Cheap online daters

THE MIND OF THE ON-LINE DATER

Why would anyone go on-line to date someone else? Assuming that they are not desperate for “love,” what possible rational motivation could they have? It seems to me that the same basic condition which applies to on-line dating also applies to Bitch. What is that basic condition?

It is anonymity. All of us on Bitch have our pseudonyms, our false names which in many cases reflect our false or at least markedly modified “personas.” But why do we seek anonymity? What have we got to hide? I think the answer to that is simply our real-world selves. As a result there is a fundamental schizophrenia involved in on-line communication reflected in the real-world self as opposed to the cyber-world self. The one may, or may not, be related to the other. Usually not. We seek protective cover for our real-world selves for a number of reasons, principal among which is the fear of being the object of scorn or ridicule, something we may have expeienced in real life. So why go on-line at all?

Some say that it simply a matter of being lonely but I think that is superficial. On-line communication would never remedy loneliness because of the conceptual distance built into such commnication. Only physical presence can remedy loneliness. Others say it is more a social matter, one of curiosity to hear what others have to say. But what do they have to say? Well, what some have to say involves only the trivia of life – minding one’s manners in supermarket checkout lines or criticizing others’ bad driving habits. Still others pride themselves on their ecological awareness by riding a bike. That, of course, is the real message of bicycle riders’ bitches about bad-mannered car drivers. Nauseatingly, they want us to know how ecologically aware they are.

Then there are those engaged in the gender wars. Each day brings out the usual crop of bitchers, usually female, who have been wronged in one way or another, whose bitches invariably take the standard form of the standard “men are pigs.” Some, like the present bitcher, don’t even get that far. They’ve been stalked by on-line cheaters who won’t even pay the membership fee for the on-line dating service. That’s a dry heave.

Finally, we come to people like me, the intellectual top-of-the-line on Bitch. We go on-line to hear what others are thinking. Of course, the realization that they are not thinking about anything much quickly becomes apparent. So where do people like me go from there? Well, we use on-line sites like this to structure and cultivate our own reflections. There’s the old saying to the effect that you don’t know what you think until you write it down. So for the top-of-the-line people like me it’s all about reflexive conceptual exploration – reflecting on one’s own reflections and giving them shape and point. Just like I’m doing now, as a matter of fact.

But as regards the initial question as to the mind of the on-line dater? Forget it. Intellectually speaking, there’s no one home and if there’s no one home intellectually, there’s no one home, period.

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!

RSVP

: Boru (09/09, 2:54PM)

“Not all females on dating sites are money grupping (sic) airheads; like I’m sure, not all men on those sites are out for a quik (sic) romp in the hay.” Boru

Good afternoon Boru. Thank you for addressing me as a worldly intellectual but, since the phrase was in scare quotes, I’m not sure if it was intended to be taken literally. But I’ll take it that way since, as we all know, it is an accurate reflection of my reality.

In any case, I draw your attention to your comment which I’ve quoted above. There are two key words. Do you know what they are? Right, they are the same word: “all.” Worldly intellectuals like me, those top-of-the-line commentators on Bitch, would never claim universality in respect to their assertions, judgements or claims. It is true, of course, that there are those who go on on-line dating sites are not all money grubbers or those out for a quick romp in the hay. But, of course, this was never my point. What was my point?

My point was the nature of on-line communication itself. I initially characterized it as “schizophrenic” in the sense that the on-line “persona” usually bore little if any relation to the real-life poster. Take me. Many think I’m a cold-hearted rationalist whereas the truth is I’m a loveable, funny, romantic sentimentalist. It is also true, however, that I’m not mindless.

In addition and entailed in the schizophrenic nature of on-line communication, is the unavoidable conceptual distance between those doing the communicating. This is not to say that there are no exceptions to this conceptual distance, cases where it might be transcended but, in matters romantic, I think it would be just that, an exception. But, as I say, we worldly intellectuals make no blanket assertions.

So, to conclude, it was never my intention to issue a black/white dichotomy in respect to those who go to on-line dating services, to say nothing of those who go on Bitch which is similar but, of course, by no means identical since the motivation is different. To reflect upon and structure that comparison would be an interesting intellectual exercise as I’m sure you would agree but it must wait for another time.

I hope that this has clarified matters for you, Boru. Do not hestitate to reply if you have further difficulties in this regard.

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!

RSVPs

: Good dog Molly (09/09, 8:31PM)

Good morning, Good dog. Unfortunately, you were wrong on both counts. My “assinine” was a genuine mistake, not a typo. It’s a word I never use – I consider it, well, pompous – and you can see the double “s” is cognitively more appropriate than the single “s”. You can see that, can’t you Good dog?

As far as Boru is concerned, after two or three spelling mistakes it’s not a matter of being a “typo” anymore but rather an indication of serious grammatical – not to say intellectual – shortcomings. I’m sure you agree with my analysis.

: Stephen Harper (09/09, 8:39PM)

If you pull down your pants, Stephen, bend over, and look over your shoulder in the mirror, you will see it.

: Boru 1014 (09/09, 10:08PM)

See my note to Good dog above. I am still waiting for your clarification of my being “hilariusly asinine.” Let me give you a hand. Members of the lower orders often find the locutions of their intellectual superiors a matter of ridicule. This is not because they are, in fact, ridiculous but rather because they appear to be so in the eyes of semi-literates. Do you think I’m on the right track?

: Daniel Abraham (09/10, 3:59AM)

Daniel, you are slipping back into incoherence again. I will not try to explain why this is so because you will not understand. A contributing factor, however, might be your lack of sleep.

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!

RSVPs

: Mad Dog Molly (09/10, 9:57AM)

Good afternoon, Mad Dog. Well, you certainly seem to have made a meal out of this one. Do I detect a head of steam there, Mad Dog? Could you, as incredible as it might sound, be harbouring ill feeling towards Montrealman? Incredible, just incredible.

Anyway, I’ll just comment briefly on your salient points:

Well yes, you were wrong since I admitted it was not my typo but my error. In my view, however, it indicates a certain nobility of character on my part rather than a dastardly desire to ridicule anyone. But, of course, you will think what you like.

However, I was (mildly) interested in your theorizing about the relationship between spelling and education. Now this is my cup of tea. I must say, however, that I did not find it (your theorizing) compelling. You claim that there is a relationship of dependence between the two but that is is not “absolute.” Now this is (or could be) interesting.

Sadly, however, we were then treated to your vacuous assertion that it’s “a matter of how one’s brain functions.” Well, of course, this immediately leads us into different territory entirely since the links between neurological functioning, education and spelling is unrelated to the narrower question under review, i.e., education and spelling “simpliciter”. (That’s Latin, Mad Dog.) You must try to stay on topic.

Anyway, one could reply and say that yes, that’s true in an obvious, tautological sense – if one’s brain didn’t function then one’s spelling, one supposes, goes out the window. But, of course, more is required, specifically some demonstration of just how one’s brain does function and how its ;proper functioning issues out into one’s spelling, one way or the other. Sadly, we never find out.

From there on it’s all downhill. We are treated to a series of speculations, invariably introduced by the word “perhaps” and in respect to which the obvious response is, ” Well, yes, perhaps.” Not very satisfying, Mad Dog.

I must say, however, that your aborted venturing into the realm of educational philosophy did give me a moment of amusement.

: Captain Planet (9:58AM)

Do I “support social classes?” Whatever can that question possibly mean? Do you mean that I think that they exist?. I ask you, Captain, does the pope live in Rome? Am I a “closet aristocrat?” Well, Captain, does that mean that, while you clearly think I am an aristocrat, my sin is concealing it? I suppose you’re right, Captain. I had better come out of the closet now. Thanks for your advice.

(10:04AM)

You charge me with a “grave error,” that of purportedly criticizing someone’s grammar on an online forum. Passing by the accuracy of your charge, would it be possible to give a Taxonomy Of Errors such that my error registered “grave” on the scale of such errors? I think that we’re entering the interesting waters of moral philosophy here, Captain, and I await your taxonomy with anticipation.

On the other hand, in the absence of supporting evidence, it seems to me that anyone who charges another – on an on-line site or not – with committing a “grave error” is himself guilty of committing a grave error and, of course, must be punished accordingly. You do understand that, don’t you Captain?

: Boru (10:23AM)

But Boru, I never said that you were stupid because you couldn’t spell. See my comments for Mad Dog above for a fuller rendering of the relationship between spelling and intelligence.

I was puzzled by your comment to the effect that there are kids with degrees who can’t spell. Who might they be? Well yes, I suppose kids with degrees in Business and the like. I take your point.

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!