I definitely agree, internet dating should be viewed as a supplement to in-person interaction and attempting to meet people that way, not a replacement.
Dating is mostly a numbers game. The more people you meet and interact with, the higher your chance of finding that special someone (or getting laid, if that's your rhing).
A friend of mine in law school had a reputation for being succesful with women. But his success rate wasn't higher than most guys, it was just that he would try and chat up pretty much any woman he found attractive. He didn't seem to have any fear of rejection.
A complaint a lot of people have is that it's tougher to meet people once you graduate from college. Which is true because you don't have as many opportunities to meet new people in a variety of socially-friendly settings.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
So just because they have some degree of interest in some outdoor activity, which they may or may not want you to participate in with them, that's a deal breaker?
So just because they have some degree of interest in some outdoor activity, which they may or may not want you to participate in with them, that's a deal breaker?
You're doing it wrong.
Yeah, that's pretty much what it came off as. I mean, if the person I was dating took part in an activity that I didn't particularly enjoy, it wouldn't be a dealbreaker (unless it was like....male prostitution, or something :P ). I'd either also take part to see if I'd like doing it with them, or let them take a friend/do it by themselves.
What I do get is the opportunity to view and be viewed by people outside of the areas I spend 95% of my time (work, gym, apt complex, grocery store, local bar). Maybe they contact me, maybe I contact them, maybe nothing happens. On the off chance no one messages me and no one I message ever replies it just means that I don't meet people that I would never meet in my normal life anyway. The horror! The upside is that I have a profile that is always potentially working for me while I doing otherthings like working, sleeeping, watching tv etc. For free. While I can also pursue other means of meeting women at the same time if I so choose.
So just because they have some degree of interest in some outdoor activity, which they may or may not want you to participate in with them, that's a deal breaker?
You're doing it wrong.
Yeah, that's pretty much what it came off as. I mean, if the person I was dating took part in an activity that I didn't particularly enjoy, it wouldn't be a dealbreaker (unless it was like....male prostitution, or something :P ). I'd either also take part to see if I'd like doing it with them, or let them take a friend/do it by themselves.
That's the way I look at it. I mean, I get that you should have some common ground, but I'd get bored quick if we both liked the exact same things and didn't have anything different. But find me a girl into working on cars...:winky:
What I do get is the opportunity to view and be viewed by people outside of the areas I spend 95% of my time (work, gym, apt complex, grocery store, local bar). Maybe they contact me, maybe I contact them, maybe nothing happens. On the off chance no one messages me and no one I message ever replies it just means that I don't meet people that I would never meet in my normal life anyway. The horror! The upside is that I have a profile that is always potentially working for me while I doing otherthings like working, sleeeping, watching tv etc. For free. While I can also pursue other means of meeting women at the same time if I so choose.
this should be in the OP
I concur.
:v
Can you fix my grammar errors? "I doing" should be I'm doing, "otherthings" should be two words. Stupid phone typing with a less than functional spacebar!
What I do get is the opportunity to view and be viewed by people outside of the areas I spend 95% of my time (work, gym, apt complex, grocery store, local bar). Maybe they contact me, maybe I contact them, maybe nothing happens. On the off chance no one messages me and no one I message ever replies it just means that I don't meet people that I would never meet in my normal life anyway. The horror! The upside is that I have a profile that is always potentially working for me while I doing otherthings like working, sleeeping, watching tv etc. For free. While I can also pursue other means of meeting women at the same time if I so choose.
this should be in the OP
I concur.
:v
Can you fix my grammar errors? "I doing" should be I'm doing, "otherthings" should be two words. Stupid phone typing with a less than functional spacebar!
Considering that was done on a phone it's pretty damned good.
So you want a story about an interesting trip one took; sarcastic comments about one's self; various anecdotes; one's likes, dislikes, aspirations, et cetera; emoticons; and liberal use of exclamatory sentences? AND you want it short?
Well, which one? You can't do all of that in four sentences.
If they like your picture, you'll get a response. If they don't, you won't. That's how it works. You can write complete shit and if they like your picture, they'll reply.
If you write something brilliant there's a chance that it might tip things into your favour in terms of getting a reply, but it's negligible. So negligible that we can discount it entirely.
I recommend writing three sentences. One sentence referencing something in her profile (to show that you read it), one sentence about yourself, and a third sentence for something witty and/or exciting. That's it.
If you write something long, you're just wasting your time and looking desperate/obsessive/stalker-like. Decisions are made on the photo, after all. So don't expend all your creative juices on somebody who very well may not reply. That just makes you look sad.
Also don't write "hi". That looks like spam that you're sending to hundreds of random people and in all likelihood that's probably the case.
So yeah, my protip is three sentences.
If you actually believe all of this, you're in for some disappointment.
Let's just say that this post is full of so much wrong that I don't even know where to begin pointing out how wrong you are.
