100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
|
|
|
OK, Folks, there is no need to argue. The OP says nothing about fear, although I understand that the qualifier "some" should have been in the OP. *AHEM* "Why Are Women Afraid to Send the First Letter" Merriam-Webster: "Definition of AFRAID: filled with fear or apprehension..." Somebody notify the authorities, then...OP's account has been hacked. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sensing sexual tension here. 
Is THAT what it is, when someone follows another around making note of - and taking special exception to - their posts? "Sexual tension"?!? Poor itty bitty thang. Maybe going solo would cure it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well I consider Obama a very large part of the government...just look at what he has said and by his actions(or inaction)to perpetrate the lies. He also "nominated" Al Sharpton (I would consider that the left-liberal wing of the Democratic party) to do the usual race bating on behalf of the administration. Anyway..The whole scam of the last six years is to not have a "legitimate" source. Nobody ever knows anything in this administration. I have not seen President Obama walking with his hands in the air chanting "Don't Shoot". Can you direct me to the video of this, which YOU have seen, but that has not yet made it to my national or local news? I am not aware that President Obama has "nominated" Al Sharpton for ANYthing; please provide a citation to a legitimate source for THAT presented-as-fact statement. The rest - if not the aforementioned - is simply knee-jerking emotional reactionism, which does not belong in an intelligent discussion...which is what I AM here for. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't speak for all women, but then again, neither can you. I send [first] messages, when I'm interested. 
I used the words "...not being presumptuous..." and Not being interested understood. I saw that you included 'presumption and excluded 'disinterest' when drawing your conclusion that it IS because all/most/many women "are afraid to send a first letter". As most of the women responding are indicating, "fear" has little to do with the equation, so it's an erroneous conclusion to draw for all/most/many women. I did not draw a conclusion, but asked a question, both in the thread title (less the question mark) and my first statement of the post. Even if we add the missing question mark, your title indicates you HAVE drawn a conclusion. Simply change the order of your sentences/questions, and you will see your words - and your foregone conclusion - more clearly: ...why women will search a man's profile, but rearly if ever send the first introductory letter to a man? Why Are Women Afraid to Send the First Letter[?]
Again, only two women have even remotely alluded to "fear", though "uncomfortable" and "unfamiliar" are not necessarily synonyms of "fear". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the OP: I am not being presumptuous, although wondering why women will search a man's profile, but rearly if ever send the first introductory letter to a man? Not every profile is interesting to a woman understood. Please notice that the author of the OP didn't say "many women" or "most women" or "all women". He simply said "women". Granted, I consider the inquiry to be a bit clumsy if not weird. In English-language writing, if there is no quantifying qualifier in front of a noun, the "all" is presumed and understood. I was cutting the OP slack by allowing the missing quantifier TO be "many" or "most" instead of the understood "all". In any event, not a single single woman has indicated "fear" is the reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most online women try to date out of their league.. Agreed. Most online women eventually realize they could have several dates with many men online, if only they'd lower their standards 5 or 6 levels, and date out of their league. 
Hehe...Only 5 or 6? 
I was trying to soften the blow. Some online men are extremely sensitive. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't speak for all women, but then again, neither can you. I send [first] messages, when I'm interested.
I used the words "...not being presumptuous..." and Not being interested understood. I saw that you included 'presumption and excluded 'disinterest' when drawing your conclusion that it IS because all/most/many women "are afraid to send a first letter". As most of the women responding are indicating, "fear" has little to do with the equation, so it's an erroneous conclusion to draw for all/most/many women. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
... The fake news about the poor child who was "murdered" while his hands were in the air or shot in the back took off and was used by opportunists from the liberal wing of the government and Democratic party... Citation to a legitimate source for this presented-as-fact statement? Read the Grand Jury transcripts...over 60 witnesses from forensics to ballistics all confirm he tried getting the the cops gun. Not to mention the 9 black witnesses who ALL testified that he charged the officer like a football player with his head down. Not one witness Black or white testified he was on his knees with his hands up. Thank you. I am well aware of what the transcripts say...I've been one of the few who's actually been citing and quoting it in most of these discussions. I wanted a citation to a legitimate source that says this version of the story was created and perpetrated by "opportunists from the liberal wing of the government and Democratic party", given that - factually speaking - the people who are giving this bastardized version of the story are the "eyewitnesses" (who couldn't keep their stories straight and/or admitted, under oath, they hadn't seen a thing), NFL-football players, and thug-wannabe opportunists looking for a *good* excuse to loot a few free TVs just in time for Christmas gift-giving. None of those are affiliated with the "government" - either from its "liberal wing" or from the conservative Bible-thumping branch and many are too young TO be registered with ANY political party. So, I'll still wait for the citation legitimate source that verifies the "Don't-Shoot-Arm-Uppers" are affiliated with the government and/or work for the Democratic party.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Women expect a man to send a long imaginative letter, right after they use their large brain to say hi to us.. 
Really? Why do so many of you send "a long imaginative [flirty] letter" to us when we've not even noticed you? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most online women try to date out of their league.. Agreed. Most online women eventually realize they could have several dates with many men online, if only they'd lower their standards 5 or 6 levels, and date out of their league.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't speak for all women, but then again, neither can you.
I send [first] messages, when I'm interested.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Female Hormones
|
|
"Dayyyyum...that is one fine-looking man!!!" followed by a wink, a nod, and a sly smile, so he knows what I'm thinking, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I tender my resignation.
Since I was hired for my abilities and expertise, if suddenly The Boss had a Napoleon complex, my services aren't needed [anymore], otherwise he'd/she'd be doing my job him/herself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
... The fake news about the poor child who was "murdered" while his hands were in the air or shot in the back took off and was used by opportunists from the liberal wing of the government and Democratic party... Citation to a legitimate source for this presented-as-fact statement? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...But Society has made our Sexuality a dirty thing and our Enjoyment of Sexuality wrong. This is simply not true. There are plenty of services that you can call/go online and hear about and discuss women's secrets and sexual fantasies. They typically charge about $3.99/minute and ask for your credit card, upfront, for on-going billing. Perhaps what you meant is you're not finding many women here who are willing to engage in sex chats with you, a complete stranger, for free?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
well well
|
|
is it u and i And, it's "a, e, o, and sometimes y". This time it is NOT "y not". Welcome and best of luck to you, OP!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No agenda or special time-management skills when I do it. A couple of emails, a couple of phone calls, a meet-and-greet, and then - if everything is still fine with BOTH of us - we begin dating. If there's 4 or 5 mutually-attracted men in the picture at the same time, so be it.
I'll go on a date for a particular night that I'm available to the first one who asks. Dating 4 or 5 different guys until just one that gets my exclusive attention has never happened for too long a time. Sooner or later, a guy figures out to make plans for the next date before the current one ends...thus making me 'not available' when one of the slower-on-the-draw types comes a-calling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Women
|
|
Yay-ness. We're simply just bashing all women in general now, instead of just the ones who weigh more than we'd prefer, all in good fun, of course. 
It's a goose/gander thingy...all in good fun, of course.
Of course, just a little fun. Lifes too short IMHO Absolutely. It's always fun to do a little opposite-sex gender-bashing. ESpecially while on an online *dating* site. *giggle* *giggle* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Obama taken to Hospital
|
|
"Kings" don't run for election, run for re-election, nor have term limits [among other major differences].
You can call things whatever you want; doesn't mean others will know - or agree - with whatthehell you're talking about. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Women
|
|
Yay-ness. We're simply just bashing all women in general now, instead of just the ones who weigh more than we'd prefer,
all in good fun, of course.
It's a goose/gander thingy...all in good fun, of course.
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
