I’m not sure what the problem is, but the link to the OKCupid post doesn’t work—I had to use google to reread the comments.
Unless I missed something, there were more favorable comments than not, and from more people. the post has positive karma, too.
As I understand it, there are a number of men on LW who found that a lot of the advice they’d been given by women about dating didn’t work for them, and they’re touchy about the subject.
I’m not sure what the problem is, but the link to the OKCupid post doesn’t work—I had to use google to reread the comments.
Do you mean the link in the original post to the earlier thread? It worked for me just now. What problem did you have?
Unless I missed something, there were more favorable comments than not, and from more people.
Most of the active discussion I’ve seen has been about why this is hogwash and shouldn’t be posted here (so I appreciate hearing another view). But I only get alerted to comments for threads I’m alread in, so my view is pretty biased.
there are a number of men on LW who found that a lot of the advice they’d been given by women about dating didn’t work for them
I’m new here; did you get this impression from previous discussion, individual comments over time, or something else? If it’s true, I wonder how similar the women-being-asked and women-being-pursued were (e.g. if they were discussing it with their nerdy female friends and then trying to pick women up at clubs, or vice versa). I confess that I take on a charitable view of peoples’ goals in romantic pursuit, and also that my idea of “charitable” is pretty close to “assuming it agrees with me.” (As it should! Would you trust someone who behaved in ways they didn’t recommend?)
which just says in red, “This post doesn’t exist”.
I tried one other post from this discussion in Recent Comments, and got the same result.
On the one hand, I do think the majority response was in favor of the post. On the other, there was a strong minority which was a good bit nastier than I’d say is usual for LW.
I got that impression from discussion here. And I’ve just realized that while I’ve seen a lot about bad dating advice from women to men, I’ve never seen a clear description of what that advice is. Guys?
Although contrary to that I’ve had discussions with female friends where they admit that they like cocky men… but then that women wasn’t trying to portray a “nice girl” attitude.
Honestly I think this is the smartest sentence in there:
When women discuss what they want in a man, remember that they might not be fully aware of what really turns them on.
Of course they aren’t. Most people don’t think much about what they really want, just like they don’t think much about who they really are. It’s possible that het men and het women are so different that the men aren’t also clueless in this regard, but I doubt it. And each set treats the other like its members are stupid about relationships at best, and deliberately conniving at worst. No wonder we get this ridiculous, overblown sense of adversary about dating. : \
This woman thinks the reason men get bad advice is that they’re not asking the right questions. I don’t agree with everything in that article, but overall I think it’s on the right track.
We have to be careful here. We need to qualify the difference between sexually attractive and attractive qualities in a partner. That is the difference between what may make us horny and what we would actually want to live with.
I think most het men know quite well what is sexually attractive to them. We have a very simple function to work out (young and shapely). See any top100 girls fhm list in all its monotony. Compare it to the mixture of age ranges/body types you get in this list .
The attractive qualities in a partner are more complex and men are probably equally bad at knowing this.
We have to be careful here. We need to qualify the difference between sexually attractive and attractive qualities in a partner. That is the difference between what may make us horny and what we would actually want to live with.
I think that’s important to note. It’s my impression that, regardless of what gender you are, the kind of person you’d be most eager to have a one-night stand with isn’t the kind of person you’d be most eager to marry. The “virgin/whore dichotomy” doesn’t apply to just women.
I think most het men know quite well what is sexually attractive to them. We have a very simple function to work out (young and shapely). See any top100 girls fhm list in all its monotony. Compare it to the mixture of age ranges/body types you get in this list .
I suspect that male attraction is actually more complicated than conventional wisdom would hold, and that attraction to other factors gets attributed to physical appearance. For example, Tina Fey wasn’t “hot” until after she became famous and successful.
The attractive qualities in a partner are more complex and men are probably equally bad at knowing this.
Indeed. So I suppose we could say that identifying attractive personality traits is just as difficult on both sides, and how hard it is for a given person depends on that person’s priority mix of physical and personal attractiveness.
They know whether they’re getting good customer service. But I don’t particularly agree with the analogy. Men and women should be working with each other, not against each other. I don’t tolerate potential partners who treat me otherwise, and I don’t have much sympathy for people who do.
I just looked a little closer at the URL you’re getting—seems I’ve confused the system by moving the post from the discussion section and/or changing the title. Hmm. Someone should probably know about that, but I don’t know who or how to alert them.
I have noticed that links to Rationality Quotes October in Recent Comments have the same problem for me—the problem is that the r/discussion/ somehow gets inserted between lesswrong.com/ and lw/2tw.
Speaking of Recent Comments, are we ever going to get that thing fixed? It’s been broken for something like a few weeks now. (It makes one feel like LW is “ill”.)
I’m not sure what the problem is, but the link to the OKCupid post doesn’t work—I had to use google to reread the comments.
Unless I missed something, there were more favorable comments than not, and from more people. the post has positive karma, too.
As I understand it, there are a number of men on LW who found that a lot of the advice they’d been given by women about dating didn’t work for them, and they’re touchy about the subject.
Do you mean the link in the original post to the earlier thread? It worked for me just now. What problem did you have?
Most of the active discussion I’ve seen has been about why this is hogwash and shouldn’t be posted here (so I appreciate hearing another view). But I only get alerted to comments for threads I’m alread in, so my view is pretty biased.
I’m new here; did you get this impression from previous discussion, individual comments over time, or something else? If it’s true, I wonder how similar the women-being-asked and women-being-pursued were (e.g. if they were discussing it with their nerdy female friends and then trying to pick women up at clubs, or vice versa). I confess that I take on a charitable view of peoples’ goals in romantic pursuit, and also that my idea of “charitable” is pretty close to “assuming it agrees with me.” (As it should! Would you trust someone who behaved in ways they didn’t recommend?)
If I click on the rightmost link while I’m in Recent Comments, I get http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/2tw/draft_rational_dating_less_wrongers_on_okcupid/
which just says in red, “This post doesn’t exist”.
I tried one other post from this discussion in Recent Comments, and got the same result.
On the one hand, I do think the majority response was in favor of the post. On the other, there was a strong minority which was a good bit nastier than I’d say is usual for LW.
I got that impression from discussion here. And I’ve just realized that while I’ve seen a lot about bad dating advice from women to men, I’ve never seen a clear description of what that advice is. Guys?
I believe that this is a representative article on the view of bad advice.
Although contrary to that I’ve had discussions with female friends where they admit that they like cocky men… but then that women wasn’t trying to portray a “nice girl” attitude.
Honestly I think this is the smartest sentence in there:
Of course they aren’t. Most people don’t think much about what they really want, just like they don’t think much about who they really are. It’s possible that het men and het women are so different that the men aren’t also clueless in this regard, but I doubt it. And each set treats the other like its members are stupid about relationships at best, and deliberately conniving at worst. No wonder we get this ridiculous, overblown sense of adversary about dating. : \
This woman thinks the reason men get bad advice is that they’re not asking the right questions. I don’t agree with everything in that article, but overall I think it’s on the right track.
We have to be careful here. We need to qualify the difference between sexually attractive and attractive qualities in a partner. That is the difference between what may make us horny and what we would actually want to live with.
I think most het men know quite well what is sexually attractive to them. We have a very simple function to work out (young and shapely). See any top100 girls fhm list in all its monotony. Compare it to the mixture of age ranges/body types you get in this list .
The attractive qualities in a partner are more complex and men are probably equally bad at knowing this.
I think that’s important to note. It’s my impression that, regardless of what gender you are, the kind of person you’d be most eager to have a one-night stand with isn’t the kind of person you’d be most eager to marry. The “virgin/whore dichotomy” doesn’t apply to just women.
I suspect that male attraction is actually more complicated than conventional wisdom would hold, and that attraction to other factors gets attributed to physical appearance. For example, Tina Fey wasn’t “hot” until after she became famous and successful.
Definitely.
Indeed. So I suppose we could say that identifying attractive personality traits is just as difficult on both sides, and how hard it is for a given person depends on that person’s priority mix of physical and personal attractiveness.
I like that link.
Me too. But we’re just women, what would we know about how women work. ; )
How much does the average customer know about how to be a successful salesman?
They know whether they’re getting good customer service. But I don’t particularly agree with the analogy. Men and women should be working with each other, not against each other. I don’t tolerate potential partners who treat me otherwise, and I don’t have much sympathy for people who do.
I just looked a little closer at the URL you’re getting—seems I’ve confused the system by moving the post from the discussion section and/or changing the title. Hmm. Someone should probably know about that, but I don’t know who or how to alert them.
I have noticed that links to Rationality Quotes October in Recent Comments have the same problem for me—the problem is that the r/discussion/ somehow gets inserted between lesswrong.com/ and lw/2tw.
Speaking of Recent Comments, are we ever going to get that thing fixed? It’s been broken for something like a few weeks now. (It makes one feel like LW is “ill”.)