Given that there is a civilization-wide campaign of overt hostility towards men...yeah good luck finding one that hasn't taken some damage along the way.
When men don't show up to dating events they're "too prideful to admit they need dating help" and "care about sex, not relationships" but when women avoid dating apps it's because an uover-representation of men causes them to "bahave badly".
I think the closest she got to understanding the situation is when she mentioned that dating events allow women to just be pretty and hide their peronality for a limited time, while men need to show that they're charming, funny, and wealthy in that same time.
A woman's value is directly tied to her ability to have a family.
A good rule of thumb is that a woman's fertility halves every year over 32. The quality of those eggs also falls dramatically.
It is very common for a woman to miscarry the pregnancy after an abortion. So if a woman has had an abortion, she might take a long time to get pregnant, then lose the baby.
Specifically, straight women, who are flocking in droves to singles nights around the world in an attempt to find a pleasant, emotionally available, and suitably untraumatised man.
Wait, trauma is bad again? I can't keep up. But yeah I'm sure the women who are on more drugs than an entire pharmacy can hold are the sane ones.
They should call it the beta exchange program. No one seems to know where the hawt guys will come from but they're so used to offloading their problems onto others that they're not concerned about it. The reason they need this gimmick to balance out the male/female ratio in the first place is because men wised up to the fact that they'll get the same results on the apps regardless of what those results are. Chad isn't gonna put up with that bullshit when he's only a few swipes away from free pussy being delivered to his door and the betas can get rejected by bottom of the barrel Chad chasers without getting off the couch. The only dudes going along with this shit are trying to simp their way into the pants of the woman dragging them. If they were actually desirable the woman in question would be fucking them instead of trying to pawn them off on others in exchange for an alpha that's supposed to magically appear at a beta exchange.
She answered the question in the second paragraph and didn't realize it.
This might sound hyperbolic. But it’s a realistic depiction of what’s going on in the dating industry right now.
This is the problem right here. Not men. Not women. Dating and romance were a ingrained part of social interaction. It was woven into the fabric of every day life. What was once fundamental is now siloed off into its own niche. You can blame lawyers, media, HR, apps, dating events, whatever you want and you wouldn't be wrong.
Dating was something that happened when two people encountered socially and liked one another. Not an industry. Now it's a mix between hobby and "life planning" task with all the joy and spark of shopping for health insurance.
And yes, lady. Part of it is the way men interact with romance. There's plenty of guys who would love to be with someone, but there aren't many who would pick "interact with a bunch of random women," when deciding how to use a few hours of their time in the future. There's nothing appealing about scheduling an appointment to be judged in a sterile environment. That's not dating, that's an exam. Opportunities for IRL social interaction between men and women (and everyone in general) have been gutted by the technology age and when there were still naturally occurring social interactions, they've been sanitized in an attempt remove any possibility.
tl;dr: Everyone's working, you're not allowed to go out with the people you work with, and no one wants to spend their time off trying for romance with randomly selected strangers. Actually, no. Worse than randomly selected; selecting for women who go to single's events.
Edit: I will admit pair ticketing is a clever approach at first glance, but not once you realize that the majority of guys are there only because they're hoping the friend will notice him because he did her a favor. The guys who would attended under those circumstances are specifically there for her, which isn't going to work out well for your match rate.
I love my wife and family. I even like a lot of women. I think romance and dating are fun.
The issue is 95% of american women are so unpleasant that none of this applies. That are really inconsiderate and disrespectful and it sours any attraction you would have when you see their spoiled behaviors. A woman who acts feminine, physically not overweight nor gross, is respectful, and genuinely open and interested in a man's heart and soul will not have any issues with dating or marriage.
These women are just not fun to be around, they are grumpy, and constantly talking down and disrespecting these men. Its just no fun at all to be around them let alone spend time with them on dates or make effort for them.
I’m sure the women going to these events are either terrible people and/or have massively inflated expectations for what level of man they are a match with.
If the women were hot and they sucked dick without much effort, you'd have a whole army of men at these events. Since they aren't hot and don't suck dick easily, no men will waste their time. If a woman is good looking and sucks dick easily, she wouldn't need help finding men so all men know without even going to the event that the only women there aren't hot and don't suck dick easily.
> no lol, I'll just go "boysober" and, presumably, extinct.
Seriously, the idea of a free market is as absurd as communism. In both cases, I want to know what actual, concrete, real-world evidence points to even the hint of the possibility of the theory.
The free market is not a policy, like Communism, it's a goal. The idea is to have laws and policies that account for human behaviour, rather than pretending it doesn't exist, to allow people to have a level playing field in terms of commerce.
Seriously, the idea of a free market is as absurd as communism. In both cases, I want to know what actual, concrete, real-world evidence points to even the hint of the possibility of the theory.
The "free market" relies on assumptions that usually aren't true in practice. The lack of colluding parties is the most notable. The difference is that under "capitalism" the colluding parties are a bug (albeit one that no one with any power wants to fix) and under communism they're a feature. I don't want to venture into No True Scotsman territory but there's a lot of awful shit going on, and rooting that out would the market more "free".
"Olivia Petter, who has set up her own dating events, finds out why men are so reluctant to join – and what women can do about it"
How about women stop being insufferable cunts?
"We also know that research has found single women tend to be happier than single men, whereas married men are twice as likely to be happy with their lives."
Nice cope at the end, if that was the case men would be more likely to organize such events. Maybe men dont wanna date single women in their 30s which still have very high standards. And others just have given up long ago, especially if they are fucked on the job market anyway and what woman would take a man who is unemployed and stays at home? Yeah thats maybe like 5% of women but thats probably happening to a lot of men if they constantly get discriminated against except in jobs 99% women would never do.
It worked – I’ve hosted five events so far (including one for queer women) under the name Red Lips Dating, because not only do I love a red lip but kissing someone with red lipstick often leaves a memorable mark, much like dating a forward-thinking, empowered, and independent woman. Try it yourself and see.
This passage reads like the author is a lesbian. A lesbian is trying to find out why men are avoiding 'single nights'. :')
But on dating apps, it seems the latter might have more luck. While men are typically represented more on dating apps than women, within my own social circles, it seems men certainly have the upper hand when it comes to dating apps. I know so many successful, smart, beautiful, single women, and increasingly few eligible men, giving the men an advantage that often results in bad behaviour; what incentive is there to commit to one person when you can have your pick of the litter?
You see Olivia Petter making that Dreamworks Movie Cover face and you know exactly what you're in for.
As someone already mention, men who would do well at one of these events will do well tripping on his shoelaces in the grocery store. The men who have a few cards stacked against them understand the game that is being played here and avoid the humiliation ritual.
the entire article is just misandry blaming men for all the damage females have done
Lol r/whereareallthegoodmen
A "suitably untraumatised man," huh? Bitch, we could say the same about all of you!
That's literally the opening paragraph, too.
Given that there is a civilization-wide campaign of overt hostility towards men...yeah good luck finding one that hasn't taken some damage along the way.
This is a great point. They systemically attack men and then wonder why men are reeling.
When men don't show up to dating events they're "too prideful to admit they need dating help" and "care about sex, not relationships" but when women avoid dating apps it's because an uover-representation of men causes them to "bahave badly".
I think the closest she got to understanding the situation is when she mentioned that dating events allow women to just be pretty and hide their peronality for a limited time, while men need to show that they're charming, funny, and wealthy in that same time.
Didn't see a mention of the average age of the women attending these.
Tick tock, ladies.
Which tells you everything you need to know. That number doesn't start with a 2, that's for sure. It might not even start with a 3.
On her thirtieth birthday, a woman's stock starts dropping fast. Once she hits 35, it's over. Very few women manage to get married after 35.
A woman's value is directly tied to her ability to have a family.
A good rule of thumb is that a woman's fertility halves every year over 32. The quality of those eggs also falls dramatically.
It is very common for a woman to miscarry the pregnancy after an abortion. So if a woman has had an abortion, she might take a long time to get pregnant, then lose the baby.
Observe the attached chart I found.
https://femia.health/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Monthly-fertility-rate-by-age-1024x658.jpg
Their feminist sisters lie to them about this.
(((feminist)))
Overestimation of their own value, caused by a life of misplaced priorities.
No sympathy from me.
But that's the safest age to get pregnant! Science said so!
Wait, trauma is bad again? I can't keep up. But yeah I'm sure the women who are on more drugs than an entire pharmacy can hold are the sane ones.
They want a fresh canvas. No fun in damaging damaged goods.
Laughs in male.
They should call it the beta exchange program. No one seems to know where the hawt guys will come from but they're so used to offloading their problems onto others that they're not concerned about it. The reason they need this gimmick to balance out the male/female ratio in the first place is because men wised up to the fact that they'll get the same results on the apps regardless of what those results are. Chad isn't gonna put up with that bullshit when he's only a few swipes away from free pussy being delivered to his door and the betas can get rejected by bottom of the barrel Chad chasers without getting off the couch. The only dudes going along with this shit are trying to simp their way into the pants of the woman dragging them. If they were actually desirable the woman in question would be fucking them instead of trying to pawn them off on others in exchange for an alpha that's supposed to magically appear at a beta exchange.
If these women "want a relationship" with a man, why do they even have straight male friends that they aren't married to?
It's not "men aren't dating", it's "feminist women have unrealistic standards".
She answered the question in the second paragraph and didn't realize it.
This is the problem right here. Not men. Not women. Dating and romance were a ingrained part of social interaction. It was woven into the fabric of every day life. What was once fundamental is now siloed off into its own niche. You can blame lawyers, media, HR, apps, dating events, whatever you want and you wouldn't be wrong.
Dating was something that happened when two people encountered socially and liked one another. Not an industry. Now it's a mix between hobby and "life planning" task with all the joy and spark of shopping for health insurance.
And yes, lady. Part of it is the way men interact with romance. There's plenty of guys who would love to be with someone, but there aren't many who would pick "interact with a bunch of random women," when deciding how to use a few hours of their time in the future. There's nothing appealing about scheduling an appointment to be judged in a sterile environment. That's not dating, that's an exam. Opportunities for IRL social interaction between men and women (and everyone in general) have been gutted by the technology age and when there were still naturally occurring social interactions, they've been sanitized in an attempt remove any possibility.
tl;dr: Everyone's working, you're not allowed to go out with the people you work with, and no one wants to spend their time off trying for romance with randomly selected strangers. Actually, no. Worse than randomly selected; selecting for women who go to single's events.
Edit: I will admit pair ticketing is a clever approach at first glance, but not once you realize that the majority of guys are there only because they're hoping the friend will notice him because he did her a favor. The guys who would attended under those circumstances are specifically there for her, which isn't going to work out well for your match rate.
I love my wife and family. I even like a lot of women. I think romance and dating are fun.
The issue is 95% of american women are so unpleasant that none of this applies. That are really inconsiderate and disrespectful and it sours any attraction you would have when you see their spoiled behaviors. A woman who acts feminine, physically not overweight nor gross, is respectful, and genuinely open and interested in a man's heart and soul will not have any issues with dating or marriage.
These women are just not fun to be around, they are grumpy, and constantly talking down and disrespecting these men. Its just no fun at all to be around them let alone spend time with them on dates or make effort for them.
I’m sure the women going to these events are either terrible people and/or have massively inflated expectations for what level of man they are a match with.
Women pushed other women to push men away.
Women most affected.
*Jewish women
If the women were hot and they sucked dick without much effort, you'd have a whole army of men at these events. Since they aren't hot and don't suck dick easily, no men will waste their time. If a woman is good looking and sucks dick easily, she wouldn't need help finding men so all men know without even going to the event that the only women there aren't hot and don't suck dick easily.
> The male market doesn't want what I'm selling.
> Should I adapt what I'm offering?
> no lol, I'll just go "boysober" and, presumably, extinct.
Seriously, the idea of a free market is as absurd as communism. In both cases, I want to know what actual, concrete, real-world evidence points to even the hint of the possibility of the theory.
The free market is not a policy, like Communism, it's a goal. The idea is to have laws and policies that account for human behaviour, rather than pretending it doesn't exist, to allow people to have a level playing field in terms of commerce.
The "free market" relies on assumptions that usually aren't true in practice. The lack of colluding parties is the most notable. The difference is that under "capitalism" the colluding parties are a bug (albeit one that no one with any power wants to fix) and under communism they're a feature. I don't want to venture into No True Scotsman territory but there's a lot of awful shit going on, and rooting that out would the market more "free".
"Olivia Petter, who has set up her own dating events, finds out why men are so reluctant to join – and what women can do about it" How about women stop being insufferable cunts?
Ummm...
"We also know that research has found single women tend to be happier than single men, whereas married men are twice as likely to be happy with their lives."
Nice cope at the end, if that was the case men would be more likely to organize such events. Maybe men dont wanna date single women in their 30s which still have very high standards. And others just have given up long ago, especially if they are fucked on the job market anyway and what woman would take a man who is unemployed and stays at home? Yeah thats maybe like 5% of women but thats probably happening to a lot of men if they constantly get discriminated against except in jobs 99% women would never do.
This passage reads like the author is a lesbian. A lesbian is trying to find out why men are avoiding 'single nights'. :')
She says it herself: 'eligible men'.
Standards for thee but not for me.
Feminists are spoiled brats.
Article links to this paper, published 2024: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39721969/
Very interesting that they would put forward something true like that.
You see Olivia Petter making that Dreamworks Movie Cover face and you know exactly what you're in for.
As someone already mention, men who would do well at one of these events will do well tripping on his shoelaces in the grocery store. The men who have a few cards stacked against them understand the game that is being played here and avoid the humiliation ritual.