how realistic are online dating women about their looks?

[some_username1]

22 minutes ago, preraph said:

It's already not tolerated when men do it and the most common complaint is men using photos that are 15 or 20 years old because they may genuinely think they still look like that.

 

Since you are already schooled on the filters, I think maybe your imagination could fill in the gaps there and assume that the woman may have some lines or zits 

It’s hard to “fill in gaps” when you’ve got nothing to work with!  Have you seek the effect of these filters? Like I said- it makes someone’s face look like an airbrushed smudge with some eyes and a smile stuck on it. I mean fine if it’s like one or two women doing it that you can filter out but when pretty much all women in your area in your age range are doing it it makes online dating redundant because I know from experience that the woman in the pictures is not the woman who would be turning up on a date. 

[Tamfana]

If there is a big problem with people misrepresenting how they look, do FaceTime with them before setting up a date.  

[some_username1]

11 hours ago, Cookiesandough said:

Lol @ candy floss with eyes and mouth. But let’s be real, not everyone uses that filter....it just make them look more appealing so you message/go out with the ones obviously using filters in every pic. I’m sorry, but I’m saying it, if guys go on dates with girls who only use the blurry, google eye filter, they kind of deserve what they get. Same with girls who use these filters and don’t get a call back... you asked for it 

Totally agreed! If you fall for it (which I have because I didn’t realise the effect was so striking) then yes you need to suck it up and learn from it (again, which I have). I’m more lamenting that it’s not easily avoidable anymore, at least not where I am, because most women of a certain are using the hell out of it.

Guess the only answer is to close my accounts and report to my local bar instead....

[preraph]

8 minutes ago, some_username1 said:

It’s hard to “fill in gaps” when you’ve got nothing to work with!  Have you seek the effect of these filters? Like I said- it makes someone’s face look like an airbrushed smudge with some eyes and a smile stuck on it. I mean fine if it’s like one or two women doing it that you can filter out but when pretty much all women in your area in your age range are doing it it makes online dating redundant because I know from experience that the woman in the pictures is not the woman who would be turning up on a date. 

So stop choosing women using flawless photos because no one is flawless. I mean you know this but you're still choosing them hoping they actually look like that but you can tell they're filtered so you know better. Pick someone with a realistic photo who doesn't look flawless. Someone with an eye crinkle or a pimple or uneven complexion.

[NuevoYorko]

13 hours ago, some_username1 said:

When everyone is doing it and you know how much it distorts the truth it renders OLD null and void because you simply aren’t getting the goods as advertised. 

OLD is not a shopping site.  Other people are not "goods," you are not a customer, and none of us are entitled to anything when we go meet a person off OLD for the first time.  You're not meant to be "getting" anything.  

I agree with you that the extreme filter is annoying.  I probably automatically apply my own filter to those women who use it, not because I am concerned about "false advertising" but I am turned off by the idea that a woman would choose to do that to the point where I feel disinterested in knowing more.  Yes, some flattering touch-ups are perfectly acceptable to me,  portraits have been touched up for decades before apps were even a concept.  People want to look their best.  

[SumGuy]

1 hour ago, preraph said:

So stop choosing women using flawless photos because no one is flawless. I mean you know this but you're still choosing them hoping they actually look like that but you can tell they're filtered so you know better. Pick someone with a realistic photo who doesn't look flawless. Someone with an eye crinkle or a pimple or uneven complexion.

Exactly, just go to another profile.  The good news is that it is really obvious when these filters are used so it's not like you are being tricked into thinking that is the actual look.  Of course in candlelight she may well look like that.  

[basil67]

5 hours ago, some_username1 said:

You say that, but look at it this way: if a woman goes on a date with a guy who has doctored his pictures or he is using pictures that aren’t him or were from five years ago when he actually had teeth whose fault is that? Would you lament men’s poor self esteem that they have to pull this chicanery just to get someone to date them? Somehow I don’t think you would be shedding any tears for the man in that story, you would be batting for the woman who was deceived.

 

No, I wouldn't look at it like that at all.   I think this points to low self esteem, exacerbated by those who will only accept male or female beauty as a date

So just as I feel so sad that women are getting caught up in the idea that they aren't good enough as regular people, I'm equally saddened to see that body image issues are increasing in young men.  Many a perfectly healthy and trim guy now sees himself as not good enough because he doesn't have big muscles or isn't tall enough.   

If I was single, I'd find myself a perfectly regular bloke in daily life.  Yes, it may take a while, but there's no hurry.

[some_username1]

5 hours ago, preraph said:

So stop choosing women using flawless photos because no one is flawless. I mean you know this but you're still choosing them hoping they actually look like that but you can tell they're filtered so you know better. Pick someone with a realistic photo who doesn't look flawless. Someone with an eye crinkle or a pimple or uneven complexion.

As I said above- I skip profiles like that but that’s exactly my complaint, that the vast majority of female profiles contain all sorts of shenanigans to stop men from getting a clear idea of what they actually look like (the inverse might also be true but I have no experience of browsing male profiles). It’s a bit of an epidemic at the moment and it’s frustrating that older women (in big numbers) don’t represent themselves as they are.

[OatsAndHall]

5 hours ago, preraph said:

So stop choosing women using flawless photos because no one is flawless. I mean you know this but you're still choosing them hoping they actually look like that but you can tell they're filtered so you know better. Pick someone with a realistic photo who doesn't look flawless. Someone with an eye crinkle or a pimple or uneven complexion.

 

Yup... When using OLD, I will only message women who have at least one "real" photo of themselves. I learned that one the hard way; been on plenty of first dates with women that I didn't friggin' recognize when we first met. Even with a dozen pictures to look at..

It works the other way as well. I never used a filter when on my dating profile but I got far more dates when I started including more 'non-selfie" pics. Hell, I think I look rather haggard in one pic I put up but I snagged a lot more responses and dates when I tossed it up there.

[basil67]

4 minutes ago, some_username1 said:

As I said above- I skip profiles like that but that’s exactly my complaint, that the vast majority of female profiles .......

You seem to have an entitlement thing going on.  People can put whatever they want in their profiles.  If you don't like it, then go without.

[chillii]

l only ever went for natural , real.

Not sayin l don't love and appreciate make up and things, l actually love the look and a bit of effort in that way , l find make up so feminine , but l wasn't interested in some glammed professional fake bs

Edited January 26, 2020 by chillii

[greymatter]

I never used a filter on any of my photos and can't imagine that "the vast majority of women" do that. It makes no sense given how quickly it would be found out to be fake. My photos were all posted as is, and were current within the last 6 months. Worked for me. 

[thefooloftheyear]

No dog in this fight, but I always wondered this ...

With all the subterfuge out there, and there is no reason not to believe it(guys that I know have told me what they experienced). why would anyone do it in this type of venue?  I mean, sure, do something to hide flaw on a job interview or something like that, but if the goal is a relationship(or even just sex for that matter), then its pretty much a given that the other person is going to see you naked at some point, no?

I don't understand the logic...

TFY

[NuevoYorko]

1 hour ago, thefooloftheyear said:

No dog in this fight, but I always wondered this ...

With all the subterfuge out there, and there is no reason not to believe it(guys that I know have told me what they experienced). why would anyone do it in this type of venue?  I mean, sure, do something to hide flaw on a job interview or something like that, but if the goal is a relationship(or even just sex for that matter), then its pretty much a given that the other person is going to see you naked at some point, no?

I don't understand the logic...

TFY

Eh, there have always and will always be "tricks" to attract the opposite sex, and not just for women.  Look at PUA (of which, fortunately,  I was blissfully unaware til I came over here) for example.  If that stuff works,  I can only imagine the horror on the women's faces when they find out what lies beneath all the gaming ...

[chillii]

Can't even imagine what pua is , hate to think actually with some of the stuff l read round here haha.

[thefooloftheyear]

3 hours ago, NuevoYorko said:

Eh, there have always and will always be "tricks" to attract the opposite sex, and not just for women.  Look at PUA (of which, fortunately,  I was blissfully unaware til I came over here) for example.  If that stuff works,  I can only imagine the horror on the women's faces when they find out what lies beneath all the gaming ...

Join the club.,...I knew nothing about it as well til hanging around here...

I dunno...Seems like anyone with any sense in their brain could cut through that PUA nonsense in no time....But this whole business of filters, photoshop,  and old pics and such just don't make any sense at all to me...I recall a story a friend of mine relayed to me when he first met a woman OLD.,,He's all excited she looked great, blah blah...,They agree to meet at a restaurant and she got there first...He walked around the restaurant 3 or 4 times and didn't see who he thought he was supposed to meet...Just as he was about to leave a woman who was sitting by herself stopped him and said "Hi I'm (whatever her name was)" ,,,,awkwardly he sat with her and the date began.. After the drinks were brought out he couldn't help but say something to the effect that she looked nothing like what he expected-didn't say she looked bad or anything but I think she probably understood where he was going with that comment....She started to sob a bit,  and he felt bad about it, and the date ended early because it was just too weird.....

I know this guy well and he is actually a pretty laid back and reasonable guy, so the appearance difference must have been pretty dramatic...I just don't understand the thinking...Id think if anything when it comes to this,  it's better to "under promise and over deliver",  as they say...

TFY

Edited January 27, 2020 by thefooloftheyear

[Miss Spider]

Happened to me once. The guy, when we met, he looked different than his pics. I could tell it was the same guy, but the angles and filters he had used made him look different 

Edited January 27, 2020 by Cookiesandough

[basil67]

6 hours ago, greymatter said:

I never used a filter on any of my photos and can't imagine that "the vast majority of women" do that. It makes no sense given how quickly it would be found out to be fake. My photos were all posted as is, and were current within the last 6 months. Worked for me. 

