I never get laid. Feeling undesirable or something.

[welkin]

The impression I'm always left with is that whilst the date has been pleasant it has been dreadfully platonic. It oftens feels more like 2 friends having a chat rather than something that may go somewhere.

I'm not expecting to be leaping into bed with them after a first date but to get anywhere surely there has to be inkling of 'sexual tension'?

Ironically, this is easier if you're kinky and looking for someone who can fulfill a particular kink. Then you can just flirt with some more explicit sexual undertones or even openly discuss your kinks, which will allow you to establish a sexual connection and have a greater chance at finding what you need.

This strategy might offend a non-kinky girl, but she will not be what you want anyway so you can reject her or be rejected by her without hard feelings, and a kinky girl will understand why you're being so straightforward.

If you aren't kinky... hmm... then I'm at a loss.

 

[CWatson]

...or my idiotic nervousness whenever I end up talking to someone I like. Or perhaps part of the problem is I seem to like just about any cute girl who is willing to talk to me (is that wrong though? )

That's the underconfidence we were talking of. Or, more accurately, the desperation. Women can smell this from a mile off and they don't like it.

Counter-intuitive as it sounds, it's okay to not like a girl just because she likes you. Being selective will actually get you farther than complete accessibility.

Shiny> Internet dating means what exactly? Are you chatting online, or actually meeting up in person? I mean, talking online can be a good start, I suppose, but, I can't see myself not actually "knowing" the person until I meet.

It's like Facebook, except it's okay to message strangers. You put stuff on your profile, they put stuff on their profile, you compare notes. Yes, it's obviously possible to fake things, but that's counter-productive, and most sites have some sort of moderation function where you can point them at profiles you think are fakes. Generally you use on-site e-mail to have conversations, and then go from there however you feel comfortable--phone messages, normal e-mail, Facebook, etc. (If you're going to try one, I recommend OKCupid.)

 

[toshiskitten]

That's the underconfidence we were talking of. Or, more accurately, the desperation. Women can smell this from a mile off and they don't like it.

Counter-intuitive as it sounds, it's okay to not like a girl just because she likes you. Being selective will actually get you farther than complete accessibility.



It's like Facebook, except it's okay to message strangers. You put stuff on your profile, they put stuff on their profile, you compare notes. Yes, it's obviously possible to fake things, but that's counter-productive, and most sites have some sort of moderation function where you can point them at profiles you think are fakes. Generally you use on-site e-mail to have conversations, and then go from there however you feel comfortable--phone messages, normal e-mail, Facebook, etc. (If you're going to try one, I recommend OKCupid.)

Great recommendation. I love OKCupid. It's how I met my boyfriend.

 

[Mac98]

I kinda disagree with Welkin. That is to say, if all girls are like this, I find it kinda shallow. Not that I think anything's wrong with you, Welkin, I just mean that first dates usually hold an air of awkwardness and so it's normal sometimes for people to do faux-pas. I don't see why there should be do's and dont's to dates (of course, whipping it out or farting should be a no-no, but you get what I mean).

Everyone you'll ever meet or have a first date with will have a certain something about them that you both like and dislike. Sometimes even love or hate. But that's normal. That's what it's like being a human being meeting another human being for the first time in a romantic setting.

I would say every date should be seen as "would I be friends with this person" and not "would I date this person". Too much pressure and too much judgeing when in fact, the LAST thing I would want my girlfriend to do is judge me on silly little things like chewing too loud or how I laugh...

 

[welkin]

I kinda disagree with Welkin. That is to say, if all girls are like this, I find it kinda shallow. Not that I think anything's wrong with you, Welkin, I just mean that first dates usually hold an air of awkwardness and so it's normal sometimes for people to do faux-pas. I don't see why there should be do's and dont's to dates (of course, whipping it out or farting should be a no-no, but you get what I mean).

Everyone you'll ever meet or have a first date with will have a certain something about them that you both like and dislike. Sometimes even love or hate. But that's normal. That's what it's like being a human being meeting another human being for the first time in a romantic setting.

I would say every date should be seen as "would I be friends with this person" and not "would I date this person". Too much pressure and too much judgeing when in fact, the LAST thing I would want my girlfriend to do is judge me on silly little things like chewing too loud or how I laugh...

