Princess MoMo

Mr. Disqualified:

Subject: Caveat Emptor no longer exists! [Editor’s Note: “Caveat Emptor is the headline on my dating profile.]
Hello Esquire!

Before I proceed here are the answers to your questions:

1.) You’re (You are)
2.) There’s (There is)
3.) Than
4.) Here

Also, lawyers should not be using contractions when they write or type. Consequently, your choice selections were inappropriate and I decided to put the correct answers in parenthesis.

Now, I already have been disqualified due to your age and height restrictions, however I decided to respond anyway (knowing full well this message will be deleted-hopefully at the conclusion of being read).

99.9% of the guys on here have no idea what caveat emptor even means, which means they will disregard it and hound you anyway. With that said, caveat emptor no longer fully exists- especially if you happen to have a latent defect in the realm of new residential housing and building so I think you need to find a different latin phrase maybe Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas would have been better for you.

It was quite comical because I knew your profession without having to even look. However, a woman of your stature should know that by placing all of those requirements on a guy it will be virtually impossible to find one. You have already weeded out over 75% just by your quiz alone.

Although I do not meet every standard, being in the legal field you surely know that courts generally look to “reasonableness” and do make exceptions to “extraordinary” cases. I fit into the category of and “extraordinary” case. If you have the gumption to broaden your criteria away from these self-created restrictions and are interested in replying your reply will be happily accepted.

Sincerely,

Jay

Princess MoMo:

Jay-

Strong work on the quiz. If the quiz weeds out 75% of men as you suggest, I’m okay with that. If a guy cannot master basic English, how will he be able to learn the complexities of MoMo? (MoMo is my nickname and, yes, I
speak in third person often. )

Onto the Latin portion of your message. I don’t see how “Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas” applies. Care to elaborate?

There are three of my criteria that I absolutely will not budge on:
1. I would NEVER date a man with children (because I don’t want to deal with kids unless they are of my genetic material);
2. I would not seriously date a man who is not living comfortably, by my standards; and
3. I have a very difficult, if not impossible, time budging on the height requirement. I realize that many may argue that this is superficial. That’s fine. There is a psychological block in my mind that won’t let me get past being taller than a man I’m with, with or without heels. I’ve tried dating “down” in the literal sense (i.e., men shorter than I am in heels). It turns me off.

Based on a review of your profile, it appears you’re 5’8″. I wish I could be more accommodating because your message sucks way less than the garbage I receive on a daily basis on this site. However, the height requirement is fairly strict and I’m not willing to give up my heels quite yet.

Thank you for taking the time to write an articulate and thoughtful message and best of luck!