# Met this girl on OKC but it appears that I do all the contacting



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

We haven't met face to face yet but I am having second thoughts because not once in two weeks has she sent a text first saying hello or good morning or picked up the phone and called to see how I was

So I just don't feel the need to meet her and treat to brunch when the interest appears to be one-sided. I mean she is a good looking girl so I know she can either be in the process of getting to know someone or already involved/

I just feel it doesn't make a lot of sense to arrange a meeting with someone who never initiates contact at al.

Anyone agree? I don't have a issue with paying but i need to feel that she is also interested in me too.

Seems like men are expected to chase and pay


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

If that's how you feel, then just stop contacting her.


----------



## SecondTime'Round (Jan 15, 2015)

I think you just ask her. Most people like to be asked directly if assured you really are ok with either answer? interested or not. Just be honest and genuine and ask if there's enough interest to get together.


----------



## SARAHMCD (Jul 2, 2014)

I'm curious how often you're texting someone you only met online 2 weeks ago. Personally, I wouldn't be texting a guy just to ask how he's doing today if we'd never even met yet. 
Early on, yes, I think most women expect the guy to make the initiatives. Is she responding quickly to you? And not just one word answers? If so, ask her if she is interested in meeting.


----------



## Rowan (Apr 3, 2012)

It may be that she prefers the guy to make the first move to ask her out. And, since you haven't asked for a meeting yet, she may unsure of your interest level. She may not be comfortable with a whole lot of back and forth with someone she's never met. It seems a bit extreme to expect phone calls and good morning/good night texts daily from someone you're not in a relationship with and haven't even asked out yet. 

I'm on a couple different online dating sites. If there isn't enough interest to arrange a face-to-face meeting within a week or so of initial contact, then I typically just cut my losses. There's little point, in my opinion, in investing a lot of time and emotional energy in someone you've never actually met in person.


----------



## frusdil (Sep 5, 2013)

I think most women like the man to take the lead, in the early stages of dating. Is she receptive to your contact? Happy to hear from you and engages in conversation with you? Or is it like pulling teeth to get any kind of conversation happening?

If it's the former - she's interested, and likes you leading things. Nothing wrong with that, though it may not work for you, which is what dating is for - to find this stuff out. 

If it's like pulling teeth to get conversation going, stop contacting her, she's not interested.

When we started dating, hubby made all the plans and initiated pretty much all contact. I liked that, told him so, so he kept doing it  He led our relationship, he courted me and I lapped it up - I LOVED it. Obviously as time goes on contacting each other becomes more even, but he still planned most of our dates and things like that - he still does now we're married. It's like he's still courting me, I love it and so does he 

Now that may not work for you - you might prefer to date differently, and that's fine too. As I said, that's what dating is for. One of my girlfriends just a couple of days ago expressed her frustration to me about a man she's just met, who keeps texting her but she wants him to call her. She said "Why won't he call? I hate texting!". I said "Why are you telling me? Tell him!". I said tell him ONCE in response to a text, that you'd prefer him to call rather than text and that you're looking forward to talking to him. If he keeps texting, just stop responding.

Same with you - ask her why she doesn't contact you. If you don't say anything how will she know that you don't like it?


----------



## Maneo (Dec 4, 2012)

is only been 2 weeks. don't overthink this. if it just doesn't feel right, move on. if it feels worth a risk, have coffee. Starbucks is cheaper than a meal.


----------



## IDon'tKnowAnymore (Jul 6, 2015)

It's possible that she's not that interested. Stop contacting her for a while, and see what happens.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

Hurry up and meet her face to face. Then make your decision.,


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

You haven't even met face to face and already you're clingy and needy and wanting frequent contact. The only way she'll take you seriously and reciprocate your interest is if you DO meet and you both like each other. You're going about this all wrong, IMO. Until you meet, you are probably just one of many prospects, and may seem like the least stable.


----------



## pleasecoffee (Jun 18, 2015)

if you are doing all the contacting, She's just not that into you. But do a favor and tell her in a quick text "it's not going to work out" then delete the # from your phone. don't ghost on a girl. it hurts. I have been there and it sucks. all those I have met on OKC faded and as a female I want to know why, but I don't have the balls to ask them why. two weeks is plenty of time to plan a date and meet face to face.


----------



## toonaive (Dec 13, 2012)

Maneo said:


> is only been 2 weeks. don't overthink this. if it just doesn't feel right, move on. if it feels worth a risk, have coffee. Starbucks is cheaper than a meal.


This


----------



## dash74 (Jan 3, 2015)

SMG15 said:


> We haven't met face to face yet but I am having second thoughts because not once in two weeks has she sent a text first saying hello or good morning or picked up the phone and called to see how I was
> 
> So I just don't feel the need to meet her and treat to brunch when the interest appears to be one-sided. I mean she is a good looking girl so I know she can either be in the process of getting to know someone or already involved/
> 
> ...


Dude you have a classic attention wh*re she is probably getting brunch from 20 different dudes and she wont call because she doesn't care to remember your name or number 

Now I am probably fos but maybe not just think about it and go meet a woman irl and not online 

remember the 1:3 golden ratio 1 call or txt to every 3 of hers or she will think you need her more and then you will end up in the same situation

I am glad I am married dating games suck balzack


----------



## pleasecoffee (Jun 18, 2015)

the 1:3 is TOTALLY BS. It should be 1:1, because if you are only going to reply after 3 of my texts, I will assume you are just stringing me along for sex.


----------



## SARAHMCD (Jul 2, 2014)

pleasecoffee said:


> the 1:3 is TOTALLY BS. It should be 1:1, because if you are only going to reply after 3 of my texts, I will assume you are just stringing me along for sex.


Agreed. I hate this supposed "rule". If I text a guy twice and he doesn't respond, I'm not texting a third time. He's not interested.


----------



## Tomara (Jun 19, 2013)

She could be busy
She could be not interested

I personally hate lots of text messages because they can be taken the wrong way. Sure way to find out is to stop, it she contacts you then you know she is interested.


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

SARAHMCD said:


> I'm curious how often you're texting someone you only met online 2 weeks ago. Personally, I wouldn't be texting a guy just to ask how he's doing today if we'd never even met yet.
> Early on, yes, I think most women expect the guy to make the initiatives. Is she responding quickly to you? And not just one word answers? If so, ask her if she is interested in meeting.


Yes she responds to all my calls and my texts but we have not met yet because she went out of town and then came July 4th. But I just wanted to see a text or call from her first atleast once before we met


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

Rowan said:


> It may be that she prefers the guy to make the first move to ask her out. And, since you haven't asked for a meeting yet, she may unsure of your interest level. She may not be comfortable with a whole lot of back and forth with someone she's never met. It seems a bit extreme to expect phone calls and good morning/good night texts daily from someone you're not in a relationship with and haven't even asked out yet.
> 
> I'm on a couple different online dating sites. If there isn't enough interest to arrange a face-to-face meeting within a week or so of initial contact, then I typically just cut my losses. There's little point, in my opinion, in investing a lot of time and emotional energy in someone you've never actually met in person.


Well I was buying time for the most part because I was determined not to go on another date until July 11th or 12th

So I would be setting up a face to face meet for this weekend. I did call last night and she responded a hour later saying sorry she missed my call and could we chat tomorrow

Would be nice if she called me tonight which would definitely have me setting up the meet for this weekend


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

frusdil said:


> I think most women like the man to take the lead, in the early stages of dating. Is she receptive to your contact? Happy to hear from you and engages in conversation with you? Or is it like pulling teeth to get any kind of conversation happening?
> 
> If it's the former - she's interested, and likes you leading things. Nothing wrong with that, though it may not work for you, which is what dating is for - to find this stuff out.
> 
> ...