You have deliberately used different examples of details, i.e. 'chewing too loud or how I laugh'.

Do you think it's fair if your girlfriend judges you based on whether you're self-absorbed and only talk about the things you're interested in? Whether you speak ill of your ex? I don't consider these things to be shallow at all. In fact, these are not just first-date faux pas, these are all-time faux pas.

As for a few other minor negatives, I understand first date can be nerve-wrecking, so some are okaaaay. I suppose telling you not to act nervous won't make you change your ways automatically. But if it's something you notice yourself doing on a first date and can easily stop, why not put in a bit of extra effort to leave the other person a better impression?



I should also add: what WOULD be superficial is if the guys look at the list and only changed the way they appear, but not on a more fundamental level. I.e. pretending to be interested in what the girl has to say just to get to a next date. Perhaps then instead of looking at the list I gave and make a mental note not to do it, ask yourself why you might do any of them. If you're into a girl, why would you NOT want to ask her for her opinions? If you respected your ex's, why are you eager to diss her in front of a new girl? (And if not, why don't you respect someone who has shared a segment of their life with you?) If you barely knew the girl, why do you feel like you have to compliment her to get on her good side? ... By asking these questions, you might find that the 'criteria' aren't so superficial or picky after all.

 

[shiny5437]

Thank you for your perspective Welkin, although it has probably made me even more wary of dating! Do all women go into first dates seeking to judge the guy? And what gives women the right to judge guys and expect instant interest? The typical line I've gotten after dates is that we've just not 'clicked'. What is actually meant by that? Is it even a realistic for women to expect that following an hour or two? Sorry, if that's a bit ranty but it does feel frustrating.

I'm not sure I could go from platonic dates to openly discussing kinks. I'm not sure how you'd get into that line of conversation. To me, I'd be worried about committing the faux pas of being a sleaze. Is a bit of mild sleaze acceptable? Is that expected?

I'm completely lost and befuddled by this dating business. I'm not surprised most people do their relationship stuff under the influence of alcohol.

 

[subwannabe]

I think both women and men "judge" their dates, they just do it in different ways. That's just human nature and will probably neve change. Of course some go to the extremes.

 

[welkin]

Thank you for your perspective Welkin, although it has probably made me even more wary of dating! Do all women go into first dates seeking to judge the guy? And what gives women the right to judge guys and expect instant interest? The typical line I've gotten after dates is that we've just not 'clicked'. What is actually meant by that? Is it even a realistic for women to expect that following an hour or two? Sorry, if that's a bit ranty but it does feel frustrating.

I'm not sure I could go from platonic dates to openly discussing kinks. I'm not sure how you'd get into that line of conversation. To me, I'd be worried about committing the faux pas of being a sleaze. Is a bit of mild sleaze acceptable? Is that expected?

I'm completely lost and befuddled by this dating business. I'm not surprised most people do their relationship stuff under the influence of alcohol.

It all varies by the person. Some are quicker to dismiss a person based on a superficial trait, others have ironcast principles that they expect their partner to abide as well. But in the end, we all judge. And sometimes 1-2 hours are sufficient to show a person's character. First-date jitters only excuses some behavior, it doesn't give one the excuse to be a jerk.

That said, I think a lot of the decision-making is already done before meeting. For a guy I'm interested in, meeting is a sanity check in case he violates one of my deal-breakers (e.g. if he smokes). For guys I'm lukewarm with, meeting... To be honest, it's a one last chance to impress me or that's it type of deal.

But this is great news! If you tend to be nervous when you meet a girl for the first time, you have a much better chance of getting her to like you during online chats. If she's already interested in you, then she's more likely to be less judgmental when she sees you.

As for kinks, I am submissive and I've made a decision to only date dominant guys, so this is what I include in my online dating profile. Anonymity helps. =) Presumably every guy who contacted me has read my profile, and it usually comes up in our first or second online chat, even before we meet in person.

Lastly, "we didn't click" is just a face-saving rejection. Usually we (not just girls) are all too nice to give the other person the real reason.

 

[Mac98]

Although I don't actually go on "dates", the girls that I do encounter or show interest in I try not to judge. Otherwise, I'd be seaking just another Me and as much as I wish otherwise, it would never work out. I try to accept people for their flaws especially when I've just met them. First impressions often mean jack shit!

