Jump to content

Recommended Posts

My mate divorced within a year of marriage - and after licking his wounds and counting the cost he recently took his tentative first step back into dating and joined a site. Fast forward a few months and I've been regaled with stories of the encounters he's had - with at least ten great girls of all backgrounds, interests and sexual preferences too strong to outline in a nice family forum.


Put short he found it was a total hotbed of repressed deviancy and strings free fun - he dated a barrister, a make up artist, a dancer and a travel rep - all types.... and described the experience like "shooting very randy fish in a barrel".


The site in question?


Guardian Soulmates. Which of course has many non Guardian readers using it (although the name helps for respectability purposes).

Agree with Louisiana re match.com - inundated with winks/emails from tattooed, beer gutted, shaven headed men who all seem to come from Kent....with not a qualification between them and barely able to string a sentence together - Yuk!


Guardian Soulmates OK but My Single Friend has some gorgeous men on it, but as there are similarly gorgeous women on it too the competition is fierce!

I am happily a couple, but before I wasn't, I used Love and Friends and Guardian Soulmates and met some nice men on both of them :)


And I know several people who are in LTRs as a result of using one or the other, including my sister.


But I do think you have to meet up PDQ, because you can get a very wrong impression of people from emails :))


Edited to add: Don't know if it still does, but Love and Friends had a forum which was quite fun, I met some people I'm still in touch with from that, both men and women.

My best friend met his wife in the Swan. Still happily married.


I just did my research there. Found my wife in clapham.


Always think if you have to pay a fee to find a soulmate you have not tried hard enough


Try going out more often and each time you go out drink a little more than you did the previous time, until you find someone. .

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson ather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
    • My view is that any party that welcomes a self-declared Marxist would merit a negative point. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...