Smile From the Devil: A Women’s Guide To Reading Dating Profiles

The secret weapons of avoiding bad dates: Critical Discourse Analysis and Thin-slicing

Image credit: LightField Studios

*This piece was originally published in Better Humans, July 20, 2021 (pre-Burned Haystack)

---

In his profile picture, he is dressed as the devil.

The actual devil — not some funny, costume-y sort of devil. The photo is an extreme close-up, and in it, he is wearing plastic fangs and red contacts in his eyes; there is something that looks like blood (or perhaps actual blood) dripping from his fangs and drooling down his chin.

He sent me a “smile.”

Before I blocked him, I read his profile text, which was shockingly articulate and completely typical. In it, he even apologizes for the frightening nature of his pics and explains that he’s just a normal guy who is really into Halloween.

He also has other appealing attributes: he’s highly educated, gainfully employed, and, from what I can tell, good-looking — if one were to remove his makeup and devil costumes (he owns multiple devil costumes, I discovered when I clicked through his other pics).

One might be tempted to give this guy the benefit of the doubt; I’m going to tell you why you shouldn’t, and I’m going to use two academic concepts to do it:

1. Critical Discourse Analysis

2. Thin-slicing

These are the secret weapons of online dating, and if you learn to use them effectively they are powerful indicators of which men you should avoid. Three notes:

• I’m writing this from a woman’s perspective and primarily for women.

• This article is about whom you DON’T want, not a guide for finding the guy you do. For one thing, what people want is too varied and individual to predict; moreover, that’s not the crucial piece of information you need.

• Finding men who want to date you is NOT DIFFICULT — there are literally millions of them. The real challenge is to weed out the bad guys so that you’re able to find the good ones. For the sake of this article, we’re going to define “bad” as egotistical, superficial, misogynistic, angry, overtly wounded, and only looking for hookups.

Critical Discourse Analysis

Critical Discourse Analysis, or CDA for short, is a method of rhetorical analysis that I use frequently in my academic writing. CDA has two primary requirements:

1. It allows you to read text in a way that reveals what the author is REALLY saying/thinking (without intention; they don’t realize what they’re revealing).

2. It dictates that you use your new knowledge to make the world a better place (in this case, we’re going to use the knowledge to keep women safe in the world of online dating).

Thin-slicing

Thin-slicing is a psychological concept featured, among other places, in Malcolm Gladwell’s second book, “Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking.” Thin-slicing refers to the idea that we can accurately make quick judgments about people based upon very “thin slices” of experience. It’s been applied to dating before (think, speed dating), as well as to the detection of personality disorders such as psychopathy.

How It Works in Practice

Here’s how we’d apply it with Devil Guy:

We take the “thin slice” — his decision to pose as the devil in his online dating profile — and draw reasonable conclusions based upon only that slice. For example, here’s a sample list from worst-to-best-case-scenario for Devil Guy:

• He really may be actually dangerous; all of the pictures he’s posted are overtly aggressive and threatening. In addition to the devil costumes, he also appears dressed up as the rapist in Clockwork Orange and as a very sinister-looking rabbit.

• He may not be dangerous at all, but he gets some sort of thrill out of scaring women.

• He may not be dangerous or even trying to scare women, but he’s so COMPLETELY clueless and tone-deaf that he doesn’t recognize that dressing as the devil is a bad choice for an online dating pic.

The third bullet is the best-case scenario, and even THEN you don’t want to date that guy. If he can’t figure out that posing as the devil is frightening to women, then what else can’t this guy figure out about women (or about anything, really)?

Examples to Look For

We’re going to go through some (real) examples next, but first, a clarification: this article focuses on “normal” stuff that men write in their dating profiles — the stuff that’s so normal I’ve been able to classify it into a totally manageable set of “genres” that appear repeatedly in men’s dating profiles.

Any woman who’s tried online dating knows that, in addition to the typical stuff we’re about to address, there is a lot of deeply weird stuff out there. In this article, we’re not dealing with outlier deep weirdness. Just block those guys immediately.

The following paragraphs contain quotes from men on a popular dating site followed by my analysis of those quotes.

“The last books I have read were the 50 Shades of Grey series.”

Two possibilities:

1. These actually are the last books he read. Which means that’s what he wants. If it’s your thing too, then cool, have at it.

2. He didn’t read the 50 Shades books at all but thought something to himself along the lines of “Women really like those books. I’ll say I read those books too, and then women will like me because I read those books.” This is not only a faulty application of logic — but a super lazy way to appeal to women. You don’t want this guy.

“I’m pretty manly… I won’t be caught dead in skinny jeans, and I own a chainsaw. ;) I like my beer hoppy, my Hendricks with a cucumber, and my coffee black.”

