Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Thurs nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts with FREE Prizes!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE Live AFA Seminar! See locations and details.


Scam free! Check out Christian Filipina - Meet Asian women with Christian values! Members screened.
Exclusive book offer! 75% off! How to Meet, Date and Marry Your Filipina Wife



View Active Topics       Latest 100 Topics       View Your Posts       FAQ Topics       Switch to Mobile


Why imbalance in US dating scene despite 50/50 ratio?

Discuss dating, relationships and foreign women.

Moderators: jamesbond, fschmidt

Why imbalance in US dating scene despite 50/50 ratio?

Postby Winston » Tue Jun 17, 2008 11:34 am

Hi all,
I was wondering something earlier today.

Since the ratio of males and females in the US is approximately 50/50, how could there be such an imbalance in the US dating scene where women have too many choices and men not having enough choices? I don't get it. It doesn't add up mathematically. Shouldn't the law of supply and demand give both sides equal choices?

So why is it, like Steve Hoca says, when you put a decent looking girl's photo on a personal ad, you get hundreds of responses from good looking guys, but when a guy puts up a personal ad, he gets maybe two responses per month?

I've tested that long ago, and it is true. But why is that so, when the ratio of males and females is around 50/50 with equal supply and demand?

Any explanations?
Last edited by Winston on Mon Jun 23, 2008 4:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Check out the latest posts in our blog The Happier Abroaders.

Don't forget my HA Grand Ebook and Dating Sites!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
 
Posts: 23612
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:16 pm







Postby Enishi » Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:14 pm

I think its part culture and part psychology. Females seem to be a bit pickier in general when it comes to mates, and American culture adds further fuel to the fire Unless the girl is extremely fat or shallow and bitchy, guys don't mind settling as much. In addition, the hottest girls are intermittently hooking up and then breaking with a small percentage of extremely smooth, extremely promiscuous men.
Enishi
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 345
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:24 pm

Postby momopi » Tue Jun 17, 2008 9:36 pm

Within a culture/ethnicity, what is considered beautiful or even "decent looking" is usually in the minority for women. It's an unrealistic, and often unhealthy yardstick for majority of women to (try) attain.

For example, in Western fashion, the models are tall, beautiful, and slim. In extreme cases, kate-moss kind of slim.

In places like Mauritania, "voluptuous" women are considered desirable. Young girls there are force-fed to be fat. If you think I'm kidding read this:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0711/p04s01-woaf.html
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Apr16/ ... at,00.html



Why do single, attractive women out-number men? Because we defined attractive women into the minority. I can walk upstairs at work right now and count the number of attractive women with one hand. Out of maybe 60-70 women on the 2nd floor, I think 10% can be considered attractive or good looking by my own standards.

In Mauritania, where 25% of the women are considered obese, the men over there probably complain about lack of pretty young fat girls.

I've known American guys who go to Asia and go crazy over all the "attractive women everywhere". By their yellow-fever definition anything young and slim is attractive. I look at their GF's and think "WTF". The girl is barely a 4-5 at best but they think she's 8-9. Ah well, to each his own.
momopi
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 4711
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 4:44 am
Location: Orange County, California

Postby Winston » Wed Jun 18, 2008 3:56 am

But Momopi, what does this have to do with the question about why the dating scene is heavily tipped toward the women's favor in America?

The point is, women have choices and even the fat or average women think they are too good for guys like me.

But with a near 50/50 ratio, the law of supply and demand should make the scene almost even. Why doesn't it?

If many men have no choices, then there should theoretically be many women who are lonely too. And if they are lonely, they'd lower their standards a bit. But they don't. How come?
Check out the latest posts in our blog The Happier Abroaders.

Don't forget my HA Grand Ebook and Dating Sites!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
 
Posts: 23612
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:16 pm

Postby Repatriate » Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:07 am

I think women tend to be more competitive about finding men. The usual scenario is that they (western women) will all compete for the same man if he fits their unrealistic ideal. For every Brad Pitt type you probably have a significant portion of women who in their minds won't settle for anything less because that's what they've been conditioned to think they deserve.

That's why when a woman has a really successful husband other women get all petty and jealous about it. They secretly want to be loved and screwed by him but can't understand why they don't have him. It's a combination of vanity, ego, and insecurity.
Repatriate
Veteran Poster
 
Posts: 2533
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 6:39 pm

Postby jamesbond » Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:35 am

Actually it's not 50/50 men to women in the US. In the US, single men outnumber single women up to age 49. Then from age 50 on up, single women start to outnumber single men. The numbers are in the women's favor, so naturally they will be more picky about who they date. Must be great being a single woman in America, they have the numbers in their favor!
Last edited by jamesbond on Thu Feb 27, 2014 7:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
jamesbond
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 7501
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:45 pm
Location: USA

Postby momopi » Wed Jun 18, 2008 8:55 am

WWu777 wrote:But Momopi, what does this have to do with the question about why the dating scene is heavily tipped toward the women's favor in America?

The point is, women have choices and even the fat or average women think they are too good for guys like me.

But with a near 50/50 ratio, the law of supply and demand should make the scene almost even. Why doesn't it?

If many men have no choices, then there should theoretically be many women who are lonely too. And if they are lonely, they'd lower their standards a bit. But they don't. How come?



Would you want to be with someone who you're not attracted to?

If I had to choose between singles life vs. being with someone I didn't like, I'd rather stay single and play video games.
momopi
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 4711
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 4:44 am
Location: Orange County, California

Re: Why is there imbalance in US dating scene with 50/50 rat

Postby fschmidt » Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:41 pm

The explanation is that prostitution is illegal and socially unacceptable in the US. Men have a greater desire for variety than women do, and prostitution provides for this imbalance of desire. Without prostitution, men constantly hit on women and things get very messed up.
fschmidt
Veteran Poster
 
Posts: 2118
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 8:16 am
Location: El Paso, TX

Re: Why is there imbalance in US dating scene with 50/50 rat

Postby Winston » Sat Jun 21, 2008 10:04 pm

fschmidt wrote:The explanation is that prostitution is illegal and socially unacceptable in the US. Men have a greater desire for variety than women do, and prostitution provides for this imbalance of desire. Without prostitution, men constantly hit on women and things get very messed up.


W: But what does that have to do with why women have more choices than men in the dating field?
Check out the latest posts in our blog The Happier Abroaders.

Don't forget my HA Grand Ebook and Dating Sites!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
 
Posts: 23612
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:16 pm

Postby Erasmus » Sat Jun 21, 2008 11:52 pm

In addition to Fschmidt's answer, there is another, equally important reason:

American women only want and date a very limited percentage of men. The top men. This is somewhere between 10 to 30% of the male population. These men can enjoy rotating harem type relationships where they can string along multiple women at once (who may or may not know about each other).

Just think of the attractive women (as in the non-repulsive ones) entering relationships with one of these top men and then switching one for another. As in, they only date within the top % of men. The men who arent in the top % are left out. The men in the top % are dating more than one woman at the same time.

This leaves a large percentage of men who arent impossibly popular or rich without girlfriends or wives.

Let's see who the men are with the greatest access to women, and maybe you will remember from your youth:
(In no particular order)
1. Tall and good looking (need both)
2. Football player and popular (not good enough to be just a player in some cases)
3. Relatively wealthy, often displayed by driving a newer model flashy car
4. Member of prestigious campus fraternity
5. Any guy, regardless of height, looks, weight, if he has tattoos, dealt drugs, been in a gang, been to prison, etc.
Erasmus
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:55 am

Postby Erasmus » Sat Jun 21, 2008 11:56 pm

From the defunct website "Hookupculture.com"

There is No Longer Someone for Everyone

One of the common myths about dating is that there's a soulmate out there for everyone. Dating services have made millions promoting the idea that your perfect partner is out there, you just need to try harder to find them. This seems to make sense since there are an equal number of men and women. The reality is that in promiscuous culture, a small percentage of men can monopolize sex with a majority of women. When this happens, the matching up process does not occur, and singles end up floating indefinitely around the dating pool.


The Attractiveness Hierarchy

In the monogamous marriage system of the past, the majority of men and women found mates and got married. In that system, singles knew roughly where they were ranked in overall attractiveness and married a mate of roughly equal rank as soon as they could, usually by their early 20's. There were strong economic and sexual pressures to marry early, and this motivated singles to quickly find a mate of roughly equivalent attractiveness rather than wait for their "perfect soulmate." In the monogamous system, if one waited too long, the pool of eligible mates shrank, and it became more difficult to find a quality partner.

In today's society, birth control removes the incentive for singles to settle into their place in the attractiveness hierarchy. Because women freed from birth control can have sex without marriage, they can engage in temporary physical relationships that have no marriage potential while they wait and hope for Mr. Right. These strings of temporary relationships help women meet their short-term emotional needs but delay them from pursuing serious marriage partners. Men have a greater evolved desire for unfettered sex, and generally prefer more sex partners rather than a commitment to marriage and raising children. Because women are willing to have premarital sex, the attractive men who have ready access to many new sex partners have little incentive to pursue marriage at all. They generally prefer to circulate among women rather than settling down.

(Note: Robert Trivers' 1972 parental investment theory proposed that men's stronger sex drive and stronger desire for variety in their partners is the result of a basic biological difference between the sexes. In order to procreate, men need only invest the few minutes to have sex, while women must invest at least nine months of pregnancy to bear the child. From a biological standpoint, sperm is cheap and easy to produce, while wombs are much, much more valuable. Women possess the more valuable reproductive resource, so sex and pregnancy imply a much greater investment on the part of women.

A result of this investment differential was that before the invention of contraception, sex improved the reproductive potential of man much more than it did a woman. When a man had sex with more women, he could have more children. One prolific example, Moulay Ismail the Bloodthirsty, fathered 888 children out of a harem of 500 women. A woman, on the other hand, can have only one child per nine months no matter how many men she has sex with. Because of this differential, over the course of evolution, women became pickier about the quality of their sex partners while men became the more sexually aggressive and less choosy gender.)


Circulating around the Pool

The promiscuous system allows very attractive men to avoid commitment and be continually available for sex. Because these men can have more sex, women have sexual access to more attractive men than they would have been able to attract as marriage partners under the monogamous system. However, there is a downside for many women and men. For most men, it means that the few particularly desirable men at the top of the attractiveness hierarchy can monopolize many of the women. By having many relationships, many sex partners and even multiple wives in serially monogamous fashion, the most attractive men can consume the prime reproductive years of multiple women. For biological reasons, a woman's fertile lifetime is much shorter than a man's, making it even easier for some men to consume an unequal share of female reproductive resources. When some men consume more than their share of women, there will necessarily be other men, lower on the attractiveness hierarchy, who will have no suitable women available for marriage at all. This also means that all of the men who are not at the top of the hierarchy must lower their standards. (Meaning fat women can now date average men - Erasmus)

Most men don't realize that rampant promiscuity hurts them. They think that the pill and sexual revolution have brought them a sexual boon. They don't realize that promiscuity prevents them from finding high-quality women. The monogamous marriage system allowed a man only one woman, which meant that virtually all men got at least one woman. In the monogamous system, attractive women were more evenly distributed so the majority of men were able to attract more desirable women than they could attract under the promiscuous system.

For women, the transition to the promiscuous system has made it more difficult to find a marriage partner as well. The attractive men don't commit because they have new sex partners constantly available. Lower-status men shun marriage because they hope to gain more options as they gain status and rise into the ranks of the highly attractive. Women who are accustomed to having sex with highly attractive men also don't want to "settle" and marry the kind of less sexy man that would be willing to marry. Men don't want to to be settled for, either. This means that both men and women remain circulating in the dating pool for long periods without settling into marriage. Shows like Sex and the City and movies like Bridget Jones' Diary resonate because this experience is so common among modern metropolitan singles. As promiscuity increases, marriage declines and fewer singles can find lifelong partners.
Last edited by Erasmus on Sun Jun 22, 2008 12:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
Erasmus
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 3:55 am

Re: Why is there imbalance in US dating scene with 50/50 rat

Postby fschmidt » Sun Jun 22, 2008 12:01 am

WWu777 wrote:
fschmidt wrote:But what does that have to do with why women have more choices than men in the dating field?


Because men will date for sex when they have no other choice. So in America, a married guy who wants some fun on the side will hit on and possibly date other women, whereas in a sane country, he would just go to prostitutes. This means that in America, single women who are being strung along by married guys are not available for single guys. Also, after being repeatedly hit on and dumped by guys who want them just for sex, women are going to be less friendly in general.

But there is one other related explanation. This is that as women in America become more promiscuous, they will tend to prefer short-term flings with top men as opposed to steady relationships with normal men. This concept is explained here:

http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/archi ... OQV6N2.pdf

But this also applies to Europe which is promiscuous but not nearly as hostile as America. My explanation again ties into prostitution. Promiscuous women are highly tuned to seek out promiscuous men and to avoid men who cannot get sex. This makes evolutionary sense because in a promiscuous society, evolutionary success is determined by sexual success. But in a healthy society with stable marriages, women will seek out good providers because this is the best evolutionary strategy in such a society. In promiscuous Europe, all men can be promiscuous because prostitution is readily available. This makes all men appear reasonably attractive to the promiscuous women. But in America, most men cannot easily get sex, and this becomes a self-reinforcing cycle as women pick this up and label such men "losers" and avoid them at all costs.
fschmidt
Veteran Poster
 
Posts: 2118
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 8:16 am
Location: El Paso, TX

Postby Grunt » Sun Jun 22, 2008 1:57 am

This equation labors under the false premise that the average American female has any inherent worth.

This, of course, is false.
Grunt
Junior Poster
 
Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 8:13 pm

Postby jamesbond » Sun Jun 22, 2008 3:23 pm

Grunt wrote:This equation labors under the false premise that the average American female has any inherent worth.

This, of course, is false.


Ha Ha! That's funny Grunt but true! Most women in America are not worth pursuing. You still see men in America pursuing women like crazy with all these "pick up artist" wannabes patroling the bars and clubs in America. Vh1 had a reality tv show on last fall called, "The pickup artist" where this guy nick named "mystery" showed average guys how to pick up women in bars and clubs. There is going to be another show on Vh1 this fall called "The pickup artist 2" where he shows some loveable losers how to meet women in bars and clubs (wow, what a great place to meet women!). :lol:
User avatar
jamesbond
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 7501
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:45 pm
Location: USA

Postby jamesbond » Sun Jun 22, 2008 3:33 pm

I have heard it said that in America, 20% of the men are sleeping with 80% of the women. That very well maybe true after reading what I read on this thread. There are guys in America who are getting laid left and right (not many guys though are like this) these guys have learned how to approach women in bars and clubs and having been doing this for years. They have learned to not let the rejection from women bother them. I do give these guys credit for learning to be "players" it does take a lot of practice and a lot of rejection from women.
User avatar
jamesbond
Elite Upper Class Poster
 
Posts: 7501
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 5:45 pm
Location: USA

Next

Return to Dating, Relationships, Foreign Women

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests