I think you might have misread GP's post a bit; I didn't understand him to be saying "Without a job, there are fewer opportunities to meet eligible women." Rather, I think he was saying "Without a job, fewer women will consider you eligible. (Contrasting with last generation where employed men were fine with dating unemployed women, this generation of employed women are not as fine with dating unemployed men.)"

Well let's be honest, job status, not unlike height/ethnicity/appearance is one of the many discriminating characteristics used in dating.

Let keep it honest, job status is directly related to ethnicity/appearance.

You don't think having a job helps you when the person you are interested in is deciding whether they are interested back?

I'm past dating age (and anyway I have a relationship that has survived 20 years), but when I was younger, I never considered what the woman would bring to the relationship financially. I'm very traditional, though, so perhaps this attitude is no longer as common as it was when I was younger.

In popular American culture in our time, there is not an emphasis on what the partner brings to the relationship financially. I also did not think much about my wife's earning power (or at least, not explicitly, although we met in college so there is some same-class-ness happening there).

But I think that is not typical of cultures across space and time. Just ask Jane Austen. :-)

Particularly women evaluating men. In general, women see the ability to protect and provide as desireable qualities in a mate.

I disagree. I don't think its harder to meet like minded people. Meetup and Facebook solved that issue,

I think the issue is that it's SO EASY to find people that there is very little incentive to actually care about a specific group more than any other. Its like criticisms of modern dating. The ocean is so large and easy to navigate that there is no incentive to get anything to actually work. Just moving on is easier.