Tuesday, August 23, 2011

So How Do People Meet Anyway?

I talked about this a lot in my other post The clique culture. Basically, the overwhelming majority of couples in the city are a result of meeting through school, work, or friends. The big three. These are the socially accepted channels through which you can best hope to meet someone. If you aren't connected through any of these channels, you pretty much have no alternative other than what I call "fringe game". Fringe game is just a catchy umbrella term I am using to describe the mechanism a man in this city must use to meet women who are not a part of the big three. It can be either the internet, high volume cold approaches in public venues, or just pure fucking luck where a woman metaphorically "trips" and falls into your arms.

Naturally, fringe game is usually treated as beyond the pale since it falls outside agreed upon social standards where you have to meet through a network of your peers, as loosely connected and fake as that network may be. But actually, internet meeting is the most socially accepted of the fringe strategies a man has at his disposal, since it is at least advertised in a somewhat positive light in the eyes of the public. Just look at the subway advertisements and chances are you will see Lavalife plastered on one of them.

Whenever I used to see an obvious boyfriend and girlfriend walking around, I would wonder how they met. I thought that chances are good that the guy has got some good game and maybe picked her up in a club somewhere. But through experience and wisdom gained I realized that most certainly they met through either school, work, or friends. And in fact, if the girl is a young, hot, twenty-something it is virtually 100% certain that she met the guy through her social network, and probably at a young age too, like when she was still in high school. Young attractive girls who are not very picky get snapped up very early, and they are only snapped up by guys in their immediate social network. This means that the remaining single, yet picky females form the pool of women which single guys have to choose from. But even within their social network these women are difficult to get with, and meeting them in public compounds the level of difficulty. This leaves only the internet, since to be on a dating site there must be at least a ghost of a chance you want to meet someone from online. So that strips away one level of difficulty. But unfortunately, the internet is also a catch basin for some of the pickiest females who can't meet someone through the socially accepted means (the big three). These females, frustrated with a lack of "good men" in their social circle, resort to the internet in hopes of finding their prince. Fortunately, you can always pick out (and avoid) the profiles of these women since they are the most romantic sounding, containing buzz phrases such as: "want chemistry", "want to experience passion", or whatever other bullet list they manage to come up with.

In fact, I never, ever hook up with these women. I only hook up with women from online who write simple direct profiles which don't drip with romantic bullshit. Furthermore, I never hook up with women who are looking for anything in particular (unless it's sex). It's the women who look for boyfriends and something "genuine" and "real" that I have a very hard time meeting, and if I do, it's a crap-fest anyway. This is one main reason why I restrict myself to only offering new women sex, since I am almost never good enough to be the boyfriend (again, working from the picky pool of single women I have to work with). You see, sex is just one thing, which I can deliver. But the boyfriend role has many expectations that go with it, and quite a bit of bullshit to boot. So as a result, whenever I meet someone new it's only ever as a sex prospect.

It might seem like I'm taking an overly extreme position by screening for 100% sex. But Toronto women force you to take extremes. For example, if you said you were looking for something between a casual and serious relationship, the women will try to push you towards the serious relationship end of the spectrum (along with all the bullshit that goes with that). So if you give them even the possibility of an opening they will try to take it, hence the reason why I have to take the extreme position that I do.

However, if by chance she is nice enough then more can develop, and it will be much more REAL. But I never start off with the possibility of "more" because it always invites the scheming types.

By the way, when women say they want something "real" and "genuine" in their internet profile, they actually mean something that is socially stamped as such, such as dating, dinner, waiting for sex, and whatever other relationship stipulations this society tells women they deserve and as such should demand from a mate.

But like I said, I reject such fake bullshit, and I therefore never, ever start off as anything but the sex prospect, because if I do it usually never goes anywhere (meaning I am not her type). And the few times where it can, it does so in a direction I don't like, with fake courtship rituals or other market-value related bullshit where I have to pay to play, but at the same time not look like I'm doing that.

Also, it's easier for me to meet an attractive woman for sex than as a prospective boyfriend, again because sex is just one thing, but a boyfriend must be many things.

There is another interesting facet of the whole meeting dynamic that is worth exploring. This is the complaint both men and women often have that the people they meet who they like don't want to see them again, and the people who they don't like want to see them again. Why is this happening?

Since women here generally have an inflated sense of their own attractiveness and what they deserve, they usually end up going for guys that are actually more physically attractive than them. So it makes sense that in this instance the men don't want to see them again, since they sense the discrepancy and justifiably feel they deserve more. And this explains the complaint women have where they say that when they meet someone they like (someone who is more attractive than them), that person doesn't like them back.

Now, when women complain that when they don't like the guy, but the guy likes them, it's more commonly because the guy is closer to the woman's own level of physical attractiveness, but because of her own inflated sense of attractiveness she sees him as not good enough.

Guys are more reasonable in their expectations. So when guys complain that when they like a girl, that girl doesn't like them, it's more commonly because the girl is closer to his own attractiveness, which justifiably explains why the guys are surprised and frustrated. But when guys complain that when they don't like the girl, but she likes them, it's more commonly because the girl is significantly below the guy's own attractiveness and she's just overshooting what she thinks she deserves.

This means that women more often reject men closer to their own actual level of attractiveness, and men more often accept women closer to their own level of attractiveness. But hook ups can only happen when both parties like each other, so the end result is that less attractive women hook up with more attractive men more commonly than the reverse situation, since women tend to stick to their guns more than men and are willing to go for YEARS without sex until they meet the man who doesn't mind going out with a woman less attractive than him. They can hold out for the overshoot more than men can resist the undershoot.

So it looks like the man is getting a raw deal, which is true, but only if he's monogamous. The way I see it, I don't mind being with a woman who is not quite as attractive as me, as long as I can still be with other women. To me, that's the equalizer in what appears to be an unfair situation where men are concerned.

19 comments:

Dennis said...

Based on my experiences thus far being in the game, these days I relegate my pickup to daytime venues. I don’t have a large social circle therefore my options are limited. Whenever I go out to night venues I feel worse when I leave than when I arrived. Like Paul Janka said, night venues sell the illusion of sex, catering the female ego and taking advantage of the horniness of men and today’s “trick” culture. Day game I walk away feeling much better about myself, even if any phone numbers I get that day don’t pan out. There’s less bullshit, it’s FREE, and I’m seeing the woman in her natural state instead of whatever celebrity she’s trying to emulate at a night spot.
Online dating doesn’t work for me, so I removed my profiles. I’m not interested in forming shallow friendships at school, work, or whatever just so I can meet women, so day game is my best bet.
Outside of becoming wealthy, I really don’t think there’s anything more I can do. I’ve decided that this is how it’s going to be for me.

Anonymous said...

you forgot to mention church, and arranged marriages. Anyone reduced to fringe game probably has social circles that are thin, worthless, or non-existent, which means dating efficiency nose-dives, making quality and compatibility much more difficult to come by. Women in bars either drink, smoke, or get around. Or all of the above. Men on internet dating sites are low status losers at least in the eyes of hypergamous women hoping to marry up. Any man worthy of a modern princess will have 50 close friends and will routinely host or get invited to house parties, where he can cherry pick amongst the best of his towns young debutants. Everyone else, polish up that PoF profile, read the popular "game" blogs, and do 100 cold approaches a day.

Joe said...

You're so right it makes my head spin. It's the ugly truth, I used to beable to meet women through my friends at the bars until I moved. Now I have two choices, create an online dating profile and get girls the painless way or...make a complete fool of myself by getting dressed up to "pick-up" women using PUA tactics that don't work and get rejected by women...

I take online dating instead, why? Are you ready for this? Because number one I got LAID! And two, it landed me a loving relationship, in other words it worked for me and everything else is bullshit.

Now I will say this, the whole looks theory you have is true, I agree it's a raw deal in a nut shell that happens a lot.

Anonymous said...

Good post. I agree with your conclusion regarding seeing any potential new 'relationship' through a booty lense only. It is a wise risk hedging strategy, and plays excellently into women's hard wired hypergamous natures.

Only comment I would have is regarding the litmus test for dating market value. Men value youth and beauty, primarily. Women value status and power. There are exceptions, but these traits are largely consistent among 95%+ of the population. Women's perception of male 'attractiveness' is therefore more flexible and subjective than men's regarding what traits add up to 'attractive'. Looks do play a part in it, but it usually has to do with high social status with respect to their peers, social dominance and wealth.

Regarding my first point... It is therefore imperative to make it clear that you are seeing other women (for sex) when first meeting someone, even if a long term relationship is your goal. This immediately raises your status in the woman's eyes because you have the ability to be selective (are getting laid), yet choose to pursue her. You CHOSE her, and being chosen by a man with choices, makes her wet.

I wasted many excellent years of my twenties being infected with one-itis. Focusing all of my energy on just one woman. Little did I realize, this actually worked against me in her eyes. Albeit subconsciously, but nevertheless. While most men think taking the moral high-ground and doing what women 'say' they value in a relationship will raise their value - only the opposite is true.

Today, I enjoy a primary open relationship with a woman who is very happy with the way it works. She is monogamous to me, but does not object to my sleeping with other womem as long as I make time for her and treat her as my primary partner while we are together. In fact, she is monogamous to me yet doesn't demand that I be same. Her psyche did not do well with having more than one relationship at the same time, yet she understands and values that I do. It makes her subconsciously hot for me to know that I can sleep with other women, yet choose to offer my time and affection for her.

For yourself or any readers who are interested to read more about such topics, I highly recommend going through the archives over at Roissy (fomrerly Citizen Renegade, now Chateau Heartiste). No one has so elequently and succintly analysed the sexual marketplace and devised clear and effective strategies for men in how to come out on top, and create happiness for themselves and their partners.

Great work on the blog, btw.

Mark said...

There was a documentary I watched recently called Science of Sex Appeal. In it they showed a pairing experiment with a group of men and women. In the end they basically paired up within 1 point (on a scale of 1 to 10) within each other. In my personal relationship, people jokingly tell me "your gf is too good looking for you". And my response is "Well it's supposed to be that way! :-)" haha. She is a 9 and I would say I'm about an 8 (about 1 point difference), and I find we have a good balance because of it.

