The problem with that recommendation, Totage, is that I have now run out of ladies to email. I'm either waiting for new women to join the site or for the ones I've already emailed to get back to me.

As I understand it, you ladies on these dating sites sometimes get scores of emails every day. (All I have is anecdotal evidence of this, so if this turns out to be hyperbole, please forgive me.) The end result is that you don't have time to sift through the chaff and so many emails just get ignored.

What, then, is the secret to NOT getting ignored. I've had a little bit better luck around JSH than I have elsewhere (OKCupid and eHarmony) but considerably more than half of my emails never get a response.

Without posting any specific examples, what sorts of things am I [probably] doing wrong? What sorts of "right" things do you look for in an email that makes you want to respond? Or is it a totally subjective, indescribable feeling you get about an email when you read it?

I vote for Jasmine. She wears that sexy top that shows off her belly and she's got such exotic eyes.

Now that I think about it, I don't want a girl to be indifferent to my appearance. I like to dress up sometimes and I don't want the effort to be unappreciated. Furthermore, as previously noted, a healthy romantic relationship probably SHOULD have some sizzle. I don't want my romantic partner to be indifferent to my looks. I want her to find me physically appealing.

Rejection wouldn't be so bad if it always came in the form of "You seem like a sweet guy, but I don't think you're my type." Unfortunately, responses vary. Sometimes, you'll just get ignored, sometimes you'll get the disdainful eye-roll. I once tried introducing myself to a lady and she just said, "Whatever you're selling, I don't want any." You get to feel like the dog who's been kicked for no good reason.

Without delving too deeply into the argument, Abracadabra, your initial argument is logically incorrect. You are trying to define (sex) as the sin and (out of wedlock) and (within marriage) as the intent. That is not the case. (Sex) without further identity can not be described as sinful or not-sinful. Specification is required. Therefore (Sex out of wedlock) is sinful but (Sex within marriage) is not.

Another way of looking at this, which is more legalistic, but which adequately describes the situation, is that within the Christian framework, only married people are "licensed" to have sex. Having sex without that license (ie: the approval of God) makes the action a sin.

TexasRose, I think that you've really described the situation well. Allow me to back up what you're saying from the men's perspective.

Ordinary, healthy people want romantic relationships with people who are both emotionally supportive (nice) and sexually fulfilling (spark & spice.) As you've noted, however, we have come to expect "what we want, when we want, with whomever we want." That kind of mentality leads us to make rash decisions. If you look at somebody's profile picture and you don't find them attractive or their personality seems kind, but bland, then it's easy to dismiss that person as unexciting.

Our "when we want it" attitude prevents us from even giving the other person a chance.

As LongHairBiker notes, however, it's also possible to idealize the qualities that we believe make a person nice. He cites "honesty" and I think he makes a good point. The truth is not always comfortable. Yes, the person telling the truth might need to be gentler in his delivery. Ultimately, however, trying to argue or throwing an insult back is not an appropriate response to somebody's honest opinion.

I have also run into the difficult position where my partner is emotionally supportive but even after careful consideration, there is little or no attraction. It doesn't make somebody a bad guy (or a bad girl) to back away from the relationship in this situation. As a self-proclaimed "nice guy," I only intend to have sex with one woman in my entire life and I expect that woman to be attractive to me.

The one with the little girl asking the police officer to tie her shoe is especially adorable. Children are amazing.

In the film, "What Dreams May Come," Robin Williams' character dies and finds himself in Heaven. His guide there explains that people undertake tasks as they travel through the afterlife.

Robin Williams says something to the effect of, "There's work to do? I like that."

A good relationship is the same way. It is not effortless. Pursuit of an effortless relationship is immature. In fact, like Robin Williams' character, we should be EAGER to work when we found ourselves in romantic paradise.

Funny that you should ask. I'm actually playing in a weekly tournament next week. Wizards of the Coast sponsors an event called "Friday Night Magic." Participating stores can either run a Type 2/Standard constructed tournament or a booster draft.

The entry fee at the store where I play is less than the after-tax cost of two booster packs but EVERY player gets two booster packs just for playing (and then the top 4 get a few extra packs.) It's a great deal and you get to play cards all night to boot!

It is my opinion that we actually have things too good here in the United States. Our quality of life is such that it's easy not to care about the erosion of our rights. Comfort has made us complacent.

