Girls, what is the percentage of finding the type of man you want, according to this website?

[MCheetah]

I entered in the basic criteria I typically hear women wanting in men and got 2%, which is high.

What is the ACTUAL percentage of finding the type of guy you want? And DON'T lie!

https://igotstandardsbro.com/

This was given to me by user @demonics.
"I think its just important for women to realize that obsessing over that will exclude [over 80%] of men. Literally ANY further criteria beyond that, that number will immediately shoot up to 99%. And before you even start with the BS, no one is insecure about this; it's called MATH."

[Lliam]

Keep trying to convince yourself that no woman would look twice at a 5'11" male who isn't movie star gorgeous and wealthy. Average is repugnant, worse than worthless.

Yeah, all women care about is above average height (over 6') and extreme wealth. 🤣 All women are shallow, right, unlike the sensitive men who only want love.

That's why fewer than 2 out of every 100 men ever find a partner according to your "research".
🤣🤣🤣

[lrina]

some women aren't even attracted to tall men though--

[DizzyDesii]

Yea usually i agree with your answers but i dont care much about a guys height as long as he's over 5’5 (too short for me) and under 6’4 (too tall for me). My exes have mainly been 5’7, 5’10, 6’0 or 6’2 but i have dated one 5’6. As for wealth, a lot of my exes were broke because we dater in high school or college. I had no problem with that. There were plenty of date activities that didn't have to involve money. But after i graduated college, i cared that the guy at least had a job that wasn't drig dealing or fast food like McDonalds. Now due to covid, i can understand if they work fast food as long as they dont see that as a long term job. I dont care about how much a man makes as long as he can pay his half of the bills/rent. I do care that he knows how to save though like i do. A lot of my exes never tried to save up

[Lliam]

@lrina. That's my point. The average height of men is 5'7.5". Very, very few look like Brad Pitt or are wealthy. Yet I see couples everywhere. That seems to shatter the theory that is popular in some male circles on the internet that the women are only interested in wealth and Adonis-like looks. I think there are other factors that make people attractive.

[lrina]

ohh i see what you mean now. yeah i agree.

[MCheetah]

@Lliam
Like I said before, considering your age, you're over six feet tall, you're already with someone, and at your age, likely have a decent amount of money, I doubt you could ever understand something you would never be put in a position to be disadvantaged by. As for your anecdotal evidence, I'm also pretty sure you're only seeing men over the age of 40 or young men who are tall or otherwise successful, and never think about them actually NOT being tall, un-wealthy, or not having Jupiter sized egos. Which is the majority of men. There's a huge difference between the older generation and people under 40 nowadays. Because of course you'd think every single man in the world is just "making it all up" despite actual statistics and 60% of straight men under 40 being single nowadays and 25% of men now being virgins by the age of 40. Yes, your anecdotal evidence overrides ALL of that, though!

[Lliam]

The thing is, mcheetah, I'm looking at it from the perspective of someone who has been dating since I was 16. I didn't get married until I was 42 because I didn't want to. And I was never close to wealthy.

When I walk down the street and see couples, they include every age range from teens on up.

Also, you're over 3" above average height.

I hesitated before sharing my original comment because I was afraid it sounded harsh. But I get tired of the poor excuse that women are shallow. I think there are other factors, other than looks and wealth, that make people attractive.

[MCheetah]

Statistics don't lie, man.

Yes, there are other things that matter. Relationship stuff. That comes later. I'm talking about just getting in the front door. Most men can't do that nowadays and there's a huge number of reasons why dating sucks nowadays.

It's not just women's shallowness, but that is a big part of it. I'm not going to be told by like 500 women I'm too short for them and then pretend like that's not a thing because it's not "politically correct" to call women out on their shallowness (not that men can't also be shallow, but only women can get away with it this much). Screw that! What do I have to lose in being honest about this stuff?

I don't dislike women, but dating's f*cked up nowadays, men are addicted to porn and some are simps on OnlyFans. Women have inflated egos due to OF, Instagram, and modern feminism telling them they can do no wrong and if they're not millionaires by 25 with their gender studies degrees, it's solely due to "patriarchy" and they just got to Cancel Culture the right men to get what they want. Society in GENERAL is f*cked up right now, but I'm just focused on women's crazy dating standards on this question. And despite what you may think, it is all very real.

Look up Tinder statistics and see if short-ass men like me ever stand a chance on there. (And yes, I know. Tinder is supposedly a "hook up app.") Or better yet, make a profile of a mediocre, 5 out of 10 looking, 5'11" man with all the "right" personality traits and see how far that gets you. And better you bring up "that's just online dating," remember that the users of these sites are also real people. Real women. And that nothing necessarily makes "real life" better or more preferable to them.

[MCheetah]

Also, to what I said, "statistics don't lie." I probably shouldn't have said that. The numbers don't lie, but people can lie using statistics all the time. So never mind.

[LogicBomber]

Statistically speaking 90% of women only want and actively chase the 1% of men.

[LogicBomber]

This site is fun to use against female profiles on dating sites. Haha they are definitely delusional.

The “exclude married” checkbox is redundant because we all know that women care less if a man is taken, they want to take men from other women to prove they are “the better woman”.

And no woman is going to be honest on this thing, they will write what they think sounds good, even if it is anonymous. Woman even lie to themselves.

[lrina]

uh most women do actually care whether or not a man is married though?

[LogicBomber]

@lrina www.sciencedirect.com/.../S0022103109001048

[lrina]

it's not even a credible site. maybe do something productive like going on actually credible sites instead of assuming random ass shit.

[LogicBomber]

@lrina You are a fucking lunatic. Stop pretending like you have any idea what you are even talking about.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/sciencedirect/

ScienceDirect is a website which provides access to a large bibliographic database of scientific and medical publications of the Dutch publisher Elsevier. It hosts over 18 million pieces of content from more than 4,000 academic journals and 30,000 e-books of this publisher.[2][3] The access to the full-text requires subscription, while the bibliographic metadata is free to read. ScienceDirect is operated by Elsevier. It was launched in March 1997.[4]

[lrina]

@LogicBomber you're literally a man :') i think i have some idea of what i'm talking about if i'm like, i don't know, **an actual woman**

[LogicBomber]

@lrina Your personal experience does not invalidate the standard traits of females.

[lrina]

i'm not the only woman out there. so i'm not the only one who thinks this way. that statement is just as valid as me saying all men are rapists.

[LogicBomber]

@lrina No, at NO POINT did I say all women, ever.

[lrina]

90% is quite a huge percentage.

[LogicBomber]

@lrina It is still nowhere near “all”

[DizzyDesii]

I've met many men who were 90% of what i wanted. But the 10% that made them undateable consisted of dealbreakers like being a workaholic, smoker, 5+ years younger/older, or wanting sex way sooner than i was willing to give it up. So i do think my guy is out there. he's just likely rare…

[exitseven]

yes, I remember the question you asked about this. We would have been okay except for my age.

[MCheetah]

@DizzyDesii
But do you really need a literal perfect man, though? Yes, dealbreakers are solid reasons to not be with a guy. But what if he was 85% of what you wanted but had no dealbreakers at all? Is that still not good enough?

[DizzyDesii]

A perfect man? Of course not. And i’ve dated 80 percents they were usually involving one of the above dealbreakers. I dont need a 100% man but i need a 90%+ with no dealbreakers

[MCheetah]

"I need a 90%+ with no dealbreakers."

So *almost perfect, then.

And I remember your dating criteria. It was a big-ass list. Like 30 or more goddamn things on it. At least though, you're one of the few women willing to date short men. I do remember that.

[DizzyDesii]

That list was filled with must haves and wants. The wants were not must haves. I had like 10 or so must haves

[MCheetah]

@DizzyDesii
You DO realize ten mandatory requirements is still a lot, right? Especially when it's things like a muscular gym body, which few men already have. And then some women have the gall to say women aren't that picky. Most people have only five "must haves" or less, not 10 or more.

[DizzyDesii]

You need to go back and look at my list. Im not into muscular guys. I like slim muscular as in skaterboy type body. That is not even abs or biceps. Just toned arms and decent chest and flat stomach. So I don't know what you're remembering. My mandatories are things surrounding age range, believing in God, not smoking, possibly wanting marriage (im still debating myself), wanting kids before we’re 30+, having a strong work ethic (not being rich), able to commit/remain faithful, willing to live down south, has few sexual partners, is not gay/bisexual, doesn't have more than 1 kid (and the kid must be between ages 2-7), and can wait for at least 6 months for sex (other things may happen but not sex). I dont see ANYTHING wrong with those MUST-HAVES

[MCheetah]

"Slim muscular... Toned arms "

That IS muscular to me. I'm not saying they need to be Arnold. Being a swimmer or a bodybuilder is irrelevant.

And things like "wanting kids before 30" is already going to eliminate at least 50% of men before even getting into everything else. You really don't think you're asking for much with all that stuff? These aren't even your "wants."

You can demand whatever you want in men. I never said women couldn't. My point is, those men are near impossible to exist, be open to you, and be compatible to build a relationship with. None of this stuff (yours or other women) even accounts for personality. Finding someone who's just compatible with you is already going to be really hard to find without taking into account their height, body fat percentage, and willingness to have kids fresh out of college.

It's super unrealistic, is my point. Hence, the question. And Lliam seriously thinks all women are angels who'll be with anyone and everyone. But yeah, you can demand whatever you want in men; no one's stopping women from doing that. I'm just asking them to be honest about it.

I've already posted several times on this site my criteria in a woman, which is basically don't be woke, don't be queer, don't be a dude, and don't be a bitch.

[DizzyDesii]

Who wouldn't want a toned person? Stop projecting insecurities on others must haves. The wants are not must haves nor dealbreakers so no i dont think im asking for too much. Wants are “bonuses” not needs. You say its unrealistic but most of my exes were exactly what i stated in my musthaves. Heck my college was over 70% of what i wanted. But the dealbreaker was once again not being able to wait 6 months or starting up a smoking weed/cigs habit out of peer pressure. I dont want men like that. Whats unrealistic is whining about things that can't be changed like height. Once again you are like 5’9 right? That is not even short. Good Lord. As for your requirements, dont be woke? Im black but i do not need to date people who focus that much on politic matters and i dont. Woke is some shitty term that people seem to call people who disagree with then. I dont even use that vocab. I don't know what the exact definition of queer is bt it sounds like theyre questioning their sexuality so i dont blame you there. Dont be a tranny is totally understandable as well. You call people the B word a lot which is one of the main things that make me cringe about your posts. I hate that word and its a dealbreaker if a dude calls me or any other man/woman that. Its just a rude term that I've never liked and find utterly disrespectful. I get that some people can be rude but just say that. I never understood callling then a female dog. And lastly, this a slim/skinny muscular/toned guy

[MCheetah]

I rarely ever use the term "bitch" (I've only used it three times this month, in fact) and no, I'm not 5'9"/175 cm. I'm 180 and as you know, that's a dealbreaker for MANY women. According to the GAG poll I did on here, 45% of women, in fact.

Like I said, you can want whatever you want in a man. But here's a calculator showing you and other women how likely it is you'll get that. And all of that is before personality even comes into account.

[DizzyDesii]

Lmao i could count the times you used the B word before the new year hit. It was a lot lol. And i asked if you’re 5’9 but inthink you're saying you’re 5’8? One inch shorter? Lmao thats nothing. Most rappers are shorter than that and they still get women. The men in my high school and college all ranged from 5’7-6’5 with the majority getting girls being 5’8/9/10 because tthey had cute faces and goofy personalities. aren't you in Japan? Maybe you should come home and meet more women that are used to those heights. And GAG isn't even a quarter of the world in terms of statistics. people lie on here and sometimes even hit the wrong poll option. Talk to some real world women about this. Like forreal

[MCheetah]

No. You likely just Googled 180 cm and got five point nine feet. 5.9 feet is not the same as 5'9". There are 12 inches in a foot.

[DizzyDesii]

Dude 180 is 5’11 thats not short

[Agagagagaga]

I’m amused that you want a man with a “strong work ethic” but not a “workaholic” and you want someone who is open to having kids (even though you don’t know if you want them) before they are “30+” while you yourself are 27. And it’s a “dealbreaker” if they are “5+ years younger/older.”

You’re full of inconsistencies and contradictions, and have a very, very narrow, ever dwindling range of men you find acceptable.

And all the while that old biological clock keeps a ticking.

I’m not telling you to compromise. I don’t especially care what you do. But thank you for painting a picture of the ridiculous standards that modern women have for romance and companionship. It was enlightening and made me smile.

Good luck finding your needle in a haystack.

[DizzyDesii]

@Agagagagaga i have strong work ethic but im not a workaholic. Im jus tsaying who works hard and isn't a slacker/procrastinator. I still prefer to only work a 9-5. Bt because im not married or with kids just yet, my job makes us work 10-12 hours. And you misread. I’ve 100% wanted kids since age 3. I said im debating if i want a legal marriage. So next time just ask before you attack my standards

[420Rachel]

Did I do good? I have no idea how this shit works lmao

[MCheetah]

Down to Earth.

[420Rachel]

I try to be 😎

[purplepoppy]

Wow I'm surprised the human race doesn't go extinct. It's easier to get a gay panda to breed than it is humans.

[lrina]

17.7% overall, and 31.7% of white men. 2/5 on the delusion score

[Prettygurl12]

😂😂😂😂😂

0.064%

5/5 delusional

Excellent. Just filled it out for my husband. Haters gonna hate lol

[MCheetah]

At least you're honest.

[Prettygurl12]

Yeah... that's the one thing I project the most. If nothing else, I'm extremely honest.

[LimboOfTheDink]

65.2% chance. But I know that's not true. Unfortunately there is no maximum height choice, so I can't calculate the actual percentage which I'm sure would be much lower.

[Dinklex3]

Lol.
Obvious BS, but was entertaining.
Got 16.4%.

[Fuentes]

Fresh&Fit called it the delusional woman calculator

[sunflower00]

I just did it and it said 53.6%, but I think this is completely stupid and kind of sexist? And these aren’t even important factors to be honest? Like it says nothing about personality? Weird

[sunflower00]

Also why is it calling women delusional etc and seems like it’s made by a man who can’t get girls and is salty about it

[LogicBomber]

Your shaming tactic is hilarious.
Why can’t you accept that women are literally delusional when it comes to their standards instead of reducing it to shaming the males for pointing it out.

[MCheetah]

@sunflower00
You do know I couldn't give any less of a sh*t whenever someone uses the term "sexist" or "racist" nowadays, right? It's lost all meaning. It's just what people use to shut down a conversation.

How TF is women's own standards "sexist"? And personality is largely irrelevant to both men and women in the modern dating world and not exactly something you can measure using actual statistics anyway.

Literally everything you said here validates the website. You wouldn't be whining like this if it was as ridiculous as you claim. You'd just laugh it off. But please, whine some more while saying nothing of value.

"Women have high standards. Men pointing them out is 'sexist' though." 🙄

[Novacane]

Well according to stats and if you ask most girls their ideal man I think those are all factors or important factors that most women use to describe their ideal man. Now of course it says nothing of their personality because that is very hard to measure, no matter what test, questionnaire or zodiac you throw at people you can’t always measure someone’s true personality

[MartianBuddy]

That's funny as fuck, but is the methodology flawed is my question.

[Zygum]

This website is not a dating site, here every body has fake profile and picture

[Chthou95]

Lmao lets see how many delusional women think they'll find their petfect man