That's it! I give up! Obviously, if I want a dance partner this summer I can't simply wait to be asked. I've got to do something, and I've decided that something - as I clench my jaw and square my shoulders - will be dreaded Internet dating.
I will resign myself to standing alongside the information superhighway, figuratively, with a sign 'round my neck declaring my desperation, and my hope that someone interesting throws his name in my cup.
Previous sites I've used didn't work - I'm still seriously single - so this time I checked out what I'd considered value-based alternatives.
My exploration of two of these sites revealed they match me to potential mates based more on personality than shared values.
Both sites feature in-depth personality questionnaires - this actually appealed to me. I enjoy giving my opinion, especially on my favorite topic: myself!
ALL THE QUESTIONS!
The Chemistry.com questionnaire has 56 items, including some that play more like computer games than questions.
I took two spatial tests and, failing the second, I wondered what that said about me - that I have no spatial skills (true), or that I passed the other because I'm good at manipulating computers (also true).
Given four passport-like photos, the computer asked whom I'd trust. Two questions asked for title suggestions on abstract images.
By comparison, the eHarmony questionnaire appeared conventional. Some questions required straight answers: income, height and things I do in my spare time. I didn't mention my penchant for questionnaires.
Of course, when the thermometer gauged my progress at 77-percent complete, I resisted the urge to send my normally dearly beloved computer out the nearest window.
After answering all 436 questions - including true-or-false, multiple choice and huge sections of 1-to-7 sliding scales - even I'd had enough.
Surprisingly, among their many questions, both sites failed to ask for information I'd been asked elsewhere. Neither asked my weight directly (thank you) or my political viewpoint.
I chose personality-profile matching because I want to get past superficialities, but I did miss the chance to detail my musical/literary/cinematic preferences.
I guess that's OK, since they didn't ask the sports I (don't) participate in, or the places I (haven't) traveled to either.
FACT OR FICTION?
I struggled profoundly to answer 99.770643 percent of the questions honestly. I looked deeply into the cobwebbed, inky morass of my soul and extracted the truth about who I am.
A study showed 24 percent of Internet daters believe small untruths or little fibs are all right; reality has shown some Internet profiles contain big, fat whoppers.
I believe we should always tell the absolute truth - except that I lied.
I used a nickname instead of my legal first name. Hey, I'm a famous, well-known and highly respected columnist; I just want to be adored for who I am on the inside.
FOR THE LONG-TERM
In the end, I think I preferred the excessive questions.
After giving everything I know about myself including eye color, Chemistry.com still needed an essay. I'm a writer, and I can't sum up my personality in 200 words.
Or rather, I can, but only after decades of drafts, re-drafts and careful meditation that includes a visit to a Tibetan retreat center in Tibet.
For now, I'll take my place alongside the electronic superhighway, my personality on display, this time alongside an entirely superficial but requisite cute picture (this time, maybe I'll hold a mai tai).
Both sites advertise that they will find me a long-term relationship, and I hope so. Long-term sounds great, especially when it means avoiding another profile - at least until next summer.
Sofia lives in North Seattle and can be reached at needitor@nwlink.com.
[[In-content Ad]]
