ClueChick: real clues from a real chick

No one who's been following this discussion will be surprised to learn that I'm rarely impressed by someone who describes himself as sexy or specifies that he wants the object of his affections to be sexy. Are we playing the obvious game, or what?

"Sexy", like "fun" or "cool", is meaningless. Of course each person wants to hook up with someone sexy, but what's sexy to you may be a huge turnoff to me. The whole point in posting a profile on a dating site or an ad on Craig's List is to catch someone's attention and convince them that you'll be a good match. One of the ways to do that is to explain what you find sexy so that she can say to herself, "Hey, look, here's a guy who wants someone like me!" And on the flip side, you can describe what's sexy about yourself so that that special woman out there who has a fetish for gangly, freckled guys will be sure to write you.

The more explicit and creative you can be, the more you stand out, and the more you stand out, the more interesting you will be. (Okay, that's an oversimplification. There are lots of ways to stand out in a bad way, but if you've been paying attention, most of those should be easy to avoid.) What catches my eye is creativity, and using "sexy" doesn't score that point by a long shot.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:24 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (0)

Alien Coming to Earth - m4w - 29

Hi
We are an alien civilization coming to visit your planet tomorrow.
Since we are not in the habit of abducting individuals for research, we are posting for volunteers.
We need one female or more (we already have enough males) who is willing to explain and demonstrate your species' intriguing practice of non-reproductive sex.
We plan to send an individual for the purpose of this research. The individual will resemble a 29 year old male.
We welcome you to apply or to make any inquiries.

Clever, offbeat. I like it.

Posted by ClueChick at 7:01 PM in real ads | Permalink | Comments (2)

In my observation, lots of people who don't fit the cookie-cutter definition of beauty like Craig's List and other online dating sites. As such, these areas also attract people who are interested in people outside the Vogue standard, too, so it's not uncommon to see ads from or for transfolks, fat people, handicapped people and others. Today, I'll talk about fat.

There are a lot of different ways to describe one's self or one's desired mate as larger, and each seems to be popular amongst different circles or to carry different associations. One of the most popular seems to be BBW, or big, beautiful woman. (The less common corollary for men is BHM, or big, handsome man.) There's also the straightforward fat, as well as big or larger. Then, of course, you have the euphemisms, which is where things can get a little confusing: buxom, curvy, or thick. I haven't fully figured out thick, actually, but it seems to indicate good proportions on a larger frame. And there's also a smattering of other terms: chubby, chunky, zaftig, rubenesque, plump.

It's hard to know what people are imagining when they describe their desired hookup as any of the above terms: some think size 12, while others may be picturing size 24, and ditto the people who describe themselves in those terms.

Unlike with "fun" or "cool", I don't think there's an easy way to get around these confusions. Until fatness is socially "unloaded" enough that people can list their weight as easily as they list their height, we'll be dealing with workarounds and euphemisms. Instead, my advice is that whether you're a fat chick or someone looking for one, be prepared for people who use the same terms to mean different things.

Posted by ClueChick at 9:24 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tonight, I've collected a handful of very entertaining headlines for your entertainment:

Come spread at my spread (Females only) - m4w - 40

So delicate, so tempting!

Please I am a virgin that needs a lady tonight!! - m4w

Ahh, smell that desperation. Let's talk about the meaning of "need", shall we?

Big old fat slob want to go down on you - m4w

BABY! Hold me back!

Sometimes, for fun and out of curiosity, I respond to ads that seem completely ridiculous to me just to find out if there's actually action happening in those ads that I think are absurd. After all, I'm pretty particular, and I know not everyone is, especially when looking for random, anonymous sex. It's pretty infrequent for me to get a response, probably in part because people think I'm asking out of sarcastic meanness (which I can understand, though that's not my intention when I respond) and in part because they're not interested in bothering to email with a woman who isn't even remotely interested in hooking up with them.

Posted by ClueChick at 9:10 AM in real ads | Permalink | Comments (0)

When posting an ad to CL, or writing a profile on another site, you often have the opportunity to include a headline, which should be a quick snapshot of who you are and what you're looking for. Ideally, it'll be catchy enough to garner interest on its own, but at the very least, it should reflect what you'll expound upon in the longer context of the ad or profile.

For my money, relevance is more important than being catchy. Because there's nothing like clicking through a catchy headline that's right up my alley only to find the content disappointing:

Looking for a sexy, smart girl to take out for drinks tonight!

Hi, I'm looking for a sexy girl to take out tonight for some drinks at one of our great lounges downtown (I have a great one in mind). A liitle about me: I'm 31, 5'9, dark/dark, athletic build (work-out often), yes attractive, self employed, [good college] graduate. So why am I posting here, same reason you're looking! Will send pic upon request. I have two businesses that keep me pretty busy and need some relaxing fun! Wanna join me?

Good headline! But the ad? Boooring! And also, what does it have to do with the headline? He doesn't sell me on either why he wants a sexy, smart girl, nor on why one would want him.

Think of your headline as a hint to catch the attention of your audience. It should appeal to the same types of people that your ad will interest, so you're wasting your time and theirs if the headline grabs all comers without appropriate followup in the actual profile. Better to have fewer click-throughs but from actual prospects, and that's where a good headline comes in.

