There are more appropriate ways to say this:
"Nobody with kids. I might want kids some day, but I’m not ready yet, and it feels like there would be too much pressure to either be involved with her kids or be cut out of a major portion of her life until we’re really serious. And again, not ready.
And somebody athletic, since I’m into biking and hiking and other activities that require a certain level of fitness.
And… well, somebody who isn’t into the whole casual sex thing, honestly. I think sex is special and, for me, requires a strong emotional connection. I want someone who has similar views on sex."
See, I feel like it changes it when you’re not focusing on the other person, but yourself. I’m not ready for kids, I’m into fitness, I’m a demisexual. It sets up the same thing without disparaging people who aren’t what you’re looking for.
I’ll first say that from a social standpoint it makes sense to focus on yourself when asked that. But the person asked “tell me what you look for in a girl”. You would have to be pretty damn masterful at thinking on your feet to take that question and immediately flip your answers into I statements. Especially if you’re anon and obviously don’t get asked things like this a lot.
No kids is a common wish although the reason for it can make or break how fine it is to have.
My guess is that anon is overweight, and the person they were talking to was thinking of friends they had that were overweight and were great people.
Anon betrayed that their preference was a bit delusional and/or didn’t understand that it can take work to be in shape and takes it for granted that women should be expected to be fit for him without him having to do anything. That’s a pretty sour fart of an opinion.
The no dating apps thing is pretty cringe. And could certainly make you seem like a pariah to most people. It definitely betrays a sense of superiority if it’s in your top 3 dating requirements. I feel like anon knowing the word demisexual is slim to none but that would be the best thing you could say.
Actually my guess is that this is fake and anon is just stirring the hate mongering pot.
I also casually declare strangers I meet at a bar for 20 minutes to be great catches and offer up any of my single friends phone numbers. Dont you?
friend’s gf
few hours
I agree that it’s likely made up, and that the guy likely has a lot of misogynistic views, but you at least don’t need to misrepresent the post.
Thats fair, I was trying to highlight how they just met. Two hours is more time but still, would be strange to try and hook them up with someone.
I also think its odd from his perspective. He just met her, they are drinking, she barely knows him, and yet has a bunch of single friends who are perfect for him.
If I were him I would change the topic immediately. But then again I wouldnt go to a bar for romance in the first place.
My only gripe with this is that nobody should have to defend themself for not wanting kids. If you don’t want kids then you don’t want kids and should be able to just leave it at that.
Nobody SHOULD have to explain anything. So it’s okay to not do it. but if you’re on a date, where you’re trying to put yourself out there and establish at least a friendly relationship, you probably want to be cordial and share your thoughts on the matter. Instead of just shutting down mid-date.
I don’t consider it a defense, exactly. It’s more clarification. Just saying “no kids” might suggest he doesn’t want kids ever, which would reduce the potential partners unnecessarily (and if he does want kids eventually, being paired with someone specifically because they don’t want kids would just create problems later). Saying “no kids yet” sets them up with someone who doesn’t have kids but might in the future.
I like how you put this. Anon was asked requirements and all he gave were deal-breakers. It comes off as desperate, crass, or both.
Its also fake. I could rewrite the ending.
“Friends GF laughs uncontrollably at my list of dealbreakers, as she’s drunk and at a bar, not sober at a coffee shop”
“Friends gf proceeds to go around the bar posing my list to every woman, and eventually also all the men, hysterically laughing the whole time while I try to hide by the jukebox.”
That friend? Albert Einstein.
That Einstein was a handful!
This is an actualized response. In the moment a lot of people can’t pull this off, it does take practice. You’re right, of course, this is better…I just wish people would more commonly be willing to ask a clarifying question or two before pulling out the butcher’s knife.
Some folks just aren’t good with their words and may otherwise be great people. In this situation, true or not, they were talking for some time. I think that level of interaction is worth some benefit of the doubt and the tiniest bit of patience. Instead, despite hitting it off and having a great conversation, shallow lady over there judges him by a single moment amongst probably a dozen leading up to it.
