I wonder what she's looking for

[nospam99]

I'll share another little OLD story because I'm curious what others think ...

 

I'm coming up on my first anniversary of OLD in about a week. This morning I got an Other Match on match.com. All the ducks lined up - at least 'on paper'. This is a woman I first contacted around the time of my first month on OLD. To the best of my recollection (I wasn't yet saving copies of OLD messages) it was on ourtime and she wasn't interested. But given time having passed, it being a different OLD site, and the 'ducks', I sent a message. She responded. Interesting that, since my response rate was falling below 25% on match last I looked. Nevertheless she's not interested, saying (a) she thinks I'm a 'nice person' (b) she's not attracted and © wishing me luck in my search.

 

All fair. I sent her a 'thanks for responding' note just because that's how I play that transaction in the OLD game. But here's the mystery ... If she's not lying about the 'nice person' thing but is nevertheless not attracted and all she has to go on is profile and OLD message, Occam's Razor says it's my looks. Still all fair. But ... what is she looking for? This is an early 60-something widowed grandmother on OLD for at least eleven months. Is she holding out for Brad Pitt?

[central]

There are plenty of people I wouldn't want to meet or date, based solely on appearance. Add in any one of many other possible deal breakers (or finding one with someone I would or am dating), and it really is difficult to find a great match.

 

It sounds like this woman saw - or thinks she sees - something about you she doesn't like or doesn't want to deal with. Many people at this age (I know many women with this attitude) would rather be alone, than be with someone they aren't sure might make their lives significantly better. And the ones who are overly eager to find someone, often have significant flaws that would give me pause.

 

It's a numbers game. Meet enough people, and eventually someone comes along where the connection is mutual. It can be hard to let go of the ones that seem ideal, but don't feel the same way. They may be missing out, of course, or maybe they see something that doesn't work - for them.

[preraph]

Listen, just because women get old doesn't mean they want a man bad enough to be with someone they're not attracted to. Maybe men are more that way, I don't know, but women will go without unless they are attracted to and like someone, especially older wiser women.

[Normm]

Interesting that, since my response rate was falling below 25% on match

 

 

You're doing better than the national average. Be proud.

 

But here's the mystery ... If she's not lying about the 'nice person' thing but is nevertheless not attracted and all she has to go on is profile and OLD message, Occam's Razor says it's my looks

 

 

You don't need fancy scientific theories to know it's about your looks. As far as a mystery? No mystery, she wants somebody better looking and for now she's willing to wait until she finds him. Try her in another 10 years she might be more receptive.

[nospam99]

Many people at this age (I know many women with this attitude) would rather be alone, than be with someone they aren't sure might make their lives significantly better.

 

women will go without unless they are attracted to and like someone, especially older wiser women.

 

No mystery, she wants somebody better looking and for now she's willing to wait until she finds him. Try her in another 10 years she might be more receptive.

 

Oh, yeah - Occam's Razor (the simplest explanation is the most likely). And this is just a one-woman example (though looks may be a major factof for many of the 75% no-responses, too). But the mystery is what does a woman like this expect to eventually 'find'? Eleven months. She's not a youngster so I won't guess how many other 'non-winners' she's dealt with during that time. But I assume she wouldn't still be using match.com (and paying the fee so she can send messages) if she'd already found her Brad Pitt.

 

Normm's (probably joking) remark about another 10 years gets me thinking .... The way the OLD 'game' is played, as a guy, I have to make most initial contacts. My 'target demographic' is 'younger women'. I'm 64. I've met four women 66-68 (one of the 68s initiated) and twelve 55-63. But some women initiate contact with me. Those who initiate contact tend to be older, several in their 70s. I've also been told by the local speed-dating coordinator that it's difficult to find enough men over 60 to hold events. This is borne out not only by the lack of a scheduled speed dating event for 'seniors' where I live, but also in the more heavily populated nearby Westchester, New York City, Northern New Jersey, and New Haven/Greenwich areas. Senior Ladies, you snooze, you lose.

Edited September 21, 2018 by nospam99

[CautiouslyOptimistic]

NS, you have talked quite a bit about the physical attractiveness of women in your age range and your preference for dating certain types. Why would it be any different for women?

