[TonySandos]

Judging by the apps own algorithm, the developer would rate low aside from having a graduate degree(internship only). Is there such a thing as poetic irony?

Ballsy entrepreneurs and other successful people without a paper trail of their socially sanctioned success stories are out on this one too.

I'd call this for drones, by drones.

Older women and those typically herded in the sheltered community of colleges are the target female audience. This is another bullet missed.

On the VERY positive side; they hide coworkers and make a market for all those cute work girls you'd otherwise avoid because it wasn't the right place to mack on her, so you mack women for similar companies lol.

I'd actually like this if it wasn't weighted on facebook and more on linkedin, but included more linkedin like sites for diversity of career successes.

But 19 out of 20,000? This app will be a ghost town occupied by carousel/alpha widow hamster more vacant than plentyoffish.
I'll wait until they open the ranks to younger women will good, middle class paying jobs like clerical types and young lawyers. Come here sugar babe.

[Shortest Straw]

(01-30-2015 01:35 AM)Icepasian Wrote:  

(01-30-2015 12:30 AM)Seboist Wrote:  

(01-28-2015 11:58 AM)DJ-Matt Wrote:  

I'm not surprised that they let you filter by race, given that this app obviously favors the girls. I can't tell you how many online dating profiles say shit like "I'm not into black guys" or "Only wants dark meat" and "I'm not racist I just have preferences on what I like as everyone does".

I've seen that often as well. I'm curious though, do guys' pages ever say "no black chicks" or anything like that?

From what I know, men are typically less 'racist' about who they fuck given the fact that boner goggles don't give a shit about your personal opinions. The male erection transcends ideological boundaries. Also, the status component of a man's preferences is nowhere near that of a woman's and fucking a decent looking chick of any race doesn't involve a loss of any. Even if the guy was a hardcore racist in a far-right group, the other men in the group would most likely rationalize it as "superior [insert race here] dick colonizing/degrading the [insert other race here]'s women".

Men and women both snipe at the other sex if they're seen dating interracially but unlike men, women also snipe each other.

I had the most un-politically-correct thought the other day.

So I reckon that women act on an evolutionarily basic impulse when they have casual sex. I'm pretty sure the urge to pair bond is evolutionarily more advanced.

Why do white women go for black men? It's not to marry them; interracial marriages aren't that common. But big black cock - white women getting fucked by multiple black guys - is a common porn theme. It's all about the casual sex with alphas, preferably large groups thereof.

Do women go for black guys because deep evolutionary memories - deep memories of ancestry in Africa - are being stirred?

You could say the topic deserves its own thread, but I'm not that bold and/or stupid, so I'll bury it here.

[GeroMeroHero]

(01-30-2015 01:48 AM)Shortest Straw Wrote:  

(01-30-2015 01:35 AM)Icepasian Wrote:  

(01-30-2015 12:30 AM)Seboist Wrote:  

(01-28-2015 11:58 AM)DJ-Matt Wrote:  

I'm not surprised that they let you filter by race, given that this app obviously favors the girls. I can't tell you how many online dating profiles say shit like "I'm not into black guys" or "Only wants dark meat" and "I'm not racist I just have preferences on what I like as everyone does".

I've seen that often as well. I'm curious though, do guys' pages ever say "no black chicks" or anything like that?

From what I know, men are typically less 'racist' about who they fuck given the fact that boner goggles don't give a shit about your personal opinions. The male erection transcends ideological boundaries. Also, the status component of a man's preferences is nowhere near that of a woman's and fucking a decent looking chick of any race doesn't involve a loss of any. Even if the guy was a hardcore racist in a far-right group, the other men in the group would most likely rationalize it as "superior [insert race here] dick colonizing/degrading the [insert other race here]'s women".

Men and women both snipe at the other sex if they're seen dating interracially but unlike men, women also snipe each other.

I had the most un-politically-correct thought the other day.

So I reckon that women act on an evolutionarily basic impulse when they have casual sex. I'm pretty sure the urge to pair bond is evolutionarily more advanced.

Why do white women go for black men? It's not to marry them; interracial marriages aren't that common. But big black cock - white women getting fucked by multiple black guys - is a common porn theme. It's all about the casual sex with alphas, preferably large groups thereof.

Do women go for black guys because deep evolutionary memories - deep memories of ancestry in Africa - are being stirred?

You could say the topic deserves its own thread, but I'm not that bold and/or stupid, so I'll bury it here.

Do they have lots of interracial casual sex? Sharpshooter on rok said something like this but he thinks it's the hamster at work. Being aware of porn and the BBC fetish, they have to know if the legends are true.

And most other manosphere writers who have broached the subject conclude that white women going for black men is not common outside the ones with a fetish for them.
But it is ultimately all anecdotes warring with one another. Stats are more important.

[TonySandos]

Just read the average age selection box is 31-40. Never mind what I said about trying it out.

[Shortest Straw]

(01-30-2015 01:52 AM)GeroMeroHero Wrote:  

Do they have lots of interracial casual sex? Sharpshooter on rok said something like this but he thinks it's the hamster at work. Being aware of porn and the BBC fetish, they have to know if the legends are true.

And most other manosphere writers who have broached the subject conclude that white women going for black men is not common outside the ones with a fetish for them.
But it is ultimately all anecdotes warring with one another. Stats are more important.

I know in the swinger community black men are disproportionately represented. I think it's kind of an offshoot of the cuckold / black bull fetish, but I'm not sure.

It'd be frickin hilarious if this dating app turned into an interracial dating scene.

[GeroMeroHero]

(01-30-2015 02:16 AM)Shortest Straw Wrote:  

(01-30-2015 01:52 AM)GeroMeroHero Wrote:  

Do they have lots of interracial casual sex? Sharpshooter on rok said something like this but he thinks it's the hamster at work. Being aware of porn and the BBC fetish, they have to know if the legends are true.

And most other manosphere writers who have broached the subject conclude that white women going for black men is not common outside the ones with a fetish for them.
But it is ultimately all anecdotes warring with one another. Stats are more important.

I know in the swinger community black men are disproportionately represented. I think it's kind of an offshoot of the cuckold / black bull fetish, but I'm not sure.

It'd be frickin hilarious if this dating app turned into an interracial dating scene.

Forbidden flesh. I guess
On matching sites like OkCupid Black Men are the least responded to aside from south asian (I assume that includes Indian...) men. But that could also be because responding to one publicly would be scandalous... which I personally don't believe but it's a possibility.
This video apparently triggered Buzzfeed by reporting this. Do yourself a favor, avoid the comments section.

[cibo]

So I checked out her linkedin. Oh man does it have shitty writing. It's like she barely put in any effort.

Quote:

Focus on mobile, consumer internet, and enterprise software companies.

For a few of her jobs, it looks like she just copied and pasted the HR job description.

Quote:

The New Business Development group works with Google Product and Engineering teams on incubation-exploratory efforts, technology and meta-data licensing, strategic partnerships, urgent special projects, and alternative distribution for existing and new business initiatives.

New Business Development Managers are self-starters with deal and partnership experience who will work closely with the Google product team on new product initiatives and key strategic relationships. You are a top performer who has a deep interest in the internet technology industry and Google products. You are also entrepreneurial, creative, open-minded, and adaptive. When interacting with internal and external clients, you will need to possess good judgment, be persistent and action oriented, and be highly collaborative.


Responsibilities

Co-lead exploratory discussions with potential partners.
Evaluate opportunities and present recommendations to the management team.
Open doors, negotiate and close business deals.
Communicate and collaborate with a broad range of constituents (product, engineering, marketing, sales, legal and top external executives).

[TonySandos]

"Strategic partnerships" is a term so inept and clueless that it leads one to doubt the individuals IQ

[Shortest Straw]

(01-30-2015 03:10 AM)cibo Wrote:  

So I checked out her linkedin. Oh man does it have shitty writing. It's like she barely put in any effort.

Quote:

Focus on mobile, consumer internet, and enterprise software companies.

For a few of her jobs, it looks like she just copied and pasted the HR job description.

Quote:

The New Business Development group works with Google Product and Engineering teams on incubation-exploratory efforts, technology and meta-data licensing, strategic partnerships, urgent special projects, and alternative distribution for existing and new business initiatives.

New Business Development Managers are self-starters with deal and partnership experience who will work closely with the Google product team on new product initiatives and key strategic relationships. You are a top performer who has a deep interest in the internet technology industry and Google products. You are also entrepreneurial, creative, open-minded, and adaptive. When interacting with internal and external clients, you will need to possess good judgment, be persistent and action oriented, and be highly collaborative.


