When I get an idea in my head, I have to go research it. This explains why, when my mother asked me if I'd tried dating on the internet (I hadn't), I immediately went and checked out several different dating sites.
Want to know what I learned?
They suck.
The mainstream sites like those Match.com & eHarmony places actually won't let you use the word 'fat'. I'm not kidding. It's a forbidden word. Because $DEITY knows no one would ever want to claim to be fat! Let alone *eek!* want to meet any of those horrible fat people (except to make fun of them, of course - and we must protect the fatties!)! Egads!
Yeah. So, my first act of internet dating was to sign up for both sites (they have a free version) in order to send them each strongly worded comments about how ridiculously stupid banning the word 'fat' is. Particularly when you're totally cool with words like 'overweight' and 'big & beautiful': can you say disgusting hypocrites, kids? Yeah, you can be 'big & beautiful', but for $DEITY's sake, don't talk about your fatness! Euphemize it! Hide it! Diet it away!
The other way in which dating sites appear to suck is that many of them assume you have one gender preference in your seeking: you are either a man or a woman, and you are looking for one, not both or either. I realize that there are certain programmatic limitations in the common dating engines, but couldn't everyone just add a 'gender is a continuum' or 'either' option to their stupid databases?
Yeah, maybe not the folks who bring you those over-the-top Middle America "look, I found my husband on the internets & I'm completely normal, I swear" teevee ads... but it wouldn't be that hard for the peeps on the more liberal/young/cool sites (I'm thinking that OKCupid place that everyone gets the tests from, or the Nerve/Salon/Bust personals) to take gender out of the equation, or at least make it a more complex variable.
Hmmph.
On the other hand, they've given me opportunities to proselytise: a random guy sent me an email wherein he called me "girl", and I sent back something like "dude, you're cute, but I'm a grrrl not a girl - or did you miss the Big Hairy Feminist subtext in my hastily written profile?" - so it wasn't a total waste of time.
Want to know what I learned?
They suck.
The mainstream sites like those Match.com & eHarmony places actually won't let you use the word 'fat'. I'm not kidding. It's a forbidden word. Because $DEITY knows no one would ever want to claim to be fat! Let alone *eek!* want to meet any of those horrible fat people (except to make fun of them, of course - and we must protect the fatties!)! Egads!
Yeah. So, my first act of internet dating was to sign up for both sites (they have a free version) in order to send them each strongly worded comments about how ridiculously stupid banning the word 'fat' is. Particularly when you're totally cool with words like 'overweight' and 'big & beautiful': can you say disgusting hypocrites, kids? Yeah, you can be 'big & beautiful', but for $DEITY's sake, don't talk about your fatness! Euphemize it! Hide it! Diet it away!
The other way in which dating sites appear to suck is that many of them assume you have one gender preference in your seeking: you are either a man or a woman, and you are looking for one, not both or either. I realize that there are certain programmatic limitations in the common dating engines, but couldn't everyone just add a 'gender is a continuum' or 'either' option to their stupid databases?
Yeah, maybe not the folks who bring you those over-the-top Middle America "look, I found my husband on the internets & I'm completely normal, I swear" teevee ads... but it wouldn't be that hard for the peeps on the more liberal/young/cool sites (I'm thinking that OKCupid place that everyone gets the tests from, or the Nerve/Salon/Bust personals) to take gender out of the equation, or at least make it a more complex variable.
Hmmph.
On the other hand, they've given me opportunities to proselytise: a random guy sent me an email wherein he called me "girl", and I sent back something like "dude, you're cute, but I'm a grrrl not a girl - or did you miss the Big Hairy Feminist subtext in my hastily written profile?" - so it wasn't a total waste of time.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:01 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:15 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:19 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:19 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:21 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:24 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:27 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:30 am (UTC)I think society tends to lean towards the fact that the word "fat" is too degrading. I guess others would call it "robust."
Who's to say that a man or woman wrote in to say that using the word fat was too degrading for the site?
You can only please part of the people, part of the time. :(
(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:30 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:31 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:33 am (UTC)Which dating kindof is, no matter what, come to think of it.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:33 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:34 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:37 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:47 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 10:52 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 11:10 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 11:22 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 11:53 am (UTC)Zoiks, that's enough for me.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 11:58 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 12:17 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 12:31 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 12:33 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-29 02:07 pm (UTC)my sources tell me
Date: 2005-12-29 04:13 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-30 06:00 pm (UTC)Course, I'm not a big fan of the modern ethic that says that you have to prevent people from saying anything that might offend anyone--especially on a dating site. Personally, I'd much rather that any idiot who wanted to put up "No fat chicks" on his webpage could announce his idiocy to the world, and thus prevent any fat or sensible women from having to deal with him. Similarly, it'd be much better to see some racist fuck putting up "No kikes" (or whatever) on his profile than having to find out he's a racist fuck in person.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-30 08:19 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-30 08:20 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-30 08:29 pm (UTC)Also, you should read the comments to my comments, where I suspect I'm about to get banned from the community for arguing the sexism (even using their prejudice + power definition) of "tiny dick" remarks.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-30 08:31 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-30 11:40 pm (UTC)im really more of an idea guy with stuff like that.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-31 04:42 pm (UTC)But hey, let's look at the grand history of social rights movements, be they racial or gendered.
In the beginning, you have a cause; a problem that needs addressing. And in the beginning, you have oppression. At this time you will get a very few brave individuals who stand up and make a difference.
Once they start to make headway, you will get a movement, when various people who suffered under the oppression but lacked the firm character to stand up at the beginning signing on. This is where things start to get rolling, and this is where you see the real backlash, where supporters are getting targeted by organized establishment groups.
After the movement starts making real gains, you get an action network, where the structures established during the movement phases are used to exert power to try to solve as many of the existing problems as they can, and to achieve parity.
After this, you will get the original, wiser individuals who started things either dropping out because they have achieved their goals, or had already passed out of the movement for other reasons (for instance, old age). The moderates join them, and what you have left is the institution, a bureaucratic entity that exists solely to further itself. At this point it is no longer a force for good, but merely a cancer--a mutation of what was once a healthy and necessary system into something that will grow endlessly, consume endlessly, and destroy everything in its own name.
At this point you will see a reaction, which will come about via the same pattern set out above.
Mainstream feminism has degraded to an institution. It is being attacked by a reaction (not a backlash) that is trying to correct many of the insanities spawned by an organization whose sole purpose is to justify its existence.
I'd love to pretend I was one of the great people standing up in the cause phase, but I'm not. That started awhile ago. Now is the movement, which, when it comes down to it, is where shit really starts to get interesting.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-12-31 10:10 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-01 03:14 pm (UTC)There is no answer for this problem, this is just a fact of the way people think, the fundamental flaws inherent in the average human. This is why Ghandi was killed by his own followers, and why a feminist forum feels the need to tell its readers what is the Doctrine, and what is the Heresy.
I dream of a day in the future where feminism does not feel the need to ask "Is prostitution good or bad?", but instead asks, "What can we learn about prostitution, and how can we use that learning to make the world a better place?"
(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-03 01:25 pm (UTC)http://www.singlesinthecity.net/Main/index.html
http://richmond.friendsearch.com/dating/virginia.htm
(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-05 05:34 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-01-15 08:47 pm (UTC)