LoveShack.org Community Forums

Reload this Page LoveShack.org Community Forums > Romantic > Dating

General online and other dating discussion


Dating Dating, courting, or going steady? Things not working out the way you had hoped? Stand up on your soap box and let us know what's going on!

Like Tree216Likes
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 6th April 2016, 12:48 AM   #1
Established Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,829
Post General online and other dating discussion

Moderation note - Due to topic drift from a more personal dating issue, noted in attributed quotes referencing that discussion, into general dating discussion, moderation copied postings to a thread specifically designed to encourage such general discussion. Our old consolidated thread was stale so we'll start fresh here. This post happens to be the start point but is not indicative of this member starting this thread. Moderation did.

If you're not posting about a personal dating situation, rather making general comments about dating, this is your thread.

If you're posting about a personal dating issue and are seeking advice specifically about your issue, feel free to start a thread right here in our Dating Forum. Thanks!



Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
People are starting from scratch night after night when all they really need is to slow down and take the time to get to know someone. Some people don't seem to accept the idea at all that attraction can build slowly. Some people don't seem to think it's dating unless people are treating eachother like disposable napkins.
Just because it can doesn't mean it will. People would rather trust their gut and move on. I can tell in less than 20 minutes if I want to see someone again or not. If I'm attracted to them and interested, I proceed. If I'm not, I don't see them again. My time is valuable. I have high standards. I'm not going to let people keep auditioning when they're not right for the part, I only have so much time to cast the role, and a hundred people waiting to be seen.

People know what they like and what they don't like. Let's say you try spicy food and you don't like the taste at all. Why would you take another bite? Maybe if you're just indifferent to the taste, you might take another. But if you can easily order a food you do like instead, there's no reason not to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
There is nothing efficient or practical about the fast food dating culture that exists today. It is turning folks into serial daters and leaving more people single and frustrated than ever before. It is not leading to more fulfilling or stable relationships, and the statistics only support this.
You have no evidence. Just because you're single and frustrated doesn't mean everyone is. People have access to people they didn't have before. People are being more selective. It's not up to you to determine if being selective is good or bad for an individual. If that's how they want to proceed, that's their choice. They can reap the rewards or lack thereof on their own terms without your judgment.
By the way, here's the link saying a third of new marriages now start online. For the third time: Study: More than a third of new marriages start online

Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
Lol, evolution applies to dating in no way shape or form. If only the wealthiest the most beautiful, or the most intellegent people only were allowed produce offspring, there would not be 7 billion people walking the earth. And they would be a lot sexier, wealthier and smarter. And dating would not be the mess that it is. The dating culture we have today rewards none of our good qualities. It is bringing out the worst in people and I'm not the only one who's said so in this thread.
That's a dramatic oversimplification and your view of "good" qualities is entirely subjective within this context. People want to mate with the most powerful, athletic, good looking, affluent, healthy people they can find. Go ahead and argue that. Do you think Melania Trump is with Donald because he's so "good" and not for his power and billions of dollars? Do you think Tom Brady and Giselle Bundchen just got together coincidentally? How do you think they're together?

The number one priority of life on Earth is to stay alive. The second is to reproduce and make sure your offspring stay alive. Someone who's rich, strong, and powerful has a much better chance of survival than someone who's poor and weak. That's why people are attracted to money and power. It makes survival easier. Being "good" has nothing to do with any of that, that's why so called "good" guys like yourself end up so frequently befuddled as to why women don't like them for their "good" qualities. They're secondary when it comes to dating.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
Pace is completely relevant. You cannot get to know someone with this superficial WARPspeed pattern that exists in dating. You cannot judge someone based on five seconds of dating, or a profile photo and brief bio. Getting to know someone requires far more time than modern attention spans these days can handle.
By that logic, you "should" go out with every single person with a profile on OKCupid because you can't get to know someone well enough through a profile picture or description. No **** you can't get to know someone that quick. Most people don't want to know most other people at all. And guess what? They have enough options that they don't have to and they're willing to take the risk of not meeting someone they have no attraction to. They only want to know the people who they find interesting and attractive. Whether or not they decide you're interesting or attractive to even click on your profile in the first place, or meet you in person, or meet you a second time doesn't matter. What people "should" do or the pace they "should" move at or the concessions they "should" make people are totally dubious because they have their own criteria and circumstances that govern their own lives. They don't live by your standards or expectations. There is no law that says you "should" give everyone a fair chance because life is so fair any everyone deserves your time and consideration. Maybe we should let everyone play in the NFL without a tryout or combine to make sure they fit the most basic requirements to perform at the level expected of them? Because life "should" be fair, right? Because we can't make judgments or assumptions on people to save time without actual confirmation that they're inadequate, right? Utter nonsense. You live in a fantasy world.

