If the dating market is a market, then why it's not regulated,at least online dating

[Karmadhi]

So i noticed that Leo and a lot of other people here are against libetarians and more in favour of equality and mechanism that prevent a minority to control all the resources. Personally i agree with this, however i am not sure why this does not apply to sex too. What happens these days that just like in a monopoly, a few guys (maximum 10-15 percent) have access to all the girls meanwhile a lot of guys are left with nothing. The incel phenomenon keeps getting worse meanwhile you have guys with lay-counts in the hundreds. Now getting sex, just like getting a good job or money is mostly a result of hard work, with a help of good luck. If a guy is born in a good family his economic prospects are going to be better than a guy that is born in a poor family, just like a good looking extroverted guy naturally will have better dating prospects than an autistic ugly person. When it comes to most markets mechanism are created to prevent this unfair distribution, while keeping competition still open. Scandinavian countries are a good example. Now when it comes to dating market, sex and love are human needs therefore in terms of importance i would put them at par with having a home and food to eat. When it comes to regulation you cannot really regulate human interactions however online dating should be regulated. In addition, another way for this regulation can be by promoting guys to be more social and for girls to be less entitled and picky. I mean this may sound dumb but when 1/3 of guys are lonely virgin that has negative consequences for society. It makes them mysogonistic, and even violent sometimes. Some objections which i will hear:

1. "If you are not lazy and improve yourself then you will not have problems". True, however same logic can be applied for all markets. If you work hard and save your money then you will not be broke. So why we still have systems that protect lazy people that are not wise with their money? i personally love such systems but it feels a bit double standard here.

2. "This is just a ego defense for you (opener of thread) to justify your lack of success with women". Personally i am working on improving myself and am quite social, i do not blame the unregulated dating market for my success, however i see sometimes a lot of guys frustrated and lonely and i feel very bad for them. I also see girls frustrated too, however their frustration often comes from a specific guy not wanting them. For guys it is about NOBODY wanting them. I cannot feel the same for a starving kid than for a kid that has food but only wants cake.

3. "You should be happy things are like this because now if you work hard you will be at the top". This is not about me again, it is about a society problem.

4. "Why you even care man, just focus on yourself". Same logic for why we should care about social welfare and stuff, just work hard and focus on yourself. However that logic is flawed and selfish.

If anyone plans to block this thread for low quality i would appreciate an actual good response about the reasoning behind it, instead of saying "self biased lazy" etc. I put some effort into writting this so please give an actual argument. I could also remove all threads regarding social equality and economic welfare systems by calling them tools to justify lazy irresponsible people. However i would find that not the right thing to do.

Edited May 26, 2021 by Karmadhi

[Hardkill]

I think this a good question in a way. I am curious to see what many people's responses to this questions are.

[Karmadhi]

1 hour ago, Peter Miklis said:

You wrote a long post, but your solution seems a little lacking. How on Earth are you gonna make women less picky and entitled? Lol impossible, women are gonna want who they want, there's nothing we can do about it. When you give women choice, they'll become picky, and rightfully so. Bear in mind that women always had and always will have more sexual market value than men.

Teaching men how to be better at attracting girls, teaching this stuff in school and making men less wimps and more masculine (healthy masculinity). Also not demonizing the concept of pick up (as long as it is done consciously).

Then when it comes to online dating which is very popular these days, there you can easily regulate it. 

These days thanks to SJW you cannot even tell girls that attraction between men and females is assymetrical. They will call you sexist and dismiss anything you say. Try showing Leo's attraction videos to modern western females, most of them will dispute him. His video on "How to make a man fall in love with you" has like a 30% dislike (the highest out of all of Leo's videos i have seen).  

Education  on the matter is key.  

Edited May 26, 2021 by Karmadhi

[Lynnel]

1 hour ago, Karmadhi said:

So i noticed that Leo and a lot of other people here are against libetarians and more in favour of equality and mechanism that prevent a minority to control all the resources.

You can't be serious.

The whole problem with this mindset in case it was not obvious is that you cannot treat women as a fucking RESSOURCE. Nor men. Nor human beings in general.

This is exactly the issue with excessive materialistic orange which will view women/men like a pieces of meat with a certain market value disregarding pretty much everything else and the most important parts such as connection and personality traits.

You need to stop equating people to a certain "value" parameter and decomposing their personnality according to that. Viewing someone according to his "value" on the "sexual market" is one very biased lens which when pushed to the extreme leads to nonsense like this.

For instance, regardless of "value" a lot of people are not compatible and would never be happy together.

Meanwhile, money is always money - and you can always buy a piece of bread with money to feed yourself. It's a completely different matter.

To anyone reading this : stop mentally masturbating to crazy sociale equality theories that would land you free sex, go out, get laid, and outgrow stage orange.

Edited May 26, 2021 by Lynnel
Typo

[Karmadhi]

@Lynnel 1. Sex is a human need.

2. Leo has called it a "sexual market" where people "exchange value". Not my words here.

35 minutes ago, Lynnel said:

stop mentally masturbating to crazy sociale equality theories that would land you free sex, go out, get laid, and outgrow stage orange.

stop mentally masturbation to crazy social equality theories that would give you free money, go out and work. No need for unemployment benefits or for social security. Work and you have money for it. See how flawed the logic is.

I am not talking about pussy communism here. I am talking about mainstream mechanics that would help guys get better with girls. Education should teach guys better regarding gender and sexuality. Also stop demonizing pick up. This is what the state can do, not give people free pussy out of thin air. I never said that. Just like when you leave the education system you have a basis level of mathematical and language skill, you should have a basis on socialization skills and how both genders think and operate.

If online dating was heavily regulated especially regarding paid services or even better, banned all together. This alone would do big changes.

Edited May 26, 2021 by Karmadhi

[Leo Gura]

I am all for better education to help guys not become incels. But the fact is no school is gonna teach you what it takes to pull hot girls and be attractive. You are much better off learning that via online sources like RSD.

The bottom line is: you can't regulate women to spread their legs for lame, weak, needy, pathetic men who play video games all day and complain on Incel forums.

As far as education goes, you got all you need online for free. The problem is you aren't willing to use it.

In the future I would like to see schools teaching masculunity and femininity courses. But that will still not be enough. The only way to reform an Incel is to send him into the field and do some serious cold approach. School will never do that for him.

[ItsNick]

@Karmadhi Sex is indeed a survival need for men.

But women have their own survival needs when it comes to sex. And thus their own unique challenges too.

 

And I agree that the education system should be focussed on developing you as a human being too and that this could help.

But I disagree with your idea of "regulating online dating":

4 hours ago, Karmadhi said:

regulation can be . . . for girls to be less entitled and picky.

Try imagining being a girl (or a gay guy) and hundreds of men want to sleep with you because you're hot.

What would you do? Sleep with all of them?

Nah. You'd only choose the highest quality guys, right?

[Preety_India]

A good analogy to explain you is the concept of free market and free will.

Free market means there is no restriction on what is bought and sold. There are less regulations on demand, supply and pricing. 

Free will means the option to exercise one's will without hindrance or restrictions. 

Dating or sexual marketplace is essentially a free marketplace and involves free will. The reason you don't have regulations as you have with employment because a job is a resource. Agreed that both food and sex are survival needs but when you eat your food you aren't harming another human being. You're simply satisfying your need.

But when it comes to sex, such a regulation can mean two things- one is satisfaction of your needs and the second is pussy control. Now the latter option has the capacity to harm a human being. It's not an innocent satisfaction of needs. It also means pressuring someone against their will. When you consume unemployment benefits you're talking about resources that don't carry a heart. Money and food don't carry a heart. However a woman is not a non living resource. She is a living , breathing human being with a psychology. Pressuring a woman/human is against human rights because it enters the territory of slavery. Covert slavery. I cannot pressure someone to work for free for me or give their labor via emotional blackmail. That would be considered forced labour. Such ideas are criminal in their origin no matter how innocently they're projected. That's why the sexual marketplace is exclusively free and not regulated unless you're living in a stage red society that has forced marriages.

Having your sexual needs met is a fundamental right yet having free will is also an equally important fundamental right. Free will has precedence over need Because need can be compromised with but not free will.

Thus you can say that sex is a basic need but a woman can argue that her right to decide what she wants is her free will. A woman may not want sex at all. Pressuring her would equate to sex slave or Human slavery.

Since the question of free will is involved,the sexual marketplace cannot be regulated the way you regulate jobs or funding.

Any form of pussy control is slavery and therefore criminal.

 

[Jacob Morres]

43 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

no school is gonna teach you what it takes to pull hot girls and be attractive

maybe but at the bare minimum schools needs to teach social skills, confidence skills and at least some relational skills with women 

[Karmadhi]

@Leo Gura What can be done is for society not to demonize cold approach so much. It is hard for people to do it when 99% of society labels you a creepy weirdo for doing it. Imagine if learning new skills to get better job was demonized, how stupid would that be. I am not confusing being creepy and harassing with cold approach. 

Also online dating should either be banned or heavily regulated. There people that pay get advantages which is messed up. Personally i would vote to remove it completely but if kept at least to be made equal for everyone. Ads should be enough, no need to charge on top with boosts and shit like that. Greedy devils those firms are. 

Lastly, yes education is out there however we are not talking about special cases. We are talking about the average person. People that have some wisdom and are into self improvement are not the majority, those people are rarely angry incels. There are also plenty of free material on how to learn valuable skills and still people are stuck without jobs or do not know how to safe/invest. Plus unfortunately most of the advice out there regarding this stuff is either very pro make (red pill) or some PUA manipulative shit that will turn you into a ruthless fucking machine. Very few channels i found to be effective yet conscious and ethical. A society full of PUA devils is not much better than one full of angry incels tbh. So even if you decide to research this stuff on your own it will be very hard to find good healthy sources. Education and removal of stigma for learning this stuff would be the best solution imo. If society can make it seem normal to be obese "fat acceptance movement" then i doubt it will be very hard to make it seem normal for guys to learn this stuff.

 

Edited May 27, 2021 by Karmadhi

[Aaron Truth]

I am just here to see if this was a real post. 

[Karmadhi]

@Preety_India You make amazing points however i did not say to regulate it in terms of girl's communism. I never ever support the idea of getting free stuff without putting work for it. I do not support free money because you are lazy to work. I meant structure education and society in a way that men are raised in a proper way. More emphasis on learning about attraction, human to human interaction and do not demonize the idea that talking to a girl you do not know is bad. Why you think 99.9% of guys are horrified to approach? Because of the way they have been conditioned by society that they are losers, desperate, weird etc if they talk to a stranger. 

Basically create mechanisms to make men more desirable to women, then women choose them by their own free will. By more desirable i do not mean to make them into asshole players, just a bit more grounded and social. 

Leo's videos on "What women like in men" and "Why women fall for assholes" should be required viewing. The fact that such honest videos piss off so many people is an issue. 

[Roy]

5 hours ago, Karmadhi said:

The incel phenomenon keeps getting worse meanwhile you have guys with lay-counts in the hundreds.

And those "guys" probably have HIV, genital herpes, and child support payments through the roof.

Get a bigger perspective, the grass isn't always greener on the other side.....

[Karmadhi]

@Roy Using a condom removes all the things you mentioned. I meant the outcome is very unequal. Being a billionaire can also make you depressed and create issues in your life. 

[Karmadhi]

46 minutes ago, ItsNick said:

But I disagree with your idea of "regulating online dating":

Online dating has transactions that reward you paying for it. It is simply a business, it does not care about people actually meeting and creating relationships. By regulation of online dating i mean remove all paying options so everyone gets an equal playing field. Either make it with a subscription for everyone or make it free with ads to give revenue. The firms that own the sites make billions, the paying options are pure stage orange greed, not business necessities for survival. 

[Preety_India]

8 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

@Preety_India You make amazing points however i did not say to regulate it in terms of girl's communism. I never ever support the idea of getting free stuff without putting work for it. I do not support free money because you are lazy to work. I meant structure education and society in a way that men are raised in a proper way. More emphasis on learning about attraction,

This is freely available on YouTube and forums. Lots of books as well

 

8 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

 

human to human interaction and do not demonize the idea that talking to a girl you do not know is bad. Why you think 99.9% of guys are horrified to approach? Because of the way they have been conditioned by society that they are losers, desperate, weird etc if they talk to a stranger. 

This cannot be possible because you're looking at it only from your own viewpoint.

If I allowed every stranger guy to talk to me, then I would have a hundred creeps following me around every month. Simply impossible. Crime rates against women are through the roof even when women are advised by their mothers to not into a car with a stranger

I have experienced rape like situations even when I took all precautions. Not talking to a stranger is just a basic safety protocol for most women .

Maybe if men want women to be so free around them,then invest in women's safety by educating other men to respect women and not rape or harass them. Make it harder for a man to get away with rape . Make women feel safe. You want women to trust you freely. Then it's your job as men to cultivate that trust. You want freedom around men then pay the appropriate price for that freedom.

You can't expect to ask for greater freedom and then also have other men abusing that freedom. 

 

 

8 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

Basically create mechanisms to make men more desirable to women, then women choose them by their own free will. By more desirable i do not mean to make them into asshole players, just a bit more grounded and social. 

This depends on the man itself. You already have the tools. You can socialize if you want to. In fact socialization in today's environment is much easier than ever before in history of mankind. In 1950s you wouldn't have been able to talk to me the way you're talking right now. Communication between the sexes has become much easier. Cultural norms all around the world are relaxed in regard to this. 

 

8 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

Leo's videos on "What women like in men" and "Why women fall for assholes" should be required viewing. The fact that such honest videos piss off so many people is an issue. 

Women fall for assholes because assholes are sexually attractive. They know how to appear sexually attractive in terms of mannerisms. Some of this is learned whereas much of it is a genetic gift. 

If you think that women have a luxury when it comes to dating, that's simply not true. You can show me 100 profiles of men and I might not be attracted to any of those. You see the problem? You might think that too many rejections is a problem and women has it easy. But what if a woman is approached by men that she is just not attracted to ? Then she only keeps rejecting. You feel rejected, agreed. Yet she may be tired of rejecting men and never finding the man of her dreams. So it's hard for her as well,even if she is attractive. What she is attracted to depends on her standards as well as mindset. Attraction is biological. A man cannot control what he is attracted to, similarly a woman does not have much autonomy on who she is attracted to.

 

If she is attracted to assholes, it's her biology doing her this misfortunate favor, she can't do much to control it.

 

[Roy]

31 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

Using a condom removes all the things you mentioned. I meant the outcome is very unequal. Being a billionaire can also make you depressed and create issues in your life. 

If you think condoms will actually protect you from getting an STD or a pregnancy after having sex with 50 different people let alone "hundreds" you are either severely inexperienced and naïve or deliberately ignorant about how reckless that kind of behavior is.

[Karmadhi]

1 hour ago, ItsNick said:

But I disagree with your idea of "regulating online dating":

Online dating has transactions that reward you paying for it. It is simply a business, it does not care about people actually meeting and creating relationships. By regulation of online dating i mean remove all paying options so everyone gets an equal playing field. Either make it with a subscription for everyone or make it free with ads to give revenue. The firms that own the sites make billions, the paying options are pure stage orange greed, not business necessities for survival. 

[Karmadhi]

@Preety_India

20 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Maybe if men want women to be so free around them,then invest in women's safety by educating other men to respect women and not rape or harass them

You are talking about it from Indian pov, i am talking about the western world. In the western world the biggest issue guys face is being too nice and treating girls like princesses. They treat you too well with the agenda of sleeping with you. The scale has went from too ruthless to too nice. The sweet spot is in the middle.

21 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

In fact socialization in today's environment is much easier than ever before in history of mankind

Then why virgin rates have risen from 6-7% of adults to over 25% in just 10 years. Clearly technology has made socializing face to face less common. It is a side effect of it, a price we have to pay for all the benefits it gives us.

23 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

Women fall for assholes because assholes are sexually attractive. They know how to appear sexually attractive in terms of mannerisms. Some of this is learned whereas much of it is a genetic gift. 

If you think that women have a luxury when it comes to dating, that's simply not true. You can show me 100 profiles of men and I might not be attracted to any of those. You see the problem? You might think that too many rejections is a problem and women has it easy. But what if a woman is approached by men that she is just not attracted to ? Then she only keeps rejecting. You feel rejected, agreed. Yet she may be tired of rejecting men and never finding the man of her dreams. So it's hard for her as well,even if she is attractive. What she is attracted to depends on her standards as well as mindset. Attraction is biological. A man cannot control what he is attracted to, similarly a woman does not have much autonomy on who she is attracted to.

 

If she is attracted to assholes, it's her biology doing her this misfortunate favor, she can't do much to control it.

Men should be taught what actually attracts women, not what women think they are attracted to. Everytime this topic is brought up a swarm of females debate on this issue and it goes no where. How about people become aware of what they actually like instead of sugar coating it to suit their ego? This goes for both sexes. The issue is that this misleads guys and makes them think that being nice and caring is what will get you girls. It will not and the most common thing that happens is a nice guy that learns through sheer experience to be a little more of a ruthless person. Leo went through it and many others did. Maybe teach guys what works from the start. Hollywood romance creates big issues and misinformation on this topic, leaving guys confused and unable to know how to hunt.

 

26 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

This cannot be possible because you're looking at it only from your own viewpoint.

Yes i am, i am trying to balance it as much as possible but my biases make it impossible to do that.

 

 

[Preety_India]

@Karmadhi yea I personally "am" attracted to ruthless guys.