So kind readers, I have been corresponding on the illustrious match.com with a guy that has his age listed as 37. He approached me first with an email. He is cute, educated, and uses spell check. After 4 emails he casually writes that he is really 40. I reply that 40, is fine but why doesn’t he correct his profile? (naive Penelope assumed it was a typo) His reply just now:
I put the age at 37 to be included in more searches i.e. someone looking for 31-37. A month ago a bartender carded me and complemented me on looking so young. So I didn't think I was too much of a stretch.
Do you think I should:
- Delete and not respond
- Blow it off. It’s not that big a deal
- Write back that it concerns me that he starts out lying
- Write back that I’m really a man, but most people think I’m a woman so it’s not that big of a stretch
- Send him a case of Vienna Sausages
I have already made a decision. I am interested what you all think.
5. Send him a case of vienna sausages..if he is lying about his age. The size of the member cannot be too far behind (not that size matters.. :))
ReplyDeleteSulie Collins
Votes noted. Thank you. OMG I totally forgot Sulie's last name was always Collins. You were such an odd child...
ReplyDeleteI am torn between number 4 and number 5. I would be concerned about him lying right off the bat like that, and if it's something as unmeaningful as age then he is probably a mangroomer (concerned about irrelevent things). He didn't give you a chance to make your own decision.
ReplyDeleteJCH--I truly appreciate your prompt and thoughtful vote. I am sure I speak for all the ladies in the house that we commend a man coming forward and speaking his truth.
ReplyDeleteI also appreciate your complete understanding of the severity of the damage a ManGroomer™ can inflict. Please use the registered trademark in the future when referring to the ManGroomer™. On a Mac it is option 2 Thank you.
JCH just texted me and reminded me of a simple grammar rule. He pointed out when using ManGroomer as a noun (and I will add as a verb) there is no need for the tm. I agree yet I feel the registered trademark highlights the fact that I was married to man that had a Mangroomer™. What was I thinking? It will be my cross to bear...
ReplyDeletethis is my second attempt at posting a comment. i cannot make a choice. it would have to be 2. while i certainly do not think lying is "no big deal," at least he told you before you met. also, he has a valid point about his age. he's in a weird bracket. are there any red flags?
ReplyDelete33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333
ReplyDeleteBye Bye
I would say 3 or 4. Can't really pick just one.
ReplyDeleteI am sticking with my vote of 5...while I have not suffered from someone with the Mangroomer like tendencies, I have dealt with feeling that strong red flag at the pit of my stomach...
ReplyDeleteSulie Collins...
R-E-D flag. Who needs more. Do the one that makes you feel the best. At the vienna sausage moment, that was perfect. This one may call for a case of calendars. All I know, is it sounds much like "oh yeah, I forgot I was married twice...it didn't seem important." I vote for Penelope gratification - go with your gut!
ReplyDelete3 or 4. 4 just makes me laugh. But I agree with the last post, it sounds too much like "I forgot I was marreid twice to the same woman and she bore my children" (is that the right bore?). If he looks so young then lying about his age makes no sense...but most men make no sense. No more red flags, even seemingly innocuous ones.
ReplyDelete- L
In the words of Penelope...RED FLAG!!!!
ReplyDelete