Perspective

[basil67]

5 hours ago, ZA Dater said:

I am no longer prepared to compromise without there being mutual attraction,been there and done that it never works at all. All that happens is I end up compromising more and more and end up going on date's with people who do not interest me at all.

Actually the whole package exists fairly often, I've met a fair number of people I would date, this latest person is a good example. The option really is date someone I am not interested in or spend a hour every few months chatting to someone I am very interested in. It's an easy choice, albeit a compromised one.

 

You do you.   And the rest of us imperfects will get on with our lives and loves and laughter and futures together.   

[NuevoYorko]

That's right.  NO COMPROMISES.  He will hold out for his Dream Barbie and will settle for nothing less.  

[ZA Dater]

17 minutes ago, NuevoYorko said:

That's right.  NO COMPROMISES.  He will hold out for his Dream Barbie and will settle for nothing less.  

Correct I should have stopped going on dates with people I had no interest in years ago. 

But seeing as nobody I ever find interesting ever finds me attractive I guess I'll just need to make do with nothing but a few conversations.

I guess it depends what is termed a positive outcome, for me it could be a good conversation. For others it might be falling in love. If the best I can do is a conversation then I just need to be happy with that. 

One thing which is nice is to be off OLD. 

 

[BaileyB]

6 hours ago, ZA Dater said:

One thing which is nice is to be off OLD. 

Until the next time…

We’ve surely heard this, as we’ve heard everything, before…

[FredEire]

1 hour ago, BaileyB said:

Until the next time…

We’ve surely heard this, as we’ve heard everything, before…

Except his rigidness will keep him on the starting blocks and unable to react even if what he wanted magically came along.

It's like a martial artist saying he wants to win a world championship, but he won't practice because the 3 times he tried sparring it went badly for him.

Instead he will just sit at the side of the class watching because clearly he can't get what he wants even though he hasn't really tried, he just knows he's not good enough so he will content himself just sitting and quietly resenting all the others making an effort.

[NuevoYorko]

What really burns me is that the whole thing seems to hinge on the mundane, boring, and physically unappealing qualities of the women he has encountered.  None of them are capable of having a conversation, they are terribly lacking in the beauty department (his poor ex, can you imagine?) they are not intellectually up to his lofty level.  

This superiority is impossible to empathize with, when the OP is not even willing to treat these "underlings" as human beings.  Ugh.

[NuevoYorko]

I mean ... the OP expects NOTHING of himself.  He is ok with beating himself up because of enjoying self-pity ("If only my parents told me I am ugly") but when it comes to interacting with women (or probably anybody) he feels 100% certain that nothing is required of him.  He's not expected to bring a thing to the table, yet the woman is supposed to be a superstar in order to "earn" his attraction.

Ugh again.  

 

[FredEire]

1 hour ago, NuevoYorko said:

I mean ... the OP expects NOTHING of himself.  He is ok with beating himself up because of enjoying self-pity ("If only my parents told me I am ugly") but when it comes to interacting with women (or probably anybody) he feels 100% certain that nothing is required of him.  He's not expected to bring a thing to the table, yet the woman is supposed to be a superstar in order to "earn" his attraction.

Ugh again.  

 

I think it's also an issue with only seeing things on the surface level and not being able to look deeper than that.

Eg "This woman is boring because she's talking about her cat and not world affairs", not having the insight to think "This woman is talking about her cat because she's on a first date, feels talking about cats is a pretty safe topic, and we might bond over pets if I'm also into that and have one. She could actually have a lot in common with me on world affairs opinions but she's not getting into that because you know, it's a first date".

[ZA Dater]

1 hour ago, NuevoYorko said:

What really burns me is that the whole thing seems to hinge on the mundane, boring, and physically unappealing qualities of the women he has encountered.  None of them are capable of having a conversation, they are terribly lacking in the beauty department (his poor ex, can you imagine?) they are not intellectually up to his lofty level.  

This superiority is impossible to empathize with, when the OP is not even willing to treat these "underlings" as human beings.  Ugh.

How do you suppose I treat them if as you seem to suggest I do not treat them as human? Frankly would you go out with people you did not find interesting, I would suggest you would not so why should I? 

It actually hinges on a total lack of mutual attraction for which I guess nobody is actually to blame. I've spent years going on dates with people who I did not find particularly interesting just based on exchanges on OLD in the hope things would be different in person, are you suggesting I do more of this and if so why and for what purpose?

I am not asking for empathy either.

[ZA Dater]

1 minute ago, FredEire said:

I think it's also an issue with only seeing things on the surface level and not being able to look deeper than that.

Eg "This woman is boring because she's talking about her cat and not world affairs", not having the insight to think "This woman is talking about her cat because she's on a first date, feels talking about cats is a pretty safe topic, and we might bond over pets if I'm also into that and have one. She could actually have a lot in common with me on world affairs opinions but she's not getting into that because you know, it's a first date".

Sorry that does not wash with me. What makes a first date any different to having a random conversation with someone? I ask someone about their weekend for example, what makes this question different whether its asked on a date or at a coffee shop or in the office (ok not a good example)? 

Frankly your post would hold water if I had some sort of attraction to the person but this never happens so mostly every single date I have been I was not really interested in the person to start and equally when I have met people I was interested in, they were not interested in me. 

[ZA Dater]

1 hour ago, NuevoYorko said:

I mean ... the OP expects NOTHING of himself.  He is ok with beating himself up because of enjoying self-pity ("If only my parents told me I am ugly") but when it comes to interacting with women (or probably anybody) he feels 100% certain that nothing is required of him.  He's not expected to bring a thing to the table, yet the woman is supposed to be a superstar in order to "earn" his attraction.

Ugh again.  

 

Actually I do expect a lot from myself in terms I need to try not be awkward, I need to not be shy, I need to find every ounce of confidence I can and I need to be acutely aware of the need to try keep the conversation light and flowing from both directions. I also need to look at body language as they can sometimes be quite valuable. 

The other thing I need to ensure is I do not over complicate the conversation and try keep it relatable. 

[FredEire]

2 minutes ago, ZA Dater said:

Sorry that does not wash with me. What makes a first date any different to having a random conversation with someone? I ask someone about their weekend for example, what makes this question different whether its asked on a date or at a coffee shop or in the office (ok not a good example)? 

Frankly your post would hold water if I had some sort of attraction to the person but this never happens so mostly every single date I have been I was not really interested in the person to start and equally when I have met people I was interested in, they were not interested in me. 

Because there is something different at stake in every interaction in life. It's why language has different levels of formality, and there's a whole lot more subtle stuff beyond formality. As I said in an earlier post if I was at a business conventional business and world affairs would be a good starting point since you want to network and increase you business connections and don't want to get more personal. On a first date you're usually lightly personal but you wouldn't get into serious family stuff etc unless you know people that well.

If you don't want to "play by the rules" exactly you shouldn't necessarily. I have a friend who was very successful with women who would say all sorts of wacky stuff and catch people off guard, but it would make them feel like they were talking to someone unusual and interesting. But you can't fault people for doing the regular thing which is talking about pets or annoying flatmates etc etc. That's just what most people are comfortable with it's not who they really are. But you don't seem very good at seeing beyond this and being able to take into account that first interactions are a poor view of how they are overall.

I guess you mean you weren't physically attracted to them also, that's fair enough and as you've said you can't change that. I understand how others find your attitude very snide and dismissive though. There's been many dates I've had where I didn't find the girl attractive physically but we still got to know eachother, talked and had a nice time and ai went home feeling that, even though I wouldn't see her again, it had been and enjoyable night. You seem to be going "ew" and waving for the bill ASAP though. You have a very low level of interest in the character of people and actually getting to know how they are rather than ticking off the surface level boxes that are "useful" for you.

[FredEire]

8 minutes ago, ZA Dater said:

Actually I do expect a lot from myself in terms I need to try not be awkward, I need to not be shy, I need to find every ounce of confidence I can and I need to be acutely aware of the need to try keep the conversation light and flowing from both directions. I also need to look at body language as they can sometimes be quite valuable. 

The other thing I need to ensure is I do not over complicate the conversation and try keep it relatable. 

Yes and something as simple as leaving aside the world affairs for business meetings would be a good start with that.

[ZA Dater]

22 minutes ago, FredEire said:

Because there is something different at stake in every interaction in life. It's why language has different levels of formality, and there's a whole lot more subtle stuff beyond formality. As I said in an earlier post if I was at a business conventional business and world affairs would be a good starting point since you want to network and increase you business connections and don't want to get more personal. On a first date you're usually lightly personal but you wouldn't get into serious family stuff etc unless you know people that well.

If you don't want to "play by the rules" exactly you shouldn't necessarily. I have a friend who was very successful with women who would say all sorts of wacky stuff and catch people off guard, but it would make them feel like they were talking to someone unusual and interesting. But you can't fault people for doing the regular thing which is talking about pets or annoying flatmates etc etc. That's just what most people are comfortable with it's not who they really are. But you don't seem very good at seeing beyond this and being able to take into account that first interactions are a poor view of how they are overall.

I guess you mean you weren't physically attracted to them also, that's fair enough and as you've said you can't change that. I understand how others find your attitude very snide and dismissive though. There's been many dates I've had where I didn't find the girl attractive physically but we still got to know eachother, talked and had a nice time and ai went home feeling that, even though I wouldn't see her again, it had been and enjoyable night. You seem to be going "ew" and waving for the bill ASAP though. You have a very low level of interest in the character of people and actually getting to know how they are rather than ticking off the surface level boxes that are "useful" for you.

Ok then I put to you, what do you make of an interaction with someone I did not know that well that encompassed lots of mutual talk about families, growing up and was a more personal type of conversation? Of course people must do what makes them feel comfortable and that is fine, no problem. The bold is somewhat disturbing because believe it or not even I try to make a positive impression and why would someone not be who they are? 

My attitude was not always dismissive but frankly I am waste so much time on dates I should never have gone to begin with and you know truthfully I hardly ever left those dates thinking it was time well spent because to be honest I should never have gone on them to begin with. Haha I did laugh because I actually have sat through many three course dinners with people I should not have so its definitely not a case of me scampering off as quickly as possible.

My level of interest is perfectly aligned with the level of interest historically show in me, when I sit down and do not get asked one question in 2 hours its definite no from me and that is irrespective how attractive I find the person.

Then again I have never had mutual attraction.

 

[ZA Dater]

29 minutes ago, FredEire said:

Yes and something as simple as leaving aside the world affairs for business meetings would be a good start with that.

I have done this many times and have tried to take a genuine interest in cats and kids and and and.

[FredEire]

1 hour ago, ZA Dater said:

Ok then I put to you, what do you make of an interaction with someone I did not know that well that encompassed lots of mutual talk about families, growing up and was a more personal type of conversation? Of course people must do what makes them feel comfortable and that is fine, no problem. The bold is somewhat disturbing because believe it or not even I try to make a positive impression and why would someone not be who they are? 

My attitude was not always dismissive but frankly I am waste so much time on dates I should never have gone to begin with and you know truthfully I hardly ever left those dates thinking it was time well spent because to be honest I should never have gone on them to begin with. Haha I did laugh because I actually have sat through many three course dinners with people I should not have so its definitely not a case of me scampering off as quickly as possible.

My level of interest is perfectly aligned with the level of interest historically show in me, when I sit down and do not get asked one question in 2 hours its definite no from me and that is irrespective how attractive I find the person.

Then again I have never had mutual attraction.

 

Some people are more comfortable getting into personal stuff straight away, which is fine. Some people are not, which is also fine.

They're not who they are because they want to go with what they think might be more relatable to you on a first date, even if this is cats or their annoying flatmates. This may not be the most fascinating thing for them either but they know if they launched into world affairs the majority of people would think they are a bore, if they got into deep family stuff maybe you would be uncomfortable, that's not their fault and you should give them a pass.

It's not a waste of time, going out with people you're not attracted to is part of the process of finding people you are attracted to, it can be a learning experience. Dating them for 6 months for example if you're not attracted to them would be a waste of time though, I agree.

I'm curious how you spend 2 hours on a date and aren't asked one question, it seems highly atypical to me. Are you overpowering them with verbose opinions on world affairs and they don't know how to respond?

[ZA Dater]

4 minutes ago, FredEire said:

Some people are more comfortable getting into personal stuff straight away, which is fine. Some people are not, which is also fine.

They're not who they are because they want to go with what they think might be more relatable to you on a first date, even if this is cats or their annoying flatmates. This may not be the most fascinating thing for them either but they know if they launched into world affairs the majority of people would think they are a bore, if they got into deep family stuff maybe you would be uncomfortable, that's not their fault and you should give them a pass.

It's not a waste of time, going out with people you're not attracted to is part of the process of finding people you are attracted to, it can be a learning experience. Dating them for 6 months for example if you're not attracted to them would be a waste of time though, I agree.

I'm curious how you spend 2 hours on a date and aren't asked one question, it seems highly atypical to me. Are you overpowering them with verbose opinions on world affairs and they don't know how to respond?

Not really a friend of mine has had similar where people do not ask him anything either.  Honestly the times that happened was where I made an effort to keep conversation light and very much "get to know' even though I was not particularly interested in the person I tried to make the most of the date itself. Where I become unstuck us when I try and see if the person has any opinion and where they do not, a part of me simply just switches off, here I am being very general, heck if someone is passionate about animal rescue or knitting or baking or anything, then talk about that but when I sit with people and there is seemingly no passion for anything that becomes truly a waste of time, notwithstanding there being no attraction.

