>>424490
It sounds awful, but I do understand the problem having lived in London for 18 years. Then again, the whole modern dating scene (Tinder, Bumble, etc) fills me with complete dread - the only time I have ever "swiped right" is on behalf of others when they've asked me to "help". Thank goodness I have a partner and am very happy with her.

>>424491
>It sounds awful, but I do understand the problem having lived in London for 18 years.

Huh, it does seem to be a harder scene but I've not been able to work out why considering the place is full of millions of career women with a positive gender balance. Maybe it's the long-hours.

>>424493
If its any consolation, most of the women I know complain about the dating scene in London too - I don't think its particular to men, at all.

My local gaming bar runs a regular speed dating events for geeks. They have way more men interested than women, so women have to be bribed with free drinks while very few of the men who apply make it through. Maybe non-geeky speed dating has less of a dearth of women.

No idea, stopped thinking of myself as human some time ago. Don't bother with dating or hookups at all. Life's a lot more simple now.

I've been on speed dating 3 times. It was a waste of time. Despite even matching with some of them, they don't respond when you contact them.

Never tried speed dating, as I find the concept ridiculous. How can you possibly work out if somebody is a promising match for you by talking to them for just a matter of minutes.

>>424493

I think something about online dating in built up areas causes people start to view each other with contempt if they don't match their ideal.

Serial monogamy can reach an absurd end game where people can have high expectations whilst putting in no effort themselves or compromising.

The myth of the soul mate becomes destructive because people start thinking the perfect person is someone you might actually find and are entitled to have.

>>424498
I find I know if I've clicked with someone really quickly. But a speed dating format seems a terrible way to do this, as you're basically trying to have a simultaneous 5-minute job interview intsead of a relaxed conversation. I'm an acquired taste anyway, I'm sure 90% of the women I spoke to would be smiling, nodding and quietly plotting their route to the fire escape.

>>424571

>But a speed dating format seems a terrible way to do this, as you're basically trying to have a simultaneous 5-minute job interview intsead of a relaxed conversation.

Five minutes may be enough to spark someone's initial interest and give them a very tentative idea of what kind of a person you are. But it's always going to be quite superficial, and you are going to run the risk of passing on people who would really be a good match for you after all, but never had a chance because you only had five minutes together.

I've been on dates where I was reluctant to even go, but having spent two or three hours with that person, I often gained a much more profound idea about who they were, and that was often also when I really began to feel some sort of attraction, and again in a way that five minutes with somebody could just never really engender.

And I also don't think that speed dating solves the problem that many singles with busy schedules feel they have. If you can't even make time to get to know somebody during the course of an evening together, even if they then turn out to be no good match for you at all, then maybe you just aren't in a place in your life where a partner is what you need.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuJW6gzxQwg

>>424574
Whoah. You should have said the clip contains the r word.

>>424583
If you are truly this sensitive then I worry for your ability to cope with any sort of discordance in your life.

>>424583

How and why are you worried about that while posting on a website called britfags?

>>424583
What's the R word?

>>424593
Rubberbandits.

>>424593

Rimming.

>>424593
Rhododendron.

>>424583

>the r word

Seth Rogen?

Sorry, my mistake. Won't happen again.

>>424593
Rubberbabybuggybumpers.

>>424593

Ronseal.

This is a Cuprinol website and we won't utter that R word again.

>>424615
I use Cuprinol because it's cheap and I rent anyway. But Ronseal is better and everyone knows it, even you.

>>424495
One of the local similar venues had bints asking the organisators to bring less programmers.
Poor dweebs.

>>424629
Fewer.

>>424629
include <iostream>
int main()
{
bool codersAreDweebs = true;
while (codersAreDweebs)
{
std::cout << 'Please kill me' << std::endl;
}
return 0;
}

>>424630
Thanks m9.

>>424618
It does what it says on the tin, i.e. it seals Rons.

Well, I'm going to my first one later and now feel like a teenager getting ready for the school disco. My guess is that you need to put a suit on but what questions should I ask? More importantly, how do you answer what you're looking for? My relationships have always just fallen the way they have - I live largely without big plans.

I think I'd rather just go to a few job interviews than this. There's cocktails afterwards as well so there's that torture as I'll be on my own.

>>424495
>>424629
Makes you wonder what kinds of women go to this. I thought speed dating was more something for nerds now that we have tinder and everything.

>>424670

>Makes you wonder what kinds of women go to this.

I suspect they advertise them as something other than 'geek night' to the women? Either that or it's just a load of lasses that like marvel films and memes and that and are surprised when they're shoved in front of a load of trainspotters and Linux enthusiasts.

>>424670

>More importantly, how do you answer what you're looking for? My relationships have always just fallen the way they have - I live largely without big plans.

That's a perfectly satisfactory answer. It'll turn some people off, but if you say it with confidence it'll make you look easy-going and fun-loving rather than an aimless waster.

>>424670
Ah cock. I waited until 3 to book the ticket and by then they only had female ones going spare - 10 by the looks of things so really I think I dodged a bullet for a 25 person event.

Maybe next weekend and I'll try and do some selfies for OkCupid in the meantime.

>>424690
To give you an update: I just got back from an event and while I had no idea what I was doing there weren't any major embarrassments.

I will say that 4 minutes isn't long enough at all unless you're looking for doing chat-up lines. In a best case scenario you just manage to get the conversation flowing and then you have to abruptly move and it's back to square one. I can't remember half the people I spoke to and the lads who clearly did well were the ones who arrived with a game-plan much like pulling random fanny at a nightclub. Makes you wonder what the point is really.

If I was going to do it again I would admit to the shame of going 'nerd dating'. It got awfully tedious getting asked about travelling and holiday plans for the umpteenth time and I was tempted to start a cunt-off by pointing out it's just empty consumption. If I was being honest I could strike out everyone on those grounds.

Oh well, I got pretty hammered and a pencil out of it.

>>424943
>I can't remember half the people I spoke to and the lads who clearly did well were the ones who arrived with a game-plan much like pulling random fanny at a nightclub. Makes you wonder what the point is really.

I have never been to such an event - but I imagine the point is, when you meet someone you like, they're generally very easy to talk to and conversation flows easily. An awkward first four minutes probably isn't going to turn into something wonderful, given more time. I think that's the point of speed dating. If I were you, I would be brutally honest about how travelling and holiday plans were empty consumption - you need to quickly find the person who feels the same way about it, by the sound of it; maybe don't make it sound like a cunt-off though.

>>424943
> I was tempted to start a cunt-off
Audible mirth.

Join Slimming World or one of the other fat clubs. Seriously, you will be drowning in fanny batter.

>>425050

Then shortly after he'll be suffocating for other reasons.

>>425057

Slimming World has a pretty decent success rate. It's a pretty smart move to get your hooks into the Slimmer of The Month while she's still fat and doesn't have any self esteem yet.

>>425059
Never change, .gs.

>>425060
Think about it. It's the ideal place to meet women.

A lot of them aren't even fat. You don't want the type of fat woman that goes to a fat club, though. Go for the reasonably sized ones.

>>425050

I'm only nine stone. I don't think I could pull it off. Shame really, because I love a fat bird.

>>425059
>It's a pretty smart move to get your hooks into the Slimmer of The Month while she's still fat and doesn't have any self esteem yet.

If you ever read the likes of Love It then they regularly have stories from women who were fat, lost a lot of weight and then decided to ditch their loyal husband and friends because they've decided they're now better than them and are getting attention from loads of other blokes.

If you go to Slimming World to pick up women you don't go for the huge women actually losing weight. You go for the ones who are a healthy size already. If you're into fatties then go for the one who was feeling bad so she polished off a pack of biscuits.

Drowning. In. Fanny. Batter.

>>425061

Exactly this.

I've actually had first hand experience in these groups. You're often the only bloke there, or one of a very, very small handful, you have something in common with all the girls there, and it might seem daft, but you're seen every week to be working towards and achieving a goal, which is a fairly attractive trait to have. Not to mention that men often lose weight faster than women by grace of body chemistry, so you end up painting yourself as a dedicated sort of chap without really trying.

And, as you allude to, 'fat' means something very different to women than it does to men. There's women there who only really want to lose a bit of a belly, or think they're half a stone too heavy, and many people continue to attend the group even when they're at their ideal weight and are maintaining - they highly recommend you do this in the group, and they waive all group fees if you're within 3lbs either way of your target weight, so you're almost guaranteed there's women there every week who are at their target weight and very enthusiastic towards others still losing. There are of course much bigger people there, but it's not even close to a majority in a typical group.

Not to mention being stuck in a church hall with 45 women every monday night for an hour and a half is an excellent way to hone your banter skills, even if you don't fancy anyone at the group.

I call it the 'whale method'

>>425077

How would you rate the effectiveness vs. the 'ostrich method'?

>>425080

I think they're both very valid and effective methods, but the ostrich method is going to provide you with a better opportunity for casual sex with multiple women - my methodology is, admittedly, more geared towards a singular sexual or even romantic partner. It's a lot harder to play the field when the field all meets once a week to gossip. There are ways around this, such as going to different groups, but really to undertake the Whale method you must be prepared to be stuck with one partner until she either succeeds, or gives up on that last five pounds entirely, or eats enough cake that she's too embarrassed to go back.

>>425065

>>425077
This lad. This lad gets it.

>they waive all group fees if you're within 3lbs either way of your target weight

That's one of the key things about these fat clubs. They charge you if you lose too much weight. They want to encourage positive and sustainable lifestyle changes rather than dramatic changes in weight where you might end up piling it all back on again because they've not fundamentally got rid of bad habits. This even gives our resident 9 stone lad a way in to the weigh-in; being skinny doesn't mean you are healthy so you're interested in healthy lifestyle choices and being better.

Seriously, there is no better way to meet women. FEAST, LADS. FEAST LIKE KINGS UPON THE WOMEN.

>>425083
Wot the bloody fuck?

>>425087

>FEAST, LADS. FEAST LIKE KINGS UPON THE WOMEN.

Fanny is syn free, after all.

>>425083

I know a bad photoshop when I see one.

If you want to know what my upper limit is, I'll tell you when I find it. I will tell you that I was once rushed to hospital on a spinal board as a result of a facesitting mishap. 100% worth it.

>>425087

>This even gives our resident 9 stone lad a way in to the weigh-in; being skinny doesn't mean you are healthy so you're interested in healthy lifestyle choices and being better.

Nice angle, I might give that a punt.

>>425096
>I'll tell you when I find it. I will tell you that I was once rushed to hospital on a spinal board as a result of a facesitting mishap

Can you explain facesitting to me, please? I like fat women but I've never seen the allure of that.

>>425096
I've always wanted to try facesitting but never had the chance. My last two gfs have been over 30 stone, and both refused to sit on my face as they thought they'd hurt me. I'm missing out.

>>425101
>My last two gfs have been over 30 stone

Can you show me a picture of someone of a similar size? I'm not very good at visualising weights and heights. My girlfriend is a size 18, possibly a size 20, and I'm not sure how much she weights but I'm guessing she's not 30 stone hefty.

>>425099

It's just eating fanny but she's on top. I suppose the appeal is that it feels quite submissive. Sort of the equivalent of shoving your cock down her throat.

>>425103

Please enjoy this unsettling presentation.

>>425104
Oh, is that it? I thought it was people who got off on being smothered. I've done that, but my girlfriend doesn't like it because she cums too quickly.

>>425105
Thanks. She's big, but not that big.

>>425105
Oh fuck those crappy videos with synthesised voices.

>>425106

As someone who's neither a sub nor into fatties, face sitting is a great way to give head without straining your neck. It's less comfortable for the bird but it lets you focus up so much more I'm certain she'll find it worthwhile.

>>425099

Do you like fannies? Do you like arses? Do you like thighs? Then why not try having your head completely surrounded by fanny and arse and thigh! I'm definitely into the smothering/crushing aspect, but I also really like getting punched.

>>425101

Word to the wise: triple-check that your bed is sufficiently sturdy. You do not want the entire weight of a substantial woman landing on your head from a height. It hurts, and not in the fun way.

>>425106

>Oh, is that it? I thought it was people who got off on being smothered.

That's also a thing, where they just sort of sit on you so you can't breathe. It's hot if you're into that sort of thing.

The effect is pronounced enough when my 7st girlfriend does it, I can't even imagine a massive woman doing it, I'd probably just feel like I was definitely going to die.

>>425111

I've been told to correct that my girlfriend is 8st 2, so "they don't think I'm anorexic"

>>425111
I'd imagine it's smellier with a hefty lass.

>>425096
>If you want to know what my upper limit is, I'll tell you when I find it. I will tell you that I was once rushed to hospital on a spinal board as a result of a facesitting mishap. 100% worth it.

Jesus lad. Well each to their own. Also what do you think of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2gIJkDYe-g