In over 6 years of coaching singles for more dating success, one thing has become glaringly clear to me: fewer people are willing to venture out to singles events, Meetup groups, and hobby activities in search of dates. They'd much rather focus most of their attention on using technology--whether it be online dating sites, Facebook, or texting--to connect with new people. Don't get me wrong--these can be great tools to find dates and stay in touch with folks. But, I find it troubling that these seem to have replaced in-person interaction. Here's why:
There's no substitute for face-to-face contact when it comes to learning about a new person. You can discover FAR more about someone by observing their nonverbal communication (facial expressions, tone of voice, and other body language) than you can from the words they say. Even the way your "date" treats the server in the coffee shop or restaurant where you have your first meeting can tell you a LOT more about his/her character and personality than an online dating profile ever could. Let's face it: some people are good at saying nice things in an email/text or on the phone (what they think the opposite sex wants to hear) but can't back that up with actions (ie, they don't "walk their talk") or they aren't really who they pretend to be.
And then there's the fact that you'll never know if you have physical chemistry with someone until you meet him/her in person. I found this out the hard way after a whirlwind weekend of emails and 4-hour phone calls with an online prospect who lived 3 hours from me. The banter and conversation was so stimulating and entertaining, I just had to meet him...and drove a long way to do so...only to find out the minute I saw him that there was absolutely no chemistry. He looked exactly like his online photo, but I just didn't feel the "spark"--even after spending a couple hours with him that day. You're either attracted or you're not.
Getting out of the house and mingling has another advantage too: nobody will know your age, so they can't pigeon-hole you based on that. I can't tell you how many of my Baby Boomer female clients are afraid to list their real age on their online profile because they assume men always seek younger women, so their profile will never pop up in a search guys their age will do. Since this is a legitimate concern, I advise them to get "out there" and be their fun, friendly self (since most of them look younger than they are anyways). Once somebody gets a taste of your personality and sense of humor and is compatible with you in terms of interests/hobbies and physical attraction, they're far less likely to worry about your age.
Maybe that's why a new online dating venue called "How About We...?" launched recently. It allows people to post a fun date idea and see who responds...thus cutting through the time it would have taken to email and phone call and getting right to the in-person meeting, to see if you have fun together and a physical attraction. I'll be curious to see how new users like this site and how many couples result from it.
In my opinion, it's sad that technology and "cyberdating" have created walls that sometimes reduce the time we spend in actual human interaction and connection. Sure, they have their place, but in the world of dating, they seem to me a detriment to getting a sense of the actual person you're considering spending time with.
How about you? Are you willing to mix it up and go out at least 2 or 3 times a month to meet people in person...to spend as much time experiencing face-to-face connections as you are "virtual" connections? If you are, you'll maximize your chances of meeting more people and of forming deeper relationships. What do you think?
Friday, February 17, 2012
Friday, December 2, 2011
Do you want a life partner or a soul mate?
I heard a very interesting podcast lately about the difference between a life partner and a soul mate. According to David Steele (relationship coach, author of the book Conscious Dating, and founder of the Relationship Coaching Institute)and his 3rd wife and soul mate Darlene, a life partner is someone who is limited in his/her ability to meet your emotional needs. You get along fine, but you feel as if something is missing. This person may love you and have some things in common with you, but he/she doesn't really "get" you.
A soul mate, on the other hand, is so tuned into you that he/she really DOES get you. A soul mate is someone with whom you have a deep emotional, mental, spiritual, and physical connection...a person you feel truly safe with and accepted by. With your soul mate, you feel that nothing is missing: you have 100% of what you desire in a partner and can be totally authentic with that person all the time. Plus, there is such a synergy between you that you bring out the very best in each other.
I love this quote from David on the topic of finding a mate with whom you have a soulful connection: "Be willing to drive people away by being authentically yourself." In other words, never pretend to be anything you're not in order to impress someone you're dating; instead, be prepared to see the people who aren't really meant for you fall by the wayside. He says that the process needed to find a true soul mate involves "screening out" everyone who isn't perfect for you. Don't settle, he says. Figure out what's most likely to cause you to settle for 2nd best...and stop doing that.
