[Starla]

Austin Allegro, on 12 April 2012 - 12:24 PM, said:

Excellent point. As I see it, any 'normal' person, ie, someone with mainstream views, conventional behaviour/outlook and average or above in looks, will have paired off long term before they are 30.

Those that don't either have 'issues' (ranging from anything from serious problems like alcoholism down to unusual opinions/unconventional lifestyles) which limit the number of possible partners they could have, or they 'punch above their weight' (ie, have unrealistic expectations of their partner in terms of looks, money, intelligence etc) and limit their possible partners in this way (I would consider myself to have suffered from both these symptoms).

It seems likely that if someones main priorities in life are watching Eastenders in their sportswear, communicating in text speak, or the classic "staying in and watching a DVD with a glass of wine" then the chances of being single are reduced. Their dating pool is sadly about 75% of the single UK population. You just need to vaguely fancy someone and it's a done deal. My mates (men/women) that struggle most finding a relationship are the ones that are the most articulate, interesting and stupid-funny left field. The dating pool (puddle) is tiny in comparison. It's not meeting someone that's the problem, it's meeting someone worth meeting. Then you're at the mercy of luck, looking for someone not tangibly described on paper.

[snowflux]

Austin Allegro, on 12 April 2012 - 12:24 PM, said:

Excellent point. As I see it, any 'normal' person, ie, someone with mainstream views, conventional behaviour/outlook and average or above in looks, will have paired off long term before they are 30.

Those that don't either have 'issues' (ranging from anything from serious problems like alcoholism down to unusual opinions/unconventional lifestyles) which limit the number of possible partners they could have, or they 'punch above their weight' (ie, have unrealistic expectations of their partner in terms of looks, money, intelligence etc) and limit their possible partners in this way (I would consider myself to have suffered from both these symptoms).

However, by mid 30s or so a number of people can come back on the market due to relationship break ups, divorce etc which is why I never discounted women with children per se. There's a difference between a decent woman with one or two children whose husband left her for another woman, and the Yeah-but-no-but Waynetta Slobb type with a family of mixed and uncertain paternity.

As a single dad (my wife died when my lad was 2 years old) on a dating site, I'm probably one of the few men who actually tend prefer women with one or two kids since they are more likely to appreciate the limitations that having children to care for places on a potential relationship. Women of my age (30s/40s) without children tend to have what seems to me a rather immature and unrealistic outlook on life, though that's obviously generalising rather wildly.

[The Masked Tulip]

silentstan, on 12 April 2012 - 09:15 AM, said:

I might stick my profile back up just so I can add this photo.

[thecrashingisles]

Austin Allegro, on 12 April 2012 - 12:24 PM, said:

Those that don't either have 'issues' (ranging from anything from serious problems like alcoholism down to unusual opinions/unconventional lifestyles) which limit the number of possible partners they could have, or they 'punch above their weight' (ie, have unrealistic expectations of their partner in terms of looks, money, intelligence etc) and limit their possible partners in this way (I would consider myself to have suffered from both these symptoms).

Sadly an aversion to debt comes into that category.

[DrMartinSanchez]

I'm reviving this thread...
Just found another interesting profile:

http://www.pof.com/v...ile_id=12954384

r u man enuffff for her? I know I'm not

[Dave Beans]

Starla, on 12 April 2012 - 01:32 PM, said:

It seems likely that if someones main priorities in life are watching Eastenders in their sportswear, communicating in text speak, or the classic "staying in and watching a DVD with a glass of wine" then the chances of being single are reduced. Their dating pool is sadly about 75% of the single UK population. You just need to vaguely fancy someone and it's a done deal. My mates (men/women) that struggle most finding a relationship are the ones that are the most articulate, interesting and stupid-funny left field. The dating pool (puddle) is tiny in comparison. It's not meeting someone that's the problem, it's meeting someone worth meeting. Then you're at the mercy of luck, looking for someone not tangibly described on paper.

I think thats absolutely true. Those with a "strange" outlook on life (me included) can find it hard to meet anyone...You know within the first few sentences if speaking to someone whether they get you, or whether you're just hopelessly embarrassing yourself with bizarre ramblings...

