Jane2011 Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 Before you meet him you could ask him to take a picture of himself and send it to you. Maybe say "What will you be wearing? Can you send me a photo ahead of time so I can recognize you? I am terrible at recognizing faces." What's interesting is that he does have three pictures up and he looks thin in all of them. He certainly doesn't look like someone who's 6'2 and weighs 240. He looks like he's 6'2" and weighs about 175-190 in his pics. So I think he may not have updated pics up.... Hmmm...
Jane2011 Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 240 for 6'2 can work depending on the guy's frame. Some of those "ideal" weight to height guidelines are just not so. I' a little over 6'2 and I'm supposed to weigh like 187. I weighed that in high school. My friends thought I was wasting away at 215 and looked unhealthy. 225-230 is excellent for me but I weight more than that now. As far as looks goes, proportions matter most. If you're 6'-2 and 240 but you have a narrow frame and a distended stomach, it's gonna look bad. But if you're broad shouldered and strong, the 240 disappears into the balanced picture of a big fella. I'll keep all that in mind. I'm not sure yet if I'm going to meet him in person. The thing is, even if he is just a "big" guy and not necessarily a "fat" guy, he's likely to be bigger than I'm comfortable with. I'm small. Even going for bigger and taller guys than me, 6'2" and 240 against my 5' and 105 might be a bit too much.
Andy_K Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 Bear in mind that 6'2" and 240 lbs is roughly what arnold schwarzenegger measured in his prime. This guy is probably going to be carrying a lot more chub, but if he's got a big enough frame it'll be spread out enough that he will look 'big' rather than 'fat'.
RedRobin Posted February 29, 2012 Posted February 29, 2012 I'm getting the picture that OLD is for people whose primary criteria are looks. Pair that with the propensity for lots of simultaneous dating and dishonesty. Seems like a very sad place to try to find someone special.
mesmerized Posted March 1, 2012 Posted March 1, 2012 I don't really pay attention to profiles with "average" body type in men. Most man with some muscle tone would put "athlethic". I'm quite the hypocrite :-s
carhill Posted March 1, 2012 Posted March 1, 2012 Thoughts? My primary concern is that we get on online and have chemistry in person. Numbers in a profile, IME, have no bearing on that dynamic, historically. YMMV. 1
january2011 Posted March 1, 2012 Posted March 1, 2012 When I was OLD, I think I put myself as average but truth be told, I was probably somewhere between thin and average. I would have preferred 'slim', but that wasn't an option. I see the weight category is only a guideline anyway. Plus people can be delusional and/or intentionally deceptive to increase their response rates. You probably never going to be that sure of what you're getting until you meet in person and spend some together.
USMCHokie Posted March 1, 2012 Posted March 1, 2012 I don't really pay attention to profiles with "average" body type in men. Most man with some muscle tone would put "athlethic". I'm quite the hypocrite :-s When I tortured myself with the online dating, I usually put "average" on my profile...
carhill Posted March 1, 2012 Posted March 1, 2012 When I tortured myself with the online dating, I usually put "average" on my profile... Would you say that using the word 'average' was your honest 'style' of expression of such matters? If so, then a compatible woman would give it the appropriate weight in her decision-making process. A woman who filters out average has her own perspective on such matters; her own 'style'. That's valid. No need to feel dismayed, IMO.
USCGAviator Posted March 1, 2012 Posted March 1, 2012 I guess how some men can try and squeeze a few inches in height, women do the same with weight. Average=few extra pounds and so on. Very few women I've had dates with held true to the weight description they put in their profile.
USMCHokie Posted March 1, 2012 Posted March 1, 2012 Would you say that using the word 'average' was your honest 'style' of expression of such matters? If so, then a compatible woman would give it the appropriate weight in her decision-making process. A woman who filters out average has her own perspective on such matters; her own 'style'. That's valid. No need to feel dismayed, IMO. At the time, yes, I felt like it was an honest assessment of myself...I felt I was relatively average, so that's what I put...just like in real life, I undersold myself online...I didn't want to be a disappointment if we were to actually meet...and besides, I had a twisted view of what women perceived when they saw "athletic"... "Is a douche...?" I had no incentive to lie...and if I met a girl and she found me better than average, then that was better than the alternative of being disappointed in what she saw...
carhill Posted March 1, 2012 Posted March 1, 2012 Here's a word - average A potential meeting and whatever might result from it could turn on that word, or not. In the realm of life, what is one word? I'll try another word - felon This marketing stuff has potential I had no incentive to lie You had incentive to provide an honest, consistent with your style, assessment. You did. That's it. Whatever results is outside of your control. I have an OLD anecdote- I responded to an ad I liked the sound of. There was no picture. Eventually, after a couple of e-mails back and forth (this was when e-mail was new and 'cool'), she sent me a picture. Eventually I would go visit her. She became the 'one who got away' (my own fault), all from a simple, likable, 'average' ad on American Singles. You can see the picture she sent me in my LS travel album; it's the one with her daughter. Had I filtered for 'pictures only', I never would be able to tell the story because it wouldn't have happened. Sometimes things match up and sometimes they don't. People filter according to their own preferences and market according to their own ethics. It's all good information.
january2011 Posted March 1, 2012 Posted March 1, 2012 In the realm of life, what is one word? Profound indeed. *nods*
AmEricanWomann Posted March 1, 2012 Posted March 1, 2012 That's a good question that the OP asks. When I place an on a dating website, I try to avoid surprises by always posting at least 4 to 6 recent pictures on my profile. To me, recent means within the last six months and never any more than a year old. I also make sure that at least half the pictures I post are full length. However, I do have some problems deciding what category to list my body type as, as I'm sort of in a borderland. As I've posted before ,Ive lost a substancial amount of weight. AT my heaviest there was no doubt I was a BBW. I was literally the biggest size that most large size clothing sizes carried. But now I'm a size 12 or 10 depending on the style. That sounds a bit large and I'm sure it is to some. But Im one of those women with that J.Lo Kim Kardashian type figure. I have a very small waist, decent but not huge boobs and my collar bones jut out like cliffs. My hips and butt are what put me in the 10 or 12 dress size, I do have quite the booty for a white chick..If the website lists curvy as a catagory that's what I will use because that's the label I think suits me most. However if all they have is a choice between "a few extra pounds" and "average" that's where the issue comes in. The average size for american women these days is 14, and most plus size clothing shops start at 14. So that would actually make me slightly less than average. However, I still would like to take off a few lbs and using that reasoning, I could easily say I should check the box that says a few extra lbs. Also, another problem is that these days, it seems that people who say they are a a few extra lbs are actually BBWs and are at least 50lbs over weight. I worked too hard to put myself in the same catagory as those that are still obese. So it all goes back to what I said in the begining. I post recent, full length pictures so whatever body type I am, will be obvious from the photos and no one who contacts me will feel they were the victims of false advertising
RedRobin Posted March 1, 2012 Posted March 1, 2012 The sad thing is. I look better than average according to alot of people. There are times when I've let that go to my head, and felt the sting of a great big karma slap. However, I'm not going to do what I did when I was younger and wear the equivalent of burlap overalls and shave my head. It is neither here nor there. I wish to be loved for my insides. I don't post pictures on OLD. I don't want to attract the kind of men who are primarily visual. I don't want that to be the first thing he sees in me.
SJC2008 Posted March 1, 2012 Posted March 1, 2012 I've met 4 women on the site I'm on and they all list themselves as average. The 1st 3 were clearly NOT. They were pretty chunky. The one I'm dating now has what I call a womanly figure. Meaning she has a FIGURE, with a LITTLE meat. I list myself as a few extra. I'm 5'10" 200. My problem areas arw my thighs and stomach lol.
Recommended Posts