# Question for the men - what am I doing wrong?



## Begin again

Only twice in my life have I felt an exciting, mutual attraction to a man. In most cases, he's much more into me than I am into him. In fact, I've steered clear of having male friends because usually they end up wanting to date me. I also have a hard time with online dating, because I seem to get the guy who's way too into me way too soon. I usually call it off by the end of the first or second date if I'm not 100% into the guy, because I can see him looking at me like I'm the woman he wants... but he's not who I want and I hate being in that position!!

What am I doing wrong, if anything? Why is it easy to find a guy who will fall for me (and I'm not bragging, I've been proposed to 4 times in my life!) and so hard to find a man who I fall for?


----------



## Lostinthought61

tailor back your sparkling personality . BTW i thought you were married?


----------



## Betrayedone

Do I smell narcissism? Or is it just poorly chosen words?


----------



## Young at Heart

Begin again said:


> Only twice in my life have I felt an exciting, mutual attraction to a man. In most cases, he's much more into me than I am into him. In fact, I've steered clear of having male friends because usually they end up wanting to date me. I also have a hard time with online dating, because I seem to get the guy who's way too into me way too soon. I usually call it off by the end of the first or second date if I'm not 100% into the guy, because I can see him looking at me like I'm the woman he wants... but he's not who I want and I hate being in that position!!
> 
> What am I doing wrong, if anything? Why is it easy to find a guy who will fall for me (and I'm not bragging, I've been proposed to 4 times in my life!) and so hard to find a man who I fall for?


Be careful for what you wish for as you may get it! You might find a great guy, fall for him and find out he will not commit to any kind of relationship.

Typically in a M/F relationship, one partner desires the other more intensely. I may be reading too much into your limited comments. 

It sounds like you want to be the one that has a greater level of desire (at least initially), that you want to be head over heels in love/lust. (You don't want to wait for more than 2 dates to allow a guy to work his way into your heart.) 

So what is it you do to see if you are 100% into a guy before the end of the 2nd date? Could it be some guys are a little shy? Does your "into him 100%" testing involve kissing, sex. pheromones, facial symmetry, upper body muscles, intelligence, humor, wealth, earning potential, the way he looks, the way her dresses, sophistication?

MW Davis has some great advice for couples who are not liking what is happening in their relationship. It is called doing a 180. It means, what you are doing, isn't working so act in a different way to trigger a different response from your partner(s). 

What it sounds like to me is you are probably sending off mixed messages to the men you go out with. You want to fall in love, but you want instant sexual chemistry tension, you want them to be vulnerable and open up to you so you can quickly and efficiently judge them or drop them. Not sure that is attractive to most guys.

You need to figure out what it is that you really want and how to fairly communicate that. Let's say a guy asks if he can take you out to coffee. Do you get bubbly and flirt with him? How do you see if he will pass your instant "into him 100% test." Do you explain that at this point in your life you are not looking for a soul mate, husband, or serious boyfriend? Or do you throw yourself at him to see if it ignites chemistry in you?

Once you understand what you want, what your boundaries are, then look for a guy is at the same stage in life or at least who understands where you are.

Most guys want to be with women who make them feel good about themselves. The want to feel sexually desired by a woman. Many men want the woman to make them feel more masculine. 

For a serious relationship, most guys want someone who has similar values, future goals, someone you are proud of, proud to bring home to his parents, relatives at holidays, and friends. They want someone they can trust with their checkbook and credit rating, someone who won't cheat on them, someone who will be a good partner and take care of them when they need taking care of. You don't get there on two or less dates, it takes time. But that is what builds the basis for a strong long term relationship.

If you are a little less desperate (less than 2 dates, really?) to falling in love and spend more time getting to know "good prospects" you just might fall in love with someone who will last.

As someone who has been married for 45+ years, it takes time to get to know someone.


----------



## meson

You're cutting it off too soon, that's your mistake. Expecting to be 100% into someone in the first several dates is expecting too much to quickly. Sometimes feelings do develop that quickly but for me anyway most don't. I knew my wife for four years before we started dating. And although we knew we wanted to be married within weeks (which is super fast compared to many) we weren't 100% into each other until after five or so dates. 

Imagine it had been you, you probably could have detected my interest in you and mis interpreted as 100% too early and dropped me after the second date. Perhaps something could have grown and perhaps I would have been a good match but because you dropped me so fast you wil never know. 

I think you need to learn to be with men and have fun but not let them drive the entire thing. You need to be comfortable with learning about people and let things develop. Fear is preventing you from really discovering who those men really are. 

And it's not like the relationship with my wife was the first and only "magical" experience. I had proposed to two other women first. One had an affair and dumped me while we were engaged and the other was just never into me. I remained friends with the later for years and both of these relationships taught me what I wanted out of marriage. Likewise Mrs. meson went through similar relationships and learned what she wanted in a marriage. Both of us knowing what we wanted is what enabled us to know so fast that we had found our matches..

Take the risk and learn from each experience.


----------



## uhtred

Think about what signals you may be accidentally sending with words body language and clothes. You clearly have the ability to attract men, which is great, but you need to be able to be friendly without encouraging flirtation. 

Now, some men will harass woman without any encouragement. If that is what is going on, that is an entirely different situation and not your fault at all. Here I'm assuming you are being friendly, they are just misinterpreting the type of friendship you are lookign for

Are these in situations where you are starting to date someone and they want to get too close too soon, or is this is non-dating social situations?


----------



## Begin again

First, this is really only dating situations, as I don't keep male friends that have any sexual interest in me at all. I don't want the pressure or hassle of having someone make advances when I've already said no. 

As for cutting it off after the second date, I have yet to continue on to a third or fourth date that I didn't look back on and wished I'd ended it after the second. 

The thing is, I am good at making a man feel good about himself. And I'm not demanding about money (I make my own, thanks!) I have a solid head on my shoulders, know how to be feminine and yet can go on a hike/camp and enjoy getting dirty. I'be been described by more than a few men as "fun." And these were not men I dated; they were people who just know me.

Anyway, if I go out on a date (doing online dating), I act like I would on a date. I flirt, I joke, I am open. This is who I am and how I am. I see this as their opportunity to show me who they are, but I usually don't feel the spark back. 

I have also been stalked twice by men who I went either on one or two dates with. Not serious stuff, but enough to make me cautious. And I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings. 

Some people may call me narcissist, but I'm really not. I'm just me, honestly! I'm happy with who I am and I think guys find that attractive. I'm not the best looking woman, maybe a 7?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## meson

Begin again said:


> As for cutting it off after the second date, I have yet to continue on to a third or fourth date that I didn't look back on and wished I'd ended it after the second.


If this is the case then the problem is you choose the wrong men to date.


----------



## x598

Begin again said:


> Only twice in my life have I felt an exciting, mutual attraction to a man. In most cases, he's much more into me than I am into him. In fact, I've steered clear of having male friends because usually they end up wanting to date me. I also have a hard time with online dating, because I seem to get the guy who's way too into me way too soon. I usually call it off by the end of the first or second date if I'm not 100% into the guy, because I can see him looking at me like I'm the woman he wants... but he's not who I want and I hate being in that position!!
> 
> What am I doing wrong, if anything? Why is it easy to find a guy who will fall for me (and I'm not bragging, I've been proposed to 4 times in my life!) and so hard to find a man who I fall for?


how old are you?

while i do believe that spark and chemistry you speak of exists.....and is sure exciting and enthralling.....in most cases......a long term successful relationship wont come of it once you realize the person has flaws just like everyone else.

i think age teaches us to appreciate some of the more important things then those giddy initial feelings.


----------



## Begin again

meson said:


> If this is the case then the problem is you choose the wrong men to date.


Well, I guess if I'm not into them, then that is a problem. Not sure how to find better guys...
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## uhtred

All that is great, and men find it attractive. Probably you best option is to look for men YOU are interested in first and date them. 




Begin again said:


> First, this is really only dating situations, as I don't keep male friends that have any sexual interest in me at all. I don't want the pressure or hassle of having someone make advances when I've already said no.
> 
> As for cutting it off after the second date, I have yet to continue on to a third or fourth date that I didn't look back on and wished I'd ended it after the second.
> 
> The thing is, I am good at making a man feel good about himself. And I'm not demanding about money (I make my own, thanks!) I have a solid head on my shoulders, know how to be feminine and yet can go on a hike/camp and enjoy getting dirty. I'be been described by more than a few men as "fun." And these were not men I dated; they were people who just know me.
> 
> Anyway, if I go out on a date (doing online dating), I act like I would on a date. I flirt, I joke, I am open. This is who I am and how I am. I see this as their opportunity to show me who they are, but I usually don't feel the spark back.
> 
> I have also been stalked twice by men who I went either on one or two dates with. Not serious stuff, but enough to make me cautious. And I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings.
> 
> Some people may call me narcissist, but I'm really not. I'm just me, honestly! I'm happy with who I am and I think guys find that attractive. I'm not the best looking woman, maybe a 7?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## tech-novelist

What are your criteria for a man you *would *fall for?


----------



## Herschel

So, you go on a bunch of dates and get proposed to by guys you really aren't in to. What are you in to? Maybe you like the ladies? Have you ever really been into a guy? You don't seem to give anyone a chance, and either that's on you because you are cutting it off too short, or on you because you are accepting dates from guys that have no chance.

Consider what you want, and if you are as in demand as you think you are, only date those guys. If you don't get dates with those guys, maybe you aren't in as high of demand as you think you are. So then stay single or settle.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## norajane

Begin again said:


> First, this is really only dating situations, as I don't keep male friends that have any sexual interest in me at all. I don't want the pressure or hassle of having someone make advances when I've already said no.
> 
> As for cutting it off after the second date, I have yet to continue on to a third or fourth date that I didn't look back on and wished I'd ended it after the second.
> 
> The thing is, I am good at making a man feel good about himself. And I'm not demanding about money (I make my own, thanks!) I have a solid head on my shoulders, know how to be feminine and yet can go on a hike/camp and enjoy getting dirty. *I'be been described by more than a few men as "fun." And these were not men I dated; they were people who just know me.*
> 
> Anyway, if I go out on a date (doing online dating), I act like I would on a date. I flirt, I joke, I am open. This is who I am and how I am. I see this as their opportunity to show me who they are, but I usually don't feel the spark back.
> 
> I have also been stalked twice by men who I went either on one or two dates with. Not serious stuff, but enough to make me cautious. And I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings.
> 
> Some people may call me narcissist, but I'm really not. I'm just me, honestly! I'm happy with who I am and I think guys find that attractive. I'm not the best looking woman, maybe a 7?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Those are the guys you should be dating. The ones that _know _you and like _you_ - the real you, not the image of you that your dates have of you that they are attracted to.

Are there men that you are interested in that are in some way unsuitable or unavailable? If so, have you done any reading about intimacy issues? That helped me recognize some of my dating patterns when I was in your shoes.

@*Young at Heart* is right about this, and it applies to women, too:



> Most guys want to be with women who make them feel good about themselves.


It could just be that you really haven't met someone who lights you up and makes you come alive. It's worth waiting for.


----------



## Begin again

Herschel said:


> So, you go on a bunch of dates and get proposed to by guys you really aren't in to. What are you in to? Maybe you like the ladies? Have you ever really been into a guy? You don't seem to give anyone a chance, and either that's on you because you are cutting it off too short, or on you because you are accepting dates from guys that have no chance.
> 
> Consider what you want, and if you are as in demand as you think you are, only date those guys. If you don't get dates with those guys, maybe you aren't in as high of demand as you think you are. So then stay single or settle.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


It's not that I'm that "in demand." I'm not a 10 or anyone's dream girl. 

I have been into a few guys where they were single and so was I. That hasn't happened in a long time. And I'm just very picky. No need to lay out all my particulars. I'll read your suggestions and think them through. Please keep posting... I have something to learn here.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Begin again

norajane said:


> Those are the guys you should be dating. The ones that _know _you and like _you_ - the real you, not the image of you that your dates have of you that they are attracted to.
> 
> Are there men that you are interested in that are in some way unsuitable or unavailable? If so, have you done any reading about intimacy issues? That helped me recognize some of my dating patterns when I was in your shoes.
> 
> @*Young at Heart* is right about this, and it applies to women, too:
> 
> It could just be that you really haven't met someone who lights you up and makes you come alive. It's worth waiting for.


The men who said that were all married. One I would have LOVED to have dated, but he was married with kids. He had no idea, but I did have a crush on him. Could barely talk when he was around. But haven't felt that with someone who was free... Not in a long time. Maybe all the good ones really are taken!  ones that are good for me, anyway.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## norajane

Begin again said:


> The men who said that were all married. One I would have LOVED to have dated, but he was married with kids. He had no idea, but I did have a crush on him. Could barely talk when he was around. But haven't felt that with someone who was free... Not in a long time. Maybe all the good ones really are taken!  ones that are good for me, anyway.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Yeah, you might want to look into the intimacy issues thing...there you are falling for one of those unavailable men I mentioned.


----------



## Begin again

norajane said:


> Yeah, you might want to look into the intimacy issues thing...there you are falling for one of those unavailable men I mentioned.


That hasn't happened in 15 years. But I will admit that if he showed up at my door today, I'd jump his bones and wouldn't quit for days!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Wolf1974

It's most likely the vibe your putting out. Keeping around guys who don't float your boat but want you is an ego boost and safer than going after men who will challenge you or whom may hurt you.

Guys do this too, I know I have done it


----------



## Begin again

Wolf1974 said:


> It's most likely the vibe your putting out. Keeping around guys who don't float your boat but want you is an ego boost and safer than going after men who will challenge you or whom may hurt you.
> 
> Guys do this too, I know I have done it


You must have missed it where I said I don't do this. I don't keep male friends who are interested in me in any way. Not fair to either of us, honestly, and it's not an ego boost - it's wrong!

I do want a better man than I'm finding out there, but I'm not going for the "challenge." If some man thinks it's fun being a challenging person to date, I'm not interested. No games, thanks. Mutual attraction doesn't require being coy, "too busy," mixed messages, etc. but maybe that's it - I just don't want to play the game?!?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Daisy12

Begin again said:


> The men who said that were all married. One I would have LOVED to have dated, but he was married with kids. He had no idea, but I did have a crush on him. Could barely talk when he was around. But haven't felt that with someone who was free... Not in a long time. Maybe all the good ones really are taken!  ones that are good for me, anyway.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_



If you find you only want married men, maybe you need to take a closer look at yourself. You may have commitment issues. It's easy to want and crave what we can't have, but harder to commit to what we can have. You may be subconscious finding faults with these men as you don't want to be in a relationship. I would lay off the dating for a while and concentrate on what makes you happy and fulfilled. Plus you seem to always find what you want when you stop looking. Best of luck.



Sent from my D2206 using Tapatalk


----------



## Begin again

Daisy12 said:


> If you find you only want married men, maybe you need to take a closer look at yourself. You may have commitment issues. It's easy to want and crave what we can't have, but harder to commit to what we can have. You may be subconscious finding faults with these men as you don't want to be in a relationship. I would lay off the dating for a while and concentrate on what makes you happy and fulfilled. Plus you seem to always find what you want when you stop looking. Best of luck.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my D2206 using Tapatalk


I may have some commitment issues, true. I don't want to be in a lopsided relationship and I do look to find the potential problems right away. I rule out A LOT of people, but really just ones I am pretty confident I wouldn't be compatible with. It's an attempt to not make the same mistakes twice, but perhaps I'm too ready to stop before I start. I'll consider that. I have dated a few men for a long time (1 year each) that I wasn't really interested in because I was trying to make it work, trying to fall for them. I don't always give up after the second date, but in both those cases I really should have. Kinda of sad for both of us.

As for not dating for a while, I would do this except I'm 43. A lot of men have already scratched me from their list due to my age, so I don't want to wait. It can be a superficial world out there.


----------



## Married but Happy

Have you only/mainly dated men who contact you or approach in person? Or, (if you use online dating) do you contact men whose profiles show the traits you would like in a man? If you are letting men do all the initiating, then for whatever reason (in-person personality, or how you come across online) you are attracting the wrong men. If you are not initiating, then I suggest you consider doing so, to have more control over who you meet. If you already are initiating, then you probably need some people who know you well to give you honest feedback about how you present and how men interpret that.


----------



## Wolf1974

Begin again said:


> You must have missed it where I said I don't do this. I don't keep male friends who are interested in me in any way. Not fair to either of us, honestly, and it's not an ego boost - it's wrong!
> 
> I do want a better man than I'm finding out there, but I'm not going for the "challenge." If some man thinks it's fun being a challenging person to date, I'm not interested. No games, thanks. Mutual attraction doesn't require being coy, "too busy," mixed messages, etc. but maybe that's it - I just don't want to play the game?!?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


:scratchhead:

I wasn't talking about your friends. You totally missed the point. Never mind


----------



## Begin again

Married but Happy said:


> Have you only/mainly dated men who contact you or approach in person? Or, (if you use online dating) do you contact men whose profiles show the traits you would like in a man? If you are letting men do all the initiating, then for whatever reason (in-person personality, or how you come across online) you are attracting the wrong men. If you are not initiating, then I suggest you consider doing so, to have more control over who you meet. If you already are initiating, then you probably need some people who know you well to give you honest feedback about how you present and how men interpret that.


I am initiating online. Quite a bit, actually. It seems the men I'm interested in are not interested in me, because I've only had one respond to me. And I'm pretty cute, but men can be superficial. I'm more attractive in person.


----------



## Begin again

Wolf1974 said:


> :scratchhead:
> 
> I wasn't talking about your friends. You totally missed the point. Never mind


You said the following: 

Keeping around guys who don't float your boat but want you is an ego boost and safer than going after men who will challenge you or whom may hurt you.

How do you keep them around? You mean date them? Well, that's part of my problem!! I tried to make myself like them, to fall for them. It wasn't about giving me an ego boost. Quite the opposite, actually. I dread going on a first date with someone from online dating because I fear they are going to like me and I don't like them. When that happens, I have to find some way of ending it. And some guys get really pissed about you calling it off. Because of that, I've decided that I will always pay my half on a first date, that the date should be short (either dinner only or coffee) and that I won't kiss them at the end of the night. No mixed signals!!


----------



## Married but Happy

Begin again said:


> I am initiating online. Quite a bit, actually. It seems the men I'm interested in are not interested in me, because I've only had one respond to me. And I'm pretty cute, but men can be superficial. I'm more attractive in person.


It's a numbers game. Most men have to send out dozens (or more!) emails to get one date - or even a reply. Women may have better luck overall, but that probably depends on their _perceived_ attractiveness (probably based on a few photos), which may not correlate with how you present in person. Even so, I think you may have the best results by continuing to initiate - all you need is one response, if it turns out to be the _right _response. It can't hurt to continue meeting other guys who initiate - you could still get lucky and encounter a great match. If you get tired of meeting them, take a break or do more screening before choosing who to meet.


----------



## Herschel

Begin again said:


> It's not that I'm that "in demand." I'm not a 10 or anyone's dream girl.
> 
> I have been into a few guys where they were single and so was I. That hasn't happened in a long time. And I'm just very picky. No need to lay out all my particulars. I'll read your suggestions and think them through. Please keep posting... I have something to learn here.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Explain picky? In terms of attractiveness? Financial security? Personality? Lump in his pants? All of the above?


----------



## Wolf1974

Begin again said:


> You said the following:
> 
> Keeping around guys who don't float your boat but want you is an ego boost and safer than going after men who will challenge you or whom may hurt you.
> 
> How do you keep them around? You mean date them? Well, that's part of my problem!! I tried to make myself like them, to fall for them. It wasn't about giving me an ego boost. Quite the opposite, actually. I dread going on a first date with someone from online dating because I fear they are going to like me and I don't like them. When that happens, I have to find some way of ending it. And some guys get really pissed about you calling it off. Because of that, I've decided that I will always pay my half on a first date, that the date should be short (either dinner only or coffee) and that I won't kiss them at the end of the night. No mixed signals!!


Ok I will try this again. You surround yourself with men you don't want to date or go after men you can't have. You do that as a defense mechanism, why I'm not sure maybe scared of being hurt or commitment. 

When I did it was out of fear. I purposely went after some women that I knew would let me down and kept women who were interested in me at arms length. Sure I always had a valid "reason" why I did this but truth was i went after the wrong type So i never really had to put myself out there. 

OLD is a numbers game. You email men and only one email you back so you call them shallow. Not likely just not interested. My guess is that you are attractive and get some emails but quickly discount them. So you can really only do one of two things

Continue to picky, nothing wrong with this. When I am looking for a relationship i am picky as well. Just realize if you take this route it will take longer and you'll have some Lonley nights. I totally agree with you that first dates should be short,cheap or pay 1/2, and no mixed signals. To me you are doing that 100% right

Two date around. That doesn't mean a accept every date. But you never know who you will connect with. My GF is beautiful but her profile was a hot mess with 2 selfie picks and two lines of information. But I knew moment I met her in person she was different. You won't get a real sense of people till you meet is my point. To use my history as an example I have now been divorced almost 6 years. I easily went on 150+ first dates and only landed 3 realtionships longer than 4 months. It literally is a numbers game and you have to date a lot to find the right one.


----------



## Begin again

Herschel said:


> Explain picky? In terms of attractiveness? Financial security? Personality? Lump in his pants? All of the above?


I resisted putting out a list, as I'm sure the guys on TAM will rip me to shreds if I do. But honestly, I have a long list of what I want and don't want and it's a bit different than most women. I'll share some of the big ones and ask that you don't tear me apart for it. 


Educated (at least a BA)
Lives fairly close to me (I don't want to drive more than 1 hour to see them, as I have limited time as it is)
Make at least as much money as me (I want an equal)
No conservatives/church goers/hunters/NASCAR fans/
Confident
Taller than me
Neither fat nor a body builder (not attactive to me; bulky muscles look unnatural!)
Comfortable with who he is
Not Type-A (I don't want to have to keep up all the time or always be on the go!)
Makes me laugh - this one is really important!!!


----------



## Begin again

Wolf1974 said:


> Ok I will try this again. You surround yourself with men you don't want to date or go after men you can't have. You do that as a defense mechanism, why I'm not sure maybe scared of being hurt or commitment.
> 
> When I did it was out of fear. I purposely went after some women that I knew would let me down and kept women who were interested in me at arms length. Sure I always had a valid "reason" why I did this but truth was i went after the wrong type So i never really had to put myself out there.
> 
> OLD is a numbers game. You email men and only one email you back so you call them shallow. Not likely just not interested. My guess is that you are attractive and get some emails but quickly discount them. So you can really only do one of two things
> 
> Continue to picky, nothing wrong with this. When I am looking for a relationship i am picky as well. Just realize if you take this route it will take longer and you'll have some Lonley nights. I totally agree with you that first dates should be short,cheap or pay 1/2, and no mixed signals. To me you are doing that 100% right
> 
> Two date around. That doesn't mean a accept every date. But you never know who you will connect with. My GF is beautiful but her profile was a hot mess with 2 selfie picks and two lines of information. But I knew moment I met her in person she was different. You won't get a real sense of people till you meet is my point. To use my history as an example I have now been divorced almost 6 years. I easily went on 150+ first dates and only landed 3 realtionships longer than 4 months. It literally is a numbers game and you have to date a lot to find the right one.


150 first dates?!?! Holy cow!

Thanks for sticking with this thread. I don't have time to do that much dating, nor do I want to, but I do speak to anyone I find interesting on the phone first to see if there's something there. I've spoken to quite a few guys (maybe 20). 

And to clarify, I don't "surround myself with guys" in any sense. I keep female friends and it's not often I'm in mixed company anymore (unless you call showing up to my kid's soccer practice or games where the dads are as surrounding myself with guys!  I will talk to them a bit, but only if there's no wedding band. And I've never hit on anyone like that, as I prefer to know someone before I go down that path.


----------



## 225985

Begin again said:


> Educated (at least a BA)
> Lives fairly close to me (I don't want to drive more than 1 hour to see them, as I have limited time as it is)
> Make at least as much money as me (I want an equal)
> No conservatives/church goers/hunters/NASCAR fans/
> Confident
> Taller than me
> Neither fat nor a body builder (not attactive to me; bulky muscles look unnatural!)
> Comfortable with who he is
> Not Type-A (I don't want to have to keep up all the time or always be on the go!)
> Makes me laugh - this one is really important!!!


I meet or exceed everything on this list. I wish this was my wife's list. 

I hope you do not live in the South US. Your just eliminated every guy here. (BTW, I am not FROM the South, obviously.) :smile2:


----------



## Begin again

blueinbr said:


> I meet or exceed everything on this list. I wish this was my wife's list.
> 
> I hope you do not live in the South US. Your just eliminated every guy here. (BTW, I am not FROM the South, obviously.) :smile2:


I live in the Southeast, yes. But in one of two areas that runs "blue" and has a lot more variety. Educated, technical, etc. I'm not completely without options!


----------



## Married but Happy

Begin again said:


> 150 first dates?!?! Holy cow!


Yes, it can take that - sometimes more. I met my second wife less than a year after I left my ex, and had about 50 first dates in that time and a couple of (short) relationships that - obviously - didn't work out. Those 50 dates were just the ones I wanted to meet - I had over 900 distinct contacts and conversations to find those 50.


----------



## Begin again

Married but Happy said:


> Yes, it can take that - sometimes more. I met my second wife less than a year after I left my ex, and had about 50 first dates in that time and a couple of (short) relationships that - obviously - didn't work out. Those 50 dates were just the ones I wanted to meet - I had over 900 distinct contacts and conversations to find those 50.


Wow. OK. Guess I need to change my strategy!


----------



## naiveonedave

Am I correct that you are still in the process of getting a D? Re: your other thread? If so, I think you are too close to you past marriage and need to get past it to not project your M issues/H issues onto the new guys.


----------



## jld

Begin again said:


> I resisted putting out a list, as I'm sure the guys on TAM will rip me to shreds if I do. But honestly, I have a long list of what I want and don't want and it's a bit different than most women. I'll share some of the big ones and ask that you don't tear me apart for it.
> 
> 
> Educated (at least a BA)
> Lives fairly close to me (I don't want to drive more than 1 hour to see them, as I have limited time as it is)
> Make at least as much money as me (I want an equal)
> No conservatives/church goers/hunters/NASCAR fans/
> Confident
> Taller than me
> Neither fat nor a body builder (not attactive to me; bulky muscles look unnatural!)
> Comfortable with who he is
> Not Type-A (I don't want to have to keep up all the time or always be on the go!)
> Makes me laugh - this one is really important!!!


Very good list.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Begin again

naiveonedave said:


> Am I correct that you are still in the process of getting a D? Re: your other thread? If so, I think you are too close to you past marriage and need to get past it to not project your M issues/H issues onto the new guys.


Well, I've been separated for nearly a year now. By law you must be live apart for a year before you can divorce. And while it's true that I may have some issues from my marriage that I might project, I don't know how to get past those issues unless I'm in the situation where I can get past them.

It's like saying you have a bad streak in shooting freethrows - to get better, you have to get out there and shoot! Now, if you have psyched yourself out, you need to work on that. Sure. But I recognize what I went through and how it affected me and I'm actively trying to be a better person/less impacted by my past. That's all we can ask for when someone has been married before - that they aren't 100 free from their past but that they recognize when it may be impacting them and actively try to not let it be an issue. I think you won't know there's an issue until you actually face it! In the case of the one man I dated, what was funny to me was that the biggest issue wasn't something I'd experienced in my marriage - it was something I didn't have to deal with, and that was the man making himself available. So, you never really know unless you get out there. And the fact that I'm on here, asking questions, looking at myself, etc., says I'm trying to be better today than I was yesterday.


----------



## uhtred

That is a reasonable list. 
How wide a range of ages is acceptable? How important is appearance to you?

Of course the 1 hour drive may cover a lot of men if you live in a city, but not that many if you live in the country. There are a lot of men like you describe, but the density varies a lot with location.

I think keeping the first couple of dates pretty casual will help. 

Its interesting though. I think I meet all of those (I don't know if I'd make you laugh....), but I didn't when I got married. 




Begin again said:


> I resisted putting out a list, as I'm sure the guys on TAM will rip me to shreds if I do. But honestly, I have a long list of what I want and don't want and it's a bit different than most women. I'll share some of the big ones and ask that you don't tear me apart for it.
> 
> 
> Educated (at least a BA)
> Lives fairly close to me (I don't want to drive more than 1 hour to see them, as I have limited time as it is)
> Make at least as much money as me (I want an equal)
> No conservatives/church goers/hunters/NASCAR fans/
> Confident
> Taller than me
> Neither fat nor a body builder (not attactive to me; bulky muscles look unnatural!)
> Comfortable with who he is
> Not Type-A (I don't want to have to keep up all the time or always be on the go!)
> Makes me laugh - this one is really important!!!


----------



## VermisciousKnid

jld said:


> Very good list.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


As long as she's not 6' tall. At least 80% of the male population in the US is 6' or under. If she's 5' 10" she has twice as many guys to choose from.


----------



## naiveonedave

Begin again said:


> Well, I've been separated for nearly a year now. By law you must be live apart for a year before you can divorce. And while it's true that I may have some issues from my marriage that I might project, I don't know how to get past those issues unless I'm in the situation where I can get past them.
> 
> It's like saying you have a bad streak in shooting freethrows - to get better, you have to get out there and shoot! Now, if you have psyched yourself out, you need to work on that. Sure. But I recognize what I went through and how it affected me and I'm actively trying to be a better person/less impacted by my past. That's all we can ask for when someone has been married before - that they aren't 100 free from their past but that they recognize when it may be impacting them and actively try to not let it be an issue. I think you won't know there's an issue until you actually face it! In the case of the one man I dated, what was funny to me was that the biggest issue wasn't something I'd experienced in my marriage - it was something I didn't have to deal with, and that was the man making himself available. So, you never really know unless you get out there. And the fact that I'm on here, asking questions, looking at myself, etc., says I'm trying to be better today than I was yesterday.


I still think you may be impacted by your impending D. At least you should try to be cognizant of it when 'rating' your suitors.

I looked at your list and if you live in the USA, you will have a hard time meeting all criteria at the same time. Taking out religious and hunters probably cuts >50 to 75% of the men right off the top. Not sure how much you make or how tall you are, but that could be a significant amount as well. A guy friend of mine has the same issue, his criteria basically makes it impossible to get past date 2. Virtually 99.9% of women violate at least one of his critical criteria. 

Good luck!


----------



## VermisciousKnid

naiveonedave said:


> I still think you may be impacted by your impending D. At least you should try to be cognizant of it when 'rating' your suitors.
> 
> I looked at your list and if you live in the USA, you will have a hard time meeting all criteria at the same time. Taking out religious and hunters probably cuts >50 to 75% of the men right off the top. Not sure how much you make or how tall you are, but that could be a significant amount as well. A guy friend of mine has the same issue, his criteria basically makes it impossible to get past date 2. Virtually 99.9% of women violate at least one of his critical criteria.
> 
> Good luck!


From my quick reading, 40% of Americans say they go to church but only about 20% actually attend regularly. Approximately 6% of Americans hunt, and double that number fish. Even if there's no overlap between the churchgoers and hunters, that's a maximum of 26%, or if you throw in fishers and assume none of them hunt or go to church that gets you to roughly 40%. 

I'm sure the percentages vary greatly by region, though.


----------



## naiveonedave

VermisciousKnid said:


> From my quick reading, 40% of Americans say they go to church but only about 20% actually attend regularly. Approximately 6% of Americans hunt, and double that number fish. Even if there's no overlap between the churchgoers and hunters, that's a maximum of 26%, or if you throw in fishers and assume none of them hunt or go to church that gets you to roughly 40%.
> 
> I'm sure the percentages vary greatly by region, though.


