pof is another pathetic site.

Page 7 of 8 [ 128 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Joined: 11 Oct 2015
Age: 1937
Posts: 275

12 Oct 2015, 12:44 pm

A lot of women go to dating sites just to get validation, and they were never there to really find anyone. The big dating sites are too general and these are the ones that attract people who are not serious about finding someone, but just want to see how many people contact them, or just hook up or whatever.

I remember there was a site around, called "aspie affection" but it was the target of trolls and it was hacked. Also, there was the obvious problem of males outnumbering females, which is a tendency on dating sites in general, but even moreso within the autism spectrum which is something that is also dominated by males.

You also have to take into consideration fake accounts for the purposes of trolling or phishing.

You have to be cautious on the internet.

Lukeda420
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,640
Location: Chicago suburbs.

12 Oct 2015, 2:29 pm

MissyManny, ForRetail = Katy = troll

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,949
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

12 Oct 2015, 4:35 pm

realitypill wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

darkphantomx1 wrote:

Why OkCupid and POF sucks
1. Too many whales

2. Only whales are interested in you

3. Whenever you do talk to pretty girls, they don't reply.

4. If you're short like me, you're f****d.

5. If you go on a date and you're short like me you're f****d.

6. Don't even f*****g bother if you're ugly like me, you stand no chance!

7. Don't even bother if your social skills suck, you stand no chance!

8. You're a guy out of 100 guys fighting for 1 woman.

So women who aren't skinny are automatically not dating material in your eyes? Yet you are complaining about women being picky about male appearances.

Body weight is completely within one's control. Genetic looks (the main criteria that women base their choice of men on) aren't within one's control at all.

Also, there's a huge difference between slightly chubby and grotesquely overweight. When most men use the term "whale" to describe women, they're referring to the latter.

Wow what a crock of bull...sure people can have a bit more control of their weight than say the shape of their nose for instance. But no its a myth everyone can completely 'control' their weight, and some people have genetics that do cause them to be naturally heavier...I personally am quite skinny usually borderline underweight and I can't change that, I can put on a few pound if I go under my default weight but even that is difficult. Took me a week in the hospital once to get back up to a healthy weight cause I had gotten too stressed and wasn't eating enough plus my body burns stuff up really fast. I imagine just as much as I have had difficulties with that someone who's a bit overweight but unable to become 'skinny' that is not really their choice that is just their body not everyone is built skinny.

Also I kind of get the impression they mean anything beyond 'slightly chubby' not specifically say morbidly obese people who are at risk for major health problems due to their weight. I suppose the poster who made the comment will have to specificy....I just know I've seen the comment 'whale' applied to plenty of bigger women who are quite far from what you describe.

_________________
We won't go back.

The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,098
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

12 Oct 2015, 4:45 pm

In darkphantom's post, there's only one thing that cannot be disputed: "You're a guy out of 100 guys fighting for 1 woman."

This is why all dating sites are pathetic for men .

And yes, it's also undeniable that obesity is way more common there than it is in normal population (maybe it's also true for shortness in men) - even tho I don't agree with his language.

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 12 Oct 2015, 4:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,098
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

12 Oct 2015, 4:49 pm

Neotenous Nordic wrote:

You have also take into consideration fake female accounts that sites owners 'deliberately' leave to make it appear more gender balanced.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,949
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

12 Oct 2015, 4:53 pm

CommanderKeen wrote:

realitypill wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

darkphantomx1 wrote:

So women who aren't skinny are automatically not dating material in your eyes? Yet you are complaining about women being picky about male appearances.

I have met a lot of women whom are over weight and I consider them attractive. Some of them are actually active. All of the ones I have met that are very fat are very lazy and even admit to it. No one should be obligated to fit someone else's standard of beauty. That being stated, no one should guilt trip anyone else for not being attracted to certain types of people. There is such a double standard now. It's wrong for a man to want a woman that isn't lazy and takes care of herself, but it's okay for women to have high standards EVEN if they themselves are not that attractive by conventional standards.

No that is not at all what I said....I said perhaps a guy who calls any women who are a heavier in weight, whales might be just as picky as all the women who've rejected him. And even if he did specifically mean extremely obese women its still derogatory to call them whales. I certainly would not date a guy who talked about people that way.

I didn't say its ok for women to have super high standards but wrong for a man to want a women who isn't lazy..as you say being bigger doesn't particularly imply they are lazy or don't take care of them self. I think lots of women have far to high of standards, I think lots of guys also develop rather high standards for themselves...like saying they are so unappealing and ugly but acting like its insulting if a woman who is not conventionally attractive talks to them or has interest. Hence why I responded how I did to that comment about whales.

_________________
We won't go back.

RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,085
Location: Adelaide, Australia

12 Oct 2015, 5:02 pm

CommanderKeen wrote:

RetroGamer87 wrote:

ForRetail wrote:

Do you think that a woman who has a degree, car, house and good job is being unreasonable for expecting any man she dates to have the same?

Damn it that's my problem. All the girls have a degree and I don't.

I wouldn't even feed into her comments. She obviously has her own agenda.

Oh, it's her again. The coward with a thousand screennames. Yeah, screw her. At least I have a life, she's just an unemployed troll with too much time on her hands.

_________________
The days are long, but the years are short

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,949
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

12 Oct 2015, 5:02 pm

SwissPagan wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

darkphantomx1 wrote:

So women who aren't skinny are automatically not dating material in your eyes? Yet you are complaining about women being picky about male appearances.

well, I think fitness equivalent isn't an unreasonable request...

What is fitness equivalent?....I am skinny, my boyfriend is a bit larger probably a bit over just 'chubby' but I think we have similar activity levels. So how exactly would size/weight alone determine whether or not someone is your 'fitness equivalent' or not. I mean sure it makes sense someone who is fairly active probably wouldn't want to be with someone who spends all their free time lounging on a couch but you can't just look at someones size and immediately decide 'fat lazy slob' at them.

_________________
We won't go back.

RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,085
Location: Adelaide, Australia

12 Oct 2015, 5:09 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:

SwissPagan wrote:

well, I think fitness equivalent isn't an unreasonable request...

What is fitness equivalent?

I think maybe SwissPagan meant attractiveness equivalence.

_________________
The days are long, but the years are short

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,949
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

12 Oct 2015, 5:10 pm

beakybird wrote:

sly279 wrote:

beakybird wrote:

sly279 wrote:

beakybird wrote:

I only tried an online dating site once, but met my wife there. Granted this was 10 years ago when many people still thought it was lame (including me) to use them. I'm sure a lot has changed and many people view it differently. Probably way more sites too.

My friend used POF to find two girlfirends, both of whom are completely psycho. Like REALLY psycho. I wouldn't suggest it based on that.

I'd have to say if you are really serious about finding a relationship and not a hook up, a paysite would be the only way to go. Those people (the real ones) are probably more serious about finding the right person.

What about for low class people who want to find a relationship.

Paid sites are for middle class people who are well off.

Well I'd hardly have called myself well of at the time (or now). At that time I was on unemployment barely getting anything.

But if you can't afford it you can't. I just think that the free ones would attract more transient types who are "just curious". Seems like it would be the online equivalent of meeting your future spouse at local bar on ladies night. Chances= slim to none, disappointment inevitable.

As an interesting side note, when I was doing this online dating stuff it was when eHarmony first came out. I was attracted to their advertisements regarding deeper connections so I wanted to try. It was free so I figured what the heck. Go to the site. It says, complete the test, fill out your info and at the end we'll show you who of our however many thousand people they said they had that match. Ok, I thought. The personality thing was LONG, took like 45 min. As Im doing it I'm thinking, ah this should produce good results at least, very detailed. After I was done, would you believe the thing told me there was literally no one in their entire database that matched me? Not one female! Talk about a kick in the balls! Not a self-esteem builder at all.

That was my first indication that I really was just not like most of the rest of the world.

Eharmony said I was unmatchable and rejected me from their site.

At least Im not the only one.

I never signed up since I figured I wasn't enough of a square to meet someone there...I mean I don't see any metalheads on there. Also all the commercials for it always creeped me out, half the time it looked like the significant other a woman or man found may as well have been their fraternal twin and they always had light pastel colored clothes I can't help associating with yuppies.

_________________
We won't go back.

The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,098
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

12 Oct 2015, 5:15 pm

Celebs and millionaires aside, I personally see more athletic/fit guys with obese girls, than obese guys with athletic/fit girls.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,949
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

12 Oct 2015, 5:23 pm

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:

Celebs and millionaires aside, I personally see more athletic/fit guys with obese girls, than obese guys with athletic/fit girls.

I do see quite a few skinny guys with quite large women, and they'll be close together not like the guy keeping his distance out of disgust or something.

_________________
We won't go back.

CommanderKeen
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 May 2014
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,138

12 Oct 2015, 5:52 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:

CommanderKeen wrote:

realitypill wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

darkphantomx1 wrote:

So women who aren't skinny are automatically not dating material in your eyes? Yet you are complaining about women being picky about male appearances.

I was replying to what he said, adding on to it. I actually wasn't addressing you in that instance.

CommanderKeen
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 May 2014
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,138

12 Oct 2015, 5:59 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:

beakybird wrote:

sly279 wrote:

beakybird wrote:

sly279 wrote:

beakybird wrote:

What about for low class people who want to find a relationship.

Paid sites are for middle class people who are well off.

Eharmony said I was unmatchable and rejected me from their site.

At least Im not the only one.

I'm a metal head. King Diamond is my favorite band/singer. I'm not trying to call you out, but I remember seeing you on the myyearbook.com forums years ago. I remember some of your posts.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,949
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

12 Oct 2015, 6:28 pm

CommanderKeen wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

I'm a metal head. King Diamond is my favorite band/singer. I'm not trying to call you out, but I remember seeing you on the myyearbook.com forums years ago. I remember some of your posts.

Ah yes myyearbook....before they changed the name and got rid of the forums, I do remember that place.

_________________
We won't go back.

CommanderKeen
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 May 2014
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,138

12 Oct 2015, 6:35 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:

CommanderKeen wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:

I'm a metal head. King Diamond is my favorite band/singer. I'm not trying to call you out, but I remember seeing you on the myyearbook.com forums years ago. I remember some of your posts.

Ah yes myyearbook....before they changed the name and got rid of the forums, I do remember that place.

Did you ever windup seeing Judas Priest in concert? lol

Page 7 of 8 [ 128 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Jump to:

pof is another pathetic site. Post Reply New Topic

pof is another pathetic site.