Posted by ClueChick at 9:02 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (0)

Ahh, the ongoing bugaboo on appearance. Let's just take it as a given that when looking for a date, a mate or a hookup, we all want to find someone who's attractive to us. Let's also take it as given that each person has different "types" who they find attractive, and I'm not really in the business of scolding people for their tastes. Great.

Lots of men say, of the woman they're looking for, that she should be "fit". I always assume this is social code for "thin" or, at least, "not fat". This is silly. Fit is orthogonal to fat. That is, they're not on the same line, and that means that you can have both or neither or one or the other. Fit is not, after all, a body type but a condition. If what you mean is that you want someone who can keep up with you when you hike Mt. Hood or ski the Alps, then, yes, you want someone fit (and you may want to specify just how fit you mean). If, on the other hand, you want someone slim, just come out and say it.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:08 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (2)

It's important not to let your goal blind you to what the other person is saying:

RandomDude: Hey
ClueChick: Howdy
RandomDude: what's up??
ClueChick: just working. who are you?
RandomDude: you're hot i like ur picx
ClueChick: thanks! do I know you?
RandomDude: your profile says your kinky
ClueChick: sometimes
RandomDude: I like kinky girls in fuck me shoes
ClueChick: I never got into fuck-me shoes
[RandomDude proceeds to send me several links to shoes he thinks are hot]
ClueChick: well, that's not really my sort of thing.
ClueChick: have a good day!
RandomDude: do you like to dominate men?
ClueChick: no, thanks! bye!
RandomDude: if you did like it, what would you want to do to me?
...

Posted by ClueChick at 10:44 PM in IMs | Permalink | Comments (0)

In many social interactions, we use keys and codes to hint at what we mean without actually saying it. This usually works because we tend to spend time with people who share a common vocabulary. But when you're surfing the web to meet new people, that shared language doesn't necessarily apply.

This means that when you specify the kind of person you're looking for, it's worth taking a bit of time to spell out what you mean rather than rely on words that may mean significantly different things to different people. Some of my favorites of these are "fun" and "cool".

When I say I want someone fun, I mean someone who can keep up with me in conversation, will come up with some wild and crazy thing for us to do on a moment's notice (an impromptu skinny dipping outing? a trip to an amusement park?), or will enjoy the same sorts of movies I do. Someone else looking for someone fun might want a companion to the museum's latest show or a buddy to catch the local team's showing down at the neighborhood sports bar.

Similarly, cool, to me, means someone laid-back, who shares some of my important opinions, and who will like my friends. To you, a cool person may be wearing the right clothes or reading the right books.

So to say that I want someone fun and cool isn't useful, unless I spell out what that means. Hardly anyone thinks they're not fun and cool, at least in certain circumstances, after all. It doesn't hurt anyone not to spell it out, of course, but it'll save a bit of time and confusion, and it may help to target your ad or profile to the right audience in the first place.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:14 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (2)

In honor of a holiday I only somewhat celebrate, but which brings business-as-usual to a halt here in the US, I'd like to step away from my usual patter to talk politics.

This fall, we have heard numerous reports of appalling torture techniques used against detainees in the "war on terror" that the Bush administration has adopted as its legacy program. As a person who loves her own freedom and holds out hope for humane treatment between individuals and nations in the future, I have been deeply troubled by these reports, and by VP Cheney's ongoing support of such activities.

Naturally, we all want to feel safe in our daily lives, and it seems to be human nature to dislike and/or fear change, especially in the day-to-day. The events on and since September 11, 2002 have certainly impacted each of us in different ways, and each person will have to decide for themselves what changes are reasonable. I hope, though, that we will all come down on the side of right treatment of all people, with torture falling well outside the definition of right treatment.

Tomorrow, I will return to my normally entertaining reports and commentary on the online dating scene, but today, when millions of Americans celebrate the birth of the Prince of Peace, I'd like us all to consider expressing our outrage over these and other troubling political matters, wherever you are or whatever your leanings.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:17 AM in Administrativa | Permalink | Comments (0)

... don't put all their addresses in the cc: field, so they can see just who and how many women you're spamming with your boring, generic response.

Why not? Because on the off chance that one of the women doesn't notice that you've done this, you can be sure that at least one of the ones who did notice it will email all the rest of them to talk about what a loser you are.

On second thought, go ahead and do this. It's worth a great laugh for the women, at least!

Posted by ClueChick at 10:33 AM in response types | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sometimes, Craig's List postings are too good to be true. You know the ones: "I'm a hot 18 year old virgin looking for an older dude to come fuck me senseless!" I always figure the men who respond to those deserve the spam they're going to get.

Here's another good one from Boston's CE section:

I'm a dirty whore. Interested

I have this thing about big dick. This is a serious post. I really could use a good NSA fuck. I can deep throat, love it deep and enjoy anal. I'll decide by your dick pictures. Depending on the dick picture. I might have my own gang bang. You can reach me direct at mocha_princess30 at yah.

Included with this post was a picture of a very lovely ass, though slightly slim-hipped for my taste.

My money's on this being a man trolling for jerking material.

Posted by ClueChick at 5:31 PM in real ads | Permalink | Comments (3)

I first joined OkCupid because I had a really boring job and OkCupid had lots of entertaining quizzes to keep me occupied. In order to keep track of my quiz results, I had to create a profile, and once I'd created a profile, I might as well fill it out and put up some pictures, right?

I like OkCupid very much, and here's why:

1) Lots of quizzes. I'm a sucker for quizzes, and I love seeing other people's results. And they're a bit of a distractor from the personal ad-ness of the site, which I like, so it feels less like a meat-market than some.

2) Few multiple choice categories to fill out in your profile. I hate it when I have to check a bunch of boxes in categories that either aren't important to me or with pre-set options that don't suit me.

3) Nonstandard questions to answer as part of your profile: You have the standard self-summary, but then there's also "I'm really good at:" and "The most private thing I'm willing to admit here:"

4) Community/networking possibilities. I like being able to network with my friends and see an extended friend network, and who knows whom.

5) A matching system based on your answers to a long series of "what do you prefer" type questions. The matching compares your answers, what you would desire in a partner, and the other person's answers to come up with a number. Based on how it matches me with friends and exes, I'd say it's pretty good.

In general, I find OkCupid to encourage people to create more complete profiles than many other dating sites, and I don't know if it's because of the type of people it attracts or the format of the site, but they also seem to be more interested in a complete person on the other end, too.

OkCupid is more of an investment of time than something like Craig's List, but since a CL posting may or may not pan out, OkC is a bit like long-term investing and will probably result in some fun down the line but not instantaneously. I'm told by two of my male readers that the scene in OkC is much better for them than CL, so that's certainly another thing to take into consideration.

And, of course, an OkC hookup is what got me into casual sex in the first place, so I've got to give it a tip-of-the-hat for that, as well.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:41 AM in dating sites | Permalink | Comments (2)

I often browse various cities' Craig's List listings when I'm looking for entertainment. Tonight, for the first time, I hit Las Vegas's CE section. Holy shit. More than half of them were commercial spam, and people there have obviously given up on flagging. What a huge bummer. And here you'd think that Las Vegas would be a great place for casual hookups! I guess you may have to resort to casinos and bars there. Tragic.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:03 PM in dating sites | Permalink | Comments (1)

My basic approach to kinks of all sorts is a pretty classic, "What you want is okay, as long as everyone involved in the actualization of your fantasy does so with informed consent," sort of idea. So the guy with the impregnation fantasy who I mentioned yesterday doesn't strike me as strange for having that fantasy so much as for the oddness of trying to enact it with strangers, particularly those who might answer a Casual Encounters ad. By definition, an activity that results in a baby is not casual.

The leap of faith involved in playing out that fantasy with a stranger is what boggles me: you're trusting a stranger to have current test results, not to have exposed him/herself to an STD since the test was taken, not to change his/her mind about custody or financial arrangements (or lack thereof) down the road. To me, living out a hot fantasy just isn't worth it.

Anyway, if I were looking to pick up a father for my fantasy child, he'd have to show me some other test results beyond the STD test. After all, if I'm not picking the father out of love, I at least ought to get the best genetic material possible.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:07 AM in real ads | Permalink | Comments (0)

I need a woman's body so I can eat her out. No recip - m4w - 29

Somehow, this headline doesn't quite work. When I first read it, i thought it was someone posting about having been born in the wrong body or something. The phrase, "I need a woman's body" just made me think of someone saying wistfully, "I need a new pair of eyes."

Setting that aside, one must ask: Once you have her body, what did you have planned for, oh, her mind? Or would a Real Doll do the trick?

Posted by ClueChick at 11:46 PM in real ads | Permalink | Comments (1)

This is an example of one of the strangest trends (there are a couple of these each day in most major cities) I've seen on Craig's List:

Ladies,

I have a hot fantasy of cumming inside of a woman and making her pregnant, with a session of very wild and hot sex. If you would help me indulge this fantasy, I can pay you $400 in cash tonite. I am a very very clean while male, recently separated from my wife of 6 years. My current STD test with all negative results is shown below and I can e-mail this to you as well. I am very down-to-Earth, easy going, fun loving, intelligent, professional, love meeting new people. I am looking for a regular provider who is willing to meet with me on a fairly regular basis, or a one-time only fantasy fulfillment experience for a woman who may have this hot little fantasy. Please e-mail me with your picture and lets make this happen now. Hope to hear from you. Don't be afraid, e-mail me now. Let's do something crazy tonite !! Dare to indulge !!!

He did, in fact, include a very small image of of an STD test, which I presume he would forward to any respondent.

My questions:

First, do women often browse Craig's List looking for non-involved fathers for their children?

Second, if they do, would they really be looking in casual encounters??

Third, if this guy is actually meeting up with strange women for some hot, unprotected sex, just how long are his nice, clean STD results going to be trustworthy???

And let's not even talk about the legal entanglements involved in fathering a child!

Posted by ClueChick at 10:07 AM in real ads | Permalink | Comments (10)

In Having an IM conversation with a prospective date, I alluded to one of my (admittedly many) pet peeves: the "buzz" feature in Yahoo's IM client. This sparked a storm of agreement among my friends, who shared a variety of stories of other noisy features that people have used to try to get their attention, from a loud smooching sound to a big pair of lips that actually have a 20 second spiel leading up to a loud smooching sound. UGH.

