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.
It's a waste of time for most men until you can show stats that prove otherwise.., you've got nothing. I was on the phone for my pre-screening w/ my It's Just Lunch rep today she spent 20 minutes ripping OLD a new one. It was totally off the clock and impromptu. she basically said everything I do it's a waste of time for most men. It's a business scam preying on socially awkward men Match has so many fake profiles I don't even know where to begin.
4:1 M:F ratio in some areas...yeah I guess it would make sense for a woman. If the shoe fits, wear it.
Agreed it's shown horrendous outcomes on this end. Some people are having success with OLD though apparently.
People being deceptive, not forthcoming, etc is pretty common.
It doesn't matter in the online dating world. No one has any integrity. Everyone's fake and superficial as hell. add to all of that flakey.
Sure they do. You just haven't met them. Just because you haven't met a good catch or two doesn't mean they don't exist.
Perhaps y'all just have bad pickers or you attract certain types that aren't a good fit. But many of us have met some really cool and interesting people on dating sites, and for some, relationships formed as a result of meeting on a dating site.
Had no problems with online dating, met some pretty good people. Sure some are jerks, but it's pretty easy to pick them out.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
Sure they do. You just haven't met them. Just because you haven't met a good catch or two doesn't mean they don't exist.
Perhaps y'all just have bad pickers or you attract certain types that aren't a good fit. But many of us have met some really cool and interesting people on dating sites, and for some, relationships formed as a result of meeting on a dating site.
They are in the vast minority. This is pretty much confirmed on multiple accounts.
True things may be different for women, in different geographical areas, and in different age groups.
They are in the vast minority. This is pretty much confirmed on multiple accounts.
Based on what? It's not as rare as many disgruntled daters make it seem, but then again, they have a different perception based on their limited and narrow sample size. I have dozens of friends in my social circle that met their partners online. I've honestly lost track. It is exceedingly common and normal in military circles and metro cities. Sure, if your sample size is relatively small and lacking due to geographical location not yielding results or the best results, it may appear to be a wash, but this is due to specific factors and not the medium itself. There are a lot of factors that determine success, and region/location is one of them. My husband had very little success with finding good matches in one area he lived, but when he moved back to a metro city of Nor Cal, a lot more matches.
I'm sure if I lived in a rural or small city in the South or Midwest, a significant distance from a metro city, I would have had a much different experience. I likely wouldn't have had anywhere near the success I had. But that's not online dating's fault when there are very real factors that affect one's overall experience and success. If one has specific criteria that falls outside the norm for a particular area, that will absolutely affect one's experiences.
Quote:
True things may be different for women, in different geographical areas, and in different age groups.
If heterosexual women have had success, then that in turn means their partners were also successful. It's pretty amusing when so many bitter and disgruntled daters claim it doesn't work, that it only works for women, when in order for it to work for hetero women it must also "work" for the hetero men they're with. So when I say I had success with dating sites, whether that means dates, casual dating, serious relationships, marriage, then those men also had success.
Quote:
Older tends to work better with OLD than younger.
I don't know. I mean, most of the women in my social circle are in their late 20s to late 40s, and many met their partners online. I was 27 when I re-entered the dating scene, and of the 100+ men I met from these sites, maybe seven were under 35. My husband met his second girlfriend on a dating site when he was 28, and his ex before me at 32. He was 35 when we met. He met women online in between relationships. It "worked" for him. It also works for many of the other men I met and interacted with. The serious relationship I was in before I met my husband, he met several women on OKC, and dated one for a few months. He had decent success.
There's things I feel it's more than okay to not divulge early on or on the first few dates. Like certain medical conditions or personal things, that are really nobody's business.
I just don't feel like age is something you should need to lie about. The only time I ever lied to someone about my age was when I was 15 and liked this 17 year old. I thought she wouldn't like me if she knew I was 2 years younger than her, so I told her I was 16. I couldn't say I was 2 years older, because she knew what grade I was in. We never wound up being together, because I messed a bunch of things up, lying about my age was not one of them haha.
