SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Canadians looking to impress on their next romantic date might want to stay clear of on-demand car services, taxis or even public transit, according to the findings of a recent autoTRADER.ca survey that explores the role of the automobile in modern-day dating. In fact, a whopping 92 percent of Canadians say they find it appealing when their date shows up with their own ride. And don't even think about "borrowing the car" for the occasion – close to half of the population surveyed (48 percent) reported that they would find a borrowed vehicle unattractive or "embarrassing beyond words."
While it is unsurprising a publication called Autotrader would find car ownership is necessary for romance, do the study's claims track? Do today's humans really prefer being picked up for a date by someone who owns a car? Is being picked up on a motorcycle really the least attractive?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by AthanasiusKircher on Saturday February 11 2017, @04:52PM
Also, it should be noted that even if one doesn't "pick up" a date in a car at a residence, there are all sorts of reasons one might end up in one's car at some point on a date. (And no -- I wasn't going there.)
I've had at least a couple "first dates" where I met someone at a restaurant or bar or whatever, but we ended up walking a bit for whatever reason, and eventually I ended up either driving her home or driving her to her car (or somewhere convenient to get to her car, like a subway station). Completely agree with the analysis above about location/cultural dependency -- in a major city, cars are often an encumbrance or something you leave parked in a convenient place (which is often not where the good restaurants, show venues, etc. tend to be). Nevertheless, as I said, even in such circumstances, there might be a reason you eventually end up riding in the car of one party or the other.
I absolutely agree with the summary's analysis that borrowing a car or pretending to have one when you don't or whatever is just a bad idea if you think it might even be an option to see your date again.
But I also think the summary brings up another important question: if your date cares too much about what kind of car you drive as a way of judging you, do you even WANT to be in a long-term relationship with that person? I certainly wouldn't. And if you live in a city where car ownership is less essential, having your date judge you for not owning an unnecessary encumbrance -- again, to my mind, a red flag for long-term relationships. Remember that most long-term relationships and marriages that break up often do so over money disagreements. Owning a car is a MAJOR part of most people's financial lives. If you have vastly different perspectives on how essential car ownership is or whether it's important to have a cool late-model car despite the hit to your pocketbook or whatever... well, disagreements early about this stuff don't bode well for long-term compatibility.
But if you're just "looking to have fun" and not interested in long-term viability -- sure, go buy (or even borrow) the fancy late-model sports car and rev it up when you meet her.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday February 11 2017, @08:04PM
if your date cares too much about what kind of car you drive as a way of judging you, do you even WANT to be in a long-term relationship with that person?
I suspect most people still think of car ownership, dwelling ownership, career success, etc all serve as a quick, public, non-invasive estimate of earning power, and therefore success.
When judging a potential partner, this matters, and it, perhaps unconsciously, transcends "love".
Also, all people judge other people. Anybody who suggests this is not true is delusional. Its normal, and routine, and happens a hundred times every day. To assume "car" should have no part in this unrealistic.
Now I do see that you left yourself the wiggle room of stating "cares too much", (which by itself calls for a judgement). But the point stands that financial security does AND SHOULD play a part in partner evaluation, unless you are independently wealthy and can afford supporting a hanger-on playboy/girl.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Saturday February 11 2017, @09:23PM
Yes, your car matters. It's not nice or fair, perhaps, but that's life.
What hurts is being misjudged. I've always driven small economy cars, by choice, not out of a lack of money to afford "better". Most people can't see past the car, and just assume I must be poor. Surely no one would choose to drive a Geo Metro? Most of the women couldn't run away from me and my car fast enough. But to me, the Metro was one of the very best cars there is. Great fuel economy, and reasonably well built, not a pile of junk like an American designed and built small car such as a Ford Escort. (The Escort got so bad that Ford had to take a design from Mazda to put some quality back in it.) That the vast majority of Americans despise little cars works in my favor when it comes to buying one, as they can all be had at dirt cheap prices. It also works against me in that the previous owner probably didn't like the car and treated it badly. It was tough to stick to my convictions when even my friends couldn't tell I drove that car out of choice. Like everyone else they thought I would buy a "better" car if I had more money, so I must be dirt poor. What surprised me was my protests were taken as bull and lies. They really thought I had to want a "better" car, and what I was saying was just the sort of excuses and justifications they'd expect of anyone stuck with a small car. You really like that car? Suuure you do. You're just trying to gild a turd with your talk, uh huh, you don't fool us.
