Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> What I’ve long wondered is how women react in the real world now that they have all the power on dating apps

Women always had that specific kind of power in real world. When/if you go to a party, observe the people who are alone, standing against a wall; they're invariably men, without absolutely no exception. This says everything about power.

Having said that, bear in mind that this kind of power is only a (arguably small) part of relationships between the sexes. It says a lot, but it's still a (small) part.

> Why would they try to find a date in any other way?

Because the dating medium strongly correlates with the interest of the people involved. Not everybody's looking for the Tinder type of relationship.

"Before Tinder", one would just go to a nightclub. It's exactly the same experience; and for the same reason, not everybody goes to nightclubs.



It took me half a lifetime to realize this, but you are correct. It's the man's job to try, and it's the woman's job to choose.

It's honestly changed the way I think about relationships.


> It's the man's job to try, and it's the woman's job to choose.

Is that a descriptive or prescriptive statement?

Or put another way: Are you observing and remarking on cultural norms, or stating "This is how things should be?"

I only ask because when someone says "It's X's job to [whatever]" the connotation is "X should [whatever]" but the context surrounding this made it ambiguous.


Not the parent but it's definitely descriptive.

Should it be that way? The answer likely depends on whether you're a man or a woman. From the male's POV changing the game benefits us since there's less work to do. If you're a woman then it's the opposite and a net negative.

This sexual dynamic evolved for a reason, so changing it seems like the epitome of an uphill battle.


> The answer likely depends on whether you're a man or a woman. From the male's POV changing the game benefits us since there's less work to do. If you're a woman then it's the opposite and a net negative.

I don't have a horse in that race, but I do have an ethical concern.

If you tell men that they're supposed to try, then it's likely that a lack of success will be met with trying harder.

What does this result in, practically speaking? Being more forward? Being more touchy? Being more in their face putting in the effort?

a.k.a. creepy, stalkerish behavior and possibly an increase in the incidence of sexual assault and/or harassment.

That's the concern I have with the "should" position.


That's an interesting definition of "trying harder". I think the person employing that strategy would quickly find that it doesn't work as well as some other ways of trying harder. Those could include:

Inhabiting different environments. E.g. a female friend suggested I take up yoga as yoga classes tend to be more/mostly female. Within a few classes I was dating a woman I met there.

"Putting it out there" by which I mean proactively telling friends that you're interested in meeting women. This was suggested to me and my first reaction was "That's silly. Everyone knows I'm single and looking..." but in fact most people - even your friends - aren't prioritizing your dating life. If you mention it to them it sometimes can trigger a "Hey, that reminds me, I know someone who's also single...you two might be a good match."

Increasing your velocity. At the end of the day meeting someone you want to date is a numbers game. The more women you meet the more likely you are to find a match. "Trying harder" can simply be making more attempts to meet more women.

I.e. trying harder doesn't have to be creepy.


> That's an interesting definition of "trying harder".

See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16898821

> I think the person employing that strategy would quickly find that it doesn't work as well as some other ways of trying harder.

You'd think, but in practice, not always. Aren't humans amazing?

I think if we're being prescriptive, I think working towards a culture where all parties involved do both choosing and trying. Put forth the effort to get to know people, then choose who you want to be romantically/sexually involved with among the people for whom there is even a remote mutual desire.


The population imbalance in China/India is a separate issue.

>Aren't humans amazing?

I wasn't suggesting it's not tried. Simply that it's unlikely to be successful and thus will find fewer adherents.

>working towards a culture where all parties involved do both choosing and trying

This happens already. Women pursue men all the time, they just don't have to expend as much energy as men do.


> The population imbalance in China/India is a separate issue.

The observable consequences of this imbalance offers insight into human nature. The article and comments in that thread delve far into them.

It's worth reading.


That results in what is basically the dating schema for the last century. Men put forth the effort, and women choose the winners. If a man does not try, he does not find anything. If a woman does not try, she just gets poor suitors.


You could also argue it's a small contribution ( don't want to give it too much credit) to the creation of `incel` which now has driven multiple frustrated young men to commit mass murders.


The one making the choice is more likely to end up with preferred partner. The one accepting/rejecting existing proposal has less chance to end up with most preferred partner.


Women can make choices too. It’s just that it’s frowned upon when a woman makes the first move. That’s your downside.

Men can brag Baku their sexual lives and even exaggerate it. Women have to do the opposite and be very secretive.

Perhaps it ties to the dynamic. Women are buyers. Men are sellers. Easy to spend $1000 to buy things, hard to earn $1000 to sell something.

Western dating is a totally different beast than other countries.


I compared advantages of active vs passive person in that model - that holds true regardless of which gender is on which side.

I think there are three different datings - the one when you look for partner, the one where you seek temporary fun and then the one when you seek brag points/social status through trophy partner you don't really care about. These discussions tend to confuse them.


> It's the man's job to try, and it's the woman's job to choose.

IMO this is very close, but missing an important point. It's a man's job to escalate, it's a woman's job to choose.

Women definitely try. They put a lot of effort into how they are perceived (looks, mannerisms, etc.) and giving us subtextual clues that they are interested.

All we have to do is be a little vulnerable and ask them out on a date, go for that first kiss, get down on one knee and so on.


> All we have to do is be a little vulnerable and ask them out on a date, go for that first kiss, get down on one knee and so on.

It's a lot more complicated than that. Getting down on one knee can be more expensive than a knee replacement.


Relevant: "Why Don't Women Ask Men Out on First Dates? Despite greater equality, women still don't ask. Why?" https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-how-and-why-sex-...


with most animals, it is the male that pursues and the female that chooses. i honestly cannot think of an exception to this pattern.


Not really. This is old thinking. The theory of sexual selection has been evolving in the past few years.

BBC has a good intro on the subject: http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160624-we-have-the-wrong-id...


i skimmed the article and did not find anything stating that females frequently and actively compete for males. there are a lot of other counterexamples to anthropomorphic behavior there [that has been assigned to sexes] but not the specific one we're discussing here. i think the generalization at hand is on pretty solid footing.

it's really the same for all generalizations. i can make the statement, "males are attracted to females" and it will be true in 95%+ of cases. just because some limited counterexamples exist does not make this generalization a poor representation - these are not laws of physics or mathematical axioms that need absolute conformance to be usefully true.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: