A Revival - Reality Check II

[Vaughn]

In early 2006, BC began a thread called Reality Check, which I thought had much merit.
Rather than resurrect it by reply, I've decided to revive it as a new thread - as many (if
not all) of the resultant links are now outdated.

What Men See vs. What Men Seek

Perhaps ogling photos in an agency website is a foolish way to begin a search... why not
state your criteria first, disregarding all photos - and see where you are led ?

In BC's original words:

Ok here's the deal..

Discussion is how pictures affect your choice.. vs ladies criteria you really desire.

1.  In most browsers it is possible to turn off images..  This should hide the pictures..  If you visit agency sites  regularly you may have to clear your browser cache.
(if you don't know how to do any of this ask and someone here will hopefully help you.)

2. Pick an agency site with a good search engine and search YOUR criteria for your "Dream Lady".  Review the resulting profiles (without pics). Feel free to use more than one agency site.

3. Pick your top 5 or 10 profiles based on your non visual criteria and save the links..

4. Post your best links in this thread. (DON'T PEEK!!!!!)

5. Turn the images back on and see what the ladies look like!

Doesn't matter if you're married or just looking.. just consider it a game where  honesty counts.  If you wish to include the criteria you used (age ranges, language abilities etc) it would be great but not essential.. you can explain the search criteria you used in your post with the links you produced.

BE HONEST!!! when posting your links.. that way it will be more fun for us all.

[Gator]

Vaughn,

I missed the 2006 thread.  Drat!

This is a wonderful idea.  I am guilty of surfing the photos and stopping to read only when a photo appealed to me.   

Sounds bad on my part?

Actually, I was not that bad because 67% of the time I stopped to read.  Nevertheless, I am sure that unconsciously I was less critical with those who ranked higher on the beauty scale.

[I/O]

Doesn't matter if you're married or just looking.. just consider it a game where  honesty counts.

Oh Yeah? Try that line when Russian Mrs looks over your shoulder at the PC screen.

[GQBlues]

Not sure how credible the merit would be for obvious reasons, Vaughn.

The fact is, even here at home, physical attraction is definitely the primal cursory attractant that grabs my attention which in turn dictates my ensuing actions. If I'm not attracted to the woman, it matters little if that particular woman have a greater compability sets with me.

Surfing agency pages, as many are fairly aware and just like any other web-based dating sites - local or otherwise, people generally write down fairly idealistic criteria and more often than not, profiles are sweetened and tempered to juice up the person. The 'Best Foot Forward Syndrome'...For FSU agencies, chances are the profiles are written by other people and not necessarily the person itself.

Unless of course if this is just for the sheer exercise...then forgive my intrusion.  

[docetae]

Oh Yeah? Try that line when Russian Mrs looks over your shoulder at the PC screen.

even worst ... try to explain it when she will find the browser history...:
- What is it !!!????
- I was doing a blind test ...
- A blind what ?
- To see if a woman can be interesting and beautiful
- I am not interesting and beautiful ? You are looking for a new wife ?
- I did not want to say that ...
- What did you want to say ?
- I just wanted to play ..
- You want to cheat with other women ?
(sound of rolling thunder and eternal damnation..)

[Vaughn]

The fact is, even here at home, physical attraction is definitely the primal cursory attractant that grabs my attention which in turn dictates my ensuing actions. If I'm not attracted to the woman, it matters little if that particular woman have a greater compability sets with me.

GQ, therein lies the problem most searching men face - wading through countless glamour pics of
Elvgren-esque ladies, most of whom fail his requirements. While I don't suggest this method as a
means to an end, the merit stares us in the face - so you whittle down the field based on your
stated parameters, view only those qualified - and see who you come up with...  I know, I know,
that eliminates all the "fun" of clicking on the bikini-clad eye candy...

As for marrieds playing around with this - those words were BC's, not mine. And I share your concerns.
My wife is understanding to a point - and shopping profiles exceeds that point by GOB's country mile...

[Shadow]

Before searching through profiles, do a test on recognizing real and fake smiles, and if a picture it 'posed' or 'real'.
If you score well in both, study the pictures for women that are not posing and smile genuine. While this will exclude those who had professional photos made on advise of their agency or friends, it will weed out a lot of bad apples.

[Mars]

Not sure how credible the merit would be for obvious reasons, Vaughn.

Surfing agency pages, as many are fairly aware and just like any other web-based dating sites - local or otherwise, people generally write down fairly idealistic criteria and more often than not, profiles are sweetened and tempered to juice up the person. The 'Best Foot Forward Syndrome'...For FSU agencies, chances are the profiles are written by other people and not necessarily the person itself.

Unless of course if this is just for the sheer exercise...then forgive my intrusion.  

This echoes my thoughts exactly.  Many, many women do not write their own profiles.  Even those that do, do not give it careful consideration.  Even men well versed in English often do not give their profiles careful consideration re the wording.  The deal is; you go to a new website to look.  But many times to look, they require you to fill out a profile.  So you write down words off the top of your head.  You think, "When I get ready to correspond, I'll go back and fix up the words."  But you never do.  Same with the women.

[Mars]

Before searching through profiles, do a test on recognizing real and fake smiles, and if a picture it 'posed' or 'real'.
If you score well in both, study the pictures for women that are not posing and smile genuine. While this will exclude those who had professional photos made on advise of their agency or friends, it will weed out a lot of bad apples.

And pictures are also a somewhat unreliable screening device.  Many, many women I have met don't look much like their pics.  Some better, some worse.

The end result of reading profiles and looking at pics:  It is a total crap shoot.  You pays your money and you takes your chances!!

[groovlstk]

Not that it matters, but it would be easy to skew your search results by including a few of those ubiquitous profile words like "shaping" or "active rest" or "cozy home." 

[Vaughn]

groov,

  Somewhere way back in the archives, way before your marriage, you had me ROTF
with a short profile statement by some gal whose Papa worked long stretches at sea
and Mum - "she's the chief accountant."

  I stated this method had some merit, and BC alluded to "some fun". It's definitely not
a science, as soulmate searching is never that. Some of the parameters include items
like age, place of residence, occupation, wants children or not, has children or not,
status (single, divorced, widowed) - I don't see these items as being haphazardly
filled in just to activate a profile. I concede that paragraphs like "About Myself" might
be authored whimsically by an agency shill. Entering keywords, admittedly, could also
bring these into the mix.

 My thoughts were that the photos skew the search by default - including attractive women
who otherwise fulfill few if any desires (other than the physical) by the searcher. As Mars
stated, even photos can mislead - as in the "borrowed" photo, the "aged" photo, the
studio "airbrushed" creation, the "best profile" pose, and also not to be dismissed, the
bikini/lingerie shot designed to perform like a good freshwater trout hook.

 It's nice to read a TR where the guy exclaims "she looks better than her pictures". That
was my experience in meeting Elvira the first time.

[GQBlues]

Vaughn-

I do believe that this landcsape is continually evolving. The introduction of webcams can definitely exorcise most skepticism people may harbor regarding photos of convenience. You can't hide much when speaking in front of a camera 'live'. In some degree, daily conversation on a webcam can also render a peek into the person's behavior and mannerrism.

Also another venue or tool available today which wasn't available during my search, is venues like Facebook/MySpace. This gives a person another way to look into the person's personal association, and more importantly the type of people he/she is surrounded by. Another good way to get an idea into the person's social life and surrounding.

As for the exercise, one thing that would be interesting to insert in your search criteria are phrases like go to nature, go in for sports, etc... I'm willing to bet that would pull in most if not all of the profiles. LOL.