What dating standards are fair for women to hold?

krackedy · 2024-11-06T15:16:35+00:00

A woman decides her own standards. If she can't find anyone to meet them it's up to her if she wants to lower them or be alone.

Same for men.

a_minty_fart · 2024-11-06T15:05:49+00:00

There are no unfair standards if you can accept the competition that comes with them.

You can demand whatever you want from the dating market but the dating market is not obligated to give it to you.

EugeneCezanne · 2024-11-06T17:48:57+00:00

I don't generally see standards as inherently fair or unfair, absent context. Blatant hypocrisy often provides the only context in which I'd consider otherwise. For example, if her standards include that a man be rich and 100% financially supportive, but she's broke and has no intention of contributing—that's her right, but also open for criticism.

I see nothing wrong with a 6 holding out for a 10. It may be a losing strategy, but it's not a question of ethics.

I see nothing wrong with standards being superficial. We should want to date people we're attracted to. And attraction is largely pre-intellectual: you can't talk yourself into feeling something you don't, no matter how sound the argument.

Women certainly shouldn't consider every man who approaches. It's true that attraction may develop over time: most of the time, it doesn't. It simply isn't practical, or good to yourself, to give out time to everyone simply because they want you already.

rustlerhuskyjeans · 2024-11-06T15:40:00+00:00

A woman got one egg and has to bear the child, so that changes your mindset from a guy, even if she’s on birth control. Women strongly desire affection, but most don’t want to sleep with a bunch of guys all the time. When she does and it’s some random guy, he physically turns her on and prob has a cool life.

Women are open to all types of guys right now. However, if you want low effort casual intimacy and you don’t know her, she’s only going to do that with a much smaller subset of clearly desirable men. That’s why cold approach and dating apps are so much more difficult for men.

Muscletov · 2024-11-06T16:01:46+00:00

Both women and men are free to have any standards they want. Anything else is not enforceable and the mere notion to do so is ridiculous. However, people with high standards might have to deal with others judging them for being shallow, overly harsh or hypocritical, especially when they constantly demand things from potential partners they themselves do not have or fulfill. And while it goes for both genders, I think women are much more guilty of this. than men.

What irks me the most about women in particular and their standards is the compulsive hypocrisy, embellishment and lying, i.e.:

Loudly claiming their right to have any and all standards and then turning around to criticize men for having ones as well
Acting like their standards are always supremely reasonable, humble and noble, even when they really aren't
Denying having standards that make them look shallow or self-serving

To put it into an example: you are absolutely free to reject a man for being short and telling him so, but don't falsely blame your rejection on his character or ascribe your height standards to "patriarchal brainwashing". Don't get mad when he or anyone else calls you shallow, because you are. And don't attack the next man who might reject you for some other arbitrary reason. Be consistent and take accountability. Again, same goes for men.

Gravel_Roads · 2024-11-06T14:57:53+00:00

Everything is fair. Some standards are more likely to produce results than others, but people aren't required to succeed, so failure is also an option.

shadowrangerfs · 2024-11-06T15:59:01+00:00

I consider unrealistic standards to fall into two categories.

Math. How many of this man even exists. If you standards result in a man that is less than 1% of the population, it's unrealistic because the chances of you finding that man and him being single and him wanting to be with you are slim to nil.
You don't meet the standards of the people who meet your standards.

As for unfair, if they are just selfish.

CryptoThroway8205 · 2024-11-06T19:24:41+00:00

First one but I'd still say it's delusional for a 4' something broke girl to want a 6 ft guy in finance with blue eyes and a trust fund.
Second one isn't as delusional. Like a 5'8 girl can still require the guy be 6ft. But the average height difference between men and women is closer to 6 inches and I don't think she'd care if the guy were 6'2. She probably wouldn't be like "you're too tall" to a 6'5 guy either. I think standards drop as women get older as they're reminded of their biological clocks.

I guess height doesn't matter as much to guys so maybe this is a bad example. Pretend I used the wealth equivalent.

SecondEldenLord · 2024-11-07T00:55:09+00:00

She can decide her own standards, in the end she will end up single if her standards are ridiculously high and way out of her league.

Main_Aside_3072 · 2024-11-06T15:30:26+00:00

Everything is fair. But you can't shame men who don't want obese women or promiscous women, for example. Everybody can have standards, that doesn't make people insecure and you have to accept it.

GrandpaDallas · 2024-11-06T16:52:02+00:00

A woman gets to decide her own standards; they're all equally legitimate.

I'd say that's perfectly fair. You're choosing a partner for life, you should be picky and set your own standards.

A woman should specifically seek out her looks and/or status match.

Specifically? No. She should be realistic with herself knowing how she looks and understanding better looking people may have higher standards? Absolutely. But I would say she's more than fine shooting her shot for a 10 if she wants to go for it. No harm in trying, and maybe he's into her.

A woman's standards shouldn't be superficial.

Everyone's standards are going to be a little superficial. That's just how it goes.

A woman should consider most men who approach her.

No. Some women are going to be approached by several men in a single night. To expect her to even consider one of them every time it happens is unrealistic. A person should be free to say no whenever they want to, even if the only reason is they just don't feel like it.

A woman's standards should include me, specifically

Dumb

Lift_and_Lurk · 2024-11-06T15:17:26+00:00

I feel like any standards anyone has are fair. But if it isn’t getting them the results they want then they should probably re-evaluate the standards.

I mean everyone’s standards are thier own, right?

Ludens0 · 2024-11-06T15:21:54+00:00

It is not about fairness, it is just about the probability of success.

The higher the standard, the higher the chance of failure. So it is up to them to live with cats forever waiting for a man that doesn't exist.

Ok-Dust-4156 · 2024-11-07T02:24:04+00:00

Literally anything. Just have some idea how realisitc those standards are, how many men fit those standards and don't expect those men to suddenlly appear at the door out of nothing.

AidsVictim · 2024-11-07T04:06:37+00:00

Looks match (meaning without makeup) and lifestyle match.

I doubt most women will accept the former though. They're somewhat more reasonable on the 2nd (they still chase exciting guys but aren't offended by the thought of dating someone with their own lifestyle)

Double_Aught_Squat · 2024-11-06T19:29:02+00:00

It's not so much about women's high standards as much as their poor behavior when they find out men have their own standards and they don't meet those standards.

abaxeron · 2024-11-06T14:44:17+00:00

I have mentioned it multiple times, if law-abiding women were not getting knocked up by criminal men at higher rates than by law-abiding men, AND by violent criminals more than by thieves, it would be a great, huge, decent first step.

https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1gatbpz/women_dont_like_bad_boys_any_more_than_men_like/ltgha0n/

Edit:

As a lot of people seem to be confused, let's recheck the numbers.

Men non-offenders: N = 1,791,693; fertility rt. = 0.74; children = 1,791,693 * 0.74 = 1,325,853 children fathered by law-abiding men.

Men offenders: N = 691,550; fertility rt. = 1.22; children = 691,550 * 1.22 = 843,691 children fathered by criminal men.

Children mothered by criminal women: 215,203 * 1.42 = 305,588 children mothered by criminal women.

Thus, children of men offenders mothered by women non-offenders, AT LEAST: 843,691 - 305,588 = 538,103.

Fertility rate of men offenders EXCLUDING ALL children mothered by women offenders (assuming that all their fathers were offenders):

538,103 / 691,550 = 0.778

STILL higher than reported fertility rate of non-offender men of 0.74.

Bite me.

TopShelfSnipes · 2024-11-06T14:48:43+00:00

A combination of the first two.

She needs to have a realistic perception of her own SMV and RMV to loosely place herself within a range, and should be willing to consider men in that range. It's okay if she aims above her range. Within the ranges, she should get to decide her own standards and preferences.

AKA she gets to decide her own standards, but they're rooted in reality.

Her rejecting men that are within her range before giving them a chance (aka a broke, overweight 5'1" woman rejecting a 5'7" man with a $70,000 a year job, a fit body, and a decent face) is just a waste of everyone's time.

I would say the same thing to overweight 5'4" broke men with busted faces who habitually swipe left on "plain janes" who are on the heavy side of average and don't have a seductive style of dress.

Obviously, this is before taking personality into account since these snap judgments are typically made before men and women get to know each other and thus are based almost wholly on looks.

A woman's standards can be superficial. It's reasonable to not want to date short men, or men shorter than her. That's a preference. But immediately disqualifying men under 6'5" is idiotic unless she is also tall. It's also okay to have superficial preferences for eye color, hair color, hairline, facial shape, race, etc. But going back to the original point, these standards need to be rooted in reality.

A woman should not have to consider most men who approach her. It's probably wise for her to at least think this through, but if a man's approach is too aggressive/offputting, she has every right to reject him, same if she just simply finds him unattractive. She shouldn't write him off specifically because he approached, but either for lack of attraction/repulsiveness/somehing about the approach that rubbed her the wrong way. That's not requiring her to "consider" him as she doesn't owe him anything more than basic courtesy, and that ends if he gets pushy.

I'm off the market, but as someone above average, I'm already confident I meet enough women's standards to have options if I ever god forbid wound up single again, so the inclusion or exclusion of me in the group isn't really relevant.

IndependenceSad9300 · 2024-11-06T16:35:29+00:00

All women should have me as their ideal man. Ill reject then all those mgtow all the way

gangbangoldfolkshome · 2024-11-06T16:47:09+00:00

It’s actually not about women tbh. If men want to be more successful in dating, they need to improve their relationship with themselves. Women’s standards are quite frankly, completely irrelevant.

If you analyze the language that men use when complaining about female standards, it becomes pretty clear that these men don’t have any confidence in their ability to get what they want. They don’t think highly of themselves and consider themselves inferior. Usually this is because they use socially approved metrics to measure themselves by. What do I mean by socially approved metrics? It’s the things that society tells you you NEED in order to have sex with attractive women. Be tall, athletic, make a lot of money, have an interesting career, be famous, etc. So men look at those conditions and they think “I don’t have these therefore I’m not good enough to mix my genes with the genes of an attractive woman. Instead, let me lash out at women for having very high standards”.

The thing is if men stopped measuring themselves by the socially approved metrics and decided to just approve of themselves as they are and reward themselves with confidence, they would become much more interest to women. And to really drive the last nail in the coffin, men should be concerned about what they want from woman and then screen for those qualities. But since most men admittedly would fuck anyone who gives them an ounce of attention, they don't even think about having their own standards and conditions.

And a man who has no standards and doesnt screen women is considered a low quality male. Hence why even being concerned with women's standards is a losing game. If you all you think about is how to meet her standards, then she's the selector and you are jumping through her hoops. But if all you are concerned is your own standards and whether she's good enough to even talk you, then the tables are reversed. Now the woman will naturally become concerned with whether she meets your standards. And thats how you become a 10% male.

AutoModerator · 2024-11-06T14:37:01+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Several_Fish7837 · 2024-11-06T19:57:10+00:00

I'd say any standards that put an emphasis on things you can actually control (and to draw the line on what things you control or not, that's something else), but biology will get in the way.

Standards and attraction aren't and will never be fair.

Gitsumrestmf · 2024-11-06T21:29:40+00:00

No one can tell you what your "standards" are. You are attracted to what you are attracted to.

Having said that, the whole idea of "standards" is rather ridiculous. You meet a person who you genuinely see a future with, that's it. All those "standards" and other nonsense go out the window.

Goonerlouie · 2024-11-07T00:10:15+00:00

A woman gets to decide her own standards; they’re all equally legitimate. Agree, but no complaints if things don’t go your way
- A woman should specifically seek out her looks and/or status match. You should seek the best of the best in looks and status. Again, no complaints if you only attract your looks/status match though
- A woman’s standards shouldn’t be superficial. Hard agree on this. Will looks really matter when you’re 50? 60? 70? 80? Doesn’t anyone think of the long term anymore?
- A woman should consider most men who approach her. Potentially, given how rare it is nowadays?
- A woman’s standards should include me, specifically. Lol. I think I’m top tier in personality and relationship material, so yeah, if they’re not me I think you’re downgrading

Key-Faithlessness-29 · 2024-11-07T00:12:40+00:00

Women shouldn't be chastised for their standards. Its men who keep simping for them that gives them the choice to keep high standards also the fact that they don't want men as much as men want them.

Change these two facts and men can have standards too and the dating game will be much on equal footing

Savings-Bee-4993 · 2024-11-07T01:49:07+00:00

A woman gets to decide her own standards.

That doesn’t mean her standards are rational though, nor that they should be praised or accepted.

A woman in general should want and pursue someone (1) she’s attracted to, (2) who has objectively good values, priorities, and similar goals, and (3) who will commit to her and work on improving themself and the relationship.

The problem is that women hyper-focus on (1) and don’t consider strongly enough (2) and (3).

hidratedhomie · 2024-11-07T05:55:46+00:00

I'm going to be brutally honest with a job analogy. If you still have a line of candidates, even if you publish a job offer with insane requirements, then they validated your standards and you can keep them as high as you like. But your leverage goes away with age, and you can end up as a tone deaf employer complaining about how "nobody is wants to work anymore" if you don't adjust them or compensate with better benefits.

Affectionate_Cat1512 · 2024-11-07T10:40:32+00:00

Dating isn't fair. Period. Everybody should be able to have any standards they want

Throwaway26702008 · 2024-11-07T16:47:28+00:00

Therapy. Yes you can have whatever standard, as long as it isn’t due to prejudice, but ive seen many women say that if you don’t go to therapy, youre a huge red flag.

Cunnin_Linguists · 2024-11-06T18:44:53+00:00

A woman should specifically seek out her looks and/or status match. If she's a 6, she should be open to 6s, and it's probably unrealistic (or even downright delusional) for her to hold out for a 10.

This

Women are constantly online talking about how men don't commit and yadda yadda, men obviously commit as something around 60% of men are in relationships. They just don't want to commit if you're too far below them.

Women need to stop gaslighting each other and be honest/realistic with each other's SMV

ShturmansPinkBussy · 2024-11-06T15:18:08+00:00

Anything as long as they gracefully accept being rejected for serious relationships instead of throwing fits and seething at men like spoiled children.

Which unfortunately seems to be a tall order.

Combatenjoyer23 · 2024-11-06T15:32:39+00:00

It depends on the woman. Obviously a real quality person with a lot to offer would justifiably have very high standards. But some woman in 30k debt who don't date no brokies is a meme.

fucksiclepizza · 2024-11-06T18:41:57+00:00

She can have whatever standards she wants.

giveuporfindaway · 2024-11-08T04:29:46+00:00

Other:

She can have whatever standards she wants, no matter how ridiculous (be 7ft tall). But she must adhere to a free sexual market place without government intervention. She cannot report her husband for beating her. And if her baby daddy decides to leave and her child starves, then oh welp.

blarginfajiblenochib · 2024-11-06T14:56:31+00:00

I’m between 1 and 2 because I feel a combination of both is realistic for anyone of any gender. You can have whatever standards you like but you are not entitled to anyone; you will also be subject to your own level of attractiveness and what you realistically have to offer potential partners, regardless of how high/low your standards are.

Title	What dating standards are fair for women to hold?
Author	blonde___guardian
Upvotes	27
Comments	266
Date	November 6, 2024 2:37 PM UTC (1 year ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1gkzxvh/what_dating_standards_are_fair_for_women_to_hold/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/what-dating-standards-are-fair-for-women-to-hold.1534814 https://theredarchive.com/post/1534814

Comments