He also describes the Tenderloin as though the Bronx "took a shit all over Manhattan." Keep that shih-t out of Peter's backyard, folks, where it belongs. Peter Shih doesn't go to the Bronx. The Bronx is dirty. There are poor people there. Peter Shih is not poor. He is rich. He is clean.

So he's too good for our women, our trannies, and our poor people? What kind of argument can you make against this other than "You are a disgustingly bad person?"

I guess he hasn't been to Alaska or North Dakota. Anyone having this experience in a major city needs to find new places to hang out. They do exist, but you might not see all your existing friends there.

The misogynistic language wasn't necessary. However, I believe that supply and demand applies roughly to dating markets. When one sex is in short supply, it is "bid up" by members of the other sex.

While my strategy has been to improve my own value, there's only so far that can go. I can also improve my outcomes by avoiding buyer's markets.

To me that this statement can be true or false (I've never been to SF so have no idea). It either is or it's not true.

Separately from that, one can argue 'It's sexist to grade women based on their looks and to likewise imply that attractive women can be expected to act differently than homely ones'.

Some people in this world would definitely say that it's not sexist to grade women on appearance, and in fact it is a value judgement held in positive regard in many parts of the world. That there is a class distinction that implies standards of behavior follows from this.

But the commenter who said 'it's sexist, nothing to discuss' avoids have to make that judgement. He prefers to just say 'I choose to label certain topics taboo (ie label sexist), hence avoid having to discuss them'

This isn't about value judgements of attractiveness, nasty enough as that can be.

If you care about your values and standards for behavior they should apply globally, regardless of gender, race or physical appearance.