Does the "average" guy really have that much trouble with dating and relationships?

[TheBigQuestion]

This is something I've been meaning to get write about for a while, because it's something that a significant portion of male posters here assert. In short, everyone who is a regular here has seen some variation of the following statements: "The vast majority of men can be dateless for months and years at a time." "If you aren't really rich, good looking, a drug-dealer, or otherwise are high status, most women won't touch you with a 10 foot pole." "I'm under 5'10" and don't have muscle, this must be the reason that women don't like me." "10% of men bang 90% of the women." etc, etc, ad nauseum.

 

The first thing I think of whenever I see any of these statements is wonder on which planet these posters spend most of their time. This simply does not reflect the experience of anyone I know in real life, with the exception of the men who are extraordinarily bad looking and out of shape and/or are known to have behaved towards women in almost criminally creepy ways. I know this isn't a scientific sampling, but I decided to go to my friend list on Facebook to see just how many men are in a relationship. I don't have the time to actually look through the whole thing, but I went through the first 3 letters of the alphabet and found that, among that sampling, 20 of the men were either in relationships, married, or always have an FWB. It really seemed like a 50/50 split, and this is just what people are willing to share on facebook. I'm 24, and everyone in my friends list is between the ages of 19 and 33 or so. Beyond facebook, the majority of my friends have had girlfriends for significant portions of their lives, and their social capital (in all the aforementioned ways) pretty much runs the gamut from pretty high to abysmally, wtfisshedoingwithhim low.

 

So honestly, what gives? Are the bitter, angry dudes here just seeing what their eyes want to see and tuning out reality, or was I somehow blessed with having friends and acquaintances who all happen to be within this magical 10% of men who sleep with 90% of the women?

[Wolf18]

Where do you live?

 

 

My experience and my friends its the polar opposite, almost anti-thesis of what you are saying.

 

What planet do you live on, that men don't have women troubles?

 

Also , whats your social circle look like? IF all your friends were on the Alpha Sigma beer pong team with you, your results will be skewed.

[somedude81]

The average guy has had a few girlfriends and may or may not be in a relationship.

 

But, that doesn't mean that their aren't millions of guys who struggle with women. They mostly keep their problems to themselves so the outside world doesn't know.

 

As a man who has been single his entire life, the only thing I care about is my reality. Knowing that other men can get women, doesn't do me any good.

 

Wolf is also right about your social circle. That will affect whether the guys you know are single or not.

[Tom81]

Have to remember that this is a dating forum...there is going to be greater concentration of guys and girls looking for advice, down on their luck, and having discussions about their troubles with dating. Yes, maybe it's 50/50 on facebook, but this isn't your friends list...this is a section of a site about dating

[TheBigQuestion]

Where do you live?

 

 

My experience and my friends its the polar opposite, almost anti-thesis of what you are saying.

 

What planet do you live on, that men don't have women troubles?

 

Also , whats your social circle look like? IF all your friends were on the Alpha Sigma beer pong team with you, your results will be skewed.

 

I grew up in New Jersey in a middle class suburb about 5 miles west of New York City. I went to college in NJ and have also lived in the central and southern regions of the state. If you stay away from NJ cities, there are just as many spoiled, entitled, rich princesses in this state as in NYC. Hell, I'm sure you know plenty of people that moved from my state into your fine city and try to pass themselves off as NY natives. So it's not like I'm dealing with a different female demographic than you are.

 

I already answered your questions when I defined "social capital." With the exception of the ugliest, most obese men that I've known, a vast majority of them have had some degree of success with women. Their experiences run the gamut, but I can't think of more than a handful of guys I've met who have never had a girlfriend and/or are still virgins. And like I said, those are the guys that you can take one look at and know exactly why they've gotten nowhere. I don't associate exclusively with rich, male models, if that's what you're insinuating.

[TheBigQuestion]

The average guy has had a few girlfriends and may or may not be in a relationship.

 

But, that doesn't mean that their aren't millions of guys who struggle with women. They mostly keep their problems to themselves so the outside world doesn't know.

