In the gay world "fat" is an ugly word. I suppose in the straight world it is too, but in the straight world those that are conscious of their weight more often than not are women. Straight men don't pay that much attention to their actual weight but focus instead on having a six-pack. In gay world however weight is a number, a statistic, and at times it seems more important to gay men in narrowing down suitors than what someone actually looks like.
This is more visible and easier to demonstrate online than in-person. The latter seems to afford some degree of lenience. When you set up a profile on dating sites however you are prompted to fill out a profile of statistics. Those statistics at the end of the day are filters. What you put is going to determine whether someone on the site even sees your profile at all. That's a bit unsettling. It means if you don't fall into a given range of "acceptability" then you're not even seen.
When you visit one of these sites it is inevitable that you will filter people like this. You see a site prompt you by saying 25,000 profiles match your criteria - the first thing you do is not to try and view them all but to narrow it down. The filters come out in force and you enter your "ideal" values for a partner. That's where the problem arises. A number is just that, a number. It's not a story, it's not an explanation, and more often than not it is not realistic, nor is it an accurate representation of the person you have pictured.
Let's say you are a 5 foot 7 inch man. If you are of average build then you'd aim to be 10 stone to 11 stone to be "healthy" according to the Body Mass Index - BMI. [1.7m, 151 lbs / 68kg]
The problem with this is that it does not factor in body type, and muscle to fat ratio. This does play a big part in determining whether the person is a healthy weight. A pound of muscle is much denser than a pound of fat. Let's take another example:
John Cena, a rather famous wrestler is just over 6 foot [1.85m], and weighs 17 stone 13 pounds [251lbs / 114 kg], according to the Body Mass Index, John Cena is Obese. Now looking at his picture you will be no means argue he is anything but Obese. He's an exquisite specimen of fitness. However if you were to see a dating profile without his picture and saw an almost 18 stone, 38 year old man, most gay men would pass without a second notion. Now you can argue if he included a picture you wouldn't - but that only assumes you get to even see the picture, those filters we mentioned earlier would automatically filter out John Cena because he's not in your ideal definition of a healthy weight.
Therein lies the problem - we apply our own standards to other people and fail to realise that what applies to us might not apply to others. We assume that because we are a certain height and a certain weight that anyone else should have the same proportions as us to be healthy - assuming we actually think we ourselves are healthy.
The question is why do we do this? In the real world we don't stop someone before they speak to us and ask them what weight they are, how tall they are, and the plethora of statistics we look for and filter by online. We don't do it in those situations but at the same time we do still narrow people down to a lesser extent in the real world. Why do we like to say no more than we like to say yes? Is it the genuine desire to reduce the possible number of people making Mr Right easier to find? Or is it something else? I've wondered about this and I have a theory. We like to reject others because it makes us feel good. The more people we say no to the "higher" we elevate ourselves. We see a site with 25,000 profiles and enter our filters and get it down to 1,000 and we feel some pleasure in thinking 24,000 people weren't "good enough" for us. We want people to be interested in us, and to be in the position to say no, because it makes you feel desirable. Dismissing those 24,000 people makes you feel good but what does it achieve?
Gay Dating Online
The internet makes many things easy. Convenience often comes at a cost though. When it comes to gay dating sites they make it easier to say no than it is to say yes - or, to be more accurate, it makes it easier to say nothing at all. There's nothing wrong with the realisation that you're not that into someone, or that they aren't what you are looking for, but in the real world if you lose interest in someone or if you just aren't interested at all then you have the obligation to show common courtesy by letting the other person know. When it comes to the online world however it's far too easy just to delete a message and never even reply. To ignore someone completely.