Yes she responds to all my texts and calls


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

pleasecoffee said:


> if you are doing all the contacting, She's just not that into you. But do a favor and tell her in a quick text "it's not going to work out" then delete the # from your phone. don't ghost on a girl. it hurts. I have been there and it sucks. all those I have met on OKC faded and as a female I want to know why, but I don't have the balls to ask them why. two weeks is plenty of time to plan a date and meet face to face.


She was out of town and then the July 4th Holiday came so now we are able to meet


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

dash74 said:


> Dude you have a classic attention wh*re she is probably getting brunch from 20 different dudes and she wont call because she doesn't care to remember your name or number
> 
> Now I am probably fos but maybe not just think about it and go meet a woman irl and not online
> 
> ...


This is a total PUA move. If I guy did this to me, it would be a complete non-starter for me.

This will turn off the women worth dating, and will only attract the insecure ones. BAD ADVICE.


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

dash74 said:


> Dude you have a classic attention wh*re she is probably getting brunch from 20 different dudes and she wont call because she doesn't care to remember your name or number
> 
> Now I am probably fos but maybe not just think about it and go meet a woman irl and not online
> 
> ...


You could have a point, since we met on OKC these are all the excuses she had for not answering the phone or not being to meet 

1. Traveling Out of State to a friends wedding

2. Some Event she was attending in the evening

3. Helping a friend move

4. Car issues

5. Dinner with her brother for his birthday'

6. Birthday Party for a friend



So you can see how I am not too excited to meet on top of her not initiating contact atleast once


----------



## weightlifter (Dec 14, 2012)

Does okc use schills?


----------



## dash74 (Jan 3, 2015)

FeministInPink said:


> This is a total PUA move. If I guy did this to me, it would be a complete non-starter for me.
> 
> This will turn off the women worth dating, and will only attract the insecure ones. BAD ADVICE.


And okc and the likes are full of women looking for a quick fix of attention, dinners, ect you dont enter the online dating game without a sound battle plan and a strong backbone look up the pizza ordering game that is why I told him to meet someone in real life and not online

1:3 is pua behavior or game and so what it maybe a nonstarter for you but I bet you would not be one sided with contact like the op's whatever she is and thus its moot with you but not for her she is running a game on him and he needs to drop her with no call just straight up ghost her


----------



## dash74 (Jan 3, 2015)

SMG15 said:


> You could have a point, since we met on OKC these are all the excuses she had for not answering the phone or not being to meet
> 
> 1. Traveling Out of State to a friends wedding
> 
> ...


She's full of more excuses than a crackhead on cops time to jump ship


----------



## frusdil (Sep 5, 2013)

SMG15 said:


> You could have a point, since we met on OKC these are all the excuses she had for not answering the phone or not being to meet
> 
> 1. Traveling Out of State to a friends wedding
> 
> ...


I still think you should at least let her know that you'd like her to contact you first sometimes. As a woman should let a man know that she prefers phone calls to texts etc. You only say it once though. If she doesn't change, then it means you're not compatible and you move on.

I'll be honest, her list of excuses are pretty long...my hubby used to call me, and he'd let me know when he was going to call so I made sure I was available. If I had something on I'd let him know that, and say that I'd be free at X time...


----------



## Maneo (Dec 4, 2012)

sounds to me like she is putting only modest effort into this. you've only talked on the phone and had online discourse. you met on a dating site. likely that she may have several similar dialogues going with other guys from the dating site. you aren't her first priority. no big surprise. she probably won't invest more in the relationship until she feels something more substantial might develop. 

you, on the other hand, seem to be ready to invest more energy already. 

your self imposed dates for your next date are nearly here. meet the woman at an inexpensive place. go dutch if you want. see if there is spark. nothing ventured, nothing gained. you've spent more time in this thread on the forum than it will take to meet her for a cup of java. order the coffee to go and if there is no spark, depart early. if there's a spark order a second cup.

geez, just do it or not


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

You have to remember that the amount of attention a woman receives on a dating site is 50x that of a man. In fact, it's so lopsided, that no men I know that have ever used a dating site has had any success whatsoever without making contact first. Simply put, the vast majority of women put up a profile and sit back and wait. Whereas the men on those sites (regardless of their reason for being there) send out 20 messages a day in the hopes of just getting one response.

I used a dating site once, in between my divorce and my meeting my now wife. I had a great profile, enough information to get a sense of who I am, but not my entire life story. A handful of really good pictures that showed my face, body type and height/weight, etc. I was 32 or 33 at the time, employed, no kids, owned a house and two cars, and I am a decent enough looking guy. You'd think I would have generated at least a little bit of interest.

And... nothing.

I had a profile up for a little less than two months, and not one woman contacted me first. I probably sent out 80 or 90 messages to women I thought might be at least a bit of a match, and got back less than 10 responses. Of those, only one went anywhere, and we realized we weren't a great match after about 2 weeks or so. Never met in person.

Dating sites DO work, but if you're a man looking for an actual relationship (not just sex), you're going to have to be extremely patient AND do a lot of work. The worst part about it is sending messages. One liners won't catch anybody's eye. So you spend 20 minutes crafting a nice, personal message to someone and you never hear from them. Repeat that 50 or 100 times, and it gets tiresome.

And the crappy thing is that if and when you finally generate some interest from somebody, the likelihood that she's juggling a few guys at the same time is high, so you're competing right off the bat.

If I had to do it over again (online dating), I'd put up a kick-a** profile, and freakin' leave it there. Hell, I'd probably even say right in the main intro box that I'm not interested in contacting 50 women a month with strong, personal intro messages, only to not even receive so much as a "thanks for your message, not interested." If you're interested, please contact me, and I'll get back to you one way or another. I'm not interested in throwing spaghetti at the wall, and I'm not lazy, either. If you're the type of woman who expects 100 men a day to contact her, therefore you don't have to do any work, I'm not interested!"


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

alexm said:


> You have to remember that the amount of attention a woman receives on a dating site is 50x that of a man. In fact, it's so lopsided, that no men I know that have ever used a dating site has had any success whatsoever without making contact first. Simply put, the vast majority of women put up a profile and sit back and wait. Whereas the men on those sites (regardless of their reason for being there) send out 20 messages a day in the hopes of just getting one response.
> 
> I used a dating site once, in between my divorce and my meeting my now wife. I had a great profile, enough information to get a sense of who I am, but not my entire life story. A handful of really good pictures that showed my face, body type and height/weight, etc. I was 32 or 33 at the time, employed, no kids, owned a house and two cars, and I am a decent enough looking guy. You'd think I would have generated at least a little bit of interest.
> 
> ...


Hmm... you say it's so much easier for women in OLD? I beg to differ. I can't even BEGIN to count all the clever, thoughtful, well-crafted messages that I've sent to men who were, according to the OLD algorithms, and excellent match for me. And how many of them generated a response? Maybe five in the last year?

And yes, I'm getting a decent number of messages, from men, but less than 5% are acceptable/dateable. It's incredibly demoralizing.

So I've stopped investing any energy or hope into OLD at all. It's not worth it. If you find a gem, you know it, and there won't be all this drama and second-guessing. Otherwise, you have to be pretty flippant/cavalier just to keep all your hopes and dreams from being crushed.


----------



## pleasecoffee (Jun 18, 2015)

alexm said:


> You have to remember that the amount of attention a woman receives on a dating site is 50x that of a man. In fact, it's so lopsided, that no men I know that have ever used a dating site has had any success whatsoever without making contact first. Simply put, the vast majority of women put up a profile and sit back and wait. Whereas the men on those sites (regardless of their reason for being there) send out 20 messages a day in the hopes of just getting one response.
> 
> I used a dating site once, in between my divorce and my meeting my now wife. I had a great profile, enough information to get a sense of who I am, but not my entire life story. A handful of really good pictures that showed my face, body type and height/weight, etc. I was 32 or 33 at the time, employed, no kids, owned a house and two cars, and I am a decent enough looking guy. You'd think I would have generated at least a little bit of interest.
> 
> ...



Yeah, this is completely false. I get that I am not even a 7 (I've been told between a 4 and a 6), but I had been on OLD (4 different sites) since May. I would go weeks without a email. tons of looks, but no replies. I sent out plenty (upwards of 50-60) in that time, only got three replies back. And those who I did talk to, faded after a week. I deleted all my accounts because I got frustrated. Guys want Barbies, and that is not me. Guys assume because TV shows like According to Jim and King of Queens, that they don't need to look good to get the hot chick.


----------



## coffee4me (Feb 6, 2013)

pleasecoffee said:


> Yeah, this is completely false. I get that I am not even a 7 (I've been told between a 4 and a 6), but I had been on OLD (4 different sites) since May. I would go weeks without a email. tons of looks, but no replies. I sent out plenty (upwards of 50-60) in that time, only got three replies back. And those who I did talk to, faded after a week. I deleted all my accounts because I got frustrated. Guys want Barbies, and that is not me. Guys assume because TV shows like According to Jim and King of Queens, that they don't need to look good to get the hot chick.



My friends in their 50's would agree with you they didn't get tons of messages. They didn't have their pick of guys - they couldn't even find 1 guy to have a coffee date. They say women in their 50's are invisible. 

Clearly you are much younger pleasecoffee (nice username ) You've been told you are a 4 to a 6? Who the heck tells you stuff like that? What's that even mean? You are average don't get your hopes up? Don't listen to that crap.


----------



## Constable Odo (Feb 14, 2015)

SMG15 said:


> We haven't met face to face yet but I am having second thoughts because not once in two weeks has she sent a text first saying hello or good morning or picked up the phone and called to see how I was


She's not into you. Just stop texting her and move on.




pleasecoffee said:


> But do a favor and tell her in a quick text "it's not going to work out" then delete the # from your phone. don't ghost on a girl. it hurts.


How is it going to "hurt" someone who isn't emotionally vested at any level in the "relationship"?




pleasecoffee said:


> I've been told between a 4 and a 6


These numbers are completely subjective, since what one finds a 3 someone else may find a 10. 

However, you should take great comfort to know that, from an evolutionary perspective, men by far find extremely average women the most attractive.

The reason for this is quite simple: If men were only attracted to exceptionally attractive women (say, 3 standard deviations from the mean), then the species would go extinct, because such women would be extremely rare. Instead, nature ensures men will be attracted to the "average", to ensure we have an adequate number of mates to choose from, and thus, the species continues.

I have always considered myself "average". My SO may disagree with me, the same way she thinks she is "nothing special" yet I find her incredibly beautiful.




SMG15 said:


> .


OP: It doesn't take a 2x6 whacking you in the forehead to realize if this woman were interested, she'd be actively texting and emailing you back and forth. If you're the only one initiating contact, then it sounds as if she's simply being polite and responding to you when prompted.

Move on.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

SMG15 said:


> So I would be setting up a face to face meet for this weekend. I did call last night and *she responded a hour later saying sorry she missed my call and could we chat tomorrow*


yes, online dating is stupid. Tell her you like talking with her and want to meet. If she misses your call again and messages to schedule a time that suits her, simply tell her to call you when she's available - this puts the ball entirely in her court and so if you don't hear from her you know where you stand, and if you do get a call from her your problem has been solved. Meanwhile keep contacting other potential dates you see on OKC and everywhere else you go.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

FeministInPink said:


> Hmm... you say it's so much easier for women in OLD? I beg to differ. I can't even BEGIN to count all the clever, thoughtful, well-crafted messages that I've sent to men who were, according to the OLD algorithms, and excellent match for me. And how many of them generated a response? Maybe five in the last year?





pleasecoffee said:


> Yeah, this is completely false. I get that I am not even a 7 (I've been told between a 4 and a 6), but I had been on OLD (4 different sites) since May. I would go weeks without a email. tons of looks, but no replies. I sent out plenty (upwards of 50-60) in that time, only got three replies back. And those who I did talk to, faded after a week. I deleted all my accounts because I got frustrated. Guys want Barbies, and that is not me. Guys assume because TV shows like According to Jim and King of Queens, that they don't need to look good to get the hot chick.


Fair enough guys!

My personal experience is ~7 years ago, so maybe the online dating scene has evened out a bit since then. I stand by what I say was my experience, even though the scenarios may have evolved since I was last in it.

That said, any of my male friends who have used online dating to find a mate (not sex), have similar experiences to tell. Though again, they are not recent, either.

My uneducated guess is that the playing field has levelled out over the years, and people (men especially) have figured out that it's women who will get the bulk of the attention on these sites (at least the free ones, anyway) and have adapted accordingly. I think the paid sites, like Match, probably lure a more serious clientele than the free ones (PoF), and having to pay to have a profile probably eliminates the "set it and forget it" types of people.

On a related note, my wife was on a free dating site (PoF) in the year she was single prior to meeting me. She said she did make the initial contact a number of times, but was mostly met with d-bags and dudes looking to hook up. But the amount of interest she generated was unreal, at least relative to the amount of "work" she had to do. Again, this is 7-ish years ago.


----------



## Loveofmylife921 (Jun 28, 2015)

Hi there everyone! I just wanted to say to pleasecoffee, I think your a 10. And like the other guy said and I have said before beauty is subjective. One persons 4 or 6 is another persons 10. So smile and be positive.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

pleasecoffee said:


> Yeah, this is completely false. I get that I am not even a 7 (I've been told between a 4 and a 6), but I had been on OLD (4 different sites) since May. I would go weeks without a email. tons of looks, but no replies. I sent out plenty (upwards of 50-60) in that time, only got three replies back. And those who I did talk to, faded after a week. I deleted all my accounts because I got frustrated. Guys want Barbies, and that is not me. Guys assume because TV shows like According to Jim and King of Queens, that they don't need to look good to get the hot chick.


First of all, if that's you in your avatar pic, then the people who are saying you're between a "4 and a 6" are blind. My avatar picture is a solid 8, by the way.

Second of all, who on earth is telling you something like that? Who actually says that to somebody? And who uses that scale after the age of 18 or 19, anyway?

Now, I'm going to disagree with you that it's entirely based on looks (ie. being a Barbie). We men aren't all that shallow, and certainly no more shallow than women can be.

In my analogy above, I also had zero luck, despite me being decent looking and having a pretty good profile, if I recall. Not to mention being early 30's, educated, financially secure, no kids, owning property, and divorced - looking for a relationship, not a hook up. I went into online dating at that time thinking I'd find somebody pretty quickly. Aren't I what women are looking for??? And in 2 months, nothing. Like NOTHING.

So like you, I started thinking negatively. I'm not a tall guy (5'7"), and I don't have abs of steel (normal, average body). So I thought it must be the pictures I have on my profile that's not attractive to women, and some of them probably aren't even reading my profile, just looking at the pics, saying "too average", "too short", "no abs" or whatever.

So it goes both ways.

But then I started to think more positively. Perhaps a small percentage of these women were somehow intimidated by my profile in one way or another. Maybe intimidated isn't the right word. Maybe I had it _too_ together? Maybe some were broken, or hurt, and more comfortable with somebody similar? As stupid as it sounds, my wife was somewhat intimidated by me when we started dating. She was a blue collar, high-school level educated, single mom, who had only ever rented before, and never owned a new car. She described herself as "white trash" :grin2: She was unsure if our different upbringings and lifestyles would mesh well together. In the end, we've very much met in the middle, where we each have a little bit of the others worlds now ingrained in us. And we're both better for it.

But had we come across each other's profiles on some dating site, it's unlikely either one of us would have contacted the other - which is the downside to online dating, it allows you to set strict parameters, things that, had you not been asked when filling out the information, might never have occurred to you.

When you're online dating, you're tending to look at a whole bunch of things at once, rather than going through the "normal" steps of dating. In real life, you see somebody who's attractive to you. Then you talk to them. Then you go out for a coffee or something. Then a second date, a third date, dinner at home, a day spent together, then sex, and on and on and on, until marriage.

Online, you're taking out about 10 birds with one stone with the click of a mouse, and it's easy to overlook somebody who's actually a good match for you - all without even making contact online, never mind in person.

It may be convenient, and it may be a time-saver, but it'll never compare to meeting somebody in person without already knowing half their life's story ahead of time, what their likes and dislikes are, and what they're looking for in a mate. It sounds cheesy, but getting to know somebody the old fashioned way is f***ing magical.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

alexm, actual "online dating sites" like PoF and OKC actually can't match the convenience of tinder - and if you haven't heard that's where all the pretty young people go to find dates these days.

As for PoF and OKC, your experience seven years ago was the same as mine 3 years ago. waste of my time. But I had a friend who's brother was on there, getting sex almost nightly, and he's shorter than you and I almost guarantee lower ranking on the scale, the difference is he wasn't looking for anything other than a warm hole, and likewise there were plenty of warm holes looking for nothing but a guy willing to poke it. No pictures were ever necessary, only rubbers. Oh and no expectations other than be the gender claim.

For normal people looking to meet other normal people it's gotta be the worst. Attractive people looking for good relationship material is probably a close second (but at least they have many other avenues).


----------



## jb02157 (Apr 16, 2014)

SMG15 said:


> We haven't met face to face yet but I am having second thoughts because not once in two weeks has she sent a text first saying hello or good morning or picked up the phone and called to see how I was
> 
> So I just don't feel the need to meet her and treat to brunch when the interest appears to be one-sided. I mean she is a good looking girl so I know she can either be in the process of getting to know someone or already involved/
> 
> ...


I agree with you. I don't think it makes sense for you to initiate all the contact. Seems like she's not interested enough to bother with.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

I am going to go against the others and agree with you Alex but it was over 4 yrs ago that I was OLD so maybe things have changed.

Woman, mid 40's and I got 100's of contact requests, 10 plus per day and that was a mix of paid and free sites. I never once made first contact, there was no need. But I do live in a city of 4mil people so it was easy. The men that I did meet or date all said the same thing that OLD was difficult for them, they sent out lots of requests and often got no reply. I was multi dating most of time, then met Mr H and we became exclusive very quickly.

OP OLD is a numbers game, don't waste emotion or energy on it. Make contact and meet up withing a few days. If you haven't met within a few days then just move on to the next one. I assume you are looking for women to date not a pen pal?


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

I generally don't text or call someone much when I've set up a time to see them. Sort of seems a bit pointless? If you talk about everything before you see them, what will you talk about when you see them?

That said, I'm just not into texting and calling except when I have something to say. Maybe she doesn't have a lot to say.

You haven't even met yet and you're wanting her to be head over heels for you. I say it like that because it literally took me being head over heels for someone before I'd be texting and calling like a lovesick puppy. I don't care how someone feels in the morning, I'm just thinking about my first cup of coffee. The coffee machine gets more love from me than someone I haven't even met yet, that's for sure.


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

Constable Odo said:


> She's not into you. Just stop texting her and move on.
> 
> OP: It doesn't take a 2x6 whacking you in the forehead to realize if this woman were interested, she'd be actively texting and emailing you back and forth. If you're the only one initiating contact, then it sounds as if she's simply being polite and responding to you when prompted.
> 
> Move on.


Sometimes I feel like I live on a different planet to everyone else. I don't understand the expectation that anyone should have enough interest in someone they haven't yet met to actively contact them prior to an arranged meeting, other than to confirm the meeting. Especially when a majority of the time, one of them was actually away, on a trip or whatever.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Lon said:


> alexm, actual "online dating sites" like PoF and OKC actually can't match the convenience of tinder - and if you haven't heard that's where all the pretty young people go to find dates these days.


Actually, you raise an interesting theory.

When I dipped into online dating (and again, 7 years ago, for ~2 months, my sample size is not long, nor is it current), I don't think there were as many different sites, catering to different wants, at the time.

As you say, things like Tinder now exist, among many other apps and sites that cater to individual markets.

So when I was on Match, for example, there weren't just people looking for relationships on there, if you know what I mean. Nowadays, with Tinder, as well as sites that are specifically designed for short term hookups. it's likely that those people have migrated elsewhere, leaving places like Match to the folks searching for actual relationships.

I'd venture a guess that places like Craigslist aren't nearly as popular as they once were, either, for short term, or long term relationship personals.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

breeze said:


> Sometimes I feel like I live on a different planet to everyone else. I don't understand the expectation that anyone should have enough interest in someone they haven't yet met to actively contact them prior to an arranged meeting, other than to confirm the meeting. Especially when a majority of the time, one of them was actually away, on a trip or whatever.


This entire thread is an accurate portrayal of how society is moving along (devolving...) when it comes to dating and relationships.

It's about texts and emails and profiles and pictures - all very detached ways of getting to know somebody.

I'm certainly not against online dating - it works, and it's convenient. But as mentioned a few posts above, if you're not meeting in person within a week (or less), then what are you doing?

I'm not really sure why anybody is spending any longer than that chatting back and forth before even meeting in person - which is when you'll figure out of you're compatible or not. If I look at your profile and am interested, I'll send you a message. You look at my profile, and if you're also interested, then move on to phase 2 - human contact (!!!) It's kind of the point, no?

The idea is to match up with somebody and go from there. But it seems as though people can't even be bothered to do the "get to know you" phase in person any more.

It's even worse with casual stuff, to the point where only a brief description and a photo is enough to have sex with somebody. (or not even a photo, apparently!! :surprise: )


----------



## Constable Odo (Feb 14, 2015)

alexm said:


> So when I was on Match, for example, there weren't just people looking for relationships on there, if you know what I mean. Nowadays, with Tinder, as well as sites that are specifically designed for short term hookups. it's likely that those people have migrated elsewhere, leaving places like Match to the folks searching for actual relationships.


This is getting a bit off topic... but...

