5 ms·

They use a man as an example for the story, but I'd bet my last dollar this is mostly something women do. And it seems perfectly reasonable, too. The big prob

by tsotha 11y ago

They use a man as an example for the story, but I'd bet my last dollar this is mostly something women do. And it seems perfectly reasonable, too. The big problem for women on dating sites is too much choice, so any reasonable criteria they can use to winnow down the crowd is a worth applying. If you send a message riddled with spelling and punctuation mistakes, what you're really saying is "I'm not taking this seriously enough to spend an extra five minutes proofreading my message." You may as well write "Hey, I'm here for the sex, and don't expect me to put any effort into it." Probably fine if your looks can justify that kind of attitude, but for the rest of us... And yeah, it shouldn't be surprising nobody on Grindr cares.

Mz 11y ago
Probably fine if your looks can justify that kind of attitude, but for the rest of us... Women tend to care less about "looks" -- or, at least, care differently. I have seen studies that indicate that women are typically looking for "looks" that suggest career success more than hot bod.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 11y ago
  I wonder how many of the people talking up this kind of biotruth have an insufficiently-fine rumpus.
  - Mz 11y ago
    If you are suggesting that I am an ugly man, no. I am a woman and, by all accounts, I have an adequately fine rump, as well as other assets in the looks department. And I am one of those women who isn't looking for a hot bod per se, but who would not go so far as to say "Looks don't matter." as just one data point, backing my earlier statement -- I mean, in addition to having seen studies, as I stated earlier. Also: FYI: * rum·pus a noisy disturbance; a commotion. "he caused a rumpus with his flair for troublemaking"
  - JesperRavn 11y ago
    Are you seriously saying that ugly people aren't able to form a reasoned opinion on dating? That's a horrible thing to say.
    - hugh4 11y ago
      One could argue that the experiences of people at both ends of the attractiveness bell curve are so atypical that they will emerge with a poor understanding of how it works for everyone else. Also, please don't use "omg did you say that I can't believe you said that" as an argument.
      - JesperRavn 11y ago
        I'm sorry, I'll stick to using "you must be an ugly loser" as an argument in future.
    - GFK_of_xmaspast 11y ago
      No of course not, I'm merely asking about the presence of a correlation.
- 7Figures2Commas 11y ago
  > Women tend to care less about "looks" -- or, at least, care differently. I have seen studies that indicate that women are typically looking for "looks" that suggest career success more than hot bod. From http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dating/ http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dati...: > As you can see from the gray line, women rate an incredible 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium. Very harsh. > Paradoxically, it seems it’s women, not men, who have unrealistic standards for the “average” member of the opposite sex. But there's also this: > On the other hand, when it comes to actual messaging, women shift their expectations only just slightly ahead of the curve, which is a healthier pattern than guys’ pursuing the all-but-unattainable. But with the basic ratings so out-of-whack, the two curves together suggest some strange possibilities for the female thought process, the most salient of which is that the average-looking woman has convinced herself that the vast majority of males aren’t good enough for her, but she then goes right out and messages them anyway. Perhaps this speaks to your "differently" point, but it's still amusing (or disturbing depending on one's relationship status) that online daters appear to generally be so disconnected from reality. This really isn't shocking though. The biggest problem with online dating is that it gives people the false impression they have unlimited options. The perfect person (handsome/gorgeous, educated, fun, wealthy, emotionally available, etc.) who will put your past dates to shame could always join tomorrow. This dynamic leads to people becoming incredibly picky[1], so the bar for what constitutes "attractive", "educated", "wealthy", etc. is for many always rising beyond what will ever realistically be available to them. [1] http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/PSPI-online_dating-proof.pdf http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/PSPI-online_dating-p...
  - Mz 11y ago
    Online daters are not the be all and end all of humanity. What people say in studies on dating sites may not be representative of humanity as a whole.
    - 7Figures2Commas 11y ago
      I never said they were. Frankly, the studies should motivate singles to make a concerted effort to get out and interact with people in real life.
- balladeer 11y ago
  > I have seen studies From my real life experiences, which mostly included asking female friends and colleagues, those studies have always sounded absurd, pretentious, and stupid. Looks matter a lot. Really a lot; for either sex. That is almost ubiquitously true especially for these dating sites. This guy put it really good there: > “It’s the visual. I don’t think anybody reads these things,” says Mr. Simkhai. “If you’re hot and attractive to the other person, you’ll meet them. Grammar? Are you kidding?” That's exactly how it works, aberrations or exceptions aside.

by tsotha 11y ago

Mz 11y ago

Probably fine if your looks can justify that kind of attitude, but for the rest of us... Women tend to care less about "looks" -- or, at least, care differently. I have seen studies that indicate that women are typically looking for "looks" that suggest career success more than hot bod.

GFK_of_xmaspast 11y ago
I wonder how many of the people talking up this kind of biotruth have an insufficiently-fine rumpus.
- Mz 11y ago
  If you are suggesting that I am an ugly man, no. I am a woman and, by all accounts, I have an adequately fine rump, as well as other assets in the looks department. And I am one of those women who isn't looking for a hot bod per se, but who would not go so far as to say "Looks don't matter." as just one data point, backing my earlier statement -- I mean, in addition to having seen studies, as I stated earlier. Also: FYI: * rum·pus a noisy disturbance; a commotion. "he caused a rumpus with his flair for troublemaking"
- JesperRavn 11y ago
  Are you seriously saying that ugly people aren't able to form a reasoned opinion on dating? That's a horrible thing to say.
  - hugh4 11y ago
    One could argue that the experiences of people at both ends of the attractiveness bell curve are so atypical that they will emerge with a poor understanding of how it works for everyone else. Also, please don't use "omg did you say that I can't believe you said that" as an argument.
    - JesperRavn 11y ago
      I'm sorry, I'll stick to using "you must be an ugly loser" as an argument in future.
  - GFK_of_xmaspast 11y ago
    No of course not, I'm merely asking about the presence of a correlation.
7Figures2Commas 11y ago
> Women tend to care less about "looks" -- or, at least, care differently. I have seen studies that indicate that women are typically looking for "looks" that suggest career success more than hot bod. From http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dating/ http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dati...: > As you can see from the gray line, women rate an incredible 80% of guys as worse-looking than medium. Very harsh. > Paradoxically, it seems it’s women, not men, who have unrealistic standards for the “average” member of the opposite sex. But there's also this: > On the other hand, when it comes to actual messaging, women shift their expectations only just slightly ahead of the curve, which is a healthier pattern than guys’ pursuing the all-but-unattainable. But with the basic ratings so out-of-whack, the two curves together suggest some strange possibilities for the female thought process, the most salient of which is that the average-looking woman has convinced herself that the vast majority of males aren’t good enough for her, but she then goes right out and messages them anyway. Perhaps this speaks to your "differently" point, but it's still amusing (or disturbing depending on one's relationship status) that online daters appear to generally be so disconnected from reality. This really isn't shocking though. The biggest problem with online dating is that it gives people the false impression they have unlimited options. The perfect person (handsome/gorgeous, educated, fun, wealthy, emotionally available, etc.) who will put your past dates to shame could always join tomorrow. This dynamic leads to people becoming incredibly picky[1], so the bar for what constitutes "attractive", "educated", "wealthy", etc. is for many always rising beyond what will ever realistically be available to them. [1] http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/PSPI-online_dating-proof.pdf http://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/PSPI-online_dating-p...
- Mz 11y ago
  Online daters are not the be all and end all of humanity. What people say in studies on dating sites may not be representative of humanity as a whole.
  - 7Figures2Commas 11y ago
    I never said they were. Frankly, the studies should motivate singles to make a concerted effort to get out and interact with people in real life.
balladeer 11y ago
> I have seen studies From my real life experiences, which mostly included asking female friends and colleagues, those studies have always sounded absurd, pretentious, and stupid. Looks matter a lot. Really a lot; for either sex. That is almost ubiquitously true especially for these dating sites. This guy put it really good there: > “It’s the visual. I don’t think anybody reads these things,” says Mr. Simkhai. “If you’re hot and attractive to the other person, you’ll meet them. Grammar? Are you kidding?” That's exactly how it works, aberrations or exceptions aside.