Anonymous said...

I didn't know women actually had boyfriedns or even let men near them nowdays. You guys must be secretly thinking you can't believe it every time she lets you even touch her.

Warren Farrell wrote that 'good looking women want more than just good looking men.'

Women often say they want a great personality blah blah blah...it is usually only IN ADDITION to the power and wealth.

Don Juans are successful because they do what works. They pay attention, not to what women SAY they want, but what women actually respond to. Big difference.

Anonymous said...

80% of those who advertise online are men. I give up and will just pay as I can afford it now. I think women at worst don't actually like men, but at best just tolerate them. At heart we know we have to 'prove ourselves' and buy our way out of the toleration zone.

Shawn said...

I have found that cold approaching is a waste of time.

Anonymous said...

I don't agree with this completely... I am a female that has dated different races and types. I do not have a type and would give a decent guy a chance. There has been times where guys think I am always cheating on them, but I am not and will not clarify... which has caused relationships to end... I don't think I am an ugly girl and my friends are all very attractive too! But we are currently finding it difficult to meet men and men do not approach us... but they do stare. What would you suggest?

John said...

The problem is in your last sentence: "men do not approach us". This means you do not approach men. If you said that you approach men but they reject you then I would have sympathy. The reality is that all the approaching that happens is from the men's side, and the result is almost universally that things go nowhere as a result. I know this from experience and from stories other guys bring up. When approaching females a guy can expect a 99-100% failure rate. This reality feeds back into the system and causes most men to not approach at all. The men you notice staring, but not approaching, is their way of expressing their desire to approach but ultimately not going through with it because of the very high chance of failure and possible humiliation that will result.

If you truly do want men to approach you then I suspect you are part of the very small minority of females who actually want to meet men in public, OR you are lying by omission and only want the very highest calibre of men to approach you, which still translates into being unapproachable for the vast majority of men.

I suggest you do some approaching yourself. And if you refuse to do that, and I suspect you will because women are chicken about this sort of thing, then you must go out of your way to make yourself as approachable as possible. You can do this by standing next to guys you want to meet and giving them some smiles and eye contact. That is plenty of bait and for me personally it would be all the signals I need to strike up a conversation with you, assuming I was interested. I would never, ever approach a woman that didn't give me obvious signals of interest, and I suspect many other guys are the same. Look at it this way, giving signals of interest is much easier than approaching, so to not even be willing to do THAT part of the mating dance is wholly unacceptable.

Pontifex said...

Its true though most men do not approach- or approach well. There are lots of women here in the same boat Im sure (poor social circles, just moved here, etc) that would love to be approached- you just may not find them in the "club"

Anonymous said...

>>But we are currently finding it difficult to meet men and men do not approach us... but they do stare<<

If a woman won't even look at me, there's zero chance of me saying anything.

Men will almost always screen themselves out, rather than BE screened out.

The fact is, women don't like being approached publicly by men. And men know it.

Reserpino said...

Hi, John.
Things in Naples (Italy) work the same.
And here we think that in the USA and in Canada situations are better, easier, super genuine, and so on.
You know the saying: what your neighbour has is always better.

Anonymous said...

i am a straight man, and meeting a good woman has become so very difficult these days for me. today we have much more nastier women out there than ever before, and many of them are not looking for men like they once did. i seem to come across the very nasty ones, and there are certainly much more LESBIANS NOW than ever before.

Anonymous said...

Warren Farrell is usually spot on when it comes to these issues.

His comment on this subject is this:

Women often complain that when they do approach a man, the get turned down.

(My comment - I wonder what would happen if men went around complaining about being turned down)

The reason is this:

If a woman thinks a man is going to ask her, she will wait as long as it takes - 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 1 year or more.

The only time they usually ask is when they think he ISN'T going to.

Which means they usually only take initiatives with men who are marginally interested. Wich translates to a 'no' answer.

I actually don't think women like men at all, and there is a contempt for men.

the only time I don't feel this contempt is when I'm in South America. Others might say the same aobut the Philippines.

Dieter said...

The layout of your blog is quite clean and I agree with what you say. Hopefully, more men will reflect on such views, which many other men out there have also observed. Keep up the posts.

Anonymous said...

A well used excuse ..."women can't approach men at will without being seen as crazy or desperate. That's how it is."

Saying 'that's how it is' doesn't actually prove anything. Can you provide specific reasons why? I see it tossed out frequently, but without any substantiation. Women don't have any problem approaching George Clooney, David Beckham etc., but suddenly she's desperate if she approaches Mr Private Citizen? Please. Men can appear desperate also, just as they can appear cool and calm. So can women.

Anonymous said...

Do people use Tinder and such?

Pro Mathew said...

A lot of singles who are into technology and using the internet to make connections are meeting these days through the free dating site - MeetOutside and this is an increasing trend the world over in general. Gone are the days when online dating was a taboo, when someone said that they used a "dating site" they were looked down upon. These days it is in style. The focus is on finding someone and getting things on rather than waiting forever to do things like "everyone" does.