Why don't you go out with every woman who messages you? You "should," by tier logic. You don't have enough chance to know them otherwise and they owe you their time, right?

Your problem is that you can't respect peoples' ability to make up their own minds. You assume you know what's better for them and their circumstances than they do.

Last edited by LoveShack.org Moderator; 6th April 2016 at 7:50 PM.. Reason: Clean up icons and clarify topical content
normal person is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 2:33 AM   #2
Established Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by normal person View Post
You have no evidence. Just because you're single and frustrated doesn't mean everyone is. People have access to people they didn't have before. People are being more selective. It's not up to you to determine if being selective is good or bad for an individual. If that's how they want to proceed, that's their choice. They can reap the rewards or lack thereof on their own terms without your judgment.
By the way, here's the link saying a third of new marriages now start online. For the third time: Study: More than a third of new marriages start online
Actually, I do and the trends are disturbing. You may call it being more selective but the result is that stable successful romantic relationships are in decline in this country. That is because we have a dysfunctional dating culture that is making it harder and harder for people to form real romantic relationships:

Unmarried and single Americans now make up 27 percent of all households, up from 17 percent in 1970.

Single? You're not alone - CNN.com

The percentage of unmarried and single Americans actually outnumbers the number of married Americans.
http://nypost.com/2014/09/09/single-...arried-adults/

The birth rate in this country has hit historic lows:

Baby bust! Millennials' birth rate drop may signal historic shift

Fact Sheet: The Decline in U.S. Fertility

And according to my sources, online dating isn't helping:
5% of Americans who are currently married or in a long-term partnership met their partner somewhere online. Among those who have been together for ten years or less, 11% met online.


Online Dating & Relationships | Pew Research Center


Quote:
Originally Posted by normal person View Post
That's a dramatic oversimplification and your view of "good" qualities is entirely subjective within this context. People want to mate with the most powerful, athletic, good looking, affluent, healthy people they can find. Go ahead and argue that. Do you think Melania Trump is with Donald because he's so "good" and not for his power and billions of dollars? Do you think Tom Brady and Giselle Bundchen just got together coincidentally? How do you think they're together?

The number one priority of life on Earth is to stay alive. The second is to reproduce and make sure your offspring stay alive. Someone who's rich, strong, and powerful has a much better chance of survival than someone who's poor and weak. That's why people are attracted to money and power. It makes survival easier. Being "good" has nothing to do with any of that, that's why so called "good" guys like yourself end up so frequently befuddled as to why women don't like them for their "good" qualities. They're secondary when it comes to dating.
Being rich strong and powerful has nothing to do with finding a relationship in this day and age, and you know it. There are millions of examples of overweight or poor people getting married for every one celebrity you could name.


Quote:
Originally Posted by normal person View Post
By that logic, you "should" go out with every single person with a profile on OKCupid because you can't get to know someone well enough through a profile picture or description. No **** you can't get to know someone that quick. Most people don't want to know most other people at all. And guess what? They have enough options that they don't have to and they're willing to take the risk of not meeting someone they have no attraction to. They only want to know the people who they find interesting and attractive. Whether or not they decide you're interesting or attractive to even click on your profile in the first place, or meet you in person, or meet you a second time doesn't matter. What people "should" do or the pace they "should" move at or the concessions they "should" make people are totally dubious because they have their own criteria and circumstances that govern their own lives. They don't live by your standards or expectations. There is no law that says you "should" give everyone a fair chance because life is so fair any everyone deserves your time and consideration. Maybe we should let everyone play in the NFL without a tryout or combine to make sure they fit the most basic requirements to perform at the level expected of them? Because life "should" be fair, right? Because we can't make judgments or assumptions on people to save time without actual confirmation that they're inadequate, right? Utter nonsense. You live in a fantasy world.

Why don't you go out with every woman who messages you? You "should," by tier logic. You don't have enough chance to know them otherwise and they owe you their time, right?

Your problem is that you can't respect peoples' ability to make up their own minds. You assume you know what's better for them and their circumstances than they do.
People can decide for themselves, but I'm saying that the way we are doing things in this dysfunctional dating environment is not making us happier, and not equalling more healthy stable and fulfilling relationships, contrary to what you seem to believe. And if we want to reverse that trend a lot of gals will have to seriously reconsider the way they are going about dating, i.e. this superficial speed dating culture we have.
oberkeat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 3:22 AM   #3
Established Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 4,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
If I can convince some women reading this thread to give the next guy they date a second look instead of being too hasty and taking the convenient way out and giving into the instant gratification impulse, I think they would be surprised by the quality of relationships they find themselves in. If I can convince one gal out there that she does not have to settle for the dysfunctional dating standard that has taken over, then what I have been through will have been worth it.
OP, I guarantee you that if this poor woman you went out on that date with were to read this thread, she will only be relieved that she didn't give you a "second look" after all.

The responses on this thread of yours are about unanimous. Do you realize how badly you are coming across? That you're this tightly wound here has to translate to real life, and it may be what gave her misgivings not to see you again.
__________________
You'll thank me for saying that later.
Imajerk17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 3:49 AM   #4
Established Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 6,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
And according to my sources, online dating isn't helping:
So why are you bothering with it at all? Why all the fuss?

Why not just quit beating your head against a wall and change what you are doing?
Toodaloo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 8:28 AM   #5
Established Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 13,760
Journal Entries: 1
I'm someone who needs more than one date to figure out if I feel it for someone. Insta-sparks very rarely happen to me. So I tend to go on 2-5 dates with men, when I see there could be potential.

Even then, there have been instances when I knew on the first date that the date and I weren't compatible. It didn't make them horrible human beings. It just meant I knew before they did that we weren't a match (based on humour; differences in lifestyle; the general interaction).

When I started OLD, I read an advice book that pretty much said: Rule #1 of OLD: get comfortable with rejection. (Note: the book was geared towards women). That would be my advice to you: yes OLD, by increasing how many people we get to meet and date in the course of year also increases the amount of rejection we face. No big deal. It happens. I know you say you're quitting dating, but if ever you give it another shot, learn to accept rejection gracefully.
__________________
To handle yourself, use your head, To handle others, use your heart.
Kamille is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 9:29 AM   #6
Established Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imajerk17 View Post
OP, I guarantee you that if this poor woman you went out on that date with were to read this thread, she will only be relieved that she didn't give you a "second look" after all.

The responses on this thread of yours are about unanimous.
I think people don't want to believe the dating scene has gotten as bad as it is. I think they want to think positively no matter how bad the truth is. But it's the unfortunate reality. The statistics I quoted above really show the consequences of the way dating is done today. The declining marriage and birth rate. The escalating singles rate. The dating scene itself has to change if we're going to reverse those trends.
oberkeat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 9:34 AM   #7
Established Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,829
Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
Actually, I do and the trends are disturbing. You may call it being more selective but the result is that stable successful romantic relationships are in decline in this country.
"Stable" and "successful" romantic relationships declined steadily from the 1870s. Coincidentally, the only sizable drop offs in that figure were after WWII and every year from 1980 up to today, long before the current environment materialized.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-in-one-chart/

Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
That is because we have a dysfunctional dating culture that is making it harder and harder for people to form real romantic relationships:
Conjecture. Even if that's somewhat true, there are plenty of extraneous factors that affect numbers and the culture that creates the numbers. The economy, shifts in religious attitudes, shifts in cultural attitudes, etc. Divorce was unfathomable to lots of people a few decades ago. Now it's barely stigmatized. You have no evidence to suggest that peoples' relationships in earlier times were more stable and more successful just because they got married and didn't get divorced.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
And according to my sources, online dating isn't helping:
5% of Americans who are currently married or in a long-term partnership met their partner somewhere online. Among those who have been together for ten years or less, 11% met online.
Wait, so you're saying it didn't help the 5% of people of the US (16 million total) or 11% (35 million) who it literally helped? Who entered into long term relationships or marriages when it was the only reason they met? So your argument is "It doesn't work. It's only worked for 35 million relationships that wouldn't have occurred without it?" Keep in mind that those figures don't even represent the whole population because not everyone uses online dating, and they haven't been using it with the same frequency people do today. So if even 15% of people use it seriously, that's a 48 million person sample size you take the success number from, not 322 million. Consider that in conjunction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
Being rich strong and powerful has nothing to do with finding a relationship in this day and age, and you know it. There are millions of examples of overweight or poor people getting married for every one celebrity you could name.
It has everything to do with selectivity and finding the best relationship available. Everyone is trying to get the best partner they can. I'm not saying fat, poor, people don't get married. The reasons rich, powerful, beautiful people intermarry is because they can. They have the resources to justify being with someone on their level. The reason overweight poor people intermarry is because they have to because they can't do any better. The overweight, uneducated welfare bum isn't married to Giselle Bundchen not because he doesn't like her, it's because he doesn't have a chance in hell with her. Your theory might have some credibility if you showed significant examples or stats of people with resources like wealth, beauty, and power marrying people who were poor, ugly, and weak. But it doesn't happen, that's the point. People generally intermarry with the same socioeconomic status and looks. So if you have more or better resources like money or looks ("more desirable traits"), the more likely you are to end up with someone else with more or better resources. Show me significant examples otherwise and I'll eat my words.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
People can decide for themselves, but I'm saying that the way we are doing things in this dysfunctional dating environment is not making us happier, and not equalling more healthy stable and fulfilling relationships, contrary to what you seem to believe. And if we want to reverse that trend a lot of gals will have to seriously reconsider the way they are going about dating, i.e. this superficial speed dating culture we have.
Just because it's not making you happy doesn't mean it's not beneficial for millions of other people who have figured it out. If people didn't think their methods were making them happier, they wouldn't be doing things that way. People are happier with the selectivity and options than they are settling, and that's why it's done the way it is and not in some antiquated fashion. Why else would people do it the way they do if they didn't enjoy it and it didn't bring them happiness?
normal person is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 9:36 AM   #8
Established Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 6,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
I think people don't want to believe the dating scene has gotten as bad as it is. I think they want to think positively no matter how bad the truth is. But it's the unfortunate reality. The statistics I quoted above really show the consequences of the way dating is done today. The declining marriage and birth rate. The escalating singles rate. The dating scene itself has to change if we're going to reverse those trends.
You make it sound as though people who are single are infected with some sort of contagious disease...

[]

The dating scene is NOT that bad. I am on it! I should know! Yes it is sometimes heart breaking, yes it is sometimes a drag but for the most part its fun and enjoyable even if it has yet to yield any results!

Statistics can be read any number of ways. They can be twisted and turned.

There are some fabulous men and women out there just waiting to meet each other.

[]
Toodaloo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 9:44 AM   #9
Established Member
 
MidwestUSA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,390
Anyone who wants to experience the 'good old days' of dating should agree to

Get rid of their computer
Trash the xBox and PS4
Throw away the cell phone
Dial a rotary phone that shares a party line
Write letters to pen pals and WALK them to a corner mailbox
Ride your bicycle everywhere
Get a poker group together and meet once a month
Go to church
Go to the library when you need to look something up
Sit at a good old soda fountain, if you know what that is

Can we bring back drive in theaters?


If you get my drift, what one is experiencing as 'dating woes' is directly related to the advances of technology.

All of the 'organic' ways of meeting anyone have gone out the window, because people have their heads in their electronic devices 24/7[]
MidwestUSA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 9:48 AM   #10
Established Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 6,756
You have just described my life! []
Toodaloo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 9:50 AM   #11
Established Member
 
central's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: NW Florida
Posts: 2,859
From what I've read, the declining birth rate is a function of a more educated, wealthier society. This has been the trend for all countries where the standard of living has improved and women have more education.


The declining marriage rate just reflects the fact that marriage isn't a necessity for men or women to thrive in this culture. Both can be independent - women no longer need a man to earn an income. And they don't need husbands. 40% or more children are born to single mothers. It may not be ideal, but it apparently works well enough, especially if the father is involved in their lives.