If a girl talks too much about herself, I don't much care because odds are she has other superb qualities you wouldn't find in other girls. If I see absolutely no qualities that distinguish her from the rest, then fine. I'll admit that I'm no longer interested, but for this to happen I have to actually get to know a person.

That's just how I work. I think the whole "dating scene" today has gotten way out of hand in the sense that people are now just crossing people off their lists or eliminating potential candidates till they find the right one like a friggin reality tv show. It's sad that it's become this. If you REALLY aren't interested in the person, who's to say you wouldn't get along great as friends?

I don't know. When I hear my parents' stories of dates and all that stuff it kind of sickens me that this is what I'm supposed to be looking forward to. Being auditioned.

 

[slumbermama]

i have not read all the responses, so...i am going to ask this. do you exude confidence? on either gender it is sexy. not too much...not that cocky type that makes one want to hurl...but the kind where your shoulders are squared, your head is high, and your smile is real.

there is a balancing act. you don't want to be the ass that women shy away from but you don't want to be too aloof and awkward. if you stray too far to either side you smell of desperation.

myself and most of my friends like guys that are outgoing, funny, smart, yet slightly shy. i actually have a friend that loooooves the shy guys. i like to talk to those guys and pry them out of the shells they have themselves locked in. i like to think that everyone has something about them that makes them sexy....physically...not just emotionally. eyes, nose, mouth, arms, hair...i am an eye and arm girl. love a guy with great arms and eyes. a good sense of humor is great too. if a guy can make me laugh i am hooked. that is how i ended up married...well...a combo of the eyes, arms, and humor.

i say be you and let your good traits shine through. eventually you will find a woman...or lots that are interested. oh, also, a lot of women are still old fashioned in the sense they want the guy to ask them out. you might get a vibe but nothing will happen if someone does not step up to the plate. ; )

 

[NightL]

I'm wondering what makes me so bad.

...all in the name and how you perceive yourself... dethklok666

...with a name like that... well... the only sex you are ever going to get is with your right hand...

Would you be interested in a person who called themselves dethgriptolittleboys666

Every relationship starts with communication... why the hell would any woman want to communicate with someone who called them-self (or even thought of them-self as...) dethklok666

Be interested and be interesting... grow up from being an eighteen year old warlock.

 

[welkin]

Call me cynical, but I don't believe in "not judging". After all, we are all trying to find someone to spend A LOT of time with (unless you are looking for casual sex), obviously we want that person to be someone we like a lot. If we can't even be interested for 2 hours, how can we want to be with the person for months and even years?

When you say "I don't judge if the guy/girl does this or that", that only means the "this or that" is not high on your list of priorities. I am sure you have other things high on the list that it's a real deal maker or breaker for you. Yes the items you value may differ from the ones I value, and they may take longer time to discern so you need to take your time and go on more second dates than I do, but really, as long as no deception is involved, it doesn't make you a more or less noble person in dating.

The bottom line is, you just have to find someone whose priorities are roughly the same or complementary as yours.

 

[shiny5437]

I totally agree that dating is a selection process but my experience outside of dating is that when I've had relationships or fallen for a really attractive girl is that it's always something that's taken time. Certainly it's never been within a couple of hours. I believe the only judgement I can realistically make is whether I could bear to see them again to then at that time think about getting to know them with a view to the longer term.

I don't think you can go into these situations with a 'shopping list' and I know plenty of people who have ended up happily together with someone they wouldn't have predicted as being right for them.

Even writing about the whole dating / relationships thing makes me feel really frustrated. I know I'm doing the right thing by getting out there and trying it but it seems so arbitrary at times with no obvious route to improve things. GRRR!

 

[welkin]

I totally agree that dating is a selection process but my experience outside of dating is that when I've had relationships or fallen for a really attractive girl is that it's always something that's taken time. Certainly it's never been within a couple of hours. I believe the only judgement I can realistically make is whether I could bear to see them again to then at that time think about getting to know them with a view to the longer term.

I don't think you can go into these situations with a 'shopping list' and I know plenty of people who have ended up happily together with someone they wouldn't have predicted as being right for them.