Responsibilities

Co-lead exploratory discussions with potential partners.
Evaluate opportunities and present recommendations to the management team.
Open doors, negotiate and close business deals.
Communicate and collaborate with a broad range of constituents (product, engineering, marketing, sales, legal and top external executives).

Oh my god. it's just gibberish. Subjective, meaningless gibberish. A computer could do a better job, pulling words at random from a biz-speak dictionary.

Every single word is fucking junk.

I went to a top business school. No Harvard or Stanford (cough) but a serious school. It's strange how the transition from blue pill to red doesn't happen suddenly. Now that I look back on it, the women that were in that b-school program were capable of the most stunning inanities. For some weird reason, they were given a pass on it everywhere they turned. The men were capable of some stupid shit, but what was weird was that the women almost uniformly demonstrated a certain odd complete lack of competence, coupled with defensiveness to compensate for the incompetence. I recall one telling me that "zero sum gain" was a finance term. One after another we guys covered for them. Didn't even realize that we were doing it. And in our talent show, they did a "feminazi" skit where they shamed a guy, by putting his picture up on the slide show for everyone to see, for having had the nerve to stare at their tits. I hang my head in shame for not pulling the plug on the projector.

It was unreal how the sense of entitlement pervaded the women, and how we men supported it, completely unaware.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised this thinking persists to this day, if not amplified over time.

The sad irony is they are nurtured and coddled for a while, but eventually the female privilege runs out. I think we are seeing this sad bitch's privilege well run dry, but I'm not optimistic.

[ElBorrachoInfamoso]

@SS

I've never thought of women with top MBAs being grossly underqualified or incompetent compared to the men. There's definitely a difference in average ability but it's not large enough to consider the chicks unqualified.

Of course many of them are under the delusion that their degrees or career success somehow make them more attractive to men. That's like a fat man thinking his bitch tits make him more attractive to women.

[Shortest Straw]

(01-30-2015 12:54 PM)ElBorrachoInfamoso Wrote:  

I've never thought of women with top MBAs being grossly underqualified or incompetent compared to the men. There's definitely a difference in average ability but it's not large enough to consider the chicks unqualified.

I should clarify. I have a tendency to make sweeping statements without making it clear that I'm thinking about the mean of the distribution, and the tails of the distribution, but I recognize that the populations overlap to a great degree.

The women weren't universally unqualified. There were about 50 women in a class of 500. Of that 50, about 5 were visible. The remarkable thing was that the five were visible for their idiocy. They didn't have the sense to shut up when they didn't know what they were talking about. Or, as with the feminazi shaming, they didn't stop to think that they were advertising that they would be difficult to work with. Smart guys learn to not make unfounded statements; they also learn to not display that they don't play well with others.

Still, I don't have reason to believe that the five visibly idiotic women were less qualified than the bottom 10% of the men. But they sure seemed happy to lead people to that conclusion.

To me it's just weird that Amanda Bradford would froth in a public forum, or would fill her Linkedin profile with gibberish, but it's actually in line with women's pervasive shamelessness. I can't believe she got into Stanford - the MBA guys I have met from there are wicked smart - but I guess that's female privilege for you.

The other factor of note was that the top tier was all men. None of the women stood out in a positive way. This is in line with observations that the standard deviation of women's IQs is narrower than that of men.

(01-30-2015 12:54 PM)ElBorrachoInfamoso Wrote:  

Of course many of them are under the delusion that their degrees or career success somehow make them more attractive to men. That's like a fat man thinking his bitch tits make him more attractive to women.

It's simple projection. They assume that what they lust after is what is lusted after in themselves. I think men do that to a lesser extent; you don't see many men dolling themselves up for Okcupid profiles. Or maybe you do. I don't want to find out.

[awkward]

(01-26-2015 02:10 AM)KeepMovingForward Wrote:  

Seems like a means for professional women to secure a well off beta.

Which is why the article refers to them as "beta users"

[Simeon_Strangelight]

She got mixed and somehow crazy reviews on NYTimes and even Huffingtonpost:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/25/style/....html?_r=0

Quote:

Amanda Bradford, third from left, founder and chief executive of the League, a dating app, recruiting users for it at a San Francisco party. Credit Matt Edge for The New York Times

That pic says it all really - sinewy 30+ carousel riding deluded sluts at your disposal.


That's her.

Quote:

Ms. Bradford, who turned 30 the week her app was introduced, speaks in a low, confidential voice and has blue eyes that either scan the room or lock in on her interlocuter to create an immediate sense of intimacy. At Fort Mason, she made her way into the crowd, her Chanel bag full of cards and League-branded slap bracelets she planned to hand out to new recruits.

What a surprise that she turned 30 and she got the Beta journalist mesmerized for sure.

Quote:

On Thursday, she had met a group of girlfriends at the Battery, a private club favored by the city’s moneyed tech crowd. They mixed somewhat uneasily at an investment bank holiday party, where she spotted some of her users in the wild (including a guy who kept asking one of her friends to make out every half-hour, as if on some sort of schedule). The next night, she attended an Ivy League and Alumni Holiday party at a bar downtown.

Why would such a hot elite-born 10-in-her-own-eyes need a dating app at all? But I guess those men don't send CVs to her up front and it's not as if she can start contacting blokes on linkedIn for dates.

The next part has another of The Leagues hot shots and more hamsterese in store for us:

Quote:

It’s also made him or her feel farther away than ever thanks to an overabundance of choices. Lately, it seems, a certain cold, data-driven logic has overtaken what were once quaintly known as matters of the heart.

Enter the League, which does not offer a constantly replenishing stream of smiling faces and quippy come-ons. Users are shown only five potential matches a day. If they don’t connect with any, they have to wait until tomorrow’s batch is served. If Tinder is a superstore for mate-shopping, the League, with its tiny pool and selective criteria for entry, is a boutique.

“There’s a lot of flux right now, and people don’t know where they stand,” said Audrey Melnik, a friend Ms. Bradford had been with at the Battery.

Ms. Melnik, 38, is herself the founder of a relationship web app, WotWentWrong, meant to give users closure after a breakup. (Ms. Melnik has since moved on from the app, founding Zootrock, which helps companies monetize their social media presence.) Looking around the smartphone-enabled dating landscape, she sees a lack of effort and high expectations for connection.

“People have become pretty lazy in that they text, they don’t call,” she said. “They expect to have instant gratification rather than learn something about someone before jumping into bed together.”

First of all - only women have an OVERABUNDANCE OF CHOICES as cock is cheap and slim attractive pussy is rare.

Second comes in another The League customer - a 38 year old super-catch who started another useful app that was supposed to collect data from dates that went wrong. That is another hamster talking - as if women are going to be honest: too Beta, did not get my pussy wet, too short, too small dick, too big dick, gotten fucked by 3 hotter dudes this week.... right.....

Also no - you bloody bitch - "people" (unless she talks about the 0,1% of super-attractive men) have not gotten lazy and don't answer texts - you women have gotten lazy getting 200 dick-offers on dating apps/day.


Also - the League creator is certainly in the solid WB category - seems to be in very good shape, but way too crazy and demanding for a LTR.
Reeling in the Beta provider catch after having been slammed by an Alpha just yesterday - that pic says it all.

Quote:

“I’d never really been single and dating,” she said, noting that she had met her long-term partners at college and through work.

Yeah - I believe that - she was hot enough to attract instant attention. Now that she turned 30 it's the beginning of the end.

As she mingles in the group she puts out another gem of Hamsterese:

Quote:

“It’s like hitting on people,” Ms. Bradford said. “I like to find the leader of the group.”

Of course you do - as all Hypergamous bitches do - only an Alpha billionaire with model-looks will do for Cupcake - one that preferably has tons of Game and has gotten tired of fucking 20yo models (pre-selection) and wants to settle down with you.

As she speaks to another group:

Quote:

“The girls are amazing in San Francisco,” she said. “Where do you go to meet ambitious, smart guys who want to meet a heavy-hitter girl?”

A woman in a strapless white dress flecked with gold spots arched her eyebrow at Ms. Bradford’s pitch. “I don’t need any of that stuff,” she said. Besides, would the League even work on her phone? She reached in her clutch and pulled out a Samsung with a tiny raised keypad.

