|
|
|
|
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/1/2008 6:07:45 PM | | vegan: What's with the gradeschool set of dating laws? Are we 12 years old. Newsflash. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Your 4 may be a supermodel's 10. If your "physical law" were true that would make me a 12 because whenever I do end up dating someone they're usually at least an 8 (using your scale). These are women that have asked me out. Not once have I ever asked a girl out first. The age thing isn't carved in stone either because a lot of men and women including myself are pretty open minded on the age thing. I've been emailed by women as young as 18 and as old as 58 . Also, if someone is going to judge me because I wrote one too many sentences or one too few sentences they have issues I wouldn't want to deal with anyway. | |
|
| Internet dating: ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS!
Posted: 4/1/2008 9:09:03 PM | well, while the women here circulate with an even smaller number of men than what would happen off-line, there's always lots of free porn available and you won't have to worry how you dress, whether you shave or even have to listen to the "am I fat" questions.
:) | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/1/2008 9:20:10 PM | "You say that you've only sent out 15 e-mails. That's pathetic! You've got to work a lot harder than that." Frankie. While this is very true, I think the OP is complaining about the very fact that he has to do that and most women probably on the same level of attractiveness can just sit back, so I understand where he is coming from with this thread.
And Black Kitty, you are answering a complaint with a complaint of your own! Yeah it must suck that creep guys send you women the suggestive emails, but what do they have to do with the OP, or any other normal guy on this site. I would be willing to bet that most if not all of the men that you are so tired of hearing complain so much, are not the pervs you speak of. Furthermore, the mere fact that women get SO MANY more emails than men on this site indicates the higher statistical probability women have of actually meeting a nice man on this site based on numbers alone. I don't agree with the OP saying that women only care about the pictures, since I don't consider myself gorgeous and I have had a couple emails in the past, but the women on here do also tend to pick out of their league. Overall OP, I second everything else you say and I feel your anguish! | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/1/2008 9:25:12 PM | think this statement is absolutely true.
I feel like a nobody on this website, and in real life I do so much better but seems like online here, being a man, you have to drop your standards because women who are in your league are NOT looking for men in their league!
Honestly enough I am sure there are many men out there who are messaging only the best looking out of the lot but really if your not getting any attention at all from women in the same playing field, then there's something definitely wrong there! For example, I don't understand why I ONLY get messages from women who all seem to be universally unattractive. So its like this, if your say on a scale of attractiveness an 8 as a man, your already in trouble because all the women 7 or higher are only considering 9s and 10s out of the pool, and of course this leaves you with all the 6s and below! Are the girls who are a 6 messaging men who are also around a 6? Not really.
Summarily, its almost like you HAVE to be a model or something to get even a response from anyone halfway attractive on this website! Its a bloody conspiracy I tell ya! Thank god I have a life outside of this fantasy world... and you should too if your reading this! | |
|
| |
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/1/2008 9:36:06 PM | | I have to agree with you, and it is especially clear when you see what the women write compared to men. (I checked out men's profiles because I had a feeling this was the case.) Either women are generally not intelligent, not expressive and of limited imagination or they (as you say) just put down the bare minimum in order to get on the site and just reel them in. I hope it's the latter. And I love the women who say: "anyone can say anything on a profile, so I'm not going to say anything." WRONG! Not saying anything on a profile actually allows one to be a chameleon (sp?) and not have to commit to any personality. This way, if they see someone they are interested in, they can cater to that person's likes and dislikes. Not that this necessarily happens, but hey, if you put a little of your true self in your profile, you are exhibiting honesty, vulnerability, self-committment and trust. How about trying that, you women? | |
|
| |
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/1/2008 9:45:55 PM | To be truthfully honest most of the women's profiles here suck.
It really is true! Seems to me that sadly most of the attractive women are using ONLY their pictures as a lure and really there's no way to tell if you would get along with them or not, or even if you were there 'type!'
So what options do you have, except piecing together a short sweet concise message with nit bits of whatever you can gather from the profile, and write a message that she probably won't reply to anyways because theres plenty more messages in her inbox? I think its a tad unfair.
