Horror Tales of Online Dating (What's Really Wrong With Online Dating Sites Such as Match.com, EHarmony.com, etc.)
Posted Thu Feb 1 17:30:09 2001 by sbaldwin |
By M. Nevada
"Find Your Perfect Date at Match.com", reads this online dating service's current banner ad. "Find a Nightmare", reads the banner ad attached to the inside of my skull. Because online dating, at least in my experience, is one of the unfunniest jokes around.
What am I ranting about? Well, the six months that I spent on Match.com, and the 120 dollars I coughed up were complete wastes of time and money.
I first joined Match.com because it seemed to have the biggest database, and its friendly, photo-driven database let me actually look at the people I was sending e-mail to. Unfortunately, the database underwent a complete restructuring shortly after I joined, destoying several evening's worth of work creating an an earnest, heartfelt personal profile. So I had to painstakingly re-enter all this information.
After re-building my personal information, reconstructing my personal search criteria, and uploading a new picture of myself, I waited patiently for some incoming e-mail to arrive. After two weeks had gone by, with nary a response, I went on the offensive, and started to actively search for women matching my criteria (heavy-smoking divorced caucasion atheists).
I quickly found that there were forty-one of these people within a 50 mile radius of my location. Because I don't believe that love is blind, I narrowed my search criteria to the twenty-five who had actually uploaded pictures of themselves, and immediately screened out another seven for being butt-ugly. That left me with eighteen, so I composed one heartfelt, sincere, earnest e-mail, and sent the same message to the group using a "blind copy CC".
Five women of the eighteen replied, and over the next several weeks, I began trading e-mails with three of them. Here is a brief summary of the resulting encounters.
Date 1: A Candle-Lit Dinner
Judith seemed to have everything going for her. A cute face, a paying job at a prominent New York film institute, a wry way of expressing herself in e-mail, and realistic expectations about the prospects of meeting Mr. Right through an online dating service. She wrote: "I really don't think we'll know if there's a real connection between us until we actually sit down together and make eye contact". She suggested we meet at an intimate Italian restaurant near her workplace on the West Side, and I hung out at the bar until she showed up.
I remember sitting there with a Diet Coke, with my back to the entrance and my mind swirling with fantasies about what we'd talk about - the arts, Giuliani, the Yankees - whatever seemed most conducive to romance. But then, my reverie was broken when an extremely large woman tapped me on the shoulder, I turned around, and it was Judith - about 80 pounds heavier than her picture had indicated. I could hardly even see her eyes peering out from within the folds of fat, much less make contact with them.
Because I consider myself a gentleman, I bought her dinner (Lasagna), and talked exclusively about Giuliani, which seemed to please her to no end. But as soon as I could dump her in the subway, I ran screaming back to the East side, and never sent her e-mail again.
Date 2: Romantic Phone Sex
With the Judith experience safely behind me, I began to more carefully analyze the pictures that my six "hot" prospects had uploaded of themselves, to look for obvious signs of retouching or Loch Ness monster-style fakery. Using software originally developed by the CIA Global Maps Division, I began blowing up and enhancing some of these grainy JPEGs, and sure enough, several contained dead giveways that they were taken many years ago, when the subject was in much better
(or at least much younger) shape. These background clues included biplanes flying in the distance, cars with tailfins, and an old Nixon: Now More Than Ever poster.
I was left with two prospects whose pictures seemed honest. One was an exotic belly-dancer, and I had made all the arrangements to meet her when she requested that we talk on the phone first.
There was scratchy Middle Eastern music playing in the background when I called, and what seemed to be a couple of hungry kids screaming. This is in itself wasn't a turnoff - in fact it was almost a turn-on. But when this poor woman began talking, I knew that there was no way on earth that we could ever communicate earnestly and heartfeltly about anything, at least in any extant language. She sounded like just like Brezhnev did after a hard night of drinking, so I told her I was feeling ill (which I was), and I moved our date into the far-distant future (2006).
Date 3: Sexy E-Mail
Older, wiser, but still horny as hell, I was now down to just one prospect, so I sent her another piece of earnest e-mail. By this time, I was becoming increasingly desperate to meet someone under 800 lbs. who actually spoke the English language, but I was also getting gunshy.
So I began asking a few personal questions about her - what kind of food she liked eating, whether she liked music from the Middle East, or had a thing for vodka - innocuous things like that. I had become accustomed to this kind of probing behavior - (one of my correspondents had actually asked for my Social Security Number, and I stupidly complied, and of course never heard from her again).
