Ok, so I’ve got some more data on the whole who-contacts-who issue for online dating. Check it out. First, I can’t help but giggle at the distribution of male attractiveness as perceived by women. Unless they think all the really attractive guys don’t date online, then this distribution is hilarious. It represents what I’ll call the good driver response-- when you ask people if they think they’re in the top 50% of drivers, almost everyone responds yes. Apparently, this is called illusory superiority (thanks, Wikipedia). So apparently women don’t know what medium looks are.
I think I come out ok on this. I gave 25% of guys as being attractive to me (not quite the same as attractive). Also, of the four “totally decent” guys presented, I think the first two are a bit better than medium while the second two are the definition of medium. I would click to see the profiles of the first two based on their pictures. Of course, none of them are overweight which probably makes a big difference in how attractive I think they are.
But clearly I’ve been too generous to my male counterparts in saying that their experiences were the same as mine. Clearly, no, I’m getting more messages from much less attractive people than guys of similar looks. I love it when data shows I’m right. But I have to highlight one of the commenters who blamed the matching on the site. Dating sites ask you what you’re like and what you want, but if people lie about their attractiveness or have all kinds of personal characteristics in common than you’re going to be a good match even though the person could be much less attractive than you. As one person put it:
“’look! we both are liberal! I bet that goddess will totally love my desperate ass!’”
Or in my case, he likes dogs and is a night owl. No, don’t. I have no idea why these guys are being shopped to me. I like morning people.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment