing chronic problems getting dates, even if she is a total head case.

Remember the MSM has warped the definition of beauty to include basically anything that satisfies the woke agenda. You cannot trust articles like this at face value. The entire point was to portray the lonely women as victims of misogyny and patriarchy. Nothing is their fault. Have an out of wedlock baby with a thug absent baby daddy? Not her fault. Etc.

Males haven't drifted anywhere. If a woman is sweet.kind sexy and loyal, not extremely and openly promiscuous and not insane, she will have no trouble finding a good man to wife her up. That's pretty much the way it's always been. If she has unreasonable expectations of reality that is not realitys fault and it's not the fault of men. Sorry but most guys don't want an obese illiterate low income baby mama nor do they want a neurotic whacko refugee from a woody Allen movie who thinks drawing a bunch of circles will solve her problems.

You have even seen it in some of the bitter nasty responses in this thread from these kind of women.

Lies. THere are plenty of traditionally and exceptionally beautiful women who are perpetually single and/or have trouble dating despite being sane and perfectly nice. Sandra Bullock comes to mind and there are plenty of other celebrity women who fit this mold. you just want to believe we live in some kind of fairytale where everything magically works out for everyone perfectly fairly

Nope! The prior poster is exactly right. If you have unreasonable expectations, have a terrible personality, and think you are attractive (but really are average), you will be single forever until you give up and embrace cat collecting and boxed wine.

More cope. The reality is that life is unfair and sometimes things dont work out. And many attractive women rightfully have higher standards and arent willing to settle as much for the ugly guy, so they stay single. It is what it is. It's a fiction to imagine that life works out perfectly fairly and everyone finds their exact match.

I am a reasonably attractive guy. I often date slightly less attractive women. Their personalities are soooo much better than women who think they are attractive.

Normally the better looking a women thinks she is, the meaner her personality is. 20 years from now the pretty woman won't be that attractive. The women with a great personality will still be beautiful.

And see, this is something a lot of guys think. That all beautiful women are secretly mean, probably because they have some trauma of being rejected in 8th grade or something. This is the reality for ACTUALLY beautiful women- having some kind of weird projection of a personality beamed onto you by total strangers who resent you for your looks. I'm glad someone posted it, because it's a phenomenon I've observed many times that truly, strikingly attractive women have to contend with. That's one of the reasons they have a harder time dating than average looking women

Nonsense. "Truly, strikingly attractive women" are not anyone you personally know. You know nothing about their lives. The people you work with who are single and blaming it on men are not truly, strikingly attractive women. The truly attractive women already got married or if not they are in a profession where physical beauty is critical and do not lack for male attention.

It's like some ppl who gave the example of sandra bullock. She's rich and famous but not particularly attractive.

Putting "nonsense" before your post won't make your nonsensical rambling any better. There are plenty of very beautiful women who have a hard time getting matched up. Sometimes because they intimidate men, as literally the man before said outright. Stop denying the truth that everyone can see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a guest editorial in NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/11/opinion/marriage-women-men-dating.html

I agree with the DCUM consensus that women can now afford to be picky because they have higher educations and incomes. But the author suggests that modern men are not emotionally available. Nonsense, - men were not emotionally available in previous generations either, but people still got married! The author calls for policies such as supporting single parents and higher ed cost reform. If you subsidize single parents, then you get more of them. If you want to increase marriage rates, then you need to start burning witches, bachelors, and spinsters.

Are women too picky? The article mentions an anthropologists book about egg freezing that mention "online ageism" and has a taxonomic Table 1.1 of cads. Or consider the author's college friend, who must be in her forties now:

One of these friends, with whom I went to college, would like nothing more than to be married. She’s beautiful and successful, and not, as far as I can tell, overly “picky.” She has had long-term relationships in the past, and cherishes the intimacy and stability they provide. To that end, she keeps a post-it note on a bulletin board. On it, she has drawn out 10 lines of 10 circles each. Every time she goes on a date with someone new, she fills in a circle. She’s committed to going on at least a hundred dates as she searches for a male partner with whom she can have a family. In two years, she’s filled in nearly half of the circles, and she’s still single. It’s like an SAT test form where every answer is incorrect. When she asks her male friends to set her up with their friends, they consistently tell her that no one they know would be good enough for her. “It’s like, how bad are you guys?” she marvels.

Yes, this friend sounds too picky.

Look it's all relative. The article described the lucky friend as beautiful and successful. Of course they didn't print her picture or provide her resume. A truly beautiful successful woman simply does not have these kinds of ongoing chronic problems getting dates, even if she is a total head case.

Remember the MSM has warped the definition of beauty to include basically anything that satisfies the woke agenda. You cannot trust articles like this at face value. The entire point was to portray the lonely women as victims of misogyny and patriarchy. Nothing is their fault. Have an out of wedlock baby with a thug absent baby daddy? Not her fault. Etc.

Males haven't drifted anywhere. If a woman is sweet.kind sexy and loyal, not extremely and openly promiscuous and not insane, she will have no trouble finding a good man to wife her up. That's pretty much the way it's always been. If she has unreasonable expectations of reality that is not realitys fault and it's not the fault of men. Sorry but most guys don't want an obese illiterate low income baby mama nor do they want a neurotic whacko refugee from a woody Allen movie who thinks drawing a bunch of circles will solve her problems.

You have even seen it in some of the bitter nasty responses in this thread from these kind of women.

Lies. THere are plenty of traditionally and exceptionally beautiful women who are perpetually single and/or have trouble dating despite being sane and perfectly nice. Sandra Bullock comes to mind and there are plenty of other celebrity women who fit this mold. you just want to believe we live in some kind of fairytale where everything magically works out for everyone perfectly fairly

Nope! The prior poster is exactly right. If you have unreasonable expectations, have a terrible personality, and think you are attractive (but really are average), you will be single forever until you give up and embrace cat collecting and boxed wine.

More cope. The reality is that life is unfair and sometimes things dont work out. And many attractive women rightfully have higher standards and arent willing to settle as much for the ugly guy, so they stay single. It is what it is. It's a fiction to imagine that life works out perfectly fairly and everyone finds their exact match.

I am a reasonably attractive guy. I often date slightly less attractive women. Their personalities are soooo much better than women who think they are attractive.

Normally the better looking a women thinks she is, the meaner her personality is. 20 years from now the pretty woman won't be that attractive. The women with a great personality will still be beautiful.

And see, this is something a lot of guys think. That all beautiful women are secretly mean, probably because they have some trauma of being rejected in 8th grade or something. This is the reality for ACTUALLY beautiful women- having some kind of weird projection of a personality beamed onto you by total strangers who resent you for your looks. I'm glad someone posted it, because it's a phenomenon I've observed many times that truly, strikingly attractive women have to contend with. That's one of the reasons they have a harder time dating than average looking women

Nonsense. "Truly, strikingly attractive women" are not anyone you personally know. You know nothing about their lives. The people you work with who are single and blaming it on men are not truly, strikingly attractive women. The truly attractive women already got married or if not they are in a profession where physical beauty is critical and do not lack for male attention.

It's like some ppl who gave the example of sandra bullock. She's rich and famous but not particularly attractive.

I think people sometimes mix up beautiful and unattainable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can't find the source anymore, but I read an interesting article about how, historically, a good percentage of the population did not marry. They joined religious orders, joined the army, became educators, moved in with family to help out ... we have this cultural ideal that everybody pairs off, but that has never been true and, socially speaking, doesn't need to be true. Single people are a normal part of society.

Those people were often voluntarily celibate, though, or removed from the societal sexual marketplace by death, disease, disability, and so on, in. Societal and medical pressures also enforced a strict sexual code. Promiscuity led to death, ostracization, etc.

Much current misery for both sexes comes from these people, who would historically be single in the true since of the word, trying to have it both ways, being unmarried and still consorting with the opposite sex, and becoming jaded and bitter over time through failure after failure with said opposite sex. Sorry, but it just doesn’t work out in the long term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
A couple of points:

As a man I don't want to raise someone else's kids. (You want a good man? Don't have kids outside of marriage.)

Many women in DC are smart, that's great! But many are ~40+ and have prioritized their careers over family for most of their lives. I don't care about the status-level of my partner's job. I don't care how much money my partner makes. I do care if someone will be a good partner and can give me time and togetherness. (The DC area dating apps are filled with attractive, single, smart, 40 year old female attorneys.)

Women who are fat aren't attractive. (Most women who are online dating are obese. You want a good man? Have good hygiene, go to the gym regularly and diet.)

Women who are old aren't attractive. (You want a man? Lock one down before you turn 35-40. After 45 most women are invisible to men and you'll be stuck dating 60 year old men.)

Most people (men or women) who are still dating and never married by their late 30s-40s aren't partner material. (Emotional, psychological, sexual, commitment issues...)

Are looks important to men? Yes! And sex and a real emotional connection.

One easy fact about dating: if you want to find someone who will commit to you, date someone who is less attractive than you are. If you are a 6, date a 4 or 5.


Either you are in your late 30s-40s and aren't partner material by your own admission or you are too young to know what you are talking about. In any case, your only meaningful contribution to this thread is some eyerolls

No he’s exactly on point!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Normally the better looking a women thinks she is, the meaner her personality is.
Haven't found this to be true at all.

There is a term for pretty women with nice personalities who want to be married. It is "Mrs."

There is a reason why people are single. Obviously there are the fat, single moms. But DC has many single educated women. Some are "difficult" or inflexible. One DCUM single was slender, but only wanted to wear hiking boots and bulky sweaters. Those difficult women don't want to hang out in bars, or do online dating. They certainly don't want to get professional photos and work on their profiles. They don't want to date somebody of different race, politics, or religion. They are just a pain in the ass about matching.

Dating after divorce, I was shocked by women who would sleep with me, but not date me. Some women only date alcoholics or artists or bums, not educated Wall Street guys. This has become an iconic joke. Hot single women have a reason for being single.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pInk1rV2VEg

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a guest editorial in NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/11/opinion/marriage-women-men-dating.html

I agree with the DCUM consensus that women can now afford to be picky because they have higher educations and incomes. But the author suggests that modern men are not emotionally available. Nonsense, - men were not emotionally available in previous generations either, but people still got married! The author calls for policies such as supporting single parents and higher ed cost reform. If you subsidize single parents, then you get more of them. If you want to increase marriage rates, then you need to start burning witches, bachelors, and spinsters.

Are women too picky? The article mentions an anthropologists book about egg freezing that mention "online ageism" and has a taxonomic Table 1.1 of cads. Or consider the author's college friend, who must be in her forties now:

One of these friends, with whom I went to college, would like nothing more than to be married. She’s beautiful and successful, and not, as far as I can tell, overly “picky.” She has had long-term relationships in the past, and cherishes the intimacy and stability they provide. To that end, she keeps a post-it note on a bulletin board. On it, she has drawn out 10 lines of 10 circles each. Every time she goes on a date with someone new, she fills in a circle. She’s committed to going on at least a hundred dates as she searches for a male partner with whom she can have a family. In two years, she’s filled in nearly half of the circles, and she’s still single. It’s like an SAT test form where every answer is incorrect. When she asks her male friends to set her up with their friends, they consistently tell her that no one they know would be good enough for her. “It’s like, how bad are you guys?” she marvels.

Yes, this friend sounds too picky.

Look it's all relative. The article described the lucky friend as beautiful and successful. Of course they didn't print her picture or provide her resume. A truly beautiful successful woman simply does not have these kinds of ongoing chronic problems getting dates, even if she is a total head case.

Remember the MSM has warped the definition of beauty to include basically anything that satisfies the woke agenda. You cannot trust articles like this at face value. The entire point was to portray the lonely women as victims of misogyny and patriarchy. Nothing is their fault. Have an out of wedlock baby with a thug absent baby daddy? Not her fault. Etc.

Males haven't drifted anywhere. If a woman is sweet.kind sexy and loyal, not extremely and openly promiscuous and not insane, she will have no trouble finding a good man to wife her up. That's pretty much the way it's always been. If she has unreasonable expectations of reality that is not realitys fault and it's not the fault of men. Sorry but most guys don't want an obese illiterate low income baby mama nor do they want a neurotic whacko refugee from a woody Allen movie who thinks drawing a bunch of circles will solve her problems.

You have even seen it in some of the bitter nasty responses in this thread from these kind of women.

Lies. THere are plenty of traditionally and exceptionally beautiful women who are perpetually single and/or have trouble dating despite being sane and perfectly nice. Sandra Bullock comes to mind and there are plenty of other celebrity women who fit this mold. you just want to believe we live in some kind of fairytale where everything magically works out for everyone perfectly fairly

Nope! The prior poster is exactly right. If you have unreasonable expectations, have a terrible personality, and think you are attractive (but really are average), you will be single forever until you give up and embrace cat collecting and boxed wine.

More cope. The reality is that life is unfair and sometimes things dont work out. And many attractive women rightfully have higher standards and arent willing to settle as much for the ugly guy, so they stay single. It is what it is. It's a fiction to imagine that life works out perfectly fairly and everyone finds their exact match.

I am a reasonably attractive guy. I often date slightly less attractive women. Their personalities are soooo much better than women who think they are attractive.

Normally the better looking a women thinks she is, the meaner her personality is. 20 years from now the pretty woman won't be that attractive. The women with a great personality will still be beautiful.

And see, this is something a lot of guys think. That all beautiful women are secretly mean, probably because they have some trauma of being rejected in 8th grade or something. This is the reality for ACTUALLY beautiful women- having some kind of weird projection of a personality beamed onto you by total strangers who resent you for your looks. I'm glad someone posted it, because it's a phenomenon I've observed many times that truly, strikingly attractive women have to contend with. That's one of the reasons they have a harder time dating than average looking women

Being pretty can make people dull. If you are a pretty girl you don't have to work for things. Guys will shower you will attention and gifts simply for showing up. Maybe you're smart, but you live in a bubble and this affects how you see yourself and others.

Being average can make someone dull. It's actually pretty absurd to judge someone's personality by physical looks alone. The sad reality is that many people who genetically gifted with their looks are genetically gifted across the board. The tall, good looking guy with a symmetrical face is often smart and sometimes funny too. And the ugly, plain girl can often be hideously dull. That's why smart people judge on a case by case basis. But I think sometimes people tell themselves these things, the "all beautiful people are idiots" cope, so they can feel a bit better about their own mediocrity and that of their partner.

My experience with most women who went to academically competitive colleges was that they are generally quite plain. Less competitive schools such as University of Miami, Penn State, Arizona State, etc. seem to have better looking women. Physical attractiveness doesn't correlate to intelligence.

Some studies have found that physically attractive people actually have higher IQ's (generally). Maybe those women at academic colleges just had less superficial peer groups and didn't make themselves look conventionally attractive with clothes/makeup.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a guest editorial in NYTimes.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/11/opinion/marriage-women-men-dating.html

I agree with the DCUM consensus that women can now afford to be picky because they have higher educations and incomes. But the author suggests that modern men are not emotionally available. Nonsense, - men were not emotionally available in previous generations either, but people still got married! The author calls for policies such as supporting single parents and higher ed cost reform. If you subsidize single parents, then you get more of them. If you want to increase marriage rates, then you need to start burning witches, bachelors, and spinsters.

Are women too picky? The article mentions an anthropologists book about egg freezing that mention "online ageism" and has a taxonomic Table 1.1 of cads. Or consider the author's college friend, who must be in her forties now:

One of these friends, with whom I went to college, would like nothing more than to be married. She’s beautiful and successful, and not, as far as I can tell, overly “picky.” She has had long-term relationships in the past, and cherishes the intimacy and stability they provide. To that end, she keeps a post-it note on a bulletin board. On it, she has drawn out 10 lines of 10 circles each. Every time she goes on a date with someone new, she fills in a circle. She’s committed to going on at least a hundred dates as she searches for a male partner with whom she can have a family. In two years, she’s filled in nearly half of the circles, and she’s still single. It’s like an SAT test form where every answer is incorrect. When she asks her male friends to set her up with their friends, they consistently tell her that no one they know would be good enough for her. “It’s like, how bad are you guys?” she marvels.

Yes, this friend sounds too picky.

Look it's all relative. The article described the lucky friend as beautiful and successful. Of course they didn't print her picture or provide her resume. A truly beautiful successful woman simply does not have these kinds of ongoing chronic problems getting dates, even if she is a total head case.

Remember the MSM has warped the definition of beauty to include basically anything that satisfies the woke agenda. You cannot trust articles like this at face value. The entire point was to portray the lonely women as victims of misogyny and patriarchy. Nothing is their fault. Have an out of wedlock baby with a thug absent baby daddy? Not her fault. Etc.

Males haven't drifted anywhere. If a woman is sweet.kind sexy and loyal, not extremely and openly promiscuous and not insane, she will have no trouble finding a good man to wife her up. That's pretty much the way it's always been. If she has unreasonable expectations of reality that is not realitys fault and it's not the fault of men. Sorry but most guys don't want an obese illiterate low income baby mama nor do they want a neurotic whacko refugee from a woody Allen movie who thinks drawing a bunch of circles will solve her problems.

You have even seen it in some of the bitter nasty responses in this thread from these kind of women.

Lies. THere are plenty of traditionally and exceptionally beautiful women who are perpetually single and/or have trouble dating despite being sane and perfectly nice. Sandra Bullock comes to mind and there are plenty of other celebrity women who fit this mold. you just want to believe we live in some kind of fairytale where everything magically works out for everyone perfectly fairly

Nope! The prior poster is exactly right. If you have unreasonable expectations, have a terrible personality, and think you are attractive (but really are average), you will be single forever until you give up and embrace cat collecting and boxed wine.

More cope. The reality is that life is unfair and sometimes things dont work out. And many attractive women rightfully have higher standards and arent willing to settle as much for the ugly guy, so they stay single. It is what it is. It's a fiction to imagine that life works out perfectly fairly and everyone finds their exact match.

I am a reasonably attractive guy. I often date slightly less attractive women. Their personalities are soooo much better than women who think they are attractive.

Normally the better looking a women thinks she is, the meaner her personality is. 20 years from now the pretty woman won't be that attractive. The women with a great personality will still be beautiful.

And see, this is something a lot of guys think. That all beautiful women are secretly mean, probably because they have some trauma of being rejected in 8th grade or something. This is the reality for ACTUALLY beautiful women- having some kind of weird projection of a personality beamed onto you by total strangers who resent you for your looks. I'm glad someone posted it, because it's a phenomenon I've observed many times that truly, strikingly attractive women have to contend with. That's one of the reasons they have a harder time dating than average looking women

Being pretty can make people dull. If you are a pretty girl you don't have to work for things. Guys will shower you will attention and gifts simply for showing up. Maybe you're smart, but you live in a bubble and this affects how you see yourself and others.

Being average can make someone dull. It's actually pretty absurd to judge someone's personality by physical looks alone. The sad reality is that many people who genetically gifted with their looks are genetically gifted across the board. The tall, good looking guy with a symmetrical face is often smart and sometimes funny too. And the ugly, plain girl can often be hideously dull. That's why smart people judge on a case by case basis. But I think sometimes people tell themselves these things, the "all beautiful people are idiots" cope, so they can feel a bit better about their own mediocrity and that of their partner.

My experience with most women who went to academically competitive colleges was that they are generally quite plain. Less competitive schools such as University of Miami, Penn State, Arizona State, etc. seem to have better looking women. Physical attractiveness doesn't correlate to intelligence.

What a dumb statement. So much of “beauty” is cultivated. The women at the selective schools are busy focusing on things like their degrees and future careers and not spending their free time getting their hair bleached blonde/getting spray tanned etc to be “hot” for a man dumb enough to draw such a conclusion.

[Anonymous]

Women have a shelf life or "best if married by" date.

They were sold a bill of goods by radical feminism that getting married and having a family aren't important.

A lot of them don't wise up until it's too late.

Any woman who isn't married past the age of 30 who is angry about that has to answer the question: So what were you doing from ages 18-30?

Self-reflection is non existent among this group as a lot of the responses here show.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A couple of points:

As a man I don't want to raise someone else's kids. (You want a good man? Don't have kids outside of marriage.)

Many women in DC are smart, that's great! But many are ~40+ and have prioritized their careers over family for most of their lives. I don't care about the status-level of my partner's job. I don't care how much money my partner makes. I do care if someone will be a good partner and can give me time and togetherness. (The DC area dating apps are filled with attractive, single, smart, 40 year old female attorneys.)

Women who are fat aren't attractive. (Most women who are online dating are obese. You want a good man? Have good hygiene, go to the gym regularly and diet.)

Women who are old aren't attractive. (You want a man? Lock one down before you turn 35-40. After 45 most women are invisible to men and you'll be stuck dating 60 year old men.)

Most people (men or women) who are still dating and never married by their late 30s-40s aren't partner material. (Emotional, psychological, sexual, commitment issues...)

Are looks important to men? Yes! And sex and a real emotional connection.

One easy fact about dating: if you want to find someone who will commit to you, date someone who is less attractive than you are. If you are a 6, date a 4 or 5.

As I man, sometimes I'm skeptical about women who talk about how many men are true jerks. Then I read something like this and see what they mean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A couple of points:

As a man I don't want to raise someone else's kids. (You want a good man? Don't have kids outside of marriage.)

Many women in DC are smart, that's great! But many are ~40+ and have prioritized their careers over family for most of their lives. I don't care about the status-level of my partner's job. I don't care how much money my partner makes. I do care if someone will be a good partner and can give me time and togetherness. (The DC area dating apps are filled with attractive, single, smart, 40 year old female attorneys.)

Women who are fat aren't attractive. (Most women who are online dating are obese. You want a good man? Have good hygiene, go to the gym regularly and diet.)

Women who are old aren't attractive. (You want a man? Lock one down before you turn 35-40. After 45 most women are invisible to men and you'll be stuck dating 60 year old men.)

Most people (men or women) who are still dating and never married by their late 30s-40s aren't partner material. (Emotional, psychological, sexual, commitment issues...)

Are looks important to men? Yes! And sex and a real emotional connection.

One easy fact about dating: if you want to find someone who will commit to you, date someone who is less attractive than you are. If you are a 6, date a 4 or 5.

I . . . . don't really know where to start with this one. So I'll just say, you are NOT a good man.

[Anonymous]

In today's world, you need an amazing partner or no partner at all. A bad partner - or one who turns bad - jeopardizes your whole future.

Marrying anyone is a very risky move. The ways in which they can sabotage you - and your future children - are terrifying. The safest move is to be alone and save as much money as you can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
A couple of points:

As a man I don't want to raise someone else's kids. (You want a good man? Don't have kids outside of marriage.)

Many women in DC are smart, that's great! But many are ~40+ and have prioritized their careers over family for most of their lives. I don't care about the status-level of my partner's job. I don't care how much money my partner makes. I do care if someone will be a good partner and can give me time and togetherness. (The DC area dating apps are filled with attractive, single, smart, 40 year old female attorneys.)

Women who are fat aren't attractive. (Most women who are online dating are obese. You want a good man? Have good hygiene, go to the gym regularly and diet.)

Women who are old aren't attractive. (You want a man? Lock one down before you turn 35-40. After 45 most women are invisible to men and you'll be stuck dating 60 year old men.)

Most people (men or women) who are still dating and never married by their late 30s-40s aren't partner material. (Emotional, psychological, sexual, commitment issues...)

Are looks important to men? Yes! And sex and a real emotional connection.

One easy fact about dating: if you want to find someone who will commit to you, date someone who is less attractive than you are. If you are a 6, date a 4 or 5.


Either you are in your late 30s-40s and aren't partner material by your own admission or you are too young to know what you are talking about. In any case, your only meaningful contribution to this thread is some eyerolls

No he’s exactly on point!

He's really not. i was -objectively- pretty hot in my younger days and have been married for a long time now. So I guess I'd tick all of the first Dbag's boxes. I would not have given someone with his attitude the time of day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A couple of points:

As a man I don't want to raise someone else's kids. (You want a good man? Don't have kids outside of marriage.)

Many women in DC are smart, that's great! But many are ~40+ and have prioritized their careers over family for most of their lives. I don't care about the status-level of my partner's job. I don't care how much money my partner makes. I do care if someone will be a good partner and can give me time and togetherness. (The DC area dating apps are filled with attractive, single, smart, 40 year old female attorneys.)

Women who are fat aren't attractive. (Most women who are online dating are obese. You want a good man? Have good hygiene, go to the gym regularly and diet.)

Women who are old aren't attractive. (You want a man? Lock one down before you turn 35-40. After 45 most women are invisible to men and you'll be stuck dating 60 year old men.)

Most people (men or women) who are still dating and never married by their late 30s-40s aren't partner material. (Emotional, psychological, sexual, commitment issues...)

Are looks important to men? Yes! And sex and a real emotional connection.

One easy fact about dating: if you want to find someone who will commit to you, date someone who is less attractive than you are. If you are a 6, date a 4 or 5.

As I man, sometimes I'm skeptical about women who talk about how many men are true jerks. Then I read something like this and see what they mean.

Yes, there are A LOT of them. It's just that good men are generally not witnessing the jerks in their interactions (often private ones) with women. You have no idea.

[Anonymous]

Do you really think most men or even a significant minority of men, all other things being equal, want to:

1) raise another man's or men's child or children?

2) marry a woman in her late 30's or older?

3) do NOT want a partner who will give him time and togetherness?

4) marry an obese partner?

5) marry a partner who is in her late 30s or 40s (of the issue is people who have never previously been married)?

6) want to take the risk of marrying a possible head case woman who has never married in her late 30s or 40s?

Where are all these men then? I've never met a single one. Because they don't exist.