nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

How come Tinder is so difficult?

BabyE

Anyone have success off it, why do standards seem to be through the roof nowadays. You got to have the good facial looks, the immaculate hair, amazing body, height, charisma and all the trappings of high status and wealth and then maybe, just maybe you might snag yourself a ticket using the rebound card.
What is it? Are we seeing a breathing out of the average male? Is a men only as good as his worse attribute to a women? So you might have a ripped well maintained body but by god if you are below 6 foot or that face isn't as symmetrical as it ought to be then you may as well sign out of the dating game.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

The Talking Bread

If someone wasn't making an effort to maintain some sort of even small conversational rapport I wouldn't humour them too long! They may be a lovely person outside the virtual world but I wouldn't have too much patience for small talk over a text!
I would imagine it is guys who would generally be the more enthusiastic to strike a chat anyway. Obviously not a generalisation but most guys would prefer not to engage in "hi, hw r u 2day" style messages!
Anyone will tell you that in general a fella would initiate the conversation anyway with the first message. Again, not everyone but a majority.

Arevaci

ligerdub wrote: »

Nightclubs are a terrible place to meet women, a lot of them are on the defensive and are there to reject men, which is fair enough, it's natural to be cautious with total strangers. Of almost all of the friends I know most of them met their other half's through friends or work.

Nightclubs and pubs I’ve found are the best places to meet women if you can have the courage to talk to them (and it isn’t too loud). There’s girls I’ve met on nights out who’d never consider liking me online.

If you can have courage to go up to and talk to a women, you are miles ahead compared to where you would be online:

First, by talking to her you're showing a certain level of confidence which girls like. With online dating these days guys hardly ever approach women anymore (who are not already friends). And despite all the talk of rape culture, I’ve heard more complaints from my female friends about how guys are dopes and never talk to them anymore.
Second, you’re right there standing in front of her, you may not be the fantasy guy she’s been waiting for but she just has to look around at every other pissed guy to realise you’re probably the best option.
Third, if she happens to be horny there’s only one step left and that’s very motivating – compared to a week of texting online and rescheduling where the connection fades quickly.
Fourth, you’re connecting with the girl on a biochemical level face to face; online there’s no such connection, in the same way facebook doesn’t make us feel anymore social.
Fifth, she’s probably had some alcohol so all those Irish guilt inhibitions around sex or even just talking to guys will be reduced.

I hate to always be really mathematic and 80/20 etc. but the odds for a guy are spectacularly higher face to face compared to online. Online is great for the really handsome guys and maybe the socially awkward guys with great holiday photos but for majority of guys we look far better face to face. I've even seen this with my online dates. There's been girls who I met online who I wasn't particularly interested in when we met face to face, yet they would be quite persistent in continuing the night (even though I was the persistent one online).

I guess it’s about picking your opportunities, yes you’ll have zero chance with a group of Irish girls in wooly jumpers sitting round a table. In contrast, two Spanish girls on holiday will definitely be at least interested to talk to you – or generally any girl that looks bored out off her head drinking with her mates.

It really is as simple as talking, reading body language, if there’s no negative gestures/expressions, continue, if there is, give up and tell her it was nice talking to her. In the future Skype type dating will be a lot more helpful to guys but for now, approaching women in real life is where the best opportunities are at.

TLDR: As a guy you’ll generally never get a girl at your level online so you’ll be restricted to reluctant hook ups. If you approach girls in the real world, you’ll connect with them better, they’ll see you as a confident guy and you can definitely hit it off with girls above your own level.

Kal El

Cornelius Crow wrote: »

I know what youre talking about but i don't think it bears any relation to the fact that myexperience would suggest there's a generation of men who don't grasp how to make conversation or why ot would be of importance.

I couldn't give a fiddlers if a guy is doing the "mass swipe" thing, or we do converse and it becomes obvious that we're not suited so subsequently unmatches me.

When a guy sends a message saying hi or whatever, and doesn't demonstrate any capacity to chat back and forth after that, it makes me wonder whether they are either lacking in basic social skills or so egocentric to think that they've made sufficient effort. If making basic conversation constitutes "hard work" from a guy's point of view then perhaps it's time for me to walk away from tinder.

I dont agree theres a generation of men that cant make conversation. I really think you are just hitting the mass like market. A guy will message a girl back even if he has no interest in them. Im sorry you have got quiet a few of them.

professore

MeatTwoVeg wrote: »

This 80/20 thing sounds like a load of sh1te. I suspect it's a theory dreamed up by unsuccessful guys to explain their dating failures.
Most women would hook up with most guys.
Most guys would hook up with most women.
Assuming you're not spectacularly ugly or out of shape, you have a reasonable chance to pick up people of the opposite sex if you make some effort.

