Tinder (swiping left/right) in real life...

I'd have chosen the one he chose, but all the video did was make me glad I am married and not dating.

Not everyone has the same taste.

Fascinating.

They did the same thing with a woman but didn't do it the same way, it's all horseshit and supposed to teach us some kind of lesson about superficiality. But they chose 2 super-attractive initial selectors and a group of at least reasonably attractive people to select from. Had they chosen an average guy in the beginning, he would end up with 0 matches no matter who he swiped right to. Also notice they made all the women barefoot because if they let them wear what they wanted many would wear heels and auto-reject the guy because he would have seemed shorter to them. The conversations that were made after a match were also too civil because they knew they were on camera when in reality it would go super-flirty and more binary at that point, get sexually charged or fizzle immediately.

the girl with the bangs and tats is a very good example of why old people talk shit on millennials

JeffTUSCL had it right I believe. Even in the comments, one man joked that he could swipe right on 30 girls, and they'd all swipe left on him. Another comment said that studies show that men are far less selective than women. Men generally swipe right for over half the choices, while women usually find 85% of the choices subpar. That's no surprise to me, it's exactly why women get into clubs free while men pay to get in.

Well isn't this fun? :)

@TFP ... if women find 85% of the choices sub-par on the basis of visual information alone, while men pick much less selectively, then why do we say that men are more visual than women? That seems to be a contradiction doesn't it? They're more visually picky with computers, and less so with real humans? Doesn't make sense.

@ DC9428 ... Hahahaha ... I believe one problem with STRIP CLUBS is that they've made us all pickier. :)

Anyway ...

Sure, you're SUPPOSED to be all "I'm not superficial" but my experience with on-line dating apps is, 100%, "1. That girl is butt-ugly, next! 2. That girl is butt-ugly, next! 3. That girl is REALLY FRIGHTENINGLY butt-ugly, NEXT NEXT OH GOD NEXT! 4. Oooh hot wait FAKE! That's an image of Kathy Ireland. Next. 5. That girl is butt-ugly, next. 6. Maybe. Oh wait she says her body is "normal" and I know to translate that to "too fat" so, no, next. 7. That girl is butt-ugly, next. 8. Ugly, next. 9. 10. 11. Ugly ugly ugly, next next next." ad infinitum. The times I've ever tried computer-based meeting, whether a smartphone app or not, I have NEVER found anybody even marginally physically attractive enough that I would consider trying to date her. I thought it was categorically understood that internet meeting services were all about fat girls who couldn't get dates otherwise, so, if you were a guy who like shagging fatties, you could probably get laid through one or another of those services, but if you want someone who is "hot enough to be a girlfriend / partner", you won't find her on-line, period.

Maybe my demographics impact this somewhat -- I'm in my early 50s now, but I have been on the internet since my early 30s, though (of course) on-line dating was much less prevalent back then; and, I've been living in smaller urban areas. The one time I was in a larger area (Tampa Bay region) I found there to be a LOT of fundamentalist-christian-types looking for meeting people to go pray with. But when I look around at the "success stories" at various websites, what I see are couples comprised of: A. fat-ish short guys with goatees (because they think they will look like they have a stronger chin, if they hide their fat-ass neck with some bullshit facial hair) who have been cleaned up for the purposes of the image, but who do jobs like "works in a bakery" or "important long term plans for investment potential" (a.k.a. not "good catches" according to traditional female provider needs); with B. REALLY REALLY FAT WHITE GIRLS.

Like, fat. Like, REALLY FAT. I don't mean, "oh hey she is the zaftig type of college girl, maybe she needs to learn to use the tread-master." I mean, BMI skyrocketing. She has size-A 38 tits, because her ribcage is size A-37.9 and her nipples poke through the fabric. And she just LUVVVS Christ and puppies.

Another one I run into, regularly, is just how furkin' DUMB the people are. "If you want to meet a smart girl, go to a bookstore," goes the standard advice, at first seeming reasonable, "and try the self-help and new-age aisles," thereby directly contradicting the first half of the advice. I met someone who kept asking me why I was using big words. "Uh, (silly question) because they mean what I intend?", I said. She said, "Intend, see, that's too big, why did you do that?" Wow, how to do you respond to that? Thing is, for all these idiots, the feedback that I got from the match-maker was that the girls wanted to see me again. I was like, "At first I thought I didn't want to fuck them, mostly because of what they look like, but I tried to be less shallow than all that. However, now that I've met them, I REALLY don't want to fuck them, because they're so goddamned STUPID ...".