Even writing about the whole dating / relationships thing makes me feel really frustrated. I know I'm doing the right thing by getting out there and trying it but it seems so arbitrary at times with no obvious route to improve things. GRRR!

I think it depends on what's on that shopping list. For everyone, there are things he prefers, and there are things he needs. The preferables are compromisable (and thereby allowing the "waiting to get to know them better"), the needs are not. And the ones regarded as picky probably just have more "needs" than others.

It's a very individual decision with no right or wrong. Being selective is not necessarily a superior thing -- it limits one's dating pool and certainly a pickier person can miss out. But then... shouldn't the pickier person be the disadvantaged one? And if they're not complaining, why are you?

People who complain about others being picky should just learn not to take rejection personally. Keep in mind that it doesn't mean the rejectee is in any way lacking, but that the rejector is going to have a harder time finding a partner. That should help put things in the right perspective.

I will end this with the Gestalt Prayer:

I do my thing and you do your thing.
I am not in this world to live up to your expectations,
And you are not in this world to live up to mine.
You are you, and I am I,
and if by chance we find each other, it's beautiful.
If not, it can't be helped.

 

[CWatson]

I don't think you can go into these situations with a 'shopping list' and I know plenty of people who have ended up happily together with someone they wouldn't have predicted as being right for them.

While I obviously don't know the people you're referring to (how could I?), I'd have to say that I think they may be exceptions that prove the rule.

The thing about a "shopping list" is that it's not just somebody being picky. --Well, I suppose it is; but it's also about being self-protective. Example: for me to marry some fictional perfect woman (let's call her "Crystal"), there are certain personality traits she absolutely must have (critical thinking skills; integrity; some love of music or fiction; willingness to have sex more than once a month) and others that she absolutely cannot (closed-mindedness, lack of self-awareness, extreme devotion to a religion; excessive irresponsibility or impulsiveness; excessive substance use). These are on my "shopping list" because I know, for a fact, that without these compatibilities, I'll be miserable and need to divorce. And marrying someone or even dating someone who goes afoul of the shopping list is just plain stupid on my part. I try not to do it.

Sometimes you try dating someone because you're not sure what you think: "Hey, this person's politically conservative, I wonder how that will affect me." This is not stupidity, it's self-exploration, and there's absolutely no reason the relationship can't be a positive experience. And sometimes you try dating someone because you don't know, one way or the other, what their values are. You can't always tell compatibility at a glance. This is why I contend that your examples are exceptions that prove the rule: I would say they met someone they were compatible with, but whom they didn't recognize as being compatible with them--either because the partner's compatibility was not obvious from the surface, or because they themselves did not yet have a complete picture of what they were looking for.

Compatibility is something you learn by doing. Trying new things is the whole point of dating. But the shopping list is about speeding up the process by removing from the dating pool (which, to the average straight person, consists of something like three billion individuals) the old things--the people whom you already know you won't get along with.

 

[Mac98]

Why can't the ultimate deal breaker be: "Am I happy with this person?"

Yes? Then we'll either work through the flaws that bug me or I'll have to learn to deal with it

No? Then apologies all around and move along.

These little games of "does he have shiny, white teeth?", "Does she have a flat stomach?", "Does he have a huge tattoo covering his whole forearm?", "Does she believe in the same God that I do?" are merely getting in the way of something potentially beautiful because you're not giving this person a chance because he doesn't add up to what your "dream person" is supposed to be or look like.

In my opinion, it shouldn't be a process of elimination, it shouldn't be an audition and it shouldn't be a test. Open-mindedness? How about staying open-minded to the possibility that you're ideal mate isn't neccessarily anything like your shopping list.

 

[welkin]

Why can't the ultimate deal breaker be: "Am I happy with this person?"

Yes? Then we'll either work through the flaws that bug me or I'll have to learn to deal with it

No? Then apologies all around and move along.

These little games of "does he have shiny, white teeth?", "Does she have a flat stomach?", "Does he have a huge tattoo covering his whole forearm?", "Does she believe in the same God that I do?" are merely getting in the way of something potentially beautiful because you're not giving this person a chance because he doesn't add up to what your "dream person" is supposed to be or look like.

