Online Creeps Inspire a Dating App That Hides Women's Pictures 482
HughPickens.com (3830033) writes "Tricia Romano reports at the Seattle Times that Susie Lee and Katrina Hess have developed Siren, a new online dating app designed to protect against men inundating women with messages that are by turns gross, hilarious, objectifying and just plain sad. A 2012 experiment by Jon Millward, a data journalist, found that women were messaged 17 times more than men; the best-looking woman received 536 messages in four months, while the best-looking guy received only 38. Lee hopes to change the nature of the messages and put women in the driver's seat. As online dating options have grown, Lee noticed that her friends' frustration did, too: With every good introduction often came a slew of lewd ones. "I just started looking (at online dating options) and very quickly realized how many things are out there and how immediately my 'creepy meter' went up," Lee says. The free iPhone app, currently launched to a select market in Seattle in August, allows women to peruse men's pictures and their answers to the "Question of the Day" ("You found a magic lamp and get three wishes. What are they?") and view their Video Challenges ("Show us a hidden gem in Seattle"). If a woman is suitably impressed by a man's answers, she can make herself visible to him. Only then can he see what she looks like. "It's a far more thoughtful — and cautious — approach than the one taken by the dating app of the moment, Tinder, which is effectively a "hot or not" game, with little information beyond a few photos, age and volunteered biographical tidbits," writes Romano. "And the implicit notion that it's a "hookup" app can be uncomfortable for some women."
OK Cupid's stats as illustrated by co-founder Christian Rudder give another example of how steep the curve is, when it comes to physical attractiveness vs. messages received on online dating sites.
How about... (Score:5, Insightful)
Women just message the men they like instead.
Re:How about... (Score:5, Funny)
OH MY GOD quit oppressing women you sexist patriarch!
Online dating (Score:3, Insightful)
You're doing it wrong.
Not wrong as in "that's wrong to do", but wrong as in "you'll do better with people you interact with in the real world."
If, of course, you can put the cellphone/iPad/keyboard down for enough minutes to interact with the people around you.
Online profiles are far more "crafted" than real-world interactions, and real-world interactions provide far more clues when someone is gaming you.
The people around me are boring (Score:2)
Re:How about... (Score:5, Funny)
MISOGYNIST!
Re:How about... (Score:5, Informative)
Women just message the men they like instead.
That doesn't work, because the women don't want to look "easy". They want the man to do the work.
But existing dating websites already offer the option of hiding your picture, so this adds nothing new. The problem is that hiding your picture results in far fewer messages, by a factor of eight. I met my wife through match.com (now married for 12 years, with two kids). I never messaged any women that didn't display their pictures. In addition to issues of chemistry/attractiveness, photoless people are more likely to be married or in other relationships.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:How about... (Score:5, Funny)
I met my wife the old fashioned way - mutual desperation and booze.
Bars never worked for me. I don't drink, and I am not interested in desparate drunks. Match.com was great. I met many women, and had a date (or two) almost every weekend for six months. I already knew that my future wife's goal was marriage and kids before I even clicked on her link. We exchanged a few emails, chatted on the phone, and then met two days later. Everything clicked. The only real question was whether we had compatible indentation styles. On the second date, she had her laptop with her, so I asked to see a code sample and take a look at her ~/.indent.pro. Her code was perfect BSD style, like a snippet from from the FreeBSD kernel. We were married eight months later.
Re:How about... (Score:5, Funny)
"We were married eight months later."
What took that long? Getting emacs vs. vi settled?
Re:How about... (Score:5, Funny)
"We were married eight months later."
What took that long? Getting emacs vs. vi settled?
No. I use emacs. She uses vi. Who cares? If you share code, and use the same git repository, then a common indentation style is important. Using the same editor is not. The only thing we argue about is which editor the kids will learn.
Re:How about... (Score:4, Funny)
No. I use emacs. She uses vi. Who cares?
Mixed marriages never work.
And you should teach the kids vim. She shouldn't be using vi, but vim.
The only thing we argue about is which editor the kids will learn.
you should teach the kids vim. She shouldn't be using vi, but vim. What is she, a time traveller from the days of Souza on gramophones? Or maybe teach nano, maybe leafpad.
All joking aside, glad you found the geekwoman of your dreams.
