Calling yourself "fun-loving" in a singles site profile

Mundane Pointless Stuff I Must Share (MPSIMS)
#21

But Freckafree, that’s the problem. The way someone writes is an indication of the kind of person he/she is. As you yourself said, if someone can’t string together a couple of coherent sentences, then that tells you something about the person.

Mind you, I’m not saying that one’s writing style gives you complete insight into another person’s character. However, it does tell you something.

Perhaps more importantly, when somebody exclaims, “Who cares about quality? You should be the one who strives to learn about the other person, instead of judging them based on the quality of what they wrote,” that says something as well. It tells me that this is a lazy person who doesn’t care about his or her work. Rather, this person wants others to make the effort to sift through his half-baked (and perhaps incoherent) ramblings, so that he doesn’t have to put his or her best foot forwards.

#22

Well then, consider people like tremorviolet. As she attested, she enjoys having fun but she’s by no means extroverted or a party girl.

That’s the problem with using vague phrases like these. They ultimately tell you nothing.

#23

“Fun-loving” = “easy lay”

Don’t you people speak English?

#24

How *you * doin’?

#25

Either that, or you’d get a lot of replies from Goth/Emo folks. Might be worth an experiment.

#26

Amen, JThunder! I hope my first post didn’t sound like I was disagreeing with you. (And if it did, I’m apparently the one who can’t string a couple of coherent sentences together. :smack: )

#27

At first, I thought you were disagreeing, but I think I understand where you’re coming from now. Glad we agree. :slight_smile:

#28

Yes. Specifically, “extroverted party girl who chats with everyone at a mile a minute and likes to go dancing and drinking till dawn at the kinds of after-hour clubs where there’s an even chance of gunfire occurring anytime after 2AM… and would never be caught dead at the library reading a good book.”

Not for me. I tend to avoid those kinds of profiles.

I once overheard a woman at my work who resembles this description (except for the drinking and gunfire) say, “I could never go out with an introverted guy.” I felt a pang of pain because she’s South Asian and not skinny and I was very attracted to her, but since I pegged the introvert meter when I took a personality test, it probably wouldn’t work. Opposites may attract, but they don’t last long together.

#29

I think this is because both employers and writing teachers are professionals, with a clear idea of what is the best future employee, or the best writing. So they encourage clarity and specifics because that saves them time. A resume saying " I’m highly qualified" annoys them, because it doesn’t provide the specific information they are looking for.

Men and women on dating sites looking for an SO, however, aren’t professionals, and they don’t have a clear idea of what the “best” candidate for them would be.
(Yes, I know some of them DO have clear and specific demands, for instance with regard to income figures and breastmeasurements. Such people will value clarity just as much as the professionals you listed as examples. )
However, most people want somebody who resembles them. Who has the same “feel” in the way they talk and think. And that includes thinking in the same concepts: be they fuzzy or outright nonsense (like the use of " fun-loving) or confused, or clear or all of the above, depending on the subject.

Language like this need not convey actual information; think of it more as language used as nest-scent.

#30

Empty descriptors like “fun-loving” et al. are a good way to weed out people who wouldn’t be interesting, but the problem is (at least at my age) that every single woman’s profile is loaded with them. Odds are better than even, too, that if you see one, the profile will be full of them, often to the exclusion of anything that sets her apart from the crowd.

Be glad, at least, that you know to never date this person.

#31

Maybe you’re right, though I don’t think I’m ready to agree just yet. It’s worth thinking about.

I’ll say this, though. If somebody actually prefers someone who chooses vague, vacuous and meaningless descriptions because that person *resembles * himself or herself… well, that’s kinda pitiful. (I apologize if this offends anyone, but really… How are you suppsoed to know that you truly resemble someone if his/her profile is laden with a whole lot of nothin’?)

#32

When I look at a woman’s profile, I’m not evaluating it to see if she’s a good fit. I’m looking for something that I can use to strike up a conversation, with the hope of meeting her and then seeing what I think. Knowing that she’s “fun-loving” doesn’t help at all with that.

Of course, it’s no problem if the rest of her profile does contain useful information, but like I said above, one empty descriptor usually implies a lot of empty descriptors.

#33

That’s actually my reaction to the phrase. Also “ever so slightly chubby.” No idea why that image comes to mind, but it is stranger with “fun loving gal” than “fun loving girl.”

#34

I think it’s because “gal” is usually found after “full-figured.” I don’t usually see “fun-loving” followed by another noun, unless it’s something like “I’m a fun-loving, full-figured gal.”

Blech!

#35

Maybe “fun-loving” is code for “I like to play around and am just looking for sex.”

#36

What’s the equivalent on male ads? I haven’t noticed one catch phrase that stands out like that, although there are a lot of “fun guy” generic activity phrases.

I have seen it in the women when I’ve gone to scope out the competition. It was so obvious that it had bothered me too. I had my profile written to kind of take a potshot at that, but you’ve inspired me to word that more strongly. Why would I want a man that’s attracted to mealy-mouthed women that bug the hell out of me?

#37

*Fun-Loving [ /i]is a code for " Likes it in the pooper".

likes to take walks is code for " Oral Sex God/dess"

#38

An (ex) friend of mine from back home weighs ~400 lbs*. She works for Curves. She proudly wears the Curves T-shirt - you know, has that silhouette of a thin woman on it? You should have seen some of the looks she got. My favourite happened to be an incident at the grocery store, in which she bought a few piles of pre-made fast food-style burgers, since they were on sale. She did the same thing at a Burger King drive-thru once, proudly wearing her bright blue shirt with Curves emblazoned across the front in hot pink, ordered ten Juniour Whoppers… and a diet Coke. The look on the cashier’s face at the window was peeeeeee-riceless.

    • Let it be noted, I have nothing against overweight/obese people, hell, I’m one myself, but I do have something against this one *particular * overweight person, hence my post. I’ll admit to a touch of hypocritical-ness if you admit it’s pretty funny. :wink:
#39

“John Smith was a prosaic man of average height and build, who faced no overwhelming challenges and had no particular asperations for life. He drifted through life, pausing only occasionally to gauge his own satisfaction, a question he always answered with a resolute ‘OK.’ This is his story.”

#40

I know this is in the wrong thread, and yet it seems significant taht it dropped in when it did…