Instead of rehashing those arguments, let's borrow an analogy instead.
Think of dating as a market, where males and females trade. Each trader has a different amount of market value. What makes up that market value is detailed well here: http://krauserpua.com/2014/01/23/tom-torero-guest-post-male-sexual-market-value/.
Rolling with the market analogy, there isn't just one universal market for dating. This is because there are high (but not insurmountable) barriers to trading market value across long distances.
Instead, we have a bunch of markets. Each one is separated to a different extent from the others, and each one has a different composition of traders in it. These two factors determine the prices and quantities at which male and female market values are traded. Since the two factors differ, the prices and quantities must differ. TL;DR:
Yes, location matters. But ...
The extent to which the two factors differ is subject to debate. How separated are dating markets? How much does the composition of traders in each market differ?
The smart trader doesn't care about these questions though. That person simply does both of the below to the most profitable extent:
1) Increasing their own market value, and,
2) Finding/creating the most separated dating market with the most favorable composition of competitors and customers.