Online dating-observation

vm007
vm007 Posts: 241 Member
edited November 23 in Chit-Chat
Hello all, (disclaimer- this is just an observation/opinion)

So first time in my life I opened up an account online. I moved to a new remote community (very small and what not) so assumed it'll be a good way to make friends and I noticed that, people are a LOT tolerant in real life compared to online.

For example- if a joke is bad in real life- we still laugh it off or don't think twice about it however, if it were online-that's it. Game over!

Now, think about it- the best friend we have now- was once a stranger to us right? we gave it a chance and it blossomed into a friendship. If we have zero tolerance online, would that translate into more meaningless encounters and alone at the end of the day?

The false self of esteem gets boosted by barrage of messages yet none of them given a chance? False self of importance with the number of likes/messages/followers yet still no companionship.

I have zero online presence other than here and now of course those online dating website and that's what I've observed.

What do you all think?
You know maybe in future- polygamy would be a thing and focused on? (it'll allow people to not worry about finding companionship rather just wham bam thank you man) and move on. (Sort of like japanese culture)

«1

Replies

  • KyleGrace8
    KyleGrace8 Posts: 2,205 Member
    What the what?
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • vm007
    vm007 Posts: 241 Member
    newmeadow wrote: »
    vm007 wrote: »
    Hello all, (disclaimer- this is just an observation/opinion)

    So first time in my life I opened up an account online. I moved to a new remote community (very small and what not) so assumed it'll be a good way to make friends and I noticed that, people are a LOT tolerant in real life compared to online.

    For example- if a joke is bad in real life- we still laugh it off or don't think twice about it however, if it were online-that's it. Game over!

    Now, think about it- the best friend we have now- was once a stranger to us right? we gave it a chance and it blossomed into a friendship. If we have zero tolerance online, would that translate into more meaningless encounters and alone at the end of the day?

    The false self of esteem gets boosted by barrage of messages yet none of them given a chance? False self of importance with the number of likes/messages/followers yet still no companionship.

    I have zero online presence other than here and now of course those online dating website and that's what I've observed.

    What do you all think?
    You know maybe in future- polygamy would be a thing and focused on? (it'll allow people to not worry about finding companionship rather just wham bam thank you man) and move on. (Sort of like japanese culture)

    In the future?

    It's done now? -I must be on the wrong website then.

    But I meant it won't have "taboo" connotation attached to it.
  • GemstoneofHeart
    GemstoneofHeart Posts: 865 Member
    Ummmmmm


    What?
  • Mariakerry166
    Mariakerry166 Posts: 1 Member
    Maybe it has more to do with a large community v. a small community. I’ve done some traveling and noticed differences between the two. There’s such a thing as ‘small town mentality’.
  • vm007
    vm007 Posts: 241 Member
    lol I'm getting lot of "wut"

    TLDR

    All I'm saying is that people have very low tolerance online compared to real life. How would one ever connect with anyone if they don't give each other a "chance".

    I'm saying- our best friend or friends now we have- were once strangers to us.

    Then I asked a question if polygamy is our future lol
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,179 Member
    @vm007 On-line allows people to respond quickly with the first thought that forms in their mind. This is their adrenal system texting.
  • nocookiestoday
    nocookiestoday Posts: 1,022 Member
    vm007 wrote: »
    lol I'm getting lot of "wut"

    TLDR

    All I'm saying is that people have very low tolerance online compared to real life. How would one ever connect with anyone if they don't give each other a "chance".

    I'm saying- our best friend or friends now we have- were once strangers to us.

    Then I asked a question if polygamy is our future lol

    I talk to whoever talks to me. That's not a lot of people, but some interaction is nice. I try to be open-minded about what's being said and I try to be thorough and respectful when I respond. Sometimes people get my personality (or humor, fun sarcasm, etc.), and sometimes they don't. If they come back, yay progress! Lol.
  • vm007
    vm007 Posts: 241 Member
    nocookiestoday wrote: »
    vm007 wrote: »
    lol I'm getting lot of "wut"

    TLDR

    All I'm saying is that people have very low tolerance online compared to real life. How would one ever connect with anyone if they don't give each other a "chance".

