Estimated reading time: 13 minutes
Hi Doc,
I’m writing in because I’ve hit a wall in dating and I’m not sure what to do about it. I (32/cis/man) have been on and off dating apps for the past handful of years. I recently went on a run for about 2 months late last year where I went out with 15 different women. I redownloaded the app last week and had my first date of 2024 last night. I enjoyed it, we talked about a lot of things, I left with a good feeling. I wasn’t over the moon or anything but I felt there were enough positives that I would offer another date. Today I got a “thanks, but no chemistry” response. Even though I wasn’t gaga for her I still felt some hurt over it, which brings me to the subject of the letter.
Are my expectations for a first date too low? Here’s what I’m generally looking for
– Is she the same person advertised in the profile?
– Am I attracted to her in person?
– Is she easy to talk with?
– Do we share a lot of common ground with our interests and passions?
If those things are true, I’m happy with the date and I don’t see a reason not to pursue things further. First dates for me are usually some sort of physical activity or coffee, or dinner. There’s only so much you can do or get across to another person in 1-3 hours. I’ve consistently gotten the “no spark” feedback in my experiences in dating and I’m really starting to run myself down for it. I have to be the problem, right? I think there’s one of two things going on
– My expectations are too low (in my control)
– My dates’ expectations are very high (not in my control)
As far as what’s in my control, I think I live a pretty full life. I dance, I perform improv and standup comedy, I cook, I work out, I’m in shape, I have close friends, I socialize as much as time and energy permits. I get a lot of matches and dates with attractive women. What is it about me that makes them take a nibble of the food and set it back down? Is this a matter of how I’m seeing myself, as that guy who isn’t worth another look?
The thought of raising my expectations sounds like the last thing I should do. Last night I wasn’t feeling a spark either but I just don’t see that as a reason to write someone off that quickly, but if the women I go out with have full inboxes maybe they can afford to do that. I’m not sure where to go with this but it’s not making me feel very good about me.
What Do We Want?
It’s really frustrating when you meet someone who you like – even if you only kinda like them – but they just don’t feel the same about you. It’s even tempting to take it personally; after all, you’re on a date. How can it not be personal? The thing is that people can and will be uninterested in you for reasons that aren’t about you as a person so much as what they want and what you want. Sometimes those things don’t line up.
You’re right, WDWW: there’re things that are under your control and things that are outside of your control. The problem I think you’re running into – at least as far as understanding what’s going wrong – is that you’ve created something of a false binary here. It’s not necessarily about you setting your expectations or standards too low or someone else setting theirs too high. Too high and too low aren’t useful metrics to work from. What is “high” for one person can seem gob-smackingly low to others. Low, similarly, is another metric that’s entirely personal, and doesn’t mean that your idea of what “low” means jibes with theirs. The line from “When Harry Met Sally” about how someone can think they’re low maintenance but actually are high maintenance comes to mind.
Plus I think that a lot of times, the idea of someone’s expectations or standards being “too” high or “too” low comes with subtext of judgment, especially when applied to women and dating.
A lot of the complaints I see about women having their standards “out of whack” comes from dudes who think they deserve a supermodel while they’re not willing to put in a commensurate amount of effort to attract one, while resenting that their “looksmatch” wants nothing to do with them.
(To be clear: I’m not saying that you are doing this or thinking this. This is just one of the reasons why I find that the high/low dichotomy isn’t a helpful way to think about your situation.)
Sometimes it’s just about what you’re expecting or looking for, and whether those line up with what the other person is looking for. It’s not about high or low, so much as someone wants A while you want G. Think of it this way: if you’re in the mood for butter chicken or lamb biryani, you’re probably not going to go to your local kosher delicatessen. That doesn’t mean that there’s something wrong with the deli, or with wanting biryani; they’re just not serving what you’re after.
If someone is looking for something that isn’t what you have to offer, or doesn’t mesh with what you’re looking for, then that doesn’t mean that there’s a fault in you or in them. There’s no good guy or bad guy, no right or wrong here, just a mismatch. Even if you’re cool with them, their not being equally cool with you doesn’t imply fault or flaw, it just means that the x-factor they need isn’t there. It would be like blaming yourself for having hazel eyes instead of black or blue ones.
Another potential mismatch might be the level of intensity of attraction someone may want or expect. Some folks may feel that they need to feel chemistry instantly, like a lightning bolt from the heavens themselves. That’s all well and good. Speaking strictly for myself, I think that’s a recipe for going on a lot of frustrating first dates. But the fact that someone wants something we may think is unrealistic or “unreasonable” doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s that way for them; they may have reasons why accepting less than ends up badly for them. But if you’re someone who’s more of an acquired taste or you have more of a slow-burn attraction style, that’s not someone who’s going to be a great match for you.
A third possibility is that you’re not necessarily working to create that chemistry. There are a lot of people who struggle with dates in part because they are reticent to be overt about their interest, to flirt or create the potential for that lightning bolt to strike. It can be useful to look at some of how you act on dates; if you’re very hands-off/ uncontroversial conversational topics/ pleasant-but-unexciting dates, then you may not be building the mix of physical and emotional attraction that might lead to another date. Exciting beats pleasant every time – both in terms of personality, but also dates.
And of course, as I’m often saying: part of the problem with online dating is that you can’t tell whether you and someone else are a good match without meeting in person. Even video chats aren’t going to convey more than a very basic vibe check. As the sage once said: love isn’t brains, it’s blood, screaming at you to work its will, and a lot of what attracts us to one person but not another are subtleties that can only be detected when we’re in physical proximity with one another.
This is why I’m a big believer in a pre-date date (or a vibe-check or whatever you may want to call it) for online matches – the 15 minutes for coffee or ice cream or what-have-you to see if you’re as good a match in person as you are on paper.
And to forestall the obvious: yes, you can have runs of bad luck that last for unreasonable amounts of time. People can have slumps that last weeks, months or even years. That doesn’t automatically mean there’s something wrong with them; sometimes it really is just shitty luck. It’s improbable, but that’s the thing about probability; improbable isn’t the same as impossible. I’ve personally seen people who were lovely – both in terms of conventional attractiveness and in personality – who struggled for years to go beyond a first date. They would take breaks from dating, come back when they were ready and became a lot more discerning in who they would give a full evening to… and eventually they found the folks who were right for them.
So with all that in mind: what do you do? Well, the first step is to be mindful about what is under your control – how you behave on the dates, who you’re choosing to see and when, what kinds of dates you take them on and so on.
The next is to change things up. As I’m always saying: if you want different results, you have to do things differently. Online dating may not be right for you – God knows more and more people are opting out because of the various frustrations and headaches that dating apps bring. You may do better to meet people in person, where you might not only have a better gauge on your compatibility, but where you would feel less pressure to make things “happen” and have time to actually let a connection build. Plus, it would mean that you would have greater odds of serendipity and meeting folks who might not be your normal “type”.
You might also examine what kind of relationships you’re looking for or the level of connection or attraction you’re feeling for someone. If you’re looking for a committed, long-term relationship, then you may want to prioritize people you feel more strongly about or that you’re more actively interested in – a “fuck yes”/”fuck no”. It’s much easier to build and convey that sense of “lightning from a clear blue sky” when you feel it too. It’s harder to build that when you’re feeling “well, they’re nice enough, I guess”.
But also, pay attention to how you feel about yourself. This is something that comes up all the time: if you’re not feeling great about yourself, it’s a lot harder to attract others and convey why they should be into you. You don’t need to see yourself as a 10 at all times, but you really need to be willing to see yourself as much more than a 2.
Consider someone like Jack Black, who has confidence and presence in spades. He may be strongly flavored, but he’s someone who’s energy, confidence and charisma are palpable. It carries people along, inspires them and makes them much more interested in him; he wouldn’t be nearly as magnetic on screen if his entire persona was apologizing for existing. It’s the cup of tea/shot of whiskey divide or perhaps tap water vs. an IPA. Not a lot of folks get excited for tap water and not everyone likes IPAs… but the folks who love IPAs will actively seek it out and choose it before anything else.
You already know that lots of attractive women are into you enough to at least go on a first date. Now it’s a matter of making sure you’re finding the right women to date and conveying the fun, energy and excitement that will give them reason to crave another date with you. And if you want them to see it… well, make sure you’re seeing it in yourself, too.
Good luck.
Hello Doctor,
I’ve always wondered if there was a difference between feeling sexual attraction and lust. I’m 30 years old, and since I was 15 I’ve always had a porn addiction. I think it has taken a bad influence on how I view the world and how social media has become a toxic drug. After doing some self-awareness and mindfulness, I realize that I’ve been looking at female bodies instead of them as people. Soon I’ll be a month of getting over my addiction one day at a time. I continue to set small goals while focusing on school and hobbies, but sometimes I do get attracted to random women easily (not sure if that’s sexual/romantic or lust, though).
Am I on the right track? Is this what I should be doing?
Addiction Overload
Alright, AO, I’m going to push back a little on the terminology you’re using. I would honestly question whether you had an addiction to porn – something that psychologists and psychiatrists generally agree doesn’t actually exist. People can and do have problematic relationships with pornography and use it in ways that’re detrimental to their well-being… but addiction is a loaded term and one that tends to be misused often.
I mention this because a lot of folks toss “porn addiction” around as a part of a way of stigmatizing people’s relationships with sex and sexuality and their own their own sexual needs. The NoFap crowd is a great example of this; what may seem like a support network for people with problematic relationships to porn is often far more about stigmatizing sexuality and hating women than it is finding a healthy relationship with sex and sexual expression.
In fact, the prevalence of “porn addiction” and “sex” addiction” tend to correlate a lot to feelings of guilt and religious belief; it’s the idea that there’s a “right” way to experience sexual attraction or arousal and a “wrong” way, and experiencing it the “wrong” way makes you a “bad” person. In reality, there is no standard level of sexual desire or sexual expression. Some folks have high libidos, some folks have low ones. Some people have responsive sexual desire and others have spontaneous sexual desire and still others have very limited sexual desire that may be situational or require more than just physical attraction. When we start to pathologize sexuality and sexual expression, we tend to end up creating situations where folks feel like their perfectly normal and healthy sexuality is somehow “wrong”.
That’s actually I’m picking up from your letter; you talk about being attracted to random women as though this were a problem, instead of just a sign that hey, you’re a primate with a sex drive.
Here’s the thing: being attracted to people, finding their bodies desirable or otherwise just good old-fashioned horniness isn’t an issue in and of itself. Expecting to not be attracted to anyone until you know them as an entirely holistic individual isn’t exactly realistic. When we first encounter someone, one of the things we have to go on is how they look – and especially how they look to us. It’s not every often that you can look at someone and see that their post-graduate degree from Oxford after all, but we often can look at someone and know if we find them attractive or not.
That’s not a bad thing or a sign of disrespect. We’re not beings of pure intellect and reason, we’re also giant walking bags of meat and chemicals and sometimes that meat wants to slap up against other bags of meat in interesting ways. So it’s not inherently bad if you see someone and your immediate reaction from your limbic system is “jaw-drop-wolf-whistle-lip-bite” like you’re in a Tex Avery cartoon.
The difference comes in how we treat people. Treating people like something to be consumed is a problem. This is what objectification means – you’re treating them like a mindless object, not an individual with agency, dreams, wants and ambitions. If the only way you’re relating to women is “animated Fleshlight to jerk off into” then yeah, that’s a problem. But seeing a woman and thinking “damn, she’s hot”? Not an issue in and of itself… especially if you are able to also see that she’s an individual and more than just something that makes your penis smile.
And that’s ultimately what makes the difference between lust and basic attraction. Attraction is part of the holistic individual; you may love them for their mind but you want them for their ass. Lust is about fulfilling a desire, regardless of anything else – including acknowledging or crediting the other person’s humanity and individuality. It’s consumption and need, not something shared between two (or more) consenting individuals.
Keep that in mind and you should be fine.
Good luck.
www.doctornerdlove.com
