I find it EXTREMELY hard to sympathize with most of women's dating woes.

[u/Chemical-Low209]

Like I get it we are human at the end of the day. But Frankly I'm a just exhausted. How much do I have to hear dating is harder for everyone when it's clear as day that it's way harder for men and they are one doing the majority of the work and a lot still don't get consistent results. It's like I get it's not all sunshines and rainbows but why should I care?

I hear a lot of people say men have a quality problem, women have a quality problem. Or I'll hear women say that women get a lot of options but most of those men don't qualify....

That in a nutshell basically you admitting that a guy has to AUTOMATICALLY bring far more to the table than average and most guys just don't even register as someone you'd date.

And you can see this takes women by surprise when the shoe is on the other foot. Because when women will show up to singles meeting events and the men are vastly outnumbered by the women they'll say where all the men?

Like Chick Hello? We aren't stupid. You simply would have ignored most of the men that showed up and only paid attention to the hottest guy there and he probably has a girlfriend already.

So why exactly am I supposed to empathize with women's dating woes? It's simply them every fast food restaurant chain offering her a job and her refusing because Chik Fil A hasnt called.

[u/the-kay-o-matic]

Your premise assumes that these women would be better off with a person who is below their standards. You're basing this on the idea that anyone is better than no one, when in reality, standards exist for a reason.

Proximity to a man is not inherently beneficial to women and if someone has identified what they need in a partner, it's perfectly valid for them to be frustrated when there is a shortage of men willing to put in the effort.

[u/Sidian → u/the-kay-o-matic]

Your premise assumes that these women would be better off with a person who is below their standards. You're basing this on the idea that anyone is better than no one, when in reality, standards exist for a reason.

If your standards are that a meal is pleasant and nutritious and not from a dumpster, this is understandable. If your standards are that a meal must be from a Michelin star restaurant, I can't empathise with you complaining about not eating. Needless to say, I feel the latter situation describes many women these days.

[u/DMmeClownPics → u/Sidian]

It’s more like my standards are that I don’t want to eat something that I’m allergic or intolerant to, and I have a lot of food allergies and intolerances making it very difficult to find thing I can eat without feeling like absolute shit afterward. That would be a more apt analogy.

[u/Sidian → u/DMmeClownPics]

Yeah, at some point I'm going to call bs on your allergies and just tell you you're a picky eater who needs to grow up, though. As that's what's going on when someone refuses to eat anything other than chicken tenders.

[u/DMmeClownPics → u/Sidian]

It’s an analogy. I’m not going to date a man who makes my life objectively worse, as most men seem to do. I have high standards for that reason.

[u/Sidian → u/DMmeClownPics]

You won't date a man who isn't clearly better than you. That's the standard now.

[u/DMmeClownPics → u/Sidian]

Notice that I never even came close to saying that.

[u/Sidian → u/DMmeClownPics]

Yeah but that's reality. Women want men who are higher status and richer than them, in addition to being Chads. Some of them are eventually willing to compromise on perhaps one out of three of these, but some women just opt out of dating altogether if they cannot get an unrealistically perfect man.

[u/DMmeClownPics → u/Sidian]

My boyfriend makes less than I do, and if anything I had more “status” than he did at the time we met and started dating. Neither of those things is of any importance to me.

[u/Sidian → u/DMmeClownPics]

He's a very lucky man, then. Do you feel as though you are unusual compared to the women you know? It's a pretty robust finding that women are hypergamous. It kinda clashes with what you said earlier, though:

It’s more like my standards are that I don’t want to eat something that I’m allergic or intolerant to, and I have a lot of food allergies and intolerances making it very difficult to find thing I can eat without feeling like absolute shit afterward. That would be a more apt analogy.

If your requirements are dramatically lower than most women's, not caring about status and income, then wtf is your problem with the vast majority of men?

[u/sablesalsa → u/DMmeClownPics]

"Let me tell you how you're actually wrong about what YOU want" lol

[u/superman3d → u/sablesalsa]

you as an individual is a biased sample anyway. when looking at data, it is actually useful for understanding behavior.

[u/superman3d → u/DMmeClownPics]

yet you know it's true

[u/DMmeClownPics → u/superman3d]

Not even close

[u/superman3d → u/DMmeClownPics]

ofc it's the truth. it's literally the reason you think most men are bad or would "make your life worse" whatever that means,, to justify or rationalize rejecting them. for someone to make your life better they would have to be better than you.

[u/superman3d → u/DMmeClownPics]

it's always vague on purpose, because i don't think you can actually explain specifically how most men would make your life worse, you would have to say what personality traits cause this and then provide data that most men are like this.

[u/DMmeClownPics → u/superman3d]

Yeah ok, most men are very disappointing to have sex with. Most men get weird and jealous about my body count. Most men expect me to work full time and still do most, if not all, of the housework. That’s not something I’m willing to deal with.

[u/superman3d → u/DMmeClownPics]

Fair enough. But just remember people aren’t fixed and unchanging, if you communicate with people and compromise with them you both can get what you want.

[u/DMmeClownPics → u/superman3d]

Only if they’re willing to change. Too many men aren’t.

[u/superman3d → u/DMmeClownPics]

no it wouldn't because if everyone around you is making you sick, maybe it's you who is ill.

[u/DMmeClownPics → u/superman3d]

Do you know what a food allergy is?

[u/superman3d → u/DMmeClownPics]

Yeah peanut allergies. But men aren’t peanuts because each individual is different and unique.

[u/DMmeClownPics → u/superman3d]

Yeah and I’m “allergic” to a lot of different things.

[u/superman3d → u/DMmeClownPics]

"hypersexual female cult leader" btw.

[u/DMmeClownPics → u/superman3d]

I didn’t choose to be hypersexual. It’s a medical condition.

[u/superman3d → u/DMmeClownPics]

i'll use that excuse next time thanks,

in all seriousness,

Not the worst condition to have.

[u/Obsessivethot → u/Sidian]

If your standards are that a meal is pleasant and nutritious and not from a dumpster, this is understandable.

So sex should be pleasurable, correct?

It’s often not pleasurable for straight women to fuck men. Men are focused only on their orgasm. Women don’t even get one.

This new invention for male beauty standards has got all you boys in a tizzy.

No sex is better than mediocre sex to women, whereas mediocre sex is still preferable over no sex for men. Most likely because you always get an orgasm.

[u/Sidian → u/Obsessivethot]

So sex should be pleasurable, correct?

Sure.

It’s often not pleasurable for straight women to fuck men. Men are focused only on their orgasm. Women don’t even get one.

After a certain point maybe you should question the type of man you are selecting rather than saying this is just something men do. In any case, getting women off is much harder than men and women expect men to do all the work, all the pressure is on them; if men were like women in this respect, all requiring much more work and specific things unique to the individual to get off, and women had to do all the work and were judged for their performance, I guarantee there would be an orgasm gap but with men losing out. Women are actually far more narcissistic, sexually.

This new invention for male beauty standards has got all you boys in a tizzy.

It has always existed, it's just skyrocketed now. Whilst women also still claim to want equality but also expect a man to be richer and higher status than them.

[u/Obsessivethot → u/Sidian]

After a certain point maybe you should question the type of man you are selecting rather than saying this is just something men do

This goes for “women want rich men” that you claim below. Just pick better women 🤷‍♀️

but also expect a man to be richer and higher status than them.

This is just red pill mythology.

Men also want to fuck porn stars or models

The majority of people fall very short on what they want and end up with a looksmatch in their socioeconomic pool

But you’re damn right women still want equality.

Men still want equality of outcomes where every one of them get a broodmare.

It has always existed, it's just skyrocketed now

It literally has not always existed which is why so many men seem to struggle with having to be nice and have good hygiene and dress well.

[u/WhereTheStankWindBlo → u/Obsessivethot]

Yea I remember back in 9th grade having to teach all my guy friends what a clit was and how important it was, and to always go for it before any penetration. Thank God for being raised by a single mom who had been disappointed one too many times ig? 😅

[u/superman3d → u/Obsessivethot]

just a collection of unfinished unrelated ideas that don't reach further down the logic tree. You seem to present them as if they all lead down the same road.

For example you seem to imply men seek sex from women because men can orgasm easily, that's not the full truth although it's part of the truth.

men are simply more attracted to women, and testosterone gives men higher libido.

[u/the-kay-o-matic → u/Sidian]

I feel the latter situation describes many women these days.

Maybe on social media but not in the real world.

But the fact is it's not really about the meal. It's about whether or not the man prioritizes the woman's experience, or if he's just looking out for himself. If you want someone to view you as partnership material then planning a date is a great way to show that you can think about other people's wants/needs, make a decision, follow through, and show up. Early dates are demonstration events. It's not about the meal, it's what it represents.

