I think it's great that they've added that feature... however... I wonder how many people proclaim that they're willing to date someone already in a relationship vs. how many will actually do it if/when presented with the real opportunity?

@1: "I wonder how many people proclaim that they're willing to date someone already in a relationship vs. how many will actually do it if/when presented with the real opportunity?"

It's a dating site, people are already theoretically "interested depending on the opportunity"?

What's the betting that more married men are interested in dating pretty much anyone, than women are? I'd like to see a breakdown of the statistics by gender.

My guess goes something like this:

People on OKC who prefer to date someone already in a relationship:
• people already in a relationship;
• recently divorced men in their fifties making up for lost time;
• single men in their teens and twenties looking for NSA sex.

People on OKC who will accept dating someone already in a relationship:
• some single women over 45;
• some people open to NSA sex.

I wish this was broken down some. I feel like there is a difference between someone who likes to bang a Grindr hookup once or twice a year on the side with permission or have the occasional 3 way with their spouse vs. people in triads or who hookup weekly on the side. You know, monogamish vs. full on open.

On the one hand, OkCupid gets that not everyone is looking for the same thing out of a relationship, on the other hand, I find than OkCupid believes that "you might like" poly women and couples if you like kinky submissive women.

@2,
What I mean is, some people may check the box saying they're ok or interested in dating someone already in a relationship in order to get more dates, but aren't truly ok with it and will let the truth out only after a connection's been made.

Kind of like saying, "yeah, I'm ok with kids/pets/etc." Then going on a few dates with someone who has kids/pets/etc., and after they express interest in something more, letting out that you were never really interested in kids/pets/etc. It's a shitty tactic that some people use to get their foot in the door hoping the other person will eventually accommodate them.

@7: I suppose that's always going to be a difficulty of self-ascription, no matter the site.

@4: I'll add people like myself to your first list: poly folks who don't want to date someone who is looking for a "primary" relationship.

Of that 24% interested in group sex, I wonder how many are anything OTHER than straight men interested in FFM threesomes?

MsHoneywell @9,

Yes, thank you. I was thinking of you as ‘people already in a relationship.’ I was forgetting that poly people can be single.

Venomlash @10,

I know there are women interested in MFM threesomes. Even MMF threesomes.

Good for them, but I don't think linkages will occur often enough to make a different in OkCupid's bottom line or user interaction. They'll get more out of this press release than from the new capabilities.

@13: That's always why they release their statistical data, though.

Alison Cummins, what is the difference between an MFM and an MMF threesome?

About OKC--this seems like poly acceptance, but seems like it will add more frustration for users at cross purposes. Isn't it more efficient to have people looking for monogamy on one site and poly relationships on another? Online dating has enough needle-in-haystack challenge.

FWIW, I am a monogamish married man in my mid forties. I was on OKC two years ago, and again recently. The number of women who have contacted me and are happy to go on dates has tripled, and the quality is way up too. 32-44 has been the age range, not the 45+ Alison Cummins theorized. My super attractive wife gets nothin from women. Baffling.

M? Milk - It is a truth universally acknowledged that the letter in the middle of a group of mixed letters must be the one that receives the bulk of the attention. The letters on the outside presumably have minimal interaction. Thus, an MFM could be two men sharing a woman, or a woman enjoying two men, while an MMF would be a man having both a man and a woman.

A while back, we were having a productive discussion about slashes and other symbols. I can't recall whether, say, M>M>F just meant that M1 would top M2 and then M2 would top F, or if that would be simultaneous. But we were getting somewhere with slashes indicating couples. FM/F would suggest a husband being the centre of a three-way with his wife and another woman; MF/F would suggest the wife as the centre. I cannot recall if there was consensus about using a colon to indicate the third as the centre, but it seems useful. Either MF:F or FM:F would suggest an OS couple each taking a turn with a female guest star. There are various refinements possible; who knows how much we could convey in a few characters if someone really worked out a proper code?

Ok. Great. Monogamy is hard, it's all a bit of a white lie, sexual fulfillment is important to emotional health, dating apps are great blah blah blah.

But who has the freaking time to date all these people?

Milkshake @15: "Alison Cummins, what is the difference between an MFM and an MMF threesome?" -- I'll take this one: the sexual orientations of the Ms involved. (MFM = two straight men, MMF = two bi men.)

To the list at 4, I'd add, people who unrealistically expect that the person in the relationship will leave that partner if someone "better" comes along.

@16: "My super attractive wife gets nothin from women. Baffling."

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU! Where were you when I was desperately trying to convince Savage Love readers of how much harder it is for women to get women?

And who is at the center of all this new poly interest? Our wonderful friend Dan, I'd be willing to bet. He has certainly opened my mind to the possibilities of friendly honest sex with another man besides my mate. Love you, Dan!

@21 -- I'm paying attention, fwiw. So I'm sure the silent lurking majority is taking notes. I know how annoying it can be to feel you're talking into a vacuum.

Wrote you back on the dicks and doms one, btw. No need to respond, just wasn't sure if you knew.

Wow, let's conflate polyamory with group sex here. Also, just because I'm poly and partnered doesn't mean we have to date as a unit (or that either of us want to date anyone who does.)

@21 BiDanFan - can you steer me to the thread? Even the bi-gals who are seeking threesomes with a male partner are not interested in something casual/sexual without the dude. or even coffee.

re bi women ISO other women -- I wonder if there's concern about wasting time on pillow princesses, who enjoy receiving oral and getting fucked, but aren't enthusiastic about going down on a woman or fucking her. Not sure how one would make clear on one's profile that one wasn't a pillow princess. Being explicit might bring a lot of unwanted male attention...

asymptoticbliss @16,

1) Does your wife cruise women but get no response?

2) I have no doubt your wife is superattractive to you. Is she superattractive to dykes? The women who get me hot and bothered tend to be androgynous. They perform adulthood really well, not necessarily femininity. (Ditto men. I’m into adults, not femininity or masculinity.) I’m very familiar with the ways women perform femininity to signal deference to men and make our lives a bit smoother. It gets old. It doesn’t turn me on or incite me to pursuit. An online profile that includes lots of signals of competence is much more likely to get a response from me than one with photos of a round ass or flat abs.

Its hard to tell on OKC who is catfishing..., but yes she reaches out to those that seem similar to her in OKC robot terms, and in overall 'style'. Does she appeal to dykes? I have no idea - but she is pretty squarely within the conventional 'feminine' beauty standard - petite, big boobs, cheekbones, long hair, fashion etc. She has a profile that is pretty square, talks about normal stuff like her passion for cooking and desire to go dancing etc. She doesn't want to talk much about sex on a profile that has her face, but she also tried the headless sexpot profile. She gets a little bit more attention there, mostly 'likes' from similar headless women and emails like 'Sup?' We are in NYC, which should be one of the best dating pools in the world. Baffling.

“pretty squarely within the conventional 'feminine' beauty standard - petite, big boobs, cheekbones, long hair, fashion etc.”

Yeah. No. I would go, “clueless bicurious” and stay far, far away. Not clueless about life generally, but she’s not giving me any hints that she knows what it’s like to have her heart broken by a woman or has had to figure out how to take the initiative seducing a woman or how to manage within a tight, shared social circle after she's broken a woman’s heart. She’s not cluing me in that she knows how to manage outside a masculine–feminine dynamic where she gets lots of points for flawless performance of femininity. It wouldn’t be clear to me why she’s interested in dating a woman.

If I were going to date a bicurious woman* she’d better have a good background with dykes — say, working in an arts or social field with lots of lesbian colleagues. And maybe she built her own house.

* Actually, I have dated bicurious women. They were nice people but it never got beyond a few kisses.

@27, Alison. I find that a really weird comment. You are into adults.. Not masculine and feminine.
And your comment to @28 about his wife, just a little offensive imo.

Any stereotypes re bi people is as damaging as it is re gay or straight people.

@29 - what lavagirl said @31. After 10 years of having sex with women she is not 'bi-curious'. And no, she has never fallen in love with a woman, but she isn't looking to, as she is happily married to me. She wants a new FWB, and clearly says so on her profile. Frankly, she would prefer to have her way with a clueless bi curious woman than have to worry about if she was 'performing her femininity' properly.

@asymptomatic. High quality related to age only? I really hope you didn't mean that.

I did have a few ss relationships separate from my husband when I was younger. No luck now. I think I know why....

I don't have anything to offer. I mean, what does your wife have to offer? FWB. When we are young that can be enough. Now? So she's hot in feminine way. She would appeal to a male's definition of sexy. That doesn't mean she would appeal to a lesbian or bi gal. She would likely appeal to me (like an hour glass shape) or someone who likes lipstick lesbians but that isn't all lesbians. Allison likes androgynous.... (I don't understand the rest of her comments)

So narrow group. And then she can't offer a relationship really. She's married to you. They will never be primary. In a busy adult life that can lead to little time for the second. If the second is someone's wife, that man might want to be involved (my experience... the wife will play but her husband watches/participates).

Essentially you have to find a woman JUST like your wife who has an SO who doesn't want to join in, and on top of it, she would be attracted to. I am one - my husband doesn't mind me having relations with women and doesn't need to be involved - but I dont think there are a lot of us out there.

This actually isn't as revolutionary as it sounds. Instead of listing that they're in an open relationship and linking the other person's profile in the main body text, the link to the other person's profile is right there up top.

@32: 33 said it best. In addition to your average woman knowing fuck-all about how to approach and seduce another woman, and thus coming in like a clueless teenaged boy, you're offering a strictly secondary/FWB arrangement. Ask yourself how many women go for that when offered by a man. It's not suddenly massively attractive when a woman is the one doing the exact same thing.

Lipstick Lesbian, Dark horse?Another stereotype, it sounds like one. I'm a Lipstick Feminist, and it has always felt that makes me less of a Feminist because I wear lipstick. Bullocks.
I'm not bi in the real world, I am in my fantasy world. And the women who join me there, often have succulent breasts and womanly bodies. Blondes and brunettes, not a one some mainstream notion of what a bi or lesbian woman looks like.
And if I ever do cross over into the real world, I think my attractions would go to the same sort of woman, and she also would wear lipstick.
@34 I think @ 32 has made it pretty clear his wife is no novice in her relations with other women.

Lava, Google is your friend. Lipstick lesbian refers to a style of dress or presentation some but not all lesbians may select. It is not an insult. As versus androgynous as an example. There is one lady at my gym that has that gender bender boyish style going on. Works for me.

Goggle is not a friend Dark Horse, I'll check it though. Thanks.
And yes, attraction is a personal thing; there is no right and no wrong.

The new Cate Blanchett movie.. Carol.. Looks good.

You are the one accusing me in engaging stereotypes.

Darkhorse.. Sorry if I was unclear. The relative age of the women writing to me has not changed, (the typical <10 years younger) just the quantity and quality. I've never had women older than me by more than a year contact me. The age range of women contacting me is a different age range than was hypothesized @4, and wholly uncorrelated with quantity/quality. all data is based on okc claimed ages, your results may vary ;)

@39 Dark Horse. I just mean I don't think of Google as a friend.
Even having Lipstick Lesbian as some category sounds like a stereotype to me, in a way.

A woman is a Leabian, how she dresses or whether she wears lipstick, how is that ever a concern or an issue in any way?
Maybe forty years ago, when feminists were first throwing it all off, stopped shaving or wearing any makeup, wearing overalls and doc martens.. Then it was a statement.
Today, needing such catorgories sounds restrictive.

Lesbian.

asymptoticbliss @32, if I were your wife and looking strictly for sex I'd look on Adult Friend Finder or craigslist. Or go to swinger events. On OKC, I think most women looking for other women want at least the possibility of developing feelings for each other -- since they went to the trouble of answering all those questions.

Erica, I didn't read that @32 bliss was saying his wife was just looking for sex. I read she is interested in FWB. As I inderstand that relationship, feelings are involved.

My experience of FWB is that it's not really a friendship -- FWB never get together just to have a chat or see a movie or go for a hike.

And again, from what I've seen most women seeking women on OKC are open to loving feelings if they happen. Since feelings are notoriously hard to control in sexual relationships, the way people prevent falling in love is by keeping sex partners at arm's length. And in my experience, that's more common on AFF. Or maybe craigslist, though I haven't tried that personally.

@38: It was very good. Alternately heartwarming and despairing, a powerful story of people unaccounted for in societal ideals of the time. I actually saw it with my girlfriend and her girlfriend and HER mother, and I definitely felt that there was some amount of the film that I'd never entirely understand just because I'm not a queer woman.
I definitely recommend it to anyone who's not a young child or a raging homophobe.

@46 how sad that your FWB are just WB. All of my FWB over the years have always had a friend component (either first or as part of the deal) I would never want them to be just a hook up that isn't apart of my life in some way.

Thanks Venomlash; both the stars are good actresses, I'm interested to see it.