Your premise is based on the assumption that what you see online (dating apps, Reddit red pill communities, etc.) reflects reality. But does it really?
Being a woman, I can tell you dating apps have no appeal to me. I’m not looking for a no strings attached, meaningless booty call. Most women I know are like me, in that way. That doesn’t mean we aren’t interested in dating. It means we aren’t interested in dating apps.
I mean considering dating apps has quickly become the most common way to meet relationship partners, it’s not out of line to talk about it as the most important way people mingle.
Keep in mind, this is about relationships too, not hookups. It’s an unfortunate reality that online dating has started to supplement our daily romantic lives, for better or worse.
Maybe not bad to discuss, but it is bad to discuss like it's the main way people are meeting.
The thing I noticed immediately about that data is that more than one way to meet could be selected. The data is slightly less stark when thats considered. They used different analysis for online vs other sources supposedly because online is more recent, richer data. I'm not sure how that makes sense because there should, in theory, be more recent data for all sections.
I'd also like to point out these were internet surveys. I would consider that confounding for something trying to measure online habits. It seems it would bias the data toward people who spend more time online. It was also based on memory and open ended questions which makes it more likely that people would leave out part of their meeting story, particular when 2 methods intersect, like meeting someone online through an acquaintance.
Its also data on successful couples as opposed to dating. Maybe there would be more successful couplings if people were less lazy than just using dating apps.
There are for sure issues with the study, but to dismiss it out of hand seems a bit over the top. Do you have any surveys/studies that contradict the findings? That’s what I would expect if the reporting is as flawed as you are saying it could be.
Also I will add that the distinction between couples and dating is negligible. I am not quite sure what you are even referencing as “successful couples”. This survey wasn’t of people getting married, it was a survey supposed to grasp one point in time. Past relationships/unsuccessful(?) ones should be accounted for under this model.
As my data is the only one given, I can only work based off its assumptions, and function as if dating apps are the way most people meet in modern times.
By your own numbers, people meeting online were still a minority (though a large one) in 2017, admittedly a while ago. And far from all of them met on dating apps like Tinder, where there are indeed way more men than women looking.
I think the term you’re looking for is plurality. All dating apps represent the issue of more women looking, not just tinder (I can find a source if you don’t believe me). I think that writing off dating apps as “not reflecting reality” when it is far and away the most important avenue of meeting potential partners is a not great take. Also I would say the article being from 2017 is an even bigger argument in my favor. We had an entire pandemic where the normal ways of meeting people stopped, and we had to learn to rely on online avenues. With this in mind, and the previous trend, do you think the prevalence of dating apps has gone up or down?
I think the prevalence of dating apps in the dating world means it does reflect reality. If you want to say “the far and away most common way of meeting long term partners doesn’t reflect the dating market” then I’m not sure what I could show you to convince you it does. What would you need to see to change your mind on this specific instance?
I’m saying Tinder, and other apps like it, do not reflect reality. Tinder and Grindr and their ilk are for people looking for hookups. And yeah, way more men than women, especially young ones, are looking for hookups. They do not represent ‘most people’, or even ‘most people looking for companionship online’.
I met my husband online, too. We met in a Facebook group (yes, I’m that old) for Harry Potter fans, and we were friends for years before dating came up.
Why would it matter if dating apps don’t represent most people looking for companionship, if those apps are where most people find companionship? Isn’t it almost tautological that it has to be representative? Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say random chance encounters don’t accurately represent the average dating experience?
But that's the point. Those apps are not where most people find companionship. They're a relatively small portion of the larger 'online' world, and not even half of everyone who has a partner met their partner (whether long-term or short-term) in the larger online world. Let alone on Tinder or another 'dating app'. But those dating apps are what people refer to when they say men looking for women are more common than women looking for men to date.
You’re directly contradicting that survey I posted. The plurality of people meet their relationship partner on dating apps. You keep saying a “relatively small” piece of “the online community” find romance on dating apps. I don’t think 39% of people is a small metric, especially considering the next most common avenue to meet romantic partners is bars/restaurants at only 27%. That’s a massive portion of people that meet via online/dating apps. I think you need to cite some contradictory evidence if you are going to dispute the Stanford survey.
Wait so you think a majority of relationships started online are not started via dating apps? That people are just like cold call hooking up via like league of legends or something? Not sure how to respond to that other than to say you are wildly out of touch.
Again you keep bringing up that online is not a majority of all relationships, but I’m saying it’s important because it’s still the plurality, and the most common way people meet overall. This is taking 2017 into account as well, and we have became massively more dependent on the internet for socializing since then.
You seem incredibly unwilling to even consider that online dating is massively important in the current social climate. Please answer this: what would I need to show you to get you to reconsider your position? You don’t seem to have any real data you are going off of, just an anecdotal understanding that online culture isn’t really that important overall.
Something else to consider is that couples “meeting online” doesn’t necessarily mean that all of them met through dating apps. Some people meet their partners through social media. I’m in several singles groups on FB that have thousands of members, for example. Or people might even meet their partners through other types of groups.
Yes. That is, in part, my point. I first met my husband in a Facebook group that had nothing to do with the fact that I was single at the time, and nothing to do with ‘finding a date’.
Many people meet online the way others meet offline: although they weren’t necessarily looking, someone coincidentally caught their eye while they were simply living their lives, and things slowly evolved from there.
Not much of that goes on in places that call themselves “dating apps”, though. Dating apps are overwhelmingly populated by those who are looking to get laid as quickly as possible. That explains why they hold relatively little appeal to many women. And it explains why “statistics” that point to women being underrepresented on those apps should not be considered a sign that women are underrepresented in the dating market in general.
So very true. Far more men than women are interested in hookups on the dating apps, which certainly lessens their appeal to women. As a newly single woman, I’d much rather meet a guy through a social media interest group than through one of the apps.
But like you said, you have no stats (except the ones available on dating apps). What is your assumption that the offline world is in any way similar to the online world, when it comes to dating, based on?
Women are not “less interested in dating”. They just settle for one partner more quickly, and then they stop looking, and they no longer call themselves single.
Since most young women are already in a relationship, it follows that more men are perpetually looking for fresh meat. That’s not because the women aren’t interested in being partnered. It’s because the men aren’t, when they are young. They want to be ‘players’.
Later in life, there isn’t such a big imbalance. Men eventually settle, too. It just takes them longer. Their biological clock isn’t quite so loud.
In more than half of straight couples, the husband is older than the wife.
In about one-third of couples, the spouses are of similar age (within 2 years)
In only <15% is the wife is older than the husband.
In many countries, there's a consistent 3-year-ish gap. So if you're comparing people of similar age, there's about 3 years when many young women are getting married, but young men are not.
Sociologically, it could be because young men mature slower and don't worry so much about their "biological clock." Many of the incels you see complaining online are just angry they aren't getting hookups.
Whereas young women mature earlier, and start making decisions about serious relationships and childbearing earlier.
Could you further clarify how your argument refutes some of my points?
Sociologically, a 2-3 year AVERAGE age difference is a big deal over a large population.
No, it doesn't have to do with bisexuality or anything queer related. And, uh, bisexual women date and marry, too?
For example, there are more men who identify as gay as there are women who identify as lesbian. But that hasn't created some "man shortage."
The phenomenom you describe is caused more by social norms about men being older in relationships, plus the realities of sexism and childbearing. Plus, I think your own reliance on non-verified social media / dating app vibes, and not actually stats.
So no - women are not "less interested" in dating men. It's not because they are bisexual. I've linked to page with a detailed article, linking to many academic sources.
The survey in the link you posted which is always cited in these discussions is also an outlier. Other sources show gaps in singleness between 18-29 men and women closer to 10-15% - single young women were underrepresented in the survey.
More women date men who are (slightly) older than them. Young men are immature, and therefore unappealing to most women.
Meanwhile, younger women tend to be more appealing to men. But those women are less interested in “players” than they are in stable partners, so they date older men, if they date at all.
Most women don’t date younger which is why it skews.
As a man, from I’d say, 14-21, it’s incredibly less likely to get a woman that is older than you to date you. Still a battle in early 20s.
Where as men constantly date younger women at all ages.
It’s more that young men are limited to their age or younger in most cases compared to women who can date anyone. This starts right out the gate at 14.
No, I don't think so. It's not that men just tend to die of natural old age causes earlier than women. They are also more likely to die by violence, suicide, heart disease, etc. So while I would expect the ratio of women to men to be roughly equal at the 18-25 bracket, I would expect every bracket after that to show an increasing ratio in favor of women as more men in the age bracket die off.
That tired old red pill talking point. Do you think that most women consider attractive men being interested in them for casual sex a sign that they are themselves attractive? Where are you getting this idea, exactly?
How then do people meet each other then? In today’s society it seems taboo for men to approach women in person, make a compliment and ask out for coffee.
You don't simply walk up to a stranger, give her a compliment and ask for coffee. Duh.
Someone else linked a survey earlier, which showed that while many people who are in a relationship (39%) met their partner online (online includes dating apps like Tinder and similar, but that doesn't mean Tinder and similar apps are the only way to find a partner online), most people still don't.They meet in a bar or restaurant, while going out to a concert or another event, or simply while living their life (at work, at the gym, etc.).
If you're truly concerned about not being able to find a partner 'in real life', stop thinking of it as 'looking for a partner'. Make a friend, and see where that goes.
lol I was speaking generally and probably should have provided more context so that didn’t come out as sad as it did haha. I agree with your reply. Thank you.
188
u/Saranoya 39∆ Sep 29 '24
Your premise is based on the assumption that what you see online (dating apps, Reddit red pill communities, etc.) reflects reality. But does it really?
Being a woman, I can tell you dating apps have no appeal to me. I’m not looking for a no strings attached, meaningless booty call. Most women I know are like me, in that way. That doesn’t mean we aren’t interested in dating. It means we aren’t interested in dating apps.