Freddy Kreuger, Leonard Cohen, and other adult dating mismatches
|
Posted:Oct 31, 2016 11:25 pm
Last Updated:Apr 12, 2019 2:10 am
1910 Views
|
Newcomers to a site such as this may initially think they've stumbled on an Aladdin's cave of willing flesh, and begin typing “applications” with feverish little fingers, anticipating an avalanche of ardent replies and a full dance card for several months ahead. After all, who could possibly resist what you have to offer? However, it soon becomes obvious that people (or at least the vast majority) have a variety of selection criteria, and there’s a sinking realization that you are not young (or old) enough, inked enough, tall enough, black enough, ripped enough or pierced enough to cut it out there.
I’ve always been one of those who believes a little homework is essential before arranging to meet anyone, because with a few mail/pic exchanges, two people can tell pretty quickly whether they’d get on, and it helps to avoid one of those situations where you wish you hadn’t shown up for a date because obviously it’s not going to work. I’m pretty honest, and if I suspect through mail chat that I’m not on the same wavelength, then I’ll say so. Conversely, if my correspondent realizes I’m not for her, then I’ll accept it gracefully. I must admit that I’m at an age now where it’s becoming less unusual to suffer abrupt unilateral termination of correspondence as soon as I’ve sent a face pic. Imagination is a wonderful thing, and the media you choose to put up on your profile form the basis of the mental image people construct. Sending a face photo after a few rounds of promising chat requires a deep breath, even for people who may feel confident about their looks. It’s the internet equivalent of a wolf rolling on its back to expose its belly. It shows your true colours and once you’ve hit the “send” button, the Rubicon has been crossed. Women may get excited about disembodied Abs, tats and dicks individually or collectively, but for them the face is the acid test that brings together the whole man. For example, you never hear women say something like “Yeah I wouldn’t mind shagging him if he put a bag over his head” (except in the context of BDSM perhaps………  ) Lately I’ve had a few experiences of the “face-pic suicide bomb” phenomenon that has blown to smithereens previously enthusiastic mail threads. It’s been almost as effective as sending, say, a photo of Freddy Krueger or John Kramer (why do these guys always begin with “K”??): you can almost hear a muffled “Awww………Jeezus!!” coming from somewhere down the pipe, as if they’ve put their hand on something slimy in the dark
Rejection and being rejected is a delicate business. No matter how brave a face you put on, and no matter what kind of self-image you possess, it still stings, even a little. On the other hand, it is a test of character and your response can say a lot about you.
So … I’m sort of curious to hear about people’s experiences of this. If you receive an off-putting face photo from an otherwise promising correspondent, what do you do? Suddenly go quiet and hope they’ll go away? Send them a polite reply and try not to hurt their feelings too much? Accuse them of having totally misleading profile media and wasting your time?
And if you are on the receiving end of rejection? Do you regard it as an intolerable insult to your pride? Do you resort to name-calling and abuse, or rant away with terms such as “your loss” (in sharp contrast to the almost sonnet-like qualities of your previous love-mails)?? Or do you just slink away to a dark corner, suck your thumb, and listen to Leonard Cohen?
I’m also intrigued about what kind of response (if any) you’d rather have from a “rejectee”. For example, if you’re a woman and have just blown out a guy, would absence of any response merely serve to justify your rejection of him (“yeah…I knew he was a wimp…”), or would you rather he come back at you with all that macho posturing? Enough material there for a psychological symposium ....
© Crusoe 2016
|
|
|
0
Comments
, 1 Pending
|
|
Adult dating deal-breakers: are your criteria reasonable, stringent, or just plain wacky?
|
Posted:Feb 5, 2015 4:04 am
Last Updated:Aug 27, 2017 5:49 am
4978 Views
|
During the course of my decade-long odyssey in the company of my fat squishy friend, I’ve become pretty accustomed to the huge variety of personal tastes expressed in profiles on this, and other adult dating sites. While acknowledging that successful and fulfilling sexual activity is very much dependent on whether one’s partners tick certain boxes (and I’m no exception), now and again I’ve encountered profiles where I felt the criteria were so strict that the individuals concerned were perhaps denying themselves the joys that about 95% of humanity might offer them
Of course, there are the ultra-fitness fanatics who would never consider meeting anyone who doesn’t sport unnaturally hypertrophic Abs, and there are those for whom dating people outside certain racial stereotypes would be anathema (now and again, in fits of facetiousness, I’ve been known to contact those types and offer to show up after dipping my dick in a bath of henna – but somehow they remain unconvinced .
Recently, I spotted a profile owned by someone who was not British, but touring Scotland for a fortnight. She was looking for Scottish guys who were “hairy” (perhaps not unreasonably), but then (perhaps unwittingly) reduced her chances of finding a compatible partner by stating that she would only consider men who were aged between 40 and 43 and had a penis at least 9 inches in length. I’ve really no idea whether her quest was successful, but it got me thinking: In the great scheme of things, if you are in a very specific part of the world for a very short time, can you afford to be so choosy??
Elsewhere, I have seen profiles owned by female citizens of the US of A, in which they state that they will only meet currently serving members of the military. And while we’re still in the New World……I’ve even seen some profiles suggesting that anyone who is an atheist would be denied conjugal rights ……. Which got me wondering whether a religious melding of minds could be a factor that has hitherto been overlooked in the quest for the ultimate orgasm
Although it can’t be denied that this world offers a rich cornucopia of potentially rewarding sexual experiences, I often think it’s ironic that people often isolate themselves in particular niches, whether it be BDSM, fetish, inter-racial, ultra-fitness, or whatever. Of course I realize that sexual attraction is a very individual thing, but speaking for myself, although I have certain “ideals”, I am capable of exercising a degree of flexibility (especially in view of my age……haha……). So my question is this: What are your adult-dating deal breakers? Are they as simple as a set of bad teeth, or are your requirements so esoteric as to be almost impracticable ?? I’d be interested to know .
© Crusoe 2015
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
“All’s fair in love and war” ?? : the politics and pragmatism of adult dating
|
Posted:Aug 28, 2014 12:39 am
Last Updated:Aug 27, 2017 5:54 am
5640 Views
|
It’s probably reasonable to state that the majority of individuals of both sexes who use sites such as this are not expecting to find soulmates or prospective marriage partners, but that they are still operating in an environment that is a fertile breeding ground for jealousy, desperation, doubt and suspicion. For the purposes of this post, I am not including the pure hedonists amongst us who simply wish to copulate as randomly and frequently as possible with all-comers: the gang-bangers, the sex party enthusiasts and the doggers, or – to a certain extent – even couples who seek to add new flesh to their existing repertoire now and again. I’m really referring to people who, like me, operate on their own and prefer 1-on-1 “adult dating”, which may involve a meeting of minds as well as bodies, and – as a result – a degree of emotional investment, however small. I’m not particularly fond of the term “no strings attached”, partly because it seems to imply that we are divested of any kind of responsibility, but also because any form of sexual contact actually *creates* strings, even though the degree to which they bind two people may vary considerably depending on the “neediness” of each individual. On the face of it, though, when posting our profiles, we are making ourselves open to er....“offers” on the proviso that we are free agents with no obligation to “shack up” on the strength of a night in the sack.
It’s probably not a sweeping over-generalization to say that women tend to be more hard-wired for commitment than men, and that men perhaps tend to look back over their shoulders less frequently than women when walking out of the bedroom door. However, I think both sexes have an equal capacity for possessiveness and suspicion, and I’m sure that – unless they are very level-headed – neither is immune to feeling a “pang” of some sort if they suddenly discover that the person with whom they were noisily and enthusiastically sharing bodily fluids a couple of weekends back has in the meantime acquired a new “testimonial” from someone else
So…… to all you individual “adult daters” out there: to what extent do you regard yourself as a free agent? Are you perfectly philosophical about the extremely limited likelihood of finding fidelity on a site like this? Do you automatically acknowledge that any person you date is likely rutting away willy-nilly elsewhere? Would you feel compelled to confront a recent sexual partner about his/her activity on the site, or – on discovering a new testimonial from a recent partner – be devastated to such an extent that you would realize this site is not for you and delete your profile in despair ? In other words, how “sophisticated” are you about adult relationships? Are you basically “old fashioned” at heart and secretly hope to find your Sir Galahad or your Sleeping Beauty? Or are you happy to go with the flow, and take it all as one big adventure?
© Crusoe 2014
|
|
|
2
Comments
|
|
Redefining the Urban Dictionary - for the purposes of this site
|
Posted:Aug 25, 2014 5:54 am
Last Updated:Sep 1, 2014 3:26 am
5014 Views
|
“Master” = a bloke with a photo of a bit of rope on his profile.
“Dom” = a dysfunctional bloke who only feels secure with women when he’s ordering them about.
“Bull” = a bloke who can get an erection at least some of the time.
“Couple” = an ill-defined entity that may on occasion actually comprise a man and woman, but which is often simply a man armed with a few pics of a woman who may/may not be his wife/GF/ex/internet glamour model.
“Slut” = a woman who will have sex with anyone.
"Bitch" = a woman who will have sex with anyone but me
“BBW” = someone in whose presence certain topics need to be uttered in hushed tones.
“VWE” = a man with a penis.
“Big black cock” = black cock (cf. “white cock”).
“Daytime fun” = a form of high farce that involves tumbling through someone’s front door around lunchtime giggling with your trousers round your ankles.
“Dogging” = an open-air communal activity that doesn’t involve dogs.
“Cheating” = a man in a relationship secretly having sex with a different woman (note: there is no female equivalent).
"Cuckold" = a bloke who can no longer be bothered to shag his unattractive wife, and prefers to delegate the task to the less faint-hearted.
"Will reply all messages" = won't reply to any messages.
"Muscular" = a thick-set guy with lots of flab.
"I'm handsome, powerful, professional, wealthy, well-educated" = I'm living in a fantasy world.
"Just out of a long-term relationship now looking for sex." = girlfriend left me because I have a small cock and I'm crap in bed.
'Size/age/looks unimportant' = will fuck anything.
"Couple looking for fem" = Male half's idea to join the site
That will do for starters. Modifications and/or further entries welcome.
© Crusoe 2014
|
|
|
0
Comments
|
|
"I have a very high sex drive": discuss.
|
Posted:Oct 2, 2013 10:07 pm
Last Updated:Sep 20, 2018 8:07 am
6633 Views
|
For those here who are genuinely looking for meets (which may, in fact, represent a minority), I suppose it goes without saying that one would wish to portray oneself as being sexually desirable. Obviously, one way of doing so would be to post photos (perhaps with "mixed results" The other would be to paint an alluring verbal self-portrait.
Clearly, in order to get prospective flies buzzing around one's dustbin, an image of barely controllable, practically insatiable libido never does any harm. Any self-respecting swinger is unlikely to be drawn to the prospect of racy innuendo over a pint of mild in the local, followed by a bit of slap and tickle on the sofa. Ostensibly, one has to be reeking of hot pheromones, bristling with rampant desire, and offering an inexhaustible supply of endless orgasms until dawn's early light and well beyond.
Perhaps to cover themselves for this eventuality, a large number of people feel compelled to include the phrase "I have a very high sex drive" in their profile descriptions. But what does this actually mean in real terms? Have the people in question submitted their average sexual performance to peer review by a scientific panel of professional sexologists?
I don't think anyone would argue that human libido covers a vast range. Some have the sexual energy of a snail, whereas others will appear to shag anyone and anything (even bicycles) at any time. Also, I don't think anyone would dispute that evaluation of one's own individual libido is extremely subjective. I'm willing to bet that if it were possible to interview a snail, he/she (being hermaphrodite would also claim to be "hot stuff".
Which leads me to my point: Is it, in fact, of any value at all to claim one has a "high libido"? Aside from the fact it's impossible to measure quantitatively, there is a natural tendency for humans to view their own sexual attributes through rose-tinted specs: to place themselves at a point on the libido ladder that gives them sufficient self-esteem.
In addition, there is the old conundrum of quantity versus quality. It may indeed be true that someone is driven to have sex 15 times a day, but is that because his/her "per orgasm" level of perceived satisfaction is a lot shallower than that of someone who, say, needs only about one good shag a week, from which he/she emerges fully drained and contented?
Libido is likely correlated with many factors: age, genetics, mood, time of day/year, or the perceived attractiveness/chemistry of a prospective sexual partner. However, I would say that the most fundamental is the degree of individual reward and contentment derived from sex. If sex elicits barely a flutter of gratification, one is not going to seek it as actively as someone whose limbic system lights up like a Christmas tree, shudders to utter contentment and fulfillment, and ends up being squirted through a worm-hole in the space-time continuum
Personally, I take all subjective claims of libido levels with a pinch of salt. Everything is relative. It's always impossible to tell how anyone will perform, or how two people will interact, before it actually happens. Which is why I think "what I'm going to do to you" e-mails are hilarious
© Crusoe 2013
|
|
|
3
Comments
|
|
Dubious winks etc.
|
Posted:Sep 3, 2012 6:09 am
Last Updated:Aug 21, 2017 5:08 am
7031 Views
|
Don't die of shock, but I'm actually adding something to (for want of a better term) "my blog".
Call me a naive, trusting soul if you like, but I would prefer to take people's profiles at face value. Sadly, however, the internet is a medium that by necessity anonymizes people: it gives everyone a voice, but the origin of the voice is pure conjecture.
In the present context I'm not here to rant about so-called "couple" profiles which, in a high proportion of cases, appear to have been concocted by a male for his own gratification, armed with a few photos of a woman who may/may not be his current/ex GF/wife. Instead I'm talking about the incessant stream of "winks" that flow into my mailbox on a daily basis, all of which appear to be from female 20-somethings located in the US (or occasionally - for originality - my native UK or Japan).
Speaking as a man who is "of a certain age", it's inevitable that my thoughts sometimes stray into the realms of Lolita-land. However, age and experience of life also bring with them (at least in my case) a sense of reality. Therefore, if a 23-yr-old in Cincinnati decides to wink at me, I'm not stupid enough to think it's a real attempt at communication, let alone a reflection of my sexual attractiveness through the eyes of a living, breathing woman of tender years. So I'm forced to conclude that these "Lolita winks" are "bots" generated by the site with the express aim of giving a little thrill to middle-aged men so that they will continue to be engaged with the site. If that's the case, then I find it insulting, and also a damned nuisance, because it makes it much harder to discriminate between what's real and what's fake here. As a result, if any *genuine* woman decides to write to me, is it surprising that her honest intent is immediately viewed with suspicion?
If anyone is employed by VisionPersonals.com to scour the blogs and profiles of members to search for clues as to how they can improve the site, then I'm saying to you: "Stop this ridiculous "dubious winks" system". It serves the interests of neither the site nor its members.
I suspect that many men of an age similar to myself on here have a pretty good idea of the types of profiles from which these "winks" emanate. However, for those of a perhaps more gullible/inexperienced nature, I've compiled a short list of criteria to look out for. "Bot" profiles may not necessarily have *all* of these features, but hopefully this will serve as a helpful guide:
1. About 90% of them are allegedly in the US of A, but a few purport to be in Japan, Oz, NZ etc. Those that claim to be in Japan are generally of non-Asian ethnicity, and are called "Ashley".
2. The vast majority are aged 22-25 (with a few token 30-yr-olds thrown in to make things a little confusing).
3. Their handle names are generally some sort of corny prefix ("sweetnsexy", etc.) followed by a string of numbers.
4. The majority lack any type of photo, but the pic on display in those that do is invariably a "too good to be true" glamour model.
5. The wording of their self-intro has a distinctly generic sort of feel to it ("My friends would say I have an easy-going personality." etc.)
6. Many of them claim to be "God-fearing" (sic) and simply gagging to settle down with a nice mature man. (Presumably none of these "bots" have read the "religion" entry on my profile.) They love and cooking too, and are "good listeners" . Certainly they'd be the very gal that a battered, world-weary, over-the-hill has-been such as myself would grab with both hands and retire from A F F to a life of Lolita-bliss. The big give-away is some kind of statement that they "love older guys" or have a "father complex": attraction for a guy 25 years a girl's senior is something that does not happen in real life, except if it is motivated by money.
7. Their profiles mysteriously disappear a few day after emanating the "wink": a bit like a UFO.
Although this article is (probably) aimed at male members of a similar age, I'd be interested to hear from members of all ages and sexes as to whether they are similarly targeted. For example, are women in the 40-50 age bracket targeted by fake winks from Latino/Italian lovers with a site age of 20-30, or are young men aged 20-30 targeted by "fake MILFs" ??
Your input on this would be informative and might give us all a laugh.
©Crusoe 09/2012
|
|
|
2
Comments
|
|
Raison d'etre
|
Posted:Sep 29, 2010 8:32 pm
Last Updated:Oct 31, 2016 11:19 pm
7259 Views
|
Up to now I've refrained from blogging because frankly I couldn't see the point of talking to myself Recently, however, I've realized that this little slot can have its uses, and if it can provide prospectively interested people with a clearer idea of my aims and philosophy in being here, then so much the better. Yeah....I know.....my profile is way too long and people these days have short attention spans. But the written word is now much maligned and undervalued, which I think is a shame because it can say a lot about the writer, and I've always believed in being as open as I can about myself, as it avoids a lot of wasted time and misunderstanding.
Recently I posted something on a friend's blog which I thought encapsulated pretty well the reasons I'm here and what I'm looking for, so I'm sure she won't mind if I "recycle" it here (after a little further editing for the purpose intended). Hopefully if any prospective viewer makes it as far as here (which seems doubtful....lol), then I hope it's taken as a useful corollary to what's already on my profile.
I *will* be posting again now and then about issues I feel are relevant for anyone who might be thinking of getting to know me. But I've no intention of broadcasting regularly, so don't hold your breath
********************************************************************
When I first joined the site a long time ago, I had a lot to get out my my system and a lot to try. Much of that urge and curiosity has now been satisfied (or let's just say the embers are still glowing, and waiting for someone to give them a poke now and again , so these days I suppose the type of connection that best suits me is the "friend with benefits" (FW . However, I strongly believe that whether that type of connection can work for a person is strongly dependent on age and "life stage".
For someone like me who has spent a long time being restrained and responsible, and raising , and who is by now perhaps a little cynical about the myth of eternal bliss with a single partner, the FWB arrangement makes it possible to enrich one's remaining sexually active life with a variety of interesting like-minded people without getting bogged down with stuff that is by now tediously all too familiar.
On the other hand, for a younger person who has perhaps never had a long-term "responsible and committed" relationship (and by long term I mean at least 5-10 years), there is a lot more at stake and a lot more expectation that things might develop into something solid. Therefore there is a much higher potential for jealousy, disappointment, and dissatisfaction if your emotional investment is deep (and of course younger people tend to be more idealistic and passionate, which is a double-edged sword Of course I'm not trying to suggest a sweeping generalization here, because I know that some younger people are wise and experienced beyond their years, but on the whole it's true, and can only be expected.
I recently met a woman in roughly the same age group (about 5 years younger) with whom I'd been swapping mails for about 3 months. That initial mail communication was important because it told us that we were on the same wavelength and had similar expectations. We spent a memorable weekend together walking, eating, fucking, and swapping philosophies. She was at a similar "life stage" and - like me - was a firm believer that life is too rich and varied to derive total satisfaction from a single permanent partner; rather she likened her attitude to compiling a "filing cabinet" containing men who basically were all compatible in terms of attitude and philosophy, but who each had something different to offer. I think that came pretty close to my own philosophy at this point in my life.
I suppose when people are younger, the deal-breaker with any relationship is whether or not to have and make a go of it together, because having really *does* need commitment (believe me, I know!). However, if that is not a concern, I honestly believe that most people would be a lot happier if they cultivated a coterie of trusted and compatible FWBs who were otherwise free to follow their desires. The big mistake that people make when they're younger is that they think partners will always stay the same. They don't. Evolution and change is fundamental to life and the cosmos, and humans are no exception. FWBs don't last forever either, and their own circumstances change too, so you have to be prepared to respect their right to move on if they feel they must. It's so important to keep one's expectations fluid, act on change, and try to make the best of new situations. If you can achieve that, then you're on the right path for handling the fickleness of human relationships.
©Crusoe 09/2010
|
|
|
4
Comments
|
|
To link to this blog (__Crusoe__) use [blog __Crusoe__] in your messages.
|
|
|
| Sun |
Mon |
Tue |
Wed |
Thu |
Fri |
Sat |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
311
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
