Online Dating: Is there a Big Difference?

“Guys’ number one fear with online dating is the girl is chubby. women’s is they’re going to get murdered.”

– Hampton Yount

 “If we meet offline and you look nothing like your pics, you’re buying me drinks until you do.”

-Relatably.com

“Ahh, Tinder. The crystal meth of online dating.”

– Simon Taylor

About a decade ago, while I was writing a chapter on online dating for a book on relationships, I began research on the various online dating sites. In order to get an up-close look at how these dating websites worked, I joined a few of the most popular ones. Most of them began the registration and membership process by having me take some type of “compatibility quiz.” Some of these dating websites had lengthy, in-depth questionnaires. Others just stuck to asking me about the basics such as age, dating goals, education and profession. Yet, in the long run, I found that most of the compatibility tests were flawed in one way or another.

On a couple of these dating websites, I registered as “Dr. Pete A. Padilla.” I do have a Ph.D. and can use such a title if I choose to. However, whenever I registered as “Dr. Padilla,” the computer algorithms these websites used to find compatible partners started matching me with people that were exclusively in the medical field. They matched me with people in fields such as medical health administrators, nurses, and even bona fide medical doctors (MDs).

These dating websites never attempted to pair me with a library administrator, a professor, or a successful female business owner. Their assumption was that I could only be interested in establishing a relationship with someone in the medical field. I can assure you, not everyone who works in the medical field necessarily wants only to date and marry someone who is also in that field. And that goes for anyone in any field.

Another thing about these online dating sites stuck out to me. Despite the lengths any of these dating websites went through to make sure that their paying clients didn’t rely solely on matching people by the level of their physical attractiveness, in the end, this is exactly what was emphasized.

After I was matched, and then digitally introduced to someone, the first thing that the person on the other end of the computer did was ask for was a recent picture of me. I thought to myself, what happened to the claims these dating websites made that something like “deep-compatibility” was being emphasized in their method of matching potential relationship partners? The ultimate determining factor as to whether or not someone wanted to pursue a relationship with me was how good-looking I happened to be.

In the beginning days of online dating, it was stigmatized as the last resort for desperate singles. During those early days, no one wanted to admit they even had a dating profile. And when someone did meet someone online, they would often lie about where they met. Online dating was only for desperate and a sense of shame was associated with even logging on to such dating sites.

And as you can guess, as Internet use exploded, many of the old stigmas associated with its use also quickly evaporated. Once the younger generations joined the dating scene via their laptop computers and later their ubiquitous smart phones, the stigma associated with using such dating sites almost completely disappeared. I would guess that once a television commercial about computer dating appeared during the Super Bowl, the jig was up. Today there are television ads for dating sites at all hours of the day and night.

“Online dating doesn’t suck, too many people suck at online dating!”

– Kevin Darné

Today some social scientists estimate that there are over 8,000 dating sites in the world. There are plenty of options for today’s tech-savvy singles. I remember one television commentator saying. “There are more dating sites in the world than there are hospitals in the US. That’s almost too many. How do you even choose the right one?”

One thing that online dating is able to offer is websites (or dating sites) that are focused on certain social characteristics. There are dating websites for almost any category you could think of.

There are sites for specific worldwide geographic locations. Sites are designed to emphasize the U.S.; the U.K.; Canada; Australia; Russia; and India. Although this list is not comprehensive, it does paint the picture of what type of geographical dating exists.

Dating websites are available for certain ages. All of the typical age groups are represented. These include dating sites for teens; young adults; Middle-aged people; and even senior citizens.

Of course there are dating sites specifically suited for one’s sexual orientation. There are dating sites for straights; gays; lesbians; bisexuals; and transgender individuals.

Some of the most popular dating sites revolved around religion. Religion is an especially important factor in partner compatibility. So the main religions are certainly represented in the array of available dating sites. There are dating sites for Christians; Jews; Muslims; and general spiritualists.

Race and ethnicity are also well-represented in the top dating sites. There are dating sites aimed specifically at Blacks; Whites; Asians; Latinos; and sites for people who want to date interracially.

It’s also not surprising that some dating sites are aimed at the economically-minded dater. In this category there are three types of dating sites. There are the free dating sites. Then there are the “affordable” dating sites. And lastly, you probably guessed it, there are dating sites that are costly and provide the daters with a sense of exclusivity. I guess you could say this last category has somewhat of a designer type dating orientation. You can only join if you can afford to.

The last category of dating sites is the most unusual. This category includes odd niche dating sites aimed at really specific dater such as Trekies; sugar daddies; outdoor-oriented lifestyles; and even a dating site aimed at people who are fascinated with “My Favorite Pony.”


After some intensive online research, I also found a list of the “best” dating websites for certain categories.

Best for serious relationships – eHarmony

Best for working professionals – EliteSingles

Best free dating site – Okcupid

Best casual dating site – AdultFriendFinder

Largest dating app – Tinder

Best senior dating site – SilverSingles

Best personality matching system – Hinge

Best for Christian singles – ChristianMingle

Best married dating site – AshleyMadison

Best dating app for women – Bumble

More women than men – Seeking

Serious dating site for under 30 – Zoosk


What I did learn was that online dating did have its risks and its rewards. After all, anyone could be anything they wanted to be online. Then again, specifically targeted dating websites could narrow down and separate the riff from the raff. So the risk-reward factor is probably a wash. Like with any type of life experience, a person will have to learn as-they-go. As an individual gets more experienced at online dating, they should be able to learn how to successfully navigate the Internet-based dating scene.

Believe it or not, according to research, dating sites can lead to less divorce. There are a few reasons for this. One reason is that online dating sites encourage “Intentional Dating.” According to Sarah Hanlon:

“In short, dating sites can cut through the clutter and get to the heart of why a couple would want to meet, date, and even marry by avoiding the random chance that the partners would randomly meet in a social venue such as the local bar scene. Researchers found that people who meet online are more in tune with what they’re looking for, and what they want to get out of the experience.”

Hanlon goes on to say that Internet dating can result in stronger marriages. She says that dating sites can lead to more fulfilling marriages in comparison to relationships formed offline. This means that these types of relationships can “go deep, and go deep faster” since the wheat is separated from the chaff from the get-go. So, in the end, Hanlon says that marriages from online relationships were more likely to experience a more satisfactory bond, which resulted in “…marriages that last longer than marriages formed offline.”

A second reason that online dating may lead to a drop in divorce rates is because people using them “are more in tune with what they are looking for,” says Cecily Gold Moore. Moore commented this about her research:

“We find that people who meet online are more in tune with what they’re looking for, and what they want to get out of the experience. For better or for worse, once you meet someone online it can be easier to ask questions that may otherwise be a little intense for a first or second date, such as, ‘What sort of commitment are you looking for?'” … “We find that when you’re clear about your expectations and intentions, you’re more likely to find success in dating because there’s no guessing involved and you’ve fully put yourself out there.”

Moore comments that when “Intentional Daters” log on to the dating sites with a specific purpose in mind, the end result is that they end up finding a meaningful connection with their intended partner.

Rachel DeAlto, a social scientist from the Pew Research Center, explains that “the user intent behind using a comprehensive service like Match sets the relationship apart from offline couples from the beginning.” Liz Colizza, director of Couples Therapy for Lasting, says that relationship success is more likely when the partners at the outset are able to find what they are looking for rather than settling for a potential partner they may happen to meet randomly offline. A niche dating site can easily cut the random factor associated with offline dating.

A third reason that online dating can reduce divorce is because highly selective dating leads to alignment with a person’s individual social values. Liz Colizza puts it this way:

“Online dating allows people to be highly selective in who they choose to talk to because the pool of potential partners is large and because of the format,” she explains. “People want to meet other people that are compatible with them, but often don’t know where to go for that. Online dating platforms offer that space for people to match with potential partners.”

Colizza argues that relationship success is rooted in a couple’s “goal alignment.” She says that a potential couple that meets on a targeted dating site can discuss and reveal these personal goals “almost immediately.”

A fourth reason for a decrease in the incidences of divorce from online dating is that dating sites allow a romantic connect to be made by unlikely couples. Rachel Alto says, “The apps have created a way for you to focus on the qualities of the person you’re looking for instead of accessibility.” In other words, dating sites have to ability to significantly expand the dating pool.


Online Dating Terminology

Over the years, online dating has developed its own terminology that corresponds to the phenomena associated with it as it emerged and developed. Below is a sample of some of the various online dating jargon used in today’s digital dating environment.