Re: (Score:3)
No. I use emacs.
Heretic! Burn the nonbeliever!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that hiding your picture results in far fewer messages
Wasn't that the point here? How is that a problem? (Aside from the "I wonder what does he/she have to hide?" questions...)
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is that hiding your picture results in far fewer messages
Wasn't that the point here?
No. The point is to get fewer lewd or undesirable responses, not fewer responses overall. Neither the summary nor TFA claims that only, or even mostly, the "bad" responses were reduced, and there is no reason that I can see why that should be true. In fact, it seems to me that the best guys can afford to be the most choosy, and would be the least likely to click on a profile with no photo. If you really want to just reduce the number of messages, with no regard for quality, then just delete every other
Re: (Score:3)
In other words it reinforces the exact problem feminists claim to want to solve in the first place.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:How about... (Score:4, Insightful)
If I'm understanding correctly, this allows her to view a guy's profile and/or other info (Question of the day) and choose to allow him to see her picture while it is still not visible to everyone else. From what I remember, for other sites you could have a picture everyone could see or no one could see.
Of course, this gives a guy a bit of an edge since if he stumbles upon her profile and her pic is visible, he knows she's already looked at his profile and she's already somewhat interested.
Re:How about... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, if I don't see a picture I'll assume she's ugly. In fact, even if I see a nice picture my first suspicion will be that it's an exceptionally good one (the "Myspace angle") and that in reality she's too fat or too skinny and in any case too ugly. And if she's really beautiful, as proven by dozens of hot pictures and thousands of "likes", hearts, or whatever, then it is very likely that she's in the beginning of her 30s, extremely frustrated by men (viz., her own choices based on repeating the same mist
Re: (Score:3)
I think your sample size needs to be increased somewhat
Re:How about... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How about... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
She's a cunt because she expects the men to come to her.
Well, she doesn't need you, you loser.
She instead try being an equal where she makes first contact at the same rate that men contact her.
Or, if lonely men want women to continue to use dating sites, they can stop acting as if equality means women should emulate the desperate, creepy behaviours of males without social skills and low self image, and start making online sites a place for mutual satisfaction. Get it? NOTHING you do will make women subservient to your desires. Get over it.
Re:How about... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How about... (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, from roughly 16 to roughly 40 I thought and behaved like that. ... real life and internet are no difference in that.
Meanwhile I know that a wink and a smile is all what women ever do.
After that it is up to the male one to engage in a 'talk'
I can understand that you are shy in real life and don't 'get it' when a woman blinks, waves, smiles at you.
But when a woman does that on a dating site, it is a clear signal, made for geeks, nerds and idiots like you and me.
Still insisting, she should message you, is: brain dead!
Re:How about... (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, from roughly 16 to roughly 40 I thought and behaved like that. Meanwhile I know that a wink and a smile is all what women ever do. After that it is up to the male one to engage in a 'talk' ... real life and internet are no difference in that.
I think that is a bit of a generalization. One problem men often have is we have no idea what to say, and what the reaction will be.
A coworker once became angry with me when I asked if she was going to take some time off after having her baby. Wasn't asking as a boss, just a question probably every woman we we worked had asked her.
That's just one example. But I certainly found that my future silence, my carefully weighing out every word for possible insult or for some hidden sexual innuendo - and in the end, it was just easier that avoid the problem was better than inadvertently getting in trouble.
That's sad in a couple ways. I'm pretty innocuous, most people think I'm a decent guy. But I'm also pretty prudent.
But cowing me into submission is not going to stop the jerks from sending the ladies pohotos of their willies either.
And after all of the prudent guys are silenced, all that is left..........
Re:How about... (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah, I can really relate to this.
The decent chaps (particulary ones who naievely point out "not all men..." before discovering this is like a red rag to a bull) are the ones who attempt to engage positively with these issues.. and because they are the ones trying to engage, they are often in receipt of some of the unpleasant feedback that should really be going to those other guys.
The problem is that once bitten, twice shy - it inclines most of us to back away and not prod that particular hornet's nest again. Which is a shame, because the idiots who create these problems in the first place are far more likely to listen to "bro's before ho's" - getting more of the decent men on side and active against their idiot step-brothers would be a victory for feminism.
I was really encouraged to see this point of view put forward by Emma Watson in her speech.
Both sides have something to learn - the well-meaning men need to learn that they don't need to engage with the women - they already *know* about discrimination. They need to engage with the misogynists.
And the feminists could help matters by swallowing some of their totally understandable rage and politely explaining this to us, instead of biting our heads off.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not creepy if it works. It's kind of like real spam - try millions of times and if one works it pays off.
Dick pics/crude messages work for a subset of women as do really well thought out messages. But a really good message costs 30m-1h; a bad one .5 minutes even if the response rate is 10x worse it is still worth it.
I wonder if there is actually a biological factor here?
Hear me out, the predominate male animal biological strategy is to inseminate as many females as possible, each insemination involves injecting millions of sperm after one or two eggs per female. Is it possible that this digital mating-dance-span as it were, is just a logical exstension of the biological stratagy.
Re:How about... (Score:5, Insightful)
These women seem frustrated that there are so many men they don't approve of approaching them. Apparently they think continuing to enforce the paradigm of "men must do all the work to gain my favour" is going to fix that.
Re:How about... (Score:5, Interesting)
These women seem frustrated that there are so many men they don't approve of approaching them. Apparently they think continuing to enforce the paradigm of "men must do all the work to gain my favour" is going to fix that.
ok, so since I used to work on an online dating service, I had a female fake profile in addition to my male fake - I'm male. You would not believe the level of crap some men think is a good idea to send to women, and no, it does not go the other way. This is not about playing hard to get or expecting favors, this is about creeps with very lacking social relationship skills. Even as a man I got mad about "males".
Re:How about... (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course it doesn't go the other way. The messages will essentially only go one way: from men to women. That is backed up even in the summary; women don't send messages so obviously men don't get a lot of creepy or unwanted messages from women.
Additionally, yes men with low social skills will be on dating apps / web sites. They are still the ones expected to make the first move so they use informal methods like this to test the waters. But they are bad at it so get labelled creepy. They may just seriously not understand social norms and why they are creepy.
You should also not underestimate the effectiveness of messages that you (or I) would consider outrages. I have seen guys get good responses from messages that I would consider way over the top. I don't understand it but it does seem to be a decent strategy. 9 out of 10 women might hate it but if it gives better results than other methods people are going to use it.
I wouldn't expect you not to get mad about other males. They are your competition after all.
Re: (Score:3)
Additionally, yes men with low social skills will be on dating apps / web sites. They are still the ones expected to make the first move so they use informal methods like this to test the waters. But they are bad at it so get labelled creepy. They may just seriously not understand social norms and why they are creepy.
I dont think you quite understand how this works.
Creep == man I dont want attention from. See aslo: scrub.
It doesn't matter how polite or socially astute they are. If a woman receives attention from a male they decide is the wrong type, they are a creep regardless of if they sought that kind of attention.
This is the main reason I've given up on dating in the west. Asian and to a lesser extent Latino women dont have this issue. If an Asian girl doesn't want your attention, she'll be polite about it
Re: (Score:3)
Fair point, but I don't think the handful of employees really contributes to this problem vs the thousands/millions of users. And I think it is good that people working on a service knows all aspects of it.
All aspects? Are you confessing to sending creepy messages to women?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
How about.... when a man wants to send a message to a woman for the first time, first of all they need to spend $10 to buy a "point", the content (with sender and recipient anonymized) get sent to 5 other random men for approval; they will be asked "Is the content appropriate and respectful" Yes/No ?.
If 3 out of 5 agree, then the voters receives a point. If the Yes' have a plurality, the recipient gets a message, and a chance to report it if lewd. If the recipient thinks the message is OKAY, then t
Re: (Score:3)
Or the simple option. Allow recipients to rate messages for lewdness/rudeness. People could then filter their messages on the rating of the sender and the sender has no clue what their message rating is.
Re: (Score:3)
Pretending looks don't matter is retarded (Score:4, Funny)
My recommendation is take the rejection at face value and in private, instead of meeting up for a date and have the guy run screaming because you're a 450 pound overweight lard-ass
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
between plastic surgery, makeup, hair dye who is the shallow ones men or women..
stop being so vane and judgmental among yourselves then perhaps men will follow suite, but quit with the double standard
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Pretending looks don't matter is retarded (Score:4, Funny)
Women in the drivers seat`? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Women in the drivers seat`? (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. And that whole "a lot of them creeps?" Well, there's an old saying, "you have to kiss a lot of frogs to get a prince."
Also
allows women to peruse men's pictures and their answers to the "Question of the Day" ("You found a magic lamp and get three wishes. What are they?") and view their Video Challenges ("Show us a hidden gem in Seattle"). If a woman is suitably impressed by a man's answers, she can make herself visible to him. Only then can he see what she looks like. "It's a far more thoughtful — and cautious — approach than the one taken by the dating app of the moment, Tinder, which is effectively a "hot or not" game,
How is this not a variant of the "hot or not" game? To NOT be a variant, it should allow BOTH sides to see each others pics only after she's decided that she's impressed only by his answers, not his answers and photos.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting idea...
All pictures are hidden by default. Men and women browse each others profiles. When both sides "like" the other profile, they both get to see pictures.
This may quickly devolve into men "liking" every female profile, but it still forces the woman to be interested in profile content before seeing a photo.
Re: (Score:2)
They are already there (in the dating game). And they were always there.
Really? The stereotype that women have to wait for men to make the first move puts MEN in the driver's seat. We don't have to deal with constant unwanted advances - we only do the dating thing when *we* want to. If a woman subscribes to that convention, then she has to wait for men she's interested to approach her, while under the same convention, men can pick their target and go for it. How is that putting women in the driver's seat?
That's why I've never understood why some men whine about "always having t
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Right. And Corporations are not in the driver's seats, when they're hiring.
People seeking employment have alll the privileges. Corporations are so oppressed.
Re: (Score:3)
That's why I've never understood why some men whine about "always having to make the first move." It puts us in the driver's seat.
To continue the stereotypical car analogy here, it puts us in the driver's seat, but it means we get to deal with the rejection when we see someone along the side of the road we want to offer a lift to, and lose big time when we miss seeing the perfect passenger.
Why is it better to be "in the driver's seat" than to share driving responsibility and expect the woman to stop and offer us a ride if she's interested in doing so?
Forgetting the analogy -- complaining about "always having to make the first move"
Re: (Score:3)
That's why I've never understood why some men whine about "always having to make the first move." It puts us in the driver's seat.
I used to complain about it because I didn't want to be in the driver's seat all the time. I wanted women to approach me as often as I approached them. That's still what I'd want out of dating.
I've never understood why some men want control all of the time. Give it a rest every now and then.
Re:Women in the drivers seat`? (Score:5, Insightful)
Being able to successfully make the first move takes courage, self-confidence, communication skills, at least a pretense of extroversion, and charisma.
Apparently women like men with those skills, to the point that they'll date them and then complain when the men keep using those skills to find other women to date at the same time.
Note to women: if you dated and then married a guy who is charming and able to approach a strange woman (you) with self-confidence, do you really have any right to complain when he continues to exhibit those characteristics after you are married?
Re: (Score:3)
Is there a right to complain should he continue to communicate comfortably with strangers, either male or female? Absolutely not. Is she within her rights to complain if he is flirting and making advances on other people when supposedly in a committed relationship? Absolutely. What's more is this goes both ways.
I have no qualms talking to anyone. I have never been introverted and I can strike a conversation up with anyone from a small child to a octogenarian and everyone in between, it helps if people'
Re: (Score:2)
She liked my ''take it or leave it' attitude
Congrats on puling that off when you basically had no other options!
Re: (Score:2)
yeah, ok, whatever. (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole dating situation is ridiculous these days. Dozens, or even hundreds of guys email a couple of women and almost none get any response at all; is it any wonder they escalate to crap? A response, positive or negative, is better than no response to a lot of people.
If you're in the top 20% on looks, congrats. Otherwise: you get treated like shit, whichever side your on.
Re:yeah, ok, whatever. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Otherwise: you get treated like shit, whichever side your on.
What's an on? I didn't even realize I had one.
Re: (Score:2)
Dozens, or even hundreds of guys email a couple of women and almost none get any response at all
When I used match.com, I got a response rate of about 30%. So maybe the problem is with you, not the women.
