Meeting ‘quality’ people
I listened to an ad today on one of my favorite radio stations, Mix 96.5 FM from Tulsa. I like the frequent Kelly Clarkson songs (ever since I got the DVD ‘Love Actually’). Most of the rest of the contemporary adult stuff is pretty John Tesh-y, too.
The ad was for a Tulsa singles dating service. The ad asks if you are having trouble meeting ‘quality’ singles.
And the term ‘quality’ single seems to be a loaded phrase. They never define the term, they never relate what ‘quality’ means to the advertiser, or what ‘quality’ they actually deliver to the customer.
I did a dating service, a bunch of years ago. I talked to a different server, the heart-logo nationwide chain, in a couple of cities. I couldn’t tell they were any better, or much different, than online dating. Except that their claim that because their customers all paid $350 to $500 each (this was a Lo-ong time ago), that meant each was really interested in a long term relationship. Gag me with a spoon. What the fee meant was that the company made a lot of money on every signup. Videos? They were OK. But unless you were fashion, society page, and financial page A-listers, the odds sucked for finding someone better than ‘well, we found you someone that *might* not be too bad a match, maybe..’ That is, you would be better off hiking to the nearest apartment complex, and start ringing doorbells and asking about single women. Even with a visit from the cops, you would be better off, and more likely to find someone wonderful. (Great Expectations, that was the national chain. The expectation part was sure true, for me.)
Just a moment, I want to get another glass of wine. OK. But the quality thing still bothers me. The US Government, the laws of the land, church teachings, they are all clear - each of us is as ‘good’ as anyone else. We don’t have a caste system with a lower caste. We don’t have royalty or peers of the realm. We have public figures, we have entertainment figures, we have people we respect and revere nationally. But supposedly, under law or in social terms, no one is ‘better’ than another. So how can one peson be ‘quality’, and another not be?
In terms of dating I prefer to think of people as available or not, as being of good character or not. Appearance? That is a matter of taste, although certain aspects are cultural baggage inflicted by fashion or business exploiters. Aptitudes and interests? These generally appeal or repel others, based on backgrounds, personal feelings and interests, etc. Past experience? Some people favor an experienced partner, others consider past experience ‘dirty’ or damaging. Again, cultural baggage and personal choice.
For my money, the one broad characteristic that makes one ‘good quality’ as a partner or date, is character. Honesty, discipline, good with children and animals, respectful. Once you find a ‘good quality’ partner-prospect, all that is left, is to find out if you like each other, find joy in each other’s company, if your interests coincide, if you find yourself attracted to each other. With that quality date/prospect.