General online and other dating discussion

[Rejected Rosebud]

the sad reality is that they are facing a dating culture that is actively working against them because of the need for instant gratification. They are encountering a dating culture that is more hostile more superficial and less conducive to forming stable successful relationships than it has ever been. A lot of gals have a dating style that is keeping them single and keeping them from getting to know great guys and vice versa. They are jumping the gun and nexting guys way too fast because of the misguided belief in instant spark.

 

Are you willing to spend a lot of your time trying to get to know a woman who you find unattractive?

[BlueIris]

Anyone who wants to experience the 'good old days' of dating should agree to

 

Get rid of their computer

Trash the xBox and PS4

Throw away the cell phone

Dial a rotary phone that shares a party line

Write letters to pen pals and WALK them to a corner mailbox

Ride your bicycle everywhere

Get a poker group together and meet once a month

Go to church

Go to the library when you need to look something up

Sit at a good old soda fountain, if you know what that is

 

Can we bring back drive in theaters?

 

 

If you get my drift, what one is experiencing as 'dating woes' is directly related to the advances of technology.

 

All of the 'organic' ways of meeting anyone have gone out the window, because people have their heads in their electronic devices 24/7[]

 

haha. And for heaven's sake, ivory soap and pressed dress shirts please! oh, and expect people to think you belong in jail if you're having sex "willy-nllly"

[HillValley]

Something that especially disturbs me, and which the most unhappy "nice guy" recently posting about the decline dating in modern times has not addressed:

 

Why, in these discussions, is it up to the women to give the undesirable (to them) men a "fair trial," but not vice versa?

 

Will someone please address this? Why aren't women who are deemed undesirable supposed to be given many chances to warm the guys' hearts?

 

That rarely, if ever, comes up here. Please explain!

 

Cause fair or not, the mate selection process favors keeping women happy. If this party has more women at it, then men will show up. Less women, then less men.

It's called LADIES NIGHT! for a reason.

 

Dating apps want to cut down on harassment of women so they make stuff like Bumble so guys can't message first.

 

Also, the idea of less desirable women is much more exaggerated than media would like women to believe. There's no such thing as a "nice girl" syndrome.

[HillValley]

People are much more accessible now, more than any other time in history.

 

The sad sad truth is that we can see people at our fingertips even if they live a thousand miles away. It's all so impersonal now.

 

We don't want to deal with the troublesome relationship so we escape into cyberspace. Dealing with real life issues is becoming a thing of the past. Now we have become so intertwined with the lack of digital communication in relationships as opposed to in person communication. Why didn't she text me? Why won't he add me on Facebook? etcetera and so forth.

 

I said this elsewhere. We associate the internet with solution, not problems.

 

You can order an out-of-stock shirt from 1975 from some 45 year-old lady in China but we can't find a girl who likes Spiderman, likes hiking, and cooks by logging on after work? Blasphemy!!!!

[Rejected Rosebud]

Cause fair or not, the mate selection process favors keeping women happy. If this party has more women at it, then men will show up. Less women, then less men.

It's called LADIES NIGHT! for a reason.

 

Dating apps want to cut down on harassment of women so they make stuff like Bumble so guys can't message first.

 

Also, the idea of less desirable women is much more exaggerated than media would like women to believe. There's no such thing as a "nice girl" syndrome.

 

I don't think you understood my question, so I'll rephrase it:

 

To guys complaining about women who don't give them "a chance":

 

1) Are you willing to give women you don't find attractive AT ALL "chances"?

 

2) If your answer is "no," then why the double standard?

[BlueIris]

I never said anywhere that finding any relationship should be the end goal for most people. But for those folks who are seeking a meaningful relationship, the sad reality is that they are facing a dating culture that is actively working against them because of the need for instant gratification. They are encountering a dating culture that is more hostile more superficial and less conducive to forming stable successful relationships than it has ever been. A lot of gals have a dating style that is keeping them single and keeping them from getting to know great guys and vice versa. They are jumping the gun and nexting guys way too fast because of the misguided belief in instant spark. It's not an issue of selectivity. Two dates before you decide to move on is not unreasonable. What is unreasonable is going out into the dating world expecting to be wowed within minutes of meeting someone, and then if they don't repeating the process night after night, year after year. It's crazy.

 

"Crazy"? No, they’re ok with it. It’s not crazy to them.

“way too fast” for who? They’re ok with it. You’re not.

“expecting to be wowed”? She didn’t say that. YOU’re saying that.

 

Do you see the irony in complaining about others’ instant gratification problems when you’re complaining that you can’t get a girlfriend?

 

There are many conventions about dating in the old days that might blow your mind. Based on what my grandmothers, mom and aunts said, plenty of men worked pretty hard to get a date and the attention of a "gal" he fancied. As my dad was in hospice he told me stories of how he watched and flirted with my mom for a year. A year. He wanted to own a great looking sports jacket before he asked her out. Are you willing to put in a year getting to know someone and getting yourself improved and ready before asking her out?

 

If you want to go all old school, believe me, old guys like my dad would tell you off in a second. (And then they'd be banned. )

 

You know, if you want a modern woman, listen and learn from women- and men who love and have had good relationships with women. There are some men in great long term relationships here. I think some guys who are successful with women have been posting to you, but you're arguing with them, not listening and learning.

 

Hey, if you want to be miserable and not change and blame "it" out there, have at it. Or turn it around and get some backbone and change yourself.

Edited April 7, 2016 by BlueIris

[Rejected Rosebud]

My dad didn't even ask my mom out for the first time until he had saved enough money from his college job bussing tables to buy a car!

 

He was hopeful, but I'm sure he wouldn't have got all furious if she hadn't gone for him.

 

Also he wasn't expecting to try her out sexually before he became her boyfriend.

 

That was probably not so out of the norm back in "the good old days" of dating. Any guys complaining about the way it is now willing to go out on a limb like that?

[normal person]

I never said anywhere that finding any relationship should be the end goal for most people. But for those folks who are seeking a meaningful relationship, the sad reality is that they are facing a dating culture that is actively working against them because of the need for instant gratification.

 

You just keep recycling the same, unproven adages. Most people are seeking meaningful relationships. But not just with anyone, only with people they find appealing and attractive to begin with. The only people the culture is "working against" are people who aren't on par with everyone else, meaning the people no one wants to date. If you happen to fall into that category, that's not everyone else's fault, that's largely your own fault.

 

They are encountering a dating culture that is more hostile more superficial and less conducive to forming stable successful relationships than it has ever been. A lot of gals have a dating style that is keeping them single and keeping them from getting to know great guys and vice versa. They are jumping the gun and nexting guys way too fast because of the misguided belief in instant spark.

 

No, they're encountering a dating culture that provides them the option to get the best guy they possibly can and not waste their time with men they have no interest in.

 

It's not an issue of selectivity.

 

If you she selects someone else over you, it's an issue of selectivity. What I think your statement translates to is "I'm very upset I'm not getting selected."

 

Two dates before you decide to move on is not unreasonable.

 

It's very, very unreasonable if you don't like the person at all and you have 10 other people you'd rather go out with and only so much time. Let me guess, you go out with everyone twice even if you hate them the first time?

 

What is unreasonable is going out into the dating world expecting to be wowed within minutes of meeting someone,

 

You've never met someone and had an instant connection?

 

Even so, if someone's expectations are unreasonable, they will be unsuccessful and have to adjust their expectations. If their plan works, then no adjustment is needed and they'll find someone great. It's a risk that people are willing to take because the potential reward is priceless. I don't see how you can justify being so hung up on how other people want to decide things for themselves. If you don't like this style of dating, no one's making you do it. But stop trying to impose your will on everyone else -- they think it works just fine.

 

and then if they don't repeating the process night after night, year after year. It's crazy.

