Unhinged

I have once again dipped my toe into the online dating experience; my aim is not to hurry up and go on dates, or land another husband, but to observe, as if I were conducting a social research experiment. This time around I am armed with the "Burned Haystack Dating Method," which, as the name implies, teaches one to find the needle in a haystack by burning the haystack.

The idea of eliminating as many men as you can based on keeping a keen eye for possible red flags, things that seem icky, and personal preferences seems to go completely against the way women are socialized to keep the door open to any man paying attention to us. It disposes of the ol' "give him a chance" mentality, and encourages being picky. In college, I used to always get accused of being "too picky" as if it were a crime to have standards. Even in my "pickiness" I still chose someone who was widely known as a good guy who has shown himself to be something else. Being picky can does not always protect us from choosing wrong.

I set up my profile on Hinge with the the required six photos and chose my prompts. Within a day I had 39 notifications alerting me that different men on the app had left comments on photos or prompts. As I attempted to sort through the profiles, I got a pop up saying my viewing would be limited because I was not using the app with a paid subscription. Gotta love capitalism!

That's the conflict with these things, it's the dating version of LinkedIn pushing you to the premium membership so you can see the 16 people who viewed your profile. Curiosity is supposed to entice you to pull out that credit card and sign up, and if setting up a subscription is the expectation, do they really want any of us to meet up and delete the app?

With a much more discerning eye, I am using this experience to fine tune what profiles are acceptable. Acceptable isn't the same as good, it means there are no red flags on display given this first glance at a very small amount of information provided.

In no particular order, here are some of my "Do not pass Go, Do not collect $200" criteria:

* Multiple car selfies

* Bathroom selfies

* Unflattering photos. One man posted a photo of himself in a bed wearing a hospital gown and sporting an oxygen tube. A+ for transparency, but what in the seeking a nurse with a purse is taking place, here? There was another who posted a shot of his torso -- no head, no lower legs and feet, which I'm guessing was an attempt at going beyond the basic selfie/headshot, but really, this was the best he could do?

* Every photo includes them wearing sunglasses, a hat, or other accessories of disguise

* Obviously fake names (I kid you not, one man listed himself as "beach bum," and a countless number of black men have gone with the name "King")

* Anyone mid-40's and up "looking to start a family"

* Political views consisting of "conservative," "moderate," "other," "not political" or not making their political views visible. It astounded me how many black men claimed to be "not political." Sir, have you seen the news? Being Switzerland is not a luxury you can afford in 2026. Anyone who doesn't care about (or is committed to) electing officials bent on eliminating the rights of selected segments of the population is a no for me, dawg.

* Any references to their love language being "physical touch" (and 99.9% of the time, those responding to the love language prompt will mention "physical touch"). Also grounds for dismissal: reference to "a woman's touch," "passionate hugs in the kitchen," "cuddling/snuggling," and any declarations that they like good kissing or sex. There is nothing wrong with liking these things; however, this is a dating site profile. Would it be appropriate to declare any of this to a dating prospect when introducing oneself for the first time?

(nice try, I'm not choosing this particular "Bear.")

* Nonmonogamy or "figuring out my relationship type" or checking off all of the relationship options in what should be a single answer

* Low effort, to include poor grammar and spelling, one word responses to prompts, incorrectly responding to prompts, text talk in the age of everyone having easy access to a full keyboard (only Prince could get away with substituting "U" for "you")

You go crazy for Burger's what? What does a burger possess that makes you crazy? Oh the suspense!

* Using prompts to tell me who I should be, challenging me to message you because no one texts on the app, any reference to "No drama." The ones doing this seem to forget the intention should be for them to inform me why I should be interested in them, not a checklist of what I need to be to win them over.

* Anything that has the slightest whiff of fetishism (looking at you, white dude named Jerome, for stating that you "prefer dating outside of (your) culture and race,)" and you, other dude who answered the prompt "I go crazy for..." with "FEET!" Again, is this appropriate to mention in a basic introduction?

Win me over by accepting my fetish which shall not be named

* Anyone lying about his age. Looking at you, Barry, who states he's 58 on his profile:

and then shares within a prompt that he's actually 64.

Can ya believe it folks? Barry saw nothing wrong with lying and attempting to lighten the mood with the ol' aw shucks, but I'm young at heart defense and sealing the deal with a "Woot!" as the youths say. If you'd seen Barry's profile photos, it was not that hard to believe the man was his actual age. The deeper message is that he thinks he's entitled to be a prospect for anyone who filtered out his real age. Barry believes he can convince women who purposely filtered out the 60-somethings to make an exception for him. That "Woot!" is sure to charm the ladies into reconsidering their age limit. Good luck with that, Barry.

A lot of men seemed to be more focused on describing what they want in a woman instead of telling women about themselves. Quite a bit of ordering from the menu style descriptions show up in these prompts, as if they are stacking a bacon double cheeseburger with their favorite toppings. You'll see the words "loyal," "drama free," and "feminine," repeated, along with menu orders for "playful," "fun" and "doesn't take herself too seriously." There are very few asking to meet curious, intelligent, and funny women. Many of them want women who will smile and laugh at their jokes, cuddle on the couch, and join them in their hobbies, to be the cheerleader to their life while not offering to provide the same type of support themselves. They may have better luck adopting a Golden Retriever instead of expecting a constant one directional flow of adoration from a mentally sound adult human being.

"Intellectual Alpha" isn't asking for too much, right? A big booty woman of any race will do.

Or, you know, be a smiling *or* laughing woman dancing freely barefoot -- that's not too much to ask, and not in any way unrealistic or delusional:

If those were too much, try being a non-argumentative lady who wears dresses and skirts. At least one man will go crazy for you if you can match his not-too-demanding request.

Or, you know, be a grown up Powerpuff Girl:

Sometimes the descriptions, which, if I understand the concept of these prompts correctly, are intended to show why we should be interested in these men, do the opposite.

I'd have to ensure we have the same understanding of "fun." Is dating like waiting in line or is it the actual ride? Did he really think this was the ideal metaphor to describe dating him? What works for a three minute thrill ride may not be what I want to experience for the duration of a relationship.

And then there's this:

Would I want to date someone who feels like preparing for a test? Is the prompt itself the test? Life is hard enough and in the end, we're all gonna pass anyway (bah-dump-tshhh!)

Speaking of tests, I'd have to "win" this guy over by doing something I hate? Who enjoys subjecting someone they should like to activities they hate? If someone is joining me for something I enjoy, I'd feel terrible if they were enduring something they hated only because they like me. I wouldn't even be able enjoy myself knowing I was burdening someone like that. What is with these sadists men who think suffering and self abandonment are signs of love? This isn't something potentially painful but productive like, say, couples therapy, this is a scary movie, sir. Why wouldn't you just seek someone who, I don't know, actually likes scary movies?

Some descriptions of greatest strengths are not the flexes they think they are.

So you aren't a good listener. Sign me up, said no woman, ever.

So you will always play Devil's advocate when nobody asked for that. Noted.

Some describe themselves and in doing so lapse into telling us what kind of women they like, even if it has nothing to do with the actual prompt.

And he closed it out with that old "as beautiful on the inside as she is on the outside" cliche. Does anyone actually mean this when they say it, or are they trying to sound like they aren't superficial?

This morning I realized one of my favorite current comics, Candy Hearts by Tommy Siegel, uses this type of interpretation in the panels where he mocks dating apps. For years I've been laughing at art imitating life without understanding these very jokes would eventually become a part of my personal reality.

Based on my research so far, I have little expectation that I'll find a match anytime soon; until then I'll burn hay till the needle shines.