Clichés in Women’s Profiles – Why They Occur

Before I add the third and final part to this miniseries, I wanted to add my thoughts on why this phenomenon – of why women’s profiles tend to look and sound the same – occurs.

Someone on YouTube mentioned something very important in one of their videos, that even I hadn’t thought about before I began this miniseries: women haven’t had to advertise themselves in the same way men have, when it comes to courting/dating/sex.

I’ve often observed and commented that all women have ever had to do to get laid is step outside their front door, sometimes not even having to ask anybody for their consent. I consider it a joke when women tell people they’re looking for, pursuing or trying to find a guy – usually because all this selective looking, pursuing and finding is being done from a fixed spot (i.e. it’s not proactive looking, pursuing or finding). There was an excellent Nemi strip in the Metro a few weeks ago, demonstrating that a woman’s way of “finding” men is basically waiting for them to approach her.

But whatever you think of this, I think it says something that more and more women are actually having to put themselves forward at some level. Whether it’s to do with these so-called “equal rights”, women’s generally increased pickiness, the increasing unattractiveness of marriage to men or whatever else, I have no idea.

I would guess that the practice of women advertising themselves is a recent phenomenon (as in the last three or four decades), because a lot of women’s profiles begin with the adage that it’s an incredibly hard, sometimes contrived thing to do.

I can see where they’re coming from: for centuries they’ve relied on make-up, clothes, shoes, hairstyles and physical features to do the advertising for them, and they still heavily rely on those things today. You’ll notice that women go to extraordinary lengths to be noticed by their appearance when they go out, yet they’re generally adverse to talking to other people (especially men they don’t find attractive). This is also reflected online by some women having a blank or near-empty profile or ad, save for one or two photos of themselves.

The many clichés and copy-and-post snippets in women’s profiles, in my opinion, comes from women having no idea how to describe themselves, let alone advertise themselves to potential suitors. It might be that they’ve been raised on the idea that a man has to fit their requirements, with absolutely no thought about what she will bring to the table. Or it might be that they have no idea what men find attractive. I think it would most likely be along the lines of buying into the kind of person their parents, friends, society and the media say they should be, so much so that they have no idea who they are. (In their defence, I will say that women are subjected to an awful lot of social conditioning.)

So the solution for most women is to copy what other women have done, especially those who are seen or thought to be getting attention from men. Just for the sake of getting some attention from men, it doesn’t really matter what these women are actually communicating from copying what other people have written – at this stage it seems to be all about satisfying the ego.

Back in the day it used to be about having a photo – and it still is, because you allegedly get 2243434353422 times more responses (which, by the way, doesn’t help at all if you have zero to begin with – do the math!). Most women did not have a photo back then, nor did they have access to a webcam or a scanner (many of them lied about having “broken” webcams or scanners, or not knowing how to use them), so for the sake of getting attention from men they would use default Windows wallpaper, Internet “joke” pictures or fake photos (i.e. photos of other, generically attractive girls). There used to be a site called Fakers Suck for outing those people, which is now defunct – thankfully the practice of using fake photos has dramatically declined, but still happens.

As for the textual content: way back in the day, before Internet dating was conceived, generic terms such as GSOH or VGSOH were common in personal ads; the modern equivalents are “love to laugh”, “up for anything” and “if you want to know anything just ask”. These are clearly clichés because, if you ask the person behind the ad what these terms actually mean, or to clarify their usage, you’ll often find they have no idea or, more likely, refuse to respond.

While it’s easy and probably accurate to think that women copy-and-post these statements because they’re lazy, unoriginal and devoid of a personality, I think it’s more about women thinking that these statements attract men. But again, the outcome is exactly the same:

Women who copy-and-paste other people’s content end up looking and sounding the same, therefore there’s absolutely no reason why a man should pick one woman over the other.

That’s all I really have to say on the issue for now. But I thought it was important to write because, while there are other pages that mention profile clichés and poke fun at people who use them, I thought it was just as important to flesh it out a bit more – just like with “nice guy” bashing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

nineteen + 18 =