I do agree with many of these.
I do agree with many of these.
Well, I like makeup on guys, rings, too, and shiny, pointy shoes. I lived in Europe and enjoy a Speedo on a hot bod...
If he doesn't like my cats and thinks Obama is a socialist, he's out. But really, what makes a guy undateable is really so....not anything I can describe. He, for whatever reason, doesn't carbonate my hormones. (TM Bloom County.)
I was flipping through this book while I was at Barns & Nobles this afternoon.
Hah, if women adhere to what's written in the book then 99% of them would be single right now, LOL. I see a lot of young and youngish men with rings, especially on their thumbs. Why is that a turn off? I don't think wearing socks with sandals is necessary bad either. A hot guy can wear anything. I do agree about skullets (mullet but with a bald head) and bushy back hair though.
you know who's "undateable"?
The narrow minded prigs who think this kind of superficial selection process is Ok.
You know we all have them, single friends who bitch and moan about how the can never find the right person, and then every time they find some sucker to go out with them, they dump them for these kind of idiotic reasons.
Sometimes you just gotta have superficial standards. Like two internet dates I met. One wore a kilt (to a rock concert...in Philadelphia, not on St Patty's day) and the other showed up in shorts with knee high white socks (like the 70's gym socks with red stripes at the top), sneakers, and the m&m's candy guys pictured on his t-shirt. These were the first impressions the men presented to me? Each man was in his late 30's-early 40's.
Shallow, yes I suppose, but some things I just can't handle. But I don't think its narrow minded (I even told kilt-man that he really deserved to be with someone who was comfortable with him, in whatever he chose to wear). I guess that's why I'm still single at 33. But...I couldn't see myself married to a future 50 year old that still dressed like high school.
I think it's depend on the guy and the situation. It looks good on Jeff Probst when he wears it on Survivor. Now if some random Jason Alexander look-alike was wearing it while walking downtown, I would say "Um...Really?" .As are men who wear necklaces past the age of 25. You're out of college now, put down the puka shells and step away....
I feel the same way with men and earrings. If you're a teen, in your 20s or young 30s and decent shape then yes you can carry it off. When you're Harrison Ford's age and still has an earring? Uh ...No.
I don't get why ordering salad is undateable. There are places that just have really great salads. Especially when they have those tasty tart little apples and blue cheese. And walnuts. And are not salad-like.
"The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practicing sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play." –Olympic Charter
^ I wonder if she wrote the funny Seinfeld episode where everyone hates Jerry for ordering salad.
The only one I'd agree with is the "men who don't like animals." That would be a deal breaker with me, as it points to the guy's character. All the rest are just fickle habits to nick-pick on to justify dumping someone.
Some of the reasons in the article are petty and shallow, but so what? A lot of women do dump men (or don't even go out with them in the first place) for those reasons, whether they admit it or not. There's no denying it -- appearance and manners do make a difference.
"Nature is a damp, inconvenient sort of place where birds and animals wander about uncooked."
from Speedy Death
I certainly have nothing against guys who order salads and wear rings. So what? He eats healthy, and has a bit of jewellery is okay! (As long as he doesn't wear as much bling as Mr. T, I am fine with it).
Hmmm, one of the things I think makes a man undateable is a tendency toward shallow, superficial assessments of women. Because most women really hate it when guys dump them for shallow, stupid reasons.
Trolling dates all the way back to 397 B.C. - People began following Plato around and would make fart noises after everything he said.
Treating animals as emotional or physical punching bags =
I won't date a guy who doesn't read. I've tried, but it just doesn't work for me. And I don't care if he likes Tom Clancy or Dostoevsky - just as long as he's capable of settling into a book of some kind instead spending his free time glued to the TV or getting antsy and bored when I'm immersed in a book.
"...some people are moulded by their admiration, others by their hostilities.”
― Elizabeth Bowen, The Death of the Heart
I wouldn't go so far as to say that I wouldn't date somebody because of it but seeing "definitely" spelled as "defiantly" drives me CRAZY The pronounciation is completely different so how do you mess up the spelling??
I wish they'd clarified more what they mean by not liking animals. If they mean that the guy actively hates and mistreats animals fine, that can be a dealbreaker. But I don't see what's wrong with just not being fond of them... I think dogs and cats are cute but I would never want to own one because I wouldn't want to get up early in the morning to have to walk them, scoop their poop or clean their hair off of all my furniture, too much bother. I sure hope that doesn't make me undateable!
All of the other stuff on the list, the speedos, socks in sandals, chest hair, I can overlook if the guy's personality makes up for it. My one dealbreaker would be smoking. I'll occasionally smoke a cigarette at a party but I would never smoke if I know I'm going to have any sort of physical proximity with a date/boyfriend. In fact I recently refused a chainsmoker who asked me out because the smell of cigarettes wafting off of him as he sat next to me made me want to retch.
Does anybody else feel that that's a reasonable dealbreaker?