Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's important not to overlook the inherent biological factors related to mating. While we don't consciously factor-in all of our biological drives, they are constantly at work below the surface. From an impassive genetic perspective, the only reason for sexual contact is reproduction. This doesn't mean that we don't include things like emotional, intellectual, or social attraction when searching for a mate. It does mean that there are strong, instinctive processes underlying the logic of our mate selection.
Women have always been more selective than men. Barring eons of evolution, they always will be. Selectivity in mating is a significantly more important part of a woman's reproductive strategy than it is of a man's. A woman will have approximately forty years of fertility. At a maximum, she can reproduce only once every nine months during that time.
Contrast that to men. While sperm counts (and means of delivery) diminish over the years, a man can easily have sixty or seventy years of potential fertility. It only takes about twenty-four hours for his body to replenish depleted sperm. Over the course of his life, he can theoretically reproduce thousands of times.
From the standpoint of genetics, it is vital for women to be highly selective in choosing a mate. Every nine months wasted on the wrong partner, is another loss of one of her limited reproductive opportunities. Men have literally thousands more reproductive opportunities than do women. Therefore they can afford to be less selective.
Again, I certainly recognize that human sexual attraction is about a lot more than just genetic reproduction, but whether we are consciously aware of it or not, there are innate processes at play in terms of what we find attractive in members of the opposite sex, and in how and why we pursue those attractions.
for most women getting attention is all they want. the sex is secondary. that makes internet games the wrong place for a guy. you are trying to buy milk in a hardware store.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,962,945 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogead
It's important not to overlook the inherent biological factors related to mating. While we don't consciously factor-in all of our biological drives, they are constantly at work below the surface. From an impassive genetic perspective, the only reason for sexual contact is reproduction. This doesn't mean that we don't include things like emotional, intellectual, or social attraction when searching for a mate. It does mean that there are strong, instinctive processes underlying the logic of our mate selection.
Women have always been more selective than men. Barring eons of evolution, they always will be. Selectivity in mating is a significantly more important part of a woman's reproductive strategy than it is of a man's. A woman will have approximately forty years of fertility. At a maximum, she can reproduce only once every nine months during that time.
Contrast that to men. While sperm counts (and means of delivery) diminish over the years, a man can easily have sixty or seventy years of potential fertility. It only takes about twenty-four hours for his body to replenish depleted sperm. Over the course of his life, he can theoretically reproduce thousands of times.
From the standpoint of genetics, it is vital for women to be highly selective in choosing a mate. Every nine months wasted on the wrong partner, is another loss of one of her limited reproductive opportunities. Men have literally thousands more reproductive opportunities than do women. Therefore they can afford to be less selective.
Again, I certainly recognize that human sexual attraction is about a lot more than just genetic reproduction, but whether we are consciously aware of it or not, there are innate processes at play in terms of what we find attractive in members of the opposite sex, and in how and why we pursue those attractions.
Yeah, except in the scientific community the idea of sperm = cheap, and eggs = valuable, and it makes sense for the females of a species to be less promiscuous has actually completely flip flopped in the last 20 or so years.
What I don't understand is the fact that more men are going with OLD, as their source of meeting women. At best, OLD should be just a supplement. Unless you live in some tiny village, with women who are related to you, OLD shouldn't be your only method to date. The fact of the matter is that very few women use OLD. The only place you can find a 10-1 ratio, is with OLD. What is baffling, is when men complain about the lack of success they have on OLD. If you aren't having success irl, what makes you think that using OLD, where men outnumber females 10-20:1, will bring you anymore than 10-20x's the number of fails?
If you can score women irl, and have a decent way with words, OLD is great to supplement irl dating. If you have a tough time irl, OLD will probably be a source of disappointment and resentment. Because of the internet, and the ability to be someone you aren't, men get a false sense that it should be easier than real life. But really because of the number of men for each female, OLD is harder than meeting someone in person. Those odds are not the numbers that I would bet all my chips on...just sayin
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,962,945 times
Reputation: 40635
I dunno. I did great with OLD and rarely met anyone IRL. Where would I? I won't date friends of friends, exes of friends, or co workers as a rule. My personal activities are almost all solo or completely male dominated. OLD made dating 1000x than relying on real life dating post undergrad.
I just don't think OLD is as great for women as the OP thinks it is. Lots of women have never used it and have no desire to start. For those of us who do use it, it's not exactly an endless showering of attention from men. It's full of liars, flakes, and people who you just aren't interested in.
I agree with this. I'm pretty sure I'm not ugly but I am over 50. Still, you'd think I'd be hearing from men my age or older but not so much. Get some young men sometimes who probably think it'll be easy sex and some crazies and men who I have nothing in common with. At all, at all. Maybe once every month or two I'll talk to someone with real possibilities but often I have to message them first.
One thing I don't do is lie about it or pad my numbers. . . And when men keep repeating ad nauseum that women get hundreds of messages a week, the poor young women who are not getting that many are probably not going to be forthcoming about that fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948
for some women getting attention is all they want. the sex is secondary.
Ok, 2 cents from a guy that used OLD at around age 40. (engaged to gal he met using OLD)
I've also spoken to A LOT of gals about their experiences using OLD so here goes:
1) Varies by age AND which OLD site you are using. Also can vary regionally. In short, really hit and miss.
2) Women can get spammed by vastly older guys and young guys looking for a cougar romp.
3) As such, guys can be easily overlooked but also don't have to put up with a lot of BS and garbage.
key tips:
1) Write a sincere detailed profile.
2) Get a GOOD but realistic profile picture....no crappy selfies.
3) Get a thick skin and settle in for the long haul if you are looking for a special person because there are a lot of people on the sites and only a small % will be right for you.
I dunno. I did great with OLD and rarely met anyone IRL. Where would I? I won't date friends of friends, exes of friends, or co workers as a rule. My personal activities are almost all solo or completely male dominated. OLD made dating 1000x than relying on real life dating post undergrad.
Yeah, but I would bet that if you were in a typical social setting, that you aren't going to have a problem socializing with women. You were already capable of meeting women....I had great results with OLD, but I also was able to meet women irl. Like you, I have a male dominant client base, and I have a similar rule about dating ex's of friends.
I think OLD is great for guys who have the people skills, and ability to attract women cerebrally. It sucks for guys who rely on looks, or have a tough time talking to women in person.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
