# Comments on The Boyfriend's Introduction to Feminism

**URL:** https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/comments-on-the-boyfriends-introduction-to-feminism/2108
**Category:** Elliot Temple
**Tags:** bot, curiosity-blog
**Created:** [September 25, 2025, 7:11pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/comments-on-the-boyfriends-introduction-to-feminism/2108 "2025-09-25T19:11:21Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 96

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![anonymous105](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/8797f3/32.png) [@anonymous105](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/anonymous105)
#### Post date: [October 3, 2025, 4:11am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/comments-on-the-boyfriends-introduction-to-feminism/2108/96 "2025-10-03T04:11:22Z")

</div>

> [@anonymous45](#):
>
> Uh maybe (and I can think of some things I would want women to use as selection criteria) but you asked me to define hypergamy originally and then you said you disagreed. I don’t want to get too distracted.

I think that women’s preferences in partners are pretty relevant to the concept of hypergamy.

If the hypergamy idea is built around the desirable high value traits you mentioned, and actually very few women use those traits as their primary decisive factor when dating, then how does the hypergamy idea survive?

> [@anonymous45](#):
>
> Also, women who date like this are less likely to stay with these guys _or talk about them_ (in person, unless you’re a close female friend perhaps) so if you do know women who do this then there’s survivorship bias in your sampling, too.

If that’s the case, why does it matter much?

I know why manosphere dudes think it matters, but you seem to be avoiding committing to the idea that once a woman has had a few partners she becomes a used up whore.

> [@anonymous45](#):
>
> But now consider the context of 70-80% of couples meeting on tinder/bumble: you see some photos, there’s a small bio. Which men do women swipe right on and why? What is in those photos that convinces them? What else do they have to go off?

Not sure where those numbers come from?

> **[The who, where and why of online dating in the U.S.](https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2023/02/02/the-who-where-and-why-of-online-dating-in-the-u-s/)**
>
> Online dating has made what once seemed like a foreign concept for many – striking up a conversation with someone they have never met on the internet – a

> **[As Dating App Usage Increases, Bumble and Tinder Compete for Americans...](https://civicscience.com/as-dating-app-usage-increases-bumble-and-tinder-compete-for-americans-seeking-love-on-demand/)**
>
> With dating app usage rising, Bumble and Tinder compete for users seeking love on demand. Explore trends and consumer preferences with CivicScience insights.

Those articles show quite different percentages than you used.

But even taking your numbers, and accepting that many initial contacts go that way… okay. Do you think most of your desirable traits are well illustrated in a dating profile?

> [@anonymous45](#):
>
> Another thing: when women go on dates with guys from apps, are they actually choosing a long-term partner every time or are there other reasons? (e.g., validation and sex are two big other reasons that come to mind)

Sure, though I think men are much more likely to be seeking validation and sex than women. It’s easier for women to get sex, and men typically define themselves around validation from women in a way that is not symmetrical.

> [@anonymous45](#):
>
> If anything I think you might be out of touch with what some women _do_.

I’m not sure that many women are seeking tons of sex and validation via apps. I think that’s a minority, actually.

–

One thing that may be a big disconnect is that I think women are broadly **correct** to be selective and date less men. Men are not very good partners for women, for the most part.

This has always been true but in the past women had greater need for men due to misogynistic social restrictions. So if you were a woman a mostly worthless man that could provide money and e.g. vote for you, or get you a credit card, was providing tangible value to you.

But women can cover their own financial needs now. So a partner needs to actually provide something else. Maybe a hot guy is fine for a date or two, but that is not a decisive factor when choosing a partner.

Most men are bad at talking to women, treat women poorly, are not equal partners, do not take care of themselves or their households, etc. They are often sexist. They are more argumentative and their emotional outbursts are more often external and even dangerous.

They just kind of suck. If you look in women’s spaces where they talk to each other, women often say **the bar is on the floor**. A man who is actually kind and fun to be around and genuinely shoulders an equal burden of the partnership (household, kids, etc.) is very rare.

That is a consistent thing I have seen across 100% of the successful happy relationships I’ve actually encountered in real life. Those are the traits women want in their partners. Physical appearance, wealth, status, and power do not make the list at all.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/comments-on-the-boyfriends-introduction-to-feminism/2108)._