Women as a whole want different things, and often don’t know what they want from moment to moment. In my experience, most women prefer to be approached in public under some circumstances, and what those circumstances are differs wildly from woman to woman.
The thing is, there are signals - open body language, frequent glances around the room, etc.
The tougher bit for some folks is also seeing, and respecting, when they clearly want you to go away, AND not taking it personally. They may want someone to approach them, but for whatever reason not you. That’s perfectly OK, and says nothing about your general worth, just their interest at the moment.
Go, initiate contact, and if you’re getting one word replies, crossed arms/body facing away from you, refusal to meet eyes, inauthentic laughs, etc., exit cheerfully, move on with your day and let her move on with hers.
The biggest problem I’ve had women tell me about is not being approached, but guys not taking the hint if it’s not clicking and leaving them be. Be the guy who reads the situation, takes the hint if present and doesn’t get all fucked up about it, and you’ll probably end up talking to someone who does want to talk to you later.
Should note this is often just human stuff, and holds for a lot of guys as well with the caveat that they’re often, though not always, more direct.
They may want someone to approach them, but for whatever reason not you.
I remember in college being mildly devastated when a friend I had a thing for was talking about how she just wanted to meet someone that (superficially) seemed a lot like me, but then was not into me.
Of course, in retrospect I realized I’d done that to couple women without realizing what was happening.
Yeah, I’m autistic so reading behavioral cues more or less doesn’t work for me. It’s not impossible but my error rate is significantly higher than most people’s. I just focus on being friendly and honest. I always take an opportunity to be introduced to someone. I always take an opportunity to become closer to someone if they want that. I also focus on being pretty (I only attract bisexual women, lol)
In my perception, approaching women like the days of old (pre social media) is dead as a concept. There are two ways forward: women become more explicit about when they want to be approached, or they themselves do the approaching. It seems to me that the latter is the path they’ve chosen. Every woman I’ve ever dated has come to me and made it clear they want me in that way. Is this a good solution? Probably not. More people are single than ever but that is caused by a lot of factors, not just this social change.
There are reasons subtlety and body language evolved.
Some men don’t take direct “Not interested. Please leave me alone” well. They’ll call you a [slur, slur] and maybe get violent. But fake laughter and dead-ending the conversation has lead to safer outcomes.
So, yeah, it sucks people can’t be direct and honest, but it’s not just coming out of malice.
Also a lot of the time people don’t really know what they want, or want contradictory things.
It’s not acting like children. It’s acting like adults. Most adults use subtlety for a variety of reasons. Personal safety and letting someone down gently are just two that come to mind.
You can want everyone to have a standard API with nice json output, but that’s just not how humans are. Expecting it is folly.
If you don’t mind me asking, how is this reading minds? This is watching for behavioural cues, which lend some evidence of interest/disinterest. Men exhibit similar cues as well - think about the guy sitting at the bar, facing the interior with a grin looking about, versus the guy hunched over with a scowl counting the bubbles in his beer. Unless you’re moved by pathos to clink scowling guy’s glass, who seems more approachable?
Will admit there are folks who see a single behavioural cue and immediately jump to “They want to jump my bones”/“They wish me and my family were dead”, which is dumb. What I’m talking about is more “Oh, looks like they may be open to chat with someone, go say hi”, then noting if that impression stays or dissipates on fresh evidence. Again, the biggest problem I’ve heard of is people, but particularly women approached by men in a social setting, not wanting to tell the approaching party to fuck off (politely or otherwise) because of a perceived or real threat of violence. But this feeling often comes across pretty clearly in body language - if you’re a decent person, reading those cues and and exiting gracefully just makes sense.
Discounting non-verbal cues in IRL communication is silly. We give out a lot of information about how we’re feeling with our bodies to those paying attention. I’ll admit it can sound kinda creepy when writing it all out, but for some folks this is all intuitive. For other folks, thinking about this a bit helps with being more at ease in talking with new people, whether platonically or with an eye to something more.
This is going to come off terribly, but do you talk to many people IRL? There’s no game here, just humans being humans.
That said, perhaps not your preferred types of humans, which is perfectly fine. If anything, not engaging people the way I describe here could be a filter for the kind of people you prefer to interact with. Really isn’t anything wrong with that, though others may find it a bit constrictive.
If what you’re doing makes you happy and secure in your relationships with people, then more power to you!
That’s not reading minds though. What was being described are social skills you very likely already have, but are used to applying to non romantic interactions with men.
I have no idea how that is anything like saying common sense is common. That did not address what I said. Someone has failed in some aspect of this communication. Since it may have been me, I’ll try rephrasing.
Do you talk to people you are not romantically interested in sometimes? Are you able to generally guess whether they would be receptive to interacting or not? Could you conceivably guess if a person waiting in a waiting room might be open to chat, versus wants to be left alone?
The point I was driving at is people often behave as though interacting with those they are sexually attracted to is different. While it can be in some ways, the way you can identify whether someone you’re not sexually attracted to would like to interact can be used with those you are sexually attracted to as well. It’s not mind reading.
If you cannot do these things with people you are not sexually attracted to either, that’s a skill that can be developed, and the issue is not an inability to read women’s (I’m guessing) minds.
Women are human individuals and not a single-minded monolith.
What women universally don’t want is to feel threatened, creeped out or objectified. It is perfectly possible to talk to someone without doing any of these. Though it gets a lot easier when you view them as humans.
When & who it is/is not appropriate to approach is a totally separate issue from what I’m talking about.
I think the problem has more to do with the expectations of meeting people via dating apps vs organically irl, especially through common interests/activities.
Also, let’s be real, regulating Capitalism does not work (look around).
Also, let’s be real, regulating Capitalism does not work (look around).
*looks around*
It seems to work fine around me. I peeked at your profile to confirm my assumption that you’re American, and it seems I’m correct. I’d say it’s partly a cultural issue in your country. The whole rugged individualism thing leads to a whole lot of anti-regulation sentiment. In my country even the ultraconservative “let’s throw the gays in the oven and deport all black people to Africa” party isn’t considering privatizing healthcare or education. The classical liberals are considering this, but this is where having a sane election system comes in. Since neither the conservatives nor the socdems agree, it’s pretty hard for them to enact anything even if they do win an election, because “winning” an election usually means like ~30-40% of parliament seats and the ruling coalition is always a minimum of 2 parties, often 3. Plus the president’s one and only power is that he can tell them to fuck off if a law seems unreasonable.
We currently have people from 6 parties in parliament, plus some people who were either thrown out of their party, or left it willingly.
We’re pretty good at making noise if we don’t like something, and while a lot of people complain about our MPs and ministers getting paid so much, it means they can live well enough without taking bribes. Party donations have limits that can get people into actual trouble if exceeded, and individual campaign donations aren’t a thing. Political corruption gets the party fined and potentially individuals punished too. Even in municipal government corruption cases. There was a case that took several years, where a businessman approached a politician in the same party as the capital city’s mayor, implying that if the mayor were to reduce certain legal costs on the department store his company was building, the party would receive a major donation - which it then did. The party got fined nearly 10x what they made from this deal, and two people received probationary sentences. This party, formerly a major player, can now barely afford their next election campaign. The company that owns the future department store has been fined more than once for not getting it done as fast as promised - because it’s in a prominent location along the promenade.
We have tons of consumer protection laws too. Plus a government entity for consumer protection so you don’t have to hire a lawyer and go to court to get your justice in a lot of cases. Similar for employment rights, etc. Fire someone without a paper trail to prove their incompetence or malice? You’ll be paying them a hefty severance.
There’s a big gap between what you’re describing and the USA. We pretty regularly see fines that are a fraction of what the crime earned, if it’s prosecuted at all. We also have an utterly insane far right wing party and a spineless right party.
We should break up match group. It’s not a whole ass monopoly, but it has such a big market share it doesn’t really need to compete much. So it offers garbage, makes a lot of money because there aren’t a lot of other like options (and people don’t realize the apps are all owned by Match)
There’s a big gap between what you’re describing and the USA. We pretty regularly see fines that are a fraction of what the crime earned, if it’s prosecuted at all. We also have an utterly insane far right wing party and a spineless right party.
Yeah, that’s my point. It’s not that capitalism can’t be regulated, it’s that the US can’t regulate capitalism sufficiently enough.
We should break up match group. It’s not a whole ass monopoly, but it has such a big market share it doesn’t really need to compete much. So it offers garbage, makes a lot of money because there aren’t a lot of other like options (and people don’t realize the apps are all owned by Match)
Agreed. So many monopolies out there that people barely realize are monopolies because a parent company owns a bunch of different “competing” brands rather than running everything under one brand name. Match Group is one of them.
Agreed that the capitalist commodification of love sucks, but also, who even does things IRL anymore? And if you do, success rate isn’t that great either, unless you abide by rules 1 and 2.
I’m no longer single, but when I was, there were two main activities I did outside of work. Gym - a place where it just feels wrong to approach women. And women never approached me. Bar - cozy local small community place where I had plenty of great conversations with a lot of people, many of whom were women, but most were in relationships already. Maybe it’s the same for women as it is for men, where in a relationship you’re more confident and thus have an easier time talking to strangers. Made some friends though.
