Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  > Standards, Preferences and other foolishness      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Darkbutcomely
Joined: 4/20/2011
Msg: 26
Standards, Preferences and other foolishnessPage 2 of 4    (1, 2, 3, 4)
In the past when I got in relationships with men I had no common interests with it became all about him and his interests. He was rarely willing to do the things I enjoyed except the occasional birthday or Valentine gift. And it was really hard for him to understand why I didnt get as much enjoyment out of his actives as he did. Often he would think it would come down to simply explaining the active and I would be able to see how great an active it is. Now after years of that I seek out guys who share at least 3 of my interests before I showed up. IF he thinks he is the one to convert me to a major sport fan then he has an issue I dont want to deal with.
And if I seek just the physical then the 22 and 26 and 32 year olds would have a chance as they are physically beautiful. Balance in all things.
 Seki1949
Joined: 9/4/2013
Msg: 27
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 12/29/2017 8:25:50 PM
OP, what are you still doing on a singles site with all the bliss you have at home?
 ohenryx
Joined: 3/12/2010
Msg: 28
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 12/30/2017 1:45:12 PM
Good question, Seki. I suspect the whole other thread, which pointed back to this one, was nothing but a "troll". Probably just best to ignore him.

Messages this short may not be posted
Messages this short may not be posted
Messages this short may not be posted
Messages this short may not be posted
Messages this short may not be posted
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 29
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 12/30/2017 2:13:40 PM

Good question, Seki. I suspect the whole other thread, which pointed back to this one, was nothing but a "troll".

I dunno -- doesn't seem like a troll concern/question. More like someone confused about dating/relationships and is coming to a cross-roads:

I met several women who possessed all that I wanted but even after several years of trying not a one could make the sale.

What do you mean by "the sale"? Like scoring a date, consecutive dates, or starting a relationship? Or do you mean to garner Your interest? I get the impression the latter...

Now after two years of unqualified joy, I have come to the conclusion that my preferences meant squat.

I think many gals suffer the "I want this [list of checkmarks] in a guy," but the guys they gravitate toward Aren't that... and when they do meet guys who pretty much clear that checklist... lo and behold, she's consistently Not interested. What we end up wanting VS what we Think we want are usually not going to be exactly the same. With some people, there's a Big difference. They want a guy (or gal) who fits the casting call for the type of BF/GF that'd be great for Xmas cards, to show to maw & paw, to have a kid with -- basically to Show Society. But in reality, on a horny Wednesday evening in mid-April, no -- that's not what drives our engine.

Don't go by check-lists of what you want, just have a list of Don't Wants that fits just about Everyone. This isn't a job interview -- you're not doing this for Xmas cards or to make ANYONE proud. You're doing this with someone you mesh well with + having sexual attraction.
 sussex11
Joined: 12/24/2017
Msg: 30
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 12/30/2017 3:05:42 PM
I read once: We don't get what we want, we get what we are. I have worked hard at being the very thing I want....some people go thru relationship after relationship trying.
 LetitiaLeGrande
Joined: 3/22/2015
Msg: 31
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/1/2018 3:35:43 PM
the fact that you refer to women's values according to their hair colour shows how superficial men can be.
The brunette could toss some bleach over her hair and be more of what you envisaged but does it change her?
You say you have something grand now and I guess wishlists dont mean much in the long run. You also are limited by the choices of the women and whether they want you.
 LetitiaLeGrande
Joined: 3/22/2015
Msg: 32
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/1/2018 3:37:53 PM
I agree that intelligence is essential but then again so is physical chemistry or attraction. I do notice that many men are with women who on the face of it are batting way out of their league with looks but rarely the other way around. Any ugly man with money and success can attract a beauty but it does not work in reverse or rarely.
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 33
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/1/2018 3:41:31 PM
"we don't get what we want, we get what we are"

>>>I'll concur, but I believe we date people who make us feel comfortable about who we are, what we are, and the way we choose to live. Otherwise why date someone who makes you uncomfortable about the adult you've turned yourself into? well, maybe just for the sex, I guess.

wow, the magic has disappeared. Golly, what a tragedy.
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 34
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/1/2018 8:42:18 PM

I agree that intelligence is essential but then again so is physical chemistry or attraction.

I would say that's apples & oranges, tho. Intelligence level, or shall I say not having a Lack of intelligence, is just a means to an ends. Chemistry & Physical Attraction is the ends.

I do notice that many men are with women who on the face of it are batting way out of their league with looks but rarely the other way around.

Taking away married couples after-the-fact many years later where either gender can lose their looks while the other doesn't -- I would say it's not hard to find guys with gals below their league. Thing is, he's rarely going to want an LTR out of it, where you'll find more women willing to be in LTRs with guys in which she can certainly do better in looks. That's because many women (the # is shrinking) are Also looking for something with varying levels of importance to them emotionally or logically -- looking for a guy to financially support them (+kids) or certainly able to. With women working in solid careers more and more, the prevalence of this has gone down.

Any ugly man with money and success can attract a beauty but it does not work in reverse or rarely.

I solidly disagree with that. It's not as easy as that. If he's Really RICH, not just has a lot of money, as long as he isn't super-ugly and hangs out in the right places, he can at some point, sure. But usually what I see with guys who have a lot of money -- they tend not to be ugly, but of ones who are clearly Not attractive, they'll either (a) get a true beauty who's crackpot crazy [short-lived], or (b) get a gal who's an average Jane or slightly better -- out of his league, but not what one would call a Beauty. Obviously Truly RICH helps change that, though.

However, I don't live in circles where gals going after guys with money is prevalent -- nor older-folk environments where being supported and desire to be living large in retirement is understandably more wanted, and things are less about looks for females.

I believe we date people who make us feel comfortable about who we are, what we are, and the way we choose to live.

I believe that's our ideal -- but I also believe people as a whole don't operate exactly that way, when the rubber meats the road. :) If that flows/clicks well in that dept but she's "meh" in looks, if we're not lonely or wanting the Concept of "with someone", being more than Friends-WB / just-dating isn't going to be wanted. If we're Really Attracted to her outside the norm while being a really cool gal, our tastes in compatibility shift at bit (or more), and what will mesh well with us is more open with said gal. Many times though, in the beginning prior to being an item -- we can be Too open in what we want / what flows well with us... and then when the dust settles if/when having been an item with them, it goes back closer to how we were... where if it's too big a difference, and well, "old p*ussy is old p*ssy" has at least some small effect -- ya start not getting along.

Otherwise why [not] date someone who makes you uncomfortable about the adult you've turned yourself into?

Well, there's a big difference between feeling that you can roll decently while knowing it's very possibly not the most ideal VS knowing & feeling that you never could. :)
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 35
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/1/2018 8:55:01 PM
"an ugly rich man can attract a beauty, but not the reverse"

>>which made me think that, generally speaking, men impress other men with how beautiful their woman is. Her status or financial success may not be as impressive, b/c "being a man" means he should already have status and success. If he's relying on her for both, it might be emasculating. An ugly rich dude can attract a CERTAIN type of beauty. Hugh Hefner did it, but even with Viagra he wasn't doing much in the bedroom at his age, and his gfs knew they'd be meeting celebrities at the grotto and move up from there.

when I said we date people who make us feel comfortable, I should have specified, that assumes a person isn't lying. Women, generally, want to feel comfortable with a sex partner. men looking to hit'n'quit may not worry about comfort levels, but if they've gotten to know a female for a while, enough to feel comfortable around her, they may feel she's relationship material..and then ask her out. But meeting a stranger with the intention of dating, yes, they only might want to make her feel comfortable enough so that the date goes where he wants it to. he may be so confident, he doesn't care whether he's comfortable around her, he's comfortable everywhere he goes. and ironically, that may be a real turn-on for her. but for Average Joe, while he wants the woman out of his league, he's going to find he's so paralyzed by trying so hard to impress her and worrying that it won't be enough and he's going to lose her, that he doesn't feel comfortable around her...and then has reasons to not approach or date her.
 Nestaron
Joined: 10/11/2017
Msg: 36
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/1/2018 9:21:29 PM
You want to know secret of dating find out what your appeal is to others. You start with middle of spectrum average person says yes, you know your atleast attractiveness is average, so go out on a date show good time, you have atleast one lady/gent that might say something good about their date with you. Try the next better looking one until you stop getting dates that is the top of your bar and limit. Then you get more dates because you know who finds you attractive and who to approach. If 5 doesn’t respond you are not that and go the other way. When the other way you hit that response mark and slowly raise it, lots of dating and practice increasing your appeal through desirability.
 ohenryx
Joined: 3/12/2010
Msg: 37
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/2/2018 8:45:55 AM
Nestaron, message 43:

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away … No, wait, I mean, several years back in a different thread here in the forums. The subject of a man “dating down” to get his confidence up was discussed. A number of women turned apoplectic over that one.


gtomustang
for Average Joe, while he wants the woman out of his league, he's going to find he's so paralyzed by trying so hard to impress her and worrying that it won't be enough and he's going to lose her, that he doesn't feel comfortable around her...and then has reasons to not approach or date her.

