According to this study, your chance to get a bang with a speed-dating partner is 6%. Your chance to have a relationship with a speed-dating partners is 4%. (Unclear from the study abstract whether that means you have a 6% chance at the start of a speed-dating event, or whether that 6% refers to the subset of speed-dating partners who have agreed to go out with you.)
We studied initial and long-term outcomes of speed-dating over a period of 1 year in a community sample involving 382 participants aged 18–54 years. They were followed from their initial choices of dating partners up to later mating (sexual intercourse) and relating (romantic relationship). Using Social Relations Model analyses, we examined evolutionarily informed hypotheses on both individual and dyadic effects of participants’ physical characteristics, personality, education and income on their dating, mating and relating. Both men and women based their choices mainly on the dating partners’ physical attractiveness, and women additionally on men’s sociosexuality, openness to experience, shyness, education and income. Choosiness increased with age in men, decreased with age in women and was positively related to popularity among the other sex, but mainly for men. Partner similarity had only weak effects on dating success. The chance for mating with a speed-dating partner was 6%, and was increased by men’s short-term mating interest; the chance for relating was 4%, and was increased by women’s long-term mating interest.
This is from an interesting blog called Barking Up The Wrong Tree, a sort of warehouse of various studies examining human behavior. “Choosiness increased with age in men, decreased with age in women” made me LOL. Yep, when looks is all you can bring to the dating market, it’s no surprise you become more desperate the older you get. Also no surprise that older men with higher social status than when they were younger, become choosier. Proof that it’s better to be a man than a woman as you get older.
It strikes me that this study would be a good way to scientifically test the merits of game. You could arrange a speed dating event with AFCs (average frustrated chumps), tally their success rate at getting dates and bangs, and then have the same group of men spend three months learning game and then repeating the speed-dating experiment with them to see if their date and bang rate improve. It’s not a perfect experiment, (obviously, the group of women at the follow-up speed-dating event would be different), but it could give a glimpse into how much improvement one could expect from game. I think most men currently on the fence about the efficacy of systematic pickup would happily learn game if it meant a doubling from 6% to 12% in their lay rate.
The 6% number suggests that speed-dating as a form of meeting women kind of sucks, but it may compare favorably to meeting women in bars if the bar lay rate is less than 6%. That would be another hypothesis to test; I suspect speed-dating, because it attracts the desperate dregs of womanhood, has a higher lay rate, but that is small comfort to the man who prefers fucking girls who still have the glow of youth. A 6% lay rate with cougars, or a 3% lay rate with kittens? I think I know which success rate most men would prefer.
[crypto-donation-box]
