Dateonomics by Jon Birger — Book Review by Evan Marc Katz

27 Shares

Every day I read something new about dating and relationships. Usually, it’s an article or study that I share on Thursdays. But I rarely read books about dating; it’s too much like my day job. When I’m done with work, I generally prefer dysfunctional family fiction by, say, Jonathan Franzen or Elizabeth Strout.

Yet every so often, I come across a book that intrigues me enough to review. There was Hanna Rosin’s “The End of Men.” There was Laura Kipnis’s “Men”, and there was Suzanne Venker’s “How to Choose a Husband”.

Today, I want to tell you about Jon Birger’s “Dateonomics.”

It’s going to get a lot of news coverage — and it should — for it highlights some sobering facts about the perception that there are “no good men out there.”

I’ll admit, I went into the read with a very skeptical eye. A big part of my business is giving women hope. Not false hope; I’m the world’s worst liar and fake cheerleader. But I have always believed that for every good woman, there is an equivalent good man. By the time you’re done reading “Dateonomics,” you might think otherwise.

The premise of the book is simple: the gap between college-educated women and college-educated men is widening rapidly. In 1981, there was about a 50/50 split between college graduates from both genders. Look at what happened in 30 years:

“In 2012, women earned 1,025,729 bachelors vs. 765,317 for men. That’s 34% more women than men who graduated from college. It’s predicted that by 2023, women college graduates will outnumber men by 47%.

Why does that make a difference? Birger suggests that it’s nothing more than a math equation. Men are buyers. Women are sellers. And when there are too many sellers, the buyers have control and can drive the prices down. Specifically for sex.

If a guy can get a woman to come to his house for sex without a phone call, without dinner and a movie, and without exclusivity, what incentive does he have to stop?

In Birger’s words, “Lopsided gender ratios turn some nice guys into monsters.”

Basically, an average guy can get on Tinder, swipe right, and text a dozen women at once. And since there are so many more women than men, the women feel they’re “competing” for his affections. This naturally affects the way men court women.

They don’t.

They don’t have to.

If a guy can get a woman to come to his house for sex without a phone call, without dinner and a movie, and without exclusivity, what incentive does he have to stop?.

Birger puts into numbers the patterns we’ve been observing anecdotally. Women in cities like New York really do have the deck stacked against them.

“Subtract the estimated gay and lesbian population from Manhattan’s total population count, and you wind up with a hetero dating pool with 39 percent more college-educated women than men age 22 to 39. For college grads, age 22 to 29, removing the gay and lesbian population from the numbers pushes the oversupply of women relative to men up from 39 percent to 54 percent.”

Harrowing, huh? And it only gets worse as you get older.

“Today’s 40-year-old college educated woman started out in a dating pool with 117 women for every 100 men, or 17 percent more women than men…However, once two-thirds of the men in the 40-year-old’s original dating pool had gotten married, the remaining single women were confronted by a far more daunting dating market, one with 50 women for every 33 men. That’s 52% more women than men.”

Now, to be fair, this seems to assume that the dating pool is static — that people get married and are off the market forever. In fact, a decent percent of men get married AND divorced before 40. The average age of divorce is 30 and a full 60% of the men who marry between 20-25 get divorced. All of them go right back into the dating pool. Regardless, these are pretty eye-opening numbers that Birger suggests are tantamount to a game of musical chairs:

If there are three women for every two men, and two couples pair off, that leaves one woman standing alone.

Eventually, most men WANT to commit. Which is why 80% of the population still gets married.

It’s a fair point, but I don’t think it’s that simple. For even though Birger is presumably correct on the statistics, it does not mean the story is over and that women should give up. Not by a long shot.

First, there is something a bit elitist in only giving numbers on college-educated women who want college-educated men. People with Bachelors degrees only account for only 40% of the population. That leaves 60% of the population. I understand why educated people want to date educated people, but let’s not pretend that everyone who didn’t go to college is a drooling moron.

Next, I have to somewhat quibble with the musical chairs theory. Technically, if you lined up 1,025,729 women and 765,317 men (people who graduated college in 2012) and made them all pair up, sure enough, you’d have 250,000 women twiddling their thumbs. But that’s not how dating works.

Many women are focused on their careers. Many women have no interest in dating. Many women are depressed or in a bad emotional state. Many women have given up on men. Many women have no desire to be married. There are a LOT of women who have opted out of the marriage sweepstakes, in other words. Now, we don’t know if there are an equal number of men who have opted out, but I think it’s safe to say the musical chairs metaphor doesn’t quite hold water. It’s not like we’re looking at 100,000,000 chairs for 120,000,000 people. The numbers are too fluid — and also too large.

No matter where you go, no matter what your gender, there’s going to be a finite number of people who are actively dating, emotionally available, attractive, educated, commitment-oriented and interested in you. Go onto Match or OkCupid. That’s a random sampling of what’s out there and both sites’ gender ratios are close to 50/50. And if that’s the case, how much time do you want to spend worrying that, societally, there are more women college graduates than men?

My point is not to entirely negate Birger’s use of game theory, which suggests that men turn into players because they don’t have to commit. It’s just not the full story. Eventually, most men WANT to commit. Which is why 80% of the population still gets married. And why, as a single woman, you’re never going to run out of college educated men to choose from. The game of musical chairs never actually ends. Match will never go out of business, I will never go out of business, and just about everyone who wants to get married eventually gets married.

Long story short: even if there are more women on a macro level, on a micro level, I don’t think it makes that much of a difference. There are still tons of guys out there.

However, the author does make some very salient points that echo things you may have read here — particularly about how female maximizers can be left standing alone because they were consumed with their careers, didn’t prioritize love, and felt they deserved to be picky.

“With a lot at stake in getting it right in one shot, it’s the women who are confident that they are holding a strong hand who are likely to hold out and wait for the perfect prospect.”

This is why it seems that there are a disproportionate number of “quality” 40-year old single women. Like Lori Gottlieb, they were holding out for a 10, while the appropriate guys settled down with other women who may have been less impressive on paper but who prioritized love and compromise.

Birger’s solution to this is that women should pursue men. I don’t think that feels good for most women, nor do I think it’s very effective. What I do concede, is that it behooves all of us to date extensively through our 20’s, to grow and mature, and figure out what works for us, so that we can realistically settle down between 30-35 instead of 35-45. Life doesn’t always work that way, of course, but it’s hard to argue that prioritizing love is, in any way, “bad” for you.

Whether we like it or not, it is a competitive market for women and if you approach your love life seriously and proactively you’re more likely to find the love you want.

The author concludes his sobering math lesson with a few recommendations, based on the numbers alone, as opposed to any real-world practicality.

    1. Choose a college based on its sex ratio. According to Birger, one-quarter of college-educated American couples met in college or grad school. While he’s correct that there are more single college-educated men at age 26 than at age 36, the problem is that 26-year-old men, for the most part, are not really ready to get married. They haven’t lived enough, found their careers, made enough money, slept around enough, nor are they necessarily mature and selfless enough to be health partners. But yes, there are a lot more of them when they’re fresh out of college.

    2. Factor gender ratio into your career decision. Since 10% of couples meet at work, you increase your odds of meeting a man if you go into a science and math career. Of course, then you’d have to marry a science and math guy.

