Online Dating & Relationships Forums

Dating Sites are for women


Truestory

Anonymous
blah
If you're a guy, and you've tried a dating site before and it hasn't worked for you, then you're among plenty other men who have had the same experience. I have read so many forums and posts about how these men have tried these websites and they are upset that women either completely ignore their messages, or send one or two responses before ignoring their messages. All the women defending themselves respond something like this: "If we aren't interested, we can ignore whoever we want. Move on and find someone else." Yet, how are we supposed to do that when nearly every single woman we message does the same thing? It literally turns into a thing of luck in the end.

Ladies, this isn't a game. You put yourselves out there like you're trying to find your dream man, and even if your profile is almost 100% similar with his, if he sends you something like "Hello", he is simply ignored because he "isn't trying hard enough". I understand that there are a lot of weirdos out there, and I understand if you feel uncomfortable sending messages back to guys because they "seem creepy", but what is your ultimate goal? Why have you put yourself out there on a website if you don't want to talk to anyone? Oh, sorry, anyone who doesn't look like David Beckham. I get that there are more guys on these websites than girls, but that is strictly because it is harder for men to find women. We're the ones who have to make all the effort and even if we put in enough effort, 9 times out of 10, we will be rejected. I've seen women post on their profiles something like: "Only message me if you're not creepy. Etc, etc..." How on God's green earth would you know if they are creepy or not? Why even post that? Do you honestly think that will keep creepy men from messaging you? If you don't want "creepy" men messaging you, do yourself, and all of us a favor, and delete your profile.

I've skimmed through these websites saying they have all the online dating tips for men, and how to change up your profile and how to properly message women and you will begin receiving a lot more messages, winks, dates, whatever. Why should we HAVE to comment on something on their profile? Why should we HAVE to ask them a question? Why should we HAVE to say anything other than "hello"? Women want us to take the time to read their profiles and then include something we read, as well as ask them a question about something we read also. Why should we do that when they don't do it? On most of these tip websites it claims that women get hundreds of messages a day, so by that logic the only reason we include ANYTHING other than "hello" in our messages is so these women can go onto our profile, ignore what we've written, look at our pictures and see if we're good looking enough for them to give us the pleasure of their response to our question(s). I could be wrong, but if these ladies really do get so many messages, why would they even bother reading every single guy's profile? So, why even bother posting an "About you"?

The way I see it, it really comes down to one of three things: 60% of these women already have boyfriends, and either they or their friends made a profile of them to laugh at all the "lonely losers". 30% of these women really are THAT stuck up and only talk to the best looking guys. 10% of these women are genuine users looking for a legitimate relationship.

One last point I'd like to make is this: If you're too shy to message these women in the first place, do NOT waste your money on a website that costs money to sign up. In fact, don't waste your money at all. I mean logically speaking, why would any woman in their right mind pay for a dating site?

So forget it guys. Don't even waste time or money. Find a woman in person. You might get rejected, but there's a better chance you won't. Atleast she said something to you.
 Quote

joy

Anonymous
I think I belong to that 10% women that are genuine users looking for a legitimate relationship ONLINE. Though I had to say its my fault why I reach my 30's without having a boyfriend. You might not believe it but because its all about work. I'm really caught up with work that I let many dates and guys slip away. This is no ones fault but mine. I accept the mere fact that its too late for me. But some friends and relatives told me that my guy will come. Then I realize why nothing happened, and still my fault. I still spend my days and night with computers, documents to read, website to make, deadlines to meet, on my office. This make me knows nothing- AS IN ZERO- about dating. I just keep on browsing with list of profiles on dating site but I dont click on them to view and read their profile. Of course I saw some really good looking guy but then I feel shy again, in the end, I just close the browser. Do you have any idea how hard it is to be like me. Im sure Im not the only one experiencing this. But I hope and pray their Mr. Right will find them. Because sometimes, its hard to be alone. You cannot share some thoughts to your family and friends because you dont want them to be worried so you end up standing on your own. What does a woman really want is just someone they can depend upon, because after all we all have our own weakness and sadness. I really want to be brave and ask some guys to date but I simply cant. Its so hard to date at this age. I guess Ill just pray. So atleast, I try once before giving up. If nothing happens with online dating site then I guess its okay with me. I still have my work and life goes on. Smile Good luck!
 Quote

Status: offline

Maraphax

Forum User
Junior
Registered: 2013/06/11
Posts: 16
As much as I consider myself an excellent writer, I couldn't have said it better than the OP did.

I will add to this a bit... a theory perhaps. It's my impression that is is primarily an issue with *North American* women. I believe the reason for this stems from mass media.

For decades, mass media has always been supported by capitalism. I'm not putting down capitalism. It does what it does. The bottom line is what counts. For decades, the bottom line for marketing through mass media was targeted to those with money to spend. This meant men. Sure, marketing was far more limited compared to today. First it was just newsprint, and then radio.... then television.

Marketing targeted women, more directly and with less confusion about gender roles. I'm not saying this was right or wrong, just that marketing was pretty straightforward for both women and men.

Since then, North American society has continually liberated our views on gender roles. Here we are at a point where women are told they can be and achieve just about anything. And it is true that women earn more money and find themselves in important occupational roles more than ever before. This also means that more women than ever before have money to spend.

And money is what draws the attention of marketing... which turns the weapons of mass media towards women.

But for the mass media, liberated roles aren't good enough. They want maximum effect. From the fringe liberal women to the most conservative housewife.

They achieve this by bombarding women with symbolism that often conflicts. Women are taught from the beginning of their lives an assortment of contradictions in order to appeal to as wide a consumer base as possible... therefore maximizing the consumer potential through the mass media. "Women are strong and independent!" is a theme that is often not all that far away from "Find a handsome, financially stable man to propose to you with a rather large and expensive diamond ring". This is just one of many examples of dichotomies fed to women.

The result is that North American women are taught to believe that they can have Superman and Clark Kent at the same time... or have a bad boy who treats them right... or a wealthy man with a modest view... and so on. Even the perception of what constitutes an attractive male is programmed into women. I saw a woman online who promotes a "BBW" themed night club, and she was posting screen shots from the film "Magic Mike" on her Facebook page. I've seen other women who think that you have to be 6 feet tall with tattoos up and down your arms to be attractive. It makes me think how in the 80's it was about what clothing he wore, and in the 70's "attractive men" had hairy chests and a mustache or even a beard. Today, it's the goatee. Tomorrow it might very well be sideburns again like it was in the 90's.

And the funny thing about it is that men who may very well have been thought of as "attractive" in one decade are totally undesireable ten years later. As for what men find attractive, that hasn't changed in a very long time.... hundreds, thousands, perhaps even a hundred thousand years' time. We notice boobs, butt, hips, legs... all those things that offer physical sexual suggestion. We also notice eyes, a smile, complexion, hair, voice, smell... attitude... etc.

Women notice thhat level of detail in men, sure. But with North American women, it is often an afterthought to the programmed images associated with "attractiveness" that the mass media has fed them. With men, we notice a handful of details right around when we notice the more sexually-oriented features. It's a total experience for us. We take yih in at first encounter... all of you.

When considering the internet and dating profiles, that decreases some... and yes, all humans are visual creatueesr. I would think even blind people visualize things in their own way. Certainly the deaf rely on visuals. So naturally, men and women both usually go for the pictures first in profiles. But there is where the similarity ends.

For most men, if the woman is attractive by a human standard, great. Some with immediately message... others will then read the profiles (YES we do!).

For women, it is the OP above said. They go straight for the pics like men do, but when they review the pics they are running the physical appearances through their mass media provided "acceptability filters". Now, some women have less restrictive physical criteria than others.Sometimes this is because a particular woman is less conditioned by mass media; she has resisted the programming and is perhaps more in tune with her own independent thought process and sexuality. For other women, they may simply loosen their restrictions because low self-esteem tells them they aren't food enough for the "David Beckhams" and should just stick to the "Seth Rogans" who at least might have some potential.

So what is the point here? Men are more resistant to programming by mass media when it comes to what they consider to be "attractive"; no matter how much Calvin Klein and much of the fashion community has tried for nearly two decades to convince men that "super skinny is sexy", in the end the returning interest is in women with "curves", because from.the dawn of human ity it's those curves that signify femininity and set women apart from men.

But why can't women be this way? It's ironic, but mass media may have shown us that men aren't nearly as concerned with image as women are.

If image is the foundation under shallow behavior... does this mean that women have a greater potential to be more shallow than men do?

I suppose it depends on your definition of "shallow"... but it seems pretty clear that mass media has fed women a lot of ideas and they gobble it up like a hungry stray dog who just dug its way into a dogfood factory.
 Quote

Status: offline

Maraphax

Forum User
Junior
Registered: 2013/06/11
Posts: 16
I apologize for any typos, I am on a tablet and I am constantly reminded why virtual keypads will never fully replace the tactile feel of a keyboard with actual physical keys.

You should be able to read the above and understand what I'm saying.
 Quote

All times are EST. The time is now 12:16 am.

  • Normal Topic
  • Sticky Topic
  • Locked Topic
  • New Post
  • Sticky Topic W/ New Post
  • Locked Topic W/ New Post
  •  View Anonymous Posts
  •  Able to post
  •  HTML Allowed
  •  Censored Content