I just looked this up, most places I looked show >50% attend church at least monthly. It does look like surveys are all over the map. Some references are up to 70% at least monthly. I would expect geographic region is significant, and we really don't know what the OP has as a threshold of too religious.

http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/attendance-at-religious-services/


----------



## meson

Begin again said:


> Well, I guess if I'm not into them, then that is a problem. Not sure how to find better guys...
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Sounds like you are doing a lot of online dating and if that's the case it is a numbers game like Wolf and MBH mention. I would suck at online dating myself. I like to know people somewhat before I would date them. 

For me if I had to start dating again I would also branch out and do activities with groups. Thinks like hiking, kayaking, dance, music, theater etc. There are lots of meetup groups, if you live in a populated area, that you can try. This means you get to do fun things you like while meeting people you are not dating. It's a way to get to know people slowly in a way where there are no expectations. You can even do the activities with a girlfriend of it makes you feel more comfortable.


----------



## Begin again

meson said:


> Sounds like you are doing a lot of online dating and if that's the case it is a numbers game like Wolf and MBH mention. I would suck at online dating myself. I like to know people somewhat before I would date them.
> 
> For me if I had to start dating again I would also branch out and do activities with groups. Thinks like hiking, kayaking, dance, music, theater etc. There are lots of meetup groups, if you live in a populated area, that you can try. This means you get to do fun things you like while meeting people you are not dating. It's a way to get to know people slowly in a way where there are no expectations. You can even do the activities with a girlfriend of it makes you feel more comfortable.


Yeah, I thought about doing some meetup type things. I've googled some in my area and not sure I'd find any singles, but at least I'd meet some new people.


----------



## Begin again

naiveonedave said:


> I just looked this up, most places I looked show >50% attend church at least monthly. It does look like surveys are all over the map. Some references are up to 70% at least monthly. I would expect geographic region is significant, and we really don't know what the OP has as a threshold of too religious.
> 
> Attendance at religious services - Religion in America: U.S. Religious Data, Demographics and Statistics | Pew Research Center


Not to be too snarky, but if a single man attends church regularly, we just won't have much in common. Most men go to church because their wives do. I think that's a pretty fair statement, right?


----------



## naiveonedave

Begin again said:


> Not to be too snarky, but if a single man attends church regularly, we just won't have much in common. Most men go to church because their wives do. I think that's a pretty fair statement, right?


IMO, that is not the case. I go w/ or w/o the W. I am sure some men feel the way you present it, but most that go, go either way....

It is your call, I just think it is worth pointing out that you are pre-selecting the pool of potentials mates down really quickly.


----------



## Herschel

Let the shredding begin! I don't shred, but I will point out inconsistencies... 



> [*]Educated (at least a BA)


90% reasonable. Education is important, though, many smart people are able to forgo due to being aggressive. But I am sure they could probably take a minimum knowledge test to get a waiver...



> [*]Lives fairly close to me (I don't want to drive more than 1 hour to see them, as I have limited time as it is)


100% reasonable. LD never works (in my opinion)



> [*]Make at least as much money as me (I want an equal)


20% reasonable. You don't want an equal, you want at LEAST an equal, whereas, he will be getting at MOST an equal. This is a common thread in society today where many women can look for a man who makes as much or more than him, while he likely can only find women making as much or less than him. 

The other aspect is what you define as an equal. Sometimes less stress, free time and other aspects of life are fringe benefits and have value attaches that would needed to be converted into real dollars.



> [*]No conservatives/church goers/hunters/NASCAR fans/


95% reasonable. I appreciate all these points, but you are somewhat grouping a segment together with this. I agree, but only 95% so.



> [*]Confident


75% reasonable. Clearly confidence is important, and that also ties into your successful requirement, but it's a broad term that is very subjective.



> [*]Taller than me


0% reasonable. We are all the same height lying down. Maybe it's my shorty bias in this, but it's amazing to me that someone would possibly deny a love of a lifetime due to being 1 or 2 inches taller than their mate.



> [*]Neither fat nor a body builder (not attactive to me; bulky muscles look unnatural!)


90% reasonable. Attractiveness is important, and often heavy people get heavier as they get older. Musclebound people tend to focus on themselves as they get older.



> [*]Comfortable with who he is


80% reasonable. As long as he makes as much money as you, is taller, in good shape but not too buff, is an atheist and is sure of himself.



> [*]Not Type-A (I don't want to have to keep up all the time or always be on the go!)


15% reasonable, based on your other points. The likelihood of you finding someone else that covers all those other points and isn't Type A or Alpha is really a stretch. 



> [*]Makes me laugh - this one is really important!!!


75% reasonable. Is he a clown, is he there to amuse you? I assume the humor needs to be intentional? 

This reminds me of the movie Singles. Do you want him to say "Bless You" when you sneeze?

Jokes aside, it's not like your "requirements" are really that far fetched, most people want the "max" for what they can get. It doesn't mean that someone else could eventually fill in some of those aspects as you grow with them. The problem is, if you never feel satisfied, you'll always be wondering what if...


----------



## naiveonedave

If you just go by Herschel's percentages and go with all men are taller than you, you are excluding 99% of men, just saying.


----------



## Phil Anders

My wild guess: Could you be applying left-brained criteria to your OLD process and missing encounters with the unexpected? Maybe you need someone who doesn't neatly check all your laundry-list boxes, who surprises you with a combination of in-person chemistry and novel background/perspectives you hadn't considered. 

You may be more open to this in a natural RL setting outside the scripted OLD scenario, where everyone is overly conscious of what's at stake from the first swipe or IM, and may view even the most promising prospects on their match list with a jaundiced eye.


----------



## meson

Begin again said:


> Yeah, I thought about doing some meetup type things. I've googled some in my area and not sure I'd find any singles, but at least I'd meet some new people.


My guess is that you will find singles. In my hobby there are a lot of singles of all ages. I climbed with a single woman who met a fellow that I knew and it eventually led to their marriage.


----------



## Holdingontoit

Begin again said:


> I resisted putting out a list, as I'm sure the guys on TAM will rip me to shreds if I do. But honestly, I have a long list of what I want and don't want and it's a bit different than most women. I'll share some of the big ones and ask that you don't tear me apart for it.
> 
> 
> Educated (at least a BA)
> Lives fairly close to me (I don't want to drive more than 1 hour to see them, as I have limited time as it is)
> Make at least as much money as me (I want an equal)
> No conservatives/church goers/hunters/NASCAR fans/
> Confident
> Taller than me
> Neither fat nor a body builder (not attactive to me; bulky muscles look unnatural!)
> Comfortable with who he is
> Not Type-A (I don't want to have to keep up all the time or always be on the go!)
> Makes me laugh - this one is really important!!!


Actually, I think your list is fairly typical for women in the US. You want someone tell, educated, makes a good income, decent body, funny, not a jerk - isn't that what most women want? And if I understand from other posts in this thread, you are divorced after being married for over 10 years? So you are not in your 20s looking for marriage #1 for you and the guy? Seems to me that many of the guys you desire are already married and their wives are holding on tight because if you are a woman married to a guy who meets all your criteria you probably want to keep him rather than dump him and try to replace him. So yes, you find many married men attractive because in your age range the guys who fit all your criteria are most likely either already married or are total players and turn you off. Which explains your OLD experience.

Two suggestions: as others have said, focus on some hobbies and allow the meeting men aspect to take place organically as you take place in groups and events that involve your hobby. That way you get to know them and they get to know you and by the time you decide to date, you already know you like and are hot for each other. Second, give serious thought to going after widowers. If they were happily married they tend to want to remarry. Allows you to use preselection without anyone cheating on anyone.

Good luck. I hope you find someone wonderful soon.


----------



## Begin again

Holdingontoit said:


> Actually, I think your list is fairly typical for women in the US. You want someone tell, educated, makes a good income, decent body, funny, not a jerk - isn't that what most women want? And if I understand from other posts in this thread, you are divorced after being married for over 10 years? So you are not in your 20s looking for marriage #1 for you and the guy? Seems to me that many of the guys you desire are already married and their wives are holding on tight because if you are a woman married to a guy who meets all your criteria you probably want to keep him rather than dump him and try to replace him. So yes, you find many married men attractive because in your age range the guys who fit all your criteria are most likely either already married or are total players and turn you off. Which explains your OLD experience.
> 
> Two suggestions: as others have said, focus on some hobbies and allow the meeting men aspect to take place organically as you take place in groups and events that involve your hobby. That way you get to know them and they get to know you and by the time you decide to date, you already know you like and are hot for each other. Second, give serious thought to going after widowers. If they were happily married they tend to want to remarry. Allows you to use preselection without anyone cheating on anyone.
> 
> Good luck. I hope you find someone wonderful soon.


Thanks! Actually, I just texted back and forth with a guy that meets every one of my criteria. And then some! I'm hopeful. More to come...


----------



## Married but Happy

naiveonedave said:


> If you just go by Herschel's percentages and go with all men are taller than you, you are excluding 99% of men, just saying.


That's a good thing, narrowing the field, making it easier to recognize someone who does match, not having to spend lots of time figuring it out. That still leaves hundreds of thousands of men to consider just in the USA.

My dating criteria were even more selective (although a little different), and apparently excluded about 99.5% of all women with whom I was in contact. Even so, I found several who were very strong possibilities - but I did have to expand my travel radius to 2 hours. I am very happy with the one I found, and was prepared to spend a lot more time searching if it had been necessary.


----------



## naiveonedave

Married but Happy said:


> That's a good thing, narrowing the field, making it easier to recognize someone who does match, not having to spend lots of time figuring it out. That still leaves hundreds of thousands of men to consider just in the USA.
> 
> My dating criteria were even more selective (although a little different), and apparently excluded about 99.5% of all women with whom I was in contact. Even so, I found several who were very strong possibilities - but I did have to expand my travel radius to 2 hours. I am very happy with the one I found, and was prepared to spend a lot more time searching if it had been necessary.


I agree, though I think Herschel is high on his % estimates. She could be at <0.1%


----------



## Faithful Wife

Sounds to me like you just need to keep trying. I'd say I only feel mutual attraction enough to keep dating someone about 25% of the time...and of those, it drops down to maybe only 25% of them by the fourth date. So yes it is a numbers game.

Good luck with the new one you just mentioned.


----------



## Fozzy

Focus back on the two men that you DID feel that attraction for. What criteria was exclusive to only them that all the rest lacked?


----------



## Blondilocks

Prioritize your list. What is the #1 deal breaker? Doesn't make you laugh - next. And so on. Can he be religious if he doesn't shove it down your throat and tell you you'll be going to hell? Can he make 10-20% less if he ...? Can he be an inch shorter and not have a short man syndrome with you? 

Your requirements are your requirements and no one has the right to say they are wrong. Just realize that the fewer deal breakers you have, the more candidates that will be available.


----------



## x598

Begin again said:


> It's not that I'm that "in demand." I'm not a 10 or anyone's dream girl.
> 
> I have been into a few guys where they were single and so was I. That hasn't happened in a long time. And I'm just very picky. No need to lay out all my particulars. I'll read your suggestions and think them through. Please keep posting... I have something to learn here.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


you arent the first woman to say "i am picky". Yes, I read your list of pretty typical traits desired in a male. Nothing earth shattering there. I mean seriously who wouldn't want t be with someone who is smart, compliments your looks, makes a decent living, shares your political views, and is entertaining to be around? thats what i got from what you wrote and there is nothing wrong with that.

but i have heard a saying in your age bracket....finding a good mate is like parking spots at the mall. all the good ones are taken and you are leftover with junk in the back of the lot.

gone are the days when you were 20 and there was a plethora of single people.

i suggest you get into some activities...but do it for you not because you are own the prowl. not knowing where you live makes it kind of hard (can't suggest mountain climbing or surfing if you live in Kansas). as for the dating sites.....well they are full of desperate people and i think your chances are slim to none of finding someone who truly stimulates you and measure up to your requirements ....although it does happen. The thing is...the type of man you describe is out living life, working hard, having fun...not sitting around buried in his phone pining for a date. Those are easy to get when you have a fulfilling life.


----------



## Young at Heart

I will again suggest that the OP, focus on the big picture.

She uses a "2 date or out" "am I 100% into a guy" test. Consider for a moment that most people are very good at communicating without using words. You body language, tone of voice, facial expressions all tell volumes about what you are thinking even if you say little to nothing.

Have you ever considered that maybe the guys you are "2 date testing" know that they are being evaluated? Have you ever considered that maybe that makes them feel uncomfortable?
Have you ever considered that maybe your "2 date test" makes you look clingy which is not sexy in the eyes of your date?

Sure you don't want to waste either your time or some guy's time, but they are "big boys" and some may be willing "invest" some time in getting to know you even if you are a "7" or so. One of the better pieces of advice I got from a sex therapist was that sex is best when it is playful and relaxed, where you can laugh about what doesn't quite go right and realize that each time doesn't have to be perfect. With enough practice the sex will become excellant.


----------



## Lila

This thread has been an eye opener. 

150+ dates!!!!! Holy crap that's a lot! I've always known the Online dating scene was tough but that sounds brutal . 

But specifically to your issue...I'm of the mind that you either have 'the spark' with someone or you don't. What exactly constitutes 'the spark'? I have no idea. It's intangible but obvious when felt, so I get what you're saying about wanting that. However, I've also had it hit me out of left field with people that on paper would never caught my interest. Basically what I'm saying is, I agree that you shouldn't waste your time on people who you KNOW would never light your fire but I also agree that you should stick with meeting people in social settings rather than OLD. Meetup is excellent for this. 

Sent from mobile using Tapatalk


----------



## Bobby5000

You're overly impressed with yourself and crave adulation and make sure you do not fall in love so that you are not disappointed. Your need for control prevents you from letting ago- at least that's my 2 cents.


----------



## Begin again

naiveonedave said:


> IMO, that is not the case. I go w/ or w/o the W. I am sure some men feel the way you present it, but most that go, go either way....
> 
> It is your call, I just think it is worth pointing out that you are pre-selecting the pool of potentials mates down really quickly.


Quick facts on the gender gap - Church for Men

Single Men in the Church: A Female?s Perspective - SingleRoots

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/291418.Why_Men_Hate_Going_to_Church
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## *Deidre*

Begin again said:


> I am initiating online. Quite a bit, actually. It seems the men I'm interested in are not interested in me, because I've only had one respond to me. And I'm pretty cute, but men can be superficial. I'm more attractive in person.


I'm thinking that part of it could be that you're becoming the one to pursue the men. And probably the men you like, aren't attracted/interested in women who pursue. The men who do end up interested, maybe you are not interested in them, because deep down you want a man that you're interested in, to pursue you. That's my best guess. Just something to think about.


----------



## tech-novelist

Begin again said:


> I resisted putting out a list, as I'm sure the guys on TAM will rip me to shreds if I do. But honestly, I have a long list of what I want and don't want and it's a bit different than most women. I'll share some of the big ones and ask that you don't tear me apart for it.
> 
> 
> Educated (at least a BA)
> Lives fairly close to me (I don't want to drive more than 1 hour to see them, as I have limited time as it is)
> Make at least as much money as me (I want an equal)
> No conservatives/church goers/hunters/NASCAR fans/
> Confident
> Taller than me
> Neither fat nor a body builder (not attactive to me; bulky muscles look unnatural!)
> Comfortable with who he is
> Not Type-A (I don't want to have to keep up all the time or always be on the go!)
> Makes me laugh - this one is really important!!!


What are your age requirements?

Also, how much money do you make, since making at least as much as you is a requirement? E.g., if you make $250,000/yr, that is going to rule out almost everyone.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Bobby5000 said:


> You're overly impressed with yourself and crave adulation and make sure you do not fall in love so that you are not disappointed. Your need for control prevents you from letting ago- at least that's my 2 cents.


Is this based on anything she has said?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Begin again said:


> Quick facts on the gender gap - Church for Men
> 
> Single Men in the Church: A Female?s Perspective - SingleRoots
> 
> https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/291418.Why_Men_Hate_Going_to_Church
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


These were fascinating, thank you for sharing them.

Have you thought of taking up golf, or do you golf?


----------



## Begin again

tech-novelist said:


> What are your age requirements?
> 
> Also, how much money do you make, since making at least as much as you is a requirement? E.g., if you make $250,000/yr, that is going to rule out almost everyone.


Looking for a man between 40 and 53. For income, I make about what the average income is for a person my age who has been in the work force 20 years and has a BA. It's over six figures, but not absurd. For my neck of the woods, it means I can afford a small home on my own.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Begin again

Ok, I really do want some advice here. I previously posted that I texted back and forth with a guy yesterday who meets all my requirements and then some. But there are some problems, too. Here goes:

1. I have two kids; he has zero. So he goes/does what he wants when he wants: go out of town, plays sports, hang out with friends. He told me he will be out of town 5 out of the next 7 weekends. Our schedules conflict so much right now that we can't even find leisurely time for a first time phone call.

2. He's just getting back into the dating scene after many years. His wife passed and he was with his sick wife through it all. Won't share more details, since it's not my story. But he's only had 1 date since. I get the feeling he should/wants to go sow his oats while I'm looking for a real connection.

Our conversation was great, but based on the two items above I've already ruled him out in my mind. Does that make sense or is it because I'm commitment phobic or something? I've got a date tonight with another man, so I'm not putting my eggs in one basket.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## tech-novelist

Begin again said:


> Ok, I really do want some advice here. I previously posted that I texted back and forth with a guy yesterday who meets all my requirements and then some. But there are some problems, too. Here goes:
> 
> 1. I have two kids; he has zero. So he goes/does what he wants when he wants: go out of town, plays sports, hang out with friends. He told me he will be out of town 5 out of the next 7 weekends. Our schedules conflict so much right now that we can't even find leisurely time for a first time phone call.
> 
> 2. He's just getting back into the dating scene after many years. His wife passed and he was with his sick wife through it all. Won't share more details, since it's not my story. But he's only had 1 date since. I get the feeling he should/wants to go sow his oats while I'm looking for a real connection.
> 
> Our conversation was great, but based on the two items above I've already ruled him out in my mind. Does that make sense or is it because I'm commitment phobic or something? I've got a date tonight with another man, so I'm not putting my eggs in one basket.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I don't know if you are commitment phobic, but you have just added two more items to your list of requirements (compatible schedule and recent dating experience), and every item you add decreases your probability of finding someone.

BTW, I told my wife about this thread and she said that you should pick three items on your list to keep and ditch the other ones. One in particular she suggested ditching was your requirements for physical appearance; she said "not repulsive" should be sufficient.

Now let's do some probability estimates:

1. Lives fairly close to me (I don't want to drive more than 1 hour to see them, as I have limited time as it is)
I don't know where you live, but I doubt there could be more than 1 million men within an hour's drive of you, so let's start with that. If that's wrong, adjust for the actual number.
2. Single = 20% of men (200,000)
2. BA = 25% (50,000)
3. Make at least as much money as me (I want an equal) = 50% (25,000)
4. No conservatives/church goers/hunters/NASCAR fans/ = 50% (12,500)
5. Confident = 50% (6250)
6. Taller than me = 75% (4687)
7. Neither fat nor a body builder = 25% (1172)
8. Comfortable with who he is = 100% of confident men, so no problem
9. Not Type-A (I don't want to have to keep up all the time or always be on the go!) = 75% (878)
10. Makes me laugh - this one is really important!!! = 25% (220)

(Added)
11. No children = 25% (55)
12. Age 40-53 = 25% (18)
13. Recent experience dating = 50%? (9)

So according to this calculation, we can estimate that there are perhaps 10 men who meet all these criteria, assuming that they are all independent. Now of course we know that is not quite true (height and income are correlated), but it's probably good enough to calculate a very rough estimate. Let's be generous and assume it's 100 men.

And of course we haven't included the requirement that you have to meet all of the men's requirements too, which would reduce the number quite a bit further.

Conclusion: I don't think you are being realistic.


----------



## Lila

@Begin again, why not keep 'text guy' on the back burner until you actually meet? Be casual, friendly even, until such time where you can meet in person.

You are looking at dating like a chess game. Way too intense and too many steps ahead. Kick back and take it one step at a time. 

Sent from mobile using Tapatalk


----------



## Begin again

tech-novelist said:


> I don't know if you are commitment phobic, but you have just added two more items to your list of requirements (compatible schedule and recent dating experience), and every item you add decreases your probability of finding someone.
> 
> BTW, I told my wife about this thread and she said that you should pick three items on your list to keep and ditch the other ones. One in particular she suggested ditching was your requirements for physical appearance; she said "not repulsive" should be sufficient.
> 
> Now let's do some probability estimates:
> 
> 1. Lives fairly close to me (I don't want to drive more than 1 hour to see them, as I have limited time as it is)
> I don't know where you live, but I doubt there could be more than 1 million men within an hour's drive of you, so let's start with that. If that's wrong, adjust for the actual number.
> 2. Single = 20% of men (200,000)
> 2. BA = 25% (50,000)
> 3. Make at least as much money as me (I want an equal) = 50% (25,000)
> 4. No conservatives/church goers/hunters/NASCAR fans/ = 50% (12,500)
> 5. Confident = 50% (6250)
> 6. Taller than me = 75% (4687)
> 7. Neither fat nor a body builder = 25% (1172)
> 8. Comfortable with who he is = 100% of confident men, so no problem
> 9. Not Type-A (I don't want to have to keep up all the time or always be on the go!) = 75% (878)
> 10. Makes me laugh - this one is really important!!! = 25% (220)
> 
> (Added)
> 11. No children = 25% (55)
> 12. Age 40-53 = 25% (18)
> 13. Recent experience dating = 50%? (9)
> 
> So according to this calculation, we can estimate that there are perhaps 10 men who meet all these criteria, assuming that they are all independent. Now of course we know that is not quite true (height and income are correlated), but it's probably good enough to calculate a very rough estimate. Let's be generous and assume it's 100 men.
> 
> And of course we haven't included the requirement that you have to meet all of the men's requirements too, which would reduce the number quite a bit further.
> 
> Conclusion: I don't think you are being realistic.


So, would you tell a man that he should shoot for a woman whose appearance was just above "not repulsive?"
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## naiveonedave

Begin again said:


> So, would you tell a man that he should shoot for a woman whose appearance was just above "not repulsive?"
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I was going to post the same break down as Tech did. I think he is being generous as to the number that are actually available to you. You have too many criteria that kick guys out before you get to see if you have any chemistry with them. Not repulsive might be too loose....

Also, you have a lot of baggage, just D'd, and two kids. That will kick you out from many single men.


----------



## 225985

Begin again said:


> Looking for a man between 40 and 53. For income, I make about what the average income is for a person my age who has been in the work force 20 years and has a BA. It's over six figures, but not absurd. For my neck of the woods, it means I can afford a small home on my own.


That's me again. :wink2: I exceed all these. :surprise::surprise: And I love dogs. uppy:

You just need to find an activity or enter a social circle that attracts this type of person you describe.



naiveonedave said:


> Also, you have a lot of baggage, just D'd, and two kids. That will kick you out from many single men.


This ^^^^


----------



## Begin again

blueinbr said:


> That's me again. :wink2: I exceed all these. :surprise::surprise: And I love dogs. uppy:
> 
> You just need to find an activity or enter a social circle that attracts this type of person you describe.
> 
> 
> 
> This ^^^^


Considering I could go on a few dates a week with men who fit most of these criteria already, I think you all are being a bit pessimistic.

I just did a search on my online dating site for men who meet the criteria above (as best I can; no option for "not a hunter or nascar fan") and I came up with over 1000 men who are within 15 miles of my zip code. I think I'll be ok. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## 225985

Begin again said:


> Ok, I really do want some advice here. I previously posted that I texted back and forth with a guy yesterday who meets all my requirements and then some. But there are some problems, too. Here goes:
> 
> 1. I have two kids; he has zero. So he goes/does what he wants when he wants: go out of town, plays sports, hang out with friends. He told me he will be out of town 5 out of the next 7 weekends. Our schedules conflict so much right now that we can't even find leisurely time for a first time phone call.
> 
> 2. He's just getting back into the dating scene after many years. His wife passed and he was with his sick wife through it all. Won't share more details, since it's not my story. But he's only had 1 date since. I get the feeling he should/wants to go sow his oats while I'm looking for a real connection.
> 
> Our conversation was great, but based on the two items above I've already ruled him out in my mind. Does that make sense or is it because I'm commitment phobic or something? I've got a date tonight with another man, so I'm not putting my eggs in one basket.


I could have been this guy. I have no kids. Wife was very sick for long time and I was a good caregiver. Happily she recently had a life saving, life altering procedure and I will not be a widower anytime soon, I hope. But if my wife passed away I would be new to the dating scene.

After losing a long term spouse it is natural to want to fill your calendar with activities (go out of town, plays sports, hang out with friends). It means he is well ground, has a life, and is probably doing things he would not do before while he cared for his wife (that shows he has compassion, and knows his priorities. ) But unless it is for work reasons, he has just recently met you and therefore you are not yet a priority for him to shift his social calendar. If I was him and you and I clicked, then unsurprisingly my weekends become more available to spend with you. But not a first. I would not drop everything for you. If this guy suddenly cleared his weekends for you, you would have said he is too needy, and you would have excluded him for that. 

Don't rule him out because you got "the feeling" he wants to sow his oats. Did he try to sleep with you on the first date? Don't rule out a potentially good thing by projecting your fears on to the guy.

You seem very quick to make a judgement on a guy. If you are in high demand, you can do that. But then you seem to eliminate everyone and then complain (for lack of a better word) about not being able to find great guys.


----------



## Wolf1974

Lila said:


> This thread has been an eye opener.
> 
> *150+ dates!!!!! Holy crap that's a lot! I've always known the Online dating scene was tough but that sounds brutal . *
> 
> But specifically to your issue...I'm of the mind that you either have 'the spark' with someone or you don't. What exactly constitutes 'the spark'? I have no idea. It's intangible but obvious when felt, so I get what you're saying about wanting that. However, I've also had it hit me out of left field with people that on paper would never caught my interest. Basically what I'm saying is, I agree that you shouldn't waste your time on people who you KNOW would never light your fire but I also agree that you should stick with meeting people in social settings rather than OLD. Meetup is excellent for this.
> 
> Sent from mobile using Tapatalk


It actually wasn't that bad at all. But as I said on another thread it all depends on expectations. If I walked into each of those thinking Man I hope this is the last first date I ever have I would have been disappointed 150 times. That would be brutal and most people would give up. Instead I kept those dates to 1 beer and about 30 minutes, absolutely no dinner dates or long dates. My attitude was I was just going to meet someone and it probably won't lead to more than this but hey least the beer is good lol


----------



## Lila

Begin again said:


> Considering I could go on a few dates a week with men who fit most of these criteria already, I think you all are being a bit pessimistic.
> 
> I just did a search on my online dating site for men who meet the criteria above (as best I can; no option for "not a hunter or nascar fan") and I came up with over 1000 men who are within 15 miles of my zip code. I think I'll be ok.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Please don't change a thing in your selection criteria. Your preferences are your preferences. Your issues have nothing to do with those and I'm rather surprised you're getting so much push back on it. Having read many threads on TAM from men who's partners settled from them, I would advise you strongly NOT to settle. 

For what it's worth, I don't think your criteria is all that unusual or outrageous. My husband and I belong to several social meetup groups for the over 40 crowd Many of the members are single men and seem to meet your requirements. So yea, I don't think your criteria is limiting you to a life of perpetual loneliness.


----------



## Wolf1974

Begin again said:


> Ok, I really do want some advice here. I previously posted that I texted back and forth with a guy yesterday who meets all my requirements and then some. But there are some problems, too. Here goes:
> 
> 1. I have two kids; he has zero. So he goes/does what he wants when he wants: go out of town, plays sports, hang out with friends. He told me he will be out of town 5 out of the next 7 weekends. Our schedules conflict so much right now that we can't even find leisurely time for a first time phone call.
> 
> 2. He's just getting back into the dating scene after many years. His wife passed and he was with his sick wife through it all. Won't share more details, since it's not my story. But he's only had 1 date since. I get the feeling he should/wants to go sow his oats while I'm looking for a real connection.
> 
> Our conversation was great, but based on the two items above I've already ruled him out in my mind. Does that make sense or is it because I'm commitment phobic or something? I've got a date tonight with another man, so I'm not putting my eggs in one basket.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


1) makes sense. Any relationships that works has to have time for both parties to be available. Sometimes that sucks but it is what it is. Compatibility is key to any relationship.
2) you shouldn't make that assumption for him. Unless he tell you specifically I don't want anything serious now then you can't know what he wants or is ready for.

Bottom line is though if he has no time to date then he shouldn't be dating at all.


----------



## 225985

Wolf1974 said:


> It actually wasn't that bad at all. But as I said on another thread it all depends on expectations. If I walked into each of those thinking Man I hope this is the last first date I ever have I would have been disappointed 150 times. That would be brutal and most people would give up. Instead I kept those dates to 1 beer and about 30 minutes, absolutely no dinner dates or long dates. My attitude was I was just going to meet someone and it probably won't lead to more than this but hey least the beer is good lol


That is a lot of beer. :beer: :grin2:


----------



## Lila

....deleted as @blueinbr beat me to it.


----------



## Wolf1974

Lila said:


> LOL, that's a crap load of beer. :laugh::wink2:


True but I live in the craft brew state so was always an excuse to get out and try new micro brewery's lol

If I did have multiple first meets on one day I did have to space them out some though :smile2:


----------



## Married but Happy

Begin again said:


> Considering I could go on a few dates a week with men who fit most of these criteria already, I think you all are being a bit pessimistic.
> 
> I just did a search on my online dating site for men who meet the criteria above (as best I can; no option for "not a hunter or nascar fan") and I came up with over 1000 men who are within 15 miles of my zip code. I think I'll be ok.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I think you'll be ok, too. Well, as long as you aren't living in the south - if you are, move to the northeast or the west coast ASAP!

I met enough women who met my criteria even though the odds were much worse for me (at least going by tech-novelists method of analysis). I would only date Myers-Briggs personality types INFx or INTx, ALL of which together comprise less than 11% of the entire population. Fortunately, they are over-represented in OLD, as far as I can tell - probably because they prefer not to go out partying! Add in liberal, very HD, very non-religious non-smokers with no children under the age of 12, and you'd expect I'd have to extend my radius to include Australia (actually, one of my best dates actually was a Brit in Hong Kong), but most were within 2 hours by car. I could have even added in a very bizarre requirement that they not have pierced ears, and still found lots of good matches (strangely and coincidentally, 4 out of 5 of my top matches did NOT have pierced ears!). I even got my bonus wants: very pretty, self-sufficient, high EQ, martial arts experience, loves to dance, hike, and sail.

Yes, you'll be fine - just keep meeting people and keep the attitude that it's fun to do so.


----------



## Faithful Wife

tech-novelist said:


> BTW, I told my wife about this thread and she said that you should pick three items on your list to keep and ditch the other ones. One in particular she suggested ditching was your requirements for physical appearance; she said "not repulsive" should be sufficient.


Tech this is just crazy. If your wife really said this, does this mean you are not attractive to her, you are simply "not repulsive"?

And even if it doesn't mean that, would you be ok with a woman who married you but who was not attracted to you, simply found you "not repulsive"?

What if you over heard her saying to her girlfriends about you "yeah, he's not attractive to me at all, he's just barely acceptable but at least he is not repulsive"....that would make you feel secure in the relationship? Oh especially if it was followed up by "now that new guy YOU are dating, phew, he's a total hottie!" to her friend.

What about after a few years and the bedroom is dead and the woman comes to TAM to share her story and basically it starts out with "well we are sexless and I can't really figure out why I don't want to have sex with him, well, actually I never did really, I've never been that attracted to him, but someone gave me the advice that I should just go for someone who is not repulsive, so here I am...with a man who is not repulsive but not attractive to me at all and now I don't want to have sex with him".

I mean, wtf? 

OP, I say go for guys who are so attractive to you that you will want sizzling hot sex with him every night for the rest of your life once you find each other! :x


----------



## Begin again

blueinbr said:


> That is a lot of beer. :beer: :grin2:


He did say "good beer."

So, i think it should be at the same pub and the same seat every time. Think of the stud you'd be, with 150 different dates!!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## *Deidre*

Not sure if this is just my observation, but it seems anyways like some of the men here are implying that women should not be as picky as men when dating…that men can be super picky. No one needs to settle – people should be reasonable, but no one should settle. It’s just an observation I’m picking up on, though. lol :scratchhead:


----------



## Wolf1974

Begin again said:


> He did say "good beer."
> 
> So, i think it should be at the same pub and the same seat every time. Think of the stud you'd be, with 150 different dates!!
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Hardly a stud. Dating is a numbers game and I just have many many lesss requirements than you. So I have no issues meeting someone to see if we
Click in person rather than disqualify them based on what they wrote in a profile. If I did that I would have never met my GF of three years that I live with. Her profile sucked
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Wolf1974

*Deidre* said:


> Not sure if this is just my observation, but it seems anyways like some of the men here are implying that women should not be as picky as men when dating…that men can be super picky. No one needs to settle – people should be reasonable, but no one should settle. It’s just an observation I’m picking up on, though. lol :scratchhead:


I think if you want a relationship you should ABSOLUTELY be picky. But I would say that meeting or just talking to people should have a lower bar. Because sometimes what you think you want is very different from What you find and fall in love with. Now you can be picky and limit dates. Nothing wrong with it just realize that it will likely take longer to achieve what you want most likely.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Married but Happy

Wolf1974 said:


> Hardly a stud. Dating is a numbers game and I just have many many lesss requirements than you. So I have no issues meeting someone to see if we
> Click in person rather than disqualify them based on what they wrote in a profile. If I did that I would have never met my GF of three years that I live with. Her profile sucked
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Many profiles are just awful, but the people are great. Whenever possible, I'd communicate a while to find out enough to decide whether to meet - it they couldn't communicate well via email, chat, or phone, then they almost certainly couldn't communicate well in person. When still in doubt, I'd still meet them, but usually all that did was confirm my doubts. Once in a great while, though, I was pleasantly surprised.

I would meet a woman if they suggested it, regardless of what I thought about them - it was interesting "research" to help calibrate my intuition, if nothing else. However, I think women may want to be a little more careful about who they meet.


----------



## Wolf1974

Married but Happy said:


> Many profiles are just awful, but the people are great. Whenever possible, I'd communicate a while to find out enough to decide whether to meet - it they couldn't communicate well via email, chat, or phone, then they almost certainly couldn't communicate well in person. When still in doubt, I'd still meet them, but usually all that did was confirm my doubts. Once in a great while, though, I was pleasantly surprised.
> 
> I would meet a woman if they suggested it, regardless of what I thought about them - it was interesting "research" to help calibrate my intuition, if nothing else. However, I think women may want to be a little more careful about who they meet.


I agree. What you read in a profile and how they are in real life can be completely different. Now the OP has some hard lines about money and education so you can do some of that eliminating up front I suppose same with race or religion. I did have my automatic disqualifiers as well. You have an interested category , maybe category, and no way category. I was more than willing to meet just about anyone in the upper two categories and learned through experience that perseptions aren't always reality of a date 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## 225985

*Deidre* said:


> Not sure if this is just my observation, but it seems anyways like some of the men here are implying that women should not be as picky as men when dating…that men can be super picky. No one needs to settle – people should be reasonable, but no one should settle. It’s just an observation I’m picking up on, though. lol :scratchhead:


I have not dated in 25 years. But I do know the ratio of men to women re: OLD. OP can be very picky and still get many dates. IMO guys are LESS picky than women. 

I was only saying that she might mistakenly filter out some good ones. But if she has plenty of fish she can afford to do that.


----------



## john117

If you live around Kentucky we have a match . Superbly educated, well compensated, no NASCAR etc, confident... Not sure about the taller than me part. 5' 9" 

Seriously, dating is a numbers game. If you subset it well enough it works. If you're too wide criteria wise, or too narrow, it won't.


----------



## tech-novelist

Begin again said:


> So, would you tell a man that he should shoot for a woman whose appearance was just above "not repulsive?"
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I would tell a man who had a list corresponding to yours that he would be very unlikely ever to meet anyone who would fulfill it. The precise items that should be dropped as requirements would be up to him, but maintaining a list like that is a pretty certain way to prevent success.


----------



## Married but Happy

tech-novelist said:


> I would tell a man who had a list corresponding to yours that he would be very unlikely ever to meet anyone who would fulfill it. The precise items that should be dropped as requirements would be up to him, but maintaining a list like that is a pretty certain way to prevent success.


It will indeed prevent success, IF you are not already meeting people who match. If you realize that you aren't finding any matches with the stricter criteria, they need to loosen. I had a longer list, but I was _somewhat _flexible in applying it - if something lacking was compensated for by something else, that could be workable. I had only a few truly non-negotiable items. For example, I would not date a smoker - one of my best prospects had just quit (but hadn't updated her profile), so I gave her a chance; she stuck with it, too.


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> Tech this is just crazy. If your wife really said this, does this mean you are not attractive to her, you are simply "not repulsive"?
> 
> And even if it doesn't mean that, would you be ok with a woman who married you but who was not attracted to you, simply found you "not repulsive"?
> 
> What if you over heard her saying to her girlfriends about you "yeah, he's not attractive to me at all, he's just barely acceptable but at least he is not repulsive"....that would make you feel secure in the relationship? Oh especially if it was followed up by "now that new guy YOU are dating, phew, he's a total hottie!" to her friend.
> 
> What about after a few years and the bedroom is dead and the woman comes to TAM to share her story and basically it starts out with "well we are sexless and I can't really figure out why I don't want to have sex with him, well, actually I never did really, I've never been that attracted to him, but someone gave me the advice that I should just go for someone who is not repulsive, so here I am...with a man who is not repulsive but not attractive to me at all and now I don't want to have sex with him".
> 
> I mean, wtf?
> 
> OP, I say go for guys who are so attractive to you that you will want sizzling hot sex with him every night for the rest of your life once you find each other! :x


As usual, my situation is not a model for anyone to follow.

As a matter of fact, my first wife didn't seem to be too hot for me after the initial excitement wore off, but we didn't have a sexless marriage.

And as for S and I, when we met, we weren't even looking for new partners.

Both S and I were extremely fortunate to meet each other, as we are far better suited to one another than could be expected. In fact, just the chain of coincidences necessary for her to contact me in the first place would be enough to convince anyone who didn't know me very well that I was making it up. If TAM had been here at that time, and I had come on the board asking whether they thought I should go ahead with my plan to divorce my wife and marry S, they would have told me I was crazy, and the odds would have been that they were right.

Now in this case we have a poster who is asking what she is doing wrong. Of course she can do whatever she wants, but since she has asked for feedback, my opinion, and that of S, is that she is being far too picky and is greatly reducing her chances of finding someone who meets all of her criteria.


----------



## Satya

If you totaled up the amount of time you've been posting responses to the thread, how many coffee dates could that have amounted to, roughly? 5? 10? Just something to think about.

My view is, the more you talk about it and hyper focus, the less you're getting out and doing it. Preferences are good, boundaries (non-negotiables) even better. You got that part down.

I dated online for just over 2 years total after my D, off and on, until my husband found me.... Just as I was going to pull the plug on dating altogether. I worked 55+ hrs a week, plus 25+ in homework for my masters, and dated every other day: coffee, lunch, and afternoon tea dates. No dinner dates unless we'd met for coffee first. No texting for longer than 3 days without meeting. I'd offer to pay if I set up the date. If you're a charming enough personality, you can push forward these boundaries without seeming like you carry around a clipboard with a checklist. My husband was the only one who saw my real efforts and he bought me a noise making "bull$hyt button" on our second date, which is velcroed next to my steering wheel in honor of the occasion. 

Man, was I ever busy, but it was fun and very confidence building. 

Just my take on the experience. It is like a second (or third!) job, less the stress. Dating should never be stressful.


----------



## Faithful Wife

tech-novelist said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tech this is just crazy. If your wife really said this, does this mean you are not attractive to her, you are simply "not repulsive"?
> 
> And even if it doesn't mean that, would you be ok with a woman who married you but who was not attracted to you, simply found you "not repulsive"?
> 
> What if you over heard her saying to her girlfriends about you "yeah, he's not attractive to me at all, he's just barely acceptable but at least he is not repulsive"....that would make you feel secure in the relationship? Oh especially if it was followed up by "now that new guy YOU are dating, phew, he's a total hottie!" to her friend.
> 
> What about after a few years and the bedroom is dead and the woman comes to TAM to share her story and basically it starts out with "well we are sexless and I can't really figure out why I don't want to have sex with him, well, actually I never did really, I've never been that attracted to him, but someone gave me the advice that I should just go for someone who is not repulsive, so here I am...with a man who is not repulsive but not attractive to me at all and now I don't want to have sex with him".
> 
> I mean, wtf?
> 
> OP, I say go for guys who are so attractive to you that you will want sizzling hot sex with him every night for the rest of your life once you find each other!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As usual, my situation is not a model for anyone to follow.
> 
> As a matter of fact, my first wife didn't seem to be too hot for me after the initial excitement wore off, but we didn't have a sexless marriage.
> 
> And as for S and I, when we met, we weren't even looking for new partners.
> 
> Both S and I were extremely fortunate to meet each other, as we are far better suited to one another than could be expected. In fact, just the chain of coincidences necessary for her to contact me in the first place would be enough to convince anyone who didn't know me very well that I was making it up. If TAM had been here at that time, and I had come on the board asking whether they thought I should go ahead with my plan to divorce my wife and marry S, they would have told me I was crazy, and the odds would have been that they were right.
> 
> Now in this case we have a poster who is asking what she is doing wrong. Of course she can do whatever she wants, but since she has asked for feedback, my opinion, and that of S, is that she is being far too picky and is greatly reducing her chances of finding someone who meets all of her criteria.
Click to expand...

None of that answered my question. Does she think you are not attractive but simply "not repulsive"?


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> None of that answered my question. Does she think you are not attractive but simply "not repulsive"?


No, and I wouldn't want that, so I would prioritize attraction.

But I didn't (and wouldn't) have all those other requirements (or corresponding ones).

In other words, one can (and in fact should) have requirements for a partner (or anything else, for that matter), but if those requirements are extremely unlikely to be met, then one has the choice of either reducing the requirements, or going without.


----------



## Faithful Wife

My experience in the past 8 months...

I have a lot to offer and I am able to attract a man who has a lot to offer as well. I am not looking for a deep commitment right now, but do want a sexually exclusive relationship with someone I'm very fond of. It could turn into more with the right person but I'm ok if it doesn't.

I did mostly online dating because it is efficient and can result in the most dates compared to the amount of effort you put into dating. If you want to meet people only in person, then it takes a lot more time and effort, resulting in fewer dates. 

During the early part of my dating adventure, I was doing some alternative dating. The rules were basically the same for that, and my results were about the same as well.

I paid very close attention to profile details. You can find out a lot about a person by reading between the lines. I learned quickly that even when I did this, a lot of people are not very self aware and therefore, their profile information is not accurate. Example would be a guy who claims he is ready to find a life partner but who definitely is not ready or he is a straight up commitment phobe. 

So I learned to read profiles closely, but to not expect the person to actually match what they said when I met them. This way I had no real expectations. 

I also learned to just not respond to guys I did not feel attraction to based on pictures and their profile information. Once in awhile I might say "thanks but no thanks" but usually I just don't respond. If you respond at all (but express a lack of interest in them) they would sometimes get cranky in return. I don't owe anyone anything and would get pissed when I would respond politely only to get a mean response in return....so I stopped responding to anyone I didn't have any interest in.

When I was really rolling, I had 2 to 3 dates a week. Usually coffee dates to start. I always paid my own and a lot of times I paid the whole bill.

I ended up exclusive with one guy fairly early on. We had lots of mutual attraction and a similar list of things we brought to the table as a partner. Seemed like a good match so we gave it a shot. Quickly became obvious that there was not an emotional or mental match. With mutual sexual attraction as the only thing in common, it quickly ended. 

I probably had a total of 30 or so first dates in 6 months. Then a handful of 2nd and 3rd dates. 

Currently I am exclusively dating a man I met on *******. He meets everything on my list of things I wanted in a guy....

He is 6'2".

We have crazy good mutual attraction.

He is a professional in an industry I can respect.

He is an old fashioned gentleman in the streets and a freak in the sheets.

He is responsible and respectable. He has a lot of great long term friendships and I like his friends.

He is 6 years older than me (which fits in my age criteria). 

He has family obligations that match well with mine and we are at the same general stage in life.

He is intelligent and funny.

My mom and kids like him.

........

Don't give up and don't despair. Keep at this, you'll find him.

And definitely do not lower your standards! You either feel the mutual attraction, or move on. There's no good that can come from you dating someone you aren't that attracted to.


----------



## Faithful Wife

tech-novelist said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> None of that answered my question. Does she think you are not attractive but simply "not repulsive"?
> 
> 
> 
> No, and I wouldn't want that, so I would prioritize attraction.
> 
> But I didn't (and wouldn't) have all those other requirements (or corresponding ones).
> 
> In other words, one can (and in fact should) have requirements for a partner (or anything else, for that matter), but if those requirements are extremely unlikely to be met, then one has the choice of either reducing the requirements, or going without.
Click to expand...

I have no idea how you've determined that she is extremely unlikely to meet someone who fits her criteria. I saw your list of probabilities and thought it was way off and silly.

Based on what SHE is bringing to the table, she will not have a problem attracting a man with similar qualities.


----------



## uhtred

One small bit of advice is to be a bit flexible with your "requirements". I know two very successful engineers who never finished college. If someone is otherwise great, but slightly shorter than you, that could be OK. 

Basically having standards is great, and you should in general stick to them, but bending some in return for someone who is great in some other way can be fine.


----------



## Faithful Wife

uhtred said:


> One small bit of advice is to be a bit flexible with your "requirements". I know two very successful engineers who never finished college. *If someone is otherwise great, but slightly shorter than you, that could be OK*.


I don't think we should ever lower our physical standards. That is just asking for trouble (in the sex life) later on down the road. It is true that if we meet someone and there is a compelling reason to not pass them over even though there is one or more things you are not attracted to, then yeah, if you're feelin' it...you should go for it. But typically, if you have any type of feeling like "I'm not that attracted to him, but maybe because I like x, y, and z about him, it will be ok" you are already headed for trouble. And also, the guy should not have to be with someone who doesn't actually feel strong attraction for him, that's not fair to him either. If the "truth" came out and he finds out you weren't attracted to him, you just ignored this fact because "all his other attributes" were attractive, it is going to make him feel like sh*t.


----------



## Begin again

Wolf1974 said:


> Hardly a stud. Dating is a numbers game and I just have many many lesss requirements than you. So I have no issues meeting someone to see if we
> Click in person rather than disqualify them based on what they wrote in a profile. If I did that I would have never met my GF of three years that I live with. Her profile sucked
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Did you do a bunch of first dates, or some second and third? I'm told not to rule a guy out on the first date.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## BetrayedDad

Begin again said:


> What am I doing wrong, if anything? Why is it easy to find a guy who will fall for me (and I'm not bragging, I've been proposed to 4 times in my life!) and so hard to find a man who I fall for?


My two cents, taking everything you said at face value. 

If EVERY guy you date falls in love with you then the only thing I can think of is you are dating guys way below your sex rank. You need to be more selective before you go out so you don't waste your time. If you're an 8 for example don't date a 5 or they will all be throwing themselves at you. When you are looking online pick guys in the 7-9 range. It can't be your stunning personality because how do you know anything about someone after 1-2 dates?!? You don't so it's probably a looks thing. And guys are very visual so you probably look better than what they can typically get. Maybe you think these guys look okay but obviously you should set the bar a little higher in the looks dept.

tl;dr - Be more picky!


----------



## BetrayedDad

Satya said:


> dated every other day: coffee, lunch, and afternoon tea dates. No dinner dates unless we'd met for coffee first. No texting for longer than 3 days without meeting. I'd offer to pay if I set up the date.


This is exactly how you do it.... I did exactly the same thing, worked very well.