So here she met a girl who for God's sake did not even have a smartphone. Girls - get this one an Iphone - how else are you going to ride the cock-carousel without a proper dick-picking-device?

Also - what the fuck is a heavy-hitter-girl?

__________

Huffingtonpost was more negative than this little fluff-piece:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/11...05086.html

Quote:

According to Bloomberg Businessweek, a post on a student Facebook page for the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School on Friday shared some insight -- or at least a healthy dose of projection -- about the application process:

“While you don’t know exactly what got you in, you do know that the best things in life are the most selective," reads the post, reportedly written by someone unaffiliated with The League.

Even the Huffpo Betas get the process of rampant projection, where gold-digging carousel-riding whores try to capitalize as their looks wane.

Quote:

Because, among other reasons...

"You'll never have to wonder if that Harvard hottie is too good to be true."

Hallelujah! Praise the online dating gods for answering our prayers. Because that was totally keeping us up at night.

Fuck - Huffpo is getting Redpill - hehe. And the journalist Avery Stone embedded that little gif here (it's a woman - so what can you expect?)



Also interesting The League's term for the Beta-launch:

Quote:

The League is due to roll out first in San Francisco; other cities will follow suit depending on demand, the company says. Apparently, over 300 people have already signed up for the waiting list, eager to join the app's “private alpha" launch.

Whoa - someone has been reading the 'sphere! Read further girl - you will find some of us on the app - those who like to fuck easy broads on their way to cougar-dom.

[N°6]

Quote:

There are already 75,000 people failing to join The League, a Tinder for the elite

The League, a new dating app that launched in January, has a waitlist that’s already 75,000 people long.

Founded by Stanford graduate Amanda Bradford, The League raised $US2.1 million from Silicon Valley investors for a controversial take on dating. The app’s goal is to make a more selective Tinder that’s only for the most interesting and motivated single people in cities around the world.

The acceptance algorithm The League uses scans an applicant’s social networks — primarily LinkedIn — to ensure they are in the right age group and that they are career-oriented. That doesn’t mean they have to be Ivy graduates or work for a big-name firm. But they should have accomplished something in their 20s.

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-le...ist-2015-2

[Saweeep]

(02-11-2015 12:46 AM)N°6 Wrote:  

Quote:

There are already 75,000 people failing to join The League, a Tinder for the elite

The League, a new dating app that launched in January, has a waitlist that’s already 75,000 people long.

Founded by Stanford graduate Amanda Bradford, The League raised $US2.1 million from Silicon Valley investors for a controversial take on dating. The app’s goal is to make a more selective Tinder that’s only for the most interesting and motivated single people in cities around the world.

The acceptance algorithm The League uses scans an applicant’s social networks — primarily LinkedIn — to ensure they are in the right age group and that they are career-oriented. That doesn’t mean they have to be Ivy graduates or work for a big-name firm. But they should have accomplished something in their 20s.

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-le...ist-2015-2

It would have been useful to know how the male/female split of those losers waiting.

[ThrustMaster]

Was showed this last weekend by a 30-something I know who was in on it since the Beta. Looked at some of her matches - guys from all walks - one guy was a construction worker. Just thought I'd add the data point.

[StrikeBack]

Quote:

Also - what the fuck is a heavy-hitter-girl?

One who has heavy weight behind her punch i.e a fattie.

[Dismal Operator]

So she's come out with a post on LinkedIn to explain her rationale for creating the ap.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/im-elitis...a-bradford

The TLDR version, my emphasis in bold:

Quote:

The couples that we create, even if small in absolute numbers right now, ideally will go on to successfully demonstrate that dual-career relationships are not only possible, they are preferable. These power couples will ultimately serve as the role models that our society sorely lacks today.

My hope is that The League promotes higher education, encourages career-ambition, and, most importantly, cultivates the desire for an egalitarian relationship in both sexes.

Our generation has the unique opportunity to weed out the antiquated social norms that stem from decades (if not centuries) ago, yet still manage to profoundly influence how we define a relationship in today's world. If as a founder I can point to even a small increase in the number of equal partnerships that result from the curated community we’re building, then I’m okay being labeled an elitist, or whatever anyone wants to call me. Because if we can help move the needle of society, even a tiny bit, towards equalism, that is much more important to me than my own google search results.

In short, she's mad that men prefer youth, beauty and fertility. She is disappointed that this:



in and of itself, with no other information is enough to possibly induce a boner. She would like this,



in and of itself with no other information, to possibly induce boners. When that happens en masse, she'll have something viable. Until then its more of the same feminist infused BS. Here it is in full, bold is mine. The formatting that presents normal, inane sentences as though they were important quotes to be highlighted is from the original.

Quote:

I’m Not An Elitist, I’m Just An Alpha Female

In less than a month from today The League turns 1 and I turn 31. As I reflect back on my first year as a single founder (yes, the pun is intended), my biggest regret is that for nearly a year I’ve held my tongue on voicing the mission behind The League, and instead let the press write their own story about a dating app exclusively for good-looking rich kids. I told myself I was just obeying wise adages: ‘ignore the critics’, ‘focus on your users and your product’, and ‘no press is bad press’, but by refusing to respond, I essentially let the media go on to corrupt our concept into one so superficial and optimized for clickbait that it’s nearly unrecognizable to me now.

Why did I hold back? Truthfully, I was worried that if I shared my real vision behind The League I would alienate some of our user base -- particularly the men -- which a dating app clearly needs to survive. This, in turn, could further segment our already-smaller-than-Tinder addressable market, and could hurt our chances at getting traction and raising funding. But ironically, by downplaying my mission, I was actually suffering from the very same type of complex I am determined to eradicate.

And at 31, it’s time for me to stop worrying about what other people think and start worrying about moving the needle.
So if you’ll bear with me while I get on my soapbox for a few minutes, I’d like to finally explain why I started The League.

When I got an academic scholarship to Carnegie Mellon to study computer science, I never thought twice about how education and career would affect my dating life. I worked incredibly hard to graduate early and build my resume, network, and pedigree working in all-male teams at name-brand tech companies. After finishing it all off with an MBA, I started to realize that with every promotion or degree I collected, I embodied more and more the definition of ‘alpha female’. (The fact that women who are able to compete successfully with men in the workplace warrants us a special label is ludicrous to me, but I embraced it because it meant I was succeeding).

After business school, I entered back into the world of singledom after the end of a 5 year relationship. It became clear that I had effectively qualified out a large pool of guys that were simply not interested in dating an alpha female;

I was an over-educated, career-obsessed wanna-be tech executive with little interest in playing the 'traditional' doting girlfriend.

And to be fair, I qualified out guys that didn’t share my same drive to achieve, level of intellect, or desire to be in a relationship where our careers and social lives were of equal importance. It only took me a few dates ‘in the wild’ to realize that the typical online dating sites were a waste of my - and their - time. And when you’re $200,000 in debt after business school, you tend to place a high dollar value on your time.

It became clear to me that as far as women have come in redefining our role in the workplace, there is much work left to do in redefining our role in relationships.

In 2015, there are many men who will claim they want a ‘smart, ambitious woman’, but I’ve noticed it often doesn’t play out that way in reality, and there are plenty of studies [1, 2] to corroborate my anecdotal evidence. It also doesn’t mean men expect their ‘ambitious’ wife to stay that way after marriage. An HBR study finds that 50% of millennial men expect their wife’s career to take a back-seat to theirs (vs. equal priority), and nearly 70% expect the wife to be the primary caretaker of their children (vs. equal responsibility). Even more daunting for some men are ‘progressive relationships’ - where the female may have a busier schedule, a more powerful network, and achieve more career success than her male partner. A University of Chicago study shows a woman and man are much less likely to pair up if her income exceeds his. All of this points to why it’s not uncommon for women to feel the need to

‘tone down [our] intelligence, opinions, and career ambition as to not scare guys off’.

This awful, cringeworthy expression is what drove me to create The League. I wanted to build a community where smart, outspoken, high-achieving women are celebrated and encouraged to progress in their career full-time. I wanted to never EVER hear a woman be worried that her educational achievements or career ambition would be a turn-off. As Sheryl Sandberg wisely advised to us:

‘T he most important career choice you'll make is who you marry. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner.' - Sheryl Sandberg

I wanted to build a community where this type of relationship is the rule, not the exception.

The media has slammed The League for our ‘exclusive’ model and labeled us an elitist app for trust fund kids and ivy league grads.

My inbox flooded with dozens of reality-show production companies pitching us to create the next Millionaire Matchmaker, type-casting me as the millennial's Patti Stranger whose goal is to match up rich men with gorgeous women desiring financial security.

These stereotypes make my blood boil and couldn’t be more wrong.

The women in The League have consciously prioritized their education and career trajectory: 98% have college degrees, 8% are pHDs, 30% have advanced degrees, 14% are director-level or higher, 21% are managers, 13% are CEOs, founders, co-founders or owners, and over 39% are estimated to be making six figure salaries. And this is all with an average (and median) female age of 29. These are high-achieving women that are likely to continue working post marriage and post children (if they choose to have them). The men they (we) want to be matched up with on The League are educated, ambitious, accomplished and confident enough in themselves to desire a female partner that has the drive and intellect to reach high levels of professional success, even if it eclipses his own.

What at first glance is easy to label as elitism is actually efficacy of this broader mission.

The League’s heavily scrutinized admissions-based model is our attempt to create a founding community of high-achieving, diverse, and influential members that will serve as trailblazers to help change the conventional gender views still prevalent in our society. Yes, we are selective - we believe in the research that correlates education and professional achievement with ambition, and weigh these data heavily in our screening algorithms. Though it’s currently a slow and far from a perfect admissions process,

If we open the gates too wide and too fast, we risk becoming like every other dating app out there where the men judge women on their looks and the women struggle to find men who value their intelligence and support their ambition.

And then our mission has failed.

The couples that we create, even if small in absolute numbers right now, ideally will go on to successfully demonstrate that dual-career relationships are not only possible, they are preferable. These power couples will ultimately serve as the role models that our society sorely lacks today.

My hope is that The League promotes higher education, encourages career-ambition, and, most importantly, cultivates the desire for an egalitarian relationship in both sexes.

Our generation has the unique opportunity to weed out the antiquated social norms that stem from decades (if not centuries) ago, yet still manage to profoundly influence how we define a relationship in today's world. If as a founder I can point to even a small increase in the number of equal partnerships that result from the curated community we’re building, then I’m okay being labeled an elitist, or whatever anyone wants to call me. Because if we can help move the needle of society, even a tiny bit, towards equalism, that is much more important to me than my own google search results.

Amanda Bradford, Founder & CEO

theleague.com

#endofsoapbox #micdrop #getmeoffTinder #neversettle

While the flaws in her argument are well documented here, it's interesting to note that she basically started this app to bail herself out in one way or another.

She's a 31 year old, who despite being relatively attractive, is single, owing to her thinking that what men find attractive in women should be the same as what she looks for in men. She is also a woman $200k in debt with a degree that, while prestigious, hasn't afforded her the ability to remove those financial constraints from her mind.

So this app will either allow her to fish for a rich guy who will absorb her debt, or it will possibly allow her to draw from the Tech Bubble 2.0-driven river of money sloshing around Silicon Valley, making her a rich woman in that way.

Thus it might actually work out for her personally in the end, but she'll fail miserably in trying to change the human condition as she seems to aspire to.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

Yeah - with great financial success this can become yours:



http://www.businessinsider.com/meet-the-...ite-2015-8


The League could be described as:
Well fucked and worn out career minded pre-Wall spinster is looking for Beta Bucks for less stimulating but more financially rewarding occasional sex and yearly BJ (divorce-rape in 80% of the cases guaranteed to resume Alpha fucks at the age of 38 - just don't tell the egalitarian Beta Bucks that we need for the app)

She has also forgot to mention that quote by Sandberg for the pre-31 aged woman:



For all the Beta Bucks out there - you are better met learning Game and finding yourself a cute 22 year old waitress (with an IQ of 115-120) for whom you will be the Alpha-Beta Summa Cum Laude for the next decades or life. Most crazy feminist career pussy is a tough rug to chew literally.

[kaotic]

delusional fantasies from career whore island

$200K in debt ? Yeah, thanks I'll pass on dating you.

Game recognized if you have these career whores spend their time and money on you for being the "bad boy" in their life.

But half these women aren't even worth it - wall hitting women who have careers and wouldn't make great mothers or wives for that matter.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(10-22-2015 01:22 PM)kaotic Wrote:  

delusional fantasies from career whore island

$200K in debt ? Yeah, thanks I'll pass on dating you.

Game recognized if you have these career whores spend their time and money on you for being the "bad boy" in their life.

But half these women aren't even worth it - wall hitting women who have careers and wouldn't make great mothers or wives for that matter.

Those women here are from one of The League parties:


4-5.8 at best. Any successful man in his early 30s making good 6 digits is settling way below his league with "Alpha" women like that.

To make things clear - this is a real Alpha woman:



Alpha with men is relative whether you use the term for sexual market value or state of mind, but male Alphas can be anything from CEO, pick-up-artist, writer, car mechanic with super dominant state and massive Game, pro-athlete, 80 pound overweight man with 100 million and massive Game and charisma, broke ex-convict etc.

It's only interesting that women try to use our Red Pill terms. But sugar - there is no female equivalent of Alpha. You are just an aging women who wants to cash in on the best long-term commitment after having fucked the exciting men and having failed at securing commitment from rich dominant men.


The App should be called: Settle with us before you find out how much more you can get on the sexual market!

[MatineeMan]

The crux of the issue is that many women for some reason think that men find the same things attractive in women that they find attractive in men. They need to stop 'Projecting' as was once cool for them to say.

[Excelsior]

As is to be expected, this woman talks herself into circles in her bid to rationalize things.

Quote:

In 2015, there are many men who will claim they want a ‘smart, ambitious woman’, but I’ve noticed it often doesn’t play out that way in reality, and there are plenty of studies [1, 2] to corroborate my anecdotal evidence. It also doesn’t mean men expect their ‘ambitious’ wife to stay that way after marriage. An HBR study finds that 50% of millennial men expect their wife’s career to take a back-seat to theirs (vs. equal priority), and nearly 70% expect the wife to be the primary caretaker of their children (vs. equal responsibility). Even more daunting for some men are ‘progressive relationships’ - where the female may have a busier schedule, a more powerful network, and achieve more career success than her male partner. A University of Chicago study shows a woman and man are much less likely to pair up if her income exceeds his.

My instinct is that she is criticizing this state of affairs - she'd prefer that the bolded not be the case and would criticize men for making it the case. The problem is that men haven't made it the case - female choice is also underlying this state of affairs, and this woman proved it earlier with this statement:

Quote:

After business school, I entered back into the world of singledom after the end of a 5 year relationship. It became clear that I had effectively qualified out a large pool of guys that were simply not interested in dating an alpha female.

I was an over-educated, career-obsessed wanna-be tech executive with little interest in playing the 'traditional' doting girlfriend.
And to be fair, I qualified out guys that didn’t share my same drive to achieve, level of intellect, or desire to be in a relationship where our careers and social lives were of equal importance.

She's trying to mention it in passing here, but the words speak very loudly: she didn't want to date down.

Like most human females (who, like most great apes, are sexually hypergamous), she sought a male who was at or above her socio-economic and intellectual level. That means that, having made herself into a "over-educated, career obsessed wanna-be tech executive" with a Carnegie Mellon degree and an MBA, lots of men were off the table for her. She wasn't going to be considering construction workers, soldiers, truck drivers, police officers, or any number of blue collar-men whose levels of education and socio-economic standing felt inferior to her "highly educated" self.

This informs the bit earlier where she laments the fact that men hate relationships in which women outearn/outwork them and that men and women are less likely to pair up when that is the case. Men know that women want men at or above their socio-economic/intellectual level and when faced with men below that level they, like this woman, tend to shy away or show dissatisfaction. If I enter a relationship with you and you establish yourself in a place that is above me professionally, financially, and so on, I have now become the very man you openly admit to shying away from: they guy who is below your level and eligible only to be "qualified out".

Why would a guy sign up for that? It doesn't work for men and, in this author's own admission, it doesn't really seem to work for women either. Nobody wants it, so why assume (as so many highly educated women do) that its lack of prevalence or acceptance is down to patriarchal sexism or male chauvinism?

[polar]

You guys, I've got an amazing app idea: it'll be like match.com, only it will match male Ivy grads, financiers, and sports stars with models, gymnasts, and ballet dancers! No men under $1m net worth and no women over 120 lbs or 25 years old.

Now, who knows some VC investors?

[ThrustMaster]

Imho men in that category don't need a dating app if they have any modicum of style
Or game. And US$1m is chicken feed in most costal markets in the US...