I can remember that happening to me, more than once, but that was a very long time ago. There are some advantages to age and wisdom. Some, just not enough!
 Whisky_River
Joined: 10/14/2017
Msg: 38
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/2/2018 9:06:38 AM
Again....What one man considers hot.....may not be what another considers "hot" or
what another considers dating down would be anothers "hot"....
I don't understand why people don't get that?

Quit trying to define love/women/men/atractiveness/morals..... as the "same" for you and me....
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 39
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/2/2018 10:26:14 AM
"You want to know secret of dating? find out what your appeal is to others."

>>>I always give this as advice. you really don't know what it is, that people want from you, until you know...what is the appealing thing that is wanted from you. If you want to know if someone loves you, you first have to know what about you is loveable. then you can see if they even bother to notice it or not. If someone can be brutally honest with themselves and realize they don't offer anything that can't be found in other people, other than their hot ass...then that person knows exactly what people date them for. And then they can plan accordingly for where all their relationships end up.

"You start with middle of spectrum average person says yes, you know your at least attractiveness is average, so go out on a date show good time, you have atleast one lady/gent that might say something good about their date with you. Try the next better looking one until you stop getting dates that is the top of your bar and limit."

>>>Ever hear of the Peter Principle? :) Its a real interesting explanation of workplace abilities. I was able to learn as a young man, my attractiveness to women, based on how they ignored me but chased after my friends, who had the same personalities (which was why we were friends). but that takes being curious enough of your surroundings to look at them and not be self centered.

"What one man considers hot, another does not."

>>>true to a point. Any man or woman who is, for example, a 7 on a scale of 1-10 (meaning, they attract 70% of the people they meet), will be physically attractive to 3/4rs of the population, but not everyone. That human being will be "out of league" to some, "obtainable" by those who are a 6 or a 7 themselves, and "Settling" for some 25 yr old hardbody with perfect skin and hair who is physically attractive to 90% of the population.

and of course, we're talking about physical attraction. You may want to talk to the hottie, but after hearing how air headed they are, you may not want to suffer thru courting them.
 flyover_boy
Joined: 12/28/2016
Msg: 40
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/2/2018 12:32:57 PM

Any ugly man with money and success can attract a beauty but it does not work in reverse or rarely.


I support the principle point, although subject to exaggeration, I’ve found it to be mostly true. The extreme examples grab a lot of attention, the old ugly rock stars and their young hot wives. The more subtle, everyday examples is what I see, close up. The guy in his 60‘s, not ugly, but balding and just a ‘past his prime’, who runs/owns a company, does well and has some status in life. His wife/girlfriend in her 40‘s, plain Jane, to be sure, but gym rat-like, yoga mat in the backseat. In reverse, it would turn heads. Not that it never happens or can’t, but realistically, very rare.

There is one other little category in this ‘mismatch,’ and that’s guys without looks, money or status who do very well and bat ‘out of their league.’ Their secret ? They talk and listen to women very well. Not being fakes, and not the guy in the club with his cheap complimentary lines, but sincere and very subtle. Look at the creeps who are on wanted posters fleecing women. There are plenty of successful men, with good looks who struggle to what comes to these guys (the good ones) so naturally.


I solidly disagree with that. It's not as easy as that. If he's Really RICH, not just has a lot of money, as long as he isn't super-ugly and hangs out in the right places, he can at some point, sure. But usually what I see with guys who have a lot of money -- they tend not to be ugly, but of ones who are clearly Not attractive, they'll either (a) get a true beauty who's crackpot crazy [short-lived], or (b) get a gal who's an average Jane or slightly better -- out of his league, but not what one would call a Beauty. Obviously Truly RICH helps change that, though.

However, I don't live in circles where gals going after guys with money is prevalent -- nor older-folk environments where being supported and desire to be living large in retirement is understandably more wanted, and things are less about looks for females.



In support your counterpoint, there’s another issue you didn’t raise which comes into play in this mix. That is the desire to couple or even be married/get married. It’s often been assumed women are the ones who desire this and men avoid it. But the reverse has and is true too. Some men are so desperately wanting to attach they do marry/pair ‘below their league.’ It is still a little less common with successful younger men, but I can think of a couple examples in my life. These men are often children of divorce and desire the concept of ‘family’ to heavily it is THAT which drives their relationships. It is the senior driving force for them to pair.
 norwegianguy456
Joined: 6/11/2015
Msg: 41
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/2/2018 1:14:34 PM

Any man or woman who is, for example, a 7 on a scale of 1-10 (meaning, they attract 70% of the people they meet), will be physically attractive to 3/4rs of the population, but not everyone.

I don't see the rating so much that way. Yeah, ratings vary some -- notably with people with unique looks (higher or lower). But for most the population, looks is pretty universal within genres, when you're not getting it down to exactness. Where I disagree with your defining of that -- a 1-10 isn't the % of attention. Like the OKC analysis -- the hotter gals (8-10) would get Way more attention, where the 1-3s wouldn't. The hot guys could get some real traction, while the 1-5s wouldn't hardly get any. So it's not an even distribution, but Tilted quite readily. Which is why guys who are 5s/6s will nose-dive on the less attractive ones to "scoop up" some action, and not want to stick around, furthering the bad-guy-label that guys just want sex. Yeah, with gals lower, sure. Get a gal Higher than him, that's when the stalker dude concept comes out - lol.

that’s guys without looks, money or status who do very well and bat ‘out of their league.’ Their secret ? They talk and listen to women very well. Not being fakes, and not the guy in the club with his cheap complimentary lines

Here's the problem with that though -- it's not a secret. In fact, you take a guy who's a "5" at best, and you have him interact with real cute women -- he's going to be applying that "secret". It's natural & basic. So wait -- if that's the case, how do some of these guys who are 4s or 5s get gals who are 6s and 7s, and it's not some crazy rarity? Social connections, and having a positive social popularity. The more social connections you have, the easier it is to get dates. That's why people go "I'm tired of THE bar" (as if they're all the same) when at or nearing a certain age -- because many of their friends moved away, got hitched, etc -- and they have less social connections. It's not a fruitful, it's not as fun. Helps further the "get hitched" desire that maw & paw have always espoused. :)

That is the desire to couple or even be married/get married. It’s often been assumed women are the ones who desire this and men avoid it. But the reverse has and is true too. Some men are so desperately wanting to attach they do marry/pair ‘below their league.’ It is still a little less common with successful younger men, but I can think of a couple examples in my life.

I agree that the same goes for guys -- to get Coupled Up is a positive. Even among many guys who by and large, just date-for-fun. But I will say to get married for the sake of being married and "aiming low" when their own looks hasn't nose-dived -- I'd say that happens, yes, but it's no trend at all. You'll find that more with gals (although the guy having a great job, solid, etc. is an Extra motive that guys won't have themselves).

I think the main thing is, is that guys (not all of course) Can have fun just-dating. Take Bob. He's a 6.5 / 10. Decent job. But after his last LTR girlfriend, he's actually found his niche in just-dating. And over the years, even pretty much going steady with some, but not wanting to stick so much with becoming super serious... wanting to keep his options open. Is he anti-relationship? No. He's just More Picky about it. He's going to want a 7.5 or higher, without Any costs on persona, a "wow" factor that's Different than what he can get when going out. Unlike Sad Sally who thinks not being in an LTR is a lack of social status / achievement -- Bob grows up thru experience and realizes that's just a silly notion. He wants someone who's a wow-catch, not just on looks. But at the same time, he's probably not purely targeting that, Because just because the gal isn't a "wow" catch, doesn't mean just-dating can't be fruitful and fun with more attainable targets. :)
 Ladyinred0407
Joined: 2/6/2016
Msg: 42
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/2/2018 1:39:47 PM
Pssst............... Seki and Henry, AND NG,
FYI to answer your question, etc........... pertaining to the OP..............THIS thread was started January, 2012
A lot can happen in 6 years! LOL
 backcreek7
Joined: 12/2/2014
Msg: 43
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/2/2018 2:50:47 PM
Well, if you have enjoyed 69 ~ as I have ...
Minds out of the gutter please, col ....

The year 1969 that is & the Rolling Stones hit ...
these lyrics say it all ...
" No, you can't always get what you want ~
But if you try sometime, you will find ~ you get what you need ...
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 44
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/3/2018 6:51:47 AM
“We don't get what we want, we get what we are.”

