online dating and the paradox of choice

[FitChick]

The dating sites I prefer have the usual checklist so I can weed out some dealbreakers (smoking, custody of kids, separated), but I tend to ignore most of that and concentrate on photos (a whole other minefield!) and how they express themselves in writing. I like a man who can write several paragraphs about himself and who he is looking for. It shows he can communicate beyond grunting. He reveals his intelligence, self-awareness and focus (or lack thereof), personality and sense of humor. If he writes a generic "I like eating out or in," "drinking red wine and watching DVDs" or "I have a great sense of humor," I usually pass him by. He's likely to be just as boring in real life.

 

People forget that in online dating you are making a first impression and marketing yourself, just as you would in a job interview. If someone can't be bothered putting their best foot forward in the beginning, it's downhill fast from that point.

 

I have quite a few friends and relatives who have met their spouses online. They are attractive and intelligent. I have had more positive experiences than negative, fortunately, but that is due to my discriminating tastes.

[ThsAmericanLife]

between the dating site and facebook it's incredibly easy to find out everything you need to know about people.

 

you failed to do so and are trying to pass blame, it's as simple as that.

 

and no, there is never going to be a perfect way for you to 'shop' for men.

 

Not true.

 

The last person I 'dated' from OkC later admitted to cheating on his ex-wife ALOT while they were married. This doesn't show up on Facebook or the questions on OkC.

 

How did it show up this time you might ask?

 

Inconsistencies in his behavior... gained from the multiple opportunities I had to observe his actions over the course of a few weeks time. I knew he was hiding something... trusted my gut, and told him I didn't see any romantic potential. He was pretty upset that I came to that conclusion in just a couple of weeks of dating... and he confessed. Maybe as some kind of last ditch attempt at a relationship? Who knows. I'll leave that for the next woman to deal with...

 

At least two other men I met there confessed after talking with for a few weeks that they were recovering alcoholics. Um... NEXT...

 

None of these things show up on Google, Facebook, or on dating sites. These are men who would not have a snowball's chance in hell of spending even COFFEE time with a woman like me without OLD.

 

Yes, OLD is a good way to meet people outside of your normal social circle. In my experience, that is almost never a good thing.

 

FTR... I haven't 'failed' anything. In fact, I've succeeded at culling out a HUGE source of losers... and not relying on 'fake' means like Google, Facebook, or dating sites to give myself a feeling of security.

[zengirl]

Let's just say the type of guy I want to be with probably wouldn't be up on OKC, but that doesn't mean others couldn't find a good match for them. Everyone's definition of a quality man/woman differs as the discussion in this thread contests.

 

Yes, except that's NOT all you said (and your short description of quality guys that I bolded above probably fits what most people think, though they have various additions and variations; those are basic traits most human beings want). You said a lot of other "judgmental" things. I don't care, but apparently you find casting judgment unfair when others do it. Just pointing out the hypocrisy.

[ThsAmericanLife]

I agree with this, but don't you think there's an inherent selection bias in guys who sign up for OKC vs. guys who don't? When I was looking for matches on the site and found the selection was different from what I was encountering elsewhere, I realized this was probably the reason. Maybe online dating will reach a stage where EVERYONE has a profile up, like almost everyone these days has a facebook...but it's not there yet. And honestly I'd be sort of disturbed if that ever came to pass, because I think it would further encourage this window-shopping mentality to relationships that seems to be taking hold in our culture.

 

We seem to have reached the same conclusion about OLD...

[torn_curtain]

Yes, except that's NOT all you said (and your short description of quality guys that I bolded above probably fits what most people think, though they have various additions and variations; those are basic traits most human beings want). You said a lot of other "judgmental" things. I don't care, but apparently you find casting judgment unfair when others do it. Just pointing out the hypocrisy.

 

Whether a guy fits the adjectives I used (intelligent, kind, etc.) is very subjective.

 

I'm very skeptical of OLD, it's true. But I think there's a big difference between being skeptical of a cultural trend vs. judging a person as I've seen you do based on a trivial behavior of theirs (calling them "needy" because of such and such behavior which happens to differ from your own relationship style).

[zengirl]

I date online the way I used to in real life -- I observe, I listen carefully, I use my intelligence and intuition. If someone devious or broken manages to bypass those filters, as soon as I discover that, I end it immediately because I don't want to waste my time. I am not desperate. I learn from the experience and move on. I don't blame a computer database. We all have to take responsibility for our choices in life. Too many people play the victim card these days and have a pity party. NOT attractive.

 

I agree with this, and I think you and I probably cull pretty similarly, FitChick, from the sounds of it.

 

I agree with this, but don't you think there's an inherent selection bias in guys who sign up for OKC vs. guys who don't? When I was looking for matches on the site and found the selection was different from what I was encountering elsewhere, I realized this was probably the reason. Maybe online dating will reach a stage where EVERYONE has a profile up, like almost everyone these days has a facebook...but it's not there yet. And honestly I'd be sort of disturbed if that ever came to pass, because I think it would further encourage this window-shopping mentality to relationships that seems to be taking hold in our culture.

 

I think there's a selection bias with various dating sites (as in different people do different ones, and yes, a few personality types will not date online, but that's pretty rare in the younger X generation, Y generation, and millenials, and becoming less rare in still single older people as well), but I don't think it's a BAD one like you say. Almost everyone I know has had an OKC profile at one time. Do they all like the site and say it worked? No. Do even the ones who liked it all have one now or did they find their mates on there? No, not all. But almost everyone in my generation knows a good love story that came from online these days; I feel like it's pretty common.

 

But there's a selection bias everywhere. When you go to any venue, you're only going to meet the people who choose to be there. The same thing with your message board you mention, the same thing with any bar, club, school, work, whatever.

 

FTR, in the recent studies I've seen, only 41% of Americans have Facebooks and about 30% of Americans (studies vary) date online---and there are obviously going to be people with FB who aren't single. The thing is, in my age bracket, those %s are much higher, but you're overstating how common a FB is, really, in comparison to dating online.

 

The people who window shop online are the same people who'd do it in person, IMO.

[zengirl]

Whether a guy fits the adjectives I used (intelligent, kind, etc.) is very subjective.

 

I'm very skeptical of OLD, it's true. But I think there's a big difference between being skeptical of a cultural trend vs. judging a person as I've seen you do based on a trivial behavior of theirs (calling them "needy" because of such and such behavior which happens to differ from your own relationship style).

 

That's silly. You only find it trivial because you disagree with me. And again, way to pass judgment.

[torn_curtain]

That's silly. You only find it trivial because you disagree with me. And again, way to pass judgment.

 

Well, I think it's entirely silly to judge somebody as "needy" based on whether they need daily contact in a relationship. And it's not because I disagree with you. Even if I thought daily contact was needy behavior, I would think it was a pretty trivial bit of evidence to pass judgment on someone.

 

Anyway, I don't want the other thread to spill into this one, but I've said my piece.

[zengirl]

Well, I think it's entirely silly to judge somebody as "needy" based on whether they need daily contact in a relationship. And it's not because I disagree with you. Even if I thought daily contact was needy behavior, I would think it was a pretty trivial bit of evidence to pass judgment on someone.

 

Anyway, I don't want the other thread to spill into this one, but I've said my piece.

 

If the behavior occurred on occasion, I agree it doesn't mean the person is needy. Depends on the frequency and duration, as with all things. And a needy person could transform their behavior and become less needy. I never failed to allow for that possibility.

 

You may think it's trivial, and silly, and that's fine, but that's a judgement in and of itself. Hypocrisy. . . all I'm saying.

[torn_curtain]

I agree with this, and I think you and I probably cull pretty similarly, FitChick, from the sounds of it.

 

I think there's a selection bias with various dating sites (as in different people do different ones, and yes, a few personality types will not date online, but that's pretty rare in the younger X generation, Y generation, and millenials, and becoming less rare in still single older people as well), but I don't think it's a BAD one like you say. Almost everyone I know has had an OKC profile at one time. Do they all like the site and say it worked? No. Do even the ones who liked it all have one now or did they find their mates on there? No, not all. But almost everyone in my generation knows a good love story that came from online these days; I feel like it's pretty common.

 

That's probably because you hang out with a crowd that would be into OKC. I'm thinking of all the guys I know who are young professionals and only about a quarter of them are on OKC. The guys I know who are on it are what my friends and I would call not boyfriend material for one reason or another. Most of them are commitment phobes like your ex was, and a lot of them don't know how to approach women in real life.

 

But there's a selection bias everywhere. When you go to any venue, you're only going to meet the people who choose to be there. The same thing with your message board you mention, the same thing with any bar, club, school, work, whatever.

 

Of course, but some venues are going to pull a more positive selection than others. I'm probably not going to meet the love of my life in a seedy bar where guys go to get laid, although I guess it's possible. I'd have a better chance hanging around a bookstore, which has its own selection bias but in a more favorable direction. I just don't think the selection bias inherent to dating sites is a good one for guys.

[torn_curtain]

 

You may think it's trivial, and silly, and that's fine, but that's a judgement in and of itself. Hypocrisy. . . all I'm saying.

 

As usual, you're applying the definition too literally rather than taking into account context and nuance.

 

I'm not going to get into this, as it's not worth the time or effort.

[sm1tten]

Like ZG, I think there's an inherent selection bias at work in every place I am where I am interacting with other people, actually.

 

And frankly, what difference does it make? If you [general you] were unsuccessful finding a mate through online dating and are continuing to be unsuccessful finding a mate in real life, then either the problem is YOU or the problem is the rest of the world, not the format you're using. What's the common denominator here?

[zengirl]

That's probably because you hang out with a crowd that would be into OKC. I'm thinking of all the guys I know who are young professionals and only about a quarter of them are on OKC. The guys I know who are on it are what my friends and I would call not boyfriend material for one reason or another. Most of them are commitment phobes like your ex was, and a lot of them don't know how to approach women in real life

 

My ex was not a commitmentphobe! Where did you get that idea? I haven't dated one of those in ages. Why do you feel the need to call my ex and my friends names when you haven't even met them?

 

Most of my friends are savvy, groovy, smart, fun, attractive young professionals who prioritize relationships over sex and have interesting lives.

[torn_curtain]

My ex was not a commitmentphobe! Where did you get that idea? I haven't dated one of those in ages. Why do you feel the need to call my ex and my friends names when you haven't even met them?

 

I didn't call your friends names? I do think your ex was a commitmentphobe from how you described him. You said he bailed on every single relationship he was in and then begged the girl back. Is that not the definition of commitment phobia?

 

Most of my friends are savvy, groovy, smart, fun, attractive young professionals who prioritize relationships over sex and have interesting lives.

 

That's nice. Most people think their friends are awesome. I just know that you're probably friends with people who are similar to you, so it makes sense that they'd also be into OKC since you are.

[torn_curtain]

Like ZG, I think there's an inherent selection bias at work in every place I am where I am interacting with other people, actually.

 

And frankly, what difference does it make? If you [general you] were unsuccessful finding a mate through online dating and are continuing to be unsuccessful finding a mate in real life, then either the problem is YOU or the problem is the rest of the world, not the format you're using. What's the common denominator here?

 

This thread wasn't supposed to be about me, so let's stay on topic.

[zengirl]

I didn't call your friends names? I do think your ex was a commitmentphobe from how you described him. You said he bailed on every single relationship he was in and then begged the girl back. Is that not the definition of commitment phobia?

 

No. It's really not. He's not afraid of commitment. He has attachment issues, if anything. He should NOT get back together with those girls (including me) as they're incompatible, but the way he ends things is emotionally fraught, so his decision-making skills are compromised. That's what happened with us. We would've broken up over our incompatibilities, but his realizing them emotionally and then acting before he could process the logical issues, caused a lot more drama and dissonance. Thus, we got back together, both processed, and I realized: yes, we're incompatible. Had he not had an outburst, he would've readily realized it too, but the drama and attachment confused him. Commitment was not his issue at all. It's just that he reacts emotionally to problems before he can realize them. (That's my spin at least).

 

At no point, did I ever describe him as having issues with commitment.

[zengirl]

This thread wasn't supposed to be about me, so let's stay on topic.

 

Uh, you brought my exBF and **** that wasn't into the thread into it AGES ago, so again: hypocrisy.

 

And funnily enough, smitten said GENERAL YOU quite clearly. Interesting that you decided that was about you.

[torn_curtain]

No. It's really not. He's not afraid of commitment. He has attachment issues, if anything. He should NOT get back together with those girls (including me) as they're incompatible, but the way he ends things is emotionally fraught, so his decision-making skills are compromised. That's what happened with us. We would've broken up over our incompatibilities, but his realizing them emotionally and then acting before he could process the logical issues, caused a lot more drama and dissonance. Thus, we got back together, both processed, and I realized: yes, we're incompatible. Had he not had an outburst, he would've readily realized it too, but the drama and attachment confused him. Commitment was not his issue at all. It's just that he reacts emotionally to problems before he can realize them. (That's my spin at least).

