Reading Men’s Bio on Grindr

[Shotsfired]

7 hours ago, fskn said:

@Philip, I always read what's written, and I share your frustration about being asked to repeat information that's in my (fully filled-out) profile.

A particular pet peeve is repeating the obvious in profiles. If you're muscular or work out x times a week, we'll be able to tell from your photos. And if you have to say that you're a "nice guy", it probably means that you have been accused of not being nice. 

@ErosWired, I agree, specific profiles help avoid conversations that will be awkward and that won't go anywhere. "Just want to cuddle" often is a red flag, as is the blank profile or the model-quality torso marked "looking for friends".

@Japbtm, I love Grindr's new tags, but they really are just Tribes v2. Both generations of Grindr classifications suffer from the same design flaw: users don't know whether tribes and tags reflect what you are or what you are seeking in someone else.

I have had a paid Grindr subscription for several years now. It pays for itself in the time I save from being able to limit the "cascade" (the grid of people) to people who (a) are currently online and (b) not only have a pic, but a face pic, specifically. If I could also remove profiles with distance display turned off, I'd be ecstatic. I don't want to have to guess how far apart we are, and it's possible to find any Grindr user's exact location from the locations of nearby users — a scary possibility, but nevertheless true for any location-based system that sorts profiles in order by distance.

 

You nailed it. It is especially irritating when you are looking to be dominated and you can't tell what they want from the hashtag.

I miss the art of cruising.  It was less tedious and more spontaneous. 

A lot of the ads are about as passionate  as a dog turd. People need to stop treating dating apps like takeout menus.  One went so far as to dictate how many dogs they wanted their date to have. Crazy.  

Also, just like in the theatre, you are auditioning always. I can tell you that I read their profile. How you present yourself is key to whether I contact you.  First, I am more interested in who you are looking for than who you are not looking for. If you say you are into hairy guys,  I know I might respond, until I also see something like "absolutely no gingers." I am not a ginger,  but that is so rude  I don't care if you are my type physically,  if you are needlessly calling out groups of  people  for exclusion, you are likely someone I don't want to be around.  Even guys I have no intention of dating can reach out and say hello. If someone you don't like reaches out you, can ignore them, let them down gently or just say "no thank you." Don't be a dick. Chances are you come out looking like a bigoted racist jerk.

 

I haven't met a race,  religion nor a male body type where I  haven't been able to find somebody that really turns me on. That's the truth. Calling out people in a general with the purpose of excluding them over superficial reasons is annoying and immoral  

I lose my temper when straights enter gay/queer spaces with entitlement and without invite. .  Theu need to come correct or get out. Also, trans people are not their punching bags, litmus tests, or their trial go at gayness.  Straight men are getting on Grindr more and more with homophobic comments. 

Edited January 23, 2022 by Shotsfired
Drug references

[fskn]

All so well said, @Shotsfired!

4 hours ago, Shotsfired said:

It is especially irritating when you are looking to be dominated and you can't tell what they want from the hashtag.

Apart from the problem of guessing the perspective of tags (about the person or about the person sought), how do you feel about the limit on the number of tags? I want to include dom and some fetishes like spit, but have had to focus on essentials like bb, drugfree and vaccinated. On one hand, Grindr's allowing more than 8 tags would increase the potential for affinity matches, and on the other, as happens in BBRTS, where people can check as many preference boxes as they like, too many tags could make it hard to tell what a person likes best. "All emphasis is no emphasis."

4 hours ago, Shotsfired said:

I miss the art of cruising.  It was less tedious and more spontaneous. 

A lot of the ads are about as passionate  as a dog turd. People need to stop treating dating apps like takeout menus.

...

Also, just like in the theatre, you are auditioning always.

The lack of engagement apparent in some profiles and in some conversations is pretty sad. (My call for CRM-like functionality could even be misinterpreted as endorsing the takeout menu/store catalogue approach. I meant only that a full and permanent history of our interactions with other people would be useful!) Considering what's at stake — great sex, marginal sex, or no sex; meeting a friend, a fuck-buddy or your future husband, or meeting nobody; feeling energized by interactions or being left lonely — it pays to spend time on what we write in our profiles, on our review of other people's profiles, and on our conversations. "Anything worth doing is worth doing well."

