![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
In what world is this NOT TMI? (OKCupid)
Oct. 2nd, 2007 03:20 amSetup: I'm talking to an interesting OKCupid denizen who's an author, and who despite being rather full of himself is rather witty and seems worth chatting with.
In the first conversation we have, Author-Fanboy tells me "Oh, the first time I met [well-known science fiction author] I was nude at the time" and goes on to share an amusing story regarding being at a convention and skinnydipping, and being called out of the pool by an acquaintance of his to meet WKSFA.
Now, however improbable, this story doesn't bother me because (a) it's about the person himself's naked bits and (b) he's not sharing anything that a dozen or two people didn't already see at the time.
Problem: During our second conversation, he discusses someone known to both of us-- a woman who's dating a guy I plan to meet up with on Saturday. Now, I'll take my lumps here, I may not have clearly explained that while I know OF this person, I don't actually KNOW her. (In other words, he may have felt that he was talking to someone who knew her, which may have made him more comfortable sharing things about her.)
However, Author-Fanboy goes on to tell me...uh, well, I don't want to say exactly, but he told me quite a bit about a PRIVATE conversation between him and this certain woman, and specifics about certain of her body parts.
"Whoa, TMI!" says I, upon hearing this.
"What?" he responds. "I told you the story about me and WKSFA, you didn't object to that!"
Am I weird for thinking that telling amusing stories about yourself naked in public is WAY different from telling stories about people's private conversations and encounters with you?
And more to the point, ought I to let the woman in question know about it or would that be equally creepy? And how would one do that without mortally embarrassing us both? He says that she's "okay with" such things, but not having heard it from her, I'm wary.
In the first conversation we have, Author-Fanboy tells me "Oh, the first time I met [well-known science fiction author] I was nude at the time" and goes on to share an amusing story regarding being at a convention and skinnydipping, and being called out of the pool by an acquaintance of his to meet WKSFA.
Now, however improbable, this story doesn't bother me because (a) it's about the person himself's naked bits and (b) he's not sharing anything that a dozen or two people didn't already see at the time.
Problem: During our second conversation, he discusses someone known to both of us-- a woman who's dating a guy I plan to meet up with on Saturday. Now, I'll take my lumps here, I may not have clearly explained that while I know OF this person, I don't actually KNOW her. (In other words, he may have felt that he was talking to someone who knew her, which may have made him more comfortable sharing things about her.)
However, Author-Fanboy goes on to tell me...uh, well, I don't want to say exactly, but he told me quite a bit about a PRIVATE conversation between him and this certain woman, and specifics about certain of her body parts.
"Whoa, TMI!" says I, upon hearing this.
"What?" he responds. "I told you the story about me and WKSFA, you didn't object to that!"
Am I weird for thinking that telling amusing stories about yourself naked in public is WAY different from telling stories about people's private conversations and encounters with you?
And more to the point, ought I to let the woman in question know about it or would that be equally creepy? And how would one do that without mortally embarrassing us both? He says that she's "okay with" such things, but not having heard it from her, I'm wary.
Two rants and an "awww, sweet" for the price of one here, folks.
( Short rant re: poly )
( the aww-sweet part )
( and now the real rant )
( Short rant re: poly )
( the aww-sweet part )
( and now the real rant )
(OKCupid) How stupid is that?
Sep. 16th, 2007 11:47 amSeen in a journal:
"I was totally amazed at the number of morons who thought that somehow because I was checking in late last night that I was just sitting here with the hopes of having some naked idiot with their cock in their hand messaging me."
Gee, maybe they felt comfortable telling you that they were naked because YOUR PROFILE PICTURE IS NAKED. (Or at least topless and showing off major cleavage down to mid-breast, where the pic is cropped. It could well be naked.) ETA: The self-righteous tart now says that she's wearing a pink-and-white halter top. Well, that would be nice, if the shirt was actually visible in the pic, but it's not. Deliberate cropping? No idea. She also says that you'd see more at the beach. Lovely, but we're not AT the beach.
If you are of the opinion that nudity is not offensive, then you'd better not be using it as a pejorative for other people and not yourself. If you are of the opinion that nudity does not mean sexuality for you, then you must be willing to allow it to mean sexuality for other people, so long as that opinion does not lead to actions that do you any harm, and not use that as an insult either.