You know within 30 minutes, in person, if you want another date.

No reason to waste everyone's time, it's a number game. Simple as that.


----------



## uhtred

As people age, they change physically, usually for the worst. Someone who meets your standards now, will probably not do so in 20 years. Its one of the reasons that I think people shouldn't pay too much attention to physical appearance when they are looking for a long term partner.

Physical appearance is of course different from how attractive someone is to you overall. I think that is based on a whole variety of traits. 




Faithful Wife said:


> I don't think we should ever lower our physical standards. That is just asking for trouble (in the sex life) later on down the road. It is true that if we meet someone and there is a compelling reason to not pass them over even though there is one or more things you are not attracted to, then yeah, if you're feelin' it...you should go for it. But typically, if you have any type of feeling like "I'm not that attracted to him, but maybe because I like x, y, and z about him, it will be ok" you are already headed for trouble. And also, the guy should not have to be with someone who doesn't actually feel strong attraction for him, that's not fair to him either. If the "truth" came out and he finds out you weren't attracted to him, you just ignored this fact because "all his other attributes" were attractive, it is going to make him feel like sh*t.


----------



## Faithful Wife

uhtred said:


> As people age, they change physically, usually for the worst. Someone who meets your standards now, will probably not do so in 20 years. Its one of the reasons that I think people shouldn't pay too much attention to physical appearance when they are looking for a long term partner.
> 
> Physical appearance is of course different from how attractive someone is to you overall. I think that is based on a whole variety of traits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think we should ever lower our physical standards. That is just asking for trouble (in the sex life) later on down the road. It is true that if we meet someone and there is a compelling reason to not pass them over even though there is one or more things you are not attracted to, then yeah, if you're feelin' it...you should go for it. But typically, if you have any type of feeling like "I'm not that attracted to him, but maybe because I like x, y, and z about him, it will be ok" you are already headed for trouble. And also, the guy should not have to be with someone who doesn't actually feel strong attraction for him, that's not fair to him either. If the "truth" came out and he finds out you weren't attracted to him, you just ignored this fact because "all his other attributes" were attractive, it is going to make him feel like sh*t.
Click to expand...

So let's say you overhear your wife telling a friend "oh no, I've never been attracted to uhtred. I love him for other reasons, but the attraction has never been there"....that wouldn't hurt your feelings?

Even if it wouldn't, I can guarantee you that it would hurt most men.


----------



## Begin again

uhtred said:


> One small bit of advice is to be a bit flexible with your "requirements". I know two very successful engineers who never finished college. If someone is otherwise great, but slightly shorter than you, that could be OK.
> 
> Basically having standards is great, and you should in general stick to them, but bending some in return for someone who is great in some other way can be fine.


Yes, I am somewhat flexible on a lot of things, but others not so much. The "text" guy is pretty much a brute (6'2" athlete and very built). I have a date tonight with a guy who is 5'8" and foreign. I'm throwing a wider net than many give me credit for.

I won't date a man who is 5'3" - sorry, just cant.


----------



## BetrayedDad

Begin again said:


> I'm throwing a wider net than many give me credit for.


Not me. Like I said, that's your problem. Not picky enough.


----------



## Faithful Wife

BetrayedDad said:


> Not me. Like I said, that's your problem. Not picky enough.


I agree...and that's not very common between us.


----------



## uhtred

I think its a range. "never been attracted" is pretty strong. OTOH, if she was attracted to me but wished I were a couple of inches taller, then that wouldn't be so bad. 

People may differ a lot. For me, attraction is very fluid. There are a lot of things I like, and there are women I find very attractive even if they don't match all of the things I like. Other people may have a narrower sense of attraction. 




Faithful Wife said:


> So let's say you overhear your wife telling a friend "oh no, I've never been attracted to uhtred. I love him for other reasons, but the attraction has never been there"....that wouldn't hurt your feelings?
> 
> Even if it wouldn't, I can guarantee you that it would hurt most men.


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> I have no idea how you've determined that she is extremely unlikely to meet someone who fits her criteria. I saw your list of probabilities and thought it was way off and silly.


Feel free to change the percentages to whatever you think is reasonable. I multiplied the final answer by 10 to make it more generous, but of course they are just very rough estimates (as I indicated).



Faithful Wife said:


> Based on what SHE is bringing to the table, she will not have a problem attracting a man with similar qualities.


Ok, then apparently she is doing everything right, which means this thread is not necessary any more?


----------



## Faithful Wife

uhtred said:


> I think its a range. "never been attracted" is pretty strong. OTOH, if she was attracted to me but wished I were a couple of inches taller, then that wouldn't be so bad.
> 
> People may differ a lot. For me, attraction is very fluid. There are a lot of things I like, and there are women I find very attractive even if they don't match all of the things I like. Other people may have a narrower sense of attraction


I understand what you are saying. And I agree "a couple of inches taller" being a preference but overall there is strong attraction, then of course it could still be a great match. 

I just recommend that everyone pursue others who they feel strong mutual attraction with. One sided attraction or just "meh" level attraction for both is always going to be a problem.

For some people, what we refer to as "looks" are not what triggers the most attraction for them. Some may consider having shared values as the thing that really makes them feel most into someone, for example.

Or a combination of physical looks and other attributes.

Whatever it is though, people should follow their instincts on who they are initially attracted to. Then determine if the attraction is mutual. Then sort of simultaneously try to determine if this person is in the same place as you are and wants the same things, are they a decent, good person, etc. 

There are so many things that can become deal breakers as you keep going down the check off list. 

But generally speaking, if strong mutual attraction (based on whatever the individual knows about their preferences) is missing from the onset, this is problematic for any future.

There are of course cases where the love for someone can make a couple very attracted to each other more and more as the years pass. I wouldn't shoot for this though. 

Strong attraction fuels those butterflies in the stomach feelings. Who would want to miss out on that?


----------



## Faithful Wife

tech-novelist said:


> Ok, then apparently she is doing everything right, which means this thread is not necessary any more?


I don't think she's doing anything "wrong".

We can't control who shows up on our radar and when. Her guy just hasn't shown up yet. She is navigating the dating waters like most who are dating. I think she's doing great.

One thing to remember is that the men she is dating all have their list of preferences too, as they should. And if they can give as good as they get, they should not settle on less than their bottom line either. The guy I am dating had a very specific list that I fit into. We both have a couple of qualities that the other would prefer different, but they are not deal breakers and the matches on our lists far outnumber them.

Everyone should stick to their own standards.


----------



## Begin again

Faithful Wife said:


> I don't think she's doing anything "wrong".
> 
> We can't control who shows up on our radar and when. Her guy just hasn't shown up yet. She is navigating the dating waters like most who are dating. I think she's doing great.
> 
> One thing to remember is that the men she is dating all have their list of preferences too, as they should. And if they can give as good as they get, they should not settle on less than their bottom line either. The guy I am dating had a very specific list that I fit into. We both have a couple of qualities that the other would prefer different, but they are not deal breakers and the matches on our lists far outnumber them.
> 
> Everyone should stick to their own standards.


I am doing one thing wrong, and I see it and don't seem to be able to stop it. I am too nice. Honestly, I am. 

Tonight, I went on a date with a man who I have no physical attraction with. He's an ok looking man, very smart, and positive. But I didn't feel anything for him. But I'm gracious, friendly, etc. I think this is my Southern upbringing and how I saw my mother interact with everyone. And the date tonight, about half way through dinner, gives me "the look." I know it. It's the look that says, "this person is really great. I could really fall for her." But I'm not feeling that. And the worst part is that I don't know how to not be gracious, friendly, open. I give the wrong signals! I don't want to hurt his feelings. I hate hurting someone. So I keep being myself. I'm not flirting, but I'm also not giving signals that I'm disinterested. And so he keeps feeling more. 

At the end of the night, he asks me out for tomorrow. And what do I say? No? Sorry, but you misinterpreted me being nice as me being attracted to you? So I agree!!!!

I need to fix this about myself. It gets me in bad situations, like tonight. I hate this about me. This is EXACTLY what I was talking about in my original post. I need to fix it and still be true to who I am... not sure how I can do both.

And how do I get out of this now? I don't lie. I hate lying. I only do it if I must to avoid hurting someone. I feel like I should lie to him and say that my old boyfriend asked me out again or something. Anything to not hurt his feelings and to not go on another date I don't want to go on!

I will say this - I'm only going on the coffee dates from now on. 30 min max.


----------



## Begin again

Oy... he just texted me to tell me that "I'm very sweet and beyond his expectations." God, I hate hurting people!!! Hate it.


----------



## SunCMars

Begin again said:


> I'm not the best looking woman, maybe a 7?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


A 7 on the outside.

A 9.2 organically....hermetically!

Personality tops flash!


----------



## tech-novelist

Begin again said:


> I am doing one thing wrong, and I see it and don't seem to be able to stop it. I am too nice. Honestly, I am.


Maybe you need "No More Mr. Nice Guy"? :scratchhead:


----------



## Begin again

tech-novelist said:


> Maybe you need "No More Mr. Nice Guy"? :scratchhead:


LOL! While I don't do covert contracts nor am I passive aggressive, I do try to be nice to anyone if there's no reason to be otherwise. And if a person seems to like you and hasn't done anything wrong... oh, I don't know! I think I will read it again. I read it a few years ago, but it was because my STBXH was a "Nice Guy." I'll look again and see if anything might help me figure out how to stop being this way.


----------



## norajane

Begin again said:


> Oy... he just texted me to tell me that "I'm very sweet and beyond his expectations." God, I hate hurting people!!! Hate it.


When you first meet someone, date or otherwise, how long does it take for you to know whether you're interested? With the men you have found compelling in the past, how long did it take for you to know you were interested?

If you know quickly, maybe try speed dating. You can meet a bunch of people on one night, and decide quickly if you want to know them more or not. If not, you don't check his box on your dance card, no harm, no foul.

If you're slower to become attracted to people, then you're better off trying the meetup things where you can meet people who share your interests and get to know them without the "dating" aspect over it.


----------



## Wolf1974

Begin again said:


> Did you do a bunch of first dates, or some second and third? I'm told not to rule a guy out on the first date.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


all those were first dates. I had less than 25 second if that gives you any idea. Why would you rule out a guy on a first date. If you have no spark you won't find it later in my opinion. What I would suggest is if you're on the fence with someone don't rule them out until you meet them in person because that's when you'll know if you have a spark or not.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Begin again said:


> I am doing one thing wrong, and I see it and don't seem to be able to stop it. I am too nice. Honestly, I am.
> 
> .....
> 
> I will say this - I'm only going on the coffee dates from now on. 30 min max.


Yes, short coffee dates unless you feel a spark and then can stay longer, is best.

I hear you, being too nice to be able to let someone down easily is a problem.

You will have to practice. Why not practice on tonight's date? Text him tomorrow afternoon and just say "I'm so sorry but upon reflection, I don't think we are a good match. Thank you anyway though and good luck in your search".

I've had to send texts like this before and it isn't fun, but it isn't unfair or unkind, either. Once you get the hang of it, it isn't so bad. Wouldn't you want to hear the same if it was true from a guy and he just wasn't feeling it, even though you were?

You can do this. Don't go on a second date with the guy, that will hurt him worse in the big picture. Unless somehow in the morning you feel better about him and are truly open to seeing if any attraction can build.


----------



## Begin again

Faithful Wife said:


> Yes, short coffee dates unless you feel a spark and then can stay longer, is best.
> 
> I hear you, being too nice to be able to let someone down easily is a problem.
> 
> You will have to practice. Why not practice on tonight's date? Text him tomorrow afternoon and just say "I'm so sorry but upon reflection, I don't think we are a good match. Thank you anyway though and good luck in your search".
> 
> I've had to send texts like this before and it isn't fun, but it isn't unfair or unkind, either. Once you get the hang of it, it isn't so bad. Wouldn't you want to hear the same if it was true from a guy and he just wasn't feeling it, even though you were?
> 
> You can do this. Don't go on a second date with the guy, that will hurt him worse in the big picture. Unless somehow in the morning you feel better about him and are truly open to seeing if any attraction can build.


This is what I will do, as I totally agree. But.... Many on TAM told me that I shouldn't just rule a man out after 1 date. Others say 30 minutes is enough.

If you are a guy who said I give up too soon, what's your criteria?

And yes. I will text him today and let him know.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Married but Happy

Begin again said:


> This is what I will do, as I totally agree. But.... Many on TAM told me that I shouldn't just rule a man out after 1 date. Others say 30 minutes is enough.
> 
> If you are a guy who said I give up too soon, what's your criteria?
> 
> And yes. I will text him today and let him know.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


IMO, rule someone out ASAP. Go with your gut or intuition, but if there are any objective reasons to end it even when you gut says otherwise, end it. Your feelings _and_ your rational mind must be in agreement to go forward, but _either is good enough to bail_. Some men are going to be nervous or shy on a first meet - that's not a red flag, so if there are no other negatives, they may deserve another chance.

Most of the time, you'll know immediately if you're physically attracted. Sometimes, someone who isn't initially will become more so as you spend that 30 minutes with them. And sometimes they'll become a lot less so once they open their mouth and say something stupid or offensive! It's rare that by the end of a short date you're truly uncertain - if you are, then see them again. A second, more extensive date will make things clear. If you're still uncertain, then end it - _continuing_ uncertainty is a red flag.


----------



## Begin again

So, I did it. I texted him and said thank you but I didn't feel chemistry. He replied back with, "ok. Thanks." It sucked, but I did it.

And then an hour later he texts again to say he felt that I did feel chemistry. Sigh... I think I just won't respond.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Wolf1974

Begin again said:


> So, I did it. I texted him and said thank you but I didn't feel chemistry. He replied back with, "ok. Thanks." It sucked, but I did it.
> 
> And then an hour later he texts again to say he felt that I did feel chemistry. Sigh... I think I just won't respond.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I'm not sure I follow. So he texted you a second time to tell you that you were wrong what you felt,or in this case didn't feel? If that's the case I would say block him. Some people just don't handle rejection well. Sounds like You might have sidestepped a land mine here
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Rowan

Begin again said:


> So, I did it. I texted him and said thank you but I didn't feel chemistry. He replied back with, "ok. Thanks." It sucked, but I did it.
> 
> And then an hour later he texts again to say he felt that I did feel chemistry. Sigh... I think I just won't respond.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I understand how you feel. You're being the woman you were taught to be - polite, gracious, upbeat. Many people find that attractive. If you're smart, pretty and funny in the bargain, you're going to attract a lot of men. Many men in the dating world will mistake your sparkling personality for being into them and assume you're interested in sex, and maybe even a relationship. Many will also mistake that initial attraction to you for compatibility - which it definitely is not. The truth is, that you won't be attracted to many of the men you meet. You also won't be compatible with most of them. And that's okay. It's fine to be choosy. 

However, yes, you are going to find yourself having to say "thanks, but no thanks" fairly often. And you'll have it said to you fairly often. This is modern dating. Just continue to be yourself and lean to say "I really enjoyed meeting you, but I just don't think we're compatible" in that same gracious, polite, upbeat manner you were raised to offer to everyone. 

I will say, though, that the guy coming back to let you know that he thinks you really _are_ attracted to him would be an absolute deal-breaker for me. He might have been trying for funny and playful. It fell flat. Or, he might seriously have been letting you know that he knows what's best for you better than you do. That's insulting, controlling, and a little creepy from a man you've only just met. In any case, I would either simply not respond - at all, in any way - or block him completely.


----------



## tech-novelist

Begin again said:


> So, I did it. I texted him and said thank you but I didn't feel chemistry. He replied back with, "ok. Thanks." It sucked, but I did it.
> 
> And then an hour later he texts again to say he felt that I did feel chemistry. Sigh... I think I just won't respond.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I agree that you shouldn't respond, and should block him.

But you should also know that this is perfectly normal: men often think that women are more interested in them than is actually the case, whereas women don't make this mistake *as frequently*.

(This error is explained by evo-psych but I won't get into that here to avoid a derail.)


----------



## Faithful Wife

Begin again said:


> So, I did it. I texted him and said thank you but I didn't feel chemistry. He replied back with, "ok. Thanks." It sucked, but I did it.
> 
> And then an hour later he texts again to say he felt that I did feel chemistry. Sigh... I think I just won't respond.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


No don't respond.


----------



## meson

Begin again said:


> This is what I will do, as I totally agree. But.... Many on TAM told me that I shouldn't just rule a man out after 1 date. Others say 30 minutes is enough.
> 
> *If you are a guy who said I give up too soon, what's your criteria?*
> 
> And yes. I will text him today and let him know.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_



Of the women that I have loved and had a LTR with, I found that with none of them did I instantly feel something for them. There was no immediate spark. 

I have felt a spark with women and an instant attraction so I know it does happen for me but it is much rarer then love building due to knowing the person over time. And this is my point if you are filtering and expecting a spark immediately you may be inadvertently tossing a potential match.

My criteria also reflect what I have learned through my LTRs:

* Ability to commit. Not just to an LTR but to social engagements, plans and dreams.

* challenges me intellectually and is intelegent 

* ability to resolve conflict in a positive way that benefits all parties.

* has distinct plans or designs for their life that doesn't conflict and is consistent with my long term plans

* enjoys the outdoors and is not afraid of adventure

* trustworthy and transparent

* similar lifestyle patterns like cleanliness, housekeeping, non-smoking etc.

* independant and able to contribute to the lifestyle she lives and desires which is consistent with mine.

* has a strength of will and is unafraid of conflict when it is required. Has the ability to control and master fear.

* is physically attractive and can be casual to super dressed. Doesn't mind being scungy while camping or backpacking.

* is respectful to all, not just those she likes. Considerate and nurturing to children. 

* a great sense of humor and gets mine

These qualities are not in any particular order. Note that a large number of them can't be known with a handful of dates. So since my criteria mostly depend upon knowing the person, I recommended things like meetups where you can get to know people. This may not work as much for you similar to OLD doesn't do much for me except to introduce me to people.


----------



## tech-novelist

meson said:


> My criteria also reflect what I have learned through my LTRs:
> 
> * challenges me intellectually and is *intelegent *


But not necessarily good at *poofreading*...


----------



## x598

OP

after reading many of the replies here....it almost seems like your journey to find a partner is akin to a 16 year old on a shopping trip.

It just feels like you have a list of requirements, throw out an online profile and expect a perfect match with the spark or chemistry you crave.

it really isn't as simple as window shopping at the mall. To really get to know and understand somebody...it takes time and patience and you seem to be on overdrive.

It also wreaks of ego in that you have these "picky" and/or high standards that have to be on par with what you bring to the relationship.

You sound EXACTLY like my XW and are the same age....she thought her "package" was highly desirable, like yours, and yet 5 years later, she still can't meet "mr right"

Love isn't something you can fill out a checklist and force or make happen.


----------



## meson

tech-novelist said:


> But not necessarily good at *poofreading*...


As it turns out Mrs. meson is an excellent proof reader and is very tolerant of my horrible spelling. Proof reading on TAM is one of my faults...Forgive me.


----------



## Steve1000

Begin again said:


> At the end of the night, he asks me out for tomorrow. And what do I say? No? Sorry, but you misinterpreted me being nice as me being attracted to you? So I agree!!!!
> 
> I need to fix this about myself. It gets me in bad situations, like tonight. I hate this about me. This is EXACTLY what I was talking about in my original post. I need to fix it and still be true to who I am... not sure how I can do both.
> 
> And how do I get out of this now? I don't lie. I hate lying. I only do it if I must to avoid hurting someone. I feel like I should lie to him and say that my old boyfriend asked me out again or something. Anything to not hurt his feelings and to not go on another date I don't want to go on!
> 
> I will say this - I'm only going on the coffee dates from now on. 30 min max.


I remember in my younger days asking a lady out on a date. She pulled me aside and told me that there is nothing wrong with me, but I'm not the flavor she is looking for. I told her thanks for being so honest and direct with me. We ran into each other again a couple of times and there was no awkwardness. I no longer remember what she looks like, but I remember that she must have been a cool person.


----------



## Begin again

x598 said:


> OP
> 
> after reading many of the replies here....it almost seems like your journey to find a partner is akin to a 16 year old on a shopping trip.
> 
> It just feels like you have a list of requirements, throw out an online profile and expect a perfect match with the spark or chemistry you crave.
> 
> it really isn't as simple as window shopping at the mall. To really get to know and understand somebody...it takes time and patience and you seem to be on overdrive.
> 
> It also wreaks of ego in that you have these "picky" and/or high standards that have to be on par with what you bring to the relationship.
> 
> You sound EXACTLY like my XW and are the same age....she thought her "package" was highly desirable, like yours, and yet 5 years later, she still can't meet "mr right"
> 
> Love isn't something you can fill out a checklist and force or make happen.


Well, I'm now following the advice of most TAM members who have been successful with online dating. Perhaps I'm at least 21 now.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Wolf1974

tech-novelist said:


> I agree that you shouldn't respond, and should block him.
> 
> But you should also know that this is perfectly normal: men often think that women are more interested in them than is actually the case, *whereas women don't make this mistake.*
> 
> (This error is explained by evo-psych but I won't get into that here to avoid a derail.)


i wouldn't agree. I have had more than a few women argue with me that I need to give them another chance or that I was wrong for not choosing them. Some people just don't get it. It's a humbling thing to learn you don't float everyone's boat lol
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## tech-novelist

Wolf1974 said:


> i wouldn't agree. I have had more than a few women argue with me that I need to give them another chance or that I was wrong for not choosing them. Some people just don't get it. It's a humbling thing to learn you don't float everyone's boat lol
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I added a qualifier that women don't make this mistake *as frequently* as men.


----------



## Wolf1974

tech-novelist said:


> I added a qualifier that women don't make this mistake *as frequently* as men.


Well can't say for sure since I don't date men lol. But to all seriousness if you are trying to argue someone into dating you then you shouldn't have to wonder why they are single. What I have always told my female friends is send the text or
Email thanks but no thanks, just being polite, then immediately block them if they are worried about blow back. Most just say they are disappointmend and move on but some people just can't let that go. The guy the OP was talking about is one of those
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## BetrayedDad

Begin again said:


> I am doing one thing wrong, and I see it and don't seem to be able to stop it. I am too nice. Honestly, I am.


I'm pretty sure it's not that. In fact, positive.



Begin again said:


> Tonight, I went on a date with a man who I have no physical attraction with.


Yup. This is it. Why would you waste your valuable time?!?


----------



## COguy

Begin again said:


> This is what I will do, as I totally agree. But.... Many on TAM told me that I shouldn't just rule a man out after 1 date. Others say 30 minutes is enough.
> 
> If you are a guy who said I give up too soon, what's your criteria?
> 
> And yes. I will text him today and let him know.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I don't know...if I'm not into someone in the first 30 minutes I'm not going to force anything. Now I won't NOT see someone a 2nd time if things were going OK but I wasn't crazy about them. But if I am not attracted to them or their personality bores me, sorry I'm not going to waste my time.

I only know what you've posted here and I wonder if you're just not selecting from appropriate pools of candidates? Maybe your initial filter is not good? What's it like when you're not dating online? Why aren't you meeting real people?


----------



## Daisy12

Have you determined that these guys you go on dates with are "not the one" on the first date? How do you really even get to know someone that well on a first date, I mean sure there would be major turn off, being shorter , completely unattractive or a real douche personality, but I'm sure some of them must have seemed decent. 

I don't understand this spark that everyone is talking about but It's been almost 20 years since I was on a date so I am rusty on the whole concept, but when I fell in love with my husband I really loved him, but as time passed and we went through tough times together and I saw how good he was with our children I realized that I loved him even more that when I married him. It also made him much more attractive to me. Those years we spend really getting to know each other created a love that can't and won't be found on sight. I don't believe in love at first sight, I believe that is lust. Really love has to grow and by nutured and with really love the person you are with will be the most attractive person in the world to you, even if society says they are not.

It sounds like your standards are very high and given that you are at an age where most woman have been married for years with kids are you willing to lessen them to find a man or or your prepared to be happy alone if that "ideal" man never shows up. I'm not saying you should lessen your list of qualifications, but if maybe you want to really find someone to spend your life with you might compromise. I work with the elderly and there are a lot of single older woman there that never got married and when asked why, they say the right one never came alone. It's sad because they have no family, and who's to say that there is even a right one for each of us. No one is perfect, we all have flaws.


----------



## Faithful Wife

x598 said:


> It also wreaks of ego in that you have these "picky" and/or high standards that have to be on par with what you bring to the relationship.


This is laughable. Do you think the men she is dating have low standards?


----------



## COguy

Faithful Wife said:


> This is laughable. Do you think the men she is dating have low standards?


I think he's saying the opposite. If you want to land Brad Pitt you have to be a woman that Brad Pitt would date.

If you're a 5 and you're looking at other 5's as uninteresting losers, either your standards are too high or you need to become a 6.

I think that's one of the great tragedies of this modern era. We tell all these women that they're special snowflakes and they deserve a guy who is a 10. No. I'm sorry. Not all women deserve a 10. Maybe your personality sucks. Maybe you're boring. Maybe you aren't looking your best physically. These are all things that are important to quality guys.

Not saying that's what's going on here, just offering perspective on the comment.


----------



## Faithful Wife

COguy said:


> I think he's saying the opposite. If you want to land Brad Pitt you have to be a woman that Brad Pitt would date.
> 
> If you're a 5 and you're looking at other 5's as uninteresting losers, either your standards are too high or you need to become a 6.
> 
> I think that's one of the great tragedies of this modern era. *We tell all these women that they're special snowflakes and they deserve a guy who is a 10.* No. I'm sorry. Not all women deserve a 10. Maybe your personality sucks. Maybe you're boring. Maybe you aren't looking your best physically. These are all things that are important to quality guys.
> 
> Not saying that's what's going on here, just offering perspective on the comment.


I get that...yet she already described what she is bringing to the table, and her list of desirable traits she is seeking in a man were not any different than the desirable traits she is also offering.

As to the bolded...nothing the OP has said sounds like she thinks she is a special snow flake that "deserves a guy who is a 10". Also, where is it you think women are getting this message? I've certainly never heard that message. No friends of mine have ever heard that message. There is nothing on this OP's thread that would suggest she got that message. Help me out here...please give a concrete example of how "we are telling all these women that they're special snowflakes and deserve a guy who is a 10".

I think what we are really seeing is that men don't like to hear that women evaluate a man based on more than just him being a "good guy". We actually want to be *attracted* to a man, and have a compatible lifestyle and values. If he's a "good guy" but we aren't attracted to him, sorry, no, there's no reason to continue seeing him in most cases (exceptions do occur, though).

Do we have any issue with a man who wants a woman who is not only a "good woman" but is also attractive to him, and has a compatible lifestyle and values? Nope. It seems perfectly reasonable that he would want this. It also seems perfectly reasonable that if he is a 5, he should only expect to date a 5. This is reasonable for both genders. 

I've never heard anyone of any gender being told that they "deserve" something different than what they bring to the table themselves....other than when I've heard men here at TAM say that they feel they deserve a woman who is hotter than they are, because red pill.


----------



## Begin again

So the guy I'm texting with is pretty awesome. Timing is off so we can't meet for a couple of weeks due to traveling, but as I said he meets all my criteria and then some. If he's not into me once we meet, then he's not. But I will say that I didn't have everything I wanted in the man I married and we didn't grow in love - we grew apart. Sad, but true. So, I won't settle. Period. 

I appreciate all the advice here, and I'm trying to be smarter about how to online date and will also do some more activities where I'll meet people beyond work and my current social circle. I do have a friend who keeps trying to introduce me to her single guy friends, but I haven't taken her up on it yet. In other words, I do have options. 

If nothing else, I'll learn and grow from this experience. That's a win if I strike out with online dating for a while. I'll still get some hits and eventually a home run.


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> I get that...yet she already described what she is bringing to the table, and her list of desirable traits she is seeking in a man were not any different than the desirable traits she is also offering.


If men *in general* were attracted to the same traits as women *in general*, that would be definitive.

They aren't, though.

Women *in general* are more interested in provider status than men are *in general*. This means that women *in general* consider income, occupation, and other indicia of ability to provide more important than do men *in general*. So *a lot* of men aren't going to be as concerned with her degree or income as she might be with theirs. They will be *more *interested in her appearance and personality.

(Did I add enough qualifiers to avoid the response of NAWALT or NAMALT?)


----------



## Faithful Wife

tech-novelist said:


> If men *in general* were attracted to the same traits as women *in general*, that would be definitive.
> 
> They aren't, though.
> 
> Women *in general* are more interested in provider status than men are *in general*. This means that women *in general* consider income, occupation, and other indicia of ability to provide more important than do men *in general*. So *a lot* of men aren't going to be as concerned with her degree or income as she might be with theirs. They will be *more *interested in her appearance and personality.
> 
> (Did I add enough qualifiers to avoid the response of NAWALT or NAMALT?)


But what does any of this have to do with the OP? She has said that she has her standards and what she is looking for. Your response was that she "should" stop looking for someone she finds attractive and instead, settle for someone who "isn't repulsive"....(ok so your wife suggested this, but the fact that you posted it on here makes it come from you, either way).

So here is a woman who does not fall into your generalities. She knows what she wants, part of which is a man she feels attraction for.

Why would you then try to convince her to go for something she doesn't want?

And also....

Let's say your generalities are true....by your own RP dogma, these generalities only apply to woman who is looking fora life mate, not finding someone who she wants to have sex with. Right?

When you are just dating, you are not trying to make someone your life mate on the first date, but you are considering having sex with them. You are asking yourself if you feel attraction, if you would kiss them, if you can imagine yourself in their arms....(for myself, I'm always checking out their hands...do they look like sexy, strong hands that will manhandle me.....mmmm....oops sorry, this isn't about me....)

So therefore, according to RP itself, *ATTRACTION is of ultimate importance to WOMEN when they want to find someone to have sex with*.

Of course the OP wants more than "just sex", but sex is going to be part of any adult dating relationship unless both people are waiting for marriage, which is normally disclosed upfront....whereas life partner type stuff is not part of most dating relationships in the beginning (you don't go pick out wall paper for your future house together on a date, but you might have sex on a date).


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> Let's say your generalities are true....by your own RP dogma, these generalities only apply to woman who is looking fora life mate, not finding someone who she wants to have sex with. Right?
> 
> When you are just dating, you are not trying to make someone your life mate on the first date, but you are considering having sex with them. You are asking yourself if you feel attraction, if you would kiss them, if you can imagine yourself in their arms....(for myself, I'm always checking out their hands...do they look like sexy, strong hands that will manhandle me.....mmmm....oops sorry, this isn't about me....)
> 
> So therefore, according to RP itself, *ATTRACTION is of ultimate importance to WOMEN when they want to find someone to have sex with*.
> 
> Of course the OP wants more than "just sex", but sex is going to be part of any adult dating relationship unless both people are waiting for marriage, which is normally disclosed upfront....whereas life partner type stuff is not part of most dating relationships in the beginning (you don't go pick out wall paper for your future house together on a date, but you might have sex on a date).


Apparently I wasn't clear.

What you said was:

"I get that...yet she already described what she is bringing to the table, and her list of desirable traits she is seeking in a man were not any different than the desirable traits she is also offering."

What I was saying is that the fact that she has the same list of desirable traits as the ones she is looking for in a man doesn't *necessarily *mean that a man with those traits would find them attractive *in her*.

E.g., she wants him to make at least as much as she does. Should he want her to make at least as much as he does? In that case, they would both have to make exactly the same amount of money...


----------



## Faithful Wife

tech-novelist said:


> Apparently I wasn't clear.
> 
> What you said was:
> 
> "I get that...yet she already described what she is bringing to the table, and her list of desirable traits she is seeking in a man were not any different than the desirable traits she is also offering."
> 
> What I was saying is that the fact that she has the same list of desirable traits as the ones she is looking for in a man doesn't *necessarily *mean that a man with those traits would find them attractive *in her*.
> 
> A trivial example is that she wants a man who is taller than her. Does that mean that a man would want her to be taller than him? Obviously that wouldn't work if it were true.


