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.
IMO people begin developing narrow preferences when they are single for a long time. When you are alone, you are thinking about those things more.
Interesting. I've developed a narrow preference after having been in many relationships with many different types and since I know what I am most attracted to, I aim for just that. Why bother if I know I won't be attracted to someone? Life is too short to be with someone I was never attracted to physically. You need a spark to rekindle a flame. No spark, no flame.
Having said that, interesting thread. I'm one to put a small age range. But then again, I already have issues finding men because I don't want them to have kids and want them to KNOW they don't want kids. That alone rules out a TON of people, especially at my age. But I've dated outside my range, it's fine, but I heavily prefer them to be closer in age to me than not.
What I don't like to see.....a 40-year-old man saying he'll date anyone from 24-50. Really, you want to date someone almost fresh out of college? Why? And all those that are poised to write, "sex", that's exactly why I rule out men who are open to dating women a LOT younger than them.
I see nothing wrong with having strict standards. I just don't want to hear them complaining about how they can't find anyone. If you know you have strict standards, expect to be single longer than most. I have an xbf who has very high and strict standards. It took him 14 years to find the perfect woman. He's very happy now.
We (most of us anyway) cast a wider net since it's more difficult to attract female attention online. The "average" woman will have multiple offers from men she's not interested in. The "average" man will have zero offers if his criteria is too specific.
I think most men just want to see if the woman is someone they'd be OK having sex with multiple times each week. We'll gladly make love to a woman whether she's 19 or 49 and average looking. Once she meets that low threshold, which encompasses almost every woman, then we can start figuring out who is compatible.
And, for the record, I would never date a cashier. It's too mundane of a job that does not require intelligence. It also suggests a lack of ambition. (And, yes, I realize that I am generalizing. This is something that works well for me so I continue to do it)
a cashier=lack of intelligence and/or ambition LOL
How about a women who has 2 jobs to support herself, one of them a cashier, so she can live comfortably and afford a nice place in a nice neighborhood? Lack of ambition, isn't it?
I will never forget this one idiot back in 2005 on Yahoo. He had a profile that said he wanted someone from 5'7" to 5'9", no more than 110 pounds, a size 2, "maybe a 4," and "callipygian."
I had to break it to him that any woman who is 5'7" to 5'9" and underweight like that is most likely not going to be callipygian. Indeed, she probably has no butt at all.
So I'm home tonight, and bored. I spent some time looking at different apartments and I figured while I was doing that, I'd log into the fake, empty account on OKC and look for some men, too.
And I do believe Mr. Callipygian is on there. Same town. Still admitting to lying about his age by 5 years (but will explain later, of course). Looks like he had some work done, too. Only this time, no mention of "size 2 or size 4" or "callipygian." Oh, no. This time he's requesting that no one with a BMI over 19 contact him.
And based on my answers to 400 questions, he's a 94% match for me!
I guess I'm a jerk, too!
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.