Online dating

Lyaiera

armaghlad wrote: »

What do people have as their pictures on their OD profiles?

1.) Me in my pyjamas, ate'in a bag of taytos with pizza sauce around my mouth.

2.) Hangover me with panda eyes from sleeping in my make up. Note the unbrushed hair.

3.) Me laughing uproariously with a can of Bav in my hand and an empty tinny pyramid behind me.

MarkAnthony

smash wrote: »

Would you like to invest in my online clothes shop that operates solely on unverified descriptions of the products?

Would you base a long term relationship purely on physical looks?

MarkAnthony

Lyaiera wrote: »

1.) Me in my pyjamas, ate'in a bag of taytos with pizza sauce around my mouth.

2.) Hangover me with panda eyes from sleeping in my make up. Note the unbrushed hair.

3.) Me laughing uproariously with a can of Bav in my hand and an empty tinny pyramid behind me.

I'm in love!

armaghlad

maudgonner wrote: »

Also, either I'm incredibly bad at judging people's age or there's a hell of a lot of creativity going in in that area.

There's an awful lot of '35 year olds' who've done twenty years worth of hard living, from what I've seen. (And I don't doubt that women are even worse for it than fellas)

Some women look magnificent for their age and I can't believe that they're 5-10 years older than me... others on the other hand could pass for 50 while only being 3 or 4 years older than me

MarkAnthony

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Would you base a long term relationship purely on physical looks?

Speaking for myself unless I am physically attracted to a man and can imagine myself having sex with him then there won't be a relationship.

That physical attraction is entirely subjective but I must feel it.

smash

Lyaiera wrote: »

1.) Me in my pyjamas, ate'in a bag of taytos with pizza sauce around my mouth.

2.) Hangover me with panda eyes from sleeping in my make up. Note the unbrushed hair.

3.) Me laughing uproariously with a can of Bav in my hand and an empty tinny pyramid behind me.

No duck face in front of a filthy mirror with clothes all over the floor?

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Would you base a long term relationship purely on physical looks?

Would you walk in to a bar on the pull with a blindfold over your face?

MarkAnthony

smash wrote: »

Would you walk in to a bar on the pull with a blindfold over your face?

Would you order the 57 instead of the 92?

robbiezero

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

The prevalence of burgeoning beer bellies flowing over the belt buckles of most Irish men's wrangler jeans bears out your hypothesis that their hiking consists of hiking down to the local pub to watch English soccer whilst slugging back pints of cheap lager.

I'm an avid hiker myself. I spent a wonderful week hiking along the Murtèl - Pontresina trail in Switzerland last summer. A magnificent and challenging experience.

Facts Murtèl - Pontresina
Hiking time: 4h00
Difficulty: difficult
Elevation: 1772 - 2757 m
Distance: 12.3 km

Lyaiera

I don't know if it's just me, but I find non-physical attributes can definitely encourage my physical attraction. Like if I really hit it off with someone, or can talk really openly with them, I just find that physical attraction developing.

whiskeyman

smash wrote: »

Would you walk in to a bar on the pull with a blindfold over your face?

Who needs a blindfold when you've beergoggles!

maudgonner

smash wrote: »

Would you walk in to a bar on the pull with a blindfold over your face?

Also, this is Ireland. There's a 90% chance you'd end up messaging your cousin/ex/friend's boyfriend/boss/GP/priest.

It's really not worth the risk

MarkAnthony

Deleted User wrote: »

Speaking for myself unless I am physically attracted to a man and can imagine myself having sex with him then there won't be a relationship.

That physical attraction is entirely subjective but I must feel it.

Physical attraction isn't solely based on looks, at least it's not for me. While I completely agree what there has to be some physical attraction you may find that some turn offs can be forgiven if the personality is there. Good sex is based on looks, great sex is based on the mind and looks.

The other issue is going purely off photos, usually taken by a **** camera by someone with very poor photography skills or indeed not, which can be even more misleading.

Prior to OD people would have a chat before bumping uglies, that and a reasonable amount of alcohol is why it was easier to at least start a fling/relationship. Now it's purely on physical looks, with people finding it very easy to say no rather than giving it a shot and see where it goes.

smash

maudgonner wrote: »

Also, this is Ireland. There's a 90% chance you'd end up messaging your cousin/ex/friend's boyfriend/boss/GP/priest.

It's really not worth the risk

I actually matched with a friends ex on tinder. Didn't realise who it was at the time.

smash

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Prior to OD people would have a chat before bumping uglies, that and a reasonable amount of alcohol is why it was easier to at least start a fling/relationship. Now it's purely on physical looks, with people finding it very easy to say no rather than giving it a shot and see where it goes.

People are having sex with those they find good looking, while dismissing those they find unattractive... oh the horror!

messy tessy

PandaX9 wrote: »

Aside from the dress up one, unless that's already been brought up in conversation - I love those questions! I feel like I'm every guys worst tinder nightmare - not into casual sex at all, isn't uncomfortable with saying what I feel (as diplomatically as possible while being direct - no need to be disrespectful to others) and love having actual conversations other than "hi. How u?". One of the guys I'm going on a date with actually engaged me in a sort of game of twenty questions and it's probably one of the more enlightening conversations I've had in ages... How sad is that :pac: ?

all I can say is, as long as you're not immediately diving in at the deep end, keep at it and you'll find someone who'll reciprocate . I think it's harder to "click" with people when the dating scene is so impatient - people are just a swipe away, people are holding out for someone "better", people can be shallow etc.

I could have written this! Admittedly I have only joined pof yesterday (was on Tinder before and deleted it after a couple of hours) so am sort of curious how it will go this time.

Lyaiera

smash wrote: »

People are having sex with those they find good looking, while dismissing those they find unattractive... oh the horror!

I don't think that's the case though. Depending on what you mean by "Good Looking." I know some people who by any objective societal measure are not good looking, and I'm still attracted to them.

When people talk about, "Good Looking" it's very easy to confuse what an individual thinks is good looking, with what the average of 1,000 people would find good looking.

MarkAnthony

smash wrote: »

People are having sex with those they find good looking, while dismissing those they find unattractive... oh the horror!

Of course they are and they always did. However as I said some of the the subtlety has been lost making it more difficult when it comes to longer term relationships.

Don't worry you'll get a bit older someday and then you'll understand. until then keep us all entertained with the smart comments.

MarkAnthony

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Physical attraction isn't solely based on looks, at least it's not for me. While I completely agree what there has to be some physical attraction you may find that some turn offs can be forgiven if the personality is there. Good sex is based on looks, great sex is based on the mind and looks.

The other issue is going purely off photos, usually taken by a **** camera by someone with very poor photography skills or indeed not, which can be even more misleading.

Prior to OD people would have a chat before bumping uglies, that and a reasonable amount of alcohol is why it was easier to at least start a fling/relationship. Now it's purely on physical looks, with people finding it very easy to say no rather than giving it a shot and see where it goes.

Yes indeed. I do agree to an extent. For me great sex is definitely about the mind and also the heart as well as the physical. My own experience has been that I must feel a spark and that spark comes from many different places including my physical attraction towards the person. I have had dates in the past with lovely men who I got on great with but I just didn't fancy them.

Having a chat in a bar occurs without blindfolds on. I'm not going to be approached by a stranger who knows nothing about me because he has taken a guess that I'm a good person. It will be because he likes what he sees.

maudgonner

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Prior to OD people would have a chat before bumping uglies, that and a reasonable amount of alcohol is why it was easier to at least start a fling/relationship. Now it's purely on physical looks, with people finding it very easy to say no rather than giving it a shot and see where it goes.

Prior to OD people would go to pubs & clubs, cast their eyes around the room for someone they fancied and try to start a chat with them. Which is pretty much what happens in OD.

You're also assuming that people judge solely on photos, which I don't think it true, certainly not for everyone. It's a factor, as is the content on their profile, or what is written in an opening message. The relative importance of physical appearance probably depends a little on what you're looking for too - a hookup, short-term fun or a long-term relationship.

For me OD is just another way of making contact with people, not that different from offline dating. But since I'm not very interested in the pub & club scene, it's a much more effective way for me of meeting people. It takes more than a good photo for me to be interested in a guy, but I won't deny that some level of attraction is a factor.

smash

Lyaiera wrote: »

I don't think that's the case though. Depending on what you mean by "Good Looking." I know some people who by any objective societal measure are not good looking, and I'm still attracted to them.

But I'm talking in the context of the previous post which was talking about bumping uglies based on purely on physical looks.

Lyaiera wrote: »

When people talk about, "Good Looking" it's very easy to confuse what an individual thinks is good looking, with what the average of 1,000 people would find good looking.

Which is why I said "with those they find good looking".

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Of course they are and they always did. However as I said some of the the subtlety has been lost making it more difficult when it comes to longer term relationships.

There are various dating sites targeted at various groups. Example being that Tinder is nearly all for hook ups now or the occasional date, Match.com is for relationships and POF is in-between.

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Don't worry you'll get a bit older someday and then you'll understand. until then keep us all entertained with the smart comments.

Sure :rolleyes:

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Attraction can come after you get to know a person though.
I personally would never have a relationship with a guy that I find really attractive straight off the bat, because they're usually very bad news. It would be alright for the ride but id be setting myself up to be messed around big time. Generally.

MarkAnthony

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes indeed. I do agree to an extent. For me great sex is definitely about the mind and also the heart as well as the physical. My own experience has been that I must feel a spark and that spark comes from many different places including my physical attraction towards the person. I have had dates in the past with lovely men who I got on great with but I just didn't fancy them.

Having a chat in a bar occurs without blindfolds on. I'm not going to be approached by a stranger who knows nothing about me because he has taken a guess that I'm a good person. It will be because he likes what he sees.

Quite! And I've never said otherwise, at the end of the day there has to be a level of physical attraction. The point I'm making, admittedly very long windedly, is that tinder et al reduce this to pure physical attraction without ever getting any of the other 'je ne sais quoi'.

Edit Match.com etc have been mentioned. These too reduce the experience as I've indicated. It's something I believe we've lost - and perhaps OD was never the platform for it. I felt though that not having a photo of several of the women I met helped me look more at personality than looks immediately. Of course it eventually at some point does come down to there being some spark as you rightly point out.

Lyaiera

smash wrote: »

Sure :rolleyes:

You quoted someone else, not me with that.

I'm just against the idea that attraction is based solely on looks. It's a part of it, how much a part of it depends on each person, but for me it's not even near the most important part.

MarkAnthony

smash wrote: »

Sure :rolleyes:

You misquoted there, to be fair to the other poster you might fix the tags. Edit - Many Thanks fixed.

I guarantee you something though - you're gonna get older.

maudgonner

MarkAnthony wrote: »

The point I'm making, admittedly very long windedly, is that tinder et al reduce this to pure physical attraction without ever getting any of the other 'je ne sais quoi'.

As smash said, you might be basing your opinion solely on Tinder. Not all online dating is like tinder. I downloaded tinder for a look but deleted it pretty quickly, it's just not what I'm after.

There's a range of sites/apps that approach things differently and cater for different aims. I think you're unfairly painting them all with a hook-up brush (which sounds like a kinky fetish thing).

smash

Lyaiera wrote: »

You quoted someone else, not me with that.

Weird. But fixed it there.

Lyaiera wrote: »

I'm just against the idea that attraction is based solely on looks. It's a part of it, how much a part of it depends on each person, but for me it's not even near the most important part.

Initial attraction is usually based on looks. I never stated that it's the be all and end all. For online dating, a system can tell you who you might match with but 9 times out of 10 it's the photo that will decide if you actually message them or not.

MarkAnthony wrote: »

I guarantee you something though - you're gonna get older.

I fail to see your point here? You're dismissing me on the basis that you think I'm young and inexperienced with life, which is a wrong assumption.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

smash wrote: »

Weird. But fixed it there.


Initial attraction is usually based on looks. I never stated that it's the be all and end all. For online dating, a system can tell you who you might match with but 9 times out of 10 it's the photo that will decide if you actually message them or not.

You're right. Something like tinder is swiping right for someone you are into. But that's ok for just hooking up. You need much more than just looks or attraction to carry that forward though.

MarkAnthony

maudgonner wrote: »

As smash said, you might be basing your opinion solely on Tinder. Not all online dating is like tinder. I downloaded tinder for a look but deleted it pretty quickly, it's just not what I'm after.

There's a range of sites/apps that approach things differently and cater for different aims. I think you're unfairly painting them all with a hook-up brush (which sounds like a kinky fetish thing).

I've edited a post above on that point. I'm basing it on all forms of dating sites. They all reduce what your initial impression. That's borne out by the fact that most people wouldn't even look at a profile now without pictures.

Having used to forerunners to tinder for much kinkier hook ups than you'd get on your average tinder I can assure you I'm well aware of the excellent utility these services/site have.

MarkAnthony

smash wrote: »

I fail to see your point here? You're dismissing me on the basis that you think I'm young and inexperienced with life, which is a wrong assumption.

I'm dismissing your point on the basis of several things that you've indicated:

(i) You're here for the thanks and the lulz. Absolutely fine that's what AH is for and it would be very boring without people like you.

(ii) You've missed the subtlety in my points, probably faults on both sides there but rather than engage you've gone for the above. Again no animus there it's AH.

(iii) Your inexperience or particular experience of the basis of long term relationships is apparent. That does not mean I believe you are young, a tad immature perhaps, but I've no idea of your physical age or life experience, just that your opinions are ones that I dismiss as poorly argued. (Again it's AH)

smash wrote: »

Initial attraction is usually based on looks. I never stated that it's the be all and end all. For online dating, a system can tell you who you might match with but 9 times out of 10 it's the photo that will decide if you actually message them or not.

To restate my point again, what if it wasn't? If you gave it a bit of time without the photo and then saw the photo would your reaction be different to seeing the photo first? Fair enough in your case if it would not be.

Superhero1993

The downfall is the hook-up culture. Nobody wants to make real connections sadly.