Online Dating?

Loneliness, Depression & Relationship Forum

Help Support Loneliness, Depression & Relationship Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
kaetic said:
kamya said:
kaetic said:
kamya said:
TheRealCallie said:
Yeah, and if every **** woman was a sex addict, it probably would be great.  SOME people want more than just a fresia and dump, thanks.  SOME people would rather have something real.  Not everyone will screw anything that moves. 

As I said, maybe if you stop being so bitter and negative, you'd get more chances.

And as I said, you have no idea what you're talking about. 

Even if someone actually were bitter and negative, deciding not to be isn't going to magically make people more likely to send them a message or match with them. That's not how it works.

There are interesting things in the article kaetic linked with the survey questions. Maybe I'm colorblind or not seeing it properly. The graphs are really small on my phone. Most of the women chose 1 to 2 dates as how long they want their next relationship to last, followed by the forever option. Most chose 1 to 2 dates as the most time they'd ideally have to wait before having sex as well. 

So again, how is an inbox full of willing sexual partners a problem?

Um... That wasn't what the pie charts were about, or the article actually. This guy used his expertise with math to figure out how to make the system work for him. The pie charts actually show the results for each group for each of the different questions, but they are pretty hard to read. The problem was in the compatibility algorithm, and he got around it, pretty clever.

And again... Wasn't an argument. Just thought it was interesting and wanted to share it.


I don't understand how you misunderstood what I was saying the first time but let me try again.

I know it wasn't an argument. And I know what the article was about. It was the actual data that I found useful and interesting though.

The pie charts do show the results for each group for the different questions. Data showing what actual women are honestly answering to actual relationship questions when no one else is looking.

I was just pointing out that according to those pie charts it seems like the options that were chosen the most by most of the groups of women were the ones involving 1 night stands and having sex within the first couple of dates. Meaning, most women on dating sites are mainly looking for sex. Meaning, that an inbox full of willing sexual partners is more of a positive than not. (For most of the women)

That's all. No arguing. Just interesting to see that reality according to those graphs seems to be pretty much in line with what I'd already expected.

I misread the last line, that's why I thought you were taking it as an argument. My apologies.

I see what you mean with the pie charts. I just glanced over them before. But you left out there were four options and it appears that on that question the results were split pretty evenly between wanting a one night stand and wanting a relationship to last the rest of their life.

Also what's wrong with having sex within the first couple of dates? With the two answers together yes that could be misleading, but I don't see how having sex early on would necessarily mean that person isn't looking for a relationship.

I didn't forget that there were 4 options or that one of the other big groups wanted their relationship to last a lifetime. I mentioned It in my first post in the exact same sentence that I mentioned that 1 night seemed to be the most picked option. 

I'm not saying that those wanting to have sex early on are all mostly just looking for sex and not a relationship. I AM saying that about the ones answering that they mostly want their next relationship to last one night. That doesn't seem like a leap to me.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to have sex within the first couple of dates. The two answers are correlated together though. Someone looking for a one night stand for the first question probably isn't going to answer anything other than 1 or 2 dates for the second question. We've already established that the answer that the largest amount of the women answered was that they are looking for one night stands. So, it's not a giant leap to also say that the largest group of women represented in those charts are mostly interested in looking for sex as well.

I never said there is anything wrong with the behavior. Just like I never blamed women for the problems that guys face on those sites. I am more interested in understanding what is actually happening and why. I've said it probably 10 times in this thread, that there is nothing wrong with acknowledging that a problem exists. You can even try understand the main reasons why it exists without blaming someone or claiming that someone is doing something wrong. Sometimes the system is just shitty.
 
ardour said:
So everyone's a successful well paid math phd with equally successful friends?  

What prompted this?

He had to set up multiple profiles tailored to different spectrums users based on the questions they answered.  Sounds like a lot of effort. And it's unclear whether the person he ended up with messaged him because of shared interests or because he "popped up in her search for 6-foot guys with blue eyes near UCLA". (Good thing he wasn't 5'11 eh.)

Guess so... search results are brutal.
 
In response to OP, I do think to an extent online dating is frustrating.
I am currently in a relationship that began online.  We talked online and over the phone exclusively for about a year.
Eventually, we met in person when he came to visit me.  I didn't want him to leave but he couldn't stay, so I went with him.

That was 5 years ago, and we've been together 6 years now.  We have a child together.

If you want to try to do online relationships, try to keep the distance pretty minimal.  I live 12 hours away from my family (mom & grandma) now that I am with my partner.  It is pretty hard on us to be able to get together even once a year.  Be realistic.  If you live too far apart and hardly get to see each other, it will probably not be very successful.  Life happens, jealousy happens, the fact that you are not face to face can also affect the way you perceive someone's mood when they're speaking to you.  You can't really read their body language or anything and things get misconstrued sometimes.

Everyone's situation is different.  Sometimes it's easier to find someone you click with when you're not trying to find someone.  I keep thinking about the types of websites and apps made for matchmaking, and although some people find success that way, it's a lot more frustrating when you're seeking someone out and facing rejection or rejecting people without getting a chance to really get to know them.  People can be very quick to judge without getting to really know them...  & miss out on knowing really great people for whatever reason they had to reject them.
 
Richard_39 said:
Okay, suppose I grant your point; the complaining is entirely legitimate, exactly accurate and 100 on the mark. The problem lies with others and there is nothing they can change.
....what then?
Accept it? Be bitter, or sad, or miserable or lonely or whatever those people feel for 80 years ( or whatever the life expectancy is)?
What's the endgame? Will it help people care for them? Or kiss them?
I'm genuinely curious, because its not my view of life. You call it optimistic, but it isnt really; I cant accept a life of miserability or loneliness forever, if I felt that way. Its not in my nature. Not a fatalist, if it can be called that. Not much in the habit of accepting hopeless situations.

That's what they're doing, not accepting it. It's also hard to accept when someone denies all of their struggle to add on a stupid argument.
You don't have to absolutely give up on life and love just because you acknowledge an issue with online dating, but saying just keep doing it forever and ever while expecting different results is hardly a beneficial advice.

This is unrelated, but I remember someone saying "I'm willing to do the work, but I wish women would tell the truth about what they really want", I think it falls a little on it. Women here can't accept that males have it worse somewhere, even when it's a very mild ******* argument.

The end game of this, in particular, is to have the space to complain or be upset that they need so much... a lot of the times the stupidity of some posts makes me wonder if people know that this is basically a place to vent your frustrations and not to appear nice or put together. Gladly, I had the time to meet a lot of people in here and I don't talk out of my ass when someone else's lifes/actions are in the discussion.
 
TheSkaFish said:
I don't know.  I want to fight, I want to rage against this, I want to break away from it.  I don't want to accept this as my fate.  I wish I could see something else in the cards for me than this, but unless I can start pulling some rabbits out of my hat, the kind I'd never been able to before, it's very hard to even imagine it.  I've gotten to 32 now, with absolutely nothing in this area of life.  It's starting to get scary now.

'honeysuckle gets real' past 35. Its the point when you realize "this is it", not some vague, indulgent idea of a "fate" you don't think is really going to happen.  Some might call it despair, although that's being a bit dramatic. You realize no mentally sound woman would have anything to do with you even if you could somehow meet singles near your age. and you couldn't even function in a relationship if given the chance.
 
ardour said:
TheSkaFish said:
I don't know.  I want to fight, I want to rage against this, I want to break away from it.  I don't want to accept this as my fate.  I wish I could see something else in the cards for me than this, but unless I can start pulling some rabbits out of my hat, the kind I'd never been able to before, it's very hard to even imagine it.  I've gotten to 32 now, with absolutely nothing in this area of life.  It's starting to get scary now.

'honeysuckle gets real' past 35. This is the point when you realize this is your life, not some vague, indulgent and depressing idea of  a "fate" you don't think is really going to happen.   Psychological unpleasantness results. Some might call it despair, although that's being a bit dramatic. You realize no mentally sound woman would have anything to do with you even if you could somehow meet singles near your age, which seems next to impossible.