To this day, I don't think I was being overly intrusive, but my correspondent clearly thought differently. Maybe she got my e-mail at the end of a long day, or her real boyfriend had dumped her - I'll never know. But here's the reply I got back after sending her a simple "request for clarification of one of your earlier points" message:
WHAT THE HELL IS THE MATTER WITH YOU. DO YOU WANT TO MEET ME OR NOT? ARE YOU ONE OF THOSE AMBIVALENT SONS OF BITCHES WHO CANT MAKE UP THEIR MIND - ARE YOU SRIOUS ABOUT MEETING ME OR JUST WANT TO TORTURE ME AND FUCK WITH MY HEAD? DON'T BOTHER REPONDING - IM UP TO HERE WTH YOUR DUMB QUESTIONS. NANCY.
Epilogue:
I cancelled my Match.com subscription, spent the money I saved on two reasonably good subscription porn services, and tried to forget the whole thing. But I can't really forget, because every day, I receive junk mail about some wretched new Match.com event - a wine tasting, or a boat cruise, or a getaway weekend.
Someday, I'm sure I'll meet someone, and maybe, God willing, we'll wind up having grandchildren together. But I'm 100% sure that I'd be better off taking my chances with a random, in-your-face encounter than by flying blind in a world of illusion. And I'll certainly never date online again, until such time as they can screen out the imposters, the losers, the psychos, and the women who sound like Brezhnev.
I actually do know people who have met compatible mates online, but I believe these success stories are vastly outnumbered by the number of empty, unhappy, soul-searing experiences that nobody publicizes - the victims are too ashamed, and the service doesn't want to know either. Match.com and its brethren are, in my opinion, seamy lonely-hearts clubs where deception, trickery, and paranoia run rampant, scarring the gullible and the guileless.
But then again, I guess I'm one of those "ambivalent sons-of-bitches who can't make up their mind" - at least about throwing myself blindly into the arms of these cyber-weirdos.
|
Name: bob
Email:
Date: Tue Feb 6 11:59:23 2001
Comment: Toni, you aren't really some sweaty guy named "Marv" working nights at Home Depot, are you? I told you, I'm not into that...
:)
|
Name: Toni
Email:
Date: Tue Feb 6 11:29:47 2001
Comment: Oops my BAD! Bob i misread your comment! See what you do to me!?!?! I like your type..hehe
|
Name: Toni
Email:
Date: Tue Feb 6 11:26:06 2001
Comment: LOL Bob NEVA..and i say NEVA underestimate UrSELF!!!!
|
Name: bob
Email:
Date: Tue Feb 6 08:49:30 2001
Comment: Wanna see me first? Search for "3s" on amihotornot.com... Yeah, I know I'm probably overestimating myself :)
|
Name: Toni
Email:
Date: Tue Feb 6 08:01:04 2001
Comment: My Gawd Bob..I want you!
|
Name: ATestDummy
Email: d.lahey@azcentral.com
Date: Tue Feb 6 06:20:17 2001
Comment: well i must say that i would never rely on matching dates sites or companies, but i do believe in dates through the internet.
Sure you will find alot of strange people around, just think that those that use these sites, maybe have relation problems with themselfs, they don't feel confident of their look and things like that.
I'm not here to offend anyone or to tell that i'm goergeous, i just think that everyone has the strenght of going out and find the right person, they just need to consider themself more. I love myself and i like to have fun alot. Working on the net i stumble many times on chats and comments on the most wierd sites. Doing my life i fell in love with a woman through the net... and tomorrow morning i'm going to move to go live with her.
Remember that life is really strange sometimes, it's just a matter of knowing how to get the swirls of a wierd day...
Don't discurage yourself and smile your day thru!!
Best of luck,
Just a lucky CrashTestDummy
|
Name: suzanne
Email: macbabe@earthlink.com
Date: Tue Feb 6 01:51:44 2001
Comment: I can't believe some of the posts I've been reading re online dating --the sexism, the misinformation, the ignorance! It's true, a lot of people who use online dating services have "issues," but so do people in the workplace, your friend's brother/sister, and just about everyone else. It is so not true that beautiful women can get laid anytime they want so that if they are online they must be desperate. (The issue of whether getting laid should be the first priority is open to question!) In fact, the opposite is true. I am a very attractive woman, a lot smarter than most, and I find that men I meet are intimidated by me. It is difficult to meet someone compatible online, but one advantage is that if you don't post a photo, you have to rely on your brains and writing ability to attract someone. I would much rather date an average-looking guy who is superintelligent (and maybe a geek) with a great sense of humor, who reads books, has many interests, and writes articulately, than a good-looking stud with subnormal intelligence. Unfortunately, I'm afraid a lot of men are only interested in a woman's looks. And I thought that by the time I'd hit 40 things would be different from the bad old days. Apparently, they're not. I did have the good fortune to meet someone great on matchmaker several months ago--he lives in NYC and I'm in Boston, but we get along great and we would never have met at work, at a bar, or through "networking." At least there are a few men around who aren't pigs. And by the way, if anyone wants to see my photo, I'd be happy to refer you to my website. I'm not a butt-ugly chick. And I'm NOT fat. I look like my photo.
And, guys, if it turns out that the woman you meet turns out to be less beautiful than a Victoria's Secret model, get over it! Chances are, you aren't that great looking either, and she just might have--gasp--a brain! And maybe even a personality and a life! Shocking, isn't it?
|
Name: Lisa
Email:
Date: Mon Feb 5 19:10:20 2001
Comment: I truly hope that you will meet your 'Soul Mate' soon. You sound like a very articulate man, with many aspiratons. Thank you for sharing your well written story, and yes, there are certainly some weirdo's out there in cyber-land.
Good Luck for the future !
|
Name: bob
Email: pale_13@usa.net
Date: Mon Feb 5 16:56:45 2001
Comment: The whole IP Addy issue wasn't really what I was trying to get at when I asked "And who would you be, exactly?"
Perhaps what I should have said was, "Gee, isn't it interesting how certain people love to yell and scream in online posts, as long as they don't have to reveal anything about themselves that might lead to someone reproaching them?"
And to get back on subject, this is the kind of faceless person you often find trolling dating services.
|
Name: Laughing at You
Email:
Date: Mon Feb 5 16:02:59 2001
Comment: OK then. 32.97.136.0
I'll dispense with the subnet.
My point was, however, that everybody's IP is readily available in the source code of this document.
So yeah Bob, you're safe using your dialup or proxy, or whatever, but some people here might just be posting from work and might have static IPs.
Nice to know I ruffled your feathers thought. He. He.
Oops. Got to go to study hall. Have to walk the significant other home. She's got some 30 year old perv hitting on her and following her around.
Eeewww.
|
Name: bob
Email: pale_13@usa.net
Date: Mon Feb 5 15:55:32 2001
Comment: And here I was thinking I was 32.97.136.234...Ever heard of a variable IP? Or names?
Most of us humans use them, since a a string of numbers tends to be impersonal. I imagine you're late for study hall, so please don't hang around on my account, you insipid little twit.
I don't ever recall claiming superior skills. For one, I appreciate it when someone who has been around a while posts information that I might find useful or relevant. If I ruffle a few feathers, so be it, but the best any of us can do is to pass along our own expereinces,along with the expereinces of those close to us.
At least I don't hide.
|
Name: bob
Email:
Date: Mon Feb 5 15:42:50 2001
Comment: thanks for sharing.
|
Name: Laughing at You
Email:
Date: Mon Feb 5 15:41:10 2001
Comment: Hey Bob.
Gee you're dumb.
In between sermons about how much more skilled you are then the majority of us poor ignorant 20-something web monkeys (and advice on dating for the none too social), did it ever occur to you to check the source code of a posting script.
Yah know. Like CGI for Dummies.
He's
208.209.196.245
You, on the other hand are:
32.97.136.232
|
Name: bob
Email: pale_13@usa.net
Date: Mon Feb 5 14:04:05 2001
Comment: and you would be who, exactly?
|
Name: you moron
Email:
Date: Mon Feb 5 13:07:02 2001
Comment: Hey mr. "NAmeless" wonder! Why don't you at least post a feckin name once in a while and maybe your dumbass posts won't get nuked.
Idiot. I hope NetSlaves decides to post people's IPs...
-YM
|
Name:
Email:
Date: Sun Feb 4 22:07:04 2001
Comment: WHICH 2 PORN SITES
hey! STOP NUKING MY POSTS!
|
Name: copake_master
Email: cs@zeppoplus.net
Date: Fri Feb 2 20:03:48 2001
Comment: the worst thing about this online dating thing is that you never know the true "opportunity cost" of carrying on these protracted e-mail exchanges. People have stopped going out, and the computer keeps them in isolation. I don't think online dating is a sick thing - hell, computer dating was one of the first mainframe applications to be successfully commercialized back in the 1960s. But I'll never know the real cost of doing it this way - because I'll never know who it was that I missed because I was sitting here, at the keyboard, trying to get dates.
|
Name: zinnsmeister
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 19:46:30 2001
Comment: >..when I told him I had no interest in being a married man's toy, he posted my information out on a same sex site along with a picture I had sent him. Lovely world, ain't it.
