New Online Dating Statistics - 10 Trends You Probably Didn’t Know

[@IguanaSloth]

Dang, Damien! You're killing it with the high-quality content lately!

[@SchoolOfAttraction]

Cheers bud!

[@chrisbunka]

I can’t wait for my roommate to watch this so we can discuss it. He just loves stats!

[@rnt45t1]

I've been single for over ten years now. Tinder came out in 2012. I don't think that's a coincidence. I'm also trying to accept the reality that I'm a 33 year old bald man who is nowhere close to rich enough to attract women. It's really hard to feel like it's even worth trying anymore.

[@SchoolOfAttraction]

I wish I could convince you that you don't have to be rich to attract women. You just need a solid job. I know this becuase of how many men and women I work with I see who they're dating.

[@rnt45t1]

@@SchoolOfAttraction Yeah, I've spent the last decade seeing women date men that surprise the hell out of me. I have a decent job, that's for sure. I just started late to the investing game because I didn't get sober until last year.

[@pilotgfx]

its just like sourcing work really, if you keep lowering the bar you will with certainty succeed :)

[@OnyxStudiosInteractive]

Go where you're treated the best. I think for online dating, as long as you have the ability to travel to different places you can overcome any inherent disadvantages that may come with your local area. There's also something to be said for having longer conversations with women without the filter of having to match with them first. Instagram, Linked-In, Facebook etc allow you to potentially connect without the cultural bias/competition/distraction etc that comes with a dating app.

[@dubbula]

Yea autistic guy here qnd I hate planes so won't travel easily. I'm screwed

[@primavera919]

Which dating app allows you to change location?

[@OnyxStudiosInteractive]

@@primavera919 Fake gps on Android allows you to change location

[@MyNameishidden-l2f]

glad that this channel is back

[@SchoolOfAttraction]

Cheers!

[@alkirajbradfield4183]

In reference to the third topic you covered I completely agree, however it also appears to be a subconscious decision when choosing people to swipe on because it’s been shown that when you see your reflection, or take a picture of yourself, the mere effect makes you appear more good looking than you are due to controlled variables such as lighting, angles, asymmetrical features on your face. You control those aspects when you see your own reflection, but not when others see you.. so really when I see myself, I know I’m about 30% uglier than how I perceive myself 😅

[@alkirajbradfield4183]

And on number 5 I believe you’re spot on with the mining for positive words because in my personal experience, a positive message that includes a topic where they’ve acknowledged something I’ve written about my interests in my bio, is ALWAYS met with warmth and a happy response from my end. If a bloke comments (or compliments) my name or my eyes, I don’t have anything to work with, “thanks, my mum gave them to me”. Sure, I think im hilarious with that response, and usually they do too. However the fella who messages me saying that they also love Hamilton the Musical, or ask me about any of my interests I’ve written, it shows they’ve read it, found something in me they also like, and want to engage in the common interest. Like you said about women equally looking for what they offer a man, and what a man can offer them. That interaction on dating apps separates men drastically, and tbh, it’s not an unrealistic expectation for women to want a man that shows a slither of depth to them with wanting to share common interests, but the bare minimum in that aspect, is truly refreshing. Which I assume is why women have a less positive experience on these apps. 💁🏻‍♀️

[@Bellywoodstudios_diadance]

You always have such refreshing interesting takes on dating

[@SchoolOfAttraction]

Thank you :)

[@UnlistedAccount]

Define "Men are more happy with.." because if the male standard for happy is getting a date at all, and for women it's finding a handsome, rich, prince, who wants to commit to her... Then happy is a useless way to measure experience.

[@SchoolOfAttraction]

For women, it's finding a man who wants ot date her and not just shag her - and who will also treat her with basic respect... Yeah I know you dont' believe me- This is almost impossible for women to find - and NO, lowering their standards doesn't fix the problem in the slightest... Unattractive men are just as likely to lie about wanting a relationship to get in her pants and treat her like rubbish as a chad is, so there's really no easy solution. You think all women are just seeking a rich guy, but while it's nice to find a rich guy to date, it's far from most women's first priority. I know, because I'm working with men and women in dating all the time - I see what actually happens.

[@robertchavez5137]

So helpful my man.

[@thebiggerpicture__]

Another great video.

[@jcransome5616]

If you don’t get matches. NO GRIFTING DATING COACH SCAMMER LIKE THIS WILL HELP THAT

[@raymondzerulla9067]

Women are always more dissatisfied. They complain more and have more hoops for men to jump through to consider being with them. And I watch a lot of dating coaches who say women's standards are too high today.

[@ghostridersinthesky21]

The sugar daddy site is so much better than garbage tinder. I finally can have many matches and select my ideal vvoman

[@modernexistence4206]

No emotional connection

[@ghostridersinthesky21]

@@modernexistence4206 not true at all you can love someone while still appreciating what they can do for you. If you want a relationship without looks or monei, then just fall in love with a very overweight vvoman who doesnt care if youre broke

[@SchoolOfAttraction]

I mean I've played with sugar dating sites - I know that it can feel awesome to have all these women chasing yoiu - but it's a pretty emotionally unhealthy space - the power-dynamics that it engenders aren't really good for either gender long-term.

[@dinos9607]

OK, what a whole lot of mistranslation of data by researches, most probably paid by dating app sites. The latter are anxious to maintain their clientele, especially after sensing there is a slight flattening of the rising curve of the previous years. Dating sites as well as "dating sites' gurus" may not wish to talk about that, but here we are to do the analysis : 1. The first point is a ridiculous sugar-coating of the fact that men cannot afford to be selective, they just have to try by numbers. Women are inundated by offers and as such have the luxury of spending time only on those profiles that are closer to what they esteem as "feasible" - and make no mistake here : women do know it is very much feasible for them as 5vers to appeal, as a booty-call of course, to a man ranking 7 and 8. The finding about "men talking about themselves" and women "talking 50-50 about themselves and what they want" just exemplifies that. Men cannot pose their standards at all, they are just desperate so they leave it open. Women are inundated by offers and as such they talk less about themselves and more about what they want. It is of course women selling and men buying and there is far more demand than offer in this transaction. The presenter of this video is thus totally disingenuous by sugar-coating this grim-for-men reality. 2. The second point is of course the 80%-20% : it is just sugar-coating the grim basic reality and turning it on men, as if they are deficient in how to present themselves. Utter bull's crap. 3. Number three is an outright lie and that is why they don't shoe the actual data. The raw data saws that women respond only to men who are at minimum 25% more attractive on the scale than them. I.e. a 5ver will respond only to a 7 and above! Men on the other hand respond to pretty much all women except the bottom of the barrel, which necessarily includes also women 25% more attractive than them. They just brush off the data that shows that men respond also to women 25% less attractive than them. The average man swipes right 60% of women (!!!! i.e. more than the majority!). The average woman swipes less than 5% of men - and these are exclusively men 25% more attractive on the scale than them. So the sugar-coating of the reality done here is of another level! 4. The "more positive/negative" experience is a meaningless metric. The real metric is sex - and that is what they try to avoid. How easily can the average male user find access to sex via these online applications and how does that compare to the ease of access to sex that women have through these apps? The average woman can have sex the very same night, while the average man can try for years and have no luck at all. This is the reality they want to avoid. Whether men are happier to use these apps is inconsequential, men are easy-going, they do not complain. Women will complain about everything. And of course the vast majority of women who use dating apps end up turning into booty-calls for the 1percenters who use and abuse them and as such it is natural that a large number of women will end up having an overall negative experience of dating apps. Tik Tok is full of videos of females of all ages expressing their feelings of being hurt after using dating apps. Men, of course will be less negative : the few winners are elated with these apps. The big majority of losers, well, they did not lose anything but time but hey, why complain. Men are easy going, not whiners on average. 5. That was to be expected and reveals female nature. Men understand today they must not treat women like princesses but more like 304s - if anything they have more chances of a positive feedback with the latter rather than the former. 6. Inconsequential point. Does not even mention the stats to back it up. Attractive men (= looks + signs of wealth) always will be ranking higher. Others must offer something "unique" but in the sheer numbers won't be able to compare. Perhaps the paper meant that the unattractive and non-wealthy have to do something unique in hopes of appealing to some little sub-category of women who may find it attractive. That is something men did always but is more or less pointless in the greater picture of course. The standards of attraction never change and it is by these that men have to go if they want to go by numbers. 7. That was to be expected. But he forgot to mention that this works to women 2 and 3 levels below the man's status. 8. The importance of a man's wealth is inconsequential. Dating apps are for sex. For hook-ups. For booty-calls. It is purely carnal sex. Extremely few women would seek a marriage prospect in dating apps. This data just shows that in the beginning of the dating app frenzy some women may had tried to use dating apps as a tool for searching marriageable partners but then year after year this idea was cast aside as it became clear that dating apps are just for hook-ups : the vast majority of women are hooking up with the same few attractive men and that's it. It does not matter if they are rich or poor. If they are rich so much better, but since it is a hook-up it is all about sexual desire of the moment. 9. Nothing new. Women want older men 3 to 8 years older than them, men want younger women overwhelmingly in the 18-24 age group. The latter is hidden of course to not thwart older females. 10. Male desireability maintained in older age.... LOL! That refers exclusively to the 5% subset of men. The rest? Forget it. Men. You are much better off away from apps. Up your professional and social skills to achieve socio-economic rise and women will come to you rather than pointlessly chasing them in apps. The best women have never created a profile in any such app anyway.

[@ACruz-kq9di]

Great response! I expected more from the video but it turned out to be the same ol’ feel good bs placating to women

[@Straga_Severa]

> The raw data saws that women respond only to men who are at minimum 25% more attractive on the scale than them. I.e. a 5ver will respond only to a 7 and above! Men on the other hand respond to pretty much all women except the bottom of the barrel, which necessarily includes also women 25% more attractive than them. Could you give a link to this counter-data?

[@dinos9607]

@@Straga_Severa Go to Rollo Tomassi's channel and you will find a deluge of data. Men swipe right on average to 60% of women. You need to be no mathematician to understand that while this includes women above the man's value it also clearly includes women below and often far below him. In this video this man is just sugar coating pretending that "both sexes do the same". No they don't. Women e x c l u s i v e l y concentrate on men 25% above their value while men just try their luck with all.

[@Straga_Severa]

@@dinos9607 So, you can't give me the exact links to data. Got it, thanks.

[@dinos9607]

@@Straga_Severa I just gave you but you are too lazy to go and watch. Rollo Tomassi has repeatedly mentioned that people "asking the data" are vanishing exactly the moment they are served the data. It is a typical propagandist move. Asking for data - and doing so in the most inappropriate way, i.e. demanding others to do the hard work for them - and when being served the data they vanish. That is exactly what you do here. I repeat : go watch Rollo Tomassi, he is serving the cold hard data right in your mouth on every single video of his. You can even find videos dedicated to this specific issue. But as said, you are too lazy for this.

[@jaxaxx01]

I truly am too surprised.

[@skipps-4981]

My move to Australia had nothing to do with this video

[@SchoolOfAttraction]

hahaha

[@pilotgfx]

within the next 5 years, this video will be taken down due to presenting harmful statistics "that could be misused to incite hate". its truly sad and this resistance towards truth due to wokeness is one of the very key challenges we face as humanity

[@SchoolOfAttraction]

Yeah it's impossible to know where the wokeness will end.. but it will reach a limit at some point and we'll bounce back to normal

[@rob_341]

Can I join the Facebook page without joining the course?

[@SchoolOfAttraction]

Hey Rob, no unfortunately - the FB group. is designed to be one of the primary benefits of paid membership :)

[@CJB-]

I think this channel is for the already super confident.

[@BalkanBiker]

The first part is spot on. It aligns well with Corey Wayne's 3% man book. You should start your profile or at least include in it what you are looking for in a woman. So when she sees your profile she's inclined to think "omg I'm the type of person he's looking for!" That book not only changed how I date women (as well as helping me figure out how did I pick up the most beautiful women in the past), but also helped me land a new job. Read the motherfucking book everyone, at least 10-15 times :D And listen and like Damien's videos.

[@guitarplayer1994]

It's so sad, the graph shown about men's desirability still shows the downside of not being white. Of course I live in Europe but it's still so saddening ...

[@SchoolOfAttraction]

Yeah it is sad.. But it is often culture clash rather than skin colour.. For example, I've dated a few women from africa, but african-american women not so much... Obviously I've met some cool exceptions, but once they're part of the black american culture too much, that culture doesn't vibe for me so they wouldn't be compatible for me.

[@ghostridersinthesky21]

Im a white guy on tinder and I have zero success. Only when joining Seeking, did I have lots of success

[@BEATmyguest31]

Nope. Not using it. Fuck online dating

[@ameydivekar7531]

I wonder if the sample size is large enough to include more conservative regions like India/subcontinent. The last statistic would not hold true for countries like India.

[@tonydecentblackman1327]

Actually, the 80/20 rule comes from online data. So, is this video an attempt to get men to stay with online dating?

[@SchoolOfAttraction]

It comes from a polymath in the start of the 20th century long before online data - Vilfredo Pareto

[@maenad1231]

8:35 sounds like being a ”niche”

[@maksymnardyshev2174]

5:35- that's because women shoot so much higher)

[@WastedTalent83]

lol for a second i thought this could be interesting but.. definitely not.

[@phillip6083]

I have a theory to the gender based satisfaction disparity. Typical woman.. Looks start declining after 25ish. Has 1 to 3 kids at home still. Must work more to maintain family. Typical male. May have 1 or more dependents but not living with him. Makes do with less luxuries so work needs are not as great. Looks more consistent as he ages. The typical man(imo)has no children...maybe 33%? So all his money is his.more disposable income . Likely has a nice car or truck. So when they meet online a 30yo man looks at a 30 yo woman who probably smokes and looks maybe 40, has kids(1 to 3)must work long hours to maintain a home(has less social time)and due to modern views by women she is not tolerant of a man who does not meet certain criteria. But for men.we have a small pool of women online.but we have more time available to look, our criteria are lower if our expectations are low and honestly...most of us do have lower expectations due to the willingness to date down where as women want equal or better.but with that men are also expected to take the kids and responsibility. If she decides to support her family 90%or more then he is fixing her car, driving kuds around or pickibg them up, running errands etc.if they split it 50/50 hes giving more than she is(typically)plus a woman being more driven by emotion is more likely to take small slights as greater slights and blow them out of proportion. Most men are willing to go from woman to woman.most women are too but the difference being is the percieved quality of the man.if the man meets her criteria but after a time dumps her she feels more of a loss.as he is in the upper percentile of men. A man loses a woman(lets say she was a 6 and hes s 7)he still has a bigger pool of women to choose from. The disparity starts with what is expected. A woman wants a man who is going to be dependable and stable, at her smv or better(even as her smv declines with age)etc. Where as a man wants and needs are much simpler.so easier(relatively speaking)to replace from a wider shallow pool.

[@SchoolOfAttraction]

I think you're a little harsh on the average 30year oldwoman on online dating - barely any of them smoke - most don't have kids yet at that age (although this does depend on country and city - but I'll use UK/USA/Australia big cities as a reference point). IBut I do think men experience that they offer more of value on average as they get older while women offer less as they get older. So I do agree with this. This is definitely a part of it.

[@phillip6083]

@@SchoolOfAttraction of course i speak from my locale and exp.i live in southern missouri.biggest and closest city is springfield. Smoking and vaping is big here.most women have 2.5 kids and no men.

[@mrxiong2567]

All dumb facts

[@Alice8000]

Datr

[@phillip6083]

This is my experience on bumble so far. Build profile and right away get one like.of course you got to pay to see a like.my question is....how does seeing the like improve my chances of meeting?i mean if she liked me on a platform where the women are supposed to make the first move(and im hearing now they can send an emoji instead if text)then what am i paying for exactly? So im curious....how is the site set up gor a woman.i make a female account.they are much stricter on pics for women.i had to redo it several times before they accepted it. Profile built and right away it says 7 matches.tgen when i go to look theres only 1.i do find my actual profile quickly and like it to see if it is free for a woman to message and just how that works out exactly.log in to my profile and....at first it says i have a new like but when i look its just the 2 original probably fake likes.hmmm Maybe ive used up my likes for the day?but i expand my preferences and bumble shows me more woman outside my distance and age range.but not my alternate profile.odd. So im assuming that since both pros are me that they are likely a good match and im not being shown my best match but my second best matches. And they want us to pay for bs functions that do nothing to improve the chance of meeting a good person?

[@SchoolOfAttraction]

Another part of the problem might be that nobody uses bumble much where you are, that could cause this issue - then what bumble does is expands your search radius to give you SOMETHIGN to match with. But if you've limited the radius you wnat to meet peopel from then it only shows you the people in your radius. I've never suggested to pay with bumble - bumble offers the least benefit to paying of all the online dating apps I've tried.

[@ManOfAdventure2011]

@@SchoolOfAttraction I want ALL dating apps to require women to only post full length body photos and list their height and weight. Why will they not do it?