I noticed that in the video the dude went for anyone with a larger body as long as it was something related to nice face. And maybe he forgot which way was good and bad? For a few early on, he was swiping the uglies to "good" and the hotties to "bad," maybe he regretted that. And he turned down some whom I would define as stone-cold-hotties by the "standard" North American middle-class college-educated usual preferences. He liked the butt-ugly one with blue hair, for instance. So maybe he was just trying to prove that he wasn't going to reject all the fat girls, because he knew they'd get on his case for that. I frankly can't understand why it's so interesting to me, to watch him (and society in general) fail like that ... of course, I go to strip clubs regularly, maybe my standards are warped.

good video. thanks for sharing. i think the girl he picked is very attractive. i would have picked her too.

when it comes to dating/hookups, i'm not too picky. i think there are lots of cute women out in the world. however, in the strip club, i'm really picky because i'm paying, and more importantly, 'i'm paying a lot of money.

i've used tinder a great deal. there are many attractive women on there. the problem is, an attractive women on tinder is going to get LOTS of attention--so its probably very overwhelming for women.

i do think that guys have different tastes in women. however, i don't think tastes are DRASTICALLY different, at least not in most cases. one of the best ways to see that guys have different tastes in women......is simply to go clubbing with a TUSCL pal :-)

I don't think standards are warped. Everyone has their type but good looking people tend to be a universally objective thing. What is warped is the accessibility of attractiveness and the viability of holding onto that accessibility. Both sexes should logically be affected equivalently but it negatively impacts men more than women, no matter how many "woke" videos like this want to imply that the superficiality is a male evil.

By accessibility I mean that we live in a world now where porn is at our fingertips. Not just porn but terabytes and terabytes of endless variety of porn streaming in seconds to any device with a screen, and not just any women but some of the hottest women you can ever come across in everyday life. Also by accessibility, strip clubs and hookers. Pay a fee, touch, get off. You get to choose the best looking and they will not say no, so long as you have the cash. It's all transactional but it is instant gratification with the most attractive women a guy who lived 10,000 years ago might almost never encounter in his entire life.

Yet when it comes to the actual results of online dating or regular dating, a man would have to be a superhero to get success with the kind of women he really wants. He has to settle dramatically. Vast majority of men forced to settle.

Women's choices are different. They have been positioned now in society to hold the cards and even the most mediocre of women can choose among the top males - who will settle, and most women rotate through these top males.

Top 1% of women & men will match up.

Remaining top 19% of men will settle for remaining top 79% of women. These women just rotate through these men, who mostly just use them, thus leading to "all men are pigs" and other belief systems.

Remaining 80% of men battle for the remaining bottom 20% of women and are disenfranchised.

The cycle of transactional instant gratification intensifies.

The final brunette was attractive but I would have more considered 1 of the 2 early blondes. Any case, I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with swipe culture. In the right context, it makes sense. Imagine this guy is in a strip club where his goal is high mileage. There are 30 strippers to choose from but he has only 1 liquid present to give. He first chooses a small set that have potential and interviews each in the LD area before deciding which to take to VIP.

For dating, he can't swipe right on everything he might settle for, but he has to swipe right on enough so that he can get a better statistical chance to get a match. This particular guy in the video has a better statistical chance to get a match that he can then whittle down to than a more average looking guy who might get barely any matches, so that guy has to swipe right more because the herd will thin more harshly for him.

A woman, even an average one, doing the same thing could have swiped left on 28 of 30 guys and still had a chance with at least 1 of the remaining. The reliability for her to get exactly what she wants in looks, or at least very close to it, isn't even a challenge. The challenge for her is to find someone who she can either fuck easily or is compatible to date. From her smaller set of more selective choices, she determines the range of men and the perception of what she can have.

I think a better study would be to take a group of 30 men and 30 women and try to ensure ALL are matched up to at least reasonable satisfaction, with everyone understanding that none of them are guaranteed to get the exact person they want. Have multiple rounds of mutual swiping left-right and as each 2 people are paired off with mutual satisfactory matches, the remaining keep repeating the swipe left-right game with each other. Eventually, everyone is paired off.

Will all of those pairings be happy? Probably not, the bottom 2/3 will probably wish so strongly for a better match that they would rather have no match than the one they got.

New swipe apps are constantly getting it wrong on how to beat the last app. The wrong is that they think their success is to cater to women. If they catered to men more, they would thrive. They can do this by implementing a maximum match ratio for the top % of men. Those men's options will not be stunted enough to matter perceptually to them, and the match pressure then pushes down to the remaining men who get better exposure so that the 20/80 (or 20/60) gets closer to an equilibrium.

Women will not notice much of a difference since they will always be satisfied to be able to choose among the match overlaps they feel were within their selection power. What do I mean by this? Imagine a room of 1,000 men. Women are asked to choose the top 20%. If the top 20% are already known before choices are made, you remove those top 20% and ask women to choose their top 20% of the remaining 800 - never telling them that 200 have been taken off the plate. They will still perceive that their selections are valuable as they are the ones doing the selecting.

"Guys who can't get laid at all have a tendency to become very bitter and resentful towards women because they feel they've been rejected their entire lives, hence, the incel phenomenon. Then you have the other side of the spectrum, guys who get laid way too easily and have started treating girls as disposable entertainment. These guys become convinced that no matter how shitty their behavior is, that they are actually God's gift to women and continue treating them like garbage until they finally can't get away with acting that way anymore."

Yup. One reason i dont feel bad these girls. Some men can hit women, say whatever they want and that woman might go back to him or at the least another woman will take him anyway. Beats me. But if they dont care why should i(or anyone else)? also dont believe in the metoo shit.


"Yet when it comes to the actual results of online dating or regular dating, a man would have to be a superhero to get success with the kind of women he really wants. He has to settle dramatically. Vast majority of men forced to settle.

Women's choices are different. They have been positioned now in society to hold the cards and even the most mediocre of women can choose among the top males - who will settle, and most women rotate through these top males."

Yup. Its amazing how much i see women with men "out of their league" so to speak. Funny that men are supposedly more "visual" yet so many settle.


As far as the online dating thing, the numbers are so warped(probably 100 dudes for every real woman) its a waste of time except for that top 20% who get laid plenty regardless. Everyone else certainly has a better chance of picking up a chick in a more traditional fashion.

"Its amazing how much i see women with men "out of their league" so to speak."

I should add, the only way that happens the other way around is if men are paying for it, or they're rich.

DC, in a sense yes. In order to make it work, those who would otherwise get the abundance of matches would have to suffer the consequences of reduced matches, or not getting their normal rate of matches if they didn't properly engage the range of matches they did get. Any human being getting more than a few matches a day is already overflowing.

Think about it like an app where people swipe for free food.

As matches increase, the volume of rotations decrease. Traditional dating web sites are more heavily male audience but swipe apps are closer to equilibrium on the ratio of men and women.

That won't automatically trigger women to swipe right on men they otherwise wouldn't when the options are overflowing, but if the pool of guys is proportionally shrunk down when the top ones are rotated out more often, the portion of men they choose from the remaining will statistically stay the same - because they will still perceive they are choosing from the top 15% of what's available. Their match counts will remain relatively the same and the main difference is that more guys who otherwise would not make the cut can now at least engage with more matches and increase their real results.

They couldn’t find hotter girls than that? I wouldn’t rate any of them past a 7.

I think Tinder is crumbling a bit and no longer really working as well as before for matching. They shifted to creating 2 higher tiers and 1 of them you can't even pay to get in. They are in the cash-out phase. Competition comes from apps like Bumble but that piece of shit went the opposite and just put more power to female profiles. You're still swiping but even if you get a match, the females have to initiate a chat within 24 hours or the match disappears. These bitches don't chat.

They put their IG on there, which you can't find the link to, and seem to have some perception that the chats will happen on IG. Chats don't happen on Bumble, nothing ever moves to IG. If they type out their IG then all they want are followers, they sure as hell won't engage with a guy they can't easily connect the dots with as being a match they made on a swipe app.

Bumble was supposed to carve out the sexually aggressive, creepy men but all they do is just get far fewer people interacting. Most other swipe apps also fail on their gimmick.