I have no idea what a “Hendricks” is, but this guy has some sort of ego problem. It’s not even important to interrogate it too much because I can promise you’re not going to want to deal with this person long term.

“The most influential person in my life is my grandmother. She is a living saint, lives life for others, and rarely thinks of her own happiness. She loves and cares for others before herself… she is the greatest person I know.”

This one is tricky because it looks okay on the surface, but here’s what this means: “This is what I want. I think this is the definition of a ‘good woman.’” It means he defines women not by who they are or what they do or what they like or what they’ve accomplished, but entirely by what they’re willing to sacrifice. This is what he will expect of you.

“I’ve always been a giver, and I want someone who knows how to give to me as well. I was in love once, completely; I want that feeling again, this time for the rest of my life, and with a woman who gives her heart to me in its entirety.”

We can sympathize with this guy, but unless you want to kick off your new relationship by trying to make up for some other woman’s perceived sins or shortcomings, you should avoid this guy.

“I’d like to meet someone that does what they say they are going to do. Honesty and dependability are very important to me.”

Ditto.

“I am naturally inclined to assume a traditional leadership role in a relationship; however, I appreciate strong women. I am a very caring person.”

HAHAHA!! What?! “I’m going to dominate you. I want it to be a challenge, though. I dominate because I care.” Hard pass.

“I’m looking for a woman who is trustworthy, honest, and able to get along with others.”

This guy is looking for a golden retriever. Move along . . .

“Communication honesty and loyalty. The woman would have to accept my {{{{hugs}}}}”

Is this a threat? What is going on with all those brackets?

“I’m passionate about my country.”

No. He’s a Trumper.

“To me, a woman is like a gift, the package and the wrapping is beautiful but the real gift is what’s inside. Intellect and personality are very important. I want to be with a woman who is comfortable in a dress at formal dinner parties and in blue jeans at Packer games. If you are beautiful on the inside as well as the outside, I look forward to hearing from you.”

There’s a lot to unpack here. Aside from the cheesy-and-also-terrifying “woman as a gift to be unwrapped” metaphor, it’s just too . . . I don’t know . . . directive. I want to pick my own clothes.

“I will never hit you.”

If this is your bar for your standards, then I guess you’ve found your man.

“You should be positive, open-minded, and willing to try new things. You should enjoy staying fit, staying sharp, and truly believing that the best things are still ahead! You should be well-read but not take yourself too seriously, responsible but still fun!, and take good care of yourself but still be able to enjoy good food and a few drinks now and then! If this sounds like you and you’re ready to jump whole-heartedly into love, send me a message!”

This one is also tricky. The content of what he’s saying, while cliched and overly exclamation-pointed (!!!), is not the real problem here.

The real problem is that he wrote this text in response to the question “A Little Bit About Me.” The problem is that he’s writing in second person (“you” should be this, “you” should be that, etc.).

If he’d written it in the first person (“I’m positive, open-minded, and willing to try new things . . .”), we wouldn’t be analyzing this text. But this guy took a question about him and co-opted it to tell YOU exactly what you need to be to be worthy of his attention.

This guy is mansplaining to you in his dating profile. Imagine what it would be like to live with him.

“I’m looking for a woman who keeps herself slim and trim and keeps a beautiful home.”

No. In addition to being misogynistic and superficial, this is a weird thing to say in 2021. This guy is probably a jerk, but he also just has bad judgment, and you don’t want that.

Clichés To Consider More Seriously

And lastly, a quick “decoder” list, for phrases that show up so frequently you may gloss right over them (but you shouldn’t!):

• “I’m looking for a woman who is giving/generous/passionate” = “I’m primarily looking for sex.”

• “I’m looking for a woman who is open-minded.” = “I want weird sex,” or, “I want sex with multiple people,” or, “I’m married.”

• “I’m looking for a woman who is compassionate and who completely accepts me as I am.” = “I want to be impossible, infuriating, unemployed, and generally ineffectual.”

Some of these may be fine with you (hopefully not that last one)—the point isn’t to be judgmental, the point is to understand what’s being revealed so you can make the right decisions for yourself.

The more we practice this kind of critical reading and thinking, the better we become at it.

Applying analytical techniques like these in the search for love seems cold and calculating, I know. But The Internet is a cold and calculating place — literally — I don’t mean that as judgment. Dating platforms run on code sequences, algorithms, and money. To pretend that they’re governed by angels and rainbows is not only delusional but dangerous.

So we should recognize the reality of what we’re doing, get smart about doing it, and avail ourselves of practices that maximize the chance for success, just as we would with any other technological endeavor. Good luck in love. ❤