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. 41
    tonysam

    People with a bachelor’s degree are only 19 percent of the population.

    The book is sexist filth designed to scare women and force them out of education and careers. The media hype is an old trick employed when the economy is bad. I have seen this repeated over and over for decades.

    Men and women aren’t delaying marriage because of this guy’s stupid theory of men playing the field. It’s because the job market stinks coupled with monstrous student loan debt. Shame on anybody who believes twhitewash.

    1. 41.1
      In Not Of

      That’s probably the most reasonable post on the matter I have seen.

  2. 42
    jon

    It seems that from a sociological point of view, feminism has won and more women are better educated and successful than men.   Not only are women equal, but they are above men in financial and social status.   But now the dilemma is that women cannot find equal male partners.   A feminist women might feel the need to marry a guy with a bachelor’s degree or an mba, and will prefer to be alone rather than married to an inferior blue-collar man.   There is no easy answer or solution for these women that have reached the pinnacle of individual success, but cannot find a husband to match that success.

  3. 43
    McLovin

    Ok, Evan, fair enough. I will shuffle off back into the shadows. As I’ve said several times, it’s not my desire to upset the henhouse for fear of ruining the eggs.

     

    I do want to make one statement, though, vis-a-vis your empassioned defense of the marriage monolith. If children are being born out of wedlock, and unmarried parents is a bad arrangement for children, the responsibility for that lies 100% at the feet of women.  Females  not only control the if/when  of the sexual act, but if that sexual act results in conception, again, women also  100% control  whether or not  that pregnancy comes to term  (barring natural occurences.)

     

    But I agree with jon/Chance. No man should ever get married in the Western world.

     

     

    1. 43.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      McLovin,

      I’d actually rather you NOT shuffle off into the shadows. You provide a valuable (if one-sided) point of view. If anything, I would hope your engagement here would serve to remind you of a few things:

      a) Women are not monolithic.
      b) Women are not wrong for being attracted to taller, wealthier men, no more than you’re “wrong” for being attracted to younger, prettier women.
      c) If women refuse to compromise and date the 95% of men who are not six-foot 100K earners, they risk standing alone. If men refuse to compromise and date the 95% of women who are not 25 with perfect bodies, they risk standing alone.
      d) Thankfully, many people figure this out themselves. Just walk around a mall and look at all the average looking couples who abound.
      e) While many of these couples made mistakes by marrying, many more are very happy with their decision to marry and wouldn’t imagine it any other way.
      f) If either MGTOWs or Radical Feminists refuse to see the best in the opposite sex, concede the validity of the argument from the other side, or act in such a way that would produce a healthy relationship (authentic, vulnerable, trusting, selfless, generous, sensitive), those people will either be single for life or bad relationship partners.
      g) If someone chooses to be single, that’s a perfectly valid life choice. That single person should not negate the validity of happily married folks, no more than he’d want someone to negate the validity of his own life choice.

      In other words, whether you like me or not, I’m a moderate. I’m a translator. I hear the complaints of men. I hear the complaints of women. Many are valid. Some are highly exaggerated (any form of “there are no good men/women” in my city/state/country).

      If you stay, I’d request that you not insult the women here and instead make your points through logic, reason and empathy.

      If you go, please tell all the folks in the Red Pill community that the REAL red pill is being doled out here – it’s the version that encompasses the truth on BOTH sides, not just the side that you’re on.

  4. 44
    S Drake

    It’s all in the numbers, really…

    So when a woman has requirements of >$100k income, >6 ft tall, and ‘intelligent’, she  immediately eliminates the majority of the male population:

    For men, 6 ft tall or taller  in the US falls at the 80th percentile, so 20% of men in the US are 6 ft tall or more

    Men that make $100k or more in the US fall at the 90th percentile, so 10% of men in the US make $100k or more

    For simplicity, lets say an ‘intelligent’ man falls in the top 1/3  of the intelligence realm of the male population, so 33% of men in the US are ‘intelligent’.

    Doing the math -> 20% x 10% x 33% = 0.66%   – or 2/3 of 1% of men would be acceptable based on these requirements.

    Any you haven’t even seen a picture of him yet…

    1. 44.1
      Karmic Equation

      Yeah, and what percentage of those men are single? That should reduce the numbers even more, particularly if you add in AGE, as well. For example, most 6′ 100K+ attractive men with degrees are probably already married with grandkids.

      And if he IS 6′ 100k+ and attractive and single, is SHE within the age range HE is looking for? Unlikely.

      Bleak.

      Easiest standard to relax is the degree.

      Followed by $.

      Next is height. As long as he is taller than she is when she is in flats, that should be fine.

      Next is looks, imo. If I don’t find his face attractive enough to kiss, no way can I ever have sex with him. Ever.

      Each requirement that is relaxed should increase her dating pool exponentially.

       

      1. 44.1.1
        S Drake

        Good point Karmic, I should add a few more things…

        After some thought, I’m thinking it may be best to revise the percentage of ‘intelligent’ men that make $100k to 50% from 33%, which would put my previous calculation at 1% of the male population is at least 6 ft tall, makes >$100k, and is ‘intelligent’.

        Another area that I really can’t address through numbers is people that won’t date a particular race of won’t date outside of their religion.   This obviously will further limit the available suitors.

        Your point about age is excellent.   Let’s assume that roughly 50% of single women fall in Mr 1%’s acceptable age range (most likely generous and using wide age ranges like the 1/2 +7 rule).

        Based on census data, approximately 50% of the male population over 18 is single.   I think your point about a larger portion of the >$100k men being married is valid, but I can’t find demographic data readily available for that subset.

        So doing the additional math, we are now at:

        1% (previous) x 50% (age) x 50% (single) = 0.25% or 1/4 of 1%.

        To put it into real numbers, there are approximately 50 million unmarried men over 18 in the US, based on census data.   Of those 50 million, 125,000 would meet the >6 ft / >$100k / Intelligent criteria based on 0.25% from above.   Given the land area of the US of 3.806 million square miles, there are 0.033 men per square mile that meet these requirements, assuming a uniform population distribution.

        Where have all the good men gone?   There weren’t very many to begin with…

         

        1. Buck25

          Good luck with getting many women today to accept that 1/2 your age plus 7 rule, no matter how much money, (or anything else) you have. Women today virtually all think they are entitled to a man no more than 5 years older than themselves,   and preferably younger. This goes even (perhaps moreso) for women in their fifties and sixties. Let the flaming commence….

    2. 44.2
      jon

      No woman wants to date a short nerdy engineer.   Yet engineers make a lot of money.   Women don’t feel that romantic spark with engineers because they are too nerdy and not emotionally intelligent.   There are plenty of single rich men available, especially in places like san fran and silicon valley, yet a woman won’t settle because those guys are too nerdy or unattractive, despite having bachelors degrees.

      1. 44.2.1
        Karmic Equation

        I’m thinking nerdy females may like nerdy engineers.

        Overweight girls may like nerdy engineers.

        Problem is that nerdy engineers want to date women who look like Megan Fox (like most men do and even some women since she’s bisexual haha).

        Perhaps the short nerdy engineers should try contacting women he considers IN or BELOW his league as opposed to above it.

        $ can only offset only  so much in looks. It’s not the panacea unless you’re a millionaire/billionaire.

        Or the nerdy engineer should consider spending some of his money on a wardrobe makeover and sign up for physical training. If that doesn’t work, he should spend some money on plastic surgery.

        Every. Single. Celebrity. has that done, so it’s not shameful.

        If you have money, and you’re unhappily single because of your looks, spend money to fix it. Obviously, invasive surgery should be the final resort.

        1. Buck25

          KE,

          Well then, I guess I’d better find a damn good plastic surgeon, then. I don’t know what to do about the other stuff. I’ve been told, that if I tell the truth about my income, I’m assumed to be a liar. If I don’t disclose it, I must be insolvent. If I disclose my real height, I’m presumed to be lying, and I must be at least 2 inches shorter. If I tell the truth about my philanthropy, I’m a braggart, ditto for my intellect or my job. Heaven forbid I show my house or car in a pic; just another phony, probably doesn’t even belong to me. I use my real current pics, they must be out-of -date (because, every woman knows a man my age doesn’t look like that). If I tell the truth about my age, my profile gets screened out; if I fudge it, I’m just a liar. I write anything romantic, I’m assumed to be a phony; if I don’t I’m boring. Use some humor, I must be a player; if I don’t… boring…again.I don’t know why we can’t just admit that online dating is solely and completely about age, height and looks, and just leave it at that. Same for women, no looks, no dates; her profile could look like Mother Teresa’s-but what man wants to date Mother Teresa-I damn sure don’t!   I don’t wan to date a young supermodel either; I’d settle for a reasonably fit lady of 50 to 55 with a decent face and a good personality. My chances of getting same? In OLD, I’d have a somewhat better chance of being struck by lightning.

        2. Emily, the original

          Buck25,

          I’d settle for a reasonably fit lady of 50 to 55 with a decent face and a good personality.

          I don’t mean to be rude, Buck, but aren’t you 68? An 18-year age difference is fairly significant. I’m 45. That would be like me aiming for a 27-year-old man, or an 85-year-old woman aiming for you. Some women do like older men, but most women prefer to date men + or – five years of their age.

        3. Tom10

          @ Buck25
          “I don’t wan to date a young supermodel either; I’d settle for a reasonably fit lady of 50 to 55 with a decent face and a good personality. My chances of getting same? In OLD, I’d have a somewhat better chance of being struck by lightning.”
            
          Well Buck, isn’t the obvious response to this comment that OLD isn’t really working for you, therefore, you might need to consider a different medium to increase your chances of success?
            
          I’ve just recently begun to try OLD dating (Tinder and Bumble) and haven’t been hugely impressed so far. My (superficial) stats are almost ideal in terms of what women want, and although I have a decent response rate and make new matches every day, I’ve found that I do far better IRL: in ten seconds face-to-face I can create a far better impression and rapport than through hours/days of on-line communication. Admittedly, I’ve been fairly lazy and haven’t made a huge effort so far; I’m just seeing what comes along rather than actively searching and reaching out.
            
          Also, I’ve noticed that women will only really consider guys their own age (+5 years) or younger on-line, whereas they seem to be more flexible in real life. Therefore, it’s reasonable to infer that as a 68 year old man, your preferred age range of 50 to 55 is your main limiting factor (which you already know).
            
          So as an objective observer your choice seems simple: if you want to improve your odds you’ll have to date women your own age on-line, or meet women through a different medium. Your personality shines through your comments so I’d imagine you’d be an interesting guy to converse with in person.
            
          Are there any local venues/events where you could go to meet available women in person?

        4. Buck25

          @ Emily,

          No, it’s not rude, it’s reality. Admittedly, I’m looking for a unicorn, and that may take some doing; it has so far, anyway. Honestly, I haven’t done well with most women my own age; they think and act older than I do; the ones in my area mostly have just about given up on sex, and few of them are any semblance of attractive, most because they don’t try anymore. They’d be worse than no relationship at all, honestly. I am not most people’s idea of what 68 looks or acts like. As for the age gap, it’s not quite as bad when you’re older, though still significant for most, which I accept. I’m well aware of the hatred most women feel for older women looking for younger men, but fortunately for me, not all feel that way, so there is hope. As for online, I’m done, that’s a complete waste of time in that community, and if some woman who complains she can’t find a man, but refuses to consider dating me, that’s her loss, not mine. If I sound a little pissed, it’s because honestly, I’m in better shape by far than most fifty year old guys I know, and a lot more active, but it is what it is. I’m well aware that today’s women online mostly judge men as an age, not by who they are. It’s ok, I refuse to let them bring me down, no matter how many would like to. I repeat my observation here that on this blog, in particular, tearing down men, especially older men, is a popular female sport, mostly revenge inspired.

          It’s actually funny, because in real life I pull younger than that on a regular basis; too young, at least for me. Otherwise, I know I don’t fit into the current feminist narrative, that men my age are fit only for the scrap heap, or some 80 year old hag. Too bad, because   hell will freeze over before I accept that. All I have to do is find ONE, that doesn’t feel, and is happy with what I can bring to the table, and that just might be doable.

          @ Tom,

          OLD Has   gone from a primary source to a very minor supplement. Virtually useless, unless one is dating candidates for a nursing home. I maintain an active social life, and there I do get some results. I currently am dating a 46 year old, rather attractive at that, so apparently I’m not so washed up and useless, as a lot of feminist women, and older online daters, would like to think. We’re not all the bald, pot-gutted, sedentary, viagra-dependent, toothless, one-foot-in-the-grave eunuchs some of the resident harpies here like to claim ALL older men are. I’m enjoying destroying the stereotype, lol!

        5. Buck25

          Tom all I know is I’ve given online my best shot. Absolutely does not work for me, and my area,. YMMV. I concentrate strictly real world now, where I can use my conversational skills.Some chance of success, vs. none online. Not great odds, of course, which I’m sure delights some of our female contributors here, but I just might win yet; I only have to get lucky ONCE And if not, I at least won’t have caved in to their idea of what they think I “deserve” because of my age. Censure that, Evan, like you did the last one.

        6. Emily, the original

          Buck25,

          We’re not all the bald, pot-gutted, sedentary, viagra-dependent, toothless, one-foot-in-the-grave eunuchs some of the resident harpies here like to claim ALL older men are.

          You don’t like being described in this manner, yet this is how you describe women your own age:

          I haven’t done well with most women my own age; they think and act older than I do; the ones in my area mostly have just about given up on sex, and few of them are any semblance of attractive, most because they don’t try anymore.

          You don’t see the irony in that? All I know is that, if I go into a bar and try to talk to the 27- to 32-year old men (the 18 to 13 year age difference you mention that you would settle for), I am competing with women who are in their 20s. That’s the cold reality of the situation. I am competing with women young enough to be my daughter.

        7. Tom10

           
          @ Buck25
           
          “I currently am dating a 46 year old, rather attractive at that”
           
            
           
          Great!
           
            
          So, um, what are you complaining about? And why are you still on-line dating if you’ve already got a hawt young thang? Lol.
           

        8. Buck25

          “Why are you still online dating…”

          Tom,

          I’m not; just shut down the last account. I’m not happy with the experience over the last three years, however, and to be honest, I’m not too happy with some of the gratuitous (and mostly untrue) stereotypical attacks on men my age I’ve had to read here, either.

           

          “You don’t like being described in this manner, yet this is how you describe be women your own age”

          Emily, first of all, I didn’t start it; I responded to attacks, couched in language calculated to tear down older men in the most patently offensive terms possible.I make no apology for that; women here started it, and I responded, though not in quite the hateful, nasty, stereotypical, misandrist screed women used against men here. I thought I was pretty restrained, because I could have used the precise gender equivalent insults, and If you think what I said was rough, I think you all know I could have said far worse. Your side wanted a gender war. You got one. Some of your side wanted to insult men, especially older men, as viciously as possible. They did so. Then you and Evan want to judge me for a relatively civilized (by comparison) rejoinder. Sorry, but your outrage rings hollow, and more than slightly hypocritical. This is a mostly women’s blog. I get that. It is not, however, the women’s locker room. There are real flesh and blood men here, not abstractions; some of us happen to have feelings too(not that many of you care), and quite a few women here have no business ever accusing men of insensitivity and lack of empathy,   considering how much both sensitivity and empathy are conspicuously lacking among some of the distaff set here. I’ve complained about the most egregious stuff before; I’ve asked nicely for those who were doing that, to stop it. They did not. You want to consider what I’ve said about older women my rejoinder to the insults and the flat-out misandrist lies, go ahead. It sure as hell wasn’t unprovoked. What’s sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander. You’ve been abused? I’m sorry, I really am. You had a rotten marriage? I’m sorry for that. You got used? I’m sorry for that too. But neither I nor any other man here did it to you, and I for one am sick and tired of all but about three men here, coming here looking for insight, and instead  being forced to serve as the punching bags for the misandrist rage of certain women here. It’s not personal to you, but some women here, a goodly number of them, need at least a small taste, (and that’s all   I’ve served up, a small taste) of the garbage we’ve had thrown at us, and then had our noses rubbed in for good measure. To the strident screeching harpies here(they know who they are), if you’re so damn brave and smart, you warrior princesses, go on men’s turf, and scream your venom there. You’ll get far worse than you ever got from me, I promise! NOW I’ve said my piece, and I’m finished.

