eHarmony (boyfriends, man, attracted, gay)

[DennyCrane]

Originally Posted by OngletNYC

I tried eharmony once, gave up after the trial period. I ended up meeting one person, but the lenghty back and forth questions didn't seem worth mediocre date I got out of it. Now that I've thought about it again, perhaps I should give it another try. It was almost 3 years ago when I tried, and to be honest I really wasn't ready to be dating yet.

Dating does require a lot of patience. That's probably why so many people dislike it. These days, people seem to want immediate chemistry.

[OngletNYC]

Originally Posted by DennyCrane

Dating does require a lot of patience. That's probably why so many people dislike it. These days, people seem to want immediate chemistry.

That doesn't have anything to do with it in my case.

I got divorced 5 years ago, and I simply wasn't over it yet. Answering questions about what you want out of a relationship and life in general is impossible if you haven't settled into your new life as a divorcee. I know many people jump into another relationship quickly after a divorce, but I'm not one of those people. To be honest, I've only really started feeling like I am ready to be in a relationship this year, 2010.

[k374]

the problem I had with eharmony was that 90% of the women on there are fat, some of them ridiculously so... I was looking for someone who is fit not an amorphous blob of lard. Even funnier is that these blobs claim to be involved with various activities - skiing, running, kayaking... sure right!

[miyu]

Eharmony is just a tool in a bag of tools. It can only be good in that it saves you time, if you have a busy profession, or if you are very particular about the qualities you are looking for.

If you have nothing else in your bag of tools it's not gonna help you.

I think 90% of men on there are fat or ugly or just plain lame. But you only need one good match. You can ask them for their picture or else you won't talk to them. The alternative for some people is - not meeting anyone at all. It's preferable to meet somebody even if you have to filter through their pictures.

[philwithbeard]

Originally Posted by OngletNYC

I ...... Now that I've thought about it again, perhaps I should give it another try. It was almost 3 years ago when I tried, and to be honest I really wasn't ready to be dating yet.

Give one of the free dating sites a chance 1st.

OkCupid.com takes a lot of time and effort to answer all the questions that site asks, something like 3000 questions, but you can answer as many as you want, and come back later to answer a few more at a time. Lots of fun short tests other members submit (What actor would portray your life, etc.)

IMO, avoid Adult Friend Finder as it is mostly just casual sex.

Plenty of Fish is acceptable, but not a great site.

The point is your photo (digital quality, shot composition, lighting, focus, and so forth) your written profile (grammar, spelling, proof-reading, and most important--editing and re-editing to get it right) takes time and several tries. Practice on a free site before you spend you money on a pay site. Get feed back on your photo and profile and improve both. Just remember, a cheap cell phone photo taken in your bathroom mirror usually subtracts 2 points from your looks.

***********************

BTW: there is a psychology test called Myers-Briggs which you can Google. This test, and the theory behind M-B test is the basis for these dating sites and all their psychology questions they ask members. Problem is this is mostly empirical Ivory Tower thinking and test writing. There is little hard experimental scientific validation on the test questions, the selection of the answers, the phrasing of the questions and answers, and cultural / social / economic / age / group stratification for answers selected to the questions. The test writers add their own cultural & age bias to the questions and possible responses.

Google for Myers-Briggs personality type indicators (MBTI). There is 16 major personality types, ranging from ESTJ to INFP.

[Huckleberry3911948]

did i ever tell you about my eharmony blond cutie in nashville? we phoned/emailed for a few months and then i took the plunge, flew there - there she was standing in the parking lot, quasimoto. people lie alot dont they.

[sierraAZ]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948

did i ever tell you about my eharmony blond cutie in nashville? we phoned/emailed for a few months and then i took the plunge, flew there - there she was standing in the parking lot, quasimoto. people lie alot dont they.

Only a garganzillion times and counting!

[DennyCrane]

Originally Posted by k374

the problem I had with eharmony was that 90% of the women on there are fat, some of them ridiculously so... I was looking for someone who is fit not an amorphous blob of lard. Even funnier is that these blobs claim to be involved with various activities - skiing, running, kayaking... sure right!

Look around you. 2/3 of adults in this country are overweight. So it stands to reason that the majority of people you see online will also be overweight since they're drawn from the general population. Second, people in the real world lie about how active they are. I met someone a while back who claimed to run marathons. Maybe she did, but she sure didn't look like a traditional runner.

Originally Posted by philwithbeard

BTW: there is a psychology test called Myers-Briggs which you can Google. This test, and the theory behind M-B test is the basis for these dating sites and all their psychology questions they ask members. Problem is this is mostly empirical Ivory Tower thinking and test writing. There is little hard experimental scientific validation on the test questions, the selection of the answers, the phrasing of the questions and answers, and cultural / social / economic / age / group stratification for answers selected to the questions. The test writers add their own cultural & age bias to the questions and possible responses.

While it's true that sites like eHarmony don't release the empirical data they collected or methodology they used in formulating their matching algorithms, that doesn't necessarily mean they have no value. The alternative is to have no method at all which leads people to just use their own biases and prejudices.

[onihC]

Originally Posted by DennyCrane

No you don't. The premise of the site is to match you based on personality traits, not on looks or income.

Interesting. So I guess a person's profession is not listed either?

[DennyCrane]

Originally Posted by onihC

Interesting. So I guess a person's profession is not listed either?

You have the option of listing it, but I think you can leave it blank. In terms of who you're matched with, I don't recall if there was a way to filter by profession.