Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Good point. I didn't consider this--that some people use OLD to find what is much more difficult to find in there daily life.. I guess from that perspective then yes OLD is more efficient. My type, does not seem to use OLD that often, most of the time they haven't needed to because they frequently meet and date women that they meet when they are out.
I'm an introvert, and tend to end up with other introverts. A lot of them are techy/geeky/computer types that make online dating their go-to for dating because it's a realm they're already familiar with. These types also frequent meetup groups, but a lot of them tend to be on the younger end or they're just at a different stage of life.
I've had better luck meeting this type online than any other medium. Well, I'm sure I'd have some luck at Comic Con, but that only comes around once a year where I'm at, and I'm much too far to attend DragonCon.
I'm a "desirable" and certainly don't have a disposable-partner mentality at all. When I'm in a relationship, I'm in it. One relationship ended not because I got bored or because he was a douchebag, rather, he wasn't "ready" to blend families (the work involved). I ended things with one man after dating briefly because he was not in a good place. His mom passed away the week we started dating and I started to notice huge divergences in religious beliefs. He was all over the place at times, but as I dug deeper I discovered he still clung to ideas and beliefs that don't sit right with me. And he struggled with intimacy. He was actually a really great, handsome and brilliant guy. We just weren't compatible overall.
Another, well, we were very compatible, but he was over stressed from work and an upcoming deployment, his first, and wasn't sure about doing long distance during his deployment.
I have come across sketchy and douchey people, sure. The same can be said for a number of "traditional" methods for picking people up (concert, club, bar, gym -- do people do that?) I don't need online dating, but the kind of people I like, my type, it's just a more efficient method. The likelihood I'm going to run into an attractive nerd/geek, intellectual, artistic, Humanist (atheist, agnostic, pantheist, deist), gamer, liberal, hedonist/kinkster, cinephile, super affectionate, hopeless romantic-guy between 35-43 who is open to dating a woman with kids, at Whole Foods Market, the bank, the park, movie theater, sushi restaurant, or any other random place, is slim to none. However, I've met many who meet many of the above preferences via online. And I sure as hell would not have ran into this type when I lived in the South. Randomly bumping into an atheist in the South!? That's laughable. There are actually far more attractive well-to-do men than my type, which has very little to do with GQ model looks, status or high income.
Of course, not all desirable people are like that. However, there are a lot of desirables with egos the size of the sun because they garner so much attention from OLD and abroad. For instance, younger men are told to "sow their wild oats", so they try to get as much as they can. Their women counterparts looking for serious relationships are wondering why they can't find a decent yet attractive guy to commit. This is one of the reasons.
Yeah, that's what I thought, too. I used very lax search parameters -- just looking at CF men within a certain age range -- and Match.com came up with seven people in a 10-mile radius of my zip. None of them were remotely attractive to me, and I got the distinct impression that their CF status was due to lack of gainful employment, not because that's what they chose.
That's actually another part of the problem with online dating. Again, the ASP research indicates that it encouraging a "shopping" mentality, fostering commoditization of people.
Well, you could certainly make the argument that dating IS shopping, whether you meet your dates online or elsewhere. Many make that comparison. I'm personally not quite that cynical-- I view it as a chance to meet interesting new people, not to purchase a commodity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melissa78703
Dating should be hard!
Says who? I say dating should be enjoyable. If it wasn't, I wouldn't do it. If I want something hard, I'll get another job or another advanced degree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melissa78703
Who says that you have to go on a date whenever you want -- or that this is even a healthy thing to be doing?
Have to go on a date whenever I want? What does that even mean? "Have to" and "want to" are different things by definition. Nobody HAS TO go on dates, but many people want to, and will when they have the chance with the right person.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melissa78703
I would rather have one quality date a month than four that feel like a big waste of time,
I agree completely. I have been on very few dates that I thought were a waste of time, though, so that's not an issue. Usually on dates I'm doing an activity I enjoy, and would otherwise be doing by myself or with a friend, so the time spent is the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melissa78703
or that end up with me sitting across from a married dude.
I've never been on a date with either a dude or a married person (other than a few who were in the divorce process), let alone a married dude, so I can't relate to that, either. Sorry.
I'm sorry meeting dates online didn't work for you, but it does for many of us. You do what works for you, and we'll do what works for us. There's no need for you to try to convince people that your experience is somehow universal when it clearly isn't.
Yeah, that's what I thought, too. I used very lax search parameters -- just looking at CF men within a certain age range -- and Match.com came up with seven people in a 10-mile radius of my zip. None of them were remotely attractive to me, and I got the distinct impression that their CF status was due to lack of gainful employment, not because that's what they chose.
Unfortunately, that doesn't stop a lot of people from having kids anyway.
I found it scary that so many guys between 35-45 posted that their longest relationship was 1-2 years.
This is the norm for never-married men and women, in my experience. Usually when people find someone they want to be with for more than a few years, they marry them.
I think people's expectations on dating sites are why you see so many of those who brag that they travel to Tibet on the weekend and save poor orphans on Wednesday nights in their profiles. Everyone feels they have to "Keep up with the Jones's" just to have a shot.
For what it's worth, I was talking about people's unrealistic expectations of the actual websites, not of themselves or other people.
There ARE people who travel to Tibet and/or work with the poor or orphans, you know. I realize you're exaggerating for comedic effect with the "on the weekend" and "saving on Wednesday nights" part, but it appears you're rather cynical toward people with worldly or altruistic outlooks on life. If that's not what you're looking for, move on to someone else.
I wonder what kind of cross section of the population uses online dating sites. I wonder the same thing about other internet sites, such as this one. Am I seeing the "normal" population or some sort of an interesting cross section?
This probably varies depending on your location and various demographic variables, but in my demographic circles (mostly 30-something urban and suburban professionals with a few 20-something and 40-somethings mixed in, mostly childless and never married, mostly with graduate or professional degrees), I found the people on eHarmony and Match.com to be an extremely representative sample of the population I meet offline. (I found the free sites like OKC and especially POF to be a little more skewed toward the sketchy by comparison.) In fact, many of them were the exact same people I met offline. I was matched with friends, friends of friends, exes, friends of exes, colleagues, students and former students (yikes!) and a former roommate, among others.
Most single people I know in their 30's in my circles have done online dating at some point. I think with younger people (college-aged) and older people (who may view the internet with skepticism) it may be different. It may also be different in lower SES groups or more rural/conservative areas, but I'm not certain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by burgler09
In reality, online dating is no different from meeting normally. Either way you're going to meet good people and bad people. Anyone who blames online dating is just making an excuse.
Yep, this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by the minx
There are plenty of normal people using online dating - your friends, your family, your coworkers. I'm not sure why you guys insist on trying to insult those who use it.
I agree. Let's be real, the type of guy that is my physical and occupational match wouldn't need to be online trying to find a date.
I'm curious to know what physical or occupational type that would be. I haven't spent much time perusing men's profiles online, but for women in my area I've seen everything from ugly to smoking hot, and from retail workers and factory workers to corporate executives, surgeons, and successful entrepreneurs. I assume the range of men is similar.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