That's bullshit.  Sorry, but it is.  You can't say NO mentally sound woman would date someone with no experience because I know there is some who would.  

But Ska is a case in point.  He has this VERYVERY spec idea in his head of who he would and would not date.  That's fine for younger people, teenagers, because they can play around with it, but when you go so long without any willingness to alter that or at the very least give some other types of women even a tiny chance, of course you will likely fail every time.  When you throw in the lack of a job, virtually your entire life and as a result still live with your parents, it's going to almost guarantee rejection because it's unlikely someone over thirty is going to want to take care of an adult of that age when they refuse to get a job, any job.  So yeah, ska could change a lot, but he doesn't.  And he is also a big one to blame others and society in general for all his issues with dating.  Blaming the bad boys, instead of looking at what he hasn't done.  Yes, he went to college, yes he has a degree, but that was YEARS ago and he has no experience in that field, making it hard to get into the field he wants because he waited so long.  Whereas younger people fresh out will have the newer practices and possibly intern experience.
 
I think we are confusing who gives the chances here. First you say he (or men) has a narrow idea of what he wants, but then say he won't get too far by living with his parents. So who us really being narrow? Just becayse someone doesn't iwn a house doesn't mean they are a burden or useless. Most men in this situation would give a chance if a woman shows interest, but that's not something you can control.
 
Xpendable said:
I think we are confusing who gives the chances here. First you say he (or men) has a narrow idea of what he wants, but then say he won't get too far by living with his parents. So who us really being narrow? Just becayse someone doesn't iwn a house doesn't mean they are a burden or useless. Most men in this situation would give a chance if a woman shows interest, but that's not something you can control.

Would they?  I'm not so sure about that.  It's one thing if you got laid off and were looking for a job, but when you've NEVER really had a job and as a result still live with your parents in your 30s because you refuse to "settle", it's completely different.   It's going to be A LOT harder to find someone who will take that on.  I'm not saying there's no one would do that, but it's going to be unlikely.  A functioning adult should be taking care of himself by the time they hit 30.  Honestly, well before.  And as I said, if you've had jobs, it would be a different story, but when you refuse because you are entitled and think you should be able to run a company (or **** close to that), it's becomes an issue of being...well, a spoiled brat, so to speak.  You don't have to own a house, but you should be able to take care of yourself, you should be able to pay some bills or buy things, like food or basic necessities by yourself.  And I never said Ska was a burden or useless, I would hope he would help out, in some way, if he couldn't financially.  And I'm also not saying he should pay for the woman, because he (and no one) should take care of the other person, unless they have that agreement (think stay at home parent).  I'm simply saying that if Ska were to get into a relationship right now, the woman would have to do everything financially and it would be harder for someone to take that on when they've never had a job in their adult life.  It's the same for women, but as I was using Ska as an example, I used the "he" pronoun. I suppose there are some sugar mamas out there, but I doubt they fit Ska's description of what he says he would date.
 
I had jobs and have one now. I don't have my degree yet so I have to work part time to study. I am 30, so you could say I'm barely functional. Have to live by the day and there's no better chances than just going full wage slave. What are my chances at this point? Because I can offer everything else, romantically speaking.
 
It's a little bit of a different culture in the US in regards to living with parents for extended periods of time. But, I think Callie's most important point is the full imaturity aspect of never starting life, at some point - especially for older women (not early 20s)- not being self-sufficient is going to be an issue. That's not unreasonable.
Living with parents but being functional and taking care of yourself is fair enough, imo. It's actually great tactic to save up money, much better than moving fast and struggling like hell to be comfortable.
The "you have to have life figured out before 30s" is a little out there, though... Not everyone lives in the land of the free, ya know. In most countries, opportunities are really low, not even accounting how much more studying people have to do now. The market changed drastically from what it was 10, 20 years ago.

I still think males are more forgiving of women that have financial issues/no desire to work. I could find guys that'd take care of me financially much easier than guys can find girls to even be interested in them, and I assure you that I do not have gold-digger looks.
 
That's a fair point that the US is different than other cultures.  I can't really say much about dating in other countries and I know living with your parents is more accepted in other cultures.  But it's not so much in America.  
If you are staying with your parents to save money or whatever reason, that's okay to an extent, but not so much if you aren't helping out because you won't get a job. But no, you don't have to have everything figured out.  I seriously doubt most people have things figured out at 30.  
But again, I was using ska as an example and he is in the US.  It is definitely more about being more mature and helping out than simply living with parents.
 
DarkSelene said:
It's a little bit of a different culture in the US in regards to living with parents for extended periods of time. But, I think Callie's most important point is the full imaturity aspect of never starting life, at some point - especially for older women (not early 20s)- not being self-sufficient is going to be an issue. That's not unreasonable.
Living with parents but being functional and taking care of yourself is fair enough, imo. It's actually great tactic to save up money, much better than moving fast and struggling like hell to be comfortable.
The "you have to have life figured out before 30s" is a little out there, though... Not everyone lives in the land of the free, ya know. In most countries, opportunities are really low, not even accounting how much more studying people have to do now. The market changed drastically from what it was 10, 20 years ago.

I still think males are more forgiving of women that have financial issues/no desire to work. I could find guys that'd take care of me financially much easier than guys can find girls to even be interested in them, and I assure you that I do not have gold-digger looks.

That I do agree with. The number of times Ive had a past girlfriend tell me "I want to be a housewife or at home mom" is literally 100%. Whereas one of the main criteria of many women on dating websites is, as listed in the description, "who has a job". Then again, I think thats the conflict playing out on the unequal discourse of Feminism over the past 80 years; we have the right to choose to not work, but if you do its a negative. I won't say its generalized, because its not, but I do believe those who dont go by that philosophy form the exception, not the norm.
Needless to say, I'll marry the next girl who buys me dinner, on the basis that its never happenned in 39 years ;-)
As for your previous post...well honestly I didnt get all that lol. Might be the language barrier or the fact I only had one hour of shut eye last night. Lets agree to disagree, though Id be lying if I said I cared all that much about the subject to begin with lol. Im too firm a believer in peoples right to do whatever they want despite what I may think about it to have much of a strong opinion on it. I'll probably still say men complain too much, but that's just me, a man, complaining too much ;-)
 
It's not even that anymore, now choosing to be a housewife is horrible for womankind.
 
To be fair to him it's likely Ska's never really been in a situation where his lack of a job/career was the deciding factor. A job and some goals are just about a necessity, but even then some guys lack the right personality traits, expected experience and life progressions.
 
This thread originally started out as a question that seemed to be an invitation to vent about the frustrations of online dating. It seems to me to have turned into a debate here on whether a "dateless" person should continue with the efforts of dating while others are saying that that is bad advice. Whether or not they are talking about online dating anymore isn't clear to me. But here is my two cents, or maybe it is a quarter:

I am 31 now and not what one might consider a "dateless" person. I guess I have a guy right now I am dating whom we have never had an official, or any kind really, of discussion of relationship status with. He lives about 40 minutes from me in a major city in my state, while I live in a smaller city in the same state. To be honest, I'm not sure I can say what we are or even if we are even dating anymore, since I haven't seen him in awhile. I will say, though, that I grew up in a very religious culture where "everyone" gets married by the time that they are, I dunno, say, about mid twenties. And that's considered old. I did not date in high school, but when I turned 18 I wanted to be married to someone of my religion, and being that I lived in the Chicago area at the time, which, might as well say it, doesn't have very many Mormons, my options of dating were always limited. There was a point where I decided I did not care to date men of my faith anymore since I was getting towards mid 20s and was not getting any dates, and I did meet many guys on POF, however they did not respect my standards and did stupid things like beg for sex or refuse to take me home until we had sex, so I gave up on the idea of dating men who weren't lds, and so I was dateless for years afterwards. Even when I went to college at BYUI, which was nicknamed "BYU-Ido" at the time because of its reputation of marrying off people. I hated every minute there and despite being very active and joining clubs, I think that when people found out I was over 25 they did not want to date me, and I stopped telling people my age. During that time I felt completely hopeless about dating and getting into a relationship, as seems to be a common feeling here. But what I want to say in regards to this discussion/argument, is that I understand why many of the guys here are angry and bitter about not being able to get in a relationship. I certainly know how that feels. Even with the advantages I know I have, I still feel at times like I want to just go somewhere alone and scream about the anger of it all, and I know that there are those worse off than me. When you are in this state of mind where everything seems hopeless and going to get worse, your brain tends to try and find coping mechanisms to deal with the situation. For me, this seemed to be a numbing effect where I stopped seeing myself as a person and beginning to experience a strange feeling as if being underwater sort of, like nothing around me is real, or I'm somehow detached and not part of what goes on around me. I even take medication to treat this and see a therapist, but I have to say that I really wish that on this site of all sites, a site for self described lonely people, there was a bit more of compassion for the hopeless.

