<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"According to some new information, online dating is not only a good way to meet someone, it&amp;#39;s a great way to save a whole bunch of money. About $6,400, to be exact.\nPinterestFacebookHow can I enter this magical world where I get a hot guy and a full piggy bank?\n&amp;quot;How so?&amp;quot; you might ask. Between the possible site fees, the occasionally split checks, and the endless cost of cute tops, kissable lip gloss, and hairspray needed to make you look your most appealing, it&amp;#39;s kind of a pricey venture. Except that apparently couples who meet online get married faster, thereby spending less money on dates during a long-term relationship. Evidently the average length of time for &amp;quot;traditional&amp;quot; dating is 42 months before marriage, whereas people who meet online have an 18.5-month average dating-to-marriage cycle.\nWhile I&amp;#39;m all for news that&amp;#39;s encouraging for online daters like myself, I feel like there are a few glaring flaws in this theory. For example:\nMost people don&amp;#39;t online date when they&amp;#39;re 22 and hopeful and have fresh, dewy skin. They just regular date, meeting people at bars and grad-school classes and while they&amp;#39;re out doing all the fun stuff they still have energy for. They turn to online dating when they&amp;#39;re burnt-out on losers or got dumped by the terrible guy they thought they could change, and they&amp;#39;re just ready to meet a nice man who wants something serious already. So maybe they get married semi-quickly after beginning to online date, but it&amp;#39;s very likely they put in plenty of years of &amp;quot;traditional dating&amp;quot; and all the costs that come with it.\nThe numbers used to calculate the cost of dates in a long-term dating relationship? $130 per date, once a week. Am I just the poorest, or does that seem kind of expensive? A $130 date isn&amp;#39;t outrageous by any means, but I&amp;#39;d think of it as more of a once-a-month or once-every-few months kind of date.\nSomewhere in the course of that 42-month &amp;quot;traditional dating&amp;quot; relationship, there&amp;#39;s a good chance that couple moved in together, thereby paying so much less rent per person for a much nicer place than a single person that I instantly hate them.\nAnd. hello, people who are not in relationships also go on dates. This analysis seems to misunderstand how online dating works, saying, &amp;quot;The average dating site customer spends just $239 a year for online memberships, which more than pays for itself to the tune of $12,803 in cost savings from fewer dates.&amp;quot; (And assuming you split the cost of those dates, that&amp;#39;s where we get that $6,400 in savings.) Um, you don&amp;#39;t just plunk down your membership fees and magically get sent a husband. If that were the case, online dating would be the sliced bread of our time (i.e., freaking great). But maybe 10 percent of &amp;quot;online&amp;quot; dating&amp;quot; takes place online. The other 90 percent is, surprise, going on dates! Dates that cost money.\nAnd finally, this does not seem to take into account the cost of therapy, years of which you may need after being subjected daily to online dating messages like these.\nObviously there&amp;#39;s a certain convenience factor to online dating, but do you actually think it&amp;#39;s a money saver?? I just can&amp;#39;t see it.\nYou might also wanna read...The Dos and Don&amp;#39;ts of Online Dating"^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://www.glamour.com/story/how-online-dating-could-save-y>