I've noticed a pattern here among the saner blue pillers that accept that just finding a random sex partner is harder for men, but women are still the eternal victims because women don't GAF about casual sex and just want a committed loving relationship. Most will go on to claim that it is particularly difficult for women to get this, more so than for a man. Ergo, the argument goes, women are still the less lucky ones because the ease with which they can obtain a ONS is outweighed by the immense difficulty of obtaining a life partner.

But, what's the big obstacle to women getting a significant other? Sure, it's obviously easier for a woman who's looking for a ONS, but that doesn't imply that women are not advantaged and privileged in the LTR or spouse-hunting sphere.

The only slight disadvantage that women have in the search for an LTR is that some men will pretend to want an LTR but will actually only want to use her for sex.

This is embarrassingly easy to fix, if you don't want sex right away: simply mention, on the first date, that you have a strict policy of no sex until after the 10th date. This trick will ensure that 99.9% of guys who would pump and dump you will go away. The guys who agree to this stipulation are all looking for an LTR.

I can't think of any other plausible disadvantages that would affect a man less than a woman.

Women have great advantages in the LTR hunt. For example, if Steve agrees to a date with Lisa, we know for sure Steve is sexually attracted to Lisa. But if Jane agrees to a date with Larry, we have no clue if Jane considers Larry as a potential lover: it's completely normal for a woman to accept a date from a man she'd never willingly have sex with. So chalk that up as an advantage for the ladies.