When I was on Tinder, though, with my fairly mediocre appearance, I’d still get matches. Not every day, but at least a couple a month in even the slower periods and like half of them evolved into at least conversations (not a simple “hey” -> unmatch). Met some IRL. Both times I’ve been on Tinder, I eventually found someone there, though it was over a year in both cases (nearly 3 years second time). And both times the person I found was someone who’d pretty much just joined. I don’t live in what I’d call a big city though.
Nowadays, I also work from home with no office option (unless I rent one for myself), so even shitting where I eat is not an option if I become single. What DO people do in their free time where they meet new people, besides nightlife activities? I’m not interested in drinking 2-3 nights a week anymore lol
If you want to meet women, take a pottery class, join a softball league, take knitting lessons, join a book club, volunteer at a local animal shelter, go to the library regularly, join a protest, join a running or biking group, or even look around on one of those meetup apps for activities in your area
Maybe your problem was that you only went to your gym and your bar, instead of trying to meet new people? The point is, it’s easy to get stuck into a routine, and swiping on Tinder often becomes part of the routine
Maybe your problem was that you only went to your gym and your bar, instead of trying to meet new people?
I guess I wasn’t super actively trying to meet new people, I was focusing more on my career. Most of those activities unfortunately sound boring to me. Biking group sounds nice. In fact, the only two ways I can do cardio is with a podcast or with other people. Otherwise I go flat out because to my ADHD mind, the end goal of all movement is to get to your destination ASAP. Book club sounds like a great way to get some accountability for my total lack of a reading habit these past few years, so I might look into that as well. There apparently is at least one in my city. As a kid I’d read several books a week, now it’s several years per book :(
meeting women is really easy if you’re friends with women. they always have single friends who they’d be happy to introduce you to. obviously don’t be friends with women just for this purpose though
Agreed, but seems like then you should do it for yourself (physical and mental health, stimulation from learning skills, broadening horizons) and if you make friends in the process that’s cool.
Most people have good qualities that make them attractive (if you have none then that might be something to work on). Just treat women like they are ordinary human beings (which they are) - ask questions, listen to the answers, check back with them at a later date to see if that thing they mentioned worked out, offer to help if they have a problem, etc.
Most men can drastically improve their appearance with some effort. Best plan for this is to ask your closest female friends what you can do. Also, having an attractive personality counts for a lot (potentially more than looks depending on the woman) assuming you aren’t fuck ugly.
If you want, send me a pic (privately) and I’ll tell you if it’s really over or what you can do to look better. As for friends, that’s more complicated, but I got all my friends by talking to strangers in public.
Opposite for me. I’ve gone on plenty of first dates via apps, and a few second dates, but have only ever “dated” people that I happened to meet organically.
Honestly, I’m good. I never really used apps but I have had a lot of girlfriends through mutual friends and such. I’m just over it. I’m tired of romance and especially tired of sexuality. I just want to program computers.
Yes, I understand. But it’s less about the sex & moreso the companionship. When you’re 58 years old hanging out by yourself day in/day out, you may wish you’d put more effort into developing relationships.
I have sufficient companionship. Plenty of true friends who know and love the real me. I’ve been more fortunate in this than most people could hope to be if I’m being honest. I really think that when you take sex out of the equation, most of modern dating is a feeble attempt to foster this type of relationship. People are afraid to reveal their true self and so they seek one person they feel safe enough to do so with, when you can actually have this relationship with everyone you’re close to if you’re brave enough.
I love being friends with women but I don’t love being romantically or sexually entwined with them. And I’m not attracted to men. So why pursue it? I socialize when I have the energy for it. In the rest of my free time, I want to write code.
I agree that physical intimacy can make people become closer, but I’m not always sure that’s for the best. I think it’s better kept as something to enjoy after a deeper bond has already formed. Anyway, I’m not asexual but I am somewhere on that spectrum, not sure where though. Also yeah… when my friends tell me about their tinder dates I can’t believe how transactional and almost algorithmic their date sounds. It’s such a shame that it’s the norm now.
Fuck capitalism for sure, but the apps can still work. I know happily married couples who met on tinder. Not saying that it’s everyone’s experience, but still. The more avenues people are open to the better sometimes.
Honestly, OKC back in its heyday was the place to be. So many of my friends made legitimate, genuine connections there. Devastating that they ended up being sold to match. OKC had plenty of people, but it was apparently the goto for all the nerds. A lot of them use meetup now, but there’s really nothing like what it was for nerd/nerd dating.
Second that. I met my partner on OKC 8 years ago, and before I met them I also made lots of connections and had several dates with other people I met via OKC, some of whom I’m still friends with. The site certainly wasn’t perfect, all dating sites are straight up self-esteem murderers if you’re a heterosexual man, but as far as dating sites go, it was the best I’ve used because it actually tried to match you with people who shared values with you.
At the same time I was also on tinder, and it was a barren wasteland of boring normies and felt more like a meat market than anything. I never had a meaningful match on there.
