CMV: Men who are sexually aggressive and constantly “on the prowl” seem to be much more successful at dating than cautious men
​
Speaking as a woman, there’s something I’ve noticed over the years that I think people underestimate when discussing male dating success.
The men who seem to get the most women aren’t necessarily the best-looking, richest, tallest, or highest-status men.
Very often, they’re simply the men who try the most.
And by “sexually aggressive,” I don’t mean men who ignore consent or refuse to take no for an answer. I mean men who are extremely forward, assertive, flirtatious, willing to escalate, and almost completely unafraid of rejection.
They meet a woman they like? They approach her.
Conversation is going well? They flirt.
They sense mutual attraction? They make their intentions obvious instead of spending three months wondering whether she likes them.
She rejects them? They don't spend the next two weeks analyzing what went wrong. They shrug, move on, and talk to somebody else.
I've known men who aren't particularly handsome, wealthy, charismatic, or impressive on paper, yet they're constantly dating or hooking up with women. The common denominator seems to be that they're always on the prowl. They create opportunities constantly.
Meanwhile, I've known attractive, intelligent men who can go months or years without anything happening because they're cautious. They need strong signs of interest before approaching. They fear looking creepy. They overthink rejection. They become emotionally invested in one woman before anything has even happened.
It makes me wonder whether male dating success is much more of a numbers game than people want to admit.
Imagine two otherwise identical men.
Man A approaches/flirts with 5 women in a year and succeeds with 2.
Man B approaches/flirts with 100 women and succeeds with 15.
Man B gets rejected dramatically more often, and his "success rate" is actually worse. But from the outside, everyone sees a guy who gets tons of women.
And there's another factor: rejection seems to affect these aggressive men less. They don't necessarily interpret rejection as evidence that they're unattractive. It's simply one woman saying no, so they move to the next one.
So I'm starting to think that, above a certain minimum threshold of attractiveness/social competence, fearlessness, assertiveness, volume, and willingness to risk rejection may predict a man's dating success more than looks, money, or status.
Do you agree?
And for the men here: have you actually seen your dating results improve significantly simply by approaching more women and caring less about rejection? Or does this only work for men who were attractive enough to succeed anyway?