America has propagandized heavily to promote big cars and trucks over little, and Americans have taken it to heart. In the US, a 2.0L engine is small. In Columbia, 2.0L is huge, much bigger than average. Australians refer to the huge American luxury cars of the Cadillac and Lincoln varieties as "Yank tanks". American manufacturers have been all too happy to roll with the prevailing sentiment and egg people on. It's all about parting fools from their money. Canyonero, anyone?
However, I believe electric will be the way to go in the future and my plan is for my next car to be all electric. The question is when to make the jump. I want the car to be able to do road trips in a reasonable amount of time, none of this needing a whole hour to recharge enough to go a measly 25 miles, like the Chevy Bolt needs. That right there means your top speed cannot be more than 25 mph once you've used up the initial charge. You'll spend more time sitting around waiting for the car to recharge than you will driving. An hour long charging session should give at least 200 miles more range, preferably 300 miles or more.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday February 11 2017, @10:33PM
Well, small is not universally mistaken for low quality (or even cheap) by most people.
You can find small quality cars [whatcar.com].
Small doesn't have to mean devoid of creature comforts, safety features, etc.
Most of the women couldn't run away from me and my car fast enough.
They might have been aware that the Geo Metro garnered zero stars [edmunds.com] for safety.
Or maybe they looked at how you maintained it. Did it ever see a wax job? Were all the pizza boxes less than a week old?
There are a lot of people that keep a small efficient cars around for city errands or short commutes. But even those people tend to give a fig about safety these days.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Informative) by bzipitidoo on Saturday February 11 2017, @11:58PM
That is misleading. The lowest possible crash test rating a car can have from the NHTSA is 1 star. 0 stars means untested and/or no data available.
I can speak from personal experience. T-boned a car when it ran a red light just as I was entering the intersection. The Metro was totaled, and I walked away with a few bruises. Yes, it had airbags and yes they worked.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 12 2017, @09:30AM
My car isn't old enough to grow pubes. (grin)
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday February 12 2017, @02:05AM
>I've always driven small economy cars, by choice, not out of a lack of money to afford "better".
So, you're cheap - that's a trait some women like.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday February 12 2017, @03:09AM
So, you're cheap - that's a trait some women like.
I don't know this person, but buying an "economy" car even when you can afford better doesn't necessarily imply "cheap" -- it just says you have different priorities.
Some people like to splurge on season tickets to a sports team they are fans of. Some people like to splurge on season tickets to the opera or the ballet. Some don't care much about a "new car" but are happy to fork out several hundred dollars/person for a fancy meal. Etc., etc. Everyone has their priorities.
Frankly, if I'm on a date, I'd rather see someone who splurges on something they're passionate about -- whatever it is. Someone who can both save up money responsibly AND spend it on something meaningful is a lot more interesting to me than someone who "goes through the motions" of trying to "look" successful with the standard signs (nice car, fancy watch, etc.). I know I'm in the minority, but I also know (from experience) that relationships between people who crave the "standard cultural signals" of success are not generally compatible with people who are actually successful but don't care about such stuff.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday February 12 2017, @02:42AM
Also, all people judge other people. Anybody who suggests this is not true is delusional. Its normal, and routine, and happens a hundred times every day. To assume "car" should have no part in this unrealistic.
I never suggested that people don't judge other people. What I suggested is that IF you make a CHOICE not to own a car for some rational reason (e.g., look at examples I gave -- like you live in a city where it's an expensive unnecessary encumbrance) or you make a CHOICE not to buy the most fancy expensive latest model because you have other financial priorities, THEN a first date where someone judges you so much for that lack of car or "good car" or whatever is already starting off with some pretty big flags for incompatibility.
