nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Does Tinder etc give girls a fake sense of validation and give guys a bruised ego?

RedTie

This was a reply to a thread that had been moved/deleted when I hit "post" earlier. The OP, a guy, said he was having a tough time getting matches on Tinder and I shared my thoughts.

Since the original thread is gone here's what I typed up. I think it raises a question that needs looking at in this digital age.

Gauguin_Ghost wrote: »

I know I'm not the only one, it seems a lot of blokes find it hard

You're definitely not alone there.

I consider myself average looking, a female friend once gave me brutal honesty and said I was a "6/10 on a good day". At the time, a few years ago, I thought that was terrible. But in hindsight she was right. And I've had to admit to myself that when it comes to Tinder etc that it isnt enough to get loads of matches.

The rise of Tinder, POF etc has given Irish females a false sense of how good looking they think they are, and here's why:

Fake Validation.

The majority of Irish men would get up on a lampost and are swiping "yes" on everything and anything on Tinder and copying and pasting the same message to girls on POF, changing one detail specific to them to make them feel special.

Girls: the majority of men dont even look at who they're swiping "yes" to and then unmatch if they dont like what they see later. I've been out with friends who are looking at a gig with their eyes and swiping right at the same time without even glancing at their phone.

One friend of mine met his wife using this "throwing everything to see what sticks" method! Thankfully she's lovely, but I think he got lucky.

Unless you're out in Copper Face Jacks, this is not how real life works.

Irish girls are getting fake validation on these apps because on some of them the amount of men vs women is 8:1. That's crazy odds in favour of the girl.

So OP dont beat yourself up. I fare better offline than online these days when its comes to meeting nice girls. Give them a nice smile and show some confidence, you'll be amazed how far those two things alone will get you.

Or at the very least, get the fúck off Tinder. It's shockingly bad for all involved. Men get their egos bruised and women meet men who just want the ride.

TLDR: Tinder and it's ilk are not how real life works.

Does Tinder etc give girls a fake sense of validation and give guys a bruised ego?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Burial.

Rakish Paddy wrote: »

And if Tinder is leaving a guy with a bruised ego, he's using it wrong - the only thing I had bruised was my mickey!

If a guy is bruising his mickey he's using it wrong.

Rakish Paddy

Burial. wrote: »

If a guy is bruising his mickey he's using it wrong.

It's less how I was using it, and more what the ladies were doing with it!

Rekop dog

RoboRat wrote: »

Teasing done right is a massive turn on to most women, especially when they are used to being put on a pedestal when they are out. It shows that you are confident enough in yourself to take the risk on something that might backfire. It has to be natural and not contrived and therefore not distinctly noticed, if even noticed, but also not too cocky and definitely not insulting.

This is the crux of it. When most lads go on a date with a good looking girl, they're so afraid of messing it up that they go down the overly nice route, whereas if they behaved more like they would down the pub with their mates, harmless teasing ect they'd fair far better.

Most PUA techniques evolved from lads smart enough to see what women actually respond positively and applying it regularly. There is a more sinister side to it which pray on less secure women but the fundamentals of teaching lads to be more fun/risky/memorable are very sound.

Burial.

Rakish Paddy wrote: »

It's less how I was using it, and more what the ladies were doing with it!

Do you want me to call the guards? Sounds awful.

Rakish Paddy

Burial. wrote: »

Do you want me to call the guards? Sounds awful.

It was pretty great, but I admit I did need a few days of a break here and there while I was on Tinder!

Are Am Eye

I'm picturing Rakish Paddy sitting in the shower fully dressed getting soaked. Crying to himself saying - 'it's not my fault. But I can't get clean'

Burial.

Rakish Paddy wrote: »

It was pretty great, but I admit I did need a few days of a break here and there while I was on Tinder!

This you?

Rakish Paddy

Burial. wrote: »

This you?

That's me after I gave up Tinder, and had only memories to look back on.

kylith

RedTie wrote: »

There's a story a friend of mine still mentions now and again, goes like this:

An average looking single woman goes upto an average single guy, grabs him by the balls and says "Wanna fúck?!". Cue the guy 9 times out of ten saying yes.

But then

An average looking single man goes upto an average looking single woman, grabs her by the privates and says "Wanna fúck?!". 10 times out of 10 that guy is getting, at the least, a slap or maybe even a jail cell for the night.

TLDR: Women hold almost all the cards in the initial part of boy meeting girl. Things definitely change as the relationship goes on, but at the start I think the (wonderful) female of the species has most of the influence on how it will begin.

That's not a story, it's an old joke. And it goes like this:

A man sees another man standing on the street. Man 2 is approaching women and as Man 1 watches Man 2 gets slapped 5 times in 10 minutes. Curiosity piqued 1 approaches 2 and asks what he's doing.
"I'm asking women to shag me", says man 2
"You must get slapped a lot," says man 1
"Oh yes," says two, "But I get shagged a lot as well".

Burial. wrote: »

Negging is one of the most misunderstood things when it comes to "game" which is why when done right it's incredibly effective. The fact women know when they're being "negged" means the guy doing it is clueless. People seem to think it's something like "your shoes are ugly, wanna f*ck?" Negging is a form is teasing/flirting, something a regular 'loser' would never do or say because to him women are beautiful and wonderful and they need to be told that and he has to be a nice guy to get the girl.

Negging was a way of setting yourself aside from the other 9 lads who fawned over a girls looks...then some guys just took it too far on models and p*rn stars and regular guys started using cookie cutter lines and found that it didn't breed the same results. I can guarantee if you've ever been chatted up by a guy who clearly knew what he was doing and was good with women then you've been negged in some shape or form.

Negging is subtly trying to put a person down in order to impact their self esteem in an attempt to make them more receptive to predatory advances. A 'neg' is what we would otherwise call a backhanded compliment: You're not as fat as you used to be. A lot of women couldn't pull off having their roots showing like that. That's a lovely dress, my mother has the same one. This cake isn't as bad as the last one you made.

This is not 'banter', it is the basis of an abusive relationship.http://thoughtcatalog.com/danielle-page/2015/04/i-flirted-with-men-using-negging-at-a-bar-and-heres-what-i-found-out/

con___manx1

I use bumble. The rules of the app is the woman has to write to you first. It's actually quite fun getting cheesie opening messages from girls and at least you no straight away that they fancy you. I don't use tinder or pof. Bumble is way better. I have been messaging 5 or 6 girls at a time sometimes ; )

Burial.

kylith wrote: »

Negging is subtly trying to put a person down in order to impact their self esteem in an attempt to make them more receptive to predatory advances. A 'neg' is what we would otherwise call a backhanded compliment: You're not as fat as you used to be. A lot of women couldn't pull off having their roots showing like that. That's a lovely dress, my mother has the same one. This cake isn't as bad as the last one you made.

This is not 'banter', it is the basis of an abusive relationship.

Nah those aren't negs those are just stupid attempts at humour and insults. See my post above of "those shoes are ugly, wanna f*ck". Likely said by someone trolling/messing and 99% of people will never actually say that with intent of getting with the girl. A neg would be something like "ahh you're blonde, blondes have my heart broken, if only you were a brunette". That's not insulting but serves the purpose of not fawning over her looks and giving her an inflated ego.

If you're hurting women psychologically with negging you're not negging them you're just insulting them.

kylith

Burial. wrote: »

Nah those aren't negs those are just stupid attempts at humour and insults. See my post above of "those shoes are ugly, wanna f*ck". Likely said by someone trolling/messing and 99% of people will never actually say that with intent of getting with the girl. A neg would be something like "ahh you're blonde, blondes have my heart broken, if only you were a brunette". That's not insulting but serves the purpose of not fawning over her looks and giving her an inflated ego.

If you're hurting women psychologically with negging you're not negging them you're just insulting them.

In that case I suggest you yourself learn what negging is because you've arrived at a different definition to every site I can find. Even 'Seduction Science' describes it as a way to "lower a girl’s social value in relation to yours ".

Basically if you're not psychologically hurting them then you're not negging properly

_Whimsical_

I have never used Tinder so to be honest I haven't a clue but is the "average" or below average looking woman getting showered with attention on it? Are girls who've taken a pic of themselves in a tracksuit top with no make up getting loads of matches?

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

There is a happy medium between insincere compliments and consciously slagging someone off to differentiate yourself from the herd. Speaking for myself only (we haven't had the weekly woman meeting to decide what our official policy on everything is and what to lie about for kicks yet, those are on Thursdays) both are off putting.

I hate the buzz when someone obviously has a strategy for the interaction, some kind of playbook to trick me into continuing to talk to them. Either they treat all social interaction like that, in which case go away, or that's the only way they can think of women, in which case **** off. I'm not a Rubik's cube, I'm a real person.

The men I know who do the best with women beyond a string of one night stands with headcases don't have any secret. They do tend to be men who have women as friends and a lot of them have sisters.

I done been out the game longer than Tinder's been a thing but from what I can see it's mostly a case of wherever you go, there you are. If you're insecure, up yourself, or mental before you sign up Tinder's not going to change that. I have a few women friends on it and I certainly wouldn't say it's giving them a big head, because they're not that sort of person. Of course it's very looks based and there's an inherent shallowness to it and that on balance probably does benefit women, but that's not women's fault. You never hear these complaints about lesbian dating apps like.

kylith

Are Am Eye wrote: »

Postcount : 1

I wonder who registered an account to distance themselves from defending negging

I wonder who also has no friends if they think that only higher status people tease lower status people

And also no experience of dating if they're going to use sweeping statements like 'across the board'.

Amazing that my ill-dressed, unkempt, compliment paying bf has had as many girlfriends as he has, really...

MightyMandarin

kylith wrote: »

Negging is subtly trying to put a person down in order to impact their self esteem in an attempt to make them more receptive to predatory advances. A 'neg' is what we would otherwise call a backhanded compliment: You're not as fat as you used to be. A lot of women couldn't pull off having their roots showing like that. That's a lovely dress, my mother has the same one. This cake isn't as bad as the last one you made.

This is not 'banter', it is the basis of an abusive relationship.

It depends for what intention they're being said. If a guy is consciously thinking "hmm I'll deliberately insult her just to lower her ego so that when I make my advances, she won't think she's holding all the cards" then that's pretty ****ty, and is what I would describe as negging.

If however, I just make backhanded remarks like I would do with other lads, and expect to receive the same, but without any intention of hurting someone psychologically (if those insults above hurt someone, they must have thin skin imo) so I have a better chance with that person, then that's not negging at all imo.

I say **** to my friends all the time that isn't particularly nice, and when I meet a girl that doesn't change, because why should it? People might think I'm a dick (and they're probably right) but I'd rather be decent on the inside and not be a "nice guy" rather than someone who never insults anyone to their face but acts like a snake in the grass. It's just the way I act, which might be perceived as "negging" but all that pua is for clowns anyway imo.

Fighting Tao

So after all the PUA threads getting deleted here over the past few years, someone got one past the opening mention of how they think women like to be treated.

RedTie

Fighting Tao wrote: »

So after all the PUA threads getting deleted here over the past few years, someone got one past the opening mention of how they think women like to be treated.

The thread mentioned Negging in some of the posts, the whole thread isn't about it.

And why the hell were previous Negging threads deleted?

hatrickpatrick

LadyMacBeth_ wrote: »

About this whole negging thing. If it's a bit of banter or teasing someone, insulting them in a joking way then that's grand, that's quite typical for Irish flirting in general, I enjoy it. I like compliments too of course but only if I think they are genuine.

This. PUA's conception of "negging" is really just overly-complicating the human mating dance, of which a bit of teasing / making fun of people is an integral aspect. But that's long been my view of the whole seduction guide thing anyway - humans have a mating dance just like most mammals, it's just that for whatever reason, it comes instinctively to most mammals and to some humans, but not to all, and those who are left out of having those instincts have to be taught, or teach themselves, these behaviours. When people read seduction guides and more extremist stuff like TRP, if you strip all the convoluted and sometimes outrageously offensive ways of framing these things down to their basics, they're just describing how humans flirt and turn eachother on, which some people are unfortunate in not having any instinctive and natural conception of.

It's for that reason that I don't condemn the people who read such stuff even if those who write it often have absolutely reprehensible views of the opposite sex (let's not pretend that womens' magazines don't encourage just as much manipulation and possessiveness as PUA does) - some people use it to get the ride, some people use it to find long lasting relationships, some use it just to feel more confident. Rather than attacking those people, in my view those of us who are lucky enough to have good instincts should count ourselves lucky that we're not one of the unfortunate ones who doesn't.

This is particularly true because in our current society, guys are in a horrible position particularly as teenagers - they're expected to be confident enough to make the first move, but if they f*ck up or make a mistake they're likely to be not only rejected, but labelled creepy etc, which I'm sure screws up one's confidence big time. So I'd argue that the stakes are higher in the current climate, wherein guys are walking a tightrope between being forward enough and brave enough as the human mating dance requires, while not being SO forward that they get accused of being creepy or harassing. And that line is often fairly arbitrary.

I'll give you an example. A woman I know used to have awful trouble with relationships because her mum was quite old fashioned and passed down "the rules" style thinking to her - basically, guys want to chase, so feign disinterest, blow him off, be almost rejectful of him indeed. Now, that might have worked in previous decades, I don't know, but I do know that our current society tells guys that if you get the slightest hint that a woman isn't interested, you should back off immediately or risk being accused of all kinds of horrible things.

So this poor girl would continually toy with guys' minds in this way, pretending she was busy when she wasn't, taking hours to reply to texts, making sure she was spotted in photos with other guys so as to keep the guy she actually liked "on his toes" - all stemming from the 1950s ideology she was taught - and then she'd be absolutely distraught when, predictably, the guy she genuinely liked got bored super quickly and went off with someone else who was more straightforward and didn't play tricks on him.

She's long since grown out of it, but in that kind of climate it becomes obvious enough why some guys, particularly those who are shy and self-conscious to begin with on account of not having the instincts I mentioned earlier, become absolutely terrified of chatting up a woman and therefore have to rely on 'tricks', 'techniques' and so on in order to be more confident, or at leasy feign being more confident. Because while one girl might be like her and actually want guys to continually pursue her, another would react with a "ugh you're such a f*cking creep, can't you take the hint that I'm not interested and just back off".

pickarooney

kylith wrote: »

In that case I suggest you yourself learn what negging is because you've arrived at a different definition to every site I can find. Even 'Seduction Science' describes it as a way to "lower a girl’s social value in relation to yours ".

Basically if you're not psychologically hurting them then you're not negging properly

Negging sounds like something Hyacinth Bucket would do to her husband.

kowloon

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40504076 Saw this after first posting. Maybe standards are a little lofty. Or maybe it's time to start human stud farms.

RedTie

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

So this poor girl would continually toy with guys' minds in this way, pretending she was busy when she wasn't, taking hours to reply to texts, making sure she was spotted in photos with other guys so as to keep the guy she actually liked "on his toes"

I think this type of thing, unfortunately, still works today.

Some people will always want what they cant have. Then when they get it, they don't want it anymore.

hatrickpatrick

RedTie wrote: »

I think this type of thing, unfortunately, still works today.

Some people will always want what they cant have. Then when they get it, they don't want it anymore.

Well all I can say is that it didn't work for her. For years she'd be annoyed about lads losing interest in her, usually after spending a few weeks blowing them off, not replying to messages, making it look like she was always out with other lads etc... In the current social climate, persistence is seen as creepy, harassing or even "rapey", so if a lad reckons you're not interested he's quite likely to say "ah well, f*ck it" and move on.

RedTie

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Well all I can say is that it didn't work for her. For years she'd be annoyed about lads losing interest in her, usually after spending a few weeks blowing them off, not replying to messages, making it look like she was always out with other lads etc... In the current social climate, persistence is seen as creepy, harassing or even "rapey", so if a lad reckons you're not interested he's quite likely to say "ah well, f*ck it" and move on.

Here's a novel idea: why don't men and women all over the world stop playing f*cking mind games! :pac:

LadyMacBeth_

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Well all I can say is that it didn't work for her. For years she'd be annoyed about lads losing interest in her, usually after spending a few weeks blowing them off, not replying to messages, making it look like she was always out with other lads etc... In the current social climate, persistence is seen as creepy, harassing or even "rapey", so if a lad reckons you're not interested he's quite likely to say "ah well, f*ck it" and move on.

A certain level of disinterest works, being over eager isn't appealing. I think this girl went too far though, of course someone is going to lose interest if you blow them off for weeks.

cantdecide

con___manx1 wrote: »

I use bumble. The rules of the app is the woman has to write to you first. It's actually quite fun getting cheesie opening messages from girls and at least you no straight away that they fancy you. I don't use tinder or pof. Bumble is way better. I have been messaging 5 or 6 girls at a time sometimes ; )

As a below average looking guy, swipe for swipe I got a lot more interest from the girls on Bumble compared to any of the others.

With regard to the larger topic of online dating and apps, I'd say there's still an inherent tension there. I think there is still a skepticism that makes people a little extra critical of the person across the table that makes things harder.

On the larger issue of OD and the negative aspects, I was intrigued by a point made here not so long ago from a lady that pointed out that it's a lot easier for a woman to find just sex, it's much harder for a genuine woman to weed through the creeps and timewasters. Conversely, it's difficult for average guys to elbow past the Dennis Reynolds types. I think OD exacerbates this phenomenon.

leggo

The people espousing PUA 'techniques' and beliefs...you realise the author of 'The Game' himself has disavowed it now right?

There is merit to some of the things in that community, no doubt (it was something I nerded out over for a year so I know of what I speak), but of course human nature being what it is the stuff that's ethically questionable and pretty creepy is the stuff that the masses latched onto, for example talking about people like they're robots to be programmed, or puzzles to be solved.

The stuff that's good is the stuff that focuses on self-esteem and self-worth, which the book and material itself covered subconsciously but ultimately missed the boat on (hence Strauss disowning it today now that he's married with a kid). That speaks to the mentality of the people 'teaching' and following the material more than anything. The idea that 'you are worthwhile and deserve to be happy but can present yourself in a way that appeals to people more' is solid and doesn't harm anyone. But instead a lot of the material focuses on 'here's how you trick people into liking you', which inherently suggests the opposite of the message you should be learning and led to the entire thing being discredited.

What people failed to realise is that the 'tricks' were meant to be tricks on the people using them, as in "the bull**** beliefs that you tell yourself to get through the day (e.g. The rant in the OP to steer this back on-topic) are crap. You are responsible for your failures but can also be responsible for your own successes. And if you don't believe me, try this and see how people's reactions change. See? That girl wouldn't have ignored you in the past because *she* was broken, if you present yourself in a better way people are more than open to connecting with you!" If those preaching it had been able to understand that themselves and communicate it effectively, there'd be no issues now. Instead they were often broken souls themselves so it became something different.

Dr Crayfish

I don't know I think it's great. So easy to meet women nowadays because of these stupid apps, you can set up a date every week if you like. Then again I'm not short and I'm not ugly, if you're either of those you're f**ked.

osarusan

leggo wrote: »

I was listening to his podcast just yesterday and he was making fun of stuff he said in The Game, specifically how the entire idealism was based around tricking people into liking you.

And I've given you a long post detailing what I disagree with, why would I give you a point by point list to argue with? I've spent enough time making my point with that post. Pick at that if you're determined to argue.

Gone, deleted, by the time you'd replied.

I wouldn't bother replying to any poster with a post count of 1.

I wonder how many times he has been deleted already.

[Deleted User]

Do you honestly have nothing more important to do than put up foolish videos and talk nonsense?