What's up with Online Dating

[Iris The Butterfly]

I hate online dating and my sincere hope is that I never find myself on an online dating site ever again. I did find my bf on Bumble, so yes, it does work... but I still advise against it. My overall experience has been negative and a massive waste of time.

 

I went on a million first dates, dated one guy for almost 5 months from online, my bf now for 7 months going strong met online. Can't tell you the countless times I was ghosted, asked for 'body pics', asked, 'wanna F&*%', guys asking me for my Instagram but never wanting to meet, etc. I did go out with a handful of really nice guys but either they weren't interested or I wasn't after a date or two... the thing I found with online is that there's no real connection, and the person is also talking to, or could still be looking for the next best thing. Or, meeting someone for the first time you don't even know if you'll have chemistry, which happened to me often. When you meet the old fashioned way, you know all of that straight off the bat. Much better.

 

I tried Match, Bumble, Tinder, OKC on and off for about 5 years. Met one serious bf in between and we met in person. My bf and I joke that we met in the neighborhood since we happen to live walking distance apart. I was happy to find someone who hated OLD as much as I did! He deleted his profile after dating me a couple weeks. I can't tell you how happy I was to delete my account I think I'll tell him that today!

Edited June 2, 2019 by littlebridge

[smackie9]

I had some Gfs that were using OLD when it was new....it was bad back then too. My husband and I went looking for a coworker's profile to see what he put on there, and omg the guys on there were pathetic. I would never use it. I think hosting parties, and bbqs inviting friends and their friends would be a better way to meet people and expand my social circle.

[alphamale]

I had some Gfs that were using OLD when it was new....it was bad back then too..

 

smackie9 that was back when there were few women on the internet. the guys on the internet were mostly dorky and nerdy computer nerds looking at porn

[Fekenaws]

Imo there is a bit of a cultural pushback on online dating at the moment. I can still get dates, but matches are becoming harder and harder to find. I'm fairly young too, I'm 25. Most of my friends agree it's been getting harder recently, and I can't see ageism playing against me just yet.

[CLS63AMG]

Feast and famine ... I'm just reporting because it might shed light on the topic. Between the day I turned 65 (in February) and May 16 I got 2 responses to 39 messages I sent, a little over 5% response rate. Since then, 4 out of 10, 40% overall, 2 out of 4 on POF for 50% and 2 out of 6 on Match for 33%. It's worth noting that one of the 'conversations' on each platform was started by the woman. Is spring in the air? With respect to the 'next step', one woman on each platform has said they'll phone me. Having no explanation for this 'shift' in results, I'll fall back on the often stated observation that OLD is a numbers game just like dating in general.

 

 

Spring/summer helps - its probably the best time to try it. The worst is Feb/March/April from my experience. People are still on there but the motivation to meet is low and messages are few and far between.

 

 

 

They say right after new years is the busiest time on dating sites but I am not so sure the meeting part is actually busy. Whatever rush that happens after new years quickly dies out before getting going again when the weather gets better, then it dives again.

[Cora]

I just recently got back on a dating website after taking a break for 2 years. I don’t know why I thought it would be any different than it was before. This was only my fourth full day on the site and I’m already ready to quit again. Nothing but the same old people from years ago when I was on there. Same people from before messaging me like it’s the first time they’ve made contact.....they just don’t remember because they probably message so many people. So I’m having to re-block people I previously blocked when I had my old profile. Haven’t been on there long and already have one guy asking to be exclusive (wanting me to delete my profile) before we’ve even met in person! Another guy wanting me to send him money. They all seem perfectly normal at first chat, but then the crazy comes out. Then there are the usual ones messaging for sex and ones looking for sugar mommas....yes, his profile actually stated looking for his sugar momma. Then another wanting to pay you for friendship in return...no sex or anything physical...just friendship. And what’s up with guys (and maybe some girls do this too, I dunno) you meet on there calling you these pet names....baby, sweetie, sexy etc. and you’ve only been talking for 5 minutes? Would they seriously do that with someone they just met in person? And so many I notice don’t put in any effort whatsoever....nothing filled out on their profile, spelling/grammar mistakes every other word. I dunno, maybe I’m just too picky.

 

I know OLD works for some people.....my brother met his fiancé online, but it apparently doesn’t work for me. I just seem to attract crazy. OLD didn’t work for me years ago and it’s not working for me now. Guess this turned into more of a rant.

[dinzsant]

Maybe Online dating has just run it's course. I am not sure, but I do know that my results for Online dating are not anywhere near what it used to be. I am still on the same sites, I am still a good looking , in shape 52 year old guy. But in the 3 years since I became single again and tried Online dating it has just been dismal.

 

What do you guys/gals think?

 

 

it's horrible....dreadful. for all ages. flakers, time-wasters. I think a lot of woman sit on those sites just for an ego boost and have no intention of meeting anyone...or are bored and filling in time. it's not about 52, and 52 is not 'old'. just middle age. the woman there are, on a whole, simply not serious.

 

if you do get a message and set up a date, Generally, you need like 13 dates to find someone you have any connection with.

sites like POF, and okcupid are the worst....maybe paid sites may be better, although i have my doubts

[crispytoast]

For everyone who is complaining about the algorithm of swiping apps, have you ever actually looked into how swipe ELO works? The less often you swipe, the longer you spend looking at a profile, the more you get positively swiped, the more you match, the higher your ELO. The higher your ELO, the more you show up for women who are swiping, the more likely you will get positively swiped, your ELO goes even higher. It's a cycle. There is such a huge pool of men on swipe apps and unless you game the algorithm from the start, your ELO will be hurting and your profile will barely ever show up. You can swipe all day and you are only getting further from even being viewed.

 

Last time I was on Tinder, I had two grainy selfies and then pictures of things I liked to do, not even with me in the picture. My profile was not very serious or detailed, it briefly and jokingly hinted at my interests. Far from the desired profile, basically everything you're not supposed to do. From the beginning, I would read every profile, then leave the profile open for a few minutes scrolling back and forth through the photos every so often, usually while watching TV or a movie. Then I'd swipe the relevant direction (which honestly I already knew how I was going to swipe in the first sentence or two of the profile). I'd often wait 10-20 minutes between swipes. Within the first half hour of making the profile, I had over 10 women who had swiped me right. I didn't do anything special, my profile wasn't close to the ideal profile, I was just dressed and groomed sort of nice in my selfies and my profile showed up. That's it.

 

Within a few days, I was in top picks. I got curious and bought Tinder Gold for that month. There were very few women I was attracted to which didn't surprise me because my profile was garbage and for the most part only the thirstiest women would consider swiping me. Of the 30+ women who swiped me that month, I probably only swiped back 10 at most. And after the first few days the amount of women swiping me slowed down significantly as most everyone who would consider swiping me had already swiped. The more attractive women took a little time to swipe me because in general they aren't obsessively swiping like thirsty Tinder users do, both male and female. If I'd had a friend help me out with some solid pictures and spent a little more effort on my profile, I likely would've had more matches with higher ELO women. I considered doing this but in general the concept of online dating turns me off and I ended up unsubscribing at the end of the month and deleting my profile.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that if you want to use a swipe app, start from scratch and game the algorithm. Making a good profile of course matters but you could have the perfectly crafted profile and if you swipe constantly and don't even read the profiles, your profile will get dropped to the lowest priority.

[TheFinalWord]

To me, the sample of people online is a pretty accurate reflection of people in real life. The harsh reality is OLD is an accurate reflection of your objective physical attractiveness. If you're writing 50 messages and getting only 1 reply, you're shooting above your physical looks capacity. Hate to say it, but it's true. If all you're pulling on OLD is 4s and 5s, guess, what? You're a 4 or 5. OLD is the black pill of your looks. It's a tough pill to swallow because we tend to over inflate our physical looks. For example, a lot of people think they look younger than they actually look. When they get on OLD, they don't understand why people aren't writing them back, when they look so young! The bad news is, they're not writing you back because they don't find your physically attractive. One caveat is distance. If you are hours apart, they might be interested, but won't try to set up a date. In my experience, however, these women will at least write you back and flirt with you a little, but will eventually say the distance is too far for them.

 

The major difference from a dating success perspective (for guys at least), is factors a woman might overlook if you met in real life because you compensate in some way, are automatic no-goes in the online world.

 

Height, age, income, any of the superficial standards. In real life, you might approach a woman and you both find each other attractive. You have a great time and really hit it off. When she finds out you are 5'11" and not 6', she might overlook it because maybe she couldn't tell when you first met. But with OLD, if she puts 6 foot as her minimum height, you're automatically filtered out of her search. In Match, for example, if you're not in her Match filters your messages go into an "Other" folder, equivalent to a Junk folder.

 

Or if you look younger than you really are, let's say you're 45, but look early 30s, if you have a successful date with her before she finds out you're outside her standard age range, she might overlook it; whereas, online, you're going to get filtered out by age and not even considered, no matter how youthful you look.

 

The plus side is you know people online are looking to date and it's easier to put yourself out there. In real life, women barely ever approach a guy they're attracted to. But they will online. So, the rejection factor is easier to overcome with online.

 

But in general there's no difference in the quality of people online vs real life. The difference is the people rejecting you don't have to look at you in the eyes when they reject you, so what you're getting with OLD is the harsh truth of what the people you message think of you as a dating prospect. They can't use normal excuses like "I have a boyfriend" or "I'm not looking for a relationship right now" because they're on a dating website. So, you'll see a lot of your messages are read, but not replied too. Those same people not replying, if you had approached in real life, you would have gotten a BS excuse. Same outcome, you can just mass message with OLD. Let's say you write 50 women a day. Even if you get one reply, that's probably better than real life if you're going for your looks match or a bit lower. Whereas in real life, how likely is it you even encounter, let alone ask out, 50 women a day? Heck, 50 women a year? The average PUA says you need to approach 300 women to even get one hit. So from a pure numbers perspective, the odds for OLD are better than average if you are going for your looks match or lower. If you're going for women above your looks level, your rejection rate will be the same as it is in real life.

Edited June 5, 2019 by TheFinalWord

[Grey40]

I've had a lot of success using OLD. I haven't had success at finding a good relationship, but I've been on hundreds of dates from these apps. Yes I'm above average looking, but I think there are still general rules that you must do in order to succeed regardless of looks.

 

1) You must use all of the apps simultaneously and use them A LOT. going on once a week is not going to land you matches. You have to dedicate time every single day on there if you're serious about finding people.

 

2) You need to use only the best possible pictures of yourself at all times. There is a site called photofeeler.com where you can put in pictures of yourself for free and get them randomly rated based on attractiveness. Keep uploading photos until you 3-4 at the highest ranking, then use those as your main pictures.

 

3) Don't bull**** around and waste weeks talking to one person thinking they're the one. If you're a guy, ask them for their number and ask them out quickly. There's no real time frame but don't let more than a couple days go by. If convo is real good on the first night, do it then.

[Grey40]

 

But in general there's no difference in the quality of people online vs real life. The difference is the people rejecting you don't have to look at you in the eyes when they reject you, so what you're getting with OLD is the harsh truth of what the people you message think of you as a dating prospect. They can't use normal excuses like "I have a boyfriend" or "I'm not looking for a relationship right now" because they're on a dating website. So, you'll see a lot of your messages are read, but not replied too. Those same people not replying, if you had approached in real life, you would have gotten a BS excuse. Same outcome, you can just mass message with OLD. Let's say you write 50 women a day. Even if you get one reply, that's probably better than real life if you're going for your looks match or a bit lower.

 

your post is 100% spot on. couldn't have said it better myself. Online Dating is no different than in person, but as you said, people can reject you easier and without emotion.

[some_username1]

Can you do that.. Go on lol.

 

I could, in fact I have an idea for a swipe app with an (as yet) unique USP that I think would solve *some* of the problems but in doing so create others, so I don’t think it’s worth my time to even prototype. People on swipe apps don’t want problems- even if those problems are actually for a better experience in the long run and that is a key issue with them imo. Trying to engage people by taking it seriously instead of as an ego-boost/time-killer is counter-productive really.

 

But I digress, on the subject of algorithms it would be commercial suicide to remove any kind of elo rating system. The core audience of a dating app is attractive women. Attractive women bring the thirsty dudes in their droves waving cash for the mere hope of being considered by a hot woman. The problem there is what is in it for the hot woman? If 50% of the time she swipes she is seeing a neck-beard with poor social skills in his mother’s basement she is going to close her account and stick to the likes of Tinder and Bumble which fall over themselves to give the hot woman the best experience possible.

 

When all the hot women leave the whole eco-system collapses. User engagement drops etc. You could try it as a social experiment of sorts, but you wouldn’t make a penny out of such an app. Algorithms are a necessary evil.

[some_username1]

 

But in general there's no difference in the quality of people online vs real life. The difference is the people rejecting you don't have to look at you in the eyes when they reject you, so what you're getting with OLD is the harsh truth of what the people you message think of you as a dating prospect. They can't use normal excuses like "I have a boyfriend" or "I'm not looking for a relationship right now" because they're on a dating website. So, you'll see a lot of your messages are read, but not replied too. Those same people not replying, if you had approached in real life, you would have gotten a BS excuse. Same outcome, you can just mass message with OLD. Let's say you write 50 women a day. Even if you get one reply, that's probably better than real life if you're going for your looks match or a bit lower. Whereas in real life, how likely is it you even encounter, let alone ask out, 50 women a day? Heck, 50 women a year? The average PUA says you need to approach 300 women to even get one hit. So from a pure numbers perspective, the odds for OLD are better than average if you are going for your looks match or lower. If you're going for women above your looks level, your rejection rate will be the same as it is in real life.

 

There is a lot of truth to this but I disagree that the same people rejecting you online would reject you in person. Body language and congruity is massive. Plus I don’t think I’ve ever encountered a woman who enjoys online dating. They want the old school experience- eyes across a crowded room etc. They want to be charmed by a voice not a pixel. If anything online dating makes it *easier* to chat women up in real life because (from what I get told by my dates) nobody is doing it in real life. Some surprisingly attractive women are saying that too. Guys are too busy with their phones talking to women on the internet to take a risk in real life. The bar scene is a gold mine for men these days and I’d be all over it if only I was better at thinking on my feet

[salparadise]

Started using those sites in 2014, been on over 100 dates and final conclusion is that it doesn't work - for multiple reasons.

 

All of them had issues, which everyone has, but the rejects find themselves on dating sites forever IMO. Beautiful women that are narcissists, permanently unavailable, permanently looking for men that don't exist, pathological liars, physical or mental issues, perpetual f*** ups - and they all have one thing in common, a perfect profile that will have you clawing to meet them.

 

Also don't forget the biggest issue with OLD, at any given time 60% or more are rebounding and need to go use a few people off them to realize they aren't anywhere close to being ready for a new relationship.

 

I think this ^ is a fairly accurate evaluation. My experience has been similar. I've had a lot of dates, and a few relationships that seemed good for awhile but then fizzled for various reasons... but all for the same reason if you look at the larger perspective and don't get mired in details.

 

Dating online changes people's attitudes and expectations in subtle ways they don't even realize at the time. You can take a normal person coming off of a divorce or the death of a spouse and put them online, and if they engage in the process for any length of time they can't help but be affected.

 

It's different for men and women too, because women tend to view being the chooser in the mating game as their entitlement and duty. We know they get bombarded with messages and offers, so they can be choosy. We also know they place the average threshold at the eightieth percentile, while they aren't even interested in average. They're looking for top tier guys only. These thing are often expressed in the profiles –– bragging about being highly selective, lists of what they will not accept, or stating explicitly what qualifications one must have before your message would be welcomed.

 

The Paradox of Choice. When people have seemingly unlimited choices, it makes it extremely difficult to choose, and to be satisfied once they do. They're always second guessing and reevaluating if they made the right choice... and in online dating the multitude of choices remain available after people start seeing someone, so they never really close the door on the inherent doubt. It's GIGs on steroids.

 

Everyone is aiming high. This study shows that, a) leagues do exist, and b) that both men and women are aiming above their heads in terms of who they deem acceptable. So if you're a man with a ranking of 5 (average on a 1-10 scale), you're looking for a 7.5 woman, while she's gunning for a 10... and not inclined to compromise.

 

People become hardened, cynical and distrustful. We reinforce our high walls to protect our hearts after having them broken a few times. What we really need to do is become more open to possibility, but that's not how it works. We lose our ability to be vulnerable, which is the key to the whole damn thing. My belief is that interactions through the dating sites, the commodification of feelings and intentions, contribute significantly to this hardening process. Who hasn't felt the sting of being ghosted or unmatched (before or after meeting) from the best prospect you've had in months, as if you had no value to them whatsoever? How many times can you experience this before it diminishes your belief that good things are even possible?

 

Another inherent factor that is undeniable –– people who are dating online (in the age category we're discussing) are all people who've failed at relationships (with few exceptions). That doesn't mean they aren't good people, or that the next one can't be successful, but it does mean that they're not among the other fifty percent who made their first marriage work, or had the dedication to stick it out through the ups and downs. So they all have baggage to some degree, and what we're talking about is pairing up two such people and hoping for success... or perhaps a miracle. I know a number of couples who've had success the second time around, but they seem to be the exceptions and not the rule.

 

I also believe that as we go through life there are windows of opportunity when certain things happen naturally. For example, a young child has a window of opportunity for acquiring languages; if they're exposed to multiple languages they absorb them like a sponge. That window closes later on. From our late teens through our twenties we seem to have an inherent capacity to fall in love. Later in life we seem to be resistant –– the need for love remains real, but our window of opportunity is partly closed.

 

I could probably write a book on this sh*t I've done it so much and thought about it so thoroughly. I've had several successes if you define success as relationships that lasted more than a few months, but finding "the one" is elusive. I've lowered my expectations and raised the bar on who I will consider dating. I'm off the paid sites (match) and rely mostly on Bumble now. The good thing about Bumble is that the women have to initiate. That doesn't mean that they'll continue, but it sure gets me (as a man) out of the business of making the effort to craft a nice message and getting virtually no responses. Since the women are ultimately doing all of the choosing anyway, why not just let them do it from the git-go? It saves us all a lot of time and trouble.

 

So I sit back and let'em come to me now. I don't get excited about anyone until she has shown that her interest remains high after the first few days and the initial messages. If she's still in (and interesting to me) and sending more than short replies I'll ask her out.

 

The thing to remember is, it only takes one to change your life... and you never know when that could happen. The trick is staying open to possibility, yet being realistic about the fact that you're looking for a needle in a haystack.

[TheFinalWord]

Plus I don’t think I’ve ever encountered a woman who enjoys online dating.

 

Well, if you look at my full post you will see I said that some of the filtering parameters that are automatic no goes with OLD can be overcome with real life interactions.

 

But I don't buy that women don't like OLD. Women are the primary drivers of OLD.

 

They may not enjoy it, but they benefit from it immensely. At least way more than men benefit.

 

For one, women are glued to their phones all day. Women can make a career putting their pics on IG, streaming themselves playing video games, selling their pics through Snapchat. They profit too much from OLD to not like it. Yeah, it doesn't give them the romantic fairy tale they want, but I don't see any of them complaining about not getting enough matches. If anything, it's options overload for them. What a hard problem to have (jk).

 

Second, one of the really interesting theories of the manosphere is that women's OLD behavior is a primary driver of why so many men are having problems these days.

 

Women get so much attention with OLD that their actual sexual market value is inflated. In other words, if we were limited to only real life, a woman that is a 5, would generally only get approached by a guy that is a 5 and all things being equal people would date their looks match.

 

However, women are so bombarded with matches and messages in OLD world, that they begin to see themselves as more attractive than they really are and they begin to reject their looks matches. It activates their hypergamy and they have unlimited dating options. It makes it hard for them to stick with one guy because every time they get online they have 400 matches to pick from.

 

"I'm a 5, but I matched with 10, 7's today. Let me keep swiping and maybe I'll match with a 9 tomorrow. Since it's OLD, I can ghost those other guys. If the 9 doesn't work, who cares, there's 100 more where that came from!"

 

OLD puts women in abundance mindset.

 

Imagine your confidence if you logged onto Tinder and had 300 matches. Each one telling you how beautiful you are. Would you ever run out of dating options? No. Antecdotally, you can see this on the forums. Women will talk all the time about how they had dozens of dates and aren't sure which guy they like. Men on the other hand, are lucky to get the same number of dates in their entire lifetime.

 

It's one theory to make sense of the fact that women have basically had the same amount of sex over the past 10 years, whereas the percentage of men having sex has decreased to the point that 30% of men between 18-30 reported having no sex in 2018.

