"You Can't Argue a Woman Into Liking You"

You made your case like a lawyer. Stable job. Good guy. Ready for something real. All true. All irrelevant.

She weighed your points, nodded along, felt nothing — then fell hard for some tattooed bartender with a motorcycle and a gambling problem.

Logic is where attraction goes to die. The "22 Rules" work a level deeper, on the subconscious switches that decide within minutes whether you register as a MAN or as part of the furniture.

Stop presenting evidence. Start flipping switches.

Read more...

article: When It Comes To Romantic Attraction, Real Life Beats Questionnaires

MatureDJ

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
12,732
Reaction score
5,148
www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/09/06/548645037/when-it-comes-to-romantic-attraction-real-life-beats-questionnaires
Dating sites claim to winnow a few ideal suitors out of a nigh-infinite pool of chaff. But the matches these algorithms offer may be no better than picking partners at random, a study finds.
Dating sites claim to winnow a few ideal suitors out of a nigh-infinite pool of chaff. But the matches these algorithms offer may be no better than picking partners at random, a study finds.
My opinion: The most important traits are physical attractiveness, age, intelligence/education, money/job (for women) & no kids (for men). Everything else is fluff, even though it shouldn't be.
 

"I'm Not Looking for Anything Serious Right Now"

When a woman says it, guys hear a confession. A heads-up. A scheduling conflict.

Here's the translation: I don't feel anything. Right now. With you.

Watch what happens when a man triggers actual attraction. The busy career, the recent breakup, the "not in a place to date" — all of it evaporates instantly. The same woman who was guarding her freedom is suddenly free every night.

The "22 Rules" explain why. When the right switches flip, her timeline rearranges itself around you.

Read more...

Wilko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 13, 2010
Messages
594
Reaction score
134
I always found the "matchmaking" aspects of OLD absurd - how dumb do you have to be to rely on an algorithm to tell you whether you get along with someone? The worst sites are the ones that only allow you to contact the people they recommend to you. E-harmony was the f*cking worst for that bullsh*t.

Speaking of which, have you seen the new ads for E-harmony basically promoting cuckoldry? There's always some (formerly) single mom raving about how great e-harmony is, and there's always some poor dumb schmuck sat next to her, pleading with his dead eyes - what the f*ck have I done?! There's another one where the woman openly mocks her new boyfriend, saying how awkward he was. What. The. Actual. F*ck.

Some barriers to entry might be a good idea though, I like the idea of "curated" OLD.

Hell, if I ran an OLD site, instead of flagging profanity and nudity in people's profiles, I'd ban the f*ck out of people for using daft cliches. Probably institute some rule where you have a minimum and maximum number of messages. Minimum to keep the girls from getting too lazy, and a maximum to stop the guys from acting all thirsty. Go over or under and I'll hide your account for a week.

Yeah, that would work actually - a successful site would moderate the worst tendencies of both genders. You need to stop women from acting like entitled princesses, and prevent men from acting like slobbering jerks.

Sadly, I don't think it would be too popular.
 
Last edited:

MatureDJ

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
12,732
Reaction score
5,148
I often wondered if eHarmony's MO was to limit the number of folks matched up so that folks would feel a sense of shortage and therefore be more accepting of any potential.
 
Top