I just happened today to remember an article from The Atlantic in 2018 when a client asked me if he was “shooting out of his league.” The article was called “Dude, She’s (Exactly 25 Percent) Out of Your League.” The study discussed both men and women’s desirability, in addition to the desirability of those they want to date, defined in terms of “leagues.”
I personally hate the expression, but a “league” when it comes to dating is, put simply, a quantification of someone’s attractiveness. So, for example, if I deem myself a “7” on the scale of 1 to 10, one being the most unattractive (think Ursula from "The Little Mermaid"… though she has a certain appeal) and 10 being Zendaya (my girl crush), then anyone who is an 8 or above is “out of my league.” It’s not scientific, obviously, and it’s superficial as heck. But we all rate people, including ourselves. How accurate, though, are we at determining our own desirability?
As a note, luckily, the study describes a league as “not different tiers of hotness, but a single ascending hierarchy of desirability.” If this is the case, then at least “desirability” might include some less superficial (and more earned) attributes, like level of education and wit, which you’d never know from just looking at someone’s exterior.
Regardless, the main finding in the article was that “…most online-dating users tend to message people exactly 25 percent more desirable than they are.”
Does this finding mean we first rank ourselves internally and then look for people better? It seems that’s what the study implies. It’s no wonder response rates are so low on dating sites, especially if most people know going in that chances are slim. And it’s much easier to reach out to someone online than it is to walk up to this “25% more desirable” person at a bar because rejection comes in the form of a non-response. No harm, no foul.
But maybe the conclusion isn’t what it seems. Something I constantly notice in working with clients of all ages and desirability, as it were, is most clients do not accurately assess what they are putting out into the world, or self-awareness. For example, about 95% of my clients over 55 tell me that “other people my age [generally of the other gender] don’t look as good as I do… or are just plain old.” Obviously that can’t always be the case. So I have to wonder how self-aware people actually are about their league, as the article would indicate, or how blind we are to our own shortcomings. Do people think they are on par with these “aspirational” online daters they’re interested in? Maybe so. This means that everyone has a 25% inflated view of self. Is that confident or delusional? You tell me.
Many men come to me expressing interest in a woman significantly younger and always “fit.” I have to, point blank, tell some people that those women are likely looking for partners closer to their own age who have also led an active and healthy lifestyle. (I give tough love, but I’m pretty nice about it.) Conversely, I have clients who have never been married telling me that they won’t date someone who has… wait for it… never been married.
If you want to shoot for someone amazing, make sure you’re amazing yourself, whatever that means to you. As I tell my clients, it’s important that you hold yourself to the same standard you hold your desired partner. And the only way to know what standard that is would be to look inward.