    3. Move West. There are closer to equal male to female ratios in Western states, as compared to Eastern and Southern state. California has a 12% difference for women 30-39. North Carolina has a 38% gap for the same demographic. That’s all well and good, but how many people are going to blindly go to a state with no job and no family to increase their statistical odds of finding a college-educated husband?

    4. Expand dating pool to lesser-educated men. This may sound like the least desirable option, but it’s likely to be the most effective. Look at, say, the dating pool for black women: 112,989 black women vs. 59,119 black men graduated college in 2011. As a result, educated black women have little choice but to consider dating less educated black men — if they choose to date black men. As I’ve written before, there is a sizable difference between dating someone who doesn’t have an advanced degree and dating someone unintelligent. These days, 24% of marriages have a wife that earns more (up from 6% in 1960), so this model is going to be more prevalent in the future.

I know there’s a lot of information here — and I know that there’s the temptation to pull out the most sensational headline from this (“Women are screwed!”), but I would urge you to stay calm.

In a country with 50 million single men, it only stands to reason that there’ll be one who is a perfect fit for you. If you take anything from this book review, it’s that, there is  competitive market for women seeking educated men and if you approach your love life seriously and proactively you’re more likely to find the love you want.

Click here to pick up a copy of Dateonomics and please share your thoughts about this piece below.

Join our conversation (394 Comments).
Click Here To Leave Your Comment Below.

Comments:

  1. 21
    Sasha

    Maybe I’m just an odd duck here. My grandfather was born into a wealthy “old money” family and went to Harvard because that’s what everyone in his family did. He fought in WW2, and afterwards became a large animal veterinarian in a farming community. He says that if he had to do it all over again, he wouldn’t have gone to Harvard. My mother never got any formal degree and works as a landscaper, but is a better writer and knows more about literature then almost anyone I’ve met. My father went to engineering school, never used what he was taught, and eventually taught himself an obscure trade which makes him a decent living.

    I went to college and got a film degree, and I learned three things from that experience: 1) if you want to work in the film industry, you should absolutely NOT go to school for it, 2) in many ways, college is a scam, and 3) you will grow far more as a person from just about anything you do (the jobs you hold, the internships you have, or the places you travel) then you ever will from going to college. If I ever have kids, I’m going to tell them not to go to college unless there’s a specific job they want that requires it.

    Yet, apparently if you fail to make the mistake of going to college, women think that disqualifies you from dating them. That’s so dumb i can’t even wrap my mind around it. Any woman who gives me points because I have a college degree is essential rewarding me for being a moron in my youth.

    1. 21.1
      Alexis

      It’s because you went to film school. Going to uni to study STEMM is absolutely not a waste of time. For careers in these fields you need formal education whereas this isn’t the case for artistic pursuits (I spent a year in art school before going to uni to do STEM).

  2. 22
    A.D.

     

    I married a less educated man 🙂 I have a Master’s degree, he is a college dropout. He is one of the most intelligent men I’ve ever met though.

  3. 23
    LEH

    Or women could start sharing men.   2 women for every man.   The numbers don’t look like there are enough quality men to go around.

    1. 23.1
      jon

      There is growing acceptance of polygamy in Utah, so I think more women will become accepting of the polygamous lifestyle from a financial standpoint.   But even today, there are plenty of divorced dads with numerous baby mamas, so its already happening.   Divorced dads are having several wives even if he is just legally married to one wife at a time.

  4. 24
    BarbiJo

    I know this mostly applies to the earlier comments, but in defense of school teachers, as it came across to me that some of the opinions were that teachers did not earn a good living or enough to properly support a family, and therefore are overlooked or not considered the most desirable partners education-wise in the dating market (at the bottom rung), so I need to set the record straight. I AM a teacher, have been teaching elementary school for 18 years, and I can tell you:

    1. All public school teachers MUST have a BA as well as a teaching credential (an additional 2 years of study to achieve this license), and the vast majority of teachers where I live (So CA) have MA’s, including me. So educators as a whole are highly educated. We are also a group that you are unlikely to find people that cannot write normally well-thought out educated emails and texts – I DETEST text speak!

    2. Most educators DO earn a good living, and are near the top of the income scale – I make literally right under 6 figures. I am a single parent with 3 kids, receive no child support, and still own my own home (bought it brand new 14 years ago in a nice area, 2,600 sq. ft.), can afford a decent car, pay all of my bills, and still have money to take my kids on vacations and buy what we need. Why am I sharing this? To prove that teachers CAN afford a decent standard of living, so those that overlook this population because they do not earn $200,000 or own ocean front mansion-sized property are missing out and apparently gold diggers!

    3. Most educators would make great partners as they like kids and understand kids, are patient, caring, kind, nurturing, organized, flexible, etc. and many other great qualities.

    4. We get a lot time off, and have a good schedule, which does help with child rearing options.

    5. Our retirement accounts and health benefits rock!

    My point is to please not discount teachers when looking for an educated partner, male or female.

     

  5. 25
    Chrissy

    I am Australian and can honestly say that university   (what we call colleges) education has never been a qualifier in any of my or the women I know’s relationships.

    Neither is earnings. I have used several online dating sites and indeed met my husband on one (at the age of 40). I can’t recall ever seeing an income bracket on there and certainly wouldn’t have paid any attention if there was.   I am an intelligent woman and have always earned a good income but all I asked of my men was that they be employed.

    Perhaps this is a cultural thing.   I love reading this blog but I am often amazed at the differences in “dating” between our two nations. We are quite a casual laidback society here. We don’t even refer to a couple as “dating” and there seems to be less rigidity in mate requirements. Maybe because religion plays less of a part in our country? Not sure but it is certainly fascinating. To me at least 🙂

    1. 25.1
      JB

      Well Chrissy I can attest that American women on Match DO look and qualify at education and income. When I changed my profile from “some college” to Bachelor’s degree and that “raise” I got at work from 75K a year to 100K a year …..wink wink nudge nudge as well as putting down that I’m a “manager” my response rate nearly tripled including responses from the same women who had previously ignored me. Funny what a little “raise” and a job “promotion” can do to spark the ladies interest…lol

      If you met  your man on a site with no income bracket that’s great but many American women go on Match specifically because they know they can have a search criteria of men who make or “say” they make an acceptable yearly salary to them whatever that may be. I’m glad all you ask of a man is that he is employed. It’s not that way for many women all over the world not just here in the states.

    2. 25.2
      jon

      Yeah, I think Americans have a sense of elitism along with puritan values and hollywood fantasy, that makes people seek out perfect mates, instead of realistic mates.   Religions do play a role in casual sex and mate selection.   In America, it seems like catholics are less prudish and more open-minded when it comes to dating options, perhaps its due to the strong social services that catholic church provides for its members.

      1. 25.2.1
        Prospect

        America is also a more materialistic country as well which drives a lot of these attitudes.

  6. 26
    LC

    I’ve dated many guys who are less educated than me.   I truly don’t care about degrees as long as the guy has ambition, motivation, and works.   I don’t care if he’s as intelligent as me, either, because there are different types of intelligence.   I have a degree in Chemistry and Nuclear Engineering.   I would only have to date engineer types if I put a ton of emphasis on my man having a degree.   But I have found that my education and income have been intimidating to men, and that’s why I’ve always tried to avoid talking about it unless asked.   I think my last boyfriend disappeared because his job was going badly (he doesn’t have a degree).   He just barely makes due, but I love him very much and would have made things work.   But the expectations go both ways–a man wants to feel like “the man,” and he won’t feel that way if he’s not able to pay for things.   Some of us girls have simply educated ourselves out of the dating market, and no amount of compromise can make a man feel like a man in these times where jobs and education are increasingly escaping men.

  7. 27
    MilkyMae

    The real problem facing educated women is that there will be less men.   Not because they rule out uneducated men but because there will be less men around to actual meet in their lives.
    If women out number men in college then college relationships are less likely for women.   I’ve been on a few campuses and the lack of men is significant.     This is traditionally the time women get the most exposure to men.   After that they will probably get a job that requires a degree(they usually pay more) and there will be less men there as well.     Furthermore, some will seek higher skilled fields that employ more women such as education, healthcare and social work.   I don’t think women are “screwed” but the landscape is changing from women(and men).

  8. 28
    Stacy

    Well,lucky for me that a college education is not one of my requirements (I have a Masters).I look for men who are emotionally intelligent, wise, attractive, gainfully employed, and kind (among a few other things.) I have yet to meet men who are smarter because of formal education.Personally,I don’t see how one has to do with the other.

  9. 29
    DeeGee

    In the original post Evan said:

    which suggests that men turn into players because they don’t have to commit.

    Men turn into players because that is what works with women.
    Whenever I act as a player with a younger woman at any of the corporations I work at, she is all attentive and flirty back.
    Then when I turn into myself, an average nice guy, the women scatter like rats from a sinking ship (except the married ones, who are always asking me “you’re such a nice guy, why are still single?”).

    they were holding out for a 10

    In my experience all women usually hold out for a 10, unless they find a player who is willing to date them, or a guy who is really dating down (way down) to their level.
    No where have I seen this more than on dating sites.
    I joined OK Cupid a while ago, just out of interest to see the available women in a city I plan to move to in the next year or two.   But I decided I will try dating some of the matches that are closer.
    I think I’m only average (only a 5 in looks, maybe higher in body because I strength-train and have less than 10% body fat, currently ~$60k income doubling next year), but unless I really date down, every other woman that is on-par with me or a bit below me on OKC that I chatted with or went out with, stated to me openly that I do not meet all of their requirements for them dating way up.

    1. 29.1
      jon

      Women are lazy daters and want to be led.   If a male player shows a woman attention and energy, she will respond to his advances.   The bland, boring nice guys are un-exciting and don’t get her blood flow going.   Most men are very lazy in dating and relationships, which is the main reason that aggressive players attract so much attention with women, they are unique and mentally-strong.   Women can be very compliant and easily persuaded by an aggressive alpha man.   Women WANT to find reasons to like a guy, so a guy has to step it up and give her the aggressive attention she desires.

      1. 29.1.1
        DeeGee

        jon said: “The bland, boring nice guys

        So “nice guy” = bland and boring?

        I think it is silly that men have to always have this fake front on of being a player to be successful.

        1. jon

          Unfortunately, women’s expectations are created by the hollywood media, so they see charasmatic actors like clooney in romantic comedies and they want their real life boyfriends to wow them just like in the movies.   Men are influenced the same way in expectations of women to look like thin models.   The bland boring nice guy act might work well at church and meeting religious women who want that type of guy.   But if you don’t look as hot as brad pitt, then an unattractive guy is going to have to find other ways to spark a woman’s interest, which best done by having an aggressive player personality.   Nice guys also appear weak and wimpy, most women don’t want their husbands to be weak and wimpy.   Nice guys may have better luck with unattractive women with low self-esteem.   Don’t be asexual, women want men who aren’t afraid of their masculinity.

        2. JB

          Nice guys also appear weak and wimpy, most women don’t want their husbands to be weak and wimpy.”

          Well Jon we’ll see in the next season of The Bachelor when nice guy boring Peter Brady look alike Ben Higgins tries to woo and possibly even entertain 27 lovely ladies with his less than dynamic milk toast snoozefest personality. I’ll be interesting to watch.

          Of course the term “nice guy” will always  have a different  definition  depending of course on what he looks like and what he does for a living.

        3. jon

          Hah, I don’t know many nice guys who date and kiss 25 women at the same time!!!   Isn’t the idea that players aggressively hit on and date several women at the same time; while nice guys sit back and wait for a woman to call him?   If you’re a nice guy, then you’ll have better odds dating younger women who might at the very least, date you for your older wisdom and intelligence.   Women just don’t value or appreciate passive unattractive men.

        4. Karmic Equation

          “Women just don’t value or appreciate passive unattractive men.”

          That’s an incorrect assumption, Jon. It’s not a matter of “not valuing” the passive unattractive guy.

          Women “need” to feel desired. So #1, pursuit makes her feel desired. So that’s why men need to pursue. It’s not so much that passivity is a turn off, but rather that pursuit is a turn-on. Not “stalkery” you-are-The-One-after-one-date pursuit, but normal, I-like-you-and-about-75%-sure pursuit.

          #2, even though most women protest to the contrary, most women want a guy with a good looking face. Not necessarily a handsome face, but something attractive about his face: Nice smile, nice eyes, nice cheekbones, nice hair, or nice shaped head if bald, etc. Something about his face has to be attractive to her. He has to have a face she can envision kissing. If she can’t envision it, deal is off. Even if he has the best body she’s ever seen. Even if he’s the nicest guy in the world.

          So, if you’re about 10-20 lbs overweight with a “good looking enough” face, you’ll do ok. You don’t need abs of steel for most women, unless she also has abs of steel. And even then, most women would overlook some weight if you have a nice face.

          Finally, #3, women do like “nice guys” but refer to #1. We like “normal” guys, not stalkery or needy guys. So showing interest is necessary and NOT showing “too much” interest is just as necessary. Sort of like a woman trying to dress sexy and not trashy. There’s a line. Most women know where that is. But some don’t. The ones that don’t get the “wrong” kind of male attention, as in he thinks she’s advertising, whereas she just thinks she looks sexy. She might not have any idea she went over the line, until he makes unwelcome advances because he misread her wardrobe intentions.

        5. DeeGee

          jon said: “while nice guys sit back and wait for a woman to call him?

          uh… no.
          I will call a girl, or ask her out.   Text or email her.
          I’m just not a pushy PUA/player who tries to be all cool and slick and get into her pants on the first date.

    2. 29.2
      Noemi

      “In my experience all women usually hold out for a 10, unless they find a player who is willing to date them, or a guy who is  really  dating down (way down) to their level.”

      All women?

      1. 29.2.1
        DeeGee

        Noemi said: “All women?

        I have yet to meet one who is willing to date equal (let alone down).
        I’m sure they do exist, like unicorns and zero calorie dark chocolate.

        1. verhrzn

          I’ve dated guys who made less money than me, who were more socially awkward than me, and who were my equal in physical attraction, sometimes less*, and these guys are dumped me for far more attractive/higher quality women.

          Also dark chocolate is actually far healthier for you than milk chocolate.

          #UnicornOut

          *Verified not only by friends but by random people from online dating boards where guys are NOT known for being gentle about a woman’s bad looks.