People talk a big game about voting but for many, that's just because they want to feel involved and to pretend that they matter. If one votes Republican and that state goes blue (blue=Rep and red=Dem, right?), then that person can feel a sense of contribution and accomplishment. It is democracy theatre.

Before we can even get people to voice their opinion about their rights, we need to make them CARE about their rights. Although I've made a token effort, I'm only really beginning to appreciate my rights and duties as a citizen. I'm tired of settling for the illusion of democratic choice and I'm disappointed at the number of people that I see who seem completely satisfied by the DC song and dance routine.

I've heard of it, but I have only played it once. It's pretty intimidating for a new player (even a seasoned game-player, like myself.) I think I was eliminated in three rounds. I was playing as Austria and it was later explained to me that either Turkey or Austria goes pretty early and, well, as the new player, I negotiated poorly.

The political landscape of American politics is dominated by two primary parties. This is largely a function of the voting mechanism employed by American elections. The plurality system is simple to implement, but it results in circumstances in which a voter is encouraged to vote for a candidate whom he does not rank highly just to prevent the victory of a candidate whom he ranks even lower. (Many people to whom I have spoken state that they voted for John Kerry in the last presidential election not because they like him but because they liked George W. Bush even less.)

I could delve into a discussion of different voting systems and how they could remedy the problem, but I would rather address the problem as it stands now.

It is my opinion that my vote is my VOICE. To vote for a candidate of whom I do not approve is a lie. With this in mind, I hold that is dishonest (morally incorrect) to vote for a candidate whom one does not endorse. The desired ends, preventing a candidate whom one actively dislikes from becoming president, does not justify the means -- lying on one's ballot. A vote for a third party is not a waste simply because if you WANT to vote for a third party candidate, then it is the only morally correct vote to cast.

Opinions?

There was also a TV program that was inspired by the movie. Don't forget to mention that the woman that they create with their weird computer science also possesses potent technomagical powers.

Sincereman51, it is absolutely true that I doubt myself when it comes to approaching a stranger. It just seems like completely unnatural behaviour to me. I'm aware of my strengths and I'm pretty sure I'm as good as the next guy, but I feel bizarre talking to a stranger. It's not even like it's ME being rejected, really, because whomever I'm trying to talk to doesn't know who I am. I just have a hard time overcoming the notion that I am going to seem like a crazy man trying to strike up a conversation with somebody I don't know. (It's not as easy as just saying to my rational self that everybody else does it, so it can't be THAT crazy. I'm a stubborn cuss.)

I am paying a visit to my baby sister in North Carolina for Thanksgiving. She visited me last year because I had just moved to Minnesota. Now, I get to return the favour. I love to cook and Thanksgiving dinner is a HUGE opportunity. (For anybody who may be roasting a turkey for the first time, Alton Brown's recipe is excellent.)

By the way, when I say "fake it," I don't mean to say that I would put on a phony persona. What I mean is that no matter how afraid I was, no matter how much my bowels were quaking with anxiety, that I would carry out the conversation. And then, afterward, I'd go throw up in the bathroom if I needed to, but at least I'd have practiced conversing with a stranger, like a normal person.

I'm honestly too afraid to get up off my bar stool to walk over and start a conversation. Are you saying that I should just stay where I am?

This is a practical joke. You build up the listener's expectations and then you end the joke without satisfying their curiosity.

<quote> Sincereman51 wrote:
Just be yourself. If you do that and you're happy with who you are as a person, you should already be confident and if the other person doesn't like you, so what. Not everyone will like you so it's no big deal. </quote>

This is, unfortunately, just the sort of advice that I have difficulty putting into practice. Perhaps it is true that I SHOULD be confident already, but the fact of the matter is: I am not. Perhaps this is abnormal, although I have a notion that a lot more people feel this way than one would guess from hanging out in clubs or bars.

What's the secret to getting out of this rut? To use somebody else's term, should I "fake it until I make it?" Can I practice "pretending" to be confident until it just becomes part of who I am?

(Maybe I would need a professional to answer this one.) Do you think that my lack of confidence stems from a core dislike of myself? You suggest that if I'm happy with who I am, then confidence should come naturally. If I am not confident, in your opinion, does that mean that I am suppressing self-dissatisfaction?