As for men, they are seeing the legal downsides of marriage, especially when divorce comes into the picture. There are few advantages to marriage. The legal system is still weighted in favor of women - or many judges still are - even when the laws are gender neutral.
Emilia and joseb like this.
central is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 10:07 AM   #12
Established Member
 
WaitingForBardot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 699
For some reason this thread's got me fantasizing about a world where every woman is required to give me a fair shot. Whomever my heart desires, or my gaze lands upon, is required to give me their full attention until I decide it's enough...

Lewis Grizzard got it right: "Sex hasn't been the same since women started enjoying it."


[]
__________________
"It ain't what you don't know that's so harmful, it's what you know that just ain't so." -- Mark Twain
WaitingForBardot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 10:23 AM   #13
Established Member
 
joseb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,103
Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
I think people don't want to believe the dating scene has gotten as bad as it is. I think they want to think positively no matter how bad the truth is. But it's the unfortunate reality. The statistics I quoted above really show the consequences of the way dating is done today. The declining marriage and birth rate. The escalating singles rate. The dating scene itself has to change if we're going to reverse those trends.
You are going on about this escalating singles rate and declining marriage and birth rate as if it is some terrible disease that must be wiped out.

What's so wrong with people being single? Maybe they realise that it's a nice way to live.

What's so wrong with a declining birth rate? Maybe people realise they don't have to overpopulated the planet to leave a legacy.

What's so wrong about a declining marriage rate? Maybe people realise it's becoming an outdated and pointless tradition that can easily result in financial ruin.

Personally I welcome these tends.
joseb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 10:31 AM   #14
Established Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,829
Quote:
Originally Posted by oberkeat View Post
I think people don't want to believe the dating scene has gotten as bad as it is. I think they want to think positively no matter how bad the truth is.
The only people who are worried about it are the people who it doesn't benefit, like the people with nothing desirable to offer. And no offense, but if you don't have anything desirable to offer, and the circumstances don't benefit you for those reasons, that doesn't make it "bad." That just makes it natural selection. The people with things to offer other people will use it with success and view it as a Godsend. The people who have resources naturally or worked to achieve them get rewarded, the people who don't have those things naturally or didn't work for them don't. No, it's not entirely fair, but it's not entirely unfair either. You can't help the circumstances you're born into, but you can always do more to improve yourself. If you didn't have the capacity to figure our how to improve, or the will to do what's necessary to succeed, you don't get selected. Natural selection.

Here's the thing, if someone exercises selectivity and successfully finds a match, they and the person they select will ultimately think the process is for the better. They'll think all the schooling, hours at the gym, developing an interesting life, etc paid off for them. They'll think it's perfectly fair that they worked for something, succeeded at it, and were rewarded for it.

But if someone exercises selectivity and decides that you aren't good enough for them, then of course you will think that it's terrible and superficial, unfair, and elitist, as I suspect is why you're ranting so hard. It creates an environment where the best traits are rewarded by selection and the lackluster or unappealing traits aren't selected.

If this girl had looked at you the first time and in 10 seconds told you how impressive it was that you're a surgeon, how smart you must be to do that, how funny your profile was, how nice your car is, and how she thought you were both going to have a great time, my guess is that you wouldn't be complaining that it's superficial and that she didn't even try to get to know you for longer than 2 hours. You'd just willingly accept the circumstances and resources that you worked so hard for.

Everyone wants what's best for themselves and they don't want to settle. So as I explained, like Darwinism, it benefits the people with the most desirable traits; the ones that are most likely to be selected. Natural selection. If you naturally have them or worked hard to acquire them, you get selected. If you don't naturally have them and/or haven't worked hard to acquire any, you won't get selected and might start complaining about how no one gives you a chance that life isn't fair. Like you have here.

Evolution benefits the more desirable, "better" traits. As I've said, the solution is very apparent. If you want better success, be a better person. Success, power, strength, health, beauty, and other resources are "better" and more attractive than the lack of those things. And the more you have, the better. If you want to be more successful, get more of those things. You have to adjust yourself to the environment. The environment won't adjust to you no matter how hard you complain about it.
normal person is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th April 2016, 10:31 AM   #15
Established Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by normal person View Post
"Stable" and "successful" romantic relationships declined steadily from the 1870s. Coincidentally, the only sizable drop offs in that figure were after WWII and every year from 1980 up to today, long before the current environment materialized.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-in-one-chart/



Conjecture. Even if that's somewhat true, there are plenty of extraneous factors that affect numbers and the culture that creates the numbers. The economy, shifts in religious attitudes, shifts in cultural attitudes, etc. Divorce was unfathomable to lots of people a few decades ago. Now it's barely stigmatized. You have no evidence to suggest that peoples' relationships in earlier times were more stable and more successful just because they got married and didn't get divorced.
At a certain point in the 20th century, the declining birth and marriage rate and the escalating singles rate stop being a product of gender equality and start becoming a symptom of our dysfunctional ideas regarding dating and relationships. Are you saying these converging trends are just coincidence? No way.


Quote:
Originally Posted by normal person View Post
Wait, so you're saying it didn't help the 5% of people of the US (16 million total) or 11% (35 million) who it literally helped? Who entered into long term relationships or marriages when it was the only reason they met? So your argument is "It doesn't work. It's only worked for 35 million relationships that wouldn't have occurred without it?" Keep in mind that those figures don't even represent the whole population because not everyone uses online dating, and they haven't been using it with the same frequency people do today. So if even 15% of people use it seriously, that's a 48 million person sample size you take the success number from, not 322 million. Consider that in conjunction.
5 percent is far less than the 22 percent you quoted for us earlier. You might split hairs over how many people that actually is, but the fact is online dating did not get the job done for the vast majority of coupled people out there. If an auto repair shop quoted a 5% success rate, they would not be in business very long.


Quote:
Originally Posted by normal person View Post
It has everything to do with selectivity and finding the best relationship available. Everyone is trying to get the best partner they can. I'm not saying fat, poor, people don't get married. The reasons rich, powerful, beautiful people intermarry is because they can. They have the resources to justify being with someone on their level. The reason overweight poor people intermarry is because they have to because they can't do any better. The overweight, uneducated welfare bum isn't married to Giselle Bundchen not because he doesn't like her, it's because he doesn't have a chance in hell with her. Your theory might have some credibility if you showed significant examples or stats of people with resources like wealth, beauty, and power marrying people who were poor, ugly, and weak. But it doesn't happen, that's the point. People generally intermarry with the same socioeconomic status and looks. So if you have more or better resources like money or looks ("more desirable traits"), the more likely you are to end up with someone else with more or better resources. Show me significant examples otherwise and I'll eat my words.
Your argument wasn't that like attracts like. Your argument was that wealth, beauty, power and the fight for survival has everything to do with relationship formation, which no one dating today would agree with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by normal person View Post
Just because it's not making you happy doesn't mean it's not beneficial for millions of other people who have figured it out. If people didn't think their methods were making them happier, they wouldn't be doing things that way. People are happier with the selectivity and options than they are settling, and that's why it's done the way it is and not in some antiquated fashion. Why else would people do it the way they do if they didn't enjoy it and it didn't bring them happiness?
As I said, I'm not the only one out there who are finding out how poisonous this dating culture has become. These boards are a treasure trove of folks who are frustrated and disappointed with dating, the statistic trends we're seeing regarding coupledom back it up. It's not just me.
oberkeat is offline   Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

 

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Consolidated discussion - Online dating spiderowl Dating 1994 29th April 2016 6:42 PM
Damaged Goods: General Discussion SycamoreCircle General Relationship Discussion 33 6th January 2015 3:27 PM
online dating general question bigheartkindsoul Dating 0 9th November 2007 12:30 PM
A matter of thought..general discussion abt fwbs emotionsmessmeup Friends and Lovers 7 14th October 2005 10:46 PM

 

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 4:51 AM.

Please note: The suggestions and advice offered on this web site are opinions only and are not to be used in the place of professional psychological counseling or medical advice. If you or someone close to you is currently in crisis or in an emergency situation, contact your local law enforcement agency or emergency number.


Copyright © 1997-2013 LoveShack.org. All Rights Reserved.