r/GenZ • u/lil-Jackfruit5895 • 9h ago
Rant Dating???
Dating apps have ruined our generation istg
•
u/chatme_please 2007 9h ago
What the fuck😭😭
•
•
u/EmptyStupidity 2003 9h ago
Hopefully if enough girls respond like this he’ll get the hint
•
u/Critical_Concert_689 7h ago
mfw "Sometimes I get bored and like to troll people on Tinder"
I'm doubtful these are real people.
•
u/capy_on_a_moped 1h ago
Unfortunately, I think this type of person would just grow resentment towards women rather than be critical of their actions.
•
•
•
•
u/d3rp7d3rp 9h ago
Why are so many like this
Oh yeah red pill podcasts
•
•
u/pinapizza 1997 5h ago
Something something pairbonding bullshit, something something something excuses for wanting girls to stay virgins
And funnily enough, they expect to be able to have sexual access to as many virgin women as they want while still maintaining that virginity expectation. Bro the math ain’t mathing there
→ More replies (6)•
•
u/Allanprickly 9h ago
And this is the kind of guy thats getting matches....... I havent even gotten 1 match. Life is cruel beyond words.
•
u/RagieWagieInACagie 1997 8h ago
Getting matches is based solely off your appearance. If you’re a guy getting literally no matches then unfortunately you’re just too ugly for OLD.
•
u/Allanprickly 8h ago
Yup. Sadly surgery is insanely expensive so gonna take a while for me to save up.
•
u/Rolmar 1998 7h ago
learning how to be stylish and taking care of your hair/ having good photos is probably cheaper
•
u/Allanprickly 6h ago
Yeah but paying for a stylist is also expensive. And 60-100usd haircuts every 2 weeks isnt cheap either.
•
•
u/3soxfoxy 5h ago
Use ChatGPT to help build a wardrobe within your budget. Who tf is paying that much for a haircut? $40 will get you a decent fade and you only need haircuts once a month. Please stop defeating yourself for no reason.
•
u/Allanprickly 5h ago
Spending 1000s of dollars on clothes + hair cuts + products to only look 2% better just doesnt seem worthwhile. If your ugly your ugly and no amount of shirts or hair spray will change that.
•
u/Miko48 5h ago
Well I guess we’ll just all have to through you a pity party cause you’ll never find love and be single and miserable forever. This attitude is so fucking annoying and pathetic, you want to sit and bitch about your situation, but have every excuse in the world to not do something about it. People here are trying to give you some genuine advice and you just don’t want to listen and instead just whine and complain and wallow in your own misery.
→ More replies (3)•
•
u/ASU_SexDevil 1997 46m ago
Or just… eat healthier and work out?
If your first thought is surgery then you’re just looking to cut corners and take the easy way out.
•
u/Orangutanion 2002 8h ago
This is by design. Understand that the people who run these apps hate you and they want you to die alone. Don't believe me? They hate women too.
•
u/therealpork 3h ago
He's probably 6ft which is probably all OP cares about.
→ More replies (2)•
u/Allanprickly 2h ago
Nah dude its hard to tell height from pics. Its defs cus the guy was attractive.
•
u/therealpork 16m ago
My guy... height is the first and foremost thing on a profile after the initial pic.
•
•
u/Loserdogma 9h ago
“Not all men” and sure whatever but holy shit a goddamn hoard of them are genuinely the most braindead and disrespectful creatures I’ve ever met.
•
u/Orangutanion 2002 8h ago
men who are not like this may never receive romantic attention in their lives.
→ More replies (1)•
u/DrCastor_Rae 6h ago
Right? Guys like him are getting matches and then they say stuff like this. But the guys who are genuine and have good intentions never get matched lol.
Dating is a rigged game.•
•
u/treycook Millennial 1h ago
People who are genuine and have good intentions and are attractive also exist, and they are probably partnered lol. There are also a lot of toxic people who treat their partners like shit, and less conventionally attractive people who find relationships too. Online dating apps indeed suck but it's because they're predatory and prioritize engagement and retention for payments from their userbase, not because of the stereotypical nice guy who never gets an honest chance.
•
u/iDislikeSn0w 2000 7h ago
Why is this okay to say? What about if we swap “men” for any racial demographic in your sentence, you’d still think it holds up then?
•
u/Murky_Crow 5h ago
Right? It’s a deeply hateful thing to say. They would never say that about any other demographic or race.
•
u/i_stealursnackz 2008 2h ago
You think they don't say that about black people? God, I WISH people didn't.
•
u/Murky_Crow 2h ago
Not people, just a specific person I’m referencing here.
The one clutching pearls claiming that most to all men are horrific.
If you took their exact words, and you say against a specific racial group or demographic group, they would be screeching from the rafters to stop it
→ More replies (1)•
u/Professional-Gear974 1h ago
Isn’t that the point? That’s is a crappy thing to say? We can all generally agree black people aren’t a good example of a race getting the best treatment from other races.
•
u/i_stealursnackz 2008 1h ago
They said they wouldn't say that about any other demographic or race, before they clarified, I literally thought they were saying people don't say that about other people. My point was that people unfortunately do because racists exist.
•
u/Professional-Gear974 1h ago
That applies to women just as much as it does to men. Generally the more attractive ones are less inclined to be decent or nice people because they don’t have to. And the people who are nice don’t show up as much. This wouldn’t get posted if he said all the right things so we don’t hear about it as much.
•
u/Happy-Viper 5h ago
“I have chosen to march with this asshole. He was then an asshole. Clearly, this is a men’s issue.”
→ More replies (28)•
•
u/Fuzea 9h ago
NIH studies have found that those with 8 or more partners are more likely to get divorced. This doesn’t just apply to women though, it also applies to men. You can blame this line of thinking on Andrew Tate, or religion, or misogyny, or whatever, but the data backs the notion that fewer sexual partners leads to fewer divorces. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with seeking out someone with fewer partners granted that you hold yourself to the same standard.
•
u/Phylaras 8h ago edited 8h ago
Source?
To elaborate, I found a study using NIH data and that's it. The study explicitly found an association and could ave been caused by a 3rd factor.
•
u/Fuzea 8h ago
If you are citing the smith and wolfinger study you are misinterpreting the findings. The finding of the study was that higher number of partners correlates to higher divorce rates even when factoring in other externalities (religiosity, personal beliefs, mental health, etc.).
•
u/Phylaras 5h ago
It is still an association. It is not causative.
There could be a 3rd factor explaining the effect and the authors are explicit about it. Maybe highly impulsive people have more partners, for example. That impulsivity is also plausibly the reason for more divorce.
•
u/Myppismajestic 2004 46m ago
Yes that's what correlation leaves unanswered, you have not really said anything of substance.
We can still broadly use this correlation finding to model future dating behavior using past one.
•
u/Phylaras 39m ago edited 36m ago
It means that you can't ask a person how many partners they've had and assume that more = bad.
The data do not show that.
So no, it's not useful for dating and trying to press it into that use is an exercise in statistical illiteracy.
•
•
u/medfad 30m ago
Also, I'm not sure who you're trying to call statistically illiterate.
The study literally says: "We find the relationship between premarital sex and divorce is highly significant and robust even when accounting for early-life factors. Compared to people with no premarital partners other than eventual spouses, those with nine or more partners exhibit the highest divorce risk, followed by those with one to eight partners. There is no evidence of gender differences."
They're literally saying previous premarital partner count is a significant predictor of divorce. Your conclusions don't follow, you're using a red herring trying to imply that we think more partners = inevitable bad. You're being blinded by your bias
•
u/RhythmicRavenclaw 2h ago
But the study talks about partners not sexual partners, it's pretty logical to assume someone with more relationships has a higher chance of being divorced at some point.
•
u/Myppismajestic 2004 44m ago
That's not what the study is claiming. It's specifically talking about how PAST number of partners is negatively correlated with likelihood of a relationship succeeding long term. A relationship AFTER those PAST ones.
•
•
•
u/_Tal 1998 7h ago
Doesn’t matter even if true. You’re dating an individual, and statistics only apply to collectives. You could arbitrarily guess the probability that a relationship with someone will be successful based on all sorts of superficial factors. It’s all irrelevant because the only thing that ultimately matters is who they are as a person once you actually get to know them.
•
•
•
u/SamHugz 4m ago
Bruh all these people calling you stupid are ridiculous, but you're half right. Statistics are relevant and inform decisions and reveal important knowledge on a population level. Statistics are extremely important and relevant.
Where you are correct is that statistics create bias. Bias creates assumption, and assuming you already know what another human being you are first connecting with is right generally doesn't lead to positive experiences.
•
u/stefan-emil 7h ago
Extremely nieve mindset lol. If you know a certain choice has Incredibly low odds of success compared to other options, why would you go with that one??
→ More replies (1)•
u/Happy-Viper 5h ago
Nah, statistics apply to individuals. Not every time, but enough that it should be factored into your decisions.
•
•
•
u/wafflepiezz 8h ago
He’s got it wrong. The more sexual partners someone had, the less happier they are in long term relationships. That’s the study he’s trying to refer to but failed miserably.
•
u/wenevergetfar 4h ago
This i believe ngl. The more ive gotten laid the less i want to settle, novelty is pretty fun
•
•
u/Professional-Bad-559 9h ago
At the point he didn’t respect you enough to answer your question: “WBU”, that shouldn’t been the end of the convo. Guy doesn’t think or respect women much.
•
u/Ok-Amphibian-6834 8h ago
I thank the Lord every day I’m married and don’t have to put up with this garbage. Op. My condolences.
•
u/lil-Jackfruit5895 8h ago
HELP
•
u/EnergyTurtle23 8h ago
I honestly just mostly avoided relationships until I got closer to my mid to late 20s because too many people are “playing games” when they’re younger. In the later part of your 20s you’ll start to meet more people who take the prospect of a relationship more seriously, by then most people have had a few failed relationships and are hopefully humbled and have a better idea of what they really want out of life. Good luck! I found my person, you will too someday.
•
u/lil-Jackfruit5895 8h ago
What happens when I tell you I’m already in my mid to late 20s 🥹🥹🥹
•
u/Critical_Concert_689 7h ago
age is just a number; some people grow old, but never grow up. Others misinterpret "growing up" as having a relationship that meets socially defined milestones rather than one built on "playing games."
Everyone has a different agenda in life; accepting theirs and your own is maturity.
•
u/newnoon111 2006 8h ago
He says all of that whilst probably having multiple past relationships 😭
•
u/phosphosaurus 7h ago
Ikr, she should've asked him lmao. Probably like 20 previous partners and has the audacity to judge her.
•
•
•
u/lankamonkee 8h ago
Topic changer. I’ve got a bomb that’ll blow up any chance with OP
•
u/Accomplished_Pen980 8h ago
I always went with "these are my limits and boundaries. If I'm going to scare you off, let's get it done now not in 6 months when it's too late to rewind."
•
u/yasinburak15 2003 8h ago
Bro just delete the app and don’t download any of them I don’t get why mfs think you can only find people on platforms.
Embrace tradition, face to face. You don’t see more shit like the irl.
I truly don’t understand this gender war or red pill stuff anymore after two years of studying for fun lmao, some mfs are beyond saving.
•
u/jpollack21 2000 6h ago
Back in college I compliment a girls hair and she called me weird and told everyone in class I was a creep... as a whole I probably agree, but for dudes like me our only shot at a relationship is dating apps where you know from the start someone is interested in you and won't call you a creep just for striking up a conversation
•
u/ThatSmartIdiot 2004 1h ago
what the fuck
and this is one of the reasons why i'm a strong advocate for friends-to-lovers. you'd know the person enough to trust they won't make your life a living hell just because you want romantic connection
•
u/Orangutanion 2002 8h ago
it is genuinely harder to meet a woman the "correct" way than to get a job. And you know what? This is by design.
•
•
u/Alphy101 1996 8h ago
The Tate brothers really did a number on the low self esteem guys.
•
u/DeathByDumbbell 1999 1h ago
As we all know, before that guy soiled the earth with his presence all men loved and respected women who had a lot of sexual partners. Yep, totally.
•
u/Alphy101 1996 1h ago
You're right. And all women did it as well.
See how redundant that logic is when you brush every male person as identical? It kind of defeats the argument of this whole post.
•
u/DeathByDumbbell 1999 1h ago
How did I brush every male person as identical? I'm saying that Andrew Tate didn't invent the concept of 'men disliking women who sleep around a lot'. That kinda has been the norm.
•
u/Difficult-Map-3263 3h ago
You have low self esteem for having morals and standards?
•
u/i_stealursnackz 2008 2h ago
What could this possibly have to do with morals?
And yes, if you're hung up on someone for having previous partners rather than anything about the person themselves AS a person, yes, you do have low self-esteem. The previous partners someone's had are not mogging you, they have nothing to do with you, you are fine.
→ More replies (13)
•
u/Majestic-Avocado2167 8h ago
Dodged a bullet keep it moving, he’ll grow up someday just not with you
•
u/Accomplished_Pen980 8h ago
The man has standards and boundaries, that's a problem?
If a woman doesn't want to date a guy who's banged the block, she has boundaries and it's "slay queen, you go, girl!!"
But a guy with boundaries and principals... he's a red flag
I can't see it
•
u/Difficult-Map-3263 3h ago
Thank you! Why are all the women in the comments acting as if this is ut of line. The guy has a set standard that he doesnt want a woman with alot of mileage. That simple!
→ More replies (9)•
u/Critical_Concert_689 7h ago
The man has standards and boundaries, that's a problem?
I'd argue that's not the problem; it's the approach.
You'd have to be a social eunuch to approach the discussion in this manner, and THAT is the problem.
•
u/Accomplished_Pen980 6h ago
What rule, law, commandment are you applying to this fella that demands he abide your rule?
He doesn't want to wast his or her time, he asked a direct question, read the answer and noped out with minimal footprint.
Who does he owe and what are they owed and why?
→ More replies (10)
•
u/Sweet_Detective_ 7h ago
How would it be biology if that was the case though? Wouldn't it be like psychology? Of course it's not the case, but if it was, I don't see how biology comes into play
•
u/jpollack21 2000 5h ago
This is still better than getting one match a month and maaaybe a first date every 3 months. With paying for premium and using it for hours everyday, it took me about 2 years to actually get a girlfriend and then she cheated like 6 months later
•
2h ago
[deleted]
•
u/jpollack21 2000 2h ago
I dont know what the guy looked like but why would you say this lol
•
2h ago
[deleted]
•
u/jpollack21 2000 2h ago
Wtf I also went to UofM what are the odds??
Also i dont know what that means but it sounds derogatory as hell so I'm not going to comment on that... how and why would i know what the guy looked like lol I'm not out here stalking her instagram thats psycho
•
u/crunchylimestones 3h ago
Tbf, it's true, but it's not great to enter into a relationship with that frame of mind
•
u/Witty-Second835 8h ago
Not to brag or anything, but I’m a lesbian and don’t have to put up with.. this. Yall stay safe tho
•
u/Accomplished_Pen980 8h ago
Speaking of stay safe... statistically lesbian relationships end in a much higher rate of divorce than any other kind of divorce and report the highest incidents of domestic violence of all relationship types.
→ More replies (6)•
u/Act_Bright 7h ago
Those stats involved women who'd been in relationships with men
Obviously, a lot of lesbians had been divorced...
→ More replies (7)•
u/jpollack21 2000 6h ago
Im guessing you probably deal with the stale convos in a sea of empty DMs (not dissing you, just saying 90% of dating apps is waiting for a like/match)
•
u/Witty-Second835 5h ago
Last time I used them was when I dated men last year. Definitely wouldn’t receive the unlimited likes with women lol
•
u/jpollack21 2000 5h ago
That's smart lol the apps are truly dreadful and a confidence killer for sure
•
•
u/Individual99991 Millennial 5h ago
Yeah, good luck finding even one partner, buddy.
When I see stuff like this, I wonder if it's a dating version of that phishing scam where they deliberately misspell stuff and put in logical errors to weed out anyone who pays attention to what they're reading and responding to.
•
•
•
u/eltaquerodeCA 9h ago
I swear to god, the gene pool needs to be cleaned
•
•
•
→ More replies (10)•
•
u/Atell_ 9h ago
He isn’t wrong
It’s just true for BOTH men and women, the scientific literature is pretty clear on that
kinda silly bringing up in the context (on him, boneheaded) and (on her) obviously above her head the possible biological ramifications for monogamy
biology is not about freedom it’s always there wether we like it or not
•
u/ddizzle13 8h ago
Only women get those studies thrown in their face. Bc the body line is ppl looking down on women with a high body count while praising men for it
•
u/Raythia 8h ago
The only people who praise men with high body counts are other men. I'd assume most women either don't care or they see it as a red flag, just like how men see a high body count as a red flag for women.
•
→ More replies (5)•
•
u/mysecondaccountanon Age Undisclosed 8h ago
What scientific literature? Give me citations, or at least DOIs.
•
u/Accomplished_Pen980 8h ago
There is this one: https://ifstudies.org/blog/counterintuitive-trends-in-the-link-between-premarital-sex-and-marital-stability
Then there's this one: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10989935/
These are pretty big peer reviewed data sources
But I bet you could have googled that your self
•
u/Act_Bright 7h ago
One factor not seemingly controlled for, at least in one of them: people who have more relationships might be more confident in ending them due to incompatibility
In other words, they might have different standards and expectations for a longer term partner
•
u/Accomplished_Pen980 6h ago
That's what the guy here is saying... he sees the risk for an incompatibility he isn't willing to risk and is opting out early, respectfully
What ever his reasoning or how he arrived it, in his heart, based on the information he has, there is a no-go zone and OP was in it so he noped out.
He didn't owe her anything, he isn't liable for anything. He asked, she answered and he was satisfied that he he was moving along, no further need to expend time or energy
•
u/Act_Bright 6h ago
You have absolutely no issues with any of the way he handled this conversation?
•
u/Accomplished_Pen980 6h ago
What criticism can I offer.. he was efficient?
•
u/Act_Bright 6h ago
No issue with 'that's biology'?
Which it isn't.
•
u/Accomplished_Pen980 5h ago
There is a biological certainty that the more sexual partners a person has, man or woman, the more difficult it becomes to Pair-Bond.
That is a biological reality. I know it's trendy to deny basic biology in the service of personal moral high ground these days but I'd say that's a fair way to weed out people who aren't a fit.
•
u/beerandglitter 1h ago
Pair bonding is a myth just so you’re aware lol that’s just not a thing. There’s nothing biological about more partners being a bad thing.
•
•
u/mysecondaccountanon Age Undisclosed 4h ago
I prefer people to actually cite their sources if they're going to claim something like that. Forgive me, I am in academia, and I like to actually be able to verify what's being told to me. It's drilled into my head that if you make a claim, you'd better have your sources ready to back it up. I don't like the whole "just google it" line of thinking as it stifles productive sharing of knowledge (including the diversity of knowledge one gets through sharing) and also stifles the process of checking claims.
I don't quite have the time to go over the studies themselves at the moment as I am working on a project at the moment. However, as just a little thing, I like to at least look at the journals and authors of a paper for credibility, as that takes very little time.
I'll start with the one from the JFI. The journal is decently credible, I'll give you that. Nicholas H. Wolfinger...seems interesting. I believe I've heard of him and his research before, though I'd probably have to go through my downloaded files that I store for easy search access through Zotero, and I have no access to the computer I use for that at this exact moment. From what I can tell, his Wikipedia page was created by a company that you pay to have make them for you, which as an editor myself has always left a strange taste in my mouth. Truthfully, I don't see how someone can be totally nonbiased in their editing if they're directly being paid and their employment hinges on the person they're writing about, but I digress as that relates little to the topic at hand and technically it is not proven that he himself paid for this (it could've been anyone, technically speaking). I won't go into the Title IX things that happened against him, as I know that will draw controversy here.
Jesse Smith, on the other hand, is a public member of the Heterodox Academy, which makes me question his objectivity in regards to certain topics (IYKYK). However, I'll try to keep my own views on the people and the organizations he chooses to associate with from tinging how I read his research, I suppose, once I get to it.
Having skimmed through a bit of the study (like I said, nothing major, as I am quite busy at the moment, unfortunately, with the start of the academic semester), I see it is based around self-report studies, which always carry less validity than and have certain disadvantages compared to other forms of information collection, but you run into that risk when you're doing some forms of psychological research.
The first link is not to academic research, but more to an opinion piece by Wolfinger for the IFS, a think tank that mostly centers around right-leaning/conservative media. Take that as you will.
Honestly though, I do question why you answered me, given you're not the original commenter? For all you know, these aren't the studies they would have sent me. While I do appreciate you chiming in, don't get me wrong, I did ask them, so it is a bit weird to have someone totally unrelated jump in and answer for them.
•
u/Accomplished_Pen980 4h ago
If you were my professor and my grade was dependent on it, I'd maybe put in more effort but I don't really take assignments from random people on the internet for no reward, you have Google, you can take what I said at face value or look it up your self, you're an adult.
•
u/jaydean20 8h ago
Please direct me to the "scientific literature" on this, because I am extremely skeptical.
Logically, it just doesn't make sense. Having little-to-no experience in past relationships makes it pretty difficult to learn the important emotional development lessons necessary to maintaining a successful one.
Looking at it from a purely biological perspective, the logic still doesn't add up to what you're describing. Natural selection favors bloodlines that procreate the most offspring, as that gives them the greatest chance of surviving and further proliferating. Given the limitations of human reproduction, this is improved by procreating with many different partners.
The movie "Idiocracy" made a pretty valid point about this; while it's not really a "good" thing or something we should morally/ethically aspire to, our biology clearly favors mating with as many different people as quickly as possible in order to keep our genes alive.
•
u/DeltaDied 2001 8h ago
Never tried it, dk if I ever will😭😭people are so insufferable and insensitive these days.
•
u/Hozan_al-Sentinel 8h ago
You dodged a bullet. Personally I've had more luck with dates and relationships when meeting people in person instead of on those apps.
I know that's anecdotal but I'm not entirely convinced our entire generation is cooked. Just some of us.
•
u/Just_Joking_04 7h ago
Just small correction, it hasn’t been Dating apps that have brought up this mindset in men, it’s the manosphere.
•
u/SilverFighter05 2005 7h ago
For the love of god uninstall dating apps. The amount of filtering they don't do and the distinct lack of decent people using them makes them useless
•
•
u/ThermalBlossom 4h ago
He’s not wrong, look it up?
•
u/Front_Statistician38 Millennial 2h ago
But do you think pointing this out will help you get a girlfriend or laid? Some things don't need to be said out loud
•
u/therealpork 3h ago
Tip: don't match with taller guys
•
u/i_stealursnackz 2008 2h ago
Because the manosphere content farmers clearly measure guys in height so they can choose which men specifically to throw the illusory truth effect at.
•
u/therealpork 17m ago
Bruh, manosphere content creators HATE short men.
•
u/i_stealursnackz 2008 1m ago
True, but they also hate men in general. You wouldn't set people up with advice that basically has them bound to never get a partner and always be seen as an asshole if you liked them.
•
•
•
u/Front_Statistician38 Millennial 2h ago
OP if you're asking women this on dating apps you're cooked, like you need to read the book of Pook or wait for your AI waifu cause ain't no way
•
•
u/ClueIntelligent4092 2h ago
I know which one of them won't end up in a successful long-lasting relationship
•
u/Magic_Zach 2h ago
So...
Specifically targeting women makes no sense at all. However, there is a line of logic to this though. If a person has had a higher number of failed relationships, that's the individual setting their own track record. So why would another relationship have a different expectation?
Catch is, this track record can only go up, because when relationships are successful they stop participating in the dating space. So there's no way to stop it, but you can slow it down. If person A is going relationships x2 as often as Person B, reasoning does point that yourself having a relationship with Person A will have a higher chance of failure, faster. It's simply following a trend.
That said, there is also the odds that Person A was extremely unlucky in past relationships. The logical thing to do would be ask the reason for the past failures, but that's a taboo for a current relationship too 🤷
•
u/iLLiCiT_XL 1h ago
Lotta young guys listen to content made by angry, lonely, single or divorced dudes and then wonder why they end up angry, lonely, single, and/or divorced.
•
u/Saint_Clair 1995 1h ago edited 1h ago
While the way this guy approached the topic is gross, he is sadly correct. For both men and women they are more likely to have a marriage that ends in divorce than people with fewer previous partners. The data shows this is more pronounced for women than men.
Somewhat strangely the least number of divorces come from (In order of least to most likely)
0 OR 1 previous partners
3 - 9 previous partners
2 previous partners
10 or more previous partners
•
•
•
•
u/Myppismajestic 2004 56m ago
Literature reviews support what he says. Men, women, or anyone else's chances of finding a long term partner negatively correlates with number of partners they've previously had.
Why do you think him mentioning that is somehow evidence of ruin of dating in our generation?
•
•
•
u/Divine_madness99 38m ago
What’s up with this new thing where people make a general statement, and then justify it with a quick “that’s biology tho”. I feel like this topic falls more under sociology, and is a mindset thing if you could prove this was a real concrete phenomenon
•
•
u/Mara2507 2004 31m ago
The one thing I dont understand is these guys think women shouldnt date or be sexual with a lot of partners. But they also believe a "high quality man" is one that has had a lot of relations. So like... who are these presumably straight guys supposed to be with if women cannot have too many partners due to bIoLoGy?
•
u/mchngrliris 9m ago
"that's biology" is a fucking insane thing to say. bio essentialism is a fucking plague on our society
•
•
u/Enough-Candy85 9h ago
It’s so obvious that bloke is getting dumped left and right because he’s a dipshit and he’s in his denialcore phase.
•
•
•
•
u/jpollack21 2000 6h ago
This logic makes no sense because I would rather be with someone who has had multiple relationships because they usually know what they're looking for and not just looking to waste time.
•
u/AutoModerator 9h ago
Did you know we have a Discord server‽ You can join by clicking here!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.