> Criticizes pathological behavior of some men openly

> Puts a disclaimer before criticizing pathological behavior of some women

Nothing will improve until we as men stop gatekeeping ourselves from stating facts openly, without apologies. Women can be very shitty, often are, and that has to be said without the need to preface it or soften the blow.

> They're in a sticky spot where their most successful customer is one that they will never see another dime from, and there's not really a way around it.

naive question: why has no one made an app with the reverse incentive structure? i understand that the current business model is much more lucrative...but i feel like with how fed up people are with the inability of modern online dating to provide quality, long-lasting relationships a new platform that optimizes for match quality and longevity would eat all of Match Groups offerings lunches. i guess there just isn't enough money to be made so it's not even worth it?

> Many men (Not all, but many) are there simply because they want to get laid. They're not looking for a relationship, they're looking for a hook-up, and they're not honest about their intentions.

In fairness, this is not at all exclusive to online dating.

> Many men (Not all, but many) are ... not looking for a relationship, ... and they're not honest about their intentions.

> Some women ... expect to be taken out to $50+/plate restaurants on a first date, ... women are just trying to score free meals

> It's hard to make relationships kick off when they begin so adversarial.

I think you're letting a judgmental and expectant point of view toward certain women on the apps cloud over a very real problem of why the apps are not very useful for finding relationships. The basis of which is our expectations of how we want others to be and when they are not, they are the problem (justified or not) -- that then morphs into a cascading sequence of issues, if engaged with, on repeat.

That these particular women, who have expectations, at least say so -- up front. Yet comparing that with men are "not honest about their intentions" (expectations).

How is a woman looking for an actual relationship suppose to work with dishonesty? Men looking for an actual relationship can steer clear of that impending disaster.

I can ignore someone who declares their expectations, which I find off-putting. And if they don't declare it but expect a mindreader and they instead get a coffee, well I'm out a coffee and thankfully they showed who they were early and I move on. Their loss, not mine. On the other hand, if my date was stringing me along and lying about what they wanted until I was deceived enough into handing over what that actually was -- that's a far more consequential loss than a $4 cup of coffee. We should want everyone to clearly state what they want and expect, without the judgements, then everyone (with proper intentions) would benefit.

> 1. Many men (Not all, but many) are there simply because they want to get laid.

so are many women, unnecessarily gendered observation

you just hear less about guys crashing out over it

> Many men (Not all, but many) are there simply because they want to get laid.

Honestly, that's fine. The issue was when the "get laid" app suddenly decided to be the "find serious relationship" app. Makes about as much sense as Roblox thinking about a dating app, but I guess the MBA's told them it brings more monies.

> but some women greatly over-value themselves.

It's overblown, but the high level concept of "women are picky" the inevitable course of nearly all dating aspects. Evolutionary wise, women need to be picky due to their long gestation period, and men aren't as picky because they can copulate with dozens of women over the course of days. Add in a caste system and the pareto principle, and even scenes from millenia ago aren't as different from 2026 Tinder as you'd think.

But of course your last point only polarizes this existing natural phenomenon.

>Dating sites/apps have a financial incentive for your relationship to fail.

This is why we needed to litigate these sites yesterday. But we were too busy fighting amongst ourselves, like serfs warring in the streets while the kings sit in an ivory tower. This is an issue only regulation can fix. The human element shouln't be sold off to capitalism, especially in this time where people are supposedly concerned about falling birth rates.

> misogynistic

the definition requires "contempt", but it has been diluted to mean any statement that merely points out of corrosive behavior

additionally, many of the statements are actually class based and not inherently gendered, for example, we would call out a man trying to date for free meals too, but since its seen in contexts about women, its stated in reference to that gender, masquerading as contempt and misogyny, but not highlighting what is in the observer's heart and mind whatsoever.

[flagged]

When you say “$50+/plate” are you saying the dinner itself or each dish? Either way, (in the US) that is not considered a particularly expensive meal for an adult taking someone on a date. In 2026 you should expect $100-$200 bill with drinks basically anywhere. Going out to dinner is not cheap. $100 is actually a great deal unless we’re talking chain restaurants.

If you don’t want to spend that every first date, then I would suggest not making dinner the first date. Do something more casual first time around. Bar, coffee/walk, whatever.