> Men's ratings of women follow the same principle. Practically everything does.
The OKCupid data doesn't bear this out. Men's ratings of women's attractiveness is fairly symmetric. Women's ratings of men's attractiveness is highly skewed and unrealistic.
This asymmetry is a fundamental law of online dating, as inescapable as gravity. If you were genuinely ignorant of this ... I really don't know what to say.
>And I'm telling you, from the female side of the exchange, it takes nearly nothing to be in the top 20% of profiles (could be done in 10 mins of thoughtful effort) and even less to be in the top 20% of conversations (keep pants zipped).
Of all the guys you swipe right on, what percentage are below 5'9?
The OKCupid data doesn't bear this out. Men's ratings of women's attractiveness is fairly symmetric. Women's ratings of men's attractiveness is highly skewed and unrealistic.
This asymmetry is a fundamental law of online dating, as inescapable as gravity. If you were genuinely ignorant of this ... I really don't know what to say.
>And I'm telling you, from the female side of the exchange, it takes nearly nothing to be in the top 20% of profiles (could be done in 10 mins of thoughtful effort) and even less to be in the top 20% of conversations (keep pants zipped).
Of all the guys you swipe right on, what percentage are below 5'9?