…but that is how it goes. That’s the game. It’s all just a bit silly though.
This is an actualized response…
I agree with you 100%, but I’d say it’s easier than it seems. It does require practice, for sure, but I’d argue that talking like an incel also requires practice. (Lee’s assume the fictional guy in the Green text got his practice on 4Chan).
I think the thing is that bro is making a choice; whether that choice is to consciously talk about the things he dislikes in low value females, instead of just himself or what he likes (as you would do in date), or to spend his day on 4Chan, unconsciously practicing and learning how to be more like Andrew Tate.
Either way, the problem is not lack of skill, it’s the choice to do nothing or even dig in harder into poor communication skills.
Then comes the lack of appropriate feedback, without judgement, to help them realize that it is them who are turning themselves into “low-value men” if there were to judge themselves by the same measure.
The good thing is that people have time to practice. People who are bad with their words already know it, and they clearly could practice if only they felt it had value.
Anon is definitely not into fitness though. Probably a lard ass himself.
Bingo! It’s not always what you say but HOW you say it.
Also, this is just a really negative set of statements. “I DON’T want X, Y, and Z.” Even giving anon a pretty big benefit of the doubt and assuming they didn’t state it like “No fatties,” they aren’t really saying what they want in a partner, just a bunch of standards by which they would judge somebody.
The search for a romantic partner should involve more positives than negatives. You should have ideas about what things you like in people and yourself, and what interests and activities that you’re passionate about and would like to share with someone. If you start with a laundry list of things that you don’t like, that’s not just going to be off-putting, it’s going to be limiting you to thinking only in those terms, rather than finding something that brings you joy, and finding someone that has that in common with you.
That’s what he should have said. What he probably said was “no fat chicks, no crotch goblins, no hoes.”
Well first these are the frequent talking points of incels when they harp on what they consider “low value females”. If you find yourself constantly repeating such devaluing talking points, maybe a break from the internet would do you good. Secondly, and more generally, it is usually more attractive to talk about the things you love than the things you hate. Unless you have already established that you and the other person hate the same things, then you can bond over that too.
This. She probably wasn’t disgusted by the content, but by the form of what he said.
I can almmost guarantee this is what it is. One of those isn’t even a big deal. If I was single I wouldn’t date a single mom, not because there’s anything wrong with them but because I’m looking for a serious relationship, and I know I’m not emotionally ready to be a father and I know I never will be.
I don’t want kids for that reason. I was raised by a single mom and have seen how difficult it is. Nothing but respect for all of them out there.
Yeah, I don’t know why no dating apps. What’s that about?
Probably something about the hookup culture? Strangest of the 3 imo
For sure. I met my now fiancee on a dating app, neither of us are into hookup culture. She’s demisexual so it’s actually the opposite for her and I’m just not interested in it. These guys are really huffing the 4chan sauce hard.
Probably true, I found my wife before dating apps were commonplace, just what I’ve heard from others my age, I can’t imagine trying to date these days. Also kinda surprising 4chan is still around.
Yea 4chan is worse than it used to. I browse the X board which is just supernatural stuff. No kidding, 5 percent is the stuff I browse for which most people would be interested in, ghosts, cryotids, aliens, scary stories the usual stuff but X is overrun by semen retention, succubus, manifestation, literal religious nut jobs, actually literal insane conspiracies, the nobody (sounds interesting but it’s actually just delusional people), divination and spirituality and any and all combinations of all these topics sprinkled with casual racism and xenophobia.
I’m not even nitpicking these are common and I just pulled up the app and saw all of the there.
I unserstand how some of these could fall under paranormal but the board is just overrun by insane posts and nobody sane could remotely believe them.
My boi here knows how to hold a conversation.
A skill OOP seems to be severely lacking in
Don’t bring object oriented programming into this.
Anons member will forever remain private.
I believe a lot of the problem with 4chan is that they publicly declare everything, when a lot of it should really be contained to a private scope
We, the plebs, do enjoy the public declarations of 4chan though. It’s like how normies enjoy gossip magazines to hear what bullshit some actor has done this week. In both cases, people also like to complain how bad it is to like those things.
Incels? there are plenty of family men that think this way. They stuck to their preferences and have a much better life for it. We shouldn’t marginalize them for it and give them names that don’t make any sense also being afraid to speak about preferences is not good.
If an incel becomes a family man, he isn’t an incel anymore. It’s part of the definition of incel. Also, they don’t have a better life for it, but a better life despite it (if they even have a better life, incels tend to sabotage their own happines). And you say we shouldn’t marginalise men,but it’s okay to marginalise women?
All this inclusivity talk but keep shitting on incels?? How does that work?
Basic human society. Hunters and gatherers did it too.
People formed tribes to build a circle of trusted people, those outside the tribe were not trusted by default. It was a basic survivval technique. Tribesmen who broke the trust were kicked out. People who wanted to join the tribe had to prove their trustworthiness.
Inclusivity people are a global tribe. You are not in the tribe because you have proven yourself not trustworthy. You cannot be trusted to treat all tribe members with respect. If you want to be back in the tribe, you will have to prove yourself.
For some one that is offended by 3 preferences and talks all this inclusivity. You are a hypocrite!
Not at all. It is just that these two groups don’t go together. You are free to choose either. If you want to play with the other incels, that is fine. If you want to join the inclusivity group that is fine, you are welcome, that is the essence of inclusivity. But you cannot be in both.
Preferences are fine. It still matters how you express them. In the current zeitgeist, with inceldom being a thing, the way these preferences were expressed smacked of that. The fact that you want to defend this specific trifecta of otherwise completely unrelated preferences, claiming they lead to a better life, makes me think you might be an incel yourself, or maybe just a conservative who’s consumed a few too many such videos promoting “family values” and purporting that these are threatened by a woman’s weight, or her having to raise a child on her own, or her seeking love and attention on dating apps. Truth is these are pretty much unrelated to whether one values family and to each other. It’s just a collection of caricatures, stereotypes, and cautionary tales circulating in conservative circles. If all one can think of when asked for their preferences regarding a partner are these known talking points, it is a little suspect. FWIW, I do not think we should marginalize conservatives. But I do think we should marginalize misogyny.
How you express them is crazy lol… express them by not being afraid. Never be afraid to say them so it can be heard and respected. You talk all this inclusivity and shit on incels.
Hmm I am not sure I understand what you’re saying or that you understood anything I said. Maybe we are talking past each other. Nevermind, let’s forget about incels. Main point is whatever your preferences, framing them positively helps.
“I just want a manic pixie dream girl whos never known the touch of a man but is an absolute nymphomaniac and doesn’t have sharp knees is that so much to ask???”
Saving this for when I have to describe my preference to anyone again.
I just started talking with a girl who said she loved eggs as a midnight snack. So I said I’m looking for a Gaston-like girl, large as a barge, eats 5 dozen eggs, and hair on every inch of her. She responded in good humor, a fun little conversation.
Whats up with the knees?
not having positive preferences to look for but instead having multiple dealbreakers suggests that all women are functionally the same to you except for the ones who you think are lower quality… that is to say, you are not meaningfully valuing other people
Deal breakers are things that are limits. Limits are–in general–a good thing. It’s not that you’re saying that women–or people in general–are fungible, but you’re saying that people that fit any of these criteria won’t work.
IIRC, Dan Savage has said that there’s no settling down without settling. You can–should–have limits, but if it’s more than five things, you need to look at yourself very, very closely. You aren’t going to like every single thing about your partner, but you have to be able to accept them.
I could say, for instance, that I prefer people that are heavily tattooed, pierced, scarred, branded, and implanted. (…Which limits me to about .0001% of the US population.) But that’s not a deal breaker; I’m not going to reject someone because they don’t fit that particular preference, even though my body modification is important to me. On the other hand, I absolutely will not date anyone that doesn’t have a worldview that’s grounded in reality, e.g., is religious/“spiritual”, or believes in any conspiratorial nonsense, because I couldn’t have respect for a person like that. THAT’S a deal breaker. I won’t date someone that wants children; I’m unfit to be a parent, and I had myself sterilized a number of years ago. Again: that’s a deal breaker, because as with religious garbage, it’s a question of basic values.
But when people ask for your preferences they want to know your actual preferences (the positives), not the dealbreakers.
For example, if I asked someone out to lunch and asked what kind of food do they prefer (their preference) then I don’t want to hear a list off all the foods they dislike.
Continuing with the food analogy.
The problem is that I’m basically up for trying almost anything.
I know what I foods I probably wouldn’t like (paprika for example).
And there are certain foods that I like more than others, but there is no hard preference.
Asian food? No problem.
Pizza? Love it.
McDonald’s bit plain but always reliable.
Kebab? Nice.
There simply is no preference, as long as I like the taste and it fills the stomach, I am happy.
But the point of saying that certain things are dealbreakers is that, outside of those, anything is within the realm of possibility.
Do I prefer people with “extreme” body modifications? Sure. Is that a requirement? No.
With food, maybe I prefer Brazilian steakhouses, but the only thing I really dislike is pasta, sandwiches, and deep-fried everything. I’m not going to exclude Thai, Indian, Ethiopian, or Polish food, just because it’s not my favorite kind of restaurant. I’m literally going to be fine with anything that isn’t on my dislike list.
My preference is women not yet blessed with children, in good shape, and not whoring themselves out on dating apps like tinder.
It’s actually really simple to use positive language!
not whoring themselves out on dating apps like tinder.
Oh yeah, really positive that
It actually is -
-I’m not interested in having kids, so I’d want a partner that feels the same.
-I like exercising, so I’d want to be with someone who does as well, particuarly if they’re into (insert physical hobby you enjoy)
-I like to go out and do (insert activities in meatspace that often involve meeting people), so I’d be interested in someone who likes to do that kind of thing over just sitting at home scrolling the internet.These are good qualifiers that more or less equate to the same thing as OP states without coming across like a dick. From there, if someone was to introduce someone to OP, they can make a further determination of compatibility, and if someone doesn’t match due to the blunter version of the above it can be as easy as “I didn’t really feel a connection, [and unless she’s actually kind of a bitch] but she’s a great person and I hope she meets someone awesome”.
Edit: That said, if you’re the version of yourself that doesn’t match what you’re looking for, you should be working on that before seeking a partner IMO.
ಠ_ಠ
Instead of saying “good shape” which is a boring / potentially problematic answer, instead say “someone who is into (whatever sport or activity you enjoy)”. If you love to cycle or trail run then wanting someone who shares your interests is legitimate.
I’m imagining he was an obese single dad scrolling Tinder as he was telling her this.
no girls who are on dating apps like Tinder
But why tho?
A reasonable argument would be because oop sees sex as something special and would like a partner that thinks of it the same way.
In reality, oop probably thinks of woman who are on tinder as worthless sluts and doesn’t want a woman with a higher headcount than him because it bruises his ego.
I too, would be upset if my hypothetical partner had more kills than me. Excuse me, I’m the killing machine here. I’m the one who’s body is designed to rip and tear and glide through the air! You’re making me look lazy.
How dare u!
(I will almost always take the chance to make fun of the act of using “headcount” or “bodycount” to refer to the number of sexual partners someone has had.)
I also always use the term a little tongue in cheek
tongue in cheek
Giggity
Fair question! I’m guessing he views such women as sluts and beneath him.