Here are a few tips:
1. Send an individualized response. Mention a few things from her personal profile, and compliment her on something specific.
2. Include a picture of yourself next to a nice car, or house, dressed well. Men are "shallow" about looks, women are "shallow" about money.
3. Mention that you like dogs and/or horses.
Re: (Score:2)
4. Mention that you have to be at the gym in 26 minutes.
Re:yeah, ok, whatever. (Score:5, Funny)
4. Don't mention that you like dogs and/or horses sauteed with garlic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Dozens, or even hundreds of guys email a couple of women and almost none get any response at all; is it any wonder they escalate to crap?
Yes it is a wonder. If you don't get a response and your reaction is to escalate to stalking, harassment, gross pictures, that's not a normal or healthy response at all and shows that there's something wrong with you.
Otherwise: you get treated like shit, whichever side your on.
"Not getting a response to an unsolicited message" -- this isn't being treated like shit, not at all. If you send out an unsolicited message then you should have ZERO expectation or entitlement of getting a response.
(I'm male by the way, probably about a 6/10 on hot-or-not, and spent several ye
Lol (Score:5, Insightful)
As if I'm going to jump through hoops just to get to look at a girl? This starts the relationship out on a bad note -- one where the guy has accepted responsibility for the actions of others and is willing to make sacrifices as a result. This is sexism at its strongest, unless it works in both directions -- ie, no pictures are displayed until a user chooses to present themselves to another.
Where's the benefit? (Score:5, Insightful)
Can't women just do this on any other dating site by not having any photos on their profile and sending photos once they've been talking to a man for a while?
Why would a man join this site compared with dating sites that let him see photos and don't make him jump through silly hoops?
Re:Where's the benefit? (Score:4, Insightful)
He wouldn't. That's why the solution is to promote a moral panic, brand men who don't use this site as part of the problem, and then use social pressure to force the issue.
Unworkable. (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems pretty unworkable to me. I suppose these women must be a mix of Angelina Jolie/Kate Upton and Jennifer Lawrence, to insist on being anonymous.
What I don't understand is why would a desirable man put up with all of these games just to view a woman's picture? If a man is attractive enough to get replies and messages from women on online dating sites in general (most men can easily send out hundreds of messages to get only a handful of replies), presumably he's attractive enough to go on other sites that don't make the man jump through these hoops, just to view the woman's picture, let alone go out on a date.
Which means that the men who are willing to put up with these kinds of hoops wouldn't be attractive to these women in the first place.
Why not... (Score:2)
This doesn't seem like it would be all that hard to fix, without resorting to unusual measures like the ones brought up.
Re:Why not... (Score:5, Insightful)
And particularly on height (Score:3)
As a short guy how much it sucks to try and date. I'm lucky in that I'm quite tall but man, are women stuck on height. Most women will NOT date a man shorter than them. It is a deal breaker to them for whatever reason. They also seem to feel it is perfectly reasonable, and not just very shallow.
It really sucks for short guys because at least with looks you can generally do something. While you can't change your looks radically you can lose weight, work out, wear better clothes, etc and improve your looks at
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Why not... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Women are just as discriminatory as men (Score:4, Interesting)
If you TRULY want to solve the problem of abusive men, then the solution is simple:
Create a website where the men can NOT make first contact.
You don't have to require the women to actually write an email - heaven forbid you do that. Just set it up so that the women have to 'wink' (or whatever you want to call it), at the men before the guy can write back.
This would have several advantages - including saving the men from wasting their time.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I've never heard anyone call Tinder a dating app. It's a hookup app. It's about sex. That's it. Of course it's going to be shallow.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't work (Score:5, Insightful)
It has been tried. A dating site was made where only women could initiate contact. The result? It went nowhere because women wouldn't initiate contact in almost any case. Men couldn't women wouldn't, so it didn't go anywhere.
The thing is not only do we have a cultural bias that men are supposed to initiate relationships, but the person who initiates puts their emotions on the line, sets themselves up for rejection. Women do not wish to do that by and large, and do not need to since men are very willing to initiate so they just don't.
Unless we are able to change that, such a site will go nowhere. The vast majority of women will just be unwilling to initiate a relationship and thus the site will wither and die.
Concerning (Score:2)
Question of the day: How much do you make? (Score:2, Funny)
Video Challenge: Upload a video of your paycheck.