Sounds easy, right? But, in my experience and that of my clients, I've discovered there are a million reasons why we DO settle...especially if we're older, divorced, and thinking that "all the good ones are taken." I often hear people say "I'm not getting any younger. Maybe my chances of finding someone really in synch with me are slim, so I guess I'll be OK with someone who's 'good enough'." I too have thought like this. Nobody's perfect, so it follows that there's no "perfect" partner. In fact, I've often told clients that, after age 50 or so, most potential partners have so much "baggage" accumulated from the past that we're fortunate if we can get 80% of what we want in a partner, and the other 20% we'll have to compromise on.
It seems like a practical, realistic approach--one that makes it possible to have more dating prospects by giving everyone a chance. However, after hearing David and Darlene tell it, I'm beginning to change my mind. He said that, after 2 marriages and a 5-year live-in relationship that didn't work out, he decided "I'd rather be single than settle." So he took some time to regroup, work on himself, and develop his "Manifesto for a successful relationship" -- a list of 7 things he absolutely would NOT compromise on. He got VERY clear on what he passionately desired in a partner and went on a quest to find her. And, within 4 months of writing that list, he met Darlene. It's a beautiful story, and you can hear it here (Using Conscious Dating to Find Your Soul Mate):
http://consciousdating.com/finding-new-strategies/soul-mate
How about you? Do you believe there is a soul mate out there for you? Are you willing to keep looking until you find that person? And are you also willing to stay single rather than settle if you don't happen to find him or her? That's the mind-set that David had to get comfortable with before he started searching. And I believe it's that determination that finally resulted in his finding the woman he describes as "the female version of me."
A soul mate, on the other hand, is so tuned into you that he/she really DOES get you. A soul mate is someone with whom you have a deep emotional, mental, spiritual, and physical connection...a person you feel truly safe with and accepted by. With your soul mate, you feel that nothing is missing: you have 100% of what you desire in a partner and can be totally authentic with that person all the time. Plus, there is such a synergy between you that you bring out the very best in each other.
I love this quote from David on the topic of finding a mate with whom you have a soulful connection: "Be willing to drive people away by being authentically yourself." In other words, never pretend to be anything you're not in order to impress someone you're dating; instead, be prepared to see the people who aren't really meant for you fall by the wayside. He says that the process needed to find a true soul mate involves "screening out" everyone who isn't perfect for you. Don't settle, he says. Figure out what's most likely to cause you to settle for 2nd best...and stop doing that.
Sounds easy, right? But, in my experience and that of my clients, I've discovered there are a million reasons why we DO settle...especially if we're older, divorced, and thinking that "all the good ones are taken." I often hear people say "I'm not getting any younger. Maybe my chances of finding someone really in synch with me are slim, so I guess I'll be OK with someone who's 'good enough'." I too have thought like this. Nobody's perfect, so it follows that there's no "perfect" partner. In fact, I've often told clients that, after age 50 or so, most potential partners have so much "baggage" accumulated from the past that we're fortunate if we can get 80% of what we want in a partner, and the other 20% we'll have to compromise on.
It seems like a practical, realistic approach--one that makes it possible to have more dating prospects by giving everyone a chance. However, after hearing David and Darlene tell it, I'm beginning to change my mind. He said that, after 2 marriages and a 5-year live-in relationship that didn't work out, he decided "I'd rather be single than settle." So he took some time to regroup, work on himself, and develop his "Manifesto for a successful relationship" -- a list of 7 things he absolutely would NOT compromise on. He got VERY clear on what he passionately desired in a partner and went on a quest to find her. And, within 4 months of writing that list, he met Darlene. It's a beautiful story, and you can hear it here (Using Conscious Dating to Find Your Soul Mate):
http://consciousdating.com/finding-new-strategies/soul-mate
How about you? Do you believe there is a soul mate out there for you? Are you willing to keep looking until you find that person? And are you also willing to stay single rather than settle if you don't happen to find him or her? That's the mind-set that David had to get comfortable with before he started searching. And I believe it's that determination that finally resulted in his finding the woman he describes as "the female version of me."
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Why people over 55 are better at dating online
Did you know that people over 55 are the #1 age group visiting American online dating sites? And singles 45-54 are the #2 group? Maybe that's because, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, about 37% of people 50 and older are unmarried...and the divorce rate among people that age is high.