And we've all gotten the overly cutesy email with lots of smilies and cartoonish hearts and flowers and who knows what all else.

To this I say: Just because the feature exists doesn't mean you have to use it. Think about how it might be received. If you're striking up an IM conversation with someone during the work day, they may have a coworker or boss looking over their shoulder at that moment. If you cause them embarrassment upon starting the conversation, I can assure you that things will not turn out well for you. Do the illustrations in your email add to it, or are they just propping up a weak approach?

Counterintuitively, it seems that the people who make the most use of these extra features of communication media are those who are least effective at actually communicating through them. In order to show off, in this case, less is often more.

Posted by ClueChick at 1:31 AM in IMs | Permalink | Comments (0)

When you're meeting new people online, you answer all the same questions again and again. I've fantasized about making up an FAQ to get that sort of thing out of the way, but it seems a little antisocial. So we go through the basics with each new person: What's your real name? What do you do for work? What's your living situation? What do you do for fun? yawn

Every once in a while, someone jazzes things up by asking an offbeat question, and I love that! It indicates to me that he's creative, can get out of a rut, and he's willing to be a bit funny or goofy. I'm sure some women don't like goofy, but I'm not among them.

How many marshmallows can you fit in your mouth at once? What's the grossest thing you've ever eaten? What's the longest you've gone without sleep?

Whatever you're asking, a surprising question can shake the conversation out of the autopilot realm and back into actual, interesting interaction. This, on those rare occasions that it happens, is enough to make me sit up and take notice. I like that.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:28 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (4)

I didn't even bother to click through this one:

I Look for Girl - 32

Or: "Me Tarzan, you girl."

Posted by ClueChick at 5:36 PM in snarky | Permalink | Comments (5)

At least a couple of times a week, I see a man's CE ad that says something along the lines of, "I don't care what you look like." This is sheer stupidity talking. Here's why:

First, you're lying. Everyone cares about looks, to some degree or other. You may have different tastes than many, you may have tastes that are broad enough that almost every woman in the world could be attractive to you, but that's different from saying that you don't care what your lovers look like. Anyone who disagrees with me is welcome to comment or email, but unless you make an extremely good case for yourself, I will think you are lying.

Second, and perhaps more important, this is not the way to make yourself appealing. "I have no standards," is not sexy. At least part of the fun of a random hookup is knowing you can land someone who's worthwhile and who thinks you're worthwhile. That doesn't mean you both have to be moviestar gorgeous, but it does mean that you each judge the other to be interesting and appealing enough to bed. For me, someone who uses no taste in discerning who he sleeps with will, ultimately, make me feel yucky for bedding him. As I hate that feeling, I don't fuck people who give me the sense that they could be just as happy fucking anyone wandering around with a convenient hole.

Selectivity is a compliment to your partner(s). It's not about being snooty or rude, but rather, understanding and appreciating your own individual tastes. If you have a broad range of attractions, great! More power to you -- you're in a much better position to take advantage of opportunities than is someone who's extremely particular. But don't put down your potential partners in the process.

Posted by ClueChick at 7:31 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (0)

Once upon a time, it was somewhat uncommon for people to have pictures of themselves in digital formats. Even if you had email and chat systems, you might not have easy access to a scanner or a digital camera, and you actually had to go out of your way to get a picture of yourself up online.

These days, you may have to go out of your way, but most people have lots of digitized pictures of themselves, and so the expectation is that you do, too. I can't imagine trying to navigate the waters of online dating if I didn't have a photograph to send somewhere between first contact and first face-to-face meeting. If you don't have one, I can't recommend highly enough that you get one.

It is not enough, however, simply to have a photograph. It really ought to be a good one. People will typically assume that the photo you send when you're trying to hit it off with someone is a photo that shows you in what you think is a good light. If the photo sucks, they will be assuming that this is a good picture of you -- you looking your best, or nearly so -- so if it's a terrible picture ... well, you get the idea.

The picture should look like you, and the current you. If you've changed a lot in the last six months, you should have a picture from more recently than six months ago. If you haven't changed in two years, a two-year-old photograph is just fine. When in doubt, ask a friend.

It should be a reasonably good photograph. It doesn't have to be 800 ultra-super-megapixels, but it shouldn't be blurry, fuzzy or otherwise difficult to make out what you look like. It should also be bigger than a thumbnail. I don't want to have to use a magnifying glass to try to figure out what you look like.

On the question of headshots vs. full-body shots, some people feel very strongly that you should include a full-body picture. I actually don't care so much about that, and between a picture where I can see a body well or one where I can see the face clearly, I'll take the face.

And, finally, if you're going to be demanding about the photographs your potential date sends you, you'd damn well be ready to pony up your own portfolio, possibly even before getting pushy to see more from her.

Posted by ClueChick at 7:48 PM in ground rules | Permalink | Comments (1)

If you enjoy my blog, you will probably also appreciate Dating Horrors, where they take an admirably snarky and humorous tone about the whole dating scene. Highly recommended!

