I totally agree with you, we all have preferences, and they matter. :) However, in a way, that is kind of my point. Often our real preferences can be betrayed by such broad labels. Let's take your example, you've found that people above or below a certain range lead to an experience that is less enjoyable than you seek. But as you've said, it's a general thing, you have been with some outside that range who have not lead to the poor experience you wish to avoid. However, how many more saw that range listed and moved on without contacting you? How many more good experiences could you have (or have had)? Of course, the reverse is also true, people within that range could suffer from the very characteristics you aim to avoid. And so it is with weight too. I've said before (on these forums) about a girl I dated for a while who was over 200lbs. And, to be totally honest, if I had seen that, especially without pics, it might have put me off (try as I might to avoid it, some reactions happen whether we want them or not - though pics tend to override this tendency, and certainly would have in this case(!), as I don't assume people to be lying, stranger things happen all the time lol). However, this was (is) one sexy woman, who also happened to be great in bed. Here's where it gets even odder, yes, it was apparent she had a few extra pounds, but, even though I do like BBWs, I would not have called this girl one. Yet, she was about 5'7", and when she told me she was over 200lbs, I was stunned! I didn't believe it. I playflly accused her of palming lead weights on the scale. Had I focused on #s (or had she not had the option of putting "0" in), who knows? I may well have missed out on some _great_ times with a VERY sexy woman. But by looking at some pics to get a rough idea, reading profiles, and emailing, then IMing before finally meeting, we got a feel for each other and realized that there may well have been some chemistry there (and there was indeed). Whatever one is inferring from stats (or any other general preferences) can be found in pics and profile. Are they too heavy or thin for you? Do they look too old or too young? Are they too immature? etc. Everything else can be asked, or found out in person. :) That's my take on it anyway, I know that's a hard sell, most people seem to like having the stats (unfortunately :p lol).

ages should NOT be listed on personals. Nor weight. When you meet someone in person, you don't card them or whip out a scale and ask them to stand on it." First of all, I very much enjoy your posts. You tell us what you are thinking in an educated way. Quite refreshing. Anyways. I agree to a degree...but only to a degree. Age range. I do see your point, taking each person on their own merit is a good thing. I do have a preferred age range...I like mid to late 20s through early 40s. I prefer at least mid 20s because I like being around gentlement with a little bit of experience under his belt, education, intelligence and wit. 40s. This is usually where I ruffle feathers. I tend to stay away from men in this range, older than 45, because in my personal experience they have had issues with erections. And I like cock. Fingers and tongue are minimal to me, I'm there for the penis. Does this mean I never, ever play with men who are 46? No, I've had great fun with them. Weight. We are attracted to who we are attracted to....some people like HWP, some like some meat, some love BBWs/BHMs. Its all about personal preference.

Just thought I should add, something else stood out from reading more comments here. I do have a "range" listed as well. I don't want people to see that, read what I said, and then think I'm a hypocrite. We all have mental hangups, thanks to our society, and they are hard to look past when we sit alone and reflect on them. Face to face is another situation however. What I mean is - at one point in time, I thought 50 was "too old for me", the point where it might creep me out a little. But then I started seeing ALL KINDS of hot women who were 50 or older (celebs and non-celebs, some I work with and many in this community). I had to accept that it isn't so creepy afterall. So I needed to open that up. However, what happens if you put the widest range allowed by the site? People think you are idescriminant and only need a proverbial "hole and a heartbeat" (like the stereotype of the single guy lol). So instead, I tried to find a range that reflected my taste, yet was not so wide as to give the above impression. Beyond that, I look at profiles based on distance, and then pics, if there are any, and text and see if there is an interest. (and if I might be a match for them as well) Derrick

Wanted to add a side note - some have suggested that there should be no labels, and that "everyone is different". Yet, the responses in this thread offer evidence to the contrary. If everyone was truly different, you wouldn't see groupings or percentages stack up like this. And the truth is, we really aren't all that different anyway. And what differences we do have, really only move us into smaller groupings. I pride myself on being unique, from taste to interests to style to basically everything. Yet, there's a great line I once read that often comes to mind "Always remember you're unique....... just like everybody else". ;) Labels are not inherently bad in any way. They are natural. And nature is neither bad nor good, it simply _is_. However, operating on the notion that labels are bad, that further bolsters my above argument - people "label" others based on their age or general age group, so if we wish to avoid that behavior, we should remove those stats from all profiles. :)

Very interesting thread. I've experienced the opposite of this quite a bit. I pay as little attention to age as absolutely possible (and truly wish all of society could bring themselves to let go and stop forcibly reminding everyone else of theirs). Yet time and again I've been either, stopped before I email seeing 35 or 40 or higher as the minimum, or flat out told I'm "too young" (ordinarily there are far worse things to be told, but in the moment, it's still a slight bummer lol). The comment someone made about being rejected in email but hit on in person is the crux of something I've been saying for a long time now - ages should NOT be listed on personals. Nor weight. When you meet someone in person, you don't card them or whip out a scale and ask them to stand on it. Why should online be any different? The claims about time shortages are bunk. We're ALL busy, and nobody really wants to waste their own time. But if you can't get a feel for if you might like them from their pics or profile or email, then bail. #'s listed won't be any less susceptible to fraud than pics or statements, so it doesn't provide you any value at all, rather, only potential detriment (by causing you to reject a great potential playmate). After that, it comes down to "paying to play", so to speak, meaning taking a chance to go meet someone who's pics might leave you a little uncertain about true attraction, or who might not have face pics, or any pics at all. Truth is, most people look better in person anyway, and chemistry can NOT be established via text, stats, and pics. The stats and pics actually offer little of substance too, it's down to the communication more than anything else. I've strayed a bit. Point is, blowing someone off for being a certain age based PURELY on the stat (not appearance, not communication/personality, etc) is a damn shame and utterly self-limiting behavior. (and the same applies to weight, or to pics that are missing, or missing faces, or "iffy") Derrick

Jinx&Minx,

I loved your profile, especially the part about wanting 150% straight men.
So you need a guy who's 100% manly with a half-gay Siamese twin? :-)

Jack and Darlene,

i love your post. you should read our profile. you will chuckle, i think....

j and m

lol I like that, its okay to get to the point, so much bullshit on here, they advertise for sex and then say they are not looking anymore, well take the f____ing thing off here. I am here for fun and hopefully to put a big smile on someones face.

A topic that's well written and strikes a chord. Putting strict limits in your profile can be pointless at times because when you meet people and have play time with them, many of those things just don't seem to count. We do believe, however, that if there are some things that attract you, put them in your profile. Put pictures in your profile so other people can decide just how attractive you are (or aren't). They may decide that the twinkle in your eye is more important that all their so called requirements put together. One reply on this topic talked about how they were rejected via e-mail but hit on when in person. When we say no to someone, we always leave open the possibility that if we were to run across them at a party or event, our initial impressions could be wrong and we might hit it off. That's why we like to go to social events where it's possible to meet a lot of people at once and just see if there's that chemistry that goes beyond what is written in the profile. Most of the couples on this site don't have to look for perfection because they've already found it with their spouse! Anyone trying to surpass that relationship is sure to fail. But inviting others, endowments, imperfections and all, into the bedroom can certainly spice things up! :)

We've run across this too. We may have even been one of those couples sometimes. We've been shot down very rudely by a couple while on the web. We ended up meeting this couple at a party and they were hitting on us very strongly. They refused to believe that they shot us down until we copied them their email. This couple was older than us. We have run into both older and younger couples who don't know what they are doing as well as those that do. We have put limits on ages, we have kids in their early 20's and her parents are in their late 50's. We don't get off playing with people our kids or our parents ages, that's just us. The couples we play with don't have to have the perfect bodies we don't either, we find that most people we know are that way.