[nospam99]

NS, you have talked quite a bit about the physical attractiveness of women in your age range and your preference for dating certain types. Why would it be any different for women?

 

Objectively, no reason it would be different. However 'some people' say that relative to men women are less interested in looks and more interested in characteristics such as personality and confidence.

 

Nevertheless I started this thread to ask what others thought about the expectations of one woman who we are guessing doesn't find MY physical attractiveness appealing. I believe the guess is correct (sniff, sniffle, sigh, whimper), but we still can't generalize about the relative importance of physical attractiveness to other women.

[Normm]

one woman who we are guessing doesn't find MY physical attractiveness appealing.

 

 

It could be something else but nobody here has seen your profile, at least that we know of.

 

 

Do you have something very polarizing in there? Smoker, Trump supporter, athiest, Jehovah's witness, serial killer? If so it could be one of those, if not, then sorry but maybe you can take better pictures or something, that's your only hope.

[CautiouslyOptimistic]

It could be something else but nobody here has seen your profile, at least that we know of.

 

 

Do you have something very polarizing in there? Smoker, Trump supporter, athiest, Jehovah's witness, serial killer? If so it could be one of those, if not, then sorry but maybe you can take better pictures or something, that's your only hope.

 

Hillary supporter? :

 

NS, with regard to women not caring as much as men about attractiveness, I think that is more of an "in real life" thing, not OLD. Just my opinion. Most people, men and women, don't usually invest energy into meeting a perfect stranger if they aren't attracted to begin with.

[JuneL]

If my memory doesn’t fail me, you’ve been on OLD for no less than 11 months, right? Would you be receptive to some nice lady who’s obese and physically inactive, simply because you haven’t met a lady for over 11 months?

 

Personally, I have only been attracted to men who are very so-called “alpha”. So I can totally reject a guy who seems “nice” and has good looks.

[JuneL]

Hillary supporter? :

 

NS, with regard to women not caring as much as men about attractiveness, I think that is more of an "in real life" thing, not OLD. Just my opinion. Most people, men and women, don't usually invest energy into meeting a perfect stranger if they aren't attracted to begin with.

 

That is very true. OLD is by definition very superficial as far as first impression is concerned.

[nospam99]

It could be something else but nobody here has seen your profile, at least that we know of.

 

 

Do you have something very polarizing in there? Smoker, Trump supporter, athiest, Jehovah's witness, serial killer? If so it could be one of those, if not, then sorry but maybe you can take better pictures or something, that's your only hope.

 

Thank you Normm. But I didn't start the thread to ask for help. I'm satisfied that my profile is generating 'enough' interest and that I'm meeting 'enough' women. The thread is about my curiosity about what this one woman expects to achieve with OLD.

 

FWIW, non-smoker (as are most women I see on OLD), no politics in profile (I really don't care but I don't HATE Trump so I've missed out on two vehement Trump-haters and avoid profiles that sound like they only want men who also hate Trump), non-religious (profile says 'spiritual but not religious'), and I didn't say how many bodies I've got buried in the garden. My own personal opinion, based in large part on women's preferences as listed in THEIR profiles, is that my age (64), height (5'8"), body type ('average' - I'm working on it but can't in all truth or fairness claim 'athletic' ... yet), and income (I'm semi-retired so less than $75k) is filtering out significant female interest. That and I look the way I look - my photos are reasonably flattering, yet real. I 'flex' on the age and height requirements (but not body type and income) by sometimes contacting some women who say they are looking for a little taller and / or a little younger. (I find it 'interesting' that I get 0% response when I flex on height.) The other characteristic I avoid violating is I don't contact women (only Christian so far) who say they are very serious about their faith and only seeking men who share their beliefs.

[nospam99]

If my memory doesn’t fail me, you’ve been on OLD for no less than 11 months, right? Would you be receptive to some nice lady who’s obese and physically inactive, simply because you haven’t met a lady for over 11 months?

 

Personally, I have only been attracted to men who are very so-called “alpha”. So I can totally reject a guy who seems “nice” and has good looks.

 

On the one hand, touche On the other hand, IMHO my looks are not the deal-breaker that obese and physically inactive are. But for the ladies, certainly for the one in question, YMMV.

[JuneL]

I don’t think it’s such a good idea to put in your income, if you’re semi-retired (I take it to mean that your full-time income is double of that?). Unless you’re not looking for a (retired or not) professional woman, many may use your (low) income as an approximation to your career ambition.

 

Thank you Normm. But I didn't start the thread to ask for help. I'm satisfied that my profile is generating 'enough' interest and that I'm meeting 'enough' women. The thread is about my curiosity about what this one woman expects to achieve with OLD.

 

FWIW, non-smoker (as are most women I see on OLD), no politics in profile (I really don't care but I don't HATE Trump so I've missed out on two vehement Trump-haters and avoid profiles that sound like they only want men who also hate Trump), non-religious (profile says 'spiritual but not religious'), and I didn't say how many bodies I've got buried in the garden. My own personal opinion, based in large part on women's preferences as listed in THEIR profiles, is that my age (64), height (5'8"), body type ('average' - I'm working on it but can't in all truth or fairness claim 'athletic' ... yet), and income (I'm semi-retired so less than $75k) is filtering out significant female interest. That and I look the way I look - my photos are reasonably flattering, yet real. I 'flex' on the age and height requirements (but not body type and income) by sometimes contacting some women who say they are looking for a little taller and / or a little younger. (I find it 'interesting' that I get 0% response when I flex on height.) The other characteristic I avoid violating is I don't contact women (only Christian so far) who say they are very serious about their faith and only seeking men who share their beliefs.

[nospam99]

I don’t think it’s such a good idea to put in your income, if you’re semi-retired (I take it to mean that your full-time income is double of that?). Unless you’re not looking for a (retired or not) professional woman, many may use your (low) income as an approximation to your career ambition.

 

This is turning into a discussion of my OLD tactics ...

 

I don't specify my income in my profile. But before I decide to contact a woman, I check the income she says she's 'seeking' in a man. Most say 'no preference'. But if the woman has bothered to specify the income of the man she's seeking and it's in one of the over $75k selections, I don't contact her. Most of these women are high-level professionals from Westchester or Fairfield counties who specify that they are making at least $50k themselves, usually more.

Edited September 21, 2018 by nospam99

[preraph]

Oh, yeah - Occam's Razor (the simplest explanation is the most likely). And this is just a one-woman example (though looks may be a major factof for many of the 75% no-responses, too). But the mystery is what does a woman like this expect to eventually 'find'? Eleven months. She's not a youngster so I won't guess how many other 'non-winners' she's dealt with during that time. But I assume she wouldn't still be using match.com (and paying the fee so she can send messages) if she'd already found her Brad Pitt.

 

Normm's (probably joking) remark about another 10 years gets me thinking .... The way the OLD 'game' is played, as a guy, I have to make most initial contacts. My 'target demographic' is 'younger women'. I'm 64. I've met four women 66-68 (one of the 68s initiated) and twelve 55-63. But some women initiate contact with me. Those who initiate contact tend to be older, several in their 70s. I've also been told by the local speed-dating coordinator that it's difficult to find enough men over 60 to hold events. This is borne out not only by the lack of a scheduled speed dating event for 'seniors' where I live, but also in the more heavily populated nearby Westchester, New York City, Northern New Jersey, and New Haven/Greenwich areas. Senior Ladies, you snooze, you lose.

 

She's just throwing a line out, but I bet she's fine if she doesn't catch anything. So far, she's throwing them back. She may just be looking for someone to talk to.

 

Seriously, NoSpam, I think you're doing okay. Just stop worrying about the ones who aren't interested.

[Chilli]

Being attracted to someone though isn't all just about looks .

ln the looks is also the person , and the type and all that stuff. l could easily see someone gorgeous but have zero interest because l'd also see the person and know straight away she wasn't for me no matter what she looked like.

Edited September 21, 2018 by Chilli

[khalessi]

I agree it should go deeper than looks but of course you can start there but there has to be something more or else...