Ok if your theory is true ... but imagine you go on Tinder and you match every girl you swipe on. A couple of them are super hot by your tastes, a good few are only OK and another chunk are "plain". Who are you going to meet up with?

strawdog

Maybe some do but I would never use Tinder as my primary way of dating (presuming that's what you're looking for), just a fun time killer that has a small chance of paying off. There's really too little info available to take it seriously. For me, being social, going to big nights out, meeting new people through activities etc are still the meat and potatoes of dating life and way more likely to pay off.

Tinder is like doing a scratch card, an amusement that could potentially pay off big occasionally, but usually I'd be just happy to 'make my money back'(ie match with someone nice, go out on a date that's not a disaster or even fun, but ultimately doesn't go anywhere). Human attraction and relationships are far too complicated to have higher expectations.

The only way I find Tinder consistently useful is as social information. Finding out about acquaintances or people I half-know IRL who are single. I never swipe right as it would just be awkward, but, it means I know who is single in my extended circles. Might sound stalkerish but I think we all want to know who we know that is available.

On a totally unrelated matter I decided to add the Spotify option on it last night, just to give a bit more info about myself as I haven't had a match in a while. It chose as my anthem 'Creep' by Radiohead! Spotify knows!

Surreptitious

blacklilly wrote: »

Em if you're kinda involved with someone, it isn't exactly a great idea. Unless you tell them you're doing it as an experiment.

It's casual.

Conor Bourke

Kal El wrote: »

I covered this in a message, but a big part of that problem is men mass match. Like will match every girl then only after then get a like back they actually look at there profiles. They could easily have looked at your account and decided they dont like you taste in music or something

I know what youre talking about but i don't think it bears any relation to the fact that myexperience would suggest there's a generation of men who don't grasp how to make conversation or why ot would be of importance.

I couldn't give a fiddlers if a guy is doing the "mass swipe" thing, or we do converse and it becomes obvious that we're not suited so subsequently unmatches me.

When a guy sends a message saying hi or whatever, and doesn't demonstrate any capacity to chat back and forth after that, it makes me wonder whether they are either lacking in basic social skills or so egocentric to think that they've made sufficient effort. If making basic conversation constitutes "hard work" from a guy's point of view then perhaps it's time for me to walk away from tinder.

blacklilly

Surreptitious wrote: »

I'm going to download Tinder for a few days and report back on the findings. I never used it before really so we'll see the interest. I'm kinda involved with someone so I'm not too bothered, just an experiment.

Em if you're kinda involved with someone, it isn't exactly a great idea. Unless you tell them you're doing it as an experiment.

MeatTwoVeg

The Talking Bread wrote: »

?? Why? I quoted that part. The rest I more or less agreed with. What did you mean by it!

That most people have a reasonably broad range of attraction.

Surreptitious

I'm going to download Tinder for a few days and report back on the findings. I never used it before really so we'll see the interest. I'm kinda involved with someone so I'm not too bothered, just an experiment.

The Talking Bread

MeatTwoVeg wrote: »

It's kinda weird that that's what you'd take from that statement.

?? Why? I quoted that part. The rest I more or less agreed with. What did you mean by it!

Kal El

Cornelius Crow wrote: »

In my experience of tinder, that's a big part of the problem: most guys I match with make little or no effort to converse. Regardless of who sends the opening message, I've a pain in my face with the amount of guys on there who don't seem to grasp the basic mechanics of conversation. They don't come across as bad guys, and it's not limited to the good-looking lads who don't feel the need to try, it's endemic almost across the board!

I send a guy a message containing a question, they reply with the answer and nothing more. Trying to get them to chat is like pulling teeth and those I've pointed this out to either reply with something inane like "lol", they get defensive or they stop replying/unmatch. If i stop replying, i might get another message the next day just saying "hey".. I don't get it!

I'm in my 30's matching with guys no younger than 30, how do these men not understand the basics of conversation?! And how do they hope to inspire someone to want to meet them if they wont engage in even a little bit of chat?

I'm sure ive passed over quite a number of very eligible guys on tinder because i found the attempts at conversation were so dull, I couldn't bring myself to suggest meeting. I don't want to get into a serial penpal thing with someone on tinder, I'm not looking for chats to pass the time all day but ffs I need to get a sense for someone if I'm going to meet them.

I covered this in a message, but a big part of that problem is men mass match. Like will match every girl then only after then get a like back they actually look at there profiles. They could easily have looked at your account and decided they dont like you taste in music or something

MeatTwoVeg

The Talking Bread wrote: »

but to suggest "most" people would "hook up" with most of the opposite sex is suggesting most people have no reasonable standards or even respect for themselves!

It's kinda weird that that's what you'd take from that statement.

Kal El

MeatTwoVeg wrote: »

This 80/20 thing sounds like a load of sh1te. I suspect it's a theory dreamed up by unsuccessful guys to explain their dating failures.
Most women would hook up with most guys.
Most guys would hook up with most women.
Assuming you're not spectacularly ugly or out of shape, you have a reasonable chance to pick up people of the opposite sex if you make some effort.

I agree with this 100%, Im definitely not in the top 20% and when using it I was easily getting girls in the top 20%. This was in Amercian cities and Dublin. Ive never used it outside of cities though as I dont want to meet people that might know me :pac:
Only thing Id recommend is like girls you are attracted to, I know guys who like every girl and for me it makes no sense. Like 100 girls you are attracted to if you get 5 to like you back thats 5 youre attracted to. Do it for the day and you can have 20 attractive girls. After a week it could be 100. Now of that 100 you could easily be meeting 10 of them if you choose.
I think where most people go wrong is the mass liking

SarahMollie

Online dating always gets a raw deal here, but I just wanted to pop up and say that a girl I know (sister of a friend) got engaged yesterday to her BF of 2 years who she met on Tinder.

That brings to a total of 3 engagements out of 5 current long term relationships of people I know personally who met online. It can't be all bad!

silverharp

MeatTwoVeg wrote: »

This 80/20 thing sounds like a load of sh1te. I suspect it's a theory dreamed up by unsuccessful guys to explain their dating failures.
Most women would hook up with most guys.
Most guys would hook up with most women.
Assuming you're not spectacularly ugly or out of shape, you have a reasonable chance to pick up people of the opposite sex if you make some effort.

there is hardly going to be very reliable data. I did see some reference about a study done on one of these sites and that the male choices were more "reasonable" than the female ones. The whole thing varies by age so it might be more a younger issue, I knew some guys that didn't date a lot in college but they were studying good career courses like Engineering , Architecture and the like , a couple of years out of college doing very well for themselves and they had met someone and were married a few years later. Given that there are more girls than boys are going to college these days even that problem mightn't be so bad :pac:

Conor Bourke

MeatTwoVeg wrote: »

Assuming you're not spectacularly ugly or out of shape, you have a reasonable chance to pick up people of the opposite sex if you make some effort.

In my experience of tinder, that's a big part of the problem: most guys I match with make little or no effort to converse. Regardless of who sends the opening message, I've a pain in my face with the amount of guys on there who don't seem to grasp the basic mechanics of conversation. They don't come across as bad guys, and it's not limited to the good-looking lads who don't feel the need to try, it's endemic almost across the board!

I send a guy a message containing a question, they reply with the answer and nothing more. Trying to get them to chat is like pulling teeth and those I've pointed this out to either reply with something inane like "lol", they get defensive or they stop replying/unmatch. If i stop replying, i might get another message the next day just saying "hey".. I don't get it!

I'm in my 30's matching with guys no younger than 30, how do these men not understand the basics of conversation?! And how do they hope to inspire someone to want to meet them if they wont engage in even a little bit of chat?

I'm sure ive passed over quite a number of very eligible guys on tinder because i found the attempts at conversation were so dull, I couldn't bring myself to suggest meeting. I don't want to get into a serial penpal thing with someone on tinder, I'm not looking for chats to pass the time all day but ffs I need to get a sense for someone if I'm going to meet them.

The Talking Bread

MeatTwoVeg wrote: »

This 80/20 thing sounds like a load of sh1te. I suspect it's a theory dreamed up by unsuccessful guys to explain their dating failures.
Most women would hook up with most guys.
Most guys would hook up with most women.
Assuming you're not spectacularly ugly or out of shape, you have a reasonable chance to pick up people of the opposite sex if you make some effort.

Nonsense! I think we have evolved from the neanderthal age of sexual appetite!
You could make a fair argument about the "ten to two" factor on a night out for some but to suggest "most" people would "hook up" with most of the opposite sex is suggesting most people have no reasonable standards or even respect for themselves!

It is a forbidden cliche but personality and confidence of a prospective partner are growing much more important than ever in this day of age with internet dating.
People have much more choice dating wise with the likes of POF and Tinder so obviously attraction is significant but other factors then need to be considered. It is much easier to be extrovert and not really yourself if you meet someone out in a pub whereas your personality is exposed a lot more through internet dating (providing you actually quit the window shopping and small talk stage and actually meet up!) It's impossible to read into someones personality until you sit down face to face..

ligerdub

I think you need to consider the culture of the setting.

People are about 100% more of arsehole in a nightclub compared to normal life, and about 3000% more of a horndog on dating sites than in a normal setting.

The same decent guy or girl you're looking for and may end up meeting is likely to be different to what their best version is, i.e. their normal self.

Nightclubs are a terrible place to meet women, a lot of them are on the defensive and are there to reject men, which is fair enough, it's natural to be cautious with total strangers. Of almost all of the friends I know most of them met their other half's through friends or work.

Surreptitious

blacklilly wrote: »

As I said I'm speaking from personal experience. Of course I'm still hopeful of meeting one of the good ones. However in the time I've been single I've met very few. Maybe that says more about me then it does the men I've dated or maybe I've just been unlucky, who knows.

You've also misquoted me, what I said was that it "seems most of the good ones are taken"

I agree with you about the current dating climate or else it could just be me.

MeatTwoVeg

This 80/20 thing sounds like a load of sh1te. I suspect it's a theory dreamed up by unsuccessful guys to explain their dating failures.
Most women would hook up with most guys.
Most guys would hook up with most women.
Assuming you're not spectacularly ugly or out of shape, you have a reasonable chance to pick up people of the opposite sex if you make some effort.

silverharp

midnight city wrote: »

I'm not on tinder or any other online dating sites but surely if all the women really were waiting for the top 20% of men it would be a very long wait for most of them. The top 20% of men are going to be interested in the top 20% of women.

I believe it doesn't work that way, the alleged position apparently is that at least in large US cities is that there is a bit of an 80/20 rule going on here ie 20% of the guys are getting 80% of the sex that is on offer, I half jokingly say Tinder is where civilisation goes to die because its where all the normal conventions go out the window. So it makes younger average guys grumpy as they feel dating is an uphill chore and are seeing a relative drought but also more women end up in their 30's feeling cynical or chewed up and essentially out of the market as they missed the game of musical chairs that was going on around them.
If its even only half true in the US it sounds grim and not so hot if its even only a quarter or an eighth true here. I'd assume Irish girls are more reasonable in real life and ditto if your an average guy that wont jump out on an online profile stick to the real world

elusiveguy

eeguy wrote: »

Go on...

Western men are an eagerly sought commodity

Broadly, every like was a match, every match started a conversation with me, most conversations were engaging and enthusiastic and if that continued for more than about 2 days, they would try to arrange dates

TBF I found it all a bit intense and shallow but that's generally how I found everything about HK:o

eeguy

elusiveguy wrote: »

I also tindered a bit in Hong Kong, I was living there for about 6 months. VERY different experience to here.

Go on...

elusiveguy

I don't think its just that it "seems most of the good ones are taken", its that all the good ones who you'd actually date are taken. (That's in general rather than you in particular BL)

I did tinder for about 18 months, found a few nice people who I'm friends with, found a few crazies, found a few who were just awful human beings.

I also tindered a bit in Hong Kong, I was living there for about 6 months. VERY different experience to here.

midnight city

I'm not on tinder or any other online dating sites but surely if all the women really were waiting for the top 20% of men it would be a very long wait for most of them. The top 20% of men are going to be interested in the top 20% of women.

blacklilly

The Talking Bread wrote: »

How is that not negative! Thinking that "all the good ones are taken"!!

As I said I'm speaking from personal experience. Of course I'm still hopeful of meeting one of the good ones. However in the time I've been single I've met very few. Maybe that says more about me then it does the men I've dated or maybe I've just been unlucky, who knows.

You've also misquoted me, what I said was that it "seems most of the good ones are taken"

The Talking Bread

How is that not negative! Thinking that "all the good ones are taken"!!

blacklilly

One eyed Jack wrote: »

There are bucketloads, bucketloads of friendly, good looking, successful, genuine, sound, decent guys out there, honestly! I'm not one of them myself, but there's plenty of them out there all the same.

Speaking from experience, it would seem most of the good ones are taken.I'm not being negative here, I am talking from personal experience.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don't think that's a very fair assessment at all tbh. The vast, vast majority of people in my experience at least, have plenty of respect for the person (or indeed people, as the case may be!) they're dating. It's only again a tiny minority of people who would consider people disposable because they have no respect for them, and honestly, if you need to know where you stand with someone after a couple of months dating, and they see you as clingy or desperate, would you really want to continue a relationship with that person?

I'll respectfully disagree with you here, again speaking from experience as I assume that as you are just recently separated you have not been on the dating scene for some time. Things have massively changed. People are now dating like headless chickens, this is the reality. It's like a sweet shop to most, the general attitude is that there is always someone better out there. Again as above, I've no doubt there are decent people, hell I'd consider myself one but in mine and my friends experience its needle in the haystack stuff.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It's always been a minefield in fairness, but I think again the whole idea of the whole idea that people are afraid to give anything a proper go with someone because they feel there may be something better in the tinder swiping world, could only be applied to a very, very small minority of people.

I think what you are saying above may have been relevant 10 + years ago but now people date numerous people at the same time, being exclusive is not something you take for granted and as I said above because there seems to be this lurking feeling that maybe there's someone better, there's also an apprehension about being exclusive with someone.

The_Captain

The amount of sad sacks and creepy shut-ins in this thread is shocking

How dare women not find you attractive. They're all just vain, money-grabbing whores.