        2. DeeGee

          verhrzn said: “I’ve dated guys …”

          My comment was perhaps more facetious than serious.
          I had hoped that was obvious from the attempt at humor.   🙂

          I think a lot of the problem I have is simply my location.
          That could be the reason for my being myopic.
          A small city in oil/grain country.
          Moving is sometime in my future.

          and said: “dumped me for far more attractive/higher quality women

          Sorry to hear that.
          If they were that shallow you don’t want or need them.
          I personally don’t equate attractiveness with quality.

          and said: “Also dark chocolate is actually far healthier

          zero calorie is rare …   😉

        3. Alexis

          I’d be super happy with ‘equal’: a man with a PhD in STEMM, average height for men or taller (considering I’m taller than the average woman in my country of residence), who’s my age (+8 years) and not overweight (I’m not very fit but have a healthy body size/weight; I’m around a 6-6.5 with regards to looks). However, it’s hard to find someone whom I find attractive… I agree with the statement above: if I don’t feel like kissing a man, it’s never going to happen.

  10. 30
    Jordan

    Here is a brutal assessment of dating economics.   Two-thirds of American women are overweight.

    This would be the equivalent of two-thirds of American men living with their parents.

    Real attractive isn’t it?

     

    Footnotes:

    This is not an American women suck and foreign women are awesome post.   I live in America and I’m guessing so do most of the readers and posters so this is why I mentioned this.

    I realize that roughly the same percentage of American men are overweight too, but since women also place great emphasis on men’s status, ambition, money, and confidence, being overweight isn’t as great of a hindrance for men as it is for women in the dating marketplace.

    1. 30.1
      Chance

      Well, this message board just got really interesting today.   I look for to reading maaaaaaany heated replies tomorrow heh.

       

      1. 30.1.1
        Jordan

        Facts are stubborn things.

    2. 30.2
      Stacy

      Well, I am slim, very fit, and it’s still hard out here.lol

      Everyone complains about the same thing so I think this goes so much deeper than

       

  11. 31
    Josie

    Hey Jordan-   Facts are always useful when casting aspersions across an entire gender.

    check out the Kaiser Foundation statistics:   http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/adult-overweightobesity-rate-by-gender/

    Percentage of men who are overweight is 70 percent , while the percentage of women who are overweight is 57 %.

     

    1. 31.1
      Jordan

      So 57.6% of American women are overweight while I said two-thirds were.   I only 9 percentage points off.

      Again, I said men were similar to being two-thirds overweight and they are 70% so I was only 3.4 percentage points off.

      My point is this.   If 57.6% of men were homeless, unemployed, or living with their parents, would women find them attractive?

       

       

    2. 31.2
      DeeGee

      Josie said: “Facts are always useful when casting aspersions across an entire gender.

      Jordan did mention that the percentages of overweight are roughly the same.
      The difference is that for men, one of the main things they look for in a woman is looks (where overweight would matter), but for women the main things they look for in a man is money and status (where overweight matters less).

      1. 31.2.1
        Josie

        Sorry, I’m a very health conscious gal (exercising 5-6 times per week and involved in a sport ) and require that my partner be a regular exerciser and have a healthy BMI.   Even a few pounds overweight is a concern, as my most recent LTR ex was just a few pounds overweight but did not have a healthy exercise routine.   This indicated to me that his health was not a priority to him.   sure enough, he gained substantial weight during the relationship and began experiencing related health problems , while exacerbating his depressive tendency.    Exercise is critical to mood as well.

         

         

    3. 31.3
      Morris

      Any study that uses BMI  is  inaccurate. Especially for men. It doesn’t distinguish  between muscle and fat. And we know which gender has more muscle.

    4. 31.4
      Buck25

      Josie,

      I shouldn’t have to point out that using BMI as a measure of “overweight” means that heavy boned, very muscular but nevertheless extremely fit individuals have a BMI which would indicate they are “overweight’ when they are in fact healthier that their “normal” weight counterparts. Now, which gender would you guess has a far higher percentage of individuals with that body type/build? Hint, it’s NOT women. I haven’t seen parable study by body fat percentage, but I’ll bet that tells a far different story, one YOU don’t want to hear.Regardless, there’s weight, and then, there’s FAT; pretty big difference in how that looks, no?

  12. 32
    Stacey

    The subject of this book and the comments here are really amazing in just how nutty they truly are and how everybody keeps missing the point. Yes it is probably true that there are more women than men in the 30-45 white collar college educated cohort. But so what? That has got to be the least useful metric out there because it assumes that a college degree somehow is a good measure of eligibility for both men and women, and nothing can be further from the truth. Plenty of college educated women are considered ineligible by their male peers for being immature, overweight, unattractive, ball-busting, difficult, unrealistic, overly materialistic, etc., and when you exclude these perpetually single ladies from the stats, the numbers really don’t look that bad at all.

    I dated in what’s considered on of the worst markets for women in the US in my 20-ies, got married, divorced and now dating again in my early 30-ies. In my experience, women shoot themselves in the foot with ridiculous expectations, like insisting on only dating guys who live in the city (only to presumably move to the suburbs once they are married?), or having highly superficial criteria for looks (why is it necessary to have a 6′ tall guy? or does it really matter how much hair he has?), or focusing on some checklists and what the guy must BE rather than how he must make them FEEL.

     

    1. 32.1
      jon

      Exactly, I think that these checklist women are secretly happy just being single and independent.   Sure, women can whine about not finding the perfect guy but if a woman really wanted to be married, she would find a way to be married.   I don’t want to call it compromising or settling, but there are some alpha career women that never want to settle, because they are perfectionists or highly neurotic, so it is probably easier for them to be single and alone, than married and un-happy.   I think most men are emotionally-geared to be independent and alone, so a man being single at 40 is not really a big deal.   So it really shouldn’t be a big deal for a woman to be single at 40 or 50.   I think there is a feminist mantra of “having it all” meaning a career, a family, a perfect husband, but realistically, no one is promised to have it all with the perfect life.   When a man or woman accepts that life can never be perfect or a fairytale, then they can start making realistic decisions.

      1. 32.1.1
        Tracy L.

        Men still do the proposing and won’t file for divorce even when his wife hasn’t had sex with him for years.   There are very few who would stay in a marriage that wasn’t meeting her needs.

        1. Chance

          A big reason for this is due to incredibly unfair divorce laws that result in blatant discrimination towards men (when children are involved) or the higher-earning spouse (regardless of whether children are involved, but still almost always the man).   Men should never marry – ever – until these laws and gender roles in our country become less one-sided.

        2. Evan Marc Katz

          Yes, men should never marry – ever. There should be a full-on gender marriage strike, where couples who are in love refuse to tie the knot, and couples who want kids have them out of wedlock at a higher rate than the abysmal rate we’re seeing today. That should solve things.

        3. Chance

          EMK, respectfully, that’s my belief.   Marriage has nothing to do with being a great partner and parent.   It is nothing other than the mixing of finances for the non-religious.   Also, I feel like people too often conflate the types of people who have children out of wedlock with the actual act of having children out of wedlock.

        4. Evan Marc Katz

          Respectfully, Chance, it’s like believing in pure socialism or libertarianism. Sounds far better in theory than if it were actually put into practice.

        5. jon

          despite what some people think, society has decided that marriage is outdated.   You shouldn’t shame people or women for having children out of wedlock.   There is such a negative stigma on divorce-shaming or spinster-shaming of women, that it really messes up a woman’s perception of the dating market, which leads to perfectionism and unrealistic expectations.   Feminism and traditional marriage are often opposing ideas in practice.   Sure, people can still get married, but they might get married later for reasons of senior companionship, instead of procreation.   Marriage rates will probably equal the marriage rates in Europe.

