Yeah, I also fell into the "someone who operates like me, but of the opposite sex" trap.

For years I was looking for another engineer (I have a bachelor's in general engineering, masters in SE), or at least someone mathematically/scientifically inclined. Ambitious, constantly working on personal projects, likes to travel, go to conferences, pick up new hobbies, etc.

Now I'm married to a social worker who's had the same job for 12 years, dropped out of music school, didn't have a passport (never even considered getting one), doesn't know math beyond basic algebra, often sleeps until noon, and generally doesn't have any hobbies besides "hanging out with friends."

But you know what? I love my husband, I think we work really well together :) He was really the first guy I ever dated after I decided to get out of my bubble and stop looking for "male versions of me" and I wouldn't change anything for the world!

I'm happy for you!

I was lucky in that when I met the woman who became my wife, neither of us was looking for anything other than to get laid. Sounds crass, but I think it helped me avoid the "look for a female version of me" thing, because we are nothing like each other.

After spending the first few months pretending that we weren't, in fact, falling for each other, we gave into it and 15+ years later, still working on staying together :-)

IMHO this is the best way to go, never expect anything and you'll never be disappointed; it doesn't prevent you from getting some great surprises.. Also, any relation i had with someone i thought was the 'feminine versions of me' went to shit pretty quickly.. Although being (at least somehow a little bit) different pushes you way further forward.

In my experience, that's true for all humans, not just for humans of the opposite gender. Don't assume they are like you just because you share some similar biological appendices.

I think grouping people by gender is not very helpful. There are always exceptions and usually quite a few. But maybe that is just so in my social circles.

>I think grouping people by gender is not very helpful. There are always exceptions and usually quite a few. But maybe that is just so in my social circles.

Isn't it pretty well-known that mating behavior is different between genders in humans (well-know == observed scientifically in this case)?

If 60% of men exhibit mating behavior x and 60% of women behavior y, that's a clear statistical difference but there are so many exceptions that it's not useful in daily life.

Yeah, I hate how women are never normally distributed. Only men operate in statistically simple distributions.

No, they are normally distributed. Men are just attracted to the top 1% (or even 0.1%) of women. It just happens that most women are not that physically attractive which is an important trait for both genders.

Once you realize this and figure out how much you are worth (sexually), dating will really become easier.

The data shows it's women who have unrealistic expectations of beauty. They rate 80% of men as uglier than average on dating sites [0]

[0] https://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dat...

It's no big secret that women are often bombarded by messages and other overtures on dating sites. Perhaps the "viewing males as more unattractive than they might otherwise" just stems from being primed for pickiness, especially on the Internet.

If you meet someone at a party, maybe he's a friend of a friend, you talk to him for a while, you might think "He seems like a reasonably handsome guy!" You see the same guy as a profile picture, out of a sea of 20 others messaging you at the same time, and you're just mentally primed for reasons to reject people, rather than accept them. You're more likely to think "Ugh, stupid haircut. 1/5 stars. Would not date"

So I don't think that women have unrealistic expectations of beauty, in general everyday life, it's just that the motivations and mindset is so much different on dating sites.

The data doesn't show that. It shows behavior on okcupid sites. Presumably. I don't understand why we blindly believe this data given many known issues about psych and sociology studies.

They are critical, but not unrealistic. From that blog:

"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."

You can also interpret that as "women would rather date guys they think are ugly than be alone" (as the author does in the following sentences).

Isn't that being realistic though?

Only if you assume the default position is needing to constantly have a partner

>It just happens that most women are not that physically attractive

This is a pretty bold assertion. On what do you base it?

Seems to me that the average woman is average looking.

Logical enough

>but the different genders operate differently

I agree. Add to that list different cultures, societies, levels of wealth, occupations, upbringing, personality quirks, fetishes, randomness...

The expectation of finding someone who "operates" like you is tough to meet.

The author doesn't even operate like his own gender.