Treat people like people (Score:5, Interesting)
I haven't been on a dating site for some time since having found someone (not on a dating site, BTW) and taking myself out of the game. But several years ago I was on a couple of dating sites geared specifically towards Christians. I was in my 40's and looking for age-appropriate matches. I try to be as well mannered online as I am face to face, especially on a dating site. I had very little problems getting responses, and what I learned from many of the women I talked to surprised me. A lot of them told me about how lewd and creepy the men were -- and this was supposed to be a Christian dating site! In contrast I always behaved as a gentleman, and in fact, I had to hide my online status sometimes because when I logged on I would get inundated with chat requests.
Unfortunately I never found anyone who was a great match. Distance was usually a problem. I met someone the traditional way.
It seems to me that a lot of people cannot handle the anonymity that an online presence provides. This is true, not just of dating sites, but everywhere. There is a tendency to objectify everyone. Men are particularly bad at it, but I've seen women do it too. The thing is, people like to be treated like people. A good rule of thumb is to not say anything to anyone that you wouldn't say within arm's reach.
Re: (Score:2)
Arranged marriage was so much better (Score:5, Interesting)
than this crap.
Re: (Score:3)
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that dating stopped after the arranged marriage occurred. Back when attraction and love weren't an important component in marriage partner selection, both parties were expected to find those things elsewhere (and typically did).
Grossly inaccurate article. (Score:5, Funny)
They claim that the best looking man only received 38 messages in four months. That's totally untrue. I received 43 messages.
Implicit Ignorance. (Score:2)
" Tinder, which is effectively a "hot or not" game...And the implicit notion that it's a "hookup" app can be uncomfortable for some women."
Implicit notion? Thank you Captain Obvious.
If a woman assumes Tinder is anything but a "hookup" app, then she has just shown me the very reason to avoid her, for my ignorance alarm is blaring. I really don't need to take a look at the intelligence meter or even the rest of the package.
It's not like our online dating app choices are Tinder and...Tinder.
And Tinder is used for one thing.
worst-looking guy (Score:3, Funny)
I can report that my findings indicate that the worst-looking guy receives 0 messages in four months.
Damn girl (Score:5, Funny)
Your font looks so good. How about we get together and kern that shit?
If you don't want people to see your picture... (Score:3)
What's with all the feminism/SJW articles today? (Score:4, Insightful)
Depressing (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Strange, I've never been unable to handle this...
Re: (Score:3)
You are an exception (I'm presuming you are female). Most women do not wish to initiate a relationship. Part of it is cultural that historically in western (and most other) cultures men pursued women and that carries over to today. However part of it, no small part from the women I've discussed it with, is emotional. You take the emotional risk when you initiate a relationship, when you ask the other person to date you. If they say you, then you have been rejected, which nobody likes. Many women would prefe
Re:This wont work because... (Score:5, Informative)
I am, indeed, female. (And bi, so I have experience flirting with both men and women. Though, y'know, not straight women, though a femme-y bi woman isn't necessarily going to have social removed from a similarly femme-y straight woman.)
I think it's more complicated that simple fearing of rejection. Women are strongly socialized not to initiate (you will be seen as fast! and too pushy, and forward, and generally undesirable!) and to be leery of the advances of men. (And, frankly, to be afraid of men. And not for no reason, though women are not uniquely vulnerable. Men, of course, are suppose to never admit to being either afraid or having been hurt.) Meanwhile - and probably partly as a buffer against their fear of rejection - men often ritually objectify women amongst themselves* and focus on the more trivial sexual aspects of the relationship. I mean, don't get me wrong, sex is great, but you don't expose yourself, emotionally, as a man, by saying you're looking for sex.**
Really, I think many parts of this are pretty ridiculous, and not just on one side or the other, but it's useful to understand where it comes from. It's a lot less useful to get stuck there. And, of course, especially as the gender roles of days past fade, we have more and more evidence that guess what? Men and women both crave emotional connection. And men and women both crave sex. (Sadly, none of that guarantees we'll be on the same schedule for any of our cravings.)