I adore sluts over or beneath me, far too much so tbh. It is like my weakness, and it battles with my deep need for trust and loyalty. A group of friends used to call me Capt. Save a Hoe. I don’t do well with sifting through a list of people and putting myself out there. I’m not some promiscuous type at all. I am someone that tends to see the best in people and their real potential in unique ways. My rather out of the box perspective on everything in life and the way I care about people in my close social orbit tends to draw and keep potential partners that are not very good for my own needs. I have an enormous number of interests and sort of mold myself within different spaces over time. Many relationships are only effective when I have a limited range of interests and maintain certain patterns. Most of my relationships end when I am constrained from changing like this over a period of years. The ways I change and mold to different curiosities is very introverted and not an aspect I can effectively share. These are times when I need my independence and space while also having a partner open minded and willing to evolve with me. Like if I get back into hardcore cycling, she gets a bike and often comes along doing whatever it takes to rise to the challenge. Not for every ride, but to share the occasional experience. Or let’s say I get into metallurgy and casting again, or airbrushing automotive class graphics, or CAD design projects, or programming games, or robotic cat toys with microcontrollers. The thing is, I need someone that is not just able to flex to me like this, I want someone that is independently doing the same. I want to shape myself to explore with them in their unique and independent interests in any space they are passionate about. It does not matter if it is stereotypically masculine or feminine to me. I have no concern over such marketing nonsense or gendered dichotomy.
So no, it has nothing to do with how I view people on dating apps in some judgemental context. It has everything to do with a known weakness I have. I will commit myself to a cause that is unhealthy for me. I don’t put a lot of thought into myself and my interests in this area. My mind is like a little kid in wonderment at the world around me; drawing in my curiosity so much that I forget to eat. I therefore keep my distance and only take notice when someone stands out for reasons that infer they might be functionally abstracted like I am. I’ve tried other types of people to my detriment and learned that lesson hard.
U tell me
I think it’s 100% reasonable to not want to meet dating app girls
I’m old and don’t understand. Elucidate me, nerd
Not OP but:
You: Dont like Tinder girls because you are sexist and dont like “hoes”.
Me: Dont like Tinder girls because it means they gave all their private data and pictures to a big tech corpo that sells it for profit.
Now I’m curious, are there any FOSS dating apps out there? Even as kind of a joke?
Based
Makes sense to me, but I’m odd like anon too I guess. I won’t work for places that have an HR department for (likely) similar complex reasoning. I don’t fit the mold or follow the rules like most people in a job. Just give me responsibilities and I’ll be as reliable as if you do them yourself. I don’t handle arbitrary people and bureaucracy well. I just do what makes sense in the moment like a business owner that is very conservative. I ran my own businesses for a long time and act like the employees I wish I had been able to find. When a company has an HR department it says they are inflexible and incompetent in efficiency and abstraction. I know I will be miserable in such a place where layers are used to mask managerial incompetence and political maneuvering.
Similarly, a person that likes to shop around and date a lot says quite a bit about their ethics and mindset. I’ve never used a dating app in my life. All of my long term relationships are from friends of friends. I have no curiosity about who is out there in general or judging people based on their best sales force lies or old pictures. I am only interested in the rare people that say or do something candidly interesting when I am not expecting it; like if someone has a nerdy passionate interest or interesting quark. The average person is not interesting to me, and average people are on dating apps.
Plus, I know what I am, and I do not care to try and sell that to anyone. I would much rather the person at least have some familiarity with me beforehand. Starting off formally of calling it “dating” just sounds silly to me. Like, let’s be friends first for awhile. “Dating” puts sex in play on some kind of level. No one can think straight after that addiction starts. So, friends-first for me, and dating apps are not the kind of environment where I can find nerdy interesting friends without extra baggage and expectations.
The third one is pretty weird, it’s just the default way to meet people now.
The other two are pretty straightforward.
Tinder is the worst possible way to get to meet people, unless you’re at least a 9/10 guy or a woman who just wants to hook up, nothing more. At least that’s been my experience, both using the app and talking to friends who have. Meaningful connections are rare.
It might be a regional thing? I live in a Town known for its Technical University, so most of the people on Tinder are socially awkward and tech literate 18-25 y/os who either don’t like going to noisy places like bars, clubs etc. or just prefer texting first before committing time to a date (free time is kind of hard to make as a student here).