 

As a man who has been single his entire life, the only thing I care about is my reality. Knowing that other men can get women, doesn't do me any good.

 

Wolf is also right about your social circle. That will affect whether the guys you know are single or not.

 

I'm not denying that there are millions of men who are perpetually single. What I'm denying are the blanket statements that are constantly touted as fact when, given what I know about the men who make those statements, just seem impossible. I don't live some sort of charmed life. My friends aren't all wealthy models. In fact, most of them are victims of the bad economy to some degree or another.

 

My point in making this thread is to try to figure out how people come to these conclusions. I've lived my entire life in an area that is arguably among the most shallow and entitled areas of the country, and I still don't see a majority of average, homely-looking women all making a B-line to have sex with the guy with 6-pack abs and movie star facial features.

[somedude81]

I'm not denying that there are millions of men who are perpetually single. What I'm denying are the blanket statements that are constantly touted as fact when, given what I know about the men who make those statements, just seem impossible.

It's probably just something that guys tell themselves so they can feel better. Guys who are bad with women also other guys doing poorly to make each other feel good.

 

Just consider the blanket statements to be like stereotypes.

 

Of course, many stereotypes have an element of truth to them.

[Wolf18]

I grew up in New Jersey in a middle class suburb about 5 miles west of New York City. I went to college in NJ and have also lived in the central and southern regions of the state. If you stay away from NJ cities, there are just as many spoiled, entitled, rich princesses in this state as in NYC. Hell, I'm sure you know plenty of people that moved from my state into your fine city and try to pass themselves off as NY natives. So it's not like I'm dealing with a different female demographic than you are.[/Quote]

 

I don't know about NJ, but I life there is much simpler than NYC.

 

I already answered your questions when I defined "social capital." With the exception of the ugliest, most obese men that I've known, a vast majority of them have had some degree of success with women. Their experiences run the gamut, but I can't think of more than a handful of guys I've met who have never had a girlfriend and/or are still virgins. And like I said, those are the guys that you can take one look at and know exactly why they've gotten nowhere. I don't associate exclusively with rich, male models, if that's what you're insinuating. [/Quote]

 

Well I'm not a virgin.

 

I'm probably average to semi-good looking (other males say I am a good looking male, but women as a whole think I'm "ok" to unattractive). I'm like 5'8. I've got lean muscle but not enough for women to notice. Don't have a car and have about 700 bucks in the bank.

 

In other words, when it comes to areas that attract women, I am nothing out of the ordinary or am lacking.

 

I try to work through it. I have rapport with people very easily and am popular wherever I go, people think I'm smart and funny, as well as bold and loyal. Yet I'm invisible to women.

 

But years ago, when I was much more muscular with very broad shoulders and a 6 pack, I was a ladies man and had no issues what so ever with women. Women who had nothing in common with me wanted to be with me and would actually grope me in the halls, while today women I have once in a lifetime amounts of things in common with just want to be my ****ing "friend".

 

Just because your situation might be different, and there might be variables you don't notice, doesn't mean our criticism or statements are not legitimate.

[carhill]

In my historical and current social circle of male friends, if anyone approaching 'average' ever had any issues with women, it would be myself and one other guy who is now about 50 and has never been married.

 

The marked difference between he and I is I 'gave in' and conformed to societal conventions regarding behavior and dating protocols. He still continues to attend church weekly, is very picky about the women he approaches and courts them very carefully. I gave up on that general philosophy about 17 years ago, hence the difference in LTR's and my getting married. His frustrations often mirror those I read here on LS. We both come from a pretty conservative religious background, but I didn't stick with it like he has. Of my other friends, some have been married decades, some have been married a few times and nearly all have been consistently with women. Most start dating immediately when they split up with a wife or girlfriend. A few have cheated. I'm pretty much an outlier, taking substantial periods of 'alone' between relationships.

 

So, I'd say my data set of average men, aged 45-66, do not have that much trouble with dating and relationships. My 'trouble' level is likely that the 'average' of that data set. I doubt any of them would ever participate in an online relationship forum like LS, which perhaps is good information in and of itself.

[TheBigQuestion]

I don't know about NJ, but I life there is much simpler than NYC.

 

 

 

Well I'm not a virgin.

 

I'm probably average to semi-good looking (other males say I am a good looking male, but women as a whole think I'm "ok" to unattractive). I'm like 5'8. I've got lean muscle but not enough for women to notice. Don't have a car and have about 700 bucks in the bank.

 

In other words, when it comes to areas that attract women, I am nothing out of the ordinary or am lacking.

 

I try to work through it. I have rapport with people very easily and am popular wherever I go, people think I'm smart and funny, as well as bold and loyal. Yet I'm invisible to women.

 

But years ago, when I was much more muscular with very broad shoulders and a 6 pack, I was a ladies man and had no issues what so ever with women. Women who had nothing in common with me wanted to be with me and would actually grope me in the halls, while today women I have once in a lifetime amounts of things in common with just want to be my ****ing "friend".

 

Just because your situation might be different, and there might be variables you don't notice, doesn't mean our criticism or statements are not legitimate.

 

Yes, I'm well aware of your "back in high school, ladies love me, and now, everyone except women love me" story. That has no bearing on whether statements like "You need to be a 6'3" model in order to even have a chance at sleeping with or dating a woman nowadays," or whatever other form in which it emerges, are legitimate. I only assume that my experiences in life, encompassing a variety of social settings in a very socioeconomically and culturally diverse environment, cannot possibly be so rare that statements like the ones above are actually true.

[joystickd]

I think they just focus on a small subset of women. I'm in a rural area and do ok. I probably would do great in a big city. I have some difficulty due to a woman that was my first experience still bad mouthing me but its not affecting me that bad. I see guys on here and think WTF. I was a virgin until 24 and now I'm doing great considering the area I live. Its just they tend to focus on the rejections and bad aspects of dating.

[Wolf18]

Yes, I'm well aware of your "back in high school, ladies love me, and now, everyone except women love me" story. That has no bearing on whether statements like "You need to be a 6'3" model in order to even have a chance at sleeping with or dating a woman nowadays," or whatever other form in which it emerges, are legitimate. I only assume that my experiences in life, encompassing a variety of social settings in a very socioeconomically and culturally diverse environment, cannot possibly be so rare that statements like the ones above are actually true.

 

 

The point is that if you don't have an appearance that is extraordinarily attractive, you better be making more than 60 grand a year or freakishly tall. Or date morbidly obese women.

 

Personally , I think you've got an interdimensional wormhole in that part of NJ, because all the guys I talk to at school, at the pub, and at my job, all have similar complaints as me.

[Feelsgoodman]

This is an interesting topic.

 

The truth of the matter is that both BigQuestion and Wolfie are right. There are tons of average men who are struggling with women and there are lots who do not. To some extent, it has to do with with the your geographic location, but much more critically, it has to do with your social circle.

 

North Americans are notoriously clique-y...they start building their social circles early on in life and these social cliques are generally quite inflexible. They also rely on these social circles for dating, which acts as a self-limiting factor. So if you happen to be part of a great social circle, you are much better off than if you have a lame social circle or no social circle at all.

[Wolf18]

I doubt guys our age in India have any complaints. My classmate from biology class Ajay finally cashed in his arranged marriage ticket. He's about 5'3 and almost completely bald, his wife looks like a Bollywood star

 

Meanwhile us Western men literally have to get on our knees and beg trash at the bar.

 

I think perhaps arranged marriages go a little too far, but if we were to reinstate monogamy (REAL monogamy) as a social standard. I'm not a puritan what so ever, but it would benefit men much more than this society where women "multi-date" and can change men faster than they change underwear. In the end, women will be happy too, they wouldn't be in that awkward situation most women nowadays will be in when they turn 40 with no kids or marriage prospects, simply because they just spent all their life ****ing unattainable guys (the 10% guys here are talking about) or because nobody is ever good enough:rolleyes:.