It also turns out that singles over 50 may also be better at finding love through Internet dating sites than their younger counterparts. There are 2 reasons for this:
1) Singles 18-34 are moving away from online dating and using social networking sites like Facebook instead.
2) While 20- and 30-something singles are focused on marriage and starting a family, older singles (especially those who've been married before) take a more relaxed approach to dating and are careful to choose people who share their interests.
According to Gian Gonzaga, senior director of R&D for eHarmony labs, baby boomers are better equipped than younger singles to find a perfect match. That's because they have a deep comprehension about what's important in a relationship. One older couple who met in their 60s (interviewed for an article on this topic in The New York Times), thinks this is because the more things you can do and enjoy together, the better able you'll be to hang in there during tough times.
So, which dating sites are the best for over-50 singles to try? Well, the president of Spark Networks (which owns SilverSingles, JDate, Spark.com, BlackSingles, and ChristianMingle) says that Spark sites had a 93% increase in new members 50 and older across all its sites in the first 8 months of 2011, compared with the same time period in 2010. So there are a lot of baby boomers on those sites. It's also worth considering sites like SeniorPeopleMeet, LavaLifePrime, and SeniorFriendFinder.
I hear stories all the time about seniors trying online dating for the first time at the urging of their 40-something kids, many of whom know folks who've met their spouses online. It's definitely a good idea for one other big reason: it's convenient. When you're older and your eyesight isn't as good, driving at night to attend singles events isn't as easy to do. And there are far less events for the over-55 group anyways. So the Internet is the perfect solution.
If you don't know where to begin in choosing sites and writing a profile, I can help. That's my specialty. I've assisted hundreds of seniors in getting set up with online dating, and they now have thousands (even millions) of people to choose from on a variety of sites--all from the comfort of home. If the statistics quoted above are correct, your chances of success finding love online are even better than those of young people. So what are you waiting for?
It also turns out that singles over 50 may also be better at finding love through Internet dating sites than their younger counterparts. There are 2 reasons for this:
1) Singles 18-34 are moving away from online dating and using social networking sites like Facebook instead.
2) While 20- and 30-something singles are focused on marriage and starting a family, older singles (especially those who've been married before) take a more relaxed approach to dating and are careful to choose people who share their interests.
According to Gian Gonzaga, senior director of R&D for eHarmony labs, baby boomers are better equipped than younger singles to find a perfect match. That's because they have a deep comprehension about what's important in a relationship. One older couple who met in their 60s (interviewed for an article on this topic in The New York Times), thinks this is because the more things you can do and enjoy together, the better able you'll be to hang in there during tough times.
So, which dating sites are the best for over-50 singles to try? Well, the president of Spark Networks (which owns SilverSingles, JDate, Spark.com, BlackSingles, and ChristianMingle) says that Spark sites had a 93% increase in new members 50 and older across all its sites in the first 8 months of 2011, compared with the same time period in 2010. So there are a lot of baby boomers on those sites. It's also worth considering sites like SeniorPeopleMeet, LavaLifePrime, and SeniorFriendFinder.
I hear stories all the time about seniors trying online dating for the first time at the urging of their 40-something kids, many of whom know folks who've met their spouses online. It's definitely a good idea for one other big reason: it's convenient. When you're older and your eyesight isn't as good, driving at night to attend singles events isn't as easy to do. And there are far less events for the over-55 group anyways. So the Internet is the perfect solution.
If you don't know where to begin in choosing sites and writing a profile, I can help. That's my specialty. I've assisted hundreds of seniors in getting set up with online dating, and they now have thousands (even millions) of people to choose from on a variety of sites--all from the comfort of home. If the statistics quoted above are correct, your chances of success finding love online are even better than those of young people. So what are you waiting for?
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Do politics and online dating mix?
How willing are you to mention your political leanings when dating online? Well, if you're like most of the online daters interviewed for a recent University of Miami study published in the journal Evolution and Human Behavior, you're not very willing at all. In fact, in that study, only 14% of online daters even indicated their politics in their profiles. And, of those who did, 57% listed themselves as "middle of the road".
Even more interesting to me is this fact: that 14% is less than the 17% who admit to being heavyset, stocky, or carrying "a few extra pounds". Hmmmm... Why would more people be willing to actually say they're overweight than to define their political beliefs? Aren't most single people afraid they'll be negatively judged (and maybe even rejected) more because of their body type than anything else? I certainly hear that a lot from my dating coaching clients, especially the women.
Another dating coach who weighed in on this thinks that, because those interviewed for the study were using a free dating site, they'd be less likely to post their political preferences because they're often just dabbling in dating, not yet interested in a serious relationship, and thus not as apt to fill out the entire questionnaire for their profile. And I'm sure that's part of it.
But, why is it that only 43% of those who DID list their politics (a mere 7.3% of the total people surveyed) actually defined themselves as liberal or conservative? The same coach thinks it's because it could limit a person's dating pool if they define themselves too specifically. She's got a point there. If you say you're at a certain end of the political spectrum, you might only attract those at the same end, and you'd never have a chance with those in the middle or at the other end. So, if you're conservative, only other conservatives would contact you. But, is that a bad thing? Wouldn't you be more compatible with a like-minded person? And isn't it better to know up front the types of beliefs a prospect holds rather than to be sadly surprised on date 2 or 3? Isn't it a waste of your time and energy to be meeting a bunch of people who ultimately don't have that much in common with you and instead to zero in on those who do?
This, of course, all depends on how important you think a person's politics are in terms of compatibility. There are certainly people on both ends of the spectrum who wouldn't feel at all comfortable hanging out with their polar political opposite--for fear they'd argue about things in the early months of dating and maybe even disagree about values, lifestyles, ways to raise children, etc. in the later stages. Certainly, for young daters looking for a spouse, this makes sense. It's easier to envision a long-term partnership or marriage with a person who shares your world view than with someone who doesn't. Why set yourself up for fights and failure?
A separate study at another university supports this assertion. It found that political attitudes were the strongest shared trait among spouses--even higher than good looks or personality. In other words, when people are looking for marriage partners, they're drawn to those with the same political attitudes...which suggests that couples most likely to commit long term actually share the same political views at the start of the relationship as opposed to growing closer politically over the course of time. Knowing that, then, wouldn't it be smart for those seeking an LTR or marriage who have specific political beliefs to indicate that in their profiles in order to attract someone they're more likely to click with...and to "weed out" those they're more likely to argue with?
What do you think? Are similar politics important to you? Do you feel uncomfortable with someone with dissimilar political or world views? If you're a liberal, would you be unlikely to reply to or write to someone who checked the "conservative" box on his or her profile? How about the "middle of the road" box? Also... have you ever had a relationship where political disagreement was one of the major reasons for breaking up? I did myself in the first 2 years I was dating after divorce, but he didn't reveal his views for almost 9 months...I guess for fear that it'd drive me away (which it did). Obviously, in that case, his pretending to be OK with the views I'd been voicing since Day 1 backfired in the end...and what he feared actually came true anyways. I'd love to hear your take on this. Drop me a line!
Postscript: One other interesting finding from the University of Miami study: older online daters and those with higher education levels were more willing to express a definitive political preference (perhaps, in my opinion, because they're more comfortable with who they are and thus less concerned about others judging them and also because life has taught them that it's easier to get along with like-minded people and that it takes too much energy to deal with those with conflicting viewpoints). Certainly, when I got married the 2nd time at age 51, I expressed my political preference and wrote only to like-minded men. If you're an older dater, I'd love to hear your take on this.
Even more interesting to me is this fact: that 14% is less than the 17% who admit to being heavyset, stocky, or carrying "a few extra pounds". Hmmmm... Why would more people be willing to actually say they're overweight than to define their political beliefs? Aren't most single people afraid they'll be negatively judged (and maybe even rejected) more because of their body type than anything else? I certainly hear that a lot from my dating coaching clients, especially the women.
Another dating coach who weighed in on this thinks that, because those interviewed for the study were using a free dating site, they'd be less likely to post their political preferences because they're often just dabbling in dating, not yet interested in a serious relationship, and thus not as apt to fill out the entire questionnaire for their profile. And I'm sure that's part of it.
But, why is it that only 43% of those who DID list their politics (a mere 7.3% of the total people surveyed) actually defined themselves as liberal or conservative? The same coach thinks it's because it could limit a person's dating pool if they define themselves too specifically. She's got a point there. If you say you're at a certain end of the political spectrum, you might only attract those at the same end, and you'd never have a chance with those in the middle or at the other end. So, if you're conservative, only other conservatives would contact you. But, is that a bad thing? Wouldn't you be more compatible with a like-minded person? And isn't it better to know up front the types of beliefs a prospect holds rather than to be sadly surprised on date 2 or 3? Isn't it a waste of your time and energy to be meeting a bunch of people who ultimately don't have that much in common with you and instead to zero in on those who do?
This, of course, all depends on how important you think a person's politics are in terms of compatibility. There are certainly people on both ends of the spectrum who wouldn't feel at all comfortable hanging out with their polar political opposite--for fear they'd argue about things in the early months of dating and maybe even disagree about values, lifestyles, ways to raise children, etc. in the later stages. Certainly, for young daters looking for a spouse, this makes sense. It's easier to envision a long-term partnership or marriage with a person who shares your world view than with someone who doesn't. Why set yourself up for fights and failure?
A separate study at another university supports this assertion. It found that political attitudes were the strongest shared trait among spouses--even higher than good looks or personality. In other words, when people are looking for marriage partners, they're drawn to those with the same political attitudes...which suggests that couples most likely to commit long term actually share the same political views at the start of the relationship as opposed to growing closer politically over the course of time. Knowing that, then, wouldn't it be smart for those seeking an LTR or marriage who have specific political beliefs to indicate that in their profiles in order to attract someone they're more likely to click with...and to "weed out" those they're more likely to argue with?
What do you think? Are similar politics important to you? Do you feel uncomfortable with someone with dissimilar political or world views? If you're a liberal, would you be unlikely to reply to or write to someone who checked the "conservative" box on his or her profile? How about the "middle of the road" box? Also... have you ever had a relationship where political disagreement was one of the major reasons for breaking up? I did myself in the first 2 years I was dating after divorce, but he didn't reveal his views for almost 9 months...I guess for fear that it'd drive me away (which it did). Obviously, in that case, his pretending to be OK with the views I'd been voicing since Day 1 backfired in the end...and what he feared actually came true anyways. I'd love to hear your take on this. Drop me a line!
Postscript: One other interesting finding from the University of Miami study: older online daters and those with higher education levels were more willing to express a definitive political preference (perhaps, in my opinion, because they're more comfortable with who they are and thus less concerned about others judging them and also because life has taught them that it's easier to get along with like-minded people and that it takes too much energy to deal with those with conflicting viewpoints). Certainly, when I got married the 2nd time at age 51, I expressed my political preference and wrote only to like-minded men. If you're an older dater, I'd love to hear your take on this.
Friday, September 2, 2011
Why don't men attend singles events?
In my 8+ years in the post-divorce dating world and my 6 years as a dating coach after my 2nd marriage, I've either attended or hosted hundreds of singles events. And I've noticed something undeniable: at least 70% of the attendees are women. Why is this?
Well, from surveying men about why they didn't sign up to attend the various events I hosted in the past, I found out there were 4 main reasons:
1) It was too far away from home & they didn't feel like driving
2) They didn't want to have to get dressed up
3) Their fear about being one of a minority of guys in a roomful of women deterred them
4) If there wasn't an "activity" as the focus of the event, they felt awkward just mingling with strangers
It's unfortunate that these things keep men from taking advantage of a great opportunity to meet dozens of high-quality women. But I guess I can understand some of the hesitance on the guys' part. It takes a lot of confidence and someone pretty outgoing to feel comfortable meeting strangers for the first time. And men have had to put up with rejection from women for years in the dating world, and they'd rather not set themselves up for more of it.
One type of singles event I found got a pretty good turnout from men was a potluck dinner party held at my home. It was casual and informal and easier to talk to people in a home atmosphere. They could always chat about the food item they brought or the array of edibles other people brought as they lingered around the serving table. And they could chat with me during awkward moments and ask me about a certain woman who caught their eye and even get an assist with an introduction to her if they wanted.