    I'm saying- our best friend or friends now we have- were once strangers to us.

    Then I asked a question if polygamy is our future lol

    I talk to whoever talks to me. That's not a lot of people, but some interaction is nice. I try to be open-minded about what's being said and I try to be thorough and respectful when I respond. Sometimes people get my personality (or humor, fun sarcasm, etc.), and sometimes they don't. If they come back, yay progress! Lol.

    You don't share cookies so maybe that's what it is! start sharing cookies and that's progress right there n then !
  • nocookiestoday
    nocookiestoday Posts: 1,022 Member
    Haha! I'll share cookies, just remind me not to eat any!!
  • slessofme
    slessofme Posts: 7,740 Member
    I reactivated my account recently and promptly realized just how much I must hate myself.
  • lilac_bunny
    lilac_bunny Posts: 137 Member
    I think you are mixing up terms. Polygamy is the practice of loving more than one person at a time and can apply to someone who is faithful to more than one person. So basically it's monogamy multiplied. I think you mean are we going to give up on relationships in the future. I don't think that will ever happen as most people seem to be biologically programmed to fall in love.
    In terms of looking for relationships or friendships online I think most people are only looking for relationships and therefore something more specific. If you want to make friends you would be better off on an interest forum. I'm not sure i agree that people are more tolerant in real life. I have walked away from plenty of men in a bar who come out with some crap one liner or I just don't like the look of the only time I would 'give someone more of a chance' is when social etiquette means I can't avoid them, such as having to work with them or you are both there to see a mutual friend.
  • km8907
    km8907 Posts: 3,861 Member
    Robot-Confused.gif
  • vm007
    vm007 Posts: 241 Member
    newmeadow wrote: »
    vm007 wrote: »
    lol I'm getting lot of "wut"

    TLDR

    All I'm saying is that people have very low tolerance online compared to real life. How would one ever connect with anyone if they don't give each other a "chance".

    I'm saying- our best friend or friends now we have- were once strangers to us.

    Then I asked a question if polygamy is our future lol

    In real life, that tolerance people profess is a mile wide and an inch deep. If there's a disparity of opinion between how the same people feel in real life versus what they say online when it comes to "tolerance", that's a good clue.

    Tolerance is what one employs when children whine and fuss on airplanes and how one keeps one's mouth shut at work when the boss is being annoying. It isn't a lense through which to view intimate relationships or the cohesion that bonds a society - other than through the most superficial means. It's a form of patience necessary to reduce conflict in the public exchange of ideas and within interactions amongst people with whom one has no common values or interests. It has its place in that regard and it is valuable as such.

    You seem to be wondering if the idea of monogamy is an antiquated social construct, but correct me if I'm wrong.

    For those who personally value monogamy for philosophical, practical, medical or religious reasons - they're probably not going to be converted in the other direction. If they screw up, those who aspire to monogamy will apologize, repent, divorce, negotiate a solution, whatever.

    Monogamy or the aim toward it will never be completely eradicated in my opinion, no. It's the highest standard by which to adhere and there will always those who will rise to its challenge, no matter how difficult it is to maintain over the long haul.

    It's the constant pursuit of finding the "perfect" one however, that "one" will never be found if same level of tolerance isn't applied to the field where one is seeking a mate. Plus, to be honest, from the number of profile I've read, I feel as if, they want an idea of a perfect person not actually that perfect person because who would date a robot? No flaws, no surprises, nada.

    I've grown up around people who have been together since they got married and may stay together for rest of their lives. They don't say "I love you" or show affection towards each other rather they display a bond. It's like an inseparable bond that holds them together and theyve accepted each other with their flaws and strengths the same.

    Those very relationships consists of anger, disappointment, happiness, sadness, joy and other myriad of emotions which I can't name (I don't know if there are any other than listed) It isn't like a movie in which we only see "love" and then the movie ends in 2 hours.

