Online dating

KomradeBishop

maudgonner wrote: »

And yet you've had it explained, multiple times, that there are many reasons for people not to want to respond to messages where no pic is available. But you continuously reply that we shouldn't make 'snap judgements' based on no evidence. There's a huge implication in your posts that those snap judgements are the reason for not choosing to reply.

If that's not what you mean, you need to be much clearer in your posts. Because they come across as quite judgemental IMO, and clearly I'm not the only one who feels that way.

My posts aren't actually talking about whether or not someone replies - if there's any implication there, it's unintentional.

I'm solely taking issue, with the inaccurate snap judgements.

I can not be any clearer than stating it directly, as I have done in this post, and my previous one to you.

If people keep on portraying me as taking issue with not replying, then - after I have clarified that - you'd have to ask, why would they do that, given they know that's not what I'm talking about? (hasn't happened yet - but I've got the very strong feeling, that may become a straw-man that gets used against me)

ibarelycare

KomradeBishop wrote: »

It is not 'pedantry' - you are trying to justify judging people over imagined/made-up negative personality traits, by using the word 'picky' - which is normally only used for e.g. fussiness over real/known traits.

They are two completely different uses - and you are trying to use that word to muddy the two.

Dating websites - given the disparity between numbers in genders/messages - do seem far more likely to promote the kind of judgemental attitudes being discussed here, than other kinds of dating.

In fact - it is precisely the format of online dating, the number of messages, that people are trying to use to justify these attitudes.

Since when does picky mean fussiness over "real/known" traits only? Picky means someone is difficult to please...as far as I'm aware the definition isn't exclusive to only "real" traits.

You're wrong to think that this sort of judgment isn't prevalent in "real world" dating. I've seen women sneer at men in pubs for many reasons - his shoes, his accent, his hair, what he's drinking.

Snap judgments are rife in all areas of life and they really are nothing new. Online dating is just another part of life in which they happen.

maudgonner

KomradeBishop wrote: »

My posts aren't actually talking about whether or not someone replies - if there's any implication there, it's unintentional.

I'm solely taking issue, with the inaccurate snap judgements.

I can not be any clearer than stating it directly, as I have done in this post, and my previous one to you.

If people keep on portraying me as taking issue with not replying, then - after I have clarified that - you'd have to ask, why would they do that, given they know that's not what I'm talking about? (hasn't happened yet - but I've got the very strong feeling, that may become a straw-man that gets used against me)

You joined into the conversation at a point when that is exactly what was being talked about - people not replying to messages/profiles with no picture. You then quoted a number of posts that mentioned that exact thing. So of course people assumed that's what you were commenting on?

And I fail to see your logic in being shocked that people make snap judgements - of course they do. Dating profiles provide a limited amount of information, you have to make an initial judgement on what they contain, or do not contain.

As ibarelycare says, this is hardly unique to online dating. In fact I think it's much more prevalent in a nightclub atmosphere, where appearance is usually the only factor in whether someone decides to talk to a stranger.

When I browse through a dating site I judge the profiles all the time: this guy is too young for me, that guy lives too far away, he's really into sports and fitness, he's not looking for anything serious. That's the way it works? And guys on dating sites do exactly the same thing, so it's unfair to single out women for criticism.

KomradeBishop

ibarelycare wrote: »

Since when does picky mean fussiness over "real/known" traits only? Picky means someone is difficult to please...as far as I'm aware the definition isn't exclusive to only "real" traits.

You're wrong to think that this sort of judgment isn't prevalent in "real world" dating. I've seen women sneer at men in pubs for many reasons - his shoes, his accent, his hair, what he's drinking.

Snap judgments are rife in all areas of life and they really are nothing new. Online dating is just another part of life in which they happen.

If someone is judging you over negative traits they imagined and you don't even possess, that is in no way comparable to judging someone over their shoes, accent, hair or what they drink...

The two are completely incomparable. You are using the word 'picky', to try and muddy those two circumstances.


"I've seen women sneer at men in pubs for many reasons - his shoes, his accent, his hair, what he's drinking."
You know, that's pretty close to the image this discussion is giving me.

As I explained as well, due to the disparity in numbers between genders/messages on dating websites, I think such sites are prone to promoting/proliferating such attitudes even more.

These are definitely undesirable attitudes in society - and should be discouraged as a result - people should be judged on something of substance, not on made-up or petty things.

smash

Dating profile are shop windows. People are free to enter or pass by as they wish. If someone doesn't have anything displayed in their window then the majority won't shop with them. It doesn't make them bad people, or even picky people. It just means that they've taken note of other options that are more appealing and interesting.

KomradeBishop

maudgonner wrote: »

You joined into the conversation at a point when that is exactly what was being talked about - people not replying to messages/profiles with no picture. You then quoted a number of posts that mentioned that exact thing. So of course people assumed that's what you were commenting on?

And I fail to see your logic in being shocked that people make snap judgements - of course they do. Dating profiles provide a limited amount of information, you have to make an initial judgement on what they contain, or do not contain.

As ibarelycare says, this is hardly unique to online dating. In fact I think it's much more prevalent in a nightclub atmosphere, where appearance is usually the only factor in whether someone decides to talk to a stranger.

When I browse through a dating site I judge the profiles all the time: this guy is too young for me, that guy lives too far away, he's really into sports and fitness, he's not looking for anything serious. That's the way it works? And guys on dating sites do exactly the same thing, so it's unfair to single out women for criticism.

If people ignore that I explicitly said, I am not talking about whether people reply or not, but instead about the snap judgements - then they have no excuse for that after I've explained it (3-4 times now).

There is nothing wrong with making judgements about known things, that a person finds attractive/unattractive - making shít up about someone though, in order to judge them, based on assumptions/lack-of-information, and/or making petty judgements over inconsequential things - that deserves criticism, especially if these sites can help promote such hyper-judgemental attitudes into wider society (which I suspect they do - beyond their current prevalence).

KomradeBishop

smash wrote: »

Dating profile are shop windows. People are free to enter or pass by as they wish. If someone doesn't have anything displayed in their window then the majority won't shop with them. It doesn't make them bad people, or even picky people. It just means that they've taken note of other options that are more appealing and interesting.

Agreed - and so there is no need to make snap judgements about them, in assuming they are married/cheating, low self-esteem, or are "obscenely unattractive", yes? (as that is the issue being discussed)

maudgonner

KomradeBishop wrote: »

If someone is judging you over negative traits they imagined and you don't even possess, that is in no way comparable to judging someone over their shoes, accent, hair or what they drink...

This is the part of your argument that mystifies me the most. Do you think women spend hours poring over pictureless/empty profiles thinking denigrating things about the guys?

I doubt it highly. It's simply a way of ruling in/out potential matches. While it may be a crude way of deciding whether someone would be suitable for you, what more do you expect from a situation where limited information is available?

smash

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Agreed - and so there is no need to make snap judgements about them, in assuming they are married/cheating, low self-esteem, or are "obscenely unattractive", yes? (as that is the issue being discussed)

There's no need to assume any of these things. There will always be a 'why?' though.

KomradeBishop

maudgonner wrote: »

This is the part of your argument that mystifies me the most. Do you think women spend hours poring over pictureless/empty profiles thinking denigrating things about the guys?

I doubt it highly. It's simply a way of ruling in/out potential matches. While it may be a crude way of deciding whether someone would be suitable for you, what more do you expect from a situation where limited information is available?

Why on earth does this have to be followed by a snap judgement thinking e.g. "obscenely unattractive"? Why not just say "too much effort to look at this, next...".

Just move on to the next profile, without making an unwarranted negative assumption/judgement about somebody...

KomradeBishop

smash wrote: »

There's no need to assume any of these things. There will always be a 'why?' though.

Agreed - that's pretty much the point I'm getting at so: I'm taking issue with people assuming such things, and making snap judgements about people.

There will always be a 'why' of course, but when there is a lack of information, I think that should be answered with an "I don't know, but lets move on..." rather than making a very negative assumption/judgement, without any basis.

maudgonner

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Agreed - and so there is no need to make snap judgements about them, in assuming they are married/cheating, low self-esteem, or are "obscenely unattractive", yes? (as that is the issue being discussed)

Those are some of the reasons people might refuse to send a picture. Of course other reasons exist (I'd like to see the probability behind those reasons, that's unlikely to become available though), but it's a huge warning flag not to have a picture.

I have factors of my own - I've been stalked on internet dating sites. I'm also cautious about inadvertently messaging people I know. Having pictures on their profile is no guarantee against this, but it helps.

Whether you like it or not, being able to see what someone looks like is a factor in deciding whether to pursue things.

ibarelycare

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Why on earth does this have to be followed by a snap judgement thinking e.g. "obscenely unattractive"? Why not just say "too much effort to look at this, next...".

Obviously because not everyone is such a good and pure person as you :rolleyes:

Why do you care what goes on in peoples' heads??? It has absolutely no impact on you or anyone else.

KomradeBishop

maudgonner wrote: »

Those are some of the reasons people might refuse to send a picture. Of course other reasons exist (I'd like to see the probability behind those reasons, that's unlikely to become available though), but it's a huge warning flag not to have a picture.

I have factors of my own - I've been stalked on internet dating sites. I'm also cautious about inadvertently messaging people I know. Having pictures on their profile is no guarantee against this, but it helps.

Whether you like it or not, being able to see what someone looks like is a factor in deciding whether to pursue things.

In one sentence you talk about being stalked on dating sites, and in another you think not having a picture up is a 'warning flag'...

Can you not see the huge disparity in what you just said? You just provided a perfect reason, not to have your picture up...

Stop pretending I am talking about no replies as well...I already said multiple times, directly to you, that I'm not taking issue, with people being picky about having no picture - but about snap judgements.

Superhero1993

Online dating is a massive letdown. I'm a 22 year old guy and I am genuinely after a relationship (not hook-ups). I would consider myself decent looking but get very little matches on tinder and barely any replies on POF. The ones that do reply, that I like then suddenly stop messaging.

smash

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Agreed - that's pretty much the point I'm getting at so: I'm taking issue with people assuming such things, and making snap judgements about people.

There will always be a 'why' of course, but when there is a lack of information, I think that should be answered with an "I don't know, but lets move on..." rather than making a very negative assumption/judgement, without any basis.

But even if they do make a snap judgement does it matter? It's not like they're coming across a profile and sending message to state it. They just move on and the owner of the profile is unaware of their judgement.

If however you receive a message from a profile that doesn't have a picture, you're entitled to ask why they don't have one and to see one before continuing the conversation. Of course you're also entitled to ask "Why don't you have a picture? Are you a fat sweaty wilder beast?" but that wouldn't be nice and you'd be blocked fairly fast.

KomradeBishop

ibarelycare wrote: »

Obviously because not everyone is such a good and pure person as you :rolleyes:

Why do you care what goes on in peoples' heads??? It has absolutely no impact on you or anyone else.

Well I wouldn't say I'm 'pure' or anything, but I try...don't you?

I don't fúck away my moral standards just because I'm not 'perfect' - and that doesn't give anyone else an 'out' either.

I explained in my posts as well, that I think this has a wider effect on society overall due to the prevalence of dating sites and them possibly imparting this type of attitude onto a wider number of people.

I don't care about individual peoples thoughts, I care about the aggregate effect that dating sites could possibly have here, on promoting hyper-judgemental attitudes throughout society.

maudgonner

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Why on earth does this have to be followed by a snap judgement thinking e.g. "obscenely unattractive"? Why not just say "too much effort to look at this, next...".

Just move on to the next profile, without making an unwarranted negative assumption/judgement about somebody...

I think most people simply will move on without putting more thought into it.

But the conversation was about why people discard messages with no pictures. Of course there are reasons why lack of a picture is an issue. Lexie's post mentioned some that are an issue for her. I've mentioned some that are an issue for me. Of course they don't apply in all cases, but the probability is high enough for me to discount such messages. I'm sure I have thrown some babies out with the bathwater, but unfortunately no system exists with perfect information, so I've got to do my best with the limited info that is supplied.

armaghlad

I've been using OD on and off for around 2 years now. I make snap judgements and make no apology for it. What attracts you to someone in the first place is making a snap judgement based on their appearance both online and in person.

The more you use these apps, the more you get a feel for who people are and what kind of personality traits they have. Yes it's quite a generalisation to pigeon hole people like that but from my experience it's accurate enough. It's also a very natural reaction to have.

Take for example POF. I stopped using it quite recently but you get plenty of profiles with no picture. I ignore these. Especially when beside body type it says "prefer not to say". That to me says not only is this person unwilling to show what they look like they're also incredibly self conscious. Already I've found a personality trait that I don't like in a person without even talking to them so I'll immediately ignore this user.

Now before anyone jumps to any conclusions, I don't mind if someone is self conscious, in fact it's almost a good trait to have - it's the failure to overcome it that really puts me off someone. Everyone is self-conscious to a certain degree. Actively broadcasting it on OD will repel rather than attract attention.

KomradeBishop

smash wrote: »

But even if they do make a snap judgement does it matter? It's not like they're coming across a profile and sending message to state it. They just move on and the owner of the profile is unaware of their judgement.

If however you receive a message from a profile that doesn't have a picture, you're entitled to ask why they don't have one and to see one before continuing the conversation. Of course you're also entitled to ask "Why don't you have a picture? Are you a fat sweaty wilder beast?" but that wouldn't be nice and you'd be blocked fairly fast.

I agree with asking for a picture being a valid request - and some posters have been criticizing e.g. messages that even include a link to a picture.

I don't think snap judgements matter individually, but I think that the way dating sites work, may (through this dynamic) promote hyper-judgemental attitudes throughout wider society, beyond their current prevalence - which would be harmful to society overall - and it's that which I'm focusing on.

Superhero1993

Ya shouldn't be angry about not getting replies, if ya don't have a picture on your profile. In a world where pretending to be who your not online is quite prevalent, I would never blame someone for not replying, especially women.

ibarelycare

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Well I wouldn't say I'm 'pure' or anything, but I try...don't you?

I don't fúck away my moral standards just because I'm not 'perfect' - and that doesn't give anyone else an 'out' either.

I explained in my posts as well, that I think this has a wider effect on society overall due to the prevalence of dating sites and them possibly imparting this type of attitude onto a wider number of people.

I don't care about individual peoples thoughts, I care about the aggregate effect that dating sites could possibly have here, on promoting hyper-judgemental attitudes throughout society.

Of course I try to be a good person. But, like everyone else, I still judge people at times.

As I've said, judgment of our peers is NOT a new thing so I don't know why you keep going on as if online dating sites are responsible for it being prevalent. They're not. If anything, social media is the medium which has increased hyper-judgmental attitudes more than anything else in our generation. People put their lives out there for everyone to see, and in return people judge them.

smash

KomradeBishop wrote: »

I agree with asking for a picture being a valid request - and some posters have been criticizing e.g. messages that even include a link to a picture.

Well it does question the validity.

KomradeBishop wrote: »

I don't think snap judgements matter individually, but I think that the way dating sites work, may (through this dynamic) promote hyper-judgemental attitudes throughout wider society, beyond their current prevalence - which would be harmful to society overall - and it's that which I'm focusing on.

I'd disagree and state that hyper-judgemental attitudes are already prevalent in society. If you walk in to a bar as single person on the pull you'll dismiss over 95% of the bar (unless you have no standards). How is that different than swiping left?

KomradeBishop

Superhero1993 wrote: »

Ya shouldn't be angry about not getting replies, if ya don't have a picture on your profile. In a world where pretending to be who your not online is quite prevalent, I would never blame someone for not replying, especially women.

Except that discussion wasn't about replies. It was about snap-judgements made about people who don't have pictures.

armaghlad

KomradeBishop wrote: »

I don't think snap judgements matter individually, but I think that the way dating sites work, may (through this dynamic) promote hyper-judgemental attitudes throughout wider society, beyond their current prevalence - which would be harmful to society overall - and it's that which I'm focusing on.

I think these attitudes are natural in humans. Is there not some theory that a female will know within 30 seconds (or some ridiculous short period of time) of meeting a male whether or not he is suited to her as a sexual partner?

A minority of people actually use online dating, so how can you blame it for having an overarching impact on society? I'd blame the media and celebrity culture before OD.

Superhero1993

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Except that discussion wasn't about replies. It was about snap-judgements made about people who don't have pictures.

Fair enough. I'd be of the same opinion. It give the impression of a fake profile to me.

KomradeBishop

ibarelycare wrote: »

Of course I try to be a good person. But, like everyone else, I still judge people at times.

As I've said, judgment of our peers is NOT a new thing so I don't know why you keep going on as if online dating sites are responsible for it being prevalent. They're not. If anything, social media is the medium which has increased hyper-judgmental attitudes more than anything else in our generation. People put their lives out there for everyone to see, and in return people judge them.

I didn't say dating sites are responsible for it being prevalent. I said the way dating sites work, may be contributing to making it more prevalent - may be instilling hyper-judgemental attitudes in quite normal otherwise-nice people, in a way they may not be fully conscious of - i.e. making society overall that little bit worse.

maudgonner

KomradeBishop wrote: »

In one sentence you talk about being stalked on dating sites, and in another you think not having a picture up is a 'warning flag'...

Can you not see the huge disparity in what you just said? You just provided a perfect reason, not to have your picture up...

Yes, I accept that having my picture up is a risk, but I think it's a necessary one if I'm going to use online dating at all. I feel that in order to use the sites properly I need to have a picture on my profile. It would be quite hypocritical of me to ask guys to supply a picture if I wasn't willing to do so myself, wouldn't it?

Pictures are one way to identify false accounts, which are used to stalk people. So that's one way I mitigate the risk, by asking guys to supply a picture either on their profile or in their message.

Stop pretending I am talking about no replies as well...I already said multiple times, directly to you, that I'm not taking issue, with people being picky about having no picture - but about snap judgements.

You have made that clear. You just want to control how we think, not what we do.

KomradeBishop

smash wrote: »

I'd disagree and state that hyper-judgemental attitudes are already prevalent in society. If you walk in to a bar as single person on the pull you'll dismiss over 95% of the bar (unless you have no standards). How is that different than swiping left?

I didn't say they weren't - as I explained in the previous post, I think such sites may be helping make it even more prevalent.

thattequilagirl

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Except that discussion wasn't about replies. It was about snap-judgements made about people who don't have pictures.

It's not a snap judgement. It's a snap decision. You didn't put a pic up? I'm not judging you, and it doesn't really matter to me why the "why" is... I'm not interested.

There are a hundred other guys with photos and you've offered nothing to differentiate yourself.

Why do people think members of the opposite sex owe them a chance? We don't owe you anything. If you wanna go out with me, or for me to reply to you, the onus is on you to show me why I should.