Kathryn B. Lord - Find-A-Sweetheart: Blog 2007/01

Match.com Makes News:Bits

1. Match.com is changing its look —and from appearances, the kind of singles it is trying to recruit. Style-wise, the site has gone black and white, with a little crisp nave blue, and added the cute motto “It’s okay to look!” And they have also added a stylist to help with advice for profiles and presentation. (Although that guy Jay Manuel looks very weird. Is he made out of plastic?) Looks to me like they are aiming at a higher end market. The site now makes regular sites like Yahoo! Personals and especially true.com look pretty cheesy. , for sure, to $34.95 for a month, $16.99 each if you sign up for six. Still a bargain, when you think that even at full price, that’s just a little over a dollar a day for access to millions of singles.

2. Then, in a bow to just how famous Match.com has become, The Washington Post published a piece on 1/28/2007 that is basically an angry rant about the plight of single women by an anonymous woman in her 30’s. It’s sort of amazing that the Post would even publish an anonymous piece, let alone one that blames Match.com and other dating sites for her ills.

However, like most rants, there are grains of truth. Granted, men (and women) have gotten spoiled by the seeming plethora of “hotties” of both genders. Never mind that these folks practically never return emails. Anonymous goes on to list her demands for dignity and respect, for all single women to to start “dignified dating behavior.” Some of the list makes sense, like honesty, keeping in shape and not dressing provocatively. But just as her anger reduces the effect of her message, some of her guidelines negate the rest. Like “If you don’t receive flowers by the third date, dump him.” Gosh.

Remember, the Internet and dating sites like Match.com are the medium, like a telephone. Phones changed people’s lives, too. We are in the middle of a big change period for dating and mating. It feels like with Internet dating going mainstream (out of the shadows), we are now in a bit of the opposite extreme, of people going sort of wild with expectations, and then having massive disappointment.

3. Then, practically on the same day as the Post piece (1/29/2007), the Wall Street Journal ran an article about Match.com and baby boomers. Match. now has the largest number of paid subscribers among U. S. dating sites. Match.com’s subscribers (paid members) now number 1.3 million, up by 1/3 over the past two years. How? Match has been reaching out to singles over 50 and divorcees, pitching itself as a destination for mainstream daters who want serious relationships. Yowzah! Is that what we want to hear or what???

Here’s more:

At Match, 23 percent of subscribers are over 50, more than double the number two years ago. Yahoo Personals has seen double-digit growth in the number of users over 50 in the past two years, thanks in part to a new service that provides extra control, privacy, and security. EHarmony’s fastest-growing age group last year was the over-50 segment.

Here’s something you rarely see: the number of paid subscribers to Match.com (1.3 million) and the number of “registered users” (15 million—total of PAID and UNPAID users), in the same article. These figures are rarely paired together, because of what I call “Online Dating’s Dirty Little Secret”—by far the largest percentage of folks with their profiles on dating sites are unpaid, and therefore not able to answer your email without paying up first. That’s more that 11 to 1, paid to unpaid, on Match.com. That means for every 11+ first emails you send out, you should only expect to get 1 back! Why is this so? Read my earlier posting to find out.

Here’s a bit that I found interesting but confusing:

The site is also branching out to daters desiring privacy, like executives or teachers reluctant to post their pictures online where subordinates or students may find them. It has introduced Chemistry.com, a premium service that shows a subscriber’s profile only to those candidates deemed suitable by a personality test developed by an anthropologist.

I’ve had a number of clients who are professionals in their community and really worry that their clients will see and recognize them. Some way for them to take advantage of online dating and protect their privacy would be great, but I don’t think Chemistry.com is going to do it. Chemistry.com has dud written all over it. The best part of Chemistry.com is it’s name. I have heard no good buzz at all. A commentator on Mark Brooks’ Online Personal Watch listed fiascos for 2007, and Chemistry.com is fifth on this list.

I love Match.com. It’s where I met my Sweetie Drew in 1998. But it’s not perfect. And worst of all, it ignores ME! A successful Romance Coach who met her now-husband right there! The epitomy of dumbness, wouldn’t you think? Now, Yahoo! Personals knows a good thing when they see it. I got RECRUITED to write for Yahoo! Personals. Wake up, Match,com!

From Your Romance Coach, Kathryn Lord

I’m on Online-Dating-Confessions…

I just never know where I am going to turn up. I just got an email that noted I was on Online-Dating-Confessions scroll down to see me—not as juicy as it sounds, just recorded interviews with me and other online dating folks. According to the copy here, I’m pretty good.

Kathryn’s on Yahoo!

Did you know that I write for Yahoo! Personals? Every few weeks or so, a link one of my articles is posted on the front page of Yahoo!, and watch out! Visits to my website go up times ten or more, I get stacks of emails from singles asking for coaching and advice, and new readers join the mailing list of my enewsletter *eMAIL to eMATE* (You aren’t a subscriber??? Sign up here.) It lasts for about a day, then it is back to the normal flow. I can practically tell to the minute when my article goes off the board and the new stuff comes up.

I was a Yahoo! star earlier this week ( Yahoo! featured), and right in the middle of all the emails came the following:

I just wanted to thank you for sharing your insight and knowledge in the dating arena. After reading your article on “Are you ready for a new relationship”, it helped me to understand more about myself, and what to present to my future significant other.

Thank you again for your contribution to this modern problem that many people face.

Sincerely,
John

Isn’t that wonderful? That makes all my work worthwhile.

I also heard from one of my old therapy clients who now is single, found me via Yahoo!, and wants Romance Coaching. And I heard from a Romance client from way back who is getting married. Yahoo!

From Your Romance Coach, Kathryn Lord

“Biggest Loser,” “Ugly Betty,” and Downright Mean

I’ve found myself in a nasty quagmire a few times lately over
meanness. When I heard about the shows “Ugly Betty” and “The
Biggest Loser,” I couldn’t believe the shows’ titles. Whatever
the actual shows were about, those titles are MEAN. I decided
not to watch either just on principle. Not even to see what they
were about.

Around the same time, “Borat” hit the theaters around here. What
did “Borat” mean? No negative connotations that I could
determine, but the reviews both piqued my interest and turned me
off at the same time. I did have what I called a perverse
interest in seeing it, even though I was worried that I would
laugh and then be embarrassed that I had found something funny.

I couldn’t talk anyone into going with me. Drew doesn’t like
comedies. Meg wasn’t interested. But then we were all at a
party where several people raved about how much they had liked
it. Meg went without me, and then reported back that she hated
it and found it had “no redeeming social value at all.” Since
Meg has a finely tuned ethical barometer, I believed her. She
did say that the guy she went with laughed and that made her mad
—at him. Since the premise of “Borat” seems to be tricking
real people into acting like their real selves on film, no matter
how caddish they are, I am glad I did not go. Tricking people
and laughing at them is not something I find funny. No matter how
boorish they are.

Then, I slid into some very disturbing conversations with “The
Biggest Loser” fans who tried to convince me how great the show
was, how it was really educational (fat people would learn how to
eat and exercise by watching it), and how the
biggest loser was really a winner. Somehow, I couldn’t be
convinced. How could a show that played on the commonly
understood phrase “the biggest loser” (as in “He is the biggest
loser”) possibly be construed as a positive experience for people
struggling with weight? Which more and more people in this
country are doing every day.

Rather than break my pledge to myself not to add to the Nielson
ratings of “The Biggest Loser,” I Googled the show and found this
Entertainment Weekly review which put my
worst fears into words. Here are a few of them:

But there’s a loathsome, mock-the-fatty undertow to Biggest
Loser. Part of the ugliness comes courtesy of the editing. ....

Loser’s challenges are even more manipulative: Many of the stunts
have no goal but to ridicule - or punish - the contestants. One
can argue that forcing out-of-shape folks to climb to the top of
that L.A. building was a lesson in perseverance. But what’s the
point of making them squeeze in and out of car windows too small
for them? Or forcing them to build a tower of pastries using only
their mouths? Or compete for a bag of lard? (Thereby forcing a
nation to make an immediate, collective ‘‘tub of’’ reference.)

More Googling, this time on “Ugly Betty”, brought up the ABC
“Ugly Betty” website. The banner across the top reads: “Ugly is
in! Go to the ABC store to buy this T-shirt and get an Ugly
Betty ring free! ABC’s net proceeds to benefit Girls Inc.,
inspiring all girls to be strong, smart and bold.”