 

How about this: if someone wants to do this and thinks it's worth their time and energy, why don't you just let them do it without complaining about it? It's their life, their circumstances. If it wasn't working for them and/or if they didn't enjoy it, they would stop, don't you think? If they didn't think it was beneficial, they'd try another method. It sounds like you're just bitter because the person it's not benefitting is you. Sorry, but that's your own fault, not everyone else's.

 

Maybe you should respect peoples' abilities to make up their own minds about how they spend their time and allocate their affection and not try to decide how to do it for them.

[HillValley]

I don't think you understood my question, so I'll rephrase it:

 

To guys complaining about women who don't give them "a chance":

 

1) Are you willing to give women you don't find attractive AT ALL "chances"?

 

 

 

2) If your answer is "no," then why the double standard?

 

You're scenario is flawed.

 

The reason those guys are complaining is because they feel they meet the requirements the person ask for, but not the intangibles. If a girl/guy ask for an active person who likes cooking and has a nice job... so when they meet that person some people think they have a chance.

[HillValley]

Any guys complaining about the way it is now willing to go out on a limb like that?

 

Most guys have a rejection story like that especially in their teen years. I know I have a few.

 

You think if you wait for that "exact right moment" and let the girl get to know you slowly before that and then she's say yes!

 

Only by the time you ask, you find out some other dude swooped in and asked her cause the girl wasn't worried about that moment. She just wanted someone to ask.

 

Maybe she always would have said, no. But all you're left with is watching someone else with her and hypotheticals.

[Rejected Rosebud]

You're scenario is flawed.

 

The reason those guys are complaining is because they feel they meet the requirements the person ask for, but not the intangibles. If a girl/guy ask for an active person who likes cooking and has a nice job... so when they meet that person some people think they have a chance.

 

"Flawed scenario"? :confused: There is no scenario.

 

I clearly asked (twice) :

 

1) Are you willing to give women you don't find attractive AT ALL "chances"?

 

Are you? Yes, or no?

 

There are lots of active people with a nice job who can cook. I would still have to be attracted to them in order to enter into the type of relationship which would include sexual intimacy.

 

Do you feel differently?

[HillValley]

"Flawed scenario"? :confused: There is no scenario.

 

I clearly asked (twice) :

 

1) Are you willing to give women you don't find attractive AT ALL "chances"?

 

Are you? Yes, or no?

 

There are lots of active people with a nice job who can cook. I would still have to be attracted to them in order to enter into the type of relationship which would include sexual intimacy.

 

Do you feel differently?

 

(A) Yes. I would and I have. I got left standing alone waiting for a date I didn't want to go on in the first place. So yay me!

 

(B)So you've never had female friends who lament about not being able to find a good guy who is supportive and not abuse? Cause that's a very broad criteria that many men could meet.

 

That's the frustration some guys have. If they meet the basic criteria a woman openly articulates, then why wouldn't he think he has a chance? To a certain extent, you can become a better lover. Abusers are usually always abusers.

Edited April 7, 2016 by HillValley

[Rejected Rosebud]

(B)So you've never had female friends who lament about not being able to find a good guy who is supportive and not abuse? Cause that's a very broad criteria that many men could meet.

 

Being supportive and non-abusive is the absolute baseline of what one would want in a partner. Basic good qualities. No woman is going to pick a guy solely on those. She is going to have to be ATTRACTED.

 

That's the frustration some guys have. If they meet the basic criteria a woman openly articulates, then why wouldn't he think he has a chance? To a certain extent, you can become a better lover. Abusers are usually always abusers.

 

All the frustrated guys here on LS have probably posted, at one time or another, about how they won't date a fat woman, or one without a perky butt, or any kids, or who is much older than him, or a different race, or won't have sex until she's married. I suppose they wish to be with a woman THEY ARE ATTRACTED TO.

 

Women are the same!!

 

I'm not talking about earth-shattering fireworks, though some people want that and that's their own business. I'm talking about some kind of a connection that makes you WANT to be with a person!! Otherwise, why not spend your time with your friends or reading a great book?

 

 

Why are you talking about abusers anyway?