Sigh....

Sorry I didn't realize I would have to break this down further for you....

When I said "her list of desirable traits she is seeking in a man were not any different than the desirable traits she is also offering", by "not any different" I did not mean they were exactly the same traits...I meant she has a reasonable list of desirable traits that a MAN may have, and she is offering a reasonable list of desirable traits that a WOMAN might have....and that her traits combined with the traits she is looking for should be a decent match. It is "not any different" in the sense that a man will also have standards and such a list and this is normal and typical.

So for example, a man she is interested in may have on his unwritten list that he hopes the woman he meets has breasts. Yet the OP does not have on her list that she hopes a man has breasts. I did not realize you would require such a detailed breakdown in order for you to understand. Hope this helps.

Though of course, you still side stepped everything I actually said in my previous post. I'm super, duper sorry it makes some of you guys angry that women actually want to have sex with attractive men. I know, I know, the truth hurts.


----------



## MrsAldi

Begin again said:


> I resisted putting out a list, as I'm sure the guys on TAM will rip me to shreds if I do. But honestly, I have a long list of what I want and don't want and it's a bit different than most women. I'll share some of the big ones and ask that you don't tear me apart for it.
> 
> 
> Educated (at least a BA)
> Lives fairly close to me (I don't want to drive more than 1 hour to see them, as I have limited time as it is)
> Make at least as much money as me (I want an equal)
> No conservatives/church goers/hunters/NASCAR fans/
> Confident
> Taller than me
> Neither fat nor a body builder (not attactive to me; bulky muscles look unnatural!)
> Comfortable with who he is
> Not Type-A (I don't want to have to keep up all the time or always be on the go!)
> Makes me laugh - this one is really important!!!


I'm wondering why you didn't list any personality traits? 
Are they important as well?

Education and all that are fine but not always achievable, when it comes to matters of the emotions & compatibility in a relationship or marriage, which helps in the long term more? 

If you found a partner who had all the physical traits but a low paid job, would you consider dating him? 




Sent from my B1-730HD using Tapatalk


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> Sigh....
> 
> Sorry I didn't realize I would have to break this down further for you....
> 
> When I said "her list of desirable traits she is seeking in a man were not any different than the desirable traits she is also offering", by "not any different" I did not mean they were exactly the same traits.


When you said *the desirable traits she was seeking were not any different than the ones she was offering*, I thought for some unknown reason that you meant that *the desirable traits she was seeking were not any different than the ones she was offering*.

How silly of me. :surprise:


----------



## Faithful Wife

tech-novelist said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sigh....
> 
> Sorry I didn't realize I would have to break this down further for you....
> 
> When I said "her list of desirable traits she is seeking in a man were not any different than the desirable traits she is also offering", by "not any different" I did not mean they were exactly the same traits.
> 
> 
> 
> When you said *the desirable traits she was seeking were not any different than the ones she was offering*, I thought for some unknown reason that you meant that *the desirable traits she was seeking were not any different than the ones she was offering*.
> 
> How silly of me.
Click to expand...

"Not any different" in the sense that a man also has his list of requirements. Make sense now?

Of course you still didn't actually address what I said....but that's ok. I know it hurts to acknowledge that women do want to have sex with gorgeous men.


----------



## *Deidre*

The question is...if that is true...why would men be offended by women wanting to sleep with hot guys, when they want to sleep with hot women?


----------



## Holdingontoit

*Deidre* said:


> The question is...if that is true...why would men be offended by women wanting to sleep with hot guys, when they want to sleep with hot women?


Because those of us who are not hot know that women will never want to sleep with us, and we want to sleep with them SO BADLY, and it hurts to know that it is never going to happen or at best she is settling for us because we are reliable providers and not because she is as hot for us as we are for her.


----------



## tech-novelist

Faithful Wife said:


> "Not any different" in the sense that a man also has his list of requirements. Make sense now?


Yes, of course that makes sense. Maybe you should have said that in the first place, then we wouldn't have had this issue.



Faithful Wife said:


> Of course you still didn't actually address what I said....but that's ok. I know it hurts to acknowledge that women do want to have sex with gorgeous men.


In fact RP says exactly that, as *I pointed out* in the other thread.

So I'm not the one who doesn't want to acknowledge reality.


----------



## *Deidre*

Holdingontoit said:


> Because those of us who are not hot know that women will never want to sleep with us, and we want to sleep with them SO BADLY, and it hurts to know that it is never going to happen or at best she is settling for us because we are reliable providers and not because she is as hot for us as we are for her.


Well, that's honest, I guess.


----------



## Begin again

To those debaters who will go unnamed... Please stop the thread jack.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Begin again

@MrsAldi

First... Welcome back! 

Second... If he can make me laugh and he's confident and knows who he is, it won't matter if he's the life of the party or the quiet type. I've dated attoneys and artists, project managers and college professors. In the end, I can connect with lots of different personality types, just not conservatives, more rural people, and those who aren't well educated. I can be friendly and even friends, but I can't relate to certain types. It's like the man I went out with the other night. He was so smart, he actually holds many US patents and works at a company that makes things for the US government that he can't talk about. He was humble about it, which was good. But I can't relate when his intellect surpasses mine by probably 30 IQ points. It's not personal, it's just reality.

And to answer your question about a low paying job, the answer is no. And not because I'm money hungry. Hardly! Right now I'm wearing an 8 year old sweatshirt, $10 flip flops, and a $16 t-shirt. But I also saw what not having money at the end of life did to my parents. I know what it's like to live in fear of not having enough. And I have other expenses to consider. Can't have a man who can't pay his own way in life. Nope, sorry.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Begin again said:


> To those debaters who will go unnamed... Please stop the thread jack.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Yes...and I apologize. Tech and I are old sparring partners. 

We will behave.


----------



## Begin again

Holdingontoit said:


> Because those of us who are not hot know that women will never want to sleep with us, and we want to sleep with them SO BADLY, and it hurts to know that it is never going to happen or at best she is settling for us because we are reliable providers and not because she is as hot for us as we are for her.


That's like me driving past the million dollar houses and being jealous that I'll never live there. But the truth is that if I worked hard enough, I could live in a million dollar house. You could live in one AND have a hot wife if you worked hard enough. You just don't want to... So please drop it about not being able to land a "hot" woman. It's pitiful.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## heartsbeating

I know jacksh!t about dating.

Now that's out the way, my thoughts are if you're going to turn someone down - or decline an arranged date - how about the courtesy of a phone call instead of a text? Have the conversation. As difficult as that might feel.


----------



## heartsbeating

With the text guy this time around, I'd agree with others that it doesn't warrant any more communication.


----------



## tech-novelist

Begin again said:


> @MrsAldi
> 
> First... Welcome back!
> 
> Second... If he can make me laugh and he's confident and knows who he is, it won't matter if he's the life of the party or the quiet type. I've dated attoneys and artists, project managers and college professors. In the end, I can connect with lots of different personality types, just not conservatives, more rural people, and those who aren't well educated. I can be friendly and even friends, but I can't relate to certain types. It's like the man I went out with the other night. He was so smart, he actually holds many US patents and works at a company that makes things for the US government that he can't talk about. He was humble about it, which was good. But I can't relate when his intellect surpasses mine by probably 30 IQ points. It's not personal, it's just reality.


Yes, 30 points seems to be about the limit for most people, but it depends to some extent on what the two IQs are.

That is, 130 - 160 is probably going to be less troublesome than 100 - 130, if only because the person with a 160 IQ must have learned how to deal with people *way *below him (or her) in intelligence, and has more "horsepower" to throw at that problem.


----------



## Holdingontoit

@Begin again: Wishing you good fortune on your journey. As others have said, it is a numbers game. Keep looking. Keep dating. Eventually you will find one who checks all the items on your list and who you enjoy being with IRL. You aren't doing anything wrong except for being impatient. Very common human trait. And maybe being a little too polite for guys who don't get the hint. Just keep playing Meghan Trainor's "No" song in your head if that boy ain't giving up.

And FWIW, I did score the nice house in the burbs and the hot wife. And 25 years later, I still only have eyes for her.


----------



## MrsHolland

Begin again said:


> I resisted putting out a list, as I'm sure the guys on TAM will rip me to shreds if I do. But honestly, I have a long list of what I want and don't want and it's a bit different than most women. I'll share some of the big ones and ask that you don't tear me apart for it.
> 
> 
> Educated (at least a BA)
> Lives fairly close to me (I don't want to drive more than 1 hour to see them, as I have limited time as it is)
> Make at least as much money as me (I want an equal)
> No conservatives/church goers/hunters/NASCAR fans/
> Confident
> Taller than me
> Neither fat nor a body builder (not attactive to me; bulky muscles look unnatural!)
> Comfortable with who he is
> Not Type-A (I don't want to have to keep up all the time or always be on the go!)
> Makes me laugh - this one is really important!!!


Your list is not that different to what many of my friends would put down, it is also pretty much what I had on my list, plus I had good looking and wicked SOH.

If that is what you truly want then the only reason that I can see for not getting it is that perhaps while this is what you want, it might not be what you think you deserve or are worth.


----------



## Begin again

MrsHolland said:


> Your list is not that different to what many of my friends would put down, it is also pretty much what I had on my list, plus I had good looking and wicked SOH.
> 
> If that is what you truly want then the only reason that I can see for not getting it is that perhaps while this is what you want, it might not be what you think you deserve or are worth.


Very observant. I think the closer the guy is to my ideal, the more scared I get that he may not like me or things may not work. I went through a real heartbreak when I was 22. I know I'm strong enough to handle it now, but back then it messed me up for a little while. Made me gun shy. You know the old saying: A cat will only sit on a hot stove once. And it will never sit on a cold stove again, either. Well, that's kinda how I have felt. I think I've been too apt to be "ok" with the men I've dated, tried to tell myself I should accept them as they are, not be judgmental, etc., when really I just wanted more. So, now I'm trying to be more brave. And I may end up sitting on a hot stove again... and that will just have to be ok.


----------



## MrsAldi

@Begin again

I wish you every success in dating. 
Me personally, I would find it a daunting task for sure!  
Knowing my luck, I'd probably do something clumsy, knock over a wine glass or something.  


Sent from my B1-730HD using Tapatalk


----------



## Begin again

Finally spoke to texting guy tonight. We talked for 3 hours! The unfortunate part is that I'm not too fond of his personality. He is very sexual, but not very flirtatious. He also is very brutal in his honesty to the point it's a bit off putting. He doesn't make me feel at ease.

Anyway, we are going to meet face to face in the next day or two. I honestly hope he just says not interested. Is that bad?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## BetrayedDad

Begin again said:


> Finally spoke to texting guy tonight. We talked for 3 hours! The unfortunate part is that I'm not too fond of his personality. He is very sexual, but not very flirtatious. He also is very brutal in his honesty to the point it's a bit off putting. He doesn't make me feel at ease.
> 
> Anyway, we are going to meet face to face in the next day or two. I honestly hope he just says not interested. Is that bad?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Yes.

It's a red flag that he's just looking for a smash and dash.

Don't put out on the first date.


----------



## dianaelaine59

Begin again said:


> I resisted putting out a list, as I'm sure the guys on TAM will rip me to shreds if I do. But honestly, I have a long list of what I want and don't want and it's a bit different than most women. I'll share some of the big ones and ask that you don't tear me apart for it.
> 
> 
> Educated (at least a BA)
> Lives fairly close to me (I don't want to drive more than 1 hour to see them, as I have limited time as it is)
> Make at least as much money as me (I want an equal)
> No conservatives/church goers/hunters/NASCAR fans/
> Confident
> Taller than me
> Neither fat nor a body builder (not attactive to me; bulky muscles look unnatural!)
> Comfortable with who he is
> Not Type-A (I don't want to have to keep up all the time or always be on the go!)
> Makes me laugh - this one is really important!!!


So why don't you just list these things on your dating profile?


----------



## Begin again

dianaelaine59 said:


> So why don't you just list these things on your dating profile?


I pretty much do. You can select height, body type, religious views, proximity, etc. I've said I want a man who is comfortable with who he is. I've also stated that I'm not looking for a guy who lives at a fast pace.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Rowan

Begin again said:


> Finally spoke to texting guy tonight. We talked for 3 hours! The unfortunate part is that *I'm not too fond of his personality*. He is very sexual, but not very flirtatious. He also is very brutal in his honesty to the point *it's a bit off putting*. *He doesn't make me feel at ease*.
> 
> Anyway, we are going to meet face to face in the next day or two. *I honestly hope he just says not interested.* Is that bad?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Why are you going on a date with someone who makes you feel ill at ease? And why on earth would you be hoping that he says he's not interested? You absolutely have the agency, the authority, the right, and the responsibility to say that _you_ aren't interested in _him_. This man makes you uncomfortable. You aren't obligated to meet him and wait for him to decide if the two of you are compatible. Cut it off now. Just politely tell him that you've decided the two of you don't mesh well, after all, and cancel the date. 

It may be that your hesitance to be honest with guys about your lack of interest is what is creating some of the issues you're having with dating. Polite is a great thing. Being too polite to be honest about your actual level of interest is not. That's closer to conflict avoidance than good manners. Being hesitant to say "no, thanks" if something doesn't feel right to you does disservice to both you and to the men you're interacting with.


----------



## tech-novelist

Begin again said:


> Finally spoke to texting guy tonight. We talked for 3 hours! The unfortunate part is that I'm not too fond of his personality. He is very sexual, but not very flirtatious. He also is very brutal in his honesty to the point it's a bit off putting. He doesn't make me feel at ease.
> 
> Anyway, we are going to meet face to face in the next day or two. I honestly hope he just says not interested. Is that bad?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Why would you go on a date with someone with whom you don't feel at ease on the phone?

Don't do it.


----------



## Begin again

I'm just really confused, I think. I'm told not to rule someone out so quickly, to give them a chance. But when do you do that? Only when they seem great? How did these guys go on 150 dates? I would hardly go on any of I had no reservations. I don't think I'll find Mr. Perfect For Me if I don't give them some opportunity.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Rowan

In my opinion, a neutral impression was something to potentially build upon, but a negative impression was not. 

I was willing to give a guy a chance, some time to see if there was some spark there, if I was otherwise _neutral_ about him. But if he made me feel ill at ease, if I just got a vibe that made me uncomfortable, or if I found elements of his personality off-putting, then that was pretty much it for me. I wasn't willing to expend much more time on someone that I'd gotten to know well enough to dislike. 

You're not neutral about this guy. You actually are put off by his personality. If you feel compelled to verify in person what you seem to already know - that you don't like something about this man - then meet him for coffee in a nicely public place. But don't lock yourself into anything longer for a first meeting. And be prepared to say "no, thank you" to anything further or to continued interaction. With some practice, you may find yourself more comfortable trusting that inner "nope" that you seem to be purposely ignoring with this man.


----------



## Begin again

I did actually go on a lunch date with this guy. He was very into me and I was still neutral about him. We texted quite a bit, but I just kept feeling something was off. He had planned an actual date for us, but I called it off.

Come to find out, his wife had passed away less than two months from the time he put up his online dating profile. That just makes me feel wrong. No wonder he thought his friends might have a hard time with him dating someone. Two months? Sigh... 

And with that, I'm done with online dating. Haven't found a decent man in six months. Not one. I deleted all my pictures, hid my profile, and cancelled my subscription. That's how I define DONE.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## arbitrator

*Strictly from a legal standpoint, I wouldn't recommend dating until such time that the ink is fully dry on the divorce decree and it has been duly executed!

One's emotions in the divorce process needs appropriate time for healing!*
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## uhtred

People grieve in different ways. I wouldn't hold that against someone. One of the big effects of loss is a feeling of loneliness. 

If I were to die, I would want my wife to meet other people and to be happy as soon as she was comfortable with it. 





Begin again said:


> snip
> Come to find out, his wife had passed away less than two months from the time he put up his online dating profile. That just makes me feel wrong. No wonder he thought his friends might have a hard time with him dating someone. Two months? Sigh...
> 
> snip
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


----------