Then I go to girlsinc.com where I find the following:

BE UGLY ‘07
Girls Inc. is teaming up with ABC on the “BE UGLY ‘07” campaign.
The campaign encourages people to be real in a superficial world,
just like the title character of ABC’s hit show, Ugly Betty.
Girls Inc. kicked off the partnership at a luncheon event hosted
by ABC Entertainment and CosmoGIRL! magazine, where Girls Inc.
girls met the show’s star, America Ferrera. Congratulations to
America Ferrera and the Ugly Betty team on their recent Golden
Globe wins!

First off, the girls in the accompanying photo with “Ugly Betty”
start America Ferrera (what a name) did not particularly happy or
in on the joke. And Ferrera was by far the prettiest girl in the
picture. And co-host COSMOGIRL??? Go on over to that site.
No ugly girls there.

ABC has made a half-hearted attempt to defend the show name “Ugly
Betty” by starting a “movement” to reclaim ugly and make the term
a positive one. Like black folks reclaiming n****r and gay folks
reclaiming queer, faggot, and dyke. The difference that self-
serving ABC does not see is that n****r, queer, faggot and dyke
are only okay when used by the minority group with each other,
usually affectionately. Those terms have a far different
connotation when used by the non-minority group members. Ugly
has a long ways to go. Who would ever want to be called “ugly,”
whether or not the namer was ugly, too?

Even more ridiculous is that the “Ugly Betty” character is not
ugly! The actress who plays her is beautiful, and the “ugliness”
seems to be glasses, braces, and a bad fashion sense. She looks
like a gawky 13 year old girl who could easily become a real
beauty in just a few years. What about someone truly ugly? A
disfigured actress who looked it? Would that be so funny?

What about a reality series about people who were messy and
needed help getting organized? We could call it “The Dirtiest
****”! You name the minority. Lots would fit. They could get a
free house makeover. Why stop there? How about a free new house
to the dirtiest?

Segue to a story from the Netherlands:

Dutch shock at proposed dating show for ‘visibly disfigured’

The Netherlands, the country that has pioneered reality shows
like “Big Brother”, is planning a new first - a dating programme
for the visibly disfigured.

The broadcaster SBS 6 is seeking candidates for its “Love at
Second Sight” show due to be launched in February.

“Do you have a visible serious handicap and are you looking for a
partner?” says an appeal on its Web site.

“The programme is a platform for people with such problems to
share experiences and feelings in a positive way with the rest of
the Netherlands and to show that they are absolutely not
pitiful,” the broadcaster said.

“The main aim of the programme is to remove prejudice about these
people, to create more acceptance and respect and, of course, to
find the love of their lives.”

But the majority of Dutch viewers are turned off by the show that
was initially set to be called “Monster Love”.

A poll by the mass circulation De Telegraaf daily showed 85
percent do not like the idea, with only 9 percent in favour.

“~~Moster~~Monster Love”? Need I say more???

Sour Valentine’s

and found that the period between New Year’s and Valentine’s Day is prime for break-ups: more than twice as prime. Kindly, Yahoo! Personals has developed a section for Want to read the survey results in details?

Infidelity expert Ruth Houston says that infidelity peaks on Valentine’s Day. Isn’t that dandy? Houston has a questionnaire posted to help you figure out if your mate is cheating.

Want to get even? will help you with that, too. If you’d like to chose from the most creative ways imaginable to get back at your ex, try www.Poisonpen.com “When You Care Enough to Send the Very Worst>’ www.deadroses.com will send… dead roses. And www.ThePayback.com has about everything an angry ex should need.

Not that I suggest actually DOING any of these things. Remember what you do is about you, really, and not you ex or whatever evil they have done TO you. But you might have fun just looking around a bit.

If you are tempted to DO any of these tricks, take two aspirin and go to bed, then think about it again tomorrow.

From Your Romance Coach, Kathryn Lord

Dating Advice Tidbits

Here’s a collection of little bits and pieces that have been collecting on my desk and are not long enough for full article treatment:

“Guilt coffee”—what you agree to when you can’t say “no,” even when you know this is not a match.

“Don’t ask for anything that you can’t bring to the table, and beware of those who do.” Like good finances, youth and vigor, good health, basic truthfulness.

Especially on the first date, turn off your cell phone, pager or Blackberry and do not talk about you ex. Do not make or take phone calls, answer a page, or check or send emails during a date.

Act and dress your age, in other words, like an adult, and one who is on a date. Spare the flip flops and cutoffs.

Ask questions. You want to find out as much as you can about the other person. And people like it if you ask about them.

Be honest so that you can back up what you say later if you have to. While you shouldn’t be afraid to mention accomplishments, do not brag.

Be attentive and listen for clues about your date. You may need or be able to use them later.

Do not use a date as a confessional.

Not everyone is going to like you. In fact, at least 95% of people won’t. You don’t like everyone, do you? So why do you expect everyone to like you, or get upset when they don’t? Get real. And if everyone DID like you, you would be completely overwhelmed. Thank the universe for doing much of the sorting for you.

Know the expression “No pain, no gain”? In dating, it’s more like “No risk, no gain.” Falling in love means taking risks. Sometimes you get brusied. It’s part of the game. And then you are back to the pain part.

Dare to make the first contact. If you don’t, you will be limited to those few weho contact you first. You are much more likely to get what you want if you do the picking.

Try to get some distance on the whole “Looking-for-Love” business and not get too attached to the outcome. Particularly with specific individuals. Always send out multiple first contacts and do not allow yourself to get focused on one potential candidate. You have no idea if they will respond to you at all until they do, and even then, take your time.

You can’t win if you don’t play the game. And your chances are much better than winning the lottery.

Singles often lie or distort in an attempt to get an edge over others, to “get their foot in the door,” with someone who might otherwise not contact them. It’s a waste of time, because they are much more likely to get the opposite reaction: anger. People who discover they have been lied to feel tricked.

Have an exit strategy.

If you lie, you can’t complain that others do.

From Your Romance Coach, Kathryn Lord

Another Love Story…

Yes, they are twenty-somethings, and yes, they are in Scotland, but it’s another sweet story about folks finding each other on the Internet.

And tucked in the article, this interesting tidbit:

Computer-based introductions are now even replacing traditional hotspots such as parties or holidays as the best way to meet a mate, according to a new survey by financial services firm Mint.

I knew it.

And here’s another one:

Chris and Jennifer Creary met online in 2004 when they both lived in St. Petersburg, Florida. They are now married and living in Pensacola.

From Your Romance Coach, Kathryn Lord

Sharp Eyes and Dumb Criminals

A man wanted for robbery and murder was spotted by an Internet dater who was looking at profiles on PlentyofFish.com. 26 year old Calvin Bennett had posted a profile and photo on PlentyofFish.com and had been contacting women while he traveled north from Arkansas, where he had committed the crime. “America’s Most Wanted” had shown Bennett’s photo on the show, and a viewer called the U. S. Marshall’s office to say she recognized him.

In a path worthy of a terrific movie, the Marshall’s office contacted the website owner, who was able to trace messages that Bennett has sent to various women, and locate him in Wisconsin, where he was staying with a woman he had met on PlentyofFish.com. The Marshall’s moved in and arrested Bennett.

Lessons:

1. You are not private on the Net. If you are a criminal, it is probably not a good idea to post you photo on an Internet dating site.

2. Murderers and robbers have the same access to online dating sites as everyone else.

3. Internet daters, beware. Your potential mate has the duty and obligation to prove who they are and that their intentions are positive. These people are strangers, and need to be treated as such until proved otherwise.

4. Do not invite someone you don’t know into your home.

From Your Romance Coach, Kathryn Lord

Previous Posts

Categories

Archives

Kathryn's Blog

Match.com Makes News:Bits

Best Rules are to Forget Them

I’m on Online-Dating-Confessions…

Match and paid/unpaid

Kathryn’s on Yahoo!

How Many Millionaire Can There Be? Not Many

“Biggest Loser,” “Ugly Betty,” and Downright Mean

An Online Dating Wedding

Sour Valentine’s

What’s In Store for Internet Dating in 2007?

Dating Advice Tidbits

Facts from MIT about Internet Dating Habits

Another Love Story…

No Good Ones On Dating Sites? Think Again…

Sharp Eyes and Dumb Criminals