    North America tends to follow Japanese culture, I wonder if we will end up like them? More and more members are joining every day (dating websites) yet how many are actually getting out of it? Always thinking "plenty of fish" in the sea and never actually catching a single fish.
  • xFunctionalStrengthx
    xFunctionalStrengthx Posts: 4,928 Member
    vm007 wrote: »
    North America tends to follow Japanese culture, I wonder if we will end up like them? More and more members are joining every day (dating websites) yet how many are actually getting out of it? Always thinking "plenty of fish" in the sea and never actually catching a single fish.

    I disagree. The world as a whole tends to be both unique, and similar, regardless of where you are. What you are describing is not just unique to Japan, nor North America (and we certainly don't follow their culture). It is occurring throughout the world. Part of it is the fault of technology, and the "instant gratification" that comes with it. Part of it is due to changing times.


    I think most of the civilized world is changing, and realizing that true love doesn't come with, nor is ultimately sealed with, marriage. For myself, and many others I know, we have zero desire to get married again. Not for fear of commitment. Rather, because the commitment comes from within to your partner. We don't need religion, nor the Gov't, to bless the relationship. Nor, do we need them to provide conditions if we decide to end it.
  • eccomi_qui
    eccomi_qui Posts: 1,831 Member
    It’s hard to find a common meeting ground on the internet for those internet dates
  • Lounmoun
    Lounmoun Posts: 8,423 Member
    I have not done online dating but have made several long lasting friendships online. Maybe it depends on the type of site/group you are meeting people through?
    I don't think polygamy will stop being taboo in my lifetime. I think what I would see as a more likely societal change in future is the promotion of smaller family sizes or a benefit given to not having children.
  • slessofme
    slessofme Posts: 7,740 Member
    edited December 2017
    @vm007 You think people aren't developing relationships, but you wonder if polygamy (polyamory might actually be what you mean) is a possibility? To be either version of poly, it requires multiple relationships. And @newmeadow has a point - are you being as tolerant as you would like others to be? I'll be frank, I'm a person that isn't tolerant. I'm more than ok with imperfect as long as I find a person compelling. I would rather someone wants to spend time with me because they find me compelling, rather than because they tolerate me.
  • boehle
    boehle Posts: 5,062 Member
    bitcoincat wrote: »
    I never read profiles. I see the profile pic and send messages.

    haha
    I am very similiar
    I will look at the pictures and if I am attracted, then I will read their profiles.
    if I dont like your pics, I am not reading your profile
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • vm007
    vm007 Posts: 241 Member
    slessofme wrote: »
    @vm007 You think people aren't developing relationships, but you wonder if polygamy (polyamory might actually be what you mean) is a possibility? To be either version of poly, it requires multiple relationships. And @newmeadow has a point - are you being as tolerant as you would like others to be? I'll be frank, I'm a person that isn't tolerant. I'm more than ok with imperfect as long as I find a person compelling. I would rather someone wants to spend time with me because they find me compelling, rather than because they tolerate me.

    I meant it in a way - that -who cares what's written. Just physical attraction- one night stand and wham bam thank you man. Attention span has been decreasing overall. WIth that we can have multiple partners.
  • emjay6x3
    emjay6x3 Posts: 213 Member
    In my humble opinion, I do really think it depends on the people. There are people who serial date whomever they meet in bars, and then there are people who serial date whomever they meet online. There are also people who meet online and are in a committed relationship, or meet in person and are in a committed relationship. I also believe that depending on which site you're joining, you're probably giving off the idea of a certain expectation. For example, I myself view Tinder as more of a hook-up, nothing serious, type of a site/app. However, if you're paying for eHarmony, then you're probably looking for something less fling-y and more towards the serious scope of a relationship. Of course, I'm sure even these have their exceptions. Just my two cents!
  • xFunctionalStrengthx
    xFunctionalStrengthx Posts: 4,928 Member
    edited December 2017
    newmeadow wrote: »
    vm007 wrote: »
    slessofme wrote: »
    @vm007 You think people aren't developing relationships, but you wonder if polygamy (polyamory might actually be what you mean) is a possibility? To be either version of poly, it requires multiple relationships. And @newmeadow has a point - are you being as tolerant as you would like others to be? I'll be frank, I'm a person that isn't tolerant. I'm more than ok with imperfect as long as I find a person compelling. I would rather someone wants to spend time with me because they find me compelling, rather than because they tolerate me.

    I meant it in a way - that -who cares what's written. Just physical attraction- one night stand and wham bam thank you man. Attention span has been decreasing overall. WIth that we can have multiple partners.

    I mean I don't know by personal experience, but let's just say I've heard when you meet these avatars in person they look nothing like their profile photo 75% of the time. If that's the exclusive criteria that you'd use for your low attention span whamming and bamming, you'd be behooved to determine a candidates bangability in person versus by staring at and fingering a plastic screen.

    We used to go to discoteques and fornicate in the bathrooms, elevators, in the corners of the room behind the drapes and in the alley by the dumpster out back. Don't you polyamorous millennials still do that at your raves and mosh pits and such? You act like you never heard of it before.

    They're too busy swiping a phone screen to look up and realize there's a life outside an electronic gizmo. They also feel entitled to it all, and want it yesterday.
  • slessofme
    slessofme Posts: 7,740 Member
    @vm007 Multiple ongoing partners or endless one nighters? Ongoing would be more polyamory. Maybe it's a lack of attention span or maybe it's reluctance to be vulnerable.

    @newmeadow Ah, the urban myth of the profile pic that doesn't actually look like the person. I've heard it, but not had that experience.
  • vm007
    vm007 Posts: 241 Member
    newmeadow wrote: »
    vm007 wrote: »
    slessofme wrote: »
    @vm007 You think people aren't developing relationships, but you wonder if polygamy (polyamory might actually be what you mean) is a possibility? To be either version of poly, it requires multiple relationships. And @newmeadow has a point - are you being as tolerant as you would like others to be? I'll be frank, I'm a person that isn't tolerant. I'm more than ok with imperfect as long as I find a person compelling. I would rather someone wants to spend time with me because they find me compelling, rather than because they tolerate me.

    I meant it in a way - that -who cares what's written. Just physical attraction- one night stand and wham bam thank you man. Attention span has been decreasing overall. WIth that we can have multiple partners.

    I mean I don't know by personal experience, but let's just say I've heard when you meet these avatars in person they look nothing like their profile photo 75% of the time. If that's the exclusive criteria that you'd use for your low attention span whamming and bamming, you'd be behooved to determine a candidates bangability in person versus by staring at and fingering a plastic screen.

    We used to go to discoteques and fornicate in the bathrooms, elevators, in the corners of the room behind the drapes and in the alley by the dumpster out back. Don't you polyamorous millennials still do that at your raves and mosh pits and such? You act like you never heard of it before.

    This was my first time signing up for something "online" I don't have any social media presence other than here. Not sure if this constitutes as social media though? So I don't even know how I was suppose to operate "online".

    Lol in real life- I used to talk or say hi or comment on the situation if -it hits the right chord then we are set if it doesn't then I'd move on -online however, it seems like where tolerance should be of paramount is no where to be found. For example- sometimes meaning gets misinterpreted via message compared to over the phone which has a sense of tone. lol I was told that I need to use more "emoji's" when I talk to convey message or underlying tone. I tried using them but sometimes javascript error- emoji's end up showing up as " ??? " and the whole tone of the message changes lol and boom- you are out. Ergo the tolerance part.
  • Vikka_V
    Vikka_V Posts: 9,563 Member
    vm007 wrote: »

    You know maybe in future- polygamy would be a thing and focused on? (it'll allow people to not worry about finding companionship rather just wham bam thank you man) and move on. (Sort of like japanese culture)

    I don't understand

  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories