Chemistry.com… Holy Cats


Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 5:00 am Pacific USA Time.

Some of you may remember my testing of eHarmony in Feb 2006 (I can't even be bothered to check the blog archives!). That was something other than else.

This time, I decided to try Chemistry.com. I'm not looking for Mr Right or a serious relationship, but I always hope that if these matching systems are as good as they say, I'll meet people who'd make great friends.

I just don't get this. I really don't. OK, maybe people aren't that serious, and maybe they're not that interested in me. I'm not that interested in them, though I'd like to make friends. But there are some really bizarre things going on here.

This week, a guy tried to tell me he wants a take-charge woman. When I told him I am that but don't want to be that in a relationship because I want an equal relationship, his reply was that he does want an equal relationship. The example he used for an equal relationship. Referring to himself, "I might help out in the kitchen."

Are you freaking kidding me? That implies that I'm cooking and sometimes you'll help out? And that's equal? If you want a take-charge woman, you are probably not looking for something really equal… or you would have said that in the first place. :)

I picked like 7 guys so far who I'd like to communicate with and see if they're out of their minds or not. Only one responded. Seemed like a nice guy who'd have some things in common with me. Said he wanted to go out. Sure, I'll go out. Gave me his number. I called and got voice mail. I left a message saying we should plan something. Never heard back… that was like 2 weeks ago. I hope he's OK! But barring an emergency, I'll say that this doesn't look very good for what I would want in a friend (forget about some sort of date).

The other guys? Didn't respond at all. Not sure if they are logging in. One guy tried to tell me eHarmony was better, but my experiences there were WORSE. I am not sure if they've changed this, but in 2006, eHarmony treated me not wanting kids as a preference that wasn't really important to me. So even though I flagged everything I could as "I don't have kids, I don't want kids, and this is 100% important to me," they sent me people who had kids and wanted kids. That's a major FAIL. I'd rather be alone the rest of my life than to have kids or have to deal with someone else's kids, even adult children.

So Chemistry.com, I paid for a month to check you out, and I will be cancelling in about a week so you don't charge me again. I didn't expect to find love. I wasn't looking for a husband. And maybe because of that, I have really high standards.But then again, I know CRAZY when I see it, and I know a dating website that nobody seems to be logging into when I see it.

Chemistry.com, you were better than eHarmony in that you didn't send me piles of people every day who had really BASIC things completely opposite to me. That was good. But that's about it. The rest of these guys don't seem to be logging in. They're not responding to me, they're not archiving me… it's just nothing. You are more expensive than eHarmony, and I don't need that!

I'm not bothering with Match.com (Chemistry.com's big sister). When I looked at it in 2006, the second question is asked was what is your best "part," and "brain" was not a choice. I don't want to be "analysed" for my body parts, thanks!


Share!  
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Digg
  • Google Reader
  • Delicious
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

Categories: That's Bad Marketing

Comments Closed

2 Responses to “Chemistry.com… Holy Cats”

  1. Frank Rizzo says:

    Who cares? Does Bill Gates blog about his personal life? Get a grip lady!

  2. Firstly, Frank, sorry I had to reject you at Chemistry.com. :)
    Second, thanks for comparing me and my blog to someone as famous and important as Bill Gates. That’s lovely of you!
    Third, my blog is about marketing. To me, the service a company offers is part of that, and human behaviour is part of that.
    And maybe some people who were going to try these sites will save their money. That would be good too.