 

At no point, did I ever describe him as having issues with commitment.

 

I'd call that commitment phobia, but whatever name you want to give it, it makes him poor relationship material.

[torn_curtain]

Uh, you brought my exBF and **** that wasn't into the thread into it AGES ago, so again: hypocrisy.

 

And funnily enough, smitten said GENERAL YOU quite clearly. Interesting that you decided that was about you.

 

Yeah, and I regret mentioning him because this thread has veered way off topic and become boring.

 

It was pretty clearly directed at me -- who else would it have been?

[sm1tten]

This thread wasn't supposed to be about me, so let's stay on topic.

 

I think it's highly interesting how defensive you've become over the course of this thread and rather laughable that you think this thread isn't about you. It's all about you, isn't it? But my comment was clearly NOT directed at you. ETA: If it had been, just like everywhere else that I spoke directly to you, I would have said T_C, or quoted you.

 

And FWIW, I'm not suggesting that an inability to find a partner online is necessarily a failure. I'm saying that an inability to find a partner anywhere is possibly a personal problem, and frankly, a need to project that onto other people and mechanisms is probably part of the reason for the ensuing loneliness.

[torn_curtain]

I think it's highly interesting how defensive you've become over the course of this thread and rather laughable that you think this thread isn't about you. It's all about you, isn't it? But my comment was clearly NOT directed at you.

 

And FWIW, I'm not suggesting that an inability to find a partner online is necessarily a failure. I'm saying that an inability to find a partner anywhere is possibly a personal problem, and frankly, a need to project that onto other people and mechanisms is probably part of the reason for the ensuing loneliness.

 

Right, you think the whole thread is "about me" but your snarky comment wasn't directed at me. Uh huh.

 

Reread the OP. I may have referenced some of my experiences but I didn't start this thread to discuss my own life. I started it to talk about a larger cultural issue that I find far more interesting. Let's stay on topic -- this is boring.

 

And FTR, I've never had trouble finding partners both online or off, so your point about me projecting is moot.

Edited August 17, 2011 by torn_curtain

[sm1tten]

t_c, your experiences are all over this thread. As are mine. As are zg's. And pretty much everyone else who has posted in this thread. That's why the thread is about you. It's just as much about you as it is about everyone else who posted in it because we're all posting our opinions based on our experiences and the people we know. I'm a social scientist, but when I post here, it's purely personal and not professional - not a single person on this forum is posting from anywhere near an unbiased or purely clinical viewpoint.

 

The second part of my comment; I'm still not talking about just YOU, t_c. You seem to think I'm attacking you for some reason, and whatever, I keep saying I'm not. I'm talking about EVERYONE who is expressing things that you have also expressed. My comments were never intended to be directed solely at you. I even wrote the point without the word "you" in it specifically so that it would not be directed at anyone in particular, and you still took it to be about you, t_c.

 

But regardless of that, I stand behind it, and I think it is quite on-topic. I think the dangerous aspect of online dating is not an overabundance of choices, but the fact that people treat it like a convenient band-aid for their love life and then are upset that their hearts are still bleeding. The mechanism of online dating isn't faulty. It's the people. Kind of like, I suppose, saying that guns aren't bad - people who use guns on other people to commit crimes are bad. That might be going too far though, but my brain is too occupied to do better at the moment.

 

ETA: Some of the people.

Edited August 17, 2011 by sm1tten

[torn_curtain]

No. It's really not. He's not afraid of commitment. He has attachment issues, if anything. He should NOT get back together with those girls (including me) as they're incompatible, but the way he ends things is emotionally fraught, so his decision-making skills are compromised. That's what happened with us. We would've broken up over our incompatibilities, but his realizing them emotionally and then acting before he could process the logical issues, caused a lot more drama and dissonance. Thus, we got back together, both processed, and I realized: yes, we're incompatible. Had he not had an outburst, he would've readily realized it too, but the drama and attachment confused him. Commitment was not his issue at all. It's just that he reacts emotionally to problems before he can realize them. (That's my spin at least).

At no point, did I ever describe him as having issues with commitment.

 

Just FTR... http://www.loveshack.org/forums/t271408/

Edited August 18, 2011 by torn_curtain

[zengirl]

Just FTR... http://www.loveshack.org/forums/t271408/

 

Yes, I had a discussion on that, but came up with the conclusion that it had nothing to do with commitment (if you read the whole thread). And as I said in most of those posts, he was committed to me, and that was not the issue. It was hypotheticals and styles.

