100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Enough With The Cliches, Already | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I think it's time that those of us who are actually here for (hopefully) something more than pointless blatherings about what we would do to the person above us, called a moratorium on the endless string of useless cliches that seem to infest our forum posts like an epidemic of mental corrosion.
Three examples: 1. "It always shows up when you stop looking." Wrong. It does NOT ALWAYS show up. I'm living proof. Now, I'm not saying it NEVER happens that way -- any student of non-zero possibilities knows that it MUST occasionally happen that way, simply due to mathematical laws. Something with a zero possibility (i.e., "my dog will turn into a kayak next Thursday") will never happen, but something with a non-zero possibility (the classical example in physics is that of all the air molecules in a room moving to one side of the room -- it's unlikely, but there is nothing in the laws of physics which disallows it) most likely WILL happen if you wait long enough. But "It always shows up when you stop looking" is not an inevitable law of nature. It's a cliche, it's wishful thinking, and it may sometimes be accurate. But it is by no means universal. 2. "The common denominator in all your failed relationships is you." There has always been something about this statement that struck me as specious, but it took me awhile to figure it out. And here it is -- the common denominator in ALL OF YOUR ENTIRE LIFE'S EXPERIENCES is you. What does that mean, insofar as cause-and-effect is concerned? Not much! Let's say you've been a passenger in five different cars that were involved in five different accidents in your life. Well, sure, you've been unlucky, but.... There's a sort of implicit blame game going on in "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" -- in other words, since you were involved in all of these, then it's your own fault -- there's something inherently wrong with you, otherwise you could not possibly have engendered so many failures. Is it your fault that you were in the five accident-bound cars? (Other than that you chose to ride in those cars in the first place, for whatever reason?) See, the problem with "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" is that it completely ignores the possibility that the other party may have had some responsibility for the failure of the relationship. Rather than deal with "we just weren't compatible" or "they changed after awhile," or whatever, it turns into "Hey, it's your fault that none of them worked out." But what if those exes, the ones who were "your fault," had just as bad a track record in THEIR other relationships? So now "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" applies to both parties, but you can't really sustain accusatory blame ("you're the common denominator"!) with the obligatory stigma if it's spread around to all involved. I think we need to see this one for what it is -- it's just shorthand for "I'm too lazy to think up any useful comment or advice, so I'll just say something to make you feel bad about yourself." Yes, that's helpful. 3. "I like to see the glass as half full." It doesn't make any difference. If it's half full, it's also half empty; this is simple math. Whether you choose to put a positive spin on the imagery, it doesn't change the amount of fluid in the container. Also, it's one of those phrases that shows up in profiles almost as often as "I'm laid back and easy going," which is about as informative as the UPC code on the Shredded Wheat box. There are more. Lots more. They don't help, they don't provide anything in the way of relevant information or communication enhancement. They need to be retired. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. "I like to see the glass as half full." It doesn't make any difference. If it's half full, it's also half empty; this is simple math. Whether you choose to put a positive spin on the imagery, it doesn't change the amount of fluid in the container. Also, it's one of those phrases that shows up in profiles almost as often as "I'm laid back and easy going," which is about as informative as the UPC code on the Shredded Wheat box. I always loved this one too. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You would miss the cliche's Lex...You don't know what you got till it's gone and tommorrow will be a better day.
But, the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lex the common denominator of all your failed relationships and experiences is you the only time it matters is when you wish to make a change within yourself that you want to find the commonalities and differences and variables of what made those relationships fail.....what each of them had in common and what you don't want to look for.....you can only make change when you break down the commonalities differences what you liked and didn't like in order to find what you are looking for and decipher your own code
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's time that those of us who are actually here for (hopefully) something more than pointless blatherings about what we would do to the person above us, called a moratorium on the endless string of useless cliches that seem to infest our forum posts like an epidemic of mental corrosion. Three examples: 1. "It always shows up when you stop looking." Wrong. It does NOT ALWAYS show up. I'm living proof. Now, I'm not saying it NEVER happens that way -- any student of non-zero possibilities knows that it MUST occasionally happen that way, simply due to mathematical laws. Something with a zero possibility (i.e., "my dog will turn into a kayak next Thursday") will never happen, but something with a non-zero possibility (the classical example in physics is that of all the air molecules in a room moving to one side of the room -- it's unlikely, but there is nothing in the laws of physics which disallows it) most likely WILL happen if you wait long enough. But "It always shows up when you stop looking" is not an inevitable law of nature. It's a cliche, it's wishful thinking, and it may sometimes be accurate. But it is by no means universal. 2. "The common denominator in all your failed relationships is you." There has always been something about this statement that struck me as specious, but it took me awhile to figure it out. And here it is -- the common denominator in ALL OF YOUR ENTIRE LIFE'S EXPERIENCES is you. What does that mean, insofar as cause-and-effect is concerned? Not much! Let's say you've been a passenger in five different cars that were involved in five different accidents in your life. Well, sure, you've been unlucky, but.... There's a sort of implicit blame game going on in "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" -- in other words, since you were involved in all of these, then it's your own fault -- there's something inherently wrong with you, otherwise you could not possibly have engendered so many failures. Is it your fault that you were in the five accident-bound cars? (Other than that you chose to ride in those cars in the first place, for whatever reason?) See, the problem with "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" is that it completely ignores the possibility that the other party may have had some responsibility for the failure of the relationship. Rather than deal with "we just weren't compatible" or "they changed after awhile," or whatever, it turns into "Hey, it's your fault that none of them worked out." But what if those exes, the ones who were "your fault," had just as bad a track record in THEIR other relationships? So now "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" applies to both parties, but you can't really sustain accusatory blame ("you're the common denominator"!) with the obligatory stigma if it's spread around to all involved. I think we need to see this one for what it is -- it's just shorthand for "I'm too lazy to think up any useful comment or advice, so I'll just say something to make you feel bad about yourself." Yes, that's helpful. 3. "I like to see the glass as half full." It doesn't make any difference. If it's half full, it's also half empty; this is simple math. Whether you choose to put a positive spin on the imagery, it doesn't change the amount of fluid in the container. Also, it's one of those phrases that shows up in profiles almost as often as "I'm laid back and easy going," which is about as informative as the UPC code on the Shredded Wheat box. There are more. Lots more. They don't help, they don't provide anything in the way of relevant information or communication enhancement. They need to be retired. You know what? I truly agree with what you say. All of this stuff gets old fast. Folk need to step up, look at themselves and stop all of this useless blabbering. everything begins and ends with YOU. No one can do anything for you but You !!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some people can't think outside of the box. It could be a win win. If you play your cards rights...........
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's time that those of us who are actually here for (hopefully) something more than pointless blatherings about what we would do to the person above us, called a moratorium on the endless string of useless cliches that seem to infest our forum posts like an epidemic of mental corrosion. Three examples: 1. "It always shows up when you stop looking." Wrong. It does NOT ALWAYS show up. I'm living proof. Now, I'm not saying it NEVER happens that way -- any student of non-zero possibilities knows that it MUST occasionally happen that way, simply due to mathematical laws. Something with a zero possibility (i.e., "my dog will turn into a kayak next Thursday") will never happen, but something with a non-zero possibility (the classical example in physics is that of all the air molecules in a room moving to one side of the room -- it's unlikely, but there is nothing in the laws of physics which disallows it) most likely WILL happen if you wait long enough. But "It always shows up when you stop looking" is not an inevitable law of nature. It's a cliche, it's wishful thinking, and it may sometimes be accurate. But it is by no means universal. 2. "The common denominator in all your failed relationships is you." There has always been something about this statement that struck me as specious, but it took me awhile to figure it out. And here it is -- the common denominator in ALL OF YOUR ENTIRE LIFE'S EXPERIENCES is you. What does that mean, insofar as cause-and-effect is concerned? Not much! Let's say you've been a passenger in five different cars that were involved in five different accidents in your life. Well, sure, you've been unlucky, but.... There's a sort of implicit blame game going on in "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" -- in other words, since you were involved in all of these, then it's your own fault -- there's something inherently wrong with you, otherwise you could not possibly have engendered so many failures. Is it your fault that you were in the five accident-bound cars? (Other than that you chose to ride in those cars in the first place, for whatever reason?) See, the problem with "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" is that it completely ignores the possibility that the other party may have had some responsibility for the failure of the relationship. Rather than deal with "we just weren't compatible" or "they changed after awhile," or whatever, it turns into "Hey, it's your fault that none of them worked out." But what if those exes, the ones who were "your fault," had just as bad a track record in THEIR other relationships? So now "the common denominator in all of your failed relationships is you" applies to both parties, but you can't really sustain accusatory blame ("you're the common denominator"!) with the obligatory stigma if it's spread around to all involved. I think we need to see this one for what it is -- it's just shorthand for "I'm too lazy to think up any useful comment or advice, so I'll just say something to make you feel bad about yourself." Yes, that's helpful. 