El Reg's festive dating app guide, Pt. 2: The FEMALE perspective There's no need to be home alone this Christmas. In part one we looked at the male perspective and in this second and final part, Lucy Orr reveals all about the online dating game. I’m a serial monogamist and part time cougar but it wasn’t until a rather unhappy breakup in 2009 that I even had the slightest inkling that online …
"My initial motivation after my break up was that I was suddenly at a loss for a suitable companion to drag to punk gigs and play Tekken with"
Seems like solid profile to me...
Truth-based reaction aside, thanks for an honest and personal account of your experience.
Now I just need to work out how to reconcile your comment above with my wife's request to buy two Tekken games she only played once each with me. Her earlier confidence leads me suspect she only ever played against nubs before me. Should I not have rubbed her face in it? (My profile said I would rub her face in it.)
After reading this article, and the previous one written from another perspective I think we need broader coverage.
I'm thinking of people like the bloke who likes cars http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/2000899/Man-admits-having-sex-with-1000-cars.html
Particularly now that a lot of other stuff (like cars) are signing up to the Internet Of Things.
I met mine on-line when I wasn't searching, we just happened to have a mutual friend. She was on another continent, so clearly nothing was ever going to happen so we were both just ourselves rather than trying to be the person we though the other one wanted. That was over sixteen years ago, we've been married for fifteen, and a lot of paperwork submitted to the immigration people (it was much easier back then).
Those were the days of dial-up internet too, before it went unmetered, so my phone bill was horrendous with all the time chatting and the international phone calls (no Skype either).
I met my spouse online 13 years ago. But not on a dating site.
The trouble with dating sites is, everyone there has one thing in mind. (Not all precisely the same "one thing", but close enough.) And it's enough to deter anyone from being honestly, uninhibitedly themselves.
Of which countless can be found up the street and down the block. Dating sites should include in depth psychological profile testing with bio-feedback polygraph tests. There also needs to be a depth charge detector test for people who have the potential for vindictiveness. And, surely, we need to know the likelihood of maturation away from one's previous self, that may result in divorce and injury to children. I am almost of a mind that people need to be licensed to have children, or at least be made to attend a year long course in non-traumatic, genius making child rearing technique. We simply need to get smarter, faster.
BTW, great cartoons with the article. Should be made a regular feature.
try this:
I'm going to ask you a series of questions, just relax and answer them as simply as you can.
Q. It's your birthday, someone gives you a cat skin wallet?
A. I wouldn't accept it. Also, I'd report the person that gave it to me to the police."
or,
Q, Your walking in the desert and you come across a tortoise. You turn it over, letting it's soft underside bake in the hot sun. you see it kicking, but you're not helping it. Why aren't you helping it? Maybe you're fed up. Maybe you want to be by yourself. Who knows? You look down and and watch the tortoise.
A: What do you mean, I'm not helping? Do you make these questions up?
Q: I mean: you're not helping! Why is that?
They're just questions, In answer to your query, they're written down for me. It's a test, designed to provoke an emotional response... Shall we continue?
<snip>
I would put the tortoise on an anthill and when all the flesh had been eaten and the carapace was cleaned out, I think it would be a brilliant place to store my new cat skin wallet.
Do not forget that psychopaths are everywhere and it is not necessarily a bad thing <insert smiley thing>.
> I would put the tortoise on an anthill and when all the flesh had been eaten and the carapace was cleaned out, I think it would be a brilliant place to store my new cat skin wallet.
Clearly that test was designed to weed out replicants¹, not legionnaires. :-)
¹ It's a reference to a well-known film from the early 80s. I'm surprised I could identify it since I haven't watched it in many years.
... since we all, I ass+u+me, want to be with people who are useful, share at least some of our interests, have a sense of humor, are kind and considerate, and are NOT mooching psychic vampires with abusive tendencies, right? Unless you're into that, of course.
Yeah I expected this to have more analysis of what was specific to a woman's experience of online dating rather than just a brief mention of dick pics and then move on to things which were clearly only relevant to the individual involved. Not that I am unfamiliar with what women experience on these sites but the content didn't exactly mesh with the title.
I thought women were supposed to be deeper than men and be more interested on what's inside rather than outer physical attributes, appears they are just as shallow as us and all that looking into the eyes/window to the soul codswallop is exactly that, twaddle.
And while I'm at it, what's wrong with bin diving. It's a derogatory term for an eco-friendly activity. I wouldn't touch the food but there's some good stuff to be found in skips, especially if your into re-purposing.
I've been bin diving since the age of about 10, found my first Jerry Lee Lewis album and a few others in a bin behind a supermarket, all of them played perfectly well.
Depends on what the woman in question wants. As it has been exhaustively studied, physical appearance is used as a proxy for the real qualities a woman is looking for, and it not by itself a big factor in their choice for a long term relationship.