BREADCRUMBING it’s an easy way to keep the door open in case they decide they want to pursue something down the line

BENCHING keeping someone on the bench in case they are needed to come into the game (not a secret it’s happening)

CATFISHINGpretending you are someone you’re not in order to get a date (talhotblond)

CUSHIONINGkeeping the bench warm “just in case” the player is need.

CUFFING SEASON period between late Fall and Winter when any warm body is better than none at all

CURVING – turning down your advances, but not doing it directly. (kiss, but only on the cheek)

GHOSTING – being too much of a scaredy-cat to breakup. Instead, they just disappear (gone ghost = invisible)

HAVING FUN = the person is interested in casual sex

FIREDOORINGthe door only opens one way (they can go in and out. You can only go one way that they choose)

INCEL  – someone who is involuntarily celibate but thinks they deserve sex (dangerous)

KITTENFISHINIG  – stretching the truth rather that outright lying

LOVE BOMBING  – strong romantic activity out of the door, then it all goes away after the “capture”

MICRO-CHEATING  – activity that isn’t necessarily outright cheating, but is wrong and is hidden from the partner.

ORBITING  – a person will ghost you, but continue to stalk your social media simply keeping themselves in your orbit

PANSEXUAL  – a person who is attracted to someone regardless of their gender (depends on circumstances)

POLYAMOROUS  – having more than one partner at a time (known to everyone involved)

ROACHING – you get mad about your partner’s actions, then they blame shift it to YOU.

SEX INTERVIEW  turning conventional dating on its head (sex first- then maybe get to know the person)

SITUATIONSHIP  – you’re not in, but you’re not out, you’re in a situation

STASHING  – keeping a partner hidden, not showing up on their social media in order to keep their options open.

STEALTHING This is the act of taking a condom off during sex without even letting your partner know you’ve done it.

SUBMARINING ghosts you and then just pops back into your life after a lengthy silence as though nothing had happened.


What percentage of people meet through online dating?

Today it’s a multi-billion dollar business.  According to statista.com, in 2020, online dating revenue in the U.S. amounted to 602 million U.S. dollars, and it is projected to reach 755 billion U.S. dollars by 2024. I would predict that with such a meteoric rise in use, perhaps online dating will someday become the predominant way people will date. Perhaps Aziz Ansari had it right when he commented

If You Own a Smartphone, You’re Carrying a 24/7 Singles Bar in Your Pocket.

According to a 2019 study, almost half of U.S. online users had met or know someone who had met a romantic partner via a dating website or app. By the end of that year, around 77 percent of adult online users reported having gone on a date with someone they had met online.

Data from The Knot 2019 Jewelry and Engagement study showed that 22 percent of couples meet online and end up getting engaged. Tinder, the dating app behemoth, is responsible for matching 30 percent of all engaged couples who met online, with OkCupid and Bumble rounding out the top three websites

In the end, it doesn’t much matter how you meet someone. The real test will always be how well your dating and relationship skills will stand up when you actually meet your person of interest in the flesh. Anyone can portray themselves as anything they want to online. But eventually your success or failure will come down to how you act with your potential partner: no matter the method of introduction.


Hanging Out with the Moms at Their Teenage Son’s HS Graduation Party


When I moved from Phoenix to Denver, I entered the city as a single guy. Since I was originally from Denver, I was still friends with the people I had stayed in contact with while living in Phoenix. So, when some of my family and friends found out I was still single, they went into overdrive with their efforts to find me a romantic partner. Perhaps it was the fact that I had become successful in my career and was still single that had something to do with the flurry of activity to find me a dating partner. It was perceived as though a romantic partner was the “missing piece” of my ultimate success. Everywhere I went, I was told about this, or that woman, who would be a good match for me.

In the long run, this flurry of suggestions for possible romantic partners did end up being useful. Within six months of moving to Denver, I met and got to know a woman who had been “suggested” to me. As it turned out, we had actually gone to high school together back in the 1970s. After meeting in person, and interacting a few times, we decided to define ourselves as an official couple. I soon found out that my new girlfriend had three teenage children, two boys and a girl. Eventually, I got to know her children and we had carved out a comfortable step-family for ourselves

About a year after becoming a couple, this woman’s oldest son was set to graduate from high school. As a result of her kids being involved in a lot of school activities, my girlfriend had become friends with a lot of her kids’ friends’ parents. And like her, most of the parents she had developed a friendship with were single mothers. In fact, it was with a few of these single mothers that my girlfriend had planned a graduation party. Of course, she and I were invited to attend the upcoming festivities.

When my girlfriend and I arrived at the graduation party, I headed straight for the food table.  I had gotten to know most of these parents before hand, and had learned that most of them were very talented cooks. I ended up eating with the recent graduates on the outside patio. My girlfriend didn’t join me while I was eating. Instead, she disappeared somewhere else in the large party house.

After I was finished eating, I stayed and interacted with the teenage party-goers. After all, I already knew some of them, and as a social psychologist, I enjoyed hearing about their plans for their futures. I stayed and mingled with these teens until eventually I had to use the restroom.

On my way to find the restroom, I passed by one of the bedrooms where I found the single mothers all gathered around a computer desk. As I entered the room, the women were all focused on the computer screen while one of them was surfing a few dating websites

I remember the ladies behaving all giggly and saying either, “Go for it, swipe right.” Or saying, “Oh no, swipe left.” At the time I didn’t know what those comments meant. But in only a matter of about five minutes, I learned that swiping right meant that these women were interested in learning more about the guy’s online profile. I also learned that swiping left meant that these women were not interested in the guy or even reading his online profile

The longer I stayed in the room observing these women interact on these various dating websites, the more I learned about these online dating platforms and about how these women were navigating through them. I noticed that the women would collectively “vote” on whether to swipe right or to swipe left. After about thirty minutes of observing their behavior, I learned that some of these women actually had plans to go out to a nearby club where they planned on meeting a few of the guys they had swiped right for.

Since I wasn’t much of a drinker, I volunteered to drive these women to the club so that they wouldn’t risk getting a DUI. But serving as the designated driver also allowed me to go inside with these women and observe them “on the prowl.” One of the first things I noticed was that the guys who they ended up meeting at the club were much younger than they were. These guys tended to be squared-jawed and had somewhat of a muscular build. Although the women were all friends, I could tell that they were somewhat competing with one another for these younger guys’ attention. Let’s just say that there was some good old-fashioned competition in Cougarville.

By the time we all exited the club, only one of the women had actually left with one of the guys that had shown up to meet them. The women that left the club without a guy had played an interesting game. Despite the fact that they didn’t leave with any of the guys, they all seemed to have had a blast drinking and flirting with these young hunks.

But in the end, I had to wonder if this experience truly reflected how the online dating scene truly functioned. Perhaps these women were competing with one another and were not acting the way they would have if they had been on a date by their self. I also had to wonder if the “swiping event” back at the party house was influenced by the social dynamics of the group. Would some of these women have swiped right on a guy’s profile that was less of a square-jawed hunk had they been navigating the dating website on their own? In short, I had to wonder how much the “group think” phenomenon had been in play.

Later I came to find out that some of my suspicions were confirmed. The only woman to leave with one of the younger square-jawed hunks didn’t end up actually dating him. I found this out in a round-about way. A few weeks later, when the summer college semester began, that young hunk happened to be seated in the front row of the classroom where the course I was teaching was being held.

Since he recognized me from the night at the club, he wasn’t averse to me asking some questions about what happened to him and the woman who he had left the club with. He ended up telling me that he and that woman hadn’t really hit it off. When I asked, “Why not?” he told me that they didn’t have much in common. He went on to explain to me that when he found out that she had two teenage daughters, it was then that he knew they were in “two different places in their lives.”

Although I wasn’t personally interested in online dating for myself, this experience did pique my interest in the trend. I learned that at the time, it was an up-and-coming way of meeting people for dates.

If you are interested in a fantastic tale of  catfishing, click on this link- tolhotblond. If possible, try to watch the original documentary. It the time of this writing, it was available on Amazon Prime. There is also a docudrama about this case. However, it doesn’t have quite the shock value as does the original documentary.

                                                                                                                                               

REFERENCES

Hanlon, S., (2020). Dating Apps Can Lead to Less Divorce, According to Research. Here’s why users are finding love at first swipe. https://www.theknot.com/content/dating-apps-marriage.