Posted by ClueChick at 4:36 PM in other sites | Permalink | Comments (2)

Men aren't the only ones who write remarkable ads. In the spirit of gender equality, here are a couple of baffling w4m ads from Craig's List:

This one is titled "Picky":

Everyone is too blind to what is to be fortunate, like being handicap. Look around and appreciate what around us. It might be pretty tomorrow, so each of us also. I myself, miss my love at the moment, can others be blind? yes. I'd give anything to have loyal friends right now.

The message here: There's something seriously wrong with me but if I'm lucky, someone won't figure it out until after they've emailed me.

"independent thinker"

are there any thinking men out there? Im looking for men who break away from the american materialistic monoculture, who dream and work toward a better future, environmentalist, tv basher, bike warrior....most importantly simple, honest, hard-working(preferably with his hands), down to earth, and who loves to laugh. I am a moral person and appreciate the gentleman....

pic for pic, of course.

I just love ads (from anyone) that start out, "Are there any ______ out there?" Maybe it's just me, but it makes me think this person is gonna be really picky, since usually the blank is filled in by something obvious and easy, like "fun guys" or "hot women". Using that lead-up is like a code saying, "this isn't really what I'm looking for, but this is what I'm going to say because it's socially acceptable."

Posted by ClueChick at 8:02 PM in real ads | Permalink | Comments (0)

The first thing we have to agree on here is this: Women are actual living, breathing, thinking human beings. If you place us on a pedestal, we are almost bound to fall off it and land on your head, perhaps breaking your neck in the process. If you treat us like shit, you'll be lucky if the worst you end up with is some bad smelling shoes.

Lots of men seem to experience women as a whole different species. They find us weird, unfathomable and mysterious. We're certainly not real people so much as somewhat bizarre quasi-people.

*BZZT*

You've got to get over that. Men and women may have differences, and they may be real, but at root, we're all people, just like each other. Seeing members of the opposite sex as whole people, worthy of respect, will help in all your interactions.

You all may remember that guy with the kickass ad who I wanted to fuck. One of the things I loved about his ad is that he took the time to point out that he's respectful. What this means is that he sees a woman as a full person, who will have opinions and desires, and with whom he'll be making a connection (even if a casual one) when they hook up. That makes me hot.

I don't want to be with a guy who's going to see me as a cardboard cutout, or as a porcelain doll. I want to be with someone who sees me and respects me as a person. I'd rather be "one of the guys" if that's what it takes than an incomplete idea. If you can show me that you see women in a real way -- usually by interacting with me through email in a way that feels complete and honest -- that's way, way more likely to get my attention than describing some hot sex scene with a fantasy woman who's more like a blow-up doll.

Posted by ClueChick at 11:01 AM in ground rules | Permalink | Comments (3)

You know what I love? I love when a guy:

1) Responds to my ad with an email that's clear, coherent, engaging and 2) includes a g-rated picture. When I email him back, he 3) engages in an interesting email exchange long enough to 4) make plans to actually meet. Once we've made plans, he 5) doesn't cancel them at the last minute and 6) actually shows up. While we have coffee (because he 7) didn't insist that we have to fuck the first time we meet), 8) our conversation flows nicely, we both get a chance to talk, laugh and get to know each other. 9) At the end of the evening, we both agree we'd like to see each other again and 10) he emails me after the date to confirm that he'd like to see me again.

Yes, when this happens, it makes cluechicks happy.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:23 PM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (0)

In case you think you've had a bad time in cyberdating, you can probably console yourself by knowing that this didn't happen to you! (Unless it did, in which case, you have my most sincere condolences.)

Posted by ClueChick at 11:18 AM in worst case scenarios | Permalink | Comments (5)

On Monday, I reviewed Yahoo! Personals, and not particularly favorably. The most interesting thing about having a Yahoo! profile, and the reason I haven't deleted mine, is that even if you don't pay for the service, if you're signed into the Yahoo IM system, people who like your profile can IM you. It sets up a separate IM profile based on your personal profile, so it's not obvious to the people who see your profile who you "really" are.

Naturally, however, this leads to a whole additional set of advice for men striking up IM conversations with women they don't know. Here are a few tips:

1) If you're starting a conversation with me, it's because you've seen my profile, which includes pictures and information about me. Please, for the love of all that's entertaining on the internet, don't pull the, "Hey, baby, what's up?" and expect me to be instantly fascinated by you.

2) It's especially useful if you start the conversation by saying that you saw my profile, what caught your eye about it, and either giving me some information about you or giving me a link to follow to read your profile.

3) I swear I'm going to maim the next guy who starts a conversation with me with a "buzz". This is a function that causes my IM client to make a loud doorbell noise, and it does, in fact, get my attention. But it's extremely intrusive and annoying. There's no need for this -- most people have their IM clients set up so they get notified of messages, and if they don't, it's probably because they don't want to be disturbed.

4) An IM conversation is not an entitlement to my time. I step away from the computer on a regular basis, or I may be working and need to focus on a task. Sending repeated "Are you there?" messages does not impress me. I'll get to you when I have a moment, and if I don't, I've probably left the computer for a while. If you need to leave, you can say something like, "Sorry you had to step away! I hope we can chat another time."