What? Point it out. Writing a long profile makes you look needy and desperate. I would say decisions are 75% made on the photo. Our best example of this here is tardcore. If we put his profile up with rubbish or bland text, I guarantee you he'd get as many (or more, as it would appeal to an even lower common denominator than OKCupid's usual) positive responses as he does now. This is more true for men, who will msg a pretty woman with the IQ of a cucumber, but it's also true for women, it's just that A) the kind of picture that works is probably different, and a really, really dumb profile can turn a lot of women off regardless.
For women it's going to be a lot based on the photo, and the profile is more something that you can screw up to DQ yourself than it is going to be something that will save you from terrible photos.
So you want a story about an interesting trip one took; sarcastic comments about one's self; various anecdotes; one's likes, dislikes, aspirations, et cetera; emoticons; and liberal use of exclamatory sentences? AND you want it short?
Well, which one? You can't do all of that in four sentences.
If they like your picture, you'll get a response. If they don't, you won't. That's how it works. You can write complete shit and if they like your picture, they'll reply.
If you write something brilliant there's a chance that it might tip things into your favour in terms of getting a reply, but it's negligible. So negligible that we can discount it entirely.
I recommend writing three sentences. One sentence referencing something in her profile (to show that you read it), one sentence about yourself, and a third sentence for something witty and/or exciting. That's it.
If you write something long, you're just wasting your time and looking desperate/obsessive/stalker-like. Decisions are made on the photo, after all. So don't expend all your creative juices on somebody who very well may not reply. That just makes you look sad.
Also don't write "hi". That looks like spam that you're sending to hundreds of random people and in all likelihood that's probably the case.
So yeah, my protip is three sentences.
If you actually believe all of this, you're in for some disappointment.
Let's just say that this post is full of so much wrong that I don't even know where to begin pointing out how wrong you are.
What? Point it out. Writing a long profile makes you look needy and desperate. I would say decisions are 75% made on the photo. Our best example of this here is tardcore. If we put his profile up with rubbish or bland text, I guarantee you he'd get as many (or more, as it would appeal to an even lower common denominator than OKCupid's usual) positive responses as he does now. This is more true for men, who will msg a pretty woman with the IQ of a cucumber, but it's also true for women, it's just that A) the kind of picture that works is probably different, and a really, really dumb profile can turn a lot of women off regardless.
For women it's going to be a lot based on the photo, and the profile is more something that you can screw up to DQ yourself than it is going to be something that will save you from terrible photos.
this is completely wrong
if this was really the case I'd be chatting up a hundred girls a day
some of the other shit is stupid but yeah, i think it's pretty obvious that being really good looking will lessen the need for other positive attributes in your profile
So you want a story about an interesting trip one took; sarcastic comments about one's self; various anecdotes; one's likes, dislikes, aspirations, et cetera; emoticons; and liberal use of exclamatory sentences? AND you want it short?
Well, which one? You can't do all of that in four sentences.
If they like your picture, you'll get a response. If they don't, you won't. That's how it works. You can write complete shit and if they like your picture, they'll reply.
If you write something brilliant there's a chance that it might tip things into your favour in terms of getting a reply, but it's negligible. So negligible that we can discount it entirely.
I recommend writing three sentences. One sentence referencing something in her profile (to show that you read it), one sentence about yourself, and a third sentence for something witty and/or exciting. That's it.
If you write something long, you're just wasting your time and looking desperate/obsessive/stalker-like. Decisions are made on the photo, after all. So don't expend all your creative juices on somebody who very well may not reply. That just makes you look sad.
Also don't write "hi". That looks like spam that you're sending to hundreds of random people and in all likelihood that's probably the case.
So yeah, my protip is three sentences.
If you actually believe all of this, you're in for some disappointment.
Let's just say that this post is full of so much wrong that I don't even know where to begin pointing out how wrong you are.
What? Point it out. Writing a long profile makes you look needy and desperate. I would say decisions are 75% made on the photo. Our best example of this here is tardcore. If we put his profile up with rubbish or bland text, I guarantee you he'd get as many (or more, as it would appeal to an even lower common denominator than OKCupid's usual) positive responses as he does now. This is more true for men, who will msg a pretty woman with the IQ of a cucumber, but it's also true for women, it's just that A) the kind of picture that works is probably different, and a really, really dumb profile can turn a lot of women off regardless.
For women it's going to be a lot based on the photo, and the profile is more something that you can screw up to DQ yourself than it is going to be something that will save you from terrible photos.
First, the conversation we were having was not about profile writing. It was about what messages should entail if they are going to get noticed and/or responded to. Now that that's out of the way, we can get to the substance of the post.
Spacemilk has already stated that her post was not meant to be used for every message ever, it was meant to be a catch-all to explain what you should do in certain situations. I won't reiterate or quote the post because it's back there for your perusal.
