Press "PandaGuides" above to follow us!
A recent matchmaking event in Hangzhou, known as the "Thousand-Person Matchmaking Conference," has captured widespread attention - but for an unexpected reason: the near-total absence of male participants. While some reports claimed no men attended, the truth is that only a handful showed up, and many left early after assessing the situation. This begs the question: why was male participation so low?
One primary factor discouraging men was the event's fee structure. While women were allowed to participate for free, men were charged steep fees, with tiered pricing ranging from ¥600 to ¥1,200, depending on their "level." This led many men to question whether paying more would genuinely increase their chances of finding a compatible partner.
As one netizen sarcastically noted, "Is a ¥1,200 fee supposed to guarantee meeting top-quality women? The best dishes are never leftovers." Critics argued that such a setup alienates men and reinforces a transactional view of relationships.
Historically, matchmaking events offered free or discounted entry for men to balance gender ratios, given that such gatherings often saw more men than women. However, times have changed, with growing numbers of women struggling to find suitable matches. In response, this event seemingly attempted to profit from the situation by imposing higher charges on men - an approach that backfired.
Another deterrent was the stringent requirements for male participants. Men were expected to be aged 20-45, own property or a car (with proof), and have either ¥300,000 in savings or an annual salary exceeding ¥200,000, supported by bank statements or pay slips. In contrast, the criteria for women were far more lenient: aged 20-38 and "gentle and virtuous."
Such glaring disparities sparked backlash online, with one commenter labeling the event a "parasitic conference," adding, "They’re all waiting for hosts, but none showed up. How strange!"
The stringent demands left men feeling exploited. Wealthier men saw no need to attend, while those who didn't meet the financial thresholds were effectively excluded. Even middle-class men, who might have participated, chose to avoid what they saw as a blatant money-grab.
The situation reflects broader societal changes. Over the past decade, materialism and "gold digger" stereotypes have increasingly colored discussions around relationships. Influencers promoting these ideals have warped societal values, prioritizing financial gain over genuine connection.
Recent scandals, such as the cases involving Zhai Xinxin and the so-called "fat cat" incident, have further heightened male wariness. These women, often highly educated and well-employed, allegedly manipulated men for financial gain, fostering distrust in relationships.
For many men, the fear of encountering a "gold digger" has led to greater caution in dating. The term "gold digger festival" has even been coined to describe matchmaking events like this one, where men feel they are merely targets for financial exploitation.
The Hangzhou event has drawn a flood of comments online, with many men sharing their disillusionment. One attendee described it as "one of the dumbest things I’ve ever done," summarizing the experience as "paying to be humiliated."
Others joked about the lure of free food at such events. "My decision to attend depends entirely on whether there’s free barbecue and drinks," quipped one man.