[oberkeat]

You just keep recycling the same, unproven adages. Most people are seeking meaningful relationships. But not just with anyone, only with people they find appealing and attractive to begin with. The only people the culture is "working against" are people who aren't on par with everyone else, meaning the people no one wants to date. If you happen to fall into that category, that's not everyone else's fault, that's largely your own fault.

 

Your attitude toward dating and human beings in general is completely elitist and dehumanizing. Your advice to the millions of men and women who are being used and abused by this dysfunctional dating environment is, "well, this is what you can expect if you're not a billionaire athlete or supermodel." Very constructive advice. You paint a much darker picture of dating than I do.

 

 

No, they're encountering a dating culture that provides them the option to get the best guy they possibly can and not waste their time with men they have no interest in.

 

Women are not getting the "best" guys in this dating market. Many of them are getting no guys. Many of them are in a holding pattern waiting for something that is completely unrealistic -- the mythical instant spark. I was on a dating site last year and met a very attractive girl. We went on one date which was one and done. I kid you not, six weeks later she was still logged in active on that dating site. She was an example of what online dating and our dysfunctional dating culture is turning many women into: the serial dater. The type of woman who goes from man-to-man week after week never settling on any one of them because of her unrealistic expectations regarding an instant spark. she is not finding a relationship. She's wasting her time and that of a lot of guys with these 10 second tryouts that go nowhere beyond superficial first impressions.

 

If you she selects someone else over you, it's an issue of selectivity. What I think your statement translates to is "I'm very upset I'm not getting selected."

 

I feel no anger whatsoever. What I do feel is sadness and worry over the perverse and unnecessary direction that our culture is heading in when it comes to dating. It has gotten so difficult for people to find lasting relationships now that our birth rate is beginning to resemble parts of war-torn Europe. That's something we need to be worried about.

 

It's very, very unreasonable if you don't like the person at all and you have 10 other people you'd rather go out with and only so much time. Let me guess, you go out with everyone twice even if you hate them the first time?

 

A perfect example of what I was saying earlier. The dehumanizing effect that our algorithm dating style is having on human relationships. It's called GIGS. What incentive do people have to actually get to know one another when they have 50 or 100 more people in their inbox. People do not have the humility or the attention spans to actually invest their full attention and getting to know another human being. Yes I said it. A flesh and blood person, not just another number on the long list of potentials. I get the feeling that you treat all the women you date as just an option. You can call me old-fashioned, but that's not the way I treat my dates.

 

 

You've never met someone and had an instant connection?

 

Even so, if someone's expectations are unreasonable, they will be unsuccessful and have to adjust their expectations. If their plan works, then no adjustment is needed and they'll find someone great. It's a risk that people are willing to take because the potential reward is priceless. I don't see how you can justify being so hung up on how other people want to decide things for themselves. If you don't like this style of dating, no one's making you do it. But stop trying to impose your will on everyone else -- they think it works just fine.

 

I have been in relationships and seen other couples where one person was not initially head over heels, but they allowed things to build slowly into attraction and long term relationships. I fail to understand why that concept is so offensive to you. Why the notion of investing time to get to know someone as a human being and not "an option" is so perverse.

 

 

How about this: if someone wants to do this and thinks it's worth their time and energy, why don't you just let them do it without complaining about it? It's their life, their circumstances. If it wasn't working for them and/or if they didn't enjoy it, they would stop, don't you think? If they didn't think it was beneficial, they'd try another method. It sounds like you're just bitter because the person it's not benefitting is you. Sorry, but that's your own fault, not everyone else's.

 

Maybe you should respect peoples' abilities to make up their own minds about how they spend their time and allocate their affection and not try to decide how to do it for them.

 

As I said earlier people are free to make their own mistakes. I'm just letting folks know that there is a better way to date than what has become the norm in our disposable culture. Someone reading this might get married and have a baby because they decided to give a guy a second date instead of nexting him after the first.

Edited April 7, 2016 by oberkeat

[HillValley]

Being supportive and non-abusive is the absolute baseline of what one would want in a partner. Basic good qualities. No woman is going to pick a guy solely on those. She is going to have to be ATTRACTED.

 

Are you serious? Some women seem to pick guys without ever considering those "basic" qualities are true is part of the frustration.

 

So women end up in bad relationships cause she places more emphasis on attraction/spark rather than if he's honestly supportive.

 

The reason serial cheaters are serial is cause they can get into multiple relationships(sexual or long-term).

 

You don't see those guys on her asking for advice on how to come they can't find women to cheat on.

 

All the frustrated guys here on LS have probably posted, at one time or another, about how they won't date a fat woman, or one without a perky butt, or any kids, or who is much older than him, or a different race, or won't have sex until she's married. I suppose they wish to be with a woman THEY ARE ATTRACTED TO.

 

Women are the same!!

 

I'm not talking about earth-shattering fireworks, though some people want that and that's their own business. I'm talking about some kind of a connection that makes you WANT to be with a person!! Otherwise, why not spend your time with your friends or reading a great book?

 

 

Why are you talking about abusers anyway?

 

Just like looking for a job. Certain jobs have requirements you don't fit so you know not to apply, but others you do even if you don't fit all of them so you apply.

 

So imagine you can't apply for any jobs cause you're missing two requirements stated but meet all the others? Requirements you could learn if given the chance? And the company keeps saying they can't find any qualified candidates. Of course there are intangible elements like how well you fit within the company culture, but purely based on what is openly stated that they want. You feel like you should have a shot at the job.

 

You can't even get an interview.

 

 

To me, if a guy openly states, all I just want a good woman and yet is openly rejecting good women a chance with him cause they're overweight then stop complaining.

 

Words and actions.

Edited April 7, 2016 by HillValley

[oberkeat]

Are you serious? Some women seem to pick guys without ever considering those "basic" qualities are true is part of the frustration.

 

So women end up in bad relationships cause she places more emphasis on attraction/spark rather than if he's honestly supportive.

 

 

 

 

 

Very well said. There's too much emphasis on instant spark these days.

[normal person]

Your attitude toward dating and human beings in general is completely elitist and dehumanizing. Your advice to the millions of men and women who are being used and abused by this dysfunctional dating environment is, "well, this is what you can expect if you're not a billionaire athlete or supermodel." Very constructive advice. You paint a much darker picture of dating than I do.

 

The point is, if someone thinks they can do better, it's in their best interest to try. If they can't, they end up with the best they can get. It's not so much an attitude, more of an observation. If a girl makes $150K and looks like a model, why would she go out with a fat guy on welfare? Why would she go out with a guy who even makes half that and is just moderately out of shape? There are so many other guys out there that she doesn't have to -- she can afford to take the chance to try and get the best partner, the one with every single quality she desires. Both those guys would probably like to be with someone like her but they can't.

 

Look around you and see how many people marry outside socioeconomic status or marry someone whose level of attractiveness is totally incongruent to their own. If you don't notice a pattern, you're fooling yourself. It's not an "attitude," it's reality.

 

 

Women are not getting the "best" guys in this dating market. Many of them are getting no guys.

 

As I've said 100 times already, no, they're not getting "no" guys, and even if they were getting "no" guys, then they prefer that to getting a guy they hate. If they didn't prefer it, they wouldn't do it. Get that through your head.

 

Many of them are in a holding pattern waiting for something that is completely unrealistic -- the mythical instant spark.

 

Why do you care so much what other people want to do with their time?

 

I was on a dating site last year and met a very attractive girl. We went on one date which was one and done. I kid you not, six weeks later she was still logged in active on that dating site.

 

Did you ever think that maybe she has her own standards and thoughts about what she wants in a partner and has every right to try and fulfill them?

 

She was an example of what online dating and our dysfunctional dating culture is turning many women into: the serial dater. The type of woman who goes from man-to-man week after week never settling on any one of them because of her unrealistic expectations regarding an instant spark. she is not finding a relationship. She's wasting her time and that of a lot of guys with these 10 second tryouts that go nowhere beyond superficial first impressions.

 

Yeah, you're totally right. She'll never find anyone.

 

 

I feel no anger whatsoever. What I do feel is sadness and worry over the perverse and unnecessary direction that our culture is heading in when it comes to dating. It has gotten so difficult for people to find lasting relationships now that our birth rate is beginning to resemble parts of war-torn Europe. That's something we need to be worried about.

 

Society thanks you for your concern, but I think we'll survive.

 

A perfect example of what I was saying earlier. The dehumanizing effect that our algorithm dating style is having on human relationships. It's called GIGS. What incentive do people have to actually get to know one another when they have 50 or 100 more people in their inbox.

 

They don't have incentive to know people that aren't appealing to them. They have incentive to know the ones that do. Just because the people they do want to know aren't as common doesn't mean they don't exist. People who get a lot of messages will just select the best ones and discard the rest.

 

People do not have the humility or the attention spans to actually invest their full attention and getting to know another human being. Yes I said it. A flesh and blood person, not just another number on the long list of potentials.

 

To want to know a person, you have to first be attracted to them and find them appealing. If you don't, there's no point in getting to know them. Why don't you look on OKCupid and go out with every single girl in your city regardless of job, looks, and personality in order to get to know them? Answer that question without dodging it for the third time. You probably don't want to because you have no interest in them by looking at their profile. So you decided you don't want to go out with them because you have no interest in them and you aren't attracted to them.

 

Now answer this: What's the difference between deciding that after looking at their page for 5 seconds and actually meeting them and talking for an hour, and then deciding you don't want to go out with them because you have no interest in them and you aren't attracted to them. People who go out with you, regardless of how long or how many times, are the ones giving you more of a chance.

 

And you know what? By not giving allowing every single girl in your city a fair "chance" to get to know you, you're just as guilty of the crime you've been bemoaning as anyone else.

 

I get the feeling that you treat all the women you date as just an option. You can call me old-fashioned, but that's not the way I treat my dates.

 

I get the feeling that you don't respect a women's right to make up her own mind and decide what's right for herself. Call me old fashioned, but I think that's oppressive and misogynistic. I only go out with people I have interest in because I'm not so stupid to waste my time thinking that I might magically become attracted and interested in someone after 3 hours when I hadn't before. I realize people just want what's best for themselves and I want them to make their own decisions and pursue their own paths to happiness on their own terms, whatever they might be, without suggesting that I know what's better for them.

 

I have been in relationships and seen other couples where one person was not initially head over heels, but they allowed things to build slowly into attraction and long term relationships. I fail to understand why that concept is so offensive to you. Why the notion of investing time to get to know someone as a human being and not "an option" is so perverse.

 

The concept is not offensive, it's just time consuming and impractical. The notion that you think the natural evolution of society and technology that people are choosing to immerse themselves in willingly isn't expediting things is ludicrous. It's like you're saying "Why does everyone drive cars? Cars can crash sometimes so they're a bad idea. I tried a car once and I didn't like it. Therefore, everyone should have to walk everywhere."

 

People know that cars can crash. But the reward of getting somewhere quicker outweighs the minor risk of crashing. Just like the reward of meeting someone you're really attracting to outweighs the risk and expenditure of your time to keep giving your time to people you don't even like.

 

What you still haven't answered is this: if people were unhappy with the way they're doing things, why would they continue to do them?

 

As I said earlier people are free to make their own mistakes. I'm just letting folks know that there is a better way to date than what has become the norm in our disposable culture. Someone reading this might get married and have a baby because they decided to give a guy a second date instead of nexting him after the first.

 

I think we got the memo about 12 pages back. Thanks, though. Everyone knows now.

Edited April 7, 2016 by normal person

[Rejected Rosebud]

Your attitude toward dating and human beings in general is completely elitist and dehumanizing. Your advice to the millions of men and women who are being used and abused by this dysfunctional dating environment is, "well, this is what you can expect if you're not a billionaire athlete or supermodel."