Lots of people like the fancy new sports cars or whatever. Lots of other people are attracted to people who like them. I have nothing against such desires or such people -- everyone's free to do with their money as they with. But the SUMMARY here was posing a question about a situation where presumably one has a choice to buy a car or not. (If you simply can't afford a car of any sort, then your point is clearly valid since the person is poor, but there's no sense in even posing the question there. The question from the summary only makes sense in a context where one has an actual choice -- like, should you be siphoning off huge percentages of your low income to impress some girl on a date and make her think you're more secure financially than you are? Again, to me that's just asking for long-term trouble.)
Look -- everybody can talk all they want to about how to impress the ladies or how "logical" it is to make all sorts of assumptions based on car ownership (or type of car owned). What I'm saying is that if one is seriously considering the question of the summary, one is already willing to say, "Yeah, maybe I don't need a car." And that says something about your priorities in life. If a first date is scared off because of that choice and isn't even interested enough to know a little more and find out WHY you might have made that choice (or even, you know, be supportive of it -- as would likely be necessary in a long-term relationship), then it's a huge flag.
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Saturday February 11 2017, @09:02PM
if your date cares too much about what kind of car you drive as a way of judging you, do you even WANT to be in a long-term relationship with that person? I certainly wouldn't.
That's a bit silly. It is not just a matter of "what kind of car". For example you can tell by the smell if someone smokes even if they avoid smoking on the date. You can tell is someone is untidy (very off-putting for me); of course they might have tidied it up for the date but if it is untidy then they certainly are too. If they are driving, you can assess something of their personality by the way they drive which they might suppress in a chat but shows up when they are behind the wheel - big-head-show-off? aggressive-bastard? timid?
Also there is your choice of music if you play any. I once had a first date with a girl who was a bit Bohemian and obviously thought I was too staid. I'd given up on her and as I drove her home I thought WTF and put on my music - heavy metal (which most girls don't like). You could see her attitude to me totally change (for the better). I didn't ask her out again anyway - not attractive.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday February 12 2017, @02:08AM
>I thought WTF and put on my music - heavy metal (which most girls don't like). You could see her attitude to me totally change (for the better).
Donkey to Shrek: "I like you, you got that "I don't care what anyone thinks" thing goin' on..." Read Surely you must be joking Dr. Feynmann for some very practical advise on women.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday February 12 2017, @02:58AM
That's a bit silly. It is not just a matter of "what kind of car". For example you can tell by the smell if someone smokes even if they avoid smoking on the date. You can tell is someone is untidy (very off-putting for me); of course they might have tidied it up for the date but if it is untidy then they certainly are too. If they are driving, you can assess something of their personality by the way they drive which they might suppress in a chat but shows up when they are behind the wheel - big-head-show-off? aggressive-bastard? timid?
I completely agree. I was talking about one example -- and a rather common one. There ARE people who judge others based simply on the MAKE/MODEL of car they drive. Other people in this thread have even said that it's unrealistic for people not to. (Frankly, I sincerely don't give a crap about what kind of car someone drives, but I'll admit I'm in the minority.) But sure -- one can judge all sorts of stuff about a person based on how they keep their car. I completely agree, and I never meant to suggest otherwise.
What I was pointing out is that there are plenty of people who are more "shallow" than that. (And I put that word in quotation marks because I frankly don't even like that adjective, but it's commonly used in situations like this. But I don't like it because to me it implies a judgment against such people... I don't in any way begrudge people who prioritize fancy car ownership as a signal of attractiveness. That's a choice. I don't care -- you do what you want and be attracted to what you want. Nevertheless, those people exist, and if you end up on a date with such a person and you are NOT such a person, there could be problems down the road....)
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Sunday February 12 2017, @02:03PM
I have a friend with 15 Jaguars, 4 Audis, a Range Rover, a Lincoln stretch limo, a 1950's Cadillac sedan, and a small Renault. Before you get excited, they are all rust buckets sitting in a yard except for 3 of the Jags, two of the Audis, and the Renault (and even those are old).
For a date he uses the Renault. I wonder what can they tell about him?