On your comment about decisions being made completely if not all on the photo, the only thing we're going to get here is anecdotal evidence at best. You can't prove your side, we can't prove our side, the only thing I can tell you is go take a look at what EVERY female in this thread has said about internet dating. Now go look at the huge emphasis that all of us place on the content in their profile, and go look at all the stories people post here about how they changed a paragraph, a few words, or a section, and they're getting so many more messages! The claim about photo being the major decider in these decisions is bullshit and you know it. In the case of LearnedHand's post, he claims it's COMPLETELY about the photo. Why do we even give profile writing tips in this thread, why don't we just tell everyone to hire a professional photographer and not worry about their profile? Oh yeah, because profile content matters.
And since that was pretty much the entire content of LearnedHand's post, besides where he AGREED with Spacemilk's post, I think that pretty much covers it.
So you want a story about an interesting trip one took; sarcastic comments about one's self; various anecdotes; one's likes, dislikes, aspirations, et cetera; emoticons; and liberal use of exclamatory sentences? AND you want it short?
Well, which one? You can't do all of that in four sentences.
If they like your picture, you'll get a response. If they don't, you won't. That's how it works. You can write complete shit and if they like your picture, they'll reply.
If you write something brilliant there's a chance that it might tip things into your favour in terms of getting a reply, but it's negligible. So negligible that we can discount it entirely.
I recommend writing three sentences. One sentence referencing something in her profile (to show that you read it), one sentence about yourself, and a third sentence for something witty and/or exciting. That's it.
If you write something long, you're just wasting your time and looking desperate/obsessive/stalker-like. Decisions are made on the photo, after all. So don't expend all your creative juices on somebody who very well may not reply. That just makes you look sad.
Also don't write "hi". That looks like spam that you're sending to hundreds of random people and in all likelihood that's probably the case.
So yeah, my protip is three sentences.
If you actually believe all of this, you're in for some disappointment.
Let's just say that this post is full of so much wrong that I don't even know where to begin pointing out how wrong you are.
What? Point it out. Writing a long profile makes you look needy and desperate. I would say decisions are 75% made on the photo. Our best example of this here is tardcore. If we put his profile up with rubbish or bland text, I guarantee you he'd get as many (or more, as it would appeal to an even lower common denominator than OKCupid's usual) positive responses as he does now. This is more true for men, who will msg a pretty woman with the IQ of a cucumber, but it's also true for women, it's just that A) the kind of picture that works is probably different, and a really, really dumb profile can turn a lot of women off regardless.
For women it's going to be a lot based on the photo, and the profile is more something that you can screw up to DQ yourself than it is going to be something that will save you from terrible photos.
First, the conversation we were having was not about profile writing. It was about what messages should entail if they are going to get noticed and/or responded to. Now that that's out of the way, we can get to the substance of the post.
Spacemilk has already stated that her post was not meant to be used for every message ever, it was meant to be a catch-all to explain what you should do in certain situations. I won't reiterate or quote the post because it's back there for your perusal.
On your comment about decisions being made completely if not all on the photo, the only thing we're going to get here is anecdotal evidence at best. You can't prove your side, we can't prove our side, the only thing I can tell you is go take a look at what EVERY female in this thread has said about internet dating. Now go look at the huge emphasis that all of us place on the content in their profile, and go look at all the stories people post here about how they changed a paragraph, a few words, or a section, and they're getting so many more messages! The claim about photo being the major decider in these decisions is bullshit and you know it. In the case of LearnedHand's post, he claims it's COMPLETELY about the photo. Why do we even give profile writing tips in this thread, why don't we just tell everyone to hire a professional photographer and not worry about their profile? Oh yeah, because profile content matters.
And since that was pretty much the entire content of LearnedHand's post, besides where he AGREED with Spacemilk's post, I think that pretty much covers it.
because most of us aren't ridiculously good looking
Ran into a girl today. We had chatted on PoF, met once before classes, and then nothing. I assumed she didn't like me.
Turns out she has a ridiculous number of classes this semester crammed into three days a week because she's doing a practicum the other two days. So, I guess I assumed wrong. That was a small self-esteem boost.
Ok here are my womanly two cents about this discussion, other women, please chime in because obviously what I like or think is not universal:
First of all, yes, the profile picture does matter to women. BUT! READ ON!
Secondly, what one woman finds attractive is WAYYY different from what another woman finds attractive. Woman truly do operate differently. One woman will prefer ectomorphs and another woman will prefer beefy mcbeeferstein. I honestly believe that more women prefer a wider range of body styles than guys do, i.e., it is much easier to find two girls who prefer totally different looking men than it is to find two guys who prefer totally different looking women. It seems like the criteria for guys is often "don't be overweight", the end. For girls a lot more goes into it and it's very much personal taste. If you don't attract hot girl #384 that you've messaged, that doesn't mean every girl finds you ugly. (that said, things like well-groomed hair (be it long or short) and good hygiene appeal to pretty much every girl)
Thirdly, I have seen my fair share of hot-guy profiles and I've gotten my fair share of hot-guy messages. Now, I know I'm a snob about writing and message quality (I even have a note about grammar in messages in my profile), but shitty profiles and shitty messages do not cause my panties to melt automatically if the guy is hot. I'm flat-out not going to message a guy or respond if his profile is poorly written. I particularly don't message a guy who has barely filled out his profile, because I don't know anything about him.
tl;dr: Yes pictures matter. But women have such variegated tastes that you shouldn't worry about this. Your profile is going to matter more.
i have no doubt that you're being honest about your tastes but i think people- not 'ladies' or whatever is the sexist flavor of the day- generally accord a lot more value to appearance than you do. it doesn't mean give up, fat people, or too bad, no partners for you, people with bad skin... but i think there are a lot of nice platitudes that may be meaningful but are also sort of in denial about the fact that appearance is huge to a lot of people.
i've gotten some sweet, thoughtful messages- and approaches in person- that made me smile but that i wouldn't entertain because the person wasn't physically attractive, to me. i mean, that can make me whatever kind of person, but i definitely don't think it makes me in the minority.
anyway i guess my point isn't really anything detractive from your position- people should put effort into their profiles and the way they comport themselves, and certainly no one should try to coast through on looks. but i think 'be interesting! it's nice to look good but ultimately that isn't what brings in the partners' is incorrect. in my experience it's very much the both of them. i won't date a bimbo, but i definitely won't date a woman i find unattractive- and taste in personalities vary as much as taste in looks.
because most of us aren't ridiculously good looking
Disclaimer: Men are often completely shallow too. I'm by no means trying to lump all of the picture bias on woman here, and believe me, it pains me to even glancingly agree with LH.
Actual post: I do think this is part of my problem (I can't speak for the other gents in this thread), because while I don't think my pics are terrible, I'm also not Gods Gift To Womankind Given Flesh And Form, so for all my (I like to think) witty messages and attention to detail within profiles, it still feels like an uphill battle.
While I've been making changes for me (in terms of eating better, exercising more and improving my lifestyle), I am not afraid to admit that I'm also making an effort to get into better shape in hopes of being more likely to attract a partner, especially one whom I find attractive in return. I can be honest and recognize that by any standard I was unacceptably overweight at the start of the year, and with a lot of effort I've dropped 40-45 pounds (and even admit this in my Most Private Thing, though this may or may not be a good idea) and axed older pictures not because they showed a smaller me, but because they showed a larger one. Which reminds me, I need to go murder one from December of last year. Has it helped? I'm not sure, but I'm happy with the changes so far and continue into the end of the first half of my 2 year plan to get into shape quite pleased with the results to date.
In conclusion, while wit, charm, confidence and intelligence are all important, I don't think it's entirely reasonable to just ignore the fact that attractive pictures can and will make up for other shortcomings. Is this always true? NO. There are plenty of obese men and women with stereotypically 'attractive' partners who love them all the same, but at the same time I daresay that these are the exception, rather than the rule. Even if we assume that being a bit behind the appearance/physique bell curve isn't a handicap, per se, I have a hard time believing it's doing one any favours either. And for all that we can say "just be witty, and funny and awesome!" doesn't make it so. Hell, I daresay that it's quite possibly harder to change ones level of wit or humour or intelligence than it is to hit the gym regularly, so for those of us who are at least of average appearance and perhaps average'ish personality and mental qualities, well, it's hard at times not to feel a little boned on both ends.
And as an aside to Spawn, while the content of any change may or may not boost ones responses, also keep in mind that at least with OKC, a change to a profile (newly answered questions, changed essays, etc) also bumps your profile up to be viewed on more people's front pages as well. We'll probably never know how much of an effect a given change actually had, or how much it was simply from being an active user and thus being put forth to more people by the system. As we've noted with little dissent, it is after all a numbers game.
ITT: Forar's back to committing Big Block Of Text Attrocities.
He blames Riz. >.>
Edit: Organichu and I are on the same wavelength... I think. ^5.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
i mean, i'm not saying people should be bitter and self-depreciating about their looks, or anything- or think that hope is lost. but, and i say this recognizing that our society sort of engenders and then fosters body image issues in a lot of people, i do think it's silly how we kind of bank in the opposite direction to 'counteract' it. a lot of people go
'i like literature and culture, so it's a necessity for me that my partner is well read and comprehends what he reads'
and no one blinks an eye. that's something you can work on- the reading, like losing weight- and something you are, to an extent, gifted with... a family who sprung for braces, or a good schooling that lets you understand literature. we have a lot of expectations for our partners- or i feel most of us do, anyway- and i don't really fault any of them.
i think i'm a very, very average looking dude, and i get laid pretty often. i'm not screaming of ragnarok or anything. i'm only saying that attraction is complex, and can involve a sense of humor and a list of favorite movies and a smile and a waist size. saying 'well looks are only a small part' is something that, while i thin might make certain people feel better, probably isn't entirely true.
all i can think of right now is some other community on the internet, in a subsection of a bodybuilding forum, with some guy going
"look, i know you're dumb and you can't pronounce the word 'othello', but some women out there care a lot more about your muscles than these minor issues with your brain. keep your chin up, bro, ok?"
Ok here are my womanly two cents about this discussion, other women, please chime in because obviously what I like or think is not universal:
First of all, yes, the profile picture does matter to women. BUT! READ ON!
Secondly, what one woman finds attractive is WAYYY different from what another woman finds attractive. Woman truly do operate differently. One woman will prefer ectomorphs and another woman will prefer beefy mcbeeferstein. I honestly believe that more women prefer a wider range of body styles than guys do, i.e., it is much easier to find two girls who prefer totally different looking men than it is to find two guys who prefer totally different looking women. It seems like the criteria for guys is often "don't be overweight", the end. For girls a lot more goes into it and it's very much personal taste. If you don't attract hot girl #384 that you've messaged, that doesn't mean every girl finds you ugly. (that said, things like well-groomed hair (be it long or short) and good hygiene appeal to pretty much every girl)
Thirdly, I have seen my fair share of hot-guy profiles and I've gotten my fair share of hot-guy messages. Now, I know I'm a snob about writing and message quality (I even have a note about grammar in messages in my profile), but shitty profiles and shitty messages do not cause my panties to melt automatically if the guy is hot. I'm flat-out not going to message a guy or respond if his profile is poorly written. I particularly don't message a guy who has barely filled out his profile, because I don't know anything about him.
tl;dr: Yes pictures matter. But women have such variegated tastes that you shouldn't worry about this. Your profile is going to matter more.
I tend to agree. Certainly, I have to find the guy attractive, but what I find attractive and what my sister finds attractive is totally different. This goes for my girl friends as well. Some of them have husbands that they have always found quite good looking and attractive. I don't really see it. I mean, they're decent looking, as far as I'm concerned, but I don't find them attractive at all.
I've absolutely not replied to messages from guys I thought were quite good looking simply because their profile was almost non-existent, filled with spelling and grammar errors, or just plain "What?" Good looking with or without jobs and monies cannot overcome that negative for me.
tl;dr: Attractiveness matters, what that means for everyone is different; shitty messages and profiles are usually deal-breakers regardless of the hotness level of guy.
Edit: Drat. Cross-posted with a long agreeing post with people who were posting about long agreeing posts. :-P
I like how we're all writing these long and drawn out posts explaining why we agree with each other.
For the record, I agree with all of you.
Edit: Except LearnedHand. I don't agree with him.
Let me direct you to my 347 page Treatise on Why I Mostly Concur With Your Equally Valid if Somewhat Differing From My Own Viewpoints and Think We May in Fact Be Communicating On a Similar Wavelength of Communication: Volume 1 of 5
In other news I just sent off my first real attempt at a message since I restarted OKcupid, so now we can all eagerly await my non reply and then debate on how much better my profile/picture would need to be in order to warrant a response.
A lot of people are intimidated by attractive people too. I remember this girl I was talking to on plenty of fish(don't use anymore) told me that if she met me in real life she'd be too nervous or intimidated to speak to me.
Same applies to attractive women. I know I can still get shy when I see someone I find really attractive.
Really though, I think it's a bit of an overestimation to imply that being attractive just makes your life go better. It can enhance certain social aspects. People will have more patience with you. Kinder in general. You can be an asshole and manipulate less attractive people, small favors, etc. Beyond certain layers of social function though, it's not going to simply put you into a greater social sphere(whatever that may be). You still have to be capable, sociable and have other positive attributes.
I have other attractive guy friends and they aren't swimming in female attention. One friend in particular dates what I wouldn't classify as more attractive than average women. Not unattractive but not people that would make others take notice.
Anyways, not necessarily directed at anyone here, but this discussion about physical attractiveness made me think about it.
being attractive just makes your life go better. It can enhance certain social aspects. People will have more patience with you. Kinder in general. You can be an asshole and manipulate less attractive people, small favors, etc.
For this reason I intentionally make life harder on random attractive people whenever I can. I figure it's a small balancing force to whatever advantages their looks have given them.
Okay, I can't actually back that up, but while I'm aware that there are negative aspects to a pleasing appearance (extra unwanted attention, preconceptions on ones mental faculties or lack thereof, etc), I believe some studies have shown that this is actually the case to a degree (attractive people got higher marks in school (or at least more attention in class), were paid more, treated better, etc).
Fake edit: a quick google search hasn't shown me any of the studies in particular, but there is a non-scientific msnbc article on the matter that refers to someone who claims to have done several scientific studies on the matter.
being attractive just makes your life go better. It can enhance certain social aspects. People will have more patience with you. Kinder in general. You can be an asshole and manipulate less attractive people, small favors, etc.