        6. Chance

          EMK, I’m guessing you know what Mark Twain had to say about stats.   Just kidding.   Either way, it’s best to look up multicollinearity when having these discussions.   The stats you provided don’t indicate that having children out of wedlock is the cause of children not faring well because there are so many other factors that are correlated with out-of-wedlock births that can also be driving factors of a child’s well-being.

           

          Also, I’m completely open to being wrong… I’m wrong all the time, but how is avoiding marriage good in theory and bad in practice?   Not sure I follow.

        7. Evan Marc Katz

          I was trying to be generous and open minded about your theory. 🙂 Personally, I don’t think my relationship would be strengthened without marriage; I think it would be weakened. There’s something about the permanence and investment of a marriage that is far greater than “this is my girlfriend.” I kind of feel like any married person would say the same. In other words, I completely disagree with you but respect your right to your theory.

        8. jon

          Those stats just show that despite not getting married, women are still having their first child at the same age, regardless of wedlock or marriage.   So if stats are true, then there are more older women getting married for the first time, except they already have a child out of wedlock.   Is it really a good thing that women are delaying marriage, yet still having children before marriage?   Granted, divorces are happening less because there are less shotgun weddings.   If you want to “save the children” then you would want more Shotgun marriages.   People are not going to stop having pre-marital sex in their 20’s, so the rates of fatherless children will only continue to climb as more women delay marriage.   Marriage can certainly be amazing the first 5-10 years, but its usually the lifelong commitment that people can’t deal with, for a variety of valid reasons, so they get divorced.   Equality is great for the workplace, but its far more difficult to practice equality in the dating and relationship world. By that theory, women should make the first move, pay for dates.   But feminism should also be about women being leaders and being able to lead men, which is often an unattractive trait when it comes to Men dating women.   Marriage may be better for society in the macro-sense, but that doesn’t mean that every married couple is happy together.

        9. Shaukat

          Agree with Chance. On the issue of stats, not boycotting marriage. There is not a single controlled study which could allow people to make the inference about out of wedlock kids that the evangelical Christian right is always  pushing. I personally know one couple who live together and have a five year old. They’re not married, but the kid is thriving. My guess is that if  a study was done controlling for income, abuse and  commitment to one’s partner, that correlation cited above would disappear.

        10. Evan Marc Katz

          You’re missing the broader point. Women who have children with “baby daddies” often don’t have their baby daddies invested in their lives. People who get married and raise a nuclear family have better outcomes than people who don’t. This is not surprising, nor controversial.

        11. Chance

          EMK, what you’re describing is simply correlative.   It isn’t causal.   With your latest comment to Shaukat, it really sounds like you’re espousing the benefits of a child that has a father in his/her life.   We agree on this point for sure.

           

          That said, I don’t believe men should have children either until the unmarried/divorced fathers have equal reproductive and parental rights as women.   I didn’t really get into that in prior comments.   However, I can sympathize with a man who really, really wants to be a father deciding that he must get married to do so because that is the only way to ensure that he has equal parental rights (as long as he stays married, of course).

      2. 32.1.2
        Prospect

        “I think that most men are emotionally geared to be independent and alone”

        Married men live longer and are healthier than single men.   Women often perform the unseen and undervalued labour of looking after husband’s (and children’s health).

  13. 33
    Stacy

    ‘so much deeper than looks’

  14. 34
    lynn

    I got a review copy of this book from Netgalley (I’m a librarian), and I’m really enjoying reading it. At the very least, the statistics tutorial at the beginning of the book is quite useful to anyone (especially me, since I’m considering signing up for an online nanodegree in data science to supplement my master’s and I didn’t take statistics in college, so I have some catching up to do before I can start…).

    Some of the gender ratio examples might be matters of perception, especially online. So many dating sites create fake female profiles to lure male subscribers, that gender ratios online probably only appear to favor men. On Tinder, for example, men actually outnumber women 2 to 1. Also, about 30% of Tinder users are married, so… it’s not that good of an example of an actual singles market.

    Everyone loves to hate on the Rules, but that book’s main thrust was for women to make themselves seem more in demand and less available – psychological tactics women should adopt perhaps especially now, since it creates the illusion of scarcity, and that illusion of scarcity you create around yourself makes you seem like you are in short supply, and the demand for you is great. You can get around a real shortage, or supply and demand crisis in dating, basically by using psychological tactics.

    Avoid using technologies that don’t support you in that, or that basically exacerbate the appearance of the man shortage (i.e. Tinder, even though in reality they have a woman user shortage nearly as bad as Ashley Madison’s…).

    Use an app like Bumble, instead of Tinder, so the male users don’t have unlimited female images to swipe through. Eliminates some of their “paradox of choice.” Use niche dating sites that will probably have more men than women, based on interests, geography or lifestyles (i.e. Alaska Men, FarmersOnly.com, etc).

    Additionally, I do agree it’s wise to look at guys who aren’t as educated. Doesn’t mean you have to date financially/emotionally unstable people, or weed smoking losers who think the government owes them a free ride. Look at guys who maybe got through a couple years of college, and dropped out because they had to start working, or found a better opportunity elsewhere (for example, lots of guys in tech don’t have formal degrees necessarily, but they do have good jobs). One of my brothers quit college with 3 credit hours left to go (it was a Phys Ed requirement his advisor neglected to tell him about). Since he lived in another state by then, he would not consider abandoning his job and family for three months just to take an undergrad P.E. requirement to get the parchment. He works in tech, so he didn’t really need the parchment anyway. Eventually, because the university he attended was trying to get their graduation stats   up, they just awarded him his degree anyway. (I guess he called their bluff!)

    Also, lots of guys working in blue collar fields have great incomes, and are hardworking, and don’t necessarily meet a lot of women. Guys in general construction must be making a killing in the market right now – judging by how long a wait list there was for my handy man when I needed new attic stairs installed in my house, and a new ceiling in my living room after the old plaster one caved (it’s an old building).

    Also, intellectual women are very attractive to men who are themselves very articulate and read widely, but never had the opportunity to attend college, and are feeling like they are missing something. You’re arm candy with your multiple degrees and your nerd glasses, to many of those guys.

    You could always move to a city with a better gender ratio, but that’s not always practical for grown up women who have jobs and mortgages and elders to care for, and strong roots in a particular community.

    Finally, you could just pull a Michelle Obama and *hire* the guy you want to date/marry. Since women have all the advanced degrees these days, the guys will be working for us. So, dating ratios aside:   “that’s alright, that’s okay, they’ll be working for us someday.”   (Better not burn any bridges, guys!)   😉

    1. 34.1
      jon

      Lynn, if there are 2:1 men per women on Tinder and Match, then it would mean that a woman can get her choice of husband with online dating.   I actually think that despite the constant complaining, it is far more easier for a woman to find a husband on Match, than at a bar.   The women complaining, are often just really bad daters or lazy daters.   There are some men that want to commit to marriage, but there are a lot of men who don’t want marriage.   Its up to the women to find men who want marriage.

  15. 35
    Pia

    Some of us girls have simply educated ourselves out of the dating market, and no amount of compromise can make a man feel like a man in these times where jobs and education are increasingly escaping men.