Remember how you could search for interests? I’m pretty sure you could just like type in “Final Fantasy” or “Speed Chess” and find people who liked it enough to put it on their profile.
Now it’s just a shadow of what it used to be. A crappy tinder knockoff with vestigial profiles.
The problem is when it works it’s despite the algorithm not because of it. It’s probably easier for women, as there are more men on dating sites and there are women on dating sites.
I really don’t think that’s an accurate assessment of the algorithm, but seeing as I am not privy to it, and I imagine you’re not either, I’m not really sure that’s a point worth discussing.
It’s certainly easier for women to get matches on tinder, but not really sure how that’s related. I didn’t specify the sex or sexual orientation of the couples I was referring to. And even for heterosexual couples, it does mean a man found a wife through tinder, so it being easier to get matches as a woman does not mean that men don’t get matches, it’s kinda a necessary step in the women getting matches thing.
I think I’ve had like two dates from in-person meets, and if I put effort (without paying) into it I can get like 1-3 dates a week on the apps. I’m not a model or other outlier.
I live in an urban area and put effort into writing messages. The bar for men is really low.
Every date is a roll of the dice and you’re hoping for that Yahtzee. Or at least a four of a kind. If you’re making four rolls a week you’re probably going to find it faster than one a month.
You’re also don’t have unlimited time. You probably don’t want to find your first big love when you’re 70, when you could instead find one at 30.
And to be clear, I wouldn’t recommend going on a date with just anyone with a pulse. Check your deal breakers and shared interests first.
Of course, you could do app-dates and from-real-life dates at the same time.
This also assumes you, like me, have boundless energy for dates. I know people that are exhausted just leaving their house once.
hey i like your overall points but i need to point out that it’s SO much more than “rolling the dice”. i do agree that quality over quantity is more important when dating. and that means not just “how good are they” but really “what kind of person are they?”
you may have 3 dates a week via apps, but they’re all with people who use dating apps, in a dating app context. not trying to put anyone down, but it’s just different than meeting a friend of a friend at game night or something. so to use your dice metaphor, it’s more like praying for a nat 20 while rolling d6s.
It’s more like “friend of a friend” is a +2 circumstance bonus, and you’re rolling 1d20 + Investigation vs DC 17. It helps, but it’s pretty small. You can stack bonuses on your profile (eg: Good Pictures +3, Good Profile Text +2) to get a similar effect.
Also a lot of my friends’ friends aren’t people I’d want to date.
There are so many people using dating apps in 2025, it’s not a big filter. If this was 1997, then “meeting people online” would in fact be a very small slice of the population.
When I was younger I sometimes tried to go out with people I was friends with first. The rejections were worse. I’d still have to see her all the time at social events.
There was also a lot more “oh! She’s cool! Shit. She’s seeing someone. And doesn’t date men.”
The apps let you filter for a lot of stuff right up front. Don’t have to waste time pining after people that aren’t available.
Someone from the app says no or doesn’t click? Back into the aether they go, never to bother me again.
To each their own, if it’s working for you, but there are a lot of things dating apps can do better. Capitalism just shits up the place, as usual.
Fuck the Capitalist commodification of love.
Drop the dating apps & muster up the patience go do things & meet people irl instead.
Women do not want to be approached in public.
We’re better off regulating dating apps and predatory buisness practices, because people prefer to use apps.
Women as a whole want different things, and often don’t know what they want from moment to moment. In my experience, most women prefer to be approached in public under some circumstances, and what those circumstances are differs wildly from woman to woman.
women ought to have a signal that they are open to being approached, like a PvP flag or something
The thing is, there are signals - open body language, frequent glances around the room, etc.
The tougher bit for some folks is also seeing, and respecting, when they clearly want you to go away, AND not taking it personally. They may want someone to approach them, but for whatever reason not you. That’s perfectly OK, and says nothing about your general worth, just their interest at the moment.
Go, initiate contact, and if you’re getting one word replies, crossed arms/body facing away from you, refusal to meet eyes, inauthentic laughs, etc., exit cheerfully, move on with your day and let her move on with hers.
The biggest problem I’ve had women tell me about is not being approached, but guys not taking the hint if it’s not clicking and leaving them be. Be the guy who reads the situation, takes the hint if present and doesn’t get all fucked up about it, and you’ll probably end up talking to someone who does want to talk to you later.
Should note this is often just human stuff, and holds for a lot of guys as well with the caveat that they’re often, though not always, more direct.
I remember in college being mildly devastated when a friend I had a thing for was talking about how she just wanted to meet someone that (superficially) seemed a lot like me, but then was not into me.
Of course, in retrospect I realized I’d done that to couple women without realizing what was happening.
