Do Women have it 'easier' then men?

[Deleted Member]

1 minute ago, SexxyMoeFoe said:

• If you never get replies you may think a bunch of replies is awesome regardless of quality (even if it doesn't results in a single additional date)
• If you often get scam message you may just want replies from genuine/real people (now imagine they are all OF content creators chatting to get you to subscribe)
• If you think different profile content is the answer, consider that you may be asking the person to misrepresent themselves or leave out important details. (For instance for me personally, not saying I am a kinkster - since that seems to be a trigger - which would get me vanilla guys I would never date) ... because leaving out that detail *might* stop *some* unwelcome messages
• Etc etc (I am not going to address point raised in all these posts)

Most people don't want to spend their whole life online dating. So for most people, "success" means getting dates, getting laid, getting relationships, etc.

[SexxyMoeFoe]

8 minutes ago, BlushingFlush said:

Most people don't want to spend their whole life online dating. So for most people, "success" means getting dates, getting laid, getting relationships, etc.

Agreed, but we weren't talking about success here (maybe that was the underlying goal), the question was do women have it easier and that's what most of the replies addressed...

[Deleted Member]

23 minutes ago, SexxyMoeFoe said:

Agreed, but we weren't talking about success here (maybe that was the underlying goal), the question was do women have it easier and that's what most of the replies addressed...

Sure but do they have it easier with what? Probably not getting messages online as that's just a means to an end.

[SexxyMoeFoe]

 

11 minutes ago, BlushingFlush said:

Sure but do they have it easier with what? Probably not getting messages online as that's just a means to an end.

 

Well then what was the point of your fake profile?  You were trying to prove something, but if you had never planned to meet then I think it's either not relevant to this discussion or you were referencing it to show exactly that - that women get more messages or maybe not as many nasty ones as they claim...

 

But to answer your question, the OP said specifically 

On 8/29/2021 at 2:51 PM, eyemblacksheep said:

I've seen from time to time claims that women have it 'easier' than men on kink and dating websites.   

The general claim is it's easier as they will have more 'likes' on photos or posts, receive more comments, receive more compliments, more offers, more matches, so on and so forth.

 

[Deleted Member]

2 minutes ago, SexxyMoeFoe said:

Well then what was the point of your fake profile?  You were trying to prove something, but if you had never planned to meet then I think it's either not relevant to this discussion or you were referencing it to show exactly that - that women get more messages or maybe not as many nasty ones as they claim...

Well eyemblacksheep said that women might get more messages (which could be used to get more dates, meet more people) but that they also get harassment so it could be more difficult in that sense. I was merely questioning the extent to which harassment might be exaggerated.

[SexxyMoeFoe]

deleted re-post

Edited September 26, 2021 by SexxyMoeFoe
posted multiple times

[SexxyMoeFoe]

1 minute ago, BlushingFlush said:

Well eyemblacksheep said that women might get more messages (which could be used to get more dates, meet more people) but that they also get harassment so it could be more difficult in that sense. I was merely questioning the extent to which harassment might be exaggerated.

I know why you said it, I just meant that you were pointing out to me that the goal was to get more dates/sex, etc when even your own comments don't support that premise. The question from the OP was about general online interactions.

As far as harassment - Maybe some are exaggerating but (at least from the women I know) it's actually underreported because we usually get very little support outside of friends. Most people usually say something like "well it's the internet" or "what do you expect because of [fill in your random reason here]". 

[SexxyMoeFoe]

deleted re-post

Edited September 26, 2021 by SexxyMoeFoe
multiple re-posts

[SexxyMoeFoe]

sorry about the multiple posts.  technical issues

[Deleted Member]

3 hours ago, SexxyMoeFoe said:

I know why you said it, I just meant that you were pointing out to me that the goal was to get more dates/sex, etc when even your own comments don't support that premise.

Sure they do because I don't care about messaging people just for the sake of messaging people on here whether OP is about online interaction or not. So then it's a question whether online dating is tough because of harassment or tough because people don't get meets from it.

[ge****]

1 hour ago, BlushingFlush said:

Sure they do because I don't care about messaging people just for the sake of messaging people on here whether OP is about online interaction or not. So then it's a question whether online dating is tough because of harassment or tough because people don't get meets from it.

The answer is it can be tough for both reasons, and others besides - and is down to individual experience as to what those actual reasons are - I've been around on-line NSA hook up sites long enough to know that women don't, for the most part, exaggerate the level of harassment they get, sure there are *some* that will play on it, just as there are *some* who will play men along for the attention, OF sign ups and more, but they're in the minority.

There are however a lot of men who don't get how those sites work and *do* think they're entitled to meets just for signing up and who then get frustrated and lash out with abusive messages and worse when it doesn't turn out that way.

Now ultimately it does come back to individual perception and experience as to who has it easiest - again a lot of men will say women have it "easier" because of the volume of messages and interest they get from men on those sites, and are able to be "picky", but what they miss is the quality of that interest is usually somewhat lacking.

Likewise *some* women will suggest men have it easier as men don't have to put up with the levels of *** and harassment that women do.

The reality is that neither group has it "easier" they just face different problems and experiences from each other.

[ey****]

Let's say a brand new woman joins this (or any) site with a view of meeting someone - she probably might have somewhat of a specific criteria in the sense that she might want someone who is generally a sub (rules out the Dominants) or a generally Dominant (rules out the subs) for a relationship (rules out those wanting casual play) or casual play (rules out those looking for a long term relationship) who is mono (rules out those who are poly) or part of a polycule (rules out those who are mono)

This is before we even get into preferences on age, fetishes, or physical features. Or whether it's someone she wishes to attend events with.

Any messages from anyone outside of those criteria is worthless.   The volume of messages she receives is moot if they're outside of her basic criteria.

These, to a degree are similar problems that a guy would have.   We all have basic criteria.  

We might have a little bit flexibility - but - we all already should know there are more people we won't be compatible with than will be.

--

Of course. The feeling is generally that a woman would have the pick of the guys. All these messages. All these suitors. And, I mean, Hell, if she saw a guy that interested her - then if she messaged him he'd totally be interested, right?

So. Why not you? 

As we've already attributed above - if you meet the criteria then you are already ahead of the many who don't.  If you don't meet the criteria then with the examples I gave first - they don't meet yours either. So, it's moot.

While it often might seem there's more guys - when you start removing those outside the criteria then there are fewer.  

There is then greatly more chance of a discussion ending in at least a coffee.

But in general - this is a two way problem

[ge****]

Agree with all of that eyem - it really isn't quite as simple as "women get more messages therefore have it easier" for the reasons you've stated and more.

As I often say women may well get more messages but it's the quality and interest in those messages that counts - a woman may get 100 messages but only be interested in the person behind 4 of them - a guy might send 100 messages and get 4 replies from people who are interested - net result is the same.

Likewise in terms of the number imbalance between men and women on sites like this - it may "seem" a reason why some men don't get responses - but generally speaking if you take out the men who don't "get" how sites like this work, who think they're entitled to responses and attention just for signing up, or who don't put the effort into their profiles and messages, or finding the right approach - the numbers are a lot more evenly balanced with people who are all perfectly happy with their experience, or accept that it might not be as good as they hoped.

[Deleted Member]

5 hours ago, gemini_man said:

Now ultimately it does come back to individual perception and experience as to who has it easiest - again a lot of men will say women have it "easier" because of the volume of messages and interest they get from men on those sites, and are able to be "picky", but what they miss is the quality of that interest is usually somewhat lacking.

If they are getting hundreds of messages though and guys are barely getting any responses, probably there will be more overall "quality" (in terms of compatibility) within a larger quantity of messages than a smaller quantity of messages. So I didn't miss all that you were mentioning, I just hadn't gotten around to pointing this out.

[ey****]

Let's pretend there is

So going with an argument of for every 100 message - there are 4 that are quality.

Quality being quantified that the message and associated profile was enough to make the recipient think "yeah, this person is worth chatting to" 

This still means having to sift through 96% junk

But what this also means is that for the guys sending the messages - most of the 96 who were unsuitable largely don't count.  That either their message was unappealing. Their profile was unappealing. Or there was nothing wrong with them par se, but it being relatively obvious that there was a mismatch in what was being looked for. Perhaps a conversation did start but then it went south pretty quickly.

Once you take those out of the equation - the guys sending the messages who are appealing, or sent a good message who are compatible would have a very good chance of things progressing.

That even. Instead of being up against hundreds of guys.  Would, really, be up against 3.

 

[ge****]

35 minutes ago, BlushingFlush said:

If they are getting hundreds of messages though and guys are barely getting any responses, probably there will be more overall "quality" (in terms of compatibility) within a larger quantity of messages than a smaller quantity of messages. So I didn't miss all that you were mentioning, I just hadn't gotten around to pointing this out.

Of course it's not a precise science and of course when you factor in ultimate compatability (sufficient for things to progress beyond messages) the outcome may change - but by that point the balance is even as the guy may just as easily decide the lady is not for him as the other way round.

You also have to factor in that a lot of men will blanket bomb every profile within a certain distance in the hope of getting a reply, to the point that *any* response they receive they'll be interested in - the reverse is true for women on the receiving end.

My point is still valid though that lots of messages does not mean "easier"

[ey****]

I guess though.  Pretend the person on the receiving end is getting a lot of messages.   How can you stand out?

Pretend the next time they log in they will be 20 messages and you're hoping for at least a response.  

 

[SexxyMoeFoe]

9 hours ago, BlushingFlush said:

Sure they do because I don't care about messaging people just for the sake of messaging people on here whether OP is about online interaction or not. So then it's a question whether online dating is tough because of harassment or tough because people don't get meets from it.

That's a new question/discussion - totally different topic.  It's fine that you don't care about messaging people for interaction, but that's what we're talking about. Harassments is just ONE reason, women have it tough, just like scammers are 1 reason men have it tough. I'd definitely participate in a discussion of "What makes online dating hard for Men and Women" if you start it!

Not everyone contacts others only for relationship or hookup. I get tons of message on sites like this, from people outside my preferences and outside my location who just want to talk.  We might have a kink in common, or they might want info on a kink they don't know about, or they want an online friend (of course some might have ulterior motives but some don't), etc. Maybe that's not what you want or do but you can't dismiss those that do.

(I think you might enjoy it given your contributions here)

[Deleted Member]

 

 

2 hours ago, eyemblacksheep said:

This still means having to sift through 96% junk

So you've got to sift through 96 messages that are really easy to discard then you find 4 quality people and your pretty much sorted for dates and what not. Compare that to months or years in dating limbo. I'd 100,000 x rather just delete/block/report a couple of people I don't like then find a quality partner.

 

2 hours ago, gemini_man said:

by that point the balance is even as the guy may just as easily decide the lady is not for him as the other way round.

My point is the guy may have considerably fewer correspondents to determine compatibility from than the guy.

 

2 minutes ago, SexxyMoeFoe said:

That's a new question/discussion - totally different topic

It's really not though. If you just want to chat for the sake of chatting, get a pen pal, maybe go on a language forum and find someone Italian or French. Or discuss politics on Reddit, you don't even have to submit your gender. Nobody will harass you provided you don't have majorly outlier opinions expressed in an extremely provocative or controversial manner.

 

Quote

Harassments is just ONE reason, women have it tough, just like scammers are 1 reason men have it tough

And not the main reason, the main reason being an insufficient pool of correspondence from which to select compatible candidates compared to women. If you don't want to get scammed don't immediately talk to female profiles off the website before you've built connection. If you're not a male model, be wary of users with profile pictures that look like they were taken in a studio by a professional photographer. If you get scammed once, shame on them, if you get scammed twice, shame on you.

 

Quote

I get tons of message on sites like this, from people outside my preferences and outside my location who just want to talk.

Then it's not "dating" or "online dating" you've got tough. It's just the internet in general.

[Deleted Member]

11 minutes ago, SexxyMoeFoe said:

I'd definitely participate in a discussion of "What makes online dating hard for Men and Women" if you start it!

I'll let you know when it's been accepted through moderation.

[ey****]

8 minutes ago, BlushingFlush said:

So you've got to sift through 96 messages that are really easy to discard then you find 4 quality people and your pretty much sorted for dates and what not. Compare that to months or years in dating limbo. I'd 100,000 x rather just delete/block/report a couple of people I don't like then find a quality partner.

I think moreso

Be one of the 4 quality people.  That's it.  

 

[SexxyMoeFoe]

1 hour ago, eyemblacksheep said:

I guess though.  Pretend the person on the receiving end is getting a lot of messages.   How can you stand out?

Pretend the next time they log in they will be 20 messages and you're hoping for at least a response. 

I think this statement here is often overlooked... If I get 20 messages a day (depending on the site, that's about normal - more if I post a discussion or a new pic or something)

• Maybe 15-16 are not not what I am looking for at all - for a multitude or reasons.
  • Maybe 5-6 (of these 10) do the "I know I am not what you want but I thought I would take a chance" thing.
  • 4 might have no profile and send a message that says "Hi" and want me to let them know if I am interested.  Interested in what?
  • Others might say they prefer to get to know people irl and not put "their whole life in their profile" They prefer to talk not just text all day. Hard pass. Usually this means they aren't what I want but think if we meet they have a better chance of convincing me otherwise
  • 2-3 could be subs offering me services (that I am not interested in), or doms telling me I haven't found the right dom or offering me mentoring or something. LOL
• Maybe 3-4 just want to chat... about kinks, life, etc. Some want to ask me about my implants. Some just want to compliment me on something. etc. 
• MAYBE 1 is actually a local person who is falls into the criteria I am looking for.  And you still need to chat and get to know the person to see if they actually are looking for the same things and if see if there is enough substance and "online chemistry" to want to meet them etc. 

The inbox clutter just makes it harder. You hear a lot for men that "it's a numbers game", but they don't realize that also makes it a numbers game for the recipients

[Deleted Member]

3 minutes ago, eyemblacksheep said:

I think moreso

Be one of the 4 quality people.  That's it.  

This is my point - it means you have way more competition to belong to a very small, select pool of male correspondents considered to be "desirable". Having to fight your way up to being a 4% man isn't an advantage in dating.

[Deleted Member]

1 minute ago, SexxyMoeFoe said:

I think this statement here is often overlooked... If I get 20 messages a day (depending on the site, that's about normal - more if I post a discussion or a new pic or something)

• Maybe 15-16 are not not what I am looking for at all - for a multitude or reasons.
  • Maybe 5-6 (of these 10) do the "I know I am not what you want but I thought I would take a chance" thing.
  • 4 might have no profile and send a message that says "Hi" and want me to let them know if I am interested.  Interested in what?
  • Others might say they prefer to get to know people irl and not put "their whole life in their profile" They prefer to talk not just text all day. Hard pass. Usually this means they aren't what I want but think if we meet they have a better chance of convincing me otherwise
  • 2-3 could be subs offering me services (that I am not interested in), or doms telling me I haven't found the right dom or offering me mentoring or something. LOL
• Maybe 3-4 just want to chat... about kinks, life, etc. Some want to ask me about my implants. Some just want to compliment me on something. etc. 
• MAYBE 1 is actually a local person who is falls into the criteria I am looking for.  And you still need to chat and get to know the person to see if they actually are looking for the same things and if see if there is enough substance and "online chemistry" to want to meet them etc. 

The inbox clutter just makes it harder. You hear a lot for men that "it's a numbers game", but they don't realize that also makes it a numbers game for the recipients

Alright but consider that what you describe as "inbox clutter" is effectively "profile clutter" for most guys the difference being you have to think of thoughtful and insightful messages to send to find out if your compatible. So we say you go through 20 profiles a day to find someone to message:

• maybe 15-16 are not not what you are looking for, e.g.
  • maybe 5-6  might not be what you want but you're tempted to take a chance to find out
  • 4 might have no profile or even a picture
  • others might say that they don't want to write "their whole life in their profile" 
  • 2-3 could be findoms requesting servitude, gifts or tributes

See, it's exactly the same situation reversed but harder because you still have to send out the first message and be a 4% man like eyemblacksheep suggests.

[ey****]

11 minutes ago, BlushingFlush said:

This is my point - it means you have way more competition to belong to a very small, select pool of male correspondents considered to be "desirable". Having to fight your way up to being a 4% man isn't an advantage in dating.

But you don't have to be the top 4%

The 96% in that scenario are all useless.  Have sent unappealing messages and/or have unappealing profiles.  That the recipient goes through their post history and goes "Lol, nope".  That the person is not of the dynamic the person is looking for.  That the recipient was looking local and the sender is not local.   So on so forth.

It then becomes a case of messaging those you realistically have a chance with and "realistically" is because you meet the criteria of what they are looking for and  you can demonstrate that.