“Online dating is a full-time job”. Said by a friend of mine, a good-looking, conscious, kind man with a great job and great income. An “eligible bachelor”, if I ever met one.
This episode is about dating, with special emphasis on online dating. There are a lot of cool things about online dating, and likewise a lot of challenges and pitfalls which translates to frustration and heartache for singles looking to create relationships — perhaps you’ve been there?
Some of the amazing benefits about online dating:
If you look up “online dating statistics”, you’ll find all kinds of interesting material.
For example, on eHarmony’s website, you can read that …
That last stat is important, because it tells you that online dating is only one - and not the most important - way to meet people.
Please remember that until 20 years ago, there was no online dating, period, and people still met, dated, fell in love, and got married. So in case you’re not enjoying your online dating experience, and you opt not to use that method, you can still meet, date, and find the love of your life.
The stat about how 53% of people lie on their profiles illustrate one of the main difficulties with online dating. Actually this is an issue with dating in general, but greatly exacerbated by online dating.
The issue is what I call Dating, Amazon.com Style. We go dating online like we shop for products on Amazon. We quickly scan the photo, then the product specs and details, and buy it or not. It’s normal we’re scrolling through hundreds of items before we choose one.
The sheer number of potential dates gives rise to profile fatigue, or as one of my friends called it, indecision overwhelm. It’s the same thing that happens when you to the supermarket to buy peanut butter, jam, or bread. You are faced with so many options that it’s hard to decide. And studies now show that even when you choose an item, you’re not satisfied with, because you know it’s likely it could have been better.
Same thing happens in online dating. Because we aware how many options there are, and because there is so much information we can sort and filter people by, even when we pick someone to date, it’s hard to get rid of the nagging doubt that we could be - maybe even should be, deserve to be! - with someone who is more loving, sexier, better off, healthier, better looking, and more like us.
We all have a “list” of what we want in a partner. Some write it down, some just have one in their mind, but it’s a list all the same. The list is full of specs, or “must-haves”, criteria by which we sort the potentials. Things like, must love dogs, must be into personal growth, must be vegetarian, must work out, must love traveling, must make $100K a year, must be certain age, and many more.
This list, combined with the ease of scrolling through hundreds of profiles, turn human beings into two-dimensional “products” that seemingly consist of only of a few pictures and some specs. But of course, human beings are so much more complex, deep, rich, and multi-facetted than can be present on a profile.
Just think about your own profile. How well does it tell the full story of who you are as a human being?
You can also be sure that the same way you sift through people, and discard them based on their age, height, looks, income, religion, and interests, is also being done towards you.
Now, it’s not to say it’s a bad thing to have preferences and be looking for someone you are a good match for. It’s just that there’s normally a big difference between what we think we want and what we really want. Sonika & I have been teaching a method to distinguish the two for years. In the entertaining and enlightening book about dating by Aziz Ansari, Modern Romance, he quotes a study for saying, “The kind of partner people said they were looking for didn’t match up with the kind of partner they were actually interested in”.
Some of the things I share for what to instead to make a better dating experience for yourself are …
There’s much more in the podcast … hope this is helpful, and I’m rooting for your enjoyable dating experience.