Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Women turn to internet for truth about their date
Scotsman.com ^ | August 23, 2005 | Fiona MacGregor

Posted on 08/24/2005 8:09:41 AM PDT by billorites

ONE in three women prepare for blind dates by spying on their prospective partners via the internet to obtain information about their careers, their hobbies and what they look like, a new study has found.

Increasing numbers of men are also using internet search engines to carry out so-called "suitability checks" before meeting their date.

And private investigators have reported an increase in clients whose suspicions about their partners have been driven by "i-spying".

The study found about 35 per cent of women said they had no qualms about going even further and looking at messages on the mobile phone of a partner or date.

The UK poll of 3,000 people by Onetel, a broadband provider, found women were far more likely to admit to snooping than men, with just half the number of males confessing they had sneaked a look at their partners' text messages.

One in 20 people of both sexes said they had searched the internet for a photo of a future blind date - leading 4 per cent of them to cancel a meeting because they did not like what they saw.

While psychologists said that there is nothing wrong with checking out background information, they warned that those who meddled too deeply could end up losing partners through lack of trust.

Websites such as Friends Reunited were named as a fruitful source of information.

Over half of those questioned admitted they had checked the site to find out about partners.

Professional investigators said they were not surprised by the findings.

Stephen Grant, a partner at Grant and McMurtie with 25 years' experience as a private detective, said he had had an increase in clients coming to him whose suspicions had been fuelled by internet searches.

And he said he had dealt with more women than men in such cases. "I don't know if that is because men are more philandering or women are more suspicious," he said.

He added: "With internet searches, we get people in the early days of a relationship coming to us after they have found things out - perhaps that a person is married - and they want us to confirm that.

"For people in a relationship, it is often their mobile phones that give them away. Another area where people get caught out is e-mail.

"When a client comes to us we do an internet search and see what comes up - we may well find something in a newspaper article or court records."

While the report found over two-thirds of people believe women are more likely to snoop, it showed less distinction between male and female behaviour at the more extreme levels of suspicious behaviour.

Around 15 per cent of women and 12 per cent of men said they had sent a text to their partner from a different number pretending to be someone else to see if they took the bait.

And 17 per cent of women and 15 per cent of men would do a police check on their partner if they got the chance. It also found 28 per cent of women and 21 per cent of men frequently drive past the house of someone they are attracted to, to see if they are in and if any extra cars are on the drive.

Half the women said they read their partner's bank statement, compared to a third of men, and 40 per cent would inspect their partner's phone bill, compared to 24 per cent of men. And 16 per cent of people have unearthed a secret they really did not want to find out.

Dr Cynthia McVey, a psychologist at Glasgow Caledonian University, said: "[The stereotype of women snooping] may date back to a time when women were at home and had less opportunity to stray, while men were out at work. Wives who were suspicious would check receipts or for signs of lipstick or perfume.

"Internet snooping is just a modern version of ancient human responses to feelings of insecurity and jealousy.

"But while checking the internet for general information is fairly harmless, to read someone's text messages or e-mails is an invasion of privacy and shows a real lack of trust, which is not good in a relationship."

Perils and pros of doing some research when love comes a-clicking

EDWARD BLACK

WOMEN might think they are stealing a march on men by using the internet to uncover information on a prospective date, but they are not alone.

After meeting my current girlfriend in a nightclub, e-mail proved an embarrassment-free way of arranging that tricky first date as well as yielding her company details. A quick Google search dug up a photograph of her on a financial firm's website, and also a résumé of her career - invaluable for conversation purposes later.

Unfortunately, with me being a journalist, she was able to glean far more information about me as well as finding details of a romantic mini-break spent in a Scottish health spa with a former partner published in The Scotsman's travel section.

Fortunately she missed my name on a lapdancing industry website which appeared when I wrote a story on a sheriff who was forced to resign after being caught in a sauna.

Another potential internet banana skin was a feature which involved three former girlfriends dishing the dirt on what I was like to go out with. The so-called Ex-files were a response to a call from feminist Germaine Greer to set up a website for women to log details of men who had behaved badly towards them so that other women could avoid a similar fate.

Behaviour such as making a partner show you a text message when their phone bleeps in front of you shows an unattractive degree of paranoia. Teenage love letters should be private, so when it comes to saved text messages or e-mails, try something a bit more old-fashioned: trust.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: internet; singles
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-163 next last
To: RockinRight
then I will tease her and she says I'm mean.

...Keep it up. She likes it. "Mean" is one of those female words that have a different meaning than the male version. ;)

101 posted on 08/24/2005 11:27:58 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ("Feelings are not a tool of cognition, therefore they are not a criterion of morality." -- Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
I'm not mean but I didn't get one of of those. Where do I get one?

She was the first grade teacher for my cousin's kids. He introduced us. It was pure luck - like winning the lottery.

102 posted on 08/24/2005 11:29:09 AM PDT by KevinB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

You should say "Many" or "in my experience, a lot of" women, instead of just "women". I'm not interested in a bad boy. I'm interested in real men, who are considerate without being doormats, fun rather than dangerous. I know a lot more girls who want that than those who want bad boys.

All right, so I do know a lot who want bad boys. Their IQ is usually the same as their bra size.


103 posted on 08/24/2005 11:33:09 AM PDT by JenB (When life hands you lemons, make hard lemonade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: reagan_fanatic

LOL!


104 posted on 08/24/2005 11:33:39 AM PDT by TheForceOfOne (The alternative media is our Enigma machine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog
They may go after guys who turn out to be jerks, but it's not the jerkiness that attracts us. It's the confidence and masculinity. That side of jerks that doesn't take crap from anyone also attracts the part of women who want that on our side.

You got it! A+! With the additional fine point that women really want men who won't take any crap from them either, and who will pass that test when put to it. "Nice guys" crumble when a woman gives them crap, and usually either try to beg or buy their way back into the woman's affections - which just annoys her further. Judging by some of the posts on FR, there are men who have been married for decades who are still begging and buying domestic tranquility. Their wives must be ready to throw them down a well by now. ;)

105 posted on 08/24/2005 11:34:58 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ("Feelings are not a tool of cognition, therefore they are not a criterion of morality." -- Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: baker_girl; Lazamataz

Laz is not at all a cad. But he did used to have this odd fascination with alpacas.....


106 posted on 08/24/2005 11:37:37 AM PDT by cjshapi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Jeeves

Wow, I got an A+! - and I agree with your additional observation. I think that's accurate.


107 posted on 08/24/2005 11:38:17 AM PDT by HairOfTheDog (Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: baker_girl

When I lived in Albuquerque, I had a heck of a time finding women to date. Most already had a kid or were divorced--which for me were immediate red flags. Not always of course, but at the time I just was not looking for an "instant family, just add Betis."

Now it is not so hard to avoid those red flags, but trying to avoid the RED flag (as in Marxist/Maoist variety) is close to impossible.

I think I need to move to Texas.


108 posted on 08/24/2005 11:39:26 AM PDT by Betis70 (Every generation needs a new revolution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: cjshapi

Ping.


109 posted on 08/24/2005 11:41:24 AM PDT by Junior (Just because the voices in your head tell you to do things doesn't mean you have to listen to them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites
Many years ago, I had an intrusion detection system (IDS) and pervasive logging on my computer systems by default, among other things (at one house, the physical security systems were far more pervasive than just simple IDS, part of some experimental development work). A not insignificant number of girls I dated left their footprints all over the IDS at the first opportunity, snooping in places that they really had no business in. Not that they ever found anything -- there wasn't anything to find.

Not in one case did I ever let on that I knew they were doing it. I simply cataloged the fact and kept it in mind.

110 posted on 08/24/2005 11:41:48 AM PDT by tortoise (All these moments lost in time, like tears in the rain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JenB
I'm interested in real men, who are considerate without being doormats, fun rather than dangerous.

