Who do you think is more delusional about who’s “in their league”? Men or women?

[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:Men think they are entitled to someone who is more attractive than they are, and women think they are entitled to someone who has more money than they do.

Indeed, I am. Why wouldn't I be entitled to an attractive woman? One of us has to be the less attractive one. Why does that have to be her and not me. Women say all the time that looks are not as important to them as they are for men. They value other qualities in a man a lot more than looks. Is that true, or not? Either way, I've always been glad to put it to the test.

You are not entitled to someone who wouldn’t want you. I’m not entitled to have the most expensive car or the youngest man and I realize that.
Women need to be attracted to choose you. It’s pointless to pursue in a way, should be a two-way street.

Yeah, no shit Sherlock. Entitled, is an over-used word these days especially by women. Indeed, I feel that I'm entitled to a good life if I put in the effort to achieve it. I'm also entitled to happiness and that includes having a partner who may be out of my league by my judgement while I may be perfect, or at least good enough in her estimation. It's for her to decide of course but I'm not going to limit myself. Women certainly don't and it's normal for them to pursue high-value men. When it comes to men doing the same, why the derision?

The issue is that you operate in terms of “high value” in relationships. Your thinking is clouded by your idea of a perfect woman. And you almost don’t care how she feels about you - possessing her as an object is your main goal. Eg dating is feeding into your ego .

Men like you end up with pretty women who don’t want to sleep with them. Then they complain at no sex in marriage etc.

You gave up on finding mutuality because you just settled for pretty body that wants your resources.

It’s very easy to see partner feels about you , you just need to be observant. You just don’t care

People like you will never be happy. Because beauty comes and goes - you will always “upgrade”

Wow, you really have me figured out, don't you? You sure like to project. Hey, dumbass, the whole thread is about "high-value" people. How else do you define someone who is out of your league? That said, I never defined her as you have defined it for me, putting words in my mouth. I also never used the word, perfect, or even pretty. And when did I say I don't care how she feels about me? How does that make any sense? What do you know of my resources? Go speculate on someone else's comments. You don't know anything about me except that I sometimes choose to pursue women whom I consider, out of my league. BTW, that could describe nearly any women if I was: old, fat, ugly, broke, feeble minded, etc.

It’s because you believe you are untitled to a woman who is more attractive than you (you said it’s okay for woman to be more attractive didn’t you ?). You don’t believe women are also visual and sexual beings. We need to be attracted, too!

IMO women need to be more forthright about how being with them is a lottery where you have to look good enough to even be in the drawing. Only after that threshold is cleared will other qualities - sense of humor, sensitivity, competence, etc. - get you across the finish line.

Guys hear women talking about the second part without being explicit about the first part which ends up making the second part sound like disingenuous bullshit.

Hmm, as a woman I do agree, but looks/attraction are totally subjective and fluid. I’ve been attracted to men who weren’t objectively attractive compared to societal standards, but for some reason I was completely drawn to and turned on by them. I’ve also seen “attractive” men who do nothing for me (for example, I don’t find most male celebrities very attractive). All of my girl friends are attracted to very different men. I like dorky looking guys, my best friend likes bad boys.

You should still be sensitive, competent, have a sense of humor, etc. There are women who will be attracted to you for your looks, but won’t stick around if you don’t have the rest (and even if they did, is that really the kind of woman you want?)

What you wrote actually is not supported by research. When asked to rate who they are attracted to, women were finding “attractive” the same set of shown male profiles. Just the same as with men . Attractiveness level can be actually measured and quantified

Sounds like this was for OLD profiles? That's a bit different.

For one, so much of attraction is in-person chemistry. I've been wildly attracted to men in real life who I would have swiped past on a dating app. That's why it's so important to meet people in real life.

Second, most men's OLD profiles are truly awful. I'd say 80% don't even have the 'About me' section filled out. The photos are all selfies at unflattering angles in bad lighting.

When you give so little to make a judgement off of, of course women will swipe right on the 10-20% of men who have taken the time to craft an excellent profile. Good pictures, fill the entire thing out, tell about yourself and your lifestyle.

On OLD profiles, I do focus on their looks and career first and foremost. But that's just because there's so little else to go off of. I do occasionally come across profiles of men who aren't the most attractive or successful, but they have an excellent profile, are interesting, and we have a lot in common. I always swipe right on them.

I don't really get why men complain about how hard OLD is. It really doesn't take much to stand out from everyone else. I just had a date last night with a man who isn't very attractive by conventional standards (although I found him cute), works in middle management, but his profile was so sweet and he took the time to ask me thoughtful questions about myself. Compared to the 90% of men who just message 'hey wyd' every few days. Didn't get a chance to sleep with him last night, but hoping to this weekend.

You sleep with men on second date? How many second dates do you get?

Sometimes! Sometimes even the first date, depends on if I'm feeling it. I love sex, and if I want it, I don't see any reason to wait a random amount of time. If a guy doesn't want to date me because I slept with him too early, he's not the right guy for me. I'm too old to play games around men's random sexual hang-ups.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:Men think they are entitled to someone who is more attractive than they are, and women think they are entitled to someone who has more money than they do.

Indeed, I am. Why wouldn't I be entitled to an attractive woman? One of us has to be the less attractive one. Why does that have to be her and not me. Women say all the time that looks are not as important to them as they are for men. They value other qualities in a man a lot more than looks. Is that true, or not? Either way, I've always been glad to put it to the test.

You are not entitled to someone who wouldn’t want you. I’m not entitled to have the most expensive car or the youngest man and I realize that.
Women need to be attracted to choose you. It’s pointless to pursue in a way, should be a two-way street.

Yeah, no shit Sherlock. Entitled, is an over-used word these days especially by women. Indeed, I feel that I'm entitled to a good life if I put in the effort to achieve it. I'm also entitled to happiness and that includes having a partner who may be out of my league by my judgement while I may be perfect, or at least good enough in her estimation. It's for her to decide of course but I'm not going to limit myself. Women certainly don't and it's normal for them to pursue high-value men. When it comes to men doing the same, why the derision?

The issue is that you operate in terms of “high value” in relationships. Your thinking is clouded by your idea of a perfect woman. And you almost don’t care how she feels about you - possessing her as an object is your main goal. Eg dating is feeding into your ego .

Men like you end up with pretty women who don’t want to sleep with them. Then they complain at no sex in marriage etc.

You gave up on finding mutuality because you just settled for pretty body that wants your resources.

It’s very easy to see partner feels about you , you just need to be observant. You just don’t care

People like you will never be happy. Because beauty comes and goes - you will always “upgrade”

Wow, you really have me figured out, don't you? You sure like to project. Hey, dumbass, the whole thread is about "high-value" people. How else do you define someone who is out of your league? That said, I never defined her as you have defined it for me, putting words in my mouth. I also never used the word, perfect, or even pretty. And when did I say I don't care how she feels about me? How does that make any sense? What do you know of my resources? Go speculate on someone else's comments. You don't know anything about me except that I sometimes choose to pursue women whom I consider, out of my league. BTW, that could describe nearly any women if I was: old, fat, ugly, broke, feeble minded, etc.

It’s because you believe you are untitled to a woman who is more attractive than you (you said it’s okay for woman to be more attractive didn’t you ?). You don’t believe women are also visual and sexual beings. We need to be attracted, too!

IMO women need to be more forthright about how being with them is a lottery where you have to look good enough to even be in the drawing. Only after that threshold is cleared will other qualities - sense of humor, sensitivity, competence, etc. - get you across the finish line.

Guys hear women talking about the second part without being explicit about the first part which ends up making the second part sound like disingenuous bullshit.

Hmm, as a woman I do agree, but looks/attraction are totally subjective and fluid. I’ve been attracted to men who weren’t objectively attractive compared to societal standards, but for some reason I was completely drawn to and turned on by them. I’ve also seen “attractive” men who do nothing for me (for example, I don’t find most male celebrities very attractive). All of my girl friends are attracted to very different men. I like dorky looking guys, my best friend likes bad boys.

You should still be sensitive, competent, have a sense of humor, etc. There are women who will be attracted to you for your looks, but won’t stick around if you don’t have the rest (and even if they did, is that really the kind of woman you want?)

What you wrote actually is not supported by research. When asked to rate who they are attracted to, women were finding “attractive” the same set of shown male profiles. Just the same as with men . Attractiveness level can be actually measured and quantified

Sounds like this was for OLD profiles? That's a bit different.

For one, so much of attraction is in-person chemistry. I've been wildly attracted to men in real life who I would have swiped past on a dating app. That's why it's so important to meet people in real life.

Second, most men's OLD profiles are truly awful. I'd say 80% don't even have the 'About me' section filled out. The photos are all selfies at unflattering angles in bad lighting.

When you give so little to make a judgement off of, of course women will swipe right on the 10-20% of men who have taken the time to craft an excellent profile. Good pictures, fill the entire thing out, tell about yourself and your lifestyle.

On OLD profiles, I do focus on their looks and career first and foremost. But that's just because there's so little else to go off of. I do occasionally come across profiles of men who aren't the most attractive or successful, but they have an excellent profile, are interesting, and we have a lot in common. I always swipe right on them.

I don't really get why men complain about how hard OLD is. It really doesn't take much to stand out from everyone else. I just had a date last night with a man who isn't very attractive by conventional standards (although I found him cute), works in middle management, but his profile was so sweet and he took the time to ask me thoughtful questions about myself. Compared to the 90% of men who just message 'hey wyd' every few days. Didn't get a chance to sleep with him last night, but hoping to this weekend.

You sleep with men on second date? How many second dates do you get?

Sometimes! Sometimes even the first date, depends on if I'm feeling it. I love sex, and if I want it, I don't see any reason to wait a random amount of time. If a guy doesn't want to date me because I slept with him too early, he's not the right guy for me. I'm too old to play games around men's random sexual hang-ups.

I don’t know . I wouldn’t let a person I just met in my home. Not sure why I would open my legs for them , even if they are super hot and nice. I woulwant to ask all the questions to see if they are a potential long term fit for me. Ask if they have STDs transmittable through skin contact or are having other active sexual partners or even hide a wife . Usually one date is not enough for that. And u get many second and third dates with very nice men so choosing is hard. I would have to sleep with too many people to test drive. The upkeep to do this is unimaginable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Men think they are entitled to someone who is more attractive than they are, and women think they are entitled to someone who has more money than they do.

Indeed, I am. Why wouldn't I be entitled to an attractive woman? One of us has to be the less attractive one. Why does that have to be her and not me. Women say all the time that looks are not as important to them as they are for men. They value other qualities in a man a lot more than looks. Is that true, or not? Either way, I've always been glad to put it to the test.

You are not entitled to someone who wouldn’t want you. I’m not entitled to have the most expensive car or the youngest man and I realize that.
Women need to be attracted to choose you. It’s pointless to pursue in a way, should be a two-way street.

Yeah, no shit Sherlock. Entitled, is an over-used word these days especially by women. Indeed, I feel that I'm entitled to a good life if I put in the effort to achieve it. I'm also entitled to happiness and that includes having a partner who may be out of my league by my judgement while I may be perfect, or at least good enough in her estimation. It's for her to decide of course but I'm not going to limit myself. Women certainly don't and it's normal for them to pursue high-value men. When it comes to men doing the same, why the derision?

The issue is that you operate in terms of “high value” in relationships. Your thinking is clouded by your idea of a perfect woman. And you almost don’t care how she feels about you - possessing her as an object is your main goal. Eg dating is feeding into your ego .

Men like you end up with pretty women who don’t want to sleep with them. Then they complain at no sex in marriage etc.

You gave up on finding mutuality because you just settled for pretty body that wants your resources.

It’s very easy to see partner feels about you , you just need to be observant. You just don’t care

People like you will never be happy. Because beauty comes and goes - you will always “upgrade”

Wow, you really have me figured out, don't you? You sure like to project. Hey, dumbass, the whole thread is about "high-value" people. How else do you define someone who is out of your league? That said, I never defined her as you have defined it for me, putting words in my mouth. I also never used the word, perfect, or even pretty. And when did I say I don't care how she feels about me? How does that make any sense? What do you know of my resources? Go speculate on someone else's comments. You don't know anything about me except that I sometimes choose to pursue women whom I consider, out of my league. BTW, that could describe nearly any women if I was: old, fat, ugly, broke, feeble minded, etc.

It’s because you believe you are untitled to a woman who is more attractive than you (you said it’s okay for woman to be more attractive didn’t you ?). You don’t believe women are also visual and sexual beings. We need to be attracted, too!

IMO women need to be more forthright about how being with them is a lottery where you have to look good enough to even be in the drawing. Only after that threshold is cleared will other qualities - sense of humor, sensitivity, competence, etc. - get you across the finish line.

Guys hear women talking about the second part without being explicit about the first part which ends up making the second part sound like disingenuous bullshit.

Hmm, as a woman I do agree, but looks/attraction are totally subjective and fluid. I’ve been attracted to men who weren’t objectively attractive compared to societal standards, but for some reason I was completely drawn to and turned on by them. I’ve also seen “attractive” men who do nothing for me (for example, I don’t find most male celebrities very attractive). All of my girl friends are attracted to very different men. I like dorky looking guys, my best friend likes bad boys.

You should still be sensitive, competent, have a sense of humor, etc. There are women who will be attracted to you for your looks, but won’t stick around if you don’t have the rest (and even if they did, is that really the kind of woman you want?)

Again, putting words in my mouth that I never said. Of course she needs to also be attracted to me. I can't unilaterally decide that we will be together. As for the second part, you're making my point better than I have in this thread. Thank you for that. In pursuing some women who I would judge to be out of my league, that's my own judgement. I can't decide that for her. She may find me attractive or desirable for any number of her own reasons. So why should I limit myself in making the attempt. All I risk is getting rejected at a higher ratio than if I didn't try. I can deal with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Men think they are [b]entitled to someone who is more attractive than they are, and women think they are entitled to someone who has more money than they do.

Indeed, I am. Why wouldn't I be entitled to an attractive woman? One of us has to be the less attractive one. Why does that have to be her and not me. Women say all the time that looks are not as important to them as they are for men. They value other qualities in a man a lot more than looks. Is that true, or not? Either way, I've always been glad to put it to the test.

You are not entitled to someone who wouldn’t want you. I’m not entitled to have the most expensive car or the youngest man and I realize that.
Women need to be attracted to choose you. It’s pointless to pursue in a way, should be a two-way street.

Yeah, no shit Sherlock. Entitled, is an over-used word these days especially by women. Indeed, I feel that I'm entitled to a good life if I put in the effort to achieve it. I'm also entitled to happiness and that includes having a partner who may be out of my league by my judgement while I may be perfect, or at least good enough in her estimation. It's for her to decide of course but I'm not going to limit myself. Women certainly don't and it's normal for them to pursue high-value men. When it comes to men doing the same, why the derision?

The issue is that you operate in terms of “high value” in relationships. Your thinking is clouded by your idea of a perfect woman. And you almost don’t care how she feels about you - possessing her as an object is your main goal. Eg dating is feeding into your ego .

Men like you end up with pretty women who don’t want to sleep with them. Then they complain at no sex in marriage etc.

You gave up on finding mutuality because you just settled for pretty body that wants your resources.

It’s very easy to see partner feels about you , you just need to be observant. You just don’t care

People like you will never be happy. Because beauty comes and goes - you will always “upgrade”

Wow, you really have me figured out, don't you? You sure like to project. Hey, dumbass, the whole thread is about "high-value" people. How else do you define someone who is out of your league? That said, I never defined her as you have defined it for me, putting words in my mouth. I also never used the word, perfect, or even pretty. And when did I say I don't care how she feels about me? How does that make any sense? What do you know of my resources? Go speculate on someone else's comments. You don't know anything about me except that I sometimes choose to pursue women whom I consider, out of my league. BTW, that could describe nearly any women if I was: old, fat, ugly, broke, feeble minded, etc.

It’s because you believe you are untitled to a woman who is more attractive than you (you said it’s okay for woman to be more attractive didn’t you ?). You don’t believe women are also visual and sexual beings. We need to be attracted, too!

Wow, what a revelation! I never thought about that. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Men - all day long. We choose you.

[Anonymous]

Sometimes! Sometimes even the first date, depends on if I'm feeling it. I love sex, and if I want it, I don't see any reason to wait a random amount of time. If a guy doesn't want to date me because I slept with him too early, he's not the right guy for me. I'm too old to play games around men's random sexual hang-ups.

If a guy has sex with you on the first date and then does not want to date you, it is not a "sexual hang-up".

Instead, it means you were suitable as a sexual partner but not as a romantic partner.

As you pointed out, this preference indicates he is not the "right guy for you". He has a right to select who he wants, and you have that right as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Men - all day long. We choose you.

This is true for sex, not for relationships. The problem with this analysis is that most men aren't delusional about their targets--they know they can't get most women. The top 1/5 of men can get a lot of women and are not delusional, while the top 1/20 of men can get all the women and tend to be misogynists.

For relationships, most women tend to be delusional. The issue is that the ease of getting a man to have sex is far different from getting him to commit, but most women confuse the two and end up in "situationship" or as "side pieces" or whatever modern vernacular you prefer to use for being a human sex toy. Older women are the most delusional because they remember when they could get all the men (for sex) but have a hard time adjusting to the declining interest from men as they age.

The truth is the hardest thing to land is a highly desirable man, and only a few women manage the task.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Men - all day long. We choose you.

This is true for sex, not for relationships. The problem with this analysis is that most men aren't delusional about their targets--they know they can't get most women. The top 1/5 of men can get a lot of women and are not delusional, while the top 1/20 of men can get all the women and tend to be misogynists.

For relationships, most women tend to be delusional. The issue is that the ease of getting a man to have sex is far different from getting him to commit, but most women confuse the two and end up in "situationship" or as "side pieces" or whatever modern vernacular you prefer to use for being a human sex toy. Older women are the most delusional because they remember when they could get all the men (for sex) but have a hard time adjusting to the declining interest from men as they age.

The truth is the hardest thing to land is a highly desirable man, and only a few women manage the task.

That’s the misogynistic crap. There is no such man on Earth who can get all women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Men - all day long. We choose you.

This is true for sex, not for relationships. The problem with this analysis is that most men aren't delusional about their targets--they know they can't get most women. The top 1/5 of men can get a lot of women and are not delusional, while the top 1/20 of men can get all the women and tend to be misogynists.

For relationships, most women tend to be delusional. The issue is that the ease of getting a man to have sex is far different from getting him to commit, but most women confuse the two and end up in "situationship" or as "side pieces" or whatever modern vernacular you prefer to use for being a human sex toy. Older women are the most delusional because they remember when they could get all the men (for sex) but have a hard time adjusting to the declining interest from men as they age.

The truth is the hardest thing to land is a highly desirable man, and only a few women manage the task.

That’s the misogynistic crap. There is no such man on Earth who can get all women.

You must be unfamiliar with the stats from Tinder, etc. that show a small percentage of men garner the majority of female interest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Men - all day long. We choose you.

This is true for sex, not for relationships. The problem with this analysis is that most men aren't delusional about their targets--they know they can't get most women. The top 1/5 of men can get a lot of women and are not delusional, while the top 1/20 of men can get all the women and tend to be misogynists.

For relationships, most women tend to be delusional. The issue is that the ease of getting a man to have sex is far different from getting him to commit, but most women confuse the two and end up in "situationship" or as "side pieces" or whatever modern vernacular you prefer to use for being a human sex toy. Older women are the most delusional because they remember when they could get all the men (for sex) but have a hard time adjusting to the declining interest from men as they age.

The truth is the hardest thing to land is a highly desirable man, and only a few women manage the task.

That’s the misogynistic crap. There is no such man on Earth who can get all women.

You must be unfamiliar with the stats from Tinder, etc. that show a small percentage of men garner the majority of female interest.

This majority of female interest doesn’t necessarily mean they want all that interest. Or want to use those women they don’t need romantically for sex. Most decent men don’t do it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Men - all day long. We choose you.

This is true for sex, not for relationships. The problem with this analysis is that most men aren't delusional about their targets--they know they can't get most women. The top 1/5 of men can get a lot of women and are not delusional, while the top 1/20 of men can get all the women and tend to be misogynists.

For relationships, most women tend to be delusional. The issue is that the ease of getting a man to have sex is far different from getting him to commit, but most women confuse the two and end up in "situationship" or as "side pieces" or whatever modern vernacular you prefer to use for being a human sex toy. Older women are the most delusional because they remember when they could get all the men (for sex) but have a hard time adjusting to the declining interest from men as they age.

The truth is the hardest thing to land is a highly desirable man, and only a few women manage the task.

That’s the misogynistic crap. There is no such man on Earth who can get all women.

You must be unfamiliar with the stats from Tinder, etc. that show a small percentage of men garner the majority of female interest.

Who is funding the collecting and publishing of these stats on Tinder, and what’s their goal? How are they getting this data?
It’s obviously not in the best interest of Tinder for people to feel that no one is interested and give up. And it’s also not in the best interest of Tinder for people to find a long term partner. They want people to hook up and come back to the app.
So what’s the deal with this statistic? Where is it from?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Men - all day long. We choose you.

This is true for sex, not for relationships. The problem with this analysis is that most men aren't delusional about their targets--they know they can't get most women. The top 1/5 of men can get a lot of women and are not delusional, while the top 1/20 of men can get all the women and tend to be misogynists.

For relationships, most women tend to be delusional. The issue is that the ease of getting a man to have sex is far different from getting him to commit, but most women confuse the two and end up in "situationship" or as "side pieces" or whatever modern vernacular you prefer to use for being a human sex toy. Older women are the most delusional because they remember when they could get all the men (for sex) but have a hard time adjusting to the declining interest from men as they age.

The truth is the hardest thing to land is a highly desirable man, and only a few women manage the task.

That’s the misogynistic crap. There is no such man on Earth who can get all women.

You must be unfamiliar with the stats from Tinder, etc. that show a small percentage of men garner the majority of female interest.

Who is funding the collecting and publishing of these stats on Tinder, and what’s their goal? How are they getting this data?
It’s obviously not in the best interest of Tinder for people to feel that no one is interested and give up. And it’s also not in the best interest of Tinder for people to find a long term partner. They want people to hook up and come back to the app.
So what’s the deal with this statistic? Where is it from?

You're talking about how they keep women on Tinder. They keep men on there by offering higher tier subscriptions and using bots to fake attention until they eventually give up. Tinder has no problem publishing those statistics

[Anonymous]

Oh, without a doubt it's women. Just using statistics from OLD, 80% of women only go for the top 10% of men.

[Anonymous]

In current society, it seems women are much more transactional in who they date, i.e. "what do you bring to the table".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh, without a doubt it's women. Just using statistics from OLD, 80% of women only go for the top 10% of men.

I don’t think that’s the same as delusional. OLD is like a buffet and they’re grabbing the lobster since it’s sitting there. Delusional is when a 10/10 bombshell is propositioning Joe Schmo the American tourist in China and it never even crosses his mind that her intentions might be dishonorable.