4 hours ago, Shotsfired said:

I am more interested in who you are looking for than who you are not looking for. If you say you are into hairy guys,  I know I might respond, until I also see something like "absolutely no gingers." I am not a ginger,  but that is so rude  I don't care if you are my type physically,  if you are needlessly calling out groups of  people  for exclusion, you are likely someone I don't want to be around.

Forgive me if I've told this story before. A friend of mine worked as a postal clerk. She explained that a marketing consultant had come in and told the manager to take down all publicly-visible signs with negative messages, prices, etc. Even the wall clock had to go. The consultant was right. In dating apps, we can find the types of people we prefer without putting down others, by using positive statements and tactful triage after people respond. And I don't mean exclusionary statements couched in positive terms, like "Love Asians, white guys and light-skinned Latinos"; the person might as well be listing the groups they don't like.

 

5 hours ago, Shotsfired said:

I lose my temper when straights enter gay/queer spaces with entitlement and without invite. .  Theu need to come correct or get out. Also, trans people are not their punching bags, litmus tests, or their trial go at gayness.  Straight men are getting on Grindr more and more with homophobic comments. 

Use of Grindr by non-GLBT people is an unfortunate phenomenon. I'd like to see it made contrary to the terms of use, and enforced with aggressive profile moderation. The "BBC4TS" (to pick one common example) and "no men!" profiles should be deleted, as should profiles of straight women looking for straight men. These are opportunistic invasions of queer spaces, and often involve sex work (which is great, but doesn't belong in a dating app).

Although I'm happy that trans people are now welcome on Grindr (they were not always, and their profiles were subject to deletion), I get nervous when I see "T4T" used in a frankly exclusionary way. Last night, I saw "not attracted to facial hair" in a profile. As I waited for the profile picture to load, I was expending a straight guy, but instead, the profile belonged to a trans person. Going on to an app used mainly by gay men and saying you don't like male features is a puzzling choice.

In the end, trans people who are only interested in meeting other trans people, and trans people who are eager to meet straight people who are themselves only willing to meet trans people, need separate apps with critical masses of the preferred users.

5 hours ago, Shotsfired said:

One went so far as to dictate how many dogs they wanted their date to have. Crazy.

This kind of gay person has been influenced by straight women, who apparently tell the men they meet how many children they want to have. It's a Lifetime movie phenomenon, whereby having children is an end in and of itself, and the partner is incidental.

[Guest]

Quote

I read them, why not.  It does save time with regards to useless chatting.  Grindr can be a shady place to begin with; I am lucky to have been able to meet many great encounters via the app.  But since I am picky, I do find bios important.  An empty bio is simply overlooked by me.  

 

[T-Girl-Cumdumpster]

On 1/22/2022 at 11:51 AM, dustysawblades said:

Personally I prefer an almost blank profile. If their title indicates that they're a bottom or into BB I'll msg them. I don't want to see their face, and if they have a filled out profile that's a turn off for me. It's only about them coming over or vice versa, me putting my load in them, and that's it. 

lol I feel the exact same about tops. I don’t want to know what they look like, their name, race, age, status, height, or weight. I just wanna take their loads. get used and move on to the next horny top. I wanna be nothing more than a fuckhole.

[PozBearWI]

On 1/23/2022 at 10:53 AM, fskn said:

All so well said, @Shotsfired!

Apart from the problem of guessing the perspective of tags (about the person or about the person sought), how do you feel about the limit on the number of tags? I want to include dom and some fetishes like spit, but have had to focus on essentials like bb, drugfree and vaccinated. On one hand, Grindr's allowing more than 8 tags would increase the potential for affinity matches, and on the other, as happens in BBRTS, where people can check as many preference boxes as they like, too many tags could make it hard to tell what a person likes best. "All emphasis is no emphasis."