You've described some of the attributes of a bad boy.

Bad boys are not wife-beater-tshirt wearing, abusive alcoholic jerks. Those are just jerks.

I'm talking about the difference between the confident and the doormats. These bad boys are the ones who can take you or leave you, but would kinda prefer to take you, should that work out. They are the ones who are not pushovers. They are their own men. They already know who they are. There are as many bad boys in suits as there are in motorcycle leathers. While they are not dangerous, there are hints they may have had dangerous pasts.

111 posted on 08/24/2005 11:41:48 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Islam is merely Nazism without the snappy fashion sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog
It's the confidence and masculinity. That side of jerks that doesn't take crap from anyone also attracts the part of women who want that on our side. If they can turn that outwards and not toward me, they're OK.

Bingo. You just nailed what a bad boy is.

112 posted on 08/24/2005 11:43:56 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Islam is merely Nazism without the snappy fashion sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Junior

Funny...was just on this thread. Great minds think alike.


113 posted on 08/24/2005 11:43:59 AM PDT by cjshapi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Betis70

As I said, right now I've got a good woman, but she's a hopeless liberal.

I gave up on looking for a right-wing chick as there simply aren't any around here that aren't either married, frigid, old, bible-thumpers (I don't mean just Christian-Christian is a preferred trait obviously, I'm talking the in-your-face-bible-thumping type that won't even let you have a beer without a lecture), or stuck up. Most were attractive in a physical sense though! And I know that interesting, attractive conservative women exist (just look on FR-plenty here!) but none in Akron, O-hi-O!

The woman I'm dating now is a wonderful person despite being a left-wing moonbat...sigh...I tried converting her, but it's proven hopeless...


114 posted on 08/24/2005 11:45:07 AM PDT by RockinRight (Democrats - Trying to make an a$$ out of America since 1933)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Ever read about David DeAngelo's "Cocky + Funny" method??


115 posted on 08/24/2005 11:46:15 AM PDT by RockinRight (Democrats - Trying to make an a$$ out of America since 1933)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight
If you can make a woman laugh, you can make her feel.

If you can make her feel, you can have her.

116 posted on 08/24/2005 11:49:12 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Islam is merely Nazism without the snappy fashion sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
What women really want is commitment!....follwed immediately by honesty & respect!

The dictionary defines commitment it as an obligation that restricts freedom of action....

That sums it....

..a woman looks for someone who will stay the course....

..whether bad boy, good guy, nice, whatever.

117 posted on 08/24/2005 11:50:17 AM PDT by Guenevere (Jamie Gorelick is responsible for more deaths than there have been soldiers killed in Iraq.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

#116..You're right...I left out humor, and that's majorly important!


118 posted on 08/24/2005 11:51:56 AM PDT by Guenevere (Jamie Gorelick is responsible for more deaths than there have been soldiers killed in Iraq.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight

I've accidently dated a few left-wing moonbats. They made for more "reach for the Tums" dinners than I care for.


119 posted on 08/24/2005 11:52:13 AM PDT by Betis70 (Every generation needs a new revolution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

I know who they are, and I think I know something about who you are, from ready your posts. You're too vulnerable to be really 'bad'.

Honestly, my own assessment is that you are too old to use the term "bad boy". "Bad boy" appeals to the teenager in me that liked the long haired guys who played in high school bands and while being pretty nice guys, owned a big water bong and made my parents nervous because of how they dressed and the volume of the music coming from the car stereo when we pulled out of the driveway (parents obviously didn't know about the bong).

You're 40 now. There's got to be something else you're supposed to grow into, some better label for a grown up than 'bad boy'. Heck most of the long haired 'bad boys' I dated have other personalities now, one is a high school teacher, others are professionals of some type, some of the few who couldn't grow up are dead.


120 posted on 08/24/2005 11:52:59 AM PDT by HairOfTheDog (Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-163 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson