Abstract

This study was conducted to quantify the Tinder socio-economic prospects for males based on the percentage of females that will “like” them. Female Tinder usage data was collected and statistically analyzed to determine the inequality in the Tinder economy.

***It was determined that the bottom 80% of men (in terms of attractiveness) are competing for the bottom 22% of women and the top 78% of women are competing for the top 20% of men.***

The Gini coefficient for the Tinder economy based on “like” percentages was calculated to be 0.58. This means that the Tinder economy has more inequality than 95.1% of all the world’s national economies. In addition, it was determined that a man of average attractiveness would be “liked” by approximately 0.87% (1 in 115) of women on Tinder. Also, a formula was derived to estimate a man’s attractiveness level based on the percentage of “likes” he receives on Tinder:

attractiveness%=16.8*ln(like%)+52.3

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4145079&forum_id=2#37319918)

We can also see that the wealth distribution for males in the Tinder economy is quite large. Most females only “like” the most attractive guys. So how can we compare the Tinder economy to other economies? Economists use two main metrics to compare the wealth distribution of economies: The Lorenz curve and the Gini coefficient.

The Lorenz curve (Wikipedia link) is a graph showing the proportion of overall income or wealth assumed by the bottom x% of the people. If the wealth was equally distributed the graph would show a 45 degree line. The amount the curve bends below the 45 degree line shows the extent of wealth inequality. Figure 2 shows the Lorenz curve for the Tinder economy compared to the curve for the U.S. income distribution from a few years ago.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4145079&forum_id=2#37319932)

I.e. they derive far more utility out of competing for the most attractive guys than they do actually getting and fucking a guy who is not going to make lots of other girls jealous.

Also when you factor in that 2/3rds of American men are overweight or obese you're basically just saying that most fat people--other than say the top 20% of overweights can still get laid (i.e. the slightly overweight and/or muscle weight high BMI)--and the bottom 25% of thin people (i.e. nowags, nowigs, rat-faced Jews, the monster-faced) are incels.

I would also love to see a break out of how attractiveness is defined and scored in this study. I bet there would be a high correlation with wealth signifiers i.e. there's a group of borderline guys who if you swap their clothes, travel signifiers, expensive apartment settings, cars, etc. can move from the top 20% to the bottom 80%. And I'd guess this group is a significant chunk of the top 20%. This would mean that true Chad privilege is likely reserved for only the group that's solidly above this level in attractiveness.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4145079&forum_id=2#37322949)

Edit - if she's after top 1% chads, does that mean I'm at least 50th percentile? 180

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4145079&forum_id=2#37320020)

"Several women in the survey actually preferred rape or dismemberment to the mere thought of dating an unattractive man. It's shocking, but this is what the data tells us," he added.

One man in the study rated as "highly attractive" received 856 likes in a single week, while a group of his unattractive counterparts received only two, one of which was accidental.

Men rated as slightly unattractive were grouped alongside garbage, cancer, and even death by women of average appearance.

http://chicagonews.com/articles/study/attractiveness-53684276-htm

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4145079&forum_id=2#37320137)

Bravo

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4145079&forum_id=2#37320219)

I only use tinder occasionally for work travel and I have Premium or whatever it is called so I can see when chicks like me.

When I first download the app, I will quickly rack of dozens of likes and it will keep on going at the rate of ~30-40 per day. BUT, the second I start liking chicks back and swiping, the rate of new likes coming in drops by like ~75%.

Basically, it seems thet Tinder shows you to tons of chicks when you first sign up, but they drop that number as soon as you start engaging with the app.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4145079&forum_id=2#37320784)

lol Melvin

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4145079&forum_id=2#37321796)

The unexpectedly good results for ugly men suggest to me either that (1) some girls are using this to actually try to meet someone to date; or (2) there are hookers there. Probably both, but #1 makes me kind of feel bad for those girls.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4145079&forum_id=2#37320760)

The sad part about this is that no girl thinks "I'm a naive rube who's going to get P&D'd by some worldly chad who doesn't gaf about me but will pretend to for 3 dates" -- even if they are exactly that.

---

For the most part, though, of course tinder is for sluts. Bizarre how people try to deny this obvious fact.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4145079&forum_id=2#37322811)

Your Looks and Your Inbox: How men and women perceive attractiveness

http://archive.is/UDrKU

As you can see from the gray line, women rate an incredible 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium. Very harsh. On the other hand, when it comes to actual messaging, women shift their expectations only just slightly ahead of the curve, which is a healthier pattern than guys’ pursuing the all-but-unattainable.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4145079&forum_id=2#37323116)