Posted by ClueChick at 9:02 AM in IMs , misc tips | Permalink | Comments (4)

We all know that a man's odds of hearing back from a woman who posted to casual encounters are slim to none. For this reason, it's a good idea not to get too invested in your emails. I recommend that you don't agonize over each word, each turn of phrase, how to make every last thing you write be perfect. If you spend half an hour sweating over how to win this chick's heart, then it's going to be very hard on you if you don't hear back from her. It doesn't do to get attached before you even know her name.

How does this jive with my admonition to personalize your responses? Am I reversing my prior statements and encouraging the generic bulk-style response? By no means.

I suggest that you have a paragraph or two about yourself that you can cut and paste (or, if you're not the cut-and-paste type, a few things you can toss off in a conversational email without having to think too hard about it), and then write a personalized opener and closer that shows you read her ad and are interested in her, not just any woman who might have posted (even if you're interested in any woman who might have posted).

Don't take more than ten minutes in responding to any ad. Think of it as a conversation on the subway -- you have just a few minutes to strike up a conversation and find a connection before you arrive at your stop. Your goal is to get the number and fill in the innumerable blanks later, so don't get hung up on it until that opportunity arises.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:02 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (0)

In Show off when you respond to a personal ad!, I said, "Give me a piece of who you are and make it real." Sapiophile suggested this statement could use a bit of fleshing out.

What I mean when I say that is that the responses I get anywhere -- be it Craig's List, Yahoo! Personals, OkCupid or elsewhere -- to a profile or a personal ad should be the opener to, if everything works out right, a long conversation. I want your opening gambit to promise me a lot, and then I want the conversation to back it up.

Think about it this way: Both of these emails are real responses to ads I've posted. (Yes, you're getting a little tidbit of information about some of what I go for, here.) Tell me which is more interesting:

I'm 28, professional, very intellectual, sometimes introverted and shy, not someone you would normally expect to be very dominant and kinky.

I'm open to exploring a variety of activities. I think the contrast of hard and soft, silky and rough, hot and cold is very sexy. You set the limits, keeping in mind that I am to have free reign within them.

I also happen to be a very deep, very respectful person who can also hold an interesting conversation. I'm also fairly attractive.

Or:

30 swm 5'9 light brown hair blue eyes good shape. I'm clean cut d/d free and a non smoker. Easy going but know what I want and not afraid to get it. Looking for a regular ongoing thing.

An email approach doesn't need to be long to spark interest. It should have the promise of an engaging conversation, of a connection. The first respondent above did that. He opened the door, conversationally, and left room for me to wonder what was beyond the threshold. The second guy, on the other hand... eh. There's no there there. There's no spark, no grab, no hook. He hasn't put anything of himself into his email, while with the first fellow, I get a glimpse into what he likes, what creativity may lurk under the surface. That's what I mean when I say you should give me a piece of yourself.

As for making it real, I hope that's obvious -- the promise of your email needs to be an honest reflection of what and who you are because that'll play out down the line.

You'll be glad to know that guy #1 above backed up the promise of his first email with several more really great emails, a nice face-to-face, and then some very, very fun play. My favorite!

Posted by ClueChick at 10:05 PM in actual responses | Permalink | Comments (0)

Let's talk about desperation a bit more. I'm going to assume that I don't need to expand on why desperation is best avoided, both for internal (personal state of mind) reasons and external (being attractive to other people) ones, right? If I'm wrong on that assumption, someone send me an email and I'll go into more detail.

Desperation is unattractive in everyone in nearly every circumstance. The only times it makes sense and might be useful are times of acute crisis: I'm desperate to save my cat from the burning building, say. If you are desperate to hear back from the woman with the perfect personal ad, you're setting yourself up for disastrous failure.

What desperation signals is a need for external support for a lack that would be better served by a solid internal foundation.

What does that mean?

It means that being attractive starts inside you, with your attitude, your confidence, and your comfort in who you are.

We have all experienced encounters with people who were desperate for attention, and unless we're stalkers who like to create unhealthy obsessions and dependence, we find that overwhelming and unappealing. This is especially true for casual sex, as even a hint of desperation makes me back way off, thinking that with that need for hand-holding, this guy isn't going to be able to keep it light at all.

We've also all met those people who, objectively speaking, aren't drop-dead gorgeous, and, in fact may simply be okay-looking, but who somehow manage to present a special something, that certain "oomph" that makes people sit up and pay attention. That can't be faked.

This all goes back to being solidly comfortable with who you are, knowing who you are, and knowing what you want. If you're looking for a partner or lover to fill up an empty space in you, then you're headed for a codependent dynamic at best. Some people look for that, I'm sure, but I recommend filling your own needs and then teaming up with someone else who's hot and appealing.

If you're desperate and you know it, you're in better shape than many, who seem to think that clinging, needy interaction will draw someone in. Start by building up your own solid foundation so that you're not so teetery, and you'll be in much better shape to attract someone interesting.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:57 AM in ground rules | Permalink | Comments (0)

Yesterday, I posted about frequency of posting ads on Craig's List and the importance of avoiding the scent of desperation. This evening, I'm going to talk a bit about persistence when responding to an ad, while still avoiding seeming desperate.

As I've discussed in the past, women who post to CL get a massive quantity of responses. This can make it difficult to appreciate each one. Furthermore, the bulk of them come in the first day and evening, with another, smaller bunch, the next day. This means that some responses -- even good responses -- fall through the tracks.

The approach I'm about to describe is one that you should not abuse, but it can come in handy. If you respond to an ad for which you think you're an excellent match, and you write a really killer email as soon as you see it -- in the first day or two it's up -- but you don't hear back, it may be worthwhile to return to it a few days later and write a short, polite note saying something like, "I responded to your ad the other day, and I know you've probably been inundated by replies! I just wanted to drop you a note to reiterate my interest and hope to hear from you!" Don't put a lot of pressure into it, don't write an email a day until the posting goes down, don't assume that this will be the magic key into the door. However, it can make you stand out, and if she liked your original email but it got lost in the shuffle, this gives her "permission" on the social level to respond even though it's been a few days.

(This is something I always wonder about when I have a full inbox: it's been 6 days since a great guy responded to my ad, and I just never got to writing back to him... it just seems awkward to email him at that point -- he probably doesn't even remember my ad! But of the three times a man has given me a gentle reminder, twice I was glad to get that nod. and the third time, it wasn't a good match, but I didn't mind the poke.)

This can also be a good technique if you heard back from a woman once, but then after responding to her email, you never heard back from her. Again, you may have gotten lost in the shuffle, and it could help you to write another email a few days or a week later.

However, if you do use this technique, I can't emphasize enough the importance of prudence. Do not -- I repeat do not -- overuse this. It's very easy to get pegged to the desperation scale, and desperation is best avoided, not only because it looks bad but also because it is bad. When coming at any endeavor from a place of desperation, you're automatically operating from weakness. Don't do it!

Posted by ClueChick at 9:27 PM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (2)

I have a book/picture/email/ad that I'm wondering if you would review?

Yes, of course! That's at least half of the point of this blog, after all: to answer the weird questions about dating and the online scene that you can't ask anyone else. Are you wondering which of your three dreadful pictures is the least dreadful? You think your email has game, but you're not getting any responses? Just curious about a particular dating/attitude book? I'm your girl chick!

Obviously, in some of these cases, especially photographs, I won't be able to share my nuggets of insight with everyone, but as trends in questions develop, I'll be able to pass those on.

Why am I doing this? Well, aside from enjoying both lending a hand and the whole personal ad scene, I presume that in a vacuum, I will eventually run out of opinions (hard to believe) and have to start recycling old posts. So, by all means, feel free to ask me whatever questions you might have!

In upcoming posts, I'll be reviewing Play or Be Played: What Every Female Should Know About Men, Dating and Relationships by Tariq "K-Flex" Nasheed and, once I actually get my hands on a copy, The Game: Penetrating the Secret Society of Pickup Artists by Neil Strauss.

Posted by ClueChick at 9:22 AM in Q&A | Permalink | Comments (0)

Today was an excellent mail day, and I have lots of interesting things to ponder and then post for your reading pleasure. For now, I'd like to start with a question one reader asked:

What's wrong with reposting? Writing a good post can take anywhere from an hour, if you're inspired, to half a day. Why not get the most out of it?

First off, if you're writing posts that are getting you a good response rate, you don't need my advice. In fact, if you're a man writing ads that are steadily getting you more than a couple of replies each time to post it, I'd love to hear about it, because you're in a vanishingly small minority. Everything I write here is from the point of view of a woman who loves Craig's List for all its potential; I've never tried posting as a man, much less tried posting enough times to get any useful collection of data on this point. I have the bright idea of banding together my male readership to put together a slightly broader range of information on this point, maybe after the new year rolls in, but for now, I'm just writing what I know, which is a woman's perspective.

That said, the reasons I recommend against reposting are:

1) If you're reposting daily, you look desperate. Desperation, as we all know, is never attractive.
2) Women who browse CL frequently will recognize your post from prior days. If your ad is one that she might have been inclined to answer, she will be less inclined to answer if it's posted often.
3) If you're posting frequently and not getting the responses you'd like, posting more frequently is unlikely to help.

I'm not saying you can't post every day. I'm saying that if you do, you should mix it up a bit. It's a rare post that can't use a bit of spiffing up, and sometimes taking a different tack will help you to appeal to a different audience.

Also, reposting the same thing every week or two is significantly less desperate-seeming than posting on a daily basis. Try having a few ads that reflect what you want and who you are, and alternate posting them, so you're not "that one guy" to the women who are paying attention. Variety is, after all, the spice of life!

[Private to errand boy: try volunteering some information and see what the lady says.]

Posted by ClueChick at 11:19 PM in Q&A | Permalink | Comments (0)

As we all know, there are loads of dating sites out there in cyberspace. Some big, some small, all, no doubt, with their own benefits and disadvantages. Although Craig's List is certainly my favorite, both for entertainment and for instant(ish) gratification, I have profiles on a variety of other sites, which I leave moderately active, mostly for kicks, but also on the theory that you never know. After all, much like the lottery, if you don't play, you can't win, right?

This morning, I'll be talking a bit about Yahoo! Personals, which I joined on a whim after hearing a friend talk about hers. From the very beginning, I didn't love the setup -- it's not very creative, and it felt quite constraining. I am, after all, not your everyday kind of girl, so having lots of limited categories often doesn't work for me. But I'm good at working around those things, and I did. Of course, I'm also far too cheap, and not motivated enough, to pay for any dating site, so I enjoyed the benefits of full membership for only the first seven days, and then they cut me back to only being able to write pre-formulated emails to people I might be interested in.

