several problems with that.
they all think they're top tier, but aren't close. that's the hilarious part.
there are very few girls no one else wants. maybe less than 1% of all girls have trouble getting dsr.
then there's the fact that being able to doesn't justify it. I could kill my all my neighbours easily. not going to
and the competing itself is on the basis of incredibly superficial traits. i'm picky about selecting for good people. they're picky about selecting for a valuable commodity. see the difference? pickiness is good when it encourages humility, altruism, empathy and intimacy. the girls on these sites deserve ridicule. they need it, they're getting out of control, and they hurt themselves, too. few people can be happy the way they operate, and a plethora of research supports the notion that rising numbers of girls now feel empty and unfulfilled, despite the free bounty of superficial pleasure they have been given access to.

this seems like a thorough and educated response.

however... isn't it safe to assume that the girls on dating sites represent an accurate sample of women IRL? in other words, if the women in this microcosm don't exhibit humility, altruism, or empathy, how can we assume that offline women do? maybe these girls are just more open about it... when you meet a girl IRL and get to know her, she may turn out to be the same way.

so maybe ALL women deserve ridicule? or, alternately, none of them do, because that's just the way women are?

most girls have plenty of options in real life, so why go on a dating site? well, because you are either abnormally picky and superficial, or some other problem that stops you functioning as well as you want in real life. so, most girls on dating sites tend to be abnormally unappealing (i.e the sexual value of the average male, hence on the site for similar reasons), abnormally picky, have social anxiety, or want an ego boost.
not really representative of the average girl. it should be noted that while most girls are not as extreme in their exhibition of behaviour as the super-hypergamous dating site ones, an overall trend towards that direction has been in effect since feminism arose, accelerating recently due to the degradation of pop culture etc.

what constitutes the western stereotype of a girl these days deserves ridicule, but it's best to take them as a case-by-case basis in real life. more info on my opinion related to this:
http://www.love-shy.com/lsbb/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=15604&p=301626#p301626

It's not so much the way they look. Most of their photos are so piss poor anyway you can't tell what they look like, but it's what they write which is so disparaging. They have such a dull and prosaic outlook. They are so unfathomably boring. I guess they're on there because they're dateless and can't get friends either. What they seek is so painfully unreasonable not even the Prince watsit of watsit would be able to impress them. In fact that is probably the only person who could pique their interest; the Prince of Watsit.

There is something depressing about looking through all those profiles and finding how samey and spammy they all are.

I don't have enough posts to read the other thread, but a quick question: do you spend a lot of time around women IRL?

it seems to me that the average woman IS about as "super-hypergamous" as she can be.



if we could get every man to "go on strike" we might be able to change these women... but how can we all unify?

I tend to associate in conditions that would lead to more reasonable girls. Like on my physics course for example, or at the local geek club.
I do wish sometimes I had a little more practical experience. It's hard to know what girls all around you are thinking, what their attitudes are in general, when you're too LS to consider talking to them.

Looks like e-harmony is having a special this weekend. I saw this ad on facebook

Just replying to the OP, there's already tons of good discussion here, so some of this might be redundant.

I recently signed up for OK Cupid, I thought that the quizzes were interesting, but after a while I got a bit suspicious. It feels like I'm taking the Scientology Oxford Personality Test, or something. Furthermore, matching me up with someone depending on a bunch of survey questions seems to be a load of BS to me. Users can easily exploit this kind of a questionnaire.

In the past, I got one date from an online dating service, I forgot the name of it and it was years ago. So far, no success with this service. Not even a reply, but lots of "snow cows", as we call them here, have certainly looked at my profile. Most of these women seem to be in search of a certain income, as someone here mentioned, and I'm not willing to let total strangers in on those details. With that in mind, it may be more economically sensible for me to just hire a whore, cheaper and more professional.

This is also my first post here. Hello. So far, I've really enjoyed the insight that you folks have been posting here.

Sometimes I wish dearly on OKCupid (or any other dating site for that matter), you could just type in "good, decent girl", and it would do so. Apparently it is too advanced an algorithm...

Snow cow - I like the term. What I find most disturbing about these dating sites is that you see a thumbnail of a pretty face, then you click on her profile and then you look at her other pictures and you realise she's been posting pictures of how she looked when she was younger. She's placed the photo of when she was younger next to the more recent one, and like, can you tell the difference??? Hell yeah.

And I'm thinking holy struth. What happened? Which reactor did she stumble into to? How did she get like that? It's disturbing. Maybe the wise stick with whores huh?

I think we should post up an advice page for young women. Try to warn them that their looks are not permanent, and they should really check out a guy before jumping in at the deep end. If they get a good man, their looks will last longer due to less stress from the absence of beatings and general abuse comonly found in joe average alpha.

Welcom to the forum BTW. I've only been here a month or so.

I think even if there was a button with "good, decent girl" on it, the screen would only show up blank. If a girl is good and decent, she probably doesn't need to go on OKstupid. At the end of the day a girl can walk into a pub / bar with a couple of friends, or go to a football match, etc, and someone they will meet because blokes are easier for women to find than women are for blokes to find, because women have a way of getting around town to where they've got to be without giving men the chance to meet her.

The reason, well you can blame Joe Alpha Average Dumbschmuck who allways barges in on conversations screaming like a gorilla so that the shyer males flee in one direction and the female is either cought up and smothered in his slimegrease or she manages an exit, never to return to that place you visit again. Or if she does, it's with HIM.

Wherever you go there is allways a Joe Alpha Dumbschmuck to fuck it up for one. There's a really good George Carlin sketch in When will Jesus Bring the Pork Chops, along this theme about how everything was going really well till the gorilla showed up. Story of my life that one. Always a gorilla on the loose.

Stay away from OkCupid if you can help it. It's a cesspool of epic fail proportions. My top 10 "matches" are a joke.

A lot of the girls are like this one:


If you're not attractive and don't indicate that you make $50K or above, don't even expect a response back when you message them.

The problem with online dating sites especially okcupid is that everyone is doing this:

Women are fundamentaly cowards.

Exactly