I have been on both sides of this, and to be honest most people are passive aggressive, they do it because they don't want to confront the other person, because inevitably they will ask you to justify your decision - something which reminds me of that episode of the Simpsons where the town joins a cult and they watch a brain washing film and any time someone stands up a spotlight shines on them and a voice says "You're free to leave but do you mind telling us why?" - this puts you in an awkward position of having to nail down feelings and emotions into concise articulations. The truth is "it just doesn't feel right" is a sentiment you can feel but in writing it leads to more questions than it answers. So instead people just avoid it all together and don't say anything at all - or block. The latter I never saw the point of, except in cases of abuse but even then it's not effective for the same simple reason - they can create another account, or in some cases the site explicitly says they have blocked you. Back in the days of MSN if you blocked someone you just appeared offline. They couldn't actually know for sure whether you were offline or whether you had blocked them.
This convenience of cowardice - and I admit that's what it is, even though I have been on both sides - is something that encourages negative behaviour in people. In the case of being the one to ignore someone, it discourages the development of effective social skills to deal with this kind of conflict and encourages you to simply stick your head in the sand and pretend it never happened. More fool us as this leaves us ill prepared to confront situations like this in the real world. If anything the physical barrier the internet provides should encourage you to learn how to do this in a safer environment. The real world is a lot more risky in terms of the threats that exist.
My experiences of online dating are limited to the gay world, so I can't comment on the straight, but I would assume the same problems exist. As for the actual process of dating online I have a fair few horror stories of my own when it comes to that, and a few that were somewhat happy, although they didn't end with the stereotypical 'happy ever after' - much to my disappointment.
I have been on both sides of this, and to be honest most people are passive aggressive, they do it because they don't want to confront the other person, because inevitably they will ask you to justify your decision - something which reminds me of that episode of the Simpsons where the town joins a cult and they watch a brain washing film and any time someone stands up a spotlight shines on them and a voice says "You're free to leave but do you mind telling us why?" - this puts you in an awkward position of having to nail down feelings and emotions into concise articulations. The truth is "it just doesn't feel right" is a sentiment you can feel but in writing it leads to more questions than it answers. So instead people just avoid it all together and don't say anything at all - or block. The latter I never saw the point of, except in cases of abuse but even then it's not effective for the same simple reason - they can create another account, or in some cases the site explicitly says they have blocked you. Back in the days of MSN if you blocked someone you just appeared offline. They couldn't actually know for sure whether you were offline or whether you had blocked them.
This convenience of cowardice - and I admit that's what it is, even though I have been on both sides - is something that encourages negative behaviour in people. In the case of being the one to ignore someone, it discourages the development of effective social skills to deal with this kind of conflict and encourages you to simply stick your head in the sand and pretend it never happened. More fool us as this leaves us ill prepared to confront situations like this in the real world. If anything the physical barrier the internet provides should encourage you to learn how to do this in a safer environment. The real world is a lot more risky in terms of the threats that exist.
My experiences of online dating are limited to the gay world, so I can't comment on the straight, but I would assume the same problems exist. As for the actual process of dating online I have a fair few horror stories of my own when it comes to that, and a few that were somewhat happy, although they didn't end with the stereotypical 'happy ever after' - much to my disappointment.
I miss True Blood
I'm a binge-watcher. When I discover a show that I like I'll watch the whole thing, or as much as I can in one go and keep it up until I've seen it all. When I first got into Game of Thrones it was to my behest, spurred on by a friend I worked with, when I watched a few episodes I was hooked and I followed through. I had to catch up at the time as the latest season was about to air and I had 3 to catch up on. I'm quite good at avoiding things entirely when I am not interested, and up until then I had no idea what the show was actually about.
I have always had an affinity for Vampire lore. I read Bram Stoker's Dracula - which I found infuriating but I think the main reason for that was because of the time period it was set in, the chauvinist attitudes were insinuating and made me seethe with the desire to slap some of the male characters, I digress - the story was frustrating too though because of how little the characters knew of vampires, but you can't hold that against the author when he was the first to create a work centred around them. Over the years though I have explored many series that focused on Vampires. From the cheese of Vampire Academy to the cream of True Blood. The latter I have been missing lately.
A few months ago I watched the first episode of The Vampire Diaries - yes, a little late to the party here too - and I liked what I watched. I made my way through the seasons but it went stale quite quickly for me. I followed through, watching every episode up to date and my over arching opinion is that this is mediocre at best. True Blood was so much better to me, but I guess the creators of The Vampire Diaries would probably have been prepared for the comparisons before they ever produced a pilot. The Vampire Diaries vs True Blood is a no-contest for me, True Blood wins hands down. The problem though is when something is good, it becomes hard to match. This is something that's been true of many things not just Vampire Serials but throughout the entertainment industry as a whole. Our expectations over time have been raised, and when we return to older works we find them hard to embrace. In the same way that returning to Bram Stoker's classic was frustrating, we find it hard to go back to simpler times.
I get this with a lot of things I remember watching when I was younger. I loved Charmed and could not get enough of it, yet last year when I took the notion of binge-watching the whole series again I couldn't make it more than a few episodes in - Nostalgia it seems is very good at making our memories far happier than the reality. I said in a previous post that I was contemplating the nature of life crises, mid and quarter, if it's true to say that our nostalgia makes things seem happier than they were then perhaps it could be true to say the same of people. Maybe we weren't as happy as we think we were, and maybe the people we miss are more-so the idea, as opposed the reality. If that's true then it would mean the reality of longing for days that have passed is even more depressing as the days you recall never actually happened - not as you imagine them anyway. Isn't that a sombre thought?
I have always had an affinity for Vampire lore. I read Bram Stoker's Dracula - which I found infuriating but I think the main reason for that was because of the time period it was set in, the chauvinist attitudes were insinuating and made me seethe with the desire to slap some of the male characters, I digress - the story was frustrating too though because of how little the characters knew of vampires, but you can't hold that against the author when he was the first to create a work centred around them. Over the years though I have explored many series that focused on Vampires. From the cheese of Vampire Academy to the cream of True Blood. The latter I have been missing lately.
A few months ago I watched the first episode of The Vampire Diaries - yes, a little late to the party here too - and I liked what I watched. I made my way through the seasons but it went stale quite quickly for me. I followed through, watching every episode up to date and my over arching opinion is that this is mediocre at best. True Blood was so much better to me, but I guess the creators of The Vampire Diaries would probably have been prepared for the comparisons before they ever produced a pilot. The Vampire Diaries vs True Blood is a no-contest for me, True Blood wins hands down. The problem though is when something is good, it becomes hard to match. This is something that's been true of many things not just Vampire Serials but throughout the entertainment industry as a whole. Our expectations over time have been raised, and when we return to older works we find them hard to embrace. In the same way that returning to Bram Stoker's classic was frustrating, we find it hard to go back to simpler times.
I get this with a lot of things I remember watching when I was younger. I loved Charmed and could not get enough of it, yet last year when I took the notion of binge-watching the whole series again I couldn't make it more than a few episodes in - Nostalgia it seems is very good at making our memories far happier than the reality. I said in a previous post that I was contemplating the nature of life crises, mid and quarter, if it's true to say that our nostalgia makes things seem happier than they were then perhaps it could be true to say the same of people. Maybe we weren't as happy as we think we were, and maybe the people we miss are more-so the idea, as opposed the reality. If that's true then it would mean the reality of longing for days that have passed is even more depressing as the days you recall never actually happened - not as you imagine them anyway. Isn't that a sombre thought?
Starting Over
I'm not new to the internet, nor am I new to blogging, but every now and then you find that urge to scrap everything and start over. Right now I am filled with that urge. I have been for a while. It's not just an impulse, this I know for sure as it has been months now for me, living with this feeling.
I was once told that in decades passed people had mid-life crises and that in the modern age with the pace of life quickening we have them sooner now. The idea of a "quarter life crisis" was something I laughed off in my early 20's mainly because I never let things weigh me down that much. I was a lot more impulsive when I was younger, I would rise to things much more than I do now. "Scrappy" is probably an apt definition but at the time I would have resented you for calling me that. As I have got older though more and more I find myself just wanting a quiet life. In doing that though I have become complacent with many things and let them mount up over time. The baggage I have gathered has been something of a burden.
I'd like to be one of those people that just drops everything and runs off to join the Tibetan Monks or goes away to find themselves. The problem is I burden myself with guilt much more than I should. I feel responsible for people and things despite the fact I am young, single, never married, have no children, have no financial commitments other than student loans and various debts I amounted over the years. As for my possessions many of them I could probably do without but I hold onto the mentality of "what is mine will always be mine" and I tend to form deep sentimental attachments to the things I keep. I have had people say to me that I no longer own my possessions, that they own me, and I must confess to an extent it is true.
This isn't a post to sit and whine about my life, and complain about how bad I have it - I have a good life, I know that. There are a lot of people that are a lot worse off than me; but the thing is, if you let the fact someone is worse off than you stop you from confronting the things that are making you unhappy you might as well resign yourself from life altogether. I don't mean to end it all, I just mean to give up caring entirely. If you weigh up the validity of your emotions by their extremity in comparison to others you will never feel anything other than moderation ever again. Why would you ever feel happiness when there will be many people out there who are far happier than you?
The point of this post is to illustrate one thing - me. This is who I am and it's the best description of me and my thought process you can get, far more than anything I could ever write to summarise my ethos in life and my interests. This is what I do, I think. Way too much at times. I think up, I think down, I think forwards, I think backwards, if you can think about it I probably have too, and if I haven't I would be eager to, so don't be shy. "Have you ever", "Would you ever", "Did you know", and "Do you think" are the best openings you could ever make in a conversation with me.
I will aim to update this blog at least once a week, more if I can manage it.
I was once told that in decades passed people had mid-life crises and that in the modern age with the pace of life quickening we have them sooner now. The idea of a "quarter life crisis" was something I laughed off in my early 20's mainly because I never let things weigh me down that much. I was a lot more impulsive when I was younger, I would rise to things much more than I do now. "Scrappy" is probably an apt definition but at the time I would have resented you for calling me that. As I have got older though more and more I find myself just wanting a quiet life. In doing that though I have become complacent with many things and let them mount up over time. The baggage I have gathered has been something of a burden.
I'd like to be one of those people that just drops everything and runs off to join the Tibetan Monks or goes away to find themselves. The problem is I burden myself with guilt much more than I should. I feel responsible for people and things despite the fact I am young, single, never married, have no children, have no financial commitments other than student loans and various debts I amounted over the years. As for my possessions many of them I could probably do without but I hold onto the mentality of "what is mine will always be mine" and I tend to form deep sentimental attachments to the things I keep. I have had people say to me that I no longer own my possessions, that they own me, and I must confess to an extent it is true.
This isn't a post to sit and whine about my life, and complain about how bad I have it - I have a good life, I know that. There are a lot of people that are a lot worse off than me; but the thing is, if you let the fact someone is worse off than you stop you from confronting the things that are making you unhappy you might as well resign yourself from life altogether. I don't mean to end it all, I just mean to give up caring entirely. If you weigh up the validity of your emotions by their extremity in comparison to others you will never feel anything other than moderation ever again. Why would you ever feel happiness when there will be many people out there who are far happier than you?
The point of this post is to illustrate one thing - me. This is who I am and it's the best description of me and my thought process you can get, far more than anything I could ever write to summarise my ethos in life and my interests. This is what I do, I think. Way too much at times. I think up, I think down, I think forwards, I think backwards, if you can think about it I probably have too, and if I haven't I would be eager to, so don't be shy. "Have you ever", "Would you ever", "Did you know", and "Do you think" are the best openings you could ever make in a conversation with me.
I will aim to update this blog at least once a week, more if I can manage it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)