Edited June 6, 2019 by TheFinalWord

[Ruby Slippers]

OLD puts women in abundance mindset.

Quite the opposite for me. More like: Wow, an endless sea of cheaters, creeps who just want to get laid, and losers Which is why I'm inclined to leave the dating sites in my rear-view mirror.

[TheFinalWord]

Quite the opposite for me. More like: Wow, an endless sea of cheaters, creeps who just want to get laid, and losers Which is why I'm inclined to leave the dating sites in my rear-view mirror.

 

I see what you are saying...BUT...

 

There's an "endless sea."

 

You have tons of people to match with with OLD. Yeah, 80% are not viable options, but you have those options at least. Tons of people cheat in real life too, it's just easier to cover your tracks online. Most men just want to get laid in real life too. But even that isn't as easy these days.

 

But my main point is most men wake up to ZERO matches, no replies to messages, no winks, likes, or anything.

 

Of those two options, an endless sea or a dry desert, which would you rather deal with? Which would be the most likely to eventually lead to something?

[alphamale]

OLD puts women in abundance mindset.

 

women are already in "abundance mindset" in real life (without OLD)

 

the majority of women can get laid whenever they want - and attractive women have a plethora of choices in everything

[Poke]

Quite the opposite for me. More like: Wow, an endless sea of cheaters, creeps who just want to get laid, and losers Which is why I'm inclined to leave the dating sites in my rear-view mirror.

 

Yes to this! I’m not perfect, but there sure is an overabundance of damaged guys in my neck of the woods and I seem to attract them all.

[guest569]

I find that really hard to believe enigma but you're in a big city right?

[some_username1]

I find that really hard to believe enigma but you're in a big city right?

 

Never EVER under-estimate a man’s need for sex to the extent that he would take whatever he can get.

 

In fact (and in all seriousness) you could restore some equilibrium to the dating scene by having a widget on Facebook that tells the world who a man has swiped right on and what messages he has sent. Ripped dudes DO NOT want their pretty future conquests to see how deep the barrel they have been scraping is, nor do they want their friends to know.

 

I’d also love to know what would happen if Enigma’s friend were to say to the ripped dude “okay, let’s have sex but first I want you to take me to a few bars in town and show off that we are together tonight”. ThAt is the point when ripped dude would cut and run and would tell his friend all she needs to know about the decisions she seems to be making.

[chillii]

lf the time ever came l'd use it again , probably the same one.

More so though not expecting anything really but just keeping my eye out for that one special lady type thing , never do know.

l never understand the matches thing l always read round here not sure how they work l never even looked at 99% of ones they sent me l thought it was just advertising, and they sent a lot .

l did my own scanning had no idea so called matches they sent were suppose to be serious, helpful or whatever the idea is.

lf l'm ever there again l must take a look at them haha.

[JuneL]

I find that really hard to believe enigma but you're in a big city right?

 

It’s much easier for women to find a casual hookup, because unlike guys, many women are not willing to do that. But a heterosexual monogamous couple consists of exactly one male and one female; it’s a myth to think women have a much easier time getting into a serious relationship. What’s the use of getting tons of messages, when over 90% of them are from weirdos?

 

His friend might be having fun hooking up with good looking guys now. But the fun may wear off soon, and she’ll doubt whether she’s only good for sex only.

[chillii]

Yeah it is a myth . l know l could've remarried 4 or 5 times already since my divorce but l met a lot of great women that couldn't find a relationship let alone marriage or spent years on 4 or 5 date sites at once and never got anywhere, the date site thing alone is just an allusion, hum drum. lt all evens out in the end just different things easier harder what goes round comes round.

Edited June 7, 2019 by chillii

[Ruby Slippers]

That is what's up with OLD.

So... women can get easy sexy easily. This is true in real life and online. Always has been, always will be.

 

Of those two options, an endless sea or a dry desert, which would you rather deal with? Which would be the most likely to eventually lead to something?

For women who want hookups, sure, dating sites make it a easier to narrow down the many options to the best, according to your preferences. It's true that many staggeringly good-looking men have messaged me on dating sites, some of them pretending to want something real, but most obviously after one thing. So I never took that bait.

 

Few women want hookups only, and for women, hookups don't usually lead anywhere useful.

 

For women who want something more, which is most of us, dating sites don't offer much.