I did an experiment: on bumble and CMB I did not write a job on my profile, got 0 matches for many weeks. I also tried writing a decent/average white-collar job on my profile and again, 0 matches for many weeks. The same day I changed to a high status white collar job, I immediately started getting matches again.
However, this time, I decided to do something different. I wrote that I was a student of a high-status field. To my surprise, I still got matches.
This was really strange to me, because a person with an average-status white-collar job will have much more money than a student, who is most likely in debt and broke. In fact, some people in average-status white collar jobs, depending on their industry and connections, might very will be making a really high salary, higher than people in high status jobs. However, I don't expect that women think like this, otherwise at least some would have swiped right, but literally 0 did. Although if they do know this, then that would mean that option B below is true.
However, the result of my experiment shows 2 possible things:
A) When women want a long term relationship (both bumble and CMB are long term apps, as opposed to tinder: on tinder I never wrote a job on my profile and I always got matches), they are willing to go with a broke student and play the waiting game, they are willing to wait until he graduates and starts making lots of money, they would prefer this over someone with average income who already has money
B) Women care more about status than money
Which one do you guys think it is? I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if the girls on the app were dumb enough to not have the foresight to think that a guy with an average white collar job would potentially have enough money. But even if that is the case why would they swipe right on me when I was just a student. Doesn't this mean they care more about status than money? But then again, maybe they are so thirsty for money that they would wait until a student in a good program graduates and makes a lot of money as opposed to going out with a guy who makes an average income right now.
Also notice how looks are not relevant at ALL? ZERO matches without a high status job. Yet on tinder (which is hook up/short term dating app) I get matched with girls without writing any job, some of them are even attractive. Alpha fucks;beta bucks is 100% true. When they want to fuck they ONLY go for looks, when they want long term they ONLY want money and/or status (but I wonder which one more). So if you are an above average looking funny and witty and interesting guy who has a decent white collar job, your value is 0 in the dating market for long term relationships. If you are an ugly bald short boring beta guy with a high status job, you value is higher. I really wonder how women can be so stupid to be so simplistic: I mean how stupid do you have to be to pick a guy you have 0 attraction to because he makes 100 grand a year yet you ignore a guy who you would enjoy every moment with and are slightly attracted to, just because he "only" makes 80k a year. Is that 20k a year difference worth it? Literally wtf. Or maybe the 80/20 rule is literally true and they literally don't find ANY guys in the 80% attractive AT ALL so they think to themselves might as well 100% focus on money/status. that is, if bottom 80% of men range from 1/10 to 7/10 in terms of looks, and the top 20% are 8/10s and higher, that means they literally don't find any guy under 8/10 attractive at all, so they don't care if they marry a 1/10 or a 7/10, so they might as well only care about money/status.
[–]thequarenteenpill2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]whatwasthatcat[S] 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]thequarenteenpill0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]whatwasthatcat[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]DangZagnut2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]whatwasthatcat[S] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]tramese2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ppdeny1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ChadwickSlickdick0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]whatwasthatcat[S] 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sir_manalot0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]foxfoe0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PubliusVirgilius0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]whatwasthatcat[S] -1 points0 points1 point (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]PubliusVirgilius0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link