For this reason I intentionally make life harder on random attractive people whenever I can. I figure it's a small balancing force to whatever advantages their looks have given them.
Okay, I can't actually back that up, but while I'm aware that there are negative aspects to a pleasing appearance (extra unwanted attention, preconceptions on ones mental faculties or lack thereof, etc), I believe some studies have shown that this is actually the case to a degree (attractive people got higher marks in school (or at least more attention in class), were paid more, treated better, etc).
Fake edit: a quick google search hasn't shown me any of the studies in particular, but there is a non-scientific msnbc article on the matter that refers to someone who claims to have done several scientific studies on the matter.
There's a ~3% wage premium for being good looking. Another statistically significant boost for people who are tall (though that might have some overlap obviously). Then there's the issues of women making $0.87 for a dollar's worth of work and things like race and so forth with black people who have 'white' names being more likely to get interviewed and hired at places and so on. It's really kind of disheartening when you realize just how much forces beyond your control impact you significantly over the course of a lifetime.
Then again I'm a white 6'-0" average-ish looking dude; so pay me, bitches.
moniker on
0
Options
JeanHeartbroken papa bearGatineau, QuébecRegistered Userregular
edited October 2010
Eh, a girl I had talked to last year (tough never actually met) recontacted me out of the blue anddddd I have a date tomorrow haha. Talk about unexpected, I didn't tought i'd hear from her ever again.
Jean on
"You won't destroy us, You won't destroy our democracy. We are a small but proud nation. No one can bomb us to silence. No one can scare us from being Norway. This evening and tonight, we'll take care of each other. That's what we do best when attacked'' - Jens Stoltenberg
Posts
A friend of mine in law school had a reputation for being succesful with women. But his success rate wasn't higher than most guys, it was just that he would try and chat up pretty much any woman he found attractive. He didn't seem to have any fear of rejection.
A complaint a lot of people have is that it's tougher to meet people once you graduate from college. Which is true because you don't have as many opportunities to meet new people in a variety of socially-friendly settings.
Rigorous Scholarship
You're doing it wrong.
:winky:
Yeah, that's pretty much what it came off as. I mean, if the person I was dating took part in an activity that I didn't particularly enjoy, it wouldn't be a dealbreaker (unless it was like....male prostitution, or something :P ). I'd either also take part to see if I'd like doing it with them, or let them take a friend/do it by themselves.
Check out my art! Buy some prints!
I concur.
:v
That's the way I look at it. I mean, I get that you should have some common ground, but I'd get bored quick if we both liked the exact same things and didn't have anything different. But find me a girl into working on cars...:winky:
Can you fix my grammar errors? "I doing" should be I'm doing, "otherthings" should be two words. Stupid phone typing with a less than functional spacebar!
Considering that was done on a phone it's pretty damned good.
Nah, too cliche. Still, I couldn't think of anything better to title this. How's your week been, anything exciting happen?
Ohh, and I'm tony. Hi
My mom's been crying for hours since you haven't called her back. She misses you.
3ds friend code: 2981-6032-4118
This explains your other posts so well.
My first message to a girl who had half of her profile as "I want to/like to/am fucking your mom"
She's also the one with the boyfriend, who I did bad things with.
3ds friend code: 2981-6032-4118
I had so many things I was planning to type in response to the LH posts. You've said it all in one sentence. haha
wish list
Steam wishlist
Etsy wishlist
I've only gotten one nonresponse, out of like 20 or so tries. I'm pretty good at that, I think.
Do you tell them you're hung like christ?
I like to leave that as a pleasant surprise.
What? Point it out. Writing a long profile makes you look needy and desperate. I would say decisions are 75% made on the photo. Our best example of this here is tardcore. If we put his profile up with rubbish or bland text, I guarantee you he'd get as many (or more, as it would appeal to an even lower common denominator than OKCupid's usual) positive responses as he does now. This is more true for men, who will msg a pretty woman with the IQ of a cucumber, but it's also true for women, it's just that A) the kind of picture that works is probably different, and
For women it's going to be a lot based on the photo, and the profile is more something that you can screw up to DQ yourself than it is going to be something that will save you from terrible photos.
this is completely wrong
if this was really the case I'd be chatting up a hundred girls a day
people like good looking people
...I just got that joke... wow. That is wrong on so many levels, but hilarious.
First, the conversation we were having was not about profile writing. It was about what messages should entail if they are going to get noticed and/or responded to. Now that that's out of the way, we can get to the substance of the post.
Spacemilk has already stated that her post was not meant to be used for every message ever, it was meant to be a catch-all to explain what you should do in certain situations. I won't reiterate or quote the post because it's back there for your perusal.
On your comment about decisions being made completely if not all on the photo, the only thing we're going to get here is anecdotal evidence at best. You can't prove your side, we can't prove our side, the only thing I can tell you is go take a look at what EVERY female in this thread has said about internet dating. Now go look at the huge emphasis that all of us place on the content in their profile, and go look at all the stories people post here about how they changed a paragraph, a few words, or a section, and they're getting so many more messages! The claim about photo being the major decider in these decisions is bullshit and you know it. In the case of LearnedHand's post, he claims it's COMPLETELY about the photo. Why do we even give profile writing tips in this thread, why don't we just tell everyone to hire a professional photographer and not worry about their profile? Oh yeah, because profile content matters.
And since that was pretty much the entire content of LearnedHand's post, besides where he AGREED with Spacemilk's post, I think that pretty much covers it.
because most of us aren't ridiculously good looking
Turns out she has a ridiculous number of classes this semester crammed into three days a week because she's doing a practicum the other two days. So, I guess I assumed wrong. That was a small self-esteem boost.
First of all, yes, the profile picture does matter to women. BUT! READ ON!
Secondly, what one woman finds attractive is WAYYY different from what another woman finds attractive. Woman truly do operate differently. One woman will prefer ectomorphs and another woman will prefer beefy mcbeeferstein. I honestly believe that more women prefer a wider range of body styles than guys do, i.e., it is much easier to find two girls who prefer totally different looking men than it is to find two guys who prefer totally different looking women. It seems like the criteria for guys is often "don't be overweight", the end. For girls a lot more goes into it and it's very much personal taste. If you don't attract hot girl #384 that you've messaged, that doesn't mean every girl finds you ugly. (that said, things like well-groomed hair (be it long or short) and good hygiene appeal to pretty much every girl)
Thirdly, I have seen my fair share of hot-guy profiles and I've gotten my fair share of hot-guy messages. Now, I know I'm a snob about writing and message quality (I even have a note about grammar in messages in my profile), but shitty profiles and shitty messages do not cause my panties to melt automatically if the guy is hot. I'm flat-out not going to message a guy or respond if his profile is poorly written. I particularly don't message a guy who has barely filled out his profile, because I don't know anything about him.
tl;dr: Yes pictures matter. But women have such variegated tastes that you shouldn't worry about this. Your profile is going to matter more.
i have no doubt that you're being honest about your tastes but i think people- not 'ladies' or whatever is the sexist flavor of the day- generally accord a lot more value to appearance than you do. it doesn't mean give up, fat people, or too bad, no partners for you, people with bad skin... but i think there are a lot of nice platitudes that may be meaningful but are also sort of in denial about the fact that appearance is huge to a lot of people.
i've gotten some sweet, thoughtful messages- and approaches in person- that made me smile but that i wouldn't entertain because the person wasn't physically attractive, to me. i mean, that can make me whatever kind of person, but i definitely don't think it makes me in the minority.
anyway i guess my point isn't really anything detractive from your position- people should put effort into their profiles and the way they comport themselves, and certainly no one should try to coast through on looks. but i think 'be interesting! it's nice to look good but ultimately that isn't what brings in the partners' is incorrect. in my experience it's very much the both of them. i won't date a bimbo, but i definitely won't date a woman i find unattractive- and taste in personalities vary as much as taste in looks.
Disclaimer: Men are often completely shallow too. I'm by no means trying to lump all of the picture bias on woman here, and believe me, it pains me to even glancingly agree with LH.
Actual post: I do think this is part of my problem (I can't speak for the other gents in this thread), because while I don't think my pics are terrible, I'm also not Gods Gift To Womankind Given Flesh And Form, so for all my (I like to think) witty messages and attention to detail within profiles, it still feels like an uphill battle.
While I've been making changes for me (in terms of eating better, exercising more and improving my lifestyle), I am not afraid to admit that I'm also making an effort to get into better shape in hopes of being more likely to attract a partner, especially one whom I find attractive in return. I can be honest and recognize that by any standard I was unacceptably overweight at the start of the year, and with a lot of effort I've dropped 40-45 pounds (and even admit this in my Most Private Thing, though this may or may not be a good idea) and axed older pictures not because they showed a smaller me, but because they showed a larger one. Which reminds me, I need to go murder one from December of last year. Has it helped? I'm not sure, but I'm happy with the changes so far and continue into the end of the first half of my 2 year plan to get into shape quite pleased with the results to date.
In conclusion, while wit, charm, confidence and intelligence are all important, I don't think it's entirely reasonable to just ignore the fact that attractive pictures can and will make up for other shortcomings. Is this always true? NO. There are plenty of obese men and women with stereotypically 'attractive' partners who love them all the same, but at the same time I daresay that these are the exception, rather than the rule. Even if we assume that being a bit behind the appearance/physique bell curve isn't a handicap, per se, I have a hard time believing it's doing one any favours either. And for all that we can say "just be witty, and funny and awesome!" doesn't make it so. Hell, I daresay that it's quite possibly harder to change ones level of wit or humour or intelligence than it is to hit the gym regularly, so for those of us who are at least of average appearance and perhaps average'ish personality and mental qualities, well, it's hard at times not to feel a little boned on both ends.
And as an aside to Spawn, while the content of any change may or may not boost ones responses, also keep in mind that at least with OKC, a change to a profile (newly answered questions, changed essays, etc) also bumps your profile up to be viewed on more people's front pages as well. We'll probably never know how much of an effect a given change actually had, or how much it was simply from being an active user and thus being put forth to more people by the system. As we've noted with little dissent, it is after all a numbers game.
ITT: Forar's back to committing Big Block Of Text Attrocities.
He blames Riz. >.>
Edit: Organichu and I are on the same wavelength... I think. ^5.
'i like literature and culture, so it's a necessity for me that my partner is well read and comprehends what he reads'
and no one blinks an eye. that's something you can work on- the reading, like losing weight- and something you are, to an extent, gifted with... a family who sprung for braces, or a good schooling that lets you understand literature. we have a lot of expectations for our partners- or i feel most of us do, anyway- and i don't really fault any of them.
i think i'm a very, very average looking dude, and i get laid pretty often. i'm not screaming of ragnarok or anything. i'm only saying that attraction is complex, and can involve a sense of humor and a list of favorite movies and a smile and a waist size. saying 'well looks are only a small part' is something that, while i thin might make certain people feel better, probably isn't entirely true.
all i can think of right now is some other community on the internet, in a subsection of a bodybuilding forum, with some guy going
"look, i know you're dumb and you can't pronounce the word 'othello', but some women out there care a lot more about your muscles than these minor issues with your brain. keep your chin up, bro, ok?"
For the record, I agree with all of you.
Edit: Except LearnedHand. I don't agree with him.
That's kind of our M.O.
Clearly you never spent much time around the MMO subforum during my raiding days. That was, like, my favourite hobby.
Edit: And of course. That usually goes without saying.
I tend to agree. Certainly, I have to find the guy attractive, but what I find attractive and what my sister finds attractive is totally different. This goes for my girl friends as well. Some of them have husbands that they have always found quite good looking and attractive. I don't really see it. I mean, they're decent looking, as far as I'm concerned, but I don't find them attractive at all.
I've absolutely not replied to messages from guys I thought were quite good looking simply because their profile was almost non-existent, filled with spelling and grammar errors, or just plain "What?" Good looking with or without jobs and monies cannot overcome that negative for me.
tl;dr: Attractiveness matters, what that means for everyone is different; shitty messages and profiles are usually deal-breakers regardless of the hotness level of guy.
Edit: Drat. Cross-posted with a long agreeing post with people who were posting about long agreeing posts. :-P
wish list
Steam wishlist
Etsy wishlist
Let me direct you to my 347 page Treatise on Why I Mostly Concur With Your Equally Valid if Somewhat Differing From My Own Viewpoints and Think We May in Fact Be Communicating On a Similar Wavelength of Communication: Volume 1 of 5
Wasn't expecting 9.9 rating. My ego is sort of through the roof now.
3ds friend code: 2981-6032-4118
Same applies to attractive women. I know I can still get shy when I see someone I find really attractive.
Really though, I think it's a bit of an overestimation to imply that being attractive just makes your life go better. It can enhance certain social aspects. People will have more patience with you. Kinder in general. You can be an asshole and manipulate less attractive people, small favors, etc. Beyond certain layers of social function though, it's not going to simply put you into a greater social sphere(whatever that may be). You still have to be capable, sociable and have other positive attributes.
I have other attractive guy friends and they aren't swimming in female attention. One friend in particular dates what I wouldn't classify as more attractive than average women. Not unattractive but not people that would make others take notice.
Anyways, not necessarily directed at anyone here, but this discussion about physical attractiveness made me think about it.
For this reason I intentionally make life harder on random attractive people whenever I can. I figure it's a small balancing force to whatever advantages their looks have given them.
Okay, I can't actually back that up, but while I'm aware that there are negative aspects to a pleasing appearance (extra unwanted attention, preconceptions on ones mental faculties or lack thereof, etc), I believe some studies have shown that this is actually the case to a degree (attractive people got higher marks in school (or at least more attention in class), were paid more, treated better, etc).
Fake edit: a quick google search hasn't shown me any of the studies in particular, but there is a non-scientific msnbc article on the matter that refers to someone who claims to have done several scientific studies on the matter.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3917414
Hey, I'm on the internet and I can lie as much as I want without proof. HURRAY!
There's a ~3% wage premium for being good looking. Another statistically significant boost for people who are tall (though that might have some overlap obviously). Then there's the issues of women making $0.87 for a dollar's worth of work and things like race and so forth with black people who have 'white' names being more likely to get interviewed and hired at places and so on. It's really kind of disheartening when you realize just how much forces beyond your control impact you significantly over the course of a lifetime.
Then again I'm a white 6'-0" average-ish looking dude; so pay me, bitches.