The lack of engagement apparent in some profiles and in some conversations is pretty sad. (My call for CRM-like functionality could even be misinterpreted as endorsing the takeout menu/store catalogue approach. I meant only that a full and permanent history of our interactions with other people would be useful!) Considering what's at stake — great sex, marginal sex, or no sex; meeting a friend, a fuck-buddy or your future husband, or meeting nobody; feeling energized by interactions or being left lonely — it pays to spend time on what we write in our profiles, on our review of other people's profiles, and on our conversations. "Anything worth doing is worth doing well."

Forgive me if I've told this story before. A friend of mine worked as a postal clerk. She explained that a marketing consultant had come in and told the manager to take down all publicly-visible signs with negative messages, prices, etc. Even the wall clock had to go. The consultant was right. In dating apps, we can find the types of people we prefer without putting down others, by using positive statements and tactful triage after people respond. And I don't mean exclusionary statements couched in positive terms, like "Love Asians, white guys and light-skinned Latinos"; the person might as well be listing the groups they don't like.

 

Use of Grindr by non-GLBT people is an unfortunate phenomenon. I'd like to see it made contrary to the terms of use, and enforced with aggressive profile moderation. The "BBC4TS" (to pick one common example) and "no men!" profiles should be deleted, as should profiles of straight women looking for straight men. These are opportunistic invasions of queer spaces, and often involve sex work (which is great, but doesn't belong in a dating app).

Although I'm happy that trans people are now welcome on Grindr (they were not always, and their profiles were subject to deletion), I get nervous when I see "T4T" used in a frankly exclusionary way. Last night, I saw "not attracted to facial hair" in a profile. As I waited for the profile picture to load, I was expending a straight guy, but instead, the profile belonged to a trans person. Going on to an app used mainly by gay men and saying you don't like male features is a puzzling choice.

In the end, trans people who are only interested in meeting other trans people, and trans people who are eager to meet straight people who are themselves only willing to meet trans people, need separate apps with critical masses of the preferred users.

This kind of gay person has been influenced by straight women, who apparently tell the men they meet how many children they want to have. It's a Lifetime movie phenomenon, whereby having children is an end in and of itself, and the partner is incidental.

@fskn I really enjoy your posts! 

One thing I do like about Grindr is that while there seems to be a huge influx of women seeking men there; it is easy to block those profiles when I see them which takes them out of my "view" as it were when I am cruising Grindr.  

Man I agree with you, calling out race (whether context is "prefer" or "dislike" is still making it a determinant.  And I fail to understand why that matters?  I tend to take men "as they are".  If we don't hit it off, that's OK.  We don't have to jump in bed with everyone (fun though that sounds).  🙂  

 

Jim

[PendragonSpirit]

I haven't actually used any of the apps in a couple of years now. But when I was, I would absolutely read the profiles to see if people were potential matches in the "I'll fuck you raw" category. If someone's profile said "Safe Only" or similar, I'd move along. Yes, in some cases people who were "safe only" would jump at the chance to go raw if presented the opportunity, but for the most part it helped me weed out the ones where I'd be wasting my time.

[partying.hard]

1 hour ago, WiChaser said:

@fskn I really enjoy your posts! 

One thing I do like about Grindr is that while there seems to be a huge influx of women seeking men there; it is easy to block those profiles when I see them which takes them out of my "view" as it were when I am cruising Grindr.  

Man I agree with you, calling out race (whether context is "prefer" or "dislike" is still making it a determinant.  And I fail to understand why that matters?  I tend to take men "as they are".  If we don't hit it off, that's OK.  We don't have to jump in bed with everyone (fun though that sounds).  🙂  

 

Jim

I prefer guys be very specific in what they want.  I’m white.  I’m 44.  I’m hairy.  I’m beefy.

if they crave black men, it doesn’t hurt my feelings.

if they was 50 and older, or 25 and younger, it doesn’t hurt my feelings.

if they want a Twink, it doesn’t hurt my feelings.

instead, I’m appreciative I don’t need to waste my time.  If their preferences are based on things that won’t get their dick hard, who am I to criticize?

[PozBearWI]

1 hour ago, partying.hard said:

I prefer guys be very specific in what they want.  I’m white.  I’m 44.  I’m hairy.  I’m beefy.

if they crave black men, it doesn’t hurt my feelings.

if they was 50 and older, or 25 and younger, it doesn’t hurt my feelings.

if they want a Twink, it doesn’t hurt my feelings.

instead, I’m appreciative I don’t need to waste my time.  If their preferences are based on things that won’t get their dick hard, who am I to criticize?

I certainly don't argue with that.  No load refused here.  Any man who wants to unload in my hole is invited to do so.  

[BootmanLA]

2 hours ago, partying.hard said:

I prefer guys be very specific in what they want.  I’m white.  I’m 44.  I’m hairy.  I’m beefy.

if they crave black men, it doesn’t hurt my feelings.

if they was 50 and older, or 25 and younger, it doesn’t hurt my feelings.

if they want a Twink, it doesn’t hurt my feelings.

instead, I’m appreciative I don’t need to waste my time.  If their preferences are based on things that won’t get their dick hard, who am I to criticize?

I don't think most reasonable men have a problem with people who list "these are the things I like". I might roll my eyes if they're too specific, but I don't take offense.

I do think more of us have an issue when the person posts a list of "these are the things I refuse" - the "no this, no that, no the other" types, especially when this, that, or the other are immutable characteristics. Back in the pre-online era, personal printed ads (in the backs of gay magazines and newspapers) not infrequently had the phrase "No fats No femmes No blacks" - a threeway of rudeness that just screamed "stay away from the crazy".

[PozBearWI]

On 1/24/2022 at 4:25 PM, BootmanLA said:

I don't think most reasonable men have a problem with people who list "these are the things I like". I might roll my eyes if they're too specific, but I don't take offense.

I do think more of us have an issue when the person posts a list of "these are the things I refuse" - the "no this, no that, no the other" types, especially when this, that, or the other are immutable characteristics. Back in the pre-online era, personal printed ads (in the backs of gay magazines and newspapers) not infrequently had the phrase "No fats No femmes No blacks" - a threeway of rudeness that just screamed "stay away from the crazy".

Yup, when blocking just removed those profile from my view, I use it.  I'm not mad at them, it just saves both of us unnecessary grief.  And it is mighty helpful to know that if the only thing a guy wants is a BBC; I can stop right there as for certain mine is not that.  😄

[Pigforcum]

I always read them myself

[Brianbttm]

One big problem with Grindr bios is that I see it happening more often guys don't put their sexual position i.e. top, vers or bottom. If guys would list their position it would save a lot of headaches. I have bottom listed in mine and also put in the header or description specifically "bb bottom" and "no condoms". But it's inevitable that I get hit up by someone and when I verify during the chat and ask "u into bb?" I get the response safe or condoms only. 

Edited January 30, 2022 by Brianbttm

[NWUSHorny]

7 hours ago, Brianbttm said:

One big problem with Grindr bios is that I see it happening more often guys don't put their sexual position i.e. top, vers or bottom. If guys would list their position it would save a lot of headaches. I have bottom listed in mine and also put in the header or description specifically "bb bottom" and "no condoms". But it's inevitable that I get hit up by someone and when I verify during the chat and ask "u into bb?" I get the response safe or condoms only. 

I typically see it from guys whose profiles indicate they are looking for a relationship, or at least someone to date. I just assume they leave it off because they don't do casual fucks. What I find more irritating is the ones who do list a position but then tell you they don't do casual sex when you do meet up with them. Too many of them are sure they can talk me into at least dating them, without taking into account the differences in our sex drives.

[JamesL100]

Often the profiles are not updated. Plenty of new guys leave blanks saying they will fill in later .. but are still incomplete (even at the basic yes/no level, let alone with at least a couple of their own words) some months later.
Many have become attached or detached so you don't know how many you might be meeting. A lot ask for bb sex but have 'always' safe sex. Some 'Peter Pan' profiles are perpetually just under a decadal birthday (always 29, 39, 49, 59, 69).

Edited January 31, 2022 by JamesL100
grammar

[fskn]

33 minutes ago, JamesL100 said:

Some 'Peter Pan' profiles are perpetually just under a decadal birthday (always 29, 39, 49, 59, 69).

Love the Peter Pan description! Seems just like goods at the supermarket, always priced at 99¢ instead of $1, possibly with quality to match. What do people expect for 99¢? 😂