Yeah, I’m autistic so reading behavioral cues more or less doesn’t work for me. It’s not impossible but my error rate is significantly higher than most people’s. I just focus on being friendly and honest. I always take an opportunity to be introduced to someone. I always take an opportunity to become closer to someone if they want that. I also focus on being pretty (I only attract bisexual women, lol)
In my perception, approaching women like the days of old (pre social media) is dead as a concept. There are two ways forward: women become more explicit about when they want to be approached, or they themselves do the approaching. It seems to me that the latter is the path they’ve chosen. Every woman I’ve ever dated has come to me and made it clear they want me in that way. Is this a good solution? Probably not. More people are single than ever but that is caused by a lot of factors, not just this social change.
Reading minds isn’t a “signal”
I’m sorry but if men and women want equality in their relationships then women need to stop this middle-school behavior.
There are reasons subtlety and body language evolved.
Some men don’t take direct “Not interested. Please leave me alone” well. They’ll call you a [slur, slur] and maybe get violent. But fake laughter and dead-ending the conversation has lead to safer outcomes.
So, yeah, it sucks people can’t be direct and honest, but it’s not just coming out of malice.
Also a lot of the time people don’t really know what they want, or want contradictory things.
I understand the excuses people make to not act like mature adults.
I’m sorry if men were rude to you, them acting like children doesn’t give you a pass.
It’s not acting like children. It’s acting like adults. Most adults use subtlety for a variety of reasons. Personal safety and letting someone down gently are just two that come to mind.
You can want everyone to have a standard API with nice json output, but that’s just not how humans are. Expecting it is folly.
If you don’t mind me asking, how is this reading minds? This is watching for behavioural cues, which lend some evidence of interest/disinterest. Men exhibit similar cues as well - think about the guy sitting at the bar, facing the interior with a grin looking about, versus the guy hunched over with a scowl counting the bubbles in his beer. Unless you’re moved by pathos to clink scowling guy’s glass, who seems more approachable?
Will admit there are folks who see a single behavioural cue and immediately jump to “They want to jump my bones”/“They wish me and my family were dead”, which is dumb. What I’m talking about is more “Oh, looks like they may be open to chat with someone, go say hi”, then noting if that impression stays or dissipates on fresh evidence. Again, the biggest problem I’ve heard of is people, but particularly women approached by men in a social setting, not wanting to tell the approaching party to fuck off (politely or otherwise) because of a perceived or real threat of violence. But this feeling often comes across pretty clearly in body language - if you’re a decent person, reading those cues and and exiting gracefully just makes sense.
Discounting non-verbal cues in IRL communication is silly. We give out a lot of information about how we’re feeling with our bodies to those paying attention. I’ll admit it can sound kinda creepy when writing it all out, but for some folks this is all intuitive. For other folks, thinking about this a bit helps with being more at ease in talking with new people, whether platonically or with an eye to something more.
Adults use their words to communicate.
Children play games.
This is going to come off terribly, but do you talk to many people IRL? There’s no game here, just humans being humans.
That said, perhaps not your preferred types of humans, which is perfectly fine. If anything, not engaging people the way I describe here could be a filter for the kind of people you prefer to interact with. Really isn’t anything wrong with that, though others may find it a bit constrictive.
If what you’re doing makes you happy and secure in your relationships with people, then more power to you!
That’s not reading minds though. What was being described are social skills you very likely already have, but are used to applying to non romantic interactions with men.
This is like saying common sense is common.
It isn’t. And we can’t expect people to know everything so sometimes we have to use words.
I have no idea how that is anything like saying common sense is common. That did not address what I said. Someone has failed in some aspect of this communication. Since it may have been me, I’ll try rephrasing.
Do you talk to people you are not romantically interested in sometimes? Are you able to generally guess whether they would be receptive to interacting or not? Could you conceivably guess if a person waiting in a waiting room might be open to chat, versus wants to be left alone?
The point I was driving at is people often behave as though interacting with those they are sexually attracted to is different. While it can be in some ways, the way you can identify whether someone you’re not sexually attracted to would like to interact can be used with those you are sexually attracted to as well. It’s not mind reading.
If you cannot do these things with people you are not sexually attracted to either, that’s a skill that can be developed, and the issue is not an inability to read women’s (I’m guessing) minds.
Women are human individuals and not a single-minded monolith.
What women universally don’t want is to feel threatened, creeped out or objectified. It is perfectly possible to talk to someone without doing any of these. Though it gets a lot easier when you view them as humans.
I said elsewhere that writing a good profile is a skill many people have neither the aptitude nor training for, and thus fuck it all up.
Talking to strangers in public? Also a skill, and I’d say a much more difficult one with much higher stakes.
I’ve known charismatic sensitive people that can read a scene and chat up people. That’s an outlier. Most people are bad at all of that.
also, remember the “man or bear? Definitely the bear” thing from a while ago? Still a thing.
deleted by creator
I missed the part where the person your responding to said in public?
Go to meetups, the climbing gym, run clubs, volunteering, language class, literally anywhere you meet people
When & who it is/is not appropriate to approach is a totally separate issue from what I’m talking about.
I think the problem has more to do with the expectations of meeting people via dating apps vs organically irl, especially through common interests/activities.
Also, let’s be real, regulating Capitalism does not work (look around).
*looks around*
It seems to work fine around me. I peeked at your profile to confirm my assumption that you’re American, and it seems I’m correct. I’d say it’s partly a cultural issue in your country. The whole rugged individualism thing leads to a whole lot of anti-regulation sentiment. In my country even the ultraconservative “let’s throw the gays in the oven and deport all black people to Africa” party isn’t considering privatizing healthcare or education. The classical liberals are considering this, but this is where having a sane election system comes in. Since neither the conservatives nor the socdems agree, it’s pretty hard for them to enact anything even if they do win an election, because “winning” an election usually means like ~30-40% of parliament seats and the ruling coalition is always a minimum of 2 parties, often 3. Plus the president’s one and only power is that he can tell them to fuck off if a law seems unreasonable.
We currently have people from 6 parties in parliament, plus some people who were either thrown out of their party, or left it willingly.
We’re pretty good at making noise if we don’t like something, and while a lot of people complain about our MPs and ministers getting paid so much, it means they can live well enough without taking bribes. Party donations have limits that can get people into actual trouble if exceeded, and individual campaign donations aren’t a thing. Political corruption gets the party fined and potentially individuals punished too. Even in municipal government corruption cases. There was a case that took several years, where a businessman approached a politician in the same party as the capital city’s mayor, implying that if the mayor were to reduce certain legal costs on the department store his company was building, the party would receive a major donation - which it then did. The party got fined nearly 10x what they made from this deal, and two people received probationary sentences. This party, formerly a major player, can now barely afford their next election campaign. The company that owns the future department store has been fined more than once for not getting it done as fast as promised - because it’s in a prominent location along the promenade.
We have tons of consumer protection laws too. Plus a government entity for consumer protection so you don’t have to hire a lawyer and go to court to get your justice in a lot of cases. Similar for employment rights, etc. Fire someone without a paper trail to prove their incompetence or malice? You’ll be paying them a hefty severance.
There’s a big gap between what you’re describing and the USA. We pretty regularly see fines that are a fraction of what the crime earned, if it’s prosecuted at all. We also have an utterly insane far right wing party and a spineless right party.
We should break up match group. It’s not a whole ass monopoly, but it has such a big market share it doesn’t really need to compete much. So it offers garbage, makes a lot of money because there aren’t a lot of other like options (and people don’t realize the apps are all owned by Match)
Yeah, that’s my point. It’s not that capitalism can’t be regulated, it’s that the US can’t regulate capitalism sufficiently enough.
Agreed. So many monopolies out there that people barely realize are monopolies because a parent company owns a bunch of different “competing” brands rather than running everything under one brand name. Match Group is one of them.
Take a class.
Agreed that the capitalist commodification of love sucks, but also, who even does things IRL anymore? And if you do, success rate isn’t that great either, unless you abide by rules 1 and 2.
I’m no longer single, but when I was, there were two main activities I did outside of work. Gym - a place where it just feels wrong to approach women. And women never approached me. Bar - cozy local small community place where I had plenty of great conversations with a lot of people, many of whom were women, but most were in relationships already. Maybe it’s the same for women as it is for men, where in a relationship you’re more confident and thus have an easier time talking to strangers. Made some friends though.
When I was on Tinder, though, with my fairly mediocre appearance, I’d still get matches. Not every day, but at least a couple a month in even the slower periods and like half of them evolved into at least conversations (not a simple “hey” -> unmatch). Met some IRL. Both times I’ve been on Tinder, I eventually found someone there, though it was over a year in both cases (nearly 3 years second time). And both times the person I found was someone who’d pretty much just joined. I don’t live in what I’d call a big city though.
Nowadays, I also work from home with no office option (unless I rent one for myself), so even shitting where I eat is not an option if I become single. What DO people do in their free time where they meet new people, besides nightlife activities? I’m not interested in drinking 2-3 nights a week anymore lol
Hobbies, classes, sports teams, volunteering
If you want to meet women, take a pottery class, join a softball league, take knitting lessons, join a book club, volunteer at a local animal shelter, go to the library regularly, join a protest, join a running or biking group, or even look around on one of those meetup apps for activities in your area
Maybe your problem was that you only went to your gym and your bar, instead of trying to meet new people? The point is, it’s easy to get stuck into a routine, and swiping on Tinder often becomes part of the routine
I guess I wasn’t super actively trying to meet new people, I was focusing more on my career. Most of those activities unfortunately sound boring to me. Biking group sounds nice. In fact, the only two ways I can do cardio is with a podcast or with other people. Otherwise I go flat out because to my ADHD mind, the end goal of all movement is to get to your destination ASAP. Book club sounds like a great way to get some accountability for my total lack of a reading habit these past few years, so I might look into that as well. There apparently is at least one in my city. As a kid I’d read several books a week, now it’s several years per book :(
Isn’t great? Eh I’m 1 for 1 and I most certainly do not follow rule one or two. Just talked and made it work with a friend of a friend
I don’t think I’ve ever met someone organically and then dated them
They say workplace relationships don’t work and they’re probably right, but the problem is that’s the only place you ever meet anyone these days.
When you befriend the people at your workplace, you will also meet their friends.
That’s wishful thinking. I might be befriendable, but I’m not fit to introduce to people.
Have you tried shitpost dating?
https://lemmy.world/post/27886845
When everyone in your workplace is a transplant, their friends are just other coworkers
Which is not a bad start to make more friends.
Before you started working you meet people at school, well, take classes and meet people you don’t work with!
I asked out my coworker about a week ago.
I can’t recommend against it enough.
meeting women is really easy if you’re friends with women. they always have single friends who they’d be happy to introduce you to. obviously don’t be friends with women just for this purpose though
That requires having time to be friends with and meet people
If you don’t have time for friends you definitely don’t have time for dating.
It feels Machiavellian to do something like befriending people or playing sports that I would not otherwise do
Agreed, but seems like then you should do it for yourself (physical and mental health, stimulation from learning skills, broadening horizons) and if you make friends in the process that’s cool.
That only works out if you are attractive to begin with.
Most people have good qualities that make them attractive (if you have none then that might be something to work on). Just treat women like they are ordinary human beings (which they are) - ask questions, listen to the answers, check back with them at a later date to see if that thing they mentioned worked out, offer to help if they have a problem, etc.
I lack good qualities, true. I don’t know if that could be worked on, as large part of it is me being ASD.
I treat women as you said, it’s simply that they generally avoid me.
Most men can drastically improve their appearance with some effort. Best plan for this is to ask your closest female friends what you can do. Also, having an attractive personality counts for a lot (potentially more than looks depending on the woman) assuming you aren’t fuck ugly.
Welp, I am simply at another level of ugliness. Also friends? What is this thing called “a friend”?
If you want, send me a pic (privately) and I’ll tell you if it’s really over or what you can do to look better. As for friends, that’s more complicated, but I got all my friends by talking to strangers in public.
Opposite for me. I’ve gone on plenty of first dates via apps, and a few second dates, but have only ever “dated” people that I happened to meet organically.
Yeah I think that’s common, but it’s literally how we’ve been doing it since, well, forever.
Big Tech wants you to think it’s scAAaRRrry BooOoOOo!
(I mean, tbf, sometimes it is. Also humiliating lol).
I have! Once, in highschool, it went poorly
Honestly, I’m good. I never really used apps but I have had a lot of girlfriends through mutual friends and such. I’m just over it. I’m tired of romance and especially tired of sexuality. I just want to program computers.
Careful or you’ll get exactly what you’re asking for.
That’s the goal, man. I would be happy to never have sex again. I always felt like it was more for her benefit than mine anyway.
Yes, I understand. But it’s less about the sex & moreso the companionship. When you’re 58 years old hanging out by yourself day in/day out, you may wish you’d put more effort into developing relationships.
Maybe not, I’m just saying.
I have sufficient companionship. Plenty of true friends who know and love the real me. I’ve been more fortunate in this than most people could hope to be if I’m being honest. I really think that when you take sex out of the equation, most of modern dating is a feeble attempt to foster this type of relationship. People are afraid to reveal their true self and so they seek one person they feel safe enough to do so with, when you can actually have this relationship with everyone you’re close to if you’re brave enough.
I love being friends with women but I don’t love being romantically or sexually entwined with them. And I’m not attracted to men. So why pursue it? I socialize when I have the energy for it. In the rest of my free time, I want to write code.
Good to hear. I hope you continue having lots of fruitful relationships, you seem like a reflective person.
I actually think being physically intimate allows two people to become closer, unless they’re asexual, of course (sounds like you might be).
And I agree with you about shallow relationships but, imo, it’s dating apps that cause the problem, not sex.
Dating apps do not always allow relationships to blossom naturally. Tinder dates (or whatever) can feel more like job interviews. Real yucky stuff.
I agree that physical intimacy can make people become closer, but I’m not always sure that’s for the best. I think it’s better kept as something to enjoy after a deeper bond has already formed. Anyway, I’m not asexual but I am somewhere on that spectrum, not sure where though. Also yeah… when my friends tell me about their tinder dates I can’t believe how transactional and almost algorithmic their date sounds. It’s such a shame that it’s the norm now.
Fuck capitalism for sure, but the apps can still work. I know happily married couples who met on tinder. Not saying that it’s everyone’s experience, but still. The more avenues people are open to the better sometimes.
We’re a happily married couple who met through OkCupid, back when that was decent!
Honestly, OKC back in its heyday was the place to be. So many of my friends made legitimate, genuine connections there. Devastating that they ended up being sold to match. OKC had plenty of people, but it was apparently the goto for all the nerds. A lot of them use meetup now, but there’s really nothing like what it was for nerd/nerd dating.
Second that. I met my partner on OKC 8 years ago, and before I met them I also made lots of connections and had several dates with other people I met via OKC, some of whom I’m still friends with. The site certainly wasn’t perfect, all dating sites are straight up self-esteem murderers if you’re a heterosexual man, but as far as dating sites go, it was the best I’ve used because it actually tried to match you with people who shared values with you.
At the same time I was also on tinder, and it was a barren wasteland of boring normies and felt more like a meat market than anything. I never had a meaningful match on there.
Remember how you could search for interests? I’m pretty sure you could just like type in “Final Fantasy” or “Speed Chess” and find people who liked it enough to put it on their profile.
Now it’s just a shadow of what it used to be. A crappy tinder knockoff with vestigial profiles.
The problem is when it works it’s despite the algorithm not because of it. It’s probably easier for women, as there are more men on dating sites and there are women on dating sites.
We’ll have to make sure we’re not looking through rose tinted lenses here, you know what they say, the odds are good but the goods might murder you.
I really don’t think that’s an accurate assessment of the algorithm, but seeing as I am not privy to it, and I imagine you’re not either, I’m not really sure that’s a point worth discussing.
It’s certainly easier for women to get matches on tinder, but not really sure how that’s related. I didn’t specify the sex or sexual orientation of the couples I was referring to. And even for heterosexual couples, it does mean a man found a wife through tinder, so it being easier to get matches as a woman does not mean that men don’t get matches, it’s kinda a necessary step in the women getting matches thing.
I met my wife on Tinder in 2015 ❤️ Met her on my second week.
Hell yeah!
I think I’ve had like two dates from in-person meets, and if I put effort (without paying) into it I can get like 1-3 dates a week on the apps. I’m not a model or other outlier.
I live in an urban area and put effort into writing messages. The bar for men is really low.
All of that said, fuck the capitalist hellscape.
Quality over quantity, bruv.
I don’t think that’s really applicable here.
Every date is a roll of the dice and you’re hoping for that Yahtzee. Or at least a four of a kind. If you’re making four rolls a week you’re probably going to find it faster than one a month.
You’re also don’t have unlimited time. You probably don’t want to find your first big love when you’re 70, when you could instead find one at 30.
And to be clear, I wouldn’t recommend going on a date with just anyone with a pulse. Check your deal breakers and shared interests first.
Of course, you could do app-dates and from-real-life dates at the same time.
This also assumes you, like me, have boundless energy for dates. I know people that are exhausted just leaving their house once.
hey i like your overall points but i need to point out that it’s SO much more than “rolling the dice”. i do agree that quality over quantity is more important when dating. and that means not just “how good are they” but really “what kind of person are they?”
you may have 3 dates a week via apps, but they’re all with people who use dating apps, in a dating app context. not trying to put anyone down, but it’s just different than meeting a friend of a friend at game night or something. so to use your dice metaphor, it’s more like praying for a nat 20 while rolling d6s.
It’s more like “friend of a friend” is a +2 circumstance bonus, and you’re rolling 1d20 + Investigation vs DC 17. It helps, but it’s pretty small. You can stack bonuses on your profile (eg: Good Pictures +3, Good Profile Text +2) to get a similar effect.
Also a lot of my friends’ friends aren’t people I’d want to date.
There are so many people using dating apps in 2025, it’s not a big filter. If this was 1997, then “meeting people online” would in fact be a very small slice of the population.
This is so weird to me. I’ve only ever dated people I was friends with first.
When I was younger I sometimes tried to go out with people I was friends with first. The rejections were worse. I’d still have to see her all the time at social events.
There was also a lot more “oh! She’s cool! Shit. She’s seeing someone. And doesn’t date men.”
The apps let you filter for a lot of stuff right up front. Don’t have to waste time pining after people that aren’t available.
Someone from the app says no or doesn’t click? Back into the aether they go, never to bother me again.
To each their own, if it’s working for you, but there are a lot of things dating apps can do better. Capitalism just shits up the place, as usual.