Now, that I'm generally pretty willing to make the first move doesn't men that I'm that interested in getting random nonsense from strangers online. Especially of the "Hur, hur, suck my dick. No? Well, you were ugly anyway," variety. Back in my hometown (Seattle) I could even handle being on sites like OKCupid, because folks were generally polite, but in Ohio it was just ridiculous and I disabled my account. (I also really didn't tend to find folks I had much in common with, and the more polite folks who contacted me mostly seemed to hope that I'd make their lives more interesting and I've tried that and it ends badly.)
* Or in groups with small numbers of women where they feel comfortable, I've been present for enough of that, and I suspect at that they were holding back.
** And, of course, there's all the social stigma around women liking sex. Which is ridiculous, at least in these days of decent birth control, but there are still strong cultural currents. (It's kind of ridiculous how many times I've invited a guy into my bed, he made sure I meant for no strings sex, I cheerfully agreed... and then in the morning he decided we should be in a relationship. Um, what?)
Re: (Score:3)
and probably partly as a buffer against their fear of rejection - men often ritually objectify women amongst themselves*
* Or in groups with small numbers of women where they feel comfortable, I've been present for enough of that, and I suspect at that they were holding back.
This is extremely single sided for two reasons. One: men are allowed to find women physically attractive and they are allowed to express that. It is not a buffer against anything; it is human sexuality. Talk about social stigma about a gender not being allowed to like sex. Sheesh.
Two: Women do this too! I have been privy to many female "ritual objectifications" about men. (And I expect they were holding back). There is nothing wrong with that.
** And, of course, there's all the social stigma around women liking sex. Which is ridiculous, at least in these days of decent birth control, but there are still strong cultural currents. (It's kind of ridiculous how many times I've invited a guy into my bed, he made sure I meant for no strings sex, I cheerfully agreed... and then in the morning he decided we should be in a relationship. Um, what?)
Your bracketed text seems to contradict your other bit or is com
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Also, women could handle it, they just don't want to have to put up with all the crap that men put up with.
Re: (Score:2)
It probably will work to some degree, but I could imagine the following scenario: A woman sets up her profile and her picture is hidden. She expresses herself well in writing, and men are forced to take the time to read her profile, which is enticing. After striking up a good rapport, she reveals her picture. Uh oh. She is, shall we say, not too impressive. The guy drops her like a hot potato. That's not easy for anybody. So, in those cases, it's not going to work well.
Re: (Score:2)
What natural order? Among both our closest relatives, chimpanzees and bonobos, the females are at least as agressive in pursuing mates as the males, if often somewhat subtler in their approach. The whole "males do the pursuing" thing is probably a cultural artifact of the brief period in our species history when women were chattel. (Yes, it lasted for several thousand years - that makes it what, a few percent of the time in which we've been more or less human?)
Re: (Score:3)
What natural order? Among both our closest relatives, chimpanzees and bonobos, the females are at least as agressive in pursuing mates as the males, if often somewhat subtler in their approach.
You mean like make-up, pushup bras and clothing explicitly designed to broadcast female sexuality? Because women are pretty aggressive and compete fiercely with that stuff. Or is that not subtle enough?
Re: (Score:3)
You have a rather incomplete knowledge on this. It was not "buying" a wife. It had many functions and reasons but to think it was about ownership, slavery or chattel is just plain wrong. In fact its main purpose in Europe was specifically to assign wealth to the woman in the event she outlived her husband. Also to give incentive to the husband to treat his "chattel" right. We'd call it preemptive alimony or divorce insurance.
It was also customary for the bride's family to provide holdings in a marriage. Wou
Re: (Score:3)
So we get all sorts on the gaming threads about how mysogniy doesn't exist and it's all made up by social justice warriors (e.g. Batman?) and so on and so forth.
And then we get this:
it upsets the natural order of men pursuing women. Women wont be able to handle being in the driver's seat and facing rejection.
And it's modded up. A big fat sexist post on how all women won't be able to handle the things than men apparently can. Well, good job I have karma to burn because these days anyone pointing out blatant
Re: (Score:2)
Well, let's say, hypothetically, in some totally imaginary universe, where some women find the obnoxious behavior of men on some dating sites sufficiently repellant to only consider sites with this feature. Some men would choose to use those sites on the basis of being able to talk to those women, because the "odds" would be quite good if they were the only women there.
Re: (Score:3)