 

Actually, I think, it had to do with me not wanting to be "special." You and I likely differ in that way. I finally figured out that all ALL men, when they commit, think it's about the girl. They think she's special. (I do want to be special, of course and am; everybody is; but I'd rather not have my specialness drive the relationship.) That's just how they're wired. I never wanted the commitment to be about me---I wanted it to be about what they wanted, but they all thought they were COMPLIMENTING me (all my exes have said something similar) by saying I make them want to commit, rather than it being their natural state. It's the precise opposite of the "Just need a relationship" thing you suggested online dating people do (not that I met all my exes online).

 

As Kamille said in that thread, everyone has some degree of that and is just afraid of getting hurt, which was what he meant. But my exBF has never been one to fail to commit to a relationship, nor has he had the back-and-forth thing, or anything commitmentphobics have. He does always regret breaking up with someone, but it's because he doesn't wait till he falls out of love to break up with them. That's his chief issue with the breakup stuff. Which goes back to the question at hand: IMO, if you are still in love with someone when you break up, that's a problem (unless you're literally blindsided by the other person). So, if you initiate the breakup, why would you need time to fall out of love?

 

ETA: At any rate, my ex was a great BF, and he's a great guy. And when he meets a girl with whom he is truly compatible, I have no doubt he'll have a great, full relationship. I would recommend him to any gal I thought would be compatible with him. If you find posts from the TIME I was falling out of love with him? Of course, they're going to be more fraught with doubt and criticisms---I was falling out of love, and that's how it feels. And analysis certainly brought out the reasons why he wasn't the right guy FOR ME. But I never want to paint him as a villain. He's an awesome guy.

Edited August 18, 2011 by zengirl

[ThsAmericanLife]

Yes, I had a discussion on that, but came up with the conclusion that it had nothing to do with commitment (if you read the whole thread). And as I said in most of those posts, he was committed to me, and that was not the issue. It was hypotheticals and styles.

 

Actually, I think, it had to do with me not wanting to be "special." You and I likely differ in that way. I finally figured out that all ALL men, when they commit, think it's about the girl. They think she's special. (I do want to be special, of course and am; everybody is; but I'd rather not have my specialness drive the relationship.) That's just how they're wired. I never wanted the commitment to be about me---I wanted it to be about what they wanted, but they all thought they were COMPLIMENTING me (all my exes have said something similar) by saying I make them want to commit, rather than it being their natural state. It's the precise opposite of the "Just need a relationship" thing you suggested online dating people do (not that I met all my exes online).

 

As Kamille said in that thread, everyone has some degree of that and is just afraid of getting hurt, which was what he meant. But my exBF has never been one to fail to commit to a relationship, nor has he had the back-and-forth thing, or anything commitmentphobics have. He does always regret breaking up with someone, but it's because he doesn't wait till he falls out of love to break up with them. That's his chief issue with the breakup stuff. Which goes back to the question at hand: IMO, if you are still in love with someone when you break up, that's a problem (unless you're literally blindsided by the other person). So, if you initiate the breakup, why would you need time to fall out of love?

 

ETA: At any rate, my ex was a great BF, and he's a great guy. And when he meets a girl with whom he is truly compatible, I have no doubt he'll have a great, full relationship. I would recommend him to any gal I thought would be compatible with him. If you find posts from the TIME I was falling out of love with him? Of course, they're going to be more fraught with doubt and criticisms---I was falling out of love, and that's how it feels. And analysis certainly brought out the reasons why he wasn't the right guy FOR ME. But I never want to paint him as a villain. He's an awesome guy.

 

This reminds me of a conversation I've had in the past with men I've thought about dating...

 

I think willingness to commit has to be present before dating... not something someone 'falls' into. It is like when I started grad school... I didn't walk onto the campus of my (later) chosen school and say

 

OMG!! Just seeing this campus makes me want to get a PhD!!!

 

I knew I was ready for the effort and time it took to get a PhD... then I went about finding the right school for me.

 

For those folks who don't want a commitment, then later say they are willing to commit because of an INDIVIDUAL, I'd say their commitment is tenuous at most. The minute anything changes about that individual, their commitment is over... because they have committed to a concept about a person... not the concept of commitment.

 

My parents have been married for over 46 years... and what got them through the toughest times is the understanding that there will always be problems in relationships... and they prefer not to start from scratch with someone new... knowing that eventually problems will surface there too.