[_m8fo]

From my friend group there are two types of individuals:

1. Individuals who date many people, breaking up if they find something non-optimal. These include minor things like, not cleaning up on occasion, or not liking something you do.

2. Someone who dates very few (1-3) individuals, sticking with them until a serious, fatal flaw appears, like being racist or physically harming others, etc.

If you define a successful dater as someone who has both longevity and quality in a single relationship then Group 2 has far more success in their relationships, in my experience.

[swiley]

Group 1 is mostly women and group 2 is mostly men.

At least in my experience.

[KGIII]

That doesn't mimic my own experiences. The wajority of women that I have known well enough to observe have been willing to put up with a lot of nonsense. The majority of men that I have had the chance to observe, have had more partners.

Hell, I'm a nice guy and I'm not even sure why the missus puts up with me. (I try to get her to use at least one obscenity a day. Old ladies who swear crack me up.)

I do wonder if this a generational thing? I'm kinda old.

[dwaltrip]

Unless the majority of people you know are gay, that isn't possible.

For each hetero man you know following strategy 2, by definition, there is a corresponding woman (his partner).

And vice versa with the women who are using strategy 1.

[mattnewport]

Not true. It's perfectly possible you have a scenario where for example the top 10% of men date 100s of women, the bottom 50% date 3 or fewer women and women have a much more even distribution and date an average much higher than 3. These numbers are just an example but in reality I think something a bit like this situation does actually exist.

[dwaltrip]

Sorry, forgot about this post. It seems you are likely right... (my brain is feeling a bit foggy on this one right now). I can see what sort of asymmetric distribution you are talking about. This must have been studied at some point -- it would be interesting to see some hard numbers.

Anyways, thanks for the correction.

[tpeo]

I don't understand. What's the relationship between one person's dating strategy and another person's dating strategy? What's about gays?

Also, I don't see why, for instance, there wouldn't be something like a population where everyone only tries to date as many people as possible. Are you assuming that people wouldn't ever date the same person again?

[morgtheborg]

Not in my experience.

[watwut]

What about people who date few individuals (2-3), break up 1-2 times and their partners were neither closet racists nor violent nor anything that grave. That would describe majority of people I know.

[_m8fo]

well, the definition of a "fatal flaw" depends on the individual. even falling "out of love" with someone is obviously a fatal flaw which is probably the most common.

[watwut]

Falling out of love is big deal and reason to split, but hardly reflects badly on partners character the way racism and violence does.

If you are neat freak and she is systematically messy, than the relationship is bound to break or be lifelong hell. However, it is no violence and both partners can move to different successful long term relationship (this time being smarter and checking cleanness standards compatibility before first kiss).

[gorkonsine]

>1. Individuals who date many people, breaking up if they find something non-optimal. These include minor things like, not cleaning up on occasion, or not liking something you do.

There's a lot of iPhone users who fit this profile:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/single-iphone-owners-dont-w...

[dhfhduk]

Not really disagreeing with you, but your conclusion is almost necessarily true, which says something about Strategy 1.

One thing on my mind lately is how often people convert from one strategy to another, and how that's patterned and why.