I seriously think being born female makes dating 2x more easier.

[Els]

Exactly, Wholigan. Nothing's impossible for many of these guys. They just tell themselves it's impossible and before you know it, it shapes their view on life and gets them excited to participate in a lame topic like this. It's just stupid.

 

Dedicate yourself to becoming the best man you can be and live. Having a pissing contest on who struggles more or has it easier is just a waste of time. Not really that hard to understand. And yeah, I can honestly say in my experiences, the "average" or even the "terrible" (I'm talking lowest of the low. Drug addicted, abusive, purse snatching, beligerent, etc) man has never had as many struggles as the guys on here. I simply don't care if women have it easier. I'm also very happy that I was born a man. Fu** all that other noise.

 

I wish we could have just ended the thread at this post. Seriously.

[somedude81]

A man doesn't have to tell women he's desperate to give off the vibe he's desperate. I read and understand your responses. I also understand you choose not to believe your attitude here likely shines through in real life situations.

 

I hope you never find yourself in a relationship with anyone but your top choice. That choice may evolve. In the course of dating someone may grow on you. But when you do make it to a relationship, that better be because you believe that one woman is your best match, not because she's the only one who will have you.

What you are not seeing, is that I would be super happy just to have a girl. There would be nothing to give her the impression that she wasn't my top choice.

 

Seriously, once I start having regular sex, there is no way that I'm going to complain that she doesn't have F-cup breasts or that she's taller than I prefer. I'd just be extremely grateful that I found a girl as long as she meets the big three criteria. I'd also try my absolute hardest to make sure she's happy and to keep her.

[phineas]

Even by that logic, only the women who get approached (which may be the same subset of women) have the power.

 

Personally, I don't necessarily think there's any more or less power in being a gatekeeper as there is in being the asker.

 

I also don't think that 'having power' equates to having it easy. On that, we entirely disagree.

 

What about all the girls who never even want to go out because they never get that attention? What about the girls who have to fend off attention from guys they don't want but not turn off guys they do want? What about all the girls who go out and see guy after guy approach their prettier friend? These things happen, too.

 

Rejection sucks, but the idea that the ONLY way it can be experienced is by approaching and being shot down is false. Many women feel rejected simply by not being the woman who is approached, while others around them are. At any rate, none of this conflates to 'easier.'

 

Sorry, women have it easier in their 20's.

You will never convince me that what I see with my own eyes on a daily basis isn't real.

[oaks]

more men date several women at once. there goes your idea.

 

Nope. Do the paper exercise, and draw extra lines for those men who fit your description. It doesn't affect the outcome - men and women date equally, on average.

 

You might be saying that some men date more than some other men - ie that the distribution of dating amongst men is somewhat clumpy. I'm sure this is true, but I'm not sure where you think this gets you.

[phineas]

No, I'm not talking about sex either. I'm just explaining that it's the same math problem (and solution). Sorry for the confusion.

 

 

 

 

And I'm telling you that you're mistaken. The numbers are the same. They have to be (or you haven't chosen your 100 people in a representative way, or you need more people to be representative).

 

 

 

They can't have. It isn't possible. The 'options' of the women would be represented as people in the male sample. (unless you're saying that those teen/low 20s women are dating much older guys who aren't in your male sample, but I don't think you are).

 

The number of dates that men and women go on, for a heterosexual population where there are the same number of men and women, is the same. Really. It is.

 

You can prove this on a sheet of paper like this: Draw 20 pink dots in a column down the right hand side of the page. Those are woman-dots. Draw 20 blue dots in a column down the left hand side of the page. Those are man-dots. Now draw lines, representing dates, between pairs of man-dots and woman-dots. Now draw lots more lines, each line joining a man-dot to a woman-dot, either randomly or by deciding that some of the man-dots and/or woman-dots are celibate and some are promiscuous.

 

Now tear the paper in half vertically down the middle.

 

Now count the number of lines on the left.

 

Now count the number of lines on the right.

 

You just got the same number.

 

Sorry but there is a sub group of men who are getting with multiple women while a good portion of the male population might as well be invisible.