3. "I like to see the glass as half full." It doesn't make any difference. If it's half full, it's also half empty; this is simple math. Whether you choose to put a positive spin on the imagery, it doesn't change the amount of fluid in the container. Also, it's one of those phrases that shows up in profiles almost as often as "I'm laid back and easy going," which is about as informative as the UPC code on the Shredded Wheat box. There are more. Lots more. They don't help, they don't provide anything in the way of relevant information or communication enhancement. They need to be retired. So Lex, my friend, do tell, what is it in a dating site profile that you WOULD like to hear? how is mine??? by the way? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So Lex, my friend, do tell, what is it in a dating site profile that you WOULD like to hear? Ideally, I would like to read something about the person the profile belongs to, and not the same string of 12 or 15 rehashed cliches that are exactly the same ones I read in the last 4000 profiles. I can pretty much count on "laid back and easy going" and "Prince Charming" and "anything you want to know, you'll have to ask" and "I love my friends and family" and "long walks on the beach" and "I like to go out or stay in" and "I look good in jeans or the little black dress" and "Looks don't matter, it's what's on the inside that counts" and "I'm the most unique person you'll ever meet" and it goes on and on. None of this tells me anything about the person other than that they have the ability to copy cliches from other profiles. Because it doesn't tell me about THEM, about THEIR lives, about what matters to THEM, about what THEY dream of, about THEIR histories, THEIR hopes, THEIR goals.... And maybe most guys don't really care about this stuff. I've heard lots of women complain that "Guys don't read profiles, they just look at pictures," and maybe that's true for most guys, I have no way of knowing. But I read profiles (it doesn't take long to read "I don't know what to write here") and they're mostly disappointing and a waste of the 4.2 seconds, on average, it takes to read them. If I was the type who actually wrote to people first (I'm not, and I don't), it would only be to those whose profiles actually gave me some insight into their personae; and that almost never happens -- maybe one in a thousand actually conveys something ABOUT the person -- how is mine??? by the way? I'll take a look. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So Lex, my friend, do tell, what is it in a dating site profile that you WOULD like to hear? Ideally, I would like to read something about the person the profile belongs to, and not the same string of 12 or 15 rehashed cliches that are exactly the same ones I read in the last 4000 profiles. I can pretty much count on "laid back and easy going" and "Prince Charming" and "anything you want to know, you'll have to ask" and "I love my friends and family" and "long walks on the beach" and "I like to go out or stay in" and "I look good in jeans or the little black dress" and "Looks don't matter, it's what's on the inside that counts" and "I'm the most unique person you'll ever meet" and it goes on and on. None of this tells me anything about the person other than that they have the ability to copy cliches from other profiles. Because it doesn't tell me about THEM, about THEIR lives, about what matters to THEM, about what THEY dream of, about THEIR histories, THEIR hopes, THEIR goals.... And maybe most guys don't really care about this stuff. I've heard lots of women complain that "Guys don't read profiles, they just look at pictures," and maybe that's true for most guys, I have no way of knowing. But I read profiles (it doesn't take long to read "I don't know what to write here") and they're mostly disappointing and a waste of the 4.2 seconds, on average, it takes to read them. If I was the type who actually wrote to people first (I'm not, and I don't), it would only be to those whose profiles actually gave me some insight into their personae; and that almost never happens -- maybe one in a thousand actually conveys something ABOUT the person -- how is mine??? by the way? I'll take a look. Waiting with baited breath. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lex my Brother in life's BAD TIMES and WRONG ONES..lol
WE share many experiences through very different perspectives for the person that we are NOT the same in personality at all really. Yet OUR roads run parallel to each other in what WE have went through... I totally AGREE with all the same Clichés... People just TRY and help you through their endless use of using them ME TO, lol.. I am NOW to the place where I will no-longer SEARCH for Love.. ITS,,,NOT happening for me nor NOW do I believe I'll find THAT... So,maybe being just one of the bad guys out here who always take the ones we love from us,,I'll JOIN THEM and be a BAD BOY TO... Hey,,lifes much easier on the mind and heart dude...and way TO-MANY ladies say they want a real love,,but THEY DON'T,,just a time passer who excites their world for awhile and rocks their beds.. NOT ALL LADIES,,,but I say MANY,,ok,,,before I am castrated and thrown to the wolves that they say we are,,,,lol Life has NO ANSWERS, for finding happiness, nor should it. Its up to US to make our lives worth the fun we feel it needs, and the truth of being with someone or not wanting that,,? Me I love to share my life,,but their are MANY ways to do that,,and LOVE does NOT have to be the reasoning, just the charm,care, passion,and truth,,will do for me to be Happy at this point in my life... Maybe you might think on just not looking for what you think,but to just look and see through that living in nature,,,,? But life always turns another page,,hell,just look ion the mirror, I see a new page everyday,,and a nnew line,,,lol |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
iam4u
on
Fri 12/24/10 09:06 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Waiting with baited breath. Well, it's actually way better than most. I liked the way you explained the house; I thought I was going to get you on one cliche ("laid back") but your definition of that was very original and not at all what's usually meant by the term in the "standard" profile. The thing is, this sounds like a woman writing about herself and her life -- not a woman copying random snips out of 27 other profiles. So you're in the top 2% already. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can understand that not everyone's good at public speaking. It's extremely difficult for some folks to be self descriptive, especially in a public arena. It's even a reasonable assumption to me that even in those who are capable of self assessment and adept at wording an essay aren't necessarily going to offer more than a shadowy reflection of who they truly are, in the sense that after all, this IS the internet and too much information can be far worse than not enough information.