The last time I used OLD was wayyyy back in the "olden days" of 2003 when I got divorced; although I did meet my SO on OKC, but that was completely random chance, as I was just trolling for young(er) women 

Now, my SO did use OLD when she came back into the dating pool, including eHarmony, Match, OKC and I think there was another one I can't recall offhand. She was pretty explicit in her profile what she was looking for (relationship, marriage, kids) and what she was not (ONSs, old geezers with kids hitting on her (e.g. ME!), guys who were going to waste her time, etc.)

She had very limited success with OLD; very few men reached out to her, and almost all the dates she had, she initiated contact.

Fortunately, I was able to use my Older Man Jedi Mind Tricks on her (I waved my hand in front of the monitor while saying "Those aren't the penises you're looking for...") and later explained to her the likely reason more men weren't hitting on her in OLD is her profile came across as too intimidating. Guys are generally not looking for a woman who has her $hit together and knows what she wants, they want someone they can bull$hit.

Even in sites which are allegedly designed for "relationships", I think it is a thin veneer. In the Boston area now there are more "matchmaking" services advertising now, for people who don't want to waste the time wading through the molassas of OLD.

My one encounter with OLD was back in 2003 when I first was divorced, and it was a sheer numbers game. Men had to use the shotgun approach to contacting women, and I would probably say you were lucky if you got a 10% response rate. Probably because most of the female accounts were shills populated there by the vendor. That's one reason why I, as a man, never really gave online dating a serious chance (I think my Match 'subscription' was a 3-month deal I never renewed).

From time to time, as "new" OLD sites pop up -- like "farmersonly.com", which was a hoot, people posting pics of themselves with their livestock and tractors (and I can say this, having livestock, a tractor, and originating from a small farming community in Ohio) -- I have checked out those sites and flipped through the profiles to "rate" them by how easily they are identified as shills.

This was actually how I met my SO, but that's another story.

What I did learn back in 2003 though, was simple: if a woman isn't engaging you in an online exchange on an OLD site, but is only responding politely to your queries, she likely isn't interested, but is simply being polite to you.




alexm said:


> I'm not really sure why anybody is spending any longer than that chatting back and forth before even meeting in person - which is when you'll figure out of you're compatible or not. If I look at your profile and am interested, I'll send you a message. You look at my profile, and if you're also interested, then move on to phase 2 - human contact (!!!) It's kind of the point, no?


My SO chatted back and forth via email for two weeks before we met. Of course, when I initially contacted her, it wasn't to meet her, it was simply to compliment her on her profile, and her photographs, which I found stunning. I had no expectations of actually meeting her, because she was quite explicit in her profile what she was looking for, and I didn't meet the "qualifications". A more detailed description of our meeting is here. A year later, I still think back fondly on those initial days our our friendship.


So, pulling this all together for the OP, I stick by my original response. Stop messaging her and move on.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

When I was online dating a couple of years ago I wouldn't send a ton of text back and forth either until we met for real. Too many people pretending to not be what they said so no sense in getting invested in someone that it wasn't
Going to work out with. My opinion, 2 weeks is about 1 week to long to still be texting. Set a date for some coffee or beer and 30 min just to meet up. After that you will have a better picture on if they are interested in you and you them.


----------



## Rowan (Apr 3, 2012)

I think way too many people take the term "online dating" too literally. They seem to think it's about _dating_ online. What they should be doing is using online dating sites as a means to gain introductions to people they might not have otherwise met in their day to day life. Online dating should really be about online _introductions_. And after that online introduction, they need to meet in real life and date in the real world.


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

Constable Odo said:


> Fortunately, I was able to use my Older Man Jedi Mind Tricks on her (I waved my hand in front of the monitor while saying "Those aren't the penises you're looking for...") and later explained to her the likely reason more men weren't hitting on her in OLD is her profile came across as too intimidating. *Guys are generally not looking for a woman who has her $hit together and knows what she wants, they want someone they can bull$hit.*
> 
> Even in sites which are allegedly designed for "relationships", I think it is a thin veneer. In the Boston area now there are more "matchmaking" services advertising now, for people who don't want to waste the time wading through the molassas of OLD.


 @Constable Odo -- Well, this must be my problem, then! So, why is this? Why do they want someone who is a mess, and therefore probably a mess emotionally? And why not someone who could likely provide a healthier, more satisfying relationship? Is it because they just want to get laid? What?

ETA: I read your post about how you met your wife. Great story. It warmed the cackles of my bitter, jaded heart


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

Rowan said:


> I think way too many people take the term "online dating" too literally. They seem to think it's about _dating_ online. What they should be doing is using online dating sites as a means to gain introductions to people they might not have otherwise met in their day to day life. Online dating should really be about online _introductions_. And after that online introduction, they need to meet in real life and date in the real world.


Yeah, I've talked to a few guys who were new to OLD, and they thought that it was LITERALLY dating online; they didn't understand that it's just a segue to meeting in real life. And then they didn't understand why I stopped chatting with them. I'm not looking for a pen-pal.

I have plenty of pen-pals already on TAM.


----------



## Constable Odo (Feb 14, 2015)

FeministInPink said:


> @Constable Odo -- Well, this must be my problem, then! So, why is this? Why do they want someone who is a mess, and therefore probably a mess emotionally? And why not someone who could likely provide a healthier, more satisfying relationship? Is it because they just want to get laid? What?


That's not what I said. There's a big difference between being a "mess" and being someone who has their $hit together. Strong, confident women intimate some men. Many men are incapable of dealing with a woman who has the titanium exoskeleton of a Terminator, like my SO has; either because they find it unfeminine, they are intimidated by the strength (e.g. they are incapable of dealing with the strength of her personality and are not capable of not being in the 'power position' within the relationship.)

I, on the other hand, find women like my SO refreshing. I know exactly where I stand with her. No "hint-ease". I know her boundaries and her needs, and if I violate the boundaries, or do not meet her needs, I know she'll walk. The converse is true as well. There is no power disparity in our relationship, we are true equals.




Rowan said:


> I think way too many people take the term "online dating" too literally. They seem to think it's about _dating_ online.


I would think these people are at the lower end of the intelligence scale, and thus, ultimately, there genes will be weeded from the gene pool. Undoubtedly they also believe phone sex can get a woman pregnant.


Getting off point again, unfortunately.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

FeministInPink said:


> @Constable Odo -- Well, this must be my problem, then! So, why is this? Why do they want someone who is a mess, and therefore probably a mess emotionally? And why not someone who could likely provide a healthier, more satisfying relationship? Is it because they just want to get laid? What?


Men, by nature, are protectors, therefore the drive to find somebody who needs protecting is strong, even if it's subconscious.

If I had to do it all over again, I'd be looking for a woman who has it together - not that I thought my wife didn't. If was OLDating in my 20's, probably a different story. I'd LIKE to think I wouldn't be looking to get laid, and if one of them turned out to be awesome, then great, but I wouldn't know then what I know now...


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

alexm said:


> Men, by nature, are protectors, therefore the drive to find somebody who needs protecting is strong, even if it's subconscious.
> 
> If I had to do it all over again, I'd be looking for a woman who has it together - not that I thought my wife didn't. If was OLDating in my 20's, probably a different story. I'd LIKE to think I wouldn't be looking to get laid, and if one of them turned out to be awesome, then great, but I wouldn't know then what I know now...


That all makes sense... but you know, even the strong women want protecting. A lot of us, we're strong because we have to be. Because somewhere along the line, maybe more than once, the person who WAS supposed to be our protector (a parent, a partner, or both of them) failed to protect us, maybe even hurt us, so we had to learn how to be strong and protect ourselves. At least, that's what happened to me.

