Why Men Have No Game, in Charts

I've been noticing that there is a fundamental divide between men and women in dating:

Women feel like they deserve more effort from men whereas men feel like women's expectations are too high.

Instead of trying to cast judgment on the issue, I wanted to try and take an objective look at what has been going on between the sexes over the years. Since the dating market can be modeled as a market, I decided to do a simple supply and demand analysis of the situation.

To do this analysis, I had to make some assumptions:

First, I made the assumption that a man's effort while dating is dependent on the quantity of DTF women available (supply) and men's aggregate desire to have sex (demand).

Second, I made the assumption that men's desire for sex was maxed-out from day 1 and could not be increased.

Third, I made the assumption that men are the only gender in pursuit of the opposite sex.

These assumptions were meant to simplify the analysis. To analyze our relations over the years, we need an initial point:

1. Pre-Contraceptives (Pre 1960s)

Why Men Have No Game, in Charts

Before contraceptives, men and women courted for keeps; sex was very risky in terms of childbearing, so it made sense that commitment (a high amount of effort) would be a prerequisite for sex.

2. Post-Contraceptives (1960s-2000s)

After women used contraceptives on a widespread basis, the amount of women who were willing to have sex undoubtedly increased; and the quantity of DTF women increased (the pink line moved right relative to previous graph). Nonetheless, men didn't want to have sex more since their desire for sex was already at its maximum level. As a result, the effort required by a man in order to have sex decreased.

3. Post-Male Exodus (Today)

Today, we are in the midst of the sexodous, a movement in which some men are giving up on the dating process entirely because they perceive women's standards are too high, the men don't feel worthy, etc. This movement results in a decrease in men's desire to have sexy time as a whole (the blue line moved left relative to previous graph). Surprisingly, this movement also has a side-effect of decreasing the amount of effort needed by a man to have sex; since there are less men pursuing sex, men who still pursue sex have less competition. Therefore, they put in even less effort.


This graph is a summary of the previous graphs, and it will be used to explain why we get frustrated with one another nowadays. The primary frustrations between the sexes seem to arise out of the difference between the effort that has been historically required by men in order to get sex and the effort that is required today in order to get sex. Women justifiably think that they are just as worthy as their mother and grandmother in order to receive comparable amounts of effort from the men in their life while dating. Therefore, most women expect that men will approach them with the effort that was required historically.

Men, on the other hand, are playing the market. They are the "buyers" in this analysis (they are primarily the ones approaching women). Therefore, they want to invest as little as possible and get as much as possible out of the situation. They have likely dealt with multiple women personally, in addition to hearing about their guy friends' situations. As a result, men tend to have a good idea about the market and about what kind of effort is necessary in order to have sex.

Here is where the genders conflict. It is true that women today are just as valuable as their mothers and grandmothers, on an individual basis. It is also true that the requisite amount of effort in order to have sex has decreased over time. Therefore, women expect men to put in effort that was required historically whereas men balk at that idea because they know that they can get what they want with significantly less effort. What you end up with is a whole bunch of guys saying that women are entitled with outrageous expectations, and a whole bunch of women saying that men won't commit. They are both correct, and economics is why.

So why do men have no game? The market says they don't need it.


Join the discussion



What Girls Said 5

  • I don't get why men are complaining that women have too-high expectations if they're finding it easier than ever before to get laid. I think this is why I disregard guys I hear this from as just whiners with no game.
    For the record, I don't meet men who aren't willing to make an effort. Maybe I just broadcast somehow that I'm not an easy lay so men who want that don't bother approaching me? This too just leaves me with the impression that, most of the time, you find what you look for.

    • Specifically, I was talking about those situations in which a woman will not lower the amount of effort required to get her.

    • Show All
    • @RachelBrigs well those guys are either dumb or they hang out with prositutes lol. There are lots of girls who almost never get asked out. Lota of girls who wished the guy they liked would ask them out. Those guys just feel better or maybe are just stupid and say that most girls sleep around even though most do not.

    • You don't have to have "game". I've gotten women without using "game".

  • I am loving your economics portrayal of this. Brought me back to Macro.

  • I love how you put supply and demand into this, but you're forgetting one major factor in my opinion, the internet and the porn industry have had an impact on the demand of sex. And not to sound sexist, but porn is mostly watched by men.

    • Yup, but porn is cheaper than a woman who you have to wine and dine to get in bed every time.

      Keep that in mind.

  • Men expect sex and the girl to date them but they put no effort into it and get upset when they get negative results from putting in 0 effort
    They expect the women to do 90% of the work when it should be 50/50

  • Stats or this graph is as made up as unicorn habitat charts!


What Guys Said 25

  • there's really not much motivation to romance a girl or wait a long time for sex.

    Like let's say I meet a girl, pay to take her out on dates and make an effort to romance her and make her feel special for 2 months before I get sex.

    It really won't feel that special when I finally get to have sex with her because it's likely something that 3-5+ other guys got with little to no effort on the 1st or second date. Guys she probably met on tinder or got drunk with at a party or club.

    Also it's not like girls really put much effort into romancing the guy in the initial stages. It's all about the guy having to prove his worth to her.

    I heard an analogy, it was something like "why would you want to pay full price for milk if everyone else got samples"

    • Because you'd have a steady supply of milk for the rest of your life without much effort while the other guy has to run around and look for places to get samples. It's early work for later gratification vs. only work for the rest of your life. I'm not suggesting a relationship requires no work at some point, it does. But it offers more quality as well. It's more similar to university degree vs. early job. You have to put in some work early to go to university and get a degree while others will earn money right away. But you will make up for it later.

    • Show All
    • @LiveFreeorDieHard
      I only have a problem if other guys got to have sex with her really easily but she wanted me to work for it.
      If she's easy for me too then i wouldn't complain.

    • Ah, now that makes a lot more sense. Ok, i understand now. Yeah, i have no problem with thayt either.

  • I cringe when I hear the word, "Game" to describe men and dating.

    Anyway, I don't think men "make a woman feel good about herself AS A WOMAN and IN THE WAY THAT'S IMPORTANT AND MEANINGFUL TO HER AS A WOMAN" just that that men can "get sex."

    It's a loving gesture, and the natural motivation for that behavior is more likely to come when guys feel "safe and secure" in the power dynamic between themselves and the female.

    So, if a guy "knows with a reasonable degree of certainty" that the girl is DTF (so to speak), then he feels safe and secure enough to go ahead and give her that kind of affection. Obviously, if the two have already had sex, he feels safe and secure enough to give her that kind of affection. So, it's a clear give-away that a guy isn't really feeling a girl if "after they've had sex," they don't really feel that natural desire to give her affection and love in a way that's important and meaningful to her as a woman.

    It's one thing to say that a guy doesn't "need" to put in a lot of "effort" just to have sex.

    It's another thing to try to use that as an "excuse" for not giving women affection in the way that's important and meaningful to them as women "after a guy and a girl have already started being sexually intimate." Or perhaps, it's a mistake to "conflate" what's labeled here as "effort" with men giving their partner things that are important to their partner (as women).

    It's not "effort," even though it takes some effort.

    It's affection and love.

    It's what women want to feel, not so that they can have sex, but so they can simply feel good about themselves.

    Now, some girls do get stuck in this unhealthy mode of thinking (i. e., introjection, narcissistic identification). That looks like, "I want a guy who can travel with me to nice places, spend over $100 at a nice place once in a while, cares about dressing nice with a few brand names here and there, etc.). What's the error in logic? "If I 'identify' myself with 'nice things,' then that means that I am a 'better' or 'more important/valuable' person."

    Men do this too (e. g., "I don't just want someone who is 'a little attractive or cute,' no, I want a girl that's undiscovered Victoria's Secret international supermodel gorgeous - that's 'my standard.'"). Again, narcissistic identification.

    It's creates the same feeling of "helplessness" and "hopelessness" for women. That's the cause of that behavior more than the "economics of sex."

    • The same way women start to feel, "The things my future male partner wants are beyond my reasonable control in giving him." So, because she still wants a male partner, she tries to find a way to "cope" with this negative feeling of helplessness. A common method is what I jokingly label "lesbian feminism." What I mean is, "Screw make up! Screw high heels! Beauty is just subjective! Everyone is beautiful! Screw being thin! Stop fat shaming!" etc.

      Well, the exact same emotional dynamic takes place with men. "I can't be a billionaire muscle man model charismatic life-of-the-party comedian." And yet he still wants women. So, what happens is what I jokingly call "homeless child." No car or sh*tty car. Roommates or run-down apartment. Hipster clothing/look. Hipster dining. No travel. Most importantly, no "ambition" for any of those things, and justifications towards an "aversion" or "avoidance" of those things.

    • It's counter-intuitive, but the result is that men are "technically with a woman," and women are "technically with a man." Yet, neither of them have the slightest hint of their emotional desire for "narcissistic identification" supply being satisfied. As a result, both men and women are equally unhappy.

  • Oddly enough I'm not a big "player" in the sense that I have never been the sort of guy who is trying to fill up some sort of score sheet to see how many women will have sex with him, secondly I have not always been the most confident when it comes to these areas (not that I'm now suddenly super confident now) To help myself cope with both of these factors, I felt it was better to not make any assumptions about any woman wanting to have sex with me. This doesn't mean I don't think about it or think about the woman in question sexually. What this means is I place no pressure on her to have sex with me on some sort of ridiculous pre-defined time table. It is my belief that at the very least we should be friends first before anything else. With this in mind I don't have any false or misplaced expectations of when we will or won't have sex. This also takes all the pressure of the woman, which in turn helps her relax and feel comfortable and feeling relaxed and comfortable is always a plus when it comes to sex. This also lets the woman I'm with that we can go at her pace which is another way she can feel both comfortable and safe, she will know that I'm not just going to take advantage of her (which nobody likes). My point being is that by sort of removing sex from the equation it takes all the pressure of both me and her. It has been my experience that by giving a woman a voice and choices that it gives them the power to choose how and when any sexual activity might occur, by doing this I have found that sex usually happens more readily and sooner than it would had I applied all sorts of pressure and or tactics to speed the process up. In the end, let the woman know 1. there is no pressure for sex. 2. if she likes you and is interested, then she can choose to have sex or not It's all good (again no pressure). 3. She won't be taken advantage of, be a giver in sex and sexual activity, you will find that giving will make your whole experience better, the more she likes what you are doing the more she will give back. 4. Respect her, sex is a vulnerable time, let her know she is safe from criticism or judgement, you are both there at that moment to enjoy each other. Set the scene so you are both "safe". Lastly we are all people, lets treat each other like we would like to be treated. Be respectful, kind, gentle, humorous. Act with integrity and honor and the rest will fall into place.

    • I agree with this wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, I think we're in the minority.

    • I'm afraid you are right my friend. I'm afraid you are right.

  • You sound like an engineer. Just guessing, are you an engineer? :P

  • I loved you analytical approach to this. It reminds me of an economics lesson 😀

  • I don't get it. If anything, the market is saying men need MORE game.

    Plus, even if what you do say is true, if this movement is decreasing the amount of effort required to get laid, why aren't more men jumping at that opportunity? Just doesn't add up to me.

  • Men who make charts have no game because they spend all their time making charts instead of flirting.

  • I applaud your market analysis, especially your use of the DTF acronym. It truly lends that "professional polish" needed to sell it. ROTFLMFAO

  • Nice take, dude.

  • Lol, those graphs so remind me of Economics class. Equilibrium between supply & demand.

  • The only game a man needs to have is, "I'm rich". As soon as she realizes it without him having to say it, she starts pulling off her clothes.

    Amazing, but true.

  • lol!! Thanks for taking the time out to make this. Some food for thought. Hopefully you can make some more like this in the future, this site needs more out-of-the-box takes like this.

  • I love the free market principles. Simply love'em.

  • What does DTF stand for?

  • I hope i never see sex as an economics problem

  • *sigh*
    *gets up and walks away*

  • Good idea, imho, overly simplistic.

    From an economics standpoint, we have two separate two goods:
    - relationships with sex
    - non-monogamous sex

    These are to a significant extent substitute goods.

    In the 'non monogamous' market, it's not male effort, but rather male attractiveness that matters (in the relationship market, it's likely 'attractiveness + effort'.

    Your assessment of the impact of BC was likely true.

    But I think the next major move has been the rise of hook up culture, where high attractiveness males can easily meet their sexual needs in the hook up market, and consequently are willing to 'pay' very little effort wise in the 'relationship' market.

    By contrast, women are also taking advantage of the hookup market more than they used to, and with that as an alternative (and their ability to demand high attractiveness there), their supply curve in the relationship market has actually shifted DOWN.

    What we see then is a reduction in the quantity in the relationship market - as a group men are putting in less effort, primarily because attractive men with access to the 'hook up' market are using that instead. At the same time, women are accessing the hook up market more, so their supply curve has shifted. Women and men are complaining because the old 'price' no longer clears for either. Women who don't want the hook up market can't get the same price as the past in the relationship market, especially from better looking guys (even if they are also good looking) Men who are not especially attractive can no longer pay the old 'price' because women are more likely to opt for the hook up market instead.

  • It would seem from your research that it is quite easy to get laid these days; HOWEVER, there are a lot of men who cannot simply get laid, no matter how much effort they put into it. So, while getting laid is easier today, it is only easy for a certain percentage of men.

  • 0|0
  • no wonder you'Re not getting any

  • More from Guys