I'll first say that from a social standpoint it makes sense to focus on yourself when asked that. But the person asked "tell me what you look for in a girl". You would have to be pretty damn masterful at thinking on your feet to take that question and immediately flip your answers into I statements. Especially if you're anon and obviously don't get asked things like this a lot.

No kids is a common wish although the reason for it can make or break how fine it is to have.

My guess is that anon is overweight, and the person they were talking to was thinking of friends they had that were overweight and were great people.

Anon betrayed that their preference was a bit delusional and/or didn't understand that it can take work to be in shape and takes it for granted that women should be expected to be fit for him without him having to do anything. That's a pretty sour fart of an opinion.

The no dating apps thing is pretty cringe. And could certainly make you seem like a pariah to most people. It definitely betrays a sense of superiority if it's in your top 3 dating requirements. I feel like anon knowing the word demisexual is slim to none but that would be the best thing you could say.

Actually my guess is that this is fake and anon is just stirring the hate mongering pot.

My only gripe with this is that nobody should have to defend themself for not wanting kids. If you don't want kids then you don't want kids and should be able to just leave it at that.

I like how you put this. Anon was asked requirements and all he gave were deal-breakers. It comes off as desperate, crass, or both.

This is an actualized response. In the moment a lot of people can't pull this off, it does take practice. You're right, of course, this is better...I just wish people would more commonly be willing to ask a clarifying question or two before pulling out the butcher's knife.

Some folks just aren't good with their words and may otherwise be great people. In this situation, true or not, they were talking for some time. I think that level of interaction is worth some benefit of the doubt and the tiniest bit of patience. Instead, despite hitting it off and having a great conversation, shallow lady over there judges him by a single moment amongst probably a dozen leading up to it.

...but that is how it goes. That's the game. It's all just a bit silly though.

Anon is definitely not into fitness though. Probably a lard ass himself.

Bingo! It's not always what you say but HOW you say it.

Also, this is just a really negative set of statements. "I DON'T want X, Y, and Z." Even giving anon a pretty big benefit of the doubt and assuming they didn't state it like "No fatties," they aren't really saying what they want in a partner, just a bunch of standards by which they would judge somebody.

The search for a romantic partner should involve more positives than negatives. You should have ideas about what things you like in people and yourself, and what interests and activities that you're passionate about and would like to share with someone. If you start with a laundry list of things that you don't like, that's not just going to be off-putting, it's going to be limiting you to thinking only in those terms, rather than finding something that brings you joy, and finding someone that has that in common with you.

This. She probably wasn't disgusted by the content, but by the form of what he said.

My boi here knows how to hold a conversation.

A skill OOP seems to be severely lacking in

Saving this for when I have to describe my preference to anyone again.

Deal breakers are things that are limits. Limits are--in general--a good thing. It's not that you're saying that women--or people in general--are fungible, but you're saying that people that fit any of these criteria won't work.

IIRC, Dan Savage has said that there's no settling down without settling. You can--should--have limits, but if it's more than five things, you need to look at yourself very, very closely. You aren't going to like every single thing about your partner, but you have to be able to accept them.

I could say, for instance, that I prefer people that are heavily tattooed, pierced, scarred, branded, and implanted. (...Which limits me to about .0001% of the US population.) But that's not a deal breaker; I'm not going to reject someone because they don't fit that particular preference, even though my body modification is important to me. On the other hand, I absolutely will not date anyone that doesn't have a worldview that's grounded in reality, e.g., is religious/"spiritual", or believes in any conspiratorial nonsense, because I couldn't have respect for a person like that. THAT'S a deal breaker. I won't date someone that wants children; I'm unfit to be a parent, and I had myself sterilized a number of years ago. Again: that's a deal breaker, because as with religious garbage, it's a question of basic values.

A reasonable argument would be because oop sees sex as something special and would like a partner that thinks of it the same way.

In reality, oop probably thinks of woman who are on tinder as worthless sluts and doesn’t want a woman with a higher headcount than him because it bruises his ego.

Tinder is the worst possible way to get to meet people, unless you’re at least a 9/10 guy or a woman who just wants to hook up, nothing more. At least that’s been my experience, both using the app and talking to friends who have. Meaningful connections are rare.

The tinder one is though. Someone being on tinder doesn't tell you anything about that person. Only that they're looking for either a partner or casual sex.