 

and a lot of average women who choose to be single than be seen dating one of these average guys.

 

so your math just doesn't work.

[Sugarkane]

This site is not a fair representation of reality.

 

But if you do manage to produce real life stats that this is a new and emergent trend in society, here's an explanation:

 

Since, according to many here, men will have sex with just about anyone, it's much easier for women to lose their virginity. Does that make it easier to date or find love? No, not, if again, we refer to all the threads on here where women panicked about the idea of "having slept with someone too soon" and worrying that their date will therefore lose respect for them.

 

I'm sorry if your virginity causes you suffering, btw.

 

That's what I said earlier. My threads only confirm this.

[oaks]

it gets me left on the sidelines. that's what. if several of the men date multiple women, that leaves some of the men with none.

 

Possibly, yes. Having some men (or women!) dating more people clearly implies that some of the men (or women) are dating fewer people, and that could be no people. That doesn't demonstrate that women have it 2x easier than men - it just demonstrates that the men (or women) who have fewer dates than some other men (or women) have, well, fewer dates. The people who find it hard find it hard... but that's not a pointer to it being easier for the other sex!

 

You can also have some of the women-dots dating several men, too. It isn't an instantaneous "who is dating who right now" model, so a man-dot or a woman-dot can have more than one line starting/ending there. It doesn't necessarily imply that they are dating multiple people simultaneously. You can also draw multiple lines between the same pair of people, if you want to measure "dates" rather than "first dates" and the results are still the same - men and women date the same amount, on average.

[oaks]

Sorry but there is a sub group of men who are getting with multiple women while a good portion of the male population might as well be invisible.

 

and a lot of average women who choose to be single than be seen dating one of these average guys.

 

so your math just doesn't work.

 

I agree with your first two points, and suggest that my math works just fine! Try doing the paper exercise I suggested, and assign those properties to some of the men-dots - let some of the men-dots have no dates, some of the men-dots only have 1 date and some of the men-dots have many many dates. It doesn't matter how you distribute the dates on the woman-dot side of the paper... you'll still get the result that the men and women date the same amount!

 

Clearly there's some variation among the men (and among the women) in a real sample, which you can reflect in the paper exercise, but that isn't a pointer towards men having it easier or harder than women... just an observation that some men have it harder than some other men (and some women have it harder than some other women) but that isn't really the topic of the thread.

 

I'll say it again: men and women date the same amount.

 

What I'm not considering is whether dateless women are happier being single vs dateless men being unhappier being single (and I'm not even saying that's true, but it's a possibility, although it's clearly not universally true).

[MaxNoob]

Possibly, yes. Having some men (or women!) dating more people clearly implies that some of the men (or women) are dating fewer people, and that could be no people.

 

You'd need 21 dots for men and 20 dots for women to more accurately reflect the gender ratio of young people. For a country the size of the US, that's millions of extra men. Also, women are three times more likely than men to identify as bisexual.

[Sugarkane]

Sorry, women have it easier in their 20's.

You will never convince me that what I see with my own eyes on a daily basis isn't real.

 

That's BS or I wouldn't be currently single. I got warned that the latest person dated is a wife beater and has serious mental problems. If it's true he's an expert at covering it up. I'm far from ugly and I make the measurements to become a model and flight attendant. Just trying to find a guy that wants more than sex, is like trying to find a needle in a haystack.

[betterdeal]

The average guy had it much better in those days. Going to hookers once a week actually would have been an affordable lifestyle.

 

Nonsense. The average guy's income was spent on accommodation and food. If he did employ a sex worker, his chances of getting an incurable STD were much higher. If he got an STD he would have been too ashamed or ignorant or proud or otherwise neurotic to seek effective treatment, But I suppose his wife would also be equally ashamed and therefore the two of them would suffer in silence, which you might see as a benefit.

 

And if that didn't happen, he may well have been sent off to war. A war with an evenly equipped enemy and be one of the millions killed or maimed.

 

If that didn't happen, he may well have been in semi or unskilled labour, and suffer crippling conditions such as arthritis or asbestosis - that's if he made it through childhood and small pox, rickets, rubella, measles, mumps, pneumonia amongst other childhood ailments that killed.

 

Sure beats fighting tooth and nail for fat, annoying modern womyn.

 

If you want that life, move somewhere less developed.

[USMCHokie]

I'll say it again: men and women date the same amount.

 

I'll have to agree with oaks on this one that the number of lines, representing dates, will remain the same on both sides. However, the number of dots with lines coming out of them will not. I'd confidently venture to say that more of the pink dots will have lines than blue dots.

 

That is the distinction we're not making...

[oaks]

You'd need 21 dots for men and 20 dots for women to more accurately reflect the gender ratio of young people. For a country the size of the US, that's millions of extra men. Also, women are three times more likely than men to identify as bisexual.

 

Is it really as much as 5% difference in gender population? I thought it was smaller. But, yes, the larger population has more members to divide thee same number of dates among. That doesn't sound like being 2x harder, though!

 

As for the bisexual women, yes, but what's your point about how it affects the number of dates men and women have with each other or how it makes it 2x harder for men?

[oaks]

"

I'll have to agree with oaks on this one that the number of lines, representing dates, will remain the same on both sides. However, the number of dots with lines coming out of them will not. I'd confidently venture to say that more of the pink dots will have lines than blue dots.

 

That is the distinction we're not making...

 

Correct. You get it! But the topic is about how it's 2x harder for men than women, which is what I'm refuting.

 

Within the male population there are some guys who date lots and some guys who don't. The same its clearly true for the women, and you're saying "less so than for men" and that's possible...

 

 

Perhaps the original problem could be stated as "it's harder for the guys who have it hard (than for the women who have it hard)". I'm not sure if that's true, but it could be a good debate.

[MaxNoob]

Is it really as much as 5% difference in gender population? I thought it was smaller. But, yes, the larger population has more members to divide thee same number of dates among. That doesn't sound like being 2x harder, though!

 

As for the bisexual women, yes, but what's your point about how it affects the number of dates men and women have with each other or how it makes it 2x harder for men?

 

Yes, it's 5% more men, and with more bisexual women, than means even fewer available women. It doesn't sound like a lot, but picture a sinking ship. Woman and children get on the lifeboats first, and then there's only enough seats left for 90% of the men. It's not just 10% more difficult for the men, it's much harder because they're all fiercely competing for the remaining seats.

[somedude81]

"

 

Correct. You get it! But the topic is about how it's 2x harder for men than women, which is what I'm refuting.

 

Within the male population there are some guys who date lots and some guys who don't. The same its clearly true for the women, and you're saying "less so than for men" and that's possible...

 

 

Perhaps the original problem could be stated as "it's harder for the guys who have it hard (than for the women who have it hard)". I'm not sure if that's true, but it could be a good debate.

I'm pretty sure that OP meant that dating is is 2x easier for the average woman than it is for the average man.

 

Most men don't have sex with a new girl every month. But some men do. So they don't have it 2x as hard as women, those men are not the norm.

 

The average female can get laid whenever she wants by almost whomever she wants and she has a much higher chance at getting dates than the average man. And of course more dates with different guys = a shorter time needed to find the right guy to get into a relationship with.

[betterdeal]

So, lads, especially those who believe the premiss of the OP, what ya gonna do about it?

[Els]

Nonsense. The average guy's income was spent on accommodation and food. If he did employ a sex worker, his chances of getting an incurable STD were much higher. If he got an STD he would have been too ashamed or ignorant or proud or otherwise neurotic to seek effective treatment, But I suppose his wife would also be equally ashamed and therefore the two of them would suffer in silence, which you might see as a benefit.

 

And if that didn't happen, he may well have been sent off to war. A war with an evenly equipped enemy and be one of the millions killed or maimed.

 

If that didn't happen, he may well have been in semi or unskilled labour, and suffer crippling conditions such as arthritis or asbestosis - that's if he made it through childhood and small pox, rickets, rubella, measles, mumps, pneumonia amongst other childhood ailments that killed.

 

 

 

If you want that life, move somewhere less developed.

 

Precisely. The average person actually struggled to even survive, barely a century ago - and this is still the case in many, many countries. There was no nonsensical whining about being entitled to sex or relationships - the average person wasn't even entitled to food, healthcare, and safe/fair employment regulations. People tend to take that for granted nowadays, especially those in developed countries. One should count one's blessings instead of romanticizing unrealistic ideals of how 'good' other people have/had it (be it men in the last century, or women now, etc).

[oaks]

I'm pretty sure that OP meant that dating is is 2x easier for the average woman than it is for the average man.

 

Most men don't have sex with a new girl every month. But some men do. So they don't have it 2x as hard as women, those men are not the norm.

 

The average female can get laid whenever she wants by almost whomever she wants and she has a much higher chance at getting dates than the average man. And of course more dates with different guys = a shorter time needed to find the right guy to get into a relationship with.

 

And I'm saying that the average is the same!

 

The distribution of the dates might be the problem... A small number of man-whores taking all (or many of) the available women (in a way that isn't matched by the small number of woman-whores).

 

Anyway... Work time now, and I have a date tonight, but I might pop back in tomorrow.

[oaks]

So, lads, especially those who believe the premiss of the OP, what ya gonna do about it?

 

I disagree, but I'm going to deprive someone of a date tonight by going on one myself.

[Els]

I disagree, but I'm going to deprive someone of a date tonight by going on one myself.

 

That's the spirit!

[MaxNoob]

I was talking with few people to a girl who was in relationship. Few hours after she went single, she told us that 3 guys had asked her out and she was laughing at it.

 

So, lads, especially those who believe the premiss of the OP, what ya gonna do about it?

 

The solution for men is to compete fiercely, which exacerbates the problem. I'll use my sinking ship analogy where there's only enough lifeboat seats for 90% of the men. The ship has sunk, and the remaining guys are swimming in cold water, desperately trying to get onto the lifeboats. A guy has secured a seat, thinking he's safe, but the girl throws him overboard. Immediately, 3 guys swim up to her, pleading for mercy. Now she's thinking, well look at all the options I have - I can be picky! I don't like that guy, he didn't pay for my dinner. That one has a receding hairline. The other waited too long to call me back. Forget it, with all these guys swimming around, I can just wait for my prince charming.

[Kamille]

You'd need 21 dots for men and 20 dots for women to more accurately reflect the gender ratio of young people. For a country the size of the US, that's millions of extra men. Also, women are three times more likely than men to identify as bisexual.

 

Is it really as much as 5% difference in gender population? I thought it was smaller. But, yes, the larger population has more members to divide thee same number of dates among. That doesn't sound like being 2x harder, though!

 

 

Nope. Not according to this chart:

U.S. Population by Sex and Age, Census 2000 — Infoplease.com

 

They're not ventilated by age, but according to this, there are 151,781,326 males in the US in 2010 and 156,964,212 females. That's a little over 5 million more women. The lads will have to stay away from demographic analysis if they want to keep defending their point.

[zengirl]

Sorry, women have it easier in their 20's.

You will never convince me that what I see with my own eyes on a daily basis isn't real.

 

And you'll never convince me that what I see with my own eyes isn't real without some kind of proof or new information beyond "I see this, so it's true." Your measure of "easy" just doesn't include many of the tribulations and difficulties young women face in dating.

 

Perhaps the original problem could be stated as "it's harder for the guys who have it hard (than for the women who have it hard)". I'm not sure if that's true, but it could be a good debate.

 

That would be a different topic. I'm not actually sure if it's true, either. I'm not sure if any of this is a 'good' debate or what it serves to accomplish. Some men have it hard. Some women have it hard. Some of both don't. If anyone wants any actual empathy on the difficulties of their situation, pretending that others don't have difficulties or that their difficulties are less important is hardly the way to get it.

[zengirl]

average may be the same. its easier for the top men and harder for the bottom men.

 

Well, how does that make it 2x easier for women then, if that's true?