This is truly horrifying. When somebody does this kind of thing to you, it's almost equivalent to physical rape.
|
Name: Neveragain
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 19:41:59 2001
Comment: Hey Richard, not only do you get a million emails from some of the strangest emails from the most emotionally desparate and sexually frustrated males that ever crawled out of the swamp. Most of them are MARRIED and say they aren't. I found that out the hard way. Match.com, I got burned there, big time and when I told him I had no interest in being a married man's toy, he posted my information out on a same sex site along with a picture I had sent him. Lovely world, ain't it. Not that blind dates person to person are much better, re-entering the dating scene in your earlier 40's just ain't a picnic no matter where you try to jump in.
|
Name: zinnsmeister
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 19:11:36 2001
Comment: i've only gone on match.com as a free subscriber - just to look at the freak show. i agree that we're in a very lonely time in america - the sexual revolution is over, and most of us are cocooned with our desktops, so perhaps online dating is an inevitable product of this new era. but I find the whole spectacle of what I call "meat-marketing" depressing on sites like match. the way men and women present themselves is wholly degrading - although in profoundly different ways.
|
Name: nicegurl
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 18:30:01 2001
Comment: What Night Owl said...
It's just another way to meet people - not an online catalog. If you don't like one dating site, try one of the many others. That's what I did, and finally met my sweet and intelligent boyfriend after a lot of mostly pleasant, a few tedious and/or weird, dates. Considering I'm a New Yorker, I probably met less psychos than I would at clubs.
Now the bit about your SS - that could turn into a good horror story.
|
Name: Night Owl
Email: nightowl@ulster.net
Date: Fri Feb 2 14:35:16 2001
Comment: I think it depends a bit on your age, as well.
Three years ago, when I was 32, I found myself single again. At 32, I found the bar scene far less appealing that I did 6 or 7 years earlier. Also, at 32, chances are, most of your friends and social circle are either married or at least in a LTR, so the socializing opportunities are far fewer than when you hung out with a "crew". Also, at that age, it's less likely that you'll meet someone through networking (as you've already used up your friends friends). So online dating is a viable way to meet people.
I looked at a few personals on Excite and Yahoo (don't be an idiot an pay for this stuff) - after sifting through the obvious porn ads, I found a few that sounded like someone I would get along with. A few e-mails led to a few phone calls which led to a few dates. Although the first few were "one date and out" (including one who was MUCH heavier than her ad stated), I found all of them in the same situation I was - not into the bar scene anymore, and just wanting to meet someone. An online ad is basically saying "look, let's cut through the bullshit - I'm single and want to meet someone. Here's my interests - who wants to go on a date?"
Shortly after answering ads, I met my wife. We hit it off right away, a testomony to the selectivness of an ad, and married 35 days after meeting. It's been almost 2 years, and it's been great.
The author of the above story seems to expect a bit too much - it's meeting people, nothing more. He also did the lazy man thing by writing one response..... duh. Like anyone with a brain cannot see through that. No wonder he didn't get many replies...
|
Name:
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 14:20:41 2001
Comment: Wow, your a big time loser, sure the women are wack,but your a big time loser sorry! you must also be not very attractive, and very annoying I think thats why the women cursed in you out in all caps, get a life man, or get laid, call a hooker whatver get laid fast
|
Name: guy from north bergan
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 13:18:37 2001
Comment: Name: Emily Dresner-Thornber
>Comment: Am I the only one who just finds this >article and the following discussion downright >creepy?
I guess so. Frankly, I find articles about fast cars a lot creepier than articles about online dating (because a good friend was recently killed in one). De gustibus non disputantus, eh?
|
Name: Eric Adam
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 12:06:52 2001
Comment: Ok. I guess I have to weigh in with my opinion. I'll state up front that I met my wife on matchmaker.com. We've been together 3 years total and married last year. It worked for me.
As someone mentioned earlier, honesty is key. Sure you try to look good in the beginning, but that's how it works in meatspace as well. At least a few emails back and forth can help weed out a lot of maybes without the awkward moments.
I really don't like the way people are focusing on looks so much. It's especially distasteful to see how vulgar the comments are. And you wonder why women post no pictures or pictures taken in a better day? Grow the feck up! If you are online looking for love, chances are that you aren't even good-looking enough to be a catalog model. You're missing out on a lot of great possibilities.
Online dating isn't for everyone, but some people are really shy or have other social phobias that make meeting people very difficult and meeting virtually can smooth things out a lot.
Allow me to be elitist for a mooment and add that the internet dating was a lot better back in the day when people had UNIX shell accounts or were using Mosaic. Before AOL hit critical mass, you at least had a pretty good idea that the person in the ad was literate and intelligent. Nowadays it's as good as any bar on a Saturday night-- Treat it accordingly.
I'd put the success rate in the same range as any other meet other singles construct. Don't hide behind your computer, use it like the tool it is. Everyone has two identities and for any relationship to work you'll eventually have to meet each other's second, real identity. You tried something new and it didn't work. At least meeting on the internet is a big step beyond a middle-school dance-- Boys on one side. Girls on the other. Both exchanging glances. No one taking a chance.
|
Name: bob
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 12:01:52 2001
Comment: Greg: Hope?
|
Name: MasterPo
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 11:54:33 2001
Comment:
IMO meeting someone via an online service is no different than a singles ad or dating service. As hard as it might be to grasp, some people have work and responsibilities. They just don't have the time to spend every night bar hopping or clubing.
And if we say that meeting people at a party or gathering is acceptable, why not an online party or gathering?
|
Name: Chris
Email: K
Date: Fri Feb 2 11:36:22 2001
Comment: Richard: >Meeting women on Slashdot. Why didn't I think of that.
I met my boyfriend on /. We have been dating for about a year and are quite happy :-) :-) A friend of his saw the post and wow...what can I say? He's the greatest and the geekiest :-) He upgrades my computer, and he makes me laugh. Those are the only two things I need in this world :-) dreamy sigh
|
Name: Greg
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 11:31:58 2001
Comment: Bob,
LOL
What makes you so sure she exempted your posts from the general creepiness of the thread?
What I honestly think is that age might have something to do with it. I'm 28, and I tend to find meeting people online a bit weird. After all, I turned 18 long before the Internet hit it big.
But I find younger people who are perfectly comfortable with it. Why? Because they grew up with it. It doesn't seem strange to them at all.
|
Name: bob
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 11:13:20 2001
Comment: Emily, as you can tell from my brief comment last night and my longer post this morning, no, you are not the only one who finds this creepy.
|
Name: Emily Dresner-Thornber
Email: zenith@pave-france.org
Date: Fri Feb 2 10:54:04 2001
Comment: Am I the only one who just finds this article and the following discussion downright creepy?
|
Name: MasterPo
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 10:32:18 2001
Comment:
LOL! Great article. And oh, so true!
|
Name: stoker
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 08:23:09 2001
Comment: Like almost anything else in life, your responses will vary.
I actually had a great experience with matchmaker.com and in only a few weeks, I went on a bunch of dates with cute and interesting women. One relationship turned out really well and we wound up dating for 7 months and still remain good friends.
That being said, I've had horrible experiences using other online services. as well. There are a lot of variables involved -- time and effort are big ones. You need to spend A LOT of time cultivating your prospects. Timing is another biggie. One time I tried online dating I had great success as there were many interesting and attractive women using the service. Then later, I had relatively poor experiences when a whole new crew came online.
Overall, online dating is a useful device. Just don't trust it to find your husband or wife and you'll be fine.
|
Name: bob
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 08:00:18 2001
Comment: Jeff, some time online is one thing. Trying to spend your life there is another.
|
Name: Jeff
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 07:58:55 2001
Comment: I don't really agree with the moralistic tone Bob is taking. Most people at one time or another for various reasons (divorce, breakup of a long term relationship, move, etc.) find themselves socially isolated. In the past, they might have spent those hours in front of a TV. At least on ICQ, or in usenet, or wherever you have a chance of meeting somebody. Sure, getting an invite at the Speilberg house in Bridghampton's probably a bit more effective then Match.com but hey some of us acutually like spending time on line.
|
Name: bob
Email: pale_13@usa.net
Date: Fri Feb 2 07:35:14 2001
Comment: In most cases, I've always found that finding a potential mate worked best when people I know used the time-tested model of networking. I met most of the women I've dated over the years (now I think about it, all of them) through mutual friends. So have the vast majority of couples I've met, of any orientation. I know of not a single person I personally know (and I know quite a few) who has ever found a real relationship online that ended up for the best.
And you know what?
That means if you want something real, you should try getting off your butt, shutting down ICQ for a while, and leaving the house to meet real, flesh and blood human beings.
I find myself going about to go on a Milleresque rant, but here goes:
RANT MODE ON:
Finding someone online and expecting it to work out is generally pathetic. You are both putting up a false image of yourselves (JPEG or linguistically) that only highlights what you consider your best points. You show no body language, no subtle nuances, your timing and cadence, and any chance at chemistry are thrown off, and you show nothing that shows the kind of person you really are. It is all an act to impress some faceless stranger. Any you know what? The equally pathetic soul on the other end of that email is putting on the same song and dance, and building a fantasy of who you are to match their own delusions of who they want to be with. So you really expect that person to be the same individual you meet in person? I've always heard techies being accused of being naive and socially-retarded, but this pretty much proves it.
The there are two time-tested truths of online dating:
A) You don't have any real people in your life that you would be better spending face-time with, and/or
B) That you are working too hard and putting in to many hours at the office to mingle with the masses in real social settings.
In either case, you are a red flag for any offline people. Let's look at this point by point.
If you don't have any real friends, you are probably lacking social skills, which will retard your ability to engage in the mating game known as dating. In other words, if you are so socially inept that you cannot go out for a beer or a latte with peers, how do you expect to impress someone enough to cohabitate with you for life?
Forget trying to find a date for now and try to find some friends outside your chosen profession. Develop the ability to mingle with others not exactly like you. Once you estalish a relationship with the real world, then start trying to date, not before.
If people on these dating sites would actually be honest, I'd bet about 80% are either friendless, or only have clones of themeselves in a mutual self-admiration society. It isn't real, but an illusion of an existence. So the people aren't real in any meaningful sense, so don't expect them to be.
Secondly, if you are one of these dot-com stains constantly lamenting about 80 hour work weeks, then you don't have time for dating anyway. It would be much simpler to get a prostitute, and that would at least help the unemployment rate, if only on an hourly basis.
If you SERIOUSLY want to establish a relationship with other human beings, you can't do it through AOL and AIM. You need time to physically spend with other human beings, and sitting at a computer typing with one hand to someone on the other end doesn't count. First, quit working 80 hour weeks.
Find a job that will let you have time with others: 40 hours being what normal people work. "But how will I get ahead?" you might ask. You might be better off asking what is ahead if you are by yourself. If you can' do that, give it up, become a "ain't got" nun, and join a .com-vent.
Seriously, how do you expect to be a decent potential mate if you are never around? I though being in a relationship was about togetherness. Seems quite a few are missing the point. You can't be together if you are never around. If you are working 80 hours a week, how can you expect to be a decent as a spouse or parent?
My advice, which is probably unwanted, it to get a grip on reality, quit chasing stock options, and L-I-V-E. You only go around once, and you guys on match.com and other online love sites sure are wasting a lot of time, in my opinion.
RANT MODE OFF:
We now return you to your regularly-scheduled whining about being alone...
|
Name: Andy
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 07:53:43 2001
Comment: I accidentally posted a picture of a extremely good looking male model on oneandonly.com.
The response was teriffic suddenly every woman in the world was interested in web design and mountain biking (my interests). But quite frankly a awful lot of them had what an Oprah Winfrey trained psychotherapist would call "issues".
Voluntary work is the best way to meet the opposite sex it least you get to meet them and the chances are they decent people.
|
Name: Greg Jorgensen
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 01:17:00 2001
Comment: Nah. No need to e-mail you. I think I might have just come off wrong. My larger point was simply that meeting people on-line is just one of a number of different venues, no better or no worse than going to a bar or taking a class and that as much as a lot of geeks complain about not being able to meet women, most of them don't want to.
I don't think that "most geek guys would kill you and eat your liver to get laid" any more than most of the jocks I see at the gym. Quire the contrary. The geek guys who were attacking the woman in the Fucked Company forum (or several of the women there) weren't really doing it out of a desperate need for their approval. It was more the opposite. It was more like get off our turf while we worship Pud. We don't want women here disturbing us while we're complaining that there are no women here. This is a locker room and Pud is top dog etc.
I'm not quite sure why the men who followed Phil Kaplan up to SF aren't worth comment. At least if the women was following him because she wanted to snag him as a boyfriend it was rational and not terribly different than it would have been had she met him in an office or a bar. The men following him around (or spending hours a day posting to his forum instead of looking for work) seem as weird as that women did for leaving her 3 year old.
All in all though, it's just like the real world. The only difference I see, once again, is that there's kind of a "he man woman haters club" attitide and no real desire to integrate women into their all male world.
|
Name: Steve Gilliard
Email: sgilliard@yahoo.com
Date: Fri Feb 2 00:55:42 2001
Comment: Greg,
I did think it was odd she left her 3 year old to trail a stranger, and shit, I've had dinner with Phil, I wasn't planning on trailing him around Cali. The men are hardly worth comment. I like the guy, but that's a bit weird for me.
I was trying to be cute, without asking the relevant question. Now you can e-mail me to find out which relevant question I was hinting at if it matters.
And most geek guys would kill you and eat your liver to get laid, unless they were gay, then they'd beg you for sex.
Kate,
I don't disagree, but I think sex isn't just for marriage any more. It is for people whom you like and trust.
My point is that it makes sense to meet people in a less stressful environment, one where sex doesn't color every interaction.
And all the Slash guys are married or have steady girlfriends, so they met them somewhere.
|
Name: kate
Email:
Date: Fri Feb 2 00:31:48 2001
Comment: Wow, this touched a nerve for me.
