Recently found on r/dataisbeautiful, posted by a 23yo foid, this data is over a year of usage of Tinder:
Out of all swipes, the right swipes (after diving 3500:30000) account for 11.6%, close to the ~13% rate (based on this guy's and NYT's research) average rate, as seen in this article. This fall of 1.5% either means that this girl is either pickier than average or that the average rate is falling, which multiplies the 'it's over' effect.
At this point, it has to be mentioned that most of the images shown on Tinder are already the most-attractive men, I believe this is well-explained here. It's not hard to imagine that if males that are shown would be chosen randomly, the swipe rate would fall. It means that this 11.6% are not from the total pool of males on Tinder, but only those that are not discriminated against. A lower-tier guy is forced to live without any matches, likely never even shown to women.
Of these right swipes, many men just were either ignored or were ignoring her, while when messaging started, more than half just sent her one message and were ignored afterward. I doubt that many of these single messages were from her, as males are way more likely to message first. I couldn't find the source despite seeing it before, so I'm just going to link the scientific blackpill. Also, I've made a quick experiment: I've cleaned my Opera browser of cookies and asked Google 'Who messages first?'. All the results are asking 'Why don't women message first?' etc., suggesting men as the sex that messages first.
Out of 30000 swipes, only 5 ended with dates. That's a whole 0.016% (magic number, I know). One date for 6000 swipes. Let that sink in.
Still, while this shows that women are picky, this data is collected from a year. It means that only with online dating, she could secure 5 extremely high-quality partners that are 0.016% of the male viable pool. This is huge compared to the 0% of an incel that swipes right on every one female.
Even if an incel would fine 1 match, she'd be a low-quality partner. It's truly over
Out of all swipes, the right swipes (after diving 3500:30000) account for 11.6%, close to the ~13% rate (based on this guy's and NYT's research) average rate, as seen in this article. This fall of 1.5% either means that this girl is either pickier than average or that the average rate is falling, which multiplies the 'it's over' effect.
At this point, it has to be mentioned that most of the images shown on Tinder are already the most-attractive men, I believe this is well-explained here. It's not hard to imagine that if males that are shown would be chosen randomly, the swipe rate would fall. It means that this 11.6% are not from the total pool of males on Tinder, but only those that are not discriminated against. A lower-tier guy is forced to live without any matches, likely never even shown to women.
Of these right swipes, many men just were either ignored or were ignoring her, while when messaging started, more than half just sent her one message and were ignored afterward. I doubt that many of these single messages were from her, as males are way more likely to message first. I couldn't find the source despite seeing it before, so I'm just going to link the scientific blackpill. Also, I've made a quick experiment: I've cleaned my Opera browser of cookies and asked Google 'Who messages first?'. All the results are asking 'Why don't women message first?' etc., suggesting men as the sex that messages first.
Out of 30000 swipes, only 5 ended with dates. That's a whole 0.016% (magic number, I know). One date for 6000 swipes. Let that sink in.
Still, while this shows that women are picky, this data is collected from a year. It means that only with online dating, she could secure 5 extremely high-quality partners that are 0.016% of the male viable pool. This is huge compared to the 0% of an incel that swipes right on every one female.
Even if an incel would fine 1 match, she'd be a low-quality partner. It's truly over
Last edited:
