6 Dating Sites I Used To Meet Women (2016 Edition)

Online dating, while it’s still controversial in terms of being a legitimate and proper way to meet people, is here to stay. The best theory I have heard for it is the “three poles in the pond” theory where you meet women in bars, online, and everywhere else as your three hooks to catch women. Return Of Kings writers come in all flavors, and you’ll not get game advice from me (recommend you check out Troy, Donovan, Jon, and Roosh himself for that) but, as I am winding down a stint on many of the dating websites, here’s some advice on six of the popular ones.

E Harmony

One of the original online dating sites, E Harmony is purely pay to play; you’re either subscribed or you’re not. The service benefits from its reputation as one of the oldest and most serious sites, so, theoretically, you’d find older, more set-up women looking for something serious.

E Harmony has their vaunted matching system as their main thing; expect to spend about 2 hours filling out their profile, and the reason is that their matches should match you better than other sites. This is important because the ONLY girls you will see are the ones they send you. This is the only online dating service (other than Tinder, which is simply an app) that will not let you search on your own.

This was, for a while, a good thing. Remember, women would only get a certain amount of matches too, so it put a little bit of the brakes on the hypergamous meat market women enjoy on most dating sites. However, E Harmony pulled a bullshit move last year, and they removed the “active within” feature from people’s profiles.

Ostensibly to prevent online stalking (so a customer service rep told me), it also conveniently removes the only direct indicator of whether the match you were sent was of a girl who had an active subscription or was a ghost who had stopped their subscription months or years ago. You then had to look for activity like a girl changing her profile or pictures, or viewing your profile to determine if she was active or not.

I don’t recommend this one anymore, and I’m not sure I ever did. I suppose it’s worth the discounted rate of 8 bucks a month they beg people to come back with, but new people are hit for over 30 a month. The typical girl you will see on here is an about to hit the wall or just did career girl who is slightly overweight and got frustrated and unsubscribed two months ago.


Match is the other mainstream pay dating site, and is probably the most popular of them. They’ve got the E Harmony style match system, and all sorts of searches you can do. There’s about 9 terms for female body type (6 mean fat) and you can search by them and anything else you want. If I want pale redheaded Presbyterians with graduate degrees within 50 miles of me, I’ll find all one of them, but that degree of precision is available.

Match is a pay site for anything serious, like emailing, but they let people make profiles for free, which leads to a lot of spam profiles that are fairly easy to discern early on in your time there.  That being said, if you want to pay for an online dating site, I’d choose this one, and make sure you don’t have a recurring subscription.

The typical match.com girl is a few years younger than the E Harmony girl, still pre-wall, but probably ugly or overweight, and out of college and in the first years of her power-career path. Search by body type (you want thin and athletic only) and be prepared to go to local big cities if you don’t live in one.

Ok Cupid

Here there be crazy. OKC is a site populated by people who are younger, freakier, and have way more crazy shit going on in their lives than any of the other sites I’ll cover. Mostly a free site, but with an A List upgrade that will let you see who “likes” you and sort by body type and “attractiveness,” this one has the crazies.

If you want a two-spirited, pansexual satanist with blue hair, 50% or greater tattoo skin coverage, and more hardware in her piercings than the bolt aisle at Home Depot, this is the place for you. They have a beleaguered match function, but most everything is done by manual searching and a bunch of insipid, but weirdly creative while wildly inappropriate questions. Although, “if your partner missed and hit the wrong hole, would you go with it?” might be useful.

The Ok Cupid girl is in her young 20s and would be attractive if she hadn’t mutilated herself. She usually doesn’t still live at home with her folks, but she doesn’t really have a place either, yet; a shady apartment in the hood is the best you can get. Her profile reads like the bearings on her hamster wheel are about ready to fail, and, although many of them have a kid or two, there’s no “my children come first,” it’s more of an “oh yeah, I had a kid.”

Maybe not THIS crazy, but close.

A side effect of this being a popular, freaky, free site is the international spam. I got more visits from chicks from every Asian country except China and their Great Firewall than I ever did Americans. Use this site if you want to bag some freaky, and consider putting your Johnson in a vacuum sealer first.

Christian Mingle

Christian Mingle is the polar opposite of OK Cupid. It’s a pay site, only a pay site, and only for Christians and those who identify as one (which is not the same thing at all.) Powered by a clunky web design that looks like it came from the late 90s, Christian Mingle is a low-activity place of so-called Christians that, oddly enough, are on the other dating sites as well.

A disclaimer is in order; while I, myself, was on these sites as well, I used the same pictures and close to the same profile. I saw a good amount of girls that had enough of the same pictures to clue me in that they were the same person, but had a lot of others tailored to the site, and their profiles were very different as well. Smart marketing or hypocrisy, you decide.

Most dating websites allowed me to pony up the fee for the subscription or the upgrade, then cancel the recurring payment, and ride out my months worry free that I did not have to remember to cancel it. Not Christian Mingle; the second I turned off the recurring payments, they shut me down till I turned it back on, and I finally cancelled them the day my subscription was set to renew. Not very Christian of them.

The typical Christian Mingle girl is mid twenties to 30 and had the pre-Wall epiphany that men do not marry skanks, so she better get busy making sure she is not seen as one. The ugly and overweight ones are probably honest about not having been with many dudes, but, if any hot ones try that, they are probably “reformed” Christians that did a lot of this, unless they appear so awkward they are obviously repressed snake-handling Pentecostals.

I don’t recommend this site, or any other “flavor” online dating website like Farmers Only, Our Time, JDate, or Black People Meet simply due to lack of numbers, and the same people will be a subset on the mainstream ones.

Plenty of Fish

POF is where everyone else ends up. It’s the biggest online dating site, and the upgrade package is nice but not necessary, so it’s the standard place to have an online presence for girls where they can at least pretend to be looking for something serious (as opposed to Tinder.)

The Pareto Principle aspect of the sexes is on full display here. The top 80% of girls, and, believe me, the lower parts of that range down at 30% or so are some serious 4s have standards higher than Cheech Marin, are only going for men with everything. This leads to some odd collisions of reality, where a mid-20’s chunky girl with a receptionist job is turning down a career man with a decent physique as she is sure she can do better.

POF is mainly a search on your own site, along with a token match system called Meet Me, but there is a large forum community as well, of which I haven’t partaken and see no reason why you should, either.

The typical plenty of fish girl, at least here in the Midwest, is a large white girl with a low paying job in some half-horse town that may or may not have children with someone to whom she was never married. Tattoos a given, piercings somewhat, not so much on the blue hair. If you want to slap together a decent profile, you should do it for the laughs, but you’re looking for diamonds in sludge here.


Everyone knows Tinder, and it’s so simple I won’t comment too much on it. There are a few things I learned that I can give you.

Location really matters. Out here in the corn/rust belt Midwest, the girls are either like the worst of POF above, or obviously bots with exotic names, perfect pictures, and no profile. You swipe right on the latter, it will be an instant match, a message following 30 seconds later with a lewd suggestion and enticement to come to this site they link, or a burner phone number to text, and then you get unmatched and the tracks erased about ten minutes later after they figure out you’re not biting.

At least it’s better than what it was a year ago, when the spambots actually worked on the Tinder chat channels. Every girl was bored, on her day off, and about to open a bottle of wine before going to meet her friends later at a generic restaurant-sounding name that the programmer desperately wanted you to believe was in your town.

Age matters. I’m 36, and, although I can set my standards from 25-30, that’s not who I am going to get sent. Every girl is mid 30s to 50, and either has kids, or looks heavily pregnant but is just obese.

Attention span matters. You have about two or so chat exchanges to get her number, then you need to set up a get together soonest. Also, you have to strike the balance between committer and bad boy that the girl who is there for a relationship but realizes she has to put out first, which is all of them, wants.

It’s a hookup app, and it’s free. There’s tons of guides on how to make your picture and profile, if you want another method of easy lays, go for it.


Everything in the world is becoming dumbed-down and more stupid, from elementary education to driving, and online dating is no exception. The traditional sites are slowly dying as people move from accessing websites from their home computer to running apps off their phones, and the rise of Tinder follows right along. Run it, POF if you want a free site, and Match if you want to pay, but don’t make it your only way to meet girls in any case.

Read More: 3 Ways To Be More Successful At Online Dating

268 thoughts on “6 Dating Sites I Used To Meet Women (2016 Edition)”

  1. I know two pale redheaded Presbyterians with graduate degrees who live within 50 miles of me. Trust me that you don’t want either of them. Pescados frios.

        1. That’s basically my take. Most are “um…no” but when they shine, they shine as brightly as a super nova.

        2. He has a weird taste. imo. His freckles-argument is total bogus. I bet each of us has some form of invisible gene defect that has some form of danger … warning sign, pfeh. What nonsense.
          What I did read elsewhere though is that freckles can be symptom of sexual abuse in early childhood. Which would be a different beast.
          I personally don’t like the dyed ones. When I say readhead, I don’t mean that dark kind of red. I mean the brilliant shining red (not the feminist type of ‘shining red’). Like these:
          Now that you say it, strawlike may apply. I kinda like it. As long as it doesnt make the skull shine through. 😉
          But tastes are different, heh.

      1. I have never enjoyed the company of such redheads. Goddamn. My life is incomplete.
        (Pretty sure that middle one is Kartrashian though.)

      2. I have found them to be the feast or famine. When ya get a hot one, they are really hot. But they are the minority. Most are pretty unfuckable. But they ones that are hot, can fuck like nobody’s business. I think k they tend to be crazier than other chicks and it translates into some crazy sex.

        1. But doesn’t that describe most women? I mean I have a huge thing for Latinas but most of them, mathematically speaking, are fat grandmothers. But the hot ones are smoking.

        2. I wonder if there’ll be a drought of the hot ones in a few years as I live in a sanctuary state and suffice it to say that virtually every “iGeneration” hispanic girl is dressed up like Dora the Explorer 24/7/365.

        3. It depends what you find hot. I’ve found most guys to go for body over face or hair with boobs being of paramount importance. I go for smooth, olive skin and black hair with a cute face over anything else.

  2. Used POF years ago. The main purpose of it, IMO, is to give women ego boosts.
    Which is why closing quickly (set up a meet) is essential otherwise you’ll just be strung along.

    1. It’s like the Drake equation.
      Guy sends out 1000 messages, 1/10 of whom respond, 1/10 of whom give you their number, 1/10 of whom end up shagging you. Ratio was better a few years ago but Facebook has taken hold of the new generation of young hotties and theyre mainly all on there for attention and they flake out, whereas about 5 years ago girls were really actively seeking fuck partners and/or relationships rather than simply narcissistic validation and ego boosts.

      1. In 2014-2015, I calculated my online msg-to-lay conversion at about 1-2%. I have great photos, and they’ve all been high-quality women (for real, I don’t shag no wildebeasts). But it was NOT a high percentage. I could tell that the girls are just overwhelmed by the tsunami of thirsty guys.
        I’ve got a steady gf now, but when I get back into the hunt, it’ll be in real life, where I can show off different attributes than just my face and pecs.

  3. “Search by body type (you want thin and athletic only)”
    Athletic nowadays means, “I squeezed my fat ass into some Yoga pants for that half mile hike you see in my profile pic that had zero elevation gain.”

    1. Reminds me of my mother who used to do ‘Walking’. She had those ‘Walking sticks’ which were like hiking sticks (the purpose of which eludes me likewise) and had little foot-shaped gum ends that you could take off. I always laughed my ass off about it.

  4. I bought a $10 match subscription off groupon a year ago that I still haven’t used.. probably should fire that up for some holiday action. I’ve messed around on the free sites and they are so full of garbage I think it’s a waste of time. I got 2 numbers of young cute girls off ok stupid but don’t really have good online game. I didn’t meet up fast enough and they ghosted. I think it was a better site in the past, but now thirst and ubiquity have made them difficult.
    I have heard Christian Mingle girls will sleep with you faster than others.
    Also I have been playing around on Badoo but the girls are 95% hot, whereas all the other sites are <5% so it seems like a scam to me. I think it was created by a Russian hacker so that figures.
    For online, I’d be more interested in the international sites, good for lining up some girls prior to visiting their country. I’ve done a little of that on ok stupid, but there are better ones. Some good threads on this in rooshvforum.

    1. What Badoo is still around? It was an obvious scam where they asked for your email id+pwd and then collected all your contact info and sent them an invite like it came from yourself. Rinse+repeat.

      1. I got a 2-3 dates off Badoo when I was living in South America. No lays but it didn’t seem like a scam or anything.

        1. It is a scam for most people but as some genuine people get trapped and believe it is genuine and it does have real messaging capabilities I guess it is always possible to meet real people as well. Just like a lot of dating sites use pretty models or bots acting like pretty models to lure guys to sign up and once they did the bot is gone but if an attractive guy signs up he’ll soon meet real girls as well but generally speaking it still IS a scam because they use immoral tactics to lure unattractive guys.

  5. Just go to a hookup site like adultfriendfinder or sexsearch. The women vary in age could be damaged but want to meet and fuck at least. POF is full of women that want to pretend to not want to “hook up” unless they think you’re the whale.

    1. Hookup sites not only suffer from the Pareto principle but there are 1000 men for every girl.

      1. Yes, this is why I like the bar scene in NYC. It goes by the Beach Boys principle. two girls for eeeeeevvvvrrrrryyyyyy boooyyyyyyyyyy

        1. Just to be a dik – I believe that’s Jan and Dean
          But, similarly I found myself humming a different Beach Boys
          tune, when faced with this ‘dating app’ business:
          “I Just Wasn’t Made for These Times”

        2. I’m mad at the Beach Boys for ruining “Dont Worry Baby” with stupid, preppy lyrics about cars.

    2. Yeah, if you’re going to pay for an online dating site, adultfriendfinder is the best bet. I tried it out several years back and got two lays in the first month. Just make sure to buck the trend of shirtless selfies and dick pics (which most of the dudes on there do), post a couple of pics in some stylish clothing, and you’ll get plenty of interest.
      For free sites, I’ve had plenty of luck with OKC. POF was a shit show, and when I used Tinder I mostly matched with spam bots and fat girls.

    3. I always thought those sites were at best professionals and at worst just fake accounts meant to lure in the rubes

  6. Online dating never worked for me. Call me whatever you want but I prefer the old fashioned way. Could be a culture thing.

    1. Same here. I think I’m not photogenic at all and can’t write profile info to save my life. for some reason I’m unable to get myself to write in that arrogant 3rd person style.

  7. OKC is now a pro-tranny pro-fag social engineering site. When a user signs up via smartphone, OKC defaults your sex to FEMALE, which means guys who are too stupid to pay close attention and select MALE, end up showing up in the female user pool, meaning that straight men have to endure seeing a bunch of dudes in their search results for women. Which is an intentional plan by OKC to piss off and repel straight men.
    Further, OKC now has a preposterously bewildering amount of nonsensical “gender identities” that users can choose from, like 20 different blends of trans-(whatever), and stuff like “non-binary” and “asexual”, which lots of women are using as an excuse to validate their personal insecurity and social retardation and claim to be something that Nature never intended nor created – in order to repel straight men from hitting on them.
    I was able to shag a respectable amount of hot crazies from about 2009-2014 off OKC, and a few I actually wanted relationships with, but in the past 2 years since they rolled out all this pro-tranny BS and defaulted all new sign-ups to female, it has taken a complete nosedive. It’s also riddled with porn spam-bots, and due to the zero-effort vapid emptiness of Tinder and the general decline in human social interaction caused by Facebook, most women have zero attention span and put in no effort whatsoever to converse anymore.
    In addition to all this, add in the #fatocalypse, and online dating is all but dead.

    1. Just recently someone told me she was a sapiosexual. I had to google in. I also had one a while back who told me she was a pan sexual. I asked if that meant she was going to do my dishes after I fucked her. Turns out, that is not what that means.

      1. “sapiosexual”. Hahaha when I hear that I know it’s a slam dunk. Just quote some writer and talk about some high brow political/economic bullshit with some double entendre thrown in, and it’s a for sure I’m getting that pussy. Especially when they find out that I am well educated from reading books and not from school. They give me that “diamond in the rough” look, and I know I am gonna knock that bitch’s world sideways.

      2. if she was cool, she should have done your dishes after some sex. It’s just common decency

    2. all joking aside: all these insane terms for different sexualities seem to me just ways to validate being a whore. I am not a whore I am whoresexual. It is an identity. If you shame me I am literally hitler. It is a shame, because I like good old fashioned broken in women who just put out but don’t need to make a special identification for it.

    3. There’s a reddit group where you can post research you’re doing to get participants. One of their rules is: If you are asking for gender, be sure to include alternative genders and offer a field for custom gender.

  8. “Not Christian Mingle; the second I turned off the recurring payments, they shut me down till I turned it back on, and I finally cancelled them the day my subscription was set to renew. Not very Christian of them.”
    Thou shall never give away free dating passes. You pay for what your get. -1st Bangs 2-7

    1. I’m pretty sure Christian Mingle was created by some Jewish guys. Same guys that started JDate I think (something like the Jewish equivalent to Christian Mingle ). Not sure if they’re still involved. Maybe they sold it. I would guess someone is probably aggregating all these media properties.

      1. All the dating sites are jew owned, my security software has CM and associated sites flagged for all kinds of scams/phishing. Match will pull money from your account if you pay via PayPal. Really need to be careful with what access you give these sites.

        1. If I were to pay for any of that shit, I’d use a prepaid burner Visa with no name attached.

  9. I know it sounds odd, but I actually wind up meeting people through yelp passively. I am learning that women see a guy review a certain restaurant then look at his profile and check out what kind of places he goes to, what kind of things he likes and then will send “compliments” or even private messages. I have got a few dates out of this totally passively.

    1. We should design a Yelp site for women. Base the reviews on how good of a lay they are…heh.

      1. I have been saying this for years but, true to form, women are a contradiction. They all want to be fucked half to death until they are nothing more than a shaking and frail shell of themselves in a wetspot of their own creation who will have a phantom cock in their womb for three days but the idea that a man might have enough experience to do this to them is something they will rebel against vehemently.
        I feel bad for decent guys who keep a low notch count while looking for the one. It is like these bitches will expect him to be able jump on a hyabusa and learn a turn on a track at 160 mph when all they really drove before was a riding mower.

        1. That’s why I always encourage guys to put a lot of time, energy and study into learning how to be a good fuck. To each their own, though. Even if “their own” is wrong – heh.

        2. Yup. Thirty minutes ago I pulled my girlfriend away from her laptop, ripped off her clothes, threw her on the couch, and fucked her senseless. I never said a word. Her pupils were dilated and she was giving me that shocked-amazed look. You’ll know it if you see it. Now she’s washed her face and is cooking me lunch.
          Lesson: Go full caveman once in a while. They need it to feel happy.

        3. With women that I was really into and liked a lot, I would by them blouses with lots of buttons for the expressed purpose of ripping it off of them when they least expect it. The results were simply amazing.

        4. I remember reading my mom’s Cosmo a lot when I was a kid. I figured that when I get old enough to fuck, I’m gonna do it right. I learned a lot about women and how they think and what makes them cum from reading Cosmopolitan in the mid 80’s. And occasionally there would be a tit shot or two.

        5. Damnit, Bob. I feel like I’ve read this exact comment before. I had the same feeling with a comment from GOJ just half an hour earlier. Like I was having the exactly same conversation for the second time. Except it’s not really the seond time … it’s more like … it already happened but it’s also happening right now.

        6. Basically, dejavu, in written form. A cross firing between both sides of your brain. A fairly common thing for a lot of people.

        7. I like to mystify it a little. I am not sure this explains it either. “Science” can tend to give us simple “meh, forget about it” solutions for this kind of stuff. I don’t really buy it. Now, if this effect could be reproduced under specific circumstances, maybe I’d change my mind

      2. The problem is, the reviews would be meaningless shortly after they were written. I can imagine reading glowing reviews from two years ago of a hot bodied 8 who when I meet is hideous after being on the CC every night since.

        1. True. But if they have incredible skills, you can always put a bag over their face…I’ll take technique over looks every time if it’s just straight-up sex. But then, I’m kinda “out there”…

  10. I do pretty well wearing form-fitting shorts and pulling out a wad of cash big enough to choke a horse, whenever I’m around women. Not that they’re into dicks and money or anything! But all humor aside, I have never tried a dating site, so I have no clue what works in that regard and what doesn’t, so the article was interesting to me for that reason alone. That being said, I used chat rooms with great success, for a brief period of time, about 15 years ago. If you are a decent writer, and can write quickly, and if you have a dash of wit and humor, a lot of women find that irresistible. The problem is (just as appears to be the case with dating sites, based on what I gleaned from Luke’s article), you have to sift through so many fakes and fatties it’s a major chore. And yet, I scored a 21-year-old from South Africa who was hotter than hell, and a 24-year-old in Canada who was also eminently bangable – among others. Yes, they were all crazy as fuck, but that’s the way women are, so I’m not telling you anything new there – just wanted to throw in the chat room option…

    1. Bob you don’t even need the shorts and the cash. You just need to know how to make an entrance that……..SHOCKS THE WORLD

  11. I tried Tinder for a hot minute which lead to the famous comedian incident which, apologies all, I have been too lazy to write up with corresponding screen shots from cray cray text messages. I will get there though.

    1. This is your primary mission from this point forward. You WILL write that up and you WILL post it ASAP, got it MISTER? heh

      1. I would have been better off. Oh, and no date happened. The crazy went on pre date (thankfully). I will write it up.

        1. ya woulda been better off-Carrot Top gives all of his dates a prop from his show

  12. I know quite a lot of people who met their spouse through dating sites. I also know a lot of guys who wasted a lot of time meeting crazy bitches getting ready to hit the wall.
    Mileage may vary.

    1. “wasted a lot of time meeting crazy bitches getting ready to hit the wall.”
      Wasted? Like the incomparable George Best said “I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered”

      1. LOL. I have actually used that quote with one my siblings when asked what do I do with my earnings.

  13. BTW other amazing George Best quotes
    “If you’d given me the choice of going out and beating four men and smashing a goal in from thirty yards against Liverpool or going to bed with Miss World, it would have been a difficult choice. Luckily, I had both.”
    I used to go missing a lot… Miss Canada, Miss United Kingdom, Miss World”
    I’ve stopped drinking, but only while I’m asleep.
    In 1969 I gave up women and alcohol – it was the worst 20 minutes of my life.
    In 2009 a reported asked George Best what he thought of David Beckham
    “He cannot kick with his left foot, he cannot head a ball, he cannot tackle and he doesn’t score many goals. Apart from that he’s all right.

        1. I dunno. If it means not dying of liver cancer (the worst way to go), I’d easily live with 1 or 2 cocktails per night, instead of George’s 8 to 10.
          Thanks for reminding me of him. I’d forgotten how nimble Best was.

        2. My best friend from college is an oncologist. I trust his opinion.
          He said pancreatic is a house of horrors too.

        3. That Pancreatic cancer hits you with no warning. By the time you have symptoms of cancer, it progress to the point where you untreatable. The only we can do is pain meds and 45 round to the head.

  14. Out of cowardness, I tried dating sites one or two times. First time I actually met a girl who liked me, but that didn’t lead to anything. Then I spent a few days writing super-creative nice engaging texts while reading all about her profile to make sure she feels personally validated and all that shizzle. Predictably, that led to nothing at all. I hardly got a response.
    A few years later I tried again, with a little more red pill knowledge. More aggressive and quickly came to the point, like ‘How about we meet up and maybe go back to my place to fuck?’. That got a lot more responses, but in the end also didn’t lead to anything.
    Then again, there was also a short phase where I just went out and chatted up some random hotties. Out of all these approaches, this one got me the most positive results all in all, although I ended it before anything came of it too.

    1. yup. Back to basics tom. A woman’s value is her beauty and (at least perceived) fertility and a mans value is in his character and his resources. Dating websites play towards a woman’s strengths unless you are a pretty boy.

        1. well then put those mike chang abs up on tinder and keep your mouth shut.

        2. I am a geezer
          And I am not pretty
          But I possess game galore
          And although you don’t know it
          Your eyes truly show it
          Those panties will hit the floor…
          (La-la-la…dum-de-dum…etc. Another hit song that will never be, alas!)

        3. Hah. I am not muscular. I just have a good face. And when I actually want to, I also have a good sense of style. Usually I don’t want to, though.

        4. s’ok. You’re making up for it now.
          When I was in HS the pretty boys got more ass than a toilet seat. I, being a goon, took a little longer to come into my own.

        5. Yes, I know. I’ve read some of your blog. Lots of pent up anger. Don’t take it personally. I just like to be a purist when it comes to definitions. 😀

        6. Then you are naive. Words do not have inherent meanings. Communication is not about using the right words, but trying to understand what the other person is saying. But how presumptuous of me, you can of course define the meaning of communication for yourself.

        7. Well, saying that words have no inherent meanings is some po-mo exaggeration. It’s also obviously not true. Communication would be nearly impossible if the words had no inherent meanings, as it would be extremely time-consuming to decode any message.
          While there is always some fine-tuning of the message to the audience and/or possibility of miscommunication when the words are used outside of their common meaning, the meaning is not as arbitrary as you suggest.

        8. It is arbitrary. The fact that we can communicate so well is due to the fact that we in our culture all learn the same word-thing associations, for example in school. That does not mean word have inherent meanings. It only means that most people in our culture share associations regarding words. But there’s enough examples of where this doesn’t work and people get into conflict. Often these conflicts are nothing but the result of attachment to firm word-meanings and miscommunication.
          The best proof that words do not have inherent meanings are different languages than your own. If you hear a word you never heard before, it means nothing to you. Sometimes it does, when it sounds similar to a word you already know, but otherwise nothing. In such a case, you ask someone ‘what it means’ and you get their association, which you can more often than not ‘rely on’.

        9. I think that there are other, more important sources of conflict than a difference in associations to words. Most of the conflicts are caused by clashing interests and goals, and the ways they are worded are completely irrelevant.
          For instance: there is no real reason for conflict between you and me, as we are strangers to each other, and apart some need to boost one’s ego, arguably negligible here, only direct attack on one’s values might elicit a contentious response, but only if the other person identifies strongly with his/her values.
          Thanks for clarification. Now I understand better what you mean by “inherent meaning”. I tend to follow Wittgenstein in the assumption that the meaning is identified by the use of the word. Therefore, although it changes over time, at any given moment you can access the inherent meaning of the word by seeing how it is used. Hence, your example of a foreign word is a valid description of how we access the meaning.
          Moreover, people tend to neglect the fact that the previous usage shadows the current usage, and loads the word with implicit meaning. My favorite example is word impotence that now is almost narrowed down to the physiological/psychological condition, but originally it meant lack of self-restraint or self-control.

        10. I wasn’t writing a dissertation about where most conflict comes from. I just said that often it is about usage of words. For example, when people argue about ‘What is God’ or ‘What is good’ etc.
          Somewhere I read a nice quote: Put 10 masters in one room and they will do nothing but agree. Put the 10 students of those masters in one room and they will do nothing but disagree.
          Wittgenstein (although I don’t care about big names) is right. This is how definitions in dictionaries are derived. From examples of usage. That doesn’t mean that those meanings are inherent.
          On the other hand, this is a great example of us having a ‘conflict’ over the definition of a particular word, namely ‘inherent’. We probably agree on an abstract level about how language works. But we have different ideas about what ‘inherent’ means. Hence there is an apparent disagreement where there really is none.
          Which may of course point to the fact that the word ‘inherent’ has no inherent meaning. This statement of course would depend on the definition of the word ‘inherent’. This may mean that the statement is both true and false and it’s validity depends on whether the speaker is expressing a valid idea through saying it. Or it could indeed be either true or false, if inherent meanings do exist. So whether the statement is both true and false or either true or false in itself depends on the definition of ‘inherent’. And you could continue this paragraph ad infinitum.

        11. Well, there is a common definition of the word “inherent”. It comes from Latin inhaerere which means to stick.
          Now, I don’t think there is any conflict here. I would say you purport a very strict definition of inherent, an absolutist one, where language reality doesn’t allow any of that. I just say that the meanings are not as arbitrary as you say even when they are somewhat fluid and changing. Therefore, you logically contradict yourself.
          Going back to the origins: due to testosterone, a man with normal healthy metabolism even if he doesn’t workout at all, has more defined muscles than a woman. Pretty != flabby for both sexes anyway.

        12. The definition that comes up on Google for ‘inherent’ is: existing in something as a permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute.
          So no, I wouldn’t say my definition is wrong at all. You traced the word back to the latin root. That just tells us what it once meant, not what it means now. But since I do not believe in inherent meanings (by that definition I just posted), I will just say that the definition I used seems to be very coherent with the way this word is typically used.
          If you could build a machine that replaced every occurence of ‘apple’ in people’s brains with ‘banana’ and vice versa, no one would notice a difference. They would just use a different word to say the same thing. Hence the word does not have inherent meaning.
          Anyhow, you are basically making the point that I am too strict about the definition of inherent and at the same time you argue that meanings are not as arbitrary as I say they are. That’s a weird logic.
          My point here is that no matter how many people agree on how to use a word, I am a free person and I can use it any way I like, within the restraints of my desire to be comprehendable.
          So your point is moot. You read my comment and recognized that I was saying that I had a good face. Not more, not less. And yet you felt the necessity to lecture me how I am wrong about being a pretty boy, which is completely pointless, because it ignores the essence of my original comment, which was: I have a good face.
          As you can see, you felt the need to lecture me … because you disagreed about the definition of a word with me. Not because I was saying anything incorrect.

        13. Definitions are not completely arbitrary, that is my point and it’s still standing. Obviously, you can attempt to generate your own meanings of the words, but in the reality it amounts to psychosis.
          You point out the arbitrariness of signifier, but it’s irrelevant to the issue at hand. There are many words that are used interchangeably to mean the same thing, and it doesn’t preclude the existence of their inherent meaning.
          You said that you are a pretty boy because you have a pretty face. I disagreed with it pointing out that for most of the women pretty face is not enough to make a pretty boy. You have some anecdotal evidence that for some women this is the correct definition, but as any website devoted to the topic of becoming a more attractive male points out, it’s not correct.
          Due to crappy Western diet most of the men have wrecked metabolism and/or lower testosterone, so in fact they have to lift to have any musculature whatsoever. However, a naturally pretty male specimen doesn’t really have to, and this is exactly the point.
          I don’t lecture you at all. I don’t know where you got this impression that my intention is to lecture you. It’s good that you have a pretty face as it makes your morning sessions with the mirror all the more appealing.
          To make my point even clearer, here is a courtesy of Google Image Search some example of a truly pretty boy: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/558f0e0900cc93aa5e4fefdd09452db942a00b377e6d80c1a0fa3717a315aec6.jpg

        14. “but in the reality it amounts to psychosis”
          So let us recapitulate. I stand at a crossroads. I can go left and try to always use the correct definition. And I can go right and use whatever definitions I like. You are telling me the right way is ‘psychosis’. But if I go right, I am still the same person I am now. Nothing about my mental state changes. Same if I go left. It’s just a choice. So what do you mean by ‘psychosis’? It seems to me to be the agreement that psychosis is some kind of brain damage. I don’t think that’s what you mean. If I read between the lines, I think you are just trying to shame me from using words any way I like, because it doesn’t suit you. So you are not using the real ‘scientific’ definition of ‘psychosis’, yet I can still understand your communication. JUST HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE?!?!?
          This of course creates a kind of irony. I can go down the right path and then you will think I am “incorrect”, but I will think that the meaning of “incorrect” is arbitrary, so I will just conclude that you simply dislike what I do and not give a fuck. Indeed, if I can make the conscious choice to ignore agreements about word usage (which are not real agreements at all, because nobody ever ‘agreed’ on anything. We use words the way we do because … because we do), then I am the living evidence against inherent meaning. Because according to you, I should be unable to do that. And yet, I rebelliously (or boredly) defy your attempt put me in the place where you think I belong.
          Artists and poets create new words, use words in different ways, sometimes break up meaning completely.
          The thing is … in this case, you are just trying to impose on me some kind of standard about what a ‘pretty boy’ is. If you had actually allowed yourself to process what I was trying to say in my original comment, you would have realized it was ‘I have a good face’. But me using the word ‘pretty boy’ was such an affront to you and you thought ‘I would never call him a pretty boy if he doesn’t have musclerers’.
          The essence of your reply was along the lines of: Most women require a man to have more than a good face to be sexually attracted.
          To which I would accordingly have said: I don’t give a fuck what most women want, because most people out there are brainwashed fashion-abiding zombies who think something is cool when the media tells them it is cool.
          And hell, even if those 90% of women who didn’t think a good face was enough were somehow enlightened individuals who really know what they are saying, I still would not care. Because why should I? Those women are entitled to have their damn tastes. That doesn’t mean I am going to bother fulfilling those tastes.
          But, alas, you didn’t even bother to write what you actually mean, instead you tried to elevate your taste (and that of ‘most women’ who agree) to become some universal truth by asserting that your interpretation of the phrase ‘pretty boy’ is ‘more correct’. And then correcting me for using the term ‘pretty boy’, which is precious to you, because you see it as a ‘status symbol’ that you, as a woman, need to have firm meaning so that you have power by ‘granting’ it.
          But it is moot, because in the end ‘pretty boy’ is just a word. When you say ‘most women would think a pretty boy must have muscles’, you are just saying ‘most women have an association of the word ‘pretty boy’ and muscles in their minds’. Which … means nothing.
          And as already mentioned, had you just focused on what I was trying to say in my comment, you would see it was: I have a good face.
          And had you then thought about the thing you were about to write in response, you would have realized it was completely unnecessary. Because I never claimed most women are sexually attracted to me (as it appeared to you thanks to your attachment to the word ‘pretty boy’). On the bottom line, I just said I had a good face.

        15. Thanks for the laughs. Your answer was hilarious.
          Anyway, I was thinking about our little interaction when I was away from my computer, and I came to the conclusion that you essentially disagree with the fact that the meaning of a “pretty boy” is decided by women (and of course gay men, but they are in minority).
          Your answer just confirms my intuition. However, no matter what is your wish in this regard, the women DO decide what is attractive to them. This right is undeniable, and also symmetric to the right of men to decide what is attractive to them.
          Beauty standards are changeable and subjective. In the context of this discussion you used the phrase “pretty boy” referring to your unfortunate lack of success in online dating. And now you try to impute that you don’t care what women consider attractive. This is a classic example of “sour grapes”.
          I took a liberty at explaining your failure by pointing out that “a good face” is not enough, but I guess you prefer to hold on your little misconception. Imagine if a girl would say here: “I have no tits, no ass, and bowed legs, but I have a pretty face. It surely means that I’m a pretty girl.” I think, that the most typical answer would be: “Heck no, bitch you are delusional.”
          I was just trying to be helpful.

        16. Actually, I said you can call me whatever you want. That was my first reply to your comment.
          You seem to purposefully glance over the places where I acknowledged that everyone is allowed to have their taste.
          You also misinterpret the context in which I have mentioned ‘pretty boy’, which was a reply to lolknee’s comment (you can read it up). It was a somewhat humorous comment, but maybe you (happened or chose to) miss that. I then clarified myself stating I have a good face. At no place did I suggest women should be attracted to me because I have a good face. You have a healthy imagination for seeing me say that or interpreting it as some form of whining.
          You also miss a very big point, which makes me assume you are not all too smart. I said I don’t care what the majority of women thinks. Yes. Because ‘the majority of women’ does not mean anything to me. You act as if you were representative of all women, which you are not. You have your taste and that’s cool and many if not most women may share it and that’s also cool. I still don’t care.
          If I care about getting laid, that does not necessarily mean that I care whether most women find me attractive.
          Another factor you miss completely is that ‘being a pretty boy’ is just one factor among many. I would argue that to ‘most women’, confidence is more important. That is not a conscious choice as much as what they react to. There are many ugly guys with pretty women. What do they have? Confidence. Women tend to hook up with these guys and later wonder ‘why did I take that ugly guy’. Well, that’s that.
          What I just pointed out is another clue for you to see that my ‘pretty boy’ comment was humorous and that I never meant to say that having a good face will get me laid. That’s just what you read, because you equate my use of the phrase of ‘pretty boy’ with your conception of ‘the ultimate meaning of pretty boy’, missing completely what I was actually saying.
          Imagine the comment I made with the context as if I stood with lolknee in a bar and said it with a smirk on my face. Nobody sane would think that I am in all seriousness suggesting that I am super attractive to everyone. It’s called banter. But I admit this kind of nuance can get lost it online communication.
          I didn’t say ‘that surely means I am a pretty boy’ either. Again a misinterpretation stemming from your attachment to the word ‘pretty boy’. What I actually said was I was a pretty boy in a slightly humorous context and as soon as lolknee talked about abs, I clarified myself to make it clear what I actually meant. For some reason, you don’t accept that clarification of my real communication and are obsessed over me using the word ‘pretty boy’ to describe myself.
          If you don’t agree with me calling myself a pretty boy, oh well. I granted you that right in my first comment, because I know that people put different things and values into words and you may as well define the word the way it makes sense for you. But you weren’t satisfied with that and now seem to be intent on convincing me on the ‘real meaning of pretty boy’, which is silly.
          Honestly, just read what I actually wrote and meant, then this whole debate should appear laughable to you.

        17. It is indeed laughable, because you didn’t recognize from the very beginning that I was just teasing you. Instead of recognizing it, you embarked on a whole tirade how little you care about what I, or any other woman, can say. Hilarious.
          It’s true that if you want to get laid, theoretically you don’t have to care what the majority of women considers attractive. It’s enough if you focus on what a particular woman wants. However, it’s hard to deny that if one is a “pretty boy” or better a “handsome man”, it’s very helpful, as it’s clear that people of both sexes prefer to hook-up with physically attractive people.
          Overall, I wish you good luck with all your endeavors, and if I may add another bit of unsolicited advice, try to loosen the grip of your tight ass. While it doesn’t actually make up for the lack of visible abs or Apollo’s belt, the rumor has it that the Great Sanhedrin of women decided that we prefer laid-back guys to sanctimonious pricks.
          Also your writing is much better when you escape your self-referential bubble. Sometimes you manage to do it, and so keep up the good work.

        18. I really do hope that you don’t want to attract random strangers on the Internet. It’s quite dangerous, or so I’ve heard 🙂

    2. “‘How about we meet up and maybe go back to my place to fuck?’. That got a lot more responses, but in the end also didn’t lead to anything.”
      You should have included an abs pic of some random guy on steroids. Just crop the head.

  15. I like that new orbiting site for betas – orbitnow.com. You can actually PAY to find chicks you can orbit, and buy them gifts, cars, lunch – WOW!

        1. I know what you mean. I have all this…LOVE in my heart, and no channels toward which I can apply it. And now they take my favorite orbiting website down…OH GOD NOOOOOO etc.

        2. Yes. The only thing that comes close to giving me the warm-and fuzzy-feeling that I get while being an orbiter, is being a cuck…or maybe when I stick pins in my face, or set my nuts on fire, or slam my hand in a door, over and over. Sigh.

        3. He would be so proud he would give you a cookie…well its not REALLY a cookie (ok showing my age here)

        4. Those are all great suggestions. I should try that until I get to be an orbiter again.
          Maybe I’ll try stalking if there’s no opportunity for orbiting. I hear it’s great for the detriment of dignity.

        5. Yes…now stalking has merit. You can actually see the girl, and what I like to do, is, pretend she’s talking to me in my head, while I go through her trash, or climb a tree to peek in her window.

        6. Ha! When I catch her (the chick I am stalking), I am always holiday-conscious. For example, this chick I’m stalking right now, I intend to catch her and abduct her on Halloween. (Only for a day or so!) And I have a Joker outfit, with face paint, you know, Batman’s nemesis. And I’m going to duct-tape her to the water heater in my basement, and then pin her to the floor, and whisper, “Why…so…SERIOUS?” Great fun!

        7. If the chick is large ( curvy) enough where her gravitational pull is significant, you’ll be drawn in soon enough…

        8. Hey. That’s why they call me Bob “Beta” King. Yes, I get all the fatties and dead chicks. My pleasure to pass along pearls of wisdom. What are fiends (not a typo) for?

        9. Kneeman I asked you never to post my pictures here. Oh well. It’s all about forgiveness…what’s your sister’s address again?

        10. Interestingly, I read an article that suggested that the old ‘alpha beta’ concept actually stems from observations of wolves in captivity. The author made the argument that free wild wolves actually don’t have that type of behavior in this form, because they are basically families and the ‘alphas’ are simply the parents. Not sure what to think of this, kinda smells fishy, but who knows.
          The article also brought something else to my attention: The word ‘bitch’ is apparently the ‘correct’ word used for the Alpha’s female in a wolf pack. In fact, the definition often is simply ‘female canine’. Which makes you wonder why it is actually considered an insult …

        11. HA! Once while in a bar I was talking to a girl and her fat, disgusting land whale friend kept getting in the way. I knew I wasn’t winning the battle so I figured I would go out with some lulz. I took something that was handy, I don’t know, maybe a wadded up bar napkin and dropped it in front of her and said “Wow……I really would of sworn it would have started orbiting you” she said something nasty and I cut her off and said, and this is one of my better ones, “woah woah woah woah….I thought you people were supposed to be jolly”

        12. Makes me feel kinda cool and important since I’ve only dated dogs my whole life…thanks my friend!

        13. Yes, but did this observation mention if Lon Chaney was walking with the queen? At any point did the mention the wolf’s hair and, if so, was it perfect?

        14. yeah, my guess is that other than Bob and GOJ this one is going to be a loss on pretty much everyone.

        15. Hahaha hahahaha……not enough H’s and A’s to describe the many LoLz. Were ya able to close with the hot one at least? Or did she write ya off as an “insensitive” asshole?

        16. nah, I was totally written off. I knew it before I went atomic. It just wasn’t going to work. When I know that my chances are 0 then I at least try to get some lulz out of the situation.

        17. Tom you would love warren zevon . He is straight up your alley I believe

        18. We used to call normal sized girls with fat friends “satellite chicks” because we figured they were stuck in orbit around their gigantic friend!
          and, of course:

        19. Nice! I just tell them approximately how much weight they need to lose without wasting my time trying to be clever. But I’ll remember that one for another time.

        20. My friend once told me, in all seriousness:
          “dude, its OK if you fuk my sister – I mean, I even let you drive my car.”
          All about trust.

        21. Well the question is kind of interesting, how much mass is needed to achieve a noticeable pull ?

        22. There was a time, long ago, when there was decent reality tv. The show where he records his last album – The Wind- is one of those shows. Watching him die slowly on screen. Brutal.

        23. The tribute album after he died, Enjoy Every Sandwich is pretty good, too. Adam Sandler does a surprisingly good version of Werewolves.

        24. yeah, it was brutal. The song he went out on, Keep Me In Your Heart For A While, was awesome and in context really would have taken a stone covered in ice not to be moved by.

        25. All objects have gravitational pull. The force of the gravitational pull is equal to the mass of the two objects multiplied times the gravitational constant. There is some figuring you need to do to work in relativity in order to be accurate but for the most port that is about it. I would say that you would probably need two buoyant objects in water at about 100k tons each and around 200 feet away from each other for them to exert the king of gravity you could notice without instruments and even that would be incredibly subtle. To find out exactly much you would need the ability to do the math and to wrangle in the wild cards brought to the table by relativity though.

        26. If I may, the force is indeed G times the mass of the objects multiplied together, but then it is divided by the distance squared. Just to make sure I plugged in the value of G, the earth’s mass, neglected the other mass, and divided by the earth’s radius squared, and came up with 9.82, so ti checked.

        27. I used to be protective of my sister, but now I know she is such a post-wall crazy that any man can take her off our hands.

        28. Good for lolz.
          Did you hit the good looking one?
          Maybe yiu could have bribed the blob with pizza.

        29. Bob you don’t happen to recall my favorite Halloween movie Mad Monster Party? It was a late 60’s claymation.
          Wolfie you old dog! This party is gonna be a howl!
          InWisible man, you look good — I think

        30. I am sorry, I missed that one. Most guys would say, “Sure”, to avoid ripples, but I’m not wired that way, much to people’s chagrin. Was it a good flick…must be. I’ll have to check it out.

        31. It is a 1967 claymation with Boris Karloff and Phillis Diller and some really great music. Perfect time of year for it. Do yourself a favor with this one

        32. I’ll check it out because I’m in a rare bad mood and that will probably help…thanks for the suggestion.

        33. There’s a lot of fatties who will have their main profile pic surrounded by their way more attractive friends, then you realize it’s the fatasses’ profile.. false advertisement!

        34. You forgot the first law of internet dating. If you can’t immediately identify the target or see if they’re hot… they fat.

        35. So I’ve gathered from your website. We have much in common.
          But to be clear I will not screw your mother.

        36. Yep, they use them as cannon fodder to deflect the attention their way.
          No wait, they like them for their winning personality, right…

    1. In the dom/sub community, men often pay women with gifts and cash for the privilege of being verbally humiliated, either in person or via Skype. It’s called rinsing.
      Those dudes aren’t red or blue pill. They’re some other color.

      1. Isn’t it odd that it’s mainly politicians, mainly of the Carlos Danger type, that get caught perusing these kinds of sites? It’s like men in power want to be humiliated…

        1. I think it goes to show what type of man can gain political power in our modern world. I just can’t envision Charles I of Austria, Napolean, Hitler, or Winston Churchill doing any of these things
          But fuckboy Paul Ryan or Harry Reid……no doubt about it.

      2. This should also work if one disguises himself as some weird ass domina right? I’ll give it a try

    2. Lol. Might as well blow your wad (if not your load) at a skanky titty bar that’s next the to the LP gas depot and trucking hub..

    3. Good joke, Bob. I clicked the link and even typed it in so that I could troll the site for an hour or so. Jokes on me!

    4. Fish on! I actually clicked on it you bastard thinking I’d get a good laugh I guess I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed..!!

  16. you guys want a really good dating site. http://www.expedia.com
    Book hotel and airfare in one. Go to some awesome vacation spot and fuck loads of women. My preference is French Saint Martin with a daily catamaran bar hopping tour between st martin, st barth and anguilla

      1. weekend in Ibiza through expedia beats hours of putzing around on a dating site and will be infinitely more successful and fun

        1. Higher success in less time, but it was before the on-iine dating craze and when I had more time and less money.
          Every man hits a point when his time becomes more valuable to him than money. Then he has leverage. You won’t need to fly anywhere. The women will travel to you.

        2. that is true…but white sand beaches and crystal blue water is a beautiful thing regardless.

    1. Now you’re talkin! A catamaran with a bar gliding gently through the azure waters of the Caribbean. Now that’s not only a dating site, but a bangin’ site if you ask me.

      1. One of my talents is actually catamaran sailing. Those suckers don’t glide; they howl.

        1. Well, if I’m drinking on one, it’s over 9 meters long and gliding gently, lest any of the deck candy spill their drinks flying over swells.

  17. Don’t pay for Match with PayPal, they set up a ‘merchant agreement’ on your account that allows them to charge any amount at any time. PayPal will not refund these payments despite your ability to prove you’ve cancelled the service.
    I got hit for $100 7 months after a one-month subscription expired

      1. Yes, that’s right. Now if only they told you when such an agreement was made. As PayPal told me themselves the discussion on this is solely between them and the merchant. I was never told anyone had the authority to charge my account/bank balance other than myself
        Prepaid card does seem the best answer is you want to be a paying member of one of these sites.

        1. Wtf? Okay, that’s fucked up. All I know is PayPal subscriptions and you get notified of them when you sign up and can cancel them anytime in the account page.

        2. I am sure it was somewhere buried in a 500 page EULA that no one reads.

        3. Just as a for instance. Apple’s User agreement for Safari for Windows has a clause that the end user will not install it in windows. This is Safari for Windows that you agree to not install on windows. You cannot use it without being in violation of the terms of agreement period.
          Oh, and do you use google chrome. Well I hope you have no creative work product you are using it with. You have already agreed to the following
          “you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services.”

    1. just out of curiosity…if someone wanted to sign up for a site with one of these predatory fucks who keep charging your card couldn’t you go to any drug store (here it is Duane Reade) and get an Amex gift card with however much you felt was necessary. They work like regular credit cards and have credit card numbers and expiration dates. Other than the fact that they are burners with no record leading back to who owns them they are indistinguishable from a CC. Use that. Let match keep getting declined. Dafuq you care?

  18. Funny how all this is accurate in germany as well (but the biggest german OG app ‘lovoo’ is missing).
    Been on OKCupid for not even an hour.
    Every girl is ‘pansexual’, has dyed hair, goes to university and has some text like ‘If you dont like me youre misogynist’ on her profile.
    Ridiculous shit.
    I cant recommend any app.
    3 years ago lovoo was great to fuck german chicks but now you won’t even get a date with a landwhale unless you are a straight ten.

        1. READ: “Ready-made family, just add schmuck with paycheck and insurance and retirement plan!”

    1. Or as I call it, “Excavating the tar pits”. If it’s not some fat cow with bad boy’s kids of every race and religion looking for some poor jackass with a paycheck to shack up with her it’s these unbearable “fitness” chicks who think that having never gotten fat simply because their parents (IF they were lucky enough to even have both!) never let them eat too much shit growing up is the exact same as having a nice body you worked your entire life for, which we all know is not, attention whoring by fraudulently acting like social media gym badasses after having a membership for six months. It really is a shitshow circus of desperation and token female copycatting trying to one-up each other!

  19. In Canada, 90% of the women online are fat or hideous…worn out banged out slatterns!
    It’s terrible…just awful!!

    1. A very real benefit of an authoritarian state. In any decent culture these fat pigs would have been shipped to the hoghouse and treated like Private Pyle. A bootcamp of sort for those afflicted as eye pollution.

  20. I’ve had the most success with POF, which… for a dating site, isn’t saying much.
    I stopped using it when I found out about their race-bating tendencies. When entering your preferences for the type of guy/girl you want to match with… there is actually an option for “non-white”.
    All the people that complained to try and say it was racist were just told “that it doesn’t count against whites”.

    1. Ive got “black” and “mixed race” blocked because almost all trannies are in one of those groups. Miscegenation yields a disproportionate amount of homos and from them, the most mentally disturbed of homos become trannies – maybe this is why interracial breeding has been shamed and taboo down through history. I’m not saying this in a racist way, only observationally. Such people have major self-loathing and identity problems, and tend to be the biggest racists.

  21. Return of Kings is really going downhill. Articles on online dating? Seriously? Real men should avoid that shit like the plague. Approach real women in person instead. Think about it.. Any remotely attractive woman is already receiving plenty of attention from men. Why would they need to do online dating unless they are a slut or narcissistic as all hell? Either way they are crazy, just look at what happened to Gable a Tostee bloke!

  22. The absolute ONLY reason i would even attempt to go dumpster diving with online dating is to catfish fat old cunts for the lulz. Thankfully i have better things to do with my life.

  23. Online dating, especially POF, are packed with trannies and landwhales with customized photoshop pictures.

  24. Online dating sites, especially POF, are packed with trannies and landwhales with customized photoshop pictures.

  25. You forgot to mention that if you specify an age range very much younger than you, you’ll get rejected (E Harmony) or just plain no responses…

  26. Take the Dodgers tonight at home against the Cubs, -120 on the money line. (It means you have to risk 120 to win 100.) Slam-dunk. Game starts in half an hour though…so hustle.

      1. Well that was interesting. Hearing about a one-world government, was something I experienced from the time I could crawl. And this “Barney Miller” clip, seems very pertinent to today’s situation…does it not.
        If we were to take this at face value, a strong case could be made that the elite have the audacity to include portions of the script of their actual plans, within Hollywood-produced “fictional” TV shows (and movies)…which would indeed provide perfect cover. Because if they did that, very few people would believe that anything in a fictional program, could possibly be true. Which would mean the whole thing was no doubt just a coincidence. (You know, “just a coincidence” – kind of like me telling you a half an hour before the game tonight that it was a slam-dunk that the Dodgers would win it…which they did, 6-0.)
        If anybody wants a more current example of powerful, media-induced “coincidence”, check out “The Manchurian Candidate” (2004), with Denzel Washington and Liev Schreiber. The original doesn’t contain as much in-your-face shock value. Pay close attention to the seemingly innocuous side chatter, featuring what at first appears to be unrelated sound bytes from various television newscasts and radio newscasts, as well as seemingly harmless side banter among the film’s various characters, which are woven into the film. If you have good ears, a quick mind, and eyes to see, that should be a veritable coincidence-fest…heh.
        Side note: The original version of “The Manchurian Candidate” (1962), starred Frank Sinatra. It disappeared after its release for 26 years; allegedly because it was blacklisted. Then it slowly came out of hibernation. It’s worth a hard look, too…you can read a very interesting review of the film, which was written in 1988, and provided by that bastion of truth, “The Washington Post”, at the following link – http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/movies/videos/manchuriancandidatehinson.htm

    1. Bob, someone (maybe you) was talking about the election in terms of Vegas odds. To me that is the most sensible predictor. The vegas odds don’t have feelings and feelings get things all muddled up. I looked this morning and say Hilary -600 and trump +400 which jives with my general take on things. I don’t really have a horse in this race and so my interest is purely sporting, but do you feel that vegas has best chance at an accurate prediction?

      1. If I actually still interacted with my NWO father, I would ask him and find out who the Big Boys’ selection is for president. He would know, and has told me in the past who was going to be “elected”. (But I haven’t spoken to him in a couple of years because, well…he’s an ass.) At first I thought Trump was a shoe-in. Now I’m not so sure. I really have no idea about this one. But whoever gets in, that’s what they wanted. You can be sure of that one.

        1. I’m pretty sure that it will be Hillary. My question was more about your gambling sense. It would see to me common thinking that vegas odds would beat any polls taken

        2. Based on those Vegas odds…hmm. Hillary is favored for sure, however, I don’t know how many people vote on the presidential election. HOWEVER. Based on the potential payout, if the numbers you quoted are accurate, -600 for Hillary and +400 for Trump, I have to lean toward Trump. Those odds, if accurate, are very encouraging for Trump backers. Can you show me a link to those odds, I tried finding the odds in a search engine just now and couldn’t locate any…

        3. They were the odds this morning. Apparently at the start of the primaries they were giving 1/150 odds so there are a lot of people worried they will be paying out 1500 for every 10 bucks. That said, I don’t know how people vote. Hell, I don’t even know why they vote. It is just my natural feeling that if you want to know which way the wind is blowing the vegas odds seem to be more reliable than polls or news or stuff.

        4. Very true. It would be interesting to know how many people vote on that. I have no idea, but I can’t imagine it being a huge pile of money.

  27. Hey there 🙂
    Why is this the only line women use to open a conversation . I get this line 20 times a day. Its really creepy how women all say the same thing, yet think they are a special snowflake.

  28. online dating is such a dumpster dive. it’s a trap i fall for because i can do it anytime, but i’ve recently realized that i’d rather get rejected 1000s in bad ways from a money girl who gets my dick hard than slay a mediocre chick.

  29. On OkCupid I mostly got contacted by fat chicks and a couple of “Jewish” black girls.
    I prefer Bumble to Tinder; less glitchy, more attractive girls, and the fact they have to send the first message eliminates a good portion of the time-wasting cunts looking for an ego stimulus.

        1. Then I’ll pass, still waiting for app which doesn’t require any of social networks. I hate idea of creating false account just for that and then maybe dealing with friends in real life that accidentally stumbled upon this account.

        2. I have a fake account on facebook for Tinder which has 5 photos and that’s it. Make one, and if someone ever asks, explain why. “I did some online dating and didn’t want to put my whole life out there.”

  30. Awesome article. I did an experiment at a free dating site in my country. I used a photo of an unknown model (from another country) with a look that is considered sexy, and I messeged girls. No replies. There were a few women though who wrote to me first. All were around 40, despite my profile said I (the model) was 29, and that I looked for women under 30. What can I say, dating sites are just full of attention whores, golddiggers and single mothers who look for a dad.

  31. I’ve probably been on 500 dates in the last 15 years. 99% of girls I’ve met online look at least 15 pounds heavier in person, and about 50% as cute.
    Yet, I keep going back…

  32. So you have not found any dating sites worthwhile for 7+ girls?
    One would hope there would be somewhere one could point young men where the girls are cute, and not high number sluts.

  33. “….then you need to set up a get together soonest.”
    Ew. That one set of my grammar-nazi radar. C’mon, Luke – you can write better than that.
    Other than that great article and a welcome update to the current online dating scene – glad I’m not missing anything. As for eHarmony and their erasure of the “active since” feature, that’s probably because their renewal rate is so low that most of their women have been inactive for months and they do not want you to know this. It has nothing to do with preventing stalkers.

  34. I reached online dating burnout months ago. The way it reflects the current hostility between the genders depresses me, and don’t get me going on the obesity, unresolved mental health issues and just plain toxic bitches.
    There was a time where with some applied effort I dated some attractive women for several years off dating sites. However, like most of western womankind they were always bat shit crazy and lived in cloud cuckoo land, so it became a great place for fun size relationships where I ejected when it all became too much.
    Never say never…but no thanks…I have much more productive and rewarding things to do with my time.

  35. I just deleted my POF profile about 4 days ago. The review of it here is accurate, and its been overrun by scammers with fake profiles trying to get people to send them money to help with some personal disaster ( job loss, eviction, etc etc.)

Comments are closed.