Postlude
When I outlined this essay, I planned to dedicate this section to caveats. Namely, I intended to pre-empt any reaction that I’m an unattractive, shitty personality’d brat who’s bitter because she never gets asked out, and who prefers to blame the rest of the world rather than recognize her own part in her destiny. [In fact, I am passably attractive and reasonably personality’d, and I get asked out far more than I think my own desirability justifies.]
But then I had drinks with a good guy friend and realized that I need to acknowledge a much more cutting and depressing possibility for why the social scene here is what is it.
You see, the guy friend with whom I was splitting a bottle of wine is a stud. He’s great looking, hilarious, athletic, and successful by all conceivable standards. He’s starting a company and pursuing artistic interests on the side – and he’s actively looking for a girlfriend. And he gave me thirty-odd reasons why San Francisco sucks for men, too.
Our common complaint started with: “where are the good-looking, ambitious, accomplished and interesting people in this city?” But as we drank more wine, we got more honest: we’d both been on plenty of dates with very good-looking, ambitious, accomplished, interesting (not old) people. And, we both conceded, there wasn’t a single one whom, if we never saw them again, we’d remember to think about.
What kind of person says that?? That is, what kind of people are my guy friend and I to be so dismissive, and is it possible that San Francisco is not so bad because it has a lot of geeks and marrieds and gays and male cougars, but because it has so many of us.
And what are we? We’re the ones who excelled in our small town high schools, netting us a place at prestigious universities and, from there, elite jobs and enrollment in competitive graduate programs where we were further groomed to think we can and should do anything to which we set our minds. We’re the ones parents and teachers tapped as “high potential” when we were 12, at which point we were given permission to focus all our attention on ourselves. While the geeks were developing their computer programming skills, we were becoming experts on the art of self-perfecting. We collected accomplishments for broad-if-not-deep resumes and prepared ourselves for roles as future leaders of America.
Why do we come to San Francisco? It’s partly because we can’t go back home – our peers from New York and London are starting to migrate back that way, but the places we come from don’t afford the opportunities we’ve been bred to pursue. But it’s partly because, as it always has in America, the West Coast represents the next thing. And that, in the end, is what people like my studly guy friend and I are programmed to seek. It’s not goal-orientation, its progress-orientation. It’s the reason most of us have never stayed at a company more than two bonus cycles, the reason at my one year business school reunion the predictable answer to the question “how are things going?” was: “Fantastic! Totally kicking ass…..But I’m keeping my options open, you know. Have you heard of any interesting opportunities lately?”
How does this translate to personal relationships? A desperate fear of settling, an overly-attuned eye for flaws, and a thirty-year habit of uninhibited self-prioritization.
So it’s not that there aren’t a lot of check-all-the-boxes men and women in San Francisco, it’s that, when you take out the engineers, the marrieds, the gays, and the older men, that’s all that’s here. For all its transplants, San Francisco is a homogenous city, a pot of overachievers whose normal means of standing out fall flat. Try impressing someone at a bar here: Went to a prestigious university? Where else would you have gone? Starting a company? Aren’t we all? Have travelled to 21 countries? Only 21? Recently ran a marathon? Why not an ultra?
But here’s the big thing: all those achievements apply to women and men. If you didn’t hear the voice, it would be impossible to tell whether a bio (“I studied History at Harvard, then worked at BCG, then went back to Harvard for business school. During that time, I biked across the United States, hiked Kilamanjaro, started a nonprofit in Africa, and now I’m head of corporate strategy for a start-up travel website”) is that of a guy or a girl. Which complicates gender roles beyond logistics (whose career do we prioritize?) to fundamental worth (what do you bring to this that I don’t already have? What can you provide that I couldn’t provide for myself?).
In short, I fully acknowledge that there’s another piece of this argument, which is that San Francisco is so bad because the women here are so difficult. Were I a man here, I would be complaining that I “just can’t win” with women in SF: that they’re expectations are simultaneously incredibly high and very poorly articulated. I think the Hong Kong geek from my cocktail party had a point, if badly delivered: the women here have replaced traditional feminine charms (no one would argue that focus on personal appearance is significantly muted here relative to other cities) with gender equal pursuits. And yet we still expect to find a man whose power and ability-to-provide-something-we-can’t-provide-for-ourselves stirs our respect and desire. Men, meanwhile, understandably want to be with someone whose achievements and pursuits complement, not compete with, their own. Which makes you wonder whether gender equality is necessarily emasculating, and what that means for a generation bred in it.
And so maybe all this ranting isn’t so much about the city as about our generation, and what’s so bad about San Francisco is the sobering reality that it’s the frontier toward which we’ve been driving. It’s the city that’s creating tomorrow’s companies and setting the standard for social progress. It’s the mecca for people who want to change the world, from geeks to entrepreneurs to Self-Reliant Overeducated Thirty Somethings like me. And it leaves you wondering: where is all the progress taking us, when meaningful relationships seem so difficult to find and maintain. Is this really the world that we want? And is there anywhere else to go?
This is so dead-on correct, it’s frightening. Most importantly is the question of the roles of gender in these relationships. Short answer – we don’t know what roles to play…or that we even want to play. If you’re a women, you spend most days tapping into your alpha testosterone to excel in your field…then have to suddenly transition when out. When out with my studly male friends, the number of women who have asked them to ask them out (rather than coyly flirting to a date) is absurd. In our haste to over achieve (and our small amount of time), we hyper efficize our dating too…to our own detriment.
This is perhaps the best and most honest spot on piece on the SF dating scene I have read to date. I find myself incredibly guilty of the overachievement aforementioned (UCSB, Berkeley, Stanford, 28 countries, started multiple companies, ran half marathons, currently writing a book, etc) and have been going through a period of deep introspection about this… “And it leaves you wondering: where is all the progress taking us, when meaningful relationships seem so difficult to find and maintain. Is this really the world that we want? And is there anywhere else to go?” At what point do we say enough, both to the blah men and ourselves???
oh, marathons..?
This may be the most smug article I’ve ever read…’He’s in VC… he’s starting a company…’ how superficial are we really getting here?
A few thoughts:
1. Throughout this blog, one gets the sense that you believe the dating world should somehow be a meritocracy. If a witty, vibrant young Frau is able to get into Harvard College, why then finding a suitable mate should be a relatively painless process. I almost empathize with this (quite prevalent) attitude; but once a little pressure it placed on it, you can see this attitude for what it is: an obstacle to contributing the sorts of things – affection, time, understanding – that make a genuine, amazing relationship flourish. Entitlement is deeply unsexy.
2. I do not believe you’ve really talked to enough men in SF about what they really want in a woman (or maybe the ones you have chatted with just have not been absolutely honest). Men, and I do mean men, not boys (recent college grads) or DOM (dirty old men), desire something that is hard for women in SF to provide: meaningful company.
What does this mean? Well, men want to engage with women about things that matter, and they want a deeper, more fulfilling connection with a woman who is intelligent enough to share her own world openly and transparently – thereby making our worlds better. The problem is that the overachiever demographic – to which you clearly belong – confuses an avalanche of words and opinions for meaningful company. The two are worlds apart.
It’s not that we don’t want to hear about your misadventures at work; but we find it strange that you are so deeply bothered by the fact a Haas MBA got a promotion before your Harvard arse did that you spend 30 minutes droning on about it. And while it’s great to have someone with a near encyclopedic knowledge of the SF restaurant scene, it’s not at a bowl of cherries to field complaints about the restaurant we are currently dining in, notwithstanding how well-grounded those complaints may be. In a nutshell, SF overachievers are often the most insufferable critics of anything and everything.
(You’ve complained a lot about geeks on this blog. Endless yammering and complaining is the overachieving Aphrodite’s equivalent of “Wow, I wish women in SF were as hot as they are in Hong Kong.”)
3. Your final thought – i.e., the frontier quality of SF is what makes its overachieving singles so anxious and conflicted – is a really interesting one. I’d add something to it you might not want to hear: Most people I meet who believe themselves to be participating in some kind of Manifest Destiny Part II are hopelessly boring, one-dimensional, and irritating. They have confidence in spades, as well as some truly colorful stories. But despite their alabaster CVs, the indescribable spark which makes a human being truly magnetic is nowhere to be found.
That comment made reading the blog post worth it.
Time is a finite resource. While someone is spendint that time to be an over-achiver in their career life, that means they are not investing time in their emotional lives or other aspects of their lives for that matter. As a bay area programmer I’m just as guilty of this as the next geek, but I’m aware of it and trying to invest into my emotional life more than my career life as of late.
I think more people should be doing this!
+1, Eden.
An ivy league education, extensive travel and professional drive, while impressive, are no replacement for a genuine interest in people and a caring nature.
The author’s bad luck in the dating field is extraordinary (if not exaggerated) to be sure, but it is no surprise that pretentious people attract pretentious people.
This made me laugh!
I love this comment. You’ve summed up how I feel about this article completely. I’ve met a lot of quality men in this city, you just have to hit the right demographic and not swim with the ‘boys’. And what the hell is wrong with geeks?
This girl also makes me feel bad about not wearing heals or plastering my face with makeup as if actually not wanting to conform to a magazine is a bad thing. Then I remember that I don’t care what people think, take a sip of my beer, and cheer on my sports team solo.
While I agree with a lot of what you’ve had to say, I can’t help but notice your description of the man “every girl” is looking for includes looks, ambition, and success, but I didn’t once notice a mention of kindness, integrity or generosity (or at generosity in a grander sense, not in a “I want a man to spoil ME ME ME” kind of way). I see the start of some good self reflection here, and I hope with time you’ll begin to see happiness and success as something that may not include fancy degrees or huge bank accounts, but rather a loving family where you feel cherished. You are obviously a very talented woman and I hope you’re on track to find a path that will make you deeply, genuinely happy– who knows, maybe it will be with a socially awkward software engineer, potbelly and all!
I second Brice; furthermore, I’d like to add that this sort of thinking is not something I find prevalent in any Ivy league grads that I have met. There’s something about not being told you’re the most super special snowflake of all time every single day of your overly privileged life that makes the less fortunate truly deeper and more rounded than the most overly-educated business school major (two terms I’d hardly find synonymous in any case).
I’m clicking with this comment way more than the original post.
The author of this blog post seems to have categorized overachieving narcissists into two distinct subcategories: geeks and non-geeks. It’s a funny distinction, but I guess it’s an important indication that in her perspective, a large chunk of the overachieving narcissists are un-datable because they probably don’t have the social savvy of her and her MBA buddies. She clearly includes engineers in the geek category, and I can only assume that she would also consider doctors, dentists, and psychologists as geeks too.
Running with stereotypes, I think a large part of the original poster’s problem with dating is actually the stereotypical personality of MBA graduates and entrepreneurs (which she and her studly friend seem to be). These people place way too much emphasis on checklists and resumes.
I agree that once you have a certain level of education you tend to want your significant other to have attained some rough equivalent. I’d be a hypocrite to say I don’t have this preference. However, education should not be a deal breaker. The only reason I consider it is because it’s some mild assurance that I can talk about some highbrow junk without my date becoming confused, but plenty of folks who don’t have advanced degrees (or degrees at all) are capable of this. Actual intellect and wit should be the requirement, not a degree that merely suggests you have intellect (and may turn out entirely false). And if what you’re looking for is earning power, then actual earning power should be more important than the piece of paper.
Next, there’s the whole bit about starting your own business. Lots of people start their own businesses. I know a lot of entrepreneurs who tend to be attracted to other entrepreneurs. Their excuse is that only other entrepreneurs really get them. Seeing as how I disagree with a lot of entrepreneurs on their philosophy, that actually only supports their argument. So, I’ll stop talking about this—at least, after noting that anyone can start a business; the difference is whether it is successful, and operates in a conscionable manner.
Now, to the stuff that really irks me: travel and marathons. I’ll start with travelling. It’s sort of a trendy thing to do, and I feel most people approach it all wrong. It seems that travelling for most people involves short spurts of time with activities, which I would consider sight-seeing (including finding hole-in-the-wall places and local hangouts through travel blogs). I think what you need to do is stick around the place for as long as your vacation days will allow—meet locals, and do what they do—don’t exclusively meet up with other expats (which is nice, for a bit). I realize I’m just going down another branch of self-important narcissism here, but I think that when it comes down to telling stories about your travels, travelling my way will make your experience much more substantive and personal. It makes the memory and the retelling of it much more meaningful. So, while 21 (or 28) countries may sound impressive on its face, it really doesn’t seem that great to me if your stories just involves a list of places you ate or drank at which I could have looked up on Google.
Marathons—oh, marathons. So many of my friends run marathons and triathlons, and I just think it’s a horrible idea. I think people treat these things as trophy pieces and bragging rights (much like degrees prestigious schools, the fact that you know how to file a few papers to start a corporation, or a large number of countries “visited’). It’s shallow. Fitness can be achieved in better ways that doesn’t destroy your joints (and, really, gives you a nicer looking body). Some people will say that they run marathons to push themselves mentally and physically—like a spiritual hurdle. I think most of those people are liars. They just want another medal on the wall. Be healthy—you don’t need medals.
So, yeah, I think the main problem with the SF dating scene (at least for overachieving narcissists who don’t want to date geeks) is they really don’t have much to talk about beyond their resume. They may have some canned responses to follow up questions (like how they ate at some restaurant in Thailand that they saw on Food Network—which actually sounds awesome…), but there’s got to be more to who you are than a list (and I’m sure there is, if you learn to stop dating as if you’re in an interview).
I suppose I’m done being mean to entrepreneurs now. My point, really, is I don’t think checklists are the greatest ways to find a significant other. Maybe you have some requirements for attractiveness and intellect (and morals, if you’re like me), but don’t try to force your dates to fit into a mold made for someone who doesn’t exist. Try dating a geek.
Full disclosure: I’m an “overachieving narcissist” (that means I think I’m smart and attractive) with somewhat of a B-type personality and a handful of geeky interests (e.g., reading for pleasure). I went to a fairly prestigious university for my undergrad (I think it was 15 at the time… not 1, 2, or 3 though, so I won’t expect to be asked out by the original poster), and am almost done with my time at a tier 1 law school . Now, feel free to hate on law students for being liberal arts majors who had no marketable skills.
Eden is correct about what many of us theoretically “good catch” males experience in city dating, and why we quickly lose interest in most of these attractive, high-achieving women that catch our eye, once we speak to them. At the end of the day, even the most dominant alpha-males are not looking to “compete” with their mate, like they compete is many other areas in life. They’re looking to complement their mate with their own knowledge and skills, feel relevant, and spend quality time with someone they respect and whose company they enjoy. It’s pretty simple. Mr and Mrs Smith was an entertaining movie, but none of us really want that life.
YES.
I’m not going to trot out my intellectual bona fides (though I bet they’d match up well with those of anyone on here), but yes, entitlement is deeply unsexy.
Sure, you may have worked hard in the past. Not stoop-labor-in-the-Central-Valley hard (I’ve done that, too), but…? So has the janitor you barely glance at. The world does not owe you one damn thing. I’m looking at you, Stanford MBAs.
If you want respect, earn it by respecting others and doing awesome things for them. You want money? That’s not hard to get, as long as you have realistic needs; do stuff that is of value to other people and helps them. If you want someone to be worthy of you, be worthy of that person. That is the “achievement” that counts.
I’m not sure how I would up on this post except for clicking on one of my friend’s posted Facebook links. I’d say this portion of your post redeems yourself. Otherwise, I would have really had some issues with your overall post. Overall, I think you articulate your arguments well and this piece was very well written.
In general, I would say that women still have a disproportionate leverage in the dating scene in San Francisco, Silicon Valley / Man Jose area and to put it crudely, that women here are afflicted San Francisco 49er effect – the 4′s think that they’re 9′s. Of course, women in the SF Bay Area will often counter with the saying, “The odds are good, but the goods are odd.”
I just remember a female acquaintance of mine, when she relocated from L.A. to SF, stating honestly to me that her self-esteem went *WAY* up after moving here (and she was a fairly cute woman).
And yes, I had an ex-Facebook friend of mine, who spent his last year at Facebook in NYC, said that NYC was just crazy better for men. After fully vesting and traveling the world, he’s back in Silicon Valley to do his own startup and was complaining to me that “I can’t even get women to talk to me, and I’m *rich*.” (He jokingly said the I’m rich part, though he is).
My friend is very social, attractive Indian American male (there is a race dynamic which I did not think you went into much details in your post). He’s dating someone long distance ( white woman) he met in Tokyo in his travels that will be relocating to the SF Bay Area.
Anyways, good overall post.
I’ve been thinking a lot about the race dynamic lately. Im a 30 year Hispanic male from the east coast. Im kinda stuck in a weird place in that, I’m in a “geeky” industry (tech start ups), yet am an east coast guy, who has a little “east coast, street swagger”; so I get along and understand the “geek world” yet they dont get me. I understand the Stanford/MIT/Harvard individual, yet they dont understand my world. I’ve traveled all over the world and have friends across the social-economic spectrum, so I can acclimate easily. And although all my SF friends did, I didn’t go to an ivy league (or Stanford), yet am a serial entrepreneur, overachiever, who strives to be great, etc, etc, etc. I completely agree with all the perspectives presented here. Its actually not as depressing.
I was wondering if women in SF were difficult, a-sexual jerks because I am the only hispanic male in the Marina that didn’t bus tables or deliver food on bicycles, or maybe all men deal with the same thing? There are no educated Hispanics in this city. You gotta be kidding me if you think I’m going to the Mission to hit on those “ghetto” women. And for the “ethnic” women I have come across in the Marina, who are educated and attractive, they are all looking for a specific “type” of guy (I think) or will adapt the crappy attitude the rest of the women employ.
Yes, I live in the Marina, and yes there are an overwhelming amount of douche bags and trash, yet this is the only that I find livable in this city. And as a heterosexual male, this is the only place that has reasonably attractive women. Im a pretty confident guy and have no problem approaching women, yet I have recently just given up. Talking to women in this city is painful. Women will give you their numbers and never respond. I miss the good ole east coast woman, who will just tell you to “f” off or say no when you asked for their number.
I used to think that you could only score in this city if you were a tall white guy who went to Cal, or the classic trailer trash douche bag, who all wear those dirty Giants hats, and are drunk out of their minds by 3pm on Sat/Sun. Yet I guess we are all f’ed.
Needless to say, I am only hear to start companies. I do like the outdoor stuff, and the fact that I can ride my bike everywhere, yet I have practically given up trying to communicate with women in this city.
Fu#k this is depressing.
For the good of humanity I recommend you stay single.
Get a life @Jim. Is that all you got?
Jorge, you are true scumbag. “Those ghetto women”?
As a white male San Francisco native, with many transplant friends, I’d like to contribute my two cents. I think a lot of people don’t realize that San Francisco is not a larger and more liberal version of any other American city. Many transplant women are looking for white, English mother-tongue, American, young urban professionals. If this is what you are looking for you are in the wrong place…and might have better luck in Marin. The Marina or the gentrified parts of the mission might work too–but the heterosexual population fitting that description is small. I would suggest to branch out a bit…when a San Franciscan dates someone new, the first question from friends is not “what does he/she do?”, but “where is he/she from?” Just like most San Francisco men I’ve dealt several times with a crazy potential mother-in-law who doesn’t speak a lick of English. It is a challenge, but it is also part of our San Francisco identity–it doesn’t mean that those kind of relationships are any less likely to be successful…they simply present different challenges.
I admire my transplant friends for being brave and taking a chance on things. I also wish that many of them would branch out and enjoy the city like a native. Get to know people outside of the young urban professional community–learn some Cantonese, some Spanish. You will be amazed what you find. For San Francisco natives–the mission isn’t a place for us to go to taquerías and wait in lines–its a place for us to go to friends’ houses and eat their mother’s cooking. We don’t take the gaggle of hipster friends to Burma Superstar–we go with our Asian friends to the other restaurant on Clement Street (that don’t have hoards of hipsters outside).
If you have recently bought produce at a Safeway (instead of a small produce market) or were able to fully communicate in English with the staff of the last restaurant you went to–you’re not living in San Francisco. I believe the allure of the city attracts many people who are just not right for it. This city did not become famously liberal for no good reason–really enjoying life in San Francisco requires you to go out on a limb and out of your comfort zone (Valencia Street does not count…it might as well be Chestnut Street nowadays).
I hope your stay in my city improves!
Look: I get it. You’ve had some bad dating experiences, and it’s possible that these stereotypes of men exist. I’m sorry men have been rude to you, but we’re not all like that. I promise
Clearly the writer of this floppy postulation is not a native San Franciscan, shining through from her own one-dimensional perspective of what is, and is not, comprising of the SF populous. Otherwise, there would be a lot more truth in her assertions than there currently is.
Good luck, in any event.
Maybe it’s not about gender roles, etc. Perhaps we bred “future leaders” don’t really appreciate the really interesting things. Why not ditch our ambitions? In the end, we’re bored because our idea of progress is ho-hum. I recommend getting serious about a supernatural religion and becoming a political anarchist. We need to replace our vision of the world, and forget about kicking ass.
Yes! The 20s and 30s generation need to shake the last generation’s overachiever/always complaining about something molds that they were brought up with and the end all be all vision of progression simply by moving out West.
My response is somewhat similar.
I recommend D.F.Wallace’s “What Is Water?” : http://moreintelligentlife.com/story/david-foster-wallace-in-his-own-words
This section frames dates as about impressing one another. But what impresses me most is not accomplishments but presence, quality of attention, thoughtfulness, honesty, playfulness, and maybe a little bit of sensuality.
Which makes me think: maybe the problem is that none of us are getting enough sleep.
You are so wonderful. Why can’t the Bay Area be full of yous?
This. I might be too young to really play into the careerist dating prejudice, but aren’t people drawn to other people for personality foremost? How are you going to enter a relationship with someone whose CV is more impressive than yours (if that’s really the goal here) when you can’t get along? I feel like framing the failures of SF dating as a fault of women’s ambition is missing the point at best and dangerous at worst.
+1
You seem exactly like the character Charlize Theron played in Young Adult. Go watch that movie and learn from her.
You forgot the SNAGs — Sensitive New Age Guys. Just over the bridge in Marin, and deeply terrified of committing to anything other than their relentless efforts at self-improvement via yoga, meditation, Monday nights at Spirit Rock, and endless amounts of goji berries and acai. (And, also, just not that interesting to be around, much like the geeks, but actually way worse.) Oh, and you also forgot the Guys Who Live On Boats.
At the beginning of your article I was incredulous and honestly slightly annoyed, thinking “does she even live in the same city as I do?”. So I skipped to the postlude which was actually well written and thought provoking.
I think your frustration comes from your assumption that you should be dating people who are similar to you. Although intellectually this seems like a great idea, emotionally it’s not so much. It’s not necessarily going (or even likely) to create a healthy relationship. Not to mention that even finding this similar achiever whom you get along (and are chemically-physically compatible) with, can be very challenging simply due to statistics.
The woman I’m dating has nothing to do with the tech or business scene, and I really appreciate that. Now that I think about it, I’ve actually never been attracted to woman I’ve met in my career path (woman in the tech business are scarce). I spend the great majority of my time thinking and talking about my work, and when I’m spending time with my partner, it’s very refreshing not thinking and talking about it.
I look for playfulness, personality compatibility, and the ability to see the world from a new perspective in a romantic partner. I don’t really care about her career achievements, though I care that she is intelligent, has a direction in life, has accomplished things, and is continuing to accomplish things.
I don’t know why, (I don’t normally do this), but I feel compelled to give a word of advice to a random stranger on the Internet: branch out in your dating. Go meet a chef, a musician, a wood worker, a bar tender, an architect, a social worker, a teacher, basically anybody but the people you’re hanging out with.
Move to Portland, Austin or Denver, you’ll find more down to earth people.
God just stop be so freaken self involved. And monogamy? Psh!
It’s so great how you can live in like the best place on earth, be white (read privileged), educated (guess that went without saying), healthy and young and find sooo much to COMPLAIN about. God gawd. Take a deep breath fer gawd’s sake.
Awesome read. Your insights are honest and appropriately inquisitive. I think there’s a lot of truth to what you’ve shared, and that your key points are absolutely worthy of more dialogue. Thanks for sharing!
One thing left out of this analysis is
1) that men and women are attracted to different traits in potential partners. Most men don’t care about women’s professional or educational achievements. Women care deeply about men’s achievements since these achievements are a proxy for social status. A socially inept geek devoid of charm is to women what a fat, physically unattractive woman is to a man.
2) Women are hypergamous; that is, they strongly prefer to date up. It is very rare for a woman to be attracted to a man who is less educated or has lower social status than herself. Men will happily marry women of lower status than themselves as long as they are physically attractive and strong on attractive feminine traits like nurturing. So as an accomplished woman you are competing with all of attractive womankind for the top 10% of males in the world. Many of whom, as you rightly noted, are either married or gay.
With these odds in the dating market a single, high status male is spoilt for choice. If you’re a man in his late twenties or in his thirties, kicking ass professionally, charming, socially savvy, reasonably good looking you have your pick of women in their prime (early to late-twenties). You’re a rare commodity – the women you’re able to choose from are not. After all, you mostly care about their looks and feminine charms – not their diplomas or high-powered corporate career. In fact a high powered corporate career or a high partner count (more likely in educated women) is likely to erode the feminine charms that men with wide-ranging options prize.
So a large pool of women ends up having sex with a small pool of the most attractive men. Serious commitment from these men will elude all but the very best looking and grounded women; there is no pressure for a man to commit while safe in the knowledge that he will be in his prime for another ten or twenty years and can have fun dating a glorious variety of women in the meantime. Unfortunately women do not have this luxury.
Women have become more successful than men in getting top qualifications. Consequently they’re pricing themselves out of the dating market. For every step of the ladder women climb, the pool of feasible men they’ll find attractive shrinks; for every step on the ladder a man takes the pool of women that find him attractive grows. It’s especially lonely at the top since women are hard-wired to date up.
The really sad thing is that women are constantly told to ignore these truths, often only realising that they’ve been misled when it’s too late.
Oliver, thank you for sharing this. I found it very eye-opening as an ambitious, career-driven, young woman who does not want to become a jaded, bitter woman with no sex life in 10 years. Can you elaborate on your last sentence about women being misled?
Your comments are TERRIBLE. It is so filled with decades-old gender stereotypes and ridiculous tripe. I can barely begin to criticize it in the same way that I’m loathe to criticize an ape’s painting drawn in shit.
Now that I’ve told you how I really feel, let me be more specific:
These attitudes are incorrect. If you are a woman or a man who agrees with them you need to take a long, hard look at yourself and consider that maybe just maybe you are close-minded, lack self-awareness, and really aren’t much of a catch at all. Those would be good things to realize about yourself because they are true – and THE REST OF US CAN SEE THEM even if you can’t.
These attitudes come from cultural indoctrination that serves consumerist goals. If you have never learned to think for yourself you are simply living out the archetype created for you by media and advertising in order to increase profits and drive consumer demand. The side-effect of this is the type of attitude you’re illustrating in the above post.
How to get beyond it: First of all, consider that these things like “status” that you seek are RELATIVE. Maybe for you and everybody you went to college with there is only one thing that makes a person desirable. If that is the case, you need to meet more interesting people and/or become one yourself. As someone raised on the West Coast I find this type of perspective to be so unbelievably stupid that my initial reaction when it’s presented is to ask if you are kidding!
Now, to blow your tiny narrow mind:
1. Men are attracted to a woman who has a career. That is extremely attractive. Men like a woman who can take care of herself and has shown the initiative and ability to actually do something on her own in life. This helps to avoid people who intend to leech off of you because they are not fully-formed people. It also makes for a much more interesting person to be around. Men do not desire dolls or trophies.
2. Women are attracted to men who do something with their lives. This is extremely attractive. Women like a man who can see things through and can make good individual choices in their lives. This helps to avoid commitment-phobes and incompetent man-children who shirk in the face of the inevitable challenges in life. Women want a fully-formed adult who can support himself and has interests and knowledge and can use those things in real life. Women do not desire pushy control freaks, arrogant egoists, or people looking for someone to take care of them.
I’ll bet all of the money in my pockets that you’re Asian. Out.
[...] Postlude (or self-rationalizing) is the most disturbing part to me of the manifesto: But here’s the big [...]
Its kind of rude to say it, but it needs to be said, if all the things you say are true, you are smart, funny, witty, approach men, are socially confident and strong, I could only conclude that you are a unattractive or fat, no offense. Please post a picture of yourself and if you are not fat or ugly, I’d take back everything I said and conceed you are 100% correct. Because I can’t think of any other reason why men would not be all over you.
I’m reading this with amusement. I’m white, male, and a media professional, born in Chicago, worked in Chicago, Washington DC, Minneapolis, and Milwaukee, and in Spain and England. I ‘m in San Francisco a couple of times a year (about eighteen trips now, for extended periods of time, and have friends that have relocated here) and I find it totally unpersonable, not impersonal: unpersonable. Compared to Chicago, it’s the least friendly city I’ve ever been to. I’ve been standing on corners here, and make eye contact with someone, man or woman, say “Hi”, and “Nice Day” or something, and they literally scan me up and down, and ignore me or walk away. The prevalent attitude is: “what’s in it for me”. I’ve chatted with people from all walks of life, every where I’ve lived and worked, and never had this sort of crap happen to me.
The thing is, San Franciscans think it’s “happening” here, when in reality, it isn’t happening here at all. My neighborhood in Chicago had more jazz clubs than the entire metro area of San Francisco combined. More art galleries too. Nothing like a funny mid-western gal to crack a few jokes and have a cocktail with. Women is SFO, the loyalty runs out when the check book diminishes. Every time I go on a tour of some sort of media or arts thing, they mention that it’s only like this in San Francisco. B.S.! I’ve seen twenty of those things Chicago, DC or Baltimore, give me a break!
I guess after you relocated here from Des Moines, because you were too hip for that, when you find out SFO isn’t what it’s cracked up to be, you’ve already burned your bridges and can’t move back and admit defeat. I see sad, lonely and humorless people walking the street downtown here all the time, people that would’ve had a decent life someplace else. Makes me sad to see.
Revel in your beliefs San Francisco, it’s all you have left.
Thanks, so refreshing! I’m considering a move back to Chitown for exactly these reasons so it’s good to hear your perspective. To the Author: get out while you still can! yes, you’re observations about misfit geeks and DOMs are dead on. I can corroborate.
I love it when people who live in bubbles of their own construction write essays complaining that all the world’s a bubble
after all that good breeding, you can’t find the proper there/their/they’re?
sf, like nyc, is full of soulless posers. get out of there and perhaps pursue something that is not completely superficial. it’s the most novel of ideas, and it might actually make you interesting enough to date.
So here you reply to my previous comment. Today I came across this article on NYT. It’s worth every single word http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/magazine/the-island-where-people-forget-to-die.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Geeks outing MBAs the useless losers they are. Viva data, cold hard facts, stats, creating actual things, finding cures and to hell with bull shit hidden under layers and layers verbiage. Don’t build resumes, build things an solve real problems and be really passionate about something.
“I think the Hong Kong geek from my cocktail party had a point, if badly delivered: the women here have replaced traditional feminine charms (no one would argue that focus on personal appearance is significantly muted here relative to other cities) with gender equal pursuits.”
Translation: what the hell, why won’t anyone date me just for my looks and ignore my insufferable personality?
I’m an average-looking female software engineer and I’ve had better luck dating in SF than I have anywhere else. Fun fact: I have never even dated a developer. This city is full of fun and interesting people, sounds like you just might not be one of them.
Move out of SF. My four years spent in the Bay Area were the most miserable ones in my life. I’m surprised how comparatively happy + friendly + courteous people seem in other large cities.
wonderful issues altogether, you simply gained a emblem new reader.
What could you recommend in regards to your publish
that you simply made some days ago? Any sure?