This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
To slightly derail your post, what is the best way to judge one's market value? How do I know if the problem is tinder or my expectations?
Would the market benefit from a impartial third party rater that could tell people what is realistic for them based on market conditions.
Run yourself on dating apps. If you can't break 30 likes in 24 hours, you're most likely unattractive. If you can't break 99+ in 24, you're most likely not above a 6 in the eyes of women.
This is a totally out of touch standard. Have you actually used a dating app? I use hinge and have been on dates/slept with very attractive girls and I probably get 2-3 a day.
It's not out of touch or anything really, you're just not attractive to women. Your results are literally bang on average, it's just that you were unaware until now of the actual nature of the curve and for whatever reason assumed yourself to be at the top end. It's like when a kid who's pretty decent at math in his class of first graders gets his first taste of just how much average he is in comparison to IMO gold medalists.
You are weirdly desperate to get people to take the blackpill. Again, what experience do you have using dating apps? Because so far most of your posts read like someone who reads a lot about them, and knows a lot about them, but has never actually used one. To be clear I do pretty well on the apps and have been on plenty of dates with objectively attractive women that I met on an app. I don’t totally disagree with your thesis, but it’s way too doom and gloom considering how much low hanging fruit there is in getting good pictures and not messaging like a boring weirdo.
I find it really interesting how convinced you seem to be that you're attractive despite women literally telling you to your face through Tinder that you aren't. No, if you only get two or three likes a day on Tinder, you aren't attractive, you aren't some Casanova, and you're objectively doing quite badly in comparison to actually good profiles. Furthermore, I don't really give a damn how many dates you go on with "objectively attractive women"-- that's a more or less irrelevant metric when I'm willing to bet that nine out of every ten of those dates stopped at the first date, and probably nine out of every ten of the remainder led to precisely nothing (not to mention these objectively attractive women are probably 5s at best anyways). I have experience on dating apps, I know plenty of people who've used them, I've used them personally. I even have some data from an actual top profile to back up my point. You can go compare yours. You don't match up.
Tinder example 1
Tinder example 2
Tinder example 3
Well firstly I said that I primarily use hinge. How old are you? Tinder is pretty dead for Gen Z, at least in NYC. Secondly, going on dates with attractive women is literally the only success metric that matters when talking about dating apps. Whether or not there’s a second date/you get laid is almost totally determined by your game and her mood, rather than how good you looked in 6 photos. Also your example is totally irrelevant because it has no time measure, no location settings, and more importantly no info on how hot these matches are.
I'm just a bit genuinely curious on your philosophy so I'm going to ask flat out. Do you actually think that you're going to get more dates with two matches a day rather than two hundred?
I'm not trying to be rude but this just isn't true. If a girl is actually physically attracted to you it takes pretty close to no effort to get laid with her. Of course as with anything it's a matter of degree-- but saying it's all or even mostly game is just straight up wrong.
If you actually took a look you'd've seen that there were quite literally multiple time measures, so this is a bit of an odd question to ask. The rest of this seems a lot like special pleading and goalpost moving. Hinge match
No.
I don’t think it’s odd, I didn’t want to do the math and figured that since you’re providing the screenshots you could tell me more information about how long the profile was active. Instead I’ll just work it out: 1,095 days, 1,980 matches, so slightly under 2 matches a day. This is a little confusing to me because I definitely clear that, but you said I was ugly and date 5s :(
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link