Level the playing field, or really all the good guys are just not going to deal with it because really writing several emails is time consuming and there are much better avenues of meeting people then online, which makes it much more attractive to get off a website like this. | |
|
| |
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/1/2008 11:37:14 PM | You are of course right that their are always exceptions, but I'm giving general rules for society which generally acts relatively similar. For example, if I pick a profile of 1 person and had 100 people rate it, there'd be scores from 1 to 10, but about 90% of the #'s would be close together. Just like the bell curve. And yes, there will always be people who will ignore age and go out with someone 20 years older/younger, but again the bell curve will show that most people will prefer a closer age. Now, I'm not saying my #'s are entirely correct, their gest guesses, but there better than just saying no statistics apply.
Also, in this case it's because the guys are all saying they get no replies and are surprised. Yeah, the girls are rude, but if they are emailing girls who statistically won't like them, who'se fault is it they get no answers. They are at least partially to blame for making the errors I outlined above.
Finally, since I posted it, I got a few more emails and what a surprise. The guys who don't get replies are CONSISTENTLY emaliing girls who are not appropriate for them. Yeah, it means appropriate to me, but I'm a girl and trying to think how the general female population on this site thinks.
Interesting test if someone takes me up on it. Show me who you're gonna email and I bet if I say it's a match, you'll get a MUCH better reply rate than you're getting on your own. Just my own hypotesis. Maybe I'm wrong, who knows. | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/1/2008 11:41:58 PM | CW35, sorry that above post for in reply to yours, forgot to put it in.
Also, I looked at your profile and I'm sure you know you are not the norm on this site. Look at your profile and look at the other guys. You are going to get a much higher response rate as you know. It is not fair for them to do what you do as they will not fare as well. They need to do it properly to get replies and properly is with a thoguht out logical system. | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/2/2008 8:44:37 AM | | vegan: I see your point about the "curve" and the way society thinks. I hate to admit people are like that but I guess you are correct in that sense. I think we all have a certain thing or things about people that are attractive to the majority. I guess the problem for me lies with people who have no ability to see beyond the physical and open themselves up to other traits which can also be attractive. For instance if someone wasn't a "goddess" or was below "average" looking, but had an attractive personality and were the nicest person you ever talked to, the looks would definitely take a back seat. I also find that a lot of different physical traits like face type, weight, etc. can all be attractive depending on the type of person and how they act. Maybe I find it all hard to fathom because I don't have an exact type of person I'm strictly attracted to. As far as my profile is concerned, most women don't seem to be attracted to it or me, but I'm lucky that usually when they are they they seem to be fairly nice people with regards to both physical and personality traits. From what I've experienced on this site I'd say I'm about a 6 on the scale. Thanks for the kind opinion, though. | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/2/2008 9:33:33 AM | Ice-ey9 you speak the truth my friend, what the hell is up with the standards girls have on here, seriously lame, I know what u mean about the 8s having to go for 6s and so on.
Vegan, I completely disagree with your point that the girls being rude are being rude because guys are messaging girls who wont statistically like them? Sure sometimes I might aim a bit out of my league in terms of looks, but only if I like the persons profile, and I will write a nice message, why not do so? All the girls on here are doing that right?
But, most of the time I message girls who I think are in league with me, so I dont think your point is valid. Also, just because a girl feels she is better than you, doesn't mean she cant appreciate you taking the time to read her profile/write a message, and simply say thanks but no thanks.
The whole point of emailing someone is because you feel they may be appropriate for you, and to find out if they feel the same. Im sure most guys will read any criteria of age etc women put in their profile before messaging them. | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/2/2008 10:10:59 AM | AMedic
I'm not in any way defending the girls. I agree with you 100% that every email (except the obnox sex type ones) should be responded too. But in reality, they're not. We can spend time insulting the girls who don't respond-and I agree with you that they'r wrong and in my opinion a girl like that isn't worth your time-but guys being guys-will probably be attrracted as usual to the obnox. **** types if they look good enough.
In any event, the case here is the guys who want replies. And if they REALLY want replies instead of just to knock the girls (very productive) they should write to girls who are in their league.
Yeah, I know you're saying you're writing to girls in your league, but from the few guys who've written me asking to look at what they've done, they've been 99% wrong. I don't know if you guys overrate yourselves or girls underrate you or you don't read things as deep as girls, but I DON'T BELIEVE objectively from girls that the girls you've written to have been "appropriate".
It's just a theory in progress, maybe i'm wrong. Send me what I've requested (anyone can) & I'll take a look. This is an interesting scientific experiment for me and hopefully for you too. Maybe we'll get some answers here. | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/2/2008 10:38:00 AM | Goddess, I'll send you mine just out of curiosity.
