
Dan Ariely on why online dating is so unsatisfying - mike
http://bigthink.com/ideas/20749
======
WilliamLP
I had my first dating experiences in life online, and then I met a couple of
girls "normally". (Relationships are few and far between for me, and I have to
work at getting one and it takes a year or two and finding one is by far the
hardest problem I've ever had to solve in my life).

I'm trying online again, and the contrast is extremely stark. There is nothing
in any other experience in life that has made me think of myself as an
unwanted commodity item quite so much as this. As a man in my thirties who is
below average in height (5'8) I fight against about 25% to 75% numbers, and
the women seem almost universally to be working extra carefully to exclude me
and almost always come across as extremely entitled, both in written and in
unwritten ways. And I can't blame them for it! They just understand the
economics of scarcity, apparently. Despite being reasonably successful in life
and being in the best physical shape I've ever been (10% bodyfat or so, can
barely see my abs, can bench press 185 for 8 reps at bodyweight of 155), I
seem completely uninteresting to women in a nearly universal way without much
I can do to change this.

There are no doubt some men who succeed fantastically in this environment, but
it seems that for someone like me to do so, I would need to, very much, be
conscious of playing the game and pretty much doing anything _but_ presenting
an unashamed and straightforward version of self-expression. Since I consider
it to be the core of my character to neither accept or deal out bullshit from
anyone, but to seek the direct truth, this is a problem.

This is in contrast to where I've actually had success with women in the past
- amateur classical singing and opera. There the population is about 75%
women, with many of the men being gay. There, I can get a taste of what dating
is like for the rest of the world - I didn't have to play some stupid hyper-
masculinized pursuer who throws semi-sincere interest at a hundred women until
one of them returns a peep, but situations actually can develop somewhat
symmetrically and organically. Clearly the answer for me is to get back into a
world like that, despite not being very interested anymore for any other
reason. (My passion these days is programming and development.)

Anyway, this turned into a big rant, but I've been single for a year, face the
prospect of a few more, and it does get to me.

~~~
bokonist
_There are no doubt some men who succeed fantastically in this environment,
but it seems that for someone like me to do so, I would need to, very much, be
conscious of playing the game and pretty much doing anything but presenting an
unashamed and straightforward version of self-expression. Since I consider it
to be the core of my character to neither accept or deal out bullshit from
anyone, but to seek the direct truth, this is a problem._

If you have attitude that you're not going to make any changes to yourself in
order to land women, than you're not going to land women. And why should women
want to date you if your not willing to make the step?

Women don't want direct and straightforward. They want charm, mystery,
excitement. For one trite example, When I'm commenting on some nerdy web
forum, and my girlfriend asks me what I'm doing, I don't say, "I'm chatting on
a web forum." I say, "I'm engaging in correspondence" and paint the air of
some sophisticated 19th century aristocrat. Or I say, "the same thing I do
every night, sweetie, try and take over the world". When you can learn to
dress up the mundane aspects of life with fun and charm, you'll find women
enjoy being around you a lot more.

I used to think "game" was just something for cad's and those who wanted only
numbers and notches. But even the most cultured, educated, women wants to be
charmed, she wants that psychologically dominant rogue to game her. If you
want a great, long term affectionate companion, you need to develop both the
personal rapport and shared interests, but also the romantic game/charm that
makes her tingle for you.

~~~
WilliamLP
> If you have attitude that you're not going to make any changes to yourself
> in order to land women, than you're not going to land women.

I know! Such would be the definition of insanity and all that. That's why my
future plans involve making the best of the strengths and weaknesses I have
and who I am, who is someone who refuses to strive to be anybody but the
person of my dreams. Women don't like me and I'll live.

> Women don't want direct and straightforward. They want charm, mystery,
> excitement.

I know that too. I've read the SS literature and heard Ross Jeffries tapes.
The shit works. I don't like people who use it and it's not for me. Bullshit I
can detect disgusts me, in both genders. I know the arguments quite well and I
know human nature quite well. When you're learning a foreign language, you
don't say "Speaking French isn't me" you make the sounds that seem weird at
first. However, feeling like I need to spend my whole life making all my
conversations with women crafted according to some stupid shit I don't
actually feel isn't worth it for me. Yes I'm bitter, and I don't even rant all
the time, just in this thread:)

> you need to develop both the personal rapport and shared interests, but also
> the romantic game/charm that makes her tingle for you.

Yes I know. But I say no to this, and the anger at the fact that the person of
my dreams isn't good enough for a woman will drive me to more success, on my
own terms.

~~~
bokonist
Do you enjoy any sort of recreation, horsing around, pulling pranks, play
acting, telling stories, fantasizing, scheming, etc? Or is your life 100%
droll and serious?

Do you have other interests besides programming - travel, books, movies,
anything?

You don't have to be a Jersey Shore-like, brainless, bullsh*tter to get girls.
I think there is a difference between doing the Ross Jeffries act and spicing
up topics you genuinely like with a little bit of excitement.

~~~
WilliamLP
> Do you enjoy any sort of recreation, horsing around, pulling pranks, play
> acting, telling stories, fantasizing, scheming, etc?

Yes all of that, in a way that isn't appealing to women. The kind of humour I
enjoy includes dry self deprecation and obscure and nerdy tech jokes, and I
literally am part of the reason why women don't get into computer science
jobs. You can actually see the repulsive magnetic fields lines as they form
patterns at a distance from me at parties, not quite knowing why they need to
move but doing so anyhow. And you know what? I have the personality of leader,
and I'm going to develop myself into more of one, and women can just go to
guys like you when they want to tingle and shit.

> Do you have other interests besides programming - travel, books, movies,
> anything?

No, a little (and I recognize where your usernane is from), yes if I'm sitting
with a girl, and some other things that vary over time, including most that
are stereotypically male interests. (E.g. I love watching UFC with friends at
a bar.)

But anyway, I apologize if it appears like I'm playing a version of Eric
Berne's game "Why don't you...? yes but...", or ressentiment or glorifying my
own powerlessness or whatever. I'm really not after help, though I recognize
you and others would sincerely like to provide it.

I'm just pointing out that online dating really isn't the best path for
everyone, especially for someone like me. I really am likable to some, but I
just take a long time to get to know, and it has to be in person over time,
and it can't be the sort of whiny entitled women online who are smart enough
to understand the economics of scarcity:) My own best strategy will be a two-
pronged attack - make a ton more money and get a lot more power (in my view,
this is more honest than clowning my way through some speed seduction value
elicitation NLP bullshit that revolts me). And along with it get off the
internet more and do some things where there is continual interaction with
women. Sometimes, I know from experience, even though such things aren't that
enjoyable at first, they can take on a life of their own... E.g. the idea that
supposedly Sartre got into philosophy to pick up girls.

~~~
bokonist
_The kind of humour I enjoy includes dry self deprecation_

Yeah, self-deprecating humor is definitely romantic death, I've kicked the
habit over the years.

The reason I asked about interests is that 95% of my time is spent with
interests that women find uninteresting - programming, reading history,
reading economics, sports. Thus when I talk with women, I make sure to only
talk about the 5% (design, architecture, society, relationships, psychology,
travel) that women find interesting. In this way I am both authentic to myself
( I am genuinely interested in these topics), but also can make decent
conversation.

 _I'm really not after help, though I recognize you and others would sincerely
like to provide it._

I used to have a similar attitude to you, and similar droughts. So I feel
oddly compelled to give the unsolicited advice that I wish someone had given
me.

 _I have the personality of leader, and I'm going to develop myself into more
of one, and women can just go to guys like you when they want to tingle and
shit._

The arts of leadership are in many ways the arts of seduction.

 _make a ton more money and get a lot more power_

All the best to you, but in the modern world this is one of the least
efficient ways to try and find female companionship.

~~~
lsc
> interests that women find uninteresting - programming, reading history,
> reading economics, sports. Thus when I talk with women, I make sure to only
> talk about the 5% (design, architecture, society, relationships, psychology,
> travel)

Wow... are you sure that all women are so homogeneous?

~~~
impeachgod
Women ARE fairly homogenous. Date transsexuals, they're better.

------
rokhayakebe
I have started to use an online dating site for the first time about 4-6 weeks
ago. It is hard work. It's like having a mini part time job.

Advice for startups in this space. Cut your features to the following: Like +
Email. If I LIKE someone (judging by the looks), then show me the basic info.
If I LIKE the basic info, they get a notification and if they LIKE me then
that's it. Let us email each other from OUR OWN client. So I email
user345@datingsite.com and you route the email a la Craigslist. Simple as
that. Let us take it further.

Advice to guys. My first 2 weeks I was pinging everyone I was attracted to.
That did not work (for me). It's when I just kick back and decide to wait that
I realized it's mostly the women who choose in this game. Also if someone
contacts the conversation is usually much easier. My 2 newbie cents.

~~~
kadavy
You're right about the women doing the choosing. There was a study about how
when _women_ did the approaching in speed-dating, they became more interested.
(PDF:
[https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://faculty.wcas.north...](https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/eli-
finkel/documents/49_FinkelEastwickInPress_PSci.pdf)) So you're at an advantage
if they make the first move.

So, online, just getting into their sphere of awareness by viewing their
profile can help elicit a wink (and using a call-to-action in your profile):
<http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/match-whos-viewed-me/>

When you do finally send a message, it's best to keep it short, specific, and
include ONE question: <http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/match-messages/>

------
augustflanagan
I only ever went on one internet date. It was the best date of my life and I
ended up marrying her 4 years later.

Obviously this a ridiculous statistical outlier, but one of the reasons I
always thought it was successful was because we didn't find each other on a
huge site like Match.com or Plenty Of Fish. Instead it was through the online
dating section of the Seattle Stranger, which sort of guaranteed that we would
at least have a few similar interests right off the bat. To anyone in Seattle
I highly recommend it.

~~~
megablast
What, that you both live in Seattle and you are Strangers?

I think this is the way to go, big sites attract lots of strange people. Also,
from what I have heard, paying sites have better clientele than the free
sites, which makes sense, but I have not been game to actually pay for it.

------
ambulatorybird
I agree wiht a lot of his points. I think people do tend to be more
superficial or picky when evaluating profiles, because the photos are really
the only thing to go on -- you can't get a sense of a person's body language
or speaking style online, and textual data only goes so far. And I found the
actual "first dates" to be stressful because they're more like interviews for
dates rather than real dates -- much of the spontaneity and chemistry of
meeting a person for the first time is gone. Finally, as a non-white male, the
odds online are somewhat stacked against me, which is discouraging.

I'm intrigued by the guy's idea about creating interactive virtual spaces for
dating, rather than searching through textual profiles. I.e., put people
together in a rich, dynamic environment, let them observe the complexity of
each other's interactions, and they can gravitate toward one another on that
basis. Heck, it doesn't even have to be virtual -- you could launch something
like a matchmaking amusement park.

~~~
potatolicious
I've thought for a long time that the removal of profiles (that are viewable
by the other party) is pretty much the key that will make online dating
actually _work_.

People are far too picky, and reject far too many people they would otherwise
get along with famously in real life - I've noticed this pattern in myself
also. Profiles _suck_ at describing people, not to mention their compatibility
with you - yet they have this air of authority and legitimacy about them.

 _If_ we had a decent matchmaking service that wasn't just a complete
crapshoot (i.e., high-scoring matches _are_ actually good matches), I'd say a
blind-date system may in fact work better than what we've got now - get people
out there and interacting in real life as opposed to a terminal with a bunch
of droll readouts of vital statistics.

~~~
hapless
A blind date system would suffer from the adverse selection problem. As long
as _any other_ system exists, the blind date system would be
disproportionately used by predators and other undesirables who find it
disproportionately helpful.

Worse, in this case, the adverse selection problem builds on itself. Over
time, "normal" users would be driven out until only problematic candidates
remained.

~~~
Goosey
Off the cuff solution: Require accounts be tied to a real identity (provide
driver's license #?.. No I haven't thought about legal/privacy repercussions)
and introduce a post-date rating system. Sprinkle in some sort of staleness
algorithm along with an anti-maliciousness algorithm (IE: someone who always
rates their dates as creeps might themselves be a nutjob) and perhaps the
system can survive.

Off the cuff so tear this to pieces. Perhaps I just WANT the idea to work so
well that I am not seeing the forest through the trees.

~~~
hugh3
You'll eliminate the _complete_ creeps after one date. (Still gives a woman a
significantly nonzero chance of winding up with a _complete_ creep on his
first date anyway).

But you won't be able to eliminate those who are merely boring, or ugly, or
abrasive, or have an annoying personal habit. Your rolls will fill up with
people like these.

------
ajg1977
Good luck in real world dating if you think a coffee date after 5 hours of
surfing the web from the comfort of home is a poor ROI.

~~~
mburney
How is it not a poor ROI? My experience of "real world" dating has been: 1)
Social or physical activities that I enjoy regardless of how many dates I get
2) Meeting/knowing/connecting with people within those activities 3) Flirting
with some of those people, which naturally progresses to something more.

It beats wasting 5 hours surfing the web looking for dates.

~~~
nostrademons
What if you're surfing the web as a social activity that you enjoy anyway,
instead of explicitly _looking_ for dates?

I waste easily 5 hours/week surfing YCombinator. I'm tempted to start hanging
out on OKCupid. Not necessarily to find a date, but because then I get to
spend my online time with girls instead of guys. (No offense to the guys here,
it's just that most of my workday time is spent with guys too, and it gets
repetitive after a while...) If it leads to something more, great. If not -
what have I lost?

~~~
klipt
In my experience the etiquette on OkCupid is completely different from
elsewhere on the web - it's extremely common for someone to ignore your
message entirely.

So "hanging out with girls online" can translate to "being ignored by girls
online", which is hardly good for one's confidence.

------
billmcneale
One thing that's positive about online dating is that it takes away a lot of
the mysterious parameters.

Mysterious parameters: you meet a girl (or guy, but let's say girl) at a
party, hit it off, exchange phone numbers, call a few days later a get the
cold shoulder. Or you go on one or two dates, things still going well and then
you never hear back from that person.

What probably happened: she had a hang up, she wasn't ready, she met someone
else, she wasn't really looking, she was just interested in a few free meals,
she was set up by friends but she wasn't really into it, etc...

The advantage of online dating is that people who commit to it are usually a
bit more ready to get involved with someone else. I found that there is less
playing game and more straight-to-the-point "I'm looking for someone, so are
you, let's see if this can work".

------
kadavy
Online Dating is Unsatisfying because people suck at communicating.

They need to write good profiles by not talking about _themselves_ so much:
[http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/how-to-write-an-
online...](http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/how-to-write-an-online-
dating-profile/)

They need to write clear and compelling opening messages:
<http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/match-messages/>

They need to speak in specifics to get a conversation flowing:
[http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/conversation-
nuggets-i...](http://www.onlinedatingmatchmaker.com/conversation-nuggets-in-
online-dating/)

~~~
WilliamLP
It's posts like this that make think "forget women". I mean seriously. I would
want a relationship where I can be myself, and don't have to craft every bit
of what I say according to some stupid protocol when it annoys the fuck out of
me to see other people following when I can tell they're not being who they
want but just following the rules. Yes I'm single, yes I have been for a long
time, yes I will be for a long time further, most likely.

~~~
kadavy
The "protocol" isn't really for the sake of being someone other than yourself
- it's for letting your personality be displayed through the limitations of
the medium.

~~~
roel_v
This is a very good way to describe the 'problem' or rather 'situation', very
refreshing.

------
blizkreeg
How to approach online dating in a novel way does keep me up long hours as
this is something I'm trying to solve in my startup, albeit for a niche
segment of the population.

[Apologies for this next plug] I am very interested in teaming up with a
couple of talented and driven hackers and working together if this area
interests you. My startup has some initial traction (slightly north of a
thousand users) in the two months since launch.

My email is in my bio.

------
Goladus
Excellent interview. Yes, he mostly ignores the people who've had success, but
I don't think it really detracts much from the overall point. I've had some
success with online dating but I agree that it's generally an unsatisfying
experience much the way he describes it. (3-6 hours of work per cup of coffee
pretty much nails it).

The points about sharing experience are accurate, except that I would focus in
particular on shared experiences with multiple people at once. A big weakness
in online dating is that it's tends to be a series of one-on-one interactions.
Unless one of you is really good at seducing strangers, and does it right
away, it's going to be hard to sustain those one-on-one interactions long
enough to turn into a relationship.

At least one person has to take the step to integrate into the other's social
network, and it has to happen quickly, or else it's not likely to go anywhere.
The way offline dating tends to work is that you meet someone in a social
situation. You interact with them for a few moments at a time, with frequent
breaks while you each socialize with other people. You have opportunities to
observe the person discreetly as well as interact with them. You send each
other signals and at some point you find some privacy and get more serious.

A dating site that encouraged that sort of thing might be more successful.
(okcupid tries to encourage a variety of behaviors but ultimately their design
still winds up facilitating the one-on-one chat -> date paradigm)

------
motters
Online dating is difficult if, like me, you generally dislike superficiality
and find the prospect of turning yourself into a sales & marketing guy or a
snake oil salesman terrifying.

------
amichail
Maybe social news sites such as reddit could double as online dating sites.

The focus would be on intellectual debate, rather than on more superficial
things.

~~~
hugh3
Do you think "interestingness of intellectual debates" is the most important
quality of a partner?

~~~
amichail
It's probably a better starting point than more superficial things.

~~~
paulgb
As superficial as some attributes may be, you don't ultimately decide who
you're physically attracted to.

I think "superficial" is an arbitrary distinction anyway. Who is to say that
intelligence is a more worthy attribute than physical attractiveness?

~~~
tedunangst
_Who is to say that intelligence is a more worthy attribute than physical
attractiveness?_

Ugly people who think they're smarter than everybody else. :)

------
markbao
/ _It turns out, women really care about men's height. I’m 5’9”, if I wanted
to be as attractive as somebody who’s 5’10”, right, another inch? I would have
to make about $35-40,000 more a year._

From a 5'7": sorry, what!? Link to paper?

~~~
hugh3
The fact that women like height and money is uncontroversial (sorry dude). I
wouldn't believe any exact numbers about how much of one converts to how much
of the other.

It could be true in this case though due to the nonlinear utility of money.
This guy's a professor of computer science at Duke so he's presumably making
good money, maybe $150K? The difference between making $150K and $190K is
pretty unimportant, like an extra inch in height, whereas the difference
between making $40K and $80K is important, like an extra (I dunno) five inches
in height.

For this particular guy, he could probably increase his attractiveness by an
equal amount by spending fifty bucks on a decent haircut.

~~~
markbao
Hahaha. Oh, yes, I'm aware of that, but the amount he mentioned was strange.
But yeah, perhaps he was using a nonlinear comparison as you said, which would
make more sense.

~~~
clay
This link says 1 inch = $30000.

[http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2010/02/height-matters-income-
vs...](http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2010/02/height-matters-income-vs-height-
trade.html)

~~~
hugh3
Hmph, well the study is by Dan Airely, so he's just citing himself.

Now I want to plot a graph: "Number of papers written about the effect of
height on male attractiveness" vs "height of author"

~~~
aspiringsensei
This is an excellent reason why all published works should include a diverse
collection of very ephemeral metadata.

------
jasonlotito
Choosing PHP over Python, Perl, and ASP.

Countless hours on #php.

Meeting and talking with a girl I met on #php for hours on end on the phone.

"Dating" online.

Meeting 2 months after we started "dating".

Me moving to another country 3 months after that.

Marrying 6 years later.

Happily married and expecting our second child later this month. =)

~~~
mcantor
You met your love based on a niche common interest/activity--programming in
PHP--as opposed to a broad common activity--online dating. Not trying to
trivialize anything you said... your story is completely awesome, actually. I
just want to point out that even though what you did technically qualifies as
"online dating," it's very different from the kind of online dating criticized
in this interview!

~~~
jasonlotito
Oh, I know. However, it's the article and headline that is at fault. Online
dating sites are one thing. Meeting online is a completely different thing. =)

------
davidedicillo
I can see his point, but I have very good friends who I'm sure they would say
the total opposite. Some found love, some found fun... heck, one even found a
Maxim model (and they are still dating).

~~~
sliverstorm
While I can't help but be a little curious and jealous over the last case,
outliers always exist. You do need to make sure that your examples are not
outliers, as by their very nature they do not represent the whole.

~~~
HeyLaughingBoy
Just curious: would you still be jealous if said Maxim model turned out to be
a vapid, brain-dead, moron?

~~~
sliverstorm
Of course! In that case she wouldn't be long-term material, but it'd be nice
to have had the experience just once.

------
AaronM
I stopped reading this after the first paragraph. Who puts their article in a
small 5x5 inch box?

~~~
tome
It's not an article. It's the transcript of the video.

