Online Dating, I forgot!

[Deleted]

Lmao that's obviously not her in the avatar. Wow..

She's posted her picture before

[Mistame]

Google Mr Yuk. Maybe it was before your time

Damn, you must be old. (<-- That's a razz. XP is more a "disgusted" emoji)

It is international, a key point you keep conveniently attempting to ignore.

"English-only" does not refer to demographics, it refers to the forum rules.

You're a "native speaker" ... of what? Which American dialect? Do you drink soda, or pop? Do you speak Standard received? Do you speak one of the many UK dialects? Maybe you prefer Australian English? Go do some research and find out just how varied "English" is and how that plays out with culture.

I speak American-English. I've also an innate disdain for people who pronounce "th" as "fuh". Not sure which UK "dialect" pronounces "birthday" as "birfday", but they should be punched on principle. (razz)

Your display of ignorance is appalling.

That word doesn't mean what you think it does.

Consider this example:

I've already seen that post and since the story is from the UK, he is right. People should recognize where the story comes from and that "Asian" means something different in that context. If he was trying to say that about a story from the US, he'd be wrong as the onus would be on him to recognize where the story comes from and the difference in the context. But if we're talking about a story from the US and I say "Asian", I've no obligation to clarify to him that I'm not referring to people of Middle-Eastern descent, as that's on him.

Lmao that's obviously not her in the avatar. Wow..

Lmao there's a picture thread. Wow...

[scmpoe]

I doubt it's any different in the US.

Its not surprising you think that way considering how blissfully unaware you seem to be of online dating/men vs women dynamics, likely because most people here are talking about the experience in the western world rather than Asia.

Another factor is women on dating sites, especially tinder, are bombarded with desperate males looking for a quick lay and willing to compromise on looks, they begin to develop a superiority complex/sense of entitlement (much like you) and causing them to think they are much more desirable than they actually are.

[Freighter]

Its not surprising you think that way considering how blissfully unaware you seem to be of online dating/men vs women dynamics, likely because most people here are talking about the experience in the western world rather than Asia.

Another factor is women on dating sites, especially tinder, are bombarded with desperate males looking for a quick lay and willing to compromise on looks, they begin to develop a superiority complex/sense of entitlement (much like you) and causing them to think they are much more desirable than they actually are.

You can't get bombarded on tinder. You can't talk to someone unless both of you swiping right on each other.

[kasuke06]

I keep it simple. I don't do online dating.

[scmpoe]

You can't get bombarded on tinder. You can't talk to someone unless both of you swiping right on each other.

Bombarded with matches followed by messages.

Even an average looking woman will notice that an abnormally large number of her right swipes end up in a match, including with guys much better looking than her. You don't see how a superiority complex develops?? Meanwhile average guys struggle to even match with average girls.

I'm sure you will just deny this happens though, despite having no experience outside of your own and everyone in this thread and basically any tinder discussion anywhere saying likewise.

[Antius]

From personal experience I believe online dating is mostly dependent upon looks. When I was 235 pounds, semi out of shape with a generic style I would get zilch as far as responses. I would write well thought out profile bios and messages and nothing.

Fast forward to now; 165 pounds, decently lean, nice hairstyle and clothing. I could write the dumbest shit on my profile and get bombarded with unsolicited messages.

[Freighter]

Bombarded with matches followed by messages.

If you swipe right on everone. Who would do that?

[Stelio Kontos]

If you swipe right on everone. Who would do that?

Most men do.

70% of women swipe right on the same 20-30% of men, so the majority of men have to take cast a wide net and just right swipe everything on the off chance a woman right-swiped on them

[scmpoe]

If you swipe right on everone. Who would do that?

You are missing the point. Its not the quantity, rather the assurance women know they can be super selective (even if they themselves are only average) while knowing the few people they swipe right on while likely end up a match. Perhaps bombarded is not the right word in the case where a girl is very selective. Entitlement/Superiority Complex is though. To be fair it is the fault of men for being so desperate and so willing to aim low just to get their dicks wet, especially online.

Also what ^ guys said.

[Spectral]

There are 4 male 7s for every female 7, if you cannot find someone of your level you're probably overestimating yourself.

Nah, there are just a lot of men that think they're 7s even though they're actually dumpy and carry themselves poorly. The number of fat women in the United States is appalling, but men really aren't all that much better, they just don't stick out quite as much.

- - - Updated - - -

I never dated anyone via an online service. The few I know that have reported using such a service claim that it;s mostly junk mail, bots and a whole lot of lonely white dudes at best.

Seems desperate.

Apparently the kids these days love Tinder and such.

I don't know, I used Match when I was younger and met a couple pretty cool girls that I had good times with. Lot of nonsense to sort through, but not any worse than going out to a bar. If you're actively seeking someone, it's just pretty hard in general.

[MrKnubbles]

I tried online dating in my early 20s and it's just not worth the hassle. Just wait for the right person to come along rather than stressing yourself out by searching. You'll be much happier that way.

[Deleted]

You still don't understand what we've been trying to hammer into you for pages by now, do you? Let me just answer this question:Almost every man will do this! Will HAVE to do this in order to get ANY match, eventually, maybe once a week at best. Do you STILL not see on what a fucking high horse you're sitting over there?? Must be the thin air such high up or something...

This is simply not true. I'm not swiping right on every woman, not even the majority of them, far from it actually, and I'm getting matches. Another guy I know that uses Tinder has actually got a girlfriend through it and he too swiped left on a lot, a lot of women. None of us are even above-average looking. Sure, anyone could get a lot more matches by swiping right on everyone, but really? How desperate can you be to do that? It's just pathetic, and makes everyone's lives, women's and men's alike, harder. Also, there's a limited number of right sweeps you can make every day, so let's say that you just found the most attractive woman ever in Tinder and you just ran out of right sweeps. Congrats, you just screwed yourself over because you were greedy and desperate.

To be fair it is the fault of men for being so desperate and so willing to aim low just to get their dicks wet, especially online.

Ditto.

[shadowmouse]

Damn, you must be old. (<-- That's a razz. XP is more a "disgusted" emoji)

Nyah, just 57. My eyes must be being elderly. The tongue in that emoji is to one side, since when does one blow a raspberry with their tongue stuck out the side of their mouth?

"English-only" does not refer to demographics, it refers to the forum rules.

What is a forum for? Communication. Effective communication depends on both the person delivering a message and the person receiving it. The forum rule designates a tool, English. That does not change the fact that what we write and what we read are influenced by our background and our culture. You are confusing a forum rule with how people communicate, and within the scope of our discussion you are misusing "context" by ignoring the fact that high context and low context are particular, technical terms.

That word doesn't mean what you think it does.

Sorry, Inigo, but it does. You are attempting to have a common sense discussion armed with a dictionary and a forum rule, but you haven't bothered to educate yourself about what the terms mean. Merriam-Webster gives us: "lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified".

I speak American-English.

Which one? Unlike the UK, the US doesn't have an official "English". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_English

But if we're talking about a story from the US and I say "Asian", I've no obligation to clarify to him that I'm not referring to people of Middle-Eastern descent, as that's on him.

I appreciate that you've tried to use the word context, but you aren't using the technical terms high context and low context. http://www.culture-at-work.com/highlow.html Still you typed all that out and didn't address English. Notice, you're both using English and that by itself was not enough to prevent unclear communication. If the forum rule requiring English truly meant that's all one needs for clear communication, how could that happen?

Also, as I mentioned, there isn't much point to a forum if people aren't trying to communicate. If one just wants to throw words out and see who follows, there is WeChat. All of your attempts to codify who has an obligation ignores attempting to have effective communication. If you want rules, join a debate society or parliament.

[Mistame]

Nyah, just 57. My eyes must be being elderly. The tongue in that emoji is to one side, since when does one blow a raspberry with their tongue stuck out the side of their mouth?

Are you seriously trying to be literal about an emoji? The primary use of that emoji is a "razz". Always has been.

You are confusing a forum rule with how people communicate, and within the scope of our discussion you are misusing "context" by ignoring the fact that high context and low context are particular, technical terms.

I'm not "confusing" anything. "High-" and "low context" are irrelevant, as are your links. I made a point, whether or not it's received "properly" isn't my problem.

Sorry, Inigo, but it does. You are attempting to have a common sense discussion armed with a dictionary and a forum rule, but you haven't bothered to educate yourself about what the terms mean. Merriam-Webster gives us: "lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified".

I know what the term means and I understand the point you're trying to make. The problem is that you're mistaking apathy for ignorance. I don't care about "cultural context". I'm having a conversation in English. If someone, even the person I'm conversing with, doesn't understand that's their problem. Now if they express confusion or a lack of understanding, I'll happily explain it to them, as I've done with Freighter. But I can't be bothered to accommodate assumed cultural differences of random forum goers.

[shadowmouse]

@Mistame Yet still, there is no "English". What you mean is you are 'Murrican and don't look outside of that box. Well, I suppose stereotypes must be fed.

No, I don't mistake apathy for ignorance, I simply prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt. Ignorance is a human condition and can be changed. Apathy, like wearing one's underwear on their head, is a choice and neither are really things to be publicly proud of. Now that you've gone on record, I'll note that's how you wish to be viewed.

Enjoy the next 50 years. I'd imagine that you'll be able to keep your illusions, but at the cost of missed opportunities. The rest of the world is out here and moving on.

Cheers!

[Mistame]

Now that you've gone on record, I'll note that's how you wish to be viewed.

Good. Then I won't have to explain it again.

[Elim Garak]

I don't get it, I looked it up. Unattractive is said to be not pleasing or appealing to look at, ugly is unpleasant or repulsive, especially in appearance? Unpleasant in appearance = not pleasing to look at = ugly? Why is it wrong to use ugly when it means the same thing?

You don't call unattractive people ugly, you call them S.A.D. (severe appearance deficit)

[Pony Soldier]

I can, it just takes time to swipe past all the ugly men since there are so many of them.

- - - Updated - - -



Why would a woman message you first?

For someone who claims not to have high standards you sure sound like you have high standards. I mean feeling like it's a rule that men are supposed to message you first like you're some kind of holier than thou person is a ridiculous standard to live by first of all. Second of all you claim that there are "so many ugly guys" on Tinder so that tells me that if they don't look like a Hollywood actor or model then they're considered ugly. I seriously doubt you run into THAT many ugly guys enough to say that Tinder is full of them. They're probably 6-7s that you're passing on. A pretty obvious high standard if you ask me.

Also the word "ugly" is a strong word. When I imagine an "ugly" woman I imagine one who is like 300 lbs. missing teeth with greasy looking hair. If you're calling guys like the one you posted in that picture ugly then you in fact have high standards.

[Deleted]

Gosh I forgot how tedious and difficult online dating is (I use dating loosely) recently decided I would hop on the train unfortunately as a gay man in Yorkshire my options are limited in what I use (Grindr and Badoo). Now I am far from conventionally attractive so naturally most will ignore me BUT damn I forgot how many messages is required for a response THEN you have to filter out the timewasters. Now perhaps it's because I am older but online dating seems more difficult now to hook meet ups! When I was 17 I used Faceparty and don't recall the difficulty...

What's your opinion?

its just your age ,my record with white milfs is 10 mins date then sex in the car