If half the profiles are just a no-brainer "no" then the "real average" is only over the top 50% rather than the full 100%.
I don't deny that using these apps as a man is a more difficult experience in actually landing a date, but many women are also frustrated by the tons of crappy/creepy men out there (e.g. "dickpics" and such). Being in the "top 30/20%" is easier than you'd might think.
The biggest challenge is that Tinder can be an emotional rollercoaster and really screw over your self-esteem.
> If half the profiles are just a no-brainer "no" then the "real average" is only over the top 50% rather than the full 100%.
You're doing a lot of mental gymnastics to redefine terms like "average". Ah yes, it is perfectly fine for women to consider 80% of men to be below average in attractiveness, because those 80% are just a no-brainer "no" because they are not attractive and math is hard.
> I don't deny that using these apps as a man is a more difficult experience in actually landing a date, but many women are also frustrated by the tons of crappy/creepy men out there (e.g. "dickpics" and such). Being in the "top 30/20%" is easier than you'd might think.
Perhaps you are in the top 20% of men so you feel that it is easy to be in the top 20% bracket, but men who are not up there don't really have a path to get there. You imply that men should simply stop sending dick picks (and stop doing other, very obviously bad things), but the proportion of men sending unwarranted dick pics is vanishingly small.
All I'm saying is that "average" isn't really all that meaningful here (as it isn't in many cases). For example, the number of men who have just one or two badly lit photos from their webcam is staggering. That's just a no-brainer.
> All I'm saying is that "average" isn't really all that meaningful here (as it isn't in many cases). For example, the number of men who have just one or two badly lit photos from their webcam is staggering. That's just a no-brainer.
You're missing the point. The major finding in that OkCupid post was that (according to that post) women have an unrealistic expectation of the attractiveness of men. They demonstrated this by showing that the majority of women consider the majority of men to be below average in attractiveness. This claim is not refuted by your observation that some men send unwanted dick picks, and it's not refuted by your observation that some men use badly lit photos. I don't know why you feel like these observations somehow refute this claim? Even if 100% of men were sending dick pics and 100% of men were using badly lit photos, this still wouldn't change the fact that 1+1=2, or the fact that top 50% of men in terms of attractiveness are above the median in terms of attractiveness. If a person holds a world view to the contrary, their world view is factually incorrect.
I think you guys are both in agreement. If half the profiles are, say, 0 out of 10, then there's no way the average could be > 5. I mean, that's just math. I don't understand dropping all values less than the median to get a "real average". It's absolutely possible that women rate 80% as below average--that just indicates a huge number of zeros or huge unimodal distribution towards the low end of the range.
I've been married for a long time so thankfully don't need to use Tinder, but this reported rating distribution squares with my memory of the dating market in meatspace. 90% of women go after the top 20% of the guys. Online probably doesn't change this.