What do you think, guys? Is a potluck dinner type of event something you'd be more likely to attend rather than a dance, outing to a music venue, or singles outdoor or sporting event? What kinds of venues and activities do you like best? I and all the single ladies who continue to try new events in hopes there will be some guys there would LOVE to know! Drop me a note and share your thoughts. Thanks!
Well, from surveying men about why they didn't sign up to attend the various events I hosted in the past, I found out there were 4 main reasons:
1) It was too far away from home & they didn't feel like driving
2) They didn't want to have to get dressed up
3) Their fear about being one of a minority of guys in a roomful of women deterred them
4) If there wasn't an "activity" as the focus of the event, they felt awkward just mingling with strangers
It's unfortunate that these things keep men from taking advantage of a great opportunity to meet dozens of high-quality women. But I guess I can understand some of the hesitance on the guys' part. It takes a lot of confidence and someone pretty outgoing to feel comfortable meeting strangers for the first time. And men have had to put up with rejection from women for years in the dating world, and they'd rather not set themselves up for more of it.
One type of singles event I found got a pretty good turnout from men was a potluck dinner party held at my home. It was casual and informal and easier to talk to people in a home atmosphere. They could always chat about the food item they brought or the array of edibles other people brought as they lingered around the serving table. And they could chat with me during awkward moments and ask me about a certain woman who caught their eye and even get an assist with an introduction to her if they wanted.
What do you think, guys? Is a potluck dinner type of event something you'd be more likely to attend rather than a dance, outing to a music venue, or singles outdoor or sporting event? What kinds of venues and activities do you like best? I and all the single ladies who continue to try new events in hopes there will be some guys there would LOVE to know! Drop me a note and share your thoughts. Thanks!
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Texting vs. Calling in the Pre-Dating Stage
In my role as a dating coach, I've been getting a lot of feedback recently from single women in their 40s and 50s about my newsletter article "Whatever Happened to Old-Fashioned Courtship" -- especially regarding the fact that more men these days seem to use text messages rather than phone calls to correspond with women they've "met" online...before they've actually meet in person.
It's not that the women are against texting per se. Their complaint is that the guys seem to just want to text for days or weeks without asking for a phone number so they can set up an in-person meeting for coffee and conversation (and to find out if they have chemistry). Naturally, the women get the feeling the men aren't interested in meeting them at all. And, sadly, that turns out to be true in most of the cases I'm hearing about.
What's the reason for this? Are the guys truly NOT interested? Are they for some reason hesitant to talk on the phone or to meet? Or is this just the new way of doing things in the 21st century dating world? Well, I did some research and heard various explanations from both male and female dating coaches and also from single men themselves. Here are some of the points they made:
1) Texting is a very casual type of communication, and a lot of men get into the habit of texting because it's easier (requires less effort) than having a phone conversation. It's an easy way to flirt without taking it any further.
2) Many guys (especially shy ones) prefer texting because it allows them to think about the wording of what they want to say vs. having to think on the fly in a live conversation. (Of course, the same can be said for e-mailing.)
3) Men think that women will be more likely to respond to a text and it's easier to get a fast reply any time of the day or night because most women have their cell phones with them all day, including at work.
At first look, all of these seem to be logical reasons for texting rather than calling. And they seem perfectly OK to do with someone you know well or have been dating for a while. The problem for the women I've talked to is that they think it's inappropriate in the early days or weeks of getting to know someone (before you're actually dating) because:
1) It's too informal for asking a woman out on a first or second date. Most women say they prefer a phone call, so they know the man actually wants to hear their voice, have a conversation, and get to know them better. Using a cell phone screen and 140 characters per message doesn't allow for that. They say they can tell SO much more about the person through voice tone and inflection, conversation and listening style, etc. during a phone call.
2) It gives an implied sense of intimacy that isn't there yet. When a woman answers every text a man (who's still a stranger) sends her, he gets the message "You seem to be OK with letting me follow you around all day with short, inconsequential messages via cell phone, even though you haven't even met me." And so he continues to do that without taking it to the next level and initiating a phone call, meeting, or date.
3) It gives the man less of a reason to need to take a woman out on a date. By his way of thinking: Why would he need to go out with you when you talk to him all the time anyway?
What do think, ladies...is this accurate? And guys: what's your take on this issue? Do you text a lot more than you talk with new women you've contacted via online dating sites? If so, why? If you really want to get to know a woman, are you more likely to have an urge to talk with her on the phone or in person rather than via text messages? How do you ask a woman out nowadays? I'd enjoy hearing any and all comments. Thanks!
P.S. I love this quote from one female dating coach: "Conversations are for dates, not for cell phone screens." Just think of all the body language you're missing when you're texting rather than talking in person (since communication experts tell us that at least 70% of what we say is nonverbal)!
It's not that the women are against texting per se. Their complaint is that the guys seem to just want to text for days or weeks without asking for a phone number so they can set up an in-person meeting for coffee and conversation (and to find out if they have chemistry). Naturally, the women get the feeling the men aren't interested in meeting them at all. And, sadly, that turns out to be true in most of the cases I'm hearing about.
What's the reason for this? Are the guys truly NOT interested? Are they for some reason hesitant to talk on the phone or to meet? Or is this just the new way of doing things in the 21st century dating world? Well, I did some research and heard various explanations from both male and female dating coaches and also from single men themselves. Here are some of the points they made:
1) Texting is a very casual type of communication, and a lot of men get into the habit of texting because it's easier (requires less effort) than having a phone conversation. It's an easy way to flirt without taking it any further.
2) Many guys (especially shy ones) prefer texting because it allows them to think about the wording of what they want to say vs. having to think on the fly in a live conversation. (Of course, the same can be said for e-mailing.)
3) Men think that women will be more likely to respond to a text and it's easier to get a fast reply any time of the day or night because most women have their cell phones with them all day, including at work.
At first look, all of these seem to be logical reasons for texting rather than calling. And they seem perfectly OK to do with someone you know well or have been dating for a while. The problem for the women I've talked to is that they think it's inappropriate in the early days or weeks of getting to know someone (before you're actually dating) because:
1) It's too informal for asking a woman out on a first or second date. Most women say they prefer a phone call, so they know the man actually wants to hear their voice, have a conversation, and get to know them better. Using a cell phone screen and 140 characters per message doesn't allow for that. They say they can tell SO much more about the person through voice tone and inflection, conversation and listening style, etc. during a phone call.
2) It gives an implied sense of intimacy that isn't there yet. When a woman answers every text a man (who's still a stranger) sends her, he gets the message "You seem to be OK with letting me follow you around all day with short, inconsequential messages via cell phone, even though you haven't even met me." And so he continues to do that without taking it to the next level and initiating a phone call, meeting, or date.
3) It gives the man less of a reason to need to take a woman out on a date. By his way of thinking: Why would he need to go out with you when you talk to him all the time anyway?
What do think, ladies...is this accurate? And guys: what's your take on this issue? Do you text a lot more than you talk with new women you've contacted via online dating sites? If so, why? If you really want to get to know a woman, are you more likely to have an urge to talk with her on the phone or in person rather than via text messages? How do you ask a woman out nowadays? I'd enjoy hearing any and all comments. Thanks!
P.S. I love this quote from one female dating coach: "Conversations are for dates, not for cell phone screens." Just think of all the body language you're missing when you're texting rather than talking in person (since communication experts tell us that at least 70% of what we say is nonverbal)!
Thursday, June 9, 2011
What we look for in a spouse
How have men and women's requirements for a spouse changed over the last 70 years? Well, a 2010 study of this recently came to my attention, and its results are fascinating AND helpful for those seeking a mate.
The study of 3 generations of college-age singles was conducted by Dr. Christine B. Whelan at the University of Pittsburgh and Christie Boxer at the University of Iowa. Here are some highlights:
o Men rank a woman's intelligence #4 out of 10 top qualities they look for in a potential wife, above looks (#8). Women rank intelligence at #5.
o Both men and women highly value maturity and dependability, ranking it #3 on the list of desirable traits.
o Both sexes list sociability as #6 on their lists (showing that we all want a partner who'll actively participate in our social lives).
o Men seek women who are accomplished, interesting, supportive, and loving.
o Women seek men who are good partners, meaning they aspire to have a home and family and an egalitarian relationship with shared responsibilities.
o While men rank "a pleasing disposition" as #5 on their list, women rank it #7, indicating that women are more willing to deal with a spouse whose personality can be challenging at times (maybe they really DO love "bad boys"?)
o Both men and women agree that the most important reason to marry is for love.
I find this all very intriguing...certainly helpful information to pass onto singles in the dating world. So...how would YOU rank these traits on YOUR list for a potential mate? Here are some of the traits the study participants ranked:
- Desire to have a home & raise children
- True love
- Emotional maturity/dependability
- Sociability
- Good looks/strong attraction
- Good health
- Good financial provider
- Ambition/industriousness
- Pleasing disposition
- Intelligence
If you're looking for love the 2nd time around, I'd love to hear how the traits you desire in a mate have changed in 20 or 30 years.
Another interesting point made in the article I read about this study: Though both men and women say they desire deep, passionate love, they're not sure how to make love last over the long term. The article's authors who teach a "Marriage Prep 101" workshop, say "We teach people that love is not just a feeling; it's also an action. Staying in love requires both partners to be intentional and proactive within their relationship."
This is definitely what I've experienced in my marriage. Occasionally, those passionate loving feelings are not as strong, and at those times I need to CHOOSE to love my husband. I need to DO things that will keep our connection strong and our feelings alive (such as "Mystery Dates", a focus on our commonalities, special words, loving cards, a backrub, or time carved out just for him). We need to take actions that make the other person feel loved, appreciated, and treasured each day. And we need to be totally present with each other...not just "two ships passing in the night" in the midst of our busy lives.
Most of all, we need to choose each other first, make special times together a priority, and not take our relationship for granted. Yes, it's a conscious effort every single day. But, because our marriage is the central, anchoring relationship in our lives, we think it's worth it. :-)
The study of 3 generations of college-age singles was conducted by Dr. Christine B. Whelan at the University of Pittsburgh and Christie Boxer at the University of Iowa. Here are some highlights:
o Men rank a woman's intelligence #4 out of 10 top qualities they look for in a potential wife, above looks (#8). Women rank intelligence at #5.
o Both men and women highly value maturity and dependability, ranking it #3 on the list of desirable traits.
o Both sexes list sociability as #6 on their lists (showing that we all want a partner who'll actively participate in our social lives).
o Men seek women who are accomplished, interesting, supportive, and loving.
o Women seek men who are good partners, meaning they aspire to have a home and family and an egalitarian relationship with shared responsibilities.
o While men rank "a pleasing disposition" as #5 on their list, women rank it #7, indicating that women are more willing to deal with a spouse whose personality can be challenging at times (maybe they really DO love "bad boys"?)
o Both men and women agree that the most important reason to marry is for love.
I find this all very intriguing...certainly helpful information to pass onto singles in the dating world. So...how would YOU rank these traits on YOUR list for a potential mate? Here are some of the traits the study participants ranked:
- Desire to have a home & raise children
- True love
- Emotional maturity/dependability
- Sociability
- Good looks/strong attraction
- Good health
- Good financial provider
- Ambition/industriousness
- Pleasing disposition
- Intelligence
If you're looking for love the 2nd time around, I'd love to hear how the traits you desire in a mate have changed in 20 or 30 years.
Another interesting point made in the article I read about this study: Though both men and women say they desire deep, passionate love, they're not sure how to make love last over the long term. The article's authors who teach a "Marriage Prep 101" workshop, say "We teach people that love is not just a feeling; it's also an action. Staying in love requires both partners to be intentional and proactive within their relationship."
This is definitely what I've experienced in my marriage. Occasionally, those passionate loving feelings are not as strong, and at those times I need to CHOOSE to love my husband. I need to DO things that will keep our connection strong and our feelings alive (such as "Mystery Dates", a focus on our commonalities, special words, loving cards, a backrub, or time carved out just for him). We need to take actions that make the other person feel loved, appreciated, and treasured each day. And we need to be totally present with each other...not just "two ships passing in the night" in the midst of our busy lives.
Most of all, we need to choose each other first, make special times together a priority, and not take our relationship for granted. Yes, it's a conscious effort every single day. But, because our marriage is the central, anchoring relationship in our lives, we think it's worth it. :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
