Your numbers are way off. Good luck achieving that in practice if you're an average male. In reality you will swipe right on 30000 profiles and lucky to get a date with 5 of them. Those 5 probably won't even like you.

You could even be like this guy: https://i.imgur.com/PyJsbKb.jpeg 8924 swipes, 6675 right swipes, 261 matches, 0 dates.

Regarding your point about the gym - anecdotally, all the guys I notice who "slay" are on gear. I spoke to a guy in the fitness industry and he says almost 100% of the male fitness influencers you see on Instagram are taking something. So it's not quite as simple as "just go to the gym" although you should certainly do that anyway.

So, not only have we accepted the ridiculous premise that not having sex creates incels but it's not good enough to have more than zero sex, they have to slay?

Do people actually think dudes need to look like doped-up male IG models in order to have sex? What has the internet actually done to people's brains? It's like the internet takes a healthy brain and ponds it with a mallet until it's a thick goo.

You act as if this is all a new thing with the internet. While the term incel may be relatively new and the internet has been a gateway for a much higher amount of whining, the general concept of classifying some individuals as inferior has been around for a long time, and has been utilized for untold forms of advertising and monetization. These only work if the people who get targeted believe they are actually inferior. This advertisement was in comic books in the 1960s, when Chads were Huskies. How much different is it in overall concept than some of the stuff we hear people complaining about here. Note, I assume the coupon will no longer work...

Unrelated - is there a way to control how big an uploaded image appears? This was a pretty small file, but it is still a big picture.

We go with what works for us.

No it is more dire than that.

Being able to progress a date to relationship or sex is much harder for these guys as the average gals and even very unattractive gals are getting attention from about half the guys in the top 20-30% of male profiles, who just want sex with a different woman every night, if they can get it.

Thus why the women's complaint is 'it is just a hook up App' as they can find lots of hookups with good looking guys but they lament not being able to find a partner in that group. The guys who would partner with them are the ones they ignore.



Exactly.

But the choices have been very limited as people have shifted away from bars and nightclubs and the other main places (outside work) where they could meet face to face and instead more and more and towards Apps.


Imagine a world where women are saying 70-80% of men are just updatable while they all pursue the top 20-30%. That is the world where many men find themselves now.

Men outnumber women on these Apps also by about a factor of 10:1 so you have 70-80% of males only being given a chance by the bottom 20% of females, who are already 1/10th their population to begin with, and you can see how even that 20% of women then starts to become more selective.

This makes perfect sense though, because the only guys who use tinder are guys who cant get women IRL. Tinder is a crutch for men who lack the confidence to pick up women elsewhere. So your pool of users is going to be heavily skewed towards ugly men. The women on Tinder have their own set of issues, mostly slutty and looking for attention, and it just so happens a lot of reasonably attractive girls fall into that category.

In an increasingly online world, where more and more people are reliant on that for the 'first' interaction, yes the superficial looks of a person matter.

No one is interested in your strawman that everyone has to be an IG model, but discussing the reality of this clear and obvious trend and how it is alienating more and more men (whether anyone finds them sympathetic or not) is something that is being discussed.

if women are all mostly chasing the same top 20-30% of men as they have found a good percent of those are good looking guys who want a different sex partner every night and thus will give them ALL time in the schedule, that is an issue.

The subject of this thread really seems like it was just pretext.

I've been with my wife for 20 years, so really I have no ****ing clue what hookup culture is like these days. But I don't think I need to to observe that this doesn't generalize easily. It seems quite plausible there is a big gender disparity in the distributions of people having lots of one night stands with a different person every night from Tinder kind of thing. Few men (or women) I'd imagine are actually doing this and sure it is probably quite lopsided. Contrast that with, say, marriage where it is roughly speaking equal. Maybe somewhere in between for types of relationships in between.

Honestly, don't rea`lly know wtf the point of any of this is or how it helps the putative problem of incels becoming terrorist threats.

You know women are thirsty af, right? You don't need to be in the top 20% in the looks department to get laid. Christ, uggo dudes have sex all the time, women aren't all that picky.

The issue is that there are a percent of men who will gladly have sex with a different partner every single night and some of those men are good looking guys with game.

In the bar days those guys would make a choice and hit on a girl and hope to take her home. A less attractive girl would have little chance with them unless the guy was just taking anyone home at the end of the night. She might like the way he looks and wish he would notice her but it was very rare.