I have joked around and told people I was an age in which I wasn't, only I would tell them a second later ''I'm just kidding, I'm really (whatever age I was at any given time)''. I don't really feel like age is a personal subject with someone you're going out with.
Perhaps y'all just have bad pickers or you attract certain types that aren't a good fit. But many of us have met some really cool and interesting people on dating sites, and for some, relationships formed as a result of meeting on a dating site.
Yep!
"IF" one has the time and extra dose of patience that is needed. A solid pick filter is a must.
If your goal is only to find a younger guy to boink you, then it makes perfect sense.
If you're looking for a relationship with an honorable person, then it's bad.
Based on what? It's not as rare as many disgruntled daters make it seem, but then again, they have a different perception based on their limited and narrow sample size. I have dozens of friends in my social circle that met their partners online. I've honestly lost track. It is exceedingly common and normal in military circles and metro cities. Sure, if your sample size is relatively small and lacking due to geographical location not yielding results or the best results, it may appear to be a wash, but this is due to specific factors and not the medium itself. There are a lot of factors that determine success, and region/location is one of them. My husband had very little success with finding good matches in one area he lived, but when he moved back to a metro city of Nor Cal, a lot more matches.
I'm sure if I lived in a rural or small city in the South or Midwest, a significant distance from a metro city, I would have had a much different experience. I likely wouldn't have had anywhere near the success I had. But that's not online dating's fault when there are very real factors that affect one's overall experience and success. If one has specific criteria that falls outside the norm for a particular area, that will absolutely affect one's experiences.
If heterosexual women have had success, then that in turn means their partners were also successful. It's pretty amusing when so many bitter and disgruntled daters claim it doesn't work, that it only works for women, when in order for it to work for hetero women it must also "work" for the hetero men they're with. So when I say I had success with dating sites, whether that means dates, casual dating, serious relationships, marriage, then those men also had success.
I don't know. I mean, most of the women in my social circle are in their late 20s to late 40s, and many met their partners online. I was 27 when I re-entered the dating scene, and of the 100+ men I met from these sites, maybe seven were under 35. My husband met his second girlfriend on a dating site when he was 28, and his ex before me at 32. He was 35 when we met. He met women online in between relationships. It "worked" for him. It also works for many of the other men I met and interacted with. The serious relationship I was in before I met my husband, he met several women on OKC, and dated one for a few months. He had decent success.
This explains many things women such as yourself are just completely out of touch. You met 100 men on the sites? You know how long it takes the average guy to get anywhere near to the point where they met 100 women from online, if ever? Women use it to serial date that's why they like it. Most of the guys you went out with probably viewed you as a waste of time because they weren't serial dating. If a woman told me she met 150 guys online before she talked to me I wouldn't even give her a first date / first meeting. That's way past serial dater territory.
You're in a region of the country that has more single men than women, when there's already always more men on OLD than women to begin with, and on top of that a lot of them are nerdy socially awkward guys that sit on a PC for 12+ hours a day.
Of course women that like that kind of guy in your area are going to have a good experience online. How could you not? You'd have to be an idiot not to.
Actually CA is probably one of the best states for a woman to date period it has + percentage immigration which is always skewed towards men on H1B's for work and so on, so you have a huge surplus of single men in general running around CA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luck-67
Yep!
"IF" one has the time and extra dose of patience that is needed. A solid pick filter is a must.
It's more of a marathon than a race....
Right. Another woman in California. Sure you have that luxury, 90 percent of men in the country on OLD don't including most men in California. That's why it's called Man Jose, Man Diego, and Man Francisco.
Trying working a system where the ratio is against you 4:1...then we'll talk. It's easy when the system is working for you.
You're right, it's like a marathon. Where the women are running downhill, but the men uphill. The finish line is the same spot for all though.
Try the uphill route, then we'll talk about OLD.
Last edited by wanderlust76; 02-07-2017 at 08:55 PM..
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.