Unless you just mean that other people's nudity is yucky because they're not as pretty as you, and I got news for that-- your attitude makes you ugly, and you're going to grow into a bitter, puckered old woman who doesn't get the attention she thinks she deserves.
And that's a lot sadder than a guy with a penis who knows what he wants to do with it.
"I was totally amazed at the number of morons who thought that somehow because I was checking in late last night that I was just sitting here with the hopes of having some naked idiot with their cock in their hand messaging me."
Gee, maybe they felt comfortable telling you that they were naked because YOUR PROFILE PICTURE IS NAKED. (Or at least topless and showing off major cleavage down to mid-breast, where the pic is cropped. It could well be naked.) ETA: The self-righteous tart now says that she's wearing a pink-and-white halter top. Well, that would be nice, if the shirt was actually visible in the pic, but it's not. Deliberate cropping? No idea. She also says that you'd see more at the beach. Lovely, but we're not AT the beach.
If you are of the opinion that nudity is not offensive, then you'd better not be using it as a pejorative for other people and not yourself. If you are of the opinion that nudity does not mean sexuality for you, then you must be willing to allow it to mean sexuality for other people, so long as that opinion does not lead to actions that do you any harm, and not use that as an insult either.
Unless you just mean that other people's nudity is yucky because they're not as pretty as you, and I got news for that-- your attitude makes you ugly, and you're going to grow into a bitter, puckered old woman who doesn't get the attention she thinks she deserves.
And that's a lot sadder than a guy with a penis who knows what he wants to do with it.
OKCupid-- hm, that's trustworthy.
Sep. 4th, 2007 10:55 amReading random journal posts, I ran across this interesting post from a bisexual man:
He quotes an OKCupid question asking how a person would feel if their date asked them to get tested for STDs before having sex: positive feelings, negative feelings, or neutral?
His answer: Well, I'm a blood donor, so I already get tested.
Let's play "spot the fallacy" here:
1) Donated blood isn't tested for all STDs. It's tested for hepatitis, syphilis, and HIV. Yes, that's good. However, it's not tested for chlamydia, AND-- naturally-- it can't be tested for HPV (Human Papilloma Virus). (As a side note, this really makes me wonder about the number of people who claim to be "disease free." How do they really know?)
So, a person who donates blood and says they're "clean of STDs" could in fact be infected with several and not even know it, unless they're getting screened some other way.
And that leads us to:
2) There's a screening question for male blood donors that asks if they've ever had sex with another man, even once, since 1977. Answering that they have bars them from blood donation, forever.
Now we can argue the ethics of whether two guys who are virgins and have sex together, and are thus at no increased risk, should or should not donate blood.
However, the fact remains that this guy's "trust me" response-- "I'm a blood donor and they test me"-- basically says "You can trust me because I lied to donate blood."
Um, yeah. Even if you lied because you knew what the blood bank was looking for, and you felt able to make that decision for yourself and declared yourself able to donate-- are you going to lie to me "for my own good" too?
On a related note, OKCupid has a "dead to me" button where people never come up again.
He quotes an OKCupid question asking how a person would feel if their date asked them to get tested for STDs before having sex: positive feelings, negative feelings, or neutral?
His answer: Well, I'm a blood donor, so I already get tested.
Let's play "spot the fallacy" here:
1) Donated blood isn't tested for all STDs. It's tested for hepatitis, syphilis, and HIV. Yes, that's good. However, it's not tested for chlamydia, AND-- naturally-- it can't be tested for HPV (Human Papilloma Virus). (As a side note, this really makes me wonder about the number of people who claim to be "disease free." How do they really know?)
So, a person who donates blood and says they're "clean of STDs" could in fact be infected with several and not even know it, unless they're getting screened some other way.
And that leads us to:
2) There's a screening question for male blood donors that asks if they've ever had sex with another man, even once, since 1977. Answering that they have bars them from blood donation, forever.
Now we can argue the ethics of whether two guys who are virgins and have sex together, and are thus at no increased risk, should or should not donate blood.
However, the fact remains that this guy's "trust me" response-- "I'm a blood donor and they test me"-- basically says "You can trust me because I lied to donate blood."
Um, yeah. Even if you lied because you knew what the blood bank was looking for, and you felt able to make that decision for yourself and declared yourself able to donate-- are you going to lie to me "for my own good" too?
On a related note, OKCupid has a "dead to me" button where people never come up again.
look it up! (okcupid)
Jul. 16th, 2007 12:03 pmDear Possibly-Interesting Person:
When you suggest to me that translating "intrepidis" as "intrepid" is NOT correct, and I allow that there are shades of meaning between the two languages, responding "look it up" is fine.
When you tell me that *I* am wrong when I say a mile is longer than a kilometer, and tell me "look it up"...
I'm not being a smartass when I cut/paste the Google nine-decimal answer. I'm rubbing your nose in it, you presumptuously pedantic silly person!
In other news, the new "WTF" feature on OKCupid-- where you can see the actual difference between you and another person, as long as both of you consent-- is scary.
Why?
The people who love children and want lots of them? They're the same ones who think it's okay to spank/hit your kid so hard it leaves a red mark for a few HOURS. (For reference' sake, I'm not completely anti-spanking.)
The people who want monogamy? They're the ones who would never tell if they cheated. And most of them would help someone else cheat (that is, they'd date a supposedly-monogamous person who was in a relationship with someone else, and who didn't want to tell their partner).
The people who say they're atheist/agnostic and "not too serious about it"-- would NEVER date a seriously religious person, no matter WHAT religion. Except that they'd date someone just for the sex (which lets out the common religious person's argument, "I wouldn't date someone who wasn't compatible with my faith, because I only date people I'd be willing to marry, and if we got married, it would be a point of disagreement"). However, they prefer to date virgins... Consistency, much?
I won't even mention the people who miss the logical fallacy in "would you date someone half your age"-- obviously, if you WOULD date someone TWICE your age, then you would like your match (who could theoretically be twice your age) to be okay with dating someone half THEIR age. Except, of course, that I just did mention it.
My eyes, they hurt. From rolling.
When you suggest to me that translating "intrepidis" as "intrepid" is NOT correct, and I allow that there are shades of meaning between the two languages, responding "look it up" is fine.
When you tell me that *I* am wrong when I say a mile is longer than a kilometer, and tell me "look it up"...
I'm not being a smartass when I cut/paste the Google nine-decimal answer. I'm rubbing your nose in it, you presumptuously pedantic silly person!
In other news, the new "WTF" feature on OKCupid-- where you can see the actual difference between you and another person, as long as both of you consent-- is scary.
Why?
The people who love children and want lots of them? They're the same ones who think it's okay to spank/hit your kid so hard it leaves a red mark for a few HOURS. (For reference' sake, I'm not completely anti-spanking.)
The people who want monogamy? They're the ones who would never tell if they cheated. And most of them would help someone else cheat (that is, they'd date a supposedly-monogamous person who was in a relationship with someone else, and who didn't want to tell their partner).
The people who say they're atheist/agnostic and "not too serious about it"-- would NEVER date a seriously religious person, no matter WHAT religion. Except that they'd date someone just for the sex (which lets out the common religious person's argument, "I wouldn't date someone who wasn't compatible with my faith, because I only date people I'd be willing to marry, and if we got married, it would be a point of disagreement"). However, they prefer to date virgins... Consistency, much?
I won't even mention the people who miss the logical fallacy in "would you date someone half your age"-- obviously, if you WOULD date someone TWICE your age, then you would like your match (who could theoretically be twice your age) to be okay with dating someone half THEIR age. Except, of course, that I just did mention it.
My eyes, they hurt. From rolling.
Awww! (seen on OKCupid)
May. 14th, 2007 10:38 amFrom Phunstuph's profile, this:
"On a recent outing to a national wildlife refuge my 14 year old daughter and I marveled at the awesome color this year. We talked about the fact that those were the leaves' natural color when the chlorophyll recedes. And so I wondered....do the years past 40 bring out our own splendid hues when the camouflage of youth fades a bit?"
I liked that enough to share it.
"On a recent outing to a national wildlife refuge my 14 year old daughter and I marveled at the awesome color this year. We talked about the fact that those were the leaves' natural color when the chlorophyll recedes. And so I wondered....do the years past 40 bring out our own splendid hues when the camouflage of youth fades a bit?"
I liked that enough to share it.
Dear OKCupid users...
Mar. 14th, 2007 05:53 amI'm very glad that so many of you call yourselves writers. I'm excited that you feel the creative urge and aren't shy about expressing it. I think more people should write and enjoy the abilities they have. I think it's also good for people to improve their English skills and thinking skills by striving to write better, but even if you don't wish to do that, it's still good to write.
However, if you claim to be striving for professional publication then it behooves you to spell-check your posts and edit them for clarity and content, or have someone do it for you. If you don't, you look pretty pathetic.
If you claim to BE professionally published, but your profile is full of cliches, misspellings, misused words, and piss-poor grammar, or includes some wording indicating that you just don't know how to describe yourself, then please realize that I'm going to write you off as a liar.
I don't judge people by their grammar so much as by who they claim to be. You're allowed to be dirty for many reasons, but not just because you didn't feel like taking a shower this week.
However, if you claim to be striving for professional publication then it behooves you to spell-check your posts and edit them for clarity and content, or have someone do it for you. If you don't, you look pretty pathetic.
If you claim to BE professionally published, but your profile is full of cliches, misspellings, misused words, and piss-poor grammar, or includes some wording indicating that you just don't know how to describe yourself, then please realize that I'm going to write you off as a liar.
I don't judge people by their grammar so much as by who they claim to be. You're allowed to be dirty for many reasons, but not just because you didn't feel like taking a shower this week.
Target audience.
Mar. 11th, 2007 10:08 amProfile here of an OKCupid member who knows what he wants and exactly what to say to get it, to wit:
"I have a trebuchet in my garage."
"I have a trebuchet in my garage."
rec me some un-romance books?
Feb. 5th, 2007 03:16 am( in which I blather about clichés in fiction )
( possible spoilers for Lackey's _Four and Twenty Blackbirds_ here )
So, are there more books like this out there? The obvious sort of plot device for this would be the clergyperson tempted to break vows who doesn't, but it seems like there are a lot more reasons two people shouldn't get into a relationship even if they like each other. Any recommendations, folks?
( possible spoilers for Lackey's _Four and Twenty Blackbirds_ here )
So, are there more books like this out there? The obvious sort of plot device for this would be the clergyperson tempted to break vows who doesn't, but it seems like there are a lot more reasons two people shouldn't get into a relationship even if they like each other. Any recommendations, folks?
and while I'm at it...
Jan. 23rd, 2007 11:26 amSorry for the easily amused, but there will be no more OKCupid posts.
I've deleted my account there.
I'm trying to go through my life and get rid of things that aren't bringing me... something. Whatever it is I'm using for joy, these days.
I've deleted my account there.
I'm trying to go through my life and get rid of things that aren't bringing me... something. Whatever it is I'm using for joy, these days.
seen in chat.
Jan. 9th, 2007 04:52 amAfter a discussion about why Scotland Yard became New Scotland Yard, which was settled by a reference to a Wikipedia article, the following ten funniest words I've ever seen in chat ensued:
"Wiki said I invented the telegraph."
(pause)
"...I'm banned from Wiki."
"Wiki said I invented the telegraph."
(pause)
"...I'm banned from Wiki."
Random IM question, after about 5 minutes of chatting: "How would you feel if your boyfriend was black?"
Me: "Quite surprised, because he was white last time I saw him."
IM: "What?"
Me: "I haven't always dated white people, but currently I am, and I would be very surprised to see someone change skin color while I wasn't looking."
IM: "Are you saying you don't want to date me because I'm black?"
Me: "No, I'm saying I don't want to date you because I'm already seeing someone."
IM: "Oh."
I give it an A for persistence, but an F for comprehension.
Me: "Quite surprised, because he was white last time I saw him."
IM: "What?"
Me: "I haven't always dated white people, but currently I am, and I would be very surprised to see someone change skin color while I wasn't looking."
IM: "Are you saying you don't want to date me because I'm black?"
Me: "No, I'm saying I don't want to date you because I'm already seeing someone."
IM: "Oh."
I give it an A for persistence, but an F for comprehension.
Dear interesting man with whom I initiated a conversation:
I initiated a conversation with you because you look at least nominally intelligent, which is something I like in friends, and also in people who are more than friends.
Had we hit it off fairly well, I'd certainly consider dating you.
However, I'm not going to ask you out on a date until I'm fairly certain I do like you in that sort of way. Unfortunately, it seems that you've already put me in the category of "people to whom I should rant that I am not getting any contact from people who are interesting to me."
