Are You Really Sure You Want To Move SF? (Oakland: apartment complex, new home)

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by xani

No, SF is not a "woman's dream". It is the opposite.


Like they say: "the odds are good....but the goods ARE ODD"

lol

If you're a 7 out of 10, from either sex, you can have your literal pick of the litter in San Francisco. Unfortunately, you probably don't want to pick from the litter at all.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

So many choices, and each part of the Bay Area, or greater Bay Area (if you incl. Santa Cruz) has its own unique attractive features. You're fortunate to be able to locate anywhere, and bring your work with you. Let us know what you decide, and how you like it after you get settled in.

Ruth4Truth,

Someone sent me a PM stating you live in New Mexico. If that's true I will post a message on the New Mexico forum shortly. When I retire (in a lot of years), NM is on the short list of places.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

lol

If you're a 7 out of 10, from either sex, you can have your literal pick of the litter in San Francisco. Unfortunately, you probably don't want to pick from the litter at all.

I found this to be entirely untrue. I've known some native San Franciscan women and they are among the most desirable I've ever met. World class, sociable, liberal, intelligent, and classy to boot.

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by cBach

I found this to be entirely untrue. I've known some native San Franciscan women and they are among the most desirable I've ever met. World class, sociable, liberal, intelligent, and classy to boot.

I totally believe that's what you're perceiving. If I hadn't lived in SoCal before, I'd probably say the same thing.

But after actually seeing what world class beautiful women actually look like, it changed my perception a bit. I'm pretty spoiled to be honest.

[CaliRestoration]

Here's what Clover (popular dating app) found when they browsed their data after assessing 500,000 users across its user pool, their interactions, and how often profiles were viewed, for how long, etc to come up with a heuristic to see where its most attractive and least attractive users lived.

Here's the areas where they found the Most attractive women and for California they only had one city:

Santa Monica (SoCal)

Don't see any Bay Area cities...

Then I browsed their Least attractive women list and found only one California city:

Oakland (Bay Area)

I also noticed they had a list for Least attractive men and found the #1 area was:

Sunnyvale (Bay Area)

Again, not saying this study was conclusive, but it's yet another data point that shows that the Bay Area is not really seen as an area full of super attractive people.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

I totally believe that's what you're perceiving. If I hadn't lived in SoCal before, I'd probably say the same thing.

But after actually seeing what world class beautiful women actually look like, it changed my perception a bit. I'm pretty spoiled to be honest.

The SoCal women I've met tended to be the tan, fake boobs, mini skirts, pumps type. They remind me of Dallas women in that regard except they are more liberal. Nothing wrong with that per se, and I've had fun with that type before, but I prefer more natural women with more intellectual horsepower. I think the "4 to 9" thing they are talking about exists more in the PNW even though it is a cute little play on words for the 49ers...

I agree about the comment that San Diego is just a bunch of folks from the Midwest. Which many of the Midwest folks come from Scandinavian origins and can be attractive but they tend to bore me after a while.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by cBach

Ruth4Truth,

Someone sent me a PM stating you live in New Mexico. If that's true I will post a message on the New Mexico forum shortly. When I retire (in a lot of years), NM is on the short list of places.

Yes, I've been in NM for the last few years, but the Bay Area will always be home. ♥ And being starved for good music, not to mention beaches, and REDWOODS!, I spend as much time there each year as possible.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

Yes, I've been in NM for the last few years, but the Bay Area will always be home. ♥ And being starved for good music, not to mention beaches, and REDWOODS!, I spend as much time there each year as possible.

I understand. I'm in Austin, and while I like Austin a lot, I have too much baggage here.

I was thinking of the time when I was the happiest and when I was in the Bay Area that was it.

[SFsucks]

Originally Posted by cBach

Thank you and others for your help. I will definitely let you know how I get along.

I feel with the Bay Area, you really can't go wrong. Every place is great and has its own positive attributes. For instance, in Santa Cruz you have the beach and boardwalk and I've always wanted to live on a beach. North Bay has vineyards and redwood forests. SF is the West Coast cultural mecca.

In other cities like NYC, you pretty much have to live in Manhattan (or possibly Brooklyn) to get any benefits. New Jersey has no lure at all. Same thing with Chicago and even Austin, the suburbs are the dumps. I live within Austin city limits but of course our prices are cheaper here. Even in Los Angeles, unless you are in the city proper or along the coast, when you get inland into San Bernadino the attraction diminishes.

In SF Bay, there really is no "bad decision".

There are many dumpy suburbs throughout the Bay Area, yet the housing cost there is laughable. I disagree because they are many places in Bay Area that are nothing special and very overpriced. 880 strip from San Leandro to San Jose= boring overpriced suburbia

Peninsula towns are nice but insanely overpriced, how that's a bad decision to pay 2+million dollars for a 1500 SF 1960s ranch style home.

Santa Cruz is not really part of "Bay Area"

North Bay also has plenty of crappy places (Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa)

[CaliRestoration]

The Bay Area housing stock isn't going to get better either. Lefty NIMBYs will fight tooth and nail to keep more brand new, updated, code safe, housing from being built because they claim it "oppresses the poor by gentrifying the area". Just look at the affordable housing debates in SF.