Phateless Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 Physical attraction is a prerequisite for dating. Therefore a pic is a prerequisite for a date. There's nothing unreasonable about that. People are attracted to what they are attracted to. If you ever hope to get anywhere with women then you need to stop whining about it being unfair and go do something positive for yourself. Women are attracted to CONFIDENCE.
Content Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 Move on op,why would u wanna be with such a shallow maniac whos main goal in a relationship is to look small
Eeyore79 Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 He could have sent you a great photo with a mouth closed smile and turned up well dressed and beautifully groomed - you still would have gone 'OMG, yuck' when he opened his mouth. An honest photo would have been one which actually looked like him, i.e. a recent, full length shot showing his unkempt style and dreadful teeth. He must have known those things were deal breakers, hence why he sent me a blurry old head shot with no smile, in order to con me into meeting him. I don't know why people con others like this; they must know their unattractive attributes will be apparent when they meet someone. Why set yourself up for immediate rejection like that? Not providing honest photos is exactly the same as when people conceal other deal breakers; I dated one guy for almost a month before he told me he had three kids! I just feel that people should be honest about who they are - looks, kids, job, interests, everything - and give others a fair opportunity to evaluate them before deciding whether they want to invest time and money in meeting them.
LittleTiger Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 You got lucky, once. Go through some dating struggle, then come back and tell me what you think of meeting people without knowing their looks first. You'll sing a different tune, guaranteed. I'm 46 and I've had more than my fair share of dates (good and bad), including blind dates and newspaper dates (before www came along), dates I've paid for myself or more often gone dutch, dates where I travelled a distance and gave up significant chunks of my day, dates where I met guys I really liked but had no chemistry with, even dates where I couldn't wait to get away. I dated right through from my early teens until I was 30 when I married for the first time......and I dated briefly after I split from my ex husband - who, incidentally, wasn't conventionally 'hot' but was, and still is, a really great guy. I've pretty much tried singing every tune there is and I'm very happy with the one I'm singing now so I doubt I'll be changing it any time soon, if ever. Everything I say is based on my life experience and I've had a fair bit of that. I'm not saying anyone has to agree with what I'm saying, but I'm entitled to my own opinion.
LittleTiger Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 I just feel that people should be honest about who they are - looks, kids, job, interests, everything - and give others a fair opportunity to evaluate them before deciding whether they want to invest time and money in meeting them. I absolutely agree with you on this Eeyore. The problem with online dating is that many people aren't honest and no photograph is ever going to protect you from these people. That's why I say chat on the phone a few times before arranging to meet. If there's a mental connection then even a date without physical attraction won't be a complete waste of time.
Phateless Posted March 4, 2011 Posted March 4, 2011 I absolutely agree with you on this Eeyore. The problem with online dating is that many people aren't honest and no photograph is ever going to protect you from these people. That's why I say chat on the phone a few times before arranging to meet. If there's a mental connection then even a date without physical attraction won't be a complete waste of time. Good advice. Or make the first date a 1-hour coffee meet and greet. If you like her then ask her on a second date right then and there.
alexlakeman Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 She has a point... why date a guy that's going to be shorter than her when she wears heels? I prefer women to wear heels and obviously prefer them not to be 5 inches taller than I, lol... so I have to take the heels into considerations when I put a max height.
Eeyore79 Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 That's why I say chat on the phone a few times before arranging to meet. If there's a mental connection then even a date without physical attraction won't be a complete waste of time. The problem is, if you have a really great mental connection it sets you up for a huge disappointment if you don't fancy the person, especially if one of you fancies the other and the other doesn't return the feeling. Sometimes you may have such a great mental connection that you convince yourself you fancy the person when you really don't, and you end up in a sexless relationship with someone who's just like a friend. I prefer to at least try to verify that there's a minimal amount of attraction before I get someone's hopes up, and vice versa, I want to know that someone finds me non-hideous before I get excited about how well we seem to get along.
LittleTiger Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 The problem is, if you have a really great mental connection it sets you up for a huge disappointment if you don't fancy the person, especially if one of you fancies the other and the other doesn't return the feeling. Sometimes you may have such a great mental connection that you convince yourself you fancy the person when you really don't, and you end up in a sexless relationship with someone who's just like a friend. I prefer to at least try to verify that there's a minimal amount of attraction before I get someone's hopes up, and vice versa, I want to know that someone finds me non-hideous before I get excited about how well we seem to get along. I understand what you're saying Eeyore and I don't think I suggested anywhere that you shouldn't exhange photos before deciding to meet. Your approach seems reasonable to me. As I said before though, I don't think a photo is any indication or guarantee of attraction. What I object to is people who say they won't even respond to an email if they can't see what you look like, or if a photo is the very first thing they ask for when they contact you.........and the guys who ignore what's in your profile and email you just because they like your photo. That's what I find shallow. My attitude with dating has always been 'friends first' and if there's a spark, lets take it further - not the other way around. Dating is full of risks (for the heart and the ego) but it is supposed to be fun. To me, a night out with someone I really get a long with but don't fancy, is a lot more fun than a night out with someone I really fancy but who's company I don't enjoy.
Eeyore79 Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 No, a photo isn't a guarantee of attraction, but it at least allows you to quickly rule out those whom you are definitely not interested in, to avoid getting their hopes up. I feel that if I've been courteous enough to be honest about my own appearance then I deserve the same in return. When I did online dating, I would respond to an email from an interesting sounding person, but wouldn't invest a lot of time in lengthy discussions or agree to meet without seeing a photo. I always figured that if you didn't provide a decent photo then you must have something to hide. If you're a great match mentally and the other person also finds you attractive, that's when there's a risk that they might turn stalker-ish if you're not attracted to them. It's like "You're perfect for me, you're everything I always wanted, why don't you like me? We have this great connection, pleeease give me a chance!" This is exacerbated if the guy isn't very attractive; any attention from a pretty girl seems to encourage such guys to cling to you, because most girls don't even give them the time of day. I prefer to avoid this situation by only giving attention to guys for whom I feel at least a minimal amount of attraction. I'm not saying that the photo is the most important thing, simply that when you're dealing with such a large number of potential dates the easiest and fastest way to filter is by who you're attracted to. People scan through the results by photo and only click on the ones they like. I'd still rule out an attractive guy if his profile didn't interest me (and I wish others had extended me the same courtesy - I used to get loads of messages from incompatible guys who had clearly only looked at my photo!)
Author irc333 Posted March 5, 2011 Author Posted March 5, 2011 After two months of chatting online and on the phone, my husband-to-be travelled 12,000 miles to meet me without even knowing what I looked like (his decision not mine) Something I would've never done, even if I knew what she looked like. Good thing that turned out well, because Iheard a lot of horror stories where some friends of mine particpated in a long distance online thing with a woman. I had a friend of mine who had a online thing going on with a woman for a full YEAR before flying out to meet her. He lived in a small hick town, so there was no available women (at least his age), that's what happens in small hick towns, internet access is the only access to love. lol After a year, he flies out to meet her (they knew what each other looked like) They went to a theme park together, and she was kind of very cold and offish with him, he even tried to put his arm around her on a ride, and she stiffened up as a reaction. After the day at the park, she was avoiding him the entire week he was there. It's like she was a completely different person after the met for the first time.
LittleTiger Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 If you're a great match mentally and the other person also finds you attractive, that's when there's a risk that they might turn stalker-ish if you're not attracted to them. This can work both ways. It reminds me of a great looking guy I arranged to go on a hiking date with. Our profile's matched really well. He was into all the stuff I was into and had loads of photos showing how active and 'attractive' he was. We exchanged a few emails, I sent him a close up photo (only fair) and we arranged to talk on the phone. OMG, I'm so glad I did that before arranging to spend a whole day with him! It turned out he hadn't had a relationship is 11 years and it was sooo obvious why not. He talked non-stop about himself and even told me how his previous date had annoyed him so much he'd wanted to do her some physical harm!!! He then proceeded to tell me how 'compatible' he thought we were (based on what, I have no idea) and I had real trouble getting him to accept that I'd changed my mind about our date. He was so p'd off he was scary and I think I had a lucky escape. I always 'hid' my phone number after that, and I never agreed to go on a date with a guy until we'd spoken on the phone at least twice. I'd rather risk meeting an 'ugly' guy who was a decent person than a 'hot' guy who was a dangerous jerk but then every time you arrange to meet someone you're taking some kind of risk.........and imagine if he turned out to be less than 6ft tall! Oh, the joys of internet dating!
LittleTiger Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 Something I would've never done, even if I knew what she looked like. Good thing that turned out well, because Iheard a lot of horror stories where some friends of mine particpated in a long distance online thing with a woman. That is a sad story although I think waiting a year before meeting was a mistake. We only kept it 'virtual' for two months and we agreed before meeting that we were getting together as friends only, at least to begin with, so we 'expected' nothing more. We are well aware of how lucky we are that it worked out so well. He did take a huge risk of course, but sometimes that kind of risk is worth taking.
Author irc333 Posted March 5, 2011 Author Posted March 5, 2011 Well, traditionally, if people have met online, and they were thousands of miles a part, the usually the LONGER people wait before meeting, it's always been that way. People aren't likely to hop on an airplane to meet a stranger they met online after just 2 months...at least traditionally. Locally, well, you meet within days, lol Far away, some people wait longer, but I think he had to build vacation time first though I knew of a woman that met a guy online, he traveled to stay with her, and he was a total jerk in person. Why go through the hassle of taking that risk of meeting someone that far away, when we all know that even LOCAL dates usually wind up not so great anyhow. lol (no offense, just saying, I've heard these online LONG distance things, that just wound up as complete horror stories when they finally met face-to-face) Locally, you can just drive an hour back home, and be done, with air travel, you're stuck there. That is a sad story although I think waiting a year before meeting was a mistake. We only kept it 'virtual' for two months and we agreed before meeting that we were getting together as friends only, at least to begin with, so we 'expected' nothing more. We are well aware of how lucky we are that it worked out so well. He did take a huge risk of course, but sometimes that kind of risk is worth taking.
LittleTiger Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 Why go through the hassle of taking that risk of meeting someone that far away...... ......because we both thought it was worth the risk and because sometimes the person you've been looking for all your life doesn't live around the corner.
HeavenOrHell Posted March 5, 2011 Posted March 5, 2011 Because IMO they're shallow. Why is it so important a man is taller than his gf full stop. Why do some women factor in their heels as part of their height? I saw this profile of an averaged sized woman: " Men 5'10" and taller are preferred because when I put on my 3- 4 inch heels - I am 5'10- 5'11"" So is actually 5'6". But, of course, puts me out of the running, because I'm 5'8" if she counts the heels. Why do women count the heels? Now, if she was a woman that was naturally 5'10", it would make sense to date a taller man, but this??
unixuser Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 Attraction is important in a relationship. It is, I'm aware of that. However, that doesn't mean it should be everything. In an ideal world, this is how women would judge a guy: who the guy actually is > how much money he has, how tall he is, what he can provide you In our world (which is a mess) this is how women tend to judge guys though: how much money he has, how tall he is, what he can provide you > who the guy actually is as a person If a woman rejects you over something so trivial, odds are, she isn't gonna be a woman of much substance. Don't fret about it. Women like that usually have a non stop list of demands anyways.
SunshineD Posted March 6, 2011 Posted March 6, 2011 Just thought I'd mention that a girlfriend of mine came over yesterday. She's met a new guy, and we're dishing on him. Without any provocation on my part at all, the first thing she squeals is, "He's taller than me in heels!!!" She's only 5'5" naturally, but she's madly in love with ridiculously high stilettos. I thought it was funny. :laugh:
Recommended Posts