When I was going through my separation/divorce, everyone kept commenting on how strong I was, and all I could think was, I don't really have a choice, do I? No one else is going to protect me, so either I be strong or I fall apart. If I fall apart, I lose what little I have left in my life. If I'm not strong, people will walk all over me. If I'm not strong, I only get the scraps of what others are willing to toss my way, rather than getting what I deserve.

But, ultimately, I still want someone to take care of me, to protect me. Maybe not in a conventional, "pay my bills and fight off predators" sort of way, but even strong women need a caring place to land when things get rough. Because being strong... can be exhausting. We cry. We get scared. We get hurt. Just because it isn't obvious doesn't mean it isn't there, underneath the strong exterior.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Rowan said:


> I think way too many people take the term "online dating" too literally. They seem to think it's about _dating_ online. What they should be doing is using online dating sites as a means to gain introductions to people they might not have otherwise met in their day to day life. Online dating should really be about online _introductions_. And after that online introduction, they need to meet in real life and date in the real world.


Agreed


----------



## nirvana (Jul 2, 2012)

FeministInPink said:


> That all makes sense... but you know, even the strong women want protecting. A lot of us, we're strong because we have to be. Because somewhere along the line, maybe more than once, the person who WAS supposed to be our protector (a parent, a partner, or both of them) failed to protect us, maybe even hurt us, so we had to learn how to be strong and protect ourselves. At least, that's what happened to me.
> 
> When I was going through my separation/divorce, everyone kept commenting on how strong I was, and all I could think was, I don't really have a choice, do I? No one else is going to protect me, so either I be strong or I fall apart. If I fall apart, I lose what little I have left in my life. If I'm not strong, people will walk all over me. If I'm not strong, I only get the scraps of what others are willing to toss my way, rather than getting what I deserve.
> 
> But, ultimately, I still want someone to take care of me, to protect me. Maybe not in a conventional, "pay my bills and fight off predators" sort of way, but even strong women need a caring place to land when things get rough. Because being strong... can be exhausting. We cry. We get scared. We get hurt. Just because it isn't obvious doesn't mean it isn't there, underneath the strong exterior.


FIP, great post! :thumbup:


----------



## Constable Odo (Feb 14, 2015)

FeministInPink said:


> That all makes sense... but you know, even the strong women want protecting.


In every woman, there is still a little girl. As strong as my SO is, there is still a part of her that wants me to hold her at night when we go to bed.

The day the little girl is gone is the day a woman is incapable of loving again, because loving requires vulnerability, and that vulnerability is part of what makes a woman desire to be protected.


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

Women who are below average online will still get a lot of messages because there are tons of men willing to have sex with them.

I call that FAKE INTEREST


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

Constable Odo said:


> This is getting a bit off topic... but...
> 
> The last time I used OLD was wayyyy back in the "olden days" of 2003 when I got divorced; although I did meet my SO on OKC, but that was completely random chance, as I was just trolling for young(er) women
> 
> ...


Tonight was her last chance and I have moved on.


----------



## frusdil (Sep 5, 2013)

FeministInPink said:


> That all makes sense... but you know, even the strong women want protecting. A lot of us, we're strong because we have to be. Because somewhere along the line, maybe more than once, the person who WAS supposed to be our protector (a parent, a partner, or both of them) failed to protect us, maybe even hurt us, so we had to learn how to be strong and protect ourselves. At least, that's what happened to me.
> 
> When I was going through my separation/divorce, everyone kept commenting on how strong I was, and all I could think was, I don't really have a choice, do I?


This is so true!! If I could like this post 1000 x I would.

It's not always that we want protecting or a strong man because we've been hurt by a parents/partner etc. either. Sometimes it's just because we've been single and independent and changed the tap washers, the car tyres, checked the oil etc. because we HAD to. I was a single woman, living alone - I couldn't afford a tradie for everything so I had to learn to do those things myself. 

Now that I have my wonderful hubby, I have zero interest in any of that stuff and I don't do it, he does :grin2: I know that I can if I have to, but I just don't friggin' want to, lol.


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

FeministInPink said:


> And yes, I'm getting a decent number of messages, from men, but less than 5% are acceptable/dateable. It's incredibly demoralizing.


Can you expand on this? 

Why are only 5% of these people worth a response?

What could they be saying or doing that you are rejecting them in droves?


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

BetrayedDad said:


> Can you expand on this?
> 
> Why are only 5% of these people worth a response?
> 
> What could they be saying or doing that you are rejecting them in droves?



Probably because most of the messages are......"hey sexy"

LOL


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

SMG15 said:


> Probably because most of the messages are......"hey sexy"
> 
> LOL


Does that even work on anyone?????


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

BetrayedDad said:


> Does that even work on anyone?????


If he is HOT enough yes


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

BetrayedDad said:


> Can you expand on this?
> 
> Why are only 5% of these people worth a response?
> 
> What could they be saying or doing that you are rejecting them in droves?


I would be happy to expand on this.

A large majority of these rejections are based on clear incompatibility--the guy in question obviously didn't even read my profile. I'm talking fundamental differences on deal-breaker topics. If the guy had read my profile, he never would have messaged me. These are the guys who are sending messages to every girl they find remotely attractive, and are relying on the numbers game for one to actually stick.

The second thing, and this is where I may get in trouble, has to do with race and online dating. (I apologize in advance if I offend anyone.) I have lived in urban areas my entire adult life, mostly in mixed neighborhoods. I have found that there is a certain subset of African-American men that specifically hit on plus-sized white women because 1) they think that being with a white woman will increase their social standing, and 2) they view plus-sized white women as least desireable in the white dating market, which means that plus-sized women are low-hanging fruit. (In other words, they think we're desperate.) Being hit on by one of these guys is a weird combination of objecting and insulting. They only want you because you're white, but they only want you because they think that NO ONE ELSE DOES. I've been around the block enough times to know the difference between this, and an African-American guy who's interested in ME as a person.

So, the rejections fall about half in one category, and about half in the other.

And then there's the handful that are just so out there... like the 60-year-old guy, or the unemployed morbidly-obese gamer... guys that are fishing in the wrong pond, who are shooting way out of their league.

There are a LOT of guys in OLD that are worth a response. But I'm not getting many messages from those guys.


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

SMG15 said:


> Probably because most of the messages are......"hey sexy"
> 
> LOL


And yes, the ones that get rejected typically send messages like this.

I did once get the most lovely, well-composed message on OKC. Best message I ever got. But the guy was in his mid-50s (MUCH older than what I'm looking for), and sadly, very unattractive. (I give people the benefit of the doubt, people don't photograph well, etc., but I knew better in this case.)

Normally, with a message that good, I would definitely respond. But it was so far outside the realm of possibility that I wasn't even going to go there. A lot of times, I've found, if I respond to say, "Thanks, but I'm not interested," a lot of guys on OLD will see that as an invitation to continue the conversation... that if they keep it up, I will eventually change my mind.

It's crazy out there.


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

FeministInPink said:


> I would be happy to expand on this.
> 
> A large majority of these rejections are based on clear incompatibility--the guy in question obviously didn't even read my profile. I'm talking fundamental differences on deal-breaker topics. If the guy had read my profile, he never would have messaged me. These are the guys who are sending messages to every girl they find remotely attractive, and are relying on the numbers game for one to actually stick.
> 
> ...




I feel the same when I get a message from a woman who is separated, 3 kids, and average looking in the face.