It's not until I've spent time with someone that I can begin attempting to ascertain whether or not there's real potential for something deeper than "just friends". If I put up road blocks based simply on a determination that their intellect must be lacking if they're not willing (or able) to stimulate my intellect in a public profile, I might miss out on what is truly important, which is whether or not this person is healthy in mind, body and spirit. I agree that using cliches in a medium that allows for exacting and meaningful language can be frustrating, but I try to temper that frustration by realizing that as far as my search for a true match is concerned, it's not how they describe themselves that matters most, but rather it's more important that a personal dialog between us can be revealing through openness and honesty. So my response to this dilemma is both yes AND no... Yes, I agree that the over use of cliches in a self description can be frustrating on the surface, but no, it's not all that telling in itself. Good post though... It does make a relevant point and should cause some of us to question our own laziness. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I don'see any of those cliches in my profile except the one about "looks not mattering, it's whats inside" and I truly mean that.. I recently started to date a man that is not the most handsome and when I first read his profile, didn't think we had much in common... But after spending lots of time in email and then phone(3-4hr calls) we discovered we had a lot in common..He drives one hr to see me, is always a gentleman and we have a lot of fun...AND he treats me like a princess...lol Who knows where we will end up but going to have fun finding out!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
josie68
on
Sat 12/25/10 06:43 AM
|
 Oh my Gosh lex, you are so funny, i guess life sucks, but who cares, for gosh sakes, if we dont enjoy the crap as well as the great what is the point. My life has been a mess, if you can lose it , I will. and that is not a joke, I have spare wallets, licenses keys and still cannot find even one of them. If someone is going to get lost , it will be me. I am coming to America in a few weeks and everyone is in a major panick that i will get lost lose my passport, or just have a major disaster, and yes this may seem overprotective, but sadly one of them at least will happen, not because i am bringing bad luck on myself just because, i am hopelessly unorganised, and vague. I forget to look for things to find my way. I start to talk and forget what i was supposed to be doing. i will go shopping and start daydreaming and get lost, and have to have one of the kids tell me how to get home. So what is this all about, i love life and despite the fact that i am a walking disaster. i dont care about anything except that i enjoy every thing. if i get lost, we enjoy whatever we see, if i lose something, i ring home and they send another lot of cards and keys and i finish my shopping i dont even look for things, they will turn up or not. I guess people always have some reason why my life is a mess, but everything always seems to work out, not because it does, but because i wont let it not work out, it has to end up with something good and there is always something ok to everything. hmmmm started to ramble and now i cant remember what i was on about to start with. RATS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HEY! Watch that foul mouthed "For G*sh sakes" language sailor....we got women and children here!
;) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good sir, the expression is not a mathematical evaluation of measurement. It is an illustration of perception...well, and consistency of temperment...but it is indeed cliche. My issue is with the sheer incompleteness of the perception -- one can focus on a fraction of a reality, but to ignore the remainder of that reality is a bit delusional, in my book. One might say "Sickle cell anemia is a GREAT THING because it confers an immunity to malaria," but that would necessitate one being deliberately oblivious to sickle cell's downside. I think most things can be viewed from either or both positive and negative perspectives -- to focus solely on one to the exclusion of the other is short-sighted and potentially dangerous. The common denominator idea is truly flat and you are correct. Since we learn from our relationships (hopefully) we come closer to understanding exactly what would satisfy us. The suggestion that we are doomed to continue to fail because we do not change ourselves, in my agreement with you, is foolish. It just seems like an Argument From Laziness to me, a la "You get back what you put into it," which, lacking any sort of standardized metric, is impossible to validate beyond the mere cliche.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HEY! Watch that foul mouthed "For G*sh sakes" language sailor....we got women and children here! ;) Fair Dinkum, im sorry, will be more careful from now on |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
((((LEX))) I Always enjoy reading your posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 has always been a pet peeve of mine as well. Thanks for finally addressing it.
|
|
|
|
|