[jobaba]

This is something I've been meaning to get write about for a while, because it's something that a significant portion of male posters here assert. In short, everyone who is a regular here has seen some variation of the following statements: "The vast majority of men can be dateless for months and years at a time." "If you aren't really rich, good looking, a drug-dealer, or otherwise are high status, most women won't touch you with a 10 foot pole." "I'm under 5'10" and don't have muscle, this must be the reason that women don't like me." "10% of men bang 90% of the women." etc, etc, ad nauseum.

 

The first thing I think of whenever I see any of these statements is wonder on which planet these posters spend most of their time. This simply does not reflect the experience of anyone I know in real life, with the exception of the men who are extraordinarily bad looking and out of shape and/or are known to have behaved towards women in almost criminally creepy ways. I know this isn't a scientific sampling, but I decided to go to my friend list on Facebook to see just how many men are in a relationship. I don't have the time to actually look through the whole thing, but I went through the first 3 letters of the alphabet and found that, among that sampling, 20 of the men were either in relationships, married, or always have an FWB. It really seemed like a 50/50 split, and this is just what people are willing to share on facebook. I'm 24, and everyone in my friends list is between the ages of 19 and 33 or so. Beyond facebook, the majority of my friends have had girlfriends for significant portions of their lives, and their social capital (in all the aforementioned ways) pretty much runs the gamut from pretty high to abysmally, wtfisshedoingwithhim low.

 

So honestly, what gives? Are the bitter, angry dudes here just seeing what their eyes want to see and tuning out reality, or was I somehow blessed with having friends and acquaintances who all happen to be within this magical 10% of men who sleep with 90% of the women?

 

Let's take a look. Let's say the average guy is between 5'8" and 6'1", is not strikingly good looking, is fit or at least not overweight, and white/caucasian. Assuming you have decent social skills, guys who fit this profile should have no problem being able to attract a decent amount of women.

 

Only thing is, the further you are away from that baseline, the harder time you are going to have finding women to date you.

 

Most of my high school friends fit that profile and the ones who didn't have girlfriends by high school did pretty well in college. I do not fit that profile. Do I think that's the cause of a lot of the trouble I have/had in dating? I do, to a large degree, but oh well. Life's not fair.

 

Also, if you are shy or geeky, or have no game, you could fit that profile and still potentially struggle. So, yea, I generally agree with your assessment, but it doesn't mean women are any less shallow.

[carhill]

Oh, forgot to add that my 50 yo friend, in many ways, bears a marked similarity to George Clooney, though I'd say he's about an inch shorter than George. He has striking features, is in great physical shape, is always well-dressed and 'tidy' and makes his living as a manager at AT&T and lives in a solid middle class area of town in a well-appointed home. Some of the guys have wondered if he's gay but I don't think so. He hugs like a straight man

 

I added this to exemplify that, even with good looks, a comfortable lifestyle and a good job, a mature man can still have dating/relationship issues. Perhaps, sometimes, it's better to be 'normal' and 'average'.

[somedude81]

Let's take a look. Let's say the average guy is between 5'8" and 6'1", is not strikingly good looking, is fit or at least not overweight, and white/caucasian. Assuming you have decent social skills, guys who fit this profile should have no problem being able to attract a decent amount of women.

 

Only thing is, the further you are away from that baseline, the harder time you are going to have finding women to date you.

I agree with you about the baseline and that the further one is from it, the harder things are.

 

The men who do poorly with women usually have something "off" with them physically and or socially

 

As for myself, a guy who was short and quiet, I had zero chance with women when I was younger. Now that I'm more outgoing than I used to be, my chances of getting a woman should have gone up.

[dasein]

With the exception of the ugliest, most obese men that I've known, a vast majority of them have had some degree of success with women.

 

I still don't see a majority of average, homely-looking women all making a B-line to have sex with the guy with 6-pack abs and movie star facial features.

 

With respect to the first quote, how are you defining "success with women?" Getting laid every now and then? How much of that is "success" IYO? Getting a date? Getting a woman to go out with you a few times but not more? Getting any old GF? or getting a -quality- GF at least on your level of quality and value in the dating market? Getting a woman who will use you as a placekeeper? Or one who is madly in love with you and for whom you are their first choice, not a "make do?"

 

In my unenlightened days, I certainly got laid from time to time, had many GFs over the years, could get many women to date me a few times... and got upgraded constantly, many times by having the woman choose lesser men over me. Is that success? I thought so then, but I don't think so now. A crappy fisherman will catch fish from time to time, but does that make him a successful fisherman? In a sense, a fisherman who needs only one fish and manages to catch one after a year of terrific effort, is successful, but few would agree on that definition as being objectively correct.

 

My definition of "success with women" involves a certain degree of control of a process of meeting goals and the proportionate effort required to meet a goal, together with the ability to repeat that effort and reproduce similar results. If I have to ask ten women on par with me out to get a date, that's not an acceptable amount of control, nor is it success. If OTOH 1/3 of the women I ask out agree to go out, that's a reasonable level of control and success. If I am able to have sex with 1/2 of the women I date, that's success IMO, if only 1/5? not success. If I get dumped after 10 dates and sex is involved? Gets tricky, but if I get dumped 50% of the time by women on my level, constantly upgraded, that's not success.

 

What success with women means seems to be highly subjective. My main point in the above ramble is that getting occasional sex from a woman below you in physical attractiveness and social value is not "success with women," nor is getting a string of women to date you a few times. Success with women is having a solid idea of how much -reasonable- effort a man has to exert to fulfill his desires, and being capable of reproducing that effort again and again.

 

Turning to the second quote, I have a completely different experience than you. In the U.S. social world I have experienced, socially active modern women have much more sex than they let on, have it with top 5% men in physical attractiveness and social value, and are perfectly willing to share such men with other women. Of course they will -accept- attention and maybe even date and enter into relationships with men on their level, but until they reach a certain point of realization that 5 percentile man simply isn't going to be snagged by 70 percentile woman, and that there aren't enough 5 % men to go around, she will view the 75 percentile man she is with as a placeholder and will never ever -belong- to him, will never choose him above all others. Luckily for non 5% men, there is a backdoor through the oxytocin limerence process to countermand her agenda.

 

Men simply have a choice, never be first choice or leverage ourselves into the top 5%. Life is unfair, but that is abusively unfair IMO, and if guys want to bitchabout it, more power to them. It BLOWS.

[TheBigQuestion]

This is an interesting topic.

 

The truth of the matter is that both BigQuestion and Wolfie are right. There are tons of average men who are struggling with women and there are lots who do not. To some extent, it has to do with with the your geographic location, but much more critically, it has to do with your social circle.

 

North Americans are notoriously clique-y...they start building their social circles early on in life and these social cliques are generally quite inflexible. They also rely on these social circles for dating, which acts as a self-limiting factor. So if you happen to be part of a great social circle, you are much better off than if you have a lame social circle or no social circle at all.

 

I agree that your social circle can influence your dating life. Your descriptions of North American behaviors are pretty off-base, however. What about all the people that leave all their hometowns and go to college, grad school, or move to different parts of the country for work? Most people don't actually maintain all of their social circles. It has nothing to do with who you associate with early in life as much as who you associate with in the present day. And usually, unless the person is a townie who never went to school anywhere else, the people you hang out with in your 20s are not the same people you grew up with.

 

This is why I used my facebook friend list as an example. Like most facebook friend lists, it's a hodgepodge collection of hundreds of people that I've known to varying degrees at different points in my life. These are not the people I hang out with on a daily basis. I haven't seen or heard from most of them in years. It's a much wider and much more random data set than me talking about my friends.

[fortyninethousand322]

So honestly, what gives? Are the bitter, angry dudes here just seeing what their eyes want to see and tuning out reality, or was I somehow blessed with having friends and acquaintances who all happen to be within this magical 10% of men who sleep with 90% of the women?

 

Meh. I'd consider myself somewhere between average and above average I guess. I'm not short (I'm 6' tall) and in shape. I still struggle with women. Probably because I don't really approach women and tend to give up if another guy seems interested in the same girl. I've been on about 3 dates in the past three years.