Although I agree with this, it needs a very important qualification: we don’t get what we want, we get THE WORST OF what we are OR THE BEST OF WHAT WE ARE. Which is true depends on our worst or best aspects. Money/fame/power is always at the top of the hierarchy. Enough of those things will always cancel out the worst aspects of a person. Perhaps not for every romantic interest desired, but certainly for enough that the rich/famous/powerful won’t care that much or even at all about the handful he/she cannot have.

The worst of what we are can cancel out all of the best things about us (except money/fame/power). She’s gorgeous, she’s intelligent, she’s funny, she’s industrious, but she gets her jollies from torturing puppies and orphans. He’s tall, he’s handsome, he’s funny, he’s hardworking, but he’s a conservative Republican who thinks a woman’s only place is in the home.

I was my high school’s valedictorian, a National Merit semi-finalist, a magna cum laude college grad – that’s what I am. Yet I have dated far more high school dropouts than college grads. My overwhelming amount of negative characteristics cancels out that one positive characteristic in the eyes of basically all women with similar intelligence and educational background. Smart women are smart enough not to date me.

So although that phrase is true, most people don’t have a full understanding of “what we are.” Just because you have a great body doesn’t mean other people with great bodies will find you attractive. Just because you’re smart doesn’t mean other smart people will find you attractive. Just because you are a funny doesn’t mean other funny people will find you attractive. You will either be weighted down by your worst characteristics or lifted up by your best characteristics. Unfortunately, you really don’t have any control over which happens.

“This is one of the biggest issues with online dating. That person we say we wouldnt be interested in, isnt walking by us in real life. We cannot smell thier sexy scent, hear thier sexy laugh, or see the way thier eyes light up when they see something they like. All of these things can build an attraction. Regardless of what we thought we preferred. Online we get to see a few 1 dimensional photos and read some text. It is easy to disregard the ones who dont fall into our pre set preferances. Yet...we cannot expect people to set aside time to meet anyone they are not interested in... Real life is where it is at. Online is a plan B really...like the lottery you cannot win without a ticket, but dont think you can plan a retirement by winning the lotto.”

OLD has definitely been a double-edged sword for me. Being in the bottom 1% of men when it comes to searchable characteristics by women means theoretically that OLD should be a much more negative experience than real life because OLD does not provide much opportunity for a man with such undesirable physical traits to impress women in those other ways when 99% of the men they’re receiving messages from are superior “on paper.” But on the other hand, women willing to throw their “preferences” out the door and date a bottom 1%-er are extremely rare and difficult to find, especially as you get older because there are just simply less single women, not to mention far less experimental or risk-taking women, and OLD casts a much wider net than most people get from their social circle/work place/hobbies/church/etc. – that is in fact its #1 advantage over all other ways to meet people. I have lived in Tampa all my dating life, but I can count the number of women I dated that lived in Tampa on the fingers of one hand – I’ve met numerous women through online dating from 30 or more miles away that there is very little likelihood I would have met in a real life situation, simply because I rarely have reason to be in places like New Port Richey, Sarasota, Palm Harbor or Lakeland, and although Tampa is popular among people who live in those areas, it’s not like they spend a lot of time here so the odds of us having met in any other way are remote. Now in my 40s, I rarely ever meet any single women at all close to my age in real life situations, much less single women that find my particular set of unique characteristics attractive. So as maddening as OLD can be for the reasons you cited, as skewed against most men as it may be, much less someone like me, it’s almost my only hope and pretty much plan A.

“Having preferences or a type is great when you're 19-20 and in college, surrounded by hundreds or thousands of kids your age. As an adult it's a recipe for singledom.”

If you’re low enough on the totem pole, it’s even a recipe for singledom when you’re 19-20. I can honestly say I have never dated a woman that fell in line with many of my preferences, because no such woman has ever found me attractive. After I made it into my early 20s as a lifelong dateless person and had piled up many thousands of rejections, I decided I needed to give up this dream of dating a woman similar to me in intelligence, kindness, body type, preferred activities, goals, life philosophy and just date whoever the hell would date me... and strangely enough, even that didn’t work initially. Misleading women by omission of negative information about myself... THAT worked. At least for one date per woman, for a few years. Then the world got too smart and I got too old, and I was right back where I was to begin with. 11 years later, I’ve gotten even older, and the world even smarter and indeed the number of single women far, far, far fewer. At this point, my only preference is not to be outright repulsed, but even that now seems like a far-fetched fantasy.

"A lot can happen in 6 years!"

And, a lot of nothing can happen in 11 years.
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 45
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/3/2018 1:52:02 PM
"we get THE WORST OF what we are OR THE BEST OF WHAT WE ARE. Which is true depends on our worst or best aspects."

>>>you'll have to explain this. For example, an addict likely gets an enabler. Are they the same type of worst?

"Money/fame/power is always at the top of the hierarchy. Enough of those things will always cancel out the worst aspects of a person."

>>>Actually, money can bring out the worst in a lot of people. There's an old saying, "everyone's your brother until the rent is due". Meaning people can be your fair-weather friends. Those who rise to fame or the corner office, often are reminded of the old saw, "be nice to the people you meet on the way up, b/c you'll meet them again on the way down." There's a good reason that gets said--b/c everyone has the same human nature.

"rich/famous/powerful won’t care that much or even at all about the handful he/she cannot have."

>>>consider the latest batch of sexual abusers in Hollywood. Why did they chase after women they could not have, if they had the wealth or powerful to have so many substitutes? Sometimes, we tend to focus exactly on what we cannot have, and ignore the bird in our hand. Also, sometimes people pursue wealth and fame, just to make up for the big black hole in their souls. they're driven by their insecurity, not by a sense of drive or a desire to be better.

I'm a college grad, and I met women who weren't b/c that's where I went and met people. People who are out changing the world, are out there, not in sports bars and other famous pickup locales where people go to waste all their spare time. These people don't have the spare time to waste, and they don't see the fun in getting sloshed :)

a hot bod doesn't automatically make people hot for you. What it does do...is make them look for your other attributes. But if you don't have a bod they want to see naked...why should they care if you have other attributes? Its like looking at a boat to see how well it will act like a car. When you need a car, do you care about the gas mileage and trunk space on a boat? of course you don't, the boat is missing that one big, necessary quality. so its off your list before you even gave it a chance.

you are only weighed down by your worst qualities...when someone you want to bed, thinks they are bad qualities.
 omgherecomesb
Joined: 12/19/2017
Msg: 46
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/5/2018 1:01:36 AM
There are pof veterans on here 5-6 years running strong because of "preferences"
Preferences are your illusions about a perfect person assembled from your previous interactions and attachments with people you enjoyed.
It is closing yourself off from--->real<--- people in order to meet a "maybe" and drives disconnection.

When i get far enough into a conversation with these kinds of people, i ask them straight up...
why would this illusive person you believe exists want to date you? How would they know you exist and what would you do to ensure that? People assume because they have a preference, means that preference prefers you.

Step outside your comfort zones and talk to someone you never thought about talking to before and be open to learning something new.
 Seki1949
Joined: 9/4/2013
Msg: 47
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/5/2018 5:13:42 AM

Preferences are your illusions about a perfect person assembled from your previous interactions and attachments with people you enjoyed.


There is much truth in this. My search for the Perfect Person has ruined my life.
 from site to sight
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 48
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/5/2018 9:58:23 AM
Another quality that a perfect person must have is living at a perfect distance away-not too far, but not too close. Not many people expect a perfect person to be living in another city or state, or living 4 houses down the street. They must be living x.xxx miles away.
 HawkingJr
Joined: 4/16/2007
Msg: 49
view profile
History
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/5/2018 1:46:24 PM
“There are pof veterans on here 5-6 years running strong because of ‘preferences’”

I assume that goes double for me since I’ve been here (and dateless) for 11 years, but I think it’s highly questionable how much my “preferences” have to do with my extended stay here considering I don’t mention any preferences in my profile, I basically contact any woman in my area that I find remotely attractive (other than those who reject me indirectly in their profiles) and I haven’t received a first contact email from a woman on here in years. So I’m not really seeing how my “preferences” have much to do with my POF failures. It would be quite different if I was getting a bunch of first contact emails and rejecting all of them because they didn’t fit my preferences, or if I had a couple dozen strict preferences listed on my profile or if I was only contacting 5 to 10 “perfect” women a year, but most recent years I contact 1000+ women, although that’s starting to get harder and harder the older I get because there are less and less single women.
 forumzfishonly
Joined: 12/17/2017
Msg: 50
Standards, Preferences and other foolishness
Posted: 1/5/2018 2:53:00 PM
I guess jojo in post 2 also decided his mind wasn’t enough either..cuz she’s still here fishing :D TESTING TESTING..(her headline) :D:D
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  > Standards, Preferences and other foolishness