    @LC . You are absolutely correct, especially in my generation. I am a physician and as soon as a man discovers this, all communication ends. It occurs with my females colleagues and friends also. Plus, men on this blog have stated that they would prefer not to date a physician. (You may roast me EMK for selection bias and comparison bias.) But the truth be told, men will only tolerate an education, income, and intellectual disparity of so much before it is too great to be offset  by personality, looks, and agreeableness. I have dated men shorter  or taller than me, with and without hair, various ethnicities and cultural backgrounds, with associates degrees to Ph. D. degrees,  the entire gamut. Eventually, sooner or later, the relationship ends because of my degree, my income, my social status, my intellect. I simply accept it now. My friends, colleagues, and I do have hope for the Millenials as we see more acceptance of diversity and a willingness to bridge the disparities. Plus, these Millenials are our children and we didn’t raise them to conform to strict gender norms but to be more fluid in their interpersonal relationships.

    1. 35.1
      JB

      Well Pia I had a woman who was only too proud to brag in her profile she was a CNP (certified nurse practitioner) disqualify me not once but twice in 4 yrs because she thought I was “below” her status. She loved my profile and told me so in opening emails….twice! Yep she initiated contact with me the second time without remembering she’d blown me off 3 yrs earlier and when she realized it when I returned her email. I never heard from her again. I have a great respect for the medical profession and I understand why some men would be intimidated by you being a physician. I think many men wouldn’t even bother to email you and try. It’s their loss. For some reason I find medical intelligence extremely attractive. 🙂

      1. 35.1.1
        Not Jerry

        I dated a nurse practitioner briefly.   I don’t consider that so upscale, she was just a woman.   We were certainly not intellectually mismatched.

        I have never dated an actual physician, but I guess I would. I sure don’t fear any woman because of intellect. I haven’t ever met anyone I can’t equal in that area.

        But anyone I pay any attention to has a good vocabulary like I do and has something interesting to say.   It is interesting how many people I meet can’t carry on an interesting conversation.

        The women I really do not pay any attention to are attorneys and shrinks, because they both have a funny attitude and demeanor. I’ve had a few express interest. I just demur them.

    2. 35.2
      Karmic Equation

      “Eventually, sooner or later, the relationship ends because of my degree, my income, my social status, my intellect.”

      If a man likes you enough to enter a relationship with you–presuming he already knows your degree, income, social status, and intellect–then the reason the relationship ended will NOT be because of those things.

      It’s something else.

      Women with degrees, incomes, social status, and intellect like to blame those reasons for the demise of relationships because those are things that she cannot change. If she were to blame her personality (snobby) or behaviors (mean to wait staff), then she’d have to actually WORK on changing herself to be a better person.

      I’m not saying you’re snobby or mean to wait staff.

      And don’t get me wrong, men have plenty of faults. But men will NOT dump women who make them feel good about themselves. They WILL dump women who make them feel bad about themselves. Neither decision is based on her degree, income, social status, or intellect.

      1. 35.2.1
        Alexis

        There’s the hypothesis that men will only go out with women who make so much more than they do because if she’s got a much higher income (potential), she’ll likely be around males with equal or more earning power than she does and fear she will eventually cheat/leave.

      2. 35.2.2
        Buck25

        “…men will NOT dump women who make them feel good about themselves. They WILL dump women who make them feel bad about themselves”

        Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner, folks!

        Thanks KE,

        Ladies, it’s not your degree, or your status,or your intellect, or your money that’s a turn-off…it’s your attitude! I say that as a man who is at least your equal in most of those things-it turns me off too.

  16. 36
    McLovin

    Well, Evan if you’re accusing me of trolling, just ban me. I don’t have to participate, I’d be happy to just read. Like I said the  female ID  laid bare here are enough to keep me reading.

     

    Also, Karmic, you make the mistake of assuming I’ve always “pursued” the same type of women. I used to be a blue pill idiot.  The “good girls” are often far worse than the bad girls.

    1. 36.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      You’re borderline trolling, McLovin. I don’t ban people unless they are verbally abusive to me or my readers. You are not abusive; you are just not in agreement with the majority of things that I say, since this is a blog specifically for women who want to understand men and find love (which usually leads to marriage). Since you’re not a woman, you don’t want to find love and you don’t want to get married, I guess I’m confused about what’s in it for you.

      1. 36.1.1
        Tracy L.

        Since you’re not a woman, you don’t want to find love and you don’t want to get married, I guess I’m confused about what’s in it for you.

        He is here to troll and it’s not borderline trolling either. I have always noticed how these red pill/manosphere types love coming to blogs for women who just want to receive advice on finding love and relationships to be abusive because they know unlike on the feminist blogs we won’t hand them their asses.   Basically, the women here are soft targets for them.
         

        1. AAORK

          Tracy, stop playing the “victim card”. It’s very unbecoming. Calling some guy a “red pill” when you disagree with him is akin to  calling a woman “feminist” when disagreeing with her.   Offer something meaningful.

        2. Tracy L.

          Tracy, stop playing the “victim card”.

           
          At the end of the day, it is no one’s business how anyone chooses to find love or what criteria he or she uses in order to attain it.  
           
          The red pillers need to stop coming to this space and others where women are seeking healthy relationships with their rhetoric and go get psychological help. Seriously.

          And I don’t care if you think I am attempting to shame you, you should  be ashamed.

        3. Buck25

          Tracy, how about you try offering up substance, instead of just name-calling. You’re better than that, at least sometimes. Besides, you could stand to learn some things from the manosphere, just as we can learn some things from listening to some feminist voices (yes, even including some of the misandry that sometimes pervades this place).

  17. 37
    Rebecca

    To all of you who are bitter at the entire opposite gender for insisting on “dating up,” why bother?   You could just pity them for the unrealistic expectations that will keep them single for a long time.   And if you’re bitching about the entire opposite gender being too demanding BECAUSE you’ve been single for a long time, maybe you need to re-examine your own expectations.   It doesn’t matter what price the appraiser says my house is worth – if no one is willing to buy it at that price, it isn’t really worth that much.   And Dee Gee, if you’ve never met a woman who was willing to date her equal, let alone down, you must not know any couples.   Do you really think all the men you know have settled for women far beneath what they could have had?

    Christ, I’ve gotten drawn into this silliness that equates the worth of a human being with a number!   Isn’t it the case that in every healthy relationship, both partners think they hit the jackpot?   Otherwise, why stay with someone who doesn’t make you feel lucky?   There’s no objective “10” for me to hold out for, there’s just guys who are perfect _for me_, and every once in a while I find one of those guys who is excited to find me.   Pretty sure none of those guys would have tolerated me if I were in the habit of bitching about how “men” are too picky, though.

    1. 37.1
      DeeGee

      Rebecca said: “if you’ve never met a woman who was willing to date her equal, let alone down, you must not know any couples.

      That is kind of a silly statement, and a bit of a condescending attitude.
      Every couple that I have ever known in my 53 years, including all family and friends, in none of them has the woman made equal or more than the man for income.
      I am not saying that income difference was the reason that they got married.
      What I am saying is that ask any single woman what she wants in a man, hell, read many of the comments in this blog by women, and they almost all say their #1 requirement (or #2) is that the man makes at least twice their income.
      Go anywhere on the Internet, or any online dating site, and you will see the exact same thing.
      My point in all of this is, 90% of the single women are never going to get the top 10% earners of the single men — the numbers just won’t work.   So women coming here complaining about being single probably need to have their attitude adjusted.   And if your come-back is simply “go get a higher paying job”, well there are only so many limited slots in the top 10% of earners, that’s why they are called the “top 10%”.