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

Personal said:


> So how handsome is your face?


it doesn;t matter, I know what I like


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

FeministInPink said:


> I would be happy to expand on this.
> 
> A large majority of these rejections are based on clear incompatibility--the guy in question obviously didn't even read my profile. I'm talking fundamental differences on deal-breaker topics. If the guy had read my profile, he never would have messaged me. These are the guys who are sending messages to every girl they find remotely attractive, and are relying on the numbers game for one to actually stick.
> 
> ...


Thank you, very much. I appreciate your candor.


----------



## Rowan (Apr 3, 2012)

FIP forgot to mention the handful of messages that are just outright creepy, weird, or otherwise completely inappropriate - picture of his junk, asking if you'll send him a pair of previously worn panties, ends the otherwise perfectly acceptable message with a comment that if I'm too stuck-up to reply then good riddance (or some other vague hostility), asking if the friend I'm standing with in that one profile pic is available, and on and on. 

That deal where people are less filtered online because they can hide behind the anonymity of the internet is wildly prevalent in online dating. Even though it's not actually all that anonymous.....


----------



## Constable Odo (Feb 14, 2015)

BetrayedDad said:


> Can you expand on this?
> 
> Why are only 5% of these people worth a response?
> 
> What could they be saying or doing that you are rejecting them in droves?


Create a fake female profile on an OLD site and you'll know exactly what she means.

I think she's being extremely generous at 5%.


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

Rowan said:


> FIP forgot to mention the handful of messages that are just outright creepy, weird, or otherwise completely inappropriate - picture of his junk, asking if you'll send him a pair of previously worn panties, ends the otherwise perfectly acceptable message with a comment that if I'm too stuck-up to reply then good riddance (or some other vague hostility), asking if the friend I'm standing with in that one profile pic is available, and on and on.
> 
> That deal where people are less filtered online because they can hide behind the anonymity of the internet is wildly prevalent in online dating. Even though it's not actually all that anonymous.....


YES! Thanks for mentioning this one, which I did fail to mention. I've received numerous unsolicited d!ck pics, requests for naked pics of me, etc, etc.

I work at a university, and I matched with someone who was a student in my division. He recognized me as a staffer, but I didn't recognize him as a student right away, but I was suspicious, thinking he might be. So he asked me if I had ever fvcked a student, and that he would love to bend me over my desk and fvck me in my office! I freaked out, took screen shots of EVERYTHING, and consulted some colleagues whom I trust. They confirmed that he was indeed a student, so I told him off for his I appropriate behavior and blocked him, but kept the screenshots.


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

Rowan said:


> FIP forgot to mention the handful of messages that are just outright creepy, weird, or otherwise completely inappropriate - picture of his junk, asking if you'll send him a pair of previously worn panties, ends the otherwise perfectly acceptable message with a comment that if I'm too stuck-up to reply then good riddance (or some other vague hostility), asking if the friend I'm standing with in that one profile pic is available, and on and on.
> 
> That deal where people are less filtered online because they can hide behind the anonymity of the internet is wildly prevalent in online dating. Even though it's not actually all that anonymous.....


If a woman has a profile and makes demands about what she wants I will send her a inappropriate message too

lol


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

Personal said:


> Being a creep isn't a great approach. That said, making that evident at the beginning isn't a bad thing.
> 
> And they wonder why!


It's hard to take a women seriously when she has a laundry list of demands


----------



## Rowan (Apr 3, 2012)

SMG15 said:


> If a woman has a profile and makes demands about what she wants I will send her a inappropriate message too



Thank you, SMG15, for reminding me! I'd completely forgotten about the men who've read your profile (or not) who either find something they object to, or build something to object to from their own issues and projections, who then feel the need to send you an inappropriate message just to "teach you a lesson". 

As I said, the online dating world is just full of interesting characters, which is why many women end up actually corresponding - much less meeting - with such a small percentage of the people who contact them.


----------



## Constable Odo (Feb 14, 2015)

FeministInPink said:


> I work at a university


This is one reason why, other than a brief stint right after I got divorced, I've never seriously considered OLD as an option. I'm too notable and googleable in my area (e.g. I'm a constable, Justice of the Peace, and appointed official in my town). First thing my SO did, when we started dating and she learned my name, is google me and complete a full dossier including my blood type, DNA markers, credit history, etc. Even if I had given her a fake name, she still knew enough about me to track me down like a dog. So hard to be anonymous with all the psychotics out there...

The only other option would be to create a generic profile and offer as little as possible, but then, how does someone you contact judge you worthy of potentially dating? 

I had no reasonable answer for that, so I simply rejected OLD as an option.


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

Constable Odo said:


> This is one reason why, other than a brief stint right after I got divorced, I've never seriously considered OLD as an option. I'm too notable and googleable in my area (e.g. I'm a constable, Justice of the Peace, and appointed official in my town). First thing my SO did, when we started dating and she learned my name, is google me and complete a full dossier including my blood type, DNA markers, credit history, etc. Even if I had given her a fake name, she still knew enough about me to track me down like a dog. So hard to be anonymous with all the psychotics out there...
> 
> The only other option would be to create a generic profile and offer as little as possible, but then, how does someone you contact judge you worthy of potentially dating?
> 
> I had no reasonable answer for that, so I simply rejected OLD as an option.



Nothing comes up when you google me since my facebook page is not my real name and I have no Linkedin profile


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

BetrayedDad said:


> Can you expand on this?
> 
> Why are only 5% of these people worth a response?
> 
> What could they be saying or doing that you are rejecting them in droves?


OK I will be brave and answer this one really honestly. I prefer good looking men and rejected most due their looks. I'm sure they are great guys but just didn't have the look I prefer which is dark or grey hair, great smile and broad shoulders.

I only date/marry men with the same cultural background (Aus/NZ). I do not like tradies but dated a couple just for fun, but a serious relationship for me has to be with a high earning, white collar worker.

There were a few I dated a couple of times just for fun if they had a feature that stood out from the average eg Mr Irish because I happen to love that accent, it was a fun few weeks. 

Shallow? Yes probably but life is short, play hard.


----------



## sapientia (Nov 24, 2012)

Holland said:


> OK I will be brave and answer this one really honestly. I prefer *highly intelligent men* and rejected most due their *dullness*. I'm sure they are great guys but just didn't have the *wit and drive* I prefer, etc.
> 
> I only date/marry men with the same cultural background. I do not like tradies but dated a couple just for fun, but a serious relationship for me has to be with a high earning, white collar worker.
> 
> ...


We all have preferences. I took your reply and changed a few words that suit me...

Kudos to you Holland for being honest about what you want. If more people were like this, there would be less confusion and hurt feelings.

I believe it a kindness to *respectfully* tell someone early its just not on. No need to be an ass, just be honest and friendly about it.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

sapientia said:


> We all have preferences. I took your reply and changed a few words that suit me...
> 
> Kudos to you Holland for being honest about what you want. If more people were like this, there would be less confusion and hurt feelings.
> 
> I believe it a kindness to *respectfully* tell someone early its just not on. No need to be an ass, just be honest and friendly about it.


Absolutely they have to be of high intelligence. Sadly I learnt later in life that for me personally I also need a man with a very high EQ but it is a lesson that I took on board and it helped with post divorce dating immensely. 

You can get some indication of a person IQ from OLD profiles but not always, that takes a face to face meeting or two. I still made my choices about their profiles from their photos/looks.

I know that there were heaps of men that looked at my profile that never contacted me, all good, for the same shallow reasons no doubt and I would prefer that. 

And yes I totally agree that there is no need to be an ass to anyone you meet, if only for a brief online chat or a face to face. If I accepted their contact and then realised it was no go then the standard response was "thank you but I don't think we are a match, all the best on your journey".


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

Why do women with 3 kids and a average face think she can go on OKC and demand things?


----------



## Constable Odo (Feb 14, 2015)

sapientia said:


> We all have preferences. I took your reply and changed a few words that suit me...


Keep in mind, I have absolutely no issue whatsoever with people discriminating on the basis of whatever preferences suit them, when it comes to mate selection. 

That said, though, why is it when a guy writes:



HonestGuy said:


> OK I will be brave and answer this one really honestly. I prefer slender/athletic women and rejected most due to their obesity. I'm sure they are great women but just didn't have the look I prefer which is not overweight, great smile and huge knockers.


He is raked over the coals (as we have seen on this very forum site) for being "shallow" and "immature"?


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

Holland said:


> OK I will be brave and answer this one really honestly. I prefer good looking men and rejected most due their looks......
> 
> 
> .....Shallow? Yes probably but life is short, play hard.



I don't think so. People should fish from similar ponds. Just don't live in fantasy land.

My only expectation is that if you're looking for an 8 or a 9 stud, hopefully you're an 8 or a 9 babe. 

I've seen A LOT of stuck up 6's and 7's (women and men) on OLD batting WAY out of their league. 

No one wants their time wasted and nothing is more irritating than someone who posts up pictures of themselves from 10 years ago and/or 30-50 lbs. lighter and expects no one to notice when you actually meet up.


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

Constable Odo said:


> Keep in mind, I have absolutely no issue whatsoever with people discriminating on the basis of whatever preferences suit them, when it comes to mate selection.
> 
> That said, though, why is it when a guy writes:
> 
> ...


Well, if we're using Honest Guy's post as an example... is Honest Guy totally cut? Can you bounce quarters off his abs? If so, then he is totally justified in wanting a woman who is as fit and fine as he is.

However... a lot of the guys who are asking for/expecting they deserve that kind of woman don't have abs of steel. They have a gut (no, the Dad Bod isn't really happening), their hair is thinning, and their sense of style is marginal, but they still think they deserve a supermodel. THOSE are the guys who are called shallow, and they kind of deserve it.

If an Adonis rejects me because I have a few extra pounds, that's fair. He's probably out of my league, anyway. No love lost. 

But if a guy who IS in my league (or below my league, if I'm slumming) rejects me because I don't look like Rebecca Romijn? Well, he's got problems, because there is NO WAY that Rebecca Romijn is going to go for him.


----------



## Constable Odo (Feb 14, 2015)

FeministInPink said:


> Well, if we're using Honest Guy's post as an example... is Honest Guy totally cut?


Nobody asked that of the previous posters, did they, so it should be irrelevant to the equation.




FeministInPink said:


> Well, he's got problems, because there is NO WAY that Rebecca Romijn is going to go for him.


She may! Who knows? We've all been witness to totally hot women who are with really ugly men, and asked ourselves "How the hell did he score her?"

Love is blind. I'm still trying to figure out what my SO sees in me :grin2:


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

Constable Odo said:


> Nobody asked that of the previous posters, did they, so it should be irrelevant to the equation.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, you asked why someone like Honest Guy might be raked over the coals for being "shallow" and "immature. " I gave you an answer. And his appearance factors into the answer, the same as it would if you had used any other poster as an example.

The fact is that there are a lot of slovenly guys out there that think they deserve a supermodel. (And let's be honest, the only way that is going to happen is if said slovenly guy has beaucoup bucks.) Someone (male or female) who is constantly trying to play out of their league, who refuses acknowledge what is actually attainable... that is him/her being unrealistic and immature.


----------



## Constable Odo (Feb 14, 2015)

FeministInPink said:


> Well, you asked why someone like Honest Guy might be raked over the coals for being "shallow" and "immature. " I gave you an answer.


Unfortunately, as is evidenced by posts on these forums, your standard is rarely applied equally across gender lines.


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

And outside of Hollywood, I haven't seen a huge number of babes falling all over ugly guys. What I HAVE seen is couples where the wife has taken care of herself, and the husband has let himself go. And that double standard, for some reason, is OK in our society, but I don't really want to go into that right now... But I personally know of no examples in my life where a hot woman gets together with an ugly man.


----------



## BetrayedDad (Aug 8, 2013)

FeministInPink said:


> What I HAVE seen is couples where the wife has taken care of herself, and the husband has let himself go.


This or sometimes some people just age badly and others look the same as they did in high school.

I agree, it's RARE you see more than a two point spread in a 1-10 sex rank unless money is involved. 

Trophy spouses are the exception that is fairly common.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

SMG15 said:


> Why do women with 3 kids and a average face think she can go on OKC and demand things?


What did she demand? 

FWIW it is important to properly read a persons profile, it can tell you a lot about that person. A good profile should be upbeat and not full of things people don't want.

If by demand you mean things like "I want a guy with no baggage or drama" then I would very quickly move to the next.


----------



## FeministInPink (Sep 13, 2012)

Yeah, we've all got baggage. 

I'm just looking for baggage that goes with mine


----------



## Rowan (Apr 3, 2012)

FeministInPink said:


> Yeah, we've all got baggage.
> 
> I'm just looking for baggage that goes with mine


True! My SO and I have had conversations about this very thing. We've decided that if you look for not-crazy, you'll be looking a loooonnnggg time. You're much better off to find someone whose brand of crazy complements your own.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

FeministInPink said:


> Yeah, we've all got baggage.
> 
> I'm just looking for baggage that goes with mine


We have a whole set of luxury suitcases here. Even after 3.5 or so years things are still coming out that impact our relationship.

He had a 20 yr marriage to a woman with medically diagnosed (severe) mental health issues.
I had an almost 20 yr marriage that was for the most part sexless (not my choice).

Lots of baggage and challenges but some how it makes us even stronger. Yeah our baggage works well together


----------



## SMG15 (May 23, 2015)

Constable Odo said:


> Keep in mind, I have absolutely no issue whatsoever with people discriminating on the basis of whatever preferences suit them, when it comes to mate selection.
> 
> That said, though, why is it when a guy writes:
> 
> ...


Because only women get to be shallow


----------



## tom67 (Oct 2, 2012)

SMG15 said:


> Because only women get to be shallow


SMG it's AWALT = all women are like that be rich and go MGTOW.:smile2:


----------



## sapientia (Nov 24, 2012)

Constable Odo said:


> Keep in mind, I have absolutely no issue whatsoever with people discriminating on the basis of whatever preferences suit them, when it comes to mate selection.
> 
> That said, though, why is it when a guy writes:
> 
> ...


I don't understand it, personally. I don't care what others think of my preferences, since they are mine to live with and enjoy, not theirs. I likewise don't care what others like in a partner and don't judge. Many, many flavours.

I believe in the 'no a$$holes' rule. As for the rest - chacun a son gout.


----------



## sapientia (Nov 24, 2012)

SMG15 said:


> Why do women with 3 kids and a average face think she can go on OKC and demand things?


LOL! Which part do you find offensive? That she's a woman, has 3 kids, an average face or isn't afraid to ask for what she wants?

Have you ever been in a bartering market? Anyone can ask for whatever they wish. Maybe they get it and maybe they don't, but you'll never know if you never ask.

Depends who is listening, doesn't it?


----------

