Mr. 'Culturally biased' Dandy

Mr 'Culturally biased' Dandy, forty five, cought my eye for his polished and sophisticated photo. Yes, I am partial to stylishness and smartness in a man. His profile matches the photos in elegance and appeal. He is, however, looking for someone between 28 and 35 (not set in stone, he adds) and finishes his profile indicating that he does not want children in the future, nor does he want to become romantically involved with anyone with an established family. Fair enough, I moved on.

I was surprised when I received an email from him thanking me for looking at his profile and complimenting me on mine ('great words, lovely photographs', specially the one in a red dress). 

I replied, thanking him for his words and saying that I did find his profile intriguing but of course I was not in his target audience, in case he hadn't notice.

'I did notice that you had a family (I seem to be one of those rare types who actually reads through women's profiles before getting in touch), however I was compelled to say hello and let you know how much I liked what I read and your photographs.

(...)

I'm not really wanting to meet anyone in my local area. It's better to meet people from completely different backgrounds to my own.

(... )

So life is very good right now, I just think that it would be even better to share it with someone. :)'

I replied and finish my message with

'Life is definitely better when shared with someone compatible.'

(...)

'Finding someone compatible feels like and impossible task if I think about it too long? Being so specific in the moment is probably not the way to be when dating on-line. A more general attitude and acknowledgement that someone out there is perfect for me, and me for them, is definitely the more positive and less mentally challanging approach.'

Ok... so this guy does not like children, lives quite far away and wants to meet people outside his area (!). He also got the standard three messages without moving on. I really need to put a stop to the conversation without being rude... so I replied:

You know… we might be talking semantics here. Nevertheless, I find the concept of perfection much more daunting than compatibility. 
A relationship is a bridge between two universes that happen to be human beings. Humans are, by nature, flawed (should I say, beautifully flawed?). Expecting to find perfection seems to me an unrealistic expectation, and one that our culture and the media perpetuates ad nauseum.
 Compatibility, on the other hand, allows a degree of compromise if acceptable for both parts (the compromised should not limit their freedom or damage their dignity or values in any way).
 

Many social, economic, psychological and even biological forces contribute to mate preference. We tend to gravitate towards people with the same socio-economic and ethic background, with similar level of education, intelligence, physical attractiveness and shared religious and social values.
 

Consensually desired mate characteristics are commonly sought and they are surprisingly scarce. In a monogamous system like ours, this means that most individuals must settle for a mate who is less then their consensual ideal. In fact, anthropologically speaking, only a few acquire a mate possessing the consensually desired attributes.
 

The fact that you are 45 and ‘unmated’ might indicate that your ‘perfect’ fit, or your personal first choice of mate, was, somehow, unavailable to you. You indicate in your profile that you don’t want children. However, even if reproductive value is not important to you, you still value the cues closely tied with reproductive value and fertility, ie, lower age, health, aspects of physical appearance such as smooth and clear skin, good muscle tone, lively gait, white teeth, lustrous hair, etc. However, women with high reproductive value might prefer a man who actually wants to reproduce… in addition, being an intelligent man, you probably want an appropriate combination of physical beauty and intelligence (although a slightly lower than yours) in your partner. This lowers even more the number of potential mates. And so on… . 

And so it is Mission Improbable (but achievable) if you are willing to compromise and accept the flaws of another human being. Mission Impossible if you are looking for perfection (in my humble opinion).

It is a very interesting subject the Anthropology of mate selection. But this email is getting too long… and you probably fell asleep somewhere in the middle… :-)

I don't expect to hear from him any more...