I am not particularly interested in going on any further dates with people like that, people are not far wrong, I am looking for someone very difficult to find and realistically I wont ever find this person in a dating context, that much has become very clear to me because I am just not attractive enough. Though it must be said I have met these people before but also I think this latest debacle as perhaps made me look at everything differently because it was a case something that had I been attractive enough would have maybe been possible. My point is if you fail the initial attraction test and the "will I sleep with him" test then its becomes almost impossible to come back from that, I fail this all the time. Perhaps I am smarter around the dinner table, perhaps I have better knowledge on certain things but ALWAYS she will go with the guy who can connect in that way. Again, I am being realistic here and I do not believe I am fundamentally wrong.

Yeah being an orbiter is probably a bad place to be and I have been there for many years with a few different people to know again, its not something that can be changed.

[basil67]

2 hours ago, ZA Dater said:

Not really a friend of mine has had similar where people do not ask him anything either.

I'm also noticing this more often in social situations.  If that person doesn't ask question, end the date after you've finished your beverage.  That way you've only wasted 20 mins max.

2 hours ago, ZA Dater said:

heck if someone is passionate about animal rescue or knitting or baking or anything, then talk about that but when I sit with people and there is seemingly no passion for anything that becomes truly a waste of time, notwithstanding there being no attraction.

"Passionate" is a very strong word, so would you be OK talking with someone who "enjoys" or "is interested in"?   

That said, even if they do have a passion for park runs (which you could probably turn into a good discussion) and an interest in sewing, would this be enough to make up for them not being interested in discussing more obscure world affairs?  Because if it's not enough, then your argument about them not being able to discuss an interest in depth is moot.

As it happens, it's actually very difficult to discuss a number of interests if the other doesn't know enough to add to the conversation.  Unless you're a  knitter, what can you add to a conversation about knitting?  Sure, they may have some pics of recent things on their phone which you can admire, and you can ask how they learned, but if you're not a knitter that's where the conversation will die.   Baking is somewhat easier if you can segue into a discussion of favourite baked goods. and segue again into a discussion about food in general

I would advise that you not be judgmental on if they don't talk at length on their interests if you can't proactively add to the conversation.  If they have any social skills at all, they won't want to bore the listener by talking about something the other has no interest in. 

 

 

[ZA Dater]

14 hours ago, basil67 said:

I'm also noticing this more often in social situations.  If that person doesn't ask question, end the date after you've finished your beverage.  That way you've only wasted 20 mins max.

"Passionate" is a very strong word, so would you be OK talking with someone who "enjoys" or "is interested in"?   

That said, even if they do have a passion for park runs (which you could probably turn into a good discussion) and an interest in sewing, would this be enough to make up for them not being interested in discussing more obscure world affairs?  Because if it's not enough, then your argument about them not being able to discuss an interest in depth is moot.

As it happens, it's actually very difficult to discuss a number of interests if the other doesn't know enough to add to the conversation.  Unless you're a  knitter, what can you add to a conversation about knitting?  Sure, they may have some pics of recent things on their phone which you can admire, and you can ask how they learned, but if you're not a knitter that's where the conversation will die.   Baking is somewhat easier if you can segue into a discussion of favourite baked goods. and segue again into a discussion about food in general

I would advise that you not be judgmental on if they don't talk at length on their interests if you can't proactively add to the conversation.  If they have any social skills at all, they won't want to bore the listener by talking about something the other has no interest in. 

 

 

Someone can be passionate about knitting or making things and there are questions and ways to talk about that topic but I cannot tell you how irritating it is talking to people on dates who seemingly are interested in nothing. Frankly most things can be turned into a discussion of the person chooses to engage in a discussion but most of the time this never happens on a date and its one of many reasons I am frankly not prepared to on dates from OLD ever again.

I will say though its been good to get off OLD and not even be tempted to go back.

 

 

[NuevoYorko]

Why do you put the number of women who seemingly can't get into a decent conversation with you squarely on the shoulders of those women, or on OLD?

From my personal experience with you and your 7500+ posts, which are repetitive to the point where they could probably be consolidated into about 3 paragraphs,  you are not a "dynamic" communicator in any sense.   

Again - you appear to be an inert presence with extremely high expectations about what another person sitting across from you ought to be bringing to your encounter with them.  

 

 

 

[FredEire]

5 minutes ago, NuevoYorko said:

Why do you put the number of women who seemingly can't get into a decent conversation with you squarely on the shoulders of those women, or on OLD?

From my personal experience with you and your 7500+ posts, which are repetitive to the point where they could probably be consolidated into about 3 paragraphs,  you are not a "dynamic" communicator in any sense.   

Again - you appear to be an inert presence with extremely high expectations about what another person sitting across from you ought to be bringing to your encounter with them.  

 

 

 

Indeed, not many people I know say they have this many boring conversations. It's about finding interest with the individual you are with, there is no objective "interesting". I think there's something interesting about the vast majority of people, the only people I find total bores are the ones who operate inside rigid boxes and insist everyone must follow their lead or be looked down on.

Edited May 14 by FredEire

[ZA Dater]

2 hours ago, NuevoYorko said:

Why do you put the number of women who seemingly can't get into a decent conversation with you squarely on the shoulders of those women, or on OLD?

From my personal experience with you and your 7500+ posts, which are repetitive to the point where they could probably be consolidated into about 3 paragraphs,  you are not a "dynamic" communicator in any sense.   

Again - you appear to be an inert presence with extremely high expectations about what another person sitting across from you ought to be bringing to your encounter with them.  

Which is my choice and I wish I had made this choice much earlier in life so I would not have bothered with OLD at all. Frankly if they cannot show any enthusiasm for anything I cannot see how this is my problem? 

 

[ZA Dater]

2 hours ago, FredEire said:

Indeed, not many people I know say they have this many boring conversations. It's about finding interest with the individual you are with, there is no objective "interesting". I think there's something interesting about the vast majority of people, the only people I find total bores are the ones who operate inside rigid boxes and insist everyone must follow their lead or be looked down on.

I guess it depends what you find interesting. Its been well established I do not enjoy dating conversation, I far prefer general conversation, I still fail to see the difference between the two but nonetheless. Nice snide remark but I prefer to walk past rather than look down. 

[NuevoYorko]

46 minutes ago, ZA Dater said:

I guess it depends what you find interesting. Its been well established I do not enjoy dating conversation, I far prefer general conversation, I still fail to see the difference between the two but nonetheless. 

If you don't see a difference, how can you prefer one over the other?  

I've never heard of "dating conversation."   

You've stated several dozen (or hundreds maybe) times that if you aren't extremely attracted to a woman you "can't be bothered" and "have no interest" (your words) in getting to know anything about them.   So I am inclined to think that you have no idea what these people who don't knock your socks off with their glorious beauty and glowing personalities are interested or passionate about.  How could you?   You would not be available to listen to them.  Just sitting there feeling sorry for yourself because, once again, you are stuck across a table from a woman who is not gorgeous and magnetic.  

That's all about YOU, not the people who you've met.

[ZA Dater]

45 minutes ago, NuevoYorko said:

If you don't see a difference, how can you prefer one over the other?  

I've never heard of "dating conversation."   

You've stated several dozen (or hundreds maybe) times that if you aren't extremely attracted to a woman you "can't be bothered" and "have no interest" (your words) in getting to know anything about them.   So I am inclined to think that you have no idea what these people who don't knock your socks off with their glorious beauty and glowing personalities are interested or passionate about.  How could you?   You would not be available to listen to them.  Just sitting there feeling sorry for yourself because, once again, you are stuck across a table from a woman who is not gorgeous and magnetic.  

That's all about YOU, not the people who you've met.

When I have sat through dinners and failed to figure out what they are passionate about I think its hardly my fault, heck you think I sit there and do not engage, the opposite is true, I actually did go out to try get them to open up, attempted to keep the conversation light and even did small talk to try make them feel at ease. Consider I was not really that interested to begin with but I still tried to engage in conversation.

Sometimes this did work too well and I ended up in a very awkward position where I had to actually reject them which did not feel particularly nice. It would be true to say that today I would not go on dates with with people I had no interest in, all I am doing is adopting the same as those who wont go on a date with me, in other words I am making a choice. 

You are right I am not interested in people who are not magnetic, again my choice. In hindsight the mistake I made was to go on dates with people I was not particularly keen on but that idea was from some sort of flawed logic that dating is a numbers game, actually it probably is if you can get numbers of people you find genuinely interesting. 

Yes, I get it, I am 100% at fault for every dating interaction I have, in fact that is true because if I were attractive I'd be able to attract people I find attractive rather than trying to force myself to find people attractive simply because they will go on a date with me.