      2. 44.2.2
        Christine

        Really?   I have been dating a short nerdy engineer for the last seven months–and have never been happier.   🙂 And his fellow short, nerdy engineers at his workplace are happily married, so it must be possible.

        Well Karmic Equation, I’m not all that “nerdy”, and am not overweight (in fact, am petite).   But I also don’t delude myself that I’m Megan Fox hot! I’m more of the regular “girl next door” type (like most people I fall in the middle of the bell curve between hideous and gorgeous).

        I’m not entirely sure what demographic, if any, short nerdy engineers have the best chances with.   Women can be just as delusional about their “league”.   I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen short, chubby women within my social circle trying to pursue the tallest, best-looking guys.   I don’t think there’s any magic formula and like everyone else, the short nerdy engineers also just have to keep going until they find their match.

      3. 44.2.3
        verhrzn

        I would love to date a short, nerdy engineer. Make him a brunette and he’s exactly my type. In fact, years ago when I was young (24), I casually dated a guy who fits that exact description. He never wanted to get serious, and eventually started seriously dating a very attractive woman.

        I am a nerd woman, and love nerds, but nerds never love me back because I am ugly. Nerdy guys don’t want to date women they aren’t attracted to, either.

        1. Karmic Equation

          That’s why there’s something called makeup.

          I recently found this woman on youtube. And since I’m Asian, the stuff she does for eyes doesn’t work for me. But the other stuff could be doable: https://www.youtube.com/user/NikkieTutorials

          And putting on makeup is like any other skill. If you only do it once in a while, you’re not going to be any good at it. You do have to do it “every day”. I love makeup, but hate mascara, cuz even waterproof mascara runs on me. Awful. So I am just a klutz with mascara and that’s the one thing I need most and won’t do. Am seriously contemplating the salon installed kind that lasts several weeks.

          Anyway, learning to put on makeup and wearing flattering clothing will go a long way towards making you feel more attractive so that you give off the “I’m attractive vibe” instead of the “I’m the frumpy, nerdy female no one wants to date” vibe.

          http://mom.me/entertainment/12915-amazing-and-after-pictures-using-only-makeup/

        2. Christine

          That makes me sad, to hear anyone describe themselves as ugly!   I rarely see a woman who I think is ugly.   Most of the time, the “frumpy” women I see are that way because they’ve given up on themselves and don’t put any effort into their appearance.   Many of them would improve greatly with some makeup, and different hairstyle or wardrobe choices.   I know I’m not a young Angelina Jolie or anything, but I still make the most of my appearance with my makeup, hair products and cute clothes.   I think you just need a confidence boost.

           

        3. Verhrzn

          …. I already wear make-up. I’m at best a 4 with make-up. And I do make-up well; I frequent a local make-up store so much they have my favorite lip color picked out by the time I walk in the door.

          Some people are just ugly. It blows me away that people refuse to acknowledge this and somehow insist clothes or make-up can change reality. Take that post; not only is there make-up added, but different lighting and angle effects as well. So clearly make-up alone didn’t do it.

        4. Karmic Equation

          Verhrzn,

          There’s wearing makeup and there’s wearing make up that makes a woman look good.

          I know a lot of women who where makeup, but not a lot of women actually spend time using makeup to highlight her best features and downplay her bad ones. Yeah, they put on blush and wear lipstick and eyeshadow, but they don’t actually put them on in the best way possible to highlight their good features.

          Other than myself, I don’t don’t know any woman who tries to contour away her double chin. Most women don’t spend time contouring or, god forbid, pick out colors of lipsticks and blush that actually go well with her coloring. For example, for the LONGEST time, I INSISTED on buying “cool” red lipsticks…until I decided to get my nails done in a “cool red” color and my hands looked OLD. Then I changed my nail color to a “warm” red color and my hands looked fabulous…and suddenly it dawned on me that I was choosing the wrong colored lipstick.

          Make sure you get makeovers at your favorite makeup store whenever you’re going to spend more than $50. Most stores do makeovers for free as long as you spend $50 on their merchandise. And hunt on youtube for videos that help you highlight your best features and downplay your worst.

          Yes, I know of at least one woman where no amount of makeup would make her look attractive. And yet she has two children…from two different baby daddies…and she’s on section 8…but hey TWO SOMEONEs found her attractive.

          Obviously, I’m not encouraging you to have babies out of wedlock, but I am saying that there IS someone for everyone. But as a woman, you must do your best to accentuate your positives.

          If you’re overweight, get a gym membership and work out, and lose the weight. That is within your control. Most “ugly fat” women are no longer “ugly” once they lose weight.

          Don’t use the excuse of “I’m ugly” to get out of doing work on yourself that can improve your looks.

        5. Christine

          Verhrzn, even if you’re an immutable 4, I actually don’t think that necessarily precludes you from finding love.   I know a lot of engineers, because of my boyfriend, his friends and people at work.   Out of all of them, I only know one (from work) who married a “knockout”.   The other engineers I know are all with average or even homely women (luckily I’m with a guy who is crazy about me and thinks I’m a 10, but I don’t think of myself as “hot”–perhaps as a “cute” girl next door, but not a hot model either).   Yes, you may not get male attention as readily as the most beautiful women.   So it might take you longer, as it took me.   But just because it hasn’t happened yet doesn’t mean it never will.

           

    3. 44.3
      AAORK

      Wow Drake, as a white, 6′-2″, 100K+ guy in his forties I figured I was in the upper 15% but didn’t realize (assuming your math is correct) the extent of my rareness.   Nonetheless, here’s the kicker: when I was online dating a just year ago (same stats BTW), my response rate from women that I sent emails to (-5 to +5 my age) was about 1 in 16. I guess I just wasn’t “hot” enough. I had also noticed that for most of those I emailed, their typical preferred age range was 10-15 below and about 2-3 years higher than their age. I was almost always at the edge of their upper desired age range. However, I did get a TON of first emails from gals 10-15 yrs older than me.

      Thinking back, it reminds me of an old episode of VH1’s “Tough Love” show where a few hundred guys were put up on a stage and the host began applying all the “must have” criteria from the 30-something gals. When he was done, only a handful of the guys were left. He was trying to demonstrate to the ladies how their long list of strict criteria was greatly limiting their potential to find a mate. As I recall, a few understood the significance of the lesson but most didn’t. I figure most of those gals will eventually become clients of Evan’s type of service when they hit their forties or beyond. Seems like good job security for him. 🙂

      1. 44.3.1
        S Drake

        I’m right there with ya, AAORK!

        I’m also in my 40’s, 6’2″, >$100k and I have a degree from a Big 10 school (not sure if that makes me smart or not).    Last year, when I was doing some OLD, my reply rate was about the same as yours, probably about 1 in 20.   Eventually it gets old.   I would typically spend about 15 minutes reading through a woman’s profile and crafting a message to her that would mention something in her profile, highlight something we seem to have in common, and ask her more about her interests.

        Then… crickets.   Eventually it just becomes a huge time waster.

        The numbers exercise is actually an exercise I did for one of the women I met through OLD.   She was 5’10” and refused to date anyone the same height or shorter than her.   She had a good job and made good money and also wanted someone ‘intelligent’.   When I pointed out to her that her desired boyfriend only existed in around 1% of the male population before she even looked at a picture of him, she was floored.    We dated for about 3 months, and eventually I broke it off.   It seemed every time we would go out, she would start in with the “Define the Relationship” talk after a few drinks.   It got old.

        Yes, you and I are quite rare given the particular criteria identified, but what matters is what value is placed on those particular criteria versus other criteria by a particular woman.   From my limited sample size, I feel that most women value looks much more than they would lead you to believe.

        Another anecdote:   Back when I was doing OLD, I asked a female friend who was in her late 20’s to look over my profile and give me her thoughts.   Her first words?   “You’re loaded!”   Hmmm… makes me wonder how quickly a woman looks for the financial info when she opens an OLD profile.    She then told me that her first thought would be that I was lying about my income and that I should probably remove my income from my profile.   Grant it, she’s quite a bit younger than I am and may not be perusing too many >$100k profiles, but it still was an interesting take on the entire OLD scene.   I’m not sure how many guys embellish their income on their OLD profile, but such behavior would seem to have merit.

         

         

        1. Christine

          S Drake, thanks for that post.   I’m always interested in hearing from men, to get a better understanding of what dating is like for them (not being a man it’s obviously impossible for me to know personally).   Well, yes, it’s hard not to notice looks first, given how online dating pages are usually set up to present photos initially.   However, there are women like me who do try to look at more substantive qualities too.   My boyfriend told me he got turned down by a lot of women for “only” being 5’8″ and supposedly being too “old” for being in his early 40s (or they were just trying to dig into his wallet).   Oh well, it’s their stupid loss and my gain that they didn’t see the wonderful qualities I did in his profile.   Now I have a happy relationship with him, while they’re probably still holding out for their non-existent (or exceedingly rare) ideals.

          I’ve just taken it day by day, and haven’t once given him the “define the relationship” talk.   I trust him to set the pace, know what’s good for our relationship and set an appropriate time table accordingly.   I don’t blame you for breaking things off with that other woman, in implying that her judgment is somehow so superior to yours that you should follow her time table (my boyfriend dated women like that before and even as patient as he is, even he got fed up with it)

        2. DeeGee

          S Drake said: “my reply rate wasabout 1 in 20.

          I’m quite surprised by this.   5%?
          My reply rate on OKC was somewhere around 60%.
          My profile’s views were also at least 25 per day.
          I’m 53 and 5’8″.   Perhaps because I targeted women aged 45-55?

        3. Not Jerry

          S Drake

          If you were on Match or another pay site, 5% might be about what you can expect.

          You realize the profiles you are looking at are of all the people who ever signed up, including those that stopped paying, are maybe married, or seeing someone.   So that is about 90% or more, and they can only reply if they pull out their credit card and pay.

          That’s the problem with pay sites.   Some disagree about this but I have seen it.

          I had a GF who got hundreds of emails a day from eHarmony, which she turned off when she started seeing me.   Still got the emails.   Lots and lots of them. She couldn’t stop it. I could have but she didn’t want me to get involved.

          DeeGee said he got about a 60% response on OKC, which is about what I get there, because everyone you email can respond.

          The difference between pay sites and free sites, which are mostly all bought by Match/IAC now.

           

           

        4. S Drake

          @ Christine

          I think it’s great that you look at more than just physical attributes.   I think one of the issues that many women have that end up on sites like this is that they want the physical attractiveness, while also having the long laundry list of other requirements, which results in their potential options being about zero.

          I don’t have a problem with the “Define the Relationship” talk, in fact, I think it’s   often a necessary part of a relationship’s progression.   Sometimes you both “just know”, but often that’s not the case and the best way to clear the ambiguity is to sit down and have a discussion about it.   That being said, I believe the DTR discussion should be conducted as a planned event.   I had regularly communicated to her that I did not feel that out on the town after several drinks was the correct time or place for such a discussion, but she kept insisting on having it anyway.   She would bring it up several times a week. I would just go silent, not willing to have the discussion under such circumstances.   I told her I’d be happy to have a discussion at another time and place, when we were both completely sober and had time to think about things a bit, but that never seemed to happen.   One evening, while we were having a particular fun time, she again brought up the DTR discussion at midnight just after we had left the dance floor.   It was the final straw.

          @ DeeGee and Jerry

          You boys must be much hotter than I am!   I never made it anywhere close to 60% reply rate.    Back when I was doing OLD, I was on OKC, POF, and Match, not all at the same time.   OKC was probably about the worst for reply rate, although I did meet and date a woman I met on OKC for about 3 months.   I think she was the only one that I really dated from OKC after two years of using OKC.

          I agree with what you said about Match.   I was very conscious to make sure I only contacted women who had signed in within the past week.   The last woman I dated for any period of time I met on Match.   We made a go of it, but we both realized after about 2 months that it was never going to work, and she ended it shortly before I would have probably ended it.   My reply rate on Match was probably a bit better than OKC, although still nothing to get excited about.

          My best success by far was POF.   Within a week of signing up on POF, my dance card was so full I was having to back burner several candidates because I didn’t want to put them off several weeks before we could arrange a first date.   Then – BAM – my POF account was closed and I was banned.   Evidently this is not an uncommon thing with POF.   All it takes is one woman to report you for whatever reason and you get banned.   No discussion or appeal.   I never did anything that I would consider inappropriate, but such is life I guess.

          I think the dating sites are somewhat regional in how they are used (i.e., people that live around X use dating site Y).   I also could have been targeting too far out of my league, but I don’t think I was.   I was typically contacting women that were -10 to +5 in age range, and went on dates with women that were anywhere from -7 to +9.

          There are a few things in my profile that may be deal breakers for some women.   One is that I have a 9 year old daughter whom I have nearly 50% of the time.   Many women in my age range are empty nesters or near empty nesters and don’t want to take on someone with a child that will be around for nearly a decade yet.    The other thing I think affects my reply rate is that I am bald.   I’ve been shaving my head for about 10 years since the majority of my hair fell out.   I figured God took most of it, it’s up to me to clean up the rest.   A shaved head seems to be a hit or miss proposition with most women.   A select few thinks it’s hot.   Others think it’s OK, and I would venture a good half don’t like it at all.   It is what it is.

          I find OLD to be an incredibly frustrating avenue for dating.   Yes, you are presented with a ton of options, but many times the logistics of any potential relationship are a huge challenge and the cost of all those opportunities does start to add up.     I have had better luck finding potential partners through other avenues.

          At this point, I’ve closed all my OLD accounts and am taking a break from all dating.   I’m thinking of taking a trip to the Greek Isles next spring with all the money I’ll save from not trying to woo women 🙂

        5. Not Jerry

          S Drake,

          I doubt it’s anything like being hotter.   As EMK recommends I do a weeding process. I sure don’t contact that many women! The few that I do, I think the majority respond, not that this means anything, since I agree to meet very few.

          So that might affect my ratio.   I have never tried to use a pay site so I can’t talk about match.com except for reading about it and discounting it.

          The young daughter may be a factor.   If you are older most older people are not planning on raising kids again. Like most my age I already did that.

          I think OKC is a better quality of clientele than POF, and because of the matching which is hardly at play on POF you get less action.

          The cost of that is on POF you get a lot of contacts from those you probably wouldn’t be interested in.   So POF is more action of lower quality since the matching is not as front and center like it is on OKC.

          On POF, we’re looking at the pictures.

          On OKC, there is that 95% at the top, you can’t help noticing that.   And on OKC there are the other person’s questions and answers to read through.

          All in all, OLD sucks pretty bad if you ask me. IMHO. Well, it’s not horrible. But not the greatest.

        6. Evan Marc Katz

          Okay, Not Jerry, what IS the greatest? “Real life?” How many times a year do you take out women you meet in real life? That’s the reason people use online dating – not because it’s flawless – but because it’s the biggest resource for single people anywhere.

        7. DeeGee

          S Drake said: “You boys must be much hotter than I am!

          I only rate myself a 5.   I am 53, fit, and have my hair.

          and said: “OKC was probably about the worst for reply rate

          I also messaged some women who hadn’t been on in a month or two, with hopes that they might only be busy.
          The main problem I had on OKC was that there are so few women in my immediate 50-100km area (less than a dozen).   I had to reach out 500km to get the numbers higher.

          and said: “I also could have been targeting too far out of my league, but I don’t think I was.

          I did about the same as you for targetting.   And I received the decent response from my messages.

          and said: “At this point, I’ve closed all my OLD accounts and am taking a break from all dating.

          I disabled my OKC account recently since I went through the few women who were actually interested in going on a date.   With no luck.
          But now things seem to be going well with one of the women who is a bit further away, so I’ll see if a short-term long-distance relationship can end up as a long-term close relationship.   🙂

        8. Not Jerry

          EMK, I don’t have the answers. None of them.

          As far as real life, I am active in my singles meetup group, so I am out all the time, and we are all single. I have had a few dates out of it.   Even a little more than that.   Without that I would be 100% dependent on OLD. Glad I’m not.  My area is very active on meetup, there are multiple events every day. I know people in other areas who can’t find events. Meetup might be an alternative for some.

          If you had told me I would be on the market again post divorce at this stage, I’d have called you a liar. But then again, here we all are!

          Online dating is pretty disheartening.

          I have a woman friend, very pretty and fit.   She’s really disheartened. All these guys want to go on a meet and greet with her, and so many cancellations!   Last minute too, leaving her hanging. It’s like people on the dating sites her age (much older than you, late 50s) are all so independent they frustrate her no end.

          She’s so attractive, I can’t imagine why. It must happen to everyone.   I told her to weed them out better.   She reads your fb page, and does the 2-2-2 procedure. She will probably read this.   Heh.

        9. S Drake

          Not Jerry said:

          “If you were on Match or another pay site, 5% might be about what you can expect.”

          and

          “That’s the problem with pay sites.   Some disagree about this but I have seen it.”

          and

          “I have never tried to use a pay site so I can’t talk about match.com”

          and

          “I don’t have the answers. None of them.”

          Wait, what?

          So you’ve never used Match or any other pay site, but you know all about reply rates on  pay sites like Match?    Not sure how you gained your pay site expertise without ever using a pay site  – did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express or something?

          Also, I’m not sure what your basis is for  ascertaining the ‘quality’ of matches from a particular site.   Isn’t that why you filter?   I went on dates with great women from POF and from OKC and it had nothing  to do with which site happened to host their  profile.

           

          I think reply rates may have more to do with opportunity than anything.   In my metro area search and given my search range for age, OKC usually will have about 500 total matches, with about  200 remaining after filtering.   Match will have around 2000 total (a portion of which are essentially inactive) and I will end up with about 300 or so after filtering (filtering included filtering out the inactives).   On POF, there were nearly 5000 matches.   Filtering is a bit more challenging with POF, but I would still end up with 500 or more after filtering.   I think the number of potential candidates  explains my success rate with POF more than anything.

          I think in DeeGee’s case, there are so few available single people using online dating in his area  that the people  almost have to engage just about anyone that contacts them  because there aren’t really any more options, hence his high reply rate of 60%.

          I think the reply rates with pay sites are most likely higher, since people are paying  for the service and more likely to take a vested interest in taking the time to flush out potential candidates. With free sites, it’s easier just to let things roll and wait for the next one to come along if you’re ‘just not feeling it’ right now.

          Evan Marc Katz said: “it’s the biggest resource for single people anywhere.”

          Exactly. Nothing puts your mug in front of more potential candidates than online dating.   It’s like putting yourself in front of a stadium full of single people that are looking for a partner.

          Is it perfect?   No, not at all, but it certainly is a way to get engaged in the dating scene and  meet people!

           

        10. In Not Of

          If any guy making $100k e-mails me, alarm bells immediately go off.   I generally get the guys with no teeth.

        11. Not Jerry

          D Drake

          I got that inactive statistic from some research done by the guys who founded OKC, before they sold out to Match.com. They did the math, which EMK disagrees with.

          It was titled “Why you should never pay for online dating”.

          So you can see why match.com doesn’t want that around, but it’s still around and quite illustrative.   You can google it, I just did.

          As I said, EMK disagrees with their math but he didn’t want to tell me why for some reason, which I regret. Maybe he will relent and clue me in, I’d love to hear his views. I really would. I think their math seems right, but I am always willing to listen.

          But the facts are on a pay site you are emailing ghosts, and they cannot respond.   Maybe 90% or more.

          There are so many factors that go into OLD, how engaging your profile is, the matching in use (significant on OKC, not so much on POF). Pictures, dumb luck, how many people are in your area.   Maybe lots of other factors.

          Also some say the people on OKC are more white collar, on POF more blue collar, but I have no information that is true at all.   It may be.

          I still think OLD is disheartening.
          Maybe Neil Clark Warren is right, and he alone knows whom you’d like.

        12. Buck25

          @AAORK and S Drake, except for the height, and age, exactly the same pattern I’ve discovered. In my age   group, (roughly 55-65) women put their age range at no more than two years older to fifteen years younger; not just the attractive ones,either; virtually ALL of them. Considering that I’ve at least got top 1% money to throw on the table, I have to ask what they think THEY bring…oh, that’s right, they don’t think they should have to bring ANYTHING. How charming. Can we say, “entitled”, ladies? Why yes, I think we can…at least in that warped universe.

        13. Buck25

          All I know, is that for me, real world works, OLD doesn’t. Different age group, different part of the country, maybe it does work. Not here, and not for me. Evan likes to shoot the messenger on   this rather than acknowledge it, but so be it, I’m just reporting my own experience, and Evan is free to blame it on anything else, except the medium. I’m sure he will. All I know is I get more quality action IRL, where I can use my extroverted personality and conversational skills in a way I can’t online. Also, if you want anything outside the prevailing patterns online (we all know what those are, no point rehashing), chances are you’ll do better in real life. I’ll take a small chance of finding what I want IRL, to no chance online, and that’s the bottom line for me.Evan, I wish you wouldn’t think everyone who despises online dating is your enemy, because we aren’t, but you have your view, and some of us have ours. Says something that you feel a need to censor ours.

           

    4. 44.4
      Alexis

      @ S Drake: that’s not how statistics work.

  5. 45
    Lucy

    @DeeGee – Well I absolutely agree. No one likes to be friend-zoned but I also think there’s not a lot of logic to whether you find someone attractive. I’ve been friend-zoned by guys plenty of times too and I never try to pursue friendship with a guy who was romantically interested in me if he doesn’t want to. I never overcompensate by being extra nice to a guy I’m not interested in and hence lead him on. If a man doesn’t find me attractive, there’s no reason why I think he should have to. We just aren’t right for each other. All the talk of women ‘friend-zoning’ men and women get friend-zoned as well!

    1. 45.1
      DeeGee

      I could be wrong, but I think women would “friend-zone” men more than the other way around.

      Very few men that I know have women who are just friends.

      1. 45.1.1
        S Drake

        DeeGee:  Very few men that I know have women who are just friends.

        That’s horribly unfortunate and something I totally don’t understand.   I can’t think of a much better way for a man to learn to understand women than to have female friends.   Where else is that understanding supposed to come from?   Your mom?   Your sister?   A bunch of your buddies  eating wings and drinking beer?   Reading red pill forums?

        I have many women in my life that I would call friends, and I firmly believe that it is possible for men and women to be just friends.   I wouldn’t have it any other way.

        1. DeeGee

          S Drake said: “That’s horribly unfortunate and something I totally don’t understand.

          It’s completely true.   Perhaps it is the location I am living at (oilpatch in Canada).

          Any married couples I know, the wife won’t let him have any female friends (competition I guess).

          All of the single guys I know in their 30’s and 40’s have no real female friends, perhaps sexual tension by the guys?

          Myself, I have a few female friends, they are also unmarried, but unfortunately they tend to keep me around to have a guy to talk to, to get my opinion on things, and to have me help them with repair chores like a boyfriend or husband would.
          I tend to get frustrated with this at times, because I would also be up for dating any of them, but I’m always told that while I’m a nice guy, they aren’t attracted to me.
          They ask me about guys, but none have ever offered to fix me up with any of their female friends.

          Maybe I need new female friends.   🙂

        2. S Drake

          DeeGee said:  they tend to keep me around to have a guy to talk to, to get my opinion on things, and to have me help them with repair chores  

          This is exactly the way friends behave.   I don’t understand why you would have a problem with it.   Don’t your guy friends keep you around to “have a guy to talk to” and to get your opinion”?

           

          Female to guy friend:   Can you come over and help me install a new light over my vanity?

          Guy friend:   Sure!

          Guy friend helps install new light over vanity at his friend’s house and gets a few beers for his efforts.

          Male to guy friend:   Can you come over and help me pull the heads on my Chevelle?

          Guy friend:   Sure!

          Guy friend helps pull the heads on his friend’s  Chevelle and gets a few beers for his efforts.

          It’s the same pattern.

           

          The way you make it sound, you have an expectation for more than friendship from your female friends, and I’m surmising that expectation is uncommunicated and is leading to your resentment of your female friends.

          Have you asked to be set up with any of your female friend’s  friends?   If you haven’t asked, then why would they go to the trouble?

          I’d recommend accepting their friendship for what it is, and not   expecting anything more than friendship from them.   If they feel that you can be trusted and that you aren’t constantly trying to find an angle to date them or sleep with them, who knows what might happen.

          As far as the other guys you know that have no female friends, I’m guessing they can’t keep ol’ lizard brain in check when they are around a woman. There are many, many guys that are like that.

          One more point:   If a woman I was seeing ever told me I wasn’t ‘allowed’ to have any female friends, I would immediately end our relationship.   I’m not going to throw away potential friendships with over half the population just because I’m dating a woman, and I don’t do well with controlling people.

        3. Christine

          DeeGee, a lot of times people won’t just offer to set their friends up without being asked.   They might find it really presumptuous to just assume that you want to be set up.   There could also be concerns that if the setup doesn’t go well, you’ll blame them–and then it’ll negatively impact your friendship.

          S Drake, that’s a healthy attitude to have.   Me and my boyfriend both have opposite sex friends, and there’s been no issue with that.   While I value my male friends, there are also reasons why I never got together with them romantically.   Some people really are better off as friends than romantic partners.   I trust that’s the case with my boyfriend’s female friends as well.   I think it comes across as insecure (as well as controlling) to demand that your significant other cut off their opposite sex friends.   It presumes that your relationship is really weak, if it can be so easily threatened by any opposite sex friend who happens to be in your partner’s vicinity.   I also think it’s selfish to demand that your partner cut off friendships that make him/her happy, just because they’re the opposite sex.

           

        4. DeeGee

          S Drake said: “This is exactly the way friends behave.   I don’t understand why you would have a problem with it.” – and – “The way you make it sound, you have an expectation for more than friendship from your female friends.

          But they don’t by me beers.   Or cook me dinner.
          I buy all of the time.
          They talk all of the time.
          I feel like a boyfriend without benefits.
          I have recently (and rightly so I think) stopped contacting some of them so much and stop asking some of them for brunch, just because the giving end of the friendship is so one-sided.

        5. S Drake

          @DeeGee – It’s pretty simple, really:   Would you put up with the same behavior from a male friend?    I know I wouldn’t.   Sounds to me like you have some pretty entitled friends…

          That being said, you did set the precedent that you would pay for the privilege of being in their presence.   Backing away from that precedent will be quite a challenge, and may well result in dissolution of your friendship.

          @Christine – I think it’s great that you and your boyfriend are both maintaining your opposite sex friends in your relationship.   I wouldn’t have it any other way.

          Telling a  new partner that you won’t permit them to have opposite sex friends IS selfish, insecure, and controlling.   A relationship is built on trust and respect.   When you tell your partner they can’t have opposite sex friends, you are telling your partner several things:

          – you don’t trust your partner to make the right decisions regarding their opposite sex friends.

          – you and only you know what’s best for your partner and for your relationship.

          – your partner’s opinions and desires take a backseat to your opinions and desires, demonstrating a lack of respect for your partner’s opinions and desires.

          None of these things are healthy.   It’s the old adage of “I found the perfect guy now all I need to do is change him”.   It’s a recipe for heartache.

          I always wonder if gay guys don’t allow their boyfriends to have any male friends… maybe that’s why gay guys always hang out with women?

        6. Christine

          S Drake, I can honestly say I trust and respect my boyfriend for who he is–and that includes his friends.   He’s an adult and is intelligent enough to make that judgment for himself.   People often expect their romantic partners to fulfill their every need, but I’ve never thought that.   I think everyone needs a variety of people in their lives to round out the picture, and that can include opposite sex friends.   And I actually do have gay friends whose boyfriends don’t mind them having male friends (both gay and straight), so it is possible.   They hang out with their male friends about as often as they do with me.

          DeeGee, if you really feel taken advantage of, and if you really have unrequited love for any of these friends, maybe it is time to reconsider those friendships.   I think male-female friendships can work, but only if no one ever expects anything more.   Think of it this way.   Say one of those women finds another guy she really loves.   Could you really see her with him, without any resentment or jealousy?   With my male friends, they really were happy for me when I met my boyfriend (just as I was happy for them when they met their girlfriends).   Can you say the same thing?   If these friendships leave you feeling bad more than good, I think it’s time to walk rather than stick around, feeling resentful and hoping something changes.

           

        7. DeeGee

          S Drake said: “Backing away from that precedent will be quite a challenge, and may well result in dissolution of your friendship.

          This is what is going to happen with some of them. Unfortunately.
          I don’t want to sound bad, but after a while it starts to feel manipulative and selfish on their end.   Time to move on.

          This video on “Friend Zone” is good:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN-TdJ6NgHk

           

        8. Ted

          It’s because women use their male friends as tools. Most men would figuratively kill to date a friend. For reasons I don’t get, women seem to be faster to judge and unwilling to help a guy out.

          I miss having female friends, but I was doing all the giving and they wouldn’t even help me find somebody else.

          0erhaps if I get married, I’ll be able to spare some time.

  6. 46
    Polina

    “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″  

    Excellent review, Evan! One thing to add is the author omitted one important detail. Even though there are almost 40% more college-educated women   age 22-39 than men in Manhattan, it’s important to consider what these do or don’t do to get into a committed relationship. As a dating coach in NYC, I know that one of the biggest reason why smart professional women are single is because they don’t meet men. About 60-70% do NOTHING. They work and go home. That eliminates a lot of competition – proved by places where ration of men to women is about 8 to 2 (think real estate, entrepreneurship, business events, etc.). Additionally, if you pre-qulify places and both know and do things that lead to meeting a quality man and getting him to ask you out again and again, then numbers work in your favor. As far as access to higher caliber men and more options, NYC is the premier place to find the right man and get into a relationship.

  7. 47
    BLINGBLANGGANG

    Well said Evan✊✊

  8. 48
    Donna

    A lot of people here are using ridiculous examples to poke holes in the book. Yes, I know you know really smart guys who didn’t attend college because they went to World War II. The book is looking at how things are getting worse and worse. These days most people can at least go to some kind of college. Most (not all) intelligent people will go. Women are NOT asking too much to find someone intelligent, if they are intelligent themselves. Yet you read comments here from some really angry and bitter men. These comments prove why women end up single even when they don’t want to be – unfortunately their choices are pretty bleak.

  9. 49
    Donna

    Some women can’t help being a little overweight. Men can help living with their parents. And you’re equating something superficial with something that may show deeper issues (depending on the guy’s age.)

  10. 50
    Jordan

    I think too many women in real life hang out with White Knights with no backbone who just blindly agree with what a woman says.

    Hence when a woman goes online and sees any criticism leveled against her or women in general, she starts with the “you must be an angry and bitter man” comments.

      1. 50.1.1
        Casey

        Way to pander to your demographic.   You know who butters your bread.

         

         

         

         

  11. 51
    EFG

    The entire premise of this book is flawed.   It assumes that women and men value the same things.

    I guarantee you that men care a LOT less than women do when it comes to ‘education’.    My last  LTR didn’t go to college, but she was no dummy.   Besides, I liked her because she was pleasant and I was physically attracted to her.    My current gf did go to college, but I like her, again, because she’s pleasant and physically attractive to me.

    Yet the premise of this book suggest that an obese woman with a masters degree in basket weaving is more desirable to a majority of men than a fit woman who went to community college.

    Before women get on their moral high ground that this shows how ‘shallow’ men are, remember that education is really a code word for ‘money’, as education often correlates to more income.    Besides, I have plenty of guy friends who never went to college yet do well because they learned a trade (i.e. auto mechanics).

    The author would’ve been better off asking people to be honest in regards to what they are looking for.   I don’t demand that a woman be a model, but I do like women who are in good shape and exhibit traditional feminine qualities (in appearance and demeanor).    Education, particularly as it pertains what degree someone may or may not have, is much lower on the list.   I believe this is also true for many men.    So long as women know this, they can adapt accordingly.

  12. 52
    Kurt

    I understand the premise behind this article.   However, I really don’t feel pity for the women as I know plenty of college-educated men who are single and struggle with dating and I was in the same boat at one point.   Luckily I eventually did find a good woman to marry.

    A woman between her 20s through her early 30s has plenty of opportunities to find a man to marry her, and a huge number of women seem to assume that this will always be the case and don’t take dating seriously until it is too late and the odds are no longer in their favor.   I see this all of the time with women who reject decent-looking professionally successful men because those men are too “boring” or just don’t understand women.   A lot of these women really do tend to focus on players and sleep around when they are in their prime.

  13. 53
    Jason

    The average age of divorce is 30 and a full 60% of the men who marry between 20-25 get divorced.  

    60% failure rate? Nice to hear such a “Red Pill” comment come from you Evan.So what you are saying is that a man who marries in the USA has a 60% chance of incurring alimony and child support payments as well as (both) legal bills.Let me ask you something Evan.If you were going to go skydiving and the jump instructor said to you that “these parachutes only open 60% of the time”….Would you jump?….I assume not!

    1. 53.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      And yet college educated people over 30 have a 20% divorce rate.

      I’m happily married as are all my friends, so we’re not gonna agree on this one.

      1. 53.1.1
        Casey

        So the ‘college educated’ husband only stands  a 1 in 5 chance of getting divorced.   Still terrible odds.

         

        Within those odds is the embodiment of the problem this book posits to describe.   Educated men will know better than most what a terrible deal marriage can be for them.

         

        Divorce is a business, and it is marketed largely (if not entirely) to women.   You and your friends aren’t out of the shrubbery maze yet.

      2. 53.1.2
        Buck25

        Evan, with all due respect, I wouldn’t jump with a parachute that had a known 20% failure rate, either. Neither would any sane jumper I know. Find a better example, buddy, cause that ain’t it!

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          The difference, of course, is that when you jump out of a plane and fail, you die for a two minute thrill. When you commit to someone you love, and the relationship doesn’t work out, you have decent memories, you’ve learned a lesson, and your life can move on.

        2. Buck25

          Evan, with all due respect, I’m not so sure about the “decent memories” part of it, and the “lesson” can involve a whole lot of pain; kinda like what can happen when your chute malfunctions, but you DON’T die on the drop zone (you just wish you had). It can and does happen.

  14. 54
    Casey

    What I get from this article is that women don’t want to date ‘down’ economically.

    I.E. heaven forbid they find THEMSELVES in the position of having to pay alimony.

    There are roughly equal numbers of men & women inhabiting the earth.   This book posits that college educated women want college educated men.   All others need not apply.

    OK.

    What do college educated men want?   They want a women who is thin, pretty, pleasant, & respectful.   Modern day women fail on all 4 counts in huge & unmistakable ways.

    If you women can’t find a husband, it’s because modern day women aren’t marriage material.

     

    1. 54.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      If you can’t keep to one name (Mike, Ronin, Casey), I have little faith that you have enough integrity to be marriage material either. For all your talk about modern day woman’s failings (some of which have a partial basis in truth), you ignore modern man’s failings.

      Put another way, anyone on these message boards who has an obvious side or bias – whether men or women – is immediately rendered suspect by any objective observer.

      I know what you’re going to say before you say it: it’s always pro-man/anti-woman. Got it. I’m a little more balanced. I’m pro fairness, pro consistency, pro self-awareness. I’m anti blame, anti hatred, anti never-look-in-the-mirror-and-take-stock-of-my-own-flaws-because-its-easier-to-blame-the-opposite-sex-for-all-the-ills-in-the-world.

      And lest you think I’m only trying to run you off this forum (I am, as I hope I did with McLovin and Obsidian), I have the exact same qualms with certain women who post here, because if I ever take a man’s side, it obviously means that I am a misogynist and hate women.

      So you can go off and think I’m a purple pill sellout to women who is trying to kiss up to his clientele, and they can go off and rant about what a conservative MRA I am. You’ll both be wrong, but maybe I can finally get some peace and quiet around here. 🙂

      1. 54.1.1
        Casey

        For the record, I am neither Ronin nor Mike.

         

        While it may be convenient to assume that we are all the same person, we are not (or at a minimum, I am not) the same person(s)

         

        There are more men feeling a great upheaval and questioning the standard narrative.

         

        Consider the basis of this book.

        Why are women attending college/university at far greater rates than men?   Are they that much smarter?

         

        Is it fair that women make up such a staunch majority of the post-secondary students?

         

        Evan, you seem like a guy out to do right by all concerned.

        However, within the embodiment of this book (and your review thereof) is the problem men are trying to describe.

         

        Feminism has overshot itself.   It is no longer about 100% equal rights.   It’s about > equal rights.

         

        If it wasn’t so, then there would be a 50/50 split of men/women on post-secondary campuses.

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          To answer you quickly before I return to work:

          1. You have the same IP address and email extension as Ronin and Mike. You can see how I might draw conclusions.

          2. Why are women attending college at greater rates? Are they that much smarter?” You may be surprised to learn this, Casey, but there is an answer to that question – one that you may be loathe to admit as a man. Women are actually more mature than men at a younger age. They are less prone to violence. They are less prone to alcohol abuse. They are less prone to video game addiction and porn addiction. They are less likely to throw their entire energy into sports, rap or a manual trade. They are less likely to drop out of school. They are more likely to have the discipline to study and get better grades. These are FACTS. So when you see that there are 1/3 fewer men in college, understand: it’s not a CONSPIRACY against men. Men are simply less qualified (and interested) in college than women are; it has nothing to do with innate intelligence, per se.

          3. All the rest of your argument stems from the false premise that society (particularly liberal feminist society) is out to GET men and has the power to keep a bright young man from attending college. That’s simply not true. Are there some angry feminists who rail against the patriarchy and want an overcorrection on years of societal underrepresentation? Yes, but they’re a distinct minority. Most women just want equal rights, equal pay and equal opportunity – the American way. They’ve had to fight to get this far and the fight is not over yet. But that certainly doesn’t mean that as a white guy, you are in any way, “oppressed”. Your argument about how there should be a 50/50 split in graduate school is simply wrong – and as foolhardy as any Hispanic woman who says that Ivy League schools should be 25% Hispanic simply because of representation. This is largely ACHIEVEMENT based – and who’s achieving the most? Women, more than men. And Asians more than everybody. That’s not bias. That’s reality.

  15. 55
    Casey

    Evan,

     

    Who said I was a white guy?   You are making 2 assumptions there.

    Who said anything about a conspiracy?   I simply acknowledge the changes around me.

     

    I encourage you to read the writings of Dr. Helen Smith PHD, and in particular her book “Men on Strike”.

     

    When college/university campuses were largely the domain of men, it was  an environment in need of immediate change so that women could join.   That refrain has played again and again in male dominated spaces.

     

    Now that the tables are turned, and men are indeed the minority on campus it is all ‘Achievement Based’ and men are simply unqualified for higher education.   Interesting turn-around to be sure.

     

    Where are the programs to encourage men to go to post-secondary school?   It simply doesn’t get the same attention.

     

    Your advice to women to find good men is well-intentioned.   Here’s the problem.

    We as a society aren’t building good men.   Men are a second thought to the overarching goal of putting female needs first.   What men have to offer is currently unappreciated and out of fashion.

     

    It is absurd in the extreme that you purport that there exists no quota system on campus nor in the work environment to put certain genders/minorities first on the list.   There are government mandates to make it so.

     

    As for your long list of ‘disqualifiers’ as to what women are more likely to excel at, I will agree with you in part.   However you are conveniently leaving out the reasons why……..and completely ignored the achievements of men over the years.

     

    Male/Female intelligence (IQ) is roughly equal on average.   Here’s the thing, male IQ has a higher standard deviation.   More geniuses than women, but also more idiots as well.

     

    Yes, men cause a great deal of the problems you posit………AND they also create the greatest achievements as well (the geniuses that offset the morons you quote).

     

    As you are so fond of saying, these are simply ‘FACTS’.

     

    I really don’t expect you to ‘get it’ when I say it.

    Maybe if you and your clientele read Dr. Helen Smith’s book you could hear it from her.

     

    1. 55.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      You elide my entire point. The only people keeping men out of college are men themselves. No one is keeping them down. No one has a quota that says “admit 33% more women.”By simple meritocracy, men are falling short.

      Another point you missed when suggesting a quota system: men are not a minority. They don’t need affirmative action. They need to get their shit together. It’s the exact thing you’d probably say to the black community. Stop blaming the “system.” If men can’t get into college, it’s not because college is unattainable. It’s because they didn’t have the discipline to study as hard as women in high school. You keep reverting back to some idea of colleges “promoting” men ahead of women; it’s absurd and not based on reality. It’s just what you want to believe as further evidence that men are being oppressed. The fact that there are more male Einsteins is completely irrelevant to our discussion.

      1. 55.1.2
        Evan Marc Katz

        You’re not surprised because I’ve told you probably four times how bored I am with this conversation. So why would I waste my time reading your latest manuscript? I’m just going to assume it’s the same as all the others. You’re an articulate troll; nothing more.

        So, for the last time: I’m not banning you from expressing your opinions on my site, but I’m not dignifying your diatribes with lengthy responses either. It’s not because I’m intimidated by your intellect or cowed by your peerless rhetoric; it’s because I find you – in these settings at least – to be unpleasant. A person whose every post leaves me with a bitter taste in my mouth. Life is simply too short.

        So please, if you have any respect for me and my wishes, be gone. I hope you find whatever it is you’re looking for – validation, justice, change, or maybe a nice patient woman who is willing to wade through your miles of pain to reach the kind part inside of you that just wants to be loved. Your seething anger and singlemindedness about being heard and validated only demonstrates that you’re as human as the rest of us – even if you choose not to show it.

      2. 55.1.3
        Evan Marc Katz

        I don’t take your existence in the world personally. I would just prefer that we don’t cross paths any further. You’re like an atheist going onto a Christian blog to stir up trouble. It’s troll behavior. It’s pointless. No one is convinced. I ain’t going to your blog to convince you I’m right because I don’t care to. You can’t seem to help yourself. So I will – again – wish you the best going your own way. I hope you find some measure of happiness, because no matter what you say in return, happy people don’t do what you do. Doesn’t take a psychoanalyst to determine that you have a chip on your shoulder and an emotional void in your life that you fill with misogynist screeds on others’ sites. Bye now.

  16. 56
    Casey

    Evan,

     

    I am not swearing in my exchanges with you, perhaps you could extend me the same courtesy.

     

    You conveniently misread what I had said.   I said men are a minority on college/university campuses.

    Indeed men are a minority on college/university campuses……..or the book you reviewed wouldn’t exist in the first place.

     

    If we are using total female/male population to define ‘minority’, then using your logic, women are not a minority either.

     

    You point to the 5% moron pool of men that I mention as a statistical reason why 33% more women are attending post-secondary school than men.

     

    You say it’s all based on merits (which I am a fan thereof – merit based rewards).

    I say something is terribly amiss in those figures.

    More importantly, no one cares……including yourself.

     

    The TSX which is responsible for the listing of Canadian publicly traded companies has now put companies on their exchange under the dutiful review of either:

    1)   Having 50% of women on their boards

    2) Being called before a committee to explain why not.

     

    Does that sound like government overreach to you?

    Are you still a fan of merits?

    Or is the mere fact that corporate boards aren’t 50/50 men and women a torch you want to immediately pick up and say ‘Unfair’ or ‘Sexist to Women’ regardless of the merits?

     

    I expect suddenly you are a proponent of 50/50 in the board room, while still deriding my statement that men should be 50/50 in graduate school.

     

    Women need to hold themselves accountable to their choices too.   A topic no one wants to talk about at all.   Women do indeed make different choices that may affect career and earnings power.

     

    It is just as offensive to give  women a coveted position simply ‘because’ she is female, as it is to NOT give  women a coveted position because she is female.   The filling of jobs should be based on merits.

     

    If the problem is there aren’t enough ‘college educated’ and ‘marriage material’ men to fulfill the numbers of college educated women, it’s because of the thick heads of policy makers who see this as a situation that simply requires that ‘Men get their sh*t together.’

     

     

  17. 57
    Casey

    Evan,

     

    Don’t pretend to know what I would say about the plight of  the African-American community.

    Do you have any empathy for their situation?   Or is it ‘all their fault’ too?

     

    Certainly family formation is a disaster within the black community.   It’s actually quite tragic.

     

    Do you not think for even ONE second that policy makers (accidental or otherwise) didn’t set in motion the series of events that has decimated stable family formation in the black community?

     

    The same thing is now playing out in the Caucasian community, it just looks different.

    In 40 years we will all look back at the novel idea of stable family formation as a whimsical, transient experiment.

     

     

  18. 58
    Casey

    Pithy response by you, to be sure.

     

    The courts & policy-makers have made marriage  a dangerous place for men.   A lot of men see this as such.   Some through experience, others through observation.

     

    You are not at all interested in the discussion as to why men may be avoiding marriage (for very legitimate reasons) nor how they are being disadvantaged by post-secondary institutions.

     

    Evan, I wish you the best of luck in your marriage & career.

    With marriage being a  1 in 5 roulette game, even among your cohorts, don’t pass up that luck.

  19. 59
    SFC Ton

    The only lady commentator I can recall who did not come across as extremely off putting is Karmic Equation. The things I have accomplished in life which demonstrate traits middle age women find attractive are also desired by younger women with better attitudes.

    There is little reason why an accomplished and fit man in his 40’s should date a woman his own age. If you want a person of high caliber you have to be that person of high caliber, and ladies, no man has ever said “look at the advance degree on that gal”

  20. 60
    Lola

    Women are the sellers, men are the buyers. OK. Well, I guess there’s little to do in a market where there is too much product. Only that there are usually about the same amount of single men as there are single women, so when you throw out the need for a bachelors on your qualifications list, you will get favorable results.

    Not to be quasi-  gold digger or anything, but in my experience, men in  the trades often make more money than men with bachelors (most tradesmen out earn the engineers they work with).  They’ve owned their own homes  much earlier. And  unless you’re honing in on doctors, lawyers, and investors,  salaries between  educated and blue collar men are actually quite comparable (sometimes better for blue collar because of hourly wages instead of salaries).

    I  was 23 when I got my degree, and didn’t have a solid career related job until I was 27. I made  $14 an hour in that first job. My brother made that on a construction job when he was 18  with only a high school diploma. By the end of the summer he made $18 an hour.

    This has a lot more to do  with gender inequality, more than anything. However, we’re always going to be different as women than the men we date. So I think it’s important to give people a chance to impress you, win you over, or just click over a shared love of a certain band or  tv show.

    If I could do it all over, I wouldn’t have gotten a degree without having a  trade  to help me get through it without any student loan debt. That’s one of those things that makes  me a less  desirable product after all.

    1. 60.1
      Theodora

      I  was 23 when I got my degree, and didn’t have a solid career related job until I was 27. I made  $14 an hour in that first job. My brother made that on a construction job when he was 18  with only a high school diploma. By the end of the summer he made $18 an hour.
      This has a lot more to do  with gender inequality, more than anything.  

      No, it has nothing to do with “gender inequality”. Your brother was wise enough to learn a skill that other people need and are ready to pay for, while your “degree” is not something that people need and want to pay for – it brought you debt and a low-paying job.

      So, it’s wisdom of choice inequality. A blue collar skill is better and more useful for society than most present-day worthless, money- and time-consuming degrees, particularly in humanities.

Leave a Reply

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