I wanted to point something out, though. Some of us may be attempting to date "above our station" but isn't that for us to decide? What I'm saying is that I might be a 6 or 7 in looks (or lower, truthfully I have no idea) but I'm extremely funny, well spoken, successful and intelligent. Does that not count for anything? Can I not "bump up" my score accordingly? | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/2/2008 10:58:00 AM | | Women think they can have an endless supply or suitors (well a few I know do) just by putting a profile on a dating site and they expect many messages (and seem to get them) and a few want to be way too picky about who they respond to | |
|
| |
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/2/2008 9:03:28 PM | | Good point, but let's see the reverse. There's a girl who's real smart, makes money, and very nice, but she's only a 6 and you really only like 8's (as if we can even get this specific) are you going to date her. No. So, I hate to be harsh but I can't necessarily agree with your "bump up" assessment for MOST PEOPLE. Of course there are exceptions, but then this test is about the GENERAL RULE, not the exceptions, since you guys keep claiming you're sending hundreds of emails to "appropriate girls" and not getting replies. Thus, exceptions don't count. | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/3/2008 3:51:03 AM | Eborys,
I feel your pain. It's funny how some really good looking women put virtually no effort into their profile and yet are on 50+ members' favourites lists. It seems that guys have to work so much harder. I'm not being bitter at all. That's life, I guess. But I really don't understand why some guys add girls on their favourites list when all they have to go on is just a few hot photos, with no evidence of any sort of decent personality. Come on fellas, get some sense! | |
|
livnl8
|
Joined: 2/26/2008
Msg: 1345 | |
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/3/2008 4:08:58 AM | You're right!! women do have it made. I have to disagree with "blackkitty" lady, the rainchy e-mails are o.k. to "delete", but what about the genuine e-mails that a guy sends out.... you women still don't give them the time of day. even a reply of "no thanks" is better than nothing. I think it should be mandatory for females to reply, no initiated outgoing messeges until all incoming mail has been answered!
It's the same in life too.... all a woman has to do is go out for a night to a club or the bar area of a restaurant, sit there for a few minutes, and , she'll get alllll the attention she wants!
"genuine nice guys finish last" | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/3/2008 6:29:49 AM |
serpent27 wrote: I feel your pain. It's funny how some really good looking women put virtually no effort into their profile and yet are on 50+ members' favourites lists. It seems that guys have to work so much harder. I'm not being bitter at all. That's life, I guess. But I really don't understand why some guys add girls on their favourites list when all they have to go on is just a few hot photos, with no evidence of any sort of decent personality. Come on fellas, get some sense!
You're right. When we guys see a beautiful woman we literally lose our mind. Either we're nervous around her or we do things for her that we wouldn't do for a less attractive woman. Like one of the co-workers in the movie "40 Year Old Virgin" put it: "You're putting the p*$$y on a pedestal." That means we give away our power to very beautiful women, and then they can be as snobby and spoiled as they'd like simply because we encourage them by rewarding bad behavior. | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/3/2008 6:42:07 AM | You're right!! women do have it made. I have to disagree with "blackkitty" lady, the rainchy e-mails are o.k. to "delete", but what about the genuine e-mails that a guy sends out.... you women still don't give them the time of day. even a reply of "no thanks" is better than nothing. I think it should be mandatory for females to reply, no initiated outgoing messeges until all incoming mail has been answered!
It's the same in life too.... all a woman has to do is go out for a night to a club or the bar area of a restaurant, sit there for a few minutes, and , she'll get alllll the attention she wants!
"genuine nice guys finish last"
I'm actually going to side with the ladies on this one. When I've initiated contact for an international friendship (pen-pals) or relationship, I'd get about 1 reply for every 10 letters I sent. The women who didn't write back either weren't interested or had something or someone else in their lives.
Let's face it, women (especially the more attractive ones) get a lot messages than we guys do, and many of those women have full-time jobs, so they don't have the time to personally reply to every message they get. And look at it this way, if you guys did get a rejection letter, you'd probably write her back asking why or trying to convince her to change her mind.
Looking for a woman is like looking for a job. Do you have the right qualifications? If you don't for a particular job, then you should look elsewhere. If you do, you'll send your resume in and it'll get put in a stack with other resumes. You could make the best first impression you're capable of and someone else may end up getting the job.
It's basically a numbers game. You don't put all your eggs in one basket. Like an old Motown song said: "Mamma told me I'd better shop around." This is where you think like a womanizer even if you're not one. And you're not a womanizer until you're in a committed relationship and you start going for other women. Until then, you're free to play the field. So play the field, contact more women, and don't be so attached to results either way. | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/3/2008 9:28:27 AM | Vegan Goddess - I do agree. In fact I said as much myself. I'm going to quote myself. I know this is incredibly arrogant, but it saves retyping.
I think that things are just as hard for women. Women might well get a lot of contacts, but how many of those "good" contacts go to a specific 1/6 or 1/5 of PoF women? These beautiful women are regularly getting messages from good looking investment bankers called Brad, who like hiking in the mountains. For the rest the pickings are slimmer. If you're unattractive or overweight as a woman it can be very hard to get any level of interest, and harder still to get any decent relationship.
As a man we have options. Good looking helps, but if you can't be good looking be sucessful. If you can't be successful be funny. If you can't be funny, be kind. Women look at a range of things that combine to make a man attractive. Men don't, and a woman who isn't attractive to the majority of men doesn't have nearly the options the OP was complaining about.
It's that last paragraph I was talking about, really. Unfortunately, on the net being funny or kind, successful, intelligent or charismatic doesn't matter. Well, of course, it does MATTER, but it's impossible to tell.
And by the way, I don't really agree with your reversal, and it's kind of a double-reversal you did, which isn't fair. :)
My point reversed would be more to say: "If there was a girl who was maybe a 6, and her writing was intelligent and funny, and she had good information on her profile, lots in common and seemed really cool, could that push her up to a 7 or 8 and into 'dateable' territory?"
My response (personally) would be "of course". And I would expect the same of women. Let's say I'm a 6 in looks, should I assume that my personality (which is tremendous!) should make me WORTHY of an 8? Or should I just assume I can only get a 6 and deal with it? | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/3/2008 9:38:24 AM |
"genuine nice guys finish last"
It's interesting to note that the word "nice" originally meant stupid. Then it meant stupid in a kind of naieve way, then innocent, then kind. But it's a boring word, and it still sounds boring. Is there anything worse than being "nice"?!
I often think about that, when men complain that women don't want "nice guys". I wonder whether "nice" from the old meaning is what the women are really seeing. Or the more modern meaning of blandly pleasant? Either way, be ANYTHING but "nice"!
Looking for a woman is like looking for a job. Do you have the right qualifications? If you don't for a particular job, then you should look elsewhere.
Agreed, but what qualifications are those exactly? Honest, down to earth guy with a good sense of humour? Not a player or time waster? Hey! That's me! I'm qualified! 
Seriously, though, a lot of women put in things like that (most) and it is (in my opinion) fairly pointless and unhelpful.
It's basically a numbers game. You don't put all your eggs in one basket.
I very strongly agree. Don't take any one woman's profile seriously and get hopeful because you SEEM so perfect. That way lies badness. And the same goes for meeting people. If PoF is the only place you meet people you'll be single forever! Live life, join clubs, go to the gym, take up soccer, travel, go to parties.... | |
|
| Internet dating: sucks for guys, good for women.
Posted: 4/3/2008 10:48:56 AM | Whitegold765:
lol, sometimes arrogance is good.
Don't follow your double reversal, but the fact that YOU would give the girl more points for being smarter, doesn't count. What we're talking about here as I stated before is the bell curve and the general public and for most guys, they're NOT gonna do what you did, so I say don't be surprised if the girls are just as bad. Again, nothing wrong with writing girls "out of your range" never know what will happen, but this happened cause the guys are crying "oh woes me, i wrote to like 100 women and they all ignore me" and I think this is a Bullshi* statement since the women they wrote to were prob. not appropriate. And, from the guys who've been emailing me to review what they wrote and who they picked, my little study is so far nicely proving what I thought might be true: a) guys overrate their pics b) guys overrate their profile c) guys consistently write to girls who don't MATCH their profile d) guys write to girls whose profile they didn't read or if they did read it they ignored it and e) guys write to girls who they shouldn't be surprised don't respond-based on the "type of girl" they write to. | |
|
|
| Page 54 of 94
|
40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 |
|
Home
login 