 

But anyway, I'd say my experience is by far not in the norm. Of all my friends and acquaintances, only one other guy is in my situation (virgin, never kissed a girl, etc.). All of them guys who are average, normal people. I will say though that "d-bag" type guys do tend to get a lot of dates and do well with women, I don't know if it's a maturity thing with girls but it is something I've noticed. A lot of them date many girls at once, or have one girl they're dating and then see others on the sly.

[Ninjainpajamas]

I'm not sure if the average guy has trouble with dating and relationships, but I'm quite sure they do...because average to me insinuates that he doesn't have any special ability or aptitude with women. As for myself, I never really looked left or right to see what other men or doing or how well or what not, I've always pretty much done things my own way and as a result of that have a high level of confidence, or maybe I am that way because I am confident. In my experience, luckily I've never really had too much trouble interesting women, or having relationships throughout my life. It's pretty much up to me when I desire that, I don't feel like that is geographical in any way though...I find those arguments a little confusing. If I was moved to another country I wouldn't be worried if I could get a date.

 

For example I've never been rich or highly educated, in fact many times down on my luck but have always dated for the most part, educated and confident women with a high standard in the men that they date. On paper I didn't have much to offer them...no fancy car, sense of security, high paying job etc.. However I think if you're the kind of person that restricts yourself with your own limitations you'll never do that well in anything anyway...you have to be confident, you have to brave and willing to put yourself out there without worrying about failure. I think there are also basic fundamentals to learn about dating and what intrigues women that many guys seem to overlook. Lot's of nice guys are single, or just guys that are incompetent and don't know how to read the signs. I think in order to be consistently successful with women is to understand how they think and what they want, and when to respond or react.

 

Also I think attraction counts for a bit, however not the whole pie. I hear more women say they aren't looking for a gorgeous guy than the ones that say they are, most are flexible with looks. A lot of people don't have themselves put together however. Guys need to get haircuts, new clothes and get rid of those old boxers and socks with the holes. They need to know what looks good on them as well so female help is what i mainly go based off with that myself. From women I am associated with, I think overall many women consider men incompetent...which is the main disinterest in many of them, they don't feel like they have the desire to put themselves out there for men that don't do a lot to intrigue them. Women like very simple things and it baffles me how and why men seem to fowl that up even to me.

[TheBigQuestion]

dasein, interesting points.

 

1. How I define "success" with women isn't as important as the people who most frequently make the statements I made in my OP define it. Most of the time, they are talking about being able to get laid at least semi-regularly and being able to enter into a relationship with someone that they reasonably connect with. But since you asked, I'm 24 and have only been in two long-term relationships. I've had some casual sex here and there. I've also had two or three FWBs. The women involved ranged from not-at-all-great-looking (I had a tendency to mix my beer and hard liquor in college) to stunningly, jaw-droppingly beautiful. Overall, I consider myself successful with women.

 

2. I'm sorry, but I really don't know any truly homely/average looking women who were able to consistently sleep with any really good looking/rich player type for more than one or two occasions. If they lust after and hold out for these top 5% guys, it is in a manner no different than the vast majority of men who love their girlfriends but still lust after Victoria's Secret models. Everyone, regardless of gender, will lust for whatever they perceive to be their top 5% in the opposite gender. And likewise, I've known plenty of guys who hold out for women way out of their league too.

[seibert253]

"Average" guys are at a disadvantage. Truth sucks, but thats life. If you have the looks of Adonis, or lots of cash, then getting women requires little effort.

 

On the other hand, even average women can get guys easily. The power of the p*ssy.

[Lonely Ronin]

Hey TheBigQuestion,

 

Are we talking about getting layed, or getting into a serious relationship?

[Imajerk17]

Something to think about...

 

Every single time a girl is having sex (in a heterosexual context) a guy is having sex too.

 

For every girl in a heterosexual relationship, there is a guy in a heterosexual relationship too.

 

Do the math.