With all due respect, most of us on this thread, and the one you started, agree with normal person, and not with you.

 

Every person, and the whole world is wrong, and you are the lone righteous one? Doesn't that make you question yourself? It should, I think.

 

I believe that 100% of the time, when a person blames all of their failures and woes on things outside of themselves, that they can't be right. There is always something can do from their own side.

[Rejected Rosebud]

Are you serious? Some women seem to pick guys without ever considering those "basic" qualities are true is part of the frustration.

 

So women end up in bad relationships cause she places more emphasis on attraction/spark rather than if he's honestly supportive.

What SOME women do and like has nothing to do with the dating failures of random guys. It's really not appropriate for anyone to be frustrated over the choices of people they don't even know. NYB!!

 

The reason serial cheaters are serial is cause they can get into multiple relationships(sexual or long-term).

 

You don't see those guys on her asking for advice on how to come they can't find women to cheat on.

again, I have to ask, why are you bringing cheating into this? There are threads on cheating. Women cheat on men, it's not just men who are cheaters. Anyway, nobody on this one is complaining about being cheated on.

 

Do you really think women who turn you down are then going out with douches who cheat on them? I doubt it. Most are probably looking for a guy with qualities they value AND TO WHOM THEY FEEL ATTRACTED.

 

Just like looking for a job. Certain jobs have requirements you don't fit so you know not to apply, but others you do even if you don't fit all of them so you apply.

And, just like looking for a job, there will be many many who fulfill all the requirements. The employer is going to pick the BEST FIT and the rest of the applicants are not getting that job.

 

So imagine you can't apply for any jobs cause you're missing two requirements stated but meet all the others? Requirements you could learn if given the chance?

 

:( You've totally lost me. If you want jobs and don't fulfill the requirements, it's not up to that employer to "give you a chance." They are going to choose from the applicants who fulfilled the requirements. It would be up to YOU to improve yourself and learn the required skills if you want to work in that job - or else expect to have jobs you actually are qualified for.

 

 

To me, if a guy openly states, all I just want a good woman and yet is openly rejecting good women a chance with him cause they're overweight then stop complaining.

 

Well I certainly appreciate that! It's not common around here. The loudest complainers have entire threads about fat women if you'd care to look. They not only want a good woman, but one THEY ARE ATTRACTED TO. It's fine! Just don't be a hypocrite.

 

Anyway you seem like a good guy and I hope you find a good match for yourself, if that's what you want. But please try to ditch the idea that the women who don't go for you are probably choosing to get abused by somebody. They are probably just holding out for a man they feel attracted to!! It's not wrong!!

[elaine567]

Seems to be a lot of black and white thinking, women turn down "nice guys" but end up with handsome, hot, bad guys who treat them mean.

 

Some women do choose badly but others however end up with slightly chubby guys who make them laugh or older guys who buy them diamonds, or some unemployed guy with a heart of gold... etc, etc...

People like what they like.

No-one can be forced into spending time with people they do not like, or people they know for certain would not be a good match for them.

 

Most I guess have sized a person up in about minute concerning "attraction", the rest is just confirmation and fine tuning, so perhaps shorter dates are required not longer...

[SwordofFlame]

I don't think you understood my question, so I'll rephrase it:

 

To guys complaining about women who don't give them "a chance":

 

1) Are you willing to give women you don't find attractive AT ALL "chances"?

 

2) If your answer is "no," then why the double standard?

 

I think the problem here is most women don't seem to advocate wanting a really hot, physically attractive guy and instead are emphasizing that the non-superficial aspects are a lot more important. Sure some women do make it plain obvious that they want a really hot guy...but not all do. So then you're typical "nice guy" gets upset when he gets rejected because he thinks he has all these important non-superficial characteristics. It might be easier if women that really want a hot guy, make that clearly known in their online dating profiles That way I can avoid sending them a message....

[Rejected Rosebud]

Seems to be a lot of black and white thinking, women turn down "nice guys" but end up with handsome, hot, bad guys who treat them mean.

It's like, as women, we have exactly two choices:

 

1) a guy who won't beat us up or cheat on us, but to whom we are not attracted one bit

 

2) a guy who will beat us and cheat on us.

[Rejected Rosebud]

I think the problem here is most women don't seem to advocate wanting a really hot, physically attractive guy and instead are emphasizing that the non-superficial aspects are a lot more important. Sure some women do make it plain obvious that they want a really hot guy...but not all do. So then you're typical "nice guy" gets upset when he gets rejected because he thinks he has all these important non-superficial characteristics. It might be easier if women that really want a hot guy, make that clearly known in their online dating profiles That way I can avoid sending them a message....

 

But ... but ... but ... the guy really doesn't have to be really hot and physically attractive! We just have to feel attracted to him!!

[elaine567]

I think the problem here is most women don't seem to advocate wanting a really hot, physically attractive guy and instead are emphasizing that the non-superficial aspects are a lot more important. Sure some women do make it plain obvious that they want a really hot guy...but not all do. So then you're typical "nice guy" gets upset when he gets rejected because he thinks he has all these important non-superficial characteristics. It might be easier if women that really want a hot guy, make that clearly known in their online dating profiles That way I can avoid sending them a message....

 

It's usually all about matching pairs, so if you are a 7 do not go chasing 10s, 10s will have the ability to get "hot" guys so you are on to a loser right away.

Of course there are exceptions, but they are exceptions, chances are the exception is not going to be you.

 

There is a whole lot of other factors that may ramp up a guy's attraction value or lower it, so it is not all purely looks.

Class, education, money, earning potential, confidence, personality, fun factor, etc. all play a role. People tend to fit in best with people who are similar to themselves, similar back ground, similar family, similar education, similar interests, similar sense of humour... etc - A guy your mum will like or a girl who fits right into your family.

Again there are exceptions but no-one can bank on exceptions.

Boxes get ticked on first meeting, and if an important one is missing then it is a no-go.

The problem some people have is that they over estimate or under estimate their own worth, so pitch to the wrong audience.

[preraph]

 

As I've said 100 times already, no, they're not getting "no" guys, and even if they were getting "no" guys, then they prefer that to getting a guy they hate. If they didn't prefer it, they wouldn't do it. Get that through your head.

 

 

 

Did you ever think that maybe she has her own standards and thoughts about what she wants in a partner and has every right to try and fulfill them?

 

 

To want to know a person, you have to first be attracted to them and find them appealing. If you don't, there's no point in getting to know them. Why don't you look on OKCupid and go out with every single girl in your city regardless of job, looks, and personality in order to get to know them? Answer that question without dodging it for the third time. You probably don't want to because you have no interest in them by looking at their profile. So you decided you don't want to go out with them because you have no interest in them and you aren't attracted to them.

 

Now answer this: What's the difference between deciding that after looking at their page for 5 seconds and actually meeting them and talking for an hour, and then deciding you don't want to go out with them because you have no interest in them and you aren't attracted to them. People who go out with you, regardless of how long or how many times, are the ones giving you more of a chance.

 

I agree with all the above. Well said. I have come across the attitude on forums before that women should have to take whoever they can get if they don't get the guys they like, so there's enough to go around. Well, sorry, but maybe some women are more willing to do that than others. Someone codependent might be willing to do that, but most women I know would rather be alone than to be in a sexual relationship with someone they are not attracted to, and it doesn't matter how good they think they are in bed, because sex isn't the #1 goal of most women and they can always get themselves off. And I guess that's why it's seems so crazy that men get so desperate about finding someone to have sex with. Good grief, most single women over 45, which is their sexual prime, would still rather be with no one than with someone they found unattractive on whatever level. You certainly can't say that of men in their sexual prime late teens/early 20s. It's like a feeding frenzy and they will often sleep with anyone willing if that's the only way they can get sex. And THAT is why men think women ought to think the same way, but we don't, and you can't make us!