My own reason was more on the autistic side, as I do NOT recognize flirting unless it is specifically stated. So having an app where both parties can state “hey, we’re talking with romantic intentions here!!” was the best solution ever haha (I met my husband within 30mins of installing the app 🤷)
Hm, maybe. Where I lived, your chances were low if you’re a nerd and/or looking for something serious. Like, most people on tinder were the exact same crowd you‘d also meet in clubs. But it also wasn’t a particularly big town and most people on tinder in my age range were university students from the less nerdy faculties…
Well what should non-autistic people do then?
On an individual level? No idea, I have no experience with that lol
On a systemic level? The problem seems to be that people assume dating apps are only for hookups, so people who are looking for something serious avoid them. So the idea becomes true through self-validation. Breaking that cycle somehow would make everyone involved happier I think?
People don’t avoid dating apps because of a belief, they avoid them after they’ve been ghosted by the 3rd or 4th person in as many weeks.
Its a worse experience for building relationships than just regular life in most cases.
For you yes, that’s not the norm. In average cities/towns, it’s used for hook ups (shallow ones) and cheating. Can you meet a person there? Sure but odds are very much against it.
Note, I’m talking about Tinder specifically, dating apps are fine.
My profiles had fun and active pics, jokes, preferences, favorites, dealbreakers, and honesty. But I found the apps so damn boring and disconnecting that I’d forget when I’d occasionally have a conversation. I couldn’t get excited at all. It only made me depressed. While I know part of that is on me, it ain’t all me. I decided one dystopian corpo shouldn’t have a monopoly on romance and deleted my accounts.
I think Hinge is the only one not owned by one of the online dating conglomerates.
I agree it kinda sucks, but I just don’t meet many women in my day to day life, so it’s the best option for me.
Can’t tell if under 20 or just socially inept.
Was she an obese single mom who had met your friend on tinder?
Those are not unreasonable preferences
The tinder one is though. Someone being on tinder doesn’t tell you anything about that person. Only that they’re looking for either a partner or casual sex.
You literally just said it tells you nothing and then listed something it tells you.
Being on tinder doesn’t tell anything new given the context of the conversation. Any single girls that anon’s friend’s gf would consider referring to our apparently-single anon would be interested in one or both of those things whether they were on tinder or not, or they hopefully wouldn’t agree to a date.
Well it sort of depends. Using dating apps for hookups is fine, but its awful for building relationships. The ghosting alone is pretty traumatic.
I would hope a potential dating partner would also be aware of this and have a similar view. They could just say they use it for hook ups exclusively though and it wouldnt bother me.
Presumably, if you’re looking for a partner, if the potential partner is looking for a partner it’s better.
I would agree but tinder and most dating apps are not for relationships they are for sex.
This is fake but that said…
Meh, Tinder isn’t a dating app. It’s a hook up app. There are dating apps which are fine, but tinder is a hookup bar, you know the one, where the bar is empty by 12:30 am because everyone has found a friend for the night. Can you find a long term mate? Sure but odds are against you.
What are the dating apps?
Things like eHarmony, Match, etc. they generally have a lot more information about potential matches and there’s usually a back and forth over a period of time.
I know several people that met spouses on them.I used them with some success.
The friends that used Tinder the choice to swipe is 99% based on looks alone. And things usually move very fast.
Not saying you can’t meet long term interest on Tinder or can’t have a hook up on others. But they have pretty defined goal differences and the people that use them also.
Disclaimer: I’m a strong proponent of people being happy and doing right for them. I make no judgements.
Well actually…
Or the latter leading to the former
Reasonable preferences stated in the form of red flags are still red flags.
I think the phrasing is the problem. This comes off as overly negative. If you say something more along the lines of “I am not yet ready to have kids, so I’d rather not be with someone who has them. I like women who are in good shape, and I am looking for a long term relationship.” You come off as way less of an incel.
It is not an unknown that a lot of men have no interest in a single mother or raising someone else’s child. Saying that’s at incel level is a silly over exaggeration.
Filter. not preferences.
Same thing.
No
deleted by creator
Meanwhile women: 6 foot, 7 figures, 8 inches or move along.
Could an average rowboat support her without capsizing?
deleted by creator
I just say “I’ll know when I meet her.”
Probably because she was big, had a kid, and was on tinder 😆
