Yeah, but that's merely what the woman says she wants. That doesn't reflect what she might be impulsively attracted to.
It's like some of my female Asian friends who say they don't actively exclude Asian guys, yet their dating history pretty much is exclusively white guys (even in cities with plenty of Asian guys). Yet if I said that my small company only hires and interviews male engineers, I'm pretty sure people would criticize us for being sexist.
Furthermore, we can look at stats in online dating and compare rates of interracial marriage segmented by race and gender. What we find is that taller men absolutely have higher number of sexual partners compared to shorter men. We also find that Asian women and Black men marry out at a significantly higher rate than Asian men and Black women.
I have seen a lot of dating profiles with things like "no short guys please", "minimum height 6 ft." etc; and have heard a lot of my female friends openly admit to "not liking short guys". For some reason, admitting that seems to be a lot more socially acceptable than a man admitting that he doesn't like women with a certain body type.
Yet prejudices and discriminatory attitudes show up again when dealing with other factors. Today is seems the trend falls upon age and height. The worse is that it tends to manifest at an almost subconscious level.
So, maybe not height, but apparently a prestigious college is important. Down here in Australia, mentioning your college like it's part of your personality is just plain weird. People mention what was studied as a matter of course, but where you studied it isn't a significant part of your personality.
I can see this format of dating site solving the problem of women getting unsolicited dick pics, but I don't see how it can solve the problem of less-attractive men getting some attention.
If you ask anyone what they are looking for, chances are they will describe the qualities missing in their last partner. But that's simply describing the qualities that a person they actually wanted didn't have.
I imagine the same applies here. You might say height isn't a factor, but only picked men over 6'.
The best thing any social-networking app can do is to prune its userbase (i.e. ban people from the service) so that everyone who remains is actually using the service for its intended purpose. Then you don't need the initial extra step of both parties dancing around the question of "what are you on here looking for?"—if they're using the app, they're here for what the app is for.
For ages, there have been sites catering to people looking for casual hook-ups. And they all run into the same problem -- very few women sign up for them. We could debate why this happens (most women don't need an app to have casual sex? The risk of casual sex with a stranger is much higher for women? There is a social stigma of being a woman looking for casual sex?). Once a site embraces being a hook-up app (e.g., Ashley Madison, Craiglist's casual encounters, etc.), it invariably ends up a vast sea of desperate men fighting over scraps.
Certainly, some men and women do use Tinder as a hookup app. Numbers suggest that the vast majority of women are all swiping right on the same very small minority of very physically attractive men. Whether women are hoping for a relationship with these men or looking for casual sex, I think it's safe to assume Tinder leads to a lot of hookups for these guys.
In any case, by removing the social stigma, Tinder became popular among a much larger segment of women compared to previous dating sites. It's not unusual in Los Angeles to see models on Tinder, which you just didn't seen on dating sites of the '90s and '00s.
"Our vision from day one was to solve the problem that there is always someone you want to know, but you're afraid of rejection."
My view is that they built a hook up app and then raised a ton of money and now want to branch out and be taken seriously.
The League, in particular, has received quite a few accusations of being elitist/racist because of its selectivity, and the culture that it implies: http://www.buzzfeed.com/jarrylee/tinder-for-elites
The Dating Ring, a Y Combinator-funded dating startup, was also involved in some interesting Hacker News drama regarding spamming OKCupid users. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8454405
The dating industry in general is iffy; it's hard to isolate what works better and what doesn't when everyone is reluctant to release data.
The research on the topic is quite clear that across all ages, across all cultures, and across all races, heterosexual womens' unspoken but critically important criteria in mate selection is height.
Your impression may be biased, in part, because it's easy to measure height and create studies based around it.
My friend is handsome and rather short, whereas I'm tall and average looking. Despite what the studies say, women throw themselves at him whenever we go out, and he has a ridiculous match rate on Tinder.
While height may be one of many factors influencing attraction, it is in no way an overriding critical factor as your statement suggests.
He didn't say overriding critical factor. He said a critical factor. Yes, short but handsome men are also attractive. But nowhere as attractive as they would be if they were taller.
In real life, being handsome generally wins out over being tall, despite many men who fixate on height as a critical factor holding them back. Why is this? Maybe it's easier for someone to imagine himself as taller rather than as more handsome. You could be taller without altering the physical traits that you associate with your identity. Or perhaps most men think of themselves as handsome, whether or not they really are.
> "He said a critical factor."
>> "heterosexual womens' unspoken but critically important criteria in mate selection is height."
I stand by my assertion that his phrasing implies height is the critical criteria. Of course, this doesn't quite make sense grammatically.
Handsomeness (or physical beauty) is difficult to quantify and therefore much harder to study. Yet that doesn't make it any less of a critical factor to attraction as it plays out in the real world.
> heterosexual womens' unspoken but critically important criteria in mate selection is height.
In the real world, attraction is significantly more complex than this implies. It's obvious (to anyone who has observed attraction, rather than just read a study about it) that many factors are involved, most are hard to quantify, and these will underrepresented in studies and data.
i'm not short (i'm exactly average) but this pops up a lot on the subreddits i frequent.
Not especially good evidence that women care, but it certainly looks like men do.
They wouldn't exaggerate their height if it wasn't an important factor in potential mates. And the data confirms it:
"We've found that taller people, up to a point, have more sex".
You see on the graph that the "frequency of sex" (unlabeled y-axis) increases for men up to 6'8".
"I found myself having semi-intelligent exchanges with adult men. On a dating site. This was new!"
Also it's an ad for bumble.
There's some interesting points, but as usual tired of filtering the pages of pure and repetitive noise.
Bumble's PR people deserve a pat on the back (and the profession of modern journalism deserves a kick in the head).
Bumble’s landmark feature is that women must
take the initiative on all conversations
It might have nothing to do with male/female dynamics, and may just have something to do with a better UI/UX (which Tinder seems to have lifted heavily from in their last update), or a lack of spam bots (seriously, a third of my Tinder matches are spam bots linking to the same URLs over and over -- how is this still an issue??).
Investors are likely considering the growth, rather than the theory. Whatever the underlying reason, from one user's perspective, Bumble's growth seems very impressive.
Based just on what we know from OkCupid's excellent analytics blog back in the day, there's nothing about their business model that suggests they'll be successful. The founders are non-technical, the business model isn't data-driven, and there are lots of questionable design decisions throughout.
They're getting a large amount of positive press from people who share their apparent ideology, but there's no actual information being put out. They're closed source, privately held, and don't publish any meaningful usage statistics, so what do we know about them other than they have good PR people?
It appeals to the wrong people. The Nigerian prince scam works because it effectively filters anyone who wouldn't send money to a stranger emailing them out of the blue. Making Tinder "better" would draw in people who are not interested in what is essentially a hook-up app.
> The mainstream online dating technologies — OkCupid, Match.com, eHarmony — were all founded by men. So it’s no surprise that most popular dating products cater to male user problems.
The first part is true, but the second is non sequitur. I'd also like to ask: what is a "male user problem"? Although the wants of men and and women are somewhat different, I think it's probably a bad idea to paint genders with stereotypes in this way.
> Bumble’s landmark feature is that women must take the initiative on all conversations.
> He is most likely tired of reaching out blindly to women all the time,” she tells me. “Maybe he feels rejected. He feels ignored.”
This sounds very interesting, and good on the founders of the app for trying something new.
> Though she is extremely limited legally in talking about her experience at Tinder — they have since settled out of court — I wonder if her negative experiences there inform her dating theories now. Perhaps as a hint of Bumble’s influence, last week Tinder announced that users could now include details on education and work. [emphasis mine]
The author "wonders" if "perhaps" there is influence from Bumble on Tinder. In other words, this paragraph has no factual standing.
> If you are a male entrepreneur, approaching the problem of online dating from your point of view, the goal would be to provide male users with more women.
This statement seems presumptuous. It's not about males vs. females! It's about new ideas! Past platforms take a traditional view to dating, Bumble likes to change things up, and this is a novel thing. This piece turns a novel concept into gender politics and boils down entire companies to the gender of the person at their helm. Bumble won't succeed just because its founder is a woman: Bumble will succeed because it's a new concept from a different perspective, executed by someone who is smart and has experience. You're erasing Whitney Wolfe and writing "all women", which seems demeaning.
> This isn’t to say that all men approach online dating haphazardly, without goals or specific desires. But [...]
This comment isn't to say that this article is poorly written. But, look at all of the evidence above and think for yourself. (I mentioned another argument to look objective... but never gave it any evidence, so the reader will take my subjective perspective as fact.)
> But with these online dating innovations, the tech industry just might realize what they’ve long been ignoring: women’s experiences matter, too.
No one's ignoring women's experiences. The founders of the mainstream dating apps simply have their market and refuse to pivot because they have shareholders and investors that would rather they not change the model so immediately and drastically. What we have now is a result of a function of market forces rather than a function of gender.
I think the idea behind Bumble is very interesting, and I'm glad there are startups trying something new in the dating scene. I'd actually like to try one of these in due time. But this article just looks... bad. It turns independent, strong, intelligent people into the stereotype of "female entrepreneur".
>This statement seems presumptuous. It's not about males vs. females! It's about new ideas!
Yours is a very generous comment on a highly misandrist statement. The fact that a dating app creator/founder/owner is male doesn't mean that they must therefore have designed the app "to provide males with more women".
Even if they are using "online dating" euphemistically to refer to hook-up apps then they're making the classic mistake of assuming females aren't interested in sex and males are solely motivated by acquiring a quantity of it. Sure, subsets of those populations exist that fit the bill but the reverse associations also exist at some level.
Does this mean the founders of Bumble want "to provide females with more men" above all else?
I wish this piece didn't exist, because it makes the world a worse place.
I'd argue that Tinder doesn't work, and this probably won't either.
If you believe the spin of the article, that women make better dating apps and men are not interested in making good apps for women - OK. More power to you. Enjoy Bumble, I guess.
Why haven't women stepped up earlier to create apps in all categories? It's a complicated question and one I cannot answer. But among women-created apps, dating apps currently seem to be well represented. This may suggest that prior dating apps and sites have been deficient in serving the needs of these founders, and they think there is a still a problem to be solved in this space.
Whether or not this is the case, I don't know, but their belief is not getting under my skin.
> If you believe the spin of the article, that women make better dating apps and men are not interested in making good apps for women
I believe that it's possible for people who are not white males to bring a different perspective to the table, and I believe this can potentially serve as a competitive advantage in business.
Whether or not this holds true for Bumble, I again don't know. I didn't know any of this backstory about Bumble before today, I just knew it had a better selection of women, a better interface, and that I've gotten more dates on it than on Tinder. By comparison, Tinder primary purpose seems to be connecting me to spam bots.
For sure Dating Apps still can be improved, although I doubt that you need a specific gender or race to qualify for making a better Dating App.
(the founder of the advertised app is the female cofounder you speak of)
Certainly there was nothing to stop women starting Dating startups before now.
If that woman has success with Bumble, why not?