Is “Women only want the top 10 - 20%” actually true offline?

[Hardkill]

I've been contemplating on the notion that “women only want the top 20%” meme and I now find that to be really misleading. It seems to mostly describe app dynamics (photo-first, inbox floods, safety filters, status amplification). Offline, in socially dense contexts (recurring mixed-gender scenes, warm introductions, real third places), the old forces still run the show: taste diversity, multi-factor attraction, repetition, vouching, assortative matching, and satisficing.

That’s why, historically, most men (not 100%) ended up with partners by mid-life. Also, paying for sex is a minority behavior, and even among men who’ve ever paid, most of their encounters are still unpaid.

For premodern settings, “most men had sex by mid-life”—typically ~90%+ in many regions—while ever partnered ranged roughly ~80–95% depending on marriage system (lowest where late marriage or polygyny left more men single).

For modern settings, like in the past, most men have had sex by mid-life (often ~90–97%), and most will have ever partnered—but the age it happens and the share who never marry vary more now by region and economy than ever before.

Two things seem true and in tension:

1. App markets look extremely top-heavy; lots of men feel invisible.
2. Historically and across many countries, most men eventually have sex and many partner by mid-life (even average/below-average guys).

How do you reconcile these? My current hypothesis: the 20% vibe is mostly platform structure (photo sorting, message overload, safety screening), while offline contexts (warm intros, repeated contact, assortative matching) broaden who gets chosen. If you disagree, what data (not anecdotes) best shows the 20% dynamic holds offline?

[LordFall]

No in person the average woman dates the average man. If you want particularly attractive women then sure being in the top 10% yourself helps. 

 

[Twentyfirst]

What does it matter? Go in the top percent anyways just for yourself and then you'll see what happens with women by extension 

[Puer Aeternus]

Dating apps are so skewed because mostly men are on them anyways. It's just the path of least resistance so of course people will take them even less seriously.

Any pilled videos that reference dating apps honestly need to touch grass, it's giving a narrow perspective.

I think it becomes a toxic trap with guys that are chronically online. If they buy into the 20% narrative- then they've got a toxic idea imprinted in them before even going out into the world. They'll make assumptions off faulty data.

Edited September 12 by Puer Aeternus

[Hardkill]

I agree that offline, average women date average men, and that apps skew attention. The “top 20%” thing mostly describes app attention, not offline selection. Two truths can coexist:

Boosting your own package (health, style, social skills, purpose) helps a ton—do it for you.

In recurring, talk-friendly scenes with warm intros, assortative matching and mere exposure kick in, and most guys do fine without being “top 10%.”

[Hojo]

I would put all these toxic cluts in the same category as Russian propoghanda. Its like fake ideas being put into the minds of young people maliciously to make them angry or feel worthless. All the 6 foot and over only posts all the other posts are all put in the minds of people on purpose in the same way Russia would use propaganda against an enemy country.

[theleelajoker]

Agree with other posts on especially apps and bias through them.

Another reason is the whole influencer stuff, the dating coaches, the relationship advice, the how to get laid videos etc etc. 

All this crap did not exist when I was young, before smartphone, YouTube, insta etc.  Channels, coaches and content as above did not or barely exist, and it was fine. Nobody needed all that advice, analysis, all this "this is how men and woman are and how to get them to love/fuck you"

When I was young, nobody was talking about this stuff much and all kind of girls and all kind of guys and girls got a relationship or other romantic stuff going on.

I bet a large percentage of users here doesn't know these times, they grew up with all this social media brain washing. It's creating more insecurities, anxiety like @hojo says.

You might think all this information helps you but no more often than not it just creates bullshit believes systems, puts you in your head too much and it's making things worse.

All this Dating content reminds me of this 

 

Advertising sells you things that that you don't need and can't afford, that are overpriced, and that don't work. And they do it by exploiting your fears and insecurities, and if you don't have any, they happily give you some.

Edited September 13 by theleelajoker

[Consept]

I went on a date about a month ago with a woman I met irl (friend of a friend). We got talking about apps and she said within her first week on Bumble she got 400 likes, 400! She's a good looking woman but I wouldn't say shes top level looks, she is a cool person though. Now in her life there is no way that anywhere near 400 guys are approaching her in a year let alone a week. Not that many guys approach for one, shes probably not gonna meet that many guys day to day. So if shes choosing on an app, she may choose 4 lets say, she actually said a lot of them she wasn't interested in, so essentially women can be extremely choosy on apps, but with the 4 that she talks to just because of time, that's literally 1% of men. 

Imagine she was top level looks wise, it'd be even crazier. Competition wise though you have so much better odds than apps. Let's say this woman gets approached a couple times a week, thats your only competition. Added to that, you have more influence on the interaction than you would on an app, your vibe, connection with her, confidence all of these are usually very important for attraction. 

So imo offline the top 20% rule could be true but in reality you only have to be the best of 10 guys rather than 400. 

I will also add as well, most dating profiles from men are dogshit, so if you do spend a bit of energy on it, take good pics, have an engaging bio, you can definitely boost yourself up. But apps by their nature are going to be hugely skewed and dont represent real life. 

[Emerald]

The "Women only go for the top 20% of guys" thing has always just been propaganda to play on the insecurities of men.

You can look around at real couples in the real world and see that that's true. But most real-life couples are just boring average people, so they get overlooked. Relationships and marriages are very unsexy.

Instead, the guys who tend to believe this kind of thing are actually doing (in their own mind) the thing they fear that women are doing.

They're focusing on the top 20% of women looks-wise in their mind as the concept of what a woman is in general... without even thinking of women who are in the bottom 80% within their concept of what a woman is.

And then, they lament that women (which they're unconsciously conceptualizing as the top 20% of women looks-wise) are only going for the top 20% of guys.

But of course the top 20% of women attractiveness-wise are going for the top 20% of guys attractiveness-wise. Couples generally go for their own equals in terms of attractiveness.

But the way these Manosphere internet propaganda things talk about how the top 20% of guys basically each have a harem of 5 women who are willing to share him because he's apparently so hot and amazing, is clearly not true. Otherwise, you'd see evidence of it literally everywhere.

Most guys with girlfriends and wives are average guys who are in relationships with average women. 

[BlessedLion]

On 9/15/2025 at 6:42 PM, Emerald said:

The "Women only go for the top 20% of guys" thing has always just been propaganda to play on the insecurities of men.

You can look around at real couples in the real world and see that that's true. But most real-life couples are just boring average people, so they get overlooked. Relationships and marriages are very unsexy.

Instead, the guys who tend to believe this kind of thing are actually doing (in their own mind) the thing they fear that women are doing.

They're focusing on the top 20% of women looks-wise in their mind as the concept of what a woman is in general... without even thinking of women who are in the bottom 80% within their concept of what a woman is.

And then, they lament that women (which they're unconsciously conceptualizing as the top 20% of women looks-wise) are only going for the top 20% of guys.

But of course the top 20% of women attractiveness-wise are going for the top 20% of guys attractiveness-wise. Couples generally go for their own equals in terms of attractiveness.

But the way these Manosphere internet propaganda things talk about how the top 20% of guys basically each have a harem of 5 women who are willing to share him because he's apparently so hot and amazing, is clearly not true. Otherwise, you'd see evidence of it literally everywhere.

Most guys with girlfriends and wives are average guys who are in relationships with average women. 

Thats a great explanation and so true. It’s like the guys doing this are only accounting for the most attractive women thus being the ultimate hypocrites and doing exactly what they are complaining about. It’s like women below high levels of attraction are invisible in their model. This whole obsession with alpha males sleeping with all the women is kinda gay honestly- and cringe. 

[Emerald]

22 minutes ago, BlessedLion said:

Thats a great explanation and so true. It’s like the guys doing this are only accounting for the most attractive women thus being the ultimate hypocrites and doing exactly what they are complaining about. It’s like women below high levels of attraction are invisible in their model. This whole obsession with alpha males sleeping with all the women is kinda gay honestly- and cringe. 

Yes. They're just projecting their own tendencies towards objectification onto women... and fearing that women are objectifying them the exact same way that they objectify women.

And the way they view average and below-average looking women is boomeranging right back onto them. And this causes them a lot of shame because they feel towards themselves the disgust and indifference they feel towards women who are not top-level hot.

And then, that shame makes them see sexual acceptance from very attractive women as the only way to redeem themselves. So, it further invisiblizes average and below-average looking women in their eyes, as only the most attractive women have the power to validate them and redeem them from shame.

And the cycle continues.

[theleelajoker]

12 hours ago, Emerald said:

Yes. They're just projecting their own tendencies towards objectification onto women... and fearing that women are objectifying them the exact same way that they objectify women.

And the way they view average and below-average looking women is boomeranging right back onto them. And this causes them a lot of shame because they feel towards themselves the disgust and indifference they feel towards women who are not top-level hot.

And then, that shame makes them see sexual acceptance from very attractive women as the only way to redeem themselves. So, it further invisiblizes average and below-average looking women in their eyes, as only the most attractive women have the power to validate them and redeem them from shame.

And the cycle continues.

Have seen this cycle many times with friends. 

Tried to intervene sometimes, talking to my mates. But this "hot or not" brainwashing, this fixation on certain women proved too much.

[Recursoinominado]

On 9/11/2025 at 8:53 PM, LordFall said:

No in person the average woman dates the average man. 

They settle for average but they aren't satisfied. Average men can't turn women on at all, it is mostly a rational choice but women are ultimately moved by their feelings, and she will grow to resent his averageness. 

[Schizophonia]

This is true online because by looking at your random selfies women can easily see that you suck, it's even worse if you go on a Tinder-alternative dating site where people come because they know they're ugly/suck, lol.

In any case, it's easier and more enjoyable in real life, in a context where you can offer something.

What's paralyzing next is learned helplessness.

There isn't much of a solution you have to go through this feeling, but yes it's not natural to be abandoned by your social group; it's normal that it's infuriating/paralyzing.

[BlessedLion]

18 hours ago, Emerald said:

Yes. They're just projecting their own tendencies towards objectification onto women... and fearing that women are objectifying them the exact same way that they objectify women.

And the way they view average and below-average looking women is boomeranging right back onto them. And this causes them a lot of shame because they feel towards themselves the disgust and indifference they feel towards women who are not top-level hot.

And then, that shame makes them see sexual acceptance from very attractive women as the only way to redeem themselves. So, it further invisiblizes average and below-average looking women in their eyes, as only the most attractive women have the power to validate them and redeem them from shame.

And the cycle continues.

Damn you really nailed this, that’s spot on 

[BlessedLion]

5 hours ago, Recursoinominado said:

They settle for average but they aren't satisfied. Average men can't turn women on at all, it is mostly a rational choice but women are ultimately moved by their feelings, and she will grow to resent his averageness. 

Probably similar to how most men aren’t REALLY turned on by average women unless she really knows what she’s doing in bed- they both kinda settle in that sense but if they are wise they will focus on reasons to love each other beyond just looks. Most people don’t actually understand Love- mating is just serving survival needs- which is why people like Sadia, Orion and Chris Williamson are famous - they teach survival relating not Love 

[Schizophonia]

1 hour ago, BlessedLion said:

Damn you really nailed this, that’s spot on 

No she is wrong.

You only believe her because your ego is too afraid of an alternate reality where you don't have the privilege of your advantageous physical and economic status. 

People are led to think this because they can't get women at all; not because their physical standards are too high. Take an interest in the people concerned.

Edited September 19 by Schizophonia

[Emerald]

12 hours ago, Recursoinominado said:

They settle for average but they aren't satisfied. Average men can't turn women on at all, it is mostly a rational choice but women are ultimately moved by their feelings, and she will grow to resent his averageness. 

That's false.

Most men that I've been attracted to are average. It's a chemistry thing.

[Emerald]

13 hours ago, theleelajoker said:

Have seen this cycle many times with friends. 

Tried to intervene sometimes, talking to my mates. But this "hot or not" brainwashing, this fixation on certain women proved too much.

It seems that the pattern is fairly common.

And it's just completely to opposite mindset one needs to have a real relationship with a woman.

Not only that... but it also scares women off, as women already deal with a lot of shame in the body because of the high beauty standards and how all-encompassing they are. Women are always getting the message overtly and covertly (since early childhood) that, if they're not beautiful that they won't be loved.

The last thing that a woman needs is to feel like a guy is comparing her body to other women's bodies and ranking them. It's the opposite of safety.

So, it's often the guys who have the highest tendencies towards objectifying women will have the most fear about women objectifying them.

It's similar to how cheaters will get SUPER suspicious of their partner cheating on them... just projection.

However, there's also other insecurities that can be at play... like fear of unlovability in general. So, that is the case sometimes with this belief. But I frequently see the 'objectifiers fearing objectification' dynamic play out with these beliefs.

[Emerald]

7 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

No she is wrong.

You only believe her because your ego is too afraid of an alternate reality where you don't have the privilege of your advantageous physical and economic status. 

People are led to think this because they can't get women at all; not because their physical standards are too high. Take an interest in the people concerned.

I am definitely not wrong. You'll find that 7 times out of 10, guys who believe the "Women only go for the top 20%" thing are just projecting their own high standards and objectifying tendencies onto women.

But it might be a different dynamic for you... as I think lots of young guys can just have a fear that no woman will ever like them or prefer them if they haven't seen evidence yet of a woman liking them.

So, those narratives (though false) can also provide a less personalized way of understanding why one is struggling to meet someone. It takes the onus of personal responsibility away and says, "It's not that I need to socialize more. It's because women are unrealistically picky".

Or if there is shame, it can even provide a salve of "It's not that I'm awful. It's because women are unrealistically picky."

But if you interacted more with women in person and were generally social, you'd probably find a girlfriend pretty quickly. You just have to be more social.