That's okay, though, because, so far as I can tell, there's no one interesting there.

The problem here isn't that there's no one interesting, but rather than there are too many other people muddling up the field. And because the searching functions are far too limited, there's no good way to sort through the chaff. And because I tend to look for guys who are a bit out of the mainstream, there's a lot of chaff on Yahoo! because it is, by self-definition, mainstream.

The most entertaining bit about this profile is that it has created a special IM handle that's linked to my primary Yahoo! IM handle, so when I'm logged in, people who see my profile and want to chat with me can drop me a line. This has led to some really great conversations (with my friends after the fact). At some point, I'll be giving some advice about how to strike up an IM conversation with someone you don't know but might like to bang get to know.

For now, though, my verdict on Yahoo! Personals is an unsurprising yawn. Special interest dating sites have a lot more potential.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:08 AM in dating sites | Permalink | Comments (0)

We all know that I look at Craig's List not just for getting my casual sex needs filled but also for the entertainment value of the many different types of posts out there. This evening's top pick has to be these guys (that link will expire in a week), who write:

My Friends and I want to see your naked pictures and jerk off to them! - mm4w - 24

Reply to: pers-117462975@craigslist.org

Hey Ladies! My friends from high school are visiting, and they're from a small town in Maine. When I told them about casual encounters, they freaked out.

Basically, in high school we used to watch a lot of porn together and then jack off to it. Tonight we plan on smoking a jay, and we were hoping you'd all help us with the jerking off part. Send us a naked pic (or why not multiple pics?) and we will all sit around and talk about you, and afterward, print up the hottest 4 pics and jerk off on them. We're into boobs shots more than pussy shots, if you have a lot to choose from.

Wouldn't that turn you on, knowing you were getting a group of old friends off? It should.

we promise not to show anyone your pics, and the best four will get a reply containing a play by play of the evening. the pics will get deleted.
and we don't discriminate, we dont care what you look like, we're in it for the mentality of it. you should be too.

bring it on, we'll start rollin that jay.

God, I love the internet. I think this is a total riot. If anyone's inclined to send them a photo, by all means, do so! The anonymous remailing address through CL should work as long as the ad is up.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:48 PM in real ads | Permalink | Comments (2)

When you respond to my personal ad on Craig's List, or to my profile on other dating sites, what I want is for you to show off and convince me that you're awesome. I don't want a lot of apologies or caveats, a bunch of foot-shuffling and hemming and hawing. I want you to tell me who you are and why you're the man for me.

What this means is that, first and foremost, you need to know who you are, so that you can then convey this to me. If you can't do that, there's not much of anywhere we can go.

This also means that you should have a good sense of what you're good at and why that might be appealing to me, based on my profile or ad. And then you should be able to show this off in a way that's confident but not arrogant or off-putting.

Don't be cocky, but be solid. Don't tell me all about your shortcomings, but don't lie about your strengths, either. Give me a piece of who you are and make it real.

Posted by ClueChick at 12:20 PM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (2)

Tonight, a quick browse of several cities' Craig's List casual encounters section posts brings up four posts within the first screen on each page that are repeats between cities. Perhaps this would be understandable if we were looking at a couple of very nearby cities: New York and Philadelphia, for example, but I looked at Seattle, Los Vegas, Boston and Miami. Obviously, these are spam.

What else do they have in common? They all use all caps in the headline. I didn't even bother to click through to see what content they use to try to get people to respond and thereby subscribe themselves inadvertently to some cam site or another.

I never bother with ads that have their headlines in all caps. Some people seem to think that this will make their ad stand out. I recommend that you stick with catchy headlines and appealing ads to make yourself stand out. Those headlines in all caps? Some of them may well be real, but I assume they're all spam and move on.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:59 PM in real ads | Permalink | Comments (0)

One of the many damaging myths that our society passes on to boys and girls -- and which we then incorporate as women and men -- is that men want sex all the time, and women don't want sex almost ever. "Not tonight, dear, I have a headache." This sucks. Get over it.

Men, this means for you that when you're responding to a woman's ad on Craig's List or any other personals/dating site, you don't have to trick her into wanting sex. Especially if she's posting in the casual encounters section or has said something in her profile about wanting something lighter or less committed, she's probably telling the truth.

This is why responding to my CE ad by talking about how what you really want is to get married is going to mean that I will not, in turn, respond to you. No, it's true, I probably also will not respond to the guy who says he just wants to get together tonight, but there's a lot of room for compromise between those two positions. I encourage you to suss it out.

Women like sex. Sex is fun! We enjoy it! We may, in fact, be slightly more particular about the sex we get than many men are, but even on that one I'm not sold; I think that's something that varies a lot from individual to individual, irrespective of sex or gender. Men cheat themselves and the women they fuck when they buy into the myth that women have to be talked into a roll in the hay.

So, men, stop trying to trick women into your bed.

And while I'm at it, women, stop playing hard to get. This isn't helping anyone.

Posted by ClueChick at 9:28 AM in ground rules | Permalink | Comments (0)