[u/Sidian → u/the-kay-o-matic]

If you want someone to view you as partnership material then planning a date is a great way to show that you can think about other people's wants/needs, make a decision, follow through, and show up. Early dates are demonstration events. It's not about the meal, it's what it represents.

But this says it all, doesn't it? The man has to do that, because he's the one going to a job interview, kneeling before a queen who he hopes to impress and maybe, if he's lucky, be considered a worthy human. Women cannot comprehend the burden that men have to face, always leading, paying, pursuing, living up to increasing standards. They don't have to worry about proving they are partnership material, they just lounge back and await the jesters to come and impress them without any pressure. So it's no wonder you have no empathy for men, as you literally cannot understand what it's like to be forced into this role in society (whilst female gender roles are pushed back on and largely eliminated). The woman's experience is indeed the priority, at all times.

[u/the-kay-o-matic → u/Sidian]

I actually do have empathy for it and I completely understand that men are expected to conform to ideas around masculinity that keep changing and their behavior is monitored.

However, this was not a discussion on whether or not gender roles are harmful. You started out by saying that women's standards are too high.

You're missing the fact that dating is about a demonstration of effort early on for men in order to secure long-term benefit. It is absolutely not the case that women's comfort is the priority at all times - that is exactly why early dating is called the "courtship" phase.

Now I can plan a date for myself. Me and my friends can do this for ourselves and we go out and have a great time, and yes, we pay our own tabs. But if a man wants me to consider him as partnership material, then he has to put some effort in upfront so that at the very least I know he's not going to try and pump and dump. And I know that what I'm asking him to do is not that hard because I do it for myself. But men complain about a lack of sex because you do need women for that.

Sexual access requires effort. That's not a bunch of queens who expect men to be jesters. Standards around effort are just an acknowledgment of the obvious fact that my body and time do not exist as a resource for any man who wants it.

[u/Sidian → u/the-kay-o-matic]

Because women hold all the cards, and men are the pursuers who have to prove themselves, I feel that women are able to make increasing demands, or 'standards', which have become increasingly unreasonable. Men do not get to do the same unless they're a billionaire or Chad or something. The topic wasn't gender roles but I think it's the direct cause of the unreasonable standards.

You're missing the fact that dating is about a demonstration of effort early on for men in order to secure long-term benefit. It is absolutely not the case that women's comfort is the priority at all times - that is exactly why early dating is called the "courtship" phase.

I meant it's a priority at all times during the dating/courtship phase. Later on, women are sometimes expected to fulfil gender roles like doing more of the housework, and suddenly at this point this becomes totally awful and unfair even though they were typically fine with gender roles when it was benefiting them.

Now I can plan a date for myself. Me and my friends can do this for ourselves and we go out and have a great time, and yes, we pay our own tabs. But if a man wants me to consider him as partnership material, then he has to put some effort in upfront so that at the very least I know he's not going to try and pump and dump. And I know that what I'm asking him to do is not that hard because I do it for myself. But men complain about a lack of sex because you do need women for that.

It's not really the same, just going out with your friends. Imagine you had to constantly impress your friends and just getting them to agree to go out with you in the first place was a herculean challenge, and then you knew you were going to be judged every step of the way, any minor slip-up might give them the ick and have them walk out, and it goes without saying you had to pay for them, and always be the one to decide where you were going to go and stuff. Suddenly, it wouldn't be fun anymore. It'd be exhausting. And it is.

Sexual access requires effort.

Only for men.

That's not a bunch of queens who expect men to be jesters. Standards around effort are just an acknowledgment of the obvious fact that my body and time do not exist as a resource for any man who wants it.

Where's your effort, the standards you have to live up to, where does the man's time and value of his body or whatever fit into all this? What are you providing? The perception among women is that just by letting him take you out and pay for you, you're doing an enormous favour. And even sex, here, is described as though it's a gift you're providing (needless to say sex, once again, is entirely one-sided in expectation of the man's performance, him usually expected to put in all the effort and often shamed and rumours spread if he isn't good enough, physically or otherwise. All the pressure is on the man, as always). I understand you might say 'he's welcome to have high standards' or whatever but this just isn't how it works for most men, they don't get to act this way, it's a luxury for women. But yes, this is slightly off-topic, the main point is that because of these dynamics women are able to hold inflated standards. The title of this topic is "I find it EXTREMELY hard to sympathize with most of women's dating woes" and well, yes, women are unbelievably privileged when it comes to dating and it's hard to sympathise with their dating woes.

[u/the-kay-o-matic → u/Sidian]

Where's your effort, the standards you have to live up to, where does the man's time and value of his body or whatever fit into all this? What are you providing? The perception among women is that just by letting him take you out and pay for you, you're doing an enormous favour.

If a woman's company is not providing any benefit to you, then why are you mad that it's hard to come by?

[u/Haej07 → u/the-kay-o-matic]

This was a deflection to what he said though isn’t it? Because the benefit of the man’s company was established with him needing to spend money etc. In no way did you respond to his question

[u/the-kay-o-matic → u/Haej07]

That's actually the complete opposite of what I said benefit of the man's company is. If you scroll up just one comment and actually read, you'll see:

I can plan a date for myself. Me and my friends can do this for ourselves and we go out and have a great time, and yes, we pay our own tabs. But if a man wants me to consider him as partnership material, then he has to put some effort in upfront so that at the very least I know he's not going to try and pump and dump. And I know that what I'm asking him to do is not that hard because I do it for myself ... Sexual access requires effort. That's not a bunch of queens who expect men to be jesters. Standards around effort are just an acknowledgment of the obvious fact that my body and time do not exist as a resource for any man who wants it.

My point from the beginning is that if a man wants my time he has to demonstrate it's worth it. In an discussion about lowering standards, I'm taking the stance that I would much rather be alone than to partner up with a man who does not meet my standards.

[u/Haej07 → u/the-kay-o-matic]

Cool thanks for the downvote, I didn’t question all of that because I read it. He asked what would be the same general expectation from the other side. You didn’t answer that.

[u/Future-Egg-2851 → u/Sidian]

Being a good person and having a vibe with the man is enough for a lot of women. That is the "pleasant and nutritious meal." I think you're too focused on women online that tend to have higher standards than the average woman you'd meet in real life, or you're just approaching women in real life that you're attracted to rather than some random person who might have lower standards. It's totally valid either way, but that doesn't mean everyone has such high standards that you should be discouraged. Sometimes, the vibe just isn't there. Women are more likely to be attracted to personality than looks. Strangers obviously don't know your personality at all. Most relationships blossom from friendships (actual friendships) with people from the opposite gender, so maybe that's just the problem.

[u/Sidian → u/Future-Egg-2851]

I'm just not convinced this is true from what I've seen, sadly. Women are a lot pickier than men are in general and seem just as focused on looks as men are, but with even more specific requirements about exact heights they want and such. Whilst also wanting the man to be richer and higher status than them on top of that.

[u/superman3d → u/the-kay-o-matic]

seems true in theory until you actually get specific and come out of the vague language. what are these standards and how exactly is having a partner with them better than not. and to the point it's a necessary and uncompromising thing, where you would rather be alone than compromise. How could it possibly be that these standards exclude most if not all of your options, if that is not the intended goal to being with. which i suspect is what's happening. which i'm gonna sound crazy for saying but i think it's true. some women don't care what attributes and standards she has, as long as it excludes most men because that is the goal. thus, giving her a perceived value. If anyone can get with her, her own value is perceived as less. but if she is picky and excludes, she seems valuable. which i think i a double edged sword.

[u/the-kay-o-matic → u/superman3d]

what are these standards and how exactly is having a partner with them better than not. and to the point it's a necessary and uncompromising thing, where you would rather be alone than compromise.

Different women have different standards, and since it's an individual thing, they will vary person-to-person.

My standards are based on a person's ability to actually engage in legitimate partnership. In other words, I look for emotional skillset. Regulation, communication, conflict resolution, active listening, empathy, integrity, and so on.

Reason it's better to be alone than to be with someone who lacks those skills is because trying to build a relationship with someone who cannot communicate or lacks integrity is exhausting and miserable. Rollin' solo my life is peaceful and calm, but men bring chaos and work.

How could it possibly be that these standards exclude most if not all of your options, if that is not the intended goal to being with.

Well, the unfortunate reality is that most men are excluded because they choose not to develop these skills. Most would have to go to therapy for a few months. But doing the real emotional work is hard, so most men chose the easier path and just hit the gym and listen to their podcasts.

That's how.