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

Tinder weight filter

bloodless_coup

Why doesn't tinder have a weight filter? I should be able to choose to only appear to non fat girls.

Most of the likes I get are from fat ones. The gall of them. I'm in good shape. Why would they think I'm interested in an over weight person?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Addle

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

Except they seem to actually believe it themselves whereas women know well they're lying about their weight /size.

Plenty of delusional women out there.
I'd love to know where they get their confidence.

KevinCavan

An Irish woman who is a 4 thinks she’s a six (out of ten). An Irish woman who is a 6, thinks she is an eight.

Surreptitious

KevinCavan wrote: »

An Irish woman who is a 4 thinks she’s a six (out of ten). An Irish woman who is a 6, thinks she is an eight.

KevinCavan

Surreptitious wrote: »

Possibly.

givyjoe

Jackman25 wrote: »

Maybe I'm just getting curmudgeonly in my old age, but I hate to see this Instagram and Facebook nonsense pervading every day speech.
It is quite possibly to love your partner dearly while recognizing them as a normal, flawed, quirky unique human being.
When someone tells me their partner is amazing, I am looking for Nobel Prizes or Olympic Gold medals or stuff like that. I am almost always disappointed.

I always find the same to be true of people described as idiots or negatively in general. Never as bad as they're described. The amount of times I've heard people described as morons, idiots etc.. leaving me expecting to meet a window licker when I meet them myself. Almost always a complete exaggeration or just wrong.

ohnonotgmail

Addle wrote: »

Plenty of delusional women out there.
I'd love to know where they get their confidence.

Because their friends tell them how gawjus they are constantly.

KevinCavan

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Because their friends tell them how gawjus they are constantly.

Better looking women don’t have as many hang ups as their eternally single counterparts.

Gimme A Pound

Why not just "hot", "good looking", "all right looking", "not attractive"? That "out of ten" stuff appears invented by a Sheldon Cooper type.

bloodless_coup

Prominent_Dawg wrote: »

curious to know what ops ideal filtered weight would be

BMI Normal or Healthy Weight is about right.

bloodless_coup

Duck Soup wrote: »

The OP sounds like a real catch.

I think so.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Adam Massive Druggist wrote: »

Why not just "hot", "good looking", "all right looking", "not attractive"? That "out of ten" stuff appears invented by a Sheldon Cooper type.

Yeah, whenever I’ve thought about my looks, I’ve never placed myself on a ten point scale. The ‘out of ten’ thing seems to be more if a man thing and, I have to say, not limited to American men. I’ve heard Irish men at it and not just recently. Since my college days in the ‘00s at least.

Daisy78

givyjoe wrote: »

I always find the same to be true of people described as idiots or negatively in general. Never as bad as they're described. The amount of times I've heard people described as morons, idiots etc.. leaving me expecting to meet a window licker when I meet them myself. Almost always a complete exaggeration or just wrong.

Hmmm I think that is down to good old fashioned Irish begrudgery and one upmanship. We don't go in for bragging/boasting in this country but putting people down is the next best thing when you feel the need to be a little bit superior.

Daisy78

Adam Massive Druggist wrote: »

Why not just "hot", "good looking", "all right looking", "not attractive"? That "out of ten" stuff appears invented by a Sheldon Cooper type.

It's desperately cynical and almost always used in the context of women's looks. It says more about the person applying it than the intended individual.

B0jangles

Because you need numerical data if you're going to make a spreadsheet and plot a few graphs to help you demonstrate with hard facts why it is unreasonable for you Barbara, to turn me down, when you are CLEARLY a 6.34 (you used to be a 7.84, but turning 25 knocked you right down) and I am a 6.88.

Wait, where are you going?

Gimme A Pound

Yup. A Sheldon Cooper type.

How do they cope if there's an 11 or a -1?

One eyed Jack

Adam Massive Druggist wrote: »

Yup. A Sheldon Cooper type.

How do they cope if there's an 11 or a -1?

While I wouldn’t use a number scale to rate anyone’s physical or sexual attraction myself, I can at least understand why it’s a fairly popular means of comparison. It’s not solely limited to Sheldon Cooper types either when the phrase ‘Perfect 10’ has been around a long time now. It’s really just as arbitrary as any other ratings standard, albeit not as descriptive, but people would generally understand what’s meant by it.

Gimme A Pound

I don't believe anyone denied that there are varying degrees of beauty/attractiveness - does anyone else?

Redneck Culchie

I think Tinder is very shallow, at least on other sites people have more filled out profiles and details about themselves, values and interests.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Adam Massive Druggist wrote: »

I don't believe anyone denied that there are varying degrees of beauty/attractiveness - does anyone else?

Aaaaannnd he’s gone.

Mr. CooL ICE

Mod: A brand new poster posting controversial opinions regarding women should be a familiar site to seasoned AH posters. Please do not feed.

Mooooo

https://youtu.be/vwbKYcBdVyk

gctest50

Charge € 2 for new sign-ups via txt, stripe, paypal

Send the money to SantaStrikeForce or similar

CPTM

There are scales of attractiveness though, right? For example, for those of you who talked about how they don't like to accept that people are on a scale or not. Do you date mean people? Or do you try to find a guy/girl who is kind? That's a spectrum right? What about being funny or having a sense of humour, do you date brick wall personalities? Or do you try to find someone who you can laugh along with the most? That's a scale?

Some people are born with great abilities to talk to guys and girls, and make them feel like their thoughts are the most important in the world. Some guys and girls are born hilarious and have the best banter ever. Some are born gorgeous and eat like pigs but won the genetic lottery and have all the Instagram fame. If it's kindness or looks or humour or music taste, or whatever is important to you, you'll find you have a scale in your head. I feel the big problem is when you try to force someone else to use your parameters of attractiveness instead of letting them have their own.

Addle

Attractiveness is relative though.
It's just taste.

Anesthetize

A Tinder IQ filter would be more useful than a weight filter.

r93kaey5p2izun

I would be in favour of a weight filter, and a filter on anything that can be objectively measured or categorised, once you could see not only the suggested match's result on any and all such metrics but also their stated preference in any category. I don't see why anyone would be against such a feature.

Redneck Culchie

Liquidity Metrics wrote: »

For women, the most important factor for sexual attractiveness is looks/form, for men there are numerous factors inclusing looks/ form, such as social status, social skills, dominance and so on. Nobody has the exact same attraction mechanism but it averages out so that you can see a hierarchy at play.

Would agree with that. Although for women they have an advantage with the use of make up. Can really transform appearance. In many cases in this country women wear too much make up IMO.

Also there is a lot more women getting plastic surgery here in recent years. Lips, nose, jaw fillers etc . And men doing tanning beds, steroids, teeth whitened. It's becoming a vain and shallow country. The likes of instagram only encourages narcissism and vanity. It's all a bit pathetic really

CPTM

Liquidity Metrics wrote: »

For women, the most important factor for sexual attractiveness is looks/form, for men there are numerous factors inclusing looks/ form, such as social status, social skills, dominance and so on. Nobody has the exact same attraction mechanism but it averages out so that you can see a hierarchy at play.

Actually if you want to talk about those base rules, the general rule since we were monkeys in trees is that females like a man of power and status to protect the family. And men like a fit body to bear and feed a baby. Beautiful youthful girls dating men with big wallets and celebrity status. That's just primitive genetic stuff, and if that's where some people are at, then so be it.

However, while some people haven't evolved out of this, I think you'll find that most have. Our intelligence has grown past that primitive law of attractiveness, and suddenly a person's ability to commit, their trustworthiness, and confidence in themselves are more valuable assets to have in a partner than any of the primitive criteria we used to hold so dear.

Feisar

Surreptitious wrote: »

Abomination of a thread.

Ah yea but come along for the ride!

[Deleted User]

Feisar wrote: »

Ah yea but come along for the ride!

I don't think anyone is getting the ride