Well, I did use match.com before it got all cheesy 'n shit, and that was only, and I mean ONLY, because a coworker met her husband through it. She thought it was the greatest thing. So I tried it. I don't know about ugly pix, plus the guy posting the story sounds kinda shallow, and where is he? New York? (Sorry, never been there, I've only lived in California.) Though I ended my membership because the interface lacked some of the useful features of the old one (a couple of geeks told me its code is crap, but then, there they are, trying to get a date), my experience inspired a coworker to try it, so maybe she'll have better luck. We're in San Francisco, and looking at the women (just to check out the 'competition,' dontcha know), there seem to be more of them than when I was a member a year ago. My friend thinks they're all whitebread and boring, but if I were to do it over again, I'd feel pretty intimidated, sort of. What can I say? I didn't have a pic up, because that felt very creepy and unsafe. But I was totally honest about describing myself. One of the guys who did respond to my ad really liked what I wrote, we hit it off in writing, and when we met, we found each other very attractive too. For various reasons, we stopped dating (I shall spare you), but I ultimately found the whole thing quite exhausting. I'd start exchanging emails with someone, then never hear from them again, no explanation that's just the way it is. I just can't deal with trying to meet men online anymore, it burned out - the vast majority of people, male and female, seem so vapid and conditioned by I don't know, media or consumerism or what exactly. I have concluded I have to try to meet guys in person somehow, and frankly all those dorky singles events like the Meeting Game, or Dinner for Six are starting to look really good, if for no other reason than they're structured, and anything that takes the pressure off me to set things up, plus be totally perfect and fascinating and beautiful and successful would probably go a long way toward letting me be at ease and, in theory, attactive. Even a real live matchmaker sounds good!
I guess if you want a one night stand, you could go to craigslist, where there seem to be a lot of completely morally impaired people just wanting a feck or feck buddy. Whatever. I seem to be out of step with my peers for thinking that sex is more than a recreational sport or something you do to 'relax.' Hey, nothing wrong with 'relaxing.' I just haven't met the guy who likes me as much as I like him, who's smart, with as strong a libido as mine, and who also happens to believe that sex is for marriage.
While I do believe in 'chemistry,' these days, if you don't have a chance to get to know someone over time and the chemistry isn't instantly there, then there's a lot of painful rejection. People have forgotten or never learn that some reactions take more time than others it doesn't mean that it can't be as strong or fascinating.
So, I can't recommend match.com - c'mon do you really want to be in a meat catalogue, especially with a picture - that can be browsed by ANYone? That's how they hook more people to buy the "service." They don't give a damn about you, and the risk is entirely yours. Men don't seem to have these sorts of security issues, generally, but as a woman and a chickenshit, I definitely do.
So I concur with Mr. Nevada that the success stories are a tiny tiny minority. That these services make a lot of money off of single people, plus that the world can be a very scary place with people on different places on the scary scale who want to date you. Sure, you have to meet lots of people to find that 'one,' but there are plenty of non-commercial ways, or at least inexpensive ways of meeting people. You don't have to spend 3000 bucks, c'mon!
re: porn. I recommend Retroraunch.com
See ya on the flip side!
|
Name: Bill Lessard
Email: bill@netslaves.com
Date: Fri Feb 2 00:02:07 2001
Comment: Aren't people afraid that bashers would use this technology?
|
Name:
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 23:36:45 2001
Comment: >Wouldn't Gaydar work better if it vibrated?
I think it does, kind of like a Cybiko. See http://www.gaygety.com for technical specs - the vibration level is adjustable.
|
Name:
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 23:24:29 2001
Comment: Wouldn't Gaydar work better if it vibrated?
|
Name:
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 22:59:03 2001
Comment: this stuff will really take off when it goes wireless. imagine being able to immediately scan a party for anyone with an interest in Foucault, or Mingus. Or, for that matter, Hunter Thompson and Camaros. I think they actually came out with a product called "Gaydar" - which you could wear and it would beep if anyone gay came within 50 meters. Once the information becomes more granular, i.e "i'm looking for a caucasion, heavy-drinker, etc", this technology could be really useful for dating/mating purposes.
|
Name: disjointed paragraph
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 22:48:28 2001
Comment: Hmmm, maybe the problem with sites like match.com are people like blissed out who aren't really sure what they are...
>I'm a young, attractive woman ...
>I can be as neurotic as the next guy... ?!
|
Name: disjointed paragraph
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 22:44:38 2001
Comment: Of course, the burning question on everyone's mind is, WHICH TWO PORNSITES?
|
Name:
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 22:36:41 2001
Comment: dude - you gave up too early!! my sister had to go out on at least 100 dates but she eventually found her guy (and yeah, it's a happy marriage). figure on spending at least 3000 bucks on one of these online campaigns. if you wind up with a dog, just split, pay the tab and move onto the next email. there are plenty of women desperate enough to hook up with a guy with CIA connections - don't give up so easily!
|
Name: servicename
Email: servicename@msn.com
Date: Thu Feb 1 22:22:39 2001
Comment: I think even the writer (who seems like a nut case in his own write - what with that photo analyzing software) acknowledged that some people do actually find bliss. I suppose all of this information is anecdotal - the only person I know who hooked up with somebody was a rabid conspiracy theorist who found somebody almost as rabid on the Net. Last I heard, they were still together - I think they actually switched identities.
|
Name: blissed out
Email: reptile_dna@yahoo.com
Date: Thu Feb 1 22:17:30 2001
Comment: I placed a free trial ad on match.com two years ago looking for someone to write to -- nothing romantic or sexual involved. A year of engaging, funny, thought-inspiring emails later, I met the person I'd been writing to. We've been living together for a year now, and it's bliss.
I didn't post a picture (I'm a young, attractive woman, so I don't post pictures on the net), but I did find the person I want to be with for the rest of my life. Of course, I did get a lot of form letters from people who wanted to get laid ... those people probably still haven't found what they're looking for.
(And as far as having "issues"...we'll, I can be as neurotic as the next guy, but I went looking for companionship and found brilliance, so it worked for me.)
|
Name: servicename
Email: servicename@msn.com
Date: Thu Feb 1 21:58:18 2001
Comment: I personally find the idea of online dating completely barbaric. men and woman have been doing pretty well propogating the species for 50,000 years without this bullshit.
You see someone who rings your chimes, sidle up to her if you can, and see if you've got anything in common. then (and only then) do you start trading philosophies, or arguing about stuff. Doing this online is ridiculous - backwards. People get themselves lathered up with all kinds of fantasies, deep e-mail exchanges, and then ZAP - they meet and realize there's no chemistry. I've seen this happen again and again.
And the worst part of it is that the guy always has to pay for dinner. I haven't met a single woman online who hasn't expected the poor male to pick up the tab.
|
Name: Tom from Torrance
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 21:57:14 2001
Comment: "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves"
|
Name: guy from north bergen
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 21:50:57 2001
Comment: i tried doing match.com but yeah, most of the photos seem to have been taken under extremely favorable lighting conditions. I did meet one woman who actually _did_ look like her photo, but only head-on. When she turned her head 90 degrees, she looked completely different. It took me a while to get used to this, and well, it just didn't work out.
I think that most people on match.com are into the one-night stand trip. And I don't think there's anything wrong with this - I just think they're better off going to a standard pick-up party, i.e. the Pink Slips parties. Much less typing is involved...
|
Name: Hannibal
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 21:40:39 2001
Comment: You gave someone your social security number?
|
Name: bob
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 21:21:09 2001
Comment: I hope I don't offend anyone, but am I the only one who feels that going to an online dating service is just ASKING to meet a bunny-boiler?
|
Name: Greg Jorgensen
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 21:18:30 2001
Comment: Very interesting Steve. But I remember you slammed some woman on Fuckedcompany because she travelled from LA to SF to socialize with some people she met online. I've seen pictures of her and she's hardly what you'd consider plain. Yet you didn't criticize the 7 or 8 men who made the same trip.
Is it possible that a lot of web geeks (as much as they may protest the opposite) don't want women invading their space, that it's basically the "he man womanhaters club" no girls allowed?
|
Name: Richard Martin
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 21:12:01 2001
Comment: Meeting women on Slashdot. Why didn't I think of that.
|
Name: Steve Gilliard
Email: sgilliard@yahoo.com
Date: Thu Feb 1 20:35:57 2001
Comment: The best way to meet people is to share common activities. Let's face it, beautiful women can get laid anywhere. Women who go to Match.com have issues, as do many of the men.
You can meet women online, but I would suggest that you go to a group where you don't have the expectations of sex hanging over it. If you meet a woman on Slashdot or Plastic, you will actually have some common interests besides your desire for sex. You have a common ground of intellectual curiosity.
It is far easier to get to know someone based on what they think about less charged subjects than to try and make a romance happen on the basis of sexual attraction.
|
Name: Crash McK
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 20:08:23 2001
Comment: Yeah. A woman I know on match.com got hit with scores of the "one size fits all" emails described above based on her description alone! w/o photo! She didn't respond to any of the canned emails, though. Lesson: good looking women should not post photos, but even that may not protect you from the horny hordes.
P.S. In a moment of mental weakness, she responded to my email, and now she's my wife.
|
Name: Richard Martin
Email:
Date: Thu Feb 1 19:48:19 2001
Comment: Based on my own less than satisfactory experience with these types of sites, I suspect that any female who posts a remotely non-ugly photo gets spammed by hundreds of horny guys, and that it's difficult to rise above the noise. Any females out there who can confirm this?
|
|
|
