(Untitled)

[scootersaurus]

Is it shallow of me, when looking at online personals, to only look at and respond to ads with photos? I'm not talking a backstage (photos I can only look at when they give me permission) either, but a photo up front that I can look at before opening up a profile

Comments

[earwaxandtoejam]

Some women may not have the confidence to post their pics. Also, they may be the private kind. You know... They may not want just anybody to know that they're using a dating service? (I'm just thinking of someone I know).

[shuripentu]

Anyone can become physically attractive once you're mentally attracted to them.

[unsomnambulist]

Agreed. :)

[orts]

Totally cliche, totally true. Also the reverse.

[scootersaurus]

Ehhhh, I don't really buy that. If that was the case, the stereotypical "nice guy/girl" wouldn't exist, and there wouldn't be so many bad relationships that people are determined to "make work". :P

To me if something happens between two people then there was a physical attraction between them. It might not have been apparent at first, but it is there none the less to help draw them to each other.

[orts]

All these things are true enough....

That said, in a lot of online dating profiles, there often isn't much else to go on. And it's not just a question of their being "attractive." For example, you sometimes just know from the setting of the picture, the dress, the attitude, whether you're going to be able to hang out with someone or not. Online, I have totally avoided certain bleached-blonde women that others would consider "gorgeous" -- because that's not my type -- and contacted others who were obviously the Right Sort but rather plain by those standards. If you know what I mean.

Funny story. A friend of mine went on an online date with a woman; her picture, he thought, looked appealingly like Lucy Liu (yeah, I had to look it up. I suck at pop culture). She looked a little different in person, and during the conversation casually admitted to him that her picture online wasn't of her -- it was of Lucy Liu. Not the best strategy, I think. He lost interest pretty fast.... Anyway, caveat emptor even when there's a picture to view.

[scootersaurus]

First of all, thanks to your delete/repost I got to see a gmail conversation get updated as I'm reading it. Pretty cool. :)

I completely agree about profiles being sparse. There just isn't enough space to really say who you are. This is fine in a sense as I don't want a complete autobiography (I'd like to find out some things on a date :P), but it does usually (at least in my experience) mean that what is written down is almost the same as the dozen other profiles you just looked at (ie: "I like having fun with my friends", "I like going out or cuddling up to watch a movie", etc). A picture is almost needed to make a profile stand out.

And it's not just a question of their being "attractive."

Well, attractive is a pretty subjective word. :P

Pretty good story, and it does raise a good point. If someone is lying in their picture it'll become pretty apparent when you meet them, but if they are lying in what they write it might be awhile before it's discovered.

[earwaxandtoejam]

Actually I find that quite funny ;) I'd certainly find her attractive if I was into girls. Clearly (whoever the girl was), was better off without your friend.

Hee hee hee hee hee....... I'm still mentally laughing ;)

[orts]

The point of the story was not how "attractive" she was in real life (apparently she was) -- he lost interest in her because she was dishonest :P

That'd be a dealbreaker for me, too.

[unsomnambulist]

When it comes to online meeting up/dating I have always been more comfortable when a picture has been made available not for dating as much as a sense of security. For me the picture says: I'm not a phantom rapist. I'm a person behind the typing you might have a good time with. And as a woman if you're receiving comments based purely on your physical looks that tends to be rather obvious.