To put it in a wide perspective, depending on the moment of their lives, women are looking for one of these things, or a combination of them: adventure and amusement (likes to travel, makes me laugh, likes to do xxxx), stability (able to commit to a long term relationship and not just in for a quick romp), safety (able to sustain himself and perhaps sustain myself too) and recognition (appreciates me or makes me feel more appreciated by others because of my association with him)
Certainly, there's no direct correlation in any of these qualities with physical appearance. But someone who is good looking certainly scores better in the "stability", "safety" and "recognition" dimensions because at least it shows that he can take care of himself to a point.
Having a fat wallet also scores well in the "stability", "safety" and "recognition" parts, however to avoid the "gold digger" stigma it is not something that is being asked for directly. But again, someone with a big bank account usually can afford to at least have decent to good appearance, so it is used as well.
I have been asked how much I earn a few times. More often I'm asked what my job is (tantamount to the same thing really).
I don't mind so much, as I'm primarily interested in how a woman looks (although it isn't my sole criterion, it is important to me), so I figure both sides have their priorities. Sadly, being unemployed means that no women are interested in me (mind you, they weren't when I was working either).
I HAVE eaten stuff from skips - been arrested several times for it, too. Seems one man's trash is another man's £50 fine and 100 hours of community service.
I was homeless and starving - much of the stuff supermarkets chuck is very much still edible, it's only petty EU regulations which prohibit it from still being on sale. How DID we survive before 'best before' and 'use by' dates…?! It's a wonder there's anyone still left alive!
M&S and Waitrose provided the richest (in every sense) pickings, as would probably be expected (smoked salmon, smoked rainbow trout, mackerel fillets, pâté (chicken liver, smoked salmon, mackerel, mushroom, de fois gras (that went straight back - I was shocked that either were selling it!), plenty of fruit and dairy). Tesco wasn't worth bothering with, Sainsbury's wasn't bad. Used to get a lot of sarnies from Sainsbury's because it was only a Local; I don't eat bread myself, but I had plenty of takers.
There were places where the fuzz turned a blind eye - yep, plod with consciences DO exist (apologies to any who might be reading this, but my experience with plod, on the whole, ain't been good to say the least).
Shouldn't be a crime anyway; it's been thrown out so, presumably, the thrower didn't want it anymore which, to my mind, makes it fair game. Why arrest someone for being hungry…?
".....Shouldn't be a crime anyway; it's been thrown out so, presumably, the thrower didn't want it anymore which, to my mind, makes it fair game. Why arrest someone for being hungry…?" In England and Wales you may be prosecuted under the Theft Act as, until the rubbish has left the property, it still legally belongs to the store (even though they no longer want it). The other thing you could be charged with is trespass as the bins for supermarkets are usually kept inside the store's backyard, and your entering the yard usually triggers security systems meant to detect thieves trying to break into the store, resulting in a police response. Coppers don't like having their time wasted and may seek to limit freegan activity (and the subsequent false alarms) in their areas by making an example of you. As you said, where there are no alarms and no wasting of their time many coppers will turn a blind eye.
It could be worse - a few years back a couple decided to park up for some nookie in the backyard of a local bank and it was an armed response unit that got sent round to deal with the suspected bank robbers. The story (and video) did the rounds as the police unit were testing body cams!
> I HAVE eaten stuff from skips - been arrested several times for it, too. Seems one man's trash is another man's £50 fine and 100 hours of community service.
The UK is so fucked up. When I was living in Spain¹ we used to go bin diving with the Mayor (I'm not kidding). :)
¹ At least in my area, one day a week was designated for oversize objects (furniture, appliances, ...), most of which ended up at student flats a few hours latter.
I think you'll find that with respect to the law Spain has caught up with the UK and it is an offence to take something out of a bin. Even so, people did and still do, at least in my little corner of the country, leave things on the bottle banks and such for others to pick up.
>oversize objects
That's only if they can get to the stuff before the gypsies who are constantly cruising around in trucks looking for things to pick up. However, another law has made it harder for them to get rid of scrap metal so now they appear to be collecting paper and cardboard often by raiding the recycling bins.
@Matt - The UK catch all law is theft by finding, doesn't matter what it is, if it's in a bin or not, find something and keep it in and you could be prosecuted. When possible eating the evidence is probably the best course of action if you see them coming.
> I think you'll find that with respect to the law Spain has caught up with the UK and it is an offence to take something out of a bin.
Come to think of it, I think a Spanish friend of mine might have mentioned it recently. Then again, what is it to be expected in a country where it's illegal to vote (as far as the politicians in Madrid are concerned, let's see what the courts have to say).
> That's only if they can get to the stuff before the gypsies who are constantly cruising around in trucks looking for things to pick up.
Yeah, it's strictly first come first served. :)
> now they appear to be collecting paper and cardboard often by raiding the recycling bins.
I'd much rather have them doing the collection than FCC (big Spanish multinational who also have a near monopoly on bin collections).
>The deal with Spain is that the bins are on the street and not on anyone's property.
That is not completely correct. Some bins are on the street, others are owned by the residents and are put out for collection. Also, at least in Madrid, we pay an extra refuse collection tax per household which really pisses me off because each flat of a block of whatever size pays the tax when the block may only have a couple of bins. And even worse, the amount is based on the value of your property.
The whole "we're not so shallow" act is oh so stupid. You have to be into someone if you are in a long term relationship. You can't ignore your inner animal forever. Sooner or later your revulsion of your partner will rear it's ugly head. Then the marriage will implode.
You can't ignore your inner animal. You need something to keep yourself from strangling the other person when things get difficult. Genuinely fancying them helps in this regard quite a bit.
Many ideas sound good or "enlightened" when you first hear them but are ultimately completely impractical or ultimately highly destructive.
Eternity will likely include a few dark days and you need ever advantage you can get.
Definitely where it's at in London. Met my girl there a year ago now, and friends have found success there too. As for the others:
- eHarmony is a cultural wasteland, as is Match
- OKCupid seems to be full of weirdos (for better or worse)
- Tinder is mostly for self-validation
It's to weed out broke idiots. You still have idiots, of course. They're just not broke.
Similar to clubs that charge ridiculous entry fees.
I've had a subscription with an equally expensive site (which turned out to be useless nevertheless) for what must have been a year and a half or so.
But they had a nice forum (which was free).
And I got a nice psychological evaluation or myself.
There are also a lot of decent compassionate friendly people out there with whom you could, with maybe a lot of time and energy, create a spark.
And that is all you need to know about why online dating will not work for you either if you're not lucky enough to be the kind of handsome fellow women fall for in droves in real life. "Nice guys (/ girls?)" just get ignored both on- and offline.
1. Bin diving sounds better than six-hour board games.
2. If there is serial monogamy, why not parallel monogamy? One of Theodore Roosevelt's uncles managed this, I believe: two households unknown to each other, a very few blocks apart.
3. I am grateful to have spent my single days before the invention of on-line dating, mostly since I seldom turned down a chance to make a fool of myself.
(aging male, in case there was any doubt.)
It would have been nice if the cartoonist had acknowledged that Banksy, quite some months ago, did a picture named Mobile Lovers which is remarkably similar to the cartoonist's "Mobile Obsessed" cartoon...
I missed the men's version (terrible internet connection here in China), so sorry if this has been already said.
The Rules of Internet Dating
DONT SEND THEM MONEY
Dont fall in love with a photo.
DONT SEND THEM MONEY
10 minutes video chat is worth a year of text.
DONT SEND THEM MONEY
International dating is great value, even if you dont hit it off, you usually get a free tourist guide for the duration.
DONT SEND THEM MONEY
Understand??
(Married for 3 1/2 years to a Chinese girl I met on an international dating site).
..particularly if your lifestyle or requirements are in any way beyond a standard opposite sex relationship with a day job and 2.4 kids. I meet a lot of new people, and online dating is actually pretty damn good (comparatively) in terms of finding someone available, of a vaguely suitable age, attractive enough, where you fancy each other. You can filter out and get a yes/no answer comparatively quickly.
Meeting people is not difficult. Meeting the right available people is.
Nigel Whitfield signed-off Pt.1 with the words:
[...] come back next week to read about the altogether more wholesome experiences of Lucy Orr.
If that's what he was told at the time, I imagine he felt as misled as I did when (if) he read Pt.2! (I think Nige needs to get out more.)
And it doesn't end there; you could not stable these two articles together without one of them's bum sticking out of the skylight!
Pt.1: Apps, apps, apps, etiquette, apps, meeting IRL (sans meaningful words thereupon).
Pt.2: Apps, ... oh bugger, Nige said most of what needed saying about the apps, er ... etiquette, expectations, meeting IRL (deluxe version).
Would have worked much better as a single article on the apps, plus twinned articles on the human/IRL factors.
(as Jane says to Tom in Stillman's Metropolitan)
I doubt online dating will ever be something I want to try, even if circumstances left me single again. (To be honest, I'm not sure I'd even want to date again if something should happen to my wife. Certainly not for a long time, and I'm not getting any younger. Friends and family would provide social contact and after this many years together it's really difficult to imagine being romantically intimate with someone else.) But I understand its appeal for others, and it's interesting to hear how they negotiate these new social structures.
I've read a few of these accounts (though I missed part 1 of this series; maybe I'll go find it), and some of them are pretty entertaining, like Brian Donovan's short ebook Not a Match. (I got it as a Kindle Single; dunno if it's available in other forms.) It's a bit peripatetic but was good for a few chuckles.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