Now, this wouldn't be so bad-- maybe I'm not your type, maybe my relationship model isn't your type, whatever. But when you mention that you've "lowered your standards as far as you possibly can" that's when I get a little bit insulted and a lot amused. Either you're totally missing when people hit on you, or you're grumpily trying to see if *I* am hitting on you. And, guess what, I don't respond well to insinuations that you've lowered your standards and, maybe, if I try harder, I might just make it.
In other words, Interesting Yet Clueless Man, had you been a little less whiny, I'd probably have hit on you about an hour from now. Oh well, maybe you'll figure this out in a week or two...
I initiated a conversation with you because you look at least nominally intelligent, which is something I like in friends, and also in people who are more than friends.
Had we hit it off fairly well, I'd certainly consider dating you.
However, I'm not going to ask you out on a date until I'm fairly certain I do like you in that sort of way. Unfortunately, it seems that you've already put me in the category of "people to whom I should rant that I am not getting any contact from people who are interesting to me."
Now, this wouldn't be so bad-- maybe I'm not your type, maybe my relationship model isn't your type, whatever. But when you mention that you've "lowered your standards as far as you possibly can" that's when I get a little bit insulted and a lot amused. Either you're totally missing when people hit on you, or you're grumpily trying to see if *I* am hitting on you. And, guess what, I don't respond well to insinuations that you've lowered your standards and, maybe, if I try harder, I might just make it.
In other words, Interesting Yet Clueless Man, had you been a little less whiny, I'd probably have hit on you about an hour from now. Oh well, maybe you'll figure this out in a week or two...
Hee, OKCupid!
Mar. 31st, 2006 05:52 pmOKCupid user: Hi!
me: Hi there!
him: So you like talking about sex?
him: ?
him: ?
me: heh. a little impatient?
me: I do on occasion, yes!
him: sorry
him: Do you have any sexy pictures to share?
me: Are you saying my pictures aren't sexy?
me: *shocked look*
Man, some people just don't know how to make with the flattery anymore!
me: Hi there!
him: So you like talking about sex?
him: ?
him: ?
me: heh. a little impatient?
me: I do on occasion, yes!
him: sorry
him: Do you have any sexy pictures to share?
me: Are you saying my pictures aren't sexy?
me: *shocked look*
Man, some people just don't know how to make with the flattery anymore!
(no subject)
Mar. 1st, 2006 01:41 pmFor those of you not in the Great State of Oklahoma, it is EIGHTY NINE degrees outside.
I'm not entirely sure this is a positive. I'm sure I'm overdressed.
I'm also sad-- I miss TBS, a little (c'mon, it's only been like a day), the weather's not raining enough, my friends have sad stuff of their own, so does the rest of the world, and sometimes I can't even do a little tiny bit to fix it-- sometimes I make it worse.
But a little thing happened this morning. I got an IM on OKCupid from someone. (For those keeping score at home, it didn't start with "hi"!) He's a Lutheran seminary student who has a polyamorous friend, and he wanted advice on making her feel comfortable going to church, which she wants to do, but is afraid to. We bounced some ideas back and forth and he's going to let me know what she thinks of the suggestions*.
Just thinking about that makes me smile. Praise the Divine Who made love, so that we could love one another!
*For the record: Bible Study, where it's more acceptable to go solo and "scope out" the place, less busy services, going to church events, helping with charitable works, mostly sticking with places where you have something else to talk about and can get to know people one at a time.
I'm not entirely sure this is a positive. I'm sure I'm overdressed.
I'm also sad-- I miss TBS, a little (c'mon, it's only been like a day), the weather's not raining enough, my friends have sad stuff of their own, so does the rest of the world, and sometimes I can't even do a little tiny bit to fix it-- sometimes I make it worse.
But a little thing happened this morning. I got an IM on OKCupid from someone. (For those keeping score at home, it didn't start with "hi"!) He's a Lutheran seminary student who has a polyamorous friend, and he wanted advice on making her feel comfortable going to church, which she wants to do, but is afraid to. We bounced some ideas back and forth and he's going to let me know what she thinks of the suggestions*.
Just thinking about that makes me smile. Praise the Divine Who made love, so that we could love one another!
*For the record: Bible Study, where it's more acceptable to go solo and "scope out" the place, less busy services, going to church events, helping with charitable works, mostly sticking with places where you have something else to talk about and can get to know people one at a time.