In my opinion, it shouldn't be a process of elimination, it shouldn't be an audition and it shouldn't be a test. Open-mindedness? How about staying open-minded to the possibility that you're ideal mate isn't neccessarily anything like your shopping list.

What you're doing is straw man fallacy. Since when did anyone say the shopping list is all superficial stuff like "white teeth" or "flat stomach" or "tattooed forearm"?

If you're constantly reducing the other side's position to these silly examples, then clearly you aren't interested in what we're saying and we might as well not be having this conversation at all.

 

[Mac98]

What you're doing is straw man fallacy. Since when did anyone say the shopping list is all superficial stuff like "white teeth" or "flat stomach" or "tattooed forearm"?

If you're constantly reducing the other side's position to these silly examples, then clearly you aren't interested in what we're saying and we might as well not be having this conversation at all.

No need to be so defensive, Welkin. It was a statement in general and not aimed at anyone specifically.

 

[welkin]

No need to be so defensive, Welkin. It was a statement in general and not aimed at anyone specifically.

Precisely because it's general and not aimed at anyone, you cannot say that that's what a generic "shopping list" looks like. Unless you only want to complain about girls who judge a guy solely by his looks. That would be a different discussion.

 

[Mac98]

Precisely because it's general and not aimed at anyone, you cannot say that that's what a generic "shopping list" looks like. Unless you only want to complain about girls who judge a guy solely by his looks. That would be a different discussion.

Oh, I'm not saying that only girls do this. Guys do it too. But my point isn't only about superficial things. Sure, there are things that are unacceptable. For example, if the person sees nothing wrong with pedophilia, (s)he's probably someone you don't want around.

But I think we shouldn't really go out with a shopping list looking for the perfect match. My point is that we should stay opened to the possibility that our perfect match might not be what we have in mind.

 

[welkin]

Oh, I'm not saying that only girls do this. Guys do it too. But my point isn't only about superficial things. Sure, there are things that are unacceptable. For example, if the person sees nothing wrong with pedophilia, (s)he's probably someone you don't want around.

But I think we shouldn't really go out with a shopping list looking for the perfect match. My point is that we should stay opened to the possibility that our perfect match might not be what we have in mind.

I think pedophilia is okay as long as the person does not act on it. We are all entitled to our fantasies.

Now, what makes you think it is more valid to reject a person based on his view of pedophilia than to reject a person based on his religious beliefs? What makes your idea of "unacceptable" more correct than others' idea of "unacceptable"?

I don't think anyone has a fixed image in their head that their SO must match, but some of us know ourselves well enough to know what kinds of people we won't get along with, no matter what their other qualities are. And it seems that you are doubting this possibility. If I reject an otherwise perfect man because he smokes or has some other annoying quirks that I absolutely cannot stand, it's my own choice. If I am not complaining about missing out on such a great man, why should you be feeling sorry for me? Do you think I am not able to make a good decision for myself on my own?

And even for something as superficial as looks, suppose I am only turned on by guys who look a certain way with a certain body type, and suppose I chose to value sexual compatibility above other things, then I say I'd rather be shallow and look for someone who can make me happy and reject others upon first glance, than to date others for whom I feel no sexual attraction just so someone like you would approve.

 

[bailadora]

But I think we shouldn't really go out with a shopping list looking for the perfect match. My point is that we should stay opened to the possibility that our perfect match might not be what we have in mind.

Somehow, I doubt most people are looking for perfect, since none of us can live up to that ideal ourselves. After the newness of a relationship has worn off, our tolerances can change and little things that once seemed endearing or cute can sometimes turn annoying. It's no easy feat, keeping a relationship going for the long term, even when there is love and dedication. Therefore being self aware enough to know what you can and cannot tolerate in the long run is not being shallow. It's called being mature.

 

[Felix_Jones]

Take Eugene Levy's adivce from American Pie: The longer you go without, the less you'll miss it.

That male sexual prime is supposedly at 18, so in theory your libido should only decline. Give it time, before you know it it'll be a decade since you've had sex. Trust me it's not that big a deal. Fretting over it is probably making it worse, do other stuff. Drink, do drugs, work a lot, play a sport. All are time consuming and incredibly engaging. At the end, at least, you'll have cool stories (kinda like Jim Anchower) and loads of spare cash.

 

[Mac98]

I think pedophilia is okay as long as the person does not act on it. We are all entitled to our fantasies.

Now, what makes you think it is more valid to reject a person based on his view of pedophilia than to reject a person based on his religious beliefs? What makes your idea of "unacceptable" more correct than others' idea of "unacceptable"?

And even for something as superficial as looks, suppose I am only turned on by guys who look a certain way with a certain body type, and suppose I chose to value sexual compatibility above other things, then I say I'd rather be shallow and look for someone who can make me happy and reject others upon first glance, than to date others for whom I feel no sexual attraction just so someone like you would approve.

It's actually a policy that's universal and not so complicated, imo. What isn't acceptable is whenever someone's actions or values (or fetishes, I guess) directly harm another human being. Not acting on pedophilia is one thing (though I wonder if that is actually possible. I don't know), but I wouldn't date a serial killer or a rapist, so I wouldn't date a pedophile either.

It's not a question of what you're sexually attracted to or not. You're allowed to prefer darker skin (for example) or overweight people. But it's wrong to discard someone just because he doesn't fit that description. What I'm saying is that it is VERY possible that you fall in love with someone who doesn't fit this description. And this is why I don't support internet dating... because you filter out a BUTTload of possibilities.

Example: I always was more attracted to smaller girls. Petite. I dunno, don't wanna put a margin, but say 5'3 - 115lbs (example. I'm 21). When this spring, I fell for a girl that stood 5'8 and 140lbs. Never would I have imagined being sexually attracted to someone a little bigger and I find myself totally falling for this girl.

You're allowed to have preferances, I just think it's too bad that you would immediately dismiss someone because he doesn't fit what's ideal to you.

Somehow, I doubt most people are looking for perfect, since none of us can live up to that ideal ourselves. After the newness of a relationship has worn off, our tolerances can change and little things that once seemed endearing or cute can sometimes turn annoying. It's no easy feat, keeping a relationship going for the long term, even when there is love and dedication. Therefore being self aware enough to know what you can and cannot tolerate in the long run is not being shallow. It's called being mature.

I agree with this in the sense that there are SOME things that, for some reason, you can't get over. Quick example, someone who snores very loudly. That being said, I tend to think that if you're really IN LOVE with this person, these little pet peeves of yours shouldn't take THAT much importance. And if they do, why not discuss it with the person or find help? It shouldn't be THAT big a deal.

Of course, if the person if disloyal or abusive, then ya, totally! Get the fuck outta' there! But imo, today's way of thinking toward relationships is way too defeatest. It almost seems as though people are LOOKING to end relationships or get a divorce...

 

[welkin]

That being said, I tend to think that if you're really IN LOVE with this person, these little pet peeves of yours shouldn't take THAT much importance. And if they do, why not discuss it with the person or find help? It shouldn't be THAT big a deal.

You think things like living habits and religious beliefs and sexual preferences "shouldn't be THAT big a deal"? Can you spell "naiveté"?

Talk to the couples who separated over the exact reasons that you called "not that big a deal". Yes, maybe after many fights and counseling sessions and compromises, maybe, maybe their relationship could have survived the differences, but maybe not. And why choose to subject your relationship to all the possible arguments and disagreements and anxieties and heartaches and disappointments? Doesn't life already present you with enough problems?

I have liked and been liked by enough people to know that there isn't "one true love". You're saying maybe someone who doesn't match my criteria -- let's say religious belief -- can be a great fit for me, well you know what, I am pretty damn sure there is someone who does believe in the same gods (or the lack of which) as I do and who is also a great (if not better) fit for me. I'd rather take my time and look for that second guy and reject the first guy right away, as difference in religious belief is often a great indicator for difference in life style and opinions about social issues, I save my future self the time wasted in arguments. I wouldn't think it is wrong at all, it's rational risk aversion and evaluation -- and heck, rejecting someone is NEVER wrong. We all have our right to choose our partners as we like.

Final words: Stop being so judgmental on other people's personal choices. I am not asking you to be as picky as I am (even though I think one ought to be picky when it comes to partners possibly for life), I am not saying your not-rejecting others for difference in beliefs is necessarily wrong, so why not give me and others the same respect and not try to convert us?