That meant less attractive guys and gals had more of a chance with one another.

The less attractive gals now have a wide open chance with this percent of guys just looking for partners each night. She may well be looking for and hoping for a relationship, and she may hope his interest in her is sincere and she is not just going to hook up but get a boyfriend out of this. it just is not happening. These guys will sleep with her but that is it.

So the girls are learning 'these apps are just about hookups' as they go on these dates and find the guys will not get serious after, based on whom they are choosing, while the rest of the guys are learning that they cannot get chosen for a date.

And yet Trolly, all the data coming from the App world says the opposite of what you are saying.

You need to recognize that certain men can and will have sex with a different gal every single night, if the girls just present. that means the 'thirsty' girls are getting it and with good looking guys. That is not the issue. The issue is how do guys below that rung get that girls attention when she is booked to meet up with the better looking guy?

What the "study" likely shows (and a quick Google search reveals that these cases are so shoddily made, it is questionable to use the word "study" even in quotation marks) is that men swipe right a lot more. The misguided interpretation is definitely a cornerstone of incel beliefs, however, which is quickly revealed by a google search.

But yes, the question is still...

...it comes of as using 9/11 to discuss the evils of jet engines or talk about neo-nazi attacks as if the problem lies with average hair length.

Might help if Cuepee explained why (as he called them) "below rung people" are entitled to anything extra. This does seem genuinely important to him, so perhaps that explanation will help clear up this muddled (though mildly entertaining) thread that was supposed to be about terrorism, but also included emotional discussions about inflatable dolls and evil lefties and feminists.

Dude, I assure you that uggo guys can still get laid. There’s like millions of horny women out there, it’s not complicated.

If this is true then it will balance itself out. The below average girls will leave the hookup apps after a certain point in time and move to more traditional dating methods, leading to more success for the below average guys. If there are 10x as many guys on the apps, that means all the girls have gone somewhere else.

Also, there are many guys who have little success in real life who have success on dating apps. Ie if a guy is shy but good looking the online environment will give him more success. An average looking guy who is charming is going to have more success at bars and clubs. And by good looking I don't mean a roided up fitness influencer but someone who does some moderate exercise a few times a week and is not overweight.

but if the apps are not good for you then there are other approaches. And if most of the 'competition' is on the app it might be even better than it used to be.

I'm now an old ulgy fat git with zero interest in dating but I still meet and talk to women when I'm out and about. Venturing back after covid, the pubs are packed with people including women who all too willing to chat and I'm regualarly 'accosted' when I'm walking the dog. I'm sure young blokes looking to meet women can find a way without the app.

I think this was always the case, that women go after certain type of guy, its either looks, or success, intelligence,power, and on dating apps the first thing you see is looks and a lot of generalising is made, so its not surprising that good looking guys will get the vast majority of swipes, if it was a speed date at least where you could at least say something, the results could be more like 50/50 rather then 80-20....i think this is just the nature of apps like tinder, i also think it is normal that every man should try to project something to a woman he meets, if you are a re tard that has nothing to say and nothing to offer, and by offer i mean everything , that you are a nice guy etc, then what should you expect, you don't desreve ****, and i dont think women are that dumb that they dont know whats going on, i think they can recognise our qualities its just that the type of woman that goes to tinder is more shallow or has only shallow intentions like sex....if this all makes any sense..personally i would never go on tinder...but then again, i dont expect to get as much sex as some guys, neither would i ever want that.

sex/****ing/lovemaking can be underrated to some but maybe should be also overrated to many

Definitely yes.

I have told the story of one my better friends in high school and then Uni. He was that guy who wanted a different gal every night and he got it most weekend nights, when not in a relationship. And that was because he was good looking, fearless and did not care ultimately who he took home. He would start with the best looking girl in the bar and just work his way down until he got yes. We used to joke about watching the girls faces as they went from flattered and amused to shocked at how overt and open he was because as soon as he had any traction with a gal he would just ask 'so am I going to get anything tonight'? He did not care that it turned off 9 of 10 women. His fear was wasting his time with a gal who thought this might be lining up a date and not a hook up.

He is in his 50's now and uses Tinder the same way. He is still a good looking guy with good game. And he does not even look when he swipes. He just swipes yes to everyone until the App locks him out as you only get some many hundred swipes a day. He was one goal, and that is then to reply to the gals who swiped also on him (mutual interest) and then line up night for them. Find the ones who are willing to commit to him 'getting some, on that night'.

He loves Tinder for this reason.

And there are a percent of guys who are in that mold. Some of them good looking with game.

The gals both swipe less but also clearly are only selecting for the best looking guys who swipe on them. Guys like my friend. And they are getting their time and access. And its not necessarily that the gals think they are only going for a hook up. They, in many cases, are hopeful this good looking guy (top 20% of all male profiles) is genuinely interested in them and this can become more. But they are not finding that. This top 20% (or the player group within them) is not settling down and certainly not with many of these gals they don't even find attractive.

So the take away is not that 'men swipe more', but that the women who historically were more likely to find interest from a peer male (more equal in looks) are finding interest from great looking guys with game and thus won't even swipe on and consider a more peer male. Yes women swipe less but they ALSO only swipe on the top 20% of all profiles. Imagine thinking 80% of males are not even worth engaging with? That does not make for healthy exchanges.

Ok and yet we have a NEW and GROWING terrorist threat identified by gov't called 'Incel's' who are struggling with not being able to get laid but Trolly says 'eh, does not exist, trust me'.

Sorry but it is more complicated than you want to acknowledge.

What you are saying is similar to how many on the right laugh as the idea that Facebook could have impacted the 2016 election as if ridiculous. Or that the internet could be radicalizing people to do things like Jan 6th.

I think it is pretty clear that the internet has SHIFTED much more engagement to online, than in person, and that means it leads (as Chez pointed out) with the visual first and foremost and then with ones ability to communicate in a clear and engaging way second.

So for the bulk of guys (and yes guys still do have to make the majority of first moves) in an increasingly visual and witty quip based world, it is has become harder and harder for the lower rung of males, looks and personality wise.

You say 'no, trust me it not. They can still get laid just as much too' but reality denies your personal observation. You seem to be taking this an absolute that because 'some can and do' therefore there is no issue for the broader group which mirrors the argument from the other thread where certain people point to Oprah and Kanye succeeding to say 'see all POC can too'.

I do agree with you. I do think it will balance out OVER TIME.

I am single and date a lot. Covid slowed that down but I still got out quite a bit. Unlike many guys I have never been interested in a high body count, so while I will go out with a gal, I don't try to progress it to the bedroom or beyond that night if I am not genuinely interested. For me their is a progression and that is many dates, to see if we enjoy one another, and once that seems mutual, it can and does progress to the physical, "dating" and a "Relationship". But if I don't see that path, I pull back whereas i know a lot of guys who still try to sleep with the gal anyway (even playing up interest) to then just move on after. That has never been my thing.

And from my anecdotal experience and talking to my guy friends who also back in the dating pool, the thing we hear over and over from the gals we end up out with is the exact complaint these Apps have identified in their data which is women complain that 'these Apps are just for hookups and not for meeting someone interested in a relationship'. So many of the gals i have been out with seem surprised that we are out and I am not just trying to 'close' them into sleeping with them.

I consider that a 'tell' on how they are using the Apps, purposely or not. That they have been chasing that top percentage within the top 20% of males who that is all they want.

But I can also see how many of these women are tiring of that aspect and who may use the Apps for casual sex, when that is what they desire, especially to get a better looking guy, but are starting to look elsewhere for 'relationship'.

I think the dating Apps are right on top of that emerging trend as now the hottest new Apps are the ones that are arranging face to face meetings and old school engagement.

Sure, agreed.

But it is 'harder' when the other person has no shortage of engagement.

This might just be a cycle but the lesser attractive women are enjoying their time with the top percent of males even if they would want more, in the form of a relationship and not just sex. There is still somewhat of an ego boost to feel that better looking person selected you too. But over time I do think they recognize it to be hollow. Most anyway.

I hate to say it, but there is something to mutual desperation or neglect. Going to a pub, and seeing all the good looking people chatting and approaching one another and no one approaching you. That opens up a lesser attractive gal to an approach by a lesser attractive guy, even if he is awkward. it is still flattering that somebody selected you. that approach by that lesser attractive guy is made harder if this same gal has a 'date' lined up on Tuesday night with a top 20% looks wise that she set up on Tinder.

Again, what does any of this have to do with incels? You still haven't provided any evidence that there is actual causal connection between dating app trends and incel creation. It could be a completely spurious or insignificant correlation.