[pl1]

The Masked Tulip, on 12 April 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

I might stick my profile back up just so I can add this photo.

Awesome. But illustrates it well. A dating bird will have a bond with her kids naturally which will be obviously missing from you. She'll see love, you'll just see some random kid who can't put World Of Warcraft down, at first anyway.

[Mr. Miyagi]

DrMartinSanchez, on 24 April 2012 - 06:44 PM, said:

I'm reviving this thread...
Just found another interesting profile:

http://www.pof.com/v...ile_id=12954384

r u man enuffff for her? I know I'm not

Tits are alright.

[Starla]

DrMartinSanchez, on 24 April 2012 - 06:44 PM, said:

I'm reviving this thread...
Just found another interesting profile:

http://www.pof.com/v...ile_id=12954384

r u man enuffff for her? I know I'm not

I'm definately not man enough.

I'm just not sure that calling yourself "The Starfish" is a good idea. It conjures up the wrong image from the start.

[The Masked Tulip]

I had a classic one today.

I begun browsing the dating sites about 2 months ago and noticed a woman in Swansea who had a profile on both dating direct and on plentyoffish.

On her plentyoffish profile she is seeking a woman to explore her bisexual side for the first time.

On her dating direct profile she writes a normal vanilla profile seeking a bloke. Her dating direct profile sounded intelligent, balanced and interesting.

She has the same photo on both profiles.

So I emailed her today simply wishing her all the best stating that I thought it was honest and brave of her to put such a profile on-line - especially as there are so many small-minded people in Wales when it comes to sexuality. That is all I said - I basically encouraged her and thought that I would hear no more from her. She is in her fifties and several years above my maximum age range in seeking a partner. I did not expect a response.

This is the response I got back.

Quote

I think you have the wrong person. I'm not on dating direct. I dont appreciate being contacted by a man on a lesbian dating site either.

Within minutes her profile photo on dating direct seeking a man had been deleted - presumably so no one can now link her with her female seeking profile on plentyoffish. I mean, does she really think that I am the only person who has seen both profiles, especially as both had the same profile photo?

So I emailed her back pointing out her profile handle on dating direct and what it said about her seeking a man, pointed out that plentyoffish is NOT a lesbian dating site only and, whilst I wished her all the best coming to terms with any sexual insecurities she might have, that I did not appreciate her trying to project her insecurities on to me by trying to make out that she did not have such a profile on dating direct as well as on plentyoffish.

I have to say that her reply caused me nutter alarm radar to begin flashing.

I understand that she may have reservations and doubts about her bi-sexual desires but, gee, come to terms with them before you begin sticking up your photo on one dating site seeking a woman and on another seeking a man!!!

[The Masked Tulip]

Durch, on 03 June 2012 - 04:17 PM, said:

Give it up TMT and let her be!

[Fully Detached]

DrMartinSanchez, on 24 April 2012 - 06:44 PM, said:

I'm reviving this thread...
Just found another interesting profile:

http://www.pof.com/v...ile_id=12954384

r u man enuffff for her? I know I'm not

Is she foreign?

['Bart']

DrMartinSanchez, on 24 April 2012 - 06:44 PM, said:

r u man enuffff for her? I know I'm not

Any woman describing herself as a "princess" who isn't called Kate, Anne, Eugenie or Leia is probably best avoided.

I can feel my wallet draining from here.

[chronyx]

Quote

decided 2 be a grown up & upgrade this....as if ur goin 2 do something then you shud do it properly

"There is no emoticon, for what I'm feeling."

[Frank Hovis]

'Bart, on 03 June 2012 - 06:18 PM, said:

Any woman describing herself as a "princess" who isn't called Kate, Anne, Eugenie or Leia is probably best avoided.

I can feel my wallet draining from here.

Yep, "I was daddy's little princess", plus anybody describing themselves as "high maintenance". Goodbye, no I always walk this quickly.

This post has been edited by Frank Hovis: 04 June 2012 - 08:30 AM