I would guess that for the poster who wrote about it, it's confirmation bias.   He's probably skimming past the regular looking girls without a second thought and getting mad that all the pretty ones are fake.

Edited January 27, 2020 by basil67

[some_username1]

12 hours ago, basil67 said:

You seem to have an entitlement thing going on.  People can put whatever they want in their profiles.  If you don't like it, then go without.

So it’s entitlement to be frustrated that people don’t represent themselves as who they are (which is the whole point of online dating)? Yet again, would you say a woman is entitled for wanting men to use pictures of themselves that aren’t out of date or otherwise deceptive? We all know you wouldn’t- but it’s the same thing!

[some_username1]

4 hours ago, basil67 said:

I would guess that for the poster who wrote about it, it's confirmation bias.   He's probably skimming past the regular looking girls without a second thought and getting mad that all the pretty ones are fake.

I’m mainly swiping in the 40+ age bracket so “pretty” is highly subjective in that bracket from the get-go so it’s definitely not super-models that I’m after, just women who present themselves as they are and don’t use a combination of dark lighting/distance/filters to obscure their faces. It was only when I actually started becoming frustrated with the amount of times I was seeing it that I cottoned on to just how many are using it. I’ve seen women in lower age brackets using it too, but it seems to be 8 or 9 out of 10 profiles using tricks when swiping in the 40+ bracket.

[basil67]

It's entitlement to expect others to do things in a way which suits us.  Personally, I wouldn't bother complaining about things I have no control over.   I'd rather take my time and find someone in real life...or just be single. 

Edited January 27, 2020 by basil67

[elaine567]

A profile is essentially an advert. 
Most people want to stand out so that they will be noticed by the people they want to notice them.

Women get bombarded with images of "perfect" women.
Every celebrity pic needs to be just right, so every trick in the book is employed to give the best impression.
Selfie culture and technology has made it possible for just about everybody to use professional techniques to enhance images at the touch of a screen.
No-one wants to look "bad" on their "ad", when puffiness, lines and wrinkles and blemishes can be erased almost instantly by an app.
You can't turn up to an event in a baggy t shirt, cheap jeans and no make up and expect to impress, when every one else is glammed up to the max.
Similarly you can't show up on OLD with photos that make you look about 20 years older than everyone else your age, as everyone else is using filters and contouring makeup and lighting and angles...
OK to say everyone is fake, but are men going to  even notice the women who are more honest with their "advert"? Probably not.
That is the problem.

[some_username1]

5 hours ago, Cookiesandough said:

Happened to me once. The guy, when we met, he looked different than his pics. I could tell it was the same guy, but the angles and filters he had used made him look different 

Interesting...how did it affect your perception of him? Was there a second date? Did you feel “conned”?

[some_username1]

49 minutes ago, basil67 said:

It's entitlement to expect others to do things in a way which suits us.  Personally, I wouldn't bother complaining about things I have no control over.   I'd rather take my time and find someone in real life...or just be single. 

Whilst in a literal sense it’s entitlement, is it not wrong to “game” the system by using deception? OLD is after all a zero-sum game, if one person cheats then everyone loses.

Although I do concede that yes, the answer is obviously not to play from the start.

[nospam99]

OP here. It seems to me that a lot of the discussion has turned on people, women as well as men, posting 'fake' photos on OLD. The photos are regarded as fake either because they're years old or because they've been shopped. What I intended the topic to be about was how women on OLD (I don't look at men's profiles) self-describe by picking a body type that doesn't match their photos.

Many posters have said they've been surprised when meeting an OLD contact how little that person looks like their photos.

What I'm more curious about is how can women, just in their profiles, describe themselves one way and post photos that don't support the description.

I grant and acknowledge that, as many posters have noted, calling yourself 'average' has two different connotations. One relates to the range of POSSIBLE body types without regard to the population distribution. In that context, I'd say an 'average' body is neither slim and trim nor overweight, but falls somewhere in between. To my eyes, such a body is recognizably FEMALE, neither anorexic, skinny, hot, nor a generic 'teddy bear' shape that could easily be male (perhaps with man-boobs). The other context for 'average' IS a teddy bear shape because, as has been pointed out, the 'average' woman in the US weighs 170 lbs.

The other examples I think of when I ask the question about women being realistic include
- self-described as 'slender' when photos clearly show an average or overweight body
- self-described as 'athletic' when photos show an average or overweight body and no indication of muscle tone. USNWT members, certain heavier swimsuit models, and women in combat sports (including professional wrestlers) have what I'd call 'athletic' bodies. Female heavyweight weight lifters and most shot putters technically have athletic bodies, but were they to self-describe their body types as 'athletic' on OLD is, to me, a bit of a swerve.
- self-described as 'average' when photos show an obese body.

Again to my eyes, plenty of OLD women select a body type description that is consistent with their photos. What confuses me is the ones who 'overdescribe' while posting photos that don't support the description. Other than not being realistic, do they really believe that men viewing their profiles won't just shake their heads and chuckle?