      1. 37.1.1
        Rebecca

        Okay, I didn’t realize your definition of whether a person is “up” or “down” from you was a purely financial definition.   But even given that, my experience of the world is entirely unlike yours.   In the couple of years that I have been reading this blog, I have yet to read any posts from women who say they want a man who makes twice what they make (although I have seen women say they want a man who makes “at least” what she makes, which would have supported your point).   And I’ve known lots of couples where the woman made more than the man when they got together, including my own experience with the man I married and my parents and my sister and my sister-in-law.   As I quickly run through my closest friends in my head, it’s about 1/4 of the couples where the wife makes more than the husband, and more than that among my relatives.   Maybe I’m just living in a different sub-culture – I don’t know any of those couples where the husband is in the top 10% of the country financially.   And I had no idea that when I ask a guy what he does I was marking myself as a gold-digger; I always thought careers were a significant part of people’s lives and that question was just part of the usual process of getting to know someone.

        1. DeeGee

          Rebecca said: “my experience of the world is entirely unlike yours.“, “it’s about 1/4 of the couples where the wife makes more than the husband

          That is good to know.
          Where I live in the oil patch (and next to the grain belt), it is quite the opposite.
          Maybe the times are changing.   😉

      2. 37.1.2
        Josie

        I know several couples where the woman makes substantially more money and is more educated than the man.   I have absolutely no problem with that dynamic myself –   as I have said before, the complication arises with men who are not comfortable with it.   As an example, I contacted a guy on Match, who indicated in his profile that he was a government employee making less than I, working in a field that I admired him for.   I exchanged some messages with him and at some point he cut it off , with some version of   “you’re out of my league…   ”   Sure, that may have been a cover for not being attracted to me, but it discouraged me from seeking out less educated and successful men because I worry they will have self esteem issues.

    2. 37.2
      Ted

      Here’s the thing,   men spend   spend a lot of time and energy initiating contact. I’ve personally lowered my standards as far as they can go without having to worry about safety.

      If it were just one woman or there was something wrong with me, that would be one thing, but I’m a great catch in every area except that I’m not rich.

      Perhaps women could do us all a favor and either fix their standards or stop lying about what they want and the complaining would stop. I have no interest in wasting my time on women whose standards are an obvious mismatch.

  18. 38
    AAORK

    Wow, I managed to get thru all of the comments, and .. nothing new here. As a man, I relate to the comments about women having exceptionally long ‘must-have!’ lists. And this is coming from a guy who is reasonably attractive, stands 6-2, works out, and makes over 100K/yr. Oh, and divorced but no kids and no ex’s coming after me (a “clear title” as I refer to it). Even for me, it was very tough finding even a reasonably attractive woman who was fairly near my ‘equal’ and would give me a chance (the first question from was ALWAYS “what do you do?” .. yep, I know where this is going.). And I REALLY pitied the poor guys who didn’t have what I had. Only in the last 5 years or so did I realize that what works is being a bit aloof, a bit demanding, a bit controlling, (maybe even a bit assholish) and some other character traits I was a bit uncomfortable expressing as this seemed to contradict from what my traditionalist Mother (who came of age before Feminism took hold) taught me about how to properly treat women. But I had to do it. I altered into a persona that I had so often seen women say they don’t like (but actually gravitate toward, go figure). And, yes it worked. So be it.

    On the other hand, I do understand the frustration coming from women who constantly decry “what are all the good men?” I say they’re right in front of you, if can only get past the Disneyland/Bachelor show fantasies. When these same ladies are all chasing after the same top 10% (tall, handsome, rich guys), yeah most are gonna end up without a chair. There’s no denying it: women want to marry up. Status and wealth are powerful motivators for women (as youth and beauty is for men). And that’s OK. You just can’t complain when your fantasy doesn’t match reality.

    1. 38.1
      Karmic Equation

      When I was OLD, men ALWAYS asked me what I did. Maybe it’s because they wanted to make sure I didn’t work in a nail salon (since I’m Asian).

      If I ever asked the question first, it was NEVER because I wanted to know their income, it was because I was curious. It would be cool if we worked in the same industry or totally different.

      However, I know I NEVER asked that question before a date. I usually asked during a date, as a natural part of the conversation, not as a qualifier to have a date in the first place.

      Sounds like a lot of women asked that BEFORE she’d agree to go on a date with you?

      1. 38.1.1
        AAORK

        Yes, the question would be in the first or second message (whenever I did happen to receive a response, that is). I was always upfront and accurate with the info in my online profile, mentioning my general industry (IT) and my income bracket but in retrospect I suppose most women reading it assumed I was lying about all that stuff (I constantly see posts from women saying men are notorious liars on their profiles). Looking back, I now realize how difficult it may have been for women to believe that a (relatively) tall, mid-forties, fit, (reasonably?) attractive, 100K+ guy (I mean, we’re talking upper 15% of the population here) needed to be online. But I also learned that men and women approach potential mates differently. Men look for qualifiers while women look for dis-qualifiers. So I guess I must have been wearing unappealing/unfashionable   clothes, or my nose was the wrong shape, or my jawline wasn’t strong enough, or I didn’t live in their zip code, or … oh hell, the list goes on and on. 🙂 Immediate rejections always came from American women. That’s OK though. I will say that I noticed that Asian women were especially drawn to me for some reason. Along with mostly European women. I dated both and wound up with a lovely Lebanese lady. 🙂

        1. Karmic Equation

          So what does AAORK stand for, may I ask? It has to be an acronym of some kind 🙂

          Yes, I’ve read that as well, that women look for disqualifiers and men look for qualifiers.

          To me, it makes sense for each gender to do it that way for dating efficiency.

          I guess I was a trusting soul. I believed what men wrote in their profiles about their jobs (if they mentioned it at all).

          Glad you found someone!

        2. Alexis

          Someone’s job is of interest to me. If someone spends 36+ hours a week on something, I find that relevant to know. If someone is habitually unemployed, I’m not interested. If someone works a low earning,lo-/unskilled job with no ambitions either professionally or with regards to hobbies/charity work, I’m also not interested. It’s just really unattractive to me, a man with no job or a dead end job making very little money (without having a serious hobby/past time). I’m very well educated with a lot of hobbies and interests and would like to be with someone who shares this.

      2. 38.1.2
        In Not Of

        Perhaps ladies should start memorizing the box scores on the sports page or before at least the first couple of dates request a list of approved topics, so as to avoid appearing the gold-digger, politics, religion, etc.   Weather generally seems to be a safe topic.   Or TV shows. No, that won’t work because who has time to keep up with all the TV shows?

  19. 39
    Lucy

    Hm I guess I don’t like reading here comments like “all women are looking for a 10”. If anything I get more frustrated by the fact I meet guys who are everything I want on paper but they just don’t feel right.   Believe me when I say it really sucks when you   meet a guy you genuinely admire as a person and it doesn’t make you have love feelings. You think “what is wrong with me?”. I know a good man when I see him but I’m not  prepared to take him for a fool and date him if I have no feelings.

    I don’t want a guy I think is 100% perfect when I meet him because that just isn’t human to me. I like a bit quirkiness, a bit of not imperfection. It might make him more empathetic  because he’s lived a little. If I think he’s perfect from the get go, it can only go downhill from there. I think part of the appeal of ‘bad guys’ is the ‘devil may care’ attitude, that they feel comfortable with who  they are and don’t need to prove themselves to anyone. They are intriguing because they are not perfect – there is more to them than what’s on the surface. You can find those qualities in a good guy though!

    Besides that good on paper stuff just gets in the way of meeting some  quality guys via online dating. My friend is engaged to a guy she met on OKCupid. My friend has a postgraduate degree and is very intelligent. So is her man, but he dropped out of college to pursue business and his career. If on paper she hadn’t gone on a date with him because he isn’t as “educated” as her, then they’d never have met. She got talking to him and the rest is history.

    1. 39.1
      Lucy

      Sorry I meant “imperfection” not “not imperfection”.

    2. 39.2
      DeeGee

      Lucy said: “… when you   meet a guy you genuinely admire as a person and it doesn’t make you have love feelings.

      I mean this as an honest question, so you honestly believe that you are supposed to feel tingles inside when you first meet that person you are supposed to be with?   Really?

      This sounds just way too Hollywood romance novel to me.   Unfortunately I honestly believe that all too many women believe that this is what is supposed to happen.   Guess what, it isn’t.   You are never going to know on the “first time you see him” what he is really like and whether you and he would be good together.   You’ve probably passed on many men who would be great.

      1. 39.2.1
        Lucy

        No you’re reading something into my post that isn’t there. I’ve hardly ever felt instant sexual attraction towards anyone. In fact  it’s even rarer now because I’m not looking for sex. I turned down a guy recently because whilst I was highly attracted to him physically, I didn’t think we had much in common and I wondered what we would talk about once we had had sex.   When I say I don’t get those feelings, I mean that I can’t mentally picture them as my boyfriend. It’s difficult to describe but I’m sure men know what I’m talking about too – when you just meet someone and it just feels right, like yin and yang. With my last boyfriend, he didn’t turn me on instantly in that studly way but we had an instant bond and stayed up talking literally all night when we first met.

        I think it’s perfectly realistic to look for someone that you find attractive physically and emotionally. I have to find him physically attractive enough, not “Oh my God got to jump your bones now” kind of attractiveness and I have to feel that we have enough in common to have good conversations and enjoy life together. This is exactly the expectation men have.

        I’m just sick of there being an expectation that women should be saviours of all men and deny their own impulses to keep other people happy. We are under enough pressure as it is with regards to that. Obviously I appreciate the benefits that feminism has given me. But there are ways in which it hasn’t helped me. We are expected to have it all – the career, family, put others before ourselves. Then we have to do all a lot of things when others aren’t prepared to get their hands dirty. I never complain. I just roll up my sleeves and get on with it. So I think I’m within my rights to want a man I find desirable and who finds me desirable too.

        1. DeeGee

          Lucy said: “No you’re reading something into my post that isn’t there.

          Ok, sorry.   That is how it reads.

          and said: “but we had an instant bond and stayed up talking literally all night when we first met.

          This is one area where I get frustrated with women.
          I have had this same experience with many women, where I have felt a connection and they claim to have as well, but what they actually just did was “friend-zone” me.
          And then when I ask them out, they look all confused like “no, I’m not attracted to you in that way“.
          I have news for all of the women reading this, guys don’t want to be friend-zoned, we aren’t one of your girl friends.
          The only guys who will stay in your friend-zone are either gay men or hoping one day to be your boyfriend.   Any other guy with any self-worth will be gone.

          and said: “I’m just sick of there being an expectation that women should be saviours of all men and deny their own impulses to keep other people happy.

          I don’t follow on this.
          I don’t recall anyone saying that women should be the saviors of men.   More up-front honesty and learning how to relate to us better would be nice. That’s what Evan is here for I guess.

        2. Donna

          DeeGee, don’t you realize how hypocritical your post is? You contradict yourself. You don’t want women to expect to feel “tinglies” when they first meet someone. So basically you think women should keep dating them until they feel something. Then you say they shouldn’t “friend zone” anyone. So ok, you meet a woman, you get along, she’s not attracted yet, she’s willing to go on another few dates to see if something develops. And you aren’t, because she’s ‘friend zoned’ you. See the pressure on us? It seems to me that you find fault with every post that disproves you.

      2. 39.2.2
        Alexis

        Actually, this is how it generally works for me, and is why online dating has not worked for me. When I meet someone new, most of the time I don’t have any particular feeling and they are someone I’ll never see again, a new coworker, or a friend of a friend etc. However, in rare cases, I am very interested to get to know him because he piques my interested as I’m physically attracted to him (that has little to do with fitting the stereotypical handsome look; it’s something I can’t put my finger on). In these cases, I want to get to know someone better, and then I either find out he’s taken, only visiting town, not interested in me, or, in rare cases, he’s also attracted to me and then we start getting to know each other better, also physically. This ‘spark’ absolutely needs to be there for me and this is something I don’t get when browsing profile on a dating site. I’ve met lots of men through dating sites who, on paper, seemed perfect for me. Many were very nice people too. However, if I don’t feel I want to be physically intimate with him, there’s not going to be more than a friendship. Only once so far have I developed romantic feelings for someone who started out as a friend, where there was no physical attraction when we first got to know each other. I wish I better understood with what sort of men I feel this attraction because then I could try going to places where my chances of finding them are higher. Of course, even when I’m attracted, he’s attracted, you’re both single, you live close enough to see each other frequently, you get to know each other, you’ll likely find out down the line you want different things, are incompatible, one or both are emotionally unavailable etc etc. It’s hard regardless of how you meet.

  20. 40
    Michelle

    @DeeGee, how about not be “that guy” who uses Evan’s blog – which he created to help women find love – to make sweeping generalisations and inaccurate comments directed towards a post speaking to an *individual, lived* experience?

    I am sharing my experience to inspire women to be more open-minded about education in order   to potentially help someone find love.   I don’t know anything about “most women” or “most men.” Neither do you, unless you are a sociologist with a stack of longitudinal, peer-reviewed studies. And I live in New Zealand and I reckon you have NO idea of what “most men and women” do here.

    You did not even read my post correctly. Where exactly do I talk about my boyfriend’s possessions? And yes, he has a lovely home that is warm and welcoming and so do I – we spend more time at his because that’s where the kids prefer to be.

    I am very proud of my boyfriend for the sacrifices he has made to keep his home after his divorce so that his kids could stay in the same school. His pay packet basically goes straight to the bank. His house is in a more valuable area than mine but it will never benefit me as he won’t be selling it for 10 years and after paying out his ex he will probably put the remainder into a smaller house, not giving me bundles of $100 bills for a shopping spree! It is literally bricks and mortar to me with the bonus of being convenient to my work so we can hang out easily! If he lived further out we would hang out at mine!

    In fact if I was not dating him I would have MORE financial freedom as he cannot afford holidays overseas, etc which I am able to with my lower cost of living due to a smaller mortgage, having a flatmate and no kids. We just do without it and I go visit my family abroad on my own.

    So @DeeGee I hope you will stop making a habit of judging people and situations you know NOTHING about and take your rudeness and negativity to another blog (or nowhere at all).

     

     

    1. 40.1
      DeeGee

      You are the one who brought up his financial status in your first post.
      If you don’t think I contribute anything worthwhile to this blog, then I have no problem leaving.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *