Ferienhaus hat geschrieben: ↑09 Okt 2020 13:39Aus manchen Beiträgen hier kann man durchaus schließen, das Online-Dating aussichtsreich ist - leider nur sofern man ein gewisses Attraktivitätslevel hat, einen aufregenden Lebensstil und gewisse "Tricks" (kreative Anschreiben etwa) beachtet.
Die Likes der Frauen konzentrieren sich auf die attraktivsten Männer. Und es ist auf Dauer deprimierend, wenn man nicht einmal von Frauen die weit unter der eigenen Liga spielen zurückgelikt wird. Aber ein Date alle paar Wochen bis Monate ist mehr als das was die meisten ABs im echten Leben hinbekommen. Probier es einfach selbst aus.
Aviv Goldgeier, Hinge hat geschrieben:Q. How does this inequality compare to the inequality women face on dating apps? Is there an analogy you can use to better explain it?
A. I recently saw a post on Medium that considered incoming likes as a sort of currency. Every nation in the world has a currency, but that currency is not equally distributed amongst the citizens of every country. These economic inequalities are described using what is called the Gini index.
In our context, the closer the Gini index is to 0, the more equally likes are distributed across all of our users; a higher Gini index rating means more likes are being concentrated into fewer recipients.
The guy that wrote that post only had a couple dozen data points, but since I have access to many orders of magnitude more, reading his write-up made me curious as to what would happen if I reproduced his work using our data.
It turns out that, as it pertains to incoming likes, straight females on Hinge show a Gini index of 0.376, and for straight males it’s 0.542. On a list of 149 countries’ Gini indices provided by the CIA World Factbook, this would place the female dating economy as 75th most unequal (average — think Western Europe) and the male dating economy as the 8th most unequal (kleptocracy, apartheid, perpetual civil war — think South Africa).
https://web.archive.org/web/20200701203 ... h-engineer
Christian Rudder, OkCupid hat geschrieben:The female equivalent of the above chart shows a different bias:
As you can see from the gray line, women rate an incredible 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium. Very harsh. On the other hand, when it comes to actual messaging, women shift their expectations only just slightly ahead of the curve, which is a healthier pattern than guys’ pursuing the all-but-unattainable. But with the basic ratings so out-of-whack, the two curves together suggest some strange possibilities for the female thought process, the most salient of which is that the average-looking woman has convinced herself that the vast majority of males aren’t good enough for her, but she then goes right out and messages them anyway.
Just to illustrate that women are operating on a very different scale, here are just a few of the many, many guys we here in the office think are totally decent-looking, but that women have rated, in their occult way, as significantly less attractive than so-called “medium”:
Females of OkCupid, we site founders say to you: ouch! Paradoxically, it seems it’s women, not men, who have unrealistic standards for the “average” member of the opposite sex.
https://web.archive.org/web/20180419084 ... f4c7e603c0
Girassol hat geschrieben: ↑09 Okt 2020 13:59Da ist jetzt keiner dabei, der dreimal im Jahr um die Welt jettet und dann sein Tinderprofil mit Fotos aus Thailand, Südafrika, vom Bungeespringen und Kamelreiten flutet.
In der Generation bis Anfang 30 machen das die meisten. Egal ob Mann oder Frau.