If people do not get what they socially need as human beings, their very minds will start to find coping strategies to handle the situation whether it is a conscious decision or not. This is how mental illnesses begin. This is how terrible tragedies happen, and it is most unfortunate that even here no one can offer more than patronizing condescension with little thought to the diversity of experience that exists here. It is a human need to socialize, willpower be damned. Sure there are extraordinary stories of people that make it a long time in isolation on their own, but they certainly aren't healthy well-adjusted individuals. And there was a comment on here about how paralyzed people can walk with technology. Tell that to someone with cerebral palsy. I can tell you firsthand that some things cannot be "willpowered" and believed away. Someone in a wheelchair will have more limited options for dating than they would had they not had that disability. That is a simple fact. There may be many people who are willing to overlook that, but that does not change the fact that their pool is smaller or perhaps more shallow is a better word, than if they had been completely able-bodied. And so it goes for many things. My dating options are limited because I am crazy. So there's that.

I read a study that when a group of people were asked if they were faced with a choice of making a high enough income to be upper class, but made less than their peers, or make less but be better off than their peers, the would choose the latter. It is human nature to not only need to socialize, but to compare yourself to those around you in similar situations. It is how people figure out where they stand socially, and also what they use as a point of reference so that they can solve their own problems. The thing about this sort of frustration and hopelessness, is that it is a malady that is not likely treated with harsh criticism and angry vitriol, at least in my experience. If a person wants to vent, they should have every right to do so, and I believe that it would be conducive to the discussion and to the improvement of these people's situations if they could at least be heard.
 
ardour said:
(Good thing he wasn't 5'11 eh.)

Why the height issue?

ardour said:
'honeysuckle gets real' past 35. Its the point when you realize "this is it", not some vague, indulgent idea of a "fate" you don't think is really going to happen.  Some might call it despair, although that's being a bit dramatic. You realize no mentally sound woman would have anything to do with you even if you could somehow meet singles near your age. and you couldn't even function in a relationship if given the chance.

Well, why not?
 
DarkSelene said:
It's not even that anymore, now choosing to be a housewife is horrible for womankind.

I don't know, I guess it would be true in the US, but here thats not the case that I know of. Lots of stay at home moms or housewives end up opening CPEs too, so its not as looked down as it seems to be in the US.
Sayyou want to be a houseMAN though, then you'll be called lazy. There is some levl of inherent illogicism in that. Id much rather stay at home to raise my kids than a maid, or teacher, or whoever you would need if both parents work full time. If I had the means and it was my situation, of course.
But that seems to be, at least in the majority of the populace eyes, a still vastly exclusive female domain. Getting better though.

Also, and this is for Wallflower, the norm here is people in their 30s and 40s not being married because they consider themselves too young to really "settle down". I'm sure no one would make you feel that way, quite the opposite. In fact, if I remember your pic accurately coupled with your personnality, you'd probably have to turn down dates ;-)
Needless to say I'd have probably been expelled if I had gone there. Was a bit less about books and more about....extra-curricular activities lol.

GET your minds out of the gutter! I was a militant for the RRQ ;-)
 

Latest posts

Back
Top